Language Power In Post-Colonial Hong Kong

One of the most conspicuous legacy Hong Kong has inherited from the near 150 years of British rule is bilingualism. The English language had a prominent status in Colonial Hong Kong as majority of senior positions in the Government were taken up by the British. In addition, the adoption of the British common law systemand the heavy presence of major foreign businesses in Hong Kong also promoted the dominant usage of English in higher courts and business settings. The sustained use of English in key social settings has created a notion in which English represents power and prestige. Along with certain educational policies, the English proficiency of Hong Kong locals became an important determinant of one’s social status and political power. The phenomenon is prolonged as the change in sovereignty in 1997 did not bring any overhaul to existing social and economic structures.

The Medium of Instruction Guidance for Secondary Schools

In the late 1980’s, the Hong Kong Education Department published a report with regards to solving the dilemma involving students being taught in English in a predominantly monolingual Chinese society. The report stated for educational reasons, Cantonese, as the mother tongue for many Hong Kong inhabitants, should be the appropriate medium of instruction (MOI) and that English as a Medium of instruction (EMI) curriculums should only be offered to “students who has proven to be able to benefit from learning English”. The report estimated only 30% of students would have the capacity to receive EMI education and a criteria-referenced test written at grade 6 would be used as a mechanism to select students for bilingual education in secondary schools.

The policy that was subsequently introduced in 1997 was named Medium of Instruction Guidance for Secondary Schools. The new policy stated that beginning from September 1998, most secondary schools shall adopt Chinese as the medium of instruction. For schools which has been operating with EMI and achieved good educational results may apply to continue to teach in English if certain requirements regarding student and teacher’s language ability and the school’s overall teaching strategy can be met.

Controversy

The announcement of the new policy was met with public controversy. In December 1997, the government announced of the 400 secondary schools in Hong Kong, 114 of them qualified to teach in English. However, all 114 EMI school belonged to the highest tier (Band 1, top 25% of schools) in the secondary school ranking system. This drew criticism that the new policy was elitist and social divisive as it labelled EMI schools as first class and their Chinese counterparts as second class. There was further criticism that the new policy undermined equality and the rights for majority of students to learn in an English setting.

On the other hand, the Medium of Instruction Guidance for Secondary Schools prompted anxiety for many parents as they felt increasing pressure to send their children to a smaller pool of EMI schools in order to receive what society deemed as better education. The number of students who chose to study abroad and demand for international school spots spiked as a result, especially among wealthier families.

Relaxation of the policy

In Spring of 2001, the Education Department announced what was seen as a relaxation of the original policy announced in 1997. Changes include allowing EMI schools to carry out supplementary teaching in Chinese for lower year students and loosening of inspection requirements on EMI schools. On the other hand, CMI schools were invited to teach selected topics in English in lower forms in preparation for more English intensive curriculums in upper forms.

The Language Campaign

In 1998, the Language Campaign was launched by several influential companies with British backgrounds in Hong Kong. The companies included HSBC, Hutchison Whampoa, the Swire Group and Hong Kong Telecom etc. The aim of the campaign was to enhance English standards through promoting EMI teaching in schools in bid to maintain Hong Kong’s international competitiveness. The companies provided financial support to several universities in Hong Kong as well as the Education Department for conducting research about English usage in classrooms.

Policy Influencing

Some of the companies behind the campaign also influenced policy-making. HSBC, which donated over $20 million HKD to the Education Department, had representatives in the management team of the Institute of Language in Education, a body within the Education Department which oversaw various research and development programs in EMI teaching. Some of the research conducted were directly related to the Medium of Instruction Guidance for Secondary Schools mentioned above.

Criticisms of the Campaign

Criticisms of the campaign claimed it was conveying a message that English was on top of the language hierarchy. Critics said the campaign was founded under the assumption that all important international businesses were dominated by English speakers. In order for Hong Kong to stay competitive, Hong Kong workers must equip themselves with fluent English. As Hong Kong is a business hub where the East meets West, local workers with fluent English could act as a bridge between companies’ management, which are assumed to be foreigners, and local workers who spoke little English. This may further reinforce the notion that knowing English is the only path to acquire to power and status.

Scholars suggested by supporting English dominance in the Hong Kong education system, foreign enterprises can not only reduce costs by shifting employee training to the public education system, but their linguistic superiority can also be maintained even after Hong Kong’s return to China in 1997.  In addition, the campaign may bring undesired consequences such as instilling the idea that English is the "Universal" language and therefore undermine the need to learn other "less important" languages and it may shift the focus of language education to merely fulfilling international business needs.