The application of “scaffolding method” into promoting english learners autonomy at an international school in hanoi – an action research project

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

NGUYEN THI THAO PHUONG

THE APPLICATION OF “SCAFFOLDING METHOD” INTO
PROMOTING ENGLISH LEARNERS' AUTONOMY
AT AN INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL IN HANOI –
AN ACTION RESEARCH PROJECT
(Áp dụng “Phương pháp giàn giáo” vào việc nâng cao tính tự chủ trong việc học Tiếng
Anh cho học sinh tại một trường quốc tế tại Hà Nội – Nghiên cứu hành động)

MINOR MASTER THESIS

Major: Language Teaching Methodology
Code: 8140231.01

HANOI 2019


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

NGUYEN THI THAO PHUONG

THE APPLICATION OF “SCAFFOLDING METHOD” INTO
PROMOTING ENGLISH LEARNERS' AUTONOMY
AT AN INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL IN HANOI –
AN ACTION RESEARCH PROJECT

(Áp dụng “Phương pháp giàn giáo” vào việc nâng cao tính tự chủ trong việc học Tiếng
Anh cho học sinh tại một trường quốc tế tại Hà Nội – Nghiên cứu hành động)

MINOR MASTER THESIS

Major:

Language Teaching Methodology
(Lý luận và phương pháp giảng dạy tiếng anh)

Code:

8140231.01

Supervisor: Dr. Pham Lan Anh

HANOI 2019


DECLARATION
I certify that the thesis entitled ―The application of ‗Scaffolding method‘ into
promoting English learners' autonomy at an International School in Hanoi –An action
research project‖ is the result of my own research for the Degree of Master of Arts at
University of Languages and International Studies, Viet Nam National University,
and that this thesis has not been submitted for any other degrees.

Signature:

Supervisor

Researcher

Pham Lan Anh

Nguyen Thi Thao Phuong

Date: 3/2019

i


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First of all, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my supervisor Dr.
Pham Lan Anh for her critical feedback and valuable guidance throughout the
process of this research.
I would also like to thank lecturers and staff of the Postgraduate Department of
University of Languages and International Studies - Vietnam National University for
their interesting lectures, precious support, guidance, and constant encouragement.
My sincere thanks also go to my colleagues of English Group, in Global
International School, who as my good friends, were always willing to help and give
me their best suggestions.
A special thank -would also go to all the students in Global School who took
part in the research. Without their participation and cooperation I would not be able to
complete this research paper.
Last but not least, my deep appreciation and gratitude to my beloved family,
especially my parents and my husband for their encouragement, inspiration and
unconditional love, which enormously helped me towards the completion of my
research.

ii


ABSTRACT
Learner autonomy, a recurrent topic in language teaching over the last three decades,
has been advocated from a pedagogical point of view and from the perspective of
philosophy. Learner autonomy is one of the most important factors leading to the
success in second language learning as well as life-long learning. In view of the
necessity of learner autonomy in the context of the foreign language classrooms, the
aim of this study is to foster autonomy of EFL learners in speaking skill by
encouraging them to take the responsibility in the learning process. This is an action
research conducted with 28 grade 10 English gifted students from class 10D at Global
International School. The goal was achieved by raising their awareness, training them
the necessary strategies, and applying proposed activities. After twelve lessons of
implementing the action plan, questionnaire and was administered to discover the
difference in the level of autonomy among the subjects. Other data collection
instruments like follow-up interviews and classroom observations were also
exploited to validate the results. The findings analyzed against a set of given criteria
revealed that after having worked with this action plan, these learners were able to
improve their autonomy as well as their spoken English. They became more aware of
how certain aspects of language work and they were able to develop their
self-confidence and stimulate their motivation to continue learning in class. This
suggests a way of gauging students‘ responsibility for their own learning and that
learner autonomy, as a life-long mode of learning, can only be achieved with the
efforts of both the teacher and the learner.

iii


TABLE OF CONTENTS

DECLARATION ........................................................................................................ i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ......................................................................................ii
ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................. iii
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES ....................................................................... vi
PART A: INTRODUCTION .................................................................................... 1
1.

Rationale for the study ...................................................................................... 1

2.

Aims and objectives of the study ...................................................................... 2

3.

Methods of study............................................................................................... 3

4.

Scope of the study ............................................................................................. 3

5.

Structure of the study ........................................................................................ 4

PART B. DEVELOPMENT ..................................................................................... 5
CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................... 5
1.1.

Learner autonomy ............................................................................................. 5

1.1.1. Definition of learner autonomy ......................................................................... 5
1.1.2. Roles of learner autonomy ................................................................................ 6
1.1.3. Characteristics of learner autonomy ................................................................ 6
1.1.4. Teacher’s roles in learner autonomy ................................................................ 7
1.2.

Speaking skill .................................................................................................. 12

1.2.1. The nature of speaking and characteristics of an effective speaking lesson .. 12
1.2.2. Autonomy in speaking skill ............................................................................. 13
1.3.

Scaffolding method ......................................................................................... 15

1.3.1. More Knowledgeable Other (MKO) ............................................................... 16
1.3.2. Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) ........................................................... 16
1.3.3. Basic scaffolding strategies for English language learner ............................. 17
1.3.4. The application of scaffolding theory in oral English teaching ..................... 17
1.4.

Review of previous studies on autonomy ....................................................... 18

CHAPTER 2: METHODOLOGY ......................................................................... 21
2.1. Research question.............................................................................................. 21
2.2. Subjects of the thesis ......................................................................................... 21
2.3. Setting ............................................................................................................... 22
2.4. Research design ................................................................................................. 25

iv

CHAPTER 3: DATA ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS ........................................... 38
PART C. CONCLUSION ....................................................................................... 52
1.

Recapitulations ................................................................................................ 52

2.

Recommendations ........................................................................................... 53

3.

Limitations ...................................................................................................... 54

4.

Suggestions for further study .......................................................................... 55

REFERENCES ........................................................................................................ 56
APPENDICES ........................................................................................................... I
APPENDIX 1 .............................................................................................................. I
APPENDIX 2 ............................................................................................................. V
APPENDIX 3 ............................................................................................................VI
APPENDIX 4 .......................................................................................................... VII
APPENDIX 5 ............................................................................................................XI
APPENDIX 6 .........................................................................................................XIV
APPENDIX 7 ....................................................................................................... XVII
APPENDIX 8 ...................................................................................................... XVIII

APPENDIX 9 .........................................................................................................XIX

v


LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES
Table 1: Characteristics of independent learning
Table 2: Students‘ attitudes and performance during the project
Table 3: The benefits of the projects to the students
Table 4: Students‘ self-evaluation of their speaking skill
Figure 1: The Learner Independence Continuum
Figure 2: Students‘ opinions on the continuity of a similar project
Figure 3: Level of students‘ involvement during the project
Figure 4: Students‘ changes in their perception of learner autonomy

vi


PART A: INTRODUCTION
1. Rationale for the study
Learner autonomy, a concept promoted by Holec (1981) and others in the context of
European language education, has become a favorite topic for analysis for the last
twenty years. In fact, people pay more attention to the process of acquiring than the
product of learner autonomy. Over the history, many great thinkers such as Galileo,
Rousseau, Dewey, Kilpatrick, Marcel, Jacotot, Payne and Quick have mentioned
about the importance of autonomy by proposing their ideas on education in different
times (Balcikanli, 2008).
Students who depend on themselves in learning speaking are more able to succeed
academically and more motivated than those who do not have effective strategies in
learning by themselves (Holec,1981).Despite being discussed worldwide, learner

autonomy remains an unfamiliar concept in Vietnam. Whether or to what extent
learner autonomy is developed and practiced in Vietnamese schools is still open to
question. Due to very limited time spent on teaching and learning pronunciation in
the classroom, it has become increasingly essential to provide them with useful
learning strategies so that they can employ in their self-study time. In this case, the
success of learning English speaking depends very much on how effectively and
autonomously the students practice self-study.
For all the reasons above, I have decided to undertake a study on students‘ autonomy
in learning English speaking at Global International School (GIS), Hanoi. Despite the
effort made to implant learner autonomy, it is still at a low level in upper secondary
school setting in Vietnam, and the students in GIS are of no exception. Even the
students who are gifted at English exhibit low responsibility in their English learning process. When asked to work in pairs and groups in speaking lessons, they
start to write down their own ideas as a long presentation or some key points and
revise their own work individually, and ready to communicate only when they are
perfectly sure of their part and their ideas. Furthermore, they are generally reluctant
to question the teacher or give their opinions.

1


An open discussion in Vietnamese with the students explicates that their low
autonomy has resulted from psychological, social and personal grounds. Their
misleading beliefs, minute confidence, restricted knowledge as well as the previous
learning experience are agreed upon as the primary causes of their passive learning
style. The beliefs and attitudes learners hold have a strong influence on their learning
behaviors. It is, therefore, essential to assist students in moving towards greater
autonomy, especially in learning speaking.
This situation urges the conduction of this research to aid students in their second
language learning and life-long learning. This is basically no easy task since
autonomy does not blossom automatically. Due to the highly complex nature of

language and language learning, augmenting autonomy in language learners often
proves to be a doubly difficult objective. Although few research have been done in
Vietnam to boost students‘ active engagement in speaking, a large number of studies
in other countries have reported favorable results in developing their students‘
autonomy. Most of them use awareness-raising activities, portfolio, self-assessment,
homework and assignment in their studies. Regarding all these practices, the present
paper is an attempt to search the current research then build an appropriate project of
actions for the English gifted students in English, GIS who have average level of
learning autonomy. The expectation is to help learners generate a sense of autonomy
in language learning, elevate the students speaking skill as well as render effective
speaking lessons.
2. Aims and objectives of the study
This research aims at:
-

identifying the current grade 10 (GIS) English gifted students‘ autonomy in

speaking skill
-

working out the appropriate scheme of actions to improve the situation

-

finding out the effectiveness of the selected activities in the action plan
In particular, it is conducted to ascertain the following objectives:

2

 What scaffolding strategies can be used to develop students’ autonomy in
speaking lessons?
 What are the attitudes of the students towards autonomy in learning English
speaking?
 How do the students improve throughout the application of scaffolding in
teaching speaking?
3. Methods of the study
As mentioned above, this is an action research to solve the problem of low level of
learner autonomy in grade 10 English gifted students, GIS. To reach the goal, an
intervention was launched into the classroom environment. It was divided into two
stages. The former consists of selected awareness-raising activities such as contract
signing, and essential speaking-strategies training activities to raise students’
awareness of the problem as well as equip them with necessary skills to acquire
more confidence in speaking skills. The latter pertains the practice of such skills in
doing their home assignments and in-class activities to habituate their speaking
practice and active engagement. After the intervention, questionnaires, interviews
and classroom observations were conducted to get the feedback. The data aims at
getting the students evaluation on the activities and more remarkably, to examine
whether they become more autonomous.
4. Scope of the study
Learner autonomy is undoubtedly vast issue in the second language learning. It
borders different aspects. However, this study touches upon only one researchable
aspect of autonomy, i.e., developing autonomy in speaking skill. In the literature,
there is a range of actions to ensure students self-directed learning; however, several
pertinent activities are adopted in consideration of the context of GIS and the small
scale of this research for the sake of limited time and students‘ low level.
Furthermore, the subjects of this study are the grade 10 students who are gifted in
English as these students often exhibit the least autonomy in learning.

3

5. Structure of the study
This paper is organized into three main parts as follows:
Part A: Introduction
This part presents the rationale, the aim, scope, method and design of the study.
Part B: Development
This part is divided into different chapters. Chapter 1 serves as the theoretical
background for the study, presenting the concepts and relevant theories. Chapter 2
gives an overview of teaching and learning situation at English group, GIS. Chapter 3
deals with the actual procedures of the study: methodology, subjects and data
collection procedures. Chapter 4 presents the finding and analysis of the data
collected.
Part C: Conclusion
This last part of the study recaps the main content of the study and deals with some
suggestions for improving students‘ autonomy in studying speaking skill. In
addition, it also poses several directions for future research.

4


PART B. DEVELOPMENT
CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW
This chapter addresses a review of the literature related to learner autonomy and
pronunciation learning and teaching. In each section, the definition or explanation of
the key terms is presented together with the studies worldwide.
1.1.

Learner autonomy
1.1.1. Definition of learner autonomy

The term ―learner autonomy‖ was first introduced formally by Henri Holec in 1981
when he wrote Autonomy and foreign language learning - his contribution to the
Council of Europe‘s work in adult education. The so-called ―father‖ of learner
autonomy, provides a broad definition which considers learner autonomy ―the ability
to take charge of one‘s own learning". Scharie and Szabo (2000), turning attention to
the aspect of attitudes, seemed to share the same interest with Holec (1981) when
they presented a persuasive analysis of the interrelationship between autonomy and
responsibility. According to the authors, autonomy is defined as ―the freedom and
ability to manage one‘s own affairs, which entails the right to make decisions as well‖
whereas responsibility is understood as ―being in charge of something, but with the
implication that one has to deal with the consequences of one‘s own actions.‖
(Scharie&Szabo, 2000: 4). They argue that autonomy and responsibility are
interrelated and both require learners‘ active involvement.
Benson (2001: 47), however, stated that it is preferable to define autonomy as the
capacity to take control of one‘s own learning, largely because the construct of
―control‖ appears to be more open to investigation than the constructs of ―charge‖ or
―responsibility.‖ In his definition, he indicated three levels of control that a learner
should take in order to develop his/her learning autonomy: ―An adequate description
of autonomy in language learning should at least recognize the importance of three
levels at which learner control may be exercised: learning management, cognitive
processes and learning content‖ (Benson, 2001: 50).

5


I am in favor of Henri Holec‘s definition of learner autonomy as learners‘ ―ability to
take charge of their own learning‖. This general but concise definition, from the
researcher‘s view, really touches upon the spirit of autonomy. It is obvious from
Holec‘s definition that an autonomous learner not only possesses a sense of

responsibility for his learning but he/she is also self-conscious of that responsibility.
All in all, in second language learning, learner autonomy is a stimulating,
multifaceted concept which can be interpreted from different viewpoints. Learners‘
autonomy encompasses not only their attitudes but also their behaviors. It is both a
process and a goal in language learning, in education and in living; therefore, to
develop learner autonomy, it is important to find a way to help students to be aware of
what they have done and further reflect on it so that they could achieve personal
awareness, process and situational awareness, and task awareness.
1.1.2. Roles of learner autonomy
Learner autonomy can be regarded as an offspring of learner-centered approach,
which is an innovative and effective one in the literature of second language learning.
The benefits of cultivating autonomy in learners have been disclosed by a variety of
researchers and practitioners. Learner autonomy can lead to increase in motivation
and cooperation as well as responsibilities in their studying process, which means
more effective learning (Deci, 1995, p.2). Furthermore, the concept of autonomy is
not restricted in school aspect. Once students acquire autonomy in learning in the
school curriculum, they slip easily into autonomy for other activities outside class. In
other words, autonomous learners evolve life-long learning and hereby they are
capable of authoring the world in which they live.
1.1.3. Characteristics of learner autonomy
Many scholars agree on the hypothesis that learner autonomy entails reflective
involvement in planning, implementing, monitoring and evaluating learning.
However, different scholars may contribute additional attributes of learner autonomy
to these core features.

6


According to Scharle and Szabo (2000), an autonomous student must have built four
blocks, such as: motivation and self-confidence, monitoring and evaluation, learning

strategies, and cooperation and group cohesion. While motivation and
self-confidence refer to the intrinsic motivation and willingness to take responsibility
in learning, cooperation and group cohesion indicates that learners should liaise with
each other in the learning process. The second and third factors cover the same notion
as the core features. Monitoring skills emphasize the need to focus on the process of
learning rather than the product. This step is followed by self-evaluation, which
means learners judge their own works as objectively as they can, acknowledging their
level of proficiency, their strong and weak points.
1.1.4. Teacher’s roles in learner autonomy
Autonomous learning must be the characteristic expected to nurture in students
with the aids from teachers. Teachers take responsibility for managing and consulting
during the process. It is not leaving students to fend by themselves or sitting students
in front of computers and hoping they will learn.
First and foremost, teachers become less of a knowledge transmitter and more
of a facilitator. Relinquishing teacher‘s control is parallel with providing sufficient
guidance to smooth learners‘ way into autonomous learning, and into developing
purposefulness and creativity in doing so (Dickinson, 1995). Teachers supervise
students in their own learning- preference discovery and create opportunities for their
experience.
Autonomous learning magnitude necessarily entails difficulties in many
aspects, and different students may have problems in different ways. To that end,
teachers are also the counselors helping students with individual obstacles. Both
facilitators and counselors provide psychology-social and technical supports, the
difference between the two is that while the former mainly works with groups, the
latter in one-to-one situations (Voller, 1997). According to Riley (1988), counseling
involves a great deal of work such as eliciting information about aims, needs and

7

wishes, helping with planning, suggesting materials and sources, taking part in
interaction, offering alternatives, listening and responding, interpreting information,
giving feedback on self-assessment, and being positive and supportive, etc.
Furthermore, facilitating and counseling learners is not just a matter of pointing them
in the right direction - it is also to do with motivation, behaviors, and practical and
emotional support. Teachers, therefore, should motivate students in acquiring
learning independence as well as language skills. Beside stimulating factors,
autonomy requires a conscious awareness of the learning process, strategies and
styles. Learner strategies are a key to and ―prerequisite‖ for learner autonomy
(Weden, 1998). Learners can take care of their own learning only when he has
become more mature and made use of the pertinent strategies. Thus, teachers have to
expedite learners to know what learning strategy is and how imperative it is in
enhancing autonomous learning.
To sum up, the teacher s function should become less dominant, but not less
important. Instead of absolving themselves of all responsibility teachers, they play
more roles than before as facilitators, counselors, motivators, awareness raisers as
well as resources in this development. This implies the ―reappraisal of teachers and
learners‘ roles' (Lynch 2001, p. 394). Autonomy inevitably involves a change in
power relationships and in both teachers‘ attitudes.
However, this change cannot occur effortlessly. It is a process and it should be
characterized as ―a continuum‖ (Voller, 1997, p. 100). In accordance with this
viewpoint, Sharle and Szabo (2000) illustrate a continuum of teacher attitudes
ranging from traditional to learner autonomy attitude and suggest that teachers should
move toward the right hand side of the continuum (teacher autonomy attitude). They
further denote that this transition should be gradual rather than abrupt and dramatic to
allow time for the involved parties to adapt themselves to the new practices. It is
worth noticing that however difficult and time- consuming the transformation will be,
it is the first priority for the teachers to modify themselves first if they expect to
change their students attitudes.

8


1.1.5. Ways to develop autonomy
As learner autonomy is so crucialin second language acquisition, scholars,
researchers and teachers have long been searching for methods to magnify this
character in learners. It is suggested that this transition must be taken through raising
awareness, changing attitudes, and transferring roles (Scharle&Szabo, 2000).
The starting stage in cultivating autonomy in learners is raising awareness of
pedagogical goals, contents and strategies (Nunan, 1997). This phase functions as an
impetus to initiate learning the second language and ―opening the learner‘s eyes to
new ways of thinking about their learning‖ (Scharle&Szabo, 2000, p. 15). It is
grounded in the belief that even when teachers provide all the necessary
circumstances and input, learning cannot happen if learner is not willing to
contribute. Thus, teachers must initially present new perspective and new experience
to learners and encourage them to think consciously in their inner learning processes.
This is a tightly-teacher-controlled stage on the consumption that learner are not yet
responsible in their learning.
However, only raising students‘ awareness cannot guarantee students‘
selfdirected learning. Once they take on new viewpoints in learning purposes,
processes and the nature of language learning, they should accustom these attitudes
and strategies introduced in the first phase. This can be done by a series of activities
in which students ―consciously practice learning strategies‖, requiring more learner
initiative and higher level of responsibility (Scharle&Szabo, 2000, p. 50).
Accordingly, repeatability in doing these activities are momentous to shape and
consolidate new beliefs and habits.
The last and simultaneously effort-intensive phase is transferring roles as the
result of a considerable change in classroom management. Transferring roles is
decisive in that ‗‗For one, learners can only assume responsibility for their learning if
they have some control over the learning process. For the other, increasing

independence may evoke and reinforce responsibility and autonomous attitudes‖

9


(Scharle&Szabo, 2000, p. 80). Teachers handle over roles that are traditionally held
by themselves. However, these loosely structured activities do not entail teacher‘s
freedom of charge. Furthermore, peer support in this environment is weightier
pushing learners in acquiring ―a capacity and willingness to act independently and in
cooperation with others, as a socially responsible person.‖ (Dam, 1995, p. 1, cited in
Lee, 1998).
Sharle and Szabo (2000) hold that this three-phase process should be seen as a
smooth process where one stage develops into the next. The activities they provide in
their book should be considered as suggestive ones since ―autonomy has to be
adapted to different cultural contexts" (Holec, 1981) and accordance with students‘
level of autonomy at different stages.
Different classroom cultures may entail different teachers‘ responsibilities and
students‘ roles, which means the borderline between the suggested activities in
changing awareness and transferring attitudes are vague. In other words, to cultivate
learner autonomy, learners should first have the right attitude towards learning and
knowledge of strategies in second language learning. Secondly, they must involve in
the learning process themselves as ―language learning depends vitally on language
use‖ (Deci, 1995). Practitioners, researchers have suggested a number of activities for
learners‘ involvement. They have reported on the effectiveness of using motivating
activities (Barrett &Dabom, 2001; Kavaliauskiene, 2003; Lucliini&Rosello, 2007);
portfolios, assignments, projects and homework (Coombe, 2001; Ali, 2000;
Malcolm, 2001; Nakayama, 2000; Kavaliauskiene, 2003), self-evaluation and peer
assessment, diary and journal keeping on strengthening their responsibility and
nourish this activities.
In short, there are three phases in culminating learner autonomy, namely raising

awareness, changing attitudes and transferring roles. The activities in each part
should be adapted in line with students‘ level of self-direction and educational milieu.
During the transition, motivation is necessaryas learning is usually most efficient and

10


rapid when the learner is motivated and attentive. A range of current perspectives has
now put motivation on a different footing, integrating psychological considerations
with social conditions. The question is how to make students like what is required.
The answer lies in the students‘ investment in studying. Even when students like the
subject, learning will not happen if they do not invest enough time, money and
energy. ―Required motivation‖ is now said to be ―more important to acknowledge the
diversity of motivations and reorient them in a more holistic and richer framework of
SLA‖ (Zuengler& Miller, 2006). Bony Norton Peirce (1995) used the term
‗investment‘ to emphasis on the commitment to target language study, students‘
Whereas other researchers often focus on one of these three steps to promote
students‘ learning responsibility (only raising students‘ awareness of the matter, or
asking students to keep portfolio and assignment, or letting them to self-assess, the
researcher decided to take the first and the second stage, bearing in mind the low level
of autonomy and little speaking lesson experience of her students as well as the time
constraint of the study. As there is not enough time and the students are not mature
enough to reach the other end of the autonomy continuum, the final stage is left to
maybe the next terms.
Consequently, the author of this research decided to adopt selective activities in
the first two stages suggested by Scharle and Szabo (2000) and her tailored
assignment setting for the students to make ensure that they invest adequate time,
effort and money in their learning. Also, students‘ signing a learner contract is used to
ascertain their commitment to what they are required to do. Like other researchers
investigating the realm of learner autonomy, the researcher also uses assignments to

boost learner responsibility, but in other forms to suit her own teaching. As they have
never learned speaking before, they must be well-equipped by having chances to
practice functional language and speaking techniques. Thus, the intervention started
first with raising matter awareness and subject awareness then and regular
assignment to implant the independent learning style in the students.

11


1.2.

Speaking skill

1.2.1. The nature of speaking and characteristics of an effective speaking lesson
Speaking skill has been placed more weight in comparison with other skills as it is the
first step to identify language ability. Knowing a language means being able to speak
the language (Pattison, 1987). It is the vehicle to establish and maintain social
relationships as well as achieve professional advancement. In particular, speaking has
two principal functions: transactional function and interactional function. While the
former is primarily concerned with the transfer of information, the latter involves the
maintenance of social relationships.
Moreover, only by speaking a language can we ever hope to learn it. In order to
acquire the skills, communicative activities must be applied in class to aid students to
obtain not only accuracy but also fluency in their speech.
Regarding characteristics of an effective speaking lesson, Penny Ur (1996) has a
comprehensive look at the issue. In her viewpoint, there are four characteristics to
determine whether the speaking lesson is fruitful or not as follows:
❖

Learners keep talking in most of the time allowed for the activity in which the

learners are the center of the activity and the interference by the teacher is little.

❖

Participation is evenly distributed among learners.

❖

All group members are motivated in the activities thanks to an interesting topic
or their desire to achieve the task objective.

❖

Language use is appropriate, easy to understand and quite accurate.

The focal point in assessing a speaking lesson is students‘ active participation. It
cannot be a speaking lesson if the students do not speak the target language, let alone
managing effective lesson. Deci (1995) is correct in claiming that autonomy must
include language use. Using language or speaking the language is the prerequisite to
attain the objective. Students‘ involvement is significant but must be equal amongst
the participants. While working in pairs or groups, one student dominating the
situation and speaking most of the time may give rise to the breakdown of the

12


communication and it cannot be an effective lesson. Hence, all of the students should
be motivated to contribute to the activities.
Furthermore, Ur (1996) does have a good balance between accuracy and fluency.
This set of characters reveals that fluency and meaning should be a focal point of the

speaking lesson; however, accuracy should not be disregarded. Accuracy is the
means to ensure the act of getting the message right. Without appropriate correction
and adequate attention to accuracy, students may run the risk of fossilizing the
mistakes, which hinders the process of reaching an advanced level in the target skill.
Grounded in the literature, the following characteristics of an efficient speaking
lesson are drawn out, serving as the criteria for the assessments of my colleges‘
observations in my speaking lesson.
❖

Active and equal participation

❖ Learner-centeredness
❖ Message

oriented communication

❖

Motivation

❖

Cooperation

❖

Acceptable level of accuracy
1.2.2. Autonomy in speaking skill

The principle issues relating learner autonomy and speaking skill have so far been

considered. It is vital to investigate how autonomy is revealed and manifested in
speaking skill. To put it another way, this part deals with the characteristics of learner
autonomy in speaking and the practice to foster their autonomy in this skill.
Thombury (2006, pp. 87-92) puts forward five characteristics of an autonomous
speaker:
❖

Speed: working fast, spontaneously and coping with unpredictability

❖ Economy:

ignoring inessentials and knowing how to carry out tasks with

minimal means.

13


❖

Accuracy: being quick at detecting and rejecting errors

❖

Anticipation: thinking and planning ahead

❖ Reliability:

being versatile, i.e. performing a range of different speaking tasks

range of different topic, and being reliable even adverse conditions
This autonomy is partly due to the increased automaticity of his language production,
what he experienced as ―feeling fluent‖. As we have seen, the ability to automatize
the more mechanical elements of a task so as to free attention for higher-level
activities. The autonomy in speaking increases in proportion to the automaticity of
his language production.
Along similar line, Rubin and Thompson (1994, p. 75) gives several techniques
which autonomous students often use in speaking skill:


Rehearsal: rehearsing the situation in their heads to make sure they can do it or
rehearsing with another students



Automatic use: imagining what they would say in the foreign language in
different situations (when they are in a store or restaurant, etc.)



Paraphrasing: trying to say something in another way



Topic changing: switching to the topic they know to maintain interaction in the
target language.

In socio-cultural perspective, autonomy is defined as the capacity to self-regulate
performance as a result of gaining control over skills that were formerly
other-regulated. In classroom one, this is learners need to be given opportunities to

talk freely about subjects of their own choice. Like autonomy development in other
skills, autonomy development in speaking includes three previously mentioned
phases. Specifically, it commences with awareness-raising activities in which
learners learn features of spoken language. This is followed by appropriate activities
to aid them to gain control of these features, before reaping full autonomy as
independent speakers in a range of different spoken genres.
These activities can be selected from the repertoire of learner autonomy raising

14


techniques mentioned in the preceding sections with preference for activities
requiring more speaking practices. For instance, it is beneficial to utilize homework
assignments, tape diaries (learners keep a taped diary by recording themselves
regularly at home on audiotape and submitting this to the teacher for feedback), audio
and video conferencing (these are virtual meetings, in which two or more people
communicate via a live audio or video link over the Internet.), human-computer
interaction (Students use computer program called ―chatterbox‖ to practice speaking
with the computer instead of a person) and oral portfolios (learners reflect on their
out-of-class speaking experiences in oral form.)
To sum up, learner autonomy improving process encompasses three phrases (raising
awareness, changing roles and transferring roles). In any event, it requires students‘
investment in internalizing the target language, and it correlates with students‘
achievement in learning the language skill. Besides, teachers‘ roles are crucial in this
process as awareness raisers, facilitators, counselors, motivators and resources.
Rooted in this literature, it is investment in internalizing the target language, and it
correlates with students‘ achievement in learning the language skill. Besides,
teachers‘ roles are crucial in this process as awareness raisers, facilitators, counselors,
motivators and resources. It is pertinent to carry out the action research as a project
which encompasses two different phases. The first one deals with raising student‘s

awareness of autonomy and nature of second language acquisition. This is succeeded
by assignment to form the habit of learning autonomously for the students.
1.3.

Scaffolding method

In the field of education, the term scaffolding refers to a process in which teachers
model or demonstrate how to solve a problem, and then step back, offering support as
needed. Psychologist and instructional designer Jerome Bruner first used the term
'scaffolding' in this context back in the 1960s. The theory is that when students are
given the support they need while learning something new, they stand a better chance
of using that knowledge independently. Bruner recommends positive interaction and
three modes of representation during teaching: actions, images, and language.

15


His theories stress the fundamental role of social interaction in the development of
cognition, as he believed strongly that community plays a central role in the process
of making meaning. According to Bruner, social learning tends to come before
development. He believes that young children are curious and actively involved in
their own learning and the discovery and development of new understandings. In
order to develop kids‘ cognition, teachers need to comprehend two of the main
principles of Bruner's work: the More Knowledgeable Other (MKO) and the Zone of
Proximal Development (ZPD).
1.3.1. More Knowledgeable Other (MKO)
The more knowledgeable other (MKO) is somewhat self-explanatory; it refers to
someone who has a better understanding or a higher ability level than the learner,
with respect to a particular task, process, or concept. Although the implication is that
the MKO is a teacher or an older adult, this is not necessarily the case. Many times, a

child's peers or an adult's children may be the individuals with more knowledge or
experience.For example, who is more likely to know more about the newest teenage
music groups, how to win at the most recent PlayStation game, or how to correctly
perform the newest dance craze - a child or their parents? In fact, the MKO need not
be a person at all. Some companies, to support employees in their learning process,
are now using electronic performance support systems. Electronic tutors have also
been used in educational settings to facilitate and guide students through the learning
process. The key to MKOs is that they must have (or be programmed with) more
knowledge about the topic being learned than the learner does.
1.3.2. Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD)
The concept of the More Knowledgeable Other is integrally related to the second
important principle of Bruner‘s work, the Zone of Proximal Development. This is an
important concept that relates to the difference between what a child can achieve
independently and what a child can achieve with guidance and encouragement from a
skilled partner (Saul, 2014). For example, the child could not solve the jigsaw puzzle
(in the example above) by itself and would have taken a long time to do so, but was

16


able to solve it following interaction with parents, and has developed competence at
this skill that will be applied to future jigsaws. Bruner sees the Zone of Proximal
Development as the area where the most sensitive instruction or guidance should be
given - allowing the child to develop skills they will then use on their own developing higher mental functions. He also views interaction with peers as an
effective way of developing skills and strategies. He suggests that teachers use
cooperative learning exercises where less competent children develop with help from
more skillful peers - within the zone of proximal development.
1.3.3. Basic scaffolding strategies for English language learner
According to Bernice Moro Ph.D, Fordham University, there are six basic
scaffolding strategies for English language learner:



Demonstrating the requirements that they need to follow



Establishing a link between students‘ mental structure and new knowledge



Introducing new concepts by creating environments those are familiar to

students


Helping students see the relationship between different concepts



Checking students‘ understanding of texts by asking them to present the text in

various ways (i.e: presentations, games, conversations)


Encourage students to evaluate and adjust on their own performance, then plan

for future one
1.3.4. The application of scaffolding theory in oral English teaching
Applying scaffolding theory in the teaching activities, teachers should give students a
lot of support and help, and teach them some principles or rules that can be used to

solve some problems when no people can help, so that learners are able to strengthen
the sense of learning independently, build the learning ability of self-control and selfresponsibility. With scaffolding, the teacher transfers the learning task to the students
gradually and finally withdraws it from the learning process. In middle school oral
English teaching process, teachers help students identify their the zone of proximal
development, on the basis of this, teachers should train these students selectively,

17