★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ 00waterh: 回帖置顶 2013-11-02 19:20:27 00waterh: 金币+30, ESEPI+1, i have nothing to say about this change right now.if it success, i will say the policy-makers are right.if it fail,it will be an another bad decision. 2013-11-02 19:26:25
Alright. Maybe it's time for me to make a comment for this policy change.
This piece of news pretty much left me the impression that policy-makers in China were already aware of the importance of oral English in the development of students' comprehensive language capabilities.
I thought there could be some marks taken out specifically for oral English part in the College English Test. I even misread the news "China to downgrade English section of college admissions test" when I first saw the title because I thought the reduced marks would all be attributed to oral English assessment. However, when I looked at the details of the policy change, I would say I was startled, then upset, cause there was nothing to do with oral English at all, and the whole weight of English reduced!
There is an added 30 points for Chinese which quite a few people think students will benefit from. I personally do not agree with this view. Traditional Chinese culture and Chinese literature, of course, are very important and could be an important source for students to establish their philosophy of life. But is an added 30 points strong enough to make a difference? Some people might say yes, but I would say no.
Both the public and education system operators see marks somewhat synonymous with emphasis and outcome. But people like me could only see a changed pattern of assessment, and for us the nature of assessment does not change at all. I expect that there would not be any discernible return of that marks.
On the other hand, when you give much needed marks to oral English assessment, you can almost see an immediate return on your "investment". Students begin to speak English and use English. Results improve and hope is created where once there were only complaints and criticism towards Chinese lingually-disabled students. The future benefits for the long term English assessment reform of the whole education system are incalculable. The demand for native speakers increases and thus more foreigners come to China for living, given the job loss rate is fairly high in foreign countries. China therefore functions as a balancing role and it not only benefits China.
Having seen the new policy which I don't think is clever, or even fiscally responsible, I feel upset. I'd say it's a stupid policy for me.
Hopefully China is at the height of reform under President Xi. I still see positive to the future of English assessment regulations.
P.S. I personally seek common points while reserving difference.
And I don't think it's necessary to swear, curse, or place someone in an unfavorable light just because he is holding different opinions.
Thanks.
★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ curton: 金币+15, ESEPI+1, English for non-English background speakers is basically a tool, and yes, ideas matter more than the tool itself 2013-11-30 18:28:49 curton: 回帖置顶 2013-11-30 18:28:51
Wow
Yes, English for non-English background speakers is basically a tool, and yes, ideas matter more than the tool itself. The problem is we don't seem to get good command of the so-called tool, do we?
Three-year-old Children are having English class, which is the result of competitions, not English. For some primary schools, especially the good ones, they need some criteria to filter candidates, and English is just one of the criteria, not all. I believe for some primary schools, Chinese or mathematics is also one of these criteria. As for me, a 3-year-old child's studying Chinese or mathematics in kindergarten is no less ridiculous than he or she's studying English in kindergarten.
One's first twelve years should be free of worries and assessments, as far as I am concerned.
I believe most graduate students could not describe an event or even a book detailedly in English. When it comes to speaking, an overwhelmingly majority of people are not equipped with the fundamental English ability to finish daily conversation. Compared with failing to write a flawless Chinese article, which situation is more urgent?
Chinese is our mother language and it deserves our attention. I agree to you with regard to statements related to this. For College English Test, I believe those who fail to receive a good mark in Chinese won't say they spend all the time studying Chinese on English, right?
If one doesn't even have an ability to pass CET6, how could this person handle English journal articles when he begins to do research which range from education, psychology to natural science. Many people in university don't study English, but is it true that their Chinese is strikingly better than others?
As for the root of culture, I know many people from Hong Kong and Taiwan. Their English is way better than mainland Chinese counterparts, and their Chinese knowledge is remarkable. Then is it really English that ruins our culture?
Last, not the least, no one is supposed to feel guilty for his or her opinion. It's one's free freedom to have his or her say, and it also works for you. You are free to have your say here and I respect your opinion. Respecting other's opinions is a symbol of modern civilization, and Traditional Chinese culture won't teach people to ruin it, will it?
[ Last edited by Lopemann on 2013-11-11 at 07:59 ]
回复此楼