ENGLISH PROFICIENCY IN INDIA: PROBLEMS AND PROSPECTS Rajuri Ramesh
Assistant Professor of English, Princeton Institute of Engineering and Technology for Women, Hyderabad
Abstract - In this paper, explore significant issues with English language competence in India, with a focus on the amount and type of English language proficiency that English language teachers must possess to enable classroom instruction. We first clarify the concept of competence and how it is typically tested, and then offer data on the English language competency of instructors and students in India and the Asian area. The next section provides research that explains why a minimum level of skill is essential for effective instruction. As many instructors may not have attained a level of proficiency deemed enough for effective instruction, we address essential SLA theoretical ideas that can be used to build a training programme to increase teachers' proficiency. In conclusion, we urge all stakeholders (i.e., policymakers, language education providers, and professional groups) to collaborate and identify solutions to assist teachers in acquiring a better level of English proficiency.
Keywords: English Proficiency, India, Problems, Prospects and effective instruction.
1 INTRODUCTION
Language competency generally refers to the capacity to use language for a variety of communicative objectives. It is argued that proficient users have a good command of the language when they can comprehend it with out a problem, communicate a variety of concepts clearly in speech and writing, and engage with other speakers without difficulty.
Language competency is typically evaluated using five performance indicators: accuracy, fluency, complexity, appropriacy, and capacity (Richards, 2018)1.
The ability to produce language with correct pronunciation, vocabulary, and grammar is referred to as accuracy.
We receive a high score on this indicator if our voice and writing are error-free.
Fluency refers to the skill of expressing ideas fluently and using linguistic resources to maintain the flow of our communication and prevent communication breakdowns. Fluency in writing is evidenced by the capacity to structure thoughts coherently so that they flow smoothly together. Complexity refers to our ability to employ complex language, i.e., our command of an extensive vocabulary and syntax. The vocabulary and sentence patterns of an experienced speaker are more diverse than those of a beginner speaker, whose
1Richards, W. A., Hamied, F. A., & Nurkamto, J.
(2018). English language proficiency in Indonesia:
Issues and prospects. Journal of Asia TEFL, 15(3), 618.
speech is defined by the use of simpler terminology. Appropriateness refers to whether the language we employ is pertinent and suitable for the intended purpose, audience, and situational environment. Capacity relates to how much of what we know can be used to discuss and write about a range of topics in a variety of situations (formal or casual) and at what levels of sophistication (superficial or deep). In the context of the classroom, capacity refers to the degree to which a teacher is able to utilizehis/her their ability in the target language to explain, give examples, select relevant teaching resources, model right language use, and provide meaningful feedback on student performance.
On the basis of these performance metrics, communicative competence can be classified into a variety of competency levels, such as elementary, intermediate, and advanced. For teaching and evaluative purposes, each level may be subdivided into multiple sub levels.
Consequently, the elementary level is subdivided into pre-elementary, elementary, and post-elementary levels.
Typically, providers of language training utilize this classification for instructional and certification purposes.
The framework classifies proficiency into three categories: Basic user, Independent user, and Proficient user. Each category contains two sub- levels (See Appendix 1). Each subscale's descriptors provide information about
what individuals can do with the language and at what levels of expertise. A Basic User at the A1 level, for instance, can use the language to address the most fundamental conversational needs, such as making brief introductions and asking and answering questions regarding personal information. Extremely Proficient Users at the C2 level can comprehend complicated information from a variety of sources and communicate a broad range of communicative requirements fluently and accurately using strong vocabulary where appropriate.
2 IMPORTANCE OF PROFICIENCY This question's answer is fairly obvious.
One of the important components of a language teacher's professional knowledge is language proficiency. Professional language teachers are expected to have sufficient content knowledge (knowledge about the English language), pedagogical content knowledge (knowledge of how to teach English), and language fluency to effectively teach through the target language. Obviously, the association between fluency and teaching efficacy is not perfect. A person with a very high level of proficiency cannot automatically teach effectively in the classroom. If this were true, then all native speakers would be outstanding classroom instructors.
Even extremely proficient native English speakers need to master classroom language and utilize it effectively to support language learning in the classroom, according to research (Richards, 2017)2.
However, it is essential to emphasize that enough proficiency is a prerequisite for teaching. It is necessary, but not sufficient, for effective instruction.
Possessing a sufficient level of competency permits teachers to traverse their lessons more easily. According to research, teachers with a greater degree of English proficiency appear to be more adept at utilizing English in the classroom and providing adequate language support to their pupils. H. Richards et al. (2013) studied the following seven components of teaching in a recent study involving New
2Richards, J. C. (2017). Teaching English through English: Proficiency, pedagogy and performance. RELC Journal, 48(1), 7-30.
Zealand foreign language teachers with varying levels of competency.
Utilization of language target resources
Provision of suitable language models
Providing corrective feed forward
Utilization of the TL for class management
Provision of precise explanations
Providing diverse language input
Capacity for improvising
Two of the seven teachers in the study with higher levels of proficiency were able to cover all seven aspects satisfactorily, while the other five performed poorly on the last two, namely the ability to provide rich language input and the ability to improvise (e.g., responding to questions about the target language or culture).
In addition, research indicates that a very high degree of proficiency, while desirable, is likely not the most effective method for enhancing the overall teaching efficacy. The reality is that the majority of English teachers in the globe are non- native speakers, and only a small percentage of them achieve a very high level of proficiency. ELT and education experts agree, however, that a minimum level of English competence is required for instructors to be able to teach in English (Richards, 2017). Research conducted in Hong Kong by Tsang (2017) provides proof that a specific proficiency threshold is actually essential. Once teachers have crossed this threshold, however, her research suggests that competency seems to contribute little to teaching effectiveness (as assessed by their ability to engage students in the learning process). Other elements, such as teaching skills and the capacity of teachers to engage and motivate pupils, appear to play a larger role in teaching.
In Hong Kong, where the government had already established a competency benchmark for language teachers, Tsang conducted his research (English and Putonghua). The Ministry of Education (MOE) developed a language proficiency center to evaluate and certify university graduates (including those from universities of teacher education) who seek to enter the teaching profession as language teachers. Those who wish to teach English must pass the LPATE3) exam (Language Competency Assessment
for Teachers of English) and fulfil the MOE's proficiency criteria. Since 2001, the HKEAA and the Education Bureau (EDB) have jointly administered the Language Ability Assessment for Teachers (LPAT), which evaluates applicants' English Language and Putonghua proficiency in preparation for teaching the relevant topic in schools. Anyone who meets the entry requirements may participate in the evaluation.
The evaluation comprises of oral and written papers, as well as a classroom language evaluation offered exclusively to teachers. The Language Proficiency Requirement for teaching the relevant topic in schools is considered satisfied for candidates who achieve Level 3 or higher on all examination papers.
3 THE PROFICIENCY LEVEL OF ENGLISH TEACHERS IN INDIA
This is a highly significant subject, but official national data on the language proficiency of English teachers is largely lacking. Where data are accessible (e.g., Azis, 2018; Hamied, 2018), it is not always simple to interpret this data meaningfully. There are two issues present. First, the proficiency test consists mostly of multiple-choice questions that assess instructors' receptive language skills; therefore, the test results do not provide meaningful information regarding teachers' communicative and pedagogical language proficiency. Second, test results are reported in terms of raw scores, not proficiency bands. As is common knowledge, test scores do not provide useful information about what a person can or cannot do with the language, and are therefore of limited use to policymakers and language educators3.
However, the Indonesian Ministry of Education has some intriguing data on the English competency of teachers who taught at International Standard Schools (locally known as RSBI schools) few years ago. According to Coleman (2009), just a minuscule fraction (less than one percent) of the 27,000 RSBI instructors who took the TOEIC test had a high level of English proficiency. Half of them had a very poor
3Renandya, W. A., Hamied, F. A., & Nurkamto, J.
(2018). English language proficiency in Indonesia:
Issues and prospects. Journal of Asia TEFL, 15(3), 618.
proficiency level, while the other half had an elementary or intermediate skill level.
More over half of all teachers and principals had only a "novice" level of English proficiency, scoring between 10 and 250 on a scale of 990 points. An further 45 percent of teachers and principals have a "elementary" or
"intermediate" level of English. Only 0.7%
of teachers and 0.2% of school principals have "advanced working" or "general professional" levels of English proficiency.
(Coleman, 2009, p. 7) While the data presented above may not reflect the competency level of all English instructors in Indonesia, the general consensus among ELT academics in Indonesia is that the proficiency level of English teachers in Indonesia is highly variable.
On multiple occasions, we have encountered lecturers whose English is fluent and flawless; nevertheless, we have also encountered instructors whose proficiency falls below our expectations.
On the CEFR scale, the majorityare likely fall into the lower intermediate range, between B1 and B2 levels. It appears that anecdotal evidence supports this observation. Senior teachers and teacher educators with whom we have collaborated frequently relay their findings that many Indonesian English instructors lack fluency and confidence in speaking the language outside of the classroom. Many are forced to revert to their L1 due to their weak skills and the fact that their kids may not comprehend much English.
Fresh graduates from Indonesian teacher education colleges exhibit a range of skill levels. Again, no official data is available. According to our knowledge, some teacher education colleges require their student teachers to demonstrate competence prior to graduation, but others simply let their students to leave the programme even if they have not reached the proficiency requirement for teaching English in schools. Typically, these universities utilise the TOEFL as their recommended competence examination for graduation. The normal range for benchmark scores is between 450 and 525, while certain elite universities may require a higher TOEFL score.
Given TOEFL's popularity in Indonesia, the subject of whether TOEFL
is an adequate language competence test for teachers is pertinent. Most ELT specialists would likely concur that the TOEFL is not the best indicator of a person's general language proficiency. As we all know, the TOEFL is meant to evaluate a candidate's capacity to function in an academic environment where English is the primary language of teaching, such as in the United States.
Therefore, while the TOEFL may be a valid test for those who wish to pursue academic courses overseas, it is likely not the most accurate indicator of one's overall language proficiency. There is no assurance that someone with a high TOEFL score can speak English well in social, non-academic contexts. Moreover, the TOEFL does not evaluate the capacity to use English for teaching objectives.
There is consensus in the literature on teacher education that an English teacher must be skilled in both Standard English and classroom English (Richards, 2017).
This is a particular language competence that competent teachers require in order to effectively teach English through English.
However, inadequate language skills among English teachers are not unique to Indonesia. Other nations in the region and in other parts of the world have the same dilemma. For instance, Butler (2004) reported that many primary and secondary school English teachers in Korea felt they lacked sufficient English to teach effectively in English (the situation may have improved after a series of policy initiatives involving retraining of English teachers to improve their proficiency).
More recently, Young et al. (2014) note that many NNEST (non-native English- speaking teachers) teachers may have little English competence and must rely on their native language when instructing their students4, who likewise have limited English proficiency. Consequently, it is not uncommon for both teachers and students to use their L1 for the majority of English courses.
Similarly, it appears that many English teachers in the region do not meet the requirements imposed by their respective governments. In a recent
4Richards, J. C. (2017). Teaching English through English Proficiency, pedagogy and performance. RELC Journal, 48(1), 7-30.
colloquium on language teacher education in Asia at the 2017 AsiaTEFL conference, which was chaired by the first author, the colloquium speaker from Thailand shared the results of a survey involving approximately 400 English teachers in Thailand. 60% of them had knowledge of English and teaching approaches below the level of the curriculum they were teaching; of the remaining 40%, just 3%
had a respectable level of fluency, and only 20% taught classes for which they were certified and competent.
Other researches mostly concur with Sitthikul's assessment of the English teacher skill levels in Thailand. Baker (2008) and Todd (2016) argue for a more deliberate effort to assist Thai English teachers in developing greater confidence in the classroom. The proficiency statistics from Vietnam are comparable.
In the same colloquium, the Vietnamese speaker reported that approximately fifty percent of primary and secondary school English instructors in Vietnam had a proficiency level below the standards established by Vietnam's Ministry of Education and Training. Malaysia was more successful than Thailand and Vietnam. The Malaysian colloquium speaker indicated that the average proficiency level of English instructors was B2, which is somewhat below the national benchmark of C1 on the CEFR scale.
It is vital to highlight that the three nations have accumulated national statistics on teacher proficiency and initiated large retraining programmes for their teachers to increase their competence levels. Indonesia, on the other hand, has not even begun. We are therefore pleased that TEFLIN (The Association for the Teaching of English as a Foreign Language in Indonesia) has taken an important first step in the right direction by hosting a summit in February 2018 and inviting key stakeholders (i.e.
policy makers, senior and master teachers, language teacher educators, language researchers, and publishers) to discuss issues and challenges pertaining to language teachers, language teaching, and language teacher education.
4 ENGLISH PROFICIENCY IN INDIA COMPARE WITH OTHER COUNTRIES
English is one of the most essential languages in the world, and it's no surprise that English proficiency is high across many different countries. However, some English-speaking countries fare better than others regarding speaking and understanding English. In this article, we'll take a look at how English proficiency in India compares with other major English-speaking countries. India ranks fifth in the world when it comes to adults who can speak and understand basic vocabulary and grammar in a foreign language. This ranking is consistent across all age groups - from those aged 18 or older who scored 50% on the International Pronunciation Exam (IPA) to 6-year-olds who scored 46%.
Indian students also perform well on standardized tests for foreign language acquisition - such as the TOEFL iBT or Advanced Placement Examination (AP).
These results suggest that Indians are already well prepared to study and work internationally in any field that requires good communication skills.
Additionally, India's abundance of talented professionals means that businesses will not have any difficulty hiring bilingual staff if they require fluency in more than one language. As you can see, there are many benefits associated with being an educated Indian speaker of English. Not only do Indians enjoy high levels of success when speaking and understanding English around the world, but they're also highly versatile career-wise due to their natural aptitude for Languages Learning. English proficiency is an important issue not just in India but across the world. It ranks as the third most-preferred language after Chinese and Spanish, according to a 2017 study by Fluent 2018.
However, English proficiency differs significantly between countries. In India, for example, only around 54% of respondents were found to be proficient in English. This compares poorly with other developed countries like the United States (where 90% are considered competent), England (which stands at around 74%), or Canada (which tops 85%).
There are several factors that may contribute to this disparity:
Educated Indians tend to favor their mother tongue over English.
Poverty often limits opportunities for people to learn about and use English effectively.
Indian businesses typically don't invest in training their employees in English skills.
The government hasn't made it a priority yet...or has done so inadequately.
5 THE STRATEGIES FOR IMPROVING PROFICIENCY
Shawn (2015) gives a compilation of professional viewpoints concerning the relationship between broad SLA theories and language education. Citing Ortega (2007), he examines three potential connections between SLA theories and language instruction: (1) no influence on language instruction, (2) minimal impact on language instruction, and (3) positive effects on language instruction. Theories belonging to the third category of language learning theories, i.e., those that can assist or enhance language acquisition in the classroom, are of particular importance for the purpose of this research. The majority of scholars believe the Input Processing Theory, Interaction Theory, and Skill Acquisition Theory applicable to language training, as described by Loewen (2015). (p. 9). We would add the Noticing Hypothesis to these three (Schmidt, 1990). Despite the fact that this can be subsumed under the theories of input processing and interaction, it merits a distinct mention because the majority of language programmes include a sizeable form- focused component5.
Other theories can be employed to help teaching in general (e.g., Vygotsky's socio-cultural theory of learning), but the four aforementioned SLA theories should serve as the primary theoretical foundations for acquiring language competency. ELT specialists, such as Nation (2007), have constructed a model based on the aforementioned notions. He suggests that a good language programme be structured around four learning areas.
Below are the four areas and their respective theoretical perspectives.
5Bygate, M. (Ed.). (2015). Domains and Directions in the Development of TBLT: A Decade of Plenaries from the International Conference (Vol. 8). John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Moreover, he advises that each of these subtopics should comprise around one- fourth of the curriculum.
Nation and his colleagues have written extensively on this framework, employing it as a foundation for establishing and developing language curriculum and for teaching listening, speaking, reading, and writing (Nation, 2008; Nation & Newton, 2008). Given the robust theoretical logic supporting this paradigm, its implementation may result in large proficiency gains for our kids and teachers.
6 CONCLUSION
Given the meteoric ascent of English as a global language and the increasing significance of English in international trade, tourism, education, and diplomacy, the demand for educated and competent English teachers will increase proportionally. Due to the lack of experienced and efficient English teachers in the world at present, it is difficult to meet this demand. Andrews (2008) laments that, at present, the shortfall of qualified instructors can only be remedied by employing teachers with insufficient credentials. If they are serious about enhancing the quality of English instructors in Indonesia, ELT stakeholders, i.e. language teachers, language teacher educators, and policymakers, must address the significant challenges outlined below.
a. It is important to build a national framework of English language proficiency in order to set adequate requirements for students and teachers at all educational levels. As our neighbours (such as Malaysia and Vietnam) have already built their national foreign language frameworks, there is no compelling rationale for policymakers to start from scratch; there is no need to rebuild the wheel. We may learn a great deal from their experience creating national language standards for teachers and students, as well as from their later overhaul of their English language curriculum and nationwide retraining of their instructors. By learning from the experiences of our neighbouring nations, we may be able to avoid making avoidable and costly policy and implementation errors.
b. Since policy decisions may take some time to materialise, we propose that the more established teacher education institutions (e.g., those ranked among the top 15 in the nation) begin to develop ways to establish a language competency standard for their graduates. Although the standard may differ from institution to university, a CEFR-based minimum norm could be proposed. We believe that B2 is a reasonable level for student instructors to attain before entering the classroom.
c. The aforementioned universities could collaborate to create and produce a CEFR-based competence exam that satisfies the demands of EL teachers in Indonesia. Two components should be included in the test's design: general proficiency and pedagogical language proficiency. The language proficiency test administered by the Hong Kong Ministry of Education (i.e., LPATE) could serve as a template for the test to be administered in Indonesia.
d. The use of TOEFL and IELTS as an indicator of general competency in government institutions, educational institutions, and especially in EL teacher education institutes should be reevaluated. These are good assessments of academic English competence for people planning to study in English- speaking nations, but they may not be the most accurate indicator of one's ability to use English for general communicative reasons, much less for school language instruction. TEFLIN and other ELT professional organisations in the nation could play a more active role in supporting the implementation of a more relevant English proficiency test (e.g., CEFR based test of English).
e. Working with the Ministry of Education, English teachers' professional associations in the country could assist in identifying in-service teachers whose proficiency falls below the anticipated standard (below B2) and organising intensive English language training programmes to improve their ability.
Given the existing competency level of English teachers, extensive retraining may be required. Obviously, substantial financing from the government and other financial bodies (such as the Asian Development Bank) will be required to undertake the training programme.
There is a need to raise awareness among language education professionals (i.e., language teacher educators, language teachers, and school and university administrators) regarding the need of engaging in self-directed and/or other-directed professional development activities. One approach to accomplish this would be to dedicate a session at ELT conferences and seminars to teacher proficiency (e.g., sharing sessions on how teachers improve their proficiency levels).
Thus, we may convey to our English teachers a consistent message regarding the significance of EL proficiency.
g. We recommend that English teacher education providers reexamine their undergraduate curricula and discover approaches to assist student teachers in attaining a better level of proficiency prior to completing their pre- service education. Students can achieve a suitable level of English proficiency (i.e., B2) in four years, which is the typical length of time required to earn a Bachelor of Education. While SLA research has not fully uncovered the secret to success in L2 learning, we now have a sufficient understanding of the most influential components that contribute to direct language learning. SLA research has conclusively proved that requiring students to read and listen extensively in the target language is one of the most effective approaches to increase overall proficiency (Renandya & Jacobs, 2016).
Some Indonesian universities have previously incorporated significant reading and listening into their pre- service curriculum, but the majority has been slow to adopt this effective method of language acquisition. We recommend Day
& Bamford's (1998) seminal book on extended reading for understanding the theoretical foundations of this input- based approach to language acquisition.
We also offer the Extensive Reading Foundation's Guide to Extensive Reading and Extensive Reading Central as other excellent resources that provide practical advice on how to adopt extensive reading.
We propose "Teacher, the tape is too fast:
Extensive listening in ELT" by Renandya
& Farrell (2011) for a brief, nontechnical introduction to extensive listening.
h. TEFLIN and other ELT professional groups might publish a quarterly bulletin on teacher professional
development, focusing on teacher language competency issues in particular.
It should not be too difficult to recruit volunteers for newsletter management.
We can begin with a very brief, two-page newsletter featuring EL teachers from throughout Indonesia who are attempting to improve their competency, and then expand the length of the publication over time. The newsletter might then be sent for free to all English teachers.
i. In collaboration with the Ministry of Education, TEFLIN and other ELT professional organizations might arrange an annual "Teacher of the Year"
event and publicize the winning instructors on the Ministry's website.
Teachers may be required to submit a brief video clip of their most effective lessons. A group of judges then selects the winning clips based on a set of criteria (e.g., proper use of English, methodology, and technology, among others).
In conclusion, it is necessary to reiterate that language competency is an essential element of a language teacher's professional competence. Teachers with a higher competence level should be more skilled at using the target language to offer more effective lessons than those with a lower proficiency level. They are better equipped to give richer language input and utilize target language resources to facilitate student teaching (H. Richards et al., 2013). However, we are not saying that proficiency is the only (or most significant) factor influencing L2 acquisition. Rather, we are arguing that proficiency is a required requirement, a factor that can assist teachers in delivering more effective lectures.
REFERENCES
1. Alderson, J. C. (2005). Diagnosing foreign language proficiency: The interface between learning and assessment. London:
Continuum.
2. Andrews, S. (2003). Teacher language awareness and the professional knowledge base of the L2 teacher. Language Awareness, 12(2), 81-95.
3. Azis, A. (2018). Re-imagining English competence: Suitable frameworks for English competence. Plenary paper presented at the TEFLIN-TESOL, Jakarta, 3-4 February 2018.
4. Baker, W. (2008). A critical examination of ELT in Thailand: The role of cultural awareness. RELC journal, 39(1), 131-146.
5. Cobb, T. (2007). Computing the vocabulary demands of L2 reading. Language Learning &
Technology, 11(3), 38-64. Coleman, H. (2009).
Indonesia‟s „International Standard Schools‟:
What are they for? Paper presented at the 8th Language and Development Conference, Dhaka, 23-25 June 2009.
6. Coniam, D., Falvey, P., & Xiao, Y. (2017). An investigation of the impact on Hong Kong‟s English language teaching profession of the language proficiency assessment for teachers of English (LPATE). RELC Journal, 48(1), 115-133.
7. Council of Europe. Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) for Languages.
https://www.coe.int/en/web/common- european-framework-reference-
languages/table-1-cefr-3.3- common- reference-levels-global-scale Day,
8. R., & Bamford, J. (1998). Extensive reading in the second language classroom. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
9. Hamied, F. A. (2018). Reimagining English competence. Plenary paper presented at the TEFLIN-TESOL, Jakarta, 3-4 February 2018.
10. Loewen, S. (2015). Introduction to instructed second language acquisition. New York:
Routledge. Ministry of National Education of the Republic of Indonesia (MNERI). (2007).
11. Nation, P. (2006). How large a vocabulary is needed for reading and listening? Canadian Modern Language Review, 63(1), 59-82.
12. Nation, P. (2007). The four strands.
International Journal of Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 1(1), 2-13.
13. Nation, I. S. P., & Newton, J. (2008). Teaching ESL/EFL listening and speaking. New York:
Routledge.
14. Nation, I.S. P., & Waring, R. (1997).
Vocabulary size, text coverage, and word lists.
In N. Schmitt, & M. McCarthy (Eds.), Vocabulary: Description, acquisition, and pedagogy (pp. 6-19). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
15. Nurweni, A., & Read, J. (1999). The English vocabulary knowledge of Indonesian university students. English for Specific Purposes, 18(2), 161-175.
16. Ortega, L. (2007). Second language learning explained? SLA across nine contemporary
theories. In B. VanPatten, & J. William (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction (pp. 245-272). Marwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
17. Renandya, W. A., & Farrell, T.S.C. (2011).
“Teacher, the tape is too fast”: Extensive listening in ELT. ELT Journal, 65(1), 52-59.
18. Renandya, W.A., & Jacobs, G.M. (2016).
Extensive reading and listening in the language classrooms. In W. A. Renandya, &
H. P. Widodo (Eds.), English language teaching today: Linking theory and practice (pp 97-110). Basel, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing AG.
19. Renandya, W.A., Le, V.C., Madya, S., Oda, M., Quah, S. H., & Sitthitikul, P. (2017).
Language teacher education in Asia.
20. Richards, J. C. (2018). Communicative
competence. Available at
https://www.youtube.com/
watch?v=RpGvWYPL7cU.
21. Richards, J. C. (2017). Teaching English through English: Proficiency, pedagogy and performance. RELC Journal, 48(1), 7-30.
22. Schmidt, R. W. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning.
Applied linguistics, 11(2), 129-158.
23. Schmitt, N. (2014). Size and depth of vocabulary knowledge: What the research shows. Language Learning, 64(4), 913-951.
24. Todd, R. W. (2016). English proficiency standards in Thai universities. Keynote speech delivered at the Assumption University Annual Faculty Seminar, Bangkok, Thailand.
25. Young, J. W., Freeman D., Hauck. M. C., Garcia Gomez P., & Papageorgiou, S. (2014).
A design framework for the ELTeach program assessments (ELT Research Report No RR- 13–46). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service. Doi.1002/ets2.12036.
My Comment: A very fresh write up.
Should be included.
Best wishes
