Luận văn thạc sĩ VNU ULIS the effects of teacher’s differentiated instructions based on students’ learning styles on their motivation m a thesis linguistics

INTRODUCTION

Statement of the problem

As a lecturer in an English-major university, the researcher of this study has been teaching several courses of English skills (listening, reading, speaking and writing) so far Therefore, she has had to deal with different teaching situations as well as various kinds of English major students Through her continuous classroom self-observation, informal interviews with students and evaluation of students‟ lesson journals (a learning dairy which students were personally asked to keep writing from the beginning of each course to reflect their perspectives and feelings of the lessons and teachers), the researcher has recently identified some questionable problems in her reading class: 1) the students were not motivated enough to actively join in class activities; 2) some students were somehow more involved in certain activities while sometimes the others even showed no interest in these ones at all Different activities may evoke different reactions and feelings from different students These concerned the researcher so seriously that she decided to investigate the situation to look for the answers in a structured manner, rather than in an informal one like before

Reviewing the body of knowledge which is expected to probably result in the current problem, the researcher has found some factors having a considerable influence on students‟ motivation such as their beliefs, affective state, aptitude, personality, age, and learning styles (To and Nguyen, 2009) Although these elements all affect students, and thereby worth studying, the researcher intend to keep focus only on learning style factor in relation to motivation due to her interest and the obvious disadvantages of researching many conditions at the same time

Owing to the development of brain and psychology research into individual differences, the field of learning style theory has drawn much attention from educational researchers since the 1970s However, it was not until the 1980s with the decline of behaviorism (stimulus/ response model), the concept of individual learning preferences was taken into serious consideration in some studies as a basic influential factor to students‟ learning Some studies at that time could be mentioned, for example, Cafferty‟s study of the match in teacher‟s and student‟s cognitive style (1980), Dunn‟s work on students‟ identifying their own learning style (1983), or learning strategies developed from learning styles differences (Willing, 1984, 1985, 1989, 1988) These studies have come to some important findings 1) learners have different preferred learning styles which determine their reactions and attitudes towards particular types of in-class activities and 2) teachers‟ accommodation to different learning styles can have impact on students‟ motivation (Hunt, 1979, quoted in Willing, 1988, 1988, p.57)

Because learning style is an influential factor on motivation, teacher‟s accommodation to students‟ different learning mode appears to probably raise the level of motivation Many researchers have been arguing about matching/mismatching theories which suggest teachers should either try to match their teaching styles to students‟ learning styles or try to expand their comfort zone by forcing them to study with different learning styles Acknowledging almost all the existing theories, differentiated instruction approach recently has gained much attention in educational settings According to Tomlinson (2001), the goal of the approach is to encourage teachers to proactively prepare and offer a wide range of activities which can cater for students‟ differences (including learning styles)

Despite a lack of numerous empirical studies over the effectiveness of differentiated instructions, positive feedbacks from teachers during the application of the approach in a variety of school settings have been reported worldwide

For the aforementioned reasons, the researcher decided to start an action research project named “The effects of teacher’s differentiated instructions based on students’ learning styles on their motivation: An action research” to find the solutions to the classroom problem Though solutions suggested by other researchers‟ studies may have been proved to be effective, they may never work for her generally unique circumstance Action research has been employed for its practical goal of solving problem, rather than other kind of research for theory construction or testing This study, after finished, is supposed to contribute to a relatively neglected area of research in Vietnam or may be implemented by other practitioners for their shared classroom problem.

Aims, objectives and research questions of the research

a Aims and objectives of the research

This study is supposed to examine the relationship among three concepts learning styles, differentiated instructions and academic motivation in higher education classroom setting This action research project was conducted to aim at solving the problem of low motivation level which possibly caused students‟ low achievement at university

In the light of that general aim, some specific objectives are drawn up to outline the actual directions of the study as follows:

1) To identify the given class‟s learning styles and current level of academic motivation;

2) To project and implement some instructional differentiations upon the students‟ different learning modalities aiming to improve their academic motivation;

3) To evaluate the impact of the psycho-pedagogical intervention on the students‟ motivation level b Research questions

In brief, the objectives of the research could be specified into these research questions:

1) What are the students‟ learning styles and their current level of motivation?

2) To what extent does the new intervention cater for the students‟ learning styles?

3) How does differentiated instruction approach affect the students‟ motivation level in terms of their motivational intensity, lecturer evaluation and English learning desire?

Significance of the research

Once having been finished, this action research is expected to find the solutions to the problem of the researcher‟s own class; otherwise, its findings would shed light on necessary further studies in order to solve the issue of students‟ lack of motivation in learning English as a foreign language In case the intervention of differentiated instructions works for this class, it may suggest a good potential treatment to the problem of students‟ low motivation It does not only help the researcher herself to overcome the difficulty in teaching but it can also be regarded as a possible suggestion to other teachers who encounter classes of demotivated students In addition, this research with its thorough literature review and reliable research instruments could function as a basic reference on the subject matter

Therefore, it may benefit other researchers or teacher practitioners on their way to gain a deep insight into the issue of learning styles, differentiated instructions and motivation

Besides, another simultaneous consequence of this action research is to raise students‟ awareness of their learning style differences Many students hardly understand their learning styles In fact, students are likely to admire advanced classmates, so they tend to imitate their learning styles or methods in the hope that they can improve their study results This impulsive thought might then result in the students‟ failure because of the incompatibility of applied learning styles and their major ones Consequently, this unsuccessful attempt usually leads to their lack of confidence and motivation In this study, after learning style and motivation surveys were administered and analyzed, the results would be delivered to the students for their own sake Furthermore, if the researcher‟s hypothesis about differentiated instructions by learning styles was right, students‟ motivation would be increased significantly

Last but not least, due to the limitation of a single action research of the generalization to the whole population, this paper might not add much value to the body of the existing literature as well as not persuasive enough for policy makers and school administrators to change the methodology or syllabus However, if more action research like this one was conducted and the findings were confirmed, everything would change for good.

Scope of the research

Action research can be done by a teacher trying to solve a single problem in his/her classroom Individual action research may search for solutions to the problems of “classroom management, instructional strategies, use of materials, or student learning” (Ferrance, 2000, p 3) Besides, as few as two or a group of teachers can work collaboratively on the same subject matter that is shared among classrooms, without or with the support from principals or educational authorities

In addition, to increase the scope of possible impacts, the other two are school-wide and district-wide action research All four types are likely to be differentiated in terms of focus, possible support, potential impact and side effects

According to Elliott (1991, cited in Water-Adams, 2006), the “best” (the most emancipatory) action research is collaborative in the nature of practice, involving a few practitioners “exploring and challenging the constraints of their professional lives” Meanwhile, individual one is usually criticized for lacking validity, generalization and replication

However, Ferrance in her booklet of the Brown university series “Themes in Education” claimed that each type of action research has its own possible impacts and side effects In order to avoid disagreements on process which may cause the delay or even failure of the research and due to the piloting nature of this study, the researcher of this study decided to carry out an individual action research to deal with the problems of her own classroom before suggesting it to other teachers who share the same problem (collaborative) and then proposing it to the faculty administrators (school-wide)

In addition, because this is an individual action research and the researcher also would like to undertake a rigorous and thorough study, she only invited her own reading class of second-year students to participate in the study As a result, the data collection and analysis could be done, and considered more carefully and thereby producing more accurate findings.

Organization of the research

The study and findings are intended to be shown and discussed in the following chapters:

Chapter 1: Introduction, which provides a broad view of the whole research by presenting the current problem, mentioning aims and objectives of the paper, and indicating the significance as well as the scope of the study

Chapter 2: Literature Review, which is supposed to provide theoretical background on the issue of foreign language learning styles and motivation, discuss the key concepts, identify the research gap and review the related studies in the history both in Vietnam and in the world

Chapter 3: Methodology, which informs readers of the participants, the chosen instruments, procedures of data collection and analysis

Chapter 4: Results and Discussion, which presents the description an interpretation of the collected data in light of research questions

Chapter 5: Conclusion which summarizes the major findings discovered by the research and written up in the previous chapter (chap 4) Moreover, it suggests some pedagogical implication for teachers who share the same problem as the researcher The limitations and suggestions for future studies are also discussed in this last chapter.

LITERATURE REVIEW8 1 Key concepts

Learning styles

Individual difference is not a new field of study Before the 1970s, this term was considered somehow synonymous with ability difference measured by standard intelligence tests However, owing to the achievements in psychology in the 1970s, researchers soon realized the narrowness of this assumption Therefore, the concept of individual difference henceforth was changed into the differences in many aspects such as learning styles, interests, motivations, genders or ages Among them, “learning styles” may have been one of the most popular parts which have been studied since it was first used in the 1970s The studies on learning styles have been continuing for roughly five decades

Although it would be not conclusive enough to prove the emergence, recent years witnessed the dramatically increasing records of the researcher numbers working in this area Apart from psychological field, research into learning styles has also been conducted in a vast variety of domains, including management, vocational training and especially education in different settings and levels

Since a vast quantity of research and practitioner-based studies have deliberately targeted at learning style, there are now a wide range of definitions, theoretical positions, models, interpretations and measures of the construct in the area (Cassidy, 2004) On the one hand, this can be convincing proof of the prevalence of this theory in education and it provides the interested investigators with useful extensive literature for gaining thorough understanding of the issue On the other hand, this fact also causes the researchers such a lot of trouble when it comes to the matter of ambiguity, conflicting outcomes or measuring instrument selection

For those who are novices at the subject matter, it is quite confusing when they encounter the terms “learning styles”, “cognitive styles” and “learning strategies” To some extent, these concepts are usually used interchangeably in the learning style-related research with little difference in meaning However, in some cases (for some special purposes), these terms need to be clearly distinguished

According to Allport (1937, in Cassidy, 2004) and Riding & Cheema (1991, in Cassidy, 2004), an individual‟s learning style is the application of his cognitive style into learning situation In other words, in education cognitive style is an important component of learning style Meanwhile, “learning strategy” and

“learning style” share a lot in common, except that the latter is adapted more automatically to handle different learning tasks

When it comes to the idea of learning styles, people must bear in mind a simple but reasonable assumption put forward by Dunn and Dunn (1983) “everyone has strengths, but different people have very different strengths”

Since the term “learning style” was first in use in the 1970s, there have been tireless efforts among scholars and researchers to define it Therefore, it is not a great surprise to find numerous definitions of learning styles

Among these countless trees, there is one oak which should not and cannot be ignored The definition by Keefe (1979) has been mentioned in lots of learning style research (Reid, 1987; Willing, 1988; Coffield, 2004)

Learning styles are characteristic cognitive, affective, and physiological behaviors that serve as relatively stable indicators of how learners perceive, interact with, and respond to the learning environment … learning style is a consistent way of functioning, that reflects the underlying causes of learning behaviors (p 40)

Three components of learning styles referred to in the definition could be presented as follows:

The sensory channels (one or more senses) individuals rely on to perceive, understand, organize and retain knowledge (Dunn and Dunn, 1979; R Dunn, 1983; Reid, 1987)

Primary importance in shaping the way information is sought, and the way it is processed (Swassing, 1979)

Determine the state of the entire organism, the senses and the nervous system (Dunn and Dunn, 1979a)

Affective factors (i.e anxiety) influencing the person‟s level of achievement (Naiman et al 1975)

The Keefe‟s idea of these components were shared by Dunn, Dunn and Price

(1978, acknowledged in Willing, 1988, p 56) and even specified more into 18 identified learning style elements

For the consistency of the study, whenever the term learning style is mentioned, it refers to the notion by Keefe (1979) Moreover, it is worth noting clearly at this point that this study just focus on sensory channels or perceptual learning preferences as a primary part of learning style differences b Learning style theories, models and measures

As mentioned earlier, this study field of learning style has drawn much attention from plenty of researchers around the world Consequently, this following review of learning style models and instruments would be impossible to be all- inclusive Rather, it is going to refer to the most reviewed constructs in significant review papers and excludes the minor models that are only the adaptation of the critical models to small-scale samples or just the new labels of the existing constructs

In the review entitled “Learning Styles and Pedagogy in Post-16 learning” by Coffield et al (2004), 71 learning models which had been developed for the last 40-

50 years were listed Among them, the reviewers identified 13 major models mostly basing on their popularity

Therefore, in this paper the researcher would not mention these minor ones

Out of the 13 leading models, David Kolb‟s Learning Style Inventory (LSI) and Dunn, Dunn and Price‟s LSI are the most well-known and widely used in the UK and US respectively Moreover, Joy Reid‟s (1987) model was also reviewed on this part because of the researcher‟s later use of his self-report questionnaire

David Kolb’s learning styles model

David Kolb (1984) defined learning style as “individual orientations that gave differential emphasis to the four basic learning theory: Concrete Experience (CE), Reflective Observation (RO), Abstract Conceptualization (AC) and Active Experimentation (AE)” These four were grouped into two categories: experience- grasping approach with CE and AC; and experience-transforming approach with

RO and AE Depending on the dominance of one experience-grasping and one experience-transforming among four factors inside an individual, there were four basic types of learning styles as follows:

Learning style Dominant factors Characteristic features

Converger AC (thinking) and AE

Practical applications of ideas and deductive reasoning

CE (feeling) and RO (watching)

Imaginative and good at coming up with ideas

Seeing things from different perspectives

Assimilator AC (thinking) and RO

Capable of creating theoretical model with inductive reasoning

Accommodator CE (feeling) and AE

Actively engaging with the world and actually doing things instead of merely reading about or studying them

Table 1 Kolb’s model of learning styles

Figure 1 Kolb’s model of learning styles

Dunn and Dunn’s VAK/ VAKT models

Rita Dunn and Kenneth Dunn have spent more than 35 years devoting on the studies concerning the learning styles (identification, instruments and assessment of learning styles, etc.)

As mentioned before, Dunn, Dunn and Price (1978, cited in Willing, 1988) included perceptual strengths in the 18 distinguishable learning style elements The perceptual strength element consisted of three types of learning preferences in receiving the knowledge inputs: visual (prefer viewing pictures, maps, diagrams, etc.), auditory (favor listening to tapes, lectures or music), and kinesthetic (involve more in doing, touching and moving) Thus, the Dunns‟ learning style model is frequently used in American school system known as VAK or sometimes VAKT with tactile (prefer hands-on involvement, note taking, model building, etc.) included (Coffield et al., 2004)

Differentiated instruction

a Definition of differentiated instruction approach

Instruction differentiation theory was established on the basis of student differences which require a variety of suitably-adapted instructional approaches

Students with diverse needs should be provided not just one but multiple options to learn materials and ultimately achieve success equally in the classroom The necessity of differentiated instructions was confirmed by the significant findings in brain research which many experienced teachers have always assumed:

 No two children are alike

 No two children learn in the identical way

 An enriched environment for one student is not necessarily enriched for another

 In the classroom we should teach children to think for themselves http://www.ascd.org

According to an expert in this field Tomlinson (2000), there is not just one way to define instruction differentiation In the most fundamental way, differentiation can be understood as a teacher‟s act of “tailoring” his/ her instruction to meet individual needs If a teacher tries to differentiate her instruction in the classroom, she varies her teaching in content, process, products, or the learning environment to proactively respond to individual variance to create the best learning experience possible and therefore, keep all students engaged The model of differentiated instruction was aimed at maximizing learning-teaching flexibility, material access and possibilities of success for all students in diverse classroom

Basically, it offers students multiple options to absorb information, make sense of ideas and express what they learn (Tomlinson, 2001)

Differentiating instruction means teachers‟ “adjusting the curriculum and presentation of information to learners rather than expecting students to modify themselves for the curriculum” (Hall, Strangman & Meyer, 2003)

To differentiate instruction is to recognize students' varying background knowledge, readiness, language, preferences in learning and interests; and to react responsively

Differentiated instruction is a process to teaching and learning for students of differing abilities in the same class The intent of differentiating instruction is to maximize each student's growth and individual success by meeting each student where he or she is and assisting in the learning process

Figure 2 Learning Cycle and Decision Factors Used in Planning and

Implementing Differentiated Instruction b Components of differentiated instruction

Tomlinson (2000) clearly drew up a differentiation guideline indicating that there were three elements in the curriculum which could be differentiated to benefit students in diverse classroom

Teachers can differentiate at least three classroom elements based on student readiness, interest, or learning profile:

– what the student needs to learn or how the student will get access to the information

 Several elements and materials (acts, concepts, generalizations or principles, attitudes, and skills) are used to support instructional content

 Tasks and objectives to learning goals need aligning

 Instruction is concept-focused and principle-driven and should be adjusted in complexity level to suit diverse learners

– activities in which the student engages in order to make sense of or master the content

 Flexible grouping is consistently used

 Classroom management benefits students and teachers

– culminating projects that ask the student to rehearse, apply, and extend what he or she has learned in a unit

 Initial and on-going assessment of student readiness and growth are essential

 Students are active and responsible explorers

 Expectations and requirements for student responses should be varied

Table 4 Three classroom elements for differentiation

(Tomlinson, 2000) c Features of differentiated instruction

Tomlinson (2001) showed 7 key features of differentiated instruction as follows:

Differentiated instruction should be proactively planned by a teacher before a class This teacher assumes the differences among his learners, thereby preparing a range of ways to “get at” and express learning This preparation in advance will help the teacher not to passively reacting to some of the learners as other teachers in undifferentiated class usually do

“Differentiated instruction is more qualitative than quantitative” Some people suppose that differentiating instructions means more work for advanced students and less for struggling ones in a given class However, Tomlinson (2001) claimed that adjusting the number of the work does not effectively influence students‟ learning process, but changing the nature of the assignments does

Differentiated instruction should be employed along with continual assessments Through informal chats with individuals, class discussion, students‟ work, observation or a variety of other ways, teachers can assess their students‟ progress which can indicate what works for each learner to make the most of their potential and talents

“Differentiated instruction provides multiple approaches to content, process and product”

“Differentiated instruction is student-centered.” In a classroom, an effective lesson should be “engaging, relevant and interesting” However, it would not reach that goal if every student only had one avenue to find the lesson equally engaging, relevant and interesting Moreover, students do not have the same level of understanding at the beginning on which later understandings will be built

Consequently, differentiated instructions which provide these students multiple paths to achieve lesson objectives really take these premises into consideration

“Differentiated instruction is a blend of whole-class, group and individual instruction.”

“Differentiated instruction is organic.” In other words, this is a dynamic process When differentiating the instructions, teachers try to create the best learning match to their students at that time Over time, students/learning match may become less ideal and that‟s when teachers need to make more adjustments to maintain the effective matches

Figure 3: The Flow of Instruction in a Differentiated Classroom d Differentiated instruction strategies

In her text, “How to Differentiate Instruction in Mixed-Ability Classrooms” (Chapter 6), Carol Tomlinson (2001), identifies 17 key strategies for teachers to successfully meet the challenge of designing and managing differentiated instruction However, the author also claimed that there is no particular recipe for differentiated instruction due to its nature and ultimate goal of fitting a wide range of student variance The differentiating depends on many unique characteristics of a class such as learner‟s learning styles, personalities or learning profiles

Here are 17 “megastrategies” which can be used to successfully differentiate instructions to make learning fit students better:

 “Have a strong rationale for differentiating instruction based on student readiness, interest, and learning profile.” The rationale will be used in communication strategy aimed at students and their parents Just like the teacher, these people need to understand the “new rules of the games”, thereby not becoming resistant but contributing to the new learning ways

 “Begin differentiating at a pace that is comfortable for you.” Moving ahead with differentiating instructions quickly or not should vigorously rely on teacher‟s readiness point, which is good for both students and teachers themselves Differentiating should start from the point where teachers enjoys most or feel the most comfortable and confident working with

 “Time differentiated activities to support student success.” Students‟ time spans of attention are different Advanced students have longer time span than struggling ones One thing to bear in mind in differentiated class is to make time allotment for class activities shorter than both advanced and struggling students‟ attention time spans

 “Use an “anchor activity” to free you up to focus your attention on your students.” Advanced students are usually likely to finish the task sooner than the others, which causes dead time in class As a result, teachers need to prepare some anchor activities (suitable for students‟ readiness and interests), so that they can assign these activities in case some students claim “I‟m done” too soon in class These on-going activities can be done without teachers‟ assistant Therefore, teachers have more time to support those in need while the others are doing something meaningful

 “Create and deliver instructions carefully.” Multiple directions are needed, but delivering it to the whole class at one time may cause confusion or attention deficiency Some other options such as tape-recorded directions, task cards or assignments sheets could be employed to solve the problem of instruction delivery

 “Assign students into groups or seating areas smoothly.”

 “Have a “home base” for students.”

 “Be sure students have a plan for getting help when you are busy with another student or group.” Advanced students can work as consultants for other students with proofreading, finding answers or details, and so on

 “Make a plan for students to turn in work.”

 “Teach students to rearrange the furniture.”

 “Have a plan for quick finisher.”

 “Make a plan for calling a halt.”

 “Give your students as much responsibility as possible.”

Figure 4: Low-prep vs high-prep differentiation e Teacher’s role in a differentiated class

Learning motivation in ESL/EFL context

Motivation has always been a familiar term to every teacher in charge When teaching a particular group, there are a lot of factors which may make students fail to achieve the lesson objectives and then course objectives, including the complexity of materials, teacher‟s instructional approach or learning facilities, to name just a few Apart from their low study records and a number of other factors, poor motivation which can be detected through some class symptoms like students‟ slumping in their seats, failure to attend class discussion or class sleep is probably another worth-considering indicator Tucker et al (2002) suggested that motivation directly affects academic achievement, whereas the other factors only have indirect influence on learners through motivation

Dửrnyei (1994) referred to motivation as “one of the main determinants” in learning second/foreign language (L2) It is self-evident that those who are not motivated enough are usually struggling with school work and hardly achieve academic success The first studies over motivation were initiated by two Canadian psychologists, Robert Gardner and Wallace Lambert These researchers were also marked by introducing “scientific research procedures, standardized assessment techniques and instruments” and thereby “setting high research standards and bringing L2 motivation research to maturity” However, Gardner‟s motivation construct was then challenged and degraded as being too “influential” or

“dominant” so that others concepts were ignored or not fully considered Moreover, Dửrnyei also pointed out that the Attitude/Motivation Test Battery (AMTB) by Gardner had quite large scope of the social environment, rather than specifically focusing on academic motivation (though it does have educational dimensions with some question items asking about motivation in classroom)

Academic motivation is a student‟s desire (as reflected in approach, persistence, and level of interest) regarding academic subjects when the student‟s competence is judged against a standard of performance or excellence (DiPerna &

Elliott, 1999; McClelland, 1961; Wigfield & Eccles, 2002 in McGrew, 2004)

Academic motivation is a subtype of the general construct of effectance motivation, which is defined as the “need” to be successful or effective in dealing with one‟s environment (Gresham, 1988 in McGrew, 2004)

In this study, the definition by Wlodwoski (1985, p 2, quoted by Root, 1999) will be used thoroughly Motivation is regarded as “the processes that can (a) arouse and instigate behavior, (b) give direction or purpose to behavior, (c) continue to allow behavior to persist, and (d) lead to choosing or preferring a particular behavior.”

Gardner and Lambert (1972) mentioned the following factors which are rather related to motivation that will attempt to relate the second language ability to these two functions

1 Integrative motivation, defined as the desire to be a part of recognized or important members of the community or that society that speak the second language It is based on interest in learning the second language because of their need to learn about, associate or socialize with the people who use it or because of purpose or intention to participate or integrate in the second language using the same language in that community; but sometimes it involves emotion or affective factors a great deal (Saville-Troike, 2006, p 86)

2 Instrumental motivation involves the concepts of purely practical value in learning the second language in order to increase learners‟ careers or business opportunities, giving them more prestige and power, accessing scientific and technical information, or just passing a course of their study in school (Saville- Troike, 2006, p 86)

Furthermore, the motivation is further classified into two main categories as the following:

1) Extrinsic motivation refers to a desire to get a reward and avoid punishment

It emphasizes external need to persuade the learner to take part in learning activity (Arnold, 2000, p 14), such as homework, grade, or doing something to please teachers Both integrative and instrumental motivations are also grouped under the branch of the extrinsic motivation (Harmer, 1991, p 4)

As extrinsic motivation is based on external outcomes such as rewards and punishment This motivation could bring a negative impact to the students, because with extrinsic motivation, students do not learn with their strong intention or will but they study it because they are pushed by the interest in the rewards or the punishment When a student is learning because he is promised rewards or because he wants the rewards, he will be highly motivated to come to classes and learn and achieve the goal that is set for him But when these rewards are taken away, or sometimes even if they do not see any punishment, the student will not be interested in coming to class and learn the language any longer

2) Intrinsic motivation refers to learning itself having its own reward (Arnold,

2000, p 14) It means the learners are willingly and voluntarily (not compulsorily) try to learn what they think it is worth or important for them When students have intrinsic motivation, they have the internal desire to learn and they do not have the need for external outcomes There are no negative impacts in having intrinsic motivation In addition, intrinsic motivation pushes the student to learn without rewards, because the need is innate or come from inside or depends on their own will Lightbown and Spada (1999, p 56-57) mentioned that teachers do not have many effects on students‟ intrinsic motivation since the students are from different backgrounds and the only way to motivate students is by making the classroom a supportive environment b Motivation model - Components of motivation

Motivation is a “dynamic”, “eclectic and multifaceted” concept; therefore, a researcher who intends to initiate a motivation construct easily turns out to make it too restricted or static The last decades have seen a lot of efforts of researchers to establish motivation constructs For example, Gardner‟s motivation construct known as the integrative-instrumental system is popular on account of its

“simplicity and intuitively convincing character” Nevertheless, this construct is

“too static and restricted” according to Dửrnyei (1994) Consequently, some other studies tried to expand the Gardner‟s construct by “adding new components, such as intrinsic/extrinsic motivation, intellectual curiosity, attribution about past successes/failure, need for achievement, self-confidence, and classroom goal structures, as well as various motives related to learning situation-specific variables such as classroom events and tasks, classroom climate and group cohesion, course content and teaching materials, teacher feedback, and grades and rewards” Based on Gardner‟s construct and these studies, Dửrnyei has integrated all the components into one construct with three components specifically as follows:

Figure 5: Components of foreign language learning motivation

Related studies

2.1 Evidence of effectiveness of differentiated instruction as a classroom practice

When reviewing the studies about differentiating instructions, Hall, Strangman and Meyer (2003) noticed that there was not much existent empirical research to prove the theory validity As a result, the gap in the literature of this area can be acknowledged and further studies in future should be necessarily encouraged Although differentiated instruction approach, the whole “package” itself lacks empirical validation, its components have been investigated and validated in educational research for years The idea of differentiated instruction theory has just been put forward, but in fact, its constituents, including “readiness, effective management procedures, grouping students for instruction, and engaging learners” (to name just a few) are grounded in the reliable works from the mid- 1980s to the present Given as a typical example, “readiness” concept in the theory which suggests the content should be slightly ahead of learners‟ current level of mastery (i.e learners should be slightly pushed beyond the point at which they can learn unassisted) is based on Lev Vygotsky (1978, in Hall, Strangman & Meyer,

2003) and the zone of proximal development (ZPD), the range at which learning takes place, by Fisher et al (1980, in Tomlinson, 2000)

Despite the shortage of empirical research, a significant quantity of testimonials and classroom examples were provided by the authors of several publications and web sites Tomlinson (2000) reports the promising results (improvements in classrooms) of the application of the full model of differentiation in some educational settings Initially, this instruction process was introduced to gifted learners who did have much difficulty in acquiring the content Owing to the findings of its “excellent potential to positively impact learning” (Hall et al., 2003) and the reality of the diversity of today‟s classroom settings, this approach was then quickly applied to students of all abilities at all levels After years of application in general education classroom settings, many web sites were created in which the experts of this study area provided a plentiful source of advice, suggestions and illustrating lessons for teacher-practitioners For example, the studies by Lewiss and Batts (mentioned in Tukbure, 2011) showed that a five-year differentiated instruction program resulted in the increase of promotion rate from 79% to 94.8% after summative testing at the end of the school year, revealing students‟ performance improvement

The main drawback of this approach is teachers‟ unfamiliarity with this concept when they all can picture exactly how a “single-size instruction class” is due to their experience over many years It means the difficulty which teachers must encounter when it comes to imagine what a differentiated instruction class look and feel like (Tomlinson, 2001) This uncertainty leads to differentiating phobia which makes teachers fear attempting to implement this approach in their classroom

Brandt (1998) explained the link between the conditions in which people learn best and differentiation Apparently, the link indicates the rationale for differentiated classroom as follows:

Figure 6: The rationale behind differentiated classes

2.2 Differentiated instruction and learning style

The link between differentiated instruction and learning style can be recognized easily The latter is possibly considered as the motivational cause for the former According to learning style theory, no learners are alike In other words, they are of different abilities, interest, learning needs and learning styles (characteristic cognitive, affective, and physiological behaviors) We have known how students learn from the related works by thousands of researchers worldwide

For instance, each student in classroom must go through the process of making sense of what teacher teach “This meaning-making process” is determined by many students‟ factors such as their previous knowledge, interest and how they can learn best (National Research Council, 1990, in Tomlinson, 2001)

Therefore, although the curriculum which is designed by the state should be the same for them, the methodologies adapted in particular classrooms of diverse students must be well-tailored as multiple paths to suit individual preferences and cater for all students‟ learning process for them to equally experience success and the best learning environment That‟s where differentiated instruction can be regarded as an effective tool to accommodate students‟ learning styles The inevitable wide variance of students in classroom functions as a force to drive instruction differentiation Tulbure (2011) mentioned three theoretical- methodological arguments which her choice to differentiate instructions upon learners‟ learning styles was based on:

 Consequently to a meta-analysis performed by Sullivan [apud 15], it was established that a flexible instruction, differentiated upon learning styles, leads to an improvement of the level of academic achievement;

 Recent studies in the field of learning psychology revealed the fact that adults are individuals whose learning style and rhythm is stabilized

[12], an aspect that implies respect for and capitalization of inter- individual differences within the frame of higher education;

 The experimental intervention was accomplished during the Pedagogy seminars, a fact that implies compliance of the curriculum regarding the pedagogic disciplines studies made by the students during the 2nd year of study; in this circumstances we have considered that the differentiation of instruction according to the students‟ learning styles allows the reaching of aims and observance of the contents provided by the curriculum

Differentiating instruction which has been employed for gifted and talented students for the last two decades is definitely not new Now it is used widely as an effective teaching tool to address students‟ different learning style and thereby engaging them to make learning progress It is not scarce to find the term “learning style” present in the works of differentiation For example, in her book about differentiating instruction in a mixed-ability classroom, Tomlinson (2001) wrote “a student with kinesthetic ability and a weakness in reading, for example, may find it easier to comprehend a story by pantomiming the events in it as someone else reads aloud, and then reading the story to herself.” Differentiating supplies these different learning styles various avenue to learning

Learning styles vary between students and even within one individual over time Differentiated instruction does not mean offer different tasks to each individual, but only three or four options for students in any given class to ensure every learner would equally find an engaging learning task to undertake This makes differentiated instruction different from “individualized instruction” of the 1970s which must have exhausted teachers by suggesting they should prepare different instruction for each of 30-plus students in a single classroom

Differentiated instruction advises teachers focus on “meaningful learning and powerful ideas” for all students, but sometimes need to work with the class as a whole, sometimes small groups or occasionally individuals (Tomlinson, 2001)

To prepare for instruction preparation, teachers have to discover students‟ learning styles by a reliable learning style inventory developed by the experts in this field Understanding the individual strengths and weaknesses would help teachers to differentiate their instruction appropriately into a variety of performance indicators in order for students to access the knowledge best, have good opportunities to develop needed skills and present their strong points The essential curricula concepts may be the same for all students but the complexity of the content, learning activities and/or products will vary so that all students are challenged and no students are frustrated

As mentioned above in differentiated instruction section, there are four ways to achieve the teaching goals One of them is to differentiate by manipulating learning environment or through accommodating learning styles In spite of the variety of works on learning style by Dunn and Dunn, David Kolb or Howard Gardner which do not meet each other at one point all the time, these theories do positively benefit learners Differentiated instruction is a method which can be used to fulfill the ultimate goals of the components of learning styles: present to students a range of various instructions for learners to experience their best learning in their compatible environment preference and expand their repertoire to the other learning styles for a more well-rounded development

Figure 7: Range of activities in a differentiated classroom

2.3 Differentiated instruction and ESL/ EFL motivation (In the world and in Vietnam)

Academic motivation can be increased by many ways As mentioned earlier in motivation building strategies, learners can be motivated when offered the choice of class activities that indicates their autonomy This shows the link between differentiated instruction approach and academic motivation Differentiating instructions in classroom provides a wide range of activities, which helps every student “find learning a better fit much of the time” (Tomlinson, 2001), thereby increasing their motivation to attend class

Tulbure (2011) who did research to investigate the correlation among three key terms learning styles, differentiation and intrinsic motivation found out that differentiating instructions according to pupils‟/students‟ learning styles contributes to the improvement of the level of intrinsic academic motivation and achievement.

METHODOLOGY

Participants

The class which was investigated and took the intervention consists of 26 second-year students They had just finished their first year at university and were going to start the second year when this study was undertaken Their ages range from 19 to 21 years old (with the vast majority born in the early 1990s) The female numbers which account for roughly 89% of the total outweigh the number of males

The class students come from different hometown: 23% from cities or the suburbs, 57.7% from countryside, 11.5% from coastal area in the Central and 7.7% from mountainous area Although the same curriculum by the Ministry of Education and Training applied in every primary, secondary and high school in Vietnam, students from different areas will receive different education due to the conditions of facilities and the quality of teaching staff in each region (not mention students‟ intrinsic difference) Therefore, the fact that all of the students pass the university entrance exam cannot claim the homogeneity in these students‟ ability, level of English proficiency, learning styles or motivation For example, from my own observation and comments of my colleagues, the students from less developed area are mostly good at grammar because of the grammar-translation approach employed widely here, whereas those in the cities have more access to communicative approach as well as extra classes with foreign teachers in English language centers

Moreover, the well-equipped classrooms in the cities which help the teachers to vary the modes of learning for students benefits the city learners to become more adaptable and flexible than those from other remote areas

1.2 Description of the major and course

The university offers various major courses for its students One of the main majors in this university is English language teacher education The students studying this major have to accomplish all the required courses from the first year to the fourth year in order to gain the Bachelor of Arts degree in English language teaching Over their first two years at university, the students go through some English skill courses which were designed to improve their proficiency in speaking, reading, listening and writing English The last two years contains the courses in English teaching methodology, some other theoretical subjects such as research methodology, critical thinking or translation (some are compulsory; some optional) and the students‟ practicum in some chosen high schools

Detailed of the second-year courses: in the first semester, the students have to master three courses at the same time 3A (English for social purposes), 3B (English for academic purposes) and 3C (Test-taking skills) The preceding courses of those are 1A, 1B, 1C in first semester of the first year and 2A, 2B, 2C in the second half The sequencing courses are 4A, 4B and 4C This research was conducted in course 3A in the first semester of their second-year Therefore, this course would be described in more detail

This course is designed to assist students in reaching B2+ level of CEFR (Common European Framework of Reference) and/or Band 6.5 of IELTS (International English Language Testing System) The course focuses on the sustainable development of integrated proficiency language skills:

Listening, Reading, Speaking, and Writing in the light of competence-based and task-based approaches in language teaching Through a variety of practice tasks, the course is intended to provide students with a good opportunity to develop their communicative language competence to meet the targeted CEFR level Besides, students will be guided to develop effective learning strategies

(2007) Face2Face Upper Intermediate – Student‟s Book Cambridge:

- Tim, N & Bell, J (2007) Face2Face Upper Intermediate – Workbook

- Lecturers in Division 2, ULIS, VNU (complied & edited) (2013) Reading Supplementary Materials

1.3 Description and reflection of the teacher (the researcher)

My passion for English language was so great that I did not have to think much before selecting my university After four years studying here, I graduated in

2011 and gained my Distinction degree in an honor (fast-track) program which helped me to become a lecturer in this university Apparently, I have started my teaching career for two years so far, but had one-year experience when undertaking this study Although I am a novice teacher and have a lot of difficulty in handling class, I receive much qualified support from other experienced colleagues as well as learning a plenty of useful things from fine works by well-known researchers or educators worldwide As a result, I could see my progress day by day in my teaching which sometimes resulted right in students‟ motivation and college achievement

The class which was under investigation was a mixed-ability one Some students, a minority of the class, are hard-working and somehow motivated to make progress in the classroom Meanwhile, the rest of the class was quite passive in their learning though they also want to succeed academically.

Class problem from the teacher‟s perspective

When I first came in this class, it was quite easy to see that these students had serious difficulty in understanding what I am talking to them in English, and even some of them could not use English to communicate at all When I asked one of them several simple familiar questions such as could you tell me something special about you, the student was so confused that she had to seek translating support from the others sitting around This appeared quite surprising to me because these students had finished their first year They were supposed to master English as a communicative tool, at least in daily life context In the second week, when I started teaching the first unit according to the syllabus, it was even more problematic because most of them (except some students counted on one hand) were hardly involved in the lesson When I asked them elicit questions related to the lesson, they either looked down and stuck their eyes on the table or simply looked at nowhere I admitted it was a trauma which really made me think to look for reasons and then solutions to the problems

At first, I formed some hypotheses about the causes of the problem:

 Their low level of English proficiency which leads to a serious lack of confidence may prevent them from proactively participating in class activities;

 Their lack of motivation which is caused by their not-accommodated different learning styles may discourage them to achieve success in classroom

These hypotheses encouraged me to conduct the first steps of this action research to test the theories of the problems The first hypothesis was confirmed when I reviewed their study records in the first year

Figure 8: The proportions of the students by their study record in the first year

The pie chart indicates the percentages of the students categorized according to their study results when they finished their freshman‟s year The vast majority of the students, accounting for 85%, gained under 3.0 More seriously, over a third of them only had GPA ranging from 1.0 to 2.0 at the end of the second semester

After that, I decided to give them motivation survey to measure their current level of interest in learning in the class The result showed a lack of motivation in most of the students, both “advanced” and “struggling” ones The result would be presented in the next part A learning style survey was also delivered to the students in hope to find the cause for the motivation shortage.

Action research

According to Mackey and Gass (2005), “an all-encompassing definition of action research” seems not to exist In fact, action research, also known as

“collaborative research” or “practitioner research” or “teacher-initiated research,” can be defined and undertaken in many different ways in the field

Most other classroom research which is implemented by outside-class researchers for the purposes of “theory construction and testing”; therefore, the voices of teachers themselves are barely heard and considered Research matters originate from teachers‟ own problems and concerns in their own class, and action research is carried out by practitioners/teachers to find out the solutions to their current classroom problems

Action research is believed to be the best way to find out the solutions to a specified context Though solutions suggested by other researchers‟ studies may have been proved to be effective, they may never work for all circumstances

Hence, it is inevitable for teachers to do action research in parallel with their teaching (Waters-Adams, 2006)

“Action research is a process in which participants examine their own educational practice systematically and carefully, using the techniques of research

It is based on the following assumptions:

- Teachers and principals work best on problems they have identified for themselves

- Teachers and principals become more effective when encouraged to examine and assess their own work and then consider ways of working differently

- Teachers and principals help each other by working collaboratively

- Working with colleagues helps teachers and principals in their professional development”

As Ferrance (2000) noted, in her booklet of action research, this kind of research is neither a “library project” nor “problem-solving in the sense of trying to find out what is wrong.” In other words, action research is a cyclical process which is not to review literature knowledge of a topic or to look for the reasons for doing some certain things In fact, it is supposed to identify the real educational matters at hand, gather related data, reflect and then decide a set of actions Its ultimate goal is to better educational situations which then have impact on students

Bearing this in mind, the researcher valued action research as a practical solution to classroom problem, rather than the generalization of the results found by someone else from his/ her own teaching context

Research instruments

The adaptation of motivation and learning style questionnaire

As suggested by Dửrnyei (2003), questionnaire has always been used as one of the most common methods of data collection in both quantitative and qualitative studies on account of the ease of questionnaire construction and its efficiency A well-designed questionnaire could save researcher‟s time, money and effort, but still manage to obtain a great deal of needed information “in less than one hour” and “in a systematic manner” (pp.9-10)

Also, according to Dửrnyei‟s book focusing on questionnaire issue, questionnaire can be classified into three types about the respondent: factual, behavioral and attitudinal The questionnaire which was used in this research for the purpose of identifying the student participants‟ learning preferences was, therefore, the attitudinal type, specifically concerning the respondent‟s interest (preferences for particular activities)

Despite the popular use of questionnaire, there was a false assumption in constructing a questionnaire as Oppenheim (1992, cited in Dửrnyei, 2003) pointed out that people with a normally-functioning brain could create a questionnaire on their own In fact, this thought was in most cases wrong; it mistook daily questions for a well-designed questionnaire as a research method Not everyone, actually, could design a good questionnaire to elicit the needed information Unfortunately, a bad questionnaire may make a topic-interesting research terribly fail (Dửrnyei,

2003) For these reasons, the researcher decided not to design a questionnaire by herself, but adapting existing ones whose validity and reliability have been already proved over time a Learning style inventory

The researcher decided to adapt Perceptual Learning-Style Preference Questionnaire (PLSPQ) developed by Reid (1984) as the measuring instrument of students‟ learning styles, particularly for learners of foreign language

The survey was validated by the split-half method Originally, one subset of the learning styles consisted of 10 statements which then were reduced into 5 each after a correlation analysis As noted by Sabeh et al (2011), Reid‟s PLSPQ had been used widely in numerous studies and therefore, its validity and reliability have already been guaranteed The “user-friendly” PLSPQ consisted of 30 randomly- ordered statements which should be responded on the 5-point Likert scale ranging

“strong disagree to strongly agree” Some questions were repeated to increase the internal consistency of the questionnaire after being paraphrased a bit

For those above reasons, the PLSPQ was selected as the instrument of this research However, the modifications which had been applied in the questionnaire such as replacement (question 15), translation (question 16) and exemplification (question 17) were needed to avoid ambiguity, prevent misunderstanding and clarify the meaning respectively The questionnaire was not entirely translated into students‟ L1 (except for the instruction and the in-bracket translation of Question

16) because the language use in each statement was quite simple and easy to understand Moreover, if some repeated statements were in Vietnamese, the students would easily find out and consider them as “the ridiculous trick.”

The PLSPQ questionnaire also included its scoring sheet which guided the user how to elicit the respondent‟s learning styles via 30 questions

Owing to the researcher‟s assumption of the students‟ unfamiliarity with the key term “learning styles”, a brief explanation was provided directly when the survey was administered The assurance of confidentiality and anonymity was also written clearly at the beginning of the questionnaire b Motivation questionnaire (adapted from Gardner’s AMTB)

Even though Gardner‟s Attitude Motivation Test Battery (AMTB) was criticized by some researchers (Dửrnyei, 1994), this questionnaire in the field of motivation research was highly appreciated for its validity and reliability AMTB was first developed by Gardner and Lambert (1958) to measure non-linguistic factors (motivation and attitude) of English-speaking Canadian students learning French This survey was adapted and employed in numerous studies of motivation of the learners of different L2 worldwide (e.g., Clement, Gardner & Smythe, 1977;

Laine, 1977; Gordon, 1980; Muchnick & Wolfe, 1982) The AMTB explores learners‟ motivation and attitude towards the target language in terms of six categories:

 Integrative orientation: learners‟ motivation for learning English is for their daily life or social purpose;

 Instrumental orientation: learners need to acquire language usage skills to a proficiency level for pursuing knowledge in their specific fields of study;

 Motivational intensity: the level of learners‟ motivation in learning a language as a second/foreign language;

 Desire to learn English: the insight into how strong is the students‟ desire to learn the language;

 Parental/Lecturer’s encouragement: the effects of these two factors on students‟ motivation in learning English; and

 The rating of English skills: the supplementary and complementary information which can be linked to other factors under study

In order to reduce administration time which definitely has effect on respondents‟ commitment to complete the survey with care, some researchers had used the mini-AMTB version (12 items instead of 104 in the AMTB) suggested by

Guilford (1954) instead of the full AMTB Despite its small number of survey items

(12 instead of 104 items in the AMTB), this mini version still ensures basic conceptual structure of the original AMTB Each item in the mini version corresponds to a scale on the full AMTB (see Figure 9)

Figure 9: Equivalent scales of 12 mini-AMTB items

On the other hand, Gardner (2004) suggested that the “Guilford style” mini- AMTB should not be used as a substitute for the full AMTB The reason was that

“single item scales are subject to considerable measurement error and have a restricted number of possible response alternatives, all of which can influence the relationships of these items to other variables.” In other words, the little number of the item (one item each scale) used to measure each scale of motivation and attitude reduces the possibility of in-depth measurement, which may decrease the validity and reliability of the survey result

As a result, the researcher adapted the relevant sections of the full AMTB to design the list of survey questions for involved students in order to supplement the drawbacks of using the mini-AMTB

The AMTB which was used for adaptation in this research was an English- language version The first underlying principle for choosing this version was because of the English-language used in the whole research This version was translated for the sake of Gardner‟s international research project Another reason was that this version was developed and translated to aim at the students learning English as a foreign language The similarity between the original subjects of this survey and the participants of this research could increase the relevance of the questionnaire to its respondents in this study However, the age range of the original subjects (secondary school students) was lower than that of the participants of this research (university students)

Therefore, the adaptation of the survey was inevitable First of all, to reduce the quantity of data to analyze but maintaining the content validity of the AMTB, the researcher decided to select only the categories which accommodate the objectives of this study, including motivation intensity, lecturer’s encouragement

(appear in the survey as “English teacher evaluation”) and desire to learn English

Ten items of each chosen scale were all kept but with a small modification in English teacher evaluation section As mention earlier, the English-version AMTB was originally tailored for secondary school students who have only one English teacher, whereas the participants of this research, university English majors, have at least 2 English teacher teaching different English skills in one semester Therefore, the items in English teacher evaluation were modified with an addition “English teacher” into “English reading teacher.”

Procedure of data collection

In phase 1 (pre-intervention or problem identification), the PLSPQ questionnaire was administered to the participants (a class of second-year English majors) and then be collected In the next step, the data are presented into a visual chart and introduced to the students In addition, the questionnaire of motivation (the AMTB) is also distributed to the respondents to investigate how motivated they were usually in a reading lesson before the new differentiated instruction approach was employed

In phase 2 ( intervention ), basing on the gathered data from the two questionnaires, the researcher would form a hypothesis (see Research’s objectives) and then devise a new teaching approach (differentiated instructions) which is thought to be able to address the problem of low motivation levels among the students by catering their own learning styles During class time, the teacher (and also the researcher) is supposed to self-observe and self-reflect after that After the treatment, the motivation questionnaire will be sent out again to check if there is the improvement of their motivation or not Furthermore, interviews will also be conducted with the students at the end of process

After the cycle one of the research, the researcher would decide whether or not to conduct the second cycle based on the result of the first one

Figure 11: The research first cycle

Phase 1: PLSPQ and AMTB questionnaire + interview with some students

Phase 2: Intervention (differentiated instructions by learning styles)

Procedure of data analysis

This study employs both qualitative and quantitative methods to analyze the collected data

After gathered, the PLSPQ questionnaire will be assessed and analyzed with the guidance from the scoring sheet of the PLSPQ (see Appendix 2) provided by Reid (1987)

The AMTB motivation questionnaire will be collected and analyzed according to the scoring sheet (see Appendix 4) Each items of the AMTB survey has a numerical value ranging from 1 to 6 Positively keyed items have ascending value from “strongly disagree” (1 point) to “strong agree” (6) while negatively keyed ones have descending value from “strongly disagree” (6) to “strongly agree”

(1) The maximum mark a respondent can gain is 180 when he/she chooses all strongly agrees for positively keyed items and all strongly disagrees for negatively keyed ones One the other hand, the minimum mark is 30, which means choosing all 1-point-value alternatives The mark can be interpreted as: the more points a person gets in this survey, the more motivated he/she is

The interviews with the students, classroom observation and student‟s diaries will be coded, transcribed, analyzed and quoted as the evidence in the study

All the collected data cooperated to help the researcher gain a thorough overview on the problems and seek out the best solutions.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Research question 2

2.1 Description of new intervention (differentiated instructions)

As mentioned earlier, differentiated instructions would be employed in order to cater for the students‟ learning styles with hope that their motivation would be raised significantly According to the result of the PLSPQ questionnaire:

1) There was a wide range of learning styles in the targeted class;

2) The major learning styles of most of the students were tactile, kinesthetic and auditory (over 50%) Although visual, group and individual learning styles were not the best learning conditions, a majority of the students could still perform well with some effort

3) However, visual, group and individual learning styles were also negative to 8.4%, 12.5% and 21% respectively

In short, it was worth bearing in mind these characteristics of students‟ learning styles when differentiating instructions

Differentiation must provide a balance of learning for all students to expose their unique learning styles so that they could have the best chance to gain necessary skills, knowledge and thereby achieving success (Anderson, 2007, cited in Fenner, Mansour & Sydor, 2010)

The intervention called differentiation project was conducted over a six-week period from September 2012 to October 2012 In light of the research objectives, a set of stages had been planned:

 Differentiate class activities to cater the students‟ learning styles to raise motivation

 Evaluate the students‟ motivation each month to keep track of their progress

Teacher‟s self-observation and reflection helped record what happened in the classroom The intervention was a week-by-week action project which lasted for six weeks According to the syllabus, the 3A course started at the beginning of September and lasted for fifteen weeks The researcher project tried to cover half of the semester (before mid-term test) Week 1 and week 2 in the syllabus were pre- process stages in which problem was identified with the first surveys and interview with the students The intervention was adapted starting from week 3 to week 8 of the syllabus

Week 1 (September 3 to September 7) and Week 2 (September 10 to September

 Start the intervention of Differentiated Instructions

In this week, the theme of a life of learning was introduced Although this was a reading class, the teacher integrated the other skills into one lesson to activate as many learning styles as possible In week three, the students were supposed to learn about newspaper or magazine article At first, the teacher did a quick survey by asking the students about the frequency of their reading articles (both printed and online ones) The whole class answered by a show of hands and then classified into three small groups according to their “never”, “occasional” and “usual” frequency to hold discussion of the reasons A sample of article “learning a language” was used to get them familiar with writing article by reading and analyzing the main ideas and structure of the sample article After the whole class had explored the concept thoroughly, an assignment was presented to the students “international press simulation” The students who preferred working in group were grouped to work as journalists in particular section (economic, cultural or social news), whereas those that like working individually were assigned to role as editors At home, the students were asked to do further research on the Internet to decide the topic and the content The editors needed to find out more about the standard articles and criteria to assess an article

In week 4, the students brought their article outline and necessary materials for their making an article to class The key ideas were reviewed in groups and then the whole class After that, the journalists worked in their groups to start writing the article The teacher encouraged the students to divide the group work fairly and suitably Some tactile students were suggested to decorate the A0 paper by drawing illustration pictures for the group‟s article The kinesthetic editors moved around to help groups with their better knowledge of good articles The teacher played chief- editor role to show up to help when asked The visual and auditory students searched the Internet for more information and pictures Peer check by the editors was employed after each group had finished their article

Another theme “time for a change” was introduced A printed website on health given out to the students required them to make prediction about the percentages of the people having particular attitudes to food and dietary advice A listening recording with two monologues by two students talking about the same topic were played for students to check their prediction and recognize the reasons mentioned in the talks

The students were told to read two letters written by two people to a newspaper to suggest a change in the society by expressing their views and giving reasons Then they were asked to write a letter to a person who they hardly ever talked to recommend a good change for them (fashion, learning methods, attitudes, etc.) After finishing the first draft individually in class, they were paired up to check letters mutually at home In the next week, the letters must have been put inside an envelope sealed with a heart shaped Names of addressees must have been written clearly, but names of senders were optional

At the beginning, the teacher showed the students a mailbox and asked them to put their letters inside As a “postman”, the teacher would have them delivered to accurate locations The students were very excited when receiving letters written to them Some (who were quite shy and unpopular in class) received more than one letter while some did not The teacher explained to those without a letter in their hands that they might be too popular to have someone “hasn‟t talked to you yet”

This week, the theme was “law, crime and punishment” As a whole class, the students brainstormed all the crimes they knew and were introduced to some more new words by the teacher The equivalent punishments were predicted and then corrected by the teacher

In reading section, the students were introduced to advice leaflets against crime They were asked to make leaflets later to advice their peers to avoid being attacked, raped or pickpocketed

At home, the students found their favorite books of any kind to bring to class in week 7

The self-made leaflets were exchanged among groups for useful information to stay safe in Hanoi

The theme of week 7 was telling stories Some pictures were provided for the students by the teacher Telling stories from picture would possibly help to improve their creativity and speaking skills

All the books which were brought to class were then collected to make a

“book gallery” in class Each person picked one book to take home for reading enjoyment They had one week to finish the book and might find some critic reviews about the books

This week, the teacher and the students gathered to share what they had read and what other people in the world thought about the books in pairs The owner of the book worked with the person who had chosen the book in week 7 to exchange their ideas and discuss about the book In small groups selected by the students, they wrote their own book reviews

2.2 The extent of the accommodation to learning styles by differentiated instruction strategies

Based on the teacher‟s self-observation, and reflection, some evidence of differentiating instructions by the students‟ learning styles could easily recognized

The first thing was the integration of different skills into one reading lesson

As mentioned earlier in Literature review, reading was only regarded as a strong point of visual learners Unfortunately, visual learning style was only minor one of the majority of the class, and even nearly 10% of them had difficulties in this learning condition Moreover, the kinesthetic students accounted for the large percentage of major LS who did not consider reading as a priority Therefore, integrating listening, speaking and writing could engage more students than only reading could

Research question 3

After the first conduct, the AMTB was administered to the students in the middle and at the end of the intervention period to examine to what extent the motivation levels were affected by the differentiated instructions The results of three times of delivering the AMTB were presented together as follows:

Figure 14: Motivational intensity over a six-week period (Sept to Oct 2012)

The first line graph indicates the change in motivational intensity of the students involved in the research from September to October 2012 The most notable trend belonged to the highest grade group 41-60 points The percentage of the students who gained the most points only started at about 23% in September which then increased dramatically to become double at the end of the action research project Meanwhile, the number of those who got less than 20 points declined considerably from nearly 27% in September to only 7.8% in October

Unlike these two vibrant groups, the other mark group (21-40 points) remained quite stable with a slight fall in October Overall, over the investigated period the intensity of motivation among the students appeared to grow significantly

Along with the third AMTB delivery, an interview was also conducted afterwards to give chance for some of the students to elaborate more on their survey results In the second interview along with the third time of the motivation survey, six out of twenty-six students were chosen because of the significant change of their marks in different survey undertakings and their representative learning styles

These students majored in English teaching methodology, so they have strong motives to master English as much as possible (see Figure 16) Therefore, they invested quite a lot of time and effort into learning English and completing course requirements Apart from in-class time, six students usually spent 2 to 3 hours on average a day for self-study at home in weekdays and a little more at weekends

However, they complained about being distracted quite often by technology (mobile phone, Facebook notifications or Yahoo chat, etc.) The frequency of switching back and forth between study and relaxing reduced their real learning time at home

During the intervention time, it was revealed that they spent 30 minutes or one hour more studying in Sunday before Monday class because they wanted to participate more effectively in this class This was really good news to the teacher because it indicated the students were really motivated by the new approach

About homework and assignments, the students said that they liked the idea of the teacher allowing them to complete the assignments in different ways which fit their interest (drawing, singing or role-playing) and language aptitude Doing something they like really encouraged them a lot even when encountering difficulties Working individually and then in small groups flexibly enabled every of them to work hard on the issue and help each other when necessary

[S4] In the first year, we had to work in groups whenever we were assigned an assignment Some of the group members were really better and quicker thinker, so it was quite hard for me to make contributions to group work But now you ask us to work individually first before joining the groups, which makes me feel more comfortable and not worried about “being slower than the others” Working alone doesn‟t put a lot of pressure of fear of making mistakes, so I can concentrate more and study more effectively

Figure 15: English teacher evaluation over a six-week period (Sept to Oct 2012)

The above line graph reveals another component of the students‟ motivation: teacher evaluation during the same two-month period of the research project It is quite easy to recognize both upward and downward trend from this graph Like motivational intensity, the lowest grade group (10-20 points) tended to drop rapidly during the intervention Likewise, the percentage of the students in middle group showed a moderate fall in September before rising slowly in to end at 46.1% in the last week of October The highest group increased quite sharply by October, but then reduced its growing speed in the second half of the period In short, the students seem to evaluate the teacher in a more positive way

In the second interview, when asked about their awareness of learning styles, six students were quite excited to share about their experience with applying their understanding of LS to their study One of them said:

I want to thank you for telling us about our learning styles I think the result that said I am a visual learner was quite right for me I have compared the characteristics of a visual learner with myself, and glad to find out the similarity For example, I like pictures but not really enjoy talking and acting in class Some of the teachers before did not like me being quiet I tried so hard to be involved in class activities but it did not work Now I understand why Thank you!

The teacher brought a useful new concept to the students which helped them to understand themselves and figure out the suitable methods of learning to get the best results and achievement This is one of the most important reasons which has somewhat changed the students‟ mind about the teacher as well as their evaluation of the teacher Understanding their nature of learning made the learners less worried and confused about their uniqueness (which may be different from other

About her new methodology, some positive comments were also received from students although the teacher did not officially inform the students about the change in her teaching methods which would accommodate their learning styles for a rise in motivation level S3 said that he was quite amazed and satisfied with the teacher‟s teaching methods which showed her dedication and creativity Just like other teachers he learned with in his first year, the new teacher made a great effort to facilitate his learning process However, S4 appeared to disagree with S3‟s comparison when she claimed that the teacher was quite different and unique compared with other former teachers:

… I really like you You are so different In my first year, I was quite shy and reserved so I didn‟t participate in class activities as actively as S3 I usually just sat in the back row and watched them The teachers seemed not to care about me It was sad sometimes, but then I thought those activities were not suitable for kinds of students like me You are not like them; you encouraged me to join the activities and made me feel like I am a part of this class

CONCLUSIONS

The teacher-researcher‟s reflection on the project, limitations and suggestions for

Now there exist a lot of “new” and “effective-claimed” teaching methodologies Choosing one of them may become a big challenge for teachers themselves From the findings of this study and personal experience-observation, I highly recommend differentiated instructions according to learning styles to my colleagues worldwide

We do believe that everyone is unique though they may have the same goals of success Therefore, the way they go to approach academic achievement must be differently tailored Imposing a preferred teaching method of the teachers on different students probably leads to nothing but failure

Despite its inevitable limitation of a MA thesis, this action research project had somewhat been successful and basically solve the motivation problem of researcher‟s own class It proudly provided other teachers, educators and practitioners with ready-made learning style inventory and AMTB motivation survey together with detailed scoring sheets guiding the analysis of the results

These instruments help to reduce the difficulty teachers may encounter when having an intention of doing the same action research in their classroom

Suggested steps for using differentiated instructions by learning styles to increase students’ motivation level at university:

 Step 1: After figuring out the problem of low motivation in a class by the

AMTB questionnaire, a learning style inventory should be administered to investigate the major, minor and negative learning styles of the class

 Step 2: Teachers plan the possible and appropriate differentiated strategies

(read more in Tomlinson, 2001) to the students‟ learning styles

 Step 3: Teachers apply the strategies to class activities, homework and assignments and keep track of the progress of class motivation by the AMTB and self-observation

 Step 4: After the intervention is finished, the AMTB and interviews

(possibly relevant other instruments) can be used to check the results of the intervention Cycle two can be necessary in case the first cycle does not bring the expected results

Firstly, because of being an action research, the sample size of the study is rather small – 26 participants Although the findings of this study quite promisingly proved the effectiveness of differentiated instructions by learning styles on motivation, any replication and generalization from this study should be done with great caution

Secondly, the analysis of the results was not so effective and productive The survey results of the PLPSQ and AMTB should be analyzed by software like SPSS, so the reliability of the results would be raised and a large quantity of data could be processed quickly and efficiently Because of this limitation in analysis instruments, the researcher was made to choose action research with small sample size so that she could handle them best

Last but not least, the length of the research was quite short – only six weeks (half of the semester) Therefore, the results may be superficial and shallow

Covering as much of the syllabus as possible would be better, but the researcher suffered from the time constraint

Suggestions for the next cycles

This action research was recommended for other teachers who encountered the same problem of students‟ motivation in teaching However, the replication needs to be done cautiously, especially in case of larger population

The further studies should reduce the limitations of this research by applying to bigger sample with the use of SPSS software, and longer time of application

In case the first cycle does not work for a particular class situation, the next cycles are highly recommended After the first cycle, researchers are advised to investigate the reasons why the intervention does not have good effects on students (interviews, questionnaires, etc.) so that they could understand the core of the intervention failure before designing a more suitable one

Barberos, M., Gozalo, A and Padayogdog, E (2012), The effect of the teacher's teaching style on students' motivation action research Retrieved on November 14 th

2012 from http://steinhardt.nyu.edu/teachlearn/tfat/research/motivation

Cassidy, S (2004), Learning styles: An overview of theories, models, and measures

Educational Psychology, 24 (4) Retrieved from http://www.acdowd- designs.com/sfsu_860_11/LS_OverView.pdf

Coffield, F., Moseley, D., Hall, E and Ecclestone, K (2004), Learning styles and pedagogy in post-16 learning: A systematic and critical review London, the UK:

Learning and skills research center Retrieved on March 13rd 2011 from https://crm.lsnlearning.org.uk/user/order.aspx?code1543

Dửrnyei, Z (1994), Motivation and motivating in the foreign language classroom

The Modern Language Journal, 78 (3), pp 273-284

Dửrnyei, Z (2003), Questionnaires in Second Language Research Mahwah, NJ:

Dunn, R (1983), Learning styles and its relation to exceptionality at both ends of the spectrum Exceptional Children, 49, pp 496-506

Fenner, D., Mansour S K & Sydor, N (2010), The effects of differentiation and motivation on students‟ performance Chicago, the USA: Unpublished M.A thesis in Saint Xavier University

Ferrance, E (2000), Action Research Northeast and Islands Regional Educational

Laboratory at Brown University Retrieved on Nov 11st 2012 on www.lab.brown.edu/pubs/ /act_research.pdf

Gardner, R C (1985), Social psychology and second language learning: the role of attitudes and motivation London, GB: Edward Arnold (publishers) ltd

Guilford, J P (1954), Psychometric Methods New York: McGraw Hill

Hall, T., Strangman, N., & Meyer, A (2003), Differentiated instruction and implications for UDL implementation Wakefield, MA: National Center on

Accessing the General Curriculum Retrieved in January 2013 from http://aim.cast.org/learn/historyarchive/backgroundpapers/differentiated_instruction _udl

Mackey, A and Gass, S.M (2005), Second language research Mahwah, NJ:

McGrew, K (2004), Beyond IQ: A model of academic competence and motivation

(MACM) Retrieved in March 2013 from http://www.iapsych.com/acmcewok/References.html

O'Brien, R (2001), An Overview of the Methodological Approach of Action Research] In Roberto Richardson (Ed.), Theory and Practice of Action Research

João Pessoa, Brazil: Universidade English version Retrieved on November 14 th from http://www.web.ca/~robrien/papers/arfinal.html

Reid, J (1987), The Learning Style Preferences of EFL Students TESOL Quarterly,

21, pp 87-110 Retrieved on March 27 th 2011 from www.hufs.davidboesch.com/ /Reid.Joy.LearningStylePreferenesESLLearners.pdf

Schunk, D H (1991), Self-efficacy and academic motivation Educational Psychologist, 26, pp 207-231 Retrieved in January 2013 from libres.uncg.edu/ir/uncg/f/d_schunk_self_1991.pdf

Shams, M (2008), Students‟ attitudes, motivation and anxiety towards English language learning Journal of Research and Reflections in Education, 2(2)

Retrieved in September 2012 from http://ecommons.aku.edu/pakistan_ied_pdck/7

Stenhouse, L (1975), An Introduction to Curriculum Research and Development,

London, Heinemann (Particularly ch.10 – The Teacher as Researcher)

Theroux, P (2004), Differentiating instructions Retrieved in February 2013 from http://members.shaw.ca/priscillatheroux/differentiating.html

To, T H., Nguyen, M H and Nguyen, T M (2009), ELT Methodology I

Unpublished coursebook University of Languages and International University, VNU

Tomlinson, C A (2000), Differentiation of Instruction in the Elementary Grades

ERIC Digest ERIC Clearinghouse on Elementary and Early Childhood Education

Retrieved from http://www.readingrockets.org/article/263/

Tomlinson, C A (2001), How to differentiate instruction in mixed-ability classrooms (2 nd Ed.) Virginia, the USA: Association for supervision and curriculum development Retrieved in March 2013 from www.teachersity.org/resources/instruction.pdf

Tucker, C M., Zayco, R A., & Herman, K C (2002), Teacher and child variables as predictors of academic engagement among low-income African American children Psychology in the Schools, 39(4), pp 477-488

Tulbure, C (2011), Intensifying the intrinsic motivation by differentiating the teaching strategies in higher education Bulletin of the Trasilvania University of Brasov, 4(53), pp 97-102 Retrieved in February 2013 from http://webbut.unitbv.ro/BU2011/Series%20VII/BULETIN%20VII/03_6%20Tulbur e.pdf

Vijchulata, B and Lee, G S (1985), A survey of students‟ motivation for learning English RELC Journal, 16 (68) Retrieved in August 2012 from http://www.sagepub.com/journals/

Wajnryb, R (1992), Classroom Observation Tasks – A resource book for language teachers and trainers Great Britain: Cambridge University Press

Waters-Adams, S (2006), Action Research in Education Retrieved on November

10 th 2012 on http://www.edu.plymouth.ac.uk/resined/actionresearch/arhome.htm

Willing, K (1988), Learning Styles in Adult Migrant Education South Australia:

National Curriculum Resource Centre (NCRC)

Willoughby, J (?), Differentiating Instruction: Meeting Students Where They Are

New York, the USA: Glencoe/McGraw-Hill Retrieved in February 2013 from http://www.glencoe.com/sec/teachingtoday/subject/di_meeting.phtml

The following questionnaire is to identify your preferences of learning styles I would be grateful if you fill in the questionnaire according to what you really like in class This is not a test, so there are no “right” or “wrong” answers I am in favor of your personal interest Please give your answers sincerely as only this will guarantee the success of this research All of the information and the association between your name and your answers to the questionnaire will be treated with the strictest confidence and used only for the purpose of the study

Thank you very much for your help!

Perceptual Learning-Style Preference Questionnaire Instructions

This questionnaire has been designed by Reid (1984) to help you identify the way(s) you learn best, the way(s) you prefer to learn Decide whether you agree or disagree with each statement For example, if you strongly agree, mark:

Respond to each statement quickly, without too much thought Try not to change your responses after you choose them Please answer all the questions

1 When the teacher tells me the instructions I understand better

2 I prefer to learn by moving around and doing something in class

3 I get more work done when I work with others

4 I learn more when I study with a group

5 In class, I learn best when I work with others

6 I learn better by reading what teacher writes on the whiteboard

7 When I do things in class, I learn better

8 I remember things I have heard in class better than things I have read

9 When I read instructions, I remember them better

10 I learn more when I can make a model of something

11 I understand better when I read instructions

12 When I study alone, I remember things better

13 I learn more when I make something for a class project

14 I enjoy learning in class by trying out new activities or ideas

15 I learn better when I make drawings (e.g a mind map or a doodle) as I study

16 I learn better in class when the teacher gives a lecture (giảng bài)

17 When I work alone, I learn better

18 I understand things better in class when I participate in role-playing

19 I learn better in class when I listen to someone

20 I enjoy working on an assignment with two or three classmates

21 When I build something, I remember what I have learned better

22 I prefer to study with others

23 I learn better by reading than by listening to someone

24 I enjoy making something for a class project

25 I learn best in class when I can participate in related activities

26 In class, I work better when I work alone

27 I prefer working on projects by myself

28 I learn more by reading textbooks than by listening to lectures

29 I prefer to work by myself

Thank you so much for your cooperation!

There are 5 questions for each learning category in this questionnaire The questions are grouped below according to each learning style Each question you answer has a numerical value

Fill in the blanks below with the numerical value of each answer For example, if answered Strongly Agree (SA) for question 6 (a visual question), write and number

5 (SA) on the blank next to question 6 below When you have completed all the numerical values for Visual, add the numbers Multiply the answer by 2, and put the total in the appropriate blank

Follow the process for each of the learning style categories When you are finished, look at the scale at the bottom of the page; it will help you determine your major learning style preference(s), your minor learning style preference(s), and those learning style(s) that are negligible

LANGUAGE LEARNING SURVEY (Adapted from the Attitude Motivation Test Battery)

Following are a number of statements with which some people agree and others disagree Please circle one alternative below each statement according to the amount of your agreement or disagreement with that item The following sample item will serve to illustrate the basic procedure a Spanish football players are much better than Brazilian football players

In answering this question, you should have circled one alternative Some people would have circled “Strongly Disagree”, others would have circled