Wednesday, September 11, 2013

Never-ending battle to inform journalists about the basics of the scientific method

Published in the South China Morning Post, Sept 19, 2013
Unimpressed by English test result

In the report ("Needy children in Hong Kong benefit from English programme", September 9), you say the children improved 10 per cent in a test in June compared to a test in December.
I am strongly in favour of quality language instruction, but a 10 per cent gain doesn't seem like much for eight months of after-school English study. Were they also taking English in school? Was there a comparison group that did not have the extra instruction?
There are many approaches to language instruction and some are more effective than others. Which one was used in this programme?

Stephen Krashen

original article:

No comments:

Post a Comment