4.2. The relationships between the participants’ formulaic performance and
4.3.2. The relationship between the participants’ correct output and their
Factors No correlation Weak correlation Medium correlation English
learning background
Starting Age (ƞ = 0.141)
Sources of Exposure (ƞ = 0.291)
Learning Context (ƞ = 0.467) Perceptions of
FSs
Importance Awareness (Constant)
Benefit Awareness (ƞ = 0.231)
Perceptions of acquisition and
use of FSs
Noticing (ƞ =0.017) Active Study
(ƞ = 0.138) Usage Strategies
(ƞ = 0.066)
Learning Difficulties (ƞ = 0.269)
Study Techniques (ƞ =0.437) Active Use in
Writing (ƞ = 0.579) Results show that there is no correlation between the participants’ FS errors and the age when they started learning English, their awareness of the importance of FSs, whether they noticed FSs in the language input, whether they actively studied FSs, or the strategies they employed to use FSs. A weak correlation has been found between the participants’ FS errors and their sources of exposure to English, their awareness of the benefits of FSs, and the difficulties they had when learning English. The participants’ FS errors were found to have a medium correlation to the contexts in which they learned English, the techniques they used to study FSs and whether they would actively make an effort to incorporate FSs in their writing.
4.3.2. The relationship between the participants’ correct output and their learning factors
In addition to their FS errors, the participants’ correct output was examined in relation to their English learning background, perceptions of FSs, and perceptions of their acquisition and use of FSs. Similarly, the Eta correlation ratio (ƞ) was calculated for all the variables making up the participants’ English learning background, perceptions of FSs, and perceptions of their acquisition and use of FSs. These include Starting Age (V1), Learning Context (V2), Sources of Exposure (V3), Importance Awareness (V4), Benefit Awareness (V5), Noticing
90
(V6), Active Study (V7), Study Techniques (V8), Active Use in Writing (V9), Usage Strategies (V10), and Learning Difficulties (V11). The test was conducted at the confidence level of α = .01 for N = 41. The explained variance (ƞ2) was calculated for the weak to medium correlations, while estimations were calculated for correlations with medium strengths as explained in the previous section.
Table 4.8 presents the Eta values calculated for the participants’ correct output and the variables mentioned above (refer to Appendix G for the actual SPSS output tables).
Table 4.8. Eta values of correct output and learning factor variables Variable Learning factors Eta value (ƞ)
V1 Starting Age 0.047
V2 Learning Context 0.444
V3 Sources of Exposure 0.405 V4 Importance Awareness Not available
V5 Benefit Awareness 0.380
V6 Noticing 0.115
V7 Active Study 0.064
V8 Study Techniques 0.317
V9 Active Use in Writing 0.357
V10 Usage Strategies 0.295
V11 Learning Difficulties 0.328
First, some learning factor variables were found to have no correlation or only a negligible correlation with the participants’ correct output. Those variables include Starting Age (ƞ = 0.047), Noticing (ƞ = 0.115), and Active Study (ƞ = 0.064). As explained previously, the variable Importance Awareness was irrelevant as all participants gave the same answer. Similar to the case with the participants’ FS errors discussed in Section 4.4.2, the differences in the exact starting ages were not significant (before 5 years old, between 5 and 10 years old, or after 10 years old) enough to influence their correct output. There was also not sufficient evidence to explain why Noticing and Active Study did not affect the participants’ correct output.
Second, there is a weak correlation between participants’ correct output and several learning factors, including Benefit Awareness (ƞ = 0.380), Study
91
Techniques (ƞ = 0.317), Active Use in Writing (ƞ = 0.357), Usage Strategies (ƞ = 0.295), and Learning Difficulties (ƞ = 0.328). The explained variance was calculated for each of these variables. In terms of the difference in the participants’
correct output, 14.44% could be attributed to their awareness of how FSs would be beneficial in learning and using English (ƞ2 = 0.1444), 10.05% to their FS learning techniques (ƞ2 = 0.1005), 12.74% to their choice whether to actively incorporate FSs in writing (ƞ2 = 0.1274), 8.7% to their FS usage strategies (ƞ2 = 0.087), and 10.75% to their difficulties learning FSs (ƞ2 = 0.1075).
Third, the participants’ correct output has a medium correlation to Learning Context (ƞ = 0.444) and Sources of Exposure (ƞ = 0.405). With regard to the variable Learning Context, the explained variance, ƞ2 = 0.1971, indicates that 19.71% of the difference in the participants’ correct output could be attributed to their English learning context(s).
Table 4.9 is the SPSS output table showing the number of correct output in each level of the variable Learning Context, similar to the case of FS errors discussed in Section 4.3.3. The number of correct output – correct FSs – is displayed in the left column, while the five columns in the middle show the number of participants. For example, in the group of participants who reported studying English only at school, there was one who produced 17 correct FSs, one with 20 correct FSs, one with 21 correct FSs, one with 25 correct FSs, one with 26 correct FSs, one with 27 correct FSs, and one with 30 correct FSs. Therefore, the average number of correct FSs produced by the participants in this group was calculated to be 23.71, avg = 23.71.
92
Table 4.9. Correct output by levels of Learning Context
Crosstab Count
2. Learning Context
Total School Center
School, Center, Group
School &
Self Study
School&
Self Study &Center
Correct Output 17 1 1 0 0 0 2
18 0 0 0 0 1 1
20 1 0 0 0 0 1
21 1 0 0 2 1 4
23 0 0 0 1 1 2
24 0 0 0 1 0 1
25 1 0 0 0 0 1
26 1 0 0 2 2 5
27 1 0 0 0 2 3
28 0 0 1 3 0 4
29 0 0 0 4 0 4
30 1 0 0 1 0 2
31 0 0 1 1 3 5
32 0 1 2 2 0 5
35 0 0 0 1 0 1
Total 7 2 4 18 10 41
Average (avg) 23.71 24.5 30.75 27.83 26.1
Specifically, the participants who reported studying English at school, in English centers, and in learning groups (avg = 30.75), and those who reported studying at school and self-studying at home (avg = 27.83) produce the highest number of correct FSs in the translation test, having an average of 30.75 correct FSs and 27.83 correct FSs respectively. Meanwhile, the ones who stated that they only studied at school (avg = 23.71) or English centers (avg = 24.5) had the lowest number of correct FSs with an average of 23.71 correct FSs and 25.4 correct FSs respectively. This is quite consistent with the correlation found between FS errors and the variable Learning Context. It appears those who had formal learning at school and were autonomous in self-studying at home were more likely to produce more correct FSs and make fewer FS errors.
Concerning Sources of Exposure (ƞ = 0.405), the explained variance, ƞ2 = 0.1640, indicates that 16.4% of the difference in the participants’ correct output could be attributed to their sources of exposure to English.
93
Table 4.10 is the SPSS output table showing the number of correct output in each level of the variable Sources of Exposure. The first left column shows the number of correct output, while the 11 columns in the middle show the number of participants. For example, in the group of participants who claimed to watch YouTube in English, there was one participant who produced 20 correct FSs, one with 21 correct FSs, and one with 32 correct FSs. Therefore, the average number of correct FSs produced by this group was calculated to be 24.33, avg = 24.33.
Table 4.10. Correct output by levels of Sources of Exposure
Crosstab Count
3. Sources of Exposure Total
Read EN
Watch EN YouTub
e
Watch EN Movies
Watch EN 2 Sources
Watch &
Read EN
Watch &
Read &
Talk to VN
Watch &
Read &
Talk Fr
Watch &
Read &
Talk VN Fr
Watch EN YouTub e & Talk
Fr
Watch 2 Sources
& Talk VN
Watch 2 Sources
& Talk Fr Corre
ct Outp ut
17 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 2
18 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
20 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
21 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 4
23 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2
24 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
26 0 0 1 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
27 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 3
28 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 4
29 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 4
30 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2
31 0 0 0 2 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 5
32 1 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 5
35 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
Total 1 3 2 8 11 9 2 2 1 1 1 41
Average
(avg) 32.00 24.33 26.50 26.50 27.00 25.33 30.00 29.50 25.00 29.00 32.00
94
The participants who only watched English content on YouTube appear to have the lowest number of correct FSs with an average of 24.33 correct FSs per participant (avg = 24.33). Those who stated that they both watched English content on YouTube and TV shows or movies in English as well as those who both watched English content on YouTube and read English newspapers or books appear to perform well consistently (avg values ranging from 26.5 to 27).
Moreover, those who reported talking to Vietnamese or foreign friends in English on top of reading and watching English sources seem to outperform the others (avg values ranging from 29 to 32).
It is safe to say that while a wide variety of exposure to authentic English sources (such as YouTube content, books, and newspapers) might have a positive influence on the participants’ correct output, active interactions with other speakers of English played a significant role in their correct output production.
This reflects the beneficial effect of English-speaking communities on the acquisition of FSs documented by Dửrnyei, Durow, and Zahran (2004). It appears that even without being involved in English-speaking communities, some participants might still have gained benefits from using English communicatively with other speakers of English – even those who are their fellow Vietnamese learners.
This section has discussed the potential relationships between the participants’ correct output and major learning factors. Table 4.11 summarizes the results of the correlation test conducted on the participants’ correct output and the variables constituting their English learning background, perceptions of FSs, and perceptions of their acquisition and use of FSs.
95
Table 4.11. The relationship between the participants’ correct output and their learning factors
Factors No correlation Weak correlation Medium correlation English
learning background
Starting Age (ƞ = 0.047)
Learning Context (ƞ = 0.444) Sources of Exposure
(ƞ = 0.405) Perceptions
of FSs
Importance Awareness (Constant)
Benefit Awareness (ƞ = 0.380)
Perceptions of acquisition
and use of FSs
Noticing (ƞ =0.115) Active Study
(ƞ = 0.064)
Study Techniques (ƞ =0.317) Active Use in Writing
(ƞ = 0.357) Usage Strategies
(ƞ = 0.295) Learning Difficulties
(ƞ = 0.328)
Results show that there is no correlation between the participants’ correct output and the age when they first started learning English, whether they were aware of the importance of FSs, whether they would notice FSs in their language input, or whether they would actively make an effort to study FSs. The participants’ awareness of the benefits of FSs in learning and using English, the techniques they employed to study FSs, whether they would actively make an effort to use FSs in their written product, their strategies for using FSs, and their difficulties with FSs were found to have a weak correlation with their correct out.
Most notably, the participants’ correct output appears to have a medium correlation with their learning contexts and sources of exposure to English.