Native Speakers; Necessary But Not Compulsory

Native Speakers; Necessary But Not Compulsory

By: Afrianto Daud
(The following article was first written for the Jakarta Post)


It’s really interesting to read the last two posts on the issue of native speakers and non native speakers published by the Jakarta Post, a critical view by Martin Nelly, Non-native vs. Native English Teachers on 10/29/2011 and then responded by Rohan Mulgaonkar, The Truth about Native Speakers on 11/12/2011. The two pieces have enriched our understanding on the position of native and non-native English speakers in the discourse of English teaching in Indonesia. This article is intended to add some more points of discussion about that contentious issue.

Just like Rohan, I simply agree with Nelly Martin reminding us about the fact that native English speakers (NTs) do not necessarily make them being competent English teachers. This due to the fact that being a teacher is not enough just to have good communication skills (as owned by a native speaker), but it also requires other necessary competencies, such as teaching skills, lesson plans design, classroom management, and how to pedagogically communicate with students. Thus, being a native speaker is clearly not enough. To put it in Phillipson’s words (1996), "Teachers are made rather than born, whether they are natives or non-natives."

I also have the same opinion with Rohan that resist the presumed generalization made by Nelly Martin that took one bad case committed by an individual native speaker, in this case 'introducing' his or her students with 'f words' in the classroom to question the credibility of all native speakers.

Whether NTs are important for the process of English language learning is indeed being a hot issue lately. This is especially the case when we speak English in its current status as an international language (EIL). English has evolved with various variants (World Englishes) in the last few decades. Today we are no longer recognizing English model only from places which Kachru (1985) called as inner circle of countries (U.S., British, Australia, Canada, and New Zealand), but also many variants from outer circle countries, such as India, Singapore, Bangladesh, Malaysia, the Philippines, and others. Not to mention varieties from expanding circle countries, like China, Korea, South America, and Indonesia.

Accordingly, the so-called ‘standard English’ is no longer relevant and subject to question. Which kind of English is going to use and which variety deserves to be the standard? Moreover, it is undeniable fact that today people can communicate with any variants of English. Thus, the position of a native speaker as a language model becomes questionable. In other words, the existence of NTs is not as important as before.

In the context of English teaching as a foreign language (EFL) in Indonesia, however, a well trained native speaker of English is still quite important, but it is not a compulsory. While there is a decline in the importance of ‘standard English’ due to a lot English varieties lately, a competent NT is still believed to be a good friend and a good learning resource for students who learn English as a foreign language in Indonesia. With exceptions in some places, generally speaking Indonesia is still a place with limited conducive environment to practice English either inside or outside the class. And the existence of a NT, in some ways, could solve the problems.

Throughout my learning (and teaching) experience, qualified NTs could motivate the students to be more eager to learn and practice their English. The NTS are also considered to be good sources of learning in terms pronunciations, new vocabulary, accent, certain slang, gestures, and cultural aspects of language. It is clear that they are also good speaking partners when the students practice their English. So, I am with Vidar Weseth saying in her/his letter that if a NT is considered effective to help learning process work well, why not? (Jakarta Post, 12/11/2011)

While it might be a good idea to have NTs, its existence is not compulsory. This is attributable to the fact that with the development of technology, English language learners could easily get access to various English resources with NTs on them. They could listen to English movie, English news, and English conversation through DVD, TV, and other electronic media. They could even make a real time interaction with native speakers anytime online on the Internet.

I think that the most crucial points related to the issue of NTs is not questioning the validity of their existence as English teachers in Indonesia, but more on the aspect of justice or fairness, as also addressed by Martin in her piece. It seems to me that there is a tendency in many English/educational institutions in Indonesia to apply different policy between NTs and non-native speaker teachers (NNTs) regarding their status and salary. It is no longer a new issue that many NTs are paid better and given more facilities compared to local teachers. A university where I used to teach, for example, provides various facilities and pays much higher for NTs than the NNTs. In fact, they do relatively the same duties and works.

It will certainly potential to create a feeling of injustice and unfairness on the side of NNTs. They just can’t accept the fact that they are treated differently just because they are not native speakers. In the field, however, NNTs may have more advantages compared to NTs. For example, non-native teachers must have greater empathy because they know from experience what difficulties their own students may encounter in acquiring a sound system of another language. They could also richer experience how to a foreign language learner. So, they could work out with the students better than NTs.

To make it short, in my opinion, just treat NTs as they should be. It is okay to recruit them into the teaching staff, but the criteria should be set clear and reasonable. This includes reconsidering the information requirements which are quite complicated in the Department of Education, as Rohan enunciated. Then, if they could meet the set up criteria; they should deserve to get it. Certain privileges for NTs should be no longer exist.


The writer is an Australia Development Scholarship alumni, and currently doing his doctoral degree at TESOL International, Monash University in Australia.
Time for Younger Generation to Lead the Nation

Time for Younger Generation to Lead the Nation

By: Afrianto Daud
(First published in The Jakarta Post, 11/7/2011)


The upcoming 2014 presidential election is predicted to be a fierce contest and will be interesting to watch.

Unlike previous elections which featured senior figures such as Jusuf Kalla from Golkar Party, Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono from the Democratic Party, Amien Rais from the National Mandate Party (PAN) and Megawati Soekarnoputri from the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P), in 2014 it is very unlikely that these great figures will compete. While Yudhoyono cannot run due to term limits, the others will face age constraints.

In the next three years, Megawati will reach the age of 67; Jusuf Kalla, 72; Amien Rais, 70; and Prabowo Subianto will be 63 years old. Some other top leaders of the established political parties will also no longer be young enough in 2014, as in the case of Aburizal Bakrie and Hatta Rajasa.

While there is no crystal clear border line to call someone “old” or “young”, the figures over 60 years old mentioned above could be included in the category of “very senior”, if not “very old”, and therefore it is reasonable for us to expect them to give the opportunity to younger people to contest the presidential election.

The need to have younger candidates in the next presidential election is apparently realized by many political parties.

Therefore, if we look at the current moves of each political party, almost all of the parties have consciously prepared their young potential leaders as early as possible. This is likely to be attributable to the belief that only a party with young figureheads will earn points at the next general election.

As a result, each political party has deliberately promoted their young contenders to the public.

Puan Maharani, for example, has been groomed to continue Bung Karno’s bloodline in the leadership of PDI-P. Democratic Party chairman Anas Urbaningrum is likely to be part of the party’s strategy to use youth to maintain its lead in the next election.

Similarly, Golkar Party has Idrus Marham, who was 46 years old when elected as the party’s Secretary General in its congress in Pekanbaru in 2009.

The same trend can also be seen in “middle parties”, such as PAN, the United Development Party (PPP), the National Awakening Party (PKB) and the Prosperous Justice Party (PKS).

Perhaps the case is a bit different for PKS, because this Muslim-based party has been led by young Muslim activists since its establishment. Most of its leaders are under 50 years of age.

The question is whether this party has a strong young figure to contest the 2014 election.

Apart from political regeneration, our nation’s challenges will obviously be heavier and more complex in the future.

Internal challenges, such as separatist threats, terrorism, poverty, corruption, high unemployment and backwardness in education remain unresolved.

Those exclude outside threats, such as the negative effects of globalization, the free market system, global terrorism and the loss of national sovereignty over some territorial borders in the region.

Thus, when we talk about national leadership, we cannot just rely on young leaders. As Anis Baswedan, Rector of Paramadina University, has argued the most important issue is the progressive new ideas that the candidates offer, not their age.

In other words, the young leaders that we want are those who are progressive in soul, visionary, competent, full of integrity, and have perseverance in building the country as exemplified by many of our young leaders in the pre- and early post-independence eras.

With these characteristics they can be expected to lead the country out of its various complex tribulations.

We are thus expecting the emergence of youngsters of the caliber of Wahidin Soedirohoesodo who founded and led the Budi Utomo movement in 1908.

We also wish for the birth of far-sighted young leaders like Mohammad Yamin who declared the Youth Pledge in 1928.

Moreover, young people whom we expect to lead the nation are those with a warrior mentality and who can think “out of the box” as exemplified by Sukarni, BM Diah, et al, who “forced” Sukarno-Hatta, who was also young, to immediately proclaim the independence of this nation in 1945.

Perhaps it is too early to expect a young candidate to be the new state leader in 2014.

However, figures like Puan Maharani, Idrus Marham, Anas Urbaningrum, Anis Matta (PKS), Muhammad Romahurmuziy (PPP), Drajad Wibowo (PAN) and Yuddy Chrisnandi (Hanura) have the potential in future elections.

And the choice is not just limited to these names as there are many other potential young leaders, including those not engaged in political parties, such as Anis Baswedan and Sandiaga Uno.

Hopefully, they can show their capacity and perform well in their respective fields so that they will gain significant credit to contest the next presidential elections — if they have the opportunity to do so.

The writer is a 1998 reformasi activist and currently doing his doctoral degree at Monash University, Australia.

2014, Anak Muda yang Memimpin Negeri

Oleh : Afrianto Daud

Mahasiswa Program Doktoral di Monash University, Australia

Padang Ekspres • Jumat, 28/10/2011 11:28 WIB


Pemilihan Umum 2014 diprediksi akan berlangsung sengit dan menarik. Berbeda dengan pemilihan umum sebelumnya, dimana ada banyak partai politik memiliki tokoh-tokoh senior yang sudah memiliki nama (seperti Yusuf Kalla dari Golkar, SBY dari Demokrat, Amin Rais dari PAN, Megawati dari PDIP) pada tahun 2014 besar kemungkinan tokoh-tokoh besar ini tidak akan lagi bisa berlaga. Selain terganjal pembatasan oleh undang-undang, seperti yang dialami oleh SBY karena telah menjadi presiden selama dua kali berturut-turut, mereka juga pada saat yang sama juga terbatasi oleh waktu dan usia mereka.


Pada tahun 2014, Megawati akan memasuki usia 64 tahun. Sementara Yusuf Kalla, 72 tahun; Amin Rais , 70 tahun; dan Prabowo Subianto akan berusia 63 tahun. Beberapa ketua umum partai politik sekarangpun sudah tak begitu muda lagi pada 2014. Walaupun tidak ada garis pembatas yang jelas untuk menyebut ‘tua’ dan ‘muda’, namun para tokoh dengan usia di atas enam puluh tahun di atas tentu sudah termasuk kategori sangat senior, untuk tidak menyebut ‘sangat tua’, dan karenanya sangat pantas mereka dan para pendukungnya legowo untuk memberi kesempatan kepada anak-anak muda untuk maju bertarung pada pemilihan presiden.


Keadaan seperti ini sesungguhnya sangat disadari oleh banyak partai politik. Karenanya hampir semua partai politik secara sadar telah mempersiapkan para kader mudanya sedini mungkin. Ini diyakini karena partai politik tersebut menyadari bahwa hanya partai dengan tokoh mudalah yang bisa memperoleh poin pada pemilihan umum berikutnya.


Nama Puan Maharanie, misalnya, adalah tokoh muda yang sudah dipersiapkan PDIP untuk melanjutkan estafeta tradisi kepemimpinan darah Bung Karno di PDIP. Terpilihnya Anas Urbaningrum sebagai ketua umum Partai Demokrat, saya pikir, di antaranya juga disemangati oleh kesadaran partai ini untuk sejak awal melakukan proses penokohan kader-kader muda untuk estafeta kepemimpinan SBY. Hal yang sama juga terlihat di Partai Golkar.

Terpilihnya Idrus Marham yang saat itu masih berusia 46 tahun sebagai Sekjen pada Munas VIII Partai Partai Golkar di Pekanbaru juga bisa dipahami bahwa adanya kesadaran partai ini untuk melakukan akselerasi ketokohan kader-kader muda mereka. Kecendrungan yang sama juga bisa terbaca di partai tengah lainnya, seperti di tubuh PAN, PPP, dan PKB.


Barangkali kasusnya agak sedikit berbeda dengan Partai Keadilan Sejahtera, karena sejak awal pendiriannya partai berbasis massa Islam ini telah didirikan dan dibangun oleh anak-anak muda. Mayoritas kepengurusannya adalah mereka yang masih berusia di bawah lima puluh tahun. Pertanyaannya adalah apakah partai ini telah memiliki tokoh muda yang layak dijual pada pemilihan presiden 2014 mendatang.


Sekali lagi partai politik yang memiliki tokoh muda yang kuatlah yang bisa memperoleh keuntungan dalam pemilu 2014 mendatang. Dengan demikian, dua tahun tersisa menjelang tahun 2014 adalah masa dimana semua partai politik dengan berbagai cara mesti melakukan kaderisasi, regenerasi, akselerasi, penokohan kader muda mereka, agar mereka bisa dikenal dan ‘laku dijual’ kepada calon pemilih di 2014. Dan di sinilah pertarungan itu menjadi sengit, karena kader-kader muda itu sama sama memulai dari ‘nol’, dan tidak ada diantara mereka yang akan dengan mudah memenangkan pertarungan hanya karena ketokohan dan nama besar mereka selama ini.


Tidak Cukup Hanya Muda Usia
Tantangan nasional bangsa kita ke depan, jelas akan semakin berat dan semakin kompleks. Baik tantangan dari dalam negeri, seperti ancaman seperatisme, terorisme, kemiskinan, pengangguran, dan keterbelakangan di bidang pendidikan. Belum lagi ancaman dari luar, seperti efek negatif globalisasi, sistem pasar bebas, terorisme global, dan bahkan ancaman kedaulatan negeri berupa hilangnya beberapa teritorial negeri kita di wilayah tapal batas.


Dengan demikian, saat kita berbicara kepemimpinan nasional, tentu tidak cukup hanya mengandalkan usia muda saja. Tokoh muda yang kita inginkan tampil pada pemilihan presiden adalah tentu anak muda yang memiliki jiwa progresif , visioner, cakap, berintegritas, dan memiliki semengat juang tinggi dalam membangun negeri seperti yang telah dicontohkan oleh banyak tokoh muda kita dulu pada zaman sebelum kemerdekaan dan setelah kemerdekaan. Dengan karakter seperti ini diharapkan mereka bisa memimpin negeri ini untuk keluar dari beragam permasalahan yang melilitnya.


Kita menginginkan munculnya anak muda seperti Wahidin Soedirohoesodo yang mendirikan dan memimpin pergerakan Budi Utomo pada tahun 1908. Kita menginkan lahirnya anak muda visioner dan cinta negeri seperti Moehammad Yamin yang mendeklarasian Sumpah Pemuda pada tahun 1928. Lebih dari itu, anak muda yang kita harapkan melanjutkan estafeta kepemimpinan nasional itu adalah anak muda yang bermental pejuang, dan berfikir ‘out of the box’ seperti yang dicontohkan Sukarni, BM Diah, dkk yang ‘memaksa’ Sukarno- Hatta, yang waktu itu juga masih muda, untuk segera memproklamirkan kemerdekaan RI pada tahun 1945.


Siapa Dia?
Barangkali terlalu dini untuk bisa menebak siapa anak-anak muda yang pantas untuk menjadi pemimpin nasional setelah 2014 mendatang. Namun, beberapa nama tokoh muda kita yang sudah masuk dalam pentas politik nasional kita, seperti Puan Maharanie (PDIP), Idrus Marham (Golkar), Anas Urbaningrum (Demokrat), Anis Matta (PKS), Muhammad Romahurmuziy (PPP) bolehlah kita cermati dan terus pelajari.

Tentu tidak hanya terbatas pada nama-nama ini. Ada banyak tokoh muda lainnya yang saya pikir pantas untuk dipertimbangkan, termasuk mereka yang saat ini tidak bergerak di partai politik, seperti Anis Baswedan (rektor Universitas Paramadina) dan Sandiago Uno (pengusaha muda yang sukses). Semoga mereka bisa melakukan akselerasi dalam banyak hal sehingga memiliki elektabilitas yang cukup ketika pemilu 2014 menjelang. Ketika semua persyaratan elektabilitas terpenuhi, bukan tidak mungkin Indonesia 2014 akan dipimpin oleh anak muda terbaik negeri ini. Selamat memperingati hari Sumpah Pemuda! (*)