Since Singapore’s independence, linguistic, social, and economic change has been dramatic and fast. At the recent Teachers’ Conference and ExCEL Fest 2021, Dr Sally Ann Jones, NIE Senior Lecturer, presents an argument, as to where, why, and how we need to repurpose, reconceptualize, and rehumanize the teaching and learning of English in response to changing times for the benefit of our present and future students.

English in Schools

After independence, the English language became a lingua franca for inter-ethnic communication and an enabler of economic development through international business and technology. Since then, the role of English has expanded to include semiotic systems such as the visual and digital. We are now a multilingual, multisemiotic society who teach and learn in English.

To explore what this linguistic shift means for the English curriculum, Sally, who is from the English Language and Literature (ELL) Academic Group at NIE, draws on her own research and her review of published research about English teaching and learning in Singapore from 2010 to 2020.

Her own study in primary schools showed a strong teacher belief that the primary purpose of teaching English is for communication, reflecting the lingua franca policy without recognition of the role of language in individuals’ linguistic, cognitive, and social development.

So, what can teachers do to ensure that their teaching of English suits the times and our students? Sally argues that we need to:

• • repurpose the curriculum, that is, how we structure and present knowledge,
  • reconceptualize the relations between knowledge and the knower which we mediate with our pedagogy and language, and
  • rehumanize the classroom by increasing our professional knowledge of our diverse students. 

 English in the Curriculum

Research shows that the English curriculum is segmented literally by the way it is named, conceptually in the minds of teachers and students, and physically in the associated materials and workbooks. We teach according to sections of the syllabus or by assessment components, such as comprehension, composition, synthesis and transformation, and vocabulary. We search for the “content” of English as a subject to present to students.

However, Sally explains, “The stronger the boundaries, and the greater the segmentation and bite-sizing, the less likely it is that students will be able to transfer their learning within English and across the whole curriculum.”

Other research shows that we still maintain a rather narrow, linear view of literacy, expecting staged development. This means we lose confidence in students when they progress as individuals and we refrain from providing the intellectual challenge of critical, cross-disciplinary literacy.

Language Learning

According to Sally, a Vygotskian perspective on language learning suggests that as children learn and their thinking becomes less associated with the everyday and more sophisticated and abstract, so language must develop in complexity to allow them to express abstract, scientific concepts. Academic English is different from the English used in homes and therefore the former needs to be taught. For multilingual, diverse, and low-progress learners, this is best done explicitly.

Learning conceptually through exploratory, dialogic approaches produces principled knowledge (Edwards & Mercer, 1987). This contrasts with learning through memorization or practice which produces ritual knowledge. Principled learning leads to metacognitive and metalinguistic awareness. When we are aware of our cognitive and linguistic knowledge, it can be mentally manipulated and therefore we can decide how and when to use it and when to transfer it and connect it to fresh situations and texts, for instance.

Four Examples of Responsive Teaching

Sally suggests that responsive teaching can accommodate the aims of repurposing, reconceptualizing, and rehumanizing English language teaching. She gave four examples. First, employ dialogic teaching, that is, two-way dialogue over one-way monologue in the classroom. This means asking “why” questions to engage students in deep thinking and explaining instead of steering them to the “right” answers.

“In this way, not only do students learn the language, but they also become aware of their thinking.” Sally explains.

Second, create visible coherence and connections across units and lessons by introducing clear learning outcomes for units and lessons that visibly show connections over the different segments. Additionally, provide a high level of intellectual challenge based on what we assess diverse students already know instead of simply modelling the “right” language.

Third, use the logic of the language, such as morphology, to explain the underlying relationship among language and concepts. As an example, when introducing the concept of quantifiers, a word before a noun to express the quantity of the object, ask “Does it remind you of another word that you are familiar with? Could quantifiers be related to quantity?” Knowledge derived from understanding concepts is more likely to be transferable than ritual knowledge derived through drill and practice.

Finally, use translanguaging pedagogies that encourage students to talk about different languages to notice contrasts and similarities, which leads to greater awareness of language itself. A combination of a translanguaging approach with a conceptual one makes it more likely that students will be able to transfer conceptual understandings to their own speaking and writing.

Our Students

Sally suggests broadening our ideas of diversity and thinking of personhood as a spectrum of the interplay of more obvious ethnic, gender, and linguistic affiliations as well as less visible physical and neurological talents and interests. Responsive teaching and assessment for learning (AfL) help us rehumanize and relate to individuals, recognize them, and have confidence in their desire to learn and explore.

Sally observes that research in English classrooms does show how students appreciate the challenge and space given to them to think deeply and critically about language. “Students like the feelings of success, and the confidence shown in their abilities and their mastery of the subject,” she shares.

While she acknowledges that the processes involved in repurposing, reconceptualizing and rehumanizing the English curriculum for current times may be challenging, Sally sees the endeavour as an urgent and important one. “We’re all aware of changing times, so let’s change English education to adapt to them.”

References

Edwards, D., & Mercer, N. (1987). Common knowledge: The development of understanding in the classroom. London, NY: Methuen.

Teo, P. (2016). Exploring the dialogic space in teaching: A study of teacher talk in the pre-university classroom in Singapore. Teaching and Teacher Education, 56(May), 47–60. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.01.019