Advertisement

Taking Stock of the Effects of Strategies-Based Instruction on Writing in Chinese and English in Singapore Primary Classrooms

  • Lawrence Jun ZhangEmail author
  • Vahid Aryadoust
  • Donglan Zhang
Chapter
Part of the Education Innovation Series book series (EDIN)

Abstract

Strategies-based instruction (SBI) is widely accepted and successfully implemented in North America in language and literacy programmes, but little has been reported on how this strategy would work in a bilingual/biliteracy learning context. This chapter reports on the efficacy of such an intervention conducted in two Singapore primary schools, where the government implements a unique bilingual/biliteracy policy in education, by which English is offered as the first language and one of the other three mother tongue languages (Chinese, Malay and Tamil) as a second language subject in the national curriculum. Although the Singapore quadrilingual education policy has been internationally acclaimed as being successful, some students face challenges in biliteracy learning, resulting in some students’ underachievement. To help these students catch up with their better-performing peers, we designed an intervention programme to answer the following research questions: (1) When integrated into the regular curriculum, does SBI have an impact on bilingual students’ understanding of the writing processes in their two languages? (2) Specifically, does SBI lead to writing improvement in both languages? The study had an experimental group and a control group. Such a design was intended for comparing the pedagogical efficacy of SBI on student improvement in writing in English and writing in Chinese over a period of one semester (10 weeks of teaching) in the regular school curriculum. Results suggest that the use of SBI not only raised students’ awareness of writing strategies but also improved their English and Chinese writing scores. Thus, we conclude that SBI was a useful dimension to the writing curriculum in the two schools involved in this study.

Keywords

Score Gain Bilingual Student Chinese Writing English Writing Language Classroom 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to record their gratitude to the Singapore Ministry of Education and the Office of Education Research of the National Institute of Education, Singapore, for their generous funding of the project (Project No. 25/08/OER/LZ) awarded to the Principal Investigator, Lawrence Jun Zhang. They are also obliged to the following for their assistance: the research team members, especially the two Postdoctoral Fellows working on the project at different stages of its development, Dr Wengao Gong and Dr Yajun Zeng, the two collaborating schools and the participating teachers and students who willingly took part in the study. The authors take full responsibility for any error or fault in this chapter.

References

  1. Afflerbach, P., Pearson, P. D., & Paris, S. G. (2008). Clarifying differences between reading skills and reading strategies. Reading Teacher, 61, 364–373. doi: 10.1598/RT.61.5.1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson, N. J. (2012). Metacognition: Awareness in language learning. In S. Mercer, S. Ryan, & M. Williams (Eds.), Psychology for language learning: Insights from research, theory and pedagogy (pp. 169–187). Basingstoke: Palgrave.Google Scholar
  3. Aryadoust, V. (2012). Evaluating the psychometric quality of an ESL placement test of writing: A many-facets Rasch study. Linguistics Journal, 6, 8–33.Google Scholar
  4. Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1987). The psychology of written composition. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  5. Block, C. C., & Duffy, G. G. (2008). Research on teaching comprehension: Where we’ve been and where we’re going. In C. C. Block & S. R. Paris (Eds.), Comprehension instruction: Research-based best practices (2nd ed., pp. 19–37). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  6. Boekaerts, M., & Cascallar, E. (2006). How far have we moved toward the integration of theory and practice in self- regulation? Educational Psychology Review, 18, 199–210. doi: 10.1007/s10648-006-9013-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chamot, A. U., Barnhardt, S., El-Dinary, P. B., & Robbins, J. (1999). The learning strategies handbook. White Plains: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
  8. Cohen, A. D. (1998). Strategies in learning and using a second language. White Plains: Longman.Google Scholar
  9. Cohen, A. D., & Dörnyei, Z. (2002). Focus on the language learner: Motivation, styles, and strategies. In N. Schmitt (Ed.), An introduction to applied linguistics (pp. 170–190). London: Arnold.Google Scholar
  10. Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16, 297–334. doi: 10.1007/BF02310555.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Derewianka, B. (1996). Exploring the writing of genres. London: UK Reading Association.Google Scholar
  12. Ehrich, J. F., Zhang, L. J., Mu, J. C., & Ehrich, L. C. (2013). Are alphabetic-language derived models of L2 reading relevant to L1 logographic background readers? Language Awareness, 22, 39–55. doi: 10.1080/09658416.2011.644796.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Flower, L. S., & Hayes, J. R. (1981). A cognitive process theory of writing. College Composition and Communication, 32, 365–387. doi: 10.2307/356600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Glass, G. V., & Hopkins, K. D. (1996). Statistical methods in education and psychology (3rd ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
  15. Glasswell, K., Parr, J., & McNaughton, S. (2003). Working with William: Teaching, learning, and the joint construction of a struggling writer. The Reading Teacher, 56, 484–500.Google Scholar
  16. Goh, C. C. M., Zhang, L. J., Ng, C. H., & Koh, G. H. (2005). Knowledge, beliefs and syllabus implementation: A study of English language teachers in Singapore. Singapore: National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University.Google Scholar
  17. Gong, W., Zhang, D. L., Zhang, L. J., Kiss, T., & Ang-Tay, M. Y. (2011). Socio-psychological factors and strategy use in Singaporean schoolchildren’s English literacy learning. Reflections on English Language Teaching, 10, 1–24.Google Scholar
  18. Gu, P. Y., Hu, G., & Zhang, L. J. (2005). Investigating language learner strategies among lower primary school pupils in Singapore. Language and Education, 19, 281–303. doi: 10.1080/09500780508668682.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Halliday, M. A. K. (1985). Language, context, and text: Aspects of language in a social-semiotic perspective. Geelong: Deakin University.Google Scholar
  20. Harris, K. R., Graham, S., Mason, L. H., & Friedlander, B. (2008). Powerful writing strategies for all students. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.Google Scholar
  21. Harris, K. R., Santangelo, T., & Graham, S. (2010). Metacognition and strategies instruction in writing. In H. S. Waters & W. Schneider (Eds.), Metacognition, strategy use, and instruction (pp. 226–256). New York: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  22. Jiang, X., & Cohen, A. D. (2012). A critical review of research on strategies in learning Chinese as both a second and foreign language. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 2, 9–43.Google Scholar
  23. Kellogg, R. T. (1996). A model of working memory in writing. In C. M. Levy & S. Ransdell (Eds.), The science of writing: Theories, methods, individual differences and applications (pp. 57–72). Mahwah: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  24. Macaro, E. (2006). Strategies for language learning and for language use: Revising the theoretical framework. Modern Language Journal, 90, 320–337. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4781.2006.00425.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Macaro, E., & Cohen, A. D. (2007). LLS and the future: Resolving the issues. In A. D. Cohen & E. Macaro (Eds.), Language learner strategies: Thirty years of research and practice (pp. 275–284). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  26. McNaughton, S., & Lai, M. (2009). A model of school change for culturally and linguistically diverse students in New Zealand: A summary and evidence from systematic replication. Teaching Education, 20, 55–75. doi: 10.1080/10476210802681733.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. MOE. (2001). English language syllabus. Singapore: Author.Google Scholar
  28. MOE. (2007). 2007 Xiaoxue Huawen kecheng biaozhun [The 2007 syllabus for Chinese Language, Primary]. Singapore: Author.Google Scholar
  29. MOE. (2010). English Language syllabus 2010: Primary & secondary (Express/Normal [Academic]). Singapore: Author. Retrieved from http://www.moe.gov.sg/education/syllabuses/english-language-and-literature/files/english-primary-secondary-express-normal-academic.pdf
  30. Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Kennedy, A. M., & Foy, P. (2007). PIRLS 2006 international report. Boston: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College.Google Scholar
  31. Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Foy, P., & Drucker, K. T. (2012). PIRLS 2011 international results in reading. Boston: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College.Google Scholar
  32. O’Malle, J. M., & Chamot, A. U. (1990). Learning strategies in second language acquisition. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Odlin, T. (1989). Language transfer: Cross-linguistic influence in language learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. OECD. (2010). PISA 2009 results: Executive summary. Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.Google Scholar
  35. Ong, J., & Zhang, L. J. (2010a). Effects of task complexity on the fluency and lexical complexity in EFL students’ argumentative writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 19, 218–233. doi: 10.1016/j.jslw.2010.10.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Ong, K., & Zhang, L. J. (2010b). Metalinguistic filters within the bilingual language faculty: A study of young English-Chinese bilinguals. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 39, 243–272. doi: 10.1007/s10936-009-9137-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Ong, J., & Zhang, L. J. (2013). Effects of the manipulation of cognitive processes on EFL writers’ text quality. TESOL Quarterly, 47, 375–398. doi: 10.1002/tesq.55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.Google Scholar
  39. Oxford, R. L. (2011). Teaching and researching language learning strategies. White Plains: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
  40. Parr, J., & Limbrick, L. (2010). Contextualising practice: Hallmarks of effective teachers of writing. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26, 583–590. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2009.09.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Pressley, M., El-Dinary, P. B., Gaskins, I., Schuder, T., Bergman, J. L., Almasi, J., & Brown, R. (1992). Beyond direct explanation: Transactional instruction of reading comprehension strategies. Elementary School Journal, 92, 513–555. doi: 10.1086/461705.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Rao, Z., Gu, P. Y., Zhang, L. J., & Hu, G. (2007). Reading strategies and approaches to learning of bilingual primary school pupils. Language Awareness, 16, 243–262. doi: 10.2167/la423.0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Rubin, J., Chamot, A. U., Harris, V., & Anderson, N. J. (2007). Intervening in the use of strategies. In A. D. Cohen & E. Macaro (Eds.), Language learner strategies: Thirty years of research and practice (pp. 141–160). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  44. Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. J. (2007). Influencing children’s self-efficacy and self-regulation of reading and writing through modeling. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 23, 7–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Tan, C., & Ng, P. T. (2011). Functional differentiation: A critique of the bilingual policy in Singapore. Journal of Asian Public Policy, 4, 331–341. doi: 10.1080/17516234.2011.630227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  47. Zhang, L. J. (2001). Awareness in reading: EFL students’ metacognitive knowledge of reading strategies in an acquisition-poor environment. Language Awareness, 10, 268–288. doi: 10.1080/09658410108667039.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Zhang, L. J. (2008). Constructivist pedagogy in strategic reading instruction: Exploring pathways to learner development in the English as a second language (ESL) classroom. Instructional Science, 36, 89–116. doi: 10.1007/s11251-007-9025-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Zhang, L. J. (2010a). A dynamic metacognitive systems account of Chinese university students’ knowledge about EFL reading. TESOL Quarterly, 44, 320–353. doi: 10.5054/tq.2010.223352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Zhang, L. J. (2010b). Negotiating language, literacy and identity: A sociocultural perspective on children’s language learning strategies in a multilingual ESL classroom in Singapore. Applied Linguistics Review, 1, 247–270. doi: 10.1515/9783110222654.247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Zhang, L. J. (2013). Second language writing as and for second language learning. Journal of Second Language Writing, 22, 446–477. doi: 10.1016/j.jslw.2013.08.010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Zhang, L. J., & Ben Said, S. (2014). Toward a global understanding of local initiatives in language teaching and language teacher education: Global rules, local roles. In S. Ben Said & L. J. Zhang (Eds.), Language teachers and teaching: Global perspectives, local initiatives (pp. xix–xxx). New York: Routledge Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
  53. Zhang, D. L., & Goh, C. (2006). Strategy knowledge and perceived strategy use: Singaporean students’ awareness of listening and speaking strategies. Language Awareness, 15, 199–218. doi: 10.2167/la342.0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Zhang, L. J., Gu, P. Y., & Hu, G. W. (2008). A cognitive perspective on Singaporean primary school pupils’ use of reading strategies in learning to read in English. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 78, 245–271. doi: 10.1348/000709907X218179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Zhang, L. J., Zhang, D. L., Zeng, Y. J., Gong, W. G., Ang-Tay, M. Y., Kiss, T., Aw, G. P., Chin, C. K., & Choong, K. W. (2012). Enhancing Singaporean students’ efficacy, engagement and self-regulation for more effective bilingual/biliteracy learning. Singapore: Office of Education Research, National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Singapore 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lawrence Jun Zhang
    • 1
    Email author
  • Vahid Aryadoust
    • 2
  • Donglan Zhang
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculty of Education and Social WorkUniversity of AucklandAucklandNew Zealand
  2. 2.Centre for English Language CommunicationNational University of SingaporeSingaporeSingapore

Personalised recommendations