the place of writing in first grade kuwaiti english...

The Place of Writing in First Grade Kuwaiti English Education:

A Sociological Case Study

Elham A. A. Mohammad

B. Ed (Kuwait University), M. Ed (Kuwait University)

Centre for Learning Innovation

Faculty of Education

Queensland University of Technology

A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy

March 2008

The Place of Writing i

Key Words

Young EFL learners

English as a foreign language

Writing skills in EFL

Discourse

Kuwait

The Place of Writing…..ii

Abstract

A hybridized society, Kuwait meshes Islamic ideologies with western culture.

Linguistically, English exists across both foreign language and second language

nomenclatures in the country due to globalization and internationalization which has

seen increasing use of English in Kuwait. Originally consisting of listening, speaking,

reading and writing, the first grade English curriculum in Kuwait was narrowed in 2002

to focus only on the development of oral English skills, and to exclude writing. Since

that time, both Kuwaiti teachers and parents have expressed dissatisfaction with this

curriculum on the basis that this model disadvantages their children. In first grade

however, the teaching of pre-writing has remained as part of the curriculum. This

research analyses the parameters of English pre-writing and writing instruction in first

grade in Kuwaiti classrooms, investigates first grade English pre-writing and writing

teaching, and gathers insights from parents, teachers and students regarding the

appropriateness of the current curriculum. Through interviews and classroom

observations, and an analysis of curriculum documents, this case study found that the

relationship between oral and written language is more complex than suggested by either

the Kuwaiti curriculum reform, or international literature concerning the delayed

teaching of writing. Intended curriculum integration across Kuwait subjects is also far

more complex than first believed, due to a developmental mismatch between English

pre-writing skills and Arabic language capabilities. Findings suggest an alternative

approach to teaching writing may be more appropriate and more effective for first Grade

students in the current Kuwait curriculum context. They contribute also to an emerging

interest in the second and foreign language fields in the teaching of writing to young

learners.

The Place of Writing iii

Table of Contents

Key Words i

Abstract

Table of Contents iii

List of Figures ix

List of Tables x

List of Abbreviations xi

Statement of Original Authorship xii

Chapter 1: Kuwait and the English Language 1

The Place of English in the Kuwaiti Society 2

An Overview of the History of English in the Education System in the State of Kuwait 5

Private Schooling 5

Public Schooling 7

The Research Problem 12

Specific Research Questions 13

Significance of the Study 13

Thesis Outline 14

Chapter 2: A Review of the Literature 16

Introduction 16

Perspectives from Arabic-speaking EFL Contexts 16

Delaying the Introduction of Writing: A Contentious Issue 17

Young Children Learning Multiple Writing Systems Simultaneously 27

Globalization of English 33

A History of English Language Teaching Methodologies 36

Western Pedagogy for Non-Western Countries 41

The Place of Writing…..iv

Summary 45

Chapter 3: Conceptual Framework 47

The Cultural Context of Kuwait – In a Time of Rapid Change 48

Globalization in Kuwait 50

The Influence of Globalization on Childhood 52

The Social Construction of Childhood – An Alternative to Developmental Views 54

Sociocultural Approach 58

Chapter 4: Research Design 64

Research by Case Study 64

Limitations of a Case Study 66

The Researcher's Role 67

Data Collection 68

Site and Participant Selection 68

Classroom Observation 72

Interviews 76

Interviewing Children 77

Interviews with Teachers and Parents 80

Documentation 81

Translation 82

Transcribing 83

Data Analysis 84

Trustworthiness 89

Ethics 91

Chapter 5: English Language Curriculum Policy and Materials 94

Document 1: General Goals of English Language Teaching Document 96

The Place of Writing v

Document 2: English Language Curriculum Document 101

What is the English Language and How is It to be Taught? 101

What “Writing” in the English Language is Taught? 106

How Do Students Learn to Write in the English Language? 109

Document 3: Fun with English (FWE) Teacher’s Guide 111

What is the English Language? 111

Document 4: Pupil’s Book and Activity Book 114

Document 5: English System Private School 115

The Indian Curriculum 117

Conclusion 117

Chapter 6: Teachers and the Skill of Writing in the Public Schools 121

Introduction 121

The Public School Case Studies 126

Case Study 1: Boys’ public school 126

Setting 126

What writing is taught? 127

How writing is taught 132

Excerpt 1: Learning to write letters in the boys’ public school 134

Excerpt 2: Teacher draws the class’ attention to the starting position of letter writing 135

Excerpt 3: Spelling out words 135

Summary 136

Case Study 2: Girls’ public school 136

Setting 136

What Writing is Taught? 139


The Place of Writing…..vi

Excerpt 5: Writing the letter “s” 143

Excerpt 6: A short transcript from the lesson 145

The Private School Case Studies 146

Case Study 3: English system private school 146

Setting 146



Excerpt 7: Teacher explaining activity and introduces writing 152

Case Study 4: Indian system private school 154

Setting 154



Excerpt 8: A sample of the Indian classroom interaction 158

Excerpt 9: Copying questions and answers 160

Excerpt 10: Dictation in the classroom 161

Summary 162

Discussion 163

Chapter 7: Parents, Students and the Place of Writing 167

Students’ Reflections - What Is or Should Be Taught as Writing? 169

Case Study 1: The boys’ public school students 169

Case Study 2: The girls’ public school students 176

Excerpt 3: Write more 177

Case Study 3: The English private school 181

Excerpt 4: Amar writes sentences 181

Case Study 4: The Indian private school 185

Excerpt 6: Writing skills 190

The Place of Writing vii

Parents Support - What Is or Should Be Taught as Writing? 193

Excerpt 1: Parents’ frustration 194

Excerpt 2: A comparison between the spoken and written skills 196

Excerpt 3: Good handwriting 197

Excerpt 4: The isolation of writing 198

Excerpt 5: Opposing the delay of writing 199

Summary 201

Why Writing Should be Taught 202

Parent and Student Interviews 203

Excerpt 6: English is the future 207

Discussion 209

Chapter 8: Delaying Writing Instruction in a Global Setting 213

Introduction 213

Main Findings and Discussion 215

Language and Non–language Goals 216

Transfer Goal 216

Oral and Written Relationship 217

Limitations of the Research 219

Recommendations for Future Work 221

Appendix A: Children’s Interview Questions 223

Appendix B: A Sample of Note-taking (interview with parent) 224

Appendix B cont. 225

Appendix C: Parents’ Interview Questions 226

Appendix D: Teachers’ Interview Questions 227

Appendix E: Transcription Convention Symbols 228

The Place of Writing…..viii

Appendix F: A Caption of a Transcription 229

Appendix G: Data Management 230

Appendix H: DVD Analysis sheet 232

Appendix H cont. 233

Appendix I: Ethical Clearance 234

Appendix J: General Goals of English Language 235

Appendix K: The English Language Curriculum 239

Appendix L: The Pre–writing Skills in First Grade Curriculum 24 0

Appendix M: Student’s Work from the Boys’ Public School 241

Appendix N: Student’s work from the Girls’ Public school 247

Appendix O: English Private School class work material 250

Appendix P: Student’s Question and Answer Copying Exercise from the Indian

Private School 252

Appendix Q: Teacher Composes Short paragraph for Students to Copy from the

Board at the Indian Private School 254

References 256

The Place of Writing ix

List of Figures

Figure 2.1 Dividing up language 22

Figure 3.1 Young writers in a global context 62

Figure 7.1 Abdulla’s writing of letters and words 172

Figure 7.2 A representation of Dawood’s writing 174

Figure 7.3 Adel’s writing and the reverse letters “b” and “d” 175

Figure 7.4 Amani writes “cet” for the word “cat” 177

Figure 7.5 Anwar writes the words “cat” and “bag” 178

Figure 7.6 Samar’s inventive spelling of the words “I like” is “i lic” 178

Figure 7.7 Faisal writing sentences although Arabic is the language used at home 182

Figure 7.8 Ismail’s written skills exceed his oral skills 182

Figure 7.9 Essa building his writing on sound system 183

Figure 7.10 Emad and upper case “D” after three years of exposure to the English language 184

Figure 7.11 Ahmad writes the word “two” as “tmo” 186

Figure 7.12 Bader’s spelling invention of native speakers 186

Figure 7.13 Rana writing letters 188

Figure 7.14 Hiba writes her name in Arabic from the left 189

Figure 7.15 Reversal problem in Arabic 190

Figure 7.16 Fadel uses a similar spelling invention as he writes “love” as “lv” 191

Figure 7.17 Moussa writing the word “this” from memory 192

The Place of Writing…..x

List of Tables

Table 4.1 Six Governates of Kuwait 69

Table 4.2 Case study of schools 70

Table 4.3 Tasks and activities observed in the classroom 76

Table 5.1 Arabic consonants in different written form 106

Table 6.1 Written material collected from the six students in each of the first grade 122 classroom in each week 123

Table 6.2 Writing activities practiced in classroom in the boys’ public school 128

Table 6.3 Writing activities practiced in the classroom in the girls’ public school 137

Table 6.4 Writing activities practiced in the classroom in the English public school 148

Table 6.5 Writing activities practiced in the classroom in the Indian public school 155

The Place of Writing xi

List of Abbreviations

BANA British, Australasia and North America

CLT Communicative Language Teaching

EFL English as a Foreign Language

ELT English Language Teaching

FWE Fun With English curriculum

FL Foreign Language

IPC International Primary Curriculum

KG Kindergarten

L1 First language

L2 Second language

PPP Present, Practice, Produce

SLA Second Language Acquisition

TESOL Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages

TOFEL Test of English as a Foreign Language

TPR Total Physical Response

UAE United Arab Emirates

US United States

UK United Kingdom

The Place of Writing…..xii

Statement of Original Authorship

The work contained in this thesis has not been previously submitted to meet

requirements for an award at this or any other higher education institution. To the best of

my knowledge and belief, the thesis contains no material previously published or written

by another person except where due reference is made.

Signature

Date

The Place of Writing xiii

Acknowledgements

‘I can no other answer make, but, thanks, and thanks’

~William Shakespeare

This thesis would not have been possible without the support and constant

nurturing and guidance of my supervisors Dr. Karen Dooley, Professor Susan

Grieshaber, and the inspiration of Associate Professor Penny McKay.

In the first place I would like to offer my sincerest gratitude to my principal

supervisor, Dr. Karen Dooley, who has supported me throughout my work and provided

me unflinching encouragement, detailed advice and optimism. This thesis has been

completed and written with your expertise and benevolence in providing me with the

time, knowledge and patience.

I also would like to acknowledge the support and understanding of Professor

Susan Grieshaber. Her advice and guidance has given me the confidence in my research.

I am much indebt for your knowledge, stimulating, and critical comments. I am thankful

for allowing me to attend the doctoral group which enlightened and enriched my growth

as a student. Karen and Sue my deepest appreciation for your moral support and

understanding in times of hardship and apprehension.

Associate Professor Penny McKay, I could not have wished for a friendlier and

an insightful supervisor with special expertise in second language teaching at the

beginning of my Ph D journey. Your involvement fostered my intellectual maturity,

thank you.

I also would like to show my profound appreciation to my beloved parents Abdul

Kareem and Najeeba who helped me to realize that visions can be achieved with

persistence and self-belief. I realize that without your patience, inspiration, prayers,

continual nurturing, and life-long investment in my learning my three year experience of

work would have been impossible, I am grateful. Ahmad, Emad and Aziza thank you for

your solidarity the whole time of this work.

The Place of Writing…..xiv

Furthermore, I would like to convey special acknowledgment to my extended

family and friends who helped me pursue my ambition and who I depended on

throughout my academic work for courage, love and confidence.

I was also blessed to share my study experience with international and Australian

colleagues who provided me with their support and help in times of difficulty and were

helpful in sharing their learning experience with me. I could no other but express my

appreciation to you all. I would like also to show my appreciation to Carole Engelbrecht

who has shared this academic journey and supported me throughout the different stages.

My special thanks to Kuwait’s Ministry of Education, who gave me the

permission to enter schools and facilitated the progress of data collection to do the

research work. I would also like to show gratitude to the schools who welcomed me into

their classrooms, to the teachers, parents and students who willingly contributed to take

part in this research.

Finally, I would like to thank everybody who was important to the successful

realization of my thesis, as well as expressing my apology that I could not mention each

person personally

The Place of Writing 1

Chapter 1

Chapter 1: Kuwait and the English Language

This study investigates what is being taught as writing in Kuwaiti first grade

English language classrooms, and how it is being taught. The investigation arose from a

divergence in opinion that erupted with the introduction of the new public school

curriculum in Kuwait in 2002. This curriculum excluded the teaching of writing from

first grade, stressing listening and speaking instead. It was a change in approach that

prompted a vigorous debate in public schools. The study is informed by sociological

perspectives on child and language learning. In this Chapter, I discuss the demographic

and historic background of Kuwait and account for the place of English in Kuwaiti

society. I provide an overview of the history of the education system in the State of

Kuwait and identify the objective of this study, the general statement of the research

problem, the research questions, and the significance of the study. The chapter concludes

with an outline of the thesis.

Kuwait is a small triangular-shaped state of 17,820 square kilometres located at

the far northwest point of the Persian Gulf (Arabian Gulf). Both the geographic location

and demographic composition of the state have impacted on the place of the English

language in present day Kuwait, with implications for English language education.

Kuwait is bordered in the north by Iraq and in the south by Saudi Arabia. Nine Gulf

islands are part of Kuwaiti territory (Library of Congress Country Studies, 2003; The

World Factbook, 2007). The country is divided into six governorates (muhafazat), two

of which, Hawalli and Al-Ahmadi, were selected for the study. It is a hot, dry, desert

country with most of the population living in the coastal capital city of Kuwait. The

population is estimated to be 2,505,559 of which 1,291,354 are non-nationals (The

World Factbook, 2007). It was estimated in the 2006 survey that 1.136 million or 80%

of the labour force are non-nationals (The World Factbook, 2007). Kuwait is a modern

country influenced by globalization. This is visible in its westernized shopping centres,

cafes, and restaurants, and in the sizable foreign community. All of these features of

Kuwaiti life affect the use of English as a second language (ESL) in society and have

influenced the history of the teaching of English in public schools as a foreign language

(EFL).

The Place of Writing…..2

Chapter 1

The history of Kuwait has long entailed foreign influences, including English. In

the mid 17th century, Kuwait was marked on a Dutch map which showed it as al-Qurain.

The name Kuwait was taken from the word Kout, meaning fort. The name was given

after a fort was built in al-Qurain. At that time, it was controlled as part of the Arabian

Peninsula by the house of Khalid. By the early 18th century, different tribes from Al

Aniza migrated to the northern part of Najd (Part of Saudi Arabia at the time) and settled

in Kuwait. Al-Subah dominated the land and became rulers of Kuwait in 1752.

However, by the late 19th century, the Ottoman influence was seen as a threat and

anxiety about the Ottoman Empire influenced Shaik “Mubarak the Great,” the ruler of

Kuwait at the time, to write an agreement with Great Britain in 1899 to maintain Kuwait

as a independent British protectorate (Kuwait Information Office, 2007). From that time

English began to assume an important role in some parts of Kuwait.

According to the Kuwait Information Office (2007), the 1899 agreement enabled

Kuwait to rule its internal affairs while Great Britain watched over Kuwait’s national

security and foreign affairs. It was also the British who initiated modern bureaucratic

government in Kuwait. The discovery of oil in the 1930s (with the help of the British)

brought prosperity and wealth to the country in the 1940s, although it was not until the

1960s that Kuwait was recognized as an economically secure and developed country. In

1961, Kuwait achieved independence from Great Britain.

Kuwait is an Islamic society where the majority of the population is Muslim, but

other religions and practices are not constrained. This society is built on the concept of

extended family.

The Place of English in the Kuwaiti Society

According to Al-Mutawa and Kalani (1989), English is learned in Kuwait as a

foreign language. It has no internal function in the learner's country. It is learnt in order

to communicate with native English speakers or bilingual users of the foreign language.

Prior to the Iraqi invasion in 1990, the English language was taught and used in schools

only and was learned as a foreign language. Although English had an official role in

government dealings, generally, there was little or no reinforcement outside the

classroom and school. English was taught like any other subject in the school

curriculum. It was given little importance as people used Arabic to go about their daily


Chapter 1

business. However, after 1993, English was seen as a necessity even at university, when

English was introduced as a prerequisite and students were required to sit placement

tests to enter Kuwait University.

The changing place of English can be understood in the context of the Iraqi

invasion. Occupation has had a transformative effect on virtually every aspect of

Kuwaiti life (Library of Congress Country Studies, 2003). The impact of the occupation

has made the Kuwait population different from that in pre-war Kuwait, because of the

American influence. Interest has grown in the English language. People have become

absorbed with foreign culture and parents have encouraged their children to study

foreign languages, in particular English. This has resulted from a massive growth in the

need for English in everyday communication in the society. Although the government is

trying to “Kuwaitize” by cutting down on the number of foreign employees and

replacing them with Kuwaiti nationals, there has been an influx of expatriates into

Kuwait with a workforce coming from more than 120 countries (U.S. Commercial

Service, 2005). This has made the use of English important in everyday communicative

situations. It has become the main medium for banking and business, and is used in

street signs, vehicle panels, and shop names. Food labels, signs in restaurants, and well-

known fast food chains like McDonalds and KFC are labelled in both Arabic and

English. Thus, since 1993, the English language has assumed a prominent position in

Kuwaiti society.

Linguistically, Kuwait has now become what has been described as a hybrid

context. El Dib (2004) suggests that Kuwait fits neither the description of a foreign

language environment nor a second language setting. As was noted earlier, English is

widely spoken (Kuwait Information Office, 2007; The World Factbook, 2007; U.S

Department of State, 2007). It is required for employment in private companies, for

entrance examinations into Kuwait University, as well as for use in everyday life. In

addition, the multiplicity of nationalities with diverse first languages has made the

English language a lingua franca. Kuwait has become a multilingual society and English

is used amongst minority groups and in many work places. It is learnt after the mother

tongue, and used as a second language (Foreign & Commonwealth Office, 2007) in

everyday life and reinforced by the environment.


Chapter 1

In this hybrid context, parents have recognised a need to educate their children in

English. Children are exposed to English when conducting daily business; for example,

in supermarkets children experience English food labels, at cinemas children are

exposed to English Disney films and advertisements which are printed in English, and in

toy shops children see packaging and other materials printed in English when shopping

for games. Even at fast food chain restaurants, children are forced to use English when

not accompanied by an older person. This is not a unique situation, but increasingly

common in linguistic landscapes throughout the world as a result of economic and social

changes that are often described as “globalization” (Huebner, 2006).

Based on claims (Al-Mutawa, 1994) that the English language standard of high

school graduates was low, the government introduced English in 1993 at the primary

level, starting at the first grade. Specifically, the Ministry of Education mandated the

teaching of English from the age of six on the grounds that proficiency levels were low

after eight years of study in high school and at University (Al-Mutawa, 1996). As a

consequence, English education received considerable government resources and

attention. School libraries were stocked with English books. The Ministry of Education

has planned and is still in the process of equipping schools with computer laboratories,

and this reinforces the use of English although the majority of students are already in

touch with the Internet world. The Ministry of Education is connecting every

government school and library in Kuwait to a telecommunication network (Kuwait

Information Office, 2007).

In this context, current debates over the new curriculum have a high profile in

Kuwaiti public life and are of considerable importance for the ongoing development of

education in Kuwait. One of the most contentious issues is the role of writing in the

primary English curriculum: Should writing continue to be excluded in first grade, as in

the Fun with English Longman curriculum (Allan & Iggulden, 2002b), or should it be

retained as in the previous first grade curriculum?

To establish a better insight into the controversy over the place of writing in the

Kuwaiti English curriculum, an overview is now provided of the history of English in

the educational system in Kuwait. This entails a description of the Longman first grade

curriculum that underpins public school English language teaching in Kuwait and the


Chapter 1

rationale for teaching English at the primary level. It is followed by a discussion of the

rise of the present debate over the first grade curriculum in the State of Kuwait. The last

section flags the significance of the study for future research in the field of EFL, and for

young EFL learners in other hybrid societies.

An Overview of the History of English in the Education System in the State of

Kuwait

The strength in the development of Kuwait's education system can be attributed

to the wealth that oil has brought since the turn of the 20th century. In the early 1900s,

the educational system in Kuwait consisted of Quranic schools known as Al-Katatib.

These schools provided basic literacy skills in reading, writing, and some arithmetic.

However, as they were provided originally for the teaching of the Holy Quran, with an

emphasis on religious content, English was not part of the curriculum. This system of

schooling was offered to nearly all boys and most girls. There was no public education

at that time and such schools were funded by wealthy families.

In 1939, the Government took over education and by 1945 there were 17 schools

(Kuwait Cultural Office, 2006). As the oil industry flourished after World War II, the

government invested in human resources and began to invest money in social services,

including education. In 1956, the government established a system of kindergarten,

primary, middle and secondary schools that still exists today. English was introduced

before the independence of Kuwait as one of the subjects taught and as part of the

curriculum. In that era, English was taught for eight years beginning in middle school.

More than 40 years later, Kuwait's educational system has expanded to include schools

which are privately sponsored, and special education schools which are either sponsored

privately or by the Government. As will be established in the next section, English

education differs significantly in the public and private school systems of interest to this

study.

Private Schooling

In 1967, numerous private schools were started in Kuwait with the help of

government subsidies. Many of these schools are run by foreign sponsors and are co-

educational. The government designates K.D 5.6 million per annum (approximately


Chapter 1

$1.64 billion) for private educational facilities in addition to providing schools with

textbooks and land for school construction.

Many Kuwaiti families now prefer to enrol their children in private schools

although they are costly. This general preference has been influenced during the last

three years by the problematic implementation of the new English language curriculum

in the public primary schools (Al-Hemadan, 2005). The problems and associated issues

are discussed below in the “Public Schooling” section. Some are of the belief that

private schools provide a better education, but some parents choose to send their

children to private schools because of the importance of the English language (Kuwait

Guide, 2007). The private schools are supervised by the Department of Private

Education in the Ministry of Education. There are 69 private international schools: 16

following the Pakistani educational system; 11 Indian schools; 12 bilingual schools

(English and Arabic); 17 British English schools; eight American schools; two Filipino

schools; and one each of Iranian, French and Armenian schools. In the school year 2005,

it was estimated that approximately 40,000 students attended these schools or 30 percent

of the student population in Kuwait (Al-Hemadan, 2005).

English is taught in the British, American, Indian, Pakistani, and Bilingual

private schools only. Although the British and American schools originally operated for

English-speaking Western expatriates only, their enrolment is broader (Kuwait Guide,

2007). Each school follows a curriculum of its own which is influenced by the

educational system of the country it represents. The schools use their own curriculum

and set their own textbooks. For example, the British system follows the English

General Certificate of Secondary Education system and ‘A' level requirements, and the

American system prepares students for the Scholastic Aptitude Test Diploma

Examination. Thus, only Arabic and Islamic studies in the private schools follow the

public school curriculum and students are provided with textbooks from the Ministry of

Education for both subjects. The main medium of instruction in the American and

British schools is English. Learners in these schools are exposed to an English language

environment where little Arabic is used except amongst the students themselves or in the

Arabic and Islamic study classes. The teaching and school administration staff of the


Chapter 1

private schools are all native speakers of English. Each school recruits its own teachers,

most of whom are English native speakers.

Public Schooling

As noted previously, the public school system has four levels: Kindergarten,

primary, middle and secondary. Since 2004, the primary level has included grades 1-5,

middle school grades 6-9, and secondary school grades 10-12. Schooling begins at the

age of six. Kindergarten is available for children aged four to six years. All levels of

education are available free of charge to all citizens, including higher education.

Kuwait's public schools are segregated by sex, which starts in first grade. This case

study includes one boys’ and one girls’ school from the public sector.

English language proficiency levels of public school students have always been

an issue of widespread concern. Before the invasion, some educators and parents

claimed English language proficiency was inadequate and learners were performing

poorly even after studying the language for eight years (Al-Mutawa, 1992). To

elaborate, educators and specialists assessed students to be incompetent to function in

higher level academic studies in the English language medium. Students’ incompetency

was observed through low scores on English as a foreign language tests and low

entrance examination scores at Kuwait University (Al-Mutawa, 1992). This problem

prompted educators to take some measures to upgrade the standard of English

proficiency among students. Remedial programs, in addition to compulsory courses in

English, were introduced at university level. In addition, extra activity lessons in English

were started in public schools.

As was noted earlier, after the invasion in 1992, parents’ concerns about public

school students’ English proficiency persisted (Al-Mutawa, 1992). Arguments continued

to be based on claims about what was seen as the deteriorating level of English at the

secondary stage and the tangible incompetence of University level students to cope with

English for academic purposes. It was this that motivated the Ministerial decree of 61-

93/94 (Ministry of Education, n.d.-a.) mandating the teaching of English as a foreign

language in the primary stage curriculum from 1993-94 (Al-Mutawa, 1994). The decree

was issued on empirical evidence that the younger the learner of a foreign language, the

better the result (Ministry of Education, n.d.-a, p. 1). Thus, learning English at an early


Chapter 1

age was believed to have “a long term positive effect on linguistic competence and

performance in the four language skills” (Ministry of Education, n.d.-a, p. 1).

The notion of introducing English as a foreign language (EFL) at the primary

stage in Kuwait aroused considerable controversy. Public debate revolved initially

around either support for or opposition to EFL being introduced in the primary stage

(Al-Mutawa, 2002). In this context, studies were conducted to investigate the general

attitude towards the introduction of EFL at the primary stage in Kuwait. The results

showed a general fear of EFL interfering with the acquisition of the Arabic language

(Al-Mutawa, 1994). However, a study conducted by Al-Mutawa in 2002 concluded that

Arabic language acquisition of second year primary pupils was not affected by EFL

learning (Al-Mutawa, 2002).

After the introduction of English in 1993, all four macro-skills: listening,

speaking, reading, and writing were taught starting from first grade. The United Arab

Emirates (UAE) curriculum was used because at that time the Ministry was not ready to

publish English language books. In 2002 however, the Ministry decided to publish its

own books. It is important at this point to mention that no documentation is available on

the Ministry’s rationale for this curriculum reform i.e. the Ministry’s decision to publish

its books. However this measure initiated a new dilemma for parents. The new

curriculum caused a new round of debate, this time focused on the place of writing in the

curriculum. As noted at the beginning of this chapter, the new public school curriculum

relies mainly on listening and speaking skills. It does not introduce the skill of writing

and reading until third grade. While the UAE curriculum focused on all four skills in

first grade, the Kuwaiti new curriculum excluded the skills of writing and reading,

stressing only listening and speaking skills. It was this change that caused the debate in

the public schools that is the basis for this investigation.

Excluding writing has not drawn the attention of educational academics and

researchers as much as it has attracted the attention of parents and teachers. The absence

of writing from the new curriculum in first grade primary schools in Kuwait has not

stirred any debate among academics even though writing was taught in a limited way

when English was introduced in Kuwait primary schools using the UAE curriculum in

1993. While not questioning the integrity of Kuwait's Ministry of Education decision,


Chapter 1

parents and teachers have been concerned and upset by the new curriculum and have

wondered why the four macroskills were not being taught in an integrated way from first

grade (Jaffer, 2003).

The absence of writing and reading from the new curriculum stirred a dilemma

with parents as they found it difficult to understand the new curriculum's philosophy and

demanded that teachers instruct their children in English writing (Jaffer, 2003). This

reaction was a product of not being able, as parents, to follow their children’s progress in

schoolwork and to help them in their English studies. Parents were extremely concerned

with what was being taught in the classroom. There is evidence in the report of a feeling,

among some teachers at least, that the curriculum is designed more for native English

speakers than for learners in other contexts. For example, the teachers and supervisors

indicated that from the very first unit of first grade English, students are expected to talk

about what they see in the pictures in the textbook. This is difficult because they do not

have a sufficient base of oral language in English. Moreover, it is not clear whether the

students should talk about the pictures in English or Arabic (Jaffer, 2003). As pointed

out by an official from the Ministry, one result of this seems to have been that a

significant number of parents have transferred their children from the public school

sector to the private after the new English language curriculum was implemented in

primary schools in 2002 (Al-Hemadan, 2005).

Teachers reported that although writing is not emphasised, there was

inconsistency in presenting the content and working with the activity book (Jaffer,

2003); for instance, on page 1 in the activity book (1B) learners were required to write

numerals (which they have not practiced) and to re-order pictures. Thus, the introduction

of numerals was performed without any prior introductory exercise. This is a

controversial issue: If children were expected to be able to write numerals, why were

they not expected to write letters, words, and sentences? The point for reflection here is

that to these children, numerals in English are as unfamiliar as English letters because

Arabic uses Hindi numerals.

In a report by supervisors and teachers presented to the Ministry of Education by

the English Department for Supervision in Mubarak Al-Kabeer Educational Zone in

2002/2003, both the teachers' and the supervisors' remarks focused on the neglect of


Chapter 1

writing and reading skills in comparison to listening and speaking skills (Jaffer, 2003).

They reported that learners felt bored and uninterested during the lesson as the same

drilling routine is always used: listening to the teacher, drilling after the teacher has

spoken and then colouring, drawing or tracing and copying. It was claimed that the

missing element of writing de-motivated learners in the classroom (Jaffer, 2003).

The frustration of teachers and supervisors was aroused in part by the absence of

writing and in part by the vagueness of the term of “pre-writing” for no clear definition

was given (Jaffer, 2003). Teachers and supervisors found the activity book to be a waste

of time and effort, as it did not introduce any English letters and numerals (Jaffer, 2003).

Children would have practised writing letters and numerals and this would have helped

them in the left-to-right hand movement. Teachers stated that it is not worth spending a

whole academic year without familiarizing the learners with the letters in writing and

print (Jaffer, 2003). Moreover, as noted above when numerals are introduced, they are

introduced without prior preparation, so why must there be so much emphasis on “pre-

writing” before writing is introduced?

In response to the debate about the curriculum, the Ministry of Education

decided to have the curriculum evaluated by a neutral committee formed from outside

Kuwait. The committee's members were three curriculum experts: Dr Maria Felberbauer

from Austria, Dr Ozcan Demirel from Turkey, and Dr Yvonne de Henseler from

Switzerland/UK. The committee based their evaluation on classroom observations,

discussions with English teachers from three boys’ and three girls’ schools, meetings

with the English language teaching Supervisor General and the senior supervisors at the

Ministry of Education, and another meeting with the Head of the Curriculum Committee

and its members (Felberbauer, Demirel & Henseler, 2005). In their report, Felberbauer

et al. found too much emphasis on pre-writing during first grade. They argued that as

pupils do a lot of pen control work in Arabic, there was no need for so many pre-writing

exercises, for example left-to-right hand skill movements with eye-hand coordination. In

addition, the committee found a gap between grades 1 and 2, and 2 and 3. Specifically,

the skills were not introduced in ways that linked the skills together and there was no

bridging between the pupil’s book and the activity book in Grade 1. These shortcomings

pointed to the need for further research. It was found that the pre-writing element


Chapter 1

introduced did not provide a solid base for the activities provided in the pupil's book and

activity book (Felberbauer et al.).

Teachers and supervisors recommended that writing be introduced in first grade

through simple letter and word writing in the second semester at least, and that the

activity book be-redesigned to provide simple word writing instead of copying, drawing

and tracing activities (Jaffer, 2003). There seemed to be mutual agreement between the

international external committee and the senior supervisors in regard to some of the

points raised. Both agreed that many of the activities were too long given the attention

span of Grade 1 students. There was also a grammatical overload as many concepts such

as tenses were introduced in first grade. First Grade pupils had problems with listen-and-

point activities because the ordering of the pictures was not always clear (Felberbauer et

al., 2005). Further, there was not enough linking between the pupils' book and the

activity book. Parents complained that the books were difficult and that they did not

understand what their child was doing as there were no instructions in the book

(Felberbauer et al., 2005; see also Jaffer, 2003). In short, although their rationales differ,

both the International External Committee and the supervisors agreed that the pre-

writing component needed to be refined but for different reasons. The supervisors

believed writing should be introduced in first grade English studies; and the External

Committee that pre-writing activities were not essential as the learners already had

control over their fine motor skills.

The debate over the exclusion of writing from the Kuwaiti curriculum is one

example of a wider debate occurring globally. Many societies other than Kuwait have

become linguistically hybrid societies. As a consequence, all over the world young

children under the age of 10 are being taught a foreign language – English – under the

sponsorship of their regular educational systems, private initiatives, or commercial

language schools (Cameron, 2003; Frohlich-Ward, 1992). Several authors (Brumfit,

1995; McKay, 2006) have noted that in the last few years, there has been a new interest

in the teaching of English to young learners where previously much of the focus was on

teaching adults and secondary school learners. The general view held by researchers and

educators about early foreign language teaching tends towards delaying reading and

writing until oral control of the foreign language has been attained (Frohlich-Ward,


Chapter 1

1992). It is suggested that learners encounter complications if reading and writing in a

foreign language are introduced too early (Cameron, 2003; Curtain & Pesola, 1994;

Finocchiaro, 1964; McKay, 2006). At the same time however alternative perspectives

are emerging, challenging both the primacy accorded oral skills in young foreign

language learning (Cook, 2005) and the empirical claims made in support of that

primacy (Kenner & Kress, 2003). In other words, there are fundamental empirical and

theoretical questions that must be addressed to inform Governments and educational

systems about the most appropriate approach to take. Government responses cannot be

based simply on parents’ demands and feelings. The aim of this study is to make a small

contribution to this issue.

The Research Problem

In general terms, the study examines the teaching of English both in public

schools obligated to implement the new curriculum, and in private schools that

implement other curricula specified by their school systems. The study aims to focus on

the important issues involving what happens in practice in first grade English

classrooms, and the views of teachers, parents, and students on classroom practices. The

study has the following general purposes:

� To analyse what is considered as “writing” and “pre-writing” education in

relevant English language curriculum documents.

� To analyse teacher, parent, and student views about writing and pre-writing

education in first grade English classes.

� To describe English language teaching practices, specifically those associated

with pre-writing and writing skills in first grade classrooms in both public

and private schools.

Given these purposes, the data collected and analysed in the study are:

� Classroom observations of first grade English instruction in two public and

two private school classrooms (English and Indian).

� English language curriculum documents relevant to the classrooms observed.

� Interviews with teachers, parents, and students from those classrooms.

Research question.

The principle research question that this study investigates is:


Chapter 1

What is taught as writing in Kuwait public and private first grade

English classrooms, how is it taught and why?

Specific Research Questions

This study occurs in three stages, addressing five inter-related questions.

In the first stage of the study, the question was focused on the document data:

� What is the place of writing in first grade English language documents in

Kuwait since the reform of writing in public school curriculum in 2002?

In the second stage of the study, two questions were directed at the classroom

observation data and the teacher interview data:

� What is the place of writing in English instruction in first grade classrooms

implementing the 2002 public school curriculum and schools implementing

other curricula?

� How is writing instruction taught in first grade classrooms implementing

either the 2002 public school curriculum or, in the case of private schools,

implementing other curricula?

In the final stage of the study, another two questions were directed at the parent and

student interview data:

� What do first grade parents and students view as the place of writing in

English instruction for first graders after the reform of writing requirements

in the public school curriculum in 2002?

� Why do first grade parents and students view writing in English instruction in

first grade curriculum as important?

Significance of the Study

This study addresses an important issue about the status of oral and written

language instruction. In the 20th century, from the time of the audiovisual method in the

1940s, language instruction was based on a division of language into the four macro-

skills of reading, writing, listening, and speaking (Cook, 2002b). This division served as

a basis for dividing the tasks of teaching. It suggests developing the receptive skills

(listening and reading) before the productive skills (speaking and writing) and

developing the spoken language (listening and speaking) before the written language

(reading and writing). All English language teaching methods, except the much


Chapter 1

criticized nineteenth century Grammar–Translation method which had roots in the

classical tradition (Thornbury & Slade, 2006) were based on the assumption that speech

should be emphasized over writing and writing should be taught last (Cameron, 2001;

Finocchiaro, 1964; Frohlich-Ward, 1992; McKay, 2006). However parents and teachers

in the 21st century in hybrid societies like Kuwait are now pushing for the teaching of

writing to commence from first grade. This represents a new development in the field.

Until this time, there has been little in the way of public debate over the relative status of

spoken and written language instruction (Cook, 2005). This study therefore provides a

valuable opportunity to take up the call for researchers, educators, and others to re-

consider not only the general relationship between spoken and written language in

language teaching but also how to teach the specifics of writing in the second language

(Cook, 2005).

The study describes what is happening in practice in a complex situation where

parents are demanding that their children learn writing at an age where the professional

consensus has been to delay the introduction of writing. Moreover, the research will

provide empirical findings specific to the field of English as a foreign language for

young learners, suggesting practical implications which may enhance the professional

development of those who teach English as foreign language. Related to this, the study

will shed light on the place of writing in the English as a foreign language context in this

new era of globalization, in which many societies are now better described as hybrid

language societies.

Thesis Outline

In Chapter 2, the literature review highlights relevant research by addressing the

place of writing in the field of EFL from an Arab perspective, and considering

international views from a cognitive–developmental perspective on the delay of writing.

It then draws on significant evidence from studies conducted with young children

learning different writing systems at the same time, and young monolingual children

learning to differentiate between writing scripts. In light of that, the globalization of the

English language is reviewed. The history of the English language teaching methods is

addressed to understand the development of the teaching methods in ESL /EFL context


Chapter 1

and in the final section, contemporary views are also reviewed in light of the English

language pedagogies used in a non–Western context.

Subsequently, Chapter 3 establishes a three-fold conceptual framework. This

framework is based on a theory of childhood set in the field of sociology which is

married both with a conceptualization of globalization and with Gee’s (2005) theory of

discourse drawn on a sociocultural perspective. Chapter 4 outlines a methodological

approach and research design consistent with this framework. It describes the reasons for

implementing a case study approach and includes a detailed description of the data

collection and data analyses. Chapter 5 presents the analysis of policy documents

relevant to the study classrooms, while Chapter 6 considers data from the public and

private school case study teacher’s interviews and classroom practices for analysis. This

is followed in Chapter 7 by an analysis of the case study students' and their parents'

views from the interviews and students’ work obtained during their interviews. In

Chapter 8, the findings are presented and discussed, followed by reflections on the

limitations of and the recommendations arising from the research study.

The Place of Writing……16

Chapter 2

Chapter 2: A Review of the Literature

Introduction

The purpose of this chapter is to review literature that sheds light on the source

of the controversy at the heart of this thesis, namely the removal of writing from the first

grade English curriculum in Kuwait’s public schools. The young language learner field,

it was noted in the previous chapter, is currently expanding rapidly as a result of the new

global economic, political and cultural conditions. Within this field there is a consensus

of opinion about the primacy of oral language instruction. This thinking arises from the

cognitive developmental tradition well-established in the ESL/EFL field (Linse, 2005).

In the first part of the chapter, it is established that there is a gap in the literature

from the Arabic-speaking world around the topic of the place of writing for first graders.

It is to the international literature that the review then turns. In the second section of the

chapter, literature from within the cognitive-developmental tradition is reviewed,

focusing on the place of writing in young learners' curriculum. Attention is drawn to

assumptions and nuances of thinking around the division and ordering of oral and

written language skills, and also to points of contention. In the third section of the

chapter, attention turns to literature that, although not explicitly addressing the delay of

writing, is relevant to this study because it documents young multilingual children’s

simultaneous acquisition of multiple writing scripts. The fourth section of the chapter

describes the global spread of English, the context of the current study. The fifth and

sixth sections present a brief overview of the history of approaches to education that

have spread globally with English, and a critique of the appropriateness of those

approaches in non-Western contexts. As was indicated in the previous chapter, tension

between the 19th century grammar-translation method, with its emphasis on written

language and the academic purpose of translation, and a succession of methods

prioritizing communicative purpose and oral language was a feature of the 20th century

language teaching.

Perspectives from Arabic-speaking EFL Contexts

In establishing the context of this study in Chapter 1, some research conducted in

Kuwait was mentioned. These and others studies (Al-Mutawa, 2002; Essa & Al-


Chapter 2

Mutawa, 1997) focused on issues to do with whether or not English as a foreign

language should be introduced to young learners, and its effect on Arabic language

learning. However, no studies were found that focused directly on the topic of this study,

that is, the exclusion of writing in foreign language learning in Kuwait in first grade, or

the place of writing in beginning English. This may be because of the small amount of

research about young six year old English learners that has been undertaken in Kuwait.

Given the recency of the introduction of English as a foreign language in primary

education, another reason could be that research was not needed until the new

curriculum was introduced in 2002. The curriculum represented a major change because

up until then, writing had been taught in first grade.

Similarly, while research about the introduction of English in the Arab world is

available; there also seems to be a gap in the literature concerning the place of writing in

foreign language learning for young six year old children. While the issue of the place of

writing in first grade or young learner EFL curricula does not seem to have been

addressed in Kuwait and Arab literature, this is not the case in the wider international

literature where positions on the place of writing in young learner curriculum have been

articulated for more than forty years. It is to that literature that this review now turns.

The review begins with literature that explicitly addresses the delay of writing until oral

language skills are established.

Delaying the Introduction of Writing: A Contentious Issue

In the last two decades, the teaching of English as a foreign language to young

learners has become increasingly common, not only in Arabic-speaking countries such

as Kuwait, but also around the world. Globally, an increasing number of children under

the age of ten are learning foreign languages, in particular English (Cameron, 2001;

Frohlich-Ward, 1992). In this context, a new educational field has emerged in the past

few years, a field for the teaching of English to young learners aged six to twelve years

(McKay & Guse, 2007; Paul, 2003). This new field entails a developmental view

underpinned by child psychology and cognitive perspectives long established in both

elementary education and ESL/EFL fields (McKay & Guse, 2007; Paul, 2003). Crucially

for this study, there has emerged in the young language learner field, a degree of

consensus about the timing of teaching writing to young primary learners that entails


Chapter 2

delay of writing, although this is not going uncontested (e.g. Paul, 2003) and without

qualification. It is therefore useful to review the international literature on young

children learning English as a foreign language. In the following section, the work of

researchers who explicitly address the place of writing in English education for young

EFL learners is reviewed (Finocchiaro, 1964; Finocchiaro & Brumfit, 1983; Frohlich-

Ward, 1992).

The debate over the teaching of writing in an EFL setting for young learners is

polarized (Beard, 1995). There tends to be a strong view in the field held by cognitive

development advocates that the early introduction of writing to young EFL learners

poses as a problem for young learners (Cameron, 2001; Frohlich-Ward, 1984; McKay,

2006). The position tends to be that reading and writing should be delayed until the

young learner has good control of oral skills (Cameron, 2001; Finocchiaro, 1964;

Finocchiaro & Brumfit, 1983; Frohlich-Ward, 1992; McKay, 2006)

A cluster of reasons are given for the delay of writing. These turn on assumptions

about the social, affective and cognitive developmental characteristics of young

children, and work from analogy with first language (L1) development. For example,

Frohlich-Ward (1992) suggests that the printed word should not be introduced early to

learners under the age of ten because “if L1 speakers of English find it difficult to

establish the connection between the spoken word and the written system of their own

language how can learners of English as a FL even dream of mastering this skill?” (p.

132). This researcher also reasons that using a foreign language is a more complex

process than understanding it, and speaking is easier than reading and writing,

particularly with young foreign language learners (Frohlich-Ward, 1992).

Another area of concern is that undeveloped knowledge of writing in L1 will be

shifted to the new language especially when a new writing system is used, as is the case

in Arabic speaking countries (Frohlich-Ward, 1992). The argument is that English

foreign language learners should not be exposed to literacy (reading and writing) at a

young age under 10 years old in order to avert the possibility of de-motivating and

discouraging learners from learning the new language. Evidence is cited indicating that

although children are intrigued with learning a new language orally, they easily lose

interest and become intimidated. Problems are said to arise from children’s anxiety


Chapter 2

about assessment, and from loss of enjoyment of the language when it is encountered in

the form of skills of reading and writing (Frohlich-Ward, 1992).

Although the early researchers in the field argued for the delay of writing, their

case was qualified by reference to social factors. This qualification of the argument will

now be examined. It is a qualification that is not unique to the young learner literature.

In a discussion of the ordering of the macroskills for older children and adults, Rivers

(1981) points to the priority of social factors. She begins by questioning whether the

conventional ordering of macroskills in a foreign language – listening, speaking,

reading, writing – inspired by L1 language development is appropriate for L2 learners.

Her question turns on the differences between L1 and L2 learners, specifically, that they

are already communicating through a language, do not necessarily have the socially and

affectively supportive environment of L1 learners, and are not necessarily immersed in

the new language they are learning.

Having rejected the reasoning behind the conventional ordering of macroskills,

Rivers (1981) argues for the centrality of pedagogic considerations in decisions about

the ordering of macroskills in foreign language teachings. Her argument is that there is

no pedagogic necessity for any particular order. Macroskills have been successfully

introduced in varying orders. The pedagogic questions that need to be asked for

selecting from amongst these possibilities or inventing new possibilities are: What are

the goals of the program? Who are the learners? What is the pedagogic context in which

the students are living and learning?

According to Rivers (1981), oral skills are properly prioritised in foreign

language teachings if the goal is spoken communication, but not if it is reading.

Moreover, student expectations matter: if students, and I would add, their parents, expect

to learn writing, “should we disillusion them?” (Rivers, 1981, p. 57). Finally, how are

students accustomed to learning in their other studies, and I would add, at home? Are

they accustomed to learning language through use of books with print? As is evident

from the discussion in Chapter 1 of the public controversy around the reform of 2002

that downgraded the place of writing in the first grade curriculum, parental expectations

and students’ experience of learning to write in Arabic are salient factors in the Kuwaiti


Chapter 2

context. It is for this reason that this study is producing data from both students and

parents.

Although generally recommending delay of the introduction of writing to young

learners, researchers in the young learner field make some qualifications of their

positions that are of interest to this study. These qualifications are consonant with some

of the points raised by Rivers (1981) above. For example, as early as 1964, Finocchiaro

(1964) indicated that the skill of writing should be developed according to a society’s

needs and demands. This suggests the importance of investigating official statements of

societal requirements of English education as is done in this study with its analysis of

English policy documents.

Finocchiaro (1964) argued further that the introduction of writing in EFL as a

discrete skill relies on several variables; for example, the students’ sophistication and

ability in understanding and being able to speak the language, and also the community’s

involvement in presenting the target language through posters and signs. This latter

consideration is of interest to this study given the prominence of English in the linguistic

landscape of Kuwait since the invasion of 1990-91 as described in Chapter 1.

Finocciaro’s position is that class time should be dedicated chiefly to listening and

speaking tasks that most young learners do not encounter outside of the class

(Finocchiaro, 1964, 1989; Finocchiaro & Bonomo, 1973). This argument assumes that

linguistic landscapes in EFL contexts entail more written than oral language and further

that the school should complement the linguistic environment of the broader society.

Given the discussion of Chapter 1, it is apparent that this first assumption cannot simply

be applied to the context of this study given the presence of both written English (e.g.

signs and packaging in toy shops) and spoken English (e.g. in fast food restaurants) in

the lives of young Kuwaiti children. In addition, even if Kuwaiti children are more

exposed to written language than oral language outside of school, an alternative to

Finocchiaro’s pedagogic assumption is possible, namely that the school should build on

the capabilities and interests that the children bring to school from contexts outside the

school.

Writing more recently, Finocchiaro and Brumfit (1983), state that little or no

writing should be practiced by young learners in foreign language classrooms. However,


Chapter 2

crucially for this study, these researchers qualify this recommendation: “except with

those learners who have always used a different writing script” (p. 149, emphasis

added). This exception is consequential for EFL situations where the norm is that young

six year old children are exposed early to script in their mother-tongue, in the case of

this study in Kuwait, Arabic script. This qualification of recommendations to delay the

introduction of writing to young six year old learners was reiterated by Brumfit (1995).

Writing in the context of the rapid growth of the young learner field during the 1990s,

Brumfit (1995) took the view that approaches to the teaching of English as a foreign

language to young learners need to account for the needs of both countries and learners.

In evaluating the early literature in the field, it is important to note that

recommendations are not evidence-based. As was explicitly stated by Frohlich-Ward

(1992), there were no foundational empirical findings arising from research in the area.

Early recommendations were grounded in experts’ personal experiences. Crucially for

this study, this situation does not seem to have changed much since that time.

Taking up the theme of the place of writing with young foreign language learners

a generation later, and after the rapid expansion of the young learner field of the 1990s,

Cameron (2001) extends the historical discussion. Cameron’s is an influential position in

the newly enlarged field. Her position on the place of writing in young five to 12 year

old learners of English education begins with a separation of literacy (reading and

writing) from the other language skills. The basis for this separation is that learning to

read and to write in a foreign language presents distinct learning tasks that require

teaching. As a result, language is divided into oral and written language for young

foreign language learners, with oral instruction taking place before written instruction.

The underpinning belief is that the spoken language is the means by which the new

language is taught and learnt (Cameron, 2001; McKay, 2006).


Chapter 2

Figure 2.1

Dividing up language (Cameron, 2001, p. 19)

On the bases of her assumption that written language is unnatural, Cameron

(2001) divides the language in a new way for the purpose of teaching and sequencing

language instruction. In contrast to the long established division of language into four

macroskills (listening, speaking, reading, and writing), Cameron suggests a two part

division into oral and written language, with a new way of dividing up oral language.

Her solution to the division of oral language learning is set forth through two facets:

from thinking about how children seek out meanings in language for themselves and to

concentrate on words and interaction. In Figure 2.1, interactions are labelled discourse

skills and these discourse skills are further divided to include conversation and extended

talk. It should be noted that the term “discourse” is used here to refer to the use of the

language for real purposes, and in units larger than the sentence. From Cameron's

perspective, thinking about how children interact or communicate in the foreign

language is more important than thinking about children’s listening and speaking skills

per se. Moreover, the discourse skill can be seen and analysed in classroom activities.

Nevertheless the integration of literacy development within the spoken language

development is stressed (Cameron, 2001) because as literacy develops it becomes more

of a “tool” to aid the learning for speaking to young children.

halla

This figure is not available online. Please consult the hardcopy thesis available from the QUT Library


Chapter 2

According to Cameron (2001) in young English as a foreign language learner

classrooms, children in the primary stage struggle to make letter shapes with their

pencils and to recognize printed words and letters. Writing continues to be a difficult

process that needs careful attention to shapes and spelling. There is evidence that

literacy skills work can assist in developing speaking skills, which emphasises the need

to consider the demands that the use of written English in classroom activities makes on

learners. According to Cameron (2001), written tasks “can be attuned with the language

learning goals of the activities” (p. 67). For children aged five to seven years, foreign

language learning should make very little use of the written form as the demands of the

language learnt would be too high at this level. Using written language to support the

development of oral skills within the existing literacy levels of young children is

acceptable (Cameron, 2001). This can be achieved through literacy events and routines

in the foreign language classroom. These literacy events can be developed in classrooms

by creating opportunities where the written text becomes part of a classroom event and

is learnt through participation in the event. Cameron illustrated this notion through

integrating reading and writing in birthday routines, showing that children get to

participate orally and learn literacy at the same time (Cameron, 2001).

For this study’s purpose, it is important to note that Cameron (2001) stresses that

second language literacy is a complicated area. She emphasises that there is much that

remains unknown about young learners and the learning of languages. Like Frohlich-

Ward (1992) a decade earlier, Cameron highlights the dearth of relevant research

findings in the field of young learners and second language literacy: “In the absence of

relevant research findings, we will often need to rely on clear thinking and carefully

monitored practice as guides in the classroom” (Cameron, 2001, p. 23).

An example of the practical use of Cameron’s work is evident in McKay and

Guse’s (2007) book of practical teaching activities, Five-Minute Activities for Young

Learners. This book stresses oral skills by suggesting activities that support meaningful

language use and real communication for children aged six to twelve in EFL or ESL

learning contexts. The book is grounded in a developmental view which emphasises

children’s cognitive development. Much of the work is focused on communication and

strategies of communication and thinking in EFL/ESL field (McKay & Guse, 2007).


Chapter 2

These same ideas are developed in more detail in McKay’s (2006) approach to young

learner language assessment which draws on Cameron’s (2001) work. Explicit

assumptions of the approach are:

� young learners learn language best through oral communication;

� oral language development should precede instruction in written language

and;

� oral language is properly the core of the young learner curriculum.

Published by one of the most prestigious TESOL publishing houses, the work of

Cameron (2001), McKay (2006) and McKay and Guse (2007) is likely to be highly

influential as the young learner field continues to develop. Nonetheless, there are

challenges to the consensus about the place of writing in young six year old learner

curriculum. These are not necessarily challenges arising from paradigmatic differences.

Alternatives to the psychological and cognitive perspectives on young learners’ EFL

development exist (e.g., Kenner, 2002; Kenner et al., 2004) and will be examined below.

For now, however, the focus of this discussion is on challenges arising from within the

cognitive and psychological paradigms of the young learner field.

One well-developed challenge arises from the work of Paul (2003) who calls for

recognition of the possibility that a child-centred classroom differs from one context to

another in EFL classrooms. For example, a child-centred lesson in an Asian classroom

differs from a child-centred lesson in an ESL classroom in America. Importantly for this

study, this argument is developed by Paul to challenge the delay of writing in young

learner curriculum. In what follows, an overview of this position, arising within a

psychological paradigm is presented.

According to Paul (2003), learner-centred approaches are derived largely from

constructivist and humanistic notions, which focus on different perspectives. The

humanistic approach emphasises the inner thoughts and feelings of learners and seeks to

develop the learners’ potentials to become “a whole” person. In contrast, constructivist

approaches aim at learners as individuals trying to understand the world surrounding

them. For example, constructivist approaches identify with the idea that the learner is

“an active explorer who is constructing a mental model of how…English fits together”

(Paul, 2003, p. 7). Working from within this paradigm, Paul challenges the delay of


Chapter 2

writing for young EFL learners. He calls for a balance of the four skills for Asian

primary children (aged 6-12 years). Contrary to the commonly held view of scholars and

EFL researchers that prioritise listening and speaking over reading and writing for EFL

learners, Paul proposes that writing be given more prominence in the young learner’s

curriculum:

This is a misconception of the needs of these [Asian] children and what they are

capable of. An ESL learner may be able to pick up a lot of English naturally

without learning to read or write, but it is difficult for an Asian EFL learner to

pick up spoken English in this way. (p. 83)

Focusing on the affective characteristics of young learners, Paul (2003) states

that as much as it may seem pleasant and easy for children to listen and speak, for some

children who are shy or quiet, reading and writing can be more enjoyable than speaking.

Paul (2003) makes an argument by stating that the main reason behind the delay of

reading and writing is to replace the traditional teaching methods used at secondary

level, where communication is overridden by excessive emphasis on reading and

writing. As noted earlier, this tension between academic purposes and written language,

and communicative purposes and oral language was central to thinking in the EFL field

during the 20th century.

Paul (2003) argues that learning a language is easier when tackled in different

ways, because it provides the Asian EFL learner a chance to integrate the piece of

knowledge and learn it in different ways: “[learning] to say, read, and write the

pattern,… is much more likely [to enable the student] to internalize the new pattern”

(p. 84). He goes on to argue that children in non-English speaking homes find it difficult

to practice speaking. This claim echoes some of the arguments attributed to Kuwaiti

parents in the report by Jaffer (2003) produced after the controversy over the new

curriculum erupted in 2002. It is a claim which suggests that reading and writing are

easier tasks for at least some young learners to approach. Paul maintains that young

primary stage children learn as individuals with different learning styles, some of which

are most conducive to early writing instruction.

Although writing is considered difficult, Paul’s (2003) belief is that it is

important for young learners to balance the four skills for the following reasons:


Chapter 2

� It is easier to learn something from a number of different directions; using

more than one skill, the target patterns are learnt deeply as learners learn the

pattern from different directions, which is vital for the process of

internalization.

� Writing is a visible skill which can help teachers and parents assess the

learner’s achievements.

� It is easier for the child to read and write while speaking is difficult to

practice outside the classroom when the family does not use English.

� A balanced four skill approach caters for the needs of each learner.

Thus, the argument is based on considering the EFL learning context, and ways

of thinking about learners as unique individuals with different learning styles (Paul,

2003). Paul (2003) proposes a new understanding of writing as an important macro-skill

to be introduced early and not be isolated from the teaching of the other macroskills in

EFL classrooms.

Further challenges to the conventional ordering of macroskills arise from the

work of Cook (2001, 2002a, 2002b, 2005). Like Rivers (1981), Cook questions the

appropriateness of analogies from L1 to L2 learning. From a linguistic perspective,

speech skills have been prioritised because of linguists’ claims that: i) children gain their

spoken form before their written form in L1; ii) spoken language is the mode of

communication for many countries; and iii) many languages today exist as a spoken

language (Cook, 2005). These claims explain why the spoken form is more important

than the written skill as previously discussed in relation to audio-lingual methods;

however they are not relevant to the acquisition of a second language and are not related

to the teaching preference of literate students (Cook, 2005).

Cook argued further that the “tradition of teaching European languages since the

Reform Movement of the 1880s has been to pretend that the first language does not

exist” in the EFL context and to teach students the language ignoring their knowledge in

L1 (2005, p. 425). These beliefs are challenged by Cook (2005) as they are based on

empirical assumptions that have been adopted from the 1880s and applied to the skill of

writing in a second language. Thus Cook draws on the reasoning that being literate in L1

writing system alters learners’ thinking. He asserts, based on the above reasons, that the


Chapter 2

prominence of the spoken language should not be taken on the bases of the 1880s ideas

and linguists' theories. To write and read, several areas are of particular interest for

becoming literate. These areas are not necessarily presented in order, but include:

� Students have to learn the appropriate direction of reading and writing,

whether left-to-right as in English, right-to-left as in Arabic.

� Students have to learn to make and recognize the actual letter or character

shapes.

� Students have to learn to use the phonological processing route for relating

letters and sounds in an alphabet-based writing system.

� Students have to learn to use the lexical, morpheme-based processing route.

In an orthographically deep alphabet-based system they need this route with

individual words and meanings. (Cook, 2005, p. 429)

These areas are appropriate to the context of Kuwait where the children are

literate in their L1 and are able to read and write in Arabic, their first language. Thus,

this indicates the need to re-consider the spoken—written skill in language teaching for

young learners.

The purpose of this first section of the chapter was to review what is already

known about teaching writing to young learners of English. No literature specific to

Kuwaiti and Arab contexts was found. However, a body of literature from the broader

international context was available for review. From this literature, it is apparent that

there is some consensus about delaying the introduction of writing for young EFL

learners. However, questions were raised about the appropriateness of the separation of

the oral skills from the written skills in non-Western contexts. These questions have

emerged from the work of theorists who explicitly addressed the issue of the delay of

writing in English education for young learners. Other questions arise implicitly from

research on young children’s writing development in multilingual contexts. It is to that

research that this study now turns.

Young Children Learning Multiple Writing Systems Simultaneously

Where the consensus in the TESOL field is to delay the teaching of literacy

(Cameron, 2001; Finocchiaro, 1964; Finocchiaro & Brumfit, 1983; Frohlich-Ward,

1992; McKay, 2006), the work of other researchers and theorists (Kenner, Kress, Al-


Chapter 2

Khatib, Kam, & Tsai, 2004) suggests an alternative position. Some of this difference

arises from paradigmatic differences. Cognitive and psychological perspectives, it will

be recalled from earlier in this chapter, inform the thinking of the majority of educators

who have recommended the delay of writing. It should be noted however that Paul’s

alternative position was also grounded in the dominant psychological tradition. In

contrast, the pre-writing position of Kenner et al. (2004) is grounded in a sociocultural

perspective that views literacy in its full range of contexts. It is concerned not only with

the cognitive, but also with “social, interactional, cultural, political, institutional,

economic, moral, and historical contexts” (Gee, 2008, p. 2).

The research of Kenner et al. (2004) is concerned with bilingual children in

London and discusses the ways in which young bilingual children understand the

principles underlying different writing systems. Six case studies were carried out,

involving six year olds living in London who were learning to write in Chinese, Arabic,

or Spanish at the same time as English. The focus of the study was children who learnt

two writing systems concurrently rather than sequentially.

This project investigated the claims of researchers and educators that learning

two writing systems causes more confusion for children, which is one of the issues

addressed in the Kuwaiti and Arab literature on the introduction of English and

mentioned earlier in this chapter. In the Kenner et al. (2004) study, the observation of

literacy interaction took place formally and informally at home, the community language

school and the primary school, and produced some remarkable findings about

monolingual children encountering a different script through peer teaching. It is useful to

consider this study in detail because there are some analogies between the situation of

Kuwaiti children encountering English, and monolingual children encountering Chinese,

Arabic, and Spanish in multicultural London. The Kuwaiti context, it will be recalled

from Chapter 1, is not a pure EFL context, but a more hybrid one.

From a socio-cultural perspective, script learning occurs in a particular social

context including formal and informal home and community language learning (Kenner

et al., 2004). Two children were learning a logographic script, Chinese, as well as

English. Two were learning a non-Roman script with different directionality, Arabic.

Two were learning another Roman script, which differs in its written and sound system


Chapter 2

of the alphabetic letters, Spanish. All children were born in England apart from one

Arabic boy who arrived when he was four year old. The children spoke English fluently

except for the Arabic child who was not born in the UK. All parents were eager for their

children to succeed in English literacy as well as to write in their first language: Chinese,

Arabic and Spanish. The children were all receiving more input in English (five days a

week) than the other languages (one morning a week on Saturdays). The crucial issue for

this study was that all children were exposed to two significantly different writing

scripts. The school and community language school homework was done by the children

with the help of siblings or parents. The research investigated how children understood

the relationship between form and meaning in each system, and tried to answer the

following questions: How do the children think writing operates as a means of

representation in the language they are learning? What comparisons do the children

make between their two writing systems? What conclusions do they draw? (Kenner et

al., 2004).

The project investigated what the children knew and hypothesized about the

writing systems. Naturalistic observations were performed to show how children made

use of symbols in different kinds of texts within a variety of social interactions (Kenner

et al., 2004). Children's writing was observed in formal and informal literacy

interactions, ranging from unstructured writing at home, to home events where children

were taught by siblings and parents, to tasks set by teachers in the more formal

environment of the school classroom or community language school. Additional data

were collected about teaching methods and details of the children's literacy experiences

through interviews with teachers and parents. The project team looked at peer teaching

and the case study children were asked to teach young primary-aged monolingual

classmates how to write in Chinese, Arabic, or Spanish. Each child led five peer

teaching sessions during the year, and was visited four times at home, three times at the

primary school for observation and classroom literacy sessions, and four times at the

community language school. In addition to the observation and interview data, children's

work was collected or photocopied, along with a record of the communicative

interactions around writing either by field-notes or video-recordings.


Chapter 2

The data were analysed qualitatively, focusing on the instances in which children

expressed, through talk, action and visual representations, and the link between form and

meaning in each writing system. The children's comments, behaviours and textual

representations were examined in the light of the form–meaning relationships which

they experienced in their homes and schools. By using this approach Kenner et al.

(2004) were able to interpret the principles of each writing system constructed by the

children. Two sets of findings are of interest. In looking closely at the two children

learning to write in Arabic as well as in English, it was found that both children

developed the capacity to self correct. The children were not confused about

directionality at the conceptual level. Rather they were constantly engaged in moving

between the two systems and in that process they encountered moments of transition.

Another matter which Arabic language learners are faced with is that each letter

has two, three or even four different representations/forms. Each letter has initial,

medial, and final forms which must be used when the letter appears at the beginning,

middle, or end of a word respectively. Arabic writing always consists of joining letters

(apart from a few letters which do not join to the left), and children have to learn these

letters. Accordingly, the six year old child (Tala) was able to explain to her peers at the

primary school how to use the Arabic alphabet chart to construct her name and why the

letters looked different as she joined them up. She also demonstrated her knowledge of

the writing system by writing the name of one of her English friends in Arabic, which

required her not only to choose the letters required, but also to work out the relevant

form of each letter depending on its position.

This study also presented data which were not originally designed to be part of

the research study. The findings indicated that a number of the monolingual classmates

also showed a desire to investigate different writing systems during peer teaching

sessions. For example, when Yazan (a six year old case study participant) was teaching

Arabic numbers to his primary school class, many of the children rapidly accepted that

the symbol “0”, which would represent “zero” in English is the number “five” in Arabic.

Yazan's demonstrations of arithmetical sums were written in Arabic, from right to left.

He wrote an example of subtraction, “10-5” in Arabic, and a child called out the answer

“five…… zero,” thus having dealt with directionality, deciphered the numbers, worked


Chapter 2

out the answer, and made the comparison between the symbol for “five” in Arabic and

the English “zero.” This flexibility showed the importance and possibility of early

multilingual learning. The project underlines the abilities of young children as learners

dealing flexibly with more than one writing system (Kenner et al., 2004).

In contrast to the broad consensus in the field (Cameron, 2001; Finocchiaro,

1964; Finocchiaro & Brumfit, 1983; Frohlich–Ward, 1992; McKay, 2006), Kenner et al.

(2004) strongly advocate exposing young children, including monolingual children, to

multiple scripts. This research raises the possibility that children may have more

sophisticated script-learning capacities than some mainstream educators have envisaged,

and underlines the importance of enabling early access to biliteracy (Kenner et al.,

2004).

The study conducted by Kenner et al. (2004) is of great significance for this

research as it raises empirical questions about the present complex situation in Kuwait.

Clearly the case of introducing writing at an early age requires further investigation.

Some researchers (Brumfit, 1995; Cameron, 2001; Finocchiaro, 1964; Frohlich-Ward,

1992) take issue with beginning English writing at an early age in a foreign language,

while Kenner et al. (2004) argue for the introduction of writing in early foreign language

learning. The present study may help in providing empirical findings by exploring the

nuances of this position. Moreover the methodology employed in the Kenner et al. study

suggests methods for the present study. Data were collected through observations,

interviews, and children's work. Field-notes and video recordings were also used.

In a related research project also conducted by Kenner (2000) but in a South

London nursery school, children aged 3-4 years experienced different written scripts in a

multicultural classroom. The aim of the project was to develop a multilingual literacy

environment in the classroom. The rationale of the work was to study the literacy

knowledge young bilingual children were acquiring at home, and to broaden young

children's experiences in writing at school in other languages. Kenner’s (2000) work

indicated the similarity between young monolingual five years old learners in South

London to Kuwaiti first grade learners who were able to acquire simultaneously

different written scripts at a young age. The study is of interest as it illustrates young

monolingual children's motivation to learn another script and their interest in learning


Chapter 2

how another language functions and is of relevance to the young six years old first

graders in the Kuwaiti context. The method encouraged a great deal of writing during

the year, both from bilingual children and their monolingual classmates (Kenner, 2000).

Kenner (2000) carried out the project by initially becoming familiar with the bilingual

children and parents in the nursery by talking to the parents, and after several weeks,

running an informal interview with them. Newspapers, magazines, and alphabet learning

books were brought to the class in different languages. Classroom observations were

made to observe children's reactions to the multilingual materials in the nursery and to

listen to their talk with their classmates.

The literacy environments of the three bilingual children were observed through

their school or home experience. Billy spoke English and has a Thai background. Meer

spoke English but also her parents' language of Gujarati. Mohammad from Malawi lived

in a family that spoke English and Gujarati, and as they are Muslims, Arabic, as an

essential religious language. This project is of interest as it reveals how monolingual

children were motivated to learn the script of another language. The monolingual

children in the nursery would be congruent with the first grade English as foreign

language learners in the public schools of Kuwait, except that for the Kuwaiti children,

writing is excluded from their daily English lessons.

Kenner's (2000) observation of monolingual children illustrated that children

make use of the symbols present in their literacy environment to explore how writing

works (p. 25). This was concluded by looking at Vanessa, a monolingual child. Vanessa

sat alongside Mohammad; she started writing (as there is a chart of the Arabic alphabet

letters in the classroom) the first few letters of the Arabic alphabet, from right to left.

These first three letters include symbols which look like upturned semi-circles with one

dot underneath the first letter and two and three dots inside the second and third letters

respectively. Vanessa drew on her knowledge of numbers as she said "one shoe, two

shoes, and three shoes" (p. 26). The semi-circles represented the shape of a shoe to the

child. Kenner's (2000) work displayed monolingual children’s interest in learning to

write in another language in using literacy materials.

The monolingual children in this project were motivated to learn the scripts of a

language other than English. According to Kenner (2000), young children are interested


Chapter 2

in learning how writing operates. The similarity in the context of this study with the

Kuwaiti situation provides a base for thinking about the possibility that young children

are capable of writing at a young age. This is a position that stands in contrast to the

consensus in the young learner field about delaying the introduction of writing, in part to

protect children from demotivating literacy demands.

In this and the previous section of this chapter, literature either explicitly

addressing the delay of writing for young learners or presenting findings on young

children’s simultaneous acquisition of multiple written scripts was reviewed. This

literature presented positions for and against the delay of writing, and evidence of young

children’s capabilities that is cause for consideration given the general consensus to

delay writing. Three other bodies of literature are useful for understanding this study’s

research problem. These include literature on the globalization of English, the history of

approaches to English language education, and a critique of the export of Western

approaches to non-Western contexts. It is to this literature that this review now turns.

Globalization of English

In this section, I examine the spread of the English language and how economic

and socio-cultural movements have yield globalization and influenced the English

language. Following that, I discuss the Kuwaiti context in the light of globalization and

how the English language has been imposed through a particular teaching language

method. In the 20th century, the spread of English took a well-established position

around the world through political and economical activities (Pennycook, 1994;

Phillipson, 2002), which have been strongly connected to “the rise of the US as a

superpower that has spread English language alongside its economic, technological and

cultural influence” (Graddol, 1997, p. 8). With the rise of English as a global language

(Stromquist & Monkman, 2000), it might be understood as a language of globalisation.

The spread of English is enhanced by world organizations (Gray, 2002;

Pennycook, 1994; Phillipson, 2002) and “transnational corporations” (Graddol, 1997;

Gray, 2002). This is also highlighted in a broader sense by Crystal (2003) where she

pointed out that the spread of English was initiated by geographical-historical and socio-

cultural factors. Historically, the English language became a global language due to the

movement of English resulting from the first voyages to America and Asia. The colonial


Chapter 2

developments in the 19th century to the mid 20th century also contributed to the

recognition of English as an official language in many countries. It is this historical

stretch in time and geographical extension that made English a global language. From a

socio-cultural perspective, it accounts for how people needed the language for economic

and social welfare (Crystal, 2003). This worldwide spread of the English language and

its use for everyday encounters of communication, education, technology, politics,

health, entertainment and capitalism (Crystal, 2003; Phillipson, 2002), has raised

reservations about the global spread of English and its link to social and economical

power. The spread of English through colonization armed the language to develop

globally. Goodman and Graddol (1997) described this: “technological developments,

economic globalization and improved communications have all played a role in the new

global flows of English” (p. 182). More specifically, Pennycook (1994) holds a strong

opinion about the spread of English and its neutrality as a language. He claims that the

spread of English is constructing the world through different global forces in which

classrooms practices are construed by various significant cultural beliefs. English is now

a more dominating language than ever before.

Similar to other societies, English has rapidly become more and more important

in the Kuwaiti education system. This is due to the vast growth of interest in the

language after the Iraqi invasion of 1990 which profoundly influenced Kuwaiti society

(Library of Congress Country Studies, 2003; U.S. Department of State, 2004; The World

Factbook, 2005). English is important to the globalization processes that embody the

economic restructuring, McDonaldisation, and militarisation (Phillipson, 2002) which

were integral factors that have affected the Kuwaiti society of today. This impact

brought about the need for learning English and became part of educational planning in

1993.

As it will be recalled from Chapter 1, it was the demand for English

communicative competence that saw English introduced into the first grade curriculum

in 1993, and the controversial reform of the 2002 curriculum which excluded the skill of

writing after it had been introduced in 1993. Powerful ways of understanding that

controversy have been created by critical theorists of TESOL. As sociologists of

childhood have reconsidered their fundamental precepts about childhood in light of


Chapter 2

globalisation (James & Prout, 1997; Jenks, 2005), so too have critical TESOL

practitioners and researchers (Pennycook, 1994, 2000). For the purposes of this study,

with its focus on controversy around the new curriculum, critique of the implications of

the teaching of English in global relations of power is particularly useful.

During the last two decades, some TESOL theorists working from several

different perspectives have pointed to the cultural specificity of contexts of English

language learning in relation to global domination (e.g. Holliday, 1994; Pennycook,

2000; Phillipson, 2002). From a critical pedagogic perspective, it has been argued that

colonial and postcolonial histories matter when considering what is done in classrooms

in the name of English language teaching (Cook, 2001; Pennycook, 1994, 2000). It is

not only questions about who speaks and who sets the agenda of English language

teaching that matter, but also the very practices of everyday pedagogy. Teaching

methods and learning are not outside of cultural politics. Alastair Pennycook, a

foundational thinker in this regard, is worth quoting at length:

Assumptions about “active” and “passive” students, about the use of group work

and pair work, about self-interest as key to motivation “tell us about yourself”,

about memorization being an outmoded learning strategy, about oral

communication as the goal and means of instruction, about an informal

atmosphere in the class being most conducive to language learning, about

learning activities being fun, about games being an appropriate way of teaching

and learning – all these, despite the claims by some researchers that they are

empirically preferable, are cultural preferences. And this means that the

classroom becomes a site of cultural struggle over preferred modes of learning

and teaching. (Pennycook, 2000, p. 98; emphasis added)

For the purposes of this study, the key point to note here is the challenge made to

commonsense assumptions widely held by TESOL practitioners and researchers. These

include the assumption about oral communication as the goal and means of instruction.

This assumption was fundamental to approaches to English language teaching during the

latter part of the 20th century. It is this assumption that is at the heart of the controversy

around the new Kuwaiti curriculum, resulting in the excision of writing from first grade

classrooms.


Chapter 2

A History of English Language Teaching Methodologies

In the previous section, it was noted that there has been increasing discussion in

the English language teaching field about the appropriateness of particular

methodologies for diverse contexts. Professional understandings of language and

language pedagogy are at the core of these discussions. The argument has been made

that there is a “unilateral professionalism which has carried English language education

across the world … this professionalism is ethnocentric, failing to appreciate the social

background of others” (Holliday, 1994, p. 3). The point to note here is that the conflict is

a professional one: a conflict amongst “professional groups with different ways of

looking at education” (p. 3). Specifically, English language teaching methodologies that

arose in the private higher education sector in Britain, Australasia and North America

(BANA), have been exported to primary, secondary and tertiary sectors of state

education systems throughout the world. The approaches known as communicative

language teaching (CLT) are a core element of these methodologies which, it is claimed,

do not meet the needs of these state education systems (Holliday, 1994; Luk, 2005).

Foundational theorists of the young learner field (e.g. Cameron, 2001 McKay,

2006) have tackled the problems identified in the critique of the BANA dominance of

English language education methodologies globally. It is from this work that current

advice to delay the introduction of writing emanates. To provide a basis for discussion of

these and other positions on the teaching of writing to young learners in this thesis, it is

useful to outline relevant aspects of the history of English language teaching. In this

section of the thesis, four different methods of language learning consequential for

understanding Kuwaiti curricula are described in terms of techniques and principles:

grammar-translation; audio-lingual; notions and (communicative) functions; and other

communicative approaches.

The grammar-translation method emerged with the introduction of foreign

languages in school curricula during the 19th century. It is a bottom–up method where

the learner “synthesizes” different parts of the language to compose language (Fromkin,

Rodman & Hyams, 2007). This bottom-up approach focuses on grammatical forms, and

learning and teaching vocabulary. It borrows heavily from the classical tradition

established for studying Latin and Greek (Thornbury & Slade, 2006). The grammar-


Chapter 2

translation method focuses its main principles on the ability of the learner to read

literature in the foreign language. Thus learners learn the language through its

vocabulary and grammatical rules (Fromkin et al., 2007; Kern, 2000; Larsen-Freeman,

2000; Rivers, 1981; Thornbury & Slade, 2006). This method aims at enabling students

to translate passages from the foreign language to the learner’s mother-tongue; classes

are taught in the learner’s mother-tongue with the emphasis on grammatical rules and

grammatical models (Fromkin et al., 2007; Kern, 2000; Larsen-Freeman, 2000: Rivers,

1981). The teaching-learning process of this method relies on students learning grammar

deductively through memorization.

In a grammar-translation class, the teacher and the learner take traditional roles.

The teacher is the authoritative figure and directs classroom interactions with students.

In this approach “[literary] (formal written language) language is considered superior to

spoken language” (Larsen-Freeman, 2000, p. 18). This method reinforces reading and

writing, making them the principle factors in the method while communication skills

such as listening and speaking, are overlooked (Larsen-Freeman, 2000; Rivers, 1981).

The inability of the grammar-translation method to deliver what are now

understood as communicative outcomes prompted alternative methods from the late 19th

century onwards (Thornbury & Slade, 2006). This resulted in the audio-lingual method

which focused on communication. From the 1940s to the 1960s, there was a strong

move from the traditional method to the audio-lingual method (Kern, 2000).

Significantly for this study, this method re-directed the focus of instruction from reading

and writing to listening and speaking. Communication skills were believed to be of

priority in developing language. Reading and writing were to be tackled after

establishing listening and speaking skills (Rivers, 1981). The aim of this approach is to

use the target language automatically by new habit formation in the target language. It

was a methodology of drills, dialogue and conversation in class (Larsen-Freeman, 2000;

Thornbury & Slade, 2006).

Unlike the grammar-translation approach, in the audio-lingual approach,

vocabulary and structural patterns are taught and learnt through dialogues. The dialogues

are framed through repetitive drills and imitation which Rivers (1981) refers to as

“mimicry-memorization” (p. 42). As described by Larsen-Freeman (2000), these drills


Chapter 2

vary and are described as “repetition, backward build-up, chain, substitution,

transformation, and question and answer” (p. 45). Language is viewed as a distinctive

system which includes various levels and patterns of phonology, morphology, and

syntax (Larsen-Freeman, 2000). The goal is communicative use of the oral language and

not academic translation. It has been suggested that this goal reflected increasing

economic and political demands on schools to graduate students able to use the foreign

language they have studied (Larsen-Freeman & Freeman in press). At another time of

new demands on schools, this responsiveness of methods to societal expectation is a

cause for consideration. The teaching-learning process of the audio-lingual method gives

the teacher a demanding role as a leader, in command of the student’s language

behaviours. It demands that the teacher provide students with a good model for imitation

purposes (Larsen-Freeman, 2000; Rivers, 1981). Thus, learners are constantly following

and imitating the teacher during the lesson.

The audio-lingual method reinforces colloquial speech, the cultural aspects of

which are embedded in the target language being taught which contrasts with the

grammar-translation approaches where the focus in the classroom is on the target

language. In the audio-lingual method, reading and writing are not ignored but are left to

the student’s developing knowledge of the structure of the language (Rivers, 1981).

However, according to Rivers (1981),

this method is given in a mechanical way, students may progress like well-

trained parrots - able to repeat whole utterances perfectly when given a stimulus,

but uncertain of the meaning of what they are saying and unable to use

memorized material in contexts other than those in which they have learned

them. (p. 47)

The limitations of the audio-lingual method include that it relies on

memorization and drilling in communicative situations constructed for the classroom,

and these types of drills can be dreary and uninteresting, leading the student to a state of

exhaustion (Rivers, 1981). In the Kuwaiti context, audio-lingual and grammar-

translation methods were used in learning English as a foreign language in Kuwait’s

public schools in the early years of the 1950s and onwards (Al-Sana`a, 1993). However,

to get a better understanding of the teaching-learning process of English as a foreign


Chapter 2

language in contemporary Kuwait, the notion and functions method and the

communicative approach are now described.

After the audio-lingual method was implemented, it became apparent that,

although students were able to produce sentences accurately in class, they were not able

to use them appropriately in an authentic communicative situation (Larsen-Freeman,

2000). This led to the creation of what is described as “communicative language

teaching” (CLT). The “notional-functional” method of the 1970s was an early form of

CLT. In this approach, communication entered through the use of language functions,

such as approval and greeting language. One of the significant semantic approaches to

communicative language teaching was speech acts or functions, which was part of the

notional syllabus (Patrick & Harley, 1992). To some adherents, these functions and

notions form the core element of the communicative approach, while for others it is

regarded as just a segment of communicative teaching (Patrick & Harley, 1992). In any

case, the functional approach was relatively short-lived because it reduced language to

phrasebook simplicity. However, functional elements survive as a strand in the more

eclectic syllabuses of the present, especially in the sections dedicated to social English.

This limitation of functional thinking and its residual influence are important issues that

will be picked up later in the analysis.

The communicative approach continued to develop from the 1970s to the 1990s.

Widdowson (1979), an advocate of CLT, identified the communicative approach as an

approach which “combines situational presentations with structural practice” (p. 117).

The main aim of using the communicative approach is to facilitate communication in the

target language which is English in this study. This is achieved by understanding and

knowing the linguistic forms, meanings, and functions (Larsen-Freeman, 2000). To

clarify, this includes the knowledge that different forms are used for specific functions

and that one form can be used for different functions. This also includes the knowledge

of when, how, and with whom to use the form.

In CLT, the students play a crucial role in actively participating in the

communication processes. They are constantly engaged in understanding and being

understood, which is achieved through communication (Larsen-Freeman, 2000).

Learners take control of the communicative activities in class, which means that teachers


Chapter 2

are less active, and take on the role of organizers. The communicative approach is based

on the notion of using language for an authentic communicative purpose:

“Communicative activities have three features in common: information gap, choice, and

feedback” (Larsen-Freeman, 2000, p. 129). These three features illustrate what is

considered to be communicative and what is not. To consider an information gap

activity a communicative exchange, one person has to be able to exchange unfamiliar

information within the context of the dialogue in which one of the speakers has the

freedom to choose what to say. With respect to feedback, to consider an exchange

communicative, the listener assesses the response to determine if it fulfilled the purpose

of the communication (Larsen-Freeman, 2000; Van Els, Bongaerts, Extra, Van Os &

Janssen-Van, 1984). Authentic material is another feature of the communicative

approach (Larsen-Freeman, 2000; Widdowson, 1990), as it relates to learning the

language in realistic everyday situations. This is consistent with the aim of the approach,

which is “to make communicative competence the goal of teaching” (Larsen-Freeman,

2000, p. 121). The focal interest of CLT lies in the functions that are introduced

gradually, which include requests, permission, and apology.

Communicative language teaching has been known to have various versions (Lee

& Azman, 2004). It is relevant to this study to discuss the weak version and the

methodological notion of presentation–practice–production (PPP). The variations in the

CLT approach has led to having the approach “adopted, adapted and, no doubt,

distorted” (Klapper, 2003 p. 33). This approach has been critiqued for the lack of

obvious connectedness to second language acquisition (SLA) research or psychological

theories (Klapper, 2003) and its reliance on theoretical bases linked to first language

acquisition models.

As the 2002 curriculum implements the “weak” version of CLT, it is only

relevant to mention that, according to Klapper (2003), for several integral points “both

versions of CLT, … as far as they have been translated to the average language

classroom, have proved problematic” (p. 33). According to Klapper, the weak CLT fails

to provide real meaningful communication activities in a controlled environment where

the learner communicates through practice of functions. Furthermore, a strong critique


Chapter 2

of the “mainstream EFL style” (Cook, 2001, p. 224) of presentation–practice–production

has focused on practising the language (Holliday, 1994; Klapper, 2003).

CLT developed as a reaction to the vast number of students in developing

countries who apply to study in universities and institutions and need to have an

adequate ability to use the English language (Widdowson, 1979). Thus, the

communicative approach was a response to students’ lack of proficiency in using and

comprehending the English language. This was the situation in Kuwait that prompted the

reform of the curricula. Whether it was purely a reaction to academic concerns or an

influence of globalisation and commercial gain is a point of interest and political

challenge in the field.

The purpose in presenting this overview of the grammar-translation, audio-

lingual, (communicative) functions-notions, and broader communicative approach is to

facilitate later discussions of these approaches and EFL classrooms in first grade

classrooms of private and public primary schools in Kuwait. It also provides essential

background for understanding the common international position held in the field of

teaching English as a foreign language, specifically the teaching of writing to young

learners. However, these approaches originated in Western societies and hence their

appropriateness for non-Western countries is an issue, which is discussed below.

Before proceeding, it is worth noting that while communicative language approaches

have had a major influence internationally, the strongest critiques have come from

contexts outside of North America and Europe. These critiques have varied from context

to context, however common themes relate to the ideologies embedded in CLT, the use

of progressive, child-centred methods, and the irrelevance of communication as a goal

for contexts where it is reading and translation that are required (Norton, 2000).

Western Pedagogy for Non-Western Countries

Traditional societies have focused on certain values in their educational systems,

however, with globalization, Western ideologies of progressive pedagogy have reached

different cultures where formal schooling is the basis of education. As was established

above, the “pillars of our [English teaching] profession have been based upon experience

of a narrow set of conditions within a limited social context” (Holliday, 1994, p. 2).

Religious and national notions have been reasons to establish such educational systems.


Chapter 2

This notion of formal and progressive schooling is examined in detail in the next section,

detailing the residue of globalization in such contexts.

The impact of globalization on developing countries at large is felt through the

education sector. Spring (2006) asserts that both the goals and methods of English

language teaching in conversations about pedagogy are a facet of the developing global

society. To begin, it is necessary to consider a distinction between two different forms of

pedagogy: formal or traditional pedagogy and informal or progressive pedagogy (Spring,

2006). The former is related to theories of direct education; the classroom is highly

controlled and the mode is authoritarian; subjects are clearly defined and are taught

separately, and learning is performed through recitation and drill. In contrast,

progressive pedagogy is defined by learning by doing; teaching is based on students’

interests and activities; group work; and an integrated curriculum in which several

subjects are taught through a single learning activity. There is a clear distinction between

the outcomes of the two pedagogies: traditional education is used to produce students

who are accepting of the present state of the economic and social systems while

progressive education is a means of preparing students to actively affect economic,

political and social systems (Spring, 2006).

As globalization extended into the Islamic and Arab countries, strong educational

conflicts between Islamic and Western ideologies have emerged. Initially, the

economical overpower between countries has given rise to religious and political

societies. This rise has lead to the globalization of educational ideas (Spring, 2006).

Countries like India, Pakistan, and nations of the Middle East are a result of colonialism

and religious struggles. Countries in the Middle East called for nationalistic and Islamic

forms of education after the withdrawal of colonial powers (Spring, 2006). Arab

liberation movements prompted the emergence of authoritarian and formal school

systems: “progressive education never found its way into Arab Islamic traditions”

(Spring, 2006, p. 162). The Arab countries adopted the Euroamerican approaches to

primary to secondary education but stressed Arab nationalism. The strength of the

Euroamerican school system is its inclusion of science and technology in the curriculum.

This aspect of the system was adopted in the Arab states in addition to the study of

Arabic and Islam. Arab nations introduced religious instruction on the understanding


Chapter 2

that it would control the social behaviour of the people (Spring, 2006). School systems

encouraged nationalism by teaching national history, Arabic literature, and Islamic

history and civilization. These school systems represented highly controlled and formal

environments in which Islamic methods were stressed through memorization of text,

spoken recitation, and recognition of the teacher's authoritative role (Spring, 2006).

Points of similarity between these methods and those of the grammar-translation

approach to English language education are apparent.

After the second Gulf war, teaching English in first grade primary public schools

in Kuwait was enacted, as it was in other Gulf States and the Jordanian kingdom

(Zughoul, 2003). The use of the English language was expanding in the region, an

expansion that researchers like Zughoul (2003) claimed was a by-product of the

September 11 events and the American occupation of Iraq. These were reasons for the

Gulf countries to revert to “imperialist” and “neo-colonialist” forms of the English

modes of education and a deterioration of the use of the Arabic language (Zughoul,

2003). Though to Spring (2006), it was the start of imperialism that produced the

implementation of the Euroamerican style education in the Arab world, Asia, and Africa

(Spring, 2006).

From an Asian perspective, given that most EFL thinkers are advocates of

developmental theories within educational psychology and that these theories are

influenced by Western approaches, the child-centred approach is strongly encouraged in

a developmental context. Paul (2003) notes that child-centred approaches advocated

internationally were originally developed for Euroamerican contexts and emerged from

Western child psychology. These approaches are still not widely favoured in the Asian

contexts in which he works, where teacher-centred approaches are more familiar. These

two approaches, child-centred and teacher-centred, are the source of a fundamental

question for Paul: Is a Western pedagogy appropriate for a non-Western culture? In

examining the four macroskills from a sociocultural context, this question has not been

dealt with in detail in the field of EFL. However, as ESL contexts are different from

EFL contexts, Paul calls for recognition of the possibility that a child-centred classroom

differs from one context to another. For example, a child-centred lesson in an Asian

classroom differs from a child-centred lesson in an ESL classroom in America.


Chapter 2

From an African context, Tabulawa (2003) suggested that through aid agencies,

political ideologies are promoted rather than educational thought. One way to promote

these ideologies is by learner-centred pedagogy which is a political ideology aimed at re-

ordering society. He argues that foreign aid to education is just another method of

transferring thinking methods and encouraging individualistic Western culture by means

of learner-centred teaching methods (Tabulawa, 2003). To Tabulawa, learner-centred

teaching methods are a colonising pedagogy:

It is now time we invented alternative, culturally responsive pedagogies. There

can be no justification for a universal and homogenising pedagogy if indeed

teaching and learning are contextual activities. A universalised pedagogy

necessarily marginalises…by treating learner-centred pedagogy as a one-size-

fits-all approach to teaching and learning, pedagogies that are based on

indigenous knowledge systems are marginalised. The potential of these

alternative pedagogies has not been explored yet. (p. 22)

The point here is that Western teaching approaches have been exported to non-

Western countries without due regard for crucial elements that structure societies.

Pennycook (1994) has argued that in order to avoid conflict it is essential to understand

various teaching and learning methods as they are rooted in different social, political,

philosophical and cultural contexts. From this perspective, language teaching is seen as

cultural practices that are non-neutral and involve cultural politics. To Pennycook

(1994), “the classroom [is] a site of cultural politics, in which battles over social and

cultural practices are fought within the context of English language teaching” (p. 168).

In the case of the audio-lingual or the communicative approach, politics include

struggles over a propensity to prioritise oral language over written language. This

priority is rationalized by the idea that speech comes before written language and that

writing is a representation of speech. In an argument that is cause for reflection in the

present study, Pennycook (1994) states that this justification neglects the fact that L2

learners already read and write in their L1 and that a lot of people learn English for other

purposes than to use the language orally. The audio-lingual method and the

“communicative approach” have continued to hold the idea of avoiding L1 and other

language use in the classroom (Pennycook, 1994).


Chapter 2

In summary, learner-centred methods which are grounded in cognitive theories

of second language acquisition stress individuality and learners’ mental processes, and

overlook the social context of L2 acquisition and political relationships (Auerbach,

2000). In this approach, the social context is ignored, including whether learners are

accustomed to traditional or progressive pedagogical approaches. In regard to the

Kuwaiti context, formal classroom teaching methods are adopted and memorization and

drilling are familiar routines to the learners. The value of bringing in approaches for

which there is on no empirical evidence in the EFL non–Western context is a point on

which to reflect. The overall point of this section is that the English language and

English language teaching have become a global commodity (Pennycook, 1994), which

are exported to various countries and privileged certain methods. These methods give

oral skills primacy over written skills and are grounded in cognitive developmental

views of EFL. In the EFL literature, there is tension between these cognitive–

developmental views and sociocultural perspectives (McKay, 2006), the latter

suggesting that writing need not be delayed until the second oral language and first

language literacy skills are established. In what follows, some sociocultural principles

are introduced, and a detailed review is then provided of research showing how young

children can learn multiple scripts simultaneously.

Summary

The review of literature revealed a paucity of research in teaching English as a

foreign language to young literacy learners (Cameron, 2001). Limited research has been

found about the teaching of writing to young learners in Kuwait and other Arab

countries but there are discussions about young children and foreign language teaching

in general (Cameron, 2001; Finocchiaro, 1964; Forhlich-Ward, 1992). The general

consensus among researchers is that writing should be delayed, although there is some

qualification and contesting of this position. Research was also examined which

provides evidence that monolingual children are able to write in a different script from a

very early age. Although this literature did not explicitly deal with the delay of writing,

it suggests the possibility that writing may be introduced in English as foreign language

classes as early as first grade (Kenner, 2000; Kenner et al., 2004). Finally, literature

describing the globalization of English, the history of English education methods


Chapter 2

exported to the non-Western world, and critiquing that export of pedagogical thinking

was reviewed. This literature is useful for the study because it provides insight into the

linguistic environment of contemporary Kuwait, the methods that preceded the

controversial 2002 curriculum, and challenges to those methods.

The next chapter has five sections. In sections one and two, a conceptual

framework is developed in terms of the cultural context and globalization of Kuwait.

Then in section three, a contemporary paradigm on the globalization of childhood is

reviewed. Section four re-examines the theoretical concept of the sociology of

childhood. This framework is then built into a sociocultural perspective which is

examined in light of Gee’s (2005) approach to discourse analysis in the final section.


Chapter 3

Chapter 3: Conceptual Framework

This chapter describes the concepts that provide a framework for the

investigation of what is taught as writing in Kuwait first grade English classrooms, how

it is taught, and why. The study, it will be recalled, is being undertaken at a time when

these issues are being hotly contested in Kuwaiti society following the introduction of

the new curriculum for public schools in 2002. Moreover, this is a moment of

considerable cultural change in Kuwait, a moment in which some of the forces of

“globalisation” are evident. In the previous chapter, research into the place of writing in

curricula for young learners of English as a foreign language was examined. The review

identified not only a paucity of relevant research, but also a tendency for international

experts to extrapolate from first and second language learning in Western countries to

foreign language contexts around the world. At the core of these approaches is

developmental knowledge of the child learner derived from Western psychological

traditions dating back to the 19th century. Questions thus arise about the cultural and

sociological appropriateness of recommendations about the teaching of writing for the

Kuwaiti context.

In investigating the teaching of writing in Kuwait in this context, the present

study draws on alternative conceptual traditions. This chapter therefore outlines the

major tenets and conceptual tools of:

i) cultural globalisation and its impact on Kuwait;

ii) globalization and childhood;

iii) the sociology of childhood and understandings of childhood as a social

construction (James, Jenks & Prout, 1998; James & Prout, 1997; Jenks,

2005); and

iv) the sociocultural approach of Gee (2005).

In general terms, the framework enables an analysis of how language works to

construct young EFL learners in Kuwait as writers in both the practices of the classroom,

in the written texts of relevant policy documents, and the talk of teachers, parents, and

students. The chapter explains the theoretical perspectives and related concepts used in

this study.


Chapter 3

The Cultural Context of Kuwait – In a Time of Rapid Change

An account of the sociology of religion is necessary in order to understand the

conceptualization of globalization from an Islamic Arab perspective. The purpose is to

understand the effects of globalization on Islam and the implications of the teaching of

the global language of English in Kuwait.

In progressive Islamic cultures such as Kuwait, sociological views have

identified two religious processes: i) the birth of an Islamic political system, and ii) the

cultural revolution against Westernism and consumerism (Turner, 1994). To understand

the underpinning political and cultural views in a particular Islamic society, it is crucial

to consider two key themes. The first of these is the problem of having multiple world

religions with competing claims of often absolute truth within a universal cultural

system. The second theme relates to the problematic relationship between postmodernity

(with its cultural, aesthetic, and stylistic pluralism) and religious commitment to a more

coherent world of values, styles, and beliefs held to be true (Turner, 1994). In other

words, it is the spread of consumer culture which promotes particular ideals, attitudes,

and values as commodities into another global cultural context. Political shifts in Islamic

culture have been affected by global communication systems. On one hand, those

systems have bought about the rise of the “Islamization of cultures” (Turner, 1994,

p. 86), seen in the movement to propagate Islam globally. On the other hand, these

systems of communication opened Islamic cultures to Western consumerism (Turner,

1994). The European colonization of the Islamic world in the 18th and 19th centuries

brought about social and cultural changes that ultimately produced a complex

understanding of the relationship between Westernization (materialism) and anti-

colonialism (nationalism). The anti-colonial movement established the ideology of Islam

as the root of Arab nationalism (Turner, 1994). In the 1950s and 1960s, secular

ideologies penetrated the Islamic and Arab world, resulting in the growth of a Western

approach to political and educational systems. This development is of particular interest

to this research. Specifically, Western views of education were both resisted and used

for reform. This was apparent in the encouragement of Islamic principles of equality and

reform against liberal views of cultural and political involvement (Turner, 1994).

Western views were challenged by the re-identification of institutions and principles as


Chapter 3

they were re-located in an Islamic country. In the case of education, schools and

universities were re-structured along Islamic principles to encourage Islamic beliefs

among young people. New Islamic discourses became powerful forces in the

construction of childhood in globalizing conditions. This meant that Islamic beliefs and

practices were strongly introduced to children through the educational institutions.

Homogenous Islamic lifestyles are challenged by the wide range of lifestyles

offered by the consumerism associated with global capital. Several factors, such as

technology, transportation, communication, and new economic developments developed

consumerism further and deeper, producing a global mass culture .The spread of global

consumerism was identified as a product of Westernization (Turner, 1994), resulting in

an intense reaction from Islamicists. Overall, it is in reaction to Western modernization

that the new Islam has been restructured through the politics of a global community and

an anti-consumerist moral discipline founded on Islamic principles (Turner, 1994). This

complex interplay of Westernization and consumerism, and Islamization and Arab

nationalism is significant for understanding the ideologies embedded in the policy

documents analysed in Chapter 5.

As Kuwait is an Islamic country where 85 percent of the population is Muslim

(The World Factbook, 2007), religion plays an important role in society throughout the

civil law system and Islamic law, which are both recognized in personal matters.

However, it is consumerism that made the Kuwaiti society undergo dramatic changes in

lifestyle patterns and values. Although traditions and customs are embedded in the

lifestyle of Kuwait, the society has been undergoing rapid change in recent decades. This

is noticeable from a historical perspective, as Kuwait is a family-oriented society. Social

events unite the family members regularly over lunches and feasts. Socializing is an

essential part of Kuwaiti lives, with men gathering in a diwanyia (a gathering place for

men e.g. a room in a house or especially built hall) to discuss political, economical,

sociocultural issues or events, over a cup of tea. Women spend their days shopping and

attending social functions and responsibilities, such as visiting family and taking care of

children.

While Kuwaiti society is fixed in some respects, the discovery of oil, the

aftermath of modernization, and the Iraqi invasion mentioned in Chapter 2, has had a


Chapter 3

lasting effect on the country’s economic, social, and political affairs (Kuwait

Information Office, 2007; Library of Congress, 2007). The British influence (1899-

1961) and its current relation with Kuwait, and the economic and political power of the

United States (Crystal, 2003), are all factors that have influenced the transformation of

Kuwaiti society, making Kuwait part of the global village. The influence of English has

taken such a position globally and specifically in relation to the Kuwaiti context due to

“the joint outcome of Britain’s colonial expansion and the more recent activity of the

U.S.” (Graddol, 1997, p. 8). These historical, political, social, and economic changes

have increased the prominence of the English language in Kuwaiti society and given it

an eminent status. As it will be recalled from Chapter 2, political and economical

supremacy empowered the English language in educational institutions in the Gulf

region (Zughoul, 2003) and made the use of English a communication tool within the

society and with the outside world.

In the following section, a detailed account of the global impact on the Kuwait

cultural context is discussed. It is important to understand the forces that have shaped

and altered Kuwait’s identity, and to understand how the effects of globalization are

clearly visible in every aspect of Kuwait’s environment.

Globalization in Kuwait

Giddens (1990) defines globalization as “the intensification of worldwide social

relations which link distant localities in such a way that local happenings are shaped by

events occurring many miles away and vice versa” (p. 64). Globalization creates

economic and local changes within and across nations because nation states have been

opened “to many influences that originate beyond their borders” (Kaufman, Rizzini,

Wilson, & Bush, 2002, p. 3). These influences can be the result of war, migration,

modernization, or even social, economic, and political changes outside the country

which produce corresponding effects within it. As a result of this new phenomenon

driven by an exterior power, borders between countries and societies are dissolved

(Kaufman et al., 2002). Globalization has created institutions that seem similar

externally but are actually different in substance (Giddens, 2000). For example,

educational systems, traditions, and family appear similar to what they were in the past

but they are not, as is the case with Kuwait. Like many other nations, the Kuwaiti


Chapter 3

society has been influenced significantly by globalization. The growing number of

people from overseas residing in Kuwait has produced a multicultural society and a

diverse population. This diversity is an effect of globalization, as is the impact so created

on the society, the economy, and the policy of the country.

Globalization may result in rapid and manifold cultural change (Murphy-Berman

& Kaufman, 2002. These cultural changes affect the environment in several ways. In

Kuwait for example, places like Salmyia and Gulf Road reflect a certain form of

globalization. This is evident by the American shops and international brand names that

are displayed, whether through the restaurants and the availability of diverse ethnic

foods or the shopping centres and international clothing and commodities. This is not a

purely Kuwaiti phenomenon. There is evidence for example, that Japanese cities show

similar trends. In Japan, as in Kuwait, a range of different restaurants serve a variety of

international food (Kubota, 2002). This can be understood as evidence of globalisation.

To illustrate further, drinking coffee at home is a habit enjoyed in Kuwaiti, but with the

global dominance of American chains, Starbucks and Gloria Jeans have become the

alternative. Moreover, women wear Western clothes and not the “dara ah” (long loose

dress) which has been associated with festive occasions and traditional customs, and

men have exchanged their “dishdahsa” (long dress-like garment) for Western jeans and

t-shirts (Kuwait Information Office, 2007) to the extent that the Kuwaiti identity has

been prevailed upon by global domination.

According to Murphy-Berman and Kaufman (2002), globalizing interference

within a culture produces further interactions between people and provides easy access

into a country’s marketplace, media, law, and technology. Further, “movement of

commodities, capital, information, images across national and local boundaries will be

increased” (Murphy-Berman & Kaufman, 2002, p. 19). This movement raises the

vulnerability of countries to a loss of identity and the spectre of integration, of becoming

one society, or what Gray (2002) described as “cultural hybridization” (p. 152). This

cultural hybridity has become a feature of the Kuwait context (El-Dib, 2004) because

Kuwait is described as a country that does not fit the context of having either English as

a foreign language or English as a second language.


Chapter 3

The Influence of Globalization on Childhood

Globalization has affected childhood. It is important to this study to shed some

light on the influence of globalization on childhood, as Kuwaiti children like others

around the world are exposed to a vast plurality of information, values and beliefs

through television, the internet or by accessing global products (e.g. toys). In this study,

children in first grade are construed as part of the diverse population with multiple

experiences. These children encounter global products in various social practices. To

explain this phenomenon, in this section I review the effects of globalization on

childhood. This is followed by a discussion about the diversity of childhood experiences

(James & Prout, 1997) and how the media has affected childhood.

The impact of globalization has rendered several changes in societies; among

these changes is the change to childhood representations. At the end of the 20th century,

some theorists claimed that economic pressure and social and technological

transformation seemed to have disintegrated the social order (Giddens, 1990; Prout,

2005). Philosophers like Giddens (1990) called this transformation “late modernity,”

maintaining that it is marked by changes in social institutions and results in

corresponding changes to identities (Prout, 2005). Thus globalization, which “has done

more for children than make hamburger available worldwide” (James & James, 2004,

p. 29), has produced multiple images of childhood (Prout, 2005). That is, because of

globalization and the accessibility of media, the diversity in childhood experiences “has

been unveiled ‘inter- and intra-culturally’” (James & James, 2004, p. 29).

It seems that the theories used to look at children and childhood are inappropriate

in postmodern social and cultural orders. Conventional portraits of children and

childhood have been challenged and alternative understandings have emerged that

provide new discourses of

…speaking, writing and imaging children [which] are providing new ways of

seeing them and these children are different from the innocent and dependent

creatures ... These new representations construct children as more active,

knowledgeable and socially participative than older discourses allowed. (Prout,

2005, p. 7)


Chapter 3

Instead of children being “seen and not heard” and considered as vulnerable,

immature and in need to protection, the sociology of childhood presents children as

competent social actors, capable of engaging productively in everyday life. Childhood

then is a product of social and economic volatility, resulting in the creation and re-

creation of ways in which childhood is represented (Christensen & Prout, 2005; James&

James, 2004; Prout, 2005). In other words, as Woodhead and Faulkner (2008) put it,

“children are ‘becomings’ at the same time as they are ‘beings,’ something which

children themselves are very aware” (p. 35). Thus, because children are exposed to a

variety of sociocultural and economic settings and because of the exponential growth of

technological communication, the ways in which childhood is represented have become

increasingly diverse (Prout, 2005).

A highly powerful contributor in revealing the multi–representations of

childhood is the media. Although late modernity has added further facets than the

familiar concerns of the politics of social class, such as gender ethnicity, family

structure, and life style, these different facets have all contributed to forming diverse

identities in childhood (Christensen & Prout, 2005; Prout, 2005). This diversity of

cultural conditions and globalization are a result of late modernity and the media which

has attributed to the multiplicity of childhood representations.

The growing presence of the media, the speed and ease of the transfer of

information, and the growing accessibility of communication has resulted in the fast

spread of images, information, ideas and values throughout the world (Prout, 2005). It is

these “global products and communication processes” that have resulted in “cultural

homogenization and differentiation” (p. 29). In other words, it is globalization that has

expanded the medium of communication, making the far near or in Giddens’ (2000)

terms the “…‘out there’… ‘in here’…” (p. 30) where values and beliefs in one society

become accepted in another, or become at variance with another because other beliefs

are rejected. For example, the earlier discussion about globalization indicated that it was

consumerism which initiated conflicts between the ideologies of Arabism and

Islamicism.

This flow of information, values, and images within societies influences the

involvement of children and produces both obvious and obscure effects. It could be said


Chapter 3

that artefacts of childhood are becoming more standardized as products like toys, games

and clothes are available globally. However, Prout (2005) claimed that “in any one

location childhood experience becomes more diverse because the range of products is

enlarged, thus producing new cultural niches and leading to the emergence of new

identities” (p. 30). As globalization takes it turn in moulding new childhood identities, it

also creates opportunities for linguistic variance. Globalisation occurs in different

cultures producing “new forms of diversity and identity” (Goodman & Graddol, 1997, p.

216). Thus, a point of consideration for this study is that the English language constructs

new roles for and identities of its speakers when it is used in different contexts globally

(Graddol, 1997), producing diverse speakers of varying experiences. Childhood

experience of language (such as EFL) is distinct as different environments of language

exposure are encountered. In the case of Kuwait, images of childhood have been altered

through sociocultural and economic changes. The study draws on the sociology of

childhood as a contemporary paradigm.

The Social Construction of Childhood – An Alternative to Developmental Views

As will be recalled from the previous chapter, developmental explanations of

young children’s foreign language learning underpin the recommendation that writing be

delayed until oral language is established. However, the early 21st century Kuwaiti

context of this study is both culturally and historically different from that in which

developmental notions were formulated. The impetus for this alternative to both long-

standing psychological paradigms, and earlier sociological approaches to childhood that

incorporated psychological understandings of development, is complex. Developmental

psychology has dominated the field of early childhood for a long time (King, 2007) and

it has recognized childhood as a trait of “parental discourse, the currency of educators

and the sole theoretical property of developmental psychology” (James et al., 1998, p.

3). However, this developmental view has come under scrutiny and growing criticism in

which the familiarity and long term convictions about childhood and children’s social

value are being challenged by the sociology of childhood (James et al., 1998; King,

2007).

Developmental psychology gained influence in the field of childhood on two

assumptions: “first, that children are natural rather than social phenomena; and secondly,


Chapter 3

that part of this naturalness extends to the inevitable process of their maturation” (James

et al., 1998, p. 17). The thinking of Piaget and Vygotsky has influenced discourses of

developmentalism widely. As a result, the contemporary theory of the sociology of

childhood (James & Prout, 1997) looks sharply at the ways in which the biological fact

of the immaturity of young children is made meaningful, specifically, at how children’s

immaturity takes on meaning as a fact of culture. In this approach, childhood is

conceptualized using a social constructionist approach (James et al., 1998; James &

Prout, 1997; Prout, 2005), which identifies childhood as a “historical, social and cultural

phenomenon” (Prout, 2005, p. 55). A social constructionist view explains that childhood

is made in particular social contexts and differs across time and culture, and is built on

“intended and unintended” change (Prout, 2005, p. 54). Given the critiques of

developmental notions, the sociology of childhood provides some useful interpretive

concepts for this study. The fundamental characteristics of the approach are:

� Childhood is understood as a social construction. As such it provides an

interpretive frame for conceptualizing the early years of human life.

Childhood, as distinct from biological immaturity, is neither a natural nor

universal feature of human groups, but appears as a specific structural and

cultural component of the culture of many – but not all – societies.

� Childhood is a variable of social analysis. It can never be entirely divorced

from other variables such as class, gender, or ethnicity. Comparative and

cross-cultural analyses reveal a variety of childhoods rather than a single and

universal phenomenon.

� Children’s social relationships and cultures are worthy of study in their own

right, independent of the perspective and concerns of adults.

� Children are and must be seen as active in the construction and determination

of their own social lives, the lives of those around them and of the societies

in which they live. Children are not just the passive subjects of social

structures and processes.

� Ethnography is a particularly useful methodology for the study of childhood.

It allows children a more direct voice and participation in the production of


Chapter 3

sociological data than is usually possible through experimental or survey

styles of research.

� Childhood is a phenomenon in relation to which the double hermeneutic of

the social sciences is actually present. That is to say, to proclaim a new

paradigm of childhood, sociology has also to engage in and respond to the

process of reconstructing childhood in society. (James & Prout, 1997, p. 8)

In general terms, this perspective on the study of childhood is an alternative to

earlier psychological paradigms of child development theory, and also to earlier

sociological perspectives on childhood that incorporated developmental notions. Both

these paradigms were inextricably implicated in the childrearing and child support

practices of parents, teachers and politicians in their interactions with child, pupil and

the populace. Adult-child relations, and beliefs about such, were supported by those

explanations of child development (James & Prout, 1997). As was shown in the previous

chapter, this includes educators’ understandings of how young children should be taught

and how they should learn English as a foreign language.

Contemporary sociologists’ contentions about the limitations of the

developmental perspective for meaningful representations of childhood require them to

reconsider the position of childhood themes in a new paradigm. Developmental

explanations entailed the now ubiquitous and apparently commonsense early childhood

themes of “rationality” (or childhood irrationality), children’s “naturalness” (in contrast

to adults’ socialisation), and the “universality” of developmental processes irrespective

of the social contexts of children’s lives (James & Prout, 1997; Jenks, 1996). Although

formulated in psychology, the idea of natural growth at the core of these ideas was

integral to early sociological explanations of childhood. The impulse of contemporary

sociologists of childhood to problematise these themes arises from awareness of their

limitations even in the Western contexts of their origin.

To elaborate, in the developmental paradigm “rationality” was understood as the

mark of adulthood, that is, as the mark of full personhood. Childhood in contrast has

been viewed as a biologically determined stage on the way to these states of adulthood

and personhood. This stage was considered to be marked by “naturalness,” that is, by

irrational and non-adult behaviour. Moreover, the evolutionary path from childhood to


Chapter 3

adulthood was considered “universal”; it was viewed as a biological fundamental that

sits outside of culture. As the 20th century progressed, this particularly Western

conceptualisation of childhood was increasingly imposed on all children whether within

the West or not (James et al., 1998). The “ages and stages” notions integral to pedagogic

approaches–ELT approaches included–exported from the West were one instrument of

this provision.

From the perspective of the sociology of childhood, it is important to note that

the notion of universality, along with ideas about the irrationality and naturalness of

childhood, were translated directly into the sociological concept of “socialisation” in the

1950s (James & James, 2004; James et al., 1998; James & Prout, 1997; Prout, 2005).

This concept explained development in terms of the transformation of the immature,

irrational, incompetent, a-social and a-cultural child into the mature, rational, competent,

social and autonomous adult (James & Prout, 1997). However, beyond the 1950s, a

complex interplay of dissenting intellectual trends saw the creation of a theoretical space

within which the sociology of childhood has emerged as an alternative to both

developmental psychological explanations and notions of socialisation (see James &

Prout, 1997 for a detailed intellectual history). The notion, particularly useful for the

purposes of this study, is that it is essential to understand a child’s individuality and

cultural diversity within a specific situation (James & Prout, 1997; Jenks, 2005). The

implication is that culture is constructed through multiple forms of discourse.

As is elaborated below, the concept of discourse in play here is of language,

ideas, knowledge, and concepts, as both constituted by and constitutive of social

practices. The general point to be developed is that a child’s identity differs in the

different political settings created by discourses. In other words, children’s identities

vary in accordance with the way that discourses enacted in the context construct

individual children and their relation to teachers, parents, other students and so on in

social practices and institutions (James & Prout, 1997; Jenks, 2005), including those of

English language teaching.

In what follows, an introduction is provided about concepts drawn from Gee’s

(2005) sociocultural approach where writing is identified as a social practice (Gee,

2000). These concepts enable an understanding about the practices at work in the data of


Chapter 3

documents, classroom enactments, and talk about the teaching of writing to young

learners in Kuwait as investigated in this study.

Sociocultural Approach

A critical sociocultural perspective is used to analyse and interpret the data

produced in this study in order to develop an understanding of the place of writing in

public and private first grade classrooms in Kuwaiti society. According to Gee (2005,

2008), and contrary to the widely held belief, language is not simply a means for

communicating information, even in these days of the so-called information economy

and society, although it certainly works to do this. Rather, language is a resource for

communicating the language user’s perspectives on reality, for carrying out social

activities and for enabling us to enact social identities that support our affiliation within

cultures, social groups and institutions.

From Gee’s (2005, 2008) assumption about the functions of language, the

important theoretical questions concern how it is that language is recruited to enact

particular social activities and identities. Moreover, the focus is on the politics of

language-in-use to these ends:

This … perspective-taking process involves us in taking perspectives on

what is “normal” or not; what is “acceptable” or not; what is “right” or not;

what is “real” or not; what is the “way things are” or not; what is “the way

things are” or not; what is the “ways things ought to be” or not; what is

“possible” or not; what “people like us” or “people like them” do or don’t

do; and so on and so forth (Gee, 2005, p. 2).

The point is that language use is intrinsically political. It is a politics of social

relations within which social goods are at stake. Given the discussion in Chapter 1, in

the case of this study, those “social goods” would seem to include the distribution of

English language writing capabilities in first grade, with possible ramifications for life

chances in Kuwaiti society.

Gee (2005) argues that language, whether spoken or written, has a somewhat

magical property in that it helps create the situation in which it is used. To clarify, we

design the language we use to fit the situation in which we are using it, but at the same

time, the language we use helps create the situation. Specifically, language is used to


Chapter 3

create or build seven “areas of reality,” what Gee dubs “the building tasks”: “language-

in-action is always and everywhere an active building process” (Gee, 2005, p. 10). The

areas of reality built through language are: i) significance (when we accord “things”

such as writing value); ii) activities (when we use language to do “things” such as

conduct a writing lesson); iii) identities (for example, as a teacher of English writing);

iv) relationships (for example, relationships between a teacher and student of writing); v)

politics (for example, conveying a perspective on what is appropriate in writing

education); vi) connections (for example, drawing links between the writing and oral

language components of the curriculum); and vii) sign systems and knowledge

(privileging certain sign systems and forms of knowledge in a situation).

For the theoretical and analytic purpose of this study, four building tasks are

particularly important: significance, activities, relationships and politics. In Gee’s (2005,

pp. 11-13) terms, these building tasks can be understood as follows:

1. Significance – language is used to make things significant, giving them

meaning and value, in certain ways.

2. Activities – language is used to get recognized as engaging in a certain sort

of activity that is to build an activity here-and-now.

3. Relationships – language is used to signal what sort of relationships we have,

want to have, or are trying to have with our listener(s), reader(s), or other

people groups, or institutions with whom we are communicating, that is use

language to built social relationships.

4. Politics – language is used to convey a perspective on the nature of the

distribution of social goods.

The data produced for the study is focused on the first three of these building

tasks. However, given the extensive use of interviews, much of the data is itself

linguistic. These interviews build perspectives on the distribution of a social good

through activities and relationships. The social good is English writing, and the activities

and relationships those of teacher and student in the first grade English classroom. There

is much talk in the data about the “appropriateness” of particular activities and

relationships. In this sense, the building task of politics is always intertwined with the

other tasks.


Chapter 3

To explain the “workings” of building tasks, Gee (2005, 2008) employs what he

terms “tools of inquiry.” These tools are thinking devices for understanding how

language achieves its building task work. Three of Gee’s tools of inquiry (2005) are of

use in this study:

1. Discourses – people build identities and activities not just through language

but by using language together with other “stuff” that isn’t language.

2. Intertextuality – when spoken or written words directly reference, allude to or

relate in some other fashion to other texts, either particular texts (e.g. a policy

document) or groups of texts (e.g. the writings of a particular school of

thinking about how to teach English).

3. Conversations – sometimes spoken talk or written material, do not just allude

or relate to someone else’s words, but to themes, debates, or motifs that have

been the focus of much talk and writing in some social group with which we

are familiar or in our society as a whole. These themes, debates, or motifs

play a role in how language is interpreted (Gee, 2005, p. 21). In this study,

public Conversations about the goals of English language education and

professional Conversations about what should be taught as writing, how it

should be taught and why, are of particular interest.

These tools of inquiry are designed to enable the researcher to ask specific

questions of data. In Gee’s (2005) terms, they are “thinking devices” which help us gain

insight into issues and problems enacted through language, in this case, what is

constructed as writing education in first grade English classrooms in Kuwait in the

context of public and professional controversy over such.

In Gee’s (2005) framework, the concept of “discourse”–spelt with a big “D”– is

used to describe “language–in–use and other stuff” (p. 7). The “other stuff” here

includes non-linguistic elements of social practices within which language is used.

These include gestures, beliefs, attitudes, values, emotions, tools and other features that

accompany language in a specific time and at a specific place (Gee, 2005, 2008). These

Discourses are (re-)produced in communicative situations (for example, as teachers and

students communicate in first grade English classes, as students interact with each other,


Chapter 3

as a teacher talks to a researcher about first grade curriculum, or as a researcher talks to

parents and children about writing education).

Discourses entail models which people maintain to understand and recognize

their experiences. These models might take the form of descriptive stories, theories,

images, or plot of events. They enable people to ascertain how and why events or

specific events are connected to form a pattern. They are always simplified, perhaps

oversimplified, enabling us to capture key elements and background subtleties of events,

so that we can act in the world of complicated realities by focusing on the most salient

features, and without having to consciously interpret everything at once (Gee, 2005,

2008). In this study, the types of Discourse models that are of interest include those

about what writing is appropriately taught to first graders and how it is appropriately

taught. These models enable understanding of how language is used in the study’s data

to build activities and relationships that are always political. Given this study’s

interview, document and observation data sets, two types of Discourse model (Gee,

2005) are of use:

� espoused models: models which we consciously proclaim; and

� models-in-interaction: models that consciously or unconsciously guide our

actual actions and interactions in the world whether or not they are also

espoused (p. 83).

The concept of Conversations (Gee, 2005) is especially important in this study.

This concept enables analysis and interpretation of language used in the context of

themes, debates or motifs that are the focus of considerable talk or writing within a

society or its constituent groups. The “issues of the day,” be they public or more strictly

professional, bear on how language used in particular situations is interpreted. Given the

context of this study as described in Chapters 1 and 2, it is apparent that the concept of

Conversation will be a useful one for this study. Writing for first graders is an issue of

controversy both in public (or societal) Conversation in Kuwait and in professional

Conversation about the teaching of English internationally. It is in terms of these

Conversations that the language of this study’s data is properly analysed. A distinction

between professional Conversations and public (societal) Conversations is useful.

Professional Conversations are those that occur within what Gee (2002) described as


Chapter 3

“institutions,” in the case of this study, of teachers talk about what is appropriate to teach

as writing and how is writing appropriately taught, in the institution of government

schools and private schools, and what is practice in these institutions. In contrast, public

(societal) Conversations are the debates and issue that circulate around in general within

a society, in this study, the public controversy about the 2002 reform of the English

curriculum.

The third tool of inquiry that is useful in this study is intertextuality (Gee, 2005).

This concept is useful for understanding “cross-references” amongst particular uses of

language. It highlights points of commonality and conflict where spoken or written

words in previous or other texts are directly cited or referred to in some way, or invoked

more allusively. It is through this intertextual work that the building tasks are carried

out. In this study, politics is enacted through moments of direct and indirect agreement

and disagreement with other texts that establish relationships amongst teachers and

students of writing and writing activities.

Figure 3.1

Young writers in a global context

Islamization Kuwaiti context

New Childhood

Writing as a social

practice


Chapter 3

Figure 3.1 reflects the impact of globalization on the sub–sections of the outer

circle. In the outer circle three main factors influenced by globalization are contributing

to writing as a social practice, these are; the Kuwaiti context, new childhood

representations, and Islamization. These three factors all contribute to the new

understanding of writing as a social practice in which writing is restructured to create

new experiences for learners.

To elaborate, as Islamicism restructured itself for a new global community as a

result of Western modernization, Kuwait as part of an Islamic society re-transformed

itself too. External factors changed the structure of the Kuwaiti society socially,

culturally, politically, and economically. This transformation made Kuwait part of

globalization making Kuwait part of a “global village” in which social and cultural

values were changed. This made Kuwait hybridized culturally, influencing the diversity

in the population and particularly diversity in the childhood representations in which

each child represents an image different from the other and thus brings along new

experiences from the cultural and social environment he/she has encountered. These new

images view children as competent players in society, who are products of social and

economical instability. Thus, as globalization infiltrates into societies, cultural, social,

economic, and political elements are affected. These elements cause changes in societies

leading to the transformation of identities and Discourses of societies. Specifically

related to this study, writing is part of bigger conversations about literacy. This skill is

also viewed differently as new discourses are produced and reproduced creating new

learning experiences. Thus, Figure 3.1 represents a cause-and-effect relationship in

which a change in one element causes a change into another and in which these elements

are affected bilaterally.

This conceptual framework provides a basis to investigate the place of writing;

however, it is by means of the methodology and research design that the interpretations

and analysis of data are sought. The next chapter addresses the research design for this

study.


Chapter 4

Chapter 4: Research Design

This chapter discusses the research design used to examine the place of writing

in beginning to teach English to young learners in Kuwait primary schools. Case study

approaches have been used previously (e.g. Kenner, 2000; Kenner et al., 2004) and

found to be productive in studying children's language learning. Considering Kenner’s

(2000) work with young children learning different scripts, the research design, case

study approach, emphasises the place of writing in teaching young learners English as a

foreign language. This study investigates four first grade classrooms: two classrooms

represent children in the first grade in private schools, since children are exposed to

writing early in private schools in Kuwait; and another two classrooms represent public

schools where the skill of writing is excluded until the end of the year when letter

tracing, copying, and writing are introduced.

These four cases are used to explore the primary research question of the thesis:

What is taught as writing in Kuwait first grade English classrooms? How is it taught?

And why is it taught? This study uses multiple methods of data collection including

video-recorded classroom observations, semi-structured interviews with teachers and

parents, and structured interviews with first grade learners, as well as document analysis.

As outlined in Chapter 3, this research is rooted in understandings of childhood as a

social construction; the effects of cultural globalization, specifically, English as a global

language; and discourse analysis. This chapter provides a detailed overview of the case

study approach used, the data collection methods, the researcher's role in the study, the

data analysis strategy, and finally, the trustworthiness, validity, and reliability of the

study as a piece of a qualitative research.

Research by Case Study

A case study enables understanding of a social phenomenon (Yin, 2003). In this

case, the exclusion of the skill of writing with young first grade children in Kuwait

primary schools is seen as a social phenomenon calling for inquiry in its factual context.

According to Merriam (1998), case studies provide a means to investigate complex

social units consisting of multiple variables of potential importance that contribute to

understanding the phenomenon. Case study method is attached to real-life situations,


Chapter 4

resulting in a rich and holistic account of a phenomenon. Studies conducted by Kenner

(2000) and Kenner et al. (2004) justify the implementation of a case study approach with

children learning to write in other scripts. Case study is able to reveal the phenomenon

of writing as part of social practice, as is required by the theoretical perspectives

adopted. In employing this method, specific characteristics in real-life events are able to

be understood, which will contribute to knowledge of the language acquisition of young

learners of English as a foreign language.

As defined by Yin (2003), "case study is an empirical inquiry that investigates a

contemporary phenomenon within its real-life context, especially when the boundaries

between phenomenon and context are not clearly evident" (p. 13). Case study is unique

in how the context is linked to a phenomenon in a real-life situation (Yin, 2003).

Merriam (1998) explains a case as a thing, a single entity, and a unit around which there

are boundaries. It is the boundaries that make the study of a case possible. In the case

being investigated here, the boundaries are the place of writing in four Kuwait Year 1

classrooms: two in public schools and two in private schools.

Descriptive case studies are a productive research design for describing a

phenomenon that had not been focused on in previous studies. Yin (2003) noted that a

descriptive case study “traces the sequence of interpersonal events over time, describes a

subculture that had rarely been the topic of previous study, and discovers key

phenomena” (p. 4). The gap in knowledge in the EFL context of Kuwait suggests that a

descriptive case study is a constructive way to approach the phenomenon. A descriptive

case study provides a thorough explanation of the phenomenon studied (Merriam, 1998).

Reflecting on the descriptive nature of Olson's case study, Merriam (1998) noted that

case studies:

� Illustrate the complexities of a situation - the fact that not one but many

factors contributed to it.

� Have the advantage of hindsight yet can be relevant in the present.

� Show the influence of personalities on the issue.

� Show the influence of the passage of time on the issue-deadlines, change of

legislators, cessation of funding, and so on.

� Include vivid material-quotations, interviews, newspaper articles, and so on.


Chapter 4

� Obtain information from a wide variety of sources.

� Cover many years and describe how the preceding decades led to the current

situation.

� Spell out differences of opinion on the issues and suggest how these

differences have influenced the results.

� Present information in a wide variety of ways…and from the viewpoints of

different groups. (p. 31)

Findings are reported through detailed and literal descriptions. Thus, the design

of this research is descriptive case study involving four specific cases (Merriam, 1998).

Limitations of a Case Study

Challenges to case studies have been extensive as they have been criticized in

comparison to other forms of qualitative inquiry. Yin (2003) has discussed three

limitations of case studies: the first is related to researcher bias. Yin noted that some

case study investigators become sloppy and do not follow systematic procedures, use

vague and ambiguous evidence or biased views to influence the course of the findings

and conclusions. However, Yin is not alone in his concern about the potential influence

of the researcher, as Merriam (1998) has also asserted that "qualitative case studies are

limited by the sensitivity and integrity of the investigator" (p. 42). Thus, the

investigator's reliance on personal abilities and instincts can be a drawback. Yin (2003)

also suggested that a major problem that has not yet been addressed fully is the

investigator's ability to conduct a good case study. He argued that little has been done to

screen and test an investigator's ability in carrying out a case study.

The second limitation is that case studies provide little room for scientific

generalization. Case studies do not represent a sample, which can be considered a

shortcoming. Yin (2003) explained that "case studies, like experiments, are

generalizable to theoretical propositions and not to populations or universes. The goal of

a case study is to expand and generalize theory and not to numerate frequencies” (p. 10).

In this project, the aim is similar to what Yin has identified: to expand understanding of

the place of writing in first grade classrooms in Kuwait where English is taught as a

foreign language; and to develop some theoretical generalizations based on this

understanding.


Chapter 4

The third limitation is that case study reporting can be lengthy, time consuming,

and result in huge amounts of data (Merriam, 1998; Yin, 2003). However, Yin (2003)

suggests that there are alternative ways of writing case studies to traditional, lengthy

ones. In this study, a traditional means of writing is used. Several reports are presented

in chapters or sections involving cross-case analysis.

The Researcher's Role

In qualitative research, the researcher is an instrument (Marshall & Rossman,

1999; Merriam, 1998) for gathering and analysing data (Kvale, 1996). According to Yin

(2003), a case study investigator requires the following qualities:

� Be able to ask good questions and interpret the answers.

� Be a good listener and not be trapped by individual ideologies or

preconceptions.

� Be adaptive and flexible, so that newly encountered situations can be seen as

opportunities not threats.

� A firm grasp of the issues being studied, whether theoretical or policy

oriented, even if in an exploratory mode; as this reduces the relevant events

and information to be sought to manageable proportions.

� Be unbiased by preconceived notions, including those derived from theory;

be sensitive and responsive to contradictory evidence. (p. 59)

These characteristics enable researchers to become competent and possess the

capabilities to carry out a case study. It is important for investigators to be competent in

asking questions, probing with further questions following participant responses,

absorbing huge amounts of data, and being able to analyse, deduce, and induce

information from the case studied (Yin, 2003). Furthermore, Yin suggests an

investigator must take up new opportunities and accept unexpected changes but still not

lose track of the purpose of the study.

Researchers play a crucial role in obtaining information but it is also important to

have integrity by attempting to be unbiased, skilful, honest, and to learn from

experience. Kvale (1996) noted that "moral research behaviour is more than ethical

knowledge and cognitive choices; it involves the person of the researcher, his or her

sensitivity and commitment to moral issues and action" (p. 117). Researchers should be


Chapter 4

truthful, consider and be accountable for ethical issues, and evaluate the circumstances

so as not to risk the well-being of participants.

In this study, the researcher is a Middle-Eastern, Arabic female who speaks

Arabic and Standard English and wears conventional western dress. I am a full time

doctoral student and prior to this I taught English as a foreign language in Kuwait for

eleven years. I collected the data for the case studies, conducted the interviews and

observed the classrooms, which ran on a fixed schedule. My main role was as an

interviewer and observer.

Data Collection

Several methods can be used to investigate the phenomena in question. This

research relied on a range of methods for collecting data: video-recorded classroom

observations, semi-structured interviews with adults (English language teachers and

parents), structured interviews with first grade learners from both public and private

schools, and document analysis. Before discussing data collection techniques, site and

participant selection and the role of the researcher are discussed.

Site and Participant Selection

For the purpose of public education, Kuwait is divided into six governorates

called "Muhafazat." These six governates also have six educational departments which

are branches of the Ministry of Education. Each governorate has control over the schools

in the areas surrounding it and has its own supervision and administrative staff. The six

governates are: Al-Ahmadi, Al-Farwania, Al-Asimah, Al-Jahra, Hawalli, and Mubarak

Al-Kabeer. Two educational zones were selected from the six: Hawalli and Al Ahmadi.

Hawalli Educational zone was selected on the basis that:

1) The researcher is familiar with the area

2) Most private schools are located in Hawalli

3) Transportation between the private and public schools is easy, accessible, and

time saving in that the schools will be near each other.

To avoid partiality, Al-Ahamdi educational zone was selected by a random draw

from the remaining five educational zones. From this zone the schools were selected

from a list using convenience sampling. Creswell (2005) defines convenience sampling

as a process in which “the participants are selected because they are willing and


Chapter 4

available to be studied” (p. 149). Hence, I selected the schools according to their

accessibility and willingness to participate in the study. Access to public schools was

gained through Hawalli and Al-Ahmadi Educational zones. Private school access was

gained through the Private Education Department at the Ministry of Education and each

school’s administrative board. To obtain and gain access to schools, meetings were held

initially with the head of the school explaining the aims of the research, what was to be

achieved, how, and what was expected from the school and the teachers in order to

conduct the research.

Table 4.1

Six governates of Kuwait (Ministry of Education, 2006)

Al'Asimah Hawalli Al Farwania

Mubarak Al

Kabeer

Al Ahmadi

Al Jahra Total

Number of Primary schools

39 27 37 29 49 30 211

Number of EFL teachers

335 291 405 259 529 397 2216

Raw score of primary students enrolment in 1st Grade

3537 3284 5067

2788 6277 4750 25703

First grade classrooms

151 202 210 129 267 198 1157

The data collection focused on four first-grade classrooms: two in a public

primary school and two in private schools. Table 4.1 shows the number of primary

schools in each one of the six educational zones, the number of EFL teachers, first grade

primary students, and first grade classrooms in each governorate in the school year

2005/2006. For example, in Al Jahra educational zone, there are 30 primary schools and

397 EFL teachers in these schools. Approximately 4750 first grade students attended


Chapter 4

schools in this area. In Al Jahra educational zone, there were 198 classrooms in the 30

schools. The public schools are segregated by gender, therefore one classroom was

chosen from a girls’ school and another from a boys’ school. The main criterion for

selecting classrooms was that writing would not be taught. Classrooms were thus

selected on the basis that learners were not exposed to writing instruction during the year

long period. All first grade public school classrooms are not supposed to teach writing.

Table 4.2

Case study of schools

School type Number of classrooms

Skills taught in first grade

(1) Public boys’ school 1 No writing is taught

(2) Public girls’ school 1 No writing is taught

(3) Private English school 1 All four skills integrated

(4) Private Indian school 1 All four skills integrated

The private schools are co-educational so any two first grade classrooms were

able to be selected. Most private schools are co-educational because they follow an

independent system school policy and are not confined by the Ministry’s Educational

policy of segregation between the two sexes. The classrooms were selected based on the

basis of non-probability sampling: “the researcher selects individuals because they are

available, convenient, and represent some characteristics the investigator seeks to study”

(Creswell, 2005, p. 149). Non-probability sampling was used because I was reliant on

availability, convenience, and the fact that the classrooms have features that the study is

investigating. The classrooms were selected in accordance with the head of the English

language department where a meeting was held with the head of the department and the

teachers. An overview about the research was delivered to the teachers and a proposition


Chapter 4

to participate was given to them to think about. Once the teachers approved, classrooms

were selected according to the availability of the teacher and characteristics of the

learners. Teachers were given consent forms to sign. Two first grade classrooms were

selected from two different private schools, an English and Indian system. These first

grade classes integrated all the skills of listening, speaking, reading, and writing in their

teaching program. The four schools were identified in mid February 2006, when second

semester began. The semester ended in late May 2006. Special consideration was given

to the time to carry out the observations and interviews by setting out the dates before

the end of the school year in May. Sufficient time was allocated to each school to

accommodate unexpected interruptions arising from the school or researcher re-

scheduling. To ensure confidentiality, the schools were referred to as private or public

and were numbered 1 to 4. Table 4.2 shows the different types of schools used in the

case study, the classrooms and the kind of skills taught in the classroom.

Four teachers participated in the study: they were the classroom teachers of the

case study classrooms. If a teacher declined to participate, another teacher and

classroom was invited. Participants needed to meet the following requirements:

1. All four teachers were primary (first stage of schooling) teachers and had

primary teaching qualifications and experience

2. The two teachers from first grade in public schools used the Fun with English

curriculum.

Semi-structured interviews (Kvale, 1996) were held with teachers. The

interviews lasted from 15-30 minutes each. They were held after school in a classroom.

Twenty-four first grade learners were interviewed, six from each case study

classroom. The teachers of the four classrooms were asked to name the three least

proficient and three most competent learners in English language achievement in their

classes. The selection was based on learners’ achievement in test results and learners’

rank in classroom performance. The rationale behind selecting the least proficient and

most competent learners is to be impartial to the learners and provide a sample of

learners with mixed abilities in learning English as a foreign language. Twenty-four

children were selected by the teachers in this way from the two public and two private

school classrooms. Six children were chosen from each classroom in all schools. A short


Chapter 4

meeting was held with each child explaining the research aims and what is expected of

them and why. The children were given time to think and consult their parents and

decide if they would like to participate. In the case where some were not willing to

participate, other children were made available by the teacher and the same procedure

was conducted with them until six children were identified as willing to participate in

the study. Once they agreed, consent forms were explained to them and given to them to

sign. Semi-structured interviews were undertaken with the children. They were held in

the counsellor’s office or a vacant classroom. The interviews varied in length from three

to five minutes.

The selection of parents for the semi-structured interviews (Kvale, 1996)

depended on the children's participation in the study. Only the parents of the twenty-four

children participating in the interviews were selected for interviewing. Parents of all of

the twenty-four children were interviewed to gather data about their attitudes towards

the presence or absence of writing in the English curriculum. The parents were

interviewed over a period of four weeks (beginning mid March 2006). An equal number

of parents were interviewed from the four classrooms. Interviews with parents were

conducted in the counsellor’s office or any other facility the school offered for

individual interviews. Each interview lasted approximately 6-15 minutes. The next

section details the specific techniques used to gather data.

Classroom Observation

Classroom observation is often used as a method of data collection in case

studies (Yin, 2003). Field notes and a video-recorder were used to record what occurred

in the classrooms during the EFL lessons. According to Marshall and Rossman (1999),

observation is fundamental and highly important in all qualitative inquiry as it can be

used to understand complex interactions. Merriam (1998) comments that observations

must be recorded with great care and detail to reflect with accuracy the phenomenon

being observed. It should be noted in as much detail as is needed to form the data base

for data management and analysis.

Field notes come in many forms, including descriptions, direct quotations, and

observer comments. Field notes (Yin, 2003) were taken to record the events chosen for

the study and provided detailed descriptions of what occurred in the classroom. The


Chapter 4

content of the field notes included the date, time, description of setting, activities, and

the observer’s comments to add insight to what was being observed. Pencils and four

hard-back legal-sized notepads were used for taking the field notes; each pad was

allocated to one of the case study classes. The notepads were coded with different

numbers as to represent each classroom in the four schools.

Digital video recording was undertaken during observation times to help in

retrieving as complete a picture as possible and to focus on the events that needed to be

described. As the data were gathered in Kuwait, it was useful to video record the lessons

as the data could be retrieved when needed for coding and verifying incidents. Therefore

the digital video recording acted as an aid to examine the entire context as well as the

parts of the classroom that were investigated in the study. Croll (1986) argued that

although video recording may aid in replaying specific events, if a coding is in doubt;

they can also provide a larger number of observers the opportunity to view the same

material. The video record can thus be a data resource of use for many different

researchers. However, recording in classrooms needs a lot of “organization and creates

considerably more disruption” (Croll, 1986, p. 53). The video-recorder was placed in a

position that minimized disruption of the lessons, at the back of the classroom behind the

children.

All video-recordings were downloaded and stored on CD-ROMs. The original

video-recordings were also stored in a secure place for confidentiality in case a CD-

ROM was broken. Using both field notes and a digital video-recorder provided a

descriptive, detailed resource for examining the phenomenon of writing in the EFL

context in the State of Kuwait with beginning first grade English language learners.

The observations took place in March 2006. The English system private school

and the two public schools were visited from the beginning of March until the May

2006. The Indian private school observation visits started in the middle of April and

continued until 22 May, 2006. The observation visits for the Indian school system were

delayed because their academic year is divided into three semesters. By late March,

there was a mid–semester break and the new academic semester started in mid April

2006. Fifteen visits were made to each classroom over a course of one school semester,

making a total of 60 observational visits.


Chapter 4

The three schools located in Hawalli Area (one public and two private) were

observed on various days of the week depending on the school’s time schedule.

Observations in the Al Ahmadi School were conducted on Sundays and Tuesdays. The

English language periods ran for 30-35 minutes in public schools and 45-50 minutes in

private schools. The initial visit started with the teachers to provide them with an

orientation, to explain research procedures, obtain class lists, collect information on

teacher's weekly schedules and convenient times to visit on the scheduled days, and to

become familiar with the setting, seating patterns and identities of the children. These

initial visits were undertaken in late February 2006, before data collection began in

March.

As this study is grounded in a sociocultural theoretical frame, the observational

data will reflect the socio-cultural context. Writing is seen as social practices that entail

oral and written language. Specifically, this study looks at writing in first grade English

classrooms in Kuwait where writing is a social element. The study examines the

practices that relate to the development of children's learning to write. In identifying the

written language as learnt and stressing the importance of learning environments created

by teachers, the focus will be the resources demanded by the tasks and the support built

into the tasks (see below for an example). At this point, the tasks or activities that were

monitored when observing the first-grade classrooms are described:

1) Teacher–pupil interaction; teachers building young learners’ learning through

social interaction.

2) Spoken aspects; observing tasks that included speaking and listening

activities at word, phrase and sentence level (Cameron, 2001). These

activities can be generated through games played in class, songs sung,

question and answer.

3) Teachers giving instruction (using first language versus second language).

4) Patterns of drilling - mechanical, repetitive drilling.

5) Prewriting/reading activities: for example, observation of actions such as

scribbling; making horizontal lines, including letter-like forms in writing;

making letters, printing name or initials; holding book right side up, turning


Chapter 4

pages left to right, or right to left, showing awareness of print by pointing to

print.

6) Young learners' behaviour during class: observation of on task/off task

behaviour, in/attentiveness, disruption in class.

7) Literacy, decoding and encoding: observation of instances when children

recognize and use alphabet sounds in words, letter/sound relationship, as in

the following areas of language use illustrated in Table 4.3.


Chapter 4

Table 4.3

Tasks and activities observed in the classrooms

Tasks and activities observed in the four classrooms

a. Letter/Sounds

� Can the children identify the letters?

� Can they recognize the letter's shape?

� Can they order the letters?

� Can the children distinguish between the different sounds of the letters?

b. Morphemes/Syllables

� Are the children able to sing?

� Are they able to identify with different rhymes, chants?

c. Words

� Do the children recognize words and letters in various materials?

� Can the children distinguish words and letters?

d. Sentences

� Do the children copy words and read them?

� Do the children copy short sentences and read them?

Interviews

Interviews come in different forms and have several uses, but the most familiar

form entails “individual, face-to-face verbal interchange” (Fontana & Frey, 2003,

p. 645). The purpose of a qualitative research interview is to understand daily

experiences from the participants' own perspectives (Kvale, 1996; Marshall & Rossman,

1999; Seidman, 2006). Interviewing is a common means of collecting qualitative data

(Merriam, 1998), and the most common form of interview is the face-to-face interview,

which is called a conversation by Merriam (1998). Kvale (1996) is of the same opinion,

describing an interview as a “conversation” (p. 6) directed by the researcher to serve a

purpose in a certain direction. To Holstein and Gubrium (1997), “interviewing provides

a way of generating empirical data about the social world by asking people to talk about

their lives” (p. 113), hence they too view interviewing as a form of conversation.

This study used semi-structured interviews, or conversations that were neither

open-ended nor rigidly structured, with children and adults. Semi-structured interviews

are directed toward a particular topic, flexible and guided by questions that focus on

specific themes; however, the exact order of the questions and the exact wording is not


Chapter 4

prescribed (Kvale, 1996; Merriam, 1998). Interviewers should be skilful in listening,

personal interaction, framing questions, and probing (Marshall & Rossman, 1999). The

interviewer should have a general idea of where the interview will go and what the

outcomes will be, but there are no fully predetermined questions (Nunan, 1992) because

topics and issues determine the interview rather than questions. Interviews were audio-

recorded and transcribed in full; transcriptions were the main elements used for

interpreting meaning from the interviews (Kvale, 1996). The semi-structured interviews

with parents and teachers involved note-taking and audio-recording. According to Yin

(2003) and Seidman (1998), audiotapes provide a more accurate rendition of an

interview than any other method. The interviews were audio-recorded using a palm sized

recording device. Although it has been argued that not taking notes enables the

interviewer to participate in the conversation in a natural way, interview notes are a

useful supplement to record non-verbal activity (Burns, 2000) and were used in this

research.

Interviewing Children

A well-trained interviewer can find interviewing children a worthwhile and

mesmerizing experience (Keats, 1993; see also Marshall & Rossman, 1999) because

“children can offer a refreshing view on everyday things” (Keats, 1993, p. 92). Zwiers

and Morrissette (1999) noted that children bring a great deal to interview situations and

can be unique and important resources of data. There are calls in the field of education to

include children's perspectives as relevant and insightful in learning (Soto & Swander,

2005). However, as Marshall and Rossman (1999) put it, “too often those most affected

by educational policy and programmatic decisions – the learners – are absent from

inquiry” (p. 115). Involving children in research has the potential to reach into children’s

opinions, ideas, beliefs, feelings, and attitudes, so researchers are able to gain “access to

their inner world" (Zwiers & Morrissette, 1999, p. 131).

There are certain factors to reflect on when interviewing children: age is a crucial

element, as interviewing young learners is quite different from interviewing older

children. Young children are usually active with a short attention span, which can make

it difficult to engage their attention (Keats, 1993; Marshall & Rossman, 1999). Another

factor to be considered when interviewing children is the role of the interviewer. Fine


Chapter 4

and Sandstrom (1988) explain that the role an adult plays when interviewing children

takes two angles: the extent of the positive contact between child and adult and the

extent of authority the adult has over the child. They found the role of friend to be the

most rewarding as this role builds trust between the researcher and the child.

Interviewing children involves finding a balance between formal and informal aspects of

the interview process (Zwiers & Morrissette, 1999). The interaction needs to be formal

to include the important details of the interview and informal so as to be flexible and

aware of children's timing and pacing.

The main purpose of semi-structured interviews with children (Zwiers &

Morrissette, 1999) is to initiate a communicative dialogue in which children describe

and search explicitly into their ideas and understandings of everyday events. To initiate

an interview, special consideration should be given to gaining a child’s trust. To gain

access into a child’s world and establish trust, a familiar environment can be established

by providing toys and school-based material. The interviewer can engage the child in

familiar activities and conversations aimed at relaxing the child. This can be established

by greeting the child, concentrating on the child’s interests and hobbies, and giving an

informal and brief explanation about the interview. Building trust encourages children to

engage in conversation without tension, although interviews can be interrupted and not

go as planned because of the child’s needs (Zwiers & Morrissette, 1999). In this study, I

encouraged the children’s trust by providing familiar school materials and attempting to

engage children in casual conversations about their school and personal likings. This

relationship prepared the way for the interview.

Interviewing children in school settings can be problematic. When interviewing the

children involved, I encountered three problems:

1) Establishing trust was a key issue with the children; it was overcome by daily

interaction during the course of observation. This was in the form of

greetings or creating opportunities to speak to them (before the lesson began)

about any topic of the child’s interest.

2) Vocabulary selection; this was overcome by using simple language

appropriate to the children’s age group (Zwiers & Morrissette, 1999).


Chapter 4

3) Eliciting ideas and feelings from the children: despite Keats’ (1993)

comment that “by the age of five years most normally developing children

have the vocabulary and syntax to communicate any ideas they want to

convey” (p. 97).

Interviewers should avoid being an authority figure in interviews (McCormick &

James, 1989). The young children in this study often perceived the interviewer as having

teacher-authority, but this notion soon dissolved as children were given power to refuse

or accept to be interviewed and were given the chance to ask questions and share their

thoughts with the interviewer. Interviews with children should be short: a ten–minute

interview is sufficient as it can be tiring for young children (Keats, 1993). In this study

the interviews took approximately 4-5 minutes for each child.

The interviews were conducted in Arabic in each school but occasionally

greetings were initiated in English. A room or a place which was away from the

distractions of the rest of the school was chosen for the interview. Before interviews

began, rooms were examined to ensure that they suited young children. To make the

children feel at ease, paper, crayons, pencils, alphabet blocks, children's stories, and

educational puzzles were available in the room. These objects helped in initiating the

interview, as questions were developed around the activities (Keats, 1993). Choosing an

appropriate time of the day is important when interviewing young children. Interviews

were held in the mornings to ensure that the children were not deprived of activities they

enjoyed doing, such as assembly time, eating and play time. Simple vocabulary and

short questions were used (Keats, 1993). An audio recorder was used to record the

interview and note taking was not implemented to reduce distraction. The audio recorder

was hidden or kept away from the child's reach to avoid distraction. The interviewer's

papers, files and belongings were kept away from interviewee's space.

The questions were formulated bearing in mind the theoretical framework of the

study and were aimed at determining the place and value of writing and understanding

what writing is taught and how it is taught (Appendix A). To end the interview, Zwiers

and Morrissette (1999) recommend interviewers take time to review what children have

shared, and to ask them how are they feeling. The interviews ended by reviewing the


Chapter 4

data the children had shared, and a casual talk about their interests was begun. They

were praised for their courage and thanked for participating.

Interviews with Teachers and Parents

Semi-structured interviews were held with teachers and parents, and each

interview was conducted in the same manner. As the interviewer, I, spent time with each

interviewee, establishing rapport, stating the purpose of the study and assuring

confidentiality of responses. The interviews with the parents lasted between 6 and 15

minutes, while those with the teachers were approximately 15-30 minutes. All

interviews were audio-recorded and notes taken.

Teachers were invited to participate after the principal and head of EFL staff

were briefed on the study. They nominated a first grade teacher who suited the

requirements and I met with each teacher before beginning the interviews so as to form a

friendly acquaintance. All four teachers were first grade female teachers. Data collection

began soon after the teachers agreed to participate. Selection of the parents depended on

the teachers’ identification of children in the four classes. After they were contacted and

the study was explained, parents were invited to give consent for their child’s

participation. Contact was maintained with parents throughout the study period. All

interviewees had the choice to participate and engage freely in the interview or

discontinue if uncomfortable. They also had the choice not to be audio-recorded. Notes

were taken manually before and during the interviews with parents and teachers. Non-

verbal and verbal phrases and expressions were noted as they could contain insights

suggested by the interviewee. An illustration of the notes taken can be found in

Appendix B.

In the style of a semi-structured interview, the questions formulated for both

parents and teachers sometimes blended together. The purpose was to gather data about

the parents’ and teachers’ attitudes and values and give an understanding of their

experience. Tuckman (1994) noted that "each person's answers will reflect his or her

perceptions and interests. Because different people have different perspectives, a

reasonably representative picture of the phenomenon's occurrence and absence may

emerge and thereby provide a basis for interpretation of the phenomenon" (p. 372). It

was anticipated that collating data from both these sources would provide a rich insight


Chapter 4

into the EFL context of the writing curriculum in Kuwait. The questions were

formulated from the conceptual framework of the study which concerns literacy, literacy

as a social practice, the role of writing in young children's language learning, and the

relationship between spoken and written language; with a specific focus on the skill of

writing at an early age in an EFL context. The questions for the parents can be found in

Appendix C, and the questions for teachers in Appendix D.

The interviews were conducted in English with two of the private classroom

teachers and in Arabic with the public school teachers as the teachers felt more at ease

and were not fluent in English. However, during the interview, the public school

teachers code-switched between Arabic and English. For the parents, the interview

questions were translated into Arabic and asked in Arabic, the parent's native language,

in order to avoid any misunderstanding, embarrassment or confusion.

Documentation

Data for case studies can be obtained from various sources. This study relied on

three methods of data collection: classroom observations, interviews of children, their

parents and teachers, and documents. Written material from selected first grade children

in the study classrooms was collected to understand the young learners' progress in

writing. In the two private schools, writing is taught early and in the two public schools

young children are not exposed to the writing skill in first grade. Children's writing

development was tracked through these documents during the course of the study. The

written material was gathered from the children identified by the teachers as the three

least competent and the three most competent over the period of study (mid February to

the end of May, 2006). This written material was collected at the end of each week, that

is, every Wednesday, which is the last school day before the weekend (in Kuwait the

school week starts on Saturday and ends on Wednesday). The material collected varied

from one child to another due to a child’s absence, unfinished class work or homework,

or even the amount of work the teachers allocated to the students. Lists of the children’s

names were documented for interview scheduling for all four classes. In addition,

records of any previous experience or exposure to the English language in the public and

private schools were collected from parents.


Chapter 4

Translation

Translation includes any method of message transfer from one language to another

either through oral and written, or from speech to writing and vice versa (Newmark,

1991). According to Powers (2005), people manage translation differently. In this study,

I (translator) chose to not provide the translated text line by line because of the large

quantity and the time-consuming nature of the process. The audio-recordings were used

as the original source for the interviewee’s voices and expressive tones. The purpose of a

translator is to convey the ideas expressed and not just the words used to express them

(Sykes, 1971). To Sykes, translators should be competent in the target language in terms

of speed and accuracy, and possesses the ability to make

the proper choice of word order; the recognition of the differences in

emphasis and tone, and even in meaning, resulting from a position in word

order; the proper choice of words in result of the recognition in meaning

between nearly synonymous terms or of differences in the register of usage

over the whole range from very formal to informal, technical to entirely

non-technical; the proper choice of punctuation. (p. 42)

The interviews with parents, children, and teachers from the public schools were

translated from Arabic into English, after they had been transcribed in Arabic. I

completed all translations from Arabic to English. The translation was literal in meaning

so as to convey the interviewee’s direct speech. There were some untranslatable words

in the interviews, which meant that some words were left in Arabic as there are no

equivalent words in English. These words are associated with cultural implications; for

example, the word Wallah is used frequently by the participants to indicate their honesty

and reassurance. However, the word Wallah in Arabic can be translated into I swear in

the name of God in English, but it would not give any significant meaning in the English

language as it also carries cultural and religious value. The interviews and some of the

instruction that was observed in the private schools were translated into English. The

translation process took approximately two months as I reviewed it twice to guarantee

the proper choice of words, and the selection of the most accurate synonyms. Special

attention was given to emphasis, pauses, and speech signs. Audio-recordings were

listened to initially and then translated into short segments. Translated scripts were typed


Chapter 4

simultaneously into English. The first draft was checked and revised to record as much

detail as possible. Translations were checked again and revised after several days to

ensure accuracy and correctness of interviews. Attention was paid to grammar,

ambiguity, typing errors, and incorrect meanings expressed.

Transcribing

Transcribing recorded speech is a form of translation (Powers, 2005) and

converting audio-recordings into written text enables analysis to occur (Silverman,

2000). Audio or video recordings are not a replica of the original interview or

observation, thus neither is transcribing recorded speech. Transcribing is described as an

unclear version of a once clear speech (Powers, 2005). However, Powers counter-argues

that transcripts can keep the event because written transcripts on paper can live longer

and are easily accessible compared with audio or video-records. Agar (1996) describes

transcription as a “chore” (p. 153) and Powers (2005) writes that transcribing “is hard,

time–consuming work” (p. 10). However, audio-recordings and transcripts have more

advantages than field notes: both are available to the research community; and the audio

records can be replayed, the transcripts can be improved, and analysis can be done from

a different perspective than the original transcript (Silverman, 2001). With thorough

transcripts, researchers can go further and study sequences of utterances other than those

selected (Silverman, 2000, 2001).

An explicit transcript, Seidman (2006) says, can provide researchers with an in-

depth insight into the verbal and non-verbal material that the original speech involved.

Transcription entails several stages. “Notation conventions – that is, ways of

representing elements of speech in written form; a format for presenting the written text

- both a physical form, (paper, CD) and a design (the way the text appears on the page or

screen)” (Powers, 2005, p. 29). Transcripts should be “verbatim” (p. 29), which means

writing every word uttered, even fragmented sentences, part of a phrase, repeated words,

and non-verbal actions depending on the purpose of the research. In this research,

transcription entailed two stages: creating a verbatim transcript; and reviewing and

correcting the transcript against the audio or video recordings (Powers, 2005).

This study involved 28 interviews conducted with adults and 24 interviews

conducted with children, all of which were transcribed in full. Four of the 60 video-


Chapter 4

recordings of the classrooms were transcribed in full to grasp a deeper understanding of

the place of writing in Kuwait’s first grade classrooms. Each 30 minute interview took

approximately 3 to 4 hours to transcribe, but in some cases where the interview took

longer, the transcription time took 4 to 5 hours.

Audiotapes were labelled with participants’ codes. A notation convention was

developed (see Appendix E). The notation conventions were printed and audio-tapes

were transcribed in the order of teachers, parents and then children. All transcription was

done initially on paper and then stored on the computer. Audiotapes were listened to

again to review the transcription on the hardcopy, corrections were made and tapes were

listened to again and checked. Finally, corrections were made on an electronic file and

saved. A basic format was followed whereby each speaker’s initials were located on the

top of the page. Each speaker’s words started on a new line and pages and lines were

numbered (Powers, 2006). An example of a transcription is provided Appendix F.

Data Analysis

Before describing the data analysis process, it is necessary to describe the data

management system which was developed to provide easy access to the organization,

accumulation, and retrieval of the data collected (see Appendix G). Following the

procedures suggested by Yin (2003), data were managed through three portfolios, one

for each of the three participating groups (teachers, parents, and children). Each group

was coded and filed according to the type of data: (i) personal (ii) transcript and (iii)

analytical.

The first step in data analysis is linked to three sub-processes: data reduction,

data display, and conclusion drawing/verification (Huberman & Miles, 1998). Data

reduction involved coding field notes, interviews, and audio and video records to create

data summaries. Then themes were found through surveying the transcriptions, field

notes, audio and video records, a process that was “inductive rather than deductive”

(Seidman, 2006, p. 117). The original data collected was massive. Reading through it

thoroughly many times enabled me to focus on what was of importance and interest, and

identify themes about the skill of writing in the four case studies. The data were reduced

in two ways: significant stretches of talk were highlighted and noted in interview

transcripts; and relevant extracts from the video-recordings were marked on templates.


Chapter 4

Notes from index cards, audiotapes, CDs, videos, and notepads were organized into

themes where a pattern was identified. This material was the starting point for the initial

data analysis. Themes were categorized and this helped in looking for recurring patterns.

Marshall and Rossman (1999) note that qualitative data analysis is a search for general

statements about relationships among categories of data. A manual (Huberman & Miles,

1998) pattern matching strategy was used to examine the overall patterns of events and

themes.

After completing all transcriptions from 52 participants (24 children, 24 parents,

and four teachers), a systematic procedure was followed in analysing the transcripts. The

transcripts were revised by listening to the audio-recordings again, checking the

translation against the written transcript, and then read thoroughly to find similar and

different themes. They were also compared and contrasted to find reoccurring themes.

The themes were highlighted with different colours (green, orange, pink) to indicate

similarity, difference, or unusual themes. This procedure was carried out with each

school independently and the same procedure was used with the children’s transcripts as

well as those of the parents. The four teachers’ transcripts were kept together. Themes

were put in a schedule illustrating their similarities and differences and the themes were

then subdivided to produce new themes.

Similarly, the video-recordings were observed and one video-recording was

selected from each school. The video-recording was selected on the basis that it

represented the mid section of the observation period. This decision was taken on the

basis that the students and teacher were more relaxed with the video-recording at that

point than at the beginning, and that the teacher would have been in the routine of

instruction after the mid-semester break. Each videotape was transcribed, recording all

events in the classroom as well as verbal and non-verbal material to produce a detailed

verbatim transcript (Powers, 2005). The other 56 videotapes were observed several times

and all recurring themes were recorded on a template and saved as a table. The table

included a comprehensive list of empirical phenomena. The list was inspired to some

extent by the substantive phenomena identified as components of classroom activities by

Cameron (2001), although the theoretical assumptions about task demand and task

support inherent in Cameron’s analysis of the activities were not employed. Other items


Chapter 4

on the list emerged from repeated readings of the data. The final list of empirical

phenomena included: teacher–student interaction; spoken aspects; teacher instructions in

L1/L2; patterns of drilling; pre–writing, reading activities; decoding and encoding tasks;

and young learner’s behaviour in class. Each school was checked for the features

observed in class, recording the details required (see Appendix H).

Once the tasks were recorded, each case study was analysed again in terms of the

building tasks draw from Gee’s (2005) discourse analyses. The building tasks,

specifically used for this study were significance, activities, and relationships, and as

noted in Chapter 3, the political dimension of all these was an object of the analysis. The

building task of activities was of use here to explain what activity/activities that the

teachers, parents, and students enacted in their language as writing instruction in first

grade (Gee, 2005). The second building task, significance, was used to determine what

was valued in what was taught as writing in first grade and how is English writing

instruction important in first grade. The third task is concerned with relationships and

this task was used to answer how writing is taught in first grade and to indicate the

relationships in the classroom between the teacher and students. In all cases, issues of

politics were salient. The focus was on what was considered as appropriate activities and

relationships.

To explain the “workings” of Gee’s (2005) three building tasks - activities,

significance, and relationships - three tools of inquiry (Gee, 2005) were used:

D/discourses, intertextuality, and Conversations. These tools of inquiry helped in

analysing (i) the policy documents of the Ministry of Education, (ii) the teacher’s,

parents’, and students’ talk about what is the place of writing in first grade classrooms,

and (iii) the classroom observation data.

In Gee’s (2005) approach to discourse analysis, the analytic process entails

asking questions about the building tasks and using the tools of inquiry to explain how

these tasks are enacted. Gee provides a list of 26 questions to guide the researcher as

they begin the analytic process. Fourteen of these questions were useful for the purpose

of this study:

1. What are the situated meanings of some words and phrases that seem

important in the situation?


Chapter 4

2. What situated meanings and values seem to be attached to places, times,

bodies, people, objects, artefacts, and institutions relevant in this situation?

3. What situated meanings and values are attached to other oral and written

texts quoted or alluded to in the situations (intertextuality)?

4. What Discourse models seem to be at play in connecting and integrating

these situated meanings to each other?

5. What institutions and/or Discourses are being (re-)produced in this situation

and how are they being stabilized or transformed in the act?

6. What is the larger or main activity (or set of activities) going on in the

situation?

7. What sub-activities compose this activity (for these activities)?

8. What actions compose these sub-activities and activities?

9. What sort of relationships seems to be relevant to, taken for granted in, or

under construction in the situation?

10. How are the social relationships stabilized or transformed in the situation?

11. How are other oral or written texts quoted or alluded to so as to set up certain

relationships to other texts, people, or Discourses?

12. In terms of identities, activities, and relationships, what Discourses are

relevant (and irrelevant) in the situations? How are they made relevant (and

irrelevant) and in what ways?

13. What social goods (e.g. status, power, aspects of gender, race, and class, or

more narrowly defined social networks and identities) are relevant (and

irrelevant) in this situation? How are they made relevant (and irrelevant) and

in what ways?

14. How are these social goods connected to the Discourse models and

Discourses operative in the situation? (Gee, 2005, pp. 110-113).

These questions were selected according to the following procedures. Firstly, the

interviews and classroom observations were transcribed. These transcripts and the policy

and curriculum documents constituted the raw data sets of the study. The data were then

redescribed using four of Gee’s (2005) building tasks and three of his tools of inquiry as

an initial stage of discourse analysis. A fine–grained analysis was achieved through


Chapter 4

successive sweeps through the data. As the analysis proceeded, it became apparent

which questions, building tasks and tools of inquiry were useful for addressing the

research questions.

Specifically, it became apparent that the tool of Discourses was useful for

recognizing the activities that the participants were building during the interviews and

the activities that were enacted by the teachers and students in the classroom. Of

particular use in the analysis of the interview data was the tool of espoused Discourse

models. The tool of Discourse models-in-interaction was especially useful for analysing

and interpreting the observation data. Points of similarity and divergence between

espoused Discourse models and Discourse models-in-interaction were also useful.

The tool of inquiry, Intertextuality, was used in the document analysis and in the

analysis of the interviews with the teachers, parents and students. It helped identify

relationships and connections in written or spoken text or words through which political

positions were taken vis-à-vis given Discourse models.

The tool of Conversations was particularly useful for understanding the broader

context within which Discourse models were espoused or used in interaction. These

concerned moments of debate or themes that related to another written or spoken text.

Two types of Conversations were identified in the data: i) established professional

Conversations about English language teaching approaches evident in the documents

and teacher data; and ii) public (societal) Conversations about what should be taught as

writing and when, in the parents’ and students’ interview data.

In applying his analytic categories, Gee's (2005, 2008) suggested analytic

procedure was followed. The first step of this procedure was to choose some words and

phrases in the data, or related families of them, and identify the Discourses and

Conversations which were recognized as to what social activities were being enacted in

the data. Intertextuality was also addressed by searching for words or text that related to

other text across the data. At this point, finding the overlapping themes and interests and

illuminating irrelevant data was crucial. The emerging themes were then linked to other

themes in the study. Organizing the material obtained then helped in stating and arguing

the final theme the study addressed, that is “What is taught as writing in Kuwait public

and private first grade English classrooms and how is it taught and why?” In doing so


Chapter 4

and addressing the various building tasks, a degree of validity is obtained through

coverage and convergence.

Trustworthiness

The issue of validity has long been a particularly vexing and challenging one for

qualitative researchers. Gee’s (2005) style for analysing language-in-use-in-society

makes available procedures for addressing this issue that were used in the conduct of

this study. Gee begins by assuming that validity is social, not individual. On this basis,

he identifies several elements that provide the basis for validity judgements, including:

� Convergence – the more the answers to the 26 analytic questions (in this

study 14 questions) offer compatible and convincing answers, the more valid

the analysis. This element of validity was pursued in this study by constantly

checking whether the 14 analytic questions were yielding converging

findings. To ensure that this procedure was systematic, tables were created to

compare and contrast emerging findings.

� Agreement – analyses are more convincing the more members of Discourses

implicated in the data agree that the analysis reflects how language is being

used to particular social ends. This includes agreement with other researchers

with similar or compatible theoretical assumptions and tools. In this case, for

example, the finding of sociocultural research on young children’s

simultaneous acquisition of multiple scripts was an important literature for

locating the study’s findings.

� Coverage – analyses are more valid the more they can be applied to related

sorts of data, including being able to make sense of what has come before

and after the situation being analysed and being able to predict related sorts

of situations. In this study, this element of validity was pursued in the

analyses across the different data sets. The interviews, documents and

observations can be viewed as different social situations within which writing

for young learners was constructed in the course of the study. As the analyses

of the different data sets were developed, findings were compared to

ascertain the extent to which each made it possible to predict what was

emerging from the others.


Chapter 4

The point to be noted here is that validity is not reliant on all 26 of Gee’s analytic

questions being asked or on seeking all possible sources of convergence, agreement or

coverage. Discourse analyses are more or less valid, and further, validity is never “once

and for all,” but a judgement that changes as work progresses in the field (Gee, 2005). In

this study, validity claims are based on the big themes that run across the analytic

chapters produced by asking 14 of Gee’s analytic questions.

Furthermore, validity and reliability are important in case studies. To ensure the

quality of the research design, Yin (2003) notes that construct validity, internal validity,

external validity, and reliability have been commonly used to establish the quality of any

empirical social research. In this case study, construct validity has been increased by the

use of multiple sources of evidence: interviews, analysing documents of young learners’

written work, and carrying out classroom observations which were recorded through

field notes and video-recordings. Internal validity is measured through the research

design of this study. This is touched on through the patterns that emerge in the analysis

section. It is also evident in that participants’ interpretations were checked with them by

re-stating the participant’s responses and obtaining agreement of the interpretations from

the participant view. In case studies, it is difficult to generalize the findings as usually

they represent a certain population or event, and therefore external validity is not of

great importance. This idea is supported by critics who believe that “single cases offer a

poor basis for generalizing” (Yin, 2003, p. 37). However, Yin (2003) argues that this

idea does not apply to case studies because case studies depend on analytical and not

statistical generalization. Researchers such as Yin (2003) explain attempts to generalize

a set of findings to a broader theory in the form of analytical generalizations. Hence,

findings in case studies can be generalized when the findings are replicated in other

cases.

Reliability ensures that if a similar investigation was to be conducted with a

similar case, the investigator would be able to reach the same findings, not in replicating

the results, but in doing the same case study (Merriam, 1998; Yin, 2003). In other words,

to ensure reliability, the procedures should be described thoroughly and in detail so if

another researcher decides to carry out the same study again, the researcher would reach

similar findings. The objective of checking for reliability is to ensure accuracy and


Chapter 4

impartiality (Yin, 2003). Reliability can be created in case studies by providing

consistency in the data collected and presented throughout the research, and in ensuring

the original data collected is used in the research (Yin, 2003). This study provides a

detailed documentation of the procedures conducted through a thorough plan (case study

protocol), which outlined the overview of the case study project, provided data

collection procedures, case study questions to be investigated, and a guide for the case

study report. In addition, the fact that the data are audio and digitally recorded enhances

reliability by enabling analyses to be checked repeatedly for accuracy. Detailed, careful

data analysis ensures the reliability of the data processing in the study. The organization

and creation of a database for data management also helped to ensure the reliability of

the case study methodology. Triangulation is described as the use of various sources of

data to corroborate the findings (Denzin & Lincoln, 2000; Janesick, 2000; Richardson,

2000; Yin, 2003). In support of case study, Yin (2003) explains that the multiple uses of

various sources of evidence empower data collection and that using different sources of

evidence in case studies gives researchers an unlimited insight into significant social

matters. Thus, a significant advantage in using multiple sources of evidence entails in

the development of “converging lines of inquiry” (p. 98) where results and conclusions

may be more influential and accurate if based on using various sources of data.

Triangulating data involves the process of analysing each source of evidence and

comparing the conclusions drawn from the various sources (Yin, 2003). Thus, in this

study, the different sources of evidence were used to corroborate the findings from each

data set (observations, interviews, and the documents).

Ethics

To commence the data collection process, university ethical clearance was

required to observe first grade classes, to select and contact the interviewees, and to gain

their consent. Ethical clearance was granted from Queensland University of Technology

(QUT) in February 2006 before the schools were selected (see Appendix I). With young

children permission is required for the conduct of an interview. Ethical consideration is

of great concern to educators when it involves children’s interviews. Children’s

involvement in interviews correlates with ethical issues in research. MacNaughton and

Smith (2005) highlight children’s rights in arguing that:


Chapter 4

A “children’s rights” approach to research positions a child’s right to

privacy as equivalent to an adult’s right to privacy. Children have as much

right to refuse research participation and to refuse permission for their lives

and words to be documented as do adults. To enact this position we have to

choose ways of working in which children do not feel compelled to share

their ideas. (p. 115)

The ethical guidelines for conducting research in Australia (National Health and

Medical Research Council [NHMRC], 2007) endorse children’s welfare in that consent

is to be obtained from children (who are capable of making judgement) and their parents

or guardians in the process of the child participating in research. These guidelines

protect the child’s interests and rights, and state that researchers should recognize

children’s refusal to participate in research (NHMRC, 2007). Thus, these ethical

guidelines for research in Australia are vital because children were involved and because

the study was conducted in accordance with QUT guidelines. This increased the child’s

right to protection in sharing feelings, thoughts, and experiences (MacNaughton &

Smith, 2005) in a reassuring environment that provided them with privacy in their

participation and ownership of their thoughts. In following such guidelines, consent

forms were prepared and arranged for both the children and parents. As this study

involved schools and children, several consent forms had to be approved before starting.

To gain access to schools in the state of Kuwait, three main procedures were followed:

� A letter of authorization had to be granted to the researcher from the Ministry

of Education, permitting the researcher to contact the Al Ahmadi and Hawalli

educational zones.

� Four other consent letters were required to apply for access to each of the

selected schools in Al Ahmadi and Hawalli educational zones.

� Each school verified the letter with the respective educational zones and a

new letter of authorization was granted to the researcher. The school’s letter

of authorization facilitated access to classrooms for interviews and

observation.

As this study involved children, one consent form was sent to the children’s

parents or guardians requesting permission for their child to participate in the interview,


Chapter 4

and the second requested the child’s approval to participate. The participating children

were first introduced to the idea of interviewing and were given a brief idea about the

method before distributing the consent form to be signed. The parents were contacted by

phone initially and then sent the consent forms to be signed. Contacting the parents or

guardians by phone gave the researcher a chance to explain the nature of the research

directly and gave parents and guardians an opportunity to ask questions about what

would happen during the research. This helped to build trust. Ethically, interviews could

not be and were not started until all consent forms were signed by the parents and

children.

In this chapter, I have explained the processes and procedures of the conduct of

this qualitative research, displaying the methodology grounded in a case study approach.

This study is set in a sociocultural perspective where the place of writing in EFL

classrooms is investigated in four primary schools, of which two were public and two

are private. The participants included 24 first grade children, four teachers, and 24

parents. Data were collected by means of interviews, classroom observation, and

documents. The following chapter is the first of three data analysis chapters.


Chapter 5

Chapter 5: English Language Curriculum Policy and Materials

In this section, a detailed analysis is presented of what counts as “writing”

education for first graders in English language education curriculum documents of

relevance in the case study classrooms. The study, it will be recalled, investigates the

teaching of writing in first grade in Kuwait. The investigation arose from a divergence in

opinions that erupted with the introduction of the new public school English curriculum

in Kuwait in 2002. This curriculum is controversial for excluding writing from the first

grade and stressing listening and speaking skills instead. This represented a change from

the previous approach which had emphasised writing alongside the other macroskills of

listening, speaking and reading. It is this context that this study investigates the teaching

of writing in first grade classrooms in both public and private schools. A vigorous debate

ensued in public schools.

To begin, it is important to establish what counts as writing in curriculum

documents in force in the case study sites. Accordingly, the aim of this chapter is to

address the first of the study’s research questions:

What is the place of writing in the English language documents in Kuwait since the

reform of writing in public school curriculum in 2002?

The purpose of the question is to produce a better understanding of what is

described as “writing” education for the first grade public and private school classrooms.

In the context of vigorous public debates over the new curriculum, this is a useful work

of analysis in its own right. However, the analysis also provides a basis for the analysis

of the interview and classroom observation data that addresses the study’s questions

about teacher, student, and parent English language beliefs and practice in later chapters,

questions that are important for understanding points of public and professional

controversy around the new curriculum.

Five documents are analysed in the chapter, including documents from both the

public and private school systems that participated in the study. Four of the documents

are used in the public school system. It is in this system that writing is no longer part of

the official curriculum. These documents are as follows:


Chapter 5

1. The General Goals of Education in the state of Kuwait (General Goals

Document, n.d.). This policy document identifies the principle general goals

of education in the state of Kuwait. (See Appendix J).

2. The English Language Curriculum Document for the Primary Stage in the

state of Kuwait (Ministry of Education, n.d.-b). This document states the

objectives and goals of teaching English in the public primary schools and

gives a course description. (See Appendix K).

3. The Fun with English Teacher’s Guide for first grade (Allen & Iggulden,

2002a). This commercially produced material was prepared exclusively for

the Ministry of Education of Kuwait. This document contains both an

overview of the content of the syllabus and a unit-by-unit outline of the

syllabus.

4. The Pupil’s Book and Pupil’s Activity Book (Allen & Iggulden, 2002b).

These books are used by first graders in Kuwait public schools. They are also

used by the parents of the children for homework purposes.

It is essential at this point to clarify that the Fun with English Teacher’s Guide

for first grade which contains the syllabus is closely linked to the Pupil’s Book

and Pupil’s Activity Book (textbook). The syllabus is a guide which helps teacher

in implementing the content. The syllabus provides the teachers with instructions

about the material to be taught in class and how it is to be taught. The syllabus

entails the educational objectives, grammar, language functions, and activities to

be taught during the school year. This syllabus aids teachers in implementing the

textbook’s aims.

The fifth document analysed in this chapter is used in the English private school

which is not required to implement the public school curriculum. In its English

curriculum, writing is integrated with the skills of listening, speaking, and reading and is

considered an important component of the English education in first grade classroom.

5. The English private school follows England’s International Primary

Curriculum (IPC). This curriculum document has its origins in the Primary

National Curriculum and National Literacy Strategy implemented in


Chapter 5

England. However, it has been designed specifically for “teachers and

students in international context” (University of Cambridge, 2007, p. 1).

No documents from the Indian private school are analysed. The reason for this is

that none were made available by the school to the researcher. The level of cooperation

achieved with the two public schools and the English private school was not attained in

this context. This is a limitation of the study that will be discussed in Chapter 8.

Several concepts drawn from Gee’s (2005) approach to discourse analysis

discussed in Chapters 3 and 4 are used in the analyses of this chapter. The findings were

interpreted using the building tasks of significance, relationships, politics and activities.

These tasks are explained by using the tools of inquiry derived from the Discourse

analysis approach of Gee (2005): Discourse, intertextaulity, and Conversation.

Discourse models are used in this chapter to analyse the data on the place of English

writing instruction in first grade in public and private school documents. These models

reveal the different positions held in professional Conversations about what is taught or

should be taught as writing and when and how it is to be taught. These Conversations are

part of the historical and contemporary views held within language teaching documents.

Document 1: General Goals of English Language Teaching Document

This policy document addresses all the EFL teachers and supervisors of ELT

working in the field of education in Kuwait. It states that the general goals of teaching

English are based on the philosophy of the general goals of education in Kuwait. These

are:

� pride in Islam

� love and patriotism to Kuwait

� appreciation of Arab values, traditions, and culture, and

� correlation to other school subjects (General Goals Document, n.d., p. 12).

These goals are broad and not directly focused on development of language.

Rather the first three goals are explicitly concerned with developing social and cultural

values important in Kuwaiti society. These goals are to be achieved through English

language education, but are not concerned with development of language per se.

However, they entail an understanding of the work of English language education in


Chapter 5

Kuwait, specifically that it will build religious, national and Arab dimensions of Kuwaiti

life. Implicit in this is the theory that the teaching of a language that is variously

considered foreign and global can serve local goals. For example, pride in Islam would

be taught through vocabulary of an Islamic nature, such as mosque and prayers. In

Gee’s (2005) terms, what is at work here is a Discourse model, a taken–for-granted

theory about the way the world works. In this model, the English language can be so

taught as to advance the social and cultural values of a society in which the language

was historically foreign. This particular Discourse model is not peculiar to the Kuwait

context, but is typical of foreign language teaching curricula throughout the world.

Compare, for example, the goals of the English language teaching syllabus of Malaysia

which seeks to promote the Malaysian way of life through English education (Cook,

2001), and the Japanese national curriculum which asserts that national identity is

nurtured through learning English (Kubota, 2002). With respect to the later, Kubota

(2002) posited that “the emphasis on national identity echoes kokusaika

[internationalization] which aims to disseminate Japanese ways of thinking to the world”

(p. 24).

The Discourse model evident in the Kuwaiti document can be understood as part

of a broader debate about the nature of the society. As it will be recalled from Chapter 3,

this is a time when the rise of religion is occurring in opposition to consumerism and

Western thinking. Embedded in the English language policy then are broader political

positions of the contemporary Islamic community, a community that is infused with

anti-Westernization (Spring, 2006).

In Gee’s (2005) terms, the theory that English language education can be made

to serve local goals is part of a Conversation about the nature of society being conducted

not only in Kuwait, but the wider Arab and Islamic worlds, as indeed in other

developing and non–Western contexts. It is in this context that the concepts of pride in

Islam, nationalism to Kuwait and the Arab world, and foremost appreciation of Arab

values, traditions and culture are under the influence of religion, are found in a foreign

language education document policy. Although English is a language historically of the

West, and of globalization with its values often antithetical to those of modern Arab and

Islamic societies, the Kuwaiti public school policy seeks to harness English education to


Chapter 5

local goals. It will be shown in the analyses in Chapters 6 and 7 that there was no

contestation of these goals either in the talk of teachers, parents and students or observed

in the classrooms. Rather, parents and students were concerned with what English is

taught, specifically what is writing, and the implications of this for individual

advancement in the school system and workforce where English has become as

prominent medium of communication.

At first glance, the aspects of the policy document under discussion here would

seem to have little to do with this study’s question about the exclusion of writing from

the first grade curriculum. However, given the critique of the export of deep Western

values with English language education discussed in Chapter 2, empirical questions arise

about the possibilities of conflict between the Islamic, Arab and national values overtly

prioritised in the policy document and the values inherent in the oral language content

and pedagogy that is now the focus of first grade curriculum in Kuwait. The questions

are addressed later in this and the following chapters.

The fourth goal of the General Goals Document, that of “the correlation”

between English and the other subjects, is also of interest in this study. Again, however,

this is not necessarily apparent at first glance.

The first point to note is that the nature of “the correlation” amongst subjects is

not specified in the actual statement of the goal. However, it soon becomes obvious.

After the statement of the four general goals, a taxonomy of ELT General Goals is

provided. This taxonomy includes transfer goals which might be understood as a

specification of the general goal of “correlation” between English and the other subjects

of the Kuwaiti curriculum. It focuses on the transfer of “language skills” in addition to

“thinking skills” and “positive attitudes” from English education to other subjects and

contexts. Much of the discussion later in the chapter about the exclusion of writing from

the first grade curriculum in public schools will centre on the contradictions relating to

this goal of transfer of language skills or correlation amongst subjects.

The second point to note is that the taxonomy of ELT General Goals includes

language proficiency goals. It described the goals of English in terms of listening,

speaking, reading and writing, in addition to the transfer goals. As was noted in Chapters

1 and 2, these skills are commonly known in the language education field as


Chapter 5

“macroskills.” In the document, each of the macroskills is broken up into a set of

discrete or micro skills. In the case of writing being analysed here, these target

graphology, lexis, syntax, composition, and penmanship. Specifically, it is expected that

students in the primary stage will:

� Realize that English is written from left to right.

� Use small and capital letters properly.

� Copy words and simple sentences in cursive form.

� Re-order words to form meaningful sentences.

� Put jumbled sentences in a logical sequence.

� Write simple sentences applying rules of grammar and punctuation.

� Complete short written dialogues.

� Write simple meaningful sentences about themselves and their environment.

� Describe in writing what is seen in pictures.

� Apply good habits of penmanship (General Goals Document, n.d., p. 4) (see

Appendix L).

As was established in Chapter 2, the description of language as macroskills and

discrete skills might seem like commonsense or usual because it is so frequently

encountered. However, it is only one of a number of historically important ways of

understanding the object of English foreign language education. It originated with the

audiolingual approach of the1940s and has been subjected to some questioning and

challenge and replaced by alternatives in some contexts (Cameron, 2001; Cook, 2001,

2002a).

In other words, there has been considerable professional Conversation around the

appropriateness of the macroskills approach. To elaborate, and crucially for this study,

the macroskills represent a way of thinking about language that is not only subject to

ongoing Conversations in the field, but also consequential for the place of writing in first

grade curriculum. The underpinning assumptions and pedagogic implications of the

macroskills concept are therefore central to understanding and discussion of the

exclusion of writing from the first grade curriculum.

The order in which the macroskills are introduced in the General Goals

document is telling in this regard: listening, speaking, reading and writing. This order is


Chapter 5

not arbitrary, but reflects a cluster of assumptions of professional Discourse models

about the nature of language macroskills and their acquisition (Cook, 2001, 2002b). One

of these assumptions is that the macroskills can be categorised as either “passive” or

“active.” Listening and reading are the passive macroskills and speaking and writing are

the active macroskills. Crucially for this study, it is assumed further that the passive

skills are acquired before the active skills. In other words, listening and reading are

acquired before speaking and writing. The other key assumption is that the macroskills

can be categorised according to their oral or written status. This assumption sees

listening and speaking grouped together as oral language skills and reading and writing

grouped together as written language skills. Associated with this is the further

assumption that oral language skills are acquired before written language skills. This

Discourse which suggests that oral skills are learnt before written skills, is one of the

most enduring and ongoing positions in Conversations amongst experts and educators in

the field of English as a foreign language and second language acquisition (Cameron,

2001; Fincchiaro, 1964; Fincchiaro & Brumfit, 1983; Frohlich-Ward, 1992).

For more than sixty years, the pedagogic implication of the set of assumptions

about passive/active skills and oral/written language skills has been a particular ordering

of skills in second language education. This ordering sees listening taught before

speaking, speaking before reading, and reading before writing. By virtue of its

categorisation as an active written language skill, writing is taught last. These

assumptions and pedagogic implications are so entrenched in the second language

education field, that they are part of a body of professional commonsense that has earned

the label “the twentieth century consensus” (Cook, 2001, 2002b).

It is apparent then that the description of language in the general goals of the

Kuwaiti English curriculum is consistent with some well established assumptions in the

international second language field. Points of contestation around the implications of

this consensus for the teaching of writing in first grade classrooms in Kuwait will be

discussed in detail later in this chapter when the selection of discrete skills from the

writing macroskills for teaching in first grade will be a particular focus of the discussion.

To begin that discussion, the analysis turns now to the second of the English education

policy documents relevant to public schools in Kuwait.


Chapter 5

Document 2: English Language Curriculum Document

Whereas the General Goals Document analysed above addresses English

education across the school years in Kuwait, this document specifies curriculum for the

primary grades. In this document, explicit intertextual links are made to the General

Goals of ELT in Kuwait discussed above: “the goals of teaching English at the primary

stage are based on the philosophy of teaching English in Kuwait, and, thus, are driven

from the general goals of ELT in the country” (n.d., p. 2). In other words, the general

goal elements are carried through verbatim in the English language curriculum

document under discussion here. Those goals it will be recalled establish the Islamic,

Kuwaiti, Arab intent of the English curriculum, and also expectations of transfer of

language skills from English to other subjects of the curriculum. In addition, however,

this second document, the English Language Curriculum Document (Ministry of

Education, n.d.-b) establishes what are described as “general goals” for English

language studies in the primary school years. These are as follows:

At this stage, teaching English aims to introduce pupils to the basics of the

language, and tune their ears to the English sound system. The purpose of this is

to help them establish a new system, and use it as another means of

communication through practicing the four language skills (listening, speaking,

reading, and writing) (Ministry of Education, n.d.-b, p. 2, emphasis added).

The statement of this goal is complex and allusive. There is intertextuality in

allusive references to several different sets of understanding about the nature of the

English language, why it is taught and how it should be taught. These are understandings

inherent in the succession of methods of English language teaching described in the

review of literature in Chapter 2. This complex intertextuality is pivotal to understanding

both the public school documents and the talk and practice observed in the studies. It is

the focus of an extended discussion in the next section of this chapter.

What is the English Language and How is It to be Taught?

English is understood in two ways in the primary curriculum statement: as a new

language system (different from Arabic and other first languages in Kuwait) and as a

means of communication entailing the four macroskills. These understandings are


Chapter 5

consistent with historically important understandings of the content of English as a

foreign language education during the twentieth century. During the last three decades,

they been variously advocated in opposition to each other, and integrated as in the

Kuwait curriculum.

As previously discussed in Chapter 2, during the 20th century oral and written

skills were emphasized differently at various times and in particular contexts. The 19th

century grammar-translation method focused on literacy (Larsen-Freeman, 2000; Rivers,

1981) as the primary factor in teaching languages However, from the mid-20th century

on-wards, as utilitarian economic, geopolitical, and strategic goals became dominant in

foreign language teaching, this long–criticised method was criticised in particular for its

inability to enable students to use the language. New methods like the audiolingual and

communicative approach lead the way for language learning approaches emphasizing

oral language (Larsen-Freeman, 2000; Larsen-Freeman & Freeman, in press). This is of

significance to this study as it relates to contemporary English language teaching in

Kuwait primary public schools. The primary curriculum document displays a

configuration of allusions to the various traditions of EFL teaching. Intertextually, it is a

complex document.

Firstly, it can be noticed that the document stresses the English as a new system.

This is suggestive of the influence of the grammar-translation approach which

emphasised learning of a language as an autonomous system. Both the focus on system

and the idea that each language system is autonomous of others have since been

challenged by proponents of the communicative approach (Larsen-Freeman & Freeman,

in press). It is noteworthy then that the Primary English document also emphasises

language for communication which suggests the influence of the communicative

approach. To these communicative and grammar-translation allusions can be added a

third allusion, specifically to macroskills thinking that originated in the audiolingual

approach of the 1940s. As discussed above, this influence was carried through verbatim

from the general goals.

Three decades after the introduction of the communicative approach in explicit

opposition to the audiolingualism and other methods, this combined approach is not

uncommon in second language education internationally (Ministry of Education, n.d.-b).


Chapter 5

In this sense, the position evident in the English language curriculum document for

primary schools in Kuwait represents a common consensus position in international

professional Conversations about the object of second language education. The

implications for teaching writing are of interest here. Grammar-translation approaches

focus on the written language system. In contrast, while skills and communicative

approaches have been historically opposed to each other on various criteria, both

emphasize oral language. The point of distinction is that skills approaches break

language up for drilling whereas communicative approaches view language as an

indissoluble whole acquired through meaningful use. The ramifications of this for

practices of writing teaching enacted in the study classrooms are discussed in later

chapters, highlighting the contradictions between communicative goals and more

traditional grammar-translation style teaching methods.

For this study, it is noteworthy that while the primary document emphasizes oral

skills, written language skills are embedded in the English language curriculum. It will

be recalled that all four macroskills are explicitly named as objects of instruction in

English Language Curriculum Document (Ministry of Education, n.d.-b) under

discussion here. For now, the relevant point is that although the statements of the goals

in the public school curriculum shows the influence of approaches that focus on both the

oral and written language, the emphasis on these aspects of language varies in different

grades. The emphasis in first grade is decidedly on oral communication and this is a

consistent with the position encouraged internationally by high profile educators

(Cameron, 2001; Fincchiaro, 1964; Fincchiaro & Brumfit, 1983; Frohlich-Ward, 1992;

McKay, 2006). Specifically, the first grade English language course is:

learner–centred and focuses on effective interactive communication. It thus

provides stimulating topics relating to the pupils’ environment (interests, needs

and culture). It includes attractive visual presentation, authentic material (taped

and printed) and language practice activities throughout (Ministry of Education,

n.d.-b, p. 20, emphasis added).

Two points are noteworthy here. One relates to what is taught and the other to

how it is taught. The emphasis here is on the English for communication. However,

there is a point of apparent contradiction in that students are directed to “produce


Chapter 5

correct, accurate and meaningful utterances” (Ministry of Education, n.d.-b, p. 20).

There is tension here between “correct and accurate” utterances, an object of skills

approaches, and meaningful utterances, an object of communicative approaches. In

Gee’s (2005) terms, the professional Discourse models about the English language to

which the primary documents allude are in conflict. As will be shown in Chapter 6, this

opens the way to divergent practices in classrooms accountable to the policy document.

The second point of interest relates to how English is taught. This document

implies that the teaching of English should occur through a communicative method.

“Learner-centred” activities, relevant oral interaction, topics, and “authentic” materials

are all marks of the communicative approach (Larsen-Freeman, 2000). The model of the

learner at the heart of the Discourse on communicative teaching is of particular

importance for this study. Note the needs of the learner evident in the quote from the

primary document. The learner on whom the teaching is centred responds to stimulating

topics, relevance, and visual materials.

This is the learner of progressive developmental theories, which it was shown in

Chapter 2 have roots in the values and social relations of certain Western settings. It is

the export of this model of the learner through teaching methods, in particular English

teaching methods, that has been the object of sharp critique in recent years. It is

interesting to find this Discourse model in a document that prioritises the promotion of

Islamic, Kuwaiti and Arab values and culture. This conflict of Discourse models creates

a certain contradiction in the document as it emphasises anti-Western ideologies and yet

calls for a learner-centred method venerated in Western thought, reinforcing the

individuality of the Western culture. The learner-centred method this document is

calling for has been described as a facet of colonizing pedagogy (Tabulawa, 2003). In

addition this document poses challenges for an anti-colonial movement grounded in

Islamic and Arab nationalism (Turner, 1994).

It is apparent then that aspects of the pedagogy advocated in this document do

not reflect the socio-cultural context of the learners and their learning. It can be deduced

that the document holds Islamic and Arab values which are consistent with a formal

approach to learning and yet the document simultaneously calls for progressive


Chapter 5

approaches to learning (Spring, 2006) thereby ignoring the social setting and the

political element in the acquisition of L2 (Auerbach, 2000).

To summarise, the English Language Curriculum Document is highly complex.

There is explicit intertextuality in that the goals of promoting national, religious values

are carried through verbatim from the General Goals Document. A macroskills approach

to English education is likewise carried through explicitly from the General Goals

Document. This approach represents one position in professional Conversations about

English language teaching. In the course of being carried through to the English

Language Curriculum Document, this position is made much more complex.

Macroskills thinking is explicitly articulated to thinking from several other perspectives

historically important in professional Conversations about the teaching of English,

including communicative, audiolingual, and grammar–translation approaches. With

respect to the theory of pedagogy entailed by the communicative approach, a

contradiction was noted between a progressive model of the learner inherent in learner–

centred pedagogy and the alternative historically valued in national, religious culture. In

other words, there is some tension between positions in the natural Conversation about

the goals of English teaching and one of the positions in the international professional

Conversations on how to teach.


Chapter 5

Table 5.1

Arabic consonants in different written form

(Omniglot writing systems & languages of the world, 2007)

What “W riting” in the English Language is Taught?

In the second of the documents under analyses here, the English language

curriculum document, first grade is viewed as a stage preliminary to writing instruction

proper: “writing preparation focuses on left–to–right hand movement activities such as

drawing, tracing and coloring” (Ministry of Education, n.d.-b, p. 20). In other words, this

is not a stage for teaching of writing. Rather, students’ learning of English is focused on

learning the oral skills and pre–writing skills. This learning is built on the assumption of

students’ inability to write as they are given pre-writing skills to develop their visual

recognition abilities, eye–hand movement and directionality. Yet, with the exception of

directionality, these skills cannot be considered new to these students who already are

writing in Arabic. Consider the writing skills assumed and taught in first grade Arabic

curriculum. Table 5.1 illustrates the international pronunciation of the letter in the

English system (IPA), then it shows the sound and equivalent written form of the Arabic


Chapter 5

letter in roman script. It also gives the name of the letter demonstrated in its sound and

finally the table shows how each consonant can be written in various positions; for

example, the sound (n) differs in its writing position depending on whether it is in the

initial, middle, or final position of the Arabic language. The table also shows the sound

of the letter when written in isolation. This can be substantiated in examining the Arabic

Language Syllabus (2002/2004) for first grade where the goals of writing vary in level

from:

� Drawing;

� Tracing;

� Practicing handwriting drills;

� Copying and writing letters, words and sentences,

� Writing students’ names.

In the fifth week of school, children are expected to write and practice writing

(Arabic Language Syllabus, 2002/2004). This syllabus aims at developing “the varied

fine motor skills and it trains the student how to hold the pencil in a correct position” (p.

2) within the first two weeks. As was concluded in the independent report by

international experts discussed in Chapter 1, pre-writing skills are not a necessity at this

point as the students do a lot of pen work in Arabic (Felberbauer et al., 2005). In

conclusion, it is suggested that the pre-writing skills provided in the curriculum are

based on a developmental view which is inappropriate given that the students’ L1

writing skills are developed in Arabic.

This document, however, also attempts to teach writing through pre-writing

skills which develop fine motor skills, eye–hand coordination, visual discrimination,

visual memory, and left–to–right directionality. As discussed previously, this is not

necessarily appropriate for public school children. Some of these children are exposed to

drawing and pre-writing skills in Kindergarten, and all are already doing demanding

writing practise on a daily basis in the Arabic language and thus they control fine-motor

muscles.

In terms of eye-hand coordination, these children are exposed to strenuous

copying in the Arabic language and have mastered coordinating their eye-hand

movement through tracing and copying. The objectives stated for first grade prepares the


Chapter 5

child for mastering eye-hand coordination which are already mastered earlier through

learning to write in L1 (Felberbauer et al., 2005).

The English Language Curriculum Document also directs the pre-writing skills

towards visual discrimination, memory and directionality. These basic skills are written

in the form of objectives, such as copying some shapes with graded level of complexity,

copying some patterns (letter-like shapes, lines and circles), and realizing that English is

written from left-to-right (Ministry of Education, n.d.-b). However, visual discrimination

and memory activities are already drilled from the beginning of the year in other lessons

in first grade (e.g. Arabic). However, in regard to directionality, this skill is emphasized.

Children are expected to learn which direction the eye moves to follow along a printed

text and understand how the written text moves, horizontally, vertically, from left–to–

right or right–to–left. Yet as was established in Chapter 2, there is evidence that young

bilingual children are able to understand directionality and learn to write simultaneously

in two languages with different directional conventions, Arabic and English (Kenner,

2000; Kenner & Kress, 2003).

This document builds on a developmental position where writing is a skill that

children learn through developing skills of pre-literacy which they have mastered

already in their school year. This is an example of a common problem in English

language teaching internationally. One critic has observed that young learners are

sometimes expected to learn skills practised in other school subjects or already

established in L1 (Pennycook, 1994). In this case the problem seems to be that

developmental expectations that might be appropriate in L1 education conceived from a

skills perspective are inappropriately applied in an L2 context. The issue here is the

appropriateness of the way that the Discourse model on English as skills has been taken

up in Conversations about what should count as English in first grade Kuwaiti public

school curriculum.

A second issue here relates to the goal of transfer which first appears in the

General Goals of Education (Document 1) and is restated verbatim in this second

document, the English Language Curriculum Document for the primary stage. To

reiterate, there is a relation of intertextuality which sees a statement or “correlation with


Chapter 5

other subjects” carried verbatim from one to the next curriculum document and

elaborated as the following specific transfer goals for first grade:

� Practise language skills in other subjects

� Transfer thinking skills from English to other subjects (Ministry of

Education, n.d.-b, p. 22).

Presumably, it is required that the student learns the pre-writing skills in English

and uses these skills in other subjects. However, this seems unlikely because of the level

of skills to be learnt in English education is below that already learnt in Arabic. There

thus seems to be a point of contradiction here that arises from the uptake of the

macroskills Discourse model in the Conversation around the teaching of writing that

took another turn with the controversial 2002 reforms.

To elaborate the problem is a twofold one: these skills are transferred from the

English language into other subjects but there is no input from other subjects into the

English language. Hence, there is output from English language education but no input

from other subjects into English language education. This inconsistency forms a barrier

to the learning of the English language where already existing skills, such as copying

shapes of letters, which are practised in the Arabic language classroom, are not

transferred into the English language classroom causing the students to expand their

effort on “developing” skills already developed in the first few weeks of first grade. The

second controversy is that the English writing skill lags that of Arabic language studies

and therefore is not able to reinforce the Arabic skills. This illustrates how the transfer

goals are inherently contradictory. Although both the English and the Arabic curriculum

use a skills approach there is no recognition of transfer from one language (Arabic) into

the other (English).

How Do Students Learn to Write in the English Language?

Earlier in this section, it was stated that the document under discussion in this

section, the English Language Curriculum Document, has the goal of helping students

“establish a new system, and use it as another means of communication through

practising the four language skills (listening, speaking, reading, and writing”(p.12). It

was noted that this statement entails complex intertextual allusions to grammar–

translation (“system”), communicative (“communication”) and macroskills (“the four


Chapter 5

language skills listening, speaking, reading, and writing”). These are Discourses from

professional Conversations about what should be taught as English language. With these

Discourses come understandings about how English should be taught. This

intertextuality reflects an eclecticism that is not uncommon in English language

curricula around the world. The point of interest here relates to which of the approaches

to which the documents alludes shapes the way pre–writing is supposed to be taught and

learnt in first grade. To begin the discussion, consider the statement of pre–writing

objectives in the English Language Curriculum Document:

� Colour drawings

� Practise some free drawings

� Observe the contours of regular shapes

� Trace graded levels of mazes

� Connect numbered dots

� Practise some paper activities (folding and cutting)

� Copy some shapes with graded levels of complexity within their ability

� Realize that English is written from left to right

� Copy some patterns (letter-like shapes, lines, circles, etc) (Ministry of

Education, n.d.-b, p. 22). See Appendix L.

What is apparent here is that practice of skills is prioritised in order to establish

mastery of the English writing system for (eventual) communication. There is a

Discourse model here that has long been entrenched in education thinking; parts add up

to the whole; skills mastered in isolation will be put together in later performance. As

will be apparent from the discussion of historical approaches to English language

education in Chapter 2, this Discourse model is antithetical to that at the heart of strong

versions of communicative language teaching put forth in ongoing professional

Conversations about English language teaching. Understandings of the wholeness of

language and language learning are key to those versions of communicative thinking.

These are not the understandings of the document.


Chapter 5

Document 3: Fun with English (FWE) Teacher’s Guide

What is the English Language?

Fun with English (FWE) is the name given to the textbook materials produced

for use with the 2002 primary curriculum in Kuwait. It targets the public school teacher

population, specifically providing them with detailed instructions about how to

implement the material in class. The content describes the educational objectives,

structure, functions, vocabulary, activities, and material to be taught in each unit of the

curriculum during the school year. The Fun with English Teacher’s Guide espouses

positions in the Conversations around the English teaching that are similar to those of

the English Language Curriculum Document analysed in the previous section. In other

words, the textbook is consistent with the policy document. The objectives of teaching

FWE are based wholly on that document, English Language Curriculum Document. This

FWE document explicitly identifies with “the syllabus laid down by the Ministry of

Education” (Allen & Iggulden, 2000a, p. 1). Specifically, English is defined in this

document as a “new system and another means of communication” (Ministry of

Education, n.d.-b, p. 2). In other words, the objectives are a replication of the original

policy document (analysed as Document 1 above). There is thus an explicit intertextual

link among the documents. The FWE goes on to elaborate the objectives, stating that it:

� Presents pupils with a limited number of language items based on topics

which appeal to the age group; such as, topics of interest for 6 year olds.

� Prepares pupils for reading and writing in later stages by introducing pre-

writing and pre-reading activities which are of drawing, copying and tracing

nature.

� Encourages a positive attitude towards learning English as a foreign language

through games, songs, stories and activities.

� Ensures the use of the language as an effective means of communication

(Allan & Iggulden, 2002b, p. 1).

Two points are worth noting here. Firstly, the complex configuration of

intertextual allusions to macroskills and communicative Discourses from Conversations

about the teaching of English found in the English Language Curriculum Document is

carried through into the guidance for teachers provided in FWE. Specifically, while oral


Chapter 5

language is to be taught communicatively, pre–writing skills are to be taught for

purposes of (communicative) writing in a later stage. As was noted previously, the

Discourse model in play here is one in which skills are taught for later integration in

performance, in this case, presumably written communication.

The second notable point is that there is an allusion to the child as constructed in

the Discourse model of progressive education. This is a child for whom topics must have

appeal, and in whom positive attitudes must be developed. These points will be picked

up variously in the analyses of the FWE Teacher’s Guide and Pupil’s Book and Activity

Book that follow. The discussion turns now to the teaching of writing as described in the

FWE Teacher’s Guide.

As was indicated in the previous analyses, in English education policy

documents in Kuwait, first grade is considered as a time for developing oral skills rather

than written skills. Listening and speaking precede reading and writing skills.

Accordingly, writing is described as a pre-skill and is not taught as a main skill but as a

subordinate skill that will prepare the children for the introduction of writing in second

grade. Like the English Language Curriculum Document, FWE takes this same position.

It prioritises the development of some physical and perceptual skills (i.e. pre-writing

skills). They are the same skills emphasised in the policy document. The FWE is focused

on the same factors that have been discussed earlier: fine motor skills, eye-hand

coordination, visual discrimination and memory, and left-to-right directionality. In short,

FWE Teacher’s Guide reiterates the developmental position that is evident in the

English Language Curriculum Document.

At first glance, the approach to oral language espoused in the FWE Teacher’s

Guide might not seem directly relevant to this study’s investigation of the teaching of

writing. However, the approach to oral language teaching is a focus of criticism in both

the public debate around the 2002 curriculum reform that removed writing from first

grade English education in Kuwait, and in the interview and observation data produced

for this study. Accordingly, it is to the statements on that approach in the FWE

Teacher’s Guide that this discussion now turns.

The teaching of English is understood in the teacher’s guide as “an integrated

approach using both traditional structural and communicative approaches” (Allen &


Chapter 5

Iggulden, 2002a, p. VIII). To understand this statement, it is helpful to link this

document back to the English Language Curriculum Document which highlights that the

teaching of English is understood to “preserve the accuracy of the analytical methods of

the traditional approach while still making use of the authentic communicative activities

for the pupils” (Allen & Iggulden, 2002a, p. VIII ). To clarify the principle here is that

teaching is to be grounded in a communicative approach where students are understood

to learn through authentic communicative practice to gain fluency. It is fluency that this

document emphasises greatly. However, the teachings of structural methods are

understood to be included in the communication in the classroom “for correction,

analysis or in responses to pupil questions” (p. VIII).

In a structural approach, the students form habits of using linguistic forms and

acquiring new forms of the language. The FWE Teacher’s Guide provides a description

of this teaching-learning process. Specifically, the teaching of English occurs through

the PPP process (present, practice, produce). In this process students are presented with

accurate models of language. It is assumed that language is learned when students have

opportunities to “hear the language in its correct form and to be able to imitate the

models with some degree of accuracy” (Allen & Iggulden, 2002a, p. IX). Thus learning

English is process learning through listening and mimicking sentences with some

accuracy. This is done through routines of repetition.

In the closing stage of the lessons, the students use the structure in a

communicative activity where the main focus is on meaning. In this way the goal of the

English Language Curriculum Document of enabling the students to “produce, accurate

and meaningful utterances” (Ministry of Education, n.d.-b, p. 20) is to be achieved, as is

the goal of using the language meaningfully. The traditional approach in the FWE

Teacher’s Guide is defined as the “structural or grammatical.” The traditional structural

approach is used mainly for simple reproduction and repetition, and thus is not highly

emphasized (Allen & Iggulden, 2002a) at this stage. The communicative approach is

explicitly described as “weak” which highlights the use of practice activities in the

version of CLT, specifically, the drill of functions.

The FWE Teacher’s Guide illustrates explicitly the use of the functional

approach, the language expressions needed to communicate appropriately with the


Chapter 5

context; such as, expressing ability, expressing approval, greeting, making a polite

request (Allan & Iggulden, 2002a). The language used reflects the communicative goals

in learning English as a foreign language.

Document 4: Pupil’s Book and Activity Book

The FWE Pupil's Book and the Activity Book accompany the teachers’ guide

analysed in the previous section. These books are designed for use by the students. The

materials are divided into two sections: grade 1A and grade 1B to be implemented in

semester I and semester II respectively. First, the FWE Pupil’s Book involves a detailed

content map of the structures, functions, new vocabulary, and the songs to be taught in

the ten units (Allen & Iggulden, 2002b). Each unit consists of pictures with instructions

that require the student to do things such as “listen and point,” “listen and tick,” “look

and say,” “ask and answer,” and “listen and draw.” The book has many colourful

pictures expressing topics, such as, “hello-greeting, my body, my family, our house, and

Funni at the picnic.” The FWE Pupil’s Book contains no written print. It is designed to

accompany the listening and speaking skills that are implemented through teacher

instruction in class as discussed earlier in the analysis of the FWE Teacher’s Guide.

Thus, this text book addresses all the four macroskills objectives of: listening, speaking,

reading, and pre-writing (i.e. no writing).

The FWE Activity Book however provides the young learners with some practise

in tracing, colouring, ordering pictures, copying, and matching letter with picture pre-

writing activities. This activity book requires the practical application of the physical

and perceptual skills that are introduced as the pre-writing skills which this syllabus

considers as part of the macroskills for first graders. This activity book facilitates

drilling to practise fine-motor control, eye-hand coordination, visual discrimination and

memory, and left-to-right directionality. The Discourse models of what and how to learn

are consistent with those of the teacher’s guide and the English language curriculum

document. Pre–writing skills are drilled and practised to mastery (presumably in the

service of communication at some later time).

There is consistency amongst the FWE Pupil’s Book and Activity Book (1A and

1B), the FWE Teacher’s Guide, and the English Language Curriculum Document. All of


Chapter 5

the documents allude to the aims of teaching English in Kuwait found in the General

Goals Document, and all enter inconsistent ways into professional Conversations about

what to teach and how. The intertextuality of the pupil’s book is evident in its practical

activities, all of which are compatible with the English Language Curriculum Document

which forms the base of the curriculum for teaching English in Kuwait. The two pupil

books form the practical facet of the curriculum. The FWE Pupil’s Book is a textbook

which illustrates the content in the teacher’s guide in the form of pictures representing

the content laid out in the guide. Like the English Language Curriculum Document and

the teacher’s guide, the pupil’s book views pre–writing skills as developmental and

embedded in tracing, colouring, drawing, matching by making horizontal lines, and

copying. Thus, the activity and pupil’s books are based on the developmental principle

where the activities are introduced gradually.

Document 5: English System Private School

The curriculum used in the English private school that participated in this study

is found in a commercial document. The document targets a wide range of populations

internationally. The curriculum framework is based on the Primary National Curriculum

and the National Literacy Strategy in the UK (University of Cambridge, 2007) but has

been designed specifically for teachers and students in international contexts. It is a

flexible program that can be taken as a stand-alone course of study or offered alongside

a national curriculum (University of Cambridge, 2007). In the school that participated in

this study, the program constituted the whole of the English education course. The

school’s publicity materials highlight that the content of the curriculum is compatible

with Islam, Arab and Kuwaiti cultural and social values (verbatim quotes and references

have been avoided here in order to protect the school’s anonymity). The point is made

that learning English through this curriculum will enable the students to deepen their

knowledge and appreciation of Arab and Islamic culture.

It is apparent then that the cultural politics here is similar to that evident in the

public school documents. There is a model of English as a subject that can be taught to

promote local goals arising from the values of nationalism, in this case, Arab

nationalism. As was noted earlier in this chapter, this is part of an international


Chapter 5

Conversation about the teaching of English – a language of Western provenance – in

contexts that are not Western.

The curriculum framework is divided into stages one to six addressing first grade

to sixth grade (University of Cambridge, 2007). It is stage one which is of interest to this

research. The skills in this primary curriculum are integrated, featuring: usage which

includes phonetics, spelling, vocabulary, grammar and punctuation; reading; writing;

speaking and listening. Writing is focused on through a variety of activities that include:

� Develop a comfortable and efficient pencil grip.

� Form letters correctly.

� Spell familiar common words accurately, drawing on sight vocabulary.

� Use knowledge of sounds to write simple regular words, and to attempt other

words.

� Compose and write a simple sentence, with a capital letter and a full stop.

� Write labels, captions, lists, questions and instructions for a purpose.

� Make simple storybooks and information texts, with sentences to caption a

picture.

� Write a sequence of sentences re-telling a familiar story; and recounting an

experience.

� Locating information and record answers to questions (e.g. as lists, charts)

(University of Cambridge, 2007, p. 3).

A topic-based approach to development of these activities is taken. The topics, or

“themes” as they are described include for example “insects” and a collection of stories

set in international contexts including Mexico.

The Discourse model here entails the teaching of English language through a

topic-based approach in which the macroskills are embedded. Specifically, writing is

manifested in practising the skill of writing in a meaningful manner, of which writing is

perceived as multileveled skill targeting graphology, lexis, syntax, composition, and

phonetics.

Unlike the public school policy goals, oral development is not given primacy

over writing in the International primary programme curriculum. Physical and

perceptual skills are taught within other writing activities that exceed that of the public


Chapter 5

school English Language Curriculum Document. This primary English curriculum

perceives the writing skill through a developmental approach.

School publicity materials highlight the “structured,” “developmental” and

“individualized” nature. Graded writing materials are identified as the key to this aspect

of the program. It is of interest to this study that writing accorded such a prominent place

in the school’s publicity materials. This emphasis is not evident in the official materials

of the Cambridge International Primary Programme which merely lists writing as the

third of the four strands of English curriculum (usage, reading, writing, and speaking

and listening). This shift of emphasis might be understood in the context of the public

Conversation about the place of writing in Kuwait that erupted after the 2002 reform that

downgraded writing in the public school curriculum to be consternation of parents.

To summarize, there is a general similarity of national and religious goals in the

public and private English school English language curricula. Both systems take similar

positions in the international Conversations in English teaching documents about the

centrality of local, non-language goals. It is in the professional Conversations about

what is to be taught as writing, when it is to be taught, and how it is to be taught that the

school systems take different positions. The consequences of these differences for

classroom practices are the object of analyses in Chapter 6. Parents’ and students’

reactions to these differences form the focus of Chapter 7.

The Indian Curriculum

In the case of the Indian private school, for reasons that remain unknown to me,

no curriculum documents were made available by the school administration.

Nonetheless, it is helpful to note that the Indian school teacher stated in interview that

the curriculum’s main goal was to teach English through calligraphy and recitation.

Writing is thus a main object of English instruction in this school. Contrary to

convention in many contexts, the focus is on cursive writing as distinct from print from

the outset of first grade.

Conclusion

This chapter analysed the documents for teaching English as a foreign language

in Kuwait, focusing in particular on the suite of policy documents and classroom

materials used in the public school system. It was with the introduction of these


Chapter 5

classroom materials that the controversy over first grade curriculum that prompted this

study erupted. The research question addressed in this chapter is: What is the place of

writing in the English language documents in Kuwait since the reform of writing in

public school curriculum in 2002? In seeking to answer this question, findings emerged

not only on the place of writing but also on other related issues relevant to this study.

Specifically, in this chapter, four findings emerged:

� Deep conflicts and contradiction between the ideologies of traditional

cultural and Western English language teaching approaches.

� The influence of multiple teaching approaches in an intertexually complex

document.

� The construction of writing as a discrete skill sometimes a pre-writing skill.

� Transfer of skills from English to other subjects

The first finding was that both public and private schools documents were

participating in international Conversations about the goals of English education in non-

Western contexts. In the public school documents (the General Goals Document, the

English Language Curriculum Document, the FWE Teacher’s Guide) this Conversation

was evident in intertextual references, often verbatim, to local non–language goals. The

documents thus entered into controversy between the deep–rooted Islamic, Kuwaiti,

Arab, and nationalist values and values inbuilt in the oral language content and

pedagogic focus in the first grade curriculum. Contemporary Islamic positions including

anti-Western, anti–colonization thinking of the Islamic world are present in the non–

language goals, but seem to be in some tension with the language goals given the

progressive model of the student inherent in the notion of “learner–centred” pedagogy.

However, this tension seems to be more apparent than real because both the English

Language Curriculum Document and the FWE materials for the teachers and students

entail an emphasis on drill and practice that sits easily with Kuwaiti, Arab and Islamic

values. This play of values in the public school documents exemplifies Pennycook’s

(1994) argument about “cultural politics” and how teaching and learning methods are

embedded in social, political, philosophical and cultural settings that render approaches

originated in the West inappropriate to some other contexts. Although the English school

system was not accountable to the public school English curriculum, it nonetheless


Chapter 5

participated in this same politics and Conversations: Kuwaiti, Arab and Islamic cultural

goals of English education were emphasised in the curriculum document analyses here.

In relation to professional Conversations in which the documents participated,

the second finding of multiple teaching approaches raises important questions. These

concern tension amongst the grammar–translation, communicative and audiolingual

approaches. The professional ideology behind the public school document is a complex

one. It is a configuration of various approaches, with each approach drawing into the

documents particular factors. The grammar–translation influence focuses on the written

mode as a language system. The audiolingual influences see skills viewed as distinct,

and learned through drilling while communication influences highlights meaningful use

of language. This complexity of professional position is consistent with Pennycook’s

(1994) argument about cultural politics. He argues that classrooms are battle fields

where different approaches dominate the teaching–learning process. This is the case

however with the new 2002 curriculum which not only contains a certain rapprochement

amongst historically competing approaches to English education, but also takes a

position in a long-running professional Conversation about the ordering of macroskills,

in this case prioritising the oral over the written skills

To continue Pennycook’s (1994) argument about cultural politics, it is logical at

this point to discuss the third finding of this study which is concerned with the place of

writing in the new reformed public school curriculum. Given the discrete division of the

macroskills, it is apparent from the curriculum documents that oral language skills are

prioritised. Pennycook (1994) has questioned the imposition of the ordering of oral and

written instruction that originated from the audiolingual approach, in contemporary non–

Western contexts of English education. This study’s findings are relevant to

Pennycook’s argument that student’s written language capabilities are not taken into

consideration. The assumption that L1 learners’ writing skills might be already

developed is neglected and the acknowledgement that pre–writing skills already co–exist

in the learners’ L1 is overlooked.

In the public school documents, an assumption built on students’ inability to

write is evident where the fine–motor and co–ordination skills need to be drilled. Thus,

writing is viewed as inappropriate for first graders. Thus, the underlying suggestion is


Chapter 5

that these children might be as immature developmentally according to the document

policy. However, this immaturity that the policy has assumed about the child can be

speculated on in the next chapter, where classroom observations and teachers’ and

students’ talk is presented and analysed further.

The fourth finding of this study is related to the “correlation goal” of the public

school curriculum. This goal, carried through from the General Goals Document to the

English Language Curriculum Document verbatim might seem unremarkable. However,

it is apparent that this policy warrants reconsideration. The correlation is concerned with

the transfer of skills from English to other subjects. Yet, in the analysis of the document,

it was noticed that the pre-writing skills expected to be learnt in first grade in public

schools are at a lower level than those learned in Arabic studies. Students’ expected

performance of the writing skills in the English language included colouring, drawing,

tracing, and copying patterns of letter-like shapes. This indicated the curriculum policy’s

low expectation of childhood abilities. In contrast, in studying the Arabic language,

students are already expected to have mastered fine–motor skills earlier in the course of

the year. Additionally they are expected to have established visual discrimination, eye-

hand movement and visual–memory skills in other subjects as well.

The logic of the transfer goals is curious for two reasons: first, transfer of the

pre–writing skills from English to other subjects is unlikely as the skills supposedly

learnt in English are below those already learnt in Arabic, and secondly, in English

language instruction, writing is lagging behind the level expected in Arabic and thus it

seems unlikely that it could reinforce the skill of writing in Arabic.

In the next chapter, the analysis turns to teachers’ talk and classroom practices.

The emphasis is on the teachers’ positions in the professional Conversations about what

to teach as English writing, when to teach it and how to teach it that emerged as points

of interest in the analysis of the curriculum documents. A complex pattern of

commonality and differences from the official positions of the documents is described.


Chapter 6

Chapter 6: Teachers and the Skill of Writing in the Public Schools

Introduction

The purpose of this chapter is to analyse the practices of English writing

instruction in the case study classrooms and teachers' talk about such. In the previous

chapter, analyses of policy documents and textbook materials relevant to writing

instruction in the classrooms were presented. It will be recalled from Chapter 1 that it

was the implementation of the public school policy through the FWE textbook materials

that was the source of the controversy over the teaching of writing that erupted in

Kuwait in 2002. Accordingly, it is necessary to investigate what is happening in first

grade classrooms after the reforms of 2002.

In looking at classroom writing instruction, it is important to cast the purview of

the study beyond the public school system. This will make it possible to capture the

potential complexity of practices and teacher beliefs in a country where different

systemic requirements are in place. As it is only public schools that must implement the

new English curriculum with its controversial reduction of writing requirements in the

first grade, there is now more than ever before, the potential for considerable diversity of

writing instruction in schools in Kuwait. It will be recalled from the previous chapter

that the new English curriculum for public schools prioritises oral language skills of

listening and speaking over written language skills of reading and writing. Where

writing was once taught in the first grade in public schools, beginning students of

English are now expected to undertake only pre-reading and pre-writing activities. In

contrast, the English school syllabus stipulates writing activities that include the

composition of short paragraphs. Official requirements in the Indian system were not

made available for the study.

Given the potential diversity of classroom practice between public and private

sectors, case studies were conducted in first grade classrooms in four schools selected

from both sectors. Two of the schools were in the public sector and two in the private

sector, specifically the English and Indian education systems. The research questions

addressed to data produced in these study sites are as follows:


Chapter 6

What is the place of writing in English instruction in first grade classrooms

implementing the 2002 public school curriculum and schools implementing other

curricula?

How is writing instruction taught in first grade classrooms implementing the

2002 public school curriculum and schools implementing other curricula?

Table 6.1

Written material collected from the six students in each of the first grade classrooms in

each week

School Number samples Description

Public boys’ school (1)

Week 1 3

Week 2 4

Week 3 3

Week 4 6

Week 5 4

Trace lines. Trace and match

letters. Listening and drawing, look

and trace, trace and write letters.

Listen and colour. Count and write

the numbers. Re-order pictures.

Listen and tick. Trace copy and

write letters and words.

Public girls school (2)

Week 1 2

Week 2 6

Week 3 3

Week 4 3

Week 5 5

Listen, circle and colour. Listen and

number. Trace lines, letters. Match

letters. Re-order pictures, listen and

match, copy shapes. To identify odd

sounds and trace and copy.


Chapter 6

Table 6.1 cont.

Written material collected from the six students in each of the first grade classrooms in

each week

School Number samples Description

Private English school (3)

Week 1 4

Week 2 10-15

Week 3 9

Week 4 10

Week 5 8-10

Write letters, words & sentences.

Finish sentences with missing

words. Write parts of speech. Write

short story. Draw and write words.

Re-order and write rhymes.

Underline & write parts of speech.

Match pictures & words.

Private Indian School (4)

Week 1 7

Week 2 4

Week 3 3

Week 4 3

Week 5 3

Write missing letters (guided),

write words, complete short

dialogue (question and answer

form). Ask questions. Copy

questions and answers from the

board. Copying words for spelling.

Look at picture and circle correct

one. Read, colour, and write. Find

missing letters. Draw and write.

Answering questions, copying

words and sentences

(Comprehension and composition)


Chapter 6

To address these questions, I analysed two of the data sets produced at the case

study sites: i) video-recorded observations of English language lessons in the case study

classrooms; and ii) audio-recorded interviews with the class teachers. The observations

were undertaken for the purpose of describing what is taught as writing in diverse first

grade settings after the implementation of the new curriculum in the public school

system, and how it is taught.

As it will be recalled from Chapter 4, each of the four case study classrooms was

observed 15 times over a period of six weeks. In each of the classrooms, six students,

some of whom were considered high achieving by the teachers and others considered

low achieving, were observed and interviewed. The student’s teachers were also

interviewed. Copies were made of all the written materials produced by these students in

class during the interview period (see Table 6.1). The aim of the interviews was to

identify participants’ understandings of what is or should be taught as writing, how it is

or should be taught, and why it is or should be taught.

As might be anticipated, some differences of writing activity were observed in

the case study classrooms within and across systems (Table 6.1). Several points are

noteworthy. Firstly, in both of the public school classrooms, writing activities additional

to the pre-writing activities prescribed in the first grade curriculum were observed. There

were differences between the two classrooms, however. In the girls’ school, lessons

taught letter tracing and copying whereas in the boys’ school, word tracing and copying

were observed. Even wider ranges of writing activities were observed in the Indian and

English school classrooms. Sentences were copied in the lessons observed in the Indian

school. In the English school, students composed paragraphs.

Secondly, it should be noted that twice as many work samples were collected in

the English school system as in the Indian and public systems. This reflected different

teaching methods. In the English school system, teaching was organised around

worksheets. As individuals finished one worksheet, they were given another to

complete. Some students completed up to four worksheets in a single 40 minute lesson.

In contrast, in the Indian school, lessons entailed whole class oral drilling of sentences

and vocabulary written on the board, followed by copying of the material into students’

individual books. Every student copied the same material. In the public school system,


Chapter 6

approximately 30 minutes per lesson was spent on purely oral drills and games, followed

by 10 minutes of copying of relevant letters or words.

Generally, the teachers – in the public or private school sectors – disapproved the

delay of writing skills. The teachers taught writing based on a skill-developmental view

where all agreed on an early start with abundant opportunities for drill and practice.

Directionality was given priority by the public school teachers.

To understand these findings, relevant building tasks of significance, activities,

politics and relationships are used in this chapter. These four building tasks are

explained by the three tools of inquiry drawn from Gee’s (2005) approach to discourse

analyses: Discourses, intertextuality and Conversations. In the previous chapter, an

analysis was presented of discourse models espoused in documents relevant to the case

study classrooms. These are models of what is appropriately taught as writing in first

grade and appropriate ways of teaching it. It was shown that these models represent

contested positions in ongoing professional Conversations about what should be taught

to young learners of English, in what order, at what pace, and using what methods. The

data analysed in this chapter make available discourse models espoused by the teachers

in their talk about first grade English instruction, and models-in-(inter)action observed in

their classroom practice. Points of commonality and conflict between these models

within and across teachers are examined. Using the concept of intertextuality, points of

commonality and conflict with the models espoused in the documents to which the

teachers are accountable are examined also.

This chapter’s findings pertain to the ongoing Conversation in the young learner

field about what should be taught as English and how it should be taught. As was

established in the review of literature in Chapter 2, there is professional consensus in the

ESL/EFL field that writing instruction should be delayed until some degree of

proficiency in oral English and first language literacy has been established. At the same

time, this position has been critiqued by researchers from several different perspectives.

Points of critique include the model of mind assumed by those who would delay the

introduction of writing (Cook, 2005), and the appropriateness of pedagogic assumptions

originating in progressive Western thought and ESL contexts for traditional and EFL


Chapter 6

contexts (e.g. Holliday, 1994; Pennycook, 2000). The analyses presented in this chapter

are cause for reflection on points of contention in these professional Conversations.

In this chapter, findings from the public and private school case study teachers

are presented. This chapter has two main sections. In the first section findings arising

from the public school case teachers are presented and in the second section findings

from the private school teachers are presented. The chapter concludes with a discussion

of the findings.

The Public School Case Studies

Case Study 1: Boys’ public school

Setting

In this classroom, there was an average of 25 students during the study period.

The class was taught by Mrs. Rose (pseudonymous, like all names used in this thesis).

The class was one of six first grade classes in the school. Like the other classes in the

school, it included a mix of students of different ability. The 4x4m classroom used by

the class is located in a two-storey building at the back of the school near the

playground. The classroom is one of three along a corridor. All first grade classrooms

are set on the first floor. Case study 1 classroom has big windows overlooking the yard.

The classroom furniture is arranged in a U-shape with four double-desks in the middle.

At the time of the observations, the double-desks were placed either in rows or groups of

six. The teacher’s table was placed at the front of the room, facing the students. The

walls were bare. There was one educational poster in the room. It was beside the door,

and displayed some Arabic words spelt out alphabetically. The setting was notable

because some teachers in Kuwait, like those internationally, believe it is crucial to create

a foreign language setting in the classroom with authentic language resources including

environmental print (Stern, 1992). In such a setting it is usual to find displays, posters,

students’ artwork, and cartoons that reflect the written target language. These displays

help the learner to connect with the language and be exposed to literacy. However, this

classroom lacked any educational material, such as literacy posters or friezes to support

and reinforce the learning of English as a written foreign language.


Chapter 6

In her interview, Mrs. Rose stated that in her public boys’ school classroom

writing was introduced towards the end of the year, specifically, in the last two months

of first grade. It was during this period that the case study reported here was conducted.

Writing was practised during the last ten minutes of each English lesson after the

required content from the FWE textbooks was covered. Writing worksheets photocopied

from resources additional to the FWE materials were made available to the students for

this part of the lessons. Mrs. Rose always entered class with a “toolkit” of writing

implements that she made available to students. This box included extra pencils,

crayons, and whiteboard markers. During the writing segment of the lessons, Mrs. Rose

worked actively with the students; she took the time to circulate around the class as

students practiced copying or printing letters, and corrected their work individually.

What writing is taught?

The contrast between the writing skills Mrs. Rose thinks student should learn in

first grade, and the demands of the Ministry through the first grade curriculum, are

evident in Table 6.2. This table compares the curriculum requirements with what Mrs.

Rose teaches. In the table, the activities taught are indicated with the letter P, meaning

“practised,” while the “X” is used to indicate the activities that are not practised in Mrs.

Rose’s class. The point to be drawn from the table is that Mrs. Rose went further than

what the Ministry requirements were for writing instruction. To the pre-writing skills of

drawing and colouring prescribed in the curriculum, she added skills in copying letters,

matching letters to pictures of objects that start with the sound represented by the letter,

tracing letters and numbers, and writing of words. In other words, in the boys’ public

school, students managed to undertake writing activities during the English lesson not

only pre–writing activities. Table 6.2 also indicates the “O” for the writing activities

observed in class while the “I” signifies the writing activities mentioned by Mrs. Rose

during her interview.


Chapter 6

Table 6.2

Writing activities practiced in classroom according to teacher interview and classroom

observations in the boys’ public school

Activities Ministry’s Pre-Writing Skills

Mrs. Rose

Tracing/copying patterns in air/paper P X (I)

Cutting out shapes P X

Drawing/colouring P P (O)

Tracing paths to mazes P P (I)

Tracing letters/numbers P P (I, O)

Copying letters X P (O)

Matching letters or picture/letter words X P (I, O)

Match letter/word X X

Missing letters X X

Filling in the blanks X X

Labelling X X

Making sentences X X

Re-order sentences X X

Copying words/sentences X P (words) (O)

Spelling X X


Key: “P” = practised activity “X” = not applicable activity

“O” = observed activity “I” = activity mentioned in interview


Chapter 6

During the interview Mrs. Rose mentioned writing activities that included

tracing and copying patterns in the air or on paper, tracing letters and numbers, and

matching activities. Mrs. Rose recognized as writing letter writing where the student has

the physical ability to hold the pencil correctly and produce letters. She views writing as

a skill the student are able to perform in class: “They can write correctly the letters. If

you can consider writing letters a writing ahhh ski- just like they can ::: hold the pencil

and write.” She suggests that students are still not in control of their fine motor skills in

first grade. However, for her, this is not a reason to delay the introduction of writing.

Rather, it is a reason to introduce English writing earlier so that students become

accustomed to writing in English with its script opposite in directionality from Arabic:

The muscles of the hand are a little bit weak and to get used to the direction of

writing English from left – to – right To be quite opposite to the Arabic, but still

have ::, they still mixing between Arabic and English starting the same direction.

Umm a little bit to get used to how to write the English language. To get used to

the letters.

Mrs. Rose recognized letter writing as “writing.” She considered activities such

as matching letters with pictures of objects beginning with the letter, joining dots, and

drawing shapes as a kind of writing instruction. Matching words with pictures, and

tracing and copying letters, listening and ticking a box with the correct letter heard or a

picture of a word heard, looking at letters and saying them are all also considered as

writing instruction activities. The writing experiences the young learners are exposed to

in this version of the first grade curriculum is letter and word writing. In response to a

question about what she taught as writing, Mrs. Rose stated:

matching or joining the dots together a kind of writing we can say they can write.

Umm writing ::: circles or drawing circles, triangles we can say that’s it's a kind

of writing but in ::: b- the stage we can say that it’s a::: clear or that obvious

language of writing words and sentences. We they still I think on the second

grade it will be nice.

Both the observations and interviews provide evidence that the discourse model

of what is appropriate writing for first graders operative in this classroom is one that

entails copying and writing letters and words, and matching pictures with letters and


Chapter 6

words. It is notable that this discourse model differs from that of the curriculum

document which focuses on pre–writing skills that are more concerned with eye–hand

movements and directionality.

In her interview, Mrs. Rose opposed the delay of writing and believed it should

be introduced early. Mrs. Rose emphasizes her position on writing by swearing by God

(Wallah) which in Arabic language, as earlier explained, is used to show integrity in

speech. She said “No {Wallah1} I prefer to start writing. We were just talking, the

teachers and I, and saying that who is going to teach first grade next year will teach

writing.” In this statement Mrs. Rose revealed her position on the absence of writing in

the FWE first grade curriculum in public schools when she proposed that it was her

preference for her school staff to teach writing from the beginning of the year. Mrs. Rose

represents herself in a position of authority in the school that enables her to make

decisions with implications for all the first grade classes.

Mrs. Rose not only taught writing skills beyond those required in the curriculum,

but also expressed strong opinions about the exclusion of writing and reading from the

curriculum. This became evident when she was asked about the curriculum and the skills

and responded: “still until now Bardo2 ll- the writing skill and the reading skill::: they

ignore the writing and the reading skill. Though if the two skills were introduced and

added, the curriculum would have been much more interesting and::: the outcomes

would have been better.” It is apparent that Mrs. Rose considers the excision of writing

to have made the first grade curriculum uninteresting for students and also to have

lessened students’ achievement in English.

Mrs. Rose believes that although the curriculum is based on listening and

speaking, the young learners are capable of not only forming simple sentences orally

such as “I have a yellow bag,” but are also able to write. In her own words, “Wallah

somehow they can …..but I think a little bit the slow achievers still…most they can write

correctly the letters.” The point here is that although Mrs. Rose is not sure how the

students are able to write, she knows that they can write. As an example, Mrs. Rose talks

1 Wallah is the Arabic word used to mean God. It is used to show honesty and persuade the listener

in believing the speaker. 2 Bardo, an Egyptian slang word to mean still indicating the present time.


Chapter 6

about Hassan and what he was able to write by the end of the year: “Hassan … is

according to the three weakest Hassan is the best of them, and even he at the very end he

started to write his own name, full name ahhh and even the way he writes and shapes of

the letters is started to be better.” Furthermore, she insisted that even the least proficient

students are generally able to write letters: in her own words,”{Wallah} somehow they

can.”

In analysing the above interview data, we can see that Mrs. Rose, the boys’

public school teacher, holds three main notions that are closely linked to her position on

the place of writing: it is a skill which involves holding a pencil and fine–motor control,

directionality is of significance in learning to write in EFL; in terms of the Discourse

model espoused by Mrs. Rose, writing in first grade appropriately included writing as a

skill, involving physical abilities, tracing patterns, drawing shapes, matching letters and

pictures, forming shapes, writing and letters and words.

Furthermore, writing is considered to begin with tracing, copying and forming

letters and proceed to copying and writing words. Although this model is in harmony

with that espoused by the Ministry as analysed in the previous Chapter, it diverges from

the Ministry’s model in that writing is considered crucial in learning English. The

espoused model considered learning to copy and write letters and words as appropriate.

In short, Mrs. Rose’s espoused model is at variance with the curriculum in that it

entails writing where the curriculum does not. Mrs. Rose’s espoused model is also

inconsistent with the policy of the new curriculum which stresses oral skills, and the

delay of reading and writing. Mrs. Rose reasoning was in that the students are able to

write and the delay of writing results in boredom and low achievement in English.

It is worth to noting that while Mrs. Rose is in practice teaching more than pre-

writing skills, she chooses her words carefully in her interview, and does not state all the

activities she carries out in class. In other words, there is some degree of discrepancy

between the Discourse model espoused by Mrs. Rose and that observed in her classroom

practice. It is to this latter model, the Discourse model in–interaction that this analysis

now turns.

In the observation data, it can be seen from Table 6.1 and 6.2 that the students in

Mrs. Rose’s class did some writing skills in addition to the pre-writing skills required by


Chapter 6

the Ministry’s curriculum. These activities included letter formation, grapho–phonemic

relationship, associating the letter ‘c’ to the first sound of the word, cat, spelling, writing

numbers, and tracing, copying, and writing letters and words (see Appendix M). The

Discourse model in–interaction evident here diverges even more from the model in the

Ministry’s documents than does the model overtly espoused by Mrs. Rose.

As it was explained earlier in Chapter 5, the first grade curriculum focuses on

preparatory pre-writing skills; the first grade curriculum is a skill-based one, which

prepares students for writing through an extensive foundation of pre-writing skills, such

as drawing, tracing, and colouring which develop the left–to–right hand movement

(Ministry of Education, n.d.-b) and does not involve writing or copying letters or words.

As is clear, the demands Mrs. Rose makes of her students are not similar to the first

grade curriculum with the stress on pre-writing skills.

In short, this teacher diverges from the policy in her belief and general attitude to

the delay of the writing skill as the espoused model and in–interaction model deviate

from the Ministry’s espoused model and within the real classroom practice which

exceed those espoused in the interview.

How writing is taught

A Discourse model of how writing is appropriately taught in first grade is evident

in the observation and interview data produced in Mrs. Rose’s classroom. In examining

how the writing skills were practised through the observation and interview data, it can

be noted that again there are differences from the Ministry’s espoused model. Mrs. Rose

described how she taught writing as follows:

I start with matching or joining letters, even matching, when we match words

with pictures we start from left to right to get used to the same direction of

writing English. I can consider this stage … writing to have the left–right

direction and then we can say tracing and a little bit of writing ahhhh just one

letter ahhhh that’s it.

From this data it is apparent that Mrs. Rose’s approach to teaching writing is an

alternative to the official position of the documents and this was an issue of contention

in the public debate around the new curriculum. However Mrs. Rose is concerned about

directionality which is nominated as a pre–writing skill in the documents and was an


Chapter 6

issue of contention in the public debate around the new curriculum. For Mrs. Rose, the

fact that writing in Arabic goes from right to left whereas writing in English goes from

left to right is consequential. Her concern is to give student as much practice as possible

with orthography-specific aspects of directionality and printed letter formation of the

English language before these skills need to be mastered.

Directionality is emphasised in Mrs. Rose’s class as the focus of teaching: “to

get used to the direction of writing English from left–to–right. To be quite opposite to

the Arabic, but still have :::. To get used to the letters.” Mrs. Rose’s techniques were

entirely focused on directionality and letter formation of the English script as described

in the previous pages of this analysis. The difficulties these aspects of writing present

were to be overcome with practice: “[to know] the language involves practicing

writing.” Mrs. Rose indicated that the difficulty of writing is a crucial reason to have

students practice more rather than less. Hence, when asked about the curriculum’s

weakness, Mrs. Rose went on to say “and weaknesses ahhh still ::: ignoring the reading

and writing still, needs more practise=.” For Mrs. Rose, students need more, not less

practise with the challenging skills of English writing.

The students are taught to write by printing on four-lined paper. In these lessons

the teacher usually draws the lines on the whiteboard and demonstrates how some letters

touch only the two middle lines, while some other letters may touch three lines when

printed. For example, the following Excerpt illustrates how letter writing was taught by

Mrs. Rose. In Excerpt 1, the teacher starts by asking the students how many lines there

are to write on. Collectively, the student chorus “four lines.” It is apparent that this is a

familiar routine to the student. The teacher uses two colours, red and blue, to

differentiate between the lines. She writes the letter on the lines directing the student to

watch. It can be noticed from Excerpt 1 that the lesson is teacher-centred and no real

writing communicative situations arise during the class, although there is real oral

communication in the use of English as medium of instruction. The flow of the lesson is

controlled by the teacher in English. In the following Excerpt, all utterances, other than

those in bold italics, were in English. Although there is some code–switching, most of

the interaction occurs in English.


Chapter 6

Excerpt 1: Learning to write letters in the boys’ public school

Mrs. Rose: Boys, how many lines do we have?

Adel: Teacher, teacher (raises his hand)

Class: 4 lines (shouting out)

Mrs. Rose: We have red (Mrs. Rose draws the four lines using red and blue markers).

Abdulla: Blue, blue, red

Mrs. Rose: Blue, blue, red, that's right. Look at the board, sh- sh- please, raise your

hands “we put our hands up" What's this letter? (Teacher writes the

letter c).

Hassan: "teacher” c.

Mrs. Rose: Very good Hassan, {yalla3} Rada if I raise the ( ) and keep it between

the two lines what is it? (Writing the letter a)

Rada: a, Hassan told me.

Teacher: Akeel (calling on a students name), what is this letter “if we complete it

into” a complete circle?

Hassan: O (He shouts out of turn)

Mrs. Rose: What if we go up and down again? What is this letter? d, for DOOR.

(writing the letter d)

Abdulla: For DOG (repeats after the teacher)

Mrs. Rose: That's right d for DOG. Now this time down and – What's this letter?

(She writes the letter g on the whiteboard)

Abdulla: g, for GREEN. (He utters without taking a turn)

Another technique used in this class entails associating the shape of the letter

with the motion of an animal; for example, when a rabbit jumps, it makes the letter N

and when it jumps two jumps it makes the letter M. In learning how to write the letter

M, the teacher associated direction with movement. By way of example, consider

Excerpt 2. In this interaction the teacher indicates to the student, before writing, the

initial starting position of the letter, highlighting whether it is written “down-up” or “up-

3 Yalla , means come on, teacher uses it to encourage student participation.


Chapter 6

down” The lesson is highly guided and is structured around writing activities. The

teacher demonstrates and the students are expected to follow.

Excerpt 2: Teacher draws the class’ attention to the starting position of letter

writing

Mrs. Rose: Show me your pencils and erasers? Your pencils and..

Class: Erasers (class shouts out) (Teacher distributes worksheet)

Mrs. Rose: Dawood, please go back! Salem, please write nicely. First grade please,

no “can’t write from down to up.” From up to down – from up to down

and then one, two. (Teacher rotates, student start to write the letter m)

Mrs. Rose: “on this worksheet” writes the date 11.3.2006 “first grade” listen the

letter m, MOUSE “with which group” up, between, or down? It should

be between the two lines. (Looks at student’s work)

In addition to handwriting lessons like that described in the previous excerpt,

writing is also introduced in Mrs. Rose’s class through spelling aloud. This is illustrated

in Excerpt 3 where the teacher writes the letters on the board in isolation and then joins

them together to make a word. The method here is one of collective oral drilling.

Excerpt 3: Spelling out words

Mrs. Rose: What's this letter (writing on the whiteboard the letter c)

Class: c (collectively the students shout c)

Mrs. Rose: What's this letter? (Writing the letter a on the whiteboard)

Class: a (the students shout out a)

Mrs. Rose: What's this letter? (Writing the letter t on the board)

Class: t (the students shout out)

Mrs. Rose: CAT (the teacher reads it)

Class: c CAT (The students pronounce the sound c and then read cat)


Chapter 6

Summary

From the interviews it is apparent that Mrs. Rose understood writing as letter

formation and directionality, to be appropriately taught by tracing, copying, and drilling,

in other words, by practice This Discourse model is consistent with the methods

espoused in the Ministry’s documents as analysed in Chapter 5. To elaborate, the

English language classroom in this school is traditional where the focus is on the teacher

and not the learner. There is much practice through drill and rote learning. This is in

accordance with the Ministry’s position that communication in English is to be

developed through practice of the four skills. In other words, while Mrs. Rose’s

espoused Discourse model of what is appropriate to teach to first graders diverges from

that inherent in Ministry documents, both Discourse models on how to teach writing to

first graders espoused by Mrs. Rose and observed in–interaction in her teaching are

consistent with that espoused in Ministry documents. Moreover, it is evident from the

espoused and in–interaction model of Mrs. Rose, that the relationship task is teacher

directed; the teacher is in control of the learning–teaching process and the students’ role

is secondary.

An interesting point to consider is the disconnection of Mrs. Rose’s beliefs from

the Ministry’s as she believes the delay is the cause of boredom and low achievement.

Data produced in the other public school classroom involved in this study provides

evidence of discourse models both similar and different from those evident in Mrs.

Rose’s classroom. It is to this data that the analysis now turns.

Case Study 2: Girls’ public school

Setting

This first grade mixed ability classroom is a 4 x 4m room with one whiteboard located at

the front of the class. The classroom walls are light pink with large posters and drawings

representing the Kuwaiti culture hanging on the back wall. Most of the posters are in

Arabic. The class is organized in a traditional setting of rows of double desks for the

students. Sometimes to facilitate video–recording for the purpose of this study, the

students would sit in groups of six. Classroom windows are up high, over the students’

heads. The windows on the left overlook the playground and the ones on the right

overlook the first grade corridor.


Chapter 6

Table 6.3


observations in the girls’ public school

Activities Ministry’s Pre-Write Concept

Mrs. Fay

Tracing/copying patterns in air/paper P P (I, O)

Cutting out shapes P X

Drawing/colouring P P (I, O)

Tracing paths mazes P P

Tracing letters, numbers P X

Copying letters X P (I, O)

Matching letters or pictures/letters X P (O)

Match letter/word X X

Missing letters X X

Filling in the blanks X X

Labelling X X


Re-order sentences X X

Copying words/sentences X X

Spelling X X




The writing activities experienced in this classroom include: tracing, copying,

and circling letters. Other activities included, drawing, colouring, and matching letters,

listen–and–tick, look–and–say. Table 6.3 illustrates the writing skills required by the


Chapter 6

Ministry and the writing skills the teacher is actually teaching in class, these writing

skills are marked with a “P” for practice in class writing activities and “X” for

inapplicable writing activities. These activities are further marked with an “O” for

observed writing activities and an “I” for activities mentioned through the teacher’s

interview data. It is evident from the Table that Mrs. Fay like Mrs. Rose did more in the

name of writing instruction than was required by the public school curriculum,

introducing letter copying and matching of letters with pictures. However, it should be

indicated here, that the quantity of tasks provided to the first grade girl’s class varied

from that in the boy’s first grade class. Mrs. Rose provided worksheets for the students

to work on for each letter while Mrs. Fay rarely allocated time for each letter to be

traced, copied, and written. Also, it is important to note here that Mrs. Fay concentrated

more on pre-writing skills such as tracing and copying patterns in the air or on paper

than on copying and writing letters and words. Table 6.3 indicates the activities she

talked about in her interview such as tracing letters, numbers, and patterns and copying

letters. However, additional to what Mrs. Fay said she did in class, it was observed that

activities such as matching letters to pictures were also taught in her class.

Mrs. Fay approached the teaching of writing somewhat differently from Mrs.

Rose. In her interview, she stated that she started to teach writing towards the final week

of the school year while Mrs. Rose started teaching writing in the last two months of the

first grade year. The espoused models of when to start teaching writing varied between

these two teachers although they both teach within a similar school system, year level,

and curriculum.

In the observation data, it was noticed that Mrs. Fay’s lessons did not use any

worksheets and written material other than the FWE workbook and pupils' book.

Additional resources were not made available to the students. Also, Mrs. Fay brought no

written material or markers and crayons, and pencils to class unlike Mrs. Rose who had

her own “toolkit” of writing implements. Mrs. Fay in some instances asked for a marker

from a young student in her class.

In the next section a more detailed analysis is presented of what is seen to be

appropriate writing for first graders by Mrs. Fay. The focus is on how writing instruction


Chapter 6

is similar and different not only in the public schools but also in relation to the

curriculum documents of the Ministry.

What Writing is Taught?

Mrs. Fay, the girls’ public school teacher, took a position on writing that is

clearly manifested through her refusal to accept the Ministry’s decision. She made a

clear statement about her position and how it affects the young learners’ learning in the

long run. Holding a strong opinion about writing contrary to that of the Ministry, she

overlooks the Ministry’s policy of no writing and teaches the young learners to learn to

write letters. She disregards the Ministry’s decision and emphasizes the writing skill.

This is revealed in her interview where she says:

“Writing” , um there is no “writing” in first grade from the beginning of the year

there isn’t any “writing” , all there is, is “speaking” and sounds. But in the

second semester we started “writing” but only “letter” writing and of course

there isn't much time to spend on writing because we have to finish up the

curriculum or syllabus. And the ministry has specified only 12 “letters” to be

given and the other extra letters we have given the learners are given as

supplementary on our behalf. (Lines 10-15)

Excerpt 4: Oral drills Mrs. Fay: Excellent {ya} Abrar. A goat. Goat starts with ga . Look at this picture

what's this? Together!

Class: It's a bird.

Mrs. Fay: What's this?

Class: It's a bird (Sara raises her hand)

Mrs. Fay: Sara, what can you see in the picture?

Samar: I can see a bird.

Mrs Fay: What are these? (Pointing teacher to flashcards)

Samar: Animals

Class: Animals

Mrs. Fay: They are animals.


Chapter 6

Thus, according to Mrs. Fay, writing is not given priority in her class and

speaking is the focus of the English instruction, as shown in Excerpt 4. Recognition of

12 letters is taught in class orally as required by the Ministry and there is a little

instruction enabling the students to write these letters and the teachers have started to

teach them in writing. Writing of any additional letters was taught voluntarily. Mrs. Fay

asserted this by saying that, ‘the girls for example would recognize the shape of letters

like H – B- just to recognize the “consonants” and only 12 “letters” not all the

consonants and the rest of the alphabetic letters are not required to be taught’. The

focus of the lesson was on listening and activities like drawing: ‘and the learner is given

the chance to draw a picture’. As Mrs. Fay explained further:

As I told you there is no writing until the second semester. The Ministry doesn't

aim at teaching writing, just getting [students] to recognize the shape of the

letters. The Ministry just wants the learners to know the shape of the letters. But

we as teachers are overlooking that and teaching them to write. (Lines 63-67)

To clarify, Mrs. Fay focuses on letter that should be taught to first graders. She

makes a distinction between being able to recognize (i.e. read) a letter and to produce it

in her words, to “write” letters. At other points in her interview, Mrs. Fay identifies

“words” that should be taught to first graders, making a similar distinction between

being able to recognise and produce not only written but also oral words.

Mrs. Fay drew on several arguments about why to start writing early and not

delay the skill of writing until end of year one or beginning of year two. For example,

she states that learning words orally is not sufficient because student need to see, draw,

and write the word in order to become familiar with it. Moreover, she believes that if

students do not get enough practice in writing words, they will not be able to remember

the words. This becomes evident in her response to a question in which I asked if she

believed the students were able to write. She responded: “Now yes, in this final week, I

started to emphasize writing, approximately from the beginning of the week I focused on

letter.” Here, Mrs. Fay refers to letter copying and tracing as writing. This is a process

of trying to “control the pencil” thus indicating that holding the pencil is part of the

writing process. Mrs. Fay also believed that writing in English is associated with

directionality and learning to write from left–to–right is an element of the writing skill.


Chapter 6

Writing is taught developmentally in this class, starting from pre-writing skills like

holding a pencil, eye-hand coordination and left–to–right movement. ‘The only skill of

writing that concerns first graders is the “letter” writing. With letter writing, first we

teach them to write from left-to–right and… we have to remind them that “English”

isn’t like Arabic’. Writing is also viewed by Mrs. Fay as neat handwriting.

In summary, Mrs. Fay believes the curriculum’s weakness lies in its exclusion of

the writing skill. The delay of writing is strongly rejected and the idea of introducing

writing early in first grade is highly emphasized by this teacher. She believes an early

start is essential and possible. However, this girl’s public school teacher is caught in a

paradox as she is concerned about the delay of the writing skill yet delays the

introduction of writing until the last weeks of first grade. Evidence of this conflict is

found in the observations of Mrs. Fay. As was shown in Table 6.3, Mrs. Fay focused on

teaching listening and speaking skills in the case study lessons. She spent some time on

pre-writing skills (tracing and copying patterns, colouring) and a very brief time on

writing skills (e.g., tracing and copying letters and lines) (see Appendix N).

In terms of this study’s theoretical framework, the espoused Discourse model of

what it is appropriate to teach evident in Mrs. Fay’s interview entails the teaching of pre-

writing skills like tracing, copying, and drawing, colouring and the writing of letters. In

this model, writing is seen as a skill which consists of fine-motor control as well as

directionality and handwriting. Mrs. Fay views writing as an essential skill to be tackled

early. For her it was important to introduce the four macroskills. Thus, Mrs. Fay’s

espoused Discourse model of what it is appropriately taught as writing to first graders is

similar to that espoused by Mrs. Rose, the boys’ public school teacher. However, this is

not evident in her practice inside the classroom where her Discourse Model in–

interaction is in conformity with the Ministry’s documents that considers writing as

inappropriate for first grade. Yet, as established earlier, it was observed that writing was

given minimal treatment in Mrs. Fay’s classroom. During her teaching, writing was

practised by letting student write in the air using their index finger. Writing was not

supported as a skill in class by the teacher; she taught it to the whole class collectively

without providing feedback or reinforcement for individual students. This is a point of

distinction from what was observed in Mrs. Rose’s classroom. No writing for


Chapter 6

communication occurred, as was also the case in the boy’s public school. The class was

oriented towards listening and mimicking oral language drills. The main skills practised

in this classroom focused on listening and speaking.

The two public school teachers take a similar position in the professional

Conversation around what is appropriately taught to first grade learners of English in

Kuwait. The strengths of Mrs. Fay’s position is apparent in the way she explicitly

invokes the document in order to disagree with it (e.g., p.19 data [lines 10-15]) This

intertextuality is evidence of a strongly held professional position on what should be

taught as writing to Kuwait first graders.

Further points of contradiction arise in relation to the espoused Discourse models

on how writing is appropriately taught to first graders by Mrs. Fay as distinct from what

is appropriately taught as writing. It is to these models of the “how” of writing education

that this discussion now turns.


In this classroom, rote learning was the key teaching method: continuous oral

drills were practiced in question and answer form. The syllabus was taught throughout

the period of observation using visual pictures and oral production. In contrast, writing

was introduced through tracing letters in the air or writing the letter only once or twice

on the back of a lined book cover with an erasable marker where she says, ‘We give

them the chance to practice writing , “tracing” drawing and colouring a lot in the

book.’

Mrs. Fay taught letters by copying and tracing: ‘By looking at the “activity

book,” you can see that there is no writing in it except for “ tracing” letters’. The

writing skill was not stressed as much as tracing lines, shapes, colouring, and matching a

letter with a representation of the letter. Mrs. Fay considered this method of teaching

inadequate. To her, more practice in more situations enabled students to remember:

When the learner starts to write, he is familiarizing with the sound of the letter

and reads the word BAG for example ….and will remember the word BAG. Just

learning the word BAG in thin air doesn't help the learner learn the word. If you

don't show the learner a picture of the word and remind him/her of the word,

he/she will not remember. (Lines 100-104)


Chapter 6

According to Mrs. Fay, by knowing the sounds represented by letters, knowledge

that comes from writing enables learning of oral language. This practice took the form of

copying “tracing, drawing and colouring a lot in the book.” Thus, writing instruction in

Mrs. Fay’s terms is tracing and copying letters and words, saying: ‘“ tracing” ‘letters.’

But we do give worksheets but the worksheets don't include any writing activities. They

would include activities like “ copying” the letter and that's a new skill for them as

usually they only “ trace” or “ circle” the letter. But, now as a anew skill they “ copy

letters.”

Although little writing instruction was observed in Mrs. Fay’s classroom, there

was extended talk about how it should be taught: as previously discussed, writing was

not emphasized until the end of the year. It was in the last two weeks of the school year

that copying letters and writing letters took place: ‘We show them how to write each

“letter” individually staring from “left, up, down” Mrs. Fay went on, elaborating how

writing is taught by saying, ‘we would show them how to write on the lines and how

many lines we use to write on in the English language system and where to start writing

the “capital” or “small letter” ’. The teaching methods of Mrs. Fay is traditional, in her

own words “we would write it on the whiteboard, have all the learners in turn get up

and write it on the board and then each learner writes it.” The method was observed in

Excerpt 5 where Mrs. Fay demonstrates how letters are taught through shapes and the

starting positions of letters. Mrs. Fay writes the letter “s” on the board indicating the

position and direction of the letter as it is written.

Excerpt 5: Writing the letter “s”

Mrs. Fay: Look at the letter “s,” start from number 1 [line one drawn on the board]

OK, here. Round and round, round to the left and then round to

Class: Right.

Mrs. Fay: Again, look at the board (teacher writes the letter on the board). We start

from here (pointing to line 1) round and until number 2…another round.

OK?


Chapter 6

(Teacher continues to explain how to write the letter “s”) This is the

capital letter.

Class: Letter.

Mrs. Fay: Small letter from number 2 to number 3, round and round

Class: Round and round.

Mrs. Fay: Small letter, where do we write it? From line 2 to 3. Let us draw it – write

it in the air (Students write the letter in the air using their finger as the

teacher demonstrates).

In the girls’ public school classroom, writing is stressed through practices such as

using the index finger to trace out letters in the air. Practice was at the core of Mrs. Fay’s

objection to the exclusion of writing from the first grade curriculum.

Mrs. Fay assumed if this exclusion of the writing skill had been carried out with

the Arabic language, it would have been fine because it is a spoken language and the

learner is continuously using the language everyday. However, the case with the English

language is different as it is practised only inside the English lesson for less than 40

minutes in 24 hours. She stressed the fact that the learner is unable to use the language at

home and to communicate orally what has been learnt in class. This is evident in her

statements about the learning of letters, words and handwriting: “If it was the writing

skill emphasized, the learner writes in class and homework would be given and they

would be able to copy it and drill on the work. She would copy it repeatedly; the

material would then be learnt and remembered. The learner would be more familiar

with the letter and word. The learners’ handwriting would improve therefore starting

with listening skill and then speaking skill is not very efficient because we are not

dealing with private English schools where this method would be fruitful.”

Mrs. Fay concurred with the Ministry in her teaching of oral drills and practice of

classroom English medium and no real communicative situations arise during the lesson,

as shown in Excerpt 6.


Chapter 6

Excerpt 6: A short transcript from the lesson

Mrs. Fay: What can you see Abrar? (Teacher shows flashcards with pictures of

animals)

Abeer: I (says I and stops)

Mrs. Fay: I can, repeat I can see

Abeer: I

Mrs. Fay: "Just say after me" I can see a sheep.

Abeer: I can see a sheep.

Mrs. Fay: Amani, what can you see in the picture?

Amani: I can see a sheep.

Mrs. Fay: Excellent, I can see a sheep. Together I can see a sheep.

Class: I can see a sheep (repeat after teacher collectively).

The Discourse model of how writing is appropriately taught espoused by Mrs.

Fay entails copying and skill and drill activities that enable memorization. This espoused

model is similar to Mrs. Rose’s espoused teaching model where teaching is based in a

traditional setting of drilling and memorization. The key elements of memorization and

drilling were deemed to be appropriate for teaching writing to first graders.

Similarly in terms of the in–interaction model, the methods that Mrs. Fay used in

the teaching of writing created a drill context within which she was the key player in the

teaching–learning process. Thus, in terms of relationships, it is teacher-directed in which

the focus again is on the teacher. In this case study, writing entails drills and practice

routines. Again there is considerable similarity between the in-interaction model of Mrs.

Fay and Mrs. Rose. Furthermore, Mrs. Fay’s teaching method, like that of Mrs. Rose, is

at variance with the espoused model of the curriculum document to the extent that the

document valorises learner–centredness. Both teachers establish a teacher–centred

approach in their classroom. However, it is not in contradiction with the notion of

practice of macroskills valorised in that document. In other words, this complex play of

conformity and contradiction reflects possibilities inherent in the Discourse model

espoused in the documents themselves as analysed in Chapter 5.


Chapter 6

It might be concluded that the two teachers, Mrs. Rose and Mrs. Fay, espoused

models of how writing is appropriately taught that are consistent with the Ministry’s

espoused model with its valuing of (communication through) practice. It should be noted

however that it was practice and not communication that was in evidence in the data

produced for this study.

In the private sector of education, the system varies in its curriculum and

teaching approach. As was discussed earlier in Chapter 1, the private schools in Kuwait

function according to the expectations of the educational system of the country. These

schools use English language as the main means of instruction, exposing the students to

as much English as possible. The students are exposed to Arabic during the Arabic

language and Islamic studies classes. In the following two case studies (3), and (4), all

the macroskills (listening, speaking, reading, and writing) are integrated in the teaching

of the English language. The following section provides a description of each of the

private case-study schools highlighting what writing is taught and how writing is taught.

Then an analysis of the Discourse models is provided to unpack the place and method of

writing instruction among young first grade learners, drawing comparisons and contrasts

with the first grade curriculum enacted in public schools.

The Private School Case Studies

Case Study 3: English system private school

Setting

This classroom has 16 students. The classroom is a small rectangular shaped space of

4x3m room. There are three main working areas. In the centre there is a cluster of red,

yellow, blue and green study tables where the students usually gather to do their work.

These tables are set in a big circle. On the far right side of the classroom, there is a

carpet for discussion or talk time. On the far left there is a study table used by individual

students or for one-to-one teaching. The class is colourful with educational posters hung

on the walls, and an alphabet letter frieze hanging above the whiteboard. There is a

bookshelf for the students’ books and activity materials. Mrs. Paula’s classroom is set up

with a series of writing materials and worksheets ready to be used in class. Unlike the


Chapter 6

public school, this is a co-educational school. Moreover, the class is a multi-levelled

class and thus the writing experience in class varies from one student to the next,

according to the level the students are working at. This school uses the International

Primary Curriculum (IPC) (University of Cambridge, 2007).


Writing is a multi-levelled skill in this school practice; it is taught through various

activities, including writing missing letters, filling in blank spaces, labelling pictures,

matching words with pictures, and sentences with pictures and sentence writing. The

emphasis is on Phonics, spelling, and vocabulary. Writing in stage 1 entails:

� Developing an easy pencil grip;

� Developing correct letter writing;

� Spelling words appropriately using sight vocabulary;

� Using the knowledge of sounds to write words;

� Forming a simple sentence including punctuation;

� Writing lists and labels;

� Making undemanding storybooks with sentences to describe pictures;

� Writing several sentences to re-tell a story; and

� Finding information and recording the answers to questions (University of

Cambridge, 2007, p. 3).


Chapter 6

Table 6.4


observations in the English school

Activities Mrs. Paula

Drawing X

Tracing X

Copying Letters X

Matching letters or pictures/letters P (I, O)

Match letter/word P (I, O)

Missing letters P (I, O)

Filling in the blanks P (I, O)

Labelling P (I, O)

Making / writing sentences P (I, O)

Re-order sentences P (O)

Copying words / sentences P (O)

Spelling P (O)



In Table 6.4, it is shown that Mrs. Paula concentrated during the study period on

activities such as matching letters and pictures, letters and words, missing letters, filling

in the blanks, labelling, making sentences, re-ordering sentences, and spelling. Activities

such as, matching, labelling, writing missing letters, making sentences were all

mentioned during the interview, while re-ordering sentences, copying words and

sentences, spelling were activities observed in class.


Chapter 6

The activities listed above were practiced during reading comprehension

activities, and during other writing tasks in class. Table 6.4 shows the writing activities

that are practiced in class. They are marked with the letter “P” and the inapplicable

activities marked with an “X.” It can be seen that in this English language classroom no

drawing, tracing, and copying of letters is practiced. The activities are also marked with

an “O” if they were observed in classroom by the researcher, or with an “I” if they were

mentioned by the teacher during the interview. The students were focused on matching

letters and pictures, writing the missing letters, filling the blanks with words, labelling,

making sentences, copying words and sentences, re-ordering sentences, spelling and

writing. The learning of the sounds of words, spelling, punctuation, grammar, sentence

forming, and directionality were implemented in this classroom. In other words, students

were learning the code of written English and had some opportunities to write

meaningfully in this code.

In the private sector of schooling, writing seems to be constructed within a

different a daily Discourse which was performed as part of re-telling stories in writing,

completing nursery rhymes, and performing other activities like learning to write their

names. It included in Mrs. Paula’s words, “ writing as a skill, they can ::: do exercises

with the missing letters, they can ::: fill the blanks, and they can match and label

pictures , make sentences.” Writing is an integral part of the school day. Time was

dedicated to writing, and reinforced through various activities during the lesson. Some

students were able to construct a long complex sentence, while others came up with a

simple familiar sentence.

Writing was perceived as an important factor that serves a purpose in class. Mrs.

Paula viewed writing as a “complex activity involving vocabulary, grammar,

punctuation, imagination.” The process of writing is not a simple task according to Mrs.

Paula. She aimed at moving the class forward in their writing skill because of this

complexity. She indicated that she aimed at “pushing them to write sentences.” Mrs.

Paula dealt with the writing activity early because of its complexity and tended to let the

learners get used to the skill of writing, to a level of control and easiness. She did that by

providing the students with plenty of written activities. She indicated for example that

“in year two, the vast majority of work is written work so why should I waste time in


Chapter 6

year two when they can get used to writing now?” Mrs. Paula was aware of the second

grade syllabus and planned ahead to prepare the students for their second year which

consisted mostly of writing. Moreover it is evident that she was concerned about

building her learners’ abilities. Mrs. Paula reproduced the Discourse of a syllabus that

offered practice in the four skills through an integrative method which provided ample

practice on writing in creating new material or written work that is original to the student

but still provided the students with “top-down” and “bottom-up” opportunities for

learning. The various activities provided for the students by Mrs. Paula indicate a model

of writing as a daily practice integrated with the other macroskills.

Mrs. Paula compares writing to playing the piano, saying, “it’s like playing the

piano….The difficult thing you need to start on right away. So the more difficult the

thing is the sooner you must start. To be used to that.” Priority is given to writing

activities because in her opinion it is a process which consists of several elements

integrated together. She is strong in her opposition to delaying writing, and is not really

concerned with what people say or think about delaying writing because she seems to

believe in her own teachings of exposing young learners to writing early. Writing is of

one of this teacher’s great concerns, she states “they can get used to writing now. I don't

think it's in their best interest… even if some people think that. I don't know it.”

The Discourse model espoused in Mrs. Paula’s interview identifies matching

letters with words and pictures, filling in the blanks with words and letters, missing

letters, labelling, making sentences as appropriately taught as writing in first grade.

Writing is integrated with the other skills. Writing is not isolated; rather it is an

important component of learning the English language in this private English school

system. The espoused model suggests that writing includes grammar, vocabulary,

punctuation, and imagination. The Discourse espoused by Mrs. Paula identifies writing

as a meaningful process which is multi–levelled.

Mrs. Paula’s espoused Discourse model is consistent with that espoused in the

private English school documents, the international primary curriculum (IPC).

Moreover, she alluded to that document, using identical wording, although she did not

explicitly quote or refer to the document.


Chapter 6

In the observation data, the Discourse model in–interaction identifies filling in

the blanks, matching, making sentences, labelling, re-ordering sentences, spelling and

writing complex sentences as appropriate to be taught as writing. Thus both Discourse

models espoused by Mrs. Paula and evident in–interaction are consistent with the

espoused model of the IPC document. There is a sense of constancy between Mrs.

Paula’s teachings beliefs and the requirements of the document. A similar pattern is

evident in the data pertaining to how writing should be taught to first graders.


In the English school, writing was taught by engaging the students in various

multi-levelled activities. For Mrs. Paula, young learners need to be made familiar with

composition with extended stretches of writing. Accordingly, she tackled their initial

uneasiness by familiarizing them with writing “to get really used to that thing. Feel

comfortable that’s why I started giving them a lot of written work because I want to feel

at ease when they see a written page.”

This classroom has gone beyond the skill of copying; writing is taught to Mrs.

Paula’s class through comprehension and phonetics. In her own words:

If it’s comprehension, so writing comes after comprehension (its) a story,… we

read the story, we talk about the story and then::::: the writing activity will come

and if its phonics:::: then it will be oral activity where we talk about phonic

sounds (the blends of) (whatever we are going to deal with, to get involved with

that.

Writing in Mrs. Paula’s class is purposeful and hence writing is taught through

comprehension as well as phonetics. In Excerpt 7, the teacher reviewed a story orally

with the students and asked them questions and elicited answers to re-tell a story. She

then asked them to write. The following Excerpt shows how she introduces the writing

activity to the class.


Chapter 6

Excerpt 7: Teacher explaining activity and introduces writing

Mrs. Paula: Listen! I have a nice worksheet for you. It is not difficult and it will be

fun as well. You have to write some sentences about our story the

princess ( ) in here. I want you to draw something related to the story,

you may want to draw the princess, the prince, or the castle or it’s up to

you. Yes? You must draw here and here you write the sentences. ( )

first of all you write the sentences and then draw. Think of the story, you

think of Anwar dressed as a prince. Over here, you write the sentences,

yes?

Class: Miss, where?

Mrs. Paula: Over here. Think about the story for example, this is a story about the

princess was…… or the prince.

Student: Opened the door.

Mrs. Paula: Yes, opened the door for the princess.

Faisal: Miss Sameera Rubber (student asks assistant teacher requesting rubber)

Mrs. Paula: Even you make mistakes don’t worry. I want you to try to write sentences

about the story, even if you make a mistake or two.

Faisal: Mrs. Paula, I hear the sound and write.

In this class the lesson starts with an oral discussion that refers to a previously

read story, and then a written exercise is given to the students. The story was initially

explained orally, and then read. It was later discussed again orally before a written

exercise was undertaken (see Appendix O). All four skills were practiced in the same

period after allocating part of the previous lesson for the oral introduction and reading

activity. It is worth noting that Mrs. Paula provides the students with explicit oral

instructions before proceeding with any written material. The teacher also reviewed the

exercise orally, providing examples to work from.

In this first grade English language classroom, the teacher always provided an

oral base before proceeding with the written activities. This is evident in Excerpt 7

which shows how writing was taught in class. Moreover, these students use their L1 for


Chapter 6

communication and discuss their activities in their L1. They practise their speaking skills

of using L2 when communicating with their teacher otherwise their communication is

mainly in L1.

The Discourse model espoused in Mrs. Paula’s interview data indicates that

writing is an integrated skill that is constructed through comprehension exercises where

writing skills are encouraged and reinforced after the oral skills are given in a

comprehension or phonic activity. The skill of writing is understood as a complex

activity that entails vocabulary, grammar, punctuation, and imagination and which is

properly taught through multi-levelled activities. Mrs. Paula views practising writing

through multi-levelled activities as the key to achieving the aim of writing. The

Discourse model espoused identifies with practice. However, to Mrs. Paula, writing is a

skill that needs to be taught repeatedly and because of its difficulty it should be

embedded in the classroom Discourses.

The Discourse model in–interaction observed on the part of Mrs. Paula on how

writing I appropriately taught is congruent with this teacher’s espoused model. It is a

model of learning through meaningful use rather than repetition. Practice occurs through

re-telling stories, comprehension activities, nursery rhymes, matching, spelling, making

sentences or writing sentences to complete a story or rhyme. These writing activities

were taught through explicit oral instruction after oral skills were drilled. Evidently, the

relationship enacted is a learner–centred based on individual learning. As with the

models of what is appropriately taught as writing, the espoused and in–interaction

models of how writing is appropriately taught are in conformity not only with each

other, but with the model espoused in the (IPC) documents. The IPC espoused model is

explicitly quoted in Mrs. Paula’s actions in classroom practices.


Chapter 6

Case Study 4: Indian system private school

Setting

This classroom is a 4x4m room. It has over 25 students all seated in double

desks. The desks are cramped together towards the back of the class where the students

do not have leg room to move around. The bare walls carry no educational posters or

banners on them. It is a very old setting where the blackboard is the medium used for

writing, unlike the other case study classrooms that have whiteboards. The desks are 30

cm in width with little space for working. Mrs. Amal was the teacher. In her class, the

students practise cursive writing as print is only practiced at kindergarten level. Most of

the writing is done either in the students’ copybooks or workbook. Writing is a daily

event occurring throughout the English language lesson and other subjects.


Chapter 6

Table 6.5


observations in the Indian school

Activities Mrs. Amal

Drawing X

Tracing X

Copying Letters X

Matching letters or pictures/letters X

Match letter/word X

Missing letters P (O)

Filling in the blanks P (I, O)

Labelling X

Making / writing sentences X

Re-order sentences X

Copying words / sentences P (I,O)

Spelling P (I,O)




Table 6.5 illustrates the writing activities that are practiced in class. The

observed writing activities in Table 6.5 are marked with an “O” and an “I” is used to

indicate the writing activities mentioned in the interview. In this classroom writing

activities revolved around filling in the blanks, copying words and sentences, new

vocabulary and spelling or dictation. The writing activities Mrs. Amal introduced are

associated with vocabulary, in her words “we::: started with small sentences, then we


Chapter 6

try to give the choice of the words and they are able to understand and give me answers

whether(it is) a dog or fox.” Thus Mrs. Amal suggested that writing involved writing

short sentences with missing words in them which the student filled out. She gave an

example of two words which a student might choose from to complete a sentence.

Hence, writing here means vocabulary and sentence structure. With respect to sentence

structure, Mrs. Amal stated: ‘we are using simple sentences, for example… “I am” so

with I he has to use AM, you can’t use IS … we are writing the ummmm this grammar

fact.’ In Mrs. Amal’s classroom grammar and vocabulary are taught through writing

simple sentences.

Writing in Mrs. Amal’s class is perceived as, in her own words “ we are writing

in full sentences when learning new words I give them phonetic sound.” Writing is

taught as full sentences of which new vocabulary are introduced and sound-letter

relationship (phonetics). Phonetic sounds were emphasized in teaching the writing skill;

some learners spelt out words by recognizing the phonetic sounds while others copied

from the blackboard. This is evident in Mrs. Amal’s interview data where she said

“when learning new words I give them phonetic sound and with the help of the phonetic

sound they are able to write the spelling.”

In theoretical terms, the Discourse model espoused in Mrs. Amal’s interview

identified grammar, vocabulary, word choice, spelling, phonetics and full sentences as

appropriate for teaching in first grade. This espoused model is similar to Mrs. Paula’s

with respect to the place of grammar, vocabulary, punctuation as appropriate for

teaching in first grade.

The Discourse model in–interaction observed in Mrs. Amal’s class focused on

words, and sentences through activities which included filling in the blanks, spelling,

dictation, word choice with simple grammatical sentences, and copying short sentences.

Vocabulary and sentence structure were again the object of teaching.

Mrs. Amal’s espoused and in–interaction Discourse models differed from those

of the other private school teacher, the English school teacher Mrs. Paula, and from the

two public school teachers, Mrs. Fay and Mrs. Rose. Mrs. Amal presents a case where

the unit of writing includes the sentences but the students are not expected to produce

the full sentence themselves.


Chapter 6


Writing is taught through oral interaction with the teacher in the form of

questions and answers. In looking at Table 6.5, it is evident that the activities related to

writing are limited. To elaborate, students are asked simple questions about a topic, and

then the teacher composes a written response. This response is then written on the board.

The students are then drilled on the sentence orally before being directed to copy it.

Directions for punctuation and spatial arrangements are provided to assist with

copying. Writing in Mrs. Amal’s classroom is more focused on handwriting and the

mechanics of writing such as punctuation, capitalization, and spatial arrangements (e.g.

margin size). In Mrs. Amal’s classroom writing takes the form of calligraphy,

specifically in relation to cursive writing. Mrs. Amal stated that the curriculum activities

“are calligraphy writing.” She highlights handwriting, describing it in detail:

We are writing in full sentences so they copy down but they KNOW that we start

with capital … and with the help of the phonetic sound they are able to write the

spelling.” Students write sentences by copying and spelling. This can again be

understood from her daily teaching routines. “Writing skill, I teach them first….

how they write the student are writing, draw wide and very haphazard. They

have no control over the fingers, their minds flowing like no and so the fingers

are flowing out. So I tell him this is the line, you have to TOUCH the line and

basically give an example I write WIDELY , I go out of the margin. I don't touch

the line and I explain, is this good or bad? And then they will see with their eyes

and THEY will start understanding…. So what am doing is EXACTLY YOU

COPY IT PROPERLY ( ) you will see that you will be happy that your book

is neat and once they do it they will know the difference…. and once they are

alert what happens when they write on the line they are going out a little down,

then they erase and touch again the line.”

Like the public school teachers, Mrs. Amal directs handwriting practice very

closely. Copying routines are used, but they require the students to think about what

counts as good examples of handwriting. In short, Mrs. Amal views writing as a

developmental skill activity which is achieved through copying, and handwriting and


Chapter 6

writing is identified though spatial arrangements, fine–motor control, and eye–hand

coordination.

Mrs. Amal integrates the teaching of writing with the teaching of other

macroskills. She believed that oral skills are the base for introducing writing. As she said

Because the first lesson and the second lesson basically we teach them the simple

conversation. First I give a live example of something in the class …. Then we

are talking about something and go in details … we can convert and write about

that thing in five sentences differently.

She encourages writing by initially starting a conversation with the learners

about a topic they are familiar with and getting them to write about it. In the teaching of

writing, oral practice of the content comes first. However, it comes first within the space

of a lesson or two, not a year as espoused in the public school curriculum.

This first grade classroom in the Indian school bases its teaching of writing on

dictation and copying of materials; for example, in Excerpt 8, the teacher provides much

oral revision and drilling on the concepts of the senses and then provides the students

with the vocabulary to be dictated. The lesson is spent writing the words and drilling the

words. As the words are written, they are spelt out orally by the students in chorus.

Excerpt 8: A sample of the Indian classroom interaction

Mrs. Amal: Now take out your notebooks. All of you! And write on the top

Wednesday and read. Write 30.4.06 [date] and write read. Faster! Now

open your EV.S [environmental science] notebook and write the date.

Write senses. Fadel, where is your notebook?

Fadel: I have ( )

Mrs. Amal: Student, who has two pencils?

Rana: Me, me!

Ahmad: Me!


Chapter 6

Mrs. Amal: {khalas4 } (Rana gives Fadel pencil) alright all of you WORDS TO

LEARN

Class: WORDS TO LEARN

Mrs. Amal: LEARN. I will give you the dictation words, go home and learn the

difficult words. And tomorrow I will start the question/answers. OK?

Class: OK! WORDS TO LEARN

Mrs. Amal: One, SMELL S-M-E-L-L-, SMELL write two times OK? S-M-E-L-L.

When you write just repeat the spelling. Come on Hiba, SMELL S-M-E-

L-L, finished?

Class: Yes, finished.

In the above Excerpt, the teacher is writing the words on the board and spelling

the words orally out loud for the students to copy and learn for later dictation.

Similarly, in reading comprehension activities, writing is taught by copying the

questions of the passage and then answering the questions by copying the answers from

the blackboard. The process of copying for these students occupies considerable time;

more than 30 minutes of the lesson is spend on copying words and sentences. This can

be illustrated in Excerpt 9 where Mrs. Amal taught a comprehension activity.

4 The Arabic word has multiple meanings. It is used in classrooms to mean stop: “Enough !”


Chapter 6

Excerpt 9: Copying questions and answers

Mrs. Amal: Student copy from the board questions and answers. (Teacher writes

WHAT IS THERE IN THE CAGE? THERE IS A PARROT IN THE

CAGE.)

Class: (repeat orally) WHAT IS THERE IN THE CAGE? THERE IS A

PARROT IN THE CAGE.

Rana: Teacher wait for me (copying from the blackboard the questions and

answers).

In this short Excerpt above, the students kept following the same routine of

copying from the board while drilling orally by reading the questions and answers with

the teacher (see Appendix P). Moreover, writing was taught as composition. In this

example the teacher wrote the title “My Pet.” She initiated the lesson by reminding the

students of how to write clearly: “control your finger, the line is clear. Our mind

controls our finger.” This is a reminder to the students of what they have been directed

to do in handwriting lessons. The focus is on pre–writing skills. In the writing

component of the lesson, the teacher elicited ideas from the children but produced the

composition of 4-5 sentences herself. She encouraged the students to copy them. In other

words, copying was an important part of the lesson. The students observed the teacher

composing (see Appendix Q).

The importance of copying as the way of teaching writing was evidenced when

Mrs. Amal dictated vocabulary items and asked her students to write the words. She

required the students to copy: “two times.” (see Excerpt 10).


Chapter 6

Excerpt 10: Dictation in the classroom

Bader: Teacher, I don't have place (runs out of place on the page)

Mrs. Amal: Write on another page. DRUM, here, these 10 difficult words. Write

homework (makes the initials HW on board). Write 2 times. How many times do you

write?

Class: Two times

Bader: Two ::::: times

Mrs. Amal: And learn all the words.

The Discourse model of how it is appropriate to teach writing in the classroom

espoused by Mrs. Amal in her interview identified copying words, sentences, and

practising questions and answers, pre–writing skills, and penmanship. This espoused

Discourse model entailed practice and copying drills in the course of comprehension and

composition activities. An interesting point that is espoused by Mrs. Amal is that writing

activities are taught immediately after oral drills. Mrs. Amal’s espoused model thus

differs from Mrs. Paula’s as it relies on copying and drilling familiar activities and it

involves pre–writing practice. The Discourse model in–interaction evident in Mrs.

Amal’s observation data included copying questions and answers, and practising pre–

writing skills as appropriate methods for the teaching of writing. Relationships in Mrs.

Amal’s classroom were teacher–centred, Mrs. Amal takes a primary role in the learning–

teaching process. The Discourse models espoused and evident in–interaction in the

private schools vary. Mrs. Amal’s models are distinctly different from Mrs. Paula’s

Discourse models which conform more to the assumption of integrating the macroskills

through meaningful communicative activities. Nevertheless, it is worth noting that both

private school teachers start with oral skills and shift to the writing skills.

The teacher’s espoused and in–interaction models of what and how writing is

taught seemed to be delayed in relation to the learners ESL context. In this case study,

little is taught as writing in terms of meaningful learning. Writing is justified as a skill–

and–drill in practice.


Chapter 6

Summary

In this chapter analyses were presented of practices of writing instruction,

observed in the four case study classrooms, and in the teachers’ talk of what writing is

taught, and how writing is taught appropriately. It was found that the four teachers all

considered writing as an important skill that should be introduced earlier than mandated

by the FWE curriculum. Although writing was found to be considered appropriate for

teaching in first grade, the range of practices considered appropriate to teach writing

varied amongst the four cases.

In the public school case studies 1 and 2, it was found that both teachers diverged

in their beliefs and position on the delay of writing from that mandated by Ministry

policy. In the boys’ school, the teacher considered writing as pre–writing, copying and

writing words as appropriate to first graders. This was evident in the classroom

observations. In contrast, in the girls’ school, the teacher considered pre–writing and

copying and writing letters as appropriate for first graders, but in practice writing was

given minimal treatment in the classroom. It was thus evident in the observation that in

practice, writing was inappropriate. However, both teachers’ talk and practices indicated

that writing is considered as a skill, and directionality was given primary consideration.

The two public school teachers considered the teaching through skill–drill

activities as appropriate. Their teaching method was a teacher–centred approach,

although the policy document valorises a child–centred approach. The teaching methods

of both teachers were consistent with the policy document which mandates

communication through macroskills practice. It was the macroskills practice, rather than

the communication, that was emphasised.

In the private English and Indian schools, writing is taught as an integrated

skill—the four macroskills are all taught simultaneously. However there was a

discrepancy between the practices observed and those described in the talk of the

teachers as to what writing was considered appropriate to teach and how it was to be

taught. Writing was taught through oral drills in both private case study schools. In the

English private school, writing is understood as a meaningful complex process that

includes grammar, vocabulary, punctuation, and imagination. It is construed in the

teacher’s teachings through meaningful exercises building comprehension, composition,


Chapter 6

and phonetic knowledge. Writing was taught as meaningful practice through various

writing activities that are multi–levelled and not just merely repetitive activities copied

by every student in the class at the one time. This classroom practice entails a child–

centred approach where the practices are directed to the student’s level.

Despite the Indian private school teacher considering writing as grammar,

vocabulary, punctuation, and full sentences, what she taught as writing was vocabulary

and sentence structure. This teacher’s talk and practice differed from that of the other

three case study teachers in that, although she considered writing as appropriate, she did

not expect students to compose sentences. Rather, this teacher considered copying and

skill–drill practices as appropriate teaching. Writing was taught as a practice drill and

not as a meaningful skill. This teacher, like the two public school teachers, used the

teacher–centred approach in her classroom.

Discussion

These findings of this study can be related to the literature in Chapter 2 on what

should be taught to young learners, and how it should be taught. The findings relate to

three points from the literature:

1. Pedagogical assumptions of macroskills approaches.

2. The role meaningful communication.

3. The imposition of child–centred approach and other Western assumptions.

Data from the four case studies showed that writing might be considered

appropriate as content for first graders. Although long–established cognitive

developmental views have strongly opposed the introduction of the written skills in

young EFL learners context (Frohlich-Ward, 1984, 1992; McKay, 2006), it is apparent

from this research that teachers view the delay of writing as out of place, and students

demonstrated the ability to write beyond existing requirements of public school policy.

The position of the teachers was similar to that of Paul (2003) who believed that writing

skill should be introduced early in an EFL context: “An ESL learner may be able to pick

up a lot of English naturally without learning to read or write, but it is difficult for an

Asian EFL learner to pick up spoken English in this way” (p. 83).

This study draws a similar conclusion in an Arabic speaking society. Paul makes

an argument by indicating that children have priorities in using language skills, and that


Chapter 6

the shift to emphasis on the oral skills was a consequence of criticism of the traditional–

grammar method of the secondary school. It is important to note here that these

assumptions are not based on empirical findings in young EFL research. He argued in

opposition to the delay of writing, that learning a language through a comprehensive

method which focuses not only on oral skills but also on written skills, gives the learner

a wider range of opportunities in processing the knowledge. As was shown in the

analyses presented in this chapter, the Kuwaiti teachers held similar positions.

This study’s findings are consistent also with the position of Cook (2005) who

promoted the introduction of writing skill by reasoning that the primacy of oral skills is

founded on first language linguistic theories which are not appropriate to second

language learning and teaching preferences of children literate in a first language. Cook

(2005) further challenged the traditional views that neglected the knowledge of L1 in

foreign language classrooms. He argued that knowing the writing system in L1 changes

student’s thinking in learning. Contrary to the assumptions of more than a century then,

writing and students’ L1 writing knowledge and skills need not be excluded from the

young learner foreign language classroom. The findings of this study add support to

these claims.

The second finding of this research concerns the role of meaningful

communication in English instruction. What this study has shown is that the two public

school and the Indian private school teachers all define writing as practice. Specifically,

practice through skill–drill where the focus is on fine–motor pre–writing skills, and

writing and copying drills. These writing routines lacked the meaningful focus of writing

instruction conducted by the English school teacher who considered writing to be

meaningful practice.

In the case of the two public schools, the teachers focused on writing drills that

ranged from tracing, letter formations and copying (girls’ public school) to writing and

copying words (boys’ public school), with both teachers focusing on directionality. It

will be recalled that the Ministry’s document described the aim of teaching English in

first grade as being “to enable them to produce correct, accurate, and meaningful

utterances…[the focus is] on the listening and speaking skills…[where] writing


Chapter 6

preparation focuses on left–to–right hand movement activities” (Ministry of Education,

n.d.-b, p. 20).

The focus on pre–writing it has been argued, is unnecessary. In a previous study

conducted in Kuwait to evaluate the FWE curriculum, Felberbauer et al. found in 2005

that directionality was over-taught. Similarly, the children in the two public school case

studies, because of their experience with the Arabic writing system, did not need much

left–to–right pre–writing skills.

Moreover, meaningful production of language in real communicative activities

was not evident in the activities described in the teachers’ professional Conversations or

observed in their classroom practices. The notion of meaningless practice, which is so

ubiquitous that it has been described as the “mainstream EFL style” (Cook, 2001), has

been critiqued (Holliday, 1994; Klapper, 2003) with particular criticism directed at weak

CLT, the version of CLT mandated in the public school documents, for not providing

sufficiently real and meaningful practice of language functions.

The third finding of this study shows a teacher–centred approach to writing was

viewed as appropriate and enacted in the classrooms. The public and Indian school

teachers’ approach to teaching writing was traditional. Although the public school

document stated that English education in Kuwait is “learner–centred curriculum and

focuses on effective interactive communication” (p. 20), learner–centredness was not

apparent in the teachers’ beliefs or classroom practices. The appropriateness of

progressive educational thinking has been questioned in the literature. Given that

Western approaches were affected by L1 developmental theories, that value of child–

centred approaches, as enshrined in the new curriculum, has been debated by researchers

like Holliday (1994) and Pennycook (1994, 2000). These researchers have argued that

the export of Western pedagogies, in particular the communicative approach, to non–

Western settings is inappropriate. Paul (2003), Holliday (1994) and Pennycook (1994)

all question the efficacy of a progressive approach in a traditional context. To conclude,

the findings of this chapter relate to the widely critiqued and challenged Western

assumptions of the appropriateness of language learning approaches in non–Western

societies.


Chapter 6

Further insight into some of these and other issues in the literature relevant to

young language learners emerged from the student and parent data. It is to the analysis

of that data that the next chapter turns.


Chapter 7

Chapter 7: Parents, Students and the Place of Writing

This chapter seeks to analyse the parents’ and students’ talk about writing and

pre-writing education in first grade public and private English classes and the students’

demonstrations of writing, primarily from the interview. As was established in Chapter

1, English was introduced in the primary stage of education after the Iraqi invasion of

1990-1991, using the U.A.E book (Al-Sana`a, 1993) as the textbook. This book entailed

integrated studies of the four macroskills of reading, writing, speaking and listening

from the outset of the first grade. It was influenced by a communicative approach

focused on dialogue patterns and language functions (Al-Sana`a, 1993). However, it was

this book that was replaced in 2002 by the controversial FWE curriculum that shifted

studies of writing to the second grade, focusing instead on oral communication in first

grade. It was this new curriculum which sparked a heated debate among parents in

primary public schools (Jaffer, 2003) and created a dilemma influencing parents’

decisions to send their children to a private system school (Al-Hemadan, 2005).

In Chapter 6, the practices on writing instruction and teachers’ talk about the

place of writing in English instruction in first grade public and private case study

classrooms were analysed. It was shown that while all the teachers believed writing was

appropriate for first graders, there were differences in what was taught and how it was

taught. Macroskills were taught in isolation in the public schools but not in the private

schools. The public school teachers articulated strong beliefs about the positive effect of

writing instruction on students’ capacity to learn and to remember words currently

taught as well as oral language only. Drilling was used extensively in the public schools

and the Indian private school. Whereas a range of meaningful activities were used in the

English private school, there were thus differences in how it was considered appropriate

to teach first graders writing.

The purpose of this chapter is to interpret the opinion of students from the

classrooms and their parents on the place and significance of writing instruction in first

grade. Accordingly, the research questions addressed to data the in this chapter are as

follows:


Chapter 7

What do first grade parents and students view as the place of writing in English

instruction for first graders after the reform of writing requirements in the public

school curriculum in 2002?

Why do first grade parents and students view writing in English instruction in

first grade curriculum as important?

To address for these two questions, I analysed two of the data sets: i) audio-

recorded interviews with students from the case study classrooms; and ii) audio-recorded

interviews with the students’ parents. The student interview data includes

demonstrations of writing elicited by the researcher. Written artefacts produced by the

students during these interviews are included in the data sets analysed here. Inclusion of

these artefacts raised ethical challenges relating to confidentiality and anonymity

because the students frequently wrote their names on their work. To resolve these, I have

deleted the student’s names or in descriptive analyses changed the initials of their names

where appropriate.

As specified in Chapter 4, six students from each of the four case study

classrooms were interviewed as well as 24 parents of the participating students. The

purposes of these interviews were to identify participants’ perception of what is or

should be taught as writing, and why it is or should be taught.

Generally, the interview data indicated that the parents believed that writing

instruction should not be delayed and should be taught in first grade as English is an

important language. The interview data also suggested that the students all liked the

writing activities experienced in their classrooms. Moreover, it was found that the

students were able to write or form letter shapes with some being able to describe letter

shapes using mnemonics (e.g. the letter “v” with the numeral 7 in Arabic). To some of

the students, the difference of directionality did not seem to present a problem.

The findings were interpreted using three building tasks found to be relevant to

this chapter—activities, significance and politics—of what is appropriate as writing in

first grade. These tasks are explained by using the tools of inquiry derived from the

Discourse analysis approach of Gee (2005): Discourse, intertextuality, and

Conversation. Discourse models are used in this chapter to analyse the data on the place

of English writing instruction in first grade produced in interviews with the parents and


Chapter 7

students. These models reveal the different positions held by the parents and students

Discourses. To the parents, Conversations about what is taught or should be taught as

writing and why, are important as these Conversations are part of the public debate that

began with the implementation of the 2002 new curriculum in which the absence of the

writing instruction raised contestation within the public. Parents like teachers it will be

recalled from Chapter 1, were party to vigorous public debate over the delay of writing

from the first grade curriculum when the UAE curriculum was replaced by the FWE

curriculum. In general, it was found in Chapter 6 that all four teachers explicitly

reprimanded similar Discourses about the delay of writing in first grade public and

private classrooms. There was a general feeling that these young learners are capable of

writing. The writing of English taught or learnt in first grade public or private

classrooms theme re-emerges among the public school parent’s Discourses. These

parents’ feeling of discontent was re-merged drawing chiefly on the absence of teaching

the written skills.

For purposes of confidentiality all the names used are pseudonyms. It should be

noted that the word, Um, meaning “mother of” or Bo, “father of,” is used to relate to the

student’s parent. This is a well-established form of address in Arab culture; for example,

if the student is called “Abraham,” the parent is called “Um Ismail” or “Bo Ismail.”

In presenting this study’s findings about parents’ and students’ positions on the

place of writing in English instruction, this chapter has three sections. In the first section,

findings arising from the interviews with the students’ from the four case study

classrooms are presented. In the second section, findings from the parents’ interviews

are presented. In section three, the focus turns to why the parents and students believe

English instruction is important. The chapter draws to a close with discussion of the

findings.

Students’ Reflections - What Is or Should Be Taught as Writing?

Case Study 1: The boys’ public school students

In the students’ interviews, the word “write” forms re-occurring patterns; the

students refer to the skill of writing several times, stressing their engagement in the skill

and their desire to practice the skill. This can be glimpsed in Abdulla’s reply to a

question about the other activities he would like to do in class. He referred to writing:


Chapter 7

“to play any game with the teacher, and to write. To play a little bit and write. I want to

write about Kuwait but to write it in English.” Hassan and Adel were enthusiastic about

writing and wanted to write more. This is evident in their interviews. Further, Hassan

indicated that writing is important when he said it enabled him: “to write … write my

homework.” This comment is particularly interesting because these students are not

assigned any homework in English lessons. It seems that Hassan held a model of what a

student does that diverges somewhat from the actuality of his experience as a public

school first grader.

The boys’ public school students demonstrated writing capabilities beyond what

was mandated as appropriate for first graders in the public school curriculum. The case

of Hassan provides a dramatic example. Hassan is a six year old boy learning English in

Mrs. Rose’s class. Hassan highlighted the element of writing when talking about his

enjoyment of the English language. At the age of four, his parents registered him in a

public state kindergarten where for two years, English was not used at all except in the

teaching of the numbers from one to five. He only knew Arabic. Nonetheless, writing

featured in much of his learning during the English language lesson. When asked about

the activities he enjoyed doing in class, Hassan said “writing.” This is evident, in

Hassan’s behaviour in class. In one incident, I was seated near Hassan who was about

2m away when the teacher started the lesson with a game of musical chairs. Instead of

music, students counted numbers out loud. Hassan played along and finally was the one

to hold the last chair. “God bless you” in English was the outburst from the student and

the teacher as a reward for winning. To reward Hassan further, the teacher wrote the

letter “H” on Hassan’s hand. This was the highlight of Hassan’s morning.

Moments later, Hassan approached me and showed me what the teacher wrote

and told me to “read it.” I responded “it’s the letter H”. I asked, out of curiosity, if he

knew how to write his name and he nodded (upwards with his head) meaning “no” (in

Kuwait a gesture used to indicate negation). Furthermore, I asked him if I could write his

name and he nodded (with a downward head movement) with a smile. I wrote his name

and in a moment of intense joy, he used a red marker to copy his name twice on his

hand. He then extended his arms straight in front of him and kept gazing at his hand. I

had only two more sessions before leaving and on the final session he wrote his name


Chapter 7

nicely on the top of a test sheet and circled it with an irregular cloud-shaped sketch.

Hassan was so fond of his writing that once the test was over, he came up to me and said

in Arabic “I wrote my name in Arabic and English on the paper.” After showing me the

paper, he handed it in to the teacher. To Hassan it seems that writing his name was a

highly charged emotional experience.

During the observations, Hassan was noticed to scribble and write continuously

on his desk. He was constantly using his fingers to draw shapes on his desk or was

scribbling shapes with his pencil; for example, while Mrs. Rose was introducing the

letters M, N and W for the first time and wrote them on the board for the students to see,

Hassan kept copying the shape of the letter M on his desk using his finger. As Mrs. Rose

taught each letter, Hassan continued to copy it several times on his desk using his finger.

Although Mrs. Rose described Hassan as a less proficient student, he demonstrated

potential in learning to write independently. The incident where he learnt to write one

very important word – his name – is a case in point.

More confined in a world of Arabic was Rada who, according to his mother, had

attended a public kindergarten and had been drilled on simple English questions like

“What’s your name?” And “How old are you?” But beyond that, he had not been

exposed to the learning of English until first grade. Rada was among the six students in

Mrs. Rose’s class who were observed. He was observed learning to write the numerals

1-6. Rada attempted to write the numeral six, by initially starting to trace the numeral six

from the top then halfway through turning clockwise to the right to make the circle that

makes up for the numeral six. After a couple of tries, he attempted to write the numeral

six by starting from the top and curving the line as it goes down, turning anticlockwise

to the left to close a circle by connecting it to the curved line, forming the numeral six.

In his second try, Rada attempted to write the numeral six correctly in English without

help and discovered the correct path for tracing down the number six. In Rada’s case,

then there seemed to be a trial–and–error process at work as he tried to find proper

numeral formation technique. Rada showed understanding of directionality to the

position of the numeral six. Furthermore, to exemplify directionality, during Mrs. Rose’s

listen–and–draw activity, the student had to open their books to do the exercise of

drawing the number of items heard. Hassan who is new to English opened the activity


Chapter 7

book from left–to–right while Adel who is engaged in the English language on a daily

basis as a consequence of his enrolment in an after–school English institution, opened

his English book from right–to–left.

Figure 7.1

Abdulla’s writing of letters and words

Abdulla was aware of the writing system in the English language and showed the

potential to write, although the school offered the most minimal experience in writing as

a skill. Figure 7.1 shows Abdulla’s work, he was able to write some letters and words

dictated to him. He was able to write the “A” in both upper and lower case. He struggled

with the directionality of the upper case of the letter “B” and was not able to write the

upper case of the letter “D” but wrote the lower case form “d” correctly. Abdulla also

demonstrated the ability to write the words “cat” and “bag.”


Chapter 7

Excerpt 1: Kuwait is my country Researcher: Would you like to write something?

Abdulla: I know how to write 'KUWAIT IS MY COUNTRY'. (writes the

sentence)

Researcher: OK, write it.

Abdulla: Is there an –a- after it?

Researcher: It sounds like –u - like UMBERALLA then w like WATER just write

what you know. No one will grade this, there is no mark for it.

Abdulla: We didn't take it yet.

Researcher: w is like the letter M but written upside down.

Abdulla: like this?

Researcher: Very good. K-U-W-A-I-T good then what was your sentence?

Abdulla: “Kuwait is my country.”

Researcher: OK, good.

To further indicate his writing ability and his readiness to write, he

spontaneously suggested writing the sentence “Kuwait is my country.” It is not clear

from the data how or where Abdulla had learnt to write this sentence. Abdulla managed

to write the sentence with some assistance. (see Excerpt 1).


Chapter 7

Excerpt 2: Writing “I like Eggs”

Researcher: Can you write I-LIKE-. Try and spell it out. I and then LIKE

Dawood: L-I-A (writes the letters)

Researcher: There is a K

Dawood: -K-

Researcher: Then E - . So I- LIKE. What do you like?

Dawood: Eggs

Researcher: What is it in English?

Dawood: I forgot.

Researcher: If I tell you, can you write it?

Dawood: Yes.

Researcher: Eggs e- then (writes the letter a). That is the letter A , we want -a-

No we want the sound - G- like BAG-. Yes , that's good E-G-G-S. Good

because it's plural. Can you write your name?

Figure 7.2

A representation of Dawood’s writing


Chapter 7

Figure 7.3

Adel’s writing and the reverse letters “b” and “d”

Dawood, another of the case study students, was exposed to English for one year

at kindergarten level (KG 1) and then transferred to a public kindergarten. Dawood was

able to write the letters in both upper and lower case form. He encountered a problem in

writing the word “like,” a word which he spelt ending with the letter “a,” “lika.” This

vowel confusion might be understood in light of the fact that while English has 22

vowels, Arabic has only eight (Smith, 2001). However, once his attention was drawn to

the silent “e” he re-wrote the word ending with the letter “e.” This is illustrated in Figure

7.2. He then continued on writing his own words, ending the sentence with “eggs.”

Excerpt 2 illustrates the talk that went on between the researcher and the student.

Adel encountered a different problem of reverse letters and wrote a lower case

“d” for a lower case “b” (see Figure 7.3). He was also able to write the word “gum”

which he spelt correctly. It is not known where or how he learnt to write this word.

In contrast to the requirements of the curriculum that stipulate the teaching of

pre-writing activities where the focus is on eye-hand coordination, visual discrimination,


Chapter 7

left–to–right directionality, and fine–motor skill control, these students demonstrated

writing skills even though they have not been formally exposed to the writing skill for

very long. In the student’s interviews, the skill of writing was mentioned several times,

with students like Hassan, Abdulla, Adel and Dawood valuing writing and showing

capacity in writing spontaneously, and setting up experiences in which they learnt to

write. The Discourse model espoused by the students identified the writing of words and

sentences and also letter formation, directionality, numerals as what it is appropriate for

first graders to write. It is notable that this Discourse model includes as appropriate

content, a wider range of writing activities than those taught in their school.

Case Study 2: The girls’ public school students

These six students enjoy learning English for different reasons. The six students

indicated that their like of learning the English language is associated with the thought

of writing. These six first graders all indicated that writing is an activity they would

enjoy doing more of in class. In three different interviews, the theme of writing appears.

Abeer relates liking English: “So I can write.” However, she did not give a purposeful

reason for learning then to write. To Amani, writing was: “learning the alphabet

letters.” This feeling was also expressed by Dalal: “I like to draw, and co-colour and

write… true and false [an activity requiring students to select from a list of options about

the letter called out by the teacher] I”d like to write in English.” In another incident

Samar expressed that she would like to write her name in English: “write our names in

English, write the name of CAT and DOG,” thereby giving a precise statement of what

would be appropriate. For those who experienced lessons directed towards listening

skills, like Anwar, writing is an activity she wanted to do more of. She emphasised: “I

want to write and read more.” In addition, Rasha was conscious of the fact that writing

is excluded from the English curriculum as indicated in Excerpt 3.


Chapter 7

Excerpt 3: Write more

Researcher: Ok, what would you like to do more of in the classroom?

Rasha: ((pause))

Researcher: What activities that you don't do much of in the English lesson and you

would like to do more of with the teacher?

Rasha: She doesn't let us play and write a lot.

Researcher: Do you like that you don't write much or not?

Rasha: No, I don't like it.

This first grader realizes that writing is not given much significance in class and

showed her dislike of not practicing the skill of writing during the English lesson.

Figure 7.4

Amani writes “cet” for the word “cat”


Chapter 7

Figure 7.5

Anwar writes the words “cat” and “bag”

Figure 7.6

Samar’s inventive spelling of the words “I like” is “i lic”


Chapter 7

These first graders demonstrated different writing abilities although they have

different prior English language experiences; for example, Abeer who attended

Kindergarten stage one and two in a bilingual school was not able to write any of the

letters dictated to her except for the upper case of the letter “A.” While Amani with a

similar background to Abeer, was able to write the letters and attempted to write the

words “cat” which she spelled as “cet” and the word “bag.” She also wrote the letters

“b” and “d” in upper case and lower case form correctly (See Figure 7.4). However, in

attempting to write her name, she wrote the letter “r” as “ “ facing the left side.

Moreover, in Amani”s case, problems of directionality were evident as she started to

write from right–to–left as in Arabic.

Anwar who experienced the English language for the first time in first grade

demonstrated a broader range of skills than some of the other students who had had

longer experience of formal writing instruction. This first grader had not encountered

writing previously, but associated sounds and symbols, and was able to write the letters

“A a” in upper and lower case form of the letters, “b, f, o, s.” Anwar also attempted to

write the words “cat” and “bag” when I spelt out the words to her phonetically (i.e. b – a

– g). At the attempt to write her name which she is unfamiliar with, Anwar succeeded by

spelling it out. However, the letter “n” was not formed properly (started from the top)

and she represented the sound of the letter “l” for the letter “m.”

For Samar, a six year old who had not been exposed to English before first grade,

directionality was not a challenge. She displayed her knowledge of directionality by

flipping the pages from left–to–right in the English lesson. In writing, Samar was able to

comprehend the starting position of printing letters and numerals. When writing the

letter “F” for the very first time, Samar wrote it from left–to–right starting from the top.

However, in writing the words “I” and “like,” Samar needed guidance to associate

familiar words with sounds. Samar seemed to invent her own spelling to write the word

“like.” For a copy of Samar’s work, see Figure 7.6 which was produced as Samar

associated the sound of the letter “c” with the letter “k” in the word “like.”

Samar, a student with no reinforcement of English language learning at home,

attempted to write the numerals with Rasha who had learnt English for two years before

first grade. In the event of writing the numeral 12, Samar was able to demonstrate a


Chapter 7

good command of directionality by producing a similar outcome to Rasha’s. When

writing the numeral 12, she was able to demonstrate three concepts, that (1) the numeral

is written from left to right, (2) the numeral one is written before the numeral two, and

(3) the starting point of writing the two numerals. In (1) the two girls showed awareness

of English print and the directionality of the written form which is opposite to the Arabic

language as they wrote starting from the left. In (2) they realized that in English the

numeral representing the tens unit is uttered orally before the numeral representing the

ones unit (in Arabic the ones unit is uttered before the tens unit). Hence, the girls were

able to accurately write the tens before the ones. And (3) they showed the ability to

follow a good handwriting technique of forming the shape of numbers starting from the

top.

Dalal, a six-year-old who has not been exposed to the English language before

first grade, also managed to learn English by associating the English language with the

Arabic language. During one of the lessons, the letters “u” and “v” were drilled orally

and visually. Attempting to trace the shape of the letter “v” in the air, Dalal started to

trace the movement of her finger in the air saying “down, up” and then shouted it’s “like

seven in Arabic” [the numeral seven in Arabic is written “ “, similar to the English

letter “v”]. Dalal used her knowledge in L1 to build new knowledge in L2.

The Discourse model of the case study students espoused in the interview data

enacted letter and word writing, pre-writing skills (e.g. colour and draw), directionality,

numerals, sound–symbol relationship and the skill of writing in general as what is

appropriate to be learned as writing. Like the boys’ public school case study, the public

school girls demonstrated writing skills to which they had not been formally exposed at

school or to which they had only been exposed briefly at school. Moreover, some

students who had not been exposed to writing instruction before school demonstrated a

wider range of writing skills than their peers who had experienced prior writing

instruction. This is cause for consideration about what writing is deemed appropriate for

first graders not only in the public school curriculum, but also in the discourse models

espoused by the public school teacher participants of the study and evident in–

interaction in their classrooms.


Chapter 7

Case Study 3: The English private school

The first graders in this school have all been exposed to the English language

from nursery to their first year in primary school. These students are all in the same age

group, and have attended their pre-primary schooling in a bilingual school. These

students do not use English at home, and the main language used at home is Arabic

except for Emad who is exposed to English at home as well.

These six first graders enjoy learning English; they like the language and

demonstrated a range of writing activities. To Faisal, Ismail, and Essa, writing is an

enjoyable activity that they would want to do extra work in. Faisal wants to do more

English: “Umm I would want to write to finish all the activity books. I am now working

on my last book in English.” To understand what is meant by this statement, it is

necessary to know that the books to which Faisal refers consist entirely of written

activities, for example answering reading comprehension questions as was noted in

Chapter 6. More detail on this is provided later in this chapter. To Ismail literacy is

crucial as he pointed out that “I like to read and write.” To this first grader, literacy

(reading and writing) is part of his learning. Similarly, to Essa, writing is an important

activity that he enjoys doing and likes to do in class: “it’s nice, we finish a different book

every time.” The books to which he is referring are the same as those mentioned by

Faisal, activity books consisting entirely of written activities.

In doing class activities, Amar stated that what he learns in class is the letters, in

his own words, “ummm, to learn all the letters.” Amar is able to write words and

sentences. In the next Excerpt, Amar suggested that he write the following sentences.

Excerpt 4: Amar writes sentences

Researcher: It’s OK, can you write something?

Amar: Umm I CATCH A BLUE BIRD.

Researcher: Do you want to write anything else?

Amar: I HAVE A DOG


Chapter 7

Figure 7.7

Faisal writing sentences although Arabic is the language used at home

Figure 7.8

Ismail’s written skills exceed his oral skills


Chapter 7

Figure 7.9

Essa building his writing on sound system

These students demonstrated capability in writing when asked to write during the

interview. Their writing is illustrated in Figures 7.7, 7.8, and 7.9. In Faisal’s example, he

was able to write all the letters and wrote sentences of his own initiative. Faisal was able

to construct the last three sentences on his own “I can learn my English book, I like my

friends, and this is a wild lion” (see Figure 7.7). The sentences are spelt well although

English is not a language used at home. Faisal writes by spelling words phonetically.

Ismail also displayed a similar ability in constructing sentences. He was able to

form two sentences on his own “I have a dog sleeping” and “a man in a car.” Ismail was

able to spell the words and space them out correctly and use the appropriate punctuation

(see Figure 7.8). Yet Essa, also a six year old exposed to English since KG1, started by

writing the letter “E e” for the letter “A.” Essa was unfamiliar with the directionality of

the letter “D” (see Figure 7.9). He was not able to write the lower and upper case of the

letter “B, b” in isolation. However he wrote four sentences on his own and succeeded in

writing the words as he pronounced them depending on his own pronunciation and wrote

the lower case for the letter “b” in “booy.”


Chapter 7

Figure 7.10

Emad and upper case “D” after three years of exposure to the English language

In the case of Emad, he was not only unfamiliar with the upper case of the

reverse letter “D” but also was not able to write the lower case form of the letter “d.”

Figure 7.10 illustrates his how the letter “D” was written and also shows his ability in

forming simple sentences in comparison to his classmates. Moreover, in attempting to

write the word “Mim” meaning “name,” Emad wrote the “m” sound for “n.”

The English private school students, who experience an integrated curriculum

and a wide range of writing activities including paragraph writing as analysed in Chapter

6, were all able to write sentences during their interviews, often inventing spelling.

These performances were consistent with the Discourse model of what is appropriately

taught to first graders espoused by their teacher, observed in practice in her classroom

(Table 6.4), and espoused by the curriculum documents of that school system. This is

cause for reflection in relation to the discourse model inherent in the public school

curriculum, a model challenged explicitly by the public school teachers both in their

talk, and to varying degrees, in their classroom practice. Interestingly, one of the English


Chapter 7

private school students demonstrated problems with directionality although successfully

demonstrating written capabilities involving composition of sentences. Given that

problems of directionality are invoked as a reason for delaying writing in public school

curriculum, this is cause for consideration.

Case Study 4: The Indian private school

The private Indian school students have all been exposed to the English language

from KG 1 until the time of the study, a period of two years. According to their parents,

these student are not exposed to the English language at home and only Arabic is used,

except for Moussa whose home environment provides him with exposure to both

languages. He uses the English language at home occasionally to communicate with his

brother who also attends the same school and with his mother who is an English

language teacher.

In general, it was found that when the students were asked what activities they

would like to do more of in class, five out of the six students preferred to write more as

well as colour, read, and speak. During the interviews, four of these students were

unable to write some of the letters dictated to the other first graders in the previous three

case studies.


Chapter 7

Figure 7.11

Ahmad writes the word “two” as “tmo”

Figure 7.12

Bader’s spelling invention of native speakers


Chapter 7

Ahmad was able to write the letters in cursive form without identifying the upper

case from the lower case letters (see Figure 7.11). He wrote the letter “s” instead of the

letter “f.” When asked to write a sentence “this is a hen,” he was able to write “is” and

“a.” He suggested the word “two” and wrote it as “tmo,” confusing the letter “m” with

“w,” a reversal problem. Bader on the other hand, was able to express his writing using

conventional English spelling, in which he depended on the sound system for writing the

words. He had the capacity to write sentences using cursive writing indicating a slash for

spacing between sentences (spatial awareness). For details, see Figure 7.12.

Excerpt 5: More copying and less Writing

Researcher: If I ask you to write with me, would you want to write?

Rana: I don't know how.

Researcher: Can you write the letter A.


Researcher: Rana what can you write?

Rana: I know A-B-C-D

Researcher: Ok, That's the same A, can you write it. Do you know how to write small

A

Rana: (Noch) (shaking her head indicating no)

Researcher: Can you write D for DOG or F for FISH

Rana: (Noch)

Researcher: What can you write?

Rana: I can write D

Researcher: That's good what else can you write?

Child: F

Researcher: That's good Rana, these are the same letters I asked you to write and you

said you didn't know how to write. Can you write S- O-, that's

good. Can you write K?

Rana: I don't know how to write K.

Researcher: Can you write THIS IS?


Chapter 7

Rana: No, I don't know how to write. I just know how to write my name.

Researcher: Ok, you can write your name. Your teacher says your improving, can

you write MY NAME IS Rana.


Figure 7.13

Rana writing letters

Rana, another case study student in Mrs. Amal’s classroom, was able to write

some of the letters and only the lower case of the letter “a.” She was not able to write

words or to produce simple sentences, or even distinguish between the upper and lower

cases although she has been exposed to the English language since kindergarten (see

Figure 7.13). Excerpt 5 reveals some of the interview conversation in which Rana shows

no ability in writing although exposed to writing for two years, in comparison with the

public school children who illustrated the ability to write in such a short time after being

taught partially to write letters and words.


Chapter 7

Figure 7.14

Hiba writes her name in Arabic from the left

Also Hiba, a five-year-old girl in first grade, demonstrated very limited writing

skills after three years of learning the language. She demonstrated her ability in just

writing the letters “a, d, o” and her name (see Figure 7.14). Interestingly, when Hiba

wrote her name in English correctly, she asked if she could write her other name (I

thought she meant her family name). However, Hiba proceeded to write her name and

surprisingly she wrote her name in Arabic from left–to–right making it look like a

reflection of the original spelling in Arabic. This is a problem of reversal which because

of students’ anonymity is illustrated through a similar form of the original name (see

Figure 7.15).


Chapter 7

Figure 7.15

Reversal problem in Arabic

It is apparent from the above example that Hiba is confused with directionality.

The above form of Arabic writing is the correct form for the name Jawzaa`. In the latter,

the written form is written from left–to–right and thus it seems like a reflection of the

original. The letters are all opposite in direction (see Figure 7.15).

For these students, writing is a major element of the English instruction because

the Indian school curriculum is focused on calligraphy as described in Chapter 6. Bader,

another first grader, spends most of the lesson writing; he prefers to write and likes

writing. Excerpt 6 shows part of the conversation that took place in the interview.

Excerpt 6: Writing skills

Researcher: So how do you study? Like what else do you like to do?

Bader: Write, writing is the best thing, that’s it.

Researcher: So mostly you like to write.

Bader: Yes.


Chapter 7

Researcher: What do you like to do mostly in the English lesson? Like a task you

don't do much of with your teacher and you want to do it more?

Bader: What I like to do more is write.

Researcher: OK, are there any other things you like to do in the English lesson?

Bader: No just write and play

In response to the same question, Ahmad pointed out that he wanted to speak to

the teacher and write. Thus, communication (oral) and written is essential to Abdulla. To

Moussa, Rana, and Hiba the activity of writing is mentioned again with reading. Thus,

literacy again seems to be an important element in these students’ learning and

education.

Figure 7.16

Fadel uses a similar spelling invention as he writes “love” as “lv”

Fadel showed his spelling technique in writing “I love my school.” However, he

wrote “I lv my skol.” He spelt out the words and wrote them using sound–symbol

relationship (see Figure 7.16).


Chapter 7

Figure 7.17

Moussa writing the word “this” from memory

Moussa attempted to write “this is a hen” by spelling the word. In doing so, he

wrote “Ihit is heo.” He also wrote this is a cat, repeating “Ihit” and using an iconic

presentation of a cat to indicate the word (see Figure 7.17). Moussa showed distinctive–

forms contract (Rowe, 2008), he was able to differentiate the form used for writing and

the one for drawing.

The Indian private school students, who experience an integrated curriculum

with many written, copying, and drill activities involving sentences as described in

Chapter 6, were not all able to write sentences independently. In this they differed from

the English private school students. Moreover, the written capabilities they demonstrated

were not consistent with the Discourse model of what is appropriate writing for first

graders espoused by their teacher. It will be recalled from the previous chapter that this

was a model including vocabulary, grammar, spelling, and full sentences. It is worth

recalling in this regard that in the Discourse model in practice in this teacher’s classroom

in–interaction, students did not compose sentences they copied and drilled. Rather it was

the teacher who did the composition. This Discourse model was in contrast to both that


Chapter 7

espoused by the English private teacher and evident in practice in–interaction in her

classroom. The English private school students were observed composing not only

whole sentences but also paragraphs consisting of 4-5 sentences.

Parents Support - What Is or Should Be Taught as Writing?

The written skill seems crucial to some parents. Although their children’s oral

language is not developed in the English language, these parents demand that writing be

an integral part of the curriculum in the public school system. Um Abeer states that her

child prefers to write “she likes writing, but they don't give them here any writing. The

previous [public school curriculum] one is better, student get to write and copy. If they

had given them from the beginning writing and copying that would have been easier on

us as parents.” As a parent, Um Abeer explicitly stated that writing made her job as a

parent easier in helping their children. Writing is a process of copying and writing which

should be introduced early.

She also alludes to the previous curriculum, the UAE, which she believes was

better because it focused on the teaching of the four macroskills from the outset. This is

further explained by Um Abeer when she argued:

I am not happy or satisfied with what is being taught. The previous curriculum

was much better where there was writing. In the previous curriculum, English

was first introduced, it had questions and answers. The book had written

language in it but with this new curriculum, you open the book and all you'll find

is pictures. How can I teach her pictures?

As a parent she finds the previous curriculum a better alternative to this new

curriculum, the FWE, where the absence of writing is evident.

Um Dalal also views writing as an important skill to be taught. She argued that

teaching “the written form of the letters should be from the beginning. Just before a

while, the teacher asked me to teach her the written form of the letters. I find it troubling

to teach her all the letters at once and randomly in a last minute call.” It can be recalled

from Chapter 6 that in the girls’ public school, writing letters was introduced towards the

end of the year, precisely in the last two weeks. Um Dalal argued that not enough time

was allocated to the teaching of letters and that the teaching of the letters was


Chapter 7

inappropriately taught as the letters were not taught in alphabetical order. The

implications are that writing should be introduced earlier.

In contrast, two parents from the girls’ public school, Um Samar and Um Rasha,

initially stated that they felt content with the English taught in first grade. However

towards the end of the interview, they suggested a need for a more comprehensive

version of English to be taught. Um Rasha described the desire to have English that

teaches writing: “I wish they would teach each letter from the very beginning and in

alphabetical order just like how we were taught. We were taught the letters capital and

small and then taught the lesson.” This parent was inclined to the skill of writing in first

grade as taught to her in her own learning experience.

This opinion was shared by Anwar’s parent, who described her daughter’s

spoken skills negatively as learning to mimic. This obviously was a frustrated and

concerned parent from the girls’ public school who believed her student was just

mimicking what she heard in class. There was no real learning of oral language in the

public school curriculum, in contrast to the learning her daughter has achieved through

writing instruction at home.

Excerpt 1: Parents’ frustration

Um Anwar: In regard to the English language, I feel ::: she can- she can only mimic

words like a parrot- she can listen to a word after her teacher and keeps

repeating it. But with writing, I drill and let her write the letters. She can

say some words like APPLE and BANANA. Her speaking I am not sure

she just mimics but her writing is "OK"

Researcher: When you say she just mimics after the teacher does she understand the

meaning of the words or is it just that she mimics?

Um Anwar: No, she just mimics and doesn't understand the meaning of the words and

that's what is troubling me.

Researcher: And how do you see her in writing?

Um Anwar: She writes what I teach her to write.


Chapter 7

In interpreting this data, it is worth recalling from earlier in this chapter that

Anwar was able to write not only letters but also words by spelling them out. Um Anwar

views are explicitly stated in Excerpt 1, identifying writing as important. On this basis

she has taught her child writing at home. Um Anwar described her child’s writing as

“OK,” code–switching to English to say this. To Um Anwar, writing is copying and

forming letters. Thus, although this parent is discontent with the repetitive oral drills

approached in class, she however uses the same method to teach writing. It was evident

during Anwar’s interview that this student also recognized the drilling techniques used

in class and opposed the idea of listening without learning to speak as a communication

tool. Like her mother, Anwar seemed to value real communicative interactions where

the language used could be used in purposeful situations.

In similar claims, three other parents from the girls’ public school complained

about how the curriculum was not improving their children’s spoken skills. Accordingly,

to Um Samar, Um Dalal, and Um Abeer, their daughter’s spoken English suffered as

they are only able to practice the language at the word level. It is for that reason that

these parents expressed their support for introducing writing. For example Um Samar

described her child’s writing skill as {Ma Sha a` Allah5}. This was an evaluation of its

excellence. In addition Um Samar described her daughters’ handwriting as good in

contrast to her spoken skills. Samar, as her mother explained, was able to write with

guidance and copy letters. Samar’s case is of interest as this child was not exposed to the

English language before first year and the parents do not reinforce the language at home.

Um Abdulla, a parent from the public school, believed her son’s writing is

excellent in comparison to his spoken skills. Excerpt 2 illustrates her view.

5 An Arabic phrase evoked by Muslims to indicate appreciation for an aforesaid individual or event. The

English translation is God’s will and it is used in the event of admiration and happiness


Chapter 7

Excerpt 2: A comparison between the spoken and written skills

Um Abdulla: His spoken skill is important. He can't speak but his writing is excellent

FULL. If I give him a sentence, he can translate the sentence but he can't

produce one. I'll give you an example, what we have studied in fifth

grade is now being implemented on our student. It's all vocabulary,

vocabulary. The curriculum we studied didn't help us to speak until ninth

grade. Abdulla is able to identify a letter, he knows how to greet good

morning, hello but to speak by himself or produce any spoken sentence –

no, he can't.

Researcher: But then is he able to write?

Um Abdulla: Yes, letters and words but not sentences. He is able to produce what the

teacher taught him in class.

In the above Excerpt, Um-Abdulla signifies the importance of speech but she

noted that her son can’t speak but is able to write with excellence. Like Um Anwar, Um

Abdulla code-switches, using the word “FULL” in English to imply that her son’s

writing is good. She illustrates her son’s ability by giving an example of his ability to

translate from English to Arabic but can’t produce a sentence in English only repeat oral

vocabulary. Um Abdulla compared her son’s learning of English to her own when she

was in fifth grade. She emphasized how the curriculum she studied focused on

vocabulary and little attention was given to oral skills. This is typical of the grammar-

translation method which was popular in 1950s in Kuwait (Al-Sana`a, 1993) which

emphasized memorization and the learning of vocabulary items.

Um Abdulla indicated that her son’s ability to communicate independently is

limited to the oral language used at school. The Ministry’s document, it will be recalled,

emphasised the learning of communication through macroskills practice. However

although this curriculum depends heavily on speaking and listening practice, her son

can’t produce any spoken language on his own. Yet he can write letters and words. This

was evident is Abdulla’s interview where he was able to demonstrate his ability in

writing ‘kuwat si my cantry’.


Chapter 7

Um Hassan, a parent from the boys’ public school, expressed dissatisfaction

when she concluded that:

The previous curriculum which his older sister studied was better. I don't know

about their teaching style now. But his sister’s school help the learners more

with their speaking and writing. There is deficiency. They should give them more

to learn. Students are able to store information and then it will be easy for

student to learn.

In this above Excerpt, Um Hassan points to the previous 1993 U.A.E curriculum

which focused on the four macroskills. As it will be recalled from Chapter 1, the 1993

UAE curriculum integrated the four macroskills (listening, speaking, reading, and

writing) in first grade, while the new 2002 FWE curriculum delayed writing. A point of

interest raised by Um Hassan is that Hassan’s sister was exposed to the previous

curriculum which focused on the four macroskills. This mother hints that she was more

than satisfied with her daughter’s learning outcome than with that of her son who was

using the FWE curriculum of 2002.

Again at the boy’s public school, two of the other boys’ parents described their

children’s writing skills are as good as their spoken skill. In Excerpt 3 below, Um Adel

described her student’s spoken skills as good, but still described his writing as good. Um

Adel indicated this by stating that she teaches her child writing in English through

spelling and thus provides him with writing experiences at home. Furthermore, she

reinforces the English language by enrolling Adel in an after school English club.

Hence, this student was familiar with the sound and visual written language. In other

words, this child was able to do more than speak in order to spell out words.

Excerpt 3: Good handwriting

Researcher: And what about his writing?

Um Adel: No, (Ma Sha a` Allah) his handwriting is good.

Researcher: Can he write words?

Um Adel: Yes, he maybe, if I spell out the word – give him the spelling, he may

misspell it but he will try to read it.


Chapter 7

Likewise, Um Dawood believed her son’s writing was good. She viewed writing

as “handwriting” and she explained that the lack of writing in the school environment is

balanced by exposing Dawood to a literate English environment at home: “[I let] him…,

look at magazines.” Um Dawood created an English language setting in her home

environment. She added “moreover, using the computer helps.” When asked to

elaborate, Um Dawood referred to the computer meaning using the internet in both

Arabic and English languages. Thus, her child was being exposed to an English

language environment daily. In addition, Um Dawood responded to a question about the

level of English as follows:

{Wallah} I don't know what to say. I am not fully satisfied because I have

experienced what a private school can offer my son. If I can show you his

worksheets in KG2 when he was in a bilingual school you can realize the level of

English taught. The standard of grammar, vocabulary items and functions taught

are set high. To the level of English I studied at 5th and 6th grade. My son has

studied it in KG2 and didn't complain about its difficulty and was able to grasp

it.

Furthermore, she commented that “his handwriting is nice.” Thus, as a mother

she expects her son to write with a high standard where writing includes grammar,

vocabulary, functions and handwriting. Thus, Um Dawood compared her child’s English

level when he was at a bilingual school to his present state at the public school and

expresses her discontent.

The response in Excerpt 4 indicates how she based her argument on the fact that

the curriculum is founded on oral skills before the written skills and that this curriculum

is denying Dawood’s rights in learning.

Excerpt 4: The isolation of writing

Researcher: Well, if he didn't attend a private school in KG and nursery, then, do you

think that the curriculum is tailored to Dawood's abilities?

Um Dawood: {Walla} If the curriculum is going to be based only on speaking and oral

production then I don't think so.


Chapter 7

However, it was also evident that some parents like Um Abdulla were ambiguous

about the 2002 curriculum. In general Um Abdulla was content with the initial delay of

writing to establish the young learners’ L1 literacy in Arabic. This view is common and

shared by most researchers as discussed earlier in Chapter 2. However, this parent is

discontent with the present state of her child’s learning. Later in the interview, she

expressed a opposing view on the delay of writing. Excerpt 5 illustrates this parent’s

position.

Excerpt 5: Opposing the delay of writing

Researcher: Would you like to add anything else?

Um Abdulla: I don't know. ((Pause)) I feel the English curriculum should be taught in

Kindergarten. The listening skill should be given in kindergarten to

prepare student for the language.

Researcher: Umm,

Um Abdulla: and in first grade we should prepare them for writing. I don't know why

we are finding it difficult? I have noticed in private schools both

languages Arabic and English are being taught at the same time and it’s

working. … I don't know but I think this first grade curriculum should be

given to kindergarten students.

It is apparent this parent has doubts and was not in full agreement with what was

being taught to her child in first grade. She believed her child’s abilities exceed what

was being given to him during the English lesson and felt that the curriculum was

tailored to younger children. This view was also conveyed by Um Amani who stated:

The curriculum is weak. I feel the material provided is not right in it doesn't

build a sound base for the English language. It's too easy. Student in private

schools at KG stage are taught more than what first grade public schools are

learning.

A similar criticism was expressed by Um Hassan who demanded a more

intelligent curriculum that provided for her child’s needs. She described the new FWE


Chapter 7

curriculum as “very simple. Its disadvantages are more-. It disadvantages the student

because it's tailored for a younger age group and not for six year olds. The level of the

FWE curriculum can be suitable for day care student.” Therefore, there was a degree of

consensus among the parents that the curriculum was to easy and not appropriate for the

needs of six year old children.

At the two private schools, there were some similar views on the children’s

written capabilities relative to their oral capabilities. For example, six out of 12 parents

believed their child’s spoken skills were advanced in comparison to their written skills,

while two parents were not able to judge their children’s spoken or written abilities. One

parent thought that her child’s spoken and written skills were equal. However, three

parents believed their children’s written abilities exceeded their spoken skills.

Specifically, two parents were exact about their children’s skills; for example, Um Emad

believed her son:

…likes to write letters, he writes me letters and I correct his mistakes. His spoken

skill is improving. His writing is good he writes sentences like he wrote me a

letter before travelling and he said in it PLEASE BUY MY WATCH, AND BUY

SALLY GIFT and he drew a watch beside it.

Um Emad explained how her son writes letters as a form of meaningful

communication although he was still developing his spoken skills. She illustrates her

son’s good writing skill by referring to the letter he wrote to her before travelling.

To Um Ahmad from the Indian private school case study, she stated: “his writing is

hieroglyphic” and this mother went on to say:

They do emphasise writing more than reading. He has problems with sound.

Students have to know the sound of SH and blend the letters to make the sound

SH. They don't emphasize sounds. They do their homework and in tests they give

them to write full sentences to answer questions. Writing full sentences is a lot

for student. At the beginning of the semester, the teacher gives them a "revision

sheet" and I look at the answers of the questions and I think that's a lot. Under

each question there is a long ::: sentence the student has to memorize. Abdulla

writes full sentences but he doesn’t know how to read them. He knows how to

write the form.


Chapter 7

This parent believed the writing assigned to her child at this private Indian school

involved memorization and no real communicative writing where writing is meaningful.

Ismail’s parent also viewed his son’s writing skills as better than his spoken, in

saying “Writing, writing, the writing skill is much better than his spoken.” This view

was demonstrated clearly by Ismail’s work earlier in this chapter. Um Bader saw her

son’s writing skills as being more advanced than his speaking skills. Moreover, she

believed “he likes to write and do his homework.” Rana’s parent on the other hand

viewed writing as “dictation” which was an activity enacted at the school and which she

supported.

Faisal’s parent believed that her son, is “good he doesn’t have a problem in

writing the word correctly as he :: sees it but spelling is his only problem.” But Amar’s

parent at the same school believed:

I have noticed that his final outcome is good. Even when the teacher gives them

questions for homework to answer, I feel he has improved greatly. He has

improved greatly in writing. I feel his spoken and written skills are [equal now].

Summary

While these parents’ views of the place of writing vary in the specifics, the

overall position was that the skill of writing should be taught to first graders as it has not

been since the curriculum reform of 2002. In theoretical terms, the Discourse model

espoused by the parents viewed writing as something appropriately taught earlier than it

is at present. The delay of writing was considered to have rendered the curriculum too

easy. In other words, there was discontent with the Discourse model of what writing is

appropriately taught to first grade.

In this model, writing was explicitly construed as writing letters and words,

writing alphabetic letters (upper and lower case) and non-specifically writing. One

parent held a model that construed grammar, vocabulary, and punctuation as appropriate

to be taught to first graders.

That five out of 12 public school parents described their children’s writing as

better than their spoken language is notable. The point emphasised by these parents was

that the 2002 curriculum reform, which delayed writing and prioritised oral

communication, had not delivered a satisfactory level of spoken English proficiency for


Chapter 7

their children. In other words, not only the Discourse model of what writing is

appropriate for first graders was questioned, but also the model of what spoken language

is appropriately taught. This point of dispute is or relevance to this study given that extra

speaking instruction was substituted for writing instruction in the new curriculum.

In contrast, at the private schools, the Discourse model espoused by the parents

identified letter, word and sentence level writing as appropriate to be taught in first

grade. This model was consistent with that of the private school teachers. The parents

also indicated that writing should be focused on and that writing seemed to be in some

cases more developed than spoken skills. However there was a deviant case where the

model espoused by a private school parent identified writing sentences as inappropriate

in her child’s case. This parent stated that her son was able to write but unable to read

because he did not know the sound-letter relationship. This parent’s child was at the

Indian private school. From the data produced for this study, it is not possible to further

explain this case. What is notable however is that the parent intended to transfer her son

to the English private school where her other son is studying.

Why Writing Should be Taught

As mentioned previously in Chapters 2 and 3, the English language has taken an

important role in Kuwaiti society. The English language is given power when it is

introduced as a country’s foreign language (Crystal, 2003). In Kuwait, English has taken

the role of a second and a foreign language and thus Kuwait is described as a hybrid

society (El-Dib, 2004). The teaching of English as a foreign language is very common in

the Arab world and hence learning languages has become widespread among young

learners nowadays (Cameron, 2001; Frohlich-Ward, 1992). It is crucial here to

understand the parents’ and students’ view towards the English language and its

significance and the place of writing in these views.

The case study parents of the 24 students linked their students’ learning of a

language to Conversations about the importance of learning English as a foreign or

second language in the country’s present economical, educational, and political history,

a view widespread not only in Kuwait society but also globally. The public and private

school parents and student are conscious of the importance of learning the English


Chapter 7

language. Hence, in the next section, I shall analyse data indicating why writing should

be taught in the context of the importance of learning English as a language.

Parent and Student Interviews

As was noted above, the learning of English is highly valued and takes a pre–

eminent status within the Kuwaiti society. This is evident in the parents’ and students’

interviews. Um Abeer values the learning of the English language as follows:

Previously, it wasn’t important but now learning the English language is

important because without English one could get lost. Now English is used in all

fields. Even if you are in your home country, you have to know English as a lot of

the working force are foreign and that pressures you to speak English.

Um Abeer talked about the importance of learning the English language and it

involved two issues: i) the need for communication in a multi-cultural environment; and

ii) the social demand it makes on individuals to learn English. This parent has a positive

attitude towards the learning of foreign languages.

Similarly, Um Rasha acknowledges the importance of learning a language and

believes it is important for her child to learn a language. This same attitude is shared by

Um Mohammad who revealed in her response that “the English language is very

important nowadays,(laughs) if you are not familiar with the English language, then

you’ll be completely overlooked.” Thus, there was a general feeling that learning the

English language empowers individuals in the society and that the English language has

status. This view is also shared by Um Dawood who valorises the language using an

imperative tone: “He has to learn English because everything now is in English and

especially that he has to learn the language for later on to use in his life.” Um Dawood

pinpoints her real aim in teaching her son English and that is for future plans and, as it

was explained earlier in Chapter 1, good educational prospects are associated with the

level of English proficiency and academic achievement in the Kuwaiti society. This is

assured by knowing how to use the English language.

This attitude is also expressed by Um Adel who viewed the English language as

“the most important thing” where she attributed the learning of English for the need for

a good future education as her view is based on the fact that her relatives are facing

difficulty at university and school level. As she explained: “I have noticed that some of


Chapter 7

my family members have difficulty at university and school level and I want my student

to learn the language.” Parents in the Kuwaiti society see a need in teaching their

children English as they want to ensure a good education for their children. Bo Ismail

related his wish to have his son learn English to his own personal experience: “My field

is in engineering, I wish my student to major in scientific fields and I don’t think he will

be able to reach the standard I want by being in a public school.” He assumed his son’s

learning of English at public school would not be adequate given his hopes of his son

being well–prepared for advancement through future education. Similarly, Um Faisal

relates to her personal learning experience: “And I am happy with that because I

suffered at the University with the English language and I don’t want him to face the

same problems.” She views the learning of English as important for future academic

studies. Um Abdulla also finds learning English useful for academic and future

development: “It’s useful to him later on if I decide to have him continue his higher

studies outside Kuwait.” Furthermore Um Abdulla explained: “Today the English

language is the language of communication. It’s the language everyone is using.” This

view correlates with Um Rana who positions the English language as an important factor

in society: “Now the English language is used in government and private sectors.”

Thus, both parents,Um Rana and Um Abdulla highlight the current role of the English

language and how this language is considered a highly valuable resource at the present

time.

Accordingly, Um Rada described her desire to teach her son the English

language because to her “it seems ( ) the whole world speaks English.” This

universal view of Um Rada correlates with the earlier discussion in Chapters 2 and 3 on

globalization and how English is becoming a global language, feeding into societies’

economical, political, and socio-cultural aspects.

The point made by the parents in the interview data was that English

appropriately includes the language needed to function in society. The reason was that

English is used in all fields (scientific, educational). It was claimed that English is

empowering, enabling good education and career development. In addition, English was

viewed by the parents as a language of communication essential in Kuwait. However,

there was considerable emphasis by some parents on future educational prospects as the


Chapter 7

main reason for learning English. This it will be recalled from Chapter 1 was an impetus

for the introduction of writing at primary level in Kuwait’s public schools, a move that

involved use of the UAE materials until the controversial reform of 2002 that saw the

FWE materials that delayed writing introduction. In this context, it is significant then

that this study’s parent participants all strongly valued English education for their

children; but public school parents expressed concern about the adequacy of the FWE

curriculum for their aspirations for their children and also criticised the delay of writing

in that curriculum.

The students at the private school expressed how strongly they valued English.

Faisal was interested in learning the language and using it:

…because I didn't know the English language and am learning a lot. Because

((pause)) I like to learn. So I would know the names of animals in English and:::

the names- and to learn everything in English. I can ask someone who is English

in English.

A similar response was given by Ismail who wanted to learn English: “Because

when I grow up and there is an Englishman I would speak to him in English not Arabic.

So when we are given things to study in English, we would read it in English not

Arabic.” Thus, he also focused on the idea of using the language to communicate and

implied the use of the language as an additional language. Unlike others, Fatima and

Emad, enjoyed learning the language because to Fatima: “ it’s::: very nice” and to

Emad: “It’s nice….English is easy.”

To Amar, who is from the private English school, learning the English language

is related to academic excellence and achievement. This is evident in his response: “Yes,

because when I study and they give me homework, I can study well and know my

vocabulary. And so when she asks me a question, I can answer the question asked. So I

can succeed at school.” Amar”s main concern was succeeding at school. The private

school students’ responses were in accordance with some of the public school students.

The fear of failing and achieving success has been a notion that was brought up again by

Rasha and Mohammad from the girls’ and boys’ public school case studies.

Mohammad’s response showed his interest in learning English was associated with

passing the school year: “because I don’t fail at school,” while Rasha when asked why


Chapter 7

did he liked learning English said “because I like learning English and so so I can pass

the English subject.” Although these two students come from a different English

language background, they both are in agreement on the reason for learning English as a

language.

In all the schools, most students responded that they enjoyed learning the English

language when asked if they did. For example, to Hiba and Rana from the Indian school,

the reason to learn English was extrinsic and concerning parental pressure. Pleasing

parents is the reason for learning English and enjoying writing. This was evident in Um

Hiba’s response when asked why they chose to enrol her daughter in a private school:

“It’s not my choice, her dad wants her to because the English language taught is more

intensive than the one taught in the public schools.” In Hiba”s interview, Hiba stated

clearly that she learnt English because her father was going to buy her a computer:

“Because my dad will buy me a computer and he did.” Rana”s response was that

“because my dad will buy me toys…. To write.”

To Abdulla and Bader, learning the language was in their liking to learn the

language itself. In other words, no obvious reason beyond the intrinsic pleasure of

learning English was given. Abdulla indicated that “ it’s my favourite- we learn the

English language and w- we play”. He remarked that he learns the English language “so

when someone speaks to me in English.” A similar remark was given by Rada who liked

learning English because “I can play, study and draw. To learn.” Rada explained that he

wants to learn the language “so:::: if I travel and an Englishman speaks to me in

English, I can speak to him in English.” However, a different attitude is expressed by

Dawood who perceives English as “it’s useful. There is information in English that we

have to::: have to learn and memorize because it will benefit me . I will be useful in my

studies.”

Others like Faisal, Moussa, and Adel compared it to Arabic. Faisal stated that

“English is better than Arabic because sometimes there is a good answer and sometimes

there is a bad answer in English. It takes a long time to finish the Arabic. It never

finishes. We don’t like Arabic. We mostly like English.” To this first grader the English

language is easier than Arabic. He compared the English language to the Arabic

language and made a contrast between the two in the amount of work done in the Arabic


Chapter 7

lesson. A similar response was given by Moussa who compared the English language to

the Arabic language alo: “I love it, love it (laughs) I swear to God I love English. I love

English and Arabic language is Yuk (mo halwa).” He noted that he liked to the language

but was not able to explain why. Adel also correlated his likes to learn English to his

previous learning experience and to the Arabic language: “Because my::: all that I have

learnt in my previous school was in English. I learnt English and I learnt everything in

English {Wallah}. Yes, there was no Arabic just English.” He also explained that his

liking of the English language is because it’s easy, “easier than math, social studies, and

daily living studies.” He further explained “the words are easier, uhh when we write it’s

easy and reading is easier.”

Some of these students enjoy learning English. However some of these reasons

seem to be associated with global concepts and correlate to other learners’ views. Dalal

also showed awareness of the importance of the English language. However, she

explained her reasons. This is indicated in Excerpt 6. She is aware that the English

language is needed for future education and she associated adulthood with learning a

language.

Excerpt 6: English is the future

Dalal: So one grows up and can write

Researcher: [So one can grow and

Dalal: [So one can learn

Researcher: Why else do you like learning English?

Dalal: So I can make food, everything

Researcher: Food!

Dalal: Yes, when I grow up.

Researcher: When you learn English?

Dalal: Yes, I know.

Researcher: Why else?

Dalal: So I can go to another school and:: the next and I go to another then

finish school.


Chapter 7

In the above Excerpt, when Dalal was asked why she liked the English language,

she replied giving three logical reasons (1) to be able to write, (2) to learn and (3) to go

to another school, implying her progress in her school years from primary to secondary.

Apparently, Dalal is aware of the importance of the English language and how it impacts

on her future academic achievement.

In another case, Samar associated learning English with using the written

language in the future: “So I can learn and when I grow up I can write.” It is not clear

why she has associated particularly writing with growing up and her liking to the

English language.

On the contrary, Ameer and Anwar show that their liking the learning of English

is in using the written form. This was evident in Amani”s interview: “So I can learn and

when I grow up I can write.” In harmony with Amani”s response, Anwar indicated that

her learning of the English language is directed to the spoken skills in saying: “Because

I like to speak English: So if my friend is English, I can speak to her in English.”

Like their parents, the children articulated a range of reasons for learning

English, including communication in Kuwait society and academic success in the future.

Intrinsic pleasure in learning English was evident, as was pleasure in the easiness of

English instruction compared to instruction in Arabic. Writing was mentioned by four of

the children as part of the language they wished to learn for the future, and by one of the

children as an easy part of the English they are now learning. For at least some of the

children then, what is appropriately learnt as English is not only spoken language but

written language. This is consistent with the Discourse model espoused by their parents

and teachers and evident variously in the practice in–interaction in the classrooms.

However, it is not consistent with the model of what is appropriately taught as writing to

first graders espoused in the public school documents.

Similarly, communication was talked about by four of the children as part of the

language they aspired to learn for the future. Speaking was a necessary skill for

communication with non–native speakers of Arabic, three of the children expressed to

communicate with English speakers or when travelling. To some of these children what

is appropriately learnt as English is the spoken language which conforms to some of the

Discourse models espoused by the parents and is evident in the teacher’s classroom


Chapter 7

practices in–interaction. However, to any further extent, it is not consistent with the

model of what is appropriately taught as communication to first graders espoused in the

public school documents as the document emphasises communication by practice where

communication is limited to the classroom medium of instruction which is not

appropriate for real life communicative situations.

Discussion

In the previous chapter, findings from the teachers’ interview data and classroom

practices revealed that all four case study teachers viewed the delay of writing as an

experience that first graders could do without. In this chapter, analyses were presented of

the case study students’ and parents’ talk, and of demonstrations of student’s work

obtained during the interview. Like Chapter 6, the findings of this chapter are related to

the literature on what is or should be taught as writing and why English writing

instruction should be taught, as summarised in Chapter 2. The general findings of the

analyses were that writing is considered by both parents and students as an appropriate

skill to be learned in first grade.

The students of the four case study classrooms hold a similar view to that of their

teachers. Most expressed enthusiasm for writing and sought opportunities to learn by

trail–and–error, and by comparing L1 and L2. This is consistent with the findings of

Kenner’s (2000) work on young monolingual children learning scripts in another

language. From her research, it was established that young monolingual learners are

interested in learning how writing works. In the case of this study, the students have

evidently demonstrated their abilities in understanding the English writing system.

In addition to enthusiasm for writing, the children mostly displayed writing

capabilities that went beyond those mandated in the public school curriculum. The

private English school children were required to undertake a wide range of writing

activities well in excess of those of the public school classrooms and demonstrated that

during the interviews. The public schools were accountable to the public school

curriculum but it was observed that the public school teachers asked more of their

students than the curriculum required, but not as much as they were able to do in the

interviews. In both cases however, the students at the public schools did more than the

curriculum required.


Chapter 7

In the Indian school, students also demonstrated writing in excess of the public

school requirements although below the requirements of their own school system. The

point here is that all the children, irrespective of the school system, demonstrated writing

abilities beyond those mandated in the public school curriculum. This is consistent with

the findings of Kenner et al. (2004) where children learned another script by peer

teaching. In this study, the findings showed that children learnt another writing system,

English, not only by peer teaching but also by self–learning, parents help at home and

teachers. The findings of this study draw on two findings of Kenner et al.’s (2004) work

where six year olds learning to write in two scripts, specifically Arabic and English,

were able to learn to write in two different systems simultaneously and where

monolingual children were able to learn a different script by peer teaching.

Further, the work of Kenner et al. (2004) where young monolingual children

were learning scripts in another language, is consistent with the process of embedding

analogies with the Kuwaiti children learning English. In the former study, it was found

that monolingual children showed a tendency to explore other writing systems during

peer teaching. The belief entrenched in Kenner’s’ et al. (2004) work was that young

learners have the ability to adapt to the learning of more than one language. The findings

of this study, like those of Kenner (2000) and Kenner et al. (2004) are cause for

consideration. They raise questions about the necessity for delaying writing as has

occurred in the new 2002 curriculum.

In addition, parents construed the curriculum as easy because it excluded writing

skills that had been taught previously. They drew a comparison between the UAE

curriculum which maintained the teaching of the four macroskills in the first grade and

the FWE where the focus is on listening and speaking only in first grade. Parents also

believed that the oral language skills that had displaced writing had not been adequately

learned anyway. This is particularly evident in the public schools where children were

said to be not able to use the English language communicatively. The public school first

grade children were not able to use the language at the word or sentence level, rather

children were noticed to mimic after the teacher. This is supported by the parents’

remarks in which they believed their children’s spoken language was not improving and

those they mimicked words without understanding their meaning. Sufficient examples


Chapter 7

are noted in Chapter 7 where parents discuss their children’s oral standard. The

teachings of English in first grade depended on oral drills and memorization in which no

real communicative language was used. To exemplify, to one parent the process of

speaking in the case study classroom was described as “mimicking,” in other words

memorization. To understand this, it is worth considering the work of Rivers (1981) who

described the spoken form to be meaningless to some children, causing them to resort to

memorization of material which produces children who are “like well trained parrots”

(p. 47). The point here is that the difficulty of macroskills is not simply inherent but

seems to be reliant somewhat on the nature of the teaching.

Similarly, the findings of this study are consistent with Paula’s (2003) arguments

that focus on the teaching of writing: He propounded that young EFL learners from non–

English speaking homes tend to find writing easier in practice than speaking. This

argument was maintained by the parents and one of the public school teachers earlier in

Chapter 6.

In regard to the findings about why is English writing instruction should be

taught in first grade, in general, the parents hold a strong positive view about the value

of learning the English language. They associated the learning of English with future

academic and professional prospects. Crystal (2003) recognized that proficiency in the

English language contributed to economical and social prosperity.

This strong inclination to learn English was also explicitly verbalized by some of

the students. The findings of this study drawn from interview and observation analyses

revealed an inclination on the part of students that both the writing and speaking of

English were important skill to learn. These findings are consistent with those reported

in the literature reviewed in Chapter 2. It will be recalled that advocates of the delay of

writing qualified their positions by invoking social factors. One of these factors was the

goals of the English language education program (Brumfit, 1995; Finocchiaro, 1964;

Rivers, 1981). A second factor was the characteristics of the learners including their

expectations (Rivers, 1981), whether they were accustomed to learning print (Rivers,

1981), their sophistication (Finocchiaro, 1964), and their abilities with different written

scripts (Finocchiaro & Brumfit, 1983). The third factor was the characteristics of the

broader linguistic environment of the pedagogy, specifically, the availability of signs


Chapter 7

and posts. Evidence was found of several of these social factors that include the

student’s expectations and sophistications where the students are using print and

demonstrating the ability to write; the linguistic landscape of the learner’s in this study

as discussed in Chapter 1 and 3 indicating their exposure to English language in their

daily life’s (e.g. cereal box); and their parents’ demand concerning the need for writing.

In addition, the demonstrations of students, writing elicited during the interviews

were consistent with Kenner’s (2000) work in which young monolingual learners as

young as 3-4 years of age showed interest in learning a second writing script, in

particular a script different from that they had first begun learning. This position held by

the young first graders pertains to a wider Conversation held to the assumptions that

writing should be delayed with young ESL/EFL learners. These students’ work

vindicates questions about the consensus of delaying writing in first grade curriculum.

Therefore, these students showed the ability to demonstrate writing that exceeded that of

the public schools’ policy document and, in the case of the public schools, of their

teachers’ expectations. The parents of these students have high expectations and as their

expectations were not resolved and met, they created other opportunities for their

children’s learning experiences. In the next chapter, the main findings are discussed

drawing on the last three chapters. That is then followed by a discussion of the

limitations of the study and recommendations for future work.


Chapter 8

Chapter 8: Delaying Writing Instruction in a Global Setting

Introduction

This study has investigated the place of writing in the first grade English

curriculum of Kuwait. The principle research question the study sought to answer

was: What is taught as writing in Kuwait public first grade English classrooms, how

it is taught and why? This question arose from controversy in Kuwait over the

exclusion of writing from the public school first grade curriculum in 2002. It was

addressed in the study through an analysis of English language curriculum

documents, classroom practice in the context of those documents, and the transcripts

of interviews with teachers, students and parents who participated variously in those

practices.

In Chapters 2 to 4, the study was framed empirically, theoretically and

methodologically. The literature review of Chapter 2 yielded three empirical bases of

importance for this study. Firstly, it was established that there is a paucity of

empirical findings on the teaching of writing to young English learners in Kuwaiti

and Arab settings. Secondly, it was established that there is a small but growing body

of professional opinion in the EFL field internationally that recommends the delay of

writing until after the first grade. Crucially for this study, key figures in the field state

that their recommendations are made on the basis of little if any empirical evidence

on foreign language teaching, and by extrapolation from second language learning,

for example in immersion classes. Nonetheless, from the 1960s, calls for the delay of

writing have been qualified by invoking social factors. These include:

i) the goals of the English language program,

ii) features of the broader societal linguistic landscape; and

iii) characteristics of the learner including expectations and customary

approaches to learning, sophistication and existing abilities with other scripts.

The third key point made in the literature review is of particular interest. This

point entails evidence about the capabilities of both monolingual and bilingual 3-6

year old children in Britain who were able to differentiate between and learn

substantially different scripts – Arabic, English and Chinese – simultaneously. These

children were not even exposed to writing on a formal basis every day, but only

once-a-week in community schools. These findings suggest that it is worth


Chapter 8

questioning assumptions about the limited writing capabilities of young learners.

From the literature review, it was concluded that the controversy around writing in

the Kuwaiti first grade curriculum required empirical evidence on the teaching of

writing to young children in the society. Further, they required alternatives to the

developmental perspectives dominant in the EFL field. The literature review also

highlighted critical questioning of the Western pedagogic assumptions underpinning

the teaching of the global language of English. Key amongst these were the

assumptions that the goal of English language teaching is oral communication and

that language is best learned by young learners through oral activities in a learner–

centred approach. This work provided a body of critical questions and perspectives to

which this study’s finding could be related.

Accordingly, in Chapter 3 a theoretical framework was developed by

integrating concepts from three intellectual fields. Concepts were drawn from the

sociology of childhood, a perspective that has offered strong critique of

developmental assumptions that have the potential to create blind-spots to children’s

capabilities. This perspective was integrated with a theorisation of globalisation that

highlighted the national and religious identity projects that are occurring around the

world in the context of global processes, including the building of Kuwaiti, Arab and

Islamic identity in Kuwait. English language education is productively understood at

present in terms of these global processes. The third conceptual building block of the

study was Gee’s (2005) critical social–cultural theory that views writing as a social

practice. This theory entails a style of analysis of language-in-use-in-society that

enables description of the construction of writing education in the language of policy,

classroom practice, and participants’ reflection on practice. Methodological

principles and attendant procedures for the production and analysis of relevant data

consistent with this theoretical framework were presented in Chapter 4. Detailed

analyses of the document, classroom case studies, and parent and student interview

data sets were presented in Chapters 5 to 7. The analytic focus was variously on what

is taught as English, how it is taught, and why and what should be taught, how and

why.

The present chapter concludes the thesis with a summary and discussion of

the study’s key findings. In the discussion at the end of each of the previous three

chapters, findings about the specific research questions posed in Chapter 1 were

detailed. It will be recalled that these questions were:


Chapter 8

� What is the place of writing in first grade English language documents in

Kuwait since the reform of writing in the public school curriculum in

2002?

� What is the place of writing in English instruction in the first grade

classrooms implementing the 2002 public school curriculum and schools

implementing other curricula?

� How is writing instruction taught in first grade classrooms implementing

the 2002 public school curriculum and schools implementing other

curricula?

� What do parents and students view as the place of writing in English

instruction in first grade curriculum after the reform of writing

requirements in the public school curriculum in 2002?

� Why do first grade parents and students view writing in English

instruction in first grade curriculum as important?

In what follows, the responses to these specific questions will be drawn

together to address the principle question of this study. Attention will then be drawn

to the significance of the study for policymakers in Kuwait, and also for researchers

in the field of young foreign language learning – especially global English learning –

internationally. The chapter concludes with a discussion of the limitations of the

research and recommendations for future investigations.

Main Findings and Discussion

On the basis of the analyses presented in Chapters 5, 6, and 7, I now state and

discuss the overall findings of the study. Three main findings emerged from the

study. Specifically, thee are concerned with:

i) non–language and language goals in the context of globalization;

ii) the transfer of writing skills between English language studies and other

subjects of the Kuwaiti first grade curriculum and;

iii) oral and written relationship.

This final finding is of importance to this study as it directly addresses the

principle question. It relates to whether the delay between oral and written language

instruction needs to be a long-term one as is the case in the current public school

curriculum or whether a more short-term alternative might be feasible in the Kuwaiti


Chapter 8

context given consideration of sociocultural factors of Kuwaiti society, including

societal and individual needs in the context of globalization.

Language and Non–language Goals

A main finding of the policy analysis of Chapter 5 was that most of the goals

of the English language curriculum were concerned with the development of

Kuwaiti, Arab and Islamic culture. This is consistent with local responses worldwide

to the forces that have made the learning of English a global imperative. The non–

language goals in the public school documents form an essential part of modern

language policies, emphasising where identities and cultural aspects were the focus

throughout language education documents. In this case, it was Islamic, Arab, and

national values that were overtly dominant in the documents.

However, a finding from the analysis presented in Chapter 7 was that parents

and students were more focused on language goals when they talked about learning

the English language. They saw a need to learn the English language for social and

economic affluence. They believed learning English contributes to their well–being

through educational and professional development. Success in further education and

work were the reasons given by several parents and students for learning English.

Concerns about students’ low levels of English attainment, in both oral and written

language, can be understood in relation to these hopes and goals.

The analysis indicated a curious absence amongst the goals at the highest

level of documentation. Three of the goals were non–language goals in the sense that

they focused on the values and culture carried by the language the children are

expected to learn. The other goal was concerned with the transfer of learning from

English education to other subjects, but did not nominate what was to be learnt for

transfer. In other words, some of the normative assumptions of the policy remain

implicit. There would seem to be place for another goal here to complement the goals

of values and transfer. This is a goal stating what English language capability is

valued in Kuwait society and to be pursued through English instruction in schools.

Such a goal would ideally mesh with the hopes and expectations of students and

parents planning work futures in global worlds of English.

Transfer Goal

However, one finding of the study was that there was one specifically

language-related goal, and the delay of writing has implications for the possibility of


Chapter 8

attaining this goal. To elaborate, the language-related goal of the policy documents

was concerned with what was called the correlation of English and other subjects in

the curriculum. This goal is concerned with the transfer of skills between the subject

of English and other subjects.

However, analysis of the curriculum documents that specify how the goals

will be achieved indicated that the expectations of the English documents with

respect to writing are very low. Little is expected of the children. This has not borne

in mind the social and cultural experiences of the children. It is as if the children

have not been exposed to scripts and writing not only before first grade, but also in

the first grade. In these documents, the child is constructed as if they are a newly

born baby that does not know anything about writing. It seems as if the English

language documents want to construct writing skills from the beginning. However,

these children come from homes where they see literacy and literate social worlds

that include English. Moreover, the children are already becoming literate in Arabic.

These students have progressed in school for more than six months, and are at an

advanced developmental level; their fine-motor skills, eye-hand coordination, visual

discrimination, and visual memory are adequate for the writing of Arabic.

Directionality was another predicament that some students struggled with while

others comprehended it easily. Regardless of the students’ background, some

students were able to write with appropriate directionality from left-to-right. One

child was found to write Arabic from left–to–right. In this context, there is a certain

degree of illogicality to the assumption that children will be able to transfer their

skills from English to Arabic studies. The problem here seems to be that

developmental assumptions imported with English language teaching methodologies

have been inappropriately applied to the children’s social contexts. The questioning

of this goal is warranted because the students’ writing skills in the Arabic language

exceed those in the English language.

Oral and Written Relationship

A further finding of this study was that the relationship between oral and

written language seemed to be more complex than suggested by either the Kuwaiti

policy of delaying writing instruction until second grade or the international literature

that supports such a delay until the age of 8 or 9. This finding emerged from the case

study. It will be recalled that most of the children in the case study classrooms had


Chapter 8

not only some writing skills, but writing skills they had not been taught. It was

evident from the students’ work that the case study students explored writing and

searched for opportunities to learn the different writing system of English. These

students exhibited the potential to write independently in English in some cases.

Thus, the question arises: Is the requirement to delay writing in first grade

appropriate given influences on childhood that seem to have produced sophisticated,

active children who are learning writing in their worlds or global English?

Furthermore, as is evident from the concern of the teachers, and of the parents

who were anxious for their children to be fluent in oral English for their futures in a

globalising world, it seems that the oral skills targeted by the first grade curriculum

were yet to be mastered. For example, there was little evidence of the children being

able to express themselves in English sentences. The observations suggest that this

might reflect the teaching method, which in practice entails drilling of classroom

dialogues. The language learnt is language that children are unlikely to use in

conversation outside of the classroom, for example, imperatives such as “Open your

book.” Consistent with some of the parents’ observations, no real communicative

settings were used in the classroom. Rather, children mimicked dialogues. This

finding is cause for consideration about the efficiency of the weak communicative

approach to oral language that was being implemented in the place of writing

instruction.

These students were taught using the oral skills (listening and speaking) and

it was evident in the findings that these students were unable to produce meaningful

language which the communicative approach calls for in an authentic environment.

The students were noticed to mimic and drill orally on sentences. Some of the

students were not able to translate their understanding of the classroom language

used and thus struggled to understand even simple sentences like “How are you?”

Thus, the weak communicative approach which highlights the oral skills over the

writing skills have been seen to be ineffective with some students in the case studies

(1), (2), and (4). Moreover, parents were dissatisfied with their children’s spoken

outcomes and explained their dissatisfaction towards their children’s learning of the

English language.

The complexity of the relationships between oral and written language in the

case study classrooms is cause for further consideration. It will be recalled from

Chapter 5 that the timing of the introduction of oral and written skills does not have


Chapter 8

to entail long-term delay of written skills. Short-term delays are an alternative.

Students can spend time acquiring spoken skills early in a lesson and proceed to

written skills later in the same lesson. The delay of written language can be in

minutes, not months and years (Cook, 2001; Frohlich-Ward, 1992). The findings of

the complex relationship between oral and written language in this study suggests

that there might be some purchase in this alternative approach in Kuwaiti settings.

Moreover, it is evident that the society’s needs and the parents’ and students’ needs

were not as fully considered as they might have been. The linguistic environment of

Kuwait promotes the presence of the English language. It was evident that the

students’ and parents’ expectations were not met with regard to learning to write in

English in this environment. These students demonstrated higher abilities than those

expected from the policy document. Parents’ expectations were also not attended to

as is evident from their concerns about the easiness of the document due to the

absence of writing skills. In addition, these students are accustomed to formal

teacher–centred schooling where literacy and written texts are the basis of the

teaching–learning process. Thus, in a nutshell, the delay of writing instruction does

not adequately consider students’ learning characteristics, abilities, sophistication,

and habitual learning style. The society’s need and norms are being overlooked at a

time when globalization and its experiences of English and demands for the language

are of primary challenge across cultures.

To conclude, these children are socially constructed in a social context where

cultural and social globalization have influenced the construct of their identity as

EFL learners. Yet the curriculum is infused with developmental skill-based

perspective that does not adequately account for who these learners are. These

children have constructed their identities because of their interaction with the outside

world. As Kuwait is a hybrid society influenced by globalization and technical,

communicative, and intellectual factors, it is inadequate to neglect their personal

experience with the English language. These children encounter English in their

daily lives as part of the cultural diversity in which they live. The challenge for the

school is to build most productively on these encounters.

Limitations of the Research

This research was an in-depth qualitative investigation of the place of writing

in curriculum for young learners of EFL in Kuwait during their fifth and sixth


Chapter 8

months in first grade. As such its findings cannot be generalised to other populations

of young EFL learners. While practitioners and researchers might reflect on the

implications for other settings, those implications are likely to be limited by issues of

both time and place. With respect to time, the apparent importance of prior and

concurrent Arabic learning, means that the study might have yielded different

outcomes if conducted earlier or later in the children’s first year of formal Arabic

studies. With respect to place, it is possible that different findings might have

emerged from a study conducted in governates outside the urban core of Kuwait

City. As will be recalled from the conceptual framework in Chapter 3, globalising

processes are not necessarily experienced in the same way throughout a country. In

Kuwait, for example, global English is more evident towards the coastal area than in

the interior. It is possible that this would have implications for young children’s

capabilities in writing English.

The findings of this study are generalisable to theory. As discussed earlier in

this chapter, the findings of the study made it possible to identify the complexity of

the discourses that are constructing young writers of global English in a foreign

language context. These included paradoxes, contradictions, tensions and conflicts

relating to i) English language as an instrument of global communication in the

twenty first century; ii) English education as a site for the building of Kuwaiti, Arab

and Islamic identity in the context of globalising forces; and iii) foreign language

teaching assumptions that are not universal but deeply implicated in particular

moments of Western culture and educational history.

Given the study’s aim of theoretical generalisation, detailed qualitative case

study was an appropriate design. However, in the course of the work, it became

apparent that it might have been useful to have an even more intensive case study

design. Each of the study’s 28 adult and 24 children participants was interviewed

once. The interviews focused very sharply on what was being taught as English, and

how and why, in the participants’ classrooms at the time of the study. Follow-up

interviews with participants would have enabled potentially interesting but

unanticipated themes to have been explored in greater depth, for example, contrasts

between current and past practices, including those of the parents’ own schooling.

The unavailability of the Indian school curriculum has limited the proposition

of this study. It was not intended however. For reasons beyond knowledge, the

school curriculum documents were not made available.


Chapter 8

Logistics bore on the case study design. Although I am a Kuwaiti educator, I

conducted the study during a field visit back to Kuwait while living in Australia. This

limited the fieldwork to a period of three months. Under different circumstances, a

longer period in the field would have enabled a more intensive case study design.

Further, it would have enabled deeper relationships with participants with

implications for the discussion of politically sensitive issues.

Recommendations for Future Work

Based on the findings and conclusions of this study, I make the following

recommendations:

� Research on a theoretical level aimed at international ESL and EFL

researchers is needed for teaching approaches to be reconsidered and

reprioritised in accordance with the characteristics of learners living in

contexts of global English.

� Research is needed to ensure that pedagogical guidelines in the EFL field

are based on research specific to the field rather than unquestioningly

extrapolated from first and second language context.

� Writing with first grade and monolingual EFL learners requires further

research to build knowledge about writing and young learners, what they

can do, and how they approach the skill of writing at an early age in a

foreign language in the a context of global forces.

� As research in the field of young foreign language learners and literacy

has been limited in the Arab world, and built on assumptions of second

language education available internationally, it is important to resume

research on young learners in the field of EFL in that world and base

pedagogic implications on the empirical findings produced.

� As a matter of urgency, policy makers in the state of Kuwait need to

review the general goals of teaching English in Kuwait and the English

language document to produce a curriculum that better fits the needs of

Kuwaiti society, taking into consideration teachers’ and parents’ opinions

and their hopes of English education.

� To counter Western assumptions and views of education and childhood,

and of young learners’ involvement in language learning, it is

recommended that further studies on child involvement in the Kuwaiti


Chapter 8

society are needed. The aim should be to identify how childhood is lived

in the society, recognizing the discourses of different childhoods. This

will make it possible to better provide English education for Kuwaiti

children.

� Classroom practices and pedagogic implications are in some conflict with

the policy documents. Teachers’ assumptions of writing and pre-writing

are somewhat unclear. There is a need to establish a secure ground for

teachers in order to put in practice the skill of writing into their teaching.

It is advised that the ELT supervisory department at the Ministry of

Education take solid action towards the provision of professional

development on writing for first grade teachers.

It is important also to review the efficacy of the configuration of methods of

ELT evident in the documents. How effective is the approach which pursues

communication through practice of macroskills? Is there a more effective

alternative? These are decisions that go beyond writing for all of the English

curriculum. They are decisions that need to be made on a strong empirical base.


Appendix A

Appendix A: Children’s Interview Questions

The questions gathered information about young learners’ attitudes and

understandings, and the children's ability in the English language and the writing

skill. They were trialled with five young learners in late February 2006 at a private

language institution. The attitude and understanding questions were translated and

asked in Arabic:

� Do you like learning the English language? Why?

� Can you tell me what do you do in the English lesson?

� I'm interested in knowing what activities do you like to do in the English

classroom?

� Then what do you like to do in the English classroom? And what do you

want to do more of in the English classroom?

� When the teacher speaks in English in class, do you understand what she

says?

� Can you write down some of the letters and words you have learnt in the

English lesson which I will dictate to you?


Appendix A

Appendix B: A Sample of Note-taking (interview with parent)

Data Tuesday 9/May/2006

Interviewee parent/Pg5//of child Cg5

Time start: 10.30-11.00 a.m

Place: school social workers office

Demographic info:

Mother of 4 children

Completed studies to 8th grade.

Understands English /can’t speak

Father, Bachelor of Ed./ 6P.E teacher

Cg5– middle child , 3rd from eldest

Age 6 yrs & 7 months

Cg5 enjoys singing in Eng. & likes to write.

Cg5 not exposed to English

Actual interview info:

No help provided at home in TEFL

Tutor is an alternative for TEFL

Parents help in all school studies except English

Mother proud of child and praises a lot.

Works on speaking by listening to cassette and singing along.

Uses words only

Not very familiar with child’s standard /relies on teachers comments & evaluation

Not happy with school curriculum

Compares her child to cousins who speak fluent English

Parent=‘stronger foundation for child to learn/ I wouldn’t teach at home’

‘Can’t bother to look at English pupils book’

Travels a lot

Not sure of child’s abilities

6 Code of participant:Cg5


Appendix B

Appendix B cont.

Gestures and personality:

Conservative wears (Abaya, traditional Islamic dress)

modest

Shy

Friendly and keeps smiling

Laughs (not knowing English)

Keeps leaning forward as talking and hands closed tightly.

Makes frequent eye contact

Low tone of voice


Appendix C

Appendix C: Parents’ Interview Questions

� What is your educational background?

� What language is used at home?

� Has your child been exposed to the English language before first grade?

� Why did you prefer to enrol your child in a private school?( to be asked to

private school parents )

� Describe your child’s spoken level in comparison to their written skills.

� Do you think your child’s abilities exceed what is being given to him/her in first

grade? How? ( to be asked to public school parents )

� How satisfied are you with what is being taught to your child in first grade in

regard to the English language?

� What is your opinion of the F.W.E curriculum? (public school parents)

� How can you, as a parent, help your child learn English?

� How is the language supported at home?


Appendix D

Appendix D: Teachers’ Interview Questions

� How many years have you been teaching first grade English?

� What kind of writing experiences do you offer first grade children in your

classroom during the English lesson?

� What are the goals of teaching English in your English classroom?

� In your opinion what do you think the targeted children are capable of doing in

general, and in relation to writing during the English lesson?

� What writing activities have you introduced in the first grade English lessons?

Why have you introduced these activities?

� How do you teach the writing activities? And why do you teach it in this way?

� Can you describe each of the six young learner’s speaking/listening skills

production in comparison with their reading/ writing skills level?

� What is your opinion of the first grade English Curriculum ?(public school

teachers)

� What do you think are the strengths and weaknesses of thew F.W.E

curriculum?(public school teachers)

� Do you think the delay of writing with young first grade children is in their best

interest?

� How would you describe each of the six young children’s achievement level or

ability in class?

� How would you describe the attitude of each of the six first grade learners during

the English lesson?

� How would you describe each of the young learner’s writing skill level?


Appendix E

Appendix E: Transcription Convention Symbols

Turn –taking:

‘ words’ simultaneous speech

[ Utterances overlap but do not start up simultaneously

= latching (no intervals between the end of the prior and the start of the

next part of speakers)

::::::: sound stretch

___ cut off of prior word or sound

Clarity:

Words certain transcription

(words) uncertain transcription

( ) untranscribable

(( )) clarify comment inserted into transcript by researcher

"hello" code-switching

ahhh speaker thinking of words

mmmm non-word sound

{ wallah } untranscribable words in speakers native language explained in

footnotes

Intonation:

WORDS words pronounced aloud in English

W-O-R-D words spelt aloud in English

WORD words stressed

'____' examples of classroom activity read out aloud

g n m k h a sound of alphabet letters

Pause:

((pause)) discernible pause (of any length)

(Dooley, 2001; Lillis & McKinney, 2003; Psathas, 1995)


Appendix F

Appendix F: A Caption of a Transcription

(School 1) r

PSB teacher

Researcher: Miss (PB/teacher) for how many years have you been teaching

English?

Teacher: hhh 13 years

Researcher: 13 years was that all in the primary stage?

Teacher: yes

Researcher: First, so what kind of writing experience do you offer first grade

children in your classroom during the English lesson?

Teacher: Just individual letters “not” full sentences writing

Researcher: Just letter writing

Teacher: Just letters “until now”

Researcher: Then what are the goals of English teaching in your class?

Teacher: Hhh How we can introduce a new language foreign language as I

think a second language, hhh just “as they say to eliminate the

ignorance of the foreign language “and fun as well =

Researcher: = fun as well. Do you believe each of the six children are able to form

sentences on their own?

Teacher: I think so yes they can

Researcher: ‘Orally?’

Teacher: ‘Just simple’ sentences orally =

Researcher: = orally

Researcher: In written form

Teacher: No no

Researcher: you don't think so.

Researcher: in your opinion what do you think are the children capable of doing

during the English lesson in general as a whole class?

Teacher: I think they can practice the first skill of speaking:::::, writing

somehow ahhh listening and as much as they can reading.


Appendix G

Appendix G: Data Management

Managing data and having an organized outline for the data collected is

constructive and practical. Yin (2003) suggested that every case study project should

create a presentable database so as to provide other investigators with the opportunity

to review the evidence directly and not be restricted to the written case study report.

The case study database included field notes from interviews, observations and

document analysis.

Data were managed through three major portfolios for the three participant

groups. Each portfolio was coded through participation roles: teachers, parents and

children. Each portfolio includes three different files sorted by the function of the

file: (1) personal files, (2) transcript files, and (3) analytical files (see Diagram 1).

The personal file reflects the observer's thoughts, description of the setting, and

problems or interferences. The transcript files include a handwritten record of the

interviews, and audio-recordings. The audio-recordings were transcribed, edited and

corrected and each audio-recording was labelled by a participant code number or the

participant school initials. File three, the analytic file, discusses emerging themes

from the interviews. Main themes were organized initially in this part as a basis for

the analysis of data. Each participant was coded in the portfolio and the three files.

The participants were coded according to role and file number (e.g., teacher=T,

personal file =1 code is T1). An index card file was created for practical reasons. The

coding scheme was used to identify initial themes of gender, role, place and time of

incident. Four teachers, 24 parents, and 24 children participated. In each portfolio

there are sub-index cards for each participant. As four case study classes were

observed, a fourth portfolio was created. This contains the field note pads, the digital

video recordings, 15 observation sheets for each time each class was visited (each

handwritten). A code was given to each and they were also indexed.

After identifying the main themes that emerged with those initially proposed,

a new portfolio was created with a new coding system relating to the sub-themes.

This portfolio contains files which are cross referenced. This kind of organization

helped me in easily retrieving the data needed.


Appendix G

App

end

ix H

: D

VD

Ana

lysi

s sh

eet

Th

e P

lace

of W

ritin

g

233

App

end

ix H

con

t.

Appendix I: Ethical Clearance


Appendix J

Appendix J: General Goals of English Language


Appendix J


Appendix K

Appendix K: The English Language Curriculum

Appendix L: The Pre–writing Skills in First Grade Curriculum


Appendix M

Appendix M: Student’s Work from the Boys’ Public School


Appendix N


Appendix M


Appendix N


Appendix M


Appendix N


Appendix N

Appendix N: Student’s work from the Girls’ Public school


Appendix N


Appendix O

Appendix O: English Private School class work material


Appendix O


Appendix P

Appendix P: Student’s Question and Answer Copying Exercise

from the Indian Private School


Appendix P


Appendix P

Appendix Q: Teacher Composes Short paragraph for Students

to Copy from the Board at the Indian Private School


Appendix Q


References

References

Agar, M. (1996). The professional stranger: An informal introduction to

ethnography (2nd ed.). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Al-Hemadan, H. (2005, 6th September). Forty thousand students start school in

private sector. Alwatan Newspaper. Retrieved September 7, 2005, from

http://www.alwatan.com.kw/

Allan, J., & Iggulden, M. (2002b). Fun with English pupil’s book: Grade 1. Cairo,

Egypt: Egyptian International Publishing Company-Longman.

Allan, J., & Iggulden, M. (2002a). Fun with English teacher's guide; Grade 1. Cairo,

Egypt: Egyptian International Publishing Company-Longman

Al-Mutawa, N. (1992). The Education pathway after the Iraqi invasion: Where is it

leading to? Proceedings of the Conference of The English Language

Curriculum in Public Schools. Plaza Hotel, Kuwait.

Al-Mutawa, N. (1994). Attitudes of Kuwaiti citizens towards introducing English as

a foreign language in primary schools (EFLPS). Proceedings of the

Symposium of Teaching English as a Banking Language, Kuwait.

Al-Mutawa, N. (1996). Evaluation of inset course for teachers of English as a foreign

language in the primary state (EFLPS) in Kuwait. The Educational Journal,

10(39), 15-40.

Al-Mutawa, N. (2002). Impact of EFL on the mother tongue of Arab children.

International Journal of Arabic-English Studies, 3, 223-300.

Al-Mutawa, N., & Kalian, T. (1989). Methods of teaching English to Arab students.

Harlow, UK: Longman Group Limited.


References

Al-Sana’a, O. (1993, June). The aims of teaching the English language in the

Arabian Gulf countries. Paper presented at the Teaching EFL in primary

schools Seminar, Kuwait.

Arabic Language Syllabus Distribution. (2002/2004). Ministry of Education,

Kuwait: Government Printing Office.

Auerbach, E. (2000). Creating participatory learning communities: Paradoxes and

possibilities. In J. K. Hall & W. Eggington (Eds.), The sociopolitics of

English language teaching (pp. 143-164). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual

Matters Ltd.

Beard, R. (1995). International perspectives on children's developing literacy. In C.

Brumfit, J. Moon & R. Tongue (Eds.), Teaching English to children: From

practice to principle (pp. 228-243). Harlow, UK: Longman.

Brumfit, C. (1995). Introduction: Teaching English to children. In C. Brumfit, J.

Moon & R. Tongue (Eds.), Teaching English to children: From practice to

principle (pp. iv-viii). Harlow, UK: Longman.

Burns, R. (2000). Introduction to research methods. Frenchs Forest, Australia:

Pearson Education Australia Pty Limited.

Cameron, L. (2001). Teaching languages to young learners. Cambridge, UK:

Cambridge University Press.

Cameron, L. (2003). Challenges for ELT from the expansion in teaching children.

ELT Journal, 57(2), 105-112.

Christensen, P., & Prout, A. (2005). Anthropological and sociological perspectives

on the study of children. In S. Greene & D. Hogan (Eds.), Researching

children's experience: Approaches and methods (pp. 42- 59). London: Sage

Publications.


References

Cook, V. (2001). Second language learning and language teaching (3rd ed.).

London: Arnold.

Cook, V. (2002a). Background to the L2 user. In V. Cook (Ed.), Portraits of the L2

user (pp. 1-10). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters Ltd.

Cook, V. (2002b). Language teaching methodology and the L2 user perspective. In

V. Cook (Ed.), Portraits of the L2 user (pp. 327-343). Clevedon, UK:

Multilingual Matters Ltd.

Cook, V. (2005). Written language and foreign language teaching. In V. Cook & B.

Bassetti (Eds.), Second language writing systems (pp. 424-441). Clevedon,

UK: Multilingual Matters Ltd.

Creswell, W. J. (2005). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating

quantitative and qualitative research (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ:

Pearson Educational, Inc.

Croll, P. (1986). Systematic classroom observation. London: The Falmer Press.

Crystal, D. (2003). English as a global language (2nd ed.). Cambridge, UK:


Curtain, H., & Pesola, C. (1994). Language and children: Making the match:

Foreign language instruction for an early start grades k-8. White Plains, NY:

Longman Publishing Group.

Denzin, N., & Lincoln, Y. (2000). Introduction: The discipline and practice of

qualitative research. In N. Denzin, & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of

qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 1-32). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Dooley, T. K. (2001). Adapting to diversity: Pedagogy for Taiwanese students in

mainstream Australian secondary school classes. Unpublished doctoral

dissertation, Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia.


References

El-Dib, M. A. B. (2004). Language learning strategies in Kuwait: Links to gender,

language level, and culture in a hybrid context. Foreign Language Annuals,

37(1), 85-95.

Essa, M. R., & Al-Mutawa, N. (1997). Introduction of EFLPS in the Arab context.

Bulletin of the Faculty of Education-Qatar University, 14, 1-14.

Felberbauer, M., Demirel, O., & Henseler, Y. (2005). Report on the implementation

of fun with English grades 1-3 (No. 1077). Kuwait: Ministry of Education.

Fine, G. A., & Sandstrom, K. L. (1988). Knowing children: Participant observation

with minors. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Finocchiaro, M. (1964). Teaching children foreign languages. New York: McGraw

Hill Book Company.

Finocchiaro, M. (1989). English as a second / foreign language: From theory to

practice (4th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall Inc.

Finocchiaro, M., & Bonomo, M. (1973). The foreign language learner: Guide for

teachers. New York: Regents Publishing Company, Inc.

Finocchiaro, M., & Brumfit, C. (1983). The functional-notional approach: From

theory to practice. New York: Oxford University Press.

Fontana, A., & Frey J, H. (2003). The interview: From structured questions to

negotiated text. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Collecting and

interpreting qualitative materials (2nd ed., pp. 61-79). Thousand Oaks, CA:

Sage Publications.

Foreign and Commonwealth Office. (2007). Retrieved September 27, 2007, from

www.fco.gov.uk/


References

Frohlich-Ward, L. (1984). Two lessons: Five-year-olds and seven-year-olds. In C.

Brumfit, J. Moon & R. Tongue (Eds.), Teaching English to children: From

practice to principle (pp. 97-108). Harlow, UK: Longman.

Frohlich-Ward, L. (1992). Let them read! – later: Problems of introducing reading

and writing to young learners of English as a foreign language. In A. Essen &

E. Burkart (Eds.), Homage to W.R.Lee: Essays in English as a foreign or

second language (pp. 131-137). Berlin, Germany: Foris Publication.

Fromkin, V., Rodman, R., & Hyams, N. (2007). An introduction to language (8th

ed.). Boston: Thomson Wadsworth.

Gee, J. (2000). New people in new worlds: Networks, the new capitalism and

schools. In B. Cope & M. Kalantzis (Eds.), Multiliteracies: Literacy learning

and the design of social futures (pp. 43-68). Melbourne, Australia:

MacMillan.

Gee, J. (2002). Literacies, identities, and discourses. In M. Schleppegrell & C.

Colombi (Eds.), Developing advanced literacy in first and second languages:

Meaning with Power. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,

Publishers.

Gee, J. (2005). An introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and method (2nd ed.).

New York: Routledge: Taylor & Francis Group.

Gee, J. (2008). Social linguistics and literacies: Ideology in discourses (3rd ed.).

New York: Routledge: Taylor & Francis Group.

General Goals of Education. (n.d.). Kuwait: Ministry of Education: Government

Printing Office.

Giddens, A. (1990). The consequences of modernity. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press in

association with Basil Blackwell.


References

Giddens, A. (2000). Runaway world: How globalization is reshaping our lives. New

York: Routledge.

Goodman, S., & Graddol, D. (1997). Redesigning English: New texts, new identities. New York: Routledge.

Graddol, D. (1997). The future of English: A guide to forecasting the popularity of

the English language in the 21st century. London: Glenton Press.

Gray, J. (2002). The global coursebook in English language teaching. In D. Block &

D. Cameron (Eds.), Globalization and language teaching (pp. 151-166).

London: Routledge

Holliday, A. (1994). Appropriate methodology and social context. Cambridge, UK:


Holstein J, A., & Gubrium J, F. (1997). Active interviewing. In D. Silverman (Ed.),

Qualitative research: Theory, method and practice (pp. 113-129). London:

Sage Publications.

Huberman, M., & Miles, M. (1998). Data management and analysis methods. In N.

Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Collecting and interpreting qualitative materials

(pp. 179-210). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Huebner, T. (2006). Bangkok's linguistic landscapes: Environmental print,

codemixing and language change. In D. Gorter (Ed.), Linguistic landscape: A

new approach to multilingualism (pp. 31-50). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual

Matters.

Jaffer, S. (2003). The English curriculum first grade primary book. Kuwait: Ministry

of Education.

James, A., & James, A. (2004). Constructing childhood: Theory, policy and social

practice. Houndmills, Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.


References

James, A., Jenks, C., & Prout, A. (1998). Theorizing childhood. Cambridge, UK:

Polity Press.

James, A., & Prout, A. (Eds.). (1997). Constructing and reconstructing childhood:

Contemporary issues in the sociological study of childhood (2nd ed.).

London: Routledge Falmer.

Janesick, V. (2000). The choreography of qualitative research design: Minuets,

improvisations, and crystallization. In N. Denzin, & Y. Lincoln (Eds.),

Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 391-392). Thousand Oaks,

CA: Sage Publications.

Jenks, C. (2005). Childhood (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.

Kaufman, N. H., Rizzini, I., Wilson, K., & Bush, M. (2002). The Impact of global

economic, political, and social transformations on the lives of children: A

framework for analysis. In N. H. Kaufman & I. Rizzini (Eds.), Globalization

and children: Exploring potentials for enhancing opportunities in the lives of

children and youth (pp. 3-18). New York: Kluwer Academic / Plenum

Publishers.

Keats, D. M. (1993). Skilled interviewing (2nd ed.). Hawthorn, Australia: Australian

Council for Educational Research.

Kenner, C. (2000). Home pages: Literacy links for bilingual children. Staffordshire,

UK: Trentham Books Limited.

Kenner, C., & Kress, G. (2003). The multisemotic resources of biliterate children.

Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 3(2), 179-202.

Kenner, C., Kress, G., Al-Khatib, H., Kam, R., & Tsai, K.-C. (2004). Finding the

keys to biliteracy: How young children interpret different writing systems.

Language and Education, 18(2), 124-144.


References

Kern, R. (2000). Literacy and language teaching. Oxford, UK: Oxford University

Press.

King, M. (2007). The sociology of childhood as scientific communication:

Observations from a social systems perspective. Childhood, 14, 193-213.

Klapper, J. (2003). Taking communication to task: A critical review of recent trends

in language teaching. Language Learning Journal 27, 33-41.

Kubota, R. (2002). The impact of globalization on language teaching in Japan. In D.

Block & D. Cameron (Eds.), Globalization and language teaching (pp. 13-

28). London: Routledge.

Kuwait Cultural Office. (2006.) History of Education in Kuwait. 13 August 2007,

from http://www.kuwaitculture.com/About%20Us/History.htm

Kuwait Guide. (2007). Retrieved September 27, 2007, from

http://www.justlanded.com/english/kuwait

Kuwait Information Office-U.S. (2007). Retrieved 31st August, 2007, from

http://www.kuwait-info.org/country_profile/education.html

.

Kvale, S. (1996). Interviews: An introduction to qualitative research interviewing.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

Larsen-Freeman, D. (2000). Techniques and principles in language teaching (2nd

ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University press.

Larsen-Freeman, D., & Freeman, D. (in press). Language moves: The place of

foreign languages in classroom teaching and learning. Sage Journals online.

Lee, P., & Azman, H. (2004). Grasping at an uncertain future: English in elementary

education around the world. In P. Lee & H. Azman (Eds.), Global English


References

and primary schools: Challenges for elementary education (pp. 1-18).

Melbourne, Australia: CAE Press.

Library of Congress Country Studies. (2003). Retrieved 27th April, 2005, from

http://lcweb2.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?frd:@field(Docid+kw0027)

Library of Congress. Retrieved 31st August, 2007, from

http://countrystudies.u.s/persian-gulf-states/19-education.htm

Lillis, T., & Mckinney, C. (2003). Analysing language in context: A student

workbook. Stoke-on-Trent, UK: Trentham Books Limited.

Linse, C. (2005). Practical English language teaching: Young learners. New York:

McGraw-Hill.

Luk, J. (2005). Voicing the "self" through an "other" language: Exploring

communicative language teaching for global communication. In S.

Canagarajah (Ed.), Reclaiming the local in language policy and practice (pp.

247-268). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum associates, publishers

MacNaughton, G., & Smith, K. (2005). Transforming research ethics: The choices

and challenges of researching with children. In A. Farrell (Ed.), Ethical

research with children. Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press.

Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. (1999). Designing qualitative research (3rd ed.).

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

McCormick, R., & James, M. (1989). Curriculum evaluation in schools (2nd ed.).

London: Routledge.

McKay, P. (2006). Assessing young language learners. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge

University Press.


References

McKay, P., & Guse, J. (2007). Five-minute activities for young learners. Cambridge,

UK: Cambridge University Press.

Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education

(2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Ministry of Education. (n.d.-a). English at the Primary Stage in the State of Kuwait.

Kuwait: Author.

Ministry of Education. (n.d.-b). English Language Curriculum Document for the

Primary Stage in the State of Kuwait. Kuwait: Author.

Ministry of Education. (2006). Kuwait Statistic Charts Survey Report. (pp.

Translated). Ministry of Education, Kuwait: Government Printing Office.

Ministry of Education. (2002). Syllabus Distribution Primary Stage. Kuwait: Kuwait

Government Printing Office.

Murphy-Berman, V., & Kaufman, N. H. (2002). Globalization in cross-cultural

perspective. In N. H. Kaufman & I. Rizzini (Eds.), Globalization and

children: Exploring potentials for enhancing opportunities in the lives of

children and youth (pp. 19-30). New York: Kluwer Academics/Plenum

Publishers.

National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human research. (2007). Retrieved 1

Sept, 2007, from

http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/publications/synopses/e72syn.htm

Newmark, P. (c1991). About translation / Peter Newmark. Clevedon [England] ;

Philadelphia: Multilingual Matters.

Norton, B. (2000). Identity and language learning: Gender, ethnicity and

educational change. Harlow, UK: Pearson.


References

Nunan, D. (1992). Research methods in language learning. New York: Cambridge

University Press.

Ominglot Writing Systems and Language of the World. (2007). Retrieved 4 Sept,

2007, from http://www.omniglot.com/writing/arabic.htm

Patrick, A., & Harley, B. (Eds.). (1992). Issues and options in language teaching.

Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Paul, D. (2003). Teaching English to children in Asia. Hong Kong: Longman.

Pennycook, A. (1994). The cultural politics of English as an international language.

London: Longman.

Pennycook, A. (2000). The social politics and the cultural politics of language

classrooms. In J. K. Hall & W. Eggington (Eds.), The sociopolitics of English

language teaching (pp. 89-103). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters Ltd.

Phillipson, R. (2002). Global English and local language policies. In A. Kirkpatrick

(Ed.), Englishes in Asia: Communication, identity, power & education (pp. 7-

28). Melbourne, Australia: Language Australia Ltd

Powers, W. (2005). Transcription techniques for the spoken word. Lanham:

AltaMira Press.

Prout, A. (2005). The future of childhood: Towards the interdisciplinary study of

children. London: Routledge Falmer.

Psathas, G. (1995). Conversation analysis: The study of talk-in-interaction.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.


References

Richardson, L. (2000). Writing: A method of inquiry. In D. Norman, & Y. Lincoln

(Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 933-934). Thousand

Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Rivers, W. M. (1981). Teaching foreign language skills (2nd ed.). Chicago: The

University of Chicago Press.

Rowe, D. W. (2008). Social contracts for writing: Negotiating shared understandings

about text in the preschool years. Reading Research Quarterly, 43(1), 66-95.

Seidman, I. (1998). Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for researchers in

education and the social sciences (2nd ed.). New York: Teachers College

Press.

Seidman, I. (2006). Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for researchers in

education and the social sciences (3rd ed.). New York: Teachers College,

Columbia University.

Silverman, D. (2000). Analysing talk and text. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.),

Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 829-830). Thousand Oaks,

CA: Sage Publication.

Silverman, D. (2001). Interpreting qualitative data: Methods for analysing talk, text

and interaction (2nd ed.). London: Sage Publications.

Smith, B. (2001). Arabic speakers. In M. Swan & B. Smith (Eds.), Learner English:

A teacher's guide to interference and other problems (pp. 195-213).

Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Soto, L. D., & Swander, B. B. (Eds.). (2005). Power and voice in research. New

York: Peter Lang.

Spring, J. (2006). Pedagogies of globalization: The rise of the educational security

state. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.


References

Stern, H. H. (Ed.). (1992). Issues and options in language teaching / H.H. Stern.

Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Stromquist, N. P., & Monkman., K. (Eds.). (2000.). Globalization and education:

Integration and contestation across cultures. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

Sykes., J. B. (Ed.). (1971). Technical translator's manual. London: Aslib.

Tabulawa, R. (2003). International aid agencies, learner-centred pedagogy and

political democratisation: A critique. Comparative Education, 39(1), 7-26.

Thornbury, S., & Slade, D. (2006). Conversation: From description to pedagogy.

Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Tuckman, B. (1994). Conducting educational research (4th ed.). Fort Worth, TX:

Harcourt Brace College Publishers.

Turner, B. (1994). Orientalism postmodernism & globalism. London: Routledge.

University of Cambridge. (2007). International Primary Programme. Retrieved 26

July, 2007, from

http://www.cie.org.uk/qualifications/academic/priamry/cipp

U.S Commercial Service. Retrieved 5th October, 2005, from

http://www.buyusa/gov/kuwait/en/

U.S. Department of State Bureau of near Eastern affairs. Retrieved 31st August,

2007, from http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/35876.htm

Van Els, T., Bongaerts, T., Extra, G., Van Os, C., & Janssen-Van, D. A.-M. (1984).

Applied linguistics and the learning and teaching of foreign languages (R. R.

Van Oirsouw, Trans.). London: Edward Arnold Ltd.


References

Widdowson, H. G. (1979). The teaching of English as communication. In C. Brumfit

& K. Johnson (Eds.), The communicative approach to language teaching (pp.

117-121). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Widdowson, H. G. (1990). Aspects of language teaching. Oxford, UK: Oxford

University Press.

Woodhead, M., & Faulkner, D. (2008). Subjects, objects or participants? Dilemmas

of psychological research with children. In P. Christensen & A. James (Eds.),

Research with children: Perspectives and practices (pp. 10-40). London:

Routledge.

The World FactBook: Kuwait. (2007). Retrieved 31st August, 2007, from

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/goes.ku.html

Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed., Vol. 5).

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Zughoul, M. R. (2003). Globalization and EFL/ESL pedagogy in the Arab world.

(ERIC Document Reproduction Service NO ED479810)

Zwiers, M., & Morrisette, P. (1999). Effective interviewing of children: A

comprehensive guide for counselors and human service workers.

Philadelphia: Accelerated Development.

the place of writing in first grade kuwaiti english...

Documents