Nghiên cứu những chiến lược để phát triển kỹ năng nói tiếng anh của sinh viên không chuyên người dân tộc thiểu số tại trường cao đẳng sư phạm vùng tây bắc việt nam

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES & INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES

***********************

TRẦN THỊ NGỌC MAI

AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE STRATEGIES FOR
DEVELOPING ENGLISH SPEAKING SKILL OF NON-MAJOR
ETHNIC MINORITY STUDENTS AT A TEACHER TRAINNING
COLLEGE IN THE NORTHWESTERN AREA OF VIETNAM
(Nghiên cứu những chiến lược để phát triển kỹ năng nói Tiếng Anh của sinh viên
không chuyên người dân tộc thiểu số tại trường Cao đẳng Sư phạm
vùng Tây Bắc Việt Nam)

M.A. MINOR PROGRAMME THESIS

Field: English Teaching Methodology
Code: 60140111

HANOI - 2017


VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES & INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES

***********************

TRẦN THỊ NGỌC MAI

AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE STRATEGIES FOR
DEVELOPING ENGLISH SPEAKING SKILL OF NON-MAJOR
ETHNIC MINORITY STUDENTS AT A TEACHER TRAINNING
COLLEGE IN THE NORTHWESTERN AREA OF VIETNAM
(Nghiên cứu những chiến lược để phát triển kỹ năng nói Tiếng Anh của sinh viên
không chuyên người dân tộc thiểu số tại trường Cao đẳng Sư phạm
vùng Tây Bắc Việt Nam)

M.A. MINOR PROGRAMME THESIS

Field: English Teaching Methodology
Code: 60140111
Supervisor: Dr. Huỳnh Anh Tuấn

HANOI - 2017


DECLARATION
I hereby certify the thesis entitle ‘an investigation into the strategies for
developing English speaking skill of non-major ethnic minority students at a
teacher training college in the Northwestern area of Vietnam’ is my own study in
the fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts at University of
Languages and International Studies, Vietnam National University, Hanoi.

Hanoi, September 2017

Tr n Th Ng

i

M i


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to express my heartfelt gratitude to my supervisor, Dr. Huynh
Anh Tuan, who is willing to devote his time to offer me professional guidance and
practical comments on my research. If there is not his valuable suggestions, careful
and detailed critical comments, this study will not be fulfilled. Also, my deepest
gratitude is extended to my parents as well as friends for their support and
encouragement throughout my thesis. Finally, this research could not have been
conducted without the cooperation of the non-major ethnic minority students at
Dien Bien teacher training college during the process of data collection.

ii


ABSTRACT
The present study is conducted in the hope of finding out: (1) the types of
strategies non-major ethnic minority successful and unsuccessful learners at a
teacher training college in the Northwestern area of Vietnam use to develop their
speaking skill (henceforth referred to as speaking strategies) and (2) the relationship
between their speaking learning strategies and their oral language proficiency. In
order to seek answers to the two research questions centering on these two issues, a
descriptive survey method was applied. A questionnaire and some interviews were
utilized to collect the data. The questionnaire which consisted of 28 items was built
from Oxford‘s Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL) to elicit the ethnic
minority students‘ use of str tegies for developing spe king skill. The interviews
onsisted of 6 questions involving students‘ n me, attitudes, study methods,
perceptions and study hours of interviewees to get more understanding of the

re sons behind the students‘ le rning str tegies hoi es. Thirty six students, who
were classified as successful, satisfactorily successful and unsuccessful took part in
the survey and eight students were chosen to participate in the interviews after
completing the questionnaire.
The findings of this study revealed that some strategies were more frequently
used by learners than the others. Moreover, there were similarities in choosing
memory strategies, cognitive strategies and social strategies for improving the
le rners‘ spe king skill nd significant differences in the frequency of the use of
compensation strategies, metacognitive strategies and affective strategies among
student groups. Besides, successful and satisfactorily successful students used more
strategies than unsuccessful students. The results also presented some successful
and unsuccessful students were reported using strategies not listed in the
questionnaire. The final finding is that language learning strategies are related to
successful and unsuccessful non-major ethnic minority students‘ or l English
proficiency to some extent.

iii


TABLE OF CONTENTS
DECLARATION ........................................................................................................ i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ....................................................................................... ii
ABSTRACT .............................................................................................................. iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS .......................................................................................... iv
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS .................................................................................. vii
LIST OF TABLES .................................................................................................. viii
PART A: INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................1
1. Rationale ..............................................................................................................1
2. Objectives of the study ........................................................................................2
3. Research questions ...............................................................................................3

4. Methods of the study ...........................................................................................3
5. Scope of the study ................................................................................................3
6. Significance of the study .....................................................................................4
7. Organization of the study.....................................................................................4
PART B: DEVELOPMENT .......................................................................................5
CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW ....................................................................5
1.1. Language learning strategies ............................................................................5
1.1.1. Definitions of language learning strategies ................................................5
1.1.2.

Classifications of language learning strategies .......................................6

1.1.3. The differences between language learning strategies and language use
strategies .............................................................................................................10
1.2. Speaking skill ..................................................................................................12
1.2.1. Definition of speaking ..............................................................................12
1.2.2. Speaking strategies ...................................................................................13
1.2.3. Components of second language speaking competence ..........................13
1.2.4.

Speaking approaches.............................................................................15

1.3. Relationship between language learning strategy use and language
proficiency .............................................................................................................17
1.4. Language Learning Strategies and English Majors ........................................18
1.5. Previous studies ..............................................................................................20
iv


1.5.1. Previous studies on language learning strategies .....................................20

1.5.2. Previous studies on speaking strategies ...................................................21
1.6. Summary .........................................................................................................24
CHAPTER 2: METHODOLOGY ............................................................................25
2.1. Research questions ..........................................................................................25
2.2. Research method: Survey ...............................................................................25
2.2.1. Introduction ..............................................................................................26
2.2.2. Types of survey research: Descriptive survey..........................................26
2.2.3. Survey research designs: Cross-sectional design .....................................27
2.2.4. Steps in carrying out a survey: 7 steps .....................................................28
2.2.5. Sampling ...................................................................................................31
2.2.6. Pilot study .................................................................................................33
2.2.7. The outcomes of the pilot study ...............................................................34
2.2.8.

Summary ...............................................................................................36

2.3. Setting of the study .........................................................................................37
2.4. Participants......................................................................................................37
2.5. Data collection instruments: Questionnaire & Interview ...............................40
2.5.1. Questionnaire............................................................................................40
2.5.2. Interview (for interview questions see Appendix 13) ..............................43
2.6. Data collection procedure ...............................................................................45
2.7. Data analytical framework ..............................................................................46
2.8. Data analysis procedure ..................................................................................47
2.9. Summary .........................................................................................................48
CHAPTER 3: DATA ANALYSIS ...........................................................................50
3.1. Introduction .....................................................................................................50
3.2. Data analysis ...................................................................................................50
3.2.1. Questionnaire data analysis (for investigating the types of speaking
strategies used between successful, satisfactory successful and unsuccessful

students) ..............................................................................................................50
3.2.2. Interview data analysis .............................................................................58

v


3.2.3. Questionnaire data analysis (for finding out the relationship between
l ngu ge le rning str tegies nd students‘ or l English profi ien y)………….62
3.3. Summary ............................................................................................................68
CHAPTER 4: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION ......................................................69
4.1. Findings ..........................................................................................................69
4.1.1. Kinds of language learning strategies for developing English
speaking skill used by successful and unsuccessful ethnic minority students
............................................................................................................................69
4.1.2. Rel tionship between l ngu ge le rning str tegies nd students‘ or l
English proficiency.............................................................................................74
4.2. Discussion .......................................................................................................75
PART C: CONCLUSION .........................................................................................79
1. Summary ............................................................................................................79
2. Implications .......................................................................................................82
3. Limitations and suggestions for further studies .................................................82
REFERENCES ..........................................................................................................84
APPENDIX 1: ........................................................................................................... I
APPENDIX 2: .......................................................................................................... I
APPENDIX 3: ............................................................................................................ II
APPENDIX 4: ............................................................................................................ II
APPENDIX 5: ...........................................................................................................III
APPENDIX 6: .......................................................................................................... IV
APPENDIX 7: ......................................................................................................... VII
APPENDIX 8: ............................................................................................................ X

APPENDIX 9:

............................................................................................... XIII

APPENDIX 10 ...................................................................................................... XIV
APPENDIX 11: .................................................................................................... XVII
APPENDIX 12: ....................................................................................................... XX
APPENDIX 13: ................................................................................................. XXXII

vi


LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
ESL: English as a second language
LLS: Language learning strategy
LLSs: Language learning strategies
SD: Standard deviations
SPSS: Statistical Package for the Social Science
SILL: Strategy Inventory for Language Learning

vii


LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Seven-stage survey research process .......................................................... 31
Table 2: Strategies for survey sampling .................................................................... 34
Table 3: Three sample size estimates ........................................................................ 35
T ble 4: Summ rizes the entire result ronb h‘s lph ........................................... 38
Table 5: Strengths and weaknesses of tape-recording and note-taking ................... 45
Table 6: Speaking strategy at six categories of language learning strategy used

between successful, satisfactorily successful and unsuccessful students ................. 52
Table 7: Memory strategies used by successful, satisfactorily successful and
unsuccessful students ................................................................................................ 53
Table 8: Cognitive strategies used by successful, satisfactorily successful and
unsuccessful students ................................................................................................ 53
Table 9: Compensation strategies used by successful, satisfactorily successful and
unsuccessful students ................................................................................................ 54
Table 10: Metacognitive strategies used by successful, satisfactorily successful and
unsuccessful students ................................................................................................ 55
Table 11: Affective strategies used by successful, satisfactorily successful and
unsuccessful students ................................................................................................ 56
Table 12: Social strategies used by successful, satisfactorily successful and
unsuccessful students ................................................................................................ 56
Table 13: Overall speaking strategies between successful, satisfactorily successful
and unsucessful students ........................................................................................... 57
Table 14: ANOVA results for the language learning strategies used by learners with
different English proficiency..................................................................................... 58
T ble 15: Students‘ s ores nd their le rning str tegy use t six

tegories of LLSs ...... 64

Table 16: Students‘ s ores nd their memory strategy use ....................................... 64
Table 17: Students‘ s ores nd their ognitive str tegy use ..................................... 65
Table 18: Students‘ s ores nd their ompens tion str tegy use .............................. 65
Table 19: Students‘ s ores nd their metacognitive strategy use ............................. 66
Table 20: Students‘ s ores nd their ffe tive str tegy use ...................................... 67
Table 21: Students‘ s ores nd their so i l strategy use ........................................... 67

viii

PART A: INTRODUCTION
This part provides an overview of the current study. It starts with reasons for
choosing the research topic. Then, objectives and research questions of the study are
shown. Next, methods and scope of the study are discussed. After that significance
of the study is clarified. Finally, the outline of the study is presented.
1. Rationale
There is no doubt that speaking plays an important role in the language
learning process. Hence, among the four language skills speaking is claimed to be at
the heart of second language learning, (Egan 1999: 277). Moreover, Nunan (1999)
states that success in learning a language is measured in terms of the ability to carry
out a conversation in the language. However, spoken language production is often
considered one of the most difficult aspects of language learning (Brown & Yule,
1983). Pinter (2006) also sees that learning to speak is viewed as the greatest
challenge for all language learners to truly grasp. Thus, how to improve speaking
proficiency for students seems to be a crucial question among instructors.
A common comment drawn among ethnic minority students in Dien Bien
context is that they are able to understand what they read and write although they
sometimes may make mistakes in writing and understand a paragraph wrongly; yet
they find arduous to express their feelings and ideas through oral language. They
like to speak in their mother tongue when they interact to their friends. Also,
minority learners feel afraid of making mistakes in English speaking so they often
find hard to get enough experience with English in English class. As a result, they
fail to obtain speaking skills which lead to low marks in speaking.
‘Teachers open the doors, but you must enter by yourself’ is an old Chinese
proverb. It seems true when the change in favor of learning and teaching placed
importance on learner-centered approach rather than the teacher-centered one.
Teachers provide their students with good opportunities to gain knowledge and
learners know how to apply that knowledge to their own studying in order to be
more successful. Wenden and Rubin (1987) found that some learners were more

successful than others since they use learning strategies more effectively.

1


Furthermore, learning strategies are considered to be ― n extremely powerful
le rning tool‖ (O‘M lley, Ch mot, Stewner-Manzanares, Kupper, and Russo,
1985:43). This ‗tool‘ is ble to help students over ome the problems they f e in
their language learning journey. Nonetheless, most of ethnic minority students often
ignore appropriate strategies that they are guided by their teachers or rarely apply
those strategies in their learning.
There goes an old proverb which states: “Give a man a fish and he eats for a
day. Teach him how to fish and he eats for a lifetime‖. When applied to the
language teaching and learning field, this proverb probably means that if students
are provided with strategies, they will manage their own learning. This suggests that
using language learning strategies in learning process need to be encouraged.
There has been a limitation in the number of studies on the second language
learning of ethnic minority students in Vietnam. Study by Tran Thi Phuong Hoa
(2011) focused on ethni minority students‘ beliefs about English language learning
and the study by Le Ngoc Oanh (2009) investigated into differences of reading
strategy use between Kinh and Thai students. Until now, there has been one study
carried out by Do Thi Anh Thu (2017) on learner autonomy of ethnic minority in
Northwest region, Vietnam. However, there have not been any studies which were
conducted to discover and clarify strategies that were used by ethnic minority
students in improving their speaking skills. With high interest in this area, the
author of this paper decided to do a research with the hope of finding out the
speaking strategies used by successful learners, then, apply them to train
unsuccessful learners to assist learners in developing their speaking skill. As Rubin
(1975:42) st tes th t ‗if we knew more bout wh t the "su essful le rners" did,
we might be able to teach these strategies to poorer learners to enhance their

su ess re ord‘.
2. Objectives of the study
Unsuccessful non-major ethnic minority students may find it troublesome to
participate into speaking activities in classroom. In order to improve their
communicative ability, the search for learning strategies that are used by successful

2


and unsuccessful non-major ethnic minority learners are required. The objectives of
this paper are to:
(1) explore the kinds of language learning strategies for developing
English speaking skill that successful and unsuccessful non-major ethnic
minority students at Dien Bien teacher training college report that they use
(2) investigate the relationship ( if any) between successful and unsuccessful
non-major ethnic minority students‘ oral English proficiency and their
language learning strategies.
3. Research questions
To serve the above-mentioned objectives, the following questions will be dealt
with:
1. What kinds of language learning strategies do successful and unsuccessful
non-major ethnic minority students at Dien Bien teacher training college
report that they use to develop English speaking skill?
2. To what extent is the language learning strategies related to successful and
unsuccessful

non-major

ethnic

minority

students‘ oral

English

proficiency?
4. Methods of the study
The subjects for this study were the first-year non-major ethnic minority
students at Dien Bien teacher training college. A descriptive survey was conducted
to achieve the objectives of the present research. Data were collected through the
analysis of the questionnaire and student interviews. Then, they were compared,
analyzed and synthesized both qualitatively and quantitatively.
5. Scope of the study
The current study is carried out among the first year non-major ethnic
minority students who are classified as successful and unsuccessful. Concerning the
scope of the study, the following issues should be taken into consideration. First, the
focus of the investigation is on learning strategies which were used by ethnic
minority students to develop their speaking skills. Second, the study explores the

3


relationship between their speaking learning strategies and their oral language
proficiency.
6. Significance of the study
This study should be of potential interest to language learners who desire to
have effective learning strategies for developing their English speaking skill to
become successful learners. Besides, the study clarifies learning strategies which
were applied. In addition, it helps learners see that learning strategies are effective

language learning tools. Moreover, important implications are discussed not only to
r ise le ners‘ w reness of the use of spe king le rning str tegies but lso to help
teacher encourage their students to use and share strategies with other students.
7. Organization of the study
The study is divided into three main parts: Introduction, Development and
Conclusion.
Part A is the Introduction which provides information about the rationale, purpose,
research questions, methods, scope, significance and organization of the study.
Part B is the Development which is sub-divided into three chapters.
Chapter 1, Literature review, discusses the theoretical background in the light of
which the research matters will be discussed.
Chapter 2, Methodology of the research, describes the nuclear method used to
investigate the research matters
Chapter 3, Findings and discussions, shows the results of the study and provides
answers to the research questions
Part C is the Conclusion which summarizes the overall study and proposes some
implications as well as suggests for other related studies.

4


PART B: DEVELOPMENT
CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW
This chapter mainly focuses on the theoretical background of the study. It
begins with some brief discussion on how previous scholars define and classify
language learning strategy. Then the differences between language learning
strategies and language use strategies will be indicated. This is followed by a review
of related literature concerning speaking skill including definition of speaking and
speaking strategies, components of second language speaking competence and
speaking approaches. Then the relationship between language learning strategy use

and language proficiency is described. A detailed review of research on Language
Learning Strategies and English Majors is pointed out. The chapter ends with some
comments on previous studies of LLSs and speaking strategies with regards to the
characteristics of participants, methods of data collection, and results.

1.1. Language learning strategies
This section presents issues of language learning strategies in terms of
definition and classification. Besides, the differences between language learning
strategies and language use strategies are pointed out briefly and clearly.
1.1 .1. Definitions of language learning strategies
Griffiths (2008:83) points out, ―the on ept of l ngu ge le rning str tegy h s
been notoriously diffi ult to define.‖ Over the l st few de des, there are different
definitions on language learning strategies provided by various researchers and
scholars. However, this thesis focuses on definitions by Rubin (1975), O‘M lley
and Chamot (1990) and Oxford (1990).
As a pioneer in this field, Rubin (1975: 43) proposes that ‘the techniques or
devices which a learner may use to acquire knowledge’. (cited in Giffiths, 2004:2).
O‘M lley nd Ch mot (1990:1) des ribe le rning str tegies s ‘special thoughts or
behaviours that individuals use to help them comprehend, learn, or retain new
information’. Slightly different from these two definitions, Oxford (1990:8) sees
5


that language learning strategies are ‘specific actions taken by the learner to make
learning easier, faster, more enjoyable , more self-directed, more effective, and
more transferrable to new situations’. These definitions seem to draw the same
characteristic: language learning strategies are what can assist learners in improving
their knowledge to reach their language goal.
According to Giffiths (2004), Rubin provides a very broad definition of
learning strategies. Therefore, Rubin‘s definition is too hard to cover.

In O‘M lley nd Ch mot‘s definition, lthough it clearly presents the goals:
‗strategies are to help students achieve comprehension and learning new
information‘ (Lan, 2005:17), it does not emphasize on aspects of language learning
or solve problems faced in the language learning.
Comp red with other definitions, Oxford‘s on ept is m rked to be one of
the most comprehensive definitions (Lan, 2005:17). Oxford puts more focus on the
aspects of learning and use of information, ‗as well as the changed nature of
learning when learning is enhanced by strategies‘ (L n, 2005:17). Besides, ‗spe i l
tions‘ th t re introduced in her definition are to help learners achieve their target
language. Ramesh (2009) also agrees that ‗LLS are essential in learning a language
in order to help learners improve their language learning process through conscious
actions.‘
As noted bove, Oxford‘s definition is the most appropriate to guide the
current study because it is clear and understandable.
1.1.2. Classifications of language learning strategies
There are several different ideas on the classifications of LLSs in the field of
second or foreign language learning. Classifications of LLSs that encourage to
develop speaking skill are conducted by Bialystok (1978), O‘M lley nd Ch mot
(1990) and Oxford (1990).
Bialystok (1978) classifies language learning strategies into four categories.
First is functional practicing such as completing a transaction at a store. Second is
monitoring and formal practicing such as verbal drills found in a second language

6


class. Third is inferencing. It may be used with implicit linguistic knowledge and
knowledge of the world. She draws a clear model which emphasizes on cognitive
and metacognitive strategies. Nonetheless, the social/affective components were not
mentioned in her model. Thus, this classification is not suitable for the current study

which tends to explore the LLSs for improving speaking skill.
O‘M lley nd Ch mot (1990) presented a classification including three
major strategies: metacognitive strategies, cognitive strategies and social/affective
strategies. Metacognitive strategies refer to strategies applied to plan for learning
and thinking about the learning process, monitoring production and comprehension
as well as evaluation after the completion of an activity whilst cognitive strategies
involve the direct manipulation of learning techniques such as: repetition,
resourcing,

grouping,

note

taking,

deduction,

substitution,

elaboration,

summarization, translation, transfer and inferencing. Socio/affective strategies
mainly include the learner in communicative interaction with another person. A
distinctive point in this classification is that their study based on theories in
cognitive science. Addition lly, L n (2005:21) st tes ‗their classification was not
only theory-based but also has been fairly accepted by both teachers and researchers
in the field‘. However, their

tegory rem ins limited. This is pointed out by Cohen

(1996:11) ‗The O‘M lley nd Ch mot (1990) t xonomy fo used on ognitive nd
metacognitive strategies, and only touched the surface of social and especially
affective strategies.‘
A common weakness in the classification by both Bialystok and O‘M lley
and Chamot is limitation of affective strategies. Kr shen‘s (1982:31) affective filter
hypothesis posits that affective variables relate to success in second language
acquisition. Thus, affective strategies have been recognized as an essential role in
learning language.
In spite of the fact that these taxonomies provide first insights for language
learning strategies to help learners to be successful in speaking, the observable
weakness of the classification may be unsuitable for this research. Hence, it is

7


ne ess ry to develop more ppropri te l ssifi tion. Oxford (1990:8) sees th t ‗it is
easy to see how language learning strategies stimulate the growth of
communicative competence in general ‘. Thus, Oxford (1990), whose strategy
classification is chosen for the current study, divides strategies into two major
classes: direct and indirect.
Direct strategies which are composed of memory, cognitive and
compensation strategies refer to the purpose of language. Firstly, memory strategies
are strategies that help learners store and retrieve new information needed for
communication. Secondly, cognitive strategies are those that allow language
learners to understand and produce new language by numerous different means
easier. Thirdly, compensation strategies assist learners in overcoming their
knowledge limitations in language use in order to communicate authentically.
On the other hand, indirect trategies are grouped into metacognitive,
affective and social strategies. They are considered as "contribute indirectly but
powerfully to learning" (Oxford 1990:11-12). First, metacognitive strategies are

used for focusing, organizing and evaluating learning process. Second, affective
strategies help learners develop self-confidence and enable them to control feelings,
motivations, and attitudes related to language learning. Third, social strategies
‗provide increased interaction and more empathetic understanding, two qualities
necessary to reach communicative competence’(Oxford, 1990: 14).
Generally speaking, compared with other categories, Oxford‘s t xonomy is
―perhaps the most comprehensive classification of learning strategies to date‖
(Ellis, 1994: 539). In the same vein, her classification is appreciated to be the most
detailed and systematic strategy taxonomy to date (Radwan, 2011). It would be of
great importance and interest to look insight into 46 out of 62 strategies from her
whole strategy classifi tion for developing spe king. Oxford‘s l ssifi tion of
LLSs is the nuclear model and stream of this study.

8


Item

Strategy

Group

Class

1

Placing new words into a context

Memory

Direct

2

Representing sounds in memory

Memory

Direct

3

Structured reviewing

Memory

Direct

4

Repeating

Cognitive

Direct

5

Formally practising with sounds and writing
systems

Cognitive

Direct

6

Recognizing and using formulas and patterns

Cognitive

Direct

7

Recombining

Cognitive

Direct

8

Practising naturalistically

Cognitive

Direct

9

Using resources for receiving and sending messages

Cognitive

Direct

10

Reasoning deductively

Cognitive

Direct

11

Translating

Cognitive

Direct

12

Transferring

Cognitive

Direct

13

Switching to the mother tongue

Compensation

Direct

14

Getting help

Compensation

Direct

15

Using mime or gesture

Compensation

Direct

16

Avoiding communication partially or totally

Compensation

Direct

17

Selecting the topic

Compensation

Direct

18

Adjusting or approximating the message

Compensation

Direct

19

Coining words

Compensation

Direct

20

Using a circumlocution or synonym

Compensation

Direct

21

Overviewing and linking with already known
material

Metacognitive

Indirect

22

Paying attention

Metacognitive

Indirect

23

Delaying speech production to focus on listening

Metacognitive

Indirect

24

Finding out about language learning

Metacognitive

Indirect

25

Organizing

Metacognitive

Indirect

26

Setting goals and objectives

Metacognitive

Indirect

27

Identifying the purpose of a language task

Metacognitive

Indirect

28

Planning for a language task

Metacognitive

Indirect

29

Seeking practice opportunities

Metacognitive

Indirect

30

Self-monitoring

Metacognitive

Indirect

31

Self-evaluating

Metacognitive

Indirect

32

Using progressive relaxation, deep breathing, or
meditation

Affective

Indirect

33

Using music

Affective

Indirect

34

Using laughter

Affective

Indirect

9

35

Making positive statements

Affective

Indirect

36

Taking risks wisely

Affective

Indirect

37

Rewarding yourself

Affective

Indirect

38

Listening to your body

Affective

Indirect

39

Using a checklist

Affective

Indirect

40

Writing a language learning diary

Affective

Indirect

41

Discussing your feelings with someone else

Affective

Indirect

42

Asking for correction

Social

Indirect

43

Cooperating with peers

Social

Indirect

44

Cooperating with proficient users of the new
language

Social

Indirect

45

Developing cultural understanding

Social

Indirect

46

Be oming w re of others‘ thoughts nd feelings

Social

Indirect

1.1.3. The differences between language learning strategies and language use
strategies
According to Cohen et al.,(1996), strategies for language learning and
language use have been receiving ever-growing attention in the areas of foreign
language teaching and learning. Language educators who come from various contexts
look for ways in order to help learners become more successful in learning language
as well as communicating with foreigners. They are concerned about language
learning and language use strategies be use ‗the application of foreign language
learning and use strategies is viewed as one vehicle for promoting greater
success.‘(Cohen et l., 1996:1). However, it is necessary to make clear the difference
between language learning strategies and language use strategies. Therefore, this
section is written to provide clarification for differences between them.
This part will begin by pointing out the difference in definition. Then, it will
move on to consider distinction between classification of language use strategies
and taxonomy of language learning strategies.
Cohen (1996:2) stresses th t ‗Whereas language learning strategies have an
explicit goal of assisting learners in improving their knowledge in a target language,
language use strategies focus primarily on employing the language that learners
have in their current interlanguage.‘ The author of this thesis sees that Cohen has
10

distinguished language learning strategies form language use one clearly and
understandably.
Strategies for language learning and language use can be differentiated
according to classification. While language learning strategies are composed of
cognitive strategies, meta-cognitive strategies, affective strategies and social
strategies, language use strategies include retrieval strategies, rehearsal strategies,
cover strategies, and communication strategies. (Cohen, 1996, 2005)
Cognitive strategies involve both the identification, retention, storage or
retrieval of words, phrases, and other elements of the second language. These
strategies help learners understand new language by many different means. Metacognitive strategies deal with pre-assessment and pre-planning, on-line planning
and evaluation, and post-evaluation of language learning activities and language use
events. These strategies are actions that help learners control their learning process
by coordinating the planning, organizing and evaluating of the learning process.
Affective strategies are those strategies that help students regulate their emotions,
motivation, and attitudes. Social strategies include the actions which assist learners
in interacting with other learners and with native speakers.
Retrieval strategies are those strategies that learners use to call up language
material from storage. These strategies require learners to remember the correct verb
in its appropriate tense or retrieve the meaning of a word when it is heard or read.
Rehearsal strategies are strategies for practicing target language structures before
using them. Cover strategies are those strategies that learners use to create the
impression that they have control over material when they do not. Communication
strategies are used to by learners to convey a message that is both meaningful and
informative for the listener or reader when they don‘t h ve all the language they need.
As the discussion mentioned above, the difference between language
learning strategies and language use strategies is quite clear and concrete. This
study is conducted to explore language learning strategies in English speaking in

11

order to provide useful insights into improving English learning. The results lead to
the development of teaching and learning English.
1.2. Speaking skill
This section presents speaking skill including definitions, speaking strategies,
components of second language speaking competence and speaking approaches.
1.2.1. Definition of speaking
First nd foremost, it is ne ess ry to l rify the term ‗spe king‘. Speaking is
the primary means for talking and communicating. There have been numbers of
definitions that appear in different times.
According to Oxford Advanced Dictionary, speaking is ‘to express or
communicate opinions, feelings, ideas, etc, by or as talking’. Chaney and Burk
(1998:13) state that speaking is ‗the process of building and sharing meaning
through the use of verbal and non-verbal symbols, in a variety of contexts’. Brown,
Burns & Joy e in Florez (1999:1) see th t spe king ‗is an interactive process of
constructing meaning that involves producing and receiving and processing
information’. From the definitions above, the writer concludes that speaking not
only expresses our ideas but also transfers information to others.
In another study, speaking is defined by B iley (2005:48) s ‗the language
skill is generated by the learners in oral form.‘ A ording to Thornbury (2005:iv),
the definition of speaking concentrates on communication ability between people
that take turns in exchanging particular information. Another definition by
Brown

nd Yule (2001:25) of spe king is ‗to express the needs – request,

information, service, etc’. Based on these definitions , the author of this study sees
that speaking is the language skill of exchanging information and constructing
meaning with others orally.

Person lly spe king, I prefer Brown nd Yule‘s idea presented in their book‗Dis ourse n lysis‘ (1983). They s y th t ‗speaking can also serve one of two main
functions: transactional (transfer of information) and interactional (maintenance of
social relationships)‘( ited in S l h, 2015). They put more focus on the function of

12


speaking which is to express social relations and personal attitudes. By using this
productive skill, people can express their ideas, feeling and purpose on any topics.
Because of its great function, speaking seems to be one of the most important skills
in language learning.
1.2.2. Speaking strategies
Spe king str tegies re defined by O‘M lley nd Ch mot (1990) s ‗the tools
for active, self-directed involvement needed for developing second language
ommuni tive

bility‘ ( ited in Susie, 2011). Another definition by Larenas

(2011:87) of speaking strategies is ‗ tions nd/or pro edures th t students pply in
order to omplete n or l ommuni tive t sk su essfully.‘ A ording to Faerch
and Kasper (1983), speaking strategies defined s ―potenti lly ons ious pl ns for
solving what to an individual presents itself as a problem in reaching a particular
ommuni tive go l‖ (cited in Brown 2000: 127).
1.2.3. Components of second language speaking competence
There are some good models of second language speaking competence
which are created by great researchers. It would be a serious omission, if Canale
and Swain (1980) and (Hymes, 1971) were not mentioned in this field. Hymes
points out that the interaction of grammatical, psycholinguistic, sociolinguistic, and
probabilistic language components is essential to enhance speaking skills effectively
while Canale and Swain (1980) suggest that communicative competence is

composed of four components: grammatical competence, discourse competence,
sociolinguistic competence and strategic competence (cited in Abbaspour,
2016:146). It is clear that these researchers give their own components of speaking
competence by terminologies that are abstract and difficult for readers to
understand.
The author of the current study is in favor of Goh & Burns‘ omponents of
second language speaking competence since they are presented scientifically and
logically. Moreover, it is useful for teachers to become more knowledgeable about

13


what speaking competence involves. Thus, this model is applicable to the present
study.
Goh & Burns (2012:53) give three areas of speaking competence which are
briefly outlined below:

Knowledge of Language and Discourse requires mastering the sound patterns
of the language, knowing the grammar and vocabulary of the language and
understanding how stretches of connected speech are organised, so that they are
socially and pragmatically appropriate.
Core Speaking Skills means developing the ability to process speech quickly
to increase fluency (e.g. speech rate, chunking, pausing, formulaic language,
discourse markers). It also involves being able to negotiate speech (e.g. building on
previous

utterances,

monitoring

understanding,

repairing

communication

breakdown, giving feedback), as well as managing the flow of speech as it unfolds
(e.g.

initiating

topics,

turn-taking,

signalling

intentions,

opening/closing

conversations).
Communication Strategies involves developing cognitive strategies to
compensate for limitations in language knowledge (e.g. circumlocution,
paraphrasing, gestures, word coinage, approximation, avoidance), metacognitive
strategies (e.g. planning in advance what to say, thinking consciously about how

14

you say something), and interaction strategies (e.g. asking for clarification/
repetition, reformulating, rephrasing, and checking comprehension).
1.2.4. Speaking approaches
This study is grounded on two approaches that were discussed by Richards in
1990, namely indirect approach and direct one for the aim to determine the
approach that is more suitable in teaching speaking.
1.2.4.1. Indirect approach –CLT
Ri h rds (1990:76) st tes ‗an indirect approach, in which conversational
competence is seen as the product of engaging learners in conversational
interaction.‖ According to Schmidt (1991), the indirect approach, which was the
typical teaching practice for communicative language teaching (CLT) in the late
1970s and the 1980s, involves setting up and managing lifelike communicative
situations in the language classroom (e.g., role plays, problem-solving tasks, or
informationgap activities) and leading learners to acquire communicative skills
incidentally by seeking situational meaning (cited in Dörnyei and Thurrell
1997:141). It sees that CLT has placed more importance on fluency and ability to
communicate in a number of settings as well as in a great deal of ways.
This approach has some advantages. As stated by Nunan (1991), the
communicative approach focuses on opportunities for learners to use the target
language in a communicative way. Moreover, Sun and Cheng (2002:68) point out
that CLT ‗emphasizes authentic language input, real-life language practice, and
creative generation of language output, is highly dependent on the situational
context.‘ More import ntly, in Vietn m ontext, CLT is

w y that encourages

learners to participate actively in meaningful interaction to exchange information
and solve problems (Brandl, 2008; Canh, 1999). By this approach, learners have
great chances to participate in activities in the classroom and exposure to English in
real-life situations.

However, the weaknesses of this approach have been mentioned by other
researchers. Medgyes (1990), discovers that communicative approach is seen to be

15