Rationale
There is no doubt that speaking plays an important role in the language learning process Hence, among the four language skills speaking is claimed to be at the heart of second language learning, (Egan 1999: 277) Moreover, Nunan (1999) states that success in learning a language is measured in terms of the ability to carry out a conversation in the language However, spoken language production is often considered one of the most difficult aspects of language learning (Brown & Yule,
1983) Pinter (2006) also sees that learning to speak is viewed as the greatest challenge for all language learners to truly grasp Thus, how to improve speaking proficiency for students seems to be a crucial question among instructors
A common comment drawn among ethnic minority students in Dien Bien context is that they are able to understand what they read and write although they sometimes may make mistakes in writing and understand a paragraph wrongly; yet they find arduous to express their feelings and ideas through oral language They like to speak in their mother tongue when they interact to their friends Also, minority learners feel afraid of making mistakes in English speaking so they often find hard to get enough experience with English in English class As a result, they fail to obtain speaking skills which lead to low marks in speaking
‘Teachers open the doors, but you must enter by yourself’ is an old Chinese proverb It seems true when the change in favor of learning and teaching placed importance on learner-centered approach rather than the teacher-centered one
Teachers provide their students with good opportunities to gain knowledge and learners know how to apply that knowledge to their own studying in order to be more successful Wenden and Rubin (1987) found that some learners were more successful than others since they use learning strategies more effectively
Furthermore, learning strategies are considered to be ― n extremely powerful le rning tool‖ (O‘M lley, Ch mot, Stewner-Manzanares, Kupper, and Russo, 1985:43) This ‗tool‘ is ble to help students over ome the problems they f e in their language learning journey Nonetheless, most of ethnic minority students often ignore appropriate strategies that they are guided by their teachers or rarely apply those strategies in their learning
There goes an old proverb which states: “Give a man a fish and he eats for a day Teach him how to fish and he eats for a lifetime‖ When applied to the language teaching and learning field, this proverb probably means that if students are provided with strategies, they will manage their own learning This suggests that using language learning strategies in learning process need to be encouraged
There has been a limitation in the number of studies on the second language learning of ethnic minority students in Vietnam Study by Tran Thi Phuong Hoa
(2011) focused on ethni minority students‘ beliefs about English language learning and the study by Le Ngoc Oanh (2009) investigated into differences of reading strategy use between Kinh and Thai students Until now, there has been one study carried out by Do Thi Anh Thu (2017) on learner autonomy of ethnic minority in Northwest region, Vietnam However, there have not been any studies which were conducted to discover and clarify strategies that were used by ethnic minority students in improving their speaking skills With high interest in this area, the author of this paper decided to do a research with the hope of finding out the speaking strategies used by successful learners, then, apply them to train unsuccessful learners to assist learners in developing their speaking skill As Rubin (1975:42) st tes th t ‗if we knew more bout wh t the "su essful le rners" did, we might be able to teach these strategies to poorer learners to enhance their su ess re ord‘.
Objectives of the study
Unsuccessful non-major ethnic minority students may find it troublesome to participate into speaking activities in classroom In order to improve their communicative ability, the search for learning strategies that are used by successful and unsuccessful non-major ethnic minority learners are required The objectives of this paper are to:
(1) explore the kinds of language learning strategies for developing
English speaking skill that successful and unsuccessful non-major ethnic minority students at Dien Bien teacher training college report that they use
(2) investigate the relationship ( if any) between successful and unsuccessful non-major ethnic minority students‘ oral English proficiency and their language learning strategies.
Research questions
To serve the above-mentioned objectives, the following questions will be dealt with:
1 What kinds of language learning strategies do successful and unsuccessful non-major ethnic minority students at Dien Bien teacher training college report that they use to develop English speaking skill?
2 To what extent is the language learning strategies related to successful and unsuccessful non-major ethnic minority students‘ oral English proficiency?
Methods of the study
The subjects for this study were the first-year non-major ethnic minority students at Dien Bien teacher training college A descriptive survey was conducted to achieve the objectives of the present research Data were collected through the analysis of the questionnaire and student interviews Then, they were compared, analyzed and synthesized both qualitatively and quantitatively.
Scope of the study
The current study is carried out among the first year non-major ethnic minority students who are classified as successful and unsuccessful Concerning the scope of the study, the following issues should be taken into consideration First, the focus of the investigation is on learning strategies which were used by ethnic minority students to develop their speaking skills Second, the study explores the relationship between their speaking learning strategies and their oral language proficiency.
Significance of the study
This study should be of potential interest to language learners who desire to have effective learning strategies for developing their English speaking skill to become successful learners Besides, the study clarifies learning strategies which were applied In addition, it helps learners see that learning strategies are effective language learning tools Moreover, important implications are discussed not only to r ise le ners‘ w reness of the use of spe king le rning str tegies but lso to help teacher encourage their students to use and share strategies with other students.
Organization of the study
The study is divided into three main parts: Introduction, Development and Conclusion
Part A is the Introduction which provides information about the rationale, purpose, research questions, methods, scope, significance and organization of the study
Part B is the Development which is sub-divided into three chapters
Chapter 1, Literature review, discusses the theoretical background in the light of which the research matters will be discussed
Chapter 2, Methodology of the research, describes the nuclear method used to investigate the research matters
Chapter 3, Findings and discussions, shows the results of the study and provides answers to the research questions
Part C is the Conclusion which summarizes the overall study and proposes some implications as well as suggests for other related studies
LITERATURE REVIEW
Language learning strategies
This section presents issues of language learning strategies in terms of definition and classification Besides, the differences between language learning strategies and language use strategies are pointed out briefly and clearly
1.1 1 Definitions of language learning strategies
Griffiths (2008:83) points out, ―the on ept of l ngu ge le rning str tegy h s been notoriously diffi ult to define.‖ Over the l st few de des, there are different definitions on language learning strategies provided by various researchers and scholars However, this thesis focuses on definitions by Rubin (1975), O‘M lley and Chamot (1990) and Oxford (1990)
As a pioneer in this field, Rubin (1975: 43) proposes that ‘the techniques or devices which a learner may use to acquire knowledge’ (cited in Giffiths, 2004:2)
O‘M lley nd Ch mot (1990:1) des ribe le rning str tegies s ‘special thoughts or behaviours that individuals use to help them comprehend, learn, or retain new information’ Slightly different from these two definitions, Oxford (1990:8) sees that language learning strategies are ‘specific actions taken by the learner to make learning easier, faster, more enjoyable , more self-directed, more effective, and more transferrable to new situations’ These definitions seem to draw the same characteristic: language learning strategies are what can assist learners in improving their knowledge to reach their language goal
According to Giffiths (2004), Rubin provides a very broad definition of learning strategies Therefore, Rubin‘s definition is too hard to cover
In O‘M lley nd Ch mot‘s definition, lthough it clearly presents the goals:
‗strategies are to help students achieve comprehension and learning new information‘ (Lan, 2005:17), it does not emphasize on aspects of language learning or solve problems faced in the language learning
Comp red with other definitions, Oxford‘s on ept is m rked to be one of the most comprehensive definitions (Lan, 2005:17) Oxford puts more focus on the aspects of learning and use of information, ‗as well as the changed nature of learning when learning is enhanced by strategies‘ (L n, 2005:17) Besides, ‗spe i l tions‘ th t re introduced in her definitionare to help learners achieve their target language Ramesh (2009) also agrees that ‗LLS are essential in learning a language in order to help learners improve their language learning process through conscious actions.‘
As noted bove, Oxford‘s definition is the most appropriate to guide the current study because it is clear and understandable
1.1.2 Classifications of language learning strategies
There are several different ideas on the classifications of LLSs in the field of second or foreign language learning Classifications of LLSs that encourage to develop speaking skill are conducted by Bialystok (1978), O‘M lley nd Ch mot
Bialystok (1978) classifies language learning strategies into four categories
First is functional practicing such as completing a transaction at a store Second is monitoring and formal practicing such as verbal drills found in a second language class Third is inferencing It may be used with implicit linguistic knowledge and knowledge of the world She draws a clear model which emphasizes on cognitive and metacognitive strategies Nonetheless, the social/affective components were not mentioned in her model Thus, this classification is not suitable for the current study which tends to explore the LLSs for improving speaking skill
O‘M lley nd Ch mot (1990) presented a classification including three major strategies: metacognitive strategies, cognitive strategies and social/affective strategies Metacognitive strategies refer to strategies applied to plan for learning and thinking about the learning process, monitoring production and comprehension as well as evaluation after the completion of an activity whilst cognitive strategies involve the direct manipulation of learning techniques such as: repetition, resourcing, grouping, note taking, deduction, substitution, elaboration, summarization, translation, transfer and inferencing Socio/affective strategies mainly include the learner in communicative interaction with another person A distinctive point in this classification is that their study based on theories in cognitive science Addition lly, L n (2005:21) st tes ‗their classification was not only theory-based but also has been fairly accepted by both teachers and researchers in the field‘ However, their tegory rem ins limited This is pointed out by Cohen (1996:11) ‗The O‘M lley nd Ch mot (1990) t xonomy fo used on ognitive nd metacognitive strategies, and only touched the surface of social and especially affective strategies.‘
A common weakness in the classification by both Bialystok and O‘M lley and Chamot is limitation of affective strategies Kr shen‘s (1982:31) affective filter hypothesis posits that affective variables relate to success in second language acquisition Thus, affective strategies have been recognized as an essential role in learning language.
In spite of the fact that these taxonomies provide first insights for language learning strategies to help learners to be successful in speaking, the observable weakness of the classification may be unsuitable for this research Hence, it is ne ess ry to develop more ppropri te l ssifi tion Oxford (1990:8) sees th t ‗it is easy to see how language learning strategies stimulate the growth of communicative competence in general ‘ Thus, Oxford (1990), whose strategy classification is chosen for the current study, divides strategies into two major classes: direct and indirect
Direct strategies which are composed of memory, cognitive and compensation strategies refer to the purpose of language Firstly, memory strategies are strategies that help learners store and retrieve new information needed for communication Secondly, cognitive strategies are those that allow language learners to understand and produce new language by numerous different means easier Thirdly, compensation strategies assist learners in overcoming their knowledge limitations in language use in order to communicate authentically
On the other hand, indirect trategies are grouped into metacognitive, affective and social strategies They are considered as "contribute indirectly but powerfully to learning" (Oxford 1990:11-12) First, metacognitive strategies are used for focusing, organizing and evaluating learning process Second, affective strategies help learners develop self-confidence and enable them to control feelings, motivations, and attitudes related to language learning Third, social strategies
‗provide increased interaction and more empathetic understanding, two qualities necessary to reach communicative competence’(Oxford, 1990: 14)
Generally speaking, compared with other categories, Oxford‘s t xonomy is
―perhaps the most comprehensive classification of learning strategies to date‖
(Ellis, 1994: 539) In the same vein, her classification is appreciated to be the most detailed and systematic strategy taxonomy to date (Radwan, 2011) It would be of great importance and interest to look insight into 46 out of 62 strategies from her whole strategy classifi tion for developing spe king Oxford‘s l ssifi tion of LLSs is the nuclear model and stream of this study
1 Placing new words into a context Memory Direct
2 Representing sounds in memory Memory Direct
5 Formally practising with sounds and writing systems
6 Recognizing and using formulas and patterns Cognitive Direct
9 Using resources for receiving and sending messages Cognitive Direct
13 Switching to the mother tongue Compensation Direct
15 Using mime or gesture Compensation Direct
16 Avoiding communication partially or totally Compensation Direct
17 Selecting the topic Compensation Direct
18 Adjusting or approximating the message Compensation Direct
20 Using a circumlocution or synonym Compensation Direct
21 Overviewing and linking with already known material
23 Delaying speech production to focus on listening Metacognitive Indirect
24 Finding out about language learning Metacognitive Indirect
26 Setting goals and objectives Metacognitive Indirect
27 Identifying the purpose of a language task Metacognitive Indirect
28 Planning for a language task Metacognitive Indirect
29 Seeking practice opportunities Metacognitive Indirect
32 Using progressive relaxation, deep breathing, or meditation
35 Making positive statements Affective Indirect
36 Taking risks wisely Affective Indirect
38 Listening to your body Affective Indirect
40 Writing a language learning diary Affective Indirect
41 Discussing your feelings with someone else Affective Indirect
42 Asking for correction Social Indirect
43 Cooperating with peers Social Indirect
44 Cooperating with proficient users of the new language
45 Developing cultural understanding Social Indirect
46 Be oming w re of others‘ thoughts nd feelings Social Indirect
1.1.3 The differences between language learning strategies and language use strategies
According to Cohen et al.,(1996), strategies for language learning and language use have been receiving ever-growing attention in the areas of foreign language teaching and learning Language educators who come from various contexts look for ways in order to help learners become more successful in learning language as well as communicating with foreigners They are concerned about language learning and language use strategies be use ‗the application of foreign language learning and use strategies is viewed as one vehicle for promoting greater success.‘(Cohen et l., 1996:1) However, it is necessary to make clear the difference between language learning strategies and language use strategies Therefore, this section is written to provide clarification for differences between them
This part will begin by pointing out the difference in definition Then, it will move on to consider distinction between classification of language use strategies and taxonomy of language learning strategies
Cohen (1996:2) stresses th t ‗Whereas language learning strategies have an explicit goal of assisting learners in improving their knowledge in a target language, language use strategies focus primarily on employing the language that learners have in their current interlanguage.‘ The author of this thesis sees that Cohen has distinguished language learning strategies form language use one clearly and understandably
Speaking skill
This section presents speaking skill including definitions, speaking strategies, components of second language speaking competence and speaking approaches
First nd foremost, it is ne ess ry to l rify the term ‗spe king‘ Speaking is the primary means for talking and communicating There have been numbers of definitions that appear in different times
According to Oxford Advanced Dictionary, speaking is ‘to express or communicate opinions, feelings, ideas, etc, by or as talking’ Chaney and Burk
(1998:13) state that speaking is ‗the process of building and sharing meaning through the use of verbal and non-verbal symbols, in a variety of contexts’ Brown,
Burns & Joy e in Florez (1999:1) see th t spe king ‗is an interactive process of constructing meaning that involves producing and receiving and processing information’ From the definitions above, the writer concludes that speaking not only expresses our ideas but also transfers information to others
In another study, speaking is defined by B iley (2005:48) s ‗the language skill is generated by the learners in oral form.‘ A ording to Thornbury (2005:iv), the definition of speaking concentrates on communication ability between people that take turns in exchanging particular information Another definition by Brown nd Yule (2001:25) of spe king is ‗to express the needs – request, information, service, etc’ Based on these definitions , the author of this study sees that speaking is the language skill of exchanging information and constructing meaning with others orally
Person lly spe king, I prefer Brown nd Yule‘s idea presented in their book-
‗Dis ourse n lysis‘ (1983) They s y th t ‗speaking can also serve one of two main functions: transactional (transfer of information) and interactional (maintenance of social relationships)‘( ited in S l h, 2015) They put more focus on the function of speaking which is to express social relations and personal attitudes By using this productive skill, people can express their ideas, feeling and purpose on any topics
Because of its great function, speaking seems to be one of the most important skills in language learning
Spe king str tegies re defined by O‘M lley nd Ch mot (1990) s ‗the tools for active, self-directed involvement needed for developing second language ommuni tive bility‘ ( ited in Susie, 2011) Another definition by Larenas (2011:87) of speaking strategies is ‗ tions nd/or pro edures th t students pply in order to omplete n or l ommuni tive t sk su essfully.‘ A ording to Faerch and Kasper (1983), speaking strategies defined s ―potenti lly ons ious pl ns for solving what to an individual presents itself as a problem in reaching a particular ommuni tive go l‖ (cited in Brown 2000: 127).
1.2.3 Components of second language speaking competence
There are some good models of second language speaking competence which are created by great researchers It would be a serious omission, if Canale and Swain (1980) and (Hymes, 1971) were not mentioned in this field Hymes points out that the interaction of grammatical, psycholinguistic, sociolinguistic, and probabilistic language components is essential to enhance speaking skills effectively while Canale and Swain (1980) suggest that communicative competence is composed of four components: grammatical competence, discourse competence, sociolinguistic competence and strategic competence (cited in Abbaspour, 2016:146) It is clear that these researchers give their own components of speaking competence by terminologies that are abstract and difficult for readers to understand
The author of the current study is in favor of Goh & Burns‘ omponents of second language speaking competence since they are presented scientifically and logically Moreover, it is useful for teachers to become more knowledgeable about what speaking competence involves Thus, this model is applicable to the present study
Goh & Burns (2012:53) give three areas of speaking competence which are briefly outlined below:
Knowledge of Language and Discourse requires mastering the sound patterns of the language, knowing the grammar and vocabulary of the language and understanding how stretches of connected speech are organised, so that they are socially and pragmatically appropriate
Core Speaking Skills means developing the ability to process speech quickly to increase fluency (e.g speech rate, chunking, pausing, formulaic language, discourse markers) It also involves being able to negotiate speech (e.g building on previous utterances, monitoring understanding, repairing communication breakdown, giving feedback), as well as managing the flow of speech as it unfolds (e.g initiating topics, turn-taking, signalling intentions, opening/closing conversations)
Communication Strategies involves developing cognitive strategies to compensate for limitations in language knowledge (e.g circumlocution, paraphrasing, gestures, word coinage, approximation, avoidance), metacognitive strategies (e.g planning in advance what to say, thinking consciously about how you say something), and interaction strategies (e.g asking for clarification/ repetition, reformulating, rephrasing, and checking comprehension)
This study is grounded on two approaches that were discussed by Richards in
1990, namely indirect approach and direct one for the aim to determine the approach that is more suitable in teaching speaking
Ri h rds (1990:76) st tes ‗an indirect approach, in which conversational competence is seen as the product of engaging learners in conversational interaction.‖ According to Schmidt (1991), the indirect approach, which was the typical teaching practice for communicative language teaching (CLT) in the late 1970s and the 1980s, involves setting up and managing lifelike communicative situations in the language classroom (e.g., role plays, problem-solving tasks, or informationgap activities) and leading learners to acquire communicative skills incidentally by seeking situational meaning (cited in Dửrnyei and Thurrell 1997:141) It sees that CLT has placed more importance on fluency and ability to communicate in a number of settings as well as in a great deal of ways
This approach has some advantages As stated by Nunan (1991), the communicative approach focuses on opportunities for learners to use the target language in a communicative way Moreover, Sun and Cheng (2002:68) point out that CLT ‗emphasizes authentic language input, real-life language practice, and creative generation of language output, is highly dependent on the situational context.‘ More import ntly, in Vietn m ontext, CLT is w y that encourages learners to participate actively in meaningful interaction to exchange information and solve problems (Brandl, 2008; Canh, 1999) By this approach, learners have great chances to participate in activities in the classroom and exposure to English in real-life situations
However, the weaknesses of this approach have been mentioned by other researchers Medgyes (1990), discovers that communicative approach is seen to be full of confusion and uncertainty and results to conflicts to teachers In another study, Mangubhai et.al (2007) see that teachers are uncertain and confused about the meaning and use of CLT Besides, the limitation of using a CLT approach was pointed out by Canh and Hiep in 1999 They said that students‘ neg tive ttitudes to ommuni tive tivities nd te hers‘ l k of onfiden e in using CLT ped gogies are very apparent in Vietnam It is clear that teachers may have difficulties in applying this approach in English lesson because teachers play the role of facilitators and monitors during the learning activities (Littlewood, 1981; Richard, 2006).
Richards (1990:77) indicates a direct approach, whi h ―involves pl nning a conversational programme around the specific microskills, strategies, and processes th t re involved in fluent onvers tion‖ According to Dornyei (1997:141), the direct approach ‗recalls the traditional methods of teaching grammar, whereby new linguistic information is passed on and practiced explicitly.‘ He puts more fo us on importance of grammar instruction for teaching conversational skills
The appearance of this approach brings benefits The direct approach raises le rners‘ w reness of the n ture, systems nd p tterns involved in onvers tions vi specific language input (Dornyei and Thurrell 1994) Roger (2008:12) points out that th nks to this ppro h, ‗le rners g in knowledge on how to use the fixed expressions, micro-skills, set phrases and discourse markers that are so abundant in spoken dis ourse.‘ The direct method has been a useful one because it ―provided n ex iting and interesting way of learning the foreign language through activity It proved to be successful in releasing students from the inhibitions all too often associated with spe king foreign tongue, p rti ul rly t the e rly st ges.‖ (Rivers, 1968:20)
Relationship between language learning strategy use and language
This section is written to make a clear picture about the relationship between language learning strategy use and language proficiency by presenting definition of proficiency, determining language proficiency levels and researches on this relationship
The term ‗profi ien y‘ has been highlighted by Bachman This term refers to
‗knowledge, ompeten e or bility in the use of l ngu ge, irrespe tive of how, where, or under wh t onditions it h s been quired (1990:16)‘
According to various studies, determining language proficiency levels have been based on scores on norm-referenced or criterion-referenced tests (Bremner, 1999; Green & Oxford, 1995; Phillips, 1990), scores decided by teachers (Chamot
& El-Dinary, 1999; Chamot & Küpper, 1989; Kiely, 2002), or self-ratings by learners (Wharton, 2000) (cited in Lan, 2005) In the same vein, Brown (1994:259) suggests th t it is ne ess ry to h ve test to be ble to provide ― n indi tion of the point at which the student will find a level or class to be neither too easy nor too difficult but to be appropriately challenging‖
The relationship between language proficiency and the use of language learning strategies remain controversial among researchers over the decades
On one hand, various studies have indicated significant linkages between strategy use and language proficiency The results of these studies reveal that quantity and appropriateness of strategy use are associated with language proficiency (Chamot & Küpper, 1989; Green & Oxford, 1995; Gu & Johnson, 1996; Kim, 2001; Oxford, 2000; Park, 1997) In general, it is agreed that using language learning strategies has a positive impact on language proficiency
In addition to, a great number of other studies report that high-proficiency learners employ strategies more frequently than low-proficiency learners ( Oxford and Burry-Stock 1995 ; Lee 2003; Griffiths 2006; Yang 2007; Gavriilidou and Papanis 2010) Thus, it is true that there is a linear relationship between language learningstrategies and proficiency
On the other hand, there are some researchers who confirm that LLSs have no influence on language proficiency McIntyre (1994) feels th t ‗…either proficiency influences the choice of strategies or that strategy choice is simply a sign of profi ien y level‘ (cited in Bremner, 1999:494) Moreover, Skehan (1989) and Rees-Miller (1993) h ve seen th t ‗the existen e of orrel tion between the two does not necessarily suggest causality in a particular direction (cited in Bremner, 1999:494)‘
Whatever the argument, the majority of studies point out that LLSs and language proficiency is strongly positive relationship.
Language Learning Strategies and English Majors
Until now, research works on English majors related to learning strategy use have not been paid much attention, except for some studies by Liu (2004), Chuin &
Kaur (2015) and Buainain (2010).These reviewed studies are reported as follows:
Liu (2004) EFL Proficiency, Gender and Language Learning Strategy Use among a Group of Chinese Technological Institute English Majors
Purposes of the study - To investigate the frequency of EFL learning strategy use
- To examine the relationships of two affecting factors: gender and language proficiency Participants Technological Institute English Majors in China Methods of Data Collection Questionnaire
Methods of Data Analysis Descriptive statistics, independent sample T-test Results 1 Chinese technological Institute English Majors were medium strategy users
2 Learners with better EFL proficiency reported using the overall strategy and each of the six categories of strategy significantly more frequently than learners with lower EFL proficiency did
3 Significant gender differences among Overall strategy use, Memory strategies and Affective strategies with females surpassing males in each case
Buainain (2010) Language Learning Strategies Employed by English Majors at Qatar University: Questions and Queries
Purposes of the study - To discuss the type and frequency of language learning strategies used by Qatar University English majors
Participants English major students at Qatar University Methods of Data Collection Questionnaire
Methods of Data Analysis Descriptive statistics, MANOVA Results 1 They preferred to use metacognitive strategies the most, whereas they showed the least use of affective strategies
2 In general, the results indicate that Level and Proficiency have differences on the use of some strategies
Chuin & Kaur (2015) Type of Language learning strategies used by tertiary English majors
Purposes of the study - To investigate the types of language learning strategies
- To ex mine the English m jor students‘ per eptions of using language learning strategies while learning English
Participants English majors in University Sains in Malaysia Methods of Data Collection Questionnaire
Methods of Data Analysis Descriptive statistics, SPSS Results 1 The English majors used more indirect strategies than direct strategies They were reported to use metacognitive strategies the most The least preferred strategies among the English majors were memory strategies
2 Language learning strategies did not always develop language competency
The studies mentioned above were conducted to explore learning strategies employed by English major students as well as the frequency of strategies used in learning English The present investigation examines whether or not non-major students at Dien Bien teacher training college use learning strategies in developing their speaking skills.
Previous studies
This section states an overview of previous studies including language learning strategies and speaking strategies
1.5.1 Previous studies on language learning strategies
Gerami and Baighlou (2011) conducted a remarkable study on the application of language learning strategies by successful and unsuccessful Iranian EFL students The participants attending this study were 200 male (73) and female
(127) EFL learners The Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL; Oxford,
1990) was used to administer successful and unsuccessful EFL students The findings indicated that successful EFL students used a wider range of learning strategies and different from those often preferred by their unsuccessful peers
Besides, the result showed that the successful students used overall strategies significantly more frequently than the unsuccessful students The successful learners preferred to use metacognitive and compensation strategies the most while the unsuccessful learners used metacognitive and compensation one at a low level
Yang (2007) explored the effects of ethnicity and language proficiency on the use of language learning strategies by junior college students Y ng‘s research also investigated whether the frequency of strategy use across aboriginal and non- aboriginal junior college students and across high, intermediate and low English proficiency groups varies significantly The Oxford‘s (1990) Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL) was used for collecting data from 451 participants.The results indicated that ethnicity played a significant role in the selection of language learning strategies and l ngu ge profi ien y influen ed le rners‘ use of l ngu ge learning strategies Besides, the findings revealed more proficient students reported using strategies more often than less proficient studentsin all of the six categories.
In addition, the most and least favored strategies of various ethnic and proficiency groups were identified Students in the study employed compensation strategies most often, followed by social, cognitive, metacognitive, affective and least frequently, memory strategies
1.5.2 Previous studies on speaking strategies
Gani, Fajrina and Hanifa (2015) conducted a study aimed at exploring the learning strategies for developing speaking skills used by both low and high performance speaking students as well as the differences between the learning strategies used by both groups of learners at High School in Indonesia The questionnaire proposed by Oxford (1990) and interviews were the main instruments to collect the data.The results showed that high performance speaking students had better balance in using all kinds of learning strategies (memory, cognitive, compensatory, metacognitive, affective, and social) for enhancing their speaking skills; the same could not be found with low performance speaking students The low performance speaking one tended to focus more on employing compensation and social strategies than on memory, cognitive, metacognitive, and affective strategies to enhance their speaking skills
Ardiansyah ( 2015) investigated language learning strategies of speaking skills used by successful and unsuccessful students at semester III English
Department of IAIN Sultan Thaha Saifuddin Jambi The number of participant was
64 The questionnaires b sed on Oxford‘s SILL(1990) Speaking test, interview and observation were means of collecting data The findings indicated that the language learning strategies of speaking used by successful students were cognitive, compensation, metacognitive and social while unsuccessful students used memory, metacognitive, and affective strategies in their speaking
Another study was conducted by Susie (2011) This research explored language learning strategies for improving speaking skill employed by university students and pointed out the reasons why these students employed the strategies
The students involved in this study were six university students who were studying at the eighth semester in a university in Bandung The questionnaire proposed by Oxford (1990) and interview were data collection instruments The data from the questionnaires were analyzed using Likkert scale; while the data from the interviews were n lyzed using Kv le‘s ppro h The findings revealed that the high and the low achievers tended to employ meta-cognitive strategies the most for developing their speaking skills; while, the middle achievers tended to employ affective strategies the most The study also revealed interesting finding in which the high achievers were using the widest variety of appropriate LLS Besides, the results showed that participants employed the language learning strategies consciously to assist their progress in developing English language skills, particularly speaking skills
With the previous studies mentioned above, subject selection and data collection methods are commented as follows:
First of all, the subjects who are chosen for these studies are learners from different colleges, universities and high schools These students learn English as a second or foreign language In addition, the subjects are divided into two groups for comparison in most studies, namely successful learners and unsuccessful learners, high and the low achievers, high performance speaking students and low performance speaking students, more proficient students and less proficient students
Secondly, questionnaire, interview and observation were primary methods of collecting data
A ording to Cohen, et l., (2007: 349) on the one h nd ‗interview is flexible tool for data collection, enabling multi-sensory channels to be used: verbal, non-verb l, spoken nd he rd.‘ on the other h nd, interview is ‗somewh t prone to subje tivity nd bi s on the p rt of the interviewer‘ (2007: 352)
Questionnaire proposed by Oxford (1990) was widely used by researchers to seek le rners‘ LLSs Dornyie (2003:9) st tes th t questionn ire brings us to see unprecedented efficiency in terms of research time, effort and financial resources
Support for this method, M key nd G ss (2005) note th t ‗questionn ires re more practical and economical than interviews and they can easily elicit comparable data from a number of respondents.‘ However, the limit tion of this instrument is th t ‗questionn ire is the in bility on the p rt of the rese r her to probe responses.‘(Brown, et l., 2015:218)
The benefit of observ tion method is pointed out by Cohen (2011:78) It ‗m y help to lend a more impartial, objective perspective to the research study, rather than h ving the study rely solely on d t provided by le rners.‘ Yet the dr wb ks of this method are taken into consideration Cohen (2011:77) says that the key disadvantage of observ tion l method is ‗its in bility to produ e des riptions of intern l or mentalistic strategies such as reasoning or self-t lk‘ Another dis dv nt ge is th t
‗rese r hers re likely to olle t d t only on the students who re more verb l during the class session and this may limit the data to only a subset of language learners- namely, the outspoken or extroverted‘ (Cohen, 2011:77)
Cohen and Scott (1996) argue that no single research method is perfect
Moreover, Robson (2002: 161) discusses that how the methods of collecting data are used depend on the main purpose of the research Highly aware of the advantages and disadvantages mentioned above, the author of this thesis needs to adapt the strengths of the methods that are chosen to collect data
Summary
This chapter has touched upon the literature review related to the topic of the study First, definition and classification of language learning strategies have been clearly dis ussed in v rious w ys, yet Oxford‘s definition will be chosen for the aim of the study nd Oxford‘s t xonomy will be dopted to investig te the spe king strategies used by ethnic minority students Second, the differences between language learning strategies and language use strategies have been clarified in order to avoid confusions when exploring speaking strategies Third, an overview of on ept of ‗spe king‘, speaking strategies, components of speaking competence and speaking approaches has provided in detailed Finally, some previous studies on LLSs and English Majors, LLSs, and speaking strategies have been briefly reviewed with an attempt to find out suitable methods for gathering data in the current research and to help the researcher to compare and contrast her study findings with them The following chapter will present the research methodology.
METHODOLOGY
Research questions
As mentioned in the introduction section of the thesis, this study targets at exploring the types of language learning strategies used by non- major ethnic minority students in developing their speaking skill and the relationship between their oral English proficiency and their language learning strategies Specially, the following questions are addressed in the study:
1 What kinds of language learning strategies do successful and unsuccessful non-major ethnic minority students at Dien Bien teacher training college report that they use to develop English speaking skill?
2 To what extent is the language learning strategies related to successful and unsuccessful non-major ethnic minority students‘ oral English proficiency?
Research method: Survey
In this section, the following aspects are covered:
4 Steps in carrying out a survey
7 The outcomes of the pilot study
Survey research is now ‗a major enterprise both in academic world and beyond‘ (Kalton, 1983:4) Obviously, survey research is more and more widespread among professional fields Nunan (1992:140) proposes that survey ‗are widely used for collecting data in most areas of social inquire, from politics to sociology, from education to linguistics‘ Moreover, Kasunic (2005:3) sees that a survey allows ‗the researcher to generalize about the beliefs and opinions of many people by studying subset of them‘
Survey research is employed to collect information about population groups to ‗le rn bout their h r teristi s, opinions, ttitudes, or previous experien es‘
(Leedy&Ormrod, 2005:183) C nh, the rese r her‘s le turer, lso st tes th t survey research can describe, explore or explain physical characteristics, phenomena, behavior, attitudes, and so forth Thus, thanks to survey research, the researcher can obtain insight into the thought, ideas, opinions and attitudes of participants in using language learning strategies for developing speaking skills
After several more years of teaching, I have recognized that speaking English is one of skills that most ethnic minority students are interested in but they face many difficulties Therefore, I pursue this survey study in the hope of finding out the learning strategies for developing English speaking skill
2.2.2 Types of survey research: Descriptive survey
Kerlinger (1986) has identified some specific types of survey studies, including descriptive, exploratory and explanatory Descriptive survey has been described as indispensable in the early stages of studying a phenomenon (Dubin,
1978) as it develops the units that comprise theories (cited in Malhotra and Grover, 1998:409) In other words, descriptive study is to focus on describing the distribution of a phenomenon in a population, thereby discovering events
Exploratory survey does not have models Relationships and patterns are explored in exploratory research Explanatory research is used for seeking causal relationships among variables The first type is the most suitable for the present study because surveys are the most commonly used descriptive method in educational research (Cohen and Manion, 1985)
2.2.3 Survey research designs: Cross-sectional design
According to Kerlinger (1986:279), research design is a plan, structure and strategy of investigation so conceived so as to obtain answers to research questions or problems In the same vein, McMillan & Schumacher (2006:31) see that research design‘s purpose is ‗to provide the most valid, accurate answers as possible to research questions‘ And in their viewpoint, the design describes the procedures for conducting the study, including when, from whom and under what conditions data were obtained
It is essenti l to l rify the term ‗survey design‘ A survey design uses v rious data collection procedures to enable the teacher, researcher educator or educator to investigate a construct by asking questions of either fact (descriptive) from a sample of a population for the purpose of generalizing to the population (Griffee, 2012:52)
For survey research, there are two basic survey designs They are longitudinal and cross-sectional designs and a clear distinction is drawn between them
In terms of longitudinal designs, longitudinal studies are suitable for studying phenomenon that change by gathering data in the same organization and respondents at different points over time Although these designs are difficult to undertake, they can enhance confidence in findings
Regard to cross-sectional study, it is considered as the most common design
Through this design, the data is collected at one point in time from a sample chosen to represent the population As Cohen et al.,(2007:213) indicate that ‗a cross- sectional study is one that produces a ‗sn pshot‘ of popul tion t p rti ul r point in time‘
Longitudinal designs suffer some drawbacks A disadvantage is that they are time-consuming and expensive because the researcher is obligated to wait for growth data to accumulate (Cohen et al., 2007:216) Another problem concern in longitudinal design is securing participation as it involves repeated contact (Cohen et al., 2007:219)
There are a number of advantages in cross-sectional designs In contrast to longitudinal designs, they are less expensive and less likely to suffer from control effects (Cohen et al., 2007:217) More interestingly, they produce findings more quickly A further strength of cross-sectional designs pointed out by Cohen and his colleagues is that they are more likely to secure the cooperation of respondents
Highly aware of the merits and features of cross-sectional design mentioned above, this design is appropriate for the purpose of this study
2.2.4 Steps in carrying out a survey: 7 steps
Nunan (1992:141) suggests eight steps in carrying out a survey: define objectives, identify target population, literature review, determine sample, identify survey instruments, design survey procedures and determine reporting procedure
Brown (2001: 8) lists six steps including planning the survey, developing the instrument, gathering the data, analyzing the data statistically, analyzing the data qualitatively, and reporting the results Kasunic (2005:3) gives seven steps in the survey process: identify the research objectives, identify and characterize the target audience, design the sampling plan, design and write the questionnaire, pilot test the questionnaire, distribute the questionnaire and analyze the results and write a report
The present study pplied the K suni ‘s steps be use of the ppe r n e of pilot test the questionnaire Besides, Griffee ( 2012:142) advises that questionnaires must be piloted since the creator cannot be sure of the respondents‘ interpretations of the questions
Table 1- Seven-stage survey research process (Kasunic, 2005:7)
This current study fully follows Kasunic's seven steps as follows:
Step 1: identify the research objective
This study aims at exploring the types of language learning strategies used by ethnic minority students for developing their oral performance by seeking two the following questions:
1 What kinds of language learning strategies do successful and unsuccessful non-major ethnic minority students at Dien Bien teacher training college report that they use to develop English speaking skill?
2 To what extent is the language learning strategies related to successful and unsuccessful non-major ethnic minority students‘ oral English proficiency?
Step 2: identify and characterize the target audience
Selecting target audience depends on the problem the investigators are trying to understand and who can provide that information to the investigators
Thirty-six ethnic minority students of K19MN1 were chosen to participate in the current study They came from different ethnic minorities as well as different districts Their ages ranged from 18 to 21 Besides, they had from 3 to 7 years of experience in second language learning They were classified and placed into 2 big groups including 16 successful and 20 unsuccessful students The 16 successful students group was divided into 2 small groups: 9 satisfactorily successful and 7successful learners The decision that those students are successful or unsuccessful is made based on their scores through a speaking test
Step 3:design the sampling plan
Setting of the study
The study was conducted at a teacher training college where students were from different ethnic minorities In the school year 2016-2017, the teacher training college consisted of eight classes with 280 first –year students who belonged to the Faculty of Social Sciences, Faculty of Natural Sciences, Faculty of Primary Education and Early Childhood Education
In terms of the official course material, New English File published by Oxford has been chosen for the first –year students This document is composed of
34 lessons, each of which consists of six parts: Grammar, Vocabulary, Pronunciation, Speaking, Listening and Reading In the speaking section, learners are exposed to some tasks such as communication task, role-play and discussion on topics
With regard to ethnic minority students, it is necessary to define the meaning of the term ‗ethni ity‘ This term whi h me ns ― l rge group of people bound together by the same manners, customs or other distinctive features ‘‘ (Cornell nd Hartmann, 2007) has its roots in the Greek word ‘ethnos’ In another study, ethnicity is defined as ― distin t olle tive group of the popul tion within the larger society whose culture is different from the mainstream culture‘‘ by British scholars (cited in Wan and Vanderwerf, 2009:5)
It is widely known that Vietnam has 53 different ethnic minority groups who greatly inhabit in the mountainous areas as the Northwestern region In the Northwestern area of Vietnam, where the social and economic conditions are still underdeveloped and living environment is not suitable for good educational performance , one of the challenges that teachers face is the inefficiency of ethnic minority groups in learning English How to improve their effective learning is one of the biggest concerns for the educators in the nation in general and in each location in particular Hence, Bui Thi Kim Tuyen (2014) s ys ‗the annual educational policy in Vietnam emphasises the educational improvement for students of minority groups (e.g., Vietnam MOET, 2012)‘ Besides, McDougall
(2010) stresses that access to quality and appropriate education is a gateway to development and poverty eradication for minorities, and it is equally essential for the preservation and promotion of minority culture, languages and identities
Consequently, improving education for ethnic minority students will help to minimize the poverty for minority people in Vietnam
According to World Bank (2010), ethnic minorities have less access to education Thus, ethnic minority people have been assessed to be low educational achievements First, ethnic minority students usually work as laborers for their families after school to help their parents develop economy so they have not enough time to do their homework Second, Dang (2010) points out that ethnic minority students have to travel longer distances to get to school, which can reduce their time and energy for studies Third, ethnic minority parents may not afford to help their children deal with problems in studies because of limited knowledge What is more, many ethnic minority students and their families hardly have access to information sources like television, internet and newspapers because they spend most of their time doing housework and working on the field Lastly, teachers not only ignore culturally different opinions but also overlook the living context of their students
They only follow guidance in textbooks This causes confusion among ethnic minority students since learners encounter strange concepts that they have never heard or seen in their lives Students‘ ide s ome from their d ily knowledge bout their living environment while teachers' ideas are formed on the basis of scientific knowledge From all the reasons above, it is true that ethnic minority students have the poorest academic performance A question can be raised is how to help ethnic minority students overcome problems to succeed in their learning
Apart from personal interest, though most learners are aware of the importance of English, a small number of students are motivated to learn well and pay attention to their own learning strategies in developing speaking skill On the other hand, a large number of students are only interested in English when they are supposed to take part in the semester exam and their lack of awareness on the use of learning strategies may not denied
In terms of teaching staff, there are eight teachers of English with different edu tion l levels: one do tor l degree, two m ster‘s degrees nd five b helor degrees Many teachers not only have a great deal of teaching experience but also are full of inspiration for teaching In teaching speaking, the learner-centered approach is employed by most teachers
Mertler & Charles (2008) state that survey research is ideal for gathering a large amount of data from many different types and sizes of population when other methods of rese r h re not lw ys fe sible (Best & K hn, 2003; O‘Sulliv n, Rassel,& Berner,2003;Rubin &Babbie, 2008) However, Cohen et al.,(2007:207) affirm that it is not true to say that surveys cannot be undertaken on a small-scale basic, as indeed they can Furthermore, Brewer (2009:519) stresses that although many people understand the importance of such large-scale surveys, this type of information seeking is also valuable in smaller-scale research designs The study carried out by Bimrose and Bayne (1995) is the clear evidence in this case These researchers used only 28 participants in the survey research Therefore, a survey study approach with small-scale data was conducted in the present study
The total number of students in this research was thirty-six They were classified and placed into 2 big groups including successful and unsuccessful students The successful students group was divided into 2 small groups: satisfactorily successful and successful learners They were in the same class and came from different districts Their ages ranged from 18 to 21 Besides, they had from 3 to 7 years of experience in second language learning
The subject selection was done according to their scores from the oral examination which was designed based on Vstep speaking test format There are three parts: Social interaction, Solution discussion and Topic development In part one, students answer 3 questions related to weather topic In Vstep speaking part two, students are given a situation which is concerned about transportation with two options and they have to give their best choice and explain In part three, students talk about themselves with three suggestions
The students got from 2 to 4 were onsidered s ‗unsu essful students‘, those who quired 5 nd 6 were identified s ‗satisfactorily successful students‘ and students were successful when they got 7 and 8
The time to carry out the study was during the second semester of the first- year students when all of them had enough time to be familiar with the college life and to gain some experiences in the new learning environment
2.5 Data collection instruments: Questionnaire & Interview
According to Johnson (1991), deciding means of collecting data is an important step in conducting a survey research Johnson (1991:115) affirms that
‗observing oral language is not a widely employed data-collection technique in L2 educational research because it is so time-consuming‘ What is more, Nunan (1992:142) points out th t ‗survey data are collected through questionnaire or interviews, or ombin tion of questionn ire nd interview‘ Thus, d t of the present study were collected with the help of questionnaire and interview
The questionnaire of SILL (Strategy Inventory for Language Learning) which was developed by Oxford (1989) was adapted in this thesis Bremner (1999) sees that Oxford‘s SILL (Version 7.0, 1989) is onsidered to be the most widely-used and influential tool for the assessment of language learning strategy use to date
Data collection instruments: Questionnaire & Interview
According to Johnson (1991), deciding means of collecting data is an important step in conducting a survey research Johnson (1991:115) affirms that
‗observing oral language is not a widely employed data-collection technique in L2 educational research because it is so time-consuming‘ What is more, Nunan (1992:142) points out th t ‗survey data are collected through questionnaire or interviews, or ombin tion of questionn ire nd interview‘ Thus, d t of the present study were collected with the help of questionnaire and interview
The questionnaire of SILL (Strategy Inventory for Language Learning) which was developed by Oxford (1989) was adapted in this thesis Bremner (1999) sees that Oxford‘s SILL (Version 7.0, 1989) is onsidered to be the most widely-used and influential tool for the assessment of language learning strategy use to date
According to Oxford and Green (1995), SILL has been proven to have very high validity and reliability In terms of reliability, Green & Oxford (1995) point out that the reliability of the SILL (Cronb h‘s lph ) is found s 93 to 98 In regard to validity, Oxford (1996) considers the construct validity (how well the theoretical construct is measured), the criterion-related validity (demonstrated in the relationship between the SILL and performance), and the content validity (the degree to which the content is appropriate) (cited in Carol Griffiths, 2003:69)
Therefore, validity is argued to be "very high" (Oxford and Burry-Stock, 1995: 7-8)
The questionnaire was composed of two sections: Section A required respondents‘ b kground inform tion me nwhile in Se tion B, p rti ip nts were asked to give their answers on language learning strategies In order to make sure that the informants fully understand all the items, the questionnaire was written in Vietn mese As Dornyei nd T gu hi (2010: 49) st ted th t ‗the qu lity of the obtained data will increase if the questionnaire is presented in the respondents‘ own mother tongue‘
Of the 50 items in the Oxford‘s SILL, 34 items were hosen nd d pted for two reasons: language learning strategy use is influenced by culture and learning environment, and some strategies in the SILL are difficult for ethnic minority students to underst nd Then, these 34 items‘ reli bility w s l ul ted through ssessment of Cronb h‘s Alph B sed on the results presented in section 2.2.7, there are 28 items for the final questionnaire They consist of 6 categories: Memory (1-3 statements), Cognitive (4-12 statements), Compensation (13-15 statements), Metacognitive (16-21 statements), Affective (22-25 statements), and Social strategies (26-28 statements) (see Appendix 10)
Memory strategies included 3 items related to remembering and retrieving new information Learners pay special attention to rhythm, grammar, word order, pronun i tion, stru ture to enh n e listeners‘ ttention
Cognitive Strategies involved 9 items about understanding and producing the language They help learners understand and apply the language in various ways such as analysing, summing and summarizing
Compensation Strategies consisted of 3 items for using the language despite lack of knowledge In order to keep and maintain the interaction with the listeners and avoid breakdowns while communicating, the speakers modify the message by giving gestures, making guesses, using synonyms or Vietnamese to impart what they really want to say
Metacognitive Strategies for coordinating the learning process contained 6 items These strategies help learners manage their learning by arranging time and planning Besides, they assist learners of English in finding the focus of learning and evaluating learning
Affective strategies consisted of 4 items These items were concerned about regulating emotions Affective strategies help the learners control their emotions, motivation and attitude when they speak English
Social strategies contained 3 items Students improve their speaking skill by collaborating with others who can speak English inside and outside class It is easier to learn through asking questions and asking for help
Group of strategies No of items
Memory strategies 3 for memorizing more effectively Cognitive strategies 9 for mental processing of information Compensation strategies 3 for making up for limited knowledge Metacognitive strategies 6 for pl nning, monitoring nd ev lu ting one‘s learning Affective strategies 4 for regul ting one‘s emotions Social strategies 3 for cooperating with others
It took about 30 minutes to complete the questionnaire The questionnaire was given on a five-point Likert scale in order to guide the learners to respond to a strategy description They are: always used (4.5-5.0), usually used (3.5-4.4), sometimes used (2.5-3.4), generally not used (1.5-2.4) and never used (0.0-1.4) The criteria used for evaluating the degree of strategy use frequency are: high use (3.5- 5.0), medium use (2.4-3.4) and low use (1.0-2.4) proposed by Oxford (1990:300)
2.5.2 Interview (for interview questions see Appendix 13)
Interviews were conducted with 8 students (2 successful students, 5 satisfactorily successful students and 1 unsuccessful student) to collect the qualitative data and gather richer information for the first research question
Mackey and Gass (2005:173) indicate that interviews allow researchers to
‗investig te phenomen th t re not dire tly observ ble‘ Moreover, the interview is one of the ways to assess language learning strategies (Cohen, 2011)
Most commonly, interviews are composed of three types (McDonough, 2001:182) They are structured interview, semi-structured interview and unstructured interview Among types of interviews, semi-structured interview was chosen to gather the data for this study be use it is ―the ri hest single sour e of d t ‖ (Gillh m 2001:65) nd be use of its flexibility Besides, Dowsett (1986) stated that the rich information is provided from interviews As for this study, the main purpose was to investigate the language learning strategies in developing speaking used by students at different levels, so the necessity to collect as many opinions, perception, attitude and comments from the participants as possible was highlighted Thus, the use of semi-structured interviews was a must
Before the interview, a set of 6 questions was designed carefully to ensure the consistency in asking question and get more thorough understanding of students‘ le rning str tegies hoi es All 6 questions were open-ended questions
According to Measor (1985), in order to build a good relationship between the interviewer and the interviewees, it is necessary to ask their names or nick names
This was very useful since participants felt relaxed and more confident when responding to the interview questions Thus, the first question w s to sk students‘ n me Question 2 investig ted students‘ per eption on the import n e of spe king in their study and future jobs Question 3 w s used to explore the students‘ ttitude towards activities in class Question 4 was to investigate the speaking strategies which were used by students at home Question 5 sought information about students‘ hours of studying English Question 6 was drawn to find out the reasons for exceptional situations and to discover more strategies that were used frequently to improve speaking skills The first exceptional case showed that an unsuccessful student used speaking strategies at high level but her score was not good in the test
The second exceptional case reported that there were 5 satisfactorily successful and
2 successful students who employed learning strategies at low level but they got high marks in the exam A summary of the interview questions are shown in the table below
2 students‘ per eption on the import n e of spe king
3 students‘ ttitude tow rds tivities in l ss
4 students‘ spe king str tegies use t home
6 students‘ re sons for ex eption l situ tions and students‘ frequent learning strategies use for improving speaking skills
The language of the interviews was Vietnamese because many students were not confident with their English More importantly, using Vietnamese helped both interviewers and interviewees to avoid any misunderstanding and created a relaxing atmosphere for the interviews Each interview took about 10 minutes so the total time of the interviews was about 80 minutes
The interviews were carried out in sitting side-by-side because Walker
(1985) suggested that sitting side-by-side can often result in a more productive interview than sitting face-to-f e He expl ined th t ‗sitting side-by-side can convey the message that the interaction is meant to be cooperative rather than confront tion l‘ ( ited in Nun n, 1992:152) Through sitting side-by-side, the investig tor would prob bly explore more deep underst nding the students‘ language learning strategy use in developing speaking
In order to re ord p rti ip nts‘ responses, there re two w ys in luding note- taking and tape-recording Each type has its own strengths and weaknesses.
Table 5: Strengths and weaknesses of tape-recording and note-taking
Data collection procedure
The steps of data collection could be carried out as follows:
2 Explaining the purpose and procedures of the questionnaire with the hope of obtaining honest results
3 Delivering the questionnaire to 36 subjects and asking them to truthfully complete it about 30 minutes
4 Analyzing and discussing data gathered from the questionnaire to find out the answers for two research questions and the exceptional situations
5 Interviewing and tape-recording all the interviews with those 8 students and the teacher Then the tape would be played for the interviewees to add extra information if they desired
6 Presenting the collected data from the interviews, analyzing and discussing the finding
Data analytical framework
A questionnaire and some interviews were used to find out the answers for the first research question The questionnaire is intended to explore learning strategies which were utilized by groups ‗su essful‘, ‗s tisf torily su essful‘ nd
‗unsu essful‘ students t Dien Bien te her tr ining ollege The data obtained through the questionnaire will be analyzed by SPSS statistic Mean scores, standard deviation and frequencies for all the variables will be calculated and compared The interviews were conducted to support the result of the questionnaires and to gather more information of re sons behind the students‘ le rning str tegy hoi es The information elicited from the interviews will be an essential mean for qualitative data collection procedure
In order to answer for the second research question, le rners‘ s ores and their language strategy use will be contrasted, analyzed, and discussed.
Data analysis procedure
The aims of this research were to investigate the language learning strategies for developing English speaking skill of non-major ethnic minority students and to find out the relationship between their speaking learning strategies and their oral language proficiency The study was designed in the form of a survey study to fit the aims of the current research so the data that were collected through the questionnaire and student interviews were compared, contrasted, analyzed and synthesized both qualitatively and quantitatively
Qu ntit tive d t provided the inform tion bout the p rti ip nts‘ use of learning strategies The researcher used Statistical Package for the Social Science
Kinds of language learning strategies
Relationship between oral English proficiency and LLSs
(SPSS) 20.0 to analyze the data The frequencies of using learning strategies of the three groups ‗su essful‘, ‗s tisf torily su essful‘ nd ‗unsu essful‘ students were figured out by counting the number of responses to the questionnaire items based on 5-point scale: always used (4.5-5.0), usually used (3.5-4.4), sometimes used (2.5-3.4), generally not used (1.5-2.4) and never used (0.0-1.4) The degree of learning strategy use was calculated in terms of high use (3.5-5.0), medium use (2.4-3.4) and low use (1.0-2.4) proposed by Oxford (1990:300)
The data gathered in the form of interviews transcripts were discussed, analyzed and interpreted to provide a deeper insight into the research issue.
Summary
This chapter provided background of research methodology in investigating speaking strategies in detailed First, research questions were shown Second, survey research which was considered as the main stream of this study was clearly
Interviews transcripts compare contrast analyze discuss analyze interpret
Findings presented Third, setting of the study was described Fourth, the participants were specifically depicted Fifth, the rationale for choosing two data collection instruments was given The last three sections of this chapter including data collection procedure, data analytical framework and data analysis procedure were discussed The next chapter will report the data analysis.
DATA ANALYSIS
Introduction
Since the aims of the study were to explore the types of learning strategies used by successful and unsuccessful and to find out the relationship between their speaking learning strategies and their oral language proficiency Specifically, the total number of students in this research was 36 and all of them were in the same class They were classified and placed into 2 big groups including 16 successful and
20 unsuccessful students based on their scores through Vstep speaking test The 16 successful students group was divided into 2 small groups: 9 satisfactorily successful students who acquired 5 and 6 marks and 7successful learners who got 7 and 8 The students who got from 2 to 4 were considered as unsuccessful students
Besides, the study was designed in the form of a survey study to fit the purposes of the study Of course, the researcher used the questionnaire to collect quantitative data The questionnaire which was built from Oxford‘s Str tegy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL, Version 7.0, 1989) consisted of 28 items: 3 items for memorizing more effectively; 9 items for mental processing of information; 3 items for making up for limited knowledge; 6 items for planning, monitoring and ev lu ting one‘s le rning; 4 items for regul ting one‘s emotions; and 3 items for cooperating with others Furthermore, collected data in the form of interview were lso ondu ted to h ve insights into p rti ip nts‘ perspe tives in using their speaking strategies for improving English Therefore, this section provides a deep look into learning strategy use by successful, satisfactorily successful and unsuccessful students by analysing the questionnaire and some interviews.
Data analysis
3.2.1 Questionnaire data analysis ( for investigating the types of speaking strategies used between successful, satisfactorily successful and unsuccessful students)
The data obtained through questionnaire were analyzed by SPSS statistics including mean and SD A ording to Oxford‘s (1990) division of l ngu ge learning strategy use, High usage is from 3.5 to 5.0; Medium usage is from 2.5 to 3.4; and Low usage is from 1.0 to 2.4 The data were shown in nine tables Table 6 was to indicate the use of strategy group between successful, satisfactorily successful and unsuccessful students Table 7 was drawn to explore the use of individual memory strategies among students Table 8 pointed out cognitive strategies used by successful, satisfactorily successful and unsuccessful students Table 9, 10 and 11 described the use of individual strategies at three categories of language learning strategies including compensation, metacognitive and affective strategies in detailed Table 12 displayed social strategies used by successful, satisfactorily successful and unsuccessful students Table 13 mainly concerned the des riptive st tisti s of the p rti ip nts‘ level of su ess on their spe king str tegy use Table 14 presented ANOVA results to determine whether or not there was a difference in strategy use among the three groups of learners with levels of speaking proficiency
In order to make it easier to see the whole picture of students‘ language learning strategy use, it is necessary to create the following table
Table 6 Indicates the use of strategy group between successful, satisfactorily successful and unsuccessful students
Table 7 Explores the use of individual memory strategies among students Table 8 Points out cognitive strategies used by successful, satisfactorily successful and unsuccessful students Table 9 Presents compensation strategies used by successful, satisfactorily successful and unsuccessful students Table 10 Describes the use of metacognitive strategies between successful, satisfactorily successful and unsuccessful students Table 11 Provides the use of affective strategies between successful, satisfactorily successful and unsuccessful students Table 12 Displays social strategies used by successful, satisfactorily successful and unsuccessful students Table 13 Reports the des riptive st tisti s of the p rti ip nts‘ level of su ess on their spe king strategy use Table 14 Represents ANOVA results to determine the difference between the participants' use of speaking strategies and their levels of proficiency
It is clear in table 6 below that little difference occurred in the use of strategy group between successful, satisfactorily successful and unsuccessful students
Successful students used affective strategies the most (M=3.6071) and memory strategies the least (M= 3.2381) Unlike successful students, satisfactorily successful students employed social strategies the most (M=2.7778) and cognitive strategies (M=2.4938) the least The strategies which were used by unsuccessful students were slightly different from successful and satisfactorily successful students Compensation strategies was the highest use (M= 2.2500) and social strategies were often found in the low usage (M=1.9000).
Table 6: Speaking strategy at six categories of language learning strategy used between successful, satisfactorily successful and unsuccessful students
Groups Memory Cognitive Compensation Metacognitive Affective Social
N6 M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD
The interpretation of table 7 below indicates the memory strategies employed by successful, satisfactorily successful and unsuccessful students On the whole, there was not much difference in the use of individual strategies at this strategy group among students It is clear that all students who came from different levels were interested in using ‘When I use new English words, I pay attention to their pronunciation and say them out loud’ and they did not often use ‘I pay attention to grammar and word order during conversation’ However, the successful students utilized more these strategies (M=3.286; SD=.756) than their satisfactorily successful and unsuccessful peers
Table 7: Memory strategies used by successful, satisfactorily successful and unsuccessful students
1 When I use new English words, I pay attention to their pronunciation and say them out loud
2 I use rhymes to remember new English words 3.286 756 2.556 527 2.100 641
3 I pay attention to grammar and word order during conversation 3.143 378 2.444 527 2.100 641
Table 8 below presents cognitive strategies used by successful, satisfactorily successful and unsuccessful students It can be seen that compared other strategies,
‘I write first new English words then I speak several times.‘ w s employed the most by all three groups However, successful students used this strategy at the high usage (M=3.571) Additionally, ‘I practice reading English texts aloud.’ was employed at the high level (M=3.571) by successful learners when they faced with problems in speaking English Another common point among three groups is that they all used ‘I try not to translate word-for-word.’ the least
Table 8: Cognitive strategies used by successful, satisfactorily successful and unsuccessful students
4 I try to imitate the way native speakers talk 3.143 690 2.444 527 2.150 671
5 I write first new English words then I speak several times 3.571 787 2.889 333 2.400 681
6 I read newspapers and books to learn new words and structures 3.429 535 2.778 667 2.000 649
7 I practice the sounds of English 3.429 535 2.778 441 2.300 571
8 I use the English words I know in different ways 3.286 1.113 2.444 527 2.200 696
10 I watch films or TV program in English 3.429 535 2.556 527 2.000 562
11 I practice reading English texts aloud 3.571 976 2.333 707 2.100 852
12 I try not to translate word-for-word 3.000 816 2.000 866 2.000 725
With regard to compensation strategies, there was great difference in using speaking strategies between successful and unsuccessful students The table 9 below indicates that successful learners often employed compensation strategies at medium level (M=3.429) while their unsuccessful peers only used them at low level For satisfactorily successful students, they chose ‘I make guesses when I meet unfamiliar words in conversations.’ and ‘If I forget an English word, I explain the word in Vietnamese or use synonyms.’ at medium level whereas ‘When I cannot think of a word during a conversation in English, I use gestures to express myself better.’ was used at low level (M=2.444).
Table 9: Compensation strategies used by successful, satisfactorily successful and unsuccessful students
13 When I cannot think of a word during a conversation in English, I use gestures to express myself better
14 I make guesses when I meet unfamiliar words in conversations 3.429 1.134 2.556 527 2.250 786
15 If I forget an English word, I explain the word in Vietnamese or use synonyms 3.429 976 2.778 833 2.450 605
Table 10 below describes the metacognitive strategies used by successful, satisfactorily successful and unsuccessful students in detail Obviously, several variations in using metacognitive strategies could be found among these groups
Successful learners utilized some strategies at high level, such as ‘when I hear myself making a mistake, I correct it immediately’ (M=3.714; SD= 1.113) and ‘I have clear goals for improving my English speaking skill.’(M= 3.571; SD= 1.134)
Nonetheless, satisfactorily successful le rners used ‗I check my progress in learning
English speaking.’(M= 2.889; SD= 928), ‘When I hear myself making a mistake, I correct it immediately’ (M=2.667; SD=1.118), ‘I try to find as many ways as I can to use my English.’ (M=2.556; SD=.726) and ‘I have clear goals for improving my English speaking skill.’(M=2.556; SD=.527) at medium level Unlike their successful and satisfactorily successful peers, the unsuccessful students employed all individual metacognitive str tegies t low level nd the str tegy ‗I plan my s hedule so I will h ve enough time to pr ti e English spe king.‘ w s used the least (M=1.900)
Table 10: Metacognitive strategies used by successful, satisfactorily successful and unsuccessful students
16 I try to find as many ways as I can to use my English 3.286 1.113 2.556 726 2.100 641
17 When I hear myself making a mistake, I correct it immediately 3.714 1.113 2.667 1.118 2.150 745
18 I plan my schedule so I will have enough time to practice English speaking
19 I look for people I can talk to in
20 I have clear goals for improving my English speaking skill 3.571 1.134 2.556 527 2.250 851
21 I check my progress in learning
Table 11 below shows a detailed picture of the differences in the frequency of specific affective strategy use between the successful, satisfactorily successful and unsuccessful students It indicates that affective specific strategies were significantly differently used by students at three different levels (high, medium and low) As can be seen from the table, almost strategies were employed at high level by successful students, satisfactorily successful learners often used them at medium level and unsuccessful students employed these strategies at low level However, among the individual affective strategies, ‘I talk to someone else about how I feel when I am learning English.’ was used the least by all students
Table 11: Affective strategies used by successful, satisfactorily successful and unsuccessful students
22 I try to relax whenever I find I am stressful 3.714 488 3.111 928 2.200 834
23 I reward myself when I do well self-talk for completing the task 3.571 535 2.667 707 2.000 725 24.I do not feel shy when I make a mistake in using English 4.000 577 2.778 972 2.350 587
25.I talk to someone else about how I feel when I am learning English 3.286 488 2.222 972 1.850 745
Table 12 below provides the analysis of the social strategies used by successful, satisfactorily successful and unsuccessful students Successful learners chose ‘If I do not understand something in English, I ask the other person to slow down or say it again.’ at high level (M=3.571; SD=.976) Other strategies with the medium mean score were used by successful students were ‘when my friends speak
English in class, I try to check their errors and correct them mentally.’ and ‘I speak English with my teacher and friends after class.’ As for satisfactorily successful students, two strategies were employed at medium level One of them was ‘If I do not understand something in English, I ask the other person to slow down or say it again.’ (M=3.444; SD=1.014) and the other was ‘I speak English with my teacher and friends after class.’ (M=2.667; SD=.707) All strategies at this group ranged from M=1.700 to M= 2.150 (low level) used by unsuccessful students However, compared other strategies, the strategy ‘If I do not understand something in English,
I ask the other person to slow down or say it again.’ was chosen the most by all students to use on regular rate
Table 12: Social strategies used by successful, satisfactorily successful and unsuccessful students
26 If I do not understand something in English, I ask the other person to slow down or say it again
27 When my friends speak English in class, I try to check their errors and correct them mentally
28 I speak English with my teacher and friends after class 3.429 976 2.667 707 1.700 865
Table 13 below shows the des riptive st tisti s of the p rti ip nts‘ level of success on their speaking strategy use B sed on Oxford‘s division (1990), successful and satisfactorily successful students employed the strategies at medium level, which means that there was no variation in the overall speaking strategy use between these two groups However, it is clear to find out the differences between the students ranging from unsuccessful to successful
According to the results in table 13, there is a slight difference in the use of strategies, and this difference comes from successful students and unsuccessful students The results indicated that the lowest strategy use is in unsuccessful students (M=2.1107) whereas the highest level strategy use is in successful participants which is (M=3.3929)
Table 13: Overall speaking strategies between successful, satisfactorily successful and unsucessful students
It is clear in Table 14 below that there wasa significant difference in the use of overall strategies used (p