Chinese language reform in Singapore: teacher perceptions of instructional approaches and curriculum implementation

The Modern Language Journal

2017

This study examined the similarities and differences in the functioning of component processes underlying first language (L1) and second language (L2) word reading in Chinese. Fourth‐grade Chinese children in Singapore were divided into L1 and L2 reader groups based on whether they used Mandarin or English as their home language. Both groups were administered a battery of tasks that assessed their orthographic processing skill (OP), phonological awareness (PA), morphological awareness (MA), oral vocabulary knowledge, as well as the ability to decode characters and multi‐character compound words. Separate Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) analyses showed that in the L1 group, over and above all other variables, both OP and MA, as opposed to PA, were significant predictors of word reading, whereas in the L2 group, OP and PA, as opposed to MA, predicted word reading. Multiple‐group SEM analysis further revealed that the effects of OP and MA were significantly larger in the L1 than in the L2 group, whereas a converse pattern was found for PA. These findings are discussed in light of the linguistic and language‐to‐print mapping properties of Chinese as well as the influence of L1 and L2 learners’ differential experience on how they learn to read in Chinese.

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Word Reading in L1 and L2 Learners of Chinese: Similarities and Differences in the Functioning of Component Processes

The Modern Language Journal

2017

“…According to the Modular Chinese Language Curriculum (hereafter, Modular Curriculum) implemented in Singapore schools, two differentiated curricular paths (i.e., Higher Chinese and Chinese ) are provided for students depending on their proficiency level. While the two paths share a Core Module, which every student must take and accounts for 70% to 80% of instructional time, they differ on the rest of instructional time between low (a Bridging Module) and high proficiency students (an Enrichment Module) (Li et al, ; Ministry of Education, ). No published data was available on any correspondence between any pattern(s) of home language use and a type of curricular path that children take in school.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cross‐lagged panel analysis of reciprocal effects of morphological processing and reading in Chinese in a multilingual context

Journal Research in Reading

Koda

Leong

et al. 2018

Background While much is known about how morphological awareness (MA) contributes to reading development, little attention has been paid to how reading may conversely affect MA development, particularly in readers of Chinese in a bilingual/multilingual setting. Methods The study adopted a cross‐lagged panel design. Young bilingual readers of Chinese were measured in MA, word reading and reading comprehension – all in Chinese – twice from Grade 3 to Grade 4. Results Path analysis revealed that Grade 3 MA significantly predicted Grade 4 reading comprehension after controlling for the autoregressive effect. Over and above Grade 3 MA, Grade 3 reading also significantly predicted Grade 4 MA. Subsequent analyses, however, revealed disparate developmental patterns between those with Chinese and English, respectively, as their home language. Implications These findings, while supporting reciprocity of developmental relationships between MA and reading, also suggested that the pattern of relationships can vary as a function of students' target language experiences in a bilingual/multilingual setting.

“…In response to the gradual home-language shift from MT to English and the changing linguistic landscape in the society in general, the Ministry of Education regularly reviews and modifies MT curricula to accommodate the diverse needs of students from different home-language backgrounds, particularly those from English-dominant families (Ministry of Education, 2011). A notable example is the modular, curricular approach for Chinese (L. Li, Zhao, & Yeung, 2012;Ministry of Education, 2014a), which divides the Chinese-language curriculum into a core module that everyone studies (approximately 70-80% of the curriculum) and an adaptive module (approximately 20-30%). Those who have low proficiency in Chinese, reasonably those from English-dominant families, are expected to study a bridging or consolidation module before they study the core module.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Simple View of Reading Made Complex by Morphological Decoding Fluency in Bilingual Fourth‐Grade Readers of English

Reading Research Quarterly

2019

The authors examined the complexity of the simple view of reading, focusing on morphological decoding fluency in fourth‐grade readers of English in Singapore. The participants were three groups of students who all learned to become bilingual and biliterate in the English language (EL) and their respective ethnic language in school but differed in the home language they used. The first group was ethnic Chinese students who used English as the dominant home language (Chinese EL1); the other two groups were ethnic Chinese and Malay students whose dominant home language was not English but Chinese (Chinese EL2) and Malay (Malay EL2), respectively. The measures included pseudoword decoding (phonemic decoding), timed decoding of derivational words (morphological decoding fluency), oral vocabulary, and passage comprehension. Path analysis showed that oral vocabulary significantly predicted reading comprehension across all three groups, yet a significant effect of morphological decoding fluency surfaced in the Chinese EL1 and Malay EL2 groups but not the Chinese EL2 group. Multigroup path analysis and commonality analysis further confirmed that morphological decoding played a larger role in the Chinese EL1 and Malay EL2 groups. These findings are discussed in light of the joint influence of target‐language experience and cross‐linguistic influence on second‐language or bilingual reading development.