i
ABSTRACT
This study investigated the learners’ attitudes towards teaching methods
applied in speaking classes by native English speaking and non-native English
speaking instructors in an English center in Hanoi. The research participants
included 50 Vietnamese learners of various educational backgrounds. By
administering a closed-ended and self-report questionnaires as well as semi-
structured interviews, the study revealed that learners perceive considerable
differences in the ways NES and NNES instructor apply teaching methods. Besides,
generally NES instructors were perceived as better oral teachers. However, in terms
of specific areas in teaching speaking namely grammar and learning strategies,
students showed favorable attitudes to NNES instructors. On the other hand, NES
instructors are preferred as pronunciation and vocabulary teachers.
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ii
ABSTRACT iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS iv
LIST OF TABLES AND APPENDICES vi
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS vi
PART I: INTRODUCTION 1
1. Rationale of the study 1
2. Aim of the study 3
3. Research questions 3
4. Scope of the study 3
5. Methodology of the study 3
6. Design of the study 3
PART II: DEVELOPMENT 5
CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW 5
1.1. The Native Speaker definition 5
1.2. Native and non-native teachers 7

3. Limitations of the study and suggestions for further study 40
REFERENCES 41
APPENDIX
iv
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Responses for NES instructors’ teaching method – as seen by the learners
24
Table 2: Responses for NNES instructors’ teaching method – as seen by the
learners 27
Table 3: Preference to NES instructors for specific areas 29
Table 4: Preference to NES instructors for specific areas 30
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
M.A: Master of Art
L2: Second language
L1: First language
NS: native speaker
NNS: nonnative speaker
NES: Native English speaking
NNES: Non-native English speaking
NESIs: Native English speaking instructors
NNESIs: Non-native English speaking instructors
NESTs: Non-native English speaker teachers
NNESTs: Non-native English speaker teachers
CEFR: Common European Framework of Reference for Languages
1
PART I: INTRODUCTION
1. Rationale of the study
It is widely recognized that English is an international language and is now
used as a main tool for global and intercultural communication around the world.
As a result, there is an increasing number of people trying to master this language.

international ESL website, she found the majority of the ESL jobs listed on the job
board were offered to native English teachers only. Through a doctoral research
namely “ Status of non-native English teachers as ESL teachers in the USA”,
Mahboob found that the number of NNS teachers teaching ESL in the United States
is low (only 7.9% of the teachers employed at these programs), and that this low
figure is disproportionate to the high number of NNS graduate students enrolled in
MA TESOL and similar teacher-education programs. Mahboob attributes the low
figure to the preference given by most (59.8%) program administrators to “native
English speakers” in hiring practices.
According to Braine (1999), a commonly- used explanation for the
discrimination against NNES teachers is that students prefer to be taught by native
speakers. However, it is still doubtful whether students do show a preference for
NES teachers. While researchers have explored problems related to native speaking
versus non-native speaking instructors at length in recent years, language educators
and researchers in Vietnam have been quite silent on this topic. Specifically,
Walkinshaw and Duong (2012) is the only study which investigated the relative
value perceived by Vietnamese EFL students from tertiary institutions to native and
non-native teachers. However, as the authors suggested that research should be
conducted in other educational contexts such as high schools or private language
institutions may increase the findings’ generalisability. As a result, it is worthwhile
to explore the problems from the students’ perspective in order to ascertain whether
students prefer native English-speaking teachers over non-native counterparts.
3
Moreover, it is also worth finding out the differences in teaching methods between
the two groups of teachers. For such reasons I choose “Learners’ attitudes
towards native and nonnative English speaking instructors” which was
conducted at a private English center as a theme for my thesis.
2. Aims of the study
This study is carried out with the aim to identify the differences between
native and non-native English speaking instructors as perceived by students, with

- Chapter III: Data analysis and findings presents and analyzes the data collected
from the questionnaires and from students’ interviews.
Part III is the Conclusion which reviews the study, presents the suggestions for the
teachers, the limitations of the study and suggestions for further study. Following
part III is the References and Appendices.
5
PART II: DEVELOPMENT
CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW
1.1. The Native speaker definition
It is difficult to define what it means to be a native speaker of a language,
especially with respect to English. In this passage, I will review some definitions of
the native speaker based on some research in the fields of Second Language
Acquisition and language teaching.
In “Language” (1933), Bloomfield states “ The first language a human being
learns to speak is his native language; he is a native speaker of this language”. In
other words, a native speaker of English is traditionally defined as someone who
speaks English as his or her native language, also called mother tongue, first
language.
The next question is what qualifies someone as a native speaker? According
to Davies in “ The native speaker in applied linguistics” (1991), the word “ native”
suggests that an individual is a “native speaker of a language by virtue of place or
country of birth” which means that the individual acquired the language from birth.
However, as stated by Lee (2010), this is insufficient in determining whether an
individual is a native speaker of a language, or not, since individuals can be
resettled to other places in childhood, as in the case of children who immigrate or
are adopted in early childhood. Brutt-Gruffler and Samimy (2001) recommends that
“nativeness” constitutes a socially constructed identity rather than a linguistic
category. Pronunciation is reported to play such an important role in determining
native identity:” Pronunciation may most obviously provide clues for non-native
status since it is formed in early age and may be the least conscious element is

speaker, through effective training, can acquire most of the elements that define a
native speaker. Medgyes (1992), however, pointed out many aspects of linguistic
competence pose tremendous challenges for nonnative speakers. Among these
7
difficulties, accents and target cultural competence seems to be the two most
difficult.
1.2. Native and non-native teachers
Medgyes (1992) has brought up the controversy of whether a non-native
speaker can ever become a native speaker or not. He suggests that a non-native
speaker’s competence is limited, and that only a reduced group can reach near-
native speaker’s competence, “but sooner or later they are halted by a glass wall”
(1992: 342). On the other hand, Greenbaum ( in Kachru 1985) argues that, “ There
is no doubt that non-native speakers can acquire native-like proficiency in English
as an additional language, whether they belong to the “outer circle” (ESL) or the
“expanding circle” (EFL)” (31).
Reves and Medgyes (1994) administered a questionnaire to ELS/EFL
teachers in ten different countries to study their views on the differences between
the teaching of NESTs and NNESTs. These teachers indicated several points about
NESTs’ teaching behaviors: 1) NESTs are thought to be less prepared and show
less empathy towards students’ language struggles; 2) NESTs generally are not
familiar with how language are learned; 3) NESTs tend to be more successful with
advanced learners. From the researcher’s experience, she strongly agrees with
number (1) and number (2). During the time working with some native teachers at
EQuest Academy, I had a chance to observe their classes and found that most of
them did not prepare the lessons carefully and they seemed to lack patience with
students if students could not fulfill their homework.
Studies of teachers’ self-perceptions of their abilities in the ESL field have
different results. According to Reves and Medgyes (1994) in an EFL setting
supports the idea that NNS teachers may feel “deficient” in their language skills.
84% of NNSs admitted to having language difficulties, and only 25% of subjects

and assessment methods. I just mention the results for the latter aim which is
relevant to the topic of this passage. The study indicated that differences between
NS and NNS teachers could be detected only in some categories, mainly the
9
superiority of the NS teachers, the degree of confidence in teaching specific
language fields, and in student-teacher relations. The researcher found no difference
in perception categories relating to teaching and assessment practices, defining
students’ knowledge of English, goals of teaching English as well as the status of
the English language. In fact, the perception differences in these areas happened not
from the teachers’ status as NS or NNS but from personal and professional
variables such as country of birth, length of residence in the country, school level,
and perceived type of school. NNS teachers reported having better relations with
students and feeling more confident in using the L1 to facilitate teaching.
The last study that I shall review is “Self-awareness in NNS EFL primary
and secondary school teacher” conducted by Llurda and Huguet (2003). Their
purpose was to investigate the self-awareness of 101 NNESTs in primary and
secondary in a Spanish city. They administered a set questionnaire orally in one-on-
one interviews with the subjects, the researchers aimed to determine how the
subjects perceived their own language skills, how these skills affected their
teaching, and how the skills had evolved over time; the participants’ teaching
ideology as expressed through their preferences for designing a language course and
their goals as language teachers; and the participants’ positions in the NS- NNS
debate, specifically with respect to the preference for NSs or NNSs as language
teachers, and the need for cultural knowledge on the part of English teacher. In term
of language skills, they found that the secondary teachers showed more confidence
in their skills than primary teachers, especially in general proficiency, grammar
knowledge of grammatical rules and reading comprehension. Although primary
teachers admitted that they did experience certain difficulties in teaching English,
they did not attribute these difficulties to their proficiency in English. In the case of
language courses and language teaching goals, 86% of the primary teachers chose

In discussing these results, he states, “Nowhere is there an overwhelming
preference for NS teacher. Being an NS is only one among many factors that
influence students’ views of teaching” (p.331). This, his study shows that students
11
do not simply prefer teachers based on their status as on their status as a native or a
non-native speaker, but rather their preferences are more complex. However, while
Cook’s work shows that students may not have a clear preference for either NESTs
or NNESTs, his work does not explore the reasons for these diverse views.
In another study of students’ perceptions, by collecting qualitative data from
classroom discussions, interviews and analysis of autobiography writings of student
participants in a graduate TESOL program, Samimy and Bruff- Griffler (1999)
found that students saw NESTs as being fluent and accurate; using different
techniques, methods, approaches and authentic English; giving positive comments
on students and having communication as the goals of their teaching. Meanwhile,
participants viewed NNESTs as depending on textbooks; using mother tongue as a
medium of instruction; understanding students’ background; being sensitive to the
needs of the students and having exam preparation as the target of their teaching. In
spite of these differences, students did not consider NESTs superior to their
nonnative counterparts.
Likewise, Mahboob’s research in 2003 which aimed at evaluating ELS
students’ attitudes towards NS and NNS teachers in the United States and
investigating factors that influence students’ perceptions of their teachers showed
that ELS in America did not display a clear preference for either NS or NNS
teachers. Mahbbob used the novel and more insightful “discourse-analytic”
technique, asking 32 students enrolled in an intensive English program to provide
written responses to a cue that solicited their opinions on NS and NNS language
teachers. The student essays were coded individually by four readers who in turn
classified the students’ comments according to linguistic factors namely oral skills,
literacy skills, grammar, vocabulary, culture, teaching styles including ability to
answer questions, teaching methodology, and personal factors (experience as an

same difficulties in learning a second language as the students themselves.
David Lasagabaster together with Juan Manuel Sierra (2005) attempted to
examine the pros and cons of having a native speaker teacher. Two questionnaires
13
including both close and open were administered to 76 university students in the
age range of 18-36, with a mean of 19.7. The close questionnaire regard the
following: language skills, grammar, vocabulary, pronunciation, learning strategies,
culture and civilization, attitudes and assessment, and this with respect to primary,
secondary and tertiary education, as differences exist among teachers of different
educational levels (Llurda & Huguet, 2003). Students were given a five-point Likert
scale with regard to each of the 42 statements in the questionnaire. As for the open
questionnaire, students are encouraged to express their opinion freely in the small
group. Their students were clearly concerned about the benefits of a native speaker
teacher in pronunciation and culture. Paradoxically enough, when students
commented on the negative aspects of a native speaker teacher, 8 groups out of 17
groups admitted that a native accent brought about intelligibility problems, in fact
the top negative aspect in the open questionnaire. When the participants spent their
time reflecting and debating on the advantages of having a non-native speaker
teacher, the results (70% of the groups) clearly showed that students highly valued
the NNSTs as a resource of learning strategies throughout the process of learning
English. In general, the researchers found that university students preferred NESTs
in respect to pronunciation, culture and civilization, listening, vocabulary and
speaker whereas they showed a preference for NESTs in terms of grammar and
strategies. One thing should be noticed is that 7 groups expressed their
preoccupation about the lack of professional qualifications and ability to deal with
the teaching of grammar on the part of NSTs. Yet, they did not show any preference
for NESTs or NNESTs in the other areas such as reading, assessment, attitudes
towards English speaking countries and attitudes towards the learning of English.
When they were given the possibility of having both a native speaker teacher and a
non-native speaker teacher, the percentages were even higher 71.6%. These results

used as well as the research’s results. The students were asked to listen to brief
audio recordings delivered by the six NNS English teachers and rated the teachers’
accents according to a scale if preference. Data was collected through
15
questionnaires which included information on the students’ background, their
beliefs about teaching, and their ranking and preferences. The results indicated that
although the students rated pronunciation/ accent in the ESL teachers’ speech as
very important, pronunciation/ accent did not influence the students’ attitudes
towards their previous NNS English teachers in their home countries. The student
held generally positive attitudes toward the teachers in their home countries, and
believed that pronunciation/ accent was not as relevant as it appeared in the first
place. Further, personal and professional features as derived from the teachers’
speech, such as “being interesting”, “being prepared”, “being qualified”, and “being
professional”, played a role in the students’ preference for teachers
All the research above so far has focused on the self-perceptions of students
only. To fill the need to investigate both teachers and students in a single study,
Cheung (2002) conducted a Master thesis at The Chinese University of Hong Kong.
This research aimed to explore the attitudes of the university students in Hong King
towards NS and NNS teachers of English, the strengths and weaknesses of these
teachers from the perspective of students, and their capability of motivating the
students to learn English. Cheung also wanted to determine if there was any
discrimination against NNS English teachers in Hong Kong. Data was collected
through questionnaires, interviews, classroom observations, and post-classroom
interviews. The questionnaire was distributed to 420 randomly selected
undergraduates from a variety of majors at seven universities in Hong Kong. Ten
students from three universities were also interviewed. Besides, Cheung asked
twenty-two university English teachers, ranging from head of department to
instructor, at six universities. The study indicated that both students and teachers
saw NS and NNS teachers having their respective strength. They stated that native
speaker teachers’ strong points were a high proficiency in English, ability to use

using two instruments which were constructed based on Brown’s framework. The
first data collection instrument was a rating survey that employed bipolar semantic
differential scales and an open-ended self-report questionnaire was the second data
17
collection instrument. The two instruments were distributed consecutively to 50
Vietnamese learners of English at two public universities: 38 females and 12 males.
All respondents were third year English majors between the ages of 20 and 24, with
upper intermediate English language competence. They were asked to complete the
rating survey and the self-report questionnaire at the end of a normal class period to
evaluate the importance of native-speakerness compared with seven qualities valued
in an English language teacher: teaching experience, qualifications, friendliness,
enthusiasm, the ability to deliver interesting and informative classes, understanding
of students' local culture, and advanced English communicative competence. The
findings show that the respondents placed more value on all but one of these
qualities than on native-speakerness. Moreover, while respondents in the study
noted pronunciation as an advantage of learning from a NEST, there are questions
about whether second language learners can accurately identify native accents and
indeed whether native-like pronunciation is an appropriate goal for second language
learners in Southeast Asia who will most often use English with other second
language users.
As the authors admitted, the study still has some limitations since the data
were collected from tertiary institutions only and the gender imbalance in the
sample group. The authors stated that if research conducted in other educational
contexts such as high schools or private language institutions may increase the
findings’ generalisability.
1. 4. Summary
In summary, the chapter pictures various view points on native and non-
native teachers and its related sections including native speaker definitions, native
and non-native teachers in English language teaching. Literature review of some
previous studies of the same topic is discussed last in the chapter.

native English instructors with respect to their teaching methods through speaking
lessons?
2. Do learners prefer NES instructors to their nonnative counterparts?
2.3. Participants of the study
A total of 50 learners from 7 IELTS 5.5 and IELTS 6.5 classes in the age
range of 15 -34, all native speakers of Vietnamese, participated in the study. The
reason for selecting those who are studying IELTS course but not other courses was
that through this course learners had a chance to study with both Vietnamese and
native English speaking instructors. All of the participants had done the placement
tests at EQuest and they had achieved at least 4.0 IELTS score- equivalent to the
low B1 level in CEFR. At the time of the research, these participants were studying
their last hours of the IELTS course – at the fifth or sixth month.
The participants come from groups of different personal background and
various provinces in Northern part and Middle part of Vietnam such as Hanoi, Nghe
An, Bac Ninh, Hung Yen, Thanh Hoa, etc. They were both students and working-
people. Many learners were students who were studying at some universities or
high schools in Hanoi. Some were working in companies or state organizations.
They work or study in daytime and come to English classes in the evenings. The
variety in the participants’ age, sex, working and studying places is expected to
provide reliability and validity for the study.
2.4. Data collection instruments
Data were gained through the students’ survey questionnaires and semi-
structured interviews.
20
2.4.1. Questionnaire
To obtain the objectives of the study, a survey questionnaire has been chosen
as a way of collecting data for the research. It was chosen because questionnaire is a
valuable tool for researching the attitudes. Besides, this tool is also relatively
comfortable, time-saving and economical to administer. This method was also
supposed to be of great advantage in a way that it was easier for the participants to

voluntarily selected learners were held in order to examine why they had opinions
like in the questionnaire and recheck the data gained through the questionnaire.
Each informal interview lasted for about 20 minutes on average and was conducted
mainly in Vietnamese. Basic interview questions were prepared. Some interviews
were tape-recorded and some were taken notes. All interview data were analyzed
interpretatively.
2.5. Data Collection Procedure
First, the researcher made a phone call to EQuest’s scheduler who is her
friend to know which IELTS classes were running at that moment. Then, before
coming to classes, the researcher contacted the Vietnamese instructors and native
English speaking instructors to get their permission to conduct the survey at their
classes as well as fix the time to carry out. Finally, the questionnaires were
administered to the 50 learners at three different branches at EQuest: Nguyen Trai,
Xa Dan and An Trach, Hanoi. The first time coming to all the polled classes, the
researcher gave them the questionnaires and asked for helping. As mentioned in the
previous part, to avoid interrupting the lessons too much and to let the participants
have more time to think carefully, the respondents could bring the questionnaire
home and return it within a week. They were asked to avoid mechanically correct
answers and try to be honest as possible in their answers. The exceptionally high
return rate (100%) of the questionnaire was possibility due to the thorough
preliminary arrangements. Besides, the researcher just chose those who volunteered
in each class. The underlying reason why they were willing to help may be in the