Những hạn chế của lớp học Việt Nam ảnh hưởng đến việc đánh giá kĩ năng nói môn tiếng Anh

4

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1

Background of Questionnaire Participants…………………………..….33

Table 2

Background of Interview Informants……………………………………35

Table 3

Practical

constraints

affecting

teachers

to

conduct

speaking

assessment……………………………………………………………………………..…39
Table 4

Speaking assessment tasks used by Nam Dinh teachers………...………49


5

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
CLT

Communicative Language Teaching

EFL

English as Foreign Language

ELT

English Language Teaching

MOET

Ministry of Education and Training


6

TABLE OF CONTENTS
AUTHORSHIP DECLARATION

i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

ii

ABSTRACT

iii

LIST OF TABLES

iv

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

v

TABLE OF CONTENTS

vi

PART I
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION
1.1 Rationale of the research .........................................................................................1
1.2 Research questions and research aims ....................................................................2
1.3 Scope of the study ........................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
1.4 Methodology.............................................................................................................4
1.5 Significance of the study ..........................................................................................5
1.6 Design of the study ...................................................................................................5

PART II

CHAPTER II: LIERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Constraints in oral teaching skill at Vietnamese lower secondary school and
tertiary education ..........................................................................................................7
2.2 Constraints in speaking teaching in Vietnamese upper-secondary schools ..........9
2.2.1

Educational system .......................................................................................9

2.1.1.1

Large classes ............................................................................................9

2.1.1.2

Lack of appropriate resources ................................................................. 11

2.1.1.3

Textbook ................................................................................................ 12

2.1.2

Teachers‟ problems .................................................................................... 13


7

2.1.2.1

Traditional way‟s affection ..................................................................... 13

2.1.2.2

Lack of English competence ................................................................... 14

2.1.3

Students‟ problems ..................................................................................... 15

2.1.3.1

Low English competence ........................................................................ 15

2.1.3.2

Demotivation of speaking ....................................................................... 17

2.3 Requirements of speaking assessment at Vietnamese upper-secondary school .. 18
2.3.1

An overview of speaking assessment criteria at upper-secondary school. ....18

2.3.2

Continuous speaking assessment ................................................................ 19

2.3.3

Types of speaking assessment .................................................................... 21

2.3.4

Criteria in speaking test .............................................................................. 22

2.3.4.1

Validity .................................................................................................. 22

2.3.4.2

Reliability............................................................................................... 23

2.3.4.3

Authenticity............................................................................................ 24

2.3.4.4

Marking .................................................................................................. 25

2.3.4.5

Backwash effect ..................................................................................... 26

2.3 Role of teachers in assessing oral skill ................................................................... 26
CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY
3.1. Case study ............................................................................................................. 29
3.2 Steps in the selection of participants ..................................................................... 32
3.2.1 Questionnaire Participants ................................................................................ 32
3.2.2 Interview informants ......................................................................................... 34

3.3. Data collection ....................................................................................................... 35
3.4. Data analysis ......................................................................................................... 36
CHAPTER IV: FINDINGS
4.1. Overall findings..................................................................................................... 37
4.2. The practical constraints affecting teachers to conduct speaking assessment. ... 38
4.2.1. Difficulties caused by the educational system .................................................. 39
4.2.1.1 Large classes ............................................................................................. 39
4.2.1.2

Excessive work in addition to classroom teaching ................................... 41

4.2.1.3

Textbooks............................................................................................... 42


8

4.2.1.4

Exams‟ negative backwash ..................................................................... 43

4.2.1.5

Few opportunities for retraining .............................................................. 44

4.2.2. Difficulties caused by the students ................................................................... 45
4.2.2.1

Students‟ low English proficiency .......................................................... 45

4.2.2.2

Students‟ low demotivation .................................................................... 45

4.2.3. Difficulties caused by teachers ......................................................................... 46

CHAPTER IV: FINDINGS .............................................................................. 46
4.1. Overall findings .......................................................................................... 46
Table 3 - Practical constraints affecting teachers‟ English speaking
assessment ......................................................................................................... 49
4.2.1. Difficulties caused by the educational system ........................................ 49
4.2.1.1 Large classes .......................................................................................... 49
4.2.1.2 Excessive work in addition to classroom teaching .......................... 51
“The last tasks in speaking lessons in the textbook are difficult for students‟
speaking ability. I seldom quit speaking lessons but I can only use the first
two or three speaking tasks. I ask them to read aloud and learn by heart and
speak in front of the class. However, I cannot use the tasks of discussion. They
are too difficult for my students” (Teacher 1). ................................................ 52
Being asked about the lack of speaking tests in the textbook, the teachers
shared their opinions: ....................................................................................... 53
4.2.1.4 Exams‟ negative backwash............................................................... 53
4.2.1.5 Few opportunities for retraining ..................................................... 54
4.2.2. Difficulties caused by the students .......................................................... 55
4.2.2.1 Students‟ low English proficiency .................................................... 55
4.2.2.2 Students‟ low motivation .................................................................. 55
All the teachers in the sample reported that students were demotivated to
learn speaking English: .................................................................................... 56
4.2.3. Difficulties caused by teachers ................................................................ 56
4.2.3.1 Teachers‟ low English proficiency ................................................... 56

The younger participants also shared some ideas about the problem: .......... 57
4.2.3.2 Difficulty in eliciting students‟ responses ........................................ 58
4.2.3.3 Difficulties in ensuring reliability of assessment ............................. 58
4.3 The extent that these constraints influence the ways teachers perform
assessment of English speaking with particular reference to the use of
assessment tasks ................................................................................................ 59
4.3.1. Topic ........................................................................................................ 60
All the teachers who used this type of assessment doubted about its
authenticity: ...................................................................................................... 61
4.3.1. Interview .................................................................................................. 62


9

Teacher 10 who used this task-type gave positive opinion about students‟
attitude: ............................................................................................................. 62
However, the task make teachers difficult to lower the noise in the classroom
and to give students marks. .............................................................................. 62
4.3.2. Personal information............................................................................... 62
Teachers also conducted this type for all the levels at the beginning of the
school: ................................................................................................................ 63
4.3.4. Role-play .................................................................................................. 63
On the other hand, teacher 1 expressed a different opinion: .......................... 64
4.3.5. Dialogue practice ..................................................................................... 64
“If this assessment task is applied in all the lessons, it is really boring”
(Teacher 5). ....................................................................................................... 65
4.3.6. Picture description .................................................................................. 65
4.3.7
Information gap activity ..................................................................... 66
Only one of the participants used this type of speaking assessment. .............. 66

The teacher who was the only one using this task shared his opinions. ......... 66
Teacher 3 thought that this task was new to him. ........................................... 67
4.3.8. Discussion ................................................................................................ 67
The only teacher using this task expressed her problem of scoring. .............. 67
This participant only applied this task in high-quality classes. ...................... 67
5.1. Nam Dinh upper-secondary English teachers‟ speaking assessment....... 71
5.1.1. The ways of speaking assessment in Nam Dinh upper-secondary school
English teachers ................................................................................................ 71
5.1.2. The types of non-authentic speaking assessment tasks.......................... 71
5.1.3.1 Constraints caused by students............................................................. 73
Lack of English input ........................................................................................ 73
Students‟ demotivation ..................................................................................... 74
Teachers‟ lack of teaching methodology in speaking test ............................... 74
Teachers‟ low consciousness of „backwash effect‟ ........................................... 75
No inter-rater test reliability ............................................................................ 75
Teachers‟ low proficiency ................................................................................. 76
5.1.3.3 Constraints caused by the education system ........................................ 76
Large classes...................................................................................................... 76
Excessive work in addition to classroom teaching ........................................... 76
Textbook ............................................................................................................ 77
Exams‟ negative backwash ............................................................................... 77
Ineffective training classes ................................................................................ 78
Teachers‟ personal beliefs ................................................................................ 78
REFERENCES ................................................................................................. 86
Heaton, J. B. (1990). Classroom Testing. Pearson Longman ........................... 87
Pennington, C. M. (1999). Language Learning. Arnold .................................. 89


10

PART I
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION
1.1. Rationale of the research:

Communicative language teaching (CLT) has been applied in Vietnamese uppersecondary schools since 2006 in the new English curriculum and textbooks. The change
in new way of teaching English at upper-secondary school is considered significant to
meet the demand of social and educational development and supported by almost English
teachers at this level. However, four years of applying new English curriculum and
textbooks have shown a mismatch between CLT and expected effectiveness due to many
constraints both from the teachers and the teaching contexts.

In teaching language communicative skills, teaching speaking is the most difficult
but assessing speaking is even more difficult because of the subjective nature of the
assessment. When talking with the colleagues in my school, I realize that almost all of


11

them seldom conduct English speaking assessment although the new curriculum and
textbooks claim to be following CLT with ready-made tasks for assessing speaking.
Instead of teaching oral communication in English speaking lessons, teachers often let
their students do speaking tasks on paper, do grammar exercises or even ignore speaking
lessons to go on with the next ones in textbook. They give students scores based on their
work on paper only, never based on their oral performance. At upper-secondary school,
school English teachers are under pressure of exams, so my school English teachers focus
mainly on teaching English grammar to help their students at regular school exams and
national upper secondary school leaving exam more than developing students‟
communicative competence. In group meeting, teaching plans and grammar exercises are
usually discussed but quality of speaking lessons, especially speaking assessment is never
mentioned.

In our English teaching context, some subjective and objective causes limit us in
the conduct of English speaking teaching and assessment. The first cause, as mentioned
above is the current exams‟ pressure which demotivates us to teach oral English skills but
spending more time on grammar and reading skills as the requirement of the exams.
Secondly, teaching conditions such as large classes and insufficient facilities seem not to
support speaking because every class has more than 50 students but tables and chairs are
not conveniently arranged for speaking activities. Thirdly, in spite of being aware of the
role of speaking assessment, teachers are still under the impacts of traditional way
focusing on grammar teaching; even some do not have enough English competence to be
successful in teaching and assessing students‟ oral communication. Lastly, students‟
demotivation of speaking and low English competence also constrains us to assess
speaking as well as expected.

In the process of seeking for literature supporting my thesis, I was much
impressed and inspired by a study of Kim Hyun Sook entitled “The types of speaking
assessment tasks used by Korean Junior Secondary school English teachers” from
Asian EFL Journal, December 2003 Articles. The study both explored the speaking tasks
which were used at junior secondary schools in Korea and found out the deep roots of


12

Korean EFL constraints to teachers‟ English speaking assessment. In fact, even though
CLT has been applied in Korean schools since 1900s, English teachers still have many
difficulties in realizing it in their classroom practice similar to the current situation in
Vietnam. Besides that, Korea and Vietnam share many things such as a Confucianismbased culture and education system resulting in a conserving attitude toward knowledge,
toward the expected roles of teachers and students in the classroom (Ballard & Clanchy,
1991, cited in To Thi Thu Huong 2010: 97) and the author‟s ideas appears to very closely
relate to my study on the theme of assessment of English speaking skills of secondary
students, so I decided to replicate her study in my thesis so that the types of constraints in

assessing English speaking to teachers in Vietnamese context when CLT has been in use
at upper-secondary school for 4 years could be found and recommendations for
improvement of the situation could be suggested.
Specifically, on the basis of Kim Hyun Sook (2003) study, the researcher decided
to conduct a study to investigate the constraints in EFL Vietnamese classroom affecting
speaking assessment of English teachers in Nam Dinh upper-secondary schools as a case
study with the aim of contributing to the development of CLT in Vietnamese education.

1.2. Research questions and research aims:
The study sets out to find answers to the two following research questions:

1.

What are the practical constraints of Vietnamese classrooms that prevent

teachers in upper-secondary schools in Nam Dinh from effective, routine English
speaking assessment?
2.

How do these constraints influence the ways Nam Dinh upper-secondary

English teachers conduct speaking assessment in their classrooms?

With these questions, this research aims:

1.

to explore the practical constraints in Vietnamese classrooms affecting

Nam Dinh upper-secondary teachers to assess English speaking.

13

2.

to find out the negative impacts of the practical constraints to teachers‟ use

of speaking assessment tasks in their classroom; and
3.

to propose possible solutions to these problems.

1.3. Scope of the study:
With the aims above, the study is limited to explore practical classroom constraints and
the tasks used by English teachers to assess speaking skill in upper-secondary schools in
Nam Dinh.

Other factors affecting the practice of English speaking assessment or English language
assessment at upper-secondary schools in Vietnam are beyond the scope of the present
study due to the time and financial restrictions of a Master thesis.
1.4. Methodology:

This study employs a mixed research approach combining different methods, using both
qualitative and quantitative data so that valid, reliable thick and rich information could be
obtained to answer the two research questions. The main method is case study.

The cases were 10 teachers who were teaching English in two upper-secondary schools in
Nam Truc district and in one in Nam Dinh city.

The case study used qualitative approach to explore the constraints affecting Nam Dinh
upper-secondary English teachers‟ speaking assessment.

Two main instruments used in the study were questionnaire and semi-structured
interview. The questionnaire was used to identify the classroom constraints in assessing
speaking, the types of speaking assessment tasks as well as the ways teachers were
conducting speaking assessment. Meanwhile, the semi-structured interviews are
considered more important to help the researcher to explore the deep roots of these
constraints to suggest effective measures and solutions in the teaching context.


14

Regarding the data collection procedures, first of all, a list of five questions was sent to
the 10 teachers to get some general information. After that, the researcher conducted indepth interviews with six individual teachers to explore the roots of the problems in the
ways of speaking assessments currently used in upper-secondary schools in Nam Dinh as
well as the specific difficulties they meet when assessing speaking. These findings were
then discussed further with selected teachers to help suggest the ways to solve the
problems.

1.5. Significance of the study

This thesis was conducted in some upper-secondary schools in Nam Dinh based on the
researchers‟ interest and the demand of Vietnamese teaching context.

Firstly, the constraints of Vietnamese EFL classrooms will be identified and discussed to
make the concern of upper-secondary English teachers and administrators.

Secondly, the study is hoped to explore how much the constraints affect the ways of
teachers to use speaking assessment tasks in the classroom.

Thirdly, the study gives some recommendations to solve the problems of speaking
assessment in Vietnamese upper-secondary schools.

1.6. Design of the study

The study consists of three parts: the Introduction, the Development and the Conclusion.

Part I: Chapter I (the Introduction) presents the rationale, the background, the aims, the
scope, the method and the design of the study.


15

Part II: the Development consists of following chapters:

Chapter II: Literature Review

Chapter III: Methodology presents definition of case study, two steps in the selection of
participant, data collection and data analysis.

Chapter IV: Findings include the overall findings and the other findings of the practical
constraints in conducting communicative speaking assessment and types of speaking
assessment tasks used by Nam Dinh upper-secondary school English teachers.

Chapter V: Discussion aims to discuss about constraints in speaking assessment at uppersecondary school and give suggestions for conducting communicative speaking
assessment

Part III: Chapter VI (Conclusion) highlights the research aims, the results and shows
some limitation, suggestions for further study.

16

PART II: DEVELOPMENT
CHAPTER II: LITERATURE REVIEW

This part of the study provides a general look at the constraints affecting speaking
teaching in Vietnamese ELT from lower secondary schools, upper-secondary schools and
colleges/universities. Then the literature on theories related to speaking assessment is
reviewed to set a theoretical background for the study. Role of teachers in assessing oral
skill will be discussed in the last part of literature review.

2.1

Cited constraints in teaching English communicatively at Vietnamese lower
secondary school to tertiary levels

ELT at lower secondary school seemed not to be taken cared of as much as at uppersecondary school and higher levels of education. In fact, when discussing the problem
with my colleagues at secondary school, I realize that EFL teachers at this level are busy
teaching English only if it is reported to be the subject at entrance exam into upper-


17

secondary school. Thus, lower-secondary school students seem to learn English harder if
entrance exam includes English test. In other words, English and other subjects at this
level cannot be as important as Math and Literature which is taken more care to help
students at entrance exam into upper-secondary school. The biggest problem in ELT in
general and teaching English speaking in particular is students and teachers‟ lack of

efforts to develop communicative competence as required in CLT.

Le Van Canh (2000) in his article asserted that communicative language teaching was too
challenging in Vietnam where the teacher‟s English proficiency was low, classes were
large, the buildings, furniture and other facilities were not basic, and only low levels of
support could be provided in terms of materials, libraries and advisory services. New
teaching methods required new understandings and skills. The contrary was that teachers
were required to spend more time doing additional preparatory work, while there were
already many demands on teachers‟ time in addition to their syllabus teaching work.
Bock‟s study (2000:25-26, cited in Canh & Barnard, 2009) reported that during CLT
application in Vietnamese universities and language centres, “students were not
interested in achieving communicative competence or working in groups, being more
motivated to pass examinations, sometimes referred to as „required‟ motivation”. The
study also mentioned other factors affecting CLT in Vietnam were “large class sizes of
mixed students (between 40 and 105) and the lack of helpful facilities such as flexible
seating and consistent power supply and the difficulties of testing communicative
competence”.

Some recent research for Master theses which were conducted at Vietnamese colleges
and universities support the above ideas when teachers meet too many challenges in
teaching English speaking.
Luu Thuy Duong (2006) conducted a study of teachers‟ difficulties at teaching speaking
for the 1st year students at Hanoi Open University, Faculty of Tourism. The statistics


18

showed that 60% of informants thought that their students had low English proficiency
level, 100% responded that students had passive learning style and often spoke
Vietnamese when working in pairs and groups. The study also showed that teachers had

difficulties of heavy teaching loads and lack of training in pair and group work
methodology. Meanwhile, teachers had no support of classroom conditions such as large
classes, multi-level classes and lack of necessary facilities which could not give teachers
the advantages to organize students work in pairs or in groups. Thus, English speaking
lesson could not go as teachers expected.

Nguyen Thi Thuy Linh (2008) explored the same topic of a study with her survey
research among non-English-majored students at Thai Nguyen University-College of
Technology. The result was that 100% teachers were constrained by large classes and
multi-level classes, students‟ low motivation, students‟ low English proficiency and
students‟ passive ways of learning. She found that 76.9% of the teachers thought that they
did not have enough time to conduct speaking activities and their deficiency in English
communicative competence and unsuitable textbook did not allow them to satisfy
students‟ demand of oral communication.

Mai Thi Thanh Thu (2008), in her study reported that 85.7% of the teachers at Thanh Hoa
College of Culture and Arts could not teach speaking as well as expected because of
students‟ low motivation; 100% of the teachers responded that their students used
Vietnamese during pair work and group work, 100% of the participants blamed students‟
low English proficiency, 71.4% for students‟ passive learning styles. The problem of
educational system was also considered one of the main causes of ineffective speaking
teaching with 100% of the participants for the lack of facilities, 85.7% for multi-level
class.
In Mai Thuy Phuong‟s research (2008) on constraints affecting teachers at Foreign
Language Center, Hai Phong Universiy, the author found that 27% EFL teachers had
never been trained in CLT. Even though 73% of the participants had been trained of


19

CLT, they rarely conducted communicative activities for students. Instead, 81%
participants responded that they used just grammar translation as a routine in speaking
lessons. In fact, students just hoped to pass the exams at the university and teachers
hoped to help them do so. 100% of the teachers admitted that large class size, multi-level
classes, learners‟ low English proficiency and lack of time contributed to make them skip
teaching English speaking.

2.2

Cited constraints in teaching English speaking in Vietnamese uppersecondary schools

2.2.1 Educational system
2.2.1.1 Large classes

Vietnamese upper-secondary classes often have more than 40 students, even some
schools have more than 50 students in a class. In the case of schools in Nam Dinh, the
number of students in a class is over 50. These over-sized classess not only make teachers
difficult to manage studtents but also make students hard to move and communicate
(Gorlach (1995, Bui Thi Minh Hong, 2006). In large classes, students seem like speaking
Vietnamese without being recognized by teachers.

A study with the participation of teachers at Yen Dinh high school showed that most
teachers (70%) complained about difficulties in controlling students when they taught in
large classes. The author explained that the noise in the class was impossible because
“the majority of the students enjoyed speaking Vietnamese more than speaking
English”(Luu Thi Lan (2008:55).

Tran The Hai (2008) showed in his study that 100% teachers considered large classes and
multi-level classes affected their speaking lessons. All the classes of Do Luong 1 uppersecondary school where the author did the research included the number of students

20

between 45 and 55, so the teachers could not manage classes and were afraid that the
noise could affect other classes nearby.

Another study by Nguyen Thi Huong Giang (2008) explored that teachers at Son La
Ethnic Boarding high school found difficult in teaching speaking skills to the minority
students. 100% of the participants thought that their speaking teaching were ineffective
because of large-sized classes. As the author explained, “it is hard for teachers to
organize activities and control noise” because “teachers‟ voice is not loud enough” when
only talkative students have chances to use their voice” but other shy ones take
opportunities to use Vietnamese (p. 37).

Nguyen Thi Thu Hoa (2009) reported in her study at Chi Linh high school that 100% of
teachers considered large-sized classes was a big problem in teaching English, especially
speaking skill. A class at the school usually contained from 42 to 50 students. 71% 0f the
teachers mentioned that multi-level class as a constraint in teaching speaking skill. The
teachers found it difficult to manage students because of the noise and Vietnamese habit.

Teachers at Marie Curie school, Hai Phong complained that large classes prevented
students from participating in group work and questioning-activities because of classes‟
noise and teachers‟ unable management, even “the students can‟t move easily and some
students don‟t do the activities” but “teachers must speak loudly and get sore throat” as a
teacher reported Nguyen Duc Hung (2009). Because teachers were under pressure of
completing the lesson in a limited time, they could not conduct all the activities needed
for a number of more than 50 students in a class (Canh and Barnard, 2009).

2.2.1.2 Lack of appropriate resources

In fact, speaking and other communicative skills needs the support of facilities such as
cassettes, videos, CD-ROMs, pictures, computers and language labs (Van et al, 2006:16)
but these conditions seem so far from the reality. Canh and Barnard (2009) approved that


21

Vietnamese schools are almost poorly equipped. Tables and chairs are not arranged
suitably to support students‟ speaking activities.

A study conducted in 2008 Nguyen Thi Huong Giang at Son La Ethnic Boarding high
school showed that 75% teachers could not teach speaking as well as expected because of
poor teaching condition such as lack of equipment and mismatch in tables and chairs‟
arrangement. Luu Thi Lan (2008) in the study conducted in her school reported that 50%
of the teachers were not satisfied with school‟s lack of facilities supporting speaking
teaching. The basic materials supporting speaking activities such as pictures, handouts,
etc were self-prepared by teachers but there was no assistance of schools‟ administrators.
The lack of facilities was also explored in Nguyen Thi Thu Hoa‟s study (2009) at Chi
Linh high school. 75% of the teachers who was asked to show that it was one of the most
serious problems of teaching speaking. Besides of lack of space for speaking activities,
“three cassettes players were in bad conditions” and “there was no photocopier” (p.42).
The lack of material resources seem to make teachers less responsible for the job. Le Thi
Tuyet Mai (2009) in the study of teachers‟ classroom management in Hai Phong
mentioned that lack of space made teachers impossible to control the noise and
Vietnamese speaking in Vietnamese EFL classroom. As a result, teachers felt tired,
frustrated and demotivated to teach speaking.

2.2.1.3 Textbook

Textbook is the heart of ELT. In other word, how textbook is designed will contribute

much to the success of teachers‟ way of teaching. However, Vietnamese upper-secondary
school English teachers have been accessed to new series of English textbook for a short
time (since 2006), so they cannot easily adapt to the new contents in the book. On the
contrary, old English textbook is easier in the aspects of vocabulary, grammar,
pronunciation, accent etc. Especially, new series of English textbook requires teachers to


22

have good English communicative competence. The problems cannot be solved in a short
time.
Nguyen Thi Thuy Minh‟s study (2007:21) showed that “figures in the research seem to
suggest that there is not much emphasis on speaking skills in the workbooks. The six
review units, called “Test Yourself”, aim to help students assess their own progress
and serve as sample tests for teachers when designing 45 minute tests for their
classes. Each review has four main components: Listening, Reading, Writing and
Language Focus but no speaking practice is included”.

Tran The Hai (2008) in his study found that even though 70% of the participants
responded that they enjoyed teaching speaking, 50% of them felt hard to teach oral
communication. 60% of the teachers complained about the difficulty of speaking tasks.
Teachers also reported that they did not have enough time to cover all tasks in a speaking
lesson.

On the other hand, the recent studies on using the new sets of English language textbook
and teaching the macro skills of reading, writing and listening showed that textbook
includes so many words and a lot of topics are out of the background of students and
teachers (Nguyen Thi Bich Hang, 2008, Phung Thi Hoai Thu, 2008, Vu Thi Thu Ha,
2008, Le Minh Sao, 2008). Speaking teaching is in the streamline of difficulties like
other communicative skill.

However, the official guide book encourages teachers to use textbooks to teach and
assess speaking actively. According to Hoang Van Van et al. (2006:51), “because of the
difficulties of managing and organization, teachers can use marks in small tests of 10 and
15 minutes in classroom lessons” and speaking accounts for 20% in forty minute tests
and final tests like other skills. It seems to be discrepant because oral assessment causes
teachers and school administrators more troubles than other skills. Therefore, how much


23

successful teachers apply communicative approach and new series of textbook is still a
big question.
2.2.2 Teachers‟ problems

2.2.2.1 Traditional ways of teaching

Before the new English curriculum with CLT orientation was applied, many Vietnamese
teachers of English at secondary school levels had a long time of using the old English
textbook, so it was hard to make them immediately adapted to the new way of teaching.

Since the English curriculum innovation with the assistance of new series of textbooks
was implemented four years ago, short time workshops of two or three weeks have been
organized to train teachers to adapt to CLT approach. However, “the effectiveness of
these workshops has not been formally evaluated” (Canh and Barnard, 2009). Thus,
many teachers seemed not to be ready for teaching English communicatively. On the
contrary, “these teachers considered that they were not sufficiently competent for the
delivery of the intended curriculum” (p.29).

A range of current studies reviewed following support the idea that Vietnamese teachers

at upper-secondary school lacked teaching methodology of CLT. Especially, they still
used traditional way of grammar teaching in speaking lessons.
Nguyen Thi Huong Giang (2008) in her study of EFL teachers‟ problems in teaching
speaking skill at an upper-seconsary school in Son La reported that 50% teachers had
never been trained in CLT when the rest of 50% had only heard of in ELT training
workshops. This sad sign could not help teachers to vary speaking activities, even if they
wish to be effective in speaking lessons in the textbook and it seemed that communicative
methodology were out of teachers‟ reach.


24

Another study conducted by Luu Thi Lan (2008) at Yen Dinh high school showed that
62% teachers still made traditional teacher-centred method current in use to meet
students‟ demand of taking part in exams. In speaking lessons, oral tasks were dismissed
to give the ways to grammar exercises. In this way, teachers could save much time and
effort but still met students‟ need.

The majority of the teachers (85.7%) at Chi Linh high school in the study conducted by
Nguyen Thi Thu Hoa (2009) reported that their lack of training in new method limited
their speaking teaching. After using new English textbooks, they still applied traditional
ways in teaching speaking because “they had no chances to attend any course of CLT”
(p.40).

2.2.2.2 Lack of English competence

To be successful in applying CLT in general and teaching speaking skill
communicatively in particular, teachers of English must have a good English
competence, especially elements related to oral communication such as pronunciation,
fluency, elicitation techniques, etc. However, Vietnamese upper-secondary teachers seem

not to have these qualities to teaching English oral skill.

Out of many English teachers, a large number taught Russian before teaching English
(Canh and Barnard, 2009:29), another number were trained in in-service classes to avoid
a lack of EFL teachers a long time ago. Thus, their English competence might be enough
for the old English programme but they failed to teach along the communicative
approach. Nguyen Thi Thu Hoa (2009) reported that 85.7% of the teachers joining her
study had problem of deficiency in spoken English that constrained them to make the
process of teaching speaking skill. These teachers admitted that they had a lack of
vocabulary, pronunciation, stress, etc which was basic background in speaking skill. It
was surprised that some teachers reported that “they learnt the term CLT somewhere but
did not quite understand how it worked” Nguyen Thi Thu Hoa, 2009:40).


25

2.2.3 Students‟ problems

2.2.3.1 Low English competence
In CLT, especially speaking, students‟ English competence must be good enough to
match the difficulty of speaking tasks. However, the recent studies showed that a large
number of Vietnamese upper-secondary school students did not have good English
knowledge to speak English.
Students at Son La Ethnic Boarding high school in Nguyen Thi Huong Giang‟s thesis
(2008) were supposed not to have enough qualities to adapt oral communication of the
programme even though they had learnt English for 3 years at lower-secondary school.
The author explained that students had serious problems in vocabulary, grammar and
pronunciation. The statistics in the study showed that 100% teachers had the difficulty of
students‟ low level of English.

Another thesis by Luu Thi Lan (2008) at Yen Dinh school asserted some factors came
from learners such as learners‟ low English proficiency, lack of interest and learning
styles which prevented teachers to teach speaking skill. Because of lack of basic
knowledge, students “might feel intimidated by more advanced ones”, “they were afraid
of making mistakes and losing face in front of their teachers and classmates” (p.53).
Tran The Hai‟s study (2008) was also about teachers‟ challenges in teaching speaking at
the school in Nghe An. 100% participants thought that students‟ low level of spoken
language constrained them to teach speaking effectively. Thus, instead of speaking
English, all their students enjoyed speaking Vietnamese in speaking lessons to avoid
making mistakes. As a teacher responded, “I don‟t know that to correct my students‟
mistakes because there are too many” (p.26).


26

Canh and Barnard‟s study (2009:27) showed that students enjoyed speaking Vietnamese
in the classroom because their English competence was not good enough to communicate
in English. Use of Vietnamese seemed common for both teachers and students because
“their people would not be able to understand the lessons if they spoke English.”

The same findings were explored in the study conducted by Nguyen Thi Thu Hoa (2009).
The author reported that 100% teachers complained that students‟ low English
proficiency was one of the greatest obstacles in teaching speaking skill. “Students had
learned English since they were in grade 6” but “their knowledge of vocabulary and
grammatical structures was limited to do oral communicative activities” at new English
curriculum at upper-secondary school. 85.7% teachers referred to students using their
mother tongue during pair-work and group work.

A study conducted in Marie Curie in Hai Phong by Nguyen Duc Hung (2009) showed
that as the students‟ proficiency was limited, it seemed hard for the teachers to use some

types of communicative activities in the classroom. Students were asked to do simple
speaking tasks like dialogue practice, text –reading, etc because they could not do other
complicated activities.

2.2.3.2 Demotivation of speaking English

In EFL teaching and teaching, motivation plays an important role to be successful. In
Gardner and Lambert‟ s view (1972, cited in Nguyen Thi Thu Thuy, 2008:13), “if
learners need to speak the second language in a wide range of social situations or to fulfill
professional ambitions, they will perceive the communicative value of the second
language and will therefore be motivated to acquire proficiency in it.” However, it seems


27

that Vietnamese students at upper-secondary school do not have enough motivation to
enjoy speaking activities. This idea will be explained in the summary of the following
studies and theses.

In fact, Vietnamese students are still under affection of teacher-based approach. Canh and
Barnard (2009) explored that teachers talked much more than students in the lessons
when students enjoyed doing exercises without any argument with teachers. Passive way
of learning English and the habit of speaking Vietnamese were the main reasons to
ineffectiveness of learning speaking. Besides, students have motivation of learning
grammar for examinations and the mismatch of Vietnamese and English culture also
make students to speak English.

Nguyen Thi Huong Giang (2008) reported that minority students at Son La Ethic
Boarding high school rarely open their mouth to speak English. 100% teachers confirmed
that their students were too shy to speak English and 75% of the teachers reported that

students were demotivated to take part in speaking activities. The same number of 75%
felt hard to teach speaking when students used too much mother-tongue during pair work
and group work. Tran The Hai‟s study (2008) gave the statistics of 100% of the
participants who agreed that students were demotivated to speak. The students
interviewed shared the idea that they learnt English to take exams, they were not
compulsory in English speaking lessons and marks were given, depending on their paper
tests.

Nguyen Thi Thu Hoa (2009) also admitted in the study that most of the teachers (71.4%)
considered the lack of motivation in class participation as important constraint.
According to teachers‟ responses, “students‟ English learning was driven by testing and
grammar” for exams. 71.4% teachers thought that students were not eager to participate
in collaborative activities. In the author‟s view, communicative activities like role-play,
problem-solving tasks or information gap were strange to our culture of learning.


28

2.3

Requirements of English speaking assessment at Vietnamese upper-

secondary schools

2.3.1 An overview of English speaking assessment criteria at uppersecondary school

Officially, English speaking must be taught and assessed in the program as directed by
the Vietnamese Ministry of Education and Training (MOET).

This part summarized, cited and translated the directions from the two guide books for

upper-secondary English teachers to conduct the new English curriculum and the
textbooks English 10 and 12.


English 10 is guided to follow continuous assessment and variable

assessment (p.51)


Because of the difficulties of managing and organization, teachers

can use marks in small tests of 10 and 15 minutes in classroom lessons
(p.51)


English 10 is guided to test all the skills (listening, speaking,

reading and writing) in the examinations (p.55)


The percentage of all the skills are fairly divided in the tests:

listening 20%, speaking 20%, reading 20%, writing 20% and language
focus 20% (p.55)

Van et al. (2006)

Five criteria in language testing and assessment are listed as follows:


Insurance of comprehension: assessment must reflect all the aspects of

students‟ background, skills, competence, attitude and behaviors.