Sử dụng các hoạt động giao nhiệm vụ cho sinh viên không chuyên tiếng Anh trong các tiết học nói tại trường Đại học Kinh tế Quốc dâ

The common teaching approach applied in English lesson at most of universities and colleges is teacher-centered and lecture-oriented, which normally results in learning passivity and non

FIRST-UNIVERSITY ( Sử dụng các hoạt động giao nhiệm vụ cho sinh viên không chuyên tiếng Anh trong các tiết học nói tại trường

Đại học Kinh Tế Quốc Dân)

M.A MINOR THESIS

FIRST-UNIVERSITY

( Sử dụng các hoạt động giao nhiệm vụ cho sinh viên không chuyên tiếng Anh trong các tiết học nói tại trường

Đại học Kinh Tế Quốc Dân)

M.A MINOR THESIS

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION……… 1

1.1 Rationale of the study……… 1

1.2 Aims of the study……… 1

1.3 Research questions……… 2

1.4 Scope of the study……… 2

1.5 Design of the study……… 2

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW……… 3

2.1 Speaking skill……… 3

2.1.1 What is speaking? 3

2.1.2 Approaches to speaking……….3

2.1.3 Aspects of teaching speaking in CLT classes……….5

2.1.3.1 Introduction to CLT approach………5

2 1.3.2 Teaching interactional skill in CLT classes………6

2.1.3 3 Integrating pronunciation teaching……….6

2.1.3.4 Accuracy and fluency……… 6

2.2 Task-based language teaching (TBLT)……… 7

2.2.1 What is T BLT? 7

2.2.2 Tasks in TBLT……… 9

2.2.2.1 Defining tasks……… 9

2.2.2.2 Classifying tasks……….10

2.2.3 Advantages of TBLT……….12

2.2.4 A framework for task-based learning……… 14

2.3 Summary……… 16

CHAPTER 3: THE STUDY……… 17

3.1 The context for the stud………17

3.1.1 Introduction to the English course for first-year non-major students at National Economics University………17

3.1.2 The teaching materials and assessment……… 17

3.1.3 Situational analysis………18

3.2 Design and methodology……… 19

3.2.2 Instruments………19

3.2.3 Data collection procedures………20

3.3 Data analysis……… 20

3.3.1 Task-based project……….20

3.3.2 The post-treatment test……… 23

3.3.3 Interview ……… 24

3.4 Findings and discussion……… 29

3.5 Summary………32

CHAPTER 4: CONCLUSION……….34

4.1 Summary of the major findings……… 34

4.2 Recommendations for the application of the TB approach……… 35

REFERENCES

APPENDIXES

LIST OF TABLES

Page

Table 1: The framework for task-based learning……….14 Table 2:The levels of proficiency of the experimental class………23 Table 3: The levels of proficiency of the control class……… 24

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

This chapter aims to present the rationale of the study, aims of the study, research questions, scope of the study and design of the study

1.1 Rationale of the study

Nowadays, teaching English has received increasing attention as English has become the language for global communication To meet the future job requirements, students in general and students of Economics at National Economics University in particular need to enhance their skills of English, especially the speaking skill However, there exists a critical problem in teaching and learning English at colleges and universities resulting from inappropriate teaching materials and instructional techniques The common teaching approach applied in English lesson at most of universities and colleges is teacher-centered and lecture-oriented, which normally results in learning passivity and non-involvement in language skills in general and in speaking activities in particular Therefore, it is the high time to make a change in the traditional learning process of English at universities in Vietnam in general and at the National Economics University in particular Among the modern teaching methods, the task-based one is considered a type of analytic learning and teaching method which owns numerous advantages

According to Cadlin (1987), “Task-based learning continues with and develops recent attention to learner-centered approaches and in particular the ideas of differentiation and learner independence… Tasks serve as compelling and appropriate method for realizing certain characteristic principles of communicative language teaching and learning.” Besides, Nunan (2005) argues that “TBT does provide a flexible, functionally compatible and contextually sensitive approach for many teachers, as well as learners”

For all the reasons mentioned, we do believe that the implication of task-based approach will enable a change in students’ learning process, especially in terms of speaking skill and for the first-year non-major students at National Economics University

1.2 Aims of the study

The study aims to investigate the benefits of integrating a task-based approach in teaching speaking to the first-year non-major of English at National Economics University

The study aims to focus on students’ achievement in speaking skill and positive changes in their learning attitudes and motivation as well

1.3 Research questions

There are two research questions for the study as follows:

Question 1: Is the task-based method suitable for teaching speaking skill for the

first-year non-major students of English at NEU?

Question 2: Does the task-based approach bring about any progress in learning

process?

1.4 Scope of the study

The focus of the study was on the benefits gained by the first-year non-major students

at National Economics University when adopting a task-based approach in learning speaking The study was conducted under the scope of an experiment with a small number of the first-year students It was restricted to the second half of their first year

1.5 Design of the study

The study consists of four chapters:

Chapter 1: Introduction

This chapter presents the rationale, the aim, the scope and the design of the study

Chapter 2: Literature review:

This chapter is concerned with the theoretical background of the study which includes

an overview of speaking skill and Task-based Language Teaching

Chapter 3: The study:

This chapter refers to the real situation of learning English of the first-year non-major students

Chapter 4: Conclusion:

This chapter presents the summary of major findings and the suggestions for the

implication of the task-based approach

This chapter is concerned with the theoretical background of the study which includes an overview of speaking skill and Task-based Language Teaching

2.1 Speaking skill

2.1.1 What is speaking?

In this section, I will consider what we mean by “speaking” In language teaching, we often talk about four language skills (speaking, listening, reading and writing) in terms of their direction and modality Speaking, in particular, can be regarded as the productive, oral skill

Speaking consists of producing systematic verbal utterances to convey meaning According to Florez (1999), speaking is “an interactive process of constructing meaning that involves producing and receiving and processing information” It is often spontaneous, open-ended, and evolving but it is not completely unpredictable

Speaking plays an important part in communication as Ur (1996), Bailey and Savage( 1994) say “ for many people, speaking is seen as the central skill because of the desire to communicate with others, often face to face and in real time” It is really an impressive feat when we hear someone speaking effectively in a second or foreign language Ur (1996) considers speaking intuitively the most important of the four skills: people who know a language are referred to as “speaker” of that language as if speaking included all other kinds of knowing

2.1.2 Approaches to speaking

For many years, language teaching was seen as helping learners develop linguistic competence –that is, helping students master the sounds, words and grammar patterns of English The idea was that by studying the bits and pieces of a language, students could eventually put them altogether and communicate

In the1970s and 1980s, however, the understanding of language learning experienced a significant shift in focus This shift was influenced by international developments in linguistics, curricula, and pedagogy, as well as by sociolinguistic research (primary in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, The United Kingdom and The U.S) In addition, the

numbers of refugees and immigrants resettling in English-speaking countries made linguists and language teachers realize that developing linguistic competence alone was not enough to be able to speak English well and get along in a society

In the mid-1970s, the notion of linguistic competence came to be viewed as a component of the broader idea of communicative competence “the ability of language learners to interact with other speakers, to make meaning, as distinct from their ability to perform on discrete-point tests of grammatical knowledge”( Savignon, 1991) Being communicatively competent “requires an understanding of sociocultural contexts of language use”

There are several important models of communicative competence, all of which include some form of sociolinguistic competence, or the ability to use language appropriately in various contexts Sociolinguistic competence involves register (degrees of formality and informality), appropriate word choice, style shifting, and politeness strategies

Another important element of communicative competence is strategic competence In terms of speaking, this is the learners’ ability to use language strategies to compensate for gaps in skills and knowledge

The fourth component of communicative competence is discourse competence, “how sentence elements are tied together”, which includes both cohesion and coherence (Lazaraton, 2001) Cohesion is “the grammatical and/ or lexical relationship between the different parts of a sentence” (Richards, Platt and Weber, 1985) Cohesion includes reference, repetition, synonyms and so on In contrast, coherence involves “how texts are constructed” (Lazaraton, 2001) Coherence also has to do with “the relationships which link the meaning of utterance in a discourse” (Richards, Platt and Weber, 1985) However, coherence often involves the speakers’ background knowledge

Since communicative competence is a multifaceted construct, it is important for teachers to understand the complexities that learners face when they are speaking English One of those complexities is balancing fluency and accuracy A proficient speaker is both fluent and accurate

2.1.3 Aspects of teaching speaking in Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) classes

 Language is a system for expression of meaning

 The primary function of language is to allow interaction and communication

 The structure of language reflects its functional and communicative uses

 The primary units of language are not merely its grammar and structural features but categories of functional and communicative meaning as exemplified discourse

While in traditional second language classroom, learners play passive roles in class,

in CLT classroom, learners are encouraged to contribute as much as he gains, and learns in

an independent way Suggested by Reen and Candlin in Richards, R.C.& Roger, T.S (2001), CLT teachers’ roles are to facilitate the communicative process in the classroom, act as an independent participant within the learning-teaching group, an analyst, a counselor and a group-process manager With regard to the procedure, in CLT class, new teaching points are introduced in dialogue form Pair and group work are suggested to encourage students to use and practice Richards, R.C.& Roger, T.S (2001) summarize principles of CLT as follows:

 Learners learn a language through using it to communicate

 Authentic and meaningful communication should be the goals of classroom activities

 Fluency is an important dimension of communication

 Communication involves the integration of different language skills

 Learning is a process of creative constructions and involves trials and errors

According to this, language is no longer described through concept of grammar and vocabulary Thus, the focus of language teaching moves from mere mastery of structures

to communication proficiency

2.1.3.2 Teaching interactional skills in CLT classes

In the light of CLT approach, the goal of language study is to communicate competently in that language Richard, Platt and Weber (1985) (replicated in Nunan, D., 1999) characterize four dimensions of communicative competence as follows:

 The grammar and vocabulary of the language

 Knowledge of rules of speaking( for example, knowing how to begin and end conversations, knowing what topics can be talked about in different types of speech events, knowing which address forms should be used with different persons and in different situations)

 Knowing how to use and respond to different types of speech acts such as requests, apologies, thanks and invitations

 Knowing how to use language appropriately

Nunan, D., 1999, P.226

2.1.3.3 Integrating Pronunciation teaching

In language learning and teaching, pronunciation is considered one of the most difficult areas because of mother tongue interference and feelings of awkwardness, inhibition, embarrassment and so fourth Hedge, T.(2000) claims that it is teachers’ responsibility to decide when to focus on pronunciation, and on which aspects It is now agreed that in CLT class, pronunciation can be integrated into speaking lessons, either through activities which prepare for speaking tasks or through follow-up activities Individual sounds, word stress, sentence stress, and various types of linking can be drawn out of many classroom activities Likewise, intonation can be picked out from dialogues in textbook materials to show students its importance in indicating attitudes and emotion in conversation

2.1.3.4 Accuracy and fluency

According to Hedge (2000), “ as communicative approaches have developed, teachers have been concerned to ensure that students not only practice speaking in a controlled way

in order to produce features of pronunciation, vocabulary and structure accurately, but also

practice using these features more freely in purposeful communication” As a result, it is necessary for teacher to design both accuracy-based and fluency-based activities Hedge (2000) works out four needs of a meaningful accuracy-based activity

(i) Contextualized practice: Teachers will find a situation in which the structure is

commonly used Students feel that the structures are used naturally

(ii) Personalizing language: Personalized speaking activities enable students to express

their own ideas, feelings, preferences, and opinions as the activities allow students some degree of choice in what they say

(iii) Building awareness of the social use of language: The activity helps students

understand appropriate social behaviour and the language used in a certain situation

(iv)Building confidence: With ease and confidence, students are likely to produce

language quickly and automatically

According to Hedge (2000), fluency, on the other hand, means responding coherently within the turns of conversation, linking words and phrases, using intelligible pronunciation and appropriate intonation and doing all of this without hesitation Fluency-based activities work best in free discussion, role –play and gap activities

(i) Free discussion: free discussion on a wide range of topics, which engage students’

interests, opinions, histories, and experiences, could encourage them to use the language needed in a conversation

(ii) Role-play: In comparison with free discussion, role-play has a greater chance to

involve all the students and reduce unequal participation It is not all, for some certain students, role-play is less challenging However, role-play is not always successful and whether or not it encourages interactional skills depends on the details Functional roles and social roles seem more effective than professional roles

(iii) Gap activities: Gap activities involve each learner in a pair or group possessing

information which the other learners do not have and the information must be shared to achieve an outcome Activities of this kind can motivate students to bridge the information gap to solve a problem Moreover, activities of this kind seem to demonstrate the usefulness of pair work, which is considered less threatening

2.2 Task-based Language Teaching (TBLT)

2.2.1 What is TBLT?

According to Littlewood (2004), TBLT is a development within communicative approach It is not all, Brown (1994) also claims that “TBLT is a perspective that can be taken within a CLT framework” Besides, he stated that what various understandings of TBLT emphasize is the centrality of task itself in a language course and, for TBLT as an overall approach, the importance of organizing a course around communicative tasks that learners need to engage in outside the classroom Also, Foster (1999) points out that there are different task-based approaches which share a common idea: giving learners tasks to transact, rather than items to learn, providing an environment which best promotes the natural language learning process Candlin (1987) says that “Task-based learning continues with and develops recent attention to learner-centered approaches, and in particular the ideas of differentiation and learner interdependence” (P.3)

An important feature of TBL is that learners are free to choose whatever language forms they wish to convey what they mean, in order to fulfill, as well as they can, the task goals

Nunan (1991) gives out five characteristics of a task-based approach to language teaching as follows:

(i) An emphasis on learning to communicate through interaction in the target language

(ii) The introduction of authentic texts into the learning situation

(iii) The provision of opportunities for learners to focus, not only on language but also on the learning process itself

(iv) An enhancement of the learners’ own personal experience as important contributing elements to classroom learning

(v) An attempt to link classroom language learning with language activation outside classroom

Task-based syllabus which is considered the cornerstone of TBLT is defined by Richards (1991) as syllabus which is organized around tasks, rather than in terms of grammar or vocabulary In task-based learning, communication tasks (where language forms are not controlled) involve learners in an entirely different mental process as they compose what they want to say, expressing what they think or feel

Tasks remove the teacher domination, and learners get chances to open and close conversations, to interact naturally, to interrupt and challenge, to ask people to do things

and to check what they have done Much of this will involve composing in real time The resulting interaction is far more likely to lead to increased fluency and natural acquisition than form-focused exercises that encourage learners to get it right from the beginning According to Long and Crooks (1992), the task-based syllabuses are “distinguished from most earlier syllabus types by the fact that their rationale derives from what is known about human learning in general and second language learning in particular rather than, as

is the case with lexical, structural, notional, functional, and relational syllabuses primary from an analysis of language and language use In addition, while differing from one another in important ways, all three reject linguistic elements (such as word, structure, notion or function) as the unit of analysis and opt instead for some conceptions of tasks” (P 27)

2.2.2 Tasks in TBLT

2.2.2.1 Defining tasks

In a number of books, the word “task” has been used as a label for various activities, including grammar exercises, practice activities and role plays In some other books, tasks are defined as activities where the target language is used by the learners for a communicative purpose (goal) in order to achieve an outcome

Nunan (1989) defines tasks as activities that can stand alone as fundamental units and that require comprehending producing, manipulating, or interacting in authentic language while attention is principally paid to meaning rather than form Moreover, tasks are seen as “complete and lengthy activities” (Breen, 1987)

Skehan (1998) proposes a definition of tasks within task-based instruction following Candlin (1987), Nunan (1989), Long (1989), and others that a task is an activity

in which:

 Meaning is primary

 There is some communication to solve

 There is some sort of relationship to comparable real-world activities

 Task completion has some priority

 The assessment of the task is in terms of outcome

2.2.2.2 Classifying task

Task classification is important for a number of reasons First, it provides a basis for ensuring variety; syllabus designers can refer to the classification to ensure that they incorporate a range of task types into the course Second, it can be used to identify the task types that match to the specific needs or preferences of particular groups of learners Third,

it affords teachers a framework for experimenting with tasks in their classrooms The aim

of this section is to develop a checklist of task types This part will focus on four approaches for classifying tasks: (1) pedagogic; (2) rhetorical; (3) cognitive; and (4) psycholinguistic

A pedagogic classification:

Willis (1996) offers a pedagogic classification of tasks based on an analysis of the

kinds of tasks commonly found in textbook materials The types reflect the kind of

operations that learners are required to carry out in performing tasks:

1, Listing, i.e where the completed outcome is a list

2, Ordering and sorting, i.e tasks that involve sequencing, ranking, categorizing and

5, Sharing personal experience, i.e tasks that allow learners to talk freely about

themselves and share experiences

6, Creative tasks, i.e projects, often involving several stages that can incorporate the

various types of tasks above and can include the need to carry out some research

A retorical classification:

A rhetorial classification of tasks draws on theories of rhetoric that distinguish

different discourse domains in terms of their structure and linguistic properties- narrative, instructions, descriptions, reports… That is a classification that often underlies language

courses for academic purposes and is often linked to the specific language functions that

figure in academic written discourse, for example, definitions, classifications, and giving examples

A cognitive classification:

A cognitive approach for classifying tasks is based on the kind of cognitive operations different types of tasks involve Prabhu (1987) distinguishes three general types

of tasks based on the kind of cognitive activity involved:

1, Information gap activity involves a transfer of given information from one

person to another or from one place to another For example, using information in a text to complete a chart or table

2, Reasoning-gap activity involves “deriving some new information from given

information through processes of inference, deduction, practical reasoning, or a perception

of relationships or patterns” (Prabhu, 1987) Prabhu points out that this activity also involves sharing information but requires going beyond the information provided An example of this kind of task is a task that requires students to work out a teacher’s timetable from a set of class timetables

3, Opinion-gap activity involves identifying and articulating a personal preference,

feeling, or attitude in response to a given situation Examples of this are story completion and taking part in a discussion Such tasks are open in the sense that they afford many possible solutions

A psycholinguistic classification:

Pica, Kanagy and Falodun (1993) propose a classificatory system with the categories as follows:

1, Interactant relationship: this concerns who holds the information to be

exchanged and who requests it and supplies it in order to achieve the task goals It relates

to the distinction between one-way and two-way tasks This category is derived from research that indicates that when there is a mutual relationship of request and suppliance, negotiation of meaning is more likely to occur

2, Interaction requirement: This concerns whether the task requires participants to

request and supply information or whether this is optional

3, Goal orientation: This concerns whether the task requires the participants to

agree on a single outcome or allows them to disagree

4, Outcome options: This refers to the scope of the task outcomes available to the

participants in meeting the task goals

2.2.3 Advantages of TBLT

According to Bowen (2000), the main advantages of TBL are that language is used for genuine purpose; it means that communication should take place and that when preparing the report for the class, students should consider language form in general rather than concentration on a single form as in “Presentation –Practice-Production” model of language teaching The aim is to integrate all four skills and to move from fluency to accuracy plus fluency

Nunan (2005) says that “TBL does provide a flexible, functionally compatible and contextually sensitive approach for many teachers, as well as learners.” He also confirms that the attractive features of TBL offer the potential as follows:

(i) A replacement to or supportive infusion of more student- centered learning to certain single approach based syllabi

(ii) Utilizing more authentic experiences and materials as well as principles of constructivism compared to top down teaching

(iii) More of a sense of personal and active accomplishment including developing

a greater sense of language ownership

(iv) Increasing student participation when task teaching is well planned and implementing sensitive to learners’ learning styles, learning and communicative strategies, personalities, multiple intelligences and the overall local contexts, for example

(v) Making specific lesson goals more evident through movement towards and/ or success of task completion

(vi) Important and ongoing assessment and “wash back” to both teacher and leaner

(vii) Tasks, well chosen and developed which are centered around relevant acquisition principles, as well as sensitive to context also have potential to lessen the need for test cramming and exercise reliance on a result/ test-based oriented syllabi

Nunan (2005) also states that “It provides rather than a useful practice that can be implied across many approaches, as well as boundaries TBL may provide an enduring legacy that meets the test of the time It may also provide a curricular and syllabus

framework of flexibility that logically students and teachers will be drawn to even if it need not be the central feature for certain places.”

From the learners’ position, doing tasks in pairs or groups has a number of advantages:

 It gives learners confidence to try out whatever language they know, or think they know, in the relative privacy of a pair or small group, without fear of being wrong or being corrected in front of the class

 It gives learners experience of spontaneous interaction, which involves composing what they want to say in real time, formulating phrases and units of meaning, while listening to what is being said

 It gives learners a chance to benefit from noticing how others express similar meanings Research shows they are more likely to provide corrective feedback to each other than adopt each other’s errors

 It gives all learners chances to practice negotiating turns to speak, initiating as well as responding to questions, and reacting to other’s contributions (whereas in teacher-led interaction, they only have a responding role)

 It engages learners in using language purposefully and cooperatively, concentrating on building meaning, not just using language for display purposes

 It makes learners participate in a complete interaction, not just one-off sentences Negotiating openings and closings, new stages or changes of direction are their responsibility It is likely that discourse skill such as these ones can only be acquired through interaction

 It gives learners more chances to try out communication strategies like checking understanding, paraphrasing to get round an unknown word, reformulating other people’s ideas, and supplying words and phrases for other speakers

 It helps learners gradually gain confidence as they find they can rely on co- operation with their fellow students to achieve the goals of the tasks mainly through the use of the target language

2.2.4 A framework for task-based learning

According to Willis (1996), the components of the TBL are presented as follows:

Pre-task Task cycle Language focus

*Introduction to topic and

task:

Teacher explores the

topic with the class,

highlights useful words and

phrases to help students

understand task instructions

and prepare Students may

hear a recording of others

doing a similar task

*Report:

Some groups present their reports to the class, or exchange written reports and compare results

*Analysis:

Students examine and discuss specific features of the text or transcript of the

recording

* Practice:

Teacher conducts practice of new words, phrases and patterns occurring in the data, either during or after the analysis

Table 1: The framework for task-based learning

of familiarity with the topic and the type of task If there is a pre-task recording to set the scene, it would take slightly longer Willis (1996) also identifies three steps for pre-task

stage: Introducing the topic, Identifying topic language and giving task instructions

(ii) The task cycle: Within this stage, there are three sub stages: doing the task, engaging in planning post-task, and reporting The task cycle offers learners the chance to

use whatever language they already know in order to carry out the tasks, and then to improve that language under the teacher’s guidance., while planning their reports to the task Feedback from teacher comes when they want it most, at the planning stage and after the report Exposure to language in use can be provided at different points, depending on the type of task Either before or during the task cycle, students might listen to recordings

of other people doing the task, or read the text connected with the task topic, and relate this

to their own experience of doing the task In general, the task cycle offers learners a holistic experience of language in use

(iii) The language focus phase: This is the last phase in the TBL framework It allows a closer study of some of the specific features naturally occurring in the language used during the task cycle By this point, the learners will have already worked with the language and processed it for meaning, so they are ready to focus on the specific language forms that carry that meaning Thus the study of these forms is clearly contextualized through the task itself This final stage, which includes analysis and practice components, fulfils the fourth desirable extra condition for learning- explicit study of language form

2 Teacher’s role in the framework

In TBL lessons, the teacher is generally a “facilitator”, always keeping the key conditions for learning in mind Facilitating learning involves balancing the amount of exposure and use of language, and ensuring they are both of suitable quality

In a TBL framework, most of the emphasis is on learners doing things, often in pairs

or groups, using language to achieve the task outcomes and guided by the teacher The teacher is involved in setting tasks up, ensuring that learners understand and get on with them, and drawing them to a close Although learners do the tasks independently, the teacher still has overall control and the power to stop everything if necessary

The part the teacher plays during each component of the task framework also varies according to its aim At the end of the framework, where the focus turns to language form, the teacher acts as “language guide”, for example

In a broader sense, the teacher is also the course guide, explaining to learners the overall objectives of the course and how the components of the task framework can achieve these A summing up of what they have achieved during a lesson, or after a series

of lessons, can help learners’ motivation

The link between each task and the other components in the task cycle will also need to

be made explicit Learners will be experiencing English throughout the whole task cycle

2.3 Summary

This chapter has presented some theoretical issues of speaking skill in English and the

aspects of teaching speaking skill The focus of the literature review is on Task-based Language teaching and learning with several important points such as: the definition of TBLT, classification of tasks in TBL, the advantage of TBLT and the framework for the TBLT

The following chapter intends to provide the methodology underlying the study and the findings concerning the first-year non-major students of English at National Economics University (NEU)

CHAPTER 3: THE STUDY

In the previous chapter, all the theoretical preliminaries relevant to the purpose of

the study were discussed This chapter is devoted to the study on using the task-based teaching method in the speaking lesson of the first year non-major students of English at the National Economics University

3.1 The context for the study

3.1.1 Introduction to English course for first -year students at the National Economics University

At National Economics University, before students attend their English classes at

the first term, they have to take a placement test with 100 multiple –choice questions on grammar in order to classify students’ levels of English After the placement test, the students will be divided into different English classes of two different levels: level A and level B (A is relevant to elementary level and B is relevant to pre-intermediate level) Each English class consists of 40-45 students

After that, classes of group A and classes of group B will be offered different course books The course book for students in group A named “Powerbase” (Elementary) and the one for students in group B is “Business Basics” The first semester for both group A and B lasted 15 weeks The teaching procedure for each group is quite different because

of the students’ different levels of English For group A, grammatical parts in the course book are focused and revised regularly with supplementary exercises on grammar as they are new to almost students in this group However, for students in group B, teachers spend less time on teaching grammar and more time on drilling speaking and listening skill in the class room because the grammatical parts in course book are familiar with most of the students in group B

3.1.2 The teaching materials and assessment

During the first semester of English, different course books are used for each group For group A, the course book is “Powerbase” by David Evans and “Business Basics” by David Grant and Robert McLarty for the classes of group B Both group A

and B have supplementary books designed by the teachers at Faculty of Foreign Languages for Economics- National Economics University

The students’ assessments as follows: class participation and attendance (10%), two midterm tests (15%+ 15%) and final test (60%)

3.1.3 Situational analysis

For several years, the English course for non-major students has been changed and revised regularly in terms of course book, class size and teaching methodology The teachers at the Faculty of Foreign Languages for Economics- National Economics University have always tried to work out the most suitable English courses for students of Economics at National Economics University

The formation of English classes is based on students’ levels of English, not on major classes Therefore, each English class may consist of students from different major classes such as Banking and Finance, Business Administration, Accounting, etc

For the last two years, class size has been a problem for both teachers and students

of English at National Economics University Three years ago, there were only about

27-30 students in each English class but now there are 40-45 students in each English one because of the shortage of lecture halls

Most teachers admit that they have not had high achievement in drilling speaking skill for students because of these big classes Whenever they ask students to practice speaking in class, there will be too much noise Besides, for the classes of 40-45 students, teachers find it difficult to keep the whole class under their control They cannot manage

to help and supervise every student They also admit that they sometimes do not intend to spend time in class for speaking skill as they keep thinking that it doesn’t work well in such a big class like that Therefore, most of the time in class is used for other activities

on reading, writing or drilling grammar that students have learnt

As regards learning, it is surveyed that the students’ main weaknesses are in productive skills, especially speaking In fact, many students can do written exercises accurately but they always have difficulties in getting themselves involved in speaking activities naturally This is probably because they have got used to the teacher- centered method since they were school students Another reason is that they find it difficult to concentrate on their speaking tasks in such a big and noisy class Some of them admit that they tend to talk with each other in Vietnamese other than English, especially when