Heilman, A.W. (2006) Phonics in Proper Perspective. NJ: Pearson- Merill-Prentice Hall.
Phonics instruction is concerned with teaching letter-sound relationship only as the child relate to learning to read. A guideline for the instruction is that the optimum amount of it a child should be exposed to is the minimum the child needs to become an independent reader.
Definiton of key terms:
Phonemic Awareness- refers to the knowledge or understanding that speech consists of a series of sounds and that individual words can be divided into phonemes.
Phonics Instruction- a facet of reading instruction that (1) leads the child to understand that printed letters in printed words represent the speech sound heard when words are pronounced; and (2) involves the actual teaching of which sound is associated with a particular letter or combination of letters.
In order to larn to read the printed code, they must become proficient in segmenting syllables into their constituent phonemes. This ability has been found to be an accurate predictor of success in early reading achievement.
The case for expanding sight vocabulary
Measuring sight vocabulary is the first meaningful teast of reading achievement. expansion of sight vocabulary is the skill that best illustrates the developmental nature of reading. Whenever children are making adequate progress in reading, their stock of sight words is increasing.
Next entry- Phonological Awareness by Gail T. Gillon (2004) NY: The Guilford Press.
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
The New Direction
I was talking to Illani on the phone in the afternoon when she asked me about my research proposal. She mentioned that she read this blog, and she can't really see my direction in doing the research. The conversation makes me realise that I haven't done much into what I am really doing. I guess that is why I dont know what I'm looking for in the Language Policy and Planning books.
So while I was having Nasi Goreng ChiangMai and Nescafe O-Ais for dinner, I ran through all the information that I have read/gathered. I made some-sort of a flowchart of what my research will be. So, here we are:
First of all, I need to redefine my research title-
I know this sounds different from my previous entry. There is a need to define who is my respondents for this research. I know I was kinda ambitious earlier that I said I wanna do the whole Malaysia. But I guess it's not really do-able.
Nevertheless, the new title somehow gives sufficient information on what the research is all about, where, and who involved in this research.
Why four SBPs? This is related to the fact that I can get access to four SBPs in Pekan and Kuantan- SBPI Pekan, SMS Sultan Ahmad Shah Pekan (SHAH), SBPI Kuantan and SMS Sultan Haji Ahmad Shah Kuantan (SEMSAS). My population is the teachers that teach English in these schools. They are nonrandom samples- anyone who teaches English subject in these school will be asked to asnwer my survey forms. As there is English for Science and Technology subject, teachers who teach this subject will be included in this study as well.
Given the fact that these teachers might not be the optionist, this is where the varying attributes come in. This sort of elements will be asked in the demographic section of my survey form. Among other varying attributes that will be included in this study is the teachers' teaching English experience and gender.
So what is this research all about? As the title suggests, it will look into what these English teachers are doing in their English lessons.
What is my literature review will be all about? As I mentioned in the previous entry entitled MBMMBI: Tawaran Baru Sistem Pendidikan Malaysia, there are a few elements of this new policy that teachers in school have to adhere to. Among others are teaching of phonics, stress on the Grammar in the lessons and inclusion of science and teachnology elements in their lesson plannings. So the literature review will look into these matter- what are the benefits of these, and how best to apply it in the classroom.
Furthermore, I will look into two others elements emphasise in this new policy- the use of computer softwares in teaching and learning process, and the existance of English Language Lab in their school. How would these help in better teaching of English?
Nonetheless, I will discuss a bit about English Language Teaching Methodologies such as Direct Grammar Translation, Total Physical Response and Communicative Language Teaching.
As it is reviewed, the questions will be based on these issues. A survey form will be developed based on these elements. I am thinking to use Likert scale for this survey. I will also include an open ended question for the teachers to comment on the topic. A pilot study will be carried out in ensuring that the survey questions are valid.
Now I can see where I am heading in this research.
So while I was having Nasi Goreng ChiangMai and Nescafe O-Ais for dinner, I ran through all the information that I have read/gathered. I made some-sort of a flowchart of what my research will be. So, here we are:
First of all, I need to redefine my research title-
The Implementation of MBMMBI in Four SBPs in Pahang:
What are the English Teachers do in their classrooms?
I know this sounds different from my previous entry. There is a need to define who is my respondents for this research. I know I was kinda ambitious earlier that I said I wanna do the whole Malaysia. But I guess it's not really do-able.
Nevertheless, the new title somehow gives sufficient information on what the research is all about, where, and who involved in this research.
Why four SBPs? This is related to the fact that I can get access to four SBPs in Pekan and Kuantan- SBPI Pekan, SMS Sultan Ahmad Shah Pekan (SHAH), SBPI Kuantan and SMS Sultan Haji Ahmad Shah Kuantan (SEMSAS). My population is the teachers that teach English in these schools. They are nonrandom samples- anyone who teaches English subject in these school will be asked to asnwer my survey forms. As there is English for Science and Technology subject, teachers who teach this subject will be included in this study as well.
Given the fact that these teachers might not be the optionist, this is where the varying attributes come in. This sort of elements will be asked in the demographic section of my survey form. Among other varying attributes that will be included in this study is the teachers' teaching English experience and gender.
So what is this research all about? As the title suggests, it will look into what these English teachers are doing in their English lessons.
What is my literature review will be all about? As I mentioned in the previous entry entitled MBMMBI: Tawaran Baru Sistem Pendidikan Malaysia, there are a few elements of this new policy that teachers in school have to adhere to. Among others are teaching of phonics, stress on the Grammar in the lessons and inclusion of science and teachnology elements in their lesson plannings. So the literature review will look into these matter- what are the benefits of these, and how best to apply it in the classroom.
Furthermore, I will look into two others elements emphasise in this new policy- the use of computer softwares in teaching and learning process, and the existance of English Language Lab in their school. How would these help in better teaching of English?
Nonetheless, I will discuss a bit about English Language Teaching Methodologies such as Direct Grammar Translation, Total Physical Response and Communicative Language Teaching.
As it is reviewed, the questions will be based on these issues. A survey form will be developed based on these elements. I am thinking to use Likert scale for this survey. I will also include an open ended question for the teachers to comment on the topic. A pilot study will be carried out in ensuring that the survey questions are valid.
Now I can see where I am heading in this research.
Teaching for Cross-Language Transfer in Dual Language Education: Possibilities and Pitfalls
This paper was presented by Jim Cummins at the TESOL Symposium on Dual Language Education: Teaching and Learning Two Languages in the EFL Setting at Bogazici University, Istanbul, Turkey on September 23, 2005. This paper can be retrived from http://www.achievementseminars.com/seminar_series_2005_2006/readings/tesol.turkey.pdf
*note that most of the examples in this paper are those in Turkey/Turkish.
.....................................................
There are a few intresting points I gathered from this paper. I can summarise how this paper actually opposing the Communicative Language Teachng, CLT. Why so? Let's take a look into this matter.
Cummins starts this paper by throwing two questions-
1) How can we explain the fact that in well-implemented bilingual programs the foreign or minority language (e.g. English in Turkey) can be used as a medium of instruction at minimal or no cost to students' proficiency in the majority language (e.g. Turkish)?
2) What forms of program organization and instructional strategies are most effective in promoting students’ proficiency in both languages (L1 and L2)?
I am more interested in the first question, as it is somehow related to the situation in Malaysian classrooms.
Cummins mentions that conceptual knowledge in L1 and L2 is interdependent, as concepts, academic content and learning strategies transfer across languages. He then further discusses his very own The Interdependence Hypothesis (Cummins, 1981);
• Transfer of pragmatic aspects of language use (willingness to take risks in communication through L2, ability to use paralinguistic features such as gestures to aid communication, etc.);
• Transfer of specific linguistic elements (knowledge of the meaning of photo in photosynthesis);
• Transfer of phonological awareness- knowledge that words are composed of distinct sounds.
Let's take a look at more graphic explanation:
Verhoeven (1994) reports stronger cross-lingual relationships for literacy and pragmatic language skills than for lexical knowledge. Phonology (as measured by phoneme discrimination tests) was also significantly related across languages which Verhoeven interprets as reflecting the influence of metalinguistic factors on phonological performance in both languages.
McLaughlin (1986) reports on a second study carried out by German linguist Jochen Rehbein (1984). This research found that:
the ability of Turkish children to deal with complex texts in German was affected by their ability to understand these texts in their first language. Rehbein's investigations suggest that there is a strong developmental interrelationship between the bilingual child's two languages and that conceptual information and discourse strategies acquired in the first language transfer to the second(McLaughlin, 1986, p. 34-35).
Implications of the Interdependence Hypothesis for Pedagogy in Bilingual/Immersion Programs
Clearly, one of the implications is how we look into teaching English in our classrooms. Many teachers of second languages (e.g. French in the Canadian context) believe that instruction should be delivered exclusively through the target language. They interpret communicative language teaching as a form of the direct method that mandates exclusive instructional use of the target language and discourages students from any use of their L1. Any use of the L1 by teachers or students is viewed as a regression to the grammar-translation method that has fallen into disrepute.
The dominant monolingual instructional orientation is evident in the following three inter-related sets of assumptions, none of which is empirically supported:
• Instruction should be carried out exclusively in the target language without recourse to students’ L1. Bilingual dictionary use is discouraged (= direct method assumption);
• Translation between L1 and L2 has no place in the teaching of language or literacy. Encouragement of translation in L2 teaching is viewed as a regression to the discredited grammar/translation method; or in bilingual/immersion programs, use of translation is equated with the discredited concurrent translation method in which teachers switch constantly between languages translating all relevant instructional content;
• Within immersion and bilingual programs, the two languages should be kept rigidly separate (= two solitudes assumption).
Cummins then further suggests two means to promote cross-language transfer;
1) creation of dual language multimedia books (sounds familiar, especially during the reign of PPSMI);
2) Sister class exchange- students from another country to share experience in the target language, as well as using the L1.
...........................................................................
DISCUSSION POINT
I talked to a senior teacher in March when I was in Temerloh for Hari Kecemerlangan SBP Zon Timur. She asked me, given the fact that I graduated from overseas, what is the best methodology in teaching English. Well, of course I gave the textbook answer- CLT. But, in reality, is it so? That teacher actually has a different opinion on the matter. She claimed that Grammar Direct Translation is the best method given the fact that students need a good grasp of Grammar, before they can communicate effectively in the language. Somehow, what she said is supported by this paper by Cummins.
In my opinion, it depends on the students' language proficiency. I'm now teaching in an SBP, where most of my students can comprehend English relatively good, although some of them would reply in Bahasa. In this case, I would use CLT. In fact, earlier this year when the new Form One came in, I made compulsory to buy English-English dictionary and I made it very clear- I dont want to see any English-BM dictionary used in my class. And in the classroom, I would ranting non stop in English.
But it is different in my lessons in the tuition centre not too far from my school. In this tuition class, most of the kids are from daily schools around here. Their English is relatively low, compared to my students. So I change my strategy- I use Grammar Direct Translation. I translate almost everything- I give the equivelant in BM. Verb=Kata Kerja. Adjective=Kata Sifat, and so forth. I believe that I need to build their vocab first before I can get them to speak the language.
I wonder what was wrong in the previous curriculum, the one I was in, that they urgently need to change it. I am a living product of that curriculum. Am I not successful?
*note that most of the examples in this paper are those in Turkey/Turkish.
.....................................................
There are a few intresting points I gathered from this paper. I can summarise how this paper actually opposing the Communicative Language Teachng, CLT. Why so? Let's take a look into this matter.
Cummins starts this paper by throwing two questions-
1) How can we explain the fact that in well-implemented bilingual programs the foreign or minority language (e.g. English in Turkey) can be used as a medium of instruction at minimal or no cost to students' proficiency in the majority language (e.g. Turkish)?
2) What forms of program organization and instructional strategies are most effective in promoting students’ proficiency in both languages (L1 and L2)?
I am more interested in the first question, as it is somehow related to the situation in Malaysian classrooms.
Cummins mentions that conceptual knowledge in L1 and L2 is interdependent, as concepts, academic content and learning strategies transfer across languages. He then further discusses his very own The Interdependence Hypothesis (Cummins, 1981);
To the extent that instruction in Lx is effective in promoting proficiency in Lx, transfer of this proficiency to Ly will occur provided there is adequate exposure to Ly and adequate motivation to learn Ly.
Really, I don't understand this at first. What is Lx? What is Ly? Cummins the explains;
In concrete terms, what this principle means is that in, for example, a Turkish-English bilingual program intended for native speakers of Turkish, English instruction that develops Englishreading and writing skills is not just developing English skills, it is also developing a deeper conceptual and linguistic proficiency that is strongly related to the development of literacy in the majority language (Turkish). In other words, although the surface aspects (e.g. pronunciation, fluency, etc.) of different languages are clearly separate, there is an underlying cognitive/academic proficiency that is common across languages. This common underlying proficiency makes possible the transfer of cognitive/academic or literacy-related proficiency from one language to another.
Cummins then summarises the transfer that possible:
• Transfer of conceptual elements (e.g. understanding the concept of photosynthesis);
• Transfer of metacognitive and metalinguistic strategies (e.g. strategies of visualizing, use of graphic organizers, mnemonic devices, vocabulary acquisition strategies, etc.);• Transfer of pragmatic aspects of language use (willingness to take risks in communication through L2, ability to use paralinguistic features such as gestures to aid communication, etc.);
• Transfer of specific linguistic elements (knowledge of the meaning of photo in photosynthesis);
• Transfer of phonological awareness- knowledge that words are composed of distinct sounds.
Let's take a look at more graphic explanation:
The Dual-Iceberg Representation of Bilingual Proficiency.
From this figure, we can see that there are so much similarities between two languages, thus the elements mentioned above can be transfered. Cummins et al. (1984) found that there is minimal relationship in term of grammatical knowledge, but significance relationship is observed for literacy-related knowledge (reading comprehension, vocabulary, etc.) and pragmatic dimension of oral language, or communicative style.
Verhoeven (1994) reports stronger cross-lingual relationships for literacy and pragmatic language skills than for lexical knowledge. Phonology (as measured by phoneme discrimination tests) was also significantly related across languages which Verhoeven interprets as reflecting the influence of metalinguistic factors on phonological performance in both languages.
McLaughlin (1986) reports on a second study carried out by German linguist Jochen Rehbein (1984). This research found that:
the ability of Turkish children to deal with complex texts in German was affected by their ability to understand these texts in their first language. Rehbein's investigations suggest that there is a strong developmental interrelationship between the bilingual child's two languages and that conceptual information and discourse strategies acquired in the first language transfer to the second(McLaughlin, 1986, p. 34-35).
Implications of the Interdependence Hypothesis for Pedagogy in Bilingual/Immersion Programs
Clearly, one of the implications is how we look into teaching English in our classrooms. Many teachers of second languages (e.g. French in the Canadian context) believe that instruction should be delivered exclusively through the target language. They interpret communicative language teaching as a form of the direct method that mandates exclusive instructional use of the target language and discourages students from any use of their L1. Any use of the L1 by teachers or students is viewed as a regression to the grammar-translation method that has fallen into disrepute.
The dominant monolingual instructional orientation is evident in the following three inter-related sets of assumptions, none of which is empirically supported:
• Instruction should be carried out exclusively in the target language without recourse to students’ L1. Bilingual dictionary use is discouraged (= direct method assumption);
• Translation between L1 and L2 has no place in the teaching of language or literacy. Encouragement of translation in L2 teaching is viewed as a regression to the discredited grammar/translation method; or in bilingual/immersion programs, use of translation is equated with the discredited concurrent translation method in which teachers switch constantly between languages translating all relevant instructional content;
• Within immersion and bilingual programs, the two languages should be kept rigidly separate (= two solitudes assumption).
Cummins then further suggests two means to promote cross-language transfer;
1) creation of dual language multimedia books (sounds familiar, especially during the reign of PPSMI);
2) Sister class exchange- students from another country to share experience in the target language, as well as using the L1.
...........................................................................
DISCUSSION POINT
I talked to a senior teacher in March when I was in Temerloh for Hari Kecemerlangan SBP Zon Timur. She asked me, given the fact that I graduated from overseas, what is the best methodology in teaching English. Well, of course I gave the textbook answer- CLT. But, in reality, is it so? That teacher actually has a different opinion on the matter. She claimed that Grammar Direct Translation is the best method given the fact that students need a good grasp of Grammar, before they can communicate effectively in the language. Somehow, what she said is supported by this paper by Cummins.
In my opinion, it depends on the students' language proficiency. I'm now teaching in an SBP, where most of my students can comprehend English relatively good, although some of them would reply in Bahasa. In this case, I would use CLT. In fact, earlier this year when the new Form One came in, I made compulsory to buy English-English dictionary and I made it very clear- I dont want to see any English-BM dictionary used in my class. And in the classroom, I would ranting non stop in English.
But it is different in my lessons in the tuition centre not too far from my school. In this tuition class, most of the kids are from daily schools around here. Their English is relatively low, compared to my students. So I change my strategy- I use Grammar Direct Translation. I translate almost everything- I give the equivelant in BM. Verb=Kata Kerja. Adjective=Kata Sifat, and so forth. I believe that I need to build their vocab first before I can get them to speak the language.
I wonder what was wrong in the previous curriculum, the one I was in, that they urgently need to change it. I am a living product of that curriculum. Am I not successful?
Monday, April 26, 2010
Bilingual Education Accelerates English Language Development
Krashen in this paper defined bilingual educaton as a means of using the child's first language to accelerate the acquisition of English. He stated that the primary goal of bilingual education is English language development.
HOW DOES THIS WORK?
1) Making English More Comprehensible.
By presenting the subject matter in the child's first language, the child will understand it even if it is presented in another language. Cummins (2005)* stated that this is the transfer of conceptual elements where the child learn, say photosynthesis in Malay, but be able to answer questions in English.
2) A Short Cut to English Literacy.
It is easier to learn to read in a language you already know, and once you can read, you can read. I guess this is related to the fact that you can transfer your linguistics skills in learning your L1 in learning L2. Cummins (2005) mentioned that there are five types of transfer, and I guess the ones that related to this point are
-transfer of metacognitive and metalinguistic strategies (visualising, mnemonic devices, etc)
-transfer of specific linguistics elements (such as the meaning of photo in photosynthesis)
-transfer of phonological awareness (how a letter sounds in a language)
3) Early Exposure to Comprehensible English
Good bilingual programs provide exposure to comprehensible English from the very first day and introduce subject matter teaching in English as soon as it can be made comprehensible. My understanding of this is that once the child can understand basic English, teaching of subject matter in English should start. Somehow this is contradicting with his own paper entitled Dealing with English Fever. I have discussed this paper in my two previous entries English Fever? and Cures for English Fever. In that paper, Krashen mentioned that there is no need to start early. Starting early is only necessary to achieve native or near-native fluency.
4)Scientific Studies Support Bilingual Education
In this paper, Krashen presented a few researches done before. In these studies, students have shown the average 'effect size' about .26, which is about a quarter of a standard deviation above the average. I think this is related to the Bilingualism Theory where it says bilingual students process the same fact twice- in both language.
Krashen then give a recommendation- enrich the print environment. This can be done by having better-equipped library. I totally agree with this. Being a nerd myself when I was a child, the local library is a heaven for me. I would spend hours in the library in the afternoon after school, and more on the weekends. I read for hours each days. I finish reading a novel within a day. Even now, my favourite place is still library, and Borders and Kinokuniya. I can get lost there for a whole day- mesmerised with the rich world of knowledge.
.....................................
DISCUSSION POINT
I am very much interested with the point 3, Early Exposure to Comprehensible English. If we are to start as what Krashen suggests, we might as well to introduce the English for basic communication in primary education, and only to introduce the subject matters, be it Science, or Mathematics, or any other subjects, in English when the students have grasped the L2. Perhaps, it is best to introduce these subject matters in secondary school?..............................................................
This paper is written by Krashen, and can be retrived from http://sdkrashen.com/articles/krashen_intro.pdf
*Cummins(2005) Teaching For Cross-Language Transfer in Dual Language Education: Possibilities and Pitfalls. Retrived from http://www.achievementseminars.com/seminar_series_2005_2006/readings/tesol.turkey.pdf
I hope to discuss this research paper especially in the subject of language transfer soon.
Research Proposal Outline
INTRODUCTION
• Brief history of language policy in Malaysia
- PPSMI vs. MBMMBI
- why MBMMBI is introduced
LITERATURE REVIEW
• SLA (BICS/CALP)
• Bilingual Education (contact hour)
• Language and National Identity (language policy and planning)
METHODOLOGY
• Design and Procedure
- approach: Qualitative
- design: Survey - to answer WHAT
- varying attributes
- students' proficiency
- teachers' experience
• Subject
- English teachers of SBPs
- clustering method: SBPs all over Malaysia is divided into 5 zones- each zone will be represented by one school; there are about 5 English teachers each school, total sample is about 25.
• Instrumentation
- self-developed as there's no research has been done on the subject matter
- number of questions- around 30-40 (depending on the research areas/reseach questions
• Method of Analysis
- will use the online data analysis software
SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
• In what way would this research fill the void in the area?
- there is no research is done on this matter specifically, so there's a good chance to look into it.
• Should more research be done in the area?
REFERENCES
• Brief history of language policy in Malaysia
- PPSMI vs. MBMMBI
- why MBMMBI is introduced
LITERATURE REVIEW
• SLA (BICS/CALP)
• Bilingual Education (contact hour)
• Language and National Identity (language policy and planning)
METHODOLOGY
• Design and Procedure
- approach: Qualitative
- design: Survey - to answer WHAT
- varying attributes
- students' proficiency
- teachers' experience
• Subject
- English teachers of SBPs
- clustering method: SBPs all over Malaysia is divided into 5 zones- each zone will be represented by one school; there are about 5 English teachers each school, total sample is about 25.
• Instrumentation
- self-developed as there's no research has been done on the subject matter
- number of questions- around 30-40 (depending on the research areas/reseach questions
• Method of Analysis
- will use the online data analysis software
SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
• In what way would this research fill the void in the area?
- there is no research is done on this matter specifically, so there's a good chance to look into it.
• Should more research be done in the area?
REFERENCES
........................................................
I still think that there are some sort of researches that have been done that look into what happens in English lessons. I need to search for it and perhaps I can modifies the survey forms used to this research purpose.
Sunday, April 25, 2010
Mute English Speakers
While I was having my dinner just now, I flipped through some books on Language Policy and Planning. but somehow I failed to find something that is relevent to my topic. But again, I have no idea what I'm looking for at the first place in the books!!
Nevertheless, there is something rather interesting about Behaviourism Theory on Language Learning. In an article written by VanPatten and Williams entitled 'Early Theories in SLA', they mentioned that
"...acquiring a second language, which is seen a new set of habits. This process is a difficult one but can be facilitated by approriate instruction. Learning conditions are ideal when models are plentiful and accurate, and when feedback is immediate and consistent. ... Learners should be exposed to a large number of target examples of language; they should immitate these model repeatedly and receive feedback- positive feedback for accurate immitations, and correction of inaccurate ones. this process should be repeated until these behaviours have become a habit." (page 20).
I would rather say this is a very, very old methodology and yet many of teachers in Malaysia still practising it. This is when we are producing mute English speakers. It's like teaching a parrot to say 'hi, how are you?' and if it is asked the same question, it will say the same question over and again.
Mute English speakers is very apparent when we discuss CALP/BICS. some students are capable to answer Physics and Biology tests, but have no idea what they are all about. they have the fluency in CALP, but not so much in BICS- the basic communicative skills.
Reference:
VanPatten, B. and Williams, J. (2007) Early Theories in Second Language Acquisition. In
VanPatten, B. and Williams, J. (2007) Theories in Second Language Acquisition: An Introduction. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Nevertheless, there is something rather interesting about Behaviourism Theory on Language Learning. In an article written by VanPatten and Williams entitled 'Early Theories in SLA', they mentioned that
"...acquiring a second language, which is seen a new set of habits. This process is a difficult one but can be facilitated by approriate instruction. Learning conditions are ideal when models are plentiful and accurate, and when feedback is immediate and consistent. ... Learners should be exposed to a large number of target examples of language; they should immitate these model repeatedly and receive feedback- positive feedback for accurate immitations, and correction of inaccurate ones. this process should be repeated until these behaviours have become a habit." (page 20).
I would rather say this is a very, very old methodology and yet many of teachers in Malaysia still practising it. This is when we are producing mute English speakers. It's like teaching a parrot to say 'hi, how are you?' and if it is asked the same question, it will say the same question over and again.
Mute English speakers is very apparent when we discuss CALP/BICS. some students are capable to answer Physics and Biology tests, but have no idea what they are all about. they have the fluency in CALP, but not so much in BICS- the basic communicative skills.
Reference:
VanPatten, B. and Williams, J. (2007) Early Theories in Second Language Acquisition. In
VanPatten, B. and Williams, J. (2007) Theories in Second Language Acquisition: An Introduction. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
...............................................................
I was hoping to find something on why language policy changes from time to time. I guess i need more time to read and look into it.
MBMMBI: Tawaran Baru Sistem Pendidikan Malaysia
In July 2009, the Minister of Education, Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin announced that PPSMI is made redundant and to be replaced with a new policy, i.e., the Empowering Malay Language, Strengthening English Language Policy (Memperkasa Bahasa Malaysia, Memperkukuh Bahasa Inggeris- MBMMBI) (Ministry of Education, 8th July 2009). In the press statement which was made on 8th of July 2009, the MoE stated that Mathematics and Sciences subjects are to be taught using Bahasa Malaysia in all national schools, and in Chinese and Tamil in National Type Chinese Schools and National Type Indian Schools respectively.
This new policy will be implemented in 2012 where it will be carried out for Year One and Year Four in primary schools, and Form One and Form Four in secondary school. This staged implementation is to ensure that the current students who are in PPSMI are able to adapt to the new policy. Hence, until the last cohort of PPSMI is to finish their SPM, Mathematics and Science will be taught and assessed in Malay as well as English. This ‘soft-landing’ mechanism will be implemented where both Bahasa Malaysia and English will be used in teaching and learning process in the classroom as well as in the examinations. All public examinations will use both Bahasa Malaysia and English until 2016, 2013 and 2015 for UPSR, PMR and SPM, respectively. Right after those periods, all teaching and learning of Mathematics and Science as well as the assessments will be carried out in Bahasa Malaysia (see http://www.moe.gov.my/?id=169&aid=567 ).
There are a few reasons for the change in language policy in Malaysian education. Among others were the problems in implementing the PPSMI policy itself. The Ministry of Education Malaysia, in an observation in 2008 found:
1. Just a small number of teachers using 100% English in teaching Mathematics and Science;
2. The quality of the products, i.e., the students, has declined as the percentage of students who get A for both Mathematics and Science declined;
3. The gap between the achievement of rural areas students and urban students has widened during the implementation of PPSMI.
The results of these are more apparent as Trends in Mathematics and Science Study 2007 Report shows that Malaysian students are ranked lower in 2007 as compared in 2003 where we were ranked at number 20 for Science, and 10th for Mathematics. But in 2007, we were ranked at number 21 for Science, and 20th for Mathematics. (The full report can be viewed at http://timss.bc.edu/TIMSS2007/release.html ).
Thus, the new policy Empowering Malay Language, Strengthening English Language Policy (Memperkasa Bahasa Malaysia, Memperkukuh Bahasa Inggeris- MBMMBI) was introduced to overcome the problem. The first implementation of the policy involves the additional time allocated for both Bahasa Malaysia and English. As for English, 330 minutes are located for Year One, Two and Three while 300 minutes are allocated for Year Four, Five and Six. In National Type Schools, the time for English has been made doubled and for secondary schools, additional time is allocated to make it seven periods a week, compared to five periods previously. This is to ensuring more contact hours between teachers and students.
Under this new policy, Children Contemporary Literature Programme is introduced to stimulate interest of reading among young children. Grammar will be given emphasizes on the English lessons and more Science and Technology elements will be included in the English new syllabus.
This new policy will be implemented in 2012 where it will be carried out for Year One and Year Four in primary schools, and Form One and Form Four in secondary school. This staged implementation is to ensure that the current students who are in PPSMI are able to adapt to the new policy. Hence, until the last cohort of PPSMI is to finish their SPM, Mathematics and Science will be taught and assessed in Malay as well as English. This ‘soft-landing’ mechanism will be implemented where both Bahasa Malaysia and English will be used in teaching and learning process in the classroom as well as in the examinations. All public examinations will use both Bahasa Malaysia and English until 2016, 2013 and 2015 for UPSR, PMR and SPM, respectively. Right after those periods, all teaching and learning of Mathematics and Science as well as the assessments will be carried out in Bahasa Malaysia (see http://www.moe.gov.my/?id=169&aid=567 ).
There are a few reasons for the change in language policy in Malaysian education. Among others were the problems in implementing the PPSMI policy itself. The Ministry of Education Malaysia, in an observation in 2008 found:
1. Just a small number of teachers using 100% English in teaching Mathematics and Science;
2. The quality of the products, i.e., the students, has declined as the percentage of students who get A for both Mathematics and Science declined;
3. The gap between the achievement of rural areas students and urban students has widened during the implementation of PPSMI.
The results of these are more apparent as Trends in Mathematics and Science Study 2007 Report shows that Malaysian students are ranked lower in 2007 as compared in 2003 where we were ranked at number 20 for Science, and 10th for Mathematics. But in 2007, we were ranked at number 21 for Science, and 20th for Mathematics. (The full report can be viewed at http://timss.bc.edu/TIMSS2007/release.html ).
Thus, the new policy Empowering Malay Language, Strengthening English Language Policy (Memperkasa Bahasa Malaysia, Memperkukuh Bahasa Inggeris- MBMMBI) was introduced to overcome the problem. The first implementation of the policy involves the additional time allocated for both Bahasa Malaysia and English. As for English, 330 minutes are located for Year One, Two and Three while 300 minutes are allocated for Year Four, Five and Six. In National Type Schools, the time for English has been made doubled and for secondary schools, additional time is allocated to make it seven periods a week, compared to five periods previously. This is to ensuring more contact hours between teachers and students.
Under this new policy, Children Contemporary Literature Programme is introduced to stimulate interest of reading among young children. Grammar will be given emphasizes on the English lessons and more Science and Technology elements will be included in the English new syllabus.
..................................................
This is a part of my term paper for Edu 701 (Education and Human Development), sent to Dr. Zainab Noor in Sem 1, 2009/2010.
Cummins' CALP and BICS
This entry is to discuss a paper by Jim Cummins entitled BICS and CALP: Empirical and Theoretical Status of the Distinction
In:
Street, B. & Hornberger, N. H. (Eds.). (2008). Encyclopedia of Language and Education, 2nd Edition, Volume 2: Literacy. (pp. 71-83). New York: Springer Science + Business Media LLC.
*I dont include the rest as they are related to newly immigrants to the English-speaking countries.
DISCUSSION POINT
It is important to understand this as I believe that we need to know what is our ultimate goal in teaching English in our schools- is it to make them competent English users, or merely to get them to use the language in academic, i.e. to pass the exam and thus getting good bachelor degrees? And the answer is obvious- we need them to be competent in using English, hoping for better results in the exams hence be more competetive in the market.
How much have we achieve this? How can it be measured?
Nevertheless, I somehow suspect that we Malaysians has not much a problem in term of CALP aspect. Given any test, most Malaysians can do it very well. But there is some problem related to coversational fluency as many of us cant really deliver our needs in English. but somehow i think it is more towards motivation and self-confidence. i will need to read more on motivation, but maybe not so much now as in for the thesis. will read those topics for my recreational readings. :)
In:
Street, B. & Hornberger, N. H. (Eds.). (2008). Encyclopedia of Language and Education, 2nd Edition, Volume 2: Literacy. (pp. 71-83). New York: Springer Science + Business Media LLC.
..........................................................................
The first half of this paper discusses how Cummins derives the term CALP and BICS. As that is not really of my interest, I will discuss the meanings of the terms, and their implication towards language policy planning, and subsequently towards MBMMBI.
Definition of the key terms
CALP, or Communicative Academic Language Proficiency, can be defined as 'the extent to which an individual has access to and command of the oral and written academic registers of schooling'.
BICS, or Basic Interpersonal Communicative Skills, refers to the daily communications language skills where one can deliver his/her thought fluently.
as the names suggested, CALP differs in the sense of the domain it is used. clearly, an engineer would have different register as compared to an english teacher. as an english teacher, if I were to speak about SLA, BICS, CALP, TPR, CLT ELTM and so forth with my engineer brother, it'd be like a duck talking to a chicken!!
but as BICS concerns, we both can speak and deliver our ideas effectively given the wide vocab we both share.
Corson (1995) highlighted the enormous lexical differences between typical conversational interactions in English as compared to academic or literacy-related uses of English.
Cummins in this paper suggests a list of influences of BICS and CALP towards language policy. among others:
1) The amount and duration of funding necessary to support students who are learning English as an additional language;
2) The kinds of instructional support that EAL students need at different stages of their acquisition of conversational and academic English. *I dont include the rest as they are related to newly immigrants to the English-speaking countries.
.....................................................
It is important to understand this as I believe that we need to know what is our ultimate goal in teaching English in our schools- is it to make them competent English users, or merely to get them to use the language in academic, i.e. to pass the exam and thus getting good bachelor degrees? And the answer is obvious- we need them to be competent in using English, hoping for better results in the exams hence be more competetive in the market.
How much have we achieve this? How can it be measured?
Nevertheless, I somehow suspect that we Malaysians has not much a problem in term of CALP aspect. Given any test, most Malaysians can do it very well. But there is some problem related to coversational fluency as many of us cant really deliver our needs in English. but somehow i think it is more towards motivation and self-confidence. i will need to read more on motivation, but maybe not so much now as in for the thesis. will read those topics for my recreational readings. :)
Cure for English Fever
in the same paper presented by Krashen (as i describe earlier), he suggested some cures for this illness:
1) Modify our goals
Krashen noted that "the goal of the language class is not to produce error-free performance and complete understanding of all rules of grammar." He noted that language class should focuses in giving the basic 'tool' in learning the L2, thus the advanced students will then further acquiring the language suing the tool, on their own. 'Tool' in this context is the language skills the students already have within their own L1.
2) Language classes should be filled with comprehensible input
Total Physical Response and Natural Approach are said to be the best to give more comprehensible input (Natural Approach is developed by Krashen himself together with Kerrel in 1983, please see http://www2.vobs.at/ludescher/Alternative%20methods/natural_approach.htm ). So given the knowledge in the L1, the students can comprehend what is meant by book for an e.g. when the teacher shows a book. Natural Approach on the other hand teaches the language naturally, as if we were a child. I find this very interesting as when i was a child, I dont remember my mum correcting my BM, let alone tell me what is an adjective or a verb. I hope to discuss this more as there is an argument of MBMMBI where some argue that Grammar is more important than teaching Phonics.
*pls note that Communicative Language Teaching, which is widely promoted (and yet not widely used), teaches Grammar as well, in context as they claim it to be.
3) We can provide a powerful supplement to regular pedagogy in the form of recreational reading
Light reading provides a bridge that makes the reading of more demanding literature comprehensible. Free voluntary reading in English can be done in three stages: (1) graded readers, that is, books written especially for language students; (2) easy authentic reading (light novels, comics, magazines), and finally (3) demanding authentic reading.
I guess the purpose of this recreational reading is to cultivate reading habit among youngsters. I remember once when I was young, my novel was taken away and i was given a warn not to read such a 'novel picisan' in school. Now looking back at those years, without those kind of readings, I dont think I can even read Harry Potter, let alone books on ELTM or SLA!
4) Include sheltered popular literature
A means of combining sheltered subject matter teaching and recreational reading is the establishment of sheltered popular literature classes. The goal of these classes is to introduce students to popular literature, to what is available to them for pleasure reading in the second or foreign language, in the hope of helping students establish a pleasure reading habit in the second language (Krashen, 1999b).
5) Improve libraries
We can provide comprehensible input in the form of libraries, libraries filled, of course, with interesting books and magazines, but also filled with interesting audiotapes and videotapes. Such a library, open to the public, allows foreign language students to continue to obtain both aural and written comprehensible input long after the class is over.
6) Maintain strong first language education
The first language can contribute background knowledge and literacy development that stimulates second language development, and of course advanced first language development stimulates advanced cognitive development.
7) English need not be taught in massive doses
Recall that our goal is not to develop native-like proficiency: Our goal is only to help students reach the intermediate stage, so they can continue to improve on their own. How long it takes to reach this goal is an open question, but it is likely that one period per day for several years, with effective methodology, is enough. The failures of foreign language education in the past were not, in my opinion, due to the lack of time devoted to the language; the failures were due to the methodology.
8) We need not start at very early ages
An early start is less efficient and does not guarantee a native accent. There is no need for preschool cram school English, no need to start English at kindergarten. There is, however, a need to build subject matter knowledge and literacy through the primary language.
1) Modify our goals
Krashen noted that "the goal of the language class is not to produce error-free performance and complete understanding of all rules of grammar." He noted that language class should focuses in giving the basic 'tool' in learning the L2, thus the advanced students will then further acquiring the language suing the tool, on their own. 'Tool' in this context is the language skills the students already have within their own L1.
2) Language classes should be filled with comprehensible input
Total Physical Response and Natural Approach are said to be the best to give more comprehensible input (Natural Approach is developed by Krashen himself together with Kerrel in 1983, please see http://www2.vobs.at/ludescher/Alternative%20methods/natural_approach.htm ). So given the knowledge in the L1, the students can comprehend what is meant by book for an e.g. when the teacher shows a book. Natural Approach on the other hand teaches the language naturally, as if we were a child. I find this very interesting as when i was a child, I dont remember my mum correcting my BM, let alone tell me what is an adjective or a verb. I hope to discuss this more as there is an argument of MBMMBI where some argue that Grammar is more important than teaching Phonics.
*pls note that Communicative Language Teaching, which is widely promoted (and yet not widely used), teaches Grammar as well, in context as they claim it to be.
3) We can provide a powerful supplement to regular pedagogy in the form of recreational reading
Light reading provides a bridge that makes the reading of more demanding literature comprehensible. Free voluntary reading in English can be done in three stages: (1) graded readers, that is, books written especially for language students; (2) easy authentic reading (light novels, comics, magazines), and finally (3) demanding authentic reading.
I guess the purpose of this recreational reading is to cultivate reading habit among youngsters. I remember once when I was young, my novel was taken away and i was given a warn not to read such a 'novel picisan' in school. Now looking back at those years, without those kind of readings, I dont think I can even read Harry Potter, let alone books on ELTM or SLA!
4) Include sheltered popular literature
A means of combining sheltered subject matter teaching and recreational reading is the establishment of sheltered popular literature classes. The goal of these classes is to introduce students to popular literature, to what is available to them for pleasure reading in the second or foreign language, in the hope of helping students establish a pleasure reading habit in the second language (Krashen, 1999b).
5) Improve libraries
We can provide comprehensible input in the form of libraries, libraries filled, of course, with interesting books and magazines, but also filled with interesting audiotapes and videotapes. Such a library, open to the public, allows foreign language students to continue to obtain both aural and written comprehensible input long after the class is over.
6) Maintain strong first language education
The first language can contribute background knowledge and literacy development that stimulates second language development, and of course advanced first language development stimulates advanced cognitive development.
7) English need not be taught in massive doses
Recall that our goal is not to develop native-like proficiency: Our goal is only to help students reach the intermediate stage, so they can continue to improve on their own. How long it takes to reach this goal is an open question, but it is likely that one period per day for several years, with effective methodology, is enough. The failures of foreign language education in the past were not, in my opinion, due to the lack of time devoted to the language; the failures were due to the methodology.
8) We need not start at very early ages
An early start is less efficient and does not guarantee a native accent. There is no need for preschool cram school English, no need to start English at kindergarten. There is, however, a need to build subject matter knowledge and literacy through the primary language.
Saturday, April 24, 2010
ENGLISH FEVER?
this is a very interesting paper written by Stephen Krashen. it opens the discussion on what its meant by English Fever- the overwhelming desire to
(1) acquire English;
(2) ensure that one's children acquire English, as a second or foreign language.
in the world nowadays, English has becoming more and more important. this is very obvious given the fact that almost everything in the Internet is in English. a research by Garfield (1998) found that 95% of the articles cited in the Science Citation Index were written in English, whereas, in the year before it's about 83%. This increase is not due to more work being done by scholars in English-speaking countries; the contributions of scholars from non-English speaking countries are substantial and increasing. It is due to more scholars from non-English speaking countries publishing in English.
a more hardcore evidence- The Pasteur Institute in Paris changed the language of its journal from French to English. The editors explained that in 1973 only about 15% of articles submitted to the journal were in English, but in 1987 100% were.
Krashen then discuss the two types of language acquisition, as what Cummins (2000)* refers as BICS and CALP. Basic Interpersonal Communicative Skills or BICS refers to the basic conversational skills that we use in our everyday lives to communicate, while Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency or CALP, refers to the academic language discourse such as in scientific terms and so forth.
Krashen also discuss in brief how learning English has becoming an obsession in Taiwan where the children will be sent to cramp school at a very young age just to learn English.
He then discuss a few issues related to this-
1) comprehensible input
he asserts that "We acquire language when we receive comprehensible input in a low anxiety situation, that is, when we understand what people say to us and when we understand what we read." thus, acquiring a language is NOT by learning about language, nor by study of the rules nor by memorizing vocabulary.
2) the importance of recreational reading
"Free voluntary reading is an extremely powerful form of comprehensible input, and it is delivered in a low-anxiety environment. Those who participate in free reading programs in school make superior gains in reading, vocabulary, grammar, and writing (Krashen, 1993, 2002)." please note that Krashen is a true believer of recreational reading.
3) Younger is not faster
adults, with substantial comprehensible input, can acquire a second language faster than young children, but in a long run, those who start learning the second language earlier will have have the potential of achieving native-like proficiency. i think that once we acquired the 'skills' to learn a language, it can be transfered to learning another language.
4) The development of a good accent
i think this is closely related to the fact that we just need to fake the accent to gain acceptance into a group. like, u wanna be posh and elegance? talk like Posh Beckham. Krashen noted that accent may be a result of a reluctance, or wanting, to talk in a certain way, not a lack of competence.
5) The role of the first language
the first language can accelerate second language acquisition. education in the first language supplies background knowledge, which can help make input in the second language more comprehensible. Second, providing literacy in the first language is a short cut to second language literacy: applying the rules to learning the second language.
Krashen then made some suggestions based on this hypotheses- which i will add later tonight.
i will also try to relate this paper to our very own language policies in Malaysia.
*this paper will be discussed in depth later when i come to it in my next entries.
(1) acquire English;
(2) ensure that one's children acquire English, as a second or foreign language.
in the world nowadays, English has becoming more and more important. this is very obvious given the fact that almost everything in the Internet is in English. a research by Garfield (1998) found that 95% of the articles cited in the Science Citation Index were written in English, whereas, in the year before it's about 83%. This increase is not due to more work being done by scholars in English-speaking countries; the contributions of scholars from non-English speaking countries are substantial and increasing. It is due to more scholars from non-English speaking countries publishing in English.
a more hardcore evidence- The Pasteur Institute in Paris changed the language of its journal from French to English. The editors explained that in 1973 only about 15% of articles submitted to the journal were in English, but in 1987 100% were.
Krashen then discuss the two types of language acquisition, as what Cummins (2000)* refers as BICS and CALP. Basic Interpersonal Communicative Skills or BICS refers to the basic conversational skills that we use in our everyday lives to communicate, while Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency or CALP, refers to the academic language discourse such as in scientific terms and so forth.
Krashen also discuss in brief how learning English has becoming an obsession in Taiwan where the children will be sent to cramp school at a very young age just to learn English.
He then discuss a few issues related to this-
1) comprehensible input
he asserts that "We acquire language when we receive comprehensible input in a low anxiety situation, that is, when we understand what people say to us and when we understand what we read." thus, acquiring a language is NOT by learning about language, nor by study of the rules nor by memorizing vocabulary.
2) the importance of recreational reading
"Free voluntary reading is an extremely powerful form of comprehensible input, and it is delivered in a low-anxiety environment. Those who participate in free reading programs in school make superior gains in reading, vocabulary, grammar, and writing (Krashen, 1993, 2002)." please note that Krashen is a true believer of recreational reading.
3) Younger is not faster
adults, with substantial comprehensible input, can acquire a second language faster than young children, but in a long run, those who start learning the second language earlier will have have the potential of achieving native-like proficiency. i think that once we acquired the 'skills' to learn a language, it can be transfered to learning another language.
4) The development of a good accent
i think this is closely related to the fact that we just need to fake the accent to gain acceptance into a group. like, u wanna be posh and elegance? talk like Posh Beckham. Krashen noted that accent may be a result of a reluctance, or wanting, to talk in a certain way, not a lack of competence.
5) The role of the first language
the first language can accelerate second language acquisition. education in the first language supplies background knowledge, which can help make input in the second language more comprehensible. Second, providing literacy in the first language is a short cut to second language literacy: applying the rules to learning the second language.
Krashen then made some suggestions based on this hypotheses- which i will add later tonight.
i will also try to relate this paper to our very own language policies in Malaysia.
*this paper will be discussed in depth later when i come to it in my next entries.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)