VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY – HOCHIMINH CITY UNIVERSITY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES & HUMANITIES FACULTY OF ENGLISH LINGUISTICS & LITERATURE USING CORPUS-BASED ACTIVITIES IN ENGLISH GRAMMAR LESS
INTRODUCTION
Background to the Study
Since classrooms are becoming more learner-centered, the teacher is expected to shift from being the key figure in the classroom to a facilitator who, as Harmer
According to the 2007 study (p 108), fostering learner autonomy is essential, as it positions educators as resources rather than mere transmitters of knowledge The researcher supports this perspective, emphasizing that achieving successful learning requires more than just the involvement of teachers.
Language learners often grapple with grammar, a fundamental aspect of acquiring a foreign language Both students and teachers face challenges in mastering this complex subject Recent advancements in linguistics have led to new theories and practices for teaching grammar, with three notable approaches gaining popularity: communicative grammar teaching, a lexicogrammatical perspective, and corpus data-driven learning This study focuses on corpus-based activities (CBAs), which involve engaging with corpora and authentic language The effectiveness of CBAs in various learning and teaching contexts remains a critical question.
Language researchers increasingly recognize autonomy as a key factor in enhancing learner achievements and language acquisition (Benson, 2007, 2011; Gardner, 2011; Cooke, 2012; Everhard and Murphy, 2015) The rapid advancement of technology has provided language learners with numerous options to self-direct their studies Unlike the past, when students were confined to labs with headphones for listening tasks, they can now use laptops and smartphones anywhere, accessing learning materials with just a click or a QR code In this context, the idea of using corpora for grammar teaching and learning is becoming more feasible, although it presents certain challenges.
Content-Based Assessments (CBAs) are integral to the broader concept of data-driven learning (DDL), which Johns (2002, as cited in O’Keeffe, McCarthy & Carter, 2007, p 108) describes as a method that directly engages learners with data, transforming them into linguistic researchers DDL effectively addresses the "3 C's" of utilizing authentic texts in language education: cultural content, currency, and challenge (Mishan, 2005, p 95) The implementation of CBAs in English Language Teaching (ELT) aligns well with these principles, enhancing the learning experience.
Corpora provide authentic texts produced by native speakers, reflecting cultural content and keeping pace with the evolving English language When students seek to verify the correct usage of a word or phrase, they often respond with, “I’m gonna ‘google’ it.” This highlights that using Google to find examples of terms can be viewed as a corpus-based activity, despite the messy nature of its data Although working with a real corpus may initially pose challenges for learners, it immerses them in a systematic data environment and fosters curiosity about the words or structures they are studying.
This research investigates the impact of using computer-based corpora (CBAs) on participants' responses and changes in grammar learning Unlike engaging language learning apps like Duolingo, which feature interactive elements, corpora serve as straightforward tools for information retrieval, encompassing various electronic sources such as websites, emails, e-books, and archival texts Despite their potential, computer-based corpora remain underutilized in language education (Lessard-Clouston & Chang, 2014).
Teachers are aware of corpora, but they often question whether these resources should be viewed as an ideal learning tool or merely an additional burden for both educators and students This inquiry has sparked interest among numerous researchers.
Research by O’Keefee et al (2007), Liu and Jiang (2009), and Lewandowska (2014) provides a theoretical framework for examining the effectiveness of learning through Curriculum-Based Assessments (CBAs) However, the application of CBAs varies across different contexts and subjects, necessitating tailored materials and methods While some studies indicate that CBAs lead to enhanced achievements and greater learner autonomy, it is essential to recognize cultural differences, as previous research cannot be universally applied to all situations.
The introduction of the CDIO (Conceive – Design – Implement – Operate) framework into various courses emphasizes the importance of transferable skills, such as organizational, research, and interpersonal skills, which require learners to work independently and self-direct their studies Despite existing research on learner autonomy, the role of Corpora-Based Activities (CBAs) in language lessons remains underexplored This study aims to address this gap by focusing on English majors in Vietnam, where limited research has been conducted on the effective use of corpora, particularly beyond vocabulary acquisition The researcher identifies this as a significant opportunity to evaluate the potential of CBAs in enhancing knowledge among English majors.
Purposes of the Study
This study highlights the potential of corpus-based approaches (CBAs) to enhance learner achievements and perceptions of autonomy, rather than positioning them as superior to traditional methods The primary aim is to explore opportunities for implementing CBAs in comparable educational settings.
The purposes of the study are:
(1) To analyze the effects of CBAs on learners’ achievements;
(2) To discover the changes in learners’ perceptions of autonomy;
(3) To explore the learners’ reflection and impression on the use of CBAs.
Research Questions
This study is guided by the following research questions:
1 What are the effects of CBAs in the English grammar lessons on learners’ achievements?
2 What are the effects of CBAs on their perceptions of autonomy in learning English grammar?
3 What is the learners’ feedback on the use of CBAs?
Significance of the Study
This study highlights the potential of a corpus-based approach (CBA) in enhancing grammar learning and fostering learner autonomy It evaluates the impact of CBAs on students' grammatical knowledge and their level of autonomy Additionally, the research outlines how students can effectively utilize CBAs for grammar acquisition The findings are anticipated to provide valuable insights for educators interested in incorporating corpora into their teaching practices, ultimately benefiting both their pedagogical strategies and student outcomes.
Scope of the Study
This study aims to analyze the impact of using Corpus-Based Approaches (CBAs) in grammar lessons within an intensive Grammar 1 – B2 course at the Faculty of Linguistics and Literature, University of Social Sciences and Humanities (USSH-HCMC) The research specifically targets first-year English major students during their initial semester, who are new to the academic environment and have not previously engaged in English courses that introduce corpora This context helps control for external factors that could influence post-test results Additionally, fostering learner autonomy through various learning strategies is anticipated to become more evident at this early stage.
As the researcher cannot control how and when the learners are going to use a corpus in CBAs or outside the classroom, only the measurable so-called
The study investigates the relationship between "achievements," represented by test scores that indicate both receptive and productive grammar knowledge, and "perceptions of autonomy," which reflect learners' self-evaluations By analyzing qualitative data from learners' reflection papers and open-ended questionnaire responses, the research aims to highlight the differences between the two participant groups and draw meaningful conclusions.
Organization of the Study
The thesis is divided into five chapters
Chapter 1 explains why the researcher is interested in the topic of the research while provides the background as well as the research gap that urges her to conduct the study The scope of the study is also defined in order to set the foundation for further theoretical framework in the next chapter
Chapter 2 presents the literature related to the scope of the research and then formulates a conceptual framework for the actual research process Important studies are analyzed and related theories are compared and synthesized, which helps towards constructing further teaching materials and research instruments
Chapter 3 sets forth the research design and proposes the procedure to design research instruments as well as to collect and analyze the data Based on the conceptual framework as well as the context of application, the research methodology is also explained and structured accordingly
From the data obtained, the researcher analyzes the patterns and discusses the findings in Chapter 4
Finally, Chapter 5 presents the conclusive points and provides possible recommendations along with some pedagogical implications for students, teachers and future researchers.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Learning English Grammar
The challenging relationship between English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners and grammar stems from the frustration of navigating numerous rules and their exceptions This article examines existing research on grammar, grammar acquisition, and pedagogical grammar to clarify misconceptions and identify issues that require attention in the current English Language Teaching (ELT) landscape.
2.1.1 Grammar and Its Common “Myths”
Thornbury (2005) uses the example of making an omelet to illustrate the comprehensive meaning of "grammar." Just as someone unfamiliar with cooking cannot grasp the process of making an omelet by only viewing the finished dish, students often struggle to understand grammar when it is taught solely through the "product," such as a grammatically correct sentence.
“process” will take care of itself during the acquisition phase What Thornbury
(2005, p 8) is implying here is to reinforce the comprehensive definition of
“grammar” as not only a noun referring to how to use language correctly but also a
“verb” indicating the process of how one actually “does” grammar This reminds us of “grammaring”, a term coined by Larsen-Freeman (2001, p 67)
Larsen-Freeman (2002, as cited in Pawlak, Mystkowska-Wiertelak & Bielak, 2017) describes grammar as a "dynamic process" that necessitates language learners to actively engage with their surroundings This involves observing their conversation partners and interpreting auditory and visual cues to make informed decisions on how to respond accurately and meaningfully.
According to Pawlak et al (2017), grammar should be guided by pragmatic constraints that influence the choice of morphemes, function words, phrases, collocations, clauses, and discourse patterns In contrast, Swan (2013) presents a more limited perspective, defining grammar strictly as "syntax" and "morphology," which emphasizes the organization of lexical information through word form changes and the use of function words However, when considering the broader implications of grammar in relation to "language use," the concept becomes more complex.
Defining "grammar" comprehensively is a complex endeavor due to its multidimensional nature Larsen-Freeman (1991) identified three essential dimensions of grammar that every English language teacher should be familiar with.
The construction of grammatical patterns encompasses three key components: (1) form, which refers to the structural elements including morphosyntactic, lexical, and phonemic patterns; (2) meaning, which pertains to the lexical and grammatical significance of these structures; and (3) use, which addresses the pragmatic aspects influenced by social context, linguistic discourse, and contextual presuppositions.
The multi-dimensional nature of grammar highlights its interdependent characteristics, where a change in one dimension necessitates adjustments in the others This supports Larsen-Freeman’s (2002, as cited in Pawlak et al., 2017, p 6) concept of grammar as a "dynamic process."
Despite its complexity and multidimensional nature, grammar is frequently overlooked by teachers, particularly in the context of pedagogical grammar This oversight is often fueled by various myths surrounding the subject.
“fallacies” regarding grammar teaching and learning Based on Larsen-Freeman’s
In their 2017 study, Pawlak et al (2003) identified four critical issues regarding the nature of grammar, grammar teaching, and grammar learning that warrant further examination.
(1) Grammar is acquired naturally; it doesn’t have to be taught
(4) When we say something is grammatical, we mean that it is accurate
Regarding grammar acquisition, Benjamin and Berger (2013) in their book entitled
Effective grammar teaching often falls short due to the prevalent approach among language teachers of addressing issues as they arise For example, when a student makes a punctuation error, teachers may provide immediate corrections, but this does not ensure that the fundamental rules of punctuation are understood Consequently, students may continue to struggle with these concepts in their future writing endeavors.
Perhaps one of the most controversial matters over grammar teaching is whether form-focused instruction (FFI) is facilitative of language acquisition (Pawlak et al.,
Larsen-Freeman (2003, as cited in Pawlak et al., 2017) emphasizes that language teachers play a crucial role in enhancing students' natural language acquisition, which accelerates the learning process Similarly, Higgs and Clifford (1982, as cited in Ozawa, 2011) argue that the unmonitored use of incorrect language forms can lead to fossilization, making it challenging to correct errors that have become ingrained in a learner's mental framework.
Hence, learners need a means to detect their errors; what’s more, the instructor does play a crucial role in developing learners’ awareness of grammar acquisition
Many learners perceive grammar as a tedious set of rules filled with exceptions that must be memorized, making the learning process seem overwhelming However, this perspective can lead to misconceptions about grammar instruction Larsen-Freeman (2003, as cited in Pawlak, 2017) emphasized the importance of understanding not just the rules of grammar, but also the underlying reasons for these rules This understanding is essential for effective grammar teaching and learning, as proposed by Ellis.
In 2002, as noted by Cooke in 2012, the primary objective of a grammar syllabus shifts from merely teaching grammar usage to fostering an understanding of its underlying principles This approach encourages students to explore the reasons behind grammatical structures, either independently or with instructional support, highlighting the essential role of grammar instruction in the learning process.
One remaining myth to address is whether grammatical correctness equates to accuracy While it may seem straightforward that language is meant for learners to use rather than merely memorize, the concept of grammatical accuracy requires a deeper exploration of how to help students grasp the true essence of language learning Teachers must recognize the importance of this understanding, as highlighted by Lightbown and Spada (2013, p 208).
In the classroom, certain linguistic forms are so infrequent that students may not encounter them unless teachers intentionally introduce them While learners can identify grammatical sentences based on the rules they've mastered, the true goal of learning grammar is to apply it effectively This raises the important question of the most effective methods for grammar acquisition, leading to a discussion on various grammar learning strategies.
Autonomy in Learning English Grammar
“You cannot teach a man anything; you can only help him find it within himself.”
The concept of autonomy in education has been a topic of discussion for centuries, often viewed with skepticism regarding its role as either an idealistic goal or a necessary condition for effective learning Despite this ambiguity, it is clear that learner autonomy significantly enhances student performance, which explains the ongoing interest in this educational approach This section of Chapter 2 explores the complexities of learner autonomy concepts and constructs, contributing to the foundational framework of this thesis.
2.2.1 The Concept of Autonomy in Language Learning
Since Benson's influential article in 2007 on the philosophy of autonomy, the intricate and diverse nature of this concept continues to be pivotal in global educational policy and reform The notion of learner autonomy remains a significant focus, frequently perceived as a predominantly "Western" idea.
Jean-Jacques Rousseau's 1762 classic, *Emile*, presents the concept of natural education (Boyd, 1956, as cited in Benson, 2011, p 27) Similarly, John Dewey (1916, as cited in Benson, 2011, p 29) perceives classrooms as microcosms of the community, emphasizing that learners are motivated by their own needs to address current challenges Additionally, Kilpatrick's contributions (1921, as cited in Benson, 2011, p 31) further enrich this discourse on education.
“project method,” Carl Roger’s (1983, as cited in Benson 2011, pp 35-36) concept of teaching as facilitation and his objection to the “mug-and-jug theory” of traditional teaching
The term "autonomy" originates from Greek, combining the words autós, meaning 'self', and nomos, meaning 'law' or 'rule' This etymology conveys the concept of being governed or regulated by oneself.
2012, as cited Everhard, 2012, p 12) Regarding language learning, the theory of autonomy has been fundamentally associated with formal education
The concept of autonomy in language teaching emerged from the Council of Europe’s Modern Languages Project, initiated in 1971 A significant outcome of this initiative was the creation of the Centre de Recherches et d’Applications en Langues (CRAPEL) at the University of Nancy, France, which quickly became a key center for research and practice in the field (Benson, 2011, p 9).
Yves Châlon was the founder of CRAPEL, yet after his death, his position was passed on to Henri Holec Holec is famous for his classic definition of autonomy
Autonomy is defined as “the ability to take charge of one’s own learning” (1981, as cited in Benson, 2011, p 10) This concept is widely accepted, but Benson (2009, p 18) emphasizes the need for clarification regarding the term “ability.” Additionally, Little (1995, p 175) offers an alternative perspective on the terminology used to describe autonomy in learning.
Autonomy in learning refers to the degree to which a learner takes responsibility for their own educational journey While various researchers have proposed different definitions of autonomy, there is a consensus that it fundamentally involves the learner's acceptance of this responsibility.
“multidimensional” concept, and this has placed the foundation for further research attempts in building an autonomy construct
Within the scope of this study, it is necessary to figure out one working definition of autonomy in language learning, and that of Everhard (2012, as cited in Everhard
2015) could be considered to be an all-embracing term:
Autonomy is a sense of self-achievement that arises from collaboratively making decisions about learning while utilizing both internal and external resources The capacity to exercise autonomy is influenced by specific dispositions and can vary based on different circumstances.
Autonomy is a dynamic concept rather than a static state, as achieving complete autonomy is unattainable Learners may experience either regression or progression when autonomy is viewed on a continuum Additionally, researchers often have varying preferences for the terminology they use to describe autonomy.
(2000, as cited in Benson 2011) holds a rather idealistic view upon autonomy as a construct of capacity which can be acquired, Huttunen (1986, as cited in Benson
2011) would rather refer “being autonomous” to “learner-centered” and to Holec
(1981, as cited in Benson 2011), this would be called “self-directed” Consequently, learner autonomy is deemed a multifaceted concept
Numerous researchers have sought to develop comprehensive frameworks for understanding autonomy Notable contributions include Benson's (2009) analysis, which defines autonomy in terms of "abilities, attitudes, or dispositions," as well as Tassinari's (2012) dynamic model Additionally, constructs proposed by Murase (2015) and Cooker (2015) further enrich the discourse by structuring and generating insights from prior research.
Benson's (1997) model of autonomy encompasses three dimensions: technical, psychological, and political This framework was expanded by Oxford (2003) to include four approaches: technical, psychological, socio-cultural, and political-critical Murase (2010, as cited in Everhard, 2015) supports this later version, redefining the construct into four categories: technical, psychological, political-philosophical, and socio-cultural autonomy.
Murase (2010) developed the MILLA (Measuring Instruments for Language Learner Autonomy), a tool consisting of 143 items that assess learner autonomy across four dimensions This construct, as referenced by Everhard (2015, p 43), illustrates the comprehensive nature of learner autonomy, encompassing a broad spectrum of information about learners.
Figure 2.1 Sub-dimensions of the construct of learner autonomy (Murase, 2015, p 43)
Cooker (2015) simplifies the complexities of autonomy research by identifying a concise list of "constitutive elements" derived from a comprehensive literature review spanning 25 years (1981-2006) and factor analysis She categorizes thirty-four elements into seven key areas: learner control, metacognitive awareness, critical reflection, learning range, confidence, motivation, and information literacy, as detailed in Table 2.3.
Table 2.3 Full model of learner autonomy: categories and elements (Cooker, as cited in
Learner control • Ability to analyze/ define needs
• Ability to set achievable objectives
• Ability to choose appropriate materials
• Ability to select partners for pair/ group work
• Ability to work on one’s own
• Ability to make choice about how work will be assessed
• Ability to assess discrete aspects of one’s own work
• Ability to assess the work of peers
• Ability to take responsibility for own one’s own learning outside the classroom
• Ability to monitor one’s own learning progress over time Metacognitive awareness • Ability to provide a rationale for material chosens
• Ability to select appropriate learning strategies
• Ability to select and reject strategies according to needs
• Ability to describe the strategies used
• Ability to provide a rationale for the strategies used
• Ability to provide an evaluation of the strategies used
• Ability to describe alternative strategies that could have been used
• Ability to describe plan for future learning Critical reflection • Critical understanding of the roles of teacher and learner
• Critical awareness of different teaching and learning approaches
• Critical awareness of the variations in quality of different teaching and learning inputs
• Willingness to use the language
• Willingness to be actively engaged in learning activities Learning range • Flexibility in ways of learning
• Awareness of breadth or learning content
• Ability to seek support from other students and teachers
• Ability to collaborate with other students and teachers Confidence • Ability to seek out opportunities to use the target language
• Ability to overcome negative feedback/assessment Information
Literacy • Ability to source and navigate learning resources
Benson (2011) highlights that while we cannot directly observe learner autonomy, we can infer it through associated behaviors in various learning dimensions Measuring learner autonomy requires identifying these behaviors and assessing their manifestation in learners (p 208) The challenge in determining the level of autonomy among learners arises from the fact that these behaviors can be both direct and indirect (p 209) Everhard (2012) further emphasizes this issue by posing two questions that underscore the complexities involved in measuring learner autonomy.
The measurement of learner autonomy poses a significant technical challenge for researchers, as the construct of autonomy varies across studies and contexts When assessing whether students are becoming more or less autonomous, it is essential to assign a "degree" to learner autonomy, which remains a contentious issue even after defining the specific construct Ultimately, while autonomy can be measured, the process of developing these constructs is fraught with difficulties.
Using CBAs in Learning English Grammar
Corpus linguistics, initially utilized in lexicography and dictionary creation, has increasingly influenced language learning This section explores how corpora contribute to fostering learner autonomy, particularly in the context of grammar acquisition.
Corpus linguistics serves as an overarching term for the various applications of corpus-based activities Due to its status as an emerging field within applied linguistics, a fixed definition for corpus linguistics remains elusive Leech (1992, p 105) views corpus linguistics not merely as a sub-field, but as a distinct approach to the study of linguistics.
The methodological foundation for linguistics research is often influenced by the inherent characteristics of corpora, which can lead to differing perspectives on the theoretical status of corpus linguistics Sinclair (1991, as cited in Flowerdew, 2012, p 4) provides a definition of a corpus that highlights its significance in this field.
A corpus is a large collection of naturally occurring language texts that represent a specific state or variety of a language In contemporary computational linguistics, corpora often consist of millions of words, as the inherent creativity of natural language results in a vast array of expressions This diversity makes it challenging to identify the recurring patterns that reveal the lexical structure of the language.
A corpus is essentially a collection of linguistic data, often in electronic form, that can be analyzed both qualitatively and quantitatively (O’Keeffee, McCarthy, and Carter, 2007) Researchers classify corpora in various ways, leading to different typologies based on their perspectives The Expert Advisory Group on Language Engineering Standards (EAGLES, 1996) identifies four primary types of corpora, as detailed in Table 2.5.
Table 2.5 A typology of corpora (EAGLES, 1996)
Type of corpora Characteristics Examples
Reference Corpus Large in size and could be considered representative enough for language research
COCA (Corpus of Contemporary American English)
Monitor Corpus Change overtime The COBUILD Bank of
Parallel Corpus Texts are translated into another language
English-German Translation Corpus, ENPC (English-Norwegian Parallel Corpus)
Comparable corpus Compare similar texts from more than 1 language
LOB Corpus (British English), and the Kolhapur Corpus (Indian English)
A corpus is essential for research as it provides a structured collection of texts that can enhance the understanding of language patterns and usage Its applications extend to various fields, offering valuable insights that can inform specific studies Additionally, a corpus has practical uses in everyday life, aiding in language learning, translation, and communication analysis.
The terms "corpus" and "corpus linguistics" may not be familiar to all English learners, which highlights the importance of practical applications of corpora in language study.
“concordancing” is hardly ever introduced to the learners, especially learners at lower levels of proficiency
Concordancing is a key method in corpus linguistics that utilizes software tools, known as concordancers, to identify every instance of a specific word or phrase This technique allows users to visualize patterns in language usage by displaying concordance lines To effectively use a concordancer, learners must be familiar with certain ICT techniques, which are typically taught by instructors beforehand This approach falls under the umbrella of data-driven learning.
Linguistic corpora play a crucial role in language learning through data-driven learning (DDL), as highlighted by Flowerdew (1996) Johns (1991) emphasizes that DDL creates an ideal learning environment for intelligent, sophisticated, and motivated learners, making it particularly beneficial for English-major students.
(1991, as cited in Boulton, 2011) asserts that by replacing the tradition 3 P’s (presentation, practice, production) by DLL, we will have a new trilogy named
“identification, classification, generalization” Hence, we have labels for the DDL approach in language learning
Introducing learners to corpora allows them to identify grammatical patterns independently, earning them the title of "learners as researchers" (Benson, 2007, p 23) Teachers are encouraged to facilitate this discovery process rather than explicitly teach grammatical rules Johansson (2009, as cited in Flowerdew, 2012, p 206) describes this method as a "guided inductive approach," blending deductive and inductive learning The DDL process emphasizes the collaborative roles of both learners and teachers, highlighting that corpus use benefits both parties (Flowerdew, 1996).
Corpora serve as valuable linguistic informants for teachers, providing a reliable resource filled with native speaker utterances According to Yang (1991, as cited in Flowerdew, 1996), they offer simplicity and frequency information, along with large quantities of data in specific contexts that clarify language style and register Flowerdew (1996) suggests that when selected carefully, corpora can aid teachers in material development Overall, corpora are a significant source of input for language educators.
Learners benefit from using corpora as they can access them anytime to find answers to their grammar questions This approach is known as "serendipity learning," a concept introduced by Johns (1988) and primarily linked to Bernardini (2000, as cited in Boulton).
In 2011, it was highlighted that this type of learning experience empowers learners to take full responsibility for their education James and Garrett (1991) noted that exploring language use in this manner enhances overall language awareness Additionally, corpus data enables learners to compare their language use with authentic examples found in concordance lines This exposure provides valuable models for identifying specific grammatical patterns for future application.
A corpus-based activity focuses on concordancing, which involves working with corpus data According to Higgins (1991, as cited in Tang, 2011, p 1240), classroom concordancing aims to help learners discover grammar rules through searches for function words and to distinguish usages by searching for pairs of near synonyms To effectively meet these objectives, corpus-based activities (CBAs) must align with learners' language proficiency levels, as the nature, design, and difficulty of CBAs vary for elementary, intermediate, and advanced learners For example, elementary learners may benefit from deductive activities like cloze texts, while they may struggle with more complex tasks such as contextual and concordance analysis Saeed and Waly (2010) proposed design ideas for CBAs tailored to learners' proficiency levels, which are discussed in further detail.
The corpus query processor (CQP) interface allows learners to analyze sentence contexts through concordance lines For intermediate-level or university English majors, a valuable task is to compare the usage of specific words in different contexts, akin to a hypothesis-testing process (Tang, 2011) Instead of directly addressing this in class, teachers can encourage students to explore concordance lines to validate their hypotheses This approach helps students understand language usage more effectively by engaging with corpus data, regardless of whether their initial hypotheses are confirmed or refuted.
The Conceptual Framework
This study introduces a conceptual framework based on previous research to guide the necessary steps in addressing the research questions Liu and Jiang (2009) and Lewandowska (2014) highlight the use of Computer-Based Assessments (CBAs) in learning English grammar, which aligns with the learner support aspects identified by Law (2011) This approach leads to significant learning gains, including language achievements, enhanced metacognitive knowledge and strategies, and socio-affective development Notably, the latter two gains correspond with the elements of learner autonomy outlined by Cooker (2015).
Summary
Chapter 2 provides a comprehensive literature review on the design and application of Content-Based Approaches (CBAs) in grammar learning and teaching It thoroughly examines various aspects of learner autonomy and concludes with an analysis of previous studies to highlight new insights relevant to the current research This chapter serves as a foundational element for developing the research methodology, which will be the primary focus of the subsequent chapter.
METHODOLOGY
Research Design
The research takes on a mixed methods research pathway, which combines a
The "pretest-posttest-non-equivalent-group design," as defined by Cohen, Manion, and Morrison (2007), along with qualitative data analysis of learners' writing and reflections, provides a robust framework for research According to Fraenkel and Wallen (2009), employing a mixed methods design enables researchers to investigate and validate the relationships between variables, effectively addressing the issue of method-boundedness.
The research methodology employed in this study is the widely recognized "pretest-posttest-non-equivalent-group design," as noted by Cohen (2007) This approach involved two intact groups participating under distinct learning conditions: a control group (CG) and an experimental group (EG) This design facilitates both within-group and between-group comparisons following data analysis Additionally, the quasi-experimental design enables the researcher to maintain control over variance.
(Kerlinger, 1986, p 280) by matching and comparing different variables This whole process guarantees, to a certain extent, as Kumar (2010, p 100) asserts, “that extraneous variables have a similar impact on the control and experimental group.”
The qualitative paradigm plays a crucial role in addressing research questions by clarifying data related to learners' achievements, exploring their perceptions of autonomy, and identifying new patterns in their responses to corpus-based activities This qualitative analysis enhances the quantitative data results, making the research design explanatory, as noted by Fraenkel and Wallen (2009, p 584) To strengthen the conclusions, the identified patterns are examined for alignment with the statistical data gathered from various research instruments.
Implementing this research design requires significant time, energy, and resources; however, the researcher strategically utilizes various research instruments to ensure alignment with the design The qualitative data collected is not merely supplementary but plays a vital role in shaping the overall conclusions Acknowledging potential challenges, the following sections outline how the researcher organizes her resources and conditions to effectively support the research design.
Research Setting
The research was conducted at the University of Social Sciences and Humanities (USSH), Vietnam National University – Ho Chi Minh City, from September 2017 to December 2018 With approval from the Faculty of English Linguistics and Literature, the researcher gained valuable teaching experience in various grammar classes over a year and a half This timeframe facilitated the pilot teaching process and the development of official research instruments for the study.
The chosen research site offers excellent conditions for study, as the EF is one of the 28 faculties at USSH and is highly regarded for English language teaching and linguistics in Southern Vietnam The researcher, being a teacher at this institution, is well-acquainted with the teaching and learning processes and the research policies in place This familiarity allows the researcher to conduct both pilot and main studies directly within her assigned classes, specifically the Grammar 1 – B2 course for first-year English major students.
The Grammar 1 – B2 course was conducted over 12 weeks for morning classes and 15 weeks for afternoon classes As the researcher and teacher assigned to the morning sessions, she adjusted the syllabus to fit the 12-week timetable, ensuring that all nine modules of the textbook were covered.
The Faculty is developing a CDIO-based syllabus that highlights the importance of learners' heuristic skills in the course goals and learning outcomes Each week, students receive specific writing topics for self-practice on the grammatical concepts covered in class Implementing innovative methods, such as corpus-based activities, proves advantageous as it aligns with the course's objectives, expected outcomes, and planned activities.
Participants
The research targeted approximately 340 first-year students at EF-USSH, focusing specifically on those taught by the researcher Ultimately, 69 first-year English majors participated in the study, which was conducted during their regular class time in the first semester (September to November) of the 2018-2019 academic year.
The study involved two intact classes, Class 1802 and Class 1803, with participants randomly assigned to either the experimental group (EG) or the control group (CG) at the course's outset, independent of their pre-test scores Class 1802 served as the EG, while Class 1803 was designated as the CG, ensuring no researcher bias Both groups utilized the same learning materials, course book, syllabus, and writing assignments The key distinction was that the EG received Continuous Behavioral Assessments (CBAs) integrated into grammar lessons over the 12-week period, particularly during exercise corrections and writing assessments.
In the initial phase, Class 1802 had 45 students and Class 1803 had 46, totaling 91 participants However, the researcher decided to reduce the number of participants to 69 due to two main issues Firstly, a group of second-degree students, who were significantly different from regular English-major students in terms of educational background, age, and university experience, were assigned to regular classes These students, who have a two-year study duration and often work full-time, frequently miss classes scheduled during office hours Additionally, there were a few "elected students" from minority groups who, despite not passing the entrance exam, were admitted to university after completing a one-year pre-university course Informal discussions indicated that these students did not view themselves as part of the regular student body.
Students identified as "English majors" are often just beginning their journey in the field They face challenges in integrating with their peers due to varying levels of language proficiency Including these students in assessments can skew test results and complicate the analysis of learner autonomy perceptions Consequently, these two groups are excluded from results analysis due to differences in educational backgrounds, motivations, and learning objectives as English majors.
During the main study, all students, regardless of their exclusion status, were subjected to the same teaching and learning methods While every student participated in the tests and questionnaires, only 69 regular students were officially selected as the subjects for the investigation.
Table 3.1 Demographic description of the participants
Control Group (CG) Experimental Group (EG)
Raw count Percentage (%) Raw count Percentage (%)
Table 3.1 presents the demographic information of participants, indicating that the Control Group (CG) and Experimental Group (EG) are similar in gender and age range To confirm the homogeneity of both groups concerning their grammar knowledge and initial perceptions of autonomy, the results from the pre-test and pre-questionnaire will be analyzed and detailed in Chapter 4.
Pilot Study
Prior to the main study, two pilot teaching phases were conducted from September 2017 to April 2018, followed by a specific pilot on the pre-questionnaire two weeks before the main study in September 2018 This thorough piloting process significantly enhanced the reliability of the research instrument and the overall study.
The first phase of this pilot teaching process was conducted on the students of Class
In a pilot study conducted during the Grammar 1 – B2 course from September to November 2017, students were introduced to the BNCweb corpus platform, which was integrated into various in-class activities The teacher encouraged students to utilize this tool to confirm or correct their answers in language tasks Additionally, worksheets and instructional guidelines were developed and tested with participants The primary aim of the study was to observe learner behaviors and gather feedback to refine teaching materials and procedures for the application of corpus-based approaches (CBA).
The second phase of the pilot teaching process took place from January to April 2018, involving two intact classes, Class 1702 and Class 1703, which served as control and experimental groups Only Class 1703 utilized BNCweb to enhance their learning in the Grammar 2-B2 course, which focused on different grammatical items than the main study, thus having minimal impact on the worksheet design This phase provided an opportunity to pilot test the questionnaire items aimed at gathering learner feedback on the use of computer-based assessments (CBAs) Additionally, a short survey was conducted to inform the design of a subsequent questionnaire regarding learners' perceptions of autonomy.
Two weeks prior to the main study in early September 2018, a questionnaire assessing learners' perceptions of autonomy in grammar learning was distributed to students in Class 1801, who were also participants in the study To maintain homogeneity between the piloted group and the research participants, outlier responses were excluded, focusing solely on answers from students in the regular program This step was crucial for ensuring the reliability of both the pre-questionnaire and post-questionnaire before they were administered to the main study participants.
Table 3.2 Overview of the pilot study procedure
Phases Time range Courses/ Classes Piloted materials/ research instruments Pilot teaching phase 1
- Feedback on using CBAs in learning Grammar
- Questionnaires on learners’ perceptions of autonomy
Table 3.2 outlines the pilot study process and its contribution to the main research instruments The CBAs were strategically integrated into the syllabus for the EG, utilizing the same language input as the CG Further analysis of the teaching materials and research instruments will be provided in the subsequent sections of this chapter.
Teaching and Learning Materials
Standardizing and controlling the conditions of data collection and measurement procedure are the key factors to maintaining research reliability (Cohen et al.,
In 2007, the study ensured that the teaching materials for both the Control Group (CG) and Experimental Group (EG) were meticulously designed to eliminate any extraneous factors that could potentially skew the results These materials were developed in alignment with the theoretical framework presented in Chapter 2 and informed by relevant research studies.
The textbook and syllabus are crucial elements in the development of teaching materials, as they directly influence the formulation of research instruments.
The official syllabus for the Grammar 1 – B2 course specifies the use of the textbook My GrammarLab, which is part of a series that includes three levels: elementary, intermediate, and advanced For this study, the intermediate-level book is designated as the official course material for the Grammar 1 – B2 course.
According to Cunningsworth (1995), a standard course book package typically includes a student’s book, teacher’s book, and workbook My GrammarLab stands out as a unique resource, offering extensive online and mobile tools for self-learning It targets learners at the B1 and B2 levels (CEFR), as indicated on the book cover The well-structured Contents page organizes important grammar lessons into “Modules,” each containing five to six units with examples of key grammar points, facilitating quick reference and clear visualization for learners.
In the first half of the book, learners explore essential grammatical categories, including Nouns, Articles, Adjectives, Adverbs, and Prepositions This foundation is followed by modules on Tenses and Modal Verbs, equipping learners for advanced practice in verb forms and sentence construction As they progress, the second half of the book introduces more complex structures, such as Reported Speech, Conditionals, and Passive Forms.
Regarding the suitability of a course book, McDonough and Shaw (2013) consider the characteristics namely usability, generalizability, adaptability and its flexibility
My GrammarLab effectively meets the criteria for a comprehensive grammar book suitable for B1/B2 (CEFR) learners It features manageable exercises that encompass a wide range of essential grammatical topics The layout allows learners to access grammar points alongside exercises, facilitating a seamless learning experience without the need to flip pages This design promotes autonomous learning, ensuring that students can easily navigate the book Overall, it serves as an excellent resource for both classroom instruction and self-study.
MyGrammarLab, although relatively new in the grammar book market, offers a diverse array of resources and demonstrates its effectiveness as a supportive guide for learners Its strong emphasis on promoting autonomous learning is a key advantage, highlighting its important role in enhancing corpus-based activities utilized in this study.
3.5.1.2 The Design of the Grammar 1 – B2 Course Syllabus
Undergraduate students at EF (USSH) must complete three essential grammar courses: Grammar 1 – B2, Grammar 2 – B2, and Advanced Grammar The first two courses are offered in the first and second semesters of the first year, while Advanced Grammar is designed for sophomores to enhance their skills The "B2" designation reflects the proficiency level students achieve upon course completion, according to the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages Grammar 1 – B2 emphasizes word classes, whereas Grammar 2 – B2 focuses on constructing various sentence structures This structured pathway effectively guides learners from foundational concepts to more complex aspects of the English language.
The Grammar 1 – B2 course helps students to equip themselves with lexico- grammatical knowledge, which can assist them in other skill-based courses as well
It is also the ever first grammar course offered to the EF first-year English-major students, which conveniently suits the scope of this study
There are nine modules regarding the basic knowledge of word classes and tenses, namely:
Module 1 Nouns and Articles Module 5 Present Tenses Module 2 Possessives, Pronouns and Quantifiers Module 6 Past Tenses
Module 3 Prepositions Module 7 Present Perfect Module 4 Adjectives and Adverbs Module 8 Future Forms
The study participants gained essential knowledge about word choices, collocations, and various verb forms Over the 12-week course, learners revisited their high school grammar while acquiring new technical terms and practical applications of the target language, which will significantly aid them in the second semester and future courses.
The EF's original syllabus consists of 15 weeks of afternoon classes The researcher has made essential modifications to create a 12-week syllabus for morning classes, adjusting the learning activities accordingly.
The two groups exhibit significant differences, particularly as only the EG utilized CBAs during their lessons For more information on the similarities and essential differences between the groups, please refer to the in-class learning activities outlined in Appendix 2.
3.5.2 BNCweb: Platform for the CBAs
BNCweb is the corpus query processor that learners worked with during the whole study process
When selecting the best corpus for learners, the British National Corpus (BNC) and the Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA) are prominent choices due to their size, balance, and accessibility A comparison from Birmingham Young University highlights their differences in corpus size, genre coverage, and recency While COCA is larger and more current, BNC excels with its extensive range of spoken sub-genres, offering a well-structured representation of the language Ultimately, both corpora complement each other, and users are encouraged to utilize both rather than relying on just one.
To effectively integrate Corpora-Based Activities (CBAs) into grammar lessons, it is essential to select a specific, freely available online corpus for learners to consult In this study, the researcher opted for a single corpus program to help participants become familiar with the corpus query processor This focused approach not only aids in their initial learning but also allows for better control of the research environment, minimizing the impact of extraneous factors After the study, the researcher plans to provide additional information about other corpus options.
Within the scope of this study, BNCweb was chosen to support the whole learning process due to its versatility in many aspects The BNCweb was developed by
BNCweb, developed by Sebastian Hoffman and Stefan Evert, is a user-friendly Corpus Query Processor (CQP) that offers accessible and well-structured data for learners It allows students to sign up for a free account, enabling them to perform queries that enhance their learning experience both in and out of the classroom This simplicity is particularly beneficial for beginners, as it reduces their initial apprehension While students can also access BNCweb through COCA, using BNCweb is preferred in this study to maintain control over extraneous factors and ensure reliability, making it an ideal starting point for learners.
Figure 3.1 The interface of the BNCweb
3.5.2.2 In-class Worksheets and the Incorporation of CBAs
Both the CG and EG learners were provided with identical worksheets containing the same exercises and tasks during each class session However, the key distinction lay in the instructor's approach, as the researcher utilized the worksheets and various in-class activities to integrate corpus usage specifically in the EG, thereby enhancing the learning experience A sample of these in-class worksheets is available in Appendix 3.
Research Instruments
Data were gathered through two Grammar Achievement Tests, a preliminary and a post-study questionnaire assessing learners' perceptions of autonomy in grammar learning, a brief survey on students' opinions regarding the use of Computer-Based Assessments (CBAs) in their grammar lessons, and learners' written reflection papers following the course.
Achievement tests assess an individual's knowledge or skills in specific subjects, serving as a tool to evaluate instructional effectiveness in academic settings (Fraenkel & Wallen, 2009, p 127) This research highlights the significance of the Grammar Achievement Test in measuring learners' development and language acquisition related to grammar knowledge The participating students completed both a Pre-test and a Post-test to gauge their progress.
The Pre-test assessed the learners' prior grammar knowledge and confirmed the homogeneity of the Control Group (CG) and Experimental Group (EG), establishing a foundation for analyzing their subsequent test scores After ten weeks, the Post-test was conducted to evaluate the impact of Classroom-Based Assessments (CBAs) on students Although the Pre-test and Post-test served different purposes, they maintained the same test specifications, proficiency, and difficulty levels, ensuring alignment with the research design.
The Grammar Achievement Test included 55 items and a writing task, organized into four sections, with a total duration of 75 minutes This test aimed to assess the grammar points outlined in the syllabus.
This Grammar Achievement Test was adopted from the Faculty’s Final Test for the Grammar 1-B2 course, which accordingly possesses the following plan presented in Table 3.4
Table 3.4 Overview of the Grammar Achievement Test specifications
Section Number of test items Format Session Points
In Section 1, items were selected by creating gap-filled sentences that address specific grammar points Students participated by choosing the correct answer from four provided options, eliminating the need to generate their own words for the blanks.
Section 2 involves 10 sentences with each one containing an error The test takers had two jobs: first, they need to circle the error in the sentence; then, they were required to provide the alternative correction to that particular error
Section 3 asks the participants to rewrite the 15 sentences from the prompted words with which they were provided The purpose of this section is to test grammar knowledge, not vocabulary or idiom knowledge; therefore, the words provided in this section are expected to be familiar to the students The answer to each item of this section includes three to eight words (or less), and students were required to write down the missing words only
Section 4 expects the students to write a 150-word paragraph on a topic that was closely related to the ones that had already been covered in the courses There are two topics and the students can choose from either of them
The study utilized the official Final Exam Test for the Grammar 1- B2 course, as administered by the Faculty (refer to Appendix 6 for Test Specifications from the EF) Learners were informed about the test format at the start of the course through the syllabus The test's content and construct validity were strongly supported by its alignment with the specified items and format Additionally, the official recognition of the Grammar Achievement Test enhanced its concurrent and predictive validity.
Brown and Abeywickrama (2010) identify three key factors affecting test unreliability: student factors, test administration, and the test's nature Personal issues such as illness and anxiety can lead to inconsistent student performance during the 75-minute test To mitigate this, the researcher provided clear instructions and familiarized students with the test format, ensuring consistent testing conditions for both the Pre-test and Post-test The tests were conducted in a controlled pen-and-paper environment, where factors like noise, light, and temperature were managed to enhance comfort With a reasonable time allocation of 75 minutes and thorough preparation, the reliability of the test was effectively reinforced.
3.6.1.3 Grading the Grammar Achievement Test
To ensure a reliable dataset, it is essential that the grading remains consistent throughout the test In the initial three sections, students' responses were evaluated using the answer key supplied by the English Faculty, and points were assigned accordingly.
In Section 4, careful grading is essential due to the uncontrolled nature of the test item To ensure rater reliability, statistical tests were conducted to confirm intra-rater reliability The researcher initially marked the writing task immediately after administration using a scoresheet Three months later, the same tasks were re-evaluated without reference to the initial scores The results from both scoring sessions were then analyzed using IBM SPSS Statistics version 24 to calculate the Kappa values.
The research deliberately excluded inter-rater reliability for two main reasons Firstly, the volume of writing task papers, totaling 138 for both the Pre-test and Post-test, was too extensive to facilitate collaboration with another teacher for marking Secondly, the researcher allowed a significant time gap between the first and second evaluations, which may have affected her recall of the initial results and familiarity with the scoring process.
3.6.2 Questionnaires on Learners’ Perceptions of Autonomy
The study emphasizes the developmental stage of learners and their perceptions of autonomy, utilizing a questionnaire to illustrate the patterns and differences between the two groups.
3.6.2.1 Design and Construct of the Questionnaire
The questionnaire comprised two sections: the first assessed students' levels of agreement with learner autonomy, while the second collected personal information, including age, gender, and experiences with autonomous learning.
Data Collection Procedure
The study's activities took place during regular class hours from September 2017 to November 2018, encompassing three key phases: (1) the design of teaching materials and research instruments, (2) the execution of pilot studies on these instruments, and (3) the implementation of the main study involving both participant groups.
The pilot study for teaching materials and research instruments took place over two semesters from September 2017 to June 2018 In July and August 2018, the researcher finalized the design of these materials for both the control group (CG) and experimental group (EG) During this time, assistance was sought from the Academic Assistant to understand the upcoming classes and the characteristics of the sample The final pilot study on the questionnaire assessing learners' perceptions of autonomy was conducted in the first week of September 2018, prior to its official administration in the main study two weeks later.
To enhance the validity of the study, participants were kept unaware of their group assignments, whether pilot, control, or experimental Both the experimental group (EG) and control group (CG) were subjected to identical study conditions, including grammar points, writing topics, worksheets, and lesson durations The only exception occurred on days when EG students received additional guidelines for using BNCweb in computer-based assessments (CBAs), which extended their lesson time by 15-20 minutes.
The classroom instruction was primarily conducted in English, with Vietnamese interpretation provided when necessary to ensure students fully understood the material The researcher, who also served as the teacher, maintained a neutral approach while instructing both the control group (CG) and experimental group (EG) To prevent interaction between the two groups outside of class, lesson materials were distributed separately During the administration of tests and questionnaires, the researcher was present to offer guidance and clarify any questions regarding the test items.
Once the research instruments were all implemented, data were kept at the researcher’s discretion and were coded according to the requirements of the data analysis procedure.
Data Analysis Procedure
The analysis of data from the pre-test, two post-tests, a questionnaire on learners' perceptions of autonomy, and a short survey on feedback regarding the use of CBAs was conducted using descriptive and inferential statistics.
3.8.1.1 Analyzing the Grammar Achievement Test Results
The controlled test items were scored based on a rubric provided by the English Faculty (refer to Appendix 22) These scores were subsequently entered into IBM SPSS version 24, where statistical analyses, including Independent samples t-Test and Paired samples t-Test, were performed to determine any significant differences between the Experimental Group (EG) and the Control Group (CG).
In Section 4 of the Grammar Achievement Test, an error analysis was conducted alongside the Faculty's scoring rubric This analysis provided both quantitative and qualitative insights, enabling the researcher to draw conclusions about the students' achievements and their learning progress throughout the course.
Table 3.9 describes the framework for error analysis, which was based on the lessons they had received during the course
Table 3.9 Framework for the error analysis of the writing tasks
Wrong use of determiners D Wrong selection of articles, possessives, demonstratives and quantifiers
Wrong use of noun forms N Wrong use of singular and plural nouns and spellings in the context
Improper use of adjectives can lead to confusion, including incorrect choices, positioning, and the misuse of comparative and superlative forms Similarly, adverbs can be misused through wrong selections, positioning, and the incorrect application of their comparative and superlative forms Prepositions also pose challenges, particularly with the wrong combinations of prepositional phrases Additionally, pronouns may be inconsistently used, leading to confusion regarding antecedents and the incorrect order or choice in context The choice of verb forms is crucial, as errors can arise from using the wrong tense or aspect among the twelve verb forms Lastly, subject-verb agreement is essential, as verbs must align correctly with their subjects to maintain grammatical accuracy.
Examples of these error types can be found in Appendix 15
3.8.1.2 Analyzing the Likert Scale Data
To analyze the Likert scale data from the questionnaire, the mean score ranges were calculated The range was determined by subtracting 1 from 6, resulting in 5, which was then divided by 6 to yield an interval of approximately 0.83 This method establishes the length of the range effectively.
From 1 to 1.83 represents Strongly disagree
From 2.68 to 3.50 represents Somewhat disagree
From 3.51 to 4.33 represents Somewhat agree
From 5.14 to 6 represents Strongly agree
The analysis of mean scores from the Likert scale items reveals learners' perceptions of autonomy and their agreement with the advantages and disadvantages of CBAs.
The error analysis revealed significant differences in the writing performance of the Control Group (CG) and Experimental Group (EG) By examining the types of errors made by students in each category, we were able to identify distinctive features and rule out certain reasons for these errors, highlighting the specific characteristics of the mistakes made by both groups.
The students' reflection papers and responses to open-ended questions about their reflections on CBAs were coded as C1 to C36 for the control group (CG) and G1 to G33 for the experimental group (EG) The coded data underwent thematic analyses to uncover patterns that complemented the insights provided by the quantitative data.
3.8.3 Research Questions and Data Analysis
The research instruments and statistical tests are presented in correspondence with the research questions in Table 3.10
Table 3.10 Research questions and the corresponding research instruments and statistical tests
Research question Instruments Data and Statistical tests
1.What are the effects of corpus-based activities after the English grammar lessons on learners’ achievements ?
Participants’ scores Descriptive statistics Independent-sample t-Test Paired-sample t-test Error analysis (Writing Task)
2 What are the effects of corpus-based activities on their perceptions of autonomy in learning
Mean scores of participants’ perceptions of autonomy Descriptive statistics Independent-sample t-Test Learners’ text answer
3 What is the learners’ feedback on the use corpus- based activities?
Feedback on the Use of CBAs
Descriptive statistics Learners’ text answer
Chapter Summary
Chapter 3 outlines the key teaching materials and research instruments that are closely aligned with the research design, participants, data collection, and analysis procedures The guidelines established in this chapter are crucial for effectively conducting data analysis and discussion, which will be explored in the following chapter.