VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HA NOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES & INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POST – GRADUATE STUDIES
*****************

ĐỖ THỊ HUYỀN

USING GROUP-WORK TO IMPROVE SPEAKING SKILLS
OF THE FIRST-YEAR STUDENTS AT HANOI UNIVERSITY
OF INDUSTRY
Sử dụng hoạt động nhóm để cải thiện kỹ năng nói của sinh viên năm nhất
trường Đại học Công nghiệp Hà Nội

M.A. MINOR PROGRAMME THESIS

Field: English Teaching Methodology
Code: 60140111

Hanoi - 2017


VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HA NOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES & INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POST – GRADUATE STUDIES
*****************

ĐỖ THỊ HUYỀN

USING GROUP-WORK TO IMPROVE SPEAKING SKILLS
OF THE FIRST-YEAR STUDENTS AT HANOI UNIVERSITY
OF INDUSTRY

support and encouragement. His patience and helpful criticism helped me
confidently express my ideas into this paper. I regard myself extremely fortunate in
having him as my dissertation supervisor.
I would also like to express my sincere thanks to all my lecturers at the Faculty
of Post-graduate Studies, University of Languages and International Studies for
their valuable lectures which have helped me a great deal in gaining a lot of
theoretical as well as practical knowledge.
My special thanks go to my dear students at Hanoi University of Industry who
helped me a lot by participating in speaking lessons and interviews enthusiastically.
Finally, I would also like to express my deep gratitude and love to my devoted
parents, my husband and my friends who gave me time and encouraged me to
complete this study.

ii


ABSTRACT
Among four macro skills namely listening, speaking, reading, and writing, learners
have favored speaking because it is used frequently in daily life. However, students
still have been faced with difficulties in learning speaking skills. Therefore, the
study was conducted for the purpose of offering group-work techniques, namely
group discussion as a key to improve speaking skills of the first-year students at
Hanoi University of Industry. This is a report on the study of using group-work in
order to improve speaking skills of the first-year students at Hanoi University of
Industry. The writer used action research as the method in carrying out the research.
It was done in four steps, namely planning, acting, observing, and reflecting. The
data were collected from the students’ speaking scores in the pre-test and post-test,
classroom observation, and semi-structured interviews. The research was conducted
in two cycles. Each cycle consisted of three meetings. The study showed the
improvements of the students’ scoring and performance. In the pre-test, the mean

S18: Student 18
S19: Student 19

iv


TABLE OF CONTENTS
DECLARATION .............................................................................................................i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...........................................................................................ii
ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................. iii
LISTS OF TABLES AND GRAPHS ........................................................................ viii
PART A: INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................... 1
1. Rationale ................................................................................................................... 1
2. Objectives of the study ............................................................................................ 1
3. Scope of the study ................................................................................................... 2
4. Significance of the study ......................................................................................... 2
5. Method of the study ................................................................................................ 2
6. Organization of the study ....................................................................................... 2
PART B: DEVELOPMENT.......................................................................................... 4
CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................. 4
1. Theoretical background ...................................................................................... 4
1.1 Theoretical background of speaking ............................................................ 4
1.1.1 Nature of speaking skill ........................................................................... 4
1.1.2 Teaching speaking in a classroom ......................................................... 5
1.1.3 Testing Speaking ...................................................................................... 6
1.2 Theoretical background of group-work .................................................... 11
1.2.1 Definition of group-work ...................................................................... 11
1.2.3 Disadvantages of group-work ............................................................... 13
1.2.4 The principles in organizing group-work in speaking class .............. 14
1.2.4.1 The preparation steps ......................................................................... 14

3.3 Findings and discussion .................................................................................. 32
3.3.1 Findings ...................................................................................................... 32
3.3.2 Discussion ................................................................................................... 34
PART C: CONCLUSION............................................................................................ 36
1. A summary of findings and concluding remarks .............................................. 36
2. Limitations ............................................................................................................. 36
3. Suggestions for further study .............................................................................. 37
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................. 39

vi


APPENDICES ................................................................................................................ I
APPENDIX 1: INTERVIEW QUESTIONS BEFORE CYCLE 1 ......................... I
(ENGLISH VERSION) .............................................................................................. I
APPENDIX 2: INTERVIEW QUESTIONS BEFORE CYCLE 1
(VIETNAMESE VERSION)...................................................................................... I
APPENDIX 3: INTERVIEW SRIPTS BEFORE CYCLE 1 IN ENGLISH
(SUMMARY ...............................................................................................................II
APPENDIX 4: PRE-TEST ...................................................................................... IV
APPENDIX 5: INTERVENING ACTIVITIES IN CYCLE 1 .............................. V
APPENDIX 6: POST-TEST FOR CYCLE 1 ........................................................ IX
APPENDIX 7: INTERVIEW QUESTIONS AFTER CYCLE 1 .......................... X
(ENGLISH VERSION) ............................................................................................. X
APPENDIX 8: INTERVIEW QUESTIONS AFTER CYCLE 1
(VIETNAMESE VERSION)..................................................................................... X
APPENDIX 9: INTERVENING ACTIVITIES IN CYCLE 2 ............................ XI
APPENDIX 10: POST-TEST FOR CYCLE 2 ................................................... XIII
APPENDIX 11: INTERVIEW QUESTIONS AFTER CYCLE 2 ................... XIII
(ENGLISH VERSION) ........................................................................................ XIII


PART A: INTRODUCTION
1. Rationale
Teaching speaking skill is of great importance in second language learning. Lerris
(1999) asserts that teaching speaking helps learners to use language more fluently
and speaking is a chance to notice the gaps between what they want to say and what
they can say.
Group-work techniques are widely accepted to be an effective way to encourage
students to use the language and to motivate them to become more involved.
Richards and Loc Khart (1994) point out that students not only play more active
roles in the learning process but also get the benefits of sharing ideas with their
team members through taking part in groups. Doff (1988) states that students feel
less anxiety when they work privately with their peers than when they are in front of
the whole class. Group-work can help shy students, who never say anything in a
whole class activity.
How to promote students’ speaking skill is still a challenging question. Nine years’
experience as a teacher of English at HaUI has helped the researcher realize the fact
that students are usually reluctant to speak when they are asked in speaking lessons.
They find it difficult to express their ideas in English. In addition, their participation
in speaking classes is unequal. To tackle these problems, group-work activities are
taken into a careful consideration in order to enhance students’ speaking skills.
2. Objectives of the study
The aim of this study is to explore how group-work makes a contribution towards
improving speaking skills of the first-year students at HaUI. Accordingly, this study
will address the following research questions:
1. How is group-work used to improve speaking skills of the first-year students at
HaUI?
2. To what extent can group-work improve students’ speaking skills after it is
applied?


2


Chapter 2: Methodology shows the procedure for carrying on the research such as
semi-structured interviews and pre-test before intervention, records, intervention,
observation, semi-structured interviews, post-test after intervention, and methods of
data analysis.
Chapter 3: The results of the study report the main findings obtained from the data
collection and discuss the prominent aspects.
Part C: Conclusion is the summary of the whole study. The limitations of the study
and suggestions for further study are also recommended in this part.

3


PART B: DEVELOPMENT
CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW
1. Theoretical background
1.1 Theoretical background of speaking
1.1.1 Nature of speaking skill
It is widely accepted that speaking consists of producing systematic verbal
utterances to convey meaning. Brown (1994), Burns and Joyce (1997) state that
speaking is “an interactive process of constructing meaning that involves producing
and receiving and processing information” (Brown, 1994b; Burns & Joyce, 1997). It
means when people speak, they interact and use language to express their ideas,
feeling and thought. They also share information with others through
communication. Chaney and Burk (1998) also argue that speaking is “the process of
building and sharing meaning through the use of verbal and non-verbal symbols, in
a variety of contexts”. Referring to speaking or communication in language
teaching and learning, Brown (2001) affirms that interaction is the heart of

1.1.2 Teaching speaking in a classroom
In a foreign country, students hear spoken language regularly and the without any
conscious effort they imitate and perform their own utterances on the basis of what
they have heard. Progressively, they come at a stage where they can speak like
people around them. In the mother country, EFL students need to practice the
language regularly inside the classroom through performing different activities.
Accordingly, it is teachers’ duty to provide activities that involve interaction among
learners. O’Malley & Pierce (1996) suggest that different kinds of speaking
activities are appropriate at different levels of proficiency. Therefore, teachers
should give learners ample practice in classroom at all levels so that they could
express themselves in situations where they can produce spontaneous language.
Practice activities may serve the learning/ teaching goal of speaking proficiency.
Richard & Lockhart (1996) define practice activities as tasks used to perform
sentence patterns. They also states that the use of variety of different tasks in
language teaching is said to make language teaching more communicative because
it provides a purpose for classroom activity.

5


Learning to speak entails learners’ engagement in communicative situations so that
they will activate their speaking capacity. As a result, the development of oral skill
requires students to make active use of the language that is correct in its grammar,
vocabulary and pronunciation. Accordingly, fluency and accuracy are essential
aspects that need to be developed in classroom interaction. In terms of fluency and
accuracy, Byrne (1997) also states that the main goal in teaching the productive
skill of speaking should be oral fluency, the ability to express reasonably,
accurately, and without hesitation.
Ur (1996) suggests activities in speaking in the classroom as follows:
a. Use group-work

end of a unit, thus contributing a sense of structure in the course as a whole;
g. get students to make an effort (in doing the test itself), which is likely to lead to
better result and feeling of satisfaction;
h. give students task which themselves may actually provide useful review or
practice, as well as testing;
i. provide students with a sense of achievement and progress in their learning.
Ur (1996) suggests that the techniques of speaking test to test oral proficiency are as
follows:
a. Questions and answers
b. Monologue
c. Making dialogues
d. Role plays
e. Debate
Within the scope of the study, monologue would be used as a technique of speaking
test because the researcher only focuses on testing students’ oral proficiency in
expressing their opinions about specific topics.
Thornbury (2005) proposes two main ways of scoring in spoken test, holistic
scoring and analytic scoring.
In line with the description above, Madsen (1983) states that holistic scoring is used
to evaluate a wide variety of criteria simultaneously such as appropriateness,
fluency, grammar, vocabulary, and pronunciation.

He asserts that the holistic

scoring concentrates on communication while not overlooking the components of

7


speech. According to Madsen (1983), in this type of scoring, teachers can adapt the

Score

Indicator

21 – 25

Wholly appropriate

16 – 20

Few limitations

11 – 15

Sometimes limited

6 – 10

Limitation affected the task

0–5

Inadequate for the task

Grammar
Score

Indicator

21 – 25


16 – 20

Few inaccurate pronunciation

11 – 15

Inaccuracy of pronunciation do not seriously impede understanding

6 – 10

Inaccuracy of pronunciation do not impede understanding

0–5

Inaccuracy of pronunciation makes understanding almost impossible

Hughes (2003) designs a scale to score speaking test. In the scale, the students are
tested on pronunciation, grammar, vocabulary, and fluency. Below is the speaking
test scale stated by Hughes.
Table 1.2 Criteria of Vocabulary Proficiency
No

Proficiency Description

Scale of
Score

1


7,6 – 8,5

adequate to cope complex practical problems and varied social
situation.
6

Vocabulary apparently as accurate and extensive as that of an 8,6 – 10,0
educated native speaker.

9


Table 1.3 Criteria of Fluency Proficiency
No

Proficiency Description

Scale of
Score

1

Speech is halting and fragmentary that conversation is virtually

1,0 – 4,5

impossible.
2

Speech is very slow and uneven except for short or routine


No

Proficiency Description

Scale of
Score

1

Pronunciation frequently unintelligible.

1,0 – 4,5

2

Frequent gross errors and very heavy accent make. Understanding

4,6 – 5,5

difficult, require frequent repetition.
3

“Foreign

accent”

requires

concentrated



Table 1.5 Criteria of Grammar Proficiency
No

Proficiency Description

Scale of
Score

1

Grammar almost entirely inaccurate in stock phrases

1,0 – 4,5

2

Constant errors showing control of very few major patterns and

4,6 – 5,5

frequently preventing communication.
3

Frequent errors showing some major pattern uncontrolled and

5,6 – 6,5

causing occasional irritation and misunderstanding.

independence as they take some of their own learning decisions without the teacher
controlling every move. They learn to negotiate and to listen to different opinions.
They participate more equally and in most cases, they feel free to experiment and

11


use the language. In group-work, the focus is not only on the product but also on the
process and the skills, which are activated to achieve.
According to Davis (1993), there are three general types of group-work including
informal learning groups, formal learning groups and study teams.
Informal learning group are temporary clustering of students within a single class
session. Informal learning groups can be initiated by asking students to turn to their
neighbors and spending two minutes discussing the question that the teacher has
posed. The teacher can also form a group of three to five to solve the problem.
Informal groups can be formed at any time in a class of any size to check on
students’ understanding of the material, to give students an opportunity to apply
what they are learning, or to provide a change of pace.
Formal learning groups are teams established to complete a specific task, such as
perform a lab experiment, write a report or carry out a project. This group may carry
out their work in the single class session or over several weeks. Typically, students
work together until the task is finished and their project is graded.
Study teams are long term groups (usually existing over the course of a semester)
with stable membership whose primarily responsibility is to provide members with
support, encouragement and assistance in completing course requirements and
assignments. Study teams serve a broader purpose. They can last the entire semester
or several semesters.
In this research, the researcher utilized the first type “informal learning groups” as
the key one because she wanted to change members of groups every meetings. She
thought that working with new members in new groups would refresh every

enhancing students’ interaction, generating a supportive atmosphere, creating
chances to use the target language and promoting learner autonomy. However,
many researchers still question whether those benefits of group work really take
place in the real educational setting. They have shown that group-work displays
certain problems, which will be elaborated in the next section.
1.2.3 Disadvantages of group-work
There is a fair amount of literature on problems of group-work. Within the scope of
this research, the most common problems in class, namely intolerable noises,

13


overuse of mother tongue, and unbalanced participation among group members will
be reviewed as follows:
Harmer (2007) points out that group-work in class inevitably results in a noisy and
chaotic classroom. Right from the beginning of a group activity, the organization
stage involving grouping students might cause extensive noises. Moreover, Burke
(2011) adds that noises could be easily generated from students’ confusion when
not understanding the instructions at the instruction stage. Even worse, as Beebe
and Masterson (2011) claim, once learners are unclear about what they are going to
do, they may then fall into mutual arguments or irrelevant chatting conversations.
Moreover, students, especially elementary or even intermediate ones, tend to rely
much on their native language rather than using the target language. Brown (2001)
asserts this is exactly the distinctive feature of a monolingual class where all share a
common mother tongue. As Burke (2011) indicates, when engaging in group-work
interaction, those of low linguistic competence often resort to their native language;
teacher’s insistence on using English to communicate might lead to their complete
silence.
Finally, group activities cause unbalanced participation among members. This may
be because some may fall into roles that easily become fossilized; consequently,

communication process and make them feel inhibited or less confident to speak.
Therefore, it is necessary that the teachers should assist the students to generate
ideas through brain storming and pre-teach useful vocabularies and structures.
1.2.4.2 Designing group-work activities
The popular benefit of group-work is the positive atmosphere where students can
learn from and help one another. According to Andrewes (2003), a good group
task is presented as follows:
Create group tasks that require interdependence
When structuring group tasks, it is necessary that teachers create group tasks that
require interdependence and composition among groups. Johnson and Smith
(1991) report that the students in a group must perceive that they “sink and swim”
together, that each member is responsible for and dependent on all the others, and
that one cannot succeed unless all in the group succeed. Strategies for promoting
interdependence include specifying common rewards for the group, encouraging

15