T

he plan to eliminate English as a subject in elementary schools is not something bad if we see it from the government’s point of view. The government aims to boost nationalism for future generations by making them focus on their studies with fewer subjects.

We understand that it is important to do so since our children nowadays are growing up with a lack of appreciation of our own language and history. I see that many Indonesian children can now speak English as well as they speak Indonesian, which may lead them to ignore Indonesian and shy away from enjoying the richness of our language.

Meanwhile, decreasing the number of lessons will benefit them as it opens more room and time for students to express their creativity. Regarding this effort, the government has also decided to simplify lessons into just six subjects by eliminating both natural and social sciences from curriculum.

Every government policy will always have its pros and cons. But, the classic problem with almost all government decisions is that the solution does not address the problem. Why should it necessarily be English lessons that are sacrificed in order to achieve that goal?

It is important to master English as it is generally used worldwide. It opens a larger network and broadens knowledge. It reflects the modernity and globalization that we should face and not avoid. In order to compete with other countries, especially our neighbors, we need to accelerate our development by empowering citizens with the communication and language skills set that is internationally accepted.

The idea of attaching the sense of loving Indonesian at the elementary school level is good, but it doesn’t mean we should eliminate English as a school subject.

The key to understanding and loving Indonesian depends on the way teachers teach a lesson and the way government arranges the curriculum. It relies on the good packaging of the teaching process; the lessons should not be boring and rigid. The curriculum should be designed to be simple and applicable.

The government is also reasoning that these new changes are aimed at minimizing the burden on students. English lessons are not a burden if the subject is taught in an attractive fashion, the “burden” would be eliminated. We could also decrease the time spent on other lessons that are not urgent. Moreover, I believe that learning Indonesian and English will never be comparable.

The reason we include English in elementary schools is because it is very important to introduce English to children as soon as possible. It is an optimal time to introduce new languages to children. The teaching of English in elementary school is merely about introducing English as the first foreign language through simple vocabulary, grammar and conversation so that they are able to communicate using simple English and be motivated and confident enough to learn advanced English language skills at higher levels.

Scrapping English lessons from elementary schools will also be counterproductive and harmful. Whether or not English is forbidden, parents that want their children to be capable in their English skills will continue to send their children to any English course, outside of school. As a result, the government’s aim of increasing nationalism and decreasing the burden on students, will not be achieved.

In the end, the government should revise this plan by conducting more research and studies to see if there is an actual urgent problem that needs to be fixed based on the demand and desires of society.

Rio Trimono
Jakarta