TEACHING COMMUNICATION SKILLS AND MULTIPLE INTELLIGENCES
Though there is hardly any fully
fledged English for Specific Purposes (ESP) programme run in professional
institutions in India, teaching of one of its better known forms English for
Science and Technology (EST) in tertiary level has up to now practically
limited service role for work and study, accommodating demands for
‘communicative’ skills and ‘needs’ of the rural students who have limited
previous exposure to functional abilities in English. Despite years of teaching
communicative skills and scientific and technical English, qualitatively, I am
afraid, there has not been much improvement, as obvious from the fact that
about 75% of the technical graduates have not been able to get employment.
Perhaps most of them already know
their ‘specialized’ subjects; that is, they already possess the knowledge and
concepts of their subject, but they need English teacher’s help in their
ability to function or perform in English. Their expectations may relate to
social-cultural-education, personal and individual, and academic or
occupational. If the (general) English teacher could take it as a professional
challenge, s/he can use, with some extra effort and fresh commitment, the ESP techniques
and prove genuinely helpful to them. These include conducting the necessary
needs analysis, designing an appropriate syllabus, preparing suitable
materials, meeting and getting to know the students, teaching the course and
devising and administering appropriate tests. The teacher’s success lies in
managing the learning strategies and promoting practice and use, or what
linguists have mentioned as pragmatic function (language as doing) and mathetic
function (language as learning).
Need for international perspective
Even as we talk about globalization,
tertiary education in every discipline needs scholars and researchers who have
good international perspective and ability to work in diverse settings. The
common challenge facing us is: cultivating globally-minded graduates. How we do
it may vary from institution to institution and region to region. Needless to
say, language competence is basic to acquiring a global perspective via the
graduation courses. And, no doubt, English has been the lingua franca, and
apparently, there may not be any need to learn other languages, but it helps to
learn a couple of foreign language (and/or other regional languages) for
expanding professional networks and gaining cultural experiences which are
vital for global learning.
As far as English is concerned,
teaching the creative, pragmatic and interactional uses of English in our
academic and professional context is important. These are essentially localized
functions.
Multiple Englishes
In his stimulating exposition of the
spread of English, Braj B. Kachru emphasizes that English has not only acquired
multiple identities but also “a broad spectrum of cross-cultural contexts of
use.” During the last twenty five years or so, scholars have progressively
acknowledged the reality of multicultural aspects of English a la linguistic
interactions of three types of participants: native speaker and native speaker;
native speaker and non-native speaker; and non-native speaker and non-native
speaker. Resultantly, as Kachru points out, there has been “a multiplicity of
semiotic systems, several non-shared linguistic conventions, and numerous
underlying cultural traditions,” paving way for English as an International
Language (EIL), which provides access across cultures and boundaries. The focus
has shifted to the diverse users and language activities within a
sociolinguistic context which is often localized rather than native-speaker
oriented as far as aspects such as communicative teaching or communicative
competence are concerned.
Taking cue from international
diffusion of English viewed as three concentric circles – an inner circle, an
outer or extended circle, and expanding circle, we should recognize the
institutionalized non-native varieties of English such as Indian English, Singaporean
English, Indonesian English, Malaysian English, Chinese English, Japanese
English, Nigerian English, Kenyan English etc and concentrate on English used
in South Asian and South East Asian countries for reviewing the pedagogic
developments in language teaching with an ESP bias as also for trying to
integrate language and culture teaching. This is significant in that despite
decades of activities in the name of communicative teaching or communicative
competence, not much has been achieved in terms of methods and materials for
international competence in English. The European parochialism continues to
dominate the academics’ reasoning even as discoursal organization, both
literary and spoken, reflects a certain regionalism.
Against such a perspective, correct
identification of language needs for ESP learners has become very important
just as teaching the need-based courses continues to remain a professional
challenge for teachers everywhere. Unless there is a flexible attitude with a
user/learner-based sociocultural approach to course design and methodology, ESP
teaching will not become interesting and enjoyable.
Pragmatic communication
One also needs to reflect on changes
in the linguistic pattern in recent years following the developments in communication
technology, networks, and data banks. Aside from writing and reading, spoken
English might have become a core business English with ability to understanding
different English accents just as listening skill is vital for improving
communicative performance at work. The reality of the varieties of English one
comes across in ones everyday working and social life cannot be ignored.
In fact, during the past three
decades the shift in linguistic centre has become more marked, more
institutionalized, and more recognized. Therefore, we need to view concepts
like communicative competence, or successful pragmatic communication from a
realistic perspective of current world uses of English which is lexically and
collocationally localized. With tolerance for localized discoursal strategies,
lexicalization from local languages, and creative texts from local creative
writers in English, it should be possible to promote international interaction
and communication, or achieve international intelligibility, comprehensibility,
and pragmatic success, as Kachru points out.
The relevant material and method
now, therefore, should meet the learners’ need to interact, understand, and
respond with respect for different cultures and speakers in
professional/business meetings, discussions, presentations, interviews,
telephone conferences etc. Teachers can indeed exploit students’ creativity and
the desire to relate to others with a task-based activity oriented methodology.
Summing up
Despite problems of theory and
method posed by varieties of world English, the reality of multilingualism and
adaptation to suit ESL communicative needs are too genuine to be ignored. We
also need to accommodate new ‘text types’, accept different discourse patterns,
and recognize local usages that are conventional and normal in the native
cultures. If we think in terms of building global competency in the days ahead,
we need to change and broaden our mindset, and be more tolerant to differences,
shedding the ‘departmentalism’, the increasing ‘ghettoization’ in teaching and
research, and sequestration of budget. The current emphasis on ‘money’
generation, I am afraid, will only corrupt teachers and administration, rather
than create positive resources, innovations, or even skills development.
--Professor R.K. Singh
posted by Ram Krishna Singh at 2:40 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home