Email this article EFFECTS OF ACADEMIC QUALIFICATIONS ON MALAYSIAN ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHERS’ SUBJECT MATTER KNOWLEDGE OF LITERARY DEVICES
Abstract
Previous studies in the West have shown teachers who are academically qualified in specific subjects are able to teach better than those with degrees in non-specific subjects (Goldhaber and Brewer, 1996). Such studies within the local context are limited. As such, this study examines the effects of academic qualifications on the subject matter knowledge of literary devices among secondary school English language teachers in a northern district in Malaysia. The analysis revealed that academic qualifications had significantly influenced the subject matter knowledge of literary devices and such knowledge differ significantly among the English major and English minor, TESL and KPLI or Post-graduate Teaching Programme English language teachers. Specifically, the English major language teachers had better subject matter knowledge of literary devices than the non-English major language teachers. The TESL teachers were better than the non-TESL teachers in their subject matter knowledge of literary devices. The subject matter knowledge of literary devices amongst the KPLI English language teachers was lower compared to the non-KPLI language teachers.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Ashairi Suilaiman & Melor Md. Yunus. (2014). A Glimpse on the Re-Introduction of English Literature in Malaysian Secondary Schools. International Journal of Languages and Literature. Vol. 2 (2): 151-164.
Ball, D. L. (1990). The mathematical understandings that perspective teachers bring to teacher education. Elementary School Journal, Vol. 90: 449-513.
Baumert, J., Kanuter, M., Blum, W., Brunner, M., Voss, T., Jordan, A., Tsai, Y. (2010). Teacher’s mathematical knowledge, cognitive activation in the classroom and student progress. American Educational Research Journal, Vol. 47: 133-180.
Boekaerts, M. (1998). Do culturally rooted self-constructs affect students’ conceptualization of controls over learning? Educational Psychologist. Vol. 33: 87-108.
Brown, S, & McIntyre, D. (1993) Making Sense of Teaching. Buckingham, Open University Press.
Carter, K. (1990). Teachers’ knowledge and learning to teach. In W. R. Houston, M. Haberman, J. Sikula (Eds.). Handbook of Research on Teacher Education (4th ed.). New York. Macmillan: 292-310.
Carter, R. & Long, M. N. (1991). Teaching Literature. London: Longman Pub.
Chalarkid, P. (1994). Test developments of mathematics subject matter knowledge levels of divisions of rational numbers for Thai pre-service elementary teachers. Unpublished Ph.D Thesis. Oregon State University, USA.
Che Tom Mahmud. (2005). Literature Instruction in Selected Rural Secondary Schools in Perak. Unpublished Ph.D Thesis. University Kebangsaan Malaysia, Malaysia.
Clark, U. & Zyngier, S. (2003). Towards a pedagogical literary devices. Language and Literature, Vol. 12 (40): 339-35
Cochran, F.K., DeReiter, J. A., & King, R.A. (1993). Pedagogical content knowing: an integrative model for teacher preparation. Journal of Teacher Education, 44:261-272.
Connelly, F. M., & Cladinin D. J. (1985). Personal practical knowledge and the ways of knowing. Relevance for teaching and learning. In E. Eisrner (Ed.). Learning and teaching the ways of knowing. Chicago: Chicago University Press, 174-197.
Colton, D., & Covert, R.W. (2007). Designing and Constructing Instruments for Social Sciences and Evaluation. Jossey Bass: San Francisco, CA.
Coolie, J. & Slater, L. (1987). Literature in the language classroom. Avon: Cambridge University Press.
Darling-Hammond, L (2000). Teacher quality and student achievement: A review of state policy evidence. Education policy analysis archives. (81).
Diana Hwang & Mohd. Amin Embi. (2007).Approaches employed by secondary school teachers to teach the literature component in English. Journal Pendidikan. Jil 22: 1-23.
Elbaz, F. (1991). Research on Teacher Knowledge. The evolution of a discourse. Curriculum Studies. Vol. 22(1): 1-19.
Eraut, M. (1994). Developing professional knowledge and competence. London: Falmer Press.
Erkaya, O. K. (2005). Benefits of using short stories in the EFL context. Asian EFL Journal. Vol. 8: 1-13.
Fauziah Ahmad. (2003). The Incorporation of the Literature Component in the Malaysian ESL Syllabus for Secondary Schools: A Study of Pedagogical Implications. Journal of 3L: Language, Linguistics, Literature. Vol. 14: 49-73.
Fauziah Ahmad. (2007). Teachers’ Thought process in teaching literature: Good leadership and administration in teaching, Jurnal Pengurusan & Kepimpinan Pendidikan Kuala Lumpur. Vol. 44 (1): 55-63
Fauziah Ahmad & Ura Pin. (2007). Teaching Literature: Influencing Presage Variables. Jurnal Penyelidikan Pendidikan. Kementerian Pelajaran Malaysia,Vol. 9: 63-92.
Fathen Suriati Jusuh. (2015). The Effects of Using pictures and Illustrations in Teaching Literature Novel to Form 3 Struggling and Reluctant Readers. Jurnal Penyelidikan Pendidikan. Vol.16: 100-109.
Feiman-Nemser, S., Parker, M. (1990). Making subject matter part of the conversation in learning to teach. Journal of Teacher Education. 44 (1): 55-63.
Gay, L. R., Mills, G E., & Airasian, P. (2009). Educational Research. New Jersey. Pearson.
Goldhaber, D. D., and Brewer, D. J. (2000). Does teacher certification matter? High School certification status & student achievement. Education Evaluation & Policy Analysis, 22, 122-145.
Goldhaber, D. D., and Brewer, D. J. (1996). Evaluating the effects of teacher degree level on educational performance. Washington D.C.: NCES.
Grimmett, P.P., Mackinon (1992). Craft knowledge and the education of teachers. In G. Brant (Ed.). Review of Research in Education, Vol. 18: 385-456). Washington: AERA.
Grossman, P. L. (1989). Teachers’ of Substance: Subject Matter Knowledge in Teaching. In Reynolds, M., C., (Ed.). Knowledge Base for the Beginning Teachers. Pergamon Press. Oxford.
Grossman, P. L. (1991). Mapping the terrain. Knowledge growth in teaching. In H. C. Waxman & H. J. Walberg (Eds.). Effective Teaching. Current Research. Barkeley. CA: McCuthema: 183-299.
Gunstone, R. (1999). Content knowledge and their intertwining: A response to the paper set. Science Education, 83 (3): 393-396.
Hattie, J. (2003). Teachers make a difference. What is research evidence? Paper presented at Australian Council for Educational Research Conference.
Gwin, T. (1990). Language skills through literature. FORUM XXVIII (3):10-13.
Hashweh, M. Z. (1987). Effects of subject matter knowledge in teaching biology and physics. Teaching and teacher education. International Journal of Research and Studies. Vol. 3: 109-120.
Hill, J. (1986). Teaching of Literature in the language Classroom. London: Macmillan Pub.
Hill, H. C., Rowan, B., & Ball, D.C., (2005). Effects of teachers, mathematics knowledge for teaching on students’ achievement. American Educational Research Journal. 42 (2): 370-406.
Ibsen, E. B. (1990). The double role of fiction in foreign language learning. Towards a creative methodology. English Teaching Forum: 2-7.
Ikechukwu Abu, Siti Nor Yaacob, & Rumaya Juhari. (2010). Bullying and its relationship with depression among Teenagers. Journal of Psychology, 1 (1): 15-22.
Kennedy, M. (1991). Some surprising findings on how teachers learn to teach. Educational Leadership. Vol. 49: 14-17.
Khan, A. K. S. (2003). Pedagogical Implications of the Incorporation of the Literature Component in the Malaysian ESL Syllabus. In Vethamani, M. E. (Ed.). Teaching Literature in ESL/EFL Contexts. Petaling Jaya Selangor, (Malaysia). Sasbadi Pub. 49-6.1
Langer, J. (1997). Literacy Acquisition through Literature. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Study, 40: 602-614.
Lazar, G. (1993). Literature and language teaching. A Guide for Teachers & Trainers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Leech, G. N. & Short, M. (1981). Style in Fiction: A Linguistic introduction to English Fictional Prose. New York, Longman.
Little, J., & McLaughlin. M. (Eds.) (1993). Teachers’ work: Individuals, colleagues and contents. New York: Teachers College Press.
Mahmud Husien Salih. (1989). From language to literature in the University English Department. Forum, Vol. 27 April: 25-27.
Manan, S. (2000). Developing Critical skills: using stylistics in the ESL literature classroom. MELTA (http://melta.org/modules/sections/4/doc.
Martin, M. O., Mullis, I. V. S., Gregory, K. D. H., Hoyle, C., & Shen, C. (2000). Effective schools in science and mathematic, Chesnut Hill, M.A. International Study Center, Boston College Press.
McCrindle, A., R., & Christensen, C. A. (1995). The impact of leaning journals in metacognitive and cognitive processes and learning experiences. Learning and Instruction, 3: 168 -185.
Ministry of Education. (2000). Circular on the teaching of literature component to State Education Departments.
Ministry of Education. (1999). Curriculum specifications for the literature component in the English language curriculum for secondary schools. Kuala Lumpur; 13.
Newton, D. P., & Newton, L. D. (1999). Knowing what counts as understanding in different disciplines. Educational Studies. Vol. 25: 35-52.
Norrel, M. H. (1994). Sources of critical theory for secondary English teachers. Levels of authority in college literature classrooms. Unpublished Ph.D Thesis, George Mason University, USA.
Nowlin, D. (1991). The development and validation of an instrument as access cognitive domain status of pre-service and in-service elementary teachers’ in the division of rational numbers. Unpublished Ph.D Thesis, Oregon State University, USA.
Porter, A. C. & Borphy, J. C. (1988). Synthesis of Research on good teaching. Insight from the work of the institute for research on teaching. Educational Leadership Vol. 45 (8): 74-78.
Rosli Talif. (1995). Teaching of Literature in the ESL: The Malaysian Context. Kuala Lumpur. University Putra Malaysia.
Sadler, P., Sonnert, G., Coyle, H. P., Cook-Smith, N., Miller, J. L. (2013). The influence of teachers’ knowledge of student learning in middle school physics education classroom. American Education Research Journal, 50 (5):1020-1040.
Sage, H. (1987). Incorporating literature in ESL instruction. Englewood Cliffs. New Jersey: Prentice– Hall.
Samuel, M. (1995). Using versions of literary texts to improve comprehension. TESOL Journal 4 (3): 21-23
Schwab J. J. (1971). The Practical: Arts of the eclectic. School Review 79: 493-542.
Shinmahara, N. K. (1998). The Japanese model of professional development: Teaching a craft. Teaching and Teacher Education. 14 (5): 452-462.
Short, M. (1996). Stylistics ‘upside down’: Using stylistics analysis in the teaching of language and literature: In R. Carter and J. McRae. (Eds.). Language Literature and Learner. Longman London. 41.
Short, M. (1996). Exploring the language of poems, plays, and prose. Harlow: Longman Pub: 1-6.
Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Research. Vol. 15 (2): 4-14.
Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and Teaching. Foundations of the New Reforms. Harvard Educational Review. Vol. 57(1): 1-8.
Simpson, P. (1992). Teaching stylistics: analysing cohesion and narrative structure in a short story by Earnest Hemingway. Language and Literature. 1 (1): 47-67.
Simon, J. (1993). Perspective teacher’s knowledge of division. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education. Vol. 24: 233-254.
Spack, R. (1985). Literature, reading, writing and ESL: Bridging the gaps. TESOL Quarterly, 19 (4): 703-725.
Subramanian, G. (2003) Linguistic pathways to the study of literature in the Malaysian ESL context. GEMA Online Journal of Language Studies, Vol. 3 (1).
Tajalarapin Sulaiman, Aminudin Hassan, Mohd. Vazatsa Sapian, Saifudin Kumar Abdullah. (2009). The level of stress among students in urban and rural secondary schools in Malaysia. European Journal of Social Sciences, Vol. 10: 179-185.
Tirosh, D. (2000). Enhancing perspective teachers’ knowledge of children’s conceptions: The case of divisions of fractions. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education. Vol. 31: 5-25.
Varella, G. F. (2000). Science teachers at the top of their game: What is teacher expertise? The Clearing House. ProQuest Journal. Vol. 74 (1): 43-45.
Verdonk, P. (2002). Stylistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Wan Kamariah Baba. (2008). An Investigation into Teacher and Students’ Attitudes Towards Literature and its use in ESL Classroom: A Case-Study at a Matriculation Centre in Malaysia. Unpublished Ph.D Thesis, University of Leicester, UK.
Wayne, A. J. & Youngs, P. (2003). Teacher characteristics and student achievement gains: A review, Review of Educational Research. Vol. 73 (1). 89-122.
Weber, J. J. (Ed.). (1996). Stylistics reader: From Roman Jakobson to the present. London: Arnold.
Wenglinsky, H. (2000). How teaching matters. Princeton. N. J. Educational Testing Services.
Wesley, S. (1993). Job Analysis of the Knowledge Importance for Newly Licensed English Teachers. The Praxix Series.
Widdowson, H. G. (1975). Stylistics and the teaching of literature. London: Longman Pub.
Widdowson, H. G. (1992). Practical Stylistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Widdowson, H. G. (1996). Stylistics: an approach to stylistics analysis. In J. J. Weber (ed.) The stylistics reader: from Roman Jakobson to the present. London, Arnold.
Wong S. K. (2003). The Road Not Taken. In G. Subramanian & M. E. Vetamani. Teaching Literature in ESl/EFL Contexts. Kuala Lumpur Sasbadi Pub.
Van Driel, J. H, Verloop, N. & De Voss. (1998). Developing Science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. Journal Research on Science Teaching, 35 (6): 673-695.
Verdonk, P. (2002). Stylistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.24200/mjll.vol6iss1pp26-48
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
This journal and its content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.