A tourist seeking guidance in English is only able to speak with every fifth Hungarian, shows a 2012 survey of the European Commission. This meagre 20% is the lowest of countries in the European Union. To add insult to injury, the Hungarian government has just passed an amendment to the law on foreign language teaching that necessitates a pedagogical degree (preferably a Hungarian one) for all foreign language educators in state-financed and EU-funded language schools. The amendment was constructed so “well” they almost succeeded in ruling out native teachers.
Hungary has the highest percentage of monolinguals in the EU, and according to a statistic published this year 63% of the adult population can hardly speak a single foreign language. For some mysterious reason the government chose to address this problem by narrowing down the number of language teachers drastically. The Ministry for National Economy claims the measure was necessary to raise the level of language education but heads of schools say it has an opposite effect.
According to the new regulation, strictly those people can teach a foreign language in public education who have a pedagogical degree. This means that a diploma in linguistics or a highly valued international language teaching qualification such as CELTA (Certificate in Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages) is worth nearly nothing now, even though the latter gives a remarkably high-quality practical training and prepares candidates for real-life classroom situations.
Furthermore, the regulation almost managed to exclude native speaker language teachers from the system, but later a modification was added at the end that “only” requires them to have a university diploma. Naturally, those university students who have experience abroad and have learnt a language on a near-native level have now no right to be near any classrooms.
This measure is a step back in the development of Hungarian foreign language education because it reduces the number of near-native and native sources of language input for students. It goes against a more open-minded, synthetic language teaching technique that proved to be very successful in a number of other countries because it encourages students to retrieve the highest native input possible.
The new Hungarian foreign language teaching model now resembles that of the communist times, when the Iron Curtain blocked the access to sufficient input of Western languages and students were forced to take a more analytic approach. This often meant sacrificing the development of their practical language skills and not achieving adequate conversational competence.
The new regulations are unreasonable, inconsistent and harmful, says Zoltán Rozgonyi, president of the Association for National Language Education and Examination (Országos Nyelvoktatási és Nyelvvizsgáztatási Szakmai Egyesület). Rozgonyi said the amendment takes away the livelihood of hundreds of instructors who could have represented a different approach from that of certain faculties of Hungarian higher education in pedagogy.
Although the Ministry for National Economy keeps on claiming that the law is being deliberately misinterpreted, and plenty of options exist for those who do not meet the new expectations, the association says these ways are not worth taking. Even though schools are allowed to employ teachers without a pedagogical degree to teach non-state-funded and not language exam preparatory courses, under the new law they have lost VAT exemption, consequently entailed costs have substantially increased for both the students and the schools that would consider launching these courses.
Rozgonyi also mentioned that school leaders protested several times before the amendment was passed, and they managed to fend off the two most damaging elements of the legislative package, which included the request of a pedagogical degree for native speakers. Nevertheless, all their other remonstrance was ignored.
He said the association deems the regulation pointless because it does not promote in the slightest way the improvement in the quality of the courses. In fact, apart from increasing bureaucracy, it did not have any influence on the quality of education in schools that passed authorisation. The amendment was composed of a bunch of unnecessary regulations that were easy to meet on paper, and that allowed schools with scandalous quality of education to pass. It was also not an impediment for these institutions ratified on paper, to clinch massive assignments for large state-funded programs.
What is the government’s advice to those who would indulge in further training? One of these educators gave a statement to Index, claiming that the Bureau of Education (Oktatási Hivatal) could not give a clear answer to what type of degree in pedagogy is needed, presumably because the range of pedagogical trainings currently available in Hungary is rather chaotic. ELTE, for example, offers a three-semester training in pedagogy that might just be acceptable but to obtain such a diploma would cost about HUF 1 million, which is, naturally, not covered by state funds.
English levels in Hungary – 5 tips for Fidesz
Following their rather rushed-then-revised response to the recent European Commission Report on ”Europeans and their Languages” (which found Hungarians bottom in terms of English conversational ability), here are some other ideas for Fidesz for improving English levels in Hungary.
1. Fund incentives to attract native-speaking teachers.
The main factor in Hungary slipping so far down the rankings has been the transition from German and Russian to English as a second language. Simply put, other countries have managed this transition better, making Hungarian teacher training look perfunctory and half-hearted by comparison. Meanwhile, Hungarian universities offer courses taught in English to attract international students but many of the lecturers themselves are unable to hold a conversation in English.
In order to improve the conversational ability of Hungarian teachers and lecturers, native speakers are needed. Certainly it is cheaper to import teachers to Hungary than it is to export students to England.
Budapest provides possibly the cheapest CELTA course in Europe, attracting native speakers, but the vast majority do not stay in Hungary after training (I should know – I was one of only two who remained out of a class of twenty). Why? Because the low wages frighten teachers away. Look at the stats and you’ll find that the countries where less English is spoken are generally the same countries where wages are lowest.
On the other hand, Hungary can offer some of the cheapest living costs in Europe along with pretty decent facilities. So why not provide accommodation for native-speaking teachers in return for their teaching? Teachers don’t expect to get rich; money simply means security. Provide security in the form of free, shared housing and many young teachers will happily accept a low wage for an agreed, limited period of say, one year.
2. Broadcast un-dubbed films on TV
With the exception of 1970s Kung-Fu movies, non-English films are not usually dubbed into English; subtitles are preferred. If Hungary is serious about wanting to learn English, then drop the dubbing on English-language films! At the very least, provide viewers with a choice!
3. Introduce ability-based groups in state schools
As a private teacher in Hungary for four years, I have taught several teenagers who complained that their regular-school lessons were slow. School teachers are under pressure to get ALL their students to pass but this means at least half the class switches off. So divide students of each year into two groups: a ‘basic standard’ group and a ‘higher level group’. This will make it much easier for both the students and the teacher to achieve.
4. Make lessons and examinations 50% conversation-based
Lets remember that the statistic which caused all the fuss recently was the one concerning ‘the percentage of people able to have a conversation in English’ (In Hungary the figure was 20%). Accordingly, I find that many Hungarian students in possession of a basic (B1) English certificate are yet unable to conduct a basic conversation in English. They have the grammar and the vocabulary, they simply cannot use it in ‘real’ conversation.
Of course learning grammar and vocabulary, and practising reading, writing, and listening are all essential but if ‘having a conversation in English’ is what the Hungarian government wish to target then we need …more conversation practice.
What is conversation practice? In short, it is two or more people speaking about a subject, listening to one another and responding appropriately. Technical mistakes are fine – interaction and understanding are much more important than getting the grammar perfect. Ideally the conversation should feature recently-learned words and phrases but should not simply be robotic reproduction, Q + A, or reading aloud.
In my experience, very little of this actually happens in most classrooms. It’s easy to blame teachers, but this isn’t fair because teachers are under pressure to deliver results – results which are simply not focused on conversational ability! Currently, ‘results’ constitute two criteria: finish the coursebook, and pass the exam.
The typical coursebook is overwhelmingly dedicated to exercises each student completes alone (there may be some Q + A speaking but little ‘conversation’) which is no surprise given that the exam is similarly weighted. Between 60% and 80% of the exam grade is given to tasks the student completes alone. The ‘speaking’ part of the exam is typically 10-15 minutes only, compared to 2 hours or more of solitary exercise completion.
The bottom line is, students don’t need real conversational ability to pass a typical B1 or even B2-level English exam – 75% is about learning the grammar, the vocab, and knowing which ‘key phrases’ to use in the right places. And 75% is a good pass.
Making lessons and exams 50% conversation-based would flip this situation on its head and make conversational ability a pass/fail requirement. Speaking exams should also be recorded and randomly moderated to ensure standards. If Hungarians want to raise ‘the percentage of people able to have a conversation in English’, this is what needs to happen.
5. Teach school-leavers too
The government is clearly not happy about Hungary being bottom of the EU table for English-speaking (20%) – so what should the target be? The average for Eastern Europe is 34% – level with Poland. The overall EU average is higher at 38% – level with Lithuania. In order to be ranked in the top half of countries meanwhile, Hungary would need 51% of the population able to have a conversation in English – the current level in Greece.
If Hungary is going to make this kind of progress in under ten years (bearing in mind that other countries are not going to sit still) then it cannot rely solely on the younger generation: there simply aren’t enough children. In addition, Hungary will need to encourage school-leavers back into the classroom. This could be through subsidised in-work training, compulsory training for jobseekers, lessons for mothers on maternity leave or compulsory lessons for state employees, including teachers and health workers. Needless to say, the courses should focus immediately on conversation practice!
One final note
It should be remembered that raising English levels is not just about national pride or encouraging tourists. Nor is it about pleasing the English or the Americans. In fact, English is requested most often by other (non-UK) Europeans, in political, business, and cultural life. Only 14% of EU citizens are likely to speak German or French as a second language, while for English the figure is 38%. Worldwide the figures tell a similar story: English has become an essential skill.