A CEFR Aligned Curriculum Framework: Through the Lens of Akademi Pengajian Bahasa, Universiti Teknologi Mara

Sharifah Shahnaz Syed Husain; Julina Munchar; Zaemah Abdul Kadir; T. Parimala Devi Thevarajoo; Puteri Zarina Megat Khalid; Ani Susanti

doi:10.47405/mjssh.v9i10.3050

Sharifah Shahnaz Syed Husain Universiti Teknologi MARA, Shah Alam, 40450, Selangor, Malaysia
Julina Munchar Universiti Teknologi MARA, Shah Alam, 40450, Selangor, Malaysia https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3746-0647
Zaemah Abdul Kadir Universiti Teknologi MARA, Shah Alam, 40450, Selangor, Malaysia https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5296-0319
T. Parimala Devi Thevarajoo Universiti Teknologi MARA, Shah Alam, 40450, Selangor, Malaysia https://orcid.org/0009-0002-3663-5756
Puteri Zarina Megat Khalid Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris, Tanjung Malim, 35900, Perak, Malaysia https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9296-8662
Ani Susanti Universitas Ahmad Dahlan, Jl. Ahmad Yani, Tamanan, Nanguntapan, Bantul, Yogyakarta, 55191, Indonesia https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9885-9689

DOI: https://doi.org/10.47405/mjssh.v9i10.3050

Keywords: CEFR, Communicative competence, Curriculum, English language, Tertiary education

Abstract

Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) was introduced in 2013 in Malaysia to promote international benchmarking in Malaysia, to be integrated into all levels of education including the tertiary level. This decision was made in tandem with the introduction of the Malaysian Education Blueprint (2013-2025) and English Language Education Reforms. The reason for this is to produce graduates who are competitive and communicatively competent, able to increase graduate employability in a global market. Hilda Taba’s model and CEFR were used as theoretical frameworks in designing the new curriculum. Hilda Taba’s model was adopted at the preliminary stage to redefine goals and objectives. The structure of the new curriculum design can be divided into seven phases that are aligned to the CEFR proficiency level, language activities, and domains. The qualitative data needed for the development of the framework was taken from the stakeholders and the analysis of related government and UiTM policies. The proposed CEFR conceptual framework for tertiary education integrates the relevant requirements from the MQF (Malaysian Qualification Framework), CEFR, and MOHE (The Ministry of Higher Education). This paper offers insights into an approach to design a CEFR-aligned curriculum framework for the tertiary level, specifically to be implemented in Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM), Malaysia.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Abd Rahman, A. Z., Chong, S. T., Kaman, Z. K., & Leon, C. E. (2020). The CEFR Impact on English Language Educators teaching Engineering Programmes in a Private University in Malaysia. Journal of Techno-Social, 12(2), 41-47.

Ahmad Afip, L., Hamid, M. O., & Renshaw, P. (2019). Common European framework of reference for languages (CEFR): insights into global policy borrowing in Malaysian higher education. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 17(3), 378-393.

Aydın, B., Unver, M. M., Alan, B., & Sağlam, S. (2017). Combining the old and the new: Designing a curriculum based on the taba model and the global scale of English. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 13(1), 304-320.

Bakar, E. W. (2020). Can-do descriptors–realigning English language curriculum at higher education institution to CEFR. International Journal of Modern Languages and Applied Linguistics (IJMAL), 4(2), 84-97.

Bhuttah, T. M., Xiaoduan, C., Ullah, H., & Javed, S. (2019). Analysis of curriculum development stages from the perspective of Tyler, Taba and Wheeler. European Journal of Social Sciences, 58(1), 14-22.

Charttrakul, K., & Damnet, A. (2021). Role of the CEFR and English Teaching in Thailand: A Case Study of Rajabhat Universities. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 12(2), 82-89.

Council of Europe. (2017). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment Companion Volume with New Descriptors. Council of Europe. https://rm.coe.int/cefr-companion-volume-with-new-descriptors-2018/1680787989.

Council of Europe. (2020). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment Companion Volume with New Descriptors. Council of Europe. https://rm.coe.int/common-european-framework-of-reference-for-languages-learning-teaching/16809ea0d4.

Council of Europe. (2001). Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge University Press.

Foley, J. (2019). Issues on the initial impact of CEFR in Thailand and the region. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 9(2), 359-370.

Foley, J. (2022). CLT using CEFR and EIL in Southeast Asia and East Asia in the English language classroom. RELC Journal, 53(1), 240-252.

Hamid, M. O. (2016). The politics of language in education in a global polity. The handbook of global education policy, 259-274.

Johnson, K., Erickson, A., & Boggan, D. (2023). Connecting Learning Theory to Course Design and Facilitation by Developing a Teaching Philosophy. In Becoming and Supporting Online Adjunct Faculty in a Gig Economy (pp. 166-194). IGI Global.

Kanchai, T. (2019). Thai EFL university lecturers’ viewpoints towards impacts of the CEFR on their English language curricula and teaching practice. NIDA Journal of Language and Communication, 24(35), 23-47.

Lee, N. A. A., Kassim, A. A. M., & Bakar, R. A. (2022). The CEFR-aligned curriculum execution in Malaysia and other countries: A Conceptual paper. Malaysian Journal of ELT Research, 19(1).

Mohamad Uri, N.F., & Abd Aziz, M.S. (2018). Implementation of CEFR in Malaysia: Teachers’ awareness and the Challenges. 3L The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 24(3), 168 – 183.

Musa, N. C., Nizam, A. S., Mohamad, W. N. A. W., & Othman, Z. (2021). Framing the English Language (EL) CEFR-informed Curriculum Structure: The UKM Experience. Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities, 29.

Nawawi, N. M., Zuhaimi, N., Sabu, K., Mahamud, N. S. R., & Nasir, N. A. M. (2021). CEFR for languages and its effective implementation in secondary schools in Malaysia. Asian Journal of Assessment in Teaching and Learning, 11(1), 63-72.

Nguyen, V. H., & Hamid, M. O. (2021). The CEFR as a national language policy in Vietnam: Insights from a sociogenetic analysis. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 42(7), 650-662.

Piccardo, E., North, B., & Goodier, T. (2019). Broadening the scope of language education: Mediation, plurilingualism, and collaborative learning: The CEFR companion volume. Journal of e-Learning and Knowledge Society, 15(1),16-36.

Portillo, E., Look, K., Mott, D., Breslow, R., Kieser, M., & Gallimore, C. (2020). Intentional Application of the Taba Curriculum Model to Develop a Rural Pharmacy Practice Course. Innovations in Pharmacy, 11(1), 1-7.

Run, N. (2023). Reviewing Framework of Curriculum Implementation: ASEAN Context. Acitya Wisesa: Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 9-24.

Savski, K. (2020). Local problems and a global solution: examining the recontextualization of CEFR in Thai and Malaysian language policies. Lang Policy 19, 527–547

Savski, K. (2023). CEFR and the ELT practitioner: empowerment or enforcement?. ELT Journal, 77(1), 62-71.

Sidhu, G. K., Kaur, S., & Chi, L. J. (2018). CEFR-aligned school-based assessment in the Malaysian primary ESL classroom. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 8(2), 452-463.

Steiner-Khamsi, G. (2016). New directions in policy borrowing research. Asia Pacific Education Review, 17, 381-390.

Suasti, Y., & Ernawati, E. (2021). Education quality improvement through the development of Hilda Taba's Curriculum. International Journal of Educational Dynamics, 3(2), 61-66.

Sufi, M. K. A., & Stapa, M. (2020). Should the CEFR illustrative scales be localised to Malaysian higher education standards?–A conceptual paper. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 10(9), 885-897.