Le Thanh Hung – Dau Giay – 2011-2012

HOW TO TEACH ENGLISH TO HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS
COMMUNICATIVELY AND EFFECTIVELY

I. REASONS AND AIMS FOR CHOOSING THE RESEARCH:
In most English classes, teachers tend to overuse either English, which
makes it difficult for slow students to understand, or Vietnamese, which may
distract students from learning the language. To avoid this dilemma, teachers
should be able to know how to use English properly, and adequately to teach
their students.

It is commonly known that most students are eager to learn English if their
teachers use a good, “easy” English to teach them and this also makes them feel
interested in learning the language. From my experience, gathered from reading
books and observing what my colleagues did, the following approaches are
found to be really helpful for language teacher in this case. Besides, the new
series of textbooks presently used in Vietnamese high school are designed in
view of communicative language teaching method. Therefore, this writing is
involved the comment on bottom-up and top-down strategies and the
connection between these strategies and pair work and group-work tasks.

In gerneral, the aim of this study is to encourage teachers and students to
use as much English in the classroom as possible to communicate with each
other. Therefore, this writing introduce “How to teach English to high school
students communicatively and effectively”. This concerns with the teachers’
skills at employing pairwork and groupwork activities in the classroom. In other
words, the teachers should know how to organize pair and group work
effectively and how to deal with initial problems that may arise.

Page.1


Difficult to control

Students help one another

…………………..

Save time

2. Bottom-up and top-down strategies:
What are bottom-up and top-down strategies? As Harmer mentioned, “In
top – down processing reader or listener gets a general view of the listening or
reading passage by, in some way, absorbing the overall view of the picture” and
“in bottom-up processing, the reader or listener focuses on individual words and
phrases and achieves understanding by stringing these detailed elements
together to build up a whole” (Harmer 2001 p: 201). This is to say that top down is the process in which students use their schematic knowledge to access
to the topic of the passage, and bottom – up is the process in which students use

Page.2


Le Thanh Hung – Dau Giay – 2011-2012

their knowledge of language to explore the passage to have detailed ideas of the
text.
III. PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS:
This research was applied to three classes of tenth graders ranging from
fourteen to fifteen years old (10C1, 10C2, 10C3). Each class contains forty five
to fifty participants who are of mixed genders and language ability. In terms of
language competence, most of them might be considered as pre-intermediate

Expectations based
on prior knowledge.
(content schemata)

Expectations
based on
discourse and
sociocultural

Expectations based
on the assessment of
context

Pragmatic
s

Metacognition

Interpretation of
spoken discourse
(input)

Language knowledge
(phonology
vocabulary, grammar,)

Listening
Strategies

Bottom-up processing


Language knowledge
(phonology
vocabulary, grammar,)

Listening
Strategies

Bottom-up processing

Page.5


Le Thanh Hung – Dau Giay – 2011-2012

2. Organizing pairwork and groupwork:
The success of group or pair work depends on some extents, i.e. the
surrounding social climate, how habituated the class is to using it, the selection of
an interesting and stimulating task whose performance is well done within the
ability of the group or pair, and especially effective and careful organization.

2.1. Giving instructions:
The instructions that are given at the beginning are crucial. If the students do
not understand exactly what they have to do, there will be wate of time, confusion,
lack of effective practice, or even possible loss of control. Therefore, the teacher
should select tasks that are simple enough to describe easily; and in monolingual
classes, you may find it cost-effective to explain some or all in the mother tongue.
However, it is advisable to give the instructions communicatively rather than mere
explanation before delivering materials or building groups. And a preliminary
rehearsal or ‘dry run’ of a sample of the activity with the full class can help to

after the end of the group work. Feedback on the tasks may take such forms as
giving the right solution, if there is one, listening to and evaluating suggestions,
pooling ideas on the board, displaying the meterials the groups/ pairs have
produced. The main objective here is to express appreciation of the effort that has
been invested and its results. Feedback on language may be integrated into this
discussion of the task, or provide the focus of a separate class session later.

3. The connection between the strategies and pair-work/group-work activities:
In terms of students’ point of views and communicative language teaching
method, I have discovered that bottom-up and top-down approaches together help
learners much more in learning the language if teachers link these approaches
with pair-work and group-work activities. In this case, students will find
themselves free to talk and to communicate with one another in their own
language, and they may also feel it interesting to put their heads together and try
to explore the reading text or the listening passage. Accordingly, the students will
become more active and confident to express their ideas, and this is one of the
Page.7


Le Thanh Hung – Dau Giay – 2011-2012

goals of a language class. Let us consider the following experiences as examples
of the application in the classroom.

4. Application in the classroom:
4.1. Pair-work and group work in teaching grammar:
In order to teach the structure “used to /didn’t use to + inf” (Unit 4 English
10, part E. language focus, exercise 2), we may do as following:
Exercise 2: Work in pairs, ask what your friends used to do and didn’t use to
do (Ask about food, sport, music, school, subject ……. ).

Student: I used to listen to pop music.
Teacher: Pop music? when did you use to listen to it?
( And so on with some others)
- Teacher may ask two students to have similar conversations, while the others
listen.
Teacher: Now, The first, third and fifth row turn back. Ok, you are going to work
in pairs, talking to the one oposite you. Ready? Ask and answer the questions (in
the exercise). First, one person asks, the other answer (about all the topics) then
change the role. Start now.
- Teacher moves quickly round the class, checking that everyone is talking (but do
not try to correct mistakes, as this will interrupt the activity)
- When most pairs have finished, stop the activity. Ask a few students what their
partners said:
Teacher : Now, stop talking. Mai, tell me about Huong. What did she used to do?
Student : She says she used to eat ice cream, listen to pop music and swim in the
afternoon , she liked meat but she didn’t use to eat it.
- Teacher gives feedback:
- Well done……
4.2. Bottom-up and top-down in connection with pair-work and group-work
in teaching listening and reading:
As shown in the charts (page 2 and 3), it is clear that teachers have to
design tasks or questions which provide the students with schemata knowledge as
well as details to help students comprehend the required texts fully. For example,
when I taught the listening lesson of Unit 1 in English textbook 10 (page 16), I
conducted the lesson as following steps.
Page.9


Le Thanh Hung – Dau Giay – 2011-2012


First, in while-reading stage, students were asked to read the whole text
once quickly and answer the question “what is the main idea of the passage?”. If
it is taught to students who are not quite good at English, this can be altered by a
multiple choice question (MCQ) of the same content or “underline the sentences
that show the main idea of the text?” In addition, the students were also asked to
find out the main idea of each paragraph. These questions, which are clearly
based on top-down approach, gave the students a general picture of the text.

Page.10


Le Thanh Hung – Dau Giay – 2011-2012

Next, the students were asked to read the text again to answer a number of
questions which are based on bottom-up approach, such as following:
1. How many oceans are there?
2. How much of the earth is covered by seas and oceans?
3. How do scientists now overcome the challenges of the depth?
4. According to the first paragraph, what would happen without
modern technology?
5. …………
After finding out the answers for these bottom-up based questions, the
students could have more details about the text they are reading. Moreover, in
this case, bottom-up approach could also be made use to design such exercises as
“put the sentences which are cut out from the text into their original places” or
“what does the word seabed refer to?” etc. This kind of questions help the
students investigate the text in two important features, i.e. “cohesion” and
“coherence”. Therefore, they could decode the text fully. In other words, the
students might avoid “the mismatch between the reader’s view of the world and
the view that seems to be presented in the text” (Celce – Olshtain 2000:127)

method is while doing group-work activities to explore the texts, students tend to
use their mother tongue to discuss instead of the language they are learning.
However, as experience has shown, it is hard to control the use of L1 among EFL
and ESL learners in classrooms. Finally, in order to carry out the method
effectively, the teacher must know for sure about the students’ language
competence to apply suitable tasks or activities; otherwise, the lesson will end up
in confusion.

VII. CONCLUSION:
Personally, I believe that what I suggested above will help me, as well as
other language teachers, much in teaching career. However, the results of the
application depend much on teachers as Lewis and McCook pointed out that
teachers were applying what they were introduced to, sometimes successfully,
sometimes less ( Lewis & McCook 2002:152 ). Thus, in terms of communicative
language teaching, teachers in the new learning settings are expected to become
more reflective teachers (Celce – Olshtain 2000:17). They must be sensitive and
must know what approaches and how to apply them to their language class.

Page.12


Le Thanh Hung – Dau Giay – 2011-2012

REFERENCES:
Celce-Murcia, Marianne & Olshtain, Elite, 2000, Discourse and Context in
Language Teaching, Cambridge: CUP.
Hoang Van Van & Hoang Thi Xuan Hoa, 2009, English textbook grade 10, 3rd
edition, Ministry of Education publishing house.
Harmer, Jeremy, 2001, The Practice of English Language Teaching, 3rd edition,
Harlow: Longman.