6.1 The current syllabus
6.2 The new revised syllabus
6.3 Time allocation to English
6.4 Reading in teacher training colleges
6.5 Reading in Chichewa
6.6 Observations of reading lessons
6.7 Comments on lessons observed
The current syllabus in Malawi primary schools is embodied in English in Malawi (Books 1-8) together with the associated Teachers' Books. The series was first published in the mid-sixties, and revised in the late seventies. It is structurally organised, increasing fairly steeply in difficulty from Book 3.
In the first year of primary school, the children are taught to read in Chichewa, with the only reading in English being reading of name-cards. Reading in English effectively starts in Year 2 with the "look and say" method which appears to be the only approach for the first term. The language used has "already been used and learned in language lessons" (Teacher's Book 2). The "phonetic" approach (which would normally be called the phonic approach in this context) is introduced from the second term of year 2 onwards (see Appendix B for an outline of these initial reading methods).
Although attention is given to meaning in Teacher's Book 2, an important aspect of the reading work seems to be the correct pronunciation of written words, and the unqualified term "reading" normally refers to reading aloud (eg "the children will imitate whatever sounds you make, good or bad, so the quality of your reading and pronunciation is of the greatest importance" "many of the (word) lists contain sounds which the children may find difficult to make correctly and which should be given special practice") "much of the reading will be oral reading - "reading aloud" - so that the pronunciation and meaning of the words become surely fixed in the children's minds" (Teacher's Book 2). Silent reading is suggested as a supplement to "look and say" from about half-way through Book 2.
In Teacher's Books 3 and 4 more attention is given to silent reading, although reading aloud is still retained. In the upper half of primary school (Book 5 onwards) the official approach is that silent reading of a text should be the norm, followed by oral questions and answers; however, some reading aloud is still suggested in the Teachers' Books.
Revised syllabuses were prepared from 1988 to 1990 by various subject panels. The new syllabus for English was published in 1991. The general Subject Objectives with respect to English are:
By the end of Standard 8 pupils will be able to:
- Read with understanding different types of narrative and non-narrative material (eg short stories, notices, instructions, newspapers, booklets on farming methods, health care, etc appropriate to their age, interests and ability)- Use various reading strategies (eg extracting factual information or reading for pleasure)
- Extract the main ideas from a variety of narrative and non-narrative materials
- Follow the logical development of ideas in a variety of reading materials using reference items and signaling devices
- Make simple critical judgements (eg distinguish fact from fiction, fact from opinion) on what they read.
- Read for pleasure
- Read at a speed appropriate to the purpose and nature of the reading text (eg 150 words per minute for reading for pleasure).
(Primary School Teaching Syllabus, 1991: 3)
The main points in the new syllabus on a year by year basis are as follows:
Year 1: pre-reading activities (shape matching, sorting out shapes, matching letters). These are to be combined with analogous pre-writing activities, and developed in conjunction with Chichewa and mathematics.Year 2: the "look and say" technique is employed, using flash cards. This is combined with the "phonic" technique.
Year 3: reading aloud and reading silently; scanning
Year 4: reading silently for information and pleasure; guessing word meaning from context.
Year 5 and 6: as for 4, plus reading for attitudes and opinions; predicting content, re-ordering sentences.
Years 7 and 8: as for 5 and 6, plus skimming, making simple critical judgements and re-ordering paragraphs.
A new English language course based upon the new syllabus and entitled Activities with English, is currently in preparation. Material for the course is being trialled in 15 schools (5 in each province), with Book 1 being introduced in 1992-93. The approach to initial literacy of the old English in Malawi course is compatible with the new syllabus. On the other hand, some reading skills advocated in the new syllabus (eg scanning, word guessing, critical reading) for Standard 3 and upwards do not feature in English in Malawi.
Old syllabus:
Standard 1: 5 x 30 mins.
Standard 2: 7x30 mins.
Standards 3 to 8: 9 x 35 mins.
New syllabus proposals (introduced in 1992):
Standards 1 & 2: 5x30 minutes
Standards 3 & 4: 7x35 minutes
Standards 5 to 8: 8 x 35 minutes
In both cases English is the medium of instruction from Standard 5 onwards.
The Primary Teacher Education Syllabus (Malawi Institute of Education, 1990), which is used in the colleges running two-year Teacher Training courses, has 3 out 15 topics in the first year devoted to training in the teaching of reading. In the second year 1 out of 11 topics are devoted to the teaching of reading. No data was available on precisely how much time is spent on the topics in the two year course. However, the one year intensive course (Domasi TTC) devotes 16 hours to the teaching of reading, compared to 17 on oral skills, 15 on writing and 9 on grammar.
The Primary Teacher Education Syllabus for English is closely tied to the English in Malawi coursebooks used in primary schools, the only difference being that the former alludes to the syllabic method ("as in Chichewa") as a reading method.
There is relatively little overt attention to reading English with understanding according to the Primary Teacher Education Syllabus in the first two years of primary school. This view was supported by a teacher trainer who said that there was little comprehension work in year 2, and that this resulted in a great deal of reading aloud with little understanding of the text. Emphasis on understanding the text came in year 3.
The main emphasis in terms of time in the first two years of primary school is on Chichewa as opposed to English. Initial literacy in Chichewa is taught largely through a syllabic approach which incorporates a phonic dimension (eg nga-, nge, ngi-, ngo- ngu- are presented in contrast, then exemplified in words). It is likely that there is transfer and reinforcement of certain letter-related skills (eg letter discrimination, approximate sound values) between Chichewa lessons and English lessons. Since Chichewa speakers already know the language and therefore understand what they are reading, the fact that teachers may not attend to meaning is not crucial.
6.6.1 On the second visit a further 7 English classes were observed, which together with the 8 observations (7 English, 1 Chichewa) of the initial visit make a total of 15 observations, distributed as follows:
|
|
Year |
Urban |
Rural |
Total |
|
|
1 |
0 |
2 |
5 |
|
|
2 |
1 |
3 |
4* |
|
|
3 |
0 |
2 |
2 |
|
|
4 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
|
|
5 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
|
|
6 |
2 |
1 |
3 |
|
|
7 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
8 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
|
Totals: |
|
5 |
10 |
15 |
* including 1 Chichewa
Due to time constraints imposed by testing and travel, and also the nature of the timetabling it was not possibl to observe classes at all grades in both urban and rural schools.
A record was kept on the spot of teacher and pupil behaviour in all cases, and 13 of the 15 lessons were recorded. The observations will not be described in detail here, but a transcript of one lesson appears in Appendix G. The month and year of the observation is provided for each school.
6.6.2 Year 1 Classes (Schools P and W: both May 92)
School P (Teacher grade: T3): Here there was a high degree of repetition of sentences by teacher and pupils. One girl was kept in front of the class for almost twenty minutes while the class chanted after the teacher "I am washing my face" "She is washing her face" "I am washing my hands" "She is washing her hands". The result of this appeared to be confusion on the part of many learners as to the difference between "I" and "she", "her" and "my". Despite ample evidence of this confusion, the teacher made no attempt to clarify the differences, but merely told those who committed errors to sit down, whereupon the chanting resumed. There seemed very little evidence of preparation, and the teacher went backwards and forwards over the same sentences. New words ("basin" and "soap") were written on the board but no attempt was made to check on understanding, or draw attention to their spelling. The number of pupils present was 86, although the average class size for the first year is 196.
School W (Teacher grade: T3): This lesson was a notable exception to the general methodology. Here the teacher took advantage of the fact that the classroom had no furniture. Having clearly presented "Where are you going?" "I'm going to the door/window/corner/blackboard" he then allowed the children to walk around giving questions and answers to whichever of their classmates they happened to come across. The ease and sense of naturalness with which they did this suggested it was not a show put on for my benefit. He then wrote the sentences on the board, and the children read them aloud and copied them. Although simple, this lesson had a sense of direction and one felt that most children had learned something. The number of pupils was 54, and the average class size for the first year 69.
6.6.3 Year 2 (schools S, N (Nov 91) and P (May 92))
School P (Teacher grade: T2): Here a long section describing a shopping episode was copied from the book onto the board (Book 2, p 46: see Appendix F). Chanting after the teacher ensued, with variations in grouping - eg boys, girls, back row, front row etc. There was no attempt at presenting meaning and little checking of understanding of the text. Although the teacher asked questions, if they were wrongly answered there was no explanation from the teacher (eg when a pupil misinterpreted "where" as "wear" the teacher did not explain the issue). The teacher occasionally aided understanding of her own questions by translating them into Chichewa. Some children were asked to spell words on the board; a child who made a mistake was simply dismissed. There were 128 children in this class (see transcript of this lesson in Appendix G). The predominant impression is that the children spent too long in repetition. When not repeating, they were being, in effect, tested rather than taught.
School S (Teacher grade: T2): First the teacher wrote on the board: In the him him (sic) her house". The words were read by the teacher and repeated by the pupils. The teacher then read single sentences from the book (Book 2) which the class repeated. They appeared to have little coherence eg "In the house." "Yes, I can." "I can see him in the house." The books were then given out (approximately 1 book for 4 children) and the class chanted after the teacher. They then read aloud in groups, many pointing with their fingers at entirely the wrong place in their books, and some simply mumbling. This continued for nearly ten minutes. On two occasions boys who got restive were threatened with the stick. Flashcards with the words that had been written on the board were then produced, and used as prompts for group or individual responses. The class ended with pupils being told to look at the words on the board. These were then rubbed off and various children asked to stand up and spell them. There were 74 children in this class.
School N (Teacher grade: T3) This lesson was recorded by written notes only. It followed the same pattern as the others. Words and sentences were written on the board as follows (from Book 2):
|
|
Under the tree. |
|
under |
Can you see the cow? |
|
cow |
Yes, I can. |
|
goat |
The cow is under the tree. |
|
tree |
Can you see the goat? |
|
them |
Yes, I can. |
|
|
The goat is under the tree. |
|
|
Can you see the cow and the goat. |
|
|
Yes, I can. |
|
|
I can see them under the tree. |
First the teacher read all the sentences. Then he read them one at a time and the pupils repeated as a whole class. Then pupils came out singly (3 girls, 3 boys) and read individual sentences. If they read corectly the class clapped. If they made an error, the class as a whole corrected them by reading the relevant sentence, and the pupil repeated it. On some occasions the teacher provided the correction. Pupils pointed with a stick at the words on the board that they were reading aloud. Two out of 6 readers pointed at one sentence while saying another. (The giggling from the rest of the class suggested that most had noticed the error.) The teacher's response was to say, on both occasions "Ah, that was very bad." Next the teacher read individual words from the list, and children came out one by one to point at the word. Four children did so, all correctly. At the end of the lesson, the whole class read the passage in chorus, then the girls in chorus, and finally the boys. There was no presentation or checking of meaning at any point. The number of pupils was 117 (average 2nd year class size 120).
6.6.4 Year 3 (School N (Nov 91 and May 92: different teachers))
Both these lessons and most of those at higher standards follow a similar pattern. The text is written on the board, a few new words are repeated, the text is chanted in various combinations, (by the whole class, boys only, girls only, different rows etc) questions are asked and answered orally, and pupils may be asked to write answers or copy words afterwards. Both these lessons were characterised by complete absence of attention to meaning.
Nov 1991: Bk 3. Teacher grade: T2 (substituting absent untrained teacher). See Appendix F for text of this lesson.
May 1992: Bk 3. Teacher grade: trainee. In this class the word "caught" was drilled at length with a flashcard (the text title was "River Fishing"). However, questioning a group of 8 girls in Chichewa at the end of the lesson revealed that they did not know what "caught" meant. Their lack of response did not appear to be due to shyness, as they readily answered personal questions.
6.6.5 Year 4 (Schools S (Nov 91) and N (May 92))
School S (Teacher grade: T1) This class took place outside, a few yards from a dusty road, with vehicles passing at intervals. In contrast to most other lessons observed, this one gave attention to the presentation of the meaning of words. The teacher was skillful in this area, and used the fact that the class of 118 was being taught outside to demonstrate "tyre" and "rolling", words which both occurred in the text (Bk 4; see Appendix F). The text of some 170 words had been entirely written out on the blackboard. The teacher kept up a fairly lively pace, but paid attention consistently to the presentation of meaning, though there was little checking of understanding.
School N (Teacher grade: trainee). Again there was an attempt to present the meanings of a list of words (cinema, show, group, row, verandah, hall) at the beginning of the class. This was done by means of a rather elaborate visual aid - a cut-out representation of a cinema. However not all the vocabulary which had been written on the board was presented, and there was little checking of understanding of what was presented. The visual aid was very under-utilised. The text of some 150 words (Bk 4) had already been copied onto the board. After the presentation of the words, the text was read in various combinations of pupils. Two comprehension questions were asked at the end of the reading. "When did Mr Kapezi take the 4 children to the cinema in his car?" and "Who are the names (sic) of the four children?" Given the amount of text that had been copied onto the board, it seems the teacher could have asked rather more, and more probing, questions.
6.6.5 Year 5 (School N, Nov 91)
(Teacher grade: T2) There were 24 pupils in this lesson. The teacher had written on the board:
That's funny-funny
Don't be silly - silly
look what I have got - get got
The meanings of funny, silly, and got were presented by asking one or two children to make sentences with them. It was not at all obvious that the remainder of the class had understood the words. This was followed by the teacher reading aloud, and the class repeating in various combinations, as in other lessons. There were between 2 and 5 pupils to a book. There was no silent reading. Finally there were questions from the book. Attention to meaning was minimal (although the teacher did translate some of the questions into Chichewa). Although there was correction of error by the teacher or other pupils, there was no clarification provided for the pupil who had made the mistake. Pupils were often asked the question "Do you understand?" to which the response was always a choral "Yes".
6.6.7 Year 6 (Schools S (Nov 91 & May 92), and N (May 92))
School S, 1991 (Teacher grade: T2): This was a language class, rather than a reading class. There were 143 children. On the board was written:
|
Uses of like | |
|
1. |
like as a verb |
|
|
I like drinking tea. |
|
2. |
like as a preposition |
|
|
James walks like a cat. |
The teacher explained and exemplified the different uses of "like". Then pupils gave further examples and the teacher then provided yet more examples, with the pupils required to state the function of "like" in them. A revealing exchange was the following:
Teacher: Do you like frogs?
Pupil: No.
Teacher: I don't want you to answer the question. Tell me how "like" is used.
Given the relatively low level of English of many of the pupils, one wonders whether it was worth spending a whole lesson on this distinction, especially as most pupils seemed able to use "like" appropriately, even though they could not give it the correct part of speech label.
School S class in 1992 (Teacher grade: T3): This class was reading a particularly difficult text on trawler fishing in the North Sea (Book 6. See Appendix F). The lesson followed the standard practice of reading words aloud, then reading the text. Again there was minimum attention to meaning.
School N (Teacher grade: T2): The progression was as in many other lessons. Reading of words by the teacher and class, reading aloud of the text by the teacher, followed by the pupils reading aloud, then answering a few questions. Rather more time was spent on individual pupils reading aloud than on choral reading aloud. There was again little attention to meaning.
6.6.8 Year 8 (School S (Nov 91))
Teacher grade: T2. The text was fairly difficult (Bk 8). There were 87 pupils, sharing about 60 books (despite the fact that there were said to be nearly 4 times more English books than pupils at this Grade). The teacher copied the new words as listed in the book onto the blackboard (channel, irrigate, irrigation, fast-flowing, continue, success). Pupils were asked to make sentences with these words. If a pupil did not already know the word, no help was given by the teacher. Pupils were then asked to read silently. There was no reading aloud by the pupils in this class. After some minutes the teacher asked the pupils the questions from the book which they answered orally. Pupils were then asked to write in their exercise books the answers to questions 6 to 10. While they were doing so, the teacher went around the class looking at the work of individual pupils. The impression given here was that the teacher was testing, rather than teaching.
It appears that, irrespective of the problems of lack of material and of large classes, one of the most obvious ways in which teaching could be improved in Malawi would be if teachers could give more attention to the careful presentation of meaning and employ adequate techniques to check on understanding. Judging by these lessons, the predominant methodology for the teaching of reading in the first five years of primary school would seem to be drilling of words and sentences through repetition. The principles behind this methodology are those of the "look and say" approach to teaching reading, allied to the behaviourist "pattern drill" approach to foreign language teaching.
The approach devotes minimum attention to meaning, first because "look and say" reading was intended for learners who were learning to read in their mother tongue; second because the behaviourist "pattern drill" approach to the learning of foreign language was primarily intended to reinforce structural patterns rather than to attend to the meaning of those structural patterns or to the meaning of lexical items (indeed one teacher trainer referred to this as "pattern reading"). However, in fairness to the textbook writers, it should be pointed out that the Teachers Books advocate more attention to meaning than I generally saw carried out in the lessons observed.
The approach to reading in most lessons paid very little attention to presenting meaning or checking understanding of what was read. The main occasions on which understanding is acknowledged is when pupils do not understand questions which the teacher asks them; in these cases the questions are often translated into Chichewa. Otherwise there is little attention given to the meaning of the texts, with the result that the reading lesson seems, for the majority of the pupils, especially in the lower primary school, to be a ritual that is mystifying and eventually, stultifying. Many give the impression of floundering in a miasma of incomprehension. This impression is confirmed by the low scores obtained by pupils in Standards 3 and 4 on the reading tests. The reading lesson tends often to degenerate into "reading aloud" without understanding.
I would not condemn reading aloud out of hand. There may be roles for it in the early stages, possibly as far as Standard 3, and in certain cases beyond. However, teachers need to ask why it is being done on each occasion. Purposes put forward by those in favour of reading aloud include:
(a) in the case of individual reading aloud:(i) to check that the individual is able to decode
(ii) to give the individual practice in decoding(b) in the cases of individual and group reading aloud:
(iii) to practice pronunciation
(iv) to reinforce grammatical patterns
(v) to reinforce recognition of written words(c) in the case of group reading aloud
(vi) to enable the individual to carry out (ii) to (v) without being the focus of the teacher's attention
(vii) to carry out (ii) to (v) more economically
(viii) to provide variety in the classroom
The only purpose where reading aloud is crucial is (i). In all other cases there are ways other than reading aloud of achieving the same object. Reading aloud may have a role in these other functions, but should not be the exclusive means used. Furthermore, whatever the purpose of reading aloud, pupils should always understand what they are saying. A synchronised reading performance by a class is no guarantee of understanding or of learning. At its worse excessive choral repetition is a "reading-like" activity rather than reading itself; the children say appropriate words from memory - the same words as they would have said if they had really been able to read - but for many pupils this performance masks a lack of real competence. Reading aloud should be kept within limits and used for clear purposes, rather than merely a time filling device.
However, the main point to be made is that irrespective of the degree of reading aloud in a class, attention to meaning and understanding is essential. It is to be hoped that the new Activities with English materials will help to reintegrate reading and understanding into the classrooms of Malawi.
There are of course other teacher issues which need attention, such as the pace and direction of the lesson, having a clear objective to the lesson, and allowing pupils genuine opportunities to express themselves and ask questions if they do not understand. These may be part of a complex of socio-pedagogic culture which it is not the aim of this study to unravel; however, attention to explaining meaning and checking understanding of meaning is a crucial and manageable issue to which the attention of teachers and teacher trainers should be urgently directed.
In addition to methodological issues of course, the situation would be helped by smaller classes, and more books. However, in terms of what is short-term and relatively cheap, a change of focus from accurate parrotting to a concern for meaning is in my view essential irrespective of other improvements.
