the relationship between teacher cognition and classroom practices

HO CHI MINH CITY OPEN UNIVERSITY THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TEACHER COGNITION AND CLASSROOM PRACTICES IN ENGLISH SPEAKING INSTRUCTION: A CASE STUDY AT EUROPE VIETNAM AMERICA ENGLISH LAN

HO CHI MINH CITY OPEN UNIVERSITY

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TEACHER COGNITION AND CLASSROOM PRACTICES

IN ENGLISH SPEAKING INSTRUCTION:

A CASE STUDY AT EUROPE VIETNAM AMERICA

ENGLISH LANGUAGE CENTER

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements

for the degree of Master of Arts (TESOL)

Submitted by NGUYEN MINH HOANG Supervisor: Dr NGUYEN THUY NGA

HO CHI MINH City, May 2017

HO CHI MINH CITY OPEN UNIVERSITY

-

NGUYEN MINH HOANG

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TEACHER COGNITION AND CLASSROOM PRACTICES

IN ENGLISH SPEAKING INSTRUCTION:

A CASE STUDY AT EUROPE VIETNAM AMERICA

ENGLISH LANGUAGE CENTER

Major number: 60 14 01 11

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements

for the degree of Master of Arts (TESOL)

Supervisor:

NGUYEN THUY NGA, Ph.D

HO CHI MINH City, May 2017

STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP

I certify that this thesis entitled “The relationship between teacher cognition and classroom practices in English speaking instruction: A case study at Europe Vietnam America English Language Center” is my own work

Except where reference is made in the text of the thesis, this thesis does not contain material published elsewhere or extracted in whole or in part from a thesis by which I have qualified for or been awarded another degree or diploma

No other person’s work has been used without due acknowledgement in the main text of the thesis

This thesis has not been submitted for the award of any degree or diploma in any other tertiary institution

Ho Chi Minh City, 2017

Nguyen Minh Hoang

My special thanks goes to the participants for their generous help and support Without them, this thesis would not be possible

I would also like to thank all the teachers at the Graduate school of Ho Chi Minh City Open University Their lessons have helped me grow, not only in my teaching career but also in my life

The last, but most important, ones are my parents and younger sister I love them more than I can say Thank you for being the world to me

ABSTRACT

Thinking and actions do not always converge In teaching, what teachers think they should do is not always executed in their classrooms Therefore, this study set out to investigate the relationship between teacher cognition (i.e thinking, knowledge, and beliefs) and classroom practices One teacher teaching English for International Communication at Europe Vietnam America English Language Center participated in this case study Multiple data collection strategies including one semi-structured interview, five classroom observations, and one stimulated recall interview were utilized to investigate the relationship between her cognition and classroom practices in English speaking instruction The findings showed that her cognition was both consistent and inconsistent with her classroom practices Consistencies were found in all four themes of the study including accuracy and fluency, speaking elements, teacher roles, and teacher feedback Inconsistencies were seen in fluency-focused activities, teacher roles, and feedback in fluency-focused activities The study revealed two reasons for the inconsistencies First, her classroom practices were inconsistent with her ideal-oriented cognition derived from the semi-structured interview, but consistent with her reality-oriented cognition inferred from the rationale behind her classroom practices Second, she was not fully aware of the impact of one cognition on her classroom practices Based on these findings, several recommendations for research on teacher cognition and the teaching of speaking (including textbook writers, teacher educators, and teachers) were made

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

Statement of authorship i

Acknowledgements ii

Abstract iii

Table of contents iv

List of figures ix

List of tables x

Transcript conventions xi

Abbreviations xii

Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 Background to the study 1

1.2 Rationale for the study 3

1.3 Research aims 6

1.4 Research questions 6

1.5 Theoretical framework 6

1.6 Research significance 6

1.7 Structure of the thesis 7

Chapter 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 8

2.1 Definitions of teacher cognition 8

2.2 Definitions of classroom practices 9

2.3 Previous studies on the relationship between teacher cognition and classroom practices 10

2.3.1 Language areas (grammar, vocabulary, and

pronunciation) 10

2.3.2 Language skills (reading, writing, and speaking) 13

2.3.3 Studies on the relationship between teacher cognition and classroom practices in Vietnam 14

2.4 Four themes of English speaking instruction 18

2.4.1 Accuracy and fluency 19

2.4.2 Speaking elements 22

2.4.3 Teacher roles 23

2.4.4 Teacher feedback 24

2.5 Chapter summary 27

Chapter 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 29

3.1 Research setting 29

3.2 Participant 30

3.3 Research design 31

3.4 Data collection strategies 32

3.4.1 Semi-structured interview 34

3.4.2 Classroom observations 38

3.4.3 Stimulated recall interview 38

3.5 My roles 40

3.6 Data collection procedure 41

3.7 Data analysis 42

3.8 Validity and reliability 43

3.9 Chapter summary 44

Chapter 4: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION 45

4.1 The teacher’s cognition and classroom practices in terms of

accuracy and fluency 45 4.1.1 Cognition in terms of accuracy and fluency 45 4.1.2 Classroom practices in terms of accuracy and fluency 46 4.1.3 The relationship between the teacher’s cognition and

classroom practices in terms of accuracy and fluency 55 4.1.4 Discussion of the teacher’s cognition and classroom

practices in terms of accuracy and fluency 56 4.2 The teacher’s cognition and classroom practices in terms of

speaking elements 59 4.2.1 Cognition in terms of speaking elements 59 4.2.2 Classroom practices in terms of speaking elements 59 4.2.3 The relationship between the teacher’s cognition and

classroom practices in terms of speaking elements 60 4.2.4 Discussion of the teacher’s cognition and classroom

practices in terms of speaking elements 61 4.3 The teacher’s cognition and classroom practices in terms of

teacher roles 62 4.3.1 Cognition in terms of teacher roles 62 4.3.2 Classroom practices in terms of teacher roles 63 4.3.3 The relationship between the teacher’s cognition and

classroom practices in terms of teacher roles 65

4.3.4 Discussion of the teacher’s cognition and classroom

practices in terms of teacher roles 67

4.4 The teacher’s cognition and classroom practices in terms of teacher feedback 68

4.4.1 Cognition in terms of teacher feedback 68

4.4.2 Classroom practices in terms of teacher feedback 69

4.4.3 The relationship between the teacher’s cognition and classroom practices in terms of teacher feedback 73

4.4.4 Discussion of the teacher’s cognition and classroom practices in terms of teacher feedback 74

4.5 Summary and discussion of the key findings about the teacher’s cognition and classroom practices related to four themes of this study 75

4.5.1 Summary of the key findings 75

4.5.2 Discussion of the key findings 77

4.6 Chapter summary 78

Chapter 5: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 79

5.1 Conclusion 79

5.2 Contributions and limitations 80

5.2.1 Contributions 80

5.2.2 Limitations 82

5.3 Recommendations 83

5.4 Suggestions for further studies 84

5.5 Chapter summary 85

REFERENCES 86

APPENDIX 1 93

APPENDIX 2 94

APPENDIX 3 99

APPENDIX 3 99

APPENDIX 4 101

APPENDIX 5 113

APPENDIX 6 117

APPENDIX 7 124

LIST OF FIGURES

Page Figure 2.1 The relationship among four themes of English speaking

instruction used in this study 26

Figure 2.2 Theoretical framework for this study 27

Figure 4.1 The relationship between the participant’s cognition and

classroom practices related to four themes of English speaking

instruction 76

LIST OF TABLES

Page

Table 2.1 A summary of previous studies on the relationship between teacher cognition and classroom practices 16

Table 2.2 Non-communicative activities (audio-lingual drills) 19

Table 2.3 Communicative activities 21

Table 3.1 The interview guide for the semi-structured interview 37

Table 4.1 The relationship between the teacher’s cognition and classroom practices in terms of accuracy and fluency 55

Table 4.2 The relationship between the teacher’s cognition and classroom practices in terms of speaking elements 61

Table 4.3 The relationship between the teacher’s cognition and classroom practices in terms of teacher roles 66

Table 4.4 The relationship between the teacher’s cognition and classroom practices in terms of teacher feedback 73

ABBREVIATIONS

EFL English as a Foreign Language

ESL English as a Second Language

EVA Europe Vietnam America English Language Center

Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION

In this chapter, the background to research on teacher cognition will be presented first Following Borg (2003, 2006), the term “teacher cognition” will be used in this study to refer to teacher thinking, knowledge, and beliefs interchangeably Then the rationale for conducting this research paper will be described After that, I will state the aims, questions, theoretical framework, and significance of this study At the end of this chapter, the structure of the thesis will

be provided

1.1 Background to the study

In this section, I briefly summarize the history and reviews of research on teacher cognition to provide the background to the study

As learning and teaching are inextricably woven, students’ achievements are undoubtedly influenced by their teachers’ instruction Studies on teaching over the past few decades have attempted to delineate this mutual relationship In the 1970s, the process-product model proposed by Dunkin and Biddle (1974) was the predominant approach in research on teaching It aimed to depict to what extent teachers’ behaviors were causatively linked to students’ learning outcomes This model failed to take account of the influence of teachers’ cognition on their classroom practices (Borg, 2006) Then a new shift in studies on teaching arose in the report of a conference organized by the National Institute of Education in the United States in 1975 which stated: “If, however, teaching is done, and in all likelihood, will continue to be done by human teachers, the question of relationships between thought and action becomes crucial” (National Institute of Education,

1975, p 1) This approach emphasized the need to study teachers’ cognitive processes for a more comprehensive understanding of their classroom behaviors Teachers were no longer considered as passive technicians who only transmitted prescribed knowledge to students but rather thoughtful decision-makers who reflected on what they thought, knew, and believed for effective instructional behaviors

In the late 1970s, the primary foci of studies on teacher cognition were

“teachers’ planning, judgments and decision-making” (Borg, 2006, p 8) In the 1980s, the most dominant concept investigated by research on teacher cognition was knowledge with practical knowledge (Elbaz, 1981) and pedagogical content knowledge (Shulman, 1987) receiving most attention (Borg, 2009) In the 1990s, knowledge, specifically craft knowledge (Grimmett & Mackinnon, 1992), teacher knowledge (Fenstermacher, 1994), and subject-matter knowledge (Shulman & Quinlan, 1996), continued to be examined Teacher beliefs were also investigated in this decade According to Borg (2006), the most comprehensive review of studies

on teacher beliefs was done by Pajares (1992) In this review, he decomposed the term “educational beliefs” into different foci referred to as “educational beliefs about” for subsequent research on teacher beliefs

Studies on L2 teacher cognition have been conducted since the mid-1990s Borg (2003) reviewed 64 studies following this direction The review found that two investigated curricular areas were grammar and literacy instruction In terms of context, the U.S had the largest number of studies on teacher cognition and most of the studies focused on ESL instruction Borg (2006) did another review of over 180 studies on language teacher cognition They were conducted in L1, ESL, and EFL teaching contexts The review showed that research on language teacher cognition was fragmented Most of the studies were conducted in the U.S.; the others came from other countries such as Hong Kong, the U.K., and Australia The studies were split into three broad groups: pre-service teachers, in-service teachers, and specific curricular domains The foci of the first two groups were teachers’ experiences, beliefs, decisions, and knowledge whereas those of the third one were grammar and literacy (reading and writing) Borg’s (2003, 2006) reviews revealed that most studies on language teacher cognition were implemented in the U.S., and only two curricular areas (grammar and literacy) were investigated

In Borg’s (2006) framework for teacher cognition research (see appendix 1), teachers’ schooling and professional coursework influence teacher cognition; and

teacher cognition and classroom practice have a dialectical relationship mediated by contextual factors Due to this nature, Borg (2003, p 86) proposed three themes for studies on language teacher cognition including “(a) cognition and prior language learning experiences, (b) cognition and teacher education, and (c) cognition and classroom practice” In terms of curricular areas, most studies on language teacher cognition focused on grammar teaching whereas very few investigated speaking instruction (Borg, 2009) Indeed, in Borg’s (2015) bibliography of research on language teacher cognition from 2010 to 2015, there were only three studies related

to speaking instruction including those of Dinçer and Yeşilyurt (2013), Baleghizadeh and Nasrollahi Shahri (2014), and Chen and Goh (2014) In Vietnam, only a limited number of studies on teacher cognition were conducted such as those

of Le (2011), Nguyen (2014), and Tran (2015)

In summary, Borg’s (2003) three themes for research on language teacher cognition, scant attention paid to speaking instruction, and a scarcity of such studies

in Vietnam have provided the background that helps me delineate the rationale for the study in the next section

1.2 Rationale for the study

In this section, I describe the rationale for the study by stating some gaps in research on language teacher cognition, discussing issues of the current EFL teaching situation in Vietnam and of English speaking instruction at my current workplace, i.e Europe Vietnam America English language center (EVA), and presenting my own motivation for conducting this research paper

The background to this study have provided me with two research gaps First, very few studies examined language teacher cognition related to speaking instruction Second, there was scarce teacher cognition research in Vietnam This study attempts to fill in these two gaps by investigating teacher cognition in English speaking instruction in Vietnam

As Vietnam has been integrating itself into the ASEAN community and other international organizations, teaching and studying English effectively are

indispensable In Vietnam, English is a compulsory subject in high schools and one

of the three compulsory tests on the National High School Graduation Examination

It is also one of the required subjects in almost all undergraduate curricula The teaching of English has been being guided by the National Foreign Language 2020 Project This project was aimed at enabling graduates of vocational schools, colleges, and universities to use foreign languages (primarily English) independently and confidently in communicating, studying, and working in an integrated, multilingual, and multicultural environment (Prime Minister, 2008) The six-level Vietnam foreign language proficiency framework was used for educational curricula and materials, instructional plans, and assessment criteria for four skills (listening, speaking, reading, and writing) These aims show that English instruction needs to enable students to use English communicatively, and speaking is obviously

a crucial skill However, high school teachers primarily focus on teaching vocabulary, grammar, and reading for testing purposes whilst they pay little attention to communication skills (Van, 2013) Indeed, speaking is completely left out on the English test of the National High School Graduation Examination although it is included in high school English textbooks In certain undergraduate English courses, speaking was also omitted from tests (Nguyen, Fehring, & Warren, 2015) This scant attention given to speaking is one of the issues of the current EFL teaching situation in Vietnam Others could be classified into three primary categories including teachers (being disqualified, not communicating in English often, receiving poor salary, and having too much workload), students (having low motivation, unequal English levels, and insufficient self-study time), and facilities (poor libraries, noisy and crowded classrooms, and lack of teaching equipment) (Le, 2013; Van, 2013; Nguyen, Fehring, & Warren, 2015) These issues could make it difficult for teachers to execute their EFL teaching cognition in classroom practices

At EVA, the situation is relatively different English communication courses are aimed at helping students communicate in English successfully, and speaking receives a great deal of attention The World Link textbooks used for instruction

include a lot of speaking activities such as discussions, role-plays, interviews, surveys, and debates; therefore, students have plenty of opportunity to communicate with one another Each class has 10 to 20 students All of the classrooms are equipped with air-conditioners and CD players Despite these advantages, speaking instruction also encounters some issues First, the center does not have enough overhead projectors for teachers; therefore, most lessons are conducted with only a whiteboard and a CD player Second, students have mixed English levels While some of them can speak English quite fluently, others can barely communicate in English This makes it difficult for teachers to organize speaking activities in their classes Third, some students have very relaxed attitude towards their study and often skip their classes As a result, it is hard for teachers to help them catch up with their classmates in the next class sessions These issues could influence how teachers’ cognition is reflected in their classroom practices in English speaking instruction

Currently, I am teaching English for communication at EVA Developing students’ speaking skills is one of the primary goals of communication classes there

I also devote a lot of time to English speaking instruction in my classes In my teaching, I realized that my beliefs in how speaking should be taught were not always executed in my classroom practices For example, I firmly believe that technology, specifically the Internet, should be utilized to motivate my students to speak English; however, the reality is that I hardly ever exploit it in my classes This could be explained by the fact that the center has only three projectors, and teachers who wish to use have to reserve them It also takes about 10 minutes to get the projector in place before teaching This inconvenience has gradually made me indifferent to using technology in my classes Inconsistencies between my cognition and classroom practices in English speaking instruction have motivated me to conduct this study I would like to understand how knowledge, thinking, and beliefs

of other teachers influence their classroom practices, which will help me become

more conscious of and consequently better monitor the impact of the so-called

“teacher cognition” on my own classroom practices

In summary, the limited volume of research on language teacher cognition

in Vietnam, the scant attention paid to speaking instruction, some issues of the current EFL teaching situation in Vietnam and of English speaking instruction at EVA, and my own motivation have explained the need to conduct this study with two research aims as follows

1.3 Research aims

First, this study aims to investigate the cognition and classroom practices in English speaking instruction of one EFL teacher at EVA Second, it examines the relationship between them These two aims lead to the two research questions in the next section

1.4 Research questions

This study will attempt to answer the two questions below

1 What are the cognition and classroom practices in English speaking instruction of one EFL teacher at EVA?

2 What is the relationship between her cognition and classroom practices in English speaking instruction?

1.5 Theoretical framework

This study is guided by Borg’s (2006) framework for research on language teacher cognition (see appendix 1) In this framework, teacher cognition and classroom practices have a dialectical relationship mediated by contextual factors

1.6 Research significance

First, this research helps the participant reflect upon her cognition and classroom practices She would become more conscious of why and how she makes and executes particular pedagogical decisions in her class Second, the study is useful for teacher educators in that it would provide them with insights into how teachers actually integrate what they have learned into their own classroom practices Based on these understandings, teacher educators would be able to make

their courses more practically-oriented Third, there is little research investigating teacher cognition in English speaking instruction; this study helps inform literature

on this domain Last, the study provides me with useful information on the gap between theories and practice of English speaking instruction as well as what causes this

1.7 Structure of the thesis

This study includes five chapters as follows:

Chapter one is the introduction of the study In this chapter, I present the background to the study followed by the rationale for the study, two research aims, two research questions, the theoretical framework, and the significance of the study

Chapter two presents the review of literature on definitions of teacher cognition, definitions of classroom practices, previous studies on the relationship between teacher cognition and classroom practices, and four themes of English speaking instruction used as initial categories for investigation purposes in this study

Chapter three describes the methodology employed in this study In this chapter, I present the research setting, participant, research design, data collection strategies, my roles, data collection procedure, data analysis, and validity and reliability of the findings

Chapter four presents the findings of the study and the discussion of the findings In this chapter, the participant’s cognition, her classroom practices, and the relationship between her cognition and classroom practices related to four themes of English speaking instruction used in this study are shown and discussed

Chapter five concludes this study It provides the conclusion, contributions, and limitations of the study as well as some recommendations and suggestions for further studies

Chapter 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

In this chapter, definitions of “teacher cognition” and “classroom practices” will be presented first Then I will review previous studies on the relationship between teacher cognition and classroom practices These studies will be followed

by a review of some themes of English speaking instruction used as initial

categories for investigation purposes in this study

2.1 Definitions of teacher cognition

In this part, I present (1) some terms related to studies on teacher cognition, (2) definitions and characteristics of “teacher cognition”, (3) two types of teacher cognition, and (4) what “teacher cognition” refers to in this study

Studies on teacher cognition were overwhelmed by a multiplicity of concepts and terminology (Clark & Peterson, 1986; Borg, 2006) Two important ones were knowledge and beliefs Elbaz (1981) emphasized the importance of practical knowledge which was derived from practice and used to handle practical issues In the mid-1980s, teacher knowledge was a dominant term used in studies on teacher cognition Shulman (1986) proposed seven kinds of teacher knowledge in which pedagogical content knowledge was believed to influence teacher cognition research the most (Borg, 2006) Shulman (1986) defined pedagogical content knowledge as the transformation of teachers’ pedagogy and knowledge of the subject matter into a comprehensible form for teaching and learning Later on, Parares (1992) made an attempt to distinguish the term “beliefs” from other psychological constructs It was defined as “an individual judgment of the truth or falsity of a proposition, a judgment that can only be inferred from a collective understanding of what human beings say, intend, and do” (Parares, 1992, p 316)

However, according to Meijer, Verloop, and Beijaard (2001), it was not possible to separate knowledge from beliefs because they were closely connected in teachers’ minds Furthermore, too many specialized terminologies confused the characteristics of teacher cognition (Borg, 2006) Because of these, Borg (2003, p 81) used the term “teacher cognition” to “refer to the unobservable cognitive

dimension of teaching – what teachers know, believe, and think” In Borg’s (2006,

p 283) framework, “teacher cognition” was used as an inclusive term for a multitude of psychological constructs including “beliefs, knowledge, theories, attitudes, assumptions, conceptions, principles, thinking, and decision making” Borg (2006, p 35) defined teacher cognition more thoroughly as “an often tacit, personally-held, practical system of mental constructs held by teachers and which are dynamic – i.e defined and refined on the basis of educational and professional experiences throughout teachers’ lives” This definition depicts some distinct characteristics of teacher cognition First, teacher cognition is tacit because it is held inside teachers’ minds; therefore, it can be accessed only by virtue of reflection Second, each teacher has his/her own cognition Third, teacher cognition is practical because it shapes and is shaped by classroom practices Last, teacher cognition is continually developed by teachers’ educational and experiential knowledge

According to Borg (2006, pp 279-280), there were two types of teacher cognition including “ideal-oriented cognitions”, i.e cognitions “expressed in relation to ideal instructional practices”, and “reality-oriented cognitions”, i.e cognitions “in relation to instructional realities” In this study, I would like to understand teacher cognition in depth; therefore, I will try to identify both “ideal-oriented cognitions” and “reality-oriented cognitions” of the participant

Following Borg (2003, 2006), to avoid the multiplicity of and overlap between concepts and terminology in studies on teacher cognition, the term “teacher cognition” will be used in this study as an inclusive term to refer to teachers’ thinking, knowledge, and beliefs interchangeably

2.2 Definitions of classroom practices

Borg (2003, p 81) defined “classroom practices” as “what teachers do in the language teaching classroom” Nishino (2009, p 9) proposed the same definition, but she emphasized that “classroom practices” referred to not only what teachers do but also “the interaction among students and teachers” She also named a number of things that teachers do in their classrooms as follows:

what teaching methodologies they use, what roles they play and ask their students to play, what activities and materials they use, and how they deal with classroom management issues, such as interpersonal interactions, communication, assessment, and various pedagogical situations (Nishino,

2009, p 9)

In Borg’s (2006) framework, classroom practices and teacher cognition have

a two-way relationship mediated by some contextual factors Thus, “classroom practices” will be used in this study to refer to what language teachers do in their classrooms, which are shaped by their cognition and contextual factors and influence their cognition in return

In summary, the definitions of teacher cognition and classroom practices have shown that they are closely connected Due to this nature, a number of studies have investigated the relationship between them However, some of them found that teacher cognition was not always consistent with classroom practices (Farrell & Lim, 2005; Phipps & Borg, 2009; Yue’e & Yunzhang, 2011; Melketo, 2012; Gerami & Noordin, 2013) The following section will review different views that previous studies held on the relationship between teacher cognition and classroom practices

2.3 Previous studies on the relationship between teacher cognition and classroom practices

In this part, previous studies on the relationship between teacher cognition and classroom practices will be presented They will be split into three groups: language areas (grammar, vocabulary, and pronunciation), language skills (reading, writing, and speaking), and studies in Vietnam Studies in listening instruction are not included because I did not have access to them

2.3.1 Language areas (grammar, vocabulary, and pronunciation)

Most of the studies in this direction concentrated on grammar teaching For example, Farrell and Lim (2005) carried out a study to investigate the relationship between teachers’ beliefs and classroom practices in grammar instruction Two

experienced primary teachers in Singapore participated in this case study The data was collected by means of pre-study interviews, two non-participatory classroom observations (one per teacher) with pre-lesson and post-lesson interviews, and students’ compositions One of the teachers in the study was found to have grammar teaching beliefs being utterly congruent with her classroom practices However, there was some inconsistency between grammar teaching beliefs and classroom practices of the other teacher The factors that caused the discrepancy included time constraints and her long-time respect and admiration for deductive grammar teaching Phipps and Borg (2009) conducted another study to examine the relationship between teachers’ beliefs and classroom practices in grammar instruction Three practicing teachers in Turkey participated in this study The instruments included semi-structured interviews, non-participatory classroom observations (three per teacher), and post-observation interviews The authors divided the teachers’ beliefs into two groups: core beliefs and peripheral beliefs Peripheral beliefs were defined as “specific beliefs about language learning (and) theoretically embraced” whereas core beliefs were “a more generic set of beliefs about learning (and) experientially ingrained” (pp 380, 388) The study found that while the teachers’ peripheral beliefs were not always consistent with their classroom practices, their core beliefs were Some contextual factors leading to the inconsistencies between their peripheral beliefs and classroom practices included students (their expectations, level, responsiveness, and motivation), classroom management, assessment, and the need to monitor errors This study provided useful compartmentalization of teachers’ beliefs for subsequent research The data

of this study was richer than that of the study of Farrell and Lim (2005) since it was obtained from a number of semi-structured interviews and classroom observations Ezzi (2012) implemented another study on the relationship between teachers’ beliefs and classroom practices in grammar instruction 80 in-service primary and secondary teachers in Yemen took part in this study The instruments included a questionnaire and non-participatory observations of 12 participants’ classroom

practices The findings revealed that the teachers’ beliefs were not congruent with their classroom practices Contextual factors that caused the inconsistencies should have been identified as in the studies of Farrell and Lim (2005) and Phipps and Borg (2009) to make the relationship between teacher beliefs and classroom practices clearer

One of the studies investigating the relationship between teacher cognition and classroom practices in vocabulary instruction was conducted by Gerami and Noordin (2013) Four competent male teachers in state high schools in Tehran took part in this study To obtain data on each teacher’s cognition and classroom practices, the authors utilized a pre-observation semi-structured interview, four classroom observations, four post-observation interviews, and four stimulated recall interviews The study found that the teachers’ classroom practices were consistent with their modified beliefs (“shaped under the influence of some challenges”), not with their real beliefs (“actual understanding and true knowledge of vocabulary teaching”) (p 1540) These two types of beliefs were relatively similar to those found in the study of Phipps and Borg (2009) Both studies revealed that the teachers’ classroom practices were consistent with their reality-oriented cognitions, i.e cognitions “in relation to instructional realities” (Borg, 2006, pp 279-280)

The relationship between teacher cognition and classroom practices in pronunciation instruction has been examined by several studies including Baker (2014) Five experienced teachers and 63 students in an intensive English program

in the United States participated in this study Three semi-structured interviews, four classroom observations, and two 45-minute stimulated recall interviews were utilized to explore the relationship between each teacher’s cognition and classroom practices in vocabulary instruction The findings showed that the teachers’ beliefs about pronunciation instruction were consistent with their classroom practices

In summary, the studies above showed that teacher cognition was not always consistent with classroom practices Phipps and Borg (2009) and Gerami and Noordin (2013) found that teachers’ classroom practices were aligned with their

reality-oriented cognitions Farrell and Lim (2005), Phipps and Borg (2009), and Gerami and Noordin (2013) identified some contextual factors that caused inconsistencies between teacher cognition and classroom practices such as time constraints, student factors, and classroom management

2.3.2 Language skills (reading, writing, and speaking)

Kuzborska (2011) conducted a study to examine the relationship between teachers’ beliefs and classroom practices in the reading process, the learning of reading, and the teaching of reading Eight university teachers in Lithuania took part

in this study The instruments included lesson observations (three lessons per teacher), stimulated recalls, semi-structured interviews, and document data analysis The study revealed that the teachers’ beliefs were consistent with their classroom practices

Melketo (2012) undertook another study to investigate the relationship between teachers’ beliefs and classroom practices in writing instruction Three EFL university teachers in Ethiopia participated in this study The instruments included pre-study interviews, non-participatory lesson observations (four lessons per teacher), and students’ written work samples The findings indicated that the teachers’ beliefs were both consistent and inconsistent with their classroom practices Contextual factors that led to the inconsistencies included “time constraints, their (the teachers’) perceptions of students’ expectations, classroom management issues, and perceived lack of student motivation” (p 108)

There were only a few studies investigating the relationship between teacher cognition and classroom practices in English speaking instruction One of them was conducted by Cohen and Fass (2001) 51 teachers and 63 students at a Colombian university took part in this study The data was collected by means of a questionnaire, the teachers’ ranking of speaking activities in terms of appropriateness, and six classroom observations The results showed that the teachers’ beliefs were inconsistent with their classroom practices in terms of oral activities and the use of pair work and group work This study did not identify

contextual factors that prevented the teachers from executing their beliefs in their classroom practices Another study was implemented by Yue’e and Yunzhang (2011) to examine the relationship between teacher cognition and classroom practices in speaking instruction The participants were two university teachers in China The instruments included an open questionnaire, pre-class interviews, non-participatory classroom observations, and post-class interviews The findings showed that the teachers’ cognition was both consistent and inconsistent with their classroom practices Consistencies were found in the teachers’ cognition about student-centeredness, grammar, and vocabulary Inconsistency was manifested in their cognition about students’ participation in class The reasons for the inconsistency were “the nature of oral English teaching” and “the context and social political environment of teaching” (p 32)

In summary, the studies above also showed that teacher cognition was not always consistent with classroom practices In the study of Yue’e and Yunzhang (2011), teacher cognition was both consistent and inconsistent with classroom practices Yue’e and Yunzhang (2011) and Melketo (2012) identified contextual factors influencing the relationship between teacher cognition and classroom practices such as time constraints, classroom management, students’ expectations, and students’ participation

2.3.3 Studies on the relationship between teacher cognition and classroom practices in Vietnam

One of the few studies on teacher cognition in Vietnam was conducted by Le (2011) The participants were eight high school EFL teachers The study was aimed

at investigating the teachers’ beliefs about form-focused instruction and the relationship between their beliefs and classroom practices The instruments included semi-structured interviews, video-recorded classroom observations, and stimulated recall interviews The study found that the teachers’ beliefs were generally consistent with their classroom practices Multiple factors that influenced the participants’ beliefs and practices included professional training, prior language

learning experience, “institutional factors and learner variables”, instructional materials, and “teachers’ personal experience and the experience of others in the professional community” (pp 219-222)

Another study was implemented by Nguyen (2014) to examine the beliefs and classroom practices in task-based language teaching of 11 high school EFL teachers The data was collected by audio-recorded group lesson planning sessions, video-recorded classroom observations, and stimulated recall interviews The findings revealed that the teachers’ beliefs were inconsistent with their classroom practices

Tran (2015) also conducted a study on the relationship between teachers’ beliefs and classroom practices in task-based language teaching Six high school EFL teachers participated in this study The data was obtained by semi-structured interviews, classroom observations, lesson plans, and documents The results indicated that the participants’ beliefs were consistent with their classroom practices

In summary, while the studies of Le (2011) and Tran (2015) revealed that teacher cognition was consistent with classroom practices, inconsistencies were found in Nguyen’s (2014) study

The table on the next page will provide a summary of the studies reviewed in 2.3

Table 2.1 A summary of previous studies on the relationship between teacher

cognition and classroom practices

grammar

Turkey 2009

Phipps and Borg

vocabulary

the U.S 2014 Baker

pronunciation instruction √

Lithuania 2011 Kuzborska

reading instruction √

speaking

China 2011

Yue’e and Yunzhang

2014 Nguyen

task-based language teaching

√

2015 Tran

task-based language teaching

√

In summary, the studies above showed that teacher cognition was both

consistent and inconsistent with classroom practices In the studies of Phipps and Borg (2009) and Gerami and Noordin (2013), teachers’ classroom practices were inconsistent with their stated beliefs but consistent with their modified beliefs, i.e beliefs formed under the influence of contextual factors These findings supported Borg's (2006) compartmentalizing teacher cognition into two types: ideal-oriented cognitions and reality-oriented cognitions and implicated the need for me to identify both types of teacher cognition in this study In terms of data collection instruments, questionnaires, semi-structured interviews, classroom observations, and stimulated recall interviews were employed by most of the reviewed studies

In this study, the relationship between teacher cognition and classroom practices is examined in English speaking instruction; therefore, I need to choose some themes of the teaching of speaking as initial categories for investigation purposes The first theme chosen for this study is accuracy and fluency since they are “two clearly important speaker goals” and the distinction between them

“pervades all of language performance” (Brown, 2000, p 268) There are three more themes related to these two goals of speaking According to Harmer (2007), to speak English fluently, students need to use elements of speaking such as conversational rules and structures, conversational strategies, functional language, and fixed phrases Therefore, speaking elements make up the second theme of this study Scrivener (2011, p 225) also advised that teachers “be clear about whether your main aim is accuracy or fluency, and adapt your role in class appropriately” This proposes the third theme for this study, i.e teacher roles According to Harmer (2007), one of the roles teachers should play in teaching speaking to help students develop oral fluency is feedback provider; therefore, the last theme for this study is teacher feedback These themes will be used as initial categories to help me investigate the relationship between teacher cognition and classroom practices in English speaking instruction They will be reviewed in the following section

2.4 Four themes of English speaking instruction

This part reviews four themes of English speaking instruction including accuracy and fluency, speaking elements, teacher roles, and teacher feedback Accuracy and fluency is the first theme because they are the two foci of speaking activities The importance of distinguishing between accuracy and fluency was acknowledged by Scrivener (2011) as follows:

It is therefore important for you to be clear about what is involved in accuracy-focused work as compared with fluency-focused work And it's especially important to be clear about the differing aims - and consequently different classroom procedures - of the two (p 225)

In the study of Yue’e and Yunzhang (2011), the content of English speaking instruction emerging from the data included vocabulary, pronunciation, grammar, and error correction However, teaching English speaking means more than that According to McCarthy and Carter (1997, as cited in Richards, 2007, p 17), studies

of “discourse analysis, conversational analysis, and corpus analysis” have shed light

on some distinct characteristics of speech According to Harmer (2007), these speaking elements could help students speak English fluently; therefore, they are chosen as the second theme of this study

Teachers take on different roles during speaking activities (Harmer, 2007), and teacher roles were also listed as one of the things teachers do in their classrooms (Nishino, 2009) Thus, the third theme of this study is concerned with teacher roles

Harmer (2007, p 142) also stated that “feedback – both assessment and correction – can be very helpful during oral work” and one of the roles teachers should play to help students develop their oral fluency was feedback provider; therefore, teacher feedback is the last theme

These four themes provide the study with initial categories to investigate the relationship between the participant’s cognition and classroom practices in English speaking instruction

2.4.1 Accuracy and fluency

According to Brown (2000), making a distinction between accuracy and fluency was crucial to language performance He stated that accuracy referred to language that was “clear, articulate, grammatically and phonologically correct” whereas fluency meant “(flowing, natural) language”, and the distinction between accuracy and fluency was determined by whether teachers’ techniques were message oriented (language use) or language oriented (language usage) (pp 268-269) Scrivener (2011) believed that the switch between accuracy and fluency in his head changed depending on activities, stages of the lessons, and sometimes whatever happening in his class Both accuracy and fluency are important objectives of Communicative Language Teaching (Brown, 2000) To help students improve their language accuracy and fluency, teachers need “non-communicative and communicative activities” respectively (Harmer, 2007, p 142)

2.4.1.1 Non-communicative activities

According to Harmer (2007), non-communicative activities were designed to ensure students’ language accuracy He also listed six characteristics of non-communicative activities including “no communicative desire, no communicative purpose, form not content, one language item only, teacher intervention, (and) materials control” (p 70) Typical non-communicative activities were audio-lingual drills (Littlewood, 1981) There are several types of drills including “repetition, backward build-up, chain, substitution, transformation, and question-and-answer” (Freeman, 2000, pp 48-49) The table below will give a summary of what students

do in these drills

repetition accurately and quickly repeat what their teacher says

backward build-up repeat the end of a long sentence first and then work backward chain take turns to greet each other or to ask and answer one question substitution put teachers’ cues in a particular sentence correctly

transformation change sentence patterns (e.g changing a positive sentence to a

negative sentence) question-and-answer quickly answer questions of their teacher (or make questions with

cues given by their teacher)

Table 2.2 Non-communicative activities (audio-lingual drills)

2.4.1.2 Communicative activities

Richards (2007, p 35) believed that the most important goal of oral English instruction was to help students achieve communicative competence, i.e “how to use English appropriately for a range of different communicative purposes, particularly social purposes, educationally-related purposes and work-related purposes” To this end, teachers need communicative activities According to Scrivener (2011, p 217), communicative activities are “classroom activities designed so that learners speak and listen to one another” Littlewood (1981, p 22) stated that communicative activities included functional communication activities where students “have to overcome an information gap or solve a problem” and social interactional activities where students’ language use is influenced by social and functional considerations Thornbury (2005) proposed five features that made

an activity communicative including:

• the motivation of the activity is to achieve some outcome, using language;

• the activity takes place in real time;

• achieving the outcome requires the participants to interact; i.e to listen as well as speak;

• because of the spontaneous and jointly constructed nature of the interaction, the outcome is not 100% predictable;

• there is no restriction on the language used (pp 79-80)

Harmer (2007, p 70) listed six features of communicative activities including “a desire to communicate, a communicative purpose, content not form, variety of language, no teacher intervention, (and) no materials control” Scrivener (2011, p 217) believed that a communicative activity “involves a real exchange of information” where students need to overcome an information gap In short, communicative activities help students use language resources freely in real-life interactions to achieve an outcome Thornbury (2005), Kayi (2006), Harmer (2007), and Scrivener (2011) suggested a wide range of communicative activities which

teachers could use in their speaking instruction The table below will give a summary of these activities

acting from a script perform play scenes or their own dialogs

information-gap

games

talk to their partners to complete tasks

TV and radio games take part in appropriate TV and radio games

buzz group discuss different topics in groups

instant comment say what they think of first when seeing photos or topics formal debate argue for/against a statement

unplanned discussion discuss unexpected topics arising from the lesson

reaching a consensus discuss to reach an agreement

prepared talks present their favorite topics

questionnaires/surveys ask and answer questions of a questionnaire or survey simulation act out a real-life interaction as themselves

role-play act out a real-life interaction as other people

picture difference

tasks

describe their pictures to their partners to find differences

group planning tasks plan something (e.g a holiday) in groups, then present

their opinions pyramid discussion discuss to solve a problem in pairs, then fours, then eights,

etc to reach a class agreement jigsaw discuss to reach an agreement in their original groups and

then in redistributed groups ranking tasks put items on a list in a particular order

board games take turns to do tasks in squares

puzzles and problems discuss to solve puzzles and problems

blocking games give unexpected responses to their partners in dialogs guessing games ask yes/no questions to guess the answers to their partners’

questions story telling recount their own stories or stories of other people

interviews interview their partners on a particular topic with a rubric

given by their teacher story completion take turns to complete a story started by their teacher

reporting report interesting news they read at home to their partners

Table 2.3 Communicative activities

In summary, this section has shown that teachers need to help students develop both oral accuracy and fluency by using non-communicative and communicative activities respectively To focus on oral accuracy, teachers can teach

grammar, pronunciation, and vocabulary; however, to help students develop oral fluency, it is important to include distinct characteristics of speech which will be reviewed in the next section

2.4.2 Speaking elements

A number of authors have attempted to identify and describe specific characteristics of speaking For example, Dornyei and Thurrell (1994, as cited in McCarthy & O’Keeffe, 2004) recommended four elements including conversational rules and structures, conversational strategies, functions and meaning in conversation, and social and cultural contexts Thornbury (2005) proposed eight features: sociocultural knowledge, genre knowledge, speech acts, register, discourse, grammar (spoken English features), vocabulary, and phonology Richards (2007) focused on three aspects: conversational routines, styles of speaking, and functions of speaking Harmer (2007) suggested five facets: speaking events, conversational strategies, functional language, adjacency pairs, and fixed phrases I have chosen two groups of elements I considered important including (1) spoken English features and (2) conversational rules and structures, conversational strategies, functions and meaning in conversation, and social and cultural contexts These elements will be reviewed below

2.4.2.1 Spoken English features

Spoken English has a number of features that are different from those of written English McCarthy and O’Keeffe (2004, p 28) believed that a description of these would provide “systematic linguistic input for pedagogies of speaking” Willis (2003) and Carter and McCarthy (2006) attempted to delineate spoken English characteristics Some of them are fillers (er/erm), vague language (something/sort of), informal words (kids/Mum/Dad), repetition, back-channels (Really?, mm, right, That’s amazing) and sentences beginning with ‘but’, ‘and’, and ‘so’ (Willis, 2003) Those such as ellipsis, extensive use of pronouns, simple noun phrases, phrasal chunks, and recasting are also typical of spoken English (Carter & McCarthy,

2006) These features represent natural spoken English; therefore, they should be included in the teaching of speaking

2.4.2.2 Conversational rules and structures, conversational strategies, functions and meaning in conversation, and social and cultural contexts

These aspects were synthesized from research on discourse analysis, conversational analysis, and communicative competence (McCarthy & O’Keeffe, 2004) Conversational rules and structures refer to how to open a conversation, how

to interrupt, how to shift topics, and how to end a conversation; conversational strategies include “paraphrase, asking for repetition and clarification”, and “survival strategies” such as using “an all-purpose phrase (You know, it’s a what-d’ you-call-it)” or asking for help “(What’s the word for something you play a guitar with?)”; functions and meaning in conversation denotes “illocutionary functions” or speech acts; and social and cultural contexts mean “social norms of appropriateness” (McCarthy & O’Keeffe, 2004, p 34; Harmer, 2007, p 344) Thornbury (2005) advised using discourse markers to help students with turn management in a conversation; and enhancing students’ intercultural competence rather than teaching them sociocultural norms of English speaking countries since English is now an International Language These aspects should be integrated into the teaching of speaking because they are helpful for natural and appropriate speech production To help students develop both accuracy and fluency, teachers often play different roles

in their classrooms Some of these roles will be reviewed in the following section

2.4.3 Teacher roles

Brown (2000, p 166) stated that “teachers can play many roles in the course

of teaching” He described five teacher roles in interactive teaching including controller, director, manager, facilitator, and resource Controller refers to teachers controlling “every moment in the classroom” (p 167) As director, teachers ensure that students’ language performance is smooth and efficient A manager teacher does planning work “Making learning easier for students” is what a facilitator does (p 167) Resource means that teachers give students advice and counsel He

suggested that teachers take non-directive roles in interactive teaching so that students could become more independent Harmer (2007, pp 108-110) explained five teacher roles including controller (“leading from the front”), prompter (suggesting things students should say), participant (taking part in activities with students), resource (helping students with what they need), and tutor (playing the roles of prompter and resource) He believed that three relevant teacher roles in helping students develop their fluency in speaking activities were prompter, participant, and feedback provider (teachers’ responses to the content and language forms of students’ talks) In a study on teacher roles conducted by Sougari and Sifakis (2007), most of the participants adopted the role of facilitators whereas very few regarded themselves as role models or managers The teachers in another study implemented by Larenas, Hernandez, and Navarrete (2014, p 176) saw themselves

as “role models, facilitators, guides, mediators and prompters” It could be seen that different roles are taken on by each teacher as well as among teachers The adoption

of particular teacher roles, therefore, depends on various types of students, teaching aims, and classroom activities (Harmer, 2007) The following section will elaborate

on an important teacher role which helps students improve both accuracy and fluency in their speaking, i.e giving feedback

2.4.4 Teacher feedback

Receiving feedback from others is important to second language learning (Brown, 2000) Therefore, teachers should consider if, when, how, and to whom feedback should be given (Brown, 2000; Harmer, 2007) In the teaching of speaking, feedback includes assessment and correction (Harmer, 2007) When students’ errors are corrected depends on whether a speaking activity focuses on accuracy or fluency (Scrivener, 2011) Thornbury (2005), Harmer (2007), and Scrivener (2011) gave some suggestions on this matter

2.4.4.1 Feedback in accuracy-focused activities

Scrivener (2011) believed that immediate correction in accuracy-focused activities could be helpful Harmer (2007, pp 144-145) suggested two techniques

for doing this including “showing incorrectness” and “getting it right” “Showing incorrectness” involves repeating (“ask the student to repeat what they have said”), echoing (repeat students’ mistakes with a questioning intonation), statement and question (say something to let students know something is wrong), expression (use facial expressions or gestures to let students know something is wrong), hinting (give students hints on the kinds of mistakes they have made), and reformulation (“repeat back a corrected version of what the student has said”) “Getting it right” refers to teachers or other students explicitly pointing out mistakes that a particular student has made He advised that teachers be very sensitive when doing this because it could make students feel disparaged

2.4.4.2 Feedback in fluency-focused activities

Thornbury (2005) suggested that teachers manage their focus on formal accuracy so that it would least inhibit students’ autonomy in fluency-focused activities Most teachers even believed that students’ mistakes in grammar, pronunciation, or vocabulary should not be corrected during fluency-focused activities (Harmer, 2007) Scrivener (2011) echoed this view by explaining that interrupting students in fluency-focused activities to correct their mistakes could make it difficult for them to continue as well as demotivate other students However, Harmer (2007, pp 145-147) stated that teachers could give feedback during and after fluency-oriented activities by using “gentle correction”, “recording mistakes”, and “after the event” “Gentle correction” involves giving students prompts and/or correcting their mistakes during fluency-focused activities by using reformulation, echoing, and/or expression in a discrete and tactful manner

“Recording mistakes” refers to teachers taking notes of students’ mistakes during fluency-focused activities to give feedback later Students’ successes should also be recorded to make feedback more motivating (Thornbury, 2005) “After the event”

is when teachers give both positive and negative, content- and form-related feedback to students

In summary, this section has reviewed four important themes of the teaching

of speaking including accuracy and fluency, speaking elements, teacher roles, and teacher feedback The relationship among them will be shown in the figure below

Speaking elements

(spoken English features, conversational rules and structures, conversational strategies, functions and meaning in conversation, social and cultural contexts

Teacher roles

(controller, resource, participant,

prompter, facilitator, feedback

provider)

Teacher feedback

(showing correctness, getting it right, gentle correction, recording mistakes,

after the event)

Accuracy with

non-communicative activities

Fluency with

communicative activities