Does the Malaysian English Language Syllabus Cater to the Academic Vocabulary Needs of Secondary School Students Entering Universities?

Authors

  • Amerrudin Abd. Manan Language Academy, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur Campus, Jalan Semarak, 54100, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
  • Nor Liza Ali Language Academy, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur Campus, Jalan Semarak, 54100, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
  • Sarimah Shamsudin Language Academy, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur Campus, Jalan Semarak, 54100, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.11113/jt.v65.2345

Keywords:

Academic word list, general service word list, vocabulary, secondary school students, tertiary education

Abstract

More and more Malaysian upper secondary school students are doing well in their studies and entering colleges and universities for matriculation and diploma programmes immediately after school. Besides English for General Purposes (EGP), secondary school students should also be familiarized with the 570 academic words (in the Academic Word List) that may appear frequently in academic texts. At tertiary learning institutions, academic words are essential because students have to read more specialised and complex academic texts. This research was carried out to investigate whether the Malaysian secondary school English language syllabuses cater to the academic vocabulary needs of students who enter tertiary institutions. To investigate this, the researcher put all the 1,316 words listed in the word lists (for the lower and upper secondary school syllabuses found at the end of the syllabuses’ booklets) into Range (Nation, 2005), a tool which separates words into General Service Word List (GSL) and Academic Word List (AWL). The results reveal that of the 1,316 words, only seven belong to AWL while the majority are GSL words. Although there are statements made in the syllabuses indicating that they also cater to the students’ needs for their further education, the target words specified in the word lists suggest that they are meant mainly for EGP. The students’ academic vocabulary need has apparently been neglected.

References

Abd. Manan, A. 2008. Lexical Familiarisation of Business Terms: a Case Study. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia.

Beck, I., and M. McKeown. 1991. Conditions of Vocabulary Acquisition. In Barr, R., M. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, and P. Pearson (Eds.). The Handbook of Reading Research.Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.II: 789–814.

Corson, D., 1997. The Learning and Use of Academic English Words.Language Learning. 47(4): 671–718.

Coxhead, A., 2012. A New Academic Word List. TESOL Quarterly. 34(2): 213–238.

Coxhead, A., 2011. The Academic Word List 10 Years On: Research and Teaching Implications. TESOL Quarterly. 45(2): 355–362.

Folse, K., 2004. Myths about Teaching and Learning Second Language Vocabulary: What Recent Research Says? TESL Reporter. 37(2): 1–13.

Halliday, M., A. McIntosh, and P. Strevens. 1964. The Linguistic Science and Language Teaching. London: Longman.

Harrison, C. 1980. Readability in the Classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Haynes, M. and I. Baker. 1993. American and Chinese Readers Learning from Lexical Familiarisation in English Text. In Huckin, T. (Ed.). Second Language Reading and Vocabulary Learning Norwood, NJ: Ablex.153–180.

Jordan, R. 1997. English for Academic Purposes. A Guide and Resource Book for Teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia. 2003. Huraian SukatanPelajaran Kurikulum Bersepadu SekolahMenengah, Bahasa Inggeris Tingkatan 3. http://www.moe.gov.my/bpk/sp_hsp/bi/kbsm/hsp_bi_f3.pdf.

KementerianPendidikan Malaysia. 2003. Huraian Sukatan Pelajaran Kurikulum Bersepadu Sekolah Menengah, Bahasa Inggeris Tingkatan 5. Retrieved from http://www.moe.gov.my/bpk/sp_hsp/bi/kbsm/hsp_bi_f5.pdf.

Koda, K., 1989. The Effects of Transferred Vocabulary Knowledge on the Development of L2 Reading Proficiency. Foreign Language Annals. 22(6): 529–540.

Marks, C., M. Doctorow, and M. Wittrock, 1974. Word Frequency and Reading Comprehension. Journal of Educational Research. (67): 259–262.

Miller, D., 2011. ESL Reading Textbooks vs. University Textbooks: Are We Giving Our Students the Input They may Need? Journal of English for Academic Purposes. 10(1): 32–46.

Nation, P. 2005. Range and Frequency: Programs for Windows Based PCs. http://www.victoria.ac.nz/lals/about/staff/paul-nation.

Qian, D. 1999. Assessing the Roles of Depth and Breadth of Vocabulary Knowledge in Reading Comprehension. Canadian Modern Language Review. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University of Toronto.56: 282-307.

Thomas, A. 2010. Teach Students the All-Purpose Academic Word List. http://www.cdl.org/resourcelibrary/library_browse.php?id=42&type=subject.

Townsend, D., and P. Collins, 2009. Academic Vocabulary and Middle School English Learners: an Intervention Study. Read Write. 22: 993–1019.

Turner, J., 2004. Language as Academic Purpose. Journal of English for Academic Purposes. 2(3): 95–109.

Ulijin, J., and J. Strother, 1990. The Effects of Syntactic Simplification on Reading EST Texts as L1 and L2. Journal of Research in Reading. 13: 38–54.

Downloads

Published

2013-11-15

Issue

Section

Social Sciences

How to Cite

Does the Malaysian English Language Syllabus Cater to the Academic Vocabulary Needs of Secondary School Students Entering Universities?. (2013). Jurnal Teknologi, 65(2). https://doi.org/10.11113/jt.v65.2345