An investigation into the use of brainstorming activities in english classes at some primary schools in hue city

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING HUE UNIVERSITY OF FOREIGN LANGUAGES, HUE UNIVERSITY HUYNH NHAT UYEN AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE USE OF BRAINSTORMING ACTIVITIES IN ENGLISH CLASSES AT SOME PRIMARY SCHOOLS IN HUE CITY MA THESIS IN THEORY AND METHODOLOGY OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHING In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts, Hue University of Foreign Languages HUE, 2019 BỘ GIÁO DỤC VÀ ĐÀO TẠO ĐẠI HỌC HUẾ TRƢỜNG ĐẠI HỌC NGOẠI NGỮ HUỲNH NHẬT UYÊN ĐIỀU TRA VỀ VIỆC SỬ DỤNG NHỮNG HOẠT ĐỘNG ĐỘNG NÃO (BRAINSTORMING) TRONG LỚP HỌC TIẾNG ANH Ở MỘT SỐ TRƢỜNG TIỂU HỌC THÀNH PHỐ HUẾ LUẬN VĂN THẠC SĨ LÝ LUẬN VÀ PHƢƠNG PHÁP DẠY HỌC BỘ MÔN TIẾNG ANH MÃ SỐ: 8140111 NGƢỜI HƢỚNG DẪN KHOA HỌC: PGS.TS LÊ PHẠM HOÀI HƢƠNG HUẾ, 2019 MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING HUE UNIVERSITY OF FOREIGN LANGUAGES, HUE UNIVERSITY HUYNH NHAT UYEN AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE USE OF BRAINSTORMING ACTIVITIES IN ENGLISH CLASSES AT SOME PRIMARY SCHOOLS IN HUE CITY MA THESIS IN THEORY AND METHODOLOGY OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHING CODE: 8140111 SUPERVISOR: ASSOF PROF.DR LE PHAM HOAI HUONG HUE, 2019 i STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP The work is contained in this thesis has not previously been submitted for a degree or diploma in any university I certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief, my thesis contains no material previously published or written by another person except where due to reference is made in the thesis itself (Signed) Date: 10/12/2019 ii ABSTRACT This study aimed at investigating the primary teachers’ perceptions and use of brainstorming activities in teaching English at some primary schools in Hue City Additionally, it also explored the difficulties faced by the teachers when applying brainstorming activities in teaching English to young learners The sample of the study consisted of fifty English teachers from some primary schools in Hue City The data collected from the questionnaire, interview and audio recordings were analyzed both quantitatively and qualitatively The findings of the study revealed that most of the primary English teachers hold positive perceptions towards brainstorming activities They also illustrated how to conduct brainstorming activities in terms of types of lesson, teaching aids and classroom management Furthermore, some brainstorming activities such as listing, mind-mapping and visual brainstorming were claimed to be regularly used in their teaching English to children at primary schools The teachers then pointed out some difficulties such as the lack of time, large class and mixed levels of students That prevented them from conducting successful brainstorming activities On the basis of the findings, some implications and suggestions were made with the hope that the primary teachers will be in favor of brainstorming activities and use these activities in teaching English to young learners more effectively iii Acknowledgements First and foremost, I would like to express my profound gratitude to my supervisor Ms Le Pham Hoai Huong, Assoc.Prof.Dr who devoted valuable time to examine my thesis, supported me with many precise comments and suggestions My thesis would not be completed without her whole-hearted guidance Especially, I am really grateful to all teachers teaching MA course and my classmates in this course as well for their teaching, advice, assistance and recommendations during the time I have studied at Hue University of Foreign Languages Furthermore, I owe a major debt to all English teachers from Hue primary schools, who provided an important basis and stimulus to collect the needed data for the research Always, my heartfelt thanks go to my beloved family and friends for supporting me with care, encouragement and understanding Without their assistance, it is obviously difficult for myself to finish my thesis on time In a word, my sincere gratitude goes to all of those without whose supported my study is far from being finished Hue, September 2019 Huynh Nhat Uyen iv TABLE OF CONTENTS STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP i ABSTRACT iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iv TABLE OF CONTENTS v LIST OF TABLES viii LIST OF CHARTS viii LIST OF FIGURES viii CHAPTER INTRODUCTION 1.1 Rationale 1.2 Research aims 1.3 Research questions 1.4 Research significance 1.5 Research scope 1.6 Structure of the research CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Introduction 2.2 Theoretical background on brainstorming 2.2.1 Definitions of brainstorming 2.2.2 Rules of brainstorming 2.2.2.1 Focusing on quantity 2.2.2.2 Not allowing criticism 2.2.2.3 Welcoming strange ideas 2.2.2.4 Building on each other’s ideas 2.2.3 The roles of brainstorming activities 2.2.4 Difficulties in using brainstorming activities 2.2.5 Kinds of classroom management used in brainstorming activities 10 2.2.5.1 Individual brainstorming 10 2.2.5.2 Group brainstorming 11 2.2.5.3 Whole class brainstorming 11 v 2.2.6 Procedures of brainstorming activities 11 2.2.7 Examples of classroom brainstorming activities 12 2.3 Theoretical background on young learners 14 2.3.1 Definitions of young learners 14 2.3.2 Characteristics of young learners 14 2.4 Teaching English at primary schools in Vietnam 16 2.5 Previous studies 17 2.5.1 In other countries 17 2.5.2 In Vietnam 19 2.5.3 Gaps in the literature 20 2.6 Summary 21 CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY 22 3.1 Introduction 22 3.2 Research design 22 3.3 Research sites and participants 22 3.4 Data collection 23 3.4.1 Questionnaire 23 3.4.2 Interview 24 3.4.3 Observation 25 3.5 Data analysis 25 3.6 Summary 25 CHAPTER 4: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION 26 4.1 Introduction 26 4.2 Primary English teachers’ perceptions of brainstorming activities 26 4.2.1 Primary English teachers’ perceptions of brainstorming activities in English teaching 28 4.2.2 Primary English teachers’ perceptions of brainstorming activities in English learning 29 4.3 Primary English teachers’ use of brainstorming activities in teaching English 32 4.3.1 The application of brainstorming activities in teaching English 33 4.3.2 Teaching aids used in brainstorming activities 35 vi 4.3.3 Forms of classroom management used in brainstorming activities 36 4.3.4 Common brainstorming activities used in teaching English to young learners 38 4.3.4.1 Common brainstorming activities used in English lessons 38 4.3.4.2 The use of some common brainstorming activities in teaching English 40 4.4 Difficulties faced by primary English teachers when using brainstorming activities 45 4.5 Summary 46 CHAPTER CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS 47 5.1 Introduction 47 5.2 Summary of key findings 47 5.3 Pedagogical implications 48 5.4 Limitations of the study 50 5.5 Suggestions for further research 50 REFERENCES 51 APPENDICES 57 vii LIST OF TABLES Table 4.1 The mean score of the questionnaire 26 Table 4.2 The mean score of cluster 27 Table 4.3 Primary English teachers’ responses to benefits of brainstorming activities 28 Table 4.4 The mean score of cluster 32 Table 4.5 Teachers’ responses to teaching aids used in brainstorming activities 35 Table 4.6 Teachers’ responses to forms of classroom management used in brainstorming activities 36 LIST OF CHARTS Chart 4.1 Primary English teachers’ responses to the benefits of brainstorming activities in English learning 30 Chart 4.2 Teachers’ responses to the application of brainstorming activities in teaching English 33 Chart 4.3 Teachers’ responses to some common brainstorming activities used in English lessons 38 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Mind-mapping of Transportations 12 viii Q 7.1 Valid Cumulative Frequency Percent Percent Percent Valid Disagree 14.0 14.0 14.0 Neutral 12 24.0 24.0 38.0 Agree 14 28.0 28.0 66.0 Strongly 17 34.0 34.0 100.0 agree Total 50 100.0 100.0 Q 7.2 Valid Cumulative Frequency Percent Percent Percent Valid Disagree 10 20.0 20.0 20.0 Neutral Agree Strongly agree Total 22 15 44.0 30.0 6.0 44.0 30.0 6.0 50 100.0 100.0 64.0 94.0 100.0 Q7.3 Frequency Percent Valid Disagree 8.0 Neutral 15 30.0 Agree 24 48.0 Strongly agree Total Valid Cumulative Percent Percent 8.0 8.0 30.0 38.0 48.0 86.0 14.0 14.0 50 100.0 100.0 100.0 Q7.4 Frequency Percent Valid Disagree 6.0 Neutral 4.0 Agree 26 52.0 Strongly agree Total Valid Cumulative Percent Percent 6.0 6.0 4.0 10.0 52.0 62.0 19 38.0 38.0 50 100.0 100.0 100.0 Q8.1 Valid Cumulative Frequency Percent Percent Percent Valid Disagree 11 22.0 22.0 22.0 Neutral 14 28.0 28.0 50.0 Agree 18.0 18.0 68.0 Strongly 16 32.0 32.0 100.0 agree Q8.2 Valid Cumulative Frequency Percent Percent Percent Valid Disagree 20 40.0 40.0 40.0 Neutral 17 34.0 34.0 74.0 Agree 13 26.0 26.0 100.0 Q8.3 Valid Cumulative Frequency Percent Percent Percent Valid Disagree 19 38.0 38.0 38.0 Neutral Agree Strongly agree 17 13 34.0 26.0 2.0 34.0 26.0 2.0 72.0 98.0 100.0 Q8.4 Valid Cumulative Frequency Percent Percent Percent Valid Disagree 22 44.0 44.0 44.0 Neutral Agree Strongly agree 14 10 28.0 20.0 8.0 28.0 20.0 8.0 72.0 92.0 100.0 Q8.5 Valid Cumulative Frequency Percent Percent Percent Valid Disagree 6.0 6.0 6.0 Neutral 17 34.0 34.0 40.0 Agree 18 36.0 36.0 76.0 Strongly 12 24.0 24.0 100.0 agree Q8.6 Valid Cumulative Frequency Percent Percent Percent Valid Disagree 14.0 14.0 14.0 Neutral 18 36.0 36.0 50.0 Agree 13 26.0 26.0 76.0 Strongly 12 24.0 24.0 100.0 agree Q8.7 Frequency Percent Valid Disagree 22 44.0 Neutral 18.0 Agree 17 34.0 Strongly 4.0 agree Valid Cumulative Percent Percent 44.0 44.0 18.0 62.0 34.0 96.0 4.0 100.0 Cluster Q2.1 Valid Cumulative Frequency Percent Percent Percent 18 36.0 36.0 36.0 Valid Disagree Neutral 13 26.0 26.0 62.0 Agree 17 34.0 34.0 96.0 4.0 4.0 100.0 50 100.0 100.0 Strongly agree Total Q2.2 Valid Cumulative Frequency Percent Percent Percent 16 32.0 32.0 32.0 Valid Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree Total 13 17 26.0 34.0 8.0 26.0 34.0 8.0 50 100.0 100.0 58.0 92.0 100.0 Q2.3 Valid Cumulative Frequency Percent Percent Percent 13 26.0 26.0 26.0 Valid Disagree Neutral 17 34.0 34.0 60.0 Agree 18 36.0 36.0 96.0 4.0 4.0 100.0 50 100.0 100.0 Strongly agree Total Q2.4 Valid Cumulative Frequency Percent Percent Percent 10 20.0 20.0 20.0 Valid Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree Total 14 28.0 28.0 48.0 19 38.0 14.0 38.0 14.0 86.0 100.0 50 100.0 100.0 Q2.5 Valid Cumulative Frequency Percent Percent Percent 10.0 10.0 10.0 Valid Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree Total 18 19 16.0 36.0 38.0 16.0 36.0 38.0 50 100.0 100.0 26.0 62.0 100.0 Q2.6 Valid Cumulative Frequency Percent Percent Percent 17 34.0 34.0 34.0 Valid Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree Total 14 11 16.0 28.0 22.0 16.0 28.0 22.0 50 100.0 100.0 50.0 78.0 100.0 Q2.7 Valid Cumulative Frequency Percent Percent Percent 8.0 8.0 8.0 Valid Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree Total 11 17 18 22.0 34.0 36.0 22.0 34.0 36.0 50 100.0 100.0 30.0 64.0 100.0 Q3.1 Valid Cumulative Frequency Percent Percent Percent Valid Disagree 14.0 14.0 14.0 Neutral 11 22.0 22.0 40.0 Agree 16 34.0 34.0 70.0 Strongly 15 30.0 30.0 100.0 agree Total 50 100.0 100.0 Q3.2 Frequency Percent Valid Disagree 4.0 Neutral 12 24.0 Agree 22 42.0 Strongly 14 30.0 agree Total 50 100.0 Valid Cumulative Percent Percent 4.0 4.0 24.0 28.0 42.0 74.0 30.0 100.0 100.0 Q3.3 Valid Cumulative Frequency Percent Percent Percent Valid Disagree 8.0 8.0 8.0 Neutral 13 26.0 26.0 34.0 Agree 19 38.0 38.0 72.0 Strongly 14 28.0 28.0 100.0 agree Total 50 100.0 100.0 Q3.4 Frequency Percent Valid Disagree 4.0 Neutral 12.0 Agree 21 46.0 Strongly 19 38.0 agree Total 50 100.0 Q3.5 Frequency Percent Valid Disagree 14 28.0 Neutral 16 32.0 Agree 15 30.0 Strongly 10.0 agree Total 50 100.0 Q4.1 Frequency Percent Valid Disagree 10 20.0 Neutral 24 48.0 Agree 10 20.0 Strongly 12.0 agree Total 50 100.0 Valid Cumulative Percent Percent 4.0 4.0 12.0 24.0 46.0 62.0 38.0 100.0 100.0 Valid Cumulative Percent Percent 28.0 28.0 32.0 60.0 30.0 90.0 10.0 100.0 100.0 Valid Cumulative Percent Percent 20.0 20.0 48.0 68.0 20.0 88.0 12.0 100.0 100.0 Q4.2 Valid Cumulative Frequency Percent Percent Percent Valid Disagree 15 30.0 30.0 30.0 Neutral 13 26.0 26.0 56.0 Agree 19 38.0 38.0 94.0 Strongly 6.0 6.0 100.0 agree Total 50 100.0 100.0 Q4.3 Frequency Percent Valid Disagree 10.0 Neutral 21 42.0 Agree 14 28.0 Strongly 10 20.0 agree Total 50 100.0 Q5.1 Frequency Percent Valid Disagree 4.0 Neutral 19 38.0 Agree 17 34.0 Strongly 12 24.0 agree Total 50 100.0 Q5.2 Frequency Percent Valid Disagree 4.0 Neutral 27 54.0 Agree 17 34.0 Strongly 8.0 agree Total 50 100.0 Valid Cumulative Percent Percent 10.0 10.0 42.0 52.0 28.0 80.0 20.0 100.0 100.0 Valid Cumulative Percent Percent 4.0 4.0 38.0 42.0 34.0 76.0 24.0 100.0 100.0 Valid Cumulative Percent Percent 4.0 4.0 54.0 58.0 34.0 92.0 8.0 100.0 100.0 Q5.3 Valid Cumulative Frequency Percent Percent Percent Valid Disagree 2.0 2.0 2.0 Neutral 8.0 8.0 10.0 Agree 27 54.0 54.0 64.0 Strongly 18 36.0 36.0 100.0 agree Total 50 100.0 100.0 Q5.4 Frequency Percent Valid Neutral 17 34.0 Agree 20 40.0 Strongly 13 26.0 agree Total 50 100.0 Q5.5 Valid Cumulative Percent Percent 34.0 34.0 40.0 74.0 26.0 100.0 100.0 Valid Cumulative Frequency Percent Percent Percent Valid Disagree 4.0 4.0 4.0 Neutral 12.0 12.0 16.0 Agree 15 30.0 30.0 46.0 Strongly 27 54.0 54.0 100.0 agree Total 50 100.0 100.0 Q5.6 Frequency Percent Valid Disagree 18.0 Neutral 16 32.0 Agree 15 30.0 Strongly 10 20.0 agree Total 50 100.0 Valid Cumulative Percent Percent 18.0 18.0 32.0 50.0 30.0 80.0 20.0 100.0 100.0 Q5.7 Valid Cumulative Frequency Percent Percent Percent Valid Disagree 14 28.0 28.0 28.0 Neutral 18.0 18.0 46.0 Agree 25 50.0 50.0 96.0 Strongly 4.0 4.0 100.0 agree Total 50 100.0 100.0 Q5.8 Frequency Percent Valid Disagree 23 46.0 Neutral 13 26.0 Agree 12 24.0 Strongly 4.0 agree Total 50 100.0 Q6.1 Frequency Percent Valid Disagree 12 24.0 Neutral 18 36.0 Agree 15 30.0 Strongly 10.0 agree Total 50 100.0 Q6.2 Frequency Percent Valid Disagree 14 28.0 Neutral 22 44.0 Agree 10 20.0 Strongly 8.0 agree Total 50 100.0 Valid Cumulative Percent Percent 46.0 46.0 26.0 72.0 24.0 96.0 4.0 100.0 100.0 Valid Cumulative Percent Percent 24.0 24.0 36.0 60.0 30.0 90.0 10.0 100.0 100.0 Valid Cumulative Percent Percent 28.0 28.0 44.0 72.0 20.0 92.0 8.0 100.0 100.0 Q6.3 Valid Cumulative Frequency Percent Percent Percent Valid Disagree 12.0 12.0 12.0 Neutral 21 42.0 42.0 54.0 Agree 18 36.0 36.0 90.0 Strongly 10.0 10.0 100.0 agree Total 50 100.0 100.0 Q6.4 Frequency Percent Valid Disagree 6.0 Neutral 14 28.0 Agree 17 34.0 Strongly 16 32.0 agree Total 50 100.0 Q6.5 Frequency Percent Valid Disagree 27 54.0 Neutral 18 36.0 Agree 10.0 Total 50 100.0 Q6.6 Valid Cumulative Percent Percent 6.0 6.0 28.0 34.0 34.0 68.0 32.0 100.0 100.0 Valid Cumulative Percent Percent 54.0 54.0 36.0 90.0 10.0 100.0 100.0 Valid Cumulative Frequency Percent Percent Percent Valid Disagree 16.0 16.0 16.0 Neutral 18 36.0 36.0 52.0 Agree 20 40.0 40.0 92.0 Strongly 8.0 8.0 100.0 agree Total 50 100.0 100.0 Q6.7 Frequency Percent Valid Disagree 23 46.0 Neutral 16 32.0 Agree 11 22.0 Total 50 100.0 Valid Cumulative Percent Percent 46.0 46.0 32.0 78.0 22.0 100.0 100.0 Q6.8 Valid Cumulative Frequency Percent Percent Percent Valid Disagree 10.0 10.0 10.0 Neutral 15 30.0 30.0 40.0 Agree 22 44.0 44.0 84.0 Strongly 16.0 16.0 100.0 agree Total 50 100.0 100.0 Cluster Q9.1 Frequency Percent Valid Disagree 8.0 Neutral 16 32.0 Agree 18 36.0 Strongly 12 24.0 agree Total 50 100.0 Q9.2 Valid Cumulative Percent Percent 8.0 8.0 32.0 40.0 36.0 76.0 24.0 100.0 100.0 Valid Cumulative Frequency Percent Percent Percent Valid Disagree 11 22.0 22.0 22.0 Neutral 17 34.0 34.0 56.0 Agree 18 36.0 36.0 92.0 Strongly 8.0 8.0 100.0 agree Total 50 100.0 100.0 Q9.3 Frequency Percent Valid Disagree 10 20.0 Neutral 16 32.0 Agree 17 34.0 Strongly 14.0 agree Total 50 100.0 Valid Cumulative Percent Percent 20.0 20.0 32.0 52.0 34.0 86.0 14.0 100.0 100.0 Q9.4 Valid Cumulative Frequency Percent Percent Percent Valid Disagree 23 46.0 46.0 46.0 Neutral 13 26.0 26.0 72.0 Agree 13 26.0 26.0 98.0 Strongly 2.0 2.0 100.0 agree Total 50 100.0 100.0 Q9.5 Frequency Percent Valid Disagree 6.0 Neutral 16 32.0 Agree 25 50.0 Strongly 12.0 agree Total 50 100.0 Q10.1 Frequency Percent Valid Disagree 16.0 Neutral 10 20.0 Agree 20 40.0 Strongly 12 24.0 agree Total 50 100.0 Q10.2 Frequency Percent Valid Disagree 4.0 Neutral 16.0 Agree 22 44.0 Strongly 18 36.0 agree Total 50 100.0 Valid Cumulative Percent Percent 6.0 6.0 32.0 38.0 50.0 88.0 12.0 100.0 100.0 Valid Cumulative Percent Percent 16.0 16.0 20.0 36.0 40.0 76.0 24.0 100.0 100.0 Valid Cumulative Percent Percent 4.0 4.0 16.0 20.0 44.0 64.0 36.0 100.0 100.0 Q10.3 Valid Cumulative Frequency Percent Percent Percent Valid Disagree 19 38.0 38.0 38.0 Neutral 16 32.0 32.0 70.0 Agree 11 22.0 22.0 92.0 Strongly 8.0 8.0 100.0 agree Total 50 100.0 100.0 Q10.4 Frequency Percent Valid Disagree 24 48.0 Neutral 13 26.0 Agree 14.0 Strongly 12.0 agree Total 50 100.0 Valid Cumulative Percent Percent 48.0 48.0 26.0 74.0 14.0 88.0 12.0 100.0 100.0 ONE SAMPLE T-TEST One-Sample Statistics N MEAN OF QUESTRIAL 50 Std Std Error Mean Deviation Mean 3.39 900 013 One-Sample Test Test Value = 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference MEAN OF QUESTRIAL Mean of cluster t 27.238 df 49.000 Sig (2Mean tailed) Difference 0.000 3.467 One-Sample Statistics Std N Mean Deviation 50.00 3.42 930 Std Error Mean 013 Lower 3.208 Upper 3.727 One-Sample Test Test Value = 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Mean of cluster Mean of cluster 1.1 t df 26.420 49.000 Sig (2Mean tailed) Difference 0.000 3.418 One-Sample Statistics Std N Mean Deviation 50 3.74 878 Lower 3.155 Upper 3.682 Std Error Mean 0124 One-Sample Test Test Value = 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Mean of cluster 1.1 Mean of cluster 1.2 t df 30.513 49.000 Sig (2tailed) 0.000 Mean Difference 3.735 One-Sample Statistics Std N Mean Deviation 50 3.24 955 Lower 3.485 Upper 3.985 Std Error Mean 0135 One-Sample Test Test Value = 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Mean of cluster 1.2 t 27.132 df 49.000 Sig (2Mean tailed) Difference 0.000 3.237 Lower 2.966 Upper 3.509 Mean of cluster One-Sample Statistics Std N Mean Deviation 50 3.50 900 Std Error Mean 0130 One-Sample Test Test Value = 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Mean of cluster Mean of cluster t df 27.759 49.000 Sig (2Mean tailed) Difference 0.000 3.501 One-Sample Statistics Std N Mean Deviation 50 3.42 923 Lower 3.244 Upper 3.758 Std Error Mean 131 One-Sample Test Test Value = 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Mean of cluster t df 26.533 49.000 Sig (2Mean tailed) Difference 0.000 3.416 Lower 3.15 Upper 3.68