Evaluation of team teaching in an English course at Faculty of Tourism, Hanoi Open University = Đánh giá việc giảng dạy theo nhóm trong một khóa học tiếng Anh t20150227

Research question 1: What are the strengths of the team teaching in the pilot team-taught lessons according to the reflections of the teachers and the learners?. With the belief that the

Table of Contents

Declaration………

Acknowledgements………

Abstract………

Table of Contents………

List of Abbreviations………

List of Tables………

i ii iii iv vi vii PART 1 INTRODUCTION……… 1

1 Rationale……… 1

2 Aims of the study……… 2

3 Research questions……… 2

4 Scope of the study……… 2

5 Methods of the study……… 3

6 Significance of the study……… 3

7 Organization of the remainder of the thesis……… 3

PART 2 DEVELOPMENT……… 4

CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW……… 4

1.1 Key terms and key concepts……… 4

1.1.1 Defining team teaching……… 4

1.1.2 Defining NEST and non-NEST……… 5

1.1.3 Teaching evaluation……… 5

1.1.4 Characteristics of effective team teaching……… 7

1.2 Studies on evaluation of team teaching of NESTs and non-NESTs……… 8

1.2.1 The JET……… 9

1.2.2 The EPIK……… 10

1.2.3 The PSED……… 11

CHAPTER 2: THE METHODOLOGY……… 14

2.1 Setting of the study 14 2.2 The participants of the study……… 14

2.2.1 Teachers……… 14

2.2.2 Students……… 15

2.3 Data collection instruments……… 16

2.3.1 Questionnaire……… 16

2.3.2 Teaching diary……… 17

2.3.3 Informal interview……… 17

2.4 Data collection procedure……… 17

2.4.1 Before the pilot team teaching……… 17

2.4.2 During the pilot team teaching……… 18

2.4.3 After the pilot team teaching……… 18

CHAPTER 3: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS……… 20

3.1 Findings and discussions……… 20

3.1.1 Research question 1: What are the strengths of the team teaching in the pilot team-taught lessons according to the reflections of the teachers and the learners? 20 3.1.1.1 The effectiveness of the team-taught lessons……… 20

3.1.1.2 The teachers‟ professional development……… 27

3.1.2 Research question 2: What are the drawbacks of the team teaching in the pilot team-taught lessons according to the reflections of the teachers and the learners? 30 3.2 Pedagogical suggestions……… 33

3.2.1 Selecting team members……… 33

3.2.2 Planning……… 34

3.2.3 Leadership……… 34

PART 3 CONCLUSION……… 36

1 Summary of findings and discussions……… 36

2 Limitations of the study……… 37

3 Recommendations for further studies……… 37

REFERENCES……… 38

List of Abbreviations

CLT: Communicative language teaching NEST: Native English-speaking teacher EFL: English as a foreign language FOT: Faculty of Tourism, Hanoi Open University Non-NEST: Non-native English-speaking teacher TEFL: Teaching English as a foreign language VTE: Vietnamese teacher of English

List of Tables

Table 1: Students‟ involvement in team-taught lessons

Table 2: Students‟ reflections on team-taught lessons

Table 3: Students‟ reflections on their educational progress in team-taught lessons Table 4: Students‟ reflections on the collaboration of the NEST and the VTE Table 5: Team teaching‟s negative impacts on students‟ learning

PART 1: INTRODUCTION

1 Rationale

English is the lingua franca used by people all over the world Not until Vietnam‟s government started its international integration in the mid-1990s, was English considered essential for the country‟s integration and development Being aware of the fact that higher-paying jobs are often offered to those who can use English in their work, more and more Vietnamese people, especially university undergraduates and graduates, are learning English from a variety of sources Sadly, a great number of university graduates are estimated unable to use English in their work by employers As mentioned in the article

„Vietnamese students bad in English, why?‟ (Vietnamnet, 2008) and in many other articles

and studies, both the Ministry of Education and Training (MOET) and universities have recognized this sad reality MOET blamed the problem on universities for their low quality

in English training or the inefficiency of English teaching

With the attempt to improve the qualifications of Vietnamese teachers of English (VTEs) and to upgrade the English proficiency of Vietnamese learners, many measures have been discussed and implemented Among those, to attract more native English-speaking teachers (NESTs) is becoming a trend with the hope that they can help create the communicative environment, improve learners‟ English proficiency, and advance VTEs‟ teaching qualifications However, there are debates over whether who, NESTs or VTEs, are better English teachers Both teachers have their own strengths and weaknesses; hence, their team teaching is believed to be the best teaching model, combining their strengths together (Buckley, 2000).Team teaching in teaching English as a foreign language (TEFL) has been dominating, especially in many countries in East Asia like Japan and Korea However, this model seems unfamiliar in Vietnam‟s TEFL because team teaching has exposed not only a wide range of strengths but also a number of drawbacks

With the belief that the strengths of team teaching overshadow its drawbacks and team teaching of NESTs and non-NESTs is the best choice for Communicative Language Teaching (CLT), the researcher decided to organize pilot team-taught lessons at her work place The pilot team teaching was evaluated for withdrawing both its strengths and

drawbacks in order to prove the hypothesis of the researcher Consequently, „Evaluation of

Team Teaching in an English Course at Faculty of Tourism, Hanoi Open University‟ is the

title of her master thesis

2 Aims of the study

The study was aimed to evaluate the pilot team teaching of a NEST and a VTE in four team-taught lessons of one English course at Faculty of Tourism, Hanoi Open University (FOT) The evaluation was generalized based on the reflections of the participants including two teaming teachers and their students Both the strengths and the limitations of the pilot team teaching related to the effectiveness of the lessons and the teachers‟ professional development were explored It was hoped that the study could provide the researcher and her colleagues with insights of the effectiveness of team teaching of NESTs and VTEs in English courses at the faculty, and then call for further experiments and full practice

4 Scope of the study

In the volume of this minor thesis, the evaluation of team teaching was aimed to explore its strengths and drawbacks referring to its impacts on the effectiveness of the lessons and the teachers‟ professional development Therefore, all matters not supporting the researcher‟s objectives were put aside

In addition, this is a small-scale research with the data collected through the reflections of limited participants – 2 teachers and 30 students of one English class – about

four team-taught lessons via „questionnaire‟, ‘teaching diary‟, and „informal interview‟

Hence, no generalization of the findings derived from the study was intended; whereas, the

localization of research was proposed

5 Methods of the study

In order to gain a wealth of data for evaluating the team teaching, mixed-methods approach was chosen for the research The questionnaire was used to achieve quantitative data from the students‟ feedbacks, and the teaching diary to achieve qualitative data from the teachers‟ self-reflections Informal interviews with both the teachers and the students were also conducted to clarify the findings from the questionnaire and the teaching diary

6 Significance of the study

This study is important to the researcher and her colleagues at FOT since it serves

as the first study on team teaching of NESTs and VTEs at the faculty Its success may inspire further in-depth studies on this controversial model of teaching Because team teaching is costly, complicated, and time-consuming, a full, large-scale practice is plausible only when its benefits far overweigh its drawbacks and successful application is ensured Pilot studies like this are vital in the experimenting process In fact, the study answered the call for innovations in teaching at FOT Besides, thanks to the study, the teachers and the students involved had chances to experience a new form of TEFL

7 Organization of the remainder of the thesis

The study was developed into three chapters: Literature Review, the Methodology, and Findings and Discussions The first chapter presents the theoretical background of the study as well as reviews the literature in the research area In the second chapter, there are descriptions of the research method, participants and the data collection procedures The findings and discussions, as well as some pedagogical suggestions are mentioned in the third chapter After all, a summary of findings and discussions, limitations of the study, and suggestions for further studies are presented to conclude the thesis The list of references and appendices are also displayed

PART 2: DEVELOPMENT

CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW

The chapter contains two main sections The first section presents the theoretical background for the study with the definitions of team teaching, NEST and non-NEST, and basic knowledge about teaching evaluation and characteristics of effective team teaching The second reviews the literature on the evaluation of team teaching between NESTs and non-NESTs After that, some considerations are presented to stress the significance of the study

1.1 Key terms and key concepts

1.1.1 Defining team teaching

Team teaching is achieved by two or more teachers sharing the responsibility and instruction to the same students at the same time (Vaughn, Schumm, & Arguelles, 1997) The heart of team teaching is not in details of the structure and organization but more in the essential spirit of cooperative planning, constant collaboration, close unity, unrestrained communication, and sincere sharing Bailey, Curtis and Nunan (2001) pointed out that team teaching is not only teaching together They identified three phases of team teaching: pre-instructional planning, instructional in-class teamwork, and post-instructional

follow-up work The term „team teaching’ should not be mistaken for „co-teaching‟

Co-teaching occurs when two or more educators co-plan, co-instruct, and co-assess a group of students with diverse needs in the same general education Team teaching is just one model

of co-teaching, exactly the highest level of co-teaching

There are six main models of team teaching as follows: traditional team teaching, collaborative teaching, complimentary or supportive team teaching, parallel instruction, differentiated split class, and monitoring teacher (Robinson & Schaible, 1995) By chance, the team teaching in the study was the combination of the first three models In traditional team teaching, the teaming teachers actively share the instruction of contents and skills to all students In collaborative teaching, the teachers work together in designing the course and teach the materials not by the usual monologue, but rather by exchanging and discussing ideas and theories in front of the learners who often work in pairs or groups

The complimentary or supportive team teaching occurs when one teacher is responsible for teaching the content to the students and the other is in charge of providing follow-up activities

1.1.2 Defining NEST and non-NEST

As the concept of native and non-native speakers has not yet reached an agreement (Kachru, 1985; Kramsch, 1999; Medgyes, 2001), this research adopted one of the latest

definitions by Medgyes (2001)

A NEST (Native English-speaking teacher) is a teacher who speaks English as a

native language, works in an environment with English language as a foreign language (EFL); whose students are monolingual; and does not speak the same native language as his or her students The teaming teacher of the study, a New Zealander, is a NEST

A Non-NEST (Non-native English-speaking teacher) is a teacher who speaks

English as a second or foreign language, works in an EFL environment; whose students are monolingual, and speaks the same native language as his or her students The non-NEST of the study is a VTE

1.1.3 Teaching evaluation

According to Fleischman and Williams (1996), the process of teaching evaluation involves collecting, analyzing, and interpreting information about teaching and learning in order to measure the effectiveness of teaching The evaluation can focus on different aspects of teaching and learning to motivate modification in teaching through reflective practice

The principles of teaching evaluation recently suggested by the Center for Research

on Learning and Teaching, University of Michigan are useful references Firstly, the use of multiple methods involving multiple sources of data is highly recommended Next, the criteria for effective teaching should be determined before the criteria for teaching evaluation The teachers should be involved in the process of making evaluation criteria Finally, teaching evaluation systems should be flexible to accommodate diversity in instructional methods Effective teaching evaluation must be individualized or localized This principle was supported by Naoki Fujimoto, Tokyo University of Science, Suwa, in

his journal „Localizing Team-Teaching Research’ for Asian EFL Journal

In the study „Improving College Teaching’ for Instructional Development Program,

University of Oklahoma in 1999, Peter Seldin suggested popular sources of data for teaching evaluation including students, teacher‟s self-reflection, observers, and videos Students, the best source for understanding the immediate effects of teaching, can provide informal assessment via questionnaires or interviews - two distinct ways of obtaining information from students However, Sedin warned that although they know better than anyone what their own reactions are, they may be biased and limited in their own perspectives in teaching evaluation Besides, teachers‟ self-reflections are informative; the teachers do have their own sense of what happens since they directly participate in the situation – they themselves create the situation However, the lack of objectivity and misreading students‟ responses are potential drawbacks Data obtained from observations

of a third party, bringing both an outsider‟s perspective and professional expertise to the evaluation, are also valuable Teaching can be evaluated by colleagues (peer-evaluation),

or by instructional specialists through discussions based on observations as well as the review of course materials, syllabus, instructional contributions, and student performance Seldin also highly recommended the use of video recordings of the lessons for evaluating teaching thanks to its characteristic of giving evaluators totally objective information

There is not a standard system for teaching evaluation under all circumstances Therefore, evaluators develop their own evaluation criteria based on their own purposes of evaluation and specific setting of EFL teaching and learning Generally, the assessment of the quality of classroom instruction and learners‟ achievement are the central elements of teaching evaluation The classroom performance can be assessed based on the following criteria applied at FOT:

1 Clear explanation of the objectives for the lesson;

2 Good instruction for group interaction and individual student interaction, and encouragement of class discussions;

3 Good relations with students;

4 Reasonable board presentation, clear handwriting, and suitable voice projection;

5 Appropriate use of teaching equipments to the lesson;

6 Precise, systematic, and adequate contents and content presentation;

7 Good combination of teaching methods

1.1.4 Characteristics of effective team teaching

An effective team teaching identifies a range of characteristics related to effectiveness of the lesson and the teachers‟ professional development

Here are the criteria for lesson evaluation generalized by Ur (1996) after consulting

a number of EFL teachers:

1 The learners were active all the time

2 The learners were attentive all the time

3 The learners enjoyed the lesson, were motivated

4 The class seemed to be learning the material well

5 The lesson went according to plan

6 The language was used communicatively throughout

7 The learners were engaging with the foreign language throughout

In the other words, an effective lesson often involves the above features Moreover, there must be the recognition of learners‟ educational progress since the most important objective of teaching is always to improve learners‟ competences

In addition, distinctively, effectiveness of a team-taught lesson relies on the collaboration of teaming teachers in not only presenting but also planning, processing, and problem solving (Talbert & McLaughlin, 1993; Smylie, 1995; Knezevic & Scholl, 1996) Goetz (2000) reinforced the decisive contribution of planning, which involves teaming teachers‟ discussions over goals of the course, learners‟ needs, roles of each teacher, modifications of teaching materials and teaching contents, to the success of team-taught lessons In terms of leadership, there must be the parity among participants, which makes team teaching different from the other kinds of co-teaching Furthermore, teaming teachers have to cooperate in classroom management – one of key components of team teaching (Gatelys, 1999) With different philosophies and beliefs, they need to establish a set of guidelines and strictly follow them; which is sensitive, easily causing the breakup of the team or trouble in the student-teacher relations With the sense of trust and collegiality, they help each other to expose the individual strengths and limit each other‟s weaknesses Actually, team teaching between two teachers with different characteristics is more beneficial when the differences are harmoniously combined

The collaboration of teachers can be measured by both their verbal and non-verbal communication, especially in the classroom (Goetz, 2000) A good team often has its set of signals or post signs for quick communication without distracting learners With the team

of a NEST and a non-NEST, this factor is important since it is not only the essential factor for smoothness of the lesson, but also the model of international interactions between native English speakers and non-native English speakers

Effective team teaching requires teachers to be flexible, reflective, and active They move in and out, facilitatng groups of students They have a range of different experiences and strategies available to support their diverse learners

Benoit and Haugh (2001) attached effective team teaching with the teaming teachers‟ professional development before, during, and after class – that is during the processes of planning, teaching, and evaluating (Head & Taylor, 1997; McLaughlin, 1997; King & Newmann, 2000; Kwakman, 2003) The professional competence of each teacher

is developed because teachers‟ collaborative work includes exchanges of new ideas and information, also promotes supportive dialogues and interactions among colleagues Team teaching is meaningful for not only experienced teachers to change their norms of practice and pedagogy but also inexperienced ones to upgrade their teaching competence, contacting different teachers with different views of teaching or similar experiences of difficulties In TEFL setting, the ensured professional development for teaming teachers is the factor mostly considered for conducting team-taught lessons

1.2 Studies on evaluation of team teaching of NESTs and non-NESTs

The spread of team teaching in East Asia‟s TEFL context has called for the researchers‟ attention and consideration (Benoit & Haugh, 2001) Experience of the countries with the similar EFL contexts with Vietnam is valuable Therefore, the researcher

of this study focused on reviewing studies related to the evaluation of team teaching between NESTs and non-NESTs in Japan, Korea, and Hong Kong, which scored the high points with the model of team teaching, in order to provide the solid background for her study The literature reports the debates around three big schemes including the Japan Exchange and Teaching program (JET); the English Program in Korea (EPIK); and Primary School English Development (PSED) in Hong Kong

1.2.1 The JET

In the context of East Asia‟s TEFL, team teaching in Japan has the longest history and the largest scope with the Japan Exchange and Teaching (JET) scheme established in

1987 In the JET, team teaching jointly by a Japanese teacher of English (JTE) and a NEST

as an assistant English teacher (AET) is offered in English classes with the aim of improving foreign language education and promoting international exchange For over fifteen years of implementation, the JET program – its outcomes and efficiency – has been evaluated in order to generate pedagogical suggestions for improving the quality of the team teaching process and its end -products

Based on a large-scale questionnaire survey about various aspects of team teaching

in Japan, Browne & Wada (1998) reported that the overall response to team teaching was

highly favorable: „the program has clearly had an impact on the JTEs themselves as well

as their confidence level in working together with native speakers – AETs‟ McConnell

(2000) also described the overwhelmingly positive reaction of students to team taught classes related to the development of conversational English and the break from traditional teacher-centered instruction In Koji Igawa‟s survey in 2009, the participants including 74 JTEs and 31 AETs found team teaching positively influential to students‟ cross-cultural understanding and learning motivation as well as teachers‟ professional expertise According to the findings, both JTEs and AETs recognized the importance of planning and preparation for team teaching Although a significant number of the participating JTEs and AETs thought they shared the initiative in team-taught classes, some AETs reported that they generally took more initiative in team teaching Regarding student management, JTEs assumed more responsibility than AETs; about half of the AETs said that their JTE peers carried more responsibility in class management About the language use, the JTEs used both English and Japanese in the lessons; both agreed that students understood only half of what they said in English In this study, the JTE‟s proficiency in English is not highly ranked by either the AET or the JTE group The comments from the participants underscore the necessity for language improvement within the realm of professional development of non-NESTs Gorsuch (2002) argued that the JET scheme provided JTEs with a professional development opportunity, helping diversify their instructional practices and stretching their abilities to communicate in English

Although team-teaching shows many advantages in Japanese English classrooms, many difficulties have been pointed out in this partnership between a JTL and an AET (Scholefield, 1996; Gorsuch, 2002) Some the weaknesses of the JET scheme were explored as follows:

 The scheme is not really about improving English language teaching which reduced its impact at that level;

 The fact that AETs are largely untrained fresh graduates also reduced the impact of the program in terms of foreign language education;

 The regulations assigning NESTs as AETS reduced their role in the class and affected the ensuing impact and effectiveness of the scheme Also, a limited role for some AETs created the feeling that they were just a „human tape recorder‟

In the International TEYL Journal, Basil Tonks (2006) confirmed the fact many JTEs disliked team teaching This was because of a lack of team spirit and poor communication between teaming teachers In addition, JTEs and AETs seemed to experience stress because of significant differences in their expectations of each other

1.2.2 The EPIK

The EPIK (English Program in Korea) scheme was aimed to improve the English speaking abilities of Korean students and teachers, to develop cultural exchanges, and to reform methodologies in teaching English through the collaboration between NESTs and Korean teachers of English The duties of a NEST in the EPIK are:

 conducting conversational English classes for Korean teachers and students;

 preparing and helping develop teaching materials;

 assisting with activities related to English language education and other curricular activities;

extra- assisting and/or jointly conducting English classes with a Korean teacher;

 performing other duties specified by the host provincial officers of education

(EPIK Orientation – Seoul Metropolitan Office of Education)

Some scholars have questioned the value of the EPIK Scheme In his research in

2002, David R Carless noticed a rise of many tensions including cultural conflicts between NESTs and Korean teachers because of difficulties in co-operation related to time arrangement, Korean teachers‟ willingness to work with NESTs, or lack of understanding

of the rationale and practice of team-teaching A common reported scenario was that the NEST planned the lesson independently and taught most of it whilst the Korean teacher was present to help out with classroom management or communication problems

On the contrary, when Carless continued his study in 2006, he explored the case of successful team teaching in the EPIK in Gangwon Province In this case, the two teachers met once per week to plan the next week‟s lesson, taking it in turns to bring suitable materials and trying to integrate the materials with the students‟ regular English lessons

In class, they tried to share roles equally The Korean teacher stated that she might sometimes repeat the NEST‟s instructions in English to support her students, but would not use Korean during the team-taught lessons She saw three main advantages of team-teaching:

 Korean teachers know their students‟ standard so can support NEST in preparing suitable materials

 The Korean teacher can develop teaching methods and improve her English communication skills

 The presence of the Korean teacher can help maintain disciplines and encourage the students to take the team-taught lesson seriously

On the basis of her 6-year experience in the EPIK, she also emphasised the need for continuity since she was able to learn from her earlier less successful experiences with team teaching and develop an enhanced understanding of how to co-operate productively with her NEST counterpart

1.2.3 The PSED

Primary School English Development (PSED) began in HongKong in 2000 This governmental project emphasized the idea of partnership between NESTs and local English teachers (LETs) It involved 40 primary schools in Hong Kong with a team of 20 NESTs and 20 LETs, team teaching in classrooms and working in school-based professional development activities According to Mr Trevor Higginbottom, PSED Project Manager, the PSED‟s aims are threefold:

 to develop innovative models of good practice in the teaching and learning of English;

 to develop students‟ interest and confidence in learning English;

 to promote the professional development of all participants

Carless (2006) explored the following positive features of the project:

 healthy collaboration through genuine team teaching between NESTs and local English teachers;

 development of greater motivation, confidence and risk-taking amongst primary pupils;

 professional development amongst all participants

In the interview with Carless in 2006, the PSED Project Manager said, „all parties

have to feel that they are working in an atmosphere of mutual professional trust and respect … the NEST can’t operate successfully without the support of the LETs.‟

The studies about three schemes involving team teaching of NESTs and NESTs in Asia show that this model has useful potentials in harnessing teaming teachers‟ strengths, but is challenging in view of the sensitivity and personal qualities required Consequently, despite the long and widespread experience with team teaching, many teaming teachers, both NESTs and non-NESTs, have viewed team teaching in a negative light In general, the collaboration between NESTs and non-NESTs gave more benefits than drawbacks Moreover, the factors causing its limitations can be controlled with the appropriate attention and management

non-The evaluation of team teaching of NESTs and non-NESTs in the previous or existing programs are persuasive and reliable Those studies, both qualitative and quantitative ones, gave the researcher a thorough look into the literature of her research area

The present study was hypothesized to get the similar results However, because there are many factors affecting the process of team teaching, the distinguishing context of the faculty - most of the previous studies were about team teaching at school, not at university like in the context of the study - certainly resulted in different findings to some extent In addition, the previous researchers either used large-scale quantitative surveys or generally reported the interaction between the NEST and the non-NEST of a pair, making

it difficult to understand localized problems that are often best revealed through scale, qualitative studies Next, the data were collected mostly via teachers or observers Teachers or experts, who have sufficient knowledge and qualifications to judge whether a

small-lesson is good or bad, used to be considered the appropriate source of information This belief has been objected because the learners must have right to make the assessment Teaching and learning are united processes and the most important objective of teaching is

to support the learning Definitely, the learners have solid rights to give their opinions on teachers‟ teaching Nowadays, along with the development of Learner-centered Approach and Communicative Approach, the learners are more active in their learning; they concern and have good awareness of what related to their study Filling in the gap in the literature, the study was based on a small-scale research about team teaching of a NEST and a non-NEST at a faculty of a university and the evaluations were from both teachers and learners

CHAPTER 2: THE METHODOLOGY

In this chapter, there is the investigation into the setting of the study and its participants, also the description of research tools and data collection procedure Mix-methods approach of the study is shown in details

2.1 Setting of the study

The study was conducted in the English course 2B, the fourth basic English course

of the first-year students at FOT The course was aimed to develop students‟ language competence in speaking, listening, reading, and writing; also to improve students‟ pronunciation and vocabulary for tourism field at the basic level so that they can communicate fluently in everyday situations and some simple professional ones There is a particular emphasis on speaking and listening to help students develop their communication skills The course covered five last units of the course book Book 2 compiled by FOT‟s English Department for ten days of study – four 55-minute periods per day In addition, teacher‟s supplements are given to provide authentic materials and a variety of interesting and enjoyable activities in order to motivate students in study as well

as help them approach English in real life

2.2 The participants of the study

The research was aimed to evaluate the pilot team teaching of a NEST and a VTE based on the reflections of both the teachers and the learners; hence, there were two groups

of participants Both groups showed their high spirit of cooperation during the study

in her early sixties and remains good relationship with her colleagues at FOT Being a responsible and caring teacher with good knowledge about English language and teaching

methodology, she is loved by most students at FOT The only problem is her dialect, which students find difficult to understand, sometimes, with her pronouncing /i/ instead /e/ Actually, it is FOT‟s policy in English training that students should contact different teachers of different teaching styles, personalities, and English dialects so that they can deal with different kinds of customers in their future job

The VTE, in her twenties, is an enthusiastic teacher of 3-year experience The graduate from English Faculty, Hanoi National University of Education manages quite good language competences, communication skills, and pedagogical theories However, her pronunciation needs improving with some sounds like /z/ or /dʒ/ and intonation Lacking teaching experience and professional knowledge for tourism field, she often observes the classes of her senior colleagues as well as takes part in the workshops and training courses of tourism and English for tourism She also helps her senior colleagues with English courses 1A, 1B, and 2A at FOT, mostly contacting first year students; therefore, she has close relationships with the second group of the study In addition, she has good relationships with foreign teachers at FOT since she is assigned to support their teaching at FOT

The teachers were selected for the study because of not only their availability but also their regular interactions and rapport They have good personal and professional relationship They often discussed over the teaching and learning at the faculty and helped each other with problems In fact, they have been working as co-teachers outside the classroom

2.2.2 Students

The second group of participants is one English class of 30 first year students majoring in tour guiding and management, aging from 18 – 20 That class was selected randomly at the end of the first school year – that is they had finished three basic English courses with both NESTs and VTEs separately Even though the students all passed the university entrance exam with English as one of three exam subjects, they have different personal and educational backgrounds Their English levels rank from pre-intermediate to upper-intermediate After three English courses, they are used to ways of learning English

at FOT and gradually developing their self-study habit In general, the students have good

learning attitude according to the feedbacks of the previous teachers and are highly motivated in learning English with the awareness of the importance of English in their future career They expected to improve their communication skills, speaking, and listening skills as well as pronunciation with the English lessons They all had no experience of team-taught lessons of NESTs and non-NESTs

2.3 Data collection instruments

As mentioned in the literature review, the sources of data for teaching evaluation are often amongst students, teacher‟s self-reflection, observers, and videos All these data sources were exploited with appropriate modification in the study via three main instruments including questionnaire, teaching diary, and informal interview

2.3.1 Questionnaire

The questionnaire was used for collecting students‟ reflections on the pilot team teaching because this is the best way to get the responses from the whole class The questionnaire was composed of six parts In details, the first 5 parts were about students‟ involvement in the four team-taught lessons (Part 1), their evaluation of team-taught lessons (Part 2), their reflections on the collaboration of the NEST and the VTE (Part 3), their educational progresses during team-taught lessons (Part 4), and their feedbacks on team teaching‟s negative impacts (Part 5) The first five parts‟ items were designed in a selected-response format where respondents were asked to select one response from a five-point Likert scale: “strongly disagree (SD) (1)”, “disagree (DA) (2)”, “neither disagree or agree (NDA) (3)”, “agree (A) (4)”, and “strongly agree (SA) (5)” The items using 5-point Likert scale were favorable because it was easier and more convenient for the students, who may be aware of team teaching, but still confused about giving their opinions to evaluate team teaching without background knowledge about teaching evaluation The students gave their extra ideas related to all the contents of Part 1 to Part 5 with an open-ended question in Part 6, which also included a multiple-choice question about students‟ preferable model of teaching

The contents of the question items were designed based on the theoretical knowledge about teaching evaluation, characteristics of effective team teaching, then modified during the period of four pilot lessons to suit the objectives of research The

video records of the team-taught lessons were offered to students as the supplements for their responses to the questionnaire

2.3.2 Teaching diary

The second instrument, teaching diary, required much cooperation from the teaming teachers The teachers were asked to remain a teaching diary, in which they noted down all information related to their team teaching including the preparation, lesson instruction, assessment, and teaching evaluation The teachers both self- reflected their work and that of their partner They were there together, teaching and observing each other References related to team teaching and teaching evaluation were supplied to guide the teachers‟ reflections

2.3.3 Informal interview

This research instrument supported two above data collection instruments In the other words, the researcher used this tool to clarify her findings with the questionnaire and teaching diaries The interviews with both teachers and students before, during, and after the pilot study were conducted without fixed questions When collecting and analyzing the data, the researcher contacted the participants through emails, yahoo chats, or discussions

in person for clarifications This offered participants the chance to expand their responses, making the information from the questionnaire and teaching diaries more reliable and profound The researcher found this source much useful to complete the study

2.4 Data collection procedure

The study were carried out in the following steps: before, during, and after the pilot team teaching

2.4.1 Before the pilot team teaching

Although the data was collected based on the reflections of both teachers and students on the pilot team teaching in four last lessons of the English course 2B, the arrangement was done at the beginning of the 10-day course To create the setting for the contrastive comparisons of the students and the teachers between the lessons with a NEST

or a VTE separately and their team-taught lessons, two teaming teachers were arranged to

teach the class in the course As assigned, the NEST covered the first three lessons, the VTE next three lessons, and they team taught the rest – four lessons

Before the pilot team teaching, two teachers met to discuss the purpose of the pilot mini-course, teaching contents, learners, and classroom management; and to prepare the first team-taught lesson They beforehand got the information related to the study like the purpose of the study, research questions, and requirements of teaching diaries as well as references about both team teaching of NESTs and non-NESTs and teaching evaluation They were asked to start their diaries early, right at that step of preparation

The students were explained about the purpose of the study, how the pilot taught lessons would be conducted, also informed about the questionnaire at the end of the pilot study They learnt the basic concept of team teaching from the researcher and got further explanations from their teachers

team-2.4.2 During the pilot team teaching

During the pilot team teaching, two teachers arranged their time for planning, instructing and evaluating each lesson Generally, they met before each lesson to evaluate the previous lesson and to discuss teaching contents and their responsibilities in the following one The researcher sometimes joined their meeting beside attending all their team-taught lessons In the first team-taught lesson, she asked her friend to attend the class, recording the lesson However, noticing the influence of this person‟s presence on students‟ involvement in the lesson, she decided to set the video recorders automatic in some convenient positions in the classroom The researcher‟s presence was assumed not to affect students since they got used to her presence in all lessons from the beginning of the course, even considered her one member of the class The researcher continued modifying the question items for the questionnaire

2.4.3 After the pilot team teaching

After four lessons, the students were asked to complete the questionnaire The students were distributed the questionnaire paper in English and got the researcher‟s explanations in Vietnamese for ensuring their understanding They spent 45 minutes on completing the question items The students were also informed of the video recordings of the team-taught lessons available for their considering in their forum All the further

information were also welcome The researcher and the participants might contact in person at school or via the forum of the faculty and other ways

The teacher handed in their diaries one day after The video recordings of the taught lessons were also available for them They kept in touch with the researcher for further discussions on the content of the research Most of the informal interviews occurred afterward