Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Concept-Based Instruction in English: Issues and Challenges

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Curriculum for High Ability Learners

Part of the book series: Education Innovation Series ((EDIN))

  • 1181 Accesses

Abstract

The twenty-first century requires learners be equipped with the ability to understand and apply synergistic thinking to solve problems involving different disciplines. The contextual placement of English standards gives rise to the readiness and necessity that can make this a distinct reality in English Language classrooms across Singapore. This chapter is a call for teachers to implement a concept-based English Language curriculum.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Hwa Chong Institution was founded in 1919. It runs a 6-year programme across student ages of 13–18. It is a consistently top-performing Singapore school for the GCE ‘A’ Level Examinations. Hwa Chong has been designated as a Ministry of Education Gifted Education Programme Centre since 1999.

  2. 2.

    At the GCE ‘A’ Level Examinations, the majority of students would take General Paper. This is a subject classified at H1 Level where it is accorded 1 unit of the 12 units students can take. If a candidate is more advanced in linguistic ability and opts for Knowledge and Inquiry , this candidate would take this H2 subject in lieu of General Paper.

References

  • Beane, J. A. (Ed.). (1995). Toward a coherent curriculum: The 1995 ASCD yearbook. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beane, J. (2006). Middle years curriculum: From rhetoric to reality (3rd ed.). Melbourne, Australia: Hawker Brownlow Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boix Mansilla, V., Miller, W. C., & Gardner, H. (2000). On disciplinary lenses and interdisciplinary work. In S. Wineburg & P. Grossman (Eds.), Interdisciplinary curriculum — challenges to implementation (pp. 17–38). New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borkowski, J. G., Carr, M., Rellinger, E., & Pressley, M. (1990). Self-regulated cognition: Interdependence of meta-cognition, attributions and self-esteem. In B. J. Jones & L. Idol (Eds.), Dimensions of thinking and cognitive instruction (pp. 53–92). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deci, E. L., Koestner, R., & Ryan, R. M. (2001). Extrinsic rewards and intrinsic motivation in education: Reconsidered once again. Review of Educational Research, 71, 1–27. doi:10.3102/00346543071001001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ee, J., Chang, A., & Tan, O. S. (2004). Thinking about thinking: What educators need to know. Singapore, Singapore: McGraw-Hill Education (Asia).

    Google Scholar 

  • Erickson, H. L. (2002). Concept-based curriculum and instruction: Teaching beyond the facts. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erickson, H. L. (2006). Concept-based curriculum and instruction for the thinking classroom. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gopinathan, S. (1991). Education. In E. C. T. Chew & E. Lee (Eds.), A history of Singapore (pp. 268–287). Singapore: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs, H. H., & Borland, J. (1986). The interdisciplinary concept model: Theory and practice. Gifted Child Quarterly, 30(4), 159–163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kagan, J. (1966). A developmental approach to conceptual growth. In H. J. Klausmeier & C. W. Harris (Eds.), Analyses of concept learning (pp. 97–116). New York: Academic.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Klausmeier, H. J., Ghatala, E. S., & Frayer, D. A. (1974). Conceptual learning and development: A cognitive view. New York: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(4), 212–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marland, S., Jr. (1972). Education of the gifted and talented (Vol. 1: Report to the Congress of the United States). Washington, DC: Office of Education (DHEW). Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED056243.pdf

  • Ministry of Education. (2008). English language syllabus 2010. Retrieved from http://www.moe.gov.sg/education/syllabuses/english-language-and-literature/files/english-primary-secondary-express-normal-academic.pdf

  • Ministry of Education. (2011). English language institute of Singapore (ELIS) to play key role in strengthening the teaching and learning of English. Retrieved from http://www.moe.gov.sg/media/press/2011/09/english-language-institute-of-singapore-launch.php

  • Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2014). PISA 2012 results in focus. Paris: OECD. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/pisa/keyfindings/pisa-2012-results-overview.pdf

  • Passow, A. H. (1982). Differentiated curricula for the gifted/talented. In Curricula for the gifted: Selected proceedings for the first national conference on curricula for the gifted/talented (pp. 4–20). Ventura, CA: National/State Leadership Training Institute on the Gifted and Talented.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paterson, K. (2005). Differentiated learning: Language and literacy projects that address diverse backgrounds and cultures. Markham, ON: Pembroke Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paul, R. W. (1995). Making critical thinking intuitive. Dillon Beach, CA: Foundation for Critical Thinking.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pual, R. W., & Elder, L. (2003). The miniature guide to critical thinking: Concepts and tools. Dillon Beach, CA: Foundation for Critical Thinking.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pohl, M. (2000). Learning to think, thinking to learn. Melbourne, Australia: Hawker Brownlow Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Renzulli, J. S. (1977). The enrichment triad model: A guide for developing defensible programs for the gifted and talented. Mansfield, CT: Creative Learning Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ritchhart, R., Church, M., & Morrison, K. (2011). Making thinking visible: How to promote engagement, understanding, and independence for all learners. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tishman, S., Perkins, D. N., & Jay, E. (1995). The thinking classroom: Learning and teaching in a culture of thinking. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tomlinson, C. (2002). Foreword. In H. Lynn Erickson (Ed.), Concept-based curriculum and instruction: Teaching beyond the facts (pp. 7–10). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • VanTassel-Baska, J. (2002). Curriculum planning & instructional design for gifted learners. Denver, CO: Love Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • VanTassel-Baska, J., Zuo, L., Avery, L. D., & Little, C. A. (2002). A curriculum study of gifted-student learning in the language arts. Gifted Child Quarterly, 46, 30–44. doi:10.1177/001698620204600104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiggins, G. P., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Hwa Chong Institution, Singapore, Singapore

    Clarinda Choh

Authors
  1. Clarinda Choh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Clarinda Choh .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore

    Liang See Tan

  2. National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore

    Letchmi Devi Ponnusamy

  3. Curriculum Planning and Development Division, Ministry of Education, Singapore, Singapore

    Chwee Geok Quek

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Choh, C. (2017). Concept-Based Instruction in English: Issues and Challenges. In: Tan, L., Ponnusamy, L., Quek, C. (eds) Curriculum for High Ability Learners. Education Innovation Series. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-2697-3_10

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-2697-3_10

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-10-2695-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-10-2697-3

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation