USING TASKBASED APPROACH TO IMPROVE THE 9th GRADERS’ SPEAKING SKILLS AT A SECONDARY SCHOOL IN HO CHI MINH CITY.

USING TASKBASED APPROACH TO IMPROVE THE 9th GRADERS’ SPEAKING SKILLS AT A SECONDARY SCHOOL IN HO CHI MINH CITY. USING TASKBASED APPROACH TO IMPROVE THE 9th GRADERS’ SPEAKING SKILLS AT A SECONDARY SCHOOL IN HO CHI MINH CITY. USING TASKBASED APPROACH TO IMPROVE THE 9th GRADERS’ SPEAKING SKILLS AT A SECONDARY SCHOOL IN HO CHI MINH CITY. USING TASKBASED APPROACH TO IMPROVE THE 9th GRADERS’ SPEAKING SKILLS AT A SECONDARY SCHOOL IN HO CHI MINH CITY.

VIETNAM ACADEMY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES GRADUATE ACADEMY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES Phạm Nguyễn Bảo Ngọc USING TASK-BASED APPROACH TO IMPROVE THE 9th GRADERS’ SPEAKING SKILLS AT A SECONDARY SCHOOL IN HO CHI MINH CITY MA THESIS IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE HO CHI MINH CITY, 2021 VIETNAM ACADEMY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES GRADUATE ACADEMY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES Phạm Nguyễn Bảo Ngọc USING TASK-BASED APPROACH TO IMPROVE THE 9th GRADERS’ SPEAKING SKILLS AT A SECONDARY SCHOOL IN HO CHI MINH CITY Field: English Language Code: 8.22.02.01 Supervisor: Assoc Prof Dr Hồ Ngọc Trung DECLARATION BY AUTHOR I hereby declare that this thesis entitled “Using Task- Based Approach to Improve the 9th Graders’ Speaking Skills at a Secondary School in Ho Chi Minh City” has not been submitted to any other universities or institutions in application for admission to degrees or other qualifications This thesis, which is the product of my own original research, and to the best of my knowledge and understanding, does not contain any material previously published or written by another author, except where reference has been cited in the text The study reported in this thesis was approved by Graduate Academy of Social Sciences Author’s Signature Phạm Nguyễn Bảo Ngọc Approved by SUPERVISOR Assoc Prof Dr Hồ Ngọc Trung Date: ………………………… ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Although only one name appears as the author of this work, writing a thesis is indeed a collaborative effort I would like to express my sincere thanks to the many people who made it possible First of all, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my supervisor, Assoc Prof Dr Hồ Ngọc Trung, for his tremendous knowledge, guidance, advice and patience, which constantly inspired me throughout the research Assoc Prof Dr Hồ Ngọc Trung, for his helpful and warm encouragement as well as his insightful comments on my work from the beginning to the end of the study Next, the completion of this thesis would not have been possible without the cooperation from the respondents (one hundred and ten th graders at Viet Anh Secondary School) who have been willing to take part in the study I am very grateful to all of them for providing detailed information for the analysis of the study In addition, I would like to thank all of the lecturers who gave me interesting lessons, dedication and advice during my study at Graduate Academy of Social Sciences I also offer my special thanks to my colleagues and friends whose support and encouragement help me to have this thesis accomplished Last but not least, I must express my gratitude to my family It is their endless love and expectations that have motivated me to complete this thesis I am immensely thankful for all the assistance they have given me TABLE OF CONTENTS DECLARATION BY AUTHOR i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ii ABSTRACT vii LIST OF TABLES viii LIST OF FIGURES ix LIST OF ABBREVIATION x CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION .1 1.1 Rationale 1.2 Aims of the study 1.3 Research questions 1.4 Scope of the study 1.5 Significance of the study 1.6 Research methods .4 1.7 Structure of the study CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 An overview of Task-Based Learning 2.2 Task-Based Learning point of view 2.3 Learners 11 2.3.1 Characteristics 11 2.3.2 Cognitive Development .14 2.4 Teaching speaking skill for secondary students .16 2.4.1 The role of speaking skills in language teaching and learning 16 2.4.2 Teaching speaking skills effectively 17 2.5 Summary of literature review 26 CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLODY 27 3.1 The context of study 27 3.2 Participants 28 3.3 Data collection instruments 28 3.3.1 Questionnaires 30 3.3.2 Semi-structured interview 31 3.3.3 English speaking test 32 3.3.4 Class observation .33 3.4 Research Design 34 3.4.1 Pre-task phase options .35 3.4.2 Main task phase options 37 3.4.3 Post-task phase options 40 3.5 Research procedure 40 3.5.1 Phase 1: Diagnosing 40 3.5.2 Phase 2: Action planning 41 3.5.3 Phase 3: Evaluating 43 3.5.4 Phase 4: Reflecting 45 3.6 Methods of data analysis 47 3.6.1 Data analysis procedure .47 3.6.2 Data analysis methods .47 3.7 Summary of research methodology 49 CHAPTER - FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS 50 4.1 Data analysis from the speaking pre-test and post-test 50 4.2 Analysis of speaking tests 53 4.3 Analysis of questionnaire 55 4.4 Analysis of interviews 63 4.5 Analysis of classroom observation 73 4.6 Summary of findings and discussions 75 CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION 76 5.1 Recapitulation 76 5.2 Concluding remarks 76 5.3 Implications 78 5.4 Limitations of the study 79 5.5 Suggestions for Further Studies 79 REFERENCES 81 APPENDIX - PRE-TEST OF SPEAKING .I APPENDIX - QUESTIONNAIRE III APPENDIX - POST-TEST OF SPEAKING VII APPENDIX 4A - INTERVIEW QUESTIONS IX APPENDIX 4B – ANSWER FOR THE INTERVIEW X APPENDIX - SPEAKING BAND DESCRIPTORS XIV APPENDIX - OBSERVATION SHEET XIX APPENDIX - A SAMPLE LESSON PLAN XXI APPENDIX - RESULTS OF PRE-TEST XXVII APPENDIX - RESULTS OF POST-TEST XXXIII APPENDIX 10 - T-TEST ANALYSIS .XXXIX ABSTRACT This research seeks to identify the effectiveness of Task-Based Approach on speaking ability as well as the attitudes of the students towards the implementation During the study, the researcher carried out action research design at class 9A1, 9A2 and 9A3 with the participation of one hundred and ten students and the assistance of two teachers as examiners and observers at Viet Anh Secondary School This research used an integrated mixed-method design in which quantitative data were collected from a speaking test and qualitative data were collected from interview, observation checklist and questionnaire The results of the study showed a significant impact of Task-Based Approach on students' speaking skills; additionally, in speaking lessons, students were found to have a higher level of motivation, interest, confidence, creativity and collaborative learning skills Based on the findings, this study recommends that Task-Based Approach be applied to the teaching of English as a foreign language LIST OF TABLES Table 3.1 The phases in a Task-Based lesson 34 Table 3.2 The functional roles for the teacher 39 Table 3.3 Scope and Sequence for speaking lesson 43 Table 3.4 Procedure of the research 46 Table 4.1 Descriptive Statistics of pre-test and post-test 52 Table 4.2 The paired-samples t-test of pre-test and post-test 55 Table 4.3 The score criteria of the questionnaire result 57 Table 4.4 Descriptive Statistics of senior high school students’ feelings about Task-Based Language Teaching Approach 58 Table 4.5 Students' evaluation of their achievement on speaking skills 60 Table 4.6 Students' self- evaluation on their achievement on their other English skills 61 Table 4.7 Students’ self-evaluation on their unexpected development in learning English 62 Table 4.8: The students’ opinions about the TBLT 66 Table 4.9 Positive attitudes of the students toward TBLT 67 Table 4.10 Overall class motivation scores for all students 74 -Students work in pairs/ groups to play the roles Tell students to cover the role They ask and answer about their partner’s home Example: village, using the information A: Where is your home village? in the box B: It’s to the west of the city A: How far is it from the city? B: It’s about 15 kilometers from the city A: how can you get there? B: We can get there by bus A: How long does it take to get there? B: It takes an hour A: What people for a living in your village? B: They plant rice and raise cattle A: Does your village have a river? B: There aren’t any rivers, but there is a big lake 2.2 While – speaking: TASK-BASED APPROACH 1/ Students are placed in pairs Each student is given a picture and told that the two pictures are basically the same but there are five small differences Without looking at The students must mainly rely on their own linguistic and non-linguistic resources to perform the task That is, they must make with whatever language they already have and other ways such as gesture to convey meaning SELF-EVALUATION APPENDIX - RESULTS OF PRE-TEST CLASS 9A1 Students’ code Criteria Fluency & coherence Total Vocabulary Grammar Pronunciation Pre-test 001 1.25 1.5 1.5 1.75 6.00 002 2.25 2.25 8.5 003 2.5 1.5 2.5 8.50 004 2.25 2.25 8.5 005 1.5 1.75 2 7.25 006 1.75 1.75 2.25 7.75 007 2.25 1.25 1.75 7.25 008 1.5 1.5 1.5 6.50 009 1.75 1.5 1.5 1.75 6.50 010 2.5 2.25 1.25 7.00 011 1.25 1.25 4.50 012 2 2.25 1.75 8.00 013 1.25 1.25 1.25 4.75 014 2.5 2.25 7.75 015 0.75 1.5 5.25 016 1.25 2.25 2.25 6.75 017 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 6.0 018 1.25 1.5 1.75 5.50 019 1.5 1.75 1.75 1.5 6.50 020 2.25 2 2.25 8.5 021 2 1.5 7.50 022 1.25 1.75 1.5 5.50 023 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.25 5.75 024 2.5 2.5 1.5 1.5 8.0 025 1.75 1.75 1.25 6.75 026 2 1.5 1.5 7.0 027 2.25 1.75 1.75 7.75 028 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 6.0 029 2.25 2.25 8.5 030 2.25 0.5 6.75 031 1.5 1.5 1.5 6.5 032 1.5 2 7.50 033 1.75 1.25 1.5 1.75 6.25 034 2.25 1.75 2.25 8.25 035 1.25 0.75 2 6.0 Mean score 6.89 CLASS 9A2 Students’ code Criteria Fluency & coherence Total Vocabulary Grammar Pronunciation Pre-test 001 1.5 1.75 1.5 1.5 6.25 002 1.5 1.25 1 4.75 003 2.5 1.5 8.00 004 2.25 0.5 6.75 005 1.5 1.75 1.75 7.00 006 1.75 1.25 1.25 5.25 007 2.25 2 2.25 8.5 008 1.5 0.75 5.25 009 1.25 1.25 4.50 010 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 6.00 011 1.75 2.25 2.25 8.25 012 2.25 1.25 2.25 6.75 013 1.75 1.5 7.25 014 1.5 1.75 1.25 5.50 015 1.75 1.5 1.5 1.75 6.50 016 2.25 2.25 8.5 017 1.25 1.5 1.5 5.25 018 1.75 1.25 2.25 7.25 019 2.25 1.75 2.25 8.25 020 1.75 1.75 2.25 7.75 021 2.25 2.25 8.5 022 1.5 2 7.50 023 2.25 1.75 1.75 7.75 024 1.5 1.75 1.75 1.5 6.50 025 0.75 1.5 6.25 026 1.5 1.5 7.00 027 2 1.5 2.5 8.00 028 1.25 2.25 2.5 7.00 029 1.5 1.5 6.00 030 1.75 2.25 8.00 031 1.25 1.25 1.25 4.75 032 1.75 1.5 1.75 6.00 033 2 1.5 7.50 034 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 6.0 035 1 5.00 036 1 1.5 1.5 5.00 037 1.25 1.5 1.5 5.25 Mean score 6.63 CLASS 9A3 Students’ code Criteria Fluency & coherence Total Vocabulary Grammar Pronunciation Pre-test 001 1.25 1.5 1.75 6.00 002 2.25 1.5 1.5 7.25 003 1.5 1.5 1.25 5.25 004 2.5 2.25 7.75 005 1.5 1.75 2 7.25 006 2.5 1.5 2.5 8.50 007 2.25 2.25 2.25 2.5 9.25 008 2.25 1.75 1.75 7.75 009 0.75 1.5 5.25 010 1.5 1.5 1.5 6.50 011 2 1.5 7.50 012 1.25 1.5 1.75 5.50 013 1.25 1.75 1.5 5.50 014 1.75 1.75 1.25 6.75 015 2.25 2.5 2.25 9.00 016 2.25 1.75 2.25 2.25 8.50 017 1.25 1.5 1.5 5.25 018 2.25 1.25 1.75 7.25 019 1.25 2.25 2.25 6.75 020 2.25 2.25 1.75 8.25 021 2.5 2.25 2.25 2.5 9.50 022 1.25 1.5 1.25 1.25 5.25 023 1.5 0.75 2 6.25 024 1.75 1.75 2.25 7.75 025 2.5 2.25 1.25 7.00 026 1.5 1.75 1.75 1.5 6.50 027 2.25 0.5 6.75 028 1.5 2 7.50 029 1.5 1.5 6.00 030 1.75 1.25 1.5 1.75 6.25 031 1.75 1.5 1.5 1.75 6.50 032 2.5 2.5 1.5 8.50 033 2 2.25 1.75 8.00 034 1.5 1.5 1.5 5.50 035 1.25 1.25 4.50 036 1.5 2 7.50 037 1.75 1.75 1.5 7.00 038 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 6.00 Mean score 6.92 APPENDIX - RESULTS OF POST-TEST CLASS 9A1 Students’ code Criteria Fluency & coherence Total Vocabulary Grammar Pronunciation Post-test 001 2.25 1.75 7.00 002 2.25 2.25 2.25 2.5 9.25 003 2.25 1.75 2.25 2.5 8.75 004 2.5 2.25 2.25 9.00 005 1.75 1.75 1.5 2.5 7.50 006 2.25 2 1.75 8.00 007 2.25 1.5 2 7.75 008 1.5 1.5 2.25 7.25 009 1.5 2.5 1.5 7.50 010 2 1.5 7.50 011 1 1.5 5.50 012 2 2.25 2.25 8.50 013 1.25 1.5 5.75 014 1.5 2.25 2.25 8.00 015 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 6.00 016 1.75 1.5 1.75 7.00 017 2.5 2.25 1.25 8.00 018 2.25 2.25 1.5 1.5 7.50 019 0.75 1.5 2.25 6.50 020 2.5 2.25 2.5 9.25 021 1.75 1.5 1.75 7.00 022 2 1.75 1.5 7.25 023 1.5 1.5 1.5 6.50 024 1.75 1.75 2.5 8.00 025 1.5 2 7.50 026 1.5 1.75 1.75 7.00 027 2 2.25 1.75 8.00 028 1.75 1.75 1.75 7.25 029 2.25 2.5 2.5 9.25 030 1.5 2 7.50 031 2 1.25 7.25 032 1.5 2 2.5 8.00 033 1.5 2.5 1.75 7.75 034 2.5 2.25 2.25 2.5 9.50 035 2 1.5 2.25 7.75 Mean score 7.63 CLASS 9A2 Students’ code Criteria Fluency & coherence Total Vocabulary Grammar Pronunciation Post-test 001 1.5 1.75 7.25 002 1.75 1.5 1.5 5.75 003 2.5 2.25 1.75 2.5 9.00 004 1.75 1.5 1.75 2.25 7.25 005 2.25 2 8.25 006 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 6.00 007 2.25 2.25 8.50 008 1.5 1.75 1.75 1.75 6.75 009 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.25 5.75 010 1.75 1.75 1.5 1.5 6.50 011 2.25 2 8.25 012 2.25 1.5 7.75 013 2.5 1.25 2.25 8.00 014 1.5 1.5 2.25 6.25 015 2.25 1.5 1.5 7.25 016 2.25 2.25 2.5 2.5 9.50 017 1.5 1.75 1.75 7.00 018 1.5 2.25 1.75 7.50 019 2.5 2.25 2.25 9.00 020 2 2.25 8.25 021 2.5 2.5 9.00 022 1.75 1.75 1.75 2.5 7.75 023 2.5 1.5 2.5 1.75 8.25 024 2 2.25 2.25 8.50 025 1.75 1.75 1.5 7.00 026 1.5 2 1.75 7.25 027 2.5 2.25 2.25 2.5 9.50 028 2.25 1.75 1.75 7.75 029 1.5 1.5 1.75 1.75 6.50 030 2.25 2 8.25 031 1.25 1.5 1.75 1.75 6.25 032 2.25 1.75 2.25 8.25 033 2 1.5 2.25 7.75 034 2.25 1.5 7.75 035 2.25 2.25 2.25 2.25 9.00 036 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 6.0 037 1.5 1.25 1.5 6.25 Mean score 7.59 CLASS 9A3 Students’ code Criteria Fluency & coherence Total Vocabulary Grammar Pronunciation Post-test 001 1.75 1.5 1.5 6.75 002 1.75 2 1.75 7.50 003 1.5 1.5 1.5 6.50 004 1.75 2 2.25 8.00 005 2 2.25 1.5 7.75 006 2.5 2.25 1.75 2.5 9.00 007 2.5 2.25 2.25 2.5 9.50 008 2.25 2.25 1.5 8.00 009 1.5 1.25 1.75 6.50 010 2 1.75 1.5 7.25 011 2.25 2 8.25 012 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 6.00 013 2.25 1.75 8.00 014 2.25 1.75 2.5 2.5 9.00 015 2.25 2.5 2.5 9.25 016 2.5 2 2.25 8.75 017 1.25 1.25 1.5 6.00 018 2.5 1.5 2.5 1.75 8.25 019 2 2.5 8.50 020 2.5 2.25 2.25 2.25 9.25 021 2.5 2.5 2.5 9.50 022 2 1.25 1.5 6.75 023 2 2.25 8.25 024 2 2.25 1.75 8.00 025 1.5 1.5 2.25 7.25 026 2 1.5 7.50 027 2.25 2 1.75 8.00 028 1.5 2.25 7.75 029 2 1.75 1.5 7.25 030 1.5 1.5 2.25 7.25 031 1.75 1.25 1.75 6.75 032 2.25 2.25 2.5 2.5 9.50 033 2.25 1.75 2.25 8.25 034 1.75 1.75 6.50 035 1.25 1.75 1.5 1.5 6.00 036 1.5 2.5 037 1.75 2.25 1.75 1.75 7.5 038 1.5 1.5 1.75 6.75 Mean score 7.76 APPENDIX 10 - T-TEST ANALYSIS Pre-test Pair Paired Samples Statistics Mean N Std Deviation 6.8142 110 1.28530 7.6604 Post-test 110 Std Error Mean 21726 1.08697 18373 Paired Samples Correlations N Pair Pre-test & Post-test Correlation 110 Sig .639 Paired Samples Test Paired Differences Mean Std Std Error Deviation Mean 000 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Lower Pair Pre-test - Post-test -.68286 1.00038 Pair Paired Samples Test Paired Differences 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Upper Pre-test - Post-test -.34118 17305 T -3.6978 -1.04454 df Sig (2tailed) 000 ...VIETNAM ACADEMY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES GRADUATE ACADEMY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES Phạm Nguyễn Bảo Ngọc USING TASK-BASED APPROACH TO IMPROVE THE 9th GRADERS’ SPEAKING SKILLS AT A SECONDARY SCHOOL IN HO CHI MINH. .. practice in managing and varying the language that different scripts contain ● Using language to talk about language Language learners are often too embarrassed or shy to say anything when they... skills in language teaching and learning Speaking is among the four skills in English (speaking, listening, writing, and reading) that plays a key role in helping learners learn a language effectively