Bulletin of - ipptn.usm.my · Postponement of SPM English as a Compulsory Pass Subject Policy: A...

1 National Higher Education Research Institute (IPPTN) BULLETIN

JULY 2017

Bulletin ofHIGHER EDUCATIONR E S E A R C H

Bulletin ofHIGHER EDUCATIONR E S E A R C H

CONTENTS

Participation of Indigenous Students in Higher Education: An Overview on Australia and Malaysia

Melissa Ng Lee Yen Abdullahpp. 1-3

Postponement of SPM English as a Compulsory Pass Subject Policy: A Correct Decision?

Munir Shuib, Malini Ganapathy, Sarjit Kaur & Muhammad Kamarul

Kabilan Abdullahpp. 6-9

ViewsStrategies to Overcome the Challenges Faced by International Students in Higher Education

Manjet Kaur Mehar Singh & Malini Ganapathy

pp. 10-11

Book ReviewTowards Sustainable and Inclusive Higher Education: Challenges and Strategies

Heng Wen Zhuopp. 12-13

Introduction

Education is a powerful tool in achieving better economic outcomes and it is considered one of the main strategies for addressing socioeconomic

issues faced by the indigenous people (Hunter & Schwab, 2003; Pechenkina & Anderson, 2011). In an equitable society, it is hoped that members of all groups within the society would have comparable opportunities to undertake higher education, which not only confers significant personal development and social mobility but also contributes towards greater social cohesion. There has been gradual improvement in access and participation of indigenous students in many countries (Warrior, 2012). Australia for instance, has experienced the biggest jump in indigenous higher education participation in nearly a decade and overall enrolment has reached a record high (O’Malley, 2016). This upward trend was largely attributed to strong equity policy (Willems, 2014; Universities Australia 2008), institutional strategies and support (Mahsood Shah & Widin, 2010), implementation of indigenous pathways and transition programs (University of Notre Dame, 2014; Herbert, 2010) as well as relative increase in the indigenous population and improvement of indigenous education at the school level (Centre for the Study of Higher Education, 2008). In Malaysian context, policy has also been established (e.g., the Special Entry Access Policy) by the government to increase higher education access and participation of indigenous students (Division of Student Admission, 2011). This paper aims to provide an overview on participation of indigenous students in higher education in Australia and Malaysia.

Participation of Indigenous Students in Australia

Since 1991, the Australian Government has designated aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians as one of the six equity groups that were under-represented in higher education (James, Baldwin, Coates, Krause & Mclnnis, 2004). Systematic national data collection on indigenous students at higher education had started in 1996, after the development of Equity and General Performance Indicators in Higher Education (Martin, 1994). The indicators serve as equity framework to monitor access, participation, success and retention of six designated equity groups, including indigenous students, at higher education institutions in Australia since 1996 (Coates & Krause, 2005). This implies that systematic national data collection and monitoring system on indigenous students’ at higher education in Australia has already begun more than two decades ago. The national trend analysis (Australian Insitute of Health and Welfare, 2014) revealed that there has been a continuous and steady increase in access and participation rate of indigenous students in Australia for at least a decade (2001-2011) (Figure 1). This upward trend may be linked to the implementation of equity policy and support provided to indigenous students during their transition into higher education

Participation of Indigenous Students in Higher Education: An Overview on Australia and MalaysiaMelissa Ng Lee Yen Abdullah, Aziah Ismail & Doree PrimusSchool of Educational Studies, Universiti Sains Malaysia

BULLETIN National Higher Education Research Institute (IPPTN)2

and during their course of study at the university (Universities Australia 2008; Mahsood Shah & Widin, 2010; University of Notre Dame, 2014; Herbert, 2010). In addition, the relative increase in the indigenous population and improvement on indigenous school participation might also contributed to the increase of indigenous participation in higher education (Centre for the Study of Higher Education, 2008).

In 2011, there were 10,128 indigenous students in higher education, which accounted for 1.90% of the university student population while indigenous people made up 2.5% of the Australian population in the same year. This implies that the participation of indigenous students in Australian higher education system is still underrepresented (Australian Council for Educational Research, 2012; Universities Australia, 2013). A major reason why indigenous students are underrepresented in higher education is that the rate of school retention from Year 10 to Year 12 is significantly lower for indigenous students compared to non-indigenous students (Helme & Lamb, 2011). In addition, indigenous students also have lower aspiration for higher education and lack of information about higher education opportunities (Centre for the Study of Higher Education, 2008).There was a divergence in institutional shares of indigenous enrolment, with the Group of Eight (Go8) having 0.7%, Australia Technology Network (ATN) Group, 1.2%, Innovative Research Universities (IRU), 2.2% and Regional Universities Network (RUN), 2.3% respectively (Table 1).

The Go8 Universities have relatively low enrolments would appear not to have been successful in opening up recruitment and in part their apparently better outcomes in terms of completions may reflect a relatively more conservative approach in student selection (Pechenkina & Anderson, 2011). Even though institutional characteristics may be in part responsible for differences in education outcomes of indigenous students, their completion rates are relatively lower than those of non-indigenous students across all institutions. Indigenous student retention rate for Bachelor degrees was 71.9% compared with 83.8% for non-indigenous students (Commonwealth of Australia, 2011).

Participation of Indigenous Students in Malaysia

“Orang Asli” is a generic Malay term used to describe the indigenous people of Peninsula Malaysia. The majority of the 178,197 Orang Asli population still live on rural lands, on the fringes of forests, or less commonly, in deep forest (Jabatan Kemajuan Orang Asli, 2011). Orang Asli are not ethnically homogenous; they are officially classified into three main ethno-linguistic groups, namely the Senoi, Proto-Malays and Negritos. Orang Asli have been identified as one of the most vulnerable groups in Malaysia, with a disproportionately high incidence of poverty. In the Tenth Malaysian Plan (2011-2015), the Government has demonstrated its commitment for inclusive socio-economic development by setting a target to reduce the incidence of poverty among Orang Asli from 50% to 25% by 2015 (United Nations Development Programme, 2013). In terms of education, the majority of the Orang Asli people only had formal education up to the primary level due to high dropout rate at both primary and secondary school and very few managed to further their studies to higher education (Ramle Abdullah et al., 2013).

TABLE 1 Participation Rates of Indigenous Students (%) by Grouping of Universities (2012)

Higher Education Institutions Participation Rates (%)

Group of Eight (Go8)• University of Adelaide• Australian National University • University of Melbourne• Monash University • University of New South Wales• University of Queensland• University of Sydney • University of Western Australia

0.7%

Australia Technology Network (ATN) Group• Curtin University• University of South Australia• RMIT University • University of Technology Sydney• Queensland University of Technology

1.2%

Innovative Research Universities (IRU) Group• Flinders University • Griffith University • La Trobe University • Murdoch University

2.2%

Regional Universities Network (RUN) Group• CQ University • Federation University Australia• Southern Cross University • University of New England • University of Southern Queensland • University of the Sunshine Cost

2.3%

Note: Go8 represents 8 leading research universities; ATN Group represents 5 most innovative and enterprising universities; IRU represents a group of 7 universities that share a common mode of operation and collaborate in professional development initiatives, e-learning and ICT; RUN is a network of 6 universities primarily from regional Australia, as well as campuses in the Australia capital cities and some international campuses.

FIGURE 1 Percentage of Domestic Undergraduate Indigenous (2001-2011)(Source: Australian Insitute of Health and Welfare, 2014, p. 8)


A Special Entry Access Policy (Laluan Kemasukan Khas) has been put in place by the government to increase higher education access of Orang Asli students. These students are entitled for special entry into higher education (Division of Student Admission, 2011). Table 2 shows that in 2009, there were only 75 indigenous students at the 21 public higher education institutions (HEIs) in Malaysia, which was equivalent to 0.01% of the 437,420 university student population in the same year (Ministry of Education, 2010). In view that indigenous people made up 0.63% of the Malaysian population in the same year, the participation rate of 0.01% was considered underrepresented (Jabatan Kemajuan Orang Asli, 2011; Ministry of Education, 2010). This figure is not surprising as about 50% of the Orang Asli students drop out of their studies after year six of primary school (Fatan Hamamah, 2008). Based on previous research, three main factors could have contributed to the persistently high dropout rates among Orang Asli students: (1) poor family earnings, (2) low level of academic achievement among parents and (3) parents’ occupation (Mohammad Anwaruddin Mior Sharrifuddin, 2014).

However, in the last five years, the number of Orang Asli students at higher education in Malaysia has increased significantly with the implementation of various strategies and initiatives to boost their socioeconomic development and widening access at higher education (United Nations Development Programme, 2013; Ministry of Higher Education, 2007). In 2015, there

were a total of 563 Orang Asli students enrolling at the various public HEIs in Malaysia and their participation rate has increased to 0.13%. This positive trend is in line with the first thrust of the National Higher Education Strategic Plan (2007-2010), which is to increase access and equity at higher education, particularly among the Orang Asli students (Ministry of Higher Education, 2007). Nevertheless, despite the improved participation rate, Orang Asli is still underrepresented in higher education system in Malaysia.

There is a divergence in participation of indigenous students in public HEIs in Malaysia (Table 2). In 2015, Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM) has the highest enrollment of indigenous students at both diploma (n=201) and bachelor degree (n=59) levels. In addition to UiTM, three of the Research Universities (RUs) namely Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM), n=14, Universiti Putra Malaysia (UPM), n=14 and Universiti Malaya (UM), n=12 have relatively higher enrollment of indigenous students compared to other institutions. There is, however, no participation of indigenous students recorded in teacher colleges and community colleges in 2015.

Institutional Support for Indigenous Students’ Participation

Indigenous students’ participation in higher education, either in Australia or Malaysia, required support from their institutions. According to Filkins & Doyle (2002)

TABLE 2 Number of Indigenous Students (Orang Asli) by Higher Education Institutions in 2009 and 2015

No. Public Higher Education Institutions2009 2015

Diploma Bachelor Diploma Bachelor1 Universiti Malaysia (UM) - 7 5 122 Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM) - 3 - 83 Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM) - 3 - 144 Universiti Putra Malaysia (UPM) - 1 7 145 Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM) - 1 3 66 Universiti Utara Malaysia (UUM) - 5 - 107 Universiti Malaysia Sabah (UMS) - 2 - 108 Universiti Sarawak Malaysia (UNIMAS) - 3 - 139 International Islamic University Malaysia (IIUM) - - - 410 Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris (UPSI) 1 1 38 411 Universiti Malaysia Kelantan (UMK) - - - 612 Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM) 24 9 201 5913 Universiti Sultan Zainal Abidin (UniSZA) - 1 2 714 Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia (UTHM) - 1 5 915 Universiti Teknikal Malaysia Melaka (UTeM) 1 2 6 516 Universiti Malaysia Pahang (UMP) - 1 7 817 Universiti Malaysia Terengganu (UMT) - 1 - 818 Universiti Malaysia Perlis (UniMAP) - 2 1 519 Teachers' College 6 - - -20 Polytechnic - - 86 -21 Community College - - - -

Total32 43 361 202

75 563(Source: JAKOA, 2009, 2015; Ministry of Education, 2010)


and Reason, Terenzini & Domingo (2006), as quoted by Tinto (2012), the way students appraised their institution’s supportiveness of their needs (academic, personal, or social) is a powerful predictor of the students’ competence acquisition and self-reported improvements in social and personal development. Tinto (2005, n.d.) indeed believes that those from ethnic and/or minorities groups require extra support to succeed. This is in line with Farrington, DiGregoria and Page (1999)s’ views that these groups of students require support as they were feeling scared, nervous, lost or overwhelmed when they first arrived at the university. According to Foley (1996), indigenous students’ support services are deemed important by universities in terms of bringing the students up to the desired academic level (if needed); bridging any possible ‘gaps’ in the subject content and, lastly advancing the students’ learning, writing and critique skills. In having more understanding on indigenous needs, O’Bryan and Rose (2015) have proposed a typology that demonstrates how Indigenous students perceived support and how their encounters with university support affected their academic experiences. The typology, as illustrated in Figure 2, explains indigenous students’ perception towards university support, which is influenced by a number of factors: their expectations of support; whether support was solicited by the students or not; and the manner in which support was delivered; official or informal. When receiving these supports, Indigenous students’ reactions could be identified as ‘positively valued’, ‘symbolic’ or ‘stigmatising’ (O’Bryan & Rose, 2015).

Conclusion

In summary, there are similarities and differences in participation of indigenous students in higher education between Australia and Malaysia. Even though both countries have national policies and measures in place to boost indigenous enrolment in higher education, the participation rate of indigenous students in Australia is close to 2% with over 10,128 students while in Malaysia the participation rate is only 0.13% (n= 563 students). Participation of indigenous students in higher education at Malaysia can be increased with strong equity policy at national and institutional levels which mandates the provision of academic and non-academic support for indigenous students. Literature reviews suggest that indigenous students require transition support

when entering university and further academic, social and financial support during their course of study at the university (Universities Australia 2008; Mahsood Shah & Widin, 2010; University of Notre Dame, 2014; Herbert, 2010). Institutional support is indeed a strong predictor of students’ competence acquisition and self-reported improvements in social and personal development (Tinto, 2005). The existing policy on indigenous education should be reviewed and good practices in Australia can be adopted and adapted to the Malaysian context. National data collection systems and evaluation criteria based on an Equity Performance Framework is needed to closely monitor the access and participation of indigenous students in higher education. Future research may look into the development of Equity Performance Indicators Framework for higher education in Malaysia.

Despite a notable upward trend in participation rate of indigenous students in Malaysia and Australia. These student are still underrepresented in both countries due to high dropout rates at primary and secondary levels, lower aspiration for higher education, lack of information about higher education opportunities and disadvantaged socioeconomic backgrounds. Nevertheless, analysis on participation rate and types of institutions show that there are significantly higher number of indigenous students in multi-campuses universities such as the Regional Universities Network (RUN) in Australia and UiTM in Malaysia. Case studies can be conducted to unveil the institutional policy, good practices and support that have contributed towards higher participation rate of indigenous students in this institution.

Acknowledgements

This study is supported by Short-Term Research Grant, Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM). Grant No: 304/PGURU/6313165

References

Australian Council for Educational Research. (2012). Growth in number of indigenous university students, but still underrepresented. Retrieved 25 June 2015 from www.acer.edu.au/media/article/

Australian Insitute of Health and Welfare. (2014). Towards a performance measurement framework for equity in higher education. Canberra: AIHW.

Centre for the Study of Higher Education. (2008). Participation and Equity: A review of the participation in higher eduction of people from low socioeconomic background and Indigenous people. Retrived 20 June 2015 from www.cshe.unimelb. edu.au./research/equity/docs/EquityReview

Report.pdfCoates, H., & Krause, K. (2005). Investigating ten years

of Equity Policy in Australian Higher Education. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 27(1), 35-46.

FIGURE 2 The Typology of Indigenous Support Perception (Source: O’Bryan & Rose, 2015)


Commonwealth of Australia. (2011). Review of higher education access and outcomes for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander People. Retrieved 18 June 2015 from docs.eduction.gov.au/system/files/doc/other/contextpaper0.doc

Division of Student Admission. (2011). Opportunities for higher education through UPU: Academic Session 2012/2013 [Peluang pengajian tinggi melalui UPU: Sesi Academic 2012/2013]. Accessed 15 June 2015 from www.slideshare.net/mobile/MohdNoorNoor/panduan-kemasukan-ke-opta-2012213

Farrington, S. DiGregoria, K. D. & Page, S. (1999). The things that matter: Understanding the factors that affect the participation and retention of indigenous students in the cadigal program at the Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Sydney. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the Australian Association for Research in Education, Melbourne, Australia, 29th November to 2nd December, 1999.

Foley, D 1996, ‘Perspectives on effective student support for Indigenous students in a tertiary institution’. The Australian Journal of Indigenous Education, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 53-55.

Helme, S. & Lamb, S. (2011). Closing the school completion gap for indigenous students. Canberra: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare & Melbourne, Australian Institute of Family Studies

Herbert, J. (2010). Review of Indigenous Pathway and Transition Programs. Victoria: Centre for Indigenous Studies, Charles Strurt University.

Hunter, B. H., & Schwab, R. G. (2003). Practical reconciliation and continuing disadvantage in indigenous education. The drawing Board: An Australian review of Public Affairs, 4(2): 84-98.

Jabatan Kemajuan Orang Asli AKOA. (2015). List of Orang Asli at Public Higher Eduction Institution in 2015 [Senarai Pelajar di IPTA tahun 2015]. Unpublished statistics. Kuala Lumpur: Department of Orang Asli Development (JAKOA).

James, R., Baldwin,G., Coates, H., Krause, K. & Mclnnis, C. (2004). Analysis of Equity Groups in Higher Education (1991-2002). Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia.

Mahsood Shah & Widin, J. (2010). Indigenous students’ voices: Monitoring Indigenous Student Satisfaction and Retention in a large Australian University. Journal of Institutional Research, 15(1), 28-41.

Martin, L. M. (1994). Equity and general performance indicators in higher education. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service.

Mohammad Anwaruddin Mior Sharrifuddin. (2014). Education level among natives in Malaysia. Journal of Education and Practice, 5, 32, 66-70.

Ministry of Higher Education. (MoHE). (2007). National higher education action plan 2007-2010. Triggering Higher Education Transformation. Putrajaya: Ministry of Higher Education Malaysia.

Ministry of Education. (2010). Higher education indicator 2008/2009. Putrajaya: MoHE.

O’Bryan, M. & Rose, M (2015). Indigenous Education in Australia: Policy, Participation and Praxis. UNESCO Multi-Disciplinary Journal in the Arts. Vol. 4 (1). Victoria: University of Melbourne

O’ Malley, B. (2016). Leap in Indigenous access, general enrolment hits high. Retrieved 13 May 2016 from http://www.universityworldnews.com/article.php?story=20160127193122826

Pechenkina, E., & Anderson, I. (2011). Background paper on Indigenous Australian higher education: Trends, initiatives and policy implications. Retrieved 17 June 2015 fromhttp://docs.education.gov.au/documents/background-paper-indigenous-australian-higher-education-trends-initiatives-and-policy

Ramle Abdullah, Wan Hasmah Wan Mamat, Amir Zal, Asmawi Mohammad Ibrahim. (2013). Teaching and Learning Problems of the Orang Asli Education: Students’ Perspective. Asian Social Science, 9, 12, 118-124.

Tinto, V. (n.d.). The assessment of student retention programs. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University, School of Education. Retrieved 7 April 2016, from http://soeweb.syr.edu/academics/grad/higher_education/vtinto.cfm

Tinto, V. (2005). ‘Taking student success seriously: Rethinking the first year of college’, Proceedings of the ‘Building the engaged campus’, USA 9th Annual Intersession Academic Affairs Forum.

Tinto, V. (2012). Completing college: Rethinking institutional action, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.

Thomas, K., Ellis, B., & Kirkham, E. (2014). Remote indigenous students: Raising their aspirations and awareness of tertiary pathways. Australian and International Journal of Rural Education, 24(2), 23-35.

United Nations Development Programme. (2013). Study and review of the socio-economic status of Aboroginal People (Orang Asli) in Peninsular Malaysia for the Formulation of a National Development Plan for the Orang Asli. Kuala Lumpur: UNDP.

Universities Australia. (2008). Advancing equity and participation in Australian higher education. Canberra: Universities Australia.

University of Notre Dame. (2014). Bridging the gap between indigenous students and university education opportunities. Retrieved 8 May 2016 from http://www.nd.edu.au/news/media-releases/2014/301

Warrior, R. (2012). Native Higher Education in the United States and Canada: A report for Review of Higher Education Access and Outcomes for Aboriginal and Torres Straits Islanders. Accessed 19 June 2015 from http://www.innovation.gov.au/HigherEducation/IndigenousHigherEducation/R e v i e w O f I n d i g e n o u s H i g h e r E d u c a t i o n /Documents/CommissionedResearch/Warr

Willems, J. (2014). Educational resilience as a quardripartite responsibility: Indigenous students and distance education. Journal of Open, Flexible and Distance Learning, 16(1), 14-


Introduction

The Ministry of Education (MOE) had announced in the National Education Development Plan (2013-

2025) that the SPM English subject would be made compulsory for students to pass from the year 2016, in order to obtain their SPM certificates. Students who fail the paper would not receive their full certificates but will have the opportunity to re-sit the paper in July the following year, immediately after the release of SPM results. This policy was intended to upgrade the level of English proficiency among students and it was also grounded in the latest policy, “Empowering Bahasa Malaysia and Strengthening the English Usage” which is perceived as vital in terms of preparing students for the initiative. By implementing the policy, it was hoped that students who enter the higher education institutions will be able to communicate reasonably well in English. However, in 2015, the Ministry decided to postpone the implementation of the policy to ensure that students and teachers have more leeway in adhering to appropriate measures in view of the policy.

Had the policy been implemented in 2016, it would have affected the Form Four batch of students in 2015. These students would have to pass the English subject in order for them to proceed to higher education institutions. The implications of not passing the paper are therefore enormous. In line with this concern, a nationwide study was carried out to determine the level of readiness of various stakeholders for the implementation of the policy in 2016. The stakeholders encompass students, teachers, school administrators and parents. The notion of readiness is operationalised as having the appropriate ecosystem for producing English language students who can pass the English language SPM subject successfully. Such ecosystem consists of internal and external factors. Internal factors are those that the individual language learner brings with him or her to the particular learning situation such as personality, motivation, and experiences. External factors are those that characterise the particular language learning situation including the curriculum, teaching, culture, motivation from others and access to English language input. Past studies (Engels, 2004; Murillo and Roman, 2011) have shown that learning is less likely to take place if students are not given extra assistance beyond the formal curriculum and it was highlighted that students will make faster progress if this condition is met.

Past research investigating motivational orientations in the Malaysian context has revealed that Malaysian ESL learners are predominantly extrinsically motivated rather than intrinsically motivated (Thang et al., 2011;

Samsiah Bidin, 2009). For example, Samsiah Bidin et al. (2009) findings indicate that among Malaysia university ESL learners, those with high proficiency are more extrinsically motivated compared to students with low proficiency. This is supported by Thang et al. (2011) who similarly reported that higher proficiency students have more positive attitudes towards learning English and are more intrinsically motivated.

As few empirical studies have been carried out to understand the stakeholders’ readiness, this study thus aims to fill the research gap. More important however, is to go beyond the understanding of the readiness of stakeholders and finding solutions and practical recommendations to improve their readiness. This is hoped to lessen the negative ramifications, if any, of the new policy.

Methodology

To determine the level of stakeholders’ readiness, the study gathered quantitative and qualitative data using a mixed-method triangulation research design. The stakeholders’ readiness was examined through Hutchinson and Waters’ (1987) Needs Analysis model. Figure 1 displays the needs analysis framework.

A total of 60 schools from north, south, east coast, central and east Malaysia were chosen based on random sampling. Only schools in band three to six were selected. In total, 1,327 form four students, 302 English language teachers and 324 administrators, and 31 parents participated.

Among the 1,327 students, 52.0% were from urban schools, while 48.0% were from rural schools. In terms of gender, 53.1% were male students and 46.9% were female. The majority (70.9%) of students were Malays. Most obtained low grades for their Pentaksiran Tingkatan 3 (PT3) in 2014 whereby 58.7% either failed the English subject or obtained an ‘E’ grade.

On the same note, the majority of the teachers were female (79.9%) and Malays (59.6%). An equal number of them taught in urban schools (49.7%) and rural schools (50.3%). Most of them were trained English language teachers (82.1%) and had at least a Bachelor’s Degree (81.1%). As for the school administrators, majority (54.6%) were female and Malays (73.8%).They were mostly senior assistants or section heads. Finally, out of the 31 parents of Form Four students, majority were fathers (61.3%), Malay (48.4%), and had an income level of below RM2,000 per month (93.6%). Most were from rural areas (61.3%).

Postponement of SPM English as a Compulsory Pass Subject Policy: A Correct Decision?Munir Shuib, Malini Ganapathy, Sarjit Kaur & Muhammad Kamarul Kabilan AbdullahUniversiti Sains Malaysia


Research Objectives

The current study aims to achieve the following research objectives:

1. To determine the readiness of stakeholders for making SPM English a compulsory pass subject (teachers, students, infrastructure, etc.).

2. To evaluate the implications of this new policy on the stakeholders.

3. To make policy recommendations on the implications of making SPM English a compulsory pass subject.

Instruments

Questionnaires were developed based on Hutchinson and Waters’ (1987) Needs Analysis theoretical framework. The themes in the questionnaires reflect students’ necessities, lacks and wants towards English language skills, teaching and learning processes and opportunities to use English. The questionnaires were distributed to all stakeholders.

In addition to the use of questionnaires, focus group discussions (FGD) were conducted with the stakeholders. A participatory dialogue was also carried out with personnel from State Education Department, Penang, English Language Teaching Centre, Curriculum Development Division, MOE, and an ELT expert from USM.

The study also considered the analysis of SPM English results for 2014 and past year SPM English scores. This was perceived as vital in terms of determining the trend of SPM students’ English language achievements over a period of four years.

Findings Pertinent key findings of the study are briefly highlighted in this paper. All the four stakeholders’ groups involved in this study (students, teachers, administrators and parents) agreed that the policy would motivate students to improve their English language achievement and proficiency. The majority reported that they were agreeable to and ready for the implementation of the policy. Despite the rather optimistic view by the stakeholders, there were specific issues which they faced pertaining to the proposed implementation of the policy, as presented in the following sections.

Teachers’ General Views Towards The New Policy

The teachers conveyed their self-confidence in embracing the new policy. Respondent SKRS:T3 highlighted that “As an English teacher, we are always ready and open-minded, we can accept changes”. However, respondent KLUS:T4 stressed the point on students’ readiness, “Teachers are ready, but how ready are the students?”

Several English teachers voiced the issue of non-option teachers being made to teach English in some secondary schools, for example: “We have quite a number of non-option teachers to teach the language” (KLUS:T3). Teachers’ perceptions in students’ low readiness to pass SPM English is reflected in the quantitative data where only 40.7% of teachers agreed that their students can pass the SPM English paper. Similarly in FGD, majority claimed that their students are not ready to pass the SPM English subject in 2016. According to respondent SBRS:T2, reiterated that “I think their level of English couldn’t reach that”. Teachers have also expressed that some students have difficulty grappling basic literacy. According to respondent KLUS:T3, “There are still

FIGURE 1 Hutchinson and Waters’ Need Analysis Model


boys and girls in the system that come up, not knowing that they cannot even spell things and even read, they may be dyslexic”.

In addition, they communicated their concerns that the new policy will result in their teaching approaches becoming more exam-oriented to ensure their students pass their SPM English.

A majority of teachers conveyed that their schools lacked various school facilities which can hamper English language learning activities including LCDs (Sabah), chrome books (Sarawak) and computer labs (Sabah).

Low internet connectivity seems to be a rampant issue as it was raised by many teachers in urban and rural schools. Respondent PPUS: T9 stated that, “The Internet is quite bad...we are using our own mobile data”. Interestingly, according to respondent SBRS: T4, “when someone comes to observe, suddenly the server is very good!” which suggests that the strength of internet connection may have been manipulated.

Teachers’ Views of Their Students’ English Language Skills

Several teachers conveyed that students do not view learning English as a necessity, “They said they don’t care because they don’t have to use English” (KTRS2). Some students display a tendency to not care about the English language subject, as remarked by respondent KLUS:3, “sometimes when they are so used to getting low marks, they don’t care”. One teacher pointed out that students seem to have attitude problems in relation to learning English “Yeah, because they already set their mind saying that they don’t understand and couldn’t care less to try to understand.” (JHRS: T4). A majority of teachers also stressed that students are more comfortable with their mother tongue.

Lastly, a small proportion of teachers related the stigma of using English in schools. Respondent PPUS:T9 pointed out that “let’s say this student start speaking in broken English and others will tease that student and break the confidence, so they will go back to mother tongue.” Thus, peer pressure among students may be preventing students from conversing in English even if they want to and impede students’ English learning progress.

Teachers’ Competencies

Both the quantitative and qualitative data indicated that the English teachers needed a wide range of professional

development programmes. These programmes include; how to teach according to students’ proficiency levels, how to teach each of the language skill, as well as how to integrate ICT in their lessons suggesting that many teachers may not be sufficiently competent in these basic aspects of English language teaching.

A report by Bahagian Perancangan dan Penyelidikan Dasar Pendidikan (2013) pointed out that many teachers were not sufficiently proficient in English. Data from the participatory dialogue in the present study support this observation. This demonstrates that English teachers need training not just to improve their teaching techniques but also to improve their command of English.

Intervention Programmes As with the quantitative data, FGD data analysis found a majority of teachers to have conveyed the need for professional development workshops to ensure they are ready to observe the new policy. These include: (1) how to incorporate technology into teaching, (2) workshops to motivate and renew teaching interest, (3) techniques to teach weaker students more effectively and (4) workshops for SPM English literature component.

The participating schools had organized various initiatives to improve their students’ English language proficiency such as motivational programmes and field trips. However, these initiatives were hampered by challenges such as insufficient resources and students’ attitude especially among the low achievers. In addition, these activities tend to be participated primarily by students who are already good in English.

Past Year SPM English Examination Scores

The analysis of past year exam scores of individual schools (from 2011-2014) shows a considerably more serious situation. The data revealed that in some schools, the failure rate is more than 50%. There is also a tendency for schools in rural areas to perform worse than urban areas. These students tend to be weak not just in English, but also in other subjects. Some were even labelled as “illiterate”. These are the types of students who would have been most vulnerable had the policy been implemented.

Impact on Students in Rural Areas

Data from participating schools pertaining to past

“Several teachers conveyed that students do not view learning English as a

necessity, “They said they don’t care because they don’t have to use English”

(KTRS2). Some students display a tendency to not care about theEnglish language subject,…”

“Teachers’ perceptions in students’ low readiness to pass SPM English is reflected in the quantitative data where only 40.7% of teachers agreed that their students can

pass the SPM English paper.”


year SPM English scores indicate that schools in rural areas generally performed worse than schools in urban areas. One rural school in Kelantan, for instance, had a 54.7% failure rate. As those who fail the subject will not be able to continue their education, the education and employment gap between urban and rural students is likely to become greater.

Discussion

Taking into consideration the findings above, to what extent then is it realistic to expect all students to pass the SPM English subject in 2016? The data gathered suggests that there might be serious implications for the affected students if the Ministry of Education had decided to proceed with the policy. The most serious one concerns the high failure rate annually. The findings indicate that the failure rate is unlikely to drop significantly by 2016. According to a report by Bahagian Perancangan dan Penyelidikan Dasar Pendidikan (2013), every year about 90,000 students fail the SPM English paper. Thus, implementing the policy in 2016 might well mean that more or less a similar number of students are likely to fail their entire SPM examination in that year.

Considering the potentially high failure rate, and other negative related issues, the MOE had taken an appropriate stance to postpone the implementation of the policy. Certainly, more time is needed for schools to prepare their students to ensure that they pass the subject successfully. It is suggested that more concerted efforts should be taken by the ministry and schools to address the issues as revealed in the study.

Attention should not only be solely focused on Form 4 or Form 5 students, but also the current Form 1 students. There is a need to assist the low achievers and those with severe learning disabilities when they are in Form 1 itself. Their language needs must be addressed through various intervention programmes that are specially designed for them. If the English language needs of the current Form 1 students are seriously addressed from now, it may not be unreasonable to assume that the majority of the current Form 1 students are likely to pass the English SPM subject when they reach Form 5, which is four years from now. It is also recommended that an appropriate roadmap and strategic action plan be devised as a measure to help the Ministry determine more definitively its target date of implementation.

Conclusion

In conclusion, although all stakeholders generally agree that the new policy motivates students to improve their English proficiency, it should be kept in mind that it is those weak students who are most vulnerable to this new policy. Yet, these students may not be motivated by the policy as they are also very likely to be weak in the other two compulsory pass subjects. Furthermore, if the policy is to be implemented, all stakeholder’s readiness should be ensured or maximised by addressing the issues mentioned above such as students’ negative attitudes toward the English language, how to motivate weak students, teachers’ needs for more professional development and schools facilities and resources. This study concludes that MOE’s decision to postpone the implementation of the policy is appropriate. However, long term measures must be planned and initiated from now in order to ensure a successful implementation of the policy in the future.

References

Bahagian Perancangan dan Penyelidikan Dasar Pendidikan. (2013). Dasar wajib lulus bahasa Inggeris SPM 2016: Isu dan cabaran pelaksana. Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia.

Engel, N. et al. (2004) Factors which influence the well-being of pupils in Flemish secondary schools, Educational Studies, 30:2 (pp 29-50)

Hutchinson, T. & Waters, A. (1987). English for specific purposes: A learning-centred approach. Great Britain: CUP.

Murillo, F. J. & Roman, M. (2011). School infrastructure and resources do matter: analysis of the incidence of school resources on the performance of Latin American students. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 22(1), 29-50.

Samsiah Bidin, Kamruzaman Jusoff, Nurazila Abdul Aziz, Musdiana Mohamad Salleh & Taniza Tajudin. (2009). Motivation and attitude in learning English among UiTM students in the northern region of Malaysia. English Language Teaching, 2(2),16-19.

Thang, S. M., Ting, S. L., & Nurjanah Mohd Jaafar. (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

Acknowledgement: This paper is based on a larger research project entitled ‘An evaluation of stakeholders’ readiness towards making SPM English a compulsory pass subject’, funded by the Ministry of Higher Education (304/CIPPTN650749).

“Attention should not only be solely focused on Form 4 or Form 5 students, but also the current Form 1 students. There is a need to assist the low achievers and those

with severe learning disabilities when they are in Form 1 itself.”


Malaysia is experiencing a continuous rise on the number of international students enrolling in Malaysian higher education institutions. As based on MOHE’s statistics in 2010, the number of international students studying in Malaysia has increased from 30 thousand in year 2003 to 70 thousand in 2010. In comparison to local students, international students are confronted with problems such as different linguistics, cultural and educational background. These issues can be addressed if universities are proactive in resolving it. Hence, this article presents on some strategies to overcome the difficulties faced by international students. The strategies include:

1. Formation of a Learning Support Center (LSC) for international students2. Having English language entry requirement 3. Trans-disciplinary academic collaboration between content lecturers and language specialists4. Enhancing the role of lecturers as educators of international students

The formation of the Learning Support Center (LCS) provides many forms of support in helping international students with their academic endeavours. The LSC offers programming courses to meet academic, behavioural, social and transitional needs of international students who are new to the university. In addition, LSC according to Davison, Harris, Qureshi, Vogel, & De Vreede (2005) acts as a center for tutorial sessions and it contains a library of technical journals relevant to the courses offered. It also acts as an access center for students where the students can be contacted through e-mail, telephone or fax for any other support (ibid). The international students with various first language and discipline background have their own cultural influences and ways of speaking. In view of this, the staff of LSC need to take into consideration the students’ first language proficiency while providing support services to students. This is because international students may feel troubled if they do not understand the language used in the particular service provided to them. Besides, the academic staff may not have prior knowledge of the students’ learning needs. So by targeting their needs, the effectiveness of LCS can be stretched to the maximum.

Students’ language proficiency to enter the university has increasingly become a matter of concern of many people. For most of the courses offered, a high level of English language proficiency is required to ensure that students gain benefit from the programmes and syllabus provided. Previous studies have identified the language barriers which include writing, reading, listening, and oral skill as one of the most critical factors affecting academic performance of international students (Ku, Lahman, Yeh & Cheng, 2008). The universities should then set an English language entry requirement specifically for students to enrol in English proficiency courses as poor English language proficiency will limit the students’ ability to be fully involved in their academic endeavours. Accordingly, the international students who attend higher education institutions should be able to meet the universities’ academic requirements and cut-off points for English language. According to the Institute of Postgraduate Studies of Universiti Sains Malaysia (2016), for international students, a score of a minimum of 80 (Internet-Based) in the TOEFL or IELTS Band 6 is required by almost all the study programmes in USM. Once they have met the criteria for admission into the programme, they are allowed to enrol with the university.

Next, to facilitate effective learning, there can be a trans-disciplinary academic collaboration between content lecturers and language specialists. Trans-disciplinary collaboration is a new field and it has received less attention in Malaysian universities. This cross disciplinary integration requires preparation and it cannot do without careful planning. Lecturers from different areas are strongly encouraged to cross boundaries of their discipline, by making collaborations with a wide range of disciplines (Kaur, 2014). Expertise from different fields can be hired to integrate language and content of courses so that the students can reach optimum understanding. Additionally, the language specialists are trained to become familiar with the concepts and language of a particular discipline. With all these efforts, the students have definite ideas of the content of the subject matter after they have familiarised with the language. Hence, collaborative practices in multiple academic disciplines should be given to international students in order to assist them especially in transdisciplinary learning.

Last but not least, the role of lecturers as educators should also be enhanced. Lecturers should play a role in developing their students’ confidence in speaking with the other students in their classroom interactions, building confidence in oral presentations and enabling them to understand their conversations either formally or informally. As educators, lecturers need to be more sensitive to the difficulties experienced by various international students

Strategies to Overcome the Challenges Faced by International Students in Higher EducationManjet Kaur Mehar Singh & Malini GanapathyUniversiti Sains Malaysia

VIEWS


and pay more attention to them especially when students take less proactive roles in classrooms. Baird’s study (2012) highlighted that the attention given to the students is important for their academic development because being aware of the vulnerability of international students and knowing appropriate support to provide can make the difference between retaining a student and losing them. A comment from the study that quoted below is from an international student who could not readily cope with various issues in a new and different setting:

“Thanx (sic) so much for you helping me yesterday. I cry so much I want to go home but now I feel like I can finish my degree. I study hard now you make me confident and show me better way

(Undergraduate First Year international student).”

This underlines the significant role of lecturers in helping international students in their learning process.

Student literacy and writing development are responsibilities shared across the university and among the best strategies are institution-wide, cross-curriculum approaches that place literacy at the centre of student experience. As many universities face a critical challenge to meet the increased demand for student support with limited resources and student services that are stretched to their limits, writing and literacy development can no longer be viewed through the lens of deficit remediation for domestic and international students alike. Universities need to establish a more broad-based, university-wide measures to ensure that students gain capacity and ability in critical reading and written expression so that literacy remains a mark of “higher” education.

In a nutshell, to ensure desired learning outcomes, it is crucial to understand where those students are in their beginning of their learning journey. A positive approach should be projected to engage students’ interest and therefore create positive learning outcomes. When problems arise, universities and the students themselves should be dedicated to work towards it and amicably address the issues.

References

Baird, C. (2012). Targeted, timely, learning support for international students: one Australian university’s approach. Journal of Learning Design, 5(1), 52- 62.

Davison, R. M., Harris, R. W., Qureshi, S., Vogel, D. R., & De Vreede, G. J. (Eds.). (2005). Information systems in developing countries: Theory and practice. City University of HK Press.

Institute of Postgraduate Studies. (2016). Admission. Retrieved from http://www.ips.usm.my/ Kaur, M. (2014). Challenges in academic reading and overcoming strategies in taught master programmes: a case

study of international graduate students in Malaysia. Higher Education Studies, 4(4), 76.Ku, H., Lahman, M. E., Yeh, H. & Cheng, Y. (2008). Into the academy: Preparing and mentoring international

doctoral students. Educational Technology Research and Development, 56, pp.365–377.MOHE. (2010). Perangkaan Pengajian Tinggi Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur: Kementerian Pengajian Tinggi Malaysia.


This book is a compilation of articles presented during Global Higher Education Forum (GHEF) 2013 which focus on issues of sustainability and inclusiveness of higher education. In the literature of sustainability and higher education, a large proportion have dedicated their studies to explore the role of higher education institutions in fostering sustainable development (e.g., Filho et al., 2015; Beynaghi, 2016) which tend to answer how higher education contributes to sustainability. However, this volume focused instead on the sustainability of higher education from a largely financial perspectives. Of the three main component of sustainability: social, environmental and economic; environmental aspect has been omitted from the discussion. The book include two article which addressed the issue of financial sustainability, three papers which probed matters concerning to Malaysian higher education, a study from the perspective of academic publisher, a case study of Korean higher education and an article on students with disabilities with examples from an Australian university.

In the first article, Suwanwela, an experienced educational administrators and academic provided a review on the management of finance and funding in the context of declining governmental support, and discussed four category of coping strategies: (1) efficient use of fund, (2) internal funding generation, (3) diversification of financing sources, and (4) coping with limited finances

and funding. However, he cautions that coping strategies towards limited finance and funding may result in undesired consequences such as greater inequity, disciplines deemed unimportant being downsized, and negative effect on academic culture. This article would be particularly valuable for higher education administrators confronted by limited finance and funding, nevertheless, it appears more as a brief manual.In the second article, Asharaf Mohd Ramli and Mustafa Omar Mohammed provided an overview on global public funding mechanism where there has been a shift to cost-sharing. In the Malaysian context, the government has allocated huge proportion of funding to higher education in addition to indirect funding through National Higher Educational Fund (PTPTN). However, the sustainability of PTPTN has been questioned due to the high default in repayments, with only 50% of borrowers repaid their loans. The authors claim that cash waqf could be a viable alternative and cited religious motives (Islamic) as reason donors(muslim) would choose to waqf. However, no exact figures on the current amount of cash waqf or the percentage of public funding which cash waqf could replace was provided and the effectiveness of cash waqf fund remains doubtful. As stated by the authors, studies on philanthropic behaviour of Malaysians to higher education sector is scant and limited, thus more studies in this area is necessary before conclusive argument could be reached.

The third paper by Yee et al. is a nation wide study on alumni relations covering both public and private universities. It presents a valuable contribution to the study of alumni engagement in Malaysia. The findings suggest that most Malaysian universities follow a network centric model in their alumni engagement activities, and key factors that affect alumni relations including studying experiences, university culture, age group, geographical distance between university and alumni, and governmental support. With declining pubic funding on higher education sector, alumni could be a vital source for philanthropic giving, as evidenced by the case of Private higher education institutions in US (Holmes, 2009) and UK (Warren et al., 2014) which Malaysia has yet to capitalise on for this purpose. The references are in need to some updating.

Nair et al. investigate the public-private HEIs equilibrium in Malaysia. Drawing from five regional case studies (Australia, South Korea, Japan, Indonesia and The Philippines), recommendations on public and private mix, quality assurance and issues concerning access and equity are offered. Six determinants of successful public-private mix were suggested, but they appear more as describing the current scenario of Malaysian higher education rather than suggestions on how to enhance public and private mix, with the exception of the last determinants: public-private partnership. This contribution of this article lies in the comparative perspective through case studies and focus group with regional higher education experts.

Karlsson and Allagnat from Elsevier used bibliometrics to demonstrate that international collaboaration increase research impact and researcher mobility is correlated with greater productivity and that brain circulation is important. However, the question of ‘why’ remain unanswered. The authors imply that with more international collaboration and greater researcher mobility, impact and productivity could be improved and thus ensuring the sustainability of research. However, other issues need to be taken into account, the research capacity of researchers in a particular country, for example. The title of this article ‘Challenges in the global competition of

Towards Sustainable and Inclusive Higher Education: Challenges and Strategiesby Melissa Lee Yen Abdullah (Editor), Ahmad Nurulazam Md. Zain (Editor)Universiti Sains Malaysia Press, 2016. 185p.

BOOK REVIEW


higher education and research: perspectives on achieving inclusive and sustainable knowledge growth’ does not seem to represent the content as challenges is omitted and it remains unclear how high impact research and research productivity could be linked to inclusive knowledge growth. Only a small section on inclusiveness of access to scientific literature was provided near the end.

Park illustrates the case of Korea and demonstrated how universalisation of higher education which many developing countries aspire to become is not necessarily a good thing. The imbalance between supply and demand of graduates in the labour market resulted in high youth unemployment rate. The issue of youth unemployment rate in turn led to protest over tuition fees. Park pointed to the strong government presence in Korean public and private higher education where everything “from student selection to the recruitment of facult members and the screening of graduation candidates” (Park, 2016, p.110) are under the supervision and monitoring of the education ministry. While the article serve brilliantly in providing a quick overview of Korean higher education system and the role played by the state backed by ample statistics and figures, nonetheless, it gives the impression that the author has tried to address too many issues within this short piece.

Hicks and Manson’s paper focuses on students with disabilities and suggested five key considerations to ensure positive experience by this group of students: (1) whole-of-university approach, (2) compliance with legislation, (3) full student life cycle, (4) inclusive curriculum practices, (5) provision of specialist support and adaptive technologies. The authors, in addition, illustrated their experience at University of South Australia in providing support to students with disability. These five considerations could serve as important guide for educational administrators or researchers who wish to improve student experience.

The book ended with a descriptive study of first-generation university students in Malaysia. This article filled an important gap in the literature of higher education where student diversity is rarely acknowledged or studied. However, in defining first-generation students, it is unclear whether all children whose parents have never attended university are considered first-generation students, because in the case of family with more than one children, if one elder siblings have been to university, the younger siblings may benefit from the elder sibling’s experience and thus be better adjusted to their transition to university, this thus result in some conceptual ambiguity. Furthermore, the sampling of this study consists of only first-generation students as the researchers made the assumption that first-generation students are more at risk than second or third generation students based on past studies. A control group consisting of second or third generation students could allow comparison and strengthen the validity of the findings.

On the whole, this book has filled up some important gaps in the literature for sustainability and inclusiveness of higher education though many more questions remain to be answered. Concerns in the Korean higher education about universalisation of higher education and the ensuing low employability rate and student protest are issues which can be related to the Malaysian context as well. The blurring of boundary between public and private institutions as suggested by Nair et al. could be catalyst to innovate new funding model where funding depends on the function and performance of the institution rather than by ascribing them to either ‘public’ or ‘private’ status and limit public funding to a small pool of public institutions. With lesser funding but increasingly larger pool of HEIs, more flexible and innovative funding models of higher education institutions need to be explored. The two articles on first-generation students and students with disability also shed light on these two vulnerable groups and provided insights for administrators on how to tackle them. Educational administrators, researchers and policy makers interested in sustainability and inclusiveness of higher education, especially the Malaysian case would find this book helpful, despite not covering the environmental aspect of sustainability. Lastly, some readers might point out the rather eclectic nature of the collection of article, this is likely due to their original intention as papers to be presented in conference.

Heng Wen ZhuoAssistant Registrar, Tunku Abdul Rahman University College Penang Branch Campus [email protected]

References

Beynaghi, A., Trencher, G., Moztarzadeh, F., Mozafari, M., Maknoon, R., & Filho, W. L. (2016) Future sustainability scenarios for universities: moving beyond the United Nations Decade of Education for Sustainable Development. Journal of Cleaner Production, 112, 3464 - 3478.

Filho, W. L., Manolas, E., & Pace, P. (2015). The future we want: Key issues on sustainable development in higher education after Rio and the UN decade of education for sustainable development. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 16(1), 112-129.

Holmes, J. (2009). Prestige, Charitable deductions and other determinants of alumni giving: Evidence from a highly selective liberal arts college. Economics of Education Review, 28, 18-28.

Park, Y-b. (2016). Sustaining diverse ecosystem with strong government presence in higher education: the Korean perspective. In M, L. Y. A. Ng. & A. N.M. Zain (eds) Towards sustainable and inclusive higher education: challenges and strategies. Pulau Pinang: Penerbit Universiti Sains Malaysia.

Warren, A., Hoyler, M., & Bell.M. (2014). Strategic cultures of philanthropy: English universities and the changing geographies of giving. Geoforum, 55, 133-142.


Calling for artiClesGuidelines on Submission of Manuscripts1. Manuscripts should be written in English, typed using Times

New Roman 12 point font, and double spaced on only one side of A4 size paper with ample left and right margins on Microsoft Word.

2. The length of the manuscripts should not exceed 1,500 words. An abstract of about 150 words should be included.

3. Authors are responsible for obtaining permission to use any published material. The publisher shall not be held responsible for the use of such material.

4. Citations in the text should include the author’s last name and date of publication, e.g. (Ashton, 2001). If quotations are used, page numbers should be indicated, eg. (Ashton, 2001: 30).

5. Endnotes may be used.6. Include tables and figures within the text. Number tables and

figures consecutively.7. The reference list should be arranged in alphabetical order

and should include only works cited in the text.

Examples:

Altbach, P. G. (2004). The costs and benefits of world-class universities. Retrieved 23 October 2005 from http://www.aaup.org/publications/Academe/2004/04jf/04jfaltb.htm

Mahadhir, M., Ting, S. H. and Carol, D. (2006). Learning materials and human factors: Looking at the chemistry in the genre-based approach classroom. Proceedings of 2nd Science and Art of Language in Teaching International Conference, ‘Change: Bridging Theory and Practice’, 20 - 22 November, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Pulau Pinang.

Watkins, D. (1998). A cross-cultural look at perceptions of good teaching: Asia and the West. In J. J. F. Forest (Ed.), University teaching: International perspectives. New York: Garland.

Wolfe, R. N. and Johnson, S. D. (1995). Personality as a predictor of college performance. Educational and Psychological Measurement, Vol. 2, 177-185.

Yule, G. (1996). Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

8. All submissions should include a cover page containing the title, name of author(s), designation, affiliation, mailing/ e-mail address and telephone/fax number. A brief biographical note of the author(s) should also be included.

9. Manuscripts submitted must not be those already published or those which have been offered for publication elsewhere.

10. Manuscripts received will be acknowledged but not returned.

11. Submission of a manuscript will mean that the author agrees to transfer copyright of his/her article to the publisher if and when the article is published. Authors who wish to send their articles to be published elsewhere should seek the written agreement of the publisher.

12. Manuscripts may be sent via e-mail attachment ([email protected] or [email protected]) or via post together with the compact disk.

The Bulletin of Higher Education Research welcomes short articles, opinions, comments and information about people and events related to higher education in public and private institutions in Malaysia and abroad.

Please address your corresspondence to:The Editor-in-ChiefBulletin of Higher Education ResearchNational Higher Education Research InstituteUniversiti Sains MalaysiaBlock C, Level 2, sains@usmNo. 10, Persiaran Bukit Jambul11900 Bayan Lepas, PenangMALAYSIA

Tel: 604-653 5758 (Administration); 653 5760 (Research)Fax: 604-653 5771Web: http://www.ipptn.usm.myE-mail: [email protected]

Editorial Board

Advisor:Wan Mohd Fauzy Wan Ismail (Universiti Sains Malaysia)

Editor-in-Chief:M. K. Kabilan (Universiti Sains Malaysia)

Editors:1. Koo Yew Lie (Charles Darwin University & SOAS

University of London)2. Qiang Zha (York University)3. Malini Ganapathy (Universiti Sains Malaysia)4. Susan Mayson (Monash University)5. P. Pushkar (Birla Institute of Technology and Sci-

ence)6. Chuah Kee-Man (Universiti Malaysia Sarawak)7. Robyn Phillips (University of Tasmania)8. Jasvir Kaur (La Trobe University)

Assistant Editors:1. Noraini Mohamad Yusof (IPPTN)2. Ooi Poh Ling (IPPTN)3. Clarene Tan Chern Chieh (IPPTN)4. Nor Sida Che Nayan (IPPTN)

Graphics and Layout:Noraini Mohamad Yusof (IPPTN)

Materials in this bulletin may be reproduced. Please cite the original source of publication. Opinions expressed here may not necessarily reflect the views of IPPTN.

ISSN: 1675-6428

Bulletin of - ipptn.usm.my · Postponement of SPM English as a Compulsory Pass Subject Policy: A...

Documents

Transcript of Bulletin of - ipptn.usm.my · Postponement of SPM English as a Compulsory Pass Subject Policy: A...