Introduction
Rationale
According to an article posted on www.vietbao.vn on 9 December 2009, a large number of Vietnamese fresh graduates are complained about their limited English proficiency at workplace settings, especially their weaknesses in English communication despite their acceptable ability in their own specializations This problem may stem from some deficiency in English teaching and learning at university and lower academic levels
Therefore, it is about time to take a closer look at the current use of teaching methods which are designed to develop students‟ speaking competence
For the last few years, communicative language teaching (CLT) has remarkably emerged as an innovative teaching approach to the teaching of second and foreign languages throughout the world According to Nunan (1991), CLT features interaction as both the means and the ultimate goal of learning a language This emphasis involves that students are required to construct a habit of enthusiastically participating in classroom exchanges and real communication to enhance their speaking skill The new learning strategy can only be enabled when there is a shift between teachers‟ and students‟ roles
Learner-centered learning has reigned in modern classrooms where students are given more autonomy while teachers take the roles of controllers, assessors, organizers, prompters, participants and so forth (Harmer, 2001) who facilitate students‟ participation in a variety of interactive activities In an attempt to reverse that dominant status between the two parties, elicitation teaching has been spread into English classrooms on an international scale
On the way of educational integration, the communicative approach has been adapted to Vietnam‟s national curriculums of almost every academic level, ranging from elementary, middle, secondary to post-secondary levels Although the interest in and development of communicative-style teaching developed statistically worldwide, the adoption in Vietnam has been obstructed by the inherent dominance of grammar- translation approach It is commonly seen that Vietnamese students are typically passive and shy in language classrooms while teachers tend to embrace the role of "expert" who would impart his or her knowledge or "expertise" to unknowing students, who in turn would be assessed by evaluation instruments intended to measure the amount of transferred "expertise" (Rudder, 2000) Similarly, while elicitation has been considered an essential tool to teach speaking skill in modern classrooms worldwide, the use of it in Vietnam has turned out not to be as effective as expected Therefore, the present study saw a need to learn about teachers‟ perception of elicitation teaching and their actual employment to better understand the matter
In addition, the issue of using elicitation techniques in teaching speaking skill has not been extensively studied in Vietnam The three studies that should be highlighted so far are Pham (2006) which is using elicitation to teach vocabulary to 11 th form students in Hanoi, Tran (2007) which is eliciting techniques to teach speaking skill to grade-10 students in Hanoi Foreign Languages Specializing School (HFLSS) and Nguyen (2011) the exploitation of eliciting techniques by fourth-year students in their teaching practicum at University of Languages and International Studies, Vietnam National University
Despite their thorough investigation into the same issue, there is still room for the current study to bridge To be more specific, the two first researchers worked on the issue of applying elicitation techniques to teach high school students whose learning behaviors and goals are remarkably different from university students‟ The most recent one worked on the use of eliciting techniques by student-teachers among students who major in English, which is totally different from the context of this study In addition, Pham (2006)‟s study zoomed into the context of vocabulary teaching, thereby excluding other language components and skills With a desire to both fill these gaps to a certain extent and follow a different research implementation approach, the present researcher investigated the employment of elicitation in teaching speaking skill to first year non-English-major students In sum, filling the gaps made by the two earlier studies is another impetus for the researcher to conduct the present one
Lastly, the subject of the current study is really worth taking into consideration In the status of newcomers to university, first-year students had notable difficulties in adapting to a new academic environment and getting accustomed to new learning strategies Also, as English is not their major, these obstacles tend to affect them much worse If those problems are not completely solved, they may leave long-term bad effects on students‟ academic achievements Meanwhile, for the past few years, University of Engineering and Technology (UET) has tremendously enforced a number of policies to enhance the quality of graduates, one of which is the fulfillment of English proficiency standard as a prerequisite for graduation Therefore, an investigation into teachers‟ current employment of elicitation in teaching English speaking skill to this population plays a more significant role than ever.
Aims and objectives
In doing the research, the author attempted to address three main aspects Firstly, the study investigated how teachers conceived about elicitation in teaching speaking skill
In addition to the concepts, their actual employment was also closely looked at Last but not least was students‟ evaluation on the effects of elicitation teaching on their performance These objectives were accomplished by answering the following questions:
1 What is teachers‟ concept of elicitation in teaching English speaking skill to first-year students of UET, VNU, Hanoi?
2 How do they employ elicitation in teaching English speaking skill to first-year students of UET, VNU, Hanoi?
3 What effects does the employment have on students?
Scope of the study
First and foremost, the research focused on teachers‟ application of elicitation techniques in speaking lessons only in order to foster students‟ talk Therefore, application into other kinds of lessons and the outcomes of the teaching on other linguistic skills are not taken into consideration
Also, as stated in the earlier part, the research targeted at freshmen of UET, VNU only, which excluded those from other academic levels and institutions.
Significance of the study
It should be noted that the research was a great attempt to approach an issue which is no longer new but still needs more profound research Therefore, once finished, it can bring various benefits to involved parties namely students, teachers, educational administrators and researchers of the relevant fields
Firstly, students and teachers of UET, VNU, Hanoi are those who directly benefit from the information the research provides Teachers will have a comprehensive look at the situation of their own application of elicitation teaching to increase students‟ talk, realize obstacles that they themselves and their colleagues have encountered and work out solutions to amend their teaching practice Students are likely to be well aware of their rights and responsibilities to raise voice in class Also, they will be offered more speaking chance during lessons
Educational administrators may be provided with a close and comprehensive view into the current situation before implementing necessary amendments in terms of curriculum, facility provision and other policies
Researchers of the relevant fields can also refer to the present work for literature review
In general, students, teachers, educational administrators and researchers are those who are likely to benefit from the study in different ways.
Overview of the rest of the paper
The rest of the paper consists of four following chapters
Chapter 2 provides background theories underlying the issue including definition of key concepts and relevant knowledge in accordance with a review of related studies of the same field
Chapter 3 presents the methodology of the research including features of participants, research setting, research instruments, data collection and data analysis procedure
Chapter 4 reports and discusses findings which answer the four research questions
It also offers recommendations to relevant parties so as to accomplish a higher effectiveness of elicitation teaching
Chapter 5 summarizes major findings, highlights contributions of the research, puts forward practical suggestions for future research as well as addresses noted limitations of the study
In conclusion, the initial chapter has presented basic understanding of the research including rationales for doing the research, objectives, scope, significance and overview of the rest of the paper.
Literature review
Communicative Language Teaching
CLT has emerged as by far the most popular teaching approach defaulted in almost every English language classroom worldwide Kumaravadivelu (1993: 12) affirmed the influential power of CLT that “CLT which started in the early 1970s has become the driving force that shapes the planning, implementation and evaluation of English language teaching programs (ELT) in most parts of the world” Richard (2005: 6) also gave a full account of what language teachers mean by “communicative”:
Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) can be understood as a set of principles about the goals of language teaching, how learners learn the language, the kinds of classroom activities that best facilitate learning, and the roles of teachers and students in the classroom
CLT includes a complete code of laws that should be strictly complied with in order to develop learners‟ communicative competence as the ultimate goal, which collides with what Harmer (2001: 86) believes: “CLT features learning sequences which aim to improve the students‟ ability to communicate” In addition, Rudder (2000) claimed that
“the essence is language for communication and self-expression” It can be inferred from these views that teaching students how to use the language and to communicate in a language is considered to be at least as important as learning the language itself To maximize learning potential in a communicative classroom, teachers are instructed to make use of various tools which help to create genuine communication, one of which is the use of elicitation techniques.
Elicitation
The majority of CLT teachers tend to mention elicitation as their familiar teaching practice but the explanations of this term vary broadly This diversity may stem from a fact that elicitation hardly gets any specific clarifications in academic literature The nature of it can be roughly understood via the word “elicit” which means “draw facts, responses, answers, etc from somebody, sometimes with difficulty” (Oxford Advanced Dictionary,
Elicitation techniques are widely used in numerous sciences In English language classrooms, teachers are supposed to master these elicitation techniques to draw out answers or responses from students As defined by Darn and Cetin (2009), “elicitation is a technique by which the teacher gets the learners to give information rather than giving it to them” The definition in Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics
„Techniques or procedures which a teacher uses to get learners to actively produce speech or writing' suggests that there may be wide applications of elicitation into the field of language teaching The current research is to adopt the former definition as it directly demonstrates the nature of English teaching procedure in the light of CLT Regarding elicitation techniques, they can be considered effective tools that teachers should benefit from to accelerate their students‟ speaking capacity in class
Teachers are given five main kinds of tools to elicit students‟ talk and thereby making their classrooms genuinely communicative as follows An earlier research of the same field (Chu, 2009) made a detailed account of eliciting tools used in CLT classes
Asking questions is the leading technique employed to elicit student-talk or, to be more specific, ideas and opinions from students Questioning offers a number of benefits.
According to Darn, (2008), asking questions is a natural feature of communication, but also one of the most important tools which teachers have at their disposal Questioning is crucial to the way teachers manage the class, engage students with content, encourage participation and increase understanding Also, according to the writer, while questioning can be an effective tool, there is both an art and science to asking questions Some of the rules teachers should take into account are to consider the quantity of questions to raise in appropriate time and place to keep teacher talking time to the minimum while maximizing students‟ contributions and what questions to ask students The latter is shared by Doff (1988:23) as: “The focus of eliciting techniques is what questions to ask to elicit the expected target language”
Regarding question types, scholars had numerous different ways of classification
Grammatically, Doff (1988:23-24) gave quite a basic categorization including: Yes/no question, Or question and Wh-question Firstly, Yes/no question helps teachers to see whether students understand any point related to the lesson and keep them focused By being asked to select one option among some available ones in Or question, students are made to think carefully for the right answer Wh-questions, or questions beginning with what, who, where, when, which, etc., can be asked to obtain specific information These kinds of questions tremendously exploit students‟ existing knowledge or check their comprehension of the new knowledge Henceforth, wh-questions are by far most favored to elicit student-talk in class time
Darn (2008) also made a thorough review on types of questions As discovered, there have been a number of typologies and taxonomies of questions Socratic questioning forms the basis of eliciting (Ur, 1996: 53) Meanwhile, Darn (2008) found out that Bloom‟s taxonomy identifies six types of questions by which thinking skills may be developed and tested In the context of language teaching and learning, Bloom himself maintained that "The major purpose in constructing a taxonomy of educational objectives is to facilitate communication…” According to the author, classroom questions can fall into two main types:
Display questions: these questions help elicit learners‟ prior knowledge and to check their comprehension of the knowledge that has been taught Display questions often focus on the form or meaning of language structures and items, the answers of which are already known by teachers
Referential questions These questions are used to foster students‟ skills of providing further information, giving an opinion, explaining or clarifying They often focus on content rather than language, require „follow-up‟ or „probe‟ questions, and the answer is not necessarily known by the teacher
Mehan (1979) proposed four major types of elicitations or questions (the two terms are interchangeable by many scholars) including choice, product, process and metaprocess
The first one seeks for learners‟ agreement or disagreement with the teacher‟s statement or choose a yes/no response The second type asks them to provide a factual response such as a name, a place, etc while the third asks for students‟ opinions or interpretation The last one is the most challenging when it requires students‟ formulation of grounds for their reasoning or an explanation for the procedure by which they arrived at the answers
Those taxonomies of questions, especially the one by Doff (1998) and the other by Mehan (1979) share some common features The difference may result from their different angles of views and focuses However, all of them agree on the fact that questions are used for the main purpose of checking students‟ comprehension of the new knowledge and provoke their prior knowledge
Darn and Cetin (2006) raised the importance of offering input in association with elicitation; and pictures are always a good source of such input Using pictures is addressed by Doff (1988) as one of the easiest ways to elicit new vocabulary (or structure) In practice, CLT teachers often choose to use pictures mostly in warm-up stage to excite students and catch their attention to the lesson Doff (1988: 166) stated basic principles of using pictures: “the teacher uses pictures to set the scene and asks questions about what they see, why they think it happens, what they think will happen next and how they feel or what they think about it” Apart from being highly useful in provoking students‟ speaking, pictures are not cost- and time- consuming since they can be directly taken from students‟ textbook or from supplementary sources Another consideration for using pictures is that a good combination of visual materials and proper questions can maximize the outcomes
Chu (2009: 15) emphasized that this tool is strongly advocated by many ELT experts Traditionally, there used to be a common conception that all learning should be serious and solemn in nature This is a mere misconception as it is possible to learn a language and enjoy oneself at the same time (Lee, 1995: 35) Wright, Betteridge and Buckby (1984:1) believed that “language learning is hard work Effort is required at every moment and must be maintained over a long period of time Games help and encourage many learners to sustain their interest and work” Therefore, it is clearly seen that good games can be used during a burdensome lesson Games help teachers to create contexts in which the language is useful and meaningful If games are well-chosen and appropriately used, they can give students a break and simultaneously create chances for them to practice new skills in a highly amusing and motivating way (Ersoz, 2000) In order to fully obtain these benefits, one thing teachers should take into consideration is that
“whenever a game is to be conducted, the number of students, proficiency level, cultural context, timing, learning topic, and the classroom settings are factors that should be taken into account (Nguyen and Khuat, 2003)
According to Darn and Cetin (2006), eliciting ideas and background information also requires input which may come from a teacher's anecdote or story, a text, pictures, or a video, and involves the sharing of knowledge between teacher and learners Doff (1988:168) suggested that “teacher may also consider using texts and dialogues to guide students to respond to the language use and context of use presented in those texts and dialogues” They play the role of providing students with illustrative language samples based on which students can produce ones of their own Particularly, authentic texts and dialogues, when introduced into language classrooms, can bridge the gap between classroom knowledge and “a student‟s capacities to participate in real world events”
Related studies
As stressed previously, eliciting technique is a powerful tool frequently employed in the process of teaching English, especially under communicative approach Therefore, there is no question why the issue has been brought into research field by some scholars, both overseas and domestic involved
One of the pioneering studies on the application of eliciting techniques into English lessons is “Eliciting spontaneous speech in bilingual students: Methods and techniques” by Cornejo, Ricardo and Najar (1983) In this research, the three researchers first presented an overview of studies using traditional techniques to elicit language from students before recommending the use of interviews as a way to elicit students‟ talk Some other innovative techniques were put forward to foster students‟ spontaneous conversations, both with their teachers and students While the study could provide significant background theory and practical recommendations, it still had two perceivable limitations Since it was conducted outside Vietnam, the scope of the study did not reach Vietnamese language teaching and learning context Also, the subjects of the study were bilingual students whose culture, education and other conditions were totally different from Vietnamese EFL students‟ The gap that no specifications for Vietnamese students were made can be partly bridged by domestic researchers
In another research named “Maximizing learning potential in the communicative classroom” by Kumaravadivelu (1993), elicitation teaching was also brought into examination to see what effects it bore on learning potential in CLT classes The observational study conducted in two contrastive episodes came to a conclusion that the appropriate use of elicitation techniques contributes to making English classes genuinely communicative and maximizing learning potential Generally speaking, the findings of this research were extremely significant in strengthening the faith in the effectiveness of elicitation teaching However, the study was conducted on a small scale, which may weaken the generalizability of the results
As CLT became the most prevailing approach implemented in almost every upper- secondary school in Vietnam, there have been several researches on the field The first one is “Using elicitation techniques to teach Vocabulary to 11 th form students in Hanoi” by
Pham (2006) On shedding light on the issue, the author attempted to investigate three aspects: the situation of teaching vocabulary to 11 th form students in Hanoi, the application of elicitation techniques to teach vocabulary to these subjects and pedagogical recommendations to make a better use of elicitation techniques in teaching vocabulary
Given that his effort in conducting this study was praiseworthy and the findings had a significant contribution to the field, there were still some limitations that should be addressed Firstly, the study centered around the teaching vocabulary Although this was one of three core teaching components where the employment of elicitation techniques could be considered a must in modern EFL classrooms, the results of a thorough investigation into this field only could not represent that of the others namely grammar, pronunciation and four macro skills: listening, speaking, reading and writing Secondly, the classroom settings where the survey of this research was conducted were not yet introduced the new textbook which still followed the old teaching methods
One year later, another research on elicitation was carried out by Tran (2007) named “eliciting technique to teach speaking skill to grade-10 students in HFLSS”
Firstly, she investigated the real situation of teachers‟ using eliciting techniques to teach grade-10 students in HFLSS in Hanoi Then, outstanding advantages of this practice could be drawn out Hindrances to the employment process of this technique were diagnosed for timely and necessary pedagogical adjustments Notably, the author gave a close look at the speaking skill as the focus One perceivable limitation is that the subjects of the study were students from FLSS only, which could hardly be generalized into a wider population of other institutions across the city and country
Most recently, Nguyen (2011) worked on “the exploitation of eliciting techniques by fourth-year students in their teaching practicum at University of Languages and International Studies, Vietnam National University” (ULIS, VNU) The author looked into how eliciting techniques were used by student-teachers in teaching English to first-year students at English Division 1, Faculty of Teacher Education, ULIS, VNU The study was a praiseworthy attempt to evaluate the frequency of using eliciting techniques, the effectiveness, difficulties and solutions to enhance the effects of elicitation teaching
However, the different teaching context in Nguyen (2011) made the present researcher decide to do further work on the same issue
These listed gaps intensify the significance of the current study which targets at elicitation techniques teachers use to teach speaking skill to non-major university students
To sum up, in this chapter, the researcher has briefly defined important terms and reviewed relevant background theories The employment of elicitation techniques demonstrates teachers‟ attempt in implementing communicative approach with a view to increasing students‟ talk in class As elicitation teaching has both benefits and drawbacks, teachers need to take several principles into consideration when practicing it Supported and developed from formerly conducted studies of the same field, the current one examined the application of elicitation in a different approach and context.
Methodology
Research settings and participants
In the first academic year, students are to reach levels A1 and A2 (according to Common European Framework of Reference, now referred to as CEFR) in two initial semesters The number of credit hours each week is 6 which is halved into two class contacts In the light of Communicative Approach aiming to develop students‟ communicative competence alongside with linguistic ability, textbooks applied to levels A1 and A2 are New English File Elementary and Pre-intermediate respectively, by Clive Oxenden, Christina Latham-Konig and Paul Seligson Moreover, students can self-study with the workbooks of this series and other recommended material sources Pronunciation section is particularly intensified with the utilization of Pronunciation in use Elementary by Jonathan Marks
With regard to testing and evaluation, there are two mid-term tests and one final exam The former consists of one written and one oral test scheduled in Week 9 and 13 respectively The latter is conducted at the end of every semester in the integrative form but with the absence of the oral skill The grade proportion for these three tests is 25% - 15% - 50%, with the other 10% devoted to the checking of students‟ attendance and participation
Firstly, one of the most important features of students of UET, VNU is that they major in technical sciences Hence, English is not always their strength Students‟ English proficiency ranges widely, depending on their living and high school education background Students are supposed to achieve level B1 of CEFR by the time they graduate The number of first-year students each year is approximately 400 who are equally divided into 15 classes, i.e about 25 to 30 per class Last but not least, UET students had been placed into appropriate classes corresponding to their English proficiency until academic year 2010-2011 when the credit program began to take effects
At present, students of different levels are randomly put into one class
There are 14 teachers in the Department of English On average, each teacher is in charge of two class contacts in two different classes The majority of teachers are quite young, aged from 24 to 34 The number of teaching years ranges from 2 to 12 Although their working experience seems limited, 80% of them achieved Master Degree and the rest are to complete Master courses shortly In addition, they regularly attend training workshops as well as actively participating in annual scientific research activity
Since this study investigated the use of elicitation in real classroom settings, both teachers and students were involved as subjects of the research
Although the research focuses on teachers‟ application of elicitation teaching, students play an equivalent role as direct beneficiaries, observers and evaluators of the process They were primarily selected for the questionnaire to obtain answers to Research Question 3 The total number was approximately 80, which constituted nearly one fifth of the entire population
The selection of students taking part in the survey primarily complied with the principle of random sampling This sampling method is useful if the researcher wishes to be able to make generalization, because it seeks representativeness of the wider population (Cohen, Manion and Morrison, 2000: 100) Every student has chance to be selected The selection of one may not eliminate the likelihood of the others Therefore, this sampling method could ensure high diversity and, thus, validity for the study On applying the mentioned theory, the researcher did hand-pick four out of given 15 classes
In these four chosen classes, the researcher selected 20 students from each to approach
However, to intensify the representativeness of the study, another method namely stratified sampling was also employed to choose these 20 students properly The researcher divided the whole population of each class into sub-groups, each of which
“contains subjects with similar characteristics” (Cohen, Manion and Morrison, 2000:
101) Their A1 scores are the only criterion for different categories which serve the later selection
Score range Number of students selected
Table 1: Categorization of selected students
Students from different groups may demonstrate different viewpoints on the same issue Due to several external obstacles, the researcher could penetrate into only two classes but tried her best to choose students of highest diversity as a compensation
Because teachers are the target of this research, they underwent a careful selection procedure for both the questionnaire and interview session 10 out of 14 teachers of the Department were invited to share their opinion and experience on the investigated issue within the questionnaire It needs to note that eight out of this 10 were intentionally taken from four earlier-selected classes, which might be useful for the comparison between their own responses and their students‟ evaluation From those 10 teachers, six of them were invited to the interview session.
Research Instruments
As a survey research, it fully employed all three fundamental tools namely questionnaire, semi-structured interview and classroom observation The combination of these three instruments was believed to generate valid and reliable data
The first data collection method, the questionnaires, was delivered to both teachers and students This tool was popularly used in almost every primary research
According to Wilson and Mc Lean (1994), questionnaire was highly regarded for its outstanding merits including providing structured, numerical data, being able to be administered without the presence of the researcher, and often straightforward to be analyzed (cited by Cohen, Manion and Morrison, 2000: 245) Also, from reality, the researcher found it time- and effort- saving to conduct questionnaire survey among a relatively large number of UET freshmen and teachers These advantages are already recognized by Milne (1999) when he stated:
Questionnaires come in many different forms from factual to opinion based, from tick boxes to free text responses Whatever their form, questionnaires are often viewed as quick and easy to do
In this research context, both teacher and student question included two main sections: the first sought respondents‟ personal information which was collected and presented earlier in 3.1.1 and the second was the main content The teacher questionnaire was to deliberately find the answers to the two first research questions: teachers‟ concept of elicitation in teaching English speaking skill and their actual employment Meanwhile, the student question was targeted to the effects of that employment on students In order to get sincere opinions and objective assessment, the questionnaire was carefully designed: it began with a brief statement of the research title, the purpose of conducting questionnaire survey and a desire for cooperation from respondents The researcher also affirmed the confidentiality of the shared information In the main part, questions were mostly in two main types namely multiple choice and table grading Open-ended questions were minimized to avoid fatigue effect, especially for first year students As for the language, to make it easy for students to understand, the questionnaire for students was translated into Vietnamese and did not consist of too specialized terms whereas the teacher questionnaire was still kept in the original version of English language
In general, the questionnaire was carefully designed in terms of both appearance and content for the highest return rates as well as the usefulness of the responses
Effective as the questionnaire can be, this is not always the case In fact, there are several disadvantages in using questionnaire as a data collection instrument, one of which is the limited depth of the answers obtained The interview then appears as a no-less- important tool as it served the purpose of obtaining in-depth information far beyond the results initially collected from questionnaires According to Cohen, Manion and Morrison (2000: 268), interview is a common research tool used to collect data, as in surveys or experimental situations In the current research, semi-structured interview was employed to probe for details
Six semi-structured interviews were face-to-face interaction between the researcher and selected teachers Like questionnaires, every interview was started with a session of sharing personal information To avoid possible misunderstanding and confusion, the interviews were done in Vietnamese Under the interviewees‟ permission, the responses were noted and tape-recorded so as not to miss any important details At times, unclear points were further explained, which partly enriched the quantity and quality of collected data
In the light of a primary research, classroom observation was regarded as a must for a maximum degree of objectivity Cohen, Manion and Morrison (2000: 305) claimed that observational data are attractive as they afford the researcher the opportunity to gather „live‟ data from „live‟ situations On doing lesson observation, the researcher could verify the results collected earlier from questionnaires and interviews and particularly examined the teacher‟s actual employment of elicitation (Research Question
Before the date of observation, a checklist was drafted to orientate the observation Due to several external obstacles, the researcher was admitted into only two lessons: One was File 1D in Group 2 and the other was File 3 Practical English in
Group 10 The lessons were also filmed so that the analysis work became more favorable and accurate
In conclusion, the combination of the three most common tools namely questionnaire, interview and classroom observation brought to the researcher a rich amount of valid and reliable data, the analysis of which would be presented in the next chapter.
Data collection procedure
The data collection procedure can be divided into two main stages including the preparation and actual implementation
First of all, a research design was constructed with a selection of participants, consideration of data collection instruments and data analysis methods Not long later, first drafts of questionnaires and interview schedules were written up After that, the piloting of the questionnaire survey was carried out over a small group of students within the targeted population After the piloting session, important amendments were made to have better editions of questionnaire With a consideration of research objectives and the nature of observed lessons, the researcher constructed the classroom observation framework The last preparatory step was to send written consents to the interviewees and arrange the interview dates
This stage consisted of three steps related to activities carried out both outside and inside classrooms
Step 1: Teacher questionnaires and students were issued to get initial responses
Step 2: Classroom observation was conducted in two lessons, the choice of which could not be determined by the researcher herself but on permission
Step 3: Teacher interview was done right after the observed classes were finished
It was the suitable time for the interviewer to clarify any points that she found ambiguous or worth asking about the observed lessons as well as about the questionnaires.
Data analysis procedure
Based on questionnaire results, the researcher began to classify, synthesize and report data To make the analysis comprehensible, answers to every question in the form of words were transferred into charts first, followed by a detailed explanation Semi- structured interviews were transcribed, analyzed and integrated into the presentation of questionnaire results so that readers could have a deeper understanding of the situations
Regarding classroom observation, the researcher made a thorough analysis on the observation details videoed from the two lessons The results then were double-checked with those of questionnaires and interviews
To sum up, the research did involve a considerable number of 80 freshmen and 10 teachers of English from UET, VNU in questionnaire survey, interview and classroom observation The results, after that, were synthesized, analyzed as well as reported in the most reader-friendly way and would be clearly presented in the next chapter.
RESULTS
Data analysis and discussion
Research question 1: What is teachers’ concept of elicitation in teaching English speaking skill to first-year students of UET, VNU?
Teachers’ concept of elicitation in teaching speaking
The questionnaire survey was initiated by the question of “how often do you teach speaking skill by getting students to provide information rather than giving it to them?”which is supposed to yield dual answers Firstly, it checks whether teachers are aware of elicitation that they ever use in teaching speaking, and secondly, if yes, the frequency of teachers‟ actual using elicitation in teaching speaking Rather than directly revealing the name of this way of teaching, the research gave the equivalent definition to prevent biased answers
Figure 1: Frequency of elicitation teaching
As can be seen from the pie chart, “usually” constitutes the largest proportion of 70% followed by a relatively smaller percentage of 20% which goes for “often” Only 10% of the respondents ticked at “sometimes” whereas “rarely” and “never” were both totally ignored These numbers reflected a high chance where elicitation teaching was utilized in teaching speaking to first year students at UET, VNU The finding had no conflict with Teacher 1‟s opinion:
Teacher 1 when interviewed affirmed her frequent use of elicitation in teaching speaking as: “As an English teacher of new generation where CLT is widely advocated and exercised, I strictly follow teaching methods of this approach I try to give students more chance to talk rather talk myself for most of the time As far as I am concerned, the method that we‟re talking about is called “elicitation” in ELT.”
Nguyen‟s (2011) also found out that elicitation is frequently used in English classrooms, no matter whether they are taught by teachers or would-be teachers
Two important conclusions can be made from the first question Firstly, teachers are well aware of the technique that they use in teaching speaking, i.e elicitation, to their first-year students The data can also reveal that they put this teaching way into use with high frequency
Teachers’ concept of benefits of elicitation in teaching speaking skill
1 Checking students’ understanding of the focus issues
3 Increasing students’ talking time/Decreasing teachers’ talking time
6 Exposing students to incidental useful language
7 Having students learn how to guess 0 0 50 50 0
Table 2: Benefits of elicitation teaching
Teachers‟ responses about the effects of elicitation in teaching speaking skill was not sparsely distributed throughout the 1-5 scale but gathered in three highest levels No teachers added any other effects to the list provided by the researcher
It is striking from the chart that elicitation was effectively mostly because it was said to help increase students’ talking time and reduce teachers’ talking time This aspect was acknowledged by 100% respondents Standing at the 2 nd position was
“Activating students’ background knowledge” with 60% choosing Point 5 and 40% choosing Point 4 Elicitation was also considered extremely useful in “checking students’ understanding of the focus issues” and “measuring students’ levels” when there were 50% of the teachers choosing Point 4 and the other half choosing Point 5
Clearly, in these four aspects, no respondents ticked Point 3 or lower Points However, a percentage of up to 40% choosing that category made “keeping students’ motivated” stand at the 5 th rank The effects “exposing students to incidental useful language” and
“having students learn how to guess” attracted only 20% of the respondents for Point 4 but up to 80% for Point 3
It can be inferred from the figures that elicitation was agreed by teachers to have a number of positive effects on students‟ speaking skill Teacher 5‟s answers affirmed that:
“The most important impact of elicitation teaching is to create more chance for students to talk rather than sitting around to be passively imparted the input by the teachers like what they used to do For teachers, using elicitation is particularly good to get closer to their students, see how good or bad they are at English, etc.”
Besides those effects, T8 added: “I strongly advocate the use of elicitation in teaching speaking because it‟s a handy tool for me to see whether my students pay attention to what I‟m teaching or to what extent I can make myself understood by them”
The observation of Group 2 revealed some similar results During the lesson File 1D “The Devil‟s Dictionary”, the teacher elicited the theory of relative pronouns and relative clauses because she assumed that students may have learnt them all once at high school In this way, the teacher involved students in contributing to the construction of the theory instead of presenting them all to students However, as far as the observer could see, the teacher could hardly speak less than expected since asking many questions to elicit correct answers from students was as exhausting as saying them directly
Sometimes, the teacher did not give complete answers but let them guess the missing parts The classroom atmosphere was quite exciting at that time
The findings about teachers‟ concepts about the effects of elicitation in teaching speaking skill came as no surprise to the researcher as those benefits have been widely acknowledged by a number of authors worldwide (Refer to 1.2.3)
Such an evaluation and observation reached an agreement that elicitation was considered a highly effective tool in teaching speaking skill to UET freshmen
Teachers’ concept of the shortcomings of elicitation teaching
Although elicitation was asserted to bring a number of benefits to both teachers and students surveyed, the employment of that method had significant disadvantages
Generally, all the shortcomings in discussion were of medium degree since neither
“never” nor “usually” constituted a high percentage out of the entire respondents No teachers added any other shortcomings to the list provided by the researcher
Usually Often Sometimes Rarely Never
Figure 2: Shortcomings of elicitation teaching
1 Is time-consuming 4 Tends to be hard for teachers to approach shy students
2 Causes more teachers‟ speaking time 5 Tends to be easily abused by teachers
3 Causes particular students to dominate speaking
The chart clearly showed that the category “elicitation is time-consuming” was the most outstanding disadvantage of elicitation teaching with up to 90% and 10% selecting “often” and “usually” respectively Standing at the second position was a common belief that this way of teaching “often” (50%) or sometimes (50%) “causes more teachers’ talk time” The concerns over elicitation “causing particular students to dominate speaking” and “tending to be hard for teachers to approach shy students” are not very significant since most the surveyed teachers said that they more of
“sometimes” than “often” and even “rarely” encountered these problems The respondents were least affected by the fact that “elicitation is easily abused by teachers”
The questionnaire data were well supported by some of the interviewees‟ sincere sharing Teacher 1 said:
“Elicitation is an important tool for me to facilitate the lesson in a favorable and efficient way However, it is not always enjoyable Sometimes eliciting a word or explanation can take ten times as long as just explaining it, especially when students find it difficult to understand my elicitation Paraphrasing a question or altering eliciting techniques makes me more tired and takes more time than straight worthy presentation.”
Teacher 6 agreed with the Teacher 4 on the time consumption of elicitation as follows:
“In order to evoke more talk from students, I have to prepare a variety of teaching aids and design a lot of activities instead of using traditional resources like textbooks, blackboards, etc Apart from lesson preparation stage for in-class elicitation, the actual questioning really takes time and my plans sometimes cannot go smooth despite my flexibility in using them.”
Implications
The above findings contribute to the construction of significant pedagogical implications which are bound to better the employment of elicitation method in EFL
Darn (2009) agreed with the results of this research on the fact that eliciting is a basic technique and should be used regularly, not only at the beginning of a lesson but whenever it is necessary and appropriate However, since elicitation consists of five different types, a suitable combination and alternation of them is strongly believed to bear positive effects on keeping students motivated and accomplish the objectives of each lesson In doing so, teachers need to be well aware of the nature, benefits and drawbacks of elicitation teaching The research proved that elicitation is the most effective in increasing students‟ talk but does not necessarily mean a decrease in teachers‟ talk
Therefore, teachers need to consider suitable time for elicitation as well as for presentation during the lesson to balance the meaningful talk between them and their students This solution partly helps solve the problem of time consumption which was reported to be the biggest challenge of elicitation teaching
When it comes to elicitation manners, as questioning is the leading technique (Doff, 1988), teachers are supposed to exploit it to the fullest in a proper way As can be inferred from the research, although questions requiring specific knowledge can be commonly considered useful in activating students‟ background knowledge, an overuse of them may be met in silence and, hence, can hardly stimulate students talk In addition, teachers should pay attention to questioning manners For instance, it is not advisable to
“wait until students volunteer to response” because it may be a waste of time and students are not all confident to response; and prolonged silence or incorrect answers suggest that input is required from the teacher (Darn, 2009) Regarding how to react to students‟ responses, teachers should consider whether it is appropriate to correct them right away or just acknowledge with gestures and short comments Apart from teachers‟ elicitation, learners themselves can elicit from each other, particularly during brainstorming activities since this helps to build confidence and group cohesion as well as shifting the focus away from the teacher Teachers also need to pay more attention to the directing questions to a variety of students and take a better care of low-level students
The study also revealed a low frequency of pictures, texts, dialogues, games, activities and especially body language as eliciting techniques Teachers need to consider several tips to increase the capacity of elicitation by these techniques Firstly, since the use of the mentioned techniques is quite time-consuming, teachers should make lesson plan carefully During this process, teachers can anticipate problems possibly arising from eliciting as well as make necessary task adaptations Also, being flexible in using eliciting techniques can help teachers use the time budget more effectively Secondly, for shy and inactive students, teachers need to expose them more to pair work or group work Also, to help them overcome these psychological barriers, teachers can motivate students by introducing new topics together with diversifying games and activities Localization and personalization are two helpful practices teachers should take into account For the overall success of the lesson, beside teachers‟ effort, students should also be well aware of their responsibilities, i.e try to be supportive to teachers‟ elicitation by becoming more confident and active to raise voice in class
In a nutshell, the chapter has presented a number of important findings about teachers‟ concept of elicitation teaching, actual implementation of it and students‟ evaluation of the effects of that teaching practice The results afterwards helped to work out necessary implications that teachers could take into account to improve the employment of elicitation teaching.
CONCLUSION
Contributions of the research
The study attempted to take a close look at how teachers conceive about elicitation teaching, how they employ it in real-life English classrooms and how effective it is as assessed by students The results of the research could best reflect the situation, from which meaningful implications are put forward for practice Teachers and students of not only UET but also of other institutes could base on those findings to make necessary alterations in their own teaching and learning strategies Educational administrators can also consider drawing up new plans to improve the teaching environment so that elicitation techniques can work properly
In addition, since the study followed a direction which was quite different from the previous ones on the same field, the results of it could add another aspect namely
“teachers‟ employment of elicitation techniques to enhance first-year students‟ talk at UET ” to the existing knowledge
On the whole, the study has significant contributions for both pedagogical and research practices.
Limitations of the research
Despite considerable investment in terms of time and effort and a thorough consideration of the research scheme, the present research could not avoid shortcomings which should be admitted as follows
Firstly, due to time constraint and difficulty in approaching participants, the researcher had to restrict the number of classes for observation to two However, to compensate these weaknesses, the researcher did make a thorough research design in order to obtain valid and reliable data
The participants also posed several limitations to the study It was common knowledge that first-year non-major students, in majority, were not insightful enough to perceive the issue Moreover, some teachers during the interviews were in hurry, which affected the in-depth of their answers That was why the observations and assessments of the two parties were deliberately compared for precise and objective results
The limited scope and participant-related problems, little or much, may pose harm to the outcome of the study and should be taken into account in future research of the same field.
Suggestions for future research
The research delved into the situation of teachers‟ employment of elicitation teaching to first-year students at UET and generated several significant results However, the investigation should not be limited to those findings On the contrary, researchers may have other various approaches to the issue as follows
As stated in the previous part, the present study restricted the survey scope to first- year students of only one university in Hanoi Therefore, if time, finance and energy do allow, researchers can expand the scope for more valid and reliable data Students of other academic levels are potential subjects of the research of the same field Also, a comparison between the employment of elicitation to English-major students and to English-non-major ones can be another direction for later research
In addition, the employment of elicitation techniques to increase student-talk can be examined in a particular stage namely presentation, practice or production rather than an entire lesson; or in a particularly skill-focused lesson apart from speaking
Those are two main directions which future researchers can follow to gain further insight into the field
In a nutshell, a summary of the findings, contributions, limitations and research suggestions have been discussed in this chapter Regarding the entire work, involved parties can find it a reliable referential source to make some necessary changes as well as to implement further exploitation into the same field
Chu T H M (2009), Techniques teachers use to elicit grade-10 students‟ talk in upper- secondary schools in Hanoi, Unpublished BA thesis, ULIS, VNU, Hanoi
Cornejo R., Weistein A and Najar C (1983), Eliciting spontaneous speech in bilingual students: Methods and techniques, Educational Resources Information Center and
Clearinghouse on Rural Education and Small Schools, New Mexico
Cohen L., Manion L and Morrison K (2000), Research methods in education,
Darn and Cetin (2009), Eliciting, Retrieved from http://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/articles/eliciting on 20 November 2011
Darn S (2008), “Asking questions”, The BBC and British Council Retrieved from http://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/think/articles/asking-questions on November
Doff A (1988), Teach English: A training course for teachers, Cambridge University
Ersoz A (2000), “Six Games for the EFL/ESL Classroom”, The Internet TESL Journal, 6
Harmer J (2001), The practice of English Language Teaching, Longman ELT, London
Kumaravadivelu B (1993), “Maximizing learning potential in the communicative classroom”, English Language Teaching Journal, 47 (1), pp 12- 21
Lee K (1995), “From Creative Games for the Language Class”, Forum, 33 (1)
Mehan H (1979), Learning lessons: Social organization in the classroom, MA, Harvard
Milne J (1999), Questionnaires: Advantages and Disadvantages Retrieved from http://www.icbl.hw.ac.uk/ltdi/cookbook/info_questionnaires/index.html on 12 December 2011
Nguyen T T (2011), The exploitation of eliciting techniques by fourth-year students in their teaching practicum at English Division 1, Faculty of English Language
Teacher Education, University of Languages and International Studies, Vietnam National University, Unpublished BA thesis, ULIS, VNU, Hanoi
Nguyen T.T.H and Khuat T.T.N (2003), “Learning Vocabulary through Games”, Asian
Nunan D (1991), “Communicative tasks and the language curriculum”, TEOSL
Oxford Advanced Learner‟s Dictionary (2008), Oxford University Press, Oxford
Pham H (2006), Using elicitation techniques to teach Vocabulary to 11 th form students in
Hanoi, Unpublished BA thesis, English Department, CFL, VNU, Hanoi
Richard J.C (2005), Communicative Language Teaching Today, Cambridge University
Rudder M (2000), “Eliciting student-talk”, English Teaching Forum, 37(2), pp 17- 19
T N (2004), Tiếng Anh của sinh viên Việt Nam ở trình độ rất thấp so với thế giới
Retrieved from http://vietbao.vn/Giao-duc/Tieng-Anh-cua-sinh-vien-Viet-Nam-o- trinh-do-rat-thap-so-voi-the-gioi/45125542/202/ on 20November 2011
To T H., Nguyen T.M and Nguyen T.T (2008), ELT Methodology I Course Book ULIS, VNU,
Tran H (2007), Eliciting technique to teach speaking skill to grade-10 students at Hanoi
Foreign Language Specializing School, Unpublished BA thesis, English
Ur P (1996), A course in language teaching: Practice and theory, Cambridge University
Wright A., Betteridge M and Buckby M (1984), Games for Language Learning,
I am Chu Thi Huyen Mi from K18B, Faculty of Post-Graduate Studies – University of Languages and International Studies, Vietnam National University, Hanoi I am conducting a research on “Teachers’ use of elicitation techniques to teach speaking skill to first-year students of UET, VNU, Hanoi” and this questionnaire is an indispensable part of the research Hence, your response is highly appreciated Please give your answers sincerely to guarantee the success of this research I would like to thank you very much for your kind help
1 How often do you teach speaking skill by getting students to provide information rather than giving it to them? a Never b Rarely c Sometimes d Often e Usually
2 How effective, do you think, the above way of teaching is on the following cases? (Please tick in the appropriate blank, the numbers 1-5 indicate the ascending effectiveness)
1 Checking students‟ understanding of the focus issues
THE CONTENTS OF THIS FORM ARE ABSOLUTELY CONFIDENTIAL
INFORMATION IDENTIFYING THE RESPONDENT WILL NOT BE
3.Increasing students‟ speaking time/reducing teachers‟ speaking time
6 Exposing students to incidental useful language
7 Having students learn how to guess Others: ………
3 What are the shortcomings of teaching speaking in the above way?
That above way of teaching…
Never Rarely Sometimes Often Usually
2.Causes more teachers‟ speaking time
3.Causes particular students to dominate speaking
4.Tends to be hard for teachers to approach shy students
5.Tends to be easily abused by teachers
4 How often do you use these techniques in engaging students to speak?
Techniques Never Rarely Sometimes Often Usually
5 Using non-verbal language Others: …
5 When using the techniques mentioned in Question 4, do you………
1 Let students response at any time during the lesson
3 Ask questions requiring specific knowledge
5 Direct questions to a variety of students
6 Wait until students volunteer to response
7 Correct students‟ responses 8.Let students draw responses from one another
9 Write all students‟ responses on the board
THANK YOU FOR YOUR COPPERATION
In case you want to ask anything about the questionnaire, please contact me on
0987 488 046 or via michu.hulis@gmail.com
I am Chu Thi Huyen Mi from K18B, Faculty of Post-Graduate Studies – University of Languages and International Studies, Vietnam National University, Hanoi I am conducting a research on “Teachers’ use of elicitation techniques to teach speaking skill to first-year students of UET, VNU, Hanoi” and this questionnaire is an indispensable part of the research Hence, your response is highly appreciated This is not a test, so there are no right or wrong answers and even your name is not required to be filled in It is your personal opinion that really interests us Please give your answers sincerely to guarantee the success of this research I would like to thank you very much for your kind help
In a speaking lesson, when being evoked to speak by teachers,…
1 how do you feel? a Very confident to speak b Confident to speak c A bit nervous to speak d Nervous to speak
2 is your background knowledge activated? a Very much b Much c So-so d Not at all
3 does your talk time increase? a Very much b Much
THE CONTENTS OF THIS FORM ARE ABSOLUTELY CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION IDENTIFYING THE RESPONDENT WILL NOT BE DISCLOSED UNDER ANY
CIRCUMSTANCES c So-so d Not at all
4 do you feel embarrassed to listen to your friends rather than your teachers? a Very much b Much c So-so d Not at all
5 do you remember the lesson better when students are all encouraged to speak in the classroom? a Very much b Much c So-so d Not at all
BẢN CÂU HỎI (DÀNH CHO SINH VIÊN)
Tôi tên là Chu Thị Huyền Mi, học viên lớp K18B, Khoa Sau Đại học, trường Đại Học Ngoại Ngữ, Đại Học Quốc Gia Hà Nội Tôi đang tiến hành một cuộc nghiên cứu về “Việc sử dụng các thủ thuật gợi mở để dạy kĩ năng nói cho sinh viên năm thứ nhất tại trường Đại học Công Nghệ, Đại học Quốc Gia Hà Nội” Phiếu điều tra này là một phần rất quan trọng của nghiên cứu Vì vậy, tôi rất mong nhận được những ý kiến trung thực nhất từ phía các bạn để nghiên cứu này thu được những kết quả tốt nhất Cám ơn các bạn rất nhiều!
Lớp: Điểm thi nói Tiếng Anh kì trước:…………
II Câu hỏi Trong giờ học nói tiếng Anh, khi được giáo viên sử dụng các thủ thuật gợi mở để khuyến khích bạn nói,……
1 bạn cảm thấy thế nào? a Rất tự tin b Tự tin c Hơi run d Rất run
2 kiến thức nền của bạn có được kích hoạt? a rất nhiều b nhiều c bình thường d không chút nào
3 thời lượng nói trung bình của bạn có tăng lên hay không? a rất nhiều b nhiều
Nội dung của bản điều tra này hoàn toàn tuyệt mật Thông tin cá nhân về các đối tượng tham gia điều tra sẽ được bảo đảm tuyệt đối c bình thường d không chút nào
4 bạn có thấy khó chịu khi nghe bạn trong lớp trình bày bằng tiếng Anh thay vì thầy (cô) nói? a Rất nhiều b Nhiều c Bình thường d Không chút nào
5 bạn có thấy nhớ bài học dễ dàng hơn khi cả lớp được lôi cuốn vào hoạt động nói? a dễ hơn nhiều b có dễ c đôi chút d không chút nào
CẢM ƠN CÁC BẠN RẤT NHIỀU Nếu có điều gì thắc mắc, xin vui lòng liên hệ với tôi theo địa chỉ email michu.hulis@gmail.com hoặc theo số 0987 488 046
1 How often do you teach speaking skill by getting students to provide information rather than giving it to them?
2 Do you think this way of teaching is beneficial to you and to your students or not?
3 Do you see any disadvantages in following this way of teaching? If yes, what are they?
4 What techniques do you often use in getting students to provide information rather than giving it to them?
5 How often do you use these techniques?
6 What principles do you comply with when applying these techniques?
2 Location: Room 303 G2 Building, UET, VNU
3 Teacher’s personal information: Female, six-year teaching experience, currently teaching Group 2 and 5 of K55
(Q: Question & A: Answer) Q: Good afternoon How are you?
Q: Thank you for coming to the interview today As far as you are informed, my name is
Chu Thi Huyen Mi from Faculty of Post-Graduate Studies, University of Languages and International Studies, Vietnam National University I‟m doing a research on “Employment of elicitation techniques to teach speaking skill to first-year students at University of Engineering and Technology, VNU, Hanoi” Now, I‟d like to seek your opinion on this issue Hope to have your cooperation And please feel free to share the information as it will be kept in secret under any circumstances
A: Ok Sure! You‟re welcome
Q: How often do you teach speaking skill by getting students to provide information rather than giving it to them?
A: As an English teacher of new generation where CLT is widely advocated and exercised,
I strictly follow teaching methods of this approach I try to give students more chance to talk rather talk myself for most of the time As far as I am concerned, the method that we‟re talking about is called “elicitation” in ELT.”
Q: That‟s exactly right So what techniques do you often use to elicit students‟ talk?
A: Elicitation may vary….from using questions, using pictures, using games, etc Sorry, I can‟t remember them all Whatever technique we use, the main purpose is to make students open their mouth and raise their voice
Q: Okay What technique do you the most often among all listed?
A: I use them all, but….the one that is the handiest is asking questions
A: Actually, it depends on many factors like the lesson objectives, the availabilities of the facility and so on I need to consider which to use for each of my lesson and of course, they are not equally used, in terms of frequency
Q: Why do you often use these techniques, especially questioning?
A: As I already said, eliciting gives more chance for students to talk Instead of listening to me all the time for the theory, they have to answer my questions about that theory and constructing the lesson themselves Playing games or doing activities makes them move, act and talk, so they will develop their speaking That‟s the ultimate goal of my elicitation
Q: Is elicitation all for students‟ sake?
A: Absolutely no It‟s also a tool for me to measure my students‟ level, their learning attitudes and see whether they understand the lesson or not
Q: Is it always favorable to use this way of teaching?
A: No, either There are many disadvantages, the biggest one is that it consumes a lot of time
A: Because sometimes eliciting a word or explanation can take ten times as long as just explaining it, especially when students find it difficult to understand my elicitation
Paraphrasing a question or altering eliciting techniques makes me more tired and takes more time than straight worthy presentation Also, I spend a lot of time preparing for materials used for elicitation
Q: Besides the matter of time, are there any other shortcomings?
A: Yeah They can cause inequality in the speaking chance among students Those who seem to be willing to respond to elicitation stand at a higher chance of practicing their oral skill In contrast, shy students shelter themselves from producing talk
Q: Okay I see In elicitation, do you follow any rules or principles to get the best effects?