VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES

NGUYỄN THỊ NHƯ QUỲNH

TEACHERS’ AND STUDENTS’ ATTITUDES TOWARD
L1 USING IN EFL CLASSROOMS
AT BAVI HIGH SCHOOL, HANOI

(THÁI ĐỘ CỦA GIÁO VIÊN VÀ HỌC SINH ĐỐI VỚI VIỆC SỬ DỤNG NGÔN
NGỮ ĐẦU TIÊN TRONG CÁC LỚP HỌC TIẾNG ANH
TẠI TRƯỜNG THPT BA VÌ, HÀ NỘI)
MINOR M.A THESIS


AT BAVI HIGH SCHOOL, HANOI

(THÁI ĐỘ CỦA GIÁO VIÊN VÀ HỌC SINH ĐỐI VỚI VIỆC SỬ DỤNG NGÔN
NGỮ ĐẦU TIÊN TRONG CÁC LỚP HỌC TIẾNG ANH
TẠI TRƯỜNG THPT BA VÌ, HÀ NỘI)
MINOR M.A THESIS

Field: English Methodology
Code: 601410
Supervisor: MA.Lê Thế Nghiệp HANOI, 2011

iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART B. DEVELOPMENT

4
CHAPTER 1. LITERATURE REVIEW
4
1.1. History of language teaching methods focusing on L1 use in FL teaching
4
1.2. The arguments about L1 using in the FL classrooms
5
1.2.1. The arguments against L1 using in FL classrooms
5
1.2.2. The arguments in supports of using L1 in FL classrooms
7
1.2.2.1. Pedagogical values
8
1.2.2.2. Psychological values
10
1.2.2.3. Socio- cultural values
11
1.3. Studies focusing on teachers and learners’ attitudes toward L1 use in FL
classrooms

12
CHAPTER 2. THE STUDY
14
2.1. Research questions
14

v
2.2. Methodology


vi
LIST OF TABLES
Page

Table 1: Teachers’ reasons for their use of Vietnamese in EFL classes
Table 2: Teachers’ opinions about the situations in which they should use
Vietnamese
Table 3: Teachers’ opinions on the amount of Vietnamese used in English
classes
Table 4: Teacher’s feelings about their use of Vietnamese in English classes
Table 5: The situations in which teachers allow students to use Vietnamese

30

LIST OF FINGERS
Page

Finger 1: Teachers’ attitudes toward using Vietnamese in EFL classroom
16
Finger 2: Students’ attitudes toward using Vietnamese in EFL classroom
23
vii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

CLT : Communicative Language Teaching
EFL : English as a foreign language
FL : Foreign language
L1 : First language
MT : Mother tongue
TL : Target language

1
PART A. INTRODUCTION

1. Rationale for choosing the topic
English language has been considered as an international language for a long

2
teachers and students prefer to use Vietnamese in their English classes. More specifically,
the study tried to seek answers to the following questions:
1. What are the attitudes of teachers and students toward Vietnamese use in EFL
classrooms at Bavi high school?
2. What are their reasons for using and avoiding Vietnamese in EFL classroom?
3. In what situations do the teachers and students prefer to use Vietnamese in
their EFL classrooms?

3. Scope of the study
The study focused on investigating the attitudes of the teachers and students toward
using Vietnamese in EFL classrooms. The study confined itself to the teachers and students
who are teaching and learning English as a foreign language at BaVi high school.

4. Methodology of the study
The study adopted a mix methodology combining both qualitative and quantitative
methods for data collection and data analysis. To improve the validity and reliability of the
findings, three data collection instruments were used in the study: questionnaires,
interviews, and classroom observations.

5. Significance of the study
The findings of the present study are hoped to be useful to the following three
groups:
1. Teachers of English can make use of the findings and become aware of the role
L1 plays in teaching and learning English as well as the other foreign languages.
2. Students are better aware of their FL acquisition with the use of L1 in order to
adjust the frequency of L1 in their foreign language classrooms.
3. Language teaching methodology researchers can conduct further research in
the area which may open the way to the development of new English language
teaching methods and techniques that work to incorporate L1 use in the EFL
4
PART B. DEVELOPMENT

CHAPTER 1. LITERATURE REVIEW

1.1. History of language teaching methods focusing on L1 use in FL teaching
A brief history of the literature related to language teaching methods shows that
“the role of first language in foreign language teaching is one of the most long- standing
controversies in the history of language pedagogy” (Stern, 1992). The following glimpse in
the historical sequence of the most-recognized language teaching methods will highlight
periodic changes in the role of L1 in FL teaching.
In the early years of the nineteenth century in Western countries, the Grammar
Translation Method dominated the FL classrooms. During this period, foreign language
was taught through grammar illustration, bilingual vocabulary lists and translation
exercises. This method emphasizes on the literary language because it fundamental goal is
to help learners be able to read literature written in the target language (TL), rather than
provide them with the ability to communicate in that TL. According to this method, L1 is
freely used as “reference system” in the process of foreign language acquisition (Stern,
1983). In other words, L1 is used as the main means of instruction.
In the late nineteenth century, the Western world experienced a big change in
the need of learning foreign languages with the aim of communicating. This led to the
emergence of the Direct Method, which pays its whole attention to the spoken language.

foreign language as well as varied arguments against using the students‟ mother tongue in
the FL classrooms. Cook (2001) summarized these arguments in the three following
fundamental principles:
1. The learning of a foreign language should follow the model of the learning of
an L1 (through maximum exposure to the FL).
2. Successful learning involves the separation and distinction of L1 and the
foreign language.
3. Students should be shown the importance of the FL through its continual use.
The first principle is based on the rationale that from childhood, human beings
are exposed to the surrounding sound environment. We listen, imitate and respond to what
we hear around us and then we succeed in mastering our mother tongue. As a result, the
proponents of the monolingual approach, who believe that FL learning follows a process
similar to L1 learning, claim that exposure is vital in the learning another language (Cook,
2001). In other words, learners of a foreign language should be exposed to that FL
environment as much as possible.

6
Krashen (1985), a pivotal advocate of the only-English use in the classroom
and also an expert in the field of linguistics, has argued that people learning foreign
languages following basically the same route as they acquire their MT; hence the use of the
MT in the learning process should be minimized. Furthermore, she also stated that the EFL
classroom medium should be in English because of the significant relationship between
comprehensible input in FL and proficiency and the availability of the target language
environment is of “paramount importance to success in a new language”.
Her other suggestion is that learners‟ use of L1 in class could contribute to impeding the
success of exposure in facilitating proficiency.
Cook (1991) further elaborates on the importance of exposure. She points out
that the role of English in a language class is twofold. It is not just the medium of
instruction but the teaching content. The language interaction between teachers and
students is just the objective of the teaching. Therefore, everything the teacher does or says

found almost everywhere English is taught, even today. According to these tenets, there is
no place for L1 in teaching English. Phillipson claimed in tenet 4 that using L1 too much
will hurt the teaching and learning English. In addition, in tenet 3 he claimed that the more
English used the better and also directly implied that the less L1 use the better. For the
purpose of this paper, the first tenet is obviously the most important one. Phillipson
highlighted the importance of English-only policy in teaching English. Besides, tenet 2
also implies that native English speakers are more valued than non native English teachers.
In general, these tenets emphasize the superiority of English and conversely, the inferiority
of L1 in teaching and learning English. By the 1970s these five tenets would be
incorporated into the Communicative Approach, which quickly came to dominate language
teaching. Native English teachers teaching only in English and excluding the students L1
would become the goal for many Communicative supporters.

1.2.2. The arguments in supports of using L1 in FL classrooms
The arguments in supports of using the learners' mother tongue in FL
instruction clearly reveal that the use of first language does not have a negative impact on
FL learning, and it can be factor to help students improve the way they learn a foreign
language. Although the 'English Only' paradigm continues to be dominant in
communicative language teaching, research into teacher practice reveals that the L1 is used
as a learning resource in many EEL classes (Auerbach, 1993). This author also adds that
when the first language is used in EFL classes, practitioners, researchers, and learners
consistently report positive results. The arguments in supports of using L1 in FL

8
classrooms can be developed based on three main values: pedagogical values,
psychological values, and socio- cultural values

1.2.2.1.Pedagogical values
Contrary to the claim that the use of L1 will harm or affect the progress or
effectiveness of FL teaching and learning, many scholars argue that L1 has a place in FL

reason is simple: Because we learn to read by reading that is, by making sense of what is
on the page”.
L1 can have various uses in foreign language classroom. Cook (1999:185)
asserts that treating the L1 as a classroom resource opens up a number of ways to use it,
such as for teachers to convey meaning, explain grammar, and organize the class, and for
students to use as part of their collaborative learning and individual strategy use. This
author concludes that “The first language can be a useful element in creating authentic
foreign language uses rather than something to be shunned at all costs” .
Deller (2003) believes that L1 is an excellent resource for FL learning
especially, for students at lower level of FL proficiency if used effectively. She
demonstrates seven possible uses of L1:
1. It is useful to notice differences and similarities between the two languages.
2. Learners can enjoy materials that might otherwise be too difficult for them.
3. Learners can develop and produce their own materials including their own tests.
4. Allowing the use of mother tongue can encourage spontaneity and fluency.
5. Using mother tongue can equip learners with the words and expressions they
really want and need in English.
6. Using mother tongue can have beneficial effect on group dynamics.
7. Using mother tongue ensures that learners are able to give on going feed back.
Although the provision of maximum FL exposure to the learners seems
essential, L1 can be used alongside FL as a complement. In this regard, Turnbull (2001:
153) states that maximizing the target language use does not and should not mean that it is
harmful for the teacher to use the L1 “A principle that promotes maximal teacher use of the
target language acknowledges that the L1 and target language can exist simultaneously”.
Similarly, Stern (1992) remarks that “the use of L1 and target language
should be seen as complementary, depending on the characteristics and stages of the
language learning process”. On the other hand, overuse of L1 will naturally reduce the
amount of exposure to FL. Therefore, attempt should be made to keep a balance between
L1 and FL use. In this regard, Turnbull (2001) acknowledges that although it is efficient to


teenagers to show that they are intelligent and sophisticated people.

11
In sum, the arguments for the psychological values of L1 tell us that by
empowering the learners to feel more comfortable learning environment, which will in
turn, enhance the FL acquisition process.
I.2.2.3. Socio- cultural values
The use of students‟ native language can also increase their openness to learning
by reducing the degree of language and culture shock they are encountering (Auerbach,
1993). Auerbach also adds that the relations of power and their affective consequences are
integral to language acquisition. Students‟ learning can also be enhanced by integrating
students‟ native language into their educational experiences, thus giving their language a
status more comparable to that of English.
Finally, Harbord (1992), in support of using L1 in the classroom as a humanistic
treatment of learners, affirms that eliminating or limiting the use of mother language does
not guarantee better acquisition, “nor does it foster the humanistic approach that recognizes
learners' identities as native speakers of a valuable language that is as much a part of them
as their names”.
In general, considering the following lists of Prodromos‟ (2001:2) metaphoric
expressions might briefly summarize for the merits of using L1 and the problems that may
ensue as a result of its imprudent L1 use is:
1. a drug (though with therapeutic potential, it can damage your health and may
become additive).
2. a reservoir (a resource from which we draw).
3. a wall (an obstacle to teaching) .
4. a window (which opens out into the world outside the classroom; if we look
through it we see the students‟ previous experience, their interest, their
knowledge of the world, their culture.
5. a crutch (it can help us get by in a lesson, but it is a recognition of weakness).
6. a lubricant (it helps the wheels of a lesson moving smoothly; it thus saves time).

exposure to English but rather can assist in the teaching and learning process.

To sum up, the use of L1 in a foreign language classroom has been the subject of
much debate and controversy. Some see its use as a negative and harmful to FL learning
and teaching process while others view it as a valuable tool or resource. Opponents of L1
use argue that adults can learn a foreign language in the same way as children pick up their
mother tongue, and so there is no need of L1 use in FL classrooms. The fear that using L1
will interfere with FL and its use also reduces students‟ exposure to the target language are
also further arguments put forward against the use of L1 in FL classroom. Proponents of

13
L1 use, on the other hand, argue that the occasional use of L1 has a supportive and
facilitating role in learning and teaching of a foreign language. These supporters believe
that L1 have three main values: the pedagogical, the psychological, and the socio- cultural
values. Recent empirical studies (Prodromou 2002, Schweers 1999, and Tang 2002) also
tend to reinforce what has been argued by the supporters of L1. Their finding shows that
L1 has a place in FL learning and teaching.


English. Most of the students were at low and medium English proficiency levels. They
were not highly motivated to learn English because living in the mountainous area, they
did not have any opportunities to communicate with native speakers of English and
practice their English skills. Their main reason for learning English is that it is a
compulsory subject at school.
The participants of the study included 13 teachers of English (2 males, 11
females), who have been teaching English at BaVi high school for 3-15 years, and 100
students who have been learning English as a foreign language for 8-10 years. All the
participants are the Vietnamese, so their first language is Vietnamese.

2.2.2. Data collection instruments and procedure
The research adopted a mixed methodology- combining both qualitative and
quantitative approaches in data collection and data analysis, depending on which inquiry
strategy and approach can yield relevant and useful results. In this research, data were
collected from three instruments: questionnaires, interviews, and classroom observations.
15
 Instrument 1: Questionnaires
The study used two types of questionnaire to collect data: the first one was designed
for teachers and the other was for students.
The questionnaire for teachers was set in English. It included 8 questions, which
were a mixture of open-ended, yes/ no and multiple choice questions. The questionnaire
was distributed to 13 teachers with the aim to investigate their attitudes toward using
Vietnamese in their EFL classrooms. It also clarified the teachers‟ reasons for using and
avoiding Vietnamese, and defined the situations in which they prefer to use Vietnamese.
The students‟ questionnaire included 7 questions. These questions were set in
Vietnamese so that students can understand and answer them more easily. There were three
kinds of questions in the questionnaire: open-ended, yes/ no and multiple choice questions.

themes. The observations were conducted in 5 English lesson periods (45 minutes each):
reading, speaking, listening, writing, and language focus. The classroom observations had
2 basic aims: the first was to examine the situations and the extent to which teachers and
students actually used Vietnamese in their English classes to validate their responses in the
questionnaires and interviews. The second was an attempt to find out whether the use of
Vietnamese in English classes had positive or negative effect on the English classroom
interaction and on students‟ English comprehension.
17
CHAPTER 3. RESULTS AND ANALYSIS

3.1. Analysis of teachers’ questionnaire results
Question 1: In your opinion, should Vietnamese be used in EFL classrooms?

Percentage
(%)

a. It is less time- consuming.
b. It helps students feel more comfortable and confident.
c. It increases students‟ comprehension.
d. Others________ (please specify). 3
5
7
2

27.3
45.5
63.6
18.2

Table 1: Teachers’ reasons for their use of Vietnamese in EFL classes

In this question, the teachers were asked to explain the reasons why they think that
Vietnamese should be used in English classes.
Data from the above table showed that more than half of the teachers (63.6 %)
support using Vietnamese in English classes because it increases their students‟
comprehension. In addition, 45.5 % of the teachers found that Vietnamese should be used
in English classes because it helps their students feel more comfortable and confident than
only using English. Some teachers (27.3%) explained that they use Vietnamese because
they want to save the class time.
According to 18.2 % of teachers who chose the “Others” option of the question,

7
9
6
1
2
4

3
2
2

63.6
81.8
54.5
9.1
18.2
36.4

27.3
18.2
18.2

Table 2: Teachers’ opinions about the situations in which they should use Vietnamese
The teachers were also asked to give their opinions about the situations in which
they should use Vietnamese in their English classes. From the collected data in the above
table we can realize that Vietnamese may serve for all the listed situations with various
intensities.
According to most of the teachers (81.8%), Vietnamese is very necessary to
explain complex grammar structures, and 63.3 % of the teachers thought that they should
use Vietnamese to give the meanings of new words especially the abstract words. In