Using task based approach to improve the 9th graders’ speaking skills at a secondary school in ho chi minh city

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 9th 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 ii 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 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 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 iii 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 iv 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 v 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 vi 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 vii 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 viii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 4.1 Classification of test results in pre-test and post-test 51 Figure 4.2 A comparison of mean scores on pre-test and post-test 54 Figure 4.3 Mean score of senior high school students’ feelings about Task-Based Language Teaching Approach 59 Figure 4.4 Students are interested to learn speaking lesson with Task-Based Language Teaching Approach 68 Figure 4.5 Students’ opinions on pleasure when learning with Task-Based Language Teaching Approach 69 Figure 4.6 The activities in Task-Based Language Teaching Approach applied to learn speaking lesson are creative 69 Figure 4.7: Task-Based Language Teaching Approach helped students to remember new words easier in learning English 70 Figure 4.8 Task-Based Language Teaching Approach helped the students develop complex skills 71 (problem solving skill, collaborating skill…) 71 Figure 4.9 The summary of student’s situation after learning by Task-Based Language Teaching Approach 72 ix LIST OF ABBREVIATION Abbreviation Definition TBLT Task Based Language Teaching Approach PPP Presentation – Practice – Production x CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1.1 Rationale Nowadays, English is a global language which is not only used in English speaking countries As the English language has become an essential factor strengthening trade, travel and study in many countries, the necessity of knowing and using English in communication and studying is increasing It can be seen that most documents are written in English; we cannot access that treasure of information due to lack of English As the consequence of its importance as an international language mentioned above, it is always necessary for Vietnamese people to use it effectively As we can see that, the education department has realized this issue about the importance of English in Vietnam in the future Therefore, English is a subject that has been applied in all national schools for more than 20 However, there are still many limitations that prevent students from using English fluently Currently, English is not officially used in Vietnam, except in working or international environment Therefore, Vietnamese people not have favorable environments to practice or use English as other South East Asia countries like Singapore, Malaysia, the Philippine… For the English education in Vietnam, although students are supposed to learn English in primary school, their ability of using English as a Vietnamese is not highly appreciated Clearly, Vietnamese students always attach importance to grammatical structures, but most of them have not spoken or communicated in English since primary school Many researches show that Vietnamese students are taught grammar more than speaking and just focus on exam, scoring more than using English in common -Students work in pairs/ groups to play the Tell students to cover the role roles They ask and answer about their Example: partner’s home 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: The students must mainly rely on their TASK-BASED APPROACH own 1/ Students are placed in pairs Each student is given a picture and told that the two linguistic and non-linguistic resources to perform the task That is, they must make with whatever pictures are basically the same but there are five small differences Without looking at language they already have and other ways such as gesture to convey meaning XXV each other’s picture they talk together to locate and write down the five differences 2/ Students introduce about their countryside - Students can ask and answer/ with others in groups interview… 2.3 Post - speaking - -Assess students’ work Give the students constructive and positive feedback -Give key values Encourage students Consolidation - Students review the words, grammar - The teacher give moral lesson 4/ Home work: Learn by heat the new words Prepare part “READ”for the next lesson SELF-EVALUATION XXVI 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 XXVII 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 XXVIII 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 XXIX 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 XXX 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 XXXI 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 XXXII 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 XXXIII 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 XXXIV 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 XXXV 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 XXXVI 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 XXXVII 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 XXXVIII 7.76 APPENDIX 10 - T-TEST ANALYSIS Pair Pre-test Paired Samples Statistics Mean N Std Deviation 6.8142 110 1.28530 Post-test 7.6604 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 Pair Pre-test - Post-test -.68286 1.00038 Pre-test - Post-test Paired Samples Test Paired Differences T 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Upper -.34118 -3.6978 XXXIX 17305 -1.04454 df Sig (2tailed) 000 ... to an M .A research on ? ?Using Task-Based Learning Approach to improve the 9th grade students’ speaking skills a Secondary School in Ho Chi Minh City? ?? We hope that this research can give a small... weeks of using this approach in learning, and how Task-Based Approach improved their learning skills, as well as how Task-Based Approach helped them develop their speaking skills Only nine students... real communication, participants must manage uncertainty about what the other person will say Authentic communication involves an information gap; each participant has information that the other