By Victor Ochieng’
In Kenya Certificate of Secondary Education (KCSE) exams, technical subjects like Agriculture and Computer Studies have three papers. Papers one and two test the theoretical bit while paper three focuses on projects where the practical aspects in the subjects are tested.
This begs the question: What if we also have a project paper in English as core-career subject taught in our secondary schools?
The setting of English papers two and three can just focus purely on theoretical aspects, but paper three should be a project that examines practical aspects in English both as subject and a language.
Firstly, experts in some spheres of knowledge must have ascertained quite early that it is prudent to weld theory with practice because they are close cognates with just a slight nuance. It is what made Albert Einstein to say, “In theory, theory and practice are the same, while in practice, they are not.”
As we all know, in theory, many assumptions are made to explain the phenomenon and concepts whereas in real life, there are no assumptions whatsoever. Somehow, conditions are also peculiar. No wonder, on consanguinity of theory and practice, Leonardo da Vinci postulated in the distant past, “He who loves practice without theory is like a sailor who boards ship without a rudder and compass and never knows where he may cast.”
As a nascent expert in English language and literature, I see a lot of practical aspects in it as a subject or discipline which can be tested on a broad scope. In addition, English as a language, focuses on skills that can be tested practically through engaging students in a project. Ideally, we have four major skills taught in English as a subject. They include: Listening, reading, speaking and writing. Skills like critical and creative thinking are also tested to some extent. English paper one tests students majorly on functional and oral skills. Paper two examines comprehension and literary skills. Paper three pitches its tent mostly on testing writing skills honed by learners in their peregrination in secondary school.
Kenya National Examination Council (KNEC) has been testing the practical aspects of English as a subject and language with an attitude of finitude. Somewhat, they should expand the scope by introducing the project paper which can be purely paper three. As a proponent of this proposal, I look forward to seeing students being assigned projects which strive to test their profundity and proficiency in English as both a language and a subject.
For instance, don’t you think it will be wonderful to ask candidates to engage in writing projects of genres like short stories, playlets, or poetry? Don’t you think it will be the best way to test whether through it all, they managed to become imaginative, creative and innovative as far as mechanics of writing are concerned? What if we make things like Elocution, Public Speaking, Debating, and Poetry Performance – aspects of oral skills as part of the project? This can be used to test two important skills: those performing on stage will scoop marks on speaking or oral skills while those who are part of the audience can be tested on listening skill.
Aspects in English syllabus like pronunciation and enunciation can also be part of the project. I find it quite pointless for examiners to examine phonetical and phonological spheres like: Asking candidates to identify silent letters in words, citing homophones, homonyms, minimal pairs, or pointing out stress in words and sentences, et cetera.
These are practical issues in language which can be part of projects tested in the language laboratories. On a live basis, they can be asked to cite synonyms and antonyms. Let us have real oral tests just as it is done in foreign languages like French. This will be a good dimension, because it will compel both learners and teachers to also focus on proper pronunciation and articulation, which happen to be the key in careers of serious communication like Mass Communication and Journalism.
It is a sad state of affairs that some our teachers of English focus a lot on teaching good grammar and vocabulary but dedicate scant attention to training learners on how to puff words correctly.
Some teachers fail to train learners thoroughly in matters pronunciation because sometimes we teach what we do not practice. No wonder, most of our schools manage to churn out plenty of graduates who can afford to write right yet, when they open their mouths to speak, their defective pronunciations make you yearn to block your ears.
Think of an instance, when mother tongue supremacy makes a person to confuse ‘bandit’ with ‘pundit’ while speaking English. The consonants /b/ and /p/ that come at the front-end of those two words make a big difference. Confusion of the two, dent their meanings to a great extent. A ‘bandit’ is an armed robber, while a ‘pundit’ is an expert in something.
In a larger sense, if our schools only focus on teaching and testing English theoretically, students will cram the content and pass with flying colours. Unfortunately, when they will be required to evince practical skills like speaking and writing with some fineness and finesse, they will fail and fall flat. For haven’t we met people out here who share bragging rights that they scored A’s in English in the KCSE exams, but cannot demonstrate basic ability in both spoken and written English?
The writer rolls out English Improvement Programmes in schools. vochieng.90@gmail.com
