EFL 3rd year students awareness of CEFR requirements in learning listening at hue university of foreign languages (HUFL)

To satisfy all my concerns, I decide to have a study on “EFL 3 rd year students' awareness of CEFR requirements in learning listening at Hue University of foreign languages HUFL”.. Inves

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 1.1 Rationale

“Fluency in the English language is a key to success in life” (Hall, 2012) Thesaying refers a new era for not only the dominant role of English but also the change oflanguage learning, teaching and assessment “Fluency” word reflects the direction ofmoves towards communicative acts rather than linguistic knowledge as previous time.English now can be found in many areas of our real life such as “business, finance andbanking, science and technology, popular culture, media and international relations”(Hall, 2012) Obliviously grammar, vocabulary, pronunciation, etc cannot be highlyappreciated if speakers are not able to use them effectively in these particular contexts

For Vietnam, entering into the WTO and opening its markets to the outsideworld entails the demand for a good English language competence among bothworkers and students There were many teaching and learning language projects aim atenhancing Vietnamese English ability However, education officers admitted at aconference that foreign language teaching in Vietnam has been a “failure” According

to experts, the reason firmly comes from “incorrect understanding of the subject hasled to inappropriate teaching methods of foreign languages” (Thanhniennews, 2011,December 26th) As a result, “many college students have passed their exams with highgrades but could not use the language in their life and work” said Dr Nguyen NgocHung, chief manager of the National Foreign Language 2020 project For a long time,

in Vietnam, English language function is to learn and remember as a subject ofknowledge instead used for connecting people from other different languages Sohopefully by the implement of the National Foreign Languages 2020 project, the tasks,content, methods, curriculum of teaching and learning foreign language within nationaleducation system will be renovated It may end human perception on learning English

just for tests; instead, learners will make their effort to grasp English proficiency at thesame time

The National Foreign Languages 2020 project in Viet Nam is designed andadapted under the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR)

of The Council of Europe.The project was released in 2008 and now (2014) beingimplemented in the second phase of the project (2011-2015) All students at HueUniversity of foreign languages have been taught and assessed under CEFR I wonderwhether they have prepared for it What do they think about CEFR, its criteria inlanguage proficiency in general and CEFR’s requirements in listening in particular?How do they adapt their learning methods? What advantages and disadvantages inlearning English under CEFR? And are they able to reach this standard in the future?

To satisfy all my concerns, I decide to have a study on “EFL 3 rd year students' awareness of CEFR requirements in learning listening at Hue University of foreign languages (HUFL)”.

1.2 Research significance

This study points out the reality of learning listening under CEFR at HueUniversity of foreign languages More importantly, it can be used as additionalevidence to draw out possible predication about how successful the Nation ForeignLanguages 2020 project will get The findings and suggestions of this study will be ofgreat use to the improvement of the teaching and learning of listening at universities offoreign languages in general and university investigated in particular The paper mayalso guide teachers and trainers to help their students eliminate difficulties in learningprocess and be better on their listening skills

1.3 Research aims

The research aims at:

1 Investigating EFL 3rd year students' awareness of CEFR requirements inlearning listening at Hue University of foreign languages in Vietnam

2 Giving some suggestions in order to improve students’ listening skills andreach C1 level of their English language proficiency.

1.4 Research scope

This study mainly focuses on the students' awareness of CEFR requirements inlearning listening at Hue University of foreign languages in Vietnam Its participantsinvolve 6 English teachers and 150 EFL 3rd year students

1.5 Research questions

The project is particularly carried out to answer the following questions:

1 What do EFL students think about CEFR’s requirements in learning

Chapter 2: Literature review and theoretical background

The main content of Chapter 2 is to review all the materials related to the topic

as well as the previous research

Chapter 3: Methodology

In chapter 3, participants, research methodology, data collection and dataanalysis would be presented

Chapter 4: Findings and discussion

This chapter will analyze the data from the interviews and questionnaires

Chapter 5: Conclusion, implications and suggestions

In the final chapter, I will summarize the key findings of the study and point outsome of my implications and then the suggestions for further research

CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW AND THEORETICAL BACKGROUNDS 2.1 Introduction

This chapter focuses on providing (i) an overview of listening includingdefinition, listening significance and listening process;(ii) implement of theCommon European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) under NationalForeign Languages 2020 project in Vietnam; (iii) the Common EuropeanFramework of Reference for Languages in which CEFR’s purpose, CEFR’s levelsand CEFR’s requirements in listening at C1 level are defined one by one; (iv)factors influence EFL students’ awareness about CEFR’s requirements such aspresage factors, process factors and production factors; (v) previous researches

2.2 Overview of listening

2.2.1 Definition

There are a number of different listening definitions According to Underwood(1989:1), listening is "the activity of paying attention to and trying to get meaning fromsomething we hear"

In 2002, Rost stated that listening comprehension is an inferential process.Linguistic knowledge and world knowledge interact as listeners create a mentalrepresentation of what they hear Bottom up and top down processes are applied to get

to this mental representation and achieve comprehension

Have a look on Widdowson’s listening comprehension definitions (1990), wecan see that “It is unlike that we ever achieve an exact match between intention andinterpretation, and we probably would not know it if we did” In other word, listening

is a challenging process for language learners to master communicative competenceand an extreme difficulty for language researchers to investigate at the same time

In brief, listening is a component of language skills including a number of skills” It is more than simply hearing; it is “decoding” sounds and understanding themeaning behind those sounds (Forseth, 1996)

“sub-2.2.2 The importance of listening

Among four skills in communication, listening plays a prominent role Manyinvestigators have come to an agreement that listening is the most frequently usedlanguage skill (Morley, 1999; Scarcella & Oxford, 1992) Bird (1953) Barker,Edwards, Gaines, Gladney, and Holley (1980) proved the vital listening position withbelievable numbers In Bird’s work (1953), he concluded that female college studentstook up 42 percent of their total verbal communication time in listening while theyspent 25 percent in speaking, 15 percent in reading, and 18 percent in writing A studyconsidered by Barker, Edwards, Gaines, Gladney, and Holley (1980) confirmed Bird'sview of the primacy of listening and showed that the portion of verbal communicationtime spent by college students was 52.5 percent in listening, 17.3 percent in reading,16.3 percent in speaking, and 13.9 percent in writing Listening occupied 40-50%;speaking, 25-30%; reading, 11-16%; and writing, about 9% is a result supplied byMendelsohn (1994) In contrast, Dunkel's (1991) study reported that internationalstudents' academic success in the United States and Canada relied more on readingthan listening comprehension, especially for those students in engineering, psychology,chemistry, and computer science Thus, the importance of listening in classroominstruction has been less emphasized than reading and writing However, Dunkel couldnot deny the significant listening role in the lives of people Listening is even moreimportant for the lives of students since listening is used as a primary tool of learning

at all stages of education Before students study or collect written materials bythemselves, instructors have given instruction in oral language; it infers students mustfirstly listen

of the learners.

Aderson and Lynch (1988) stated in his research that both first (L1) and second(L2) language models of listening process has both top- down and bottom-up aspects.Besides, these two fundamental processes intersect to develop an interactive one Thus,

we have three types of listening processing.

The bottom-up process

In bottom-up processing, the learner tries to match the initial sounds of a newword to his familiar lexicon to guess what a word might be As more sounds occur, thelistener can eliminate more and more possibilities until he arrives at the single, mostaccurate match to the input sounds In brief, bottom up requires linguistic knowledge

The top-down process

In top-down processing, the learner tries to use his/her background knowledge

in comprehending the meaning of a message In terms of listening, the listener activelyconstructs (or reconstructs) the original meaning of the speaker employing new input

as clues For short, top-down occurs when background knowledge is activated

The interactive process

In listening skill, both bottom-up and top-down processing have weak points.Understanding a text is an interactive process between the listener's previous knowledgeand the text Efficient comprehension that associates the textual material with listener'sbrain does not only depend on one's linguistic knowledge Meanwhile, we must realize ifthe incoming information that the listener hears is unfamiliar to him, it cannot evoke his

schemata and he can only depend heavily on his linguistic knowledge Furthermore, inthe case, the listener can trigger a schema; he might not have the suitable schemaexpected by the speaker Therefore, only relying on top-down processing may result inthe failure of understanding.

The interactive process is consequently the combination of top-down andbottom-up processing It helps listener have the advantages and overcome thedisadvantages of these processes to augment the comprehension At high levels ofproficiency, two processes interact in a compensatory fashion so that what the learnermisses from the bottom can be compensated for from the top as schemata becomeactivated, and predictions are put forth and confirmed Even in one's native language, aperson does not actually hear every part of a message; both bottom-up and top-downprocessing work simultaneously to fill in the gaps as the incoming message progresses

In another word, the listener's purpose will also help to dictate which process dominates(Vandergrift, 2004)

2.3 Implement of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) under National Foreign Languages (NFL) 2020 project in Vietnam

In the aim of assessment the teacher’s language proficiency thousands ofteachers in 30 provinces and cities were required to sit for a test prepared last year bythe Ministry of Education and Training (MOET) The test was designed under theguidelines of CEFR to check their listening, speaking, reading, writing skills and use ofEnglish

MOET demands that high school teachers reach the framework’s second-highestskill level C1, while elementary school teachers must achieve the fourth-highest levelB1 and middle school educators the third-highest B2 The shocking result of the testwas that language proficiency was poor According to Nguyen Vinh Hien, DeputyMinister of Education and Training of Vietnam, only about 10% of teachers who

satisfied the requirement (Thanhniennews, 2011, December 26th ) A question may beraised whether unqualified teachers can train learners with qualified Englishproficiency Certainly, the answer is incapable.

Another reflection comes from the colleges and universities where thoseteachers and students are trained According to Nguyen Ngoc Hung, head of thepermanent national language Scheme 2020 foreign language teaching and learning inuniversities is still restricted, the actual teaching and learning foreign languages inuniversities does not work, foreign language is taught as a subject of knowledge ratherthan skills, teaching methods have not learner-centered He added teaching andlearning process for major exams, focusing on grammar, reading and translation Mostleavers get high grades however, they are not confident to use target language

The reality of English language teachers and students quality shows the need tolook at the responsibilities of universities to train teachers who teach foreignlanguages Therefore, no solution may be better than “retraining” and “training”teacher staff at universities of foreign languages under international standard

As we mentioned, we cannot deny the current shortages of language educationaltraining in Vietnam Upon the tendency of strong international integration, Vietnammust make strategic changes to suit learners’ need without hesitation To meet thedemand, it is necessary to update the teaching methodology and empower the teachingcapacity of the language teachers Then trainers have to train foreign language users toperform communicative acts instead of learning it to keep in mind for exams That isthe reason why in 2008 the Vietnamese Prime Minister decided to issue GovernmentDecision 1400 The goal of which is “To renovate thoroughly the tasks of teaching andlearning foreign languages within the national educational system.” (The government,September 30th, 2008) And two years later, this national renovation was implemented

by project named National Foreign Language 2020 Under Project 2020 Vietnam wants

most of its students to be able to use a foreign language, especially English, confidently

in their study, daily communication, and work by 2020

2.4 The Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR)

2.4.1 The purpose of Common European Framework of Reference for Languages

In order to provide a basis of language syllabuses and curriculum guidelines, thedesign of teaching and learning materials, and the assessment of language proficiency,the Council of Europe (CE) established CEFR It describes in a comprehensive waywhat language learners have to learn to use a language for communication and whatknowledge and skills they have to develop to be able to act effectively The descriptionalso covers the cultural context in which language is set Framework moreover, defineslevels of proficiency that allow learners' progress to be measured at each stage oflearning and on a life-long basis

The CEFR is intended to overcome the barriers to communication amongprofessionals working in the field of modern languages arising from the differenteducational systems in Europe It provides the means for educational administrators,course designers, teachers, teacher trainers, examining bodies, etc., to reflect on theircurrent practice, with a view to situating and coordinating their efforts and toensuring that they meet the real needs of the learners for whom they are responsible

2.4.2 CEFR’s levels

CEFR ranks from level A1, A2, B1, B2, C1 to C2 as ascending proficiency

- Basic User: A1 (formulaic) & A2 (simple communication)

- Independent User: B1 (learners can independently communicate in some limitedsituations) & B2 (learners can independently communicate in familiar situations)

- Proficient User: C1 (learners can communicate fluently in many contexts) & C2(learners can communicate perfectly and fluently in almost contexts)

In addition, it also defines three ‘plus’ levels (A2+, B1+, B2+).

These levels match general concepts of basic, intermediate, and advanced andare often referred to as the Global Scale For each level, the CEFR describes it inparticular details

Here is the table of Common Reference Levels: global scale

►Can use language flexibly and effectively for social, academic and professional purposes

►Can produce clear, well-structured, detailed text on complex subjects, showing controlled use

of organizational patterns, connectors and cohesive devices

►Can understand the main ideas of complex text onboth concrete and abstract topics, including technicaldiscussions in his/her field of specialisation

User

B2 ►Can interact with a degree of fluency and spontaneity

that makes regular interaction with native speakers quitepossible without strain for either party

►Can produce clear, detailed text on a wide range ofsubjects and explain a viewpoint on a topical issuegiving the advantages and disadvantages of variousoptions

B1

►Can understand the main points of clear standard input

on familiar matters regularly encountered in work,school, leisure, etc

►Can deal with most situations likely to arise whilsttravelling in an area where the language is spoken

►Can produce simple connected text on topics whichare familiar or of personal interest

►Can describe experiences and events, dreams, hopes,ambitions, and briefly give reasons and explanations foropinions and plans

►Can communicate in simple and routine tasksrequiring a simple and direct exchange of information onfamiliar and routine matters

►Can describe in simple terms aspects of his/herbackground, immediate environment and matters in

areas of immediate need

►Can interact in a simple way provided the other persontalks slowly and clearly and is prepared to help

Table 2.1 Common Reference Levels: global scale (The Common European

Framework of Reference for Languages: Council of Europe, 2001, p.24)

For short, C1 users show a long- term learning and serious practice that theyhave experienced With high knowledge, they can understand underlying meaningeven when the partners insert metaphor to draw similarity or metonymy to drawcontiguity between two things In addition, with professional language proficiency,they can take communication flexibly without interruption as native speakers

2.4.3 CEFR requirements in listening at C1 level

Basing on the Decision 1400 of the Ministry Prime about teaching andlearning Foreign Languages in the National Education System, Period 2008-2020, allleavers at universities of foreign languages (four-year program) must have languageproficiency of level 5 Another way to say, EFL student is required to reach C1 for theirEnglish qualification At this level, listener generally must achieve a number ofrequirements Their language ability is equivalent to “Can Do” statements The table 2.2that is cited in CEFR will show what requirements are in overall listeningcomprehension

2.4.3.1 Overall listening comprehension

OVERALL LISTENING COMPREHENSION

C2 • Has no difficulty in understanding any kind of spoken language,

whether live or broadcast delivered at fast native speed

C1

• Can understand enough to follow extended speech on abstract and complex topics beyond his/her own field, though he/she may need to confirm occasional details, especially if the accent is unfamiliar

• Can recognise a wide range of idiomatic expressions and colloquialisms, appreciating register shifts

• Can follow extended speech even when it is not clearly structured and when relationships are only implied and not signalled explicitly.

B2

• Can understand standard spoken language, live or broadcast, on bothfamiliar and unfamiliar topics normally encountered in personal, social,academic or vocational life Only extreme background noise, inadequatediscourse structure and/or idiomatic usage influences the ability tounderstand

• Can understand the main ideas of propositionally and linguisticallycomplex speech on both concrete and abstract topics delivered in astandard dialect, including technical discussions in his/her field ofspecialisation

• Can follow extended speech and complex lines of argumentprovided the topic is reasonably familiar, and the direction of the talk

is sign-posted by explicit markers

B1 • Can understand straightforward factual information about common

everyday or job related topics, identifying both general messages andspecific details, provided speech is clearly articulated in a generallyfamiliar accent

• Can understand the main points of clear standard speech on familiar

matters regularly encountered in work, school, leisure etc., includingshort narratives.

A1 • Can follow speech which is very slow and carefully articulated,

with long pauses for him/her to assimilate meaning

Table 2.2 Overall listening comprehension (The Common European

Framework of Reference for Languages: Council of Europe, 2001, p.66)

As I have mentioned in previous part, listening a foreign language is an activeprocess Listener receipts any utterance and completely understands it only whenhe/she has enough language knowledge, language ability and related experienceknowledge At C1, listening recordings with hard standard of structure, content as well

as accent is often used

Unclear structure will decrease the level of coherence and cohesion;consequently, receiver may match information to wrong object or unequivalent event.Furthermore, the listening topics are normally very large and maybe beyond his/herown field It means C1 listener surely fails in using top- down processing As a result, aneffort to listen and decode the sound is obviously necessary to solve the task That is thereason why people sometimes say learning language do not just communicate in targetlanguage but enrich world knowledge effectively

In term of content, another requirement of listening skill at C1 is “can recognize

a wide range of idiomatic expressions” The differences in culture make the differences

in thinking and daily lifestyle across countries And they directly impact on idiomaticexpressions that the local residents use If the listener cannot understand the role of

object, place, person, etc, the meaning of utterance cannot be inferred perfectly For

example, the idiom, “carry coals to Newcastle”, generally we know it means move or

bring something (coals) to a place (Newcastle) However, what is the relationshipbetween “coals” and “Newcastle”? The answer may become easy when listener hasknown “Newcastle is a city in England, which has the largest coal export port in theworld” Therefore, this expression want to emphasize that “do not bring something to aplace where it has been oversupplied” Meanwhile, Vietnamese people suggest idiom

“carry firewood to the forest” instead In brief, a good listener is the one who has largesocial knowledge

In term of accent, an accent is the unique way that speech is pronounced by a

group of people speaking the same language A person's accent depends on manyfactors, such as regional accents or foreign accents The former relates to geographiclocation For example, people who are from Texas often sound different from peoplewho come from New York The latter gives the distinction between people who learn aforeign language Their accents may be influenced by learning and teaching factors,such as listening material, teacher accent, etc Foreign accents, for example, someonewho was raised speaking English will sound different from someone who was raisedspeaking Vietnamese and learned English as an adult The difference in sound theypronounce may regard as unfamiliar accent Of course, unfamiliar accent comes fromeither regional or foreign accents but individual sounds, syllables and words that arepronounced are not normally similar to other ones It is in fact, very difficult tounderstand speech Listener needs to listen beyond the accent with the help of suitabletechniques This is also one of requirements that C1 learner must possess basing onCEFR

In CEFR, the CE describes listening activities that the language user as listenerneeds to be involved He/she receives and processes a spoken input produced by one

or more speakers We can look at the following table

• listening to public announcements (information,instructions, warnings, etc.);

• listening to media (radio, TV, recordings, cinema);

• listening as a member of a live audience (theatre, publicmeetings, public lectures, entertainments, etc.);

• listening to overheard conversations, etc

Table 2 3 Listening activities (The Common European Framework of Reference for

Languages: Council of Europe, 2001, p.65)

In each activity, the user may be listening:

• for gist;

• for specific information;

• for detailed understanding;

• for implications, etc

Table 2 4 Answering form for listening (The Common European Framework of

Reference for Languages: Council of Europe, 2001, p.65)

Besides, illustrative scales are provided for overall listening comprehension(table 2.2), it gives criteria for understanding interaction between native speakers,listening as a member of a live audience, listening to announcements andinstructions, and listening to audio media and recordings

2.4.3.2 Understanding conversation between native speakers

UNDERSTANDING CONVERSATION BETWEEN NATIVE SPEAKERS

C2 ► As C1

C1 ►Can easily follow complex interactions between third parties in

group discussion and debate, even on abstract, complex unfamiliar

topics

B2 ►Can keep up with an animated conversation between native speakers

►Can with some effort catch much of what is said around him/her, butmay find it difficult to participate effectively in discussion with severalnative speakers who do not modify their language in any way

B1 ►Can generally follow the main points of extended discussion around

him/her, provided speech is clearly articulated in standard dialect

A2 ►Can generally identify the topic of discussion around him/her, when

it is conducted slowly and clearly

A1 ► No descriptor available

Table 2.5 Understanding conversation between native speakers (The Common

European Framework of Reference for Languages: Council of Europe, 2001, p.66)

When conversing, participants obviously switch their roles of speaker and

hearer, they take turns in the process named turn-taking Complex interactions show

the high rate of changing their role There may be one person or one group of peopleplay in role of speaker and more than one person or groups are listeners In discussion

or debate, all participants have a chance to take turn, interrupt and sometimes overlap Itmeans that there is not only one party talks at a time Conversation seems to beconfusing so listener must be wise to understand the content or even decide who has

said In the framework, proficiency users (both C1 and C2) “can easily follow complex interactions between third parties in group discussion and debate, even on abstract, complex unfamiliar topics.”(The Council of Europe, p.66)

2.4.3.3 Listening as a member of a live audience

LISTENING AS A MEMBER OF A LIVE AUDIENCE C2 ► Can follow specialised lectures and presentations employing a

high degree of colloquialism, regional usage or unfamiliarterminology

C1 ► Can follow most lectures, discussions and debates with relative

ease

B2

► Can follow the essentials of lectures, talks and reports and otherforms of academic/professional presentation which are propositionallyand linguistically complex

B1

► Can follow a lecture or talk within his/her own field, provided thesubject matter is familiar and the presentation straightforward andclearly structured

►Can follow in outline straightforward short talks on familiartopics provided these are delivered in clearly articulated standard

speech

A2 ► No descriptor available

A1 ► No descriptor available

Table 2.6 Listening as a member of a live audience (The Common European

Framework of Reference for Languages: Council of Europe, 2001, p 67)

Table 2 6 describes the C1 requirement when listening as a member of a liveaudience At this moment, in the role of speaker, test taker directly contributes to theconversation and may control the direction, speed as well as topic On the other hand, in

the role of listener, the language user “can follow most lectures, discussions and

debates with relative ease.” (p.67)

2.4.3.4 Listening to audio media and recordings

LISTENING TO AUDIO MEDIA AND RECORDINGS C2 ► As C1

C1

► Can understand a wide range of recorded and broadcast audio material, including some non-standard usage, and identify finer points of detail including implicit attitudes and relationships between speakers

B2

► Can understand recordings in standard dialect likely to beencountered in social, professional or academic life and identifyspeaker viewpoints and attitudes as well as the informationcontent

► Can understand most radio documentaries and most otherrecorded or broadcast audio material delivered in standard dialectand can identify the speaker's mood, tone etc.

B1

► Can understand the information content of the majority ofrecorded or broadcast audio material on topics of personal interestdelivered in clear standard speech

► Can understand the main points of radio news bulletins and simplerrecorded material about familiar subjects delivered relatively slowly andclearly

A2 ► Can understand and extract the essential information from

short, recorded passages dealing with predictable everyday matterswhich are delivered slowly and clearly

A1 ► No descriptor available

Table 2 7 Listening to audio media and recordings (The Common European

Framework of Reference for Languages: Council of Europe, 2001, p.68)

Unlike listening as a member of live audience, listening to audio media andrecordings is a process that listener cannot interfere in All audio media and recordingshave already been recorded in the type of sound and/or image Another way to say, there

is no interaction between speaker and listener (test taker) For C1 criteria, listener mustface “some non-standard usage” of records and “identify finer points of detailincluding implicit attitudes and relationships between speakers.”(p.68)

2.4.3.5 Listening to announcements and instructions

LISTENING TO ANNOUNCEMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS C2 ► As C1

B2 ► Can understand announcements and messages on concrete and

abstract topics spoken in standard dialect at normal speed

► Can understand simple directions relating to how to get from X

to Y, by foot or public transport

A1 ► Can understand instructions addressed carefully and slowly to

him/her and follow short, simple directions

Table 2.8 Listening to announcements and instructions (The Common

European Framework of Reference for Languages: Council of Europe, 2001, p.67)

Another listening type may be inserted in C1 level is announcement or instruction It isnormally pronounced in poor condition such as railway station, sports stadium,supermarket, etc These spoken inputs may work with public noise at the same time

Therefore, listener must identify and pick out specific information.

2.4.3.6 Assessment by others/self-assessment

According to the CEFR, other assessment and self- assessment are two kinds oflanguage assessment Other assessment is judgment by the teacher or examinermeanwhile self-assessment is seen as judgment about learner own proficiency.Learners can be involved in many of the assessments that have been mentioned.Each assessment has different benefits and purposes The main potential for self-assessment, however, is in its use as a tool for motivation and awareness raising ingeneral and helping learners to appreciate their strengths, recognize their weaknessesand orient their learning more effectively in particular

Self- assessment criteria is based on the requirements of overall listeningcomprehension, understanding conversation between native speakers, listening as a member

of live audience, listening announcements and instructions and listening audio media

and recordings You can see self-assessment statements criteria cited from the CommonEurope Framework in the following lines.

I can understand enough to follow extended speech on abstract and

complex topics beyond my own field, though I may need to confirm occasional

details, especially if the accent is unfamiliar

I can recognise a wide range of idiomatic expressions and

colloquialisms and recognise changes in style

I can follow extended speech even when it is not clearly structured and

when relationships between ideas are only implied and not stated explicitly I

can follow most lectures, discussions and debates with relative ease

I can extract specific information from poor quality public

announcements

I can understand complex technical information, such as operating

instructions, specifications for familiar products and services

I can understand a wide range of recorded audio material, including

some non-standard language, and identify finer points of detail, including

implicit attitudes and relationships between speakers

I can follow films which contain a considerable degree of slang and

debates, public announcements, complex technical information, recorded audiomaterial and films, etc Therefore, if learners want to reach level C1 in listening, their test

result must obviously suggest that they are at level C1 on the Council of Europe

scale

2.5 Factors influence EFL students’ awareness about CEFR requirements

Requirements are essential standards or criterion that need to be obtained for

a job or at least at a particular level It is regarded as the respected result of aprocess In education, requirements will be learning outcomes if learners can finishtheir work well According to Biggs (1989), he constructs the learning process as aninteractive system with three main components, known as 3-P model: the learningenvironment and student characteristics (as Presage), students’ choice of learningfocused activities (as Process), and the learning outcomes (as Product) In thispaper, I want to investigate factors that affect undergraduate students’ thinkingabout CEFR’s requirements basing on 3-P model’s Biggs

2.5.1 Presage factors

As the term suggests, presage factors are those which exist before the time of

learning They comprise two broad types: the enduring personal characteristics

brought to the learning situation by the student (e.g gender, personality, prior

academic ability) and situational characteristics which define the learning

environment (e.g teaching methods, course structure, quality of teaching, clear goalsand standards, workload, assessment, and emphasis on independence) Prioracademic ability was operationalized by students' university entrance score Based ontheir performance in 12 years of their secondary education, students earn a ratingfrom 1 (low) to 10 (high achievement), which is used to determine order ofentrance to tertiary courses

2.5.2 Process factors

Process factors describe how students approach their learning Two

approaches to learning were selected to measure the process domain The first one isdeep approach, intrinsic motivation and emphasis on meaning, and the second issurface approach, extrinsic motivation and emphasis on reproduction According toMarton & Saljo(1976) and Thomas & Bain(1984),“a (A) ‘deep’ approach tolearning is described as striving for improved understanding by applying andcomparing ideas Conversely, ‘surface’ learning involves reproductive strategieswith little attempt to integrate information.”

2.5.3 Product factors

Product factors describe the learning outcomes including (i) academicachievement, (ii) course satisfaction, and (iii) generic skills development whichstudents derive from the learning process Traditionally,(i) academic achievementwas represented by calculating, using university academic records, students' gradepoint average , measured on a scale from 1 (low) to 10 (high), from thecommencement of their degree to the point at which the survey was conducted (ii)Course satisfaction was measured by students' responses to the item 'Overall, I amsatisfied with the quality of this course', rated on a 5-point scale from 1, disagree, to

5, agree (iii) Generic skills development was measured by averaging students'responses to the six items of the generic skills scale This scale measures processskills relevant to employability and lifelong learning, such as writtencommunication, problem-solving, analytic skills, teamwork, ability to plan one'sown work and confidence in tackling new situations

The 3-P model represented the relationship between first component and twolast ones Firstly, personal and situational factors influence a student to adopt aparticular approach to learning which, in turn, mediates or influences the types ofoutcomes achieved; and secondly, that presage factors (e.g perceptions of the learningenvironment) can also directly influence learning outcomes For short, presage may be

seen as prior factor and have a strong effect on whether requirements are reached ornot

In another study named “University students' perceptions of the learningenvironment and academic outcomes: implications for theory and practice”, AlfLizzio, Keithia Wilson and Roland Simons (2002) demonstrate the relationship ofthree ranges of such factors by the following diagram

For the first range, they clearly establish the links among teaching, workloadand prior academic ability Each factor has direct and mutual interactions with otherones On the other hand, every presage factors keep building impacts on both processand product factors, however the relationship is just one direction In other words, twolater factors have no meaning on the change of the first ones By the diagram, Lizzio et

al (2002) show that academic outcomes strongly depend on the quality of presagefactors and the choice of learning approach that students have Their coursesatisfaction must derive from the satisfaction of learning environment Therefore,students’ awareness of learning requirements should be investigated basing on theirperception of related factors such as teacher, student, facility, workload, assessment,etc

Diagram 2.1: The relationship between the academic environment, approaches to study, and academic outcomes at the level of the whole university.

(Alf Lizzio, Keithia Wilson & Roland Simons, University students' perceptions of the learning environment and academic outcomes: implications for theory and practice,

2002, p.36)

2.6 Previous research

Recently, the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages(CEFR) has been particularly concerned by a number of researchers J CharlesAlderson (2002), Barbara Lotti M.Litt (2007) and Hsuan-Po Wang, Bor-Chen Kuo,Ya-Hsun Tsai and Chen-Huei Liao (2012) had investigations into the use of CEFR indifferent contexts J Charles Alderson carried out his case studies on the use of theframework in several European countries while Barbara Lotti M.Litt focuses on the use

of the Common European Framework of Reference for languages in regional andminority language education In his study, the difficulties exist concerning theapplication of the Common European Framework of Reference to regional andminority language education So it seems necessary to adapt the framework basing onthe local condition In addition, Hsuan-Po Wang, Bor-Chen Kuo, Ya-Hsun Tsai andChen-Huei Liao made a survey on a CEFR-based computerized adaptive testingsystem for Chinese proficiency The study shows that the computerized Chineseproficiency test firmly possesses good reliability and validity They in fact, offer to usecomputer as a useful facility to test language learner proficiency under CEFR standard.All given researches reflect the conditions to satisfy the requirements at each level, onthe other hand they themselves suggest adaptions on CEFR descriptors

On the viewpoint of requirements’ power, Faez, Majhanovich, Taylor, Smith,and Crowley (2011) made a study on teachers’ perceptions of CEFR- informedinstruction including strengths and challenges In this paper, teachers reported that

CEFR-informed instruction increased student motivation, built self-confidence in theirlearners, promoted authentic language use in the classroom and encouraged learnerautonomy Through the findings from teachers’ awareness, this group of researchershave implications for second language programs in Canada and possibly otherforeign language education programs worldwide.

Back into the Vietnamese context, Nguyen Thi My Anh (2013) carried out

interesting thesis She studied the impact of CEFR on teachers’ and students’

perception, the reality of teaching and assessing speaking skill to non English majorstudents at Hue University’s College of Education From the participants’ perspective,speaking skill at B1 level needed to be taught to non-English major students From thereality of teaching and assessing speaking skill, the impact of CEFR had existed butthere are still a lot of changes in teaching and assessing in order to satisfy therequirements of CEFR standard at B1 level A large number of students lack suchthings as vocabulary, accurate pronunciation and grammar structures that playsignificant roles in speaking skill Moreover, the learning attitude is anotherdetermining factor, which causes lots of difficulties in teaching and assessing Solvingthese problems may help students achieve the defined requirements at their levels.Based on the findings, implications for lecturers, educational administrators andeducators, and students have been suggested in order to help non-English studentsimprove their English speaking skill to satisfy the new requirements following CEFRstandard

It can be seen that most said researchers either examined the use of CEFR inspecific geographic area, tool deliver language test or teaching and assessmentspeaking skill under CEFR No research is carried out to find students’ awareness ofCEFR’s requirements in learning listening skill I believe my research paper can reflectexactly the reality of implementing NFL 2020 project in Hue university of foreign

language, at the same time can elicit some useful suggestion for enhancing students’English competence effectively

2.7 Chapter summary

In this chapter, the researcher has supplied the background knowledge oflistening, CEFR and classified CEFR’s requirements in listening at C1 level Then, theresearcher has also stated the factors related to students ‘awareness Such theory will

be very useful for indentifying the research direction and designing questionnaire aswell At the same time, a number of previous studies conducted in Vietnam and severalforeign countries are deeply concerned Their achievement will support my papersimilarly, their limitation gap will be defined and fit

CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY 3.1 Introduction

This chapter describes the research approach, participants, research methods ofcollecting data and data analysis

3.2 Research approach

To collect relatively objective information, a combination of both quantitativeand qualitative approaches was used

Quantitative data were data that had been collected and put into numeric form,

so that they could be counted For instance, the information gathered for a large-scalesurvey could be added up and examined numerically, usually using percentages.Analyzing quantitative data involved the use of statistics to describe, summarize andcompare the data By using questionnaires the researcher could obtain dataquantitatively, which later on would assist the study with persuasive figures concerningthe investigated issues Using quantitative data gave a quick, easy method of analysisand had concrete, mathematically-based findings In quantitative research, since theinformation was in numerical form, we typically worked out some descriptive statistics

by means of tables and figures These methods were designed to refine and distill thedata so that readers could glean interesting information without needing to sort throughall of the data on their own The data obtained from a study may or may not be innumerical or quantitative form If they were not in numerical form, we would still carryout qualitative analyses based on the experiences of the individual A qualitativeevaluation should be utilized for this research project leveraging subjective method;that was interviews The emphasis was on the stated experiences of the participants and

on the stated meanings, they attached to themselves, to other people, and to theirenvironment Researchers who carry out qualitative research sometimes use the direct

quotations from their participants followed by figures, arguing that such quotations areoften very revealing

The application of such approaches was expected to help the researcher obtainappropriate data in terms of quantity and quality Moreover, these two approachesmight supplement each other aiming to get the comprehensive view on the study

3.3 Participants

The data for the research came from two groups: EFL teachers and 3rd yearstudents at Hue University of Foreign Languages The first group involved 5 femaleteachers and 1 male teacher who had been teaching listening skill for third yearstudents at mentioned university All teachers were qualified and obtained their masterand doctoral degrees from recongnized universities throughout the world such asAustralia, Britain, Belgium, China, France, Japan, Russia, and the United States Thesecond one consisted of 150 regular full time students of The English LanguageFellow They had studied at Hue University of Foreign Languages for 3years

To explore EFL students’ awareness about CEFR requirements in learninglistening at C1 level 6 copies of questionnaire including twenty five questions weredelivered to six English teachers In addition, 150 another questionnaires including

twenty five questions were designed and delivered to 150 EFL 3rd year students Thecontent of questions was classified in three clusters:

1 Students’/ Teachers’ awareness of CEFR

requirements in learning listening skill atC1 level

1-8

2 Factors influence EFL students’/ teachers’

awareness about CEFR requirements

9- 24

3 Suggestions for learning listening skill 25

Table 3.1: Structure of the questionnaire content

By using questionnaire, the privacy of the respondents was protected andthe students were able to provide an honest response to facilitate the study.Also, time was arranged efficiently so that the aim of the study could be reachedwithout difficulty Since all students were English major, the questionnaire wasprepared in English

All participants (teachers and students) were chosen to finish questionnaire 6copies of questionnaire for EFL teachers and 150 copies of questionnaire for 3rd yearstudents were administered After collecting questionnaires, I found that only 4questionnaires from students could not be used because they were not completelyanswered, 6 questionnaires from EFL teachers were valid to research

3.4.2 The interviews

Four of the teachers and ten EFL students were randomly chosen to interviewand get the information about their reality of teaching and learning listening skill Iused audio recording for all interviews Some interviews were carried out directly (face

to face) while others were indirect (by phone) The interest in face-to-face, semistructured was expected that the interviewed participants’ viewpoints were more

expressed than they would be in a non-face-to-face questionnaire (Flick, 1998) Therewere 5 questions for interview of each group In the purpose of approaching realproblem in friendly atmosphere invite these teachers for a cup of coffee several times Ithought coffee shop was a good place for outgoing talks Informal and related –thesisquestions were included to get further information.

In order to carry out the process effectively, the researcher contacted 10student interviewees and 4 teacher interviewees in advance to arrange a suitable timefor the interview All interviews were conducted in Vietnamese They was expected toexpress full meaning recorded in the form of written notes

3.5 Data analysis

For this study, after the questionnaires were completed and returned, all theanswers were coded and classified into groups Moreover, the information thatresearcher collected from students’ and teachers’ interviews was also analyzed toprovide more valid information about students’ awareness of C1 listeningrequirements

In order to collect reliable data from 146 questionnaires (from students) and 6questionnaires (from lectures), 10 interviews (from students) and 4 interviews(teachers), some criteria would be set in collecting and analyzing the data First, thequestionnaires were delivered and returned one day after to ensure students’ authenticinformation By leaving valid time, the participants had change to read questionsseriously, avoided giving answers without thinking or copying from other friends at thesame time Secondly, all interviews were translated for citation

The questions were divided into 3 clusters, and then were separated into clusters to analyze easily The collected data were carefully totaled up, compared,analyzed and illustrated in tables, charts based on the number or percentages Thefindings and discussion would particularly be presented in Chapter 4

sub-3.6 Chapter summary

In conclusion, by the combination of the quantitative and qualitative approachesthrough 146 questionnaires (from students), 6 ones (from teachers) and the interviewsfrom surveyed participants, the research is believed to collect and analyze data withthe highest rank of reliability and validity

CHAPTER IV FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION 4.1 Introduction

This chapter presents the results collected from questionnaires, interviews andobservation Three main parts which are presented in this chapter are (1) Awareness ofCEFR requirements in learning listening skill at C1 level; (2) Factors influenceawareness about CEFR requirements; (3) Suggestions for learning listening skill

4.2 Illustrating and analyzing results from the questionnaires and interviews

4.2.1 Students’/ Teachers’ awareness of CEFR requirements in learning listening skill at C1 level (Cluster 1)

Cluster 1 was divided into 3 sub-clusters so that analyzing data would beeasier and clearer

4.2.1.1 The CEFR level in English that students need to achieve for their

Table 4.1 The CEFR level in English for EFL students’ graduation

In the first question, the researcher aims to investigate whether third yearlearners identify the right CEFR level for EFL students or not There are four levelsgiven and of course, three of them are distracting options Table 4.1 shows a very littlenumber of students think that they need B1 certificate for graduation (1.3%) The same

percentage (2.1 %) presents a number of students choose B2 and C2 Meanwhile allteachers and most students believe C1 is the level that EFL students must have if theywant to leave university and get a job Obviously, in spite of being third year students,they have paid their attention to C1 certificate as condition of receiving graduationdiploma at HUFL This means that they will have long time to prepare and definitelytake part in examination(s) to earn C1 certificate before the end of the fourth schoolyear in university.

b The requirements of CEFR – C1 level

“very often” was chosen by 3% of students and no teacher

Briefly, the result reveals a low frequency of delivering CEFR requirementsinside class This result would be clearer and more believable when we studied next

Can use language flexibly and effectively for social, academic and professional purposes

Can produce clear, structured, detailed text on complex subjects, showing controlled use of organizational patterns, connectors and cohesive devices Students Teachers

well-Chart 4 2 The CEFR requirements at C1 level

As shown in the chart 4.2, both teachers and students had agreement with allgiven C1 requirements generally For students, the number of students graduallyincreases from the first to the last item From this result, it can be said that the ability to

“produce clear, well-structured, detailed text on complex subjects, showing controlled use of organizational patterns, connectors and cohesive devices” is noticed

considerably The chart also shows the difference in teachers’ opinion 100% teachers

chose “can understand a wide range of demanding, longer texts, and recognize implicit meaning” and “can use language flexibly and effectively for social, academic and professional purposes” as CEFR requirements at C1 level Meanwhile, 4 out of 6

teachers ticked the second option It also can be seen from the chart 4.3 a strongdifference when comparing the number of teachers and students in the last item Sincethe more students (69) chose it, the fewer teachers (2) took it for their choice

By analyzing the data, we can conclude that there were still some differences inthe answers of teachers and students but both of these two participant groups hadawareness of the requirements of CEFR – C1 level

4.2.1.2 The CEFR requirements in overall listening comprehension at C1 level (sub-cluster 1.2)

To study the perceptions of students on CEFR for listening skill at C1 level,

question 4 focused on requirements in general listening comprehension while questions

5, 6, 7 and 8 were designed to get specific requirements such as in understanding conversation between native speakers, in listening as a member of a live audience, in listening to audio media and recordings and in listening to announcements and instructions.

4 6 5 3

81 73 39

22

Understand enough to follow extended speech on

abstract and complex topics beyond his/her own

field, though he/she may need to confirm …

Recognise a wide range of idiomatic expressions

and colloquialisms, appreciating register shifts

Follow extended speech even when it is not clearly

structured and when relationships are only implied

and not signalled explicitly

Have no diffi culty in understanding any kind of

spoken language, whether live or broadcast

delivered at fast native speed

authentic material Test designers could collect and insert any daily oral recording that

is suitable to respected topic Additionally, we cannot always listen to standardizedEnglish accent We may meet Chinese, Thai, Laos, etc who use English for theircommunication Of course, to avoid communication breakdown, listener needs tounderstand such unfamiliar accents

The second item indicated the ability to recognize a wide range of idiomatic expressions and colloquialisms, appreciating register shifts received all agreements from

teachers and a half from students In contrast, only 22 students and none of studied

teachers thought the last item was about having no difficulty in understanding any kind

of spoken language, whether live or broadcast delivered at fast native speed was relevant

for C1 listening level

According to CEFR, three first requirements belong to C1 level in listening skillwhile the last one is required for C2 Thus, it could be learned that most teachers andstudents had appropriate knowledge about overall listening comprehension criteria andjust a few students need to care of their choice

4.2.1.3 The CEFR requirements for particular situations (sub-cluster 1.3) 4.2.1.3.1 The CEFR requirements in understanding conversation between native speakers at C1 level

The table 4.2 indicated the perception on the CEFR requirements inunderstanding conversation between native speakers at C1 level, which was surveyed on bothteachers and students 83.3% teachers and 19.2% students agreed that C1learners had

to easily follow complex interactions between third parties in group discussion and debate, even on abstract, complex unfamiliar topics in listening skill This criteria

showed a high proficiency, mixed skills to identify and code utterance effectively Forexample, listeners were asked to not only listen to information but also decide who theutterance belonged in a complex interaction with many speakers

Besides, the table also presented that the rest of teachers (16.7%) and 40 out of

146 students (27.4%) believed listener needed to well understand speeches betweenspeakers who used English as their first language Surprisingly, none of teachers chosethe last two items but a large number of learners chose the third and 16.4% chose thefourth To explain for this result, some students admitted that the first two requirementsare really too difficult to master in comparison with their ability

Basing on CEFR, we can realize the first option is for C1 while the second forB2++, the third for B1 and the rest for A2 Consequently, it is concluded most teachershave right answer; this is precious for teachers to set the course goal, especially instudied skill On the other hand, 79.8% third year students had better search and updateessential conditions for graduation in general and C1 listening requirements inparticular Since such requirements may change their learning style, learning content aswell as subject goal All positive changes definitely give students a chance to improvelearning output

Requirements

Percentage (%) Teacher

Easily follow complex interactions between third

parties in group discussion and debate, even on

abstract, complex unfamiliar topics 83.3

19.2

Keep up with an animated conversation between native

27.4

Generally follow the main points of extended

discussion around him/her, provided speech is clearly

37.0

Generally identify the topic of discussion around

him/her, when it is conducted slowly and clearly 0.0

16.4

Table 4.2 Students’ and teachers’ awareness on the CEFR requirements in understanding conversation between native speakers at C1 level

4.2.1.3.2 The CEFR requirements in listening as a member of a live audience at C1 level

Most lectures, discussions and debates with relative ease

The essentials of lectures, talks and reports and other forms of academic/professional presentation which are propositionally and linguistically complex

In outline straightforward short talks on familiar topics provided these are delivered in clearly articulated standard speech

Students

Chart 4 4 Students’ perception on the CEFR requirements in listening as a member of a live audience at C1 level