VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
University of Languages and international Studies
FACULTY OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHER EDUCATION
NGUYỄN HƯƠNG THẢO

USING INTERACTIVE WHITEBOARDS IN
TEACHING ENGLISH TO PRIMARY STUDENTS
IN AN ENGLISH CENTER IN HANOI
SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE
DEGREE OF BACHELOR OF ARTS (TEFL)
SUPERVISOR: PHẠM THỊ THANH THỦY, M.A.
Ha Noi, May 2014
ĐẠI HỌC QUỐC GIA HÀ NỘI
TRƯỜNG ĐẠI HỌC NGOẠI NGỮ
KHOA SƯ PHẠM TIẾNG ANH
KHOÁ LUẬN TỐT NGHIỆP
NGHIÊN CỨU SỬ DỤNG BẢNG TƯƠNG TÁC
TRONG VIỆC DẠY TIẾNG ANH CHO LỨA TUỔI
TIỂU HỌC TẠI MỘT TRUNG TÂM TIẾNG ANH
TẠI HÀ NỘI
Giáo viên hướng dẫn: Phạm Thị Thanh Thủy, M.A.
Sinh viên: Nguyễn Hương Thảo
Khoá: QH2010.F1.E2

HÀ NỘI - NĂM 2014
ACCEPTANCE
I hereby state that I: Nguyen Huong Thao, QH2010.E2, being a candidate
for the degree of Bachelor of Arts (TEFL) accept the requirements of the College
relating to the retention and use of Bachelor’s Graduation Paper deposited in the
library.
In terms of these conditions, I agree that the origin of my paper deposited in


Technology is an inseparable part of education in the twenty-first century,
especially in teaching and learning English. Therefore, there is an increasing
awareness of the importance of technology in English teaching worldwide
especially for primary children. Among various technological tools, Interactive
Whiteboards appear as useful equipment which is becoming popular. In Vietnam,
Interactive Whiteboards are also chosen by many schools and educational centers
such as Nguyen Binh Khiem, Le Ngoc Han, Tran Hung Dao, British Council,
Apollo English Center, etc. However, the usefulness of this equipment in
Vietnamese teaching environment is still a matter of controversy which have been
fully develop; thus, it offers an opportunity for the researcher to conduct this study
to initially evaluate the use of Interactive Whiteboards in teaching primary students
in some Apollo English Centers in Hanoi.
The research was carried out in two Apollo English Centers which are
Apollo Lieu Giai and Apollo Nguyen Ngoc Vu. The participants are native teachers
teaching primary students in three main levels in Apollo which are starter, mover
and flyer. Because of that setting, the researcher decided to employ the qualitative
multiple-case study approach. Therefore, data were collected through interviews
and classroom observations. The data collected were then analyzed to gain the
insights and implications of the study. After conducting the study, the researcher
found out that the application of Interactive Whiteboards in teaching English to
primary students receives the positive attitude from teachers. It is revealed that the
equipment can help teachers reduce the burden of planning lesson with various
software and provided materials. From that, teachers can have more freedom in
using software to access the resources or go on the Internet and to create more
interesting activities for students. Moreover, Interactive Whiteboards support the
interaction and conversation between teachers and students and the presentation of
new linguistic and cultural elements. On the other hand, some minor shortcomings
of this equipment are the technical problems in terms of Internet access, the Pen,
the Pointing Stick and the projector.

Page
1
4
5
5
6
6
7
7
8
9
11
11
11
12
14
14
15
17
17
17
17
17
18
19
19
iv
3.4. Phase 2: Interview ……………………………………………………
3.4.1. Sampling …………………………………………………………
3.4.2. Data collection …………………………………………………

31
33
34
36
37
38
38
39
40
45
46
48
65
v
vi
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1. Statement of the problem and rationale for the study
Technology is an inseparable part of education in the twenty-first
century, especially in teaching and learning English (Rodinadze &
Zarbazoia, 2012). When it comes to teaching process, the appropriate use of
technology can help educational system work better and more effectively
(Jonassen & Reeves, 1996; Means, 1994). On the survey delivered by
Halderman (1992), when applying technology in teaching, students have
more chance of learning faster and more regularly. In another study on “Use
of Technology in English Language Teaching and Learning: An analysis”,
Shyamlee and Phil (2012) claim that “technology provides many options as
making teaching interesting and also making teaching more productive in
terms of improvements”. Besides, technology impulses the learning process
as well. Technology makes it more convenient for students to access the
knowledge (Rodinadze & Zarbazoia, 2012). These researchers believe that

English teaching. Researchers have explored different kinds of technology
can be used in English classroom such as radio, television, computers and so
on (Bahadur & Oogarah, 2013). Among various technological tools,
Interactive Whiteboards appear as useful equipment which is becoming
popular. According to Al-Saleem (2012), “Interactive Whiteboard is a very
innovative and powerful support for language acquisition” which takes full
use of computers’ features without breaking communication, improves new
kinds of learning and applies the internet into every English language class.
Derek (2009) finds that when Interactive Whiteboards are used in classroom,
both teachers and students are highly enthusiastic. He also confirms that
Interactive Whiteboards help teaching process more convenient by quickly
displaying text, images and accessing to websites whereby teachers can have
more time for instruction. Besides, Interactive Whiteboards are becoming
popular in schools. In the United Kingdom and the United States, Interactive
Whiteboards are widely used in school, colleges and universities (Isman,
Abanmy, Hussein & Al Saadany, 2012). Moreover, Interactive Whiteboards
2
are being used beyond UK and US, namely, Saudi Abria, Mauritius, etc.
(Bahadur & Oogarah, 2013). In 2011, all primary schools in Mauritius were
equipped with at least one Interactive Whiteboard.
The appearance of Interactive Whiteboards has changed the mode of
instruction (Bahadur & Oogarah, 2013); hence, many previous research have
been conducted in different countries all over the world to examine the
effects of it in English language teaching. Those research are carried on
various learners and researchers usually attempt to analyze the effects of
Interactive Whiteboards on teaching and learning processes (Yanez &
Coyle, 2011). Solvie (2004) reports Interactive Whiteboards encourage her
primary students in literacy learning thanks to its interactive function. The
author explains that the diagrams, webs and pictures, use of colors and
shapes to highlight texts have motivated students in learning and

Furthermore, basing on the result, the researcher evaluate whether
Interactive Whiteboards is a suitable tool in teaching English to primary
students in Vietnamese context. These aims can be achieved by finding
answers to the following three research questions:
1. How are Interactive Whiteboards being used in teaching English
to primary students in Apollo English Centers?
2. What are the benefits of Interactive Whiteboards in teaching
English to primary students from the perspective of the teachers
working at Apollo English Centers?
3. What are the weaknesses of Interactive Whiteboards in teaching
English to primary students as viewed by the teachers at Apollo
English Centers?
1.3. Significance of the study
In general, the research could be useful for both primary English
teachers and researchers working on related studies.
4
Firstly, in Vietnam research on Interactive Whiteboards is quite
limited. Therefore, the study would be an official research on this theme.
Once completed, the research is expected to be a good source for primary
English teachers in considering the advantages and disadvantages of using
Interactive Whiteboards whereby they can use it more effective.
Secondly, the research would solve the controversies over the
conformity of using Interactive Whiteboards in teaching English to primary
students in Vietnamese context. Through the result, the authorities and
educators can decide whether English classes for primary students in
Vietnam should apply this new teaching tool.
1.4. Scope of the study
The study was carried out among native teachers who are familiar
with working with Interactive Whiteboards in two centers of Apollo English
in Hanoi which are Apollo Lieu Giai and Apollo Nguyen Ngoc Vu. This

The rest of the paper contains the following chapters:
In chapter two (Literature review) the researcher discusses the
literature review on the key terms of the study with the review of related
studies.
In chapter three (Methodology), the researcher describes the
participants and methodology of the study with full details.
In chapter four (Findings and discussion), the researcher presents,
analyzes and discusses the findings from the collected data.
In chapter five (Conclusion), the last chapter, the researcher
summarizes the main issues discussed in the paper, suggests several
pedagogical recommendations from the findings, acknowledges the
limitation of the study and elaborate on its contributions.
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
This chapter includes the review of the literature related to Interactive
Whiteboards and details of primary students. In each section, the definition or
6
explanation of the key terms are presented together with the studies both worldwide
and in Vietnam related to the issue.
2.1. Interactive Whiteboards
2.1.1. Definition of Interactive Whiteboards
The first Interactive Whiteboard in the world was created by SMART
Technologies in 1991 (Company overview, n.d.). In his study, Al-Saleem
(2012) states that: “Interactive Whiteboard is a touch-sensitive screen that
works in conjunction with a computer and a projector”. It can be either
hung on the wall or placed on a cart with portable wheels so that it can be
transferred anywhere in the classroom or moved from one room to another
(Brezinová, 2009). Interactive Whiteboards play the role of presentation
device since they display images, audios or videos through the projector.
Users can control the equipment from both the board and the computer. In
addition, the users can interact with the board by using a pen or their own

Whiteboards for primary and secondary schools. Beyond, the experts
forecast the application of Interactive Whiteboards in classroom will
continue rising particularly in Europe and East Asia over the next three
years (Lee, 2010).
Interactive Whiteboards are applied in different subjects and learning
contexts. Essig and Dawn (2011) delivered a study on how Interactive
Whiteboards affect elementary mathematic teachers’ in their pedagogy,
technology integration and perceptions of students at those grades. The
results found out that using of Interactive Whiteboards enhanced the
learning experience of the students. This research also plays an important
role in identifying a new and effective model of professional presentation.
Another research on the application of Interactive Whiteboards was carried
out by Syh-Jong (2010) but in a different context among secondary science
teachers. The results can be listed as follows. Firstly, Interactive
Whiteboards help in instructing subject-matter knowledge to students.
8
Secondly, they supplement new instructional strategies for teachers. Finally,
they develop the technological pedagogical content and knowledge of
science teacher.
2.1.3. Interactive Whiteboards in language teaching
Interactive Whiteboards is one of the technological equipments that
began to be used in classroom in the late 1990s (Beeland, 2002). The
appearance of Interactive Whiteboards has changed the mode of instruction,
especially in language teaching (Bahadur & Oogarah, 2013). Therefore, a
number of research has been conducted to examine its effects in both
language teaching and learning process.
An outstanding research is conducted by Al-Saleem (2012) stated that
an Interactive Whiteboards support the teaching process of foreign language
in three main ways. Firstly, Interactive Whiteboards increase the interaction
and conversation in classroom since the combination with wireless the

without having to be physically at the computer which is projecting the
image onto the board. Elements of text, graphics, sound, animation, and
video help teachers create lessons that interest and engage students during
the learning process” (as cited in Beeland, 2008, p. 2).
In short, various functions of Interactive Whiteboards allow teachers
and students to be more interactive with technology in a manner that was not
previously possible.
2.2. Primary students
2.2.1. Definition of young learners
There are some different definitions of young learners. Brezinová
(2009) defines young learners as learners aged between 6 to 11 years old.
According to Rixon (1999), young learners are defined as children between
the ages of about 5 years old to 12 years old. Otherwise, young learners are
10
also recognized as those under 14 years old (Lynne Cameron, 1999).
Therefore, in general, the definition of young learners is based on the years
spent in the primary or elementary stages of formal education before the
transition to secondary school which is the reason why the ages of young
learners are varied from one country to the others.
In Vietnam, young learners or primary students are defined as
children from 6 to 11 years old who attend classes from grade one to grade
five. Since the study is carried in Vietnam, the definition of Brezinová is the
most suitable, thus the main object of this paper are students from 6 to 11
years old.
2.2.2. Primary students’ characteristics in learning language
Children are famous for being natural language learners (Curtain,
2009). It is undoubtful that they have learned their native language with few
difficulties and by the time of 6 years old, their proficiency make non-native
speakers jealous. In her book “Languages and Children: Making the Match,
New Languages for Young Learners, Grades K-8, 4/E”, Curtain (2009) gives

fun. He also claimed that the sensory input plays an important role in a
lesson which helps students feel sufficient for a classroom. As a result, the
lesson should balance among physical activities, visual and auditory
activities and non-verbal language. Thirdly, according to Abe (1991) it is
useful to use media in teaching English to young learners since it helps the
classroom situations to be more alive. Additionally, media also helps
teachers render materials and help the students comprehend the given
materials.
12
CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY
In this chapter, the method employed to answer the research questions would
be described in details. The participants, the instruments and the procedure of data
collection and analysis would be justified.
3.1. Setting of the study
3.1.1. Interactive Whiteboards in Apollo English Centers
Apollo Vietnam was founded in 1994. It is the first fully foreign
owned English language training company in Vietnam. Apollo is an
affiliation of International House World Organization which is one of the
largest and oldest groups of language schools in the world. In Vietnam,
13
Apollo continues to strive to maintain as the top class English teaching
organization. Apollo’s achievements in education and training are
recognized by the Vietnamese Government and the United Kingdom.
Apollo is the first foreign organization that has received two campaign
medals for “the Cause of Education” from the Vietnamese Ministry of
Education and Training. In 2008, Apollo’s Chairman of the Board of
Directors was also awarded the MBE (Member of the British Empire) by
Queen Elizabeth II for providing international-standard English training in
Vietnam.
Apollo owns nine modern and international-standard centers all over

are Apollo Junior and Apollo Adult. The focus object of this study is Apollo
Junior. Apollo Junior comprises four levels, namely Kindy (students from
ages 4 to 6), Kids (students from ages 6 to 11), Kids plus (students from ages
10 to 12) and Teens (students from ages 12 to 17). Since the researcher
wants to explore the use of Interactive Whiteboards in teaching primary
students, the suitable candidate is the Kids level where attending students are
from 6 to 11 years old.
In Apollo English Centers, the Kids level is evaluated to be equal to
the A1 level of CEFR (Common European Framework of Reference for
Languages). Council of Europe describes A1 level that students can
understand and use familiar everyday expressions and very basic phrases
aimed at the satisfaction of needs of a concrete type; they can introduce
him/herself and others and can ask and answer questions about personal
details; and can interact in a simple way provided the other person talks
slowly and clearly and is prepared to help (Council of Europe, 2001).
At Apollo English Centers, Kids level is again split into three smaller
level which are Starter, Mover and Flyer. Beside four English skills, Apollo
English Centers incorporate LETS
TM
method (Learning English Through
Subjects) which supplements the knowledge of Maths, Science and life
15
skills. Therefore in each level, students have different targets. Firstly,
students of Starter level are expected to understand, speak and listen to basic
instruction. They should be able to read short sentences and a text, write
missing words (nouns). In term of LETS method, after finishing the course,
Starter students would know basic numeracy and simple mathematical
operations in English, basic awareness of science topics on the natural
world, social skills such as team work, pair work, sharing, critical thinking
(identifying and comparing), art and social sciences, etc. Secondly, Mover

3.3.2. Data collection
3.3.2.1. Justification for the use of observation
Field observation was chosen to collect the information on the
effectiveness and weaknesses of using Interactive Whiteboards in
teaching English to primary students. Le et al. (2012) reported that
field observation is the method of watching people or animal in
their natural habits. In a language study, the researcher can
observe the students and teachers’ behaviors in a language
classroom. Observation is more advantageous than questionnaire
and interview in enhancing the validity and reliability of the
information. People do not always give honest answer in doing
questionnaire; however, by observing the researcher can watch the
natural and true behaviors of the participants (Le, 2012).
Therefore, field observation is flawlessly suitable for the current
study.
17