Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
English language academic literacies for employability of Malaysian undergraduate
students
Wahiza Wahi
This thesis is presented for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy at
The University of Western Australia
Graduate School of Education
2012
i
Statement of declaration
I hereby declare that this thesis is a presentation of my original research work and
that it has not been previously submitted for a degree or diploma at any tertiary
education institution. I also certify that, to the best of my knowledge, any help
received and all sources of information used in preparing this thesis have been duly
acknowledged.
A modified version of American Psychological Association (APA 6th
) referencing
style is used in this thesis.
_______________________________
Wahiza Wahi
ii
Abstract
Struggles with unemployment, attributed largely to flawed English language
competence, experienced by graduates of Malaysian universities appear to have been
exacerbated by globalisation. A robust body of research confirms local graduates’
deficiencies in meeting the expectations of prospective employers, but has not explored
the perspectives and experiences of the key stakeholders, namely the students, in
dealing with the English language literacies prior to their recruitment. This study sought
to better comprehend undergraduate students’ perspectives and practices in dealing with
the English language demands of their university program and the expectations of
prospective employers.
The aim of this study was twofold. First, it sought understandings of
undergraduate students’ English language literacies in relation to the demands of the
tertiary education and, eventually, to marketing themselves competitively for
prospective professions. This component investigated English language academic
literacy practices and competencies of students on exit from the required university
English language course. Patterns and dimensions of students’ English language
academic literacy practices and competencies, including their perspectives on the
challenges they endured, were investigated together with educational and environmental
factors influencing their existing level of English competencies. Second, students’
English language literacy practices and competencies at this stage were compared with
prospective employers’ expectations, juxtaposing the students’ English language
practices and competencies with the prospective employers’ benchmarks.
A qualitative case study within the interpretivist paradigm drew on data
primarily from focus group interviews with 21 undergraduates from the Engineering
faculty in a Malaysian public university. Individual interviews with the students, non-
participant classroom observations, field notes and written summary sheets
supplemented the focus group data. These data were contextualized with documentary
resources from students and their teachers. Data from in-depth interviews with 13
Human Resource managers and executives representing various organisations were
supplemented by a questionnaire, official documents and field notes. The data were
subjected to rigorous inductive and iterative analysis.
iii
Key findings centre on the complexities of students’ English language academic
literacies constituting a rich blend of multiple literacy practices, encapsulating a variety
of academic discourses and assorted choices of language use to serve a wide range of
learning purposes at the tertiary level. The findings illustrate the students’ technical
adversities with English and their pessimistic outlook on their marginal academic
literacy practices and competencies in English. The findings contradict the status of
English as a second language within the students’ context. The influence of social
environments embracing school education, the university, social contact and domestic
milieu that constructed and shaped the students’ existing English language literacy
practices and competencies also emerged in this study. The findings demonstrate
significant disparity between the students’ existing English literacy competencies and
prerequisites set by the employers. This study contributes new knowledge and new
dimensions to understanding university students’ predicaments at the intersection of
English language literacies, undergraduate studies, and the struggle for employment.
These outcomes are predominantly beneficial for informing policy makers’ agendas in
producing competent graduates for future local and global workforce.
iv
Acknowledgements
In the name of Allah, The Most Gracious, The Most Merciful
“Thanks to ALLAH the Greatest, for your continuous guidance and for giving me
the strength and perseverance to complete this thesis”
I wish to acknowledge many people who have inspired and supported me in many
different ways throughout this journey of academic endeavour.
My highest gratitude is extended to my supervisors, Professor Marnie O’Neill and
Winthrop Professor Anne Chapman, for their expertise, guidance and dedication. To
Marnie, thank you for your constant comforting words when giving your constructive
comments and accommodating to my needs as a student. To Anne, thank you for your
encouraging words and constant concern about my well being. Both of you are
extraordinary supervisors. I am extremely grateful for your generosity in sharing your
wealth of knowledge and experience with me and for your dedication to teach me the
true sense of research and academic writing. It is indeed a great honour to have this
unforgettable opportunity and experience working with both of you.
My appreciation also goes to the Ministry of Higher Education Malaysia and Universiti
Kebangsaan Malaysia for giving me the opportunity and awarding me the scholarship to
embark on the doctoral degree. A deep gratitude is extended to all participants – the
students, teachers, course coordinators and the employers - for their consent and
involvement in this research. Without the information they shared, their honesty and
generosity, this study would not have been possible. My warmest gratitude is also
extended to the staff at Graduate School of Education, UWA, who had assisted me in
various possible means.
My academic journey would have been a lonely one if it had not been for the fellow
doctoral students and dear friends in Perth who had helped me in one way or another
and shared this splendid experience being together far away from our homeland. I am
particularly grateful to my wonderfully supportive friends, Mazidah and Azwan, for
going the extra miles to provide moral and physical aid in my quest of completing this
journey.
My heartfelt appreciation goes to my loving parents, brothers and sisters, my parents-in-
law and families for their constant prayers and support.
Foremost, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my husband, Zawawi, and my
beautiful children; Haziq, Kamalia and Irdina. I could not find any words that would
possibly describe how much I appreciate your unconditional love, enduring patience,
unwavering support and constant understanding of my preoccupation during the long
hours of working on this thesis. This journey has truly tested our love, courage and
sensibilities. Thank you for believing in me.
v
Dedication
To my everlasting-loving husband:
Zawawi
“Thank you Abang for the sacrifice you made to make this journey possible; it can
never be measured or repaid; but be assured that it will never be forgotten. I can never
make it without your endless love and support. May ALLAH always keep us together in
the world and in the day hereafter.”
To the apples of my eye:
Muhammad Haziq Zaqwan, Kamalia Batrisyia and Irdina Insyirah
“We are all in this together. Thank you for being a wonderful part of my life.”
With love and respect to
My parents: Haji Wahi and Hajjah Azizah
“Thank you Abah and Mak for your constant prayers, words of wisdom, love and
blessing and for providing me with the best of upbringing. These have certainly brought
me this far. Alhamdulillah.”
My parents-in-law: Haji Ab Rahim @ Ismail and Hajjah Rugayah
My siblings and my entire family
“Thank you so much for being so understanding and for assisting me in all possible
ways.”
vi
Table of Contents
STATEMENT OF DECLARATION................................................................................I
ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................. ...II
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ......................................................................................... ...IV
DEDICATION ....................................................................................................... ..........V
TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................ VI
LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES...............................................................................XI
ABBREVIATIONS.......................................................................................................XII
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
1.1 Introduction...............................................................................................................1
1.2 Rationale and Background........................................................................................2
1.3 Aims of the study......................................................................................................9
1.4 Research questions..................................................................................................10
1.5 Definition of terms.................................................... .............................................11
1.6 Overview of the literature.......................................................................................12
1.7 Conceptual framework............................................................................................14
1.8 Theoretical approach...............................................................................................15
1.9 Overview of the research method...........................................................................16
1.10 Overview of the findings........................................................................................17
1.11 Conclusion..............................................................................................................19
vii
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF LITERATURE
2.1 Introduction.............................................................................................................21
2.2 Conceptual framework............................................................................................22
2.2.1 Literacy as social practice...........................................................................22
2.2.2 Learning as a situated activity.....................................................................24
2.3 Academic literacies..................................................................................................26
2.3.1 Situating academic literacies research in higher education………………29
2.3.2 Broadening the contexts for academic literacies…………………………38
2.3.2 Locating the present study…………………………………………….…40
2.4 Employability…………………………………………………………...…….….43
2.4.1 Research on employability and employers' expectations…………………44
2.5 Workplace literacy…………………………………………………………..……47
2.5.1 Research on workplace literacies……………………………………...….49
2.6 Contextual framework……………………………………………………………52
2.6.1 English language education policy in Malaysia……………………..……53
2.6.2 English language in higher education in Malaysia……………………….59
2.6.3 Research on English literacies in higher education………………………63
2.7 Conclusion………………………………………………………………………..68
CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODS
3.1 Introduction………………………………………………………………………69
3.2 Research aims………………………………………………………………….….69
3.2.1 Specific research objectives……………………………………………….70
3.3 Research paradigm…………………………………………………………….….71
3.3.1 Case study method………………………………………………………...73
3.4 Research context………………………………………………………………….75
3.4.1 Sampling…………………………………………………………………..75
3.4.2 The students……………………………………………………………….76
3.4.3 The employers……………………………………………………………..78
3.4.4 The research sites………………………………………………………….79
3.5 Data collection methods………………………………………………………….80
3.5.1 Student data collection……………………………………………………81
3.5.1.1 Focus group interviews…..………………………...…………….81
viii
3.5.1.2 Written summary sheet…………………………………...……...83
3.5.1.3 Individual interviews……………………………………………..84
3.5.1.4 Non-participant observation…………………………………...…85
3.5.1.5 Field notes.…………………………………………………...…...85
3.5.2 Contextual data collection………………………………………………....86
3.5.3 Employer data collection………………………………………………..…87
3.5.3.1 In-depth interviews…………………………………………...…..87
3.5.3.2 Qualitative questionnaire……………………………………....…88
3.5.3.3 Official documents……………………………………………….89
3.6 Data analysis……………………………………………………………………....90
3.7 Research credibility……………………………………………………………….93
3.7.1 Quality assurance……………………………………………………….….93
3.7.2 Addressing reliability……………………………………………………...94
3.7.3 Addressing ethical issues……………………………….…………………94
3.8 Conclusion…………………………………………………….………………….95
CHAPTER FOUR: EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS: STUDENTS' PERSPECTIVES
4.1 Introduction………………………………………………………………………97
4.2 Language competencies……………………………………………………….….99
4.3 Perceived values of English……………………………………………………..101
4.4 Exploring academic literacy practices and competencies…………………….....105
4.4.1 Reading practices………………………………………………………...106
4.4.1.1 Reference materials……………………………………………..107
4.4.1.2 Lecture notes……………………………………………………109
4.4.1.3 Textbooks…………………………………………………….....111
4.4.2 Listening practices………………………………………………..………116
4.4.3 Writing practices………………………………………………………….120
4.4.3.1 Assignment……………………………………………………...121
4.4.3.2 Laboratory report……………………………………………..…123
4.4.3.3 Examination………………………………………………..……125
4.4.3.4 Thesis………………………………………………………...….127
4.4.3.5 Writing difficulties……………………………………………...129
4.4.4 Speaking practices……………………………………………………..…133
4.4.4.1 Oral presentations……………………………………………….134
ix
4.4.4.2 Group discussion……………………………………………..…136
4.4.4.3 Speaking predicaments………………………………………….138
4.5 Level of linguistic competence……………………………………………..……142
4.6 Level of communicative competence…….……………………………….…..…146
4.7 Lacking in confidence…………………………………………………………...150
4.8 Factors contributing to the perceived deficit in English………………….….......154
4.8.1 English is viewed as a foreign language………………………………….155
4.8.2 Insubstantial English foundation at schools………………………..…….156
4.8.3 Unsupportive teachers………………………………………………...….161
4.8.4 Influence from friends………………………………………………...….163
4.8.5 Restricted home practices………………………………………………...164
4.9 The aid provided by the university milieu…………………..…………………...165
4.9.1 English language courses offered for the students…………………...…..169
4.9.1.1 Foundation English…………………………..………………….171
4.9.1.2 Perceived values of Foundation English course………...………171
4.9.1.3 English for Engineering……………………………………...….173
4.9.1.4 Perceived values of English for Engineering course…………....174
4.9.1.5 English Speaking Zone……………………………………….....177
4.10 Summary and Conclusion…………………………………………………...….179
CHAPTER FIVE: EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS: EMPLOYERS' PERSPECTIVES
AND EXPECTATIONS
5.1 Introduction………………………………………………………….…………..182
5.2 Recruitment procedures………………………………………………………….183
5.3 Employers' perspectives on the English language competencies of
local graduates………………………………………………………………..….186
5.4 Employers' perspectives on local universities' preparation of local graduates
for the workforce…………………………………………………..…………….191
5.5 Employers' expectations of prospective recruits………………………………...193
5.5.1 English language competencies…………………………………….….…194
5.5.2 English language workplace literacy……………………………………..195
5.5.2.1 Speaking practices………………………………………...…….196
5.5.2.2 Listening practices……………………………………………....197
5.5.2.3 Reading practices………………………………………..………198
5.5.2.4 Writing practices……………………………………………...…199
x
5.5.2.5 Language accuracy……………………………………………...200
5.6 Summary and Conclusion…………………………………………………… .…202
CHAPTER SIX: DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS
6.1 Introduction…………………………………………………………………..….204
6.2 The complexities of students' academic literacies……………………………….205
6.3 The multiplicity of language use…………………………………………...……209
6.4 Students' English language academic literacy competencies……………………211
6.5 English as a Second Language (ESL): Stretching the term………………..……219
6.6 Ways forward: Surviving the academic endeavour……………………………..223
6.7 The impact of membership of various communities…………………………….225
6.8 The impact of school on the construction of English language literacy………...229
6.9 Juxtaposing students' English competencies with employers' expectations…….231
6.10 Conflict of interest……………………………………………………………....239
6.11 Summary and Conclusion………………….……………………………………245
CHAPTER SEVEN: CONCLUSION
7.1 Introduction…………………………………………………………………...…247
7.2 Overview of the study…………………………………………………………...247
7.2.1 Research aims………………………………………………………….…248
7.2.2 Research design…………………………………………………………..248
7.2.3 Research findings…………………………………………..………….…249
7.2.4 Research parameters……………………………………………….….….253
7.3 Substantial and original contribution to knowledge……………………………..254
7.4 Implications……………………………………………………………...………256
7.4.1 Implications for future research…………………………………………..256
7.4.2 Implications for policy and practice…………………………………...…257
7.5 Conclusion………………………………………………………………...……..261
BIBLIOGRAPHY……………………………………………………………….……262
APPENDICES…………………………………………………………………….…..278
xi
List of figures and tables
Table 1.1 - MUET results from Year 2006-2008.............................................6
Figure 1.1 - Conceptual framework for this thesis..........................................15
Figure 3.1 - Overview of the research paradigm.............................................75
Figure 3.2 - Outline of the data collection methods........................................89
Figure 4.1 - Overview of Chapter Four...........................................................99
Table 4.1 - Ranked language proficiency in Malay language......................100
Table 4.2 - Ranked language proficiency in English language....................100
Table 4.3 - The English language skills that are useful in students’
present studies............................................................................103
Table 4.4 - Relevant comments on reading practices..................................107
Table 4.5 - Summary of findings on reading practices................................116
Table 4.6 - Language used in students’listening practices...........................118
Table 4.7 - Relevant remarks on students’ writing practices.......................120
Table 4.8 - Summary of students’ writing practices....................................133
Table 4.9 - Summary of students’ speaking practices.................................142
Table 4.10 - Relevant excerpts on factors contributing to the deficit in
English.......................................................................................154
Table 4.11 - Relevant quotes on students’ preferences and indifferences.....177
Figure 5.1 - Overview of Chapter Five.........................................................183
Table 5.1 - Recruitment procedures.............................................................186
xii
Table 5.2 - Relevant comments on recruitment criteria...............................193
Table 5.3 - The importance of the English language competencies
perceived by employers.............................................................195
Table 5.4 - Situations where speaking skills in English language are
most required.............................................................................196
Table 5.5 - Situations where listening skills in English language are
most required.............................................................................197
Table 5.6 - Situations where reading skills in English language are
most required.............................................................................198
Table 5.7 - Situations where writing skills in English language are
most required........... .................................................................199
Table 5.8 - Language accuracy as perceived by employers.........................201
Figure 6.1 - Summary of findings of students' academic literacy
practices and competencies.......................................................232
Figure 6.2 - Summary of findings of employers' benchmark for
workplace literacy practices......................................................232
Figure 6.3 - The discrepancy between students' competencies
and employers' expectations......................................................233
Figure 6.4 - The interconnections between students' English language
competencies and prospective employers' expectations............239
xiii
Abbreviations
BM Bahasa Melayu (Malay Language)
CGPA Cumulative Grade Point Average
EAP English for Academic Purposes
EFL English as a Foreign Language
EPT English Proficiency Test
ESL English as a Second Language
ESP English for Specific Purposes
ESZ English Speaking Zone
ETeMS English for the Teaching of Mathematics and Science
E4E English for Engineering
FE Foundation English
GLC Government Linked Companies
ICT Information and Communication Technology
KBSM Kurikulum Bersepadu Sekolah Menengah (Intergrated Secondary
Schools Curriculum)
KBSR Kurikulum Baru Sekolah Rendah (New Primary Schools Curriculum)
L1 First Language
L2 Second Language
MEF Malaysian Employment Federation
MoE Ministry of Education
MoHE Ministry of Higher Education
MUET Malaysian University English Test
NLS New Literacy Studies
NNSE Non-native speaker of English
SES Socio-economic status
STPM Sijil Tinggi Persekolahan Malaysia (Malaysian Highest School
Certificate)
SPM Sijil Pelajaran Malaysia (Malaysian Certificate of Education)
TESL Teaching English as a Second Language
TESOL Teaching of English to Speakers of Other Languages
Q&A Question and Answer
i
Statement of declaration
I hereby declare that this thesis is a presentation of my original research work and
that it has not been previously submitted for a degree or diploma at any tertiary
education institution. I also certify that, to the best of my knowledge, any help
received and all sources of information used in preparing this thesis have been duly
acknowledged.
A modified version of American Psychological Association (APA 6th
) referencing
style is used in this thesis.
_______________________________
Wahiza Wahi
ii
Abstract
Struggles with unemployment, attributed largely to flawed English language
competence, experienced by graduates of Malaysian universities appear to have been
exacerbated by globalisation. A robust body of research confirms local graduates’
deficiencies in meeting the expectations of prospective employers, but has not explored
the perspectives and experiences of the key stakeholders, namely the students, in
dealing with the English language literacies prior to their recruitment. This study sought
to better comprehend undergraduate students’ perspectives and practices in dealing with
the English language demands of their university program and the expectations of
prospective employers.
The aim of this study was twofold. First, it sought understandings of
undergraduate students’ English language literacies in relation to the demands of the
tertiary education and, eventually, to marketing themselves competitively for
prospective professions. This component investigated English language academic
literacy practices and competencies of students on exit from the required university
English language course. Patterns and dimensions of students’ English language
academic literacy practices and competencies, including their perspectives on the
challenges they endured, were investigated together with educational and environmental
factors influencing their existing level of English competencies. Second, students’
English language literacy practices and competencies at this stage were compared with
prospective employers’ expectations, juxtaposing the students’ English language
practices and competencies with the prospective employers’ benchmarks.
A qualitative case study within the interpretivist paradigm drew on data
primarily from focus group interviews with 21 undergraduates from the Engineering
faculty in a Malaysian public university. Individual interviews with the students, non-
participant classroom observations, field notes and written summary sheets
supplemented the focus group data. These data were contextualized with documentary
resources from students and their teachers. Data from in-depth interviews with 13
Human Resource managers and executives representing various organisations were
supplemented by a questionnaire, official documents and field notes. The data were
subjected to rigorous inductive and iterative analysis.
iii
Key findings centre on the complexities of students’ English language academic
literacies constituting a rich blend of multiple literacy practices, encapsulating a variety
of academic discourses and assorted choices of language use to serve a wide range of
learning purposes at the tertiary level. The findings illustrate the students’ technical
adversities with English and their pessimistic outlook on their marginal academic
literacy practices and competencies in English. The findings contradict the status of
English as a second language within the students’ context. The influence of social
environments embracing school education, the university, social contact and domestic
milieu that constructed and shaped the students’ existing English language literacy
practices and competencies also emerged in this study. The findings demonstrate
significant disparity between the students’ existing English literacy competencies and
prerequisites set by the employers. This study contributes new knowledge and new
dimensions to understanding university students’ predicaments at the intersection of
English language literacies, undergraduate studies, and the struggle for employment.
These outcomes are predominantly beneficial for informing policy makers’ agendas in
producing competent graduates for future local and global workforce.
iv
Acknowledgements
In the name of Allah, The Most Gracious, The Most Merciful
“Thanks to ALLAH the Greatest, for your continuous guidance and for giving me
the strength and perseverance to complete this thesis”
I wish to acknowledge many people who have inspired and supported me in many
different ways throughout this journey of academic endeavour.
My highest gratitude is extended to my supervisors, Professor Marnie O’Neill and
Winthrop Professor Anne Chapman, for their expertise, guidance and dedication. To
Marnie, thank you for your constant comforting words when giving your constructive
comments and accommodating to my needs as a student. To Anne, thank you for your
encouraging words and constant concern about my well being. Both of you are
extraordinary supervisors. I am extremely grateful for your generosity in sharing your
wealth of knowledge and experience with me and for your dedication to teach me the
true sense of research and academic writing. It is indeed a great honour to have this
unforgettable opportunity and experience working with both of you.
My appreciation also goes to the Ministry of Higher Education Malaysia and Universiti
Kebangsaan Malaysia for giving me the opportunity and awarding me the scholarship to
embark on the doctoral degree. A deep gratitude is extended to all participants – the
students, teachers, course coordinators and the employers - for their consent and
involvement in this research. Without the information they shared, their honesty and
generosity, this study would not have been possible. My warmest gratitude is also
extended to the staff at Graduate School of Education, UWA, who had assisted me in
various possible means.
My academic journey would have been a lonely one if it had not been for the fellow
doctoral students and dear friends in Perth who had helped me in one way or another
and shared this splendid experience being together far away from our homeland. I am
particularly grateful to my wonderfully supportive friends, Mazidah and Azwan, for
going the extra miles to provide moral and physical aid in my quest of completing this
journey.
My heartfelt appreciation goes to my loving parents, brothers and sisters, my parents-in-
law and families for their constant prayers and support.
Foremost, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my husband, Zawawi, and my
beautiful children; Haziq, Kamalia and Irdina. I could not find any words that would
possibly describe how much I appreciate your unconditional love, enduring patience,
unwavering support and constant understanding of my preoccupation during the long
hours of working on this thesis. This journey has truly tested our love, courage and
sensibilities. Thank you for believing in me.
v
Dedication
To my everlasting-loving husband:
Zawawi
“Thank you Abang for the sacrifice you made to make this journey possible; it can
never be measured or repaid; but be assured that it will never be forgotten. I can never
make it without your endless love and support. May ALLAH always keep us together in
the world and in the day hereafter.”
To the apples of my eye:
Muhammad Haziq Zaqwan, Kamalia Batrisyia and Irdina Insyirah
“We are all in this together. Thank you for being a wonderful part of my life.”
With love and respect to
My parents: Haji Wahi and Hajjah Azizah
“Thank you Abah and Mak for your constant prayers, words of wisdom, love and
blessing and for providing me with the best of upbringing. These have certainly brought
me this far. Alhamdulillah.”
My parents-in-law: Haji Ab Rahim @ Ismail and Hajjah Rugayah
My siblings and my entire family
“Thank you so much for being so understanding and for assisting me in all possible
ways.”
vi
Table of Contents
STATEMENT OF DECLARATION................................................................................I
ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................. ...II
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ......................................................................................... ...IV
DEDICATION ....................................................................................................... ..........V
TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................ VI
LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES...............................................................................XI
ABBREVIATIONS.......................................................................................................XII
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
1.1 Introduction...............................................................................................................1
1.2 Rationale and Background........................................................................................2
1.3 Aims of the study......................................................................................................9
1.4 Research questions..................................................................................................10
1.5 Definition of terms.................................................... .............................................11
1.6 Overview of the literature.......................................................................................12
1.7 Conceptual framework............................................................................................14
1.8 Theoretical approach...............................................................................................15
1.9 Overview of the research method...........................................................................16
1.10 Overview of the findings........................................................................................17
1.11 Conclusion..............................................................................................................19
vii
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF LITERATURE
2.1 Introduction.............................................................................................................21
2.2 Conceptual framework............................................................................................22
2.2.1 Literacy as social practice...........................................................................22
2.2.2 Learning as a situated activity.....................................................................24
2.3 Academic literacies..................................................................................................26
2.3.1 Situating academic literacies research in higher education………………29
2.3.2 Broadening the contexts for academic literacies…………………………38
2.3.2 Locating the present study…………………………………………….…40
2.4 Employability…………………………………………………………...…….….43
2.4.1 Research on employability and employers' expectations…………………44
2.5 Workplace literacy…………………………………………………………..……47
2.5.1 Research on workplace literacies……………………………………...….49
2.6 Contextual framework……………………………………………………………52
2.6.1 English language education policy in Malaysia……………………..……53
2.6.2 English language in higher education in Malaysia……………………….59
2.6.3 Research on English literacies in higher education………………………63
2.7 Conclusion………………………………………………………………………..68
CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODS
3.1 Introduction………………………………………………………………………69
3.2 Research aims………………………………………………………………….….69
3.2.1 Specific research objectives……………………………………………….70
3.3 Research paradigm…………………………………………………………….….71
3.3.1 Case study method………………………………………………………...73
3.4 Research context………………………………………………………………….75
3.4.1 Sampling…………………………………………………………………..75
3.4.2 The students……………………………………………………………….76
3.4.3 The employers……………………………………………………………..78
3.4.4 The research sites………………………………………………………….79
3.5 Data collection methods………………………………………………………….80
3.5.1 Student data collection……………………………………………………81
3.5.1.1 Focus group interviews…..………………………...…………….81
viii
3.5.1.2 Written summary sheet…………………………………...……...83
3.5.1.3 Individual interviews……………………………………………..84
3.5.1.4 Non-participant observation…………………………………...…85
3.5.1.5 Field notes.…………………………………………………...…...85
3.5.2 Contextual data collection………………………………………………....86
3.5.3 Employer data collection………………………………………………..…87
3.5.3.1 In-depth interviews…………………………………………...…..87
3.5.3.2 Qualitative questionnaire……………………………………....…88
3.5.3.3 Official documents……………………………………………….89
3.6 Data analysis……………………………………………………………………....90
3.7 Research credibility……………………………………………………………….93
3.7.1 Quality assurance……………………………………………………….….93
3.7.2 Addressing reliability……………………………………………………...94
3.7.3 Addressing ethical issues……………………………….…………………94
3.8 Conclusion…………………………………………………….………………….95
CHAPTER FOUR: EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS: STUDENTS' PERSPECTIVES
4.1 Introduction………………………………………………………………………97
4.2 Language competencies……………………………………………………….….99
4.3 Perceived values of English……………………………………………………..101
4.4 Exploring academic literacy practices and competencies…………………….....105
4.4.1 Reading practices………………………………………………………...106
4.4.1.1 Reference materials……………………………………………..107
4.4.1.2 Lecture notes……………………………………………………109
4.4.1.3 Textbooks…………………………………………………….....111
4.4.2 Listening practices………………………………………………..………116
4.4.3 Writing practices………………………………………………………….120
4.4.3.1 Assignment……………………………………………………...121
4.4.3.2 Laboratory report……………………………………………..…123
4.4.3.3 Examination………………………………………………..……125
4.4.3.4 Thesis………………………………………………………...….127
4.4.3.5 Writing difficulties……………………………………………...129
4.4.4 Speaking practices……………………………………………………..…133
4.4.4.1 Oral presentations……………………………………………….134
ix
4.4.4.2 Group discussion……………………………………………..…136
4.4.4.3 Speaking predicaments………………………………………….138
4.5 Level of linguistic competence……………………………………………..……142
4.6 Level of communicative competence…….……………………………….…..…146
4.7 Lacking in confidence…………………………………………………………...150
4.8 Factors contributing to the perceived deficit in English………………….….......154
4.8.1 English is viewed as a foreign language………………………………….155
4.8.2 Insubstantial English foundation at schools………………………..…….156
4.8.3 Unsupportive teachers………………………………………………...….161
4.8.4 Influence from friends………………………………………………...….163
4.8.5 Restricted home practices………………………………………………...164
4.9 The aid provided by the university milieu…………………..…………………...165
4.9.1 English language courses offered for the students…………………...…..169
4.9.1.1 Foundation English…………………………..………………….171
4.9.1.2 Perceived values of Foundation English course………...………171
4.9.1.3 English for Engineering……………………………………...….173
4.9.1.4 Perceived values of English for Engineering course…………....174
4.9.1.5 English Speaking Zone……………………………………….....177
4.10 Summary and Conclusion…………………………………………………...….179
CHAPTER FIVE: EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS: EMPLOYERS' PERSPECTIVES
AND EXPECTATIONS
5.1 Introduction………………………………………………………….…………..182
5.2 Recruitment procedures………………………………………………………….183
5.3 Employers' perspectives on the English language competencies of
local graduates………………………………………………………………..….186
5.4 Employers' perspectives on local universities' preparation of local graduates
for the workforce…………………………………………………..…………….191
5.5 Employers' expectations of prospective recruits………………………………...193
5.5.1 English language competencies…………………………………….….…194
5.5.2 English language workplace literacy……………………………………..195
5.5.2.1 Speaking practices………………………………………...…….196
5.5.2.2 Listening practices……………………………………………....197
5.5.2.3 Reading practices………………………………………..………198
5.5.2.4 Writing practices……………………………………………...…199
x
5.5.2.5 Language accuracy……………………………………………...200
5.6 Summary and Conclusion…………………………………………………… .…202
CHAPTER SIX: DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS
6.1 Introduction…………………………………………………………………..….204
6.2 The complexities of students' academic literacies……………………………….205
6.3 The multiplicity of language use…………………………………………...……209
6.4 Students' English language academic literacy competencies……………………211
6.5 English as a Second Language (ESL): Stretching the term………………..……219
6.6 Ways forward: Surviving the academic endeavour……………………………..223
6.7 The impact of membership of various communities…………………………….225
6.8 The impact of school on the construction of English language literacy………...229
6.9 Juxtaposing students' English competencies with employers' expectations…….231
6.10 Conflict of interest……………………………………………………………....239
6.11 Summary and Conclusion………………….……………………………………245
CHAPTER SEVEN: CONCLUSION
7.1 Introduction…………………………………………………………………...…247
7.2 Overview of the study…………………………………………………………...247
7.2.1 Research aims………………………………………………………….…248
7.2.2 Research design…………………………………………………………..248
7.2.3 Research findings…………………………………………..………….…249
7.2.4 Research parameters……………………………………………….….….253
7.3 Substantial and original contribution to knowledge……………………………..254
7.4 Implications……………………………………………………………...………256
7.4.1 Implications for future research…………………………………………..256
7.4.2 Implications for policy and practice…………………………………...…257
7.5 Conclusion………………………………………………………………...……..261
BIBLIOGRAPHY……………………………………………………………….……262
APPENDICES…………………………………………………………………….…..278
xi
List of figures and tables
Table 1.1 - MUET results from Year 2006-2008.............................................6
Figure 1.1 - Conceptual framework for this thesis..........................................15
Figure 3.1 - Overview of the research paradigm.............................................75
Figure 3.2 - Outline of the data collection methods........................................89
Figure 4.1 - Overview of Chapter Four...........................................................99
Table 4.1 - Ranked language proficiency in Malay language......................100
Table 4.2 - Ranked language proficiency in English language....................100
Table 4.3 - The English language skills that are useful in students’
present studies............................................................................103
Table 4.4 - Relevant comments on reading practices..................................107
Table 4.5 - Summary of findings on reading practices................................116
Table 4.6 - Language used in students’listening practices...........................118
Table 4.7 - Relevant remarks on students’ writing practices.......................120
Table 4.8 - Summary of students’ writing practices....................................133
Table 4.9 - Summary of students’ speaking practices.................................142
Table 4.10 - Relevant excerpts on factors contributing to the deficit in
English.......................................................................................154
Table 4.11 - Relevant quotes on students’ preferences and indifferences.....177
Figure 5.1 - Overview of Chapter Five.........................................................183
Table 5.1 - Recruitment procedures.............................................................186
xii
Table 5.2 - Relevant comments on recruitment criteria...............................193
Table 5.3 - The importance of the English language competencies
perceived by employers.............................................................195
Table 5.4 - Situations where speaking skills in English language are
most required.............................................................................196
Table 5.5 - Situations where listening skills in English language are
most required.............................................................................197
Table 5.6 - Situations where reading skills in English language are
most required.............................................................................198
Table 5.7 - Situations where writing skills in English language are
most required........... .................................................................199
Table 5.8 - Language accuracy as perceived by employers.........................201
Figure 6.1 - Summary of findings of students' academic literacy
practices and competencies.......................................................232
Figure 6.2 - Summary of findings of employers' benchmark for
workplace literacy practices......................................................232
Figure 6.3 - The discrepancy between students' competencies
and employers' expectations......................................................233
Figure 6.4 - The interconnections between students' English language
competencies and prospective employers' expectations............239
xiii
Abbreviations
BM Bahasa Melayu (Malay Language)
CGPA Cumulative Grade Point Average
EAP English for Academic Purposes
EFL English as a Foreign Language
EPT English Proficiency Test
ESL English as a Second Language
ESP English for Specific Purposes
ESZ English Speaking Zone
ETeMS English for the Teaching of Mathematics and Science
E4E English for Engineering
FE Foundation English
GLC Government Linked Companies
ICT Information and Communication Technology
KBSM Kurikulum Bersepadu Sekolah Menengah (Intergrated Secondary
Schools Curriculum)
KBSR Kurikulum Baru Sekolah Rendah (New Primary Schools Curriculum)
L1 First Language
L2 Second Language
MEF Malaysian Employment Federation
MoE Ministry of Education
MoHE Ministry of Higher Education
MUET Malaysian University English Test
NLS New Literacy Studies
NNSE Non-native speaker of English
SES Socio-economic status
STPM Sijil Tinggi Persekolahan Malaysia (Malaysian Highest School
Certificate)
SPM Sijil Pelajaran Malaysia (Malaysian Certificate of Education)
TESL Teaching English as a Second Language
TESOL Teaching of English to Speakers of Other Languages
Q&A Question and Answer
xiv
1
1
Chapter One
Introduction
1.1 Introduction
Radical changes linked to globalisation, economic development and
communication technologies have led to a paradigm shift in the expectations of
employment and social life. As a result of globalisation, including a growing
interdependence among nations and information technology, the shift towards
knowledge creation, production and dissemination is seen as a more important capital
investment than physical capital in developing countries like Malaysia (Kaur et al.,
2008). Inevitably, this has significant repercussions for the development of education as
well.
In the context of rapid expansion of science and technologies and the strong
forces of the global market, the education industry has undergone gradual reformation
to suit current expectations. In Malaysia, educating people as human resources has
become the integral element in realising the government‟s vision, enshrined in the
policy Vision 2020, of achieving status as a developed and industrialised nation by the
year 2020 (Mohamad, 2011). Being a young and fast developing country, Malaysia
faces numerous demands in fulfilling her society‟s need for a highly trained workforce
within today‟s knowledge-based economy (k-economy), which emphasises the
2
importance of knowledge-based education and human capital development (Mustapha
& Abdullah, 2004). Essentially, higher education institutions are the most crucial
entities responsible for the creation and dissemination of knowledge whilst being the
centre of science, scholarship and the new knowledge economies (Altbach, 2007).
Added to these responsibilities are tremendous expectations on higher education
institutions to produce highly skilled and knowledgeable graduates with
communicative, creative and critical abilities to meet the demands of current
employment scenarios.
Integral to these expectations is the extensive use of the English language as a
global language and the main medium of communication. Hence, literacy in the English
language is an imperative ingredient cultivated in the higher education agenda to
educate and produce young Malaysians as potential human resources to fulfill the needs
of the local and international workforce.
1.2 Rationale and Background
Given the challenges facing the higher education institutions in Malaysia, there is
strong justification for this study. First, a discrepancy between the industry needs and
the manner in which university students are being prepared for the workforce is
currently observable in the country. In 2004, the Ministry of Education (MoE) and the
Ministry of Higher Education (MoHE) went through a major restructuring to upgrade
the capability of the education system to produce human capital of high quality, capable
of competing and persevering in the international arena. The former Prime Minister of
Malaysia, Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi announced that this restructuring was a
consequence of the rapid social, political and economic changes occurring in the 21st
century. To use his words,
3
However, what we now have to ask ourselves is whether the quality of
our education system has moved in tandem with its growth in quantity:
whether the younger generation passing through our national education
system is adequately equipped to thrive in an increasingly global and
competitive environment. I believe we will need nothing less than an
„education revolution‟ to ensure that our aspirations to instil a new
performance culture in the public and private sectors are not crippled by
our inability to nurture a new kind of human capital that is equal to the
tasks and challenges ahead (http://www.pmo.gov.my, 2007).
Despite the government‟s effort to improve the quality of higher education in the
country, it is alarming to discover that many graduates are unable to meet the
expectations of potential employers in the corporate world after spending three to four
years in tertiary institutions. The Committee to Study, Review and Make
Recommendations Concerning the Development of Higher Education in Malaysia
appointed by the Ministry of Higher Education in 2006 reported that;
The Committee cannot but agree that there exists some inefficiency or
weakness in the education system which has contributed to the inability
of these graduates, who have successfully completed their coursework, to
find suitable employment and make successful transitions into the
workforce. Therefore, the committee feels that there is a strong need to
examine the school system, tertiary education, the curriculum, and the
teaching-learning methodology to find ways to address this issue (p. 11,
my emphasis).
In line with the above and the current concerns over the quality of education at the
higher institutions in Malaysia, it is imperative to find out the underlying factors
contributing to the undergraduate students‟ inadequacies in order to bridge the gap
between the competencies of graduates and demands of the workforce.
Second, the prevailing reports and remarks on the abundant number of students
graduating from public universities with very poor communication skills in English
each year requires further investigation. Global forces dictate that to be able to compete
in the international market and to adapt to different work demands and requirements,
knowledge of English language is an advantage for graduates. Inevitably, English
4
proficiency is significantly important as more business dealings and transactions are
conducted in English. In fact, English has become a global language, increasingly
necessary for international intelligibility and information management (Crystal, 1997),
especially in business, science, diplomacy, information communication technology
(ICT) and organisations with an international orientation. In addition, it is largely
acknowledged that English is widely used as a medium of communication in
professional settings in Malaysia. It is important to note that competency in English
language is one of the major qualities targeted by Malaysian employers as it is an
indicator of prospective employees‟ abilities to express themselves and to elaborate on
their knowledge, skills and abilities especially during an interview. New graduates are
expected to have the ability to communicate well in English to contribute effectively to
the business especially in international corporations operating in an English language
milieu. The ability of graduates to communicate effectively in English acts as a
differentiator which significantly determines their employability (Abdul Razak et al.,
2007; Koo et al., Sarudin et al., Sirat et al., 2008). More importantly, the Malaysian
Employment Federation (MEF) highlights that new graduates are expected to “present
ideas clearly during meetings and discussions alongside the ability to write letters,
reports and memorandum” (Bardan 2007, p. 14). Concurrently, prospective employers
expect the graduates to be competent in their discipline area in all modes of English
language as well as socially and professionally competent in speaking and listening.
In spite of the expectations stated above, it has been discovered that many local
graduates have poor command of English. Many leading academicians and employers
in public and private sectors in the nation have pointed out that local graduates lack
voice. They are not capable of competing at international level or making themselves
marketable after graduation due to limited language proficiency (Koo et al., ibid;
Yaacob et al., 2005; Yunus, 2007). Indeed, employers are generally discontented with
5
graduates‟ levels of English, limited general knowledge and poor demonstration of
problem-solving skills (Abdul Razak et al., 2006; Zulkefli, 2007). Most prospective
employers and educationists alike have brought up the issue that local graduates are
unable to communicate effectively during interviews despite having impressive
academic credentials.
In Malaysia, tertiary students are required to sit for the Malaysian University
English Test (MUET), which is an English language proficiency test prior to public
universities‟ admissions. The test is set and run by the Malaysian Examinations
Council. Preparation for the test is intended to equip students with the appropriate level
of proficiency in English to enable them to perform effectively in their academic
pursuits at tertiary level. Generally, it also seeks to bridge the gap in language needs
between secondary and tertiary education by enhancing communicative competence, by
providing the context for language use that is related to tertiary academic experience
and by developing critical thinking through the competent use of language skills.
Nevertheless, in 2006, it was discovered that 65.1% of the unemployed graduates had
obtained Band 1 while 54.1% unemployed graduates graduated with Band 2 in the
MUET which identifies them as an “extremely limited user” and “limited user”
respectively (Wok et al., 2007). The description of the MUET score is presented in
Appendix 1. This brings into question the effectiveness of the language courses offered
at the universities and whether or not the graduates, especially those with MUET Band
1 and 2, benefited from the language courses offered at the higher education institutions.
In January 2007, the issues of the English language proficiency of Malaysian
university students hit the headlines in a number of newspapers when the former
Minister of Higher Education, Datuk Mustapha Mohamed, stated that based on the
preliminary findings of the MUET result, one-third or 29 percent of 120,000 of pre-
university students who had gained entrance into university came into Band 1 or 2
6
(Atan, 2007). According to the Minister, this scenario could not be ignored as the
figure was „too high‟, and it is a contributing factor to the employability struggles in the
country (Chapman, 2007). Apparently, the annual report produced by the Ministry of
Education indicated that the number of students who scored Band 1 and 2 accelerated
from more than 45% in 2006 to more than 50% in 2008. Table 1.1 illustrates the MUET
results in 2006 to 2008.
Source: Ministry of Education annual report 2006-2008
Another important factor underpinning this study is the disparity of employment
rates between graduates from public and private universities in Malaysia. Available
statistics revealed that the number of unemployed graduates from public universities
stands around 70% and private universities at around 20% (Zulkefli, ibid). This is not
surprising as English is widely used in most private universities as their medium of
instruction. Conversely, the figures stated above have created tremendous pressure on
public universities to produce employable graduates.
2006 2007 2008
Band 1 13.55 13.39 16.38
Band 2 33.57 38.81 37.23
Band 3 37.53 34.53 33.78
Band 4 13.2 11.53 11.3
Band 5 2.11 1.69 1.31
Band 6 0.05 0.04 0.01
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%
100%
Per
cen
tage
Table 1.1 : MUET results from year 2006-2008
7
The impetus for the conduct of the present study is the alarming fact concerning
the deficiencies in English experienced by a substantial number of university students
despite the dominant role of English as the leading language of academic publications,
communication and technologies at tertiary institutions. Several studies have revealed
that most Malaysian university students have poor command of English and that they
are not able to perform efficiently at the universities (Koo et al., 2008; Muhammad,
2007; Yaacob et al., 2005; Yunus, 2007). Muhammad (ibid) highlights that the levels
of proficiency in English among tertiary students are so low that they are not able to
read academic texts efficiently. Indeed, very few read enough English written materials
and use English when interacting with their peers. In the early 1980s, Omar (1987)
stated that the proficiency attained at the school level was not sufficient to make
university students effective readers, hence the need for proficiency classes at the
university level. Almost two decades later, Mohamad & Mohd Noor (2001, p.105)
found that “… by the time they enter university, Malaysian students usually have
completed 11 years of English classes, yet most are unable to carry on simple
conversations or write sentences free of basic grammatical errors”.
In reality, tertiary students‟ levels of English language and their proficiencies are
known to be diverse. This is ubiquitous specifically in the context of diverse
multilingual, educational and environmental backgrounds of Malaysian students.
Therefore, it is also significant to consider the sociological factors and the vast range of
linguistic abilities of the students at tertiary level. At one end of the continuum, there
are some groups of students, although a small minority, from urban, English-speaking
homes. At the other, there are students from rural areas with very limited exposure to
the English language and whose language at home is their own mother tongue (Wong,
1998). Pillay (1998) for instance, found disparities in the levels of competence amongst
students by socio-economic status (SES) and between urban and rural areas. She stated
8
that students who displayed a high level of competence tended to come from higher
SES groups and have a greater exposure to English outside the classroom whilst those
who displayed lower levels of competence tended to come either from rural schools
where exposure to English is limited or from low socio-economic groups in urban areas.
The New Sunday Times (Oct. 8, 2006) reported that most unemployed graduates in 2006
were Malays from lower-income families who lacked command of the English
language.
It is apparent that the issues highlighted above indicate significant relationships
between employability problems and deficiencies in English language literacies of the
Malaysian university students. A clear disparity exists between the actual performance
of the undergraduate students pertaining to their English language literacy and
competencies and the demands of the English language and literacy in the academic and
workforce worlds. Therefore, it is crucial to investigate the students‟ inadequacies in
order to bridge this gap. It is indeed an important matter to be addressed urgently.
Although there are several related studies concerning employers‟ expectations of
potential graduates, academics‟ perspectives on undergraduates and students‟
perceptions of employment, there is little research that has investigated English
language academic literacy of students at higher education institutions through the
lenses of the key stakeholders, namely the students themselves. It is important to
explore their perspectives so as to develop substantial understanding of their
predicaments with the language.
The present study focuses on a close analysis of students‟ perspectives of their
English language academic literacy practices and competencies upon completion of the
compulsory English courses at a public university. The main emphasis was to
investigate the problems concerning undergraduate students‟ deficiency in the English
language, specifically focusing on their academic literacy practices and competencies
9
upon completing their English language course at the university. Additionally, the
students‟ level of practices and competencies was compared with the current
expectations of prospective employers. Even though the conceptual framework
employed in this study suggests that there is unlikely to be a direct comparison between
the educational and professional domain, this study sought the perspectives of the
employers to gauge whether there is a match or disconnection between the students‟ and
the employers‟ point of view. It is essential to highlight the connection between
literacies and the world of work which has emerged as a key issue in higher education in
the past few years in Malaysia (Pandian, 2008). In essence, the present study adds an
important dimension to the study of English language literacies in Malaysia by drawing
in attention to the undergraduate students on their English language academic literacies
in the quest to meet the expectations of their academic settings and subsequently, to be
able to market themselves and meet the requirements of potential employment.
1.3 Aims of the study
The aim of this study was twofold. First, it intended to develop substantial
understanding of the English language academic literacy practices and competencies of
a group of Engineering students at a public university in by focusing on their
perspectives as the key stakeholders. This component explored the existing academic
literacy practices and competencies of the students at the exit point of completing two
compulsory English language courses, Foundation English (FE) and English for
Engineering (E4E); and it also identified the features of the academic environment and
English language proficiency that influenced the students‟ practices and competencies.
It was important to examine the students‟ English language academic literacy practices
and competencies at this stage as there was minimal exposure to the English language
for some students following the completion of these courses towards their final year of
study. The students‟ contact with the English language was then restricted to the
10
lectures which were carried out either exclusively in English or in a combination of
English and Malay language, with some requirements to conduct references in English
and a major prerequisite of thesis-writing in the Malay language. Second, this study
examined whether the students‟ English language literacy practices and competencies at
that stage meet the required expectations of prospective employers. This was achieved
by measuring students‟ existing level of practices and competencies against the
prospective employers‟ benchmarks for English language proficiency.
1.4 Research questions
The central research question addressed by this study was:
How does one Malaysian public university prepare its undergraduate students to meet
prospective employer expectations of English language proficiency?
Specifically, this study sought the answers to the following questions:
1. What are the academic literacy practices and competencies of the students at the
exit point of their English language course?
2. What are the perspectives of the students on their English literacy practices and
competencies?
3. Does English language proficiency of the students upon completing the English
language course influence their academic literacy practices and competencies?
4. How does the university environment support the development of these practices
and competencies?
5. To what extent do students‟ academic literacy practices and competencies in the
English language upon completing the English language course match the
employers‟ expectations?
In particular, to develop an understanding of the undergraduate students‟ English
language academic literacy practices and competencies with regards to employability,
the study set out to answer the research questions by accomplishing the following tasks:
11
1. Identify the academic literacy practices and competencies of the students in
English.
2. Identify the students‟ perspectives of their English literacy practices and
competencies.
3. Draw out the implications of the environmental and educational factors, and
English language proficiency that might impact on the students‟ academic
literacy practices and competencies in English language.
4. Measure the students‟ existing levels of practices and competencies against the
prospective employers‟ benchmarks for English language proficiency.
1.5 Definition of terms
For the purpose of this study, the following terms require clear definition:
Academic literacies – the ability to read and write various texts, to listen to
conversations and to speak in various academic discourses and activities.
English language proficiency – the ability to speak, write or perform in the English
language.
Language competency/competencies – the ability to apply and use grammatical rules, to
form and produce sentences and utterances appropriately.
Communication skills – the ability to interact with others and express oneself clearly
using appropriate linguistic and sociolinguistic knowledge.
Workplace literacy – the ability to apply all the four skills when performing the
assigned tasks at professional settings.
Employability – the ability to gain initial employment.
The terms academic literacies, workplace literacy and employability, which are central
to this study, are more extensively defined in Chapter Two.
12
1.6 Overview of the literature
The literature is reviewed in Chapter Two. A brief overview is provided
here in order to present a rationale for both the aims and the design of the
present study. Several bodies of research literature inform the study reported in
this thesis. These include conceptual and contextual literature relating to English
language academic literacies, employability, workplace literacy and English
language policy and system in higher education in Malaysia. Conceptual
literature that frames the aim and design of the present study incorporates the
theories of literacy as a social practice (Street, 1984) and social learning (Lave &
Wenger, 1991). Commencing from the sociocultural standpoint of literacy, the
literature previews the ideological concept of literacy practices which are shaped
and influenced by the social and cultural contexts of the society. The literature
also takes into account that literacy is part of social practice which entails
multiple practices.
The literature that theorises academic literacies and empirical studies on
academic literacies worldwide is also included. The review of research on
English language academic literacies indicates a scarce research in this field
within the English as a second language context (ESL) like Malaysia.This points
to a strong justification for the conduct of the present study.
The conceptual literature also delineates the discussion on employability
and workplace literacy while acknowledging available studies germane to the
topic conducted around the globe as well as those within the local context of this
study. In addition, the implications of these fields of knowledge for the
development of English language academic literacies and employability as
examined by the present study are also discussed.
13
Contextual literature that depicts the backdrop of the context of the
present study entails a discussion on the development of English language policy
in the Malaysian education system beginning from the colonial period towards
this end. An introduction to this development is necessary to appreciate the
national educational goals and current language policies that underpin them.
This discussion illustrates that the rise of English was witnessed within the
colonial era while its decline was evident amidst nationalism and nation building
and subsequently, it is well acknowledged as a global language in the
contemporary period. Correspondingly, the English literacy landscape within the
higher education institutions also experienced several paradigm shifts to suit the
national and political agenda. A review of literature on research germane to
English language literacy points to the prevailing issues surrounding the decline
in the standards of English among Malaysian university students.
Fundamental to the review of the related literature in the present study is
that (1) English language academic literacies entail multiple literacy practices
that are bounded by their social and cultural contexts; (2) there are complex
issues of languages and challenges involved in relation to academic literacies at
tertiary level as well as at the workplace; and (3) academic and workplace
literacy practices are also influenced by the practices of the immediate
community and the society at large. In sum, the view that literacy practices are
socially constructed and have ideological implications underpins the aim and
frames the design of the present study.
14
1.7 Conceptual framework
Drawing on the brief overview of literature above, which is elaborated in
Chapter Two to follow, the conceptual framework of this thesis is informed by three key
concepts. The first is academic literacy which is defined earlier in this chapter as the
ability to read and write various texts, to listen to conversations and to speak in various
academic discourses and activities. This construct draws out all the other terms as this
study is investigating the various components of literacy including the four language
skills mentioned above.
The second key concept is language as a situated social practice. In this study,
the construct of academic literacy fits in the conceptualisation of English language
learning situated in the university English courses for engineering students. It is argued
that English language use involves academic literacy in the university context in which
the conception of literacy as a social practice is also engaged. This study focuses on
particular situations of language used by the engineering students at their tertiary
institution.
The third concept contributing to the conceptual framework of this study is that
of workplace literacy. As stated earlier, workplace literacy is defined as the ability to
apply all the four skills when performing the assigned tasks at professional settings. In
this thesis, workplace literacy provides the goal including a certain standard of English
language literacy for the engineering graduates.
In essence, the focus of this study is the intersection between English language
academic literacy practices at tertiary level and the expectations of English language
workplace literacy. The conceptual framework of this thesis is summarised in Figure 1.1
below.
15
Figure 1.1: Conceptual framework for this thesis
1.8 Theoretical approach
Aligned with its central aim, this study primarily adopts a qualitative approach
to inquiry couched within the interpretive paradigm for data collection and data
analysis. The direct voices of the undergraduate students have been given limited
coverage and rarely been heard in previous research in Malaysia. Therefore, to generate
understandings of the students‟ English language academic literacies the qualitative case
study approach is deemed as the most appropriate method given its descriptive,
dynamic, and authentic nature.
Within the interpretivist tradition, the present study acknowledges that: (1)
“humans act toward things based on the meanings those things have for them”; (2) “the
meanings of things arise out of social interaction”; and (3) “meanings are created (and
changed) through a process of interpretation” (Esterberg, 2002, p. 15). Informed by this
theoretical orientation, this study obtained direct access to the researched participants
and their specific contexts to understand how they construct and interpret the meanings
of their lived experiences.
Academic literacy
Workplace literacy
English language at university
16
The qualitative case study method is regarded the most appropriate means to
investigate students‟ academic literacy practices and competencies as it takes into
consideration students‟ socio-cultural and educational backgrounds to facilitate and
generate substantial understanding and insights on the case understudy. Inevitably, this
will contribute to new knowledge and provide more qualitative evidence to the
Malaysian setting as there is a lack of theory to explain the case prior to current study.
1.9 Overview of the research method
Braine (2002) writes that academic literacies are much more than the abilities to
read and write; therefore, data has to be obtained from multiple sources for a more
comprehensive understanding of the process by which academic literacies are acquired.
Aiming to gain as much data as possible from the participants, multiple methods of data
collection were conducted involving three different cohorts; the students, the teachers
and the employers.
Student data were collected primarily from 21 Engineering students in a
Malaysian public university by means of focus group interviews and supplemented by
individual interviews, non-participant classroom observations. Added to these were the
written summary sheets fulfilled by the students, and written field notes taken by the
researcher. Complementing the students‟ data was the contextual data derived from the
documentary resources, such as the course booklets, students‟ written assignments and
results collected from the teachers and English course coordinators. Data gained from
the employers were collated via in-depth interviews with 13 Human Resource managers
and executives representing various organisations in Malaysia. These were also
supplemeted by additional instruments such as a questionnaire, official documents and
field notes to provide context for the interview data.
17
In the tradition of qualitative research, the data were read reiteratively and
analysed rigorously through an inductive process of identifying the recurring and salient
themes.
1.10 Overview of the findings
This study finds that the students‟ English language academic literacies are
complex, embracing a combination of multiple literacy practices, which are highly
interrelated and interdependent, and a variety of academic discourses using various
language choices. It discovers that students‟ diverse individual, educational and social
background and experiences build up the multiplicity and complexity of their English
language academic literacy practices and competencies.
The variations of language choices within the educational environment
complicate the students‟ English language academic literacies. While the English
language is used to conform to the flow of globalisation, the Malay language is
principally upheld to keep to the university‟s convention. This study discloses an
inconsistency of language use between the English and Malay language in the medium
of instructions, teaching materials and academic discourses within the tertiary
educational setting.
This study also notices that the students encountered various difficulties in
dealing with English language academic literacies. These quandaries of managing
unfamiliar words, understanding complicated language structure, managing lengthy
explanations and reading long texts are evidenced in the students‟ reading practices.
Although they did not have much problem in their listening practices, the students had
to endure various challenges, attributed mainly to their constraints in applying accurate
grammatical rules alongside constructing and expanding sentences, when dealing with
18
writing and speaking practices. Their restricted vocabulary also contributed to these
quandaries.
In regard to the English language, the students on the whole considered
themselves as incompetent and they had a pessimistic outlook on their marginal
academic literacy practices and competencies in the language. English is indeed largely
perceived as a complicated language. This study unveils the students‟ plight with
linguistics knowledge, in terms of grammar and vocabulary. With respect to
communicative competence, the students are generally discontented with their meagre
ability to conduct oral presentations and even to converse and express themselves in
English. It is also discovered that the students had to devote a considerable amount of
additional time when engaging in English language discourses given their restricted
productive abilities particularly in writing and speaking practices. Additionally, the
students were also confronted with their overwhelming fear of communicating in
English confidently. In reality, the students‟ deficiencies in English have restricted their
capability to perform satisfactorily in the academic arena, thus affecting their overall
academic achievement.
The present study depicts that English is not conceived as a second language by
the researched students. It is basically regarded as a third or fourth language primarily
applied within the academic settings while there were limited venues for its use outside
the academic domain. This study also provides insights into the social and educational
factors that constructed and shaped the students‟ existing English language literacy
practices and competencies which include insubstantial foundation of the English
language taught at their primary schools as well as limited encouragement from their
teachers, peers and family members. The community of practice to support the use of
the language at their schools, home and surroundings was found to be nominal to almost
absent.
19
Interestingly, this study calls attention to the inclusive responsibility held by the
schools for the students‟ incompetence in English and unconstructive viewpoint on the
language. A shift of outlook and values on the importance of English was established
upon the students‟ enrolment into higher education given the significant emphasis and
prevalent use of the language at tertiary level as well as for prospective recruitment
purposes upon graduation. Despite the constructive support offered by the academics,
the students‟ competency in English seemed delicate and insubstantial given the
confined use of the language solely within the academic vicinity.
This study reveals a significant disparity between the students‟ existing English
language literacy practices and competencies with the prerequisites set by the
employers. The students‟ deficiencies in terms of linguistic knowledge, communicative
abilities and self-confidence were far from reaching the employers‟ expectations of
English language competencies. The multiplicity of language use and literacy
expectations at the workplace is expected to exacerbate the students‟ existing
predicaments in the English language. The conflicting expectatations of tertiary
education and the recruitment expectations is also likely to impose a challenge on the
prospective graduates.
1.11 Conclusion
In brief, this chapter has provided an introductory overview of the thesis. The
earlier sections of this chapter introduce the study by discussing the research
background and establishing its rationale and aims. The remaining sections present the
research questions and outline the definition of terms, literature, conceptual framework,
theoretical approach, research method and findings of this study.
Chapter Two provides a review of the conceptual and contextual literature that
informs this study and discusses the intersecting bodies of empirical research related to the
20
topic under study. Chapter Three sets out the description of the research paradigm,
methods and design of this study in greater detail. Chapter Four reports the empirical
results collated from the students‟ perspectives while Chapter Five presents the findings of
the employers‟ perspectives and expectations. Chapter Six discusses the findings in relation
to the body of literature and previous empirical studies. Finally, Chapter Seven concludes
the thesis with a summary of the study and its parameters, followed by a discussion on the
contributions of this study and the implications of the research findings for future research,
policy and practice.
21
Chapter Two
Review of Literature
2.1 Introduction
This chapter is divided into two main sections. The first part of the chapter
provides the conceptual framework for this study of English language academic
literacies for employability by identifying and reviewing bodies of knowledge and
research cognate to the development of English language academic literacies,
employability and workplace literacy in an English as a Second Language (ESL)
environment. Commencing from the position that literacies are social practices, the
influence of discursive practices on the development of contextually specific academic
literacies will be addressed. The implications of these fields of knowledge for the
development of English language literacies relevant to the ESL environment of
Malaysian institutions of higher learning and Malaysian workplaces will be considered
in conjunction with the findings of empirical literacy studies around the globe.
The remainder of this chapter provides the contextual framework of the present
study describing the development of English language policy in the Malaysian
education system from the British era to current times. This is followed by the depiction
of the English language in the present higher learning scenarios in Malaysia as well as
research germane to the English language literacy at tertiary education.
22
2.2 Conceptual framework
This study draws upon interconnected theoretical approaches constituting
theories of literacy-as-social-practice (Street, 1984) and social learning (Lave &
Wenger, 1991) which have significant implications for the inquiry on academic
literacies from a sociocultural point of view.
2.2.1 Literacy as social practice
This study is framed by an understanding guided by the central premise that
literacy is understood in terms of social practices and typically embedded in social and
cultural contexts (Barton & Hamilton, 2000; Heath & Street, 2008; Street, 1995). In this
study, the practices of literacy and ways of understanding literate acts are seen as
dependent on the social institutions in which they are acquired and used. This broad
perspective, conceived as the „ideological‟ approach, takes into consideration the
„multiplicity‟ of literacies and their ideological nature existing within a particular
society, while rejecting the „autonomous‟ approach which perceives literacy as
decontextualised, technical and neutral skills residing in individuals (Street 1984).
Central to the „ideological‟ concept of literacy is the idea that literacy practices
are shaped by the social and cultural rules embedded in a society whereby the
acquisition of a particular set of literacy practices is influenced by different contexts and
different cultural identities (Barton 2009; Street 1993). Indeed, the „ideological‟ model
of literacy proposes a culturally sensitive view of literacy practices as they are different
from one context to another (Street, 2009). Literacies, therefore, are viewed as “context-
sensitive” (Baynham, 1995, p. 8), carrying different meanings to different people at
different times. This notion recognises literacy practices as specific social practices
operated in particular social spaces, thus underlining the contextual and situated nature
23
of those practices. Affirming that the combination of talk and various texts permeates
daily activities, Barton et al. (2000) assert that large components of social interactions
are considered as literacy practices which are influenced by literacy texts and practices.
These practices are regarded as situated practices (Baynham & Prinsloo, 2009).
Barton and Hamilton (2000, p. 8) define literacy practices as “cultural ways of
utilizing literacy” which encompass “values, attitudes, feelings and social relationship”
(Street 1993, p. 12). Within these practices are observable events, comprising regular
repeated activities or talk revolving around written text, or texts, in which literacy has a
role (Barton & Hamilton ibid). These „literacy events‟, as introduced by Heath (1983),
entail people‟s „ways with words‟ or how people use reading and writing in their daily
lives. Heath describes literacy events as “the occasions in which written language is
integral to the nature of the participants‟ interactions and their interpretive processes and
strategies” (p. 50). Her study on the distinct home and school language and literacy
practices between a black and a white working class community in the United States of
America significantly demonstrated multiple literacy events occurring in different
contexts. Essentially, Heath‟s study underscores that the patterns of language and
literacy use varied across local communities. This finding signifies that there are diverse
literacy practices associated with different domains of life such as academic, workplace
and home literacy practices and that these practices are tremendously varied.
Street (ibid, p. 12) claims that „literacy practices‟ entail „literacy events‟ as
empirical occasions to which literacy is essential in tandem with the underpinning
ideological preconceptions. For Grillo (1989, p. 15), literacy is seen as one type of the
„communicative practice‟ which involve “the social activities through which language
or communication is produced” in different social contexts. Further, Barton (1994)
contends that the diversity of literacy brings about variation in language as well. For
instance, there are varieties of English languages across the world and “not just one
24
English” (p. 30). In the same vein, Baynham (1995, p. 2) argues that the study of
literacy requires a further dimension of language as social practice to deal with “the
ways that language operates to reproduce and maintain institutions and power bases” in
combination with “the ways that discourses and ideologies operate through language”.
Gee (1996) recognises the diverse conception of literacy and literate behaviours
as „multiple literacies‟ linked to different discourses, as literacy is closely tied to the
sociocultural practices of language used in a given society. According to Gee (ibid, p.
viii), discourses are perceived as “ways of behaving, interacting, valuing, thinking,
believing, speaking, and often reading and writing that are accepted as instantiations of
particular roles by specific groups of people”. He further asserts that literacy is not
monolithic but multiple in nature, and that it is not just about language or reading and
writing per se but also of attending to the dynamic, dialectical relationship between
words and worlds. Recent scholars of literacy, such as those in the New London Group
(1996) and Cope & Kalantzis (2000) establish that multiple literacies are not only
associated with different cultural contexts and social structures, but also with different
modes or channels of communication.
2.2.2 Learning as a situated activity
Consistent with the conceptualization of literacy, this study is also informed by
the social practice presumption which views learning as a situated activity constituting
construction of identities, knowledgeable skill in practice and communities of practice
(Lave & Wenger, 1991). From the perspective of situated practice, the development and
dimension of academic literacies in higher learning institutions are seen as the
acquisition of a set of local practices embedded in a larger framework of social practice
(Casanave, 2002). As an aspect of social practice, learning involves the whole person;
“it implies not only a relation to specific activities, but a relation to social communities
25
– it implies becoming a full participant, a member, a kind of person” (Lave & Wenger,
1991, p. 53). This notion advocates that (1) learning is located within the social
practices and contexts of a given „community of practice‟; (2) learning entails a process
of engagement in a „community of practice‟; and (3) students acquire the skills and
practices of their professions primarily by participating in those practices rather than
just learning about them. Communities of practice are generally defined as groups of
practitioners who work as a community in a certain domain (Jacobs, 2005). The key
point of Lave & Wenger‟s notion that is applicable to this study is that engaging in
actual practice, rather than learning about practice, is a necessary condition for effective
learning of subject specialist discourses and the social and communicative practices of
the profession.
To reiterate, the sociocultural perspective of literacy as a social practice
conceptualises literacy as an ideological practice embedded in the social institutions and
power relationships which vary socially and culturally. Viewing literacy from this
perspective involves recognizing a multiplicity of literacies in which “the meaning and
uses of literacy practices are related to specific cultural context” (Street, 1993, p. 8).
Recognising that there are different literacy practices required in different social
contexts, this study presumes the need to look into the insider‟s account and
contextualised meanings of literacy practices in order to gain comprehensive
understanding and insights of the English language academic literacies of undergraduate
students in the higher learning institution (Maybin, 2000). In considering learning as
part of social practice, this study takes into account that learning must be understood in
connection with a practice as a whole, including its multiplicity within the context on
the immediate community and the society at large. Therefore, this broader perspective
of literacy, which recognises that literacy learning has social, cognitive and linguistic
dimensions, enables the researcher to consider the students‟ experiences in acquiring
26
and exploiting knowledge whilst dealing with English, which is the main language
utilised in their tertiary study (Hirst et al., 2004). In summary, the view that literacy
learning is socially constructed and has ideological implications underlies the aims and
frames the design of this study.
2.3 Academic literacies
Academic literacy or „tertiary literacy‟, Hirst et al.‟s (2004) term, in higher
education is simply defined as “the ability to read and write the various texts assigned in
[university]” (Spack 1997, p. 3). Johns (1997) writes that academic literacy
“encompasses ways of knowing particular content and strategies for understanding,
discussing, organizing, and producing texts” (p. 15). Fundamental to these terms of
academic literacy, this study sought to examine the multiple literacies (Gee, 1996) that
incorporate reading, writing, listening and speaking practices occurring within the social
and cultural contexts of the tertiary institution. This is important and germane as
academic literacy practices are deemed to be “active, dynamic and interactive” in nature
(Teacher Education Working Party, 2001, p. 4) which represent “particular views of the
world, uses of language and ways of constructing knowledge within academic
disciplines” (Curry, 2004, p. 51).
Taking into account Lea and Street‟s (1998) notion of academic literacy
practices, this study also considers the cultural and contextual component of writing,
reading, listening and speaking practices embedded in the participants‟ academic
routine as these can help to construct an understanding of the students‟ overall learning.
Alternatively, Heath (1985, p. 15) claims that academic literacy is “not the same thing
as learning to read and write; it is learning to talk reading and writing”. This denotes the
fact that students‟ literacy skills are certainly transferable to other disciplines and their
27
behaviours make the critical difference for their academic success instead of their skills.
These academic behaviors can be independent of any particular academic subject, but
underlie success in all academic areas (Heath & Mangolia, 1991). Similar behaviours
are observed in learning to read in a non-native language (Kern, 2000). According to
Kern, the style of reading is strongly influenced by one‟s native language reading
experience as well as by the kinds of classroom practices into which one is socialised.
As regards current understanding of academic literacies, Leki (2007) and Braine
(2002) contend that academic literacies include more than just knowledge of discrete
language skills or appropriate language use in context, suggesting that academic
literacies need to be understood holistically to include competence in reading and
writing among other capabilities (Gilliver-Brown & Johnson, 2009). Jacobs (2005)
points out that academic literacies are acquired through the use of language in reading
and writing developments within specific academic disciplines. Further, she draws
attention to the need to move away from decontextualised approaches of looking at
academic literacies.
It is often assumed that tertiary students can cope with any literacy demands that
are made of them (Hirst et al., 2004). However, this assumption is contested, given that
the increasing demands and variations of literacy practices and competencies at tertiary
level, suggest there is no guarantee that the students are able to manage their academic
literacies adequately. According to Weiner (1998) in Curry (2004), students without
sufficient academic literacies may lack the ability “to make their voices heard as they
move through the academy and into a complex world” (p. 102). Hence, scrutiny of
students‟ academic literacies is necessary especially in the context of the present study
which involves students from diverse backgrounds living in a multilingual and
multiracial country. Borrowing Zamel & Spack‟s (1998) definition of academic
literacies which “embrace multiple approaches to knowledge” (p. ix), this study intends
28
to explore students‟ multiple approaches to English language literacies where different
languages and various discourses intersect within a tertiary setting. In pursuit of
understanding the students‟ English language academic literacies, this study appreciates
the students‟ previous knowledge as an essential resource and takes into consideration
that “language is acquired when it is viewed not as an end in itself, but rather as a means
for understanding and constructing knowledge” (Zamel & Spack, 2006, p. 128).
The broad view of literacy, which establishes that literacy learning has social,
cognitive and linguistic dimensions, provides wider dimensions for this study to look at
academic literacies beyond the deficit views of individual students to consider many or
multiple literacies that exist (Gee, 1996; New London Group, 1996). Returning to the
basic tenet that literacy practices are interwoven and shaped by social institutions, this
study assumes that academic literacies are acquired through socialization process
embedded in social practices, which are patterned by an academic institution, and
interactions between learners, as participants, and their academic discourse community.
These are identified as valued literacy practices (Lea & Street, 1998; Broeder et al.,
1998).
Consistent with the conceptions of literacy and the sociocultural approach to
learning foregrounded by the present study are the complex issues of languages and
challenges of the students‟ process of acquiring English in an academic situation that
exposes them to various kinds of expectations while accommodating to the
linguistically diverse discourses and settings. This conceptual framework also
encapsulates „high level of academic literacies‟ that include reading, writing, speaking
and listening skills in English at the advanced tertiary level. The qualitative approach
applied by this study allows a thick description and understanding of how the students
negotiate various academic discourses and interact with their institutional processes
which can affect the quality of their education.
29
2.3.1 Situating academic literacies research in higher education
The following sub-sections discuss and summarise relevant research that has
been conducted hitherto into the issues pertinent to English language academic
literacies. Later, this particular study provides justification for its position within the
context of the related research.
The last decade has seen the development of a body of work on academic
literacies. In particular, numerous case studies have been conducted on first language
and second language (referred as L1 and L2 henceforth) compositions (Duff, 2008),
particularly on how non-native speakers of English (NNSE) in higher education acquire
the academic discourses, especially in the English language in order to achieve success
at the tertiary level. A review of literature on studies pertinent to academic literacies
indicated a number of studies in a diverse range of settings with equivalent orientation
yet involving various participants, such as visa students (Ivanic, 1998; Leki, 1995,
Spack, 1997), immigrants (Cummins, 1980; Currie & Cray, 2004; Johns, 1991),
international graduate students (Angelova & Rianzantseva, 1999; Dong, 1996; Ferenz,
2005; Gosden, 1996; Riazi 1997) and bilingual academics (Casanave, 1998; Prior,
1991). Whereas these studies have been extensively valuable in their own respects, only
several studies that are closely relevant to the approach of the present study will be
further discussed in this sub-section.
The earliest endeavours to research on English language academic literacies
appeared to be both practitioner-based and practitioner-led (Lea, 2004). Much of it was
initiated by scholars or academic practitioners in English for Academic Purposes (EAP)
programmes to seek ways in assisting a multicultural and multilingual population of
students making the transition into English-medium universities and to investigate the
broad issues confronted by these students across the curriculum. Some examples of such
30
studies involving undergraduate students, mostly conducted in the late 1990s, are those
by Ivanic, 1998; Leki, 1995 and Spack, 1997; these will be further elaborated.
Attempting to comprehend explicitly the strategies and practices the NNSE students
require in their academic courses, these studies had engaged exclusively on their writing
practices at several universities in the United States of America. The case studies
approach mostly applied by these studies seems to point to a general consensus on the
vast differences between individual students who interact diversely in the context-bound
academic literacy activities.
Spack (1997) contends that preceding studies focusing on reading and writing
activities were mostly quantitative in nature, restricted to examine several preconceived
classifications while condoning the significance of the context within which the
activities occur. Spack conducted a longitudinal study examining the reading and
writing strategies adopted by a NNSE undergraduate student and tracing the process she
went through to acquire English language academic literacy at an American university.
The three-year investigation was primarily designed at understanding how the Japanese
student would draw on her multiple resources as she gradually developed strategies to
succeed as a reader and writer newly enrolled in a university setting. Drawing on
multiple data sources embracing interviews, classroom observations and written
documents, the study took into account the student‟s linguistic and cognitive
development, previous educational experiences, cultural background in combination
with her interactions with instructors and course-related texts. The findings illustrate
various tensions, frustrations and breakthroughs in the student‟s reading, writing and
speaking experiences.
The findings of Spack‟s study point to several implications germane to the
current study. Most importantly, Spack‟s study shed light on the influence of L1
educational background which shaped the student‟s learning approach and the
31
development of her academic discourse practices in the L2 context. This brought about
the shift of the student‟s social and cultural identity because discourse practices are
“integrally connected with a person‟s sense of self” (Gee, 1996, p. 720).
Of particular relevance to the present study is Spack‟s notion that “all academic
tasks can be understood only within specific contexts [and] all academic work is
socially situated” (p. 50). Advocating the idea of academic literacy as a situated local
literacy practices (Barton et al., 2000), Spack underlines that ESL courses should
provide a rich environment with its exclusive learning content to assist students to
furnish all the tools they require in order to succeed in the academic discourses. This
view also takes into account the cultural and real-life contexts of L2 learners as they
vary in age and background and that they speak different languages. Notwithstanding
their strong first and second language literacy experiences, Spack asserts that students
can be expected to have gaps in their educational backgrounds. The kind of literacy
instruction they received prior to entering university is deemed to be inadequate to
satisfy the demands they face in their present environment. Therefore, students should
not be expected to possess English-language, college-level academic literacy already in
place.
In a case study of eight undergraduate students‟ academic literacy experiences,
Ivanic (1998) analysed the linguistic texts and the students‟ linguistic choices to
examine their identity formation in constructing one major academic essay. A
compelling finding of this study entails the complex identities experienced by the
students in writing within particular disciplines as well as the tension endured in their
interactions with specific people in academia. This study construes that the diversity of
settings, the undergraduates‟ lack of identity as writers in combination with their
uncertain purposes and interests make the task of learning to write seem even more
difficult.
32
Another prominent researcher in the field of academic literacy who has
conducted a number of case studies on NNSE students studying at a US university is
Ilona Leki. Contending that previous L2 writing research has considerably focused on
the issues surrounding the classroom instructions and teaching practices rather than on
the students‟ academic literacy practices beyond their writing classes, Leki also
challenges the interest in learning strategies for general language learning among most
L2 researchers such as Oxford (1990) and Wenden & Rubin (1987). To surmount these
limitations, most of Leki‟s studies provide in-depth and detailed pictures of individual
ESL students‟ academic literacy experiences learning to write while negotiating the
demands of their L2 tertiary education (Leki, 1995, 2001, 2003, 2007). One of her
earlier studies investigated the strategies applied by three graduate and two
undergraduate international students from Taiwan, China, France and Finland in coping
with their first semester of studying as newcomers in an English speaking society (Leki,
1995). She looked at the strategies the cohort brought with them to their initial
experiences in the local academic culture and the approaches they developed to
complete their English writing requirements in their content courses across the
curriculum. Informed by data from the students‟ narratives, the interviews with their
professors and document analysis, Leki‟s study reports on how the students responded
actively to the challenges of crossing cultural and linguistic boundaries by means of a
series of coping strategies. It was shown conclusively that there were varied and flexible
coping strategies developed by the students to cater to the perplexing demands of their
academic life in L1 context. Taken as a whole, a common thread and a basic theoretical
premise in all these studies is that academic contexts have a powerful influence on how
students define and approach academic literacy. These studies have provided a deeper
understanding to the present study of the multilingual undergraduate students‟
33
experiences of academic literacy beyond the L2 and writing classrooms in higher
education.
Contrastively, a number of studies in the United Kingdom are seen to deal
largely with academic literacies as a set of practices that are acquired and used by its L1
members, native speakers of English. An example of such study is that conducted by
Lea & Street (1998), intended to address the issues regarding students‟ writing in higher
education. Taking the cue from the area of New Literacy Studies (NLS) (Street, 1984;
Barton, 1994; Baynham, 1995) which views literacy from a cultural and social practice,
Lea & Street affirm that this approach can provide insights into the specific nature of
academic literacies and academic learning on the whole. This approach sees literacies as
social practices, which regard students‟ writing and learning as
…issues at the level of epistemology and identities rather than skill or
socialization‟. An academic literacies approach views the institutions in
which academic practices take place as constituted in, and as sites of,
discourse and power. It sees the literacy demands of the curriculum as
involving a variety of communicative practices, including genres, fields
and disciplines. (Lea & Street, 1998, p. 4)
In this regard, they consider the skills-based deficit models of student writing as
insufficient because of the models‟ failure to reflect on the complexity of writing
practices that occur at the tertiary level. Furthermore, learning in higher education is
perceived as adapting to new ways of knowing that entail new ways of understanding,
interpreting and organising knowledge.
Adopting the concept of academic literacies as a framework for understanding
student writing, Lea & Street investigated the contrasting expectations and
interpretations of academic staff and students in relation to students‟ written
assignments. Data for case studies were collated from two different universities in
southern England. Ten academic staff and 21 students in an older university were
interviewed alongside 13 members of the academic staff and 26 students in a new
34
university. Central to the findings of this study, three perspectives or models, termed as
“academic literacies models” (p. 3), were delineated constituting study skills, academic
socialization and academic literacies. The findings indicate that the writing practices
that the students were engaged in varied, while the feedback they received from their
tutors was found to be complex. Of particular interest of the present study are the
prevailing features of students‟ academic literacy practices which entail the requirement
to alter their practices accordingly to diverse settings, to deploy a relevant repertoire of
linguistic practices and to manage the social meanings and identities relatively to
specific settings. This generally implies the strong influence of the social and
institutional relationship of power and identity on the students‟ writing practices,
particularly in respect to the linguistic choices. The implication of this study for future
research is to explore broadly on the students, student-tutor interactions and the
institution with academic literacy perspectives to lead to a universal understanding of
students‟ learning in higher education.
In line with previous studies but addressing how graduate students acquire their
disciplinary literacy in Canada, Riazi (1997) investigated students‟ social, cognitive and
affective dimensions in their acquisition of L2 academic literacy practices appropriate to
their specific disciplines. Drawing on a qualitative multi-case study of four Iranian
doctoral students of education, this study describes how respondents developed detailed
albeit evolving task representations for assignments, as opposed to plainly learning and
viewing assessments as measures of that learning. This study adds to the literature
affirming the interactive social-cognitive process between individuals and their social
and cultural contexts in the production of texts to achieve disciplinary literacy in L2.
Grounded in Lave and Wenger‟s (1991) notion of situated learning, Casanave
(1998) carried out a study on four bilingual Japanese scholars who were educated at the
graduate level in the United States and subsequently returned to teach at a Japanese
35
university. Interested to find out the transitional experiences of the scholars from the
writing life of graduate students in L2 (English language) to the writing life of a
university faculty member in the L1 (Japanese) context, the primary data from
interviews across two years were examined. The findings depict the significance of
writing in the scholars‟ professions and the differences of writing in two diverse worlds.
Of specific interest to the present study is the finding on the complex identities
developed by the scholars in negotiating the demands of their situated academic
practices which implies that different contexts impose different kinds of expectations on
the communities.
In essence, there appears to be a consensus in the studies mentioned above that
academic literacy practices are inherently situated in the cultural norms. Therefore,
students not only need to learn new conventions, they are also required to confront with
systems of values that provide both opportunities and challenges to them. This requires
students to develop survival strategies to suit the diverse and complex academic
literacies to survive in the academic settings. At present, it is observed that little
empirical work has been undertaken to investigate academic literacies in the 21st
century. To use Casanave‟s words,
There are not a great many case studies in print about college students
and college writing teachers. One reason maybe that case studies
generally take more time than other kinds of studies such as surveys,
cross-sectional sampling, or quasi-experimental studies. (2002, p. 34)
The tendency of the research in such approaches might impose preconceived
classifications of academic tasks while focusing on specific academic or technical tasks
and ignoring the contexts in which the tasks are assigned and performed. These might
mask the complexities and difficulties encountered by individual students and thus,
recreating a deficit or study skills model of examining literacy (Lea & Street, 1998).
36
This is not to deny the value of research in this tradition. However, this seems to
suggest the need to attend more broadly to the studies of academic literacies in L1 and
L2 practices within the socio-cultural spectrum.
Nevertheless, despite the scant research in this century, one renowned study is
worthy of credit and consideration. Most recently, Leki (2007) had resumed her initial
attempt to capture L2 undergraduate students‟ academic literacy experiences and
disciplinary enculturation throughout their studies in an American university. She
argued that most educators and researchers had ignored an important feature of the
context when examining the learning of English of bilinguals. Her longitudinal study
documented a wide-ranging account of the English language and literacy learning
experienced by four immigrant and international students, two from People‟s Republic
of China and one from Poland and Japan respectively. Portions of the earlier findings of
her five-year journey in this study were published beforehand (Leki, 2001, 2003).
Fundamental to the narrative nature of the study is the focus on the students‟ variety of
backgrounds, language proficiency, and disciplinary fields, encompassing engineering,
business, nursing and social work, which provides prolific pictures of the students‟
representations of academic literacy development throughout their entire undergraduate
endeavours in L2 tertiary education.
In light of the role of writing and English language literacy of the undergraduate
students, the findings of the study reveal massive disconnections between most writing
practices within the ESL courses, as well as the general education and students‟
discipline courses. While the goal of the writing tasks assigned to the students was
found to be impractical, a dearth of written assignments was also evidenced in some
cases in the study. The findings also unveil the superficial emphasis on mechanics and
grammar accuracy in the students‟ assessments. The findings indicate that ESL and
37
composition courses are largely irrelevant to the undergraduate students‟ academic
language and literacy experiences in their tertiary curriculum.
Asserting that the students‟ struggles, successes and failures in their academic
literacy work cannot be understood without reference to its social context, Leki
introduces her own notion of „socioacademic relationships‟, defined as
…a category of social interaction with peers and with faculty that proved
to be critical to the students‟ sense of satisfaction with their educational
work and sometimes even to the possibility of doing that work. (p. 14)
Following the socio-cultural theories (Casanave, 2002; Lave & Wenger, 1991),
Leki purports that learning and language development is “crucially, unavoidably and
inextricably bound up with social factors, with other humans and human activities” (p.
262). This was observed in the formation of the students‟ identities established from
their socioacademic relationship with their peers and teachers in the study. The findings
suggested that academic literacy entails holistic understanding of the students‟
competence in reading and writing, critical thinking, knowledge of independent learning
processes as well as their personal characteristics and identity.
In sum, the research discussed above tends to be qualitative in nature or of an
ethnographic type, which enabled the researchers to look in depth at students‟ and
academic‟s interpretation of students‟ academic literacies in higher education.
Notwithstanding the diverse institutional contexts and groups of students taking a wide
range of courses in the studies, the findings of these studies all indicate the complex
nature of academic literacies in the acquisition and development of English in subject-
based knowledge in higher education. More specifically, the findings point to the
difficulties faced by students in their academic literacy practices and in the production
of texts as major requirement in the tertiary education. Generally, academic literacies
have come to be seen in terms of how students are able to effectively create and exploit
38
the various genres of text that they encounter in their classes because both genres and
ways of interacting with them vary according to the different culture which the students
bring in and perform in the academic settings. Therefore, the findings and implications
made by the above studies provide some insights to investigate the English language
academic literacies in the present study.
2.3.2 Broadening the contexts for academic literacies
To this point, the focus in the field of inquiry into academic literacies in higher
education has been primarily concerned more with issues surrounding the academic
writing practices among NNSE in English speaking countries but less on students‟
English language literacy practices in an English-as-a-second-language (ESL) context.
While the research literature provides some insights into the perspectives of NNSE in
L1 context, literature on NNSE in Asia is still scant. Generally, NNSE students within
this region must operate in environments where their mother tongue language or their
L1 is used extensively in their communication with their teachers and peers, and yet
they must read and write in English in most academic occasions. To borrow Braine‟s
(2002) words, “At present, I am not aware of triangulated studies focusing on these
students” (p. 66). Yeh (2009) also confirms that there has been little research conducted
on academic literacies in English-as-a-foreign-language (EFL) contexts. In the same
vein, Kubota & McKay (2009) assert that it is necessary to shift the focus towards the
investigation of how the discourse of English as an international language intersects
with the local multilingual contexts such as in Asian countries where English does not
serve as a major language.
Nevertheless, available research pertinent to academic literacies involves a
large-scale multifaceted investigation conducted by Evans & Green (2007) in Hong
39
Kong. Their study, which sought to examine the language problems experienced by
5000 Cantonese-speaking undergraduate students in their tertiary literacies within the
context of English-medium university, entailed qualitative and quantitative data
gathered from student and department programme leader questionnaire surveys and
supplemented by data from interviews with both cohorts. The findings demonstrate that
a substantial number of students encountered difficulties when learning the content
subjects through the medium of English. As far as the present study is concerned, the
most interesting findings from this study are those which relate to the students‟
problems in dealing with academic writing and speaking practices in English. These
difficulties constitute managing lexical and grammatical components, writing
conventions, fluency and pronunciation while the students‟ receptive and productive
vocabularies were also found lacking. With regard to the overall academic literacy
practices, listening practices were discovered to present the students with fewer
difficulties than writing, speaking and reading. This study indicates that inadequate
basic language competence in English results in lack of confidence as students struggle
to make their way towards academic success particularly in light of the increasing
demands of studying in English-medium tertiary education.
Correspondingly, the review of literature in the Malaysian context has indicated
a scarcity of empirical studies to investigate undergraduate students‟ English language
academic literacies within the sociocultural continuum. Nevertheless, a relevant study
which merits consideration is the one conducted by Koo (2008) to explore international
postgraduate students‟ perspectives on their English language literacy practices and
their ways in meaning-making in a higher institution in Malaysia. Along the lines of the
sociocultural perspective of literacy, Koo delineated her notion of academic literacy
which “...relates to the various ways of meaning-making in terms of thinking, ways of
meaning, reading, speaking, listening and writing which are valued in the academic
40
setting” (p. 54). Building on the ethnographic approach as the point of departure to
gather the perceptions and narratives of two international postgraduate students from
Thailand and Sudan on their experiences with English language, this study draws on the
attention to the need to provide considerable equity and access in relation to English
language use as medium and as a means to create knowledge for multilingual
international learners in an ESL context like Malaysia. Accordingly, Koo‟s study
proposes the “Reflexive Pluriliteracy” framework to better understand and to bridge the
diversity and differences with regards to the ways of being and ways of making
meaning among the international students particularly within the situated context of the
complex dynamics of internalisation of higher education.
2.3.3 Locating the present study
Clearly, the research in the field of academic literacies in higher education
reviewed above has tended to foreground largely on the experiences of English-as-a-
second-language (ESL) and NNSE students in the L1 or target language milieu. It could
be disputed that the confined attention to these specific group of students, who are seen
as marginalized in regard to their L2 competency by the dominant L1 academic culture
(Lea, 2004), contributes to the drawback of this body of research. However, this brings
valuable information for the starting point of the present study. Building on the theories
and implications informed by previous research, this study conversely turns the
direction towards examining the English language academic literacies of NNSE
undergraduate students in acquiring knowledge within the context in which English is
legitimately acknowledged as L2 while the widespread use of L1 is predominantly
evidenced. More importantly, the few published works and scarce research in this field
of inquiry within the region and local context offers a platform for the conduct of the
present study.
41
Additionally, research in academic literacies as stated earlier has been less on
examining students‟ English language academic literacy practices and competencies;
rather it has gone a long way in unpacking the complex relationship between writing
practices and learning among NNSE students. This understanding needs to be brought
more centrally into other elements of academic literacy practices to include reading,
listening and speaking especially in the English language. Furthermore, it is evidenced
that research in the field of academic literacies has predominantly concentrated upon the
production of written assignment. To date, less attention has been paid to other
discourses and texts which are involved in the educational arena such as the increasing
use of virtual discourses and texts in the instruction and assessment in higher education.
It is contended that the focus on students‟ writing alone might mask the significance of
multiple academic practices in learning and the overall process of acquiring knowledge
since all students negotiate a varied range of texts and discourses as part of their studies
at tertiary education (Lea, 2004; Lea & Street, 1998; Leki, 2007). Thus, this brings to
the fore the justification for scrutinizing all four academic literacy practices and
competencies in English of multilingual undergraduates in the present study. The main
intention of this study is to explicate the students‟ academic literacy practices and
competencies which also take account of the discourses and different texts involved in
their learning.
Further, this study is founded on the premise that in order to understand the
nature of academic literacies, it is necessary to investigate the students‟ understandings
about their own literacy practices, without making prior assumptions as to which
practices are appropriate and effective. This approach addresses criticisms over the lack
of authentic voices on the acquisition of academic literacies of NNSE in some studies as
pointed out by Braine (2002). According to Erickson & Shultz (1992), in Brock (2007),
42
students‟ experience has been treated in partial and incidental ways, as
researchers, teacher educators and policy analyst consider relatively thin
slices of classroom life, usually from a single perspectival angle. None of
these slices has been multidimensional enough to capture students‟
subjective worlds as whole phenomena (p. 466).
Thus, by emphasizing investigation into students‟ and their actual experiences,
this study will be able to understand their access or lack of access to their learning
opportunities. Concurrently, in view of the research discussed earlier, the present study
sees that students are active participants in the process of meaning-making in the
academy (Lea & Street, 1998) and that their relationship with the dominant literacy
practices and discourses of their academy is complex. Therefore, to examine the tertiary
literacies, it is crucial to look at the matter from the point of view of the key
participants, namely the students themselves. As such, the present study draws on
significant data concerning students‟ sociocultural and educational backgrounds,
previous educational experiences, English language learning histories and strategies to
reach to an in-depth understanding of their overall English language academic literacy
practices and competencies.
Aligned with the central aim of this study, the qualitative case study is deemed
the most appropriate method to investigate students‟ academic literacies given its
descriptive, dynamic, and authentic nature. Moreover, Braine (2002) maintains that
academic literacies are much more than the abilities to read and write; therefore, data
has to be obtained from multiple sources for a more comprehensive understanding of
the process by which academic literacies are acquired. Hence, for the purpose of this
study, data are collated from various sources constituting group and individual
interviews, observation notes and contextual documents.
In brief, while the studies reviewed above have been valuable in their own
respects, they have inevitably provided some insights for the development of further
43
inquiry in the area of academic literacies such as this particular study. This study
continues and extends this exploration by looking at the English language academic
literacy practices and competencies in the context of Malaysian higher education.
2.4 Employability
A number of studies illustrate that a concrete definition of employability is still
debatable. This is evident given that most empirical research into employability has yet
to reach consensus about what it subsumes (Knight & Yorke, 2003). According to
Andrews and Higson (2008, p. 413), “employability is an extremely complex, and
somewhat vague concept that is both difficult to articulate and define”. Nevertheless, a
general depiction of employability as described by Hillage and Pollard (1998)
constitutes “having the capability to gain initial employment, maintain employment and
obtain new employment if required” (p. 2). However, the focus of the present study
accentuates the first aspect of employability as suggested by Hillage and Pollard
pertaining to potential graduates‟ competence to attain employment.
Associating employability with the expectations of the employers, Harvey and
colleagues (1997) see that employers require graduates with knowledge, intellect,
willingness to learn, self-management skills, communication skills, team-working and
interpersonal skills. On the same ground, Yorke (1999) illuminates that employers value
skills at oral communication, handling one‟s work load, team-working, managing
others, critical analysis, summarizing and group problem-solving. Harvey (1999) further
explicates that “the employability of a graduate is the propensity of the graduate to
exhibit attributes that employers anticipate will be necessary for the future effective
functioning of their organization” (p. 4). These attributes, which are central in the
44
recruitment selection, comprise good interpersonal and communication skills, teamwork
spirit, flexibility and adaptability in any working atmosphere.
Therefore, a synthesis of the available literature as identified above explicitly
points to graduates‟ communication skills as one of the key features of employability
universally expected by most employers. Indeed, communication skills are generally
conceived to embrace written and verbal communicative abilities; thus the capability to
communicate and interact with others, either in teams or through networking (Andrews
& Higson, ibid), is considered of paramount importance in the context of the present
study. Considering the rapid growth of technology in the contemporary work setting,
the communicative attribute or „communicative literacy‟ (Koo et al., 2008) demanded of
prospective employees also needs to take into account the exploitation of other
communication tools alongside face-to-face communication (Devers, 2007). In the same
vein, Kubler and Forbes (2004) point to the need to consider linguistic proficiency,
which entails language proficiency in English and other languages, as an important
attribute for prospective graduates‟ employability. To quote Koo et al.‟s (2008) words,
linguistic proficiency relates to
the use of particular languages, the ability to apply these in appropriate
contexts including the ability to present sustained and persuasive written
and oral arguments cogently and coherently and last but not least,
sensitivity to generic conventions and to the shaping effects of language
upon communication involving circumstance, authorship, textual
production and intended audience (p. 4).
2.4.1 Research on employability and employers’ expectations
A search of the literature has established that no such study has been carried out
worldwide on English language academic literacy practices and competencies for
employability in an English-as-a-second-language context; neither has there been a
study on unemployment associated with English language incompetency among
45
university graduates. Generally, most studies abroad have deliberately dealt with the
language, literacy and numeracy needs of the labour force among immigrants or non-
native speakers of English in developed countries like Canada (Bell, 2000; Duff et al.,
2002; Malicky & Norman, 1994), the United States (Hacker & Yankwitt, 1997) and
Australia (Millar, 2001). The findings of these studies generally call for increased
contextualized, interpretive and critical qualitative studies to examine the experiences,
barriers, outcomes and personal transformations associated with language and literacy
education (Duff et al., ibid). On the contrary, it is observed that much of the extant
empirical work on employability in the UK primarily focuses on the impact of
government policy, organisational strategies, mid-career workers, wider society and
educationalists (Bowers-Brown & Harvey, 2004; Forrier & Sels, 2003; Hillage &
Pollard, 1998; Yorke, 2006).
In Malaysia, the high incidence of unemployment among local graduates in
recent years together with the changing demands of higher education as a consequence
of globalisation have prompted considerable research surrounding the unemployment
issues as its central focus (Ministry of Higher Education, 2006; Wok et al., 2007).
Accordingly, many comments and views have been expounded suggesting the need to
bridge the gap or mismatch between the available supply of manpower and the
expectations of the potential employers (Abdul Kareem & Othman, 2007; Habib, 2007;
Yunus, 2007). The fact that English language determines employability has often been
confirmed and discussed in these studies. According to Hyland & Hamp-Lyons (2002),
ensuring that their graduates can function in English in the workplace is a major issue in
many developing countries. More specifically, mention of the lack of English
proficiency as a major factor contributing to unemployment of graduates has been
consistently included in such work. Indeed, graduates from local universities have been
46
stereotyped as lacking in confidence, communication skills and proficiency in English
language in most studies.
One eminent study on unemployment problems among graduates from public
institutions of higher learning was conducted by Sirat et al. in 2004. Using the survey
instrument and focus group interview techniques, they identified the reasons why
Malaysian graduates are not successful in getting employed. An important finding of
this study suggests a comparative link between competencies in English language and
chances of being employed. This is evidenced in terms of the substantial number of
graduates were reported to have a poor mastery in English and they experience
difficulty in communication and interpersonal skills, especially speaking and writing.
Subsequently, Pandian and Abd Ghani (2005) conducted a study to examine the
university curriculum and graduates‟ preparation for the job market involving 214
employers. The findings indicate that most employers require communication skills
among graduates as it is deemed very important from the moment they start work. The
findings also bring to light the employers‟ overall concern over local graduates‟ low
competency in English as they need more graduates with high written and oral
competency in English.
Nevertheless, a number of studies have demonstrated the need to seek students‟
awareness and perceptions of employability. For instance, Juhdi et al. (2007) explored
the level of perceived employability among 151 undergraduate students in a Malaysian
private university using the survey technique. The majority of the students reported that
they still preferred to use their mother tongue for informal conversation with peers and
relatives. Interestingly, they affirmed that for formal transactions and dealing, they
would use the English language. Given the fact that English language is used as the
medium of instruction in the university, thus it is not surprising to see a high percentage
47
of students indicating English as their chosen language for formal oral and written
communication.
Succeeding previous studies, Sirat et al. (2008) carried out another research to
investigate the attitudes and experiences of employers, academics and unemployed
graduates pertaining to the issue of unemployment in the country. Drawing data from
focus group interviews and questionnaires, this study provides a constructive
information base from which to understand the issue from the viewpoints of the
participants. The findings disclose that while the industrial sector prioritises English
language competency, most local graduates are found lacking in confidence to converse
effectively in the language despite their excellent academic achievements.
Correspondingly, the academics call attention to the mastery of English as an important
requirement to help students understand lectures and to develop literacy in the
workplace after graduation. This study denotes that there is an urgent need to integrate
21st Century literacy skills across all university curriculum and the fields of study. In
addition, it is recommended that learning and teaching should be conducted entirely in
English at all public universities.
2.5 Workplace literacy
The 21st Century witnesses the „social turn‟ to the „new capitalism‟ as the
product of massive global and technological changes (Gee, 2000; Gee et al., 1996). In
the era of new capitalism, „new work-places‟ are created to value knowledge from
workers‟ day-to-day practices rather than “explicit knowledge based on theories and
past practices” (Gee, 2000, p. 185). In line with these changes, „new workers‟ are now
expected to gain and apply new knowledge continuously with complete understanding
of their practices and “proactively and continually transform and improve their work
48
through collaboration with others and with technology” (Gee, ibid). Given the changes
in the new capitalism, Gee et al. (1996) contend that language, literacy and learning are
situated in and shaped by „the work order‟ which brings about the demands of the
workplace for lifelong learners and flexible workers (Pitt, 2000).
Apparently, the radical changes occurring in the new millennium have
transformed the expectations of workplace literacy from basic skills to a repertoire of
skills, values, attitudes and identities. Workplace literacy, especially in this global
knowledge economy, demands a different kind of worker, a different understanding of
what counts as knowledge at work, and a different set of views, values and
relationships. Within the New Literacy Studies, changes in the literacy practices of
everyday life, education, and work have been at the core of interest for the last decade
(Barton & Hamilton, 1998; Barton et al., 2000; Cope & Kalantzis, 2000). Like other
literacy practices, those of the workplace change and new workplace literacies are
acquired through processes of both formal and informal learning and sense-making
(Barton & Hamilton, 1998). Descriptions of workplace literacy as it relates to the new
economy, the new work order, the knowledge society, or the information society all
give reasons to study knowledge as situated and based in activities.
In view of employers‟ expectations of workplace literacy, Fisher (2007) reports
that beyond reading and writing skills, which serve as foundations, technology skills or
computer literacy is increasingly important to all employers. On top of that, employers
emphasise critical basic skills and critical thinking, which include “acting logically and
solving problems, finding and using information” (p. 213), as crucial criteria an
employee should possess. Additionally, teamwork, social skills, attendance, timeliness,
and a good work ethic are identified as essential skills at the workplace (Bosworth,
2007). In addition, a body of literature pertinent to this study (such as Garay, 1998;
Bernhardt & Farmer, 1998) advocates the redefinition and expansion of the teaching of
49
English to include meaningful tools of communication applicable for workplaces while
preserving the teaching of literacy skills and the knowledge of literature.
2.5.1 Research on workplace literacies
The review of literature indicates a scant body of research on literacy practices
in the workplaces. One such study which investigated the role of reading and writing in
common nonacademic occupations in Sweden was conducted by Karlsson (2009).
Guided by the belief that work knowledge must be studied from the perspective of the
work activity, this study adopted the sociocultural perspective of literacy as its
orientation. Data were mainly gathered from observation which paid special attention to
literacy events of seven workers at their workplace. Using the detailed field notes and
photographs which accompanied the observation technique, the study illustrated a range
of literacy practices – running from extensive and complicated uses of writing
connected with individual responsibility to very restricted and dependent uses of
reading and writing governed by a top-down organisation. Furthermore, this study
illustrated a number of literacy events associated with reading and writing comprising
orientation or planning, problem solving, intermediation or conveying message or
information, education, external communication and documentation of responsibility
and continuity. This study concluded that the emerging ways of governing work through
written discourses linked to the new knowledge-based work order created very different
roles for individual workers.
A review of literature also has denoted that various studies conducted in
Malaysia deal with employers‟ expectations of potential employees given the need to
communicate intelligibly on the international scene. The focus has moved from
studying the exploitation of English in social and informal workplace contexts to the use
50
of English in formal situations in the workplace (Gill, 2002). Three studies are
particularly relevant to the proposed study due to their primary focus on identifying the
English language competencies required by the workplace in the Malaysian context.
Yaacob et al. (2005) interviewed four executives from Malaysian international and
government link companies (GLC) through focus group interviews to identify
proficiency and competencies of English highly valued in these corporations. The
participants rated high competencies in English as the main criteria anticipated from job
applicants because English is widely used in these corporations for different purposes in
communication, interaction and business transactions. The ability to speak and write in
English effectively is the utmost important skill valued by the employers in this study.
Similarly, Abdul Razak et al. (2006) required a number of employers from
different corporations to rank the importance of the four English language skills;
reading, writing, speaking and listening. More than half of the employers affirmed that
the ability to write in English is important. There is a higher expectation among
employers of the graduates‟ ability to speak, listen and read in English. The overall
findings show that all four language skills are considered as important or very important
skills required by the prospective employers.
Of particular interest to the present study are the elements of English language
competencies illustrated in Abdul Razak et al.‟s study (p.10), based on the data gathered
from the survey and interviews with the employers. The competencies are summarised
as follows:
1) Listening skills encompass understanding meetings and negotiations, receiving
instructions and orders and understanding information from various media.
2) Speaking skills consist of the ability to speak in social situation like formal
dinners, communicating with foreign partners, working together with foreign
counterparts, negotiating business matters, giving presentation and reporting.
51
3) Reading skills include reading reports, agreements, minutes of meetings, formal
letters, emails and instructions.
4) Writing skills comprise writing proposals, report, the content of website or
Internet.
Corresponding to previous arguments, Abdul Razak et al. asserted that
graduating students need to be trained further and given more opportunities in using the
English language in preparation for language needs at the workplace as required and
expected by the prospective employers.
Another study related to the English language needs analysis in terms the four
skills and grammar in the workplace is the one conducted by Talif and Noor (2009).
The study, which sought to identify the relevance of the tertiary English language
proficiency curriculum to the workplace, involved 86 final year students from various
disciplines in four public universities in Malaysia. The students were interviewed upon
completing their industrial training to investigate whether they were adequately
prepared by their respective universities to use English in their working environment
during industrial training.
This study parallels with other studies discussed earlier in terms of the high
demands of speaking skills among graduates to perform effectively at their workplace.
Of particular relevance to the current study are the findings on students‟ feedback
regarding the provision offered by the universities with regard to English language.
Although the majority of the students were satisfied with the English language courses
provided by their universities, they still indicated the needs for more opportunities and
activities that permit them to use the language within their academic settings.
Interestingly, this study points to the requirement to develop a context-sensitive model
of communicative competence which resembles the real world work to prepare the
university students for employment.
52
In essence, the review of related literature above gives an indication that there is
a need for more in-depth studies that provide close up examination on students‟
complex endeavours with the English language which impedes employable quality.
Most studies presented earlier employed mainly survey methods of study without
qualitative in-depth attention to further explore students‟ perspectives and experience
with English language, which is emerging as the major factor in employability. Studies
that are concerned with the students‟ attributes and readiness for employability are still
absent. Therefore, this study fills the gap in the literature by providing qualitative
insights on students‟ competencies and practices in English to distinguish the
divergence or convergence of these competencies and practices with regards to
employability. This study seeks to find answers to the problem by examining the
problem itself.
2.6 Contextual framework
The following sub-sections provide the background of the English language
policy in the Malaysian education system from the British era until present-days. An
introduction to this development is necessary to appreciate the national educational
goals and current language policies that underpin them. Next, the description of the
English language in the current context of higher learning institutions in Malaysia is
presented, followed by a discussion on research pertinent to English language
specifically within the context of higher education in the country.
53
2.6.1 English language education policy in Malaysia
English language holds as a complex and ironic status in Malaysia (Lee at al.,
2009). It is an „inherited‟ language and a „legacy‟ of the British colonialist, progressed
and altered through a long historical journey. It had been the medium of education and
the language of administration for many years prior to independence in 1957.
Historically, Peninsular Malaysia has been populated mainly by the Malays. In the
nineteenth century during the British colonial rule, Chinese and Indian immigrants were
brought into the country to work in the tin mines and the rubber plantations
respectively. These and subsequent economic migrations formed the bases of
Malaysia‟s multi-ethnic and multi-religious society.
The British, initially through Christian missionaries, established English schools
with English as the medium of instruction, as early as 1816 in Penang. English was then
used as the official language for administrative purposes which resulted in the
establishment of English medium schools to train prospective administrative employees
who were proficient in English. The English schools were established mainly in the
urban areas and most of the students were children of the royalties and aristocrats. The
students were offered ample opportunities for further education, employment in the civil
service and access scholarships. The curriculum in these schools was patterned after the
grammar school curriculum in Great Britain, with the intention of producing junior
administrative officers to support the British administration. Given that the English
medium schools were mostly set up within the urban areas, the majority of the student
population was non-Malay. The majority of the Malays who mainly resided in the rural
areas could not benefit from these opportunities (Gill, 2002). In fact, during the colonial
time, most Malay, Chinese and Tamil schools were established primarily to cater for the
cultural needs of their respective communities. Malaysians are generally observed to
54
have a variety of linguistic repertoires comprising of the Malay language or Bahasa
Melayu (referred as BM henceforth) and its diverse dialects, various Chinese dialects,
Punjabi, Tamil and the languages of East Malaysian ethnic groups such as Iban,
Bidayuh and Kadazan. English is positioned as one of the languages in the multilingual
Malaysian repertoires which is recognised as an important language in mainstream
education and many domains of the society.
Post independence to contemporary times has seen English language education
as predominantly governed by the political and national aspirations of the nation. With
the establishment of independence, the new national government set out to form a
common national educational system, attempting to bind diverse groups into a unified
whole. The initial national educational curriculum was designed in view of the
recommendations made by the Razak Report in 1956 (Omar, 1987). This was a major
influential report prepared by the Education committee aimed at creating a national
identity or a Malaysian outlook with the introduction of common content syllabuses and
the use of a standardised medium of instruction, the Malay language or BM. Indeed, the
aim of creating a national identity through BM was formally integrated into the
vernacular education system through the development of a national education
curriculum (Azman, 2004). The Razak Report gave BM its legitimate status and role as
the national language as well as the pivot of national unity and integration. Since then,
BM has been accepted as the national language and is enshrined in Article 152 of the
Constitution of Malaysia.
This policy change brought about a significant impact on the status of the
English language. In the Razak Report, the English language, which was previously the
lingua franca of the elite and which held a formal role in the running of the colonial
government, was regarded as a „foreign ingredient‟ in the national identity.
Nevertheless, the post independence government had to concede that mastering English
55
would always be crucial should the country progress economically and politically, given
the language‟s international standing and significant position across the globe (Hashim,
2004). Therefore, English was then declared as „an important second language‟ which
was retained as the medium of instruction in the former English schools and remained
as one of the compulsory subjects taught in national schools. Until 1970, two distinct
school systems operated within the country, namely the national schools which used
BM as the medium of instruction, and the national type English schools which used
English exclusively as the medium of instruction. However, the English medium was
gradually converted to BM in stages. One reason for this was the limited availability of
textbooks in BM in various disciplines especially medical, law and engineering faculties
(Omar, 1987). Despite its second language role, English was still significantly used in
commercial and communication sectors.
In 1978, the National Language Policy was implemented, unifying all education
systems with BM chosen as the medium of instruction across all national schools and
tertiary institutions as well as the premier language for nation-building and
administration. The National Language Policy reaffirmed the status of English as „the
second most important language‟. In the national system of education, English has been
taught as a second language and a compulsory subject to all students right from their
first year of primary education through eleven years of schooling until the end of their
secondary education. It has also been acknowledged as an important language for local
and international trade as well as a language that provides an additional means of access
to academic, professional and recreational materials. Although it is only taught as a
subject in the school curriculum, it is still used quite extensively outside the classroom
in some of the urban schools.
From independence to 1987, the education system remained geared toward
achieving national identity for economic and national growth. By 1983, the entire
56
national school system was using BM as the medium of instruction. The execution of
Kurikulum Baru Sekolah Rendah (KBSR) or New Primary Schools Curriculum in 1983
and Kurikulum Bersepadu Sekolah Menengah (KBSM) or Integrated Secondary
Schools Curriculum in 1989 was a step towards the implementation of an education
system with a common goal, direction and approach. Fundamental in the KBSR
syllabus is the acquisition of the basic skills of reading, writing and arithmetic. After six
years of primary education through the KBSR, students resumed their secondary
education under a revamped English language teaching syllabus in KBSM. The infusion
of moral and spiritual values along with a skill-based syllabus, incorporating listening,
speaking, reading and writing activities, while advocating the communicative approach
to English language teaching were central in the KBSM syllabus. In addition, the aim of
the syllabus was to extend overall students‟ English language proficiency in order to
meet their needs for English in everyday life, for knowledge acquisition and for future
workplace needs. According to the Ministry of Education (1989), integration in KBSM
permitted multiple dimensions of language content and situations which stimulate real
life conditions making language learning „more realistic and authentic‟.
Subsequently, the aspirations of the nation began to shift; by the 1990s,
emphasis was less on politics and ideology, and more on economic imperatives. In
1991, the former Prime Minister, Tun Mahathir Mohamad, publicly announced his
Vision 2020 objective to transform the country into a fully-modern industrialised
society by the year 2020. Vision 2020 envisages that Malaysia will become a
scientifically and technologically advanced nation by the year 2020 if it can surmount
nine challenges (Mohamad, 1991). Among the challenges, one in particular has
implications for the role of English. It is to:
57
Establish a scientific and progressive society, a society that is innovative
and forward-looking, one that is not only a consumer of technology, but
also a contributor of the scientific and technological civilization of the
future.
In the context of Vision 2020, the position of English is more clearly defined.
Essentially, it is to serve as a tool for human resource development and technological
advancement in the progress towards achieving developed nation status. The process of
transforming Malaysia into a modern industrialised society by 2020 is equated with the
development of an information and communication technology (ICT) and knowledge-
based economy.
In 1996, the Malaysian government introduced the Education Act 1996 which
commended the use of English as a medium of instruction for technical areas in post
secondary curriculum to enable Malaysia to make the quantum leap in line with the
nation‟s Vision 2020 aim towards achieving an industrialised status and to compete in
the globalisation era (Puteh et al., 2004). In addition, English has been declared as a
subject to be studied at an advanced level, particularly the sixth form or pre-university
curriculum, to fill the current two-year gap when English is studied again at university.
There will then be greater continuity in the English language curriculum from primary
school to university. With respect to secondary schools, the English language syllabus
in KBSM was revised in 2000 to extend students‟ proficiency by incorporating the
functional use of the language in everyday life and underlining the learning outcomes to
enable students to use the language effectively (Pandian, 2007).
In 2003, after more than 30 years of using BM as the medium of instruction for
all subjects except English, the Malaysian educational system experienced another wave
of change with the use of English to teach Mathematics and the Sciences in its
educational institutions in line with the growth of ICT and knowledge-based economy.
This move was made following an accelerating demand of governments, industries and
58
corporations for scientific and technological advancements mostly available in English
in the era of economic globalisation. The implementation of English for the Teaching of
Mathematics and Science (ETeMS) policy was deemed necessary to upgrade the
mastery of English among Malaysian students to enable them to access the latest
scientific information and knowledge and to communicate and participate effectively in
the global context while raising the standard of Mathematics and Science (Syed Zin,
2004). Furthermore, the former Prime Minister, Tun Mahathir Mohamad was quoted as
follows:
We want to create a new generation of Malaysians who are well-
educated and able to compete with the developed world. Despite
objections from various sectors, the Malaysian Cabinet made a decision
on using English as the medium for teaching of Science and
Mathematics. The rationale behind selecting these two subjects is the
light speed pace of development of these disciplines. (The Star, 10
October 2002)
Thus, the reinstatement of the English language as the medium of instruction in
both subjects “acknowledges the dual role of English as the language of technology and
as a global language for international communication” (Azman, 2004, p. 20).
Nevertheless, in 2009, after nine years of its execution, the government decided to
revoke the ETeMS policy effective after 2012 taking into account feedback received
from various parties concerning its implementation. According to Othman and Krish
(2011), an „abrupt‟ change like this caused teachers and students to be cognitively and
linguistically challenged. Correspondingly, Tan and Ong (2011) allege that the
implementation of the ETeMS policy had intensified the existing severe pressure of
major public examinations to the exam oriented educational system in Malaysia.
In essence, taking into account the various spheres of life embracing education,
communication, commercial and legal sectors, the position of English is clearly defined
as a second official language in the country (Omar, 1992). To borrow Omar‟s words,
59
A second language covers more domains of communication than a
foreign language, and a second language speaker shows a higher fluency
than a foreign speaker of the same language (p. 91).
In brief, the above discussion has outlined some of the key movements that have
taken place in English language literacy in Malaysia. Clearly, the rise of English was
witnessed within the colonial era while its decline was evident amidst nationalism and
nation building; it is well acknowledged as a global language in the contemporary
scenario. The literacy landscape also observed shifts in approaches to English learning
in higher education.
2.6.2 English language in higher education in Malaysia
Over the last decade, the higher education industry in Malaysia has experienced
rapid expansion in the formation of universities and colleges. It is imperative for higher
learning institutions to provide sufficient opportunities and platforms to meet the
increasing demands of the global forces. To date, the Malaysian higher education
system consists of 20 government-funded or public universities, 32 private universities
and 300 private colleges, four foreign university branch campuses and more than 500
colleges. These are multi-faculty institutions which offer a wide variety of courses. The
Malaysian higher education system underwent considerable expansion from 1980 to
2000, and there are now universities in all parts of Malaysia including the East of
Malaysia. The universities were, until 2004, administered by the Department of Higher
Education under the Ministry of Education. In 2004, the governance at the ministerial
level was rearranged to ensure expansion and sustainability of tertiary education in
Malaysia. The Ministry of Education was then split into two; the new Ministry of
Higher Education will help to promote Malaysia as an education hub.
60
Malaysian degrees correspond to bachelor, master and doctoral degrees. The
bachelor degree requires at least three years of full-time study while the master degree
requires an additional two years. Full time studies for a doctoral degree take
approximately four additional years. In most fields, students are able to select from a
wide variety of options, including their choice for minor subjects. Globalisation‟s
impact on higher education, through privatisation and internationalisation, has assisted
the growth of private higher education in Malaysia. More investments for the expansion
of public tertiary education and a change in state policy on privatisation of education
resulted in the output of more graduates with higher educational qualifications.
While the Malay language is the medium of instruction at the school level, it is
not the case at the tertiary level of education, where two distinct arrangements have
been in force for over a decade. All public institutions of higher education, with the
exception of MARA University of Technology (UiTM) and International Islamic
University Malaysia (IIUM), use the Malay language as the medium of instruction,
while most private higher education institutions use the English language.
Azman (2006, p.99) claims that “underlying the naturalisation of teaching and
learning of English in the Malaysian education system are ideological pressures and
political dogmas, often emerging from colonial, urban/rural and even local ethnic
conflicts and hierarchies”. This is evident in the English language programmes at
universities, which are generally government funded, to reflect the language policy of
the sponsors (Wong, 1998). Primarily, the most powerful influence on the nature of
English language programmes is the government‟s stand concerning the position of
English in the National Education System and society at large. Initially, following the
National Language Policy in 1970, all universities had adopted the national policy of
using BM as the sole medium of instruction. English was relegated to the position of a
second language and its role confined to being a means of acquiring knowledge.
61
However, the limited resources in BM in certain important disciplines had led to the
continuous use of English in most aspects of teaching and learning. Omar (1987) states
that though the medium of instruction from 1983 onwards has been BM at the tertiary
level, Malaysian university students will still have to use textbooks written in English,
especially those in the medical, law and engineering fields. She further explains that it
will take many more decades before Malaysians are capable of producing a sufficient
number of books for the various academic disciplines. Furthermore, the predominance
of reference books used in higher education continues to be in English (Nik, 1981). This
is beyond the control of the university policy makers and educators since the global
knowledge base and information is predominantly in English (Subramani & Kempner,
2002).
Since 2002, the role and status of English as a second language has evolved into
that of a language through which instruction and communication of knowledge in
science and technology are conducted particularly in tertiary education. Indeed, the
exceptional advent of new media technologies, global communications and increasingly
diverse population has led to profound implications and demands for English among
university students (Pandian, 2007). In line with the challenges, the Ministry of Higher
Education established its National Higher Education Strategic Plan for 2007 to 2010
which
aims squarely on holistic human capital development, to produce
Malaysians who are intellectually active, creative and innovative,
articulate, adaptable and capable of critical thinking.
(Ministry of Higher Education Malaysia, 2007a, p. 7)
This plan was intended to ensure that Malaysian universities would be able to compete
more effectively at the global stage and produce employable skilled workforce to
strengthen the nation‟s economic development.
62
Hence, English language literacy has now become crucially important for
effective transmission of knowledge in higher learning institutions. For that reason, the
Ministry of Higher Education has made it a compulsory requirement for admission to
local universities. All students must obtain a minimum of Band 1 in the Malaysian
University English Test (MUET) to be enrolled in any public universities. A detailed
description of the MUET scores is presented in Appendix 1.
The MUET is a test designed for prospective university students to assess their
English language proficiency in four areas of listening, speaking, reading and writing. It
is basically used to determine whether the students have an adequate level of English
language competence to follow undergraduate courses in their chosen disciplines.
Explicitly, the MUET syllabus seeks “to consolidate the English language ability of pre-
university students to enable them to perform effectively in their academic pursuits at
tertiary level, in line with the aspirations of the National Education Philosophy”
(Malaysian Examination Council, 1999, p. 11). Furthermore, the general objective of
the MUET syllabus is to bridge the gap in language needs between secondary and
tertiary education which is achieved through:
1. the enhancement of students‟ communicative competence to a level
appropriate for tertiary education
2. the provision of the context for language use that is related to tertiary
education experience
3. the development of critical thinking and the competent use of the four
language skills
(Malaysian Examination Council, ibid).
It is apparent that the position of English within the higher education industry
has now become increasingly important given its significant role as the leading
language of academic publications, communication and technologies. Numerous
63
attempts have been made across all tertiary institutions, which hold crucial
responsibilities in educating and producing young Malaysians as potential human
resources to fulfill the needs of the local and international workforce, to develop and
increase mastery of the English language among the university students.
2.6.3 Research on English literacies in higher education
Notwithstanding the massive initiatives put forward by many parties to enhance
English language proficiency among Malaysian students, a review of literature on
research relevant to English language literacy draws attention to the decline in the
standards of English among students in the country. Indeed, numerous studies have
reported that the Malaysian university students‟ mastery of the language is still
considered far from satisfactory despite undergoing years of learning English (Choy &
Troudi, 2006; Mohd Asraf & Sheikh Ahmad, 2003; Syed Zin, 2004). Some associate
this situation with the government‟s decision to change the medium of instruction in
schools from English to Malay in 1983 (Awang et al., 2011, Koo & Soo, 2007;
Subramani & Kempner, 2002). The implementation of the Malay-medium of instruction
had raised general concerns particularly among teachers and scholars with regard to the
deterioration of students‟ English language proficiency (Nik, 1981, Omar, 1987;
Pandian, 2002). It was found that most pre-university students have not been
sufficiently exposed to speaking and writing in English during their secondary
schooling (Nik, ibid).
However, much research has pointed to a prevailing trend of “reproduction of
information and privileging examination” (Koo, 2008, p. 56) in English language
education which contributes to the low achievement in the language among secondary
64
school students and university students, who are products of the school system.
Generally at schools, attention is driven towards preparing students for assessments
both at the school and national levels (Othman & Krish, 2011) where students are
drilled towards mastering grammatical skills (Pandian, 2002) and are oriented to
exercise memorisation and regurgitation (Ismail, 2008; Lee et al., 2010; Thang, 2003).
Given the high importance placed on national examination, it is reported that many
grammar revision books and examination practices take centre stage of learning, thus
causing the students to become examination-oriented while the class activities and the
teaching approaches have also become less focused on communicative competence.
Indeed, the teaching approaches are typically found to accentuate the exploitation of
past-year exam questions and exercise books where the chalk-and-talk drilling method
is highly evident (Pandian, 2002).
Some research has also attributed the decline in English proficiency to the
construction of the syllabus which disregarded students from non-English speaking
backgrounds who have limited or non-existent exposure to English beyond the
classroom (Rajaretnam & Nalliah, 1999). In regard to overall English language in the
school system, Pandian (2007) further discloses the mismatches between the format of
the public examination and the syllabus content. While the construct of the examination
consists of a considerable amount of writing and reading comprehension tasks, the
teaching and learning approaches recommended in the syllabus content indicate
otherwise.
The appalling standard of English among Malaysian students is not astounding
given that English literacy has consistently been regarded mainly as schooled practices
and less in terms of daily practices in the community of the rural areas (Azman, 2006).
For many students in the rural areas, English is not necessarily considered as their
second language; it is indeed perceived as a foreign language due to the restricted
65
quantity of exposure and usage of the language within their existing surroundings
(Mustafa, 2009). Considering that most interactions at the tertiary institutions are
carried out in BM or other dialects, the average Malaysian university student does not
have many opportunities to speak English beyond the walls of the English classroom
(Ting et al., 2009).
Of late, there has been considerable research carried out in response to the
overwhelming concern of the country over the low level of English proficiency among
Malaysian university graduates. Of specific interest to the present study is the study
conducted by Sarudin et al. (2008) involving 405 final year students from 6 public
universities and 117 participants representing the academic staff, government official
and business leaders. Commissioned by the Ministry of Higher Education, this large-
scale project was intended to investigate the perceptions of the public and private
sectors of the English language proficiency of Malaysian university students. The first
part of the study involved the evaluation of Malaysian public university students‟
English language proficiency based on their scores in the English Proficiency Test
(EPT). The EPT comprised five major English skills: reading; writing; speaking;
listening; and grammar components. The second part of the study entailed a qualitative
study of Malaysian university students‟ English language proficiency from the
perspectives of the academic staff, government officials and business leaders from the
public and private sectors.
In general, the findings illustrated that most students were limited users of
English particularly in terms of writing and speaking, while they were modest users in
listening and reading competencies. One key finding is that these students were
generally found to be insufficiently proficient in English to be able to undertake English
medium programmes at the tertiary level because of their poor reading comprehension
skills, limited writing skills to complete academic writing tasks as well as their
66
restricted ability to express ideas orally, to conduct presentations and to participate in
group discussions. With regard to employment, the findings also revealed that the
students were inadequately prepared for employment as they lacked the competencies to
express their thoughts and ideas, to write reports and to present them orally.
The findings also disclosed that most participants mutually agreed that the
medium of instruction in BM is the major factor contributing to the students‟ shortfall in
English together with the students‟ factors such as poor proficiency prior to undertaking
tertiary studies and their low self confidence. In addition, there was a general concern
among the academic staff, government officials and business leaders that the students
are not proactive in improving their English despite knowing their handicap in the
language. This is troubling given that their restricted competencies in English have
restrained their access to knowledge as well as their current academic performance.
Consequently, this will likely jeopardise their marketability for local and international
workplaces. As a matter of fact, many Malaysian students were aware of the importance
of English as the private sectors had drawn attention to the fact that many graduates
were unemployed because of their low level of English. Most importantly, in this study,
Sarudin et al. (2008) recommended the minimum of MUET Band 2 for university
enrolment. They also emphasised that English should be made compulsory for science
and technology disciplines and that more English programmes should be implemented
across all university curriculum to ensure that future graduates can perform effectively
at the workplace after graduation.
Given the current dilemma pertaining to deficiencies in the English language
among Malaysian graduates, it is contended that the research within this area is still
relatively nominal. Nonetheless, a review of literature in the Malaysian context denotes
that much of the outcome of research which examined the English language literacies in
higher education appears to be in tune with the findings of Sarudin et al. (2008)
67
presented above. For example, Ismail‟s (2008) study supports the view that most
university students encounter difficulties in dealing with English at university and this
has resulted in their meager performance in their discipline subjects. In regard to
reading practices at tertiary studies, research has shown (Kaur & Thiyagarajah, 1999;
Mokhtar et al., 2010; Muhammad, 2007; Pandian, 2002) that a good number of
university students were incapable of reading academic texts effectively due to their
shortfall in English. Students were observed to exercise minimal reading where it is
mostly done solely for examination purposes. The studies of Choy & Troudi (2006),
Hassan & Selamat (2002), Ismail (2008) and Rafik-Galea & Mohd Zain (2006) seem to
resonate with the findings of Sarudin et al. (ibid) which demonstrate students‟ lack of
confidence and high language anxiety when conducting communicative activities in
English. Correspondingly, Maarof et al. (2003) and Ting et al. (2009) report that a good
number of tertiary students experience difficulties conversing and expressing
themselves in English.
In brief, the analysis of literature pertinent to English literacies of tertiary
students above suggests that immediate measures to surmount the decline of English
need to be carried out at once. Arguably, more detailed research that looks into the
students‟ predicament with the language by gathering information from their own
voices and zooming in on their existing practices is necessary; such is the intention of
the present study.
68
2.7 Conclusion
Several prevailing points relating to English language academic literacies can be
drawn out from this review of the related literature. First, English language academic
literacies entail multiple literacy practices that are bounded by their social and cultural
context. Second, there are complex issues of languages and challenges involved in
relation to academic literacies at tertiary level as well as at the workplace. Third,
academic and workplace literacy practices are also influenced by the practices of the
immediate community and the society at large.
Research reviewed here has shown that there is still much to be learned about
English language academic literacy practices and competencies of university students
specifically within the ESL academic and workplace environments. In particular, there
is a dearth of literature on this topic with regard to the situation in a multilingual and
multiracial country like Malaysia. Additionally, previous studies conducted in Malaysia
have demonstrated the need to study the problems with English among tertiary students
from an ideological perspective that takes into account students‟ authentic voices and
actual experiences to provide insights into the issues under study. The present study
therefore contributes to the knowledge in the field, given its objectives and focus. The
next chapter discusses the research methodology and procedures employed to examine
the five research questions.
69
Chapter Three
Research Methods
3.1 Introduction
This chapter discusses the overall research design and methods adopted in this
study. It begins with an overview of the research aims, followed by the description of
the research paradigm, outlining the theoretical framework underpinning the design of
this study and justification for the chosen design of the study. The chapter continues
with the depiction of the research context, describing the participants and sampling
procedure, and the research sites involved in the study. This is followed by a description
of the techniques and procedures adopted for data collection and data analysis. The final
section addresses issues of validity and reliability as well as ethical issues of the study.
3.2 Research aims
To reiterate, this study had dual aims. The first was to develop understandings of
the English language academic literacy practices and competencies of a Malaysian
tertiary cohort by focusing on their perspectives. This component explores the existing
academic literacy practices and competencies of the students at the exit point of
completing two compulsory English language courses while identifying the features of
70
the academic environment and English language proficiency that influence their current
practices and competencies. The second aim of this study was to examine whether the
researched students‟ English language literacy practices and competencies at that stage
meet the required expectations of prospective employers. This was achieved by
measuring the students‟ existing level of practices and competencies against the
prospective employers‟ benchmarks for English language competencies.
3.2.1 Specific research objectives
In particular, to develop an understanding of the undergraduate students‟ English
language academic literacy practices and competencies with regards to employability,
the study set out to answer the research questions posed in Chapter One by
accomplishing the following tasks:
1. Identify the academic literacy practices and competencies of the students in
English.
2. Identify the students‟ perspectives of their English literacy practices and
competencies.
3. Draw out the implications of the environmental and educational factors, and
English language proficiency, that might impact on the students‟ academic
literacy practices and competencies in English language.
4. Measure the students‟ existing levels of practices and competencies against the
prospective employers‟ benchmarks for English language proficiency.
From a broader perspective, this study thus represents an investigation of
English language academic literacy practices and competencies through the lenses of a
group of undergraduate students situated in a specific higher learning institution in
Malaysia and the extent of correlation of the cohort‟s existing competencies with the
71
overall employers‟ expectations of English language competencies. The knowledge
obtained from the research findings will contribute information about, and provide
insights into, the distinctive circumstances of the development of English language
practices and competencies within the academic and workplace contexts. The
theoretical framework supporting the design of the study is presented in the ensuing
section.
3.3 Research paradigm
This study sits within the interpretivist tradition, which argues that “all social
reality is constructed, or created, by social actors” (Esterberg, 2002, p. 15). It is couched
in three central premises: (1) “humans act toward things based on the meanings those
things have for them; (2) “the meanings of things arise out of social interaction”; and (3)
“meanings are created (and changed) through a process of interpretation” (Esterberg,
ibid). Informed by this theoretical orientation, it is assumed that the researcher must
gain direct access to the researched participants and their specific contexts to understand
how they construct and interpret the meanings of their lived experiences. This is
achieved through “social interaction” (O‟Donoghue, 2007, p. 9) between the researcher
and the researched participants.
Consistent with the interpretive stance of this study, the qualitative approach to
inquiry was chosen to facilitate in-depth and detailed understanding (Patton, 2002) of a
group of undergraduate students‟ English language academic literacy practices and
competencies as well as employers‟ perspectives and expectations in regards to
graduates‟ English language competencies. Qualitative research is best suited for this
study of the phenomenon of English language academic literacy practices and
competencies of undergraduate students with regard to employability, about which little
information is provided in the literature (Creswell, 2008). To surmount this deficit, the
72
need for a detailed understanding of the issue from the perspectives of the participants
warrants the use of qualitative inquiry due to its fundamentally interpretive nature
(Creswell, 2009). Denzin and Lincoln (2008) write;
Qualitative research involves the studied use and collection of a variety
of empirical materials…- that describe routine and problematic moments
and meanings in individuals‟ lives. Accordingly, qualitative researchers
deploy a wide range of interconnected interpretive practices, hoping
always to get a better understanding of the subject matter at hand.
(pp. 4-5)
Within the qualitative tradition, this study acknowledges the significant
influence of natural settings on participants‟ behaviour and experiences (Bogdan and
Biklen, 2007). This study is “a situated activity” (Denzin and Lincoln, ibid, p. 4) that
seeks to unfold the reality and knowledge that “…take place in real-world settings and
[where] the researcher does not attempt to manipulate the phenomenon of interest”
(Patton, 2002, p. 39). This perspective presumes that the participants construct diverse
and multiple meanings of their own practices and experiences within their social
contexts (Denzin and Lincoln, ibid; Creswell, 2009). Hence, to capture these practices
and experiences accurately and “to make sense of, or interpret [their] meanings”
(Creswell, ibid, p. 8), the researcher visits the researched participants‟ contexts to gain
first-hand insights from the “participants‟ perspectives” (Bogdan and Biklen, ibid, p. 7)
or “insiders‟ [emic] perspectives” (Merriam, 2009, p. 14) and gather information and
resources personally (Crotty, 1998). This enables the researcher to explore the
researched participants‟ feelings, beliefs and values pertinent to the issues under study
(Schwandt, 2000).
73
3.3.1 Case study method
According to Bogdan and Biklen (ibid, p. 5);
The qualitative approach demands that the world be examined with the
assumption that nothing is trivial, that everything has the potential of
being a clue that might unlock a more comprehensive understanding of
what is being studied.
Anchored in this perspective, this study employs the case study strategy of data
collection and data analysis (Punch 2005; Yin 2008). The selection of the case study
method stems from the primary objective of this study which is to develop an in-depth
understanding of a particular case, focusing exclusively on a group of undergraduate
students‟ English language academic literacy practices and competencies with respect to
employability, which takes place in a bounded context (Miles and Huberman, 1994),
specifically, in a Malaysian public university. Germane to its descriptive feature, the
case study method offers a rich and holistic account (Merriam, ibid; Yin, ibid) of the
case under study, while preserving its wholeness and unity in its natural setting as well
as “recognising its complexity and its context” (Punch, ibid, p. 144). According to Stake
(2006, p. 3), “Qualitative case study is valued for its ability to capture complex action,
perception, and interpretation”.
Further, the “intrinsic” (Stake, 2005, p. 445) and “particularistic” (Merriam,
ibid, p. 43) nature of this case study complements its main intention to explore “a
bounded system or a case” by gathering “multiple sources of information” (Creswell,
2007, p. 73) and report the outcomes by providing exhaustive analysis and description
of the case (Merriam, ibid). This entails rigorous data collection procedures
incorporating multiple sources of data collated from focus groups interviews, individual
interviews and non-participant observations, and supplemented by additional
instruments such as written-summaries, documentary data and questionnaires.
74
Concurrently, the multiple compilations of data permit the researcher to analyse them
thoroughly “with all of their richness as closely as possible to the form in which they
were recorded or transcribed” (Bogdan and Biklen, 2007, p. 5). Using the “data-driven”
(Duff, 2008, p. 44) or inductive process of data analysis in combination with data
triangulation from various resources to arrive at themes and categories, the findings of
the case under study are presented in a form of „thick‟ and „rich‟ descriptions of the
context, participants and activities of interest. In due course, these “can bring about the
discovery of new meaning, extend the reader‟s experience, or confirm what is known”
(Merriam, 2009, p. 44).
Various literature has underlined the emergence and efficacy of case study
methods applied by numerous studies conducted all over the world in the past several
decades. In particular, Duff (ibid) notes the developmental trends of contemporary case
studies in using more interpretive and critical analytic practices to study aspects of
language learning and literacy in the bilingual, multilingual/multicultural and other L2
learning contexts. In addition, Purcell-Gates (2007) highlights the need to investigate
more case studies of language and literacy practices within the social and cultural
suppositions and tenets.
Previous studies on academic literacy or “academic discourse socialization”
(Duff, ibid, p. 89) of non-native speakers of English conducted in Asia, North America
and elsewhere (eg. Belcher and Connor (2001); Casanave (2002); Dong (1996); Ferenz
(2005); Gosden (1996); Leki (2007); Riazi (1997); Schneider and Fujishima (1995);
Spack (1997)) have indicated the value of case study strategy in providing rich
information about students, about the strategies they employ to communicate and learn,
how their own personalities, attitudes, and goals interact with the learning environment,
and the nature of their linguistic growth. Nevertheless, it is observed that such studies
were significantly conducted within the English speaking or L1 environment. This leads
75
to the impetus for carrying out a case study in order to understand the academic literacy
practices and competencies within the English-as-a-second-language (ESL)
circumstances, particularly in the Malaysian context, through the lenses of the key
participants. The case study method is deemed the most appropriate means to
investigate students‟ academic literacy practices and competencies as it takes into
consideration students‟ socio-cultural and educational backgrounds to facilitate and
generate substantial understanding and insights on the case under study. Inevitably, this
will contribute to new knowledge and provide more qualitative evidence to the
Malaysian setting as there is a lack of theory to explain the case prior to current study.
Figure 3.1 illustrates the overall research paradigm, as outlined in this section.
Figure 3.1: Overview of the research paradigm
Source: Adapted from Creswell (2009, p. 5)
3.4 Research context
3.4.1 Sampling
To best understand the phenomenon of students‟ academic literacy practices and
competencies in English language with regard to employability, the researcher
deliberately selected the students and employers to participate in the study. Participants
Selected strategy of
inquiry
Case study strategy
Research Design
Qualitative
approach
Research Methods
Questions
Data collection
Data analysis
Interpretation
Write-up
Validation
Philosophical
worldview
Interpretivism
76
selected in this manner were deemed best suited to provide information to understand
the research problem and answer the research questions in this study (Creswell, 2009).
This „purposeful sampling‟ (Creswell, 2008) or „purposive sampling‟ (Punch, 2005)
strategy allowed the researcher to obtain and record firsthand information from the
participants in order to “learn” about the case under study. In addition, this permitted
“an understanding that provides voice to individuals who may not be heard otherwise
and might give voice to „silenced‟ people” (Creswell, ibid, p. 214).
3.4.2 The students
The main participants of this study were 21 third year students from the
Engineering faculty at a public university in Malaysia. As the key informants, the
students were deliberately selected based on the level of English language proficiency
achieved in the Malaysian University English Test (MUET) at the university entrance.
The purpose of MUET is to measure the English language proficiency of university
students for entry into tertiary education as well as to gauge their ability to use the
English language for academic purposes at higher learning institutions. These
Engineering students were chosen because they were the only group at the university
who were specifically required to take up two English courses, Foundation English and
English for Engineering.
All student participants attained Band 2 in MUET, which is the lowest level
scored among Engineering students. According to the MUET descriptions, these
students are identified as “limited users” of the English language (Appendix 1). In the
first year of their tertiary study, they were required to undertake a proficiency English
course, Foundation English (FE), which is specifically designated for all newly-enrolled
students who obtained Band 1 or 2 in the MUET. The students were not required to
77
enroll in any English course during their second year of study. Following a special
requirement made by their Dean of Faculty, these students were subsequently asked to
take on the English for Engineering course (E4E), which was originally offered only for
Engineering students with higher MUET levels. This course was taken up by the
students in their third year of studies, prior to their internship programme. The purpose
of this course is to prepare the students with communication skills for the workplace
situations. Unlike their counterparts in other faculties with an equivalent MUET level,
these selected students had the advantage of taking two English courses throughout their
studies in the university. These circumstances provide strong justification for selecting
the students in this study.
In an attempt to develop an understanding of these students‟ English language
academic literacy practices and competencies, this study was conducted at the exit point
of completing the two compulsory English courses at the university, in particular, at the
end of the English for Engineering course. The reason for conducting this study at this
particular point is because there was no further English training at all provided for the
students after their industrial training. Specifically, the data collection procedure was
conducted during the last three weeks of the semester. Upon completing their third year
of full-time studies, the researched students were scheduled to embark on their
industrial training for ten weeks. Then, the students were expected to resume their
academic programme in the final year, dealing mostly with thesis writing in the Malay
language.
Generally, the researched students came from diverse majors in Engineering
studies including Chemical, Manufacturing, Electrical and Electronic, Mechanical, Civil
and Structural Engineering and Architecture, and different ethnic backgrounds. The
majority of them were Malays while three of them were Chinese. Nearly all of them
came from a non-English-speaking environment, mostly located in the suburban and
78
rural areas. The students‟ age ranges from 21 to 24 years old. The distribution of age
was due to the different pathways of entry to the university as explained in Sub-section
3.4.4. Most of these students obtained Grade B and C in English in their secondary
school examination, Sijil Pelajaran Malaysia (SPM)1.
The students were purposefully selected to take part in four focus group
interviews and, subsequently, 4 students were recruited for individual interviews. It
should be emphasised that for reasons of confidentiality in this study, the students are
identified only by using alphanumerical codes (Appendix 2). Based on the original
focus groups, four students recruited for the individual interviews were identified as
FG1d, FG2b, FG3a and FG4e.
3.4.3 The employers
This study was also informed by input from a number of employers in Malaysia
to provide information about English language competencies in the workplace and
employers‟ expectations on new graduates. These employers were selected based on
their positions as potential employers for the student participants in this study and that
they were typically involved in recruiting new graduates from Malaysian public
universities. Thirteen Human Resource Managers and/or Executives from various
public and private sectors were deliberately chosen to represent the „employers‟
standpoint for the purposes of this study. Most of the corporations that the researched
employers were involved in are multinational and local companies engaging with
industrial and service sectors. The selection of the managers and executives was made
based on their familiarity with recruitment of employees and their experience working
1 Sijil Pelajaran Malaysia (SPM) or Malaysian Certificate in Education is a secondary school examination
which is made compulsory on each student. Entrance to tertiary education requires a pass in SPM with
credits in 5 subjects including Bahasa Melayu.
79
with new graduates. The researched employers participated in in-depth individual
interviews conducted at their respective workplaces and completed a qualitative
questionnaire. Official documents produced by the respective corporations were also
gathered for this study. The employers are identified by the alphanumerical codes
established for confidentiality purposes in this study (Appendix 3).
3.4.4 The research sites
The contextual focus of this study was a public university in Peninsular
Malaysia. As one of Malaysia‟s major universities, this university is acknowledged as a
national university given its vital mission to promote the Malay language as “the
language of knowledge at the pinnacle of the nation education system” (as shown on the
university‟s website). In 2006, the university was granted a research university status
due to its prominent achievement in research, academic and community programmes
and internalisation. At present, it constitutes 13 faculties and 14 research institutes
catering to diverse academic programmes within the arts and sciences.
The Faculty of Engineering and Built Environment, from which the research
participants were selected, offers a wide range of Engineering programmes through five
departments including Civil and Structural Engineering, Electrical, Electronic and
Systems Engineering, Chemical and Process Engineering, Mechanical and Process
Engineering, and Architecture. In conforming to the requirements and the needs of the
employment sectors, this faculty aims to produce Engineering graduates who hold
sufficient scientific knowledge that enables them to perform professionally and ethically
in the local and international workplace. In accordance with the national status of the
university, one of the faculty‟s main aims is to produce Engineering graduates who are
“proficient in English and also prepared to uphold Bahasa Melayu as the language of
80
knowledge in the fields of engineering and built environment” (as shown on the
university‟s website). The minimum full-time enrolment period of the academic
programmes is seven semesters which incorporate lectures, tutorials, laboratory
sessions, examination and industrial training.
Entrance to the university is determined by the Centre for University Unit where
selection is made centrally at mid-year. There are three channels through which students
may obtain a place in the university: (1) admission with the Sijil Tinggi Persekolahan
Malaysia (STPM) or Malaysian Highest School Certificate; (2) admission with the
Matriculation examination organised by the Ministry of Higher Education; and (3)
admission through a diploma from recognised institutions. Together with the minimum
qualification in one of the channels above, the students must obtain a minimum of Band
1 in the Malaysian University English Test (MUET) for university entrance. Students
who apply for university admission with STPM qualification are usually 21 years old
while those who completed Matriculation programmes are usually 20 to 21 of age.
Students who apply to university with diploma qualifications are normally 21 to 23
years old depending on the length of their diploma studies. Some diplomas are awarded
after one year of study and others after three years.
3.5 Data collection methods
Aiming to gain as much data as possible from the participants, multiple methods
of data collection were conducted involving three different cohorts; the students, the
teachers and the employers. Student data were obtained through multiple techniques
incorporating focus group interviews, individual interviews and non-participant
observation. Added to these were the written summary sheets fulfilled by the students,
and written field notes taken by the researcher. The documentary sources, such as the
81
course booklets, students‟ written assignments and results, collected from the teachers
and English course coordinators offered contextual information about the courses as
well as supplementary information about the students‟ performance and achievement in
their English classes. Data gained from the employers were sourced from individual
interviews and supplemented by additional instruments such as a questionnaire and
official documents. Using multiple sources of data supports triangulation in data
collection and helps the research credibility by checking the reliability and validity of
the information obtained (Flick, 2002). Data collection was carried out over a period of
three months. The following sub-sections describe the data collection procedures in
detail.
3.5.1 Student data collection
3.5.1.1 Focus group interviews
Focus group interviews were utilised as the primary source of data collection
from the students owing to their flexible, stimulating and elaborative assets in providing
rich data (Punch, 2005). Given its main objective of exploring undergraduate students‟
academic literacy practices and competencies, the study utilised focus group interviews
as a means of eliciting the students‟ perspectives and experiences in a natural or real-life
atmosphere, that is, in the academic environment. As Morgan (1998, p. 2) suggests,
“[T]he explicit use of group interactions to produce data and insights that would be less
accessible without the interaction found in the group” allowed the researcher to gain
rich information pertaining to students‟ perspectives of their academic literacy practices
and competencies. The interactions among the students offered the best information as
they cooperated with each other by “sharing and comparing” (Morgan, 1998, p. 12)
their explicit “views, perceptions, motives and reasons” (Punch, 2005, p. 171).
82
A series of open-ended questions encouraged the students to explore issues
related to the topic under study in their own vocabulary and language whilst generating
their own perspectives and practices. Thus, the researcher “empowered” the students in
order to determine not only what the students think “but how they think and why they
think that way“ (Kitzinger, 1995, p. 1). The interviews were deliberately carried out in a
conversational and informal manner to allow the participants to feel comfortable as this
can provide rich source of data (Vogt et. al, 2004). While the researcher intended to
maintain the focus on the key issues, some divergence was allowed to let the
participants feel comfortable. Concomitantly, the researcher played the role of a
moderator to facilitate and „manoeuvre‟ the discussion (in terms of maintaining or
coming back to the key issues when diversion occurred) whilst recording the group
interaction. This permitted the researcher to „manage‟ the discussion when there was a
„dominant‟ and influential participant in the group. Furthermore, the use of multiple
data collection methods, such as the individual interviews and non-participant
observation, permitted the researcher to gather supplementary data to address some of
the weaknesses in using focus group interviews. As the interviews progressed, a degree
of flexibility was permissible to allow the researcher to probe and explore unanticipated
issues as they arose during the interaction (Marshall and Rossman, 2011) and to elicit
more information (Punch, 2005).
The focus group interviews were largely conducted in the Malay language, in
combination with some simple English words and phrases which were commonly used
by the participants, to allow them to feel comfortable and confident to interact and
express their opinions freely in the language. The researcher was mindful in the
translation process during data analysis to avoid deviation from original meanings.
Nevertheless, the mode of interviewing adhered to its semi-structured format to
ensure a smooth flow throughout the focus group interviews. The questions prepared for
83
the semi-structured interview acted as a guide to ensure appropriate data to answer the
research questions were captured and to facilitate data analysis (Appendix 4). Prior to
the interviews with the participants, the interview questions were pilot tested to ensure
suitability of the interview questions and the procedures. The pilot study was conducted
with a group of students, comprising five members, prior to the real focus group
interviews. The researcher discovered that the students were more expressive and
actively involved in the discussion when the interview questions were posed in the
Malay language. Therefore, the participants for the real focus group interviews were
allowed to express themselves freely using the language that they were comfortable
with such as their own Malay dialect.
In this study, four cohorts of students were interviewed and each cohort
comprised five to seven students to allow for equal opportunity for individuals to share
their views and experiences. Krueger and Casey (2008) state that focus group interviews
that are performed several times with different participants sanction the researcher to
identify trends of the perceptions and opinions expressed in the focus group interviews
which are disclosed through careful and systematic analysis of the interview transcripts.
In this study, all interviews took place in the classroom where a circular seating
arrangement was formed. Each interview session lasted approximately in sixty to ninety
minutes and was tape-recorded with the consent of the participants.
3.5.1.2 Written summary sheet
At the end of each focus group interview, students were asked to fill in a written
summary in the form of a qualitative survey (Appendix 5). The purpose of this written
protocol is to record the students‟ private comments (Kitzinger, 1995) as some students
might express themselves better through writing. It also allowed for the recording of
84
other thoughts that might not occur during the focus groups interviews. The students
were allowed to write their responses in the Malay language in which they feel more
comfortable and confident to express themselves clearly. The responses were compiled
and recorded in focus group summary sheet from which main themes and emerging
patterns were identified. Additionally, the summary sheet was exploited to supplement
and verify the data gathered from the focus group interviews.
3.5.1.3 Individual interviews
Semi-structured and unstructured individual interviews were conducted with
several students who were recruited following completion of the focus group
interviews. These interviews were intended to complement data collected from focus
group interviews to further investigate the information and insight into students‟ English
language literacy practices and competencies. Furthermore, this provided opportunities
for further discussion of sensitive or exceptional issues that were raised during the focus
group interviews. Indeed, the repetition of similar questions during the individual
interviews enabled the researcher to check the reliability, consistency and interpretation
of participants‟ experiences. For these purposes, the students were recruited based on
the researcher‟s observation during the focus group interviews of their potential to
elaborate and provide the utmost insights into their personal academic literacy practices
and experiences (Esterberg, 2002). These students were identified based on their
unwillingness to share some personal and sensitive issues and that they were not
comfortable to disclose their weaknesses during the focus group interviews. One student
was selected from each focus group. The researcher met the selected students in a
variety of locations at their convenience including their faculty and residential colleges.
Each individual interview encompassed key questions to stimulate discussion and to
85
facilitate plentiful data for analysis. All interviews were audio-taped with the consent of
the participants.
3.5.1.4 Non-participant observation
To record information that transpires in the academic setting and establish a
first-hand experience with the students (Cresswell, 2009), the researcher visited the
students‟ English language classes, particularly their English for Engineering classes,
acting informally as a non-participant observer (Marshall and Rossman, 2011). This
non-participant observation was intended to witness and identify the students‟ English
language academic literacy practices and competencies as they occurred in their natural
setting, namely, the classroom. Specifically, the prime target of the observation was the
communicative activities performed by the students in their English classes as these
were unattainable in the interviews. At the time of the data collection period, most of
the classes that the researcher visited involved individual oral presentations by the
students as part of their final project assessment. Therefore, the researcher was able to
observe the researched students‟ individual presentations.
During the observations, the researcher took note of the students‟ discernable
practices and competencies (See the following sub-section). The researcher did not
interact with the students or the teachers during the classes to avoid disruption of the
lessons. Permission to conduct the classroom observations during the English language
periods was obtained from the teachers and the university administrator beforehand.
3.5.1.5 Field notes
In this study, the field notes served several purposes. Firstly, the researcher
utilised “descriptive field notes” to supplement data that were collated from the
86
interviews. These field notes were recorded to capture descriptive information on the
students‟ impressions and expressions during the interviews as well as demographic
information, which entailed contextual details such as the number of students involved,
the time and location of the interviews (Bogdan and Biklen, 2007). Additionally,
descriptive field notes were also made for interviews with the employers participated in
this study (See sub-section 3.5.3). The notes incorporated details on these key
personnel, the date and time of conversations, the responses received and the
appointments made.
Secondly, “reflective field notes” that contained the researcher‟s personal
comments and salient observation about the students‟ insights pertinent to the topic
understudy were also made. Thirdly, the researcher utilised observational field notes
during the course of the classroom observations to record specific data relevant to the
topic under study while identifying any other occurrences of academic literacy
practices. Essentially, all field notes added to the data collection process by providing
non-verbal evidence from the participants (Creswell, 2009).
3.5.2 Contextual data collection
Further information regarding students‟ literacy practices and competencies in
the English class was obtained through individual interviews with their respective
teachers. The teachers‟ pedagogical approaches, perspectives and expectations of their
students‟ practices and competencies were sought in order to draw together meaningful
pieces of evidence to enhance data collection. In addition, the course coordinator of the
English for Engineering course was interviewed with the aim of gathering information
regarding the components of the course including the objectives, content, teaching
materials, assignments and assessments.
87
Documentary sources, comprising course booklets, lesson plans, teaching
materials, assessment handouts and marking schemes or marking rubrics prepared by
the course coordinator and teachers were collected and analysed in this study. These
documents provided some information regarding the students‟ English language literacy
and competencies as well as their standards, and the criteria of the English language
proficiency. Students‟ examination results and written assignments were gathered to
enable the researcher “to obtain language and words” of the students (Creswell, 2009, p.
180), giving authentic examples of the students‟ written language competencies. It
improved triangulation in the data collection process, providing the researcher with
credible, consistent and complete data from which to develop findings for the study
(Creswell, 2008; Marshall and Rossman, 2011; Merriam, 2009; Punch, 2005). These
enriched the researcher‟s understanding of the academic context and enhanced the
validity of the analysis process.
3.5.3 Employer data collection
3.5.3.1 In-depth interviews
To develop understandings of prospective employers‟ perspectives and
expectations of graduates‟ English language competencies, 13 Human Resource
managers and executives from various organisations were interviewed to represent the
employers‟ standpoint. The in-depth interviews were intended to gather participants‟
opinions and experiences revealed “in the own words” (Bogdan and Biklen, 2007, p.
103) to provide insights on the employers‟ general perspectives pertinent to the case
under study. These also provided information to establish a benchmark to gauge the
students‟ level of English language competencies against employers‟ expectations of
English language competencies at the workplace. Punch (2005, p. 174) writes that
88
interviews provide an opportunity to access “people‟s perceptions, meaning, definitions
of situations and constructions of reality”.
The topical or guided interviews were conducted with the employers. Indeed, the
topics of discussion were deliberately chosen and structured to focus on employers‟
opinions pertaining to the recruitment and expectations on new graduates as well as
overall workplace literacy practices, particularly with regard to English language.
Despite the semi-structured nature of the interviews, they were carried out in a mostly
conversational style, allowing a certain degree of flexibility in the discussion (Patton,
2002). The site visits to the employers‟ corporations were organised with the
participants in advance while building rapport via telephone contacts prior to the
interviews. All interviews were tape-recorded with the permission of the employers and
field notes were scribed during the interviews. The interview questions were pilot tested
one month prior to the data collection period with three selected Human Resource
Managers. The findings of the pilot study pointed to the need to utilise the questionnaire
to enhance data collection and supplement the interview.
3.5.3.2 Qualitative questionnaire
A questionnaire was given to the employers at the end of each individual
interview. It was utilised to attain identifiable data related to employers‟ expectations on
English language competencies and workplace literacies. Data brought together from
the questionnaire and in-depth interviews enabled confirmation or corroboration of each
other through triangulation and thus provided rich information (Miles & Huberman,
1994). Specifically for this study, the questionnaire was modified from the original
questionnaire developed by Abdul Razak et al. (2007). The permission to use the
questionnaire was obtained prior to the data collection procedure. The questionnaire
89
consists of open-ended and close-ended questions. The first part contains a series of
open-ended questions to gather information on the company details and employers‟
general perspectives on new employees. The second part applies the Likert-scale to
identify the importance of English language competencies and the situations where
English language skills of listening, speaking, writing and reading are exercised in the
workplace (Appendix 6).
3.5.3.3 Official documents
In collaboration with other research instruments mentioned above, the official
documents pertinent to recruitment benchmarks such as the interview assessment forms
and core competencies list were collected. These documents included samples of written
business correspondences and reports produced by the companies. Esterberg (2002)
states that some private documents can provide invaluable insight into the participants‟
lives and enhance triangulation process albeit they may be difficult to obtain and
interpret. Figure 3.2 summarizes the data collection methods outlined above.
Figure 3.2: Outline of the data collection methods
Data Collection Methods
Student data
Focus group interviews
Written summary sheet
Individual interviews
Non-participant observation
Field notes
Contextual data
Students‟ documents
- written assignments
- examination results
Teachers‟ documents
- course booklets
- textbook
- assessment tasks
Employer data
Interviews
Field notes
Official documents
Questionnaire
90
3.6 Data analysis
Data analysis within the case study approach to inquiry entailed an exhaustive
description of the research context followed by “analysis of data for themes or issues”
(Creswell, 2009, p. 184). Hence, data gathered from different sources were rigorously
analysed through an inductive and iterative process of analysis. This study adopted the
analytic strategy outlined by Creswell (2007) which constitutes the following steps:
Step 1: Data managing
Initially, all the recorded focus group and individual interviews were fully
transcribed into verbatim form for analysis purposes. Focus group interviews and
individual interviews were not considered as two separate sets of data; rather these data
were integrated for analysis purposes of this study. Both data were merged in the
analysis. The transcripts were then imported into the qualitative analysis software QSR
Nvivo 8 for storing purposes. This software assisted data management and storage while
facilitating the analysis of a large quantity of data (Bazeley & Richards, 2003) as data
can be coded into nodes. In addition, raw data from the field notes were typed while
frequency counts and percentages from the questionnaire and written summary were
analysed and synthesised. These data, in combination with other raw data from the
collected documents, were then arranged and stored accordingly to their files for easy
archiving.
Step 2: Reading and memoing
Before the coding was performed, the text data were read thoroughly to get the
gist of the overall information. This was also intended to seek for regularities, patterns
and topics to develop coding categories (Bogdan and Biklen, 2007). Throughout this
process, memos relating to the general thoughts were recorded and transcripts were
91
annotated with developing categories. Patterns, regularities and inconsistencies were
also noted for further verification.
Step 3: Coding process
The coding process comprised of segmenting the phrases, sentences and
paragraphs from the text data into categories and labeling the categories with certain
terms deriving from the actual language of the participants. Given that most interviews
were conducted mostly in Malay language in combination with some simple and
common English words and phrases, the original language was retained in the
transcripts and, thus, coding was developed using the same language. Retaining the
Malay language is necessary at this stage for accuracy and verisimilitude purposes as
certain direct English equivalent meanings are sometimes impossible. Codes were
developed to embrace setting and context, definition of situation, perspectives held by
the participants, the participants‟ ways of thinking about people and objects, process,
activities, events, strategies, relationships and social structure as recommended by
Bogdan and Biklen (ibid, pp. 173-178).
Drawing on some combination of the predetermined and emerging codes, the
codes were refined, moved, merged and deleted based on evolving patterns and their
attributes. To assist coding, organising, sorting and locating the data, the QSR Nvivo 8
software was utilised. Despite its convenience, the software did not replace the
researcher‟s role in analysing and interpreting qualitative data (Morse et al., 2002). In
fact, the researcher retained complete control of the overall analytic procedures. A
summary of the coding categories is shown in Appendix 7 and a sample of coded
transcript is provided in Appendix 8.
92
Step 4: Describing
Beyond the coding process, descriptions of the participants, their contexts and
activities were generated. Subsequently, significant themes were established based on
the coding categories. A complex analysis of the case under study was performed by
identifying and interconnecting the themes as well as integrating the frequency count
and percentage analysis acquired from the questionnaire.
Step 5: Representing
The description and themes were represented in the qualitative narrative manner
to include thorough discussion of the themes encompassing sub-themes, multiple
perspectives from the participants and quotations. At this stage, salient quotations and
supporting evidence that were extracted from the transcripts were translated into
English for writing purposes. The researcher was mindful when translating the excerpts
to ensure that “the basic requirements of (a) making sense, (b) conveying the spirit and
manner of the original and (c) have a natural and easy form of expression were all met
adequately” (Halai, 2007, p. 351). Therefore, all translated excerpts are used as direct
quotes in the findings chapters, Chapter Four and Five, for illustrative purposes. Some
occasional English words and phrases used by the participants are kept intact in the
excerpts. Additionally, figures and tables were inserted to intensify the discussions as
depicted in both chapters.
Step 6: Interpreting
Integrative interpretation of the data were made by “making sense of the
findings, offering explanations, drawing conclusions, making inferences” (Patton, 2002,
p. 480) and developing linkages to the researcher‟s personal interpretation and
93
theoretical considerations drawn from the literature. This also involved “evaluating the
data for their usefulness and centrality” (Marshall and Rossman, 2011, p. 219).
3.7 Research credibility
In an endeavour to produce a valid and reliable study and thus, establishing its
credibility, the research design, techniques of data collection and data analysis of this
study were conducted in a logical and ethical manner. The following sub-sections
provide further explanation.
3.7.1 Quality assurance
Essentially, multiple data collection strategies were deployed to ensure the
accuracy and credibility of findings in this study. First, triangulation strategy,
combining the use of multiple methods and multiple sources of data, was exercised.
Triangulation was achieved by drawing on various methods of data collection
incorporating focus group and individual interviews, non-participant observation,
questionnaire and collected documents. Adding to this was the exploitation of multiple
data derived from different sources such as interview transcripts, field notes,
documentary data and questionnaire. By comparing and cross-checking data collated
from various sources, significant themes emerging from the perspectives of the
participants were established (Merriam, 2009; Creswell, 2009).
Second, a member checking strategy was applied to ensure that the information
gathered from the interviews together with the researcher‟s interpretations were
accurate. For this, a summary of the key themes that arouse from the initial analysis
were taken back to the research participants to seek for their comments and
confirmation.
94
Third, the credibility of the findings was enhanced through rich and thick
descriptions of the findings. These constituted comprehensive depictions of the setting
and multiple perspectives pertaining to the themes.
Fourth, peer debriefing or peer examination strategy was employed to augment
the accuracy of the findings. This was achieved by assigning three Malaysian university
lecturers who were also engaged in doctoral study at that time as well as the supervisors
of this study to review and comment on the findings “so that the account will resonate
with people other than the researcher” (Creswell, ibid, p. 92). Concurrently, peer
examination also entailed “back translation strategy” (Merriam, ibid, p. 270) involving
the same three colleagues to check on the translation from Malay to English language of
the excerpts presented in the findings.
3.7.2 Addressing reliability
The reliability and consistency of this study were obtained through triangulation
of multiple methods of data collection and peer examination as presented above. In
addition, the researcher also exercised audit trail strategy to note the trail and systematic
procedures of this study. This includes recording thorough descriptions of the
methodology adopted by the study, a summary of the whole process of the study, or a
summary of the study in the researcher‟s memo.
3.7.3 Addressing ethical issues
This study was undertaken in compliance with the ethical requirements for
research as specified by the Human Research Ethics committee of The University of
Western Australia. Permission to conduct research was sought and granted from the
95
Malaysian Ministry of Higher Education and the Administration of the University
before fieldwork in Malaysia commenced.
All researched participants were informed about the project through an
information sheet and consent form (Appendix 9). The consent form also provided
assurance that participants were free to withdraw at any time, without giving any
reason. Further, assurance was provided that all information given during the fieldwork
would be held in confidence and anonymity would be respected. The university‟s actual
name was also concealed for confidentiality purposes. The participants‟ identities would
not be disclosed without their written permission. Therefore, codes were used to
represent the participants in this study in order to preserve the identity and
confidentiality of the participants. Data were securely stored in locked cabinets and only
the researcher and the supervisors had the sole access to the data.
3.8 Conclusion
This chapter has described the research paradigm, design and methods adopted
by this study. In summary, this study is couched within the interpretive qualitative
approach to inquiry which values the participants‟ perspectives, utilising their own
voice to explore the case that occurs within their own specific context in order to arrive
at profound understanding of the case. The case study research design, incorporating
multiple data collection methods and multiple data resources, was employed to explore
the English language academic literacy practices and competencies of a group of
undergraduate students and to gauge these practices and competencies against
prospective employers‟ expectations. The data collection methods and the data analysis
96
procedures were explained in this chapter. Lastly, issues related to validity, reliability
and ethical considerations impacting on the study were also described.
The findings pertinent to the students‟ perspectives on their English language
academic literacy practices and competencies are presented in Chapter Four and the
findings on the employers‟ perspectives and expectations are discussed in Chapter Five.
97
Chapter Four
Empirical analysis: Students’ perspectives
4.1 Introduction
In an attempt to answer the overarching research questions delineated at the
beginning of this thesis, this chapter and the following chapter present and discuss the
common themes and patterns that emerged from the analysis and synthesis of data
obtained from the researched subjects involved in this study. Specifically, this chapter
reports on the findings collated from the undergraduate students who were the main
participants of this study while the ensuing chapter presents the data drawn together
from the prospective employers‟ point of view. As explained in Chapter Three, data
related to the researched students‟ perspectives was collected through focus group and
individual interviews, students‟ written documents and classroom observation.
This chapter builds on the findings on the students‟ standpoints pertaining to the
four guiding research questions addressed by this study:
(1) What are the academic literacy practices and competencies of the students at the
exit point of their English language courses?
(2) What are the perspectives of the students on their English literacy practices and
competencies?
(3) Does English language proficiency of the students upon completing the English
language course influence their academic literacy practices and competencies?
98
(4) How does the university environment support the development of these practices
and competencies?
The descriptions of the students‟ academic literacy practices and competencies
and the values held by them with regards to English are identified and the influential
factors that shaped and sustained these practices and competencies are also explored in
this chapter. These findings are presented in several sections; Section 4.2 displays the
researched students‟ existing language competencies followed by their perception of the
values of English in Section 4.3. Next, Section 4.4 provides a picture of the students‟
academic literacy practices and competencies and their perspectives on their current
level of competencies. Sections 4.5 to 4.7 give details on the students‟ linguistic and
communicative incompetence and their lack of self-confidence. This is followed by a
detailed depiction of the factors that influenced and constructed their perspectives and
practices in the academic context in Section 4.8. Finally, the supports provided by the
students‟ existing academic environment are described in Section 4.9. Section 4.10
concludes this chapter with the summary of the findings. Extracts of interview
transcripts are included to illustrate findings where relevant. The structure of Chapter
Four is depicted in Figure 4.1.
99
Figure 4.1: Overview of Chapter Four
4.2 Language competencies
At the onset of the discussion on students‟ academic literacy practices and
competencies it is necessary to explore their general perspectives on their current
competencies in both major languages operated within their academic settings. This will
provide some information on the students‟ language competencies and some insights to
better understand the students‟ literacy practices.
The section on „Language proficiency‟ in the written summary asked the
students to estimate their own proficiency in four main skills, namely reading, speaking,
writing and listening in two major languages, Malay and English. Tables 4.1 and 4.2
below provide the collated and ranked summaries of the students‟ responses, showing
the range and distribution of their perceived level of proficiency in the Malay and
English language respectively.
4.1 Introduction
4.3 Perceived values of English
4.8 Factors contributing to the perceived
deficits in English
4.8.1 English is viewing as a foreign language
4.8.2 Insubstantial English foundation at schools
4.8.3 Unsupportive teachers
4.8.4 Influence from friends
4.8.5 Restricted home practices
4.4 Academic literacy competencies
and practices
4.4.1 Speaking practices
4.4.2 Listening practices
4.4.3 Writing practices
4.4.4 Speaking practices
4.2 Language competencies 4.5 Level of linguistic competence
4.7 Lacking in confidence
4.6 Level of communicative
competence
4.9 The aid offered by the university milieu
4.10 Summary and Conclusion
100
Table 4.1: Ranked language proficiency in Malay language
Skills Reading Speaking Writing Listening
Very Poor 0% 0% 0% 0%
Poor 0% 0% 0% 0%
Satisfactory 5% 5% 10% 5%
Good 20% 25% 35% 30%
Very Good 75% 70% 55% 65%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100%
The results in Table 4.1 exhibit that a significant number of the students rated
themselves as highly proficient in the Malay language; all students rated their
proficiency in Malay as „Satisfactory‟ and above for all four skills. In terms of reading
skill, 75% of the students denoted their great level of proficiency and over 70% of them
rated similarly for their speaking abilities. The percentage of students who rated their
writing ability as „Very Good‟ is 55%, relatively low in comparison to the reading and
speaking skills. As for listening in Malay, 65% of the students indicated excellent
proficiency. The findings suggest that in general the students consider themselves to be
relatively competent in the Malay language. Although the Malay language is largely
used as the medium of instruction in schools and an official language in the university,
the students still do not consider themselves highly competent in the language as they
use their own Malay dialects in most of their daily conversations.
Table 4.2 below enumerates the students‟ ranking of their level of language
proficiency in English.
Table 4.2: Ranked language proficiency in English language
Skills Reading Speaking Writing Listening
Very Poor 0% 0% 5% 0%
Poor 5% 20% 15% 0%
Satisfactory 40% 60% 70% 5%
Good 50% 20% 10% 40%
Very Good 5% 0% 0% 55%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100%
101
A contrasting result is observed with regards to language proficiency in English.
It is apparent that the majority of the students, 95%, rated Reading as „Satisfactory‟ or
above. This indicates that they are quite confident with their reading skill. In Speaking
and Writing 80% of the students rated themselves as „Satisfactory‟ and „Good‟,
implying that most of them perceived both skills as manageable. In contrast, the
minority of 20% who rated „Poor‟ and „Very Poor‟ for both skills explicitly
demonstrates that they perceived a flaw in both skills. Nevertheless, most students
indicated excellent proficiency in listening skills. To a certain extent, the table indicates
that the students‟ perceptions of their English competencies vary in all four skills. It is
reasonable to conclude that the students feel very competent in listening and
comparatively competent in reading and speaking. Contrastively, the competence in
writing is perceived to be minimal.
The most significant outcome based on the comparison of the findings reported
in this section and the figures reported in Table 4.1 and 4.2 above is that there is an
apparent mismatch between the students‟ perceived levels of proficiency in Malay and
English. The students considered themselves as more competent in Malay than in
English. These students‟ perceptions will be compared with the findings on their
literacy practices and competencies and the languages used in the academic context
gathered from the interviews in the ensuing sections.
4.3 Perceived values of English
English is officially acknowledged as the prime language used for the functional
and educational purposes at the researched students‟ faculty. Considering the fact that
every aspect of the students‟ academic discourses substantially involved the English
language, it is essential to look at their standpoint concerning the matter. The results
102
yielded from these data will shed some light on the students‟ attitudes and perspectives
on their academic literacy practices and competencies.
It appears that the students by and large looked on English as a vital and
valuable element in their present studies and most importantly, in their future career
intentions. English was universally regarded as unimportant to the students prior to their
engagement in university studies (See sub-section 4.8.2). Additionally, the students
admitted that they generally had a pessimistic outlook towards it prior to their enrolment
into the tertiary level. Their move into the higher learning institution had definitely
brought about a shift of interest towards English owing to the major requirements
placed upon them by their faculty. The accounts that follow clearly describe the
students‟ stances:
When we were small, English was not important to us; only when we
enter university that we feel it is important (FG1c).
We didn‟t see the importance of learning English during our primary
school (FG4b).
At secondary school English was not important (FG4d).
We realised how important it is only when we entered this university
because most subjects are learned in English (FG4a).
I have now realised the importance of English (FG3d).
In the context of their present studies, English is deemed as a crucial means to
get access to new knowledge and information “...because most information and books
are in English” (FG4d). Overcoming their past resistance towards the language
gradually, the students have now recognised the needs to acquire the language as it is
highly valued and widely used in their university courses. This was mentioned by
FG4b; “We have to like English and take the effort to learn it because it is very
important.”
103
Inevitably, for the students to gain new knowledge and achieve intellectual
success, it is mandatory for them to comply with the academic demands and thus, a
positive attitude towards English is considered obligatory. According to FG2b,
Even though I don‟t like English, I still have to learn it for the sake of the
exams. If I don‟t learn it, my results will be bad. I force myself to learn
because of the exams. Nowadays, English is important, so we have to
learn it.
To inquire further about the value of English in their present studies, the
students were asked to gauge the skills where English is perceived to be useful to them.
Table 4.3 below illustrates the outcomes.
Table 4.3: The English language skills that are useful in students‟ present studies
Skills Not important
at all
Not important Neutral Important Very important
Speaking 0% 0% 5% 40% 55%
Writing 0% 5% 15% 35% 45%
Reading 0% 5% 15% 35% 45%
Listening 0% 0% 10% 45% 45%
Grammar 0% 10% 30% 35% 25%
Words/Vocabulary 0% 0% 20% 50% 30%
Pronunciation 0% 5% 10% 50% 35%
It is evident that a good number of students considered speaking, writing,
reading and listening skills in English as essential to their studies. Speaking skill in
English was rated as the most important component in their learning. A further
explanation on this, as collated from the interviews, was that speaking helps the students
to express and share their ideas confidently with their colleagues in their attempt to
fulfil the course expectations. This is exemplified by FG4e
If we can speak the language well, it is easy for us to communicate with
other people, regardless of what idea we have. If we can speak the
language easily, we will always feel confident, even though I am not that
good.
Correspondingly, other skills such as writing, reading and listening were ranked
as highly important. The table also exhibits that other English components such as
104
grammar, vocabulary and pronunciation are considered moderately valuable in the
current context of the students‟ studies.
In addition to its significance to the students‟ existing context, English is also
vastly perceived as a priceless asset for their future career goals. Indeed, the students
were very much aware of the fact that English is the dominant language operated within
most corporations and that competencies in the language are absolute requisite. The
following excerpts indicate their universal thoughts;
We are aware of its importance especially for the job interview purposes
(FG3a).
English is global language and the very important asset to find job
(FG4b).
Now, English is a very important language, especially in working life
(FG1d).
Therefore, the students were of the opinion that there is an urgent need for them
to equip themselves sufficiently for the job interview as it the first and utmost important
step for them to get hold of their desired occupations. They recognised the importance
to demonstrate a good competency in English and that the failure to do so will risk them
being rejected. This is affirmed by FG1e;
No matter how good we are in our study, if our English is weak, we will
have problems going for the interview. If we are hesitant in the job
interview, we will not be employed.
Given the fact that communicative ability in English is the main attribute sought
in the recruitment selections, the students were generally in agreement that it
necessitates them to become good communicators in English as it will guarantee
abundant opportunities for them in the workforce. The remarks below provide some
examples;
105
It makes me more confident (FG4e).
People will look up on us if we can communicate competently in English
(FG2a).
...would be easily accepted by many parties (FG1d).
I want to be successful in my life and I can go anywhere in the world
without having problems to communicate (FG3d).
It is convenient to communicate with other races (FG4a).
Good communication makes work easier (FG4c).
It helps if we want to work in international or big companies (FG4d).
In essence, it is clear that English is perceived as an important tool for the
students to achieve academic excellent at the university and ultimately to be able to
obtain a reasonable job upon graduation. Most importantly, the ability to communicate
competently in English is very much appreciated as it will assure potential employment
in the future.
4.4 Exploring academic literacy practices and competencies
To understand the academic literacy practices of the undergraduates, it is
imperative to explore the roles of language, the different literacy resources and various
discourses operated within the academic domain following the suggestion put forward
by Purcell-Gates (2007, p. 11) that “Research into literacy practices of different
communities must include questions of languages, discourses, and texts.” To
complement this, it is crucial to examine the participants‟ roles that support the literacy
events that take place in the academic settings and the use of texts to support such
events.
106
In exploring the role of literacy in the students‟ institutional experiences it is
important to understand in what ways the students felt they were benefiting from their
practices concerning two major languages, English and Malay. The following sections
present the students‟ perspectives on their common reading, listening, writing and
speaking practices within their major educational discourses.
4.4.1 Reading practices
This sub-section discloses the findings on students‟ reading practices pertaining
to the central role of reading, the relevant texts applicable and the language used in the
students‟ academic endeavour.
With reference to educational texts, it is apparent that the roles of reading varied
considerably in the students‟ context. Accommodating the course requirements, the
students reported having a great deal of reading diverse texts written in English to suit
several purposes such as to obtain required information for accomplishing their
assignment; and to understand new concepts and technical procedures to create and
produce new inventions amid preparing themselves for examinations and class
assessments. A sample of relevant comments that explores their reading practices is
outlined in the table below.
107
Table 4.4: Relevant comments on reading practices
The roles of reading Relevant interview scripts
Reading to design “We have to work with designs, before creating
any new design, we have to read about it in
detail to get some ideas for our design” (FG4e)
Reading to comprehend technical
details
“…we read for the required steps…” (FG2b)
Reading for the gist of information
“We read in English to get the general idea. In
Chemistry, for example, we look for the principal
points” (FG4a)
Reading for examination “…reading for key points, so that I can memorise
and I will write them later in the examination”
(FG1a)
Reading for detailed information “I refer to books to get detailed explanation
because I can understand more by reading
books” (FG1c)
4.4.1.1 Reference materials
It was reported by the students that almost all of their content-area classes
required reading resources in English. For some students, specifically those who were
majoring in Architecture, their reading constitutes scrutinizing samples of pictures and
models in order to assist full understanding of the underlying principles and concepts.
To get a full grasp of the principles behind the pictures presented in the printed texts,
the students in the Architecture course were initially taught “…how to transform the
pictures into words...” (FG4e) in their lectures. Consequently, they can recognise the
principles and fundamentals underlying the architectural designs incorporated in the
pictures simply by looking at the pictures.
108
Reading enhanced students‟ comprehension, facilitated their thinking and
provided new ideas for them to invent new designs as expected in the coursework. To
be able to design new projects, a profound understanding of the concepts of design is
considered necessary. FG4e noted that
There are lots of researching and designs involved in the Architecture
course. Before we create new designs, we have to conduct a case study
on previous projects by studying the problems and advantages of such
projects. So our design will be based on this case study. We have to
improvise [sic] the shortcomings discovered in the previous case study.
It is imperative to note that the explanation on the principles and fundamentals
of architectural designs were conveyed to the students in the Malay language as it was
the major medium of instruction operated in their lectures. Consequently, the students
were expected to search for additional information from a variety of resources in order
to complete their assignments which required them to produce new inventions and
innovation. These references, according to the students, were substantially made
available in English. Most of the resources which were presumably expected to
supplement the students‟ course assignments comprise reference books, articles from
the internet and architectural magazines. Many ideas for designs were discovered in the
architectural magazines which were mainly written in English.
Correspondingly, for other Engineering students, particularly those in the
Mechanical, Chemical and Electrical courses, their reading practices also entailed
searching for supplementary resources to complete their assignments and projects.
However, for these students, their references were practically associated with numerical
concepts and technical details extensively appeared in English. Since the emphasis of
the course content and evaluations was placed on calculations, therefore, reading for
calculation procedures was broadly a commonplace for these students. For instance,
109
FG2c consistently highlighted, “We have a lot of calculations to deal with, everything
must involve calculation.”
Implicit in their information searching practices was a wide range of references
written in English collected from either printed or digital resources. Nevertheless, the
students unanimously agreed that they gave preference to scientific journals on the
internet. Normally when surfing the internet the majority of the sites they visited were
in English. The accessibility and abundance of information offered by the virtual
resources brought about their strong preferences towards internet journals. Having a
limited time to go to the library due to their packed class schedules and heavy
workloads, the students chose to surf the virtual library instead. The following account
was not uncommon: “We search for articles from the internet because easy, no time to
go to the library. It is more convenient to look for information than going to the library”
(FG2e). Besides the convenience of obtaining articles from the web, the massive
inclusion of calculations that the students need in the digital resources eased up their
work and facilitated their understanding of the technical concepts.
Furthermore, students were also in agreement that the absolute use of English in
most internet articles contributed highly to their inclination of exploiting them for their
references presumably because they could not find the information they wanted in the
Malay language. This was clearly expressed by FG2b “… information in Malay
language is so limited, sometimes there is none”.
4.4.1.2 Lecture notes
Generally, for the majority of the students, reading plays an explicit role in
getting the main idea and key points of their subject matter. It is indeed the vital
110
component acquired in all engineering courses. These reading practices also assist the
students‟ preparation for the on-going as well as the final assessments. The vast
majority of the participants stated that they relied heavily on their lecture notes when
preparing for their class tests and final examinations. This is primarily due to the
accessibility and practicality offered by the notes which contain comprehensive
information of the course content written in summarized or point forms. FG4b disclosed
that the students do not require much effort to study for the examination because
“lecture notes are convenient because of the points given.”
In fact, by so doing the students can spare plenty of time to memorise selected
details to get themselves ready for the evaluations. For example, FG1a indicated that he
took the trouble to learn the key points by heart as it facilitated his understanding of the
subject amid preparing himself to write the points in the examination. Nevertheless, he
had to choose certain important items to memorise as there was a plethora of details to
be taken into consideration; “Yes, I do memorise the main points, but not completely,
just a little bit. If I were to memorise the entire content, I do not think I can finish them
all.” In addition, FG4a affirmed that he could enhance his understanding of the subject
area by memorising the main ideas as noted in his comment “… I do a lot of
memorisation. The more I memorise, the more I understand.”
A further discussion on the students‟ lectures notes revealed that not all them
were deemed “easy”. According to FG4c, “It depends on the lecture notes, if the notes
consist of sub-points, those are ok, but if the notes are the photocopies of articles, they
are difficult.” To some extent, reading was deemed as a heavy duty task, especially
when the texts contained an overwhelming number of unfamiliar words or lengthy
explanation. Another student, FG1d, who also claimed that he concentrated on the
lecture notes in his preparation for the assessments, disclosed that he seeks his friends‟
111
assistance to gather the important details and to understand the essential information in
his course. This account is illustrated below;
…it depends on the content to understand the meaning of the lengthy
words. Sometimes we need to understand only a small fraction of the
long sentences; we only need to know the main points. Sometimes I ask
for the main points from my friends who have done their reading. I do
that most of the time.
Clearly, the straightforward detail presented in a concise and reader-friendly
manner was very much favoured by these students. Furthermore, it is apparent that the
lecture notes were generally printed in English. However, in certain circumstances, the
used of the Malay language in the lecture notes was still observed, specifically in the
architectural department where the lectures were mostly conducted in Malay. For some
content-area lectures, as in the case of the Electrical Engineering, English as the main
medium of instruction was only recently introduced to the students. Therefore, the
lecture notes from previous years, written in the Malay language, were still being
referred to and distributed by the lecturers to current students. Nevertheless, the
lecturers in other departments had their own discretion in choosing the most appropriate
language when delivering their lectures. Overall, the students felt that the reason
underlying the use of Malay language was simply because their lecturers wanted to
ensure students‟ complete understanding on their subject matter.
4.4.1.3 Textbooks
Except for other significant roles of reading, mainly for preparing for
examinations and fulfilling the requirement of their course assignments, the actual role
of reading in the Engineering courses was seemingly less obvious. Because of the
considerable amount of calculations embedded in their content subjects, only a portion
of written verbal reading was carried out by these students. The majority of the students
112
reported that in their reading, they hardly read fully and/or they normally skipped the
explanation and the theoretical part in their textbooks as more attention was paid to
comprehending the calculation procedures and concepts. Indeed the bulk of their
reading practices were confined to reading for straightforward explanation and
instructions related to calculations. In discussing a chapter in one of their textbooks, the
students indicated that “This is about the theory, we barely read this. We do not read
this part at all. We want to know the direct information” (FG2a).
Given the fact that engineering books largely entail a broad range of
calculations, it was observed that the students did not encounter much problem
absorbing the information offered in the texts books as the English language used in
those books appeared to be explicit and less complicated. They described the lexical
items and structure of the language as undemanding and that the vocabularies were
familiar to them, thus, making it easy for them to comprehend. FG4e declared that
“…the books in our course contain simple English; we do not have much problems
reading the books.” Despite the exploitation of some complex and advanced lexical
items for some scientific terminologies and concepts in certain parts of the books, the
students perceived them as tolerable and less challenging; therefore, they scarcely had
problems dealing with the scientific terms.
Nonetheless, such a scenario was not evident in numerous cases pertaining to
reading articles and reference books in English. Although some students found reading
such materials manageable, the majority of them claimed that it was a struggle, which
delayed or sometimes impeded them from obtaining sufficient information as they had
to spend a great deal of time reading them. Reading could sometimes be an
excruciatingly slow process for the students when the texts were dominated by
“scientific language” (FG4b), “advanced language” (FG4a) or “complicated language,
and we cannot find the words in any ordinary dictionary” (FG1e). To be able to
113
comprehend the entire texts, they often needed to stop reading and look for the
meanings of the unfamiliar words they came across by consulting either the dictionary
or e-dictionary (computer dictionary). Most of the time, they referred to the Malay-
English dictionaries for the explanation on the unfamiliar words. In essence, their
reading was frequently disrupted by the searching-for-meaning process. Hence, for
some students, their reading practices have turned out to be taxing and time-consuming
tasks particularly with regards to preparing for the examinations. This is especially true
because of the extended hours they needed to spend trying to make sense of their
reading while frequently checking on the meanings of unfamiliar words in the
dictionary, thus stretching their preparation time. Expressing his concerns, FG4d stated
that “To be able to understand our readings, we have to check the meanings in the
dictionary first. It is very slow. While other students have already finished, we are still
struggling with our readings.”
Notwithstanding their diverse choices of dictionary, the students reported
insufficient and occasionally absent explanation of most scientific terminologies and
words in these dictionaries. A student explained that
… because the Engineering language is so unique, sometimes we could
not find the words in the dictionary. If we were to translate the words,
the sentences would sound weird and that the whole idea did not make
sense at all, so, we become more confused (FG4d).
Eventually, the failure to identify the meanings and comprehend the texts dampened
their spirits to read further.
In some cases where the reading articles were deemed difficult, students read
only the sentences which they thought were important while disregarding the trivial
parts. Nonetheless, they admitted that they still relied heavily on dictionaries to help
them understand their readings. On occasions where dictionaries were not available,
114
they discussed the meaning with their friends, whom they perceived were more
proficient in English, until their reached full sense of what they were reading.
On further probing into their reading predicaments, the students explained that
their existing problems in English added up to the trouble in comprehending the
concepts in their readings. This has made them even more confused, and thus resulted in
more frustration in reading. According to a student, to be able to understand a text
profoundly, it often took more than an hour to read just ten pages. Unfortunately, most
of the time, when reading became frustrating especially when the text was too long to
manage, the majority of the students simply quit reading. This was confirmed by the
following statement; “If the language is too advanced to understand, which I do not
understand at all, then, I give up” (FG4a).
It is apparent that for these students reading posed a challenging task and they
complained of failure to comprehend when the load was too great. Even so, for readings
that they could handle, a student reported that he still had to read them twice to
understand them. Hence, he often had the extra burden of having to read even
straightforward material twice to understand it. Furthermore, another student affirmed
that he normally “read a paragraph 2-3 times to get the key points, to understand and to
highlight them” (FG4b).
Apparently, the discretion of selecting the most relevant reading resources that
suited their own individual needs and level of proficiency relied upon the individual
students. It is noticeable that when the reading became extremely demanding, the
students had no other alternative but to opt for articles written in the Malay language.
Owing to constraints on their time and proficiency in English, the students deliberately
chose simpler reading resources, specifically those printed in Malay. As one student
115
said “It takes time to read the materials. But if I do not have enough time, I will
definitely find the most convenient resources, like the ones written in Malay” (FG4e).
In short, the findings discussed above accentuate on the dominant reading
practices performed by the students in the academic context. It is apparent that these
reading practices were primarily conducted with the central aim of comprehending and
gathering new knowledge pertinent to numerical and technical details in the students‟
quest to fulfil the requirements of their courses. Furthermore, various types of reading
resources were also utilised and the choices of exploiting these resources were
deliberately made based on the conveniences offered by them. In actual fact, virtual
resources were highly preferred because of their ease of access and lecture notes were
very much favoured due to their user-friendly and precise nature. In addition, these
reading practices involved a substantial amount of English while some blend of English
and Malay were also manifested. Furthermore, the findings on reading practices also
revealed the students‟ difficulties in handling some of the reading materials. A summary
of students‟ reading practices is shown in Table 4.5.
116
Table 4.5: Summary of findings on reading practices
Reading
resources
Language
used
Roles Reading difficulties
Reference
books
English &
Malay
To comprehend architectural
principles
To comprehend calculation
procedures
Internet
journals
English
To design new inventions
To understand technical details
To complete course assessments
Dealing with unfamiliar
words
Understanding complex
language structure
Managing lengthy explanation
Managing long texts
Academic
magazines
English
To comprehend architectural
principles
To design new inventions
To complete course assessments
Textbooks
English
To comprehend calculation
procedures
To gather main ideas
To prepare for exams
Nil
Lecture notes
English &
Malay
To comprehend calculation
procedures
To gather main ideas
To prepare for exams
Nil
Dictionaries
English –
Malay
To obtain the meaning of words in
English
Nil
4.4.2 Listening practices
In the context of their institutional listening practices, all students confirmed that
they were considerably engaged in listening for lectures and tutorials in their daily
academic events. These listening practices are crucial for them in order to gain new
knowledge and keep themselves informed of matters pertaining to their studies. The
majority of the students affirmed that a great deal of their lectures entailed listening to
instructions and explanations conveyed in English. With the exception of some
conventional scientific terminologies which the students found less demanding,
117
straightforward language and simple words of English were typically used in these
lectures. The use of the English language is officially mandatory given the requirements
made upon the Engineering faculty. However, the findings also revealed several
contradictory events. Some students reported having to cope with various approaches
and language choices applied by diverse lecturers when attending their lectures. This is
due to the discretion on the lecturers to choose their preferred language for delivering
their instructions. The students disclosed the fact that a blend of English and Malay
languages was normally incorporated in most lectures. The following remark illustrates
the case in point;
Some lecturers are not firm and persistent [sic] to speak English. They
mix with Malay. They use simple words when teaching. But most of the
time, there are a lot of calculations like one, two, three, that‟s all. There
are more of calculations (FG3b).
To enhance students‟ comprehension, the lectures were normally supplemented
by notes drawn from power-point slides which were commonly written in English.
However, according to the students these teaching-aids also varied according to the
lecturers‟ preferences. It was observed in several lectures that notes written in English
were read to the students and accompanied by explanations uttered in Malay language.
One particular example given by the students related to a subject on Quality which was
taught in the Malay language whereas the teaching materials were presented in English.
FG1d commented that “…the lecturer reads the notes first, then, he translates and
elaborates in Malay language.”
A different scenario was observed in the Architectural department2 where most
lectures were carried out in the Malay medium. Except for one particular subject,
2 At the point of this study, the Architecture department was newly established in the Faculty of
Engineering. Most of the teaching resources available at the faculty were in BM. The department was
established in 2002.
118
Designs, which was exclusively conducted in English, subjects were generally taught in
Malay. Additionally, the teaching materials were also presented in Malay language.
In essence, the findings manifested several recurring patterns of language that
the students normally engaged in their academic listening practices. These patterns are
summarised and presented in Table 4.6 below.
Table 4.6: Language used in students‟ listening practices
Language used in lectures Language used for
teaching resources
Relevant quotes
Lectures conducted entirely in
English whereby simple words and
scientific terms were closely
employed.
Absolute use of English.
“All lectures and tutorials at our
faculty are in English, even the
notes...” (FG1a)
Lectures delivered in combination
of the Malay and English languages
with the emphasis on explanation
in the Malay language.
Absolute use of English.
“All lecture notes are in English,
but not all lecturers teach
completely in English, they mix the
languages” (FG2c)
Lectures performed entirely in the
Malay language.
Absolute use of Malay.
“Lectures, classes, everything is
mostly in Malay” (FG4e)
Another academic event worth looking at when discussing the students‟
listening practices is related to the consultation sessions with their respective lecturers
outside classroom settings. An extensive use of the Malay language was also noticeable
in this context; the students explained that both they and their lecturers felt more
comfortable speaking in Malay. To avoid misunderstanding while ensuring that both
parties can deliver their intended messages clearly and easily, the individual
conferencing mostly took place in Malay. This was highlighted by FG1b and FG1c
based on their observations,
Only when they teach, they use English; for individual consultation, it is
easier to speak Malay. I think because they are worried that we might not
understand. Yes, and they want to make it easy for us to talk to them.
119
On the whole, the students were in agreement that their listening practices at
tertiary level have increasingly constituted substantial amounts of English in
comparison to their prior learning experiences. This is especially true when an extensive
use and exposure towards the language have taken place in their daily academic events.
FG4e noted that “I think this kind of environment is encouraging”. Indeed, the students
were generally contented with their current listening practices as they were able to
understand most lectures commonly conveyed in English. Quoting the response made
by FG2b regarding the lectures, “…Because it is about Science, so the words are not
bombastic English. It is factual English”, indicates that listening to lectures in English
was unchallenging to them. This is so not only because they were familiar with the
language used in the lectures but also with the accent of the lecturers who were mostly
Malays or non-native speakers of English.
Nonetheless, on certain occasions particularly when the speech was delivered at
a higher rate, the students reported difficulties in understanding the whole speech as
they perceived it as overly speedy. FG2c admitted that “… sometimes when the speech
is too fast, I cannot understand a single thing. I can only understand speech delivered by
the Malays.” Concurrently, most of them confessed about their weaknesses in
responding to expressions in English although they could understand them clearly. For
example, FG4e explained that “Even though I cannot reply, I can totally understand
what has been said because I am used to utterance in English.” In short, this seems to
imply that listening to English expressions has become a commonplace to the students.
120
4.4.3 Writing practices
This sub-section presents the findings on students‟ writing practices in which
they were engaged as part of their academic discourses. It is noteworthy to highlight
that these practices, as revealed and described by the students themselves, are based on
their collective perspectives influenced by their own experiences of writing within their
core academic courses.
Central to this discussion of writing practices is the examination on the various
texts, discourses and languages involved to better understand the students‟ academic
practices. It was discovered that the students‟ writing practices generally incorporated
the construction and production of a variety of genres including assignments, laboratory
reports, examinations and a thesis. Nevertheless, in light of the discourses and language
used in the different genres, it was observed that the students‟ writing practices varied
considerably across departments within the Engineering faculty. Explicit in the variation
of their writing practices were the diverse strategies adopted by the students in order to
conform to the requirements of each genre as well as to accomplish and fulfil the
demands of the course requirements. A sample of relevant remarks that explore the
writing discourses is delineated in the following table.
Table 4.7: Relevant remarks on students‟ writing practices
Writing genres Relevant interview scripts
Assignment “Overall, it has lots of calculations” (FG2a)
Laboratory report “We have manual lab, we just copy it” (FG3b)
Examination “…our exams contain a lot of calculations” ( FG4b)
Thesis “Our major problem is to write thesis in Malay” (FG4a)
121
4.4.3.1 Assignment
The most outstanding feature observed in numerous assignments produced by
the students is a massive amount of mathematical and technical representations. Owing
to the emphasis on calculations and technical details in most of their courses, the
students reported having to deal with numerical applications, calculation procedures and
technical illustrations in their attempt to complete most of their assignments. For
example, FG2a commented that “The assignment is simple, from application to
calculation. Overall, it has lots of calculations.”
Correspondingly, the majority of the students highlighted that most engineering
assignment; specifically in the Mechanical, Chemical and Electrical courses, scarcely
involved lengthy expressions of elaboration and explanation. In addition, language
accuracy in the assignments is generally perceived by the students as irrelevant and
insignificant. In fact, the emphasis was placed upon the precision of calculation
procedures and correctness of the content of the subject matter as revealed by FG1e,
“Our assignments do not really stress on language; like “is” is wrong, it should be
“was”. Our point is more important.”
On further discussion pertaining to their assignments, FG1d exposed that
normally when given a choice for his group tasks, he deliberately avoided doing the
writing sections where explanation was entailed. Instead, being a Mechanical
Engineering student and because of his natural talents in Mathematics, he prefers
working with numbers and illustrations. He admitted that “I like to do the drawing parts.
There are lots of mechanical parts, so I avoid the writing part.”
In view of the prerequisites set out by the engineering faculty on the exclusive
use of English in all tutorials and lectures of the core subjects, inevitably, it was
expected that any written assessment, specifically assignments, should be produced in
122
English as well. This was predominantly the experience of the participants in this study.
A common perspective and consistent response regarding the comprehensive use of
English when writing their assignments was confirmed by the students as manifested in
this excerpt “Of course, our assignments are done in English. Because most information
was gathered in English, there is no way we can translate them all” (FG4c).
However, a relatively discrete scenario was observed concerning the students in
the Architecture department. Contradictory to other Engineering departments, written
assignments in the architectural courses were generally carried out in Malay. It is not
surprising given the fact that most syllabus and lectures were operated in Malay except
for one particular subject on Design, which was totally conducted in English. For her
assignments, FG4e affirmed that she had to write in English solely for the Design
subject but a great deal of Malay in other courses as clearly indicated in the following
remark “For Design the assignments must be written in English. For other courses, the
assignments are written in Malay because they depend on the lecturers. Most lectures
are mainly carried out in Malay” (FG4e). A closer scrutiny on her perspectives
regarding her current writing practices, FG4e disclosed her discomfort in having to
negotiate the demands of writing in English in her future career purposes. This is
apparent in her remark “If asked to write reports, I give up. Sorry! Because I know my
grammar and writing are terrible.” Genuinely, she admitted that there were still a lot
more things for her to improve and learn to be able to write competently in English.
It appears that regardless of what languages were employed when completing
their assignments; most students felt that the tasks were manageable. This is
conceivably due to the small amount of elaboration required from them in each
assignment and significant emphasis on mathematical and technical applications.
123
In the same vein, the students were in agreement that the application of
Microsoft Word has assisted them greatly in completing their assignments especially in
detecting their grammatical errors. FG4c explained that
…I type my assignments using Microsoft. When important sentences are
underlined with green lines or red lines, I try to amend [sic]. If the
sentence does not make sense, then I change the words. If it still does not
work, I change the whole sentence, change the story and write another
sentence. That is how I work.
In addition, most students affirmed that occasionally they seek their peers‟
assistance when writing their assignments. However, some students favoured working
independently as expressed in the following account “If I feel I can do it, I will do it
myself. If I cannot do it, I will just leave it like that” (FG4c).
4.4.3.2 Laboratory report
Embedded in the academic practices of the Engineering students was also
writing many laboratory reports. Looking into the content and layout of the laboratory
report, it was discovered that it consists of several sections including Introduction,
Procedure, Discussion and Conclusion. It appears that the literacy demands of the
laboratory report seem rather minimal for the students. The fact that they had already
learned how to write such kinds of report during their secondary-school years, has led
them to perceive the task as manageable as the current report format was relatively
similar to that in schools.
Moreover, a formatted manual laboratory report, comprising essential details
such as the procedure, materials and instruments, was provided for the students.
Therefore, it facilitated them to write the report upon completion of their laboratory
work. FG1d stated that “At this university, we are given the manual lab… so, we just jot
124
down the items that we used, and then, we include the elaboration in the conclusion and
discussion sections.”
In further discussion on the inclusion of some elaboration in the laboratory
report, the students affirmed that “…we just copy the manual lab. When it comes to the
discussion part, we create our own words, simple words, but not the fancy English
expressions. We just need to give our points” (FG3b). Furthermore, according to FG2b,
“In fact, our lecturers are not particular about our sentence structure, as long as they can
understand what we wrote about, it is fine.” It is clear that a small amount of elaboration
was required in the entire report as the emphasis was placed upon straightforward
information. Except for the discussion section, where some explanation was necessary,
the rest of the report was less taxing as they could just emulate the information already
available in the manual report. Additionally, a large amount of graphs, charts and
calculations were primarily incorporated in the report.
Interestingly, the English language was the main language utilised in many
laboratory reports by students in the Mechanical, Chemical and Electrical departments.
Nevertheless, it was discovered that the students were given a freedom to choose their
preferred language when writing their reports in certain courses. For example, FG4c
asserted that “We are given a choice, either English or Malay. But most of the time is
English. Only Chemistry is written in Malay.”
With regards to language accuracy in the report, the students admitted that they
relied on the Microsoft Word application to check their grammatical mistakes when
writing in English.
125
4.4.3.3 Examination
As most engineering subjects encompass written assessments at the end of each
semester, a substantial amount of writing was expected of the students in order to fulfill
their course requirements. One major written assessment which carries a great deal of
marks is final examination.
In view of the content and structure of the examinations, it was reported that
numerous amounts of numerical and technical explanations were incorporated. Despite
the fact that some expressions were necessary in order to explain and elaborate on the
calculation procedures, technical details and illustrations, these expressions however
were not supposed to be extensive. In fact, the short explanation appeared in the form of
relatively simple sentences encapsulating all essential keywords. This is clearly
described by FG1e “With the points that we have, we just state them. Then, we create
some sentences, not a long essay, not like a four-page essay, just a little bit of
explanation to support the calculation.” Apparently, nominal writing practices were
necessitated in the examinations as the emphasis was pragmatically placed upon
numerical applications and technical representations as asserted by FG4b, “In actual
fact, our exams contain a lot of calculations. Thus, there are fewer sentences and more
calculations.”
Correspondingly, the expectation of language accuracy was also deemed as
trivial. It was universally acknowledged that grammatical accuracy was less important
than the main content as confirmed by FG2d, “We depend on our key words, not
grammar; since our lecturers are not concerned about our grammar, as long as our
points are acceptable.” The students indicated that the focal intention is to demonstrate a
comprehensive understanding of the subject matter by writing a clear numerical
application and technical explanation in the examinations to ensure good marks. For
126
example, FG1b asserted that “The most important thing is to make sure that our
lecturers understand our explanation.”
Equivalent to other writing practices discussed earlier, a variety of language
used was also observed with regards to the examinations. Inevitably, English was by
and large employed in most engineering courses; hence, it was also used for the most
part of examinations as verified by the students. Likewise, in the Architecture
department where Malay was predominantly used as the medium of instruction, similar
language was widely applied in the examinations as well. Excluding the Design course,
which was exclusively conducted in English, most architectural courses entailed final
examinations in Malay.
In spite of the norms mentioned above, some exceptional cases were evidenced
pertaining to the selection of languages permissible in the examinations. One example
relates to the liberty given to the students to write their answers in Malay, with no
penalty on the total marks, albeit the questions were written in English. This is
manifested in the account made by FG1d, “In the exam, we are allowed to write in
Malay. The questions are in English. We are allowed to write in Malay.” In light of the
choices of language use, the students explicated that it was obligatory for them to write
their answers in either English or Malay and that a blend of both languages was
completely unacceptable. On this condition, FG1a stated that “There is this one
particular course, not all courses; the lecturer said that we can write in Malay or
English, not mixed.” In an agreement to previous statement, FG1d further explained that
“It does not affect our marks, as long as we stick to either English or Malay; and we do
not mix them both.”
Nonetheless, the students also reported that in some examinations they were
permitted to use English and Malay interchangeably. According to FG1a “Most exams
127
are in English but some lecturers allow us to write bilingually.” This was also supported
by FG4c who claimed that “It depends on the lecturers, if they say bilingual, then, we
can write in both languages.”
Congruent with the previous discussion on the students‟ reading practices, it was
discovered that the students‟ preparation for examinations accentuate calculation
procedures and technical details. In view of that, the students generally admitted that a
great deal of vital information, such as procedures, definition and concepts, was
memorised to facilitate them to write their answers correctly in their examinations. On
further probing into memorising important details for the examinations, FG2b
explicated that “We concentrate on the points only. For the sentences in the exam, we
just have a go; just write any sentences as long as the points are there.” Concomitantly,
FG2c clarified that
We do not memorise the entire sentences. Basically, we try to understand
the calculation process and then elaborate in the exams. When it comes
to marking, our lecturers look for the points of the procedures. They do
not mind our inaccurate grammar.
Indeed, most of the students‟ answers were not penalised for their grammatical
errors. As highlighted earlier, there was an overall agreement amongst the students on
their substantial reliance on lecture notes to prepare themselves for examinations. In
essence, the students on the whole were confident when using the scientific
terminologies in English in their examinations.
4.4.3.4 Thesis
A degree of unanimity was identified across the engineering courses with
reference to thesis writing. All students, irrespective of their diverse area of study,
alleged that it was a standard requirement predetermined by the faculty on the exclusive
128
use of Malay in thesis writing for all Engineering students. At the current point of this
study, the students were preparing for their industrial training scheduled in the
forthcoming semester. Subsequently, upon completion of their industrial training, they
will presumably embark on their thesis writing in the final semester of their studies.
Therefore, substantial amount of time would be designated for thesis writing as it
involves a large portion of credit for their grades.
Taking into consideration that English was predominantly used particularly in
lectures and learning resources in some courses, the students predicted that thesis
writing would be a demanding and difficult task for them. For example, FG3c
commented that “Thesis is written in Malay but all references are in English. It is
difficult to use the terms that we learn in English. It is challenging.” Anticipating some
possible complications they have to endure when writing in Malay, the majority of them
revealed their concern and uncertainty to accomplish the task. A genuinely worried sign
was noticeable in the response made by FG1b, “I have no idea how to write it.” From a
similar perspective, FG3d claimed that “Since we have learned most terms in English, it
is difficult to translate them to Malay. The meanings are not precise. It is not a direct
translation.”
On the issue pertaining to translation of terminologies in English into Malay, the
students admitted that they had previously encountered a lot of problems trying to
complete their assignments in Malay in the Etika Kejuruteraan (Engineering Ethics)
course, which is exclusively conducted in Malay. To complete the course assignment,
the students had to translate the information they gained from worldwide articles
published entirely in English. Sharing her experiences, FG2b elucidated that “I have
problems to translate the terms. Because we are so used to learning them in English,
translating them makes me confused.” In order to reduce their translation problems,
most of them opted for the translation services provided by Chitchat.com software.
129
However, despite the convenience of this software, some students reported that they
were cautious about the effectiveness and accuracy performed by the software and that
full understanding of the context when translating is necessary. Thus, they admitted that
they should not rely completely on the software for translation. In a nutshell, the
students generally affirmed that their major challenge in writing their thesis in Malay is
strongly related to translating terminologies in their field of study.
4.4.3.5 Writing difficulties
It is interesting to highlight that the students knew that distinctions of forms
existed in their writing practices but they admitted that their real writing difficulties lay
in trying to express and elaborate their ideas clearly particularly in English prose. For
example, FG3d stated that “...we have problems when writing, like writing summary,
essays, etc.” This has led to their pessimistic outlook on writing and overriding
concerns on their struggle with writing. Despite the fact that writing was a significant
necessity in their academic endeavour, it was by and large perceived as the most
difficult academic task. FG3a declared that “Writing is the most problematic, it is not
interesting.” Given a choice between writing and speaking, most students indicated their
aversion to writing as clearly expressed by FG4e “When it comes to communication,
ok, but if asked to write, I give up. Sorry!” Additionally, FG2d asserted that “We have
problems writing and speaking in English, but not in Malay.”
Indeed, the problems of writing were primarily associated with their language
proficiency. It was observed that all of the students were consciously aware of their
deficit in both languages, massively in English compared to Malay. In general, the
students asserted that their major stumbling block to writing was their limited
knowledge of grammar rules and their inability to write proper sentences free of any
130
grammatical errors. This is clearly manifested in the following excerpt “To create a
sentence is hard. Because, in order to write, we have to apply the grammar rules, like
past tense, present tense etc., writing is a complete disaster” (FG2b). Corresponding to
previous remark, an obvious pattern of correlation between writing difficulties and
grammar problems was generally shared by most students as seen in one of the
comments, “... I always fail in writing because I do not really apply the grammar. So,
when it comes to writing, the main problem is always grammar” (FG2a). For the
students, writing in English is a struggle as they lack the full understanding and mastery
of the grammar rules required. Nevertheless, the students reported that their lecturers
did not correct their grammatical errors when marking their written assessments.
Another hurdle that contributed to the students‟ writing difficulties was
vocabulary. A good number of students quoted that “writing is the most problematic
because of poor vocabulary” (FG3b). Writing assignments or prose in English is
perceived as a demanding task as they felt that they did not possess sufficient
vocabulary for accurate and appropriate use in their writing. One particular example
was cited by FG3b “Vocabulary is difficult.” Sharing his experience, FG1c stated that
Sometimes we intend to write about something that we had in mind, but
it turns out to be something else which is totally irrelevant. Because we
lack of vocabulary and most of the time our grammar is wrong. When
the grammar is incorrect, the meaning becomes different too.
As a consequence, not only similar words were applied repetitively in their
writing, their sentence structures were also claimed to be inconsistent and inappropriate.
In the same vein, FG3a claimed that his overall English language proficiency basically
restricted his capacity to write as indicated in his comments “My English is very bad. I
do not have any idea at all if I want to write in English. I do not know; writing is
terrible.” In responding to further inquiry on his writing complications, he explained
131
that he struggled to write not only in English but in Malay as well. More often than not,
he endured the laborious task of constructing and expanding his sentences when writing
in English. Similar to other students who often complained that their written work was
deficient as a result of their flaws in English, FG3a stated that “Usually my sentences
are not perfect. I do not know how to expand my sentences. Even my Malay is not so
good, what more my English.” Sharing similar predicaments, FG2g pointed out that “To
be able to create sentences is difficult.”
In addition, when asked whether they were confident when writing in English,
the students on the whole confessed that they were not confident yet they simply did it.
This is demonstrated in the following excerpt: “We are not confident but we just have a
go” (FG2a). More often than not, the students did not have any other alternative but to
use simple words in their writing owing to their limited vocabulary.
Notwithstanding their constraints relating to their writing practices, the students
were generally aware that in their Engineering courses their studies were not at stake.
This is mainly because of the emphasis placed upon numerical and technical
applications and less attention given to language usage. Therefore, the students were not
unduly concerned about their overall performance in their content subjects. Indeed, they
were of the opinion that they could pass their Engineering courses as the written
assessments were generally perceived as manageable.
In essence, the findings presented above centred on the students‟ significant
writing practices in the academic setting. It is reasonable to say that certain kinds of
genres, such as the laboratory report, constitute substantial scaffolding practices in
which the students were simply engaged in finding and substituting the right
information to be placed in the genres. In addition, the overall findings disclose that the
nature of the writing, particularly in the assignments, laboratory reports and
132
examinations, involved a great deal of technical, mathematical and graphic
representations. Therefore, the requirement for elaboration and extended continuous
prose was minimal.
In light of the language used in the different genres, the considerable variations
of language choices were remarkable. In some writing discourses, an exclusive use of
English such as in the assignments, laboratory reports and examinations was evident,
whereas, this was not found in the case of the Architecture students since most of their
content subjects were mainly operated in Malay. Moreover, there was an exceptional
case, specifically in the examination, in which the blend of both languages was
permissible. Another outstanding finding is the comprehensive use of Malay in thesis
writing across all departments in the Engineering faculty. Additionally, with regards to
the academic content, the findings revealed that clarity of the substantive content was
significantly valued than language accuracy. In brief, the table below exhibits the
summary of the findings drawn upon the students‟ significant accounts pertinent to their
writing practices.
133
Table 4.8: Summary of students‟ writing practices Writing
genres
Language used Nature of writing Writing difficulties
Assignment
Absolute use of English
(Mechanical, Chemical &
Electrical courses)
and
Absolute use of Malay
(Architecture courses)
Applying accurate grammatical
rules
Laboratory
report
Choice of either English or
Malay
(Mechanical, Chemical &
Electrical courses)
Mathematical,
technical
and
graphical
representations
Limited vocabulary
Constructing sentences
Expanding sentences
Exam
Choice of English or Malay
and
A mixture of English & Malay
(Mechanical, Chemical &
Electrical courses)
and
Absolute use of Malay
(Architecture courses)
Thesis Absolute use of Malay (all
Engineering courses)
Translating terminologies from
English to Malay
4.4.4 Speaking practices
One of the dominant features identified in non-participant observation in the
academic practices of the students in the Engineering courses is speaking. Indeed, a
substantial emphasis is designated for speaking tasks as an essential component in
almost all course evaluations, usually consisting of individual or group oral
presentations. The following sub-section discusses the students‟ speaking practices
located in their academic setting by drawing attention to the oral presentation task as
one of the vital components entailed in their course evaluations.
134
4.4.4.1 Oral presentations
It was obligatory for all Engineering students to perform a considerable number
of oral presentations in order to fulfil and complete their course requirements. In most
courses, oral presentations were necessary to complement the group integrated project
assigned to the students beforehand. Essentially, the oral presentations provided a
platform for the students to exhibit the end product of their project as well as to share
their ideas and contribution pertinent to their specific project. Each group member was
given equal opportunity to convey related information as an individual mark was
allocated specifically for the presentation, albeit the project was accomplished
collectively.
Apparently, for students in the Mechanical, Chemical and Electrical departments
these presentations were commonly conducted in English. Likewise, conforming to the
absolute use of English in the Design course, the Architecture students had to carry out
their board presentations in English. However, the students were permitted to use both,
English and Malay languages, interchangeably on certain occasions as described by
FG4e “For our board presentations, the board is printed in English but when we present
our ideas, sometimes we are allowed to mix the languages. It can be done bilingually.”
This was not the case in other Architecture courses in which the Malay language was
primarily employed. Most oral presentations in these courses were by and large
executed entirely in Malay.
It is remarkably important to note that a good number of students found
preparing for their presentations a bit taxing and time consuming. Given their major
drawback3 in terms of language proficiency and elaboration, the students reported
allocating a great deal of time and effort to prepare themselves prior to the scheduled
3 A more comprehensive explanation pertaining to the students‟ drawback in English is discussed in sub-
section 4.4.4.3.
135
presentation sessions. It appears that several strategies were adopted by the students in
their attempts to meet the expectations of performing oral presentations in English as
demanded by the course assessments. The initial preparation included studying and
comprehending the subject matter in detail to gather essential information to be
delivered in the presentation. Complete understanding of the subject matter was critical
as they were expected “...to explain and elaborate...” (FG1e) during the presentations.
Subsequently, the central ideas were converted into a point or note form to facilitate
their use during the presentation. In certain cases, the students reported that they not
only prepared the points of the content for their presentations but the answers for the
question and answer (Q&A) sessions as well.
Some students considered having the notes with the key content as sufficient and
that they were contented with it. However, some students admitted that they needed to
prepare the scripts for their presentation. For instance, FG3a explained that it is
crucial for him to write full sentences instead of point form in order to help him during
the presentation as he had difficulty in providing explanation and expressing impromptu
ideas verbally. For this, additional time and effort that allowed them to construct
sentences and write complete scripts were deemed necessary. Occasionally, they asked
for their friends‟ assistance in their preparation as mentioned by FG3c “We prepare with
our friends who are more fluent in English. They help us to create sentences and check
whether the sentences are appropriate.”
Further investigation indicated that simple words were fully utilised throughout
the scripts with minimal emphasis on language accuracy and grammatically correct
sentences. This is mainly due to the specific attention given to the precision of the
subject matter in their presentations as expected by their lecturers leading to less
consideration on the appropriate language use. Following the completion of the notes or
scripts was the preparation for delivery which entails memorising the speech based on
136
the prepared notes or scripts prior to the presentation day. FG3a declared that “We have
to work a little bit hard to create sentences and memorise them.” Indeed, preparing for
the presentation was deemed as a time-consuming process because it usually took them
one whole night to prepare for a ten-minute individual presentation. Alternatively, some
students prepared themselves by memorising the slides that they prepared for the
presentation, as claimed by FG4a; “We read the slides and memorise the sentences. We
memorise the important points which are difficult to understand.”
It is generally common for most presentations to be accompanied by the Q&A
sessions as manifested in the Engineering courses. The students stated that their
lecturers were not very particular about the language use for this session as they were
permitted to respond in Malay even though the questions were posed in English.
In addition, the students were generally awarded extra credit for their appearance
during oral presentations as some courses necessitated them to dress formally for such
events. This was evident in the integrated project presentations performed by the
Mechanical and Chemical students which normally took place in the meeting or seminar
rooms. Nonetheless, such requirement was not observable in regards to students in the
Electrical department. They reported having to conduct most oral presentations casually
which were mostly carried out in the lecture halls. Moreover, the Q&A session was not
heavily emphasised after the students‟ presentation since it was usually conducted in an
informal way.
4.4.4.2 Group discussion
In addition, another speaking practice commonly observed in the academic
context of the Engineering students was group discussion. Unlike, the English classes
where a group discussion component was incorporated in the course assessments, the
137
group discussion tasks for the content subjects were normally conducted as part of the
sharing information and decision making activities in the tutorial classes. As most of the
group projects assigned to the students necessitated collaboration in order to accomplish
the project, a great deal of time was spent on discussing their work, occasionally outside
the class routine. This group discussion is normally carried out in a casual manner.
Apparently, English is the dominant language used in the group discussion
especially when the group comprised members from different races. It is interesting to
highlight the two perspectives drawn together from the accounts articulated by the
students pertaining to their underlying motives for using English in a group discussion
which included multiple racial memberships. At one side of the standpoint, the Chinese
students4 claimed that they used English in the group discussion to ensure complete
understanding among all group members. Due to their relatively low proficiency in
Malay and with the concern that the Malay students would not be able to comprehend
them clearly if they spoke Malay, they opted for English as it was regarded as a
standard language understood by both parties. According to FG4c,
If we speak Mandarin, the Malay students do not understand. If we talk
in Malay, only my Chinese friends can understand my Malay accent
[sic]. So, the best choice is English so that everybody can understand.
At the other stance, the Malay students stated that English was deliberately
employed in their group discussion whenever mixed group members were involved in
order to comply with the Chinese students‟ common practices. Considering the fact that
on several occasions Chinese students had difficulty communicating in Malay, English
was intentionally chosen to ensure complete understanding in their discourses. Although
4 Most Chinese students in this study come from the rural areas. Their main language at home and
schools is either Hokkien or Cantonese, while Mandarin is used as the medium of instruction or formal
language at schools. Most of these students attended the all-Chinese schools for their primary and
secondary education. The Malay language is learned as one of the compulsory subjects at schools.
138
both parties were consciously aware of their weaknesses in English, they still preferred
it in comparison to Malay as it was considered their best alternative. On the contrary, in
the event where all Malay or Chinese students were respectively grouped together, their
mother tongue or a blend of both languages were commonly utilised albeit in the
tutorial classes where the medium was English. Quite often, Malay language was
generally a commonplace in group discussions conducted beyond the four walls of the
classroom. Such a scenario was explained by FG2c, a Malay student: “We discuss in
English with Chinese students because sometimes they speak English. But if there are
all Malays in the group, we use both languages but most of the time is English.”
Additionally, another Malay student (FG2b) proclaimed that “There is a different
feeling when speaking English with the Malay students; with the Chinese students we
feel a little confident but with the Malays, it is embarrassing.”
Besides the speaking practices mentioned above, the students also reported their
verbal communication practices outside the classroom vicinity which entailed the
consultation or conferencing sessions with their respective lecturers. It was highlighted
that most of this communication took place fully in Malay except for their conversations
with foreign lecturers as described by FG2a;
We speak English with the foreign lecturers. There is some hesitancy
with „broken‟ language because sometimes we have problems
understanding their speech as well.
4.4.4.3 Speaking predicaments
In light of the discussion on their speaking practices, it appears that all students
were generally plagued by various dilemmas when conversing in English. The common
ground of the students‟ speaking dilemma resided in their practical difficulties in
dealing with the language aspects embracing vocabulary, grammar and pronunciation.
139
Given their restrictions pertaining to vocabulary and knowledge of the language
as mentioned in previous sections, the students generally felt that to be able to convey
their ideas in a clear and precise manner was taxing. They confirmed that although they
were confident with their ideas which they intended to explain and share with their
audiences, quite often, they failed to articulate and express those ideas accurately during
their presentations, hence, leading to their disappointment as they did not accomplish
what they intended to say. In the worst case scenario, such a stumbling block has
compelled them to code switch between Malay and English in order to ensure that they
could get their ideas across successfully. The students disclosed the fact that normally in
their attempt to present and explain in English, their thinking was executed in Malay.
This means that the search for the Malay words was carried out mentally and
subsequently, the words were translated into English utterances and expressions. FG4a
declared that “I do not know how to respond and I do not know how to change the word
from Malay to English. When I speak English it is really awkward.” Furthermore, he
added that code switching was instinctively done especially when they were uncertain
of their utterances. He said, “When our sentences are wrong, automatically we mix
English with the Malay sentences.”
In certain occasions where they could not find the appropriate words to use in
their conversations, they simply quit talking. FG2g explained that “Sometimes when we
do not know a word when we speak English, it is difficult for us to respond.” In the
same vein, FG3b pronounced that the majority of them were not doing well in their
presentations as they had to struggle with words in order to convey and elaborate on
their subject matters. According to him, “Our vocabulary is very little. If we have good
vocabulary, we can say anything in the presentation, but we do not have enough
vocabulary, that is where we are stuck.”
140
Considering their Engineering background, the students found the scientific
terms in English as straightforward and manageable. However, to provide additional
elaboration pertaining to the scientific issues was regarded as a daunting task as they
lacked the vocabulary to enhance their explanation. Most students were in agreement
that they had to struggle whenever they were required to elaborate and explain the terms
they used in their presentation. Due to their constraints in vocabulary, they were
inclined to use simple words repetitively throughout their presentations. Furthermore, to
overcome their insufficient vocabulary, they “...just state the important points...” (FG1e)
related to the topic of presentation.
On the whole, the students were of the opinion that their flaws in vocabulary
significantly affected their ability to speak fluently and effectively. For example, FG2g
shared her concern regarding her inability to express herself smoothly as she had
problems getting the appropriate utterances and she needed more time to think before
she could produce her utterances. She said, “For me communication is difficult, because
we have to think about the sentences to articulate, this is a very slow process. I can
speak in English but it is very slow.” Similar to the previous remark, FG4a admitted that
when he speaks in English, his pace is very much slower than speaking in Malay. Thus,
he regarded this as his biggest obstacle in speaking English.
Additionally, the students admitted that their constraints in terms of
comprehending and applying the structure of the English language have certainly
confined their capacity to communicate and express themselves appropriately and
accurately. In fact, FG3c explained that “I think it is hard to use the sentences and
arrange them appropriately.” Furthermore, blaming his reluctance or “... laziness to
memorise present tense and past tense...”, FG3d admitted that this had brought about
significant repercussions on his current speaking difficulties which inhibited him to
produce satisfactory utterances. Due to his major flaws in terms of grammar and
141
pronunciation, he could produce only simple utterances when carrying out speaking
activities in his courses. Correspondingly, other students also reported that they
deliberately used simple words without paying much concern on the grammatical
accurateness of their utterances as conveyed by FG1a “I speak with simple English and
I do not care whether my sentences are grammatically correct or not.”
As far as oral presentation is concerned, quite a number of students reported that
among other difficulties they endured when performing oral presentations in English
was pronunciation. Therefore, their preparation for presentations also entailed practicing
the pronunciation and articulation of words. In addition, FG2a explained that she found
pronunciation troublesome, as she had been corrected by some people for pronouncing
several words incorrectly before. Unfortunately, the incidents had caused her losing the
nerve to speak English confidently. She said “After my pronunciation was corrected
several times before, I was so discouraged to speak English for fear that my
pronunciation will be wrong again. Sometimes this thing makes me feel less confident.”
In summary, it is conspicuous that the overall academic practices of the students
involved an immense proportion of speaking practices, specifically oral presentation, as
it is a major prerequisite in all course assessments. However, it was discovered that the
majority of the students found performing oral presentation in English a demanding task
which necessitated laborious effort and strategies. Furthermore, most formal classroom
discussions were generally conducted in English while little use of Malay and Mandarin
was evident. The following table summarizes the students‟ speaking practices as
discussed in this sub-section.
142
Table 4.9: Summary of students‟ speaking practices
Speaking activities Language used Speaking predicaments
Oral presentation
Absolute use of English
&
Absolute use of Malay (Architecture
students)
Limited vocabulary
Group discussion
Mostly in English & occasionally in
Malay or Mandarin
Applying appropriate & accurate
grammar
Constructing sentences
Consultation
Mostly in Malay & occasionally in
English
Pronunciation problems
4.5 Level of linguistic competence
The findings on the students‟ literacy practices presented above have evidently
manifested and unveiled the students‟ problems and incompetence specifically in
handling reading, writing and speaking in English. These technical hitches were vastly
associated with their setbacks in acquiring a solid foundation of English grammar rules
as well as their deficit knowledge of vocabulary and sentence structure or syntax. The
rest of this section will discuss the linguistic complications endured by the students in
their academic literacy practices.
To a large extent, the majority of the students shared the same opinion that their
lack of interest in the language is influenced by their dilemma of learning the English
grammar. English was actually perceived as a difficult language to acquire because of
the complexity of the English grammar and its absolute differences against the Malay
grammar. In point of fact, the students felt that it was troublesome for them to memorise
the grammar rules in English; as quoted by FG3d “I could not be bothered to memorise
143
present tense and past tense.” Most students found the variations of the tenses confusing
and complicated. Hence, they complained about their disability to comprehend the
differences as well as to apply the tenses appropriately and accurately in their
discourses. Conceivably, the absence of tenses in the Malay grammar could be one of
the reasons contributing to the conflict of understanding the tenses in English. The
following excerpts provide a clear picture of the students‟ predicaments in dealing with
English grammar;
... we have to memorise the grammar rules like „past‟, „present‟ and
„future‟ tenses. I do not know how to use them. And then we have to use
„was‟, „is‟, „the‟, etc., I just have a go with them (FG2d).
I have problems with these three; „past tense‟, „present tense‟, „perfect
tense‟ (FG2a).
To add the prefixes [sic] „-ion‟, „-ing‟ makes me confused. I think I can
do it in Malay but in English, it is difficult (FG2b).
My problems with grammar are the „past tense‟, „past participle‟
(FG1a).
All in all, the students reported that their drawbacks with regards to grammar
certainly had a great impact on their meagre academic performance primarily in writing
and speaking. These are obvious in the quotes that ensued;
I always fail in writing because I do not really apply the grammar (FG2a).
I am not confident to speak for fear that my grammar is disorganised
(FG1e).
In reality, although the students were very much aware of the importance of
applying accurate grammar rules in any English discourses, they were still incapable of
acquiring a reasonably adequate knowledge of the rules and thus, they disregarded them
in most of their academic discourses. According to FG1c,
144
We can understand the grammar rules during the lesson but we always
forget what we have learned after class. We do not apply the grammar
rules when we are writing our assignments because most of the time we
forget them.
Given the fact that the students had been learning the English grammar in
schools for almost 11 years5, they still could not grasp full understanding of the tenses
in English. To them, English grammar is very complex and challenging. Consequently,
this has led to their pessimistic feelings towards English.
In addition, the students‟ adversities in managing their academic practices in
English were not because of grammar alone, but also included vocabulary. Most of
them were not satisfied with their level of vocabulary which hinders their chances of
getting satisfying results in the course assessments as well as meeting the demands
made of them in the academic setting. Due to their limited vocabulary, they encountered
difficulties in expressing their opinions and elaborating their ideas especially in writing
and speaking. The expressions below illustrate the issue;
Yes, my vocabulary is very limited (FG1d).
If we have good vocabulary, we can say anything in the presentation, but
we do not have enough vocabulary, that is where we are stuck (FG3b).
We use the same words over and over again (FG3a).
...the problems are to elaborate the ideas (FG3c).
The second expression above implies that the students were not doing well in
their presentations as they had to struggle with words in order to convey and elaborate
on their subject matters. Correspondingly, FG1e admitted that he required extra time to
think before he could produce his utterances due to his inadequate vocabulary as
5 The information on the school system can be found in the Chapter Two.
145
indicated in his remark “My problem is lack of vocabulary in English...If I want to say
something, I really have to think hard first, and it does not come out smoothly.”
A similar condition was observed in regards to writing, which the students
proclaimed as the most challenging task in their academic practices. Due to their
constraints in vocabulary, they reported their struggle to write down their thoughts and
even more to develop and elaborate these thoughts in writing. Contrary to other
mainstream students, FG1b quoted that “We can only write one page for our
assignments. For those who are proficient, they write three to four pages long. They can
manipulate and elaborate their ideas”. Therefore, they confirmed that their deficit had
resulted in significant repercussions on their overall academic practices.
Furthermore, their limited vocabulary also appears to be a stumbling block for
them in comprehending complex words in their reading resources. Such resources, as
they recounted, consist of “advanced language” (FG4a), “complicated language”
(FG1e) and “powerful sentences” (FG1e) which necessitated them to refer to
dictionaries in order to reach a full understanding of the texts. Thus, this had imposed
additional burdens and time on their reading practices.
Along the lines of the discussion pertaining to the students‟ linguistic
incompetence, it was noticeable that the students also encountered several shortcomings
in terms of constructing acceptable sentences in English. Some students attributed their
difficulties in sentence constructions to their deficiencies in grammar and knowledge of
English syntax. The excerpts below clearly exemplify the students‟ complications;
...lack of knowledge in sentence structure (FG1c & FG2b)
… difficulties in creating sentences (FG3a & FG4b)
It is difficult to expand the sentences… (FG1d; FG3b &FG4c)
146
Generally, the students reported that even writing a sentence can be a laborious
task as it requires hard thinking on their part. They needed ample time to construct
sentences since they were not confident on “how to use and when to use the sentences”
(FG3b). This was also evident in their attempt to perform oral presentation and
discussion in English as exemplified by FG3c; “I think it is hard to use the sentences
and arrange them appropriately.” In the same vein, their shortcomings in
comprehending English syntax have also restrained their capability to understand and
absorb information effectively in their readings. In contrast to their more proficient
friends, who “…can simply understand the text just by reading it once...” (FG4c), the
students felt that they were at the disadvantage as they needed to consume more time
and energy to accomplish their reading tasks.
On the whole, the students claimed that they were basically dissatisfied with
their current literacy practices and competencies mainly because of their shortfalls
pertinent to linguistic competence.
4.6 Level of communicative competence
While the widespread use of English was undoubtedly noticeable in the
students‟ academic practices, its application in their daily lives proved the contrary. The
commonplace experience of students was that English speaking practices rarely
materialised outside classroom settings in their daily lives. The following excerpts
provide a clear picture of the scenario;
We do not apply what we learned in class. We learn and write in English
but we barely communicate (FG4a).
But we do not communicate, we do not speak in English (FG2a).
The reason is the use of English is minimal in our daily lives (FG2f).
147
We learn in English but we do not practice to communicate at all
(FG2b).
It was clear that the majority of the researched students were discontented with
their existing capability to conduct verbal communication in English in their academic
contetxts. This was obvious throughout the interviews when the students were
persistently comparing themselves with other proficient students, thus resulting in a
sense of inferiority and disappointment in their poor English language and
communicative competence. Owing to their MUET Band 2 result when they first
embarked on their academic journey at the university, the students were generally
plagued by their overriding concerns, low self-esteem and unconstructive feelings about
their low ability and performance in English. This is clearly illustrated in the following
accounts;
Since our MUET is so low, we are afraid to speak because people
might not understand us (FG2b).
We do not know how to speak because we are not so good (FG1d).
…we are not so good, others are far better than us. When we speak, we
feel so inferior (FG2d).
Germane to the students‟ MUET achievement was their continuous discomfort
and inferior feelings which significantly jeopardised their confidence and thus, limited
their capability to perform well in the academic arena. Apparently, the students were in
agreement that their major concern was their inability to communicate in English
although they were quite assertive in accomplishing other course requirements in the
Engineering faculty. Considering themselves as “ineffective communicator” (FG3c), the
students admitted that a good command of English would certainly enhance their
academic performance and ultimately improve their grades in the Engineering courses.
148
As a matter of fact, the students also complained about their problems to convey their
thoughts and even more to carry out simple conversations with others as highlighted by
FG1c, “Sometimes to speak casually with others or to tell them simple things in English
is difficult.”
It is obvious that the students on the whole were very much aware of their
perceived deficiencies, which inhibited their capacity to perform well in delivering their
presentations. More often than not, they noticed a lot of hesitancy in their speech, which
affected the flow of their presentations. Although they believed that they were capable
in performing verbal communication in English satisfactorily, this could only be done in
a slow pace. Furthermore, despite their attempt to speak “proper English” (FG4a) in
their oral presentations, the students claimed that they could only produce “broken
English” (FG4a) in most of their utterances due to their constraints in the language.
Additionally, FG3a revealed that “Sometimes I mix the words that I pick up from
watching movies and use them in my presentations. I just mix them in my speech.”
Taking into account the extended time they required in order to prepare for a
relatively short individual presentation, the students felt that they were far behind other
mainstream students who did not encounter such problems preparing for their
presentation and that carrying out the verbal communication tasks were not burdensome
to them. According to FG3a, “It takes time to prepare. For me, it is a problem but it is
easy for others. I use simple English sentences though”. In line with previous remark,
FG3d further explained that “For those who are fluent, they do not need time to think
when they speak; all the words seem to come to them. We have to think hard.”
Comparing themselves with their friends‟ apparently effortless attempts when
presenting their ideas, the students confessed that they were constantly disturbed by
their constraints to do the same, as their utterances were frequently disorganised and
149
that their ideas were solely confined to their prepared scripts. Furthermore, they also
commented on their inability to manipulate and expand their existing knowledge or
content of their subject matter to other contexts as they were basically bound to their
prepared texts. During the class observation, it was noticeable that most of these
students deliberately chose to present the introductory part for their group presentation
in order to avoid the middle part where elaboration of the content was concerned.
Similar patterns were observed in their written assignment which involved group work.
For example, FG1d explained that “I don‟t want to spoil our group‟s marks so I avoid
doing the elaboration parts. Since I know I am good in calculation, I choose that part
voluntarily.”
Additionally, the students realised that their overall grades were also at risk, as
there were vast differences between their achievements and those of the mainstream
students, who “…excel in their studies…” (FG1d) because of their privileges in
English. Relating to his friends, FG4a pointed out that
Their marks for presentation are different. The way their present is full of
confidence and it is well understood by the audiences. Unlike ours,
which are more disorganized and we tend to have a lot of hiccups. Marks
are given for the flow of presentation. So, we have problems with that
because we are weak.
Nevertheless, the students generally felt that they needed to improve their
communicative abilities further and to enhance their confidence for their future career
possibilities. Taking into account their major hurdles in speaking and anticipating future
difficulties, the students were of the shared opinion that it was crucial for them to
upgrade their speaking abilities, as strongly asserted by FG3b: “Whatever it is, we need
to improve our communication, I think it is the most important thing now. It is too late
to improve our grammar.” Correspondingly, other students also agreed that
communicative competence was a lot more important than obtaining good grades. FG4c
150
pronounced that “The grades are definitely important but communication is much more
important.” Indeed, it is crucial for them to possess good communication abilities
especially when their job environment requires them to work in teams.
In essence, the students clearly elucidated that they found their listening and
reading practices in English were somewhat manageable; however, their primary
problem was actually their productive abilities in writing and speaking which required
them “To produce and to speak” (FG3b & FG1e).
4.7 Lacking in confidence
It appears that besides the language complications that they had to endure, the
students were also confronted with several other major challenges including
overcoming their individual fear factors and inferiority feelings which were closely
associated with their lack of self-confidence especially when performing verbal
communication. Generally, most students confirmed that they were constantly petrified
of committing errors when presenting and conducting oral communication in English as
these might lead to misunderstandings among the audiences. Some students were also
petrified that their effort to converse in English would be pointless should they fail to
get their messages across effectively, thus, causing a complete embarrassment.
Essentially, these fear factors have impinged on their speaking abilities which
discouraged them from attempting successful speaking practices in English. The
following citations exemplified the case;
We are terrified that people will laugh at us (FG2a & FG4a).
I am terrified that others might laugh at my grammar (FG1e).
I am afraid that I am wrong, especially wrong pronunciation (FG4e).
151
I am afraid because I am not sure whether what I said is right or wrong
(FG3c).
I am not confident to speak for fear that my grammar is disorganised
(FG1e).
In addition, the students were of the shared opinion that it was quite normal for
them to be terrified when performing oral presentations in English because of their
limited proficiency in the language. As they were frequently uncertain about their
choice of words and the accuracy of their utterances, the students also reported having
to overcome their shyness presenting in English. The blend of discomfort feelings and
uncertainties such as “...fear of my wrong pronunciation...” (FG3a), “...fear of my
wrong sentences...” (FG1e) and “...fear that people might not understand what we
say...” (FG2f) brought about massive challenges for the students to speak English. FG1a
confirmed that giving presentations always posed problems to him; he was always
doubtful on how to carry out the task as he kept on asking himself “...how to start
presenting, how to speak and to explain.”
It was also common for the students to report on their nervous feelings standing
in front of the audiences when performing their oral presentations. For example, FG2f
explained that “We can speak but we are a bit shy.” The students maintained that trying
to overcome their shyness while managing their discomfort and difficulties in English
has made the speaking tasks even more overwhelming. As a consequence, the
information that they intended to talk about simply vanished from their minds. On
discussing their nervous feelings, FG3d explained that he was nervous “... because his
[sic] sentences are disorganised.” FG3c further elaborated that most of the time when
performing his oral presentation in his content subjects, he was uncertain about the
correctness of his sentences “... because we are talking to people who are more fluent
than us, so we fear what we said is wrong.”
152
Notwithstanding the fact that their learning was considerably executed in
English, the students on the whole admitted that they still perceived the language as
difficult and that they felt inferior in it. For example, FG3c asserted that “Because I am
not good in English, even my pronunciation is still not perfect.”
Interestingly, it appears that the students placed higher importance on their
confidence when attending face-to-face job interviews compared to their overall
academic achievement. To them, being able to communicate and express their ideas
effectively and assertively in the job interviews was highly salient. Considering their
speaking quandaries, a good number of the students indicated that they were extremely
worried about their performance when attending the job interview because they were
“… terrified to communicate with other people…” (FG3c) and competing with other
future graduates in the forthcoming job market as exemplified by FG3a, “I am terrified
because I cannot speak well in English, I am afraid to compete with others. I always feel
afraid and inferior.” In proportion to their MUET results, FG2e expressed her
reservations on their future occupational opportunities as seen in her remark, “…our
weaknesses is lack of confidence. For the job interview, they will look at our result and
they might reject us because of our Band 2 result. That is what we are afraid of.”
Correspondingly, FG4a stated that “…some companies do not accept people like us.”
Citing FG3d‟s words, “Perhaps, the most important factor is lack of self-
confidence”, it is safe to say that the students‟ lack of confidence was mainly fuelled by
their low MUET scores and their limited proficiency. Indeed, almost every one of them
agreed to their deficit with regards to self-confidence. This is especially true in
comparison to other students with higher MUET results who were perceived as more
assertive in their verbal communication. With regards to their confidence in facing their
future occupational requirements, the students revealed that they were generally not
153
prepared for that, “Because we are afraid to communicate in English. We are not
confident to speak or maybe we do not have the confident just yet” (FG3c).
Nonetheless, the majority of them disclosed that they never had the confidence
to speak English during their school days; in fact, their confidence level had developed
slightly since they entered the tertiary education. This was significantly attributable to
the extensive amount of oral presentations that were carried out regularly in their
content courses, which they hardly did in schools. Initially, their confidence was
enhanced at the Matriculation centres where English was used as the medium of
instruction. FG3a exemplified that “I was a little bit confident during my matriculation
years. I was confident to speak English although I made a lot of mistakes.”
Furthermore, since English was dominantly used in most of their academic routine at
the university, the students‟ confidence improved a little bit.
Moreover, the English courses that were offered to the students also helped them
to boost their confidence. For example, the English for Engineering course which was
specifically tailored to cater the students‟ future needs provided massive opportunities
and exposures for them to practice and apply the language. Numerous activities were
incorporated in the course to encourage the students to conduct individual as well as
group communication, while providing broad opportunities for them to be familiarised
with English and thus, helping them to boost their confidence. FG1e explained that,
There were a lot of exercises in the course. We really felt great especially
when we manage to complete the activities successfully. So, when we
succeed, of course, we feel more confident and we feel that we are not
that bad.
154
4.8 Factors contributing to the perceived deficit in English
The previous sections have provided a comprehensive account on the students‟
academic literacy practices and competencies within which several distinguishable
deficits in relation to their English language literacy were also identified. The findings
have also shown that there are largely congruent patterns between the students‟
academic literacy practices and competencies and their level of English language
proficiency. The following section explores the compelling factors that contribute to the
students‟ constructions of language and literacy practices. This discussion is necessary
to show that these factors had constructed and shaped the role and purpose of the
students‟ academic literacy practices and competencies and thus, provide insights into
their values and views on literacy and English language on the whole. A sample of
germane remarks that indicates the influential factors of the students‟ deficit in English
is delineated in the table below.
Table 4.10 Relevant excerpts on factors contributing to the perceived deficit in English.
Contributing factors Relevant excerpts
English is viewed as a foreign language “I do not like English since primary school
because it is like an alien language” (FG2a)
Insubstantial English foundation at schools “...the primary school made me dislike English and
it continues until now” (FG1c)
Unsupportive teachers “I was not interested to learn English because my
teacher did not guide me” (FG3a)
Influence from friends “We tried to speak English with our friends but we
never get their responses” (FG4b)
Restricted home practices “There is no encouragement from my family
because we do not communicate in English”
(FG1d)
155
4.8.1 English is viewed as a foreign language
As stated at the beginning of this chapter, it was discovered that the students‟
preconceived ideas of English were initially very negative as they found it entirely
unfamiliar to their norms and surroundings. In their early schooling, English was
perceived as a foreign language or “alien language” (FG2a) since their first introduction
to the language was as one of the compulsory subjects to be learned in schools. To
them, English was “...different from what we are used to, we are not used to English as
compared to Bahasa Melayu” (FG2a). They found learning English a bit awkward as it
was completely a foreign language given that they had grown up using their own
mother tongue6 and that they saw everyone around them speaking similar language.
Furthermore, most students pronounced that learning English then was like
learning “a new subject and yet troublesome” (FG2b), “a difficult language” (FG4b)
and “a very complicated language” (FG3a). Consequently, learning the language was
considered as an overwhelming experience and “...a heavy burden that made us felt
overloaded...” (FG3d). This is especially true when they had limited need for the
application of English in their daily lives and that they were practically surrounded by
the prevalent use of the Malay or Chinese dialect in their society. In fact, they used
English only in their English classes as affirmed by FG3a “…the use of English was
limited; only in the classroom” and FG1e “We speak English only in our English class.
Sometimes the teacher called us to read English texts out loud; that is all.”
Therefore, this depicts that, in reality, English is not their second language as
proclaimed in the country‟s policy; rather, it is indeed a foreign language for this group
of students. It was observed during the interviews that the students were comfortable
6 Generally for these students, their first language at home is not the official Malay and Chinese language but their
own respective mother tongue which includes different Malay dialects such as Kelantan Malay, Kedah Malay,
Sarawak Malay, Javanese and Banjarese as well as Hokkien and Cantonese for the Chinese dialects.
156
talking in Malay since it was convenient for them to express themselves clearly in the
language.
It appears that using the English language is a demanding task for these students
as it requires them to translate from their own first languages such as Malay, Chinese or
their own dialects into English. They revealed that more often than not their thinking
was performed impulsively in their mother tongue which was subsequently translated to
English. For example, FG4a explained that “We do not know how to learn English from
the beginning...We still think in Malay and to produce English expressions is hard.” In
the same vein, FG2a declared that “I dislike English because I find it difficult to speak
when I have to translate.”
4.8.2 Insubstantial English foundation at schools
On top of the students‟ lukewarm outlook on English, the required support from
their surroundings during their childhood and early adolescence was also found to be
lacking. In general, the students were of a strong opinion that the relatively minimal
encouragement from their society on the use of English has brought about a significant
impact on their existing deficits in terms of English language literacy practices and
competencies. Several entities including their schools, peers and family members were
recounted as the contributing factors that influenced their current conditions. Inevitably,
these factors are found to be interrelated and dependent on their own situated contexts
and the respective society in which they belonged to.
Further probing into the environmental factors as elucidated by the students, it
was discovered that their experiences at schools significantly contributed to their current
competencies and stance on English. Quoting FG3b, “Everything begins from school”,
157
it is clear that the students considered the school as the key entity mostly responsible for
their shortfall in the English language. Since English was barely utilised in schools, the
students were generally dissatisfied that schooling had not assisted them adequately to
establish their interest in the language, especially at the early stage of learning, to enable
them to acquire and build a solid foundation of English. It is worth noting that English
was initially introduced to the majority of the students when they attended the primary
schools as described in the following excerpts by FG2b;
English is like a new subject at school. I did not learn English at
kindergarten, I learned 1, 2, 3, and read A, B, C. At primary school, I
began to learn things like „apple‟, „duck‟ etc. in Year 1.Then, in Year 3,
we started to write English sentences. At that time I felt blurred, I did not
know how to use the grammar. Then, I started to hate English.
In regards to learning English at schools, the students recounted their
unfavourable experiences which they described as “unhelpful” (FG3a), “impractical
because a lot of theories” (FG2g) and “insufficient exercises and difficult to apply in our
present lives” (FG4c). It appears that the students vividly emphasised the dominant role
of schools, specifically the primary schools, in their failure to develop their interest and
enhancing full understanding of English and that schools can determine their success or
failure in acquiring the language. This is exemplified by FG1a, “I think schools are the
most important. We can build our grammar there. When it is solid, it can be easier for
us.”
It is obvious that the students repeatedly stressed the crucial function of primary
school to help them build strong foundation of English grammar whilst developing their
interest in the language because the failure to grasp complete understanding of the
grammar rules would lead to more disappointment and resistance towards English. As a
consequence, this has gradually led to their deficiencies in the language. The remarks
that ensued illustrated the case in point;
158
We did not manage to catch up at schools; after sometime, we were
reluctant to learn grammar, to memorise like „present and past tense‟,
then, we started to shy away from English (FG3b).
Our laziness caused our problems with grammar (FG3d).
...we took a long time to pick up English, so, we felt less motivated and
inferior (FG3c).
Clearly, when describing their English learning experiences at schools, the
students were inclined to associate them with their technical hitches in appreciating the
grammar rules. It was even more upsetting for them to undergo similar grammar
learning experiences at the tertiary level as grammar classes have always been
considered as “not interesting” (FG1b), “boring” (FG1a, FG2c) and “...made me
sleepy” (FG2a). These had created a great aversion towards English grammar as
declared by FG2b, “I do not like grammar the most.” Indeed, some students were of a
strong opinion that their shortcomings in grammar, caused by their lack of
understanding and interest of the grammar rules, had brought about their failure to
achieve excellent results in primary and secondary schools. For instance, FG2a
disclosed that her poor result in English had jeopardised her overall achievement in the
primary school examination. Consequently, this had enhanced her pessimistic feelings
and increased her resistance towards the language.
Apparently, the students‟ unconstructive experiences when learning English at
schools reflected their nominal interest in the language as well. The majority of the
students confessed that basically they did not have any interest at all for English during
their school days. Taken into consideration that other subjects were primarily taught in
the Malay language or Mandarin (at Chinese schools), the students found English
subject as “uninteresting” (FG2b) and “insignificant” (FG4a). This is mainly because
159
they were ignorant of the significance of learning English for their educational and
future purposes. The expressions below illustrate the situation;
I just could not put up with English (FG3b).
I hated English a lot. I did not learn anything from English at schools
(FG4e).
I felt so disgusted to learn English at primary school because I thought
English was not important at all. There was no exposure on the benefit of
English for our future (FG4a).
We did not see its importance; nobody made us realise how important it
was when we were small (FG4b).
Inevitably, the marginal attention and interest towards English have prompted
their difficulties in acquiring the language; as emphasised by FG4d “The interest has to
start when we were small. If we were left behind at school, of course we could never
make it now.” Nevertheless, the awareness on the importance of English was observed
to emerge gradually upon the students‟ admission into higher learning institutions as
mentioned at the beginning of this chapter (Section 4.3).
It is interesting to highlight that the location of the schools that the students
attended for their primary and secondary education also played a part in developing
their competencies in English. It was discovered that almost all the researched students
involved in this study originated from the rural areas and they generally agreed that they
did not learn much English as there was less attention and exposure to use the language
in their schools. This had certainly brought a significant impact on their current
situations. For example, FG1e and FG3d elucidated that
One of the factors for my weakness is English is because of the schools
in the village (FG1e).
160
Most of us come from villages, so, English was not emphasised there.
We learn English but not like those in the city who speak English
frequently. In our village, if we speak English, people will laugh at us
(FG3d).
In actual fact, the use of English in the students‟ daily lives was almost absent as
the mass number of students normally spoke either Malay or Mandarin as the official
language in schools. Simultaneously, beyond their classroom settings, they usually
communicated in their own respective dialects such as Kelantan Malay, Kedah Malay,
Javanese or Sarawak Malay for the Malays and Hokkien or Cantonese for those who
attended all Chinese schools. In essence, the students disclosed that there was “lack of
exposure to English” (FG4a), “no communication in English” (FG1d) and “limited use
of English” (FG3a) in the rural schools.
In comparison to those who live in the cities, in which the widespread of English
is very much evidenced, the students felt that they were at the disadvantage as they were
unable to speak English easily because speaking in English was not perceived as a
common or natural thing in their schools. Furthermore, they regretted that they never
had a broad exposure to English and an extensive opportunity to use it as there was less
emphasis to use the language at schools as explained by FG4e “…the environment itself
did not pressure us” to communicate in English. This is especially true as there was
limited platform provided for them to apply the language in their daily academic
literacy practices. Indeed, it was reported that English was acquired mainly through
imitation and regurgitation of discourses from texts while communication between the
students and their teachers as well as their peers was negligible. This is clearly
described in the following expressions:
...less communication practice and less reading in class (FG2c).
161
Less communication in the class; we read and answered the reading
comprehension questions or copy what the teacher wrote on the
blackboard (FG3c).
…we did not apply what we had learned, we just learned… (FG2a).
Sometimes the teacher called us to read English texts out loud (FG1e).
We memorised word to word and the format of essays (FG4d).
4.8.3 Unsupportive teachers
Within the school community, it is generally acknowledged that teachers are the
most important and influential individuals exceptionally responsible to develop their
students‟ interest and enhance their competencies in the English language. However, the
researched students in this study reported a contradictory case. The majority of them
claimed that the support and guidance provided by their English teachers at schools
were somewhat nominal to even help them establish a strong interest in the language.
Several disappointing remarks conveyed by the students such as “My teacher did not
teach me” (FG1b) and “My primary school teacher did not guide me” (FG4c) indicated
the students‟ stance that their school teachers also had an effect on their lack of interest
and competencies in English.
Given the fact that English was a completely brand new language which they
regarded as a difficult language to learn at schools, the students admitted that they relied
heavily on their teachers‟ assistance and encouragement to help them acquire the
language. Indeed, they looked on their teachers as their role models and mediators of the
language whilst the English class is the only channel for them to be exposed to the
language. The majority of the students expressed their disappointment with regards to
the teaching approach implemented by their English teachers which they recounted as
162
“uninteresting” (FG3a), “boring” (FG4e), “not cheerful” (FG1c) and “not skilful”
(FG1a). Unveiling her frustration, FG4e explained that “...the teacher gave us a lot of
exercises but she never showed us how to go about doing those exercises.” Eventually,
the teachers‟ trivial effort and guidance had discouraged the students from learning
more about the language. Thus, this brought about their low competencies in English.
A clear example was evident in the expressions cited by FG2e;
I think teacher plays an important part...My teacher could not concentrate
on us because there were so many of us in the class. She could not be
bothered about us, although we were weak in English, she did not care.
We were not proficient; we just kept quiet since we did not know how to
learn it.
Additionally, the students pointed out that the reason they were not so keen to
learn English at schools was because they were scared of the teachers. They believed
that the personality of their English teachers also influenced their interest to learn
English. Generally, they described most of the English teachers who had taught them at
schools as “strict” (FG1e) and “fierce” (FG3d) which made them “fear of the English
teachers” (FG4c) and “terrified to go to class” (FG4a). In fact, according to FG4b,
stereotyping English teachers as unkind and unapproachable was a commonplace
among most students. These had certainly caused them to shy away from learning the
English language.
In essence, it is safe to say that there were basically restricted opportunities for
English and nominal community of practice among the school members in which the
students were involved. Therefore, this confirmed that schools are the most responsible
entity which significantly influenced the students‟ existing competencies in English.
163
4.8.4 Influence from friends
It is also worthy of note that another vital factor contributing to the students‟
perceived shortfall in English concerns with their circle of friends. In most
circumstances where English was not in favoured and well accepted by their peers, the
students were inclined to follow suit as they were strongly influenced by the former.
Having identified failings in schooling as the major contributor to flaws in their English
language proficiency, the students also recognised the limited interactions in English
among themselves and their acquaintances. Moreover, the unconstructive feedback they
received from their peers when they attempted to speak English casually with them
dissuaded them from persisting in their attempts. In several occasions where they had
tried to converse in English with their friends, they received no response in return.
Instead, it turned out to be embarrassing incidents and total disappointments; as cited by
FG4b “…sometimes it looks like we are talking to ourselves.”
More often than not, the students revealed that they were reluctant to
communicate in English for they worried about the disheartening reactions from their
friends. The remarks such as “they jeered at me” (FG4a), “they laughed at me” (FG1e),
“they felt disgusted” (FG3a), “they hated it” (FG4b) and “they said I wanted to show
off” (FG3a) exhibited the depressing responses given to the students‟ attempts to
converse in English. Therefore, to avoid from the “uncomfortable feeling” (FG4c) and
the “discouraging looks” (FG3d) they received when trying to speak in English with
their acquaintances, they simply discontinued their effort. The account that ensued
exemplifies more: “Sometimes, our friends insulted us when we tried to speak in
English. It feels like a phobia, so we quit” (FG1e).
164
4.8.5 Restricted home practices
Another explanation for the difficulties with regards to English endured by the
students was the result of less community of practice of the language specifically among
family members at home. Quoting FG1b, “Family also plays important role; if our
families speak English, we would have improved in the language”, it is clear that the
students believed that their family also contributed significantly to their low
competencies in English. Considering their socio-economic background and rural
settings where English was minimally used compared to their respective mother tongue
dialects, the students declared that conversing in English was regarded as “odd” (FG2c)
and “abnormal” (FG1b) in their domestic contexts. They generally felt that speaking
English with their parents and siblings was pointless, as they did not use the language
extensively in their daily lives. FG1c explained that, “Because most of us speak our
own languages, speaking in English is awkward.” A comprehensive explanation
pertinent to their discouraging circumstances was found in the remarks made by FG4b;
It is because of the surroundings. Like in our case, we speak Malay all
the time, at home and among our friends, there is no encouragement to
speak English. English is like minority. If we want to apply it in our
daily routine, others do not do it. Because others do not do it, we feel that
we should not do it as well. It is the environmental factor actually.
In summary, the findings have disclosed that English is perceived by the
students as a foreign language. It is indeed a third or fourth language learned as a
foreign language at the onset of their education where it was frequently taught by non-
native speakers of English. Additionally, there was minimal exposure and
encouragement to use the language within the school boundaries as there were limited
authentic opportunities to use the language to enable them to improve their
competencies. Furthermore, the community of practice beyond the academic context
was also observed to be negligible as there was little opportunity for the use of English
165
and unconstructive support from the society which practically restricted the students‟
development of communicative competence and confidence in the language.
4.9 The aid provided by the university milieu
Attending to the fourth research question addressed by this study; How does the
university environment support the development of these competencies and practices?,
this section reports and discusses the findings on the university environment that
sustains the researched students‟ academic literacy competencies and practices. As
mentioned at the beginning of this chapter it was observed that the students‟ enrolment
in the higher learning institution has established trajectories of interest and development
of their English language academic literacy competencies and practices. This is
especially true as the demands and expansion of knowledge at the tertiary level have
triggered the students‟ shift of mindset towards the English language. Essentially, the
demands of the institution have deliberately forced them to use the language extensively
in order to succeed in the academic world. This is confirmed by FG4b, “When we
stepped in the university, the surroundings pushed us to learn English more.”
Supporting this remark, FG1d admitted that “at first it was quite difficult to cope with
the demands.”
In reality, the researched students in this study typically regarded the university
as the prominent entity solely responsible in establishing their appreciation and positive
outlook on English whilst enhancing their academic competencies and practices in the
language. Apparently, the prevalent use of English in the academic discourses and
resources signified the university‟s active role in sustaining the students‟ academic
literacy development as students immersed themselves in myriad academic events
166
prepared by the institution. For example, FG4d elucidated that “All the books that we
used are in English and we presented in English, all major courses were taught in
English and all assignments and presentations were carried out in English.” The
students affirmed that the social and classroom environments at the university were
conducive and encouraging for English language literacy practices. In addition, the
increased realisation of the importance of English for future career gains enhanced the
students‟ effort to master the language. Quoting FG4e, “I think the university has helped
me a lot in improving my English”, indicates the students‟ contentment with the aid
offered by the university to encourage their English language academic literacy. In fact,
this experience was unfamiliar in their school surroundings as reported in previous sub-
sections.
It was evident that various means and opportunities were provided by the
university to develop the students‟ academic literacy practices and competencies in
English. These encompassed the widespread exploitation of the language in the medium
of instruction, teaching resources and assessment tools as informed by the researched
students. For example, FG4e explained that she was grateful that her English has
improved, attributing this to the “the academic exercises, the numerous assignments and
the sources of information or references...” that she had to engage with in order to
survive the institutional expectations. Additionally, FG1d concurred that the
considerable amount of English utilised by the content courses lecturers in their lessons
and teaching aids, such as “the power-point slides and notes”, contributed to the growth
of his academic practices in English. Furthermore, there was a high degree of
consensus among the researched students that most lectures operating in English helped
to intensify their listening skills in English and thus, enhancing their academic
competency. Another constructive academic practice imposed on the students was
167
writing report and assignments in English which were relatively considered as daunting
yet beneficial tasks.
Embedded in the students‟ academic practices was also a compelling emphasis
on communicative activities in English which entail generating of ideas as well as
sharing and presenting those ideas to other members in the classroom. Most students
shared a common view that the university has opened up immense opportunities for
communicative practices as highlighted by FG1d, “For me, there are vast chances to
speak in the university whereas in schools there were lots of writings.” In actual fact,
the nature of their Engineering courses necessitated the students “to communicate and
search for information to speak” (FG1d), “to present the project in front of the lecturers”
(FG1e), “to communicate with people” (FG2e) and “to talk about the paperwork and
assignments smoothly and confidently (FG2b). The wider usage of English has enabled
the students to have more exposure to English, thus ensuring a better understanding of
the language.
To complement the conducive atmosphere was the positive involvement of their
peers who also made the attempt to use English more frequently as claimed by FG2g,
“In this university, everything is learned in English and it seems like almost everyone
speaks English here.” Contradictory to their friends at school, the students explained
that their current situation has initiated their circle of friends to converse more in
English whenever possible. Sharing a similar opinion FG2g declared that “My friends
who are at the same level like me are not shy to speak in English”. However, according
to FG3d, “Bahasa Melayu is still our main language. Sometimes we try to speak in
English but „broken‟ English.”
It is mindful to note that the substantial academic exchanges in English as
reported by the students mainly took place within the classroom practices. There was a
168
common view among the cohort that the use of the Malay and Chinese languages was
occasionally discernible in the academic domain at the same time as they were
extensively utilised beyond the four walls of the classroom. The students explained that
this scenario was unavoidable and they were aware of the fact that the university itself,
being a national university, has a reputation to uphold the national language, which is
the Malay language.
This is also evident in light of the students‟ thesis writing practices whereby a
complete use of Malay was applied while in some examinations and lectures, the blend
of the English and Malay language was observed despite the priority given to English
by the faculty. FG2d gave an example of a subject „Mekanik Bendalir‟ (Fluid
Mechanics) exam paper; “... the cover page was written in Malay but when we opened
the exam booklet, the questions were written in English. We were allowed to write our
answers in Malay because this university still upholds the value of Bahasa Melayu”.
Corresponding to the content courses at the faculty, FG4a maintained that “Sometimes
the lectures were conducted in English but the notes were written in Bahasa Melayu.”
On top of their institutional support, the students consistently highlighted their
appreciation of the encouragement received from the teaching staff, especially their
English language teachers at the university. The prevailing view among the students
was that they were satisfied with the importance of the strong personalities portrayed by
their teachers, specifically in the English for Engineering course, which they described
as “lively, very patient and understanding” (FG3d), “friendly and approachable”
(FG4a), “very nice and sporting” (FG2c) and “tolerant and lenient” (FG2d). Contrary to
their teachers at schools, the students commented on the teaching approaches which
“inspired the students‟ interest to learn English” (FG2g), “did not make the students
nervous” (FG4e) as “complicated lessons were made easier” (FG1e) and thus, “the
169
students were a bit relaxed and less stressful” (FG2e) and they “enjoyed being in the
class” (FG3d).
Indeed, the students were in agreement that their teachers play a significant role
in enhancing their confidence and interest in learning English at the university. Given
their meagre competency in English, the majority expressed their appreciation of their
teacher‟s compliments on their efforts to improve their academic literacy competencies
in the classroom. FG3c recounted that “When we did something and the teacher praised
us for it, we felt very motivated and it improved our confidence.” Undoubtedly, this had
brought about a deep sense of belonging to the academic world and thus, enhancing
their practices in English. This sentiment is also shared by FG3d who asserted that
“Actually the teachers play important roles for weak students like us. We do not like it
if the teachers are too strict because it will make us less interested to learn English and
thus, we will stop learning it.”
4.9.1 English language courses offered for the students
Thus far, it is generally acknowledged that English is the official medium of
instruction employed in most Engineering courses in the midst of the wide use of
Bahasa Melayu within the academic surroundings in order to conform to the
university‟s obligation of promoting its national identity and sustaining the national
language. Nevertheless, English is still being used extensively for the teaching and
learning of Science and Mathematics as well as Information and Communication
Technology (ICT) in the university. Additionally, accommodating to the students‟ needs
pertaining to the English language, the university has set up a range of English courses
to suit the students‟ level of proficiency and field of studies.
170
In the case of the Engineering students, two English courses, Foundation
English (FE) and English for Engineering (E4E), were distinctively designated and
made compulsory. The former was offered in the third semester (a short semester) of
their first year of studies while the latter was assigned in the second semester of their
third year. Given the students‟ score of Band 2 in the Malaysian University English Test
(MUET) prior to the university entry, it was mandatory for them to enrol in both
courses and achieve a minimum grade C, which is equivalent to MUET Band 3, before
they were allowed to graduate. The students were not required to enrol for any other
English courses during their study once they have obtained these requirements. It was
noted that there was a gap between the two courses as the students were not required to
undertake any English courses in their second year of study.
Although the students were fully conscious of their perceived deficiencies in
English, they claimed that the heavy workload assigned to them in their content courses
inhibited them to undertake more than the two compulsory English courses. This was
explicitly mentioned by FG4a, “Our main problem is time; we do not have enough time.
There are a lot of works that we have to do.” Sharing similar view, FG3a stated that
“Actually, the onus is on us. If we feel that our English is poor, then we should go for
extra English classes, but, we do not have time for that.” This is also supported by
FG2a; “After all English is only Pass or Fail for both courses. They are not counted in
our CGPA7.” This indicates that the students considered both English courses as
satisfactory and that extra English classes were deemed as unnecessary.
The following sub-sections provide some descriptions of the two English
courses taken up by the researched students, and the values of the courses as perceived
by the students in accommodating to their competencies and practices in English whilst
7 Cumulative Grade Point Average
171
enhancing their academic achievement and eventually paving the way for their future
career purposes.
4.9.1.1 Foundation English
This is a proficiency English course particularly designed for all undergraduate
students who obtained Band 1 or 2 in the Malaysian University English Test (MUET).
With the main intention of improving the students‟ existing score to reach Band 3 after
completing the course, this course provides various activities to enhance students‟
English proficiency and confidence to use the language in speaking and writing.
Foundation in grammar and vocabulary formed the basic structure of the syllabus. Apart
from in-class tutorials, a variety of language activities in the form of games, songs, class
readers, on-line exercises and language camp activities are included. (Adapted from the
Foundation English course booklet, 2009)
4.9.1.2 Perceived values of Foundation English course
Generally, there was a common expectation among the researched students that
placed strong needs on communication skills prior to their enrolment in the Foundation
English (FE) course. Given their non-English speaking backgrounds and their
constraints with regards to English language competencies, most students indicated their
need to engage in academic exchanges anticipating that more exposure and platforms
were provided in the course to increase their communicative competence.
Notwithstanding these expectations, there was a high degree of consensus
among the students concerning the ineffectiveness of the course to improve their
proficiency in English. The main disappointment expressed by most students relates to
the focal attention given to the learning of grammar and vocabulary throughout the
course. Inevitably, this has dampened their interest to learn English as the grammar
172
approach in English classes has constantly been considered as dreary and repetitive. A
clear example is evidenced in the account articulated by FG2c, “I hated it when we had
to deal with grammar exercises and arrange the sentences in FE. It was boring!”
Moreover, the emphasis on grammar in the course was generally perceived by
the majority as redundant and repetition of their previous experiences at schools as
expressed by FG1b, “I expected that we would be learning something new, instead it
was back to grammar, just like old school days.” Sharing similar views, FG4d
maintained that “For me, FE was just a repetition of what we have learned in secondary
schools.” Indeed, the students generally felt that the course was relatively ineffective in
facilitating their literacy practices in their content courses and improving their
competencies in English as it particularly taught “basic things” (FG4c). FG4a confirmed
that “I do not find the course useful because we only learned grammar and vocabulary
but we did not practically apply them.”
Taken into consideration that all students who obtained low scores in the MUET
were grouped together in the course, some students found the class atmosphere less
competitive as they did not learn much from each other due to their equivalent level of
proficiency. Correspondingly, FG4e pointed out that “I think in order to increase
students‟ level of English; students have to be forced with challenging tasks.” In
addition, some students felt that it was too short of time for them to improve their
proficiency as the course was conducted in seven weeks within the semester break.
According to FG1a, “There was nothing that I gained from the course because the time
was not suitable and it was very short.” FG2b added that “I think one semester was not
enough because everything was crammed and we had to rush to complete all the
lessons.” From the various responses drawn together, it was obvious that the students
on the whole did not perceive the focus on grammar and vocabulary in the FE course as
worthwhile. In addition, they also reported a minimal improvement pertaining to their
173
reading, listening and writing skills. With reference to writing tasks, the students
informed that they were only assigned one essay writing assignment throughout the
entire course.
Despite these disapprovals, there was a commonality that students enjoyed
various communicative activities such as group discussion, presentation and drama
which gave them substantial opportunities to converse in English and gradually boost
their confidence to use the language. As the students looked for more speaking
activities, they appreciated the activities conducted in the course that could enhance
their competence in the language. This sentiment was reiterated by FG1e, “I think to be
able to speak confidently we have to get used to it. And if the people around us support
us, respond to us, perhaps we can improve from there.”
It is noteworthy to highlight the students‟ general acknowledgement that the
communicative tasks carried out in the course were basically beneficial in improving
their self-confidence in spite of their competency in English. This was made clear by
FG1a, “I think FE helped us a lot on our self-confidence but not much of helping us to
improve our English.” On the whole, it is safe to say that most students were of the
same opinion that their level of confidence has slightly increased at the end of the
course albeit their level of competence in English remained the same.
4.9.1.3 English for Engineering
This course is offered to meet the communication needs of all engineering
undergraduate students. The primary aim of this course is to equip the students with
written and oral communication skills which can prepare them to perform well in
multiple workplace situations. To stimulate workplace discourses, the course
components constitute various tasks as stated below:
174
Writing resume and cover letter which train the students to write clearly and
effectively for job application.
Individual job interview helps to develop self confidence and polish students‟
communication skills to market themselves to potential employers.
Case study enhances students‟ communicative and critical thinking skills in
reaching consensus by allowing them to participate and manage group
discussions.
Product innovation provides opportunities for students to apply critical and
creative thinking collectively in coming up with innovative ideas and present
those ideas via oral presentation and written executive summary.
(Adapted from the English for Engineering course booklet, 2009)
4.9.1.4 Perceived values of English for Engineering course
It is apparent that the researched students‟ perspectives on the English for
Engineering (E4E) course contrasted strongly with their views on Foundation English in
terms of developing their English language academic literacy competencies and
practices. There was ample evidence collated from the cohort pertaining to their
contentment and satisfaction on the effectiveness of the course in improving their
communication skills, enhancing their confidence and preparing them for the
occupational requirements.
Contrary to the FE course, it is apparent that the E4E course was comparatively
in favoured by most students as explained by FG4b;
I think E4E is better than FE. We were more confident because most
classroom activities involved numerous discussion, thus, we improved
ourselves speaking in front of audiences such as attending to job
interviews, meeting etc.
175
Taking a similar standpoint, FG4e asserted that the course was mutually
perceived as an exclusive course which is fulfilling and significant, “It is very essential
because it is totally different than other courses.” In view of its “application” (FG1a)
approach, the majority stated that they placed high values on the significance and
relevance of the skills learnt in the course to their existing academic as well as
workplace needs. FG2c further explained that, “...there were lots of activities in E4E
course and these activities have their own purposes. So, I think when there is a purpose,
it can guarantee effective learning.” FG2c added that, “We would regret it if we had not
taken this course.”
Besides enhancing their communication skills, the common view gathered from
the majority of the cohort was the development of their self-esteem owing to the wide
exposure and variety of communicative activities conducted in the course. Essentially,
the students were mindful of the gap in between their first year and third year of studies
whereby no English class was required on them. This had brought about some
repercussions on their descending levels of confidence in conversing in English upon
the completion of the FE course. In reality, the students believed that the ability to speak
English fluently empowers them and enables them to communicate with others,
improves their confidence as well as secures a good job in the future. Furthermore FG4a
highlighted that “The English language is crucial in the field of Engineering because we
have to interact and cooperate with multiple group of people.”
For that matter, the central communicative approach implemented in the E4E
course was immensely appreciated by the students to boost their confidence. The
following remarks signified the students‟ values on the course;
The course made me feel more confident in English and I am not afraid
to speak English anymore (FG2g).
I gained my confidence to speak in front of people... (FG2e).
176
We are more confident to speak even though our utterances are
disorganised (FG1d).
...because it built my self-esteem (FG2d).
Furthermore, there was a high degree of consensus among the students on the
significance of the E4E course in preparing them for future employment. The
fundamental skills incorporated in the course were deemed necessary to provide various
inputs such as “tips on responding to interview questions” (FG3c), “job application
skills and soft-skills” (FG3b), “cooperating and working in groups” (FG4b), “sharing
ideas and participating in discussions” (FG2a) and “to support other courses for future
occupational preparation” (FG1e) . A similar sentiment was also shared by FG1d;
E4E is good because other courses did not teach us about interview. We
learned how to solve a department‟s project. We learned about
presenting in meeting and case study. That is good.
In addition, the universal outlook on the E4E course as valued by the students
concerns the opportunities to experience the workplace situation, as affirmed by FG1d,
“At least we had the experience on how to face the interview; this is fruitful for our
future.” Correspondingly, FG1a maintained that “It helps us because we do not have
any experience. After learning about job interview, we had a little bit of experience and
practice which can help us later on.” On top of that, FG3b pointed out that “It was very
good because we can visualize the condition of a meeting at the workplace.” This is in
agreement with FG4b, who cited that “E4E has exposed us on how to communicate
with other people. We can see the reality of the real world.”
Inevitably, it is obvious that the students on the whole placed high values on the
E4E course for there was a substantial awareness of its relevance and importance for
their future gains. The excerpt that ensued reiterates the students‟ point of view;
177
There are lots of benefits in E4E. It is important to learn the skills for job
interview and presentation and attending meetings before we go out from
the university. We did not learn all these in schools. That is why E4E
helps a lot (FG1d).
Essentially, the findings presented above clearly denote the students‟ inclination
for speaking compared to writing activities in their English language classrooms. A
sample of pertinent comments pertaining to their preferences and indifferences is
delineated in the following table;
Table 4.11: Relevant quotes on students‟ preferences and aversions
Preferences Aversions
“I like participating in discussions because
we can communicate with each other and
give our opinion.” (FG2a)
“What I like most is the presentation part
because it teaches us more about the
communication skills and trains us to be
more confident when talking in front of
people.” (FG2c)
“I think case study is good because we can
work as a team. We can share our ideas
and opinion and discuss in groups.”
(FG3c)
“I do not like writing the most because I
have a lot of grammar mistakes.” (FG2d)
“I hate writing, it makes me bored and I
am not very good in writing.” (FG2e)
“I dislike writing the most because it is
difficult to write and create sentences in
English.” (FG2g)
4.9.1.5 English Speaking Zone
In its attempt to encourage students to use English in their daily lives and
provide supplementary exposure to the language beyond the academic boundaries, the
university has implemented the English Speaking Zone (ESZ) in all the residential
colleges in April 2008. Despite this effort, it was discovered that students were largely
ignorant of the purpose of the programme. This is clearly explained by FG2a, “We did
178
not know anything about the ESZ; so we just ignored it and we could not care less.”
FG1b explicitly admitted that “I have never heard of it; neither did my friends”. Sharing
similar sentiments, FG1c explicated that “ESZ was just to make us speak English; it did
not really inspire us to get involved. The Malays and Chinese still communicate in their
mother tongue.”
Nevertheless, a number of students confirmed their involvement in the ESZ
programmes such as conversing in English on every Wednesday and attending the
English class conducted during night time at their residential colleges. Despite their
acute desire to improve their English through the programmes, some of them mentioned
having problems coping with the heavy load of their content courses and participating in
the class at their residential colleges. On top of these problems, the students also
complained about the tedious approach of focusing on grammar and lack of
communicative activities in the English class. This has gradually caused the students to
withdraw and, in the end, the class had to be terminated due to lack of responses from
the students. Quoting FG2d, “I did not improve anything from the ESZ. A lot of my
friends did not get involved because it was boring”; this signifies that the students
generally perceived the ESZ as insignificant. In addition, the overwhelming workload
assigned to them in their content courses also restrained the students from participating
in other non-academic events organised by the university as stated by FG1c, “If more
classes were offered to us we would not be able to participate because we did not have
enough time and we had a lot of assignments to do.”
It is important to note that the students considerably valued the university‟s
initiative in supporting their academic literacy competencies and practices whilst
equipping them with sufficient skills for their future employment purposes.
Furthermore, they seemed to appreciate the communicative activities and opportunities
provided by the institution to enhance their English language competencies.
179
Despite the slight improvement in their self-confidence, the students by and
large felt that their linguistic and communicative competences were still not well
developed. These drawbacks were generally considered as the key stumbling block to
face their potential employment, particularly when attending to the job interview. FG2a
pronounced that “The main obstacle for us to be employed is our difficulty to speak
proper English. We speak in broken English; our pronunciations are bad too.”
Correspondingly, FG1e envisaged that
I do not know how I am going to face the employment because I am still
not confident with my speaking. I am afraid what I say is wrong and my
grammar is jumbled up.
A similar sentiment was shared by FG3a, “I think it is going to be very hard for
me to apply for work because of my problems to speak in English.” Nevertheless, there
was a high degree of consensus among the entire cohort that the onus is on them to
improve and equip themselves satisfactorily for their upcoming professions.
4.10 Summary and Conclusion
To provide substantial understanding of the researched students‟ existing
English language academic literacy competencies and practices, this chapter has
presented several pertinent academic practices exercised by the students at the finishing
point of their English language courses at the university. The influential factors with
regards to English language and the features of the academic milieu shaping the
students‟ current academic literacy competencies and practices have also been
highlighted.
Firstly, it is clear that the students‟ dominant academic practices focused on a
considerable amount of technical, mathematical and graphic representations. This is
180
mainly evidenced in the students‟ academic discourses and resources related to their
area of study.
Secondly, there is apparently high level of importance placed on English within
the cohort‟s academic literacy competencies and practices due to the demands set by the
institutional setting and prospective work requirement. While English is officially
recognised as the primary medium of interaction in the academic context, the broad use
of the national language, specifically in the academic discourses and resources, was still
noticeable. This fact has ideological implications as it suggests the influence of the
political factors on the position of English and the Malay language in the institutional
community.
Thirdly, the findings have also shown that there are largely congruent patterns
between the students‟ academic literacy competencies and practices and their level of
English language proficiency. There was ample evidence that pointed to the students‟
shortfalls with respect to linguistic and communicative competence as well as self-
confidence as a consequence of their deficiency in English. In addition, the productive
abilities (speaking and writing) were mainly regarded as demanding compared to the
receptive skills (reading and listening) albeit speaking and writing practices formed the
salient foundation of the students‟ academic requirements.
Fourth, it was detected that school is the key contributing factor influencing the
students‟ existing competencies in English. Furthermore, it was identified that the
restricted opportunities for English and nominal community of practice beyond the
academic context played a part in confining the students‟ development of linguistic and
communicative competence as well as their confidence in the language. This finding has
ideological implications in that it affirms the notion of literacy as a socially constructed
practice whereby the students‟ academic literacy practices were considerably influenced
by the larger society in which they lived in.
181
Finally, the findings have shown the cohort‟s appreciation of the university‟s
role in shifting their stances on English whilst enhancing their academic competencies
and practices in the language. Nevertheless, in spite of knowing that their lack of
competence will affect their employability, the students seem unable to improve. In
conclusion, these findings suggest that students believe their inadequate competency
with regards to English language proficiency means they will not have the capability
and readiness to meet the demands of the workforce.
Thus far, this chapter has provided detailed descriptions on the students‟ English
language academic literacy competencies and practices. The following chapter will give
details on the findings pertaining to employers‟ expectations on prospective graduates in
light of the English language. The findings reported in Chapter Five will therefore
provide a dimension to understanding undergraduates‟ academic competencies and
literacy with regards to employability.
182
Chapter Five
Empirical analysis: Employers’ perspectives and expectations
5.1 Introduction
This chapter reports the findings pertaining to employers‟ perspectives and
expectations on the English language abilities of prospective recruits. The findings
presented here are primarily based on an analysis of the qualitative data, complemented
by a small-scale quantitative analysis. Qualitative information was sourced from
individual interviews with thirteen Human Resource managers or executives
representing private and public organisations. The quantitative data, incorporating
frequency counts and percentages, were gathered from the survey consigned to each
participant at the end of the interview. These data build on the descriptions of the
employers‟ overall perspectives on new graduates and local universities as well as their
explicit expectations of future employees. Subsequently, the findings of the employers‟
expectations on fresh candidates in this chapter will be used as benchmarks against
which to measure the students‟ academic literacy competencies and practices as
delineated in the following research questions:
To what extent do students‟ academic literacy practices and competencies in the English
language upon completing the English language course match the employers‟
expectations?
183
The findings in this chapter are presented in the following order; first, the
information on the recruitment procedures is discussed in Section 5.2. This is followed
by the findings pertaining to the researched employers‟ general perspectives on the
English language competencies of local graduates and on universities‟ preparation of
local graduates for the workforce in Section 5.3 and 5.4 respectively. Next, Section 5.5
provides a full description on the employers‟ expectations on English language
competencies in the workplace. Figure 5.1 illustrates the structure of Chapter Five.
Figure 5.1: Overview of Chapter Five
5.2 Recruitment procedures
On the whole, a diverse approach when recruiting potential employees was
observed in the public and private organisations. In the public sector, a special entity
known as the Public Services Commission of Malaysia is officially assigned to manage
the recruitment affairs of professional staff. To gain a position as public service officers
in any government sector, all fresh graduates are required to undergo and perform
5.4 Employers' perspectives on local universities
5.6 Chapter conclusion
5.5 Employers' expectations
5.5.1 English language competencies
5.5.2 English language workplace literacy
5.5.2.1 Speaking practices
5.5.2.2 Listening practices
5.5.2.3 Reading practices
5.5.2.4 Writing practices
5.5.2.5 Language accurancy
5.2 Recruitment procedures
5.1 Introduction
5.3 Employers' perspectives on local graduates
184
satisfactorily in four recruitment stages which entail online registration, special entrance
examination, competency assessment and interview (www.spa.gov.my).
It is necessary for all job applicants to register virtually for their prospective
positions. Following the online registration, the candidates are called to sit for the
examination which is aimed to test their general knowledge on local and global issues
and problem solving skills. The examination consists of multiple-choice-questions,
written in the Malay language, as well as essay writing in the Malay and English
languages. The third stage involves the evaluation of the candidates‟ communicative
competency in Malay and English and other relevant competencies such as discipline,
teamwork and commitment. Additionally, in the case of candidates applying for the post
of Administration and Diplomatic Officer, it is obligatory for them to conduct a public
speaking test in Malay and English as their job entails international connections. Upon
completion of the competency assessment, only successful candidates are called to
attend the interview. The interview is carried out extensively in the Malay language
given that “it is the official language operated in the government sectors” (E4).
However, E11 asserted that “the use of English is still important in the public services.”
Contrastively, it is obvious that job interview is the primary means employed by
most private organisations when selecting their new members. More often than not, the
interview is carried out exclusively in English as most private companies operate
extensively in that language. Indeed, in most private corporations, job interview is
universally regarded as crucial “to assess job applicants‟ English” (E12) and “to gauge
their communication skills” (E13). To assess the potential employees‟ communicative
ability, E13 explained that
Usually, we ask questions in English but sometimes we blend it with BM
on purpose. We can actually know whether that person is good in
English or not by we mixing our languages. Sometimes we ask the
person in English and sometimes in BM. But when we address the
185
question in English and the person still answers in BM, it shows that he
is not competent in English, he is not confident with his English.
With regard to the emphasis on English, some firms reported their strict policy
on recruiting job applicants who failed to converse fluently in the language. This is
projected in the remark articulated by E1;
If they say that they cannot communicate in English, we will not take
them in. Because communication is number one. No matter how skilful
he is, if he cannot perform and communicate with others, there is no
point.
This is also agreed by E3 as evident in his expression; “If the candidates for the
executive positions and above cannot communicate in English, we will certainly reject
them. They must be able to speak English.”
Nevertheless, in some cases where the technical expertise possessed by the
potential employees was greatly sought after, language competency was likely
disregarded by certain companies. E12 explained that “It depends on the department; if
the interviewer feels that the candidates‟ technical knowledge can supersede his
weaknesses in English; that should not be a problem.” Taking a similar stance, E9 also
indicated the importance placed on the candidates‟ skills over English language
competency particularly in respect to the manufacturing department.
In certain companies, the job interview is accompanied by written tests,
particularly applicable to candidates applying for the marketing and sale professions.
This is manifest in the account made by E6;
They must pass a certain level of the test. We ask them to write about
something in an essay form for about one-page long. We can judge their
writing based on that.
However, in some companies, diverse tests are conducted accordingly depending on the
applied professions. This is elaborated by E9;
186
Actually, different departments have their own test. Engineers have their
own tests like calculation and physics. Accountants have their own
calculation test and all before the interview. Each title has its own test,
all done in English. For administrative staff, we focus on their English
because they have to write letters, memos and all.
Succinctly, the recruitment procedures are illustrated in the following table.
Table 5.1: Recruitment procedures
Government sector Private sector
1. Online registration
2. Written test: Multiple-choice questions and
essay writing
3. Competency assessment
4. Interview
1. Written test: essay writing and
calculation
(in some firms)
2. Interview
Language used : Malay (primary)
English (occasionally)
Language used : English (primary)
Malay (occasionally)
5.3 Employers’ perspectives on the English language
competencies of local graduates
The mutual perspective generally highlighted by the researched employers was
the low level of competencies among local graduates in comparison to their overseas
colleagues. To quote E2‟s account, “Normally overseas graduates are better than the
locals in terms of speaking and writing.” This depicts the employers‟ subtle outlook on
most local degree holders. This is especially true given the performances of local
graduates during job interviews as described by a good number of employers. In fact,
the majority of fresh graduates were universally recognised as incapable of conversing
and expressing themselves well especially in English. This is manifest in the following
remarks from various employers.
On the whole, the standard of English among local graduates has
deteriorated. 90% of prospective employees speak dreadful English
during the interview irrespective of their races....Their major problem is
187
English, they cannot communicate. Since we offer executive position for
degree holders, the interviews are conducted in English. They have
problems to express themselves in English (E1).
It is a very simple interview but they cannot do well in the interview
(E5).
For fresh graduates, a lot of them that I have interviewed cannot really
speak. I would say, probably, their level is from fair to bad (E10).
It is discernible that nearly all employers are confronted with the prevailing
dilemma in recruiting potential graduates due to the latters‟ drawbacks in
communicating proficiently in English. This is manifested in the account articulated by
E10, “Because of the fresh graduates‟ weaknesses in English, it is a problem for us to
recruit new staff especially for executive positions.” Recounting their experiences when
interviewing some new job applicants, the employers explained that some candidates
“could not speak at all” (E6), “some just cannot speak English well, they cannot speak
in a complete sentence” (E9), “some just keep quiet” (E7) and “some could not open
their mouth; they were totally blank” (E8). E9 further enlightened that “...their words
cannot come out immediately; we have to wait for a while, and they take times.”
Sharing a similar point of view, E7 clarified that “it seems that they have to think first
before they can speak. When we ask questions, they really take the time to think and
construct sentences and then only they could speak”. In addition, E10 stated that
“Sometimes I do not understand the messages that they want to convey”. This scenario
was generally perceived as “appalling” as some employers complained that they were
devastated when some prospective recruits informed them that “they could barely
converse in English because English is difficult for them” (E10).
Notwithstanding their excellent academic achievement, the majority of fresh
graduates were found literally incompetent to articulate their thoughts to even promote
188
themselves in order to be employed by the organisations. The following accounts
illustrate the case in point;
Some of them obtained 3.5 to 3.8 for their CGPA8 , but they cannot
speak in English. Some can speak English but it sounds very funny (E5).
Some of them got good credits for their university result but then when
we looked at their SPM9 results, surprisingly, not many obtained As for
their English, mostly got C5, C6 (E10).
...even first class students have problems to speak in English fluently
(E2).
Some graduates have good results but when they go for interviews they
fail to get the job because of communication and the way they explain
about their knowledge (E13).
To a large extent, the majority of employers agreed that some potential recruits
did not encounter much problem “when introducing themselves” (E1) or “going through
simple ice-breaking part” (E10). However, they found it upsetting to discover that most
fresh graduates were unable to respond and elaborate on “very common questions” (E9)
or “general knowledge” (E4) posed to them which included talking about “the subjects
they learned at university” (E1), “their final year project which they were supposed to
remember” (E2) and “their best achievement, or their opinion on their studies or their
lecturers” (E13). Taking a similar standpoint, E5 illuminated that
The interview is conducted in simple English and yet some graduates are
not able to explain. They just need to give simple explanation about
terms and about the facts.
In addition, the following comment made by E13 shed light on the fresh
graduates‟ predicaments;
Actually they memorise their words for the simple introduction. They
have already been trained like “my name is...”; and then the next step,
8 Cumulative Grade Point Average
9 SPM (Sijil Pelajaran Malaysian) or Malaysian Certificate of Education is the highest school
qualification. The results are stated according to A2-A1= Distinctions; C6-C3= Credits; P8-P7=Pass and
F9= Fail. Minimum requirement for tertiary admission for English is a credit (C6).
189
when we ask them to talk about their background we can detect whether
they know what they are talking about. Then, we twist our questions a
little bit, at this point; they tend to explain in Malay. I think it is difficult
for them to describe in English.
On that note, it is safe to say that most graduates experienced great difficulty in
elaborating their ideas during the interview because of their constraints in English.
Citing E6, who stated “I think some of them have great ideas but they cannot deliver
their messages because of their English”, it is evident that the graduates‟ shortfall in
English limits their ability to promote themselves for the relevant profession. Indeed,
most employers are of the same opinion that the graduates‟ complications are the results
of their unfamiliarity to communicate in English as “they hardly speak English at home”
(E1) and “they seldom use English during their school time; only BM or Chinese” (E9).
In the same vein, E3 identified the influence of the graduates‟ socio-economic
background as a contributing factor to their incompetency in English. He disclosed from
his experiences that the majority of the job applicants who come from urban areas are
found to be more fluent than those from the rural vicinity. E7 further asserted that “If
they are not used to speaking in English, it is difficult for them.”
Describing his experience, E5 highlighted that he was discontented with the
minimum number of English courses taken up by some graduates during their tertiary
education. According to him, “In their transcript, I found out that they only took three
English papers and that is all. I do not think that it is enough to help them with their
English.” Therefore, he believed that it is essential for undergraduates to change their
attitude. Given the current emphasis on English at the workplace, future graduates
should take their own initiative to practice using English daily albeit it is against the
norms of their surroundings. This will ultimately boost their self-confidence especially
for future purposes. Essentially, most job candidates who were observed to be fluent
190
English speakers were reported to graduate from the universities where English was
used as the primary medium of instruction.
In addition, E6 was of the opinion that the personality of the job applicants has
an impact on their communicative ability as indicated in the following expression,
I notice the Engineering graduates seem a little bit difficult to speak
compared to those coming from the social sciences. It could be because
of the nature of their studies, perhaps, they depend more on the
terminology in science.
There was also a great concern pertaining to the potential employees‟ low
level of confidence raised by nearly all the employers. This was largely evidenced
during the job interviews as most job applicants, especially fresh graduates, were
observed to be “stuttering when responding and voicing out their ideas” (E8), “uncertain
of their utterances” (E6), “unconfident” (E4) and “very nervous” (E10). Implicit in the
new graduates‟ lack of confidence as informed by E8 is “their limited vocabulary which
hesitate them to speak confidently.” Sharing her own experience, E7 vividly explained
that the majority of the new graduates were not confident because
They are afraid of saying things wrongly; they are not sure of what
sentences to use for their explanation and that they are conscious of
grammar. If they are confident, they would not mind their broken
language just as long as they get their messages across.
Nevertheless, it is generally agreed that given the fresh graduates‟ first attempt
at attending a job interview, it is presumably logical for them to experience agitation.
According to E10,
As this is their first time, a lot of fresh graduates do not know what to
expect, that is why they are not confident. It becomes worse when we
start asking them technical questions. So, as a panel, we will try to make
them at ease as much as possible.
Concurrently, E8 asserted that the new graduates were not given sufficient
exposure, neither were they taught the relevant skills to confront and communicate
191
effectively in professional settings during their tertiary education; hence, the resulting
nervousness when facing the real workplace scenario, specifically the job interview.
5.4 Employers’ perspectives on local universities’ preparation of local graduates for the workforce
In respect to the employers‟ stances pertaining to universities‟ efforts to curb the
existing issues involving the local graduates, it is interesting to note their communal
belief that the schools, instead of the universities, should hold total responsibility for the
graduates‟ shortfall in English. Most employers were of the view that the emphasis on
the use of English should be put into practice during “kindergarten level” (E10) and
“primary school” (E1& E7) given their crucial positions as the fundamental providers of
basic education. The following comment explains further;
Generally we cannot put all the blames on the universities. How much
can the universities do? ...I think in schools where the basic education is,
they really have to emphasise on the students to speak in English. If we
want to start on using English, the foundation has to be strong. (E10)
Asserting that it is literally long overdue to conquer the graduates‟ shortfall in
English upon their entry at the tertiary level, E7 contended that it is pivotal to expose
and stress the importance of English for the students‟ future survivals at the early level,
particularly in schools. E6 elucidated that the negligible use of English in “the students‟
background, surrounding, family and schools” due to the frequent use of their own
mother tongue such as BM, Chinese or Tamil restrained them from acquiring English.
Given these discouraging circumstances prior to the students‟ admission into tertiary
education, it is deemed impossible for the university to surmount the students‟
deficiencies in English. According to E6, “This problem crops up from schools, not at
the university. Nothing much that the university can do about it”; this corroborates the
192
employers‟ assertion that schools are responsible for the graduates‟ deficiencies. In
addition, E10 maintained that
The problem now is our education system. We do not allow our kids to
speak up at schools; they just listen and keep quiet. So, this attitude is
carried over at the universities. When the lecturers ask something, they
just hold their tongue.
It was also alleged that „public speaking‟ should be implemented in primary
schools to train the children to speak confidently and enhance their self-esteem. E7
further explained that “If they already have a strong foundation at schools, it will be
easy for them to improve at the universities. If they are confident to speak, they can go
far.” Along the line of the employers‟ argument on improving graduates‟ competency in
English, E5 argued that the universities should allocate additional teaching hours for the
undergraduates. This is evident in his remark;
English is just a subject at the university, nothing more; it is either „Pass‟
or „Fail‟. If they want to improve the students‟ English, then, they have
to put more hours to teach English to the students.
On the subject of graduates‟ readiness for employment, E7 alleged that the
universities do not prepare their graduates adequately to confront the real workplace.
Thus, she suggested a course that represents an authentic workplace scenario such as
„Business Communication in English‟ to be taught to undergraduate students to provide
guidelines for their prospective occupational preparation. Taking a similar stance, E8
claimed that the universities‟ overwhelming emphasis on academic excellence while
neglecting the need to establish graduates‟ skills in voicing their opinions and
communicating confidently would only produce graduates “who are full in the head yet
do not know how to share their ideas with others.”
193
5.5 Employers’ expectations of prospective recruits
In the endeavour to understand employers‟ universal expectations of the future
workforce, the researched employers were asked about the criteria that they look for
when recruiting new personnel at their respective organisations. A sample of relevant
comments that indicates the employers‟ standard requirements is delineated in the table
below.
Table 5.2: Relevant comments on recruitment criteria
Employers Relevant excerpts
E3
“...have experience and knowledge for the job, pleasant attitude, can work with all level,
shows interest to work with the company and good command in both written and spoken
English.”
E6
“Communication ability; Written and oral communication skills including listening and
ability to articulate thoughts in the required languages.”
E8
“...dynamic, conversant, have good interpersonal skills and competitive.”
E9
“...appearance, qualification, working experience, job knowledge, conversational
ability, expression of ideas.”
E10
“...relevant experience, qualification, personality such as behaviour and attitude,
writing skills, English language proficiency, able to communicate without barriers with
consultants, customers, etc.”
On the whole, the findings in Table 5.2 disclose that the majority of the
employers placed work experience, academic qualifications and personality as their first
priority when considering job applications. Nevertheless, E13 explicated that “For fresh
194
graduates, we know that they do not have any work experience, so basically we will
select them based on their academic achievement, personalities and communication.”
The findings also draw attention to the employers‟ shared view that
communicative ability, particularly in English, is one of the most important criteria in
selecting prospective employees. Although it was not ranked as the leading criterion, it
is unanimously accredited as the central quality sought after. Indeed, E2 strongly
emphasised that “English competency is paramount.” Sharing this perspective, E9
enunciated that “English is very important for executive staff”. These findings suggest
that in order for new recruits to be employed by the organisations, it is crucial for them
to portray an acceptable level of fluency in English during the job interview as it is the
only platform for employers to gauge the new recruits‟ communicative competence.
In addition, E7 asserted that English is highly essential in the workplace, so
much so that the employees who are competent in English are normally privileged by
their organisations. The following section provides further descriptions of the values of
English language competencies from the employers‟ stance.
5.5.1 English language competencies
Given the primary concern on English language competencies of the prospective
workforce, it is imperative to explore the employers‟ perspectives and prospects
pertaining to these competencies in their professional milieu. This will provide
substantial insights to better comprehend the English language components and skills
required of potential employees. To achieve this, the researched employers were asked
to rank the extent of importance of the four English language competencies, reading,
listening, writing and speaking abilities, and language accuracy or grammar, expected
195
from new recruits in their respective organisations. The results are presented in Table
5.3.
Table 5.3: The importance of the English language competencies perceived by employers
Abilities
Very important
Important
Not important
Not very important
Ability to speak in English 61.5% 38.5% 0% 0%
Ability to listen in English 53.8% 46.2% 0% 0%
Ability to read in English 46.2% 53.8% 0% 0%
Ability to write in English 38.5% 53.8% 7.7% 0%
Language accuracy 23.1% 69.2% 7.7% 0%
In essence, the results signify that most employers regarded the ability to speak
in English in the workplace as pivotal. Hence, this brings to the implications that
communicative competence is the most crucial ability demanded of prospective
employees. Although listening and reading abilities have lower percentages than
speaking ability in the „Very important‟ rating, all three competencies achieve 100%
across „Very important‟ and „Important‟ ratings. This denotes that these competencies
are essentially required of the new job applicants. Writing ability is also considered
necessary as 92.3% rated the skill as „Important‟ and „Very important‟. On the other
hand, language accuracy is ranked marginally lower than the other abilities, albeit
92.3% rated it as „Important‟ or more highly.
5.5.2 English language workplace literacy
The following sub-sections present and discuss several situations in which the
English language competencies are particularly exercised in various occupational
domains. This information is necessary to provide the benchmarks for comparison
between the researched students‟ English language competencies with that of the
expectations of the employers. Given that the major focus of this study was on the
196
English language competencies mostly required by the employers in their workplaces,
each of the following sub-sections report on five situations which were identified as
„Very important‟ by the researched professionals. The other items, which were all rated
less than 38.5%, are considered less significant.
5.5.2.1 Speaking practices
Table 5.4: Situations where speaking skills in English language are most required
No Speaking Very
Important
Important Not important Not very
important
1 Giving presentation 76.9% 23.1% 0%
0%
2 Communicating with foreign
partners
69.2% 30.8% 0%
0%
3 Negotiating business matters 61.5% 38.5% 0%
0%
4 Working together with foreign
counterparts on the same project
61.5% 23.1% 7.7% 7.7%
5 Reporting 46.2% 46.2% 7.6%
0%
The findings exhibited in Table 5.4 clearly depict a high demand on prospective
personnel to be able to deliver oral presentations in the workplace settings. It is apparent
that employers typically perceived the ability to conduct oral presentations, particularly
in presenting proposals in meetings ahead of internal and external counterparts, as
crucial. Most employers agreed that a considerable amount of executive level tasks
constituted performing oral presentations exclusively in English in various situations
including monthly department meetings, proposal presentations, and briefings for the
subordinates as well as “small group activity” (E9) or group discussions.
Taking into account that most business dealings and negotiations entail
communicating and consulting other local and international companies, it is obligatory
197
for new recruits to possess the ability to converse fluently in English to enable them to
perform their responsibilities effectively. This is articulated by E1; “If they don‟t
possess good communication skills, it will be hard to communicate with others. As a
result, some areas of work might be affected.” Furthermore, most corporations also
denoted reporting skill as one of the obligations of future employees. It is essentially
useful especially in some cases which require the executives to report “the activities that
have been done to the bosses” (E1) or “the budget and appraisals in the meetings”
(E12).
5.5.2.2 Listening practices
Table 5.5: Situations where listening skills in English language are most required
No Listening Very
Important
Important Not important Not very
important
1 Understanding meetings and
negotiation
61.5% 38.5% 0%
0%
2 Understanding others at seminars,
conferences, briefings,
presentations, etc
53.8% 46.2% 0%
0%
3 Understanding information from
various media
46.2% 53.8% 0%
0%
4 Receiving instructions 46.2% 46.2% 0% 7.6%
5 Receiving orders 38.5% 53.8% 0% 7.7%
Inevitably, speaking and listening practices are closely interrelated as they are
both mandatory for successful communication to take place. Table 5.5 exhibits several
situations in which listening practices are generally indispensable. Considering the fact
that a large portion of the executives‟ responsibilities entail face-to-face interactions and
mass media communications, it is extremely essential for the potential recruits to be
able to comprehend diverse workplace discourses emerging in various settings such as
198
in the meetings, seminars, briefings and presentations. Concurrently, the ability to
absorb massive information attained from various channels is also deemed vital. As
most typical executives‟ tasks necessitate constant communication with the superiors, it
is implicit that the potential executives should be able to understand the directives or
requests mandated to them. This would enable them to perform their daily tasks
efficiently.
5.5.2.3 Reading practices
Table 5.6: Situations where reading skills in English language are most required
No Reading Very
Important
Important Not important Not very
important
1 Reading reports and agreements 53.8% 46.2% 0%
0%
2 Reading technical manuals 46.2% 53.8% 0%
0%
3 Reading technical descriptions 38.5% 61.5% 0%
0%
4 Reading formal letters 38.5% 61.5% 0% 0%
5 Reading written work instructions 38.5% 53.8% 0% 7.7%
Table 5.6 illustrates that there are a variety of reading resources that potential
employees need to decipher in order to fulfil their job requirements. It is observed that
the reading practices that most executives are expected to engage in constitute reading
various reports, agreements, technical manuals and descriptions as well as business
correspondences. Additionally, E2 commented that most executives have to conduct
some readings prior to writing their proposals. In the same vein, E3 explained that
reading is also necessary in the preparation of the executives‟ routine reports.
199
5.5.2.4 Writing practices
Table 5.7: Situations where writing skills in English language are most required
No Writing Very
Important
Important Not important Not very
important
1 Writing reports 53.8% 30.8% 7.7%
7.7%
2 Writing formal business letters 46.2% 46.2% 7.6%
0%
3 Writing standard operating
procedures
46.2% 38.4% 7.7%
7.7%
4 Writing for the website/Internet 46.2% 30.8% 15.4% 7.6%
5 Writing brochures 46.2% 30.8% 15.4%
7.6%
The findings in Table 5.7 accentuate the writing tasks frequently practiced by
every member of the workforce. Germane to the prevailing writing skills stipulated by
the majority of employers is the ability to write reports on completed work or work-
related assessment required of most personnel of the organisations. Citing E3, “The job
applicant must have a good writing skill because he needs to write reports every now
and then”; this implies the vital needs on report writing tasks. Indeed, taking into
account the significance of report writing skill, some corporations take the initiative to
conduct writing tests prior to employing new recruits. This is affirmed by E13 that
“Some companies have writing tests which include writing a report and an essay.”
Furthermore, it was reported that there are varied conventions of report writing
in most professional settings which are fundamentally subjected to the preferences of
individual organisations. E13 further explained that “Sometimes certain departments
have different ways of writing reports. Some prefer straight forward, some not. Their
choices of words and style of writing are also different.”
200
It is significant that the employers reached consensus on the importance of the
different styles of report produced by the technical and non-technical staff in their
respective companies. With regards to the manufacturing department, E9 revealed that a
fixed-formatted report was generally exploited by the engineers to state the details of
their work. Such a report constituted a considerable amount of “data” (E1), “figures and
tables with little explanation” (E9) as well as “technical terms” (E6). Contrastively, the
reports produced by the administrative, marketing and sales staffs consist of extensive
expressions and explanation in English. This is explicitly articulated by E13 in the
ensuing excerpt:
Engineers need to do report writing but it is more of technical
reports which do not have impressive words. Their main interest
is the technical terms; as long as the message reported is
understandable, that is fine. Most engineering departments have
their own template. There is less description, more straight
forward sentences, and lots of key words written in bullet point.
But in support departments like Human Resource and Finance,
yes, and their English must be good.
Besides writing the reports, other writing competencies that are comparatively
sought after by most organisations incorporate composing business correspondences,
job-related manuals and online documentations. To quote E10, “I think now the use of
Microsoft technology makes their job easier...”; this implies that the convenience
offered by the contemporary technology enhances the employees‟ writing practices.
5.5.2.5 Language accuracy
To develop understandings of the predominant role of the English language in
the occupational domains, it was necessary to delve into the employers‟ expectations
with regards to the precision of language use, particularly in terms of grammar usage
among new recruits. Table 5.8 illustrates the findings on the value of language accuracy
as perceived by the employers.
201
Table 5.8: Language accuracy as perceived by employers
While just over one fifth of the employers considered language accuracy as very
important for potential employees, the majority considered language accuracy as
important and a small minority rated it as marginal. These findings suggest that accurate
grammar is deemed as fairly essential. Indeed, there was a high degree of consensus
among the employers that it is extremely crucial for job applicants to demonstrate their
ability to converse and convey comprehensible messages effectively when attending job
interviews. Thus, this draws less attention to the candidates‟ language accuracy as the
primary objective of most job interviews is to assess the potential candidates‟
communicative competence. This is explicitly expressed by E4,
Even though we ask in English, we do not expect them to answer with
perfect English. We just want to gauge their performance and we are not
concerned about their grammar use.
Nevertheless, it was made explicit that some multinational and international
organisations operating extensively in English placed significant emphasis on the
accurate use of English grammar in their written documents and business
correspondences as they “do not want their image to be jeopardised or tarnished by bad
English usage” (E10). This is especially true in the case of the administrative, marketing
and sales staff while it is minimally applicable to the technical staff. According to E9, “I
think language accuracy is not that important for engineers because they only write
reports and present them in the department meetings”; this signifies that much of the
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Language accuracy (grammar)
23.1%
69.2%
7.7% 0%
Very important
Important
Not important
Not very
important
202
engineers‟ daily tasks hardly involved direct personal contacts with their external
counterparts. Hence, the precision of English grammar is somewhat marginalised.
5.6 Summary and Conclusion
At the onset of this chapter, some vital information on the recruitment
procedures was presented in order to provide some ideas pertinent to the employers‟
general expectations at their respective organisations. It has been discovered that the
recruitment procedures differ significantly in the public and private sectors. Explicit in
the context of language use within both sectors is the extensive exploitation of Malay
language in the former while English is considerably utilised in the latter.
In an attempt to obtain comprehensive understanding on the employers‟ overall
point of view on future workforce, this chapter has also presented and described several
issues raised by the researched employers concerning the graduates produced by the
local universities. Firstly, the concerns about fresh graduates‟ deficiencies when
communicating in English during job interviews as frequently claimed by the employers
were depicted. The employers‟ observation on most graduates‟ lack of confidence and
ability to express and market themselves for the prospective professions was also
brought to light. Secondly, the chapter has further established the employers‟ overall
stance that English language skills should be developed from school.
Finally, this chapter has verified that English language competency is one of the
prominent criteria required by most employers when selecting prospective employees at
their respective organisations. There was ample evidence that has shown the central
exploitation of English in the workplace daily practices, considerably in speaking while
relatively less in listening, reading and writing practices. However, the accurate use of
the language is ranked slightly lower than the other competencies.
203
In conclusion, this chapter has offered some depictions on the employers‟
general perspectives and expectations of future workforce. The following chapter will
discuss these findings in relation to germane literature. Later, the findings from this
chapter will be matched against the findings in Chapter Four to further establish the
extent of convergence or divergence of the overall results collated from both chapters.
204
Chapter Six
Discussion of Findings
6.1 Introduction
This chapter presents the discussion of the findings in this study. The key
findings of this study are discussed according to the significant themes that emerged and
are explained in the context of the existing body of knowledge pertaining to English
language academic literacies and employers‟ expectations with regards to English
language. Whenever possible, the findings of this particular study are compared with
previous findings in the literature. The discussion extends the review of the main
theoretical insights on the complexities of academic literacies, including the recurring
patterns of English language literacy practices and competencies pertinent to the
students in the context of this study, the multiplicity of language use, the key influential
factors on the students‟ existing English language academic literacy competencies as
well as the dimensions of convergence and divergence between students‟ academic
literacy practices and competencies with that of the expectations of employers.
205
6.2 The complexities of students’ academic literacies
This study has approached the issue of the English language academic literacy
competencies and practices from the perspectives of the students engaged in the
acquisition of knowledge at the tertiary level. The point of the discussions on the
students‟ academic literacies in English begins with the belief that there is a remarkable
diversity residing in individual students‟ educational, linguistic and geographical
backgrounds along with their varying racial and religious identity. It is understood that
the students differ tremendously in their levels of language proficiency and literacy
competence, attitude towards language, learning styles, academic preparation and
cognitive skills development prior to their tertiary study. These individual variables
bring about multiplicity and complexity of the students‟ academic literacies and
experiences on their path to achieve learning outcomes.
This study is aligned with Leki‟s (2007) and Zamel and Spack‟s (2006)
principles that the variety of students‟ backgrounds, language proficiency and
disciplinary fields contribute to the state of their academic literacies development.
However, it is argued that their studies, alongside other studies conducted by Ivanic
(1998), Riazi (1997) and Spack (1997), have narrowly focused on the experiences of
English-as-a-second-language (ESL) speakers in the target language domain. This study
conversely directs attention to the English language literacy practices of non-native
speakers of English students in acquiring knowledge within a context in which English
is regarded as a second language (ESL). Previous studies on English literacy in
Malaysia (Sarudin et al., 2008; Pandian, 2005; Stapa & Abdul Majid, 2009; Thang,
2004) are seen to approach literacy from a more decontextualised standpoint; this study
however focuses on the socio-cultural perspectives or more of a contextualised
perspective parallel to the New London Group notion of literacy as a social practice
(Baynham, 1995; Barton et al., 2000; Street, 1984).
206
Central to the findings of this study is the evidence of the complex nature of
academic literacies experienced by the students comprising a rich blend of multiple
activities, encapsulating a variety of academic discourses and mixed choices of
language use, which the students had to manage in order to serve a wide range of
learning purposes. In their quest to become educated in their major and to meet
educational expectations, the students needed to shoulder multifaceted and
heterogeneous academic duties dealing with diverse academic literacy practices
incorporating reading, writing, speaking and listening practices, all of which were
highly interrelated and interdependent.
For comprehension, construction and production of knowledge to take place in
their educational routine, the students were obliged to negotiate various literacy
practices and competencies demanded of them while conforming to the diverse
academic conventions in multiple circumstances (Curry, 2004). Quite often, writing
practices are highly valued at the university given that students‟ grades are largely
determined by their performance in written assignments, tests and exams (Evans &
Green, 2007; Leki & Carson, 1994). However, it is argued that while the production of
texts through writing practices is often evaluated and institutionally valued as evidence
of learning, other academic practices provided significant contribution to the production
of the texts as well, thus demonstrating the complexities of the students‟ academic
literacies. In the process of completing the course requirements, the students were
presumably expected to assemble as much information as possible to enhance their
understanding and facilitate the composition and creation of their work. Hence, a
combination of reading, listening and speaking practices for collecting information was
carried out prior to the writing practices which constituted the production of texts as the
ultimate output.
207
Explicit in the students‟ reading practices were reading various discourses and
genres primarily conducted with the central aim of comprehending and gathering new
information. Owing to their Engineering and Architecture discipline, the students‟ focal
reading practices largely embraced technical, numerical and graphic details. These
reading practices not only include deciphering and comprehending information from
textbooks, journals and lecture notes but also involved searching for meaning of words
from dictionaries. Thus, this points to the intricacy of the reading practices exercised by
the students as revealed in the findings. Alongside these reading practices, the students
obtained additional knowledge through the lectures that they attended and which were
supplemented by the consultation sessions with their respective lecturers. These
activities magnified their understanding and assisted the course of producing the written
work assigned by the faculty.
In the same vein, the students‟ writing practices in the academic setting varied
according to the different discourses and text production to include writing several
genres, such as the laboratory report, assignments and thesis. Notwithstanding the fact
that a great deal of technical, mathematical and graphic representation was applied
across all genres, writing these genres required the students to cope with diverse literacy
practices and competencies. Producing the laboratory report involved substantial
scaffolding practices in which the students were simply engaged in finding and
substituting the right information to be placed in the genres. Similar to providing short
answers in the examination, the laboratory report required minimal expressive
production. Contrastively, the students needed extra effort and time to gather
information by means of reading and communicating with their counterparts prior to
constructing and writing their assignments. More often than not, the students were
assigned group-projects which necessitated collaboration of ideas and effort as well as
active communication among the group members to produce the written assignments.
208
Comparable to the Engineering student in Leki‟s (2007) study a heavy reliance
on group-work projects was also evident in the case of the Engineering students in this
study. It was commonplace for the students to communicate with their peers and
lecturers within the classroom vicinity in order to accomplish and fulfill the
requirements of their daily academic repertoire. Indeed, the findings reveal that most of
the Engineering courses demanded that the students conduct oral presentations to
complement the written work submitted to their lecturers for evaluation purposes. This
denotes the value of communicative ability expected by the academics apart from the
written product mandated on the students. Additionally, with regards to the academic
content, the findings revealed that clarity of the substantive content was significantly
valued while language accuracy was deemed marginal.
Inevitably, the entire process of completing the course requirements called for
the students‟ ability to select important and relevant information and to synthesise this
information before creating and producing the new output. Taking into account the
dynamic and evolving nature of these academic literacy practices, understanding the
different discourses and academic conventions of their field was an added value for the
students as these were not specifically being taught in their curriculum. Such
circumstances gave the indication that to survive the academic world the students were
generally expected to be competent and informed about these multiple and interrelated
practices. Arguably, the development of academic literacy competency should be seen
as a long-term endeavour that entails practice and refinement of knowledge while
learning processes and strategies are transferred across multiple activities (Gilliver-
Brown & Johnson, 2009). Further, Gilliver-Brown & Johnson contend that the
expectations of academic literacy competency accelerate as tertiary students progress
through their studies given the diverse literacy requirements and variations of written
and oral conventions. The increased complexity creates a possibility that these
209
variations will instigate confusions among the students, especially for those students
whose levels of competence and confidence are less robust.
6.3 The multiplicity of language use
The complexities of the students‟ academic literacies described in the above
section also entail the use of multiple languages in the academic context. The findings
demonstrate that the students‟ academic literacies comprise a set of practices and
competencies that the students are required to learn and be familiar with alongside other
expectations which include negotiating appropriate use of language acceptable in their
discipline (Paxton, 1995). Adding to the existing diversity of the academic discourses is
the considerable variation of language choices that the students had to conform to in
order to „fit‟ the educational milieu. While English is widely used as the lingua franca in
the global world, it is extremely complicated in the context of the research students‟
academic literacies.
In light of the language operated in the students‟ academic context, the findings
recognise the tension between the English and Malay languages in the discipline area.
Complying with the growth of science and technology in the global scenario, the faculty
had officially acknowledged the use of English as the legitimate medium of teaching
and learning while retaining the dominant status of the Malay language as the official
language employed across the university population.
In view of the language used in the students‟ academic practices, the
considerable variations of language choices were remarkable. In some writing
discourses, an exclusive use of English such as in the assignments and examinations
was evident, whereas this was not found in the case of the Architecture students since
most of their content subjects were mainly operated in Malay. Moreover, there was an
210
exceptional case, specifically in the examination, in which the blend of both languages
was permissible. The findings also identify the comprehensive use of Malay in thesis
writing across all departments in the Engineering faculty.
In addition, the findings also mark absolute discrepancies in the medium of
instructions which necessitated the students to manage multiple languages used in the
lectures, tutorials and teaching resources. Indeed, the choice of language use in these
contexts depends highly on the discretion of their respective lecturers. Furthermore, the
findings manifest that the students‟ reading practices also entailed a substantial amount
of English while some blend of English and Malay was also discernible. It is interesting
to note that the students‟ were likely to converse in their own mother tongue especially
with their colleagues who come from equivalent racial backgrounds when discussing
their group projects albeit the projects were designed and written in English. Concurring
Chen & Hird‟s (2006) study, the findings unmask the students‟ common practices of
codeswitching while deliberately reserving their use of English when working in group
discussions in the classroom.
As exemplified in the findings, the students were engaged in various forms of
printed and digital resources which were integrated to suit different learning purposes.
These take into account the plethora of mathematical, technological and scientific
information in conjunction with the development of ICT which are extensively written
in English. Thus, this points to the need to master the English language as a vehicle to
gain access to the scientific and technological information in order to achieve academic
success. The findings indicate that digital resources were highly preferred by the
students because of their ease of access while the lecture notes were very much
favoured due to their user-friendly and precise features.
211
Implicit in the variety of language expectations of the faculty was the
assumption that the students enrolled in the tertiary education with the standard level of
competencies in both the Malay and English language. The tacit academic requirements
seem to suggest that the students should possess and be competent in both languages to
perform effectively and successfully in the variety of academic discourses. In reality,
the students were obliged to encounter challenging tasks in their quest to acquire
knowledge while attending to various demands put on them to survive in the academic
world.
In tune with the study conducted by Zamel and Spack (2006), the findings
demonstrate that the students‟ academic literacies were further intensified by the fact
that the students entered the tertiary institutions with varying degrees of linguistic
proficiency together with multiple identities and life experiences. This remarkable
diversity influenced their process of acquiring English language and knowledge of their
discipline. Zamel & Spack (1998) contest that what is often viewed as a universal
approach to knowledge at tertiary education does not always resonate with students‟
previous experiences. Indeed, the students‟ linguistic acquisition pathways are seen to
be multiple and complex given their varied educational and family backgrounds living
in a multiracial and multicultural society like Malaysia (Gaudart, 1987).
6.4 Students’ English language academic literacy competencies
Fundamental to the discussion of the students‟ academic literacies is the
students‟ overall perception of their competencies in English language literacy. The
findings denote that the students generally consider themselves relatively competent in
the Malay language yet their perceptions of their literacy in English language proved
otherwise. Indeed, English is broadly conceived as a complicated language to acquire
(Wahi et al., 2011). To a large extent, the students‟ lack of interest in the language is
212
influenced by their dilemma of learning the English grammar. Awaluddin (1987) found
that the major complication faced by many Malaysian students is learning the English
grammar. It is deemed a difficult language to acquire because of the complexity of the
English grammar and its absolute differences against the students‟ mother tongue or
first language. Even after 11 years of learning the English grammar in schools, they still
could not grasp full understanding of the tenses in English; instead, it is troublesome for
them to memorise the lexical rules. The absence of tenses in the Malay grammar could
be a contributing factor to the conflict of understanding the tenses in English. Maros et
al. (2007) write that it is very atypical to find a small number of grammatical errors,
specifically in the use of tenses and word order in ESL Malay students‟ written work.
Further, they report that most students have problems in using correct English grammar,
particularly in the use of article, subject-verb agreement and copula „be‟, in their
writings. It was even more upsetting for the students to undergo similar grammar
learning experience at the tertiary level, particularly in the Foundation English course,
as grammar classes have always been considered as dreary and dull.
The students‟ resistance towards grammar reflects their negative experiences
when learning grammar at the initial stage where it was taught in the primary school.
Celce-Murcia (1991, p. 4) suggests that “grammar should never be taught as an end in
itself but always with reference to meaning, social factors, or discourse – or a
combination of these factors”. Teaching and learning of grammar should take into
account the audience, the purpose, and the appropriate approaches and methods to teach
grammar for the maximum benefit of enhancing second language learners‟ linguistic
competence. Explicit grammar instruction can enhance the development of the linguistic
competence and improve on second language learners‟ fluency and accuracy so they can
use the second language effectively. Language learners should be taught to use
linguistic forms accurately, meaningfully and appropriately. Gao (2001) argues that the
213
long-term refinement in fluency and accuracy via grammar instruction is also a socio-
cultural and socioeconomic one. According to Hinkel (1998, p. 18) “Second language
fluency without accuracy may limit learners‟ opportunities for socio-cultural adjustment
and possibly socioeconomic advancement.”
Furthermore, the students‟ resentment towards English was not because of
grammar alone, but also included vocabulary. As mentioned in the findings, the
majority were often intimidated by their inadequate vocabulary and inaccurate word
choices which restrained them from expressing and elaborating their ideas comfortably.
These shortcomings also hindered their chances of getting satisfying results in the
course assessments as well as to meeting the demands made of them in the academic
setting. Mokhtar et al. (2010) contend that it is alarming to discover that most
Malaysian university students possess insufficient vocabulary knowledge to use English
as their second language albeit formal exposure to the language had been given to them
prior to their tertiary education.
It is crucial for the students to have a sufficient mastery of vocabulary, grammar
and pronunciation and possess a certain degree of competence at tertiary level (Gao,
ibid). Nevertheless, the students in this study reported their dissatisfactions for not
achieving the acceptable level of grammatical or linguistic competence in English in
order to meet their current academic requirements and consequently the expectations of
the employers. The findings suggest that the students experienced greater difficulty with
the language rather than the content of their academic discipline. This brings to the light
that the students‟ meagre competence in English language was far from reaching the
expectations of private sector and international institution employers (New Sunday
Times, 2003), which is also consistent with the findings of Koo et al. (2008) that
linguistic competence is an essential criterion for graduate employment by Malaysian
employers. Spack (1998) argues that a large gap is often observed between what
214
students bring to the academic setting and what the academic community expects from
them. This gap is more prominent in the case of second language learners who are basic
users of English with limited linguistic knowledge. Hence, this gap can stand in their
way of achieving academic success.
Taking into consideration their partial English language practices and
experiences in their previous schooling, the students had to strive to negotiate
unfamiliar literacy practices and challenging tertiary expectations in a language they
were still in the process of acquiring. The students acknowledged their plight in
mastering the English language before they began to grapple with the demands of the
higher institutions. Therefore, the language expectations and the heavy workload of
their course requirements stimulated the challenges of their academic literacy practices
even further. Given that they are not first language English speakers, this denied them
ready access to content information which was considerably taught in English in their
content courses. Inevitably, the linguistic struggles intensified their challenges to meet
their institutional expectations. This was especially true in regards to their ability to
express themselves clearly and confidently in written and spoken English. This finding
is consistent with the findings of Evans & Green (2007) that a large number of L2
students encountered difficulties in academic writing and speaking partly because of
their problems in dealing with the lexical and grammatical components of English.
Echoing Zamel and Spack‟s (2006) research, this study verifies that most
students devote a considerable amount of additional time to their studies because of
their linguistic challenges. In essence, the students disclosed that writing was a serious
burden to them as they devoted a great deal of time and effort to produce and construct
the assigned work. Writing essays or assignments in English was perceived as the most
challenging task for these students as it requires expressing ideas using appropriate and
accurate vocabularies and grammar. They reported that writing a sentence can even be a
215
laborious task as it requires hard thinking on their part. As often mentioned in the
students‟ responses, their written work normally consisted of countless grammatical
errors with the extensive use of simple words and syntax. Not only were similar words
applied repetitively in their writing, their sentence structures were also inconsistent and
inappropriate. Aligned with the study conducted by Sarudin et al. (2008), which
discovered that Malaysian public university students have limited ability to prepare
written reports and complete academic writing tasks effectively because of their deficit
in English, this study also confirms Ling‟s (2000) study that there were university
graduates who were incapable of stringing together a proper sentence in English.
Just as writing was considered a taxing and time-consuming task, so was reading
especially when the reading resources constituted an overwhelming amount of difficult
words, thus requiring the students to repeatedly refer to dictionaries for word meanings.
Their restricted vocabulary appeared to be a stumbling block for them in
comprehending complex words in their reading materials and guessing the meanings of
words in context. The dependency on dictionaries for the meanings of words makes
their reading practices tiring and time consuming, hence, taking the pleasure out of
reading and discouraging further interest in reading (Mohd Asraf & Sheikh Ahmad,
2003).
It is indeed challenging for the students to read academic texts as they are
conceptually and syntactically difficult for them to comprehend (Nambiar, 2007).
Reading is an excruciatingly slow process for them especially in regard to
understanding previously unencountered „subject specific‟ or scientific and technical
language and attempting to comprehend „difficult words‟ or „advanced language‟.The
students‟ difficulties in managing lengthy expressions, sophisticated lexical items and
unfamiliarity with the discourse patterns used in the written texts (Andrade, 2009)
brought about the risk of assuming some information is important while disregarding
216
the rest and presuming it as trivial simply because of their struggle in reading advanced
texts. Taken together, these predicaments denote a substantial body of lexis blocking
comprehension which consequently will impede academic progress (Evans & Green,
2007). It is also disturbing to discover that they quit reading when it became too
complicated to endure. Sarudin et al. (ibid) reports that most students lack the reading
comprehension skills that allow them to select relevant texts to incorporate into writing
assignments. Complementing Sarudin et al‟s study, this particular study further
discovers that the reasons underpinning the students‟ difficulties are due to their
limitations in comprehending the structure of English while their inadequate vocabulary
fails to assist their reading practices.
A significant finding is that the students acknowledged that they grappled with
their speaking tasks particularly oral presentation. Not only did they express their
concern over devoting a great deal of time for the preparation of presentations, they also
mentioned their struggles in pronunciation and lexical production in their utterances.
More often than not, the students reported that extra time and effort were devoted to
construct sentences, write the scripts and memorise their speech prior to the presentation
day. Given their Engineering background, these students found the scientific terms that
they were dealing with as straightforward and manageable. More often than not, they
just memorise the keywords of their subject-content for the purposes of their
presentations. However, to provide additional elaboration pertaining to the scientific
issues was problematic to them as they lack the vocabulary to enhance their explanation.
This finding resonates with those of Mohd Asraf and Sheikh Ahmad (2003) that
students‟ lack of vocabulary makes it difficult for them to express themselves in
English. Correspondingly, this finding supports Bruna‟s et al. (2007) remark that
simplifying language and focusing only on keywords or terms decreases students‟
opportunities to engage with subject-appropriate discourse and consequently,
217
diminishes their ability to function in that domain. During the class observation, it was
noticeable that most of these students deliberately chose to present the introductory part
for their group presentation in order to avoid the middle part where elaboration of the
content was concerned.
Since elaboration is a major drawback for the students, they sometimes sought
their friends‟ assistance to help them in preparing for the content of presentation as well
as the answers for the question and answer sessions after the presentations. The students
stated that it usually took them one whole night to prepare for a ten-minute individual
presentation. As they encountered dilemmas in pronunciation, their preparation for
presentations also entailed practicing the pronunciation and articulation of words. It is
alarming to learn that the students felt that the oral presentation imposed a wearisome
task for them considering the high value credited to it in most Engineering courses.
This finding coincides with Sarudin et al.‟s (2008) study which discovered that the low
English language proficiency among most Malaysian university students confines their
ability to express opinions and ideas orally, to conduct presentations and to participate
in group discussions. In the same light, Robert (2005) denoted that it is surprising to see
that after a fairly good number of years learning the English language, undergraduates
are yet to speak English using correct sentence structure, or in some cases, even to
engage in a dialogue.
More importantly, in line with the studies by Hassan and Selamat (2002), Ismail
(2008) and Sarudin et al. (2008), the findings of the present study exhibit that the
students proved low engagement in active production of discourse ideas in English as
they lack productive abilities, which were seen as problematic practices, compared to
receptive abilities. Hassan and Selamat (ibid) report that students‟ limited opportunities
to use English outside their classrooms contribute to their low proficiency in the
language, thus confining their ability to speak and write. Brumfit (1984) points out that
218
there are a large number of people who never acquire a second language to a high level
of proficiency. Such outcomes were evident in the context of this study where the
students were found to possess limited abilities in productive skills associated with
writing and speaking in English. Andrade (2009) also cited a parallel discovery in her
study involving the international students who were non-native English speakers in the
United States. Her study revealed that the students were more competent on tasks
involving receptive skills, comprising reading and listening, than on productive skills
such as writing and speaking, which require them to stretch their English abilities.
Furthermore, the prevailing concerns among the students not only includes their
shortfall in communicating competently in English but also their low self-esteem. In a
study on the factors affecting less proficient ESL learners‟ use of strategies for language
and content area learning, Ismail (ibid) draws attention to students‟ nominal self-
confidence in using English neither in nor outside the classroom boundaries due to their
deficiency in linguistic knowledge and experience in using the language. On certain
occasions where communication in English is required, such as in group discussions,
the students were found to resort to their respective mother tongue language or dialect
for the sake of convenience. This was made worse as their lack of practice in using the
language prohibited them from improving their confidence and communication skills in
English. Interestingly, Ismail‟s findings are in tune with the findings described in this
particular study in light of the students‟ feelings of inferiority in communicating in
English for fear of making mistakes or being laughed at and teased which constrained
them from using English in their daily academic interaction with their counterparts. The
fear of the negative reactions or responses from their society predominantly inhibits
them from using the language in their real life events. There is ample evidence of
students‟ lack of self-confidence in using English due to their deficits in the language
219
reported in previous studies in Malaysia (Abdul Rahman, 2005, Abdul Rashid, 2005;
Hassan & Selamat, 2002; Kaur, 2006; Pandian, 2007; Tan, 2005).
This study thus represents an increasing awareness of the role of language in
learning and constructing knowledge. Zamel and Spack (2006) contend that the
acquisition of language and academic literacies entails a longstanding and evolving
process which requires students to undergo several stages of constructing hypotheses
about the unfamiliar language as well as the norms and conventions of the language
within the contexts before they can fully achieve the target language. Substantiating this
view, the findings of this study demonstrate that the students are confronted with
massive learning challenges especially when their ability to master the knowledge and
skills are hindered by their shortfalls in English. In essence, these deficits in English
language competencies generally resulted in significant repercussions on their overall
academic performance. To a certain extent, the students verified that they are far behind
because of their incompetency in English in all the academic practices. This points to
the divergence between the expectations of the faculty and the overall performance of
the students. Furthermore, it is quite disturbing to learn that the students‟ have
constraints in expressing their ideas effectively and confidently, given the challenges
and expectations of the workforce which the students might encounter in their near
future.
6.5 English as a Second Language (ESL): Stretching the term
English is officially placed as the second language in Malaysia (Gill, 2002). In
line with the planned growth of Malaysia as an industrialised and developed nation in
Vision 2020 (Mohamad, 2011) and the recent development of internationalisation of
higher education in Malaysia, English is taught as a second language nationwide. A
very poignant feature of the context of this study is that the students are from a
220
multicultural society learning English which is taught as a second language but not
necessarily deemed so by them. In actual fact, this study attests that English is a
language used in an environment that fits neither the description of a second language
nor that of a foreign language setting. There is a prevailing view among the students
that English is an „alien language‟ when it was first introduced as one of the compulsory
subjects to be learned in schools (Wahi et al., 2011). Generally for these students, their
first language at home is not the official Malay or Chinese language but their own
respective mother tongue which includes different Malay dialects such as Kelantan
Malay, Kedah Malay, Sarawak Malay, Javanese and Banjarese as well as Hokkien,
Hakka and Cantonese for the Chinese dialects. It is commonsensical for the students to
feel awkward when learning English as it was completely an outlandish language
unfamiliar in their surroundings since they had grown up using their own mother tongue
and they saw everyone around them speaking a similar language.
The students‟ overall perception of English as a foreign language is indeed an
enlightening discovery in this study. In reality, English is a third or fourth language
learned as a foreign language at the onset of their education where it was commonly
taught by non-native speakers of English. English is a compulsory school subject taught
as a second language next to the Malay language, which is the national language as well
as the primary medium of instruction in all national schools. A number of educators
delineate that the term TESOL (Teaching of English to Speakers of Other Languages) is
more applicable than TESL (Teaching English as a Second Language) to suit the current
position of English education in the country (Kok et al., 2009). In many instances,
Manglish (Malaysian English) is preferred in everyday communication. Manglish refers
to informal English established from the influence of vernacular language in English
(Lee, 1998). Moreover, Ortmeier-Hooper (2008) argues that the term ESL is not only a
descriptor with all kinds of complications, it is also “an institutional marker, pointing to
221
a need for additional services and also to the status of someone still marked as a novice
in the English language” (p. 390).
Additionally, there was minimal exposure to the language outside the school
boundary as there was no community of practice to provide authentic opportunities to
use the language to enable the students to improve their competence. Generally the
students confirmed that they only use English in the English classes. Razali (1992)
maintains that students from remote and rural areas in Malaysia may not see the
importance of learning English, thus they lack motivation as they find it difficult to
learn this foreign language. The findings of the present study corroborate Schuetze‟s
(2002) remark that when learning English in a foreign language environment, the target
language plays no major role in the community and it is usually learnt in the classroom
formally. For the students in the present study, learning English was like learning a
foreign language, and they had limited need for the language in their daily lives.
Therefore, the lack of a community of practice limited their development of proficiency
and confidence with the language. This depicts that, in reality, English is not their
second language as proclaimed in the country‟s policy; rather, it is indeed a foreign
language for this group of students. In reality, using the English language is a
demanding task for these students as it requires them to translate from their own first
languages such as Malay, Chinese or their own dialects into English.
Despite these constraints, the students had to endure two formal English course
requirements in their higher education. Although there were some considerable
requirements made on them pertaining to the English language such as the medium of
communication, references, written and oral assignments in English, the use of English
among these students was still insignificant. The real need for English language use was
limited only to a few academic purposes and research area. English was mainly applied
within the academic contexts. Beyond the four walls of the classroom, there was still
222
nominal contact with English and plenty of opportunity for avoidance of the language as
there was a restricted „real‟ community of practice.
Byrne (1991) illuminates that linguistic competence encompasses accuracy and
fluency. Accuracy refers to the accuracy of the language content; grammar,
pronunciation and vocabulary, while fluency signifies “the ability to express oneself
intelligibly, reasonably accurately and without too much hesitation; otherwise
communication may break down because the listener loses interest or gets impatient” (p.
9). Thus, the ability to speak English accurately and fluently is essential for effective
communication. Nonetheless, the findings of this study indicate that the students did not
demonstrate the levels of accuracy and fluency in English required for effective
communication. Gao (2001) states that it is natural for second or foreign language
learners to attain either positive or negative experience in their language learning.
However, the majority of them may not have achieved a reasonable level of competence
in a second or foreign language.
In a non-native English-speaking environment, such as in the case of this study,
it is difficult for the students who are non-native speakers of English to be able to speak
as accurately and fluently as native speakers. Unlike the native speakers of English who
acquire their first language at an early age by picking it up naturally the rich cultural and
linguistic environment they were born or grew up in, the non-native speakers are
selective in the kind of input they take since they have already learnt their first language
(Gao, ibid). Davies (2003) stated that the non-native speaker is normally “exposed to a
limited set of encounters and has little or no exposure to the cultural beliefs and
knowledge which the target language bears” (p.115). In addition, there is lack of
exposure to good models of English and opportunity to use English, particularly in a
non-native English-speaking environment. He further asserts that the language problem
is compounded when students learn the linguistic knowledge like learning a book, as the
223
four skills in the target language may not be well developed, especially the speaking and
listening skills because students have less opportunity to use the language in a non-
native English-speaking environment.
6.6 Ways forward: Surviving the academic endeavour
Clearly, the students‟ learning practices and experiences did not occur in a
vacuum; instead, they involved an execution of a complex combination of academic
literacies. In general, the findings depict a rich and multifaceted picture of the students‟
experiences and struggles in their academic pathway. It is noteworthy to underline that
despite the students‟ plight and incompetency in English, they appear to be somewhat
capable of undertaking the complex academic tasks and making acceptable
contributions to the disciplines they are studying. This is especially true considering
their perseverance and the effort they put in to meet the expectations of their lecturers.
In view of their drawbacks in English, the students indicated that their lecturers rarely
paid attention to correcting their wrong usage of words and syntax as their main
objective was to achieve precision of content. Despite their shortcomings in confidence
and competency in communicating in English, they still placed high values on, and
looked forward to, more communicative activities to help them build their confidence in
using the language and more platforms for them to conduct oral presentations to prepare
themselves for their future job opportunities.
Apparently, in the process of struggling to understand their course materials, the
students established new strategies for learning unfamiliar subject matter and for
acquiring the language of that subject matter. Conforming that learning strategies are
exploited by learners to assist the process of acquiring knowledge by making it easier,
faster and pleasurable, Oxford (1990) indicates that learning strategies help learners
develop second or foreign language competence in many ways. As manifested in the
224
findings, several learning strategies were employed by the students to comply with the
expectations of their disciplines. Embedded in the students‟ academic literacies was the
dependency on peers‟ assistance in their preparation for oral presentations as well as in
comprehending the difficult words in their readings. Peer discussion was also conducted
as a source of reference mainly to help clarify concepts drawn from their reading
resources written in English.
The translation strategy adopted by the students also merits commentary. The
findings reveal that the students relied heavily on dictionaries to aid their
comprehension, construction of utterances as well as composition of assigned work due
to their familiarity with their first language and deficiencies in English. Interestingly,
the students acknowledged the fact that thinking was cognitively executed in their
mother tongue and subsequently translated into English to comply with the
requirements of the academic. In such circumstances, the students employed
organisation patterns from their L1 which sometimes resulted in ineffective
communication (Andrade, 2009). Furthermore, the actual practices of memorising key
points, main ideas, procedures, definitions and concepts in the preparation for
examinations was also noticeable in the context of the research students. These
strategies were found to be universal practices among Malaysian students as confirmed
in the findings carried out by Ismail (2008), Lee et al. (2010) and Thang (2003). Lee et
al. explain that students resorted to memorisation or regurgitation of lectures notes when
under pressure to study or prepare for assessments. Further, Thang maintains that it is a
disturbing fact that memorisation, which is frequently associated with rote learning
among Malaysian students, may be the result of the exam-oriented and teacher-centred
approach extensively exercised in schools. Thus, this limits the students‟ abilities for
creative and critical thinking. Recognising the students‟ tendency to focus on keywords
as a means of circumventing their linguistic problems, Bruna et al. (2007) maintain that
225
this practice may obscure the students‟ ability to make meaningful connections between
various scientific processes and mathematical operations.
Generally, it is contended that the students‟ knowledge maybe incomplete in
certain areas yet there is a possibility that they possess valuable knowledge in other
aspects of their study. This seems to imply that the students draw on their educational
and cultural experiences and knowledge in order to achieve academic success (Zamel &
Spack, 2006).
6.7 The impact of membership of various communities
The findings also call attention to an outstanding shift of mindset in the students‟
stance pertinent to the importance of English language. At the onset of their education,
the students had developed a pessimistic outlook on English on account of the marginal
exposure and encouragement from their school and home communities that deprived
them of recognising the value of English for their future purposes. In such
circumstances, the students sought identity as members of their school and domestic
societies through pursuing local ways of belonging which placed high values on the use
of their respective mother tongue. Furthermore, the English literacy practices at schools
were reported to consist primarily of completing language practice activities such as
answering reading comprehension questions, grammar practice activities and copying
information. Indeed, the classroom was not regarded as a place to begin to understand
the social uses of literacy. This signifies the traditional view of language literacy which
regarded language as a system of structures and vocabulary, not as a means to operate in
the real world (Currie & Cray, 2004).
However, their learning trajectory into higher education has led to a significant
leap of perspective on the importance of English. Certainly, the impact of expectations
226
of English at tertiary level has instilled an awareness of changes in the perception of
English language literacy by the students. The need to master the language was imposed
by the academic requirements for university success. The widespread use of English in
the educational media and resources also enhanced the need to be competent in the
language. At this point, the English language was perceived as the vehicle to survive in
the tertiary community. The social practices of acquiring knowledge in the students‟
academic community typically necessitated some adjustments by them in order to
develop a sense of belonging to their existing community. Being instrumentally
motivated, the students‟ awareness of the importance of English has also instigated their
interest in it at the university. This coincides with the findings by Choy and Troudi
(2006) that there were differences in students‟ perceptions and attitudes towards
learning English in schools and college. Students‟ attitudes are seen more positive in
college as the social environment is more conducive for learning English.
The importance and necessity of English was underscored not only in higher
education but also for prospective positions in the workforce after graduation. In fact,
their understandings about the English language literacy that is needed for future
success seemed to be increasingly developed as evidenced in their concerns about their
competencies to meet job interview and workplace literacy requirements. Studies have
shown that Malaysian students realise the importance of English for their future
development and that they are extrinsically motivated by factors such as the desire to
get good grades, opportunities to further their studies and career advancement to
improve their English (Thang, 2004; Zubairi & Sarudin, 2009).
Nevertheless, the social reality in the students‟ current context revealed that even
though English literacy was valued and fully appreciated, there were very limited
venues for its use in their settings. The main language of communication in the faculty
was Malay language while a range of varied languages and dialects were in use in their
227
non-academic domains. The students were basically aware of the importance of using
the language habitually in their daily repertoire and that it requires constant practices in
their academic and non-academic spheres. However, the support they received from
their community of practice appears to be insignificant and sometimes almost absent.
This implies that, should they intend to change their current deficiencies, they must be
willing to take risks and adapt to the negative responses and non-acceptance by their
circle of friends or unsupportive community for speaking in English. It is evidenced that
the emphasis on English medium at the institutional setting is still not sufficient to
create a homogeneous social network for the students to learn and use English because
of the presence of different social groups and contradictory learning priorities.
Inevitably, the findings also bring to light the variation of medium of instruction
throughout the students‟ academic trajectory. In line with the changes of the country‟s
language policy, the students were obliged to adapt and cope with the switch of
language use from the beginning of their primary up to their current tertiary education.
It is safe to say that the students have experienced various contradictions in their
language learning and academic literacies. Indeed, they have been tremendously
affected by the variations and inconsistencies of language use in the educational system
and consequently face a language dilemma and marginalisation especially in the context
where English is dominant. Arguably, with the constant changes of language policy and
educational system in the students‟ learning trajectories, there is no guarantee that the
students have been well equipped by their previous and current academic experiences to
cope with the academic literacies required of them (Hirst et al. 2004). Correspondingly,
the contemporary challenge endured by the students is the tension between their
restricted English literacy opportunities, due to current policy mandates, and the
broadening and intensifying literacy demands made upon them across the tertiary
curriculum (Enright, 2010). Further, the expectations of their future career pathways
228
also require some adjustments. No matter how well they know the substantive content
of their Engineering discipline, their prospects will be impacted by their ability to
convey it in English and their capacity to respond to more general interactions with the
counterparts in the workforce.
Taken together, the findings make obvious that the membership of a particular
group or society significantly influences the practices of the society. This is consistent
with Koo‟s (2001) notion that membership of various discourse communities provides
the multicultural Malaysians with linguistic and cultural resources to establish multiple
ways of behaving and adopting a full range of social roles. These roles, which create
continuities and discontinuities, are indeed confined by their social membership of
various communities to include nationality, religion, age, lifestyle, class and
ideologically oriented spaces.
This study also confirms the crucial role of meaningful situated language use in
the construction of knowledge and learning opportunities of the students suggesting that
language literacy learning is highly contextualised. The findings disclose that English is
broadly utilised within the academic domain and the literacy practices in English are
bound to the context in which they occur be it in the institution or the workplace. Zamel
and Spack (2006, p. 137) write that “crucial to this perspective on language and literacy
acquisition is an understanding of the contextualised, embedded nature of this process”.
This points to the fact that language and literacy are situated in specific educational
contexts and acquired through the students‟ engagement with their academic literacy
practices and experiences while conforming to the norms and conventions of the
academic requirements.
229
6.8 The impact of school on the construction of English language literacy
Another notable finding of this study is the students‟ prevailing view of school
as the pivotal entity highly responsible for their weak foundation of English language
literacy. Interestingly, the findings discover that most employers also shared a
corresponding standpoint that school should take the total onus on the students‟ shortfall
in English. It is contended that to resolve the students‟ deficiencies in English at the
university level is impracticable, and too late to hope to be effective.
Most students were of a strong opinion that their shortcomings in basic linguistic
knowledge in English were caused by the restricted exposure and encouragement given
by their schools at the onset of their education. The deficits in the language were
reported to develop over time all the way through their primary and secondary
schooling while jeopardising their overall academic achievement and escalating their
resistance towards the language. Arguably, there is a need to provide a strong
foundation and extensive exposure at the school level particularly at the initial stage of
schooling given the students‟ background of living in the rural vicinity. On factors that
affect the learning of ESL in Malaysia, Chandrasegaran (1981) points out that students
living in the rural area have limited exposure to English which deprived them of the
opportunity for hearing and reading in English and the experience of wider contact with
English thus, making them less competent in the language.
Indeed, schools play a vital role to develop the students‟ interest in English as
there is no other way for them to get a full grasp of the language except from school and
that there is an absence of community of practice of the language at home. Given the
widespread lack of English in their home environments, the school had out of necessity
to play a bigger role with respect to English literacy. Complementing the findings
230
derived from a study conducted by Azman (1999), this study depicts the association of
English with school practices or formal practices exceptionally used within educational
or professional domains, not in the private sphere. In this construction, literacy was
perceived in terms of school practices and less in terms of practices that occurred every
day in the community. This also contributes to the students‟ notion of literacy equated
with school success, future career opportunities and functioning in modern life.
Additionally, the findings call attention to the critical roles of responsive and
highly committed teachers in fostering the students‟ success in the English language. It
is indisputable that teachers can play a major role in developing and fostering the
students‟ interest and boosting their confidence to use English in their daily academic
repertoire particularly at primary school. It is imperative to build the strong foundation
towards English at the primary level as it the most crucial stage that either establishes or
breaks the students‟ interest in the language. Alas, the students reported that their
primary school teachers contributed significantly to their limited interest and hostility
towards English. However, a twist of outlook on English at the university was reported
owing to the supportive and responsive characteristics of their teachers. In the same vein
of the study conducted by Mohd Asraf and Sheikh Ahmad (2003), this study verifies
that the students showed positive responses to their English teachers at the university
due to the supportive and non-threatening atmosphere established by the teachers.
In addition, Thang (2011) highlights that there is a need for Malaysian teachers
to pay more attention to students with lower proficiency to break the vicious cycle by
providing a conducive and stress-free environment for English learning. Teachers
should enhance their students‟ interactive and creative abilities, capture their interest
and cater to their diverse needs in order to sustain their interest in learning the language.
Along the same line of argument, Hassan and Selamat (2002) point to the need for
teachers to break free from creating lessons that are oriented towards examination in
231
order to develop their students‟ productive abilities as well as enhancing their positive
attitudes towards English. Enright (2010) maintains that most educators and
practitioners are very much overwhelmed by the pass exit exams and standardised tests
that they often disregard the values of students‟ language and literacy experiences that
they bring into the classrooms.
6.9 Juxtaposing students’ English competencies with employers’ expectations
To reiterate, this study sought to find out the extent of the researched students‟
English language academic literacy practices and competencies upon completing their
English language courses and the extent to which these competencies match with the
expectations of prospective employers. To provide substantial understanding of the
researched students‟ existing English language academic literacy practices and
competencies, several pertinent academic practices commonly exercised by the students
at the finishing point of their English language courses at the university are discussed in
Chapter Four. These are represented in the following diagram.
232
Figure 6.1: Summary of findings of students‟ academic literacy practices and competencies
Several prominent workplace literacy practices which require English language
competencies as described by the prospective employers are presented in Chapter Five
and outlined in the diagram below.
Figure 6.2: Summary of the findings of employers‟ benchmark for workplace literacy practices
Students' English language academic literacy practices & competencies
Reading practices
- reading different academic resources
- reading to:
* comprehend principles
* comprehend calculation procedures
* design new inventions
* understand technical details
* complete course assessments
* gather main ideas
* prepare for exams
* obtain the meaning of words
Listening practices
- listening to lectures & tutorials
Writing practices
- writing various genres:
* assignmnet
* laboratory report
* examination
* thesis
-writing involves mathematical, technical & graphical representations
Speaking practices
- speaking for :
* oral presentation
* group discussion
* consultation
Employers' expectations
Speaking practices
- giving presentation
- communicating with foreign partners
- negotiating business matters
- working together with foreign counterparts on the same project
- reporting
Listening practices
- understanding meetings & negotiation
- understanding others at semionars, conferences, briefings, presentations, etc
- understanding information from various media
- receiving instructions
- receiving orders
Reading practices
- reading:
* reports & agreements
* technical manuals
* technical descriptions
* formal letters
* written work instructions
Writing practices
- writing:
* reports
* formal business letters
* standard operating procedures
* for the website/Internet
* brochures
233
In general, the findings point to the students‟ perceived shortfalls with regard to
linguistic and communicative competence as well as self-confidence as a consequence
of their deficiency in English. Specifically, the findings indicate that the students‟
encounter various difficulties in terms of speaking, writing and reading. Central to the
findings of the employers‟ expectations of prospective recruits is English language
competence as the salient quality sought after. Clearly, there is apparent discrepancy
between the students‟ competencies with that of the employers‟ expectations. This
discrepancy is illustrated in the following diagram.
Figure 6.3: The discrepancy between students‟ competencies and employers‟ expectations
Students' English language academic literacy practices competencies
Speaking predicaments:
- Limited vocabulary
- Applying appropriate & accurate
grammar
- Constructing sentences
- Pronunciation problems
Writing difficulties:
- Applying accurate grammar rules
- Limited vocabulary
- Constructing sentences
- Expanding sentences
Reading difficulties:
- Dealing with unfamiliar words
- Understanding complex language
structure
- Managing lengthy explanation
- Managing long texts
Employers' expectations
Speaking practices:
- Giving presentations
- Communicating with foreign partners
- Negotiating business matters
- Working together with foreign counterparts on the same project
- Reporting
Listening practices:
- Understanding meetings & negotiations
- Understanding others at seminars, etc
- understanding information from various media
- Receiving instructions
- Receiving orders
Reading practices:
- reading reports & agreement
- reading technical manuals
- reading technical descriptions
- reading formal letters
- reading written work constructions
Writing practices:
- Writing reports
- Writing formal business letters
- Writing standard operating procedures
- Writing for the website/Internet
- Writing brochures
234
There is a prevailing view among the employers that communicative
competence is the most crucial ability demanded of prospective employees given the
central exploitation of English in the workplace daily practices. This is highlighted in
the findings with regards to the employers‟ ranking of speaking abilities as the most
important skills valued at the workplace ahead of listening, reading and writing.
Consistent with the findings of Abdul Razak et al. (2007), the relatively limited
attention given to the accurate use of English in the work settings is also revealed in the
present study. Certainly, the findings signify that there is a strong need for future
recruits to enhance their communicative competencies and skills as these are
significantly required by the employers. Nevertheless, this does not imply that other
competencies are unimportant; rather the emphasis in communicative abilities are of
primary concern.
In agreement with the present study, Pandian and Abd Ghani (2005) note that
English competency is indeed a necessity in the workplace. There is ample evidence in
this study that most organisations place high values on potential employees‟ ability to
conduct oral presentations, particularly in presenting proposals in meetings in front of
internal and external counterparts, as well as to communicate and consult with other
local and international companies. Therefore, there is a crucial demand of
communicative skills, particularly in the English language, on prospective employees
the moment they begin their journey in the occupational sphere. This is especially true
given the dynamic and evolving nature of interactions in most business dealings and
negotiations in the workplace scenario. These corroborate with other studies such as by
Megat Johari et al. (2002) and Lee (2003) that most international and reputed companies
list excellent communication skills in English as one of the main criteria for recruiting
new staff.
235
Inevitably, the need for competency in English is paramount specifically in the
job interview. Abdul Razak et al. (2006) point out that the English language is an
important factor and an indicator of the job applicants‟ ability to express themselves and
elaborate on their expertise during the interviews. As exemplified in the findings of this
study, most employers highlighted that it is imperative for potential recruits to exhibit
acceptable communicative qualities and market themselves adequately during the job
interview as these will determine their employment or otherwise.
Nonetheless, a huge disparity between the students‟ existing English literacy
competencies with the prerequisites set by the employers is evidenced in the findings. It
is poignant to note that the students‟ current competencies in English are indeed far
from reaching the employers‟ expectations due to their major deficits constituting
partial linguistic knowledge, communicative incompetence and low self-confidence.
These deficiencies have resulted in a negative outlook on their existing English
language competencies and impacted their overall academic performance. The major
concern constantly raised by the students was their meager capability to express and
articulate their ideas conveniently and comfortably in English. This could well limit
their ability to promote themselves satisfactorily and meet the demands of prospective
employment upon graduation.
While employers expect future recruits to reach the level where they can think in
English, provide spontaneous responses particularly in the job interviews and
communicate effectively and appropriately in the workplace, the students in this case
disclosed that they lacked the language to get their message across owing to their
restricted capability in the productive skills. It is evidenced that the students were
confronted with the inconveniences to respond to conversations in English as their
thinking is normally carried out in their mother tongue language and, subsequently, they
236
need to translate their utterances before they can even produce them in English. This
implies the complexities they might encounter in the near future should they were
required to respond spontaneously in their work routine. Affirming that linguistic
proficiency in English is one of the essential attributes for students‟ employability,
Kubler and Forbes (2004), in Koo et al. (2008) purport that it entails the abilities to use
the language and to apply these abilities in appropriate contexts as well as presenting
ideas convincingly and coherently in written and oral discourses while simultaneously
complying with the generic conventions. However, these abilities appear to be lacking
in the context of the students in this study. In addition, Koo et al. (ibid) contend that the
language proficiency of graduates could be viewed in terms of functional English for
workplace environments which are different from academic milieu. This also points to
the need to review the English language as functional lingua franca operating within the
complex multicultural and multiracial context where English is literally not the mother
tongue language.
Essentially, attending the job interview is likely to establish some kind of a
threatening environment for the students due to their low self-confidence to converse in
English. As firmly expressed by the students, they would be terrified to go through the
job interviews since they are not confident to speak appropriate English, to pronounce
and articulate their words properly and even to produce grammatically acceptable
utterances. As a matter of fact, English language is largely perceived as their biggest
barrier for employment. Indicating that they may have acquired and possessed some
basic knowledge on the procedures to apply and prepare themselves for the job
interviews as well as some training on conducting discussions and meeting from the
English for Engineering course that they attended, this preparation however was
conceived as insufficient as they still lack the competence and confidence to
communicate in English. Therefore, in spite of knowing that their lack of competence
237
will affect their employability, the students seem unable to improve. In essence, these
findings suggest that the students‟ inadequate competency with regards to English
language proficiency virtually guarantees that they will not have the capability and
readiness to meet the demands of the workforce.
Clearly, there is a convergence between the employers‟ dilemma regarding
graduates insufficient abilities and the research students‟ existing competencies in
English. The students‟ current circumstances appear to substantiate and confirm the
employers‟ overall belief that prospective employees possess limited competency in
English. Additionally, the findings resonate with those of Sirat et al. (2008) and the
remark made by the employers in the present study that most graduates are incapable to
project their communicative abilities despite their excellent academic achievement due
to lack of confidence and mastery of English. Towards this end, Aruna (2011) affirms
that the poor level of English and lack of self confidence are the main reasons for
concern among Malaysia employers. Also, it is apparent that the students‟ deficits in
English, as illustrated in the findings, coincide with the study by Sirat et al. (ibid) on
graduates‟ perspectives pertaining to their restricted interpersonal and interactive skills.
According to the graduates in the study, the exposure to English in their tertiary
environment was minimal; while their lecture notes were mostly printed in English,
their lectures were presented in Malay. These brought about difficulties using English in
the academic setting whenever they intended to do so.
Further, it is deemed problematical for the students in this study to apply for the
positions in multinational and international organisations where daily routine
necessitates English practices because of their scarce communicative competence and
confidence. Indeed, the sheer exhaustion of operating at two levels of English language
is predictable, given the daily conversational English that the students are expected to be
able to engage with, alongside other Engineering discourses that they have to be able to
238
perform in everyday discussion while attending to meetings and delivering oral
presentations. Their informal communication in English and formal Engineering
discourses that they are expected to manage if they are involved in such kinds of
environments will impose an immense complexity and challenge to them. This is
especially true considering the variations of English literacy expectations and practices
occurring in diverse occupational contexts as shown in the findings. Concurring with
Heath‟s (1983) notion, it is disputable that the situated nature and patterns of language
and literacy differ widely between the academic and workplace domains. This implies
that the differences will not guarantee that the students would be able to be
communicatively competent in both spaces.
Interestingly, the findings depict the variations of written discourses practiced in
different companies which are subjected to the preferences of respective departments.
Such variations are due to the nature of work involved in certain areas of work. With
respect to the Engineering written discourses, it is arguable that writing the technical
genres required of the workplace should not inflict many problems on the students since
they are familiar with the Engineering components. Comparable to their current
academic discourses, the written genres at the workplace are reported to contain
numerical details and technical representations with a fixed written form. Hence, there
is a tendency for the students to be able to deal with such discourses and survive the
writing practices as these are closely parallel to what they have been doing in their
written assignments at tertiary level, particularly in their technical report writing. Given
the emphasis on the clarity of content in most written discourses in the Engineering
courses which require minimal elaboration and marginal language accuracy (Leki,
2007), it is possible that the students are capable of performing adequately in the
workplace settings. Furthermore, the findings reveal that in some cases where the
technical expertise possessed by the potential employees was greatly sought after,
239
language competency was likely to be disregarded by certain companies. This will
possibly open up a window of opportunities for the Engineering students, as in the case
of this study, to secure some positions in the employment sphere.
In summary, this study illustrates the discrepancies between the students‟
perspectives of their overall English language competencies and the prospective
employers‟ expectations with regard to English language competencies. This is
represented by the following diagram.
Figure 6.4: The interconnections between students‟ English language competencies and prospective
employers‟ expectations
6.10 Conflict of interest
Just as the academic literacies in the context of this study are seen as complex,
the workplace literacy is also found to be complicated given the various expectations
and practices carried out in diverse organisations. The obvious multiplicity of language
use and practices also mark the complexities of the workplace literacy. While the
private corporations appear to have greater emphasis on English competencies and
practices among prospective employees, it is not so great in the public sectors. The need
for proficiency in the Malay language far exceeds that of English specifically in regards
to formal correspondences and communication while Malay is used largely in daily
Students' perspectives:
- Low communicative competence
- Low linguistic competence
- Low self-esteem
Employers' expectations:
- High communicative ability
- High English language competencies
- High self-esteem
240
interactions in the public domain. The findings indicate that although the mastery of
Malay language is perceived as a much-needed skill by the employers in the public
sector, the requirement for English is still considered significant particularly in certain
areas of services and cooperation that involve communication with international
counterparts and organisations.
A conflicting scenario is observed in the private sectors where formal
correspondence and corporate communication are almost exclusively operated in
English while Malay is mainly used in the informal interactions among the staff. Rafik-
Galea and Mohd. Zain (2006) write that within the context of professional organizations
in Malaysia, specifically in the private sector, employees do not have any other choice
but to use the English language as it is supreme in the business community. It is
undeniable that English language has become the lingua france of most Malaysian
private organisations (Rafik-Galea & Hassan, 2003). However, the Malay language is
also essential especially in relation to business dealings involving the public sectors.
These findings imply that the language expectations of the potential recruits vary as the
requirements of the respective employers differ. Therefore, these variations raise some
matters of concern pertaining to the incompatible language expectations required on
future graduates. As exemplified in the finding, the students‟ existing deficiencies in the
English language were the result of various language expectations and inconsistent
medium of instruction at different levels of their educational trajectory. It is disputable
that various language expectations in the work setting will intensify the students‟
dilemmas with regards to the English language, thus imposing uncomfortable
consequences on them. Arguably, in the quest to achieve the developed nation status
and to compete in the global economic world, the country should establish a clear policy
241
on the language issues as these bring about significant repercussions on the quality of
future employees.
Another important finding of this study is that there is a big gap between the
expectations of the faculty with that of the employers. It is evidenced that the faculty‟s
primary concern was to generate future graduates‟ professional competencies, whilst the
employers, on the other hand, seem to appreciate the holistic competencies among the
graduates. Taking into consideration the academics‟ aim to develop the students‟
knowledge in the Engineering discipline and to ensure that the students would be
competent engineers, the curriculum was designed with a loaded variety of up-to-date
courses in areas which the academics perceived as essential competencies to be required
by the employers. The employers are actually looking for additional critical criteria that
also embrace interactive and interpersonal skills as well as English language
competencies. In essence, the employers not only expect professional discipline
competence as the base line, but also the value-added English language competence in
both professional and social contexts. Koo et al. (2008) state that most employers are of
the opinion that the universities should train their future graduates to be well prepared in
oral and written communication as these are pivotal in most organisations.
In the provision of engineering graduates for future workforce, Mohd Radzuan
& Kaur‟s study (2010) denotes that academics need to incorporate and emphasise on
oral presentation skills alongside receiving and giving feedbacks for presentations in the
engineering curriculum. These skills are considered necessary as engineers‟ job
specifications require them to communicate their ideas clearly to their clients,
colleagues and management. Further, Bhattacharya et al. (2007) point out that the
demands of engineers at the workplace are indeed challenging and demanding.
Therefore, prospective engineers should be trained to possess the technical competency,
communicative ability and language proficiency to ensure that they are capable to reach
242
out to the multicultural and global audience of various levels and technical background
knowledge in any formal or informal situations.
Given the expectations of employers discussed earlier, it is safe to say that the
support and provision provided by the university to the Engineering students in this
study is still inadequate. The fact that the students were required to take up only two
English courses throughout their entire tertiary study is insufficient to help them
develop their competence and confidence in the language. Furthermore, the gap in
between the two English courses where there was no English courses taken in their
second and final year has resulted in discontinuity in terms of the exposure and
opportunities to exploit the language in the academic setting. While the students were
contented and satisfied with the English for Engineering course which helped them to
improve their communication skills, enhance their confidence and help them to prepare
for future employment, the Foundation English was regarded otherwise. At the same
time, the attempt to enhance English literacies outside classroom boundaries in the
English Speaking Zone programme is also considered a letdown as students were not
well informed of its purposes and advantages. Arguably, the university should provide
more English courses in which the students can appreciate and relate to their future
gain; this will guarantee effectively learning and enhance students‟ self-esteem.
Nevertheless, Muthiah (2003) contends that a mismatch exists between the
communication skills taught at the university and the language skills required for the
effective execution of the job in the Malaysian workplace. The findings in the present
study, as shared by the majority of the researched students and identified in the non-
participant observation in previous chapter, indicate that there was inadequate forum
provided by the lecturers for the students to interact actively in their classes as the key
concern was to allow ample room for dissemination of information to take place.
Further, it is implied that the two-way communications were not encouraged by the
243
teachers in schools and tertiary institutions given the pressure to teach the wide syllabus
area within a restricted time while ensuring that the students are prepared and geared
towards the frequent examinations. This has made educators resort to spoon-feeding and
the students to regurgitate the content without much space for discussion and expression
of individual opinion (Kaur, 2006). Thus, this has consequently diminished the
students‟ ability to communicate effectively within the academic domain (Bruna et al.,
2007).
In addition, Abdul Kareem and Othman (2007) reports from their findings that
many Information and Computer Technology (ICT) corporations in Malaysia lamented
the fact that many jobs could not be filled by the local graduates due to the mismatch in
the training provided by academia and the skills required by the industry. Inevitably, the
goal of the academic discourses assigned by the faculty was specifically meant to verify
the students‟ learning development and to evaluate their academic performance. In line
with the academic requirements, the academic literacy practices and the production of
learning output within the academic domain did not necessarily duplicate and
correspond with the type of practices and genres produced at the workplace. Indeed, the
genres that the students learned and engaged in their studies were basically the
academic versions of their disciplinary genres which were not necessarily equivalent to
what they might be expected to produce in the job setting. At the university, the students
were taught to produce a standard form of writing conventions whereas, in reality, it
was reported that there are varied conventions of report writing in most professional
settings which are fundamentally subjected to the preferences of individual
organisations. Thus, this finding confirms that norms of speaking and writing vary
significantly across different communities and cultures (Gee, 2000; Heath & Mangolia,
1991). Correspondingly, Knight & Yorke (2003) affirm that there are diverse social
practices that take place in the employment sectors. Further, they purport that current
244
higher education institutions are primarily concerned about developing advanced
understandings of valuable subject matter but not about employability. The variation of
literacy practices between the respective departments in each organisation resembles the
complex feature of the workplace scenario. This will probably impose various
expectations on potential employees as well. Scheeres (2007) argues that the
proliferation of new skills and learning roles and values at the workplace also enhance
the varying and increasing demands on potential employees. Perhaps, this could be the
reason why graduates are not capable of applying their knowledge to the work
environment (Sirat et al., 2004).
The findings also reveal that different discourses impose different literacy
demands. In terms of the academic discourses, each field of knowledge has its own
subject specialist discourse which is used to construct knowledge in that particular field.
Students therefore have to learn the subject specialist discourse in order to read the texts
and to write their own. For example, Mechanical Engineering students might read, write
and speak about things in their field quite differently from the ways in which students in
other Engineering disciplines might speak about some of the same phenomena, because
they applied differently in constructing knowledge in each of their fields. When
graduates go into the workplace, they are expected to bring with them the generalised
academic discourse, their subject specialist discourse and all of the discourses and
literacies that the employers want so that they will become efficient workers. These
sorts of literacies might include conversational English, English for Specific Purposes
(ESP) as well as being able to adapt to the house style for communications, such as
writing letters and memos and report writing. These are what constitute in the real
literacies in the ESL environments of Malaysia. These also suggest that the current
provisions for English language learning in Malaysia especially at the tertiary level are
245
not adequate to develop the skills and competencies required either for their academic
studies or for future employment.
According to Zamel and Spack (2006, p.147), “Language and literacy practices
are not static but rather are embedded in content and tied to specific contexts”. This
denotes that the literacy practices of a community are vastly influenced by the social
and cultural goals and practices in which it is embedded (Street, 1995; Barton &
Hamilton, 2000; Heath & Street, 2008). Further, Heath (1983, p.11), in highlighting the
fact that two communities located only a few miles apart can practice “different social
legacies and ways of behaving”, suggests that the group of people and their
surroundings contribute significantly to the way in which literacy practices characterise
a community. The present study illustrates this phenomenon across the academic and
workplace communities in the context of university training of Engineering students.
6.11 Summary and Conclusion
This chapter has presented and discussed the findings of the present study. The
key findings underline the complexities of the students‟ English language academic
literacies constituting a rich blend of multiple literacy practices, encapsulating a variety
of academic discourses as well as choices of language use to serve a wide range of
learning purposes at the tertiary level. Concurrently, the findings also depict the
students‟ technical adversities with English and their pessimistic outlook on their
marginal academic literacy practices and competencies in English. Interestingly, the
findings point out that English is not perceived as a second language by the researched
students in the context of the present study. The influence of social environments
embracing school education, the university, social contact and domestic milieu that
246
constructed and shaped the students‟ existing English language literacy practices and
competencies emerged in the findings have considerably been discussed in this chapter.
More importantly, the discussion on the students‟ existing English literacy
competencies and prerequisites set by the employers demonstrate a significant disparity
between them. The following chapter in concluding the thesis, addresses some of the
implications emerging from the discussion of the findings.
247
Chapter Seven
Conclusion
7.1 Introduction
This chapter concludes the thesis in three main sections. It begins by providing
an overview of the study to outline the aims, design, key findings and parameters of the
research. Next, the chapter presents a discussion of the original contributions this study
makes to the extant knowledge on English language academic literacies. This chapter
ends with the implications of the findings for theory, practice and future research that
may be of interest to academic researchers, policymakers and practitioners.
7.2 Overview of the study
The key concern of this study was to develop substantial understandings of
Malaysian undergraduate students‟ English language literacies in their quest to meet the
demands of their tertiary education and to market themselves for recruitment. Building
on the investigation of the emic perspectives of the students‟ English language
academic literacy practices and competencies, the researcher hoped to develop insight
into the students‟ academic literacy experiences and competencies and compare them
with prospective employers‟ expectations of English language competencies at the
workplace. The impetus for this study is germane and imperative in the present context
248
of Malaysians‟ concerns about the abundant number of unemployed graduates who
failed to meet the expectations of prospective employers on account of their deficiencies
in the English language. The motivation to conduct this study was prompted by the need
to provide quality learning experiences and to produce future graduates with adequate
skills and abilities to meet the demand and standards of the local and international
workforce (Ministry of Higher Education, 2006).
7.2.1 Research aims
Intended to elicit an account of the students‟ English language academic
literacies, this study was guided by three general aims: (a) to explore the students‟
existing English language academic literacy practices and competencies at the exit point
of completing two English language courses; (b) to explore the students‟ perspectives
on their current competencies in the English language; and (c) to identify the features of
the academic and social environment that influence their English language academic
literacy practices and competencies. These general aims are complemented by a specific
aim which is to compare the students‟ existing level of practices and competencies
against the prospective employers‟ benchmarks for English language competencies.
7.2.2 Research design
Given its primary objective to generate understandings of the topic under study
through the lenses of the key stakeholders, the qualitative case study approach couched
within the interpretivist paradigm was employed for data collection and data analysis in
this study. The direct voices of the undergraduate students have been given limited
coverage and rarely been heard in previous research in Malaysia. The perspectives of
the students were collected primarily from 21 Engineering students in a Malaysian
249
public university by means of focus group interviews and supplemented by individual
interviews, non-participant classroom observations, field notes and written summary
sheet. Complementing the students‟ data was the contextual data derived from the
documentary resources gathered from the students and their teachers. The employers‟
perspectives were also collated via in-depth interviews with 13 Human Resource
managers and executives representing various organisations in Malaysia. Data gained
from the employers were supplemented by a questionnaire, official documents and field
notes to provide context for the interview data. In the tradition of qualitative research,
the data were read reiteratively and analysed rigorously through an inductive process of
identifying the recurring and salient themes.
7.2.3 Research findings
This study has been able to give informed answers to the guiding research
questions set at the beginning of this thesis. The following key findings that have
emerged from the data of this study are summarised and presented according to the
research aims.
a) To explore the students‟ existing English language academic literacy
practices and competencies at the exit point of completing two English
language courses.
The findings disclose that the students‟ English language academic literacies are
complex, embracing a combination of multiple literacy practices and a variety of
academic discourses using various language choices. The students needed to deal with
diverse academic literacy practices incorporating reading, writing, speaking and
listening practices, all of which were highly interrelated and interdependent. These
practices also entailed the exploitation of different resources to suit various discourses
250
and genres. It was discovered that the students came to tertiary education with diverse
individual, educational and social background and experiences that contributed to the
multiplicity and complexity of their English language academic literacy practices and
competencies.
Adding to the diversity of the academic literacies was the considerable
variations of language choices within the educational milieu. While the English
language was used to comply with globalisation, the Malay language was principally
upheld to conform to the university‟s regulations. Absolute discrepancies of the use of
the English and Malay language were observed in the medium of instructions, teaching
materials and academic discourses within the students‟ tertiary setting.
In exploring the students‟ academic literacy practices, this study also discovered
that the students were confronted with various difficulties in managing their literacy
practices. With regard to the reading practices, the findings depict the students‟
predicaments when dealing with unfamiliar words, understanding complicated language
structure, managing lengthy explanations and reading long texts. Although the students
did not encounter much problem in their listening practices, they were troubled by their
difficulties in dealing with their writing and speaking practices given their constraints in
applying accurate grammatical rules along with constructing and expanding sentences.
Their restricted vocabulary also contributed to these quandaries.
b) To explore the students‟ perspectives on their current competencies in the
English language.
The students generally perceived themselves as incompetent in the English
language and they had a pessimistic outlook on their marginal academic literacy
practices and competencies in the language. On the whole, English was considered as a
complicated language. The findings illustrate the students‟ technical difficulties in
251
dealing with English, which they typically attributed to their plight with linguistics
knowledge in terms of grammar and vocabulary. The students‟ deficit in the English
language also had an effect on their overall communicative competencies. They were
discontent with their meagre ability to conduct oral presentations and even to converse
and express themselves in English. The findings exhibit that the students had to devote a
considerable amount of additional time when engaging in English language discourses
given their restricted productive abilities particularly in writing and speaking practices.
Alongside the language complications that they had to endure, the students were also
confronted with the quandary to use English confidently due to the overwhelming fear
of committing errors. Taken together, the students‟ deficiencies in English have
constrained their capability to perform satisfactorily in the academic arena. This
situation brought about significant repercussions on their overall academic achievement.
(c) To identify the features of the academic and social environment that
influence the students‟ English language academic literacy practices and
competencies.
The findings contradict the position of English as a second language within the
students‟ context. It was depicted that English was largely regarded as a third or fourth
language primarily applied within the academic settings while there were limited venues
for its use outside the educational sphere. The findings also provide insights into the
social and educational factors that constructed and shaped the students‟ existing English
language literacy practices and competencies which include insubstantial foundation of
the English language taught at their primary schools as well as limited encouragement
from their teachers, peers and family members. The community of practice to support
the use of the language at their schools, home and surroundings was found to be
nominal to almost absent.
252
Essentially, the findings draw attention to the overall perceptions shared by the
participants of the inclusive responsibility of the schools for the students‟ incompetence
in English and unconstructive viewpoint on the language. A shift of outlook and values
on the importance of English was established upon the students‟ enrolment into higher
education given the significant emphasis and prevalent use of the language at tertiary
level as well as for prospective recruitment purposes upon graduation. The constructive
support offered by the academics enhanced the students‟ interest to learn the language.
Despite these affirmative circumstances, the students‟ competency in English seemed
delicate and insubstantial given the isolated use of the language solely within the
academic vicinity.
d) To compare the students‟ existing level of practices and competencies
against the prospective employers‟ benchmarks for English language
competencies.
The findings demonstrate a clear disparity between the students‟ existing
English language literacy practices and competencies with the prerequisites set by the
employers. The students‟ deficiencies in terms of linguistic knowledge, communicative
abilities and self-confidence were far from reaching the employers‟ expectations of
English language competencies. Inevitably, the students‟ current circumstances
substantiate the employers‟ general standpoints and concerns over prospective
graduates‟ shortfall in English. Although the Engineering discourses in the academic
and workplace literacy were somewhat comparable, other literacy components were
observed to be diverse. It is presumed that the multiplicity of language use and literacy
expectations at the workplace will exacerbate the students‟ existing predicaments in the
English language. The conflicting demands of tertiary education and the recruitment
expectations will also impose a challenge on the prospective graduates.
253
In summary, this study adds to the existing literature on English language
academic literacies by:
i. identifying the dimensions, patterns and scope of the students‟ academic
literacy practices and competencies in English
ii. identifying the driving forces that foster and hinder the students‟
academic literacy practices and competencies
iii. determining other influential factors and the key drivers that influence
the students‟ English language academic literacy competencies
iv. determining students‟ current English language practices and
competencies with regards to contemporary expectations of prospective
employers.
7.2.4 Research parameters
The undergraduate students‟ practices and competencies in dealing with the
English language requirements of tertiary education and the expectations of prospective
employers have been demonstrated as robust for the participants in the context of this
study. Being the outsider to the students‟ communities, the researcher attempted to
explore the students‟ English language academic literacies as much as possible by
employing several data collection techniques. Nevertheless, this study was not able to
delve into the students‟ absolute academic literacies involving other content subjects in
the faculty. Another aspect of this study which the researcher considers as an important
parameter was her inability to observe non-academic literacy practices occurring outside
the classroom boundaries. Future studies could explore the non-academic literacies to
provide broader perspectives and a more comprehensive picture of the students‟ overall
English language literacies.
The findings and conclusions of this study can only be generalised to the
population from which the sample of interest has been drawn. The notion of
„transferability‟ (Lincoln & Guba, 1985; Punch, 2005) or „proximal similarity‟ (Patton,
254
2002) may be applied to the findings with similar contexts. However, caution must be
exercised with the transfer of findings given the small number of participants in the
present study. Studies of larger number of participants in this context are deemed
necessary to consolidate the findings.
7.3 Substantial and original contribution to knowledge
The present study has yielded findings that make an original contribution to both
the theory and practices of English language literacies. Firstly, it adds to the broader
view of academic literacies by unveiling the complexities of English language academic
literacy practices embedded in a higher learning institution situated in a multilingual
context. This study offers originality by documenting the Engineering students‟ current
academic practices, scrutinizing their English language practices and competencies as
well as their predicaments with the language. This study has uncovered some implicit
aspects that are unique to the context of this study of engineering students‟ academic
literacy practices and competencies and which shed light on the students‟ perceived
crisis with the English language literacy, in particular, in terms of linguistic and
communicative competence as well as low self-confidence in using the language at the
Malaysian public university. This study is also significant in that it explicates the social
influential aspects contributing to the students‟ current English language academic
literacy competencies. Such aspects include the school as the dominant factor alongside
other influential entities in the students‟ community. Therefore, in arriving at an
understanding of the concepts and practices of English language academic literacies of
undergraduate students, this study confirms the notion that literacy is influenced by the
social and cultural practices in which it is embedded.
This study has been concerned with a wider institutional approach to acquire
insights and conceptual elaboration from an analytical induction of the students‟
255
academic literacies with regards to employability. Therefore, the main purpose has been
to move away from a skills-based model to consider the complexities of English
language literacy practices and competencies that are taking place in tertiary education
and the workplace scenario. Whilst not representing a sample from which
generalisations can be drawn regarding the English language academic literacies of the
entire higher education in Malaysia or even specifically in the university, this case study
points to important theoretical questions and connections that might not otherwise be
raised. These constitute the complexity and multiplicity of literacy practices and
languages that took place within a multilingual context.
Secondly, the present study contributes to the body of knowledge pertaining to
English language literacies by providing a comprehensive account of the English
language academic literacies of undergraduate students with regards to employability in
a public higher learning institution in Malaysia. An extensive search of research
literature in the country has failed to identify any such type of study. There has been a
plethora of literature, research and academic attention paid to English language
literacies at the primary and secondary levels. However, very few studies have focused
exclusively on academic literacy practices at tertiary level. In addition, the current issue
of unemployment of Malaysian graduates due to their lack of proficiency in English is
indeed a major concern of the country. However, it is observed that no attempt has been
made so far to explore the students‟ predicaments with the language as does this
particular study. Although there are some related studies concerning the employability
matter which involve employers‟ expectations of potential graduates, students‟
perceptions of employer expectations and workplace literacy (as discussed in the
literature review chapter), towards this end, there is little research that has investigated
English language literacy of students at higher education institutions, which is the major
contributing factor to the employability dilemmas in Malaysia.
256
Thirdly, previous studies on employability and employers‟ expectations of
graduates‟ skills have mainly employed a quantitative approach. The present study
contributes to the body of knowledge by employing a qualitative approach to
investigating the research problem. This provides the opportunity to consider the
different backgrounds of the students as well as their diverse language competencies
and practices. The focus of this study relates to the gaps between English language
literacy outcomes at the higher learning institutions and language and literacy
competencies required for employment. This is an area in which little research has been
done and the analysis in this study makes a contribution to this area of research. The
findings from this study provide an original contribution to the knowledge based on this
field of educational investigation. More importantly, the comparison of the findings of
the students‟ existing English language academic literacy competencies with the
expectations of prospective employers indicates a clear mismatch. This contributes to
existing knowledge base and the findings of the present study serve as one contribution
to policy makers, educators and researchers alike interested in finding the solutions to
the graduates‟ unemployment issues.
7.4 Implications
The findings of this study have implications for future research, policy and
university practices.
7.4.1 Implications for future research
This study contributes new knowledge and new dimensions to the understanding
of university students‟ overall predicaments with regard to English language literacies
that might jeopardise their chances for recruitment. To this end, research on tertiary
students‟ English language academic literacies in Malaysia is still scarce and there are
257
yet broad opportunities for further research. This study provides a basis for such
research agendas through its in-depth study of English language academic literacies for
employability among a group of Engineering students in one particular higher learning
institution in Malaysia. This study is an aperture for other researchers interested in
delving into the topic further with other groups of students in other educational settings.
Similar studies to the one reported here need to be carried out on other disciplines to
determine the patterns of academic literacies practiced by other undergraduate students
in similar institutions, particularly with the same level of English proficiency, to further
confirm or disconfirm conclusions made in this study.
Application of the qualitative case study approach to study graduating students
in other higher learning institutions would complement the knowledge generated from
this study. In particular, multiple case studies might delve deeper into the differences
and specific characteristics of English language academic literacy practices and
competencies exercised by each of the student cohort, as initiated by this study. Possible
research designs with extended empirical examination might include larger numbers of
participants within the total university populations.
Given the unique multicultural and multilingual student cohorts in Malaysia, it
would be valuable to conduct a comparative study to consider the similarities and
differences between diverse undergraduate students at various tertiary institutions to add
a comparative dimension to this study.
7.4.2 Implications for policy and practice
This study contributes previously unexplored insights into the concerns and
experiences of undergraduate students in dealing with the requirements of English
language literacies at tertiary education and, consequently, in meeting the expectations
258
of potential employers after graduation. It suggests that English language literacy
learning is complex and highly contextualised particularly in the multilingual context of
education in Malaysia. This points to the requirements of the policy makers and
educators alike to understand the process students have to undergo in order to acquire
knowledge in an additional language, specifically the English language. English
language literacies learning and teaching at every level of the educational system must
take into consideration learners‟ diverse cultural and linguistic backgrounds. In fact,
academic institutions need to find ways to be more responsive and sensitive to the
diversity of students in order to teach students in meaningful ways.
This study confirms the crucial role of meaningful situated language use in the
construction of English language literacy learning opportunities for language learners.
In particular, this study recognises a strong imperative for the acquisition and practice of
English to take place particularly at the initial stage of schooling. This signifies the
significant role of the elementary and primary schools to build and develop children‟s
constructive knowledge, attitude and confidence in English in every sense of the word.
Schools hold a key responsible to promote the importance of English in the current
global age. Indeed, promoting English should not be considered as jeopardising the
status of the Malay language as the national and official language in the country, as has
been suggested by Lee (2011). In addition, Her Royal Highness Raja Zarith Sofiah
asserted that introducing English-based subjects in schools should not be regarded as
eroding the patriotism and making the population less nationalistic. According to her;
Fluency in English and a strong command of it is necessary in the 21st
century. We don‟t have to fear the English language. Studying English as
a language won‟t change us from being Malaysians to being pseudo-
English or pseudo-American. It has nothing to do with being pro-English
or pro-British, or with glorifying our colonial past. It has nothing to do
with us being any less nationalistic or patriotic. (Letchumanan, 2011)
259
As far as government policy is concerned, English is viewed as vital for the
nation‟s growth and aspiration to achieve the policy Vision 2020 of becoming a
developed country. This study depicts that the changes of language policy in the
educational system have brought about a significant impact on the students‟ proficiency
in English. This foregrounds the need for a standard and realistic language policy
across all curriculums to produce competent learners. Given the dominant role of
English as a means for understanding and constructing knowledge, the mastery of the
language among students of all ages is necessary as this will also enhance their
employment prospects. In this competitive world, as knowledge and skills continue to
multiply, every student has to make an attempt to master the English language to
achieve academic success and to develop adequate literacy in the workplace of the
future.
As a result of the growing importance of English and the government‟s open
support for the language, universities have had to reorient their perspectives on the use
of English on campus. The extensive use of English needs to be emphasised across the
entire university community. As long as English is just a subject in the university
curriculum with limited opportunities for its use in the academic context, it will be
difficult for students to achieve mastery of the language. The dimensions of the English
language challenges in higher education should therefore include extensive effort to
improve graduates‟ existing language realities to a higher standard in order to fulfill the
requirements of employment.
According to Malaysian Minister of Higher Education (2007),
Malaysia‟s higher education is to be revamped to produce graduates of
higher quality to meet the country‟s need for better human capital and
competitive edge in facing the challenges of globalisation.
260
This gives the indication that the universities have to reconsider radically the education
and training needs of their undergraduates. In fact, universities must understand the
needs of their students, and provide courses that meet these needs. This points to a need
to design interactive approaches of language learning within the local contexts which
entail oral and written practices to enhance students‟ fluency and accuracy. English
language learning at the tertiary level should deviate from the emphasis on grammar to a
communicative language approach that provides more platforms for students to develop
their communicative abilities through classroom exchanges and assignments that
promote the acquisition of English. It is vital to provide additional and multiple English
language opportunities and exposure in the university environment. In light of the
current expectations of integrative skills and English language competencies in the 21st
century workplace, the university curriculum needs to be revised in order to address the
needs of the contemporary workplace. Graduating students need to be trained
sufficiently and to be given more opportunities in using English language in preparation
for language needs for the workplace and the soft skills needed by the prospective
employers. Failure to address these dimensions will lead to producing graduates with
low quality, thus increasing the nations‟ burden of handling the issue of unemployment.
This study identifies the mismatch between the employers‟ expectations and the
research students‟ competency in English. It implies that if the Malaysian government
and the universities want to fix the problem of unemployed graduates, there is a need to
investigate the students‟ problems with English from the outset of their tertiary studies.
The universities should look at these findings seriously and come up with plans to
improve their programmes and services, particularly with respect to the balance between
theory and practice and to match educational contents to industrial needs and English
language competencies. Furthermore, the university curriculum needs to be revised
from time to time to establish and develop links between the universities and the
261
industries. This is crucial as the workplace has always experienced unexpected changes
pertaining to knowledge and technology. The universities must take cognisance of the
need to constantly upgrade, improve and equip future graduates with the necessary
employability skills needed in the workplace so that they will be well prepared and well
competent to meet the demands of future local and global workforce.
7.5 Conclusion
This study is timely and strategic in terms of Malaysia‟s serious
unemployability struggles of its local graduates, attributed partly to their poor language
and communication competencies in English. This study provides a detailed description
and theoretical explanations of the English language academic literacy practices and
competencies of undergraduate students in managing the requirements of tertiary
education and the expectations of prospective employers. The findings provide avenues
for further investigation, verification and improvement of students‟ English language
literacies and employability. More importantly, the findings of this study call for a
situated response in policy, research and practice that addresses language questions in
knowledge and cultural production from the perspectives of the students and
educationists at the ground level.
262
Bibliography
Abdul Kareem, S., & Othman, M. (2007). Unemployed ICT graduates: Fact or fallacy?
Paper presented at the Seminar on Higher Education and Graduate
Employability: New Directions, Trends and Challenges, Bangi.
Abdul Rahman, R. (2005). Learning English from learners' perspectives. In Kertas
Kerja Seminar Penyelidikan Pendidikan Kebangsaan kexii 2005 (pp. 15-24).
Putrajaya: Kementerian Pelajaran Malaysia.
Abdul Rashid, R. (2005). Beyond the syllabus: Reveals the secret towards improving
the English language among the sixth formers. In Kertas Kerja Seminar
Penyelidikan Pendidikan Kebangsaan kexii 2005 (pp. 257-266). Putrajaya:
Kementerian Pelajaran Malaysia.
Abdul Razak, N., Azman, H., Abd Aziz, M.S., Wong, F. F., & Yaacob, A. (2006).
Malaysian youth and their employability: Feedback from government linked
companies. Paper presented at the 5th Language for Specific Purposes
International Seminar LSP: Exploring New Frontiers, Johor Bahru.
Abdul Razak, N., Azman, H., Abd Aziz, M. S., Wong, F. F., & Yaacob, A. (2007).
Developing an exit test (Malaysian English competency test – MECT) for
university graduates. Selangor: Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.
Altbach, P. G. (2007). Tradition and transition: The international imperative of higher
education. Rotterdam: Centre for International Higher Education, Boston
College and Sense Publishers.
Andrade, M. S. (2009). Increasing accountability: Faculty perspectives on the English
language competence of nonnative English speakers. Journal of Studies in
International Education, 20(10), 1-19.
Andrews, J., & Higson, H. (2008). Graduate employability, 'Soft skills' versus 'Hard'
business knowledge: A European study. Higher Education in Europe, 33(4),
411-422.
Angelova, M., & Rianzantseva, A. (1999). "If you don't tell me, how can I know?" A
case study of four international students learning to write in the US way. Written
Communication, 16(4), 491-525.
Aruna, P. (2011, September 19). Potential employers see better grasp of English, but
youths lack confidence, The Star Online. Retrieved from http://thestar.com.my
263
Atan, H. (2007, 23 January). English proficiency still low at local varsities, New Straits
Times. Retrieved from http://www.emedia.com.my.
Awaluddin, S. (1987). The use of tenses in the written English of the Secondary Three
students in Malaysia. Singapore: SEAMEO Regional Language Center.
Awang, S., Maros, M., & Ibrahim, N. (2011). Revisiting communicative strategies: Use
and impact on Malaysian schools. Paper presented at the Solls.Intec 2011
Language, culture and literacy: Engaging diversity in challenging times, Bangi.
Azman, H. (1999). Multilingual literacies in rural Malaysia : National goals and local
practices. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The University of Western
Australia, Perth.
Azman, H. (2004). Global English and English literacy education in Malaysia. In P. Lee
& H. Azman (Eds.), Global English and primary schools: Challenges for
elementary education (pp. 17-29). Melbourne: CAE Press.
Azman, H. (2006). English literacy education in rural Malaysia. In S. Nair-Venugopal,
K. Salehuddin, S. Pillai & V. Sriadulpan (Eds.), Writing the past into the
present: Reflections of 35 years of scholarship in language and literary studies
(pp. 272-278). Bangi: Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.
Bardan, H. S. (2007). Graduate employability, issues and challenges - Facing the
realities of the working world. Paper presented at the Seminar on Higher
Education and Graduate Employability: New Directions, Trends and Challenges,
Bangi.
Barton, D. (1994). Literacy: An introduction to the ecology of written language.
Oxford: Blackwell publishers.
Barton, D. (2009). Understanding textual practices in a changing world. In M. Baynham
& M. Prinsloo (Eds.), The future of literacy studies (pp. 38-53). London:
Palgrave Macmillan.
Barton, D., & Hamilton, M. (1998). Local literacies: Reading and writing in one
community. London: Longman.
Barton, D., & Hamilton, M. (2000). Literacy practices. In D. Barton, M. Hamilton & R.
Ivanic (Eds.), Situated literacies: Reading and writing in context (pp. 7-15).
London: Routledge.
Barton, D., Hamilton, M., & Ivanic, R. (2000). Introduction: Exploring situated
literacies. In D. Barton, M. Hamilton & R. Ivanic (Eds.), Situated literacies:
Reading and writing in context (pp. 1-6). London: Routledge.
Baynham, M. (1995). Literacy practices investigating literacy in social contexts. New
York: Longman Group.
264
Baynham, M., & Prinsloo, M. (2009). Introduction: The future of literacy studies. In M.
Baynham & M. Prinsloo (Eds.), The future of literacy studies (pp. 1-18).
London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Bazeley, P., & Richards, L. (2003). The Nvivo Qualitative project book. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Belcher, D., & Connor, U. (Eds.). (2001). Reflections on multiliterate lives. UK:
Multilingual Matters.
Bell, J. S. (2000). Literacy challenges for language learners in job-training programs.
Canadian Modern Language Review, 57(1), 173-200.
Bernhardt, S. A., & Farmer, B. W. (1998). Work in transition: Trends and implications.
In M. S. Garay & S.A. Bernhardt (Eds.), Expanding literacies: English teaching
and the new workplace (pp. 55-96). New York: State University of New York
Press.
Bhattacharyya, E., Sivapalan, S., & Idrus, H. (2007). Students‟ perceptions of employer
expectations of professional technical oral communication skills. In A. Pandian
& M. Kell (Eds.), Literacy: Diverse perspectives and pointers for practice (pp.
283-303). Serdang: Universiti Putra Malaysia Press.
Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2007). Qualitative research for education: An
introduction to theories and methods (5th
ed.). Boston: Pearson Education.
Bosworth, B. (2007). Adults with basic and below literacy levels: Findings from NAAL
and implications for practice. Washington DC: National Institute for Literacy.
Bowers-Brown, T., & Harvey, L. (2004). Are there too many graduates in the UK?
Industry and Higher Education, 12, 243-254.
Braine, G. (2002). Academic literacy and the nonnative speaker graduate student.
Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 1(1), 59-68.
Brock, C. H. (2007). Exploring an English language learner's literacy learning
opportunities: A collaborative case study analysis. Urban Education, 42(5), 470-
501.
Broeder, P., Extra, G., & Maartens, J. (1998). Durban language survey. In G. Extra & J.
Maarteens (Eds.), Multilingualism in a multilingual context: Case studies on
South Africa and Western Europe (pp. 121-138). Tilburg: Tilburg University
Press.
Brumfit, C. (1984). Communicative methodology in language teaching: The roles of
fluency and accuracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bruna, K. R., Vann, R., & Escudero, M. P. (2007). What's language got to do with it?:
A case study of academic language instruction in a high-school "English Learner
Science" class. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 6, 36-54.
Byrne, D. (1991). Teaching oral English. England: Longman.
265
Casanave, C. P. (1998). Transitions: The balancing act of bilingual academics. Journal
of Second Language Writing, 7(2), 175-203.
Casanave, C. P. (2002). Writing games: Multicultural case studies of academic literacy
practices in higher education. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Celce-Murcia, M. (1991). Grammar pedagogy in second and foreign language teaching.
TESOL Quarterly, 25, 459-480.
Chandrasegaran, A. (1981). Problems of learning English as a second language: An
investigation of factors affecting the learning of ESL in Malaysia. Singapore:
SEAMEO Regional Language Centre.
Chapman, K. (2007, January 23). Varsity students do badly in MUET, The Star Online.
Retrieved from http://www.thestaronline.com.my.
Chen, R., & Hird, B. (2006). Codeswitching in EFL group work in China. Language
Culture and Curriculum, 19(2), 208-219.
Choy, S. C., & Troudi, S. (2006). An investigation into the changes in perceptions and
attitudes towards learning English in a Malaysian college. International Journal
of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 18(2), 120-130. Cope, B., & Kalantzis, M. (2000). Multiliteracies: Literacy learning and design of
social futures. London: Routledge.
Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five
approaches (3rd
ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Creswell, J. W. (2008). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating
quantitative and qualitative research (3rd
ed.). New Jersey: Pearson Education.
Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative and quantitative and mixed
methods approaches (3rd
ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Crotty, M. (1998). The foundations of social research: Meaning and perspective in the
research process. London: Sage.
Crystal, D. (1997). The greening of linguistics. Education Australia, 37, 7-9.
Cummins, J. (1980). The cross-lingual dimensions of language proficiency:
implications for bilingual education and the optimal age issue. TESOL
Quarterly, 14, 175-187.
Currie, P., & Cray, E. (2004). ESL literacy: language practice or social practice?
Journal of Second Language Writing, 13(2), 111-132.
Curry, M. J. (2004). UCLA community college review: Academic literacy for English
language learners. Community College Review, 32(2), 51-68.
Davies, A. (2003). The native speaker: Myth and reality. United Kingdom: Multilingual
Matters Ltd.
266
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). (2008). Collecting and interpreting qualitative
materials (3rd
ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Devers, C. (2007). Literacy in the information age. Unpublished interview. University
of Illinois.
Dong, Y. (1996). Learning how to use citations for knowledge transformation: Non-
native doctoral students‟ dissertation writing in science. Research in the
Teaching of English, 30, 428-457.
Duff, P. A. (2008). Case study research in applied linguistics. New York: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.
Duff, P. A., Wong, P., & Early, M. (2002). Learning language for work and life: The
linguistic socialization of immigrant Canadians seeking careers in healthcare.
The Modern Language Journal, 86(3), 397-422.
Enright, K. A. (2010). Academic literacies and adolescent learners: English for subject-
matter secondary classrooms. TESOL Quarterly, 4, 804-810.
Esterberg, K. G. (2002). Qualitative methods in social research. Boston: The McGraw-
Hill Companies.
Evans, S., & Green, C. (2007). Why EAP is necessary: A survey of Hong Kong tertiary
students. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 6(1), 3-17.
Ferenz, O. (2005). EFL writers‟ social networks: Impact on advanced academic literacy
development. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 4(4), 339-351.
Fisher, N. T., & Schneider, L. C. (2007). Literacy education and the workforce:
Bridging a critical gap. Journal of Jewish Communal Service, 82(3), 210-215.
Flick, U. (2002). An introduction to qualitative research (2nd
ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage Publications.
Forrier, A., & Sels, L. (2003). The concept of employability: A complex mosaic.
International Journal of Human Resources Development and Management, 3(2),
102-124.
Gao, C. Z. (2001). Second language learning and the teaching of grammar. Retrieved
from http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3673/is_2_122/ai_n28888768/
Garay, M. S. (1998). Toward a working English for twenty-first-century schools and
colleges. In M. S. Garay & S. A. Bernhardt (Eds.), Expanding literacies: English
teaching and the new workplace (pp. 21-53). New York: State University of
New York Press.
Gaudart, H. (1987). English language teaching in Malaysia: A historical account. The
English Teacher, 16, 17-36.
Gee, J. P. (1996). Social linguistics and literacies: Ideology in discourses (2nd ed.).
London: Taylor & Francis.
267
Gee, J. P. (2000). The New Literacy Studies: from 'socially situated' to the work of the
social. In D. Barton, M. Hamilton & R. Ivanic (Eds.), Situated literacies:
Reading and writing in context (pp. 180-196). London: Routledge.
Gee, J. P., Hull, G., & Lankshear, C. (1996). The new work order: Behind the language
of the new capitalism. Boulder: Westview.
Gill, S. K. (2002). International communication: English language challenges for
Malaysia. Serdang: Universiti Putra Malaysia Press.
Gilliver-Brown, K., & Johnson, E. M. (2009). Academic literacy development: A
multiple perspectives approach to blended learning. Paper presented at the
Proceeding ascilite, Auckland.
Gosden, H. (1996). Verbal reports of Japanese novices‟ research writing practices in
English. Journal of Second Language Writing, 5, 109-128.
Grillo, R. (1989). Dominant languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Habib, A. R. (2007). Quality of programmes and services offered by public and private
universities as perceived by recent graduates. Paper presented at the Seminar on
Higher Education and Graduate Employability: New Directions, Trends and
Challenges, Bangi.
Hacker, E., & Yankwitt, I. (1997). Education, job skills, or workfare: The crisis facing
adult literacy education today. Social text, (51), 109-117.
Halai, N. (2007). Making use of bilingual interview data: Some experiences from the
field. The Qualitative Report, 12(3), 344-355.
Harvey, L. (1999). Employability: Developing the relationship between higher
education and employment. Paper presented at the Fifth Quality in Higher
Education 24-Hour Seminar, Warwick University.
Harvey, L., Moon, S., Geall, V., & Bower, R. (1997). Graduates' work. Birmingham:
Centre for Research into Quality.
Hashim, R. (2004). Education dualism in Malaysia: Implications for theory and
practice (2nd ed.). Kuala Lumpur: The Other Press.
Hassan, F., & Selamat, N. F. (2002). Why aren't students proficient in ESL: The
teachers' perspective. Retrieved from www.melta.org.my/ET/2002/wp10.htm
Heath, S. B. (1983). Ways with words: Language, life, and work in communities and
classrooms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Heath, S. B. (1985). Literacy or literate skills?: Considerations for ESL/EFL learners. In
P. Larson, E. Judd & D. Messerschmidt (Eds.), On TESOL '84 (pp. 15-28).
Washington DC: TESOL.
268
Heath, S. B., & Mangiola, L. (1991). Children of promise: Literate activity in
linguistically and culturally diverse classroom. Washington DC: National
Education Association.
Heath, S. B., & Street, B. V. (2008). On Ethnography: Approaches to language and
literacy research. New York: Teachers College Press.
. Hillage, J., & Pollard, E. (1998). Employability: developing a framework for policy
analysis. Institute for Employment Studies, London: Department for Education
and Employment.
Hinkel, E. (1998). Grammar teaching: Weighting fluency and accuracy. TESOL
Matters, 8(6), 18-32.
Hirst, E., Henderson, R., Allan, M., Bode, J., & Kocatepe, M. (2004). Repositioning
academic literacy: Charting the emergence of a community of practice.
Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 27(1), 66-80.
Hyland, K., & Hamp-Lyons, L. (2002). EAP: Issues and directions. Journal of English
for Academic Purposes, 1, 1-12.
Ismail, R. (2008). Factors affecting less proficient ESL learners' use of strategies for
language and content area learning. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation).
Universiti Putra Malaysia, Selangor.
Ivanic, R. (1998). Writing and identity: The discoursal construction of identity in
academic writing. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Jacobs, C. (2005). On being an insider on the outside: New spaces for integrating
academic literacies. Teaching in Higher Education, 10(4), 475-487.
Johns, A. (1981). Necessary English: A faculty survey. TESOL Quarterly, 15, 51-57.
Johns, A. M. (1997). Text, role, and context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Juhdi, N., Jauhariah, A., & Shaharudin. (2007). Study on employability skills of
university graduates. The Business Wallpaper, 2(1), 1-6.
Karlsson, A-M. (2009). Positioned by reading and writing: Literacy practices, roles and
genres in common occupations. Written Communication, 26(1), 53-76.
Kaur, N. (2006). Non-autonomy and low-English proficiency among Malaysian
students: Insight from multiple perspectives. In K. Ariffin, M. R. Ismail, N. K.
Leng & R. A. Aziz (Eds.), English in the Malaysian Context (pp. 21-33). Shah
Alam: University Publication Centre.
Kaur, S., & Thiyagarajah, R. (1999). The English reading habits of ELLS students in
University Science Malaysia. Paper presented at the Sixth International Literacy
and Education Research Network Conference on Learning, Penang.
Kaur, S., Sirat, M., & Azman, N. (2008). The scenario of globalisation and
internationalisation of higher education in Malaysia. In S. Kaur, M. Sirat & N.
269
Azman (Eds.), Globalisation and internationalisation of higher education in
Malaysia (pp. 3-21). Pulau Pinang: Penerbit Universiti Sains Malaysia.
Kern, R. (2000). Literacy and language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kitzinger, J. (1995). Qualitative research: Introducing focus groups. BMJ, (311),
299-302.
Knight, P. T., & Yorke, M. (2003). Employability and good learning in higher
education. Teaching in Higher Education, 8(1), 1-16.
Kok, E. T., Mohamed, A. R., & Kim, G. S. (2009). Improving school English in
Malaysia through participation in online threaded discussion groups. Asian EFL
Journal, 11(2), 147-162.
Koo, Y. L. (2001). Exploring the view of reading as a social practice. In A. A. Idris, M.
Maros & C. K. Quah (Eds.), Writings in applied linguistics (pp. 15-27). Bangi:
Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.
Koo, Y. L. (2008). Internationalising academic literacy practices in English as a lingua
franca for teaching and learning in Malaysia higher education: Practices and
policy. In S. Kaur, M. Sirat & N. Azman (Eds.), Globalisation and
internationalisation of higher education in Malaysia (pp. 51-76). Pulau Pinang:
Penerbit Universiti Sains Malaysia.
Koo, Y. L., & Soo, H. P. L. (2007). The social construction of literacy by Malaysian
Chinese parents: Perceptions of parents toward the language and literacy
practices of two teenage children. The Reading Matrix, 7(3), 72- 87.
Koo, Y. L., Pang, V., & Mansur, F. (2008). Employer perceptions on graduate literacies
in higher education in relation to the workplace. English for Specific Purposes
World, 7(4), 1-16.
Krueger, R. A., & Casey, M. A. (2008). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied
research (4th
ed.). Thousands Oak, CA: Sage.
Kubler, B., & Forbes, P. (2004). Employability guide, English subject centre: Student
employability profile. United Kingdom: The Council for Industry and Higher
Education (CIHE) and Higher Education Academy Learning and Teaching
Support Network (LTSN).
Kubota, R., & McKay, S. (2009). Globalization and language learning in rural Japan:
The role of English in the local linguistic ecology. TESOL Quarterly, 43(4),
593-619.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lea, M. R. (2004). Academic literacies: A pedagogy for course design. Studies in
Higher Education, 29(6), 739-756.
Lea, M. R., & Street, B. V. (1998). Student writing in higher education: An academic
literacies approach. Studies in Higher Education, 23(2), 1-17.
270
Lee, F. T. (2003). Identifying essential learning skills in students' Engineering
education. Paper presented at the 26th HERDSA Annual Conference,
Christchurch.
Lee, K. S., Azman, H., & Koo, Y. L. (2010). Investigating the undergraduate experience
of assessment in higher education. GEMA Online Journal of Language Studies,
10(1), 17-33.
Lee, L. T. (2011). Learning English doesn't jeopardise role of BM, New Straits Times.
Lee, S. K. (1998). Manglish. Kuala Lumpur: Times Books International.
Lee, S. K., Lee, K. S., Ya'acob, A., & Wong, F. F. (2009). English language and its
impact on identities of multilingual Malaysian undergraduates. Paper presented
at the Solls.Intec 7th International Conference, Language and Culture: Creating
and Fostering Global Community, Putrajaya.
Leki, I. (1995). Coping strategies of ESL students in writing tasks across the
curriculum. TESOL Quarterly, 29(2), 235-260.
Leki, I. (2001). "A narrow thinking system": Non-native-English-speaking students in
group projects across the curriculum. TESOL Quarterly, 35(1), 39-67.
Leki, I. (2003). Living through college literacy: Nursing in a second language. Written
Communication, 20, 81-98.
Leki, I. (2007). Undergraduates in a second language: Challenges and complexities of
academic literacy development. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Leki, I., & Carson, J. (1994). Students' perceptions of EAP writing instruction and
writing needs across the disciplines. TESOL Quarterly, 28(1), 81-101.
Lethcumanan, J. R. (2011). A royal bashing for 'pendatang' demons. Retrieved from
http:www.klik4malaysia.com.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Ling, C. S. (2000, December 22). Will, courage needed to arrest decline in the standard
of English. News Straits Times. Retrieved from http://www.emedia.com.my
Maarof, N., Osman, K., Yamat, H., & Yunus, M. (2003). Keupayaan penguasaan
kemahiran Bahasa Inggeris dikalangan pelajar Melayu dalam arus globalisasi.
Paper presented at the Seminar Pembinaan Keupayaan Melayu dalam Arus
Globalisasi, Bangi.
Malaysian Examination Council. (1999). Malaysian university English test. Selangor:
Majlis Peperiksaan Malaysia.
Malicky, G. V., & Norman, C. A. (1994). Participation in adult literacy programs and
employment. Journal of Reading, 38(2), 122-127.
271
Maros, M., Hua, T. K., & Salehuddin, K. (2007). Interference in learning English:
Grammatical errors in English essay writing among rural Malay secondary
school students in Malaysia. e-Bangi Journal of Social Sciences and
Humanities, 2(2), 1-15.
Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (2011). Designing qualitative research (5th
ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Maybin, J. (2000). The New Literacy Studies: Context, intertextuality and discourse. In
D. Barton, M. Hamilton & R. Ivanic (Eds.), Situated literacies: Reading and
writing in context (pp. 197-209). London: Routledge.
Megat Johari, N. M. M., Abdullah, A. A. A., Osman, M. R., Sapuan, M. S., Mariun, N.,
& Jaafar, M. S. (2002). A new engineering education model for Malaysia.
International Journal of Engineering Education, 18(1), 8-16.
Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation.
Revised and expanded from qualitative research and case study applications in
education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). An expanded sourcebook: Qualitative data
analysis (2nd
ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Millar, P. (2001). The workplace English language and literacy program in Tasmania.
Literacy and Numeracy Studies, 11(1), 41-52.
Ministry of Education Malaysia. (1989). Compendium: A handbook for ELT teachers.
Ministry of Higher Education Malaysia. (2006). Report by the Committee to Study,
Review and Make Recommendations Concerning the Development of Higher
Education in Malaysia: Towards Excellence. Shah Alam: UPENA, UiTM
Ministry of Higher Education Malaysia. (2007a). National higher education action plan
2007-2010: Triggering higher education transformation. Putrajaya: Ministry of
Higher Education Malaysia.
Ministry of Higher Education Malaysia. (2007). The national higher education strategic
plan: Laying the foundation beyond 2020. Putrajaya: Ministry of Higher
Education Malaysia.
Mohamad, M. (2011). A doctor in the house: The memoirs of Tun Dr Mahathir
Mohamad. Kuala Lumpur: MPH Group Publishing.
Mohamad, M., & Mohd Nor, F. (2001). The challenges of teaching English at tertiary
level: Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia Experience. Paper presented at the
International Education Conference: Reflections, Visions and Realms of
Practice, Kuala Lumpur.
Mohd Asraf, R. & Sheikh Ahmad, I. (2003). Promoting English language development
and the reading habit among students in rural schools through the Guided
Extensive Reading program. Reading in a Foreign Language, 15(2), 13-30.
272
Mohd Radzuan, N. R., & Kaur, S. (2010). A survey of oral communication
apprehension in English among ESP learners in an Engineering course. English
for Specific Purposes World, 10(31), 1-14.
Mokhtar, A. A., Rawian, R. M., Yahaya, M. F., Abdullah, A., Mansor, M., Osman, M.
I., et al. (2010). Vocabulary knowledge of adult ESL learners. English Language
Teaching, 3(1), 71-80.
Morgan, D. L. (1998). The focus group guide book. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Morse, J. M., & Richards, L. (2002). Read me first for a user guide to qualitative
methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Muhammad, A. M. (2007). The effectiveness of an academic reading course in
facilitating tertiary students‟ comprehension of academic texts. (Unpublished
doctoral dissertation). Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Selangor.
Mustafa, Z. (2009). ESL or EFL? TESL or TEFL? Retrieved from ePrints@USM Open
access repository of USM research and publication http://eprints.usm.my/9995
Mustapha, R., & Abdullah, A. (2004). Malaysia transitions toward a knowledge-based
economy. Retrieved from
http://scholar.libvtedu/ejournals/JOTS/v30/pdf/mustapha.pdf.
Nambiar, R. M. K. (2007). Enhancing academic literacy among tertiary learners: A
Malaysian experience. 3L: The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language
Studies, 13, 1-21.
New London Group. (1996). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures.
Harvard Educational Review, 66(1), 60-92.
New Sunday Times. (2003, May 25). Language of the global economy.
Nik, A. R. (1981). The teaching of law in the Malay language - an assessment. In A. H.
Omar & N. E. M. Noor (Eds.), National language as medium of instruction (pp.
295-308). Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka.
O‟Donoghue, T. (2007). Planning your qualitative research project: An introduction to
interpretivist research in education. New York: Routledge.
Omar, A. H. (1987). Malay in its sociocultural context. Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa
dan Pustaka.
Omar, A. H. (1992). The linguistic scenery in Malaysia. Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa
dan Pustaka.
Ortmeier-Hooper, C. (2008). "English may not be my second language, but I'm not
'ESL'". College Composition and Communication, 59(3), 389-419.
Othman, M., & Krish, P. (2011). Teacher talk in the Science classrooms. In T. N. T. M.
Maasum, Z. Amir, N. M. Noor, T. C. K. Choon & F. Hashim (Eds.), Classroom
practices in ESL and EFL contexts: Insider perspectives. Serdang: Universiti
Putra Malaysia Press.
273
Oxford, R. (1990). Strategy inventory for language learning: What every teacher should
know. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
Pandian, A. (2002). English language teaching in Malaysia today. Asia Pacific Journal
of Education, 22(2), 35-52.
Pandian, A. (2007). Literacy outlook: Realities and critical encounters with English
language in Malaysia. Pulau Pinang: Penerbit Universiti Sains Malaysia.
Pandian, A. (2008). Literacy skills in higher education: A comparative study between
public and private university students. In S. Kaur, M. Sirat & N. Azman (Eds.),
Globalisation and internationalisation of higher education in Malaysia (pp.
286-320). Pulau Pinang: Penerbit Universiti Sains Malaysia.
Pandian, A., & Abd. Ghani, A. (2005). University curriculum: An evaluation on
preparing graduates for employment. Penang: National Higher Education
Research Institute.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd
ed.). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Paxton, M. (1995). Tutor responses to student writing. South African Journal of Higher
Education, 9(1), 189-198.
Pillay, H., & (1998). Issues in the teaching of English in Malaysia. Retrieved from
http://language.hyper.chubu.ac.jp/jalt/pub/tlt/98/nov/pillay.html
Pitt, K. (2000). Family literacy: A pedagogy for the future? In D. Barton, M. Hamilton
& R. Ivanic (Eds.), Situated literacies: Reading and writing in context (pp. 108-
124). London: Routledge.
Prior, P. (1991). Contextualizing writing and response in a graduate seminar. Written
Communication, 8, 267-310.
Punch, K. F. (2005). Introduction to social research: Quantitative and qualitative
approaches (2nd
ed.). Los Angeles: Sage.
Purcell-Gates, V. (2007). Complicating the complex. In V. Purcell-Gates (Ed.), Cultural
practices of literacy: Case studies of language, literacy, social practice, and
power (pp. 1-22). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Puteh, A., Dali, M. H., & Saari, A. (2004). A study of the language medium policy
implementation in Malaysian education. Sintok: Faculty of Cognitive Sciences
and Education, UUM.
Rafik-Galea, S., & Hassan, M. S. H. (2003). Bilingualism in Malaysian Corporate
Communication. Studies in Foreign Language Education, 18, 91-112.
Rafik-Galea, S., & Mohd Zain, S. Y. (2006). Communication apprehension and
language choice in communicating. In K. Ariffin, M. R. Ismail, K. L. Ngo & R.
Abdul Aziz (Eds.), English in the Malaysian Context (pp. 61-77). Shah Alam:
University Publication Centre.
274
Rajaretnam, T., & Nalliah, M. (1999). The history of English language teaching in
Malaysia. Shah Alam: Biroteks Institut Teknologi MARA.
Razali, N. (1992). ESL in Malaysia: Looking beyond the classroom. The English
Teacher, 21, 31-38.
Riazi, A. (1997). Acquiring disciplinary literacy: A social-cognitive analysis of text
production and learning among Iranian graduate students of education. Journal
of Second Language Writing, 6, 105-137.
Sarudin, I. H., Zubairi, A. M., Nordi, M. S., & Omar, M. A. (2008). The English
language proficiency of Malaysian public university students. In Enhancing the
quality of higher education through research: Shaping future policy (pp. 40-65).
Putrajaya: The Ministry of Higher Education Malaysia.
Scheeres, H. (2007). Talk and texts at work: Beyond language and literacy skills.
Literacy & Numeracy Studies, 15(2), 5-18.
Schneider, M., & Fujishima, N. (1995). When practice doesn‟t make perfect: The case
of a graduate ESL student. In D. Belcher & G. Braine (Eds.), Academic writing
in second language: Essays on research and pedagogy (pp. 3-22). New Jersey:
Ablex.
Schuetze, U. (2002). Speaking an L2: Second versus foreign language acquisition. In
Morrison, G.S., & Zsoldos, L. (Eds.), Proceedings of the North West Linguistics
Conference '02. Burnaby, BC, Canada: Simon Fraser University Linguistics
Graduate Student Association.
Schwandt, T. A. (2000). Three epistemological stances for qualitative inquiry. In N. K.
Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd
ed., pp.
189-213). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Sirat, M., Buang, A. A., Isa, A. M. M., Pandian, A., Abdullah, M. A., Ibrahim, M. D., et
al. (2004). Masalah pengangguran dikalangan siswazah. Pulau Pinang: Institut
Penyelidikan Pendidikan Tinggi Negara.
Sirat, M., Pandian, A., Muniandy, B., Sultan, F. M. M., Haroon, H. A., Azman, H., et al.
(2008). The university curriculum and the employment of graduates. In
Enhancing the quality of higher education through research: Shaping future
policy (pp. 136-159). Putrajaya: The Ministry of Higher Education Malaysia.
Spack, R. (1997). The acquisition of academic literacy in a second language: A
longitudinal case study. Written Communication, 14, 3-54.
Stake, R. E. (2005). Qualitative case studies. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.),
The Sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd
ed., pp. 443-466). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Stake, R. E. (2006). Multiple case study analysis. New York: The Guilford Press.
275
Stapa, S. H., & Abdul Majid, A. H. (2009). The use of first language in developing
ideas in second language. European Journal of Social Sciences, 7(4), 41-47.
Street, B. V. (1984). Literacy in theory and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Street, B. V. (1993). Cross-cultural approaches to literacy. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Street, B. V. (1995). Social literacies: Critical approaches to literacy in development,
ethnography and education. New York: Longman Publishing.
Street, B. V. (2009). The future of 'social literacies'. In M. Baynham & M. Prinsloo
(Eds.) The future of literacy studies (pp. 21-33). London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Subramani, S., & Kempner, K. (2002). Malaysian higher education: Captive or post-
Western? Australian Journal of Education, 46(3), 231-254.
Syed Zin, S. M. (2004). Hala tuju pengajaran dan pembelajaran Sains dan Matematik
dalam Bahasa Inggeris (PPSMI). Diges Pendidik, 4(1), 1-12.
Talif, R., & Noor, R. (2009). Connecting language needs in the workplace to the
learning of English at tertiary level. Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences &
Humanities, 17(2), 65-77.
Tan, B. L. (2005). Boosting the English language speaking skill. In Kertas Kerja
Seminar Penyelidikan Pendidikan Kebangsaan kexii 2005 (pp. 179-186).
Putrajaya: Kementerian Pelajaran Malaysia.
Tan, M., & Ong, S. L. (2011). Teaching Mathematics and Science in English in
Malaysian classroom: The impact of teacher beliefs on classroom practices and
student learning. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 10, 5-18.
Teacher Education Working Party. (2001). Literacy in teacher education: Standards for
preservice programs. Brisbane: Queensland Board of Teacher Registration.
Thang, S. M. (2003). Investigating the 'problem' of memorisation among Malaysian
English as a second language (ESL) learners. Journal e-Bangi 1(1), 1-16.
Thang, S. M. (2004). Learning English in multicultural Malaysia: Are learners
motivated? Journal of Language and Learning, 2(2).
Thang, S. M. (2011). Attitudes and motivation of Malaysian secondary students towards
learning English as a second language: A case study. 3L: The Southeast Asian
Journal of English Language Studies, 17(1), 40-54.
The New Sunday Times. (2006, October 8). Employment: Final touches.
Ting, S. H., Mahadhir, M., & Chang, S. L. (2009). Sphere of English usage and fluency
of ESL speakers. Paper presented at the Solls.Intec 7th International Conference,
Language and Culture: Creating and Fostering Global Community, Putrajaya.
276
Vogt, D. S., King, D. W., & King, L. A. (2004). Focus groups in psychological
assessment: Enhancing content validity by consulting members of the target
population. Psychological Assessment 13(3), 231-243.
Wahi, W., O'Neill, M., & Chapman, A. (2011). Investigating English language
academic literacy for employability of undergraduate students: A case in a
Malaysian public university. In A. Pandian, S. A. M. Mohamed Ismail & Toh C.
H. (Eds.), Teaching and learning in diverse contexts: Issues and approaches
(pp. 90-101). Malaysia: School of Languages, Literacies and Translation, USM.
Wenden, A., & Rubin, J. (1987). Learner strategies in language learning. New Jersey:
Prentice Hall.
Wok, S., Abdul Rahman, S., Abdul Majid, H. S., Mohd Noor, N. A., Zubairi, A. M., &
Mohd Yusof, D. (2007). On profiling the Malaysian graduates‟ employability
2006: Employed and unemployed. Paper presented at the Seminar on Higher
Education and Graduate Employability: New Directions, Trends and Challenges,
Bangi.
Wong, H. (1998). ESL programmes at tertiary level: Balancing policy, attitude and
learner realities. Paper presented at the Learners and language learning
SEAMOE Regional Language Center, Singapore.
Yaacob, A., Azman, H., Abd Razak, N., Abd Aziz, S., & Wong F.F. (2005). Nilai
kebolehpasaran belia Malaysia di sektor syarikat antarabangsa: Satu tinjauan
awal. Paper presented at the Seminar Penyelidikan Generasi Muda Realiti
Generasi Muda: Melangkah ke Hadapan, Bangi.
Yeh, C. C. (2009). Student perceptions of an EFL undergraduate‟s research writing
project. RELC Journal, 40(3), 314-332.
Yin, R. K. (2008). Case study research: Design and methods (4th
ed.). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
Yorke, M. (1999). The skills of graduates: A small enterprise perspective. In D.
O'Reilly, L. Cunningham & S. Lester (Eds.), Developing the capable
practitioner (pp. 174-183). London: Kogan Page.
Yorke, M. (2006). Employability in higher education: What it is - what it is not. York:
Higher Education Academy.
Yunus, F. (2007). Skills development in higher education and employment. Paper
presented at the Seminar on Higher Education and Graduate Employability:
New Directions, Trends and Challenges, Bangi.
Zamel, V., & Spack, R. (Eds.). (1998). Negotiating academic literacies: Teaching and
learning across languages and cultures. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates Publishers.
Zamel, V., & Spack, R. (2006). Teaching multilingual learners across the curriculum:
Beyond the ESOL classroom and back again. Journal of Basic Writing, 25(2),
126-152.
277
Zubairi, A. M., & Sarudin, I. (2009). Motivation to learn a foreign language in
Malaysia. GEMA Online Journal of language Studies, 9(2), 73-87.
Zulkefli, A. H. (2007). Isu dan strategi kearah pembangunan modal insan sektor
pengajian tinggi bertaraf dunia. Jurnal Pengurusan Awam Jabatan
Perkhidmatan Awam Malaysia, 6(1), 15-21.
278
Appendices
Appendix 1 Malaysian University English Test (MUET)
Band Description
Appendix 2 Student codes
Appendix 3 Employer codes
Appendix 4 Focus group interview
Appendix 5 Written summary
Appendix 6 Employer Questionnaire
Appendix 7 Coding of categories
Appendix 8 Example of coded transcript
Appendix 9 Information Sheet
279
Appendix 1
Malaysian University English Test (MUET)
Band Description
AGGREGATED
SCORE
BAND USER COMMAND OF
LANGUAGE
COMMUNICATIVE ABILITY UNDERSTANDING TASK
PERFORMANCE
260 – 300 6 Very good
user
Very good
command of the
language
Highly expressive, fluent, accurate and
appropriate language; hardly any
inaccuracies
Very good understanding
of language and contexts
Functions extremely
well in the language
220 – 259 5 Good user Good command of
the language
Expressive, fluent, accurate and appropriate
language but with minor inaccuracies
Good understanding of
language and contexts
Functions well in the
language
180 – 219 4 Competent
user
Satisfactory
command of the
language
Satisfactorily expressive and fluent,
appropriate language but with occasional
inaccuracies
Satisfactory understanding
of language and contexts
Functions satisfactorily
in the language
140 – 179 3 Modest user Modest command
of the language
Modestly expressive and fluent, appropriate
language but with noticeable inaccuracies
Modest understanding of
language and contexts
Able to function
modestly in the
language
100 – 139 2 Limited
user
Limited command
of the language
Lacks expressiveness, fluency and
appropriacy : inaccurate use of the language
resulting in breakdown in communication
Limited understanding of
language and contexts
Limited ability to
function in the language
Below 100 1 Extremely
limited user
Poor command of
the language
Unable to use language to express ideas:
inaccurate use of the language resulting in
frequent breakdown in communication
Little or poor
understanding of language
and contexts
Hardly able to function
in the language
Malaysian Examinations Council
280
Appendix 2
Student codes
No Student
codes
Gender Age Race Year of
study
Major MUET
1 FG1a Male 24 Chinese 3rd
Chemical Engineering Band 2
2 FG1b Male 24 Chinese 3rd
Chemical Engineering Band 2
3 FG1c Male 22 Malay 3rd
Biochemical Engineering Band 2
4 FG1d Male 22 Malay 3rd
Manufacturing Engineering Band 2
5 FG1e Male 22 Malay 3rd
Manufacturing Engineering Band 2
6 FG2a Female 23 Malay 3rd
Electrical & Electronic Engineering Band 2
7 FG2b Female 21 Malay 3rd
Microelectronics Engineering Band 2
8 FG2c Female 21 Malay 3rd
Electrical & Electronic Engineering Band 2
9 FG2d Female 21 Malay 3rd
Electrical & Electronic Engineering Band 2
10 FG2e Female 21 Malay 3rd
Architecture Band 2
11 FG2f Male 21 Malay 3rd
Chemical & Process Engineering Band 2
12 FG2g Female 21 Malay 3rd
Chemical Engineering Band 2
13 FG3a Male 22 Malay 3rd
Mechanical Engineering Band 2
14 FG3b Male 22 Malay 3rd
Mechanical Engineering Band 2
15 FG3c Male 22 Malay 3rd
Mechanical Engineering Band 2
16 FG3d Male 22 Malay 3rd
Mechanical Engineering Band 2
17 FG4a Male 22 Malay 3rd
Chemical Engineering Band 2
18 FG4b Male 22 Malay 3rd
Chemical Engineering Band 2
19 FG4c Male 22 Chinese 3rd
Civil & Structural Engineering Band 2
20 FG4d Male 22 Malay 3rd
Chemical Engineering Band 2
21 FG4e Female 22 Malay 3rd
Architecture Band 2
281
Appendix 3
Employer codes
No Employer Codes Sector Type of organisation 1 E1 Private Multinational 2 E2 Public Local 3 E3 Private Local 4 E4 Public Local 5 E5 Private Local 6 E6 Private Multinational 7 E7 Public Local 8 E8 Public Local 9 E9 Private Multinational
10 E10 Private Local 11 E11 Public Local 12 E12 Private Multinational 13 E13 Private Multinational
283
282
Appendix 4
Focus group interview
Part A : Language practices
1. What language(s) do you speak well in?
2. What language(s) do you understand well in?
3. What language(s) do you read well?
4. What language(s) do you write well in?
5. Do you listen to the radio? In what language(s)?
6. Do you listen to cassettes or CDs? In what language(s)?
7. Do you watch television? In what language(s)?
8. Do you watch movies or CDs/DVDs? In what language(s)?
9. Do you surf the internet? In what language(s)?
10. Do you use text messages on mobile phone? In what language(s)?
11. What type of reading materials do you often read? In what language(s)?
12. What type of references do you choose for your assignments? In what language(s)?
13. What type of writings do you write often? In what language(s)?
14. In what language(s) do you write your assignments?
Part B : English language
1. Do you like English? Why?
2. Do you like learning English? Why?
3. What do you like most about learning English? Why?
4. What do you dislike most? Why?
5. Do you like communicating in English? Why?
6. Would you like to be a better communicator in English? Why do you want to?
7. What are your main problems in learning English in your schools?
8. Do you think English classes in schools have prepared you adequately to cope with
your present life? Why?
9. Do you think English is important in your studies at the university? In what way(s)?
10. Do you think English is important in your future work? In what way(s)?
282
283
282
11. Do you think the English courses at this university are preparing you well for your
present studies? Why?
12. Do you think the English courses at this university are preparing you well for your
future work? Why?
13. How do you think you can better prepare yourself for future work?
Part C : Foundation English course
1. What activities in the course that you like most? Why?
2. What activities in the course that you dislike most? Why?
3. What do you expect of this course?
4. Do you think this course has helped you to improve your English? Why?
5. What are the skills that you want to learn more?
6. What do you think about :
The course
Your teacher
The course materials
Your classmates
The facilities
Part D : English for Engineering course
1. What activities in the course that you like most? Why?
2. What activities in the course that you dislike most? Why?
3. What do you expect of this course?
4. Do you think this course has helped you to improve your English? Why?
5. What are the skills that you want to learn more?
6. What do you think about :
The course
Your teacher
The course materials
Your classmates
The facilities
283
Appendix 5
Written summary
1. My language proficiency in Bahasa Malaysia and the English Language for
the following skills are as follows :
a. In Bahasa Malaysia
Skills Very Good
1
Good
2
Satisfactory
3
Poor
4
Very Poor
5
Reading
Writing
Speaking
Listening
b. In English
Skills Very Good
1
Good
2
Satisfactory
3
Poor
4
Very Poor
5
Reading
Writing
Speaking
Listening
2. Do you think schooling has prepared you adequately to cope with your
present life ?
…… Yes ……. No
Why?
3. What are your main problems in learning English in your schools?
284
284
284
4. Do you think the Foundation English course has helped you to improve your
English? Why?
5. Do you think the English for Engineering course has helped you to improve your
English? Why?
6. Explain what you have achieved in the courses in terms of :
Grammar
Pronunciation
Vocabulary
Reading
Listening
Speaking
Writing
Doing presentations
Participating in discussions
Performing in front of big audience
6. What activities in the courses that you like most? Why?
7. What activities in the courses that you dislike most? Why?
285
8. What are the skills that you want to learn more but you don’t have them
in the courses?
9. What do you think about
the courses
your teachers
the course materials
your classmates
10. Do you like communicating in English ?
……Yes …… No
Why?
12. Would you like to be a better communicator in English?
…… Yes …… No
Why do you want to?
13. Is the English language courses that you are taking now very useful for
your studies?
Strongly disagree
1
Disagree
2
Neutral
3
Agree
4
Strongly agree
5
Why?
284
286
14. The English language skills are useful in my present studies.
(Rank the skills according to its importance)
1 2 3 4 5
Very important Important Neutral Not important Not important at
all
Skills Scales
a. Speaking
1 2 3 4 5
b. Writing 1 2 3 4 5
c. Reading 1 2 3 4 5
d. Listening 1 2 3 4 5
e. Grammar 1 2 3 4 5
f. Words/
Vocabulary
1 2 3 4 5
g. Pronunciation 1 2 3 4 5
15. Do you feel that the English courses you are taking now train you satisfactorily to achieve
your ambition?
Strongly disagree
1
Disagree
2
Neutral
3
Agree
4
Strongly agree
5
Why?
287
16. What skills do you need in future to help you achieve your career goals?
Reading skills
Writing skills
Listening skills
Speaking skills
Thinking skills
Others. Please state : ………………………………………………..
17. Do you think that your content courses at UKM are preparing you to communicate well in
your
a. present studies
……Yes ……No
Why?
b. future work
……Yes ……No
Why?
288
Appendix 6
Employer Questionnaire
This questionnaire is designed to help identify the English language needs and workplace
competencies of new executives at your company. Please answer each question carefully
based on your workplace realities and needs.
Instructions: Please write in the spaces provided or tick ( / ) in the relevant boxes.
Section A : Personal & company details
Name of organisation :
Address :
Participant’s position :
1. What are the services provided by your organisation?
2. What is the main language used in this organisation?
3. What are the criteria required by your organisation in recruiting new employees?
4. What is your expectation of the new employees in your organisation?
5. What do you think of the level of English competencies of applicants during the
job interview?
6. Is English language accuracy (grammar) important for new employees in your
organisation? Why?
289
7. How would you rank the importance of the following English language
abilities for a new employee in your company?
Abilities
Not very
important
Not important Important Very
important
Ability to write in English
Ability to speak in English
Ability to listen in English
Ability to read in English
Language accuracy (grammar)
Section B : Situations of English Language use
Use the scale below and tick ( / ) the relevant boxes.
NA = Not Applicable
1 = Not very important
2 = Not important
3 = Important
4 = Very important
How would you rate the importance of English in carrying out the following situations in
your company?
Listening NA 1 2 3 4
Receiving orders
Receiving instructions
Understanding others at seminars, conferences,
briefings, presentations, etc
Understanding meetings and negotiation
Understanding information from various media
Other situations (Please specify and rate)
Speaking NA 1 2 3 4
Giving orders
Giving instructions
Reporting
Speaking during discussion /meeting
Giving a presentation
Discussing work schedules and procedures
Contributing ideas and opinion to group discussion
Responding to customer enquiries face to face or on
290
the phone
Responding to complaints/problems/difficult
customers
Initiating contact, conducting, demanding
discussions on the telephone
Telephone conversations, taking messages,
answering inquiries on the telephone
Speaking in social situations (e.g. formal company
dinners)
Interacting in social situations (conversations about
current issues)
Interpreting work (simultaneous interpretation from
English to other languages and vise versa)
Seeking information from others at work
Communicating with foreign partners
Working together with foreign counterparts on the
same project
Negotiating business matters
Conducting interviews
Collecting information
Giving comments
Other situations (Please specify and rate)
Writing NA 1 2 3 4
Taking notes during briefing and instructions
Translating from English into
Malay/Mandarin/Tamil
Translating from Malay/Mandarin/Tamil into
English
Writing proposals
Writing items for newsletter
Filling in forms
Writing details of telephone messages
Writing simple instructions
Writing short descriptions on forms
Writing instructions for use, service and
maintenance instructions, transport / shipping
291
documents, etc.
Writing telegrams, telex and telefax messages
Writing memo
Writing formal business letters
Writing email messages
Writing reports
Writing minutes of meetings
Writing brochures
Writing orders
Writing analyses of data
Writing technical descriptions
Writing a summary
Writing notices and announcements
Writing company regulations
Writing standard operating procedures
Writing for the website/Internet
Other situations (Please specify and rate)
Reading NA 1 2 3 4
Reading written work instructions
Reading work schedules
Reading technical manuals
Reading financial and statiscal data/reports
Reading agenda and minutes of meetings
Reading company documents/information
Reading books and articles in one’s own field
Reading newspapers and magazines
Reading business brochures
Reading service and maintenance instructions
Reading telegrams, telex and telefax messages
Reading memo and notices
Reading formal letters
Reading email messages
Reading professional journals and professional
literature
Reading reports and agreements
Reading company newsletter
Reading formal correspondence
Reading company’s regulations
Reading technical descriptions
Reading a summary
292
Reading information related to the use of computers
Reading information on the Internet
Other situations (Please specify and rate)
Please feel free to add any other language competency and the quality that your
organisation feels important but not covered in this questionnaire.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Thank you for your cooperation.
293
Appendix 7
Coding of categories
Categories Code Topic
A - Reading practices A1
A2
A3
A4
A5
Books
Internet journals
Lecture notes
Academic magazines
References
B - Speaking practices B1
B2
B3
B4
B5
Presentation
Group discussion
Speaking activities
Confidence to speak
Less communication
C - Writing practices C1
C2
C3
C4
Assignments
Examination
Laboratory report
Thesis
D - Listening practices D1 Lecture
E - Other practices E1
E2
E3
E4
Language use
Translation
Elaboration
Calculation
F - Students’ perspectives F1
F2
F3
Importance of English
Interest in English
Perspectives on the mainstream students
G - Problems with English G1
G2
G3
G4
G5
G6
Grammar
Vocabulary
Pronunciation
Speaking
Writing
Lack of confidence
H - Deficit factors H1
H2
H3
H4
H5
H6
Environment
School
Teachers
Friends
Family
Lack of interest
I - English courses I1
I2
Foundation English
English for Engineering
294
J - University J1
J2
J3
J4
Lecturers
Friends
Classes at the faculty
Facilities
K - Preparation for
employment
K1
K2
Industrial training
Job interview
295
Appendix 8
Example of coded transcript
1 Tapi disebabkan mungkin sekolah dulu lambat catch-up, makin lama
makin malas.
(We did not manage to catch up at schools; after sometime, we were
reluctant to learn it.)
H2, H6
2 Kebanyakannya kita orang daripada kampung. Macam saya daripada
kampung, so BI tak dititik beratkan. Tapi belajar, belajar, kalau kat
bandar kalau keluar je speaking je. Kat kampung kalau speaking kena
gelak.
(Most of us come from villages, so, English was not emphasised there.
We learn English but not like those in the city who speak English
frequently. In our village, if we speak English, people will laugh at us.)
H1, H2, H4,
G4
3 Lecturer guna simple word ajar. Tapi kebanyakannya banyak pengiraan
macam one, two, three tu je. Banyak calculation.
(Lecturers use simple words when teaching. But most of the time, there
are a lot of calculations like one, two, three, that’s all. There are more of
calculations.)
J1, D1, E4
4 So have manual lab, we just copy manual tu. So pastu masa discussion
tu buat ayat sendiri, simple words.
(We have manual lab, we just copy it. When it comes to the discussion
part, we create our own words, simple words. )
C3, E1, E4
5 Thesis BM tapi rujukan-rujukan semua BI. Thesis mesti tulis BM.
(Thesis is written in Malay but all references are in English. We must
write the thesis in the Malay language)
C4, A5, E1
6 Faktor utama mungkin keyakinan diri kurang. Self –confidence.
(Perhaps, the most important factor is lack of self-confidence.)
G5
7 Sekarang ni apa-apa pun communication skill kena improve. Nak kata
nak improve Grammar memang takde masa dah buat masa sekarang.
Saya ingat apa-apa pun communication skill yang paling penting
sekarang ni.
(Whatever it is, we need to improve our communication, I think it is the
most important thing now. It is too late to improve our grammar.)
G4, G1
8 We don’t have any problem when reading when hearing [listening] but
we have problem when writing.
A1, D1, C1
296
9 Sebab takut nak berkomunikasi dengan orang yang cakap English. So
rasa tak confident nak cakap. Belum sampai confident lagi kut.
(Because we are afraid to communicate in English. We are not confident
to speak or maybe we do not have the confident just yet.)
G4, G5
10 Vocab teramat sangat kurang. Kalau ada vocab, cakap pun ok masa
present, tapi vocab takde tu yg jadi stuck tak boleh cakap tu.
(Our vocabulary is very little. If we have good vocabulary, we can say
anything in the presentation, but we do not have enough vocabulary, that
is where we are stuck.)
G2, B1
11 Saya rasa susah nak mintak kerja. Kalau pada saya BI macam ni susah,
susah sangat.
(I think it is going to be very hard for me to apply for work because of
my problems to speak in English.)
K3, G4
Source: FG3 transcript
297
Appendix 9
INFORMATION SHEET
Research title:
Investigating English language academic literacy for employability of Malaysian undergraduate
students.
Research purpose:
The current issue of unemployment of Malaysian graduates due to their lack of proficiency in
English is a major concern of the country. There is little research that has investigated English
language literacy of students at higher education institutions, which is the major contributing
factor to the employability dilemmas in Malaysia.
This study is significant because it explicates factors involved in the current academic literacy
competencies and practices of undergraduates from a Malaysian public university and compares
their existing competencies in relation to the employability expectations. The study focuses on
the gaps between English language literacy outcomes at the higher learning institutions and
language and literacy competencies required for employment. The study will develop substantial
understanding of the English language academic literacy competencies and practices of
undergraduate students and it will examine whether students’ existing level of English language
literacy competencies and practices meet the required expectations of prospective employers.
The information will provide an insight into the English language literacy at the university and it
will serve as an initial contribution to the policy makers, educators and researchers alike
interested in equivalent fields of study.
Benefits:
Benefits for students:
Students would gain awareness and better understand their own academic literacy
practice and competencies.
Students can also prepare themselves to fulfill the expected employability skills required
by the employment sectors.
Benefits for universities and staff:
The course coordinator and teachers of the Foundation English course would be able to
make necessary improvement and changes to the course, which is especially tailored to
their students’ existing competencies and practices. This will help to equip the students
with adequate skills to face the workplace challenges.
Benefits for employers:
Employers would be able to contribute their knowledge and provide information to assist
the higher education institutions in producing graduates with good qualities.
Research participants:
The main participants will be first year students who enroll in the Foundation English course at
National University of Malaysia (UKM). Teachers and the course coordinator of Foundation
English who are teaching the selected students will also be involved. Twenty employers
representing four different employment sectors in Malaysia will be chosen to provide
information about English language competencies in the workplace.
298
Research procedures:
Student volunteers will be invited to participate in:
an audio-taped focus group discussion with 4 other students (1½ - 2 hours)
completion of a written summary (10 minutes)
individual interviews (1 hour)
Teachers and course coordinator will be asked to:
participate in an audio-taped individual interview (approximate 1 hour each)
allow the researcher to conduct non-participant observation of one language lesson
(approximate 2 hours)
allow access to course booklets, lesson plans, teaching materials, assignments and results
Employers will be asked to:
complete a short questionnaire (20 minutes)
participate in an audio-taped interview (30 minutes) to facilitate the process.
Participant rights:
Participation in this research is voluntary and participants are free to withdraw from the study at
any time and for any reason, without prejudice in any way. In such cases, the research records
will be destroyed. Participant confidentiality will be respected at all times. The project
investigators will have sole access to the data collected, and it will be stored in a secure storage
facility. The results of this research may be published, but without revealing the participants’
identity. All data will be coded in order to preserve the identity and confidentiality of the
participants.
Further information about this study can be obtained from any of the following research team
members:
Associate Professor Marnie O’Neill Research Supervisor +61 8 6488 2392
Associate Professor Anne Chapman Research Supervisor +61 8 6488 2387
Wahiza Wahi Researcher +61 8 6488 2300
If you would like to take part in this research, please read and sign the attached consent form.
Thank you for your time and cooperation.
Yours sincerely,
Associate Professor Marnie O’Neill
The Human Research Ethics Committee at the University of Western Australia requires that all
participants are informed that, if they have any complaint regarding the manner, in which a
research project is conducted, it may be given to the researcher or, alternatively to the Secretary,
Human Research Ethics Committee, Registrar’s Office, University of Western Australia, 35
Stirling Highway, Crawley, WA 6009 (telephone number 6488-3703). All study participants will
be provided with a copy of the Information Sheet and Consent Form for their personal records.
299
Investigating English language academic literacy for employability of Malaysian
undergraduate students.
PARTICIPANT CONSENT FORM
I (the participant) have read the information provided and any questions I have asked have been
answered to my satisfaction. I realise that I may withdraw at any time without reason and
without prejudice during the data collection phase of the study. I understand that all information
provided is treated as strictly confidential and will not be released by the investigator. The only
exception to this principle of confidentiality is if documents are required by law. I have been
advised as to what data is being collected, what the purpose is, and what will be done with the
data upon completion of the research.
I agree to participate in selected aspects of the study. (Please tick in the relevant boxes).
Focus group audio-taped interview
Individual audio-taped interview
Completion of a written summary
Classroom observation
Collection of course documents
Completion of a questionnaire
I agree that research data gathered for the study may be published provided my name or other
identifying information is not used.
Name : ____________________________________ (print)
Signature : _________________________________
Date : _____________________________________
The Human Research Ethics Committee at the University of Western Australia requires that all
participants are informed that, if they have any complaint regarding the manner, in which a
research project is conducted, it may be given to the researcher or, alternatively to the Secretary,
Human Research Ethics Committee, Registrar’s Office, University of Western Australia, 35
Stirling Highway, Crawley, WA 6009 (telephone number 6488-3703). All study participants will
be provided with a copy of the Information Sheet and Consent Form for their personal records.
300
Investigating English language academic literacy for employability of Malaysian
undergraduate students.
TEACHER PARTICIPANT CONSENT FORM
I (the participant) have read the information provided and any questions I have asked have been
answered to my satisfaction. I agree to participate in this study, which includes individual
interviews, classroom observations, and other required course documents, realising that I may
withdraw at any time without reason and without prejudice during the data collection phase of
the study.
I understand that all information provided is treated as strictly confidential and will not be
released by the investigator. The only exception to this principle of confidentiality is if
documents are required by law. I have been advised as to what data is being collected, what the
purpose is, and what will be done with the data upon completion of the research.
I agree that research data gathered for the study may be published provided my name or other
identifying information is not used.
Name : ____________________________________
Signature : _________________________________
Date : _____________________________________
The Human Research Ethics Committee at the University of Western Australia requires that all
participants are informed that, if they have any complaint regarding the manner, in which a
research project is conducted, it may be given to the researcher or, alternatively to the Secretary,
Human Research Ethics Committee, Registrar’s Office, University of Western Australia, 35
Stirling Highway, Crawley, WA 6009 (telephone number 6488-3703). All study participants will
be provided with a copy of the Information Sheet and Consent Form for their personal records.
301
Investigating English language academic literacy for employability of Malaysian
undergraduate students.
COURSE COORDINATOR PARTICIPANT CONSENT FORM
I (the participant) have read the information provided and any questions I have asked have been
answered to my satisfaction. I agree to participate in this study, which includes individual
interviews, classroom observations, and other required course documents, realising that I may
withdraw at any time without reason and without prejudice during the data collection phase of
the study.
I understand that all information provided is treated as strictly confidential and will not be
released by the investigator. The only exception to this principle of confidentiality is if
documents are required by law. I have been advised as to what data is being collected, what the
purpose is, and what will be done with the data upon completion of the research.
I agree that research data gathered for the study may be published provided my name or other
identifying information is not used.
Name : ____________________________________
Signature : _________________________________
Date : _____________________________________
The Human Research Ethics Committee at the University of Western Australia requires that all
participants are informed that, if they have any complaint regarding the manner, in which a
research project is conducted, it may be given to the researcher or, alternatively to the Secretary,
Human Research Ethics Committee, Registrar’s Office, University of Western Australia, 35
Stirling Highway, Crawley, WA 6009 (telephone number 6488-3703). All study participants will
be provided with a copy of the Information Sheet and Consent Form for their personal records.
302
Investigating English language academic literacy for employability of Malaysian
undergraduate students.
EMPLOYER PARTICIPANT CONSENT FORM
I (the participant) have read the information provided and any questions I have asked have been
answered to my satisfaction. I agree to participate in this study, which includes questionnaires
and interviews, realising that I may withdraw at any time without reason and without prejudice
during the data collection phase of the study.
I understand that all information provided is treated as strictly confidential and will not be
released by the investigator. The only exception to this principle of confidentiality is if
documents are required by law. I have been advised as to what data is being collected, what the
purpose is, and what will be done with the data upon completion of the research.
I agree that research data gathered for the study may be published provided my name or other
identifying information is not used.
Name : ____________________________________
Signature : _________________________________
Date : _____________________________________
The Human Research Ethics Committee at the University of Western Australia requires that all
participants are informed that, if they have any complaint regarding the manner, in which a
research project is conducted, it may be given to the researcher or, alternatively to the Secretary,
Human Research Ethics Committee, Registrar’s Office, University of Western Australia, 35
Stirling Highway, Crawley, WA 6009 (telephone number 6488-3703). All study participants will
be provided with a copy of the Information Sheet and Consent Form for their personal records.
303
