AN INVESTIGATION INTO LANGUAGE LEARNING STRATEGIES TO IMPROVE ENGLISH SPEAKING SKILLS AMONG HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS: A CASE OF THREE HIGH SCHOOLS IN BINH DUONG PROVINCE

The role of language learning strategies (LLS) in second language acquisition has received increased attention across several disciplines in recent years. LLS has been shown to occur in many studies over the years to improve language learning efficiency. The current study endeavors to scrutinize LLS employed by the students at (1) Binh Phu, (2) Vo Minh Duc, and (3) Nguyen Thi Minh Khai high schools and suggests solutions to improve the effectiveness of LLS. Based on the data collected and analyzed by mixed methods (quantitative and qualitative), the survey reveals that students’ motivation enormously affected LLS. The author first sent and collected data from questionnaires, complimented interviews, and experimental teaching and classroom observation. The findings simultaneously show that students use many LLS to enhance their speaking skills, but the most frequently used ones are cognitive and affective. Significant correlations among types of LLS and the influence of motivation on the choices of LLS are consistent with previous studies. The study’s results concerning LLS and the effectiveness of LLS are expected to be beneficial to teachers of English and students in terms of narrowing the gap between the students LLS and their teaching methodologies preferences and sketching out the appropriate strategies to enhance students’ speaking skills. The implications of these findings and the importance of viewing learners holistically are discussed, and recommendations are made for ongoing research.

PEOPLE'S BINH DUONG PROVINCIAL COMMITTEE THU DAU MOT UNIVERSITY -🕮 - HOANG THI LE QUYEN AN INVESTIGATION INTO LANGUAGE LEARNING STRATEGIES TO IMPROVE ENGLISH SPEAKING SKILLS AMONG HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS: A CASE OF THREE HIGH SCHOOLS IN BINH DUONG PROVINCE MAJOR: ENGLISH LANGUAGE MAJOR CODE: 22 02 01 MASTER THESIS IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE BINH DUONG PROVINCE, 2023 PEOPLE'S BINH DUONG PROVINCIAL COMMITTEE THU DAU MOT UNIVERSITY -🕮 - HOANG THI LE QUYEN AN INVESTIGATION INTO LANGUAGE LEARNING STRATEGIES TO IMPROVE ENGLISH SPEAKING SKILLS AMONG HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS: A CASE OF THREE HIGH SCHOOLS IN BINH DUONG PROVINCE MAJOR: ENGLISH LANGUAGE MAJOR CODE: 22 02 01 MASTER THESIS IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE SUPERVISED BY Ph.D TRAN THANH DU BINH DUONG PROVINCE, 2023 STATEMENT OF THE AUTHORSHIP I, the undersigned, hereby declare that I am the sole author of the thesis entitled “An Investigation into Language Learning Strategies to Improve English Speaking Skills among High School Students: A Case of Three High Schools in Binh Duong Province.” I have fully acknowledged and referenced the ideas and work of others, whether published or unpublished, in my thesis My thesis does not contain work extracted from a thesis, dissertation, or research paper previously presented for another degree or diploma at this or any other university Binh Duong, July 2023 Hoang Thi Le Quyen i RETENTION OF USE I hereby state that I, Hoang Thi Le Quyen, being a candidate for the degree of Master of English Language accepts the requirements of the University relating to the retention and use of Master’s Theses deposited in the Library In this regard, I agree that the original of my Master’s thesis deposited in the Library should be accessible for purposes of study and research ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This thesis would not have been possible without the support of many people and groups Firstly, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my supervisor, Ph.D Tran Thanh Du, for his continued guidance and invaluable assistance and insights leading to the writing of this thesis My sincere thanks also go to all Thu Dau Mot University teachers for teaching me the essential knowledge to complete this paper Furthermore, I am greatly indebted to Binh Duong Department of Education and Training and Vo Minh Duc high school for their financial support and assignments Moreover, I am fortunate to have been a part of the English Group of Vo Minh Duc upper secondary school; highly thankful to my colleagues and students from Vo Minh Duc, Binh Phu, and Nguyen Thi Minh Khai high school for their constant bits of help Additionally, I am greatly indebted to the authors of my paper’s references Last but not least, I am grateful for my parents, siblings, husband, and daughters whose unconditional love and support keep me motivated and confident iii ABSTRACT The role of language learning strategies (LLS) in second language acquisition has received increased attention across several disciplines in recent years LLS has been shown to occur in many studies over the years to improve language learning efficiency The current study endeavors to scrutinize LLS employed by the students at (1) Binh Phu, (2) Vo Minh Duc, and (3) Nguyen Thi Minh Khai high schools and suggests solutions to improve the effectiveness of LLS Based on the data collected and analyzed by mixed methods (quantitative and qualitative), the survey reveals that students’ motivation enormously affected LLS The author first sent and collected data from questionnaires, then complimented interviews, subsequently experimental teaching, and classroom observation The findings simultaneously show that students use many LLS to enhance their speaking skills, but the most frequently used ones are cognitive and affective Significant correlations among types of LLS and the influence of motivation on the choices of LLS are consistent with previous studies The study’s results concerning LLS and the effectiveness of LLS are expected to be beneficial to teachers of English and students in terms of narrowing the gap between the students' LLS and their teaching methodologies preferences and sketching out the appropriate strategies to enhance students’ speaking skills The implications of these findings and the importance of viewing learners holistically are discussed, and recommendations are made for ongoing research Key words: affective strategies, cognitive strategies, language learning strategies, memorization strategies, speaking skills iv LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS C: Control class E: Experimental class IELTS: International English Language Testing System LLS: Language learning strategies BP: Binh Phu high school MK: Nguyen Thi Minh Khai high school VMD: Vo Minh Duc high school Pre: Pretest M: Midterm test P: Posttest S1: LLS … S12: LLS 12 S1COMPUTE: Memorization strategies S2COMPUTE: Cognitive strategies S3COMPUTE: Compensation strategies S4COMPUTE: Metacognitive strategies S5COMPUTE: Affective strategies S6COMPUTE: Social strategies v LIST OF TABLES Chapter Table 1.1 The population of the three high schools Chapter 29 Table 3.1 Student subjects 35 Table 3.2 Teacher subjects 36 Table 3.3 Speaking assessment criteria (Adapted from IELTS speaking criteria) 41 Table 3.4 Cronbach’s Alpha for each category of the questionnaire 44 Chapter 46 Table 4.1 Students' English learning 46 Table 4.2 Students’ motivation in learning English 47 Table 4.3 Descriptive statistics of students’ motivation in learning English 48 Table 4.4 Students’ preference for LLS 48 Table 4.5 Descriptive statistics of the activities 56 Table 4.6 Descriptive statistics of pretest results 57 Table 4.7 Paired sample midterm test 58 Table 4.8 Paired sample posttest 59 vi LIST OF FIGURES Chapter 10 Figure 2.1 Diagram of the Strategy System 19 Figure 2.2 Theoretical Framework 27 Chapter 29 Figure 3.1 Concept map of data collection and analysis 32 Figure 3.2 Sampling procedures 34 Figure 3.3 The formula for calculating the reliable sample size 35 Chapter 46 Figure 4.1 LLS preference of the sample 49 Figure 4.2 LLS use of three grades 50 Figure 4.3 LLS use among three grades 51 Figure 4.4 LLS use among three schools 51 Figure 4.4 Differences of test results 51 Figure 4.5a LLS use of VMD students 52 Figure 4.5b LLS use of BP students 52 Figure 4.5c LLS use of MK students 53 Figure 4.6 Differences of test results 61 Figure 4.7 Test results among three schools 61 vii LIST OF APPENDICES APPENDIX - LANGUAGE LEARNING STRATEGY CATEGORIES CLASSIFIED BY RUBIN, O’MALLEY ET AL., AND OXFORD 80 APPENDIX - LEARNING STRATEGIES 81 APPENDIX – STUDENTS’ ENGLISH LEARNING AND MOTIVATION 84 APPENDIX - STUDENTS’ PRIORITY OF LLS 87 APPENDIX - OBSERVATION CHECKLISTS 92 APPENDIX 6- QUESTIONNAIRE FOR STUDENTS 100 APPENDIX - INTERVIEW QUESTIONS FOR TEACHERS 106 APPENDIX - INTERVIEW QUESTIONS FOR STUDENTS 107 APPENDIX - RESULTS OF TEACHER INTERVIEWS 108 APPENDIX 10 - RESULTS OF STUDENT INTERVIEWS 113 APPENDIX 11 - RUBRICS FOR PRE, MID, AND POST-TESTS 118 APPENDIX 12 – TEST RESULTS OF VO MINH DUC HIGH SCHOOL 122 APPENDIX 13 – TEST RESULTS OF BINH PHU HIGH SCHOOL 127 APPENDIX 14 – TEST RESULTS OF NGUYEN THI MINH KHAI HIGH SCHOOL 132 APPENDIX 15 - PRETEST OF SPEAKING 137 APPENDIX 16 - MIDTERM TEST OF SPEAKING 138 APPENDIX 17 - POST TEST OF SPEAKING 139 APPENDIX 18 – PAIRED SAMPLE T-TEST 140 APPENDIX 19 – COMPARISON BETWEEN CONTROL AND EXPERIMENTAL CLASSES 146 APPENDIX 20 – COMPARISON AMONG CONTROL CLASSES FROM THREE SCHOOLS 148 APPENDIX 21 – LLS USE AMONG THREE HIGH SCHOOLS 152 viii APPENDIX 17 - POST TEST OF SPEAKING Part – Introduction: Examiner asks each student two of the following questions Where is your hometown? Do you like your hometown? Do you live in a house or a flat? What is your neighborhood like? What job you want to be in the future? What is your favourite school subject? Do you usually celebrate your birthdays? How did you celebrate your last birthday? What did you enjoy doing as a child? 10 Do you think is it better for children to grow up in the city or in the countryside? Part – Social interaction: Students pick up one of the following topics Topic 1: Describe the advice you received on your subjects or work? You should say:  What it was  Who you received it from  What you did after receiving it  And how you felt about it Topic 2: Describe a female teacher you admire You should say:  Who she is  What she is like  And explain why you admire her Part – Questions and responses: The examiner will ask further questions which are connected to the topics discussed in part 138 APPENDIX 18 – PAIRED SAMPLE T-TEST PRETEST Paired Samples Statistics Pair Pair Pair Pair Pair Pair Pair Pair Pair Mean N Std Deviation Std Error Mean PreVMD10C 5.37 38 1.683 273 PreVMD10E 5.11 38 1.269 206 PreVMD11C 5.03 38 1.498 243 PreVMD11E 5.03 38 1.442 234 PreVMD12C 5.21 38 1.379 224 PreVMD12E 5.08 38 1.531 248 PreBP10C 5.03 38 1.551 252 PreBP10E 4.92 38 1.282 208 PreBP11C 4.92 38 1.459 237 PreBP11E 4.82 38 1.291 210 PreBP12C 4.95 38 1.293 210 PreBP12E 4.97 38 1.241 201 PreMK10C 4.92 38 1.050 170 PreMK10E 4.89 38 1.203 195 PreMK11C 4.84 38 1.263 205 PreMK11E 4.95 38 1.089 177 PreMK12C 4.76 38 1.125 183 PreMK12E 4.89 38 1.429 232 Descriptive Statistics N Minimum Maximum Mean Std Deviation PreVMD10C 38 5.37 1.683 PreVMD12C 38 5.21 1.379 PreVMD10E 38 5.11 1.269 139 PreVMD12E 38 5.08 1.531 PreVMD11E 38 5.03 1.442 PreBP10C 38 5.03 1.551 PreVMD11C 38 5.03 1.498 PreBP12E 38 4.97 1.241 PreMK11E 38 4.95 1.089 PreBP12C 38 4.95 1.293 PreBP11C 38 4.92 1.459 PreBP10E 38 4.92 1.282 PreMK10C 38 4.92 1.050 PreMK12E 38 4.89 1.429 PreMK10E 38 4.89 1.203 PreMK11C 38 4.84 1.263 PreBP11E 38 4.82 1.291 PreMK12C 38 4.76 1.125 Valid N (listwise) 38 MIDTERM TEST Descriptive Statistics N Minimum Maximum Mean Std Deviation MVMD10C 38 4.97 1.365 MVMD10E 38 10 6.26 1.223 MVMD11C 38 4.95 1.355 MVMD11E 38 6.21 1.234 MVMD12C 38 5.16 1.079 MVMD12E 38 6.42 1.200 MBP10C 38 4.87 1.455 MBP10E 38 5.79 963 140 MBP11C 38 4.82 1.312 MBP11E 38 5.87 963 MBP12C 38 4.79 1.069 MBP12E 38 5.97 1.078 MMK10C 38 4.79 1.597 MMK10E 38 5.95 1.293 MMK11C 38 4.95 1.335 MMK11E 38 6.42 1.081 MMK12C 38 4.68 1.141 MMK12E 38 5.87 1.189 Valid N (listwise) 38 Paired Samples Test Paired Differences 95% Mean Std Deviation Std Confidence Error Interval of the Mean Sig t df Difference (2tailed) Lower Upper Pair Pair Pair Pair MVMD10C MVMD10E MVMD11C MVMD11E MVMD12C MVMD12E MBP10C MBP10E -1.289 1.469 238 -1.772 -.807 -5.412 37 000 -1.263 1.309 212 -1.693 -.833 -5.950 37 000 -1.263 1.155 187 -1.643 -.883 -6.741 37 000 -.921 1.282 208 -1.342 -.500 -4.431 37 000 141 Pair Pair Pair Pair Pair MBP11C MBP11E MBP12C MBP12E MMK10C MMK10E MMK11C MMK11E MMK12C MMK12E -1.053 1.207 196 -1.449 -.656 -5.376 37 000 -1.184 1.036 168 -1.525 -.844 -7.046 37 000 -1.158 1.443 234 -1.632 -.684 -4.946 37 000 -1.474 1.224 199 -1.876 -1.071 -7.419 37 000 -1.184 1.111 180 -1.550 -.819 -6.568 37 000 POST TEST Paired Samples Test Paired Differences 95% Mean Std Deviation Std Confidence Error Interval of the Mean t df Sig (2tailed) Difference Lower Upper Pair Pair Pair Pair PVMD10C PVMD10E PVMD11C PVMD11E PVMD12C PVMD12E PBP10C PBP10E -1.526 1.736 282 -2.097 -.956 -5.421 37 000 -1.500 1.983 322 -2.152 -.848 -4.663 37 000 -1.526 1.827 296 -2.127 -.926 -5.151 37 000 -1.447 1.554 252 -1.958 -.936 -5.740 37 000 142 Pair Pair Pair Pair Pair PBP11C PBP11E PBP12C PBP12E PMK10C PMK10E PMK11C PMK11E PMK12C PMK12E -1.447 1.841 299 -2.052 -.842 -4.847 37 000 -1.368 1.777 288 -1.953 -.784 -4.747 37 000 -1.395 1.824 296 -1.994 -.795 -4.714 37 000 -1.447 2.165 351 -2.159 -.736 -4.121 37 000 -1.342 1.820 295 -1.940 -.744 -4.546 37 000 Descriptive Statistics N Minimum Maximum Mean Std Deviation PVMD10C 38 5.08 1.514 PVMD10E 38 10 6.61 1.480 PVMD11C 38 5.45 1.389 PVMD11E 38 10 6.95 1.469 PVMD12C 38 5.13 1.379 PVMD12E 38 10 6.66 1.361 PBP10C 38 5.00 1.611 PBP10E 38 6.45 1.389 PBP11C 38 5.13 1.597 PBP11E 38 6.58 1.222 PBP12C 38 5.21 1.277 PBP12E 38 6.58 1.266 PMK10C 38 5.03 1.585 PMK10E 38 6.42 1.464 PMK11C 38 5.16 1.701 143 PMK11E 38 6.61 1.386 PMK12C 38 5.11 1.351 PMK12E 38 10 6.45 1.329 Valid N (listwise) 38 144 APPENDIX 19 – COMPARISON BETWEEN CONTROL AND EXPERIMENTAL CLASSES Descriptive Statistics N Minimum Maximum Mean Std Deviation EPREGOP 38 3.33 6.56 4.9620 58753 EMIDGOP 38 5.00 7.89 6.1491 71041 EPOSTGOP 38 5.56 8.56 6.5877 78521 CPOSTGOP 38 3.67 6.56 5.1433 79366 CMIDGOP 38 3.00 6.67 4.8860 87850 CPREGOP 38 3.78 6.11 5.0029 57503 Valid N (listwise) 38 Descriptive Statistics N Minimum Maximum Mean VMDEPRE 38 3.33 7.00 5.0702 VMDEMID 38 4.67 8.00 6.2982 VMDEPOST 38 5.33 8.67 6.7368 VMDCPOST 38 3.67 7.00 5.2193 VMDCMID 38 3.00 6.67 5.0263 VMDCPRE 38 3.33 7.33 5.2018 BPCPRE 38 3.33 7.00 4.9649 BPCMID 38 3.00 6.67 4.8246 BPCPOST 38 3.67 6.67 5.1140 BPEPOST 38 5.33 8.33 6.5351 BPEMID 38 4.67 7.67 5.8772 BPEPRE 38 3.33 6.67 4.9035 MKEPRE 38 3.33 7.00 4.9123 145 MKEMID 38 4.67 7.67 6.0789 MKEPOST 38 5.33 8.67 6.4912 Valid N (listwise) 38 146 APPENDIX 20 – COMPARISON AMONG CONTROL CLASSES FROM THREE SCHOOLS Descriptive Statistics N Minimum Maximum Mean VMDEPRE 38 5.07 VMDEMID 38 6.30 VMDEPOST 38 6.74 VMDCPOST 38 5.22 VMDCMID 38 5.03 VMDCPRE 38 5.20 BPCPRE 38 4.96 BPCMID 38 4.82 BPCPOST 38 5.11 BPEPOST 38 6.54 BPEMID 38 5.88 BPEPRE 38 4.90 MKEPRE 38 4.91 MKEMID 38 6.08 MKEPOST 38 6.49 MKCPRE 38 4.84 MKCMID 38 4.81 MKCPOST 38 5.10 Valid N (listwise) 38 Descriptive Statistics N Mean VMDS1 121 2.12 VMDS2 121 3.30 147 VMDS3 121 2.97 VMDS4 121 3.47 VMDS5 121 3.41 VMDS6 121 2.02 VMDS7 121 2.06 VMDS8 121 2.97 VMDS9 121 3.38 VMDS10 121 2.83 VMDS11 121 3.79 VMDS12 121 2.19 BPS1 121 2.06 BPS2 121 3.32 BPS3 121 2.88 BPS4 121 3.54 BPS5 121 3.36 BPS6 121 2.02 BPS7 121 2.07 BPS8 121 2.99 BPS9 121 3.31 BPS10 121 2.85 BPS11 121 3.84 BPS12 121 2.11 MKS1 128 2.00 MKS2 128 3.27 MKS3 128 2.79 MKS4 128 3.46 MKS5 128 3.26 MKS6 128 2.05 148 MKS7 128 2.11 MKS8 128 2.86 MKS9 128 3.41 MKS10 128 3.11 MKS11 128 3.70 MKS12 128 2.12 Valid N (listwise) 121 Descriptive Statistics N Mean VMDS6 121 2.02 VMDS7 121 2.06 VMDS1 121 2.12 VMDS12 121 2.19 VMDS10 121 2.83 VMDS3 121 2.97 VMDS8 121 2.97 VMDS2 121 3.30 VMDS9 121 3.38 VMDS5 121 3.41 VMDS4 121 3.47 VMDS11 121 3.79 Valid N (listwise) 121 Descriptive Statistics N Mean BPS6 121 2.02 BPS1 121 2.06 149 BPS7 121 2.07 BPS12 121 2.11 BPS10 121 2.85 BPS3 121 2.88 BPS8 121 2.99 BPS9 121 3.31 BPS2 121 3.32 BPS5 121 3.36 BPS4 121 3.54 BPS11 121 3.84 Valid N (listwise) 121 Descriptive Statistics N Mean MKS1 128 2.00 MKS6 128 2.05 MKS7 128 2.11 MKS12 128 2.12 MKS3 128 2.79 MKS8 128 2.86 MKS10 128 3.11 MKS5 128 3.26 MKS2 128 3.27 MKS9 128 3.41 MKS4 128 3.46 MKS11 128 3.70 Valid N (listwise) 128 150 APPENDIX 21 – LLS USE AMONG THREE HIGH SCHOOLS Descriptive Statistics N Mean Std Deviation LLSMK 128 2.84 532 LLSBP 121 2.86 497 LLSVMD 121 2.88 487 Valid N (listwise) 121 VMDS6 VMDS7 VMDS1 VMDS12 VMDS10 VMDS3 VMDS8 VMDS2 VMDS9 VMDS5 VMDS4 VMDS11 Valid N (listwise) Descriptive Statistics N 121 121 121 121 121 121 121 121 121 121 121 121 121 Mean 2.02 2.06 2.12 2.19 2.83 2.97 2.97 3.30 3.38 3.41 3.47 3.79 BPS6 BPS1 BPS7 BPS12 BPS4 BPS3 BPS8 BPS9 BPS2 BPS11 BPS10 BPS5 Valid N (listwise) Descriptive Statistics N 121 121 121 121 121 121 121 121 121 121 121 121 121 Mean 2.02 2.06 2.07 2.11 2.85 2.88 2.99 3.31 3.32 3.36 3.54 3.84 151 MKS1 MKS6 MKS7 MKS12 MKS3 MKS8 MKS10 MKS5 MKS2 MKS11 MKS4 MKS9 Valid N (listwise) Descriptive Statistics N 128 128 128 128 128 128 128 128 128 128 128 128 128 Mean 2.00 2.05 2.11 2.12 2.79 2.86 3.11 3.26 3.27 3.41 3.46 3.70 152