Đang tải... (xem toàn văn)
Peer feedback activity has been appreciated by many researchers for its various advantages towards students’ learning and development of soft skills. However, this activity is not always successfully conducted in students’ English speaking classes, due to the feedback’s limitations and students’ difficulties as feedback givers and receivers. This study, therefore, looked into the ways teachers facilitated that activity and the effects of such facilitation, specifically in the scope of FELTE sophomores’ speaking classes. Participants of the study were 3 speaking teachers of FELTE sophomores and their 79 students. The researcher employed three data collection methods, which were questionnaire, teacher and student interview, and observation. The results indicated many techniques that teachers employed to facilitate peer feedback activity, together with the facilitation’s positive effects on the students – as feedback givers and receivers – and on the quality and quantity of feedback. The findings suggest the application of certain facilitation techniques, as well as adjustments in the use of some others to enhance their efficiency, thus better promote peer feedback activity in speaking class.
ABSTRACT Peer feedback activity has been appreciated by many researchers for its various advantages towards students’ learning and development of soft skills. However, this activity is not always successfully conducted in students’ English speaking classes, due to the feedback’s limitations and students’ difficulties as feedback givers and receivers. This study, therefore, looked into the ways teachers facilitated that activity and the effects of such facilitation, specifically in the scope of FELTE sophomores’ speaking classes. Participants of the study were 3 speaking teachers of FELTE sophomores and their 79 students. The researcher employed three data collection methods, which were questionnaire, teacher and student interview, and observation. The results indicated many techniques that teachers employed to facilitate peer feedback activity, together with the facilitation’s positive effects on the students – as feedback givers and receivers – and on the quality and quantity of feedback. The findings suggest the application of certain facilitation techniques, as well as adjustments in the use of some others to enhance their efficiency, thus better promote peer feedback activity in speaking class. i TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT i TABLE OF CONTENTS ii LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES vi LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS vii PART I: INTRODUCTION viii 1. Statement of research problem and rationale viii 2. Aims of the study and research questions viii 3. Significance of the research ix 4. Structure of the study ix PART II: DEVELOPMENT xi CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW xi 1.1. Key concepts xi 1.1.1. Facilitation xi 1.1.2. Feedback xi 1.1.3. Peer feedback xii 1.1.4. Speaking xiii 1.2. An overview of peer feedback xiv 1.2.1. The roles of students’ peer feedback xiv The role of students’ peer feedback in students’ learning xiv The role of student peer feedback in students’ development of soft skills xv The role of students’ peer feedback in the learning environment xv 1.2.2. Limitations of student peer feedback xvi 1.2.3. Students’ difficulties when conducting peer feedback activity xvii ii 1.2.3.1.Difficulties from students’ attitudes xvii 1.2.3.2.Difficulties from students’ ability xviii 1.3. Teachers’ facilitation for peer feedback xviii 1.3.1. Building feedback partnership among students xix 1.3.2. Providing training on giving and receiving peer feedback xix 1.3.3. Providing encouraging feedback forms xx 1.3.4. Other strategies xxi 1.4. Conclusion xxi Chapter summary: xxii CHAPTER 2: METHODOLOGY xxiii 2.1. Scope of the study xxiii 2.2. Participants xxiii 2.2.1. Teachers xxiii 2.2.2. Students xxiv 2.3. Data collection instruments xxv 2.3.1. Questionnaire xxv 2.3.2. Interview xxvi Interview for teachers xxvi Interview for students xxvii 2.3.3. Observation xxviii 2.4. Data collection procedure xxix 2.5. Data analysis method and procedure xxxi 2.5.1. Data analysis method xxxi 2.5.2. Data analysis procedure xxxi iii CHAPTER 3: FINDINGS, DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS xxxiii 3.1. An overview of peer feedback in FELTE sophomores’ speaking class xxxiii 3.1.1. Peer feedback occurrence xxxiii 3.1.2. Limitations of student peer feedback xxxiii 3.1.3. Students’ difficulties when conducting peer feedback activity xxxiv 3.2. Major findings, discussion and implications xxxvi 3.2.1. Major findings xxxvi 3.2.1.1.Research question 1 xxxvi 3.2.1.2.Research question 2 xlv 3.2.2. Discussion and implications xlix PART III: CONCLUSION liii 1. Summary of the findings liii 2. Conclusion of the research liv 3. Limitations of the study and suggestion for further research liv LIST OF REFERENCES lv APPENDICES lx APPENDIX 1: QUESTIONNAIRE FOR STUDENTS lx APPENDIX 2: STANDARDIZED OPEN-ENDED INTERVIEW FOR TEACHER PARTICIPANTS (translated by the researcher) lxiii lxiv 1. APPENDIX 3: INTERVIEW GUIDE FOR STUDENT PARTICIPANTS (translated by the researcher) lxv APPENDIX 4: CLASS OBSERVATION SCHEME lxvi APPENDIX 5: MARKING RUBRICS FOR GROUP PRESENTATIONS (CLASS B) lxvii iv APPENDIX 6: SAMPLE TEACHER INTERVIEW EXTRACT lxviii APPENDIX 7: SAMPLE CLASS OBSERVATION TRANSCRIPTION EXTRACT lxx v LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Feedback types by Warner (2010, p.1) xii Table 2: Groups of speaking teachers of FELTE sophomores xxiv Table 3: Descriptions of student participants xxiv LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Feedback-focused observation tally scheme (Mackey & Gass, 2005, p.199) xxix Figure 2: Peer feedback occurrences noted in class A, B and C xxxiii Figure 3 Students' opinion about limitations of student peer feedback xxxiv Figure 4 Students reported difficulties when conducting PF activity xxxv Figure 5: Techniques employed by teachers to facilitate peer feedback, as perceived by students xxxvii Figure 6: Teachers' ways to give immediate encouragement for student peer feedback xlii Figure 7: Teacher facilitation's effects on the feedback givers xlv Figure 8: Teacher facilitation's effects on the feedback receivers xlvi vi LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ULIS University of Languages and International Studies FELTE Faculty of English Language Teacher Education PF Peer feedback RQ Research question vii PART I: INTRODUCTION 1. Statement of research problem and rationale The competitive labor market in Vietnam has been requiring undergraduates to develop not only their knowledge and and soft skills, but also foreign languages, among which is English. However, after four years studying English in university, a lot of graduates are still described as being unable to use this language in real-life contexts (Doan, 2008). Especially for the speaking skill, many graduates are incapable of participating in discussions using English, being hesitate to speaking English and afraid of others’ knowing their low proficiency (Le, 2011). This fact raises considerations regarding English teaching and learning at university, specifically about helping students overcome the hesitation to raise their voice so that they can be more confident when using English in real-life situations. A solution for this situation could be promoting student peer feedback (PF) in speaking class, which is highly appreciated for helping learners familiarize themselves with the real working world (Reynolds, 2009). In addition, peer feedback activity can also help to enhance students’ critical thinking (Lam, 2010) and collaborative skill (Nilson, 2003), which are among the essential soft skills. However, due to the students’ personality, their level of English and level of critical thinking, peer feedback might not successfully take place in an English class. Teachers as facilitators, thus, have an important role in promoting peer feedback among students. Nevertheless, this role of teachers in English speaking classes has not received adequate attention from researchers. These reasons urge the researcher to conduct a study on teachers’ techniques for facilitating peer feedback and their effects on students’ peer feedback activity. The study is entitled: “TEACHERS’ FACILITATION FOR STUDENT PEER FEEDBACK IN SPEAKING CLASS OF THE SOPHOMORES IN FELTE, ULIS” 2. Aims of the study and research questions viii The research was carried out to investigate the techniques used by the speaking teachers to facilitate PF in a speaking class, as well as the effects of those facilitation methods on the peer feedback activity. Thus, the study would answer these two research questions (RQs): RQ1: How do the teachers facilitate peer feedback in speaking class for second year students in FELTE, ULIS? RQ2: What are the effects of the teachers’ facilitation techniques on students’ peer feedback activity? 3. Significance of the research Once successfully conducted, the research could benefit both teachers and second year students in FELTE, ULIS: As for the teachers, better understanding of the issue will help them organize peer feedback more effectively in a speaking class. They, consequently, will find it easier to conduct speaking lessons where students receive more useful and more frequent feedback on their performances. Thanks for that, the students will also benefit. The research findings can also be a good reference for speaking teachers of other organizations, as well as teachers of other subjects involving PF. 4. Structure of the study There are three parts in this research: Part I: Introduction In this part, the rationale, aim of the study and the RQs are stated. Part II: Development Chapter 1 – Literature review – includes definitions of the key terms, an overview of peer feedback activity and the teachers’ facilitation techniques for peer feedback. Chapter 2 – Methodology – provides explanations for the study’s scope, participants, data collection instruments and data analysis procedure. Chapter 3 – Results, discussion and implications – is where data are analyzed to answer the two RQs. Following the analysis are the discussions, including implication and recommendation from the data. ix Part III: Conclusion A summary of the findings, conclusion of the research, its limitation and suggestion for further study are found in this part. A List of references and Appendices are also included. x [...]... checklist items Specifically, Q2 includes feedback limitations, the options of which were reviewed by Maarof et al (20 11), Lam (20 10) and Nilson (20 03) Similarly for Q4, a list of difficulties for students when conducting PF is presented, whose sub-items were listed by Withers (20 09), Nilson (20 03), Sultana (20 09), Carlson & Nelson (1996, as cited in Sultana, 20 09), and Lam (20 10) Q5 and 7 go into teacher’s... word-choice or tense (pp 29 4 -29 5) Feedback has been classified differently by many scholars Brookhart (1998) as cited in Le (20 10) labels four types of feedback: effective, descriptive, evaluative xi and motivational Le (20 10) also proposes another classification from Crane (20 06), by which there are five feedback types: confirmative, corrective, explanatory, diagnostic and elaborative Warner (20 10),... supportive and friendlier” (Rollinson, 20 05 as cited in Sultana, 20 09, p. 12) Explaining for a more leaner-autonomous leaning environment, says Rollinson (20 05) in Sultana (20 09), since comments and correction are no longer given only by the teacher, the class are less teacher-dominated When correction is given by the teacher, Rollinson (20 05, as cited in Sultana, 20 09) goes on explaining, it strengthens... subject has any questions before starting the interview (pp. 127 - 128 ) • Class observation: Once permission for class observation had been granted, the researcher started this phase Observations of class A were on March 5 th and 15th, 20 13; observations of class B were on 5th and 12th March, 20 13; and observations of class C were on March 14th and 28 th, 20 13 Besides using the aforementioned observation schemes,... relevant research findings” (Zhang & Wildemuth, 20 09, p.309) The researcher, while processing data, allowed new categories to emerge 2. 5 .2 Data analysis procedure Although there have been various content analysis processes suggested, namely Elo & Kyngas (20 08) and Mayring (20 00), the researcher chose to follow the 8-step-procedure by Zhang & Wildemuth (20 09) This is because other models focused on purely... into their own subsequent revisions” (Lam, 20 10, p. 120 ) Some students were then reported to be aware of PF’s importance and critical on their friends’ products, thus to “become even more critical of their own writing” (Lam, 20 10, p. 120 ) A similar experiment was also conducted in ULIS, VNU by Luu (20 11) regarding peer feedback training in writing class Luu (20 11) reports that the training brought about... and 7 go into teacher’s strategies and their effects that the student could recognize The lists of strategies and effects include ones that were mentioned by Nilson (20 03), Do (20 09), Reynolds (20 09), Sultana (20 09), Withers (20 09) and Lam (20 10) Lastly, Q8 is open-ended, telling the student to write down their suggestions of teacher facilitation techniques The use of questionnaires in this research was... the research 2. 2 Participants Participants of this study will only include three speaking teachers of second year students in FELTE, ULIS and their students, as described as below: 2. 2.1 Teachers Since the paper is about “teachers’ facilitation”, the participation of teachers was undoubtedly essential Specifically, teachers who were teaching English speaking skill for FELTE sophomores were chosen The... (Maarof et al., 20 11) xiv Generally speaking, students will gradually be more in charge of their own studying thanks to peer feedback (Sultana, 20 09) PF as a teamwork activity can “enhance students’ sense of autonomy and responsibility in the learning process” agrees Jacobs (1989, as cited in Sadeghi & Baneh, 20 12, p.910) With the support from their friends, emphasizes Maarof et al (20 11), the activity... suggestions” (Reynolds, 20 09, p.55) for their friends’ presentations Gower, Phillips & Walters (1995) cited in Sultana (20 09) also share that “involvement indeed increases” (p. 12) as students give PF to their peers on their performance xv Moreover, feedback offered by students among themselves is considered less threatening than that from teachers, says Rollinson (20 05, as cited in Sultana, 20 09) Students are . CHAPTER 2: METHODOLOGY xxiii 2. 1. Scope of the study xxiii 2. 2. Participants xxiii 2. 2.1. Teachers xxiii 2. 2 .2. Students xxiv 2. 3. Data collection instruments xxv 2. 3.1. Questionnaire xxv 2. 3 .2. Interview. findings xxxvi 3 .2. 1.1.Research question 1 xxxvi 3 .2. 1 .2. Research question 2 xlv 3 .2. 2. Discussion and implications xlix PART III: CONCLUSION liii 1. Summary of the findings liii 2. Conclusion of. xxvi Interview for students xxvii 2. 3.3. Observation xxviii 2. 4. Data collection procedure xxix 2. 5. Data analysis method and procedure xxxi 2. 5.1. Data analysis method xxxi 2. 5 .2. Data analysis procedure