(Luận văn thạc sĩ) english used in instructions in reading lessons by vietnamese teachers – a case study at faculty of english language teacher education, ULIS, VNU

i VIENAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES FACULTY OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHER EDUCATION PHAN THI TOAN ENGLISH USED IN INSTRUCTIONS IN READI

i

VIENAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

FACULTY OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHER EDUCATION

PHAN THI TOAN

ENGLISH USED IN INSTRUCTIONS IN READING LESSONS

BY VIETNAMESE TEACHERS – A CASE STUDY AT

FACULTY OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHER EDUCATION,

ULIS, VNU

Tiếng Anh được sử dụng bởi giáo viên người Việt khi hướng dẫn sinh viên học

kĩ năng đọc – Một “nghiên cứu trường hợp” tại Khoa Sư Phạm Tiếng Anh,

trường Đại học Ngoại Ngữ, Đại học Quốc Gia Hà Nội

i

VIENAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES FACULTY OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHER EDUCATION

PHAN THỊ TOÁN

ENGLISH USED IN INSTRUCTIONS IN READING LESSONS BY VIETNAMESE TEACHERS – A CASE STUDY AT FACULTY OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHER EDUCATION, ULIS, VNU Tiếng Anh được sử dụng bởi giáo viên người Việt khi hướng dẫn sinh viên học kĩ năng đọc – Một “nghiên cứu trường hợp” tại Khoa Sư Phạm Tiếng Anh, trường

Đại học Ngoại Ngữ, Đại học Quốc Gia Hà Nội

i

ACCEPTANCE

I hereby state that I : Phan Thị Toán, English K21D, being a candidate for the degree of Master of Arts (English Teaching Methodology), accept the requirements of the College relating to the retention and use of Graduation Paper deposited in the library

In terms of these conditions, I agree that the origin of my paper deposited in the library should be accessible for the purposes of study and research, in accordance with the normal conditions established by the librarian for the care, loan or reproduction of the paper

Signature

September 15th, 2014

ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This paper would not have been completed without the support of many people, to all of whom I am profoundly indebted

First and foremost, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my supervisor, Ms Nguyen Thi Minh Tam, PhD for her precious support and insightful comments, which have always been the decisive factors in the completion of this paper

Second, I would like to send my heartfelt thanks to the teachers and the students of two first-year reading classes at Division I, FELTE, who allowed me to administer the observations and interviews and who have enthusiastically helped me to carry out the study with ease

Last but not least, I am truly grateful to my family and my friends for their continual encouragement and support during the time I conducted the research

iii

ABSTRACT This study investigates the support of teacher instructions in academic reading lessons in two first-year classes at Department I, FELTE, ULIS, VNU A multiple case study design and the qualitative approach were applied to take an in-depth investigation into the problem

Five observations with a recorder and two observation schemes, one of which based on the theory by Fairclough and the other is based on the theory of effective instructions, were conducted in each class to discover the way the teachers guided the students with the reading exercises Moreover, the teachers’ and students’ perceptions of the effectiveness of the instruction giving were measured by their responses in the interviews after the observation process The data collected were coded and then decoded and analyzed under each research question It was found out from the study that simple English words and structures were used in almost all the instructions Moreover, both the teachers and the students were satisfied with the explicitness of the instructions However, it is recommended that teacher instruction should still be improved More referential questions should be used to catch the students’ attention and motivate them to think More explanation and checking, including understanding checking and result checking, should be conducted to make sure the effectiveness of the instructions The teachers need to pay more attention to the guidance about how to deal with the questions and the language in the reading texts, as well

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACCEPTANCE i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ii

ABSTRACT iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS iv

LISTS OF ABBREVIATIONS ix

PART A: INTRODUCTION 1

1 Statement and rationale of the research 1

2 Aims of the study 2

3 Research questions 2

4 Scope of the study 2

5 Methods of the study 3

6 Significance of the study 3

7 An overview of the rest of the paper 3

PART B: DEVELOPMENT 5

CHAPTER 1: THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK 5

1.1 Instruction 5

1.1.1 Definition of instruction 5

1.1.2 The role of teachers’ instructions 6

1.1.3 Some techniques of instruction giving 6

1.1.4 Principles of effective instructions 7

1.1.5 Comprehension instruction in reading lessons 8

1.2 Teachers’ language use in instructions in the view of Discourse Analysis 9

1.2.1 Classroom Discourse 9

v

1.2.2 Classroom Discourse Analysis 10

1.3 Review of the previous studies 12

CHAPTER 2: METHODOLOGY 15

2.1 Research approach and Research design 15

2.1.1 Qualitative approach 15

2.1.2 Multiple-case study design 15

2.2 Context of the study 16

2.3 Participant selection 16

2.3.1 Sampling method 16

2.3.2 Participants 17

2.4 Data collection methods and procedures 18

2.4.1 Classroom Observation 18

2.4.1.1 Purpose 18

2.4.1.2 Structure 19

2.4.1.3 Procedure 20

2.4.1.4 Coding scheme 20

2.4.2 Interviews 20

2.4.2.1 Purpose 20

2.4.2.2 Structure 21

2.4.2.3 Procedure 21

2.4.2.4 Coding scheme 21

2.4.3 Data collection procedure 22

2.4.3.1 Phase 1 22

2.4.3.2 Phase 2: 22

vi

2.5 Data analysis method and procedure 22

CHAPTER 3: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION 23

3.1 Findings 23

3.1.1 Answer to research question 1: 23

3.1.1.1 Vocabulary 23

3.1.1.2 Grammar 24

3.1.1.3 Cohesion 25

3.1.1.4 Structure of text 25

3.1.1.5 Discourse as discursive practice 26

3.1.2 Answer to research question 2: 27

3.1.2.1 Instruction effectiveness in the teachers’ perception 28

3.1.2.2 Instruction effectiveness in the students’ perception 30

3.1.2.3 Instruction effectiveness under the theory of an effective instruction 32

3.2 Implications for teaching 33

3.2.1 The patterns of English used 33

3.2.1.1 Vocabulary and grammar 33

3.2.1.2 Cohesion and structure 34

3.2.1.3 Discursive practice 35

3.2.2 Techniques of instruction giving 35

3.2.2.1 Content of instructions 35

3.2.2.2 Instruction giving time 36

3.2.2.3 Understanding checking 36

PART C: CONCLUSION 37

1 Recapitulation 37

vii

1.1 Major findings 37

1.1.1 Research question 1 37

1.1.2 Research question 2: 37

1.2 Pedagogical implications 37

2 Contributions of the study 38

3 Limitations of the study 38

4 Suggestions for further studies 39

REFERENCES 40 APPENDIX 1A – OBSERVATIONS IN G1 I

1 Observation scheme 1 I

2 Observation scheme 2 XII

APPENDIX 1B – OBSERVATIONS IN G2 XVIII

1 Observation scheme 1 XVIII

2 Observation scheme 2 XXIX

APPENDIX 2A – INTERVIEW QUESTIONS FOR THE TEACHERS XXXV

1 Vietnamese version XXXV

2 English version XXXVI

APPENDIX 2B – INTERVIEW QUESTIONS FOR THE STUDENTS XXXVII

1 Vietnamese version XXXVII

2 English version XXXIX

APPENDIX 3A – INTERVIEW T1 XL

1 Vietnamese version XL

2 English version XLIII

APPENDIX 3B – INTERVIEW T2 XLVI

viii

1 Vietnamese version XLVI

2 English version XLIX

APPENDIX 4A – INTERVIEW G1 LII

1 Vietnamese version LII

2 English version LVI

APPENDIX 4B – INTERVIEW G2 LIX

1 Vietnamese version LIX

2 English version LXIV

APPENDIX 4C – THE TEST USED IN INTERVIEWS WITH STUDENTS LXIX APPENDIX 5A – SAMPLE OF T1’S INSTRUCTIONS CI APPENDIX 5B – SAMPLE OF T2’S INSTRUCTIONS CIII APPENDIX 6 – SAMPLE OF READING TEXTS USED IN CLASSROOMS CV

ix

LISTS OF ABBREVIATIONS FELTE Faculty of English Language Teacher Education ULIS University of Languages and International Studies VNU Vietnam National University, Hanoi

PART A: INTRODUCTION

1 Statement and rationale of the research

In a lesson where English is taught as a second or foreign language (hereafter in this thesis referred to as L2), the effective academic development of students may require many elements Beside the external factors, the successful interaction between the teacher and the students is clearly essential Obviously, the efficiency of this communication serves as a connection between the two, which provides a better atmosphere for the classroom environment According to Justice, Hamre and Pianta (2008), it is teachers’ facilitation of learning objectives that determines whether students gain from instructions Mashburn et al (2008) also claims that for students’ academic attainment and social skill growth, the way teachers guide and connect with students need to be focused on Apparently, more effective teacher-student cooperation leads to enhanced students’ outcomes

Teaching reading skills for first year students at university is not an easy task for every teacher The reason is that, most first-year students lack academic reading skills, especially when “University-level reading greatly differs from High School reading” (Hermida, 2009, p 21) Whereas, teachers play a leading role in providing learners with the knowledge, skills and understanding they need to read, write, speak and listen effectively (Arkoudis, 2003, p 162 cited in Uys et al., 2007) Therefore, the instructions given by the teacher has a dramatic effect on developing students’ academic reading skills So far, many authors such as Kamil (2008), Archer and Hughes (2011), Ryder et

al (n.d), Buckheit (2010), Rubagumya et al (2010), and Vasilopoulos (2008) have examined this relationship but they only analyzed the impact of instructions in building the students’ skills in general

In Faculty of English Language Teacher Education, English is used as the only medium

of classroom discourse, including instructions Although the students major English, this

is still a barrier to them in conducting activities in classroom Sadly, to the best knowledge of the researcher, there is no standard on how the teachers’ language use should be for the best sake of the students There seems hardly to be; moreover, any

author having investigated in the English practice in these instructions, especially in Vietnamese education

This real situation has inspired the researcher to choose the tittle “English used in

instructions in reading lessons by Vietnamese teachers – A case study at Faculty of English Language Teacher Education, ULIS, VNU.” with the expectation to have a

deeper knowledge of the language use in the instructions given by teachers

2 Aims of the study

The study aims at observing the patterns of English used by the teachers and exploring the extent to which those patterns make their instructions effective

3 Research questions

With such aims as mentioned, the study answers the two following questions

1 What are the patterns of English used in the instructions given by the teachers?

2 To what extent do the patterns of English that the teachers use make their instructions effective according to the theory, the teachers and the students?

4 Scope of the study

This investigation is taken in academic reading lessons only That is because these lessons concern of different kinds of exercises which are totally different from those at high schools Therefore, the students do need comprehensive and detailed instructions from the teachers As asserted by Boulware et al (2007), students cannot develop their reading level with only the exposure to the reading texts They need the guidance from the teacher about the effective strategies Autrey & Demuth (2012) also states that in the classroom, the teacher should adapt the content, methodology and delivery of instructions for the success of the lessons, which is partly gained through the teacher’s appropriate language use

This study targets at the effectiveness of the teachers’ instructions in the perceptions of the teachers and the students Another focus is the teacher’s use of English in their instructions given to the students before, during and after they do the reading tasks It is not only the structures and the vocabulary of English but also the way the teachers deliver instructions in English The English used is examined in the perspective of discourse analysis

5 Methods of the study

The research applies qualitative method in collecting and analyzing data The participants

of the research are the teachers and the students of two first-year academic reading mainstream classes A case study is used to take a deep investigation into the issue The data are collected through two instruments: classroom observations (with recordings) and face-to-face interviews Initially, through the classroom observations, the language patterns and instruction giving techniques used by the teachers are recorded with two observation schemes Next, the teachers are interviewed for their perception of the success of their instruction giving Afterwards, two groups of students from the two classes are asked about their opinion on the effectiveness of the teachers’ instructions in helping them deal with the reading texts and exercises The data; next, are coded and decoded in the analyzing period

6 Significance of the study

Among few studies on the English used in teacher’s instructions in academic reading lessons at first-year ULIS mainstream English majors, the study would be of great benefit for its target population (mainly the teachers) and other researchers interested in the topic For the teachers, the research findings would be a good source for some proposals about the effective way of using and processing English in their instructions in academic reading lessons The recommendations are expected to offer not only short-term but also life-long suggestions for them in delivering comprehensive and full guidance For other researchers, the study could be a reliable source of related literature and a basis to expand the research scope in the same field, as well

7 An overview of the rest of the paper

The rest of the paper is comprised of the four following chapters:

Chapter 1 (Theoretical Framework) introduces the theoretical foundation for the whole

study Besides providing the definitions of key terms like instruction and classroom

discourse, it offers a critical review of studies related to the research problem

Chapter 2 (Methodology) specifies the participants, the instruments, the two-phase

procedure of collecting data and the procedure of processing data from the observations and the interviews

Chapter 3 (Findings and Discussion) presents and analyses all the collected data to help

find out the answers to the two research questions The chapter also provides the researcher’s suggestions on the use of English in academic reading lessons at first-year mainstream classes based on the findings and related studies

The Conclusion summarizes all the major points presented in the findings, the

contributions and limitations of the study as well as some suggestions for further research

PART B: DEVELOPMENT CHAPTER 1: THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK This chapter provides an overview on the theoretical framework related to the study Beside the definitions of key terms like instruction or classroom discourse, the chapter provides critical background information to ensure the thorough understanding of the research matters Hence, the literature gap and rationales of the study are revealed

1.1 Instruction

1.1.1 Definition of instruction

Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary (2010) describes instruction as “detailed information on how to do or use something” (p 774) In Cambridge Dictionary (2013), instruction is “something that someone tells you to do” (p 749) The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language (2000) defines instruction as an accurate direction to follow Collins English Dictionary (2003), on the other hand, clarifies instruction as the action of knowledge communicating Overall, instruction refers to the information conveyed to a recipient to perform something

Štalmašková et al (2006 cited in Nguyen, 2010) says that instruction is the teaching,

education performed by a teacher or the “action, practice, or profession of teaching” (p 19) Huitt (2003) considers instruction as one of the main teachers’ activities in classroom (the other two are planning and management) Ur (1996) clarifies instructions as “the directions that are given to introduce a learning task which entails some measure of independent student activity” (p l6) In Housen & Pierrard (2005), L2 instruction is intentional effort to increase L2 acquisition

Briefly, instruction can be described in two ways In a broad sense, it is the common teaching performed by the teacher during the lesson In a narrow sense, it is the teacher’s explanation about an activity or a task

In the case of this study, instructions are the explanations and the guides from the teacher during the lessons to help the students read with comprehension and fluency In the activity of instruction giving, the teacher imparts the knowledge and especially, the reading skills and strategies to the students

1.1.2 The role of teachers’ instructions

Obviously, instructions play an important role in helping the teacher to direct the class and achieve the lessons’ objectives Harmer (1998) announces that “The best activity in the world is a waste of time if the students don’t understand what it is they are supposed

to do” (p 4) A similar opinion claimed by Nguyen et al (2003 cited in To et al., 2008) is: “If students do not know what they are expected to do about the tasks/activities, they will not be able to perform the tasks successfully” (p 16) In that point of view, the students’ clearness of what should be done and what way to do decides the outcomes of the lessons

Housen & Pierrard (2005) states that instructions increase learners’ accuracy, complexity (richness, sophistication) and fluency On the other hand, they provide crucial exposure

to L2, influence L2 learning propensity and activate language learning mechanisms and processes Moreover, they enable internalization of new L2 knowledge, modification of L2 knowledge and consolidation of L2 knowledge (Housen & Pierrard, 2005) It can be inferred that the language use in instructions plays a very important role in the development of students’ L2 acquisition

In conclusion, instructions are indispensable in L2 learning They not only give the students an exact direction in developing their language competence but also strengthen their skills and confidence Therefore, the teacher must be really careful and well-prepared in his/her use of language to benefit the students the most

1.1.3 Some techniques of instruction giving

Nguyen et al (2003 cited in To et al., 2008) suggests four different techniques for instructing the students

 “Step – by – step” or “feed – in” approach: Give one instruction at a time, not a series

 Students recall: If necessary, get the students to translate instructions into their mother tongue (Vietnamese)

(p 16)

In short, giving instructions does not mean giving the students the directions only and let them find the way themselves The explanations may become nonsense if the students do not understand Therefore, comprehension checking is really crucial Furthermore, through the activities, the teacher needs to observe and support the students whenever they encounter difficulties

1.1.4 Principles of effective instructions

According to Ur (1996), the principles of effective instruction giving and checking are: careful preparation, having the class’s attention, presenting information more than once, being brief, illustrating with examples and getting feedback On the other hand, Gower et al (1995) proposes seven factors which are: attracting students’ attention, using simple language and short expressions, being consistent, using visual or written clues, demonstrating, breaking instructions down and targeting the instructions (p 40) Huitt (1996) also discusses several principles They are: active presentation of information; clear organization of instructions; step-by-step progression from subtopic to subtopic; use many examples, visual prompts, and demonstrations; constant assessment of students’ understanding; alter pace of instruction based on assessment of students’ understanding; and effective use of time and maintaining students’ attention Prozorova and Novikava (cited in Hickey, 2006) think that effective instructions should increase comprehensibility; interaction; and thinking/study skills

Generally, the points described in the principles above can be summarized in five critical elements:

 Attract students’ attention

 Make the instructions easy to understand

 Illustrate the instructions with different forms of information

 Assure students’ understanding

 Develop students’ interaction and study skills

Clearly, English in instructions has been always one of the concerns of the teachers and experts However, there have been still no standards for the simplicity of language use as well as studies on how the good choice of language use can affect the success of the lessons

1.1.5 Comprehension instruction in reading lessons

When learning four skills of English (speaking, reading, listening, writing), students seem

to learn reading first In a publication by Texas Education Agency (2002), it is said that reading is “central” to learning Moreover, students’ reading competence decides their

“future success” (p 3) Bouchard and Sutton (2001) claims that “Teaching children to

read … is the responsibility of every teacher, every administrator and every parent.”(p 3) Obviously, reading is an essential skill which all students should master

The question is how to build and develop students’ reading skills According to Texas Education Agency (2002), the purpose of reading is “comprehension” Anderson et al (1985) believes without comprehension, reading is a “frustrating, pointless exercise in word calling (p 4).” Ontario Ministry of Education (2003) claims that the goal of reading

is to read a diversity of books with “understanding, skill, and confidence (p 2.4).” Therefore, comprehension is the final goal of reading instructions (Learning Point Associates, 2004) Besides, reading instructions are to help students “develop the knowledge, skills, and experiences they must have if they are to become competent and enthusiastic readers.” (Texas Education Agency, 2002, p 30)

Dole (2008) states that students need to be taught a set of strategies and vocabulary related to important concepts when they read texts, especially when they get confused Learning Point Associates (2004) suggests some comprehension strategies which are: Using prior knowledge; Generating questions; Comprehension monitoring; Cooperative learning; and Graphic and semantic organizers (p 31-38) According to that paper, to instruct students comprehensively, it is necessary that the teacher use direct explanations; make the strategies perceived useful by the students; give students chances to use the strategies immediately; repeat the explanations and modeling of how to use the strategies within the same lesson presentation; gradually transfer responsibility for applying the strategy to students; assess how well students understand the content and how well they

use the strategies; and maintain a focus on the strategies (p 37-38) Meanwhile, Kamil (2008) offers question answering; question generation; constructing maps; comprehension monitoring; cooperative learning; summarizing; and using graphic organizers (p 3-4) The policies mentioned in Texas Education Agency (2002) are activating and using background knowledge; generating and asking questions; making inferences; predicting; summarizing; visualizing and comprehension monitoring (p 9-11) Moreover, it is also emphasized that comprehension instruction must begin as soon

as students begin to read and it must:

• be explicit, intensive, and persistent;

• help students to become aware of text organization; and

• motivate students to read widely

(Texas Education Agency, p 12)

In general, the comprehension strategies are quite the same among the researchers Those strategies are also applicable in L2 classrooms Hence, it is how the teachers really do with their instructions that matters

1.2 Teachers’ language use in instructions in the view of Discourse Analysis

1.2.1 Classroom Discourse

According to Henry & Tator (2002), discourse is the way in which language is used

“socially to convey broad historical meanings” (p 25) It is the language “identified by the social conditions of its use, by who is using it and under what conditions” (p 25) In a more specific definition, Hinkel & Fotos (2002) suggests discourse in context may be one

or two words or a novel

From the definitions above, it can be seen that discourse can be any piece of language produced with a purpose Teachers’ instruction is; therefore, a type of discourse More specifically, it is a part of classroom discourse, which happens inside the classroom According to Zuengler & Mori (2002), classroom discourse is the classroom interaction performed between teacher-student and student-student Nunan (1993) views classroom discourse as the unique type of discourse that arises in classrooms Similarly, Behnam & Pouriran (2009) claims that classroom discourse is distinctive for the features such as

“unequal power relationships; turn-taking at speaking; patterns of interaction, etc.” (p

118) The authors also point out that what really matters in classroom is the way teachers give questions (p 118) Two common kinds of questions mentioned in this paper are

Display and Referential questions While the former is often used for short answers,

which are predictable, the latter is for more “interaction and meaningful negotiation” (p 118)

Chang (1999, p 2-3 cited in Behnam & Pouriran, 2009, p 119) divides classroom

discourse into four categories: IRF (Initiation-Response-Feedback), Instruction, Probing Questions, and Argumentation From this point of view, instruction is of a quite small

scale In fact, when giving instructions, teachers often add questions (including probing (referential) questions) to push the students to raise their voices Moreover, questioning is also a method of instruction giving Therefore, in the case of this study, instruction covers probing questions and even IRF, where questions are asked in a more traditional way Mehan (1979 cited in Behnam & Pouriran, 2009) suggests a structure of the three

component pedagogic discourse which includes: “An opening phase, an instructional phase where information is exchanged between teacher and students and a closing phase”

(p 119) This opinion is interesting because Mehan considers the instruction as the main interaction between teachers and students

McTear (1975 cited in Behnam & Pouriran, 2009) also proposes four types of language

use in classroom discourse They are Mechanical (no exchange of meaning), Meaningful (meaning is contextualized but no new information is conveyed), Pseudo-communication

(new information is conveyed but in a manner unlikely to occur outside the classroom),

and Real communication (spontaneous speech resulting from the exchange of opinions,

jokes, classroom management, etc.) (p 119-120) Instruction giving, then, often contains the third and the fourth types

In short, instruction is an important part of classroom discourse, having clear influence on the students’ language acquiring process

1.2.2 Classroom Discourse Analysis

Schiffrin, Tannen, & Hamilton (2001) announces that study of discourse is study of

language use That means, language examining includes examining its purpose and effect Abrams & Harpham (2005) assumes that discourse analysis concerns of the use of

language in a “running discourse”, and involves the “interaction of speaker (or writer) and auditor (or reader) in a specific situational context, and within a framework of social and cultural conventions" (p 81) According to Wood & Kroger (2000), discourse analysis is not only about method; it is also a view on the characters of language and its link to the key matters of communal arts Gee (2005) claims that discourse analysis is one way to join in a very important human task That is to think more carefully about the meanings given in people's words to make the world better

Kumaravadivelu (2008) considers analyzing classroom discourse as “describing certain verbal behaviors of teachers and students as they interact in the classroom” (p 455) He emphasizes the effectiveness of Communicative Orientation of Language Teaching observation scheme This scheme, as stated by Kumaravadivelu (2008), is “directly linked to communicative methods” of language teaching, and designed for “real-time coding” as well as for “analysis of recordings of classes” (p 456) On the other hand, Allwright (1998 cited in Kumaravadivelu, 2008) suggests a three-way analysis in his

observational scheme: a turn-taking analysis, (turn-getting and turn-giving practices); a

topic analysis, (the use of language as instances of linguistic samples); and a task analysis, (the managerial as well as the cognitive aspects of classroom tasks) (p 457)

In the view that classroom discourse is also a product of society where the teacher and the students have specific social roles, some researchers apply the schemes of critical discourse analysis to describe the discourse used in classrooms (which is called classroom critical discourse analysis) Critical discourse analysis, according to Fairclough (1992), is an attempt to synthesize language studies and social theory As claimed by Blommaert & Bulcaen (2000), critical discourse analysis looks critically at the nexus of language and social structure, pursuing to “uncover ways in which social structure impinges on discourse patterns” and power relations (p 449) As a result, critical discourse analysis can look beyond apparent factors of classroom language, and brighten

features of agency and power in the classroom (Boaler, 2003)

In Fairclough’s point of view (1992), discourse is a mode of both representation and action He emphasizes that there is a dialectic relationship between discourse and social structure, with discourse is on one hand, constrained by social structure, and on the other

hand socially constitutive For analyzing discourse, he suggests a three-dimension framework, considering “every discursive event as being simultaneously a piece of text,

an instance of discursive practice and an instance of social practice” (p 4) The first

dimension is discourse-as-text, i.e the linguistic features and organization of concrete

instances of discourse (vocabulary, grammar, cohesion and text structure.) The

second dimension is discourse-as-discursive-practice, i.e discourse as something that is

produced, distributed and consumed in society (force, coherence and intertextuality)

The third dimension is discourse-as-social-practice, drawing on the Marxist concepts of

ideology and hegemony (p 100)

In this study, Fairclough’s framework is applied to analyze the discourse of teachers and students during instruction time However, because the nature of instruction giving is the dominance and control from the teachers, the research focuses only on the two first dimensions: discourse as text and discourse as discursive practice

1.3 Review of the previous studies

Until now, there have been a lot of studies on classroom discourse in general, on instruction in specific

The effectiveness of classroom interaction was studied during the 1980s with the names

of Soar (1973) and Stallings, Robbins & Presbrey (1986) In their investigation, the researchers focused on academic-engaged time, classroom management and certain patterns of teacher-student interactions Some other researchers named Brophy & Evertson (1978) and Good and Grouws (1975) mentioned the link between explicit instruction and students’ achievement However, they did not investigate the effect of language use on the students’ accomplishment Later, the experts paid more attention to the qualitative dimension of instruction and engaged in case studies of exemplary teachers (Philips, 1972; Au, 1980; Delpit, 1995; Health, 1983 and Goldenberg & Gallimore, 1991) Nonetheless, what was emphasized was the so-called literature instruction in classroom, which used authentic literature for independent reading, read out-loud and collaborative discussions In other words, the papers in this period concentrated on methods (literature-based or skills-based) of teaching and learning inside classrooms only

Recently, there have been many studies on the techniques of giving successful instructions Kamil (2008) and Learning Point Associates (2004) directed at the five essential components of effective reading instructions which are phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary and comprehension The investigators, in comprehension part, stated some general requirements of a comprehensive instruction Foorman & Torgesen (2001) and a group of Administrative Literacy Task Force (Ryder et al., n.d) researched the efficient reading instructions for small group reading They both targeted

at children Besides, a publication from Texas Education Agency (2002) and Dole (2008) also had a look at a useful comprehension instruction and suggested the qualification that

an instruction should meet to be an effective comprehension instruction On the other hand, Archer & Hughes (2011) and Rosenshine (2012) concentrated on the steps (strategies) to deliver successful instructions in classrooms Both of them discussed the clearness and explicitness of instructions However, they did not concern deeply the use

of English by the teachers to make their instructions clear and explicit

In term of classroom discourse, there has been much interest from the scientists Many of the studies on language classroom discourse examined the interaction inside classrooms

In Allwright and Bailey (1991), Long and Sato compared the teachers’ and native speakers’ use of display and referential questions, comprehension checks, clarification checks, and confirmation checks Pica and Long (as reported by Nunan, 1989, p 25) focused on the differences between conversations in and out of classrooms and the differences between the language of experienced and inexperienced teachers Swain (1985) investigated the link between the question types asked by the teachers and the language acquisition of the students Suter (2001), on the other hand, studied the link between the questions and the interactions in classrooms Oberli (2003) investigated how

an experienced teacher in Seoul, Korea, chose to answer the weak/strong dichotomy with regard to questioning and feedback strategies On the contrary, Buzzellia & Johnston (2001) inspected the practice of authority in classrooms and argued that authority was best understood in relation to the twin concepts of power and morality What is more, Walsh (2006) explored the dynamics of L2 classrooms (mainly from teachers’ perspectives), looked at the relationship between classroom interaction and language

acquisition, and reviewed approaches commonly used to analyze L2 class interaction He also conducted a fine grained analysis that shed light on why teachers and learners did what they do in L2 language classrooms Bloome, Carter, Christian, Otto, & Shuart-Faris (2005) presented analyses of classroom discourse in relation to language and literacy events from a microethnographic perspective It reflected increasingly strong concerns over issues ranging from gender, race, identity and power relations within and beyond classrooms

Shortly, both instruction and classroom discourse are scientific interests and have been investigated by many researchers all over the world However, to the best knowledge of the researcher, there have not been any studies examining deeply the discourse of instructions by the teachers in reading lessons to see the success of instruction giving under the perception of the teachers and the students Therefore, the researcher is encouraged more to take an examination into this issue

Summary

The chapter has provided the theoretical background for the whole study through providing the definitions of key terms and significant background information on instruction giving and classroom discourse analysis Moreover, a critical review of studies related to the research problem is also offered

CHAPTER 2: METHODOLOGY The chapter specifies the approach and methodology of this paper, including the the size and characteristics of the sample and justification for and description of the two data collection instruments Moreover, a detailed report on the procedures of data collection and data analysis is also comprised

2.1 Research approach and Research design

2.1.1 Qualitative approach

Sellers (1998) claims that “Qualitative research is an in-depth exploration of what makes people tick on a particular subject: their feelings, perceptions, decision-making processes, etc.” (p 1) and it will “provide a much deeper understanding of how the target market thinks” (p 2) Moreover, Qualitative research is “effective in identifying intangible factors.” (Mack et al., 2005, p 1) Le (2011) remarks that the purpose of Qualitative research is “to explore and describe participants’ understanding and interpretations of social phenomena in a way that captures their inherent nature” (p 88), or in other words,

to understand the reality as in real experiences (Sherman and Webb 1988 cited in Ely, M

et al., 1991) The data collected would be descriptive rather than numeric or counting

In this paper, it is expected that what the teachers and students think they should do with the instructions, how they implement in each activity and how they perceive their success would be investigated in depth Especially, all the aspects of the problem are seen in their real contexts Thus, Qualitative approach becomes the most suitable because the events are studied in natural settings (Hughes, 2006)

2.1.2 Multiple-case study design

According to Dörnyei (2007 cited in Le, 2011), case study was the basic qualitative method which helps “maximize our understanding” of the research problem (p 152) He emphasizes that the insight obtained through case study was richer and deeper than any other methods Tellis (1997) also claims that this method was to figure out the details under the opinion of the participants

Case study can be single-case or multiple-case As stated by Baxter & Jack (2008), multiple case studies allow the researcher to see the “similarities and differences between the cases” (p 550) On the other hand, according to Yin (2009), case study designs need

to “maximize their quality through four critical conditions: construct validity, internal validity, external validity and reliability” (p 24) For this reason, a multiple-case design

is often stronger than a single-case design

2.2 Context of the study

In the first school year of cohort QH-2013, there are nineteen English teaching major classes at Department I, FELTE, ULIS, VNU for both social and academic skills The

reading lessons are based on the book Reading Resources 2 compiled by the teachers in

the Faculty and delivered by the Department Besides, in the lessons, the teachers can provide supplementary materials A reading lesson is integrated with a writing session The total time for both sessions are four periods, i.e., 200 minutes The teachers base on the content of the week schedule and the activities of each session to flexibly divide the time The reading session covers instruction giving, task performing and answer checking

as the main activities Each week concerns one theme and the overall objective of the course is to improve students’ vocabulary, knowledge and reading skills The activities are designed based on the skills Students are required to do the similar exercises at home after they have practiced the skills with the content related to the theme in class In class, the teachers deliver and instruct the students with the handouts, then give time for discussion (questioning and sharing) before asking them to do the exercises

2.3 Participant selection

2.3.1 Sampling method

The participants of the research were selected based on cluster sampling, in which the samples are divided into many groups and the sample of each group is selected randomly (Bennett, Woods, Liyanage & Smith, 1991) The method was chosen due to its convenience Since the observations could only be taken on Wednesday and Thursday afternoons, and the teachers must be the same in all the lessons, the researcher picked one class by Ms G and another by Ms T to ensure the observation time and commitment This method is not against the case study design because according to Stake (2000 cited

in Le, 2011), the potential for studying is also a criterion and even more important than representatives Meanwhile, the two samples were the most enthusiastic and willing ones that supported the researcher wholeheartedly when collecting data Moreover, few

difference in the students’ ability in different classes hardly affects the instruction giving

of the teachers

2.3.2 Participants

The participants are two first-year classes and two teachers at FELTE, ULIS - VNU Before conducting the observations, the researcher had contacted with all the teachers being in charge of academic skills via email Academic classes were chosen because academic skills are considered to be more important than social skills in dealing with examinations and knowledge in university Moreover, the students first learn about English academic skills in tertiary education As a result, they must need more instructional guidance from the teacher, both in quantity and quality Through email, the teachers were informed of the research topic and aims as well as the observation plan In negotiating with the teachers, the researcher was accepted by two of them, which were

Ms T and Ms G They were pleased to know about the research result to see how they could improve their instructions However, the researcher had to keep secret their names and the classes observed During the observations, to be more convenient for both, the teachers would inform the researcher of each lesson plan, especially when they would like change the order of the activities To keep the natural environment of the classes, the students were not informed of the research topic until the end of the observation process Frankly, it was expected that the participant number would be three so that the information would be more diverse and reliable Nonetheless, two was still adequate because the information could be seen in different contexts with different participants The teachers are young and have been teaching reading in Division I for more than three semesters They are in charge of teaching reading for both semesters of the school year They used to be students at English Department Teacher G wished to change the students’ English knowledge and skills as well as results in examinations Teacher T strongly considered the variety in students’ vocabulary and structures as well as their difficulties in acquiring and processing the content of the texts

The students have just graduated from high schools, where most of them do not have enough reading practice Their time of learning English ranges from seven to ten years However, some of them did not major English at high school Moreover, their environments hardly support the regular approach to English In both classes, some of the students were shy and unconfident Most of the time, they waited until the teacher required them to speak Although disciplined, they did not often speak clearly and find the exact information to answer the questions Some students; however, were more enthusiastic and active They contributed positively to the lessons Nonetheless, most of them still needed many supports from the teachers

2.4 Data collection methods and procedures

The study applies two instruments to collect the data: class observation and interview The two classes were observed parallel in five consecutive weeks Afterwards, the teachers were invited to two isolated interviews Last, two groups of students from two classes were interviewed separately

2.4.1 Classroom Observation

2.4.1.1 Purpose

The results of the observations were useful to answer research question one: “What are

the patterns of English used in the instructions given by the teachers?” and a part of

research question two: “To what extent do the patterns of English that the teachers use make their instructions effective according to the theory, the teachers and the students?”

According to Borg (2006 cited in Le, 2011), observation provides evidence of a lesson procedure Since the data are “concrete descriptive” (Borg, p 231), it is appropriate for qualitative research Good (1988) states in agreement that classroom observation is to provide a description of the difficult issues Through observation, the researcher can have

an insight into the process of the lessons Hence, observation provides the researcher with the language use and other factors of teacher-student relationships in classrooms for deep analysis of the instructions

2.4.1.2 Structure

An observation scheme based on the framework by Fairclough (scheme 1) and another scheme (scheme 2) based on the theory of good instructions to collect some more data for answering research question two were used in the observations

Observation scheme 1:

Dimension

Discourse as text Vocabulary Pronouns

Verbs Modal verbs Question words

Sentence Types

Structure of text (the organization of conversations) Discourse as

discursive practice

Teacher’s turn Student’s turn

Led by Understanding between turns

Teacher:

Student:

Observation scheme 2:

Criteria

Steps Say 1 instruction in one time:

All in one time:

Students’ response Attention/Listening:

of the room to keep the original atmosphere of the class

At the beginning of the lessons, two observation schemes were printed out and the recorder was set At home, the recordings were used to transcribe some supplementary data

2.4.1.4 Coding scheme

Terms or pieces of information Codes

Student 1, 2 … in the classes S1, S2……

If the content is not covered x

2.4.2 Interviews

2.4.2.1 Purpose

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with the two teachers after the lessons to find out their rationales, opinions and self-evaluation on the instruction giving On the other hand, two groups of students in two classes were invited to two interviews for more realistic understanding of how they perceived the teachers’ instructions

The information would be the answer for research question two: “To what extent do the

patterns of English that the teachers use make their instructions effective according to the theory, the teachers and the students?”

For Borg (2006 cited in Le, 2011), semi-structured interview is flexible for allowing the interviewees to speak in open-ended manner, which might be unpredictable The

information collected; so, is richer As a result, interviews help to pursue the in-depth information around the topic (McNamara, 1999)

2.4.2.2 Structure

The interviews with the teachers included seven questions The questions were to ask about the teachers’ preparation, rationale, assessment and perception of the instructions’ effectiveness as well as their satisfaction with their instruction giving Almost all the questions are open-ended Vietnamese was used during the interviewing time but English

was encouraged with some typical terms like strategies or check, etc

The interviews with the students contain nine questions The questions were designed for the information about the students’ opinions on, understanding, application, analysis and suggestions for changes of the instructions In these interviews, a small test was given in question eight, where the students were asked to do one similar exercise to those in the lessons with the same instructions as the teachers’ and then, evaluated the effectiveness

of the instructions To ensure the accuracy of the recall, the detailed descriptions of the input and review of instruction giving in some lessons were provided Vietnamese was used most of the time but English was needed with some key terms

2.4.2.3 Procedure

The interviews with the teachers were conducted first Before that, the researcher had contacted with teacher T and teacher G to ask for their permission via email At the beginning of the interviews, the recorder was set In the interviews, the researcher asked and the teachers answered There was no note taking for the concentration of information collecting and sharing

One day later, the interviews with the students were conducted Each group had five students When the researcher asked, they took turn to answer After the last students raised their voice, the researcher moved to another question The recorder was set at the beginning and paused when the students did the test When coming to the test, the researcher first introduced about the text, the exercise, and the time limitation After that, the papers were passed to all the students, then collected and the results were checked 2.4.2.4 Coding scheme

Terms or pieces of information Codes

Class by teacher G, T G1, G2

Interviews with teacher G,T I1, I2

Student 1, 2… in the interviews S1, S2…

2.4.3 Data collection procedure

2.4.3.1 Phase 1

2.4.3.2 Phase 2:

At first, the recordings were transcribed to get more evidence for the observations Coincidentally, the interviews were transcribed and the information was classified Afterwards, the data were put under each research question to get the answers

2.5 Data analysis method and procedure

The data were firstly coded According to Le (2011), coding is the process of “reducing the information obtained to make it manageable” (p 115) When coding is performed, actually, analysis is made

After that, the codes were categorized and the data were decoded The answer to each research question was grouped from specific pieces of responses

The researcher employed the inductive strategy of analyzing As stated by Borg (2006 cited in Le, 2011), categories and codes for analyzing information were within the particular situation of each study, basing on the inductive approach

Summary

Throughout this chapter, the methodology of the paper, which is qualitative method, has been explained First, the sample selection for observations and interviews with the cluster sampling method was substantiated Following was detailed explanation for and description of the two data collection instruments The chapter was concluded by a report

of the methods and procedures of data collection and analysis

Interviews with the students from the two classes

Getting permission of the teachers and supports from the two classes

Five weeks of observation (with recorder set)

Semi-structured interviews with the two teachers

CHAPTER 3: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

In this chapter, all the data collected from the observations and interviews will be analyzed and discussed to provide the answers to the two research questions Furthermore, the implications and recommendations will also be given based on the results

3.1 Findings

3.1.1 Answer to research question 1:

What are the patterns of English used in the instructions given by the teachers?

The information to answer this question was taken from the class observations with the observation scheme 1

3.1.1.1 Vocabulary

The vocabulary used in the instructions by the teachers are familiar and quite simple

In the use of personal pronouns, when giving instructions, the teachers often used “I

(want you to)…./I (would like you to)…”, indicating a high level of personal ownership

of the steps and strategies they were giving However, while T1 used “you” in all the

requirements: “After you handle with part A, you read part B and see what questions can

be answered with its information.” (T1, O5), T2 used “we”: “We may read through the questions, read through only We can’t answer anything at this stage.” (T2, O4) That

means, T2 involved herself in the task but T1 stated clearly that was the students’ duty The teachers also tried to be explicit in their instructions They used the verbs which described directly what the students should do Therefore, it was easy for the students to

catch and follow their ideas: “When you read paragraph A, you may need to underline

the main ideas so that you can remember or make some comparison later” (T1, O4) or

“We read through the questions and underline the key words.” (T2, O3) In fact, with

each activity, the teachers, most of the time, read the requirements in the books and used

the verbs in the titles: underline, order, rearrange, answer, decide, etc

When giving strategies for the exercises, the two teachers were not the same, either

Whereas T1 often used the verb “recommend”: “Yes, thirteen minutes, but I recommend

you to read it in twelve minutes only” (T1, O5), T2 often applied “advice” or “make”: “I don’t make you underline but you are advised to underline the key words in this part”

(T2, O5) Although both of them showed the regular use of the verbs like “want (you

to…)” or “would like (you to…)”, the difference in using the verbs indicated that T1 put

more power on the students in deciding the way to do the exercises On the contrary, T2 emphasized her authority and her role in the classroom or the activity

Additionally, the teachers maintained using the modal verbs “(not) need”, “(not) have

to”, “can” and “should” in their instructions: “You don’t need to read the questions first

because before you read the text, reading the questions may be a waste of time.” (T2,

O5), or “You don’t have to underline the key words but in this part, you should do.” (T1,

O3) With the use of “need” and “have to” in negative and “can, should”, both teachers gave the students the right to think for themselves They were not required, but suggested

to follow the steps

Lastly, in questioning, though the teachers asked yes-no questions more often, they still

used Wh- (what, why, how) with the dominance of “what”: “So what are the strategies?

What do you read first?” (T2, O1), or “When it comes to gap-filling, what comes in your mind?” “What is the purpose of reading the text first?” (T1, O2) The use of such

referential questions let the students express in a more meaningful way As a result, they would communicate more openly

3.1.1.2 Grammar

To ensure the understanding of the students, both the teachers used simple structures T1

tended to use short and strong imperative forms: “Convey the text and tell me where the

information is.” (T1, O2) or “You do this exercise in ten minutes only.” (T1, O3),

stressing her authority in class In contrast, T2 adopted longer sentences, showing

politeness: “I’d like you to look through the questions only for practice two.” (T2, O2) or

“I’m going to give you five minutes to do it in pairs or in groups of three” (T2, O1)

Sometimes, both teachers used the expressions “I want you to…” or “I need you to…” to

require the students to do exactly as they said

When asking questions, the teachers often used both types of questions Referential ) questions were to give the students the chance to communicate meaningfully while

(Wh-Display (Yes-No) questions were the suggestions of the answers for the students: “How

do you deal with this kind of exercises? Do you read the questions first?” (T1, O2)

Nevertheless, the students usually hesitated to answer Wh-questions Therefore, yes-no questions were more prevalent in both classrooms

Furthermore, some other questions were used to check the students’ understanding such

as “Do you understand?” or “OK?” or “Right?” (sometimes T2 also spoke with alternative structures such as “Do you understand – Does it make sense?”, which could

be beneficial to the students in term of reviewing their knowledge of language); but most

of the times, the students did not respond or responded with very low voice

3.1.1.3 Cohesion

Cohesion in the classes was achieved through the reflection of the teachers to the students and through the linking words used inside the instructions as well as the voice quality to signal these devices, which were given in long discourses The ‘dance of agency’ (Boaler, 2003), in which agency moves between the teachers and the agency of the subject, was evident As observed, while T2 used the linking words to link her pieces of instructions

such as “Now, next, first, second, then”, T1 emphasized each piece by stressing on the word “Now” After the students had reported their experiences, the teachers first summarized, and then moved to their own ideas: “She said that when she read the

passage first, she cannot understand anything so she read the questions first Do you have the same feeling? Some say yes and some say no That’s why I say it’s just a way I recommend only” (T1, O4) When the students are speaking, the teachers sometimes

intervened to correct their mistakes of English use, showing that there was really an exchange of information and the teachers understood what was being revealed by the students

3.1.1.4 Structure of text

In two classrooms, the instructions were initiated by a question asked by the teachers (referential first, then if the students could not answer, the teachers changed to a display question) and answered by the students, may or may not re-expressed by other students, then reformulated by the teachers, and distributed publicly as the teachers re-confirmed in front of the classes or wrote down on the board The texts were, after that, consumed by the classes Obviously, the instructions, were controlled by the teachers The students responded to the questions in ways which they hoped will be acceptable to the teachers

There were not many interchanges and the interchanges were also self-contained, initiated and concluded by the teachers

3.1.1.5 Discourse as discursive practice

The “force” of the discourse was to convey the ideas of the teachers to the students The structure of the classrooms was one speaker – all others were listeners Although the teachers tried to involve the whole class in the development of a shared understanding and applying of the strategies in reading, most of the times the students kept silent Even when they raised their voice, they did not report the results of dealing with the exercises applying their strategies Clearly, the teachers were the main factors to give the steps and strategies of doing the tasks With this role, they also tried to make their instructions comprehensible to the students However, the focus of the lessons was on the material rather than mental process Students were required to find a solution to the problem instead of conveying their personal thinking Sometimes, the teachers stopped to ask questions so that the students can raise their voices about the strategies Nevertheless, the questions were mostly to review the strategies delivered before For example, the teachers

did not ask “What do you think?” but “What did you do?” That means, instead of

suggesting things for the students to think about, the teachers asked the students to share their experiences It can also be easily realized that the teachers dominated the classes

The apparent goal of the students was to guess what was in the teachers’ mind: “What do

you think we should do with this kind of tasks?” / “How can we deal with this exercise?”

(Asking to review the knowledge) After that, the teachers closed the discussion with

their confirmation of the steps that the students should follow: “OK With this exercise,

first you should….” However, when confirming the strategies, the teachers used the

phrases “You can”, “You don’t need” and “You don’t have to” dominantly Plainly, they

allowed the students to see the reading skills as both personal and social when they could actually apply their own strategies and share them with their friends rather than follow a fixed framework to do the tasks

The coherence of the classes were gained through the consistent and meaningful interpretation the students constructed of what the teachers were saying Students were able to make sense of, follow and apply what the teachers were saying (sometimes they

gave out a different idea from the teachers’: “I don’t read the text first because I don’t

understand anything when I do so I read the questions first.” (G1, O4)), and the teachers

expected the students to understand, too They checked the students’ understanding by asking most of the time Notwithstanding, in most cases, the coherence was produced by the teachers, by asking leading and prompting questions of students, and then coming back to their own opinions

The two classes also had manifest internal intertextuality in which each piece of discourse is related to a previous one Commonly, the teachers asked a questions, the students answered, then the teachers synthesized and stated their point of view Sometimes, they wrote the steps on the board The text in these two classrooms illustrated

a social practice which the teachers are required to make their thoughts publicly available and to review the ideas of the students to build an understanding of a reading strategy In eliciting the experiences from the students, the teachers waited until the students finished their sharing and then ended up the discussion with their own ideas The classes did feature a discourse in which the teachers are empowered They were active in giving the tips while the students were passive in listening and following

Because of the nature of instruction giving process, there was not a clear turn-taking practice Power was located with the teachers However, the teachers were willing to give the students chances to raise their voices and to decide the strategies for themselves To a lesser extent, the power could also be ascribed to the argument produced by the teachers and some students as the students attempted to explain and approve their methods However, most of the students just agreed with what the teachers said They did not see themselves as active participants in learning, who had power over both the skills and the discursive practices of the classroom They simply accepted a more passive role, in which the skills being learnt had power over them, and in which the teachers maintained control

of the discursive practice of the classroom

3.1.2 Answer to research question 2:

To what extent do the patterns of English that the teachers use make their instructions effective according to the theory, the teachers and the students?

The information to answer this question was taken from the observation scheme 2 and the interviews with the teachers and the students The data were analyzed and the findings can be interpreted in 3 aspects: instruction effectiveness in the teachers’ perception, instruction effectiveness in the students’ perception, and instruction effectiveness under the theory of effective instruction

3.1.2.1 Instruction effectiveness in the teachers’ perception

In general, the teachers were satisfied with the efficiency of their instruction giving in classrooms

As shared by the teachers, the most important factor of an instruction was explicitness Therefore, when giving instructions, they used very simple and common words and structures, which, in their opinion, were understandable to all of the students in their

classes T1 stated: “Unless the students are at a very low level, they can easily

understand my instructions.” (I1) As a matter of fact, in preparation for the instruction

giving, the teachers did not consider much the English use because they both believed that they were using the simplest language in classrooms Instead, they prepared the strategies applied to the exercises

However, the teachers often had to change their plans for the limit of time T1 shared, in the classroom, she wanted to give more detailed instructions and check the students’ understanding more carefully Nonetheless, there was often not enough time left for her Similarly, T2 also wished to check the students’ results after they had finished doing the exercises but most of the time, she could not for the short duration of the lessons T2

asserted: “In any case, I think that the instructions before the activities are very

important Therefore, I always focus on this part and do it very carefully.” (I2) When

instructing, T2 also delivered instructions at the same order of the steps Moreover, she

based on the level of each students to ask questions: “If the students are good, I ask

open-ended questions so that they can share more of their opinions; but if the students are not very good, I use close-ended questions so they just need to answer yes or no.” (I2) What

is more, T2 claimed that the structure of the instructions needed to be clear with separate small parts and the instructions must cover all the things the students need to know such

as the time, the steps, the strategies, the techniques, and the tips While T1 used the same

way of instruction giving for all the students, T2 thought that the key words could be the same but the clarification must be varied With students at low level, she gave examples and modelling Sometimes she used alternative words or structures, but she did not do it

on purpose Her only criterion was to be understandable and she just uttered the sentences that she thought could make her instructions more diverse without confusing the students When asked about their satisfaction, T2 said that she was really happy with what she was doing for the students while T1 was just satisfied with the clearness of the instructions but not with her language use She expected to use more interesting or complete sentences The level of the students, yet, made her break the sentences down and she could not use her favorite structures

In their evaluation of how their instructions supported the students, the two teachers agreed that the students could understand the steps, techniques, and strategies as well as prepare for the time pressure of each task type They also thought that the students were instructed to choose their best strategies and analyze the techniques Notwithstanding, as confessed by the teachers, they could not control the students’ response to the instructions In other words, they could not know whether the students apply their guidance or not Additionally, they could not help the students to perform well with a specific task because the results depended much on the students’ vocabulary and

grammar resources: “I just can give the students some general strategies to deal with a

specific task type for their examinations and self-study later However, I cannot control their performance with a particular exercise.” (I2), or “For the limit of time, I just can focus on the task types, not the content, vocabulary or grammar.” (I1)

Afterwards, when sharing about their wish to change, the two teachers showed two different opinions T1 expected to make some change with the lesson structure and the text content for more instructions of vocabulary She wished to design and apply many activities to develop the students’ vocabulary:

“If possible, I will give more detailed instructions and will focus more on vocabulary With each exercise, I will ask the students to do the example question first Then I discuss with them the strategies to do that question and come to the frame of strategies After that, I ask them to answer ten more questions, check the results and ask