the relationship between teacher cognition and classroom practices

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING
HO CHI MINH CITY OPEN UNIVERSITY

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN
TEACHER COGNITION AND CLASSROOM PRACTICES
IN ENGLISH SPEAKING INSTRUCTION:
A CASE STUDY AT EUROPE VIETNAM AMERICA
ENGLISH LANGUAGE CENTER

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of Master of Arts (TESOL)

Submitted by NGUYEN MINH HOANG
Supervisor: Dr. NGUYEN THUY NGA

HO CHI MINH City, May 2017


MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING
HO CHI MINH CITY OPEN UNIVERSITY
------------------------------

NGUYEN MINH HOANG

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN
TEACHER COGNITION AND CLASSROOM PRACTICES
IN ENGLISH SPEAKING INSTRUCTION:
A CASE STUDY AT EUROPE VIETNAM AMERICA
ENGLISH LANGUAGE CENTER

Major:

TESOL

Major number:

60 14 01 11

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of Master of Arts (TESOL)

Supervisor:
NGUYEN THUY NGA, Ph.D.

HO CHI MINH City, May 2017


i

STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP
I certify that this thesis entitled “The relationship between teacher cognition and
classroom practices in English speaking instruction: A case study at Europe
Vietnam America English Language Center” is my own work.
Except where reference is made in the text of the thesis, this thesis does not contain
material published elsewhere or extracted in whole or in part from a thesis by
which I have qualified for or been awarded another degree or diploma.
No other person’s work has been used without due acknowledgement in the main
text of the thesis.
This thesis has not been submitted for the award of any degree or diploma in any
other tertiary institution.

Ho Chi Minh City, 2017

Nguyen Minh Hoang


ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to thank this section for giving me the opportunity to thank my
loved ones.
Dr. Nguyen Thuy Nga has been and will always be my VIP. Her instruction,
guidance, and support mean a great deal to me. I would like to thank her for
everything she has done for me and, above all, for being part of my life.
My special thanks goes to the participants for their generous help and
support. Without them, this thesis would not be possible.
I would also like to thank all the teachers at the Graduate school of Ho Chi
Minh City Open University. Their lessons have helped me grow, not only in my
teaching career but also in my life.
The last, but most important, ones are my parents and younger sister. I love
them more than I can say. Thank you for being the world to me.


iii

ABSTRACT
Thinking and actions do not always converge. In teaching, what teachers
think they should do is not always executed in their classrooms. Therefore, this
study set out to investigate the relationship between teacher cognition (i.e. thinking,
knowledge, and beliefs) and classroom practices. One teacher teaching English for
International Communication at Europe Vietnam America English Language

Center participated in this case study. Multiple data collection strategies including
one semi-structured interview, five classroom observations, and one stimulated
recall interview were utilized to investigate the relationship between her cognition
and classroom practices in English speaking instruction. The findings showed that
her cognition was both consistent and inconsistent with her classroom practices.
Consistencies were found in all four themes of the study including accuracy and
fluency, speaking elements, teacher roles, and teacher feedback. Inconsistencies
were seen in fluency-focused activities, teacher roles, and feedback in fluencyfocused activities. The study revealed two reasons for the inconsistencies. First, her
classroom practices were inconsistent with her ideal-oriented cognition derived
from the semi-structured interview, but consistent with her reality-oriented
cognition inferred from the rationale behind her classroom practices. Second, she
was not fully aware of the impact of one cognition on her classroom practices.
Based on these findings, several recommendations for research on teacher
cognition and the teaching of speaking (including textbook writers, teacher
educators, and teachers) were made.


iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Statement of authorship ........................................................................................... i
Acknowledgements ...................................................................................................ii
Abstract ................................................................................................................... iii
Table of contents ..................................................................................................... iv
List of figures ........................................................................................................... ix
List of tables .............................................................................................................. x
Transcript conventions ........................................................................................... xi
Abbreviations..........................................................................................................xii

Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION ................................................................................ 1
1.1 Background to the study .................................................................................. 1
1.2 Rationale for the study ..................................................................................... 3
1.3 Research aims .................................................................................................. 6
1.4 Research questions ........................................................................................... 6
1.5 Theoretical framework ..................................................................................... 6
1.6 Research significance....................................................................................... 6
1.7 Structure of the thesis....................................................................................... 7

Chapter 2: LITERATURE REVIEW .................................................................... 8
2.1 Definitions of teacher cognition....................................................................... 8
2.2 Definitions of classroom practices ................................................................... 9
2.3 Previous studies on the relationship between teacher cognition
and classroom practices ....................................................................................... 10


v

2.3.1

Language

areas

(grammar,

vocabulary,

and

pronunciation) .................................................................................................. 10
2.3.2 Language skills (reading, writing, and speaking) ................................... 13
2.3.3 Studies on the relationship between teacher cognition and
classroom practices in Vietnam ....................................................................... 14
2.4 Four themes of English speaking instruction ................................................. 18
2.4.1 Accuracy and fluency ............................................................................. 19
2.4.2 Speaking elements .................................................................................. 22
2.4.3 Teacher roles ........................................................................................... 23
2.4.4 Teacher feedback .................................................................................... 24
2.5 Chapter summary ........................................................................................... 27

Chapter 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ...................................................... 29
3.1 Research setting ............................................................................................. 29
3.2 Participant ...................................................................................................... 30
3.3 Research design ............................................................................................. 31
3.4 Data collection strategies ............................................................................... 32
3.4.1 Semi-structured interview ....................................................................... 34
3.4.2 Classroom observations .......................................................................... 38
3.4.3 Stimulated recall interview ..................................................................... 38
3.5 My roles ......................................................................................................... 40
3.6 Data collection procedure .............................................................................. 41
3.7 Data analysis .................................................................................................. 42
3.8 Validity and reliability ................................................................................... 43


vi

3.9 Chapter summary ........................................................................................... 44

Chapter 4: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION ....................................................... 45

4.1 The teacher’s cognition and classroom practices in terms of
accuracy and fluency............................................................................................ 45
4.1.1 Cognition in terms of accuracy and fluency ........................................... 45
4.1.2 Classroom practices in terms of accuracy and fluency........................... 46
4.1.3 The relationship between the teacher’s cognition and
classroom practices in terms of accuracy and fluency .................................... 55
4.1.4 Discussion of the teacher’s cognition and classroom
practices in terms of accuracy and fluency ...................................................... 56
4.2 The teacher’s cognition and classroom practices in terms of
speaking elements ................................................................................................ 59
4.2.1 Cognition in terms of speaking elements................................................ 59
4.2.2 Classroom practices in terms of speaking elements ............................... 59
4.2.3 The relationship between the teacher’s cognition and
classroom practices in terms of speaking elements ......................................... 60
4.2.4 Discussion of the teacher’s cognition and classroom
practices in terms of speaking elements .......................................................... 61
4.3 The teacher’s cognition and classroom practices in terms of
teacher roles ......................................................................................................... 62
4.3.1 Cognition in terms of teacher roles ......................................................... 62
4.3.2 Classroom practices in terms of teacher roles ........................................ 63
4.3.3 The relationship between the teacher’s cognition and
classroom practices in terms of teacher roles .................................................. 65


vii

4.3.4 Discussion of the teacher’s cognition and classroom
practices in terms of teacher roles ................................................................... 67
4.4 The teacher’s cognition and classroom practices in terms of
teacher feedback ................................................................................................... 68

4.4.1 Cognition in terms of teacher feedback .................................................. 68
4.4.2 Classroom practices in terms of teacher feedback .................................. 69
4.4.3 The relationship between the teacher’s cognition and
classroom practices in terms of teacher feedback............................................ 73
4.4.4 Discussion of the teacher’s cognition and classroom
practices in terms of teacher feedback ............................................................. 74
4.5 Summary and discussion of the key findings about the
teacher’s cognition and classroom practices related to four themes
of this study .......................................................................................................... 75
4.5.1 Summary of the key findings .................................................................. 75
4.5.2 Discussion of the key findings ................................................................ 77
4.6 Chapter summary ........................................................................................... 78

Chapter 5: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................. 79
5.1 Conclusion ..................................................................................................... 79
5.2 Contributions and limitations ......................................................................... 80
5.2.1 Contributions .......................................................................................... 80
5.2.2 Limitations .............................................................................................. 82
5.3 Recommendations .......................................................................................... 83
5.4 Suggestions for further studies....................................................................... 84
5.5 Chapter summary ........................................................................................... 85


viii

REFERENCES ....................................................................................................... 86
APPENDIX 1 ........................................................................................................... 93
APPENDIX 2 ........................................................................................................... 94
APPENDIX 3 ........................................................................................................... 99
APPENDIX 3 ........................................................................................................... 99

APPENDIX 4 ......................................................................................................... 101
APPENDIX 5 ......................................................................................................... 113
APPENDIX 6 ......................................................................................................... 117
APPENDIX 7 ......................................................................................................... 124


ix

LIST OF FIGURES
Page
Figure 2.1 The relationship among four themes of English speaking
instruction used in this study .................................................................................... 26
Figure 2.2 Theoretical framework for this study .....................................................27
Figure 4.1 The relationship between the participant’s cognition and
classroom practices related to four themes of English speaking
instruction .................................................................................................................76


x

LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table 2.1 A summary of previous studies on the relationship
between teacher cognition and classroom practices ................................................ 16
Table 2.2 Non-communicative activities (audio-lingual drills) ............................... 19
Table 2.3 Communicative activities......................................................................... 21
Table 3.1 The interview guide for the semi-structured interview ............................ 37
Table 4.1 The relationship between the teacher’s cognition and
classroom practices in terms of accuracy and fluency ............................................. 55
Table 4.2 The relationship between the teacher’s cognition and

classroom practices in terms of speaking elements ................................................. 61
Table 4.3 The relationship between the teacher’s cognition and
classroom practices in terms of teacher roles........................................................... 66
Table 4.4 The relationship between the teacher’s cognition and
classroom practices in terms of teacher feedback .................................................... 73


xi

TRANSCRIPT CONVENTIONS
T

teacher

S, S1, S2

student’s pseudonym

W

writer

I

semi-structured interview

O

observation

SR

stimulated recall interview

…

pause

<>

interpretive comment

italics

translation of original speech

[…]

skipped text


xii

ABBREVIATIONS
EFL

English as a Foreign Language

ESL

English as a Second Language

EVA

Europe Vietnam America English Language Center

L1

First Language

L2

Second Language


1

Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION
In this chapter, the background to research on teacher cognition will be
presented first. Following Borg (2003, 2006), the term “teacher cognition” will be
used in this study to refer to teacher thinking, knowledge, and beliefs
interchangeably. Then the rationale for conducting this research paper will be
described. After that, I will state the aims, questions, theoretical framework, and
significance of this study. At the end of this chapter, the structure of the thesis will
be provided.
1.1 Background to the study
In this section, I briefly summarize the history and reviews of research on
teacher cognition to provide the background to the study.
As learning and teaching are inextricably woven, students’ achievements are
undoubtedly influenced by their teachers’ instruction. Studies on teaching over the

past few decades have attempted to delineate this mutual relationship. In the 1970s,
the process-product model proposed by Dunkin and Biddle (1974) was the
predominant approach in research on teaching. It aimed to depict to what extent
teachers’ behaviors were causatively linked to students’ learning outcomes. This
model failed to take account of the influence of teachers’ cognition on their
classroom practices (Borg, 2006). Then a new shift in studies on teaching arose in
the report of a conference organized by the National Institute of Education in the
United States in 1975 which stated: “If, however, teaching is done, and in all
likelihood, will continue to be done by human teachers, the question of relationships
between thought and action becomes crucial” (National Institute of Education,
1975, p. 1). This approach emphasized the need to study teachers’ cognitive
processes for a more comprehensive understanding of their classroom behaviors.
Teachers were no longer considered as passive technicians who only transmitted
prescribed knowledge to students but rather thoughtful decision-makers who
reflected on what they thought, knew, and believed for effective instructional
behaviors.


2

In the late 1970s, the primary foci of studies on teacher cognition were
“teachers’ planning, judgments and decision-making” (Borg, 2006, p. 8). In the
1980s, the most dominant concept investigated by research on teacher cognition
was knowledge with practical knowledge (Elbaz, 1981) and pedagogical content
knowledge (Shulman, 1987) receiving most attention (Borg, 2009). In the 1990s,
knowledge, specifically craft knowledge (Grimmett & Mackinnon, 1992), teacher
knowledge (Fenstermacher, 1994), and subject-matter knowledge (Shulman &
Quinlan, 1996), continued to be examined. Teacher beliefs were also investigated in
this decade. According to Borg (2006), the most comprehensive review of studies
on teacher beliefs was done by Pajares (1992). In this review, he decomposed the

term “educational beliefs” into different foci referred to as “educational beliefs
about” for subsequent research on teacher beliefs.
Studies on L2 teacher cognition have been conducted since the mid-1990s.
Borg (2003) reviewed 64 studies following this direction. The review found that
two investigated curricular areas were grammar and literacy instruction. In terms of
context, the U.S. had the largest number of studies on teacher cognition and most of
the studies focused on ESL instruction. Borg (2006) did another review of over 180
studies on language teacher cognition. They were conducted in L1, ESL, and EFL
teaching contexts. The review showed that research on language teacher cognition
was fragmented. Most of the studies were conducted in the U.S.; the others came
from other countries such as Hong Kong, the U.K., and Australia. The studies were
split into three broad groups: pre-service teachers, in-service teachers, and specific
curricular domains. The foci of the first two groups were teachers’ experiences,
beliefs, decisions, and knowledge whereas those of the third one were grammar and
literacy (reading and writing). Borg’s (2003, 2006) reviews revealed that most
studies on language teacher cognition were implemented in the U.S., and only two
curricular areas (grammar and literacy) were investigated.
In Borg’s (2006) framework for teacher cognition research (see appendix 1),
teachers’ schooling and professional coursework influence teacher cognition; and


3

teacher cognition and classroom practice have a dialectical relationship mediated by
contextual factors. Due to this nature, Borg (2003, p. 86) proposed three themes for
studies on language teacher cognition including “(a) cognition and prior language
learning experiences, (b) cognition and teacher education, and (c) cognition and
classroom practice”. In terms of curricular areas, most studies on language teacher
cognition focused on grammar teaching whereas very few investigated speaking
instruction (Borg, 2009). Indeed, in Borg’s (2015) bibliography of research on

language teacher cognition from 2010 to 2015, there were only three studies related
to speaking instruction including those of Dinçer and Yeşilyurt (2013),
Baleghizadeh and Nasrollahi Shahri (2014), and Chen and Goh (2014). In Vietnam,
only a limited number of studies on teacher cognition were conducted such as those
of Le (2011), Nguyen (2014), and Tran (2015).
In summary, Borg’s (2003) three themes for research on language teacher
cognition, scant attention paid to speaking instruction, and a scarcity of such studies
in Vietnam have provided the background that helps me delineate the rationale for
the study in the next section.
1.2 Rationale for the study
In this section, I describe the rationale for the study by stating some gaps in
research on language teacher cognition, discussing issues of the current EFL
teaching situation in Vietnam and of English speaking instruction at my current
workplace, i.e. Europe Vietnam America English language center (EVA), and
presenting my own motivation for conducting this research paper.
The background to this study have provided me with two research gaps.
First, very few studies examined language teacher cognition related to speaking
instruction. Second, there was scarce teacher cognition research in Vietnam. This
study attempts to fill in these two gaps by investigating teacher cognition in English
speaking instruction in Vietnam.
As Vietnam has been integrating itself into the ASEAN community and other
international organizations, teaching and studying English effectively are


4

indispensable. In Vietnam, English is a compulsory subject in high schools and one
of the three compulsory tests on the National High School Graduation Examination.
It is also one of the required subjects in almost all undergraduate curricula. The
teaching of English has been being guided by the National Foreign Language 2020

Project. This project was aimed at enabling graduates of vocational schools,
colleges, and universities to use foreign languages (primarily English)
independently and confidently in communicating, studying, and working in an
integrated, multilingual, and multicultural environment (Prime Minister, 2008). The
six-level Vietnam foreign language proficiency framework was used for educational
curricula and materials, instructional plans, and assessment criteria for four skills
(listening, speaking, reading, and writing). These aims show that English instruction
needs to enable students to use English communicatively, and speaking is obviously
a crucial skill. However, high school teachers primarily focus on teaching
vocabulary, grammar, and reading for testing purposes whilst they pay little
attention to communication skills (Van, 2013). Indeed, speaking is completely left
out on the English test of the National High School Graduation Examination
although it is included in high school English textbooks. In certain undergraduate
English courses, speaking was also omitted from tests (Nguyen, Fehring, & Warren,
2015). This scant attention given to speaking is one of the issues of the current EFL
teaching situation in Vietnam. Others could be classified into three primary
categories including teachers (being disqualified, not communicating in English
often, receiving poor salary, and having too much workload), students (having low
motivation, unequal English levels, and insufficient self-study time), and facilities
(poor libraries, noisy and crowded classrooms, and lack of teaching equipment) (Le,
2013; Van, 2013; Nguyen, Fehring, & Warren, 2015). These issues could make it
difficult for teachers to execute their EFL teaching cognition in classroom practices.
At EVA, the situation is relatively different. English communication courses
are aimed at helping students communicate in English successfully, and speaking
receives a great deal of attention. The World Link textbooks used for instruction


5

include a lot of speaking activities such as discussions, role-plays, interviews,

surveys, and debates; therefore, students have plenty of opportunity to communicate
with one another. Each class has 10 to 20 students. All of the classrooms are
equipped with air-conditioners and CD players. Despite these advantages, speaking
instruction also encounters some issues. First, the center does not have enough
overhead projectors for teachers; therefore, most lessons are conducted with only a
whiteboard and a CD player. Second, students have mixed English levels. While
some of them can speak English quite fluently, others can barely communicate in
English. This makes it difficult for teachers to organize speaking activities in their
classes. Third, some students have very relaxed attitude towards their study and
often skip their classes. As a result, it is hard for teachers to help them catch up with
their classmates in the next class sessions. These issues could influence how
teachers’ cognition is reflected in their classroom practices in English speaking
instruction.
Currently, I am teaching English for communication at EVA. Developing
students’ speaking skills is one of the primary goals of communication classes there.
I also devote a lot of time to English speaking instruction in my classes. In my
teaching, I realized that my beliefs in how speaking should be taught were not
always executed in my classroom practices. For example, I firmly believe that
technology, specifically the Internet, should be utilized to motivate my students to
speak English; however, the reality is that I hardly ever exploit it in my classes. This
could be explained by the fact that the center has only three projectors, and teachers
who wish to use have to reserve them. It also takes about 10 minutes to get the
projector in place before teaching. This inconvenience has gradually made me
indifferent to using technology in my classes. Inconsistencies between my cognition
and classroom practices in English speaking instruction have motivated me to
conduct this study. I would like to understand how knowledge, thinking, and beliefs
of other teachers influence their classroom practices, which will help me become


6

more conscious of and consequently better monitor the impact of the so-called
“teacher cognition” on my own classroom practices.
In summary, the limited volume of research on language teacher cognition
in Vietnam, the scant attention paid to speaking instruction, some issues of the
current EFL teaching situation in Vietnam and of English speaking instruction at
EVA, and my own motivation have explained the need to conduct this study with
two research aims as follows.
1.3 Research aims
First, this study aims to investigate the cognition and classroom practices in
English speaking instruction of one EFL teacher at EVA. Second, it examines the
relationship between them. These two aims lead to the two research questions in the
next section.
1.4 Research questions
This study will attempt to answer the two questions below.
1. What are the cognition and classroom practices in English speaking
instruction of one EFL teacher at EVA?
2. What is the relationship between her cognition and classroom practices in
English speaking instruction?
1.5 Theoretical framework
This study is guided by Borg’s (2006) framework for research on language
teacher cognition (see appendix 1). In this framework, teacher cognition and
classroom practices have a dialectical relationship mediated by contextual factors.
1.6 Research significance
First, this research helps the participant reflect upon her cognition and
classroom practices. She would become more conscious of why and how she makes
and executes particular pedagogical decisions in her class. Second, the study is
useful for teacher educators in that it would provide them with insights into how
teachers actually integrate what they have learned into their own classroom
practices. Based on these understandings, teacher educators would be able to make

7

their courses more practically-oriented. Third, there is little research investigating
teacher cognition in English speaking instruction; this study helps inform literature
on this domain. Last, the study provides me with useful information on the gap
between theories and practice of English speaking instruction as well as what causes
this.
1.7 Structure of the thesis
This study includes five chapters as follows:
Chapter one is the introduction of the study. In this chapter, I present the
background to the study followed by the rationale for the study, two research aims,
two research questions, the theoretical framework, and the significance of the study.
Chapter two presents the review of literature on definitions of teacher
cognition, definitions of classroom practices, previous studies on the relationship
between teacher cognition and classroom practices, and four themes of English
speaking instruction used as initial categories for investigation purposes in this
study.
Chapter three describes the methodology employed in this study. In this
chapter, I present the research setting, participant, research design, data collection
strategies, my roles, data collection procedure, data analysis, and validity and
reliability of the findings.
Chapter four presents the findings of the study and the discussion of the
findings. In this chapter, the participant’s cognition, her classroom practices, and the
relationship between her cognition and classroom practices related to four themes of
English speaking instruction used in this study are shown and discussed.
Chapter five concludes this study. It provides the conclusion, contributions,
and limitations of the study as well as some recommendations and suggestions for
further studies.

8

Chapter 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
In this chapter, definitions of “teacher cognition” and “classroom practices”
will be presented first. Then I will review previous studies on the relationship
between teacher cognition and classroom practices. These studies will be followed
by a review of some themes of English speaking instruction used as initial
categories for investigation purposes in this study.
2.1 Definitions of teacher cognition
In this part, I present (1) some terms related to studies on teacher cognition,
(2) definitions and characteristics of “teacher cognition”, (3) two types of teacher
cognition, and (4) what “teacher cognition” refers to in this study.
Studies on teacher cognition were overwhelmed by a multiplicity of concepts
and terminology (Clark & Peterson, 1986; Borg, 2006). Two important ones were
knowledge and beliefs. Elbaz (1981) emphasized the importance of practical
knowledge which was derived from practice and used to handle practical issues. In
the mid-1980s, teacher knowledge was a dominant term used in studies on teacher
cognition. Shulman (1986) proposed seven kinds of teacher knowledge in which
pedagogical content knowledge was believed to influence teacher cognition
research the most (Borg, 2006). Shulman (1986) defined pedagogical content
knowledge as the transformation of teachers’ pedagogy and knowledge of the
subject matter into a comprehensible form for teaching and learning. Later on,
Parares (1992) made an attempt to distinguish the term “beliefs” from other
psychological constructs. It was defined as “an individual judgment of the truth or
falsity of a proposition, a judgment that can only be inferred from a collective
understanding of what human beings say, intend, and do” (Parares, 1992, p. 316).
However, according to Meijer, Verloop, and Beijaard (2001), it was not
possible to separate knowledge from beliefs because they were closely connected in

teachers’ minds. Furthermore, too many specialized terminologies confused the
characteristics of teacher cognition (Borg, 2006). Because of these, Borg (2003, p.
81) used the term “teacher cognition” to “refer to the unobservable cognitive


9

dimension of teaching – what teachers know, believe, and think”. In Borg’s (2006,
p. 283) framework, “teacher cognition” was used as an inclusive term for a
multitude of psychological constructs including “beliefs, knowledge, theories,
attitudes, assumptions, conceptions, principles, thinking, and decision making”.
Borg (2006, p. 35) defined teacher cognition more thoroughly as “an often tacit,
personally-held, practical system of mental constructs held by teachers and which
are dynamic – i.e. defined and refined on the basis of educational and professional
experiences throughout teachers’ lives”. This definition depicts some distinct
characteristics of teacher cognition. First, teacher cognition is tacit because it is held
inside teachers’ minds; therefore, it can be accessed only by virtue of reflection.
Second, each teacher has his/her own cognition. Third, teacher cognition is practical
because it shapes and is shaped by classroom practices. Last, teacher cognition is
continually developed by teachers’ educational and experiential knowledge.
According to Borg (2006, pp. 279-280), there were two types of teacher
cognition including “ideal-oriented cognitions”, i.e. cognitions “expressed in
relation to ideal instructional practices”, and “reality-oriented cognitions”, i.e.
cognitions “in relation to instructional realities”. In this study, I would like to
understand teacher cognition in depth; therefore, I will try to identify both “idealoriented cognitions” and “reality-oriented cognitions” of the participant.
Following Borg (2003, 2006), to avoid the multiplicity of and overlap
between concepts and terminology in studies on teacher cognition, the term “teacher
cognition” will be used in this study as an inclusive term to refer to teachers’
thinking, knowledge, and beliefs interchangeably.
2.2 Definitions of classroom practices

Borg (2003, p. 81) defined “classroom practices” as “what teachers do in the
language teaching classroom”. Nishino (2009, p. 9) proposed the same definition,
but she emphasized that “classroom practices” referred to not only what teachers do
but also “the interaction among students and teachers”. She also named a number of
things that teachers do in their classrooms as follows:


10

what teaching methodologies they use, what roles they play and ask their
students to play, what activities and materials they use, and how they deal
with classroom management issues, such as interpersonal interactions,
communication, assessment, and various pedagogical situations. (Nishino,
2009, p. 9)
In Borg’s (2006) framework, classroom practices and teacher cognition have
a two-way relationship mediated by some contextual factors. Thus, “classroom
practices” will be used in this study to refer to what language teachers do in their
classrooms, which are shaped by their cognition and contextual factors and
influence their cognition in return.
In summary, the definitions of teacher cognition and classroom practices
have shown that they are closely connected. Due to this nature, a number of studies
have investigated the relationship between them. However, some of them found that
teacher cognition was not always consistent with classroom practices (Farrell &
Lim, 2005; Phipps & Borg, 2009; Yue’e & Yunzhang, 2011; Melketo, 2012;
Gerami & Noordin, 2013). The following section will review different views that
previous studies held on the relationship between teacher cognition and classroom
practices.
2.3 Previous studies on the relationship between teacher cognition and
classroom practices
In this part, previous studies on the relationship between teacher cognition

and classroom practices will be presented. They will be split into three groups:
language areas (grammar, vocabulary, and pronunciation), language skills (reading,
writing, and speaking), and studies in Vietnam. Studies in listening instruction are
not included because I did not have access to them.
2.3.1 Language areas (grammar, vocabulary, and pronunciation)
Most of the studies in this direction concentrated on grammar teaching. For
example, Farrell and Lim (2005) carried out a study to investigate the relationship
between teachers’ beliefs and classroom practices in grammar instruction. Two


11

experienced primary teachers in Singapore participated in this case study. The data
was collected by means of pre-study interviews, two non-participatory classroom
observations (one per teacher) with pre-lesson and post-lesson interviews, and
students’ compositions. One of the teachers in the study was found to have grammar
teaching beliefs being utterly congruent with her classroom practices. However,
there was some inconsistency between grammar teaching beliefs and classroom
practices of the other teacher. The factors that caused the discrepancy included time
constraints and her long-time respect and admiration for deductive grammar
teaching. Phipps and Borg (2009) conducted another study to examine the
relationship between teachers’ beliefs and classroom practices in grammar
instruction. Three practicing teachers in Turkey participated in this study. The
instruments included semi-structured interviews, non-participatory classroom
observations (three per teacher), and post-observation interviews. The authors
divided the teachers’ beliefs into two groups: core beliefs and peripheral beliefs.
Peripheral beliefs were defined as “specific beliefs about language learning (and)
theoretically embraced” whereas core beliefs were “a more generic set of beliefs
about learning (and) experientially ingrained” (pp. 380, 388). The study found that
while the teachers’ peripheral beliefs were not always consistent with their

classroom practices, their core beliefs were. Some contextual factors leading to the
inconsistencies between their peripheral beliefs and classroom practices included
students (their expectations, level, responsiveness, and motivation), classroom
management, assessment, and the need to monitor errors. This study provided
useful compartmentalization of teachers’ beliefs for subsequent research. The data
of this study was richer than that of the study of Farrell and Lim (2005) since it was
obtained from a number of semi-structured interviews and classroom observations.
Ezzi (2012) implemented another study on the relationship between teachers’
beliefs and classroom practices in grammar instruction. 80 in-service primary and
secondary teachers in Yemen took part in this study. The instruments included a
questionnaire and non-participatory observations of 12 participants’ classroom