i

VIETNAMNATIONALUNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES
*********************

VÕ THỊ KIM CÚC

THE EFFECT OF CLASSROOM INTERACTION ON DEVELOPING
NON-ENGLISH MAJOR SOPHOMORES’ SPEAKING SKILL AT HO CHI
MINH UNIVERSITY OF INDUSTRY (HUI) Ảnh hưởng của tương tác trong lớp học đối với việc phát triển kỹ năng nói của sinh
viên năm hai không chuyên ngữ tại trường Đại Học Công Nghiệp TP.HCM

M.A MINOR THESIS
FIELD: ENGLISH TEACHING METHODOLOGY
CODE: 60140111
HoChiMinh, 2014 ii


Name:VÕ THỊ KIM CÚC
Supervisor’s Name: Dr. NGUYỄN TRƯỜNG SA

“I certify that this work is entirely my own and has not been accepted as part of a
submission to another purpose elsewhere”.
Signed:

Word length: words iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This study has been completed with the help and support of many persons.
Therefore, I am grateful to all of them.
First and foremost, I would like to express my special thanks to my supervisor, Dr.
Nguyen Truong Sa, who shaped me on the path toward being an independent researcher.
Dear Dr. Nguyen Truong Sa, thank you for your initial ideas of the research topic and
your support during the time I was conducting the research. You have invested a lot of
energy and valuable time counseling and correcting my thesis. Without your help and
support, I would have been in much trouble completing my study. Working with you, I

sophomores at Ho Chi Minh University of Industry (HUI). The data were gained through
naturalistic observation, document analysis and interview. The data were analyzed by
using FLINT (Foreign Language Interaction) system by Moskowitz (1971) and
classroom interaction types of Malamah-Thomas’ (1987) frameworks. The findings
revealed that teachers, students applied some categories of talk in FLINT system, some
classroom interaction types. Teachers thought that interaction can increase students’
knowledge, confidence, establish relationship. They encountered some difficulties during
interaction: students do not want to take risk, students’ vocabulary and grammar
problems.
vi TABLE OF CONTENTS
DECLARATION OF AUTHORSHIP
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS i
ABSTRACT ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS iii
LIST OF TABLES ANF FIGURES v
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS vi
PART A INTRODUCTION
1. Rationale of the study 1

1. Conclusions 33
2.Implications of the study 34
3.Suggestions for further research 35
REFERENCES 37
APPENDIX 1 I
APPENDIX 2 IV
APPENDIX 3 V
APPENDIX 4 VI
APPENDIX 5 VII viii

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Participants detailed information…………………………………………15
Table 2: Observation and interview schedule…………………………………… 19
Table 3: The results of all observations…………………………………………….21
Table 4: The results of classroom interaction types……………………………… 25

ix

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
HUI Ho Chi Minh University of Industry
FLINT Foreign Language Interaction Analysis

classrooms provides the opportunity for meaningful practice of learners’ linguistic
resources that lead to accuracy. In addition, in the study of Hailey (2006),
interaction not only helps learners to notice what they cannot express precisely the
meaning they wish but also pushes learners to produce more accurate and
appropriate language. In the same vein, Savignon (1983) affirms that the
development of communicative competence is promoted in “expression,
interpretation, and negotiation of meaning involving interaction between two or
more persons or between one and a written or oral text”. One again, the effect of
interaction on learners’ communicative competence and then speaking ability is
asserted by Welker’s (1997 82) that “a thousand meetings, the best textbooks,
creative teaching materials, even native speakers visiting classroom aren’t going to
give students English communicatively. Only by using English with their teacher
and classmates will develop the ability to speak English”. However, in the light of
speaking skill, it seems that the author fails to address classroom interaction in the
relation to develop speaking skill.
In Vietnam, most of students cannot use English for communicating in real
situation although they have learned English for many years. According to Van
(2007 22) “Vietnamese learners’ English proficiency levels were very low, they
seemly failed to take part in oral communication”. In addition, Thinh (2006)
2

addressed that many Vietnamese students are unable to produce a perfect sentence
although they have learned English in classrooms for seven years. Then it becomes
doubtful whether the unadequate interaction makes Vietnamese students in general
and students in colleges, universities in particular are not able to speak English. The
researcher also wonders whether classroom interaction is one of the causes that lead
to failure and corruption of students’ English speaking or to what extent English
teachers have met the barriers in applying classroom interaction in teaching
speaking skills. The paper is conducted in the pursuit of revealing the hidden part of
language teaching and learning. For that reason, the paper will serve the practical

English teaching and learning out of discussion
5. Methods
The research is based on qualitative method with three instruments:
classroom observation, interview and document analysis. The video from classroom
observations areanalyzed and then coded by using Flint (Foreign Language
Interaction) system (Moskowitz 1971) and Malamah-Thomas’ (1987) frameworks.
These instruments areaimed to find out the classroom interaction types, collect the
information from teachers’ perceptions of the importance of classroom interaction
and barriers in applying the classroom interaction.
6. Definitions of terms
Interaction is the collaborative exchange of thoughts feelings, or ideas between
two or more people, resulting in a reciprocal effect of each other (Brown, 2001 48)
Classroom interaction is the patterns of verbal and nonverbal communication and
the types of social relationships which occur within classrooms (Richards & Platt
1992 52)
Speaking is an interactive process of constructing meaning that involves producing
and receiving and processing information (Brown, 1994; Burns & Joyce, 1997).
4

Sophomore non English major students are students in the second year of
university or college and their majors are not English
7. Design of the study
The paper of the research will be organized as follows:
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION consists of rationale of the study, aims of the
study, research questions, scope of the study, methods and design of the study.
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW explains the theoretical framework
related to the study. In this chapter, the researcher serves the theory of speaking,
interaction, interaction in speaking classroom, aspect of interaction as well as types
of classroom interaction. Besides, it also contains the previous studies examining
the gains of teaching speaking upon interaction.

between two or more people, resulting in a reciprocal effect on each other” (Brown
2001 165), or face to face communication with particular “prosody, facial
expression, silence and rhythmical patterns of behavior between the participants”
(Crystal 2003 238), have been given a lot of attention within the language learning
fields in recent years. From the two definitions, it is suggested that interaction can
only get occurred when there is a specific purpose and an identified situation. In the
course of classroom interaction, “classroom interaction” refers to “verbal interaction
through spoken words” between the teacher and students and among students in the
language classrooms. To put it in another way, classroom interaction means to
communicate spontaneously and verbally for the sake of sharing social and personal
data (Couniban 1998 72). As shown previously, because interaction and classroom
interaction involve human beings, such things as emotions, creativity, agreement or
disagreement and so on should be taken into considerations (Couniban 1998 72).
For that reason, it is easy to recognize feelings included in the conversations among
turn-takers. In language classrooms, interaction involves not only teachers and
6

students but students also. Even when the commitment to ease oral performance
fails, making an effort to fill the gap between them will get students to speak in
some ways.
1.1.2. Aspect of interaction
1.1.2.1. Teacher talk
In language teaching and learning, what is called by “teacher talk” is the
language typically used by teachers in their communication. In simple words,
according to Ellis (1988), “teacher talk” is special language the teacher use when
addressing learners in the classroom. Teacher talk is crucial and important, not only
for the organization and management the classroom but also for the process of
acquisition.
According to Flanders (1970), as quoted by Krypsin and Feldhusen (1974 20),
the section of “teacher talk” is readily subdivided into two major categories: indirect

to, or communicating understanding of past, present, or future feelings of students.
- Praises or encourages: praising, complementing, tell to students why what
they have to say or do is valued. Encouraging students to continue, trying to give
them confidence. Confirming answers are correct.
- Jokes: Intentional joking, kidding, making puns, attempting to be humorous,
providing the joking is not at anyone’s expense. Unintentional humor is not
included in this category.
- Uses ideas of the students: clarifying, using interpreting, summarizing the
ideas of students. The ideas must be rephrased by the teacher but still recognized as
being student contributions
- Repeat student response verbatim: repeating the exact words of the students
after they participate.
- Ask questions: asking questions to which an answer is anticipated. Rhetorical
questions are not included in this category.
b. Direct teacher talk
8

Based on Flanders categories, as quoted by Krypsin and Feldhusen (1974),
direct teacher talk is divided into smaller and more meaningful unit:
- Explaining or Informing: another component that takes up very significant
portion of teacher talk is explanation. Informing or lecture is generally used to get
across important facts, opinions, concepts, or generalizations to the students.
- Giving direction or commands: this category is used when student
compliance with the teacher’s statement results in some observable activity. Hence,
direction or commands giving by the teacher allow the student only minimal
freedom in responding. The distinction between commands and directions depend
on the freedom allowed to the students. Commands which are very explicit are more
limiting; whereas directions are less demanding and voluntary in tone.
- Scolding/Reprimanding or Defending Authority: in general, teachers employ
statement or criticism or reprimand in order to correct students’misbehaving.

among many possible answers which have been previously shaped but from which
students must now make a selection.
- Silence: Pauses in the interaction. Periods of quiet during which there is no
verbal interaction.
- Silence A-V: Silence in the interaction during which a piece of audio-visual
equipment is being used to communicate.
- Confusion, non-work oriented: More than one person at a time is talking, so
the interaction cannot be recorded. Students are out of order, they are not behaving
as the teacher wishes, and they are not concerned with task at hand.
- Laughter: laughing, giggling by the class, individuals, and or the teacher.
10

- Uses English: using English by the teacher or students.
- Nonverbal: nonverbal gestures or facial expressions by the teacher or the
students who communicate without the use of words.
Another simpler point of view is Flanders’categories. As quoted by Krypsin
and Feldhusen (1974), Flanders subdivides students talk into two categories
depending on the students’response.
- Student talk – Expected or predictable response: this category is when the
student replies to a teacher’s question or direction based on the type of question or
direction posed by the teacher.
- Student talk-Initiated response: In this case, the student is responsible for
originating the verbal activity. It is when students volunteer statements or questions
without being asked or induced by the teacher.
1.1.3. Types of classroom interaction
It is true that classroom interaction come in many shapes and forms (Van Lier
1988) and many be in various combinations. In the classroom aiming at teaching the
target language, the types of interaction often include:
- Teacher speaking to the whole class;
- Teacher speaking to an individual student with the rest of the class as

the subject. At this time, the teacher plays a role of a facilitator of learning.
The fourth type of interaction means that it is the learner instead of the teacher
who initiates the question. When this occurs, it is regarded as learner initiative.
Learner initiative is common in the learner-centered classroom, but rare in the
teacher-fronted classroom.
The fifth and sixth types- student speaking to student and student speaking to
group members-are usually called pair work and group work; the latter is inevitably
12

linked to tasks. Researchers advocating pair or group work believe that these two
types of interaction can provide more opportunities for language production, and
collaborative work facilitates learning.
Student speaking to the whole class is the seventh type of interaction that
mainly focuses on the student workshop or presentation.
1.1.4. The importance of classroom interaction with speaking skill
Interaction plays the key role in learning a language. With this point of view,
Williams and Barden (1997 206) put it in this way “if we take an interaction view of
learning, we see the nature of the interaction that take place as a key to learning.
This is especially apparent in the case of learning a language where using language
is essentially a social activity, and interaction in the target language is an integral
part of the learning process”. In addition, in a study into the role of classroom
interaction, Hall and Verplaetse (2000) affirm that it is in their interactions with
each other learners learn the form and the content of the target language hence
foster the individual development. With the same vein, Bocale (2004) explains,
interacting helps learners to learn words and phrases more easily and use the
language more correctly than they just hear or see them passively. The process of
negotiation of meaning makes learners understand and acquire the same time the
structure of the language. Furthermore, in a claim on the importance classroom
interaction in language learning in foreign language lessons, Allwright (1984 158)
asserts it is “inherent in very notion of classroom pedagogy itself”.

14

CHAPTER 2 METHODOLOGY
2.1. Participants
The research was undertaken over a period of four months. The non-
participant observation took place at the second semester of non-English major
sophomores in Ho Chi Minh University of Industry (HUI). Three teachers (Teacher
A,B,C) were teaching Basic English at three classes (class A, B, C) respectively and
150 non-English major sophomores were chosen as the participants in this study.
Teacher A was about twenty seven years old. He was non-native speaker of English,
graduated from Ho Chi Minh University of Industry with a major in English, and
just got his M.A. degree in TESOL from Victoria University. He has been teaching
English for 3 years.The age of teacher B was about twenty nine. She was non-native
speaker of English, graduating from Quy Nhon University a major of English, and
got her M.A. degree in TESOL from Ho Chi Minh City Open University. She has
been teaching English for 6 years.Teacher C was 50 years old. She was non-native
speaker of English, graduating from Vinh University a major of English, and got her
M.A. degree in Applied Linguistics from Canberra University. She has been
teaching English for 17 years. The 150 students were from different faculties, non-
English major and their average age was twenty. The class A located on the fourth
floor of the first building on the campus, there are 39 girls and 16 boys in class A.
The class B had 23 girls and 27 boys. Teacher C’s class was composed 28 girls and
22 boys. All of them were in the second year of non-English major learning. The
students in three classes had two English classes every week and spent 3 months

TESOL
MA degree
of Applied
Linguistics
Class
Class size
50
50
50
Gender of the students
29 girls, 16 boys
23 girls, 27
boys
28 girls, 22
boys
Student age (years old)
20 to 21
20 to 21
20 to 21
Levels (according to
school’s curriculum)
Pre-intermediate
Pre-
intermediate
Pre-
intermediate
Textbook used
American
Headway 1B
American

communication” (Fraenkel & Wallen 2009 472). Document analysis has
advantanges, namely it is useful as a means of analyzing observation data and a
researcher can delve into records and documents (Fraenkel & Wallen 2000 83). In
this research, the document analyzed was video’s transcription of teaching-learning
process. Further, to investigate the classroom interaction appeared between teacher
and students, this research employed Foreign Language Interaction (Flint) system
developed by Moskowitz (1971), as cited in Brown (2001 170). This analysis
system has several benefits; it is helpful in developing interactive language teaching
since it gives the researcher a toxonomy for observing teachers, set a framework for
evaluating and improving the teaching and helps to set a learning climate for
interactive teaching (Brown 2001 168-169). While, to investigate types of
classroom interaction in speaking class, the researcher used Malamah-Thomas’s
(1987) framework about types of classroom interaction.
In addition, interview was conducted for three observed teachers. Interview
is defined as a “rich source of data which provide access to how people account for”
(Silverman 2006 148). Interviews are also valuable because they permit researchers
to gain participants’ insider perspective on what they do and why they do it by
asking focused questions and eliciting attitudes, beliefs, and perspectives (Bartels
2005). For this research, the purpose of interview is to find out the barriers when
teacher employ the classroom interaction as well as teacher’s perception the
importance of classroom interaction.
2.3. Data collection procedures