• Tiada Hasil Ditemukan

The CEFR-Aligned Curriculum: Perspectives of Malaysian Teachers

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2022

Share "The CEFR-Aligned Curriculum: Perspectives of Malaysian Teachers "

Copied!
8
0
0

Tekspenuh

(1)

The CEFR-Aligned Curriculum: Perspectives of Malaysian Teachers

Paramjit Kaur1*, Mah Zhi Jian2

1 School of Education, Universiti Utara Malaysia, Kedah, Malaysia

2 Ministry of Education, Kedah, Malaysia

*Corresponding Author: paramjit@uum.edu.my

Accepted: 15 February 2022 | Published: 1 March 2022 DOI:https://doi.org/10.55057/ajress.2022.4.1.13

__________________________________________________________________________________________

Abstract: This paper examines the perceptions of primary school teachers regarding the introduction of the Common European Framework of References for Languages (CEFR) in the Malaysian school curriculum in 2018. This study employed a 4-point Likert scale questionnaire adapted from Nguyen (2017) and Teoh (2018). The data were collected from 500 primary school teachers using a questionnaire that included 11 close ended items and one open ended item. An online version of the questionnaire was distributed to primary school teachers all over Malaysia using the snowball sampling method. The findings showed that the majority of teachers had positively perceived the implementation of CEFR-aligned English curriculum (M=2.82). However, many teachers also indicated that they faced many challenges related to the implementation of the CEFR-aligned curriculum (M=2.24). This study concludes that although the teachers showed a positively viewed the CEFR-aligned curriculum, they may not be able to implement the curriculum successfully as they encountered certain challenges related to it. Curriculum reforms and changes need to take into account teachers’ concerns and provide them with support in order to optimize learning and teaching. Teachers’ concerns and perspectives need to be taken into account as they are major stakeholders that ensure the outcome of language policies.

Keywords: Common European Framework of References for Languages, CEFR, English language teaching

___________________________________________________________________________

1. Introduction

The Malaysian Ministry of Education (MOE) constantly improves the language curriculum in schools in its effort to upgrade the teaching and learning of the English language. This is in response to improve the English proficiency of Malaysians and prepare a workforce that will be able to function in a globalized world. At the tertiary level, the issue of weak English language proficiency and language skills among the local graduates still remain unsolved despite MOE’s various language policies and curriculum reforms (Shanmugam, 2017;

Mustafa, 2018). Employers from the industry and various other sectors often complaint of poor English skills among undergraduates entering the job market (Tan, 2017). In 2017, in order to enhance English proficiency skills as well as to benchmark Malaysian students against international standards, MOE decided to adopt the CEFR. Thus, the primary and secondary English language curriculum were aligned to the CEFR in 2017. MOE aspired to set internationally accepted standards based on the CEFR, tailored to the specific needs of the Malaysian classrooms. The CEFR levels will play the role as the guiding framework in efforts

(2)

to align the curriculum development, teaching, learning and assessment from pre-schools to tertiary education. With this vision in mind, the CEFR was introduced to Malaysian teachers towards the end of 2016 via the Familiarization Cascade Training. In 2017, courses such as Learning Materials Adaptation, Curriculum Induction and Item Writing were conducted to prepare teachers for the CEFR-aligned primary school English curriculum (Ministry of Education, 2015). In 2018, Year 1, Year 2, Form 1 and Form 2 students started to use the CEFR-aligned primary school curriculum. The textbooks used in schools were also aligned to the CEFR levels.

Malaysian teachers’ understanding of the CEFR and their English language proficiency are keys to the successful implementation of the CEFR-aligned curriculum. Teachers are one of the key factors in determining the success of the implementation of the CEFR in Malaysia. If teachers do not understand the CEFR and the aims behind it, the success would be limited.

Mustafa (2018) highlighted several issues related to the initial implementation of the CEFR training. Among these included the issue of teachers’ proficiency that would also need to be improved and aligned to the standards in the CEFR. However, when selected teachers who underwent training in the CEFR-aligned syllabus and textbooks were expected to train their colleagues, information was lost in translation (Mustafa, 2018). Thus, the CEFR training programme was not without its challenges and shortcomings. This paper examines the perceptions of primary school teachers about the introduction of the CEFR in terms of the potential uses of CEFR and the challenges faced by primary school teachers.

2. Literature Review

Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR)

The CEFR is a framework to describe language ability of learners across the world, i.e. it is a framework that acts as a standard to rank English language ability based on the different skills for learners internationally. The CEFR was initially designed for the speakers of other languages across Europe and to organise language proficiency in Europe, which was then adopted by other countries like Malaysia (Ministry of Education, 2015). The CEFR has now become a fundamental reference point of English across the world for governmental policies that determine immigrant rights to entry and citizenship, and national curriculum targets (McNamara, 2011; Alderson, 2007). Hence, the CEFR is almost impossible to be ignored (North, 2014). The CEFR functioned as a planning tool to promote transparency in language education. Policy-makers, for instance, refer to the CEFR in order to set minimum language requirements for different purposes, which include entry to higher education, employment and immigration. The CEFR is also a reaction to developments in language teaching and learning in a globalized world that thrives on international business and communication. The English language learning is no longer viewed as a subject to be learned for academic purposes but as a means to communicate with others internationally, especially for international business.

The CEFR descriptors focus on the learners and provide the readers with a tool for reflecting on what is involved in language use and in language learning, teaching and assessment. The CEFR describes six levels of proficiency for foreign language learning. In every level, a list of the expected competence and skills that language learners should have and be able to perform is outlined (Azman, 2016). It is a framework that consists of a descriptive scheme to analyze what is needed in language learning and use. It also provides a definition of communicative proficiency at six levels arranged in three categories. Basic users of the language are at A1 and A2 level. B1 and B2 are for independent users while users who achieved C1 and C2 are considered proficient users of the language (North, 2014). In the Malaysian context, preschool

(3)

children are expected to be moving towards A1 when they enter primary school, and to reach A2 by the time they leave. Secondary school children are expected to pass through B1, and the target for post-secondary students is B2. University students are expected to reach B2 or C1 (Ministry of Education Malaysia, 2015).

Potential Uses of the CEFR

In this era of globalisation, the Malaysian education system aspires to prepare pupils for international mobility. Therefore, it is hoped that Malaysian pupils’ language qualifications can be internationally recognised so that pupils do not have to go through entrance or language tests before furthering studies in another country. According to the Ministry of Education, Malaysian English curriculum in primary schools is not aligned with international standards.

Besides, teachers are not sufficiently equipped to interpret and deliver curriculum document.

In terms of assessment, there is a lack of balanced and discrete testing of all language skills.

Teachers also possess limited ability in carrying out formative assessment to support pupils’

learning (Ministry of Education, 2015).

CEFR seems to be able to help bridge these gaps as it is a framework which provides a basis for teachers to help pupils orient themselves and set language learning goals in accordance with their optimal level of which they should work on (Council of Europe, 2001). The framework focuses on pupils’ strengths and describes what they can do rather than what they have not achieved. Pupils are able to set realistic learning targets and outcomes. Hence, the CEFR encourages teaching and learning in the classroom to focus on individual language goals and that will help teachers shift their emphasis from focusing on performance in examinations and traditional pen and paper assessments. It is hoped that the CEFR-aligned curriculum will reduce the “teach to the test” phenomenon in the classroom. This is supported by Xuan (2017) who reported that English teachers from a language faculty in a university in Vietnam had a very favourable opinion of the CEFR’s role in developing curricula and assessment. The teachers found CEFR’s clear and detailed description of proficiency levels useful and the role of the CEFR manifested the most in their assessment practices and teaching activities (Xuan, 2017).

The CEFR also encourages an action-approach teaching and learning in the classroom. It focuses on communicative aspects of using the language, rather than knowing about the language content. Since the CEFR is about ‘raising questions, not answering them’ (Council of Europe, 2001, p. xi), students will be encouraged to reflect on those questions and present relevant answers based on contexts rather than focusing on memorising grammar rules and vocabulary. CEFR also focuses on the constructive outcomes of language learning. In other words, the feedback it provides is focused on specific skills and abilities instead of simply giving a grade in assessment (Council of Europe, 2001). Students will receive information on their strengths and weaknesses in certain language areas and skills. With these students, can then re-orient themselves and work towards their next target of competence in the language.

Adopting the CEFR can help to bridge the gap in assessment as mentioned earlier. The Malaysian Examination Syndicate can align the end-of-year and exit assessments in primary schools to international standards in order to ‘obtain a picture of student performance that has more validity beyond the school’ (Ministry of Education, 2015, p.175). Once the assessment is aligned to CEFR, students can benchmark their performance level with pupils of similar age group from another country which has adopted the CEFR.

(4)

3. Methodology

This study adopted a quantitative approach in data collection. The targeted population of this study was Malaysian primary school English teachers who had implemented the CEFR-aligned English curriculum in 2018 and/or 2019. The sample of this study was 500 primary school English teachers from all the states around Malaysia. The samples were part of CEFR training groups and researchers requested that an initial set of respondents to send the questionnaires onto their fellow teachers who had taught the CEFR-aligned curriculum. The questionnaire was emailed via Google Doc, and employing the snowball sampling method, teachers were requested to forward the questionnaire to their friends who also attended the CEFR training.

Thus these teachers were able to forward the questionnaire to their colleagues, and their colleagues were then requested to forward it as well.

The questionnaire used in this study is adapted from Nguyen’s (2017) study on Vietnamese EFL teachers’ perceptions towards the use of CEFR and Teoh’s (2018) study on Malaysian secondary school English teachers’ perceptions towards the implementation of the CEFR- aligned curriculum. The questionnaire employed in this study consists of two sections; that include the first section which has seven items pertaining to background information and the second section has 19 items of which 18 items use the Likert-scale to investigate the perceptions of teachers on the implementation of the CEFR-aligned curriculum and one open- ended item to investigate the challenges that the respondents faced. A reliability test was run and yielded a score of α = 0.83, indicating the items are valid and reliable.

This study adopted a quantitative approach to collect data. The population of this study were Malaysian primary school English teachers who had implemented the CEFR-aligned English curriculum in 2018 and/or 2019. The sample of this study was 500 primary school English teachers from all the states around Malaysia. The samples were part of CEFR training groups and researchers requested that they send the questionnaires on to their fellow teachers who had taught the CEFR-aligned curriculum. The questionnaire was emailed via Google Doc, and employing the snowball sampling method, teachers were requested to forward the questionnaire to their friends who also attended the training. Thus, these teachers were able to forward the questionnaire to their colleagues, and their colleagues were then requested to forward it as well.

The questionnaire used in this study is adapted from Nguyen’s (2017) study on Vietnamese EFL teachers’ perceptions towards the use of CEFR and Teoh’s (2018) study on Malaysian secondary school English teachers’ perceptions towards the implementation of the CEFR- aligned curriculum. The questionnaire employed in this study consists of two sections; that include the first section which has seven items pertaining to background information and the second section has 19 items of which 18 items use the Likert-scale to investigate the perceptions of teachers on the implementation of the CEFR-aligned curriculum and one open- ended item to investigate the challenges that the respondents faced. A reliability test was run and yielded a score of α = 0.83, indicating the items are valid and reliable.

4. Findings and Discussion

Table 1 shows the perceptions of the respondents towards the potential uses of CEFR. The overall mean score on teachers’ perceptions towards the potential uses of the CEFR was M=

2.91, SD = 0.46, indicating that teachers held positive perception. The respondents perceived the CEFR-aligned curriculum useful for the primary school pupils. The statement “The CEFR makes language learning in the classroom more fun.” had the highest mean score (M = 3.10,

(5)

SD = 0.62). This was probably due to the fact that the CEFR-aligned curriculum adopts an action-oriented and communicative approach. Therefore, pupils are involved in a lot of communicative activities and as a result, the time spent on ‘chalk-and-talk’ approach of teaching English to young children is reduced, making lessons more fun for the pupils. On the other hand, the statement “The CEFR has been useful as criteria to evaluate pupils” recorded the lowest mean score (M = 2.81, SD = 0.56). This was probably because as the CEFR-aligned curriculum had just been implemented, there were no clear guidelines on how summative assessment should be carried out. Nonetheless, the respondents were informed about the procedures for formative assessment hence holding positive perceptions towards the use of CEFR to evaluate pupils. The respondents may have faced challenges in the actual implementation of the CEFR-aligned curriculum. The findings concurred with the studies carried out by Sakai and Jimbo (2010), Faez, Taylor, Majhanovich and Brown (2011), Zheng, Zhang and Yan (2016) and Nguyen (2017). It was not surprising if the teachers found it challenging since the implementation of CEFR-aligned English curriculum in Malaysia was still in the early stages.

Table 1: Perceptions towards the Potential Uses of the CEFR

Item Statement Mean Standard

Deviation 1 The CEFR is widely known as criteria to evaluate pupils’ English

proficiency.

2.94 0.60 2 The description of the CEFR is easily understandable. 2.90 0.56 3 The CEFR has been useful as criteria to evaluate pupils. 2.81 0.56 4 The CEFR provides a means of aligning assessment with

proficiency level.

2.86 0.56 5 The CEFR promotes better curriculum design. 2.83 0.64 6

The CEFR leads to the perceived shift from teacher-centred knowledge-driven classes to learner-centred communication- oriented instruction.

3.04 0.59

7 The CEFR makes lesson planning and implementation in the classroom more systematic.

2.83 0.66 8 The CEFR makes language learning in the classroom more fun. 3.10 0.62 9 The CEFR helps to ensure language levels are pitched at the right

level for the pupils.

2.90 0.61

Overall 2.91 0.46

Table 2 shows that the respondents’ overall perception towards the challenges of using the CEFR was negative (M=2.24, SD=0.45). In other words, the respondents faced challenges in the implementation of the CEFR-aligned curriculum. The findings concurred with the studies carried out by Zheng, Zhang and Yan (2016) and Nguyen (2017). It was not surprising if the teachers found it challenging since the implementation of CEFR-aligned English curriculum in Malaysia was still in the early stages and these teachers were considered as the pioneer group.

Thus, maybe even policy makers may not have clear ideas of certain aspects of the introduction of the CEFR.

The respondents in this study found it confusing to use the new level-based scale. This was most probably due to the fact that the respondents had not understood the differences in each level and found it difficult to identify a pupil’s level according to the descriptors in the CEFR.

For example, respondents might not be able to identify clearly the differences between A1 and A2 in the CEFR scales. Besides, the respondents also found the language used in CEFR ambiguous. At the same time, the respondents found it challenging to design assessments too.

The lowest means score was 1.82 (SD = 0.69) for the statement ‘there is (no) lack of funding, and (no) limited time and expertise. This finding was consistent with Nguyen’s (2017) study

(6)

which reported that teachers faced challenges in the early stages of a curriculum reform. Since CEFR has just been implemented in Malaysia, the Ministry of Education is still depending on the experts from Cambridge English to help make the alignment in terms of curriculum, assessment and materials. Hence, it is not surprising to note that respondents felt that there was limited expertise around to help them solve the problems they faced. Besides, teachers had undergone training for curriculum induction in August 2017 and the CEFR-aligned curriculum was implemented starting from January 2018. Therefore, respondents found they had limited time to understand CEFR thoroughly before they had to start implementing the curriculum.

Another issue worth highlighting was that the respondents might not receive sufficient information during training. Uri and Aziz (2018) noted that normaly familiarization workshops conducted were inadequate and insufficient for classroom implementation. Teachers need extra help when it comes to implementing what they have learnt in their own classrooms.

The only statement that received positive perception was “It is easy to design lessons based on the CEFR”. The statement recorded the highest mean score within the dimension with M = 2.68, SD = 0.69. One of the possible reasons was that there was a lot of support and references given to teachers for them to plan their lessons. The Scheme of Work had been given to them and there were suggested sample lesson plans for them to refer to.

Table 2: Teachers’ Perceptions towards the Challenges of Using the CEFR

Item Statement Mean Standard

Deviation 10 *There is (no) confusion about how to use the new scale

(the CEFR) due to the familiarity with using level-based scale.

2.14 0.62

11 *The language used in the CEFR is (not) ambiguous. 2.35 0.68 12 It is easy to design lessons based on the CEFR. 2.68 0.69 13 *Designing assessments based on the CEFR is (not)

challenging

2.18 0.66

14 *There is (no) lack of funding, and (no) limited time and expertise.

1.84 0.69

Overall 2.24 0.45

Note. *items have been reverted to positively-worded statements

5. Conclusion and Implications

The results of this study suggest that the implementation of the CEFR-aligned curriculum is generally well-received by the English teachers in Malaysian primary schools. The positive perceptions held by the teachers may imply that the teachers are ready to accept the curriculum reform since the CEFR-aligned curriculum was rolled out in the year 2018. This is similar to findings by other similar studies by Zheng, Zhang and Yan (2016) and Nguyen (2017). It could be implied that generally teachers understand and welcome the rationale behind the alignment of the local curriculum towards international standards, that is the CEFR. However, the teachers also indicated that they perceived the implementation of the CEFR as challenging.

Respondents may be enthusiastic about the introduction of the new curriculum, however, they need more support and guidance in terms of the actual implementation of the curriculum.

It is important for teachers to perceive the curriculum reform positively as the whole process will take a few more years before all the curricula from pre-schools to universities are aligned to the CEFR. Teachers may need to change their current ways of practice in the years to come and it is hoped that more positivity among teachers can be instilled so that the motivation to

(7)

improve the teaching and learning of English in Malaysian primary classrooms will be sustained. Teachers’ negative perceptions towards the challenges of implementing the CEFR- aligned curriculum imply that there are still issues to be sorted out to enable the curriculum to be implemented effectively. School administrators especially need to give support and provide training for teachers to implement the CEFR-aligned curriculum.

School administrators should be well-informed about the alignment of the curriculum to the CEFR. There is a dire need for school administrators to be given briefing and information about the implementation of the curriculum, especially the implications of aligning the curriculum to CEFR towards assessment, classroom practice and materials selection. The Ministry of Education should also align the procedures in implementing the curriculum among the policy makers, curriculum planners, education officers, school administrators and school teachers. An example would be standardizing the writing of lesson plans and providing a standard operational procedure for recording formative assessment results in the classroom. This process is vital so as to ensure consistency in implementation and avoid confusion among teachers due to contradicting instructions given by officers from different divisions.

Teachers’ perceptions play an essential role in the success of the implementation of a curriculum reform. As teachers are the catalyst in the curriculum reform, the challenges that the teachers faced, namely the lack of resources, classroom issues, the cultural elements in the textbooks, the content and language of the textbooks, preparing lesson plans, and the school administrators need to be addressed to ensure the successful implementation of the curriculum.

It is hoped that the CEFR-aligned English curriculum will bring positive changes to the English Language Teaching field in Malaysia and that Malaysians’ English standards will be raised to the desired level, at par with international standards.

References

Alderson, J. C. (2007). The CEFR and the need for more research. The Modern Language Journal, 91(4), 659–663.

Azman, H. (2016). Implementation and challenges of English language education reform in Malaysian primary schools. The Southeast Asian Journal of English language studies, 22(3), 65 – 78.

Council of Europe. (2001). The Common European Framework of Reference for Languages:

Learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Faez, F., Majhanovich, S., Taylor, S., Smith, M. & Crowley, K. (2011). Teacher reactions to CEFR’s task-based approach for ESL classrooms. The Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics, Special Issue 14(2), 1-19.

McNamara, T. (2011). Managing learning: Authority and language assessment. Language Teaching, 44(4), 500-515.

Ministry of Education Malaysia. (2015). English Language Education Reform in Malaysia:

The Roadmap 2015-2025. Kuala Lumpur: Ministry of Education Malaysia.

Mustafa, Z. (2018, July 11). Proficient way to better English. New Straits Times. Retrieved from https://www.nst.com.my/education/2018/07/389562/ proficient-way-better- English.

Nguyen, N. T. (2017). EFL teachers’ perceptions towards the use of CEFR-V. European Journal of English Language Teaching, 2(4), 74-86.

North, B. (2014). The CEFR in practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Sakai, S. & Jimbo, H. (2010). JACET survey on CEFR: A comprehensive study on the framework of English Language teachers’ professional development in Japan. Tokyo:

(8)

JACET SIG.

Shanmugam, M. (2017). Unemployment among graduates needs to be sorted out fast. The Star Online, Retrieved from http://www.thestar.com.my/business/business- news/2017/03/25/ unemployment-among graduates needs- to-sorted-out-fast/

Tan, C. (2017). Poor English skills a major complaint in every industry. The Star Online.

Retrieved from https://www.thestar.com.my/news/nation/2017/03/25/

poor-english-skills-a-major-complaint-in-every-industry/

Teoh, L. V. (2018). Malaysian secondary school English teachers' perception towards the implementation of CEFR-aligned curriculum (Unpublished Project Paper). Universiti Utara Malaysia.

Uri, N. F. M., & Aziz, M. S. A. (2018). Implementation of CEFR in Malaysia: Teachers’

awareness and the challenges. 3L: Language, Linguistics, Literature, 24(3), 168 – 183.

https://doi.org/10.17576/3L-2018-2403-13

Xuan, M. N. (2017). Diffusion of the CEFR among Vietnamese teachers: A mixed methods investigation. The Asian EFL Journal Quarterly, 19(1), pp.7-32

Zheng, Y., Zhang, Y. & Yan, Y. (2016). Investigating the practice of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) outside Europe: A case study on the assessment of writing in English in China. ELT Research Papers. Southampton:

University of Southampton.

Rujukan

DOKUMEN BERKAITAN

In view of the above phenomenon and to fill-in the gap, this study attempts: first, to determine consumers’ general purchasing behaviour pattern when they

The purpose of this study was to investigate the perceptions of the music teachers associated to the teaching of multicultural music education in Malaysian primary schools. The

H1: There is a significant relationship between social influence and Malaysian entrepreneur’s behavioral intention to adopt social media marketing... Page 57 of

Therefore, at 1400C with coarser grain size, the composite mechanical properties slightly decreases but the readings were quite high compared to the composites sintered lower

In this thesis, the soliton solutions such as vortex, monopole-instanton are studied in the context of U (1) Abelian gauge theory and the non-Abelian SU(2) Yang-Mills-Higgs field

Although the liver was not a major target organ, the involvement of the liver in the pathogenesis of dengue virus infection, in particular concerning the

Finally, there is the method of unobtrusive control (Tompkins & Cheney, 1985) which is described as getting employees to control themselves. It is a process by which members of

Exclusive QS survey data reveals how prospective international students and higher education institutions are responding to this global health