Nghiên cứu về việc Sử dụng Bài tập Thuyết trình-Viết Thu hoạch trong Bộ môn Hoa Kỳ Học ở Trường ĐHNN-ĐHQGHN Độ Phù hợp và Hiệu quả từ Góc độ Đánh giá của Giảng

iii


TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS i
ABSTRACT ii
LIST OF FIGURES v
PART A: INTRODUCTION 1
1. Background of and rationale for the study 1
2. Aims of the research 1
3. Significance of the study 2
4. Scope of the research 2
5. Organization of the study 3
PART B: DEVELOPMENT 4
CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW 4
1.1. Key and related concepts 4
1.1.1. Content-based Instruction and the teaching context in ULIS-VNUH American
Studies courses 4
1.1.2. The presentation assignments 11
1.1.3. Relevance and efficacy 15
1.1.4. English skills in sheltered course classes 17
1.1.5. Interdisciplinary research skills 18
1.2. How does this study fit into other research? 19
1.3. Summary 19
CHAPTER 2: METHODOLOGY 20
2.1. Research questions 20
2.2. Participants 20
2.3. Instruments 21
2.4. Data collection procedures 29
2.5. Data analysis procedure 29
2.6. Summary 30

CHAPTER 3: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 31
iv


3.1. Perceptions of teachers and students of the degree to which the presentation-
reflection assignments have helped to meet the couse's objectives 32
3.2. Perceptions of teachers and students of the degree to which the actual assignment
quality has met the assignments' requirements 45
3.3. What do teachers and students suggest about modifying the assignments? – Practical
implication and suggestions 48
3.4. Summary 50
PART C: CONCLUSION 51
1. Summary of findings 51
2. Limitations of the study 52
3. Suggestions for further research 52
REFERENCES 53
APPENDIX I
Appendix 1. American Studies course outline I
Appendix 2a. Survey questionnaire form – Student version VIII
Appendix 2b. Survey questionnaire form – Teacher version X
Appendix 3a. Summary of questionnaire data – Students' Perception XII
Appendix 3b. Summary of questionnaire data – Teachers' Perception XIII
Appendix 4. Median Values XIV
Appendix 5. Correlation between efficacy index and presentation score XV
Appendix 6. Summary of relevant suggestions from students XVI



v

LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE PAGE
Figure 1 - A continuum of content and language integration (Met, 2007) 7
Figure 2 - A continuum of content and language integration (Met, 2007) 8
Figure 3 - Relevance & Efficacy Concept 16
Figure 4 - General knowledge separate 32
Figure 5 - General knowledge combined 33
Figure 6 - Specific knowledge separate 34
Figure 7 - Specific knowledge combined 35
Figure 8 - Presentation assignment influence on presentational skills 36
Figure 9 - Reflection assignment influence on presentational skills 37
Figure 10 - Presentational skills combined 38
Figure 11 - Presentation assignment's influence on English skills 39
Figure 12 - Reflection assignment's influence on English skills 39
Figure 13 - English skills combined 40
Figure 14 - Interdisciplinary research skills separate 42
Figure 15 - Interdisciplinary research skills combined 43
Figure 16 - Preparation for further study seperate 44
Figure 17 - Preparation for further study combined 44
Figure 18 - Presentation assignment efficacy 45
Figure 19 - Reflection assignment efficacy 46

1

Chapter 1: Introduction

PART A: INTRODUCTION
1. Background of and rationale for the study
n the world, research and teaching about the United States of America have a long

tradition, dating back to as early as the birth of the country. At the University of
Languages and International Studies – Vietnam National University, Hanoi (ULIS-
VNUH), however, this multi-disciplinary study field just entered the curriculum as a
subject for about a decade (Country Studies Division, 2009).
Throughout this period, the academic staff of the Country Studies division assigned to
implement the course have been constantly embarking on improving the course's contents,
through modifying the structure, updating and refining materials, and perhaps more
importantly, the teaching methods. This arduous task is bound to increase in intensity as
the division has to take the lead in designing an entirely new undergraduate program on
American Studies for the university, which will be launched around the 2012-2013
timeframe. Therefore, as a junior lecturer working in liaison with the group, the author had
the need to help revise some elements of the current teaching method used in the American
Studies courses, and so this thesis was an ideal chance to aid in the effort.
During the three recent academic years from 2008 to 2011, the majority of students' casual
feedbacks to teachers of American Studies courses mainly expressed concerns about
assignment requirements, assignment quality, and, naturally, assignment grading. Rather
than catering to the sporadic questions about different aspects of the course assignments,
this study took the chance to investigate the core and overarching dimensions of the course
assignments already in place, i.e. oral presentation and written reflection, as tangible and
available products of the teaching and studying processes.
2. Aims of the research
With said purposes, the study aimed at answering the three main questions below:
i. To what degree do American Studies lecturers and students at ULIS-VNUH think
the design of the courseworks have helped to meet the course's objectives?
I
2

Chapter 1: Introduction

ii. To what degree do they think the actual assignment quality has met the

assignments' requirements?
iii. What do they suggest about modifying the assignments?
3. Significance of the study
The research did not aim to and thus did not suggest the best assignment design to be used
in the course. Instead, it was expected to have a certain impact on the way how the current
assignment types of American Studies courses – and even of similar courses offered by the
division e.g. British Studies or General Geography of the UK and the US – would be
designed, both in paper and practice, to better meet the preset course objectives. It also
served as a referential material for researchers and teachers alike who are interested in the
testing and assessment aspect of curriculum design.
4. Scope of the research
As stated, the study would look at the American Studies assignments in only two main
dimensions: relevance and efficacy – whose meanings within this research context would
be interpreted later in the next chapter.
In terms of research population, the study targeted at students and lecturers involved in the
American Studies courses at ULIS-VNUH. Specifically, for practical reasons, these are
students from the classes of QH081E, since they were the latest groups to take the courses
– while all the previous groups had graduated. As for the lecturers, all of them came from
the Country Studies Division – Faculty of Linguistics and Cultures of English Speaking
Countries.
3

Chapter 2: Literature Review and Practical Basis

5. Organization of the study
This research report is organized into three main parts:
Part A, Introduction, provides the rationale for, the aims, significance, scope and
organization of the study.
Part B, Development, comprises three chapters:
Chapter 1, Literature Review, presents related literature that provide the theoretical basis

for this study.
Chapter 2, Methodology, describes the research instruments, participants and the
procedures to conduct the research, including data collection and data analysis.
Chapter 3, Results and Discussion, presents and discusses findings to derive valid
implications.
Part C, Conclusion, summarizes the main findings, and draws out lessons and suggestions
for similar studies in the future.
4

Chapter 2: Literature Review and Practical Basis

PART B: DEVELOPMENT
CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW
1.1. Key and related concepts
1.1.1. Content-based Instruction and the teaching context in ULIS-VNUH American
Studies courses
ince the early 1980s, there has been a growing interest in combining language and
content teaching. In the American context, programs, models, and approaches have
proliferated in all levels of instruction, creating various forms of incorporating language
and content teaching (Met, 1991). In the mid 1990s in European countries, curriculum
innovations have been directed toward the content and language integrated learning
approach, in which both curriculum content – e.g. science or geography – and English are
taught together (Graddol, 2007). All these forms of incorporating language and content
teaching fall under the heading of Content-based Instruction.
Content-based Instruction (CBI) is a curricula approach or framework, not a method.
While most foreign language curricula put focus on learning about language rather than
learning to use language for meaningful communication about relevant content, the CBI
approach seeks to reach a balance between language and content instruction.
Richard (2005), described Content-based Instruction (CBI) as a "process-based CLT
approach", an extension of the Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) movement

which takes different routes to reach the goal of CLT, i.e. developing learners'
communicative competence. This approach is the "integration of a particular content [e.g.
math, science, social studies] with second language aims. […] It refers to the concurrent
teaching of academic subject matter and second language skills" (Brinton et al, 1989).
Similarly, Crandall and Tucker (1990) define it as ". . . an approach to language instruction
that integrates the presentation of topics or tasks from subject matter classes (e.g. math,
S
5

Chapter 2: Literature Review and Practical Basis

social studies) within the context of teaching a second or foreign language". Curtain and
Pesola (1994), however, use the term in a more restricted way, limiting it to only those ". . .
curriculum concepts being taught through the foreign language . . . appropriate to the grade
level of the students . . . ".
Overall, it is clear that the term CBI is commonly used to describe a curricula approach
which seeks to integrate language and content instruction. This paper thus adopts the view
similar to that of Curtain and Pesola (1994) in which CBI involves the curriculum concepts
being taught through the foreign language, appropriate to the grade level of the students.
Content
With the concept of "Content-based Instruction" defined, it is necessary to turn to the
concept of "Content". On the definition of content, different authors have different views
about what content should be. In Crandall and Tucker (1990), content is seen as "academic
subject matter" while in Genesee (1994), content ". . . need not be academic; it can include
any topic, theme or non-language issue of interest or importance to the learners". Chaput
(1993) defines content as ". . . any topic of intellectual substance which contributes to the
students' understanding of language in general, and the target language in particular". Met
(1999) proposes that "…'content' in content-based programs represents material that is
cognitively engaging and demanding for the learner, and is material that extends beyond
the target language or target culture". This paper adopts the definitions of Met (1999),

Curtain and Pesola (1994), which is most relevant to the research context. Therefore,
"content" here is seen as materials, or specifically "curriculum concepts", that are
cognitively engaging and demanding for the learner, and is material that extends beyond
the target language or target culture.
Overall, the various definitions of content do not conflict each other, in fact, they represent
the diverse characteristics of programs that integrate content and language (different
models of CBI), which will be presented in the later section.
The rationale of CBI
Content-based instruction (CBI) bases its rationale on the premise that students can
effectively obtain both language and subject matter knowledge by receiving content input
in the target language. Although it has been recently recognised by influential authors such
6

Chapter 2: Literature Review and Practical Basis

as Rodgers as "one of the Communicative Language Teaching spin-off approaches"
(2001), some authors contemplate the paradigm within an even wider perspective:
according to Stryker and Leaver (1997), for instance, CBI "is a truly and holistic approach
to foreign language education … (which) can be at once a philosophical orientation, a
methodological system, a syllabus design for a single course, or a framework for an entire
program of instruction".
The benefits of the approach are directly or indirectly associated with an extensive body of
research from a variety of fields. Strong empirical support for CBI can be found in second
language acquisition research, in teacher training studies and in cognitive psychology, as
well as in the outcomes documented by successful programs in a variety of contexts and
levels of instruction (Adamson, 1993; Dupuy, 2000).
A synthesised, though still accurate revision of the benefits perceived in view of the
different areas is included in Grabe and Stoller (1997); the conclusions derived from these
findings lead these authors to suggest seven rationales for CBI that can be summarised in
the following points:

i. In content-based classrooms, students are exposed to a considerable amount of
language while learning content. This incidental language should be
comprehensible, linked to their immediate prior learning and relevant to their
needs. [. . .] In content-based classrooms, teachers and students explore interesting
content while students are engaged in appropriate language-dependent activities [. .
.]. The resultant language learning activities, therefore, are not artificial or
meaningless exercises.
ii. CBI supports contextualised learning; students are taught useful language that is
embedded within relevant discourse contexts rather than as isolated language
fragments. [. . .] Thus, CBI allows for explicit language instruction, integrated with
content instruction, in a relevant and purposeful context.
iii. [. . .] The use of coherently developed content sources allows students to call on
their own prior knowledge to learn additional language and content material.
iv. [. . .] In content-based classroom, students are exposed to complex information and
are involved in demanding activities which can lead to intrinsic motivation.
7

Chapter 2: Literature Review and Practical Basis

v. CBI [. . .] lends itself well to strategy instruction and practice, as theme units
naturally require and recycle important strategies across varying content and
learning tasks.
vi. CBI allows greater flexibility and adaptability to be built into the curriculum and
activity sequences.
vii. CBI lends itself to student-centered classroom activities.
Classification of CBI and current teaching context
With the definition of CBI examined, this section deals with the classification of CBI and
locates where the teaching approach guiding the American Studies course stand among
those types. In accordance with the primary aim of the course, which is to provide students
with fundamental knowledge about the American country and civilization (Country Studies

Division, 2007), Content-Based Instruction was employed as the main teaching approach
throughout the course – and the question here is which model? Overall, there has been little
consistency in the CBI models classified and applied. Through a careful review of related
literature, this paper adopts the classification used by Met (1999). Met (2007) has specified
two contrary facets of the approach as follows:

CONTENT-BASED LANGUAGE TEACHING:
A CONTINUUM OF CONTENT AND LANGUAGE
INTEGRATION
Content-Driven


Content is taught in L2.

Content learning is priority.

Language learning is secondary.

Content objectives determined by course goals or
curriculum.

Teachers must select language objectives.

Students evaluated on content mastery.

Language-Driven


Content is used to learn L2.

Language learning is priority.

Content learning is incidental.

Language objectives determined by L2 course goals or
curriculum.
Students evaluated on content to be integrated.

Students evaluated on language skills/proficiency.

Figure 1 - A continuum of content and language integration (Met, 2007)
8

Chapter 2: Literature Review and Practical Basis

Nevertheless, in collating this bi-continuum with the actual method's features, it is
observed that the way the course is carried out falls to the grey area between the two ends.
This observation is proven most explicitly in the way students are expected to be evaluated
– with around 10% of the total assignment grade reserved for the command of English and
presentation skills (Dang, 2008). Therefore, a more detailed and thus more meaningful
continuum of the Content-Based Instruction method is needed to describe precisely how
the courses have been and are being taught in terms of content and language integration.
These models, according to Met, are diverse in characteristics and are put into a continuum
which illustrates the relative role of content and language with the content-driven program
at one end and the language-driven program at the other. These CBI models differ in the
degree to which outcomes determine priorities in designing instruction from the general to
the specific: units, lessons, tasks and activities. The continuum is summarised in the figure
below.

CONTENT-BASED LANGUAGE TEACHING:

A CONTINUUM OF CONTENT AND LANGUAGE
INTEGRATION


Content-Driven

Language-Driven
Total
Immersion
Partial
Immersion
Sheltered
Courses
Adjunct
Model
Theme-Based
Courses
Language classes
with frequent use
of content
for language
practice
Figure 2 - A continuum of content and language integration (Met, 2007)
The different models are briefly elaborated as follows.
i. Total immersion
The Macmillan English Dictionary (ELT Terms) defines immersion as an approach that
. . . tries to reproduce the experience of being in the L2 country in class using these
techniques:
 No textbooks or notebook, only authentic materials.
9

Chapter 2: Literature Review and Practical Basis

 No grading of the language.
 Using several teachers who may have conversations between themselves, or
ungraded conversations with the students.
 Only using L2.
 No grammar or vocabulary explanations.
Total immersion programs, taking precedence from the 1960s French immersion
experiment in Canada, use the target language as a teaching tool, surrounding, or totally
"immersing" students in the second language.
ii. Partial immersion
This model reflects the total immersion model to a lesser extent, hence its name.
iii. Sheltered courses:
Case, Ndura and Righettini (2005) cited Echevarria, Vogt, and Short (2004) to explain the
ideas of sheltered courses as follows (emphasis added):
. . . the emphasis on teaching language first and then content is what separates content-based
instruction from the closely related sheltered-content instruction. That is, within a content-based
model, the teacher may create exercises or assignments that focus on teaching a particular feature of
language, whereas in a sheltered model, the emphasis is on teaching content by adapting the
language levels of grade-level texts first. Assignments meant to teach only language and absent
from the larger focus on content would not be included in a sheltered model.
iv. Adjunct model
According to Davies (2003), in his specific teaching contexts:
Adjunct classes are usually taught by ESL teachers. The aim of these classes is to prepare
students for "mainstream" classes where they will join English L1 learners. Adjunct classes
may resemble EAP or ESP classes where emphasis is placed on acquiring specific target
vocabulary; they may also feature study skills sessions to familiarise the students with
listening, note taking and skimming and scanning texts. Some adjunct classes are taught
during the summer months before regular college classes begin, while others run

concurrently with regular lessons.
v. Theme-based courses
10

Chapter 2: Literature Review and Practical Basis

Theme based courses are usually found in EFL contexts. These course can be taught by an
EFL teacher or team taught with a content specialist. The teacher(s) can create a course of
study designed to unlock and build on their own students' interests and the content can be
chosen from various topics (Davies, 2003).
vi. Language classes with frequent use of content for language practice:
The name is self-explanatory. In these classes, the main focus is language teaching. For
language practice, class teachers use selected content as inputs.
Among the models above, the actual instruction model seems to fit in most with the
Sheltered Courses as the latter is defined by Echevarria, J., Vogt, M.E., & Short, D. (2004)
(cited in Short, D. & Himmel, J., 2007) as shown above.
Its neighbor, the adjunct model, can be refuted as being noted by Davies (2003) as "[its]
emphasis is placed on acquiring specific target vocabulary" and "they may also feature
study skills sessions to familiarise the students with listening, note taking and skimming
and scanning texts." These two characteristics are too distant from the course's objectives
(Country Studies Division, 2007).

11

Chapter 2: Literature Review and Practical Basis

1.1.2. The presentation assignments
Student presentations are a common part of many courses at colleges and universities as
they are one of the ways to improve learning of course material. The potential benefits of
student presentations include greater class interaction and participation, increased interest

in learning, new perspectives not covered otherwise, and improvement in communication
and presentation skills.
Purpose
The presentation assignment has two major purposes: first, it provides a framework for
students to apply the different skills they are learning in an environment that encourages
interaction with others. Second, it provides opportunities for students to create and share
their personal interpretations of knowledge learned with an audience (Spencer & Bartle-
Angus, 2000).
Advantage
According to Essberger (2007), asking students to give presentations has the following
advantages:
 it gives the presenting student a good opportunity to practise unaided speaking
 it gives the other students good listening practice
 it increases the presenting student's confidence when using English
 it can be good practice for the real situation for those students who may actually
need to give presentations in English in their professional lives
 it is an excellent generator of spontaneous discussion
Besides, presentation assignments have many important outcomes. Based on Spencer &
Bartle-Angus (2000) 's research, first, students are able to work from their intellectual
strengths, drawing on resources and background knowledge that may not be traditionally
highly valued in an academic setting. Students often comment on how much they
appreciate being able to use their artistic talents or their love of music to help them to
create an interpretation of the text.
Second, students take responsibility for their own learning and use their ideas to enhance
the understanding of their group and of the class. Through extended opportunities to share
ideas, students build new understandings that create a new representation of the text.
12

Chapter 2: Literature Review and Practical Basis

Third, because of the collaborative nature of the groups, students have the opportunity to
consider the text from a variety of perspectives, making it more likely that a student will
make sense of the text.
Another benefit of the presentation assignment is increased motivation and interest in the
class. In general, students enjoy the opportunity to work with their peers and to create a
response that reflects their thinking.
Finally, the presentation assignment creates an authentic learning environment. Students
must work cooperatively with others who have varying backgrounds, intellectual strengths,
and values to create a meaningful response for a community of their peers. Students
control much of what occurs in the process. They select a text, they negotiate meaning
through interaction with others, and they develop a way of presenting the meaning of the
text in a new medium.
A particular problem and justification of peer-evaluation and report/reflection assignment
As shown above, students can gain knowledge not only from the research they and other
students perform, but also by observing the other presenters' strengths and weaknesses to
develop better communication and presentation skills. However, despite the positive
aspects of using student presentations in the classroom, some students may show resistance
to do extra work, have fear in public speaking, and display boredom while sitting through
others' presentations if they are not engaged with the experience. Therefore, such students
may have generally negative beliefs about giving classroom presentations.
Moreover, in addition to the expected potential benefits of class presentations for
presenters, the question is whether the audience (non-presenting students) benefits from
class presentations. It is hoped and expected that non-presenting students in the class could
also benefit from student presentations. These potential benefits for non-presenting
students include learning different perspectives about the course material and improving
communications skills by observing others. As with any presentation, the challenge is to
get non-presenting students to pay attention and to be engaged in the learning experience.
One way to overcome this challenge is to ask non-presenting students to evaluate the
presentations (peer-evaluations). It is believed that peer-evaluations could be a good way
to get non-presenting students involved and engaged in the presentations in order to get the

13

Chapter 2: Literature Review and Practical Basis

most benefit from the learning experience. Specifically, asking students to list what they
learn from presentations through taking notes – and comment on the strengths and
weaknesses of each presentation – will promote (or force) greater involvement with the
presentations. As a result of being actively engaged in the presentation, the students should
benefit much more than if they had merely been passive viewers.
In their recent research, Girard, Pinar, & Trapp (2011) 's conclusions have helped justify
this belief:
First, teachers could improve students' learning of class materials by using class
presentations as part of their course assignments. Class presentations seem to be beneficial
for students regardless of gender and/or university.
Second, peer-evaluations of student presentations enhance students' engagement with the
presentations and promote active learning.
Third, students perceive that presentations contribute to the improvement of public
speaking skills.
Fourth, teachers do not need to be concerned about gender differences in student
perceptions of presentation benefits. Peer-evaluation of student presentations should be
incorporated as part of a course's presentation requirement.
Assignments in the case of ULIS-VNUH American Studies courses
Given these theoretical foundation, the assignments for a typical American Studies course
include group presentations on a certain topic and individual reflection essays of group
members on that same presentation and topic. Other groups have to write
reports/evaluation on the presentation performances of their classmates as well. Both the
presentation and the reflection are graded (Dang, 2008). Since the last school year of 2010-
2011, another assignment has been integrated into the syllabus – which is essentially a
series of mini tests, called "quizzes". However, due to its relative novelty and experimental
nature, the assignment is not considered in the scope of this paper.

On a side note, beside presentation, the other assignment is known under several names in
different class – report, reflection, evaluation, comment sheet, etc. Nonetheless, for
14

Chapter 2: Literature Review and Practical Basis

convenience, this research report would use "reflection/report assignment", or simply,
"reflection assignment", with the intent to encompass all varieties of the name.