THE NEED FOR ENGLISH IN UNIVERSITIES: A LOCAL CHALLENGE FOR GLOBAL OPPORTUNITIES

Golda J. Tulung Sam Ratulangi University, Manado Presented in ‘English in Higher Education’ Event Le Meridien Hotel, Jakarta, March 12th, 2015

INTRODUCTION

The impact of globalization

A demand for university graduates to have good commands of English.

A challenge for universities to produce qualified human resources in this globalization era.

The implication: a mastery of English as an international language.

The mastery of English can be measured by TOEFL.

Universities in Indonesia have determined certain TOEFL scores.

UNSRAT: not all faculties have required students to take TOEFL, though the university had targeted a score of 430 to its graduates in 2013.

Question: How is the university students’ English proficiency, measured by TOEFL score?

Objective: To describe the results of the students’ TOEFL score in order to determine their English proficiency level.

As a way to evaluate the university’s target achievement in terms of the students’ English proficiency.

As a reference in decision making either in the university level or in the faculty level in terms of the students’ English proficiency.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Brown (2007)

English proficiency generally include four skills: speaking, listening, reading, and writing.

TOEFL: a test of English proficiency used by a lot of educational institutions as an indicator of students’ proficiency.

ETS (1999)

TOEFL: an English test designed to measure a mastery of English for those whose mother tongue is not English.

To measure test takers’ ability to use and understand English at the university level (Listening, Structure and Written Expression, and Reading)

Types of TOEFL: International TOEFL, TOEFL ITP, TOEFL Prediction.

TOEFL is the main instrument that is mostly used in decision making (Jamieson, Jones, Kirsch, Mosenthal &Taylor, 2000) and mostly used in the world (Pierce, 1992; Hamp-Lyons, 1998).

The main goal of TOEFL is not to test the use of daily English but to capture test takers’ ability to function in an academic context which principally has its own genre, different from the daily language use (Zareva, 2005).

Carson, et al (1990): TOEFL score conversion to proficiency level

Elementary: 310 up to 420

Low Intermediate: 421 up to 480

High Intermediate: 481 up to 525

Advanced: 526 up to 677

RESEARCH CONTEXT

Language Center at UNSRAT, 2013

Students from four faculties: Faculty of Engineering, Faculty of Public Health, Faculty of Mathematics and Basic Sciences, and Faculty of Law

100 students, 25 from each faculty

TOEFL Prediction

Students’ TOEFL Score by Faculty

Engineering Public Health

Math & Basic Sciences

Law Total

Minimum 347 327 340 343 327

Maximum 520 463 487 493 520

Average 424 379.2 405.1 401.7 402.5

Students’ TOEFL Score by Component

TOEFL Score

Listening Structure Reading Total Score

Minimum 320 310 310 327

Maximum 530 520 580 520

Average 411.2 389.4 406.9 402.5

Students’ Level of Proficiency

LEVEL Freq %

Elementary (310-420) 71 71

Low Intermediate (421-480) 24 24

High Intermediate (481-525) 5 5

Advanced (526-677) 0 0

Total 100 100

Conclusion

1. Students’ TOEFL score is low, with the average of 402.5 (below the target TOEFL score of 430)

2. Students’ levels of English proficiency: 71% in Elemetary, 24% in Low Intermediate, 5% in High Intermediate, and 0% in Advanced

3. A local challenge for global opportunities

Recommendation

1. Providing students with good English courses and English reading materials during their studies

2. Providing students with a good TOEFL preparation course before taking the test

3. More particularly with the English Department, making some changes in the curriculum

A Model of Curriculum Change: English Department

Old Curriculum New Curriculum

Semesters 1-2

•General English (4 sks)

•Speaking (4 sks)

•Grammar (4 sks)

Semester 1-2

•General English (4 sks)

•Oral English (8 sks)

•Written English (8 sks)

A Model of Curriculum Change: English Department

Old Curriculum New Curriculum

Semesters 3-4

•Speaking (4 sks)

•Listening (4 sks)

•Reading (4 sks)

•Writing (4 sks)

•Grammar (4 sks)

Semester 3-4

•Oral English (8 sks)

•Written English (8 sks)

A Model of Curriculum Change: English Department

Old Curriculum New Curriculum

Semesters 5-6

•Scientific Writing (2 sks)

•Correspondence (2 sks)

Semester 5-6

•Scientific Writing (2 sks)

•Correspondence (2 sks)

Changes in Methodology

Old Curriculum New Curriculum

Speaking:

•Communicative Approach

•Follow the book

Speaking:

•Communicative Approach

•Context-teaching point-practice

•Emphasis on fun and interesting classes

Changes in Methodology

Old Curriculum New Curriculum

Listening:

•Only bottom-up skills

•Completely separated from speaking

Listening:

•Balance of bottom-up and top-down skills

•Integrated with speaking

Changes in Methodology

Old Curriculum New Curriculum

Reading:

•Comprehension questions

•Arbitrary vocabulary, not tested/reviewed

•Portfolio/reading log-academic/serious texts

Reading:

•Skills-focused

•Vocab from General Service List, Ss keep a vocab notebook,tested

•Portfolio/reading log-graded readers,

reading for pleasure, academic/serious

Changes in Methodology

Old Curriculum New Curriculum

Writing:

•Students receive no feedback

•Product-focused, no writing process

Writing:

•Ss receive written feedback

•Writing process is used

•Ss are active for the duration of class

Changes in Methodology

Old Curriculum New Curriculum

Grammar:

•Separate class

•Exercise-based, no communicative practice

•Many grammar points per lesson

•Comprehensive

Grammar:

•Integrated w/ 4 skills

•Practiced through speaking and writing

•Maximum one grammar point per

lesson

•Less comprehensive

THANK YOU