Teacher's beliefs and reported classroom practices in EFL writing instruction at the selected high schools in Ho Chi Minh city

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING

HO CHI MINH CITY OPEN UNIVERSITY

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

TEACHERS’ BELIEFS AND REPORTED CLASSROOM

PRACTICES IN EFL WRITING INSTRUCTION AT THE

SELECTED HIGH SCHOOLS IN HO CHI MINH CITY

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of

the requirements for the degree of

Master of Arts (TESOL)

Submitted by TRUONG MINH HOA

Supervised by Assoc. Prof. Dr. PHAM VU PHI HO

Ho Chi Minh City, October 2016

i

STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP

I certify that this thesis entitled “Teachers’ Beliefs and Reported Classroom

Practices in EFL Writing Instruction at the Selected High Schools in Ho Chi

Minh City” is my own work.

Except where reference is made in the text of the thesis, this thesis contain material

published elsewhere or extracted in whole or in part from a thesis by which I have

qualified for or been awarded another degree or diploma.

No other person’s work has been used without due acknowledgement in the main text

of the thesis.

This thesis has not been submitted for the award of any degree or diploma in any other

tertiary institution.

Cam Ranh City, October 2016

Truong Minh Hoa

ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This Master of Art in TESOL thesis is the result of a fruitful collaboration of all the

people whom have kindly contributed with an enormous commitment and enthusiasm

in my research. Without the help of those who supported me at all times and in all

possible ways, it would not have been feasible for me to complete my M.A. thesis.

I would like to thank the Buddha and the Avalokiteśvara Bodhisattva, who made all

things possible.

I am deeply indebted to my supervisor, Assoc. Prof. Dr. Pham Vu Phi Ho, from Ho

Chi Minh City Open University, whose compassion, encouragement and guidance

throughout the research have helped in the completion of this thesis. I have truly

learned from the excellence of his skills and from his wide experience in research; no

words are adequate to describe the extent of my gratitude.

I would like to express my particular gratitude to my beloved mother Pham Thi Lien

and younger sister Truong Thi Phuong Hong Thao as well as my respectful teacher

Truong Viet Khanh Trang (Dean of Faculty of Garment Technology and Fashion, Ly

Tu Trong Technical College) for their unconditional love, understanding,

encouragement, financial and spiritual support over time and distance.

I would like to thank my TESOL classmates, including Nguyen Thi Thu Thuy, Phan

Thi Mien Thao, Mai Thi Ngoc Hanh, Luu Thi Huyen Tran, and Le Thi Minh Sang,

who shared their constructive opinions on my thesis.

I am also much obliged to the high school teachers, namely Vo Thi Bich Vien,

Nguyen Le Yen Thuy, Van Thanh Minh Trung, Tran Thi Hoang Trang, Nguyen Thi

Phuc Trinh, and Nguyen Thi My Chau, who enthusiastically helped me to distribute

and collect questionnaires as well as participated in my interview sessions.

I owe a great debt of gratitude to the anonymous participants who contributed data to

this thesis.

iii

ABSTRACT

Writing in a foreign language is deemed to be the most difficult language skill to learners,

especially at high school level; consequently, its teaching has become a challenging task for

the high school teachers in Vietnamese context. Teacher belief related literature indicates that

what teachers do in the classroom is directly governed by what they think and believe.

Thereby, the current study adopted features of a survey research design in order to examine

the EFL high school teachers’ beliefs about writing and its teaching, their actual classroom

practices, as well as the interplays between their beliefs and practices in the realm of EFL

writing instruction.

A sample of seventy–six EFL teachers from the eight selected high schools situated in Ho

Chi Minh City was recruited to the current survey. The beliefs and practices of EFL writing

instruction of these studied teachers were elicited through two instruments of thirty–nine–

item questionnaires and semi–structured interviews. Then the questionnaires were

quantitatively analyzed and the interviews were qualitatively analyzed.

Results of the study showed that most of the participants held different views/orientations

about writing skill and teaching writing, consisting of form–based, cognitive process–based,

functional social–based, and interactive social–based views; nevertheless, the form–based

orientation was still most favored in their beliefs. On the contrary, in practical, most of the

high school teachers much followed the product approach, which underlies form–based

orientation instead of different approaches. This can evidently account for the low results of

writing section in the National GCSE examination in consecutive recent years when high

school students only were asked to learn sample writing texts by rote (form–based

orientation) rather than being guided basic writing steps (process–based orientation) as well

as being developed their social awareness of what to be written (social–based orientation).

From the interviews, there was evidence to reveal that high school teachers’ ability to transfer

their beliefs into teaching practices was primarily impacted by schooling–related factors (e.g.,

class duration, curriculum, examination demands, teaching materials), and student–related

factors (e.g., students’ lack of motivation, students’ knowledge and language proficiency) as

well as teachers–related factors (e.g., teacher’ preparation time). Ultimately, some

implications of this study for high school teachers are also discussed.

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

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

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ………………………………………………………………………….ii

ABSTRACT …………………………………………………………………..……………………....iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS ……………………………………………………………………………iv

LIST OF TABLES ………………………………………………………………………………….viii

LIST OF FIGURES, CHARTS ………………………………………………………………………x

ABBREVIATIONS..…………………………………………..……………………………………...xi

Chapter One: INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background to the Study ........................................................................................................... 1

1.2 Rationale for the Study ………………………………………………………………………..5

1.3 Research Questions ……………………………………………………………………………7

1.4 Significance of the Study ………………………………………………………………………8

1.5 Key Words ……………………………………………………………………………………...9

1.6 Overview of the Thesis Chapters ……………………………………………………………..9

Chapter Two: LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Teaching Writing...................................................................................................................... 11

2.1.1 Writing: Natures, Levels, and Aspects ………………………………………………….11

2.1.1.1 Natures of Writing ……………………………………………………………………11

2.1.1.2 Writing Levels ………………………………………………………………………..13

2.1.1.3 Aspects of Writing ………………………………………………………….………...14

2.1.2 Theoretical Orientations to Teaching Writing ………………………………………….15

2.1.2.1 Behaviorist Learning Theory……………………………………………....................16

2.1.2.2 Cognitive Learning Theory …………………………………………………………..16

2.1.2.3 Social Constructivism Learning Theory ……………………………………………...16

2.1.3 Approaches to Teaching Writing ……………………………………………………….17

2.1.3.1 Product Approach ……………………………………………………………………17

2.1.3.2 Process Approach ……………………………………………………………………18

2.1.3.3 Genre–based Approach ………………………………………………………………19

2.1.4 Roles of Writing Teacher ……………………………………………………………….21

2.1.4.1 Knowledge Transmitter………………………………………………………….……22

2.1.4.2 Facilitator…………………………………………………………………………….22

2.1.4.3 Feedback Provider …………………………………………………………………...24

2.2 Teacher Beliefs ………………………………………………………………………………..24

v

2.2.1 Definition of Teacher Beliefs …………………………………………………………...24

2.2.2 Categories of Teacher Beliefs …………………………………………………………..25

2.2.2.1 Teachers’ Beliefs about the Subject Matter ………………………………………….26

2.2.2.2 Teachers’ Beliefs about Teacher Roles and Teaching ……………………………….28

2.2.2.3 Relationship between Beliefs about the Subject Matter, about Teacher Roles and

Teaching ……………………………………………………………………………...28

2.2.3 Importance of Teacher Beliefs on Practices of Teaching Writing ……………………...29

2.2.4 Factors Impacting Teacher Beliefs and Teachers’ Practices of Teaching Writing ……..30

2.3 Summary of English Writing Curriculum at Vietnamese High School …………………..31

2.3.1 English Textbooks for High School ……………………………………………………31

2.3.2 Objective of MOET towards Writing Skill at High School ……………………………32

2.3.3 Description of the Writing Sections ……………………………………………………33

2.4 Studies on Teachers’ Beliefs and Practices in Teaching Writing …………………………34

2.5 Research Gap …………………………………………………………………………………40

Chapter Three: METHODOLOGY

3.1 Pedagogical Settings and Participants ………………………………………………………42

3.1.1 Sampling Methods ……………………………………………………………………...42

3.1.2 Pedagogical Settings ……………………………………………………………………44

3.1.3 Participants ……………………………………………………………………………...45

3.2 Research Design and Process ………………………………………………………………..46

3.2.1 Research Design ………………………………………………………………………...46

3.2.2 Research Process ………………………………………………………………………..47

3.2.2.1 Pre–study Interviews …………………………………………………………………48

3.2.2.2 First Questionnaire Construct ……………………………………………………….51

3.2.2.3 Expert Comments on First Questionnaire ……………………………………………51

3.3 Research Instruments ………………………………………………………………………..54

3.3.1 Questionnaire for Teachers ……………………………………………………………..54

3.3.1.1 Rationale for Questionnaire …………………………………………………………54

3.3.1.2 Description of the Questionnaire ……………………………………………………55

3.3.2 Interview for Teachers ………………………………………………………………….58

3.3.2.1 Rationale for Interview ………………………………………………………………58

3.3.2.2 Description of the Interview …………………………………………………………59

3.4 Validity and Reliability ………………………………………………………………………60

3.4.1 Reliability ……………………………………………………………………………….60

3.4.2 Validity ………………………………………………………………………………….61

3.4.2.1 Content Validity ………………………………………………..………………….... 61

vi

3.4.2.2 Construct Validity ……………………………………………………………………62

3.5 Data Collection ………………………………………………………………………………..63

3.5.1 Administering the Questionnaire ……………………………………………………….63

3.5.2 Conducting the Interview ……………………………………………………………….64

3.6 Data Analysis Procedure ……………………………………………………………………..66

3.6.1 Quantitative Analysis for Questionnaire ………………………………………………..66

3.6.2 Qualitative Analysis for Interview ……………………………………………………...66

Chapter Four: FINDINGS and DICUSSION

4.1 Research Question 1 …………………………………………………………………………68

4.1.1 Beliefs about Importance and Nature of Writing ………………………………………69

4.1.1.1 Beliefs about Importance of Writing …………………………………………………69

4.1.1.2 Beliefs about Nature of Writing ……………………………………………………...73

4.1.2 Beliefs about Teacher Roles and Teaching Writing ……………………………………78

4.1.2.1 Beliefs about Teacher Roles …………………………………………………………79

4.1.2.2 Beliefs about Teaching Writing ………………………………………………...……81

4.1.3 Summary of the Teachers’ Beliefs ……………………………………………………..87

4.1.3.1 Teachers’ Beliefs about the Importance of Writing to High School Students ……..…88

4.1.3.2 Teachers’ Beliefs about the Nature of Writing at High School Context ……..………88

4.1.3.3 Teachers’ Beliefs about Teacher Roles in Writing Classroom ………………………88

4.1.3.4 Teachers’ Beliefs about Teaching ……………………………………………………89

4.2 Research Question 2 ………………………………………………………………………….90

4.2.1 Pre–writing phase ………………………………………………………………………91

4.2.2 During–writing phase …………………………………………………………………..93

4.2.3 After–writing phase …………………………………………………………………….95

4.2.4 Summary of the Teachers’ Classroom Practices ………...……………………………..97

4.3 Research Question 3 ……………………………………………………………………….....98

4.3.1 Form–based Orientation: From Beliefs to Classroom Practices ………………………..99

4.3.2 Cognitive Process–based Orientation: From Beliefs to Classroom Practices ………...100

4.3.3 Functional Social–based Orientation: From Beliefs to Classroom Practices …………102

4.3.4 Interactive Social–based orientation: From Beliefs to Classroom Practices…………..104

4.3.5 Summary of the Interplays between the Teachers’ Beliefs and Practices …………….105

Chapter Five: CONCLUSION

5.1 Summary of Key Findings ………………………………………………………….………108

5.1.1 The Teachers’ Beliefs about Importance and Nature of Writing, Teacher Roles and

Teaching Orientations at High School Level ……………………………………….…108

vii

5.1.2 The Teachers’ Actual Classroom Practices of EFL Writing Instruction at High Schools

…………………………………………………………………………………………110

5.1.3 The Extent of Congruence between the Teachers’ Beliefs and Classroom Practices…111

5.2 Implications of the Findings ………………………………………………………..………112

5.3 Limitations of the Study ……………………………………………………………….……114

5.4 Recommendations for Further Research …………………………………………….……115

5.5 Contributions of the Study …………………………………………………………………116

REFERENCES …………………………………………………………………………………..117

APPENDICES …………………………………………………………………………………...125

viii

LIST OF TABLES

Page

Chapter Two: LITERATURE REVIEW

Table 2.1: Teacher Roles Proposed by Uddin (2014) …………………………………….. 23

Table 2.2: Teacher Beliefs Suggested by Some Authors …………………………………. 25

Table 2.3a: Examples of Teachers’ Beliefs about Subject Matters ………………………..26

Table 2.3b: Teachers’ Beliefs about Nature of Writing Skill ……………………………... 27

Table 2.4: Objective of MOET (2006) toward Writing Skill at High School ………..…… 32

Table 2.5: Text Types of Writing Sections ……………………………………..………… 33

Chapter Three: METHODOLOGY

Table 3.1: The Pedagogical Settings ……………………………………..……………….. 44

Table 3.2: Demographical Information of Participants ……………..…………………….. 45

Table 3.3a: Results of Pre–study Interview 1…………………..………………………….. 48

Table 3.3b: Results of Pre–study Interview 2 …………..…………………………………. 50

Table 3.4: Profiles of Participants in the Pilot Study………………………………...…….. 52

Table 3.5: The Link between Research Questions and Instruments ……….….………….. 54

Table 3.6: Description of the Questionnaire (Part II) ……………………..……………..... 56

Table 3.7: Description of the Questionnaire (Part III) ………………..…………………… 57

Table 3.8: Reliability Analysis (Cronbach’s Alpha) ……………..………………...….….. 60

Table 3.9: Process of Questionnaire Delivery and Collection ...………………….…...….. 63

Table 3.10: Demographical Information of the Interviewees..………………….………… 65

Chapter Four: FINDINGS and DISCUSSION

Table 4.1: Teachers’ Beliefs about the Extent of Importance of Writing …………………69

ix

Table 4.2: Teachers’ Beliefs about Reasons for Importance of Writing ……….…….…71

Table 4.3: Teachers’ Beliefs about Nature of Writing ………………………….…...…. 74

Table 4.4: Teachers’ Beliefs about Teacher Roles …………………………..…………. 79

Table 4.5: Teachers’ Beliefs about Teaching Writing …………….…………….……… 82

Table 4.6: Teachers’ Classroom Practices on Pre–writing Activities ……………….…...91

Table 4.7: Teachers’ Classroom Practices on While–writing Activities ….……………. 93

Table 4.8: Teachers’ Classroom Practices on After–writing Activities…..………….….. 95

Table 4.9a: A Comparison between the Teachers’ Beliefs and Practices ……..…………99

Table 4.9b: A Comparison between the Teachers’ Beliefs and Practices …..……….… 100

Table 4.9c: A Comparison between the Teachers’ Beliefs and Practices ...……...…..… 102

Table 4.9d: A Comparison between the Teachers’ Beliefs and Practices……………..... 104

x

LIST OF FIGURES, CHARTS

Page

Chapter Two: LITERATURE REVIEW

Figure 2.1: Borg’s (2003) Framework …………………………………………………… 30

Chapter Three: METHODOLOGY

Figure 3.1: Research Process …………………………………………………………….. 47

Chapter Four: FINDINGS and DISCUSSION

Chart 4.1: Impacting Factors on Interplays between Teachers’ Beliefs and Practices …. 106

xi

ABBREVIATIONS

EFL: English as Foreign Language

ELT: English Language Teaching

GCSE: General Certificate for Secondary Education

MOET: Ministry of Education and Training

TESOL: Teaching English for Speakers of Other Languages

1

Chapter One

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background to the study

In learning a foreign language, learners are subjected to four skills in a natural order

of acquisition that are listening, speaking, reading, and writing. And the latter, writing, is

deemed to be the most difficult language skill to be acquired (Mekki, 2012), requiring

“the mastery of a variety of linguistic, cognitive, and sociocultural competencies”

(Barkaoui, 2007). As what Mekki (2012) asserts, writing is a “difficult, sophisticated,

social activity and an important skill for language learners as well as native speakers”.

For linguistic factors, writing imposes a great necessity for careful and precise

completion, organization and connection of sentences. For cognitive factors, sometimes

the task of writing is imposed on us and this may cause a loss of ideas. For the

psychological factors, there is a lack of interaction and feedback between the writer and

the reader, the thing which makes writing a difficult task.

According to Mekki (2012), one of primary causes making writing skill difficult to

acquire is that students or teachers still believe that students‟ good writing ability derives

from what they have learnt about language and text forms but ignore specific steps and

collaborative strategies. It can be inferred that in order to master writing skill, language

learners not only need linguistic knowledge since “even with linguistic knowledge

students often struggle to produce a cohesive piece of writing” (Uddin, 2014), but they

also grasp their social awareness of writing contexts (Khanalizadeh & Allami, 2012) as

well as their cognitive awareness of the processes they use to write (Hyland, 2003).

In helping learners develop their writing which is deemed such a sophisticated skill, it

is evidenced that “teachers are one of the key factors in delivering instruction that leads

to the development of competent literacy learners, [...] to be pivotal in influencing

students‟ literacy achievement” (Kraayenoord et. al, 2009). In other words, what teachers

2

teach may have explicit effects on writing performance of their students (Nguyen Ho

Hoang Thuy, 2009).

As teachers play such a critical role in developing learners‟ writing performance, their

instructional beliefs have also become a key issue in education since “what they believe

as well as what they do not believe have powerful influence on their classroom

behaviors” (Le Van Canh, 2011). This may originate from the view that “teachers are

active, thinking decision–makers who make instructional choices by drawing on complex

practically–oriented, personalized, and context–sensitive networks of knowledge,

thoughts, and beliefs” (Borg, 2003). In specific, Kuzborska (2011) elaborates that

“teachers‟ beliefs influence their goals, procedures, materials, classroom interaction

patterns, their roles, their students, and the schools they work in”. Therefore, Richards et

al. (2001) posit that “in order to understand how teachers approach their work, it is

necessary to understand the beliefs and principles they operate from”.

Indeed, teachers‟ beliefs in language education have been receiving an increased

concern from educational researchers and extensively discussed in literature (e.g., Farrell

& Particia, 2005; Yin, 2006; Phipps & Borg, 2009; Khonamri & Salimi, 2010;

Kuzborska, 2011; Li, 2012; Regassa & Teshome, 2015) since the 1970s (Zheng, 2009;

Erkmen, 2014), significantly contributing to the exploration of teachers‟ beliefs, and the

relationship between teachers‟ beliefs and practices (Zheng, 2009; Shinde & Karekatti,

2012). To put it different, exploration of teachers‟ pedagogical beliefs is at the heart of

our understanding of their planning, instructional decisions, and classroom practices. For

example, Li (2012) emphasizes that “a teacher‟s educational beliefs in the language

teaching–learning process will exert an imperceptible influence on forming active

language teaching methods and will bring about an improvement in students‟ language

abilities”.

Specific to the field of writing instruction, in recent years, researchers have shown an

increased interest in exploring how teachers think, feel and perceive about nature of

3

writing, their teacher roles and teaching in classroom, as well as the congruence between

what they believe and what they actually do in writing instruction (e.g., Farrell, 2006;

Khanalizadeh & Allami, 2012; Abadi & Marzban, 2012; Melketo, 2012; Corpuz, 2011;

Uddin, 2014; Nigam, 2015; Gaitas & Martins, 2015).

Farrell (2006) posits that “teachers examine their values and beliefs about teaching

and learning so that they can take more responsibility for their classroom actions”.

Empirically, the study showed that the participant believed that writing was an

intellectual activity which takes a lot of time for thinking and analyzing; therefore, the

participant took process approach to teaching writing. It is found that teachers‟ beliefs

have a direct effect on the teaching practices by transferring those beliefs into a practical

reality. In the similar vein, teachers‟ beliefs about nature of writing and teaching writing

skill have also been found in Khanalizadeh & Allami (2012). The study heightened

teachers‟ beliefs about theoretical orientations to writing including (1) writing as a formal

system, (2) as a cognitive process, and (3) as a social activity. More systematically,

English teachers‟ beliefs on the teaching of writing for both primary and high school

students were also investigated in Abadi & Marzban (2012) according to four main

categories, comprising of (1) meaning of writing; (2) importance of writing; (3) teaching

activities and practices; (4) feedback. In term of age factor, differences in teaching

writing skill should exist when we teach for different groups of students.

Not only teachers‟ beliefs about writing and teaching writing have constantly been

explored, but relationships between teachers‟ beliefs and their actual classroom practices

of writing instruction have also been published (e.g., Melketo, 2012; Uddin, 2014;

Nigam, 2015). For examples, Uddin‟s (2014) study has yielded its findings that although

the participants believed that writing as a process and student writers should follow

several stages to write such as gathering idea, planning, revising, drafting, they were

unable to practice in classrooms what they believed for some reasons including large

classroom, exam oriented culture, demands of syllabus completion on time, low–level

students, and time constraints. Likewise, Nigam (2015) examined how beliefs impact