Nghiên cứu về việc Sử dụng Bài tập Thuyết trình-Viết Thu hoạch trong Bộ môn Hoa Kỳ Học ở Trường ĐHNN-ĐHQGHN Độ Phù hợp và Hiệu quả từ Góc độ Đánh giá của Giảng

Content-based Instruction and the teaching context in ULIS-VNUH American Studies courses ince the early 1980s, there has been a growing interest in combining language and content teachi

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS i

ABSTRACT ii

LIST OF FIGURES v

PART A: INTRODUCTION 1

1 Background of and rationale for the study 1

2 Aims of the research 1

3 Significance of the study 2

4 Scope of the research 2

5 Organization of the study 3

PART B: DEVELOPMENT 4

CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW 4

1.1 Key and related concepts 4

1.1.1 Content-based Instruction and the teaching context in ULIS-VNUH American Studies courses 4

1.1.2 The presentation assignments 11

1.1.3 Relevance and efficacy 15

1.1.4 English skills in sheltered course classes 17

1.1.5 Interdisciplinary research skills 18

1.2 How does this study fit into other research? 19

1.3 Summary 19

CHAPTER 2: METHODOLOGY 20

2.1 Research questions 20

2.2 Participants 20

2.3 Instruments 21

2.4 Data collection procedures 29

2.5 Data analysis procedure 29

2.6 Summary 30

CHAPTER 3: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 31

3.1 Perceptions of teachers and students of the degree to which the

presentation-reflection assignments have helped to meet the couse's objectives 32

3.2 Perceptions of teachers and students of the degree to which the actual assignment quality has met the assignments' requirements 45

3.3 What do teachers and students suggest about modifying the assignments? – Practical implication and suggestions 48

3.4 Summary 50

PART C: CONCLUSION 51

1 Summary of findings 51

2 Limitations of the study 52

3 Suggestions for further research 52

REFERENCES 53 APPENDIX I Appendix 1 American Studies course outline I Appendix 2a Survey questionnaire form – Student version VIII Appendix 2b Survey questionnaire form – Teacher version X Appendix 3a Summary of questionnaire data – Students' Perception XII Appendix 3b Summary of questionnaire data – Teachers' Perception XIII Appendix 4 Median Values XIV Appendix 5 Correlation between efficacy index and presentation score XV Appendix 6 Summary of relevant suggestions from students XVI

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1 - A continuum of content and language integration (Met, 2007) 7

Figure 2 - A continuum of content and language integration (Met, 2007) 8

Figure 3 - Relevance & Efficacy Concept 16

Figure 4 - General knowledge separate 32

Figure 5 - General knowledge combined 33

Figure 6 - Specific knowledge separate 34

Figure 7 - Specific knowledge combined 35

Figure 8 - Presentation assignment influence on presentational skills 36

Figure 9 - Reflection assignment influence on presentational skills 37

Figure 10 - Presentational skills combined 38

Figure 11 - Presentation assignment's influence on English skills 39

Figure 12 - Reflection assignment's influence on English skills 39

Figure 13 - English skills combined 40

Figure 14 - Interdisciplinary research skills separate 42

Figure 15 - Interdisciplinary research skills combined 43

Figure 16 - Preparation for further study seperate 44

Figure 17 - Preparation for further study combined 44

Figure 18 - Presentation assignment efficacy 45

Figure 19 - Reflection assignment efficacy 46

PART A: INTRODUCTION

1 Background of and rationale for the study

n the world, research and teaching about the United States of America have a long tradition, dating back to as early as the birth of the country At the University of Languages and International Studies – Vietnam National University, Hanoi (ULIS-VNUH), however, this multi-disciplinary study field just entered the curriculum as a subject for about a decade (Country Studies Division, 2009)

Throughout this period, the academic staff of the Country Studies division assigned to implement the course have been constantly embarking on improving the course's contents, through modifying the structure, updating and refining materials, and perhaps more importantly, the teaching methods This arduous task is bound to increase in intensity as the division has to take the lead in designing an entirely new undergraduate program on American Studies for the university, which will be launched around the 2012-2013 timeframe Therefore, as a junior lecturer working in liaison with the group, the author had the need to help revise some elements of the current teaching method used in the American Studies courses, and so this thesis was an ideal chance to aid in the effort

During the three recent academic years from 2008 to 2011, the majority of students' casual feedbacks to teachers of American Studies courses mainly expressed concerns about assignment requirements, assignment quality, and, naturally, assignment grading Rather than catering to the sporadic questions about different aspects of the course assignments, this study took the chance to investigate the core and overarching dimensions of the course assignments already in place, i.e oral presentation and written reflection, as tangible and available products of the teaching and studying processes

2 Aims of the research

With said purposes, the study aimed at answering the three main questions below:

i To what degree do American Studies lecturers and students at ULIS-VNUH think the design of the courseworks have helped to meet the course's objectives?

I

Chapter 1: Introduction

ii To what degree do they think the actual assignment quality has met the assignments' requirements?

iii What do they suggest about modifying the assignments?

3 Significance of the study

The research did not aim to and thus did not suggest the best assignment design to be used

in the course Instead, it was expected to have a certain impact on the way how the current assignment types of American Studies courses – and even of similar courses offered by the division e.g British Studies or General Geography of the UK and the US – would be designed, both in paper and practice, to better meet the preset course objectives It also served as a referential material for researchers and teachers alike who are interested in the testing and assessment aspect of curriculum design

4 Scope of the research

As stated, the study would look at the American Studies assignments in only two main dimensions: relevance and efficacy – whose meanings within this research context would

be interpreted later in the next chapter

In terms of research population, the study targeted at students and lecturers involved in the American Studies courses at ULIS-VNUH Specifically, for practical reasons, these are students from the classes of QH081E, since they were the latest groups to take the courses – while all the previous groups had graduated As for the lecturers, all of them came from the Country Studies Division – Faculty of Linguistics and Cultures of English Speaking Countries

5 Organization of the study

This research report is organized into three main parts:

Part A, Introduction, provides the rationale for, the aims, significance, scope and organization of the study

Part B, Development, comprises three chapters:

Chapter 1, Literature Review, presents related literature that provide the theoretical basis for this study

Chapter 2, Methodology, describes the research instruments, participants and the procedures to conduct the research, including data collection and data analysis

Chapter 3, Results and Discussion, presents and discusses findings to derive valid implications

Part C, Conclusion, summarizes the main findings, and draws out lessons and suggestions for similar studies in the future

Chapter 2: Literature Review and Practical Basis

PART B: DEVELOPMENT CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW

1.1 Key and related concepts

1.1.1 Content-based Instruction and the teaching context in ULIS-VNUH American Studies courses

ince the early 1980s, there has been a growing interest in combining language and content teaching In the American context, programs, models, and approaches have proliferated in all levels of instruction, creating various forms of incorporating language and content teaching (Met, 1991) In the mid 1990s in European countries, curriculum innovations have been directed toward the content and language integrated learning approach, in which both curriculum content – e.g science or geography – and English are taught together (Graddol, 2007) All these forms of incorporating language and content teaching fall under the heading of Content-based Instruction

Content-based Instruction (CBI) is a curricula approach or framework, not a method While most foreign language curricula put focus on learning about language rather than learning to use language for meaningful communication about relevant content, the CBI approach seeks to reach a balance between language and content instruction

Richard (2005), described Content-based Instruction (CBI) as a "process-based CLT approach", an extension of the Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) movement which takes different routes to reach the goal of CLT, i.e developing learners' communicative competence This approach is the "integration of a particular content [e.g math, science, social studies] with second language aims […] It refers to the concurrent teaching of academic subject matter and second language skills" (Brinton et al, 1989) Similarly, Crandall and Tucker (1990) define it as " an approach to language instruction that integrates the presentation of topics or tasks from subject matter classes (e.g math,

S

social studies) within the context of teaching a second or foreign language" Curtain and Pesola (1994), however, use the term in a more restricted way, limiting it to only those " curriculum concepts being taught through the foreign language appropriate to the grade level of the students "

Overall, it is clear that the term CBI is commonly used to describe a curricula approach which seeks to integrate language and content instruction This paper thus adopts the view similar to that of Curtain and Pesola (1994) in which CBI involves the curriculum concepts being taught through the foreign language, appropriate to the grade level of the students

Content

With the concept of "Content-based Instruction" defined, it is necessary to turn to the concept of "Content" On the definition of content, different authors have different views about what content should be In Crandall and Tucker (1990), content is seen as "academic subject matter" while in Genesee (1994), content " need not be academic; it can include any topic, theme or non-language issue of interest or importance to the learners" Chaput (1993) defines content as " any topic of intellectual substance which contributes to the students' understanding of language in general, and the target language in particular" Met (1999) proposes that "…'content' in content-based programs represents material that is cognitively engaging and demanding for the learner, and is material that extends beyond the target language or target culture" This paper adopts the definitions of Met (1999), Curtain and Pesola (1994), which is most relevant to the research context Therefore,

"content" here is seen as materials, or specifically "curriculum concepts", that are cognitively engaging and demanding for the learner, and is material that extends beyond the target language or target culture

Overall, the various definitions of content do not conflict each other, in fact, they represent the diverse characteristics of programs that integrate content and language (different models of CBI), which will be presented in the later section

The rationale of CBI

Content-based instruction (CBI) bases its rationale on the premise that students can effectively obtain both language and subject matter knowledge by receiving content input

in the target language Although it has been recently recognised by influential authors such

Chapter 2: Literature Review and Practical Basis

as Rodgers as "one of the Communicative Language Teaching spin-off approaches" (2001), some authors contemplate the paradigm within an even wider perspective:

according to Stryker and Leaver (1997), for instance, CBI "is a truly and holistic approach

to foreign language education … (which) can be at once a philosophical orientation, a methodological system, a syllabus design for a single course, or a framework for an entire program of instruction"

The benefits of the approach are directly or indirectly associated with an extensive body of research from a variety of fields Strong empirical support for CBI can be found in second language acquisition research, in teacher training studies and in cognitive psychology, as well as in the outcomes documented by successful programs in a variety of contexts and levels of instruction (Adamson, 1993; Dupuy, 2000)

A synthesised, though still accurate revision of the benefits perceived in view of the different areas is included in Grabe and Stoller (1997); the conclusions derived from these findings lead these authors to suggest seven rationales for CBI that can be summarised in the following points:

i In content-based classrooms, students are exposed to a considerable amount of language while learning content This incidental language should be comprehensible, linked to their immediate prior learning and relevant to their needs [ .] In content-based classrooms, teachers and students explore interesting content while students are engaged in appropriate language-dependent activities [ .] The resultant language learning activities, therefore, are not artificial or meaningless exercises

ii CBI supports contextualised learning; students are taught useful language that is embedded within relevant discourse contexts rather than as isolated language fragments [ .] Thus, CBI allows for explicit language instruction, integrated with content instruction, in a relevant and purposeful context

iii [ .] The use of coherently developed content sources allows students to call on their own prior knowledge to learn additional language and content material

iv [ .] In content-based classroom, students are exposed to complex information and are involved in demanding activities which can lead to intrinsic motivation

v CBI [ .] lends itself well to strategy instruction and practice, as theme units naturally require and recycle important strategies across varying content and learning tasks

vi CBI allows greater flexibility and adaptability to be built into the curriculum and activity sequences

vii CBI lends itself to student-centered classroom activities

Classification of CBI and current teaching context

With the definition of CBI examined, this section deals with the classification of CBI and locates where the teaching approach guiding the American Studies course stand among those types In accordance with the primary aim of the course, which is to provide students with fundamental knowledge about the American country and civilization (Country Studies Division, 2007), Content-Based Instruction was employed as the main teaching approach throughout the course – and the question here is which model? Overall, there has been little consistency in the CBI models classified and applied Through a careful review of related literature, this paper adopts the classification used by Met (1999) Met (2007) has specified

two contrary facets of the approach as follows:

CONTENT-BASED LANGUAGE TEACHING:

A CONTINUUM OF CONTENT AND LANGUAGE

INTEGRATION

Content-Driven

Content is taught in L2.

Content learning is priority.

Language learning is secondary.

Content objectives determined by course goals or

curriculum.

Teachers must select language objectives.

Students evaluated on content mastery.

Language-Driven

Content is used to learn L2.

Language learning is priority.

Content learning is incidental.

Language objectives determined by L2 course goals or curriculum.

Students evaluated on content to be integrated.

Students evaluated on language skills/proficiency.

Figure 1 - A continuum of content and language integration (Met, 2007)

Chapter 2: Literature Review and Practical Basis

Nevertheless, in collating this bi-continuum with the actual method's features, it is observed that the way the course is carried out falls to the grey area between the two ends This observation is proven most explicitly in the way students are expected to be evaluated – with around 10% of the total assignment grade reserved for the command of English and presentation skills (Dang, 2008) Therefore, a more detailed and thus more meaningful continuum of the Content-Based Instruction method is needed to describe precisely how the courses have been and are being taught in terms of content and language integration These models, according to Met, are diverse in characteristics and are put into a continuum

which illustrates the relative role of content and language with the content-driven program

at one end and the language-driven program at the other These CBI models differ in the

degree to which outcomes determine priorities in designing instruction from the general to the specific: units, lessons, tasks and activities The continuum is summarised in the figure below

CONTENT-BASED LANGUAGE TEACHING:

A CONTINUUM OF CONTENT AND LANGUAGE

Figure 2 - A continuum of content and language integration (Met, 2007)

The different models are briefly elaborated as follows

i Total immersion

The Macmillan English Dictionary (ELT Terms) defines immersion as an approach that

tries to reproduce the experience of being in the L2 country in class using these techniques:

 No textbooks or notebook, only authentic materials

 No grading of the language

 Using several teachers who may have conversations between themselves, or ungraded conversations with the students

 Only using L2

 No grammar or vocabulary explanations

Total immersion programs, taking precedence from the 1960s French immersion experiment in Canada, use the target language as a teaching tool, surrounding, or totally

"immersing" students in the second language

ii Partial immersion

This model reflects the total immersion model to a lesser extent, hence its name

iii Sheltered courses:

Case, Ndura and Righettini (2005) cited Echevarria, Vogt, and Short (2004) to explain the ideas of sheltered courses as follows (emphasis added):

the emphasis on teaching language first and then content is what separates content-based instruction from the closely related sheltered-content instruction That is, within a content-based model, the teacher may create exercises or assignments that focus on teaching a particular feature of

language, whereas in a sheltered model, the emphasis is on teaching content by adapting the

language levels of grade-level texts first Assignments meant to teach only language and absent

from the larger focus on content would not be included in a sheltered model

iv Adjunct model

According to Davies (2003), in his specific teaching contexts:

Adjunct classes are usually taught by ESL teachers The aim of these classes is to prepare students for "mainstream" classes where they will join English L1 learners Adjunct classes may resemble EAP or ESP classes where emphasis is placed on acquiring specific target vocabulary; they may also feature study skills sessions to familiarise the students with listening, note taking and skimming and scanning texts Some adjunct classes are taught during the summer months before regular college classes begin, while others run concurrently with regular lessons

v Theme-based courses

Chapter 2: Literature Review and Practical Basis

Theme based courses are usually found in EFL contexts These course can be taught by an EFL teacher or team taught with a content specialist The teacher(s) can create a course of study designed to unlock and build on their own students' interests and the content can be chosen from various topics (Davies, 2003)

vi Language classes with frequent use of content for language practice:

The name is self-explanatory In these classes, the main focus is language teaching For language practice, class teachers use selected content as inputs

Among the models above, the actual instruction model seems to fit in most with the Sheltered Courses as the latter is defined by Echevarria, J., Vogt, M.E., & Short, D (2004) (cited in Short, D & Himmel, J., 2007) as shown above

Its neighbor, the adjunct model, can be refuted as being noted by Davies (2003) as "[its] emphasis is placed on acquiring specific target vocabulary" and "they may also feature study skills sessions to familiarise the students with listening, note taking and skimming and scanning texts." These two characteristics are too distant from the course's objectives (Country Studies Division, 2007)

1.1.2 The presentation assignments

Student presentations are a common part of many courses at colleges and universities as they are one of the ways to improve learning of course material The potential benefits of student presentations include greater class interaction and participation, increased interest

in learning, new perspectives not covered otherwise, and improvement in communication and presentation skills

Purpose

The presentation assignment has two major purposes: first, it provides a framework for students to apply the different skills they are learning in an environment that encourages interaction with others Second, it provides opportunities for students to create and share their personal interpretations of knowledge learned with an audience (Spencer & Bartle-Angus, 2000)

Advantage

According to Essberger (2007), asking students to give presentations has the following advantages:

 it gives the presenting student a good opportunity to practise unaided speaking

 it gives the other students good listening practice

 it increases the presenting student's confidence when using English

 it can be good practice for the real situation for those students who may actually need to give presentations in English in their professional lives

 it is an excellent generator of spontaneous discussion

Besides, presentation assignments have many important outcomes Based on Spencer & Bartle-Angus (2000) 's research, first, students are able to work from their intellectual strengths, drawing on resources and background knowledge that may not be traditionally highly valued in an academic setting Students often comment on how much they appreciate being able to use their artistic talents or their love of music to help them to create an interpretation of the text

Second, students take responsibility for their own learning and use their ideas to enhance the understanding of their group and of the class Through extended opportunities to share ideas, students build new understandings that create a new representation of the text

Chapter 2: Literature Review and Practical Basis

Third, because of the collaborative nature of the groups, students have the opportunity to consider the text from a variety of perspectives, making it more likely that a student will make sense of the text

Another benefit of the presentation assignment is increased motivation and interest in the class In general, students enjoy the opportunity to work with their peers and to create a response that reflects their thinking

Finally, the presentation assignment creates an authentic learning environment Students must work cooperatively with others who have varying backgrounds, intellectual strengths, and values to create a meaningful response for a community of their peers Students control much of what occurs in the process They select a text, they negotiate meaning through interaction with others, and they develop a way of presenting the meaning of the text in a new medium

A particular problem and justification of peer-evaluation and report/reflection assignment

As shown above, students can gain knowledge not only from the research they and other students perform, but also by observing the other presenters' strengths and weaknesses to develop better communication and presentation skills However, despite the positive aspects of using student presentations in the classroom, some students may show resistance

to do extra work, have fear in public speaking, and display boredom while sitting through others' presentations if they are not engaged with the experience Therefore, such students may have generally negative beliefs about giving classroom presentations

Moreover, in addition to the expected potential benefits of class presentations for presenters, the question is whether the audience (non-presenting students) benefits from class presentations It is hoped and expected that non-presenting students in the class could also benefit from student presentations These potential benefits for non-presenting students include learning different perspectives about the course material and improving communications skills by observing others As with any presentation, the challenge is to get non-presenting students to pay attention and to be engaged in the learning experience One way to overcome this challenge is to ask non-presenting students to evaluate the presentations (peer-evaluations) It is believed that peer-evaluations could be a good way

to get non-presenting students involved and engaged in the presentations in order to get the

most benefit from the learning experience Specifically, asking students to list what they learn from presentations through taking notes – and comment on the strengths and weaknesses of each presentation – will promote (or force) greater involvement with the presentations As a result of being actively engaged in the presentation, the students should benefit much more than if they had merely been passive viewers

In their recent research, Girard, Pinar, & Trapp (2011) 's conclusions have helped justify this belief:

First, teachers could improve students' learning of class materials by using class presentations as part of their course assignments Class presentations seem to be beneficial for students regardless of gender and/or university

Second, peer-evaluations of student presentations enhance students' engagement with the presentations and promote active learning

Third, students perceive that presentations contribute to the improvement of public speaking skills

Fourth, teachers do not need to be concerned about gender differences in student perceptions of presentation benefits Peer-evaluation of student presentations should be incorporated as part of a course's presentation requirement

Assignments in the case of ULIS-VNUH American Studies courses

Given these theoretical foundation, the assignments for a typical American Studies course include group presentations on a certain topic and individual reflection essays of group members on that same presentation and topic Other groups have to write reports/evaluation on the presentation performances of their classmates as well Both the presentation and the reflection are graded (Dang, 2008) Since the last school year of 2010-

2011, another assignment has been integrated into the syllabus – which is essentially a series of mini tests, called "quizzes" However, due to its relative novelty and experimental nature, the assignment is not considered in the scope of this paper

On a side note, beside presentation, the other assignment is known under several names in different class – report, reflection, evaluation, comment sheet, etc Nonetheless, for

Chapter 2: Literature Review and Practical Basis

convenience, this research report would use "reflection/report assignment", or simply,

"reflection assignment", with the intent to encompass all varieties of the name

1.1.3 Relevance and efficacy

Relevance

According to Oxford dictionary, the meaning of "relevance" is defined as:

Relevant /ˈrɛ lɪ v(ə)nt/

adjective

closely connected or appropriate to the matter in hand

According to Cambridge dictionary:

Relevance

noun

the degree to which something is related or useful to what is happening or being talked about

Contextualized, in this research's terms, for both teachers and learners, the relevance factor

of the assignments referred to the degree to which the actual implementation of the assignments can help realize the objectives set out for the course Perception from both sides regarding this factor, however, is treated separately then discussed jointly

Efficacy

According to Oxford dictionary, the meaning of "efficacy" is defined as:

Efficacy /ˈɛ fɪ kəsi/

noun

the ability to produce a desired or intended result

According to Cambridge dictionary:

Efficacy

noun

an ability, especially of a medicine or a method of achieving something, to produce the intended result; effectiveness*

Chapter 2: Literature Review and Practical Basis

*However, based on the review of various other sources, efficacy is rather different than

effectiveness To quote Peter F Drucker, an American educator and writer, "Efficiency is

doing things right; effectiveness is doing the right things."

Efficacy, particularly in this research, referred to the quality and quantity of work

performed by students in its relation with the assignments' requirements (level of adherence to guidelines) It stems from the belief that if the requirements are stricly followed, the intended results will be achieved

Accordingly, the following figure proposed another way to visualize the two concepts

relevance and efficacy in their relation to each other and to course objectives:

1.1.2 Notions behind the objectives

There are key concepts in ULIS' American Studies course objectives which might not be readily obvious Due to their importance, it is imperative that these concepts are made clear

in light of existing literature – "English skills" (in a sheltered instruction class context), and

"interdisciplinary research skills" Acknowledgedly, "presentational competencies" and foci of American Studies were important concepts, too, but they were adequately defined

by the course syllabus already

Figure 3 - Relevance & Efficacy Concept

Power (Efficacy)

Course objectives

Assignment

Angle (Relevance)

1.1.4 English skills in sheltered course classes

According to The Education Alliance at Brown University, Sheltered English instruction is

an instructional approach that engages English language learners above the beginner level

in developing grade-level content-area knowledge, academic skills, and increased English proficiency In sheltered English classes, teachers use clear, direct, simple English and a wide range of scaffolding strategies to communicate meaningful input in the content area

to students Learning activities that connect new content to students' prior knowledge, that require collaboration among students, and that spiral through curriculum material, offer English language learners the grade-level content instruction of their English-speaking peers, while adapting lesson delivery to suit their English proficiency level

Among all sheltered instruction models applied, the SIOP model by Echevarria, Vogt and Short (2000) is widely considered to be one of the most effective (e.g Pearson Education, 2008; The Education Alliance – Brown University, 2006) The SIOP model identifies 30 important elements of sheltered instruction under eight broad categories:

It would not be of much benefit to us to explore into each and every category The primary concern of the moment is what the SIOP model suggests teachers to test in their students –

in terms of their language skills, specifically Category VIII provides an answer:

In language regard, it seemed to focus very much on students' vocabulary, and, possibly, their grammar – in order that they could come up with adequate answers, rather than language skills Therefore, in the context of the American Studies course in question,

Chapter 2: Literature Review and Practical Basis

English skills might be understood narrowly as knowledge areas of grammar and (general and technical) vocabulary – as other English language communication skills are covered under the umbrella term "presentational skills" already

1.1.5 Interdisciplinary research skills

According to Beckman, A and Beckman, M (2008), interdisciplinary research is a mode

of research by teams or individuals that integrates information, data, techniques, tools, perspectives, concepts, and/or theories from two or more disciplines or bodies of specialized knowledge to advance fundamental understanding or to solve problems whose solutions are beyond the scope of a single discipline or area of research practice

Larson, Landers, & Begg (2011) in their effort to "add clarity and develop a set of shared definitions, values, and language about interdisciplinary research", have designed a list that sketches major area of competencies for interdisciplinary research skills:

 Investigate hypotheses through interdisciplinary research

 Draft funding proposals for interdisciplinary research programs in partnership with scholars from other disciplines

 Disseminate interdisciplinary research results both within and outside his or her discipline

 Author publications with scholars from other disciplines

Communication

 Advocate interdisciplinary research in developing initiatives within a substantive area of study

 Express respect for the perspectives of other disciplines

 Read journals outside of his or her discipline

 Communicate regularly with scholars from multiple disciplines

 Share research from his or her discipline in language meaningful to an interdisciplinary team

 Modify his or her own work or research agenda as a result of interactions with colleagues from fields other than his or her own

 Present interdisciplinary research at venues representing more than one discipline

Interacting with others

 Engage colleagues from other disciplines to gain their perspectives on research problems

 Interact in training exercises with scholars from other disciplines

 Attend scholarly presentations by members of other disciplines

 Collaborate respectfully and equitably with scholars from other disciplines to develop interdisciplinary research frameworks

Nevertheless, considering the practical situation of teaching and learning at ULIS, any effort to enhance students' (interdisciplinary) research skills within a certain undergraduate course would be limited only to integrating them into course assignments but not a full-fledged research in cooperation with a large, diverse team of researchers with the highest purpose of publication Therefore, the interdisciplinary research competencies would be scaled down and understood in this context as: (the ability to) (i) integrate concepts and methods from multiple disciplines in designing interdisciplinary research protocols, (ii) read journals outside of his or her discipline, and (iii) engage colleagues (experts) from other disciplines to gain their perspectives on research problems

1.2 How does this study fit into other research?

This research would best contribute to, among all relevant studies, the body of researches

on sheltered instruction, which until recently dominated by commanding and

"enlightening" principles by Echevarria, Vogt and Short Specifically, going along with the order of the day – "think globally, act locally", this study will provide a very tangible review of the testing and assessment facet of sheltered instruction classroom in a well-defined, local context

1.3 Summary

Through reviewing a collection of literature, this chapter has (i) presented the actual teaching context in question, (ii) investigated the notions of embedded in the course objectives, (iii) considered prospective research tools, and (iv) and located the position of this study within the research body

Chapter 3: Methodology

CHAPTER 2: METHODOLOGY

he preceding chapter briefly reviewed the literature on the research topic for the theoretical basis of the study This chapter, on the practical side, discussed the participants, the research instruments, and the procedure of data collection and data analysis as a means to maximize the validity and reliability of the whole research

2.1 Research questions

Again, this study aimed at answering the three main questions below:

i To what degree do American Studies lecturers and students at ULIS-VNUH think the design of the courseworks have helped to meet the course's objectives?

ii To what degree do they think the actual assignment quality has met the assignments' requirements?

iii What do they suggest about modifying the assignments?

2.2 Participants

As the research scope indicated, there are two groups of stakeholders from the Faculty of English Language Teacher Education and Faculty of Linguistics and Cultures of English Speaking Countries that can participate in this research

The first group composed of 532 students in 22 classes of QH081E – third year students at the moment they participated in the survey The research targeted at this group of students

as they were familiar the procedures and requirements in Country Studies courses as they had taken two courses on General Geography of the UK and the US and British Studies in the previous semesters and they had just completed the course in question of American Studies before the end of their third year These students were asked to participate in a questionnaire survey, which is elaborated in the next parts

The second group of participants are teachers of the Country Studies Division who taught American Studies to the QH081E classes Given the small number of teachers – 6 people – and the research's concern, data yielded from this group of participants was treated

T

qualitatively to provide deeper insights and explanation to the issues arose Two of the teachers have more than 10 years of experience in teaching these courses, while the others range from 2 to 5 years This group of teachers were invited to give responses to a questionnaire survey, followed-up by a short in-depth interview

2.3 Instruments

The methodology of this research is a combination of quantitative and qualitative approaches – with the former played a more significant role, as it would provide large sketches of the situation while the latter would provide a basis for further interpretation of the situation Three data gathering instruments were utilized to collect data needed to answer the research questions as well as for the purpose of triangulation The first one is a questionnaire survey in two slightly different versions – one issued to students and the other teachers The second one is interview, carried out after each participating teacher finished answering the survey The last one is secondary analysis of data on students' American Studies scores – most importantly the presentation-reflection scores

Likert (1932) developed the principle of measuring attitudes by asking people to respond

to a series of statements about a topic, in terms of the extent to which they agree with them Likert-type or frequency scales use fixed choice response formats and are designed to measure attitudes or opinions (Bowling, 1997; Burns & Grove, 1997) These ordinal scales measure levels of agreement/disagreement

Chapter 3: Methodology

A Likert-type scale assumes that the strength/intensity of experience is linear, i.e on a continuum from strongly agree to strongly disagree, and makes the assumption that attitudes can be measured Respondents may be offered a choice of five to seven or even nine pre-coded responses with the neutral point being neither agree nor disagree – or uncertain

In its final form, the Likert Scale is a five (or seven) point scale which is used to allow the individual to express how much they agree or disagree with a particular statement For the sake of this study, the Likert Scale would adopt the five point version

Although very popular, the Likert Scale has so often been used under a great deal of fallacies An inspection into what the literature can offer in this regard would be vital for the research to avoid errors Jamieson (2004) has warned other researchers:

be presumed equal

measurement

parametric statistics should be considered in the design stage and must be addressed by authors

As such, much effort was invested in the data analysis process presented in Chapter 4, with special caution reserved for using median as a replacement for mean

Interview

While the questionnaire surveys yield some quantitative and qualitative data, data obtained from interviews are normally qualitative, which makes it "possible to explore in greater detail and in-depth some particularly important related topics which do not lend themselves to the questionnaire approach (Verma & Mallick, 1999) Thus, interview was employed in this study to complement what the questionnaire approach has not addressed In-depth interviews are a particularly useful qualitative data collection technique that can

be used for a variety of purposes, including needs assessment, program refinement, issue identification, and strategic planning (Guion, Diehl, and Donald, 2009; Kvale, 1996; Patton, 1987) In-depth interviews are most appropriate for situations in which we want to

ask open-ended questions that elicit depth of information from relatively few people as opposed to surveys, which tend to be more quantitative and are conducted with larger numbers of people Thus it would greatly benefit this particular study

One question arose, however, that which in-depth interview approach would be taken, then? – as Patton (1987) suggested three basic approaches to conducting qualitative interviewing:

(i) The informal conversational interview

This type of interview resembles a chat, during which the informants may sometimes forget that they are being interviewed Most of the questions asked will flow from the immediate context Informal conversational interviews are useful for exploring interesting topics for investigation and are typical of 'ongoing' participant observation fieldwork

(ii) The general interview guide approach

When employing this approach for interviewing, a basic checklist is prepared to make sure that all relevant topics are covered The interviewer is still free to explore, probe and ask questions deemed interesting to the researcher This type of interview approach is useful for eliciting information about specific topics

(iii) The standardised open-ended interview

Researchers using this approach prepare a set of open-ended questions which are carefully worded and arranged for the purpose of minimising variation in the questions posed to the interviewees In view of this, this method is often preferred for collecting interviewing data when two or more researchers are involved in the data collecting process Although this method provides less flexibility for questions than the other two mentioned previously, probing is still possible, depending

on the nature of the interview and the skills of the interviewers

The second approach, the general interview guide approach – commonly known as guided interview, was selected to be the primary approach of the interview tool used in this study Guion, Diehl, and Donald (2009) also highlighted several key characteristics of in-depth interviews as follows:

Open-ended Questions Questions need to be worded so that respondents expound on the topic, not

just answer "yes" or "no." Many open-ended questions begin with "why" or "how," which gives respondents freedom to answer the questions using their own words

Semi-structured Format Although it is important to pre-plan the key questions, the interview

should also be conversational, with questions flowing from previous responses when possible For

Chapter 3: Methodology

example, if an interviewee remarks that "The elections are approaching," an appropriate response would be, "How do you feel about the candidates involved?"

Seek Understanding and Interpretation It is important to use active listening skills to reflect

upon what the speaker is saying The interviewer should try to interpret what is being said and should seek clarity and understanding throughout the interview

Recording Responses The responses are typically audio-recorded and complemented with written

notes (i.e., field notes) by the interviewer Written notes include observations of both verbal and non-verbal behaviors as they occur, and immediate personal reflections about the interview In sum, in-depth interviews involve not only asking questions, but systematically recording and documenting the responses to probe for deeper meaning and understanding

In order to reach the depth as portrayed in the characteristics and description of approaches, other authors have elaborated on the use of various techniques, among which

"probing & follow-up questions" was one of the most popular Kvale (1996) held that:

The purpose of probing is to deepen the response to a question, to increase the richness of the data being obtained, and to give cues to the interviewee about the level of response that is desired This can be done through direct questioning of what has just been said, for example, "Could you say something more about that?"; "Can you give a more detailed description of what happened?; "Do you have further examples of this?" Alternatively, a mere nod, or "mm," or just a pause can indicate

to the subject to go on with the description Repeating significant words of an answer can lead to further elaboration

While more recently, Berry (1999) synthesizing the literature, came up with a rather comprehensive list of 9 useful probing techniques for in-depth interviewing, which were:

i Contradicting This entails deliberately giving an opinion opposite the informant's one, attempting

to arouse his/her further comments

ii Linking Linking up informant's comment with the information which the researcher wants to

know

iv Challenging Demanding more information to prove the validity of the informant's previous claims

v Encouraging Giving compliments to encourage the informants to carry on

vi Showing understanding + allowing time for elaboration Making the informant know that his/her

comments are understood and treasured + allowing him/her time for further comments

ix Procuring details Asking further questions to see if more information can be obtained

All of these techniques would be critically considered and applied throughout the interviews

Secondary analysis of data

According to Cho (2007), secondary data is data collected by someone other than the user Common sources of secondary data for social science include censuses, surveys, organizational records and data collected through qualitative methodologies or qualitative research Therefore a secondary analysis of data could still very well be defined by Glass (1975) as follows:

Secondary analysis is the reanalysis of data for the purpose of answering the original research question with better statistical techniques, or answering new questions with old data

There are some valuable advantages of this analysis method, as briefly put by Cho (2007):

This author also warned about the disadvantage of secondary data; however, given the context of the study's secondary data analysis, these would not be a problem:

Chapter 3: Methodology

2.3.1 Questionnaire

The central instrument was a questionnaire survey in two similar versions It helped collect data about teachers' and students' perceptions about the relevance and efficacy of the American Studies assignments Both versions were designed around the two core dimensions As a matter of course, the underlying connections of each question item to the said dimensions were not disclosed This instrument was chosen for its various advantages and compatibility with the aim of the research Firstly, questionnaire is an economical way

of collecting data as it helps gather a large amount of information within a relatively short period of time (Hoang, X H., & Nguyen, T M., 2006) This attribute is tremendously valuable given the large number of participants Secondly, it enables researchers to obtain data quantitatively, which later on will be translated into qualitative observations of the relationship between the assignment and the course

The 5-point Likert scale was adopted as the core framework for the design of the questionnaire Most questions were formulated on this scale in form of statements, and participants were asked to respond to these statements Possible responses range from 1-Strongly disagree to 5-Strongly agree The last open-ended question was utilized in order

to gain more qualitative data for the third research aim In detail, the questionnaire consisted of 40 questions whose construct were elaborated below [See Appendix 1a and 1b for the final questionnaire forms]

Questions 1 to 28 correspond to the first dimension – relevance It means that these questions aimed at gauging participants' perception of how the presentation-reflection assignments in their experience met – or did not – the objectives set out in the course syllabus

 Questions 1 and 2 explored the belief on how the pair of assigments could meet the first objective – providing students with general knowledge about the US in the past and at the present

 Questions 3 to 7 aimed at the overarching objective of providing students with knowledge and expressions of cultures in 5 specific themes

 Questions 8 to 15 tackled the second objective of helping students develop presentational competencies As these objectives were skill-oriented, the author

saw a need to separate this batch into 2 sets of questions: 8 to 11 reserved for the presentation assignment and 12 to 15 the reflection assignment

 Questions 16 to 21 dealt with the first half of the third objective – offering the students opportunities to improve their English languages Although there are many ways of defining English language capacity, as discussed in the literature review, it was most meaningfully defined within this research's context to be the command of general vocabulary, of jargons or terminologies in the field, and of grammar And

in the same fashion as the previous batch, this batch was divided into two sets of questions, from 16 to 18 and 19 to 21

 Questions 22 to 24 dealt with the second half of the third objective – offering the students opportunities to improve their interdisciplinary research skills As discussed in the literature review, the mini version of the adopted model consists of three interdisciplinary research competencies – with a twist to suit the conditions of the university: the ability to use concepts and methods from other fields of study, the ability to read journals and documents from other fields of study, and the ability

to consult with teachers or experts from other fields of study They were accordingly reflected in this batch of questions

 Lastly, questions 25 to 28 focused on the forth objective – preparing students who are interested in American Studies for their further study of the discipline The questions exploited this supposed preparation in four aspects: the knowledge, the English skills, the interdisciplinary research skills and the presentational provided throughtout the course

Questions 29 to 39 correspond to the second dimension – efficacy Essentially, these questions' mission was to discover the participants' belief on how well their actual experience with the assignments adhered to the stipulated guidelines

 Questions 29 to 36 focused on the different requirements laid out for the presentation preparation and implementation process, e.g the requirements on visual aids, work division, topic and content

 Questions 37 to 39 focused on the requirements for the report/reflection assignment, e.g the requirements on format, depth of analysis

Chapter 3: Methodology

The last, open-ended question was used so that participants could have chances to state their own judgment besides what had already been provided for evaluation, allowing the participants to express their suggestions and recommendations toward the possible improvement of the assignments

About the two versions for students and teachers, the only significant difference among them lied in the way in which each question was worded The other minor variation was the informational question on teaching experience for teachers and class for students

2.3.2 Interview

This instrument was used in this research as a small, supplementary tool to assist the questionnaire survey All 6 teachers participated in the research were invited to engage in small talks in which they only needed to elaborate on one main question, which was an expansion of the open-ended question in the questionnaire Here they provided further explanation to back up their comments No student was invited to participate in the interview The focused question was constructed more or less as follows:

"Would you mind elaborating on your suggestion in the questionnaire? (in response to question 40: "What is the most urgent change you want to see in the requirements of the presentation-reflection assignment?")"

2.3.3 Secondary data analysis

This study aimed at using QH081E students' presentation scores for the American Studies subject with a purpose to look for any significant correlation among all the data gathered The data was archived by the Faculty of English Language Teacher Education

2.4 Data collection procedures

The questionnaire survey was conducted in the following steps:

1 Introducing about the research via student mail group with the aid of a student coordinator This introduction reached all students of QH081E

2 The coordinator forwarded the questionnaire form to monitor of each class

3 All monitors then forwarded this form to their class' members, who later returned the filled forms to their respective monitor

4 All monitors packed the forms together and sent back to the researcher via email For teachers, the form was sent directly to each, who then returned the filled form directly

to the researcher Later they were interviewed independently after their asnwers were read thoroughly

As for the data on students' American Studies scores, first, the researcher needed to gain an authorization from the faculty This was done after an archive access request form had been filled and filed into the faculty office's archive Then the researcher had full access and the right to use all QH081E students' American Studies scores for the purpose of this research

2.5 Data analysis procedure

The input data for the research was drawn from the three above-mentioned sources: the questionnaire and interview answers and students' presentation scores

Questionnaire and interview data

Data from questionnaire was first grouped together on "community" basis, i.e students' forms were grouped according to their class, while all teachers' forms were taken together under the "teacher group"

Raw data was then sorted out and enumerated thoroughly with the aid of specialized computer programs (primarily MS Excel – as it would take much more time with SPSS) The nominal choices (1-Strongly disagree, 3-Uncertain, etc.) were converted to numeral data:

1-Strongly disagree was assigned the value of 0;

Chapter 3: Methodology

2-Disagree was assigned the value of 1;

3-Uncertain was assigned the value of 2;

4-Agree was assigned the value of 3; and

5-Strongly agree was assigned the value of 4

This choice of conversion was purely convenient for illustrating data in graph and chart forms without distorting the calculation result Different conversion scales were tested and yielded the same result

Responses were also grouped into batches under the same principles presented in section 3.3.1 on how the questionnaire was formulated and analyzed quantitatively for meaningful interpretation and discussion in the next chapter

Responses from the open-ended question were taken into analysis in tandem with data from interviews to shed light into the more in-depth issues Due to the nature of open-ended questions and the scope of interview, this data group was analyzed qualitatively, with the focus zoomed in on what had been said rather than how many people said what

2.6 Summary

This chapter has discussed the participants, the three data collection instruments used, the data collection and data analysis procedures as justifications for the methodology of the research The following chapters presents the research findings and discussion

CHAPTER 3: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

lthough the research expected to receive survey feedbacks from 532 students, due to some restraint in communication and cooperation, the research could just access 466 students in 20 out of 22 classes – which means a coverage rate of 87% Furthermore, among these 466 entries, after an arduous filtering process, 149 were considered to be invalid because the participants simply copied the answer from each other Eventually, there remained only 317 valid entries, accounting for 60% of the original target population Still, this sufficed to draw up conclusions at confidence level of 95% and confidence interval of 3.44

In the other group, all 6 teachers were able to participate and their answers were all valid – among them only 4 were able to join in the interview Teachers' responses were all analyzed qualitatively, because their small number would hardly make up many statistically meaningful conclusions for the purpose of generalization to a larger (teacher) population They would be more meaningful in some situations where teachers' and students' perceptions were collated Therefore all of of the charts below dealt with data from students' reponses only, unless noticed otherwise

The analysis below was organized on the basis of solving each research question, using relevant data from all three sources, in stead of data yielded from each type of instruments

A

Chapter 4: Results and Discussion

3.1 Perceptions of teachers and students of the degree to which the reflection assignments have helped to meet the couse's objectives

presentation-Objective 1a – Providing students with general knowledge about the US in the past and at the present

In the discipline of American Studies, as in many other content subjects, the first and foremost concern was the amount (and quality) of knowledge passed on to learners In the context of the American Studies course at ULIS, this body of knowledge was generally divided into two interconnected groups: (i) general knowledge – American geography, demography and so on, and (ii) specific knowledge themes – with five predetermined foci: history, beliefs and values, politics, economy, and education

Questions 1 and 2 addressed the general knowledge group, by asking participants' evaluation of the degree to which presentation-reflection assignments helped them to acquire general knowledge about the US in considerable depth The distribution of responses was as follows:

Figure 4 - General knowledge separate

Almost 70% agreed or strongly agreed that the presentation assignment did help them to acquire the general knowledge adequately, compared to 46% with the reflection assignment It was also reflected in the median value of 3 for presentation (see appendix 4), this type of assignment was believed to be more effective in improving learners' general American Studies knowledge than the reflection assignment (median value 2) A median value of 2 meant that the majority of respondents chose option 3-Uncertain When students felt uncertain about their improvement, or lack of it, then it was impossible to assert that the reflection assignment was able to help students with general knowledge

Figure 5 - General knowledge combined

Combined, presentation and reflection could only do a fairly good job in helping students with general knowledge, with nearly 60% agreed that they did (combined median value being 2.5) As for teachers, with the median value being 3, they seemed to believe a little

Chapter 4: Results and Discussion

more robustly in the ability of the presentation assignment to help their students in the general knowledge department

Objective 1b – Providing students with knowledge about the US in some specific themes

As for the specific knowledge themes – the questions tried to differentiate perceptions toward each of five major themes The median values yielded show that all five themes received 3 points, meaning they were more or less equally effective However, the distribution chart below showed that knowledge of history was the weakest points of all, having only 60% respondents' rating agree or strongly agree – compared with 70-75% of other knowledge foci A hint for an proper answer lied in the responses to the open-ended question Although not relevant to the question being asked, some students commented that lectures on history was the most boring of all

Figure 6 - Specific knowledge separate

Teachers had the same level of belief in this regard, with their median value being 3

Economy Education H-Trend B&V-Trend P-Trend Ec-Trend Ed-Trend