Introduction / Context:
This argumentation question examines medium-of-instruction policy. A strong argument must be realistic, relevant, and free from absolute, unsubstantiated claims. The policy proposed is extreme: vernacular-only at all levels and in all domains of learning.
Given Data / Assumptions:
- I claims a single cause (“only way”) for performance improvement.
- II highlights the practical constraint of limited high-quality learning resources across all subjects and grades in every vernacular.
- Higher education often relies on specialized literature with global circulation (journals, standards, technical vocabularies).
Concept / Approach:
- A strong argument avoids sweeping absolutes and recognizes resource ecosystems (textbooks, reference works, teacher preparation, digital content).
- Feasibility and resource availability are central to policy viability.
Step-by-Step Solution:
Evaluate I: Claiming the vernacular is the “only way” to enhance performance is overbroad. Student outcomes depend on pedagogy, teacher quality, assessment, home environment, and resources; hence I is weak.Evaluate II: The scarcity of high-quality, up-to-date materials in all regional languages, especially for advanced subjects, is a concrete constraint. Implementing a vernacular-only policy would impede access to knowledge where resources are lacking. II is strong.
Verification / Alternative check:
Bilingual or flexible-medium models often perform well, leveraging both mother-tongue comprehension and access to wider literature—supporting the caution in II.
Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Only I / Both / Either: Overstate I’s merit; it is an absolute with weak support.Neither: II is clearly relevant and practical.
Common Pitfalls:
Equating comprehension benefits in early grades with a universal, all-level mandate without resourcing.
Final Answer:
Only argument II is strong
Discussion & Comments