UPSI Digital Repository (UDRep)
|
UPSI Digital Repository (UDRep)
|
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||
| Full Text : |
| Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine and discuss one of the strategies in the latest Malaysian language education policy Memartabatkan Bahasa Malaysia Memperkukuh Bahasa Inggeris (MBMMBI) (To Uphold Bahasa Malaysia and to Strengthen the English Language). The strategy in focus is aimed at improving the quality of English language teachers. This strategy is examined in light of selected research findings and other information that is deemed relevant to a beneficial discussion of the topic. Methodology – The method employed was document analysis which involved intensive reading of the Malaysian Ministry of Education information booklets about the MBMMBI policy and other related documents and resources providing supplementary information about the policy. Findings – The analysis showed that of the five sub-strategies proposed in the main strategy targeted at improving the quality of English language teachers, three of them addressed the commonly included aspects of knowledge, skills and abilities found in the definitions of teacher quality in the literature. Teacher disposition and evaluation, another two aspects often related to teacher quality, were not included. Conclusion – Quality was not featured consistently in the policy strategy analysed. Overall, the policy did not capture the full complexity of the concept of teacher quality. Whether the omission of the other attributes of teacher quality has had any effect on the aspirations of the policy remained to be seen. Follow-up strategies were suggested such as monitoring, evaluation, reinforcement, and support strategies to ensure that the policy in practice would have the desired impact as envisaged by the policy makers. Significance – The quality of teachers has frequently been linked to student achievement in schools. This association between teacher quality and student achievement provides reason for an examination and discussion of the topic of research conducted in this paper. It is also hoped that this paper will provide some impetus for further discussions of English language teacher quality in the current Malaysian educational context. |
| References |
1. Ahmad, A. & Sahak, R. (2009). Teacher-student attachment and teachers’ attitudes towards Work. Jurnal Pendidik dan Pendidikan, 24, 55–72.
2. Andrews, S. & McNeill, A. (2005). Knowledge about language and the ‘Good language teacher’. In Bartels, N. (Ed.), Applied linguistics and language teacher education (pp. 159-178). New York: Springer Science+Business Media, Inc.
3. Bahagian Pendidikan Guru. (2009). Standard Guru Malaysia. Putrajaya: BPG.
4. Barber, M. (2005). National strategies for educational reforms: Lessons from the British experience since 1998. In Fullan, M. (Ed.), Fundamental change (pp. 73-97). Dordecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
5. Bransford, J., Darling-Hammond, L.& LePage, P. (2005).
Introduction.In Darling-Hammond,L. & Bransford,J. (Eds.),
Preparing teachers for a changing world (pp. 1-39). San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
6. British Council. (n.d.). The book of change. Retrieved from https:// www.britishcouncil.my/sites/default/files/the_book_of_change. pdf
7. Caena, F. (2011). Literature review: Quality in teachers’ continuing professional development. European Commision. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/education/policy/strategicframework/ doc/teacher-development_en.pdf
8. Chetty,R., Friedman, J. N., Hilger, N., Saez, E., Schanzenbach, D. W. & Yagan, D. (2011). How does your kindergarten classroom affect your earnings? Evidence from Project Star, The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 126(4), 1593-1660. Retrieved from http://obs.rc.fas.harvard.edu/chetty/STAR.pdf
9. Cochran-Smith, M. (2010). Foreword. In Kennedy, M. (Ed.), Teacher assessment and the quest for teacher quality: A handbook. San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons. Retrieved from http://books.google.com.my/books
10. Denessen, E., Vos, N., Hasselman, F. & Louws, M. (2015). The relationship between primary school teacher and student attitudes towards science and technology, Education Research International, Volume 2015, Article ID 534690. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/ 534690
11. English native speaker mentoring programme improves proficiency of teachers. (2014, March 25). Borneo Post Online. Retrieved from http://www.theborneopost.com/2014/03/25/ englishnative-speaker-mentoring-programme-improves-proficiencyof-teachers/
12. Eraut, M. (1994). Developing professional knowledge and competence. London: Falmer Press.
13. Goe, L. (2007). Linking teacher quality and student outcomes. In
14. Dwyer, C. A. (Ed.), America’s challenge: Effective teachers for at-risk schools and students (pp. 7-24). Washington, D.C.: National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality.Retrieved from http://www.gtlcenter.org/sites/default/files/
docs/NCCTQBiennialReport.pdf
15. Goe, L. & Stickler, L. M. (2008). Teacher quality and student achievement: Making the most of recent research. Washington, D.C.: National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED520769.pdf
16. Grossman, P., Schoenfeld, A., & Lee, C. (2005). Teaching subject matter. In Darling-Hammond, L. & Bransford, J. (Eds.), Preparing teachers for a changing world (pp. 201-231). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
17. Hall, S. J. (2012). Deconstructing aspects of native speakerism: Reflections from in-service teacher education, The Journal of Asia TEFL, 9(3), 107-130. Retrieved from www.asiatefl.org.
18. Harris, D. N. & Rutledge, S. A. (2007). Models and predictors of teacher effectiveness: A review of the literature with lessons from (and for) other occupations. Retrieved from http://www.
teacherqualityresearch.org/models.pdf.
19. Kennedy, M. M. (2010). Attribution error and the quest for teacher quality. Educational Researcher, 39(8), 591-598. doi: 10.3102/0013189X10390804
20. Little, J. W. (2002). Professional communication and collaboration. In Hawley, W. D. with Rollie, D. L. (Eds.), The keys to effective schools (pp. 43-55). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, Inc.
21. Lesley, M., Gee, D. & Matthews, M. (2010). Separating the chaff of bureaucracy from the grain of pedagogy. Teacher Education Quarterly, Spring 2010. Retrieved from http://files.eric. ed.gov/fulltext/EJ896069.pdf
22. Ministry of Education (MOE) (a). (n.d.a). To uphold Bahasa Malaysia & to strengthen the English language – Booklet. Also available online at http://www.moe.gov.my/ mbmmbi/ moe_ mbmmbi_03.htm.
23. Ministry of Education, Malaysia (MOE). (n.d.b). Program peningkatan profesionalisme guru Bahasa Inggeris. Retrieved from https://nkra.moe.gov.my/doc/dokumen/Pembentangan
Program PeningkatanProfesionalismeGuruBI_5.9.12.pdf
24. Ministry of Education, Malaysia (MOE). (2012a). Taklimat pelaksanaan analisis keperluan latihan Pegawai Perkhidmatan Pendidikan Bahasa Inggeris (PPI BI) 2012 kepada sekolah. Retrieved from http://www.moe.gov.my
25. Ministry of Education, Malaysia (MOE). (2012b). Ministry of Education policies: Frequently asked questions. PowerPoint Presentation. Retrieved from http://www.kpkk.gov.my /pdf/
Dasar-dasar%20KPM% 20(BI)%20(NCM).pdf
26. Ministry of Education, Malaysia (MOE). (2013). Malaysia Education Blueprint 2013-2025.
Putrajaya: Ministry of Education, Malaysia. Retrieved fromhttp://www.moe.gov.my/cms/upload_files/articlefile/2013/ articlefile_file_003108.pdf
27. Ministry of Education, Malaysia (MOE). (2014). Dasar
Memartabatkan Bahasa Malaysia Memperkukuhkan Bahasa
Inggeris. Putrajaya: Ministry of Education, Malaysia.
Retrieved from http://www.moe.gov.my/cms/upload_files/
articlefile/2015/articlefile_ file_003767.pdf
28. Ministry of Education, Malaysia (MOE). (2015). Malaysia education for all: End decade review report 2000-2015. Putrajaya: Ministry of Education. Retrieved from http://www.moe. gov.my/cms/upload_files/files/KPM%20%20Malaysia%20
Education%20For%20All%20 (End%20Decade%20Review%
20Report).pdf
29. Mitchell, K. J., Robinson, D. Z., Plake, B. S. & Knowles, K. T. (2001). Testing teacher candidates: The role of licensure tests in improving teacher quality. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
30. Montgomery, D. (2002). Helping teachers develop through classroom observation (2nd ed.). London: David Fulton Publishers.
31. Napisah Kepol, Mariyatunnitha Shari, & Nadiah Yan Abdullah. (2012, October). Curriculum change:ESL teachers’ understanding and challenges. Paper presented at the Asian Conference on Education 2012, Osaka, Japan. Unpublished.
32. Performance Management and Delivery Unit (PEMANDU).
(2012). Government transformation programme: Annual
report 2012. Putrajaya: PEMANDU. Retrieved from http://
www.pemandu.gov.my/gtp/annualreport2012/NKRAs-@-
improving_Students_ Outcomes.aspx
33. Performance Management and Delivery Unit (PEMANDU).
(2015). Government Transformation Programme: 2014
annual report. Putrajaya: PEMANDU. Retrieved from http://
www.pemandu.gov.my/gtp/annualreport2014/upload/file/
GTP_AR2014.pdf
34. Punch, K. F. (1998). Introduction to social research. London: SAGE Publications.
35. OECD. (2009). Creating effective teaching and learning environments: First results from TALIS. OECD Publishing. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/edu/school/4302 3606.pdf.
36. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching, Educational Researcher, 15(5), 4 – 14.
37. Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform, Harvard Educational Review, 57, 1-22.
38. Stronge, J. H. (2006). Teacher evaluation and school improvement. In Stronge, J. H. (Ed.), Evaluating teaching (2nd ed.), 1-23.
39. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Tucker, P. D. & Stronge, J. H. (2005). Linking teacher evaluation
and student learning. Alexandria, Virginia: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
40. Vescio, V., Ross, D. & Adams, A. (2008). A review of research on the impact of professional learning communities on teacher practice and student learning, Teaching and Teacher Education, 24, 80-91. Retrieved from http://www.k12.wa.us/ Compensation /pubdocs /Vescio2008PLC-paper.pdf
41. Wahlgren, B. (n.d.). What impact does teacher training have on the student’s performance? Retrieved from http://ncfk.dpu.dk/ fileadmin/nck/Nyheder/ASEMartikel_maj_2012.pdf
42. Wahlgren, B. & Larsen, L. L. (2009). Teachers and trainers in adult education and lifelong learning. Retrieved from http://www. die-bonn.de/asem/asem0919.pdf
43. Yeow, P. W. (2012, October). Standards, challenges and guidelines: Setting pedagogy standards for English language teachers (PSELT): A Malaysian case study. PowerPoint presentation presented at the IATEFL AMATE Conference. Retrieved from http://tea.iatefl.org/Prague2012/Standards,Challenges%20
&%20Guidelines-Yeow.pdf |
| This material may be protected under Copyright Act which governs the making of photocopies or reproductions of copyrighted materials. You may use the digitized material for private study, scholarship, or research. |