This study was planned to investigate Gonpasingma Lower Secondary School teachers and students’ reflections on a required Dzongkha English language policy. The study was made through the use of notes on observations and expressed concerns which were intended to develop a consensus with regard to the required amendment. Phenomenology was employed since this design helps in knowing abiding concerns regarding the “language policy” and of lived experience.
Data were gathered through formally written answers from all the twenty-four respondents. Earlier language policy was established through strict regulations imposed by the school authority. Soon after withdrawing the existing practice, students returned to their habit of speaking their own vernacular languages. Compared to English, students did feel comfortable to speak Dzongkha (the national language). Our findings are that in spite of well-known difficulties, teachers need to provide adequate guidance by being role model whereby students will understand the correlation of native language and second language, and the adverse effect of avoiding Dzongkha and English.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Literature review
2.1 Language influence
2.2 Language sensitivity
2.3 National language
2.4 English advantages
2.5 Drawback of English incompetency
2.6 Remedies to improve language
3. Method
4. Findings
4.1 Individual´s view on the introduction of language policy
4.2 Language/dialect spontaneously used in the premises of school
4.3 Help rendering practices
4.4 Dzongkha/English speaking barriers
4.5 Strategies to help children speak Dzongkha and English
4.6 Reprimand to language defaulters
4.7 Viewpoint on vernacular language
5. Discussion
6. Recommendation
7. Conclusion
Research Objectives and Focus Areas
This study investigates the reflections of teachers and students at Gonpasingma Lower Secondary School regarding the required Dzongkha and English language policy, aiming to uncover challenges and develop a consensus for policy amendments through qualitative inquiry.
- Evaluation of current perceptions regarding the school's language policy.
- Identification of barriers preventing students from speaking Dzongkha and English.
- Analysis of effective pedagogical strategies to enhance verbal communication skills.
- Review of disciplinary measures and their impact on student self-esteem and learning.
Excerpt from the Book
Introduction
From the time joining this school in 2010, it was observed that Class IV and above were constantly reminded to speak the two literacy languages. English speaking was given extra caution due to the fact that most curriculums in Bhutan are taught in English. Accordingly might not find hard to deal Math word problem which many Bhutanese students felt this as setback.
Students in broader spectrum however were reluctant to cooperate to the initiative taken that evidenced from the way they speak local dialect (Tshangla-lo) in the nooks and corners. For going against, teachers had to use quite number of reprimands. For example – hang language tag, clean toilet, cut grass, and make them stand in front of the assembly. As per compiled language policy; students are to speak English on Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday; Dzongkha on Thursday, Friday and Saturday, and on Sunday the language of their choice. If students preferably speak English in all the six days of the week is to give with recognition and reward.
In an undeniable setting, a few girl students showed enthusiasm to start to converse in English. Analyst could notice how these girls made attempt. The intonation they exposed alike mother tongue. They used some jargons and vocabularies of mother tongue due to inability to locate right terms in English. Kelman (1971) accepts this as not really a committed error, because “…in which he/she communicates with his mother and with immediate environment serves to think, and link him/her with a wider group” (p.31).
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: Outlines the observational background of the language policy at Gonpasingma Lower Secondary School and establishes the guiding research questions.
2. Literature review: Provides a theoretical foundation covering language influence, sensitivity, the role of national languages, and global English proficiency trends.
3. Method: Describes the qualitative phenomenological design and the participant group selected for the study.
4. Findings: Presents the primary data regarding teacher and student views on policy, speaking barriers, and current disciplinary measures.
5. Discussion: Synthesizes the research findings, highlighting the conflict between policy enforcement and student comfort with native languages.
6. Recommendation: Suggests pedagogical shifts toward informal communication, role modeling, and the cessation of harsh physical punishments.
7. Conclusion: Summarizes the study’s impact and suggests that findings be disseminated to broader educational institutions.
Keywords
Language policy, Dzongkha, English language, Bhutan, Education, Phenomenology, Bilingualism, Teacher-student interaction, Verbal communication, Linguistic identity, Classroom strategy, School policy, Language barriers, Learning motivation, Qualitative research.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this study?
The study investigates the teachers' and students' perspectives on the mandated language policy at Gonpasingma Lower Secondary School in Bhutan.
What are the central themes discussed in the paper?
Key themes include the impact of language policy on identity, the challenges of bilingual education, and the effectiveness of various pedagogical approaches and disciplinary measures.
What is the core research objective?
The objective is to understand the lived experiences of participants to uncover flaws in the current policy and propose improved, more supportive strategies for language learning.
Which methodology was applied?
A qualitative phenomenological design was utilized, involving written responses from twenty-four participants, including eight teachers and sixteen students.
What aspects are covered in the main section?
The main section covers personal views on the policy, linguistic habits within the school premises, barriers to speaking English and Dzongkha, and recommendations for improvement.
Which keywords define this work?
The work is defined by terms such as language policy, bilingualism, Dzongkha, English, pedagogical strategy, and educational reform.
How does the school currently manage language compliance?
The school uses a combination of reminders, rewards for English proficiency, and various disciplinary measures like language tags and cleanup duties for those who fail to comply.
What is the author's stance on corporal punishment?
The author strongly advises against corporal punishment, citing research that it causes emotional distress and long-term mental health issues, suggesting it should be replaced by role modeling and positive reinforcement.
What specific difficulty do students face regarding English?
Students often lack sufficient vocabulary and sentence-structuring skills, leading to fear, passiveness, and a preference for their mother tongue, Tshangla-lo.
- Quote paper
- Tashi Namgyel (Author), 2012, English as an academic language in Bhutan. Language policy implementation issues, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/310992
