VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES FALCUTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES TONG THI MY LIEN INVESTIGATING ORAL PARTICIPATION IN IN-CLASS GROUP WORK BY FIRST-YEAR STUDENTS AT ENGLISH DEPARTMENT, UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES, VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI NGHIEN CUU VIEC THAM GIA NOI TRONG HOAT DONG NHOM TREN LOP CUA SINH VIEN NAM THU NHAT TAI KHOA ANH, DAI HOC NGOAI NGU DHQG HA N O I M.A Combined Program Thesis Field: English Language Teaching Methodology Code: 60-14-10 Supervisor: Ms Dinh Hai Yen (M.A.) HANOI-2010 IV TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Retention j Acknowledgements ii Abstract iii Table of contents iv List of abbreviations vii List of tables viii List of figures ix INTRODUCTION Problem statement and rationale Aims of the study Scope of the study Significance of the study Organization of the study DEVELOPMENT CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW 1.1 Definitions of key terms /./ / Group work -5 1.1.2 Participation 1.2 Overview of group work 1.2.1 Group organization L2.2 Benefits of group work 1.2.3 Problems oj group work 1.3 ESL/ EFL students' participation in group work 11 1.3.1 The importance ofESL/EFL students 'participation in group work // 1.3.2 Patterns of students 'participation in group work // 1.3.3 Students ' lack of participation in group work 12 1.4 Influential factors on ESL/EFL students' participation in in-class group work 13 1.4.1 Student-related factors 14 1.4.2 Pedagogy-related factors 15 1.4.3 Culture-related factors 16 1.5 Teachers' monitoring strategies to increase students" participation in group work 17 1.6 Justification for the research 18 CHAPTER 2: RESEARCH METHODS 2.1 Participants 20 2.2 Data collection methods 20 2.2.7 Questionnaires 21 2.2.2 Semi-structured intervicM's 22 2.2.3 Observations 23 2.3 Data collection procedures 23 2.4 Data analysis methods and procedures 25 CHAPTER 3: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION 3.1 Students' perceptions towards group work 26 3.2 Students' participation in in-class group work 32 3.3 Factors affecting students" participation m in-class group work 43 3.4 Teachers' monitoring strategies during group work 60 VI CONCLUSION Summary of the study 68 Pedagogical implications 69 Limitations of the study 73 Suggestions for further studies 73 REFERENCES APPENDICES VII LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ED: English Department EFL; English as a Foreign Language ELT: English Language Teaching ESL: English as a Second language ULIS: University of Languages and International Studies NNS: Non-native English Speaker NNSs: Non-native English Speakers NS: Native English Speaker NSs: Native English Speakers VNU: Vietnam National University Vlll LIST OF TABLES Table 3.1: Students' perceptions towards group work Table 3.2: Students' participation in in-class group work Table 3.3: Student-related factors Table 3.4: Pedagogy-related factors Table 3.5: Culture-related factors Table 3.6: Teachers' monitoring strategies during group work - Teacher application Table 3.7: Teachers' monitoring strategies during group work - Student preference Table 3.8: Teachers' observed monitoring strategies during group work IX LIST OF FIGURES Figure 3,1: Students' perceptions of group work's advantages Figure 3.2: Students' perceptions of group work's disadvantages Figure 3.3: Participation patterns in in-class group work Figure 3.4: Quality of ideas shared in in-class group work Figure 3.5: Participation imbalance in in-class group work Figure 3.6: Number of turns taken by different group members Figure 3.7: Amount of talking time of different group members Figure 3.8: Student-related factors Figure 3.9: Pedagogy-related factors Figure 3,10: Culture-related factors INTRODUCTION PROBLEM STATEMENT AND RATIONALE Group work has been widely believed to offer various advantages such as enhancing students' interaction, generating a supportive atmosphere, creating chances to use the target language and promoting learner autonomy (Long & Porter, 1985: Brown, 2001) Thus, it has blossomed in English as a Second Language (ESL) and English as a Foreign Language (EFL) classrooms The emphasis on group activities is particularly noteworthy in Vietnamese English Language Teaching (ELT) setting where students are EFL learners and have few opportunities to use English in daily life (Vo, 2004) Nonetheless, the effectiveness of group work has been reconsidered closely since Tickoo (1991, p.53) left the open question "/.v group work a pedagogic universal or a partial remedy'^" after his experiment comparing the success of a group-work class with a teacher-directed one Since then, the need to examine how group-work theory works in practice has rapidly emerged Addressing this issue, in the world of language teaching, various studies such as those by Jones (1995), Zhenhui (2001), Martine (2003), Yuenfeng (2005), and Chen (2004) were conducted to discover what actually happened when implementing group activities in language classrooms However, deep empirical investigations in the sub-area of students' participation and influential factors on their participation in group work were few in number - Martine (2003) and Yuenfeng (2005) Pitifully, those merely explored learners' oral participation level measured by the number of turns taken and the amount of talking time Thus, a more comprehensive evaluation of their participation would be highly appreciated in the research field In addition, although Martine (2003) discovered many possible influential elements, it was targeted at mixed-culture groups of native-English-speaker (NS) and non-native-Englishspeaker (NNS) postgraduate students, rather than single-culture groups of tertiar> EFL learners, in the meantime, Yuenfeng (2005) examined tertian EFL learners in singleculture groups, but it only focused on two factors, namely task t>pes and teacher roles Furthermore, all of the related studies (Martine, 2003; Yuenfeng, 2005; Melles, 2004; Jones, 1995) simply based on the qualitative methods Accordingly, in those investigations, there might be inevitably potential limitations of relying on a single approach (Nunan, 1992) With regard to Vietnam's ELT context, the aforementioned issue has not been thoroughly investigated despite the existence of a few related studies such as the one by Vo (2004) This means thorough exploration into EFL students' oral participation and influential factors in single-culture group work remain a gap The urgency to research into the discussed matter becomes significant, when it comes to the ELT context of University of Languages and International Studies, Vietnam National University (ULIS, VNU) Although group work is a familiar ELT method at English Department (ED), it is considerably new for the majority of freshmen, who have had little previous group-learning experience in high school Consequently, it has inevitably posed huge challenges for both teachers and students at this site The study entitled '"investigating oral participation in in-class group work by first-year EFL students at ED, VLISy VNlf^ was conducted as an attempt to examine the perceptions of first-year EFL learners at ULIS, VNU towards group work, investigate their participation level and quality in group work, find out possible influential factors on their participation, and pinpoint teachers' monitoring strategies to motivate students to participate in group activities HopefulK, this research, focusing on single-culture groups of Vietnamese EFL students at tertiary level, could narrow the abovementioned research gaps and bring new perspectives to the field AIMS OF THE STUDY The purpose of this study was to investigate the oral participation of first-year EFL students at ULIS, VNU in in-class group work Specifically, it addressed the following research questions: / What first-year EFL students at ULIS, VNU think about group work? How are those students ' level and quality of oral participation in in-class group work? What factors affect those students ' oral participation in in-class group work? Which monitoring strategies have EFL teachers at the research site applied to increase the students* oral participation in in-class group work'^ Which ones are preferred by the students? From the findings, the researcher would recommend several pedagogical implications to motivate and balance the oral participation of first-year EFL students at ULIS, VNU in group work, eliminate negative influential factors on their participation, and boost positive ones SCOPE OF THE STUDY Due to time constraints, instead of aiming at group activities in general, the study focused on those conducted within classroom contexts Besides, the study merely examined the oral participation of EFL students rather than both verbal and non-verbal aspects Moreover, it was carried out with just a sample of 100 first-year EFL students and five teachers of English at ED at ULIS, VNU SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY Although the study was conducted on a small scale with a particular group of first-year EFL students at ULIS, VNU, the researcher hoped that its findings could be of great significance Specifically, it would contribute to the existing knowledge in the field concerning group work, students' participation in group work, infiuential factors on their participation, and teachers' strategies to motivate students to participate Moreover, it could help to raise awareness of first-year EFL students at ULIS, as well as EFL learners about the problems in the participation of their peers in in-class group work and certain elements affecting their participation It could also assist teachers of English to recognize what encourage or discourage a number of their students from participating in group activities so that the\ could adjust their teaching methods to motivate their students in language learning Finally, it would propose several useftil recommendations for teachers XI person prepare the talk Thus the teacher has to something to make them know that anyone can be called, so they all feel mvolved m the discussion 4, Which monitoring strategies have you applied to increase students' participation in in-class group work? Do you think your students like those strategies? I always set the time limit very clearly before the discussion, and remind the students when there are only five and two minutes left I believe this will help them to monitor their time bener and have better performance rather than giving them plenty of time but they could not make use of it Teacher (T5): L In your opinion, what your students think of group work? In my opinion, first-year students simply think that group work means working with more than t^\'o other students in the class to complete one task I don't think they can fully perceive the importance of partnership or being fair in workload, etc How you evaluate your students' level and quality of participation in in-class group work? The level of participation also depends on the topic of the group work For example, if students are asked to tell others about an event in the past (a dream), or an unforgettable experience, the students are not interested in this because those topics are very personal Thus, onl\ those who realK has an exciting experience would speak Besides, their English competence is not good enough to impress others with their emotion and feelings In other words, they may find their experience interesting but others not think so, which means the group work is boring Therefore I only ask Ss to work in group to discuss some social issues which are very objective and anyone has something to share While discussing, they tend to avoid the use of complicated words and simplif\ their expressions so that everyone can understand What you think affects your students* participation in in-class group work? Their command of English is not good enough for them to discuss in English; therefore, they find it hard and prefer to this task individually Which monitoring strategies have you applied to increase students' participation in in-class group work? Do you think your students like those strategies? often think of different ways to mix students into groups such as using games, so they have chances to work with many students I think my students love my strategies XII APPENDIX 5: TRANSCRIPTS OF TEACHER INTERVIEWS (SCHEDULE 2) Teacher I (Tl): Ihe^elonZ^a^^^^^ ' ' ' " ^ ^ " ' ' ' ' ^ " "'"'' ' ' " ' ' ' ' ^ ^//^^rr/c/pa^/^;, in the group discussion in Today I see that many tended to keep silent in groups They didn't want or didn't know how to contnbute^Additionally, some who were better at speaking English tended to dominate the group activities They made the others become even more silent " Which monitoring strategies did you apply to increase students' participation in the group activity? Do you think your students liked those strategies? Today, I intervened a lot by going to each group to remind Ss to stay focused on the task but I think this was not favored by the students I also said something to encourage less active members to speak and participated in the discussion by suggesting several ideas For these two strategies, I believe that the students loved them Teacher (T2): L How you evaluate your students' level and quality of participation in the group discussion in the lesson today? For groups that were quick at working out the answer to the questions and had some spare time, they turned to discuss something else which is not related to the topic of the task Which monitoring strategies did you apply to increase students * participation in the group activity? Do you think your students liked those strategies? Two minutes before the presentation of each group I move from group to group and make students in one group choose a piece of paper which indicates whether she has to perfbnn or not B\ that wa> students not know who is going to be called, and all of them have to prepare thoroughly Teacher (T3): / How you evaluate your students' level and quality of participation in the group discussion in the lesson today? Some students did not participate in the discussion, especially the shy and weak ones while some were too domineering and did not give their friends the chance to talk Which monitoring strategies did you apply to increase students' participation in the group activity? Do you think your students liked those strategies? Today, I went to each group and raised some ideas for the group to think, which was highly appreciated by the students Teacher (T4): L How you evaluate your students ' level and quality of participation in the group discussion in the lesson today? Some students who were good at speaking tended to speak more than those who were a bit sh> and who were not really confident about their speaking skills 1-1 „r,nh< inrrease students' / participation in the K'^'^'P Which monitoring slrategws did you apply totnuic nast i activity? Do vou think your students liked those strategws , u u c oiu HkriKii nr not set I moved around and see whether the Ss really discuss or not I sei ithe time limit ven clearly before the discussion, and reminded the students when there are only five and two minutes left XIII Teacher (TS): L How you evaluate your students' level and quality of participation in the group discussion in the lesson today? While discussing, they tended to avoid the use of complicated words and simplify their expressions so that everyone could understand Which monitoring strategies did you apply to increase students' participation in the group activity? Do you think your students liked those strategies? I only asked Ss to work in group to discuss some social issues which were very objective and anyone had something to share XIV APPENDIX 6: TEACHER INTERVIEW SCHEDULES Teacher interview schedule 1 In your opinion, what your students think of group work? How you evaluate your students' level and quality of participation in in-class group work? What you think affects your students' participation in in-class group work? Which monitoring strategies have you applied to increase students' participation in in-class group work? Do you think your students like those strategies? Teacher interview schedule How you evaluate your students' level and quality of participation in the group discussion in the lesson today? Which monitoring strategies did you apply to increase students' participation in the group activity? Do you think your students liked those strategies? XV APPENDIX 7: STUDENT INTERVIEW SCHEDULES Student interview schedule 1 What you think of group work? In general, how you evaluate your level and quality of participation in in-class group work in comparison with others? What has affected your participation in in-class group work? Student interview schedule How you evaluate your level and quality of participation in the group discussion in the lesson today? What affected your participation in the group activity? XVI Date of observation: APPENDIX 8: OBSERVATION SCHEME Time: Duration of group work: Class: Group work observation Put a dash (/) for each turn Group members Number of turns taken Amount of talking time Member I Member Member Member Member Teacher' monitoring strategies Put a tick (/) when the teacher uses that strategy No Monitoring strategies Standing at the front or the side of the class to observe groups Moving around to observe groups Keeping distance from groups for the beginning stage of the activity for them to work by themselves Moving around to remind if groups not stay focused on the task Moving around to remind any dominant speakers to share turns w ith others Moving around to encourage any shy members to speak Assigning further tasks for those who have finished earlier Providing language help when students need Correcting students' mistakes made immediately during group work 10 Taking notes of students' mistakes made in groups for later correction 11 Trving to correct all students' mistakes made in groups Teacher application ^ r C > 1/1 E o - ^ C/) ^ (U c CJ a U > t/1 O) ^ ^ o O H U »- I- ^ > J s: o D CO b '-5 O Z o z u CO S; a a C cd C a; Q < o o z E ^ c2 ^ c ^ c O H C/5 ^ > Vr z ^ CO s:5 E a E P 4^ 2> c CO c o ^ a> -Q O o & CO C O O 4> ^ u- (/i cr .s s: i^ C E E s ^ ^ ^' SI *" a> c a> ^ O b O -— cd ^ C > E ^ -S e ji o C O Q> O 1- -O c 11^ ^ C a , J^l ? 1^ -1 u- — ••—• O ^ C — < > O ^ o a ^ > ^ ^ U a #H — -^ ^ ^ ^ ^ O ^ • ^ t/: T: P Qc ::::D L ^ O c» ^ "^ < ct: o w ^^ uo ^ x ^ I- IIIMI e c H C/5 X o ^^ r^.1 - ^ ^ • - — ^ c E £ t - ^ _^ C - E L- ^ f- — ^ C i>l = ^ :::i ^ B, ^ ^ — ^ > ^ ;>: C O g a :^ ; c: ^ c- ''^ fe C C T3 '^ ri C " ^ O -C — t > £ »- ' - a ^ ^ C= a5i n_ *" • a tj ^ ^ «« rt i J c ? rriirrrr E 4> dJ =d t- — • C — 'c3 r" ' •*^ o £ "T; V; E "^fj *;: UJ - b ^ ?^ ^ H • ^ ^J ^ i sDl E : ^ •5 i -^ -c ' -5 CO > a> r t O ã^ iĐ ^Az ;^ O E E lity C/5 - Group work refers to' oral activities done in smaL OS ^ 15 ^ C/l s a - Z — < •5 c/) ^ a c ' £ ^ "5 z ^ o b — •h: •4—• > ~ C/i ideas " (^ * ~ •s n ^ ^ ^ ^ "O (L> o z 0£ •S a "ts oi O o • >> £ i S ^5 a D-o a a "^ Z — rvj m -^ »n N r- 00 O '^ 'C 0, L« Q T3 C CO < u CO T3 CO CO OJ O- cioi c co (^ CO Đ feb ã^3 CO s C OT CO X C CO C § > CO Cu CU O c o CU >^ "a> CO CO O CO O) Q u «—* (U (^ c o C (U (U •-• • * - E CO E I jc cu O "cO O z -I r^ r*^ OJ > o s grou Cj ^ ^ ^ c "i •5 :D J C O OD c c > CO c > _>j •O c c CO aol c c c o O U IT) c o o i> CO E E CO ">^ CO C/5 E a > C/5 VO r - > < ^^ CO ? c 00 ri H < H CO a > 0 k> 0 CO x: c -^ ^1 •fc .S- -^ ^ C c • -^ ^ ^.«_ ^- Vj ^ •^ :3 , < Sf3 H z a • ^ l ^ ^ ^ 0^ •i =i: < >* -rt ' • ^ ^ ^ **• -^ ,>^ ^ i ^3 2S • ^ z U -0 -s: k *ãã u < â GO -O s Cu CO co' CO GOl CJ OJ u CO uc • « : CO < lo C/3 CO c E 11) *••>• CO CO c %i ^ E c/: z z z -2i CO -O > C CO 4-' • CO CO a> -«—• a> > c t:: o c E CA; U CO CO CO O J (U (U to OJDi c C-) LO u O C9 CO a> cj o c -:-: _> ãã-ô -o o J 9J ^ < true S c C O CO (U c Of >•, C CO > k ^ to c o o - ^ o C/3 ^ CO o C ãô*# tr ;^ a; • ••.* a H k situ ation of in-c vT CO TD OJ CI _>J (U "3 0 the followir to o X) *cO CO cu X ) o o >^ -:^ c uo C T3 C C O ^ C3 So H Z u X) C/) H Of CO c CO < % -^ o U 2: J u (U O ^ Of CO CO Q c o CO 'C a o u a a < JZ CO ex C/3 U CO O u k o O o j j Oj inyo '> •5 'J\ ^ ^ ^ &< Q £ k- C H < '•J ^ ^ ^ ^ C / ^ -^ -S; -^ CO ^ ^- C, " •.• ' CO -C CO > Z u JZ < ^ — -^ *^i •^ *^ CO CL 1> a CO o j= u c CO ro o o a c o ^^ CO a fS CO E o o k C/3 O >^ a> QD e Z O k o c o "U o (U OJ o feb c o OJ k o CQ B o Z Oi O^ Oil lU kO) O) OJ 0^ CO X (N v-> ^ oo •o a OJ E ^ t: CO OJ Oj oo c o 1/3 oo IE cj o od E c ? c c k &0| ooi §1 £ C c (u El 00 c h k u c O O CO j CO ,k- I ^ [ CO I CO OOI * - CO - C E bto _C0 o o o > OJ c (A Q0|T3 c i a> •~ ' CO CO CO H < H •3 •3 o CO a > s? ^ C ^ H > > c "5 x : > CO i/j oq c 'u 00 c 0 CO oa 00 OJ t i '> c co; ^ 'Ei C Q ' I O CQ c CO CO OQ •o "o E o o CO I I C k OO 00 OJ (U CO o c a> c i (U ^ ^-< >^"eO X X -a (U ^X obi T3 -o a> O u c CJ X (U c c -2 tu O oo ti (/I k o X u CO 3 CO O CO k O a> O u c *•* o CO o in X CJ C4 o O O ko o > X c j CO O CO OO o c u c CO ,5 •5 X c CO c ctOl 001 c OO ooj a> ooi oo c E OX) ooi ,E c c C ooi OOI 15 c 15 15 c > OJOl u "5 CO E CO a> I CQ c C/5 CO CO a> CQ >^ CQ C CO u o (U t/) CO a> E OJDI E -a CO -o JZ ^^ X ^ >^ CO CO TD C C O 4^ o o o o Cu O o e CQ a> lO D > CO I— tu X u CO a> u O > a> "ob a> "co u £/) k