Using differentiated instructions to increse learners particippations to multi level speaking lessons an action research submitted in partial fulfilment of requirements of master in tesol

LIST O F TABLESTable 2 Numbers of times learners on task initial stage 35Table 3 Learners’ behaviours in speaking lessons initial stage 37Table 4 Learners’ self-evaluation o f participat

USING DIFFER ENTiATFO INSTRUCTIONS TO INCREASE LEARNERS’ PARTICIPATION IN

USING DIFFERENTIATED INSTRUCTIONS TO INCREASE LEARNERS’ PARTICIPATION IN

M ULTI-LEVEL SPEAKING LESSONS:

jU J ffl B ẢẴ< ?-Ũ JL

k

Hanoi, January 2008

L IS T O F A B B R E V IA T IO N S HI

L IS T O F T A B L E S IV

L IS T O F G R A P H S V

C H A P T E R 1 IN T R O D U C T IO N 1

1.1 Background to the s t u d y 1

1.1.1 Theoretical background I 1.1.2 Practical background 2

1.2 AIM OF THE STUDY 4

1.3 Research q u e s t io n s 4

1.4 Scope a n d significance of the study 5

1.5 Orga nization of the thesis 5

C H A P T E R 2 L IT E R A T U R E R E V IE W 7

2.1 Multi-level c l a s s e s 7

2.1.1 D efining M L C 7

2.1.2 M LC advantages 8

2.1.3 M LC p r o b le m s 9

2.1.4 Learner participation 11

2.1.4.1 W hat is learner participation? 11

2.1.4.2 Factors affecting learners’ participation 13

Su m m a ry 15

2.2 D i f f e r e n t i a t e d i n s t r u c t i o n in M L C 15

2.2.1 What is D I? 15

2.2.2 Why should D l be applied in M L C ? 17

2.2.3 D l strategies 19

C H A P T E R 3 M E T H O D O L O G Y 23

3.1 Research m e t h o d 23

3.1.1 Action research (AR) 23

3.1.2 AR p ro ce d u re 24

3.1.2.1 Identifying the problem (weeks 1 and 2 ) 25

3.1.2.2 Collecting initial data (week 3 to week 5 ) 25

3.1.2.3 Analysing initial data and generating hypothesis (week 6 ) 25

3.1.2.4 Planning action (weeks 6 and 7 ) 25

3.1.2.5 Im plem enting action (weeks 8 9 10 and 11) 26

3.1.2.6 C ollecting data to monitor ch an g e 26

3.1.2.7 A nalyzing and evaluating learners’ participation 26

2

» »

3 2 2 2 1 Q u e s tio n n a ire 1 (A p p e n d ix e s 1 and 2 ) 29

.2 2 2 2 Q u e s tio n n a ire 2 (A p p e n d ix e s 3 and 4) 30

3.2.3 Teaching d ia ry 31

3 2 3 1 R a tio n a le b e h in d th e use o f te a c h in g d ia r y 31

3 2 3 2 D e s c rip tio n o f th e te a c h in g d ia r y 32

3 3 T h e p a r t ic ip a n t s 33

3.3.1 The researcher - the teacher 33

3.3.2 The observers 33

3.3.3 The subjects - the students 33

C H A P T E R 4 T H E R E S U L T S 35

4.1 I n i t i a l d a t a 35

4.1.1 Learners ’ participation 35

4.1.2 Learning experience and opinions o f classmates * English le v e l 39

4.1.3 Learners ' attitude to speaking 40

4.1.4 Learners ' attitude to speaking topics and speaking activities 41

4.1.5 Learners ' attitudes to instructions, a n d classroom atm osphere 43

4 1.6 Learners ’ readiness fo r speaking activities 41

4.1.7 Learners ' preference f o r group w o rk 44

4.1.8 L earn ers9 recommendations f o r better speaking le ss o n s 45

4.1.9 C onclusion 46

T h e h y p o t h e s is 4 6 4 2 P l a n n i n g a c t i o n 4 6 Independent P ro jects 46

Tiered A ssignm ents 47

Flexible G rouping 48

Varying Q uestions 49

4.3 D a t a c o l l e c t e d in t h e a c t io n s t a g e 51

4.3.1 Learners ’ on-task behaviours 51

4.3.2 L ea rners’ perceptions o f their behaviours 52

4 3 2 1 L e a rn e rs ’ b e h a v io u rs in sp e a k in g le s s o n s 52

4 3 2 2 L e a rn e rs ’ s e lf-e v a lu a tio n o f p a r tic ip a tio n le v e l 53

4.4 A c t io n r e s e a r c h e v a l u a t i o n 55

4.4.1 Learners ' participation 55

4.4.2 Learners ' behaviours in initial and action sta g es 57

4.4.3 Learners ' evaluation o f fo u r strategies ' effectiveness 60

Su m m a ry 61

C H A P T E R 5 C O N C L U S I O N A N D R E C O M M E N D A T I O N S 62

Appendix 3: Q U ESTIO N N A IRE 2 (English version) 80

Appendix 4: Q U ESTIO N N A IRE 2 (Vietnamese version) 83

Appendix 5: O BSERVATION SH E E T 86

Appendix 6: SPEAKING LESSON PLAN ( Initial data) 88

Appendix 7: SPEAKING LESSON PLAN (Action stage) 91

Appendix 8: TEA CH ING DIARY - ENTRY 1 (initial data) 95

Appendix 9: TEA CH IN G DIARY - ENTRY 2 (Action stage data) 99

Appendix 10: TEA CH ING DIARY- ENTRY 3 (Action stage data) 103

A ppendix 11: FIVE SPEAKING LESSONS (fro m L ife lin e E le m e n ta r y a n d L ife lin e P r e -In te r m e d ia te ) 107

4

assistance, co n sid eratio a encouragement and constant support W ithout these, the thesis could not have been com pleted.

My special thanks go to Mrs Nguyen Thai Ha, M.A - Vice D ean o f the D epartm ent o f Post Graduate Studies, Hanoi University for her valuable ideas, suggestions and com m ents o n the research approaches

I would also acknow ledge m y great gratitude to all the lecturers and to th e organizers for this M aster course at Hanoi University

M y special thanks are also expressed to m y friends, m y colleagues and thirty four students taking part in m y research for their great help with data collectionand analysis.Last but not least, I am deeply grateful to my parents, my husband and m y son for their support, encouragem ent and love, which were extremely im portant for th e com pletion o f this thesis

learners ’ participation in speaking lessons increases once the action p la n has been implemented''! To find the answers to these questions, an action research w as carried out

The subject o f the study was 34 second year students o f class 644 - Tourism section, Vocational Training Center, PDU They were observed in speaking classes and invited to com plete survey questionnaires The initial stage revealed that the level o f difficulty o f the speaking activities, the topics available in the course book, and the teacher’s instructions were not appropriate for different groups o f learners w ith different language

levels The findings initiated the hypothesis th at applying differentiated instruction

strategies f o r m ixed-ability speaking classes w ould increase learn ers’ participation An

action plan, w ith four strategies (Independent Projects, Tiered Assignm ents, Flexible Grouping, and Varying Questions) adopted from Tom linson’s (1995) was

implemented The post stage found a positive answ er to the hypothesis The evaluation o f the action research showed that learners’ participation increased when the action plan was implemented

LIST O F ABBREVIATIONS

LIST O F TABLES

Table 2 Numbers of times learners on task (initial stage) 35Table 3 Learners’ behaviours in speaking lessons (initial stage) 37Table 4 Learners’ self-evaluation o f participation behavioirs (initial

stage)

38Table 5 Students’ previous English learning experience 39

Table 7 Learners’ readiness for their speaking activities 44

Table 9 Numbers o f times learners on task (action stage) 51

Table 11 Learners’ self-evaluation o f participation level 54

Table 13 Learners’ behaviours in initial and action stages 58Table 14 Learners’ self-evaluation o f participation level h initial and

Table 15 Learners’ evaluation o f four strategies’ effectiveness 60

IV

Graph 4 Learners’ self-evaluation o f participation in initial and

action stages

57

How ever, learners’ low participation is one o f the problem s that can frequently be encountered in m ixed-ability lessons Things get w orse when this problem is present in speaking classes as this will result in very unproductive classes W alker (2005) and

R em edios, Clarke & Hawthorne (n.d) share the sam e opinion that Asian students are reticent in developing their verbal skills, and that m any o f them dem onstrate their lack o finterest in debating and participating in discussion Lack o f verbal interactions inclassroom s was perceived as an obstacle to m axim ization o f their learning potential (W alker, 2005)

Educators have sought to improve learners’ participation by, first o f all, finding its causes The m ain ones include students’ learning experiences, classroom atmosphere, students’ attitude to course book’s activities and topics o f m aterials (Xu, 2006; Peacock, 1998) In m ixed-ability classes, different groups o f learners have different learning experiences Their attitudes to activities and their topics o f interest also vary The classroom atm osphere is, therefore, can not often facilitate learning and teaching process

In order to im prove learners’ participation, teachers o f these classes have to plan their lessons strategically to meet the diverse needs o f their learners (Tom linson, 1999, 2001, 2003)

It is a common knowledge that students leam best when the tasks given to them arc neither too easy nor too hard Unfortunately, tasks or activities available in course books

are usually designed for a specific level o f language, which means that they can hardly meet the diverse needs o f mixed-ability class learners Tom linson (1995) has introduced

D ifferen tiated In stru c tio n (DI), which is considered an effective approach to the problems for teachers o f mixed-ability classes

By differentiating the content, process, product and learning environment according to learners' readiness, interest, and learning profile, DI adaptors can solve the problem o f learners’ low participation

1.1.2 Practical background

W ith an attem pt to im prove learners’ participation level in MAC, DI w as intended to be applied in a class o f tourism in Vocational Training C enter (VTC), at Phuong Dong University T h e researcher hopes that it could be the solution to the problem o f learners’ low participation in speaking lessons T his section provides practical background inform ation fo r the study by briefly describing how speaking lessons are usually delivered, and then clarifies w hy the researcher thought DI would succeed in solving stated problem

PDU is a private university founded in 1994 The VTC was founded later, in 2001 There are three departm ents in the Centers, i.e Department o f Tourism , Department o f Accounting, and Department o f Information Technology Students in this C enter in general do not have to take any entrance examination A dmission granting is based on the results o f entrance exam ination to PDU or other universities, which are usually low Some o f the students are sent to VTC b y som e companies w hich have education cooperation contracts with the Center

English is a com pulsory subject for students o f this Center It is covered in four terms (two years) w ith 225 periods There are 180 periods for General English and 45 periods for English for Tourism Students are expected to m aster basic knowledge o f grammar, vocabulary, and develop their communicative com petence in the target language The whole curriculum is framed as in Table 1

T a b ic 1 : Tim e allocation

Four macro skills and grammar at elem entary level (from unit

1 to unit 6 - ¡.[feline Elementary).

Continue with four m acro skills and gram m ar at elem entary

level (from unit 7 to unit 12 - Lifeline Elementary).

Four macro skills and G ram m ar at elem entary and pre-

intermediate level (from unit 13 to unit 14 - Lifeline Elementary and unit 1 to unit 4 - Lifeline Pre-intermediate).

Focus on speaking, listening skills, and vocabulary on tourism

to obtain intermediate level o f English on tourism

A s could be seen from Table 1, speaking skill is practiced and developed in all four terms Graduates from this C enter are supposed to use the English they have acquired in

th e ir work Especially, fo r students o f Tourism, English is o f great im portance to their

jo b Therefore, am ong the four skills, speaking has been em phasized and considered a vital skill for these students

Learner’s English levels are much diversified Like other students at VTC, thirty four learners in the tourism class w ere selected either based on their university entrance exam ination results o r nom inated by their companies B efore this course at PDU, they had very different experiences learning English The study length ranges from 0 to 12 years M oreover, they were exposed to two sets o f course books: seven-year and three- year Som e students, unluckily, have never been exposed to the English language before this couise

The researcher’s own experience from term 11 and the beginning o f term III w ith the class revealed the fact that learners’ participation in speaking class was very low Students kept gossiping with each other, passing notes, doing other sub jects’ exercises or homework, using cell phone, yaw ning or dozing Learners who w ere off-task are from both lower level and higher level groups These students did not seem to be happy with the activities which are either too easy or too difficult Those who found the understanding or skills below their level expressed their disappointment with the activities Although they did

3

well in oral tests and could answer teachers’ questions correctly without effort, they were

m entally lazy and got bored with the lessons W hen learners continue to work on the input they already mastered, little if any new learning takes place (Tomlinson, 2001) On the other hand, the students who found the activities too difficult got frustrated and did not involve in the lessons

Considering w hat happened to the students in this class as well as what has been stated in the theoretical background section, it is suggested that DI, as advised by Tomlinson (2001 ), could be used to solve the problem

In brief, the problem o f learners’ low participation in speaking classes has initiated this action research entitled Differentiating instructions to increase learners’ participation in speaking m ulti-level classes The study was conducted to discover the real causes for the problems o f poor involvement and try four DI strategies as a solution to im prove the situation in the focused class in VTC at PDU

1.2 Aim o f th e study

This action research aim s at increasing learners’ level o f participation in speaking classes

with the intervention o f four DI strategies, Independent Project, Tiered Assignments, Flexible G rouping and Varying Questions, as means o f im proving course book

activities and teacher’s w ay o f giving instructions to m eet diverse needs o f students in mixed ability classes (M AC) Details on these strategies could b e found in section 2.3.3

1.3 R esearch questions

To achieve this aim, the answers to the following questions were sought:

1 What are th e causes o f learners ' low participation in speaking classes?

2 To what extent Joes learners ' participation increase once the fo u r D I strategies have been em ployed?

1.4 Scope a n d significance o f the study

M AC-related problems have been attracting attention o f educators and researchers and have been found to be diverse in nature Serious consideration o f the issue to problems concerning m ulti-level classes arises and has their certain effects on her students’ learning and h er teaching Among them, low level o f participation is frequently prioritized to be dealt with because o f its adverse effects U nder serious tim e and budget constraints and due to the researcher’s lack o f experience in doing research, the researcher only focused on four DI strategies (Tomlinson, 2001) and carried out her research in her own class only This small scale project certainly lim its the generalizability o f its findings to a bigger student body H ow ever its practicality will undoubtedly be o f great significance to teachers o f English at PDU and M LC instructors

in general

The presence o f o th er problems in MLC e.g m ethodology application, assessm ent and evaluation, etc as w ell as the usefulness o f other strategies are fully aw are o f by the researcher, but they w ere not investigated under the circum stances as discussed in the previous part

It is hoped that th e study will identify the m ain causes o f learners’ low participation in speaking classes o f mixed ability and appropriate actions based on these findings could

be done and evaluated All this would m ean a great deal to the teaching com m unity in Vietnam where m ulti-level classes are very common The study w ould not only specify what the problem s w ere and what to do about them but also point out reservations to be considered with the suggested solutions

1.5 O rg a n iza tio n of the thesis

The thesis consists offive chapters, organized as follows

Chapter 1 - Introduction - provides background to the study, states the aim s, the research questions, the scope and significance o f the study, and outlines the organization o f the thesis

5

Chapter 2 - Literature Review - covers areas relating to the issues, namely multi-level classes, learners’ participation and D1 theory.

Chapter 3 - M ethodology - describes the research method, the data collection instruments and information about participants in the study as well as the steps to conduct the study.Chapter 4 - The Results - provides the data analysis, the discussion on the initial data, the data collected to evaluate the project

Chapter 5 - C onclusion and Recommendations - sum m arize m ajor findings and provides recom m endations o n the application o f the four DI strategies

C H A P T E R 2 L IT E R A T U R E R E V IE W

This chapter presents related literature that provides the theoretical background o f the research It includes three main parts The first part 2.1 provides the theoretical background to m ulti-level classes (MLC) in foreign language learning Learners’ participation will b e discussed in part 2.2, and the last section, 2.3, examines DI in MLC

2.1 M ulti-level classes

2.1.1 Defining M LC

Multi-level o r m ixed-ability classes in foreign language learning and teaching are com m on since no tw o students can be the sam e in term s o f language background, learning speed, learning ability and motivation (Corpur, 2005) Even w hen students are placed according to some criteria, it is im possible to have a homogeneous class

Bell (1991) stated that “when w e talk about M LC, w e tend to focus on the variation in students’ control o f the language We talk about the influent student sitting next to the one w ho can barely piccc together a sentence” (1991, p 1) The term m ulti-level was also used b y Shank and Arlington (1995) to identify any group o f learners who differ from one another in one o r m ore significant ways H e shared with som e other researchers the variables that affect the levels within the class such as the native language o f students, (some use th e R om an alphabet, some do not); their know ledge o f other languages; their degrees o f literacy in their first language as well as in English (Bell, 1991; Santopietro, 1991; W rigley & Guth, 1992) They also include the type and am ount o f a learner's previous education; the learning style preference; learner expectations o f appropriate classroom activities; and the culture, religion, gender, and age o f each student (Guglielmino & Burrichter, 1987) Other influential factors are learners’ personality,

confidence, m otivation and interest (Ur, 1996) So, M ulti-level is understood in a broad

way, referring to not only level but other aspects as well

For this study, M LC is delined as a class o f learners am ong who there are marked differences in the level o f perform ance in foreign languages (Ur, 1996) The reason for this choice is that all the students in the targeted class are considerably hom ogeneous in

7

term s o f LI (Vietnamese), knowledge o f other languages (English only), literature in LI and previous education (all com pleting senior secondary school) Their learning styles and expectations o f class profile could be considered sim ilar given the traditional teaching styles they were exposed to at secondary school They are, as could b e expected, hom ogeneous in culture, religion and age range.

2.1.2 M L C advantages

Balliro (2006) reflected that many MLC differences do not represent them selves as problems On the other hand, they can enrich the com m unication o f the students and often attract instructors to “stay in this marginalized, poorly paid field” H e also repotted that m any teachers o f M LC suggested that w hen classes have a strong and clear identity and when students leam to work in mixed proficiencies, there w ere few er conflicts

arising He concluded that from this prism, multi becom es the strength rather than a

deficit

Aydinli and H om e (2006) also stated that multi-level classes can provide opportunities for learners Those with limited proficiency have an opportunity to interact with more proficient English speakers, and advanced learners benefit b y using their English skills to help low er level students negotiate m eaning Students in m ulti-level classes can leam to work together across differences and develop learning com m unities in w hich members leam from one another’s strengths (Corley, 2005; H ofer & Larson, 1997; Jacobson, 2000;

W right, 1999)

Ur (1996, p 305) pointed out four advantages o f heterogeneous classes as follows

Firstly, they provide a much richer pool o f hum an resources than do less m ixed classes The individuals have between them far more life experience and knowledge, more varied opinions, more interests and ideas, all o f which can be used in classroom interactionSecondly, there is educational value in the actual contact betw een very different kinds o f learners They get to know each o ther's values, personalities etc., and thereby increase their own know ledge and awareness o f others, as well as tolcrance and understanding

The third advantage o f MLC is the fact that the teacher is very much less able to attend to every individual in the class, which makes learners them selves help by teaching each other and working together As a result, peer teaching and collaboration are likely to be fairly common, and an atmosphere o f cooperation seems to be fostered.

Last but not least, U r (1996) pointed out that these classes can be seen as “m uch more challenging and interesting to teach, and provide greater opportunity for creativity, innovation and general professional developm ert”

In short, M LC provide both teachers and learners with opportunity to work better in a way that supports cooperation and creativity w hich have their precious value in a mixed- ability speaking class

U r (1996) also m entioned other differences like language learning ability, educational level, world knowledge, cultural background, m otivation, etc These differences in a MIX! are obvious, m aking the problems o f interest generation m ore serious

The second challenge is that teachers cannot m ake sure that their learners are all learning effectively (Copur, 2005; Ur, 19%) The teacher’s aim is to reach all o f his learners However, it is well known that every learner has a different w ay o f learn in g and they also learn and progress at different speeds The tasks provided by teachers arc not suitable for all For example, while some learners may find the task very easy to deal with, some o f their classmates find it difficult to understand Besides, learning also depends on what students have brought with them into class (C'opur, 2005) What the

9

students in a MLC have with th a n are far from the same So, the diversity oncc again produces negative impacts on learning.

M aterials are also referred to as an aspect that teachers in MLC have to take care of It is difficult to find suitable materials for all Since most language textbooks are designed for

an ideal hom ogeneous classroom environment (Copur, 2005), they are rigidly aimed at one kind o f learner, with no options, or flexibility (Ur, 1996) The problem is obvious in the teaching context o f the researcher, in particular, and in oth er universities in Vietnam,

in general English language textbooks such as the Lifeline series (Hutchinson, 1999) and the N ew H eadw ay series (Soar, J & Soar, L, 1999) are used widely, which means

students with different starting points have the sam e journey to go Although it is a com m on know ledge that it is the role o f teachers to make the available m aterial suitable for their own learners, and new textbooks are also attached w ith added optional tasks, it is still very difficult to make M LC students content

The characteristics o f MLC also produce the problem o f learner participation as teachers find it hard to activate all learners

For students w ho are not specialized in English, the olassmom is usually the only environment w here they are exposed to the language use However, only a few students, the m ore proficient and confident ones, seem to respond actively to teacher’s questions.Students find it hard to speak in the target language for m any reasons ranging from poor interest to lim ited confidence, from age to know ledge (Copur, 2005) Students w ho are insecure about th e ir preparation or their English language skills may elect to remain passive, w aiting fo r the classmates who are always ready to respond to eventually speak

up ((K insella & Feldman, 2003) Som e students would like to express everything they think or feel by u sin g new language, and they m ay take many turns to speak i f they think they have prepared enough Som e need longer w ait-tim e to process a question and frame

an answ er than their classmates “ If impetuous or loquacious learners are regularly allowed to blurt out answers, other more reflective o r reticent participants are left with little tim e for critical thinking and engagement” (K insella & Feldman, 2003) As a result, teachers have to face a problem o f considerably impartial participation o f learners,

M ore detailed inform ation on learners' participation is presented in the following section

o f 2.1.4

Som e other MLC problems are also well researched, including those related to class management and discipline (Copur, 2005; Ur, 1996), new m ethodology application, individual awareness, and assessment and evaluation (Ur, 1996) How ever, they are not mentioned here because they are not big problems in the researcher’s speaking class The priority is sent to the problem o f low participation

2.1.4 Learner participation

2.1.4.1 W hat is learner participation?

Learners’ participation is an important aspect o f classroom interaction, especially in foreign language lessons Participating in the lessons, learners can practice the language and to produce output (Ellis, 1994) Moreover, it also helps to evaluate learners’ learning outcomes G am er (1998) comments that “participation m otivates learners, builds their confidence, and opens them to new vistas” (p 1 )

A ccording lo Humer (1993), active participation is "the ability o t the learner to be consistently engaged in what is to be learned” In oth er w ords, active participation is “the engagement o f the learner’s mind w ith that w hich is to be learned” It can be divided into overt participation and covert participation Overt participation is the visible or observable behaviour o f the learner that are relevant to learning and learner’s dem onstration o f the engagement o f their minds on the learning in an observable way Covert participation is invisible or unobservable behaviour o f the learner that are relevant

to the learning Active participation is said to increase the rate and degree o f learning

Learner participation can also be classified into verbal participation and non-verbal participation Verbal participation can be realized and recorded easily when learners verbalize their thoughts and perception However, according to W alker (2005) and Remedios Clarke & Hawthorne (n.d) Asian students are reticent in developing their verbal skills, and usually demonstrate their lack o f interest in debating and participating

in discussion Lack o f verbal interactions in classroom s was perceived as an obstacle to

m axim ization o f their learning potential (W alker, 2005) W hile it is not easy to understand the non-verbal participation, a concept o f non-verbal com munication should

be identified Eryilmaz & Dam define non-verbal com m unication as “a system consisting

o f a range o f features often u sa i together to aid expression” (2005, p 1) The main com ponents o f the system are Kinestics (body language), Proxem ics (proximity) Haptics (touch), Oculesics (Eye contact) Chronemics (use o f tim e, waiting, pausing), Olfactics (sm ell), Vocalics, Sound symbols, Silence, Posture, Adornment, Locomotion

Tw o other concepts that should be mentioned w hen discussing learners' participation is

learners’ on-task behaviours and off-task behaviours O ff-task behaviour is a term used

to describe occasions when the learner is engaging in a behaviour that is not related to the activity set b y the teacher Typically this term is used to refer to relatively low level forms o f behaviour, such as day dreaming, looking around the room, playing with

m aterials o r equipment, gossiping with neighbour, passing notes, dozing and so on The

opposite o f off-task behaviour is, predictably, on task behaviour Nunan (1992) states

that students are “on-task when they are actively engaged in the pedagogic work o f the day” Peacock (1998) adopts this definition and also regards persistence as part o f on-task behaviour, as he proposes that “learners who spend more tim e actively engaged in study are persisting with the set task”

The on-task/off-task concept has been employed in many research projects both overseas and in Vietnam examining learner’s behaviours in classroom setting (Hopkins, 1985; Peacock, 1997; Lai Hong Ha, 2004; Trinh Thi Anh Hang, 2004) as it assists the researchers in quantifying a seemingly abstract variable In this thesis learners’ participation is also specified as learners’ on-task behaviour, which refers to “learners speaking to others in their group o r to the teacher, o r actively w orking within their

assigned group” (Peacock 2003) It should be clarified that actively working here

consists o f both verbal and non-verbal participation

The reason for the inclusion o f non-verbal participation is that there are som e possible underlying factors governing learners’ participation (Tsui, 1998), tw o o f which are students' learning style and their cultural backgrounds Some learners prefer listening and

internalizing rather than verbalizing If the teacher tries to force them participate verbally,

th eir learning process would be adversely affected B esides, Asian learners, are usually

“m odest” and do “not volunteer to answer until they are called on by teacher; otherwise

they would be accused o f showing o ff' (Tsui ,1998).

For a clearer insight into the data to be collected as presented later in C hapter 3, learners’

participation is broken down into raising hand; speaking in L1/L2 in pair/group work; using body language; taking notes o f important points; m aking questions to group

m em bers; giving opinions in class discussion It also includes asking teacher for clarification; making questions for further understanding; listening to teacher’s instructions; and listening when classmates m ake questions In other w ords, they

cover both verbal and non-verbal, both covert and overt participation

2.1.4.2 Factors affecting learners’ participation

There are many factors that affect level o f on-task behaviour, either individually or in com bination (Peacock, 1998) The five dominant factors are the topic o f the materials, the type o f activity undertaken by learners, the teaching approach adopted by the tcachor, the

m otivation that brings learners to class, and the cultural factors X u (2006) m entions ten factors including w orking experience, previous learning, perceived com petence, desire to com m unicate, attitude to teaching, attitude to activities, course book, input, topic and class atmosphere

A conclusion has also been drawn by X u (2006) that there is som e relationship between students’ oral participation and their perceived com petence as well as their desire to com m unicate in class H e states that these are the m ain factors, and com m ents that the teacher should strengthen learners’ belief that com petence can be developed through experience In addition, to improve learners’ competence, confidence, and participation,

it is teacher’s task to draw their involvement, stim ulate their reaction and offer them chances to experience success (Xu 2006)

Xu (2006) also suggests that “accomplishment and encouragement arc the crux in the improvement o f learners' self-confidence” The factor o f learners' desire to communicate

13

can be brought into play in learners’ participation if it is generated and maintained He asserts that to achieve the purpose, teachers should pay more attention to the modification

o f teaching m ethodology and classroom atmosphere The researcher also illustrates with

C hinese classroom atm osphere w here teachers are described as authoritative truth-givers These teachers lecture their students, control the inform ation they receive, whereas the students usually “act as subject to authority and receivers” (Xu, 2006) H e concludes that

“the change in teaching m ethodology and classroom climate will greatly involve learners

in the learning process, provides opportunities for students to make contribution, and arouse their desire to communicate” (p 5)

It is fiarther argued that learners’ on-task/off-task behaviour level is affected by the tasks themselves A ccording to Powell, McIntyre, & R ightm yer (2006) i f the lessons included prescribed activities and closed tasks, a large proportion (82% ) o f th e off-task behaviour took place They defined closed tasks as “those that involve correct responses o r require single, narrow strategies for success” (p 4) Lessons characterized b y this type o f tasks lacked th e factors that foster engagement w ith learning These factors include choice, challenge, control, collaboration, construction o f meaning, and positive consequences On the other hand, th ese researchers appreciate open tasks w hich provide learners with more freedom and a sense o f ownership over learning, and therefore foster learners’ engagement w ith learning

They further recom m end that learners should be given with chances to select the tasks which they find interesting and personally relevant M oreover, learners should be encouraged to set their own goals and take responsibility for their own developm ent This helps learners m ake sense o f what they are learning Learners’ b e lie f in their ability to be successful should also be strengthened (for exam ple, through activities such as discussions about books where everyone’s opinion is valid, rather than textbook exercises

in which answers are either right or wrong)

Since learners’ participation is affected by many factors, it is advisable that teachcr in each class has to find the main one/s in his/her own setting The choice o f methods to

increase the level o f on-task behaviour, as can be expected, also varies considerably, depending on specific situation.

In the researcher's teaching context, the main factors that negatively affect learners’ participation can be divided into objective and subjective ones from learners’ perspective

O bjective factors include the course book, its activities and topics Subjective factors include learners’ previous learning experiences, their attitudes to speaking activities, and classroom atmosphere These factors are believed to affect learners’ participation in all class types, but in MLC in general and the researcher’s context in particular, they must be seen as the outstanding ones due to the nature o f each class As already presented in Chapter 1, the school’s admission policy, w hich only aims to screen the students in terms

o f their perform ance at the three subjects taken at university entrance exam s, has grouped students with very different English learning experiences and fam ily background together This surely leads to clashing attitudes to English learning and teaching with related issues suchas materials and instruction style

Sum m ary

Problem s with M LC have been encouraging teachers and researchers to find ways to solve Personalization, individualization, open-ended cues, com pulsory plus optional instructions (Ur, 1996; Copur, 2005), flexible grouping (Shank & Arlington, 1995; Ur, 1996; Copur, 2005; Ree, n.d.), extra homework (Ree, n.d.), using stories, especially folktales (Torun, 2004), etc are the popular ones Each o f th ese solutions usually deals with one M LC problem However, there is a m ore com prehensive set o f solutions, known

as D ifferentiated Instruction (DI) for MCL, w hich will be discussed in the following sectio n

2.2 D ifferentiated instruction in M LC

2.2.1 W h a t is D I?

Differentiation o f instruction is a teacher’s response to learner needs guided by general principles o f differentiation (respectful tasks, on-going assessm ent, adjustment and flexible grouping) where teachers can differentiate c o n ten t, process, p ro d u c t and

15

le a rn in g en v iro n m en t according to learners’ read in ess, in te re st a n d le arn in g profile(Tom linson, 1997).

C ontent, as argued by Tomlinson, is “what the student needs to learn or how the student

w ill get access to the inform ation” (2001a, p l) Content can be in the form o f major concepts, principles and skills that are taught O ne important thing is that all learners should be given access to the same content Therefore, in M LC, teachers should adjust the degree o f complexity to teach the content so that their students can learn the same concepts in different ways (Corley 2005)

Process could be defined as a set o f “activities in which the student engages in order to make sense o f or to master the content” w hile product is “the culm inating projects that ask the student to rehearse, apply, and extend what he o r she has learned in a unit” (Tom linson, 2001a) The fourth elem ent to be differentiated is th e learning environm ent -

“th e w ay the classroom works and feels” The learning environm ent “m ust make students feel em otionally safe before learning will take place (Howard, 1994; Jensen, 1998, cited

in Corley, 2005)

Readiness refers to a student’s knowledge, understanding, and skill related to a particular sequence o f learning According to Corley (2005), learners’ readiness is said to be influenced by their cognitive proficiency, prior learning, life experiences, and attitudes about school (p 13)

Students’ interest in this kind o f class is also worth attending to It has been stated in Chapter 1 that the factors affecting readiness and interest in a m ixed-ability class vary' considerably Students’ readiness and interest also show a great deal o f distinction If the students are curious and interested in the topics, they will invest tim e and energy in their learning, and they are “more likely to be engaged and to persist in learning” (Corley

2005, p 14)

The last factor to consider is learning profile, referring to how a student learns best However, learners’ preferences for learning are shaped by learning style, intelligence preference, culture, and gender and therefore diversified in M LC A ccording to Corley

(2005), i f MLC teachers support different learning modes, more learners will successfully com plete the tasks given.

There is common m isunderstanding o f DI as it is not the individualized instruction o f the 1970s The teacher cannot do som ething different for each student in the classroom It is not a free-for-all for students doing whatever they want The teacher manages and

m onitors many activities simultaneously The classroom includes purposeful student

m ovem ent and talking, not a disorderly or undisciplined atmosphere

DI is also m isunderstood as another way to provide homogeneous grouping It is not separating the class into three groups - advanced, m iddle and struggling It is the use o f flexible grouping, w here students m ay be in m any different groups depending on the task and objective DI does n o t mean teaching to the low est com m on denom inator and adding extra w ork to keep advanced students busy A dding w ork is only adding to the workload, and that only challenges advanced students’ tim e managem ent skills It is offering pow erful teaching and learning opportunities fcr all learners - not ju s t for some

Differentiated instruction is not a strategy “It is a total w ay o f thinking about learners, teaching and learning” (Tom linson, 2001) Teachers do not “do” a DI activity when there

is extra tim e or apply it to one aspect o f teaching - it is a philosophy about teaching and learning that perm eates every aspect o f the classroom

2.2.2 W hy should DI be applied in MLC?

In a m ulti-level class students represent a broad range o f academ ic readiness, interests, learning profiles, m odes o f learning, and cultures Thus, it is not easy to provide them with a “good” education that helps them m aximize their capacity as learners (Tomlinson, 2001b)

It is advisable that teachers o f M LC should provide learners w ith a variety o f learning options designed to tap into different readiness levels, interests, and learning profiles DI

is the m eans to help the teachers having m ixed-ability classes achieve these goals

T o differentiate instruction is, first o f all, to recognize what they have experienced, how ready they are, what language they have been exposed to, what they prefer when learning and what their interests arc to react responsively DI is a process to approach teaching and learning for students o f differing abilities in the same class (Hall, 2002).

D l is useful for ML.C teachers because this set o f strategies bases itse lf on many educational theories w hich are critical to teaching in general and teaching in M LC in particular (Corley, 2005) There are two m ain principles serving as foundation for successful application o f DI

T h e first principle is that students learn best w ith m oderate challenge However, the tasks available in the textbooks are usually designed for a specific level Therefore it is a m ust

to m odify the tasks and the w ay these tasks are carried out to m eet the various needs o f

th e learners It means the instructions should be differentiated in these classroom s The difficulty should be “slightly above learners’ current level o f mastery” (Corley, 2005,

p 15) so that learners will b e engaged in learning Learners should be provided w ith an

em otionally safe environm ent where they can work the w ay they like and be scaffolded

by tcachcis with appiopriatc instructions (Corley, 2005)

Learning as the construction o f understanding is the second principle Learners must obtain the m eaning o f w hat teachers seek to teach Factors that influence learners’

m eaning-m aking process include students’ prior understanding, interests, beliefs, how the student leam s best, and the student’s ability attitudes about s e lf and school (National Research Council, 1990, cited in Tomlinson, 2001a)

Tom linson shares the same opinion when he asserts that learners actively participate if they feel a sense o f safety and the knowledge is clearly organized (2001a) He also adds that little i f any learning would take place if students work on understanding and skill already mastered, or if tasks are far ahead their current point o f mastery

In a word, DI is useful in MLC because it helps teachers tailor their teaching DI suggests changes in learning tasks and teachers' support on the basis o f learners’ readiness, interest, and learning profile

2.2.3 DI strategies

Tom linson (1995) suggests nine strategies that ean he applied in mixed-ability

classroom s to differentiate instruction, including Com pacting, Independent Projects, Interest Centers or Interest Groups, Tiered Assignm ents, Flexible Grouping, Learning Centers, Varying Questions, M entorships/Apprenticeships and Contracts

O f these nine strategies, the researcher chooses Independent Projects, Tiered Assignm ents, Flexible Grouping, and Varying Questions to apply in this action

research

T he other five strategies are not included because they are not suitable for the researcher’s teaching context The researcher found them all very useful in m ixed ability classes How ever they both require longer tim e fram e, or financial support and help from other resources like administrators, m edia specialists, parent volunteers, o r com munity mem bers to be carried out and to be evaluated It w as then decided that the researcher can

m anage only four selected strategies in her classroom, considering her teaching situation and ability

The first strategy o f Independent Projects is described b y Tom linson (1995) as a

“process” through which both students and teacher identify problem s o r topics o f interest

to th e students This in turn leads to decision on the type o f product to be developed The product should not only solve the problem, but also dem onstrate the learners’ ability to apply skills and knowledge to the problem o r topic (Tomlinson, 1995)

This strategy is based on students’ in terest, w hich allows the stu d aits to plan on the basis

o f their interest The teacher’s role is, first o f all, to build on students’ interest, and then

to provide them w ith appropriate assistance in planning in order for high standard of production Criteria for success should be established as well This strategy can help satisfy students’ curiosity and encourage their independence (Tom linson, 1995)

The second selected strategy is Tiered Assignments W illiams (2002) defines Tiered Assignments as “parallel tasks at varied levels o f com plexity, depth and abstractness

with various degrees o f scaffolding, support, o r direction” (p 1) A ccording to Tomlinson

(1995), Tiered Assignments are used by teachers within a heterogeneous classroom in

19

order to meet the diverse needs o f the students The activities vary in their difficulty level

so that all learners can explore ideas on the basis o f their prior know ledge and prompts continued growth Learners are divided into different groups w hich explore the desired

content in different ways The rationale for the use o f Tiered A ssignm ents is that the

strategy helps teachers modify the tasks on the basis o f learners’ readiness, so that these tasks becom e appropriately challenging In other words, MLC teachers can avoid anxiety-producing (too hard) or boredom-producing (too easy) Furthermore, the strategy also allow s m odification o f w orking conditions based on students’ learning style A s a result, it can promote learners’ success and motivation

In order to succeed w ith the strategy, the teachers have to m ake sure that the task is focused on a key concept or generalization essential to the study There are some task ’s aspects that can be adjusted to ensure appropriate challenge, i.e complexity, abstractness, num ber o f steps, concreteness, and independence A variety o f resource m aterials which are at differing levels o f complexity and associated w ith different learning m odes should

b e used A nother requirement is that there should be clear criteria for quality and success because different groups have different things to do (Tomlinson, 1995)

W ith Flexible G rouping students can be grouped in different w ays and they can also

work individually based on the match o f the task to their readiness, interest, o r learning style Tom linson (1995) suggests teachers create skills-based o r interest-based groups that are heterogeneous or homogeneous in readiness level Either students or teacher can select the w ork groups Besides, the assignm ents are som etim es purposeful and som etim es random Therefore, both students and teachers have a voice in work arrangements M oreover, this strategy allows both for quick m astery o f infonnation or ideas and need for further exploration by students needing m ore tim e for mastery, both collaborative and independent work It can also allow students to w ork with a variety o f peers

However, teachers are responsible for giving all students opportunities to work both with students most like them selves in readiness and/or interest, and with those dissim ilar from themselves in readiness and/or interest The students are also kept from being cast as

those in need o f help and those who ¿ire helpers, from being ‘pegged’ as advanced or struggling Playing either role for a long time has bad effects on students (Tomlinson, 1995)

The last strategy selected for this study is V a ry in g Q uestions Tom linson (1995) suggests teachers vary the sorts o f questions posed to learners on the basis o f their readiness, interests and learning styles The im portance o f question is also perceived by

Thom son (2003) when com m ents “the cutting edge o f know ledge is not in the known but

in the unknown, not in knowing but in questioning” (p 61) Q uestions should play a vital

role in English speaking classrooms - both student questions and teacher questions By eliciting questions and answers teachers can initiate a better learning environment (Q uestioning strategies, n.d) Q uestioning is w idely used as a “contem porary teaching technique” and “research indicates that questioning is second only to lecturing in popularity as a teaching m ethod” (Cotton , 1988, p 1)

R eview on classroom questioning shows “the relationship betw een teachers’ classroom questioning behaviours and a variety o f student outcom es, including achievement, retention, and level o f student participation” (Colton, 1988, p 1) The conclusion drawn

by many researchers is that “instruction which includes posing questions during lessons is more effective in producing achievement gains than instruction carried out without questioning students”

Questions can be classified in different ways and one o f the m ost frequently adopted ones

is B loom ’s (1956) taxonomy There are, in ascending order o f sophistication, six types, including (1) knowledge, (2) comprehension, (3) application, (4) analysis, (5) synthesis,(6) evaluation Q uestions o f the first three types are considered low er cognitive questions and the left higher cognitive questions Lower cognitive questions ask learners m erely to recall verbatim o r in his/her own words w hat was taught by the teacher Dealing with higher cognitive questions, learners have to mentally m anipulate pieces o f information they have learned to create an answer, which is supported by logically reasoned evidence (Cotton, 1988)

Both higher cognitive anti lower cognitive questions have their own roles in teaching and learning A ccording to Cotton (1988), if the use o f higher cognitive questions increases (to 50 percent o r more), then learners’ on-task behavior, the length o f student responses; num ber o f relevant contributions volunteered b y students; num ber o f student-to-student interactions; students’ speculative thinking and their relevant questions are very likely to

be positively affected However, simply asking higher cognitive questions does not necessarily lead to the production o f higher cognitive responses Lower cognitive questions are m ore effective than higher level questions w ith prim ary level learners, especially i f teachers use them to impart factual know ledge and assist students in com m itting th is know ledge to memory (Cotton, 1988)

This know ledge o f questioning in classroom is important for th e researcher to d ecide on questioning technique in the action stages

As could be im agined using questions is not easy at all, and things are m ore com plicated

in a m ixed ability classroom These above findings suggest th at teachers should vary questions, based on learners’ readiness, interests, and learning styles Teachers should cncouiagc tlicii learners to build on their classm ates' answers and lo explain and defend their own answ ers Since learners can learn from a w ide range o f responses, teacher’s varying questions appropriately can help nurture m otivation through success

In brief, the fo u r strategies i.e Independent Project, Tiered Assignm ents, Flexible Grouping and V arying Questions have been selected for this study due to their potential

relevance to th e characteristics o f the researcher’s setting o f a MLC The chance for success is sensed from their rationale and guidelines for use suggested as well as positive findings reported by those who have applied these strategies in different M LC (W illis & Mann, 2000; Hall, 2005; Saldana, 2005; National K-12 Foreign Language Resource Center, 2 0 0 7 )

C H A P T E R 3 M E T H O D O L O G Y

In this chapter, the research m ethodology is described It consists o f th e description o f the subjects, data collection instruments and information about participants in this study

3.1 R esearch m ethod

3.1.1 Action research (AR)

AR can be defined as a combination o f the terms "action" and "research" (Kermis and Me Tagger, 1982) It puts ideas into practice for the purpose o f self-improvement and increasing knowledge about curriculum, teaching, and learning The ultimate result is improvement in what happens in the classroom and school Ferrance considers AR a “process in which participants examine their own educational practice systematically and carefully, using the techniques o f research” ( 1997, p 1 ) For him, AR serves as a quest for knowledge about how

to improve, involves people working to improve their skills, techniques, and strategies, and show the teacher how to change his or her instruction to impact students

W allace (1998) fu rther specifies AR as a process o f collecting and analyzing data on everyday practice so that decisions about how to better practise in future can be made First o f all, it is a tool to deal with problems discovered in specific situations (Nunan, 1988) Also, it is "problem focused," mainly "concerned w ith a single case in a specific situation" and tries to find solutions to the problem in focus (Onel, 1997, p 1) or bring about change (Richards in Brenner, 1993) AR not only encourages teachers to critically consider ideas and to adopt them into their teaching environment (Nunan, 1988), but involves them in their teaching as well (Richards in Brenner, 1993) This helps to raise teacher's aw areness o f theory (Ramani, 1987)

Another characteristics discussed by Todd (2001) is that AR aim s to “develop the teaching situation and the teacher-rcsearcher rather than generate new know ledge” The researcher does not face problems o f reliability and generalisability since findings in AR are useful w ithin a specific context rather than applicable across m any different situations, and its validity can be measured “by the extent to w hich the research produces findings which are useful in developing the classroom situation” (p 2)

W ith such m erits AR was selected for this study, which is sm all-scale and practical in nature It was expected to assist the researcher in the journey to find the causes o f poor participation in her specific multi-level class In the role o f the teacher she herself understands h er classroom context, could make decisions on changes to improve it and learners will be the beneficiaries o f this project In conducting AR, the researcher-teacher can “become in control o f the w hole process o f research and investigation” (Todd, 2001,

p 3) M oreover, AR is not only an input into but also a stim ulus for teacher reflection -

an important com ponent o f personal and professional developm ent In a word, conducting AR is one significant way to develop h er s e lf as a teacher

3.1.2 AR procedure

M cB ride and Schostak (1989) recommend the following m odel o f AR procedure

(2) collecting ddld7

(1) identifying a fccus of (3) analyzing data/

interest or a problem generating hypotheses

T SIT U A T IO N ,*"

\ \ u, i-I

(7) analysis and (5) implementing

3.1.2.1 Identifying th e p ro b lem (weeks I a n d 2)

In this mixed-ability class, there is a range o f problems, one o f which is learners’ low participation in speaking lessons This problem was identified in the first tw o weeks o f sem ester 3 Although this step is supposed to be difficult, the researcher’s conclusion was reinforced b y her previous experience teaching this class in sem ester 2 She had a chance

to get to know h er students well before the formal investigatioa As a result, the problem

o f low participation w as selected to be the focus o f this AR

3.1.2.2 Collecting initial data (week 3 to week 5)

In this step, initial data about learners’ attitude to speaking activities, their interest, their learning profiles, and their participation in speaking lesson w ere collected from week 3 to

w eek 5 As discussed in Chapter 2, these factors are likely to be the causes o f learners’ low participation

T o confirm the problem stated in step 1 and find out its causes, a questionnaire for

students (A ppendixes 1 and 2), an observation sheet (Appendix 5) and teaching diary

w ritten by the teacher-researcher (Appendix w ere designed D etails on these data collecting tools are available in section 3.2 Information brought about by these tools

w ould help to answ er the following two questions:

Ï What was the participation level in speaking lessons?

2 What are the causes o f the participation problems?

3.1.2.3 Analysing initial data and generating hypothesis (w eek 6)

This step w as conducted in week 6 All the data collected using the various tools were analyzed to answ er the two research questions raised in 3.1.2.2 Initial data are expected

to show the discrepancy betw een the speaking activities and the various levels o f learners In oth er w ords the speaking activities were not appropriate to all the students in this mixed-ability class

3.1.2.4 P lan n in g a ctio n (weeks 6 and 7)

The fourth step w as carried out in w eeks 6 and 7 In th is stag e the hypothesis,

w hich is D I w ill im prove stu d en t p a rtic ip a tio n in sp ea k in g classes, w as form ed.

25

C arefu l co n sid eratio n o f speaking activ ities in U nits 2, 3 and 4 in L ifelin e Pre-

in te rm e d ia te and the literature on m ixed-ability class brought about th e four

stra te g ie s to d ifferen tia te instructions G uid elin es on how to em p lo y DI w ere

w o rk ed out B esides Q uestionnaire 2 was designed to c o lle ct data about stu d e n ts’

ev alu a tio n on th eir ow n p articipation w hen the revised sp eak in g a c tiv itie s w ere

em ployed O b se rv a tio n sheets and teaching d iaries w ere also p rep ared to co llect the

d a ta to e v alu ate th e action plan

3.1.2.5 Im plem enting action (weeks 8, 9, 10 and 11)

The action plan w as implemented in three speaking m eeting times, each o f which w as in

45 minutes D etails on the action plan preparation and im plem enting are provided in Section 4.2 - Planning action steps

3.1.2.6 Collecting data to monitor change

D ata w ere collected during the four weeks o f plan im plem entation to answ er the question

To what extent does lea rners' participation increase once the action plan has been implemented?

Three speaking lessons were observed with the use o f observation sheet This tally sheet

w as used to record learners’ on-task as well as off-task behaviours Three teaching diary entries w ere also w ritten by the teacher-researcher Moreover, Questionnaire 2 was adm inistered in th e last speaking lesson in week 11

3.1.2.7 A nalyzing and evaluating learners’ participation

In th is step, th e research er analyzed the data co llected a fter th e in terv en tio n o f the actio n plan In this step , the researcher analyzed the data co llected in w eeks 8 - 1 3 ,

w h ich reflect stu d e n ts’ participation and th e effectiv en ess o f revised class

m anagem ent B y co m parin g the pre-action data and data collected d u rin g action stage, the effe ctiv en e ss o f the changes and im plem entation w as reflected M oreover,

the an sw er to th e second question To what extent does learners' participation increase once the action pla n has been implemented? w as found.

3.2 D ata collection instrum ents

Three instruments i.e classroom observation, survey questionnaires and teaching diary

w ere used in this study to collect the data needed

3.2.1 C lassroom observation

3.2.1.1 R atio n ale b ehind th e use of classroom ob serv atio n

Nunan (1989) comments that direct observation cannot be replaced as a way o f discovering language classrooms Tim e needs to be spent on looking in classroom if understanding o f language learning and teaching is to be enriched C lassroom observation

is obviously a means o f collecting classroom-based data and inform ation about teaching All this serves as the first reason for the selection o f observation in this study

In addition, observation can provides greater understanding o f teaching and learning to

m ake teach er’s decision-m aking more informed and systematic (W ajnryb, 1992)

W ajnryb (1992) also suggests that observation is a m eans tow ards building relationship

w ith colleagues based on mutual respect and support Both the teachers being observedand the ohservers have important role before, during and after the observation, andbenefit from the process The teacher being observed has to m ake carefiil preparation for

th e lessons, and get useful feedback which m ight not be provided b y other assessment

m ethods (W ajnryb, 1992) The observers can practice their observation skill and they can learn a lot from their colleagues, which is im portant to their professional developm ent in general

The last reason for choosing classroom observation adm inistered b y non-participant observers is that the researcher will have more reliable data for th e research Information from experienced observers with careful discussions with the researcher before and after each class will work The teacher being observed focuses on her teaching, while her observers concentrate on what is happening in classroom, and are free from form ing an opinion or making an on-spot evaluation The judgmental and interpretive side comes later, after the lesson, and will be supported by other means o f inform ation collection and specified in teaching diaries o f the researcher or questionnaire completed by observers

27

3.2.1.2 D escription o f O bserv ation sheet

The observation sheet was administered in five speaking lessons The class was observed for the first tw o lessons to find out the students’ participation in real teaching situation The other three speaking lessons were observed when teacher applied four DI strategies and to d e d d e w hether they help to increase students’ participation o r not

The observation sheet was completed by three non-participant observers It is a tally sheet designed to quantify learners’ on-task behaviour in speaking lessons, which w as used by Hopkins (1985), Peacock (1997), Lai Hong Ha (2004), Trinh Thi Anh Hang (2004) to nam e ju st a few and proved to work well with Vietnam ese students in classroom context

There were tw elv e scan columns and the line num ber was the sam e as the num ber o f students, w hich w as thirty four in this study The sheet was filled out b y three non­participant observers (each observer observed eleven o r tw elve students, totally thirty four students w ere observed) w hile the learners w ere w orking in speaking activities This observation sheet started to b e filled when the learners had been w orking in pairs o r in groups for two m inutes The learners were observed one after another, clockw ise around the class Every five seconds, the observers w rote dow n the category best describing the observed student’s behaviour at that moment, and then passed to the next student Number 1 w ould be entered i f the learners w ere on-task and num ber 2 i f they w ere not on-task The observers continued this process until all students had been observed twelve times This process would be going on until the end o f the lessons

Although it is n o t easy to record learners’ on-task behaviour, it has been proved by many researchers that information collected this w ay is reliable M oreover, the researcher had already specified on-task behaviour as discussed in C hapter 2 Three observers were fully briefed on all the aspects o f learners’ participation and the w ay to fill in the observation sheet

3.2.2 S u rv ey q u e stio n n aire

Many teachers interested in classroom research arc fam iliar w ith this popular way to collect data - questionnaire, which could be defined as "a self-report data-collection

3.2.2.1 R ationale b ehind the use o f survey q u estio n n aire

Q uestionnaires were selected tor this study for four reasons

F irstly, students in this class w ere fam iliar w ith questionnaire T eachers o f other

su b jects had also used this data-collection instrum ent in the previous tw o sem esters

In ad d itio n , questionnaires can be easily used in field settings such as classroom (N unan, 1992, p 142)

Secondly, questionnaire can be used to obtain inform ation about different kinds o f

ch aracteristics such as “the thought, feelings, attitudes, beliefs, values, perceptions, personality, and behavioral intentions o f research p articipants” (Johnson &

C hristensen, 2000) A s com m ented b y W allace (1998, p 131), i f a teach er w ants to find out the attitudes o f his o r her class to som ething, “ it m ay be quite feasible and convenient to give questionnaire” It was hoped that this instrum ent w ould be useful

fo r the researcher to get inform ation about different aspects o f th e learners and the

sp eak in g activities

The third reason for the u se o f questionnaires is their anonymity, w hich is said to be an advantage o f questionnaire over other data collecting techniques This advantage can help solve the problem o f Vietnam ese students who, traditionally, a re afraid o f m aking their voices and names known

Last b u t not least, questionnaires w-ere administered because “feedback from questionnaires has the added advantage that it can be easily quantified if structured,

m ultiple choice questions ae used” (Genesee & Upshur, 1996)

3.2.2.2 D escription o f Q u estio n n aire

3.2.2.2.1 Q u estio n n a ire 1 (A p p en d ix es 1 an d 2)

The first questionnaire was designed to identify the students’ perception o f their participation level in speaking lessons and probe the possible causes o f the problems if there are by examining the participants' background

29

There are many factors affecting learners’ participation as recorded in the literature However, w ithin the limited scope o f the study the researcher would like to focus on the problem s in her MLC A questionnaire, therefore, was designed with the aim to find out the m ain causes o f learners’ low participation in her own teaching context w hich focus on learners’ previous learning experiences, their English level, their attitude to speaking skills and speaking activities, their interest, readiness and learning profiles.

The Questionnaire consists o f 22 questions Question 1 was designed to collect data about learners’ previous English learning experiences In the next 18 questions, five-point rating Likert’s scale w as applied Learners’ opinion o f their classm ates’ English level was examined in Q uestion 2 Q uestions 3, 4, 5 and 6 aimed to identify learners’ attitudes to the importance o f speaking and their learning profile Learners’ attitude to the course book, specifically speaking topics (Question 7), speaking activities’ difficulty level, interest and encouragem ent (questions 8, 9 and 10); their attitudes to teacher’s instructions (Q uestions 11), and classroom atm osphere (Q uestions 12) w ere probed

M oreover, learners’ readiness for speaking, i.e their lexical resource, gram m ar and background know ledge was examined in Questions 13,14, and 15 respectively Learners’ preference for group work was elicited by Q uestions 16, 17 and 18

The next three questions were designed to collect learners’ self-evaluation on their participation level (Q uestion 19), what and how they actually did in speaking lessons (Q uestions 20, 21) Students' recommendations for more effective participation in speaking lessons w ere examined in Question 22

Questionnaire 1, which was administered in the last 30 m inutes o f the speaking lesson in w'eek 3, was anonym ous so that the learners could freely express their opinions without fears o f being punished or disfavoured In addition, V ietnam ese version o f the

Q uestionnaire w as given to the subjects to rrinimize chances o f misunderstanding

3 2 2 2 2 Q u e stio n n a ir e 2 (A p p en d ix es 3 and 4)

Questionnaire 2 was designed to explore learners' opinions o f the effect o f four strategies implemented in three speaking lessons It was administered in the last 30 minutes o f