Nghiên cứu giao văn hóa về việc sử dụng các hiện tố phi ngôn từ trên lớp của giáo viên Mỹ và Việt = An American-Vietnamese cross-cultural study of teachers’ use

ABSTRACT This study reviews the theoretical background, which explains the important role of nonverbal behavior in communication, especially in teaching and learning, and compares the us

FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES

***  ***

LÊ THỊ THU HÀ

AN AMERICAN – VIETNAMESE

CROSS-CULTURAL STUDY OF TEACHERS’ USE OF

NONVERBAL CUES IN CLASS

(Nghiên cứu giao văn hoá về việc sử dụng các hiện tố phi ngôn từ trên lớp

của giáo viên Mỹ và Việt)

M.A MINOR PROGRAMME THESIS

Field: Engl sh Linguistics Code: 60.22.02.01

Hanoi, 2014

FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES

***  ***

LÊ THỊ THU HÀ

AN AMERICAN – VIETNAMESE

CROSS-CULTURAL STUDY OF TEACHERS’ USE OF

NONVERBAL CUES IN CLASS

(Nghiên cứu giao văn hoá về việc sử dụng các hiện tố phi ngôn từ trên lớp

của giáo viên Mỹ và Việt)

M.A MINOR PROGRAMME THESIS

Field: Engl sh Linguistics Code: 60.22.02.01

Supervisor: Prof Nguyễn Quang, Ph.D.

Hanoi, 2014

ORIGINALITY OF STUDY PROJECT REPORT

I certify my authority of the Study Project Report submitted entitled

An American-Vietnamese cross-cultural study of teachers’ use of nonverbal cues

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First of all, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my supervisor, Prof Nguyễn Quang, Ph.D., who has given me the benefit of his wisdom, advice and patience, and made valuable suggestions and precious critical comments that helped

me to carry out this study

Besides, my special thanks go to all of my lecturers and teachers at the Department of Postgraduate Studies for their great supports in the whole course of my study

I am also indebted to my family and my close friend, without their hearted encouragement, I would not finish my study

whole-Last but not least, I wish to express my thanks to all the American and Vietnamese teachers and students who enthusiastically help me complete my study

ABSTRACT

This study reviews the theoretical background, which explains the important role of nonverbal behavior in communication, especially in teaching and learning, and compares the use of major nonverbal cues between American teachers of English and Vietnamese teachers of English when interacting with their Vietnamese students The areas under investigation include eye contact, hand gestures and facial expressions which are most readily observable The findings of the study briefly answer the questions how often the American and Vietnamese teachers of English use these nonverbal cues, in which specific situations, and their students‟ attitude to them To collect data for the study, survey questionnaires and video-recorded observations were employed Data from survey questionnaire serve as input for data analysis and the other source just provides supplementing information to make sure whether data from the survey are valid or not Finally, implications for practical teaching are given

LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES

Table 1: Frequencies of using eye contact by American and Vietnamese teachers of

English 25

Table 2: Frequencies of using hand gestures by American and Vietnamese teachers of English 31

Table 3: Frequencies of using facial expressions by American and Vietnamese teachers of English 36

Figure 1 Ferrando’s definition of culture 5

Figure 2 Levine and Adelman’s definition of culture 5

Figure 3 Nguyen Quang’s flowchart of communication 7

Figure 4: Nguyen Quang’s flowchart of nonverbal communication 12

Figure 5: Eye contact by American teachers of English in specific situations 27

Figure 6: Eye contact by Vietnamese teachers of English in specific situations 27

Figure 7: Students’ attitudes to their teachers’ eye contact 29

Figure 8: Gestures by American teachers of English in specific situations 32

Figure 9: Gestures by Vietnamese teachers of English in specific situations 32

Figure 10: Students’ attitudes to their teachers’ hand gestures 34

Figure 11: Facial expressions by American teachers of English in specific situations 37 Figure 12: Facial expressions by Vietnamese teachers of English in specific situations 37

Figure 13: Students’ attitudes to their teachers’ facial expressions 39

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ORIGINALITY OF STUDY PROJECT REPORT i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ii

ABSTRACT iii

PART A: INTRODUCTION 1

1 Rationale 1

2 Objectives of the study and research questions 1

3 Scope of the study 2

4 Methodology 2

5 Structure of the study 3

PART B: DEVELOPMENT 5

CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW 5

1 1 WHAT IS CULTURE? 5

1.2 WHAT IS COMMUNICATION? 6

1.2.1 Definition 6

1.2.2 Elements of communication 7

1.3 CROSS-CULTURAL COMMUNICATION 9

1.4 NONVERBAL COMMUNICATON 9

1.4.1 Definition 9

1.4.2 The importance of nonverbal communication 10

1.4.3 Functions of nonverbal communication 10

1.4.4 Classification of nonverbal communication 11

1.5 PREVIOUS RELATED STUDIES 12

a In the world 12

b In Vietnam 13

CHAPTER 2: NONVERBAL CUES 15

2.1 EYE CONTACT 15

2.1.1 Nature and importance of eye contact 15

2.1.2 Classification 16

2.2 HAND GESTURES 16

2.2.1 Nature and importance of hand gestures 16

2.2.2 Classification 17

2.3 FACIAL EXPRESSIONS 19

2.3.1 Nature and importance of facial expressions 19

2.3.2 Classification 19

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY 22

3.1 Participants 22

3.2 Data collection instruments 22

3.2.1 Observation 22

3.2.2 Survey questionnaire 23

3.3 Data collection procedure and analysis 23

CHAPTER 4: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS 25

4.1 EYE CONTACT 25

4.1.1 Frequencies 25

4.1.2 Similarities and differences 27

4.1.3 Students‟ attitudes 29

4.2 HAND GESTURES 30

4.2.1 Frequencies 30

4.2.2 Similarities and differences 32

4.2.3 Students‟ attitudes 34

4.3 FACIAL EXPRESSIONS 35

4.3.1 Frequencies 35

4.3.2 Similarities and differences 37

4.3.3 Students‟ attitudes 39

PART C: CONCLUSION 41

1 Conclusions 41

2 Implications 42

3 Limitations of the study 43

4 Suggestions for further study 43

REFERENCES 45

PART A: INTRODUCTION

1 Rationale

It is undeniable that people express emotions and attitudes through nonverbal cues more visually than through verbal cues in communication However, nonverbal cues are used differently in different cultures Therefore, when people from different cultural backgrounds come into contact, there always exists misunderstanding because of misinterpretation of others‟ nonverbal cues in communication

In class, teachers of English interact with their students in the ways thought as

“appropriate” in their culture They teach, talk and explain to their students in their own verbal and nonverbal ways Cultural factors clearly affect both teachers and students It has been observed that the teachers might appear encouraging or discouraging, depending much on whether the students take their teachers‟ nonverbal cues positively or negatively Therefore, the researcher conducts this study to see how and how often nonverbal cues are used in classrooms at Vietnam Maritime University and Haiphong Private University and how the performance of these cues is perceived by the students

2 Objectives of the study and research questions

The objectives of the study are:

a To study how selected nonverbal cues are used by American and Vietnamese teachers of English in class

b To compare the use of selected nonverbal cues by American and Vietnamese teachers of English

From those objectives, the following research questions are raised:

1- How often are selected nonverbal cues used by American and Vietnamese teachers

of English in class?

2- To what extent are the American teachers of English different from the Vietnamese teachers of English in using the selected nonverbal cues in the particular situations in class?

3- What are the students‟ attitudes to their teachers‟ nonverbal cues?

3 Scope of the study

With the constraints of a minor thesis, the researcher just mentions the three main types of nonverbal cues by American and Vietnamese teachers of English in class, which are eye contact, hand gestures and facial expressions Moreover, the study is limited in comparing how often the selected American and Vietnamese teachers of English use these nonverbal cues in class

The study is conducted in areas of classroom interaction between American and Vietnamese teachers of English with their Vietnamese students at Vietnam Maritime University and Haiphong Private University

4 Methodology

Methods

This research resorts to mixed methods Survey questionnaires will be mainly employed to collect data from informants In addition, observation will also be used for the consolidation of data collected

Participants

The study is conducted at 10 English classes, at Vietnam Maritime University and Haiphong Private University 200 students are taught by both American and Vietnamese teachers There are 10 native English teachers and 10 Vietnamese teachers

Procedures

Step 1: giving the teachers questionnaires about their nonverbal behaviors in teaching to identify some main nonverbal cues they often use in class

Step 2: giving the students questionnaires about their attitudes to these common nonverbal cues

Step 3: conducting observations

The participants are observed in classroom by recording videos

The observations are conducted during a usual teaching period (45 minutes) and cover the following situations:

(1) The teacher is teaching/ giving instructions

(2) Students are making noise/ doing private things

(3) Students are raising questions

(4) Students are answering teacher’s questions

…

Observations are carried out with the minimum of disruption to class teaching and time frames This step aims at checking if there is any disagreement between teachers and students‟ answers

5 Structure of the study

The study is structured as follows

Part A: Introduction

1 Rationale

2 Objectives of the study and research questions

3 Scope of the study

4 Methodology

5 Structure of the study

Part B: Development

Chapter 1: Literature review

Chapter 2: Nonverbal cues

3 Limitations of the study

4 Suggestions for further study

PART B: DEVELOPMENT

CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW

1 1 WHAT IS CULTURE?

Ferrando , cited in Nguyen Quang ( 2008: 27), believes that “Culture is

everything that people have, think and do as a member of a society”

Figure 1 Ferrando’s definition of culture

Levine and Adelman‟s iceberg of culture (1993: 58) state that: “Culture is like an

iceberg, much of the influence of culture on an individual can hardly be seen but strongly

be felt The visible part of culture does not always create cross-cultural difficulties The hidden aspects of culture exercise a strong influence on one’s behavior and interactions with others.”

Figure 2 Levine and Adelman’s definition of culture

However, as given by UNESCO (World Conference on Cultural Policies, Mexico

City, 1982) and widely accepted by its members: “Culture is the complex whole of

distinctive spiritual, material, intellectual and emotional features that characterize a society or social group It includes not only arts and letters, but also modes of life, the fundamental rights of the human being, value systems, traditions and beliefs.”

In the light of cross-cultural communication, Nguyen Quang‟s (2008) definition

of culture is strongly justified According to him (2008: 33), “Culture is the complex

whole of tangible and intangible expressions that are created and adapted by a society or

a social group as well as the ways it functions and reacts in given situations; this helps distinguish one society or social group from another not only in terms of the availability

of those expressions and behaviours, but also in terms of their proportionality and manifestability.”

1.2 WHAT IS COMMUNICATION?

1.2.1 Definition

Communication, culture, and the correlation between them have become an interesting topic for many researchers Communication, might be simply understood as a tool to link people to people, countries to countries within demonstration of their own cultures through process of sending and receiving messages However, the definitions of this concept should be clearly explained

Saundra Hybels and Richard L.Weaver H (1992:5) state that: “Communication is

any process in which people share information, ideas, and feelings that involve not only the spoken and written words but also body language, personal mannerism and style, the surrounding and things that add meaning to a message” This definition seems to cover

both “ the how” and “the what” of communication

In terms of communication components, Nguyen Quang (2008:44) develops a flowchart of communication that is well appreciated and widely cited.

Figure 3 Nguyen Quang’s flowchart of communication

1.2.2 Elements of communication

Communication is made up of various elements According to Hybels and Weaver (1992: 6) they are: senders and receivers, messages, channels, noise, feedback, and setting

 Senders - Receivers

Communication is known as two-way process: sending and receiving To communicate, the senders create their messages by using verbal as well as nonverbal techniques Receivers process the messages sent to them and react to them both verbally and nonverbally

 Messages

A message represents the senders‟ ideas traveling to the receivers A message can be composed in many different forms, such as an oral presentation, a written document, an advertisement or just a comment

 Channels

The message travels from one point to another via a channel of communication The channel sits between the sender and receiver Many channels, or types, of communication exist, from the spoken word to radio, television, an Internet site or something written, like

a letter or magazine In face – to – face communication, the primary channels are sound and sight: we listen and look at each other

 Feedback

Feedback describes the receiver's response or reaction to the sender's message The receiver can transmit feedback through kinds of verbal and nonverbal responses Feedback helps the sender to determine how the receiver interpreted the message and how

it can be improved

 Setting

The setting is where the communication occurs Settings, formal or informal, can be a significant influence on communication

 Noise

Noise is interference that keeps a message from being understood or accurately interpreted Noise occurs between sender – receivers, and it comes in three forms: external, internal, and semantic

- Cross-cultural communication is communication between people who live in

different countries and come from different cultural back grounds

1.4 NONVERBAL COMMUNICATON

1.4.1 Definition

While verbal communication conveys the message through words/ speaking out, nonverbal communication indicates the message beyond words It is clear that nonverbal cues are more trustful than verbal ones, so it is more reliable for the audiences to understand exactly what the speaker means

As Levine and Adelman (1993: 100) hold that: “Nonverbal communication is

silent language, including the use of gestures, facial expressions, eye contact and conversational distances” These author seems to emphasize just some parts of nonverbal

communication, it is not a comprehensive view, at least, it is not simply “silent language”

Nguyen Quang (2008: 61) has given his definition of nonverbal communication:

“Nonverbal communication is all the components of the message that, when taken together, constitute the communication which is not verbally coded but both vocally and

non-vocally channeled Nonverbal communication is composed of paralinguistic factors (nonverbal vocal channel), such as rate, volume, etc and extralinguistic factors (nonverbal and non-vocal channel), such as body language (gestures, postures, facial expressions,…), object language (including clothing, jewellery…) and environmental language (proxemics, setting,…)”

1.4.2 The importance of nonverbal communication

The importance of nonverbal communication is undeniable, it makes up about 60 percent of communication as Hall (1959) announces As stated above, it is more reliable than speaking words Sometimes, nonverbal and verbal cues contradict, people often interpret the message more through what the speaker acts out Everyone is almost unaware of their postures, gestures and facial expressions Birdwhistell (1970), cited in Nguyen Quang (2008: 63), estimates that the average person actually speaks words for a total of about ten or eleven minutes a day, and that the average sentence takes only about 2.5 seconds Moreover, in face to face conversation, it is just 35 percent verbal, 65 percent left belongs to nonverbal behavior

Nonverbal cues are important because:

- People more easily remember what they see than what they hear

- Nonverbal communication occurs more often than verbal communication

- People can easily be cheated by verbal cues but much harder by nonverbal ones

1.4.3 Functions of nonverbal communication

According to Nguyen Quang (2008: 49), nonverbal communication has 4 main

functions:

- Firstly, nonverbal behavior may supplement words If you just speak “You are beautiful” to others, without any facial expressions, it might be considered as a boring compliment, or may be misunderstood as another negative meaning

phrase Your nonverbal cues add feelings to what you want to express Your saying will be much more powerful if you say it with your smile and soft, warm eye contact

- Secondly, nonverbal behavior may contradict your words Take a situation as

an example, when the student got a bad mark, the teacher frowned and said to him: “Good” So, in this case, “good” here could not have its own meaning with a frowning

- Thirdly, nonverbal behavior may regulate the flow of verbal interaction Speakers should know when to stop their conversation with the expressions of nonverbal cues such as: eye contact, gesture or facial expressions For instance, when I am talking to my friend, if he/she looks away or makes thumb down, I will immediately stop talking

- Finally, nonverbal behavior may take the place of words Nonverbal cues carry out a function of a substitute for words People even prefer using nonverbal cues to verbal ones For example, when seeing my friends, instead of saying

“Hi” to them, I just smile or show a V gesture My friends not only understand

my greeting to them, but also know how glad I feel when meeting them

1.4.4 Classification of nonverbal communication

Nguyen Quang (2007, 83) introduces a flowchart of nonverbal communication Whereas verbal communication is recognized by intra-language, nonverbal communication finds its expression in: paralanguage and extra-language In this dissertation, the researcher studies eye contact, gestures and facial expressions included in body language- the minor part of extra-language Discussion will be presented in the next

chapter

Figure 4: Nguyen Quang’s flowchart of nonverbal communication

1.5 PREVIOUS RELATED STUDIES

a In the world

The importance of nonverbal cues in communication as well as in class interaction

is widely accepted There have been many researchers interested in carrying out studies

on this issue For instance, Okon (2011) states that our daily nonverbal behaviors reveal who we are and impact how we relate to other people He accepts the importance of nonverbal behavior and the powerful culture influences on participants in classroom However, his main purpose is to work on outcomes when conflict arises with a student in the classroom and concerned about asking the students about their teachers‟ behavior

Sharing the same perspective, Guvendir (2011) insists that using only verbal cues cannot fully define the classroom interaction It is essential for teachers to use nonverbal communication to make students aware of their errors This researcher just gives insights into the use of nonverbal behavior of teachers in providing their students with corrective feedback

Discussing the teachers‟ nonverbal behavior‟s impact on students‟ achievement, Negi(2009) and Chaudhyl & Arifi (2012) agree that teachers‟ nonverbal behaviors play a highly important and essential role on learners‟ motivation in language classroom

In addition, Peng Hong Li (2011) indicates that most of the teachers are not aware

of the fact that nonverbal cues they use have an influence on teaching effects and ignore the role of their nonverbal behavior in class His study recommends that teachers should take advantage of nonverbal communication to assist and complement classroom teaching

to archive the best effect and high efficiency

b In Vietnam

The importance of nonverbal cues is also concerned by many Vietnamese researchers There are research works related to this topic such as the ones by Vũ Thị Thanh Mai ( 2008), Đặng Thúy Hằng (2007), Bùi Hải Sơn ( 2009), Đào Thị Thu Trang ( 2007)… However, depending on each author‟s perspective, each research provides particular results Trang (2007) focuses on comparison of common touching behaviors and their frequency in American and Vietnamese culture Mai (2007) takes a look into the similarities and differences in the way of using gestures for agreement by Vietnamese male and female Son (2009) analyzes that the most common nonverbal expressions for disappointment in order that a successful communication event can be achieved between American and Vietnamese communicators Hang (2007) also emphasizes the frequency and the specific performance of teachers‟ nonverbal behaviors Nevertheless, she just focuses on teachers‟ performance, ignores students‟ attitudes to the performance

Moreover, she gives insights into eye contact, postures, and proxemics while the researcher does research on eye contact, hand gestures, and facial expressions

CHAPTER 2: NONVERBAL CUES

In chapter 1, the researcher has offered an overview of culture, communication and nonverbal communication In this chapter, the review of the three types of nonverbal cues (eye contact, hand gestures and facial expressions) is to be presented

2.1 EYE CONTACT

2.1.1 Nature and importance of eye contact

Eye contact or eye gaze is when we look directly at a person‟s eyes as we talk to him/her Eye contact plays an important role in communication These windows of the soul- the eyes express thousands of sensitive emotions through its movement Due to its great influence, eye contact is classified in a distinctive aspect in research though eyes belong to face

Western people, such as American, English and Australian, often appreciate eye contact when communicating directly They believe that you should not trust the person who doesn‟t look you in the eye However, the amount/ frequency of using eye contact is different because of different cultures and contexts While eye contact is highly valued in Western culture, it is rarely understood to be polite in Eastern/ Asian culture For example, in Vietnam, traditional Vietnamese maintain less eye contact when talking with strangers, or the young with the old, the woman with the man, the lower status with the higher status in society It might be referred to disrespect or impoliteness Consequently,

it might be stereotypically suggested that the American belong to more eye-oriented type, whereas the Vietnamese belong to less eye-oriented type in communicating It leads us to the hypothesis that American teachers will use more eye contact (direct eye-contact) with students than Vietnamese teachers

2.1.2 Classification

There are some different ways to classify eye contact However, the researcher accepts the classification given by Nguyen Quang (2008: 126) Eye contact is divided into two main kinds: direct and indirect eye contact

Direct eye-contact consists of three sub-types:

- Soft, warm eye contact: it often expresses truthfulness, sincerity, interest,

enjoyment

- Staring: it often conveys anger, conceit …

- Wide eyes: it often reveals confusion, surprise, fear …

Indirect eye-contact/ eye-contact avoidance, consists of the following sub-types:

- Looking upward: it often expresses conceit, evasion, uncertainty …

- Looking downward: it often shows shyness, embarrassment, shame, telling lies

…

- Looking sideway: it often conveys untruthfulness, I-don‟t-care attitude…

In addition, there are some other classifications of eye contact, such as classifying them into four main kinds: intimate gaze, business gaze, social gaze, and public gaze ( Nguyen Quang, 2008: 126) However, in the thesis, the researcher investigates how teachers of English maintain their eye contact with their students in class through direct

or indirect eye contact

2.2 HAND GESTURES

2.2.1 Nature and importance of hand gestures

People often use hand gestures when they speak They may use it consciously or unconsciously to show clearly what they mean For instance, instead of saying good bye, they wave their hands Moreover, when they praise someone, they clap their hands to encourage him/her Hence, communication becomes more meaningful with the help of hand gestures

As Verderber (1990: 87) defines that: “Hand gestures are all movements of palms,

arms and fingers We use hand gestures consciously to describe or emphasize.”

Moreover, its definitions are widened in many other ways such as conscious or

unconscious gestures Webster‟s Dictionary, for example, defines gestures as “the use of

motions of the limbs or body as a means of expression; a movement usually of the body or limbs that expresses or emphasizes an idea, sentiment, or attitude.” However, the

researcher shares Nguyen Quang‟s definition of the term According to the author (2003:

144): “Gestures are movements of hands, legs and body used independently or together

with words in communicating with others, which aim at emphasizing or replace words in order to hide or express attitude and perform the speaker’s thinking”

2.2.2 Classification

Gestures are obviously important to human conversations There are different ways

of classifying gestures Axtell (1988:4) classifies gestures into three main categories: Instinctive, Coded, and Acquired However, in the thesis, the researcher classifies gestures mainly follwing the sub-types of Acquired gestures This kind of gestures involves in social acts, and it usually carries its particular cultural points; therefore, it also causes culture shocks in cross cultural communication Acquired gestures consist of 3 types: Adaptors which mean natural meaningless movement of hands, Symbolic gestures which are considered as specialized vocabulary carrying communicative meaning, and Conversational gestures which are hands‟ movements related to verbal words

Following are some specific hand gestures which appear for analysis in the thesis:

a The OK sign

- The OK sign (or the ring gesture) usually means OK,

good, fine, all correct… originally coming from America

- In France, besides, it is understood as “Zero”,

or “Unvalued”

- In Vietnam, according to Nguyen Quang (2008:161),

21/ 60 people understand this sign in the same way as American; the rest believe that means “Nothing” or „Zero” due to its suggestive appearance

b The V-gesture

- It is commonly known as the sign of “Victory” or

“Peace”

- However, if the palm is reversed, it carries the

negative meaning - “Up yours”

- Many Vietnamese cannot realize the difference

between the palm out and in Besides, some

Vietnamese use this sign as “Number 2” or

“Cuckold”

c The thumb-up and thumb-down gesture

- The thumb-up gesture means paying someone

a compliment Many Vietnamese know it although

they seldom use it Moreover, the thumb-up sign

is used as “hitchhiking” in North America

- The thumb-down has opposite meaning to the thumb-up, it means bad or disparagement

d Pointing

- The most active gestures belong to the movements of

thumbs and index fingers The use of index fingers

pointing at partners may convey the speaker‟s

anger, superiority, assertiveness, …

- Sometimes, Vietnamese use this sign to call others,

usually from superiors to inferiors

e Beckoning gesture

- In some European, Latin-American

and Asian countries the beckoning

gestures are usually performed by

giving hand forward, palm down,

all fingers are moved forward and

2.3.1 Nature and importance of facial expressions

In daily communication, we often use facial expressions to convey our attitude and emotion The changes of muscles in our face obviously show what we think and what we feel honestly Facial expressions play a very important role in communicating because people always pay the most attention to the face The Vietnamese have a saying that goes:

“Judge the book by its cover.”, and the English: “One‟s face can be read like a book”

2.3.2 Classification

Facial expressions involve a lot of movements of facial muscles Birdwhistell (1970: 8) states that a face could create about 250.000 different expressions In this thesis, only the following expressions are taken into investigation:

a Warm smile/ laugh

- It is said that a smile is “a gently curved

line that sets a lot of things straight.”

Smile is used in most cases to show

friendliness and it is almost known as

a positive message

- Nevertheless, smile used by different people in different cultures and situations, carries different meanings For example, in Vietnam, Thailand, Singapore and many other Asian countries, people usually hide their confusion by smiling or laughing Moreover, in Asia, smiling or laughing a lot is assumed to be not serious and reliable

b Chin up

- Chin usually assists other nonverbal cues with

which it goes For instance, chin up with raising

eyebrows and pouting lips means challenging

or looking down on partners

- Chin up or chin toss is interpreted differently in different cultural communities In India, it means agreement; in Germany, it shows beckoning; in Greece and the South

of Italy, it indicates negation; whereas, in Vietnam, it conveys attitude of condescension and challenge

This chapter has presented a review of the key issues of nonverbal cues often used

in classroom The next chapter introduces the methodology of the thesis

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY

With the aim of finding out the differences and similarities in using some main nonverbal cues in class between American and Vietnamese teachers of English in Haiphong, the researcher resorts to the following methods and techniques of collecting and analyzing data:

3.1 Participants

The data is collected from the samples of 10 American teachers and 10 Vietnamese teachers of English in Vietnam Maritime University and Haiphong Private University in Haiphong city, together with 200 students taught by both American and Vietnamese teachers In her thesis, the researcher does not take their gender, marital status into consideration

3.2 Data collection instruments

To achieve the objectives of the study, both qualitative and quantitative methods are employed to make the study more valid and reliable

3.2.1 Observation

Simply defined by Mason, cited in Mackey & Gass (2005:175) observation method

is “method of generating data which involve the researcher immersing (him or herself) in

a research setting and systematically observing dimensions of that setting, interactions, relationships, actions, events, and so on, within it”, it is really a useful tool to investigate behavioral and social acts

Before observations are recorded, a list of different nonverbal cues and situations has been given for the researcher to take notes and follow more easily

In order to make sure that the presence of the observer does not have any significant influence on the classroom setting, the researcher attends classes as a non-participant and tries to minimize her presence by sitting in the back of the classes The camera is also located at the back position of the classes to avoid students‟ attention

The data collected from observations is used to answer the question: How often do the teachers of English use nonverbal cues in their class when interacting with students?

3.2.2 Survey questionnaire

Questionnaire can be defined as “…any written instruments that present respondents with a series of questions or statements to which they are to react by either

writing down their answers or selecting from among existing answers.” Brown (2001:6)

Survey questionnaire is both saving time and economical for the researcher to utilize in this study

Moreover, direct questionnaire has been chosen to collect data It is the most helpful method because it brings the researcher full-filled answers from participants without any misunderstanding The researcher can ask informants for more details, or have them clarify their answers

Based on the previous studies, the questionnaires are designed for three types of participants: American teachers of English, Vietnamese teachers of English and Vietnamese students who are taught by both of them The questionnaires for teachers of English are divided into three main sections following three main types of nonverbal communication mentioned in Literature Review With six questions in total, they are designed to aim at investigating how often the teachers use those nonverbal cues in class Also, the questionnaire for students with 6 questions asks them how often their teachers use nonverbal cues when interacting with them and what they like most Most of the questions are designed in the form of “closed-item” questions, but they are also some open-ended questions which provide the informants with a chance to write down their own answers when necessary

3.3 Data collection procedure and analysis

The data collection and analysis procedure has two phases

Phase 1: The researcher designs observation checklist Observations are carried

out in lessons of some teachers of English as mentioned in 3.1 Each video-tape records a whole period of 45- minute lesson

Phase 2: Questionnaires are first piloted to a small sample of 2 teachers and 20

students to increase its construct validity and reliability Then, the supervisor gives the researcher some advice on contents of the questionnaire items to make it more suitable

The data collected from questionnaires are converted into charts and graphs The notes from observation give more details for the researcher to answer three research questions

In short, this chapter has present details of participants, the data collection instruments and procedures in the study The next chapter is to deal with the findings and discussions

CHAPTER 4: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS

In this chapter, findings and discussions are presented in response to the research questions This chapter includes three main parts which belong to main findings of the three main types of nonverbal cues used in class

The similarities are found in the use of their direct eye contact Both of the American and Vietnamese teachers try to keep their soft, warm eye contact in most cases, while such a behavior as staring is often avoided As shown in the table, 100% of the

Americans always and frequently maintain their soft, warm eye contact, which is 20%

higher than the rates of their Vietnamese informants It seems that they tend to use much this kind of eye contact in class, might thank to its positive power in encouraging students For staring, just 10% of each group has never used it, but it is often avoided in

class No one chooses always or frequently maintain staring; however, the American teachers employ it with higher frequency (50% of the Americans sometimes use it, which

is nearly double times than 30% of Vietnamese ones.)

In addition, wide eyes, surprisingly, shows a great distinction between these two

counterparts None of the American teachers chooses never using this behavior, whereas

the Vietnamese teachers keep away from it as much as possible In details, 60% of the

American teachers always and frequently use wide eyes, which is six times higher than

the Vietnamese‟s Therefore, in the light of direct eye contact, the American teachers keep higher frequency of direct eye contact with their students in comparison with the Vietnamese informants

In terms of indirect eye contact, the two groups of informants share a remarkable similarity These types are never kept all the time, but also no one has never used it The tendency of avoiding indirect eye contact is found more commonly among the American informants Those who teach in Vietnam above 4 years tend to employ more indirect eye

contact than the newer Among them, one chooses frequently using looking side way and nearly a half of them sometimes resort to maintain these indirect eye behaviors while the rest rarely use them Conversely, these behaviors are employed with higher frequency by the Vietnamese teachers, in details, nearly a half of them choose frequently and

sometimes, just only 10%-20% choose rarely use these cues

4.1.2 Similarities and differences

Figure 5: Eye contact by American teachers of English in specific situations

Figure 6: Eye contact by Vietnamese teachers of English in specific situations

(S1): The teacher is teaching/ giving instructions

(S2): Students are making noise/ doing private things

(S3): Students are raising questions

(S4): Students are answering teacher‟s questions

Looking sideway

(%)

S1 S2 S3 S4

Looking sideway

(%)

S1 S2 S3 S4

The figures above have shown that soft, warm eye contact is used in most cases by both of the informants In addition, it is the preferred eye behavior in the situation number

1, 3, and 4- when their students are in control (the Americans- 80% and the Vietnamese- from 60% to 70%) On the contrary, staring is employed only when their students cause problems in class, and the Americans‟ use is 10% less than their counterparts‟ Moreover, 30% of the Americans stare in the situation number 4 – when their students answer their questions, might be due to showing their attentions

As regard to wide eyes, a few Vietnamese teachers use this type of eye contact Also, they exploit it in a low frequency (10- 30%) in the situation number 2 and 3 On the other hand, wide eyes are preferred in all situations by the Americans as a way to show their attention to their students (40% when they lecture, 10% when the students make noise, and more than 50% when listening to their students)

In the light of indirect eye contact, surprisingly, the data of both appear quite similarly although the rates of the Vietnamese are higher than their American counterparts Looking upward and downward are employed by both in the situation number 1, 2, and 3 with low level of frequency (the Americans- 10%, the Vietnamese- mostly 20%) Looking sideway is used most of the three with the highest frequency and in all cases To go into details, the Vietnamese teachers use it more when they give lectures and interacting with their students (30- 40%), and just 10% among them maintain indirect eye contact when dealing with the students‟ errors Meanwhile, looking away is exploited most by the American in the situation number 2, when they cannot control their students and ignore them (up to 40%)

In short, the data analysis has shown that American teachers prefer using direct eye contact to indirect eye contact Moreover, the data indicate that the American teachers maintain much more direct eye contact than the Vietnamese ones Conversely, the Vietnamese teachers use indirect eye contact more frequently than the Americans