An investigation into the ability of using grammatical conhesive devices in oral presentatinos a case of grade 10 students at dau tieng high school

UBND TỈNH BÌNH DƯƠNG TRƯỜNG ĐẠI HỌC THỦ DẦU MỘT In hoa, cỡ chữ 14, Times New Roman TRƯỜNG ĐẠI HỌC THỦ DẦU MỘT ĐÀO THỊ THÙY LINH GRAMMATICAL COHESIVE DEVICES IN ORAL PRESENTATIONS: A

UBND TỈNH BÌNH DƯƠNG

TRƯỜNG ĐẠI HỌC THỦ DẦU MỘT

(In hoa, cỡ chữ 14, Times New Roman)

TRƯỜNG ĐẠI HỌC THỦ DẦU MỘT

ĐÀO THỊ THÙY LINH

GRAMMATICAL COHESIVE DEVICES IN ORAL

PRESENTATIONS: A CASE OF GRADE 10 STUDENTS AT DAU

TIENG HIGH SCHOOL

N N THẠC CHUYÊN NGÀNH: NGÔN NGỮ ANH

MÃ SỐ: 8220201

NGƯỜI HƯ NG D N HO HỌC:

TS HUỲNH CÔNG MINH HÙNG

STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP

I certify that this thesis, entitled “An investigation into the ability of using

grammatical cohesive devices in Oral Presentations: A case of grade 10 students

at Dau Tieng High School”, is the direct result of my own work

Except where reference is made in the text of the thesis, it does not

contain material published elsewhere or extracted in whole or in part from a

thesis by which I have qualified for or been awarded another degree or diploma

No other person‟s work has been used without due acknowledgement in

the main text of this thesis

This thesis has not been submitted for the award of any degree or diploma

in any other tertiary institution

Binh Duong, October 2018

DAO THI THUY LINH

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This thesis would not have been possible without the participants who

devoted time and effort to the study I would like to extend my gratitude to my

supervisor Dr Huynh Cong Minh Hung as well as all the professors that have

instructed me during my course and I sincerely thank all of them for giving me

not only helpful and valuable advice but also a variety of beneficial materials I

would like to express gratitude to Dr Nguyen Hoang Tuan and Dr Vo Kim Ha

who are devoted professors helping me a lot with my thesis I am also thankful the managing board of the class and the Faculty of Foreign Language of Thu Dau

Mot University for having created good conditions for me to finish the proposal

on time In addition, I really want to give my thanks to the authors, researchers

for having given me permission to use the materials

Binh Duong, October 2018

DAO THI THUY LINH

CONTENTS

STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iii

CONTENTS iv

ABBREVIATIONS vi

LISTS OF TABLES vii

LISTS OF FIGURES ix

ABSTRACT x

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1

1 1 Background to the study 1

1 2 Aims and research questions of the study 2

1 3 Significance of the study 2

1.4 Scope of the study 3

1 5 Overview of the thesis chapters 3

CHAPTER 2: LITERARURE REVIEW 4

2.1 Review of the literature 4

2.1.1 Oral presentations 4

2.1.2 Types of Oral Presentation 5

2.1.3 Cohesive devices 6

2.1.4 Grammatical cohesive devices 7

2.2 Related previous studies 11

2.2.1 In Vietnam 11

2.2.2 In foreign countries 13

2.2.3 Gap of the related studies 15

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY 17

3.1 Research design and data gathering instruments 17

3.1.1 Research design 17

3.1.2 Data gathering instruments 18

3.2 The research sites 18

3.2.1 Dau Tieng High School 18

3.2.2 The Grade 10 students at Dau Tieng High School 19

3.2.3 Population 19

3.3 Data collection procedures and data analysis 19

3.4 Ethical considerations 20

CHAPTER 4: DATA ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION 22

4.1 Experiment 1 22

4.1.1 Purpose of the study 22

4.1.2 Research site, samples and rubric 22

4.1.3 Findings and discussion 22

4.2 Experiment 2 28

4.2.1 Purpose of the study 28

4.2.2 Research site, samples and rubric 28

4.2.3 Findings and discussion 28

4.3 Experiment 3 37

4.3.1 Purpose of the study 37

4.3.2 Research site and samples 37

4.3.3 Findings and discussion 37

CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 67

5.1 Conclusions 67

5.2 Limitations of the study 67

5.2.1 Participants 67

5.2.2 Method 68

5.2.3 Environment 68

5.3 Implications 68

5.3.1 In teaching 68

5.3.2 In learning 69

5.3.3 For EF students’ studying 70

5.4 Recommendations for further studies 70

PUBLISHED PAPERS

REFERENCES

ABBREVIATIONS

DETB Department of Education and Training of Binh Duong Province

OPs Oral Presentations

EFL English as a Foreign Language

Qs Questionnaires

DCI Data Collection Instrument

LISTS OF TABLES

Table 2.1 The summary of grammatical cohesion 10

Table 4.1 The students’ ability in using reference 22

Table 4.2 The students’ ability in using conjunction 22

Table 4.3 The students’ ability in using ellipsis 22

Table 4.4 The students’ ability in using substitution 22

Table 4.5 Statistics 22

Table 4.6.The students’ ability in using reference 28

Table 4.7 The statistics of two groups in using reference 29

Table 4.8 The students’ ability in using conjunction 30

Table 4.9 The statistics of two groups in using conjunction 31

Table 4.10 The students’ ability in using ellipsis 31

Table 4.12 The students’ ability in using substitution 33

Table 4.13 Paired samples test for substitution 34

Table 4.15 The students’ ability in using the word “so” 38

Table 4.16 Paired samples test for “so” as substitution 39

Table 4.17 The students’ ability in using the word “so” as each function 40

Table 4.18a Paired samples test for “he” 41

Table 4.18b The students’ ability in using the word “he” 41

Table 4.19 Paired samples test for “he” as reference 42

Table 4.20 The students’ ability in using the word “he” as reference 43

Table 4.21 Paired samples test for “she” 44

Table 4.22 The students’ ability in using the word “she” 44

Table 4.23 Paired samples test for “she” as reference 45

Table 4.24.The students’ ability in using the word “she” as reference 45

Table 4.25 Paired samples test for “do” 46

Table 4.26 The students’ ability in using the word “do” 46

Table 4.27 Paired samples test for “do” as substitution 47

Table 4.28 The students’ ability in using the word “do” as each function 47

Table 4.29 Paired samples test for “is not” 49

Table 4.30 The students’ ability in using the words “is not” 49

Table 4.31 Paired samples test for “is not”as substitution 50

Table 4.32 The students’ ability in using the words “is not” as each function 50

Table 4.33.Paired samples test for “do not” 52

Table 4.34 The students’ ability in using the words “do not” 52

Table 4.35 Paired samples test for “do not”as substitution 53

Table 4.36 The students’ ability in using the words “do not” as each function

53

Table 4.37 Paired samples test for “first” 54

Table 4.38 The students’ ability in using the word “first” 55

Table 4.39 Paired samples test for “first” as conjunction 56

Table 4.40 The students’ ability in using the word “first” as conjunction 56

Table 4.41 Paired samples test for “then” 57

Table 4.42 The students’ ability in using the word “then” 57

Table 4.43 Paired samples test for “then” as conjunction 58

Table 4.44 The students’ ability in using the word “then” as conjunction 58

Table 4.45 Paired samples test for “next” 59

Table 4.46 the students’ ability in using the word “next” 59

Table 4.47 Paired samples test for “next “as conjunction 60

Table 4.48 The students’ ability in using the word “next” as conjunction 60

LISTS OF FIGURES

Figure 4.1 The students’ ability in using reference 29

Figure 4.2 The students’ ability in using conjunction 30

Figure 4.3 The students’ ability in using ellipsis 32

Figure 4.4 The students’ ability in using substitution 35

Figure 4.5 The students’ ability in using the word “so” 38

Figure 4.6 The students’ ability in using the word “so” as each function 40

Figure 4.7 The students’ ability in using the word “he” 42

Figure 4.8 The students’ ability in using the word “he”as reference 52

Figure 4.9 The students’ ability in using the word “she” 44

Figure 4.10 The students’ ability in using the word “she” as reference 45

Figure 4.11 The students’ ability in using the word “do” 46

Figure 4.12 The students’ ability in using the word “do” as each function 47

Figure 4.13 The students’ ability in using the words “is not” 49

Figure 4.14 The students’ ability in using the words “is not”as each function

52

Figure 4.15 The students’ ability in using the words “do not” 52

Figure 4.16 The students’ ability in using the words “do not” as each function 52

Figure 4.17 The students’ ability in using the word “first” 52

Figure 4.18 The students’ ability in using the word “first” as conjunction 52

Figure 4.19 The students’ ability in using the word “then” 52

Figure 4.20 The students’ ability in using the word “then” as conjunction 52

Figure 4.21 The students’ ability in using the word “next” 60

Figure 4.22 The students’ ability in using the word “next” as conjunction 61

Figure 4.23 The students’ ability in using the word “my” 62

Figure 4.24 The students’ ability in using the word “my” as reference 63

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this research is to investigate grade 10 students‟ ability in

using grammatical cohesive devices of oral presentations at Dau Tieng High

School There were 44 participants taking part in the study The method used in

this study is quantitative research with three experiments After processing the

data, the result shows that the best devices of English grammatical cohesive

devices that these students are capable of utilising in oral presentations are

reference and conjunction.The challenging ones they try to address are

substitution and ellipsis, because of their unpopularity, complicated structures as

well as students‟ attention to the five important elements of an oral presentation

While recognizing the problems, I put forward some possible solutions to

improve the use of the unusual devices and go on maintaining the popular ones

Applying critical thinking and using fixed words from the teacher‟s instructions

are two of the best ways for the students to enhance their capacity in using

grammatical cohesive devices in oral presentations

Key terms: Oral Presentations, grammatical cohesive devices

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

1 1 Background to the study

English plays an important part in society and studying (Dao Thi Thuy

Linh, 2015) In recent years, thanks to the guidelines of the Vietnamese Ministry

of Education and Training in the 2020 national project of teaching and learning

foreign languages (No, D.1400 /QD - TTg, 2008), especially the Department of

Education and Training of Binh Duong Province (DETB), the level of English

proficiency of secondary and upper secondary students in Binh Duong in general,

Dau Tieng High School in particular, has improved remarkably Previously, the

students at Dau Tieng High School were unable to present anything in front of

the class for some possible reasons

First, the curriculum as well as the design of examination may be

extremely challenging for students and they do not have enough time to prepare

and review the subjects, especially the ones requiring speaking skill The

curriculum has heavilyfocused on English grammar and reading comprehension,

so exams have had to be set this way Therefore, teachers must pay attention to

the content of the exams in order to teach their students the necessary lessons,

except for speaking skill As a result, the students do not have opportunities to

master this skill They are able to be considered to be as experts in grammar and

reading comprehension, but they might have poor speaking ability

Besides, their communicative and linguistic competences are weak For

instance, their pronunciation is not clear enough for everybody to understand

what they are saying or their vocabulary is limited Or sometimes the students do

not know how to use the words This makes them difficult to speak English Ever

since then, they are fearful of criticism or losing face Consequently, they lose

confidence to talk in front of their classmates or present something in front of the

class

However, since 2014, in Binh Duong province, the students‟ speaking

skill, has highly been improved DETB has had some policy changes for all the

secondary schools in Binh Duong Province to practice speaking skill in

mainstream classes and to organize speaking exams in grade 10 in the first and

second semester Therefore, the students, are required to change their ways of

learning English and focusing on Oral Presentations (OPs) Additionally, they

endeavor to learn grammatical and lexical cohesive devices Moreover, the

teachers in English language must use suitable and flexible methods to help

students improve speaking skill, especially inOPs

Furthermore, up to now, there is little or no research in Vietnam on using

grammatical cohesive devices (GCDs) in secondary education When analyzing

the elements to make OPs successful, the researchers usually concentrate much

on such criteria as voice, pacing, body language, pronunciation, communicative

force and audience participation Meanwhile, it is undeniable that cohesive

devices play an important role in discourse The researchers less consider OPs as

a type of discourse So they do not concentrate much on cohesive devices There

are two types of cohesive devices: grammatical and lexical cohesive devices

(Halliday& Hasan, 1976) In this research, only GCDs are analyzed This is the

reason why the title “An investigation into the ability of using grammatical

cohesive devices in oral presentations: A case of grade 10 students at Dau Tieng

High School” is chosen

1 2 Aims and research questions of the study

The study aim is to evaluate how well the Grade 10 students at Dau Tieng

High School are able to apply GCDs in OPs Through this case of study, some

suggestions can be given to the students for a more effective application of

GCDs

In order to carry out the research, the two following research questions

need to be addressed

1 What kinds of grammatical cohesive devices do the grade 10 students

at Dau Tieng High School use in Oral Presentations?

2 How can the grade 10 students at Dau Tieng High School improve the

grammatical cohesive devices in Oral Presentations?

1 3 Significance of the study

Recently, an outstanding researcher in Vietnam (Nguyen Thi Van Ha,

2007) and some other ones overseas (Alireza, 2015; Sue & Tammy, 2016;

Ratnassari, 2016) have addressed the question of GCDs in OPs The use of GCDs

in OPs is extremely complicated, so the researchers want to explore and solve

some aspects All the study reviews at the moment suffer from the fact that too

much attention has not been paid due to difficulties or lack of interest while

many researchers are highly interested in GCDs in writing (Chanawongsa, 1986;

Chen, 2008; Yang & Sun, 2012; Ong, 2011; Rahman, 2013)

In a word, this study plays an important role of explaining and exploring

the data to know students‟ ability of using GCDs in OPs Furthermore, it finds

both strengths and weaknesses of the Grade 10 students at Dau Tieng High

School in using GCDs in OPs Thanks to the study, both the students and the

teachers are capable of solving the difficulties for these concerns, including

linguistic and teaching areas

1 4 Scope of the study

This study is confined to examine the GCDs in OPs

1 5 Overview of the thesis chapters

This current thesis consists of five chapters The first chapter focuses on

the introduction This includes statement of the problem, aims and research

questions, significance of the study, the scope, and organization of the thesis The

second chapter deals with the literature review This chapter will concentrate on

the definitions of OPs, cohesive devices and GCDs Besides, types of OPs are

revealed Related previous studies are presented in this chapter to support the

research In the third chapter, methodology is included with research design,

research sites, data collection procedures, data analysis and ethical

considerations The fourth chapter tackles the data collection and provides the

results of the data and discussion in experiment 1, 2 and 3 Finally, conclusions,

limitations, implications and recommendations are mentioned in the fifth chapter

CHAPTER 2: LITERARURE REVIEW

In the investigation of the ability of using CDs in OPs of grade 10 students

at Dau Tieng High School, the study needs to present the previous and current

literature about OPs as well as cohesive devices, especially GCDs Furthermore,

the definitions of GCD and OPs should be shown in order to make the research

clear Therefore, these issues are the focus of this chapter

2.1 Review of the literature

2.1.1 Oral presentations

There is a considerable amount of literature on OPs What is known about

OPs is largely based on Ming (2005) and Nguyen Thi Van Ha (2007) According

to Ming (2005), OPs are defined as typically and partly spoken, partly visual

form of communication Similarly, OPs have been indicated as being brief

discussions on a focused topic which is delivered to a group of listeners so that

they can impart knowledge or motivate discussion They have the same

structures as written discourse, consisting of introduction, main body and

conclusion (Nguyen Thi Van Ha, 2007) Besides, OP is an art which involves

attention to the needs of the audience, careful planning and attention to delivery

OP can be delivered in classes, at conferences, in public lectures or in company

meetings

Thanks to OPS, presenters are able to improve fluency and accuracy and

enhance confidence (Piccinini, 2010) as well as “gain practice in choosing and

narrowing a topic, gathering information from a variety of sources, organizing

and supporting ideas, expressing the main idea, formulating questions, working

within time limits, preparing audio and/or visual aids, speaking formally in front

of a group, leading a discussion, and answering questions” (Meloni &

Thompson, 1980, p 503-510) In addition, it is one of the most popular activities

in student-centered classroom (King, 2002; Truong & Storch, 2007; Al-Issa &

Al-Qubtan, 2010; Alwi & Sidhu, 2013)

To give a successful presentation and at the same time a good image of the

audiences, Jeff Radel (Ph.D in University of Kansas Medical Center) states that

an OP should have five important elements: rate, opening, transitions, conclusion

and length

First of all, the optimal rate for an oral presentation is about 100 words

per minute Pauses, repeat, variation in speed or tone and distracting fillers

like “um‟s, er‟s, like‟s, you know‟s” also contribute to a fruitful talk

Secondly, opening plays an important part in a good OP The opening could

immediately catch the interest and attention of the audience, while avoiding

trite filler formal phrases (eg Thank you for having me .) and technical

jargon Thirdly, it is often said that transitions are the keys making OPs

coherent, logical and persuasive Presenters need to pay attention to using

transitions with GCDs in order to make an impressive oral presentation

Moreover, many presenters consider the fourth element, conclusion, to be an

important factor to create a good impression on the audiences At the end of

OPs, presenters summarize the main concepts just discussed and claim how

their work relates to issues they have raised Last but not least, length is a

necessary element The speakers should not run over Instead, they shorten the

talk by removing details, concepts and information, not by eliminating words

2.1.2 Types of Oral Presentation

There are various types of OPs, presented individually, in pairs, or in

groups of students depending on the size of the classroom, the topic, and the

objectives of the course According to Al-Issa and Redha (2010), OPs can be

divided into three types: controlled OP, guided OP, and free OP

2.1.2.1 Controlled OPs

A teacher can design a controlled oral presentation for students whose

language proficiency level ranges from beginning to elementary In this type, the

teacher chooses the topics, the content of OPs, and the grammatical and lexical

issues that the students have learnt in class Therefore, the students feel interested

and find it easy to present their OPs

The aim of this kind of the presentation is to make students confident

when presenting in front of their classmates and teacher (Abdelreheim, 2014;

Piccinini, 2010) In addition, it helps students maximize their meaningful

participation in classroom and develop the target language

2.1.2.2 Guided OPs

A guided oral presentation is used with lower-intermediate or intermediate

students' language proficiency level The students are instructed with the topics

that are suitable for their level of proficiency Moreover, the students are guided

an appropriate use of grammatical and lexical items and time distribution They

are encouraged to use overhead projector, handout or PowerPoint to attract other

students‟ attention

2.1.2.3 Free OPs

A free oral presentation is suitable for upper-intermediate and advanced

levels of students Actually, at this level of proficiency, students are able to

present any topic collected froma variety of resources such as transparency or

PowerPoint slides After presentation, students get ready to self-assuredly answer

simple or challenging questions from their classmates

In this study, a controlled oral presentation is chosen because of my grade

10 students‟ English level

2.1.3 Cohesive devices

Cohesive devices consist of grammatical cohesive devices and lexical

cohesive devices (Halliday & Hasan, 1976) According to Definition (2013),

cohesive is defined as an adjective connected in a rational way to form a whole

In addition, Osisanwo (2005) states that a text is cohesive when the linguistic

means held together a text as a single unit Halliday and Hassan (1976) affirm

that cohesive devices play a significant role in establishing cohesion in texts

Hence, it is applicable to do research on the issues that language learners usually

meet when using cohesive devices (Hinkel, 2002; Indriani, 2012; Karahan,

2015)

2.1.4 Grammatical cohesive devices

Halliday and Hassan (1976) and Brown and Yule (1983) state that

grammatical cohesion refers to a variety of grammatical devices employed to

make more specific relations among sentences Cohesive devices can show the

close relationship between pieces of text in a specific way The objective is to

help readers comprehend the referred items, the replaced ones and even the

omitted ones (Harmer, 2004) Furthermore, the combination of sentences using

semantically relational cohesive devices need a shared linguistic environment

The basic categories of grammatical cohesion such as reference,

substitution, ellipsis and conjunction are listed in details, based on theoretical and

specific grammatical cohesion and provide a practical means for describing and

analyzing texts (Halliday and Hassan, 1976)

2.1.4.1 Reference

Halliday and Hassan (1976) are among the first to do research about

cohesion and the continuity of reference in the discourse

There are two kinds of references: endophora or situational (referring to a

thing independent of the context of situation) and endophora or textual (referring

to a thing identified in the surrounding text) The endophoric relations have two

types, those which look back in the text for their interpretation (anaphoric

relations) and those which look forward to the text for their interpretation

(cataphoric relations) (Quirk, 1972)

2.1.4.2 Substitution

Halliday and Hassan (1976) show that substitution is the replacement of

one item by another It is a relation in the wording rather than in the meaning

This means that, generally, the substitute item has the structural functions identical to the one it substitutes

There are three types of substitution These are nominal, verbal and

clausal substitution

Nominal substitution is used to replace a noun with another word that can

produce the same meaning in a text (Halliday and Hasan, 1989) The following

example will clearly illustrate

A: Which hat do you like? B: I like the red one

“One” substitutes for the noun “hat” with the same meaning

Verbal substitution is used to replace verbs in a text The verb can be

substituted by “do” (Halliday, 1989)

For instance, A: I like chicken B: So do they

In this example, “do” substitutes for “like”

Clausal substitution replaces a clause in a text with a simpler form The

clauses are usually substituted by “so” and “not” (Halliday and Hasan, 1989)

Ellipsis is known as substitution of zero (Halliday and Hasan, 1989) It

deletes elements in sentences Although ellipsis is almost similar to reference, an

ellipsis appears in a sentence when it refers back to the previous sentence instead

of a word in reference Foley and Hall (2003) believe that substitution and

ellipsis are both devices for avoiding the unnecessary repetition of words or

phrases in speech or writing There are three types of ellipsis: nominal, verbal

and clausal ellipsis

Brown and Yule (1983) mention that nominal ellipsis is an omission of a

noun in a text as the following example

My sisters are very kind Both (0) are willing to help other people if they

have difficulties

The full sentence should be “My sisters are very kind Both my sisters are

willing to help other people if they have difficulties” The meaning of the test

does not change although the word “my sisters” are omitted

Similarly, Brown and Yule (1983) continue to give a definition about

verbal ellipsis It is defined as an omission of a verb in a text without changing

the meaning The following example clarifies that view of point

A: Have you been working?

B: Yes, I have (0) (Nunan, 1993, p 26)

In the example above, B‟s full sentence should be „Yes, I have been

working‟

Continuously, Brown and Yule (1983) state that clausal ellipsis is an

omission of a clause in a text to make it simple, as seen in the following example:

A: Why‟d you only set three places? Paul‟s staying for dinner, isn‟t he?

B: Is he? He didn‟t tell me (0) (Nunan, 1993, p 26)

In the example above, B‟s complete sentence should be „Is he? He didn‟t

tell me that he’s staying for dinner” The speaker omits the clause „that he’s

staying for dinner”

2.1.4.4 Conjunction

In their analysis, Halliday and Hasan (1989) define conjunction and

conjunctive adverbs as GCDs They bound one sentence with another sentence

There are four types of conjunction: additive, adversative, causal and temporal

Additive conjunction is used to give more information to a phrase or

clause that already stated (Halliday and Hasan, 1989, p 244-249) Some words

describing additive conjunctions are “and, also, moreover, furthermore, etc.”

Adversative includes conjunctions which indicate contrast between different positions or situations Examples of this type include “but, though, however, nevertheless.”

Causal conjunctions, the third type, incorporate words and phrases

introducing causes and results, such as so, because, then, therefore

First, next, then, in conclusion, and finally are examples of the fourth type,

temporal conjunctions, used to express relations in time

In summary, grammatical cohesive devices (grammatical cohesion) refer

to the logical and structural rules that govern the composition of clauses, phrases

and words in any natural language and the following table clarifies them in

detail

Table 2.1 The summary of grammatical cohesion

GRAMMATICAL COHESION

bal

Nominal Additive

Existential Possessive One /

ones, the same, so

Do, have

My sisters are very kind

Both are

willing to help other people if they have difficulties

And, and also, nor, or, or else, furthermore,

by the way, in other words, likewise, on the other hand, thus

I, you, we,

he, she, it,

they, one

My / mine, your / yours, our / ours, his, her / hers, its, their / theirs, one‟s

This / that, these / those,

here / there, now, then,

Have A: Have you been working?

B: Yes, I have

Yet, though, only, but, however, at least, in fact,

on the contrary, I mean, in any case

Definite article Clausal Clausal Causal

only set three places? Paul‟s staying for dinner, isn‟t he?

B: Is he? He didn‟t tell me

So, then, therefore, because, otherwise

2.2 Related previous studies

2.2.1 In Vietnam

Before the thesis, there seems to be little or no research on students‟

ability in using GCDs in oral discourse or OPs in Vietnam

Nguyen Thi Van Ha‟s research is the most remarkable The study “A

study of oral presentation difficulties of second-year English majors of Phuong

Dong University in the speaking lessons and solutions” was published in 2007 In

an attempt to do the survey research, the researcher utilizes questionnaires with

62 second-year English-majored participants at Phuong Dong University Most

of the students are twenty years old, except for two students who are twenty-two

since they failed in the previous university entrance examinations However,

these students‟ English proficiencies are different, the main cause of which may

be their different origins from the countryside (32 students) to the town (19

students) and big cities like Hai Phong, Thanh Hoa, Nam Dinh and Ha Noi (11

students)

In the study, there are some various valuable contributions to other theses

First of all, it discovers that the students have trouble in the organization of their

presentations They do not know how to highlight the development of the

presentations, for example, I’ll develop 3 main parts First, I will give you

the…… Second, …… This means that they have difficulties in using

conjunction Another challenge for her students is the appropriate usage of

vocabulary and structures Fifty-seven students have obstacles to this problem

whereas only five are able to use it This proves ninety-two percent are not able

to use vocabulary and structures in the right way A few students (8%) are able to

smoothly apply it From then on, the researcher recommends some practical

solutions for enhancing these students‟ oral presentations

Beside her positive contributions, some flaws of the study are clearly

recognized Firstly, because her thesis focuses on “oral presentation difficulties

of second-year English majors of Phuong Dong University in the speaking

lessons and solutions”, the findings should be related to this problem In spite of

the fact that she pays attention to the ability of the students in using grammar,

structure, and vocabulary, her shortcomings are lack of analyzing the students‟

structural or grammatical errors She just concentrates on the overview

Secondly, she applies questionnaires (Qs) in her research surveys This

technique would be more convincing if she combined questionnaires to persuade

the readers Some students may not be willing to answer the questions Bernard

(1994) illustrates that the students might not want to show the information or

they might think that they will not have some advantages from responding,

perhaps even be penalized by giving their real view of point

With some shortcomings in her research, in my thesis, I try to fill and

analyze which GCDs the students are good at or weak so that the students are

well prepared for their OPs In addition, quantitative research with experimental

research design is used in my thesis so as to make more reliable

2.2.2 In foreign countries

Not only Vietnamese researchers explore the students‟ ability in using

GCDs in OPs but also many foreign researchers do

For example, Alireza (2015) investigates “Patterns of Cohesion in Class

Presentations by Native Speakers of English Mobin Motamed” In his research,

some English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners avoid speaking and do not

participate in class presentations because they are afraid of not being cohesive in

speaking In coping with such a problem, some crucial solutions of using the

patterns of cohesion in speaking are required to teach the learners of English how

to be cohesive in speaking An appropriate task in this regard was studying and

analyzing native contexts The interpretation could be taken from exploring some

class presentations that occur in an English native context Thus, this study aimed

to examine the cohesive patterns used by native speakers of English in 8 class

presentations which are taken from Michigan Corpus of Academic Spoken

English (MICASE) The analysis begins with the collection of the data, which is

the transcription of the class presentations Then, the patterns of cohesion,

reference, conjunction, ellipsis and substitution are identified After tabulating

the findings, they are discussed to see how native speakers of English use these

patterns of cohesion in making their speaking more textual in interaction The

findings show that the native speakers of English in class presentations

frequently used reference, conjunctions, and ellipsis, and they rarely use

substitutions in the class presentations The findings could be taken out to act as a

model to guide EFL students to use these patterns to be more cohesive in their

class presentations Furthermore, this research might be more innovative if the

participants are non – native speakers

Another noteworthy work in this field is conducted by Sue and Tammy

(2016) They study “Oral Academic Discourse Socialization of an ESL Chinese

Student: Cohesive Device Use” Data sources for their research include video

transcripts of one participant, Haidong, who was a PhD student studying physics

at a university in the American Midwest, and who had been in the United States

for two years at the time of the study His four presentations presented in the

study were collected from an oral English proficiency test offered at the

university His four time presentations began in September 2007, December

2007, March 2008 and September 2008 The topics Haidong presented in four

times are the same or similar topics: The discovery of Newton‟s Law / the

discovery of Newton‟s law of universal gravitation Sue and Tammy (2016)

show the result after exploring Haidong‟s ability in using cohesive devices He is

able to use references, lexical cohesion and conjunctions well However, he has

difficulties in using substitution because he only uses it once Amazingly,

Haidong is unable to utilize ellipsis In fact, this research is fully justified by its

design Moreover, the participant in this study is the non native speaker who

considers English as a foreign language This helps to recognize and evaluate the

participant‟s competence in using cohesive devices clearly and how to improve

the weak devices Nevertheless, this study also has some limitations First, there

is only one participant for the research He is a PhD whose proficiency of English

is rather good This cannot evaluate accurately the ability of students in general

in using cohesive devices Meanwhile, there are more participants in my study

than theirs and my students‟ proficiency of English is not as good as Haidong

Another research that plays an important role in my thesis is conducted by

Ratnasari (2016) This research is conducted to investigate the use of cohesive

devices in the speech The aims of this research are to identify the types of

cohesive devices used in the speech of students of speaking IV class and to

explain how the occurring types of the cohesive devices reflect the semantic

relation in the speech of speaking IV students in relation to their text clarity A

qualitative method is utilized in this research consisting of data reduction, data

display, and conclusion drawing The data is in the form of utterances which are

derived from the transcripts of the speech The primary instrument of the

research is the researcher herself and the secondary instruments are data sheets

The data is analyzed by categorizing, using the cohesion proposed by Halliday

and Hasan (1976) The results of this research show the most frequently used

cohesions in the speech are conjunction, reference, and lexical reiteration,

whereas the usage of ellipsis, substitution, and lexical collocation is the least

2.2.3 Gap of the related studies

From the information above, it has been suggested that these works play

an important part for discovering students‟ ability in using GCDs in OPs

However, one of the major drawbacks to exploit this literature review is that

research has tended to focus on writing (Chanawongsa, 1986; Chen, 2008; Ong,

2011; Yang & Sun, 2012; Rahman, 2013) rather than speaking, especially OPs

As can be seen, OPs are the best combination of written and spoken discourse However, very little is known about GCDs in OPs both in Vietnam (Nguyen Thi

Van Ha, 2007) and overseas (Alizera, 2015; Sue & Tammy, 2016; Ratnasari,

2016)

Moreover, in Vietnam context, the response of students‟ ability in using

GCDs in OPs is not fully understood Nguyen Thi Van Ha (2007) fails to fully

define what reference, substitution and ellipsis are The study makes no attempt

to explain the meaning of these key terms and analyse how well the students in

the third year majoring in English apply these useful devices This means the

nature of GCDs in OPs remains unclear except conjunction Meanwhile, my

study makes a major contribution to research on GCDs in OPs by demonstrating

the convincing and reliable data in this field as well as providing clear working

definitions about GCDs

Additionally, in oversea context, recently there has been little discussion

about students‟ ability in using English GCDs in OPs There are three studies as

mentioned above Despite the fact that these researchers make efforts to

investigate the ability of students in using GCDs in OPs, their subjects were

mainly students in universities, colleges or PhD, or the students whose English

was considered as a second language or native language This research

concentrates on the students who are at high schools and their English language

is known as a foreign language The learners study it as a compulsory subject at

school This is a new point in this study Therefore, this study it is hoped will

contribute to the field of GCDs in OPs

Up to now, there is little or no research in Vietnam as well as in foreign

countries on using GCDs that makes students‟ OPs better in secondary

education When analyzing the elements to make OPs successful, other

researchers concentrate much on students‟ performances such as voice, pacing,

body language, preparation, pronunciation, communicative force and audience

participation Meanwhile in discourse, it is undeniable that cohesive devices play

an important role (Halliday & Hasan, 1976 et al.) These researchers consider

less OPs as a discourse Accordingly, they do not concentrate much on cohesive

devices

In conclusion, the present study makes several noteworthy contributions to

linguistic area as well as teaching method In linguistic area, it is explored deeply

and persuasively in four criteria including reference, substitution, conjunction

and ellipsis Besides, in teaching method, it is a helpful reference for other

teachers to apply in teaching OPs These teachers can take advantage of

functional grammar of Halliday and Hasan (1976) to teach OPs effectively

Summary

To sum up, the chapter Literature Review has presented the studied results

of Vietnamese and foreign researchers about the relationship between GCDs and

OPs along with the definitions These findings add to a growing body of

literature on our understanding of GCDs and OPs They also play an integral part

for this thesis

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY

This chapter explains the method used in completing the study, giving

special emphasis to the analysis of data In the first section, the research design

and data gathering instruments are discussed The second section of the chapter

concerns the research sites - Dau Tieng High School, the grade 10 students and

the teachers at this school as well as the population The third section clarifies the

data collection procedures and data analysis Lastly, ethical consideration is

mentioned

3.1 Research design and data gathering instruments

3.1.1 Research design

The study design adopted in this research is quantitative method with

correlational, experimental and descriptive analysis Creswell (1994) defines

quantitative research as the type which is clarifying phenomena by gathering numerical examined using mathematically based methods (in particular

statistics) Quantitative data is useful to establish correlations between given

variables and outcomes Such data should permit others to certify original results

by independently repeating the analysis (Dudwick, N., Kuehnast, K., Jones, V

N., and Woolcock, M., 2006)

Also, a case study is also applied in this method A case study (ACS) is

defined as an intensive, holistic description and analysis of a single unit

(Merriam, 1998) In this study, ACS is chosen because of the following reasons

First of all, it allows a researcher to study phenomena in detail and in context,

particularly in situations where there are many more variables of interest than

there are observations (Yin, 2009) Secondly, it is more limited and more focused

(Griffe, 2012) Thirdly, it is good at answering how and why questions (Yin,

2000) Finally, a major strength of case study designs is its suitability for

small-scale research of the type often done by teachers (Nunan, 1992) One reason for

this may be that individual students, groups of students, and classes are really

made, so to speak, for use as case studies

3.1.2 Data gathering instruments

According to Griffee (2012), a data collection instrument (DCI) can be

defined as a means of collectingquantitative or qualitative data for analysis

Therefore, in this study, rubric scores, oral presentation tests, transcriptions, cell

phones, digital recorders and useful softwares such as SPSS 16 or Excel 2003,

are utilized by the English teaching staff to gather and analyze the data The

main purpose of these instruments is to exploit students‟ ability to use GCDs in

OPs Also, in the conclusions, some solutions are offered for the students‟

weaknesses

3.2 The research sites

3.2.1 Dau Tieng High School

Dau Tieng High School, which has been operated since 1970, is located in

a remote district in Binh Duong province However, it is well prepared with

modern types of equipment for studying For example, there are two labs for

teaching English, especially speaking and listening skills Most of the classrooms

have their own computer and projector to support teachers‟ teaching There are

900 students divided into 28 classes: 10 tenth-grade classes, nine eleventh-grade

classes, and nine twelfth-grade classes English is a compulsory subject at Dau

Tieng High School If students are the most important factor in the learning

process, teachers are the most integral one in the teaching process.There are eight

teachers in English Most of them are around 23 to 31 years of age The rest

ranks from 37 to 46 All of them obtained B.A, four earned C1while the others

have been trained to C1 Therefore, in general, they have good qualifications in

four skills, including reading, speaking, listening and writing Two most

remarkable characteristics of these teachers are energetic and devoted to

teaching However, some teachers are inexperienced and could be badly trained,

so they have faced many challenges in teaching English

3.2.2 The Grade 10 students at Dau Tieng High School

The majority of students are aged from 15 to 16 Most of them live near

the school but some live far away from school They come from different schools

in Dau Tieng District, so their competences in speaking skill have not been tested

yet Some are excellent, but the majority of the students do not meet the need of

English proficiency In the lower secondary school, they had few chances to

practice speaking skill Thus, it is one of the challenges for students and teachers

At first, the majority of Grade 10 students were not used to the teachers‟ way of

instruction at Dau Tieng High School, and they got some troubles to present OPs

in front of the class However, after studying English speech for one month at

Dau Tieng High School, they showed some improvements They are willing to

give a speech in front of their classmates and the speech content is persuasive

enough to attract their friends That is the reason why I choose the Grade 10

students to investigate their ability to use GCDs in OPs

3.2.3 Population

The study was conducted in Grade 10 at Dau Tieng High School The

number of students of this school is 320 with about eighty teachers (eight

teachers in English language) Forty four students from two classes of grade 10

of mine voluntarily took part in my experiments, and all these students were

from 15 to 16 years old

3.3 Data collection procedures and data analysis

Data analysis is the process by which the researcher interprets the data

collected from the oral presentation tests They were quantitatively analyzed and presented in tables and charts

The data collection started at the end of September 2016 to the middle of

March 2017, approximately for five months The participants were the students

in the researcher‟s two classes The following steps are followed to accomplish

the purpose of the study during the research process

First, the researcher chose two Grade 10 classes with 44 students for the

research After that, the students are divided into two groups: the control group

and the experimental one at random Each group consists of twenty-two students

Three experiments are conducted Before conducting the three

experiments, the researcher explains the benefits of taking part in the research

Firstly, these students get some more knowledge about speaking skill, especially

OPs Next, they are able to use GCDs in OPs smoothly and effectively After

finishing recording three tests, the researcher thanks their students for

contributing to the study In addition, some contests are regularly held for these

students such as “An English Speaking Contest” with the aims of improving their

level of English proficiency, especially in OPs

3.4 Ethical considerations

Ethical considerations can be specified as one of the most important parts

of this research because of the following reasons First of all, to protect the

participants in this study, prior to the 44 students participating in the research,

they completed a form of consent, as Miles and Huberman (1994, p.291) state

that “Weak consent usually leads to poorer data: Respondents will try to protect

themselves in a mistrusted relationship, or one formed with the researcher by

superiors only” Secondly, these 44 students have voluntarily joined this study

Last but not least, creating and cultivating trust with participants is crucial

(Sarah, 2013) Therefore, the researcher endeavors to secure research data (for

example, by storing them in locked offices or on password-protected websites)

and strip them of identifiers before sharing them with co-researchers, assistants,

readers, or audience members

In summary, this chapter uses quantitative method with correlational

experiments and descriptive analysis to investigate the Grade 10 students‟ ability

to use GCDs in OPs Thanks to three experiments above, they have dealt with the

two research questions (see in detail in chapter I) and made the analysis more

convincing Also, this is what the researcher has expected in this study

CHAPTER 4: DATA ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION

4.1 Experiment 1

4.1.1 Purpose of the study

In order to find which GCDs the grade 10 students are able to use in their

OPs and response to the first research question (What kinds of grammatical

cohesive devices do the grade 10 students at Dau Tieng High School use in Oral

Presentations?), the experiment 1 was conducted

4.1.2 Research site, samples and rubric

These 44 students voluntarilytook part in the speaking test so as to check

their usage of grammatical cohesive The topic for this oral test is “Describing a

film you like” After listening to these students‟ presentations, the teacher

analyzed which GCDs the students were able or unable to use when they

presented their topic based on the definitions of Halliday and Hasan (1976) and

Brown & Yule (1983) about GCDs such as reference, conjunction, ellipsis and

substitution

The definition of GCDs of Halliday and Hassan and Hasan (1976) is on

the basis of the rubric to analyze the students‟ ability in using GCDs

4.1.3 Findings and discussion

4.1.3.1 Analysis of reference

In terms of reference, it is a word used to refer to the words, phrases or

sentences, which are used to replace those words, phrases or sentences (Halliday

and Hasan, 1976) Two kinds of reference are exophora or situational reference

(referring to a thing independently of the context of situation) and endophora or

textual (referring to a thing as identified in the surrounding text)

Table 4.1 The students’ ability in using reference

Frequency Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative Percent

Of the 44 students who were asked their OPs about “Describing a film you like”,

it was amazing that all of them were capable of using reference Reference is the

easiest device to use in GCDs In any OPs, students are required to use reference

to make their OPs cohesive and coherent Take, for instance, in student A‟s

presentation, he said “All of my films I have ever seen, the one I like best is

because the main character of the film who has something in his life is

the same as me This film tells the story of the boy who has a great family and a

number of friends but he always feels alone” In his oral presentation, he used

reference with many functions such as personal ( I- me – my; he – his – the boy –

the main character), demonstrative (this), definite article (the) or comparative

(the same as) Other students were able to take advantage of references with the

same frequency This proves that these students are capable of using reference

4.1.3.2 Analysis of conjunction

According to Halliday and Hasan (1976), conjunction and conjunctive

adverb as cohesive devices in OPs are absolutely important It binds one sentence

with another sentence In OPs, there are many words used in this way, such as

first of all, second, last, and, so, therefore, but, however and etc Table 4.2

contains descriptive statistics for using conjunction in OPs

Table 4.2 The students’ ability in using conjunction

Frequency Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative Percent

From the information described in the table, it can be seen that all 44

students were good at using conjunction to illustrate and clarify their OPs so that

the audiencewere convinced The types of conjunctions which were frequently

used in their OPs were additive (and, furthermore, thus), causal (because, so,

then, therefore), and temporal such as “then, next, first, in conclusion”

Sometimes these students used adversative conjunctions such as “but, yet,

however” to make the ideas more impressive and interesting For example, in

student B‟s oral presentation, she presented “My hobby is watching films There

are many kinds of films but I like love story films Titanic is the one I like best

Titanic is a tragic love story film It is based on a true story of Titanic The main

characters are Jack and Rose This is the best movie I have ever watched I

recommend that everyone should watch this movie In conclusion, I think that

my hobby is very useful and it helps to relax my mind” In her oral speech, she

concentrated on using many types of conjunctions such as additive (and),

temporal (in conclusion) and adversative (but) Similarly, every student in the

experiment used conjunction to make their OP clear and believable

4.1.3.3 Analysis of substitution

In terms of substitution, it is a relation within the text body (Halliday and

Hasan, 1976) A substitute is a sort of counter which is used in place of the

repetition of a particular item Table 4.3 details the data on the students‟ ability in

using substitution

Table 4.3 The students’ ability in using substitution

Frequency Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative Percent

Of the 44 students in the OPs, over sixty percent of those (27 students)

used substitution in their OPs This example in OPs can illustrate without a

doubt In student C‟s speech, she presented “My favorite film is cartoon “Tom

and Jerry” Tom is a cat with blue and white color He keeps the house His job is

chasing Jerry day by day Somebody thinks that Tom and Jerry hate each other

but I don’t.” In this case, the student used substitution with the function of

verbal one Substitution is used in this speech as demonstrated below Another

example used by another student demonstrates a different function of substitution

like “Of all the films I have seen, “Harry Potter” is the one I like best.” This oral

presentation used nominal substitution as the word “film” is replaced by the

word “one” However, over one third of the students making their OPs were

unable to use substitution as they did not pay attention to this device At that

time, the students focused much on their OPs‟ content as well as the

pronunciation (intonnation and stress), because, as mentioned in chapter 2

(Literature Review), five important elements in OPs help the students succeed

when making an OP One more important reason is that they did not know much

about substitution due to its unpopularity

4.1.3.4 Analysis of ellipsis

Halliday and Hasan (1976) define ellipsis as substitution of zero It

involves “ a deletion of a word, phrase or clause”

Table 4.4 The students’ ability in using ellipsis

Frequency Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative Percent

As shown in table 4.4, only 3 students (6.8 percent) were capable of using

ellipsis in their OPs The main reasons are the unpopularity of this device in the

mother tongue as well as the lack of their teachers‟ instruction When making

OPs, these students pay much attention to the five important elements of oral

presentation: rate, opening, transitions, conclusion and length Very few students

were aware of the importance of using ellipsis or making their OPs impressive

This is an example of successfully using ellipsis in one student‟s own oral

presentation: “ Of all my films I‟ve seen, the one I like best is because

the main character of the film who has something in his life is the same as me

This film talks about the boy who has a great family and a number of friends but

he always feels alone because he doesn‟t trust anyone (and) although his friends

trust him really well One day, he met a girl who had stolen his wallet before He

told the girl “That‟s my wallet” The girl was so nervous and she asked him if he

wanted to tell the police “Of course”, the boy answered “I will” but he didn‟t do

that After all, they were friends……” In this speech, this student used verbal

ellipsis (will = I will tell the police) and clausal one (that = I will tell the police)

More importantly, he paid much attention to the intonation (rising intonation) to

make his oral presentation striking

“2” means “able to use”

“1” means “unable to use”

From four tables (table 4.1, 4.2, 4.3 and 4.4) as well as table 4.5, it is

shown that these students are able to use GCDs This proves that their language

use, their grammar structures as well as their organization are rather good

Furthermore, grammar structures are one of the parts of GCDs For instance, in

order to make better organization in OPs, there must be logically sequenced and

adequate support of ideas Therefore, the students must use conjunctions such as

additive (and, also, moreover, furthermore, etc), adversative (but, although,

however, etc), causal (so, because, therefore, etc) or temporal (first, second, third,

etc) Besides, it is necessary for the students to use many kinds of references,

such as “I… my, the film….it, my friend….she, etc” Furthermore, in some good

OPs, the students take advantage of ellipsis and substitution well although they

do not recognize the good cohesive devices they use For example, in student F‟s

oral presentation, he combined many cohesive devices such as reference,

conjunction and substitution He said “Of all the films I have seen, Descendants

of the Sun is the one I like best (substitution: films – one) It is a love story film

(reference: Descendants of the Sun – It) It was produced in _ by _

(reference: Descendants of the Sun – It) It is about the love of _ and

(conjunction: and) The main characters are and _

(conjunction: and) This is a love story very cute (reference: this) At home, I

watch films in my free time after I finish my homework (reference : I – my,

conjunction: after) I really like films and my sister does (substitution: verbal

like – does) I watch films although I finish my homework very late

(conjunction: adversative although, reference: I- my) However, I only like

and this film is more wonderful than other films (reference: this,

conjunction: and, however)

In conclusion, these students are able to use GCDS in their OPs in some

extent and this is also the answer for the first research question Some GCDs

which these students are capable of using well are reference and conjunction

Meanwhile, substitutions are the ones these students sometimes use to make their

OPs special and impressive However, ellipsis is the grammatical cohesive

device which is the most difficult for them to use

4.2 Experiment 2

4.2.1 Purpose of the study

Thanks to the result of the experiment 1, there are two continuous tests in

the oral examination to examine if some GCDs are complicated for the students

to use and this is also the aim of the experiment 2 and 3 After finishing these

experiments, the author can answer the second research question, “How can the

grade 10 students at Dau Tieng High School improve the grammatical cohesive

devices in Oral Presentations?”

4.2.2 Research site, samples and rubric

At this time, 44 students are divided into two groups, namely the control

group A1 and the experimental group A2 In the experimental group, all

academic definitions about GCDs and the elements to be involved in

grammatical cohesive (reference, types of reference, substitution, ellipsis and

conjunction) in using OPs and some structures to present a topic are instructed

carefully However, there is no clarification about these terms for the control

group

Then the students in both groups are required to present a topic about “my

hobby” with one condition, that they have to use four devices including

reference, substitution, conjunction and ellipsis in their OPs After that, their OPs

are recorded and transcribed in order to so that the teachers analyze and give

marks

4.2.3 Findings and discussion

4.2.3.1 Analysis of reference

Table 4.6.The students’ ability in using reference (see figure 4.1)

Experimental group (A2) Control group (A1)

Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

Figure 4.1 The students’ ability in using reference

Table 4.6 shows the percentage of students‟ ability in using reference in

experimental and control group are equal with 100% This can be explained that,

in each oral presentation, reference is the easiest and most useful device which

helps the presenters avoid repeating the word(s) many times and create an

effective oral presentation This is especially seen in student A‟s presentation in

experimental group, he said “My hobby is reading I read uh…uh….storybook,

magazines, newspapers and any kinds of material that I find interesting”

Similarly, in student B‟s presentation in the control one, she said “One of my

hobby is listening to music It started when I was in grade 6 I wanted to improve

my listening skill” Those students are able to use reference in the simplest way

Because of the same level of using reference in the speaking test, their Mean,

Median and Mode are also equivalent (as see table 4.7)

Table 4.7 The statistics of two groups in using reference

Reference (A1) Reference (A2)

Ability to use Inability to use

4.2.3.2 Analysis of conjunction

Table 4.8 The students’ ability in using conjunction (see figure 4.2)

Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

Figure 4.2 The students’ ability in using conjunction

Table 4.6 contains descriptive statistics for using conjunction in OPs

Based on table 4.6, there are 22 cases of this sub-type in the experimental group

and the same number in the control one The results are amazing The students in

both groups are excellent at using conjunction at 100% with the view to making

their OPs smooth and logical

Student C (experimental group): I like listening to music for the following

reasons Firstly, it entertains me and helps to relax Secondly, I listen to English

music so I can improve my English listening skills Last but not least, listening

to music makes me love my life

Student D (control group): One of my hobbies is listening to music This

is my hobby because music is very interesting My hobby started when I was

Ability to use Inability to use