Prof. W. A. J. M. De Costa’s article on the “Need for rethink on Sri Lankan education” which appeared in The Island of April 12 is insightful and all-encompassing. Although it hasn’t made references to Teaching English as a Second Language (TESL), its content urges one to rethink the way English is taught, specially, in schools.

All these decades, English teaching has been pretty much a classroom affair with more focus on reading and writing. Among the numerous reasons which, both wittingly and unwittingly, have contributed to this anomaly are inadequate proficiency of teachers of English, overemphasis on writing at the cost of spoken fluency, focus on grammar from early grades, lack of resources in schools to implement more productive and efficient methods, tendency to treat English as just another subject in terms of methodology, time constraints, popular and convenient method of translation used by private tutors, lack of motivation, etc. More than any of the foregoing is the students’ lack of exposure to a language-acquisitive environment in the school, and all the above-mentioned factors have been contributing to it.

Exposing Grade1 students to English language will be taking a significant step towards improving their overall proficiency in English. The step taken by the Ministry of Education, in collaboration with the NIE, to train Grade 1 class teachers and those assigned to teach English for Grade1 in using English in their classes is sure to have a far-reaching significance in TESL in Sri Lanka. Although some may look at it pessimistically as too idealistic, specially, considering the lack of exposure of primary grade teachers in remote areas to English, the initiative will surely gather steam in the succeeding years.

This is surely the first instance of employing the primary level class teachers to improve the English language skills of the first graders, which shows an attitudinal shift in our approach to the teaching of English as a Second Language (L2). Firstly, it shows a more mature view with regard to teaching as an L2 in that the method presumes the need to providing a language acquisitive environment as early as possible. Secondly, it engages the class teachers, with whom the students spend most of their time, to play the leading role in the project. All these years, class teachers have not been considered as potential resource persons in making the students feel that English is more a medium of communication and not just another subject to be learned in the traditional way, only with the “English Teacher” presiding over the class. Thirdly, perhaps most importantly, it will create a healthy environment at the school conducive for obviating any resentment felt by the teaching staff towards the ‘teachers of English’ who may speak to their students in English outside the classroom. In other words, brief exchanges in English between teachers and students as well as among students will naturally be accepted as the order of the day by all leaving little room for undue animosity towards English becoming normalized.

Of course, there will be the usual teething problems. The principal can play a big role in promoting a positive attitude towards such a change. It would prove to be a turbo boost to the programme if the principals, specially those who lack fluency in English, are also made to participate in the subsequent training sessions or, alternatively, in a separate programme where they would be motivated to promote the use of English within the school. Surely, the principals with such a training and orientation, will be able to significantly boost the level of enthusiasm of both teachers and students. Conversely, only a lukewarm interest on the part of a principal would tend to have a disenchanting influence on the whole programme in a school. In fact, extending the programme to all the primary grade teachers starting from Grade 2 teachers, specially, to those who have no fluency in English will certainly give an impetus to the programme and the results will be quite exciting in the years to come. It is only through such a holistic approach that the government schools will be able to produce students who may be on par with those of the international schools with respect to their English language proficiency.

Such steps as the above will have a crucial influence on building a healthy environment in the school towards improving the English education of the whole school community. It will create a feeling among the teachers and the principal that enhancing English competency of the students is not only a responsibility of the English Teachers, so to speak, who are resource-strapped, but a collective effort and also a national responsibility.

What has to be done is to make the student feel at home with English without relegating it to the ‘English’ classroom. When the primary grade teachers start using English to give simple instructions and commands such as, for example- stand up, close/open your books, look at the board, who can answer the question etc. the students will naturally be at home with listening to instructions in English. This is especially effective since it is the class teacher of primary level students that constantly interact with her students most of the time and get them to do various outdoor activities. It will immensely help the task of the English teacher who has only 40 minutes with the students.

In other words, the new approach will connect all the primary teachers in a network of facilitators for teaching communication skills of the student. What’s more it will motivate all those teachers who have been cut off from learning English due to various reasons to take heart and increase their own proficiency. In other words, the new approach will be far-reaching and have multiple benefits on the TESL in Sri Lanka. One can only hope that the programme will continue despite potential resistance from various groups who would feel unduly pessimistic.

Susantha Hewa