DISEÑO DE ESTRATEGIAS

The education ministers in the Declaration & Recommendations of the 45th _Session of the International Conference in Education in Geneva, 1996 (MOE, 2004) stated that teachers’ contributions are important in education as they are the medium to bring the renewal of education through ideas, methods and practices. Hence, the higher level of teacher education training – in particular, the teacher education institutions (TEIs) – plays an important role in producing future teachers with the knowledge, attitudes, behaviours and skills that this particular education system considers to be necessary.

Since the aim of the teacher education programme is to equip trainee teachers with a set of competencies to teach in the real school environment, well-planned curricula in teacher education programmes are vital in preparing prospective teachers for developing their professional competencies. Wright (2010) further stresses that the intent of teacher education, specifically second language teacher education (SLTE), should be to provide opportunities for trainee teachers to acquire the skills and competencies of effective teachers and to discover the working rules that effective teachers use. This notion is supported by the belief that the effective teacher differs from the ineffective one primarily in having the command of a larger repertoire of competencies-skills, abilities, knowledge and so forth that contribute to effective teaching (Medley 1979, cited in Richards & Nunan, 1990).

Generally, the teacher education curriculum for the programme offered by TEI in Malaysia is planned, evaluated and developed by the curriculum officers in the Teacher Education Division (TED) together with the expertise from several TEIs that existed before the Teacher Education Institute Malaysia was transformed into its own division (Tsui, 2008). In TEI, the pre-service teacher training equips the trainee teachers with a curriculum for a specific level of education, together with a specialized area with elective subjects (BPG, 2007). Since the future teacher would act as the agent for the implementation of the educational programme in Malaysia, the teacher education curriculum aspires to prepare the teachers with knowledge and skills as well as developing the teacher’s potential to implement effective teaching-learning process. This aspiration has become the major foundation, and it is stipulated in Kurikulum Kursus Perguruan Asas (Teacher Education Curriculum), which is now being implemented in TEIs and other higher education institutions that offer education programmes. These institutions are responsible for preparing the future teacher with

adequate knowledge and skills consistent with current ideas about appropriate teaching practices in Malaysia.

Research into teachers’ cognition, particularly on NQTs in Malaysia, is still scarce especially at the Institute of Teacher Education (ITE) level. One reason is that the Bachelor of Teaching (B.Tchg) programme fully managed by the ITEs is still relatively new. Previously, Bachelor of Education (B.Ed.) programmes were offered by the universities, and teacher training colleges were only able to conduct the programme in collaboration with both local and foreign institutions. Before 2008, the ITE had 27 campuses that were managed independently and offered a three-year diploma programme and a post-graduate certificate programme. In 2008, all 27 teacher training colleges were upgraded to the ITEs and were brought together under one central management structure to standardise quality. The curriculum and qualifications were upgraded to offer a five-and-a-half-year foundation and degree programme and a post-graduate diploma programme. Since then, the ITEs have been responsible for running their own programmes preparing graduate teachers for primary schools. One of the programmes offered is the newly introduced Bachelor of Teaching (B.Tchg), also known as Program Ijazah Sarjana Muda Perguruan (PISMP), which enables all primary school teachers to be qualified to degree level. Over the next five to ten years, the ITEs aspire to transform themselves into world- class teacher training universities (Ministry of Education, 2013). According to Jamil et al. (2011), the first intake of the four-year degree-level course was in 2007, when 3,725 students enrolled for the PISMP programme in different specialized areas. In ITEs, the curriculum of this pre-service teacher training aims to prepare the trainee teachers for a specific level of education and also through elective subjects for teaching in a specialised area (BPG, 2007).

2.5.1

The English language teacher education programme

The trainee teachers are trained according to the planned curriculum with the aim of achieving learning outcomes in each teacher education course in the teacher education programmes. The professional knowledge gained will help them to impart the subject-content effectively and to help their learners to acquire the utmost knowledge in the future. In 2011, several ITEs enrolled the first cohort of trainee teachers for the PISMP programme with a major in Teaching English as a Second Language (TESL). The degree awarded is Bachelor of Teaching (Hons) in the Teaching of English as a Second Language (Primary Education). The core courses of this newly implemented PISMP (TESL) programme run solely by the ITEs generally pertain to the knowledge base of language teaching. Graves (2009) informs

us that the knowledge base of language teaching consists of what language teaching involves and what language teachers need to know and be able to do to apply such knowledge effectively in a English as a Second Language (ESL), or English as a Foreign Language (EFL), classroom. Based on the PISMP (TESL) English language teaching courses (see Appendix A), there seems to be a heavy emphasis on the knowledge base for language teacher education. In addition, there is a great deal of emphasis on the use of songs, plays, drama and poetry in the elective subjects of the primary ESL curriculum. In other words, the courses that the trainees are expected to study are dictated by a tradition in which teaching is seen as routine. This scenario reflects the SLTE development four decades ago, which emphasised a process-product paradigm, and traditional beliefs of what teachers need to know and ignored and devalued individual prior experiences of teachers (Freeman and Johnson, 1998).

In terms of teacher education models in SLTE which will be presented in Section 3.4, from the three models presented, ITEs in Malaysia seem to adopt the applied science model (Section 3.4.2) to a certain extent, focussing on transmitting their knowledge about teaching and learning to their trainees. Trainees are expected to apply what they have learnt in their classroom, especially the pedagogical theories learnt during training. In terms of the input of modules in the ITE, the trainees are exposed to ITE modules which emphasised understanding the ELT knowledge base. For instance, the trainees are taught about the use the pedagogical practices, theoretical positions and beliefs about the nature of language, the nature of language learning, and the applicability of both to a pedagogical setting in the ‘TSL3103 ELT Methodology’ module (Semester 2). The use of L1 and its effect on the language classroom is also exposed in this module. The teacher educators would normally encourage the trainees to avoid using L1 in an English classroom, and this stand/advice is emphasised again during practicum supervision. In addition, the trainees are exposed to two modules about ways of disciplining the students and also on classroom management in ‘EDU3104 Behaviour and Classroom Management’ (Semester 3) and ‘TSL3109 Managing the Primary ESL Classroom’ (Semester 5).

The PISMP (TESL) English Language teaching courses in Appendix A also seem to suggest that the curriculum is theoretically based. The delivery modes include lectures, discussions and micro-teaching. The trainees are given the opportunity to observe teachers during school based experience (SBE) in the earlier part of the training and they are involved in practicum in the later part of the training (semesters 5, 6 and 7 consecutively, which normally will take one to three months). However,

trainees go out to school after they have completed their bachelor programme with a great many theories but having had little opportunity to test them in the real world, although they were given the opportunity to teach during a six-month practicum. While the practicum is a significant element of the teacher education programme and in principle ought to enable the trainee teachers to apply the theories in practice as well as developing their attributes and professionalism as teachers, from my supervision experience in most cases the trainee teachers only show-case their teaching practice ability for their practicum supervisors when they were being evaluated. At times, the co-operating teachers appointed would also observe and evaluate them; otherwise, the trainees were left on their own if there is no observation from both supervisors and co-operating teachers. This is because it is always assumed that the trainee teachers will demonstrate their teaching based on the supervisors’ expectations of what they have been taught in college. Kabilan and Izzaham (2009) point out an alarming result of such a tendency, shown in Ong et al.'s study in 2004 on trainee teachers in Malaysia, in which the trainee teachers reveal that their practicum failed to give them opportunities to engage positively in trying to put theory into practice because they were overwhelmed by the classroom realities. Despite the above, the practicum is not entirely unhelpful. However, this does not mean that the training had not prepared the trainee teachers for classroom realities since the practicum functions as a bridge that would help them to develop their professional competence and identity. Trainee teachers emerging from this programme also have other issues to deal with, as outlined in Sections 2.6 and 2.7.

2.5.2

English curricula and the PISMP curriculum

In Malaysia, the English language is considered a key school subject and it is part of the school curriculum from the primary level for all learners. In 2011, a new curriculum for the primary school, Standard Based Curriculum for Primary Schools (KSSR), was launched in an effort to restructure the components in the previous curriculum, the Integrated Curriculum for Primary School (KBSR). KBSR was based on a linear approach of integrating the four language skills in each English lesson, while KSSR is based on a modular approach whereby the pupils need to master listening and speaking first before moving to learn other language skills of reading and writing, and reasoning skill (thinking skill), which is included. In terms of the PISMP (TESL) curriculum, the course contents were designed with reference to the primary school curriculum at the time the programme started (KBSR), and so for the first cohort of PISMP (TESL) trainees enrolled in the programme, whom I intend to study, this was the English curriculum that they followed in their first year of training. They began working with the KSSR in their second year. Although the KBSR syllabus will no

longer be in use by the time the trainee teachers graduate, they are expected to be familiar with both primary school curricula.

The trainee teachers have the opportunity to apply their knowledge of both curricula during classroom presentations of ideal lesson plans or through micro-teaching sessions. They are asked to do this since they will be expected to teach upon graduation following the KSSR. Additional problems arise when they have to cope with two curricula, especially during the teaching practicum sessions at school and when they are confronted with the real situation of implementing the curriculum. At the point at which they did their practicum, both curricula were still being used, so they needed to be prepared for both.

During the practicum, the trainees are able to seek further assistance from either their practicum supervisors or co-operating teachers in the school. However, sometimes either supervisors or co-operating teachers or both are still vague about KSSR. Some practicum supervisors themselves are not familiar with the latest information on KSSR since some only received secondary information through in-house training. Similarly, the teachers in schools are still in the process of adapting to the new curriculum and, as practitioners, they are still experimenting to determine the best practice for their pupils. Trainees, therefore, receive conflicting messages from the ‘experts’ during the practicum. They might develop their personal practice based on a mix of their reflection on the theories learnt, the practices used or recommended by practicum supervisors and their co-operating teachers, and their experience of the reality in the classroom.