FACULTY OF ENGLISH LINGUISTICS & LITERATURE THE EFFECTS OF EFL LISTENING-SPEAKING PORTFOLIOS ON STUDENTS’ LEARNING OF EFL LISTENING, SPEAKING SKILLS AND THEIR PERCEPTION TOWARDS LEAR
INTRODUCTION
Context of the study
1.1.1 The general context of the study
Since the 1990s, English has become “the most favored foreign language in
In Vietnam, various modifications to English language teaching practices have been implemented to enhance students' English proficiency Traditionally, the grammar-translation approach dominated English lessons, focusing on the memorization of grammar rules and structures through rote learning This model primarily involved a one-way transmission of knowledge from teachers to students, resulting in limited opportunities for interaction among students or between students and teachers.
The introduction of the communicative language teaching approach sparked significant innovations in curriculum and course book design, facilitating the integration of English macro skills in classrooms For instance, the new high school English program features dedicated sections for listening, speaking, reading, and writing, alongside grammar, pronunciation, and vocabulary in each unit of the Tieng Anh book series (Hoang et al., 2014).
Theoretically, there would be greater chances for meaningful interactions in
Despite the introduction of EFL listening and composition experiences in English classes, significant improvements in students' speaking competence have not been observed Many students, after six or seven years of high school English education, still struggle to pronounce sentences correctly Furthermore, a considerable number of students find it challenging to engage in English conversations, even though they possess a good understanding of English grammar and achieve high scores on tests.
The challenges in teaching English speaking skills in Vietnam arise from several key factors Despite being a mandatory part of the national curriculum, speaking lessons are often inadequately implemented, particularly in rural areas where resources like CDs and VCDs are scarce, leading teachers to skip these sections (Pham, 2011) When speaking lessons do occur, they frequently focus on rote pronunciation rather than meaningful communication, and many teachers themselves mispronounce words, which can demotivate students and reinforce their own pronunciation errors Additionally, students often struggle with shyness and a fear of making mistakes in conversations, further limiting their speaking practice, which is typically confined to the classroom environment.
Vietnamese instead of English during lessons, thus minimizing chances for actual spoken English use
Another reason pertains to English teaching-testing mismatch at high school
Despite the theoretical emphasis on all four macro skills in English lessons, speaking skills are not assessed in English exams, leading to a negative backwash effect This oversight results in both teachers and students neglecting listening and speaking skills during classes Consequently, many high school graduates struggle to communicate effectively in English.
In Vietnam's tertiary institutions, the approach to teaching English oral skills to non-English majors is quite similar across universities The primary focus of the English training programs is to enhance students' English knowledge and communicative competence while preparing them for the TOEIC test However, many universities fail to adequately teach listening and speaking skills in their English classes.
In 2006, it was noted that English mid-term and final tests do not assess students' speaking skills, leading both teachers and students to prioritize reading, grammar, and vocabulary exercises in their exam preparations As a result, many university students may excel in written English examinations yet still lack the necessary spoken English proficiency for basic communication.
Challenges in English training programs stem from physical constraints and budget limitations Large, diverse classes complicate the organization of speaking activities, making it difficult for teachers to balance communication among students with varying levels of English proficiency (Bui, 2006) Additionally, limited funding results in lower wages for English teachers, which can diminish their commitment to effective teaching Consequently, rather than focusing on enhancing students' communicative competence, teachers often resort to providing grammar and reading exercises aimed solely at test preparation.
University students often struggle with English oral performance due to bad habits formed during high school, which are exacerbated by their shyness and fear of making mistakes This hesitation leads to withdrawal from speaking activities A significant factor contributing to their challenges is the lack of autonomy in their learning process According to N D (2011), without autonomy, students are unlikely to succeed in their learning, regardless of the favorable conditions provided.
Developing learner autonomy is essential for cultivating an independent and skilled workforce in Vietnam, as recognized by educators and researchers (Dang, 2012; Le, 2013; Nguyen, 2009) However, a study from Can Tho University revealed that many Vietnamese teachers and learners are still unfamiliar with the concept of learner autonomy (Nguyen, Chung, Truong, Pham, 2014) Recent educational reforms, particularly the integration of information technology in language teaching, align well with promoting learner autonomy, especially in today's globalized context MOET Deputy Minister Nguyen Vinh Hien has highlighted the urgent need to leverage technology to enhance English teaching and learning outcomes, particularly in speaking and listening skills (T T, 2015) Nonetheless, the implementation of technology in teaching English oral skills varies across institutions due to differences in technological infrastructure and curriculum design The next section will delve into the specific context of the study, focusing on technological infrastructure, the English training program, and the human factors involved.
1.1.2 The specific context of the study
This study aims to enhance English teaching and learning outcomes by promoting learner autonomy and improving student achievement at a public university in southern Vietnam, which specializes in training for the Oil and Gas industry Despite being supported by a major national economic group, the university faced significant challenges during its establishment and had to rely on the infrastructure of a neighboring college, resulting in limited classroom facilities that included only a whiteboard and movable table rows.
Projectors were also available to be delivered to classrooms at registered time slots A computer room was installed for computing classes only
The English training program at this university comprises 42 credits and aims to achieve an equivalent of an IELTS score of 5.5 It is structured into five consecutive courses across three phases: the first two phases focus on General English, while the third phase emphasizes Academic English, culminating in an IELTS preparation course The program utilizes the New English File textbooks to support learning.
The General English courses, English 1 and English 2, utilize the materials from Oxenden, Latham-Koenig, and Seligson (2004) tailored for beginner, elementary, and pre-intermediate levels Additionally, Q-skills for success, specifically Books 3 and 4 by Gramer, Lynn, and Ward, are incorporated into the curriculum.
2010) are used for two Academic English courses – English 3, and English 4 courses IELTS Express: Intermediate Coursebook (Hallows, Lisboa, & Unwin,
The IELTS preparation course utilizes textbooks that encompass the four essential skills: listening, speaking, reading, and writing The English program is structured to teach these skills in an integrated manner, dividing each course into specific segments for Speaking-Listening and Reading-Writing At the end of the semester, students are evaluated through four distinct tests, each focusing on one of the skills These test papers are crafted by English lecturers and receive approval from the Head of the English Department.
The English training program at the university is supported by highly qualified teachers, all of whom have achieved a minimum score of 7.5 on the IELTS test, with many holding Master's degrees in Teaching English for Speakers of Other Languages from English-speaking countries Committed to a communicative teaching approach, these educators are not only responsible and enthusiastic during lessons but also approachable and supportive outside the classroom The Board of Rector is dedicated to enhancing the quality of English education by sponsoring various programs to improve teacher qualifications and fostering an English-speaking environment for students Significant financial investments have been made to upgrade facilities, including the establishment of two state-of-the-art language laboratories equipped with computers, headphones, and modern monitoring systems Additionally, a blended learning model was planned to launch in 2015, featuring an E-learning system on the Moodle platform.
Aims of the study
This study investigates how the integration of speaking e-portfolios enhances learner autonomy and explores their effect on students' achievement in developing speaking skills.
Research questions
To fulfill these aims, the study sought answer to the following questions:
1 To what extent do speaking e-portfolios improve learner autonomy dimensions, namely Learner Involvement, Appropriate Target Language Use, and Learner Reflection?
2 What are the impacts of speaking e-portfolios on students’ speaking achievement?
Significance of the study
International researchers have highlighted the potential benefits of speaking e-portfolios (Cepik & Yastibas, 2013; Hsu, Wang, & Comac, 2008; Huang & Hung, 2010; ệzdemir-ầağatay’s, 2012), yet empirical evidence in the Vietnamese context remains scarce A study by Cao in 2012 explored the effects of speaking e-portfolios on Facebook on students' speaking skills This research aims to expand on previous findings by investigating the relationship between speaking e-portfolios, learner autonomy, and students' speaking achievements The study seeks to enhance existing literature by linking e-portfolio components with principles that promote learner autonomy Additionally, the results may introduce new perspectives on conceptualizing learner autonomy and provide valuable insights for implementing speaking e-portfolios in Vietnam and similar English teaching environments.
This study aims to explore the integration of e-portfolios in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) speaking classes, utilizing Moodle software, which aligns with the university's e-learning system As a pioneering effort in blended learning at this institution, the research will discuss the advantages and disadvantages of the speaking e-portfolio design, the teaching methodologies employed, and virtual class management challenges These insights are expected to pave the way for the successful implementation of an English blended learning model in the near future.
Scope of the study
This study investigates the enhancement of learner autonomy dimensions and the immediate impact of incorporating speaking e-portfolios on students' achievement in learning speaking skills over a fifteen-week semester It focuses solely on the short-term effects, examining overall speaking achievement in EFL rather than specific speech qualities Additionally, the study does not consider students' attitudes towards the e-portfolio model, with findings based on the author's reflections on the construction and implementation process Ultimately, the research aims to assess the development of learner autonomy and overall speaking achievement resulting from the integration of speaking e-portfolios.
Organization of the study
This paper is structured into five chapters Chapter 1 outlines the study's context, research aims, questions, significance, scope, and organization Chapter 2 critically reviews literature on e-portfolios in language education, addressing classification, components, benefits, and challenges, while summarizing various speaking e-portfolio models from recent research It also operationalizes learner autonomy, reviews its different versions, and discusses practices that promote it in the current study, culminating in a proposed conceptual framework Chapter 3 details the research questions, design, participants, instruments, data collection, and analysis procedures Chapter 4 presents and discusses the study's results in relation to prior research Finally, Chapter 5 concludes with pedagogical recommendations for implementing speaking e-portfolios, acknowledges limitations, highlights the research's contributions, and suggests directions for future research.
LITERATURE REVIEW
E-portfolios in language education
Portfolios serve as essential tools across various professions, showcasing representative performance and personal vocational growth over time In education, they function not only as a compilation of student work but also as a platform that highlights students' ongoing efforts and improvements on their initial submissions These purposeful collections exhibit students' progress, achievements, and engagement in the selection process, including criteria for content choice, merit evaluation, and evidence of self-reflection.
Since the 1990s, the information economy has driven contemporary pedagogy to prioritize active learning, as passive methods fail to equip students with the critical skills required in today's workforce (Carmen & Christine, 2006, p.37) In this context, e-portfolios have emerged alongside traditional paper portfolios, becoming vital educational tools that enhance active learning in collaborative settings and contribute to the dynamism of the educational landscape.
E-portfolios have been defined in various ways depending on their implementation context, educational objectives, and intended audience According to The National Learning Infrastructure Initiative (2003, cited Barrett & Carney, 2005), e-portfolios serve specific educational purposes.
An authentic and diverse collection of evidence, sourced from a comprehensive archive, reflects the knowledge and experiences of an individual or organization This curated content is thoughtfully designed for presentation to specific audiences, serving a distinct rhetorical purpose.
An e-portfolio serves as a digital repository for students to collect, reflect on, and present evidence of their learning According to Cambridge (2003), e-portfolios consist of a collection of learning artifacts that are both gathered and interpreted Barrette (2005) further describes e-portfolios as digital containers that organize various media types—such as audio, video, graphics, and text—into a structured context, facilitating the organization of learning evidence in relation to established goals for future reference.
Drawing on other researchers’ work, Moritz and Christie (2005, cited in Carmean
E-portfolios are valuable tools that enhance students' skills in self-analysis, goal setting, and self-motivation, as highlighted by Christie (2006) This pedagogical approach aims to foster learners' reflective agency while also enabling teachers to monitor and improve their instructional methods (Benson & Smith, 1998; Galley, 2000; Graves, 1992, cited in Carmean & Christie, 2006).
E-portfolios are essential tools for gathering students' work over time, showcasing their self-reflection and active involvement in content selection and evaluation criteria creation (Wu, 2012, cited in Soliman & Wahba, 2014) This definition highlights the importance of student ownership in managing their e-portfolios, including decisions on what to collect, how to assess the quality of their work, and strategies for enhancing that quality.
E-portfolios lack a universally accepted definition, as their meaning is influenced by the context of their implementation, the objectives they aim to achieve, and the intended audience This versatility allows e-portfolios to serve various pedagogical purposes, including teaching, learning, assessment, and even marketing students to a broader audience.
According to Rolheiser, Bower, and Stevahn (2000), teachers and researchers typically utilize portfolios for two primary purposes, which correspond to two main types: process portfolios and product portfolios.
Product portfolios, also known as display or showcase portfolios, serve to document students' work, enhance their self-evaluation skills, and showcase their best achievements throughout a language course.
Process portfolios, as highlighted by Yurdabakan (2011), evaluate students' sustained efforts and offer insights into both students' thinking and teachers' instructional methods (Stefanakis, 2002) They serve as a tool for monitoring student progress (O’Malley & Pierce, 1996) and showcase evidence of students' efforts, successes, failures, and overall development The primary benefit of process portfolios lies in their ability to help learners acknowledge their growth and understand the factors contributing to that development.
E-portfolios, like traditional paper portfolios, are designed with specific purposes that guide the collection of students' artifacts They are categorized into three main types: product, process, and assessment e-portfolios (Stefani, Manson & Pegler, 2007) Product e-portfolios, also known as showcase e-portfolios, focus on displaying students' work, enhancing their self-evaluation skills, and showcasing their best achievements during language courses (Rolheiser et al., 2000; Yurdabakan, 2011) Additionally, these e-portfolios serve as a means for graduates to demonstrate their competencies to potential employers during job applications (Willis & Wilkie, 2009, cited in Chau & Cheng, 2010, p 933).
Process e-portfolios require students to continuously contribute, modify, and reflect on their work, enabling them to track their improvement (Moya & O’Malley, 1994) This approach serves as an effective tool for formative assessment, offering periodic insights into student performance, improvement rates, and learning barriers, which helps teachers adjust their lesson plans accordingly Additionally, combined portfolios integrate both process and product approaches, linking teaching, learning, and assessment while actively involving students in the evaluation process (Cole et al., 2000, cited in ệzdemir-ầağatay’s, 2012) Assessment e-portfolios compile artifacts of students' learning and development over time, providing teachers with evidence of multi-faceted learning, distinguishing it from traditional standardized testing methods (Cummins & Davesne, 2009).
E-portfolios can also be further categorized according to specific pedagogical objectives IMS Global Learning Consortium – an association promoting e- portfolio practice in learning and education proposed a comprehensive classification of e-portfolios according to six purposes (IMS, 2005) Each purpose emphasizes a particular aspect of students’ development through documenting, deeply reflecting, and engagingly evaluating their learning artifacts in full awareness of the target audience The six equivalent types of e-portfolios are classified in Table 2.1
Six types of e-portfolios classified by IMS Global Learning Consortium
Learning artifacts are collected to exhibit students’ achievement to the ‘authority’ to make assessment decisions based on judging criteria defined by the authority
Students’ learning or achievement are collected and showed to the intended audience ‘in a persuasive way’ There is also selecting criteria for the contents of presentation e-portfolios
E-portfolios serve as a valuable tool for storing, managing, and improving learning over time They incorporate students' reflections on their learning, which fosters the development of meta-cognition, aids in formulating personalized learning plans, and integrates diverse learning experiences.
Learner Autonomy
Autonomy in the classroom is often perceived as an external concept, akin to a plant from an exotic location that struggles to thrive without suitable conditions Over the past thirty years, learner autonomy has gained significant attention in second language education research In Vietnam, there is a growing commitment to fostering this attribute among students to enhance the quality of second language education.
(Dang, 2010; Le, 2013; Nguyen, 2009; Nguyen, Chung, Truong, Pham, 2014)
Autonomy is a complicated and multifaceted term which “encompasses concepts from different domains, such as politics, education, philosophy and psychology” (Blin, 2005, p.16) The word ‘autonomy’ etymologically has its origin from a
The term "autonomy," derived from the Greek word auto-nomos, signifies the ability to establish one's own laws (Voltz, 2008, cited in Dang, 2012) In education, this concept is particularly relevant to learners, as it reflects their capacity for self-directed learning (Holec, 1981) Since its introduction in language education, learner autonomy has become a focal point for professional discourse and research, leading to evolving definitions over time Notably, Holec (1981, p 3) was instrumental in defining learner autonomy as the "ability to take charge of one’s own learning."
Learner autonomy is defined as the ability of students to understand how to learn (Wenden, 1991), to learn independently without teacher support (Dickinson, 1987), to manage their own learning activities (Cotterall, 1995), to make informed choices (Littlewood, 1996), and to take charge of their own educational journey (Benson, 2001) While these definitions highlight various aspects of autonomous learning, they often do not reflect the actual learning behaviors of students in specific contexts.
Learner autonomy is defined as the ability of students to take full responsibility for their learning decisions and implementation (Dickinson, 1993) Cotteral (1995) further emphasizes that this autonomy does not arise naturally but develops through interaction with learning contexts This suggests that autonomy can only flourish in supportive environments, where effective teaching practices provide opportunities for learners to exercise control over their learning process.
The concept of learner autonomy encompasses various interpretations, as identified by Benson (1997), who outlined three key versions: technical autonomy, which emphasizes students' learning management skills; psychological autonomy, focusing on cognitive processes in learning; and political autonomy, which pertains to the learning process and content Pennycook (1997) further developed the political aspect by introducing a political-critical version that highlights the impact of power, control, access, and ideology on learning Recognizing the role of the learning environment in fostering autonomy, Oxford (2003) introduced socio-cultural autonomy as an additional dimension Each of these versions will be elaborated upon in the following section.
Benson (1997) highlights the significant role of the educational environment in shaping students' language learning and emphasizes that autonomy involves the skills necessary for managing learning independently, without teacher support This perspective suggests that learning is enhanced when students gain independence in exploring their educational paths and making informed choices about their learning processes to achieve their goals Furthermore, as noted by Oxford (2003) and Pennycook (1997), the learning environment can profoundly influence learners' behaviors, indicating that learner autonomy can be fostered in various contexts.
The concept of "other-created situations" enhances students' self-directed learning, leading to the establishment of numerous self-access learning centers globally (Dang, 2010) Little (1994, 2004b, 2007a, & 2007b) emphasizes that learner autonomy cannot thrive in isolation, as purely independent learning is insufficient for fostering autonomy Therefore, situational factors such as technology and resources play a crucial role in creating environments that stimulate autonomous learning The technical perspective alone fails to adequately explain how learner autonomy is activated and developed, highlighting the importance of recognizing individual learners' attributes in the learning process (Benson, 1997; Oxford, 2003; Pennycook).
1997) referred to those personal qualities as the psychological version of learner autonomy
Holec’s (1981) definition of learner autonomy highlights students' ability to take charge of their learning by setting objectives, selecting content, and evaluating their progress (Le, 2009) Subsequent research has expanded this concept, emphasizing students' capacity and willingness to manage their learning effectively through decision-making, monitoring, and collaboration (Dam, 1995; Little, 1991; Scharle & Szabo, 2000) Rooted in constructivist learning theory, this perspective views learning as a reorganization of experiences rather than mere knowledge recall (Dang, 2010; Le, 2009) Consequently, language learning transcends simple memorization, involving creative internalization and diverse performance of the target language, reflecting complexity and flexibility among learners.
From a psychological perspective, learner autonomy encompasses the mental and emotional attributes that enable students to learn effectively (Oxford, 2003) It is fostered by a combination of qualities, including essential strategies, knowledge, and attitudes towards language learning (Wenden, 1991) This psychological interpretation of learner autonomy describes it as a cognitive process that regulates students' learning behaviors, ultimately aiding them in achieving their educational goals.
This version fails to fully explain the development of learner autonomy, as it overlooks the impact of situational conditions While the technical perspective emphasizes the role of the out-of-class learning environment, the psychological viewpoint focuses on learners' reasoning skills and processes as key factors in autonomy growth To address this gap, Oxford (2003) proposed a socio-cultural perspective, which provides a more comprehensive understanding of learner autonomy.
2.2.2.3 Social-cultural versions of autonomy
The social-cultural perspective emphasizes that social interaction is crucial for students' cognitive and language development (Oxford, 2003) Additionally, learner autonomy is fostered through the interaction between students and their learning environments (Smith & Ushioda, 2009) This means that students respond cognitively to situational influences, such as technological resources, even before these factors formally affect their learning Consequently, this interaction can enhance students' cognitive abilities, enabling them to develop more effective behaviors for gaining control over their learning processes.
Two key theories that inform the concept of learner autonomy are Vygotsky's Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) and Lave & Wenger's community of practice Vygotsky (1978) defines ZPD as the gap between what learners can achieve independently and what they can accomplish with guidance He emphasizes the significance of social interaction within a supportive learning environment, involving peers, teachers, and parents, as crucial for effective learning.
Supporting less capable students through scaffolding and collaborative learning exercises can significantly enhance their ability to reach their maximum potential within their Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) This approach aligns with the theory of community of practice, as proposed by Lave and Wenger, emphasizing the importance of social interaction and shared learning experiences in educational settings.
According to Wenger (1991), students develop personal abilities and qualities that help them build relationships within a learning community, transitioning from outsiders to full participants This process of connecting and integrating allows students to acquire knowledge and skills from more experienced members, enhancing their competence and reinforcing their sense of community identity.
Situational influences play a crucial role in enhancing learner autonomy capacity (Dang, T T, 2010, p.34) In this context, Little (2004a & 2007a) emphasizes that learner autonomy is not solely derived from independence; instead, it emerges from a dynamic interplay of independence and dependence as students engage with their peers in the learning environment.