VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POST- GRADUATE STUDIES
******************** LÊ THỊ PHƯỢNG
LEARNERS’ ATTITUDES TOWARDS NATIVE AND
NONNATIVE ENGLISH SPEAKING INSTRUCTORS

(THÁI ĐỘ CỦA NGƯỜI HỌC ĐỐI VỚI GIÁO VIÊN
BẢN NGỮ VÀ GIÁO VIÊN NGƯỜI VIỆT) M.A. MINOR PROGRAMME THESIS
Field: ENGLISH TEACHING METHODOLOGY
Code: 60.140.111

Hanoi, 2014

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI

Hanoi, 2014
i

DECLARATION

I declare that the thesis entitled “Learners’ attitudes towards native and
nonnative English speaking instructors” is the result of my own research and the
substance of this thesis has not, wholly or in part, been submitted for a degree to any
universities or institutions.

Hanoi, March 2014 Lê Thị Phượng


Hanoi, March 2014
Lê Thị Phượng
iii

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.


1.2. Native and non-native teachers 7
1.3. Previous researches on students‟ attitudes towards NESTs and NNESTs 10
1.4. Summary 17
CHAPTER 2: METHODOLOGY 18
2.1. Research setting of the study 18
2.1.1. An overview of the research site 18
2.1.2. Description of the instructors and the IELTS 5.5 and 6.5 courses 18
2.2. Research questions 19
2.3. Participants of the study 19
2.4. Data collection instruments 19
2.4.1. Questionnaire 19
2.4.2. Semi-structured interviews 20
v

2.5. Data collection procedure 21
2.6. Data analysis procedure 22
2.7. Summary 23
CHAPTER 3: DATA ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS 24
3.1. Differences between NES and NNES instructors 24
3.1.1. Native English Speaking Instructors‟ teaching methods 24
3.1.2. Non-native English Speaking Instructors‟ teaching methods 27
3.1.3. Comparing results 29
3.2. Learners‟ attitude towards native and non-native English speaking instructors 29
3.2.1. Teaching Pronunciation 31
3.2.2. Teaching Vocabulary 32
3.2.3. Teaching Grammar 34
3.2.3. Teaching learning strategies 35
3.2.4. Other findings 36
3.3. Summary 38
PART III: CONCLUSION 39

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.
In Vietnam, many students try to enhance their English competence by taking part
in English courses, which results in the increasing influx of foreign teachers coming
to Vietnam to teach English.
However, the role of native speakers and nonnative speakers as instructors of
English has been a controversial issue in recent years. Despite the fact that non-
native English speaking ( NES) instructors around the world outnumber the native
English speaking (NNES) instructors by far ( Samimy & Brutt- Friffler, 1999),
numerous cases of discrimination against NNES instructors have been reported and
NES instructors are preferred over NNES instructors when they are applying for the
same position (Braine, 1999). Indeed, there is a stereotype that native English

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
regard to instructors‟ teaching behavior in speaking classes.
3. Research questions
To achieve the aim mentioned above, the following research questions were
raised for exploration:
1. What do learners perceive as the differences between native and non-
native instructors with respect to their teaching methods through speaking
lessons?
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.

4. the individual is communicatively competent (Davies, 1991; Liu, 1999; Medgyes,
1992), able to communicate within different social settings (Stern, 1983),
5. the individual identifies with or is identified by a language community (Davies,
1991; Johnaon & Johnson, 1998; Nayar,1998)
6. the individual does not have a foreign accent ( Coulmas, 1981; Medgyes, 1992;
Scovel, 1969, 1988).
The question is that whether a nonnative speaker can become a native
speaker . As Lee concluded in his paper named “ The Native Speaker: An
Achievable model?”, it is impossible for any learner of a language, after the critical
period, to become a native speaker unless he or she is born again. It is impossible
because in order to be considered as a native speaker of a language, a person must
satisfy the one most salient criterion-acquire the language in early childhood and
maintain the use of that language. According to Phillipson (1996), a nonnative
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

preparation as the goal of their teaching. However, while they perceived that NESTs
and NNESTs each possessed strengths and weaknesses, they did not consider the
native speaking teachers superior to their NNS counterparts. Whereas Reves and
Megyes (1994) focus on the differing levels of language proficiency and their
effects on teaching practices, the differing teaching practices identified by Samimy
and Brutt-Griffler (1999) may be attributed to cross- cultural differences.
The study “ Native and non-native English teachers: investigation of the
construct and perceptions‟ (2001) was carried out by Ofra Inbar- Lourie at TEL
Aviv University in Israel. Apart from aiming at figuring out the reasons why some
teachers in Israel perceived themselves as native of English and the effects of the
native versus non-native distinction on the pedagogical perceptions of the teachers,
Inbar-Lourie also specifically sought to discover if there were differences in
perceptions between teachers who claim to be native of English and those who do
not, with respect to the following factors: differences between NSETs and NNSETs
and status of the English language; English teaching in Israel; and English teaching
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

In fact, earlier studies assumed such a bias against non-native speakers and
explored possible reasons behind it. To start with, Medgyes (1992) focused on the
UK, stated that program administrators preferred native speakers because they were
“aware that international students studying in Britain preferred to be taught by
native-speaking English teachers. This demand would have to be satisfied by the
school principal….” (p. 344). Cook (2000) agrees with Medgyes and believes that
the main reason for administrators not hiring NNESTs is their perception that ESL
students who enroll in their language course expect NESTs. Thus, according to
these papers, NNESTs are not hired because program administrators believe that
students do not want them.
Nevertheless, studies of ESL studies‟ perceptions do not corroborate these
beliefs. In one study of students‟ perceptions, Cook (2000), using data collected
through a questionnaire survey, reports,
The NS teacher was preferred by 18% of Belgian 15-year-olds, 44% of
English children, and 45% of Polish children. Looked at in reverse, 47% of
Belgian, 32% of English, and 25% of Polish children preferred non-natives, the rest
having no preference. (p.331)
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

affect, oral skills, methodology, hard work, vocabulary, culture, ability to answer
questions, and literacy. Oral skills and culture were seen as their negative
comments. The findings of this study demonstrate that the importance given to the
“native English speaker” hiring criterion by program administrators is not shared by
students. As Maboob said “ both NESTs and NNESTs working collaboratively can
provide a better learning environment to ESL students”.
Ketch and Santatn- Williamson (2002) examined the attitudes of 56 ESL
students towards NESTs and NNESTs in America. Data were collected by means of
an attitude survey questionnaire and using audio-taped passages read by 3 native
and 3 nonnative English speakers, the researchers found that the students were in
most cases could not distinguish a native English speaker from a nonnative speaker,
and an interesting thing to note is that the attitude towards teachers with different
accent is not correlated with whether a speaker‟s accent is native or nonnative, but
instead is correlated with the students „perception of whether speaker is native or
nonnative. Students viewed a perceived native speaker more favorably than a
perceived NNS. Although students showed a preference for a native instructor in
terms of teaching speaking, listening and pronunciation, they quoted two main
advantages of NNESTs, namely better source of motivation since they could show
students possibility of reaching a higher level of proficiency, and NNESTS had
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

and in relate to different levels of education. Thus, their study goes deeper than the
question of students‟ preference for NS or NNS teachers in general.
According to Moussu in “English as a second language student‟ reactions to
nonnative English speaking teachers” (2002), 84 students from Brigham Young
University, Utah, USA expressed positive attitudes toward NNS teachers at the
beginning of the semester course and students opinions were even more positive by
the end of the semester. To be more specific, analysis of the data shows that from
the beginning of the semester, the students had positive attitudes towards their NNS
teachers. The Korean and Chinese students expressed negative feelings toward their
NNS teachers more frequently than other students. Time and exposure to the
teachers only made their opinions more positive by the end of the semester. For
instance, to the question “Would you encourage a friend to take a class with this
non-native English-speaking teacher?” only 56% of the students had answered
“yes” at the beginning of the semester. By the end of the semester, 76% had
answered “yes” to the same question.
Another Master‟s thesis on students‟ attitudes towards NNS English teacher
was carried out by Kristy Liang in 2002. To put in it more details, the study was
designed to investigate 20 ESL students‟ attitudes towards six ESL teachers‟ accent
and the features of these teachers‟ speech that contribute to the students‟ preference
for teachers. Five of the teachers were NNSs from different language backgrounds
and the other was a native speaker. I was impressed by the method that the author
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

motivating students, able to encourage independent learning and thinking, sensitive
and responsive to students‟ needs, and able to respect students as individuals with
their own aspiration. The respondents also cited several shortcomings, including
their examination-oriented teaching approach, their limited use of English in class,
and the tendency to over-correct students‟ work.
By adopting a qualitative approach with the use of open-ended
questionnaires, Sung (2010) attempted to explore students‟ perceptions of both
NESTs and NNESTs to make a comparison. The open-ended questionnaire was
distributed to 81 secondary school students in Hong Kong. All the questions
required the students to indicate a preference for either an NNEST or an NEST in
different aspects of teaching, although they may also indicate a neutral position in
their answers. The author suggests that the students did not necessarily prefer
NESTs over NNESTs in every aspect of language teaching namely teachers‟
teaching methods, students‟ understanding of teachers‟ instructions, teachers‟ care
for students, teachers‟ pronunciation, teaching of English grammar and teaching of
oral English. He emphasized that we need to focus on students‟ preference for
NESTs/NNESTs in specific areas of teaching, such as pronunciation, grammar and
oral skills, so that it is possible for us to understand a more nuanced picture of
student‟ perception of NNESTs and NESTs.
Up until now, as far as the researcher know, Walkinshaw and Duong (2012)
is the only study which examines a common belief that learners of English as a
foreign language prefer to learn English from native-speaker teachers rather than
non-native speakers of English with Vietnamese participants. Data was collected by
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.