Constructive alignment in second-year speaking classrooms for English-majors at Van Lang University - A case study

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING

HO CHI MINH CITY OPEN UNIVERSITY

---------------------------------------------

NGUYEN THANH MINH

CONSTRUCTIVE ALIGNMENT

IN SECOND-YEAR SPEAKING CLASSROOMS FOR ENGLISH MAJORS

AT VAN LANG UNIVERSITY: A CASE STUDY

MASTER THESIS

TEACHING ENGLISH TO SPEAKERS OF OTHER LANGUAGES

Ho Chi Minh City, 2019

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING

HO CHI MINH CITY OPEN UNIVERSITY

NGUYEN THANH MINH

CONSTRUCTIVE ALIGNMENT

IN SECOND-YEAR SPEAKING CLASSROOMS FOR ENGLISH MAJORS

AT VAN LANG UNIVERSITY: A CASE STUDY

Major : TEACHING ENGLISH TO SPEAKERS OF OTHER LANGUAGES

Major code : 60140111

Supervisor: NGUYEN THI HONG THAM, Ph.D.

Ho Chi Minh City, 2019

i

STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP

I certify that this thesis, entitled “Constructive alignment in second-year speaking

classrooms for English majors at Van Lang University: A case study”, is my own work.

Except where reference is made in the text of the proposal, this proposal contains no

material published elsewhere or extracted in whole or in part of a proposal by which I

have qualified for or been awarded another degree or diploma.

No other person‟s work has been used without due acknowledgment in the main text of

the proposal.

Ho Chi Minh City, 2019

Student‟s Signature: Nguyễn Thanh Minh …

ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I want to express my endless gratitude to Dr. Nguyen Thi Hong Tham, my supervisor, for

her support and guidance during the process of doing this thesis. Thank you for your

great knowledge and patience in assisting and answering my questions as well as

encouraging and keeping my focus. Without you, this thesis could not be possible.

Also, my sincere gratitude goes to the participants at Van Lang University who supported

me by all their hearts. It was such a great honor to cooperate with you during my time of

doing research. Thank you for helping me making this thesis.

To all my great lectures at Ho Chi Minh City Open University, thank you for taking your

valuable time to instruct me during the course. All experiences and knowledge sharing by

all of you have encouraged me in widening my horizon.

Finally, my eternal love and thanks go to my friends and my family who always have

faith in me and encourage me since I participated in the course. Without all of you, I

could not finish my course properly.

iii

ABSTRACT

This qualitative case study aimed at investigating the implementation of

constructive alignment in Speaking classrooms for second year English-majored

students at Van Lang University since the university registered for National

Standards of Accreditation and Asian University Network Quality Assurance

(AUN-QA). This study explored the implementation of constructive alignment in

three extents: (1) the implementation of constructive alignment in Speaking

classrooms of second-year English-majored students at Van Lang University; (2)

the perspectives of lecturers and students toward constructive alignment in the

context; and (3) some suggestions to improve the implementation. Notably, two

lecturers and 55 students from two Speaking classes were involved in the study. The

data collection was conducted within two phases. In the first phase, the researcher

did four classroom observations, including two regular sessions and two assessment

sessions. Then, the qualitative questionnaires were distributed to all students of two

selected classes. In the second phase, the researcher conducted semi-structured

interviews for two lecturers, and two focus group interviews for students. All the

data were analyzed and categorized in light of main themes and sub-themes. The

findings of this study indicated that the constructive alignment was established in

the context; however, there remained the barriers in the alignment. Also, from the

lecturers‟ and students‟ perspectives, the effectiveness of constructive alignment was

confirmed. Then, some problems in the implementation were pointed out such as

student level and motivation, course design, teaching and learning activities as well

as assessment tasks. Finally, some suggestions were given to improve the situation,

including motivating students, changing course design procedures, covering real

topics and improve assessment tasks.

Key words: qualitative case study, constructive alignment, speaking skills,

implementation, English majors, Van Lang University

iv

TABLE OF CONTENT

STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP.....................................................................................i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT...................................................................................................ii

ABSTRACT........................................................................................................................ iii

LIST OF FIGURES......................................................................................................... viii

LIST OF TABLES..............................................................................................................ix

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS .............................................................................................x

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................1

1.1. Rationales of the study...........................................................................................1

1.1.1. Higher education in the Vietnamese context .....................................................1

1.1.2. The needs of quality assurance in Vietnamese higher education ......................3

1.1.3. Constructive alignment as a tool for enhancing the quality of higher education

4

1.2. Significance of the study........................................................................................5

1.3. Aims of the study...................................................................................................7

1.4. Research questions.................................................................................................7

1.5. Delimitation of the study .......................................................................................8

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ..........................................................................9

2.1. Approaches to learning and the relationship between them and the attainment of

the learning outcomes in higher education ........................................................................9

2.1.1. Approaches to learning in higher education ......................................................9

2.1.2. The relationship between approaches to learning and the attainment of the

intended learning outcomes in higher education .........................................................10

2.2. Constructive alignment in higher education ........................................................14

2.2.1. Definition of constructive alignment ...............................................................14

v

2.2.2. The Framework of constructive alignment......................................................16

2.3. Constructive alignment in previous studies.........................................................23

2.3.1. Benefits of constructive alignment in higher education ..................................23

2.3.2. Problems in establishing constructive alignment in higher education.............29

2.3.3. Constructive alignment in the Vietnamese context .........................................31

2.4. Conclusion ...........................................................................................................32

2.5. Teaching English speaking skills at university level...........................................33

2.5.1. English speaking skills.....................................................................................33

2.5.2. Characteristics of speaking skills.....................................................................33

2.5.3. Public speaking skills.......................................................................................35

2.5.4. Teaching English speaking skills.....................................................................37

2.5.5. Assessing speaking skills.................................................................................37

2.5.6. Teaching speaking skills at university level ....................................................38

2.6. Constructive alignment and English-speaking skills...........................................40

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY ...................................................................................43

3.1. Research design ...................................................................................................44

3.2. Setting and participants........................................................................................45

3.2.1. Description of Speaking 4 course for English-majored students at Van Lang

University.....................................................................................................................45

3.2.2. The appropriacy of the syllabus.......................................................................47

3.2.3. Participants.......................................................................................................51

3.3. Instruments...........................................................................................................53

3.3.1. Classroom Observations..................................................................................54

3.3.2. Qualitative questionnaires................................................................................55

3.3.3. Semi-structured interviews for lecturers..........................................................56

3.3.4. Student focus group interviews........................................................................57

3.3.5. Documentation.................................................................................................59

3.4. Data collection procedures...................................................................................59

3.4.1. Classroom observations and qualitative questionnaires ..................................60

vi

3.4.2. Semi-structured interviews focused group interviews.....................................61

3.5. Piloting the instruments.......................................................................................62

3.6. Data analysis procedures .....................................................................................63

3.7. Validity and reliability.........................................................................................65

3.7.1. Validity ............................................................................................................65

3.7.2. Reliability.........................................................................................................66

CHAPTER 4: FINDINGS.................................................................................................67

4.1. The implementation of constructive alignment ...................................................67

4.1.1. Aligning teaching and learning activities and intended learning outcomes ....67

4.1.2. Aligning assessment tasks and intended learning outcomes ...........................74

4.1.3. Aligning teaching and learning activities and assessment tasks......................80

4.2. Lecturers‟ and students‟ perspectives towards constructive alignment in speaking

classrooms for second-year English majors.....................................................................82

4.2.1. The effectiveness of constructive alignment ...................................................82

4.2.2. Problems in the implementation ......................................................................85

4.3. Suggestions for improvement ..............................................................................90

4.3.1. The lecturers‟ suggestions ...............................................................................90

4.3.2. The students‟ suggestions................................................................................91

4.4. Summary of the main findings.............................................................................93

CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION............................................................................................94

5.1. The implementation of constructive alignment ...................................................94

5.2. Lecturers‟ and students‟ perspectives towards constructive alignment...............96

5.2.1. The effectiveness of constructive alignment ...................................................96

5.2.2. Problems in aligning intended learning outcomes, teaching and learning

activities and assessment tasks ....................................................................................97

5.3. Suggestions for improving the implementation...................................................99

CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSION .......................................................................................101

vii

6.1. Summary of the study........................................................................................101

6.2. Limitations.........................................................................................................103

6.3. Implications .......................................................................................................104

6.3.1. Implications for enhancing the quality of learning and teaching in higher

education....................................................................................................................104

6.3.2. Implications for further research....................................................................105

REFERENCES.................................................................................................................107

APPENDICES..................................................................................................................127

APPENDIX 1: SPEAKING 4 SYLLABUS ..................................................................127

APPENDIX 2: RUBRICS FOR GRADING SPEECH .................................................140

APPENDIX 3: QUALITATIVE QUESTIONNAIRES FOR STUDENTS..................143

APPENDIX 4: CLASSROOM OBSERVATION FORMS ..........................................147

APPENDIX 5: LECTURERS‟ INTERVIEW QUESTIONS........................................151

APPENDIX 6: FOCUS GROUPS‟ INTERVIEW QUESTIONS .................................154

APPENDIX 7: DATA COLLECTION PROCEDURES ..............................................156

APPENDIX 8: LABELS OF DATA FROM DIFFERENT INSTRUMENTS .............159

APPENDIX 9: A SAMPLE OF CODING PROCESS..................................................161

viii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2.1. Student orientation, teaching method and level of

engagement (Biggs and Tang, 2011, p. 6)

…………… 13

Figure 2.2. Aligning teaching and learning activities and

assessment tasks with the intended learning outcomes (Biggs &

Tang, 2011, p.105)

……………. 16

Figure 2.3. Teachers‟ and Students‟ perspectives towards

assessment (Biggs & Tang, 2011, p. 198)

……………. 20

Figure 2.4. A sample illustrating the alignment among intended

learning outcomes, teaching and learning activities and assessment

tasks (Kennedy, Hyland, & Ryan, 2006, p. 22)

……………. 22

Figure 2.5. Model of Public Speaking as an Interaction Process

(Melh, 2017, p. 11)

……………. 37

Figure 2.6. The conceptual framework of applying constructive

alignment in teaching speaking

……………. 42

Figure 3.1. The thematic network of constructive alignment in

speaking classrooms for second-year English majors

……………. 65

ix

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2.1. Some verbs related to declarative and functioning

knowledge based on SOLO taxonomy (Biggs & Tang, 2011, p. 124)

…………. 12

Table 3.1. A summary of Methodology chapter ………….. 43

Table 3.2. Constructive alignment in the Speaking 4 syllabus at

Van Lang University

………….. 46

Table 3.3. The checklist of Speaking 4 syllabus in comparison with

AUN-QA criteria

………….. 48

Table 3.4. The evaluation of the course intended learning outcomes

in light of Bigg‟s and Tang‟s criteria

………….. 50

Table 3.5. The alignment between the course intended learning

outcomes and the program learning outcomes

…………… 51

Table 3.6. The instruments in aligning with the research questions …………… 54

Table 3.7. The constructs covered in the qualitative questionnaire ……………. 56

Table 3.8. The constructs covered in the interview questions for

lecturers

……………. 57

Table 3.9. The constructs covered in the interview questions ……………. 59

Table 3.10. The summary of data collection procedures ……………. 60

Table 4.1. Constructive alignment in Speaking 4 course at Van

Lang university from the course syllabus

…………… 68

Table 4.2. The Teaching and Learning Activities in class A and B …………… 69

Table 4.3. Brief description of assessment tasks in both classes ……………. 75

x

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

AUN-QA : Asian University Network – Quality Assurance

ATs : Assessment Tasks

CA : Constructive Alignment

GDETA : General Department of Education Testing and Accreditation

CEA-AVU&C : Centre for Education Accreditation – Association of Vietnam

Universities and Colleges

ILOs : Intended Learning Outcomes

MOET : Ministry of Education and Training

QA : Quality Assurance

TLAs : Teaching and Learning Activities

1

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

This chapter outlined the current facts of higher education quality in Vietnam.

Notably, besides many achievements have been gained so far from the educational

reforms, there are still needs for improvement due to the quickly changing of

society. Additionally, the theory of constructive alignment was briefly discussed as

an effective tool to ensure the quality of higher education in different fields. Then,

within the context of Faculty of Foreign Languages at Van Lang University, the

significance of the study is highlighted, along with the aims of the research and the

research questions. Lastly, the scope of the study was mentioned.

1.1. Rationales of the study

1.1.1. Higher education in the Vietnamese context

Teaching and learning quality in higher education has received many concerns from

the society recently. Specifically, higher education has many important functions

from different perspectives. Kerr (1982) and Duderstadt (2007) mention three main

functions of higher education, including educating (providing knowledge),

providing services (raising awareness from society) and researching. Besides,

Crosier, Riiheläinen, Horvath, Kocanova, and Kerpanova (2015) and Lane (2017)

view higher education as a place to provide human resources for the labor market.

Due to these important roles, higher education nowadays should be given more

attention to the quality of learning and teaching (Biggs & Tang, 2011).

In the Vietnamese context, the quality of higher education also receives great

concerns. The first thing to point out is the reform in higher education which has

brought about many significant outcomes such as better meeting the requirements

of society in educating people, gradually improving higher education quality, and

increasing teaching and administrating staff (Nguyen & Vu, 2015). Secondly, many

studies have been conducted on the issue. Specifically, these studies primarily cover

three areas: giving the standards for quality assurance, improving the curriculum

2

and reforming higher education. Nevertheless, some problems remain unsolved.

Among these, the issue of educational quality tends to be significant. To be more

specific, Tran, Nguyen, and Nguyen (2011) and MOET (2014) make investigations

on the question of how to assure the quality of higher education. They conclude that

the standards related to “training section” – learning and teaching – should be

evaluated by emphasizing the alignment between assessment tasks, teaching and

learning activities and course objectives.

What is more, Nguyen, Oliver and Priddy (2009), Tran et al. (2011), Nguyen, and

Tran, Le and Nguyen (2014) indicate that curricula should illustrate clearly “the

alignment of educational objectives” (p. 131) to maintain the student-centered

approach and concentrate more on professional/practical skills rather than theory.

Also, Nguyen (2012) considers that the Vietnamese way of assessment may not

fully assist the teaching and learning process. The reasons for this are the focus on

measuring students‟ memory of knowledge rather than problem-solving skills, the

underestimation of providing positive feedback, and the unclear schemas of

teaching and learning activities, and assessment tasks. Regarding the reform of

higher education, some challenges have been pointed out despite some significant

achievements. Notably, Pham (2010) and Harman and Nguyen (2010) list out these

challenges which are the traditional views of the teacher-centered approach, and

lower levels of students. Additionally, the needs of reforming all three elements –

teaching, learning, and assessment – are crucial and inseparable (Harman & Nguyen,

2010).

From the results of these studies, the quality of higher education in Vietnam varies

in many extents from learning and teaching to assessment process. Therefore, some

standards to ensure the quality among all the higher educational context must be set

through the quality assurance process. (Nguyen & Vu, 2015).

3

1.1.2. The needs of quality assurance in Vietnamese higher education

Quality assurance has been a “hot” issue in Vietnamese higher education recently.

There are two main reasons for the needs for quality assurance. Firstly, quality

assurance brings about many benefits, including (1) ensuring the teaching and

learning quality of any higher education organizations in order to provide “good”

human resources with sufficient knowledge, skills and attitudes (AUN, 2015); (2)

providing the public, especially students, essential information to support their

choice of entering which higher education institutions among many ones; (3) and

motivating the enhancement of teaching, learning and administrating process at the

institutional level, which could positively affect the quality of whole higher

education in general (Harman, 2010). Lastly, MOET (2017a) has proposed the

Strategic Plan No. 118/KH-BGDDT on the quality assurance for all higher

education institutions from 2017 to 2020. In this document, the requirements for

conducting quality assurance in higher education are given. Therefore, the needs of

assuring quality in higher education in the Vietnamese context are unavoidable.

Due to this strong need, the quality assurance of Vietnam‟s higher education has

attracted concerns from many national and especially international accreditation

agencies (GDETA, 2017). In term of national agencies, one of the most popular

agencies is Centre for Education Accreditation – Association of Vietnam

Universities and Colleges (CEA-AVU&C). Specifically, this organization was

founded in 2015 as an independent accrediting organization to certify whether the

educational institutions have met the requirements of the National Standards of

Accreditation (CEA-AVU&C, n.d.). According to MOET (2019), there are about

119 higher education institutions have been reached the National Standards of

Accreditation at the institution level. While among many international ones,

ASEAN University Network Quality Assurance (AUN-QA) has been considered as

one of the most popular choices of many universities and institutions (H. Nguyen,

2018). AUN-QA is founded in order to assure the quality of higher education within