Our Learning Structure

At our English and GP Centre, the learning structure embodies an amalgamation of the best educational philosophies, evolving from management-focused approaches to a student-centric paradigm.

Historically, the emphasis of educational systems globally as a whole was on bureaucratic management rather than understanding how students acquire knowledge (Cooney et al., 1993). Influential thinkers such as Piaget and Vygotsky revolutionised education by emphasising the importance of learning processes (Ornstein & Hunkins, 2013).

Today, just like trends in the global educational landscape, our English curriculum fosters interaction and involvement, promoting independent learning especially for General Paper. We prioritise student engagement, encouraging learners to take responsibility for their educational journeys (Fisher & Frey, 2014; Cordeiro & Cunningham, 2012; Knight, 2008).

We invite you to explore further how our guiding principles and curriculum work in harmony to empower every learner.

Cultivating Motivation

Our Belief

Our Centre believes that every child inherently desires to learn and should be empowered to do so. This belief is grounded in motivational theories, particularly Deci and Ryan’s Self-Determination Theory, which states that motivation is linked to fulfilling psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness (Deci & Ryan, 2000). Addressing children’s emotional, psychological, and cognitive needs enables their full learning potential (Kaur, 2020).

Moreover, each child is a unique learner with distinct abilities and learning styles that require personalised instructional approaches (Bernard, 1999; Linnenbrink-Garcia, 2017). We are committed to creating a supportive and adaptive learning environment that nurtures each child’s individual English educational journey.

Our Curriculum

To motivate students and support their unique GP learning paths, our centre employs differentiated instruction with a spiral effect, focusing on tailored adjustments in content, process, product, and learning environment. Such an approach enhances motivation by modifying content to suit individual learning styles, interests, and readiness, fostering deeper engagement (Tomlinson, 2001; Subban, 2006).

We offer diverse instructional methods to ensure meaningful engagement and allow students to demonstrate understanding in ways that align with their strengths (Heacox, 2012). Additionally we adopt a spiralling approach that reinforces mastery by revisiting concepts at increasing levels of complexity.

A structured approach to achieving excellence

Our Belief

We firmly believe that English Language and General Paper (GP) can be effectively studied through structured learning approaches. Structured Learning Theory indicates that providing clear, step-by-step strategies significantly enhances understanding and retention, leading to academic progress (Tharp & Gallimore, 1988).

This is supported by Constructivist Theory, which asserts that students construct knowledge more effectively when engaged with defined learning frameworks (Brusilovsky & Millán, 2007). Explicit instructional strategies boost student investment and self-efficacy, resulting in improved outcomes (Schunk, 2003; Zimmerman, 2008). By equipping students with effective strategies, we empower them to excel in English and GP.

Our Curriculum

At our Centre, we provide a structured pathway to mastering English, reinforcing our belief that it can be effectively studied. Our lessons break down complex aspects of English into manageable components, ensuring clarity and progression. Utilising Scaffolding Theory, we guide students through each thinking stage, enabling them to build on prior knowledge and develop essential skills (Wood, Bruner, & Ross, 1976).

Following the Gradual Release of Responsibility model, we go from guided practice to independent application, fostering confidence (Pearson & Gallagher, 1983). Our curriculum emphasises skills-focused learning through step-by-step drills, making mastery achievable and rewarding for all students.

Cultivating Agency

Our Belief

At The Thought Tailor, we emphasise cultivating a winning mentality in English learning through key educational theories. Inspired by Dweck’s Growth Mindset, we believe language proficiency can be developed through consistent effort and strategic learning (Dweck, 2006). By praising perseverance and problem-solving in language tasks, we encourage students to view challenges as opportunities, fostering resilience and reducing the fear of failure (Dweck, 2012).

Additionally, we apply Bandura’s Self-Efficacy theory, enhancing students’ belief in their ability to excel in English through achievable goals, constructive feedback, and self-reflection (Bandura, 1997). Together, these methods promote the persistence and self-belief essential for academic success.

Our Curriculum

Our core practices to best help students attain mastery in English and GP include self-assessment and reflective learning. We encourage students to regularly evaluate their progress in comprehension, vocabulary, and writing, shifting their focus from grades to mastery of skills, fostering deeper understanding and intrinsic motivation (Elliot & Dweck, 1988).

Reflective exercises, such as journaling, help students identify effective study strategies and refine their learning approach. We emphasise attributing success to effort and study techniques—targeted vocabulary building, grammar drills, and structured writing practices—while recognizing that setbacks can be addressed with improved strategies (Weiner, 1985). This structured approach fosters accountability and persistence for continuous improvement in English.

No child should be left behind

Our Belief

Our English and GP Curriculum

At our Centre, we focus on closing learning gaps for every student by implementing a curriculum that emphasises formative assessments and personalised learning. We regularly monitor student progress, tailoring instruction to meet individual needs and ensuring that each learner masters specific skills before advancing (Guskey, 2010). Our tiered English worksheets are designed according to competency levels, allowing students to engage with appropriately challenging material (Fuchs et al., 2001). Additionally, we use a complete categorisation approach to General Paper, breaking down concepts into manageable segments and providing personalised feedback to guide students in their learning journeys (Hattie & Timperley, 2007).

Our robust student support systems – free consultation, individual diagnostic reviews, learning journeys, life coaching, higher education advice – ensure that students gain the best possible support. With every aspect of The Thought Tailor geared for success, we leave nothing to chance.

References

Ainscow, M. (2005). Developing inclusive education systems: What are the levers for change? Journal of Educational Change, 6(2), 109-124.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W.H. Freeman.
Bernard, M. E. (1999). The relationship of self-concept and academic achievement to motivation: A longitudinal study. Australian Journal of Guidance and Counselling, 9(1), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf03173109
Brusilovsky, P., & Millán, E. (2007). User Modelling for Adaptive Hypermedia and Adaptive Educational Systems. In The Adaptive Web (pp. 3-30). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
Cordeiro, P. A., & Cunningham, D. J. (2012). Leadership in education: Organisational theory for the practitioner.
Cooney, T. J., & Others. (1993). The historical roots of mathematics education: A study of the changes and challenges facing mathematics education in the United States.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behaviour. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227-268.
Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. Random House.
Dweck, C. S. (2012). Mindset: How you can fulfil your potential. Constable & Robinson.
Elliot, A. J., & Dweck, C. S. (1988). Goals: An approach to motivation and achievement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(1), 5-12.
Florian, L., & Rouse, M. (2009). The Inclusive Schools Movement: The Role of Teacher Education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(4), 503-513.
Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2014). Better together: Restorative practices and academic achievement.
Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., & Stecker, P. M. (2001). The Responsiveness-to-Intervention Framework: A Literature Review. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 16(4), 198-207.
Guskey, T. R. (2010). Evaluating Professional Development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The Power of Feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112.
Heacox, D. (2012). Making Differentiation a Habit: How to Ensure Success in Academically Diverse Classrooms. Free Spirit Publishing.
Kaur, K. (2020). Individualised learning: Unlocking potential through customised teaching. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 9(3), 98-113. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARPED/v9-i3/2298
Knight, J. (2008). Instructional coaching: A partnership approach to improving instruction.
Linnenbrink-Garcia, L. (2017). The role of affect and engagement in conceptual change. Educational Psychology Review, 29(1), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-017-9405-7
Lumen Learning. (n.d.). Need-based theories of motivation. Retrieved from https://courses.lumenlearning.com
Ornstein, A. C., & Hunkins, F. P. (2013). Curriculum: Foundations, principles, and issues (6th ed.).
Pearson, P. D., & Gallagher, M. C. (1983). The instruction of reading comprehension. The Reading Teacher, 36(6), 608-615.
Ritchhart, R., Church, M., & Morrison, K. (2011). Making Thinking Visible: How to Promote Engagement, Understanding, and Independence for All Learners. Jossey-Bass.
Schunk, D. H. (2003). Self-efficacy for reading and writing: Influence of modelling, goal setting, and self-evaluation. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 19(2), 159-172.
Smith, J. (2007). No child left behind and the ethics of inclusion. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 39(3), 289-301.
Subban, P. (2006). Differentiated instruction: A research basis. International Education Journal, 7(7), 935-947.
Tharp, R. G., & Gallimore, R. (1988). A Theory of Teaching as Assisted Performance. In Teaching for Intelligence (pp. 21-36). Corwin Press.
Tomlinson, C. A. (2001). How to Differentiate Instruction in Mixed-Ability Classrooms. ASCD.
Weiner, B. (1985). An attributional theory of achievement, motivation and emotion. Psychological Review, 92(4), 548–573.
Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17(2), 89-100.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2008). Goal setting: A key proactive source of academic self-regulation. In D. H. Schunk & B. J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Motivation and Self-Regulated Learning: Theory, Research, and Applications (pp. 267-295). Routledge.