Nghiên cứu giao văn hóa về việc sử dụng các hiện tố phi ngôn từ trên lớp của giáo viên Mỹ và Việt = An American-Vietnamese cross-cultural study of teachers’ use

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES
***  ***

LÊ THỊ THU HÀ

AN AMERICAN – VIETNAMESE
CROSS-CULTURAL STUDY OF TEACHERS’ USE OF
NONVERBAL CUES IN CLASS
(Nghiên cứu giao văn hoá về việc sử dụng các hiện tố phi ngôn từ trên lớp
của giáo viên Mỹ và Việt)


M.A. MINOR PROGRAMME THESIS


F
F
i
i
e
e
l
l
d
d
:
:

E
E
n
n
g
g
l
l
i
i
s
s
h
h


L
L
i
i
n
n
g
g
u
u

i
i
s
s
t
t
i
i
c
c
s
s


C
C
o
o
d
d
e
e
:
:

6
6
0
0
.
.
2
2
2
2
.
.
0
0
2
2
.
.
0
0
1
1





Hanoi, 2014
VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES
***  ***

LÊ THỊ THU HÀ

AN AMERICAN – VIETNAMESE
CROSS-CULTURAL STUDY OF TEACHERS’ USE OF
NONVERBAL CUES IN CLASS

(Nghiên cứu giao văn hoá về việc sử dụng các hiện tố phi ngôn từ trên lớp
của giáo viên Mỹ và Việt)

M.A. MINOR PROGRAMME THESIS

F
F
i
i
e
e
l
l
d
d
:
:

E
E
n
n
g
g
l
l
i
i
s
s
h
h


L
L
i
i
n
n
g
g
u
u
i
i

s
s
t
t
i
i
c
c
s
s


C
C
o
o
d
d
e
e
:
:






6
6

0
0
.
.
2
2
2
2
.
.
0
0
2
2
.
.
0
0
1
1


S
S
u
u
p
p
e
e

r
r
v
v
i
i
s
s
o
o
r
r
:
:


P
P
r
r
o
o
f
f
.
.


N
N

g
g
u
u
y
y
ễ
ễ
n
n


Q
Q
u
u
a
a
n
n
g
g
,
,


P
P
h
h

.
.
D
D
.
.



Hanoi, 2014
i

ORIGINALITY OF STUDY PROJECT REPORT
I certify my authority of the Study Project Report submitted entitled
An American-Vietnamese cross-cultural study of teachers’ use of nonverbal cues
in class
Nghiên cứu giao văn hóa về việc sử dụng các hiện tố phi ngôn từ trên lớp của giáo
viên Mỹ và Việt
In fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Master of Arts
15
th
July, 2014



Lê Thị Thu Hà

ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First of all, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my supervisor, Prof.
Nguyễn Quang, Ph.D., who has given me the benefit of his wisdom, advice and
patience, and made valuable suggestions and precious critical comments that helped
me to carry out this study.
Besides, my special thanks go to all of my lecturers and teachers at the
Department of Postgraduate Studies for their great supports in the whole course of my
study.
I am also indebted to my family and my close friend, without their whole-
hearted encouragement, I would not finish my study.
Last but not least, I wish to express my thanks to all the American and
Vietnamese teachers and students who enthusiastically help me complete my study.








iii

ABSTRACT
This study reviews the theoretical background, which explains the important
role of nonverbal behavior in communication, especially in teaching and learning, and
compares the use of major nonverbal cues between American teachers of English and

Vietnamese teachers of English when interacting with their Vietnamese students. The
areas under investigation include eye contact, hand gestures and facial expressions
which are most readily observable. The findings of the study briefly answer the
questions how often the American and Vietnamese teachers of English use these
nonverbal cues, in which specific situations, and their students‟ attitude to them. To
collect data for the study, survey questionnaires and video-recorded observations were
employed. Data from survey questionnaire serve as input for data analysis and the
other source just provides supplementing information to make sure whether data from
the survey are valid or not. Finally, implications for practical teaching are given.










iv

LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES
Table 1: Frequencies of using eye contact by American and Vietnamese teachers of
English 25
Table 2: Frequencies of using hand gestures by American and Vietnamese teachers of
English 31
Table 3: Frequencies of using facial expressions by American and Vietnamese teachers
of English 36
Figure 1. Ferrando’s definition of culture 5
Figure 2. Levine and Adelman’s definition of culture 5

Figure 3. Nguyen Quang’s flowchart of communication 7
Figure 4: Nguyen Quang’s flowchart of nonverbal communication 12
Figure 5: Eye contact by American teachers of English in specific situations 27
Figure 6: Eye contact by Vietnamese teachers of English in specific situations 27
Figure 7: Students’ attitudes to their teachers’ eye contact 29
Figure 8: Gestures by American teachers of English in specific situations 32
Figure 9: Gestures by Vietnamese teachers of English in specific situations 32
Figure 10: Students’ attitudes to their teachers’ hand gestures 34
Figure 11: Facial expressions by American teachers of English in specific situations 37
Figure 12: Facial expressions by Vietnamese teachers of English in specific situations
37
Figure 13: Students’ attitudes to their teachers’ facial expressions 39






v

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ORIGINALITY OF STUDY PROJECT REPORT i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ii
ABSTRACT iii
PART A: INTRODUCTION 1
1. Rationale 1
2. Objectives of the study and research questions 1
3. Scope of the study 2
4. Methodology 2

5. Structure of the study 3
PART B: DEVELOPMENT 5
CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW 5
1. 1. WHAT IS CULTURE? 5
1.2. WHAT IS COMMUNICATION? 6
1.2.1. Definition 6
1.2.2. Elements of communication 7
1.3. CROSS-CULTURAL COMMUNICATION 9
1.4. NONVERBAL COMMUNICATON 9
1.4.1. Definition 9
1.4.2. The importance of nonverbal communication 10
1.4.3. Functions of nonverbal communication 10
1.4.4. Classification of nonverbal communication 11
1.5. PREVIOUS RELATED STUDIES 12
a. In the world 12
b. In Vietnam 13
CHAPTER 2: NONVERBAL CUES 15
2.1. EYE CONTACT 15
2.1.1. Nature and importance of eye contact 15
vi

2.1.2. Classification 16
2.2. HAND GESTURES 16
2.2.1. Nature and importance of hand gestures 16
2.2.2. Classification 17
2.3. FACIAL EXPRESSIONS 19
2.3.1. Nature and importance of facial expressions 19
2.3.2. Classification 19
CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY 22
3.1. Participants 22

3.2. Data collection instruments 22
3.2.1. Observation 22
3.2.2. Survey questionnaire 23
3.3. Data collection procedure and analysis 23
CHAPTER 4: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS 25
4.1. EYE CONTACT 25
4.1.1. Frequencies 25
4.1.2. Similarities and differences 27
4.1.3. Students‟ attitudes 29
4.2. HAND GESTURES 30
4.2.1. Frequencies 30
4.2.2. Similarities and differences 32
4.2.3. Students‟ attitudes 34
4.3. FACIAL EXPRESSIONS 35
4.3.1. Frequencies 35
4.3.2. Similarities and differences 37
4.3.3. Students‟ attitudes 39
PART C: CONCLUSION 41
1. Conclusions 41
vii

2. Implications 42
3. Limitations of the study 43
4. Suggestions for further study 43
REFERENCES 45

1


PART A: INTRODUCTION

1. Rationale
It is undeniable that people express emotions and attitudes through nonverbal cues
more visually than through verbal cues in communication. However, nonverbal cues are
used differently in different cultures. Therefore, when people from different cultural
backgrounds come into contact, there always exists misunderstanding because of
misinterpretation of others‟ nonverbal cues in communication.
In class, teachers of English interact with their students in the ways thought as
“appropriate” in their culture. They teach, talk and explain to their students in their own
verbal and nonverbal ways. Cultural factors clearly affect both teachers and students. It
has been observed that the teachers might appear encouraging or discouraging, depending
much on whether the students take their teachers‟ nonverbal cues positively or negatively.
Therefore, the researcher conducts this study to see how and how often nonverbal cues
are used in classrooms at Vietnam Maritime University and Haiphong Private University
and how the performance of these cues is perceived by the students.
2. Objectives of the study and research questions
The objectives of the study are:
a. To study how selected nonverbal cues are used by American and Vietnamese
teachers of English in class
b. To compare the use of selected nonverbal cues by American and Vietnamese
teachers of English.
From those objectives, the following research questions are raised:
1- How often are selected nonverbal cues used by American and Vietnamese teachers
of English in class?
2


2- To what extent are the American teachers of English different from the Vietnamese
teachers of English in using the selected nonverbal cues in the particular situations in
class?
3- What are the students‟ attitudes to their teachers‟ nonverbal cues?

3. Scope of the study
With the constraints of a minor thesis, the researcher just mentions the three main
types of nonverbal cues by American and Vietnamese teachers of English in class, which
are eye contact, hand gestures and facial expressions. Moreover, the study is limited in
comparing how often the selected American and Vietnamese teachers of English use these
nonverbal cues in class.
The study is conducted in areas of classroom interaction between American and
Vietnamese teachers of English with their Vietnamese students at Vietnam Maritime
University and Haiphong Private University.
4. Methodology
Methods
This research resorts to mixed methods. Survey questionnaires will be mainly
employed to collect data from informants. In addition, observation will also be used for
the consolidation of data collected.
Participants
The study is conducted at 10 English classes, at Vietnam Maritime University and
Haiphong Private University. 200 students are taught by both American and Vietnamese
teachers. There are 10 native English teachers and 10 Vietnamese teachers.
Procedures
Step 1: giving the teachers questionnaires about their nonverbal behaviors in teaching to
identify some main nonverbal cues they often use in class
3


Step 2: giving the students questionnaires about their attitudes to these common nonverbal
cues
Step 3: conducting observations
The participants are observed in classroom by recording videos.
The observations are conducted during a usual teaching period (45 minutes) and cover the
following situations:

(1) The teacher is teaching/ giving instructions
(2) Students are making noise/ doing private things
(3) Students are raising questions
(4) Students are answering teacher’s questions
…
Observations are carried out with the minimum of disruption to class teaching and time
frames. This step aims at checking if there is any disagreement between teachers and
students‟ answers.
5. Structure of the study
The study is structured as follows
Part A: Introduction
1. Rationale
2. Objectives of the study and research questions
3. Scope of the study
4. Methodology
5. Structure of the study
4


Part B: Development
Chapter 1: Literature review
Chapter 2: Nonverbal cues
Chapter 3: Methodology
Chapter 4: Findings and discussions
Part C: Conclusion
1. Conclusions
2. Implications
3. Limitations of the study
4. Suggestions for further study

5


PART B: DEVELOPMENT
CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW
1. 1. WHAT IS CULTURE?
Ferrando , cited in Nguyen Quang ( 2008: 27), believes that “Culture is
everything that people have, think and do as a member of a society”
Figure 1. Ferrando’s definition of culture
Levine and Adelman‟s iceberg of culture (1993: 58) state that: “Culture is like an
iceberg, much of the influence of culture on an individual can hardly be seen but strongly
be felt. The visible part of culture does not always create cross-cultural difficulties. The
hidden aspects of culture exercise a strong influence on one’s behavior and interactions
with others.”
Figure 2. Levine and Adelman’s definition of culture
6


However, as given by UNESCO (World Conference on Cultural Policies, Mexico
City, 1982) and widely accepted by its members: “Culture is the complex whole of
distinctive spiritual, material, intellectual and emotional features that characterize a
society or social group. It includes not only arts and letters, but also modes of life, the
fundamental rights of the human being, value systems, traditions and beliefs.”
In the light of cross-cultural communication, Nguyen Quang‟s (2008) definition
of culture is strongly justified. According to him (2008: 33), “Culture is the complex
whole of tangible and intangible expressions that are created and adapted by a society or

a social group as well as the ways it functions and reacts in given situations; this helps
distinguish one society or social group from another not only in terms of the availability
of those expressions and behaviours, but also in terms of their proportionality and
manifestability.”
1.2. WHAT IS COMMUNICATION?
1.2.1. Definition
Communication, culture, and the correlation between them have become an
interesting topic for many researchers. Communication, might be simply understood as a
tool to link people to people, countries to countries within demonstration of their own
cultures through process of sending and receiving messages. However, the definitions of
this concept should be clearly explained.
Saundra Hybels and Richard L.Weaver H (1992:5) state that: “Communication is
any process in which people share information, ideas, and feelings that involve not only
the spoken and written words but also body language, personal mannerism and style, the
surrounding and things that add meaning to a message”. This definition seems to cover
both “ the how” and “the what” of communication.
7


In terms of communication components, Nguyen Quang (2008:44) develops a
flowchart of communication that is well appreciated and widely cited.

Figure 3. Nguyen Quang’s flowchart of communication
1.2.2. Elements of communication
Communication is made up of various elements. According to Hybels and
Weaver (1992: 6) they are: senders and receivers, messages, channels, noise, feedback,
and setting.

8

 Senders - Receivers
Communication is known as two-way process: sending and receiving. To
communicate, the senders create their messages by using verbal as well as nonverbal
techniques. Receivers process the messages sent to them and react to them both verbally
and nonverbally.
 Messages
A message represents the senders‟ ideas traveling to the receivers. A message can be
composed in many different forms, such as an oral presentation, a written document, an
advertisement or just a comment.
 Channels
The message travels from one point to another via a channel of communication. The
channel sits between the sender and receiver. Many channels, or types, of communication
exist, from the spoken word to radio, television, an Internet site or something written, like
a letter or magazine. In face – to – face communication, the primary channels are sound
and sight: we listen and look at each other.
 Feedback
Feedback describes the receiver's response or reaction to the sender's message. The
receiver can transmit feedback through kinds of verbal and nonverbal responses.
Feedback helps the sender to determine how the receiver interpreted the message and how
it can be improved.
 Setting
The setting is where the communication occurs. Settings, formal or informal, can be a
significant influence on communication.


9


 Noise

Noise is interference that keeps a message from being understood or accurately
interpreted. Noise occurs between sender – receivers, and it comes in three forms:
external, internal, and semantic.
1.3. CROSS-CULTURAL COMMUNICATION
Students who study cultures and cross-cultural communication are to various degrees,
aware of three terms of culture- related communication:
- Intra-cultural communication is communication between people who live in the
same country and come from the same cultural background.
- Intercultural communication is communication between people who live in the
same country but come from different cultural backgrounds.
- Cross-cultural communication is communication between people who live in
different countries and come from different cultural back grounds.
1.4. NONVERBAL COMMUNICATON
1.4.1. Definition
While verbal communication conveys the message through words/ speaking out,
nonverbal communication indicates the message beyond words. It is clear that nonverbal
cues are more trustful than verbal ones, so it is more reliable for the audiences to
understand exactly what the speaker means.
As Levine and Adelman (1993: 100) hold that: “Nonverbal communication is
silent language, including the use of gestures, facial expressions, eye contact and
conversational distances”. These author seems to emphasize just some parts of nonverbal
communication, it is not a comprehensive view, at least, it is not simply “silent language”.
Nguyen Quang (2008: 61) has given his definition of nonverbal communication:
“Nonverbal communication is all the components of the message that, when taken
together, constitute the communication which is not verbally coded but both vocally and
10


non-vocally channeled. Nonverbal communication is composed of paralinguistic factors
(nonverbal vocal channel), such as rate, volume, etc. and extralinguistic factors

(nonverbal and non-vocal channel), such as body language (gestures, postures, facial
expressions,…), object language (including clothing, jewellery…) and environmental
language (proxemics, setting,…)”.
1.4.2. The importance of nonverbal communication
The importance of nonverbal communication is undeniable, it makes up about 60
percent of communication as Hall (1959) announces. As stated above, it is more reliable
than speaking words. Sometimes, nonverbal and verbal cues contradict, people often
interpret the message more through what the speaker acts out. Everyone is almost
unaware of their postures, gestures and facial expressions. Birdwhistell (1970), cited in
Nguyen Quang (2008: 63), estimates that the average person actually speaks words for a
total of about ten or eleven minutes a day, and that the average sentence takes only about
2.5 seconds. Moreover, in face to face conversation, it is just 35 percent verbal, 65 percent
left belongs to nonverbal behavior.
Nonverbal cues are important because:
- People more easily remember what they see than what they hear.
- Nonverbal communication occurs more often than verbal communication.
- People can easily be cheated by verbal cues but much harder by nonverbal
ones.
1.4.3. Functions of nonverbal communication
According to Nguyen Quang (2008: 49), nonverbal communication has 4 main
functions:
- Firstly, nonverbal behavior may supplement words. If you just speak “You are
beautiful” to others, without any facial expressions, it might be considered as a
boring compliment, or may be misunderstood as another negative meaning
11


phrase. Your nonverbal cues add feelings to what you want to express. Your
saying will be much more powerful if you say it with your smile and soft, warm
eye contact.

- Secondly, nonverbal behavior may contradict your words. Take a situation as
an example, when the student got a bad mark, the teacher frowned and said to
him: “Good”. So, in this case, “good” here could not have its own meaning
with a frowning.
- Thirdly, nonverbal behavior may regulate the flow of verbal interaction.
Speakers should know when to stop their conversation with the expressions of
nonverbal cues such as: eye contact, gesture or facial expressions. For instance,
when I am talking to my friend, if he/she looks away or makes thumb down, I
will immediately stop talking.
- Finally, nonverbal behavior may take the place of words. Nonverbal cues carry
out a function of a substitute for words. People even prefer using nonverbal
cues to verbal ones. For example, when seeing my friends, instead of saying
“Hi” to them, I just smile or show a V gesture. My friends not only understand
my greeting to them, but also know how glad I feel when meeting them.
1.4.4. Classification of nonverbal communication
Nguyen Quang (2007, 83) introduces a flowchart of nonverbal communication.
Whereas verbal communication is recognized by intra-language, nonverbal
communication finds its expression in: paralanguage and extra-language. In this
dissertation, the researcher studies eye contact, gestures and facial expressions included in
body language- the minor part of extra-language. Discussion will be presented in the next
chapter.
12


Figure 4: Nguyen Quang’s flowchart of nonverbal communication
1.5. PREVIOUS RELATED STUDIES
a. In the world
The importance of nonverbal cues in communication as well as in class interaction
is widely accepted. There have been many researchers interested in carrying out studies
on this issue. For instance, Okon (2011) states that our daily nonverbal behaviors reveal

who we are and impact how we relate to other people. He accepts the importance of
nonverbal behavior and the powerful culture influences on participants in classroom.
However, his main purpose is to work on outcomes when conflict arises with a student in
the classroom and concerned about asking the students about their teachers‟ behavior.
13


Sharing the same perspective, Guvendir (2011) insists that using only verbal cues
cannot fully define the classroom interaction. It is essential for teachers to use nonverbal
communication to make students aware of their errors. This researcher just gives insights
into the use of nonverbal behavior of teachers in providing their students with corrective
feedback.
Discussing the teachers‟ nonverbal behavior‟s impact on students‟ achievement,
Negi(2009) and Chaudhyl & Arifi (2012) agree that teachers‟ nonverbal behaviors play a
highly important and essential role on learners‟ motivation in language classroom.
In addition, Peng Hong Li (2011) indicates that most of the teachers are not aware
of the fact that nonverbal cues they use have an influence on teaching effects and ignore
the role of their nonverbal behavior in class. His study recommends that teachers should
take advantage of nonverbal communication to assist and complement classroom teaching
to archive the best effect and high efficiency.
b. In Vietnam
The importance of nonverbal cues is also concerned by many Vietnamese
researchers. There are research works related to this topic such as the ones by Vũ Thị
Thanh Mai ( 2008), Đặng Thúy Hằng (2007), Bùi Hải Sơn ( 2009), Đào Thị Thu Trang (
2007)… However, depending on each author‟s perspective, each research provides
particular results. Trang (2007) focuses on comparison of common touching behaviors
and their frequency in American and Vietnamese culture. Mai (2007) takes a look into the
similarities and differences in the way of using gestures for agreement by Vietnamese
male and female. Son (2009) analyzes that the most common nonverbal expressions for
disappointment in order that a successful communication event can be achieved between

American and Vietnamese communicators. Hang (2007) also emphasizes the frequency
and the specific performance of teachers‟ nonverbal behaviors. Nevertheless, she just
focuses on teachers‟ performance, ignores students‟ attitudes to the performance.
14


Moreover, she gives insights into eye contact, postures, and proxemics while the
researcher does research on eye contact, hand gestures, and facial expressions.


















15


CHAPTER 2: NONVERBAL CUES

In chapter 1, the researcher has offered an overview of culture, communication and
nonverbal communication. In this chapter, the review of the three types of nonverbal cues
(eye contact, hand gestures and facial expressions) is to be presented.
2.1. EYE CONTACT
2.1.1. Nature and importance of eye contact
Eye contact or eye gaze is when we look directly at a person‟s eyes as we talk to
him/her. Eye contact plays an important role in communication. These windows of the
soul- the eyes express thousands of sensitive emotions through its movement. Due to its
great influence, eye contact is classified in a distinctive aspect in research though eyes
belong to face.
Western people, such as American, English and Australian, often appreciate eye
contact when communicating directly. They believe that you should not trust the person
who doesn‟t look you in the eye. However, the amount/ frequency of using eye contact is
different because of different cultures and contexts. While eye contact is highly valued in
Western culture, it is rarely understood to be polite in Eastern/ Asian culture. For
example, in Vietnam, traditional Vietnamese maintain less eye contact when talking with
strangers, or the young with the old, the woman with the man, the lower status with the
higher status in society. It might be referred to disrespect or impoliteness. Consequently,
it might be stereotypically suggested that the American belong to more eye-oriented type,
whereas the Vietnamese belong to less eye-oriented type in communicating. It leads us to
the hypothesis that American teachers will use more eye contact (direct eye-contact) with
students than Vietnamese teachers.

16


2.1.2. Classification
There are some different ways to classify eye contact. However, the researcher
accepts the classification given by Nguyen Quang (2008: 126). Eye contact is divided into
two main kinds: direct and indirect eye contact.

Direct eye-contact consists of three sub-types:
- Soft, warm eye contact: it often expresses truthfulness, sincerity, interest,
enjoyment
- Staring: it often conveys anger, conceit …
- Wide eyes: it often reveals confusion, surprise, fear …
Indirect eye-contact/ eye-contact avoidance, consists of the following sub-types:
- Looking upward: it often expresses conceit, evasion, uncertainty …
- Looking downward: it often shows shyness, embarrassment, shame, telling lies
…
- Looking sideway: it often conveys untruthfulness, I-don‟t-care attitude…
In addition, there are some other classifications of eye contact, such as classifying
them into four main kinds: intimate gaze, business gaze, social gaze, and public gaze (
Nguyen Quang, 2008: 126). However, in the thesis, the researcher investigates how
teachers of English maintain their eye contact with their students in class through direct
or indirect eye contact.
2.2. HAND GESTURES
2.2.1. Nature and importance of hand gestures
People often use hand gestures when they speak. They may use it consciously or
unconsciously to show clearly what they mean. For instance, instead of saying good bye,
they wave their hands. Moreover, when they praise someone, they clap their hands to
encourage him/her. Hence, communication becomes more meaningful with the help of
hand gestures.