The International

Journal
INTERDISCIPLINARY SOCIAL SCIENCES

Volume 2, Number 4

At-Risk Students' Response to Learning Mathematics and Science in a Second Language

Arshad A.Samad, Rohani Ahmad Tarmizi, Sharifah Md Nor, Kamariah Abu Bakar, Wan Zah Wan Ali, Ramlah Hamzah, Abd. Rasid Jamian, Norhayat Marzuki, Siti Suria Salim and Othman Mohamed

www.socialsciences-journal.com

THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY SOCIAL SCIENCES http://www.SocialSciences-Journal.com First published in 2007 in Melbourne, Australia by Common Ground Publishing Pty Ltd www.CommonGroundPublishing.com. 2007 (individual papers), the author(s) 2007 (selection and editorial matter) Common Ground Authors are responsible for the accuracy of citations, quotations, diagrams, tables and maps. All rights reserved. Apart from fair use for the purposes of study, research, criticism or review as permitted under the Copyright Act (Australia), no part of this work may be reproduced without written permission from the publisher. For permissions and other inquiries, please contact <cg-support@commongroundpublishing.com>. ISSN: 1833-1882 Publisher Site: http://www.SocialSciences-Journal.com THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY SOCIAL SCIENCES is a peer refereed journal. Full papers submitted for publication are refereed by Associate Editors through anonymous referee processes. Typeset in Common Ground Markup Language using CGCreator multichannel typesetting system http://www.CommonGroundSoftware.com.

At-Risk Students' Response to Learning Mathematics and Science in a Second Language

Arshad A.Samad, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Selangor, Malaysia Rohani Ahmad Tarmizi, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Selangor, Malaysia Sharifah Md Nor, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Selangor, Malaysia Kamariah Abu Bakar, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Selangor, Malaysia Wan Zah Wan Ali, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Selangor, Malaysia Ramlah Hamzah, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Selangor, Malaysia Abd. Rasid Jamian, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Selangor, Malaysia Norhayat Marzuki, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Selangor, Malaysia Siti Suria Salim, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Selangor, Malaysia Othman Mohamed, Universiti Putra Malaysia, selangor, Malaysia
Abstract: The Malaysian government recently reverted to the English language as the medium of instruction in its education system for important content subjects such as Mathematics and the Sciences. This policy decision was made in the midst of widespread concern over the perceived falling standards of English language proficiency after the country had used Malay, the native language of the majority Malays, as the medium of instruction for almost two decades. This year marks the first year high school students will sit for the national standardized examinations in English. Dissenters to this policy shift in the language of instruction fear that many will suffer as a result of this change. In this study, the self reports of academically high and low performing students are compared in terms of their ability to perform language related tasks in Malay and the English language. Using the Chi-square statistic, the results of the yes-no responses given by the students indicate that while high performing students report no major difficulties in either language, responses from the low performing students indicate otherwise. Additionally open-ended responses to learning Science and Mathematics in a second language are also qualitatively analysed in order to obtain a more comprehensive view of the challenges these students may face. Several implications based on these results are also discussed. Keywords: Teaching English as a Second Language, At-Risk Students, Teaching and Learning

Introduction
ECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN the education system in Malaysia have seen attempts to raise proficiency levels in the English language on the belief that proficiency in the language is important in science, technology and commerce. Within the historical context of Bahasa Malaysia or Malay as the national language of the country and mother tongue of the majority Malays, some of these efforts have raised a fair deal of controversy. One such development, for example, is the recent government policy which mandates that all Science and Mathematics subjects in schools be taught in the English language. Perhaps the most controversial aspect of this shift in policy is the concerns that have been raised regarding the possibility that students who struggle with the English language will be left behind cognitively as they will fail to attain important critical and scientific thinking skills normally acquired through

content subjects such as Mathematics and Science. While students who are already proficient in the language may not be heavily impacted by this new policy, there are fears that students who are not will be severely disadvantaged. The decision to use a second language as the medium of instruction is complicated by the fact that academic language involves a specialized register which can influence the learning of the language and the content subjects (Cummins, 1984). Cummins argues that there exists a stark difference between social language which he refers to as Basic Interpersonal Communication Skills (BICS) and academic language or Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency (CALP). In work that is now often cited, he notes that BICS is usually acquired over a period of one to two years while CALP can take a longer time, even up to five to eight years for students to master (Cummins, 1984). The teaching of important content subjects in a second language such as English, however, has its proponents and detractors. It has even attracted quite

THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY SOCIAL SCIENCES, VOLUME 2, NUMBER 4, 2007 http://www.SocialSciences-Journal.com, ISSN 1833-1882
Common Ground, Arshad A.Samad, Rohani Ahmad Tarmizi, Sharifah Md Nor, Kamariah Abu Bakar, Wan Zah Wan Ali, Ramlah Hamzah, Abd. Rasid Jamian, Norhayat Marzuki, Siti Suria Salim, Othman Mohamed, All Rights Reserved, Permissions: cg-support@commongroundpublishing.com

342

THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY SOCIAL SCIENCES, VOLUME 2

a lot of political controversy in numerous countries such as in the United States with Proposal 227 regarding the use of English only even in areas with large Hispanic speaking minorities (Mora, 2000) and in the different and contrasting education policies in South Africa (Heugh, 2000). Several researchers believe that immersion in target language input through the learning of content subjects in the target language will hasten language acquisition (Imhoff, 1990). An input flood in the second or target language will provide sufficient language samples, opportunities for use and feedback for the learners to progress in the language. Hence the teaching of content subjects in a second or target language is justified. Others, however, are of the opinion that input has to be comprehensible before it can be acquired. They therefore argue for bilingual education in which content subjects are presented in the first language in order for students to understand the general concepts of the subjects (Collier, 1987). This is especially critical in programmes where academic success is highly emphasized. In such programmes, academic aptitude may also be an important factor in determining success in a language. Children who are academically weak and not proficient in English may, therefore, be in a position of double disadvantage when learning Mathematics and Science in English (Verhoeven and Vermeer, 2006; Droop and Verhoeven, 2003). The use of a language they are not proficient in as the medium of instruction may consequently cause these children to be further left behind. Some researchers believe that academically weak children should be assisted through their first language. Collier (1995), for example, argues that academic skills, literacy development, concept formation, subject knowledge, and learning strategies developed in the first language will all transfer to the second language. As students expand their knowledge base in the first language, together with an increase in second language vocabulary and oral and written communication skills, they can increasingly demonstrate their knowledge base in the second language. She goes on to cite several studies that indicate that if students do not reach a certain threshold in their first language, including literacy, they may experience cognitive difficulties in the second language. Indeed, Olshtain et al. (1990) found that academic proficiency in the first language played the most important role in predicting foreign language learning success. There have been several studies that have examined students attitudes towards and abilities in English as a second language in Malaysian contexts (Mohd. Ashraf, 2004; Omar, 1992). These studies, however, were conducted when the medium of instruction in schools was Bahasa Malaysia or had only

just begun to be conducted in the English language. As such, the students responses may not have been able to fully reflect the impact of learning content subjects in the second language on their attitudes toward learning the English language or on the use of English as the medium of instruction. Additionally, the studies did not intend to examine students views regarding learning in Bahasa Malaysia in comparison to learning in the English language. In this study, a comparison is made between students views regarding their own abilities in Bahasa Malaysia and the English language. Such a comparison is considered useful as it may provide insights into whether the students perceived problems and attitudes are related to language in general or is limited to only when the second language is used. Additionally, the influence of another important variable, namely academic aptitude, is also investigated. This study, therefore, examines the views of academically challenged and academically inclined students regarding their ability to perform basic language related tasks in two different languages. The differences in their responses to how well they perform these tasks in Bahasa Malaysia and in the English language is considered as an indication of whether the problems they face, if any, may be attributed to the task, the language, or their academic ability. Besides perceptions of their ability to perform basic linguistic tasks in Bahasa Malaysia and in English, their attitudes towards the two languages are also compared. Additionally, teacher reports regarding the problems they believe students face help provide a more comprehensive view of the challenges of learning content subjects in a second language. Hence, the first major objective of the study is to examine and compare the perceptions of academically inclined and academically challenged students regarding their own abilities to perform basic language related tasks in and attitudes towards Bahasa Malaysia and the English language. The second objective of the study is to examine problems faced by students as identified by Mathematics and Science teachers as well as the steps these teachers take to overcome them.

The Study: Method and Results

This study involved 341 academically challenged and 343 academically inclined 14 year old students from several schools in Malaysia. A second portion of this study elicited personal responses from 37 Mathematics and 52 Science teachers. The schools that were involved in the study were randomly selected from a list of schools provided by the State Department of Education in the state of Selangor that contained both academically challenged and academically inclined students. Intact classes were used from the schools that were selected. Although not sanc-

A.SAMAD, AHMAD TARMIZI, MD NOR, ABU BAKAR, WAN ALI, HAMZAH, JAMIAN, MARZUKI, SALIM, MOHAMED

343

tioned as a policy by the Ministry of Education, many schools stream their students according to academic ability. As such, academically challenged students in this study refer to students who were in the weakest class and were at risk of failing their examinations whereas academically inclined students were those from the best class and performed well in their examinations. This study is part of a larger study on students at risk in their education that was funded through a government research grant. Each group of students was given 10 statements concerning their performance, abilities in as well as attitudes towards Bahasa Malaysia and the English language and were asked to respond by either agreeing or disagreeing to the statements. The frequencies for affirmative and negative responses on every statement for the two languages for each group were tabulated and tested for statistical significance using the Pearson Chi-Square. Hence, a 2 x 2 or fourfold contingency table was formed for each statement according to each group with language (Bahasa Malaysia and English) as one facet and response (yes and no) as the other.

This study uses self appraisals as its data and the Chi-Square technique as its major statistical technique. The Chi-Square technique may have its limitations especially as it is a non-parametric technique and hence it results are usually not generalisable. However, this study involves bivariate, dichotomous nominal data which the Chi-Square technique can appropriately examine. In this study, although the responses by academically challenged and inclined students are self appraisals, they are still valuable in providing insights into how each group responds to the two languages. In the second portion of this study, the teachers in the study were asked to describe and rank three problems they faced in teaching their subject either Mathematics or Science. They were also asked to describe the steps they took to overcome each of the problems they had described. Analysing the responses of students. In Table 1, the Chi-Square values of the responses to the ten statements in the questionnaire by the two groups are presented.

The contingency table for the academically challenged students yields several interesting results. Based on the 2 values observed in Table 1, three statements should be given special attention and further analysed as the probabilities obtained are

statistically significant at p < .05. As for the academically inclined students, there are 5 statements with statistically significant Chi-Square values. The three statements involving the academically challenged students - i.e. items 1, 2 and 3 - that are

344

THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY SOCIAL SCIENCES, VOLUME 2

statistically significant indicate a difference in response in performing basic abilities according to language. Interpretation of these statistically significant Chi-Square values, however, requires a closer examination of the frequency and percentages of the responses for each statement. For example, for statement 1, as many as 189 or 55.6% of the respondents indicate that they have problems in reading in English but not in Bahasa Malaysia. This percentage is larger than any of the other three cells and therefore may be the most influential source of the statistically significant Chi-Square value obtained. This indicates that language may be a significant factor in perceived reading ability. In other words, the academically challenged students do not consider themselves illiterate as they perceive themselves to be able readers in Bahasa Malaysia. However, they acknowledge a lack in the ability to do so effectively in the English language. This finding is consistent with Mohd. Ashraf (2004) who, in her observation of rural school students, noted how such students struggled to read in English, and commented on how they were terribly slow, as the students approached reading at the word level (p. 91). Similarly, 258 respondents or 75.9% of the total number of respondents indicate that they have problems constructing sentences in English, but not in Bahasa Malaysia. This observation is a stark pronouncement of their differing abilities in the two languages and should not be taken lightly. While only 54 or 15.9% of the academically challenged students indicate that they have problems constructing sentences in Bahasa Malaysia, 299 or 87.9% say they face this problem in the English language. For the third statement that yielded a statistically significant Chi-Square value, it was once again observed that the greatest disparity from expected frequencies among the four cells was the one that indicated weakness in writing in the two languages. As

many as 191 respondents or 56% indicated they consider themselves weak in writing in English but not in Bahasa Malaysia. Given that the academically challenged students had earlier indicated problems in constructing English language sentences, it is not surprising that they also report problems in writing in the language. The consistency in professing ability in performing a basic linguistic task in Bahasa Malaysia but not in the English language among the academically challenged students as seen in the responses to these three statements must certainly be noted. With respect to the academically inclined students, significant values obtained were due to a large number of negative or no responses to the statements for both the two languages. For example, as many as 268 or 78.1 % of the respondents indicate not having difficulty in understanding the content of lessons in both Bahasa Malaysia and the English language. The same kind of response was also observed for statements 4, 5, 6 and 7 that yielded statistically significant Chi-Square values suggesting that the academically inclined students did not face many difficulties in their Bahasa Malaysia and English language lessons. Hence, unlike the academically challenged students who indicate clear differences in perceived abilities in and attitudes towards the two languages, academically inclined students report no such differences. It is therefore clear that the academically inclined students consider themselves to function well in both languages. Analysing Teacher responses. The responses of teachers regarding the problems that students face in learning Mathematics and Science provides an additional dimension to understanding the challenges faced by at-risk students. In Table 2 below, the number and percentage of language related problems in relation to the total problems they had identified are presented.

Table 2: Percentage of Language Related Problems Reported by Mathematics and Science Teachers Subject Mathematics Science No of teachers 37 52 No of all prob- Language-related problems lems reported 1st ranked 2nd ranked 3rd ranked Total 91 127 8 25 4 7 6 4 18 36

Percent 19.78 28.35

Mathematics and Science teachers consider that language related problems make up about 20% and 28% respectively of all the students problems in each of their subjects. It is also interesting to note from the table above that 25 or 48.7% of Science teachers identified language related problems as the main or first ranked problem the students faced. The percent-

age of language-related problems reported by these teachers can be considered rather high when compared to other types of problems. Mathematics teachers, for example, report problems that have been categorized into five different types as shown in Table 3.

A.SAMAD, AHMAD TARMIZI, MD NOR, ABU BAKAR, WAN ALI, HAMZAH, JAMIAN, MARZUKI, SALIM, MOHAMED

345

Table 3: Percentage of Types of Problems Faced as Reported by Mathematics Teachers Type of problem Mathematics related Disciplinary Motivation External Language related Examples Lack of basic skills Noisy and disruptive Lack of interest in subject curriculum, facilities Unable to understand English f 28 20 18 7 18 % 30.76 21.98 19.78 7.69 19.78

Table 3 clearly shows that language related problems pose a considerable challenge to students in learning Mathematics as reported by the Mathematics teachers in the study. The strategies that the Mathematics and Science teachers report they have employed in order to overcome these problems also present an interesting finding. Many teachers indicate the use of translation, simplified sentences, vocabulary work, dictionary use and bilingual presentations. While these strategies may be helpful in the short term for the purpose of understanding the Mathematics and Science lessons, their use may have a slightly detrimental effect on the learning or acquisition of the second language. These strategies differ from the more common techniques used in second language classrooms which emphasize explanation, discussions and negotiation of meaning as the means of enhancing language learning. Discussion Based on the results obtained in this study, it is clear that academically challenged students report having problems in reading, constructing sentences and writing essays in the English language when compared to performing these tasks in Bahasa Malaysia. On the other hand, the academically inclined students do not indicate such difficulties in performing these tasks. In fact, these students report no problems in dealing with many of the tasks in either Bahasa Malaysia or English. This difference between the two groups of students clearly indicates that academically challenged students will face many obstacles in learning content subjects in the English language and a clear strategy needs to be taken to overcome this problem. When academically challenged students indicate that they are not able to perform basic linguistic tasks in the English language, then this group of students will face more problems in comprehending and performing in the Math and Science class compared to their more academically inclined counterparts. However, when these students also indicate that they are able to perform these same linguistic tasks in Bahasa Malaysia, it implies that they have greater potential to comprehend and perform in the Math and Science classroom if the language of instruction were in Bahasa Malaysia. Hence, while the academ-

ically inclined students may fare well in these subjects regardless of the medium of instruction, the academically challenged students may need to be catered to in a different manner using different strategies. In addition to the obvious implication of the results that are obtained in this study, there are several specific points that should also be noted. First, it is useful to underscore that the majority of the academically challenged students in this study did not consider themselves illiterate. As seen in Table 2 earlier, only 18 or 5.3% of these students reported having problems reading in both Bahasa Malaysia and English. The results indicate that it is reading in the English language rather than reading itself that is their problem. When these students struggle with reading material in their Math and Science classes, knowing that they would have probably understood the same texts had they been in Bahasa Malaysia, it is conceivable that frustration would quickly set in. Such conditions may also negatively affect their confidence and self-esteem (Wright and Taylor, 1995). Specialized bilingual or English language sheltered programmes may be especially viable and justified in these circumstances in order to overcome this problem as continued development of both languages enhances childrens educational and cognitive development (Cummins, 1992: 94). In other words, the pedagogical strategy should be to prolong not prevent the use of Bahasa Malaysia in the content classroom for the academically challenged students. A second observation is that the relationship between academic aptitude and self reports of language ability in the two languages as was observed in this study provides implicit support to the notion of a specialized academic language similar to CALP as suggested by Cummins. Consequently, English for Academic Purpose or EAP classes may be an option that should considered. Certainly, in the Malaysian context, this need may have been anticipated with the English for Science and Technology subject offered as a school elective. Sadly, however, some schools have misinterpreted the role of this subject. Instead of encouraging the academically weaker students to enrol in order to boost their performance in the Math and Science classes, these schools have offered the subject to the more academ-

346

THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY SOCIAL SCIENCES, VOLUME 2

ically inclined students with the objective of allowing these students to obtain an additional and easy A grade in their examinations. Thirdly, it was also noticed that a slightly larger percentage of the students indicate problems in both languages when it came to more productive language skills such as constructing sentences (12.1%) and writing (18.5%) compared to receptive skills. This observation has implications not directly in the teaching of Mathematics and Science in English but rather in the teaching of the English language and Bahasa Malaysia subjects. These subjects should provide greater emphasis on the development of productive skills, especially through the presentation of micro and enabling skills that lead to increased abilities in both speaking and writing. Through anecdotal evidence and experience, many Malaysians would agree that Malaysian classrooms tend to focus on reading and listening. The teaching of Mathematics and Science in the English language may further encourage this emphasis as there will be an obvious tendency to read and listen rather than speak and write about factual knowledge introduced in the classroom. In fact, very few of the teachers use discussion as a means of solving problems students face in their Mathematics and Science classes. The language classroom, therefore, will have to correct the imbalance by focusing on productive and receptive language skills. The responses provided by the Mathematics and Science teachers have also been insightful. The fact that language related problems make up a large portion of the types of problems these teachers report clearly indicate the necessity for the students to be proficient in the language. It is unclear in the data whether such problems would be as frequently reported had the language of instruction been in the first language. Regardless, the number of times and percentage language related problems were reported by teachers must make policy makers and curriculum planners pay attention to language related issues in addition to just the content in subjects such as Mathematics and Science. Conclusion The data in this study indicate that academically challenged students face different kinds of problems in learning Bahasa Malaysia and English compared to those who are academically inclined. While academically inclined students do not report any problems in learning regardless of the language of instruction, academically challenged students indicate problems when the English language is used especially when they are required to use the language to demonstrate their knowledge and ability in these subjects. The responses imply that the teaching and learning of content subjects in the English language for academically challenged students could be more

effective if academically challenged students are provided with pedagogical support for them to interpret content and produce responses in the second language. The presentation of mathematical and scientific concepts in Bahasa Malaysia, the first language, should also be made available to these students especially at an initial stage in line with Cummins (1992: 94) who notes that literacy-related abilities are interdependent across languages such that knowledge and skills acquired in one language are potentially available in the other. In a situation where there exists a difference in attitudes and perceived performance between academically inclined and academically challenged students with respect to the medium of instruction, specialized programmes such as sheltered content based instruction, two way immersion (TWI), and transitional bilingual education (TBE) should be considered. Students in such programmes are taught content subjects in a more familiar language in classes that run parallel and in addition to the Science and Math classes that are taught in English (Brinton, Snow and Wesche, 1989). Sheltered instruction can be defined as an approach in teaching content to English language learners (ELLs) in strategic ways that make the subject matter concepts comprehensible while promoting the students English language development. (Echevarria, Vogt, and Short 2000). These teaching techniques would necessarily promote content subjects as well as the learning of English and not favor one at the expense of the other. In TWI programs, language learning is integrated with content instruction as academic subjects are taught to all students through both English and the other language (Christian, 1994). The typical TBE programme initially provides instruction in literacy and academic content areas through the medium of the students first language, along with instruction in English oral language development; occasionally with non-academic subjects such as art and physical education also taught in English (Medina, 1995). All these specialized programmes should be carefully considered in order for the academically challenged student to succeed in school. Finally, there is also a need to increase the level of cooperation between English and content subject teachers. Some of the solutions that Mathematics and Science teachers resort to when faced with language related problems involve treatment of language learning that can act contrary to the language teaching and learning process. The techniques used are short term and largely have the objective of helping teachers convey their content or at least make them feel that they have done so. However, these strategies can have a negative influence on the learning of the second language. Referring to bilingual dictionaries during lessons, for example, keep students dependent

A.SAMAD, AHMAD TARMIZI, MD NOR, ABU BAKAR, WAN ALI, HAMZAH, JAMIAN, MARZUKI, SALIM, MOHAMED

347

on an external resource and may be ineffective in promoting language acquisition. In classrooms where the mother tongue is used, difficult terminology is often dealt with through direct explanation, discussion, illustration or circumlocution. Dependence on a bilingual dictionary or even translation in classrooms where a second language is used is likely to be less effective. Other quick fixes reported by

the teacher respondents such as the use of simplified sentences, translation of vocabulary, bilingual presentation and providing a running translation may also raise the same concerns. Closer cooperation between English and content subject teachers may be able to help improve the strategies used to overcome language related problems.

References
Brinton, D. M., Snow, M. A., & Wesche, M. B. (1989). Content-based second language instruction. New York: Newbury House. Christian, D. (1994). Two-way bilingual education: Students learning through two languages (Educational Practice Rep. No.12). Washington, DC, and Santa Cruz, CA: National Center for Cultural Diversity and Second Language Learning. Collier, V. P.(1995). Acquiring a second language for school. Directions in Language and Education, National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education, 1, 4. Collier, V. P. (1987) Age and rate of acquisition of second language for academic purposes. TESOL Quarterly, 21, 617641. Cummins, J. (1992). Bilingual education and English immersion: The Ramirez report in theoretical perspective. Bilingual Research Journal, 16, 1 and 2, 91-104. Cummins, J. (1984). Bilingualism and special education: Issues in assessment and pedagogy. San Diego, CA.: College Hill. Droop, M. & Verhoeven, L. (2003). Language proficiency and reading ability in first- and second language learners. Reading Research Quarterly, 38, 1, 78-103. Echevarria, J., Vogt M.-E., & Short, D. (2000). Making Content Comprehensible for English Language LearnersThe SIOP Model. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Heugh, K. (2000). The case against bilingual and multilingual education in South Africa. Occasional papers No. 6. Cape Town, South Africa: PRAESA. Imhoff, G. (1990). The position of U.S English on bilingual education. In C.B. Cazden & C. E. Snow (Eds.) English Plus: Issues in bilingual education. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. (March), 4861. Medina, S. (1995). K-6 bilingual programs in the Los Angeles metropolitan area. Bilingual Research Journal, 19(3&4), 629-640. Mohd. Ashraf, R. (2004). Learning English in Malaysian rural schools: Attitudes, motivation and anxiety. In David, M. (Ed.). Teaching of English in Second and Foreign Language Settings. (pp. 78-96). Frankfurt: Peter Lang Publications. Mora, J. K. (2000). Staying the course in times of change: Preparing teachers for language minority education. Journal of Teacher Education, 51, 5, Nov/Dec, 345-357 Olshtain, E., Shohamy, E,, Kernp, J. and Chatow, R. (1990). Factors predicting success in EFL among culturally different learners. Language Learning, 40, 1, 23-44. Omar, A. (1992). Attitude in the learning of English among Malaysian students: A case study. In a. H. Omar (Ed.), The linguistic scenery in Malaysia. (pp. 117-142). Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka: Kuala Lumpur. Verhoeven, L. & Vermeer, A. (2006). Literacy achievement of children with intellectual disabilities and differing linguistic backgrounds. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research. 50, 10, 725-738. Wright, S. C. & Taylor, D. M. (1995). Identity and the language of the classroom: Investigating the impact of heritage versus second language instruction on personal and collective self-esteem. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 2, 241-252.

About the Authors

Dr. Arshad A.Samad Dr. Arshad Abd. Samad completed his high school education at the Malay College, Kuala Kangsar, Perak. He holds a doctoral degree from Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, Arizona, USA which he received in 1999 and Master and Bachelor degrees from Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, USA. He was appointed as a lecturer with University Putra Malaysia in 1990 after serving as a teacher at the Raja Ali Secondary School in Kampung Batu in Kuala Lumpur from 1985. Currently he is a senior lecturer and serves as the Head of Department at the Department of Language and Humanities Education, Faculty of Educational Studies, Universiti Putra Malaysia. He is involved in research and publication in the field of Teaching English as a Second Language (TESL), especially in grammar instruction, language acquisition and testing. He is also involved in various levels of consultancy work including programme evaluation of several local universities as well as for government

348

THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY SOCIAL SCIENCES, VOLUME 2

and private agencies. Among his publications are Essentials of Language Testing for Malaysian Teachers (2002) dan Perspectives of Grammar in Education (2003). Assoc. Prof. Rohani Ahmad Tarmizi Universiti Putra Malaysia, Malaysia Prof. Sharifah Md Nor Universiti Putra Malaysia, Malaysia Dr. Kamariah Abu Bakar Dr. Kamariah Abu Bakar currently is professor in science education at Faculty of Educational Studies, Universiti Putra Malaysia. Associate Professor Dr. Wan Zah Wan Ali Dr. Wan Zah curenntly is associate professor in educational technology at Faculty of Educational Studies and associte researcher at Institute for Mathematical Research. Dr. Ramlah Hamzah Universiti Putra Malaysia, Malaysia Dr. Abd. Rasid Jamian Universiti Putra Malaysia, Malaysia Norhayat Marzuki Universiti Putra Malaysia, Malaysia Siti Suria Salim Conference Attended/Participated (2004) National Conference on Graduate Research in Educatian 2004 (GREDuc 2004). Writer& Presenter. Tittle: The Preparedness of Teacher towards The Implementation of Smart School Approach.11th July 2004. Resident Hotel Uniten Bangi, Selangor. Co writers: Prof.Sharifah Md. Nor Nasional Forum of The Family with Special Needs 2004. Participant.24th July. 2004.Malaya University Kuala Lumpur. National Seminar on Education Among At-Risk Children. Participant.19th February 2005.Country Height Sports Living Club, Kajang, Selangor Research (2004)(On-Going) Research Title Year Start Sponsor/Cost Status Teachers Craft Knowledge 2003 IRPA/RM250,000.00 Member Indicator as Complements to University Entrance Requirement 2003 IRPA/RM226,000.00 Member An Examination of Teaching Practices, Learning Needs and Climate of At-Risk Students Dec. 2003 IRPA/RM279, 000.00 Member Dr. Othman Mohamed Universiti Putra Malaysia, Malaysia

THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY SOCIAL SCIENCES

EDITORS Mary Kalantzis, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, USA. Bill Cope, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, USA.

EDITORIAL ADVISORY BOARD Patrick Baert, Cambridge University, Cambridge, UK. Norma Burgess, Syracuse University, Syracuse NY, USA. Vangelis Intzidis, University of the Aegean, Rhodes. Paul James, RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia. Jos Luis Ortega Martn, University of Granada, Spain. Francisco Fernandez Palomares, University of Granada, Spain. Miguel A. Pereyra, University of Granada, Spain. Chryssi Vitsilakis-Soroniatis, University of the Aegean, Rhodes, Greece.

Please visit the Journal website at http://www.SocialSciences-Journal.com for further information: - ABOUT the Journal including Scope and Concerns, Editors, Advisory Board, Associate Editors and Journal Profile - FOR AUTHORS including Publishing Policy, Submission Guidelines, Peer Review Process and Publishing Agreement

SUBSCRIPTIONS The Journal offers individual and institutional subscriptions. For further information please visit http://iji.cgpublisher.com/subscriptions.html Inquiries can be directed to subscriptions@commongroundpublishing.com

INQUIRIES Email: cg-support@commongroundpublishing.com