Ahead of the ELT Journal debate at IATEFL 2014 in Harrogate, Graham Hall, editor of ELT Journal, presents an introduction to the motion of the debate.
The ongoing expansion of English language teaching for Primary age learners and teenagers has been a notable feature of ELT in recent years. In many countries, English is now compulsory in primary as well as secondary education, whilst English for Pre-school learners is also increasingly common. Some estimates suggest that up to 80 per cent of English language teaching globally is directed, in diverse contexts, at students in Primary or Secondary schools. As the exact cut-off point between Primary and Secondary education varies around the world, let’s assume for this blog that we’re referring to teaching children of pre- and/or post-11 years old).
As both parents and educational authorities seek to increase younger learners’ English language skills, we can’t assume that an earlier start to learning English is automatically better. The advisability of an early start to learning English can be affected by a number of factors, ranging from the availability of suitably skilled teachers and appropriate resources to concerns about the possible implications for the teaching and learning of other languages, and from the development of suitable classroom practices and methodologies to the relationship between a child’s first language literacy skills and their English language development.
So, it’s perhaps time to step back and take a little time to reflect on the extent to which the expansion of Primary ELT is, in fact, straightforwardly ‘beneficial’. If we, the ELT profession, teach millions of Primary age children English around the world, does this automatically lead to advantages, both for individuals and societies more generally, or is it possible that Primary ELT brings with it significant problems and difficulties? Does, in fact, Primary ELT do more harm than good?
There are perhaps 3 key reasons for the growth of Primary ELT. Firstly, there is the widespread assumption that ‘the earlier a language is learned, the better’; in other words, younger children are (or are more likely to be) more successful language learners. Secondly, the expansion of Primary ELT is a response to the increasing demand for English, which results from globalization; governments and policy-makers around the world would like an English-speaking workforce, which they see as leading to economic success. And finally, parents would like their children to benefit from learning English.
Yet, although age clearly influences language learning in some way, the exact nature of this relationship is rather less clear than is popularly imagined – the actual evidence in favour of younger learners’ superiority in L2 learning is rather inconsistent, especially in non-immersion situations, where encounters with English might be limited to a few hours a week in the classroom. And we might also worry about a top-down ‘rush for English’ in which policy is not thoroughly thought through and issues such as teacher training and education, and classroom methodologies and materials for teaching Primary ELT, become problematic. Is a gap developing between policy and practice, and between our goal of how Primary ELT ‘should be’, and the realities of often under-resourced classroom life?
These issues will be discussed and debated in more detail in the ELT Journal debate, held at the IATEFL Conference in Harrogate (UK) on Thursday 3rd April (11.30-12.45 BST). There, Fiona Copland (Aston University, UK) will propose the motion: ‘This house believes that Primary ELT does more harm than good’; Janet Enever (Umea University, Sweden) will oppose the motion.
For more information about the conference and to access the debate online visit Harrogate online. You can also follow us on Twitter as we live-tweet highlights from the debate and other IATEFL speaker sessions.
Graham Hall is editor of ELT Journal and works at Northumbria University in the UK, where he teaches on Northumbria’s MA in Applied Linguistics for TESOL and MA TESOL programmes.
1 April 2014 at
It’s a matter of method. In bilingual Spanish schools preschoolers are great English learners. Esl is the problem in primary and secondary school. The communicative method is substituted by an obsolete Esl method. And children lose interest
1 April 2014 at
Reblogged this on hungarywolf.
2 April 2014 at
Reblogged this on Stop Complaining – Enjoy Teaching! and commented:
Are we getting it right?
“As both parents and educational authorities seek to increase younger learners’ English language skills, we can’t assume that an earlier start to learning English is automatically better. “
Pingback: Is ELT for primary school children beneficial? ...
Pingback: Janet Enever reflects on the #ELTJ Debate at #IATEFL 2014 | Oxford University Press
14 July 2014 at
Hello there, I think your site may be having browser compatibility
problems. When I look at your blog in Safari, it looks fine however, if opening in IE, it’s got some overlapping issues.
I merely wanted to give you a quick heads up! Apart from that, wonderful site!
2 September 2014 at
Reblogged this on TESOL_Peter and commented:
I think Professor Hall is accurate with his description of the situation of non-immersion countries, like Japan where I currently live and teach. The policy on primary school English education here seems to be going in the right direction, yet what needs be done is to provide adequate support for teachers and schools in order to make a successful transition.
In terms of the debate though, I think primary ELT does not do any harm. Teachers even here in Japan notice a difference in the attitudes students have for English which did not exist years ago. The change is a change of affect, in that they feel more ready for English in middle school now due to their exposure in primary school. This makes a big difference in my opinion.