See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/331831889

APPENDIX E Questionnaire for English teachers

Method · March 2019

CITATIONS READS
0 1,542

1 author:

Nurul Farehah Mohamad Uri

University of Kuala Lumpur
13 PUBLICATIONS 86 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

CEFR adoption: Appropriacy of Form 5 English syllabus and assessments, teachers' perspectives and the challenges. View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Nurul Farehah Mohamad Uri on 01 October 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 245

APPENDIX E
Questionnaire for English teachers
I am Nurul Farehah Mohamad Uri currently pursuing my PhD at Universiti Kebangsaan
Malaysia, majoring in Language Testing and Evaluation. I am conducting a study on
stakeholders’ views on the implementation of CEFR in Malaysia. The aims of this study
are to investigate stakeholders' understanding on the implementation of CEFR for English
subject in secondary schools. This study is also interested to find out the applicability of
CEFR onto Form 5 English syllabus and assessments and explore the possible challenges
encountered by the stakeholders in the process of adopting CEFR in Malaysia.
Kindly complete the questionnaire as accurately and truthfully as possible. Rest assured
that your valuable opinions will be kept private and confidential. This survey takes about
5 to 10 minutes only. Thank you for your time and full cooperation. Your generous help is
greatly appreciated.

INSTRUCTIONS: This questionnaire is divided into four sections A, B, C & D. Please

tick (√) the options that best fit your situation.
A. Demographic Background
Age 21 – 30
31 – 40
41- 50
51 or above

Status: English option

Non- English option (please specify: _________________________)
 246

Highest qualifications PhD

Masters
Degree
Diploma

Current position: Principal / Vice principal

GPK1/ GPKhem / GPKCocu
Head of panel
Teacher

Teaching experience: < 1 year – 5 years

6 – 10 years
11- 15 years
16 years >

Current form you: Lower secondary (form 1-3)

are teaching Upper secondary (form 4 & 5)

Did you take MUET?

Yes No

Please tick (√) your English language ability based on your MUET result:
Band 6
Band 5
Band 4
Band 3
Band 2
Band 1
 247

Did you take APTIS test for teachers?

Yes No

Please tick (√) your English language ability based on your APTIS result:
C2
C1
B2
B1
A2
A1

Have you attended any CEFR related workshops, trainings or seminars? If your answer is
no, please proceed to section B.
Yes No

How many CEFR related workshops, trainings or seminars have you attended as of
today?
1
2
3>
 248

INSTRUCTIONS: Please rate how you strongly agree or disagree with each of the
following statements by circling the options.
B. Teachers’ understandings on the implementation of CEFR.
i) Teachers’ familiarity
Statements Strongly Strongly
disagree agree
I am very familiar with CEFR. 1 2 3 4 5 6

I know the main ideas and concept 1 2 3 4 5 6

of CEFR.
I only have a vague idea about 1 2 3 4 5 6
CEFR.
I only know the name, not the 1 2 3 4 5 6
content.
I get to know about CEFR from my
colleagues. 1 2 3 4 5 6
I get to know about CEFR from
readings (books, newspaper, 1 2 3 4 5 6
articles and the internet).
I am confident English language
teachers in Malaysia know CEFR 1 2 3 4 5 6
descriptors well.
I was formally introduced to the
concept of CEFR during my in- 1 2 3 4 5 6
service teacher training which is
why I am familiar with CEFR.
I was formally introduced to the
concept of CEFR at conferences, 1 2 3 4 5 6
seminars and workshops.
I am not well aware of the CEFR
descriptors. 1 2 3 4 5 6
I am familiar with both CEFR
global scale as well as “can do” 1 2 3 4 5 6
descriptor levels for all four English
language skills.
I have read CEFR related
documents (for instance: English 1 2 3 4 5 6
language education reform in
Malaysia: The roadmap 2015-
2025).
 249

I have been informed that the

implementation of CEFR in 1 2 3 4 5 6
Malaysia will be done in three
waves.
I am well informed about the CEFR
roadmap as well as aligning process 1 2 3 4 5 6
and its effect on my teaching and
learning.
I am aware that CEFR aligned
textbooks for year 1 and form 1 are 1 2 3 4 5 6
available in schools now.
I have not been informed that the
CEFR aligned textbooks are used as 1 2 3 4 5 6
supplementary books temporarily.

I am totally aware that the Ministry

of Education has set CEFR levels
B1 and B2 as the target levels for 1 2 3 4 5 6
Form 5 students to achieve upon the
completion of secondary school.
I am familiar with the CEFR level
B1/B2 four descriptors. 1 2 3 4 5 6
The CEFR familiarization
workshop has helped me to 1 2 3 4 5 6
understand and familiarize myself
with this framework.
Series of trainings and workshops
on CEFR are necessary in order for
teachers to fully understand and 1 2 3 4 5 6
familiarize themselves with the
concept and usage of this
framework.
 250

ii) Awareness on the main objectives of CEFR.

Statements Strongly Strongly
disagree agree
I know the main objectives of
CEFR. 1 2 3 4 5 6
I now understand the rationale
behind CEFR descriptors. 1 2 3 4 5 6
I believe one of the main objectives
of CEFR is to establish common
proficiency standards or 1 2 3 4 5 6
benchmarks nationally and
internationally
I believe one of the main objectives
of CEFR is to provide a basis for
comparison of the levels of 1 2 3 4 5 6
language proficiency for individual
who wishes to study or work
abroad.

iii) Adoption of CEFR onto Form 5 English syllabus and assessment.

Statements Strongly Strongly

Disagree agree
The CEFR descriptors are user-
friendly (easy to understand & use). 1 2 3 4 5 6
Adoption of CEFR in schools is
inevitable due to global spread of 1 2 3 4 5 6
English.
Adoption of CEFR onto Form 5
English syllabus and assessments
are needed to improve students’ 1 2 3 4 5 6
level of English proficiency.
Major national examination such as
SPM should be revamped to align it 1 2 3 4 5 6
with CEFR and its descriptors.
The adoption of CEFR onto Form 5
English syllabus and assessments is 1 2 3 4 5 6
part of globalization.
Adoption of CEFR onto English
SPM syllabus could improve 1 2 3 4 5 6
English proficiency among
secondary school leavers.
 251

CEFR provides a workable basis for

comparing the standards of
proficiency achieved in different 1 2 3 4 5 6
countries against Form 5 English
syllabus and assessments.
Implementation of CEFR onto
Form 5 English syllabus and
assessments help to elevate English
proficiency level among Malaysian 1 2 3 4 5 6
and to compete economically with
other countries.
It is necessary for Malaysia to adopt
CEFR onto Form 5 English syllabus
and assessments in the era of
globalization in which the main 1 2 3 4 5 6
medium of communication is
English.
The use of CEFR based teaching
and learning materials for Form 5
English will assist teachers to fully 1 2 3 4 5 6
utilize CEFR descriptors in their
teaching and learning.
The adoption of CEFR onto Form 5
English syllabus and assessments
will produce school leavers who are
able to work and compete at 1 2 3 4 5 6
international level due to strong
command of English.

The use of CEFR descriptors could

make English as the language of 1 2 3 4 5 6
work and economy among our
school leavers.
The adoption of CEFR levels B1
and B2 onto Form 5 English
syllabus and assessments is
believed to prepare Form 5 students 1 2 3 4 5 6
to be ready for post-secondary
school.

The adoption of CEFR onto Form 5

English syllabus and assessments
will increase Malaysia’s
participation in global market as
well as being economically 1 2 3 4 5 6
competitive with the rise in the
number of country’s human
 252

resource who is highly skilled and

has good command of English.

C. Applicability of CEFR for Form 5 English syllabus and assessments.

Statements Strongly Strongly
disagree Agree
I believe the proposed CEFR levels
B1 and B2 for Form 5 students are 1 2 3 4 5 6
suitable.

I believe the proposed CEFR levels

B1 and B2 that Form 5 students
should achieve upon completion of 1 2 3 4 5 6
secondary school are attainable.

I believe it is difficult for teachers

to adapt the CEFR descriptors. 1 2 3 4 5 6

I believe the proposed CEFR levels

B1 and B2 that Form 5 students
should attain at the end of 1 2 3 4 5 6
secondary school are realistic.
I can easily relate CEFR descriptors
to Form 5 English syllabus and 1 2 3 4 5 6
assessments.

I believe now is the most suitable

time for Malaysia to adopt and 1 2 3 4 5 6
integrate CEFR onto the education
system.
I believe CEFR is a suitable
framework to be adopted for Form 1 2 3 4 6 6
5 English syllabus and assessments.

I believe CEFR is an applicable

framework to be adopted onto Form 1 2 3 4 6 6
5 English syllabus and assessments.

CEFR descriptors are suitable to be

used in Form 5 English syllabus and 1 2 3 4 5 6
assessments.
CEFR descriptors are applicable to
Malaysian context. 1 2 3 4 5 6
 253

Some of CEFR descriptors are

irrelevant to the Malaysian context. 1 2 3 4 5 6
CEFR is relevant to be used outside
Europe especially in South East 1 2 3 4 5 6
Asia.

CEFR is an applicable framework

to help Malaysia meets the 1 2 3 4 5 6
economy and global demands.

It is best to adopt CEFR in its

original form. 1 2 3 4 5 6
CEFR should be modified like
Japan to ensure its applicability and
suitability according to Malaysia 1 2 3 4 5 6
context.

It is highly recommended to adapt

and modify CEFR to fit in the 1 2 3 4 5 6
Malaysian context with local touch.

Suitable Form 5 English textbooks,

exercise books and other teaching
and learning materials which 1 2 3 4 5 6
conform to CEFR levels B1 and B2
are needed.

Imported European CEFR based

textbooks, exercise books and other
teaching and learning materials are 1 2 3 4 5 6
the most suitable for Form 5
English syllabus and assessments in
Malaysia.

New CEFR aligned textbooks are

not needed because the present 1 2 3 4 5 6
textbooks are still relevant and meet
the demands of CEFR descriptors.

Malaysian made CEFR based

textbooks, exercise books and other
teaching and learning materials are 1 2 3 4 5 6
the most suitable for Form 5
English syllabus and assessments.
 254

CEFR adoption in Malaysia is

considered not suitable if Form 5
student do not attain either level B1 1 2 3 4 5 6
or B2 upon secondary school
completion.

CEFR adoption in Malaysia is

considered not applicable if Form 5
students do not attain either level 1 2 3 4 5 6
B1 or B2 upon secondary school
completion.

D) Challenges and frictions

INSTRUCTIONS: Please rate your opinion with each of the following statements by circling the
options.
Statements Strongly Strongly
disagree agree
I see myself as one of the
challenges in the implementation 1 2 3 4 5 6
of CEFR in Malaysia.

Designing CEFR based classroom

activities is time consuming. 1 2 3 4 5 6

I am not in favor of using CEFR in

my class as it reduces my autonomy 1 2 3 4 5 6
as teacher.
The integration of CEFR into our
education system will add more 1 2 3 4 5 6
burden and extra workload to the
teachers.
I am still not clear about the detail
process of CEFR implementation in 1 2 3 4 5 6
Malaysia.
I am comfortable with teacher-
centered approach; therefore CEFR 1 2 3 4 5 6
does not suit my teaching approach.

It will be challenging for me to

design class activities based on 1 2 3 4 5 6
CEFR level descriptors and “can
do” statements.
 255

I am not motivated enough to

engage effectively with the CEFR 1 2 3 4 5 6
“can do” statements in my
classroom activities.
I am reluctant to accept CEFR
because this framework emphasizes
on student-centered approach in 1 2 3 4 5 6
which I believe is less appropriate
in Malaysian classrooms.

I doubt the applicability of CEFR

descriptors to cater to the limited,
intermediate and advanced users of
English using the same syllabus and 1 2 3 4 5 6
assessments for Form 5 students.

It will be difficult to measure Form

5 students’ understanding and
mastery of grammar items since it is 1 2 3 4 5 6
not mentioned at any levels of
CEFR descriptors.

Lack of understanding on the

concept of CEFR and its
applicability in classroom will 1 2 3 4 5 6
hinder teachers from using it in their
classroom.

The length of time required for

students and teachers to become
familiar with and understand CEFR
and its descriptors will be a 1 2 3 4 5 6
challenge to integrate and complete
CEFR based- classroom activities
in class.

It will be a challenge to integrate

CEFR in teaching if one does not
fully understand CEFR descriptors 1 2 3 4 5 6
levels and its many dimensions.

Teachers’ limited understanding of

CEFR and a teaching approach 1 2 3 4 5 6
based on “can do” tasks will be a
challenge for teachers.
 256

Transition from a more grammar

oriented pedagogy to a more
communicative (action-oriented) 1 2 3 4 5 6
approach is also a challenge in the
process of CEFR implementation.

Form 5 students’ low level of

English proficiency will lead to
minimal students’ involvement in a 1 2 3 4 5 6
communicative (action-oriented)
approach.

CEFR is only another global

language policy borrowed by our
government and it will not bring
significance change to the level of 1 2 3 4 5 6
English proficiency among
Malaysian students.

Other comments:
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________

Thank you very much for your time and participation. Your answers will be collated and
aggregated for use as part of my PhD research.

*The results collected using this questionnaire was published in 3L: Language, Linguistics, and
Literature: The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies. 24(3).168 – 183. 2018.
http://dx.doi.org/10.17576/3L-2018-2403-13

View publication stats