This is a review of a webinar
on education that I watched on Saturday, 16th of May 2020, from 9.00
pm to 10.20 pm.
Title: Webinar 1 – Assessing
English Language Learner
Discussants:
- Datin Dr Mardziah Hayati
Abdullah – The member of the English Language Standards and Quality Council,
Ministry of Education Malaysia and retired associate professor from the Faculty
of Modern Languages and Communication, Universiti Putra Malaysia.
- Ms. Jayapushani Ponnudurai –
The member of the English Language Standards and Quality Council, Ministry of
Education Malaysia, a Cambridge Examiner Trainer and Examiner for IELTS and
Life Skills.
- Dr Ramesh Nair – The associate
professor at the Academy of Language Studies, Universiti Teknologi MARA and
president of the Malaysian English Language Teaching Association.
Moderator:
- Dr. Premalatha Nair – The
senior lecturer at the Institute of Teacher Education, International Languages
Campus Kuala Lumpur.
Organisers: Malaysian English
Language Teaching Association and Oxford Fajar.
Focus One – Curricular Reforms
and Common European Framework of Reference
Reforms in education in
Malaysia have been a continuous process, according to the needs of the local
and global society at particular moments. Curricular reforms in Malaysia that
involve English particularly are extensive. In 2011, Malaysia began its latest
curricular reform, Kurikulum Standard Sekolah Rendah (KSSR), which is then continued
with Kurikulum Standard Sekolah Menengah (KSSM). One specific aspect of this
new curriculum for English is the implementation of Common European Framework
of Reference (CEFR) in 2018.
Malaysia’s CEFR-aligned
Curriculum is a part of the Malaysia Education Blueprint 2013-2025 and is aimed
to make learners gain knowledge and skills relevant for the 21st
century. CEFR is designed as a framework for describing fluency and linguistic
skills (listening, speaking, reading, and writing) for learners and forms the
basis of teaching and learning. It helps the process of learning and teaching by
assigning tangible descriptors of what learners can do at various levels. The
levels being A1 from the lowest to C2 as the highest. This helps educators and
parents to give a more concrete response for learners’ progress and proficiency
and be able to dictate the next steps taken to ensure their advancements. A particular
focus of CEFR-aligned Curriculum is on the communicative ability of learners,
which is one important aspect of learning any languages. Understandable
interaction can still occur with slight errors, and this is a facet of language
learning that CEFR purposefully wants educators to also rectify upon, as before
this, the view is that a proper linguistic knowledge in terms of grammar are
absolutely important tool to express ideas, thoughts, opinions, and other
communicative skills.
Nevertheless, to think that
CEFR is only about descriptive levels is a wrong concept. CEFR also focuses on
what learners can do, through can-do statements (such as ‘pupils can narrate
short stories’ or ‘pupils can understand the main idea of a text’). The focus
on can-do statements acts as a positive enforcement for learners as they know
what their goals are and find ways to reach those goals. This focus on learner
awareness is beneficial to their self-learning.
Something to note is that we
must reiterate that CEFR is not an example, tool, or technique. It is simply an
outline or a guide for helping educators to put into places a systematic
thinking about where their pupils or students are, and where to go next.
Besides that, as CEFR is a global in its structure, the same levels and
descriptors are used throughout the world. Different countries nevertheless may
have a different set of exit targets for their learners. CEFR in Malaysia is
definitely aligned and suited to our country’s environment and society.
As far as I am concern,
CEFR-aligned Curriculum does help a teacher in determining the problems that
their pupils or students are facing, knowing setting the targets for them to
achieve, and creating lessons that are shaped by learners’ abilities. It is
undeniable that sometimes, teachers might be at a lost on what to target or
focus on, so a framework like CEFR brings about a proper guide for them to be
more concern of their learners’ achievements in class.
A focus on communicative
aspect is also another good thing about CEFR. While former curricular are
highly focussed on grammar, which is undeniably important, it is highly concentrated
on reading and writing to the detriment of speaking and listening. We do not
need to have a highly accomplished grammatical knowledge to make ourselves
understandable. While it might be needed depending on where we reside or work (and
as teachers, teaching grammar is needed), as a general skill, making ourselves
comprehensible through a clear presentation of ideas and expressions of our
thoughts should suffice.
Focus Two – Exam-oriented
Education System and Teachers’ Concerns
The educational system in
Malaysia has always been oriented towards exams, as evident from the number of
exams that a pupil will go through throughout their life such as UPSR, PT3,
SPM, and STPM. Many teachers are concerned about teaching as they are divided
between teaching for their learners’ own skills and knowledge and/or just to
pass major examinations. Malaysian society as a whole has been ingrained with
this idea that grades and marks are the most important thing in a learner’s
educational life. Vital decision-making is attached via exams and this is not a
way to go for the future. Advocates for changes have long stated that some exams
or assessment methods should be reformed.
In terms of the English
Language Education (ELE), it is seen as a continuous process. ELE should be
regarded as a non-stop learning experience or journey from pre-school and
tertiary education (if a learner chooses to enrol in tertiary education). The
implementation of CEFR can be seen as a way to reduce the dependence on exams.
The levels and descriptors can
be used to determine and assess their knowledge and what they are capable of
doing. It is not surprising to encounter moments when a learner’s grade does
not really show what he can actually do as assessment through final
examinations can be a limited and inaccurate system. Grades in the form of As,
Bs, Cs and so on only matter if they are able to be interpreted into something
that show what learners can do.
The role of CEFR in helping
learners, their teachers, or even their parents to evaluate themselves is an
important tool in ELE and encourages self-learning. They can have noticeable
and real views on what they are capable of and what they should concentrate on
next. For educators, this opens an avenue for them to properly conduct lessons
that are built around skills and linguistic awareness that their learners
already have or not have. Indeed, a continuous assessment via visible
descriptors are far better than only a final exam.
Another primary concern of
teachers are the format of tests. While undeniably, learners should know about
the format of tests, it should not be a primary issue. The ways we teach should
not have an overbearing concern on the exam format. CEFR-based lessons are
based on things to be learnt and tested on pupils. Teachers could just teach as
according to the descriptors and requirements of the CEFR-aligned Curriculum.
Learners should gain knowledge and skills for the progress of their lives, and
not just for a day during the examination period. Exam can be important, but it
is not necessarily a be-all and end-all means to determine learners’
capabilities and knowledge.
In my humble two-cents, a
reduced focus on end examinations can help reduce stress as learners are not
overwhelmed by a deluge of information to be taken in and regurgitated in a
short amount of time, when they themselves might not be able to dictate their
strengths and weaknesses. Through descriptors and continuous assessments,
learners can also build their learning through easy steps and set targets to be
achieved. A realisable pace of learning and teaching will help in ensuring
learners’ mastery and build upon what they have encountered earlier. The
process of using CEFR descriptors for measuring learners capabilities and what
they can do also take the burden out of teachers’ shoulders as they have concrete
ideas and suitable guide to create lessons that help in the step-by-step
learning process.
Focus Three – Formative
Assessment
Learning is a continuous
process. In this manner, giving assessment only at a particular timer during
the learning period does not suffice. In fact, there are differences between formative
assessment and examinations (which can be considered summative).
Formative assessment is seen
as a process used to improve on the learning process, in which evidence from
learners are taken into consideration when giving feedback and crafting the
subsequent stages for learners. Assessment is also collaborative effort between
teachers and learners. Without substantial evidence and collaboration, learners
cannot be measured appropriately. This is where CEFR descriptors can come into
play. Targets set by teachers are plans that learners need to achieve.
Summative complements
formative assessments in aspects that formative assessments cannot, especially
for exit targets and determining pupils’ capabilities at the end of the
learning period.
Focus Four – Highly Immersive
Programme
The reform plan does not only
concern CEFR. Another part of the plan is Highly Immersive Programme (HIP). One
important factor that makes learning a language easier is a constant exposure
to and use of a language in the surroundings. HIP necessitates this by having
schools create an environment where English is used through physical and
visible elements and through communicative aspects. HIP and CEFR are not
equivalent to one another, but the design of HIP is made to complement and
support CEFR-aligned Curriculum in schools. This can be done as teachers can
design activities carried out through communication and interaction.
It is of my opinion that an appropriate
environment where language is highly visible and used throughout the day helps
learners to shed some of their qualms and fear in interacting using it. A
continual effort to increase learners’ engagement with English can make them
realise that English is not just to be used inside the four corners of
classroom but also have valid real-world usages, even if the usages might be
limited to personal or educational reasons only during the school years. Engaging
learners to use or see or interact in English through the participation of other
subjects also help them to see that English language is not narrowed by only
the usage of the language in the classroom. In fact, English can matter through
various roles and topics.
This webinar can be watched here.
