1

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY- HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FALCUTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES
****** NGUYỄN THỊ SINH A STUDY ON TEACHERS’ USE OF
VIETNAMESE IN ENGLISH LESSONS AT
AN DUONG HIGH SCHOOL, HAI PHONG

Nghiên cứu việc sử dụng tiếng Việt của giáo viên trong các giờ dạy
tiếng Anh tại trường THPT An Dương, Hải Phòng M.A MINOR PROGRAMME THESIS Field : English teaching methodology
Code : 60.14.10 Ha noi - 2012


Ha noi - 2012 i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKOWLEDGEMENTS……………………………………………………………… …i
ABSTRACT……………………………………………………………………………… ii
TABLE OF CONTENT………………………………………………………………… …iii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS……………………………………………………………… vi
LIST OF TABLES ………………………………………………………… …………… vii
PART A- INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………… 1
1. Background to the study………………………………………………………… …1
2. The aim of the study…………………………………………………………… ….2
3. Research questions………………………………………………………………… 2
4. Scope of the study………………………………………………………………… 2
5. The significance of the study……………………………………………………… 2
6. Design of the study……………………………………………………………….…3
PART B . DEVELOPMENT…………………………………………………….……… 4
CHAPTER 1. LITERATURE REVIEW……………………………………………… 4
1. History of language teaching methods focusing on L1 use in L2
teaching………………………………………………………………………………… 4
2. Debate surrounding the role of L1 in the L2 classroom……………………… ….6
2.1 Support for the monolingual approach………………………………… …6
2.2 Support for the bilingual approach……………………………………………… 8
3. Studies exploring L1 use in L2 teaching………………………………… ……… 9
3.1 Studies aiming at demonstrating the positive role of L1 in L2 teaching……… 10

3.1 Major findings………………………………………………………………….32
3.2 Implications…………………………………………………………………….34
PART C . CONCLUSION…………………………………………………………………36
1. Summary of the study……………………………………………………… ….36
2. Limitations……………………………………………………………………….36
3. Suggestions for further research…………………………………………… ….36
REFERENCES……………………………………………………………………… 38
APPENDICES………………………………………………………………………….41
Appendix 1. Questionnaire for teachers…………………………………………………41
Appendix 2. Questionnaire for students…………………………………………………43
Appendix 3. Interview questions…………………………………………………… 47

iii
responses………………………………………………………………………………………… 23
Table 4. Frequency of teachers’ use of Vietnamese as reported by the students……… 25
Table 5. Students’ attitudes to the purposes of teachers’ use of Vietnamese……….… 25
Table 6. Teachers’ and Students’ attitudes to the purpose of using Vietnamese……… 27

1 PART A . INTRODUCTION

As the starting point of the study, this introductory chapter provides the
background to the study and identifies the problem that the thesis attempts to

paper is aimed to gain understanding of the attitudes to, and perceptions of, the
use of Vietnamese in English language lessons held by a group of ELT teachers
working in a Vietnamese high school with a view to clarifying further the issue
from the teachers‘ perspectives.
2. The aim of the study
Within the framework of a minor thesis, the aim of the study is to investigate the
teachers‘ use of Vietnamese as well as their reasoning for the use of Vietnamese
in teaching English at An Duong high school. Thus, the objectives of the study
are as follows:
a. Exploring teacher‘s use of Vietnamese in their English language classes
as well as their pedagogical purposes of using Vietnamese in teaching English ;
b. Finding out students‘ and teachers‘ attitudes to the use of Vietnamese in
their English classes and the differences between these two groups in their
attitudes to the use of Vietnamese.
3. Research questions
In order to achieve the above-stated aims and objectives, the study is designed to
find answers to the following research questions:
1. How often do teachers use Vietnamese to teach English and what are their
pedagogical purposes of using Vietnamese?
2. To what extent do teachers and students differ regarding their attitudes
toward the use of Vietnamese in English lessons?
4. Scope of the study
This study is designed to gain understandings about the actual use of
Vietnamese in English classrooms by the teachers and their attitudes as well as
their students‘ attitudes to the use of Vietnamese in teaching and learning
English.
5. The significance of the study
The study will be a valuable reference not only for English teachers but
also for all language instructors regarding the need to make a better-informed
decision about what language to use or how to combine L1 and the new
4 PART B . DEVELOPMENT
CHAPTER 1. LITERATURE REVIEW
Introduction
This chapter reviews the literature on the use of students‘ first language or
mother tongue in teaching the second or foreign language. The chapter begins
with a brief review of the status of the students‘ mother tongue in various second
or foreign language teaching methodology. This is to create a theoretical
background of the study. This is followed by a review of the issue of students‘
first language or mother tongue in learning the second or foreign language from
a bilingual education perspective. The next point of the review is the debate
about the use of the first language in the second language classes. Finally, the
literature on teachers‘ and students‘ attitudes to the use of the first language will
be reviewed.
1. History of language teaching methods focusing on L1 use in L2 teaching
A brief review of the literature related to language teaching methods shows
that ―the role of L1 in L2 teaching‖ is ―one of the most long-standing
controversies in the history of language pedagogy‖ (Stern, 1992, p. 279). The
following glimpse in the historical sequence of the most-recognized language
teaching methods will highlight periodic changes in the role of L1 in L2
teaching.
The Grammar Translation Method derived from ―the teaching of the
classical languages, Latin and Greek‖ over centuries (Larsen-Freeman, 1986, p.

Method developed in response to the need for Americans to learn the languages
of their allies and enemies alike during World War II, aims at helping learners
―to be able to use the target language communicatively‖ (Larsen-Freeman, 1986,
p. 43). Like the Direct Method, the Audio-lingual Method focuses on the spoken
language and forbids translation at early level and the use of the students‘ native
language in the classroom (Finocchiaro & Brumfit, 1983, cited in Ellis, 2003, p.
84). Meanwhile in the Communicative Approach, which has attracted most
attention from the language teaching profession during the past five decades, the
restricted use of native language is allowed where feasible and translation may
be used when learners find it essential or helpful (Finocchiaro & Brumfit, 1983,
cited in Ellis, 2003, pp. 84-85).
Recently, there has been an increasing attention to the merits of the L1 use

6 in the language classroom among the language teaching profession. Several
studies related to the role of L1 in the teaching of L2 have been carried out
around the world in order to develop post-communicative methods which
consider L1 as a classroom resource. The Functional-Translation Method by
Robert Weschler, which combines ―the best of traditional ―grammar translation‖
with the best of modern ―direct, communicative‖ methods‖, can be taken as an
example (Weschler, 1997, p. 3).
2. Debate about the role of L1 in the L2 classroom
2.1 Support for the monolingual approach
Advocates of the monolingual approach base themselves on three
fundamental principles. The first principle is based on the rationale of first
language acquisition. According to this perspective, human beings, from
childhood, are exposed to the surrounding sound environment. We listen,
imitate and respond to what we hear around us and then we succeed in mastering

As for the third principle, it is believed that the use of only L2 for all
interactions in the L2 classroom can proclaim the significance of L2 in
satisfying learners‘ communicative needs (Littlewood, 1981, cited in Cook,
2001, p. 409) and depict the usage of the target language (Pachler & Field, 2001,
cited in Miles, 2004, p. 8).
In addition to the above fundamental principles, the monolingual approach
believes that ―the teacher who is a native speaker is the best embodiment of the
target and norm for learners‖ (Phillipson, 1992, p. 194). This belief is based on
the assumption that native L2 speakers possess ―greater facility in demonstrating
fluent, idiomatically appropriate language, in appreciating the cultural
connotations of the language, and in being the final arbiter of the acceptability of
any given samples of the language‖, which seem to make them ―intrinsically
better qualified than the non-native‖ (Phillipson, 1992, p. 194). This native
speaker principle is quite popular in several countries including Vietnam. One
can easily realize the strong preference of Vietnamese learners of English for
native speakers of English through the advertisements put by foreign language
centers in Tuoi Tre Newspaper- one of the most popular and prestigious
newspapers in Vietnam. For example, Europe-USA International English School
(EUIES) – an English language school in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam -
advertised in Tuoi Tre Newspaper dated January 11, 2010 that ―in EUIES, you

8 will learn English speaking and listening skills with 100% native teachers of
English‖.
2.2 Support for the bilingual approach
The proponents of the bilingual approach have focused their efforts on
three points to discredit the monolingual approach. According to Phillipson
(1992, p. 191), the biggest problem of the monolingual approach is that ―it is

seem to be better than native ones as they themselves have experienced the
process of learning L2, acquiring insight into the need of their learners, which is
a valuable resource for their teaching (Phillipson, 1992, p. 195).
In this light, Phillipson (1992, p. 195) suggests that the ideal teacher is the
person who ―has near-native speaker proficiency in the foreign language, and
comes from the same linguistic and cultural background as the learners‖.
Apart from discrediting the monolingual approach, the advocates of the
bilingual approach indicate the benefits of using L1 in L2 teaching. Based on the
belief that L1 is part of adult learners‘ experience which they bring into the
classroom, Corder (1992, cited in Ellis, 2003, p. 94) states:
Second language learners not only already possess a language system
which is potentially available as a factor in the acquisition of the second
language, but equally importantly they already know something of what a
language is for, what its communicative functions and potentials are.
He proposes that L1 can help learners ―in the process of discovery and creation‖;
thus ―the effect of the mother tongue on learning L2‖ is ―facilitatory‖ (Corder,
1992, cited in Ellis, 2003, p. 94).
Atkinson (1987, p. 242), in his discussion about general advantages of L1
use, claims that to let learners use their L1 is ―a humanistic approach‖ which
allows them to ―say what they really want to say sometimes‖. He also indicates
that the use of L1 can be very effective in terms of the amount of time spent
explaining (Atkinson, 1987, p. 242).
3. Studies exploring L1 use in L2 teaching
Several studies have been carried out across the world during the
past three decades with the aim of demonstrating the positive role of L1 in
L2 teaching, finding out teachers and learners‘ attitudes toward this issue and
identifying specific situations in which L1 should be used in the L2 classroom. 10

The experimental group was asked to translate Persian sentences into English
using the structures that they have been taught meanwhile the other group was

11 requested to do grammar exercises in the course book. Then both groups were
given a post-test. The results of the post-test showed that ―the experimental
group outperformed the comparison group in terms of accuracy‖ (Vaezi &
Mirzaei, 2007, p. 3); this supported Atkinson's (1987, p. 244) statements:
An exercise involving translation into the target language of a paragraph
or set of sentences which highlight the recently taught language item can
provide useful reinforcement of structural, conceptual and sociolinguistic
differences between the native and target languages. This activity is not, of
course, communicative, but its aim is to improve accuracy.
The study also concluded that ―mother tongue, if used purposefully and
systematically, can have a constructive role in teaching other languages‖ (Vaezi
& Mirzaei, 2007, p. 42).
3.2 Studies focusing on teachers and learners’ attitudes toward L1 use in
L2 teaching and specific situations in which L1 should be used in the L2
classroom
In several other studies conducted by the supporters of the bilingual
approach, the focus tends to be on teachers and learners‘ attitudes toward the
use of L1 in L2 teaching and specific situations in which L1 should be used in
the L2 classroom. Teachers and learners‘ favorable views of the place of L1 in
the English classroom can be found in a research on the use of Spanish in
English classes at the University of Puerto Rico, Bayamon Campus, Puerto
Rico. Participants including teachers (n =19) and students (the number of the
student participants was not mentioned in the study) were asked to fill out a
questionnaire about their attitudes toward the use of Spanish in the English

Chinese in the English classroom, namely ―it is more effective‖ and ―it is less
time-consuming‖. The research seems to show that limited and judicious use of
the mother tongue in the English classroom does not reduce students‘ exposure
to English, but rather can assist in the teaching and learning processes. This is
not to overstate the role of the L1 or advocate greater use of L1 in the EFL
classroom, but rather to clarify some misconceptions that have troubled foreign
language teachers for years, such as whether they should use the mother tongue
when there is a need for it and whether the often-mentioned principle of no
native language in the classroom is justifiable. The author concluded that the use
of L1 in the L2 classrooms should be encouraged.

13 Other researchers, for example, Nguyen (1999) and Zacharias (2003)
reported their studies on the use of L1 in L2 teaching and concluded that most of
the respondents held supportive views on the role of L1 in the English
classroom. Zacharias (2003, p. 74) further pointed out the possible uses of L1 in
the process of teaching L2 including explaining the meaning of new words and
grammatical points, giving instructions, checking learners‘ understanding and
giving feedback to individual learners.
4.Conclusion
This chapter reviews the literature concerning the use of L1 in teaching L2. As
the review indicates that the view that the students‘ mother tongue should be
banned in the English language classroom is now a history. Recent studies show
that L1 has its own role in teaching L2 and that both teachers and students seem
to have positive attitudes towards the use of L1 in the L2 classes. It is also
obvious that the issue remains little researched in the context of Vietnamese
high schools. This lack of research in my teaching context motivates me to carry
out this study.

students in a class. Therefore, teaching English is very difficult for teachers.
Teachers have to face with some problems in monitoring work, giving feedback,
setting up communicative tasks as well as paying attention to all students during
class time.
Since school year 2011-2012, the new syllabus developed by the Ministry
of Education and Training has been enacted in An Duong high school . The new

15 syllabus adopts a communicative approach to teaching English. It requires
students to acquire not only a good knowledge of grammar but also to be able
to communicate in English.
Normally, there are only 3 periods ( 135 minutes ) of learning English
every week. Yet, it is not enough for the students to practice and develop their
skills as well as to enrich their background knowledge, vocabulary and structure
capacity. What‘s more, English is hardly used to talk outside class. As a result,
these factors may affect students‘ motivation in learning English. So, it is
advisable for the teachers to employ various techniques to arouse students‘
interest in learning English.
2.2.2 Teachers
The study was carried out to investigate the teachers‘ use of Vietnamese in
English classrooms at An Duong high school. Thus, the objectives of the study
are 12 teachers of English and representatives of students from different classes
at An Duong high school.
An Duong high school has 12 teachers of English aged from 26 to 48. All
of them have been teaching English at school for at least three years. Eight of
them have got the University Bachelor‘s Degree in English, four teachers left
finished the in-service training course in English. None of them have ever been
to an English speaking country but some of them have attended workshops

the teachers agree that they do not have good environment. English seems never
to be used outside class. Furthermore, in English lessons, English is used much
by teachers and good students. If the teacher uses English to explain from the
beginning to the end of the lesson, just a few students understand entirely what
the teacher means. The other students insist the teacher to use Vietnamese to
explain for them to understand the lesson better within the limited time in class.
The active students respond in both English and Vietnamese to the teacher‘s
questions. The others are lazy or reluctant to speak out either in English or in
Vietnamese because they have no effort and aim to learn. As a result, their
English is not good enough and they find that English is a very difficult subject
to learn.
2.2.4 Teaching and learning materials
The main material for teaching and learning English at high school is a new
set of English textbooks designed by the Ministry of Education and Training.

17 They were designed following communicative approach. There are five parts in
each unit arranging as follow : reading, speaking, listening, writing and language
focus in which a variety of exercises and tasks were compiled for practice. Also,
there exists a consolidate unit of which objective is examined how well the
students have achieved in the previous units. The content of the new textbook is
arranged according to themes. Each unit mentions one theme relating to
everyday life, which is very useful and practical to students‘ needs. Those
themes will be exploited and practiced from different skills that are allocated in
different periods of forty-five minutes. Compared with the old textbooks, which
students are required to master basic grammar rules of the target language and to
acquire a certain bulk of vocabulary for translating texts, the new textbooks are
designed with much practical objectives. It develops language skills

they were in Grade 6. When participating this study, they were in the second
term of the academic year. In researcher‘s observation, their English proficiency
was lower than others.
All participants took part in the survey by responding to questionnaires.
Besides, both teachers and students were also invited to take part in interviews
in order to get a complete look into the research issues.
2.4 Data collection instruments
To collect data for this study, the researcher used two main kinds of
research instruments: questionnaires for students and teachers and follow-up
interviews. Added to that, class observations were also employed to supplement
the about instruments.
2.4.1 Survey questionnaires
The instruments used in this study consisted of two questionnaires : one for
teachers and one for students. According to Gillham (2000), using
questionnaires has some advantages such as low cost in time and money; easy
to get information from a lot of people, respondents can complete the
questionnaire when it suits them, analysis of answers to closed questions is
straightforward; less pressure for an immediate response, respondents‘
anonymity; lack of interviewer bias, standardization of questions ( but true of
structured interviews ) ; can provide suggestive data for testing an hypothesis.
The questionnaires were designed in both close and open-ended questions.

19 2.4.1.1 Questionnaire for students
This questionnaire was designed with two main parts with 7 questions.
Part I was about the students‘ personal information which included students‘
gender, place of domicile and their average mark of English subject in the first
term of the school year 2011-2012. Part II was designed to elicit the students‘