Luận văn teachers’ use of the mother tongue in english language classrooms for young learners at a language center

VIET NAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, ILA NOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES & INTERNATIONAL STUDLES FACULTY OF POST — GRADUATE STUDIES PHUNG THI HIEN TEACHERS’ USE OF THE MOTHER TONGUE IN ENGLISH LA

VIET NAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, ILA NOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES & INTERNATIONAL STUDLES

FACULTY OF POST — GRADUATE STUDIES

PHUNG THI HIEN

TEACHERS’ USE OF THE MOTHER TONGUE IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE CLASSROOMS FOR YOUNG LEARNERS AT A LANGUAGE CENTER: A CASE

STUDY

@IEN CCU VE VIEC SU DUNG TIENG MẸ DE CUA GIAO VIÊN

TRONG LGP HQC TIENG ANH CHO TRE EM 6 MỘT TRUNG

TÂM NGOẠI NGỮ)

M.A Minor Thesis

Field: English Language Teaching Methodology

Code: 6014 10

Hanoi — 2012

VIET NAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, ILA NOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES & INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

FACULTY OF POST — GRADUATE STUDIES

PHUNG THI HIEN

TEACHERS’ USE OF THE MOTHER TONGUE IN

ENGLISH LANGUAGE CLASSROOMS FOR YOUNG LEARNERS AT A LANGUAGE CENTER: A CASE

STUDY

@IEN CUU VE VIEC SU DUNG TIENG ME BE CUA GIAO

VIEN TRONG LOP HQC TIENG ANH CHO TRE EM 0 MOT

TRUNG TAM NGOAI NGU)

M.A Minor Thesis

Field: English Language Teaching Methodology

Code: 60 14 10

Supervisor: Do Thi Thanh Ha, Ph D

Hanoi — 2012

1, Rationale of the study —

W Aims and Objectives of the study

3 Scope of the study

4 Methods of the study

5 Layout of the thesis

PART II: DEVELOPMENT HHu re

CHAPTER 1; LITERATURE REVIEW

1.1 Young learners

1.2 History of the use of 11 in L2 classroom

1.3 Debating surrounding Ge use of LI in the 1.2 classroom

1.3.1, Argumonts against LÌ tse

1.3.2 Arguments favoring L1 use

1.4, Use of 1 in 1.2 classroom

1.5 The amount of L1 in the English classroom

1.6 Finpirical 1escarches

CHAPTER 2: METHODOLOGY

2.1 Qualitative Multi case study approach

2.2, Setting and Participants ¬—

2.3 Data collection Instruments

2.3.2, Stimulated Recall sesesntnee

2.3.3 Semn Structured Interview

2.4, Data collection proeedure

2.5, Data analysis HHu re

CHAPTER 3: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

3.1 Findings HHu re HHu re

3.1.1 Case 1 (teachor in class for 5-6 ycars old students)

3.1.2 Case 2 (teacher in class for 6- 8 years old students)

3.1.3 Case 3 (teacher in class for above 8 years old students)

3.2 Discussions

PART TIE: CONCLUSION

1 Summary of major findinga

2 Rocommendations sesesntnee

4, Suggestions for further study

REFERENCES HH

APPENDICES

vi

EEL English as a foreign language

ELT: English Language teaching,

GTM: Grammar Translation Method

SR: Stimulated Recall

PART I: INTRODUCTION

1 Rationale of the study

In the process of forcign language teaching, the issue of the mother tongue (MT) itself has been debated for many years ‘he various views are reflections on the methodological changes in English language teaching which have in such way brought different perspectives on the role of mother longue For a long time, many popular English language-teaching methods tend to discourage the use of the first language (1.1) in the second lanyguage (1.2) classroom As a result, the English ontly approach has become a dominant and often understood to be the hallmarks of good language teaching, Despite the almost undeniable acceptance of the monolingual belief to EFL classes, recent years have wilnessed a considerable shift of views among the FLT professionals concerning the utility of students’ mother tongue (MI) in the L2 classroom What the reasons for the ignorance of MT use are, when and how the MT can be applied in the classroom and how much L1 should be used in the classroom are currently main seeking among scholars, linguists and teachers,

In the global scale, there have been various studies focusing on this topic such

as the stuces conducted by Schweers (1999) at the University of Puerto Rico, Beressa (2003) at Adama Teachers College, Tang (2002) at a university in Beijing, Duff and Polio (2009) al Universily of California, Al-Nolaic (2010) in Saudi public schools Tt

is obvious that most of them have investigated this issue at high level of education In addition, these studies emphasized mainly the use of the first language from two sides teachers and Icamers In Victnamesc context, however, it 1s rather difficult to find research in this topic Kieu Mang Kim Anh (2010) investigated the attitudes of Vicinamose Universily teachers toward Vietnamese use in Figlish language leaching Some other research is carried out by graduate students as their M A thesis like the works by Tran Ngoc Thuang (2010) on teachers’ and students’ attitude toward the use

of the MT al a high school, or Do Thi Kharh Van (2010) with her emphasis on the role

"

and use of the LI in learning vocabulary x English classes st a university Comes to the conclusion, there still exists huge gaps on the reality of using the mother tongue in classroom at every level, in every aspect in Victram

Therefore, there is a need to investigate the issue of the MI use in second language classroom from different perspectives and in different fields such as from leachers’ and sludenis’ views, int loaning of grammar, vocabulary, skills, cle This study focused on only one of those factors that are teacher’s use of MT in classes for young learners The reason the researcher focused on teachers’ use of the MT is thai teachers’ talk or language choice in the L2 classroom has a central role and is of great significance to language learners One of the main reasons for the interest is that EFL classroom and Ieachers are the only and the primary resources of the 1⁄2 for FFT students (Polio & Duff, 1994), Schweers (1999) also pointed out that if the teacher used L2, the leamers would use it also, and this created the opportunity for them to interact with their teachers and peers However, Song (2009) asserted that if teachers shared the same MT with their students, they might hardly avoid the use of LI Hopefully the findings of this study will contribute to the pedagogic methodology, especially in teaching English to young children

2 Aims and objectives of the study

The aim of this study is ío examine teacher's use of the MT- Vietnamese in English language classroom for young learners at an English centre

The objectives of the study are investigating the amount of 1.1 use by teachers

of different levels and the reasons underlying their L1 using In addition, teachers’ belief about L1 use is also addressed in order to find out the concordance to their

praclices:

In order to achieve the aim, the study addresses these following main questions:

1 Tlow much Li is used and in which sections do teachers use Li in the

classroom?

2 Why do teachers use the mother tongue?

3 What are teachers’ beliefs about MT use? Do teacher’s beliefs correlate to their

practices?

3 Scope of the study

In practice, L1 can be used by both students and teachers in L2 classroom However,

wilhin the [ramework of this ininar thesis, the study only (focuses on teachers’ use of

the MT in English classes for young learners Specifically, the study aims at

invesligaling the amount of T.1 use by leachers of different levels and the reasons

underlying thew L1] using In addition, teachers’ belicf about L1 use 1s also addressed

in order to find out the concordance to their practices

4 Methods of the study

‘The study is carried out in form of a qualitative multi case study approach in which three teachers teaching three different levels for young learners will be investigated in order to compare and contrast their MT use in L2 classroom Three

research methods, including classroom observation, stimulated recall interview, and

semi- structured interview are used to reach the aim of the study The researcher

believes that the combination of different methods to collect data could provide more reliable and valid information for analysis Classroom observations are used to

discover the amount and im which sections Vicinamese was used Stimulated recall

interview was applied to gain insights into teachers’ rationale of using the MY in the

classroom The recall interviews were fully transcribed and analyzed qualitatively

according to emerging themes The semi-structured interviews are to explore teachers’ opinions of the use of the first language in the classroom, and then compared with

teacher’s practices Semi structured inlerviews were conducted aller linishing all

observations and stimulated interviews As in the case of stimulated recall, semi structured interviews were transcribed fully

5 Layout of the thesis

‘This thesis consists of three parts, namely Introduction, Development and

Conclusion

Part I, the Introduction, presents the rationale, the aims, the scope, the method and the

design of the study

Part II, the development, consists of three chapters Chapter 1, the Literature review,

presenls background of the study This includes major arguments against and for the

use of L1, the use and amount of LI in L2 classroom In addition, it reviews some

previous studies telaled to the lopic Chapter 2, the Methodology, introduces the

participants, the data collection instraments and data analysis procedure Chapter 3

(Results and Discussions) mainly deals with the results and the discussion of the

findings

Part HI is the Conclusion of the study In this part, the major findings, some recommendations, limitations of the research as well as suggestions for further study are presented

The appendixes are the last part of the study following the reference

PART TI: DEVELOPMENT CIIAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW This chapter provides background information on the use of Ll in the L2 classroom Firstly, it presents definitions of young learners Secondly, it discusses the role of Ll in major ELT methodologies Thirdly, it gives an insight into theoretical and practical rescarch [avoring or not favoring the use of L1 Fourthly, it deals with the use and amount of L1 use in the English class It also discusses some empirical researches

on the L1 use in 1.2 classroom,

1.1 Young learners

A young leamer- who is he or she? This term in fact covers a wide age range of children Seolt and Yireberg (2001) distinguished between two groups of young leamers, one between five and seven and another between eight and twelve, considering mainly their ability to perceive the abstract and concrete Another author, Linse (2005) also defined young leamer at the age of 5 to 12 Partly shared this view is the definition by Richard & Schmidt (2010: 643) They cited that young learners in language teaching were children of pre-primary and primary school age while other second language leamer age groups were referred to as adolescent leamers, and adult learners Phillip (1993) defined the ‘young leamers’ as the children from the first year

of formal schooling (5 or 6 years old) to 12 years of age This obvious that there isa general agreement in the literature about the definition of young language leainers Kor the purposes of this stndy, the researcher referred ta children from the ages of five to twelve Therefore, children as young as three and four would not be under consider in this study

1.2 History of the use of L1 in L2 classroom

Lookmg at the literature related to language teaching methods, it is easily seen that the role of LI in L2 teaching is one of the most long-standing controversies in the

history of language pedagogy ‘he use of the L1 keeps changing periodically and regularly

The ideas of using L1 in L2 classroom were favored dummg cra of the Grammar

‘Translation Method (G'TM) According to Larsen- lreeman (2000), its purpose is to

support students to read and understand foreign language literature, and translate each

language into the olher Tt is botieved thal everythmg in English should be taught by translating from the target language into the MT and vice versa (Larsen- Freeman,

2000-74) Therefore, the language most used in the class is the students’ ualive

language Patel and Jain (2008) alse state that, in GTM, because of the translation into

the MT, students’ understanding become better and quicker (p 75) It is obviously that,

in this method, students’ T.1 is the medium of the instruction and tts rele in the 1.2

classroom is very crucial

In the late of the nineteenth century saw the emergence of the Direct Method, which pays its whole attention to the spoken language and naturalistic principle of language learning The Direct Method is based on the belief that languages were best

learned in a way that imitated a child's natural LI language leaming In this light, it is

argued that a foreign language could be taught without translation or the use of the learners’ native tongue and meaning was conveyed directly through demonstration,

visual aids and action (Richards and Rodgers, 1986: 9) Therefore, leamers should be

immersed in L2 through the use of L2 as a means of instruction and communication; so

it is clearly that there is no ground for 1.1 in Direct Method

The move away from L] use was later reinforced by the appearance of Audio- lingual method (1940s- 1960s} which saw language leaming as a process of ‘habit

formation’ (Tarson- Freeman, 2004: 43) In Audio-lingualism, the Tt was seen as

already established habits, which would interfere with the students’ attempts to master

the target language (TL) Therefore, the TL, not student native tongue, was used in the

classroomn (Larsen- Freeman, 2004: 45)

In the Communivative Approach, which has attracted most attention from the language teaching profession during the past five decades, the restricted use of native language is allowed where feasible and translation may be used when learners find it essential or helpful ‘he purpose of LI use is to provide a bridge from the familiar to the unfamiliar (Larsen- Freeman, 2004) In addition, in later stage more and more of the TT can be used

Recently, there has been an increasing attention to the merits of the L1 use in the language classroom among the language teaching profession Researchers and teachers have begun to advocate more bilingual approach, which would incorporate the students’ native tongue as a learning tool Several studies related to the role of Ll in the teaching of 1.2 have been carried out around the world in order lo develop post- communicative methods, which consider L1 as ‘a classroom resource’ (Atkinson, 1987

& Cook, 2001) The Functional-Translation Method by Robert Weschler, which combines “the best of traditional “grammar translation” with the best of modem

“direct, communicative” methods”, can be taken as an example, Ie stated that there were many possible ways to leam English and there was a time and a place for everything- including the use of the L1 (Weschler, 1997)

In short, the use of LI has been in and out of fashion through the histary of leaching The pendulum of T.1 use wings with the methodalogical change

1.3 Debating surrounding the use of L1 in the L2 classroom

1.3.1 Arguments against L1 use

There is a varicty of arguments against using the MT in the ESL or EFL classroom Cook (2001) presented three main arguments for the ignorance of the L1 use: in the targel language classroom They are: (i) The 11 acquisition argument; (ii)

‘The language Compartinentalization argument; (iii) ‘he maximum Provision of the L2 argument.

‘The first principle 1s based on the way in which L1 is acquired It is believed that monolingual L1 children cannot fall back on another language L? leaming can follow a process similar to Ll learning which means L2 leamors should not rely on other language, claim that exposure is vital in the leaming of L2 In other words, learners of L2 should be exposed to an L2 environment as much as possible Krashen (1981), a pivolal promoter of the only-T2 use in the classroom and an expert in the field of linguistics, shared this idea when claiming that humans master language only

in one way by understanding messages or reviving comprehensible inpul, What derives from the comprehensive input is that one can loa a language successfully by exposing, the target language and L! should be banned in the classroom

Regarding the seeond principle, the supporters of the monolingual approach indicated that the main obstruction to L2 leaming is the interference from LI kmowledge (Cook 2001) The interference is a majar source of difficulty in the target language learning and to avoid that, the separation of L1 and L2 should be made Krashen (1981) also suggested that errors in learners’ L2 performance result from LI Based on research findings, he reported that “a high amount of first language influence” is found in “situations where translation exereises are frequent” (Krashen, 1981: 66)

A further argument is that using T.1 might alfect students! learning process negatively, since it reduces the exposure leamers get to the L2 and reduces their opportunities for using the target language (Atkinson, 1987; Philipson, 1992; Polio & Duff, 1994; Cook, 2001; and Deller & Rinvolueri, 2002), Atkinson (1987) said that one could ‘leam Lnglish by speaking Linglish’ or in other words to leam a foreign language a person niceds to cneounter and use it, He then stated thal ‘every second spent using L1 is a second not spent using L2’ (p 12) In agreement with the previous view, Auerbach (1993) also indicated that "the more students are exposed to English, the more quickly they will learn; as they hear and use Figlish, they will internalize it

and begin to think in English’(p 14) If English is not the main language used in the classroom, the learners are net gomg to learn very much English (Atkinson, 1993:12.)

The argument of maximum TL use then means that L] should not be used in the L2

classroom at any cost

In addition to the above fundamental principles, the avoidance of L] in the L2

classroom, results from the backwash elTcet whercby nafive speakers oflen reecive a

‘disproportionate’ degree of status in foreign language teaching institution (Atkinson,

1987: 242) This bekeved iu the monolingual approach a nalive speaker leacher is the

best embodiment of the target and norm for learners (Phillipson, 1992:194), This belief

is based on the assumption that native L2 speakers teacher really naw English well, so

they lave fewer problem of words coming up in the class and it is casior for students use Hnglish simply because they do not know the students’ language (Atkinson, 1993) This native speaker principle is quite popular in several countries including Vietnam One can easily realize the strong preference of Vietnamese leamers of English for native speakers of English through the advertisements put by foreign language centers

in newspapers or websites like the advertisement by British Academic Centre on the

website bac.edu.vn ‘learning English with 100% native teachers from America and England’

T myself agreed that teachers should M the classroom with as much 1.2 as

possible However, ‘Hnglish only’ may be too challenging to students, it tends not to

ensure students’ comprehension of the meanings of certain 1.2 elements 1.1 use is

necessary to facilitate L2 mput, so it is advisable that teachers should use L] where

possible, where necessary ‘this view has been accepted in recent literature, which will

be discussed in the following section

1.3.2 Arguments favoring 1.1 use

Professionals in L2 acquisition have become increasingly aware of the role the

MT plays in the FFL classroom There is a considerable amount of literature which

10

strongly suggests that the use of LI in the L2 classrooms can be productive or may

even be necessary at times (e.g., Atkinson 1987, Cook, 2001; Cole, 1998; Schweers,

1999, Auerbach, 1993), The use of L1 in L2 classroom is a common feature and is

natural acts, which make a positive contribution to the learning process (Nation, 1993)

There is now a belief that the L1 can be a classroom resource (Atkinson, 1987, Cook,

2001) and thal substantial allention and research should be focused un

The supporters of the bilingual approach have given much of attempts to

discredil the Monolingual Approach by focusing on three points: it is impractical,

native teachers are not necessarily the best teachers and exposure alone is not sufficient

for leaming

Phillipson (1992.191) claimed that impracticality is the biggest problem ol” Hnglish only in the classroom because non-native English teachers across the world outnumber native English teachers These teachers, sometimes, may not confident or competent enough to use the foreign language for full range of classroom fictions (Cameron, 2001: 200) Cameron further stated that only English policy might be

against the natural communication between teacher and students who share a common

language Another reason for the monolingual approach's impracticality is the practically impossible elimination of L1 in lower-level monolingual classes (Cameron,

2001: 199) Tn addition, Monohngual icaching can also create Lension and a barrier

between students and teachers because in fact there are many occasions when it is

impossible and inappropriate (Pachler & Field, 2001: 86) When something in a lesson

is unclear to a student, and then it is clarified by the use of L1, that bamier and tension can be reduced or removed

Concerning the belief supported by the Monolingual Approach that native

teachers are the best teachers, Philtipson (1992) said that bemg native teachers do not

necessarily means that the teacher is more qualified or better at L2 teaching Ie also

claimed that non- native teachers could achieve all of the characteristics such as

11

fluency and appropriate use of language in the process of training He went further in arguing that non-native teachers seem to be better than native ones as they themselves have experienced the process of leaming L2 Therefore, they could provide a better learner model, teach language-leamning strategies more effectively, supply more information about the English language, better anticipate and prevent language difficulties, be more sensitive lo their students (Medgyes, 1992) Tn this light, Phillipson (1992: 195) suggests that the ideal teacher is the person who “has near- nalive speaker proficiency in the foreign language, and comes from the same linguistic and cultural background as the Ieamers” On the other side, the term ‘native teacher’ is problematic It is true that there are many variations of English around the world, and

to the question of what constitules an authentic native icacher, is open lo an endless

debate Ultimately, there is no scientific and practical evidence to support the concept

of a native teacher being an ideal teacher (Phillipson, 1992: 195)

The monolingual approach also receives criticism concerming its claim that maximum exposure to L2 leads to the success of L2 learning, Eliminating the Ll for the sake of maximizing students’ exposure to L2 is not necessarily productive There

is, in fact, no evidence that teaching in the target language results in successful learning, (Pachler & Field, 2001: 85) Agreed with Pachler’s & Field's view, Phillipson (1992)

cited that “ there is no correlation between quantity of 1.2 inpul, im an environment

where the leamers are exposed to L2 in the community, and the academic success” He also cited Cummins (1984) who quoted “a maximum exposure assumption is fallacy” (Phillipson, 1992, 211) Although maximizing L2 input is important, other factors such

as the quality of teaching materials, teachers and methods of teaching are of more significance

Apart from disorediting the monolingual approach, the advocates of the bilingual approach raise the benefits of using LI in L2 teaching Gabrielatos (2001)

affirmed thal we as teachers should nol treat L1 as a ‘sin’ and 1.1 actually does have a

place in ELT methodology (p 6) Supporters of L] in the L2 classroom also contended

that there are many instances when L] is appropriate (Atkinson, 1987; Cook, 2001)

Atkinson (1987) claimed that ‘the potential of mother tongue, as a classroom resource

is so great that its role should merit considerable attention and discussion in any

attempt to develop a Post-communicative Approach to TEFL far adolescents and

adults’ (p 241) He then offered three general reasons (or allowing a judicious LT use

in the L2 classroom: as a learner preferred strategy, a humanistic approach, and an

efficient use of lime Another author, Auerbach (1993) presented benefils of the T.1 in

the way that it can reduce anxicty, onhance the affective cnvironment for learning,

facilitate incorporation of leamers’ experiences into the learning process, promote

learner-contered curriculum development, and allow language lo be used as a meaning-

making tool She also claimed that use of L1 is beneficial for learners at all skill levels,

not only, as some have argued, for low-level learners

In conclusion, researchers have found that evidence from both research and

practice suggested that the rationale used to justify English only in the classroom is

neither conclusive nor pedagogically sound (Auerbach, 1993: 15) It should be

apparent that the use of the mother tongue in and of itself in texts and in the classrooin

is not the problem (Weschler, 1997) The mother tongue can and should be used as an integral clement in an English language program TL can supply the student with the essential sense of need to learn the language as well as the tools and motivation to do

so effectively As Atkinson (1987: 247) pointed ont that ‘although the mother tongue is

nota suitable basic for a methodology, it has, at all levels, a varicty roles to play which are at present, consistently undervahied”

13

of a concept behind structure, a reading or listening text, (3) Giving complex instructions to basic levels; (4) Co-operating among learners; (5) Explaining classroom methodology; (6) presentation and reinforcement of the language, (7) Checking for sense; (8) ‘esting; (9) Developing circumlocution strategies

On the other side, Cook (2001) mentioned the positive applications of the MT in

a dillerent! way He focused on three main uses of (he MT namely teacher conveying meaning (check meaning of words, sentences and explain grammar), teacher

organizing the class (orgamizing tasks, maintaining discipline, contacting with

individual students, and testing) and students using L] within the classroom

Cameron (2001: 201) proposed eleven ways that teachers could apply the MT in

teaching Fnglish for young Iearners They are (1) explaining aspects of the largot language; (2) translating words or sentences; (3) giving instructions; (4) checking understanding of concept, talk, text, instructions; (5) eliciting language: (6) focusing students attention; (7) testing; (8) talking about leaming, (9) giving feedback; (10) disciplining and control; (11) informal, friendly talk with students

In spite of the different way of classifying the uses of the L1, these scholars still meet

each other in many respects

1.5 The amount of L1 in the English classroom

Tl is obvious Uhat if is time to open a door thal has been [immly shut in language teaching for over a hundred years, namely the use of the L in the classroom However,

there still exists one question need to be addressed, which is “how much the I.1 is there

in the forcign language classroom?’ According to Atkinson (1987), it is necessary to avoid the overuse of the mother tongue Le further suggested that ‘ at early levels a ratio of about 5 & rative to aboul 95 & largel language may be profitable’ (p 236)

‘There will appear some possible dangers if teachers depend excessively on the LI In addition, Cook (2001) claimed that the mother tongue could become an effective

resource in the 1.2 classroom if it is used ‘deliberately and systematically’ Ta the

14

studies by Schweers (1999) and Yang (2002), the majority of teachers emphasized the importance of the occasional use of the L1 in the L2 classroom However, the exact appropriate amount of L1 in the L2 classroom has not been well investigated Cameron (2001) recommends useful principles for language choice in classroom that while teachers use the target Janguage as much as possible, but ensure that the use of first language supports the children learning, Ina sludy by Dull & Polio (1990), in allempt

to determine the amount of L2 at university, conducted a research and their result revealed thal there was a range from 10% to 100 % foreign language used in the classroom While those findings are not overtly conclusive, they de however show that there is a disparity between the reports concerning the L1- L2 proportion Therefore, more studies need lo be carried oul to address this issue

1.6 Empirical researches

Al-Buraiki (2008) investigated teachers' attitudes and practices regarding the use

of the L1 in young Jearer English classrooms in Oman The researcher found that the

LI was commonly used in English lessons, though for a range of purposes and with varying degrees of frequency The study also showed that, overall the teachers in this study believed that the L1 had a role to play in the young leamer English classroom, Furthermore, they identified different factors which influenced their decision to use the

TI such as the tine available, learners’ knowledge of concepts, vocabulary and grammar, learners’ proficiency, and learners’ age

Drosatou (2009), in his M.A thesis, focused on teachers’ and leamers’ beliefs about the usc of Greck and English in the English language classroom for young, learners, by relating them, also with their actual practices ‘Ihe findings revealed that giving instructions, presenting’ explainmg grammatical ilem and disciplining the classroom were the first, second and third sections that MI was most used Leamers,

on the other side, used MT to respond to their teachers or to ask questions/ help from leachers / peers By drawing a connection between Ieachers" and lamers’ beliefs and

their practices, it is observed that although the teachers were aware of the benefits of

TL use, they hesitate to use it in the classroom

Al-Nofaic (2010) noticed that the participants preferred to use Arabic with beginners and low-proficiency level students ‘Ihe results revealed that teachers and students generally had positive attitudes towards the use of Arabic in the classroom

The learners’ leve! and the teachers’ professional experenee also affect ihe degree Lo

which teachers resort to L1

Tang (2002) studied the use of the 1.1 by Chinese teachers of Fnglist as well as their Jeamors’ attitudes towards it The results showed that both teachers and leamers responded positively to using the L1 as a supportive and facilitating teaching tool

Schweers (1999) investigated the attitudes towards using the 1.1 of Leachers and

leamers in an KFL context where the Ll was Spanish ‘This study also showed that the majority of the teachers and leamers agreed that the L1 should be used sometimes

Prodromou (2000) conducted another survey about L1 use with Greek learners

of English Ile found that most beginner and intermediate leamers, but only a minority

of advanced learners, felt the use of the L1 in the English classroom was acceptable

16

CHAPTER 2: METHODOLOGY 2.1 Qualitative Multi case study approach

Creswell (1998, in Dutt, 2008: 21) detined a case study is an exploration of a

“bounded system” or a case (or multiple cases) over time through detailed, in-depth

data collection involving multiple sources of information rich in context Case study

methodology is believed 10 be Mloxible to suit various purposes of the study including qualitative, quantitative, and descriptive In the present study, a qualitative multiple

case study approach was employed due lo the following reasons

To begin with, a multiple case study was conducted because it helps understand

the case in depth and detailed description of specific phenomenon According to

Cohen, Manion, & Morrison (2007), case studies are useful {or analytic rather than

statistical generalization ‘This approach has the potential to deal with simple through complex situations It enables the researcher to answer “how” and “why” type questions, while taking into consideration how a phenomenon is influenced by the

context within which it is situated For the novice research, a case study is an excellent

opportunity to gain tremendous insight into a case (Baxter and Jack, 2008: 556)

Consequently, the researcher believed that to conduct a study concerning the issue of

teachers’ use of the MT in the L? classroom, it was advisable to access descriptive and

detailed data rather than a wide and superficial onc

Secondly, cellective case study enables the researcher to analyze within each

setting and across setting Tn a multiple case study, some cases are being examined to

understand the similarities and differences between the cases (Baxter and Jack, 2008:

550) Knowing these features, the researcher decided to use this approach to investigate more than onc case As a resull, il will be easier and more logical lo compare ard

contrast teachers’ L1 use in the L2 classroom Therefore, the data could be more concise and persuasive when reflecting different behaviors of various teachers from

chfferem English classroom levels

17

In general, qualitative multi-case study research was considered to be the most appropriate approach for the present study It was believe that the study could contribute somehow for further investigation in teacher’s use of LI in L2 classroom 2.2, Setting and Participants

2.2.1 Setting

The study was conducted in an English Centre The centre addresses children with age range from three to twelve years old Students are divided into classes due to their age and sometimes their level The center's purpose is building complete English learning chvironment, emphasizing Icaming English at school and at home The childron arc taught in a modem environment with electranic board, touch and talk pen, safe and comfortable classroom, ralional light, complete series of course book with varieties of

CD, DVD, CD-ROM, ‘There are three kinds of course book “[alky 'Talky Hnglish’- the series of book focusing on theme is written for preschooler Phonics series with 12 beoks focus on the consonants, vowels, R- vowels, diphthongs, consonant digraphs and blends The last course book series are the Popodoo Book levels A, B, C with 20 units

in each level The units are organized from easy to complex content which emphasize

on vocabulary, conversation, sentences, grammar, M''V- songs and chants Children from five to six years old learn natural phonics with the selected parts in Popodoo Book A which focus on pronunciation, spelling, vocabulary and also simple sentences (speaking and listening) while younger students (below 5) learn “Yalky Talky nglish’ Children from six to eight leam the Phonics and the whole Popodao Book level A and those who above nine also learn the same book with children from six to cight but with faster pace, expanding parts and harder content for each lesson In this linglish centre, Vicinamese is the only mother tongue and English as the forcign language

2.2.2 Participants

Since teachers are core participants of this research, they were chosen under

volimlary agreement, so thal the researcher could make sure about their commmitment in

18

getting involved in the study Three teachers of English, who are teaching three different levels at this English Center, then were invited to share their opinion and experience on the investigated issue

Although they can come from diverse education background, all three teachers already passed the training courses in teaching English for kids, the condition to wark

in the English School, which hold by the headquarter In addition, teachers also allend annual workshop which invite experts in teaching kids to train new skills It then can

be concluded that these teachers are well- qualified in this field and they received the same cducation in teaching young learners Like students, all of them are native speakers of Vietnamese

2.3 Data collection Instruments

The techniques employed in this study were non- participant classroom observation, stimulated recall technique and semi- structured interviews The combination of these three instraments was used to achieve a triangulation of data and thus generate the validity and reliability of the study These instruments will be described in further detail below

2.3.1 Classroom observation (See Appendix 1)

Since the research is on a practical issue, classroom observation was regarded as

an effective lool lo achieve data Coben, Manion and Morrison (2007: 305) claimed

“observational data are attractive as they afford the researcher the opportunity to gather

‘live’ data from ‘live’ situations” Observations enable the researcher to rely on teal

situation facts rather than on ‘second hand accounts’ (Cohen, Manion and Morrison,

2007; 396) ‘his merit is particularly significant in this research where the author aims

to investigate the reality of using the mother tongue and to lest whether the teachers’

practices are congruent with their stated beliefs

In the study, a structured observation format, which was modified from Cook

(2001), Atkinson (1987), and Cameron (2001), was used Whal was observed during

19

the class was the amount of the MT and the TL used by teachers in different lesson sections The researcher observed three different level English classes (each class will

be observed four times) The researcher played as non- participant obscrvation

2.3.2, Stimulated Recall (Appendix 2)

To find out the reasons why teachers used the mother tongue in the classraom,

stimulated reeall (SR) interview was applied SR is a research method towards Lie

investigation of cognitive processes through inviting participants to recall their

concurrent thinking during an event when prompted by video and audio recordings

(Fox- Tumbull, 2009: 204) SR is a valuable tool since it provided an opportunity for

real life context In addition, the use of multimedia sources in recall section has the

benelils of replaying and reintroducing cues thal were prosenl during the lask (Sime, 2006) By using this method, the researcher could assess participants’ reflection on mental processes and their explanation for their decision making,

In this study, SR was conducted during 24 hour after the observed lesson in order to make sure that the information was fresh and the research would get the best

information Because of the limited time the researcher could not interview teacher in

all four observed lessons, just two of them will be chosen to implement an interview Since the researcher was afraid that teachers’ proficiency under study was not good cnaugh to express all of their thinking, so the ilerview was condusied in Vietnamese Another reason for applying Vietnamese in interview is that both participants and the

researcher are Vietnamese, so it is easily to exchange idea and to dig deeply the

information The rescarcher audio taped cach SR interview and then transcribed

2.3.3 Semi structured Interview (See Appendix 3)

Tnlerviews are a valuable tool in iherselves The use of interview tesulls im

clearer and sharper research questions ‘he data derived from interviews can be quite rich and in-depth (Paltridgle & Phakiti, 2010) In this research, the interview employed

to seek Leachers’ opinions of the use of the first language in the classroom A

seni-20

structured interview was conducted with three teachers after finishing all observations and stimulated interviews As teachers’ responses might vary in the topic questioned, a list of prepared questions was uscd as a guide Therefore, some changes could be applied due to the interviewees’ answers Semi structured interview also was conducted in Viemamese and then interpreted in English The questions were asked in

a fixed order and the interviews were audio recorded for transerplion later

In conclusion, the combination of the three most common tools namely

observation, Stimulated Recall, and serm- structured interview brought, to the

researcher a rich amount of valid and reliable data, the analysis of which would be

presented in the next chapter

2.4, Data collection procedure

Data collection started by contacting the principal of the private language center informing her about the purpose of the study and asking for her consent for the research to take place Secondly, the teachers were contacted in person asking for their

consent to observe the classes and being involved in the SR and semi- structured

interview procedure

‘The research started with classroom observations Hach teacher was observed four times in a 60 minutes lesson of the different levels Two of the observed lessons

were chosen im advance for stimulated recall ierview SR mlerviews were conducted

within 24 hours after the observation After finishing all observations and SR, semi

structure interview was conducted to find ont teachers’ belief about the 1.1 use in the

classroom

2.5, Data analysis

This rescarch applied qunhtaive and quantilative dala analysis techniques Firstly, from the data in the observation sheet, the quantity of Vietnamese language and

English utterance during four observed lessons were calculated The L1 use in different

sections wer sorted oul, summarized and analyved qualilalively Secondly, the data

CHAPTER 3: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION This chapter will include the results obtained from data collected by the use of classroom observation, SR interview and semi structure interview The above results then will be also analyzed and discussed according to the literature and other empirical researches mentioned in chapter 1

3.1 Findings

3.1.1 Case 1 (teacher in class for 5-6 years old students)

Question 1: Tow much L1 is used and in which sections do teachers use it in the classroom?

As presented in the Methodology part classroom observation was held to oxamine the amount of L1 use and occasions on which teacher actually used 11 Alter observing four English lessons of this teacher, the research counted the times that the teacher used Vietnamese and English in all four lessons The result was shown in the table below,

Table 1: Teacher's use of Vietnamese in English classroom for 5-6 years ald students

Compamg ado conrastng English aad Vielmmnese languages (eg, 0 0

phonology, morphology, grammar)

Informal, Giendly talk with students 19 [4

23

‘As can be seen from table, the amount of Vietnamese used in this classroom is just about 419 times- a third of English used in the classroom The frequency of the Ll use was for different functions, Tho most frequent usc of L1 was for giving instructions ‘Teacher often used L1 when guiding students how to play a game, or how

(Phonics letter M and Color theme lesson) Secondly, Vietnamese was used frequently for disciplining the classroom and for informal talk with students As I observed in the classroom young leamers are often very naughty and have short time attention, therefore, it is easy to find Vietnamese sentences to remind students to sit on their chairs or stop chatting Teacher

also used L1 only to ask students about their health if teacher saw tired face of students

or students cried in the classroom

As evidence from table I, Vietnamese was less frequently used for presenting or explaining vocabulary and grammar slructurcs (live times in four ebscrved ]essons) and giving feedback (three times only) ‘his is because the focus of English in this age

is just on the simple and daily life’ topic vocabulary, so teacher often used pictures, objects to teach students For giving fecdback, teacher often used some short phrases like ‘well done’, ‘good job’, ‘excellent’ after each student's performance

Question 2: Why do teachers use the mother tongue?

Following the classroom observation, the researcher also recorded lesson for SR

interview to find out the reason why teacher used Vietnamese in the classroom.