时间：2022-10-04 10:47:46
Abstract：The general provision of English course in China’s primary schools， advocated partly on the basis of misapprehension of the critical period hypothesis， can be unjustified by the lower efficiency of primary school students and lower qualification of primary school English teachers compared with their counterparts in middle schools respectively.
Key words：primary schools；English course；feasibility
中图分类号：H319 文献标识码：A 文章编号：1673-8500（2013）02-0126-02
1.Introduction to the social background
After the implement of opening up and reform policy and China's entrance into the WTO， there is an urgent need for English talents. To open to the world with width and depth and keep up with the international trend， mastering English has become quite crucial. In July 2000， China’s Ministry of Education unveiled English curriculum standard （experiment draft）， which stipulates that " From the year of 2001， English course must be offered from grade three in qualified primary schools nationwide." Primary schools across the country quickly responded to the call and set up English course hastily. Even bilingual kindergartens has emerged as the times require， thus the age of English learners is younger and younger accordingly.
The question “should English course be offered in primary schools in China” is so controversial that has triggered hot discussion in education field. Taking theoretical bases and practical feasibility of teaching English to primary school students from grade three into account， it is questionable that offering English course in primary schools will live up to the expectation of the curriculum planners.
2. Misapprehension of critical period hypothesis
Proposed by Lenneberg （1967）， critical period hypothesis states that there is a period when language acquisition can take place naturally and effortlessly， but after a certain age the brain is no longer able to process language input that way.
Some evidence to support the critical period hypothesis was supplied by Penfield and Roberts. Penfield and Roberts （1959） argued that the optimum age for language acquisition falls within the first ten years of life. During this period， the brain retains its plasticity. However， with the onset of puberty， the plasticity begins to disappear. They suggested that this phenomenon was the result of the lateralization of the language function in the left hemisphere of the brain. That is， the neurological capacity for understanding and producing language， which initially involves both hemispheres of the brain， is slowly concentrated in the left hemisphere for most people.
Critical period hypothesis is about language acquisition， namely untutored or naturalistic picking up. As a foreign language， English is learned in a large scale in China through conscious study rather than picking up through exposure. Without natural or bilingual learning atmosphere， it is doubtable whether the advantages of the younger ones over the older ones can be brought out in such learning atmosphere. Therefore， critical period hypothesis is irrelevant with conscious study and cannot be considered as a theoretical support to the general provision of English course in primary schools in China.
3.If learners at different ages are matched according to the amount of exposure time， it is the older ones enjoy higher efficiency.
The onset of abstract thinking comes around the age of twelve （ generally， the starting age of junior high school in China）， namely the final stage of cognitive development. This stage is referred to as Formal Operation by Piaget， which means that the learner is predisposed to recognize differences and similarities and to think flexibly. There is no denying that children's （age 6-age10 ） comprehension and long-term memory are weaker than the junior high school students （age12-age15 ）. Besides， Children's self-constraint ability and attention duration spanning only 10-15 minutes are worse and shorter respectively than their counterparts in junior high schools， which means the former ones are easier to be distracted by irrelevancies. Boasting higher cognitive competence and intelligence， more comprehensive native language system， better comprehension， teenagers can learn English systematically in phonetic symbols， words， sentences， paragraphs， and discourse and improve the ability of listening， speaking， reading and writing step by step. However， this is not the same case in primary English teaching. Numerous force-fed young learners are just acquainted with scattered vocabulary and sentence patterns through repeating drill and dull rote， without knowing why.
4.The poorer pronunciation on primary school teachers’ part is likely to misguide the younger ones who are blessed with amazing imitating ability.
Characterized by strong curiosity and imitating ability toward fresh matters， children aged 6-10 are considered as the optimum group for a foreign language. Compared to Chinese and Maths， English is a newly offered course in primary schools in China. That is no wonder qualified English teachers is still in dead need. Not only offering correct language input but also knowing teaching targets' psychological development is a must for qualified English teachers in primary schools. However， only a small ratio of primary school teachers have obtained bachelors’ degree as English majors. A large ratio of English teachers in primary schools， especially in small counties of western China， even not major in English. After attending a short session of English training course， these laymen are required to undertake English teaching. Being weak in such aspects as pronunciation， intonation， cross-culture knowledge， let alone linguistic rudiments and scientific research ability， how can they take an important role in facilitating future language learning？ Meanwhile， the traditional teaching method adopted by the unprofessional teaching faculty may destroy children’s interest to English eternally. The children’s better imitating ability is likely to become a disadvantage in present learning context. Once the wrong English learning pattern is adopted and the unacceptable pronunciation is engrained， they are quite difficult to be rectified.
From viewpoint of pedagogy， the optimum period for cultivating one’s thinking pattern falls in the starting 5-10 years. Teaching by mother tongue is not only beneficial to learners’ native language acquisition but also do good to logic cultivation. Learning a foreign language at this phase， learners are prone to confuse mother tongue with foreign language. Prior to mastering mother tongue， commencing a foreign language too early will affect children’s cognitive competence and linguistic competence. If children aged between 5 to 10 are not exposed to a natural or bilingual context or there are no excellent teachers and sound teaching facilities， mother tongue is the first choice. Otherwise， children’s advantage in pronunciation cannot be brought out.
References：
[1]Ellis，R. Understanding Second Language Acquisition[M].上海：上海外语教育出版社，1999.
[2]David Birdson（eds）.Second Language Acquisition and the Critical Period Hypothesis[C]，Mahwah， NJ：Lawrence Erlbaum Associates， 1999.
[3]Stern H.Fundamental Concepts of Language Teaching[M].Oxford： Oxford University Press，1983.
[4]桂诗春.“外语要从小学起”质疑[J].外语教学与研究，1992，（4）： 52-5 4.
[5]束定芳，庄智象.现代外语教学―理论、实践与方法[M].上海： 上海外语教育出版社，1996.
作者简介：杨瑶，女，西南大学外国语学院 2011级英语语言文学专业硕士在读。