INTERIM WRITTEN REPORT

PRESENTATION

NUR ALIAA AWANGN 7261314

Overview

The problem

Literature review

Investigation procedure

Medium of classroom interaction: Language choices

in Malaysian urban primary school ESL classroom.

1.0 THE PROBLEM

1.1 Background of the Issue Teachers have been instructed to teach high

quality English in English only classrooms.

All language classroom input must be in the target language (English) to ensure that the intended learning was successful.

(Qian et al., 2009)

1.2 Problem Statement The declining level of English proficiency

among students has brought about the need to find out how to tackle the issue.

(Ahmad & Jusoff, 2011)

Employing code switching (CS) to allow students to communicate and enhance their understanding.

(Ariffin & Husin, 2011)

1.3 Objectives To identify the language used and its functions

in Malaysian urban primary ESL classroom discourse.

The focus the usage of CS among teachers and students during the classroom interaction.

1.4 Research Questions What are the code switching behaviors used

by teachers and students in primary ESL classroom?

What are the purposes and functions of code switching exhibited?

1.5 Rationale Reality; talk is conducted in English, Malay,

and in both English and Malay languages.(Chap & Presmeg, 2010)

To allow students to become proficient English users to access knowledge and information in English & to communicate successfully.

1.6 Limitation Small number of participants 6 out of 65

students are being interviewed.

Creswell (2012) outlines, research today is not without its issues, which may include a “dismally low” (p. 7) number of participants, thus causing problems in deriving reliable conclusions from the data.

2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Theoretical framework Sociocultural theory of Vygotsky

The significant role of language in communication and thinking.

2.2 Past related research CS common practice amongst

bilingual speakers, where more than one language is alternated to achieve particular purposes in a discourse.

(Heller, 2007)

2.2 Past related research

Help students to understand difficult concept, grammar, and allow them to

carry out task.(Ariffin & Husin, 2011)

Low proficient learner could comprehend the subject matters well

Enjoy their communication, feel more comfortable, less tensed.

(Ahmad & Jusoff, 2009)

Reduce anxiety focus and participate in classroom activity.

(Chi, 2000; Burden, 2001)

Advantages of CS

2.2 Past related research Disadvantage of CS:

Prevent the students from improving their language proficiency

(Muthusamy, 2009)

3.0 METHODOLOGY

3.1 Research Design

Qualitative case study.(Creswell, 2012)

Provide insight into a specific issue.

3.2 Participants Year 5 English teacher who teaches 2

classrooms; weak and good classes

3 good students from each classroom

3.3Instrumentations

Observations

Video recording Fieldwork data collection

Interviews & questionnaires

3.4 Data Gathering Procedures

Consent letter •Asking for permission to be video recorded and

interviewed

Observation •Video recording- two lessons•Fieldwork data collection- take place in all four

lessons

Interview •At the end of the lesson•Prompt the participants to find explicit data

3.5 Data Analysis Method

Transcribed

ObservationInterview

Coding

1) Identify the roles and purposes of language used

2) Identify when and why, if there is a switch of language used

REFERENCESBadrul Hisham Ahmad., & Kamaruzaman Jusoff. (2009). Teachers’ Code-Switching in Classroom

Instructions for Low English Proficient Learners. English Language Teaching Journal. Vol. 2, (2). p. 49-55.

Burden, P. (2001). When do native English speakers and Japanese college students disagree about the use of Japanese in the English conversation classroom? The Language Teacher, April 2001. Retrieved February 2, 2012, from http://www.jalt-publications.org/tlt/articles/2001/04/burden.

Chap, S. L., & Presmeg, N. (2010). Teaching mathematics in two languages: A teaching dilemma of Malaysian Chinese primary schools. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education. Springer Netherlands. 9: 137-161.

Chi, W.C. (2000). The Importance of bilingual teachers to Chinese-oriented AMEP Learners. Retrieved February 5, 2012 from http://www.nceltr.mq.edu.au/conference2000.

Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Boston: Pearson Education.

Kamisah Ariffin., & Misyana Susanti Husin. (2011). Code-switching and Code-mixing of English and Bahasa Malaysia in Content-Based Classrooms: Frequency and Attitudes. The Linguistics Journal. Vol. 5, (2011). p.220-247.

Heller, M. (2007). Code-switching and the politics of language. In L. Wei (Ed.), The Bilingualism Reader (pp. 163-176). London: Rouledge.

Muthusamy., P. (2009). Communicative functions and reasons for code switching : A Malaysian perspective. Universiti Putra Malaya.

Qian, X., Tian, G., & Wang. (2009). Codeswitching in the primary EFL classroom in China- Two case studies. Science Direct, 719-730.