A CASE STUDY ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF

COMMUNICATIVE APPROACH IN ENGLISH

TEACHING AND LEARNING IN VIETNAMESE
HIGHER EDUCATION
M.A Thao Thi Phuong
Nguyen
Division of International
Standard Program
Faculty of English
Phone number:
0963716969
Email:
phuongthaonguyen310@gmail.com

ABSTRACT
The study investigates the application of CLT in the International
Standard Program, University of Languages and International
Studies, Vietnam. Freshmen in different majors study English in
the program in one year to prepare for their academic learning.
The questionnaire and interview examine both teachers and
students reflection of the approach implementation as well as
students engagement and motivation in the teaching and
learning process. It has revealed that the program has applied
major principles and made some adjustments. Participants are
aware of the use of Vietnamese and English in class; teaching
grammar communicatively, employing communicative activities,
pair work or group work; avoiding immediate error correction
and making use of authentic materials. CLT is really employed
and does work in this context in relation with student
1

engagement and involvement. Therefore, it brings a new

impression on the CLT adoption in English language teaching in
Vietnam, which is often examined with challenges and even
failures of the approach. However, like other EFL contexts,
teachers here also have to make adaptations to fit students
need and ability. That is to say, in foreign language learning,
context may decide the way an approach work, and this can be
different from one to another.
Key words: communicative approach (CLT), non-English major
students, student engagement and motivation.

1. INTRODUCTION
1.1. Rationale
In recent decades, Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) or
Communicative Approach as its original name (Harmer, 2007) has
been advocated to apply in language teaching contexts all over the
world, especially in the settings where English is taught as a foreign
language (EFL). Due to the awareness of English being the
international language, national language education policies in EFL
countries have moved towards CLT since 1990s (Littlewood, 2007). It
could not be denied that CLT has gained the growing reputation as
an approach involving learners into the real-life language use and
develops their communication in English, which the foreign language
context may lack. However, the implementation of this approach has
also faced various challenges in this context. Some studies in the
last fifteen years such as Ellis (1996), Lewis and Cook (2002), Pham
(2007), and others have investigated the existing obstacles. A
number of difficulties have been found from all the research,
including students lack of communicative needs, the shortage of
authentic materials, the great effects of classic approaches together
with cultural related features that can not be changed immediately.
2

Therefore, in Asian settings such as China or Vietnam, Ellis (1996)

highly evaluates the teachers role in mediating the approach by
making it appropriate to the local culture and redefining the teacher
learner relationship in keeping with the cultural norms. Especially,
for the case of Vietnam, local teachers have to play the role of both
a teacher of English and a Vietnamese teacher to be reasonable
and appropriate in the way of carrying out the new teaching
approach (Phan, 2004). In other words, CLT needs to be both
culturally attuned and culturally accepted.
Few studies have been carried out about its implementation in
Vietnamese educational setting and teacher beliefs and practice
(Lewis & Cook, 2002; Phan, 2002; Pham, 2007). However, there
seems to be little concern about the implementation of CLT in a
context where English is not only a subject but also a medium for
learners to pursue their academic majors. As a result, this study sets
its aim of investigating the way CLT is implemented in the specific
context mentioned above as well as providing with some implication
for foreign language learning.

1.2. The study context

The study is conducted in the educational setting of ISP,
University of Languages and International Studies (ULIS), Vietnam
National University (VNU). Despite its two year length, it has
gained a great amount of attention from all related partners as
authorities, teachers, and students. This is a special program for
talented first-year students who belong to fast-track programs in
their majors. From four universities known as the branches of
Vietnam National University (University of Sciences, University of
Social Sciences and Humanities, University of Technology and
Engineering, University of Business and Economics), these students
spend one year studying the English for ISP in ULIS. The result of a
3

placement test at the beginning of the course categorizes students

into twenty four classes from high to low level. The ultimate purpose
is to teach students General English as a background for their major
studying in English in the next years. Thus, their ability to use the
language is highly concerned in this program because after this oneyear program students are expect to learn their majors in English.
After five six-week semesters with the levels following the Common
European Framework for Reference of languages from A1 to C1, they
can fulfill the program in case of achieving a certain score at the end
of the school year. The scope of this study is limited into two first
semesters A1 and A2.
Due to the output requirement that students can use English as
a medium in their academic majors, the biggest concern of this
program lies in enhancing both students background knowledge of
English related to its sub-skills, vocabulary and grammar as well as
promoting their communicative skills in English. To this extent,
communicative approach is preferred as the main one in teaching
and learning activities. However, factors referring the gap between
students level in different classes and the teaching time pressure
may affect the implementation of CLT in this setting. As a result, the
contextualization of communicative approach is always taken into
consideration

in

the

whole

program.

For

these

reasons,

by

conducting questionnaire and interviews to ISP students and

teachers, the project aims to answer the two following questions:
1. To

what

extent

is

communicative

approach

(CLT)

implemented in teaching English for ISP?

2. What are the implications for student engagement,
student motivation and for foreign language learning in
this context?
2. METHODOLOGY
2.1. Participants:
4

Being conducted in the context of ISP, the project involved

teachers and students of the program. Sixty eight students, about
one ninth of the total, took part in the study. Due to the fact that it is
hard to have all students participation, this number is expected to
partially reflect the whole setting with participants variety of
gender, schools and groups. Ranging in the age from 18 to 20, 37
males and 31 females belong to 18 out of 24 classes. They come
from all four branched universities as mentioned in the project
context.
With regard to teacher, the three female teachers in this study
are all junior ones who have three years of official teaching
experience. While the teachers could not represent the whole
potential participants, they did represent a distinct feature of the ISP
division

that

is

the

young

and

enthusiastic

teaching

staff.

Henceforth, three interviewed teachers will be named as teacher 1

(T1), teacher (T2) and teacher 3 (T3).
2.2. Methodology
2.2.1. Data collection instruments
Given the purpose of this study, mixed method research seems
to be the most appropriate methodology to be applied. It is
important to investigate the real situation of English teaching and
learning and the extent of CLT adaptation from both students and
teachers for a more objective result. Hence, the projects used two
types of data collection methods known as a written questionnaire
(Appendix 1) and semi structured interviews (Appendix 2).
With regard to questionnaire, the reason why I chose it as the
main method to collect data comes from the fact that a large
amount of data can be collected quickly and economically from a
certain sample. In this context, students playing the role of the
questionnaire respondents probably prefer because it saves their
time and effort. The questionnaire was designed to investigate the
extent of CLT implementation in ISP classrooms with regards to its
5

main

principles.

Moreover,

it

is

expected

to

suggest

some

implications on student motivation, student engagement and foreign

language learning related to the context. For these purposes, apart
from the first part of personal information, the second part focuses
on the use of classroom activities by a number of frequency rating
questions with the five scales applied Levine (2003) as 0-20%, 20%40%, 40%-60%, 60%-80% and 80%-100%. That is to give an
estimate for the frequency level. The third part asking about
students opinions towards their role, the lesson itself employs the
Likert scale of attitudes. Due to students level of English proficiency,
the questionnaire was sent to them in Vietnamese version. The
English version is in Appendix 1.
Moreover, two semi-structured interviews are carried out for
both teachers and students. The teacher interview is another tool to
reflect the process of teaching and learning and give more
description and explanation for what happens in the classroom.
Thanks to teachers high English proficiency, the interview was
conducted in English. The follow-up interview designed for students
who responded the questionnaire may give an in-depth description
for the answers in the questionnaire. Thus, the questions are quite
similar to the questionnaire and in Vietnamese. Each interview lasted
about thirty minutes and a list of open-ended questions can be seen
in Appendix 2.
2.2.2. Data collection procedure
The data collection has been done with a procedure of two
phases. Firstly, the online questionnaire was sent to students and the
interviews of three teachers were conducted at the same time. In the
questionnaire, it is convenience sampling because students can only
do the questionnaire in case they have Internet access, and they are
all participants that are available for the study. Secondly, the followup interview took place thanks to snowball sampling which means
from one participant; I could make contact with the other two, and
6

then interviewed three of questionnaire respondents. In the analysis,

they will be assigned as student 1 (S1), student 2 (S2) and student 3
(S3).
3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The result of the data collection process will be presented,
analyzed and discussed in this section. This analysis is supposed to
provide the answers to two research questions of the project.
1. Research question 1:
To what extent is communicative approach (CLT) implemented in
teaching English for ISP?
In

the

first

research

question,

the

investigation

of

the

implementation of CLT in ISP program is based on the major features

of this approach summarized in existing studies (Brandl, 2007;
Richards & Roger, 2001; Burns, 2009; Savignon, 2005). The aspects
are the language use referring to the use of English and Vietnamese
in the class, the grammar teaching, the fluency enhancement,
instruction materials, and error treatment.
1.1.

The language use

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

80%-100%
60%-80%
40%-60%
20%-40%
0%-20%

Figure 1: The student and teacher use of English and Vietnamese in

the classroom

The figure reveals that there is not much difference in the

frequency of student using Vietnamese and English in their classes.
More than a half of participants responded that they use the mother
tongue in the range of 40% - 60% while this scale gained a little less
number to English. The interviews explained that students normally
use Vietnamese when they cannot express their idea in English in
case students do not have enough vocabulary to speak (S2); or
when they work in pair or in group, some pairs or groups want to
exchange the ideas in Vietnamese, then translate into English (T1).
On the other hand, English is obviously used when they do speaking
activities with assigned topics (T3 & S2) or when they want to raise a
question with teachers (T1). The amount of the first language use
and second language use is rather equal in the class, which reflects
a matter that students do speak in English, but the lack of
vocabulary and the habit of using Vietnamese may hinder them.
Even though 40 out of 68 students have more than six years of
learning English before the program, their use of English and
Vietnamese in the classrooms is still a matter.
Despite their balanced use of two languages, students answers
show that teachers use English much more than Vietnamese in the
lessons. 52 respondents stated that English has been used 60% to
80% while 38 students claimed the use of Vietnamese takes place
quite occasionally. This calculation reflects teachers awareness of
applying the target language as much as possible, which Brandl
(2007) advocated. The interviews also revealed that for best classes
(group 1 and 2) the teacher uses nearly 100% of English (T1), but for
lower level ones they also use English but have to then translate into
Vietnamese, especially when explaining a grammatical point (T2 &
T3). To this extent, what ISP teachers have done followed the
principle supported by Finocchiaro and Brumfit (1983). Their use of
the two languages is also reported to highly depend on the students
level.
8

1.2.

The teaching of grammar

As Savignon (1972, 2005) emphasizes that grammar cannot be

forsaken in the CLT contexts. In this specific setting, the student
questionnaire shows that grammar teaching takes place quite
frequently in their lesson. The concern comes up with the way it is
taught and practiced.
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

80%-100%
60%-80%
40%-60%
20 %- 40%
0%-20%

Figure 2: The teaching of grammar in the classroom.

In respect of whether grammar is taught separately or
integrated into sub-skills, the answer is both as shown in Figure 2.
Referring to teaching it separately, about 80% of students stated
that the frequency varies from 20% to 60. Only five cases felt that it
is taught separately all the time. Therefore, it is not surprising to
notice of about 70% of participants reflecting the usual integration of
grammar in teaching other skills. The program is likely to pursue the
purpose of teaching grammar with speaking, reading, listening and
writing; however, the question lies in the certain amount of
separated grammar lessons. The interviews did help clarify the
problems

when

teachers

and

students

provided

reasonable

arguments as grammar is taught separately in A1 and A2 to revise

students knowledge (T2, S3).
9

In terms of the grammar practice, the chart displays a fact that

drills or mechanical practices are quite popular in the lessons with 46
students reporting its use from 60% to 100%. T1 explained that this
kind of practice almost occurs in low level class whereas even in high
level class, S1 in group 1 also mentioned drills as one kind of
grammar practice. To this extent, Grammar Translation Method still
seems to have its place in this context.

Besides, communicative

practice also has its own position in the program. Only 10 students
answered that there are no or little communicative activities to
practice the grammatical points. Teachers confirmed that they often
use interactive games with the whole class involvement. Together
with exercises, they need students to use the grammar point to
talk, to communicate with their friends(T3) and also use what they
have learnt in listening and writing(T1). At this point, their
perspective may echo the weak version of CLT as discussed in the
previous part.
To sum up, for A1 and A2, improving students grammar has
been actually regarded as one of major goals of the program. In
order to achieve this, they had a combination of both traditional
approach and communicative approach.
1.3.

Fluency enhancement

As mentioned before, the key principle of CLT is to develop

learners fluency which can be gained through communicative
activities, group work or pair work and the tolerance of error. The
situation of these issues is reported in Figure 3 as following:

10

Figure 3: The aspect of fluency in the classroom

Firstly,

as

can

be

inferred

from

the

table,

developing

communication skills attracts the serious attention in the classroom.

The frequency of communicative topics and communicative activities
is likely to be great with about 80% students responding their
proportion from 60% to 100%. The communicative topics showing
the language functions are in fact based on the Practical English
section in the course book as one teacher revealed. Communicative
tasks, discussing in the teacher and student interview, appear to be
the essential part of the lesson.
The data has shown the interest of both teachers and students
in applying activities such as role play or discussion. They see the
effectiveness of using those to raise the class up and make the
lesson easier.
Due to the high frequency of communicative activities, there is
no surprise that pair work and group work also possess the large
portion as displayed in the table. T1 even confirmed that she always
uses the cooperative learning in her lesson, especially in speaking
and listening. In other words, they become the backbone of the
lessons in this context.

11

Lastly, the study investigates the way teachers treat errors in

students speaking activities, which is whether they correct the
errors immediately or delay the action until students. Interestingly,
students have rather similar responses to the frequency of both
methods. The figure may imply that teachers apply both of them and
have a moderate use. From the interview, immediate error
correction often solves with serious pronunciation or grammar errors
affecting the meaning understanding (T3). Normally, when students
have a short talk in front of the class, teachers will not interrupt
because they are afraid of demotivating the speaker.
Generally speaking, the learning and teaching process here is in
favor of promoting students communication in terms of fluency
practice. To this extent, the communicative approach does really
work well in the context.
1.4.

The instruction materials

Last but not least, materials one of the input resources- have
been examined in the project to evaluate the level of authenticity. It
is unearthed that besides using the textbooks known as New English
File, teachers have used a number of supplementary materials.
Related to materials such as English newspapers, magazines or
films, the questionnaire result shows that over a half of students
thought that their teachers used these ones from 40% to 80% of the
lessons. All three students stated that they sometimes watched a
short film in English. T2 told that she uses BBC or CNN news in
listening or T1 even organizes a game using realia in helping
students learn new vocabulary. However, the point that T3 raised
should also be taken into consideration, she admitted that she rarely
used the English films or newspapers for low level students because
it may be too hard for them. That is to say, teachers are aware of
using

authentic

materials

but

12

they

have

to

make

careful

consideration due to students level. The story can be very different

from top classes to ones at the bottom.
2. Research question 2:
What are the implications for student engagement, student
motivation and for foreign language learning in this context?
In fact, this question can be regarded as a follow-up of the first
question. However, I put it into a separate one to highlight the
effects of CLT implementation on student in particular and the
process of foreign language learning in general. Using the Likert
scale of attitudes, the third part of the questionnaire tries to
investigate students evaluation of their involvement and their roles
in the lessons. The following table summarizes the result:

Figure 4: Student motivation and engagement in the classroom

The questions are around students viewpoint on the lessons,
their participation, their motivation and their roles in the class. It can
be clearly seen that a large number of students strongly agreed with
all the four statements which gives positive evaluations. Moreover,
no one had a strong disagreement with any statement. There are still
a certain group who are confused to give make their final decision
and chose the one between two spheres. The interviews with
teachers and students again state this result and vary the case when
figuring out that most of students are very interested in learning
English (T3, T1).
13

In terms of positive impact, the result that the lessons are

interesting to almost students and involve them in activities can be
shared with other studies in EFL contexts such as Jin, Singh & Li
(2005), Sun and Cheng (2002). Moreover, students in this context
are really motivated as Tosuncuoglu (2011) stresses that learners
prefer a meaning-based approach. What motivates them most is the
time when they can play games or do other interactive activities
because they are learning English to use the language. Importantly,
they all feel that they play the central role and teachers are the
facilitator, manager and supporter, which is another outstanding
feature of CLT. However, all teachers have the same feedback that
there are still some students who do not want to take part in any
activities in the class. Maybe they are shy and quiet people or their
English is not good enough to speak out. This kind of anxiety is, to a
certain degree, caused by CLT because all phases often require
students to be very active whereas it takes time for someone to
adjust the situation (Brandl, 2007).
With regard to the foreign language learning, when Littlewood
(1981) and Johnson (1982) indicated principles inferred from CLT
practice, they underscored that activities of this approach does
promote the second or foreign language learning because they
involve real communication. It is a pity that the project cannot
assess the approach effects on learners progress within its scope.
Nevertheless, the interviews partially affirm its benefit to learners
when all three students can see their progress in many aspects of
the language such as grammar, vocabulary, and skills. Especially,
they now feel more confident to speak in English when they meet a
foreigner or attend events in English.
4. CONCLUSION
In summary, the

study

investigated

the

application

of

communicative approach in a specific EFL context. It has revealed

that the teaching and learning process has applied its major
14

principles and made some adjustments to the local setting. Both

teachers and students are aware of maximizing the target language
use and

minimizing

the

native language; teaching

grammar

communicatively, employing communicative activities, pair work or

group work as much as possible; avoiding immediate error correction
and making use of authentic materials. They have a great interaction
with each other, and students really feel engaged into the lessons.
CLT is really employed and does work in this context in relation with
student engagement and involvement. To this aspect, it brings a new
impression on the CLT adoption in English language teaching in
Vietnam, which is often examined with a lot of challenges and even
failures of the approach. However, like other EFL context, teachers
here also have to make some adaptation to fit students need and
ability. For instances, grammar which is stressed in the first two
semesters is at times taught separately; or teachers occasionally use
Vietnamese in the lessons and still have some immediate error
correction. This is because of the gap in students level within the
program between top classes and the bottom ones, the fact that
many students cannot speak English even after ten year learning the
language at school and also students personality. That is to say, in
foreign language learning, context may decide the way an approach
work, and this can be different from one to another.
For further research, the impact of CLT implementation on
students language learning should be carried out to give a more indepth evaluation on its effectiveness. Also, due to the limitation of
this research, classroom observation needs to be applied in the
future studies.

REFERENCES
1. Borg, S and Burns, A.(2008), Integrating grammar in adult TESOL
classrooms. Applied Linguistics, 29(3), 456-482.
2. Brumfit, C. (1988), Applied linguistics and

communicative

language teaching. In Grabe, W (ed.) Annual Review of Applied

15

Linguistics:

Communicative

Language

Teaching.

New

York:

Cambridge University Press.

3. Burns, A. (2009), Grammar and Communicative Language
Teaching: Why, When and How to teach it?. CAMTESOL
Conference.
4. www.professoranneburns.com/.../camtesol2009.pdf (consulted
20/01/2012)
5. Canale, M and Swain, M. (1980), Theoretical bases of
communicative approaches to second language teaching and
testing. Applied Linguistics, 1(1), 1-47.
6. Ellis, G. (1996), How culturally appropriate is the communicative
approach, ELT Journal, 50(3), 213-218.
7. Finocchiaro, M and Brumfit, C. (1983), The Functional Notional
Approach: From Theory to Practice. New York: Oxford University
Press.
8. Grabe, W (ed.) 2009, Annual Review of Applied Linguistics:
Communicative

Language

Teaching.

New

York:

Cambridge

University Press.
9. Harmer, J. (2007), The Practice of English Language Teaching, (4th
ed.). Pearson Longman.
10. Hymes, D.(1972), On communicative competence. In Pride, J.B
and Holmes, J (eds) Sociolinguistics. Harmondsworth: Penguin,
pp.269-293.
11. Johnson, K. (1982), Communicative Syllabus Design and
Methodology. Oxford: Pergamon.
12. Lewis, M and Cook, F. (2002), Cultures of teaching: voices from
Vietnam. ELT Journal, 56(2), 146-153.
13. Littlewood, W. (1981), Communicative Language Teaching.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
14. Littlewood, W. (2007), Communicative and task-based language
teaching in East Asia classrooms. Language Teaching, 40(3), 243249.
15. Pham, H.H.(2007), Communicative language teaching: unity
within diversity. ELT Journal, 61(3), 193-201.
16. Phan, L.H. (2004), University classrooms in Vietnam: contesting
the stereotypes. ELT Journal, 58(1), 50-57.
16

17. Richards, J.C and Rodgers, T.S. (2001), Approaches and

Methods in Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
18. Savignon, S.J. (1972), Teaching for communicative competence:
a research report. Audiovisual Language Journal, 10(3), 153-162.

NGHIN CU IN HNH V VIC P DNG PHNG

PHP GING DY TING ANH THEO NG HNG
GIAO TIP BC I HC VIT NAM
Th.S Nguyn Th Phng Tho
B mn Nhim v chin lc
Khoa Ting Anh
in thoi: 0963716969
Email: phuongthaonguyen310@gmail.com

TM TT
Nghin cu ny kho st vic p dng phng php ging dy ting Anh theo ng
hng giao tip (CLT) dnh cho chng trnh Nhim v chin lc. Cc sinh vin
nm th nht t cc trng thnh vin ca HQGHN hc ting Anh c bn trong mt
nm ti HNN chun b cho vic hc chuyn ngnh bng ting Anh. Nghin cu
c thc hin qua vic pht phiu kho st cho sinh vin v phng vn mt s gio
vin v sinh vin trong chng trnh. Kt qu cho thy CLT c p dng vi mt
s thay i ph hp vi thc tin ging dy. C gio vin v sinh vin nhn thc c
tng sut s dng ting Vit v ting Anh trong lp hc, vic dy v hc ng php mt
cch tch cc, ng dng cc hot ng pht huy kh nng giao tip, hot ng i v
nhm, trnh vic cha li tc thi cng nh vic dng ti liu thc tin. Mt s kh
khn v thay i c a ra. T ch ra rng thc tin ging dy c nh hng ti
vic p dng phng php ny.
T kha: phng php ging dy theo ng hng giao tip, sinh vin khng
chuyn ngnh ting Anh, s tham gia ca hc sinh, ng lc hc tp
APPENDIX
Appendix 1:
17

STUDENT QUESTIONNAIRE
I.

Personal information:

Please circle the option or write down your answer:

1. Age:
2. Gender: Male

Female

3. Which university do you study for your major?

a. University of Business and Economics
b. University of Technology and Engineering
c. University of Science
d. University of Social Sciences and Humanities
4. Which class of ISP are you in?
5. How long have you been learning English?
II.

Activities in the classroom

Please put a tick in the boxes which show how often the following
activities take place in your English class.
Activities

100%-

80%-

60%-

40%-

20%-

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

I use the target language (i.e

English)
Students use the mother tongue
(i.e Vietnamese)
Teachers use the target language
(i.e English)
Students use the mother tongue (i.e
Vietnamese)
Learning grammatical rules in the
lessons
Grammar is taught separately from
other skills
Grammar is taught together with
other skills (speaking, listening,
18

reading or writing)
Students do structural exercises to
practise grammatical rules after
learning them
Students play games, and do other
communicative activities as role
play to practise grammatical rules
Functional activities to help students
improve communicative
competence such as greeting,
inviting, etc are used in the lessons
Games and role play are used in the
lessons
Students are required to work in
pairs/ groups
Teachers use authentic materials
(e.g: English newspaper, films)
Teachers correct student errors
when he/she is speaking.
Teachers correct student errors after
they finish their speaking activity.
III.

Student engagement and motivation in the classroom

Please put a tick () in the boxes that show your opinion on the
following statement.
Strongl

Agree

Neither

Disagr

Strong

agree

ee

ly

agree

nor

disagr

disagre

ee

e
The lessons are interesting.
Students are involved in every
activity.
I feel motivated to learn English
in this program.
Students are the centre of the
lesson, not teacher.

19

THANK YOU FOR YOU COOPERATION!

Appendix 2:
TEACHER INTERVIEW
1. How many years have you been teaching English?
2. How many hours of class do you teach a week?
3. Can you describe the programme youre teaching?
4. What kinds of material do you use in your teaching?
5. Can you describe how you would teach a new grammar point to your
students?
6.

How do you introduce and help students practice grammatical

rules?

7. Do you use communicative activities such as information gap,

jigsaw, opinion sharing, task-completion? If so, how often? What do
you like/dislike about these tasks?
8. Do you use pair work, group work in your classroom? If so, how
often? What do you like/dislike about these ways of organizing
learning?
9. What do you think about can be the role of these activities in the
lessons?
10.

Do you use English newspapers, films in your teaching?

11.

Do you use Vietnamese in your teaching? If so, when and why?

20

12.

Do your students use Vietnamese in class? If so, when and

why?
13.

How do you deal with student errors in speaking activities?

14.

What is students level of involvement in the lessons?

15.

In which phase of the lesson do you see students are most

engaged?
16.

What do you do to motivate students in the lessons?

17.

What approach(es) do you follow in your teaching? And the

effects of this/these approach(es) to the students/lessons?

18.

Is there anything else with regard to teaching English in

Vietnam that I should have asked or that you would like to comment
on?

STUDENT INTERVIEW
1. What ISP class are you in?
2. Which university are you studying for your maijor?
3. What language do you often use in the class?
4. How about learning grammar? Do you learn grammar and how
often?
21

5. How does your teacher introduce a new grammatical point?

6. How do you practice with that grammatical point?
7. How often do your teachers use this activity?
8. Do you work in pair or in group in the lessons?
9. What do you like or dislike about this way of organizing learning?
10. Can you explain more about your learning materials?
11.

In terms of error correction, what do your teachers do with the

error you make in speaking activities?

12.

Which way do you prefer?

13.

In general, what do you think about the lessons?

14.

Hows about your role in the lesson?

15.

And in which part of the lesson are you most involved?

16. Finally, would you like to have any feedback to the program?

22