VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES
*** CHU THỊ HUYỀN MI
TEACHERS’ USE OF ELICITATION TECHNIQUES TO
TEACH SPEAKING SKILL TO FIRST-YEAR STUDENTS OF
UNIVERSITY OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY,
VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI

VIỆC SỬ DỤNG CÁC THỦ THUẬT GỢI MỞ CỦA GIÁO VIÊN ĐỂ DẠY
KĨ NĂNG NÓI CHO SINH VIÊN NĂM THỨ NHẤT TRƯỜNG ĐẠI HỌC
CÔNG NGHỆ, ĐẠI HỌC QUỐC GIA HÀ NỘI

M.A. Minor Programme Thesis

Field: English Teaching Methodology
Code: 60 14 10
HANOI, 2012


HANOI, 2012
iv TABLE OF CONTENTS
Candidate‟s statement i
Acknowledgements ii
Abstract iii
Table of contents iv
List of figures and tables vi
Chapter 1: Introduction 1
1.1. Rationale 1
1.2. Aims and objectives 3
1.3. Scope of the study 3
1.4. Significance of the study 3
1.5. Overview of the rest of the paper 4
Chapter 2: Literature review 5
2. 1. Key concepts and relevant knowledge 5
2.1.1. Communicative Language Teaching 5
2.1.2. Elicitation 6
2.1.2.1. Definition of elicitation 6
2.1.2.2. Types of elicitation 6
2.1.2.3. Advantages of elicitation techniques 9
2.1.2.4. Disadvantages of elicitation techniques 11
2.1.2.5. Considerations 11
2.2. Related studies 12
Chapter 3: Methodology 15
3.1. Research settings and participants 15
3.1.1. Research settings 15
vi LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES

Figure 1: Frequency of elicitation teaching

Figure 2: Shortcomings of elicitation teaching

Figure 3: Frequency of using elicitation techniques

Figure 4: Degree of students‟ confidence to talk

Figure 5: Activation of students‟ background knowledge

Figure 6: Increasing students‟ talk time

Figure 7: Students‟ embarrassment to listen to their peers‟ talk


emerged as an innovative teaching approach to the teaching of second and foreign
languages throughout the world. According to Nunan (1991), CLT features interaction as
both the means and the ultimate goal of learning a language. This emphasis involves that
students are required to construct a habit of enthusiastically participating in classroom
exchanges and real communication to enhance their speaking skill. The new learning
strategy can only be enabled when there is a shift between teachers‟ and students‟ roles.
Learner-centered learning has reigned in modern classrooms where students are given
more autonomy while teachers take the roles of controllers, assessors, organizers,
prompters, participants and so forth (Harmer, 2001) who facilitate students‟ participation
in a variety of interactive activities. In an attempt to reverse that dominant status between
the two parties, elicitation teaching has been spread into English classrooms on an
international scale.
On the way of educational integration, the communicative approach has been
adapted to Vietnam‟s national curriculums of almost every academic level, ranging from
elementary, middle, secondary to post-secondary levels. Although the interest in and
development of communicative-style teaching developed statistically worldwide, the
adoption in Vietnam has been obstructed by the inherent dominance of grammar-
translation approach. It is commonly seen that Vietnamese students are typically passive
and shy in language classrooms while teachers tend to embrace the role of "expert" who
would impart his or her knowledge or "expertise" to unknowing students, who in turn
2 would be assessed by evaluation instruments intended to measure the amount of
transferred "expertise" (Rudder, 2000). Similarly, while elicitation has been considered an
essential tool to teach speaking skill in modern classrooms worldwide, the use of it in
Vietnam has turned out not to be as effective as expected. Therefore, the present study saw
a need to learn about teachers‟ perception of elicitation teaching and their actual
employment to better understand the matter.
In addition, the issue of using elicitation techniques in teaching speaking skill has

enhance the quality of graduates, one of which is the fulfillment of English proficiency
standard as a prerequisite for graduation. Therefore, an investigation into teachers‟ current
employment of elicitation in teaching English speaking skill to this population plays a
more significant role than ever.
1.2. Aims and objectives
In doing the research, the author attempted to address three main aspects. Firstly,
the study investigated how teachers conceived about elicitation in teaching speaking skill.
In addition to the concepts, their actual employment was also closely looked at. Last but
not least was students‟ evaluation on the effects of elicitation teaching on their
performance. These objectives were accomplished by answering the following questions:
1. What is teachers‟ concept of elicitation in teaching English speaking
skill to first-year students of UET, VNU, Hanoi?
2. How do they employ elicitation in teaching English speaking skill to
first-year students of UET, VNU, Hanoi?
3. What effects does the employment have on students?
1.3. Scope of the study
First and foremost, the research focused on teachers‟ application of elicitation
techniques in speaking lessons only in order to foster students‟ talk. Therefore, application
into other kinds of lessons and the outcomes of the teaching on other linguistic skills are
not taken into consideration.
Also, as stated in the earlier part, the research targeted at freshmen of UET, VNU
only, which excluded those from other academic levels and institutions.
1.4. Significance of the study
It should be noted that the research was a great attempt to approach an issue which
is no longer new but still needs more profound research. Therefore, once finished, it can
bring various benefits to involved parties namely students, teachers, educational
administrators and researchers of the relevant fields.
Firstly, students and teachers of UET, VNU, Hanoi are those who directly benefit
from the information the research provides. Teachers will have a comprehensive look at
the situation of their own application of elicitation teaching to increase students‟ talk,

the rest of the paper.

5 CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
This chapter means to review background theories related to the issue including
definitions of key concepts and relevant knowledge. Several related studies of the same
field are also brought to discussion.
2.1. Key concepts and relevant knowledge
Elicitation teaching is a typical execution of communicative teaching approach and
has been extensively employed by teachers who are committed to Communicative
Language Teaching (CLT). This fact shows a tight relationship between CLT and
elicitation teaching. Therefore, before digging deeper into the major concept, it is
significant to review the theory of the underlying approach.
2.1.1. Communicative Language Teaching
CLT has emerged as by far the most popular teaching approach defaulted in almost
every English language classroom worldwide. Kumaravadivelu (1993: 12) affirmed the
influential power of CLT that “CLT which started in the early 1970s has become the
driving force that shapes the planning, implementation and evaluation of English language
teaching programs (ELT) in most parts of the world”. Richard (2005: 6) also gave a full
account of what language teachers mean by “communicative”:
Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) can be understood as a set of principles
about the goals of language teaching, how learners learn the language, the kinds of
classroom activities that best facilitate learning, and the roles of teachers and students in
the classroom.
CLT includes a complete code of laws that should be strictly complied with in

from to accelerate their students‟ speaking capacity in class.
2.1.2.2. Types of elicitation
Teachers are given five main kinds of tools to elicit students‟ talk and thereby
making their classrooms genuinely communicative as follows. An earlier research of the
same field (Chu, 2009) made a detailed account of eliciting tools used in CLT classes.
2.1.2.2.1. Making questions
Asking questions is the leading technique employed to elicit student-talk or, to be
more specific, ideas and opinions from students. Questioning offers a number of benefits.
According to Darn, (2008), asking questions is a natural feature of communication, but
also one of the most important tools which teachers have at their disposal. Questioning is
crucial to the way teachers manage the class, engage students with content, encourage
participation and increase understanding. Also, according to the writer, while questioning
can be an effective tool, there is both an art and science to asking questions. Some of the
rules teachers should take into account are to consider the quantity of questions to raise in
appropriate time and place to keep teacher talking time to the minimum while maximizing
7 students‟ contributions and what questions to ask students. The latter is shared by Doff
(1988:23) as: “The focus of eliciting techniques is what questions to ask to elicit the
expected target language”.
Regarding question types, scholars had numerous different ways of classification.
Grammatically, Doff (1988:23-24) gave quite a basic categorization including: Yes/no
question, Or question and Wh-question. Firstly, Yes/no question helps teachers to see
whether students understand any point related to the lesson and keep them focused. By
being asked to select one option among some available ones in Or question, students are
made to think carefully for the right answer. Wh-questions, or questions beginning with
what, who, where, when, which, etc., can be asked to obtain specific information. These
kinds of questions tremendously exploit students‟ existing knowledge or check their
comprehension of the new knowledge. Henceforth, wh-questions are by far most favored

angles of views and focuses. However, all of them agree on the fact that questions are used
for the main purpose of checking students‟ comprehension of the new knowledge and
provoke their prior knowledge.
2.1.2.2.2. Using pictures
Darn and Cetin (2006) raised the importance of offering input in association with
elicitation; and pictures are always a good source of such input. Using pictures is addressed
by Doff (1988) as one of the easiest ways to elicit new vocabulary (or structure). In
practice, CLT teachers often choose to use pictures mostly in warm-up stage to excite
students and catch their attention to the lesson. Doff (1988: 166) stated basic principles of
using pictures: “the teacher uses pictures to set the scene and asks questions about what
they see, why they think it happens, what they think will happen next and how they feel or
what they think about it”. Apart from being highly useful in provoking students‟ speaking,
pictures are not cost- and time- consuming since they can be directly taken from students‟
textbook or from supplementary sources. Another consideration for using pictures is that a
good combination of visual materials and proper questions can maximize the outcomes.
2.1.2.2.3. Using games or activities
Chu (2009: 15) emphasized that this tool is strongly advocated by many ELT
experts. Traditionally, there used to be a common conception that all learning should be
serious and solemn in nature. This is a mere misconception as it is possible to learn a
language and enjoy oneself at the same time (Lee, 1995: 35). Wright, Betteridge and
Buckby (1984:1) believed that “language learning is hard work Effort is required at
every moment and must be maintained over a long period of time. Games help and
encourage many learners to sustain their interest and work”. Therefore, it is clearly seen
9 that good games can be used during a burdensome lesson. Games help teachers to create
contexts in which the language is useful and meaningful. If games are well-chosen and
appropriately used, they can give students a break and simultaneously create chances for
them to practice new skills in a highly amusing and motivating way (Ersoz, 2000). In order


acquired from the fact that students are made to give responses to their teachers‟ questions
and other sources of input. An appropriate use of elicitation techniques at the production
stage, for example, can eliminate the chance that “the lesson is dominated by the teacher-
he or she is using English to introduce new materials” (Doff, 1988: 159).
In addition, eliciting involves the class by focusing students‟ attention and making
them think. Teachers can activate students‟ minds more by asking questions, by pushing
them to think and encouraging them to contribute; they will be more engrossed in the
lesson. In so doing, students‟ motivation is also ignited and maintained throughout the
lesson.
Next, on the premises that the teaching of new knowledge is often based on what
the learners already know (Darn & Cetin, 2006), elicitation encourages students to draw on
what they already know or partly know (Doff, 1988: 161). Before introducing new
knowledge, teachers tend to remind students of the old one or ask them about personal
experience. By attempting to answer teachers‟ questions, students have opportunities to
scan their background knowledge system, checking what they have or partly have already
in their minds.
One minor advantage of using elicitation techniques is that students can learn or be
exposed to useful incidental language during elicitation. That is the language which is not
explicitly taught but students still pick up during their interaction in classrooms. As a
result, what students can learn is far beyond the primary objectives of the lesson.
Obviously, elicitation directly and mainly benefits students. However, in the
meantime, teachers are at a great advantage. First, “elicitation can be used by teachers for
presenting new language as well as reviewing what was taught earlier” (Doff, 1988:161).
Moreover, as a diagnostic tool, eliciting gives teachers a chance to see what students know
and what they do not and hence to adapt their presentation to the level of the class.
Therefore, it is clearly seen that elicitation plays the role as testing tools that teachers can
use to measure the level of the class.
Eliciting is a powerful diagnostic tool, providing key information about what the
learners know or don't know, and therefore a starting point for lesson planning. Eliciting

should be used regularly, not only at the beginning of a lesson but whenever it is necessary
and appropriate”. On the other hand, “there should be a mixture of eliciting and immediate
presentation rather than using the first all the time” (Doff, 1988: 161). Any improper
application or overuse of the technique can be counterproductive to students.
With respect to questioning which is the leading technique of elicitation, teachers
should pay attention to some of the following points, as reviewed by Chu (2009).
Firstly, “teachers should vary his/her questioning technique according to the
difficulty of the question” (Doff, 1988:166). They are advised to go from easy questions
12 concerning most common knowledge to more difficult and expertise ones as well as types
of questions to be used. Moreover, to involve the whole class, difficult questions should be
targeted to competent students while easy ones are spared for the weaker side of the class.
In a mixed-level class, teachers can enable learners to elicit from each other.
The second rule worth considering is that after delivering each question, teachers
should leave time for students to digest or to think of the answer. However, it is not
advised by Darn & Cetin (2009) to “pull teeth” or wait for “prolonged answers”.
Next is teachers‟ response after students give their answer. A minor gesture or
quick comments can be delivered to show teachers‟ acknowledgement which turns out to
be a very significant source of encouragement to their learners.
Lastly, “the teacher should elicit onto the blackboard” to make it easier for students
to follow and get maximum attention from them (Doff, 1988: 167).
2.2. Related studies
As stressed previously, eliciting technique is a powerful tool frequently employed
in the process of teaching English, especially under communicative approach. Therefore,
there is no question why the issue has been brought into research field by some scholars,
both overseas and domestic involved.
One of the pioneering studies on the application of eliciting techniques into English
lessons is “Eliciting spontaneous speech in bilingual students: Methods and techniques” by

th
form students in Hanoi, the application
of elicitation techniques to teach vocabulary to these subjects and pedagogical
recommendations to make a better use of elicitation techniques in teaching vocabulary.
Given that his effort in conducting this study was praiseworthy and the findings had a
significant contribution to the field, there were still some limitations that should be
addressed. Firstly, the study centered around the teaching vocabulary. Although this was
one of three core teaching components where the employment of elicitation techniques
could be considered a must in modern EFL classrooms, the results of a thorough
investigation into this field only could not represent that of the others namely grammar,
pronunciation and four macro skills: listening, speaking, reading and writing. Secondly, the
classroom settings where the survey of this research was conducted were not yet
introduced the new textbook which still followed the old teaching methods.
One year later, another research on elicitation was carried out by Tran (2007)
named “eliciting technique to teach speaking skill to grade-10 students in HFLSS”.
Firstly, she investigated the real situation of teachers‟ using eliciting techniques to teach
grade-10 students in HFLSS in Hanoi. Then, outstanding advantages of this practice could
be drawn out. Hindrances to the employment process of this technique were diagnosed for
timely and necessary pedagogical adjustments. Notably, the author gave a close look at the
speaking skill as the focus. One perceivable limitation is that the subjects of the study were
students from FLSS only, which could hardly be generalized into a wider population of
other institutions across the city and country.
14 Most recently, Nguyen (2011) worked on “the exploitation of eliciting techniques
by fourth-year students in their teaching practicum at University of Languages and
International Studies, Vietnam National University” (ULIS, VNU). The author looked into
how eliciting techniques were used by student-teachers in teaching English to first-year
students at English Division 1, Faculty of Teacher Education, ULIS, VNU. The study was

This chapter is to elaborate the methodology of the research including research
settings, participants, data collection instruments and analysis together with data analysis
procedure.
3.1. Research settings and participants
3.1.1. Research settings
Syllabus
In the first academic year, students are to reach levels A1 and A2 (according to
Common European Framework of Reference, now referred to as CEFR) in two initial
semesters. The number of credit hours each week is 6 which is halved into two class
contacts. In the light of Communicative Approach aiming to develop students‟
communicative competence alongside with linguistic ability, textbooks applied to levels
A1 and A2 are New English File Elementary and Pre-intermediate respectively, by Clive
Oxenden, Christina Latham-Konig and Paul Seligson. Moreover, students can self-study
with the workbooks of this series and other recommended material sources. Pronunciation
section is particularly intensified with the utilization of Pronunciation in use Elementary
by Jonathan Marks.
With regard to testing and evaluation, there are two mid-term tests and one final
exam. The former consists of one written and one oral test scheduled in Week 9 and 13
respectively. The latter is conducted at the end of every semester in the integrative form
but with the absence of the oral skill. The grade proportion for these three tests is 25% -
15% - 50%, with the other 10% devoted to the checking of students‟ attendance and
participation.
Students
Firstly, one of the most important features of students of UET, VNU is that they
major in technical sciences. Hence, English is not always their strength. Students‟ English
proficiency ranges widely, depending on their living and high school education
background. Students are supposed to achieve level B1 of CEFR by the time they
graduate. The number of first-year students each year is approximately 400 who are
equally divided into 15 classes, i.e. about 25 to 30 per class. Last but not least, UET
students had been placed into appropriate classes corresponding to their English

researcher divided the whole population of each class into sub-groups, each of which
“contains subjects with similar characteristics” (Cohen, Manion and Morrison, 2000:
101). Their A1 scores are the only criterion for different categories which serve the later
selection.
17 Score range
Number of students selected
>=8.5
5
7.0 < 8.5
5
5.5  < 7.0
5
< 5.5
5
Table 1: Categorization of selected students
Students from different groups may demonstrate different viewpoints on the same
issue. Due to several external obstacles, the researcher could penetrate into only two
classes but tried her best to choose students of highest diversity as a compensation.
Teachers:
Because teachers are the target of this research, they underwent a careful selection
procedure for both the questionnaire and interview session. 10 out of 14 teachers of the
Department were invited to share their opinion and experience on the investigated issue
within the questionnaire. It needs to note that eight out of this 10 were intentionally taken
from four earlier-selected classes, which might be useful for the comparison between
their own responses and their students‟ evaluation. From those 10 teachers, six of them
were invited to the interview session.
3.2. Research Instruments

questions were minimized to avoid fatigue effect, especially for first year students. As for
the language, to make it easy for students to understand, the questionnaire for students
was translated into Vietnamese and did not consist of too specialized terms whereas the
teacher questionnaire was still kept in the original version of English language.
In general, the questionnaire was carefully designed in terms of both appearance
and content for the highest return rates as well as the usefulness of the responses.
3.2.2. Teacher interview
Effective as the questionnaire can be, this is not always the case. In fact, there are
several disadvantages in using questionnaire as a data collection instrument, one of which
is the limited depth of the answers obtained. The interview then appears as a no-less-
important tool as it served the purpose of obtaining in-depth information far beyond the
results initially collected from questionnaires. According to Cohen, Manion and Morrison
(2000: 268), interview is a common research tool used to collect data, as in surveys or
experimental situations. In the current research, semi-structured interview was employed
to probe for details.
19 Six semi-structured interviews were face-to-face interaction between the
researcher and selected teachers. Like questionnaires, every interview was started with a
session of sharing personal information. To avoid possible misunderstanding and
confusion, the interviews were done in Vietnamese. Under the interviewees‟ permission,
the responses were noted and tape-recorded so as not to miss any important details. At
times, unclear points were further explained, which partly enriched the quantity and
quality of collected data.
3.2.3. Classroom observation
In the light of a primary research, classroom observation was regarded as a must
for a maximum degree of objectivity. Cohen, Manion and Morrison (2000: 305) claimed
that observational data are attractive as they afford the researcher the opportunity to
gather „live‟ data from „live‟ situations. On doing lesson observation, the researcher

This stage consisted of three steps related to activities carried out both outside and
inside classrooms.
Step 1: Teacher questionnaires and students were issued to get initial responses.
Step 2: Classroom observation was conducted in two lessons, the choice of which
could not be determined by the researcher herself but on permission.
Step 3: Teacher interview was done right after the observed classes were finished.
It was the suitable time for the interviewer to clarify any points that she found ambiguous
or worth asking about the observed lessons as well as about the questionnaires.
3.4. Data analysis procedure
Based on questionnaire results, the researcher began to classify, synthesize and
report data. To make the analysis comprehensible, answers to every question in the form
of words were transferred into charts first, followed by a detailed explanation. Semi-
structured interviews were transcribed, analyzed and integrated into the presentation of
questionnaire results so that readers could have a deeper understanding of the situations.
Regarding classroom observation, the researcher made a thorough analysis on the
observation details videoed from the two lessons. The results then were double-checked
with those of questionnaires and interviews.
To sum up, the research did involve a considerable number of 80 freshmen and 10
teachers of English from UET, VNU in questionnaire survey, interview and classroom
observation. The results, after that, were synthesized, analyzed as well as reported in the
most reader-friendly way and would be clearly presented in the next chapter.