The significance of sociolinguistic backgrounds of teachers of IELTS Test preparation courses in selected Malaysian institutions

Abstract

Grant awarded Round 10, 2004

This research investigates the teaching of IELTS Test preparation classes in Malaysia. It focuses on the linguistic, social and cultural values which different teachers bring to the classroom and to washback into the curriculum.

This research investigated the teaching of IELTS Test preparation classes in Malaysia. Malaysia has been ranked 7th in a list of top 25 IELTS Test locations worldwide (IELTS Review 2002). This ethnographic study focused on the linguistic, social and cultural values which different teachers bring to the IELTS Test practice classroom and to washback into the curriculum according to the requirements of IELTS Test preparation and associated academic and social language skills.

We visited six institutions which held IELTS Test practice classes. These were both public and private, located in and around the Kuala Lumpur area and in the state of Pahang. Within these institutions, 92 students completed questionnaires and we interviewed nine teachers. As the student questionnaires were researcher-administered in all centres but one, the return was high (90%). Of these 92 students, 47 claimed Bahasa Malaysia as the first language (with most having English as another language), 30 claimed Chinese, Mandarin or Cantonese as the first language (with most having English as another language), the remainder claimed a mixture of Tamil, Punjabi, Indonesian, Burmese, Persian, English (one student) and Malaysian ethnic languages.

Within this context, the relevance of the term ‘non-native speaker teacher’ was revisited alongside the suggestion that the richness of multilingual speech communities should be better appreciated by centre-based researchers than is currently the case. We found that the teachers’ varied linguistic and cultural backgrounds enabled them to understand the relevance of the IELTS Test in their programs, institutions and in their country, and hence to teach its skills appropriately. Furthermore, despite not being familiar with the term ‘washback’, both teachers and students commented in detail on the positive effects they perceived the Test to have on the Malaysian teaching/learning environment.

Finally, we discovered that teachers working in this region had a strong desire for more specific information about the IELTS Test and candidate assessment; they felt that such information would enable them to provide better guidance for their students.

Note: Ethnic backgrounds Malaysia

Malaysia is a multi-ethnic, multilingual country with a population of about 23.27 million people (according to the 2000 census). Although at least a hundred languages are used daily, (Gaudart 2003), there are three principal languages in use: Bahasa Melayu, Chinese (which in itself is represented by both Mandarin and Cantonese and other dialects) and Tamil.

Special note should be made here concerning the nationality, ethnic background and linguistic background of the students. Of the colleges we involved in this research, one had enrolments restricted to Bumiputera (Malays and natives of Sarawak and Sabah). Private institutions had varied enrolments of Malay, Chinese and Indian Malaysians as well as students from other countries (Iran, Mongolia, Cambodia, Bangladesh, Myanmar, PR China, Morocco, Somalia, French New Guinea, Nigeria, Pakistan and Vietnam). In the case of Chinese, some claimed to speak Mandarin, some Cantonese and others nominated an all-encompassing Chinese. Of interest, some of the students from other countries claimed to be studying English in an English-speaking country (Malaysia).

1 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

The debates and discussions over the different expressions used to describe the changes, movements and spread of the English language over the past 50 years are too complex to fully describe in this report. However, such background is important to our discussion of how English teaching, learning and usage are situated in Malaysia.

Briefly, Tan (2005) in a discussion on the policies of English as a Malaysian language refers to non-Anglo Englishes (Schneider 2004) or ESL (English as a Second Language (Schneider 2004), English as an International Language (Jenkins 2000, Alptekin, 2002), English as a Global Language (Crystal 2003), World Englishes (Jenkins 2003), World English (Brutt Griffler 2002), the definitive explanation of the inner, outer and expanding circles (Kachru 1986) and, finally, English as a Lingua Franca (ELF) (Seidlhofer 2003, 2005) which is described as a contact language between persons who share neither a common native tongue nor a common (national) culture, and for whom English is the chosen or necessary foreign language of communication, such, for example, as used in hundreds of international organisations. (For more detailed studies of how English has spread and become to be seen as a global, international, world language and/or a lingua franca, see Kachru 1986; Quirk 1985; Brutt-Griffler 2002; Crystal 2003; Jenkins 2000, 2003; Widdowson 2003; Seidlhofer 2003, 2005, Holliday 2005, among many others. These expressions can be extended to more pertinent and particular descriptions which include the varieties of English used in different regions, countries or contexts.)

Brutt-Griffler (2002) suggests that there are 1.5 to 2 billion speakers of English in the world. By speakers of English, we understand she means people who speak English in some context or another in their daily life. Of these, at least $80\%$ belong to what she terms a bilingual group of speakers, that is that $80\%$ of the users of English also speak at least one other language on a daily basis. (Brutt-Griffler, 2002). This belief is supported by other linguists such as London (2001), who gives the figure of 3 billion people throughout the world who have knowledge of English and can be considered to be users of English. Crystal (2003) claims that a quarter of the world’s population is fluent or competent in English and gives statistics of the number of English users by country (pp 62-63). Jenkins (2006) claims that through the sheer numbers using English as an international language, most of the meaningful interactions occur between non-native speakers rather than between either native speakers or between a native speaker and a non-native speaker. English can be seen as having social and economic prestige, (Pennycook, 1994), or more recently, that it is widely accepted as the language of science and technology (Crystal 2003). Crystal reports a count by the British Council claiming that 1 billion people around the world are currently engaged in learning English. According to London (2001), among others, the ability to communicate in English can help to provide entry to the labour market in many parts of the world.

Seidlhofer (2005) believes that because English does function as a global lingua franca, we need to accept that English is being shaped at least as much by its non-native speakers as by its native speakers. She adds that ‘this has led to a somewhat paradoxical situation: on the one hand, for the majority of users, English is a foreign language, and the vast majority of verbal exchanges in English do not involve any native speakers of the language at all’. At the same time there is still a tendency for native speakers to be regarded as custodians over what is acceptable usage. This view is also supported by Pennycook (1994), Widdowson (2003), Crystal (2003), Brutt-Griffler (2002), Holliday (2005) and Jenkins (2006). As Jenkins says:

And Hung (2002) says that since English is being used more and more as a tool of communication among people who speak English as a second or foreign language, we should look at the issue of ‘international intelligibility’ not from the viewpoint of speakers of traditional varieties of English but from a truly international perspective.

1.1 Native and non-native teachers of English

Teachers are in the front line in facilitating the language acquisition process and therefore in understanding the required standard which will lead individual students to reach their goal.

Holliday (2005) sees this as the ‘we’ and ‘they’ discussion. He uses the inclusive ‘we’ to mean all teachers, academics, curriculum developers, writers, publishers and so on, who are involved worldwide in the work of what he refers to as World TESOL. Holliday notes that the commonly accepted terms ‘native’ and ‘non-native’ speaker:

(Jenkins 2000, pp 8-9, citing Brown and Bisong, cited in Holliday 2005, pp 4-5)

Cook (1999) argues that:

(Cook 1999, p 185)

Indeed, Alptekin (2002) suggests that with its standardised native speaker norms, the model is ‘utopian, unrealistic, and constraining’ in relation to English as an International Language (EIL). His reasoning is based on the widely held belief that there is only one perception of the native speaker’s language and culture. This perception does not reflect the lingua franca status of English and ultimately constrains both teacher and learner autonomy. He suggests that a new concept of ‘English as a world language’ is needed which includes both local and international contexts as settings of language use, and which would involve native-non-native and non-native-non-native discourse participants, as well as native-native. Competent users of the language would include those who are bilingual and who have intercultural or cross-cultural awareness.

1.2 Pedagogic considerations

In the traditional model of English in the international context the ‘non-native’ user is normally situated along what has been called the ‘interlanguage’ continuum with the ‘native’ speaker as the point of reference. The language of the non-native user is normally assessed against this native speaker standard. (For in-depth discussions on this, see Rampton (1990), Pennycook (1994), Jenkins (2000, 2006), Hamp-Lyons and Zheng (2001), Seidlhofer (2005).) If claims can be made that English should only be taught in English and by native speakers, then the English-speaking core is able to maintain a strong hold over the production of language textbooks and English teaching methodology. Holliday (2005) uses the term ‘native-speakerism’ to describe the inherent prejudices which allow the native speaker model to dominate.

Indeed, it has been pointed out that many materials in Western textbooks are inappropriate for the Malay/Muslim world (eg Pennycook 1994). There is an argument that Western-produced textbooks remain ethnocentric and give little consideration to the sociocultural contexts in which they may be used. Teaching methodologies are cultural practices that occur within specific contexts and imply particular understandings of: language; teacher and student roles; the importance of (student-initiated) speaking in class; what are desirable topics for speech; reading practices; what constitutes a well-written text; learning as a fun activity; education as learner-centred as opposed to teacher-centred; the importance of ‘authentic texts’ and activities; motivation as an autonomous subject’s desire to speak; plagiarism as a crime; correct grammar being less important than the courage to speak; and so on.

Ha (2004) and Nambiar (2005) both assert that cultural practice within classrooms in some countries, (Malaysia, for example) is contrary to Western concepts of successful interpersonal communication. Many Malaysians consider it rude to interrupt others when they are speaking and therefore find it very difficult. When they finally get the courage to speak up, it can be abrupt and shocking and appear out of context. This may have strong relevance to test preparation which includes debate and opinion-offering in speaking tests.

The issue of standardisation of the language and what forms are presented in the classroom is most crucial and complex when it comes to an international test. Whatever the individual student goal - whether studying English for business, career, education or migration - English is seen as a vital asset to reach that goal. Therefore it would seem that the standard of English needs to reflect the ultimate desired usage of the language.

Jenkins (2005) says that where tests of English are concerned, the status quo leads to the situation where candidates taking tests which claim to have international currency (and she gives examples), may be penalised for using internationally-communicative forms of the language. Indeed, she claims that very often testing practice inhibits the teaching of accommodation and convergence strategies by discouraging the use of forms (written as well as spoken in the case of lexicogrammar) which are not standard in native speaker English but which may nevertheless be communicatively efficient and acceptable in non-native speaker interactions.

2 THE IELTS TEST IN MALAYSIA AND THE AIMS OF THIS STUDY

The true power of tests is in the pedagogical benefits they offer in the form of feedback leading to more effective teaching and learning. (Shohamy 2004, p 89)

The IELTS Test has been in operation worldwide for over 16 years and has grown in acceptance for both university entrance and for migration purposes. The role of test preparation and the associated implications of washback into classroom activities and curriculum development have, in turn, expanded.

Statistics show that more non-native English-speaking teachers of English are preparing students for the IELTS Test around the world. In addition, many of these teachers have had no direct experience with the IELTS Test (that is, many have never taken a test nor undertaken Examiner training and have never seen an actual test).

The aim of this research was to identify the sociolinguistic background of the teachers of the IELTS Test practice classroom (their use of English in all areas of their lives and their perceived awareness of cultural and linguistic factors which impact on the IELTS Test) in a selection of Malaysian English language centres. The aim was also to explore how the teachers employed the different linguistic and cultural practices available to them when preparing their students for the IELTS Test and how these practices may affect other aspects of their classroom practice.

3 METHODOLOGY

This study is an ethnographic study using qualitative analysis of the teaching of IELTS Test preparation courses in Malaysia. Such methodology allows the emergence of themes which may have been unanticipated. Interview protocols were devised and questionnaires constructed with a view to allowing respondents the flexibility to provide answers which went beyond the scope envisaged by the researchers. It is thus an example of ethnographic research, insofar as it deals with the concerns of the individuals observed and interviewed, as interpreted by the interviewers.

Although we were to some extent outsiders to the organisations involved, both of us as the researchers, had the common ground of familiarity with the IELTS Test as Examiners, and both of us had taught English and IELTS Test preparation classes in non-English speaking countries, (one of us in Malaysia while introducing the Test to staff in a college). This shared contextual background allowed us to establish an initial rapport with the participants.

Educational research at all levels, from action research to effect classroom change to policy-based institutional or government-motivated research, reduces the gap between researcher and research situation even further as it is usually carried out by educationalists. (Baxter 2003, p 50)

We believe that a qualitative, ethnographic approach to the research served our aims best because we chose to focus on teachers and students in a particular setting and we wished to present the attitudes of these particular stakeholders in the IELTS Test in Malaysia in order to interpret the cultural and linguistic capital which Malaysians perceive the IELTS Test brings them. By visiting the colleges and interacting with the stakeholders, we intended to present a picture of how IELTS is woven into the fabric of English language teaching in Malaysia.

Due to difficulties of access and time and travel constraints, it was not possible to spend more than a day at each of the selected institutions and so there were some amendments to the original research plan. The following indicates the original research plan with relevant comments on changes and limitations in brackets.

1. Protocols will be developed for in-depth interviews to establish sociolinguistic backgrounds of teachers on IELTS preparation courses at Malaysian institutions, selected on the advice of IDP. (See Table 1 below.)
2. A classroom observation schedule will be developed and arranged with teachers covering, for each class, explanations, question and answer routines, patterns of interaction, use of language and intercultural analysis. (See Appendix 3 for observation schedule.)
3. Program documentation for each course will be studied, including all outlines and artefacts developed by teachers. (Since all but one of the teachers did not prepare their own materials, this aspect of the original research plan could not be completed and, in fact, was irrelevant. One teacher showed us her own materials but most asserted they used readily available commercial texts.)
4. A series of lessons (three per course) will be observed and audio-recorded at different stages of each course. (Due to time and cross-country travel constraints, it was not possible to observe three classes in progress in all schools.)
5. An analysis of each lesson will be conducted with each teacher and audio-recorded. (Due to teachers’ commitments and time constraints, it was not appropriate to expect them to give further time to analyse classroom activity in addition to time already given for the interview. It also seemed to be culturally inappropriate to audio-record classes in progress.)
6. At all times the project will be collaborative, with each step being validated by the teachers involved. (Teachers were very obliging with time for interviews but did not respond to invitations to participate further. One teacher replied to follow-up email in detail - see Appendix 6. Another promised to but did not, and another had left her position. Since neither researcher was in Malaysia at the time of writing up the research, there was no further opportunity for follow-up.)
7. Institutions will be selected on the advice of IDP and teachers will be selected, with due observance of ethical considerations, to capture the sociolinguistic variability of Malaysia. It is envisaged that three teachers of IELTS preparation courses from each of six institutions will participate in the study. (Further institutions were selected by the in-country researcher and a total of nine teachers from six institutions were interviewed - see summary in Table 1.)

The questionnaire which was given to the students attending the IELTS Test practice classes served to add extra dimensions to the information gathered from the interviews with teachers. The classroom observation also supported the information gathered from the interviews. Triangulation of the data from these three sources added a further layer of validation to the findings, in particular to the discussion on the effects of washback, which was one of our principal aims.

3.1 Selected institutions

Most students taking an IELTS Test do so in centres in Kuala Lumpur with the option of also taking the test in Penang, Sarawak or Kuantan, and other centres around the country by arrangement. The institutions we visited were mainly clustered in and around Kuala Lumpur, with the exception of two colleges in Pahang.

For this study, four institutions were approached on the advice of IDP and three others were approached through connections established by the researchers themselves. Of the total of seven, one was unable to assist, as there were no IELTS Test preparation classes scheduled over the four-month period of data collection but the others were all willing to be involved, even though one institution was not continuing to offer IELTS practice courses within the period. The teacher at this institution was happy to be interviewed, as s/he was already known to one of the researchers.

Of the institutions visited, most were giving IELTS Test preparation classes for students who intended to study abroad but one institution required its students to take the test practice classes as part of the curriculum even though the students had no intention to study abroad. In addition, some students said they were choosing these classes out of personal interest. The six institutions represent the variety of post-secondary educational choices available in Malaysia, and exhibit the following characteristics, which relate to Malaysia’s particular cultural and linguistic diversity. The factors that influence this diversity involve:

• colonial past
• migrations from, especially, China, southern India and Sri Lanka
• government policy of boosting opportunities for native (Bumiputera) Malaysians
• Malaysia’s position of being able to provide inexpensive, quality education in English more cheaply than countries where English is the official first language, such as Australia, Canada, New Zealand, UK and the USA.

The profiles of the institutions we surveyed are summarised below. As stated in our proposal, we selected them on advice from IDP, combined with independent research. As far as we were able to ascertain, they represent the only institutions conducting IELTS Test practice classes outside the recognised British Council and IDP centres in Malaysia, in 2005, although this may change according to demand. One institution recommended by IDP, for example, was unable to assist us in our research, as they were not conducting IELTS Test practice classes for the period under observation.

3.1.1 Profiles of institutions

A. Post-secondary government-funded college providing professional training courses to Bumiputera students. Students were undertaking IELTS Tests as a benchmark indicator for English level as part of their award. B. Private college, offering training courses and degree programs, through affiliations with overseas universities, to local and overseas students. Some students have scholarships awarded by Malaysian companies. C. Similar to B, established in Malaysia by a Malaysian conglomerate. D. Relatively new private college-approved programs - students may obtain degrees in Malaysia from certain Australian or British universities. This college has affiliations with one British and one Australian university. E. Malaysian government-funded university committed to providing education for Bumiputeras. Selected students are awarded scholarships for overseas study, funded by Malaysian companies such as Petronas. The IELTS Test is undertaken by candidates preparing to go overseas on these scholarships. F. State-run vocational training college offering transfer to partner universities for candidates wishing to proceed beyond diploma level. Most IELTS Test candidates are taking the test for admission to computing studies programs in Malaysian or overseas universities. No IELTS Test practice courses were being conducted at time of data-collection because of re-structuring.

In summary, it can be seen that colleges offering IELTS Test preparation courses in Malaysia are training both international and local students:

• for study at English-speaking universities or
• for study in Malaysia, in English, for awards granted by overseas universities having agreements with the Malaysian institutions.

Overseas universities thus dictated English language requirements, whether the students were transferring to their countries or completing the award in Malaysia. This meant that all students in our survey were taking the academic module and all classes were taught for this module.

Table 1 shows the total numbers of classes, teachers and students represented in the findings of this study.

As there was no specific question relating to nationality included in the questionnaire, this study cannot draw any conclusions on the differences between responses given by Malaysian nationals and non-Malaysian nationals. There is, however, scope for further investigation of non-Malaysian students studying English in Malaysia.

Table 1: Summary of responses by institution

3.1.2 Types of classes

The six institutions had a variety of timetables and course structures. Colleges C and D ran evening courses for part-time study and College B ran a full-day Saturday program, in addition to courses which formed part of the mainstream programs.

The IELTS Test classes also need to be set against the background of alternatives available for study in English in Malaysia, eg the A-level program available in some colleges, and the SAMat (South Australian Matriculation Program). It is not the intention here to consider these alternatives in depth but their existence needs to be signaled. Such a variety shows Malaysia at an educational crossroads in English teaching, with IELTS providing just one pathway to higher education in English. Further research would be useful to indicate the proportion of students studying bridging/foundation programs from overseas universities, university entrance (eg A-level, SAMat) and students taking IELTS Tests, as all but one of the institutions visited offered this variety in differing combinations.

3.2 Sources of data

There were three sources of data: interviews with teachers; observation of classes; and student questionnaires.

3.2.1 How these sources connect - Interviews with teachers

The context of the interviews we conducted has, we believe, impacted significantly on the information received by the teachers. A consideration of this context involves location of participants/interactants, teacher training background of teachers, first language and English language background of students. Within this context, it has to be remembered that ‘the researcher and the researched inevitably become part of a new culture, which needs to be examined’ (Baxter 2003, p 48). Of course, always present in this examination is the ethical dimension, which obliges the researcher to continually withdraw from the scene and evaluate her attitudes in the light of the roles of all participants.

The network of relationships which develop during the process and the interactions which result are all part of the data to be analysed. They can never be eliminated from the process or neutralised so that they do not matter; rather, reflexivity demands that they must be incorporated into the overall cultural analysis. (Baxter 2003, p 55)

Holliday has this to say about the relationship of the researcher and the researched:

The researcher must try to see through and liberate herself from the professional discourse she brings with her in order to establish relations on the participants’ own terms. They are there as people in their own right, not simply to participate in her research. (Holliday 2002, p 173)

In other words, the everyday lives of the participants continue, regardless of the researcher, who must constantly shift the perspective to situate observed moments in a logical continuum. This may be difficult when the observed moments constitute very brief interludes. Conducting interviews, observing classes and distributing questionnaires are all interruptions to the normal lives of people going about their duties in educational institutions and data collected in these ways must always acknowledge this dimension of artificiality. Hence the researchers have to establish a relationship with the participants which is exterior to the professional one (eg Holliday 2002) but which will enable the optimum conditions for gathering the data they require.

If its objective of pure knowledge distinguishes the research relationship from most of the exchanges in everyday life, it remains, whatever one does, a social relationship. As such, it can have an effect on the results obtained… (Bourdieu 1992, p 608)

A comfortable ‘social relationship’ was readily established in our interviews with teachers, the second method of data collection but the ‘objective of pure knowledge’ was less easily obtained, perhaps because of a difference in the expectations of researchers and researched. Although a relationship had been established via email and telephone with the institutions, the teachers interviewed did not have access to the questions we had provided and therefore did not have time before the interview to think about their answers. Thus their responses, while rich in cultural and linguistic detail, did not provide the depth which we had, perhaps inappropriately, sought.

Moreover, the demands on the time of teachers working in Malaysia are extremely heavy and do not allow flexibility for in-depth discussion. Academic staff, employed at senior levels have long working hours, often including weekends, and staff at lower levels usually have many family commitments outside of teaching time. Therefore, coming from what appeared to be a comparatively generous working Western environment, we did not wish to impose on our hosts and were grateful for the valuable time they could spare us. As qualitative researchers, we believe it is important to make this observation concerning background to the project.

3.2.2 Observation of classes

For a number of reasons, classroom observation did not follow the plan originally envisaged. Problems of timetabling and access meant that only one class could be observed in each of the institutions except for one, where three classes were being taught by the college’s one IELTS Test practice teacher on the day agreed for observation. (See Appendix 3 for observation schedule.) Its main purpose was to define the activity undertaken in an IELTS Test practice class. To carry out prolonged, in-depth observation, it would have been necessary to spend time in the area and to take up the time of the teachers but neither option was feasible. The limited observation possible, therefore, could serve only to provide an outline of the classes.

The context surrounding the data gathering was a relatively new one for IELTS research because the participating teachers came from different linguistic/cultural backgrounds to the researchers.

Consequently, the interaction was between participants who may have had certain expectations of each other which were not always totally justified. Regarding the first method of data collection, observation, for example, it was necessary to reassure some of the teachers that their performance was not being assessed in any way because they associated appraisal with ‘observation’. Correspondingly, the researchers, in their notes, needed to remember that they were simply observing the content of the classes and not commenting on the skills of the teachers. On the other hand, the interviews, although recorded (with permission), seemed less threatening as it was not difficult to establish a rapport based on shared knowledge and experience of IELTS, and indeed of English language teaching.

3.2.3 Student questionnaires

The third method of data collection was through questionnaires administered to the students. Again limitations apply - a few students, for example, did not have sufficient mastery of English to understand all the questions and others gave only the briefest of answers but overall we were delighted with the students’ reflective skills and depth of perception in their answers.

In sum, we were able to triangulate the data from these three sources - classroom observation of teachers and students, teacher interviews, and student questionnaires - and consolidate our findings. Among these three methods, the classroom observation worked minimally as a data-gathering instrument but served to verify the activities we were researching, namely the teaching of IELTS Test practice classes. On the other hand, the teacher interviews, transcribed and discussed below, provided us with rich sociolinguistic and cultural material for our study, while the student questionnaires illustrated and verified many of the points made by teachers. Furthermore, there were many similarities across institutions which enabled us to construct a clear image of the role which the IELTS Test practice classes play for English teachers, and students, in Malaysia.

3.3 Schedule followed for the research

1. Official start date for project as agreed with IDP June 2005
2. Designing protocols in Australia and Malaysia May 2005
3. Contacting Malaysian institutions April, May 2005
4. First institutional visit and related data collection May 2005
5. Additional visits to remaining institutions July 2005
6. Final interview recorded with teacher in Malaysia September 2005
7. Literature review Ongoing 2005 and 2006
8. Meetings for analysis of data August 2005 - January 2006
9. Additional information sought from teachers by email March 2006
10. Writing up of report March - June 2006
11. First submission of report June 2006
12. First revision on receiving feedback August 2006
13. Second feedback received October 2006
14. Second revision completed February 2007

4. FINDINGS

4.1 Overview of findings from interviews with teachers

The six institutions visited included public universities and colleges, private universities and private colleges of advanced education. During the visits, we observed IELTS Test preparation classes in progress. We interviewed nine teachers of IELTS Test preparation classes from the six institutions, including schools in Kuala Lumpur and regional areas. Our interview protocols are in Appendix 1. Each interview lasted approximately 45 minutes and was audio-recorded and subsequently transcribed. A summary of themes arising from the interviews is in Appendix 5.

4.1.1 Sociolinguistic backgrounds of teachers

All of the teachers except one would fit the category of being bilingual with English as a first or English as a Second Language (using the expression ESL here to indicate that English is not an ‘other’ language but is used competently in all aspects of daily life, not only at work but at home and in social life). Some of the teachers interviewed also claimed to speak more than two languages in their daily life. This would not be unusual in a country such as Malaysia which is considered to be a multilingual, multi-racial, multicultural nation. This also means that most of the teachers interviewed would, as Sandra Lee McKay claims, bring second language awareness to their teaching practice.

But perhaps the greatest strength of bilingual English teachers is that they provide their students with a model of a good language learner that is relevant to their own social and cultural experiences, a model that no language teacher from another culture can ever provide. (McKay 2002, p 45)

The exception to this claim of being bilingual was from one teacher who spoke only English as a first language and claimed to be monolingual. Of interest, she commented that she had studied in an English-speaking country (India) and now worked in an English-speaking country (Malaysia).

4.1.2 Qualifications

The teachers’ qualifications ranged from no TESOL training to postgraduate level. These included: two teachers with MA TESOL from Malaysian universities; Diploma of Education (four teachers, one Diploma from the UK and three from Malaysia); and one MA in English (not TESOL) from India. Three teachers claimed to have undertaken all schooling in English (as was the practice in Malaysia during the 1960s) and one of these three had no specific teaching or TESOL training. Seven claimed to have lived and/or studied overseas (in an English-speaking country including India). One had never studied overseas. One teacher did not respond to this question.

4.1.3 IELTS Test background

It is important to note that none of the teachers interviewed had any direct IELTS Test experience either as a candidate or as an Examiner, and so all knowledge of test format, question types and assessment requirements came to the teachers from the IELTS Handbook, the IELTS website or the commercially produced practice texts.

All teachers claimed to be confident to deliver IELTS Test practice classes. The experience of such teaching ranged from 16 years (two teachers involved since test inception) to only two semesters with the majority having approximately three years’ experience with IELTS Test practice classes. All expressed confidence in being able to explain the Test in aspects such as format, linguistic and cultural demands of responses, and assessment. (All claimed to be satisfied that they could approximate actual assessment of student writing tasks and speaking practice models by using the Overall Band Descriptors in the IELTS Handbook.) All teachers used mainly commercial test practice texts with three teachers occasionally preparing some extra materials using local newspapers. Most teachers claimed that there was not enough time in their schedules to prepare supplementary materials.

4.1.4 Teachers as ‘native/non-native speakers’ and their use of English in Malaysia

It is interesting here to consider the role of the native/non-native speaker teacher in the Malaysian context because, as the interviews with IELTS Test practice course teachers testify, the term appears to have limited importance. Teachers were asked to state their first language and then to clarify the uses they had for the various languages at their disposal. Although we had imagined it to be important to find a definition for the term ‘non-native speaker teacher’, as well as ‘native speaker teacher’, we found that in the institutions we visited, only one person claimed to be a ‘native speaker’ teacher of English, and also monolingual, and so there was no opportunity to define native speaker teacher. Hence, we have chosen to focus on aspects of the teachers’ sociolinguistic backgrounds which characterise them as non-native speaker teachers in Malaysia. These aspects present a context for use of English which is vastly different from that of the centre-based teaching environment and indicate possibilities for further research. For example, one area might be the influence of surrounding languages on English which is used for limited purposes. Sweeping generalisations about the value of ‘English only’ classrooms can be challenged if it is acknowledged that inhabitants of countries like Malaysia, while admitting a need for English, do not require native-speaker-like competence and therefore need not be threatened by the insistence on using English in the classroom without being able to have recourse to their first/other languages.

One factor which centre-based researchers tend to ignore about teachers whose first language is not English is that such teachers have an understanding of the role English should occupy in their society, compared with the other languages commonly used. In other words their sociolinguistic skills are developed to the extent that they can move effortlessly from one language to another without causing misunderstanding. All the teachers in this study claimed to use only English in the IELTS Test classroom and were quite confident in doing so but eight out of nine also claimed to use other languages in other parts of their lives. One teacher, for example, declared that she spoke 80% Malay and 20% English at home, while the situation at work was exactly the reverse. Another teacher, who grew up speaking Tamil, claimed that since her marriage 13 years before, she has used English more and more, to the point where she now uses Tamil only when she visits her parents and her father chides her for acquiring an English accent! The other teacher claiming Tamil as a first language asserted that she spoke more English with her husband than Tamil and mainly English with her child. Of course, such claims have implications for the use of Tamil in Malaysia, and also for the use of Bahasa Melayu, which this teacher claimed to use minimally.

Similarly, another teacher, who claimed ‘Chinese’ as her first language, added that she now spoke English at home as well as at work. In summary, the Chinese- and Tamil-speaking teachers tended to speak more English, while the Malay-speaking teachers spoke more Malay at home. This could be because the official language is Malay which is also the cultural background of the two native Malay teachers. The other factor to consider here is that all respondents are professionally involved with English and consequently are likely to use it more frequently than the average Malaysian, especially if they can use it comfortably with family.

The question, then, becomes ‘How is a sociolinguistic background of this nature significant in the teaching of IELTS Test preparation classes?’ The following points may be considered significant:

• understanding of the role of English in Malaysia and the boundaries of its use
• understanding of the cultural difficulties of IELTS for students in Malaysia
• understanding of the cultural contrasts involved in teaching IELTS
• the experience of learning English and, in many cases, of adapting to study in an overseas, English-speaking culture.

The sociolinguistic profiles of the teachers interviewed suggest ways of describing the ‘non-native’ teacher of English in a positive light, which accords with Canagarajah’s (1999) discussion of codeswitching in Resisting Linguistic Imperialism in English Language Teaching in which he describes research on the positive influences of L1 in the language classroom:

…we need to understand that for many periphery communities, English is one more code in a rich repertoire of multiple languages. Countless millions of people who live in a linguistically-rich environment acquire more than one language simultaneously from childhood. Furthermore, the codes are often mixed in usage - as in code-switching, code-mixing, style shifting or borrowing. (Canagarajah 1999, p 129)

In their descriptions of how they use English, the Malaysian teachers provide evidence of this linguistic richness, which is not a feature of centre-based linguistic societies, and is therefore often neglected by researchers. The most detailed account of language use came from the teacher whose first language is Malay - see Appendix 6. Her comments show considerable awareness of language issues in her country:

Question: What do you use each language for?

Bahasa Malaysia…mainly for communicating with families and friends. English…for my job as an English lecturer and also when I’m communicating with the business communities. I feel more comfortable communicating with English if I know that the other person is well trained in English. Otherwise, I’m worried that I’ll offend the person because a non-user of English normally will think that an English-speaking person is trying to show off.

This example of sensitivity to language use is evidence of the understanding possessed by ‘non-native’ teachers of English working in their own environment and suggests an ability to assign a role to English which will not threaten the first language. Where the IELTS Test is concerned, it suggests an understanding of the functions of the language which students need to be familiar with, for example, dealing with ‘critical thinking’, as discussed below. Malaysian non-native speakers and teachers of English are accustomed to using more than one language in their everyday lives and therefore are more sharply focused on the linguistic requirements of the IELTS Test. They appreciate the structure of the Test and what their students, living in a non-English-speaking environment, need to absorb, to succeed in an English-speaking country.

As discussed above, the native/non-native speaker dichotomy appears less important in the Malaysian context than defining the richness of the non-native speaker context. The starting point for understanding English use in Malaysia is not that of the standard native speaker, it is rather different, as Sandra Lee McKay points out:

English fits into bilingual users’ personal language hierarchies differently in different countries and in particular speech communities within those countries. In many cases their needs do not entail achieving native-like competence in English, yet most current SLA research rests on this assumption. (McKay 2002, p 39)

The one teacher who asserted herself to be a native speaker of English also claimed to be monolingual while teachers claiming other first languages were bi- or multi-lingual. Within their particular speech community, and regardless of the number of languages they spoke, all the teachers were able to give the skills necessary for the IELTS Test, a value which was perceived by the students to be essential to their goals of studying and communicating internationally in English.

4.1.5 Teachers’ comments on teaching approaches

Three teachers commented that the commercially produced materials were culturally biased and that much of the content had no relevance to their students or that the content was too heavily biased towards the UK and Australian cultures with many lexical items not being understood by their students. This would fit the comments made by some researchers that English language textbooks (and the benchmark tests) are too narrowly prescribed to Western English ‘norms’ and that monolingual native-speaker models for international users of English should be replaced by models which are based on successful bilinguals with intercultural insights, (Alptekin 2002; Cook 1999; Pennycook 1994; Taylor 2005; Matsuda 2002; Jenkins 2006).

All teachers but one claimed that their students were highly motivated to participate in the IELTS Test practice classes. The one who did not claim high motivation in her students was from a school where the test practice classes were on the curriculum. However, not all students were going to take the Test, nor did they necessarily intend to study overseas and their motivation stemmed from the fact that without a ‘pass’ or appropriate score, the students could not proceed to the next stage of their educational or career goal. And, as another teacher said: ‘Apart from that they’re paying a lot of money. Yeah.’

Through discussion of the individual test modules, Listening, Reading, Writing and Speaking, most of the comments focused on the Writing tasks, both 1 and 2 for different reasons. It is believed that Writing Task 1 causes concern because of the unaccustomed interpretation and description skills required. Nonetheless, it is seen as a useful skill which can be carried over into other classes and other subjects, and therefore has some washback value to students. Responses to questions about Writing Task 2 provided interest because, although it was claimed that students in Malaysian classes (and this includes those students from ‘other’ countries) are not normally accustomed to giving opinions, they found this useful, and learning to analyse their ideas was seen as a valuable and creative skill. Writing Task 2 was also seen as employing and practising useful skills, particularly those required for critical thinking.

The teachers also believed that practice for the IELTS Speaking test involved and helped develop the unaccustomed habit of thinking critically. In particular, Part 3 of the Speaking test required practice because the skills of critical thinking and producing their own ideas were new for these students.

One teacher claimed that some of the topics in the Speaking test practice materials were unsuitable for Malaysians to discuss (of course she was referring here strictly to the commercially produced materials and not the actual test materials). Two teachers commented that for the Speaking test, the foreign students had pronunciation difficulties (specifically mentioned were Chinese, Bangladeshi and Korean students). One of these teachers suggested that the assessment of Speaking be modified to take into account the difficulty some candidates might have with pronunciation.

The different accents on the audio-recordings for the Listening test caused many students difficulty, specifically those students from other countries who were studying in Malaysia. While it was generally accepted that listening to native speakers was necessary to gain proficiency, the different accents and unknown lexical items caused difficulty and even distress. One teacher commented that the need to spell correctly was an issue.

Questions relating to the Reading module raised the fewest comments and those were mainly that many of the topics were not relevant to Asian students and were too ‘boring’ to maintain students’ interest. There was a general agreement that the skills required for the Reading subtest were the same kinds of skills required for reading in other subjects students were studying.

It was generally agreed that the academic skills required for the IELTS Test were good preparation for further study in universities in the Western English world (UK, Australia, USA, Canada and New Zealand), that the IELTS Test provided the students with an international standard for higher

degree study. It was, however, admitted that some of these skills, critical thinking, debate, giving opinions and so on, were new to most of the Malaysian students and therefore needed to be specifically taught.

4.1.6 Cultural concerns

Regarding questions on cultural issues relating to Test practice tasks found in the commercially prepared publications, the main comments involved the issues of learning styles. Comments again concerned the differences between accustomed learning styles of rote learning as opposed to critical thinking, the development of an argument and the individual student’s own ideas. This issue of learning style stressed again that students have difficulty with Part 3 of the Speaking test and with Writing Task 2. However, one teacher commented that a student had expressed ‘you make me a more emotional person because we have to write reflections’ with respect to the understanding and practice of critical thinking. It was also mentioned again that the content of some Test items was culturally specific to the UK and Australia (again here the reference is to commercially produced materials not the actual Test content). To quote another teacher, ‘All of the material is from English-speaking countries and so there’s nothing familiar’.

There were very few clear or pertinent responses to the interview questions relating to curriculum development and curriculum washback. As mentioned above, most of the teachers we interviewed did not participate in curriculum development nor to a great extent in the preparation of materials. The principal and oft claimed reason for this was ‘not enough time’.

Further comments about aspects of the taking of the Test may be summarised as follows:

• Students don’t like severe-looking Examiners nor those who stop them midway talking because it makes them feel that they have been wrong.
• Candidates get agitated when the Examiner is a native speaker.
• We need practice books with more international flavour.
• Teachers need to be trained to be able to make assessments on Speaking and Writing.
• Teacher training would be useful.
• Put some Asian names into the Listening (street names too).
• More Asian flavour might help contextually.
• More Asian topics and current issues.

One teacher expressed concern that, with the increasing internationalisation of some schools in Malaysia, students from other countries might be disadvantaged through lower scores on the IELTS Test. She understood the issues that such ‘periphery teachers’ (Canagarajah 2002) as herself faced with teaching students from a third linguistic and cultural context. As she said, commenting on the pronunciation of a Korean student:

When… OK if the examiner cannot understand the poor Korean girl…the way she speaks…her whole life she’ll not be able to go to an English-speaking country but I think that’s not fair. Uh. She’s from Korea. They don’t expect to speak like an Englishman or an English woman. I’m teaching language, English but I don’t speak it that well because I’ve been living here most of the time. Right? The cultural influence…all this needs to be taken into consideration. Right? And I don’t think allowance is made at all from the mark the Korean student gets. (Teacher P)

There were some interesting perceptions from teachers about the assessment standards from different test centres. Two teachers said they had changed (or were going to change) from sending their students to the IDP Test Centre to sending them to the British Council Test Centre (in Kuala Lumpur) as the perception was that the Examiners at the IDP Test Centre were too strict, or stricter, than those from the British Council Test Centre.

And finally, one college administrator observed that students arriving to study English and IELTS Test practice from other countries had largely variable test results from their own country and from test taking in Malaysia.

…people will come and say I wanna go back to China and take the test…and not do it here because it seems to be easier to pass and I’ve got students who got IELTS 7 from Pakistan and they come here and they go in my level 3.

This administrator also suggested that more information about how assessment was conducted would reduce the incidences of ‘variability’.

So, yes, I’ve been thinking you know. Human error does occur so one way to…so one way to reduce it, to minimise it, is to make it a little bit more transparent, to tell us what you’re looking for…

Further discussion on the effects of washback into aspects of curriculum development, materials preparation and teaching is detailed in Section 4.3: Washback into learning and teaching.

4.1.7 Overall findings from classroom observations

Appendix 3 summarises the main features noted in the classroom observations. By way of introduction, it should be noted that all classrooms were well-equipped with standard features such as appropriate lighting, clean blackboards, OHPs, sufficient numbers of desks and chairs (arranged in rows) and air-conditioning (with one exception, but this college was in a rural area, and had large windows on both sides and ceiling fans). Other features in common were that all classes used English throughout, and that students were quiet and co-operative, following teachers’ directions but rarely asking questions (this could have been due to the presence of an observer and, in some cases, unwillingness to speak in English). An exception was a class in college C, where the teacher encouraged students to talk in pairs, and then to volunteer information to the class.

Institutions providing IELTS Test practice did not always make these courses a compulsory part of their curriculum as they were also targeting students keen to develop their test-taking skills. Hence the intensive courses, as the administrator in college C asserted, were focused directly on test-taking practice, while the long-term program at this college was able to take a broader approach, which meant including, in particular, discussions of cultural issues.

4.2 Overview of findings from student questionnaires

We received a return of 92 questionnaires completed by students who were attending IELTS Test preparation classes at the same time as the classroom observations and interviews took place. All student responses are tabulated in Appendix 4.

The content of the student questionnaire (See Appendix 2) can be divided into the following themes:

• Questions 1-4 were related to the sociolinguistic background of the students
• Questions 5-8 described the impact of the IELTS Test on life in Malaysia or elsewhere
• Questions 9-20 gave information of the impact of the IELTS Test on English language learning and general learner washback
• Questions 21-26 were related to students’ sociocultural background.

Thus, most of the questions we asked dealt with the core related concepts of washback and impact, essential to our stated aim of analysing the ‘cultural and linguistic value of the IELTS Test’. For these purposes, the ‘cultural’ value of the IELTS Test approximates the ‘impact’ of the Test on the students’ lives as perceived in Malaysia, while the ‘linguistic’ value is related to ‘washback’.

4.2.1 Questions 5-8: Impact of the IELTS Test on life in Malaysia or elsewhere

Student perceptions of the Test reveal a particular mindset that many of them have no doubt been encouraged to adopt. This mindset is best illustrated by their responses using such words as ‘global’ and ‘international’, and utterances such as, ‘…English is pretty handy when it comes to communication with foreigners considering it is an international language and all’. There is also an awareness of the more precise need for English as a specific tool, for example, ‘English widened my opportunity to go further in majoring in geology as most of the research will be done outside Malaysia’.

Student responses in questionnaires indicate that IELTS Test preparation courses for some institutions were electives chosen to suit the student’s own requirements. On the other hand, students taking stand-alone evening or Saturday classes offered to part-time students, were often full-time students elsewhere, but seeking extra IELTS Test practice. Other students were simultaneously studying for other qualifications, such as SAMat (South Australian Matriculation) which provided an alternative pathway through IELTS and on to further study.

Many students were able to articulate responses to our questions which showed that they regarded IELTS as having a role in honing their English skills to the level required, not just for succeeding in the Test, but also for achieving an overall desirable level of fluency. English is also seen as the way to knowledge and the IELTS Test is believed to play a strong role. Within the students’ world, learning English is seen as essential. Their observations illustrate the ‘fresh impetus in post-colonial communities’ mentioned by Canagarajah (1999, p 77), in which he sees these communities appropriating English for their own use, rather than submitting to colonial dictates. As the many responses to our Question 6 (Why are you studying English?) indicate, the students see English as a gateway to opportunities.

Question 6: Why are you studying English?

Response 1: English nowadays is very essential especially in education and work field. Moreover it is the most widely used language in the world. Other reason: further study in overseas.

Response 2: English is the media of communication in tertiary studies. This language will be the portal to the seas of knowledge.

Response 3: Because it’s essential to be fluent in English if I were to further my studies overseas in Australia or NZ.

Response 4: English is the international language that is used to link the world together. Besides that English is also the language of knowledge.

Response 5: Because other languages than Malay language fascinate me.

Response 6: To gain more knowledge and be more global as English is the worldwide language.

Response 7: Because it enables me to communicate with various kind of people as English is an international language.

Response 8: For communication, better understanding ensuring a better social status.

Response 9: It’s my interest and English language is very useful in global field.

Response 10: Because it’s a worldwide language.

These samples reveal a perception of English as a means to an end, with the exception of Response number 5, the only one showing an interest in English as a language and for that reason alone, worth studying. Motivation to learn the language is strong, and the students have absorbed what their teachers have told them.

What then is the role of English?

I see its role as international communication. We need English to communicate with the world beyond the shores of Malaysia, so that we can be competitive in a global market.

(Gaudart in Vethnami, ed, 2003, p 4)

This is the opinion of Dr Hyacinth Gaudart, a respected English language educator in Malaysia.

4.2.2 Questions 9-20: Impact (washback) on English learning

The findings from this set of questions on the student questionnaire is detailed in Section 4.3, along with the discussion of findings from effects of washback from interviews with teachers.

4.2.3 Questions 21-26 and further comments

The following table represents a summary of the findings from Questions 21-26 of the student questionnaire. The question wording is given in the left hand column. For Questions 21-25, the total number of negative responses to the question is given in the middle column and the total number of positive responses is given in the right hand column. In the next table, for Question 26, the breakdown of items is represented in the middle column and the number of positive responses is given in the right hand column. Finally, the opportunity to provide comments or suggestions was given at the end of the questionnaire. In the final row of the table below, the number of students who either responded or who failed to respond is given. The discussion on the findings of all questions is given below.

Table 2: Summary of responses to questions 21-26 on student questionnaire Part 1 Questions 21-25

Table 2: Summary of responses to questions 21-26 on student questionnaire Part 2 Question 26 and number of responses to request for comments

4.2.4 Discussion

The responses to the first four questions, numbers 21-24, give information on the opportunities students had to visit and engage in the use of English in an English-speaking country. While a significant number (22) had holidayed in an English-speaking country (including Singapore and Switzerland), most of these opportunities had been brief. Only two respondents had worked in an English-speaking country (one of which was Singapore) and 10 and 14 respectively had studied/lived (some of these responses overlapped) in an English-speaking country (one of which was Malaysia).

Overall, the opportunities available to these students to use English in an English-speaking country and to gain corresponding cultural experiences were limited and therefore most of the English learning would have taken place within Malaysia, either in the classroom or by other means (see the responses to Question 26, below).

The responses to Question 25 indicate that most students perceived that their IELTS Test practice classroom, through the materials used and from the experience of the teachers, gave them positive opportunities to understand cultural aspects of life in English-speaking countries.

In addition, the high number of positive responses to the use of individual items in Question 26 indicates that most students were taking advantage of other means of gaining knowledge of English and associated cultural awareness, through their own initiatives.

Finally, all students responding to the questionnaire had an opportunity to write comments and/or suggestions. It was pleasing to note that a high proportion of respondents had taken the extra time to do this and that the responses indicated a level of English high enough to express ideas and opinions. Some responses were direct in offering suggestions such as ‘give more reading time in the test’, ‘include interactive learning’, ‘I would prefer if there is less format in the exam and based more on creative writing’, and simply ‘Make it something easier please’. Others articulated thoughts such as:

• ‘The IELTS test is very useful. Apart from the exam it also help me in daily life.’
• ‘IELTS should be taught in secondary schools…’
• ‘I wish the test can be practice in all universities and colleges in Malaysia.’
• ‘IELTS should be learn by other courses too beside language and communication in skills. It really works.’

The responses and comments discussed above lead us to conclude that from the students’ perspective, the IELTS Test practice class is a positive opportunity to gain language skills, general knowledge and cultural awareness. Most students view the IELTS Test practice classes as not only an opportunity to learn a skill but to gain knowledge and awareness of other cultures.

4.3 Washback into learning and teaching

Washback, the influence of testing on teaching and learning (Alderson and Wall 1993), can be distinguished, according to Wall, from the impact ‘…any of the effects that a test may have on individuals, policies, or practices within the classroom, the school, the educational system or society as a whole’ (cited in Cheng, Watanabe and Curtis 2004, p 4). Washback from testing is now acknowledged to be an important concept in understanding the effect of tests on both teaching and learning (Cheng and Curtis 2004). According to Lynda Taylor (2004):

Tests and test results have a significant impact on the career or life chances of individual test takers (eg access to educational/employment opportunities). They also impact on educational systems, and on society more widely.

Although washback is described in the literature as having both positive and negative effects (Cheng and Curtis 2004) we have confined our discussion, for the purposes of this research, to the positive influences of washback. (For a more complete discussion of washback, see Cheng and Curtis 2004.)

In fact, the Malaysian students who responded to our questionnaire seemed to be more aware of the washback effect on their learning than their teachers did on their classroom practice, although neither group was familiar with the expression. Students were asked to comment on the overall benefits of IELTS Test preparation for their language skills and were mostly positive. To investigate their understanding, we chose a two-part question, with the second part open-ended - Question 10: Do you think doing IELTS practice helps you with your language skills overall? If yes, how?

Students responded by referring to the features of IELTS Test practice which they believed were helping them. They talked about their language skills in a way that showed how they had reflected on their development. Some of the following examples show the perception of a positive washback effect which goes beyond the requirements of the test itself:

Student: Yes. It improves my vocabulary grammar and other important aspects in the English language.

Student: Yes. It polishes my vocabulary and it has definitely contributed tremendously to my academic writing skills.

Student: Yes. It develops my communication skills so that I can interact better with others. It also improves my writing skills.

The understanding of the role of washback is therefore doubly important to an analysis of how the Test impacts on the Malaysian teaching and learning context. Our questions to the teachers on this topic did not always elicit a clear response but we found that the student responses to our questionnaires provided clear evidence of washback in action and these responses were therefore crucial to our stated aim of analysing the ‘cultural and linguistic value of IELTS’. So, if we take washback to include the impact of the Test on students’ language development, we find that most students were able to comment with clarity on the advantages to them of test preparation courses.

As already mentioned, teachers did not seem to have reflected on the concept of washback but some were able to discuss the relationship of IELTS practice classes to other parts of the curriculum. One administrator had developed assessment criteria based on the band descriptors in the Handbook and another claimed that a test she was concurrently preparing students for, SSABSA (Secondary Schools Assessment Board of South Australia) ESL, was becoming ‘more like IELTS’. She described the SSABSA exam as incorporating a visual ‘like the IELTS one’ which she said was good for allaying student fears because the similarities could be pointed out. Furthermore, she informed us that ‘the essay question for SSABSA had become more argumentative in nature’ and implied that this was the result of the IELTS Test, although similar to ‘the old IELTS, when they had modules A, B and C’. These observations show that teachers are definitely making connections between IELTS Test practice and other aspects of their English language curricula. Another teacher commented that the skills she taught in other classes were useful:

Interviewer C: Do you think that the work that you do with the IELTS tests the kinds of skills that you have to pass on to the students in the IELTS Test? This kind of teaching? Is it useful for your other English teaching?

Teacher P: No it’s the other way round. What I do in general paper is very useful in IELTS. In the general paper we, er, teach them the writing technique and um general paper research and it’s an essay, information. In fact I share the things I have in general paper with IELTS Test too.

Expressing similar attitudes to teachers about differences between Malaysian and Western education (as typified by IELTS), students reveal that they understand, perhaps from teacher prompting, that they are required to develop different skills for academic study in English.

Student response to Question 13d: Do you think writing practice for IELTS is different from writing for other subjects?

‘IELTS provides me chances to speak my mind unlike secondary school where our syllabus in studying English are focused on textbooks.’

Student response to Question 12: Which module is most useful to you?

‘Writing presently, I’m more used to the local education system…IELTS writing helps me with the transition to academic writing.’

Both these student responses show an appreciation of how IELTS Test practice classes demand a thoughtful, critical involvement in responding to writing prompts. They thus illustrate the impact of IELTS in training students for the particular academic writing skills it is widely believed are necessary in Western universities. In addition, if these responses are compared with those which the teachers gave during the interviews, learning critical thinking skills becomes a strong focus to which all stakeholders attach importance.

Interviewer C: Is this something that your students would be used to doing in other subjects or…this…something…also is this critical thinking…is something that IELTS requires but they’re not used to?

Teacher D: Er, I agree with what you said…which is er, they’re not used to critical thinking. That’s not part of our culture er, it’s not part of our learning culture er…

Student responses to Question 13a: Do you think writing practice for IELTS is different from writing practice for other tests of English?

‘Yes. IELTS Test for writing ask argument type of essays. Contrasting to other test of English we must include our own opinion analysis and recommendation and so on.’

‘Yes. It ask for different skills and it require more critical thinking.’

‘Yes. IELTS writing practice focuses on organisation.’

Student response to Question 13d: Do you think writing practice for IELTS is different from writing for other subjects?

‘Yes. English is more flexible and IELTS allows me to write my thoughts.’

This approach to learning is contrasted by both teachers and students with rote learning practices which they state unequivocally must be ‘unlearned’.

Student response to Question 16d: Do you think reading practice for IELTS is different from reading for other subjects?

‘Yes other subjects tends (sic) to lean toward memorising. IELTS needs understanding and interpretation.’

This student echoes the observation of the teacher below with respect to rote learning, but the teacher goes on to mention the similarity between teaching for IELTS and other academic preparation courses, indicating that the skills highlighted in IELTS practice are highly relevant for studying in English generally:

Yes. It’s not only in IELTS where we try to, er, make them unlearn some rote learning see, it’s also in the other papers that I teach. Um we do and then we have, er, have to do an investigation for performance and they have to write their own report, interview people and then we have um creative writing…use creative writing…look at a picture and write as creative as possible based on that given. So nothing like what they’ve done in school. All this apart from IELTS trains them, you know, to write their own opinion…to write topic things. Very different for them… (Teacher L)

The word ‘creative’ is used by teachers and students to indicate, it would seem, a departure from the ‘rote-learning’ skills recognised as typical of prior education experiences.

Student response to Question 13b: Do you think writing practice for IELTS is different from writing in your first language?

‘Yes. IELTS tend to promote creative thinking about the topics read.’

Another teacher illuminates this approach to learning further:

They can’t produce their own opinion. It’s very difficult for them to say what they would like to say as if people would punish them. (Teacher M)

This suggests that it is unacceptable to state one’s own opinion in the local education system and emphasises the gulf between learning styles:

Teacher M: The IELTS is very good, because I know my students they don’t read textbook at all here, they don’t read textbooks, they don’t read, that’s it. What they do is they memorise, like the Chinese, it’s the culture of the Chinese, they are very good at rote-learning, OK? So they can memorise lectures, the whole lectures they could memorise, so they’re not going to read textbooks.

Interviewer A: Is there a difference between the Chinese approach to learning and the Malay approach to learning?

Teacher M: Yeah, very different. The Malays here, because they are in Chinese community they pick up the skills.

(The ‘Chinese approach’ mentioned here refers to Chinese in Malaysia and Chinese from mainland China since both groups attend the college.)

This teacher, of Malay background, did not clarify a ‘Malay approach’ and it seemed better not to insist on further cultural stereotyping at this stage since she had already mentioned that Malaysian students ‘can’t produce their own opinion’ because:

It’s just that the system of education in Malaysia…we, especially the system we have now, we have been asked not to question so the students…they won’t be able to question anyone or to say their opinion. (Teacher M)

In this comment the use of the inclusive ‘we’ shows that this Malay teacher is thinking of the education system in Malaysia for students from all linguistic backgrounds, whereas when she talks of the learning styles of Chinese students she acknowledges a difference to when she talks of the ‘Malay’ students.

Student response to Question 16d: Do you think reading practice for IELTS is different from reading for other subjects?

‘Yes, other subjects such as chemistry etc have points slapped directly in your face. As for IELTS, not all of the points are direct. Therefore a little critical thinking is of great need.’

Student responses to Question 13b: Do you think writing practice for IELTS is different from writing in other English classes?

‘Yes, we need to analysis the stimulus given for part 1; for part 2 we need to give sensible opinions and show the wide range of general knowledge that we have.’

‘Yes, In IELTS I have to be more specific (when describing the trends in task 1) and thinking critically based on issues given.’ (Task 2)

Student response to Question 12: Which module is most useful to you? Why?

‘Reading. Various skills are needed, texts…it test my critical thinking to the limit.’

There is a kind of lexical string running through these comments and threading them together, emphasising what students perceive to be the main features of IELTS. Adjectives such as ‘critical’, ‘creative’ and ‘flexible’ indicate an awareness of the need to do more than simply accept given facts; that it is necessary to develop a different set of skills which have hitherto not been required. Students perceive a requirement to ‘analyse’ and ‘give opinions’, to ‘interpret’ and ‘understand’. Some make comparisons with their first language and although they are writing these ideas in English, their second or third language, they are quite successful at articulating what they feel to be the essential differences in the way they approach IELTS compared to the way they approach other subjects or languages. Although comments are not always totally clear, they show an awareness of the need for more than surface language skills; there is a perception that the way of dealing with information is different for IELTS. Moreover, the questions themselves which we posed are open-ended, requiring students to think through a response and to give an opinion, a difficult task but one which they managed, on the whole, well and one which enabled us to get closer to how they feel about using English to prepare for the IELTS Test.

It would appear that the most beneficial washback effect of IELTS Test practice is to help the students develop appropriate critical thinking skills for future study in English. Comments from both teachers and students repeatedly emphasise that IELTS Test preparation requires an ability to think analytically and reflect on the deeper meaning of reading texts rather than rely on memorising skills. We observed students being directed to present arguments in class as they grappled with this new learning approach.

4.3.1 Cultural practices

While the students focused on different learning styles, the teachers were able to comment more on the cultural content. Understanding specific cultural allusions did not seem to be a problem recognised by the students, who did not complain of a lack of Asian content, perhaps because they did not see any cultural threat, only the excitement of being able to go to a new country. Teachers, on the other hand, whose experience had awakened in them the need to protect their own culture, were more ready to suggest the appropriacy of adding Asian content. (These contrasting attitudes between teachers and students need further research than has been possible in this paper: it is so far merely a suggestion arising from the data.)

The following exchanges give an example of this.

Interviewer C: In other words if I was to write a book specifically for the Asian content the Malaysian that would be…that would be very good?

Teacher H: Yes very good. Very good. Because it would be familiar to the students.

Interviewer C: Um. When you come to something in the book, in the commercially produced book that perhaps is not understood in the Malaysian context, do you feel confident explaining it? Something that’s culturally Western, for example. Do you feel confident explaining it to your students?

Teacher H: Depends what you know. So far I’m confident explaining because before I teach it, teach the unit, I research it. If I’m not sure about something I make sure that, you know, I have all the information regarding it. But I’m confident explaining things to them if I have information.

Teacher L: …the questions…are the content is usually one UK or Australian based content…

Interviewer C: I see. Can you just give me an example?

Teacher L: OK. There’s a task 1 but the most important is ‘the tube’.

Interviewer C: They know what a ‘tube’ is.

Teacher L: They don’t understand it, no.

Teacher MM: … because we have here Jalan, something Jalan something, there are times we have to, we have a little problem there, yes with the names of streets.

Teacher MM: I think the cultural aspects but it would really help our students if there is a mix of Asian … all the Asian flavour.

These comments suggest a way of using the language which would set it within an Asian context so that students would be using an unfamiliar language within a familiar context by building a bridge from the familiar to the unfamiliar but as Canagarajah (2002) observed:

In a context where cultures and codes are in flux, the project in language teaching is not to make students move from a ‘native’ language to a target language, or host culture to receiving culture. Rather, the need is to shuttle between cultures and communities. (Canagarajah 2002, p 146)

Thus the use of familiar terms at the beginning of the program could serve to introduce this dynamic movement between cultures, and students would learn through a process of gradual exposure as the support of the familiar is gradually removed.

A related point was also made by one of the teachers that students should only be tested on what they know:

Interviewer A: Do you think they ought to have a wider range of reading?

Teacher J: I think that’d be useful especially, um, because sometimes you know, in testing they say you shouldn’t test students on what they don’t know. You should test them on something they’ve been exposed to before.

This comment was made in conjunction with an observation that much of the reading content appeared to be Australian and, once again, a more familiar context might be appropriate at this stage. Also the idea that many English speakers actually operate mainly within other cultures is a reality.

Since roughly only one out of every four users of English in the world is a native speaker of the language (Crystal 2003), most ELF interactions take place among ‘non-native’ speakers of English. (Seidlhofer 2004, p 10)

Other comments indicate cultural attitudes to the content of the reading passages. Teacher P, for example, was very direct in condemning passages about art or music and claimed that it would be more relevant to include topics on world issues. In fact, texts on Western art or music could be seen as self-indulgence on the part of the textbook author as it would be extremely rare for young Asian test candidates, who may never have visited an English-speaking country, to be familiar with these topics. One has only to look at percentages of foreign students in university courses to see that such humanities subjects do not attract high numbers. On the other hand, current affairs topics are easier to relate to and write about.

Interviewer C: Current issues?

Teacher P: Yeah like topics like poverty er, and the world situation er, say I think will be more useful and a lot easier for them to understand.

Interviewer C: Mm. Right. More general for everybody.

Teacher P: More general for everybody rather than talking about art pieces or music pieces.

Interviewer C: Mm.

Teacher P: Or talking about the dolphins in Australia. A lot of passages I see that they refer to Australia, the oceans of Australia and this and that.

Interviewer C: Because many students go there to study.

One argument favouring cultural content in the IELTS Test has been that students need to know about the target culture. However, it is debatable whether test conditions are ideal for imparting this kind of information:

Because sometimes when you are put in that situation then you can learn from there you see. You don’t really need to say that you have to be prepared for that because you’re going there. (Teacher G)

Some teachers mentioned that the IELTS Test preparation class was just one area where they adopted teaching approaches which differed from those which Malaysian students were used to:

Interviewer C: Is there a difference between the way students approach study generally in Malaysia um the kind of skills they need for the IELTS Test?

Teacher H: Um there’s a big difference because in the schools they learn different things the way the teachers teach er, is not so…make them indicate the er, you know, students, they’re not really capable of independent study, self-directed learning…

Interviewer C: For example, let’s think about Task 2 Writing…

Teacher MM: Yes.

Interviewer C: Is that skill useful and required in other areas of their study? For academic writing and reading tasks?

Teacher MM: Yes I think. Yes. Say in Sociology, in the area of critical thinking paper they do use these skills. They need them yeah. Yeah, to analyse the topic, to be able to rationalise and be able to talk, to translate, yeah.

Teacher P: Er, no. I, I think listening they er, would have done very little during their school days in school. In Malaysia schools they do very little listening in Malaysian schools.

Having taught in the Malaysian system, these teachers are well situated to be able to comment on the relationship of IELTS Test practice to other subjects.

Regarding Writing Task 2, there were many opinions about the difficulties for students in Malaysia:

Teacher H: …see that because in secondary school they…it appears the students are trained to memorise things but here they’re trained to use the application of skills. But they do pick it up. [This belief is validated by student comments below.]

Teacher M: They’ve got this problem in the last, in the Writing section. They can’t produce their own opinion. It’s very difficult for them to say what they would like to say as if someone would punish them. And then the last part, the Speaking part, section 3, very difficult, oh dear. I think it’s very hard, it’s culture, actually.

Interviewer A: So do you think the test ought to take this difference into account?

Teacher M: No, no. I don’t agree, because if they would like to sit…if they would like to go abroad they’re not going to apply what they have learnt in their country.

This teacher, who had herself studied in the USA, demonstrates a very pragmatic approach to understanding what skills students must develop for overseas study. Coming from the same educational background as most of her students, she finds it easy to recognise the different educational philosophies.

A similar view is then voiced by another teacher, with a different linguistic and cultural background, who nevertheless had obtained her qualifications in Malaysia.

Teacher G: Sometimes or many times students are not used to voicing their opinion about any issue. So you need to give them practice there, you know to get them used to that sort of a requirement, because even in a class if you ask them what do you think about something they just don’t say anything.

Interviewer A: Do you have any techniques you’ve developed for eliciting their points of view?

Teacher G: Techniques? I’ve tried to give them like um, topics. We start off with topics of course which are closer to them, which they’re familiar with. Maybe the dress code here or something like that, you know and then they’re able to say something and then we progress to trying to give them an idea, just like this familiar topic, you know all topics have got two sides…

This exchange reveals that the teacher has a very clear understanding of what test strategies her students lack. Her mention of ‘dress code’ as a familiar topic is strong evidence of her insider understanding of the culture she shares with the students. A teacher from elsewhere would take time to build up this store of knowledge - and with this degree of expertise already in the country, it could be argued that training outsiders is a costly and unnecessary exercise. Furthermore, unlike monolingual teachers, these teachers are speaking from experience of the same culture and education as their students, and this shared knowledge gives them authority. Hence when they say ‘in Malaysia, we…’ or ‘…like the dress code here’, they are immediately part of the local environment, whereas the foreign interviewer is an outsider. As Canagarajah (2002) has observed, speaking of ‘postmethodism’:

…periphery teachers are liberated from centre expertise to become more sensitive to their local classroom and sociocultural context. This also makes periphery teachers truly creative in integrating experience, imagination and knowledge to devise learning strategies with/for students. (Canagarajah 2002, p 149)

With regard to teaching IELTS Test practice, it can be argued that Malaysian teachers, who would be defined as periphery teachers according to Canagarajah (2002), have already attained this level of expertise. This authority, it is suggested, explains why the students, in their questionnaires, are also able to express an understanding of the cultural differences in the IELTS Writing. A multi-layered, or triangulated, approach can be used to show that both teachers and students in Malaysia are aware of the cultural demands of IELTS and how these differ from their own educational practices. The fact that student awareness of these cultural differences approximates that of teachers is possible testimony to the local teachers’ ideal position as experts in two cultures qualifying them to convey this awareness.

The following is one student response to Question 9: Do you enjoy IELTS practice classes?

‘IELTS provides me chances to speak my mind unlike secondary school where our syllabus in studying english (sic) are focused on textbooks.’

Expressing similar attitudes to teachers about differences between Malaysian and Western education, students reveal that they understand, from their teachers, that they are required to develop different skills for academic study in English.

5 CONCLUSION

The stated aim of this research was to:

1. describe the sociolinguistic background of the teachers in the IELTS Test practice classroom in a selection of Malaysian English language centres
2. explore how the teachers employed the different a) linguistic and b) cultural practices available to them when preparing their students to take the IELTS Test and how these practices may affect other aspects of their classroom practice
3. find a working definition of both native and non-native English-speaking teacher specifically in the Malaysian context. The needs of teachers working in Malaysia could then be identified and strategies for fulfilling these needs could consequently be suggested.

Changes to the original brief became necessary as the research progressed and these have been noted in the report. (See section 3.) Constraints of time and place resulted in major changes to the proposed classroom observations and follow-up discussions with teachers. Regarding the former, access to the institutions was limited not only because of teaching schedules but also because of the time and expense required to travel to the actual locations. However, a range of teaching styles in a variety of locations provided valuable information (Appendix 3) confirming the professionalism of the institutions involved, and their shared commitment with IELTS Test stakeholders around the world. Moreover, the transcribed interviews with teachers provided in-depth evidence of teachers’ interest in, and knowledge of, the IELTS Test.

5.1 English language background of teachers of IELTS Test practice classes

With respect to the discussion on the terms native/non-native English-speaking teacher versus bilingual and monolingual English-speaking teacher, such distinctions have wider implications than a mere description of native and non-native might express. This may also bring into question the expression ‘periphery’ (Canagarajah 1999, 2002) bearing in mind that there has been very little investigation into what effect the diverse backgrounds of ‘periphery’ teachers have on their teaching methodology (Canagarajah 1999, 2002; Holliday 2005). What all the teachers we interviewed claimed was confidence in being able to familiarise their students with the varied linguistic and cultural environments and demands of the IELTS Test, in particular the areas of critical thinking, and expressing opinions. They also all claimed the confidence to make appropriate assessments on their students’ progress through the Band Scores as described in the IELTS Handbook.

5.2 Washback

During the interviews with teachers, it became clear that the teachers did not have the metalanguage of washback and were not accustomed to articulating the effects of the IELTS Test practice materials and pedagogy in other areas of their teaching. In addition, it should be noted that the conditions under which most of the teacher respondents were working did not allow them the opportunity to undertake professional development, nor to prepare their own materials or involve themselves in areas which would take advantage of any positive washback effects. However, some teachers did say that they had been able to use the Bandscore Descriptors given in the IELTS Handbook which had provided useful scaffolding on which to develop assessment criteria for other courses.

Student comments on the washback into their linguistic and cultural learning processes were extremely positive. Although we did not pose any direct questions to students about washback, their responses to other questions revealed that their IELTS Test practice classes gave them a great deal of confidence in using English as a tool for knowledge and for being able to think critically and to express their opinions in both writing and speaking. Regardless of whether or not the teachers are native or non-native speaking, the washback effect as perceived by the majority of students, is that the

IELTS Test practice classes gave them English language skills, general knowledge and world cultural awareness to an extent that some students commented that these classes should be offered in secondary schools and all tertiary institutions.

Indeed, since this research makes an initial foray into the area of what effect the diverse backgrounds of ‘periphery’ teachers have on their teaching methodology from the particular angle of the IELTS Test, one hypothesis emerging seems to be that to be successful in this field, teachers do not necessarily need Western-based TESOL training. What they do need, however, are answers to their questions, not ours! The teachers we interviewed had comments and questions but we had our own pre-conceived ideas of what we wanted to find out and we did not always explore their comments in sufficient depth. Most of the teachers we interviewed were eager to know how the IELTS Test administration could provide information to help them better prepare their students for the Test. They were not aware of the information they could get from the IELTS Test website which has been further enhanced since these interviews were carried out.

The main question which arises concerns the skills of these teachers to prepare students for the Test. The monolingual Western TESOL perspective has assumed (until recently, eg Carrier 2003) that a certain training program is required for all English language teachers. Hence among the recommendations emerging from these observations for IELTS are that there should be more interaction between teachers of practice classes and test administrators. This is an area where the development of practice materials for local experience and environment may well be appropriate. While the teachers are culturally and linguistically aware, their need is to become more test aware.

6 RECOMMENDATIONS

The current situation of the IELTS Test administration involves a top-down approach where the test specifications are handed down by the administrators, with little opportunity for local discussion/interaction. Teachers with a certain amount of experience are given practice classes but with no resources beyond the official handbook (a very slim volume) and commercial materials. Because most of these teachers in Malaysia are bilingual and, in some cases, have studied overseas, they understand the cultural underpinnings of the IELTS Test (as we have observed through their comments re critical thinking) and are well able to see the differences between the educational background of the students (also their social background) and that of the target English-language environment. Nevertheless, they feel that any acknowledgement of their culture is excluded from the Test content. Since IELTS is an international test, a certain level of cultural neutrality is necessary, but for teachers and students who are teaching/learning in diverse linguistic and cultural environments to feel comfortable, it is desirable to incorporate into practice materials some degree of orientation to the skills developed in the Test, and some justification for their inclusion. Teachers need to be encouraged to develop their own transition process from the local to the international.

To facilitate this, local IELTS Test administrators could regularly advise local teachers of changes to the IELTS Test website specifically where the website includes useful information on assessment. In addition, the IELTS Test website could be expanded to offer advice to teachers in varied locations and there should be opportunities for question and answer sessions. Training sessions and information packs should be provided to all institutions running IELTS Test practice courses. These sessions should encourage teachers to reflect more on how to use their own overseas experience for the benefit of their students and to feel more confident about the expertise they have acquired as bilingual students - to the extent of drawing obvious contrasts between their culture and the target one.

Finally, learners of English may use the IELTS Test materials and indeed take a test even though they may have no intention to pursue further study in an English-speaking country nor to migrate.

The IELTS Test is becoming a vehicle for general English language learning. To reflect this, the Test writers and Test practice writers could endeavour to include themes and topics which reflect the many different cultures and situations where learners live.

6.1 Summary of recommendations

6.1.1 Course/test preparation books

It would be helpful if commercially produced publications were to include a greater variety of texts and themes which represent more widely the entire English-speaking world. This would provide the scaffolding to help students everywhere to move from local to international contexts.

6.1.2 Teacher training

Teachers have expressed a need for more information about what is required for Writing and Reading tasks at different band levels. Examples of Writing scripts and Speaking responses could be commented on, and analysed in greater detail, so that teachers can be guided in this important area of test preparation. This may also alleviate the problem of teachers suggesting inappropriate Bandscores to their students and thereby causing disappointment.

Some of the classes comprised learners from other countries and language and cultural backgrounds unfamiliar to the teacher. In this situation, the students could be seen as passing from a first to a second language but within a third linguistic and cultural context. This may require specific training for teachers which has not yet been addressed.

6.1.3 Interactive website

An interactive website would be useful where teachers could be offered the opportunity to post comments and questions through discussion pages on the IELTS Test website. This would allow them to develop awareness of test and test score issues.

6.2 Recommendations for further research

Although this research has examined the positive effects of washback on teachers and learners in the IELTS Test preparation classroom, further studies could usefully examine both positive and negative washback effects and in greater detail. It would also be useful to undertake a more complex and detailed case study of one classroom in an institution where test practice is given by non-native speaking or periphery teachers in a setting where English is not the first language. Such a case study, carried out in a classroom where both local and international students are the learners may reveal yet another, growing aspect of the English language classroom and the influence of the IELTS Test worldwide.

The relevance of IELTS for study in English, but in a country where English is not the first language, also merits further consideration, particularly with regard to the Speaking and Listening modules.

Malaysia is one example of a country where English is not the official language, but where students come to study in English, and although both students and teachers in this situation continue to rate the IELTS Test positively, it is important for test administrators and designers to keep this dimension in mind. Thus the danger, expressed by Shohamy (2004), of violating democratic principles, can be avoided, because there is constant monitoring of the changing IELTS landscape.

This research also revealed that IELTS Test practice classes are being offered to students who have neither study abroad intentions, nor migration/travel intentions, and that it is being included as part of the English language curriculum. It would be interesting to explore how extensive this practice is, and its perceived value in increasing general knowledge and awareness of other cultures, not only in Malaysia but also in other countries.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We would like to thank the British Council, IELTS Australia, and University of Cambridge ESOL Examinations for granting us the opportunity to carry out this research.

We are grateful to all the institutions in Malaysia and Australia who gave us permission to interview teachers and to administer questionnaires to students.

We would particularly like to thank all the students who participated and responded so articulately to the questionnaires and the IELTS Test practice class teachers who gave their valuable time to be interviewed.

References

• Alderson, J and Wall, D, 1993, ‘Does washback exist?’ in Applied Linguistics, vol 14, no 2, pp 115-129
• Alptekin, C, 2002, ‘Towards intercultural communicative competence in ELT’ in ELT Journal, 56/1, January, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 57-64
• Baxter, A, 2003, The reproduction of professional culture through teacher education for ELT, unpublished PhD thesis, Department of Language Studies, Canterbury Christ Church University, New Zealand
• Bourdieu, P., 2002, The weight of the world. Social suffering in contemporary society, Tr Ferguson et al, Polity Press, Cambridge
• Brutt-Griffler, J, 2002, World English. A study of its development, Multilingual Matters Limited, Toronto
• Brutt-Griffler, J and Samimy, K, 1999, ‘Revisiting the colonial in the postcolonial: critical praxis for nonnative-English-speaking teachers in a TESOL program’ in TESOL Quarterly, vol 33, no 3, Autumn
• Canagarajah, S, 1999, Resisting linguistic imperialism in English teaching, Oxford University Press, Oxford
• Canagarajah, S, 2002, ‘Globalization, methods and practice in periphery classrooms’ in Globalization and language teaching, eds D Block and D Cameron, Routledge, London, pp 134-150
• Carrier, K, 2003, ‘NNS teacher trainees in Western-based TESOL programs’ in ELT Journal, 57/3, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 242-250
• Cheng, L, Watanabe, Y and Curtis, A, 2004, (eds) Washback in language testing, Erlbaum, New Jersey
• Cheng, L and Curtis, A, 2004, ‘Washback or backwash?: A review of the impact of testing on teaching and learning’ in Washback in language testing, eds L Cheng, Y Watanabe and A Curtis, Erlbaum, New Jersey
• Cook, V, 1999, ‘Going beyond the native speaker in language teaching’ in TESOL Quarterly, vol 33, no 2, Summer
• Crystal, D, 2003, English as a global language, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
• Duff, P and Uchida, Y, 1997, ‘The negotiation of teachers’ sociocultural identities and practice in postsecondary classrooms’ in TESOL Quarterly, vol 31, pp 451-486
• Gaudart, H, 2003, ‘International considerations when teaching English in Malaysia’ in Readings in TESL Vol 1: Essays in honour of Hyacinth Gaudart, ed M Vethamani, Sasbadi, Malaysia, pp 1-17
• Ha, P, 2004, ‘University classrooms in Vietnam: contesting the stereotypes’ in ELT Journal, 58/1, January, Oxford University Press, Oxford
• Hamp-Lyons, L and Zheng, B, 2001, ‘World Englishes: issues in and from academic writing assessment’ in Research Perspectives on English for Academic Purposes, eds J Flowerdew and M Peacock, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
• Holliday, A, 2002, Doing and writing qualitative research, Sage Publications, London
• Holliday, A, 2005, The struggle to teach English as an international language, Oxford University Press, Oxford
• Hung, T, 2002, ‘English as a global language and the issue of international intelligibility’ in Asian Englishes, vol 5, no 1, Summer
• IELTS, 2002, IELTS Annual Review, published by British Council, IELTS Australia Pty Ltd, University of Cambridge ESOL Examinations, Cambridge
• Jenkins, J, 2000, The phonology of English as an international language, Oxford University Press, Oxford
• Jenkins, J, 2003, World Englishes, Routledge, London
• Jenkins, J, 2006, ‘The spread of EIL: a testing time for testers’ in ELT Journal, 60/1, January, Oxford University Press, Oxford
• Kachru, B, 1986, The alchemy of English. The spread, functions and models of non-native Englishes. Pergamon, University of Illinois Press, Chicago
• Kramsch, C and Sullivan, P, 1996, ‘Appropriate pedagogy’ in ELT Journal, 50/3, Oxford University Press, Oxford
• London, N, 2001, ‘Language for the global economy: some curriculum fundamentals and pedagogical practices in the colonial educational enterprise’ in Educational Studies, vol 27, no 4, Carfax Publishing, pp 393-423
• McKay, S, 2002, Teaching English as an International Language, Oxford University Press, Oxford
• Nambiar, M., 2005, ‘Testing oral interaction: the Malaysian experience’ in Australian Language and Literacy Matters, vols 2, 3 and 4, Spring and Summer
• Pennycook, A, 1994, The cultural politics of English as an international language, Longman, London
• Pennycook, A, 2001, Critical applied linguistics: A critical introduction, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers, London
• Prodromou, L, 2003, ‘In search of the successful user of English’ in MET, vol 12, no 2
• Quirk, R, 1985, ‘The English language in a global context’ in English in the world, eds R Quirk and H Widdowson, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 1-6
• Rampton, B, 1990, ‘Displacing the native speaker: expertise, affiliation, and inheritance’ in ELT Journal, 44/2, pp 87-101
• Schneider, E., 2004, ‘Evolutionary patterns of new Englishes and the special case of Malaysia’ in Asian Englishes, vol 6, no 2, Spring
• Seidlhofer, B (ed), 2003, Controversies in applied linguistics, Oxford University Press, Oxford
• Seidlhofer, B, 2005, ‘Key concepts in ELT: English as a lingua franca’ in ELT Journal, 59/4, October, Oxford University Press, Oxford
• Shohamy, E, 2004, ‘Assessment in multicultural societies. Applying democratic principles and practices to language testing’ in Critical pedagogies and language learning, eds B Norton and K Toohey, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 72-92
• Tan, P., 2005, ‘The medium-of-instruction debate in Malaysia’ in Language Problems and Language Planning, vol 29, no 1, John Benjamin Publishing Company, pp 49-66
• Taylor, L, 2002, ‘Assessing learners’ English: but whose/which English?’ in IELTS Research Notes, issue 10, November
• Taylor, L, 2005, ‘Key concepts in ELT: Washback and impact’ in ELT Journal, 59/2, April, Oxford University Press, Oxford
• Widdowson, H, 2003, Defining issues in language teaching, Oxford University Press, Oxford

APPENDIX 1: TEACHER INTERVIEW PROMPTS: OPEN-ENDED QUESTIONS

1 What is your first language? Which language do you mainly speak at home? At work? In the IELTS Test practice classroom? 2 What is your English language background (education and experience living/working/holidaying in an English-speaking country)? 3 How confident do you feel with your English language - Speaking? Writing? Listening? Reading? 4 What is your TESOL training background? How long have you been teaching English? Do you ever have to/choose to do in service training? 5 What is your IELTS Test background? Are you a trained and certified assessor? 6 Have you ever taken an IELTS Test? Which module? 7 How long have you been teaching IELTS Test practice classes? 8 What kind of materials do you use in the IELTS Test practice classes? (commercial/self-produced?) 9 If you use self-produced materials, do you prepare these by yourself or with a group of teachers? 10 If you produce your own IELTS Test practice materials, do you model them on commercial products or do you model them on other types of English language course materials? 11 How familiar are you with the types of academic tasks which appear in commercial IELTS Test practice materials, such as describing a graphic? 12 Do you feel that the commercially produced materials are appropriate for Malaysian students? Why?/Why not? 13 How confident do you feel in explaining the cultural aspects of the IELTS Test to your students? 14 How confident do you feel assessing your students’ writing and speaking skills? 15 Are you involved in producing the curriculum for this IELTS Test practice course? If yes, can you explain how the curriculum is prepared? 16 Do you feel that your students are motivated to succeed at the IELTS Test? 17 Do you feel that your students are motivated to develop better general English language skills? 18 Do you feel there are demands made on students by the IELTS test which their cultural background does not equip them for? Which module/s in particular? What are the demands? 19 Do you feel that teaching IELTS Test preparation has a positive washback effect on your teaching? In what ways? 20 Do you feel that preparing materials for IELTS Test preparation classes has a positive washback effect on your preparation for materials for other English language classes? In what ways?

APPENDIX 2: TEXT OF STUDENT QUESTIONNAIRE

Please answer the questions as completely as possible. Thank you very much for your assistance in carrying out this research.

1. What language(s) do you speak at home?

2. What language(s) do you speak with your friends at school?

3. What language(s) do you mainly speak in the IELTS Test practice class?

4. What other English language classes do you do at school besides the IELTS Test practice class?

5. Have you ever taken an IELTS Test? Yes No

If no, please continue to Question 6.

If yes, please answer the three questions below.

Which type of test did you take? Academic General Training

Did you do Test practice before you took the IELTS Test? Yes No

Do you think Test practice helped you do the IELTS Test? Yes No

6. Why are you studying English?

7. Why are you taking this IELTS Test practice course?

8. How do you want to use English in your future?

9. Do you enjoy IELTS practice classes? Yes No Why? Why not?

10. Do you think doing IELTS Test practice helps you with your language skills overall?

Yes No If yes, how?

11. Do you think that the skills you gain from the IELTS Test practice course will help you to reach your goals in English? Yes No Why? Why not?

12. Which module (Reading, Writing, Listening or Speaking) is most useful to you? Why?

13. Do you think writing practice for IELTS is different from:

a. Writing practice for other tests of English? Yes No If yes, how?

b. Writing in other English classes? Yes No If yes, how?

c. Writing in your first language? Yes No If yes, how?

d. Writing for other subjects? Yes No If yes, how?

14. Does writing for the IELTS Test help you in any of these areas above?

Yes No If yes, how?

15. Do you find your general reading skills are improving as a result of practising the Reading test?

Yes No If yes, how?

16. Do you think reading practice for IELTS is different from:

a. Reading practice for other tests of English? Yes No If yes, how?

b. Reading in other English classes? Yes No If yes, how?

c. Reading in your first language? Yes No If yes, how?

d. Reading for other subjects? Yes No If yes, how?

17. Does reading for the IELTS Test help you in any of these areas above?

Yes No If yes, how?

18. Is the Speaking test practice useful for improving your general speaking skills?

Yes No If yes, what improvement have you noticed?

19. Do you think all parts of the IELTS Test are equally useful? Yes No Why? Why not?

20. What impact has Listening test practice had on your listening skills?

21. Have you ever holidayed in an English speaking country? Yes No

If your answer is no, please go to Question 22.

If your answer is yes:

Which country?

How long did you stay?

22. Have you ever worked in an English speaking country? Yes No

If your answer is no, please go to Question 23.

If your answer is yes:

Which country?

What kind of work did you do?

How long did you stay?

23. Have you ever studied in an English-speaking country? Yes No

If your answer is no, please go to Question 24.

If your answer is yes:

Which country?

What subject and to what level did you study?

How long did you study for?

24. Have you ever lived in an English speaking country? Yes No

If you answer is no, please go to Question 25.

If your answer is yes:

Which country?

How long did you live there?

25. Do you feel that you learn about life in English-speaking countries in this IELTS Test practice course?

Yes No

26. What other sources do you use to learn and practise English? (tick as many boxes as applicable.

Speaking with native English-speaking friends/people?

Speaking with non-native speaking friends/people?

Sending and receiving emails

Using the internet

Reading newspapers magazines books

Watching television movies

Listening to radio music

If you would like to make any further comments or any suggestions about learning English or IELTS

Test practice, please do so, on the lines below.

Thank you very much for your assistance in carrying out this research.

Appendix 3: Summary Of Notes From Classroom Observation

APPENDIX 4: TABULATED RESPONSES FROM STUDENT QUESTIONNAIRES

Note: The actual words, grammar and spelling have been reproduced without alteration.

COLLEGE A1

COLLEGE A2

COLLEGE A3

COLLEGE B

COLLEGE C1

COLLEGE C2

COLLEGE D1

COLLEGE D2

COLLEGE D3

COLLEGE D4

COLLEGE D5

COLLEGE D6

COLLEGE E1

COLLEGE E2

COLLEGE E3

COLLEGE E4

Appendix 5: Summary Of Themes From Interviews With Teachers

APPENDIX 6: ONE TEACHER’S RESPONSE TO FOLLOW-UP QUESTIONS

Note. This follow-up questionnaire was emailed to all participating teachers and one response was received. The response below includes the teacher’s exact typed words after each question asked.

We would like to remind you that all information will be kept strictly confidential and your names will not be used in any reporting. (We apologise if we have already asked you these questions but we are looking for more detailed responses).

1. What is your first language?

Bahasa Malaysian, the national language of Malaysia

2. How many languages do you speak?

Only 2, which is Bahasa Malaysia and English

3. What do you use each language for?

Baasa. Malaysia…mainly for communicating with families and friends. English…for my job as an English lecturer and also when I’m communicating with the business communities. I feel more comfortable communicating with English if I know that the other person is well trained in English. Otherwise, I’m worried that I’ll offend the person because a non user of English normally will think that an English-speaking person is trying to show off.

4. Please describe more fully your use of English outside the workplace. (home, social, other)

At home, I normally converse in Bahasa Malaysia (BM). Some of the times I’ll have discussions in English with my husband usually regarding technical, scientific or academic issues. We normally just converse in BM for everyday issues.

In social setting, most of the time I’ll converse in BM although I much prefer to converse in English since I feel I can convey my thoughts more accurately with English. However, I have to consider a factor that not all Malaysians especially the Malays in my country are fluent in English and thus could be insulted.

In business setting, I much prefer to converse and discuss in English since I was trained in business (Degree in Mgmt) and familiar with the terms in English. Besides, discussing in English also makes me appear more respectable and there’ll be less chances for me being cheated.

5. Can you think of something you now teach more successfully as a result of your IELTS teaching experience?

Listening

Reading - Most probably reading since IELTS highlights the necessary skills needed to approach the reading tasks - skills like scanning, guessing, skimming etc.

Writing

Speaking

6. In any of these areas, is there something specific you wish IELTS provided more information about (eg in the handbook)?

Not that I can think of now.

7. As an English-speaking Malaysian teaching English in Malaysia, a non-English speaking country, can you suggest what linguistic and cultural advantages you bring to the classroom?

Although I was born a Malay in Malaysia, I was also exposed to the Western education for 5 years in the USA. So, actually, in my role as an IELTS teacher, I could clearly see what problems or cultural factors that hinder them from understanding the questions and answering them.

To be more specific, having experienced both Western and local cultures, I could identify that the students are not trained in critical or analytical thinking which I think is crucial to answer many of the reading questions. My awareness enables me to help students to overcome this problem. I am also able to see how the Malaysians understand certain words or phrases the wrong way based only on their Malaysian viewpoints. But I could relate to the Western scenarios and explain to them the Western context to help them see the real meaning according to Western perspectives.

I probably help them most in understanding the language from the viewpoint of a native speaker as I was exposed much to it. It is also a valuable discovery for me now that I have also begun to realise - that language is cultural also and not just simply a tool of communication via translation. There are many cultural components in language that when you miss understanding the cultural components, you also miss some of the meanings in the language.

Another advantage that I could bring to the classroom is probably in pronunciation. I am able to demonstrate the correct pronunciation almost similar to a native speaker.

8. In what areas do you feel lacking?

I would like to be more exposed to thinking skills since there are some questions in IELTS that confuses me also. Perhaps I would also like to know the philosophy of IELTS as a test set by Western standard.

9. What is the nationality mix of students in your IELTS practice classes?

They’re all Malaysians and all Malays.

10. Can you describe some of the issues which you face teaching mixed nationality classes?

Not applicable but I would say, the more mixed the nationalities are, the more cultural factors to be taken into account.

11. What do you think are the advantages of this kind of teaching?

Not applicable

12. What aspects of the IELTS test would you like to see included in a teacher training course (given that test materials are secure)?

Philosophy of IELTS. What factors are taken into consideration when designing the test questions? What are the assumptions when designing the questions, if any? Do the test makers realise the cultural differences/factors that exist when designing the questions at international level?

Author biodata

Carol Gibson

Carol Gibson has a PhD in Sociolinguistics and has been an ESOL teacher and teacher trainer for many years. She has collaborated on previous IELTS research, has been an IELTS Test Examiner since the inception of the Test in 1989 and is currently an Examiner Trainer. She has lived and worked in Thailand, Cambodia and Japan, including providing IELTS Test training and assessing. She is co-author (with colleagues Anne Swan and Wanda Rusek) of three separate IELTS Test practice books, two published in Australia and one in China.

Anne Swan

Anne Swan is currently a PhD candidate at Canterbury Christ Church University, UK. She is researching the strengths that multilingual teachers of English bring to the profession and has recently presented papers at international conferences in the UK and Mexico on this topic. At the time of this research, she was developing a three-year transnational program in Malaysia for native Malay (Bumiputera) students. Before that, she worked in Italy, the UK, Australia and Japan. She has been an IELTS Examiner since 1989 and has taught and developed IELTS training courses in Australia, Japan and Malaysia, in addition to assessing candidates in all of these countries. With colleagues, Carol Gibson and Wanda Rusek, she has written IELTS Test practice materials for publication in Australia and China.