Students' language learning style preferences at Pham Hong Thai High School, Hanoi a case study = Sở thích học ngoại ngữ của sinh viên trường THPT Phạm Hồng Thá

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI COLLEGE OF FOREIGN LANGUAGES DEPARTMENT OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES THÁI THỊ PHƯƠNG NGA STUDENTS’ LANGUAGE LEARNING STYLE PREFERENCES AT PHAM HONG THAI

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI COLLEGE OF FOREIGN LANGUAGES DEPARTMENT OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES

THÁI THỊ PHƯƠNG NGA

STUDENTS’ LANGUAGE LEARNING STYLE

PREFERENCES

AT PHAM HONG THAI HIGH SCHOOL, HANOI:

A CASE STUDY

(SỞ THÍCH HỌC NGOẠI NGỮ CỦA HỌC SINH

TRƯỜNG THPT PHẠM HỒNG THÁI, HÀ NỘI: ĐIỂN CỨU)

Field: English Teaching Methodology Code: 60.14.10

Course: 15

MA Minor Thesis Supervisor: Dr NGUYỄN HUY KỶ

Hanoi, August 2009

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acknowledgements i

Abstract ii

Table of contents iii

Lists of graphs and table vi

List of Abbreviations vii

PART A INTRODUCTION

1 Rationale 1

2 Aims of the study 2

3 Research questions 2

4 Significance of the study 3

5 Scope of the study 4

6 Organization of the study 4

PART B DEVELOPMENT CHAPTER 1 LITERATURE REVIEW 1.1 Definitions of terms - Categorization of learning styles 6

1.1.1 Cognitive learning styles 6

1.1.2 Sensory learning styles ……… …… 7

1.1.3 Personality learning styles 7

1.2 Students’ learning preferences ……… ……… ………… … 8

1.3 Contrastive analysis between students’ and teachers’ opinions …… 11

CHAPTER 2 METHODOLOGY 2.1 Methods of the study ……… ……… ………… 13

2.2 Methodology and procedures ……… … ……… 14

2.2.1 Participants … ……… … 14

2.2.1.1 Students ……….……… … 14

2.2.1.2 Teachers ……… ……….… 15

2.2.2 Instrument ……… ……… …… … 16

2.2.3 Data collection procedure ……… 17

2.2.4 Data analysis procedure ……… … 18

CHAPTER 3 DATA ANALYSIS 3.1 Learning mode ……… ……… ……… … 19

3.2 Homework ……… ……… … 21

3.3 Learning time and place ……… ……… 22

3.4 Perceiving and processing information ……… … ……… … 23

3.4.1 Copying from the board ……… … 23

3.4.2 Listening and taking notes ……… ……… … 24

3.4.3 Reading and taking notes ……… 25

3.5 New words ……… ………… 26

3.5.1 Using new words in a sentence ………….……….… 26

3.5.2 Saying or writing a word several times ……….……… 27

3.5.3 Guessing the unknown ……… ………… 27

3.6 Error correction ……….……… 28

3.7 Teaching aids ……… ……….……… … 29

3.7.1 Cassettes / tapes ……….……… … 30

3.7.2 Written materials ……… ………….……… 31

3.7.3 Pictures / posters ……….… 31

3.8 Class activities ……… ……… ……… …… 32

3.8.1 Role-play ……… ……… ……….… 32

3.8.2 Language games ……… ……….…… 33

3.8.3 Talking with and listening to other students ……… 34

3.9 Improvement ……… ……… … 35

3.9.1 Written tasks set by the teacher ……….….….…… 35

3.9.2 Using language in real-life situations ……… …… … 36

3.10 Sense of satisfaction ……… ……….…… …… 37

PART C CONCLUSIONS

1 Major findings ……… ……….…… ………… ……… 39

2 Contributions of the study ……… ……….……… … 40

3 Limitations ……… ……….…… ……… …… 41

4 Suggestions for further studies ……… ……….……… … 42

REFERENCES ……… ……….……… … I

APPENDICES

Appendix 1: Students’ version questionnaire (in English) ……… … IV Appendix 2: Students’ version questionnaire (in Vietnamese) ……… …… VII Appendix 3: Teacher’s version questionnaire (in English) ……… X

LISTS OF GRAPHS AND TABLE GRAPHS:

Graph 1: Students’ and teachers’ view on learning individually

Graph 2: Students’ and teachers’ view on doing homework

Graph 3: Students’ and teachers’ view on learning time and place

Graph 4: Students’ and teachers’ view on learning by copying from the board

Graph 5: Students’ and teachers’ view on learning by listening and taking notes Graph 6: Students’ and teachers’ view on learning by reading and taking notes

Graph 7: Students’ and teachers’ view on using new words in a sentence

Graph 8: Students’ and teachers’ view on saying or writing a word several times Graph 9: Students’ and teachers’ view on guessing the unknown

Graph 10: Students’ and teachers’ view on being corrected immediately in front of everyone

Graph 11: Students’ and teachers’ view on learning from cassettes / tapes

Graph 12: Students’ and teachers’ view on learning from written materials

Graph 13: Students’ and teachers’ view on learning from pictures and posters

Graph 14: Students’ and teachers’ view on role-play

Graph 15: Students’ and teachers’ view on language games

Graph 16: Students’ and teachers’ view on talking with and listening to other students Graph 17: Students’ and teachers’ view on improvement through written tasks set by the teacher

Graph 18: Students’ view on using English in real-life situations

Graph 19: Students’ and teachers’ view on feeling more confident in previous

situations

TABLE:

Table 1: The English results in the first term of the school – year 2008-2009

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

ESL: English as a Second Language

EFL: English as a Foreign Language

L2: The target language

N: Number

TOEFL: Test of English as a Foreign Language

%: Percentage

PART A INTRODUCTION

The first part states the rationale for the study Afterwards, the aims, research questions, significance, scope of the study are discussed The chapter ends with an overview of the thesis structure

1 Rationale:

There have been significant educational changes in Vietnam for the last few years, especially since the new textbook set was officially used at high schools in the school - year 2006 – 2007 According to Van (2006), the English program follows two current approaches: the learner-centered approach and communicative language teaching Also, it aims at helping students consolidate, expand and improve their communicative competence: the linguistic knowledge and the communicative functions

in different topics as well as help them foster their conducts and intellectual qualities needed to enter life or to study further Understanding students’ learning style preferences, therefore, is fundamentally important and is the key to educational improvement and success

The ways in which an individual characteristically acquires, retains, and retrieves information are collectively termed the individual’s learning style (Reid, 1987; Celce Murcia, 2001) Students learn in many ways - by seeing and hearing; reflecting and acting; reasoning logically and intuitively; memorizing and visualizing; some students learn a lot from group work, others prefer working individually Some students never mind being immediately corrected both written and spoken errors, others, whereas, are easy to lose face when being corrected While some students can learn much through games and activities, other students like formal presentations

Also, teaching methods vary Some teachers lecture, others demonstrate or discuss; some teachers focus on rules and others on examples; some teachers emphasize memory and others understanding Serious mismatches may occur between the learning styles of students in a class and the teaching style of the instructor (Felder

& Silverman 1988; Lawrence 1993; Oxford et al., 1991; Schmeck, 1988), with unfortunate effects on the quality of the students’ learning and on their attitudes toward the class and the subject Many teachers, moreover, are unaware of their students’ learning style preferences, hence cannot meet the learning needs of individual students

2 Aims of the study

The case study on students’ language learning style preferences at Pham Hong Thai High School, Hanoi aims at certain points Firstly, the case study aims at investigating students’ language learning style preferences at Pham Hong Thai High School, Hanoi Students’ language learning style preferences can be defined basing on some criteria such as learning mode (individually, in pairs, in groups, etc), learning time and place, perceiving and processing information, error correction (immediate and delayed error correction), homework, new words, class activities (listening and taking notes, copying from the board, reading and taking notes, talking with and listening to other students, etc), teaching aids (tapes, cassettes, etc), improvement, sense of satisfaction Secondly, the study intends to discover teachers’ awareness of their students’ preferences The extent to which teachers know about their students’ language learning style preferences in terms of learning mode, error correction, homework, class activities, feeling of achievement, etc can be gained from their answers in the questionnaires Thirdly, the study examines the relation between some variables such as age and gender with learning style preferences Finally, the results of the study can help categorize students at Pham Hong Thai High in terms of language learning styles typologies

3 Research questions

The study intends to investigate the language learning style preferences of the students at Pham Hong Thai High School and the extent of teachers’ awareness of them Specifically, the study seeks answers to the following questions:

1 What are the language learning style preferences of Pham Hong Thai High School students?

2 To what extent, if any, are teachers aware of their students’ language learning preferences?

3 What is the association between language learning styles and age and gender variables?

4 How can these students be categorized in terms of language learning styles typologies?

4 Significance of the study

It is important to emphasize that learning styles and strategies of individual students can work together with – or conflict with – a given instructional methodology

If there is harmony between the student (in terms of style and strategy preferences) and the combination of instructional methodology and materials, then the student is likely

to perform well, feel confident, and experience low anxiety If clashes occur between the student and the combination of instructional methodology and materials, the student often performs poorly, feels unconfident, and experiences significant anxiety Sometimes such clashes lead to serious breakdowns in teacher-student interaction These conflicts may also lead to the dispirited student’s outright rejection of the teaching methodology, the teacher, and the subject matter

The results gained from the study are intended to provide an overview of students’ language learning style preferences at Pham Hong Thai High School, Hanoi

as well as the extent to which teachers are aware of their preferences The awareness of students’ ‘real’ language learning style preferences is the basis for teachers to find out teaching ways that work the best for them In addition, teachers’ awareness of students’ learning preference helps make their lessons more attractive, effective and practical The desired learning outcome of individual task, activity in each lesson as well as the whole syllabus can be easily achieved As a result, the atmosphere in the class, the attitude of students towards the teacher and the subject can be improved significantly This can certainly help improve the language learning and teaching at Pham Hong Thai High School Such information is also significant to other teachers from other high schools in similar teaching context

5 Scope of the study

The study examines student’s language learning style preferences at Pham Hong Thai High School Among about 2,000 students, 532 students from 12 classes were randomly selected: 2 classes from group A and 2 classes from group D of each grade

10, 11 and 12 12 teachers teaching these 12 classes were invited to take part in the study This number of participants is sufficient to provide valid and reliable information, the contribution of which is vital to the success of this modest research Students’ and teachers’ answers in the 13-item questionnaires on such criteria as learning mode, perceiving and processing information, new words, error correction, teaching aids, class activities, improvement, etc help answer the questions on students’ language learning style preferences at Pham Hong Thai High School as well as teachers’ awareness of them Moreover, the results of the study can help figure out the relationship between age, gender and language learning style preferences and categorize students at Pham Hong Thai High in terms of language learning styles typologies

6 Organization of the study

The study is divided into three main parts

In the first part _ Introduction _ the rationale, aims, significance, scope of the study, the research questions and the organization of the study are presented

The second part_ Development_ is divided into three chapters Chapter 1, Literature Review, deals with definitions of terms – categorization of learning styles, students’ learning preferences and a contrastive analysis between students’ and teachers’ opinions The methods of the study adopted as well as justifications for the chosen instrument, participants and procedures for data collection and analysis are discussed in chapter 2 _ Methodology In the third chapter, the data on such criteria as learning mode, homework, learning time and place, perceiving and processing information, new words, error correction, teaching aids, class activities, improvement, sense of satisfaction are discussed This chapter presents the results combined with critical interpretation and analysis, from which major findings are revealed and discussed

In the last part _ Conclusions _ we focus on some major findings and contributions of the study Limitations and suggestions for further studies are also mentioned

To sum up, the chapter has discussed the rationale, aims, research questions, significance and as well as the scope of the study Ending the chapter is an overview of the thesis organization With such contents, it acts as the guideline or orientation for the development of the later parts of the thesis

PART B DEVELOPMENT

In part B _ Development, there are three chapters: Literature Review, Methodology and Data Analysis Specifically, this part gives an overview of the literature, including the key concepts and related studies in the field; the main points regarding the methodology applied in the study and the results of the study and discussion

CHAPTER 1 LITERATURE REVIEW

Chapter 1 _ Literature Review _ presents definitions of terms – categorization of learning styles, related studies on students’ learning preferences and a contrastive analysis between students’ and teachers’ opinions Furthermore, research gaps will be disclosed in line with justification for fitness of the present study

1.1 Definition of terms - Categorization of learning styles

Reid (1995) classifies learning styles into three major categories: cognitive learning styles, sensory learning styles, and personality learning styles

1.1.1 Cognitive learning styles

In the first category, there are different sub-categories

Field-independent versus Field-dependent: Field-independent learners learn

more effectively step by step, beginning with analyzing facts and proceeding to ideas Field-dependent learners, in contrast, prefer to learn in context and holistically

Analytic versus Global: Analytic learners learn individually, and prefer setting

goals Global learners, on the other hand, learn more effectively through concrete

experience, and by interaction with other people

Reflective versus Impulsive: Reflective learners learn more effectively when they

have time to consider options before responding, in contrast, impulsive learners are able to respond immediately and take risks

1.1.2 Sensory learning styles

In the category of sensory learning styles, there are two main types of learning styles: perceptual learning styles and environmental learning styles

Perceptual learning styles

Auditory learner (learns more effectively through the ear – hearing), Visual learner (through the eyes - seeing), Tactile learner (through touch - hands-on), Kinesthetic learner (through body experience - movement), Haptic learner (through

touch and body involvement)

Environmental learning styles

Physical versus Sociological: Physical learners learn more effectively when

variables such as temperature, sound, light, food, time, and classroom arrangement are considered Sociological learners, in contrast, learn more effectively when variables such as group, individual, pair, and level of teacher authority are regarded

1.1.3 Personality learning styles

Extroversion versus Introversion: Extroverted learners are interested in concrete

experience, contact with outside, and relationship with others Introverted learners, on the other hand, are more interested in individual and independent situations

Thinking versus Feeling: Thinking learners learn best from impersonal

circumstances and logical consequences Feeling learners prefer personalized circumstances and social values

Ambiguity-tolerant versus Ambiguity-intolerant: Ambiguity-tolerant learners

learn best when opportunities for experience and risk, as well as interaction, are present Ambiguity-intolerant learners, however, learn most effectively when in less

flexible, less risky, and more structured situations

Sensing versus Perception: Sensing learners learn best from reports of

observable facts and happenings, and rely on their five senses, while perception learners learn more effectively from meaningful experiences and relations with others

Left-brained versus Right-brained: Left-brained learners tend toward visual,

analytic, reflective, and self-reliant learning Right-brained learners, on the contrary, are more interested in auditory, global, impulsive, and interactive learning

Judging versus Perceiving: Judging learners learn by reflection, analysis, and

processes that involve closure Perceiving learners, in contrast, learn through negotiation, feeling, and inductive processes that postpone closure

1.2 Students’ learning preferences

According to Felder and Henriques (1995), learning styles have been extensively discussed in the educational psychology literature (Claxton and Murrell, 1987; Schmeck, 1988) and specifically in the context of language learning by Oxford and her colleagues (Oxford, 1990; Oxford et al., 1991; Wallace and Oxford, 1992; Oxford and Ehrman, 1993), and over 30 learning style assessment instruments have been developed

in the past three decades (Guild and Garger, 1985; Jensen, 1987) However, research that identifies and measures perceptual learning styles relies primarily on self-reporting questionnaires by which students select their preferred learning styles

Reid (1987) distinguished four perceptual learning modalities, basing on the results of a survey: Visual learning (e.g reading and studying charts); Auditory learning (e.g listening to lectures or audiotapes); Kinesthetic learning (e.g physical responses) and Tactile learning (e.g hands-on learning)

Reid’s (1987, 1995) two major hypotheses about learning styles form the background to current work in the area: (1) “All students have their own learning styles and learning strength and weaknesses”; (2) “A mismatch between teaching and learning styles causes learning failure, frustration and demotivation” Reid also hypothesized that learning styles (if unchecked) persist regardless of teaching methods and materials; that they can be adapted because they are partly habit rather than

biological attributes; and that learning will be improved if students become aware of a wider range of styles and stretch their own styles

Previous studies into the learning styles of EFL students and Reid’s first hypothesis have generally reported (though with some differences) that they favored Kinesthetic and Tactile styles and disfavored Group styles For example, Reid’s 1987 study with Chinese university students (N=90), Melton’s 1990 study with Chinese university students (N=331) (favor Individual styles), John’s 1997 research with Chinese students (Taiwan), Kitchen and Chew’s 1997 study (N=318) with the Singapore university students in Chu (did not disfavor any styles); Rossi-Le’s 1995 study with adult L2 immigrants in the United States (did not disfavor any styles) and Hyland’s 1993 research with Japanese learners (favored Auditory and Tactile style and disfavored Visual styles)

Moreover, the results of Reid's study also showed that the learning style preferences of nonnative speakers often differ significantly from those of native speakers In addition, ESL students from different language backgrounds sometimes differ from one another in their learning style preferences; and that variables such as sex, length of time staying and studying English in the U S., field of study, level of education, TOEFL score, and age are related to differences in learning styles However, few studies appear to have checked the links between learning styles and discipline (e.g science versus humanities)

Three conclusions were drawn from Kavaliauskiene’s study (2003) on learners’ language learning styles preferences Firstly, more than half of the learners preferred a communicative approach to perfecting their language skills by working in pairs or small groups, taking part in projects and practicing English by talking to their peers Secondly, students paid more attention to short-term approach instead of long-term one They were not concerned with improving language skills and competence for the future usage Instead, passing the exams and getting good marks were the things they sought for Thirdly, 7 % of the learners rejected being given home assignments

Wintergerst, DeCapua, and Marilyn (2003) examined the learning style preferences of three different populations (Russian EFL students, Russian ESL students, and Asian ESL students) Findings showed that these learners clearly

preferred group activity to individual work Moreover, the Russian EFL and Asian ESL students liked group work and project work The researchers further suggested that at least some cultural influences were at play Furthermore, according to Anderson (1993), the important role of ethnicity, class and gender in shaping the learning preferences as well as learning styles of students have been supported by both quantitative and qualitative studies in cross-cultural settings

In the study on EFL students’ preferences for error correction and teacher’s feedback on writing, Rula L.D (2005) used two questionnaires: a 12-item and a 27-item

to examine 156 EFL students (53% male and 47% female) The results showed that 35% of the students thought crossing out and correcting an error were the best teacher’s feedback They showed a great concern with accuracy and error-free writing According to them, grammar, spelling, vocabulary, organization, style and content were important features in writing

Although methodology in language teaching is one of the major concerns, there are not many studies on Vietnamese students’ language learning style preferences Hue (2004)’s investigation into Vietnamese upper secondary school students’ attitude towards grammar teaching and learning (100 Thai Phien High School students) revealed that students were positive about grammar and grammar learning However, they were not satisfied with teachers’ explanation because teaching techniques and activities as well as teachers’ explanation were not varied enough With interviews and class observation (6 classes and 6 teachers at Viet Ba High School, Hanoi), Nga (2007) concluded about teachers’ beliefs about teaching reading strategies and their classroom practice that the teachers were aware of the importance of teaching reading strategies to students but they did not really teach reading strategies to their students in the class

To conclude, it is very important to understand and explore each individual’s learning style Analyzing one’s own particular learning style can be very helpful and beneficial to the student by aiding them in becoming more focused and an attentive learner, which ultimately will increase educational success Discovering this learning style will allow the student to determine his or her own personal strengths and weaknesses and learn from them and allow the teacher to adjust the best teaching way

1.3 Contrastive analysis between students’ and teachers’ opinions

According to Riazi and Riasati (2007), various studies have shown that there can

be considerable disagreement of opinions between learners and their teachers or syllabus experts, which can cause learning failure, frustration and demotivation (Reid’s second hypothesis) A divergence of opinions between these two groups has been noted regard to what learners need and prefer as well as the nature of language and language learning (Brindley, 1984)

The teachers in Barkhuisen’s (1998) survey were frequently surprised to learn about the thoughts and feelings of their students In other words, the students’ perceptions mismatched those of teachers

Spratt’s (1999) study also showed a mismatch between the learners’ preferences and teachers' awareness of them Teachers’ awareness of learners’ preferences corresponded in only 50% of cases with learners’ actual preferences Also, there was

no obvious patter to the correspondences or lack of them It, therefore, was difficult to recognize the reasons why they happened and to predict where they might happen Stapa (2003) concluded that students' preferences were in a relation with those of teachers in many cases The findings of his study reveal significant results suggesting that it is necessary to have a closer cooperation between students and teachers as well

as the way learning activities should be arranged and implemented in the class

Riazi and Riasati (2007)’s results of the case study on students’ language learning style preferences at Shiraz EFL Institutes showed that students’ preferences did not correlate with teachers’ perceptions in some aspects Regarding studying style, students did not like working individually, but teachers did not know this Students wanted the teachers to focus on receptive and productive skills equally instead of emphasizing on receptive skills only Moreover, teachers were wrong to think that their students liked

to learn the new words through translation In contrast, their most preferred vocabulary teaching strategies were guessing unknown words, using words in a sentence and not looking them up in dictionary Language games did not catch the attention of the students On contrary, most of the students liked talking with and listening to other students and having interaction with each other So, teachers should exert their utmost effort to encourage students to form groups and share ideas, organize the lesson content

in a way that equally emphasizes both receptive and productive skills, etc

Finally, Hue (2004)’s study showed that both teachers and students were aware of the importance of grammar and were positive about grammar as well as grammar teaching and learning However, teaching techniques, activities in grammar class and teachers’ explanation were so monotonous and repetitive that students were dissatisfied with the teachers as well as the lessons

There is little doubt that bridging the gap between teachers’ and learners’ perception, narrowing the gap between teacher and learner play “an important role in enabling students to maximize their classroom experience.” (Zhenhui: 2001)

As can be seen, it is vitally important to understand students’ learning style preferences and teachers’ awareness of students’ learning styles preferences and the relation between learning styles and age and gender The implication of the study is that teachers are aware of how their students approach language learning, how they feel about their learning experiences and achievements, etc, so that they can facilitate the desired learning outcomes in the class Also, students must be encouraged to express their language learning style preferences for both their and their teachers’ sakes

A few researchers have done similar studies in some settings However, in the Vietnamese context, particularly at a high school in Hanoi, it has not been done As a result, a detailed and comprehensive study of the learning preferences of Vietnamese EFL high school students seems to be of paramount necessity and importance To this end, the present study with the above-mentioned goals and objectives will be designed This chapter has provided an overview of the relevant literature in the field of the study, namely the definitions of key terms, the categorization of learning styles, a review of related studies on students’ learning preferences and a contrastive analysis between students’ and teachers’ opinions to expose the research gap

CHAPTER 2 METHODOLOGY

The following chapter embraces the main points regarding the methodology applied in the study namely the methods of the study, the participants, research

instruments as well as data collection and data analysis procedures Simultaneously, it provides for the selection of research methods and clarifies specific steps that were cautiously carried out to gain reliable and valid data

2.1 Methods of the study

The methods used are one geared toward the research questions in an attempt to understand the particular phenomenon that is being studied (Leedy, 2001) The following part will describe the rationale for choosing the methods of the study as well

as the specifics about the methods that are employed

Leedy, et al (2001: 149) states that case study is “especially suitable for learning more about a little known or poorly understood situation” Additionally, “a case study

is an empirical inquiry that investigates a contemporary phenomenon within its real-life context; when the boundaries between phenomenon and context are not clearly evident; and in which multiple sources of evidence are use” (Yin 1984: 23 cited in Nunan, 2001) Moreover, Nunan (1992) submits that the case study method is especially suitable for clarifying teachers’ understandings of their work, and responding to the problems encountered in their professional lives As students’ language learning style preferences as well as the relationship between students’ preferences and teachers’ beliefs in the context of this study have been poorly understood, the case study is the dynamic medium to the research questions

Apparently, compared with other methods, survey questionnaires were likely to

be more time saving and fruitful in the large scope, especially with 532 students involved in the study “The researcher can collect a large amount of information in less than an hour.” (Brown, 2001: 15) This advantage was fully exploited when the researcher used survey questionnaires with two different versions for teachers and students among the participants, including 532 students and 12 teachers teaching these students to collect data

2.2 Methodology and procedures

2.2.1 Participants

2.2.1.1 Students

Among about 2,000 students at Pham Hong Thai High School, 532 students (330 females and 202 males) from 12 classes of 12 teachers were randomly selected: 2 classes from group A and 2 classes from group D of each grade 10, 11 and 12, aged 16 (grade 10), 17 (grade 11) and 18 (grade 12) Such a large number represents more than

a quarter of the whole population being studied, which can ensure the reliability of collected data

All of the students have learnt English for at least 4 years (students at Grade 10),

5 years and 6 years (students at Grade 11 and 12 respectively) In classes belonging to group A, there are usually more boys than girls whereas there are more girls in classes

in group D Therefore, for each grade, 2 classes from group A and 2 classes from group

D are randomly selected to ensure a comparatively equal number of students of the two sexes from each grade

As can be seen from the English results in the first term of 2008-2009 year, participants proved to be of different proficiency, ranged from poor (< 5.0) to average (5.0 – 6.4), good (6.5 – 7.9) and excellent (≥ 8.0) This characteristic diversifies the information collected

school-Class Students

Excellent Good Average Poor

N % N % N % N % 10A1 45 4.0 8.9 29 64.4 11 24.4 1 2.2

12A1 41 8 19.5 25 61.0 0 0.0 8 19.5

12A2 49 0 0.0 16 32.7 30 61.2 3 6.1 GRADE 10 173 25 14.5 79 45.7 60 34.7 9 5.2

GRADE 11 180 27 15.0 79 43.9 58 32.2 16 8.9

GRADE 12 179 26 14.5 99 55.3 41 22.9 13 7.3

TOTAL 532 78 14.7 257 48.3 159 29.9 38 7.1

Table 1: The English results in the first term of the school – year 2008-2009

In brief, such a choice of students can guarantee the diversity of samples as well

as the objectivity of study results

2.2.1.2 Teachers

12 teachers teaching 12 above-mentioned classes were invited to take part in the study The teachers are from 26 to 54 years old The teachers graduated from the English Department, College of Foreign Languages, Hanoi National University or Hanoi University 2 out of 12 teachers were previously trained as teachers of Russian and French Two teachers have M.A degrees and three others are doing M.A courses

As can be seen, the teachers are varied in terms of age and teaching experience, however, most of the teachers are rather young, well - trained and have approximately

8 years of teaching English Moreover, all of them have used the new English textbook set (Tiếng Anh 10, Tiếng Anh 11 and Tiếng Anh 12) for at least 2 years

2.2.2 Instrument

As mentioned above, the most popular type of assessment tool for L2 learning styles is the written survey In surveys, students answer questions that reveal their particular style preferences Style surveys vary in reliability and validity, but in the last few decades they have provided useful data from which teachers and students have begun to understand L2 styles

The instrument used in this study was a language learning preference questionnaire adopted from Brindley (1984) It consisted of two versions: version 1 for students and version 2 for teachers Teachers and students answered the questions by

circling Yes / No or writing down their answers if they were different from the given ones (See Appendices) Brindley’s questionnaire proved to be not only time-saving and fruitful but also effective because it made good the shortcomings of other questionnaires For each question, participants were provided space and were encouraged to give their own answers if they were different from the given ones As can be seen, responses from the questionnaire did not only reflect generalized statements about the style use (Cohen, 1998) Participants could give their own ideas instead of choosing among the limited provided options Participants, therefore, had more chances to be more accurate about their actual preferred language learning styles

In the students’ version (13-item questionnaire), the students were supposed to state how they preferred to learn the language in terms of learning mode, homework, learning time and place, perceiving and possessing information, new words, error correction, teaching aids, activities, improvement and sense of satisfaction In the 13-item questionnaire, the teachers were asked to express their opinions as to how they felt their students from a certain class prefer to learn the language on the same criteria in students’ version The content of the 13-item questionnaire relates to ten following main issues:

1 Learning mode (Individual / pair / group work): item 2

2 Homework: item 3 and 4

3 Learning time and place: item 5

4 Perceiving and processing information: item 6

5 New words: item 7

6 Error correction: item 8 and 9

7 Teaching aids: item 10

8 Class activities: item 11

9 Improvement: item 12

10 Sense of satisfaction: item 13

There were some adaptations in the questionnaires Firstly, the questions in the student version questionnaire were translated into Vietnamese so that misunderstanding

and time consuming could be avoided In other words, in order to facilitate students’ understanding of the questions, the student version questionnaire was translated with much of carefulness and caution to ensure the preciseness of its content Secondly, in Brindley (1984)’s original teachers’ version, there were only eleven items, where two items asking about homework and learning time and place were omitted However, it can be seen that homework and learning time and place were two significant issues that should be paid attention to as they reflect students’ language learning style preferences Therefore, in the teachers’ version, these two items were added to gain information from the teacher to have a contrastive analysis with that obtained from students’ version Lastly, the purposes of the study (investigating language learning style preferences of students at Pham Hong Thai High School) as well as the thanks for the teachers’ and students’ co-operation were added to the beginning and the end of the questionnaires in both versions

Thanks to such a choice of questionnaire, and careful translation in students’ version and adaptations, there was no misunderstanding or misinterpretation of the questions in the questionnaire, which helped ensure the reliability and validity of data

2.2.3 Data collection procedure

The process of collecting data was carried out in two main phases

First, the required data were collected in one session The questionnaire was given to students during their class session At the same time and during the same session, the teachers were provided with the questionnaire (teachers’ version) to complete Thanks to the establishment of a good rapport, participants from these 12 classes as well as 12 teachers were willing to cooperate enthusiastically with the researcher, which resulted in the collection of 532 completed student questionnaires and 12 completed teacher questionnaires after all

The second phase was synthesizing and classifying the data collected from the questionnaires Answers to 13 multiple choice questions in students’ version and teacher’s version were imported into Microsoft Excel and mathematically summed up

by the spreadsheet Other answers were classified into 10 different main issues (as mentioned in 2.2.2), into other sub-criteria such as age (grade) and sex

2.2.4 Data analysis procedure

The researcher followed the statistical procedure, from coding questionnaire data

to classifying, summarizing, and reporting data in a reader-friendly way Besides, other answers of the participants were analyzed and synthesized in order to provide a deeper insight into the research matter All the results gathered from these sources will be comprehensively analyzed and discussed in the following chapter _ Data Analysis The data obtained from the questionnaire were presented in graphs, basing on different criteria and items such as learning mode, homework, teaching aids, class activities, error correction, improvement, sense of satisfaction, etc In each item, there was a graph presenting students’ view and teachers’ view on it The graph helps us determine the similarities as well as the differences between teachers’ and students’ view on each criteria In other words, they help identify teachers’ awareness and unawareness of students’ preferred learning styles in different criteria

To sum up, the chapter has presented and justified the methodology applied in the present study by clarifying different aspects, namely methods of the study, participants, instrument, data collection and data analysis procedures The presentation along with the interpretation of findings will be elaborated on in the up-coming chapter

CHAPTER 3 DATA ANALYSIS

In the third chapter, the data collected from the study are presented and analyzed Namely, the data on such criteria as learning mode, homework, learning time and place, perceiving and processing information, new words, error correction, teaching aids, class activities, improvement, sense of satisfaction are discussed Because some of the responses received rendered significant results, while some others did not This section, therefore, briefly presents those responses that were statistically significant

3.1 Learning mode

In terms of learning mode (item 2), students were asked whether they liked to learn individually, in pairs, in small groups or in one large group

Most of grade 10 students disliked learning individually (73.3%) There was no significant difference between two sexes: 25.8% of male students and 26.7% female students liked learning individually Most of grade 11 students disliked learning individually (72.2%) There was a slight difference between two sexes: more male students seemed to prefer learning individually (35.9%) in comparison with female students (21.6%) For grade 12, more than half of the students disliked learning individually (51.2%) Male and female students in grade 12 tended to have different preference in learning mode While most of male students (64%) liked learning individually, only 40% of female students liked it

As shown, in terms of learning individually, only 34.1% of students expressed their preference for working individually while 65.9% of the students preferred other modes of learning the language, such as learning in pairs or in groups There was no significant differences between grade 10 students and grade 11 ones However, grade

12 students tended to prefer a different learning mode

Graph 1: Students’ and teachers’ view on learning individually

As illustrated in the graph, 91.7% of the teachers believed that students liked learning individually Only one teacher (8.3%) did not hold such a belief Teachers generally believed that students did not like to have interaction with their classmates and form groups

It can be concluded from the results of this item that learners seemed to favor a communicative approach to language learning by showing reluctance to working on their own It seemed they felt more comfortable, productive, and relaxed by working in other ways, e.g in pairs, or in groups where their voices would be heard, and their views would be listened to and valued However, teachers should have a different way

of teaching while teaching grade 12 students because they had a different preferred learning mode compared with grade 10 and grade 11 ones More specifically, half of them liked learning individually while the other half did not Moreover, both sexes did not share the same preference Evidently, teachers were not aware that their students did not like to work on their own, and preferred to work in other ways such as in pairs

or in groups Instead, they thought their students preferred to work by themselves independently of their peers In other words, there seemed to be disagreement between students and teachers with respect to this issue

3.2 Homework

Graph 2: Students’ and teachers’ view on doing homework

In item 3, students were asked whether they like doing homework As shown in the graph, only 27.1 % of the students wanted to do their homework Moreover, the liking for doing homework tended to decrease gradually as students get older While

32.8 % of grade 10 students favored doing homework, the percentages of grade 11 and grade 12 students were only 25 % and 23.3 % respectively More female students recognized the importance of homework compared with male students at all grades Some students liked doing exercises in reference books, reading newspapers, magazines in English, etc instead of reviewing the day’s work, preparing for the next lesson or doing fixed given homework by teachers

Half of the teachers thought their students liked doing homework As can be seen, teachers were not fully aware of their students’ disliking for homework However, it should be noted that doing homework is meaningful which helps students consolidate the things they have learnt in the lesson as well as prepare for the following lesson Teachers, therefore, should consider how and how much to assign homework to their students

3.3 Learning time and place

Item 5 asks whether students want to spend all their time learning in the classroom or spend some time in the classroom and some time practicing their English with people outside

Graph 3: Students’ and teachers’ view on learning time and place

Students wanted to spend their time learning and practicing English both inside and outside the classroom (44.4 %) However, it is clear that the older the students were, the more they were aware of the combination between theory and practice, classroom English and real-life English In addition, grade 12 students seemed to be more confident to practice English with other people outside the classroom Added to this, at all ages, more female students wanted to spend their time learning both inside and outside the classroom Beside practicing English with other people outside the classroom, some students improved their English by surfing the Net, listening to English songs, watching television programs and films in English, reading books and magazines in English, etc

Only 16.7 % of the interviewed teachers thought their students wanted to spend their time learning English not only in the classroom, but also practicing it with other people outside the classroom Perhaps they believed their students were not confident enough and not hard-working enough to practice English with other people outside the class So, it is necessary to raise teachers’ awareness of students’ preference and need

to practice English more as well as the importance of it Moreover, teachers should encourage and suggest some different useful ways of practicing English outside the class

3.4 Perceiving and processing information

3.4.1 Copying from the board

In terms of ways of perceiving the knowledge, both teachers and students were asked about students’ preferred ways of learning such as by listening, by reading, by copying from the blackboard, by listening and taking notes, by reading and taking notes, by repeating what they hear, by making summaries

Graph 4: Students’ and teachers’ view on learning by copying from the board

In Vietnam, traditionally, teachers use a board and some chalk to present their lessons They usually ask their students to copy things from the board Teachers even check students’ notes in their notebooks to make sure that they have noted the things they are asked Teachers think copying from the board is really important, which helps students easily revise the lessons

As can be seen, only 37.8 % of grade 10 students liked learning by copying from the board Meanwhile, most of grade 10 students (62.2%) preferred learning by other ways There was a small difference between the two sexes 32 % of male students liked copying from the board More female students seemed to like this way of learning (40.7%) The majority of grade 11 and 12 students shared the same preferred way of learning with that of grade 10 students, respectively 64.4% and 66.3 % The older the students were, the less they tended to like learning by copying from the board Moreover, it can be shown that more male students (at any age) disliked this way of learning than female students They preferred more creative way of learning to this passive way of learning; just copying from the board

3.4.2 Listening and taking notes

Graph 5: Students’ and teachers’ view on learning by listening and taking notes

As can be seen from the graph, most of the students (72.9%) liked learning by listening and taking notes 72.2 % of grade 10 and grade 11 students liked this way of learning Grade 12 students tended to prefer this way of learning (74.4%) Surprisingly, female students seemed to favor learning by listening and taking notes For grade 10 students, 90 students out of 118 female students liked this way of learning, which accounted for 76.3 % There was a more significant difference between male and female students learning at grade 11 regarding to this way of learning 57.7% of male students liked learning by this way, whereas, 83.3 % of female students liked it

9 out of 12 interviewed teachers thought that their students favored learning by listening and taking notes, which made up 75 % However, the rest still believed that their students did not like this way of learning The results showed that both teachers and students held the belief that listening and taking notes was an effective way of learning

3.4.3 Reading and taking notes