Home⇛Psychology and Education: A Multidisciplinary Journal⇛vol. 14 no. 6 (2023)

ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHERS’ EXPERIENCE IN TEACHING ENGLISH AMONG THE STRUGGLING JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS

Josamenne Olores | Arnel Pradia | Marissa Parcon

Discipline: Education

 

Abstract:

This qualitative study aimed to explore the challenges faced by Junior High School English teachers in teaching struggling students, specifically in the areas of Comprehension, Vocabulary, Pronunciation, and Fluency. Additionally, it sought to uncover the coping strategies employed by these teachers to address these challenges and recommend effective teaching strategies for enhancing English language skills. Ten Junior High School English teachers willingly participated in one-on-one semi-formal interviews, with their responses serving as the primary data for the study. Thematic analysis was used to analyze the gathered data. The study revealed several challenges encountered by teachers. In the area of fluency, challenges included learners' difficulty in comprehending words and ideas, poor vocabulary skills, and student reluctance to learn. Regarding vocabulary, struggling learners faced comprehension difficulties and struggled with understanding basic English words and concepts. Pronunciation challenges involved common speech faults like substitution, mispronunciation, and slurring. In the area of comprehension, challenges included difficulty in constructing simple sentences, slow reading speed, and reading difficulties. To address these challenges, teachers employed diverse teaching strategies, including peer tutoring, interactive activities, games, and the integration of information and communication technology (ICT) in learning. In conclusion, teaching struggling learners posed significant challenges, but English teachers effectively addressed these challenges through the implementation of suitable teaching strategies and activities. Identifying the root causes of these challenges was instrumental in developing coping mechanisms and nurturing English proficiency among Junior High School students. The teachers' initiative and creativity played a pivotal role in enhancing students' English language skills, which are valuable in their senior high school and tertiary education.



References:

  1. Ahn, J. & McEachin, A. (2017). Student enrollment patterns andachievement in Ohio’s online charter schools. EducationalResearcher, 46(1), 44–57.
  2. Alexander, Francie. (2018). Understanding Vocabulary. Retrievedf r o m https://www.scholastic.com/teachers/articles/teaching.../understandingvocabulary
  3. Almusharraf, N. (2020). Teachers’ perspectives on promotinglearner autonomy for vocabulary development: A case study. CogentEducation, 7(1), 1-23.
  4. Arnesen, K. T., Hveem, J., Short, C. R., West, R. E., & Barbour, M.K. (2019). K-12 online learning journal articles: Trends from twodecades of scholarship. Distance Education, 40(1), 32–53.
  5. Bai, B., & Yuan, R. (2019). EFL teachers’ beliefs and practicesabout pronunciation teaching. ELT Journal, 73(2), 134-143.
  6. Bakti, K.N.N. (2017). Vocabulary learning strategies used by juniorhigh school students. Indonesian Journal of English LanguageStudies 3(2), 42-57.
  7. Bernardo, T. (2009). Language expectancy theory: Elaboration,explication, and extension. Communication and social influenceprocesses, 29-52.
  8. Breitkreutz, J., Derwing, T., & Rossiter, M. (2002). Pronunciationteaching practices in Canada. TESL Canada Journal, 19, 51–61.
  9. Bilbao, M. E., Donguila, C. L., & Vasay, M. J. (2016). Level ofreading comprehension of the education students. InternationalJournal of Liberal Arts, Education, Social Sciences, andPhilosophical Studies.
  10. Borup, J., & Evmenova, A. S. (2019). The effectiveness ofprofessional development in overcoming obstacles to effectiveonline instruction in a college of education. Online Learning, 23(2),1–20.
  11. Brown, H. D. 2001. Teaching by Principles: An InteractiveApproach to Language Pedagogy (2nd Edition). Longman: SanFrancisco State University.
  12. Bruner, J. S. (1961). The act of discovery. Harvard EducationalReview, 31, 21–32.
  13. Bruner, J. S. (1966). Some elements of discovery. In Shulman L. S.,Keislar, E. R. (Ed.), Learning by discovery: A critical appraisal. Chicago: Rand McNally, pp. 104-111.
  14. Chakraborty, P., Mittal, P., Gupta, M. S., Yadav, S., & Arora, A.(2020). Opinion of students on online education during theCOVID-19 pandemic. Human Behavior and EmergingTechnologies, 1(1), 1–9.
  15. Chamot, A. U. (1987). The learning strategies of ESL students. In E.Wenden & J. Rubin (Eds.), Learner strategies in language learning(pp. 71-85). Hemel Hempstead, England: Prentice Hall.
  16. Chingos, M. M., & Schwerdt, G. (2014). Virtual schooling andstudent learning: Evidence from the Florida virtual school. HarvardK e n n e d y S c h o o l . R e t r i e v e d f r o m http://k12accountability.org/resources/OnlineEducation/FLVS_PEPG_working_paper.pdf
  17. Clarke, V. & Braun, V. (2019). Guidelines for reviewers and editorsevaluating thematic analysis manuscripts. Retrieved from https://cdn.auckland.ac.nz/assets/psych/about/ourresearch/documents/TA%20website%20update%2010.8.17%20review%20checklist.pdf
  18. Creswell, J.W. & Plano Clark, V.L. (2011). Designing andconducting mixed method research (2nd). Sage; Thousand Oaks,CA.
  19. Desfitranita, D. (2017). Students’ rules and practices: How to speakEnglish fluently? Al-Ta’lim Journal, 24(1), 19-28.
  20. Downes, S. (2010). New technology supporting informal learning.Journal of Emerging Technologies in Web Intelligence, 2(1), 27-33.
  21. Drbseh, M. M. H. (2019). Saudi EFL learners’ difficulties inlearning English: A case of secondary school students. Journal ofApplied Linguistics and Language Research, 6(1), 140-151.
  22. Dunlosky, J., Rawson, K. A., Marsh, E. J., Nathan, M. J., &Willingham, D. T. (2013). Improving students’ learning witheffective learning techniques. Psychological Science in the PublicInterest, 14(1), 4–58. https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100612453266
  23. Dynarski, S. (2018, January 19). Online courses are harming thestudents who need the most help. The New York Times. Retrievedf r o m : https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/19/business/online-coursesareharming-the-students-who-need-the-most-help.html
  24. Fei, X., & Derakhshan, A. (2021). A conceptual review of positiveteacher interpersonal communication behaviors in the instructionalcontext. Frontiers in Psychology, 12(1), 2623.
  25. Frost, R. (1998). Toward a strong phonological theory of visualword recognition: True issues and false trails. PsychologicalBulletin, 123, 71-99.
  26. Gan, S. (2021). The role of teacher-student relatedness and teachers'engagement on students' engagement in EFL classrooms. Frontiersin Psychology, 12(1), 1-4.Geography/Demographic Profile of the School, Libungan NationalHigh School E-SIP 2023-2025
  27. Gilakjani, A. P. (2012). The Significance of Pronunciation inEnglish Language Teaching. Lahijan Branch. Islamic AzadUniversity. Lahijan, Iran. Retrieved on 17.11.2020from http://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/elt/article/view/15940/10703.
  28. Gilakjani, A. P., & Sabouri, N. B. (2016). How can students improvetheir reading comprehension skills? Journal of Studies in Education,6(1), 229-240.
  29. Glesne, C. (1999). Becoming qualitative researchers. New York:Longman.
  30. Gonzales, W. W., & Torres, C. A. (2015). Looking at CIRC throughquantitative lenses: Can it improve the reading comprehension ofFilipino ESL learners? Philippine ESL Journal, 15(1), 67-98.
  31. Gough, P. and Tunmer, W. (1986). Decoding, reading, and readingdisability. Remedial and Special Education, 7, 6-10. Retrieved: https://journal.imse.com/what-is-reading-fluency/
  32. Gross, B., & Opalka, A. (2020, June). Too many schools leavelearning to chance during the pandemic. Center for ReinventingP u b l i c E d u c a t i o n . R e t r i e v e d  f r o m : https://www.crpe.org/sites/default/files/final_national_sample_brief_2020.pdf
  33. Gu, Y. (2013). Vocabulary learning strategies. In C. A. Chapelle(Ed.), The encyclopedia of applied linguistics. BlackwellPublishing.
  34. Guba, E. G. & Lincoln, Y. S. (1989). Fourth generation evaluation.Newbury Park, CA: Sage. 87.
  35. Halliday, M.A.K. & Mattiessen, C.M.I.M. (2014). Halliday’sintroduction to functional grammar (4th edn.). Abingdon: Routledge
  36. Hamilton, L. S., Kaufman, J. H., & Diliberti, M. (2020). Teachingand leading through a pandemic: Key findings from the Americaneducator panels spring 2020 COVID-19 surveys. https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA168-2.html
  37. Harmer, J. (2015). The practice of English language teaching (5thed.). Harlow, UK: Pearson Longman.
  38. Hartmann, P. & Blass, L. (2007). Quest: Reading and writing. NewYork, NY. McGraw-Hill
  39. Heissel, J. (2016). The relative benefits of live versus onlinedelivery: Evidence from virtual Algebra I in North Carolina.Economics of Education Review, 53(1), 99–115.
  40. Hiver, P., Al-Hoorie, A. H., Vitta, J. P., & Wu, J. (2021).Engagement in language learning: A systematic review of 20 yearsof research methods and definitions. Language Teaching Research,1(1), 1-30.
  41. Jahara, S. F., & Abdelrady, A. H. (2021). Pronunciation problemsencountered by EFL learners: An empirical study. Arab WorldEnglish Journal (AWEJ), 12(4), 194-212
  42. Katz, V. & Rideout, V. (2021). Learning at home while under-connected: Lower income families during the COVID-19 pandemic.W a s h i n g t o n , D C : N e w A m e r i c a . https://www.newamerica.org/education-policy/reports/learning-at-home-whileunderconnected/
  43. Kennedy, K., & Archambault, L. (2012). Offering preserviceteachers field experiences in K–12 online learning: A nationalsurvey of teacher education programs. Journal of Teacher Education,63(3), 185–200.
  44. Khany, R., & Khosravian, F. (2014). Iranian EFL learnersâ—»vocabulary development through Wikipedia. English LanguageTeaching, 7(7), 2014. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v7n7p57 [Crossref]
  45. Kunsch, C., Jitendra, A., & Sood, S. (2007). The effects of peer-mediated instruction in mathematics for students with learningproblems: A research synthesis. Learning Disabilities Research & P r a c t i c e , 2 2 ( 1 ) , 1 - 12 R e t r i e v e d f r o m : https://www.researchgate.net/publication/319292234_Impact_of_Peer_Tutoring_on_Learning_of_Students/link/59a1416a458515fd1fe35b44/download
  46. LaBontee, R. (2016). Investigating reported vocabulary learningstrategy use in Swedish second language learning: From interviewsto questionnaires. Journal of Foreign Language Teaching andApplied Linguistics, 3(3), 131-140.
  47. Lehrer-Small, A. (2021). Exclusive data: Absenteeism surgedamong English learners during pandemic. The 74 Million. https://www.the74million.org/article/exclusive-dataabsenteeism-surged-among-english-learners-duringpandemic
  48. Leong, L.-M. & Ahmadi, S.M. (2017). An analysis of factorsinfluencing learners’ English-speaking skill. International Journal ofResearch in English Education, 1(1), 34-41.
  49. Leung, C. (2002). Extensive reading and language learning: A diarystudy of a beginning learner of Japanese. Reading in a ForeignL a n g u a g e , 1 4 ( 1 ) , 1 6 . R e t r i e v e d f r o m http://nflrc.hawaii.edu/RFL/April2002/leung/leung.html
  50. Lincoln, Y. S. & Guba, E. G. (1985). Qualitative inquiry. BeverlyHills, CA: Sage. 137
  51. Lugoloobi-Nalunga, M. (2017). Teaching English grammar: A studyof approaches to formal grammar instruction in the subject ofE n g li s h in S w e d i sh up per s e c o n d a r y s ch o o l. https://www.divaportal.org/smash/get/diva2:1168665/FULLTEXT01.pdf
  52. Marrelli, A.F. (2007). Collecting data through case studies. Wiley,45(7), 39-44.
  53. McGarry, R. (2012). Teaching English as a second language: Givingnew learners an everyday grammar. Jefferson, N.C.: McFarland &Co
  54. Miller L. Developing listening skills with authentic materials. ESLMagazine. 2003.
  55. Muzammil, L. & Saifullah (2021). Enhancing readingcomprehension of junior high school students through scaffoldinginstruction. Advances in Social Science, Education and HumanitiesResearch, 542(1), 96-100
  56. Mystkowska-Wiertelak, A. (2020). Teachers’ accounts of learners’engagement and disaffection in the language classroom. TheLanguage Learning Journal, 1(1), 1-13.
  57. Nagy, W. E., & Scott, J. (2000). Vocabulary processes. In R. Barr,P. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & M. Kamil (Eds.), Handbook ofreading research (pp. 269-284). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence ErlbaumA s s o c i a t e shttps://ijels.com/upload_document/issue_files/15IJELS-109201920-Effectsof.pdf
  58. Namaziandost, E. (2017). Pronunciation problems of high schoolEFL students: An error analysis approach with pedagogicalimplication. International Journal of English Research, 3(4), 77-82.
  59. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. (2000).Report of the National Reading Panel. Retrieved: https://journal.imse.com/what-is-reading-fluency/
  60. Ojo, O. I. (2003). Narrative descriptive, argumentative,conversational and dialogic speech types. In Alabi, A.O. (Ed.). Newperspectives in english language skills. Oyo: Immaculate CityPublisher.
  61. Oppermann, E., & Lazarides, R. (2021). Elementary school teachers'self-efficacy, student-perceived support, and students’ mathematicsinterest. Teaching and Teacher Education, 103(1), 103351.
  62. Oxford, R. L. (2017). Teaching and researching language learningstrategies: Self-regulation in context (2nd ed.). Abingdon, England:Routledge.
  63. Pulham, E., & Graham, C. R. (2018). Comparing K-12 online andblended teaching competencies: A literature review. DistanceEducation, 39(3), 411–432.
  64. Rajadurai, J. (2006). Pronunciation issues in non-native contexts: AMalaysian case study. Malaysian Journal of ELT Research, 2,42-59. https://journal.ump.edu.my/ijleal/article/view/483/97
  65. Renandya, W. A. & Jacobs, G. M. (2002). Extensive reading: Whyaren’t we all doing it? In J. C. Richards & W. A. Renandya (Eds.),Methodology in Language Teaching: An Anthology of CurrentPractice (pp. 295–302). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
  66. Rice, M. F., & Deschaine, M. E. (2020). Orienting toward teachereducation for online environments for all students. The EducationalForum, 84(2). 114–125.
  67. Rippel, M. (2009). All About Spelling series. The OldSch o o lh ou se® M ag azine, LLC. Retriev ed from http://creation.com/effective-spelling-strategies, on January 23rd,2014.
  68. Rohayati,T., et al. English Study Program Faculty of TeacherTraining and Education Jambi University (2014). https://www.academia.edu/9553692/THE_CHALLENGES_IN_TEACHING_WRITING_SKILLScruggs%20and%20Mastropieri,%201998
  69. Ryan RM, Deci EL. Promoting self-determined school engagement;motivation, learning and well-being. In Wentzel KR, Wigfield A.(Eds.). Handbook of motivation at school. New York: Routledge.2009;171-196
  70. Scruggs, T.E. & Mastropieri, M.A. (1998). In S. Ehly (Ed.), Peer-assisted learning. (pp. 165-182). Mahwah, NJ US: LawrenceErlbaum Associates Publishers
  71. Schwandt, T.A. & Halpern, E.S. (1988). Linking auditing and meta-evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. 56.
  72. Shankweiler, D. (1989). How problems of comprehension arerelated to difficulties in word reading. In D. Shankweiler & I.Y.Liberman (Eds.), phonology and reading disability: Solving thereading puzzle (pp.35-68). Ann Arbor: University of MichiganPress.
  73. Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digitalage. International Journal of Instructional Technology and DistanceLearning, 2(1), 3-10.
  74. Soltani, R. (2011). Extensive reading: A stimulant to improvevocabulary knowledge. Studies in Literature and Language, 2(3),161–167. https://doi.org/10.3968/j.sll.1923156320110203.018
  75. Stahl, S.A. (1999). Vocabulary development. Newton Upper Falls,MA: Brookline Books.
  76. Stake, R. (1995). The art of case study research (pp. 49-68).Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  77. Tangco, L., Macaraeg, A., De Guzma, M. and Dar Santos (2002).Effective Speech and Oral Communication. Manila: MIT, 95-10
  78. Tomlinson, C. (1999). The differentiated classroom: Responding tothe needs of all learners. Alexandria, VA: ASCD. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/324843878_THE_THEORY_OF_DIFFERENTIATED_INSTRUCTION_AND_ITS_APPLICABILITY_AN_E-LEARNING_PERSPECTIVE
  79. Tyminski, A. M., Haltiwanger, L., Zambak, V. S., Horton, R., &Hedetniemi, T. (2013). Developing inquiry practices in middlegrades mathematics teachers: Examining the introduction oftechnology. Contemporary Issues in Technology and TeacherEducation, 13(4), 325–359.
  80. Van de Wege, M. (2018). Teaching strategies for independentvocabulary development teaching vocabulary. The TESOLE n c y c l o p ed i a of En glish L an g u a g e T eac h in g , 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118784235.eelt0754
  81. Wallace, J.M. (1982). Teaching Vocabulary. London: Briddles. LtdWood R. Students’ motivation to engage with science learningactivities through the lens of self-determination theory: Results froma single-case school-based study. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics,Science and Technology Education. 2019;15(7):1-22
  82. Wright, A. et al. (2006). Games for Language Learning. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.( http://www.proiectpro.com/ICR/Research/FI/Summary.htm ). https://rdw.rowan.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2144&context=etd

Tools


Copyright © 2024  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic