Published in the mid-2000s, the article ELT in China and a China English Model discusses ELT in China at the time. It chronologically highlights the typical problems related to how English is taught to “non-majors” (those that do not intend to study English at university, but yet have to take an English test in order to gain a university place), as well as past solutions. Finally, the author proposes a new teaching model that integrates CLT* and GMT**.

Within the article, the author references the Ministry of Educations 2004 syllabus, Document 21, “The experimental implementation of teaching reform of college English.” The document’s significance lies not so much in its proposed methodology than its suggestion of the importance of developing alternative ways of pedagogical thinking concerning Chinese English language teaching. Radical!

This article is fascinating to me because it not only shows us the shift in thought (rather than action) from “teaching to test” to “teaching to communicate” in relation to teaching a language, in this case, English. But it also zooms out far enough to show us that this traditional teaching style may overlap to other school subjects, and have similar effects and consequences, as well. (The consequence being: you ace the test, but there is no inherent understanding of the subject matter). When I say other school subjects, I mean, teaching Chinese (to speakers of other languages), which I have experience of as a student of the language. In most cases, we are not learning to pass a test, but yet we are taught in the same archaic style that sacrifices interaction for grammatical perfection.

I do agree with the author, however, that importing alternative methods such as CLT into the China context, would be an over-simplification over a complex socio-cultural issue. The role (and god-like reference) of the teacher, the value placed on tests to measure ability, the success of drilling and rote memorisation to pass said tests, and so on, all combine to make CLT seem quite unworthwhile. Not to mention, that if teaching to communicate is quite new, then how will teachers acquire these new skills? I envisage initial resistance and uneasiness with something so unfamiliar. Also, how will they feel if they are no longer the focus of the classroom, as CLT is very much student-centred? I guess it would seem that the role of the teacher was becoming less important, and yet the preparation for CLT activities would dramatically increase the already heavy workload. There is much to consider then, in terms of which aspects of CLT are most appropriate for adoption in the China context, which may need to be adapted, and which may not included, and why.

CLT = Communicative Language Teaching

GMT = Grammar Translation Method