Transcript Slide 1

Language planning and Policy
Language Policies for Hong Kong
Schools since 1997
08-04-2013
Prepared by:
Wissam Ali Askar & R. A.
Hong Kong
General background

About 95% of the population are ethnically Chinese.
 The majority of Hong Kong people are ethnic Chinese,
originally from Guangdong prominence.
 They speak different dialects , however Cantonese is the
dominant dialect and is also the lingua franca among the local
Chinese (Fung tam, 2011).
 English was the only official language until 1974, when the
official language Ordinance was enacted to make Chinese a
secondary official language of the colony.
 For more than a century, English has been the language of
administration, law and education. It also the language of
communication (wong & Kam, 2000).
Table of content






Introduction
Language policies in colonial times (1841-1997)
The post-handover language policy
Medium of instruction Guidance for Secondary schools
The Education Commission Report reviewing the MoI
for secondary schools
Fine-tuning the Medium of instruction for secondary
schools
Introduction

English language

Cantonese language

Putonghua language

Schools in Hong Kong

Cantonese is spoken by approximately (97%) of the population.
Since 1960, Cantonese has formed a part of distinctive Hong
Kong culture.

The vernacular of Cantonese, with its distinctive vocabulary and
turn of phrase doesn’t exist in one-to-one relationship with the
available characters and structures of standard written Chinese.
Different forms of lexis and grammar

Putonghua had a low status in Hong Kong for many years
before the preparation for the handover began in 1980.

In 1955, it was adopted as the standard language of the
people’s Republic of China.

The traditional, full-form characters are still used in Hong
Kong.

The Case of English language.
Language policies in colonial times
Colonial elitism(1860-1950)
 Education initially served the interest of the colonial rulers,
creating a buffer class of educated elite from the local population.
This educated elite tended to be fluent in English and an
increasing number studied at British Universities.

By 1930, the government provision of schooling expanded.

The curriculum was not keeping track with Hong Kong’s
development as an entrepot port and light manufacturing centre,
and not with the modernization of Chinese in the republican era.

In 1950, the government permitted the establishment of schools
using Chinese as the medium of instruction (CMI) to serve for the
burgeoning population, while maintaining a large proportion of
English-medium (EMI) schools.

By 1990, more than 90% of secondary schools remained EMI.
Most primary school CMI.

Many parents favoured those that had a reputation for achieving
good results in English.
Bridge programmes were established to help students move from
CMI to EMI education.
Most secondary schools still chose to be an EMI school.



The purpose is to identify linguistic priorities of the three
language policy and specifically in respect of the medium
of instruction (MoI) for secondary schools.

The analysis also considers whether the Hong Kong
government has instigated what Cummins (2000) describes
as:

Coercive policy

Collaborative policy
The post handover language policy

The interplay between Cantonese, English and Putonghua was
addressed in the government’s goal of establishing a “biliterate
and trilingual” society.

Cantonese was associated with enhanced student learning.

Increased attention had been given to Putonghua in the school
curriculum.

English remained a powerful force
In 1997, the Education Department issued the “Medium of
instruction Guidance for secondary schools“.
Policy objectives and means of the Guidance:
1. To enable students to learn effectively, to be biliterate and
trilingual.
Policy means
Cantonese, English and Putonghua are all featured
in the secondary 1-3 curriculum, either as a MoI or as a subject.
2. To commit to promoting mother tongue teaching.
Policy means
1.The majority (75%) of secondary schools must
teach all academic subjects from secondary 1-3 in Chinese
2. Limited school based autonomy for
secondary 4 and 5, complete school based autonomy for secondary
6 and 7.
3. To introduce measures under the MoI Guidance, to enable schools
and parents to see for themselves the benefits of mother tongue
teaching.
Policy means
Official statistics compiled from Medium of
Instruction Grouping Assessments, and the secondary school
places allocation list.
4. To strengthen the teaching and learning of English in CMI schools.
Policy means
Provision for additional English teachers,
classes, teaching aids and library grants.
5. To monitor progress to see how best to achieve the ultimate
objective of the language policy.
Policy means
Triennial review and a three year longitudinal
study on the first batch of cross-over students

The actual outcomes of this policy can be argued
through two developments:

The Education commission Report reviewing the MoI
for secondary schools and the secondary school
places allocation(2005).

The Fine-tuning of the MoI (2009).
The education commission commissioned a working group to
review the implementation of the guidance and to give
recommendations on change, if any, to the policy on MoI.
The substantive recommendations were:
1. Uphold the existing policy on CMI for S1 – S3
2. Modify the criteria for schools wishing to adopt EMI.
3. Enhance English proficiency in schools by:
 Extending learning activities
 Increasing learning resourses
 Providing English enhancement schemes
 Enriching the language environment
 Increasing teacher’s professional development

Arguments on “what is best for our students” by the
government and “what is best for our children” from the
parents.

A statistic included in the education commission Report
revealed the number of schools switching away from CMI to
EMI at secondary 4, where the guidance allowed for some
school based autonomy, was approximately 50% at the time,
which indicated that there were only marginally fewer EMI
senior secondary classes after a five year implementation of
enforced mother tongue education.

Only a handful of schools sought to maintain CMI in the senior
secondary school even with the benefit of five years of mother
tongue education experience.

The recommendation of the report effectively made the
following evaluation on the outcome of the guidance:

The English proficiency was viewed in the community as a
singular standard of success for biliteracy and trilingualism.

Five years of implementation had not changed the fact that the
general demand for EMI schools exceeded the allowable
benchmark set by the guidance.
The substance of the Fine-tuning (2009) was modestly outlined
in three sub-objectives:
1. To increase exposure to English for secondary 1 to secondary 3
students.
2. To allow greater school based autonomy on the choice of MoI.
3. To remove the differentiation between CMI and EMI schools

In short, the Fine-tuning is saying “given our conviction in the
benefits of mother tongue education, we will encourage schools
to teach more English, and to teach more subjects in English”.
Conclusion
 Government intervention to promote, at the rhetorical level at
least, the educational interests of students, has failed to unite
the threads, so the task is once more left to the market forces
of lobbying by interest groups, parental choice and curriculum
decision making by schools. This resolution reflects the
preferences of pre-and post handover governments in Hong
Kong for collaborative rather than coercive policy.
References
Fung tam, A. C. (2011). Does the switch of medium of instruction facilitate
the language learning of students? A case study of Hong Kong from
teacher’s perspective. Language and Education. 25(5),398-417, doi:
10.1080/09500782.2011.573076
Wong, R. Y. and Kam, H. W.(2000). Language policies and language
education. Singapore: Times Academic Press