See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/279181382
The Relationship of English Proficiency and Mathematics Achievement
Conference Paper · January 2013
CITATION
READS
1
13,904
4 authors:
Azmin Rambely
Rokiah. R. Ahmad
Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia
Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia
123 PUBLICATIONS 348 CITATIONS
106 PUBLICATIONS 841 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE
Noriza Majid
Saiful Hafizah Jaaman
Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia
Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia
29 PUBLICATIONS 96 CITATIONS
64 PUBLICATIONS 227 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Kettlebell Swing View project
Mathematical Model of the affect factors of the immune system View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Azmin Rambely on 26 June 2015.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.
SEE PROFILE
Recent Advances in Educational Technologies
The Relationship of English Proficiency and Mathematics Achievement
A.S. RAMBELY, R.R. AHMAD, N. MAJID & S.H. JAAMAN
School of Mathematical Sciences
Faculty of Science & Technology
Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia
43600 UKM Bangi, Selangor
MALAYSIA
asr@ukm.my, rozy@ukm.my, nm@ukm.my, shj@ukm.my
Abstract: - The study aims to investigate the relationship between English proficiency and mathematics
achievement. The sample of study is taken from a population of students from Faculty of Science & Technology
(FST), UKM (n = 118) taking into account grades and English proficiency test. Chi square analyses conducted to
test the significance of the relationship between two variables. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to
examine differences in mathematics achievement English proficiency. The results showed that good mastering of
English is needed to nurture and understand mathematics subject to achieve excellent results. Furthermore, low
English proficiency resulted in students experiencing a shortage in mathematics learning and obtained a lower
grade in a mathematics course.
Key-Words:- English proficiency, mathematics, teaching and learning, performance, thinking process, native
language, ESL students
Mathematics subjects changed from the Malay
language into EL. Although the language of
instruction for Malaysia was the Malay language but
the education reform was done on the basis of EL is
seen as an international language. Mohini et al. [2]
showed that the reasons for the education reform are
Malaysia is heading towards internationalization,
increased competition in the labour market, increased
training of EL usage in the context of international
business as well as increased in the number of foreign
students in local universities in Malaysia.
1 Introduction
1.1 History of education
In the days of British rule, the Malay school system
developed by the English only provided the Malay
population with their spelling, writing, and
mathematics skills, as well as health knowledge.
Education provided did not have the potential to be
extended because it was not recognized to be accepted
as a basis for further studies into secondary school.
Thus a series of revised education policy was done
before the era of independence until after
independence. In 1970 an educational reform has
occurred with the implementation of Language
Transition Program. The purpose of this program was
to unite Malaysians of multi-races using the Malay
language. Based on this program, all languages of
instruction in English schools were converted in
stages from English language (EL) to Malay, while
Chinese and Tamil national-type primary schools
could maintain two languages but should follow the
syllabus set by the Ministry of Education. In 1982, all
schools in Malaysia used Malay language as the
medium of instruction [1].
In 2003 educational reform occurred again where
the language of instruction of Science and
ISBN: 978-1-61804-155-5
1.2 Problems of Science and Mathematics
Education around the World
The problem of teaching science and mathematics in
EL was also faced by most countries around the
world. This problem was caused by globalization and
migration, where the population of underdeveloped
countries, whose mother tongue was not EL, migrated
to developed countries whose medium of instruction
is English. Many countries around the world affected
by this setback for exaample the United States
[3,4,5,6,7,8,10], New Zealand [11,12], Australia [13]
and England [14]. Thus a lot of researches were done
[3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14] including studies by the
139
Recent Advances in Educational Technologies
International Study Centre, the Trends in International
Mathematics and Science Study (TIM2008) [15].
teachers and students [21]. In 2007/2008 school
session, the Ministry of Higher Education declared
that all university candidates are required to fulfil
additional entrance qualification to the university, by
taking the Malaysian University English Test
(MUET), with the lowest band is one and the highest
of that is six. Thus MUET becomes a measurement of
EL competency.
Therefore, this paper aims to look at students’
achievements in mathematics which are assessed
based on grades obtained in a mathematics course and
its relationship to EL proficiency.
1.3 Teaching and Learning of Science and
Mathematics in English (PPSMI)
Issues of learning mathematics and science in EL
covers the problem of the use of vocabulary in
problem solving problem, especially the process of
transforming the EL into mathematical expressions
[16], and discussions of mathematics in the classroom
[12,17]. Students with low English proficiency will
experience problems from lower to higher level, while
students who are good in EL may have a problem only
in the discussion of mathematics in the classroom.
Usually low-level mathematical problem involves
only the first and second year courses at the
university, while the discussion of high-level
mathematics courses occur in the third and fourth
years. Third and fourth year courses are very much
involved with mathematical proof, conjecture based
on logic and reasoning to arrive at the conclusion, and
the ability to generate thoughts on knowledge and
theories learned in year one and two. With a lack of
proficiency in the EL, these students will experience a
shortage in learning mathematics. Research by
Neville-Barton & Barton [11] has shown that students
who use EL as a second language (ESL) experienced
10-15% deficiency in learning mathematics due to
lack of proficiency in EL.
There are some studies that show ESL students are
facing problems in learning Mathematics, both in
primary and secondary schools. Almost every
developed and emerging countries found a decline in
Mathematics results [6,11]; reduction in mathematics
achievement because of the difficulty of
understanding the text in the first year of
undergraduate programs compared with the native
students [18] ;ESL students bear 10 to 15% deficiency
in learning mathematics due to the language and the
problem gets worse for students with low English
proficiency [11,19]. Four of the five studies show that
the ESL students do not realize the extent of their
learning difficulties [11]; mathematical vocabulary
depends on English proficiency and native language;
and problem solving is the most difficult element for
the ESL [11].
In Malaysia, the PPSMI was implemented in 2003,
starting in Year 1 (seven years old), Form 1 (thirteen
years old) and Lower Six (eighteen years old),
although teachers and students are not proficient in
English [20]. This was a big change in the country's
education system with particular challenges to
ISBN: 978-1-61804-155-5
2 METHODS
2.1 Subject
The study was undertaken on students from the
Faculty of Science & Technology (FST), Universiti
Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM), who were specializing
in Biology and Environmental Sciences fields. A total
of 118 students taking a STQM1823 course were the
subject of study. These students have learned
mathematics in EL since 2006 in high schools. All of
the students have taken the MUET examination, with
the lowest band is two and the highest of that is five.
2.2 Research Instrument
Data were obtained from the assessment of
STQM1823 course. The examination questions are
given in two languages, Malay and English languages.
There are four subjective questions given in the test
with different difficulty levels. Students are evaluated
based on overall performance in the course and
competency of English from the MUET band is
studied. The assessment includes mid-semester and
final examinations, quizzes, projects, and tutorials.
During the assessment, students are given the freedom
to choose and use the Malay language and EL in
solving problems.
2.3 Statistical Analysis
In this study, data was analyzed using descriptive
statistics which includes mean, standard deviation,
frequency, percentages and cross tabulation. Chi
square analyses conducted to test the significance of
the relationship between two variables. Analysis of
variance (ANOVA) was used to examine differences
140
Recent Advances in Educational Technologies
conducted to determine the most influenced MUET
band in student achievement scores, Table 2. The
analysis showed that students with band 5 are the
highest achievers and significantly different with
students who earned MUET band 2 (p-value = 0.026),
band 3 (p-value = 0.005), and band 4 (p-value = 0.04).
Table 3 is a cross tabulation results of MUET1
(Band 1 to 6) versus grade category, namely the
Excellent (grade A and A-), Good (B + and B), the
Fair (grade of B-, C + and C) and Poor (C- and
below). The result showed that English proficiency
affected student achievement with a significant pvalue of 0.044.
Results in Table 3 showed dependency exists
between MUET band with student’s grade
achievement. Students with low MUET achievement,
with band 2 and 3 failed to excel in a mathematics
course where 5% of the students from band 2 obtained
a poor grade and almost 40% of band 3 obtained fair
and poor grades.
Based on Table 4, it was found that the p-value for
dependence testing of MUET2, MUET category (low,
moderate and good) versus grade student achievement
(excellent, good, fair and poor) is 0.027. A significant
p-value indicated that MUET results have a
significant relationship with grade achievement. Cross
tabulation in Table 4 showed that for the moderate
MUET category, the percentages number of student
increased for lower grade category.
The performance of students in a mathematics
course is compared with the English competency
measured through MUET results. The findings
showed that, in general, the English competency
affected student performance in a mathematics
subject.
in mathematics achievement scores across different
MUET band.
3 RESULTS
3.1 Mathematics Achievement relationship
with MUET Results
Majority of the students lie in a moderate English
proficiency with band three and four of 43% and 37%,
respectively. About 10% of the students are both in
low and high bands, Table 1.
Table 1. Percentage of students with MUET band
respectively
MUET band
Number of students
Percentage
1
2
3
4
5
6
0
11
51
44
12
0
0.0
9.3
43.2
37.3
10.2
0.0
Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to test
the relationship between English proficiency, which is
assessed through MUET and student achievement in a
mathematics course which is measured by grades and
scores. The results show that the effect of MUET
results on student achievement were significant (pvalue 0.034, F = 2.995).
Since MUET results are found to affect the
achievement of students, further analysis using Tukey
HSD Multiple Comparison Test and LSD were
Table 2. Tukey and LSD Multiple Comparison Tests
Tukey
HSD
(I)
MUET
2
3
ISBN: 978-1-61804-155-5
(J)
MUET
3
4
5
2
4
Mean
Difference
(I-J)
-0.22193
-3.63848
-12.96212
0.22193
-3.41655
Confidence level 95%
Standard
Error
4.56503
4.63976
5.732
4.56503
2.84298
141
Sig.
1
0.861
0.113
1
0.627
Lower
-12.126
-15.7375
-27.9093
-11.6822
-10.8301
Upper
11.6822
8.4605
1.9851
12.126
3.997
Recent Advances in Educational Technologies
5
-12.74020*
4
2
3.63848
3
3.41655
5
-9.32364
5
2
12.96212
3
12.74020*
4
9.32364
LSD
2
3
-0.22193
4
-3.63848
5
-12.96212*
3
2
0.22193
4
-3.41655
5
-12.74020*
4
2
3.63848
3
3.41655
5
-9.32364*
5
2
12.96212*
3
12.74020*
4
9.32364*
* Mean difference is significant at 0.05.
4.40579
4.63976
2.84298
4.48317
5.732
4.40579
4.48317
4.56503
4.63976
5.732
4.56503
2.84298
4.40579
4.63976
2.84298
4.48317
5.732
4.40579
4.48317
0.023
0.861
0.627
0.166
0.113
0.023
0.166
0.961
0.435
0.026
0.961
0.232
0.005
0.435
0.232
0.04
0.026
0.005
0.04
-24.2291
-8.4605
-3.997
-21.0143
-1.9851
1.2513
-2.367
-9.2661
-12.8307
-24.3182
-8.8222
-9.049
-21.4689
-5.5537
-2.2159
-18.2056
1.606
4.0115
0.4417
-1.2513
15.7375
10.8301
2.367
27.9093
24.2291
21.0143
8.8222
5.5537
-1.606
9.2661
2.2159
-4.0115
12.8307
9.049
-0.4417
24.3182
21.4689
18.2056
Table 3. Cross tabulation of MUET1 and grade
MUET band
2
3
4
5
Excellent
0 (0.0)
1 (0.08)
5 (4.3)
4 (3.4)
Grade Category
Good
Fair
0 (0.0)
5 (4.3)
7 (6.0)
20 (17.1)
4 (3.4)
15 (12.8)
2 (1.7)
4 (3.4)
Poor
6 (5.1)
23 (19.7)
19 (16.2)
2 (1.7)
Table 4. Cross tabulation of MUET2 and grade
MUET Band Category
Poor (band 2)
Moderate (band 3 & 4)
Good (band 5)
Excellent
0 (0.0)
6 (5.1)
4 (3.4)
Grade Category
Good
Fair
0 (0.0)
5 (4.3)
11 (9.4)
35 (29.9)
2 (1.7)
4 (3.4)
course at the university level. Furthermore, students in
a lower English proficiency group showed a negative
relationship with mathematics achievement, where the
percentage of students with poor grades increased,
4 Discussions
This study has shown that English competency
affected student’s achievement in a mathematics
ISBN: 978-1-61804-155-5
Poor
6 (5.1)
42 (35.9)
2 (1.7)
142
Recent Advances in Educational Technologies
learning, on average, are higher than those who study
the subject in a second language [15].
Table 3. The findings showed that the mean
performance of band 5 group shows a very good
performance. This means that students must have a
good competency in EL to nurture and understand
mathematics at their best when teaching and learning
of mathematics is done using a second language, EL.
Lack of English proficiency in mathematics
learning creates a lack of attention to the use of
symbols, representations of objects and mathematical
operations. Dubinsky [22] states formalism in
mathematics learning is able to produce meaning.
Formalism means a representation of objects and
mathematical operations such as the use of symbols
and diagrams, while meaning refers to various factors
in the individual understanding. Failure to paying
attention to symbols, representations of objects and
mathematical operations cause dropouts in learning
mathematics or a shortage to absorb mathematical
knowledge due to the learning of mathematics in a
language that is less competent.
Good English proficiency also shows a direct
proportion to the development of cognitive skills.
Good mastery in EL provides excellent performance
while less competence in EL makes learning
mathematics difficult thus student performs poorly in
mathematics course. Although mathematics is
considered to be a subject that does not require as
much use of language because mathematics often uses
symbols, but the skills to understand, build conceptual
and blending information requires thinking in a
language that is well understood. Usually the language
of thought is the mother tongue of the students.
Clarkson [23] found that ESL students tend to
translate their learning problem into their native
language because the thought process becomes easier
in their native language which simplifies the
semantics process. Translation act as an agent to
maintain concentration in the learning process for a
long enough duration so that meaning and
understanding of the materials are achieved. On the
other hand, learning in the second language causes
students to lose some information in the thinking
process because it is difficult to be stored in the shortterm memory. By doing the thinking in the native
language, the concept of learning will be easy to
understand because communication networks in
reading, recalling, and relating information are better
than that of using a second language. This explanation
is relevant in the TIMSS2008 report which shows the
achievements of Mathematics and Science students
who used their mother tongue for teaching and
ISBN: 978-1-61804-155-5
5 Conclusion
The main objective of this research is to study the
performance of students' in mathematics course in
relation to English proficiency through MUET results.
A dependency test between mathematics achievement
and English proficiency shows that good mastering of
English is needed to nurture and understand of
mathematics to achieve excellent results. Furthermore,
low English proficiency resulted in students
experiencing a shortage in mathematics learning and
obtained a lower grade in mathematics. Mathematics
is a natural language involving certain vocabulary,
syntax, logic and reasoning. The skills to understand
the mathematical language need to be learned in the
native language and the mother tongue is also a
precursor to excellence in learning mathematics using
a second language.
References:
[1] Mahzan Arshad. 2001. Sejarah dan Pinsip Asas
dalam Pendidikan Bahasa Melayu: Satu Penilaian
Semula. Issues in Education, 24: 95-107.
[2] Mohini Mohamed, Aziz Nordin & Ronani
Hashim. 2008. Impact on the implementation of
bilingualism in science and mathematics teaching
in Malaysian school system. http://kajian
berasaskansekolah.wordpress.com/2008/04/24/
impact on the implementation of bilingualism in
science and mathematics teaching in Malaysian
school system.
[3] Hammond, B. 2008. Measure 58’s goal of
English-only classes already a reality. The
Oregonian, 20 September.
[4] Young, M.B. 1988. Academic performance of
limited English proficient Indian elementary
students in Reservation Schools: Year two report
of the national evaluation of services for limited
English Proficient Native American students.
Office of Planning, Budget, and Evaluation.
Washington, DC.
[5] Stoloff, D.L. 1989. Limited English proficient
students and mathematics and science
achievement: Stategies for success practiced
within California Academic Partnership Program
Projects. Paper presented at the Meeting of the
143
Recent Advances in Educational Technologies
[15] Mullis, I.V.S., Martin, M.O., Foy, P., Olson, J.F.,
Preuschoff, C., Erberber, E., Arora, A., & Galia,
J.
(2008).
TIMSS
2008
International
Mathematics Report: Findings from IEA’s
Trends in International Mathematics and Science
Study at the Fourth and Eighth Grades. Chestnut
Hill, MA: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study
Center, Boston College.
[16] Moschkovich, J. N. 2004. Bilingual mathematics
learners: How views of language, bilingual
learners, and mathematical comunication impact
instruction. In N.Nassir and Cobb (Eds).
Diversity, Equity, and Access to Mathematical
Ideas. Teachers College Press.
[17] Setati, M. & Adler, J. 2001. Between Languages
and Discourses: Language Practices in Primary
Multilingual Mathematics Classrooms in South
Africa. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 43:
243-269.
[18] Barton, B., & Neville-Barton, P. 2003. Language
issues in undergraduate mathematics: A report of
two studies. New Zealand Journal of
Mathematics, 32, 19–28 (Supplementary Issue).
[19] Yushau, B., & Bokhari, M. 2005. Language and
mathematics: a mediational approach to bilingual
Arabs. International Journal for Mathematics
Teaching and Learning. April Issue: 118, http://www.ex.ac.uk/cimt/ijmtl/ijmenu.htm.
[20] Barwell, R., Barton, B., & Setati, M. 2007.
Multilingual issues in mathematics education:
Introdution. Educational Studies in Mathematics,
64: 113-119.
[21] Zaidi Yazid. 2007. Meningkatkan Keberkesanan
Pengajaran Sains dan Matematik dalam BI:
Peranan
Pengurus
Sekolah.
Koloqium
Kebangsaan Kepimpinan Instruksional Institut
Aminuddin Baki Cawangan Utara.
[22] Dubinsky, E. 2000. Meaning and formalism in
mathematics. International Journal of Computers
for Mathematical Learning, 5: 211-240.
[23] Clarkson, P. C. 1992. Language and
Mathematics: A comparison of bilingual and
monolingual
students
of
mathematics.
Educational Studies in Mathematics, 23: 417429.
[24] Barton, B., & Neville-Barton, P. 2004.
Undergraduate mathematics learning in English
by speakers of other languages. 10th
International
Congress
on
Mathematics
Education, Copenhagen.
California Association for Bilingual Education in
Anaheim, California.
[6] Secada, W. G. 1992. Race, ethnicity, social class,
language and achievement in mathematics. In D.
A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of Research on
Mathematics Teaching and Learning. New York:
MacMillan: 623–660.
[7] Maestre, J.P. 1988. The role of language
comprehension in mathematics and problem
solving. In R.R. Cocking & J.P. Mestre, (Eds.)
Linguistic and Cultural Influences on Learninf
Mathematics: The Psychology of Eduation and
Instrution, pp. 201-220. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
[8] Khisty, L.L. 1995. Making inequality: Issues of
language and meanings in mathematics teaching
with Hispanic students. In W.G. Secada, E.
Fennema, & L.B. Adajian, (Eds.) New Directions
for Equity in Mathematics Education, pp 279297. New York: Cambridge Press.
[9] Cardelle-Elawar, M. 1990. Effects of feedback
tailored to bilingual students’ mathematics needs
on verbal problem solving. Elementary School
Journal, 91(2): 165-176.
[10] Moschkovich, J. N. 2002. A situated and
sociocultural
perspective
on
bilingual
mathematics learners. In N. Nassir and P. Cobb,
(Eds.)Mathematical Thinking and Learning,
Special Issue on Diversity, Equity, and
Mathematical Learning, 4(2&3), 189-212.
[11] Neville-Barton, P. & Barton, B. 2005. The
Relationship Between English Language and
Mathematics Learning for Non-Native Speakers:
A TLRI Research Report for NZCER,
Wellington: NZCER.
[12] Barton, B., Chan, R., King, C., & Neville-Barton,
P. 2004. The mathematical discourse of advanced
undergraduate mathematics. In I. Putt, (Ed.)
Proceedings of 27th Mathematics Education
Research Group Conference, Townsville: James
Cook University, 79-86.
[13] Clarkson, P. C. 2006. Australian Vietnamese
students learning mathematics: High ability
bilinguals and their use of their Languages.
Educational Studies in Mathematics, 64: 191215.
[14] Dawe, L. 1983. Bilingualism and mathematical
reasoning in English as a second language.
Educational Studies in Mathematics, 14: 325353.
ISBN: 978-1-61804-155-5
144
Recent Advances in Educational Technologies
in
[25] Bialystok,
E.
2001.
Bilingualism
Development:
Language,
Literacy,
and
Cognition. New York: Cambridge University
Press.
[26] Nur Riza Mohd Suradi, Zalina Mohd Ali, Rokiah
Ahmad, Azmin Sham Rambely, Faridatulazna
Ahmad Shahabuddin, Ummul Khair Salma Din,
Zamira Hasanah Zamzuri & Noratiqah Mohd
Ariff. 2009. Persepsi Pelajar Terhadap
Kewajaran Perlaksanaan PPSMI Bagi Kursus
Asas Statistik Tahun Satu. The Proceedings of
UKM Teaching and Learning STeM. UKM
Bangi. Pp 12-18.
[27] Qi, D.S. 1998. An inquiry into languageswitching in second language composing
ISBN: 978-1-61804-155-5
View publication stats
processes, The Canadian Modern Language
Review 54(3): 413–435.
[28] Ríordáin, M.N. & O’Donoghue, J. 2009. The
relationship
between
performance
on
mathematical word problems and language
proficiency for students learning through the
medium of Irish. Educational Studies in
Mathematics, 71:43-64.
[29] Setati, M. 2003. Researching Mathematics
Education and Language in Multilingual South
Africa. The Mathematics Educator, 12(2):6-20.
[30] Silby, B. 2000. Revealing the Language of
Thought: An e-book. New Zealand: Department
of Philosophy, University of Canterbury.
145