NGHIỂN cứu về lời HƯỚNG dẫ n của SINH VIÊN THỰC tập TRONG kì THỰC tập tại TRƯỜNG PHỔ THÔNG dựa TRÊN một hệ THỐNG TIÊU CHÍ ĐÁNH GIÁ

i
ABSTRACT
Giving- checking instruction skills was concerned not only by teachers but also by
many researchers. However, few studies investigate the effectiveness of giving and
checking skills and construct a set of criteria for effective instructions.
With the deep concerns about this situation, the researcher carried out the study
titled “A measurement of effectiveness of giving- checking instructions by ULIS
student teachers during their practicum at high school against a set of generated
criteria: a qualitative observation of five case studies”. The aims of the research were to
construct a set of criteria for giving effective instructions, then to use the criteria for
investigating the effectiveness of giving instructions, to make comparisons and contrasts
between the successful and less successful student teachers and then to form implications
for related pedagogy. The instruments adopted were observations as main instrument to
measure the effectiveness of giving instructions and self- reflections for reflecting the
effectiveness of checking instructions. The study yielded significant findings in response
to the effectiveness of giving instructions by five cases according to four components of
instructions: the content, the organization, the language use and the facilitating
techniques. To be more specific, four out of five cases made the successful performance
in giving- checking instructions. With regard to the differences between two groups of
student teachers, the successful ones frequently employed adequate information, separate
the long instructions into smaller ones, use simple verbs, combine both first and second
language and utilize more facilitating techniques in giving- checking instructions rather
than the less successful ones did. Based on those findings, the implications were made for
current and future student teachers or any researchers who take interest in the same field.
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART I: INTRODUCTION
1
1. Rationale of the study…………………………………………………
1
2. Research purpose …………………………………………………

1
3. Methods ………………………………………………………………
2
4. Significance of the study……………………………………………….
2
5. Structure of the study…………………………………………………
2
PART II- DEVELOPMENT
3
Chapter 1- Literature Review
3
1.1 Key concepts…………………………………………………………
3
1.1.1 Teaching practicum……………………………………………
3
1.1.2 Instructions and giving- checking instructions ……………….
3
1.1.3 Criteria for effective instructions……………………………….
5
1.2 Related studies………………………………………………………….
9
1.2.1 In the world ……………………………………………………
9
1.2.2 In Vietnam………………………………………………………. 10
Chapter 2- Methodology 12
2.1. Setting of the study…………………………………………………… 12
2.2. Participants…………………………………………………………… 12
2.3. Other participants………………………………………………………. 14
2.3.1. Pupils from high schools……………………………………… 14
2.3.2. The supervising teachers from high schools…………………… 15

2.4 Data collection instruments…………………………………… 15
2.4.1 Observation…………………………………………………. 15
2.4.1.1 Justification for the use of observation…………… 15
2.4.1.2 Observation scheme……………………………… 16
2.4.1.3 Observation procedure……………………………. 17
2.4.1.4 Inter- rater reliability check………………………… 18
2.5 Data analysis …………………………………………………………… 19
2.6 Limitations of the methods…………………………………………… 19
Chapter 3- Findings and Discussion 20
3.1. Checking inter-rater reliability………………………………………… 20
3.2. Quantitative findings…………………………………………………… 20
3.3. Qualitative findings…………………………………………………… 22
3.3.1 The content………………………………………………… 22
3.3.2 The organization of the instructions………………………… 24
3.3.3 Language of instruction…………………………………… 25
3.3.4 The use of facilitating techniques ………………………… 28
3.4. Checking instructions…………………………………………………. 29
PART III- CONCLUSION 31
1.
Summary
of finding……………………………………………………… 31
2. Limitations………………………………………………………………… 32
3. Suggestions for further study……………………………………………… 32
References…………………………………………………………………… 34
Appendix 1…………………………………………………………………… 36
Appendix 2…………………………………………………………………… 41
Appendix 3…………………………………………………………………… 46
Appendix 4…………………………………………………………………… 51
Appendix 5…………………………………………………………………… 52
Appendix 6…………………………………………………………………… 54

iii
2.4.2 Interview …………………………………………………… 18
iii
LIST OF
TABLES
Tables
Page
Table 1. Criteria for giving effective instructions
8
Table 2. The information of give cases
13
Table 3. The information of pupils
14
Table 4. The results from the observations judged by three observers
20
Table 5. The effectiveness of giving instructions 20- 21
iv
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
VNU: Vietnam National University
ULIS: University of Languages and International Studies
FELTE: Faculty of English Language Teacher Education
ELT: English Language Teaching
ELT 2: ESL/ EFL classroom techniques and practices
ELT 4: Pedagogical techniques
EFL: English as Foreign Language
L1: First Language
L2: Second Language
v
1
PART I:

INTRODUCTION
1. Rationale of the study
Many researchers made their suggestions or techniques on effective instructions
(Walker and Walker, 1991, as cited in Wright, 2005; Cotton, 1995; Harmer 1995 &
1998, Ur, 1996; Ur, 1996; Gerhard, 1996, as cited in Boom, 2003; Buchanan and
Huczynski, 1997, as cited in Boon, 2003; Nguyen et al., 2003, cited in To et al., 2011;
Harmer, 1998; Holmes (as cited in Susana, 2002); Boon, 2003; Scrivener, 2005;
Brashaw(n.d.) ). However, few studies integrated those suggestions and techniques
into a set of criteria to investigate the effectiveness of giving and checking
instructions. Other researchers carried out studies in giving- checking instrument
skills. They mainly focused on finding the problems and the solutions to those
problems (Susana, 2002; Vo, 2009; Nguyen, 2010; Dinh, 2011; Hoang, 2012) without
measuring the effectiveness of giving- checking instructions. In addition, none of the
studies discussed the differences in giving- checking instructions between the
successful performers and less successful ones. Last but not least, the collected data of
the previous studies were not checked for the inter- rater reliability. Instead, they
mainly came from the subjective judgments of the researchers.
Those concerns have led to the constitution of this study:
A measurement of effectiveness of giving- checking instructions by ULIS
student teachers during their practicum at high school against a set of generated
criteria: a qualitative observation of five case studies.
2. Research aims
This study aims to achieve four aims follows.

To construct a set of criteria to judge the effectiveness of giving- checking
instructions.

To investigate the effectiveness of giving- checking instructions against a
generated set of criteria in five case studies.
2

To find out the differences between the successful and less successful
performers.

To form implications for related pedagogy.
3. Methods
In order to conduct this study, the researcher uses the following methods.
Firstly, the researcher uses a set of generated criteria for the observation
scheme which investigates the effectiveness of giving instructions by five cases
and interviews for measuring the effectiveness of checking instructions.
Moreover, the study applies the correlation index to check inter- rater
reliability of collected data. If the gathered data is related well, the researcher
uses her results for data analysis.
4. Significance of the study
Once completed, this research paper is expected to serve as a referential
source for teachers and researchers who take their interest in investigating into
the same or related subject. Furthermore, this research paper can be beneficial
for teachers or student teachers who have difficulty in giving and checking
instructions or for those teachers who would like to improve this skill.
5. Structure of the study
The rest of the paper includes two
parts:
Part II- Development- consists of three chapters
Chapter 1- Literature Review- provides the background of the study
Chapter 2- Methodology- presents the research setting, participants,
instruments of data collection and the procedure to carry out data
analysis.
3
Chapter 3- Findings and Discussion - analyzes data and discusses the
outcomes.

Part III- Conclusion- summarizes the major findings of the study, the
limitations of the research and the suggestions for further studies.
PART II- DEVELOPMENT
Chapter 1- Literature Review
1.1. Key concepts
1.1.1. Teaching practicum
After seven semesters at ULIS, students at FELTE need to take part in their
teaching practicum. Many researchers and educators (Wallace, 1991; Gower, Phillips
and Walkers, 1995; Hu, 2005; Yilmaz & Cavas, 2007; Lingadu, n.d. as cited in Dinh,
2011) claims that teaching practicum plays an important role in the whole curriculum
of teacher education and is highly regarded as “a required course”( Ishihara, 2005, as
cited in Dinh, 2011, p.6). Purdy and Gibson (2008) (as cited in Ong, 2009) highly
appreciate teaching practicum because it is similar to “internship or field attachment”
in other
professions.
According to Wallace (1991) ( as cited in Dinh, 2011); Purdy and
Gibson (2008) (as cited in Ong, 2009); Vo (2009), since student teachers are not
offered a chance to work with real students, it is absolutely essential for them to be
familiar with real teaching situation and deal with teaching experiences in the
classroom. Moreover, those also agree that student teachers will gain great support
from their experienced supervising teachers at high schools. As a consequence,
teaching practicum is of great importance because it provides student teachers with
practical teaching context and experiences.
1.1.2. Instructions and giving- checking instructions
4
As regards instructions in pedagogical field, a number of researchers also have
explained this term. According to Ur (1996), instructions are “the directions that are
given to introduce a learning task which entails some measure of independent student
activity”. Sharing the same opinion with Ur (1996), Huitt (2003) believes that
instruction is “the purposeful direction of the learning process and “one of the major

teachers’ class activities (as cited in Dinh, 2011, p.13). In terms of the elements of the
instructions, Harmer (1995) proposes that the instructions should contain the main
content of the given tasks. In other words, he advises teachers to tell students what to
do with the tasks. Dinh (2011) in her research agrees that the models and time
requirement should be included in the instructions, which can help students know how
to deal with the tasks within time limit.
From those researchers’ views and the researcher’ experience, instructions are
described in this study as directions of activities which consist of six elements
delivered to students for the purpose of helping them accomplish those activities. Six
components of instructions are What to do, How to do, How long to do, With whom to
do, How to present the outcomes of the activities and How to assess the outcomes.
Giving instructions is part of teaching process in which teachers deliver
explanations, guides and requirements to their students. This part is followed by
checking instructions to make sure that students understand clearly their assignments.
According to Nguyen et al., (2003, as cited in To, T.H., Nguyen, T. M. H., Nguyen, T.
M. & Luong, Q. T. , 2011, pp.16- 17), there are four popular techniques for giving-
checking instructions: “step- by- step ” or “feed- in” approach, demonstrate it, model it
or “show- don’t- tell”, “say- do- check” and “student recall”.
“Step - by - step” or “feed – in ” approach: The teacher gives the students
one instruction at a time, not a list of instructions all together. Breaking down
instruction into small, separate steps to help students to understand them
completely, especially when there is a lot of information in instructions and the
teacher wants students to understand every word.
5
Demonstrate it, “model” it or “show – don’t – tell”: The teacher does not
talk about what students must do: instead he/she them what to do by giving a
demonstration. A demonstration is easier to understand than an explanation, and
reduces teacher talking time.
Say – do – check: The teacher follows three steps for each instruction.
First, he/she says the instruction, then he/she gets the students to do it, then

he/she checks that they’ve done it correctly before going to the next instruction.
Using Say – do – do – check the teacher can tell straight away if students have
not understood something and can take action to make sure that they understand
it.
Student Recall: After giving instructions in English, the teacher checks
that the students understand by saying, “Tell me what you have to do in
Vietnamese”. Asking students to recall what they will do in Vietnamese is
helpful at lower levels as they may not fully understand the instructions. It
makes them remember what they have to do and follow the teacher to check
that they understand what to do.
1.1.3. Criteria for effective instructions
The purpose of this part is to generate a set of criteria for effective instructions.
In regard to giving instructions, a number of researchers discuss four factors of
instructions: content, organization, language and teaching aids.
Discussing the content and the organization of instructions, Harmer (1995)
proposes that activities given by teachers are successful if their students know the
main content and the procedure for doing those activities. He also mentions “the main
aim of the teacher is to tell students what they are going to do, give clear instructions
about what exactly their task is” (p.239). On his advice, teachers may start with
grouping of students, and then follow with demonstration of activities before giving
instructions or translations of the instructions. Concerning giving instructions, Harmer
6
(1998) indicates two rules in which instructions must be kept as simple and logical as
possible. Cotton (1995) advises teachers to give “clear and focused instructions”.
Walker and Walker (1991) (as cited in Wright, 2005) and your (1996) suggest
effective instructions be brief. Gower et al. (1995) and Scrivener (2005) (as cited in
Dinh, 2011) agree that teachers should draw attention from students before giving
simple instructions. Boon (2003) in a research on effective procedural instructions
suggests instructions should be logical, structured and clear. Brashaw (n.d.) reckons
that instructions must contain essential or focused information and must be broken into

short sentences, each containing a key step; steps must be logical and sufficient. In
summary, those researchers recommend that instructions should be focused, short,
simple and logical.
When it comes to the use of language, both verbal and non- verbal language are
discussed in this study. Walker and Walker (1991), Gower et al., (1995) ”(as cited in
Vo, 2009), Harmer (1998) and Vo(2009) advise teachers to use simple and specific
language with less complex grammatical structures and concise expressions. For
example, Holmes (as cited in Susana, 2002) finds out imperative is the most effective
speech form for giving instructions. Gower et al., (1995) and Cotton (1995) highly
recommend verbal directions with a same set of words for
same instructions like “listen, try again, look at the board, stand up, turn to page. In
addition, Boon (2003) suggests discourse markers should be included in long
instructions; Vo (2009) shows that one needs signal words in effective instructions.
Furthermore, those researchers especially Harmer(1998), Buchanan and
Huczynski(1997) (as cited in Boon, 2003), Vo(2009) highly appreciate the
employment of nonverbal language in instructions such as gestures, mine, tones of
voice, stress, intonation and speed of speech which help save time in presenting
instructions. In addition to the use of foreign language, the translation of instructions
into mother tongue is suggested by Harmer (1995). Discussing the same subject of
first language, Willis (1982) proposes that mother tongue can be employed but should
7
be “minimized” and used “occasionally
only”
(as
7
cited in Dinh, 2011, p. 54). Dinh (2011) also clarifies the occasion in which mother
tongue and second language should be used. She finds out that Vietnamese should be
utilized for “complicated activities” (p. 53). To sum up, verbal language in giving
instructions must be kept simple, concise and supported strongly by many factors of
non- verbal instructions. As regards the selection between the first and the second

language, the former should be used for less complicated activities and the latter for
long and complex ones. More importantly, the combination of those can possibly help
facilitate the instruction- giving process.
In regard to teaching aids, Gower et al., (1995) (as cited in Vo, 2009), Boom
(2003) and Vo (2009) recommend visual aids should be utilized in giving instructions
to save time in repeating instructions and make it clearer. Along with visual aids,
written ones can be used like written pieces of papers and pre- written cards according
to Gower et al., (1995) and Boon (2003). With regard to writing clues, Gerhard (1996)
(as cited in Boon, 2003: 45) suggests “write down the instructions, letting the students
read them silently, then having them tell you what it is you expect from them” . In
addition to visual and written aids, human demonstrations such as examples and
models are more preferable than long verbal explanations as mentioned in the studies
of Cotton(1995), Gower et al. (1995), Boon(2003), Scrivener(2005)(cited in Dinh,
2011) and Vo(2009). Brashaw (n.d.) also introduces three options of demonstrating: the
teacher demonstrates with a student, the teacher use a pair/ group to demonstrate and
the teacher demonstrates alone. In fact, a variety of teaching aids should be employed
in order to deal with students’ different learning styles. Therefore, the employment of
three kinds of illustrative aids (visual aids, written aids and human demonstrations)
could yield effective instructions.
On the process of checking instructions, Willis (1982, as cited in Dinh, 2011),
Harmer (1995& 1998) and Brashaw (n.d.) would prefer to use mother tongue rather
than second language. To be more specific, Harmer (1998) provides three ways to
check students’ understanding of instructions: ask students to explain again, get to
8
show other how the exercise works and translate into mother tongue. Ur (1996) also
shares several methods to check instructions. They are to “paraphrase or to provide
further illustrations” (p.17). With regard to comprehension checking questions, Hoang
(2012, p. 41) finds out that Yes/No questions are “not effective enough” to examine
students’ understanding. In this study, the researcher does not construct a set of criteria
to investigate the effectiveness of checking instructions. Instead, she mainly checks

students’ understanding about the instructions in the lessons at the end of the lessons.
In summary, the criteria for giving instructions suggested by many researchers
are included in the following table.
Table 1. Criteria for giving effective
instructions.
Criteria Standard
Focused and clear content
(Gower
& Walters,
1983;
Cotton, 1995; Harmer,
1995;Harmer, 1998; Ur, 1996;
Brashaw(n.d.))
What to do?
How to do?
How long to do?
With whom to do?
How to present the outcomes?
How to assess the outcomes?
Logical/structured
organization
(Harmer, 1995; Cotton, 1995;
Boon, 2003; Vo, 2009;
Brashaw(n.d.))
Smaller steps with long, complex instructions
Logical sequence of steps:
- Using cohesive devices and signal words like
firstly, secondly.
9
Simple and concise language

llis, 1982, as cited in Dinh,
2010;Walker and Walker,1991;
Gower et al.1995; Ur, 1996;
Gerhard(1996)
(as cited

in
Boom,2003; Buchanan and
Verbal language:
- Simple: simple vocabulary , less complex
grammatical structures
- Concise: short expressions (imperatives, short and
sharp command, brief wording, verbal directives, signal
words).
1
0
Huczynski(1997) (as cited in
Boon, 2003); Harmer, 1998;
Holmes (as cited in Susana,
2002); Boon, 2003; Scrivener,
2005; Vo, 2009; Nguyen,
2010; Brashaw(n.d.); Dinh,
2011)
Non- verbal language:
- Using appropriate gestures, mine, tones of voice,
intonation, speed.
Choice between first and second language:
- L1 for complicated activities
- L2 for simple ones
- Combining two => effective instructions

Illustrative teaching aids
(Gower et al.(1995) (as
cited in

Vo,2009);
Gerhard,1996,as cited in
Boon(2003); Cotton(1995),
Boon (2003) and Vo(2009)
Using visual clues (real objects, pictures, flashcards…)
Using written clues(written pieces of papers and pre-
written cards)
Human demonstrations: examples and models
Basing on those criteria, the researcher constructed the observation form –the
main research instrument (Appendix 1 and 2).
In order to investigate the effectiveness of checking instructions, the researcher
applied semi- structured interviews to check students’ understanding of instructions at
the end of the lessons.
1.2. Related studies
In general, few researchers have investigated the effectiveness of giving and
checking instructions. Their main findings are the difficulties encountered during
instructions- giving process and the corresponding solutions.
1.2.1. In the world
In 2002, Susana conducted research on difficulties of student teachers in giving
oral instructions to EFL young learners during their practicum. The major findings of
this paper concern student teachers’ speech modification and physical demonstration.
10
To be more precise, it is the same mother tongue between students and student
teachers that has negative influence on giving instructions in second language; the
disappearance of physical movement or modeling in giving instruction poses
difficulties for student teachers on the process of giving instructions. However, it was

great regret that Susana did not clarify how L2 and physical demonstrations affect
giving instructions.
Boon (2003) on his research on effective instructions offered five suggestions
on giving effective instructions. Instructions are considered effective if their content
and organization are logical, structured and clear. Giving instructions is effective when
teachers draw attention from students and create effective learning atmosphere.
Moreover, they should be backed up with examples and checked for comprehension
especially with complex instructions.
1.2.2. In Vietnam
Vo (2009) carried out a study concerning giving and checking instruction skill
by fourth- year students to students at Luong Van Tuy High School and found its
problems, reasons and suggestions. The major problems are lengthy and unclear
instructions, teachers’ unsuitable voice and students’ negligence. She finds out three
solutions in proportion to three issues above. They are clear instructions with brief
wording, visualizing, modeling and signal words, flexible teachers’ voice and careful
comprehension checking. Those solutions can be integrated into the criteria for giving
effective instruction in the study.
Dinh (2011) did a study on giving and checking instruction skills among
student teachers during their practicum at English Division, FELTE, ULIS, VNU. Like
Vo (2009), its main purpose is to find problems (language use, time, techniques and
checking instructions) encountered by final- year students when they delivered
instructions to first- year students at ULIS. To be more specific, she found that student
teachers frequently used full sentences, complex polite request at unsuitable time and
ineffective checking techniques. Additionally, some corresponding suggestions are to
11
use short expressions (commands), modeling, and visual aids and to check
instructions, which is similar to Boon (2003)’s and Vo (2009)’s findings.
Hoang (2012) studied fourth- year students’ instructions in speaking lessons in
their practicum at English Division, FELTE, ULIS, VNU. Like Susana (2002) and
Vo (2009), it was contributed in her study that poor voice management of low volume

and flat intonation and full sentences used in instructions were the most major
problems of giving and checking instructions. She also found out six
recommendations to give and check better instructions. They are to focus on key
information, avoid wordiness; to improve voice projection; use appropriate postures
and gestures; to check students’ comprehension; to control psychological state.
Additionally, she inferred that student teachers with much more experience in teaching
a large number groups of students both inside and outside the classroom like an
English center or an English club can “make their instructions more comprehensible”
to students (Hoang, 2012, pp.43). As a result, teaching experience can possibly be one
variable in the current study.
Studying those related studies, the researcher finds out four research gaps as
follows. First and foremost, few studies constructed a list of criteria to measure the
problems. Secondly, their judgments mainly originated from the subjective opinions of
the researchers and were not checked for reliability. Moreover, those did not see the
differences between the successful and less successful performers as regards giving-
checking instructions. Finally, the major problems of giving- checking instructions
were studied from the student teachers themselves, not from their pupils.
From those research gaps, the study will focus on four goals as follows.
Goal 1: To construct a set of criteria to judge the effectiveness of giving-
checking instructions.
Goal 2: To investigate the effectiveness of giving- checking instructions against
a generated set of criteria in five case studies.
12

Goal 3: To find out the differences between the successful and less successful
performers.
Goal 4: To form implications for related pedagogy.
Chapter 2- Methodology
2.1. Setting of the study
The study was conducted at Vietduc High School, where the researcher along

with another 31 student teachers has the practicum, which facilitates the process of
administering research instruments to collect data. Moreover, as a member of the
research context, the researcher is offered a great chance to understand, interpret and
apply the setting into analyzing the data. This setting also offers real teaching
environment for student teachers, which is absolutely appropriate for the objectives of
this study.
2.2. Participants
Five cases were chosen because of following reasons. Firstly, they were
exposed to the knowledge and practice of classroom management including giving and
checking instructions in ELT 2 and ELT 4. To be more specific, they learnt four
techniques to give and check instructions. Then they applied those techniques into two
activities of micro- teaching in ELT 2 and ELT 4. Secondly, in 8
th
semester, they got
an opportunity of having a teaching practicum, which provides them with a real
teaching environment in upper secondary school. During their teaching practicum in
Vietduc High School, they are supposed to conduct their ability to give and check
instructions in a real context. Therefore, we can see how their learnt knowledge and
skills actually work. In the third place, the study is a qualitative one, so a case study is
13
appropriate for researcher, according to Cohen, Manion and Morrison (2007). In
addition, within the modest scope of the BA graduation paper, five cases can be a
reasonable choice since it enables the researcher to manage and work with the
collected data. Finally, the selection of five cases increases the possibility of dividing
into two groups of successful and less successful student teachers, which enables the
research to achieve the aim 3 in the study.
Five cases were chosen relying on simple random sampling strategy. This
sampling method is extremely beneficial for this study in many ways. Firstly,
according to Cohen, Manion and Morrison (2007), random sampling guarantees that
everyone in the population is given an equal and independent chance of being chosen,

compared to convenient sampling. As a result, bias can be avoided in this research to
great extent.
The five student teachers were coded as ST1, ST2, ST3, ST4 and ST5. The following
table provides the information of five cases.
Table 2. The information of five
cases
Name ELT2’s microteaching results and average
results (knowledge)
Teaching experience
(experience)
ST1 8.7- 9.0 2 years
ST2 8.0 – 7.5 0
ST3 8.5- 8.4 1.5year
ST4 8- 7.3 1 years
ST5 8. 3- 8.4 0
Two confounding variables - ELT 2 results and teaching experience are chosen
due to two following reasons. Firstly, ELT2 results can illustrate the knowledge of
teaching methodology. To be more precise, five cases’ background knowledge is more
14
vividly delineated. Moreover, the teaching experience was found in Hoang (2012) as a
15
factor affecting giving- checking instruction skills. Therefore, two variables will be
examined in correlation with the effectiveness of giving- checking instructions carried
out by five cases in order to find out how they relate.
With regard to experience, five cases are divided into two groups of experienced
student teachers (ST1, ST3, ST4) and inexperienced ones (ST2, ST5). ST1, ST3 and
ST4 all have experienced in working as private tutors for one or two students.
2.3. Other participants
2.3.1. Pupils from high schools
Pupils who took part in this study come from four classes in grade 10 in which

five cases are in charge of teaching them. The classes were coded as C1, C3, C4 and
C5. C1 was taught by ST1, C3 by ST2 and ST3, C4 by ST4 and C5 by ST5. C1 and C3
are English gifted classes in which the majority of the pupils are good at English. C4
and C5 are not English- gifted ones in which the majority of the pupils have difficulty
in learning English. The information of average English score is included in the table
3.
Table 3. The information of
pupils
Class Number of
surveyed
pupils
Average English score
( 1
st
45 minute- written test in semester 2)
< 5 5-6.9 7-7.9 >8
Gifted
classes
C1 47 7.6% 3.9% 23% 65.5%
C3 46 0 2.2% 28.9% 68.9%
Non-
gifted
classes
C4 49 6.5% 30% 28.5% 25%
C5 41 16.09% 25.81% 48.4% 9.7%
16
The average English scores were collected against 45 minute- written tests of the
similar level. As seen from the table 2, in two English gifted classes (C1, C3) around
two- thirds pupils are good at English, compared with about 10%- 25% in the others.
Therefore, it could be concluded that the level of language proficiency of two gifted

classes is higher than the others.
In addition to ELT 2 results and teaching experience, students’ language proficiency
can possibly be a variable which needs examining in correlation with the effectiveness
of giving- checking instructions.
2.3.2. The supervising teachers from high schools
The teachers’ names were coded as T1, T4 and T5. T1 works as a supervising
teacher for ST1, ST2 and ST3. T4 is a supervising teacher for ST4. T5 is a supervising
teacher for ST5. Three supervising teachers (T1, T4 and T5) will be invited to evaluate
the effectiveness of giving instructions against the classroom observation form
( Appendix 1).
Two student teachers (additional observers)
Like three supervising teachers, two student teachers also will be chosen
randomly and then invited to assess the classroom observation form (Appendix 2).
2.4. Data collection instruments
2.4.1. Observation
2.4.1.1. Justification for the use of observation
According to Cohen, Manion and Morrison(2007), observation methods are
powerful tools for getting insight into situations because they allows the researcher to
collect “live” data from real situations (p. 396). Patton (1990) also supposes that data
gathered from observations facilitates the researcher in terms of understanding the
situation (as cited in Cohen, Manion and Morrison, 2007). Moreover, the current study
is conducted for two following objectives. The first one is to measure the effectiveness
of giving- checking instructions. To be more specific, the main purpose of this
research is to study how five student teachers behave in instructions- giving and
16
checking process and not to find out what they report or retell in questionnaires and
interviews. The second is to make comparison and contrast in giving- checking
instructions between the good and weak performers. Thus, the use of observation is
extremely appropriate.
On the other hand, there are several drawbacks of employing observations

concerning the validity and reliability of the data gathered (Wilkinson, 2000; Moyles,
2002; Shaughnessy et al. 2003, as cited in Cohen, Manion and Morrison, 2007). In
fact, the data collected cannot be valid and reliable due to observers’ subjective
judgments, which is similar to the limitations of the previous studies. As a
consequence, the observation scheme of this study has been designed carefully and the
researcher uses five other observers consisting of three supervising teachers and two
student teachers when conducting observations to limit biased judgments. In each
lesson, the researcher along with another two observers (one is the supervising teacher
and the other is the student teacher) carries out an independent evaluation of the
effectiveness of giving instructions by the student teacher based on the given
observation form. Then the researcher will collect those data and check the inter- rater
reliability of the results from three observers. Additionally, the research applies
interviews to triangulate the collected data.
2.4.1.2. Observation scheme
Due to “ a complex second language environment” like high schools and lack
of experience in case- study research, structured observation is utilized to enable the
researcher to “compare behaviors across research contexts in a principled
manner”(Mackey & Gass, 2005, p.175).
Firstly, a set of criteria for effective instructions was employed so that the
researcher and other observers could make judgments and take notes of student
teachers’ giving instructions- related data. The set is generated from previous studies
and related theories of classroom management (Harm, 1995, 1998; Gower et al. 1995;
Cotton, 1995; Ur, 1996; Boon, 2003; Vo, 2009; Nguyen, 2010; Dinh, 2011) and the