2. Scope, rationale, and method of the review

One reason for the rapid and recent increase in research activity and peer-reviewed research on ELT in Singapore is MOE’s competitive grants system, which funds research projects in priority areas of education. This has been observed over the last two decades and since the review was conducted in 2009. A seven-year review period was therefore decided upon to balance the manageability of the number of publications with potential for both breadth and depth. Given the substantial amount of high-quality peer-reviewed research, we chose to exclude graduate student work, unreviewed conference papers, and reports. We decided to review articles published locally, regionally, and internationally due to the challenge of making a true distinction between local and international research in a country with international, regional, and national outlooks, a highly regarded education system, respected universities, and academics who regularly publish internationally about Singaporean education.

Our review was guided by the question, ‘What is the research on ELT in Singapore?’ The methodology was systematic, involving the development of search terms, inclusion criteria, and filters with subsequent appraisal and categorisation of the results (e.g. Andrews, Reference Andrews2005; Aromataris & Pearson, Reference Aromataris and Pearson2014; Davies, Reference Davies2000; Munn et al., Reference Munn, Tufanaru and Aromataris2014). We began by scoping the databases and keywords and sought advice from our librarians about the most useful databases for our task. Next, for the review proper, we searched three main databases, ‘Education Source’, ‘ERIC’, and ‘APA PsycInfo’, using three levels of search terms with increasing focus (see Table 1). For example, Singapore ‘AND’ English Language ‘AND’ Teaching. Each of the search terms in the third level depicted in Table 1 represents a separate search. We also used synonyms for each of the third-level search terms. Date (2017–2023), peer-review, and English language filters were used consistently. Regional journals were somewhat sporadically represented in the three main databases, likely due to some not being indexed there. The selection criteria for the regional journals included publication online or in print in the region, affiliation with a regional association or institution, and peer-review process. We searched these journals one by one, applying the same filters and search terms as we had in the main search. In this way, we aimed to conduct a comprehensive search as well as avoid bias towards international publications (Torgerson, Reference Torgerson2006). The results of every search were cross-checked for duplication, after which the title and abstract of each article were examined by two team members and a research assistant to confirm their relevance. This led to a collection of 175 publications. The three reviewers made joint decisions pertaining to relevance, discounting seven articles and ten more duplicates. The final number included was 158 published articles. Each article was read by at least two reviewers and a table was jointly constructed to help with categorisation. We then discussed, categorised, and organised the articles by content and count. Themes were decided upon through collaborative fine tuning and merging of categories into the five themes which structure the review. We later added one more article relevant to teacher education, which was initially missed due to its location in the Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics, giving a total of 159 publications.

Table 1.

Search terms of the review

3. Singapore’s linguistic and educational context

4. Research in the English language skills

5. Research in Multiliteracies and Technology

The concept of multiliteracies, coined by The New London Group (1996), highlights diverse and multimodal forms of literacy, with an emphasis on ensuring equitable access to learning. While not a focus in the review by Rubdy and Tupas (Reference Rubdy and Tupas2009), research in this field has been growing both internationally and in Singapore, especially with the inclusion of multiliteracies as a focal area of the Singaporean English Language Syllabus (MOE CPDD, 2020), which adopts the current broad conceptualisation of multiliteracies including psycholinguistic, sociocultural, and developmental processes alongside attention to the purposes and interrelations of multimodal and multilingual texts. It is the affordances of multimodal texts leading into the application of close, complex, analytical, reflective, and transferrable interpretive and expressive language skills that take students beyond single-dimension print literacy. However, educators throughout the world struggle with the applications of multiliteracy theory in teaching and learning due to a lack of resources and a lack of metalanguage (e.g. Dallacqua et al., Reference Dallacqua, Kersten and Rhoades2015). In Singapore, multiliteracies are instantiated in the syllabus in such a way that they are not viewed as separate skills; rather, viewing is connected with reading, while representing is connected with writing. Research has examined how multiliteracies can be taught in Singaporean schools, mostly in secondary school classrooms (Anderson et al., Reference Anderson, Stewart and Kachorsky2017; Kiss & Mizusawa, Reference Kiss and Mizusawa2018; Lim & Nguyen, Reference Lim and Nguyen2022; Lim & Towndrow et al., Reference Lim, Towndrow and Tan2021; Lim, Weninger, et al., Reference Lim, Weninger and Nguyen2021; Mizusawa, Reference Mizusawa2021), with some studies in primary school classrooms (Lim & Tan, Reference Lim and Tan2021; Lim, Towndrow, et al., Reference Lim, Towndrow and Tan2021). Many studies focused on teachers’ implementation efforts and were thus informed by concepts in reading and writing development (Lim et al., Reference Lim, Chia and Nguyen2022; Lim, Towndrow, et al., Reference Lim, Towndrow and Tan2021; Mizusawa, Reference Mizusawa2021). For example, Lim and Tan (Reference Lim and Tan2018) described a study in which an intervention was carried out to enhance the teaching of language skills with the incorporation of multimodality. The study illuminated teachers’ efforts to incorporate digital literacy into their teaching and deepen students’ appreciation of its value in honing their twenty-first-century language skills. Lim & Towndrow et al. (Reference Lim, Towndrow and Tan2021) offered perspectives on scaffolding the teaching of viewing and representing through the examination of primary school teachers’ use of multimodal texts. They highlighted the importance of technology and social media for collaborative learning and peer feedback, suggesting that these modes are particularly useful for instruction as they increase engagement and serve largely as an extension of social practices.

Some studies pointed to the tension between policy intent and constraints on the part of the teachers, in terms of their beliefs, skills, and the enactment of a multiliteracy pedagogy. For instance, Lim et al. (Reference Lim, Chia and Nguyen2022) studied five teachers’ multimodal classes and found that teachers were uncertain about the teaching of multiliteracies. The authentic texts they used to connect with students’ ‘life worlds’ (The New London Group, 1996), or the personal and sociocultural experiences that they bring to the classroom, tended to be perceived and used as language learning tools rather than ‘to broaden the students’ repertoire of multimodal literacy’ (Lim et al., Reference Lim, Chia and Nguyen2022, p. 388). Lim et al. (Reference Lim, Chia and Nguyen2022) discovered teachers’ somewhat essentialised view of multiliteracies, which Kiss and Mizusawa (Reference Kiss and Mizusawa2018) suggested was a result of reducing the syllabus to text types and standardising English, consequently divorcing writing from its sociocultural contexts. In the area of media literacy, Weninger et al. (Reference Weninger, Hu and Choo2017, p. 437) similarly found that teachers and students had ‘a traditional notion of media literacy that focused on critical analysis and audience effect’, in contrast to the expanded notion of ‘creative expression and production’ of the English Language Syllabus (MOE CPDD, 2020) (see also Weninger, Reference Weninger2018). Therefore, research on teacher support is particularly welcome. For instance, Toh and Lim (Reference Toh and Lim2021) recognised the need to support teachers in the unfamiliar arena of digital play and proposed a metalanguage to facilitate game design.

Our review examined studies on the role of technology across various age groups in multimodal ELT, termed ‘e-pedagogies’ in Singaporean schools. O’Brien, Habib, et al. (Reference O’Brien, Habib and Onnis2019) researched technology-based interventions for young learners, finding varied levels of success for students of different profiles. Yow and Priyashri (Reference Yow and Priyashri2019) addressed concerns about potential cognitive overload in young learners in a digitised environment. They investigated the in-built audio and visual features of narration and animation in single and dual language electronic books, finding that when synchronised, these two features helped young bilingual readers engage with print media in both their dominant and non-dominant languages. Choy and Cheung (Reference Choy and Cheung2022) examined the participation of 408 students in self-directed learning and collaborative learning during process writing, using graphic organisers, Grammarly (an AI-assisted writing tool), and Padlet (an online post-it wall for collaborative work) for peer feedback. Students demonstrated more favourable perceptions of self-directed learning and collaborative learning in non-online environments compared to technology-enabled ones, but more targeted instruction in the experimental group helped them to respond more positively towards technology-enabled learning. Given the move towards blended learning in a post-COVID age, it seems crucial to help students become learners who are competent in the use of information and communications technology (ICT).

Multimodal texts in the form of digital stories is another area that has been explored. Towndrow and Pereira (Reference Towndrow and Pereira2018) used digital storytelling to hone thinking skills, while Liang and Lim (Reference Liang and Lim2021) turned to video narratives in their conceptualisation of a secondary school lesson package. Anderson et al. (Reference Anderson, Stewart and Kachorsky2017) studied how a group of students experiencing difficulties with language created a set of persuasive multimodal texts. They observed that the mode of presentation allowed the students to design complex texts while exploring their own positioning in relation to classroom practices. All of these studies connected secondary school students’ experiences with social media and outlined considerations with respect to task knowledge, provision of content, and supervision of production to enable the fluent articulation of students’ ideas. At an institute of higher learning, Tan (Reference Tan2018) trialled the designing of meaningful gamification for the flipped classroom, resulting in improvements in students’ competence, motivation, and progress in reading. Finally, Shibani et al. (Reference Shibani, Koh, Lai and Kyong Jin2017) focused on learning analytics in the pedagogical use of asynchronous chats to help students practice language and work together in groups. As online learning becomes increasingly common, the use of learning analytics may be better able to support personalisation for large classes.

Multiple examples demonstrate how research on multiliteracies and technology has advanced in Singapore, responding to the call for more situated, sociocultural studies. With greater access to technology in the classroom through the National Digital Learning Programme initiative, the Student Learning Space, and GAI, this area of research is predicted to grow steadily. Furthermore, research technology related to learning, such as eye tracking and wearable sensory devices, may be applied to ELT for researchers to consider students’ perspectives and emotions in relation to their classroom experiences. Particularly significant are findings about teacher insecurity with regard to assessment and teaching multiliteracies. Since multiliteracies would not have been incorporated into many senior teachers’ pre-service education, these findings underscore the necessity of continual professional development. This points to a pressing need to research how best to support teachers in building their knowledge of twenty-first-century theories and practices.

6. Research in Bi/Multilingualism/Bidialecticism and English

In this section, we review work in bi/multilingual/bidialectal language acquisition as well as additive pedagogies. Research on bi/multilingual language development which is specifically located in reading and oral development has been reviewed in their respective sections of the paper. A review by Rubdy and Tupas (Reference Rubdy and Tupas2009) showed independent research conducted on the mother tongues and English in Singapore. However, current research reflects theories of integrated bi/multilingual development and shifts in policy evident in the English syllabi from 1991 to 2020. The English Language Syllabus (MOE CPDD, 1991) initially treated English as a ‘first language’ (Rubdy & Tupas, Reference Rubdy and Tupas2009), while the syllabus of 2001 (MOE CPDD, 2000) recognised differences in learning English in monolingual and multilingual contexts. There is a similar acknowledgement in the 2020 syllabus (MOE CPDD, 2020, p. 15), with advice for teachers to differentiate their instruction accordingly. The remarks in successive syllabi show a shift over time from pedagogies designed for first language learning to ‘a principled blend of first language (L1) and second language (L2) methods’ (MOE CPDD, 2020). In line with international theorising, this area of research reveals unique developmental patterns in language acquisition of the multilingual individual, highlighting how individuals deploy language skills in their learning of English (Garcia, Reference Garcia, Kamil, Mosenthal, Pearson and Barr2000). Key themes present are attitudes and perspectives on language; the contrast between the separation of languages by curriculum and policy in schools and the developmental intertwining of languages in the psychology of the individual in research; and the challenging quest for pedagogies suited to English-medium instruction in a multilingual environment.

Family attitudes to language is a prominent area of research. Studies of families with young children describe parental views on language adoption which drive family language policies and behaviours. For example, research on Malay families showed parental acceptance of children adopting English once in school (Mirvahedi & Cavallaro, Reference Mirvahedi and Cavallaro2020) and, conversely, parents resisting the dominance of school English to construct and preserve Malay identities (Cheng, Reference Cheng2020). Cavallaro et al. (Reference Cavallaro, Xin Elsie, Wong and Chin Ng2021) demonstrated how family socialisation determines and supports the continued use of and positive attitudes towards English and Chinese by young bilinguals. Although Singapore’s bilingual policy has been in place since the 1960s and there has been theoretical commentary and research on the relative positioning of Singapore’s various languages including SCE, there has been little research on the attitudes of those who have lived through it. Such research is gradually emerging. For example, Leimgruber et al. (Reference Leimgruber, Siemund and Terassa2018) surveyed 450 students from Singaporean institutes of higher learning and found that multilingualism was the norm among them. The students valued proficiency in English over proficiency in the mother tongues, but had positive attitudes towards the bilingual policy. The students from universities and Institutes of Technical Education, in particular, held positive attitudes towards SCE. S. Y. E. Lee and Ahn (Reference Lee and Ahn2021) uncovered mixed feelings about SCE in interviews with Singaporean undergraduates living overseas, who perceived SCE as a solidarity marker but considered it a low variety exclusive to Singaporeans. Such perception studies among young adults reflect their appreciation of and alignment with the relative value of languages under the bilingual policy. Nonetheless, speakers are aware of linguistic variation and when in Singapore, claim SCE as their own.

There is an interest in research on the acquisition of vocabulary in young bilingual learners (e.g. Setoh et al., Reference Setoh, Cheng, Bornstein and Esposito2021; Singh et al., Reference Singh, Cheng, Tan, Tan and Low2022, Reference Singh, Fu, Seet, Tong, Wang and Best2018; Sun, Yin, et al., Reference Sun, Yin, Amsah and O’Brien2018). Setoh et al. (Reference Setoh, Cheng, Bornstein and Esposito2021) identified some language-specific effects and commonalities across languages in lexical development. Singh et al. (Reference Singh, Cheng, Tan, Tan and Low2022) found influences of socio-economic status, gender, age, and exposure to English among young multilinguals from diverse economic backgrounds. They also created the first descriptive norms for children’s development of English vocabulary in multilingual settings. Sun, Yin, et al. (Reference Sun, Yin, Amsah and O’Brien2018) examined the influence of internal and external factors on the development of vocabulary in young bilinguals (speakers of English and a mother tongue at about four years of age). They found that internal factors accounted more for variance in English vocabulary knowledge, while external factors such as exposure to the mother tongues were more significant for mother-tongue vocabulary knowledge. This study adds to the findings of Mirvahedi and Cavallaro (Reference Mirvahedi and Cavallaro2020), Cheng (Reference Cheng2020), and Cavallaro et al. (Reference Cavallaro, Xin Elsie, Wong and Chin Ng2021) in underscoring the importance of the home environment and parental attitudes towards language when it comes to children’s bi/multilingual linguistic development.

Other research that adopts a bi/multilingual standpoint examines preschool children’s code-switching. Wu et al. (Reference Wu, Cai, Liang and Li2021) studied the quantity of children’s code-switching in school in relation to their home bilingualism, drawing from the Singapore Early Child Mandarin Corpus. They found that code-switching was common and increased with age. Key findings were related to parents’ use of language in homes; incidences of preschoolers’ code-switching was influenced by having at least one bilingual parent, parental beliefs in the value of bilingualism from an early age (see also Cheng, Reference Cheng2020), and input patterns in parents’ language (see also Li et al., Reference Li, Wu, Liang and Jing2022; Sim & Post, Reference Sim and Post2022). As discussed by Wu et al. (Reference Wu, Cai, Liang and Li2021), work in Singapore in this area has been largely descriptive; longitudinal research investigating the productivity of code-switching in bilingual language development would help to validate the conclusion that ‘code-switching plays an important and positive role in language development of bilingual children’ (Yow et al., Reference Yow, Tan and Flynn2018, p. 1086). Apart from research on language acquisition in bilinguals, Hast (Reference Hast2022), in a singular study, investigated scientific concept development among young English-speaking bilinguals who also spoke Chinese, Malay, or Tamil at four, seven, and ten years of age. He discovered that exposure to a home language with a broad definition of a concept (in the case of his research, an ‘animal’) facilitated children’s understanding of the concept in English for science instruction in school. Collectively, these studies illuminate not only the effects of bilingualism on English language development but also on cognitive conceptual development and the relationship between the two, as theorised by Vygotsky (Reference Vygotsky1962) and Bloom (Reference Bloom, Golinkoff, Hirsch-Pasek, Bloom, Smith, Woodward, Akhtar, Tomasello and Hollich2000).

Recognition of Singapore’s multilingualism and bidialectalism has catalysed research in additive pedagogies. With respect to ELT in secondary schools, Tupas (Reference Tupas2018) and Seilhamer and Kwek (Reference Seilhamer and Kwek2021) advocated a bidialectal pedagogical approach which would validate the use of SCE in classrooms as students explore and negotiate their understandings of learning English and learning in English. Lu (Reference Lu2023) offered an example of such a pedagogy in a secondary school intervention. He found that the approach could aid students’ development of critical language awareness. Tupas and Weninger (Reference Tupas and Weninger2022) illustrated a young teacher’s struggle to reconcile political and experiential knowledge of standard English used in the English-medium curriculum with both her own and the students’ knowledge of SCE. In research involving children with low progress in primary school, Vaish (Reference Vaish2019a) found that when translanguaging was used judiciously and systematically, it helped low-achieving children notice language and develop metalinguistic awareness. Some difficulties in implementing translanguaging acknowledged by Vaish (Reference Vaish2019b, Reference Vaish2021) included the multilingual composition or ‘superdiversity’ (Reference Vaish2019b, p. 286) of the class in relation to the bilingual profile of the teachers; the difficulty in evaluating the efficacy of translanguaging; and the structure of the customary pedagogy in the Learning Support Program for learners with low progress which constrains the cognitive fluidity required for translanguaging. Additionally, Vaish (Reference Vaish2019b) found that some children were unenthusiastic about the mother tongues, which would presumably affect their motivation for learning (see also the attitudinal research with young adults by Leimgruber et al., Reference Leimgruber, Siemund and Terassa2018, and S. Y. E. Lee & Ahn, Reference Lee and Ahn2021). Other research involving children with low progress comes from Jones (Reference Jones2018), who employed assessment for learning (AfL) techniques to analyse reading and writing tasks of two nine-year-old children, demonstrating the need for guided, additive cross-linguistic pedagogies and contrastive analysis by teachers which could draw on children’s knowledge of SCE and their mother tongue. Similar to the studies by Vaish (Reference Vaish2019a, Reference Vaish2019b, Reference Vaish2021), the findings of Jones (Reference Jones2018) suggest that the fluidity of children’s linguistic knowledge was unaccounted for in the standard materials and scaffolding provided in the tasks. The search for additive pedagogies appropriate for the diverse multilingual classroom continues.

Research on bi/multilingualism/bidialectalism and English is a growing field. The Centre for Research in Child Development at NIE has produced much research related to language acquisition and development in early childhood in Singapore. There has, however, been relatively little attention to language acquisition and development among secondary school students. Some of the reviewed research on bi/multilingualism/bidialectalism and English suggests a fluidity in children’s multiple linguistic resources, which may reflect the cognitive flexibility of twenty-first-century competencies. This presents an opportunity for local research to focus on the acquisition and development of both language and cognition.

7. Research in English as an Academic Language

Our review shows English positioned as an academic language in the English-medium curriculum. The studies reviewed are inspired by theories about the importance of language in individual cognitive development (e.g. Bloom, Reference Bloom, Golinkoff, Hirsch-Pasek, Bloom, Smith, Woodward, Akhtar, Tomasello and Hollich2000; Vygotsky, Reference Vygotsky1962) and the concept of language specificity in discourse communities (e.g. Gee, Reference Gee, Barton, Hamilton and Ivanic2000). As is the case internationally, there are two strands of research in Singapore in this regard: the first is disciplinary language and literacy in school subjects (e.g. Schleppegrell, Reference Schleppegrell2001; Unsworth, Reference Unsworth2001), and the second is language instruction in English for Academic Purposes (EAP) in the institutes of higher learning. Continuing the general trend noted by Rubdy and Tupas (Reference Rubdy and Tupas2009), research into English as an academic language focuses on classroom practice with local calls for disciplinary literacy rather than general academic literacy. For example, Green and Lambert (Reference Green and Lambert2019) noted the remarkable linguistic variation across disciplines evident in corpus research, while Seah and Yore (Reference Seah and Yore2017) argued for disciplinary literacy even in the primary curriculum, traditionally a level of schooling taught by generalist teachers.

Studies on disciplinary literacy show how teachers strive to build their multilingual students’ academic language while at the same time enabling them to use language to learn content in an English-medium multilingual context. Jones and Seilhamer (Reference Jones and Seilhamer2019) found that although mathematics teachers recognised the importance of learning mathematical language for their primary school students, they conceptualised it largely as technical vocabulary. Green and Lambert’s (Reference Green and Lambert2019) construction of secondary phrase lists suggests that learning disciplinary phrases is as crucial as learning individual words. In Seah and Silver’s (Reference Seah and Silver2020) case studies, all three teachers taught academic vocabulary. However, one was notably more effective, using students’ own writing to draw them into making language and content connections. Seah and Silver (Reference Seah and Silver2020, p. 2467) cautioned that assessing science writing merely for accuracy is insufficient for developing scientific language; instead, teachers ‘need to entertain the possibility that students’ inappropriate use of language could be a conceptual and/or representational issue’. In a study of collaborative classroom discourse in secondary school computer-supported physics lessons, Tang and Tan (Reference Tang and Tan2017) found that teachers might be implementing pedagogies without an awareness of an underlying linguistic rationale. Similarly, Jones and Seilhamer (Reference Jones and Seilhamer2019) observed that teachers in their study were unaware of the potential effects of the grammatical complexity of their own instructional language on students’ learning. This group of studies suggests a strong teacher belief that academic language consists of lexis rather than lexicogrammar or cognition represented in language. The studies also demonstrate how teachers’ beliefs affect their practice, as is the case in international research on teacher cognition.

Another strand of research focuses on EAP in institutes of higher learning. Singaporean university students tend to possess a relatively high standard of English proficiency (Brooke, Reference Brooke2018; Frattarola, Reference Frattarola2023). At the same time, foreign students for whom English is a non-dominant language may require additional support (Brooke, Reference Brooke2018; Jaidev & Chan, Reference Jaidev and Chan2018). While some articles tended to be descriptions of EAP courses (Jaidev, Reference Jaidev2021) or teacher reflections (Brooke, Reference Brooke2017; Jaidev & Chan, Reference Jaidev and Chan2018), others examined the impact of EAP interventions within Singaporean institutes of higher learning. For example, Frattarola (Reference Frattarola2023) offered a comprehensive review of tertiary-level writing courses in Singapore through a survey study of the background and pedagogical approaches favoured by tertiary-level writing teachers in Singapore. The study revealed that most teachers have a linguistics background and adopt an EAP approach. She also observed that many teachers employed a blended approach, integrating EAP with composition studies where the emphasis is on ‘critical thought, identity formation, and civic engagement’ (Frattarola, Reference Frattarola2023, p. 2). Evidence of both emphases is present in the articles analysed for this section (see also Brooke, Reference Brooke2018; Sim, Reference Sim2021). Studies involving students from institutes of higher learning examined student responses to feedback (Song et al., Reference Song, Lee and Leong2017), their ability to evaluate suitable words or phrases within their disciplinary discourse (Loo, Reference Loo2022), and support for their academic writing tasks (Wong et al., Reference Wong, Delante and Wang2017).

Of the two research strands reviewed in this section, the research prognosis is better for EAP in institutes of higher learning than it is for disciplinary literacy in secondary schools. Given the growing number of institutes of higher learning in Singapore, policy support for lifelong learning under the SkillsFuture initiative, and the recognition of the role of language in developing cognition and twenty-first-century competencies such as criticality in EAP courses, research in this area could increase in coming years. In contrast, there have been few recent studies on disciplinary literacy despite the finding that many teachers, both of English and other subjects, consider disciplinary literacy to be primarily about lexis. This can be attributed to some degree to the categorisation of teachers’ roles as language or subject teachers (e.g. Garces-Bascal et al., Reference Garces-Bascal, Tupas, Kaur, Paculdar and Baja2018) and the segmentation of the curriculum, as noted by Jones (Reference Jones2021) in her review.

8. Research in Teacher Education for ELT

Considering the influence of teachers on students’ educational outcomes (Darling-Hammond, Reference Darling-Hammond2006), it is surprising that few studies in Singapore tackle the issue of teacher education head on, and none in the 2009 review. Many research studies provide insight into the dynamics of teaching and learning in classrooms, however, these take the form of implications in publications rather than intentional examinations of teachers and teaching. In contrast, Goh (Reference Goh2017) took three findings from research on the teaching of speaking and listening, demonstrated their strengths, and suggested instructional strategies to apply them to a local context. In her review of ELT, Jones (Reference Jones2021) catalogued implications for teaching and suggested future directions for research based on them. Both types of publications – involving the extraction of specific findings, and the reviewing and cataloguing of a range of findings – are helpful for teachers interested in translating research to practice. They are useful for educators seeking a prioritised and organised compilation to select from, and equally useful for researchers who would like to know what kind of research would be helpful for teachers and learners in a Singaporean setting. As the body of research grows, it will become increasingly important to investigate ways to communicate findings to teachers, particularly where gaps in their knowledge have been revealed. Innovations in research translation also constitutes a potential area for research.

Some work on teacher education in ELT focuses on teacher knowledge and awareness. While Lim and Nguyen (Reference Lim and Nguyen2022), Xavier et al. (Reference Xavier, Hong and Renandya2020), and Teo (Reference Teo2017) reported different approaches to professional development in teaching, all of them involved teachers’ grounded reflection, knowledge building, and analysis. As Teo (Reference Teo2017) explained, a degree in English language or linguistics is not part of the entry requirement for a postgraduate diploma programme for prospective English teachers in Singapore. This might explain teachers’ insecurities in knowledge discovered in these studies; in particular, knowledge of grammar among primary school teachers (Xavier et al., Reference Xavier, Hong and Renandya2020), and knowledge of multiliteracies (Lim & Nguyen, Reference Lim and Nguyen2022) and language (Teo, Reference Teo2017) among secondary school teachers. In these studies, teachers’ knowledge was built through workshop discussions or the examination of classroom data, as well as the co-construction of teaching materials (Lim & Nguyen, Reference Lim and Nguyen2022; Xavier et al., Reference Xavier, Hong and Renandya2020). These findings provide further evidence supporting the conclusion of Jones (Reference Jones2021) that teachers’ knowledge of texts and language requires augmentation. The studies also show participating teachers gaining confidence (Lim & Nguyen, Reference Lim and Nguyen2022) and shed light on the metacognitive and metalinguistic awareness necessary for change (Xavier et al., Reference Xavier, Hong and Renandya2020) during the interventions.

Research studies on teacher education which focus on small groups of teachers are necessarily labour-intensive for researchers. However, teacher preparation courses which draw from the findings of such studies have the opportunity to put research findings into practice and reach more teachers. Chia et al. (Reference Chia, Chye and Chua2021) described their design for a pre-service professional practice and inquiry course in a concept paper supported by the reflections of five English language teachers. The course drew from aspects of the university and school practicums and aimed to position the teacher as agentive and reflective, and thus prepared for self-directed learning in future professional development. It was designed to help early-career teachers develop their twenty-first-century competencies, allowing for a move away from syllabus dependence (Teo, Reference Teo2017), lesson proceduralisation and decontextualisation (Kiss & Mizusawa, Reference Kiss and Mizusawa2018), and preteaching for national assessments (Poh, Reference Poh2021). The familiar themes of knowledge, awareness, and reflection were evident in research at institutes of higher learning as teachers reflected on their own practices in EAP courses (Brooke, Reference Brooke2017; Brooke et al., Reference Brooke, Monbec and Tilakaratna2019; Weninger, Reference Weninger2020). On one hand, the reflective frameworks discussed in these articles are helpful in demonstrating how reflections may be researched; on the other hand, the actual content of the teachers’ reflections illustrated how self-perceptions may exist in tension with student perspectives on the role of the teacher, while also providing insight into students’ conceptions of knowledge construction.

Other studies examined teachers’ experiences and subjectivities, suggesting how tensions develop and are reshaped into particular cultural models of practice among teachers of a range of ages and career stages (Pereira, Reference Pereira2018; Poh, Reference Poh2021). Poh’s (Reference Poh2021) questioning of the theory–practice gap in education led him to argue for a more complex and critical theory of pre-service education. He found three novice English language teachers reformulating their cultural models of practice to align both with the pressures experienced in schools and the politics of the work ethics of meritocracy and pragmatism. Practice was related to examinations, and to being practical, efficient, and effective teachers. Pereira’s (Reference Pereira2018) study of the reflections of nine English teachers with three to 30 years of experience produced similar findings. By critically examining interview data through an ethics of care lens (Noddings, Reference Noddings2012), Pereira (Reference Pereira2018) discovered how feelings were linked to school appraisal systems and the demands of the syllabus, school, and national assessment. Teachers felt frustrated that the pressure to perform efficiently affected their care of students and the pedagogies they were able to employ. Thus, through critical and cultural analyses, Pereira (Reference Pereira2018) and Poh (Reference Poh2021) highlighted teachers’ cognitive and emotional conflicts, described as ‘struggles with formidable constraints’ by Rubdy and Tupas (Reference Rubdy and Tupas2009, p. 336).

Another innovative study spotlighted tensions between the English-medium education policy and its bi/multilingual and bidialectal participants. D. H. L. Lee and King (Reference Lee and King2022) explored how teachers’ home language experience affected their predisposition towards student-centredness and risk-taking in their teaching of English. They found that Chinese as a home language had an influence on student-centred practice, mediated by risk-taking. The writers argued that bilingual education policies have a delayed effect on education, shaped by the cultural beliefs associated with teachers’ home languages. They further suggested that blended bilingual experiences in childhood would result in bilingual speakers with locally situated identities rather than coordinate or sequential ones (Nguyen & Ahmadpanah, Reference Nguyen and Ahmadpanah2014, as cited in D. H. L. Lee & King, Reference Lee and King2022). This could lead to greater cognitive flexibility among teachers.

The number of research studies that focus on English language teachers is limited. With more research in the future, greater coherence in this area can be achieved. Our review of research on English teachers in Singapore highlights the significant potential of teacher reflection, teachers’ reception of new concepts, and the productive nature of the researcher-teacher relationship in the development of ELT knowledge and pedagogies. At the same time, research in multiliteracies and bi/multilingual/bidialectal acquisition reveals teachers’ insecurities with respect to their knowledge, emphasising the need for support and guidance. A valuable pursuit in the future will be to identify the most effective and scalable models and timing for professional development in ELT in a local context. In addition to research on teacher knowledge and pedagogies, research on English teachers’ experiences, perceptions, and emotions (D. H. L. Lee & King, Reference Lee and King2022; Pereira, Reference Pereira2018; Poh, Reference Poh2021) can provide further insight into the successes and challenges faced by teachers in their educational settings.

9. Conclusion

Our review period saw significant research activity in ELT in Singapore with a broadening of perspectives in the areas of theory, location, and life stage, as well as a wider range of research approaches as compared to Rubdy and Tupas (Reference Rubdy and Tupas2009). In terms of research on reading and writing, multiliteracies, and technology, we observed continuity and a forward-looking agenda which aims to expand on and improve existing pedagogy (e.g. Lim & Nguyen, Reference Lim and Nguyen2022; Sun & Ng, Reference Sun and Ng2021). Policy imperatives such as full subject-based banding, the National Digital Learning Programme, and reductions in summative assessment have implications for ELT and can be taken into consideration in future research. This emphasis is also reflected in the recent English Language Syllabus (MOE CPDD, 2020) which stresses multiliteracies, metacognition, and inquiry through dialogue and twenty-first-century competencies.

Research on digital tools and digital environments of ELT is advancing (Shibani et al., Reference Shibani, Koh, Lai and Kyong Jin2017; Tan, Reference Tan2018) and given the potential for new technology and e-pedagogies, it is likely to substantially improve teaching by enhancing student engagement in self-directed and collaborative learning. This review encompasses studies investigating a range of age groups, tools, and language purposes. Policies and initiatives such as the National Digital Learning Programme, Student Learning Space, and the provision of personal learning devices to all secondary school students grant students access to digital tools and environments. This provides a space for researchers to investigate outcomes in education, particularly in relation to twenty-first-century competencies. We also expect to see an increase in the use of technology in research design. For example, eye-tracking, brain imaging, and portable sensory devices can be employed to examine cognitive and affective processes. The use of GAI in ELT classrooms is likely to produce new insights into teaching and learning, too. As such, research into the quality and benefits of such data, as well as the ethics of its collection and use, should begin now (Hobbes, Reference Hobbes2020).

While there is an expanding body of research on the syllabus focus of multiliteracies, and the theme of metacognition is seen in research on writing and speaking (e.g. Bai, Reference Bai2018; Ng et al., Reference Ng, Vijayakumar, Yussof and O’Brien2021; Sabnani & Goh, Reference Sabnani and Goh2021), the theme of inquiry through dialogue is less evident. Similarly, the skills of speaking and listening, while gaining more attention in research, continue to be understudied in multilingual Singapore. On the other hand, studies focusing on spoken interaction in classrooms – including teacher talk, questioning, and scaffolded class discussions – reflect an important turn in ELT research, as they have the potential to impact teaching and learning in a multilingual society (e.g. Ng et al., Reference Ng, Vijayakumar, Yussof and O’Brien2021; Ong, Reference Ong2019).

Classrooms are complex as students are neurodiverse and differ in terms of pace of progress, dominant languages, and socio-economic backgrounds. This diversity is acknowledged in a variety of themes, for example, research on reading with an equity perspective. However, it is most apparent in the topic of additive pedagogies for learners with low progress (e.g. Tupas & Weninger, Reference Tupas and Weninger2022; Vaish, Reference Vaish2019a). Steps have been taken to suggest appropriate accommodations for diverse learners in ELT in Singapore. Yet, ELT-specific work on neurodiversity is still lacking. This is pressing in light of the inclusion of those with mild SEN into mainstream education, which has been promoted by MOE over the last decade.

Research on the bi/multilingual/bidialectal language development of young learners has continued to grow, although research on secondary school students is still lacking. Studies on young children’s cognitive and linguistic development reveal the intricacies of the relationship between language and cognition in a multilingual brain (e.g. Hast, Reference Hast2022; Setoh et al., Reference Setoh, Cheng, Bornstein and Esposito2021; Singh et al., Reference Singh, Cheng, Tan, Tan and Low2022). For instance, the application of cognitive and linguistic strategies by multilingual learners varies depending on their knowledge of different languages. Children’s use of such skills suggests a potential for cognitive flexibility, which might aid their development of twenty-first-century competencies. While this research contributes to international theory, the challenge for Singapore lies in utilising locally situated findings to improve teachers’ knowledge of language and language development, and by extension, enhance their teaching practices.

Although there have been few studies on ELT teacher education, they are significant in setting the direction for future research in this area in Singapore. This theme encompasses research on pre-service courses, small-scale pedagogic interventions in schools with teachers, and research attending to participants’ views. The focus on the classroom has produced similar findings as research on multiliteracies, language skills, and English as an academic language suggest English teachers’ insecurities are in specific areas of knowledge, mainly, language, language awareness, and the use of language in teaching and learning. Paradoxically, research with a focus on language itself, such as the theme of English as an academic language, has decreased. It is not clear from our review whether such a critical focus will resurface in the future.

Research on ELT teacher education in Singapore (e.g. Teo, Reference Teo2017; Xavier et al., Reference Xavier, Hong and Renandya2020) highlights the need both for systematic in-service teacher education as well as further research into models of teacher professional development specifically for English language teachers. Additionally, tensions between teachers’ personal aspirations and the demands of policy, syllabus, and assessment have surfaced in critical and cultural research focusing on participants’ beliefs and attitudes (e.g. Pereira, Reference Pereira2018; Poh, Reference Poh2021). This area requires urgent attention given concerns about teachers’ well-being, which affects their recruitment and retention, and in turn has an impact on student learning.

Research involving teachers in Singapore (e.g. Kaur, Reference Kaur2021; Kaur & Lim-Ratnam, Reference Kaur and Lim-Ratnam2023) showcases how assessment determines and constrains teaching pedagogies, highlighting the need to support the development of teachers’ assessment literacy. We found only two studies on assessment in ELT within the review period (Kaur, Reference Kaur2021; Kaur & Lim-Ratnam, Reference Kaur and Lim-Ratnam2023) which focused on formative assessment. According to the authors, greater knowledge about the theory and practice of assessment in relation to teaching and learning (e.g. Winch et al., Reference Winch, Ross-Johnston, March, Ljungdahl and Holliday2014) would better equip teachers to adapt their teaching practices to suit the needs of learners. Considering the importance of formative assessment in personalising learning for diverse learners, this is a research area which could support previously mentioned concerns. Researchers (e.g. Mizusawa, Reference Mizusawa2021; Poh, Reference Poh2021; Weninger, Reference Weninger2020) have pointed out that national high-stakes assessments can limit teachers’ pedagogies, priorities, and appetite for experimentation. However, these studies tend not to focus on assessment practices; rather, findings related to assessment are embedded within revelations about teachers’ beliefs or explanations of teacher practices. We propose that researchers build on the opportunities provided by these conclusions to develop research centred around assessment. Studies can be designed to systematically investigate teachers’ beliefs, explanations, mindsets, and practices with respect to both formative and summative high-stakes assessment. This will provide an empirical basis for the development of policy, practice, and teacher education.

Research on perceptions and attitudes of teachers and students has emerged across themes. For example, ELT research in institutes of higher learning is a recent development and provides a historical or semi-longitudinal perspective on students’ views of language and language use. Against the backdrop of Singapore’s bilingual policy, other local findings have been made concerning people’s attitudes towards languages and varieties in homes, schools, and institutes of higher learning (e.g. Cheng, Reference Cheng2020; D. H. L. Lee & King, Reference Lee and King2022; Leimgruber et al., Reference Leimgruber, Siemund and Terassa2018; Tupas & Weninger, Reference Tupas and Weninger2022). Such an orientation in research in ELT is welcome and will provide relevant insights for the consideration of educators and policymakers.

Research has the potential to offer evidence of practice and inspire action. Although the focus of this review was not on research methods, it is worth noting that the reviewed studies demonstrate a research ecology comprising of varied data collection methods and sample sizes. Classroom and school-based studies continue to yield rich insight, and the system may be ripe for larger scale or longitudinal studies tracking teacher and student change across time which could complement small-scale studies. With funding and investment in ELT research, a perennial challenge is how to translate findings into practice. We hope that this review provides a solid, comprehensive overview of recent ELT research in Singapore, including its contributions and gaps, and by so doing, offers a starting point for educators, scholars, and researchers looking to research ELT in Singapore.