Luận văn an investigation into teachers' and students' attitudes toward the use of mother tongue in english language classrooms at hongai high school

and students’ attitudes towards the use of Li in the Lnglish language classroom, ‘The study conducted at Hon Gai Upper Sccondary School in Quang Ninh 3.. Methods of the study Both qua

TRAN NGOC THUONG

AN INVESTIGATION INTO TEACHERS’ AND STUDENTS’ ATTITUDES TOWARD THE USE OF MOTHER TONGUE

IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE CLASSROOMS

AT HON GAI HIGH SCHOOL

( Điều tra thái độ của giáo viên và học sinh đối với việc sử dụng tiếng mẹ đẻ trong lớp học tiếng Anh ở trường THPT Hòn Gai)

M.A MINOR PROGRAMME THESIS

FIELD: METHODOLOGY CODE: 601410

HANOI - 2010

Scope of the study

Ams of the study

Chapter I: Literature review

1.1 Anaverview on the history of the mother tongue used in EFL classraom

12 Arguments against and for L1 use

1.2.1 Arguments against L1 use

12.1.1 The L1 Acquisition Argument

12.1.2 The language Compartmetalization Argument

1.2.1.3 Provision of the Maxinman Target Language Argument

1.2.2 Arguments Favouring L1 Use

1.2.2.1 The Pedagogical Role

12.2.2 The Psychological Role

12.2.3 The Socio- cultural Role

1.3 Uses of mother tongue in L2 acquisition

1.4 Theoretical and Research Tividence Pavoring and Disfavoring 1.1 Use

15 Amount of L1 and the Leamers’ Level

Chapter TT The study

11 Participants

11.2 Data Colicetion Tnstruments

112.1 The sludent questionnaire

English as a foreign language

Grammar ‘Translation Method

analysis of translation ‘Ihe Direct Method would soon be discredited when it failed in the

al all costs This theoretical opposition to tho use of 1.1 was compounded by the development of the TEFL “industry”- there are now many situations in which the teacher simply doesn’t speak or even understand the students’ language, simply because the

loachor is an English native spsuker who does nol speak (he students’ native language

In the last thirty years or so, there have contimsed to be some methodologies which avoid the use the Li, with ‘Total Physical Response being one of these methodologies But others, like Suggestopaedia and Counselling Language Learning have included it as an intcgral part of classroom pedagogy

Recently though support for an English only policy has been declining, and some researchers and teachers have begum lo advocale more bilingual approach lo teaching „ which would incorporate the students’ L1 as a learning tool Others have even gone fir as

saying the use of L1 in the classroom is necessary (Schweers, 1999, p6) Additionally,,

new empirical findings of bilingual research have recently supported the use of T.1 in the classroom with a central argument that the side-ettect of L1 may be unwanted, resulting fiom the attitude of disaitected teacher (Butzcam,2003)

In short, the pendulum of L1 use swings with the methodological change Hor cxampts, during the leydays of the communicative approach, 1.1 use tended to be discouraged (Cole,1998; Cock,1999; 2001a, 2001b; Prodromou, 2001) The avoidance of learners” Li was also reflected in most of the L2 teaching material during this period (Atkinson,1987, 1995; Buckmaster, 2002, G Cook, 2001 b; Hawks, 2001),

L2 Arguments against and for L1 use

1.2.1 Arguments against L1 use

There is a varisly of arguments agains using the students’ mothar tongug (7.1) in the ESL or EFL classroom, Cook,¥ (2001b) presents three main arguments for avoiding

using L1 1m the target language classroom

PART A: INTRODUCTION

‘his part presenis the rationale, scope, aims, method, design and research

questions,

1 Rationale

‘The role of mother tongue or L1 in L2 classrooms is a controversial issue in L2

education, Differenl researchers, teachers and slurdenls hold different attitudes towards this issue Advocates of a monolingual approach suggest that the target language should be the sole medium of commnnication in other words, L1 should be prohibited in the classroom for oplizual usc of the target language, As Atkinson (1993) has pointed out “every second spent using Li is a sccond not spent using English” (p.12) The mother tongue has been treated as a taboo subject, source of guilt anda hint of teachers” weakness to teach properly (Prodromou, 2001), 2 waste of lime Gannleviciene and Kavakiauskiene, 2002) This position has been influential and often assumed to be the hallmarks of good language

teaching (Atkinson, 1995) In contrast, scholars such as Schweers (1999), Kramsch (1993),

Alkinson (1987) anguc that classroom usc of tho Jaarncrs? native language has eortain advantages in some ways Ll can have productive pedagogical, affective and socio- cultural roles, Atkinson (1987) claims that “the potential of mother tongus, as a classroom resource is so great that its role should merit considerable attention and discussion in any allempl to develop @ ‘post- communicative approach’ lo TEFL for adolescents and adults"(p.241) Therefore, the use of students native language should not be banned

From my personal experience both as a student and teacher of English as a foreign language, I belicve that the appropriate usc of the students’ native language is of some benefits te students’ learning ‘This belief motivates me to carry out this study, which aims

lo exarnine how the 1.1 is used in the English banguage classroom, TTopefidly the current study’s findings will partially help more people especially foreign language teachers acknowledge the role of Li in the EEL classroom as well as know how to balance L and

L2 use inthe KEL classroom appropriately

2 Scope of the sturly

The study limits itself to the use of students’ native language as well as the teachars

PART A: INTRODUCTION

‘his part presenis the rationale, scope, aims, method, design and research

questions,

1 Rationale

‘The role of mother tongue or L1 in L2 classrooms is a controversial issue in L2

education, Differenl researchers, teachers and slurdenls hold different attitudes towards this issue Advocates of a monolingual approach suggest that the target language should be the sole medium of commnnication in other words, L1 should be prohibited in the classroom for oplizual usc of the target language, As Atkinson (1993) has pointed out “every second spent using Li is a sccond not spent using English” (p.12) The mother tongue has been treated as a taboo subject, source of guilt anda hint of teachers” weakness to teach properly (Prodromou, 2001), 2 waste of lime Gannleviciene and Kavakiauskiene, 2002) This position has been influential and often assumed to be the hallmarks of good language

teaching (Atkinson, 1995) In contrast, scholars such as Schweers (1999), Kramsch (1993),

Alkinson (1987) anguc that classroom usc of tho Jaarncrs? native language has eortain advantages in some ways Ll can have productive pedagogical, affective and socio- cultural roles, Atkinson (1987) claims that “the potential of mother tongus, as a classroom resource is so great that its role should merit considerable attention and discussion in any allempl to develop @ ‘post- communicative approach’ lo TEFL for adolescents and adults"(p.241) Therefore, the use of students native language should not be banned

From my personal experience both as a student and teacher of English as a foreign language, I belicve that the appropriate usc of the students’ native language is of some benefits te students’ learning ‘This belief motivates me to carry out this study, which aims

lo exarnine how the 1.1 is used in the English banguage classroom, TTopefidly the current study’s findings will partially help more people especially foreign language teachers acknowledge the role of Li in the EEL classroom as well as know how to balance L and

L2 use inthe KEL classroom appropriately

2 Scope of the sturly

The study limits itself to the use of students’ native language as well as the teachars

Students’ self report on the purpose of Teacher’s L1 use

Students" hypothetical opinions of'Teachers’ reactions to their use of L] in

the classroom

The fiequency of teachers’ use of LL in various lessons,

Students’ self report on the purpose of Teacher’s L1 use

Students" hypothetical opinions of'Teachers’ reactions to their use of L] in

the classroom

The fiequency of teachers’ use of LL in various lessons,

and students’ attitudes towards the use of Li in the Lnglish language classroom, ‘The study

conducted at Hon Gai Upper Sccondary School in Quang Ninh

3 Aims of the study

The study aims to investigate the use of students’ mother tongue- Vietnamese- in

2, How otten do teachers and students use Vietnamese in EFL classtoom?

4 Methods of the study

Both qualitative and quantitative research methods are used, including classroom

observations, interviews, and questionnaire

© Classroom observations

Six conveniently- selected classes (of about 45 minutes in length) taught by three differcnt Icachors were observed Lo find out how frequerily and on what occasions Vietnamese is used

© Interviews

Post- observation interviews were conducted in order to gain insights into the teachers’ rationale of using I.1 in the classroom The interviews were transcribed filly and analyzed qualitativ:

5 Design of the study

The thesis cousisis of three patls:

Part A is the introduction, which presents the rationale, the scope, the aims, the methods and the design of the stady

Part B consis

of two closplars

Chapter £, the literature review, staris with a brief review of the literature on the role of mother longus in EFL classrooms, This includes major arguments against and for the use

of LI, and the pedagogic purposes for which student's native language could be employed

in the L2 classroom, Finally, an insight into the theoretical and research evidence favoring and disfavoring the use of I are presenled,

Chapter H, the study, presents the participants, the data collection instruments, the results

and the discussion of the findings

Part C

he conclusion of the stuly In this perl, some recommendations on the use of mother tongue in EFL classroom, the limitation of the study and some suggestions on further research are presented

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

and students’ attitudes towards the use of Li in the Lnglish language classroom, ‘The study

conducted at Hon Gai Upper Sccondary School in Quang Ninh

3 Aims of the study

The study aims to investigate the use of students’ mother tongue- Vietnamese- in

2, How otten do teachers and students use Vietnamese in EFL classtoom?

4 Methods of the study

Both qualitative and quantitative research methods are used, including classroom

observations, interviews, and questionnaire

© Classroom observations

Six conveniently- selected classes (of about 45 minutes in length) taught by three differcnt Icachors were observed Lo find out how frequerily and on what occasions Vietnamese is used

© Interviews

Post- observation interviews were conducted in order to gain insights into the teachers’ rationale of using I.1 in the classroom The interviews were transcribed filly and analyzed qualitativ:

5 Design of the study

The thesis cousisis of three patls:

Part A is the introduction, which presents the rationale, the scope, the aims, the methods and the design of the stady

Part B consis

of two closplars

PART B: DEVELOPMENT

CHAPTER I: LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapter reviews briefly the literature on the role of mother tongue in EFL classrooms Major arguments against and for the use of L1 and the pedagogic purposes for which students’ walive language coutd bs employed in the 1.2 classrooms are discussed in order to create a theoretical framework for the current study

L1 An overview on the history of the mother tongue used in EFL classroont

Looking at the history of mother tongue (LI) used in the L2 classroom, it can be casily seen Hat the use of LI keops changing periodically and regularly Several hundred years ago, bilingual teaching was favoured, with students learning through translation Llowatt (1984) tells us that the ideas of using L1 in the L2 classroom was a respected view

during the cra of The Grammar Translation Method-“GTM” GTM bad dominated late 19" and early 20" century teaching, and saw language learning as a means towards intellectual

development rather than as being for utilitarian, communicative purpose- the method in which nearly all phrases of (he lesson employ the use of students’ 1.1 and translation technique The use of LI to study L2 was almost universal and readily accepted, partly because language teaching placed an emphasis on the written word above the spoken words However, right afier (he Firs! World War, 1.1 use was scriously objected duc to GTM resulting in the lack of everyday vealistic spoken language content Moreover, the mass migration of people to other countries particular from Lurope to America slowly reversed this trend Loward a monolingual approach “IL was important for celucators then to refocus their lesson from students with a common L1 to students with mixed LL” (Hawks,

2001, p47) No longer could teacher rely on using L] to help them ‘The solution to such linguistically- mixed classes was using the 1.2 as the medium of teaching and the language teaching placed an cmphasis on the spoken language

A sudden and immediate removal of L1 from the classroom happened at the time of the Direel Method of the early 20 century This approach aimed at oral competence and believed languages were best learnt ina way that enmlated the “natural” Janguage learning

of the child Therefore, there was no place for translation in the classroom, ie with no

PART B: DEVELOPMENT

CHAPTER I: LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapter reviews briefly the literature on the role of mother tongue in EFL classrooms Major arguments against and for the use of L1 and the pedagogic purposes for which students’ walive language coutd bs employed in the 1.2 classrooms are discussed in order to create a theoretical framework for the current study

L1 An overview on the history of the mother tongue used in EFL classroont

Looking at the history of mother tongue (LI) used in the L2 classroom, it can be casily seen Hat the use of LI keops changing periodically and regularly Several hundred years ago, bilingual teaching was favoured, with students learning through translation Llowatt (1984) tells us that the ideas of using L1 in the L2 classroom was a respected view

during the cra of The Grammar Translation Method-“GTM” GTM bad dominated late 19" and early 20" century teaching, and saw language learning as a means towards intellectual

development rather than as being for utilitarian, communicative purpose- the method in which nearly all phrases of (he lesson employ the use of students’ 1.1 and translation technique The use of LI to study L2 was almost universal and readily accepted, partly because language teaching placed an emphasis on the written word above the spoken words However, right afier (he Firs! World War, 1.1 use was scriously objected duc to GTM resulting in the lack of everyday vealistic spoken language content Moreover, the mass migration of people to other countries particular from Lurope to America slowly reversed this trend Loward a monolingual approach “IL was important for celucators then to refocus their lesson from students with a common L1 to students with mixed LL” (Hawks,

2001, p47) No longer could teacher rely on using L] to help them ‘The solution to such linguistically- mixed classes was using the 1.2 as the medium of teaching and the language teaching placed an cmphasis on the spoken language

A sudden and immediate removal of L1 from the classroom happened at the time of the Direel Method of the early 20 century This approach aimed at oral competence and believed languages were best learnt ina way that enmlated the “natural” Janguage learning

of the child Therefore, there was no place for translation in the classroom, ie with no

Chapter £, the literature review, staris with a brief review of the literature on the role of mother longus in EFL classrooms, This includes major arguments against and for the use

of LI, and the pedagogic purposes for which student's native language could be employed

in the L2 classroom, Finally, an insight into the theoretical and research evidence favoring and disfavoring the use of I are presenled,

Chapter H, the study, presents the participants, the data collection instruments, the results

and the discussion of the findings

Part C

he conclusion of the stuly In this perl, some recommendations on the use of mother tongue in EFL classroom, the limitation of the study and some suggestions on further research are presented

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

Students’ self report on the purpose of Teacher’s L1 use

Students" hypothetical opinions of'Teachers’ reactions to their use of L] in

the classroom

The fiequency of teachers’ use of LL in various lessons,

Chapter £, the literature review, staris with a brief review of the literature on the role of mother longus in EFL classrooms, This includes major arguments against and for the use

of LI, and the pedagogic purposes for which student's native language could be employed

in the L2 classroom, Finally, an insight into the theoretical and research evidence favoring and disfavoring the use of I are presenled,

Chapter H, the study, presents the participants, the data collection instruments, the results

and the discussion of the findings

Part C

he conclusion of the stuly In this perl, some recommendations on the use of mother tongue in EFL classroom, the limitation of the study and some suggestions on further research are presented

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

and students’ attitudes towards the use of Li in the Lnglish language classroom, ‘The study

conducted at Hon Gai Upper Sccondary School in Quang Ninh

3 Aims of the study

The study aims to investigate the use of students’ mother tongue- Vietnamese- in

2, How otten do teachers and students use Vietnamese in EFL classtoom?

4 Methods of the study

Both qualitative and quantitative research methods are used, including classroom

observations, interviews, and questionnaire

© Classroom observations

Six conveniently- selected classes (of about 45 minutes in length) taught by three differcnt Icachors were observed Lo find out how frequerily and on what occasions Vietnamese is used

© Interviews

Post- observation interviews were conducted in order to gain insights into the teachers’ rationale of using I.1 in the classroom The interviews were transcribed filly and analyzed qualitativ:

5 Design of the study

The thesis cousisis of three patls:

Part A is the introduction, which presents the rationale, the scope, the aims, the methods and the design of the stady

Part B consis

of two closplars

and students’ attitudes towards the use of Li in the Lnglish language classroom, ‘The study

conducted at Hon Gai Upper Sccondary School in Quang Ninh

3 Aims of the study

The study aims to investigate the use of students’ mother tongue- Vietnamese- in

2, How otten do teachers and students use Vietnamese in EFL classtoom?

4 Methods of the study

Both qualitative and quantitative research methods are used, including classroom

observations, interviews, and questionnaire

© Classroom observations

Six conveniently- selected classes (of about 45 minutes in length) taught by three differcnt Icachors were observed Lo find out how frequerily and on what occasions Vietnamese is used

© Interviews

Post- observation interviews were conducted in order to gain insights into the teachers’ rationale of using I.1 in the classroom The interviews were transcribed filly and analyzed qualitativ:

5 Design of the study

The thesis cousisis of three patls:

Part A is the introduction, which presents the rationale, the scope, the aims, the methods and the design of the stady

Part B consis

of two closplars

PART A: INTRODUCTION

‘his part presenis the rationale, scope, aims, method, design and research

questions,

1 Rationale

‘The role of mother tongue or L1 in L2 classrooms is a controversial issue in L2

education, Differenl researchers, teachers and slurdenls hold different attitudes towards this issue Advocates of a monolingual approach suggest that the target language should be the sole medium of commnnication in other words, L1 should be prohibited in the classroom for oplizual usc of the target language, As Atkinson (1993) has pointed out “every second spent using Li is a sccond not spent using English” (p.12) The mother tongue has been treated as a taboo subject, source of guilt anda hint of teachers” weakness to teach properly (Prodromou, 2001), 2 waste of lime Gannleviciene and Kavakiauskiene, 2002) This position has been influential and often assumed to be the hallmarks of good language

teaching (Atkinson, 1995) In contrast, scholars such as Schweers (1999), Kramsch (1993),

Alkinson (1987) anguc that classroom usc of tho Jaarncrs? native language has eortain advantages in some ways Ll can have productive pedagogical, affective and socio- cultural roles, Atkinson (1987) claims that “the potential of mother tongus, as a classroom resource is so great that its role should merit considerable attention and discussion in any allempl to develop @ ‘post- communicative approach’ lo TEFL for adolescents and adults"(p.241) Therefore, the use of students native language should not be banned

From my personal experience both as a student and teacher of English as a foreign language, I belicve that the appropriate usc of the students’ native language is of some benefits te students’ learning ‘This belief motivates me to carry out this study, which aims

lo exarnine how the 1.1 is used in the English banguage classroom, TTopefidly the current study’s findings will partially help more people especially foreign language teachers acknowledge the role of Li in the EEL classroom as well as know how to balance L and

L2 use inthe KEL classroom appropriately

2 Scope of the sturly

The study limits itself to the use of students’ native language as well as the teachars

Students’ self report on the purpose of Teacher’s L1 use

Students" hypothetical opinions of'Teachers’ reactions to their use of L] in

the classroom

The fiequency of teachers’ use of LL in various lessons,

Students’ self report on the purpose of Teacher’s L1 use

Students" hypothetical opinions of'Teachers’ reactions to their use of L] in

the classroom

The fiequency of teachers’ use of LL in various lessons,

PART B: DEVELOPMENT

CHAPTER I: LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapter reviews briefly the literature on the role of mother tongue in EFL classrooms Major arguments against and for the use of L1 and the pedagogic purposes for which students’ walive language coutd bs employed in the 1.2 classrooms are discussed in order to create a theoretical framework for the current study

L1 An overview on the history of the mother tongue used in EFL classroont

Looking at the history of mother tongue (LI) used in the L2 classroom, it can be casily seen Hat the use of LI keops changing periodically and regularly Several hundred years ago, bilingual teaching was favoured, with students learning through translation Llowatt (1984) tells us that the ideas of using L1 in the L2 classroom was a respected view

during the cra of The Grammar Translation Method-“GTM” GTM bad dominated late 19" and early 20" century teaching, and saw language learning as a means towards intellectual

development rather than as being for utilitarian, communicative purpose- the method in which nearly all phrases of (he lesson employ the use of students’ 1.1 and translation technique The use of LI to study L2 was almost universal and readily accepted, partly because language teaching placed an emphasis on the written word above the spoken words However, right afier (he Firs! World War, 1.1 use was scriously objected duc to GTM resulting in the lack of everyday vealistic spoken language content Moreover, the mass migration of people to other countries particular from Lurope to America slowly reversed this trend Loward a monolingual approach “IL was important for celucators then to refocus their lesson from students with a common L1 to students with mixed LL” (Hawks,

2001, p47) No longer could teacher rely on using L] to help them ‘The solution to such linguistically- mixed classes was using the 1.2 as the medium of teaching and the language teaching placed an cmphasis on the spoken language

A sudden and immediate removal of L1 from the classroom happened at the time of the Direel Method of the early 20 century This approach aimed at oral competence and believed languages were best learnt ina way that enmlated the “natural” Janguage learning

of the child Therefore, there was no place for translation in the classroom, ie with no

Chapter £, the literature review, staris with a brief review of the literature on the role of mother longus in EFL classrooms, This includes major arguments against and for the use

of LI, and the pedagogic purposes for which student's native language could be employed

in the L2 classroom, Finally, an insight into the theoretical and research evidence favoring and disfavoring the use of I are presenled,

Chapter H, the study, presents the participants, the data collection instruments, the results

and the discussion of the findings

Part C

he conclusion of the stuly In this perl, some recommendations on the use of mother tongue in EFL classroom, the limitation of the study and some suggestions on further research are presented

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

analysis of translation ‘Ihe Direct Method would soon be discredited when it failed in the

al all costs This theoretical opposition to tho use of 1.1 was compounded by the development of the TEFL “industry”- there are now many situations in which the teacher simply doesn’t speak or even understand the students’ language, simply because the

loachor is an English native spsuker who does nol speak (he students’ native language

In the last thirty years or so, there have contimsed to be some methodologies which avoid the use the Li, with ‘Total Physical Response being one of these methodologies But others, like Suggestopaedia and Counselling Language Learning have included it as an intcgral part of classroom pedagogy

Recently though support for an English only policy has been declining, and some researchers and teachers have begum lo advocale more bilingual approach lo teaching „ which would incorporate the students’ L1 as a learning tool Others have even gone fir as

saying the use of L1 in the classroom is necessary (Schweers, 1999, p6) Additionally,,

new empirical findings of bilingual research have recently supported the use of T.1 in the classroom with a central argument that the side-ettect of L1 may be unwanted, resulting fiom the attitude of disaitected teacher (Butzcam,2003)

In short, the pendulum of L1 use swings with the methodological change Hor cxampts, during the leydays of the communicative approach, 1.1 use tended to be discouraged (Cole,1998; Cock,1999; 2001a, 2001b; Prodromou, 2001) The avoidance of learners” Li was also reflected in most of the L2 teaching material during this period (Atkinson,1987, 1995; Buckmaster, 2002, G Cook, 2001 b; Hawks, 2001),

L2 Arguments against and for L1 use

1.2.1 Arguments against L1 use

There is a varisly of arguments agains using the students’ mothar tongug (7.1) in the ESL or EFL classroom, Cook,¥ (2001b) presents three main arguments for avoiding

using L1 1m the target language classroom

English as a foreign language

Grammar ‘Translation Method

analysis of translation ‘Ihe Direct Method would soon be discredited when it failed in the

al all costs This theoretical opposition to tho use of 1.1 was compounded by the development of the TEFL “industry”- there are now many situations in which the teacher simply doesn’t speak or even understand the students’ language, simply because the

loachor is an English native spsuker who does nol speak (he students’ native language

In the last thirty years or so, there have contimsed to be some methodologies which avoid the use the Li, with ‘Total Physical Response being one of these methodologies But others, like Suggestopaedia and Counselling Language Learning have included it as an intcgral part of classroom pedagogy

Recently though support for an English only policy has been declining, and some researchers and teachers have begum lo advocale more bilingual approach lo teaching „ which would incorporate the students’ L1 as a learning tool Others have even gone fir as

saying the use of L1 in the classroom is necessary (Schweers, 1999, p6) Additionally,,

new empirical findings of bilingual research have recently supported the use of T.1 in the classroom with a central argument that the side-ettect of L1 may be unwanted, resulting fiom the attitude of disaitected teacher (Butzcam,2003)

In short, the pendulum of L1 use swings with the methodological change Hor cxampts, during the leydays of the communicative approach, 1.1 use tended to be discouraged (Cole,1998; Cock,1999; 2001a, 2001b; Prodromou, 2001) The avoidance of learners” Li was also reflected in most of the L2 teaching material during this period (Atkinson,1987, 1995; Buckmaster, 2002, G Cook, 2001 b; Hawks, 2001),

L2 Arguments against and for L1 use

1.2.1 Arguments against L1 use

There is a varisly of arguments agains using the students’ mothar tongug (7.1) in the ESL or EFL classroom, Cook,¥ (2001b) presents three main arguments for avoiding

using L1 1m the target language classroom

English as a foreign language

Grammar ‘Translation Method

PART B: DEVELOPMENT

CHAPTER I: LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapter reviews briefly the literature on the role of mother tongue in EFL classrooms Major arguments against and for the use of L1 and the pedagogic purposes for which students’ walive language coutd bs employed in the 1.2 classrooms are discussed in order to create a theoretical framework for the current study

L1 An overview on the history of the mother tongue used in EFL classroont

Looking at the history of mother tongue (LI) used in the L2 classroom, it can be casily seen Hat the use of LI keops changing periodically and regularly Several hundred years ago, bilingual teaching was favoured, with students learning through translation Llowatt (1984) tells us that the ideas of using L1 in the L2 classroom was a respected view

during the cra of The Grammar Translation Method-“GTM” GTM bad dominated late 19" and early 20" century teaching, and saw language learning as a means towards intellectual

development rather than as being for utilitarian, communicative purpose- the method in which nearly all phrases of (he lesson employ the use of students’ 1.1 and translation technique The use of LI to study L2 was almost universal and readily accepted, partly because language teaching placed an emphasis on the written word above the spoken words However, right afier (he Firs! World War, 1.1 use was scriously objected duc to GTM resulting in the lack of everyday vealistic spoken language content Moreover, the mass migration of people to other countries particular from Lurope to America slowly reversed this trend Loward a monolingual approach “IL was important for celucators then to refocus their lesson from students with a common L1 to students with mixed LL” (Hawks,

2001, p47) No longer could teacher rely on using L] to help them ‘The solution to such linguistically- mixed classes was using the 1.2 as the medium of teaching and the language teaching placed an cmphasis on the spoken language

A sudden and immediate removal of L1 from the classroom happened at the time of the Direel Method of the early 20 century This approach aimed at oral competence and believed languages were best learnt ina way that enmlated the “natural” Janguage learning

of the child Therefore, there was no place for translation in the classroom, ie with no

Chapter £, the literature review, staris with a brief review of the literature on the role of mother longus in EFL classrooms, This includes major arguments against and for the use

of LI, and the pedagogic purposes for which student's native language could be employed

in the L2 classroom, Finally, an insight into the theoretical and research evidence favoring and disfavoring the use of I are presenled,

Chapter H, the study, presents the participants, the data collection instruments, the results

and the discussion of the findings

Part C

he conclusion of the stuly In this perl, some recommendations on the use of mother tongue in EFL classroom, the limitation of the study and some suggestions on further research are presented

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

English as a foreign language

Grammar ‘Translation Method

English as a foreign language

Grammar ‘Translation Method

analysis of translation ‘Ihe Direct Method would soon be discredited when it failed in the

al all costs This theoretical opposition to tho use of 1.1 was compounded by the development of the TEFL “industry”- there are now many situations in which the teacher simply doesn’t speak or even understand the students’ language, simply because the

loachor is an English native spsuker who does nol speak (he students’ native language

In the last thirty years or so, there have contimsed to be some methodologies which avoid the use the Li, with ‘Total Physical Response being one of these methodologies But others, like Suggestopaedia and Counselling Language Learning have included it as an intcgral part of classroom pedagogy

Recently though support for an English only policy has been declining, and some researchers and teachers have begum lo advocale more bilingual approach lo teaching „ which would incorporate the students’ L1 as a learning tool Others have even gone fir as

saying the use of L1 in the classroom is necessary (Schweers, 1999, p6) Additionally,,

new empirical findings of bilingual research have recently supported the use of T.1 in the classroom with a central argument that the side-ettect of L1 may be unwanted, resulting fiom the attitude of disaitected teacher (Butzcam,2003)

In short, the pendulum of L1 use swings with the methodological change Hor cxampts, during the leydays of the communicative approach, 1.1 use tended to be discouraged (Cole,1998; Cock,1999; 2001a, 2001b; Prodromou, 2001) The avoidance of learners” Li was also reflected in most of the L2 teaching material during this period (Atkinson,1987, 1995; Buckmaster, 2002, G Cook, 2001 b; Hawks, 2001),

L2 Arguments against and for L1 use

1.2.1 Arguments against L1 use

There is a varisly of arguments agains using the students’ mothar tongug (7.1) in the ESL or EFL classroom, Cook,¥ (2001b) presents three main arguments for avoiding

using L1 1m the target language classroom

and students’ attitudes towards the use of Li in the Lnglish language classroom, ‘The study

conducted at Hon Gai Upper Sccondary School in Quang Ninh

3 Aims of the study

The study aims to investigate the use of students’ mother tongue- Vietnamese- in

2, How otten do teachers and students use Vietnamese in EFL classtoom?

4 Methods of the study

Both qualitative and quantitative research methods are used, including classroom

observations, interviews, and questionnaire

© Classroom observations

Six conveniently- selected classes (of about 45 minutes in length) taught by three differcnt Icachors were observed Lo find out how frequerily and on what occasions Vietnamese is used

© Interviews

Post- observation interviews were conducted in order to gain insights into the teachers’ rationale of using I.1 in the classroom The interviews were transcribed filly and analyzed qualitativ:

5 Design of the study

The thesis cousisis of three patls:

Part A is the introduction, which presents the rationale, the scope, the aims, the methods and the design of the stady

Part B consis

of two closplars

and students’ attitudes towards the use of Li in the Lnglish language classroom, ‘The study

conducted at Hon Gai Upper Sccondary School in Quang Ninh

3 Aims of the study

The study aims to investigate the use of students’ mother tongue- Vietnamese- in

2, How otten do teachers and students use Vietnamese in EFL classtoom?

4 Methods of the study

Both qualitative and quantitative research methods are used, including classroom

observations, interviews, and questionnaire

© Classroom observations

Six conveniently- selected classes (of about 45 minutes in length) taught by three differcnt Icachors were observed Lo find out how frequerily and on what occasions Vietnamese is used

© Interviews

Post- observation interviews were conducted in order to gain insights into the teachers’ rationale of using I.1 in the classroom The interviews were transcribed filly and analyzed qualitativ:

5 Design of the study

The thesis cousisis of three patls:

Part A is the introduction, which presents the rationale, the scope, the aims, the methods and the design of the stady

Part B consis

of two closplars

analysis of translation ‘Ihe Direct Method would soon be discredited when it failed in the

al all costs This theoretical opposition to tho use of 1.1 was compounded by the development of the TEFL “industry”- there are now many situations in which the teacher simply doesn’t speak or even understand the students’ language, simply because the

loachor is an English native spsuker who does nol speak (he students’ native language

In the last thirty years or so, there have contimsed to be some methodologies which avoid the use the Li, with ‘Total Physical Response being one of these methodologies But others, like Suggestopaedia and Counselling Language Learning have included it as an intcgral part of classroom pedagogy

Recently though support for an English only policy has been declining, and some researchers and teachers have begum lo advocale more bilingual approach lo teaching „ which would incorporate the students’ L1 as a learning tool Others have even gone fir as

saying the use of L1 in the classroom is necessary (Schweers, 1999, p6) Additionally,,

new empirical findings of bilingual research have recently supported the use of T.1 in the classroom with a central argument that the side-ettect of L1 may be unwanted, resulting fiom the attitude of disaitected teacher (Butzcam,2003)

In short, the pendulum of L1 use swings with the methodological change Hor cxampts, during the leydays of the communicative approach, 1.1 use tended to be discouraged (Cole,1998; Cock,1999; 2001a, 2001b; Prodromou, 2001) The avoidance of learners” Li was also reflected in most of the L2 teaching material during this period (Atkinson,1987, 1995; Buckmaster, 2002, G Cook, 2001 b; Hawks, 2001),

L2 Arguments against and for L1 use

1.2.1 Arguments against L1 use

There is a varisly of arguments agains using the students’ mothar tongug (7.1) in the ESL or EFL classroom, Cook,¥ (2001b) presents three main arguments for avoiding

using L1 1m the target language classroom

Students’ self report on the purpose of Teacher’s L1 use

Students" hypothetical opinions of'Teachers’ reactions to their use of L] in

the classroom

The fiequency of teachers’ use of LL in various lessons,