VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
***
NGUYỄN THỊ VÂN MAI The impact of teacher-generated materials on English
language teaching for the 7th grade students
in Tran Phu junior High School, Hai Phong
(Nghiên cứu tác động của những tài liệu dạy học do giáo viên tự thiết kế đến quá trình
dạy tiếng Anh cho học sinh lớp 7 ở trường THCS Trần Phú, Hải Phòng) M.A Thesis Linguistics
Code : 60 14 10

HANOI - 2010
i
ii
iii
iv
v
Page
1
1
2
2
2
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
5
6

7
7
8
8
8
8
9
3.2.3. Effectiveness of applying teacher-generated materials to daily lessons
3.3. Discussion of the findings
9
10
10
10
11
11
11
12
13
14
14
15
16
16
16
16
19
21
21
22
23
24

24

27
27


Appendix 2: Interview (for teachers)
Appendix 3: Summary of the interviews
30

30
31

32

33

33

34
35

35
36
36
38
38
38
39
40
I
I
V
VI

2 2. Objectives of the study
The study aims to fulfill two objectives as follows:
(1) to investigate the impacts of teacher-generated materials on ELT for the 7
th

grade Ss in Tran Phu JHS, Hai Phong.
(2) to suggest some guidelines for designing effective materials for ELT.
3. Research questions
The study is carried out to find the answers to the following research questions:
(1) What value is teacher-generated materials to the ELT for the 7
th
grade
students in Tran Phu JHS, Hai Phong?
(2) How can Ts of English in JHS design effective materials for ELT?
4. Methods of the study
In order to reach the goals mentioned above, the study is implemented in the most
common procedure with the use of both quantitative and qualitative methods as follows:
- Reading relating books and articles from various sources (university library, Internet,
private library…) to collect useful information for the study.
- Consulting the supervisor and lectures of the Postgraduate Department and discussing
with colleagues to get guidance and insightful ideas in the field of the research.
- Administering a questionnaire to 107 the 7
th
grade Ss at Tran Phu JHS, Hai Phong.
- Interviewing 4 Ts of English (at different level of ability and at different age) at Tran
Phu JHS, Hai Phong.

instruments.
Chapter 3: Data analysis and discussion.
Chapter 4: Some guidelines for designing effective materials for ELT
Part C – Conclusion: presents conclusion, implications for teaching, limitation and
suggestions for further studies.

4 PART B: DEVELOPMENT
Chapter 1: LITERATURE REVIEW
1.1. Theoretical background of teacher-generated materials
1.1.1. Definitions of teacher-generated materials
In Cambridge Advanced Learner‟s Dictionary (third edition), the verb “generate” is
defined as “to create” while Webster‟s New Dictionary (1997) defines it as “to produce”.
In this thesis, the term “teacher-generated materials” is used for a particular type of
materials which are found, selected, evaluated and produced by Ts to use in their own
teaching context.
1.1.2. Types of teacher-generated materials
In this thesis, teacher-generated materials “include anything which can be used to
facilitate the learning of a language. They can be linguistic, visual, auditory or
kinaesthetic, and they can be presented in print, through live performance or display, or
on cassette, CD-ROM, DVD or the internet” (Tomlinson, 2001:66). They can be
instructional, experiential, elicitative or exploratory, in that they can inform Ls about the
language, they can provide experience of the language in use, they can stimulate
language use or they can help Ls to make discoveries about the language for themselves.
Designing and using resources to generate materials can be time consuming. Joanna
Baker and Heather Westrup (2002:157) brought out easily found resources as the relief
for busy Ts.


In general, teacher-generated materials play a necessary role in ELT, however, the
question of how to use them effectively is still in conflict and will be discussed later in
this study.
1.1.4. How teacher-generated materials have been used in ELT
Using teacher-generated materials in English as Foreign Language (EFL) classroom has
involved a large number of Ts in ELT, which has discussed in recent years.
Not everyone would agree that Ts should design their own materials. Block (1991), who
is in no doubt that they should, prefaces his arguments for what he calls DIY (do-it-
yourself) materials design by reviewing the papers by Allwright (1981) and O‟Neill
(1982) discusses in Chapter 1. Despite their contrasting positions on course books, both
Allwright and O‟Neill seem to agree that classroom Ts are not best equipped to write
materials. Allwright puts this explicitly: “the expertise required of materials writers is
importantly different from that required of classroom teachers” (p.6). Johnson (1972:1)
implies a similar view: “Teachers choose and use instructional materials because they can
not (and ought not) prepare all the materials they need”. Behind this view seems to lie the
assumption that materials are best prepared by professionals (i.e. knowledgeable and
experiences writers) and by publishing houses which can ensure a high level of
production (Sheldon, 1988). Maybe because of this unsympathetic view, Ts, especially in
junior high schools, tends to be afraid to design their own materials despite the need of

7

their teaching context. They would rather accept boring and ineffective lessons than be
laughed or criticized.
Some other Ts, it seems, have their own view. Block‟s (1991) argument that Ts should
prepare their own materials derives in part from his dissatisfaction with published
materials. The decision to supplement the course book may also be prompted by affective
considerations. Experienced Ts know that walking into class and saying: “Hello. Open
your books at page …” is not the best way to capture the attention of a group of learners,
and many use “warm-up” activities for this reason. They also know that there are other

materials or develop a new concept. Either way, there are several benefits of teacher-
generated materials.
1.2.1.1. Save Money
Materials purchased at education stores are expensive. Create the same materials for less
money by visiting a few hobby stores. For example, instead of buying a pre-assembled
puppet-making kit, go to the store and buy the different parts needed and combine them
in a plastic bag. Share ideas with other Ts to help them save, too (Joanna Baker and
Heather Westrup, 2002).
1.2.1.2. Recycle
Use materials around house or classroom. Challenge the students to bring in cans for an
art project. Give parents another place to bring old or used items: classroom. Create a list
of items needed and distribute it to the parents. Materials created with recycled materials
reduce waste immensely (Joanna Baker and Heather Westrup, 2002).
1.2.1.3. Student Focused
Teacher-generated materials can be designed with the specific needs of children in the
classroom in mind, which ensures that their interests and developmental needs are
incorporated into the classroom material. Custom materials of this nature keep Ss
engaged in activities and help them learn necessary skills. Thus, Ts will be creating
learning objects, the learners will be doing something with the materials and receiving feedback
about their performance and this feedback is an effective way to reinforce what you want the
students to learn (Lewis, 2003). 9

Ts work hard to put together lesson plans that are exciting and educational. However,
sometimes schools do not have the funding to provide all the supplies and materials that
Ts need in order to plan the most effective lessons. For this reason, there are many
benefits to Ts generating their own materials.
1.2.1.4. Match Materials to Curriculum

Course books are usually organized around an identifiable principle and follow a
discernible pattern throughout. While this can be rather dull and boring (or „unrelenting‟)
it does provide both Ts and Ss with some security and a “coherent body of work to
remember and revise from” (Harmer, 2001:7). In contrast, teacher-generated materials
may lack overall coherence and a clear progression. Without some overall organizing
principle, materials may be piecemeal and can result in poorly focused activities lacking
clear direction. This is frustrating and confusing for Ls who may not be able to see how
their English is developing.
A further aspect of organization relates to the physical organization and storage of
materials. Without a clearly thought through and well-organized system, teacher-
generated materials may be difficult to locate for ongoing use, or may end up damaged or
with parts missing.
1.2.2.2. Quality
Possibly the most common criticism leveled against teacher-generated materials is to do
with their quality. At the surface level, teacher-generated materials may “seem ragged
and unprofessional next to those produced by professionals.” (Block, 1991:212, emphasis
in original). They may contain errors, be poorly constructed, lack clarity in layout and
print and lack durability. Harmer probably speaks for many when he says, “If the
alternative is a collection of scruffy photocopies, give me a well-produced course book
any time.” (2001:7).
In addition, a lack of experience and understanding on the part of the teacher may result
in important elements being left out or inadequately covered. Teacher-generated
materials may be produced to take advantage of authentic text. However, if not guided by
clear criteria and some experience, Ts may take inconsistent or poor choices of texts.
Besides, they can become outdated easily, e.g. news stories, articles.

11

A further problem may be a lack of clear instructions about how to make effective use of
the materials – particularly instructions designed for Ss.

group)
3. first language (all the same?)
4. academic and educational level
5. socio-cultural background
6. occupation (if relevant)
7. reasons for studying the target language (if applicable)
8. attitudes to learning (including attitudes to the language, its speakers, the
teacher, the institution)
9. previous language-learning experience (of the target language, its speakers,
other languages)
10. language-learning aptitude
11. general expectations (of the course/ textbook/ teacher/ own role)
12. specific wants
13. preferred learning styles
14. sex distribution (single sex? If mixed, what proportion of M/ F)
15. interests (insofar as these are generalisable)
In short, teacher-generated materials have to meet the same criteria as course book
materials, but these are likely to be more strictly applied because Ts know their own Ss
and will be able to „tune‟ the materials to suit their level, their aptitude, their interests,
their needs, and personalize it so that it seems even more meaningful.
1.3.2. The curriculum and the context
Discussing the curriculum, the researcher does need to pay further attention to the social
context in which it is created. Curriculum for Catherine Cornbleth (1990) is what
actually happens in classrooms, that is, “an ongoing social process comprised of the
interactions of students, teachers, knowledge and milieu” (p5). In contrast, Stenhouse
defines curriculum as the attempt to describe what happens in classrooms rather than
what actually occurs. Cornbleth further contends that curriculum as practice cannot be
understood adequately or changed substantially without attention to its setting or context.
Curriculum is contextually shaped.


conditions, student learning conditions and student achievement.

14 1.3.4. Personal confidence and competence
Personal confidence and competence are factors that will determine an individual
teacher‟s willingness to embark on materials development. This will be influenced by the
teacher‟s level of teaching experience and his or her perceived creativity or artistic skills
and overall understanding of the principles of materials design and production. In reality,
most Ts undertake materials design to modify, adapt or supplement a course book, rather
than starting from scratch, and this is probably the most realistic option for most Ts.
Decisions available to Ts include the following (adapted from Harmer, 2001 and Lamie,
1999):
1. Add activities to those already suggested.
2. Leave out activities that do not meet your learners‟ needs.
3. Replace or adapt activities or materials with:
- supplementary materials from other commercial texts
- authentic materials (newspapers, radio reports, films etc.)
- teacher-created supplementary materials.
4. Change the organizational structure of the activities, for example, pairs, small
groups or whole class.
Modern technology provides Ts with access to tools that enable professional results in
materials production. Computers with Clipart, Internet access and digital pictures offer
unprecedented means for publishing high quality teaching materials.
1.3.5. Copyright compliance
Back in November, the New York Times ran an article about the growing number of
teachers who sell their lesson plans and other curriculum materials through online portals
like Teachers Pay Teachers (Winnie Hu, Selling Lesson Plans Online, Teachers Raise
Cash and Questions, Nov. 15, 2009). Obviously, teacher-made materials have been

grade Ss in
Tran Phu JHS and to point out practical suggestions for teacher to design effective
materials, a study is conducted. Results of the study are presented in the next chapter.

16 Chapter 2: METHODOLOGY
2.1. Subjects and the context of the study
2.1.1. The subjects
In order to investigate into the impact of teacher-generated materials on ELT, the
researcher conducted a survey with two groups of subjects. They were 107 Ss in grade 7
and 4 Ts from Tran Phu JHS.
The questionnaires were distributed among both boys and girls Ss chosen incidentally
from gifted classes and normal ones at grade 7 to see their attitude towards the usage and
effectiveness of teacher-generated materials. They had learned English in JHS for two
years. Besides, during the time they were at primary school, English was brought to teach
in their syllabus as an optional subject.
Additionally, small-scaled unstructured interviews were carried out among 4 Ts, at
different age and level of ability, teaching English at Tran Phu JHS to see if they have
been using teacher-generated materials and how they have been designing these ones.
2.1.2. The context
The research is conducted at Tran Phu JHS which located at Le Chan District, Hai Phong.
This school has been being considered the gifted school for junior high students in Hai
Phong with over 50 years for training talented students. It always leads junior high
schools in Hai Phong area in prizes.
Ss here are chosen selectively mainly from some gifted primary schools in Hai Phong
such as Van To, Minh Khai, Dinh Tien Hoang so they seem to be better than ones in other
junior high schools. It is asserted by the number of prizes Tran Phu got in school-year
2009-2010 in comparison with some others in the same district.

5
10
23
3
Truong Dinh
3
3
5
8
4
Vo Thi Sau
3
4
5
23
5
Ba Ngoc
2
5
5
13
6
Du Hang Kenh
1
3
1
8
7
To Hieu


failures. Furthermore, the majority of Ss in this school have the need for learning the
lessons before class which leads to the artificial studying quality in the class and the
boring sensation of studying the same things too many times.
English group in Tran Phu JHS has fourteen Ts at different age, on different levels and
with different teaching experience, even some of them were not in a regular training as Ts
of English which causes the difficulties in designing general tests and the arguments in
marking crosswise. In addition, the conservativeness puts a hard barrier among them.
Male Female Regular In-service
0 1 26 < 5 1 0
0 6 32 < 10 1 5
0 7 45 > 10 2 5
Average
age
Teaching
experience
Educational form
Gender

Table 2: Ts of English in Tran Phu JHS
Taking the different ways of pronunciation as an example. Course books are written in
American English but almost Ts were educated in British English so they often
pronounce as their experience instead of the lessons with the attendance of another Ts or
school leaders. On the other hand, Ts can not get the standard tapes for the course books
from their school but from unreliable bookstores. Ts‟ incorrect pronunciation and bad-
qualified tapes have made Ss‟ pronunciation worse and worse.
There are 11 classes in grade 7, in which the smallest has 40 Ss and the biggest has 62 Ss.
This means that Ts and Ss can face the following challenges:
 Ts can have difficulty keeping everyone‟s attention
 Ss‟ motivation to learn English can be poor
 Ss have difficulty hearing the teacher

assist the study with persuasive figures concerning the investigated issues. It should be
noted that the writer had informal meetings with the Ss because they are not the Ss of the
researcher.
By using interview, the writer could have more in-depth information. The interview is
unstructured which still has to start with some kind of agenda, but it is loose one, a rough
checklist built around issues formulated in outline only. The direction of the interview
intentionally follows interviewee responses, with some of the characteristics of natural
conversation “The qualitative interviewer should arrive with a short list of issue-oriented
questions… The purpose for the most part is not to get simple yes or no answer but
descriptions of an episode, a linkage, an explanation. Formulating the questions and
anticipating probes that evoke good responses is a special art” (Stake, 1995:65). Before it,

20

the writer had prepared a set of questions. Furthermore, some possible follow-up
questions were also prepared (for the interview questions, refer to appendices). All the
interviews were recorded so that the writer could concentrate on observing interviewees‟
behavior without wasting time taking notes. Their facial expressions sometimes unveiled
more information than worlds could. These interviews were conducted individually in an
informal setting. Each interview took about 30 minutes, arranged at the interviewees‟
convenience. Enough time was spared for the interviewees to think of proper answers.
The steps of the research were arranged as follows:
(1) Piloting the questionnaire for students
(2) Delivering and collecting the questionnaire
(3) Conducting interviews with selected Ts
(4) Analyzing the collected data and discussing the finding
(5) Giving suggestions

21


0 5.6 31.5 29.6 33.3
Options (%)
Statements
Never Rarely Sometimes Often Always
4. Does your teacher of
English often use materials
made by herself/ himself in
her/ his lessons?
0 11.1 25.9 38.9 24.1
7. Does your teacher of
English sometimes spend so
much time on the teacher-
generated materials that
cannnot focus on the main
part of the lesson?
35.2 48.1 12.9 1.9 1.9
Options (%)
Statements
Reading
skill
Writing
skill
Speaking
skill
Listening
skill
Vocabulary
Grammar
Structure
6. In which field, are teacher-