In the final of the Inter-house English Debate Competition, Red House and Green House debated the motion ‘English should be taught by native speakers only’. Red House was the affirmative side and Green House took the negative stance.
The debate took place on Tuesday in the School Hall. The adjudicators were Mr. Chan, the teacher consultant of the English Debating Team and Miss Ho, the Head Teacher of the English Department.
The affirmative side began the debate by emphasizing that students can learn best only when they are taught by native English speakers. They pointed out that native speakers can speak the language more accurately and fluently than local teachers. Moreover, they said that native speakers know better about the correct use of English since it is their mother tongue.
‘The NETs bring with them their unique accent and intonation. Students can mimic theirs and learn to speak like native speakers. They can thus be able to speak in the most accurate way which can be understood by the global audience,’ said Amy from Red House, the first speaker for the affirmative side.
Green House admitted there might be advantages when English is taught by native speakers, but local teachers have their own superiority in teaching English in Hong Kong. ‘They share the same background as the local students. Cantonese is the first language of both of them. It is easier for the local teachers to understand the difficulties and obstacles in learning a second language and they can, therefore, devise better methods to help their students to overcome them more effectively,’ Norman, the first speaker for the negative side, put forward his rebuttal.
Both sides argued fiercely on whether native speakers enjoy a more advantageous position to enhance a more positive and effective language learning atmosphere in the classroom.
The negative side claimed that it is difficult to have interaction in the lessons taught by the native. ‘They don’t have a common language with students. It is hard for students to raise their questions and low learning efficiency will result,’ said Dick, the second speaker for the negative.
However, the affirmative insisted that English should be taught by native speakers only. ‘It can enhance learning efficiency and effectiveness when English becomes the only medium of communication between teachers and students,’ said Jessica, the third speaker of the team. To support her argument, she quoted a series of survey results released by famous universities from all around the world including Hong Kong University to prove that second language learners can master the language better if they are taught by native speakers.
All speakers from both sides were able to present their arguments with their confident voice. Their performance impressed not only their fellow schoolmates but also the adjudicators. Mr. Chan, the adjudicator who gave the comments, praised all the debaters for their great effort in reacting to their opponents’ speeches and their sensible rebuttals.
In the end, the adjudicators gave the edge to Red House. Jessica was named the debate’s best speaker. She was a strong speaker and the points raised were great and difficult to rebut.
Apart from Jessica, the adjudicators also admired Amy, who demonstrated excellent performance in the competition. She was able to build a relationship with the audience as she spoke. Amy had made use of rhetorical questions and kept eye contact with the audience to get them on her side.
In this competition, both sides made strong arguments and excellent performance. Although Red House won over Green House this time, all the debaters have set good role models for our fellow schoolmates and enhanced their interest in English debating.