The Road Map 2015 - 2025

Limited ability in using formative assessment to support learning 5.3 THE WAY FORWARD

Current trends in assessment stress the value of assessment for 5.3.1 The English Language Education Roadmap: Structure
formative learning in the classroom. While this does not suggest that and Components
the assessment of summative learning has no relevance, it implies
the need for teachers to possess the required skill sets to carry out The issues and gaps in the three key areas that have been
accurate and valid school-based assessment (SBA) to support their identified point to the need for reform in English language
pupils’ learning. To this end, English teachers’ language proficiency education at primary level. For the reform to be effective, certain
needs to be sufficiently sound to carry out the tests and use the conditions must be in place, and corresponding action plans must
test data to inform their teaching in the classroom. be implemented to achieve the intended outcomes. The direction
of reform and the implementation plan proposed for ELE in primary
The need for alignment to international standards schools is laid out in an English Language Roadmap for English
language learning at different education levels.
To obtain a picture of student performance that has more
validity beyond the school, end-of-year and exit assessments The English Language Roadmap specifies the actions to be
need to be aligned to international standards. The adoption taken in three key areas: curriculum, teaching and learning, and
of the CEFR in the development of the English curriculum and assessment. Each area addresses a set of concerns, as follows:
assessment standards is an important next step in aligning our
English curriculum to international standards. • Action plans for the curriculum address issues relating to the
primary English syllabus as the central curriculum document
that frames the structure and texture of the delivery of English
language education in our schools. The curriculum document
has to meet not only the needs of English learners in primary
schools, but the standards that it sets should also match
internationally accepted language education standards. The
proposals offered in connection with the curriculum will also
consider how greater engagement with English can be made

175

English Language Education Reform in Malaysia

The Roadmap 2015-2025

possible in primary schools. The CEFR is used to align the in response to the conditions and the foundation laid for the
existing curriculum to international standards. implementation of those plans. In view of the fact that the end of
Phase 1 is not too distant, the outcomes proposed for this phase
• Action plans for Teaching and Learning consider changes to take into account what is logistically and practically achievable.
improve the efficacy of EL teachers, teaching, and related
resources, including what is needed to implement CEFR- Phase 2: (2017 – 2020)
oriented pedagogy.
Phase 2 focuses on the implementation of the plans initiated
• Assessment strategies focus on actions needed to improve in Phase 1. The actions to be taken in the second phase follow
assessment in general, and to reform assessment so that it is and leverage on the outcomes of developments in Phase 1. In this
aligned to CEFR-based assessment in particular. phase, there will be an emphasis on monitoring and making in-
progress improvements where necessary.
It is imperative, however, that elements in the Roadmap are
viewed as components of an integrated whole. An action or Phase 3: (2021 – 2025)
initiative suggested in each key area may be interconnected with
others within the same area or in a different areas. The success The final phase of the Roadmap will focus on reviewing the
of actions taken in one area is dependent on the successful implementation and outcomes of the action plans from preceding
implementation of those in other areas. The up-skilling of teachers, waves, and making appropriate improvements with a view to
for example, must be accompanied by the availability of quality consolidating those plans. An impact study on the reformed system
teaching-learning resources and the presence of a set of consistent, will also be carried out at this stage.
coherent and effective assessment tools.
The hope is for all primary students to achieve CEFR A1
The Roadmap is to be implemented as follows over three by Year 3, and leave primary school at the end of Year 6 with at
phases corresponding to the three MEB waves: least A2, the higher end of Basic User proficiency. This target, if
reached, will prepare primary school leavers more effectively for
Phase 1 (2015 – 2016) education or communication in English in secondary school.

The first phase of the Roadmap is the time for the conditions The following sections explain the conditions for reform, actions
necessary for reform to be identified. Action plans are initiated relating to Curriculum, Teaching and Learning, and Assessment

176

that need to be undertaken in each phase of the Roadmap, and the For this purpose it is proposed that the MoE engage experts on
outcomes which can be expected to have been achieved by the end the CEFR to work with the Curriculum Development Division
of each phase. The lead agency or agencies responsible for each set (henceforth “BPK”) to align the KSSR with the CEFR, including
of action plans is also identified. A comprehensive summary of these the development of “can do” statements as learning targets
plans and expected outcomes is laid out in Section C of this document. appropriate for Malaysian learners. The review and alignment
exercise should be completed by the end of Phase 1.
5.3.2 Curriculum
Concurrently in Phase 1, a familiarisation programme needs
Developing and delivering internationally aligned curriculum and to be initiated for relevant stakeholders. The MoE and Institut
learning standards Aminuddin Baki (“IAB”) will play a major role in promoting the
understanding of the CEFR-aligned EL curriculum among teachers,
In Phase 1 of the Roadmap, the primary English education learners, school leaders and parents, so that they appreciate the
curriculum, KSSR, should be reviewed and aligned to international significance of the reform and its importance in preparing learners
standards to produce pupils with the skills required to compete for the global arena. This appreciation is a necessary precursor to
at an international level. The alignment cannot be just a matter their support for the implementation of the curriculum. In this first
of matching learning standards in the national curriculum with phase, Master Trainers must be identified to act as key deliverers
those in the CEFR. In the first place, the CEFR serves only as a of the curriculum. Training and capacity building for these Master
framework of reference that does not claim to “offer ready-made Trainers will need to be carried out by the Institutes of Teacher
solutions but must always be adapted to the requirements of Education, Malaysia (henceforth “IPGM”) and Teacher Training
particular contexts” (www.coe.int/lang-CEFR). It is a framework Division (henceforth “BPG”) of the Ministry in collaboration
that has to be adapted to meet the specific needs of learners of with BPK. It will be imperative for the trainers to fully grasp the
English in Malaysian primary schools. philosophy behind the CEFR principles and approach.

In the review exercise, it is also important to ensure that the The CEFR-aligned curriculum will be rolled out in Phase 2 of
exit targets at the end of the 6-year primary English programme the Roadmap. The BPK will need to carefully put in place a plan
match international standards appropriate for Malaysian learners. for the gradual implementation of the curriculum at all stages of

177

English Language Education Reform in Malaysia

The Roadmap 2015-2025

learning. During the roll-out, the MoE will need to ensure that all continuing to support the implementation of the internationally
English teachers are adequately inducted into the CEFR-oriented aligned curriculum.
approach, methods and techniques. We need to ensure that the
teachers are competent and confident in interpreting and translating It is proposed that the ELTC play a key role in the overseeing
the curriculum contents into meaningful and effective classroom and monitoring of developments under this initiative. As the
learning activities. The curriculum should be accompanied by a agency tasked with enhancing the quality of ELE, the ELTC is best
supporting tool-kit containing exemplars of lessons, work sheets, placed to coordinate, supervise and monitor the implementation of
teaching-learning aids and assessment tools. The implementation the various initiatives including the exercise to align the English
of the curriculum as well as the training of teachers will need to be curriculum to the CEFR.
monitored and evaluated so that improvements can be made.
In the review of the curriculum for primary English, it is imperative
In Phase 2, the first cohort of Year 3 learners who will have for the reviewers to examine the coherence and cohesiveness
gone through three years of CEFR-aligned ELE should undergo between primary and secondary English curricula. The two curricula
school-based assessment to ascertain whether they have achieved need to dovetail so that as pupils enter secondary school, they are
a proficiency level of A1, as planned. provided with appropriate and continuous support building on what
they have learnt in primary school. This approach will give learners
In Phase 3, this cohort of pupils will have completed the first more confidence in learning new things at a higher level.
full 6-year cycle of the CEFR-aligned curriculum. Assessment at
the end of Year 6, whether it is national-level or school-based, will Developing effective remedial programmes
indicate the extent to which the learners have successfully achieved
the CEFR A2 target. The reformed curriculum should at this To narrow or close the wide achievement gaps between high
stage undergo review and revision with the aim of strengthening and low proficiency learners, it is necessary to develop and run effective
it for future cohorts of learners. For the sustainability of the remedial programmes. In Phase 1, remedial programmes for students
reform, lead agencies and schools must continue capacity building yet to achieve the targets set for years 4 to 6 should be developed for
among teachers and also reinforce partnerships among relevant use in Phase 2. These initiatives should be rolled out in Phase 2 and
stakeholders so that there is a strong network of stakeholders their implementation monitored. In Phase 3, these programmes will
need to be reviewed and improved on for future use.

178

In addition to new initiatives, the existing LINUS 2.0 intended • What changes need to be made in the literacy programme or
for Year 1 to 3 students needs to be reviewed and revised in Phase the mainstream English curriculum to ensure they complement
1, based on a careful reading of the critique submitted in 2013. each other?
Among the improvements that need to be made are the inclusion
of a stronger theoretical framework in its design, a review of its The findings of the impact study will contribute to further
overall objectives, and a revision of its content. In addition, the refinement of the programme by Phase 3.
teachers managing the programme will need to be given a sound
knowledge of letter-sound relationships in English and how these Increasing English engagement time in the classroom
letters and sounds merge to form meaningful words.
The aims and aspirations of the English Language Roadmap
The role played by the FasiLINUS should be reviewed with the cannot be achieved solely through reform in the curriculum. In
aim of giving them a more leading role in designing, implementing addition to changes in learning content and standards, students
and managing remedial programmes in schools. These FasiLINUS, also need increased engagement with the language, that is, they
who are based in PPD, can help to revise the existing LINUS need more time and more opportunities to use the language. The
2.0 modules based on their experience in helping teachers in the Roadmap proposes two strategies for bringing about this increase
literacy programme. in engagement within the classroom: (a) increasing the number of
hours for English in national-type schools, and (b) teaching other
The revised version should be used in Phase 2 and an impact school subjects in English.
study conducted before the end of the second phase. The impact
study should be able to provide answers to the following questions: Class time for English in national-type Tamil and Chinese
schools is currently less than in national schools. This difference
• Do the skills acquired in the literacy programme support the should be addressed so that EL learning time is similar in all
learning of skills identified in the Primary English curriculum? primary schools. In Phase 1, BPK and the schools involved have
to determine the adjustments that need to be made for Malay and
• How can English teachers build on the basic skills that learners Mandarin/Tamil language classes, or other subjects, if a change is
have acquired in their English lessons? brought into effect. The increase in EL learning time should be

179

English Language Education Reform in Malaysia

The Roadmap 2015-2025

implemented in Phase 2, and the implementation monitored. The The selection of appropriate subjects, as well as the percentage
effectiveness of the strategy should then be reviewed in Phase 3. of total learning time involved, needs to be carefully considered in
The increase in EL learning time can be expected to bring benefits Phase 1, taking into account school and teacher readiness as well
to SRJK students by then, and so justify the increased time as the capacity of IPGM and BPG to train the subject teachers
allocation. involved, so that they can deliver content and guide learners in
English. It must be remembered that the aim of this plan is not for
In view of the current worrying proficiency levels, radical but these teachers to teach students English grammar or language skills,
necessary action needs to be taken to give learners a purpose and but to develop learners’ knowledge of particular subjects while
context for using English other than in the EL classroom. The providing a purpose and context for learners to communicate ideas
Roadmap therefore includes a proposal for the teaching of other and interact in English. In-service training will need to be provided
subjects in English. If students are taught content subjects in for teachers currently teaching the subjects involved, while pre-
English, they employ the language to gain knowledge and express service training will need to be planned for future teachers.
ideas; in other words, they are given an authentic communicative
purpose for using English. In phase 2, the focus of the plan will be on implementing
the teaching of subjects in English. This initiative will also have
This contextualised use of the language in activities outside to be monitored closely to identify areas of need and to provide
the EL classroom can result in incidental learning, where in assistance. The training of teachers will continue to be carried
an unintentional and unplanned way, students acquire English out in this second phase. The effectiveness of this strategy
vocabulary and grammar (Marsick, Watkins, Callahan & Volpe, and the training programmes will be evaluated in Phase 3 and
2006; Ortega, 2009). The learning of other subjects in English will recommendations made for improvement.
allow students to “interact with samples of the target L2 which
exemplify a wide range of structures” (Hawkins, 2005, p. 17) and Increasing engagement with English outside the classroom
to practise the language with the aim of achieving fluency rather
than accuracy in the L2, thus complementing the formal learning In Phase 1 of the Roadmap, the ELTC and the BKK need to
of grammatical forms and structures in the EL classroom. encourage schools to create English-rich environments, so that
students are immersed in English language activities as much as

180

Members of the
community can
help by conducting
interactive
beyond-classroom
activities in
English.

possible. Possible strategies include using English in making and Taking lessons from language programmes in other countries
displaying announcements, and conducting school assemblies and such as the United Kingdom, Australia and New Zealand, parents
co-curricular activities. The emergence of such environments in can be trained to support their children in the early stages of learning
some schools should be seen towards the end of Phase 1, with English. In England, parents are encouraged to help their children
more emerging and developing in Phase 2. By Phase 3, the ELTC master phonics, and similar programmes can be implemented in our
should monitor and review these school-based initiatives, and primary schools so that Year One pupils can be given more support
assist every school to set up similar environments. and exposure to English at home. Phase 2 should see the launch of
programmes managed or assisted by parents and members of the
Engagement with English can also be increased by involving community. These programmes should be monitored in Phase 2,
an under-utilised pool of resources, namely, parents and the and their effectiveness reviewed in Phase 3, so that improvements
community, in developing English programmes. Best practices can be made.
from schools that have implemented successful programmes with
the help of their PIBG should be studied, compiled and used as
models or guidelines for other schools.

181

English Language Education Reform in Malaysia

The Roadmap 2015-2025

It must be noted that there may not be a clear distinction Implementing CEFR-informed pedagogy
between the different initiatives to increase EL engagement. With
astute planning and management, and collaboration between In Phase 1 of the Roadmap, the Master Trainers or SISC+
school leaders, teachers, parents and the community, it is possible to identified as key deliverers of the curriculum need to be trained
create immersion-style EL-rich environments involving a coherent in CEFR-compatible learning and teaching principles so that they
and cohesive integration of related programmes or activities within become key personnel and reference points in CEFR-informed
and outside the classroom. Again, successful programmes already pedagogy for primary school teachers. The training and capacity
in existence could be a reference point. For instance, the approach building of Master Trainers, which will fall under the purview
adopted by SK Ulu Lubai, Sarawak, could provide valuable lessons of BPK and which will utilise the CEFR expertise employed in
on how to optimise the support of the community for ELE in and aligning the curriculum, should be completed by the end of Phase 1.
out of school. In Phase 2, these Master Trainers will be responsible for training
teachers in all schools to become capable and confident users of
5.3.3 Teaching and Learning CEFR-oriented pedagogy.

The CEFR is not merely a set of standards and “can do” Teachers will need to move away from “teaching to the test”
statements, for its adoption also represents, among other things, and helping students to provide correct answers to exam questions,
a commitment to developing learners into self-directed language to an emphasis on helping learners to do things with English. The
users capable of demonstrating those performance standards. Master trainers will need to monitor the implementation of the
The alignment of the KSSR with the CEFR is thus not limited pedagogy, with the BPK, BPG and IPGM overseeing the training
to establishing new learning standards, and it calls for attendant and monitoring exercise. Capacity building of teachers should
changes in teaching and learning that are integral to the successful continue and expand in Phase 3, the outcome of which should be
implementation of the reformed curriculum. It is envisaged that with improvements in the delivery of the CEFR-aligned curriculum.
the revised English curriculum, learners will be more motivated and
better supported in the classroom by teachers who have clearer
targets to meet in a more cohesive and coherent curriculum.

182

Using internationally aligned teaching and learning materials the aim of procuring even better learning and teaching materials
for future cohorts of learners. It is also hoped that by that time,
The reform in curriculum and pedagogy has to be supported by Malaysian EL educators will have gained enough experience to
the use of internationally aligned and CEFR-compatible teaching write locally developed materials for use with the curriculum.
and learning materials. The selection of materials is therefore of the
utmost importance. Phase 1 of the Roadmap should see the selection Coordinating and consolidating teaching and learning resources
of CEFR-aligned textbooks and support materials for Years 1 to 6
using selection criteria determined with the help and advice of the A number of teaching and learning resources, both in print and
CEFR experts employed in the development of the curriculum. This on line, have been developed over the years by divisions of the
task will be undertaken by the Textbook Division (BBT) and BPK. Ministry to support the implementation of the English curriculum.
In addition, there will be new resources procured to support the
The books and materials selected should be procured in Phase 2. implementation of the reformed curriculum. It is essential for
In view of the lack of experience of working with the CEFR on the these resources to be consolidated and coordinated to ensure their
part of Malaysian materials developers, it would be most prudent optimal use among English teachers for the maximum benefit of
for the Ministry of Education to purchase books and materials the learners.
which have either already been produced for use with a CEFR
curriculum, or which can be written specifically for the Malaysian A repository of all English-related teaching and learning
CEFR-aligned curriculum. This option gives the MoE the best resources procured or developed to support the English curriculum
chance of ensuring that the learning and teaching materials are in needs to be set up in Phase 1 of the Roadmap, and a directory
line with the aims of the curriculum. drawn up. The resources can consist of new and existing materials.
However, the existing resources need to be assessed in terms of
The selection of materials needs to be reviewed in Phase 3 their alignment with the CEFR and their potential role in CEFR-
when at least one cohort of pupils has completed 6 years of CEFR- aligned teaching and learning. This initiative can be undertaken
aligned EL learning. by the BBT, BPK and Educational Technology Division (BTP),
with one agency identified as the ‘clearing house’ in charge of
According to the outcome of the evaluation, revisions can be coordinating the distribution of these resources.
made to the list of materials as well as the selection criteria with

183

English Language Education Reform in Malaysia

The Roadmap 2015-2025

Since all too often, a repository of resources remains under- resources so that they can effectively, purposefully and seamlessly
utilised, Phase 2 of this action plan should focus on addressing integrate them into teaching and learning activities. For that
the problem of utilisation. First, teachers should be encouraged purpose, a Web portal or a user-friendly Learning Management
to use the resources for the purpose of improving the delivery System (henceforth “LMS”) should be set up to serve as a
of the CEFR-aligned English curriculum. However, teachers do gateway for teachers with language needs, and provide them with
not always know how best to use such materials, and so suitable assistance from the database.
training will have to be provided. The utilisation of resources needs
to be monitored in the second phase, perhaps by the ELTC, and Since an LMS is as good as its content, it needs to be populated
then evaluated in Phase 3. The outcome of the evaluation should with attractive and exciting resources, and provide tools to help
lead to recommendations for improving the use of resources and teachers and pupils share resources and communicate with each
the repository. other. Teachers are currently offered the use of the Frog VLE
(Virtual Learning Environment) under the 1Bestari project. It is
At the present time, the search for information or ideas imperative for the Ministry to assess the impact of the project
frequently takes users to the Internet or to an online database. and take away lessons from its implementation to further improve
Benefits from the use of ICT in supporting teaching and learning on it or develop new platforms, and optimise its use in enhancing
in the classroom need to be further exploited if our aspiration is learning, including the learning of English. At the same time,
for the integration of technology in teachers’ pedagogy. In Phase 2 infrastructural support will have to be upgraded to provide stable
of the Roadmap, the BTP should look into adopting or developing and speedy online access. In this way, there will be a greater chance
online resources that can be made accessible to teachers in various for online resources to be integrated regularly into EL lessons.
geographical locations. The resources should cover all language
skills and themes to ensure a more balanced learning of the target Enabling teachers to work with learners with differing levels of
language. These resources should be made available to teachers in ability
an online database in Phase 3.
One of the most important aspirations of the MEB is to provide
When resources are put online, the Ministry needs to plan Malaysian children with an equitable education system. In order to
a comprehensive programme to familiarise teachers with these

184

make this possible, primary English teachers have to be trained to • Integration of ongoing and meaningful assessments with
work with learners with differing levels of ability. instruction

First, teachers need training in remedial instruction for learners • Continual assessment, reflection, and adjustment of content,
with learning difficulties and disabilities. A greater command of process, and product to meet student needs
theoretical and practical knowledge in this area would enable
teachers to implement remedial programmes such as LINUS more Finally, teachers must be trained to develop the aesthetic and
effectively and help close the achievement gap between better- creative use of English among learners as an enjoyable enrichment
and poorer-performing students. activity for learners from all ability levels. Creativity in the use
of language is aligned with the Ministry’s emphasis on developing
Secondly, teachers have to be competent in the use of pupils’ higher order thinking skills. It is important that in the pursuit
differentiated learning techniques for the range of English of excellent academic outcomes, pupils are given opportunities
proficiency levels in their classes. Differentiated learning is a to develop laterally and creatively as part of a more holistic
framework or philosophy for effective teaching that involves development process. Doing this in the English lesson, just as in
providing learners of different ability levels different avenues to the other lessons, is neither misplaced nor wasteful.
learning, often in the same classroom.
Training in remedial instruction, differentiated learning and
Some guiding principles suggested to support differentiated creative language use must be put in place without delay in Phase 1 of
learning (Huebner, 2010) are: the Roadmap through in-service sessions by ELTC and BPK, with as
many teachers as possible trained by the end of Phase 1. These kinds of
• A focus on essential ideas and skills, eliminating ancillary tasks instruction should be implemented in Phase 2 and their implementation
and activities closely monitored and evaluated by the agencies involved. Based on
the evaluation, recommendations can be made for improvements in
• Responses that accommodate individual student differences teachers’use of the approaches. In Phase 3, these training programmes
(such as learning style, prior knowledge, interests, and level of will be reviewed and improved on so that eventually, every teacher
engagement). should be sufficiently competent to manage teaching and learning for
learners with different levels of proficiency.
• Flexible grouping of students by shared interest, topic, or ability

185

English Language Education Reform in Malaysia

The Roadmap 2015-2025

5.3.4 Assessment Also in Phase 1 of the Roadmap, plans need to be initiated for
developing a new CEFR-aligned national EL examination forYear 6.
Aligning curriculum and pedagogy to the CEFR means that The draft of this new exam should be ready by the end of Phase 1
assessment must be similarly aligned and teachers properly trained and piloted early in Phase 2. Based on the response to the pilot,
to implement it. improvements will need to be made so that a valid and reliable
CEFR-alignedYear 6 national exam can be implemented. In Phase 3,
Developing CEFR-aligned EL assessment it will be timely to review this first version of the national exam
and re-calibrate it against international standards so that the LPM
In Phase 1 of the Roadmap, school-based assessment (SBA) can be further assured of an internationally aligned national exam
of EL learning and SBA tools used for Years 1 to 6 need to be for primary school.
reviewed and brought into alignment with the learning standards
outlined in the new curriculum aligned to the CEFR. The nature of Upskilling EL teachers in the administration of school-based
the assessment, such as its content, the form it takes and whether assessment
it is formative or summative, must also be looked into to ensure
that the assessment is consistent with the underlying philosophy The outcome of the exercise to align SBA to the CEFR has
of the CEFR. The alignment exercise has to be led and facilitated to be shared with teachers through well-planned comprehensive
by the Examination Syndicate (LP). However, it would be crucial dissemination or induction programmes. Teachers need to be
for that agency to obtain advice and input from the CEFR experts informed early about changes to the content, form and frequency of
employed for the alignment of curriculum standards. CEFR- assessment. It will also require teachers to have a sound command
aligned SBA will be implemented in Phase 2 and closely monitored of English as well as commensurate competency to appreciate
to ensure that it is done effectively. This SBA will be reviewed in these re-aligned SBA assessments. It is therefore strongly proposed
Phase 3 and necessary revisions made. It is hoped that nine years that all English teachers be upskilled in the development, use and
of CEFR-informed EL learning and assessment will lead to valid management of these assessments, with BPG, IPGM and ELTC as
and reliable CEFR-aligned SBA for Years 1 to 6. the lead agencies responsible for the upskilling.

186

In Phase 1 of the Roadmap, the EL Master Trainers identified In Phase 2, the commissioned body will need to conduct a
as key delivers of the curriculum will themselves need training so benchmark study on Year 3 and Year 6 pupils to establish the
that they are well informed in the implementation of CEFR-aligned impact of the initiatives on the English proficiency of primary
SBA. They will then go on to train other teachers in Phase 2 in pupils. The results of the study will indicate at that point
the hope of improving SBA at primary level. Teacher management whether the target levels of A1 for Year 3 pupils and A2 for Year 6
and administration of CEFR-aligned SBA will be monitored and pupils can be reached. The results with the most significance will
evaluated in Phase 3, the outcome of which will be used in the be those from the cohort of learners going through the CEFR-
improvement of those assessments. aligned curriculum from Year 1. This cohort is expected to be in
Year 1 in 2017 and Year 3 in 2020, the end of Phase 2. A benchmark
Monitoring Progress study report will be produced at that point as a checkpoint for the
entire initiative.
Throughout the three phases of the Roadmap, the ELE reform
efforts in primary schools will have to be monitored in order to In the final phase of implementing the Roadmap, student
assess the progress being made towards creating a quality English performance in English will be benchmarked against international
language education system. The monitoring will be done by the standards. Again, it is the results of the 2017 Year 1 cohort that will
ELSQC with the ELTC as the facilitating agency. be of most significance; these pupils will be in Year 6 in 2023, when
they will take the CEFR-aligned Year 6 national examination. The
In Phase 1 of the Roadmap, the ELSQC and MoE will need expected proficiency level to be achieved is A2. These results
to select an independent body with expertise in the CEFR to will be part of the impact study on the reformed Primary EL
be commissioned to carry out benchmarking and impact studies education system to be conducted by the commissioned body. It
from the beginning of the Roadmap to its projected end in 2025. is hoped that by the end of the EL reform programme in 2025,
This body will need to review the existing curriculum as well as primary school pupils will be achieving A2, and that the primary
related materials and practices as a baseline from which to start EL education system will have been transformed into one that
the alignment exercise. The experts will have to remain available effectively prepares learners for the greater challenges that await
as resources and reference points. them in secondary school.

187

English Language Education Reform in Malaysia

The Roadmap 2015-2025

5.5 Recommendations and Implications • An increase in learning hours for English in school;

For the successful transformation of ELE in Primary • The teaching and learning of other subjects in English;
schools, changes and new developments are recommended in
administration, teaching and learning, assessment, and linkages • Optimal institutional, parental and community support for EL
between school and community. The proposed changes and programmes and initiatives;
developments include but are not limited to the following:
• Intensive and expedient training and upskilling for teachers
• The adoption of the CEFR as a framework of reference for the to meet the requirements of curriculum reform and related
primary school EL curriculum, learning targets, teaching and processes.
learning, and assessment;

• The commissioning of an independent body of CEFR experts
to review and align the curriculum, pedagogy and assessment
to CEFR standards, and to conduct benchmarking and impact
studies;

• The dovetailing of the primary English syllabus with the
secondary syllabus;

• The purchase of CEFR-based EL books and materials;

• The rigorous review, revision and coordination of current EL
initiatives and resources;

188

English Language Education Reform in Malaysia

The Roadmap 2015-2025

6

Secondary

189

English Language Education Reform in Malaysia

The Roadmap 2015-2025

Chapter 6: Secondary

The major goal of this chapter is to lend support to the
formulation of an English language roadmap for secondary
school education in Malaysia. The narrative in this chapter is
anchored on the premise that students will exit secondary schools as
confident, independent users of the language who then possess the
option to enter either the workforce or higher education institutions.

With the specific focus on secondary school education, this
chapter highlights the present status of English Language Education
(henceforth “ELE”) in Malaysia, identifies issues and gaps that
exist in the educational system at secondary level in relation to
contemporary language teaching research and approaches, and
proposes measures to improve the system by addressing the issues
and overcoming concerns that can be found. At relevant points
in the chapter, reference is made to the CEFR (see Chapter 3 for
a detailed description of the CEFR) which is used to benchmark
English language proficiency as prescribed in the MEB.

There are four sections in this chapter. Section 6.1 provides a
brief overview of ELE at the secondary school level in Malaysia
and focuses on recent policies and initiatives that have shaped ELE
in Malaysian secondary schools. Against this backdrop, section 6.2
narrows the focus of this chapter to three major areas of concern
that must be considered in formulating the English language
roadmap for secondary school education in Malaysia. They are:
(i) curriculum design, (ii) teaching and learning practices, and (iii)
assessment.

190

The discussion centres around how existing gaps in these areas and refined. Towards the latter years of secondary education, students
challenge contemporary initiatives and thrusts in ELE, especially become cognitively and affectively more mature to make decisions
the use of the CEFR as a benchmark for proficiency. The discussion regarding how and what they wish to learn. Individual differences and
leads to section 6.3 on proposals and recommendations on how to preferences also begin to emerge as important factors to be given due
address challenges in the aforementioned area of concern. This consideration in teaching and learning. In this way, secondary school
section of the chapter proposes steps to be taken in chronological education plays a vital role in the future of the students, both for them
order, according to the three waves prescribed in the Malaysian to become a contributing member of society as well as for their own
Education Blueprint 2013-2025 (henceforth “MEB”). Finally, personal future well-being.
section 6.4 summarises and concludes the chapter.
In line with the development of the secondary school student
6.1 Background as human capital and an asset to the nation, the English language is
recognised as an important international language of communication.
The secondary school level represents a critical stage in the The language is taught as a compulsory subject for 200 minutes a
Malaysian education system. From one perspective, this level is the week in secondary schools at each of the five levels for a total of 580
final stage before students either enter the workforce or further hours for the entire secondary school education period.
their studies at tertiary level. The national examination that they
encounter during the third year of secondary school often determines The present English language proficiency level of students in
the kind of subjects they will learn in the remaining two years. Malaysian secondary schools, however, is worrying. The general trend
has been that a large number of candidates fail English at the Lower
Subsequently, performance on the national standardised Secondary level with 21% and 23.4% obtaining a Fail grade in the
examination at the end of the fifth year of secondary education English paper in the Lower Secondary examination (or PMR) in 2011
will impact the students’ work options as well as opportunities for and 2013 respectively. The Cambridge Baseline Study, conducted in
higher education. 2013 to determine the baseline proficiency levels of students according
to the CEFR, provides a snapshot view of students’ English language
From another perspective, the secondary years are important years proficiency. A test was given to 31,000 students from preschool up to
when the students’English language learning habits can be consolidated secondary school levels in all states in Malaysia.

191

English Language Education Reform in Malaysia

The Roadmap 2015-2025

The results revealed that the English language proficiency level (2) Implementing school-based assessment in the lower secondary
achieved by secondary school students at the lower level (Forms school level as an attempt, not only to reduce the examination-
1 to 3) was A2, while those in the upper secondary school level oriented nature of the education system, but also to ensure
achieved B1 (p. 16). These results are disappointing as Malaysians that learning takes place more effectively.
have traditionally been considered proficient in English, even by their
international counterparts and the relatively low proficiency levels (3) Introducing the English language set system that enables
confirm a deteriorating mastery of the language among students. teachers to group students according to various ability bands
to address differentiated abilities of students. The set system
The Malaysian Ministry of Education is cognizant of the generally is also intended to motivate students to learn the language by
declining standards of the English language among secondary school catering to their actual learning needs.
students. In the MEB (2013, p. 4-11), the Ministry has declared its
intention of seeking to ensure that 70% of SPM candidates achieve a (4) Conducting the Oral Proficiency and Speaking (OPS) English
minimum Credit in the English Language paper by 2025. programme in selected schools to promote aural-oral proficiency
as a means to motivate students to use the language.
The importance of doing well in the English Language paper is
reflected in the proposal to make it a compulsory pass to earn the SPM (5) Implementing the Peningkatan Pengajaran dan Pembelajaran
certificate. To address the need to raise the proficiency level among Bahasa Inggeris Sekolah Menengah (PPPBISM) Programme
secondary school students, various initiatives related to the teaching in schools with passing grades in English below the national
and learning of the English language have been implemented. average. This programme is intended to raise the English
Language proficiency of Secondary School students through a
The major initiatives at the secondary school level in recent years specialised school support plan.
are:
The aforementioned initiatives, as well as current teaching
(1) Benchmarking student proficiency through the Cambridge Baseline and learning practices in place at the secondary school level have
study conducted in 2013 in order to determine proficiency levels of implications for English language education at other levels. They
secondary school students according to internationally recognised also present both opportunities and challenges for the formulation
standards. of a comprehensive English Language Roadmap that involves all
levels of education in Malaysia.

192

6.2 Issues and Gaps Integrated Secondary School Curriculum (KBSM) for English. This
will be replaced by the KSSM in 2017. The implementation of the
In this section, issues and gaps in the present secondary school Roadmap takes place at a time of transition from the KBSM to the
education system will be discussed in order to elucidate attainable KSSM.
goals to be set in the Roadmap. The discussion will be divided into
three broad interrelated areas of English language education at the In order to accommodate relevant outcomes prescribed by the
secondary school level, namely curriculum design, teaching and CEFR into the new KSSM, curriculum planners must be aware
learning practices, and assessment. of the differences and similarities between the current secondary
school curriculum and the CEFR, especially in terms of emphasis,
6.2.1. Curriculum presentation as well as content.

The English language secondary school curriculum has gone From a broad perspective, a major difference between the
through several revisions and a new curriculum is expected to be CEFR and the Malaysian National Curriculum (KBSM) is the way
implemented nationwide in 2017. The implementation of this new in which they are presented. Two features of the CEFR distinguish
curriculum is timely as it provides the opportunity for the incorporation it from the KBSM.
of the CEFR. However, curriculum related issues that need to be
addressed in order for the Roadmap to be successfully implemented The first is the use of a global scale that describes student language
are discussed in the section below. skills at different levels of the scale. Each level from A1 to C2 provides
clear and comprehensible descriptions that represent goals for
6.2.1.1 Differences in Emphasis between the National language learners to achieve (see CEFR Global Scale in Chapter 3).
Curriculum and the CEFR. The descriptions also include contexts and the desired performance of
specific language related tasks. For example, the B1 scale is described
At the secondary education level, a national curriculum already as the ability to
exists for the teaching and learning of English and is referred to as the
…understand the main points of clear standard input on
familiar matters regularly encountered in work, school,
leisure, etc. ... to deal with most situations likely to arise
whilst travelling in an area where the language is spoken.

193

English Language Education Reform in Malaysia

The Roadmap 2015-2025

... to produce simple connected text on topics which are In contrast to the KBSM which describes general goals in
familiar or of personal interest. ... to describe experiences communication for a period of five years, the CEFR descriptors
and events, dreams, hopes and ambitions and briefly give specify language abilities with levels of performance in a progressive
reasons and explanations for opinions and plans. manner from one level to another. In addition, the CEFR global
scale descriptors are carefully explicated and supported through
(MEB, p. 4-10). related elaboration found in the CEFR manual.

The KBSM, in contrast, provides the following four objectives A major benefit of the CEFR global scale consisting of six
that are used for the entire five years of the secondary school which levels is that teachers can easily understand the expected overall
are stated as follows: language learning progression of the students from one level to
another.
The English language curriculum enables learners to
The second distinct feature of the CEFR in relation to the
i. form and maintain relationships through conversation and KBSM is its use of “can do” statements. This is also apparent in
correspondence; take part in social interactions; and obtain the global scale described earlier. The description of the C1 level,
goods and services; for example, states that at that level, learners “can produce clear,
well-structured, detailed text on complex subjects, showing
ii. obtain, process and use information from various audio-visual controlled use of organisational patterns, connectors and cohesive
and print sources; and present the information in spoken and devices” (CEFR, p. 15).
written form;
This description emphasises mastery of ability as well as
iii. listen to, view, read and respond to different texts, and express conditions that specify how the ability is demonstrated. In
ideas, opinions, thoughts and feelings imaginatively and contrast, the KBSM specifications are comparatively broad and
creatively in spoken and written form; and less explicit such as “Take part in social interactions by discussing
plans and arrangements, solving problems, and making decisions”
iv. show an awareness and appreciation of moral values and love (Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia, 2003, p. 8).
towards the nation.

194

Although a further comparison does reveal some degree of Hence, while the specifications in the Malaysian secondary
alignment between the curriculum specifications for English in school curriculum are organised around broad areas of language
Malaysian secondary schools and the CEFR, there are significant competence, the CEFR is more specific in terms of learner
differences between the two. competencies, focusing on actual abilities and are stated as “can
do” statements which complement its more detailed description
While most “can do” statements in the CEFR can be matched of language competence.
to items in the KBSM curriculum, not all matches are exact. Some
are approximations, and some cannot be matched at all. This is ii. Emphasis on Process as opposed to Outcome.
primarily because of the difference in emphasis between the
Malaysian school curriculum and the CEFR framework. In contrast to the Malaysian secondary school curriculum, the
CEFR does not spell out how proficiency is to be acquired. Instead,
Among the notable differences that pose a challenge for the it emphasises the outcomes that should be achieved at the end of a
alignment of the Malaysian secondary school curriculum to the programme which are stated in terms of “can do” statements.
CEFR are:
For example, in the KBSM lower secondary school curriculum
i. Emphasis on language use. for Forms 1 and 2, steps in writing a simple report and the
processes in writing such a report are given - writing an outline,
The Malaysian secondary school curriculum consists of revising, proofreading, etc. The corresponding CEFR descriptors,
specifications that are organised according to the various uses of on the other hand, simply state: “Can write very brief reports to
language, i.e. Interpersonal, Informational and Aesthetic; however, a standard conventionalised format, which pass on routine factual
the CEFR descriptors are divided largely according to skills, strategies information and state reasons for actions (B1.4.3).” and “Can
and competence, i.e. Aural Reception (Listening); Oral Production describe how to do something, giving detailed instructions (B1.2.h).”
(Speaking), with its interactive section (Spoken Interaction);
Visual Reception (Reading); Written Production (Writing), with Similarly, in pronunciation, while the curriculum specifications
its activities and strategies (Writing Interaction); Audio-Visual; of both lower and upper secondary schools include learning
Reception Strategies; Linguistic Competences; Productive/ basic phonetics for correct pronunciation, CEFR simply states:
Interactive Strategies; Writing in Response to Texts (spoken or “Pronunciation is clearly intelligible even if a foreign accent is
written) and Sociolinguistic Competence/Appropriateness. sometimes evident and occasional mispronunciations occur”(B1.7.5).

195

English Language Education Reform in Malaysia

The Roadmap 2015-2025

The emphasis on outcomes as given by the CEFR allows teachers Similarly, the CEFR contains content not present in the KBSM.
to focus on the goals to be attained and the skills that students need It is important to especially pay attention to the CEFR descriptors
to master rather than on only conducting activities specified by the that are not in the curriculum specifications. Many of these are
curriculum that may or may not lead to desired outcomes. in the areas of Speaking and Spoken Interaction, areas that school
teachers say are often neglected in class because they are not
iii. KBSM curriculum-specific content. heavily evaluated in the examinations.

The KBSM curriculum specifications include content that Hence performance through discussions and interviews as
is not present in the CEFR descriptors. An examination of the well as the use of Productive/Interactive Strategies are not given
Malaysian KBSM secondary school curriculum and the CEFR due attention. These are the skills and abilities that are important
descriptors reveal that there are some curriculum specifications in performing well in interviews for scholarships or jobs and enable
that are not found in the CEFR B1 descriptors. For example, the students to function confidently in the wider world.
KBSM curriculum contains the following items: interpreting and
presenting information in non-linear texts; answering a variety 6.2.1.2. Emphasis on a Standardised Curriculum
of questions on texts listened to; and identifying different points
of view in a text; making inferences from texts that are read. One of the major drawbacks of the Malaysian, standardised
In contrast, the CEFR only mentions the use of inference in curriculum is its regimented and stepwise progression from one
identifying “unfamiliar words from the context” (B1.6.1). level to another as well as its inherent limitation in effectively
dealing with students who may require specialised attention,
There are also academic and thinking skills that relate to whether in the form of remediation or enrichment.
language ability that go beyond simple proficiency emphasised
by the KBSM that are not given as much emphasis by the CEFR The KBSM curriculum does make references to remediation and
descriptors. Clearly, the KBSM is a national curriculum and it is enrichment in the form of different “levels” of learning outcomes but
understandable that it must address some general needs within it is unclear how teachers should implement the activities as either
the context of the nation. The national education philosophy also remediation or enrichment activities. The following example from the
provides a general guideline that cuts across all subjects in the Form 4 Curriculum Specifications demonstrates this lack of clarity in
Malaysian school curriculum. these different activities.

196

LEARNING OUTCOMES SPECIFICATIONS EXAMPLES / ACTIVITIES / NOTES

2.2 Process information by: A. Processing texts listened to • To hone students’ listening skills, teachers
a. skimming and scanning for specific by: can set pre-listening, while listening and
post-listening tasks.
information and ideas; Level 1 - Pre-listening tasks include
b. extracting main ideas and details; i. Stating what the text is guessing the answers to several
c. discerning sequence of ideas; questions.
d. getting the explicit and implicit meaning about. - While-listening tasks include
ii. Noting important details completing the information,
of the text; detecting errors, sequencing.
e. predicting outcomes; (e.g. place, time, date). - Post-listening tasks include
f. drawing conclusions; iii. Asking and answering checking True/False statements,
g. identifying different points of view; sequencing, filling in details.
h. using print and electronic dictionaries; questions.
i. interpreting non-linear texts such as Level 2 • To guide weaker students by giving them
iv. Identifying main ideas and an outline in which they underline key
maps, charts, diagrams, tables, graphs; words and main ideas.
and jotting down key words and
j. making short notes and mapping out ideas phrases. • To teach higher-order skills, texts must
Level 3 be chosen at a level that is manageable.
v. Taking notes of the text Teachers must strike a balance between
heard the need for students to be stretched
and the need that the task given is
manageable. Use simple texts to teach
higher-order listening skills.

Figure 6.1 Differing Levels of proficiency in the Form 4 Curriculum SpecificationS

The standardised nature of the curriculum makes it difficult i. Encouraging student independent learning.
to cater to the needs of students with varying abilities. Measures
must therefore be taken to meet this challenge. The CEFR supports an individualised learning approach as
the performance–based descriptors provide learners with the
opportunity to reflect on their progression in language learning.
The CEFR promotes a more student-centred approach with
students taking more responsibility for their own learning.

197

English Language Education Reform in Malaysia

The Roadmap 2015-2025

This is done by making the proficiency descriptors in the ii. Using English Language Electives/Subjects to meet
CEFR available to students and thereby allowing them to reflect individualised needs
on these descriptors and assess their own abilities based on these
descriptors. Related CEFR initiatives like the Language Portfolio, A second strategy that can be used to address the challenge
which has “the development of the capacity for independent of meeting individualised needs through a standardised curriculum
language learning” as a major goal (Schneider & Lenz, 2001, p. 3), is by effective use of English language electives. In the KBSM,
have also been developed to strengthen student ability to assess two subjects – English Literature and English for Science and
themselves. Technology – are currently offered in the English language as
electives at the upper secondary level.
The Language Portfolio and the CEFR are referred to by
Trim (2007) as “not separate projects, but aspects of a coherent, Both these subjects are related to CEFR benchmarks and
integrated programme” (p. 43). Elements of such self-assessment descriptors to varying degrees. As upper levels of the CEFR (B2,
and independent learning should therefore be built into the KSSM C1 and C2) are more academically oriented, English for Science
curriculum in order to address individualised needs in learning the and Technology can be fairly well suited for students to meet some
language. of the descriptors at those levels.

In relation to the issue of individualised needs, the introduction At the same time, while the curriculum specifications of the
of the KSSM and the call to align the curriculum to the CEFR English Literature course may not be directly related to CEFR
is also an opportune time to address the question of how a new descriptors, it does allow for greater exposure to the language,
performance-based curriculum can accommodate pupils with and may even help enhance and refine language ability attained
special needs. A CEFR-informed curriculum can be carefully through general English.
structured to give due consideration to the language performance
that is attainable by special needs pupils. English Literature requires a good command of the English
language and is therefore taken by students who are proficient in the
language and have a keen interest in literature. It should however be
noted that compulsory general English includes a literature component
with the aim of allowing students to

198

engage in wider reading of 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
good works for enjoyment and 535
44.7
for self-development. They will English Literature 50.8
871 764 703 564 4.5
also develop an understanding No. of candidates
2,097
of other societies, cultures,
26.9
values and traditions that will Distinctions (%) 37.0 37.0 42.1 40.1 71.4
contribute to their emotional 1.7

and spiritual growth. Pass & Credit (%) 60.6 55.8 52.5 54.4

(Introduction to Sukatan Pelajaran

KBSM, 2000) Failures (%) 2.4 7.2 5.4 5.5

On the other hand, English for English for Science and 41,547 12,738 5,707 3,090
Science and Technology (EST) was Technology
introduced in 2001 and is described in 25.3 27.3 22.6
the KBSM Curriculum as “designed No. of candidates 74.0 72.2 75.7
to help students develop an ability 0.7 0.5 1.7
to grasp basic concepts and ideas in Distinctions (%) 14
science and to understand methods
of scientific thought and enquiry Pass & Credit (%) 84.7
in English common to all kinds of
scientific and technical discourse” (pp. Failures (%) 1.3
1-2). This is therefore a subject taken
by students who are in the Science Table 6.1 PERFORMANCE OF CANDIDATES IN
stream at the upper secondary level. ENGLISH LITERATURE AND ENGLISH FOR
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY (2009-2013)

199

English Language Education Reform in Malaysia

The Roadmap 2015-2025

In recent years, the number of students who have opted to 6.2.2. Teaching and Learning
take these subjects has decreased. The number of candidates in
the SPM and their performance rates for both subjects since 2005 Teaching English in Malaysian secondary schools can be a
are reported in Table 6.1. The declining number of candidates challenge if one is faced with students who have yet to gain a
in both these elective subjects calls to question the role these functional grasp of the language. The main reason for this is that
subjects play, especially in relation to the compulsory general the curriculum provides for a teaching approach that is grounded in
English Language subject. the assumption that students have a satisfactory foundation in the
language after learning English for six years in the primary school.
However, both subjects allow for greater exposure to the
language and may even help enhance and refine performance in the However, in reality, secondary school English language
language. The issue then is how these subjects are to be positioned teachers find themselves facing students who do not possess the
in relation to compulsory English. A possible solution would be to proficiency level necessary to handle the content of the secondary
set higher CEFR levels for both these subjects than for compulsory school curriculum. Many students have not yet mastered basic
English (CEFR level B1). In this respect, the suggested target band grammatical structures even after having gone through ten years
level for students taking either elective is B2. of learning English (Saadiyah Darus & Kaladevi, 2009).

While the needs of higher proficiency students may be met Several studies have also shown that many teachers have
through these two subjects, it is also important to address the resorted to using Bahasa Malaysia when teaching writing to limited
needs of the less proficient students as well. This may be done proficiency students as it helps them produce better quality essays
by offering new English language elective subjects catered to the (see e.g. Siti Hanim Stapa & Abd Hameed Abd Majid, 2006;
level of less proficient students. Some subjects that are currently Mohd. Sofi Ali, 2008).
being offered, such as Art or Physical Education, can be taught in
English in order to provide students with more exposure to English Students are also reported to resort to their first language
and greater opportunities to use it. when explaining an incomprehensible or difficult English passage
(Razianna Abd Rahman, 2005). At the other extreme, there are
also students in secondary schools who have the potential to move
beyond the skills and specifications prescribed in the curriculum.

200

In all instances, teachers need to draw upon the appropriate 6.2.2.1. Difficulty in teaching Students of Differing Language
teaching and learning approaches to ensure that students are able Abilities, Backgrounds and Inclinations
to realise their potential in using the English language for social
interaction, personal expression and functional goals. Several Teaching a single national General English curriculum to a
important issues on the teaching and learning of the English large population made up of students with different abilities,
language relate to classroom practices that have strayed from backgrounds and inclinations in a generally stepwise fashion may
the main intent of learning a language for communication in the lead to a significant number of students not attaining the goals
first place. Our students are unable to operate autonomously of the curriculum. Students in Malaysian secondary schools range
(Koo, 2008), and instead play the role of empty vessels relying on from the very proficient to those who do not possess the basic
teachers to fill them with knowledge (see Naginder, 2006). foundation to develop the skills prescribed in the secondary school
curriculum.
This automatically discourages and inhibits independent learning.
The strong tendency to depend on teachers for their own learning is In fact, the Cambridge Baseline (p. 13) draws attention to the
further worsened by the practice of evaluating students based on their wide range of achievement at different stages of school education;
performance and ability to obtain good grades in the examination or that although on average Form 3 is described as at A2, this accounts
display good writing skills (ibid). for only about 28% of the students while about 41% are below
this level and about 31% above it. According to the Cambridge
Current issues and common discourses with regards to the Baseline, this means effective teaching to a group as disparate as
teaching and learning of English language in Malaysian secondary the Form 3 group could only happen with differentiated instruction
schools is indicative of a need to reassess the approaches used using “differentiation strategies” (p. 13) providing support for the
to teach and learn the English language, and more importantly, weaker students and suitable activities for the more advanced ones.
conceptualise English language learning as a social activity and not
just learnt through practice and schooling. Although the KBSM curriculum provides clear directions, goals
and objectives, the diversity in the student population presents
In order for a major language education initiative such as the teachers with a clear challenge. The Ministry of Education is
Roadmap to succeed at the secondary school level, the following aware of the disparity in student proficiency levels and has taken
issues in teaching and learning need to be addressed. steps to equip teachers with the ability to teach classes with

201

English Language Education Reform in Malaysia

The Roadmap 2015-2025

diverse abilities. It has also included the introduction of the set Regardless of which set they are assigned to, students must
system for English language which assigns students into groups of also be allowed to interact with other students who are more
similar proficiency levels predetermined by a diagnostic test at the proficient through alternative methodologies such as collaborative
beginning of the academic year in Form One. and cooperative learning as well as team based learning that
draw upon social-psychological learning theories of Bandura
In this instance, the teacher’s task is more focused towards and Vygotsky. These theories specify that language learning is
tailoring her pedagogical style to the level of skill and learning most effective when learning is socially constructed and there is
requirements of her students (PPPM, pp. 4-1). The set system interaction with more proficient individuals.
which allows differentiated instruction for students of varying
levels of proficiency has been successfully implemented in more 6.2.2.2. Teaching to the Test
than half of all secondary schools at Form One, and to a lesser
extent at Form Two. The practice of teaching to the test is prevalent in Malaysian
schools. The MEB (pp. 4-2 – 4-4) addresses this issue with specific
While the structural change afforded by the set system can be a reference to both the KBSR and KBSM; that historically, the “full
catalyst for many other related remedial or enhancement activities, potential” of both curricula “has not been brought to life in the
such as the preparation of instructional manuals, writing of work/ classroom” and “examinations do not currently test the full range
textbooks, as well as selection of supplementary readers or reading of skills that the education system aspires to produce”.
materials, several concerns related to the widespread adoption of
the set system must also be given due consideration. These could Also, “skills and content that teachers perceive will go untested
be addressed at the school, state and even national level. in the National Exams are often dropped from the lesson plan in
favour of content that is more frequently tested”. The Cambridge
The question of enhancing secondary school teachers’ ability Baseline Study in its executive summary (p. 15) also identifies a
to handle differentiated instruction within the set system would similar problem in Malaysian schools.
also be clearer, more focused and organised. Care must be taken
to ensure that students do not feel segregated and made to feel A corollary to teaching to the test is the tendency for students
abandoned with the other less proficient students. to become dependent on the teachers for their learning as

202

preparation for the examinations instead of independently seeking Valid examinations that reflect actual language use are vital in
opportunities to learn. order to promote positive washback in the classroom, including
the use of a more interactive language teaching approach.
The prevailing strand in Malaysian schools is the discourse
of “privileging examination” (Koo, 2008, p. 56). Due to the high 6.2.2.3 Implementation of Teaching and Learning Initiatives
importance placed on national examinations, teachers tend to
concentrate on teaching aspects of the language they believe Various departments of the Ministry of Education have carried
will appear in the examination and neglect the communicative out a number of teaching and learning initiatives with the goal of
aspects of language learning. A consequence of this situation is raising student language performance. Some of the initiatives that
the emergence of a new class of students who can pass exams have been conducted in schools are the OPS-English programme,
and continue to the tertiary level without actually being able to the Set System and the introduction of the Teacher’s Resource Book
use the English language productively in a communicative event for the Literature Component.
(Ambigapathy, 2002).
These initiatives are important as they address concerns and
No matter how idealistic educational policy-makers may be deficiencies and allow authorities to ascertain their effectiveness
on insisting that teachers should “teach to the curriculum” and before they can be introduced nationwide. The issue then pertains
not “teach to the test”, teachers remain focused on examination to the execution of these initiatives that are sometimes carried out
results when they teach due to a number of factors. Among without teachers being made fully aware of the rationale for their
others, schools are assessed according to their performance in introduction.
public examinations. Apart from that, principals are also assessed
according to the performance of their schools in these public
examinations in the “New Deals” system or Bai’ah.

Given the direct impact of public examinations on teaching
and learning practices, the issue of inauthentic language use
in examination papers and the lack of focus on certain skills in
assessments such as listening and speaking need to be addressed.

203

English Language Education Reform in Malaysia

The Roadmap 2015-2025

The emphasis on
outcomes as given by the
CEFR allows teachers to
focus on the goals to be
attained and the skills
that students need to
master rather than on
only conducting activities
specified by the curriculum
level.

The manner in which some of these teaching initiatives are The management and coordination of teaching initiatives should
implemented is also of concern. It is important that initiatives are involve determining how a teaching initiative is conceptualised,
carried out systematically without overly burdening the teachers. trialled, adopted and disseminated. Clear duration for each process
If teachers feel burdened and if they do not see the benefit of should be specified and a clearly stated decision be made regarding
an initiative, it will not be well received, regardless of how well- the initiative.
conceived the initiative is.
6.2.2.4 Teacher-Student Classroom Interaction
Teaching initiatives should be well managed and coordinated.
This is not only to avoid redundancy and having too many The estimated number of hours to master a language at the
initiatives being carried out in a school but also to ensure that an CEFR B1 level for secondary school students is possibly between
initiative is systematically implemented and assessed before it is 550 to 600 hours, based on a Pearson recommendation that adults
widely adopted or becomes policy. require between 350-400 hours to achieve the same level. The
number of hours available for formal English language classes during

204

No Subject SPM/STPM Diploma Bachelor Masters PHD Total
22 13,963
Teachers trained in teaching 419 51 11,975 1,496
1 English and currently teaching

English*

Teachers trained in teaching 16 1 169 35 1 222
2 English and currently not teaching

English

Teachers trained in teaching other 191 47 4,059 508 10 4,815
3 subjects currently teaching English

(at Least 1 class)

Table 6.2 ELT AND EL TEACHERS IN SECONDARY SCHOOLS
AND THEIR HIGHEST QUALIFICATION

Table 6.2 ELT AND EL TEACHERS IN SECONDARY SCHOOLS AND
THEIR HIGHEST QUALIFICATION

Note: *The figure in row 1 = Masters & PhD include teachers with a first degree in teaching but with a post graduate degree in areas other than English as well.
The figure above is as of 30 April 2015

205

English Language Education Reform in Malaysia

The Roadmap 2015-2025

the entire secondary school level as described in the introduction Another point of concern is the quality of teaching and learning
of this section is 580. that takes place in the classroom. This requires teachers to have the
pedagogical content knowledge to effectively utilise the time given
Therefore, it is imperative that English language teacher- for teaching and learning. This knowledge will ensure that effective
student contact time be strictly maintained. Consequently, techniques will be employed in the language classroom.
teacher participation in training, courses and meetings that take
them away from their classrooms should be minimised. Teachers However, teaching in Malaysian classrooms is highly
should also not be required to attend courses or implement new characterised by teacher-centred approaches and the chalk-
initiatives without taking their workload into consideration as and-talk drill method (Ministry of Education, 2003). The most
teaching must remain the core and central duty of teachers. Hence popular teaching method is also reported to be drilling using past-
the Melindungi Masa Instructional (MMI) policy that is intended to year examination questions, work sheets and exercise books
ensure that instructional time stipulated for the teaching of English (Ambigapathy, 2002). In fact, language classrooms require greater
is met should be strictly adhered to. individual pupil talk time (West, 1968) as opposed to teacher-
fronted classrooms.
Furthermore, optimal teacher student interaction can only be
achieved if the teacher has enough time for each student in the Similarly, task-based and performance oriented activities
classroom. It is reported in the MEB that the student teacher ratio should also be emphasised. The teaching and learning of English
for secondary schools is now 13.1: 1, the average class size is 29.8 should not neglect the socio-cultural elements of language learning,
(pp. 2-3) and the average hours taught per day is between 2.7 and nor be seen as learning a subject, focusing on the mechanics of the
2.9 depending on the number of students in the school (pp. 5-6). language without making connections to how it is used in the real
communicative situation (Razianna Abdul Rahman, 2005).
These figures are encouraging as language classes require more
student-teacher interaction than other content related subjects. 6.2.2.5 Qualification of English Language Teachers
It is critical that conditions conducive to such an interaction be
maintained and perhaps even improved on. Teaching English in Malaysian secondary schools is an enormous
challenge for various reasons highlighted in previous sections. Teachers
must obviously be well-trained to meet the demands of a challenging

206

curriculum given the diverse background of the students. Although A major characteristic of secondary school education in
the majority of English language teachers possess the right training the Malaysian education scenario is the national standardised
and qualifications, there are still a significant number of teachers examinations which all students in the school system have to take.
who do not (see Table 6.2). Two such examinations are conducted – the first, the PT3, is taken
by Form 3 (15-year old) students, while the second, the SPM, is a
There are valid concerns that English language teachers in school leaving examination that is taken by Form 5 (17-year old)
secondary school who have not been trained to teach the subject students.
are contributing to falling standards in the quality of English
language teaching and learning in the country. At the same time, The English language subject is offered in both these
there is also a need to determine whether schools face a shortage examinations together with a host of other subjects which are
of trained English language teachers, especially in rural and remote generally pre-determined by the school system. All students sit
secondary schools. In addition to ensuring that only qualified for the same English language paper regardless of their language
teachers teach English, there is also the concern that qualified proficiency.
English language teachers have to teach other subjects in addition
to English. This is a problem because time that should be dedicated When examinations are foremost in the minds of teachers,
to developing effective lesson plans and materials is spent working students become highly-dependent on their teachers in order to
on the needs of other subjects. perform well in examinations. Such a situation does not support
learners taking charge of their own learning. A Report (ASLI-CPPS,
6.2.3 Assessment PROHAM, & KITA_UKM, 2012) commented that assessments
in Malaysia over-emphasised the importance of getting an A, i.e.
Assessment is an important component in the education the Malaysian education system practices assessment for learning
process and it is carried out for a variety of reasons. Assessments rather than assessment of learning.
allow teachers to determine how much students have learnt, and
they also help teachers provide students with further guidance and This means the education system focuses on year-end
support. However, an education system that over-emphasises assessment, or summative assessment that emphasises the
summative assessments is an exam-oriented system that creates comparison of students’ achievements with those of others
an unhealthy teaching-learning environment. (Stiggins, 2005).

207

English Language Education Reform in Malaysia

The Roadmap 2015-2025

As the Ministry of Education refines and revises its secondary in line with the goals and educational approach espoused by the
school English language curriculum to incorporate knowledge and CEFR. However, SBA has not been favourably received by many
skills of the 21st century, it also ensures that the written, taught Malaysians.
and assessed components of the curriculum are fully integrated
and benchmarked to prevailing international standards of practice. Parents, in particular, continue to view the old system of
summative examinations as the only way to determine if learning
Apart from upgrading assessment frameworks to increase items has taken place. Dissatisfaction over various aspects of the
that test higher order thinking skills, a more inclusive approach to implementation of SBA was expressed by teachers and parents
assessing students’ learning of the English language is introduced in alike which led to a review of the manner in which SBA was
the form of school-based assessment (henceforth “SBA”). The MEB administered in early 2014.
lays the plan for ending this exam-oriented culture in teaching and
learning in Malaysian schools by introducing formative assessments School-based assessment is not a new concept and throughout
alongside summative ones. the history of its implementation, several concerns have been
raised. Black and William (1998), for example, caution that if not
The new form of assessment will be conducted while the well implemented, SBA can lead to (i) an over-reliance on testing
teaching and learning process takes place rather than at the end rather than teaching and learning during class time, as well as
of it. The Ministry empowers secondary schools with standards- (ii) an over-emphasis on the managerial aspects of this form of
referenced school-based formative assessments which emphasises assessment. The implementation of SBA in Malaysian schools,
assessment for learning over assessment of learning. The following therefore, requires a thorough and careful preparation of all
is a discussion of gaps and issues concerning assessments at the relevant parties, most notably the teachers themselves.
secondary school level.
Although the Ministry of Education has assured teachers that
6.2.3.1. Lack of Readiness for School-Based Assessment they would not be overwhelmed by the managerial aspect of SBA
by having to provide continual evidence and online reports, a more
The implementation of SBA in 2012 and the consequent critical concern must first be addressed. It has become apparent
move away from a focus on summative examination is very much that a major issue to be first resolved before SBA can be successful
was one of perception and beliefs about SBA. Many including

208

the teachers involved in the new assessment mode had minimal Their professional development is thus crucial in ensuring
knowledge of SBA practices and how they benefit the teaching that teachers are well-equipped with related knowledge that
and learning process. would assist them in conducting assessment. In addition, a more
comprehensive guideline covering assessments for both progress-
Implementing SBA requires teachers to follow steps that and achievement- based purposes is urgently needed.
include preparing, administering and grading of an assessment as
well as the recording and reporting of assessment results. It is not Loo’i-Chin and Rathinasamy (2013) indicated in their research
surprising that teachers find SBA an added burden to their already that the Ministry of Education could devise an assessment
long list of responsibilities. framework in line with the curriculum framework that aims at
promoting teaching and student learning, beyond the confines of
There are however several procedures or steps that many just pointing out what are covered in the public examinations.
teachers are just not competent in (Mertle, 2005), for example
preparing a test and developing valid grading procedures. Cizek Most Malaysians are familiar with a heavily exam-oriented
and Fitzgerald (1996) discovered that teachers had the tendency school system as national standardised examinations have been
to ignore the importance of test preparation by doing what they the norm for many decades. Consequently, the switch to SBA has
think is right rather than what is actually right. been received with much resistance and scepticism. There has
been a lot of pressure from parents and even school administrators
This is echoed by what was found to be prevalent among not to lose sight of summative examinations such as the SPM and
Malaysian lower secondary teachers, where a majority of the teachers the recently introduced PT3.
tend to practise what they think is right as they had no proper guideline
to rely on as reference (Loo’i-Chin & Rathinasamy, 2013). Malone As a result, many schools have opted to maintain the term
(2013), on the other hand, highlighted the need to increase teachers’ and year-end examinations, in addition to carrying out SBA. This
assessment literacy in order to monitor students’ progress. means English teachers are still expected to help students master
the techniques of performing well in examinations in addition to
For SBA to succeed in a language learning environment with preparing, administering and grading SBA as well as recording and
a long tradition of summative assessment, teachers need to be reporting assessment results.
assessment literate. It is apparent that teachers still lack theoretical
understanding of what constitutes good assessment practices.

209

English Language Education Reform in Malaysia

The Roadmap 2015-2025

Formative assessments carried CURRICULUM TEACHING & LEARNING ASSESSMENT
out through SBA and guided by
CEFR “can do” statements are Differences in Students Lack of readiness
sufficient in assessing the teaching emphasis between of differing for school-based
and learning of the English the national language abilities, assessment
Language. It may be argued that curriculum and backgrounds and Lack of emphasis
school-based assessment appears the CEFR inclinations on specific
to be more time-consuming Meeting Teaching to language skills
and subjective than traditional individualised the test Lack of readiness
summative examinations, as it is student needs Coordinating of for performance-
conducted throughout the school through a teaching learning based assessment
year and requires close observation standardised initiatives Lack of
of the students by the teachers. curriculum Teacher student readiness for self
classroom directedness
Nevertheless, the benefits in interaction
terms of the more valid reporting Qualification of
of a student’s actual ability in the English language
language and the motivation it teachers
provides in learning far outweigh
these difficulties. The challenges Figure 6.2 Issues and Challenges in Curriculum,
in implementing SBA are large Teaching & Learning, and Assessment.
but must be overcome if language
education is to progress from the
assessment of mere language
knowledge to the assessment of
actual language ability.

210

6.2.3.2. Lack of Emphasis on Specific Language Skills 6.2.3.3. Lack of Readiness for Performance-based Assessment

Classroom practices in many secondary classrooms are mainly Performance based learning (PBL) and assessment (PBA)
characterised by students answering reading comprehension represent a set of strategies for the acquisition and application
questions and writing essays, with very little time given to listening of knowledge, skills and work habits through the performance of
and speaking exercises (Naginder, 2006). It is therefore not tasks that are meaningful and engaging to the students. PBA is
surprising that according to the Cambridge Baseline (pp. 18-29), well reflected in the CEFR, with “can do” statements describing
speaking is the weakest of the four skills and that spoken English is language performance.
an area of difficulty not only for students but also teachers.
As far back as the mid-90s, Stiggins (1995) described
Malaysian examinations at the secondary school level assess performance-based assessment as “an essential ingredient in a
the four language skills to varying degrees and do not provide equal school assessment program” (p. 239). He, however, cautioned
emphasis on the four skills. They largely assess the skills of reading that this form of assessment requires “exercise and judgment” by
and writing, and for this reason, teachers tend to prioritise these teachers who are well-trained and reliable. A further challenge
skills over listening and speaking in the classroom. would be to have PBA accepted by stakeholders.

The CEFR, however, is based on performance in a language The concept of performance based assessment is not new in
and therefore places emphasis on all four skills. The call to align the Malaysian secondary school context. The learning outcomes
the Malaysian English Language curriculum to the CEFR poses a and specifications described in the Malaysian Secondary School
challenge to the way proficiency in English is assessed in secondary Curriculum are expressed in ways similar to the “can do”statements
schools. Based on the CEFR descriptors, the performance of of the CEFR. These learning outcomes and specifications are then
students in all the four language skills should be assessed. interpreted and rewritten by teachers as behavioural objectives in
their daily lesson plans.
This will undoubtedly require that Speaking and Listening be
given greater emphasis in school-based and national assessment. However, there appears to be little effort in assessing whether
Increased emphasis on both these skills is expected to lead to these behavioural objectives truly translate into actual language
increased time given to the development of speaking and listening performance in classrooms. Numerous references on current
skills in the classroom.

211

English Language Education Reform in Malaysia

The Roadmap 2015-2025

teaching methodology that is more performance-based which consequently, both frameworks inform each other (Lenz &
describe teaching through the use of tasks can be explored to Schneider, 2002). The ELP is generally a self-assessment tool
improve the quality of classroom teaching as well as assessment (see which according to Lenz (2004), aims to promote learner
e.g. Ellis, 2008, Fotos & Nasajji, 2007; Lewis, 1998; Nation, 2008). autonomy, and supports developing learning skills “by providing
suitable guidance and instruments for the learners themselves”
6.2.3.4. Lack of Readiness for Self-Directedness (p. 23). The challenge faced by Malaysian secondary schools is
to infuse self-assessment and other forms of related assessment
Learner autonomy and self-directedness feature prominently in such as peer-assessment and portfolio assessment in the language
the CEFR. The various levels that constitute the CEFR framework classroom.
allow individual learners to assess and monitor their own language
learning abilities. Although these learner characteristics are also In terms of language assessment in Malaysian schools, greater
espoused by the Malaysian Education System in the secondary feedback to the students from public examinations must be
school curriculum, the MEB notes that the element of self- provided in terms of score reports in order to encourage self-
directedness is still lacking in the average Malaysian secondary directedness amongst the students. Students should therefore
school student. be made aware of their performance in specific skills and abilities
as well as comparative information in relation to criteria and
The “teacher as facilitator” mantra is often put aside in favour performance of their peers rather than provided with only a single
of more teacher-centred lessons in order to prepare students for letter grade.
examinations. The situation is sometimes exacerbated by the need
to focus on performance in examinations, and this does not lend 6.3. The Way Forward
itself to promoting ownership of learning among secondary school
students. The implementation of the Roadmap incorporating the CEFR
at secondary school level requires a comprehensive approach.
The CEFR was developed simultaneously with the European The way forward must be guided by the three major thrusts
Language Portfolio (henceforth “ELP”) which shares the use represented as Waves 1, 2 and 3 in the MEB. The approach
of language proficiency reference levels as a core element;

212

proposed in this section centres on the incorporation of the CEFR With this in mind, the first wave needs to be a phase during
and takes into cognizance, structural preparation, implementation which initial structural changes in the areas of curriculum, teaching
and monitoring of change, and also, assessment of the impact and learning and assessment are put into place so that significant
of the change. The Roadmap has been planned in three phases improvements are realised in the following phase.
which are linked to the MEB waves as illustrated in the secondary
education portion of Section C of this document. 6.3.1.1. Curriculum

6.3.1. Phase 1: Preparing for Structural Change (2015-2016) The Malaysian secondary school curriculum is the cornerstone
of any effort to align the educational system to the CEFR bands and
The Malaysian education system at secondary school level descriptors. The necessary groundwork related to the curriculum
involves a large and sometimes unwieldy network that consists must therefore be laid in order for a CEFR-aligned curriculum to
of many sections, divisions and departments. The call for change take shape as well as provide direction to the entire Roadmap effort.
in the approach taken for English language education in Malaysia
must ensure careful planning and preparation by all relevant bodies. i. Setting Appropriate CEFR-Based Targets
The MEB emphasises the importance of attaining internationally
recognised proficiency levels by benchmarking them to the CEFR. Language proficiency according to the CEFR is based on six
As a public document, the MEB has laid the groundwork for achievement bands that move from the lower A1 band right up to
national awareness and dialogue regarding English proficiency the highest C2 band. Each band consists of a set of descriptors that
levels. In the first wave, it is the various entities within the Ministry specify outcomes in the four language skills for language learners.
of Education that need to provide the platform for engagement, There is a need for the Malaysian secondary school English
discussion and dissemination of information with specific regard language curriculum to be closely aligned to the CEFR bands and
to the anchoring of the English language curriculum to the CEFR. integrate the relevant band descriptors into the curriculum.

Awareness and a general understanding among the general
public and all relevant stakeholders, especially secondary school
teachers, regarding the aspirations and targets of a CEFR-aligned
Roadmap are critical to its successful implementation.

213

English Language Education Reform in Malaysia

The Roadmap 2015-2025

Form 1 Form 2 Form 3 Form 4 Form 5

Phase 1 -------------- preparation for structural change --------------

Phase 2 A2 ----------------------------------------------> B1-80%*

Phase 3 B1 ----------------------------------------------> B1-100%

Note: 80% is an estimate and indicates the percentage that should have attained B1 at the end of the Phase.

FIGURE 6.3 PROPOSED MINIMUM TARGETS FOR CEFR LEVELS AT
SECONDARY SCHOOLs

The curriculum should specify the minimum band that students As can be seen in Figure 6.3, Phase 1 from 2015 to 2016 is
need to achieve at the end of the lower secondary and upper dedicated to preparation for structural change. During this stage,
secondary levels. At the same time, the curriculum should also CEFR A2 and B1 are set for lower and upper secondary school
maintain a reasonable degree of flexibility that can allow students students respectively based on the analysis of available documents
to move beyond the desired bands. and findings such as the Cambridge Baseline study and SPM English
results. This target is then communicated to other relevant agencies
The proposed minimum targets for the attainment of CEFR within the Ministry of Education so related action can be taken.
levels at lower and upper secondary school in Phases 1 to 3 of the
Roadmap are presented in Figure 6.3.

214

In the second phase, from 2017 to 2020, the target CEFR level The attainment targets for the second and third phases also
of A2 is to be achieved at the end of the first year of the secondary take into consideration the performance of secondary school
school. This target is set based on the assumption that a large students based on the CELA study on benchmarking Malaysian
portion of the A2 level has already been reached at the primary secondary school students to the CEFR. In their 2013 study, 69%
school level. English language education at secondary level should of Form 3 students were found to be at A2 or below. Similarly,
then ensure that eighty percent of the students have attained a B1 55% of Form 5 students were found to be at A2 or below. The
level at the end of Form 5. average level for both Form 3 and Form 5 was A2. It is therefore
considered appropriate for A2 to be identified as the target for
Finally, in the third phase, the focus of ELE at all levels of early lower secondary students during the second phase. This
secondary education is on the B1 level, ensuring all students target will subsequently affect the attainment target for the upper
a minimum B1 at the end of Form 5. It should be noted that secondary level as it was felt that only a portion (80%) of the B1
by 2025, the Ministry of Education aspires to have 70% of the level can be attained at the end of the secondary school.
students attain a credit level in the English Language at the end of
their secondary education. Based on current student achievement As stated earlier in this chapter, an estimated 550 to 600 hours
levels it should be possible to achieve this goal by then. are required to get to B1, which translates to five years of teacher-
student contact in the secondary school English classroom. In
The minimum target level set for students to achieve during the third phase, however, the A2 attainment target is set for the
their secondary school education is B1, which takes a learner over end of the primary school and, therefore, the required amount of
the threshold from the category “basic user” to “independent user”. teacher-student contact hours can be provided at the secondary
Level B1 is an appropriate level for all secondary school leavers as it school for the students to progress from A2 to B1.
corresponds to a population of school leavers who are functional in
English should they choose to either pursue pre-university studies An advantage of A2 straddling the primary and secondary school
or enter the job market. Some students will of course go on to B2 years at Phase 2 is that there can be a better transition for students
or to higher levels required for performance in academic and work moving from the primary to the secondary school system. Teachers
contexts (personal communication, David Little, 2012). from both levels of education will be expected to cooperate in order
to ensure the progression of their students in English.

215

English Language Education Reform in Malaysia

The Roadmap 2015-2025

It should be stressed that
the CEFR was initiated
as a self-assessment

document and, because of
this, is more likely to be
effective when students
are themselves self-
directed and willing to

perform self-assessments.

Among the key findings of a study by Evangelou et al. (2008) Technology to achieve these targets. Similarly, slightly different
was that “bridging” materials from the primary used in the targets can be set for special needs students. This may require
secondary school was a useful practice that could help in successful having to determine the extent to which the language curriculum
transitions. for these specific groups of students can be aligned to the CEFR
and whether alternative frameworks that specifically cater to the
It must be stressed here that these targets should be flexible needs of these students can be referred to as well.
enough to incorporate the English Language needs of special
learner groups such as talented and gifted students as well as ii. Incorporating flexibility in curriculum goals
special needs pupils. Careful thought must be given to the way
targets are set for these groups of students and this should be The present KBSM curriculum for secondary schools is due to
benchmarked against international standards. make way for the KSSM. This presents an ideal opportunity for
curriculum planners to not only align the new curriculum to the
A B2 target, for example, can be set for more proficient CEFR descriptors, but also to address specific issues that have been
students who can be encouraged to take elective English
subjects such as Literature in English and English for Science and

216

raised earlier in this chapter including the need to accommodate fully utilised. At the upper secondary school level, three subjects
students of diverse proficiency levels and with different language are offered in English. English is offered as a compulsory subject
learning goals. Changes to the curriculum in the first phase should for students from Forms 1 to 5. In addition to general English,
consider the needs of Malaysian students with varying levels of English for Science and Technology (EST) and Literature in English
proficiency. are currently offered as subjects in upper secondary and assessed
separately in the SPM examination.
Many initiatives carried out at schools are intended to address
specific concerns. For example, the set system is an initiative that Both these subjects are offered as electives in the Malaysian
groups students according to language proficiency and is intended secondary school curriculum. The goals and objectives of the
to allow teachers to deal with a more homogenous group of three subjects differ in their emphasis on various aspects of
students in terms of language proficiency. the language. In the English language subject, for example, the
focus is on communicative ability while in the EST and English
However, the set system prevents weaker students from Literature subjects, academic and literary genres of the language
interacting with more proficient ones – a key requirement are emphasised respectively. The different focus of these subjects
in language progression according to approaches such as the suggests that they need to be aligned separately to the CEFR. As
Vygotskian Zone of Proximal Development and Interaction based secondary school students may consist of those who have already
theories of language learning. The set system appears to be in progressed beyond B1, the curriculum must therefore make
place to address problems that should be resolved through the provisions for these more proficient students.
curriculum itself.
It is possible that English, such as the EST and Literature in
Therefore, the introduction of the KSSM that is being English, be redesigned to cater for the specific needs of students
developed in Phase 1 needs to properly address concerns that have who demonstrate a level of proficiency beyond B1. B2 can be set
been identified through the implementation of recent initiatives as the target for students who take these subjects at the upper
such as student diversity and lack of opportunity to speak in the secondary level.
English language.
New elective subjects such as Critical Thinking and Academic
In order for the secondary school curriculum to address these English may also be introduced and taught in English for more
concerns, the resources available to curriculum planners should be

217

English Language Education Reform in Malaysia

The Roadmap 2015-2025

proficient students, and provide them with a head start for further in English. Central to effective teaching and learning is the need for
studies. Similarly, remedial subjects can be offered to secondary competent and professional English teachers.
school students who have not attained A2 when they enter
secondary education. A Gap Year can be implemented for this The first phase should see long term plans in place to support
remedial programme. the professional development of English teachers. In addition to
being able to apply novel teaching and learning techniques, teachers
6.3.1.2. Teaching and Learning must also be assessment-literate in order to ensure that the CEFR
is appropriately applied in the English language classrooms.
Central to the success of plans proposed in this Roadmap is
the role of teachers in the language classroom. The CEFR requires The teachers should become assessment-literate in order to
a different approach to the teaching and learning of English in ensure that their students are able to effectively perform language
secondary schools. Proficiency in English is determined based on related tasks as specified by the CEFR descriptors for each level.
performance, as reflected by the “can do” statements. Assessment literacy is especially important in the school-based
assessment contexts as student performance is assessed directly
The first phase should involve putting in place building blocks so by teachers in their classrooms.
that teachers, students and even parents are receptive to this new
approach to developing English language proficiency. The ELTC Additionally, teachers should be encouraged to reflect on their
should be given a central role in training teachers and ensuring that teaching in order to improve quality and effectiveness as well as
they are able to meet the demands of CEFR-informed teaching. build a culture of continuous self-improvement. Towards this end,
a network of support needs to be in place.
i. Preparing Teachers and Students
Since language learning is a highly personal matter, the students’
Initial initiatives in the first wave of the MEB such as the Pro-ELT motivation is a key driving force for language acquisition. The first
programme for teachers and OPS-English programme for secondary phase should see the development of a plan that promotes greater
school students already signals the shift in emphasis to performance student self-directedness and autonomy. For this, there needs to
be greater transparency that avails to students, access to details of
their assessment scores.

218

Also, there is a need for appropriate questioning techniques in much opportunity at all to use it. Effective language learning
the classroom which encourage self-reflection and student input. requires interactive situations where learners use the language to
Furthermore, students should be educated about the proficiency communicate meanings and ideas.
levels and CEFR “can do” statements so that they understand
the goals of their language lessons. It should be stressed that the Language immersion programmes can provide valuable contexts
CEFR was initiated as a self-assessment document and, because where students can use the language in such a way. Programmes that
of this, is more likely to be effective when students are themselves involve the community can also be designed to provide language-
self-directed and willing to perform self-assessments. rich contexts where language can be used meaningfully. It is also
important to use authentic materials, including on-line materials,
The Language Portfolio utilised in many European nations in which enable independent learning beyond the classroom. These
line with the CEFR is intended to encourage self assessment and materials can complement the use of CEFR-aligned English
more independent and autonomous learners. Several descriptions language textbooks. The integrated use of these materials can
of this initiative are available and can be used as a model for the make a strong positive impact on language learning.
development of a localised version for secondary school students.
6.3.1.3 Assessment
Students can be introduced to and encouraged to use this
self-assessment tool as a means to develop individualised learning Assessment is an important component in the educational process
capabilities. Teachers can also encourage student self-directed and that verifies the abilities of students and the effectiveness of the
independent learning by sharing the goals of their lessons with the teaching and learning process. Traditionally, summative assessments
students. have featured prominently in the Malaysian Education system.
However, the first wave of the MEB has seen formative assessments
ii. Providing a language-rich environment being featured prominently in secondary schools through the School-
based Assessment system. In addition to this emphasis on formative
Some schools lack the opportunity to use English in real and assessments, the first phase also has to be a time for the following
meaningful contexts. In many rural areas, for example, students plans to be put in place.
may only get exposure to English during English lessons without

219

English Language Education Reform in Malaysia

The Roadmap 2015-2025

i. Aligning Secondary School Assessment to the CEFR Test tasks for the upper secondary school should also reflect
the types of performance associated with B1 of the CEFR.
In the secondary school years, English language proficiency is Although formative school-based assessment is still applicable,
assessed through the School-Based Assessment (SBA), the PT3 especially in encouraging learning, summative examination at the
and the SPM examinations. In a CEFR-inspired roadmap, all end of secondary school is more relevant in order to determine
these three forms of assessment should be aligned to the CEFR whether targets have been achieved. It is therefore critical for this
in order to ensure that students are able to show evidence of this examination, in particular, to be able to accurately assess student
proficiency in the English language. language proficiency.

In this first phase, there is a need to examine each of the above- ii. Establishing continuous validation processes
mentioned assessments and determine how effectively they assess
the desired outcomes prescribed by the CEFR. There is also a need to Realigning the various assessments to the CEFR requires
justify the need for an English Language paper in the PT3 summative the collective effort of various entities within the Ministry of
assessment in addition to formative assessments that are already in Education. Of particular importance is the role of the Curriculum
place at Forms 1, 2 and 3. When both school-based assessment and Development Centre and the Examination Syndicate. Both have
summative standardised examinations are used at the same time, the to collaborate to ensure that the assessments in general, and all
weightage provided to each must be clearly indicated. test items in particular, accurately measure the learning that has
taken place and the ability of the students to perform as prescribed
Similarly, the tasks that are used for each type of assessment must by the CEFR.
be determined and should reflect the tasks that are described in the
CEFR. School-based assessment, for example, can focus on tasks such A loose collaboration between the major agencies involved in
as discussion skills and interviews which may not be as easily assessed the assessment process would render the assessment inaccurate
through standardised and summative national level examinations. and misleading. Curriculum goals should be comprehensively
Similarly, the format of the English language PT3 examination needs assessed in order to establish content validity of the assessment.
to be aligned to the CEFR, especially in terms of the test tasks used in
order to ensure that the grade awarded to students represents their
mastery of all skills, namely listening, speaking, reading and writing.

220

A continuous validation process should also be established iv. Assessment to encourage independent and autonomous
during the first phase of the Roadmap in order to maintain the learning
quality of assessments conducted at the secondary school level.
To this end, it is highly recommended that an independent Teachers must also be skilled in the concept of assessment
assessment validation body be set up consisting of academics and for learning and how assessment can be used to encourage
civil servants. independent and autonomous learning among students. Practices
such as greater and more detailed disclosure of test performance
iii. Upskilling English Language teachers in relation to allow students to assess their own abilities and hence encourage
school-based assessment independent and self-directed learning.

Formative assessment which is largely school-based is an At the same time that teachers develop their assessment
integral part of the overall assessment of student learning. As literacy, formal standardised assessment must build in features that
teachers will play a central role in school-based assessment, in- encourage greater student self-directedness. Some of these features
service training programmes must be conducted in order to raise include a more detailed score reporting on test tasks as well as making
teacher awareness and develop skills regarding assessment. normative performance measures available to all test candidates.

Teachers must be trained to administer and accurately assess 6.3.2. Phase 2: Implementing and Monitoring Structural
students and how information obtained through assessment Change (2017-2021)
should be used to determine students’ level of performance as
well as to inform decision making. All teachers must attain a level At the onset of this phase, an English language curriculum that
of assessment literacy that can allow them to accurately assess is aligned to the CEFR should be fully implemented in Malaysian
their students as well as for stakeholders to be confident with their secondary schools. This curriculum would inform the teaching
assessment in school-based assessment. and learning practices, as well as assessment practices. Once
fully implemented, it is important that the structural changes are
closely monitored.

221

English Language Education Reform in Malaysia

The Roadmap 2015-2025

6.3.2.1. Curriculum enhancement programmes are supporting iindividualised needs.
Data from these studies should then help improve delivery of these
During this second phase, there will be a need to assess how programmes.
teachers are coping with the new curriculum. By doing so, the
necessary support can be extended to teachers to ensure that the 6.3.2.2. Teaching and Learning
aims of the curriculum are achieved. This support is also applicable
for English language teachers teaching English for Science and The successful implementation of the CEFR-aligned curriculum
Technology (EST) and Literature in English. Any decisions to is dependent on the teaching and learning process. Therefore,
make significant changes to the CEFR-informed curriculum should English language classrooms practices must be closely monitored
only be made at the end of this phase and must be justified by data. during phase 2. Classroom observations should be carried out
with the aim of documenting best practices and where necessary,
Therefore, there is a need in this phase for a research-driven helping teachers overcome the various challenges they face.
monitoring process carried out by independent bodies such as
universities and appropriate research agencies. There is the Towards this aim, experienced English language teachers,
likelihood that changes may need to be made to the curriculum teacher trainers and academics, who are well-versed with the
before the end of the second phase. In such a case, justification challenges of teaching English to students in Malaysia, should be
must be provided for any amendments. included in all initiatives that are designed to improve the teaching
and learning process. The effectiveness of support networks
In this phase, there will be a need to pay attention to the for English teachers to assist them in the transition to the new
development of remedial and enhancement programmes. These curriculum must also be assessed at this phase.
programmes should be in place to support the needs of students of
varying ability levels, including those with special needs. In addition to the impact on teachers, attention should also
be given to whether the new CEFR-aligned curriculum has had
The ability of students to demonstrate performance of can- positive effects on the students in terms of teaching and learning.
do statements at the B1 level would reflect the effectiveness of During phase 2, there should be greater evidence of students
such programmes. However, again, there will be a need to carry demonstrating independent and autonomous learning. For example,
out independent studies to ascertain how these remedial and

222

there should be greater student understanding of the importance assessment should be stressed and be reflected in the emphasis
of and willingness to use the Language Portfolio which is meant given to SBA. The introduction of an English Language paper
to encourage independent learning. Other indicators of student in the PT3 appears to take emphasis away from the SBA and
independent learning include taking initiative to use the language, refocuses attention on summative assessments.
greater participation in language related activities both in and
outside the classroom, as well as willingness to communicate in the The SBA should be anchored to the CEFR and teachers should
classroom without being cued. be able to determine the students’ CEFR band based on their
performance in SBA. There is therefore a need in Phase 2 to further
6.3.2.3. Assessment consolidate the SBA system to ensure that this formative system
becomes the primary source to ascertain the ability of students
In the area of assessment, the second phase should also see in English at the lower secondary level. The SBA promotes an
the continuous validation of the alignment between secondary assessment for learning approach which is appropriate at the lower
school assessments and the CEFR. Evidence must be collected to secondary level. However, an English Language paper in the SPM
determine how well the secondary school assessments are aligned examination at the end of the upper secondary education level
to the CEFR. Such evidence is necessary in order to ensure that should be maintained as a final exit level summative examination.
the bands achieved by secondary school students are recognised
by international agencies. The onus for collecting this evidence The process of continuous validation of the alignment between
falls on the shoulders of the Ministry of Education and as such, an secondary school assessment and the CEFR must be consolidated
appropriate entity must be responsible for this important task. at phase 2 of the Roadmap. The independent validation body
created during the first phase of the Roadmap can coordinate and
The Roadmap has included the suggestion made in the monitor the validation process.
Cambridge Baseline to develop new national examinations at key
stages (Executive Summary, p. 24). While the entire Cambridge Among others, this body should commission studies that
Baseline proposal may not be feasible, especially in terms of costs examine the validity of formative and summative assessments
in developing new examinations, the importance of continuous in Malaysian secondary schools. The Cambridge Baseline study
provided a useful starting point in examining the performance of
Malaysian students in English in relation to the CEFR levels.

223

English Language Education Reform in Malaysia

The Roadmap 2015-2025

It is important that this study is followed up by a similar Reports from all relevant agencies such as the ELTC, ELSQC
study at the end of Phase 2 to determine to what extent the new and the independent assessment validation body should also
curriculum and accompanying structural changes have supported provide valuable information regarding the effectiveness of all
improvements in student performance in CEFR-informed activities. Administrator comments and teacher response to the
assessments. Roadmap will also be examined.

6.3.3 Phase 3: Scaling Up Structural Change (2022-2025) By the end of phase 3 and at the end of the secondary school
level, the secondary school English curriculum should be aligned
The final stage of implementing structural change involves to the CEFR levels and reflect the general aspirations of the CEFR
assessing the impact of the structural change itself and consolidating within the context of the MEB. Language assessments at the
instructional efforts related to this structural change. The various secondary school should reflect the CEFR levels and alignment
studies that have been carried out in Phase 2 should now inform with these levels be continually validated.
decision makers about the possible need to shift targets upwards
or even downwards, depending on data collected from Phase 2 Students should demonstrate learning habits with a propensity
studies on curriculum implementation, teaching and learning for independent and autonomous learning and exit the secondary
practices, and assessments. The studies will reveal areas that need school with the target minimum B1 level with more proficient
improvement, and Phase 3 should be a time to examine these areas students achieving at least a B2 level.
and take action to address them.
The implementation of school-based assessment should be
Sources of strength and successes should similarly be noted enhanced with teachers given adequate training to raise their
and consolidated where possible. Major sources of data to assess assessment literacy and ability to accurately assess their students
the impact of the Roadmap will be the SPM examination, the and provide appropriate remediation and enrichment. Increased
results of the replicated Cambridge Baseline Study, the results of opportunity for language interaction should occur during the
the proposed assessment for non-examination classes during the English language lesson as well as through community engagement
2015-2020 period, and SBA reports from schools. and support.

224