Research into Singapore English (SgE) has undergone many paradigm shifts from the 1970s to the present. This paper first begins with a consideration of how variation in the English language used in Singapore has been studied. It then identifies the two main varieties of English commonly described in Singapore, namely, Standard SgE (SSE) and Singapore Colloquial English (SCE). The existence of these two varieties poses problems in language teaching as student teachers are not always confident in their own use and when to execute the two varieties appropriately and they may also lack the linguistic tools to help them distinguish between the two varieties. This paper examines the level of effectiveness of a particular course known as 'Features of SgE' has in introducing and helping undergraduate student teachers to distinguish between standard and non-standard features of SgE. Consequently, the features that need to be addressed in the classroom are identified. The results of a questionnaire administered at the start of the course and again at the end of the course designed to test students' knowledge of the differences between SSE and SCE are analysed. Finally, the main findings from the course feedback are discussed in order to ascertain whether the course has been effective in fulfilling its objectives.

This paper describes a research study completed in Singapore with students enrolled in an education degree program. The researchers were interested in the reading habits of Singaporean students who will become teachers of English in the Singapore government teaching service. Of interest is the data collection method which involved the development of characters of young adult readers of English in Singapore following work by Marshall (2000). Students selected the character most similar to themselves from three different descriptive characters of readers. They then highlighted salient features in the character that led them to select this character and also highlighted those features that were not similar to them. This innovative approach to data collection was used to reveal the characteristics of student readers and then consider the resultant English teachers that these readers might become. Possible changes to teacher training programs are discussed.

For the past several decades, it has been clear that the ability to write texts for academic and professional purposes ("academic writing" in this article) is key to the success of adults in U.S. society-in school, in university courses, on tests that they need to take to progress through learning and into work, and in the workforce. Academic writing has specific features and involves approaches that are different from much of the writing that is done with adult learners, particularly those learning English as an additional language (e.g., described in reviews by Hinkel, 2015;Leki, Cumming, & Silva, 2008; and a survey by Rosenfeld, Courtney, & Fowles, 2004). However, a recent survey of adult educators, conducted by the authors, found that academic writing has not been a focus in many adult education programs, and teachers receive limited professional development in this area and instructional support in implementing it. This article describes the importance of academic writing at all levels of adult education, the key features of academic writing, and the current state of writing instruction in adult education programs. It then describes the motivation for, design, and outcomes of a survey of and interviews with adult educators across the country on their preparation for and instructional practices with academic writing (conducted in 2014 and 2015).Finally, it describes approaches that can be used in adult education programs to meet the writing proficiency needs of students at all levels and next steps that the adult education field might take.

No abstract

No abstract