English Assessment for Young Learners in Indonesia

ABSTRACT

Since the implementation of the decentralization policy in education management in 2001,many local governments (PEMDA) decide to teach English as' Local content' at the elementary school level (or even in kindergarten). This LG problematic because the implementation of this without coupled with special preparatory efforts English teacher to teach in elementary school. This article discusses the profiles of English teachers who are required by proposing five main requirements: understanding the nature of children; knowing how children learn; know how children learn languages; knowing how Indonesian children learn English; and know and be able to facilitate children who are learning English as a foreign language in Indonesia.

INTRODUCTION

Decentralization of education in Indonesia basen couraged local governments to make theirown decisions relative to some portion of curricular space in the form of the use of some learning hours for what has become known as “local contents” (Jalal & Musthafa, 2001). As result of this decetralized decision-making, since last decade ,public interest in English for Young Learnes has become enhanced. This is evidenced in increasing number of district and city governments all over the country which offer English classes at the elementary school level. While decisions to teach English to elementary school pupils have been made, requirements for teachers to be ableto teach English well at this level are seldom discussed in public fora. As results, our knowledge about this important issue is very limited. To make things even more worrisome, from day to day observation we can easily find cases which indicate that elementary school English teach slack professional support and opportunities for inservice training. In addition, the current practice seems to have been guided by a very serious misconception—that is that teaching English to elementary school children does not require the same English proficiency as teaching English at a more advanced level. If not appropriately rectified, this mis-informed program implementation is bound to failure.

This article shall bring to fore what accomplished teachers of English to young learners should know and be able to do so that program planners have a relatively clear understanding of all the components necessary to create a positive environment for English teaching and learning at elementary school level in Indonesia. More specifically, using current learning theories stemming from socio-cultural perspectives (e.g., Vygotsky, Bruner, Corsaro, an Dyson)the bulk of the required knowledge base and skills has beensynthesized from multiple sources and thes requirements will be organized into five pillars relative to who children are, how the children learn, how the children learn a language, how Indonesian children learn English as a foreign and contexts that are relevant to the learners. Consistent with this thinking, Luke as cited in Barratt-Pugh & Rohl (2000) suggests that unless the learners’ experiences are taken into account, teaching methods, texts and assessment practices are inappropriate. It is therefore critical that teachers know who their target learners are before they can design a good English instruction. Who are the children? Review of both theoretical treatise and research-based reports which are underpinned by socio-cultural theories-- which strive to understand children from children’s own perspectives— will lead us to a clear conclusion that children are children—not little adults. As repeatedly shown in peer culture studies (see, for example, works by Corsaro [1985]), children have their own culture—ways of doing things—which are different from that of adults. Given this thinking, children should be treated and appreciated in their own right. If we want English teaching to work as expected, it should first of all be ensured that teachers hold an appropriate perspective about who children are because almost all pedagogical decisions the teachers would make stem from this perspective.

Pillar #2: Accomplished teachers of English should know how children learn The works of Bruner (1996) and later works of Piaget (1975) have provided very useful insights into how children learn. More specifiacally, Bruner (1996) proposes a hierarchy of children’s learning modes: enactive (which means relying on physical activities), iconic (which represents residual mental images resulting from the contacts with material entities), and symbolic (which comes later by way of symbolic means such as language). Parallel to these three modes of learning, Piaget (1975)—as cited in Chaile & Britain (1991)-- contributes another helpful concept. That is, three kinds of knowledge children create from their engagement with physical objects and social intercourse. More specifically, according to Piaget, there are three kinds of knowledge: physical knowledge (which children construct out of their “interaction” with physical objects), logicomatematical knowledge (i.e., basic concepts children acquire – as a mental residue-- from their actions on physical objects), and social knowledge (the kind of knowledge children “receive” from social interaction with other members of the culture). From these hierarchies of learning modes and kinds of knowledge constructed by children— and based on other theoretical constructs and research-based propositions as well—sociocultural perspectives propose learning principles, including the following: children learn from direct experiences; children learn from hands-on physical activities; children’s thinking is embedded in here-and-now context of situation; children learn holistically from whole to parts using scripts; and children have a short attention span. (1) Children learn from direct experiences. Unlike adults—who can generally learn from decontextualized abstractions—children learn and create knowledge base from direct experiences: from what they can capture using their senses, and from what they experience directly.

This learning principle has a great implication for topic choice and materials development by the teachers. For instance, rather than trying to engage children into the idea of playing foot ball (or soccer) during winter time—which they generally do not experience in their lives in Indonesia—teachers of English could involve the children in talking about their favorite activities during the rainy season. In this way, the learning of English makes a better sense to learners because this foreign language can serve a real purpose: talking about things they think important in their lives. (2) Children learn from hands-on physical activities Different from the way adults learn whereby abstract, virtual experiences can be digested in such an allegedly easy way, young children’s learning is greatly enhanced when the learners are engaged in hands-on physical activities such as playing with physical objects or making physical movements. This learning tendency has a great implication for instructional design. That is, rather than using seat work all the time, for instantce, a teacher of English would help her students learn better if she has the learners do things in English (such as creating posters with captions in English) or do things with English (such as negotiating field trip plans in English). In this way, English instructional activities become more varied and engaging to young learners.

(3) Children’s thinking is embedded in here-andnow context of situation Common in classes of young learners are learning activities related to the identification of colors and shapes of objects. Teachers of English often complain about how time consuming it is to prepare teaching scenarios and create learning media. Given that children’s thinking tends to be embedded in what is happening right now and what can be experienced on site, it would make a better sense if the teacher capitalize on the colors she can spot in what students are wearing and using and use this as a basis for the learning activity. The same procedure can also be adopted for the topic of shapes of objects. In this way, the teaching and learning of English can serve a real purpose, and this will, in turn, increase children’s learning motivation because they can see for themselves that English is useful. (4) Children learn from whole to parts – holistically-- using scripts As suggested in the learning principles discussed earlier, children create knowledge by accumulating what has already been experienced case by case. From this kind of experience, children develop scripts which serve as a kind or “organizer” for digesting their ensuing experiences. Take “eating in a restaurant” as an example. Using their direct experience as a guide, children would construct the eating-in-a restaurant- script as coming in-> making an order-> being waited on-> eating -> paying the bill ( and then) -> leaving. This initial script will later be revised with more details if the children experience having a meal in “all you can eat” restaurant where customers help themselves; or when dining at the expense of another person (i.e, “being treated” by another person) where the bill is taken care of by the other person. Given this way of learning, children would get facilitated if the English instruction builds on what children know rather than on what is likely new to them. In this way, thinking in the foreign language would be limited only in terms of vocabulary items— not in the concept they do not have.

Save your time!
We can take care of your essay

• Proper editing and formatting
• Free revision, title page, and bibliography
• Flexible prices and money-back guarantee

Place Order

(5) Children have short attention span Unlike adult learners who can concentrate hours and hours on the topic they are working on, children can hold their attention for about 15 to 20 minutes only. This relatively short attention span has a great implication for teaching procedures. That is, rather than using a large time block for an uninterrupted session, it would be better to divide the time block into several smaller chunk of activities where children are engaged in different, smaller chunks of learning activities. This means that teachers of English should use various teaching techniques for shorter periods of time to avoid boredom on the part of students, while—at the same time—pay close attention to teaching items being targeted for each fraction of the sessions.

Pillar# 3: Accomplished teachers of English should know how children learn a language. Parallel with the ideas discussed earlier with regard to ways of children’s learning, young learners acquire a language from direct contact with language in use, including observing and participating in literacy practices; watching how people read and write for functional real purposes; and participating in literacy events. In other words, language skills are acquired naturally in the context of meaningful oral interaction and literacy events (Wagner, 1989). In addition, children learn a language by doing things in and with the language (e.g., participating in social activities involving the use of the language; being engaged in social interaction using the language being learned). Consistent with the above described thinking, and following ideas proposed by the leading proponents of Whole Language such as Frank Smith, Ken Goodman, and Gordon Wells, Musthafa (2001) proposes three dimensions of learning a language: exposure to the language (where learners get exposed to language in use which can serve as examples to learn from), engagement (where learners get opportunities to use the language for communicative purposes), and consistent support (where the learners see for themselves that learning the language is useful;and the language they learn is socially recognized as prestigious). These three dimensions should be there if the learning of a language is to be effective as expected.

DISCUSSION

One of the main issues of concern in determinations of growth is the extent to which an assessment measures the same abilities or constructs over time. In educational assessment this issue is typically addressed in discussions of vertical scales, because an assessment with a vertical scale “is the most common way of evaluating growth from one grade level to another” (Harris, 2007, p. 233). A vertical scale is a “single, developmental score continuum that spans grade levels” (Ito, Sykes, & Yao, 2008, p. 188). Critical to the use of these scales is unidimensionality, the assumption that the same underlying ability is assessed from one grade to the next. Many researchers, however, argue that vertical scales often violate this assumption (Camilli, 1999; Lissitz & H). uynh, 2003In fact, much of the research on vertical scales explores the effects of violating the unidimensionality, or measurement invariance, assumption on the scale and on the interpretations made about individual students’ growth on the basis of that scale (Ito et al, 2008; Martineau, 2006; Proctor, 2008). Martineau (2006), for example, demonstrated mathematically how the “construct shift” in vertical scales introduces distortions to the value-added estimates of teacher/school effects in longitudinal, value-added accountability models. Similarly, Proctor (2008) found that how the construct was defined in a vertically scaled assessment of science inquiry had an impact on growth measures. Accurately measuring individual student growth has not been a focus in language testing. Most large-scale language tests (e.g., TOEFL, IELTS) are typically taken once to determine a student’s level of language proficiency at a particular point in time. Language testers, however, have been concerned with the invariance of the constructs underlying tests. An important assumption in language testing is that the construct assessed, reflected in the factor structure of the test, is equivalent across different groups of test takers, including groups of varying levels of language proficiency. Several studies have examined the factorial invariance of language tests across different groups of test takers (Bae & Bachman, 1998; Ginther & Stevens, 1998; Kunnan, 1992; Purpura, 1998; Shin, 2005). Some of these studies have focused specifically on groups of test takers differing in their levels of language proficiency. Kunnan (1992), for example, examined the factor structure of a university English as a Second Language placement exam and compared it among four levels of placement groups. Purpura (1998) looked at the invariance of the relationship between second-language test performance and strategy use for low-ability and high-ability test takers.

ENGLISH FOR YOUNG LEARNERS

The immediate pictures of whom you are dealing with when teaching English to young learners might be small beings with their unique characteristics, such as impish expression on their faces, open smiles, adorable outfit, or probably disruptive behavior. It might then lead you to think of young learners as either easy or difficult 'creatures' to teach. If you think that young learners are just little beings who can only learn something simple you may be fascinated by the idea that they can be taught by everybody without having appropriate training. But if you think that young learners are human beings who can learn complicated topics, then you may think of teachers who have adequate training only who can teach them.

As yet there has been a growing awareness acknowledging that teaching English to young learners is not as simple as we once thought. It is not a matter of teaching a list of simple vocabulary. It is rather an attempt to help young learners learn the language efficiently and effectively with the help of their environment, such as teachers, their peer-groups, parents, and their class situation. As such, teaching English to young learners needs skilled-teachers who are willing to always improve their teaching skills as they are facing complex beings with subtle attitude. The question is, do we have enough skilled-teachers to do that?

It is a pleasant thing to hear that there has been an upsurge of interest in the world of teaching English to young learners in Indonesia in line with the inclusion of English language as one of the local contents in primary school's curriculum. This growing interest can give a positive contribution to the development of English education to young learners as it might increase the number of English teachers needed for the teaching of the language. However, it can also create serious problems if it is not dealt with appropriately, as teaching English to young learners is often is understood by many, as an easy job to do and can be done by anybody without regard to his/her teaching background. If we determine that teaching English to young learners can be done by anybody without considering his/her teaching skills, we would create a loophole, so to speak, which might drag young learners to a risky situation. This is because young learners are easily driven. If teachers are not well prepared and do not know with whom they are dealing, they will only create detriments to learners. It is in light of this context that EYL teachers must know whom they are teaching and how they have to deal with them.

Conclusion

From the discussion on each required knowledge base and skills for accomplished teaching, we can see components of expertise for effective teachers of English for young learners— which have thus far never been articulated publicly in Indonesian academic discourses. In the discussion of these components of professional expertise of teachers of English, there are crucial implications for both presser vice and inse rvice teachers training programs, which have not responded adequately to the changing needs in the field of teaching of English. Furthermore, those training programs are expected to create effective teachers with a good command of English and skills in using the language for communication, and an ability to act as a role model to the learners they teach.