ABSTRACT
This study aims at investigating how giving and checking instructions
techniques were applied by the fourth year students in their microteaching. To fulfill
this objective, both qualitative and quantitative methods with three research instruments
including questionnaires, interviews and observations were employed. The participants
of the study were 90 fourth year students at the Faculty of English Language Teaching
Education, University of Languages and International Study, Vietnam National
University. 7 out of 90 participants were randomly selected to be interviewed and then
observed in their microteaching. The most significant finding of the study was that
there was a paradox between what the student teachers reported and what they actually
performed in a micro-lesson. Added to this, there were some problems in giving and
checking instructions techniques applied by the participants in their microteaching.
These problems include language use, engaging students’ concentration and checking
understanding. The student teachers tended to use lengthy and polite language and they
all delivered handouts before instructing students. Also, a minority of them attracted
students’ attention. Moreover, instead of employing a particular technique for
instructions, the trainee teachers gave a chain of instructions at a time. Finally, without
checking to see whether their instructions were fully understood or not, the trainee
teachers carried out the activities right away. The paper would be a good reference for
those who want to learn about giving and checking instructions techniques. Besides,
from the findings proposed in this research, the fourth year students in the following
years can draw experience and learn a lesson for themselves to better their giving and
checking skill in their microteaching and future teaching.
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE
Acknowledgements
Abstract
List of figures, tables and abbreviations
ii
iii

11
11
12
12
13
ii
1.3.3. Types of classroom instructions
1.3.4. Effective giving and checking instructions
1.3.5. Techniques for giving and checking instructions
2. Related studies
2.1. Related studies on mircoteaching
2.2. Related studies on giving and checking instructions
13
17
18
18
19
CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY
1. Participants
2. Data collection instruments
2.1. Questionnaires
2.2. Interview
2.3. Observation
3. Data collection procedure
4. Data analysis methods and procedures
21
22
22
23
24

iv
LIST OF TABLES PAGES
Table 1 Syntactic forms of directives
24
Table 2 Questionnaire content
32
Table 3 Reasons for giving clear instructions in order of importance
40
Table 4
Factors influencing the effectiveness of instructions
42
Table 5
How the fourth year students apply giving and checking
instructions techniques 48
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Diagrammatic Representation of a Micro-teaching Cycle
16
Figure 2 4
th
year students’ perception of the importance of giving and
checking instructions in a microteaching lesson
39
Figure 3 Difficulty level of giving and checking instructions
41
Figure 4 The most effective technique for giving and checking
instructions
43
Figure 5
Language of giving instructions
45

year students’ micro teaching,
I have identified several problems related to classroom management, one of which is
giving and checking instruction techniques. Hence, I have decided to investigate this
problem in a research paper titled “The exploitation of giving and checking
instruction techniques applied by 4
th
year students in their microteaching at FELTE,
ULIS, VNU”.
1
2. Aims and objectives of the study
The overall aim of this study was to explore how the fourth year students (the
student-teachers) exploited giving and checking instructions techniques in their
microteaching sessions. To achieve this aim, firstly, the research is expected to find out
how the fourth year students perceive giving and checking instructions skill. Secondly,
the student teachers’ real application of giving and checking instructions techniques in
their microteaching was also investigated. Finally, the researcher hoped to find out the
problems the student teachers might have when giving and checking instructions in
their micro-lessons.
In brief, the study would seek to answer the following questions:
(1) What are the fourth year students’ perceptions of giving and checking
instructions skills?
(2) How do they apply giving and checking instructions techniques in their
microteaching?
(3) What are some problems these students may have when giving and checking
instructions?
3. Significance of the study
If the mentioned objectives could be achieved, the study would hopefully
provide a closer look at the 4
th
year students’ implementation of giving and checking

paper are also provided.
3
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
This chapter embraces two main parts. In the very first part, some key concepts
related to the research topic are elaborated with the aim of providing a theoretical basis
for the study. The key concepts cover: 1) microteaching, 2) classroom management,
and 3) giving and checking instructions. In the next section, the researcher provides a
brief overview of some related studies.
1. Key concepts
1.1. Microteaching
1.1.1 Definitions of microteaching
The history of microteaching goes back to the early and mid 1960's, when
Dwight Allen and his colleagues from the Stanford University developed a training
program aimed to improve verbal and nonverbal aspects of teachers’ speech and
general performance. The Stanford model consisted of a three-step (teach, review and
reflect, re-teach) approach by using actual students as an authentic audience. The
model was first applied to teaching science, and later on it was introduced to language
teaching (Maheshwari, 2011).
In the next years, microteaching was seen as a professional development tool
applied in education. Therefore, many educationalists have provided a great deal of
approaches to microteaching.
In 1964, a critical study of microteaching techniques was conducted by Olivero
with a view to suggesting improvement in its implementation in colleges of education.
The objective of the investigation was to study the opinions of training-college
teachers about microteaching in the light of their experience while guiding and
observing lessons. The sample consisted of training college teachers teaching different
subject methodologies and 20 experienced and effective teachers.
4
Allen and Eve (1968, as cited in Maheshwari, 2011) explained that micro
teaching is a system of controlled practice that makes it possible to concentrate on

terms of class size, time, number of students, content, etc.
(2) It focuses on training for the accomplishment of specific tasks.
(3) It is videotaped for reviewing, responding, refining and re-
teaching.
1.1.2. Microteaching Cycle
Wallace (1991) points out that in tradition, microteaching has four main stages:
“the briefing”, “the teach”, “the critique” (analysis and discussion), and “the re-teach”.
However, the flexibility of microteaching allows for a wide range of variation in
implementation.
In the book “Microteaching” (2004), Sharma and Singh provide a seven-step
microteaching cycle. According to them, without these seven important steps, the
microteaching process cannot be completed. These steps are as follow:
Figure 1: Diagrammatic Representation of a Micro-teaching Cycle
6
Modeling the skill
(First step)
Planning a Micro-
Lesson
(Second step)
Teaching Session
(Third step)
Re-Critique
Session
(Seventh step)
Re-Teaching
Session
(Sixth step)
Re-Planning
Session
(Fifth step)

This is the most important component of microteaching for behavior
modification of trainee teachers in the desired direction in each and every skill practice.
7
1.1.3. The importance of microteaching
According to Maheshwari (2011), microteaching is an excellent way to build
up teaching behaviors, skills and confidence “under the micro scope”, in a protected
environment of friends and colleagues and aided by video-recordings.
He also puts forward that microteaching session is a chance to adopt new
teaching and learning strategies and, through assuming the student role, to get an
insight into students' needs and expectations. It is a good time to learn from others
and enrich student teachers’ teaching methods.
Through microteaching, student teachers can practice what has been skillfully
taught as well as receive various precious feedbacks from the supervisors in teaching
skills. In addition, microteaching provides a “safe experimentation” environment for a
student teacher to pilot with new skills of teaching and thereby improve upon them
(Wallace, 1991).
Sharma and Singh (2004) pointed out plenty of benefits of microteaching.
They supposed that microteaching helps student teachers develop self-confidence and
equip them with a collection of teaching skills such as the skill of controlling over the
size of class, quality of the students, the length of the period, and the motivation of the
students (i.e. classroom management skill), which they can apply in the practicum later
on.
Besides, microteaching makes trainee teachers get familiar with teaching styles
including drawing learners’ attention, using teaching aids, asking questions, and using
and managing time effectively. They can acquire the skill to prepare lesson plans,
choose teaching goals and appropriate learner activities. Through those, the teachers’
classroom management skills are improved. In addition, microteaching also leads
trainee teachers to focus attention on teacher behaviors, the methods of criticising
students’ performance and analysing pupil learning (Sharma & Singh, 2004).
In general, microteaching makes the teacher education program more

9
the key to the whole success of a course. If lessons do not run smoothly, a number of
difficult problems can easily and unexpectedly arise. Students may lose motivation and
concentration, become disinterested in their studies, and even get to the point where
they join in with other students’ disruptive behavior as they feel there is no viable
alternative. To prevent this problem from becoming a harsh reality, classroom
management must be put into place. Burden (2003) supposed that teachers who
possess the ability to manage their classrooms are able to create an environment where
learning is focus. Kratochwill (as cited in Dinh, 2011) emphasises the importance of
classroom management or “classroom discipline” by stating that it is considered as a
priority for teachers. Furthermore, classroom management and instructional skills are
always identified by teachers as their priority.
Marzano (2003) accentuated the essence of classroom management by stating
that in a poorly manage classroom it is impossible for effective teaching and learning
to take place. He opines that if the students are disordered, the class is in chaos; in
such situations, both the teacher and students suffer. In contrast, a well managed
classroom provides an environment in which teaching and learning can flourish.
Classroom management is “the ways in which students’ behavior, movement,
interaction, etc… during class is organized and controlled by the teacher to enable
teaching to take place most effectively” (Longman dictionary, p74). Classroom
management is all the actions teachers take to create an environment that supports
academic and social-emotional learning. It includes all of the teacher’s practices
related to establishing the physical and social environment of the classroom, regulating
routines and daily activities, and preventing and correcting behavior. According to
Sasson (2007, as cited in Nguyen, 2010), classroom management is the act of forming
and maintaining order in the classroom in which instructions are conducted.
Aspects of classroom management may vary in accordance with different
approaches. Evertson and Weinstein (2006) offered the framework indicating that
classroom management has two distinct purposes: “It not only seeks to establish and
10

of comprehensible target language input the learner is likely to receive.
Cullen (1998) provided some features of teacher talk as follows: (1) the use of
“referential” questions, (2) content feedback by the teacher, (3) attempt to negotiate
meaning with the students, and (4) the use of speech modification, hesitations and
rephrasing in the teacher’s own talk, e.g. when explaining, asking questions and giving
instructions, etc.
In the classroom context, teacher talk is generally the only source of
comprehensible input and live target language model. Therefore, the amount of teacher
talk and speech modification plays an important part, contributing to the effectiveness
of the lesson.
According to Nunan (1991), the reason for teachers to modify their talk is to
make their speech “more comprehensible, and therefore, potentially more valuable for
acquisition” (p.191). Chaudron (1988, as cited in Nunan 1991) also found out the
features of teachers’ speech modification: (1) Rates of speech appear to be slower, (2)
Pauses, which may be evidence of the speaker planning more, are possibly more
frequent and longer, (3) Pronunciation tends to be exaggerated and simplified, (4)
Vocabulary use is more basic, (5) Degree of subordination is lower, (6) More
declarative and statements than questions, and (7) Teachers may self-repeat more
frequently.
In the idea of teacher talk needed for good classroom management, Gower,
Philips and Walters (1995) explained that giving clear instructions, telling the students
what to expect, calling on students by names, etc. are dispensable parts of any lesson.
Hence, giving instructions can be seen as an essential skill that teachers should develop.
1.3.2. The importance of instructions
Barber and Mourshed, as cited in Dean et al. (2011), stressed the essential of
instructions in classroom: “The only way to improve outcomes is to improve
instruction” (p.11). That determines how successfully students will learn depend on
12
the way instructions are formulated. Unless the directions or instructions are
effectively and clearly constructed, there will be unwanted result in the quality of the

Speech Function: Directives
Form Example
1. Imperatives a. Base form of verb
b. You + imp.
c. Pres. Part.
d. Verb ellipsis
e. Imp + modifier
f. Let+ 1
st
per. Pro
Speak louder.
You go on with the work.
Looking at me.
Hands up.
Turn around, please.
Let’s try.
2. Interrogatives a. Modals
b. Non-modals
Will you read this page for me?
People at the back are you
listening?
3. Declaratives a. Embedded agent
b. Hints
I want you to draw a picture.
Sally, you are not saying much.
Of these all types, according to Holmes (1983), imperatives are stated as the
most frequent and explicit enough not to cause any misunderstanding among students.
Lewis and Hill (1985) stated that teacher’s instructions in the classroom should
be “simple, precise and explicit” (p.47). If the directives are clear, easy to understand
and straight to the points, students will certainly know what they are expected to do.

otherwise, they will lose their students’ attention.
Both Gower, et al. (1995) and Ur (1991) also agreed that hand-outs, materials
should not be delivered and group should not be formed during or before giving
instructions which may distract the students’ concentration.
1.3.4.4. Breaking the instructions down
15
In order to prevent students from forgetting the first point in the teacher’s
instructions by the time the final steps are explained, the teacher should divide
instructions into manageable steps (Hughes, 2004).
Because learners have only a short attention span (Ur, 1991), instructions
should be given in segments rather than given all at once. Also, the teacher should
check if the students understand the instructions (Gower et al., 1995).
1.3.4.5. Demonstrating
Demonstrating rather than explaining is one of the best ways to have effective
instructions suggested by many scholars. Lewis and Hill (1985) indicated that
demonstration helps “reduce the amount of unnecessary teacher language” (p.51).
Thaine et al. (n.d) reported that demonstrating using gestures and body
language is a good way to reduce the amount of teacher talk and make teachers’
instructions clearer and more understandable for learners.
Scrivener (2005), as cited in Dinh (2011), pointed out teachers should
demonstrate whenever and wherever possible.
“Showing what to do is more effective than telling what to do” is one piece of
advice proposed by Gower et al. (1995, p.41). It is better to model the task and always
do an example for students in the class.
1.3.4.6. Using visual or written clues
Gower et al., (1995) pointed out that visual clues such as real objects, pictures,
gestures or mime… are supportive tools to explain or give instructions. Moreover,
teachers can even note down some key points of their instructions on the board in
order to be easier for students to understand and remember.
1.3.4.7. Using L1

them what to do by giving a demonstration. A demonstration is easier to understand
than an explanation and reduces teaching talking time.
(c) Say – do – check
17
The teacher follows three steps for each instruction. First, he/she says the
instructions, then he/she gets the students to do it, then he/she checks that they have
done it correctly before going on to the next instruction. Using Say – Do –Check the
teacher can tell straight away if the students have not understood something and can
take action to make sure that they understand it.
(d) Student recall
After giving instructions in English, the teacher checks if the students
understand everything by saying “Tell me what you have to do in Vietnamese” or “Say
it again in Vietnamese”. Asking the students to recall what they will do in Vietnamese
is helpful as at lower level they may not understand the instructions. It makes them
clear about what they have to do and allows the teacher to check that they understand
what to do.
2. Related studies
2.1. Related studies on microteaching
Micro-teaching is seen as one of the innovations to strengthen the teaching
skills of student teachers. It is relatively a new departure in teacher training; it employs
an analytical approach to teaching and training. Therefore, there are quite a lot studies
on this issue.
In 1964, a significant study of micro teaching techniques with an aim to suggest
improvement in its implementation in colleges of education, department of
postgraduate education and research was conducted by Olivero. The objective of the
paper was to study the opinions of training-college teachers about microteaching in the
light of their experience while guiding and observing lessons. The sample consisted of
training college teachers teaching different subject methodologies and 20 experienced
and effective teachers. The study indicated that while training the science student-
teachers, activities such as teacher talk, questioning, blackboard work and

research papers in which giving and checking instructions were seen as one element of
classroom management skills. The significance of these two studies lies in the fact that
they pointed out the difficulties encountered by pre-service teachers in their practicum.
Being carried out in 2011 by Dinh Thi Ha Phuong, “Giving and checking
instructions skills among 4
th
year students during their practicum” aims at exploring
teacher trainees’ perception of effective instructions and the level of effectiveness with
19