2. Bangladesh as an ELT context: Point of departure

Bangladesh is seen here as an EFL context, while the implications of this study could arguably be applied to all the EFL countries. It should be noted that there is confusion about whether Bangladesh is an EFL or an ESL (English as a Second Language) context. Some scholars claim it to be ESL, while others term it as an EFL context. In an earlier research study, Ali (Reference Ali2011) termed Bangladesh as an ESL context, yet the country seems to fit more within the context of EFL. For the purpose of this paper we consider the country as an EFL context.

It is also essential to distinguish between an ESL and an EFL context in order to clarify the usage of the term EFL context in this paper. Carter & Nunan (Reference Carter and Nunan2001) distinguish between ESL and EFL. To them, ESL refers to a context where, together with the native language, English is widely used for different purposes. India, for example, is an ESL context, where English is commonly used in public places, parliament, etc. together with the Indian state languages. EFL, on the other hand, implies a context in which English as a foreign language is mostly confined to classrooms, i.e. EFL is not widely used. The language, in this case English, is used mainly for academic purposes. For example, Bangladesh is an EFL context, in which English is mainly used as a medium of instruction, mostly in private and some public universities. As for schools and colleges, except for national and international English-medium schools, most institutions use the Bengali language as a medium of instruction. Hence, English in Bangladesh is mainly confined to classroom usage.

3. ELT in Bangladesh

English language teaching in Bangladesh starts with learners at an early age. With the support of their parents, learners start experiencing alphabets, both Bengali and English, in their pre-school period. Eventually, children begin formal and compulsory ELT education from primary school level through secondary to Higher Secondary Education (HSE) level.Footnote ¹

Bangladesh has three streams of education systems, which may be categorized as ‘mainstream education’, i.e. the secular state education system in Bangladesh; ‘Madrasha education’, i.e. the religious education system; and ‘English-medium education’, which is run by the local syndicate of the University of Cambridge (Kamol, Reference Kamol2009). In all these three streams, English is taught as an academic subjectFootnote ², and ELT here is basically based on English for General Purposes (EGP). However, little consistency and collaboration can be observed in the ELT practices among these streams.

Problems in ELT outcomes in Bangladesh also seem to result from insignificant positive outcomes of the projects that aim to improve ELT in the country. Developing countries, like Bangladesh, are investing time and money in collaboration with the UK and other developed partners in order to improve the ELT in their respective contexts. The ELTIP, a UK-Bangladesh jointly funded project, introduced a Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) approach within Bangladesh as a part of the national curriculum in the period between 1997 and 2008 (Seargeant & Erling, Reference Seargeant, Erling and Coleman2011). The aim of ELTIP was ‘to strengthen human resources development efforts of the Government of Bangladesh’ (NCTB, 2003, cited in Seargeant & Erling, Reference Seargeant, Erling and Coleman2011: 3; Hamid & Baldauf, Reference Hamid and Baldauf2008: 16) in order to further ‘develop Bangladeshi human capital’ (Hamid, 2009, cited in Seargeant & Erling, Reference Seargeant, Erling and Coleman2011: 3) ‘by introducing communicative language teaching for English in Bangladeshi schools’ (Seargeant & Erling, Reference Seargeant, Erling and Coleman2011: 3). By introducing the CLT approach, ELTIP has caused a massive change in the English language learning and teaching philosophies (ibid.). Traditionally, ELT in Bangladesh was based on the Grammar Translation Method (GTM), and the materials used for ELT were generally prescriptive grammar rules and literary pieces, e.g. poems, short stories, etc. written in English. As a result of ELTIP, however, the national ELT curriculum changed, with a shift from GTM-based language teaching to a communicative competence-based ELT, and eventually new syllabi and CLT-based materials were devised by the National Curriculum and Textbook Board (NCTB) in order for ELT to fit in with the new curriculum (Ali, Reference Ali2010a).

However, the outcome of the ELTIP has not been as per expectation, and the project has left an ‘insignificant impact’ (Hamid & Baldauf, Reference Hamid and Baldauf2008; Ali, Reference Ali2010a; Seargeant & Erling, Reference Seargeant, Erling and Coleman2011). Although the curriculum was innovated with the philosophy of communicative competence-based language teaching, the teaching-learning outcome remained almost the same as that which prevailed before the shift (see Hamid & Baldauf, Reference Hamid and Baldauf2008). One important point that we would like to suggest here is that changing the curriculum, devising new syllabi for it and adopting a new methodology do not ensure that ELT will be improved. The improvement also largely draws upon the teachers and their ‘make-up – namely what they believe in, and what they are doing as teachers’ (Harmer, Reference Harmer2003: 290). However, problems in Bangladesh also seem to lie with the inadequate training and support ELT teachers get from the authority to cope with the changes in the curriculum (Islam, Reference Islam2003). This will be discussed more in the next section.

Recently, another project has been launched in Bangladesh to improve the ELT in the country. The project English in Action (EIA) is a follow-up project of ELTIP, and it is funded by the UK Government's Department for International Development (DfID). The aim of EIA is to ‘significantly increase English language skills for 27 million people in Bangladesh’ (Alexander, 2008, cited in Seargeant & Erling, Reference Seargeant, Erling and Coleman2011: 3), and ‘to contribute to the economic growth of Bangladesh by providing English language as a tool for better access to the world economy’ (EIA, cited in Seargeant & Erling, Reference Seargeant, Erling and Coleman2011: 3).

With such a goal, EIA is scheduled to continue until 2017 (Seargeant & Erling, Reference Seargeant, Erling and Coleman2011). Starting in 2008, EIA has passed almost 5 years with its own policy assumptions. Yet, it is argued here that just having the policy assumptions of a project is not enough. The policy assumptions need to reflect the goal of the national ELT curriculum of the country where the project is being undertaken. We further argue that for successful implementation of any project, like EIA, and also for the real innovation of an ELT curriculum in an EFL context, a socio-culturally and contextually appropriate national ELT policy is needed as part of the national ELT curriculum.

Finally, this section has indicated that the problems in ELT in Bangladesh are arising from: (a) lack of consistency in ELT practice in various institutions; (b) lack of collaboration among different stakeholders, i.e. teachers, learners, curriculum planners, syllabus designers, materials developers and methodologists, etc.; (c) the insignificant impact of teacher training; and (d) the insignificant outcome of the innovative language teaching projects. The next section addresses these issues in more detail.

4. Problems in ELT: Towards an ELT policy

In the EFL context, there should be a national curriculum and that curriculum should work in uniform for all in that context. The curriculum should be powered by a strong ELT policy in the curriculum. We do not see the policy as a separate entity, but we believe that the ELT policy must be a part of the national ELT curriculum.

This paper has identified four problems that seem to create hurdles preventing the successful implementation of ELT in Bangladesh (cf. section 3). First of all, the problem of inconsistency in ELT practice is widely felt now. At present, there are a variety of school systems and their curricula in Bangladesh (Kamol, Reference Kamol2009). As claimed by Kamol, most students of English-medium schools know little about Bangladeshi culture and customs (ibid.). The result of such diversity in education systems in Bangladesh is the emergence of a new generation with ‘differences in outlook, values and culture thus making national unity a difficult goal to achieve’ (ibid.). ELT in English-medium schools in Bangladesh seems to be completely different from both the mainstream and Madrasha education systems. Additionally, there are some national mainstream ‘English medium schools under national curriculum’Footnote ³ which sometimes use materials that are neither recommended by the Ministry of Education nor by the NCTB of Bangladesh. Interestingly, most of those materials are produced in India, and the Indian socio-cultural and contextual issues are reflected there. In this case, the NCTB-designed textbook series, ‘English for Today’ for Grade 1 to Grade 12, should be revised and updated. Using the McDonough & Shaw (Reference McDonough and Shaw2003) model, Ali (Reference Ali2012) finds a mismatch between ‘English for Today’ for Grade 11 and Grade 12 and the overall aim of the curriculum.

Hamid & Baldauf (Reference Hamid and Baldauf2008) indicate a kind of inconsistency in ELT practice in Bangladesh. Their study shows that the English language teaching-learning situation in rural Bangladesh is not the same as that in the town schools. The ELT situation in peripheral Bangladesh is really poor, and the learning outcome does not reflect the goal of the national ELT curriculum. Most ELT practitioners in peripheral Bangladesh do not have the required ELT qualifications. At present, ELT professionals in the country generally hold an MA in English literature, from which they seem to gain no practical language teaching skills. For example, as Hamid & Baldauf (Reference Hamid and Baldauf2008: 21) remark, ‘[t]here is no denying that English taught by unqualified or under-qualified teachers is bound to be unhelpful to students for passing examinations or learning the language’. It seems to us (the authors) that the greatest inconsistency lies in the process in which graduates become teachers and in what they have to teach. After studying British, American, continental and contemporary literature, most graduates of English literature enter the ELT profession, and most of these graduates struggle when they are appointed to teach the functional and CLT-based textbooks in Bangladeshi schools. Few universities in Bangladesh offer an MA in language teaching (ELT/TESOL), and even these teacher education courses ‘that are available in Bangladesh seem to lack a true understanding of the practical application of the theories in the classroom’ (Ali, Reference Ali2011: 140).

Secondly, a lack of collaboration among different stakeholders is another issue that causes impediments to the successful implementation of ELT (cf. section 3). Ali (Reference Ali2010b) suggests that there seems to be no collaboration among different phases of curriculum development in Bangladesh. First of all, the national ELT curriculum is designed in a top-down process, in which learners’ and teachers' views are not taken into consideration. In addition, the syllabus designers, the materials developers and methodologists appear as different parties with little collaboration between them. Interestingly, teachers and learners, who are the most important parties, actually seem to become the third parties, on whom the syllabus and the materials are imposed. Moreover, the test designers and the people involved in testing and evaluation seem to have little collaboration with the people engaged in other phases of the curriculum. In testing the learning outcome, no clear test specifications are provided in a common manual for all the parties involved. Additionally, no clear criteria, performance descriptors and rating scales are devised against which learners' performance could be judged (see also Kabir, Reference Kabir2009). According to Kabir (Reference Kabir2007), the validity and reliability issues in the Bangladesh national ELT tests are commonly overlooked. For Ali (Reference Ali2010b: 293):

Thirdly, impediments to the successful implementation of ELT in Bangladesh can also be attributed to the lack of appropriate and continuous guidance, support and training for the language teachers (see Islam, Reference Islam2003). In many contexts, English language teachers have not been made aware of how students learn or the ways in which they can help to facilitate learning. They often teach in the way they were taught no matter how much materials and methods may change over time. Innovation in ELT is not possible if the teacher training does not include ways in which the teachers can help their students to take responsibility for their own learning. This is often a difficult step for the teachers to take as they feel they are losing their role as a teacher and a controller. It is a big step for them to make and they need support, training and guidance. Such change cannot happen overnight.

Islam (Reference Islam2003: 13) reports that ‘unfortunately, there is no separate or independent training provision for English teachers in Bangladesh’, but ELT professionals ‘are trained under the general education training’Footnote ⁴. The primary level teacher training is organized by the Ministry of Primary and Mass Education in the Primary Teachers Training Institute (PTI). The Ministry of Education (MoE) in Bangladesh arranges for secondary level teacher training through different projects, such as Teachers' Quality Improvement (TQI) and the Secondary Education Sector Development Project (SESDP), in order to support the teachers ‘to provide quality learning opportunities in their classes’ (MoE, 2009). Generally, training is provided in the Teachers Training CollegesFootnote ⁵ (TTCs) and in the National Academy for Educational Management (NAEM). However, the training that teachers get is inadequate. For example, after an innovation in the secondary level ELT textbook at the beginning of 2013, the teachers were given a 3-day training class. In this case, the training started a few months later than when the textbook was distributed and used in the schools. Also, the training focused more on the aim and objectives of the textbook and on the testing system for the newly designed textbook. It focused less on methodology and the ways in which the textbook may be used differently for teaching language skills in the classroom. It is worth mentioning here that the textbook included listening skills for the first time in this edition, but most teachers were not trained in the ways in which they could teach the skill.

The teachers implement the curriculum and use the materials, but they also need help, guidance and training. Continual changes to the curriculum and materials do not mean that the approaches to teaching and learning methods change. We argue in favour of preparing the teachers with the necessary knowledge and skills by building or rebuilding what Harmer (Reference Harmer2003) terms their ‘make-up’. The implication is that, before we bring about an innovation, we need to establish teachers' beliefs in what we want them to do in the classroom by providing them with continuous training and support, and also engaging them into ‘…reflective and collaborative action research…’ (Ali, Reference Ali2011: 140). Imposition of what we believe on the teachers might conflict with their own beliefs about learning and teaching. This is a conflict that makes the improvement of ELT impossible.

Finally, the insignificant impact of the ELT improvement projects is seen here to be another problem preventing the effective implementation of ELT in Bangladesh (cf. section 3). As noted in section 3, ELTIP had left little positive impact on the ELT outcome in Bangladesh. EIA is now in progress with its own policy assumptions. Here, the important thing to examine is whether the policy assumptions are in line with the national ELT curriculum. EIA policy assumptions include ‘English as a global language’, ‘English and economic value’, ‘English as a language for education’, and ‘English as a language for technology’ (Seargeant & Erling, Reference Seargeant, Erling and Coleman2011). The assumptions are fine, yet we need to examine how they fit within the national ELT curriculum. The overall goal of the Bangladesh national ELT curriculum is to bring about the communicative competence of the learners (Ali, Reference Ali2010b). However, no direct policy assumption states how the EIA is going to work to prepare both the learners as well as the teachers to achieve the curricular goal. It is argued here that just having the policy assumptions of any project is not enough. The project policies in an EFL context must be directly associated with the national ELT curriculum of a country, hence making the policies an organ of the national ELT curriculum.

To address the four problems identified above, we suggest a national ELT policy as a part of the national ELT curriculum. At this stage it is important to clarify what we mean by ‘ELT policy as a part of the national ELT curriculum’ and why the policy is important for ELT in an EFL setting. Broadly speaking, by national ELT policy we mean a set of principles and a work plan in the national ELT curriculum. However, by the term we refer to neither the goal of ELT alone (the goal of ELT should be a part of the policy) nor the detailed guidelines outlined in the curriculum. The policy should stand as a separate part of the curriculum as one of the organs of the curriculum. In any case, the ELT policy and its assumptions about the learning and teaching of English, and about the projected outcome of ELT, must be based on the socio-cultural, contextual and economic realities of a country (see also Hamid & Baldauf, Reference Hamid and Baldauf2008). National ELT policy documents are important for establishing collaboration across the ELT curriculum. The policy documents should work as uniform guiding principles for all. We call the principles policy specifications (our term). The main goal of the policy is to create collaboration among all the stakeholders and to establish consistency in ELT practice, and hence to contribute to the achievement of the overall national ELT goal. Just having guidelines in the curriculum regarding different elements of the curriculum is not enough. To that end, we need what we term policy specifications for really establishing an academic culture of collaboration.

A prospective ELT policy may consider the following issues:

1. (a) the national interest of the country (i.e. how English can be used for the socio-cultural and economic benefit of Bangladesh);

2. (b) the linguistic and communicative needs of the learners;

3. (c) methodological issues, i.e. the feasibility of adopting a language teaching method across the country. We believe that the methodology produced in the BANA (Britain, Australia and North America) countries should be contextualized as per the needs of the learners and teachers of a local context.

4. (d) effective implementation of ELT in the classroom, i.e. the issues of ongoing teacher training and addressing teachers' needs and wants;

5. (e) evaluation of the outcome (i.e. how are learners' learning outcomes to be evaluated? what rating scale is to be used? and how is the programme going to be evaluated?);

6. (f) innovation, i.e. how is the overall ELT programme going to be improved?

5. Conclusion

A national curriculum of a country upholds the values, vision, educational philosophy and socio-economic goal of a nation. These things are actualized through a syllabus and its materials. It cannot be denied that every society is distinct in its socio-cultural and contextual values within which economic reality is an added phenomenon. In language teaching, we need to see how the philosophy of language education fits within the socio-cultural and economic realities of a country, and how the curriculum, syllabus, ELT materials and methods reflect the needs of learners, teachers, other stakeholders and the desire of an EFL country at large.

This research has identified four problems associated with successfully implementing ELT in Bangladesh, and they are: (a) lack of consistency in ELT practice; (b) lack of collaboration among different stakeholders; (c) lack of appropriate training; and (d) the insignificant impact of the ELT improvement projects in Bangladesh.

The argument here is for an ELT policy as a constituent part of the curriculum in Bangladesh that establishes an academic culture of collaboration among all the stakeholders. The policy specifications are expected to: (a) work, first of all, as a uniform manual for all the parties concerned; (b) create collaboration within different phases of the curriculum; (c) monitor effective implementation of the curriculum, notably seeing whether there are any mismatches between the goal of the curriculum and the other elements (i.e. syllabus, materials, tests, etc.) of the curriculum; (d) check the inconsistency in ELT practice in different institutions; and (e) assist in examining the extent to which an ELT curriculum, its syllabus and materials meet learners’ linguistic, communicative and socio-cultural needs. The policy specifications are expected to outline the things that are to be done by all the stakeholders. To put it all in a metaphor, a curriculum is a human body with all its veins, while the policy is the blood that keeps the body functioning.

In conclusion, the national ELT curriculum should be assisted, empowered and guided by the national ELT policy. Any innovation in the curriculum should conform to the policy, and also the policy assumptions outlined for any ELT improvement project should be in line with the national ELT curriculum and ELT policy. The chief function of the policy is expected to empower the national ELT curriculum and to make the curriculum truly collaborative. This is a fact that is important to realize now.