Background context of the study
In today's globalized world, English has become essential for national development, serving as the primary foreign language taught at the tertiary level in Vietnam Despite its importance, English language education in Vietnam faces significant challenges in meeting societal demands The traditional focus on grammar instruction and grammar-based assessments has proven difficult to reform, leading to Vietnam being classified as a "low proficiency" country in English proficiency.
To change the situation, various attempts have been made to reform the foreign (especially English) language teaching system, among which is the NFL
In 2008, the Vietnamese Government initiated the NFL 2020 Project, aimed at transforming foreign language education within the national educational system, with an original timeline extending to 2020, now prolonged to 2025 A key component of this project is the integration of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR), which serves as a global framework to enhance language teaching and learning in Vietnam, providing a strategic solution to reform the country's foreign language education system.
Based on the CEFR, a Vietnamese adaptation was developed and approved by authorities (MOET, 2014a; MOET, 2014b) to establish standards for teacher professionalism and learning outcomes across various education levels, from primary schools to universities The integration of CEFR standards, supported by the NFL 2020 Project, aims to drive significant improvements in Vietnam's foreign language education system, as outlined in Decision 1400 by the government (Vietnamese government, 2008) Consequently, this initiative has resulted in the renewal and enhancement of language curricula, teaching materials, and assessment methods across diverse educational institutions nationwide.
The research was conducted at a regional university in Central Vietnam, where non-English major students, primarily from the Central Highlands and surrounding provinces, pursue various fields of study These students, mostly entering university at age 18, exhibit diverse social backgrounds and varying levels of English proficiency Teachers at the university also bring different experiences and qualifications to the classroom In compliance with MOET regulations, the university mandates that non-English major students achieve a CEFR B1 level in English as a graduation requirement Consequently, in 2012, the university implemented a new policy requiring these students to meet this standard, leading to significant changes in the curriculum since 2011 A 7-credit general English curriculum was introduced, consisting of 105 hours of teacher-led classes over the first three semesters, using textbooks like English Elements and Life GE teachers are tasked with integrating learners, materials, and assessments to ensure that non-English major students meet the B1 learning outcomes within the specified timeframe, making it essential to investigate their perceptions and responses to this educational shift.
Rationale of the study
Since its release in 2001, the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) has garnered significant global attention, influencing language education policies beyond Europe, including regions such as Latin America, the Middle East, Australia, and parts of Asia This widespread enthusiasm highlights the CEFR's role as a supranational language education policy, impacting language policy planning across various countries.
In recent years, many Asian countries, including Vietnam, have adopted the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) to reform their language teaching systems However, experts warn that the success of this ambitious policy may be compromised due to its unfamiliar and top-down approach.
The CEFR, originally designed for European contexts, may lead to paradoxes if not properly contextualized in diverse settings like Vietnam (Le Van Canh, 2015; Pham, 2017) Significant differences in social needs, language learning conditions, teacher qualifications, and learner expectations raise questions about the suitability of a CEFR-aligned framework in Vietnam Nearly a decade after its introduction, the implementation of the CEFR continues to encounter challenges, including limited human resources (Pham, 2017).
Research on the adoption of the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) in Vietnam is essential, as it explores its effects on teachers, students, and the overall English language teaching and learning process Understanding the successes and limitations of CEFR implementation is crucial for enhancing future educational practices in the country.
Secondly, r the use of the
The CEFR framework has been acknowledged across various sectors, including teacher professionalism, student learning outcomes, language curriculum renewal, teaching material adaptation, and language assessment practices (Vietnamese government, 2008) However, its implementation in Vietnam has occurred at lower levels without adequate explanation or consultation with language learners (Pham, 2017) There is a notable absence of prior research or pilot studies on this framework within the Vietnamese context (Pham, 2012), and no official documentation exists regarding the involvement of teachers and students in the decision-making process for CEFR application Ignoring teachers' perceptions and students' needs undermines teachers' ownership of innovation and limits the potential for meaningful feedback (Hyland & Wong, 2013).
The adoption of the CEFR reflects a "top-down" approach in language planning, where practitioners, particularly teachers and learners at the grassroots level, have little influence in policy-making Teachers are primarily seen as implementers rather than key participants in the centralized planning processes (Poon, 2000; Waters, 2009) Consequently, the implementation of the CEFR in Vietnam may lead to discrepancies between those who endorse the policy (government officials) and those who execute it (teachers) (Chang, 2007) This situation underscores the necessity for research focused on the national CEFR adoption language policy and the challenges associated with its implementation.
The implementation of a CEFR-aligned curriculum for non-English major students at the home university raises significant concerns, particularly given that approximately 200 guided learning hours are needed for learners to progress between CEFR levels, and 350 to 400 hours to reach B1 Level (Desveaux, 2013) With only 105 teacher-led hours available and the B1 learning outcome mandated by MOET, the feasibility of achieving these goals is questionable Additionally, factors such as students' language learning backgrounds, study intensity, and external study exposure may further complicate the situation, making it increasingly challenging for GE teachers and non-English major students in Vietnam Furthermore, as MOET establishes learning outcomes without aligning them with curricula and teaching materials, state-run universities, teachers, and students face an intensified burden to innovate and adapt in order to meet these new expectations.
Research indicates that teachers, as primary implementers of language education policies, often fail to fully adhere to directives or optimize policy goals (Cohen & Ball, 1990; McLaughlin, 1987) This implementation challenge can stem from teachers' attitudes and behaviors, which have been shown to interact in complex ways (Borg, 2009, p.164) Many teachers are identified as "resistant to change" (Wang, 2008, p.3), demonstrating a reluctance to adopt teaching innovations despite expressing positive attitudes towards them.
Understanding teachers' perceptions and attitudes towards the implementation of the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) in Vietnam is crucial, as these factors influence classroom practices despite not always being reflected in them Limited research exists on this topic, highlighting a significant gap in knowledge regarding the CEFR's impact on the language education system, as well as teachers' and learners' attitudes towards its use Given the comprehensive nature of the CEFR's implementation in Vietnam, further investigation into its effectiveness and the responses it elicits from educators and students is essential This research aims to explore the grassroots level of CEFR implementation in Vietnam.
Purpose of the study and research questions
The study investigates the perceptions and knowledge of General English (GE) teachers at a university regarding the implementation of the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) for non-English major students It aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of how these teachers view the CEFR's relevance and application in higher education Additionally, the research delves into their interpretations of the CEFR's values, its necessity, and their preparedness for its implementation, as well as their insights into the overall process of applying the framework in their teaching practices.
This study investigates teachers' responses to the adoption of the CEFR within their school context, focusing on their actions and the factors influencing these responses The findings aim to establish a foundation for methodological and pedagogical implications that will support General English (GE) teachers in adapting the CEFR-aligned curriculum This adaptation seeks to bridge the gap between theory and practice, assisting educators and administrators in contextualizing a global framework for local English language teaching and learning environments.
In particular, this study seeks to answer the following two research questions:
1 What are GE language teachers‘ perceptions of the CEFR and its use for non-English major students at a university in Vietnam?
2 What are GE language teachers‘ responses to the use of the CEFR on the implementation level?
Research design overview
This study investigates teachers' perceptions and responses to the implementation of the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) for non-English major university students, utilizing a mixed-method sequential explanatory model as outlined by Creswell and Clark (2007) Data collection occurred in two phases: a pilot phase aimed at testing research instruments and gathering baseline data on teachers' views, followed by an official phase where the findings from the pilot were used to refine the questionnaire and interview protocol.
The study was conducted at a university in Central Vietnam, where the researcher has over fifteen years of experience All English language instructors teaching general English to non-English major students for at least one semester were invited to participate in the survey Additionally, eight of these teachers engaged in in-depth interviews.
The literature review and theoretical concepts relevant to the research were synthesized to establish a conceptual framework for the study Based on this framework and pilot phase results, a forty-nine item questionnaire was developed to investigate General English (GE) teachers' perceptions of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) and its implementation, as well as their responses to the CEFR-aligned curriculum in relation to teaching practices, textbooks, and classroom assessment Additionally, a semi-structured interview protocol with fifteen key questions was created to ensure the validity and consistency of the data collected during the interviews.
Quantitative data were analyzed using SPSS version 20, revealing Cronbach’s alpha values above 70, ranging from 819 to 873, indicating strong reliability of the questionnaire Descriptive statistics, including mean scores and standard deviations for each item, were generated Following the collection and analysis of questionnaire data, interview sessions were conducted and coded The qualitative data were thematically analyzed and compared with the quantitative findings.
The integration of quantitative and qualitative data revealed significant findings aligned with the research questions, sub-clusters of the questionnaire, and themes from the interviews The article concludes with a comprehensive discussion of the results, highlighting key conclusions and their pedagogical implications within the conceptual framework.
Scope of the study
This study aims to explore the implementation of a CEFR-aligned curriculum as perceived by General English (GE) teachers in non-English major classes at a home university from 2015 to 2018 It examines teachers' perceptions of the CEFR, their readiness for its application among non-English major students, and the efforts involved in the CEFR implementation process Additionally, the research investigates how GE teachers adapted their teaching methods, modified assigned textbooks, and revised classroom assessment practices in response to the curriculum renewal The findings of this study are relevant to similar educational contexts but may not be applicable to vastly different situations.
In particular, the present study explores a top-down policy of adopting a global framework to local contexts without much explanation and piloting (Pham,
The study's findings are based solely on teachers' perspectives, excluding input from administrators and students during data collection, which limits the applicability of the results to broader policy implications.
This study investigates teachers' perceptions and responses during the implementation of the CEFR at their home university, aiming to uncover challenges faced and strategies employed The findings will provide valuable methodological and pedagogical insights for General English (GE) teachers It is important to note that perspectives from administrators or students may yield different results and implications Consequently, this research focuses specifically on language education and teaching methodologies, rather than broader language policy and planning.
The study focuses on a CEFR-aligned curriculum specifically designed for non-English major university students, whose motivation and language proficiency differ significantly from those of English majors Key elements such as the timeframe, textbooks, assessment methods, and teaching activities are distinct, making it clear that the findings cannot be applied to English-major students at the same institution.
The study was conducted at a regional university in Central Vietnam, where cultural and socio-economic factors differ from those in larger cities Consequently, while the findings may be relevant to other regional universities with similar contexts, they should not be generalized to universities in Northern or Southern Vietnam, or to institutions outside the country.
Significance of the study
This study significantly enhances the understanding of top-down implementation policies in foreign language education, highlighting their impact on various aspects of language teaching methodology It offers valuable insights into curriculum renewal, adaptations in teaching practices, and modifications in testing and assessment, contributing to the existing body of knowledge in the field.
Firstly, since the 1990s, the urge to promote foreign language competency, especially English, among Vietnamese workforce and citizens has never ceased
Efforts to reform foreign language teaching in Vietnam, including the integration of global policies like the CEFR, have often been implemented in a top-down manner, neglecting local human resources and facilities Understanding and researching these policies is crucial for providing valuable insights and lessons for the Ministry of Education and Training (MOET) and policymakers.
The study aims to illuminate the implementation of a CEFR-aligned curriculum for non-English major university students at the tertiary level By capturing teachers' voices and perceptions, it seeks to highlight both the successes and challenges of the policy, providing valuable insights into the implementation process The findings will assist the home university and faculty in re-evaluating the curriculum, identifying areas for improvement, and determining necessary support for both teachers and students, ultimately enhancing the effectiveness and success of the curriculum implementation.
The study offers valuable insights for teachers and non-English major students, enhancing their understanding of the implementation process It equips educators and administrators with knowledge about their roles and the significance of the CEFR-aligned curriculum Additionally, the findings highlight the strengths and weaknesses of the policy while identifying the challenges faced by non-English major students and the reasons behind these obstacles.
The primary goal of the proposed changes is to enhance students' English proficiency and improve their learning outcomes This study is particularly beneficial for non-English major students, as it aids them in obtaining the CEFR B1 certificate, which is a prerequisite for their university graduation.
Organization of the study
The present study consists of five chapters
Chapter One describes the territory of the research by presenting the background context, procedures, the aims and importance, as well as the structure of the study
Chapter Two offers a comprehensive literature review on the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) and its implementation in language education It explores key theoretical concepts such as teachers' cognition and behavior, highlighting their interrelationship Additionally, the chapter examines the CEFR as a catalyst for change and innovation in language teaching Drawing from the reviewed theories and studies, it establishes the conceptual framework for the study.
Chapter Three outlines the methodology of the study, beginning with an overview of the research approach and mixed-method design It details the research questions and the setting in which the research was conducted The chapter further elaborates on the processes of data collection and analysis Finally, it addresses the validity, reliability, and ethical considerations associated with the chosen research design.
Chapter Four presents a comprehensive analysis of data findings regarding General English (GE) teachers' perceptions of the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) and its implementation It explores the perceived value of the CEFR, its readiness for application, and the necessity for its implementation among non-English major students, alongside the associated work required for its application The chapter further examines GE teachers' responses to CEFR implementation across three key areas: teaching activities, teaching materials, and classroom assessment Additionally, it identifies and refines emerging themes related to GE teachers' perceptions and responses to the CEFR implementation.
Chapter Five highlights the main findings of the study, focusing on the implications of the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) for non-English major university students It outlines significant conclusions regarding CEFR implementation, discusses pedagogical and methodological implications, and addresses the study's limitations while offering suggestions for future research.
REVIEW
Definitions of the key terms
This article provides a list of definitions essential for comprehending the study and its data, featuring terms commonly utilized in the educational field Key terms will be further defined in the literature review, with relevant sources cited for reference.
Change represents a progression from the current state to a desired future state, often involving systematic transformations within the education system, including organizational, policy, program, and course modifications (Fullan, 2001b) Successful educational change is more likely when the concerns and perspectives of teachers are taken into account (Hall & Hold, 1987).
The curriculum serves as a comprehensive blueprint for a course, detailing the design and overall plan that transforms content into effective teaching and learning strategies aimed at achieving specific learning outcomes (Richards, 2013, p.6).
General English teachers play a crucial role in educational settings, focusing on the broader aspects of language learning rather than specialized language use Defined as English for General Purposes or English for Educational Purposes, General English encompasses contexts where specific language needs are not easily identified, such as in schools This approach emphasizes the development of essential language skills, including listening, writing, speaking, and reading, as part of the overall school curriculum In this study, the term "General English teachers" specifically refers to educators who instruct non-English major students in these foundational language skills.
Implementation in education involves the practical application of a new curriculum, policy, or learning program (Marsh & Stafford, 1988) In this study, it specifically pertains to the execution of the CEFR-aligned curriculum for non-English major students, which includes the adoption, accommodation, or adaptation of the educational policy or learning program.
Innovation refers to the process of introducing new changes to established concepts or practices (O'Sullivan & Dooley, 2008) In this study, the term is used synonymously with changes.
Non-English major students are defined as university students specializing in disciplines other than English, as outlined by Khader and Mohammad (2010) This study focuses on this specific group to explore their unique educational experiences and challenges.
Perception Perception refers to a person‘s interpretation and understanding about the surrounding environment (Lindsay & Norman, 2013; Quick & Nelson, 1997)
Response Response is what a person does to the stimuli (Brink, 2008) In the present study, it is used synonymously and interchangeably with action or behavior.
The CEFR in language education
The Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching and Assessment was officially published by the Council of Europe in 2001, following over twenty years of research and two draft versions created in 1996 The framework is available in both English and French.
The Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR), published by the Council of Europe in 2001, serves as a foundational document for developing language curricula, examinations, and educational materials across Europe It categorizes language proficiency into six levels, encompassing skills in speaking, reading, listening, and writing, and is widely recognized in the field of language education The CEFR offers a descriptive scheme of definitions and examples, aiding language professionals in articulating their educational goals This section will explore the CEFR's definition, content, purpose, limitations, and effective usage, as well as its influence on language education.
2.2.1 A sketch of the CEFR: Definition, content, purpose, limitations and suggestions for good use
The Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) is a comprehensive framework that outlines language learners' abilities across six levels in speaking, reading, listening, and writing (Cambridge, 2011) As a "language neutral" and "language independent" scheme (Little, 2006), the CEFR can be effectively adapted to various foreign language learning contexts, providing a valuable tool for assessing language proficiency (English Profile, n.d.).
The CEFR employs an action-oriented approach, recognizing language users and learners as individuals and social agents whose evolving competencies encompass various cognitive processes, strategies, and knowledge It emphasizes the importance of both language competencies and communication strategies, asserting that successful communication requires learners to select effective linguistic resources and appropriate strategies.
The Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) serves as a comprehensive and transparent planning tool designed to clarify language knowledge, skills, and usage for all users Its explicit and formulaic information ensures transparency, while its harmonious relationship among needs, objectives, content, selected materials, and teaching/learning programs contributes to its coherence To better understand the CEFR, an initial sketch can provide valuable insights for further review.
2.2.1.2 Content of the CEFR: An outline
The term CEFR can be understood in two ways: as a document and as a framework In this study, we will primarily focus on CEFR as a framework.
The CEFR‘s best known and most influential components (Alderson, 2007; Little, 2006), are the so-called ―global scale‖ and ―self-assessment grid‖ organized in a vertical and a horizontal dimension
The global scale of the CEFR outlines six levels of communicative proficiency categorized into three bands: basic, independent, and proficient users, defined through "can do" descriptors These statements offer a comprehensive understanding of language capabilities, aiding in the establishment of communicative and functional goals for learners The CEFR is recognized as a valuable resource for learners, curriculum designers, textbook authors, teachers, and examiners (Little, 2006, p.168).
The self-assessment grid focuses on the learner's communicative language competencies and the strategies used to attain them It allows for an analysis of how the learner's abilities, various language activities, and contextual conditions interact to influence effective communication.
2.2.1.3 The purpose of the CEFR
The Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR), developed and published by the Council of Europe in 2001, aims to enhance cooperation and communication among Europe's diverse linguistic and cultural communities It serves as a comprehensive framework for creating language syllabuses, curriculum guidelines, teaching materials, and assessing foreign language proficiency, making it a vital tool for educators The CEFR facilitates the mutual recognition of qualifications across different learning contexts and supports various stakeholders, including learners, teachers, and educational administrators, in coordinating their efforts However, it is not designed to be a uniform system; instead, it encourages reflection and discussion among practitioners, highlighting the diversity in language teaching and learning By raising questions rather than providing definitive answers, the CEFR prompts educators to align their practices with the unique needs and characteristics of their learners.
The CEFR aims to equip Europeans for the challenges of increased international mobility and cooperation, fostering mutual understanding and tolerance It seeks to enhance the richness and diversity of European cultural life through greater mutual knowledge and aims to address the needs of a multilingual and multicultural Europe by improving communication across linguistic and cultural boundaries Additionally, the framework promotes cooperation among educational institutions across different countries.
2001, p.5) and is intended for such uses as the planning of ―language learning programs‖, ―language certification‖ and ―self-directed learning‖ (CoE, 2001, p.6)
2.2.1.4 The limitations of the CEFR
The Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) is a significant document in language teaching and learning, yet it has its limitations Cambridge describes the CEFR as a "work in progress," emphasizing that it is not an "international standard" or a definitive solution for every situation Additionally, the CEFR may not adequately address all contexts or be suitable for all languages Therefore, the assumption that the CEFR, as a European model, is universally applicable without modifications in non-European countries warrants scrutiny.
The CEFR's second limitation is its language-neutral nature, as explicitly stated in the framework's documentation It is designed to be context- and language-independent, which means it does not refer to specific languages Consequently, applying the CEFR to particular languages is outside the Council of Europe's intended scope.
The CEFR faces criticism primarily for its descriptors, which are seen as an abstract and complicated system that lacks accessibility for readers (Figueras, 2012; Anderson, 2007; North, 2007) Critics point out issues such as overlaps, ambiguities, insufficiencies, inconsistencies, and incoherencies in the terminology used within the CEFR scales (Anderson, 2007, p 661; Figueras).
Hulstijn (2007) highlights key concerns regarding the application of the CEFR scales for assessing language proficiency Firstly, there is no proof that learners progress to a specific level by successfully completing the preceding level Secondly, learners classified at a particular level do not necessarily demonstrate proficiency in all tasks associated with lower levels Lastly, even when learners achieve the overall skills required for a specific level, their linguistic abilities may not be uniformly consistent with others at that same level.
The CEFR faces criticism for its non-directive approach, which lacks specific guidance on language teaching methods and the assessment of communicative proficiency (Little, 2006) Additionally, North (2007) highlights the framework's omission of socio-cultural elements, raising concerns about potential shortcomings in its application across various domains and contexts.
Teachers‘ perceptions and responses
Perception in psychology is the process through which individuals recognize, organize, and interpret sensory information, allowing them to understand and make sense of their surroundings It encompasses the ability to see, hear, and become aware of stimuli, ultimately forming mental impressions that shape our understanding of the environment.
1998, p.329), of ―interpreting information about another person‖ (Quick & Nelson,
1997, p.83), or of ―interpreting and organizing sensory information to produce a meaningful experience of the world‖ (Lindsay & Norman, 2013, p.161) In brief, perception refers to a person‘s interpretation and understanding about the surrounding environment
Since the 1970s, educational research has shifted from focusing on "what teachers do" to "what teachers think," highlighting the influence of teachers' beliefs and thoughts on their behavior and actions (Borg, 2003, p.81) This change has led to the emergence of various terms to describe the complexities of teachers' cognitive processes in language teaching.
Teacher cognition, as defined by Borg (2003), encompasses the unobservable cognitive dimensions of teaching, including aspects like pedagogical knowledge, theoretical beliefs, and perceptions These concepts are deeply interconnected and challenging to distinguish While this study specifically emphasizes teacher perception, it is essential to understand it within the broader context of teacher cognition, which serves as an umbrella term for these related concepts.
Over the past 30 years, Borg has developed the concept of teacher cognition, defined as "what teachers know, think and believe" (Borg, 2003, p.81) This concept comprises two main components: teachers' beliefs, which encompass their attitudes, judgments, and opinions, and teachers' perceptions, which include their knowledge and understanding While beliefs are subjective and stable, perceptions are more objective and flexible The current study focuses on the dynamic and changeable aspects of teacher cognition, emphasizing the importance of teachers' perceptions.
This study focuses on teachers' perceptions, which encompass their interpretations of teaching and learning issues shaped by their experiences and education (Borg, 2009) Specifically, it examines how GE teachers understand the MOET policy regarding the implementation of the CEFR at the tertiary level, highlighting their awareness of its significance and necessity, as well as their views on its application for non-English major students at their institution.
The current study's understanding of responses is grounded in Skinner's operant conditioning theory, which posits that learning results from changes in overt behavior due to an individual's reactions to environmental stimuli When a specific Stimulus-Response (S-R) pattern is reinforced, the individual becomes conditioned to respond accordingly This foundational concept has been further developed by subsequent psychologists.
Brink (2008) explains that when an organism perceives a stimulus, it generates a response, which encompasses thoughts, feelings, and actions This response includes behavioral, cognitive, and affective components, linking to cognition, perceptions, and attitudes For this study, the focus is primarily on the behavioral aspect of teachers' responses, equating them to teachers' practices as defined by Borg (2003) These practices can be categorized into two main areas: the instructional strategies employed in the classroom and the collaborative efforts with peers and colleagues outside the classroom (Isac et al., 2015).
This study defines teachers' responses as their actions and behaviors aimed at implementing the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) These responses are evident in their efforts to develop teaching materials, adapt instructional activities, and update assessment practices both in and out of the classroom, all with the goal of helping students achieve the desired CEFR-based learning outcomes.
2.3.3 The relationship between teachers’ perceptions and teachers’ responses
Since the 1970s, cognitive psychology has highlighted the complex relationship between individuals' thoughts and actions, particularly in language teaching, where both teachers' practices and cognition are crucial Research indicates that teachers' beliefs and knowledge significantly influence their classroom behaviors, shaping their instructional decisions, goals, and interactions with students (Baker, 2014; Borg, 2003; Freeman & Richards, 1996; Harste & Burke, 1977) This suggests that teaching involves thoughtful decision-making rather than mere adherence to external guidelines, positioning teachers as active participants in the educational process (Borg, 2009) Additionally, teachers' practices can reflect and reshape their cognitive frameworks, indicating a dynamic interplay between thought and action in the teaching profession (Borg, 2003).
2009) From Phipps and Borg (2007) and his previous work on the field, Borg
In 2009, it was highlighted that teacher cognition significantly impacts instructional practices, demonstrating a persistent influence over time However, this cognition does not always align with actual classroom behavior The interaction between teacher beliefs and experiences is bidirectional; while beliefs shape teaching practices, the experiences gained through those practices can also modify beliefs.
Putting teacher cognition and practices in their relationship with each other and with the environment, a conceptualization of teacher psychology is synthesized and illustrated in the following figure:
The teacher iceberg model, as presented by Waters (2009) and based on the work of Malderez and Bodoczky (1999), illustrates the three levels of a teacher's identity, aligning with Borg's theory This model distinguishes between the visible aspects of teaching, such as behaviors and practices, and the deeper, unseen cognitive elements, which include beliefs and attitudes The latter, positioned at the base of the iceberg, signify deeply rooted perceptions that are resistant to change Additionally, the model emphasizes the mutual influence between these levels and highlights the significant impact of the educational and socio-cultural context on the submerged cognitive processes.
The teacher iceberg model by Waters (2009) effectively illustrates the intricate levels and relationships within teacher psychological processes, highlighting that university teachers, such as GE teachers, possess greater power and flexibility in modifying curricula compared to primary or high school educators This flexibility suggests that their perceptions can significantly influence their responses, particularly in the context of implementing innovations As primary implementers of educational change, teachers play a crucial role in the successful adoption of new practices, necessitating a transformation in their psychological processes The iceberg model emphasizes that accommodating change requires addressing all levels of teacher cognition Therefore, this study focuses on examining GE teachers' perceptions and responses, as well as their interactions, during the implementation of the CEFR for non-English major students to foster meaningful change.
The CEFR implementation as change management in English language
The concept of change management has garnered attention across various sectors, particularly in education Among the numerous theories developed, Lewin’s (1947) change management model stands out as one of the most widely recognized frameworks This model consists of three key stages: unfreezing, changing, and refreezing, which focus on altering the beliefs and practices of stakeholders Lewin's approach offers a straightforward and practical understanding of the change process, laying the groundwork for many contemporary change models.
Fullan (2007a) built upon Lewin's change management model in education, proposing a framework that includes three interconnected phases: initiation, implementation, and institutionalization He emphasizes that these phases are non-linear and often overlap in practice, as illustrated in Figure 2.2.
Fullan (2001b) emphasizes the importance of monitoring during the change process, highlighting that successful innovation requires oversight He argues that the change model is non-linear, with three interactive phases that influence one another, as illustrated by the two-way arrows in his framework (Fullan, 2007b) Furthermore, Fullan (2007b) cautions that his model only provides a general overview of a complex and intertwined reality Consequently, his educational change model is recognized for its practicality and depth, as it acknowledges the intricate, multi-dimensional relationships among the phases of change and reinforces the idea of their simultaneous existence in practice.
The initiation phase marks the moment individuals recognize the necessity for change, leading them to commit to innovation This stage involves dismantling outdated customs, beliefs, and practices, paving the way for individuals and groups to embrace new alternatives.
Implementation is the critical phase where ideas and reforms are put into action, making change more likely when individuals and groups have supportive models to emulate In educational innovation, teachers play a pivotal role as the primary implementers of these changes (Waters, 2009, p.461) Bianco (2013, p.146) highlights the significance of teachers during this phase, noting that their speech, preferences, and facilitation choices reflect an underlying theory of language and influence students' learning experiences Therefore, understanding the psychological processes of teachers as implementers is essential for successful innovation in education.
The third stage of the innovation model, known as innovation institutionalization, focuses on the sustainability of innovation within systems The successful integration of innovation depends on its design and implementation; without proper strategies and conditions, innovations may fade away rather than thrive Waters (2009) identified key factors that contribute to the success of innovation, such as effective implementation, strategies for sustainability, implementer ownership, and essential support He also noted that the absence of these factors in foreign language teaching innovation projects has hindered their long-term success.
The innovation process consists of three distinct phases: initiation, implementation, and institutionalization Innovation initiation is crucial for initiating change, while implementation is essential for translating new ideas into practice, directly involving teachers as key implementers Institutionalization ensures the sustainability of these changes According to Fullan (2001) and Fullan, Culttress, and Kilcher (2005), these phases can be further detailed into eight drivers that facilitate successful educational change management, which will be discussed in the following section.
2.4.2 Factors influential to successful educational change management
Fullan (2001, 2005) identifies key factors, termed foundation and enabling drivers, that are essential for the successful implementation of educational change These drivers not only determine the success or failure of change initiatives but also shape the perceptions and reactions of stakeholders in the educational system (Hyland & Wong, 2013; White, 2008) The relationships among these change knowledge drivers are visually represented in Figure 2.3.
Fullan et al (2005) identify eight drivers of change, categorized into foundation and enabling drivers The three foundation drivers emphasize engaging people's moral purpose as the central principle, which focuses on understanding "the why of change" in education to enhance student achievement This moral purpose is not merely a goal but a collaborative process involving all key stakeholders in educational reform The second driver, capacity building, involves enhancing the knowledge, skills, and competencies of individuals and must be implemented collectively across schools and districts Additionally, capacity building requires improving the infrastructure to support new initiatives through training, consulting, and other resources.
In 2001, it was highlighted that a crucial element in facilitating change is the understanding and insight into the change process itself Fullan (2001a) asserts that "moral purpose without an understanding of change will lead to moral martyrdom" (p.5), indicating that a deep comprehension of change is essential Although grasping this concept can be challenging and frustrating, it serves as a significant catalyst for driving effective change.
The five enabling drivers of change follow the initial three foundation drivers, with the fourth and fifth focusing on developing cultures of learning and evaluation The fourth driver emphasizes strategies that promote peer learning, highlighting the necessity of learning during the implementation phase for effective change In educational settings, fostering a culture of learning involves enhancing teachers' knowledge and skills to create impactful learning experiences for students Furthermore, integrating cultures of learning with cultures of evaluation is essential to enrich the understanding of what is learned.
For sustainable reform, leadership must be distributed throughout the organization, as emphasized by Fullan (2001) Effective change requires a system that nurtures numerous leaders who can inspire and cultivate further leadership Typically, efforts to innovate can lead to fragmentation; thus, making coherence is essential to connect various elements and align them with the overarching vision Finally, tri-level development is crucial, as it focuses on transforming not just individuals but entire systems and contexts This approach necessitates improvements at all three levels: the school and community level, the district level, and the state level.
The implementation of the CEFR in Vietnam, guided by Project 2020, aims to drive educational reforms at the tertiary level (Vietnamese government, 2008) This study emphasizes the importance of understanding educational change theories, particularly Fullan's (2001) change management theory, to explore teachers' perceptions and responses as key stakeholders in integrating the CEFR into English education Fullan et al (2005) highlight that while possessing change knowledge does not guarantee success, lacking it ensures failure Therefore, effective change requires that this knowledge be held by individuals who deeply understand the dynamics of the influencing factors (Fullan, 2007).
2.4.3 The implementation of the CEFR in the light of educational change management
The effective implementation of the CEFR in English language education, particularly in Vietnam, is crucial for fostering positive change Understanding how this change should be executed enables us to grasp the perceptions and responses of teachers, who are essential stakeholders in the CEFR implementation process.
2.4.3.1 The CEFR and curriculum design
Language education comprises three key elements: input (content and syllabus), process (teaching methods and materials), and output (learning outcomes), which are interconnected The implementation of language teaching programs can vary based on how these elements are addressed (Richards, 2013) A curriculum serves as a roadmap that links these elements, guiding the achievement of desired outcomes through suitable learning activities, materials, and assessments Different curriculum design strategies—forward, central, or backward—reflect various starting points With the introduction of the CEFR, there has been a shift towards focusing on learning targets and outcomes, exemplifying a backward design approach in curriculum development (Richards, 2013, p 26).
The conceptual framework
Theoretical frameworks for implementing and changing language curricula are still largely underdeveloped This study utilizes theories of teachers' cognition and change management, alongside a thorough literature review of CEFR values and their application in various contexts, to establish a relevant conceptual framework for effective language curriculum implementation.
The present study posits that teachers' perceptions significantly influence their responses, which in turn affect the success or failure of curriculum renewal Focusing on General English (GE) teachers' views and reactions to the implementation of the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR), this research examines the interacting variables that impact the CEFR implementation process, determining whether innovation occurs or is retracted A conceptual framework is illustrated in Figure 2.5 to enhance the clarity of the research findings.
The values of the CEFR
The necessity of the CEFR application
The readiness for the CEFR implementation
The work involved in the
Successful curriculum innovation, improving students‘ learning outcome
The CEFR implementation for non-English major students
This framework posits that General Education (GE) teachers' perceptions regarding the values, readiness, necessity, and workload associated with the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) significantly influence their responses to implementing a CEFR-aligned curriculum for non-English major students Specifically, these perceptions impact how teachers modify teaching activities, adapt materials, and renew assessment practices to align with CEFR outcomes Conversely, teachers' responses in these areas reflect their perceptions of CEFR implementation Furthermore, it is suggested that both perceptions and responses play a crucial role in the CEFR implementation process, shedding light on the success or failure of the curriculum innovation Finally, applying Fullan's (2007a) change management principles can help evaluate the CEFR implementation process, indicating that curriculum changes can occur if teachers view them as feasible and effectively integrate them into their teaching.
Chapter summary
This chapter presents a comprehensive literature review that establishes the conceptual framework for data discussion and analysis It begins by defining key terminology relevant to the thesis and then reviews the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) and its influence on language education Additionally, it summarizes and synthesizes related studies conducted globally and in Vietnam, highlighting the CEFR's attributes, values, implementation, and impacts The findings demonstrate the significant role of the CEFR in language education, identify research gaps concerning teachers' perceptions and responses, and underscore the necessity to investigate the adoption and adaptation of the CEFR framework within local and institutional contexts.
This chapter explores the interplay between teachers' perceptions and their responses, highlighting the reciprocal relationship between teacher cognition and experience It emphasizes that teachers' beliefs not only shape their instructional practices but also evolve as a result of those practices.
To achieve significant improvements in foreign language education, it is essential to examine the implementation of the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) at both institutional and individual levels Understanding change management theory is crucial for addressing the challenges involved Furthermore, as teachers play a pivotal role in this innovation phase, the success of CEFR implementation in Vietnam largely hinges on their beliefs and acceptance of the reform.
The development of a conceptual framework aims to enhance understanding of General English teachers' perceptions and responses to the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) This framework is crucial for renewing the General English curriculum for non-English major university students in Vietnam, addressing the current underdevelopment of theoretical frameworks for language curriculum implementation and change.
The next methodology chapter will present the choice for the research design, research methodology and procedures of the current study.