Thông tin tài liệu
STATEMENT OF ORIGINALITY This work has not previously been submitted for a degree or diploma in any university To the best of my knowledge and belief, the thesis contains no material previously published or written by another person except where due reference is made in the thesis itself Date: 22 June, 2016 Signature Luu Thi Thuy Hien i ABSTRACT The study aims at investigating teachers' perceptions of Learner Autonomy (LA) and practice of using classroom activities to foster learners' LA at Kontum Technical Economic College - a school in the High Land of the Central, Vietnam The sample of this study consisted of 30 English language teachers, in which the majority of them are teaching at the college whereas some of them were invited from other local schools in Kontum Province The data were gathered through a questionnaire in order to identify how the English language teachers perceived of LA, as well as examine whether there were any differences between teachers' perception of autonomous classroom activities and their actual use during their classes Also, interviews and classroom observations were chosen as other research tools to help the researcher have more information and have a deep insight into the issue studied After that, the data were analyzed using SPSS statistical software version 19.0 The findings of the research indicated that most of the English language teachers had positive perceptions of LA, its necessities in students' learning process, as well as the important role of language teacher in fostering learners' LA In addition, the research result also revealed that teachers positively perceived some autonomous classroom activities However, there was a mismatch between teachers' perceptions and their actual use of these activities during their classes because of some challenges faced by the teacher The study also makes some suggestions for both school management staffs and English language teachers to solve the problem Keywords: Learner autonomy, perceptions, autonomous classroom activities, practice of fostering autonomy ii Acknowledgements In the preparation of the research, I am deeply indebted to a lot of individuals who helped me finish this thesis First of all, I would like to express my deep gratitude to my supervisor, Assoc Prof Dr Truong Vienfor his encouragement, enthusiastic guidance, and useful advice During the time working on the research, he always spent his valuable reading my thesis, giving detailed comments, corrections as well as suggestion so that I can find some new ideas for my writing I greatly acknowledge his whole hearted supervision, without which it would be difficult for me to complete this thesis Second, I would like to extend my special thanks to all professors who gave me the knowledge on the subjects prescribed to the MA's program, suggested new topics to be considered, etc, which help me gain deep understandings to conduct a research I am also indebted all the teachers who participated in this study for their enthusiasm, willingness to answer the questionnaires, and the interview; and many thanks go to the teachers who provided the best convenience to make the class observations Then I am grateful to my sister Luu Ha Phuong, who helped me a lot in finding literature, translation for the study, and to my colleague Huynh Thi Tuyet who supported me with the technical aids to analyze the research data But for her help, SSPS is really a challenge to me Next, I would like to express my thanks to all my fellow friends in the MA's program course 2014-2016 for their helpful guidance, encouragement, and sharing information iii My deep gratitude goes to Kontum Technical Economic College administrators and all the colleagues in the General Department where I am working for their supports and sparing time and facility for me to conduct the research Last but not least, I would like to say my thank you to my family and relatives for their love, encouragement, as well as their moral and financial support iv TABLE OF CONTENTS STATEMENT OF ORIGINALITY i ABSTRACT ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iii TABLE OF CONTENTS iv LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES viii LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS x CHAPTER I - INTRODUCTION 1.1 Rationale 1.2 Research aims 1.3 Research questions and scope 1.4 Significance of the research .3 1.5 Structure of the research paper CHAPTER II - LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Theoretical background 2.1.1 Definitions of learner autonomy 2.1.2 Principles of learner autonomy .7 2.1.3 Conditions and ways of language learning autonomy 2.1.4 Roles of language teachers 2.1.5 Activities in the autonomous language learning 11 2.2 Previous studies .13 2.3 Summary 17 CHAPTER III - RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 18 3.1 Research questions 18 3.2 Research design .18 v 3.3 Participants 18 3.4 Research instruments: 19 3.4.1 Questionnaire 19 3.4.2 Classroom observations 21 3.4.3 The interviews 22 3.5 Procedure of data collection and analysis 22 CHAPTER IV - FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION .24 4.1 Teachers' perceptions 25 4.1.1 Teachers' perceptions of LA and its necessity 25 4.1.2 Teacher's perceptions of roles of language teachers 28 4.2 Practice of using classroom activities to promote LA 31 4.2.1 Teachers' perceptions of autonomous classroom activities 31 4.2.2 Teachers' practice of using autonomous classroom activities 34 4.2.3 Comparision between teachers' perceptions and their practice of using classroom activities to foster learner autonomy 37 4.3 Challenges faced by English language teachers in promoting LA at Kontum Technical Economic College: .40 4.4 Discussion 45 4.5 Summary 48 CHAPTER V - CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS 49 5.1 Summary 49 5.1.1 Summary of the study 49 5.1.2 Summary of the finding 49 5.2 Conclusion .50 5.3 Pedagogical implications .51 vi 5.3.1 Implications for English language teachers 51 5.3.2 Implications for the school management staffs 53 5.4 Limitations .54 5.5 Suggestions for further study 54 REFERENCES 56 APPENDICES 61 APPENDIX - QUESTIONNAIRE 61 APPENDIX - QUESTIONNAIRE (VIETNAMESE VERSION) 68 APPENDIX - CLASSROOM OBSEREVATION SHEET .75 APPENDIX - INTERVIEW QUESTIONS .77 APPENDIX - RAW CALCULATIONS OF THE QUESTIONNAIRES 80 vii LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES Figure 2.1: A framework fro developing autonomy in foreign languag learning Table 3.1: Demographic characteristics of the respondents to the questionnaire .19 Table 3.2: Clustering the questionnaire 21 Table 4.1: The reliability of the pilot and post questionnaires 24 Table 4.2: Mean score for the questionnaire .25 Table 4.3: Mean score of teachers' perceptions towards LA 26 Table 4.4: One-Sample Test 26 Table 4.5: Frequency of cluster 26 Figure 4.1: Percentages of teachers' perceptions of LA 27 Table 4.6: Mean score for teachers' perceptions of language teachers' roles 29 Table 4.7: One-Sample T-Test 29 Figure 4.2: Percentage of teachers' perceptions towards roles of language teachers 30 Table 4.8: Mean score for the teacher's perception of using classroom activities to foster LA 31 Table 4.9: One-Sample T-Test 32 Figure 4.3: Percentages of the most agreed activity 32 Figure 4.4: Percentages classroom activities perceived by teachers 33 Table 4.10: Mean score for practice of using activities in language classes .34 Table 4.11: Percentage of classroom activities practically used by the teachers 35 Figure 4.5: Comparison between teachers' perceptions and their practice of using classroom activities to foster LA and what they really practice .38 Figure 4.6: Percentages of teachers' perceptions and practice of using the classroom activities 38 Table 4.12: Mean score of teachers' difficulties in fostering LA 40 Table 4.13: One Sample T-Test 41 viii Table 4.14: Percentage of teachers' perceptions of their challenges regarding to students 41 Figure 4.7: Percentage of teachers' difficulties regarding to their teaching 43 Table 4.15: Percentage of teacher's challenges relating to teaching materials and school support 43 Figure 4.8: Mean scores of clusters 45 ix LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ALL Autonomous language learning EFL English as a foreign language ELT English language teaching LA Learner autonomy SPSS Statistical package for social sciences x làm việc Q27 Những hoạt động theo nhóm tương trợ hỗ trợ cho việc tự học Q28 Tự học cải thiện sinh viên tự chọn tài liệu học tập cho họ Để tự chủ việc học, sinh viên Q29 cần phát triển khả đánh giá trình học tập Giáo viên nên sử dụng hoạt động thuyết trình hay thảo luận Q30 nhỏ với bạn học để thúc đẩy việc tự học Đóng kịch, làm chương trình truyền hình hay trị chơi hoạt Q31 động có ích để đẩy mạnh ý thức tự học lớp học Giáo viên yêu cầu sinh viên Q32 viết văn để cải phát huy khả tự học Kiểm tra sửa tập nhà hoạt động hiệu Q33 để khuyến khích sinh viên phát triển khả tự học Giáo viên thúc đậy tự học Q34 cách sử dụng kiểm tra sinh viên Viết tạp chí Q35 phương pháp hiệu giúp sinh viên tăng cường tự học Sử dụng mạng internet công Q36 nghệ coi hoạt động tự học ngôn ngữ Q37 Dạy kỹ giao tiếp, thảo luận nhóm biện pháp tiếp cận lấy 72 người học làm trung tâm chiến lược giúp sinh viên tăng cường tính tự học Đặt mục tiêu đưa định Q38 điều quan trọng việc tự học Các hoạt động dự án cho có Q39 hiệu việc đẩy mạnh trình tự học Q40 Các hoạt động khác mà giáo viên dùng để thúc đẩy tự học lớp học: ……………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………… 73 Q41 Các sinh viên không thực tạo động lực cho việc học tiếng Anh Q42 Các sinh viên tự đặt mục tiêu học tập chia sẻ với giáo viên bạn học Q43 Khơng phải sinh viên có hứng thú thể xuất sắc lớp học Q44 Các sinh viên không so sánh kết học tập với sinh viên khác Q45 Các sinh viên tơi đợi lời giải thích từ giáo viên thay tự khám phá khái niệm ngôn ngữ Q46 Tôi không thực trọng đến hoạt động tự học ngôn ngữ lớp học Q47 Các sinh viên chưa hỏi tơi họ gặp khó khăn học Q48 Tôi chưa đào tạo qua chương trình đặc biệt hay khóa học liên quan đến việc tự học Q49 Sách giáo khoa không thực hỗ trợ việc đẩy mạnh trình tự học Q50 Các thách thức khác: …………………………………………………… Xin chân thành cảm ơn q Thầy (Cơ)! 74 Hồn tồn đồng ý (5) Đồng ý(4) Không chắn (3) Không đồng ý(2) Những thách thức mà giáo viên tiếng Anh trường Cao đẳng Kinh tế Kỹ thuật Kontum gặp phải Hồn tồn khơng đòng ý(1) Phần IV: Dưới thách thức việc thúc đẩy trình tự học mà giáo viên trường Cao đẳng Kinh tế Kỹ thuật Kon Tum gặp phải Xin vui lịng đọc phát biểu đánh dấu vào cột phản ánh tình trạng q Thầy (Cơ) APPENDIX - CLASSROOM OBSEREVATION SHEET Observation date: (1) First observation:…………………………………… (2) Second observation:………………………………… Class: …………………………………………………… Lesson: (1) First observation:…………………………………… (2) Second observation:………………………………… LA activities during classes: Activities When Q23 Asking students to complete the tasks alone Q26 Pair work Q27 Co-operative group work Q28 Letting students choose their own learning materials Q29 Developing the ability to evaluate students' own learning Q30 Giving a presentation or small talk with partners Q31 Making a play, a TV program, or a game show 75 How often Q32 Asking students to produce a text Q33 Checking and correcting homework Q35 Writing journals Q36 Using Internet and technology Q38 Setting up objectives and making decisions Q39 Project-based activities Other activities: …………………………………… …………………………………… Other notes/comments ………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………… 76 APPENDIX - INTERVIEW QUESTIONS There are five clusters of questions to find out more information about the issue studied, consisting of: Cluster 1: Teacher's perception towards LA and its necessities Question 1: What you define learner autonomy in English language teaching and studying? ………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………… Question 2: Do you think LA is necessary for the students? Why or why not? ………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………… Cluster 2: The roles of language teachers Question 1: Do you think LA is separated from the teachers? ………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………… Question 2: What roles of teacher should be in fostering learner's LA? ………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………… 77 Clusters 3: Teachers' perceptions towards autonomous classroom activities Question 1: According to you, are the classroom activities listed in the questionnaire useful to help students be more autonomous? Why or Why not? ………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………… Question 2: What other activities you think supportive for LA during the classes? ………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………… Cluster 4: Teachers' practice of using classroom activities Question 1: How often you employ the activities above in your class? ………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………… Question 2: What other activities you use to promote learners' LA? ………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………… Question 3: What is the most effective activity in your class? ………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………… 78 Question 4: Why don't you often use the actives like writing journal, projectbased activities, etc that are strongly rated by you in the questionnaire in your class? ………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………… Cluster 5: Challenges faced by teachers in fostering LA Question 1: What are the factors hindering you from helping students become autonomous? ………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………… Question 2: What would you like to suggest in order to solve the problems? ………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………… 79 APPENDIX - RAW CALCULATIONS OF THE QUESTIONNAIRES Reliability of the pilot questionnaire Case Processing Summary N % Cases Valid 10 33,3 a Excluded 20 66,7 Total 30 100,0 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15 Q16 Q17 Q18 Q19 Q21 Q22 Q23 Q24 Q25 Q26 Q27 Scale Mean if Scale Variance Item Deleted if Item Deleted 180,70 65,567 180,80 78,844 182,00 73,556 180,70 64,011 180,90 59,878 180,40 65,378 180,50 64,722 180,50 69,611 180,70 70,011 180,80 69,511 180,90 72,767 180,50 70,056 180,40 66,933 180,10 67,878 180,30 67,344 180,50 72,944 180,50 72,944 180,30 70,011 180,10 67,433 180,20 67,289 180,80 62,400 180,60 73,822 180,90 67,433 180,80 62,622 180,50 66,278 180,80 64,622 80 Corrected ItemTotal Correlation ,366 -,641 -,296 ,503 ,661 ,461 ,440 ,027 -,005 ,027 -,237 ,063 ,490 ,269 ,243 -,286 -,238 ,002 ,321 ,346 ,770 -,439 ,235 ,746 ,798 ,538 Cronbach's Alpha if Item Deleted ,687 ,744 ,723 ,679 ,661 ,684 ,683 ,706 ,708 ,707 ,719 ,702 ,688 ,694 ,695 ,718 ,721 ,707 ,692 ,691 ,668 ,720 ,695 ,669 ,684 ,680 Q28 Q29 Q30 Q31 Q32 Q33 Q34 Q35 Q36 Q37 Q38 Q39 Q41 Q42 Q43 Q44 Q45 Q46 Q47 Q48 Q49 180,70 180,60 180,30 180,50 181,00 180,60 180,70 180,40 180,10 180,70 180,60 180,70 180,70 180,40 181,20 180,50 181,10 181,30 181,00 180,60 181,70 70,456 62,044 66,233 68,500 65,556 65,378 66,678 63,822 72,544 66,678 64,711 68,678 72,011 72,044 67,511 69,611 66,544 71,122 64,889 66,711 68,456 -,030 ,762 ,346 ,118 ,217 ,641 ,376 ,480 -,260 ,213 ,497 ,072 -,191 -,182 ,164 ,059 ,232 -,096 ,360 ,306 ,122 ,707 ,666 ,689 ,701 ,696 ,681 ,689 ,679 ,716 ,696 ,681 ,706 ,714 ,715 ,699 ,703 ,695 ,712 ,686 ,691 ,701 Reliability of post questionnaire Case Processing Summary N % Cases Valid 30 100,0 a Excluded ,0 Total 30 100,0 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Scale Mean if Item Deleted 182,03 182,13 183,23 181,87 181,83 181,67 Item-Total Statistics Corrected Item- Cronbach's Scale Variance Total Alpha if Item if Item Deleted Correlation Deleted 74,378 ,140 ,704 79,016 -,251 ,723 74,116 ,117 ,706 75,637 ,011 ,712 72,282 ,262 ,697 73,609 ,163 ,703 81 Q7 Q8 Q9 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15 Q16 Q17 Q18 Q19 Q21 Q22 Q23 Q24 Q25 Q26 Q27 Q28 Q29 Q30 Q31 Q32 Q33 Q34 Q35 Q36 Q37 Q38 Q39 Q41 Q42 Q43 Q44 Q45 Q46 Q47 Q48 Q49 181,80 181,60 181,90 181,80 181,93 181,37 181,43 181,30 181,27 181,60 181,53 181,50 181,37 181,57 181,47 181,63 181,77 181,97 181,33 181,73 181,77 181,53 181,47 181,50 181,80 181,53 181,87 181,63 181,17 181,57 181,60 181,50 181,90 181,63 182,20 181,60 181,83 182,03 181,90 181,53 182,47 76,648 73,283 77,748 72,234 75,306 72,999 75,220 72,769 71,444 76,800 76,671 71,914 73,068 68,668 71,499 76,654 76,530 73,757 70,575 73,926 72,323 71,637 72,878 73,017 70,924 73,085 77,292 71,482 75,937 73,978 71,145 71,707 73,817 74,171 74,510 69,283 73,730 72,378 73,403 74,671 75,154 82 -,062 ,226 -,140 ,273 ,045 ,303 ,076 ,314 ,398 -,070 -,059 ,340 ,264 ,535 ,400 -,058 -,046 ,202 ,539 ,171 ,327 ,414 ,346 ,271 ,376 ,357 -,106 ,261 ,017 ,159 ,503 ,330 ,152 ,158 ,110 ,537 ,168 ,267 ,156 ,146 ,073 ,716 ,699 ,720 ,697 ,709 ,696 ,707 ,696 ,691 ,715 ,714 ,693 ,698 ,680 ,691 ,714 ,713 ,701 ,685 ,702 ,695 ,691 ,695 ,697 ,690 ,695 ,718 ,697 ,709 ,703 ,688 ,693 ,703 ,703 ,706 ,682 ,702 ,697 ,704 ,703 ,707 Descriptive questionnaire Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15 Q16 Q17 Q18 Q19 Q21 Q22 Q23 Q24 Q25 Q26 Q27 Q28 Q29 Q30 Q31 Q32 Q33 Q34 Q35 Q36 Q37 Descriptive Statistics Minimu Maximu N m m 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 83 Mean 3,63 3,53 2,43 3,80 3,83 4,00 3,87 4,07 3,77 3,87 3,73 4,30 4,23 4,37 4,40 4,07 4,13 4,17 4,30 4,10 4,20 4,03 3,90 3,70 4,33 3,93 3,90 4,13 4,20 4,17 3,87 4,13 3,80 4,03 4,50 4,10 Std Deviation ,669 ,681 ,817 ,805 ,791 ,788 ,819 ,691 ,774 ,776 ,740 ,596 ,626 ,615 ,675 ,740 ,681 ,699 ,651 ,803 ,664 ,718 ,662 ,651 ,606 ,691 ,662 ,629 ,551 ,648 ,776 ,507 ,805 ,928 ,572 ,712 Q38 Q39 Q41 Q42 Q43 Q44 Q45 Q46 Q47 Q48 Q49 Valid N (listwise) 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 2 2 2 5 5 5 5 5 4,07 4,17 3,77 4,03 3,47 4,07 3,83 3,63 3,77 4,13 3,20 ,583 ,747 ,774 ,669 ,730 ,740 ,747 ,765 ,858 ,571 ,664 Significance of the questionnaire One-Sample Test Test Value = Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15 Q16 Q17 Q18 Q19 Q21 t 5,188 4,287 -3,798 5,442 5,767 6,952 5,794 8,449 5,426 6,117 5,430 11,948 10,790 12,173 11,366 7,899 9,109 9,143 10,933 7,503 Df 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 Sig (2tailed) ,000 ,000 ,001 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 84 95% Confidence Interval Mean of the Difference Differen ce Lower Upper ,633 ,38 ,88 ,533 ,28 ,79 -,567 -,87 -,26 ,800 ,50 1,10 ,833 ,54 1,13 1,000 ,71 1,29 ,867 ,56 1,17 1,067 ,81 1,32 ,767 ,48 1,06 ,867 ,58 1,16 ,733 ,46 1,01 1,300 1,08 1,52 1,233 1,00 1,47 1,367 1,14 1,60 1,400 1,15 1,65 1,067 ,79 1,34 1,133 ,88 1,39 1,167 ,91 1,43 1,300 1,06 1,54 1,100 ,80 1,40 Q22 Q23 Q24 Q25 Q26 Q27 Q28 Q29 Q30 Q31 Q32 Q33 Q34 Q35 Q36 Q37 Q38 Q39 Q41 Q42 Q43 Q44 Q45 Q46 Q47 Q48 Q49 9,893 7,878 7,449 5,887 12,042 7,393 7,449 9,872 11,932 9,866 6,117 12,234 5,442 6,100 14,355 8,462 10,016 8,558 5,426 8,464 3,500 7,899 6,113 4,535 4,892 10,865 1,649 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,002 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,110 1,200 1,033 ,900 ,700 1,333 ,933 ,900 1,133 1,200 1,167 ,867 1,133 ,800 1,033 1,500 1,100 1,067 1,167 ,767 1,033 ,467 1,067 ,833 ,633 ,767 1,133 ,200 ,95 ,77 ,65 ,46 1,11 ,68 ,65 ,90 ,99 ,92 ,58 ,94 ,50 ,69 1,29 ,83 ,85 ,89 ,48 ,78 ,19 ,79 ,55 ,35 ,45 ,92 -,05 Raw calculation of the teachers' actual use of classroom activities (cluster 4) Mean of Cluster One-Sample Statistics Std N Mean Deviation 30 2,8018 ,40808 85 Std Error Mean ,07450 1,45 1,30 1,15 ,94 1,56 1,19 1,15 1,37 1,41 1,41 1,16 1,32 1,10 1,38 1,71 1,37 1,28 1,45 1,06 1,28 ,74 1,34 1,11 ,92 1,09 1,35 ,45 t Clust er -1 3575 One-Sample Test Test Value = 95% Confidence Interval Sig of the Difference (2Mean Df tailed) Difference Lower Upper 29 2803 -.1982 -.5252 -0.1279 Paired sample T-test & correlation test Means of cluster Means of cluster Pair Means of cluster Means of cluster Descriptive Statistics Mean Std Deviation 4,07 ,251 2,80 ,408 Paired Samples Test Paired Differences 95% Confidence Std Std Dev- Error Interval of the Difference iati- Mea Mean on n Lower Upper 1,265 ,526 ,096 1,068 1,461 86 N 30 30 Sig (2taile t df d) 13,166 29 ,000
Ngày đăng: 30/08/2023, 18:11
Xem thêm:
