PROMOTING SCHEMATIC KNOWLEDGE

TO ENGLISH TEACHERS OF SECONDARY SCHOOL

LEVELS
Margana
English Education Study Program
Faculty of Languages and Arts
State University of Yogyakarta

Abstract

To be successful in conducting the English teaching and learning process, English

teachers of secondary schools are demanded to gain two types of knowledge sufficiently.
They are systemic knowledge and schematic knowledge or background knowledge. The
former is concerned with the knowledge of the language that embodies the phonological,
morphological, syntactic and semantic knowledge. The latter deals with non-linguistic
knowledge, which consists of four issues, namely the general knowledge, topic/thematic
knowledge, genre knowledge, and social-cultural knowledge. Both types of knowledge
should be equally taken into account to establish them to be competence English teachers.
Also, the types of knowledge are of great importance for English teachers of secondary
school level to deal with the process of English language teaching and learning in order to
facilitate their students to maximally acquire the target language (English). However, it is
evident that most English teachers of secondary schools tend to give an emphasis on the
systematic knowledge rather than the schematic knowledge when they are involved in
English language teaching and learning. This may lead to the failure of the acquisition of the
macro-language skills, reading in particular due to misinterpretation or miscomprehension of
the use of the target language. To cope with such a problem, this paper deals with promoting
the schematic knowledge to English teachers of secondary school levels. It aims at providing
English teachers of secondary school levels with comprehensive insights of schematic
knowledge which is fruitful to acquire the target language.

Key Words :
Systemic Knowledge Schematic Knowledge

A. Introduction

In English language teaching and learning, English teachers of secondary schools are
demanded to be familiar with two types of knowledge, which include systemic knowledge
and schematic knowledge. This statement is supported by Lopes (1986) who states that
English teachers or second language learners should make use of two types of knowledge:
systemic knowledge (the knowledge of language) and schematic knowledge (knowledge of

Research in Teacher Education : What, How, and Why?, November 21-22, 2012, UKSW 406
content and formal schemata, namely the content area of a text and the routines of language
interaction as reflected in the rhetorical structure of language). The systemic knowledge
embodies four types of knowledge which include phonological, morphological, syntactic, and
semantic knowledge. The schematic knowledge consists of four issues, namely general,
thematic, genre, and social cultural knowledge (Hedge, 2008).
The phonological knowledge refers to the knowledge how sounds are generated by
vocal apparatus and how selected phones differentiate meanings as depicted in English words
(McMohan, 2002). This knowledge facilitates English teachers to deal with phonological
issues such as segmental elements of English (consonants, vowels, diphthongs) and supra-
segmental elements (stress, intonation, rhythm, and the like). Such knowledge is fruitful
when English teachers of secondary school levels are engaged in the process of English
language teaching and learning. Morphological knowledge is defined as a linguistic
competence, which concerns how words are constructed (Rahman, 2010:53). This deals with
the analysis of a word category used in English constructions. Added to this, morphological
knowledge also concerns the derivation and inflectional processes through affixation,
compounding, blending, clipping, and the like. The syntactic knowledge deals with how
words are constructed to form phrases, clauses, or sentences (Finegan, 2008:139). Semantic
knowledge means the knowledge of the meaning of any English constructions, which include
words, phrases, clauses, and sentences (Rahman, 2010:62). Those types of systemic
knowledge are merely concerned with the study of the internal structure of the language.
However, such systemic knowledge of language should not become the only focus of
the study of the target language because the study of the internal structure of language does
not confer a comprehensive description of how the target language is used in the actual
context. Porter and Samovar in Rappel (2009:54) claim that learning language is not simply
concerned with a collection of structures for the sake of making meaning of language but it
deals with making use of language according to the context. This implies that there must be a
switch paradigm of the teaching of English for secondary school levels from learning about
language to learning language use in context. This is in line with the statement advocated by
Philipson as quoted by Rappel (2009:38) who explicates that English language teaching must
shift from a view of learning about language to learning language for use in communication
amongst people of different cultures and linguistic backgrounds in an increasingly
interconnected world. This suggests that English teachers of secondary schools should take
into account not only the systemic knowledge but also the schematic knowledge. In other
words, both schematic and syntactic systems of knowledge should go hand in hand when
Research in Teacher Education : What, How, and Why?, November 21-22, 2012, UKSW 407
English teachers deal with the target language. This is supported by Celce-Murcia et al.
(1995:10) who promote the term communicative competence (the collaboration between
knowledge and skills) which consists of two types of knowledge, namely (1) linguistic
competence (the knowledge about language) and (2) non-linguistic competence (discourse
competence, actionable competence, socio-cultural competence, and strategic competence).
The former is called systemic knowledge while the latter is schematic knowledge.
In reference to the two types of knowledge above, ideally English teachers of
secondary school levels are familiar with them on the grounds that both facilitate English
teachers to effectively and efficiently carry out the process of English teaching and learning
at secondary school levels. Added to this, those types of knowledge drag English teachers to
provide students with the actual use of English in spoken and written forms, which assist
students to cope with the possible language barriers when they deal with the use of language
in different contexts. However, it is evident that English teachers of secondary schools tend to
give an emphasis on the systemic knowledge exploration. They somehow ignore the
schematic knowledge when they are involved in the process of English language teaching and
learning. This seems to be one of the common trends conducted by a great number of English
teachers of secondary school levels. This is likelier to be one of the causes of the lack of
English competence of English teachers of secondary school levels as reflected in the average
score of the test of teacher competence which is less than 6. This directly or indirectly causes
the failure of the acquisition of the target language of secondary school students.
With regard to the above problem, this paper deals with promoting the schematic
knowledge to the English teachers of secondary school levels. It aims at revealing the issues
of schematic knowledge which embodies four types, namely socio-cultural knowledge, topic
knowledge, general knowledge, and genre knowledge which become hot issues in English
language teaching and learning process in order to facilitate students to maximally acquire
the target language.

B. The Nature of Schematic Knowledge

As previously mentioned, schematic knowledge is defined as any knowledge which
deals with external structure of the language. It is concerned with the knowledge of beyond
language. According to Widdowson (1990), schematic knowledge refers to socially acquired
knowledge. Erten and Razi (2009:61) divides schematic knowledge into two types, namely
formal and content schemata. Formal schematic knowledge refers to textual schematic
knowledge (Singhal, 1998). It deals with knowledge of how texts are organized and what the
Research in Teacher Education : What, How, and Why?, November 21-22, 2012, UKSW 408
main features of a particular genre of writing are (Alderson, 2000). It is identical to genre
knowledge (Margana, 2010). Content schematic knowledge is further categorised into two
different types: background knowledge and subject matter knowledge. The former deals with
the knowledge that may or may not be relevant to the content of a particular text. It is defined
as “pre-existing knowledge structures stored in the mind” (Nassaji, 2002, p. 444). The latter
is directly concerned with the text content and topic (Alderson, 2000). Another type of
schematic knowledge is cultural schema (Yule, 1996). It refers to a culture-specific extension
of content schema which is needed to fully comprehend the meaning intended by the writer
or speaker (Ketchum, 2006).
In reference to the above explanation, there are four common types of schematic
knowledge. They include general knowledge, thematic/topical knowledge, genre knowledge,
and social-cultural knowledge (Hedge, 2008; Margana, 2010) . General knowledge is
identical to background knowledge or schemata. It is defined as socially acquired knowledge
as the results of natural and nurturing learning practices. Orasanu in Alyousef (2006) states
background knowledge refers to a framework which contains slots of the activated text. For
example, if the text deals with supermarket, a second language learner should have
information slots of market, types of sold things, mode of payment, and the like. If he/she
does not have such issues, they might not readily communicate with the text.
Social cultural knowledge refers to the knowledge of the social environment and
physical environment that constraint use of language. This refers to the fact that learning
target language is tied with a social process of the speakers of the target language (Alsagoff,
2012:106). Further, he states that socio-cultural knowledge refers to the insights of any issues
outside linguistics which should be explored as one of the approaches to deal with the study
of language (2012:106). The social-cultural knowledge provides the issue of “more nuanced,
multi-levelled, and complicated framings of the word around us (Block, 2007:864). In other
words, this knowledge is of great importance to English teachers of secondary schools to
comprehensively learn the target language on the grounds that language and culture are
inseparable (Corbett, 24). This is supported by Kumaradavelu in Alsagoff et al. (2012:12)
who state that language and culture are inextricably connected. More specifically, Johnson
(2006: 237) explicates that studying the target language is not only concerned with the
accumulated information of language but also with practices of the target language in context
as language represents the live experience of an individual (Derrida, 2001: 196) which is
subject to change depending on the situational and cultural contexts. This suggests that the

Research in Teacher Education : What, How, and Why?, November 21-22, 2012, UKSW 409
knowledge of the socio-cultural issue escorts English teachers to perform the use of language
in appropriate contexts.
Further, he explicates that discourse competence refers to the knowledge of how
words, phrases, clauses, and sentences are constructed to form required texts such as
descriptive, recount, and the like. More specifically, it deals with the generic structure of the
texts. Actionable competence refers to an ability to convey ideas and respond to
communicative intent. This also deals with the knowledge of the functions of language used
in different communicative events. Socio-cultural competence refers to how to communicate
messages which meet social-cultural contexts. Strategic competence refers to an ability to
select an appropriate strategy to deal with communication practices.
Thematic knowledge refers to knowledge of register or semantic domain of use of
target language. For example, the word morphology confers different meanings with regard to
what register it is used. In a linguistic domain, the morphology means the study of how
morphemes and words are generated. On the other hand, in a biology domain, the
morphology refers to the study of the form of the body of human beings. More specifically, in
a genealogy, morphology means the study of the forms of sperms. Such meanings of
morphology are successfully understood with the use of thematic knowledge. Another
example is the word mouse. In the technology domain, a mouse means a device, which is
used to move the cursor, but in the biology domain, a mouse refers to a small mammal with
short fur, a pointed mouth and a long tail.
Schematic knowledge or non-linguistic competence is of great value for English
teachers as it provides them with contextual and comprehensive understanding of how
language is used according to its domain. In addition to this, it facilitates English teachers to
gain wider knowledge of the target language because it is treated as a social behaviour. This
suggests that understanding the target language requires schematic knowledge. Grabe (1991)
advocates that to be successful to make sense of spoken and written texts, second language
learners should be familiar with schematic knowledge which embodies formal discourse
structure knowledge and content/world background knowledge besides the knowledge of
language.
With regard to the above explanation, to be successful in acquiring the target
language, English teachers of secondary schools are encouraged to take into account for the
schematic knowledge besides systemic knowledge on the grounds that both knowledge are
intertwine in nature.

Research in Teacher Education : What, How, and Why?, November 21-22, 2012, UKSW 410
C. Use of schematic knowledge in making sense of English texts

As a matter of fact, schematic knowledge is applicable for the study for macro-
language skills which include productive language skills (speaking and writing) and receptive
language skills (listening and writing). Even, it is applicable to deal with the study of micro-
language skills. However, for the sake of this article, the writer gives an emphasis on the
application of the schematic knowledge in dealing with reading comprehension as it confers
practical use of schematic knowledge to make sense of the English texts. This is in line with
the statement uttered by Anderson (1999:1) who states that reading comprehension is viewed
as an active, fluent process to build the meanings of words in a text which does not reside on
the printed page but connect the words on the printed page with the reader‟s background
knowledge and experiences.
In support of the above issue, Nassaji (2002) states that to achieve high
comprehension, second language teachers should bring the schematic knowledge to the texts.
In the same spirit, Pulido (2004) claims that when second language readers bring relevant
schematic knowledge to the reading process, they can allocate more space for textual analysis
and interpretation. This implies that existing schematic knowledge may contribute to the
functioning of what are described as automatic processes by McLaughlin (1987).
In reference to the above issue, the following presents the example of how to use
schematic knowledge to make sense of the text.
(1) Marrying our gardens is one of the milder effects of weeds- any plants that thrive
where they wanted.
(2) Weeds clog waterways, destroy wildlife habitats, and impede farming.

To make sense of Example (1), the English teachers may use general knowledge of
the word marry which means paying too much attention or spoiling the plants in the garden
under the issue of gardening. Similar knowledge should be applied to make sense of Example
(2) by looking at the word waterways which means a way of water. The word clog should be
interpreted as obstruct, block, hinder, and the like.
(3) Every atlas has its own legend.
(4) There is a difference between a university catalog and a card catalog. One given
information about the courses of study, the other gives information about books in a
library.
(5) Samuel Latham Mitchell helped found Rutgers Medical College in New Jersey in
1826 and he produced several important works in chemistry and geology.

Research in Teacher Education : What, How, and Why?, November 21-22, 2012, UKSW 411
 With the use of topical knowledge, the word legend in Example (3) should not be
interpreted as mythical story or famous person because the word legend is used in the topic of
astronomy which means explanation of symbols. In Example (4), the word catalog is used in
two different issues, namely the list of the courses and the list of books in a library. In
Example (5), English teachers should interpret the word works as books not accomplishments
or factories as the topic is concerned with the academic issue.
(6) When drawing human figures, children often make the head too large for the rest of
the body. A recent study offers some insights into this common disproportion in
children‟s illustrations. As part of the study, researchers asked children between 4
and 7 years old to make several drawings of men. When they drew front views of
male figures, the size of the heads was markedly enlarged. However, when the
children drew rear views of men, the size of the heads was not so exaggerated. The
researchers suggests that children draw bigger heads when they know they must leave
room for facial details. Therefore, the odd head size in children‟s illustration is a form
of planning ahead and not an indication of a poor sense of scale (Roger, 1999).
(7) The last gold rush belongs as much to Canadian history as it does to American. The
discovery of gold along the Konndike river, which flows from Canada‟s Yukon
Territory into Alaska, drew some 30,000 fortune hunters to the north. The Yukon
became a territory and its capital of the time, Dawson, would not have existed without
the gold rush. The gold strike furnished material for a dozen of Jack London‟s novels;
it inspired Robert Service to write ”The Shooting of Dan Mc-Grew” and other poems,
and it provided the background for wonderful Charli Chaplin movie, The Gold Rush.
It also marked the beginnings of Modern Alaska (Roger, 1999).
(8) An old proverb states, “Beware of oak, it draws the stroke.” This saying is handy
during the thunder storm season. In general, trees with deep roots that tap into
groundwater attract more lightning than do trees with shallow, drier roots. Oaks are
around 50 times more likely to be struck than beeches. Spruces are neatly as safe as
beeches. Pines are not safe as these two, but are still much safer than oaks (Roger,
1999).

To make sense of Example (6) and (7), English teachers need to apply socio-cultural
knowledge. Otherwise, some mis-interpretation may occur. In reference to Example (6), with
the use of the socio-cultural knowledge, the English teachers can make a conclusion that the
odd head size in children‟s illustration happens because children plan ahead when they are
drawing pictures. The disproportion of in children‟s illustration is not caused by having
insufficiency sense of scale. With regard to Example (7), the English teachers should know
the social cultural knowledge of the text. With the use of it, English teachers could tell a lot a
about the contents of the texts, for example: the significance of Klondike gold strike in

Research in Teacher Education : What, How, and Why?, November 21-22, 2012, UKSW 412
creative arts and the beginnings of Alaska. In Example 8, the author wants to highlight that
trees with shallow roots are more likely to avoid lightning than those with deep roots.
English teachers may apply the genre knowledge in order that they can make sense of
an English text easily. The following presents the example of the use of the genre knowledge.
(9) Gold, a precious metal, is prized for two important characteristics. First of all,
gold has a lustrous beauty that is resistant to corrosion. Therefore, it is suitable for
jewellery, coins, and ornamental purposes. Gold never needs to be polished and will
remain beautiful forever. For example, a Macedonian coins remains as untarnished
today as the day it was minted twenty-three centuries ago. Another important
characteristic of gold is usefulness to industry and science. For many years, it has
been used in hundreds of industrial applications. The most recent use of gold is in
astronaut's suits. Astronauts wear gold-plated heat shields for protection outside
spaceships. In conclusion, gold is treasured not only for its beauty but also for its
utility.

(10) There are three reasons why Canada is one of the best countries in the world.
First, Canada has an excellent health care system. All Canadians have access to
medical services at a reasonable price. Second, Canada has a high standard of
education. Students are taught by well-trained teachers and are encouraged to
continue studying at university. Finally, Canada's cities are clean and efficiently
managed. Canadian cities have many parks and lots of space for people to live. As a
result, Canada is a desirable place to live.

With the use of the genre knowledge, English teachers of secondary schools could
analyse the organisation of the text which includes the topic sentence, supporting details, sub-
supporting details, concluding sentences. Such elements facilitate English teachers to make
sense of the text. In Example (9), it is evident that the topic sentence of the text is “Gold, a
precious metal, is prized for two important characteristics.” It consists of topic (Gold) and
controlling ideas (two important characteristics). The two controlling ideas generate two
supporting details, namely gold has a lustrous beauty that is resistant to corrosion and gold is
usefulness to industry and science. Then, each supporting detail is supported by sub-
supporting details. The last sentence of Example (9) is called a concluding sentence which
functions to sum up the previous explanation. Similar analysis can be implemented to make
sense of the text as performed in Example (10).
D. How to promote schematic knowledge to English teachers of secondary school level
As previously mentioned, schematic knowledge is of great use for English teachers
of secondary school levels to equip them to be competence English teachers. For such reason,
schematic knowledge should be socialised to them.

Research in Teacher Education : What, How, and Why?, November 21-22, 2012, UKSW 413
 In relation to socialising the four types of schematic knowledge to English teachers
of secondary schools, some practical efforts can be made. The efforts include (1) embedding
the issues in the course of in-service training or in-house-training, (2) establishing the English
teachers of secondary level to be autonomously acquire various resources such as electronic
and non-electronic ones, (3) encouraging English teachers of secondary schools to be actively
involved in some conferences, (4) establishing teacher exchange program to inner or outer
English speaking countries, (5) encouraging English teachers to make use of authentic
materials, (6) encouraging English teachers to make use of movies, drama, and the like in the
process of English language teaching and learning in the secondary school levels, and (7)
facilitating English teachers to concern intercultural awareness by recognising their own
culture and the culture of inner- English speaking countries and outer-English speaking
countries and the local culture. Those efforts are of great importance to establish the
schematic knowledge.
Of the seven recommended efforts, establishing an autonomous learning is believed
to be one of the efforts which is highly advocated to English teachers to enhance their
schematic knowledge. This relies on the fact that by having autonomous learning English
teachers of secondary schools can explore the schematic knowledge from various resources
as much as they could. In practice, they can search out social cultural lives of the people who
live in inner English speaking countries such as America, Australia, Canada, England, and
the like, outer English speaking countries such as Singapore, Malaysia, India, and others.
This can be conducted by accessing them via internet. Added to this, they have to recognise
their culture which to some extent can be used to acquire the target language successfully.
Besides, English teachers can also make use of authentic materials from different resources to
teach their students and analyse them according to the relevant schematic knowledge, for
example genre knowledge.
More specifically, to equip with genre knowledge, the course designers of the in-
service-training and in-house training should incorporate the course of types of genre used in
secondary school levels which include narrative, recount, descriptive, report, procedure,
explanation, and the like. Those texts can be explored in terms of the generic structure of the
texts and distinctive language features. In other words, the course also includes the
recognition of the types of each genre and the way of analysing it.
E. Final Remarks
As previously mentioned, schematic knowledge is one of the types of knowledge
that English teachers of secondary school levels have to be familiar with. The schematic
Research in Teacher Education : What, How, and Why?, November 21-22, 2012, UKSW 414
knowledge embody four types, namely general knowledge, genre knowledge, topic
knowledge, and socio-cultural knowledge. This relies on the fact that schematic knowledge
confers a great number of advantages to do with learning macro skills such as listening,
reading, speaking, and writing. Of the four types of macro-language skills, schematic
knowledge contributes to success of making sense of the texts on the grounds that second
language readers are driven to apply their higher thinking skills to gain comprehensive
understanding of the texts.
In relation to promoting the schematic knowledge, there are seven efforts as
explored in point D. Of the seven efforts, establishing an autonomous learning is believed to
be one of the efforts which is highly advocated to English teachers to enhance their schematic
knowledge. This relies on the fact that by having autonomous learning, English teachers of
secondary schools can explore the schematic knowledge from various resources as much as
they could. This suggests that promoting the schematic knowledge establishes wider insights
for English teachers of secondary school levels to pose a challenge in dealing with English
language teaching and learning at secondary school levels.

Research in Teacher Education : What, How, and Why?, November 21-22, 2012, UKSW 415
REFERENCES

Alyousef , H. S. (2006). Teaching Reading Comprehension to ESL/EFL Learners. Journal of

Language and Learning, Vol. 5 Number 1 2006.
Alsagoff, L., et al. (2012). Principles and Practices for Teaching English as an International
Language. ESL & Applied Linguistics Professional Series. London: Routledge.
Anderson, N. J. (1999). Exploring second language reading. Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.
Block, D. (2007). The rise of identity in SLA research, post Firth and Wagner (1997),
Modern Language Journal, 92 (5), 863-876.
Corbett, John. (2003). An Intercultural Approach to Language Teaching. Clevedon, England:
Multilingual Matters Ltd.
Derrida, Jacques. (2001). Writing and Difference. London: Routledge.
Erten, I.H, & Karakaş, M. (2009). The effects of cultural familiarity on reading
comprehension. Reading in a Foreign Language, Volume 21, No. 1 pp. 60–77.
Finegan, R. (2008). Language: Its structure and Use. Boston: Thomson Wadsworth.
Grabe, W. (1991). Current developments in second language reading research. TESOL
Quarterly, 25, 375–406.
Grabe, W., & Stoller, L. F. (2002). Teaching and researching reading. Harlow, England:
Pearson Education.
Hedge, T. (2008). Teaching and Learning in the language classroom. New York: Oxford
University Press.
Johnson, Karen E. (2006). The Socio-cultural turn and its challenges for second language
teacher Education. In TESOL Quarterly (40) 1: 235-257.
Yule, G. (1996). Pragmatics. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Margan. (2010). Promoting students‟ meaningful involvement in reading lesson. Proceeding
the 7th National JETA Conference. Yogyakarta: JETA
McLaughlin, B. (1987). Theories of second language learning. London: Edward Arnold.
McMohan, A. (2002). Introduction to English Phonology. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University
Press.
Nassaji, H. (2002). Schema theory and knowledge-based processes in second language
reading comprehension: A need for alternative perspectives. Language Learning, 52,
439–481.
Porter, Richard E. and Samovar, Larry. (1985). Intercultural Communicator: A Reader.
Belmont California: Wadsworth Publishing Company.
Pulido, D. (2004). The effects of cultural familiarity on incidental vocabulary acquisition
through reading. The Reading Matrix, 4 (2), 20–53.
Rahman, T. (2010). Linguistics for beginners: basic principle. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Rogers, B. (1999). Peterson‟s TOEFL Success. New Jersey: Peterson‟s Education Center.
Singhal, M. (1998). A comparison of L1 and L2 reading: Cultural differences and schema.
The Internet TESL Journal, 4 (10). Retrieved on September 20, 2005, from
http://iteslj.org/Articles/Singhal-ReadingL1L2.html
Widdowson, H. G. (1990). Aspects of Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Research in Teacher Education : What, How, and Why?, November 21-22, 2012, UKSW 416