Exploring the usefulness of translanguaging in a ha nam high school an exploratory action reseach project

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

LƢƠNG THỊ BÍCH HUỆ

EXPLORING THE USEFULNESS OF TRANSLANGUAGING IN A HA
NAM HIGH SCHOOL: AN EXPLORATORY ACTION
RESEARCH PROJECT
(Nghiên cứu hành động khám phá: Tìm hiểu lợi ích của việc sử dụng liên ngữ
tại một trƣờng Trung học phổ thông ở Hà Nam)

M.A. MINOR THESIS
Field : English Methodology
Code : 8140231.01

Hanoi, 2020


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

LƢƠNG THỊ BÍCH HUỆ

EXPLORING THE USEFULNESS OF TRANSLANGUAGING IN A HA
NAM HIGH SCHOOL: AN EXPLORATORY ACTION
RESEARCH PROJECT
(Nghiên cứu hành động khám phá: Tìm hiểu lợi ích của việc sử dụng liên ngữ
tại một trƣờng Trung học phổ thông ở Hà Nam)

M.A. MINOR THESIS
Field

: English Methodology

Code

: 8140231.01

Supervisor : Assoc. Prof. Dr. Lê Văn Canh

Hanoi, 2020


DECLARATION
I hereby certify that the thesis “Exploring the usefulness of using
translanguaging in the high school context in Ha Nam province: An action research
approach” 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.

iii


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This thesis has, in many senses, been accomplished with the help and
encouragement of many people. Therefore, I hereby wish to send my application to all
of them.
First of all, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my supervisor,

Assoc. Prof. Dr. Le Van Canh for his invaluable and insightful comments, guidance,
and encouragement he gave me during the time I tried to do the research. This thesis
would not be completed without his great help from the beginning when this study
was only in its formative stage.
My sincere thanks also go to all lecturers and staff of Postgraduate Studies
for their valuable lessons and precious helps. Thanks to their lessons as well as
needed helps, I could overcome enormous obstacles when doing the research.
In addition, I am also grateful to my colleagues and my students who helped
me collect the necessary data. Special acknowledgement is also given to my
students from classes 10A3, 11A6 and 11A8 for their participation in the
experimental lessons.
Last but not least, I am greatly indebted to my beloved family whose support
and encouragement have always been the great source of inspiration for me in
bringing this study to a success.
Without all this support, I could not have finished this thesis.
Lƣơng Thị Bích Huệ
December , 2019


ABSTRACT
In recent years, there has been a significant shift from a monolingual approach to
teaching English as a second or foreign language to multilingual perspectives.
According to these perspectives, learners‘ first language (L1) is considered as
resources for learning the second language (L2). As a result, translanguaging in the
EFL classroom has attracted great scholarly attention and interest. The number of
studies on translanguaging in different contexts is increasing considerably. Despite
this fact, the term ‗translanguaging‘ seems to be new to many Vietnamese EFL
teachers. This thesis may be the first one that deals with this topic. This thesis
reports on the results of an action research project on the benefits and drawbacks of
translanguaging in a high school context. In the light of the discussions relative to

the effectiveness of translanguaging in the EFL classroom, the present study aims at
providing functions of translanguaging in both language teaching and learning. Data
was collected from a student questionnaire, recorded student translanguaging,
teacher self-observation and the reflection. The findings provide initial insights into
the students‘ attitudes towards translanguaging and the possible benefits of
translanguaging to students‘ learning English in the high school classroom.
Key words: translanguaging, L1, L2, code-switching


TABLE OF CONTENTS

DECLARATION...................................................................................................... i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS............................................................................ii
ABSTRACT....................................................................................................iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS...............................................................................iv
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS........................................................................vi
LIST OF TABLES.........................................................................................vii
CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION...................................................................1
1.1. Rationale of the study.......................................................................... 1
1.2. Aims of the study..................................................................................1
1.4. Scope of the study.................................................................................1
1.5. Significance of the study......................................................................2
1.6. Research Methodology.........................................................................2
1.7. Structure of the thesis.......................................................................... 2
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW......................................................4
2.1. What is translanguaging?....................................................................4
2.2. Translanguaging vs. code-switching...................................................4
2.3. Theoretical foundation of translanguaging........................................6
2.4. Previous studies on translanguaging in L2 classrooms...................11

2.5. Chapter summary.............................................................................. 14
3.1. Research context.................................................................................16
3.2. Participants.........................................................................................17
3.3. Instruments.........................................................................................17
3.3.1. Questionnaires..............................................................................17
3.3.2 Interviews.......................................................................................17
3.3.3 Classroom self- observations.........................................................18
3.4. Procedures...........................................................................................18
3.4.1. The exploratory action research.................................................. 18


3.4.2. Data collection procedures...........................................................23
3.4.3. Data analysis procedures............................................................. 23
3.5. Summary.............................................................................................23
4.2. Discussions and implications.............................................................47
4.2.1. Discussions................................................................................... 47
4.2.2. Implications.................................................................................. 49
4.3. Summary.............................................................................................52
CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION.....................................................................53
5.1. Summary of the study........................................................................53
5.2. Limitations and suggestions for further study.................................53
REFERENCES..............................................................................................55
APPENDIX.......................................................................................................I
APPENDIX I: QUESTIONNAIRE FOR STUDENTS................................ I
APPENDIX II: INTERVIEWS FOR STUDENTS................................. VIII


LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
AR

: Action Research

L1

: First Language

L2

: Second Language

EFL

: English as Foreign Language

ELF

: English as lingual franca

ELT

: English Language Teaching

SPSS

: Statistical Packages for Social Sciences

TESOL

: Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages

TL

: Target language


LIST OF TABLES

Table 4.1: Students’ attitude of L1 use in English classrooms (N= 80;
Grade 11).............................................................................................24
Table 4.2: Students’ attitude of L1 use in English classrooms (N= 45;
Grade 10)............................................................................................ 26
Table 4.3: The percentage of 11th graders’ responses towards the
question 1............................................................................................ 31
Table 4.4: The percentage of 10th graders’ responses towards the
question 1............................................................................................ 31
Table 4.5: Students’ perception of L1 use in learning grammar (N= 80;
Grade 11).............................................................................................32
Table 4.6: Students’ perception of L1 use in learning grammar (N= 45;
Grade 10).............................................................................................33


CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION
1.1. Rationale of the study
In recent years, working in bi/multilingual contexts, scholars, researchers and
teachers in the field of second or foreign language education has been increasingly
interested in the concept of translanguaging, defined as ―the planned and
systematic use of two languages for teaching and learning inside the same lesson‖
(Lewis et al. 2012, p. 3), Teachers in many different contexts have begun to
recognize the pedagogic potential of translanguaging (Li 2018a: 32) in ways that
could also be beneficial to students. In fact, translanguaging pedagogies are based

on the view that bi/multilingual learner's first language (L1) can be valuable
linguistic resources for second language (L2) learning. While interest in researching
translanguaging as a pedagogical strategy in ELT classrooms is growing globally, it
has received little attention in Vietnam. In fact, the concept of translanguaging is
new to many Vietnamese EFL teachers, and as a result, this innovative pedagogy
has not been extensively researched in Vietnamese EFL classrooms. Motivated by
the benefits of translanguaging to L2 learning, I decided to use an action research
approach to explore whether translanguaging works in the context of Vietnamese
high schools.
1.2. Aims of the study
This exploratory action research is aimed at exploring the students‘ attitudes
towards translanguaging in the EFL classrooms and the possible benefits of
translanguaging to students‘ learning English in the high school classroom.
1.3. Research questions
In an attempt to achieve the aims of the study, the following research
questions are formulated:
1. What are the students‘ attitudes towards translanguaging in learning English?
2. What are the possible benefits of translanguaging to students‘ learning English in
the high school classroom?
1.4. Scope of the study

10


The study focuses specifically on using translanguaging in learning English
as well as evaluate the students‘ attitudes towards this pedagogy in a high school in
Ha Nam province. The study limits itself to the teaching and learning English, and
the subjects of the study are 125 non-English majors from three classes studying
new ―English 10‖ textbook ( 10 A3) and ―English textbook 11‖ (11 A6, 11 A8) at
a high school .

1.5. Significance of the study
The findings of this study are beneficial in two ways. First, they provide
initial empirical insights into the possible benefits of translanguaging in the context
of Vietnamese high schools. Secondly, the study will help to influence stakeholders‘
attitudes towards the role of L1 in L2 learning.
1.6. Research Methodology
An exploratory action research design (Smith &Rebolledo, 2016) is used to
achieve the aim of the study. The study was conducted in two phases. In the first
phase, the researcher explored the students‘ attitudes towards to use of Vietnamese
in the English lessons through a survey questionnaire. In the second phase, based on
the results of the survey in the first phase, action, i.e., the use of translanguaging,
was taken in the classroom with a focus on the possible benefits of translanguaging
to students‘ learning English in classroom learning tasks. Then, the action was
evaluated to measure the effect of translanguaging on students‘ engagement in
classroom learning. Data for this evaluation was obtained by means of the
teacher‘self-observation, reflective journals and interviews of the students.
1.7. Structure of the thesis
The thesis is composed of five chapters:
Chapter 1: Introduction- deals with the rationales, aims, methods, scope,
significance and design of the study.
Chapter 2: Literature review – provides some theoretical background about
translanguaging and using the first language in the second language classrooms.
Chapter 3: Research Methodology – presents the situation analysis,
participants, data collection instrument, data collection procedures and data


analysis. The detailed results of the research are focused.
Chapter 4: Findings and discussion – shows major findings, discussion and
some recommendations for teachers and learners in using of translanguaging in
teaching and learning English.

Chapter 5: Conclusion- is a review of the study, suggestions for further
research and limitations of the study.


CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
This chapter reviews the literature on translanguaging in second and/or
foreign language teaching and learning. It first provides the definition of the
concept of translanguaging. Next, the theoretical foundation of translanguaging is
discussed. Finally, studies conducted in a variety of different contexts are reviewed
to identify the research gap where the present study fits.
2.1. What is translanguaging?
According to Conteh (2018), translanguaging was originated in Welsh
bilingual education in the 1980s. ‗Trawsieithu‘—a Welsh term coined by Cen
Williams, and later translated into English as ‗translanguaging‘—was constructed
as a purposeful cross-curricular strategy for ‗the planned and systematic use of two
languages for teaching and learning inside the same lesson‘ (Lewis et al. 2012,. p.
3). Cenoz and Gorter (2011: 359) define translanguaging as ―the combination of
two or more languages in systematic way within the same learning activity.‖ Thus,
translanguaging is understood to be a wider concept which contains not only codeswitching but many other kinds of bi/multilingual practices as well.
While code-switching refers to the alteration of switch between languages by
bilinguals in communicative event, translanguaging focuses on how bilinguals take
advantages of their linguistic resources to make meaning or to make sense (Li,
2018b). The distinction between the two concepts is detailed in the following
section. Researchers use the term ‗translanguaging‘ to describe multilingual oral
interaction (e.g. García, 2009; Blackledge and Creese, 2010) and the use of different
languages in written texts (e.g. Canagarajah, 2011; García and Kano, 2014).
2.2. Translanguaging vs. code-switching
Code-switching is a bilingual-mode activity in which more than one
language, typically speakers‘ native language (L1) and second language (L2), are
used intransententially or intersententially (Cook, 2001). Code-switching has not

been appreciated in traditional L2 classrooms where the students‘ target language


and native language were viewed as being compartmentalized or separated, and the
target language was the ―legitimate‖ language in the classroom while the native
language was a taboo. Therefore, according to Creese and Blackledge (2000), codeswitching is occasionally employed by language curriculum developers and
instructors to assist language practices that multilingual speakers are engaged in.
Meanwhile, translanguaging is a term which has recently used in line with codeswitching in the literature. Similarly, translanguaging and code-switching are related
to multilingual speakers‘ transferring between languages in a natural way.
Nevertheless, translanguaging was purposefully switched (Williams, 2002) in Welsh
bilingual classrooms. The purpose is, therefore, a marker distinguishing
translanguaging from code-switching.
García and Leiva (2013, 207) state: ―The concept of translanguaging goes
beyond code-switching. Code-switching refers to the mixing or switching of two
static language codes. Translanguaging, resting on the concept of transculturation, is
about a new languaging reality, original and independent from any of the ‗parents‘
or codes, a new way of being, acting and languaging in a different social, cultural
and political context. Translanguaging brings into the open discursive exchanges
among people in ways that recognize their values of languaging. In allowing fluid
discourses to flow, translanguaging has the potential to give voice to new social
realities.‖
Another important distinction between translanguaging and code-switching
involve modes and the means through which language is embodied. (Canagajah,
2013).Translanguaging highlights various modes that users adopt in expressing their
ideas. The intersections of different linguistic elements embroidered in various
modes illustrate the creativity and fluidity prioritized in translanguaging.
In short, ― Translanguaging differs from the notion of code-switching in that
it refers not simply to a shift or a shuttle between two languages, but to the
speakers‘ construction and use of original and complex interrelated discursive
practices that cannot be easily assigned to one or another traditional definition of

language, but that make up the speakers‘ complete language repertoire.‖ (García
&Wei 2014). Translanguaging is a planned and systematic use of two languages for
teaching and learning inside the same lesson. Code-switching practice is
particularly maligned by teachers in dual language education and bilingual students
use language in complex and dynamic ways.
2.3. Theoretical foundation of translanguaging
Recently, there have been significant changes in the outlook on the role of
learners‘ language in second language learning, according to which learners‘
language are viewed as a resource in the English –as-a-foreign language (EFL)
classroom (e.g. Corcoll& Gonzales-Davies, 2016; Creese&Blackledge, 2010;
Illman&Pietila, 2018). This view originates from new findings in neuroscience
(Cook, 2008), bilingual education research (Anderson, 2008; Cummins, 2008) and
multilingualism (Ortega, 2014). These findings have questioned the dominant
English-only principle in ELT. For example, Anderson (2008) has called for flexible
approaches to pedagogy to respond to bilingual contexts that do not fit easily into
existing paradigm. The research documented in Lin and Martin (2005) and Arthur
and Martin (2006) described the pedagogic potentials behind code switching. These
include increasing the inclusion, participation, and understandings of pupils in the
learning processes; developing less formal relationships between participants;
conveying ideas more easily; and accomplishing lessons. They spoke of the
―pedagogic validity of code switching‖ (Arthur & Martin, 2006, p. 197) and
considered ways in which the research might contribute to a ―teachable‖ pedagogic
resource. Important avenues of research have begun to question the validity of
boundaries around languages. Garcia (2007) showed in her work in New York
schools that languages are not hermetically sealed units. Garcia prefers the term
translanguaging (p. xii) to code switching to describe the usual and normal practice
of ―bilingualism without diglossic functional separation‖ in New York classrooms
(p. xiii). Conteh (2018, p. 446) notes,

Language is seen as an ongoing ‗process‘ rather than a ‗thing‘, a ‗verb‘
rather than a ‗noun‘ (Becker, 1988: 25), as in the notion of ‗languaging‘. The focus
moves from how many languages an individual may have at their disposal to how
they use all their language resources to achieve their purposes.
Li (2018b: 24) argues that translanguaging ‗challenges the conventional
understanding of language boundaries between … culturally and politically labelled
languages.‖
In educational contexts, translanguaging is a practice in which educators
allow the mixing of languages in bilingual educational settings; this practice is also
known among some linguists as ―code-switching‖ (Adamson&Fujimoto-Adamson,
2012, p.59). Meanwhile, Greese and Blackledge (2010) extended this even further,
to state that translanguaging goes beyond a basic acceptance or tolerance of the
learner‘s native language to the ―cultivation of languages through their use‖ (p.103).
Rosemary Orlando (2019) argues that there are two types of translanguaging
that can be developed in the classroom. The first type consists of allowing and
encouraging students to use their first language to help learning and translate when
they do not understand. It means that they can communicate with their friends in the
class by using their mother tongue as well as in English. This approach, when used
in English classroom, allows the development and support of learning both the
content and improving English comprehension. The second type is called ―planned
translanguaging‖. This form of translanguaging is an extensive language into the
curriculum to support both learning and language development. In this approach,
teachers while planning their lessons with two languages being integrated can
consider their classroom procedure and their lesson content in order to decide where
and when it may be beneficial to include L1. It is useful for students to work on a
particular topic.
Vogel & Garcia (2017) provide the three core premises for translanguaging:
- It puts forward that individuals select and implement features from a unitary

linguistic repertoire in order to communicate.


- It takes up a perspective on bilingualism and multilingualism that privileges
speakers‘ dynamic linguistic and semiotic practices above the named languages of
nations and states.
- It recognizes the material effects of socially constructed named language categories
structuralist language ideologies, especially for minoritized language speakers (p.4)
Cenoz&Gorter (2011, 2015) discussing the use of translanguaging in
multilingual views, focused on multilingualism (FoM) through three dimensions:

FoM

The whole linguistic repertoire
The multilingual speaker

The social context

These dimensions are related to each other because the multilingual speaker
uses his/her whole linguistic repertoire to communicate in social contexts. The use
of linguistic resources from the whole linguistic repertoire is referred to
translanguaging. In the context of multilingual education, there is a distinction
between pedagogical and spontaneous translanguaging. At first, pedagogical
translanguaging is not limited to the alternation of input and output. It included
other pedagogical strategies based on the use of the multilingual speaker‘s linguistic
resources from the whole linguistic repertoire. Nevertheless, spontaneous
translanguaging refers to the reality of multilingual usage in naturally occurring
contexts where boundaries between languages are fluid and constantly shifting. It
can take place both inside and outside classroom. Inside the classroom,
translanguaging can have pedagogical value but it has not been planned in advance

as a pedagogical strategy. Outside the classroom, translanguaging is used to
exchange the ideas as a socializing tool or making fun. When understanding the
distinction, the researcher could design more activities depending on each purpose
of translanguaging as well as help learners distinguish the differences between
translanguaging and code-switching.
The importance of translanguaging theory has been revealed in previous
research from different aspects (e.g.: linguistic, educational, socio-political, etc.),
and researchers tend to focus on three primary aspects, which could best reflect the
significance of this theory. First of all, translanguaging is an approach to make use
of languages of bi/multi-linguals by considering they possess one linguistic
repertoire instead of several different autonomous language systems (Kasula, 2016;
García, 2009). Second, translanguaging also provides multilingual speakers with
support in affirming language identities by ―creating a social space bringing
together different dimensions of their personal history, experience

and

environment, their attitude, belief and ideology, their cognitive and physical
capacity into one coordinated and meaningful performance‖ (Wei, 2010, p1223).
Third, translanguaging theory has deep social justice implications

for

the

education of bilingual students (García, 2017), especially for the US education
system in which bilingual or multilingual speakers used to be considered as
disadvantaged learners. However in English classrooms, we can design many

interesting activities by using translanguaging. García has summarized major
objectives of using this pedagogy as follow:
- to support students as they engage with and comprehend complex content and texts.
- to provide opportunities for students to develop linguistic practices for academic
contexts.
- to make space for students‘ bilingualism and ways of knowing.
- to support students‘ socioemotional development and bilingual identities. (García,
2017, p29)


According to Lewis, Jones and Baker (2012), García and Li (2014), there are
two types of translanguaging strategies: ―teacher-directed translanguaging to give
voice, clarity, reinforce, manage the classroom and ask questions and studentdirected translanguaging to participate, to elaborate ideas, to raise questions. It
means that teachers and students actually become active and excited with multiple
languages in different contexts. (Lewis: 665-670)
Jenkins (2019) explains the importance of the concept of translanguaging in
ELF studies and she emphasizes that translanguaging should be regarded as a
normal language behavior and focuses on the need to develop the relationship
between English and other languages. Whereas, Seidlhofer (2017) highlights the
importance of considering English as an additional communicative resource in the
multilingual speaker‘s repertoire and of building on the learner‘s own language
experience.
Cummins (2008, p.65) points out that ―translanguaging allows for students
to use their native language as a tool to help them excel in their target language.‖ It
is clear that developing students‘ native language strengths the base for English and
increases learners‘ literacy skills in their native languages. Translanguaging allows
English language learners to have a chance to choose how to express themselves
using all of the linguistic resources available to them, whether it is in their native
language (L1) or in the target language (TL). The researcher emphasized that the
key to the students‘ progress and achievements was the respect paid to the native

language and culture and the students used them as aids for learning. Briefly,
through translanguaging, the student can create an identity as a language learner
who incorporates his or her L1 and home culture as well as the TL and culture to
solve social situations and opportunities for communication.
Lewis, Jones & Baker (2012b: 644) summarize Williams (1996) pedagogic theory
as follows:
―The process of translanguaging uses various cognitive processing skills in
listening and reading, the assimilation and accommodation of information,


choosing and selecting from the brain storage to communicate in speaking and
writing. Thus, translanguaging requires a deeper understanding than just
translanguaging as it moves from finding parallel words to processing and relaying
meaning and understanding.”
2.4. Previous studies on translanguaging in L2 classrooms
Tina Gunnarsson (2014) presented in her research that learning English by
using trangslanguaging brings learners a number of benefits:
-

the message of the instructor is more easily conveyed

-

the message is more easily comprehended by students

-

increased understanding of class content

-

students can communicate in any language in order to get their point
across or collaborate with other students

-

a focus on function rather than form

-

increase student motivation

-

increase student participation in class discussions

In her study, translanguaging is used effectively in Swedish classrooms. For
example, the researcher taught the students how to draw on their complete language
repertoires when learning (not just language learning).She also allowed her students
to collaborate with other students speaking the same language/s or both languages
(L1 and L2) when she believed this could help them learn more effectively.
Moreover, the teacher created a classroom atmosphere where translanguaging was
accepted as the norm – translanguaging space (Wei 2011). She, thus, encouraged the
students to be open to using different language tools (dictionaries etc.) and
stimulated them to participate in metalinguistic discussions by, for instance,
contrasting and comparing to other languages. The author reported that
translanguaging could be applied in four skills in learning English and it did
increase the participation of the students and developed the fluency in using
languages. She pointed out that a translanguaging pedagogy is important for
language minoritized students, whether they are emergent bilingual or not, because

it builds on students‘ linguistic strengths. The implication of this study is that the
teacher should take advantages of the students existing skills and take their
background into account when teaching – language, culture and history as well. In
brief, the teacher can teach students how to use their complete language repertoires
as a resource for learning.
Nambisan (2014) showed in his research on teachers‘ attitudes towards the use
of translanguaging in English language classrooms in Iowa that translanguaging is
utilized in one specific ESL context and evaluate about the interest among teachers in
these practices. In the study, the survey used items based on the McMillan and Rivers‘
(2011) study and other items to collect information about the teacher‘s experience and
teachers‘ attitudes towards use of L1 in the classroom. The results showed that
translanguaging helps students by providing a safe environment where their identities
and cultures were valued, which helped the more reserved students take a more active
and involved role in their education The researcher also proposed some implications
for the teacher to make use of using translanguaging in English classrooms.
Greggio and Gil (2007) reported in their study that the beginner group used
code-switching in four particular situations: i) explaining grammar, ii) providing
instruction, iii) monitoring or assisting students, and iv) correcting learners during
the course of an activity. The results showed that this switching from the L2 to the
L1 by the teacher was used to clarify words (especially difficult words),
expressions, structures or rules to make sure that the learners understood her clearly
and effectively. Using code-switching is applied in different levels depending
learners‘ language proficiency in an EFL context. The author concluded that
professionals in the realm of foreign or second language learning should be open to
the benefits that code-switching offers in facilitating classrooms interaction and
language learning.
Baker

(2001)

points

out

some

educational

advantages

of

using

translanguaging. He notes that using translanguaging promotes a deeper
understanding of the subject matter. In addition, it helps the development of the


weaker language. For example, the second language or foreign language is often
considered as the weaker language and the mother tongue or the first language is more
dominant. Next, using translanguaging facilitates home-school links and cooperation.
Lastly, it helps the integration of fluent speakers with early learners. When using or
discussing the topic in one language and then writing about it in another language
means that the subject matter has to be cognitively processed or digested.
McMillian and Rivers (2011) surveyed 29 participants (all native-speaker
EFL instructors) about their beliefs regarding the role of L1 in the EFL classroom.
At first, the authors believed that some of the participants who are hesitant to allow
the L1 into the classroom may be preoccupied about how to incorporate it if their

proficiency is low, so that portion of the questionnaire allowed for data collection to
draw an interference on that topic. However, the responses were different from that
hypothesis. Surprisingly, the teachers who had a more positive view of L1 use in the
classroom had lower self-reported proficiency scores in Japanese, whereas the
teachers who opposed L1 use had a higher proficiency rating. The study provided
valuable insight into the minds of teachers and helped share their viewpoints on
why they agree with or oppose the presence of the L1 in the EFL classroom.
Chungke & Shumin Lin (2017) chose a translanguaging approach to TESOL
in Taiwan in their research. They emphasized that this approach in ELT stems from
the changing roles of a language teacher from providing linguistic knowledge and
skills to building learners ‗self-learning capacity, learner agency and L2 identities.
It also discusses the viability of a translanguaging approach in TESOL in Taiwanese
contexts. In this paper, they used some examples of translanguaging practices in an
EFL classroom in a rural junior high school in Taiwan to illustrate the potentials of
translanguaging pedagogy for developing learner agency and identities. In this
study, the teacher intuitively translanguaged in intentional and purposeful ways.
The teacher in this study used all elements in her and students‘ linguistic
repertoires, including English in her EFL classrooms. She used ―translanguaging‖
to teach by blending English into her repertoire of teaching and by encouraging


students to translanguage in using English along with other languages.
To sum up, some studies influenced and guided this current study on using
translanguaging in English classrooms. This suggests that the teachers can make use
of translanguaing to explain complex concepts, vocabulary, and grammatical
features or structures (Ahmad, 2009; Greggio and Gil, 2007‘ McMillan and Rivers,
2011; Tian and Macaro, 2012). When teaching new vocabulary items, it is helpful
for instructors to code-switch into the L1 to use definitions that are easier for the
students to understand, which helps them catch the meanings and allows them to
have better understanding what they are learning (Ahmad, 2009). In aspect of

grammatical features and structures, using L1 can assist the teacher to explain the
difficult points of grammar more easily because it sometimes makes the students
confused when the teacher uses the TL to present the grammar‘s rules. Cook (2001)
pointed out that translanguaging is a natural practice and allows students to make
connections between their L1 and L2.
2.5. Chapter summary
This literature review shows that interest in translanguaging is increasing.
However, in order to make translanguaging a widely accepted pedagogy, more
research is needed.
Creese and Blackledge (2010: 113) emphasizes ―the need for further
research to explore what ―teachable‖ pedagogic resources are available in flexible,
concurrent approaches to learning and teaching languages bilingually.‖ In making
this call, they echo what other scholars like Lin and Martin (2005) have also
considered important in order to move multilingual language acquisition forward.
According to Canagarajah (2011), what current classroom studies show is that
translanguaging is a naturally occurring phenomenon for multilingual students.
Translanguaging cannot be completely restrained by monolingual educational policies.
It can occur with minimal pedagogical effort from teachers. However, such studies
might give the impression that translanguaging doesn‘t have to be taught (p. 8).
Canagarajah (2011: 9) goes further and recommends, ―As we develop
teachable strategies of translanguaging, we have to consider some serious issues for


assessing the effectiveness of this practice.‖
Despite the reported value of translanguaging to second language learning,
this pedagogical practice has not been applied widely and adequately researched
both globally and in Vietnam. This fact motivates me to conduct this exploratory
action research in order to find out the students‘ attitudes towards translanguaging
and how translanguaging can work in the context of a high school in Vietnam,
where exposure to English outside the classroom is limited to the students.

CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This chapter provides background information about action research, the current
situation of teaching and learning English by using translanguaging at a high school
and a description of the methodology employed to collect data for the study. This
study is a modest attempt to respond to the call for more research on
translanguaging by exploring the students‘ attitudes towards translanguaging as well
as the possible benefits of translanguaging to students‘ learning English in the high
school classroom.
3.1. Research context
The study was conducted at an upper-secondary school, a rural school of
former Ha Nam province. The school has 29 classes with over 60 teachers of all
subjects. English is taught as a compulsory subject. Currently there are 8 teachers of
English and over 1200 students ranged from grade 10 to grade 12. Most of the students
come from villages and towns in Thanh Liem district and Phu Ly city.
Although most students are aware of the importance of learning, English is
not paid much attention by most of the students in school. Few students choose
English as a subject to take university entrance exam. Teaching English has
encountered some difficulties. First of all, the class is often large with multi-level
students. There are from 40 to 45 students in each class. It is hard for teachers to set
up communicative activities, monitor class and give feedbacks. The second is most
students are not familiar with teaching in English. They cannot understand lessons if
teachers speak English all the time. The last is the lack of materials. Materials for
reference and self-study are not available. Furthermore, some facilities needed for
learning such as computers and projectors…are not enough.
Normally, students have three periods of studying English every week. It is a
limited time for students to practice and develop skills as well as enrich their
vocabulary and structure capacity. What‘s more, English is hardly used to talk
outside classroom. All these factors have great effect on the students‘ results in

learning English. They usually have low proficiency in English so they lack