Luận văn tìm hiểu khoảng trống trong phong cách giảng dậy của giảng viên và phong cách học tập của sinh viên tại khoa ngoại ngữ Đại học thái nguyên

so cnnrerieeirorrrreol 64 5.2.1 Learning style preferences of students at SFL-TNU 64 5.2.2 Teachers’ teaching styles at School of Foreign Language, TNU .... so cnnrerieeirorrrreol 64 5.2

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, ITANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

FACUTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES

TRAN THI NGAN

AN INVESTIGATION INTO TIE GAP BETWEEN TEACTIERS’

TEACHING STYLES AND LEARNERS’

LEARNING STYLES AT SCHOOL OF FOREIGN LANGUAGES,

THAI NGUYEN UNLVERSITY

TIMHIEU KHOANG TRONG TRONG PHONG CACH GIANG DAY

CỦA GIẢNG VIÊN VÀ PHONG CÁCH HỌC TẬP CỦA SINII VIEN

TẠI KHOA NGOẠI NGỮ, ĐẠI HỌC THÁI NGUYÊN

M.A COMBINED PROGRAMME THESIS

Field : English Teaching Methodology Cede: 60140111

Ifanoi, 2017

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, ITANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

FACUTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES

TRAN THI NGAN

AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE GAP BETWEEN TEACHERS’

TEACHING STYLES AND LEARNERS’

LEARNING STYLES AT SCIIOOL OF FOREIGN LANGUAGES,

THAI NGUYEN UNIVERSITY

M.A COMBINED PROGRAMME TITIESIS

Field : English caching Mcthodology

Code: 60140111 Supervisor: Assoc Professor Dr Le Van Canh

Hanoi, 2017

5.1, Overviefr c „64 5.2 Summary of the rescarch’s findiÏng so cnnrerieeirorrrreol 64 5.2.1 Learning style preferences of students at SFL-TNU 64 5.2.2 Teachers’ teaching styles at School of Foreign Language, TNU

5.2.3 Matching or mismatching between teaching and learning styles:

5.3 Chapter summary 67 CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSEON ¬ - 6.1, Overview - - - 69 6.2, Educational implication - - 69 6.2.1 Understanding students’ ability to accept unfamiliar styles of teachers 69 6.2.2, Understanding the existence of differences in the classroom 69 6.2.3 Implementing small class size - - 70 6.3, Limitation of the researeh sccscsesseresvasinenssssnstnsensiateitineneeneenT® 6.4 Suggestions for further research - - 71 6.5 Chanter sưmmary - - 72 REBERENCES 0).cccscsesseses ses sinenesteien 3m 73 APPENDICES - T APPENDIX A: LEARNING STYLE PREFERENCE QUESTIONNAIRE

WIPHSEUDENTS co Aọ HH thư nhe i SELF-SCORING SHEET - V

EXPLANATION OF LEARNING STYLE PREFERENCES

APPENDIX B: TEACHING STYLE PREFERENCE QUESTIONNAIRE

5.1, Overviefr c „64 5.2 Summary of the rescarch’s findiÏng so cnnrerieeirorrrreol 64 5.2.1 Learning style preferences of students at SFL-TNU 64 5.2.2 Teachers’ teaching styles at School of Foreign Language, TNU

5.2.3 Matching or mismatching between teaching and learning styles:

5.3 Chapter summary 67 CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSEON ¬ - 6.1, Overview - - - 69 6.2, Educational implication - - 69 6.2.1 Understanding students’ ability to accept unfamiliar styles of teachers 69 6.2.2, Understanding the existence of differences in the classroom 69 6.2.3 Implementing small class size - - 70 6.3, Limitation of the researeh sccscsesseresvasinenssssnstnsensiateitineneeneenT® 6.4 Suggestions for further research - - 71 6.5 Chanter sưmmary - - 72 REBERENCES 0).cccscsesseses ses sinenesteien 3m 73 APPENDICES - T APPENDIX A: LEARNING STYLE PREFERENCE QUESTIONNAIRE

WIPHSEUDENTS co Aọ HH thư nhe i SELF-SCORING SHEET - V

EXPLANATION OF LEARNING STYLE PREFERENCES

APPENDIX B: TEACHING STYLE PREFERENCE QUESTIONNAIRE

2.3.1.2, Mismatches between teachers’ teaching styles and learners’ learning SIDES ố .ẻ.ẻ.ẽố _— 20 2.3.2, Previous studies on the match and mismatch between teaching styles

and learning sÉyÏes chọn in mrarrrenerirere 33 2.3.2.1 Shudies im learning styles ccscosevessenieeineinnecieive " 23 2.3.1.5 Studies in teaching styles - 25

3.1, Overview - - - 29 3.2 Conceptual Framework - - 29 3.4 Rescarch method., ác con họng mrereirraroree 30 2.4.1 Quantitative research method - 30 3.4.2, Qualitative research approach - - 31 3.5, Participants ccsccsscsssencseenstnseusentssmsnentsensineneensoeeeceeneeeen 31 3.6 Research Procedure - - - 32 3.61 Research design - - 32 3.6.2 Rescnrch Instrumetifs chọn theo 33 3⁄7 Data analysis 38 3.7.1 Quantifative Äala GHẠVSÍS con mau 38 3.7.2, Qualitative dua tHNH|JSÌN con nhang eauie 39 3.8, Chapter sammary - 40 CHAPTER 4: RESEARCH RESULES se _ 4.1 Chapter Overview container AZ 4.2, Qualitative results - - 42 4.2.1 Results from questionnaire survey with student participants .0 00.042

43 Qualitative Results 48 4.3.1 Students’ learning styles 48 4.3.2 SFL-TNU teachers' teaching styles khe 57 4.4, Chapter summary 63 CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION - - - 64

vii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 3 Conceptual Framework of the Study - 29

Figure 3.2 Qualitative data analysis procedur Figure 4.1 Students’ major, minor and negative learning siyÌes 45

2.3.1.2, Mismatches between teachers’ teaching styles and learners’ learning SIDES ố .ẻ.ẻ.ẽố _— 20 2.3.2, Previous studies on the match and mismatch between teaching styles

and learning sÉyÏes chọn in mrarrrenerirere 33 2.3.2.1 Shudies im learning styles ccscosevessenieeineinnecieive " 23 2.3.1.5 Studies in teaching styles - 25

3.1, Overview - - - 29 3.2 Conceptual Framework - - 29 3.4 Rescarch method., ác con họng mrereirraroree 30 2.4.1 Quantitative research method - 30 3.4.2, Qualitative research approach - - 31 3.5, Participants ccsccsscsssencseenstnseusentssmsnentsensineneensoeeeceeneeeen 31 3.6 Research Procedure - - - 32 3.61 Research design - - 32 3.6.2 Rescnrch Instrumetifs chọn theo 33 3⁄7 Data analysis 38 3.7.1 Quantifative Äala GHẠVSÍS con mau 38 3.7.2, Qualitative dua tHNH|JSÌN con nhang eauie 39 3.8, Chapter sammary - 40 CHAPTER 4: RESEARCH RESULES se _ 4.1 Chapter Overview container AZ 4.2, Qualitative results - - 42 4.2.1 Results from questionnaire survey with student participants .0 00.042

43 Qualitative Results 48 4.3.1 Students’ learning styles 48 4.3.2 SFL-TNU teachers' teaching styles khe 57 4.4, Chapter summary 63 CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION - - - 64

vii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 3 Conceptual Framework of the Study - 29

Figure 3.2 Qualitative data analysis procedur Figure 4.1 Students’ major, minor and negative learning siyÌes 45

5.1, Overviefr c „64 5.2 Summary of the rescarch’s findiÏng so cnnrerieeirorrrreol 64 5.2.1 Learning style preferences of students at SFL-TNU 64 5.2.2 Teachers’ teaching styles at School of Foreign Language, TNU

5.2.3 Matching or mismatching between teaching and learning styles:

5.3 Chapter summary 67 CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSEON ¬ - 6.1, Overview - - - 69 6.2, Educational implication - - 69 6.2.1 Understanding students’ ability to accept unfamiliar styles of teachers 69 6.2.2, Understanding the existence of differences in the classroom 69 6.2.3 Implementing small class size - - 70 6.3, Limitation of the researeh sccscsesseresvasinenssssnstnsensiateitineneeneenT® 6.4 Suggestions for further research - - 71 6.5 Chanter sưmmary - - 72 REBERENCES 0).cccscsesseses ses sinenesteien 3m 73 APPENDICES - T APPENDIX A: LEARNING STYLE PREFERENCE QUESTIONNAIRE

WIPHSEUDENTS co Aọ HH thư nhe i SELF-SCORING SHEET - V

EXPLANATION OF LEARNING STYLE PREFERENCES

APPENDIX B: TEACHING STYLE PREFERENCE QUESTIONNAIRE

ABSTRACT

Lnglish language teaching and learning styles play a crucial role in the

sueceas of boli (cachers and Jeamers Research has shown thal, a match between

learning styles and teaching styles will improve students learning experience and

achievements (Cornett 1983) According to Willing (1988 p.1) “An effort to

apeommodate learning styles by choosing suitable teaching styles, methadolagics and course organization can result in improved leamer satisfaction and attainment” Whereas, the mismatch between teachers’ teaching styles and leamers’ leaming

styles is very likely to happen and it not only leads to students’ Frustration and

demotivation in leaming but also greatly affects their performances instructors, confronted by low test grades, unresponsive or hostile classes, poor attendance and dropouts, may hevome overty critical of the students or begin to question their own

competence as teachers Despite its extreme importance, the matter of match or

mismatch between these two factors received very little attention in cur teaching

and learning context Therefore, this paper aims lo investigate the major {caching and learning style preferences of teachers and students at School of Foreign

Languages, Thar Nguyen Unversity Also, il is gomg lo point oul the imertwine

relationship between teachers’ teaching styles and leamers’ learning styles as well

as the importance of matching them in Vietnamese context It also investigates into

the perceptions of toachers and students on this mater, logether with their major teaching and leaming style preferences Moreover, recommendations and suggestions on how to understand teachers and leamers’ preferences and bridge the gap between them will be discussed

iti

ABSTRACT

Lnglish language teaching and learning styles play a crucial role in the

sueceas of boli (cachers and Jeamers Research has shown thal, a match between

learning styles and teaching styles will improve students learning experience and

achievements (Cornett 1983) According to Willing (1988 p.1) “An effort to

apeommodate learning styles by choosing suitable teaching styles, methadolagics and course organization can result in improved leamer satisfaction and attainment” Whereas, the mismatch between teachers’ teaching styles and leamers’ leaming

styles is very likely to happen and it not only leads to students’ Frustration and

demotivation in leaming but also greatly affects their performances instructors, confronted by low test grades, unresponsive or hostile classes, poor attendance and dropouts, may hevome overty critical of the students or begin to question their own

competence as teachers Despite its extreme importance, the matter of match or

mismatch between these two factors received very little attention in cur teaching

and learning context Therefore, this paper aims lo investigate the major {caching and learning style preferences of teachers and students at School of Foreign

Languages, Thar Nguyen Unversity Also, il is gomg lo point oul the imertwine

relationship between teachers’ teaching styles and leamers’ learning styles as well

as the importance of matching them in Vietnamese context It also investigates into

the perceptions of toachers and students on this mater, logether with their major teaching and leaming style preferences Moreover, recommendations and suggestions on how to understand teachers and leamers’ preferences and bridge the gap between them will be discussed

iti

ABSTRACT

Lnglish language teaching and learning styles play a crucial role in the

sueceas of boli (cachers and Jeamers Research has shown thal, a match between

learning styles and teaching styles will improve students learning experience and

achievements (Cornett 1983) According to Willing (1988 p.1) “An effort to

apeommodate learning styles by choosing suitable teaching styles, methadolagics and course organization can result in improved leamer satisfaction and attainment” Whereas, the mismatch between teachers’ teaching styles and leamers’ leaming

styles is very likely to happen and it not only leads to students’ Frustration and

demotivation in leaming but also greatly affects their performances instructors, confronted by low test grades, unresponsive or hostile classes, poor attendance and dropouts, may hevome overty critical of the students or begin to question their own

competence as teachers Despite its extreme importance, the matter of match or

mismatch between these two factors received very little attention in cur teaching

and learning context Therefore, this paper aims lo investigate the major {caching and learning style preferences of teachers and students at School of Foreign

Languages, Thar Nguyen Unversity Also, il is gomg lo point oul the imertwine

relationship between teachers’ teaching styles and leamers’ learning styles as well

as the importance of matching them in Vietnamese context It also investigates into

the perceptions of toachers and students on this mater, logether with their major teaching and leaming style preferences Moreover, recommendations and suggestions on how to understand teachers and leamers’ preferences and bridge the gap between them will be discussed

iti

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 3 Conceptual Framework of the Study - 29

Figure 3.2 Qualitative data analysis procedur Figure 4.1 Students’ major, minor and negative learning siyÌes 45

Table 4.5 Teachers’ Demographic Inforrnaflofi c.ocooeooee

Table 4.6 Teachers’ Teaching Styles Preferences - 48

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Kirst and foremost, | would lke to express my sincere gratitude to my supervisors Assoviate Professor Le Ven Canh for his excellent supervision and careful guidance in the completion of this thesis He provided me with valuable experience and comments, and I always greatly appreciate it

Tam grateful to teacher, Dr Tran Thi Nhi for her inspiration and endless encouragement throughout my academic life Without her tremendous support in the past four years, my dream of becoming a tertiary teacher would not became

true

1 would also acknowledge the principals and the heads of departments of School of Foreign Languages, Thai Nguyen University who permitted the research Tthank all of my rescarch participants who have contributed to this sludy

Last but not least, I would like to thank my parents and my husband for their unconditional love and support throughout my life

2.3.1.2, Mismatches between teachers’ teaching styles and learners’ learning SIDES ố .ẻ.ẻ.ẽố _— 20 2.3.2, Previous studies on the match and mismatch between teaching styles

and learning sÉyÏes chọn in mrarrrenerirere 33 2.3.2.1 Shudies im learning styles ccscosevessenieeineinnecieive " 23 2.3.1.5 Studies in teaching styles - 25

3.1, Overview - - - 29 3.2 Conceptual Framework - - 29 3.4 Rescarch method., ác con họng mrereirraroree 30 2.4.1 Quantitative research method - 30 3.4.2, Qualitative research approach - - 31 3.5, Participants ccsccsscsssencseenstnseusentssmsnentsensineneensoeeeceeneeeen 31 3.6 Research Procedure - - - 32 3.61 Research design - - 32 3.6.2 Rescnrch Instrumetifs chọn theo 33 3⁄7 Data analysis 38 3.7.1 Quantifative Äala GHẠVSÍS con mau 38 3.7.2, Qualitative dua tHNH|JSÌN con nhang eauie 39 3.8, Chapter sammary - 40 CHAPTER 4: RESEARCH RESULES se _ 4.1 Chapter Overview container AZ 4.2, Qualitative results - - 42 4.2.1 Results from questionnaire survey with student participants .0 00.042

43 Qualitative Results 48 4.3.1 Students’ learning styles 48 4.3.2 SFL-TNU teachers' teaching styles khe 57 4.4, Chapter summary 63 CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION - - - 64

vii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 3 Conceptual Framework of the Study - 29

Figure 3.2 Qualitative data analysis procedur Figure 4.1 Students’ major, minor and negative learning siyÌes 45

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Kirst and foremost, | would lke to express my sincere gratitude to my supervisors Assoviate Professor Le Ven Canh for his excellent supervision and careful guidance in the completion of this thesis He provided me with valuable experience and comments, and I always greatly appreciate it

Tam grateful to teacher, Dr Tran Thi Nhi for her inspiration and endless encouragement throughout my academic life Without her tremendous support in the past four years, my dream of becoming a tertiary teacher would not became

true

1 would also acknowledge the principals and the heads of departments of School of Foreign Languages, Thai Nguyen University who permitted the research Tthank all of my rescarch participants who have contributed to this sludy

Last but not least, I would like to thank my parents and my husband for their unconditional love and support throughout my life

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Kirst and foremost, | would lke to express my sincere gratitude to my supervisors Assoviate Professor Le Ven Canh for his excellent supervision and careful guidance in the completion of this thesis He provided me with valuable experience and comments, and I always greatly appreciate it

Tam grateful to teacher, Dr Tran Thi Nhi for her inspiration and endless encouragement throughout my academic life Without her tremendous support in the past four years, my dream of becoming a tertiary teacher would not became

true

1 would also acknowledge the principals and the heads of departments of School of Foreign Languages, Thai Nguyen University who permitted the research Tthank all of my rescarch participants who have contributed to this sludy

Last but not least, I would like to thank my parents and my husband for their unconditional love and support throughout my life

Table 4.5 Teachers’ Demographic Inforrnaflofi c.ocooeooee

Table 4.6 Teachers’ Teaching Styles Preferences - 48

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 3 Conceptual Framework of the Study - 29

Figure 3.2 Qualitative data analysis procedur Figure 4.1 Students’ major, minor and negative learning siyÌes 45

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Kirst and foremost, | would lke to express my sincere gratitude to my supervisors Assoviate Professor Le Ven Canh for his excellent supervision and careful guidance in the completion of this thesis He provided me with valuable experience and comments, and I always greatly appreciate it

Tam grateful to teacher, Dr Tran Thi Nhi for her inspiration and endless encouragement throughout my academic life Without her tremendous support in the past four years, my dream of becoming a tertiary teacher would not became

true

1 would also acknowledge the principals and the heads of departments of School of Foreign Languages, Thai Nguyen University who permitted the research Tthank all of my rescarch participants who have contributed to this sludy

Last but not least, I would like to thank my parents and my husband for their unconditional love and support throughout my life

Table 4.5 Teachers’ Demographic Inforrnaflofi c.ocooeooee

Table 4.6 Teachers’ Teaching Styles Preferences - 48

5.1, Overviefr c „64 5.2 Summary of the rescarch’s findiÏng so cnnrerieeirorrrreol 64 5.2.1 Learning style preferences of students at SFL-TNU 64 5.2.2 Teachers’ teaching styles at School of Foreign Language, TNU

5.2.3 Matching or mismatching between teaching and learning styles:

5.3 Chapter summary 67 CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSEON ¬ - 6.1, Overview - - - 69 6.2, Educational implication - - 69 6.2.1 Understanding students’ ability to accept unfamiliar styles of teachers 69 6.2.2, Understanding the existence of differences in the classroom 69 6.2.3 Implementing small class size - - 70 6.3, Limitation of the researeh sccscsesseresvasinenssssnstnsensiateitineneeneenT® 6.4 Suggestions for further research - - 71 6.5 Chanter sưmmary - - 72 REBERENCES 0).cccscsesseses ses sinenesteien 3m 73 APPENDICES - T APPENDIX A: LEARNING STYLE PREFERENCE QUESTIONNAIRE

WIPHSEUDENTS co Aọ HH thư nhe i SELF-SCORING SHEET - V

EXPLANATION OF LEARNING STYLE PREFERENCES

APPENDIX B: TEACHING STYLE PREFERENCE QUESTIONNAIRE

2.3.1.2, Mismatches between teachers’ teaching styles and learners’ learning SIDES ố .ẻ.ẻ.ẽố _— 20 2.3.2, Previous studies on the match and mismatch between teaching styles

and learning sÉyÏes chọn in mrarrrenerirere 33 2.3.2.1 Shudies im learning styles ccscosevessenieeineinnecieive " 23 2.3.1.5 Studies in teaching styles - 25

3.1, Overview - - - 29 3.2 Conceptual Framework - - 29 3.4 Rescarch method., ác con họng mrereirraroree 30 2.4.1 Quantitative research method - 30 3.4.2, Qualitative research approach - - 31 3.5, Participants ccsccsscsssencseenstnseusentssmsnentsensineneensoeeeceeneeeen 31 3.6 Research Procedure - - - 32 3.61 Research design - - 32 3.6.2 Rescnrch Instrumetifs chọn theo 33 3⁄7 Data analysis 38 3.7.1 Quantifative Äala GHẠVSÍS con mau 38 3.7.2, Qualitative dua tHNH|JSÌN con nhang eauie 39 3.8, Chapter sammary - 40 CHAPTER 4: RESEARCH RESULES se _ 4.1 Chapter Overview container AZ 4.2, Qualitative results - - 42 4.2.1 Results from questionnaire survey with student participants .0 00.042

43 Qualitative Results 48 4.3.1 Students’ learning styles 48 4.3.2 SFL-TNU teachers' teaching styles khe 57 4.4, Chapter summary 63 CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION - - - 64

vii

ABSTRACT

Lnglish language teaching and learning styles play a crucial role in the

sueceas of boli (cachers and Jeamers Research has shown thal, a match between

learning styles and teaching styles will improve students learning experience and

achievements (Cornett 1983) According to Willing (1988 p.1) “An effort to

apeommodate learning styles by choosing suitable teaching styles, methadolagics and course organization can result in improved leamer satisfaction and attainment” Whereas, the mismatch between teachers’ teaching styles and leamers’ leaming

styles is very likely to happen and it not only leads to students’ Frustration and

demotivation in leaming but also greatly affects their performances instructors, confronted by low test grades, unresponsive or hostile classes, poor attendance and dropouts, may hevome overty critical of the students or begin to question their own

competence as teachers Despite its extreme importance, the matter of match or

mismatch between these two factors received very little attention in cur teaching

and learning context Therefore, this paper aims lo investigate the major {caching and learning style preferences of teachers and students at School of Foreign

Languages, Thar Nguyen Unversity Also, il is gomg lo point oul the imertwine

relationship between teachers’ teaching styles and leamers’ learning styles as well

as the importance of matching them in Vietnamese context It also investigates into

the perceptions of toachers and students on this mater, logether with their major teaching and leaming style preferences Moreover, recommendations and suggestions on how to understand teachers and leamers’ preferences and bridge the gap between them will be discussed

iti

ABSTRACT

Lnglish language teaching and learning styles play a crucial role in the

sueceas of boli (cachers and Jeamers Research has shown thal, a match between

learning styles and teaching styles will improve students learning experience and

achievements (Cornett 1983) According to Willing (1988 p.1) “An effort to

apeommodate learning styles by choosing suitable teaching styles, methadolagics and course organization can result in improved leamer satisfaction and attainment” Whereas, the mismatch between teachers’ teaching styles and leamers’ leaming

styles is very likely to happen and it not only leads to students’ Frustration and

demotivation in leaming but also greatly affects their performances instructors, confronted by low test grades, unresponsive or hostile classes, poor attendance and dropouts, may hevome overty critical of the students or begin to question their own

competence as teachers Despite its extreme importance, the matter of match or

mismatch between these two factors received very little attention in cur teaching

and learning context Therefore, this paper aims lo investigate the major {caching and learning style preferences of teachers and students at School of Foreign

Languages, Thar Nguyen Unversity Also, il is gomg lo point oul the imertwine

relationship between teachers’ teaching styles and leamers’ learning styles as well

as the importance of matching them in Vietnamese context It also investigates into

the perceptions of toachers and students on this mater, logether with their major teaching and leaming style preferences Moreover, recommendations and suggestions on how to understand teachers and leamers’ preferences and bridge the gap between them will be discussed

iti

5.1, Overviefr c „64 5.2 Summary of the rescarch’s findiÏng so cnnrerieeirorrrreol 64 5.2.1 Learning style preferences of students at SFL-TNU 64 5.2.2 Teachers’ teaching styles at School of Foreign Language, TNU

5.2.3 Matching or mismatching between teaching and learning styles:

5.3 Chapter summary 67 CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSEON ¬ - 6.1, Overview - - - 69 6.2, Educational implication - - 69 6.2.1 Understanding students’ ability to accept unfamiliar styles of teachers 69 6.2.2, Understanding the existence of differences in the classroom 69 6.2.3 Implementing small class size - - 70 6.3, Limitation of the researeh sccscsesseresvasinenssssnstnsensiateitineneeneenT® 6.4 Suggestions for further research - - 71 6.5 Chanter sưmmary - - 72 REBERENCES 0).cccscsesseses ses sinenesteien 3m 73 APPENDICES - T APPENDIX A: LEARNING STYLE PREFERENCE QUESTIONNAIRE

WIPHSEUDENTS co Aọ HH thư nhe i SELF-SCORING SHEET - V

EXPLANATION OF LEARNING STYLE PREFERENCES

APPENDIX B: TEACHING STYLE PREFERENCE QUESTIONNAIRE

Table 4.5 Teachers’ Demographic Inforrnaflofi c.ocooeooee

Table 4.6 Teachers’ Teaching Styles Preferences - 48

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Kirst and foremost, | would lke to express my sincere gratitude to my supervisors Assoviate Professor Le Ven Canh for his excellent supervision and careful guidance in the completion of this thesis He provided me with valuable experience and comments, and I always greatly appreciate it

Tam grateful to teacher, Dr Tran Thi Nhi for her inspiration and endless encouragement throughout my academic life Without her tremendous support in the past four years, my dream of becoming a tertiary teacher would not became

true

1 would also acknowledge the principals and the heads of departments of School of Foreign Languages, Thai Nguyen University who permitted the research Tthank all of my rescarch participants who have contributed to this sludy

Last but not least, I would like to thank my parents and my husband for their unconditional love and support throughout my life

5.1, Overviefr c „64 5.2 Summary of the rescarch’s findiÏng so cnnrerieeirorrrreol 64 5.2.1 Learning style preferences of students at SFL-TNU 64 5.2.2 Teachers’ teaching styles at School of Foreign Language, TNU

5.2.3 Matching or mismatching between teaching and learning styles:

5.3 Chapter summary 67 CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSEON ¬ - 6.1, Overview - - - 69 6.2, Educational implication - - 69 6.2.1 Understanding students’ ability to accept unfamiliar styles of teachers 69 6.2.2, Understanding the existence of differences in the classroom 69 6.2.3 Implementing small class size - - 70 6.3, Limitation of the researeh sccscsesseresvasinenssssnstnsensiateitineneeneenT® 6.4 Suggestions for further research - - 71 6.5 Chanter sưmmary - - 72 REBERENCES 0).cccscsesseses ses sinenesteien 3m 73 APPENDICES - T APPENDIX A: LEARNING STYLE PREFERENCE QUESTIONNAIRE

WIPHSEUDENTS co Aọ HH thư nhe i SELF-SCORING SHEET - V

EXPLANATION OF LEARNING STYLE PREFERENCES

APPENDIX B: TEACHING STYLE PREFERENCE QUESTIONNAIRE

2.3.1.2, Mismatches between teachers’ teaching styles and learners’ learning SIDES ố .ẻ.ẻ.ẽố _— 20 2.3.2, Previous studies on the match and mismatch between teaching styles

and learning sÉyÏes chọn in mrarrrenerirere 33 2.3.2.1 Shudies im learning styles ccscosevessenieeineinnecieive " 23 2.3.1.5 Studies in teaching styles - 25

3.1, Overview - - - 29 3.2 Conceptual Framework - - 29 3.4 Rescarch method., ác con họng mrereirraroree 30 2.4.1 Quantitative research method - 30 3.4.2, Qualitative research approach - - 31 3.5, Participants ccsccsscsssencseenstnseusentssmsnentsensineneensoeeeceeneeeen 31 3.6 Research Procedure - - - 32 3.61 Research design - - 32 3.6.2 Rescnrch Instrumetifs chọn theo 33 3⁄7 Data analysis 38 3.7.1 Quantifative Äala GHẠVSÍS con mau 38 3.7.2, Qualitative dua tHNH|JSÌN con nhang eauie 39 3.8, Chapter sammary - 40 CHAPTER 4: RESEARCH RESULES se _ 4.1 Chapter Overview container AZ 4.2, Qualitative results - - 42 4.2.1 Results from questionnaire survey with student participants .0 00.042

43 Qualitative Results 48 4.3.1 Students’ learning styles 48 4.3.2 SFL-TNU teachers' teaching styles khe 57 4.4, Chapter summary 63 CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION - - - 64

vii

2.3.1.2, Mismatches between teachers’ teaching styles and learners’ learning SIDES ố .ẻ.ẻ.ẽố _— 20 2.3.2, Previous studies on the match and mismatch between teaching styles

and learning sÉyÏes chọn in mrarrrenerirere 33 2.3.2.1 Shudies im learning styles ccscosevessenieeineinnecieive " 23 2.3.1.5 Studies in teaching styles - 25

3.1, Overview - - - 29 3.2 Conceptual Framework - - 29 3.4 Rescarch method., ác con họng mrereirraroree 30 2.4.1 Quantitative research method - 30 3.4.2, Qualitative research approach - - 31 3.5, Participants ccsccsscsssencseenstnseusentssmsnentsensineneensoeeeceeneeeen 31 3.6 Research Procedure - - - 32 3.61 Research design - - 32 3.6.2 Rescnrch Instrumetifs chọn theo 33 3⁄7 Data analysis 38 3.7.1 Quantifative Äala GHẠVSÍS con mau 38 3.7.2, Qualitative dua tHNH|JSÌN con nhang eauie 39 3.8, Chapter sammary - 40 CHAPTER 4: RESEARCH RESULES se _ 4.1 Chapter Overview container AZ 4.2, Qualitative results - - 42 4.2.1 Results from questionnaire survey with student participants .0 00.042

43 Qualitative Results 48 4.3.1 Students’ learning styles 48 4.3.2 SFL-TNU teachers' teaching styles khe 57 4.4, Chapter summary 63 CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION - - - 64

vii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 3 Conceptual Framework of the Study - 29

Figure 3.2 Qualitative data analysis procedur Figure 4.1 Students’ major, minor and negative learning siyÌes 45

ABSTRACT

Lnglish language teaching and learning styles play a crucial role in the

sueceas of boli (cachers and Jeamers Research has shown thal, a match between

learning styles and teaching styles will improve students learning experience and

achievements (Cornett 1983) According to Willing (1988 p.1) “An effort to

apeommodate learning styles by choosing suitable teaching styles, methadolagics and course organization can result in improved leamer satisfaction and attainment” Whereas, the mismatch between teachers’ teaching styles and leamers’ leaming

styles is very likely to happen and it not only leads to students’ Frustration and

demotivation in leaming but also greatly affects their performances instructors, confronted by low test grades, unresponsive or hostile classes, poor attendance and dropouts, may hevome overty critical of the students or begin to question their own

competence as teachers Despite its extreme importance, the matter of match or

mismatch between these two factors received very little attention in cur teaching

and learning context Therefore, this paper aims lo investigate the major {caching and learning style preferences of teachers and students at School of Foreign

Languages, Thar Nguyen Unversity Also, il is gomg lo point oul the imertwine

relationship between teachers’ teaching styles and leamers’ learning styles as well

as the importance of matching them in Vietnamese context It also investigates into

the perceptions of toachers and students on this mater, logether with their major teaching and leaming style preferences Moreover, recommendations and suggestions on how to understand teachers and leamers’ preferences and bridge the gap between them will be discussed

iti

Table 4.5 Teachers’ Demographic Inforrnaflofi c.ocooeooee

Table 4.6 Teachers’ Teaching Styles Preferences - 48