An investigation into students’ reticence in English Speaking lessons- A case of Toan Thang high school.pdf

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES & INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POST- GRADUATE STUDIES
--------***-------
NGUYỄN THỊ LAN ANH
AN INVESTIGATION INTO STUDENTS’ RETICENCE IN
ENGLISH SPEAKING LESSONS-
A CASE OF TOAN THANG HIGH SCHOOL
(
(Đ
ĐI
IỀ
ỀU
U T
TR
RA
A V
VỀ
Ề T
TÍ
ÍN
NH
H T
TR
RẦ
ẦM
M L
LẶ
ẶN
NG
G C
CỦ
ỦA
A H
HỌ
ỌC
C S
SI
IN
NH
H T
TR
RO
ON
NG
G C
CÁ
ÁC
C G
GI
IỜ
Ờ
N
NÓ
ÓI
I T
TI
IẾ
ẾN
NG
G A
AN
NH
H -
- Đ
ĐI
IỂ
ỂN
N C
CỨ
ỨU
U T
TẠ
ẠI
I T
TR
RƯ
ƯỜ
ỜN
NG
G T
TH
HP
PT
T T
TO
OÀ
ÀN
N T
TH
HẮ
ẮN
NG
G)
)
M
M.
.A
A.
. M
MI
IN
NO
OR
R P
PR
RO
OG
GR
RA
AM
MM
ME
E T
TH
HE
ES
SI
IS
S
Field: English Teaching Methodology
C
Co
od
de
e:
: 6
60
0.
.1
14
4.
.0
01
1.
.1
11
1
S
Su
up
pe
er
rv
vi
is
so
or
r:
: D
Dr
r.
. Đ
ĐỖ
Ỗ T
TH
HỊ
Ị T
TH
HA
AN
NH
H H
HÀ
À
HANOI, 2014

i
DECLARATION
I hereby state that I, Nguyễn Thị Lan Anh, being a candidate for the Degree
of Master of Arts, accept the requirement of the University relating to the retention
and use of M.A. Thesis deposited in the library.
In terms of these conditions, I agree that the origin of my paper deposited in
the library should be accessible for the purpose of study and research, in accordance
with the normal conditions established by the librarian for care, loan, or
reproduction of the paper.
Haiphong, July…….2014
Signature
Nguyễn Thi ̣Lan Anh

ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First of all, I would like to express my heartfelt gratitude to my supervisor,
Dr. Đỗ Thị Thanh Hà, for her valuable advice, constructive comments, patient
support and encouragement in the completion of this M.A. Thesis.
I would like to send my sincere thanks to my informants in this study, whom
I selected as the target subjects of this research. Without their enthusiastic
contribution and cooperation, this research would certainly not have been
completed.
In the thesis, it is inevitable that the ideas of many other writers in this field
are reflected and developed. Their ideas have stimulated my thinking on doing this
paper. My debt to the authors listed in the references is equally great. To all these
scholars, I offer my sincere thanks.
Finally, I am greatly thankful to my family and friends, who are forever a
great source of support and encouragement.

iii
ABSTRACT
Realizing many 11th
graders at Toan Thang high school being passive in
English Speaking classes, this study aims to explore students‟ perception toward
their reticence behaviour in real- world classes, factors contributing to it and
students‟ expectation. A total of 373 students enrolled in eight 11th
grade classes,
were first observed in eight English Speaking lessons, and then filled in two sets of
open-ended questionnaire. After that, six of them were interviewed using semi-
structured format. A mix- method analysis is conducted to explore the findings.
From the study, it is revealed that students have strong willingness to participate in
English activities though they rarely do so in reality due to various learning
misconceptions. The result indicates that teachers need not only to use interesting,
various and suitable activities to encourage students to learn the target language but
also to explain and have more informal talks with students to teach them how to
learn effectively.

iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DECLARATION .........................................................................................................i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ....................................................................................... ii
ABSTRACT.............................................................................................................. iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS...........................................................................................iv
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS....................................................................................vi
LIST OF TABLES AND GRAPHS......................................................................... vii
PART A: INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................1
1. Rationale .........................................................................................................1
2. Aim of the study..............................................................................................2
3. Research questions..........................................................................................2
4. Scope of the study...........................................................................................2
5. Methods...........................................................................................................3
6. Design of the study..........................................................................................3
PART B: DEVELOPMENT .......................................................................................4
CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW ....................................................................4
1.1. Reticence behaviour in foreign language class...........................................4
1.1.1. The concept of reticence......................................................................4
1.1.2. Interpretation of reticence...................................................................5
1.1.3. Consequences of reticence ..................................................................6
1.2. Students‟ reticence behaviour in English speaking lessons........................7
1.2.1. Students’ participation in verbal interaction ......................................7
1.2.2. Potential obstacles to students’ verbal participation..........................8
1.2.3. Teachers’ roles towards students participation..................................9
CHAPTER 2: RESEARCH METHODS OF THE STUDY.....................................11
2.1. Participants and setting of the study .........................................................11
2.1.1. Participants .......................................................................................11
2.1.2. Setting of the study ............................................................................11
2.2. Data collection ..........................................................................................13
2.3.1. Data collection instruments...............................................................13
2.3.2. Data collection procedure.................................................................16
2.3.3. Data analysis procedure ...................................................................18
CHAPTER 3: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS ....................................................19
3.1. Findings.....................................................................................................19
3.1.1. Students’ reticence behaviour in English Speaking classes..............19
3.1.2. Factors affecting students’ behaviour...............................................24
3.1.3. Students’ expectation.........................................................................29
3.2. Discussions................................................................................................30

v
3.2.1. To what extent do the students remain reticent in English speaking
classes, and what activities make them the most reticent? ...............................31
3.2.2. What are students’ perception of their own learning behaviour and
factors influencing such behaviour?.................................................................31
3.2.3. What are students’ perspectives on whether, and how, to move the
classroom to a more interactive mode? ............................................................32
PART C: CONCLUSION.........................................................................................34
1. Conclusion.....................................................................................................34
2. Pedagogical implications ..............................................................................36
3. Limitations of the study ................................................................................37
4. Suggestions for further study ........................................................................38
REFERENCES..........................................................................................................39
APPENDIX 1: OBSERVATION TRANSCRIPT .................................................. I
Observation Transcript 1..................................................................................... I
Observation Transcript 2................................................................................VIII
APPENDIX 2: QUESTIONNAIRE (English) -Part 1........................................XV
APPENDIX 3: QUESTIONNAIRE (English) -Part 2....................................XVIII
APPENDIX 4: QUESTIONNAIRE (Vietnamese) -Part 1 ............................... XXI
APPENDIX 5: QUESTIONNAIRE (Vietnamese) -Part 2 .............................XXIV
APPENDIX 6: INTERVIEW QUESTIONS (English) ................................ XXVII
APPENDIX 7: INTERVIEW QUESTIONS (Vietnamese)............................XXIX
APPENDIX 8: DETAILED ANALYSIS RESULT FOR GRAPH 1.............XXXI
APPENDIX 9: DETAILED ANALYSIS RESULT FOR GRAPH 2..........XXXIV
APPENDIX 10: DETAILED ANALYSIS RESULT FOR GRAPH 3.........XXXV

vi
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
CLT Communicative Language Teaching
EFL English as a Foreign Language
ELT English Language Teaching
Ss Students
T Teacher

vii
LIST OF TABLES AND GRAPHS
TABLE 1 Data collection procedure in brief Page 18
GRAPH 1 Students‟ self evaluation- The frequency of
attending English Speaking Activities
Page 22
GRAPH 2 Students‟ real participation in class Page 24
TABLE 2 Students‟ self evaluation- The frequency of
attending English Speaking Activities (with
Mean, Mode, Median, Standard Deviation, p-
value and Standard Deviation formula in excel)
XXXI
GRAPH 3 Students‟ evaluation of main factors affecting
their reticence
Page 26
Correlation coefficient formula)
XXXII
Spearman- Brown correction formula)
XXXII
TABLE 5 Students‟ real participation in class (with p-
value formula)
XXXIV
TABLE 6 Students‟ evaluation of main factors affecting
their reticence
XXXV

1
PART A: INTRODUCTION
1. Rationale
Because of the increasing status of English as a world language, people in
Viet Nam in general and in my hometown of Tien Lang in particular are becoming
more and more aware of the importance of the spoken English. This awareness was
reflected not only during many daily informal talks but also officially in the national
English language curriculum (MOET, 2006) which required high school students to
be able to conduct conversations in English on familiar daily life topics. Despite this
expectation, many high school students have been observed to be either quiet,
uncooperative or to speak English with a trembling voice, make numerous
unnecessary pauses, or have shaking hands or legs, etc. during the lesson.
This study was motivated by my concern about the apparent reluctance of
Toan Thang high school students to participate in English- speaking class
interactions. The decision to look into students‟ reticence at Toan Thang high
school was first inspired by my teaching and living experience with the students in
this school for more than three years. Such contact not only allows a valuable
rapport with members of this case but also encourages my interest in further
understanding students‟ perception and expectation. Initial observations at the
selected location reveals that spontaneous discourse was rare in many English
speaking classes and many oral interactions not only did not include any students‟
individual thoughts or elaborated responses but also fostered a great deal of
dependence on the teacher. As a result, both teachers and students have become
frustrated and often complained about the quality of the learning outcome. This
makes it urgent to examine this phenomenon to better understand the learning
situation at Toan Thang high school and ultimately enhance the learning and
teaching of oral English here. The second reason is my realization that students
themselves and students in different context (both educational context and

2
background) exhibit different behaviour and worldviews, which would contribute
diverse perspectives, experiences and insights into the topic of reticence. The above
reasons actually drive the researcher to a study thesis, namely “An investigation
into students’ reticence in English speaking lessons - A case of Toan Thang high
school”.
2. Aim of the study
The current study aims at:
 Exploring the nature of students‟ reticence in English speaking lessons at
Toan Thang high school and some common situations for reticence to
flourish,
 Investigating students‟ viewpoints of their own learning behaviour and
potential obstacles to their verbal participation in the classroom,
 Finding out students‟ aspiration on whether, and how, to move the classroom
to a more interactive mode.
3. Research questions
(1) To what extent do the students remain reticent in English speaking classes,
and what activities make them the most reticent?
(2) What are students‟ perceptions of their own learning behaviour and factors
influencing such behaviour?
(3) What are students‟ perspectives on whether, and how, to move the classroom
into a more interactive mode?
4. Scope of the study
Within the framework of a minor M.A. thesis, the researcher only focuses on
the real situation of reticence happening among 11th
graders in their English
speaking lessons at Toan Thang high school, as well as their various angles and
desires towards this issue.

3
5. Methods
To achieve the aims mentioned above, the study adopts the methodological
approach of a survey study using mixed methods for data collection. The tools for
data gathering include class observation, semi-structured interview and
questionnaire.
6. Design of the study
There are three main parts in the thesis:
Part A: Introduction, which presents the rationale, aims, scope and research
questions.
Part B: Development of the research which includes:
Chapter 1: Literature Review, which reviews theoretical foreground from the
previous studies on students‟ reticence behaviour in general and in English speaking
classes in particular.
Chapter 2: Research Methods of the Study, which composes of 3 parts: the
fitness of case study to the research purpose, participants‟ description and setting of
the study (the case), and data collection.
Chapter 3: Findings and discussion, which is the discussion of the findings
through an analysis of the data collected through means of researching:
observations, semi-structured interviews and questionnaire.
Part C: Conclusion, in which major findings of the study will be briefly
summarized as well as the acknowledgement of the limitations of the study will be
elaborated.
Besides, the classroom transcripts, interview transcripts, questionnaires and tables
of data analysis results are included in the Appendices.

4
PART B: DEVELOPMENT
CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW
1.1. Reticence behaviour in foreign language class
1.1.1. The concept of reticence
The terminology of reticence in academic writing was first introduced in
1965 with Phillips‟ article introducing to the field of speech communication and the
notion that some people had difficulty communicating across a range of situations.
After his groundbreaking contribution, reticence caught the attention of many
researchers and linguists under different cognate constructs such as reticence
(Keaten & Kelly, 2000), communication incompetence, communication
apprehension (McCroskey, 1970) and unwillingness to communicate (Burgoon,
1976). Their studies, no matter how different they were, agreed with Keaten and
Kelly on an affirmation that reticence was a communication problem with
cognitive, affective and behavioral dimensions and was due to the belief that one
was better off remaining silent than risking appearing foolish. (Keaten & Kelly,
2000)
My own standpoint of reticence is strongly influenced by Keaten & Kelly‟s
affirmation, which has been narrowed down to a specific situation- English
Speaking classroom. Reticence, in this paper, refers to behaviour of reticents who
have a tendency to avoid communication, that is, to engage in chronic silence out of
fear of foolishness. They remain silence as a patterned response to the threat of
negative evaluation. The feeling of uneasiness, worry, nervousness and
apprehension experienced by non-native speakers when learning or using a second
or foreign language has now changed learners into reticents since they possess a set
of faulty beliefs about communication and foreign language learning process.

5
1.1.2. Interpretation of reticence
Since the beginning of reticence research, theories have been made relating
to what involved in reticence behaviour, and who often reveal themselves as
reticents.
First of all, reticence can indicate shyness characteristic. It includes attitudes
and feeling such as a lack of confidence particularly in new or unfamiliar social
settings, excessive preoccupation with self in the presence of others, inadequate
social skills, and disruptive anxiety and self-derogation in social situation. (Cheek &
Watson, 1989)
Second, reticence may imply too much inner speech overlapping one
another, which is conductive to depression, morbidity and anxiety (Tomlinson,
2001).
Third, reticence can communicate acceptance of the other person, but
without any doubt or any critical argument, which reveal passivity, lack of
creativity, shortage of knowledge, justification and inventive skills.
More often, reticence brings to light the fact that such people have no interest
on the situation they are involved. It can also be a token of not understanding, which
might be resulted from being involved in conversation or lessons with complicated,
difficult or above- level topics.
In addition, most people experience occasional feelings of shyness as a
transitory reaction when encountering certain difficult social situation. (Russel,
Cutrona & Jones, 1986; Zimbardo, 1977). Likewise, some individuals are fearful
and nervous of any unprepared situation that may cause unexpected results. They
can‟t risk themselves for any uncertain challenge. (Ely, 1986; Liu & Jackson, 2008)
Again, the above correlations between environmental factors and
communication reticence were detected and proved by many linguists‟ studies. The
results indicated that reticence is significantly influenced by antecedent
environmental factors, thus lending support to etiological explanations based on
learning theory and perception theory.

6
1.1.3. Consequences of reticence
In many cases, the reticence behaviour is not simply resulted from one or
several reasons in some certain situations, but more often, a final manifestation of
serial complicated reactions during interactions such as tension, inhibition,
awkwardness, painful self-consciousness, physical distress, and worry about being
evaluated negatively. It comes along with somatic anxiety symptoms such as upset
stomach, pounding heart, sweating, trembling or blushing, which can lead to
stressfulness and depression. If reticence is not treated carefully, it can have serious
repercussion for the reticents‟ heath themselves.
Reticence in a specific situation of foreign language classes resulted in a
series of failure. As involvement and participation are essential for language
acquisition, the more utterances the learners offer, the better their spoken language
is and vice versa. This phenomenon is known as „Matthew Effect‟, that is "rich get
richer, poor get poorer" (Chau, 1996). Students, who are actively involved, reported
higher satisfaction and higher persistence rates (Tsui, 1996).
Furthermore, the act of being silent, reluctant to participate or speak using
the target language has always been considered as the main source of frustration,
and failure for not only students but also instructors (Flowerdew & Miller, 1995;
Jackson, 2002), which is essentially important when the conceptualization of the
Communicative Language Teaching approach is implemented. This negative
behaviour or passive attitude disrupts not only instructional plan, it also makes it
hard for instructors to facilitate active learning among students. As a conspicuous
consequence, it restricts students from progress, and intended course learning
outcomes might not be achieved. Moreover, most of the time, instructors have to
struggle in exploring ways to break the uncomfortable silence in interaction in order
to minimize the feeling of discombobulating.
In short, students‟ reticence, withdrawal, or fear of interacting not only
deprives them of sharing what they know, but also deprives the teacher and

7
classmates of benefiting from it. Thus students‟ reticence has a vital influence in
teaching and learning process and there is a need for an individual, teacher and
classmate to reduce or eliminate such phenomena.
1.2. Students’ reticence behaviour in English speaking lessons
1.2.1. Students’ participation in verbal interaction
In spite of the growing expectation for verbal classroom participation in
second and foreign language learning situations, reticence research has captured the
attention of language theorists and educators in recent decades. From his
observation and experience of teaching the EFL speaking skills for more than 15
years, Hilde (2009) has noticed that most of the students who enroll in the English
Department of Qassim University have revealed reticence in speaking activities.
Non English major students in Saudi Arabia, similar to learners in foreign language
contexts (Jackson, 2002; Howritz et al, 1986), have been observed to be either quiet
or to speak English with a trembling voice, make numerous unnecessary stops, or
having shaking hands or legs, etc. during English lessons or oral English tests. The
same problem has also been observed in other Asian countries. Dick and Robinson
(1995, p. 5) reported that Malaysian students “preferred not to say anything during
lecture discussion sessions” and “if an instructor asked a question, the class would
become deadly silent”. Korean students “speak only when invited by their
instructors” and Japanese students are “nervous about asking questions in class”
because they are unsure if a question was appropriate and they would choose “to
ask questions after class, only with teachers” (Chen, 2003, p. 267- 268).
In Vietnam, many students, after over ten years of schooling toward
intellectual maturity, have not demonstrated their basic communicative skills;
rather, there is an identifiable reticence, a reluctance to speak out in class and an
apparent unwillingness of students to express themselves which, to outsiders, may
be construed as a lack of motivation or shyness (Bao, 2013). In the classroom,

8
Vietnamese students‟ culture of learning can be described as one in which students
depend heavily on the pedagogical tendency of many teachers to transmit
knowledge about the subject content (Bui, 2004).
This makes it urgent to examine this phenomenon to better understand the
causes of the students‟ reluctance to participate in the English language classroom
and ultimately enhance the learning and teaching of oral English there.
1.2.2. Potential obstacles to students’ verbal participation
Originated from Burns and Joyce‟s identification (Burns & Joyce, 1997),
there are three sets of factors that might cause the reticence in classroom activities
involving speaking: cultural factors, linguistic factors and psychological/affective
factors. The cultural factor here is understood as cultural attributes of Asian
societies which are often cited as the main causes for such alleged behaviour of
reticence and passivity. It was then widened by Cheng (2003) who used the two
terms “result of Confucian culture and tradition” and “previous learning
experience” as well as Bao (2013) with a more general name of “external forces”.
Linguistic- related factor is secondly mentioned as causing reticence.
Manifestations of communication apprehension in the EFL have been reported by
Lucas (1984, as cited in Aida, 1994) and Foss & Reitzel (1988, as cited in Aida,
1994), giving support to the idea that “people experience anxiety and reluctance in
communicating with other people or in expressing themselves in a foreign language
in which they do not have a full competence” (Aida, 1994). Moreover, reticence
relates to self-esteem & self-acceptance and whoever possesses an introvert and shy
personality often reveals reticence in class, especially foreign language classes.
According to Hui (2011), a student‟s reticence in class not only reveals that
he/ she is unwilling to talk in certain circumstances; it could also indicate any of the
following symptoms:
(1) the student‟s apathy toward the topic at hand or to the learning process itself;
(2) the student who is not comprehending is overwhelmed, or is bored;

9
(3) the student is isolated from the learning community;
(4) the student has not learned the value or strategies of engagement or he/ she
does not appreciate or believe in that value.
Additionally, reticence can be the result of high tension beween the new
approach and learners‟ traditional perception (Jarvis, 1986; Little & Sanders, 1990).
To sum up, there are a variety of factors that lead students to being reticence.
These factors, however, may not operate in isolation and as Van Worde (2003, p.5)
affirms, but are likely to be intertwined.
1.2.3. Teachers’ roles towards students participation
Teacher is considered to be the key factors that influence students‟ behaviour
in class. Such conclusion is supported by a study of 100 Vietnamese university
students. More than 90% of the respondents had studied English for at least eight
years before completing the survey that focused on causes of demotivation in
learning English, which may lead to reticence behaviour: “The largest source of
demotives was related to teachers”, “within the four demotive categories related to
teachers, teaching methods provided the largest source of demotives” (Tran &
Baldauf, 2007). Reticence can be influenced directly by the teaching methods,
questioning methods, error correction, English proficiency and characteristics of the
teacher or indirectly by teacher‟s belief, the classroom habits that he/ she formed to
the students and what he/ she often teaches the students besides the English
knowledge.
First of all, the fact that teachers themselves have poor English language
competence leads to students‟ boredom, tiredness, doubt and finally students‟
reticence. Le (2002) reported that despite the strong promotion of CLT, the lack of
appropriate in- service professional development meant that “teachers are generally
incapable of teaching English communicatively in their real- world classroom.
Instead, they spend most of their lesson time explaining abstract grammar rules and
guiding their students in choral readings.”

10
Secondly, it is teacher‟s misconception about students‟ ability that causes
students‟ consciousness of being underestimated or neglected, which finally leads to
reticence behaviour. A survey by Tomlinson & Bao (2004) demonstrated that many
teachers do not wish to change their methods, with more than half the respondents
not wishing to participate in intervention for change, and some refusing to believe
that the learners were willing to participate and refusing to believe in the potential
of learners to express themselves fluently in English.
On the other hand, in preparing their students for such exams, teachers fail to
implement communicative approaches in their classrooms and use teaching methods
relevant to the students‟ goals of passing the exams (Kim, 2006). Moreover, some
teachers seem to overuse their authority, which is considered a main source of
inhibiting students‟ verbal performance. Many teachers remain too conservative to
accept different ways of viewing the same issue (Bao, 2004).
In brief, the influence of the teacher‟s traditional role over students‟ attitudes
toward classroom participation is indicated in four main tendencies. One view
highlights teachers‟ unchallenged expertise and self- complacency as a cause of
poor teaching performance which leads to poor participation. Teachers‟ positive
qualities are a stimulus to active collaboration and enthusiastic participation. A
second view implies that teacher frequently helds misconception about students‟
potential, which is a possible reason for students‟ reticence in class. A third view
suggests that teachers‟ strong emphasis on the written test and high score prevent
students from actively involved in the Speaking lesson. Last but not least, teachers‟
overused authority is considered to be one factor that induces fear and silence
among learners.

11
CHAPTER 2: RESEARCH METHODS OF THE STUDY
This chapter is to present research methodology I choose to achieve the aims
and objectives of the study. It gives out thorough explanations of reasons for
choosing the research instruments, and clarifies specific way of getting information
through those instruments.
2.1. Participants and setting of the study
2.1.1. Participants
The voices to be heard in the study are those of 373 students, age between 17
and 18, from one intermediate level class (receiving four periods of English per
week) and seven preliminary level classes (receiving three periods of English per
week). Such levels were named by the school administration based on students‟
average score after each semester. The choice of 11th
graders, which covered
between two and three years of learning experiences at this school, allowed the
students not only to discuss their present English classes but to reflect on the history
of studying in previous classes. Among 373 students being investigated, 193
students are male and 180 are female. Most of them come from poor or middle-
income families in the rural area. Due to the lack of information and technology,
students have little chance to access English in different ways. Almost all the 11th
graders being investigated (96, 5%) have never met foreigners before and half of
them have no intention of continuing to use English after class or after graduation.
Only 21 per 373 students (5, 6%) plans to choose subjects in group D to enter
university and college. (Lương Trường Xuân, 2014)
2.1.2. Setting of the study
The analysis was carried out as a case study of Toan Thang high school. This
is a state- run school located in Tien Lang district, which is about 30 kilometer from

12
Hai Phong city center. The inhabitants here live mainly on farming, deep-sea
fishing, and a wide range of traditional handicrafts. There isn‟t any English club or
center operating at the moment in this area.
At this school, students attend 5 obligatory periods in the morning and three
optional extra- classes in the afternoon. Eleventh graders follow the curriculum
promulgated by the Ministry of Education and Training, with a weekly English
class time of 135 minutes, split into three lessons of 45 minutes each. Only students
from class 11B8, the intermediate level class, get another lesson every week,
namely „elective lesson‟. However, they all study the Basic English textbooks,
which is theme-based and skill-based.
With regard to facility and technology, the overview reveals a bad image of
inadequate facilities, resources and learning environments as well as backward
technology. There is a lack of conductive equipments such as flexible seatings and
even consistent power supply. The boards, which are all chalk boards rather than
whiteboard, bulletin, flannel or felt boards, are in poor condition. The library that
provides a limited amount of audio visual teaching aids like projectors, radios, or
pictures does not have many kinds of English books to borrow. Furthermore, the
inconvenience of bringing all those stuff to class and installing a projector or a
laptop prevents teachers from daily use in their real-world classes.
Although in grade 11, there is one selective class which is reported to have
higher average score than others, the English proficiency among students in the
same class is unequal. Large class sizes of mixed-level students (between 44 and 48
students), which confuses teachers, is also a disadvantage in every English Speaking
lessons. Additionally, in order to maintain high disciplinary standard, Toan Thang
high school has implemented many strict rules and harsh punishments against
undisciplined individuals and classes. Students are required to wear uniforms and
badges, take notes carefully and keep quiet during the lessons no matter what they
are studying. Everyday, they are watched by a group of teachers and students from
the school disciplinary team.

13
As far as the testing system is concerned, none of the examinations at this
school seek to measure communicative competence. This is the result of large- scale
non- communicative testing that continues to be the norm of Vietnam educational
testing system. Despite the aim of students achieving communicative skills, the
Ministry has institutionalised multiple-choice tests as the only testing method for
standardised high- stake tests. In these tests, pupils are tested in terms of phonetics,
grammar, vocabulary and reading comprehension. Speaking and listening are not
tested.
2.2. Data collection
2.3.1. Data collection instruments
For the purpose of this study, a triangulation of three different methods was
used for data collection. These included classroom observation, questionnaire and
semi-structured interviews.
- Classroom Observation:
According to Hopkins (cited in Mr Donough, J. & Mr Donough, S., 1997,
p.101), observation is a pivotal activity with a crucial role to play in classroom
research. In this study, observation is a helpful tool for the researcher in three main
dimensions: –to investigate whether reticence is the manner found in some specific
aspects and individuals or a frequent display among students in different classroom
circumstances; – to investigate the implementation of teaching methodology in
reality, which may contribute to students‟ reticence development; – to know the
way of cooperations and interactions between students and students, and between
teacher and students, through the task process. To fulfill those aims, the researcher
focused on observing the whole class events at the level of activity and analyzing
the communicative features of verbal exchanges between students and teachers
within each activity. The communicative features observed include the use of the

14
target language, information gap, sustained speech, the students‟ readiness to
answer, as well as their mood and behaviours.
In order to capture all necessary aspects in the classroom life during the
observations, which is time-controlled, and to avoid observer-biased information,
taking notes, video- recording and audio- recording were used interchangeably
without letting the students notice. Furthermore, the fact that at least once every
week, students at Toan Thang high school welcomes teachers from other classes to
observe their class as well as the familiarity and friendly relationship between the
researchers and students help the researcher to approach the nature of the class.
- Questionnaire:
There are two sets of questionnaire used in this study, which consists of 14
questions that sought information to answer the three research questions:
(Question 1 and 3) and what activities make them the most reticent (Question 8)?
(2) What are students‟ perception of their own learning behaviour (Question2, 4,
5, 6, and 7) and factors influencing such behaviour (Question 13 and 14)?
into a more interactive mode (Question 9, 10, 11 and 12)?
Each items in the questionnaire was either structured, open-ended, or both.
The questionnaire was first written in English and then, to ensure clarity for
respondents, was translated into Vietnamese. Since it contains a large number of
items, which could have affected the concentration span, the interest and the
willingness to answer of teenagers, I decided to administer it into two parts which
were delivered twice in each class. Part 2 seeks for factors affecting students‟
reticence behaviours while part 1 asks about the rest issue.
The rationale of this questionnaire originated from Burns and Joyce‟s
identification of three sets of factors explained in chapter 2 of this study (Burns &

15
Joyce, 1997) that might cause the reticence in class. Furthermore, it consisted of
items extracted from instruments used in previous studies, including:
-Bao Dat‟s questionnaires (Bao, 2013; Bao, 2014) to create the 2nd
questionnaire of
this research;
- Chen Meihua and Wang Xuehua‟s questionnaire (Chen & Wang, 2013) to
construct question 3 in the 1st
questionnaire;
- The second section of the questionnaire in Young‟s research (Young, 1990) with
twenty different in-class activities to set up question 8 in the 1st
questionnaire of this
thesis.
However, the final set of questionnaires used in this study is a result of the
researcher‟s preliminary investigation rather than attaching other studies‟ outcomes.
A series of eight observations in the case context mentioned above as well as five
pilots carried out among 10th
and 12th
graders at Toan Thang high school and 11th
graders at Tien Lang high school play a crucial role in modifying the original
questionnaires. Thus, terminologies and difficult expressions are eliminated and
replaced by easily- digested words and explanations.
- Interview:
Interviewing is an effective research instrument to get full understanding of
any aspects in classroom life as it is more natural than questionnaire or some of the
other instruments. With the same planned questions, the answers of interviewees
may be much various, optional, unpredictable, and different from the methods that
let the answerers graph on paper sheets. It can provide realistic information for later
thought and therefore, can be used in ancillary role as a checking mechanism to
triangulate data gathered from other sources (Bryman, 2008). However,
interviewing has its own fails such as the difficulty in controling interviewees‟
answers and the time. The researcher, therefore, must be sensitive, active and tactful
in the way of arousing question and eliciting answers.

16
Despite all those disadvantages, a semi- structured interviewing is suitable to
this case study. Six students (three males and three females) from the number of
participants above, based on their availability, voluntariness and the level of
thoughtfulness in their questionnaire responses, were interviewed regarding their
practice of English speaking in class, views on reticence and interactive mode and
suggestions to better the class environment. Pseudo names were used during the
investigation instead of their real name to protect respondents‟ privacy: Lan, Mai,
Hoa, Nam, Tuấn, Hùng (from class B1,2,3,4,7,8). The interviews were recorded so
that interviewers can focus fully on talking, using suitable body language and
understanding students rather than wasting time taking notes during the interviews.
The interview transcript, however, was made afterward to improve implication
process.
2.3.2. Data collection procedure
At the beginning of the second sememester, eight classroom observations
were conducted at the case context. These are all morning classes which vary from
the first to the fifth period. After two weeks of observation and three weeks of
study, the primary questionnaire and interview research were set up. Then, they
were tested to ensure their understandability, suitability and usefulness towards the
research‟s purpose. Five pilots were implemented at Toan Thang high school with
grade 10 and 12, and grade 11 at Tien Lang high school- a school located at the
same district. The questions and designs were tested, refined and modified at the
same time to ensure the timing and budgeting issues. To prepare for the main
course, 13 teachers and administrators were asked for permission to let the
reseacher administer the investigation in 8 eleventh- grade classes twice, each time
for 30 minutes. The two questionnaires were delivered one week apart in order for
each student to attend one more Speaking lesson and have a thorough rethink before
deciding their answer. The aim of the questionnaires was introduced to the students
so as to collect information relating to a „communicative class model‟ (Mô hình lớp

17
học theo đường hướng giao tiếp) rather than their reticence behaviour to avoid any
shyness and bias. The respondents were given some time to write their own
responses in the absence of the researcher, but clear explaination was already
exhibited at the beginning of the investigation. The teachers managing the classes
were instructed to give direction to the students and the researcher was willing and
accessible at any time during the investigation. Finally, a semi-structured interview
was employed, which was conducted with a selected number of various respondents
who seemed to have complex ideas to share and who represented interesting views
which invited further attention. The participant selection method relies on the
voluntary and available nature of participants at the case context. Table 1 below
provides a brief data collection procedure involved in the study.
TABLE 1: Data collection procedure
W
e
e
k
Methodology Location
In the morning In the afternoon
1 Classroom
observations
1st
2nd
3th
4th
5th
1st
2nd
3th
4th
5th
B1
B2
B3
B4
2 Classroom
observations
B5
B6
B7
B8
3,4
,5,
6
Questionnaire
pilot study
10C5 &12A2
(Toan Thang high school)
11B1, 11B2, 11B7
(Tien Lang high school)
7 Questionnaire
part 1
B1 B2
B3 B4
B5 B6
B7 B8
8
9 Questionnaire
part 2
B1 B2
B3 B4
B5 B6
B7 B8
10 Interview Lan Mai Hoa Nam Tuấn Hùng

18
2.3.3. Data analysis procedure
Data analysis pays more attention to in-depth interpretation than factual and
verbatim in reporting participants‟ voices. Such methods are highlighted by
Wellington (2000) and Bryman (2004) as thoughtful way to decode themes and
meaning in empirical data. Observation transcript assemble key factors toward
research aims during the lessons such as teacher- students interaction, the
uncommunicative mode, teacher and students‟ activities, behaviours and other
related elements. Similarly, the researcher made use of the information from the
questionnaires by collecting statistics, comparing the frequency of responses as well
as the relationship between different variables. The main issues raised in the
analysis of the questionnaire responses were followed up by in- depth interviews.
To explain participants‟ perceptions, transcriptions of their responses to interview
questions are processed through content analysis in which their words are
categorized, termed and interpreted so as to capture thoughts, behaviour and
viewpoints. Such processes of how categorization combined with interpretation
produce research outcome are well supported by Cohen et al. (2011), Creswell
(2008), Hesse-Biber & Leavy (2004) and Maxwell (2005). The researcher also
compared and linked the findings to those in the relevant literature for further
insights.
In order to keep data analyses as unbiased as possible, efforts have been
made by refraining from heavy reliance on researcher‟s previous knowledge and by
only employing it to make connections among key issues. Such a stance has been
recognized by theorists including Bryman (2008), Asher (1965) as essential in
interpretive research inquiry.

19
CHAPTER 3: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS
The purpose of this chapter is to discuss the findings and to give out
recommendations concerning the results of this study. The chapter begins with a
summary of findings in tables, and then a discussion of central issues emerging
from the findings oriented after the following research questions:
and what activities make them the most reticent?
(2) What are students‟ perception of their own learning behaviour and factors
influencing such behaviour?
into a more interactive mode?
3.1. Findings
Owing to the research instruments (classroom observations, questionnaires
and interviews), the writer now presents the findings in terms of three themes which
appeared in the data: students‟ reticence behaviour in English Speaking classes,
factors affecting students‟ behaviour and students‟ expectations.
3.1.1. Students’ reticence behaviour in English Speaking classes
Students‟ reticence behaviour was first observed and construed by the
researcher as an outsider and then reported by the students themselves in the first
questionnaire from item 1 to item 8 as well as in the interview. Althought the
reticence behaviour being caught in this case has been mentioned by many other
educators, the unanticipated experience is students‟ unawareness about reticence
habit.
According to eight classroom observations, students seemed to show various
manifestations of reticence. This was proved very clearly by the silence mode which
makes up more than half of the class time in every eight Speaking lesson. The

20
silence was then followed by students‟ displaying anxiety and embarrassment,
which makes the assumption more reliable. Two out of every three students who
stated their answers in class revealed nervousness, stood up slowly, looked around
before starting to talk or looked down the table, trembled uncontrollably,
stammered, put hands on chest to sigh, bit fingers, opened books repeatedly,
blushed with shame, repeated previous sentences, etc. Moreover, most of them are
called by the teacher rather than volunteering themselves. Even when the lessons
chosen to investigate aim at Speaking, the researcher rarely met students who dare
to raise their hands, not to mention speaking out their opinions. The number of
volunteers in all eight lessons is only 17 out of 373, which takes up 4,56%. It seems
that there is something inhibiting their oral participation in class and their
willingness and ability to ask questions, let alone making public observations or
criticisms of course content. Such situation occurs in many different activities
among different type of students. Some of them are not shy individuals, as the
researcher‟s knowledge outside the classroom, and many of them are male. They
were unwilling to work in groups or pairs or work in an inefficient way against
teachers‟ requirement. Most of the time working in groups and pairs is used for
chatting, communicating in Vietnamese, reading the book out loud or even working
individually. Surprisingly, among all those students, some are indeed reticent and
passive, but many are extremely active and even aggressive. The lesson process
depends mainly on the teacher and those dominant students.
Although 11th
graders at Toan Thang high school are notorious for their
heavy reliance on teachers in English classes, not all the students view themselves
as verbally passive. When being asked about the frequency of attending English
Speaking activities such as group work, role play, interview, etc. (in question 8, part
1), students admitted themselves to various degrees of participation during the
lesson rather than not participating at all. The figures in the following grasp indicate
the percentage of students who share the ideas considered and the mean of each
item.

21
0
1
2
3
4
5
3,64 3,76 3,62 3,56 3,89
3,51
3,89 3,8
3,08 3,02
3,44 3,27 3,53 3,27
3,65
3,2
GRAPH 1: Students' self- evaluation
The frequency of attending English Speaking Activities
Item 8.1 Item 8.2 Item 8.3 Item 8.4 Item 8.5
(See more detail in appendix 8)
The data from the graph above shows that “group work” (item 8.5, 8.7 and
8.17) ranks first in the order of preference of seventeen English lesson activities in
question 8. This strong desire for active participation contrasts sharply with the
passive role that students are said to adopt.
It seems that students prefer working in pairs or in groups rather than
working individually, no matter who are involved in that group (item 8.1- 3,64; item
8.2- 3,76; item 8.3- 3,62). Hoa, an interviewee, added that:
“It‟s the difficulty of the Speaking task that irritates us, not the friends. I‟m not
sure whether other classes are friendly or not but my class is really close-knit. We
feel comfortable working in groups of good or poor students or groups of males or
females etc.”
Some preferable group activities include learning to sing (item 8.17), competing in
games by team (item 8.5), repeat after teacher (item 8.8) and work on projects (item
8.15). Those are all activities that create fun, easy to follow and suitable for all
levels. Other activities such as open discussion, role-play or skit performance
receive the frequency of “sometimes” or “every once in a while”, which means they
are neither verbal nor silent students but vary their behaviour flexibly as a result of
their individual interest levels or based on the interactive or non-interactive nature
of particular subjects. Nam and Lan agreed with this assertion when saying that:

22
- (Nam) No, I‟m not (a reticent). I‟m active in some certain activities and passive in
others……It depends on whether the task is compelling or not.
- (Lan) Role play sounds nice, but I choose “sometimes” because I‟m not sure if I
can do well. It must be doable; I must have enough time to prepare it and teacher
should check it before the performance happens.
Moreover, when being asked to assess their own learning behaviour
(question 5), only 5 students (1%) agree that they‟re reticents but highlights that the
reticents in their class don‟t possess shy characteristic. They‟re “active ouside the
classroom” and only reveal themselves as reticents in English classes. A majority of
students (287 students- 77%) sometimes exposes reticence; and more surprisingly,
81 students (22%) are not reticents at all according to their own viewpoint.
Although their English Speaking lessons‟ atmosphere is considered to be
uncommunicative and English interactions rarely happen by half of the respondents,
the number of reticent individuals in class are thought to be small and
unremarkable.
From the statistic below, it‟s clear that in students‟ perspective, English
classes are rarely seen as passive (10,456%). Students participate in the class, but
English interactions hardly ever happen (44,772%) and the positive atmosphere is
created mainly by a small group of dominant pupils (44,236%).
By the same token, the interview results explain explicitly students‟ attitude.
While the other four respondents consider themselves to various degrees of active
communicators during the lesson, Mai, Hùng and Tuấn – though admitting they
tend to stay silent – claim that they can participate if they choose to, rather than
seeing themselves as passive learners. One student even remarked that the level of
learner participation alone is not a sufficient signal to detect whether or not
someone should be considered an active or passive learner. Additionally, all of them
see their class‟ atmosphere as a positive constructive one which depends mainly on
some dominant individuals. In their English speaking class, there are less than 5
students per class who are reticent learners most of the time contributing to the
lesson once forced to do so. The diversified data received provokes a question of

23
how students understand the term „participation‟ in English Speaking class. Is
keeping silence one way of participation? To clarify this issue, the researcher
continues with question 1 and question 3.
It is not beyond expectation that almost all the means in this part are not only
under 3.5 but also around 1 and 2 (strongly disagree and disagree) as reticence and
passivity is regarded to be of wide existence: students do not share their ideas (item
1, 3, 5, 6) nor ask questions (item 2 and 4) during the lesson.
They seldom use English in class to express ideas, work in group or chat
with friends (Question 1- 65, 95%). Comparing this number with the mean of above
3, 5 from students about each item in question 8- “how often do you participate in
the following in- class activitives”, it is obvious that they regard high potential of
participating regardless of a wide allegation of reticence being observed. Thus, the
results bring us a very worthwhile reconsideration of what is “classroom
participation” in Toan Thang learners‟ eyes. From the data, we can infer that, in this
context, learners might participate in classroom activities by paying attention
„quietly‟ to what is going on in the classroom and concentrating on what they need
to learn. The other possibility is that students in this case thought that they would
take an active role in class but, in reality, some of them are unable to do so due to

24
various reasons. These two possibilities co- exist and have reciprocal influence on
each other.
3.1.2. Factors affecting students’ behaviour
In this part, a number of influential factors are identified to explain when and
how students decide to withdraw instead of participating in English Speaking class.
In order to make it clearer, all the items in question 13 of the second questionnaire,
which seek for reasons of students‟ reticence behaviour in English Speaking classes,
will be categorized into fourteen groups as follow:
1. Lack of motivation (item 1, 2 and 6*)
2. Lack of practice (item 3)
3. English language itself (item 4, 5)
4. * Speaking Activities (item 6*)
5. Fear of making mistake (item 7, 8)
6. English language competence (item 9, 10, 11)
7. Lack of communicating skills (item 12, 13, 14)
8. Personality (mental and physical) (item 15, 16)
9. Learning habits (item 17, 18)
10. Preparedness (item 19, 20, 21, 22, 23*)
11. Teacher-related factors (item 23*, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34)
12. Classmate-related factors (item 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40*)
13. * English class-related factors (40*, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50)
14. Test anxiety (item 51, 52)
Notice that there are some items that cover two factors at the same time (item
6, 23 and 40) and some factors (factor 4 and 13) include not only the items listed
but also other items in the previous questionnaires.
Among all the listed causes, Graph 3 below shows only those which score a
mean of above 3.5. In another word, reasons that lead to students‟ reticent
behaviour are mentioned in the order of factors with the most powerful effect to the

25
least one, according to students‟ estimation. These research data reveal that the
nature of reticence and level of students‟ participation at 11th
classes, Toan Thang
high school are influenced by four key factors: the English proficiency,
communicating competence, learning habits and students‟ preparation.
According to the questionnaire result, the main motive of students‟ reticence
is the lack of required language proficiency. This is self- evaluated so it can be
reality or arbitrary, but it proclaims that there‟s an urgent need to promote students‟
ability before asking them to participate. In the interview, Mai said that almost all of
the words in her Speaking lessons are new for her, let alone the phrases that her
teachers and classmates use. However, she didn‟t consider it‟s her teachers and
classmates who use difficult expressions. “I don‟t know any word”, she affirmed.
Nam, however, had problem choosing the suitable word and structure to construct
his sentence. He would rather be provided with enough vocabulary before starting
to say anything. Lan also found it difficult to speak in English because of her poor
pronunciation. She felt herself unable of remembering how to pronounce one word
and even when she can guess the sound, she can‟t say it right. Surprisingly, all six
interviewee agreed that they and most of their classmates have low English
language competence and should be taught from the beginning. They used the term
“rootless” again and again to describe their current English proficiency.
Nevertheless, possessing a lot of English words and grammar rules doesn‟t mean

26
communicating in English successfully and vise versal. During a conversation, in
stead of trying to find out the exact word, the participants can use other similar
phrases, description, explanation and even body language to transfer the message
rather than using Vietnamese or revealing reticent. Relating to this method, all of
the interviewees feel strange and surprised as they have no idea how to use them.
Equally, with the mean score of more than 3.5, the communicative
competence is another cause that prevents students from speaking freely. Students
feel easy to forget or lose sight of what they want to say (item 12), react slowly or
hesitate too long to speak out their ideas which is always disorganized (item 13) and
often tremble with fear when speaking in front of others. Hoa even added that as
they owned poorer communicative competence in comparison with some other
classmates, they often need more time to prepare for one question. However, as they
are aware of the limited time for a Speaking lesson, they chose to remain silence.
More importantly, students are acquainted with a silence mode during the
lesson. Their learning style of a passive role in classroom, showing respect and
preserving harmony with teachers and friends by listening and keeping quiet is the
third important reason that pushes them toward reticence tendency. Students believe
that appropriate behaviour in classroom contexts means listening to teacher,
receiving the information and giving chance to good students. All six interviewee
agreed that they won‟t volunteer to speak until they caught the “right answer”. Such
rightness is defined as the answer provided by textbooks, teachers and good
learners. They feel more satisfied following the common norms and seeking for the
most complete answer rather than breaking the rules and accepting a variety of
opinions. Students in this case seem to lack critical thinking and have high level of
over-dependence on the teacher and other classmates. Learners regard the teacher
and good colleague as “walking dictionaries” (Nam and Tuấn), “knowledge
resources” (Lan, Mai, Hoa, Hùng) and the teacher should help them solve all the
language problems they encounter. The learners here are only expected to receive
knowledge without contributing to the learning process, let alone question a
knowledgeable teacher.

27
In accordance with the poor English language competence and
communicating competence stated above, students concur with the preparedness
factor that affect students‟ performance. Students claimed that it‟s the preparing
methods or learning strategies (item 22) that inhibit them from speaking out in
classroom. Although 65,33% of respondents express opposition toward being afraid
of unprepared situation, students really hope to prepare the lesson ahead to build
more confidence. Hoa shared that she was very hard- working at the beginning of
grade 10 and often read the textbook, looked up new words in dictionary before
coming to school. But as that method leads to no result (she still forgot and
mispronounced the words and couldn‟t make correct sentences), she became lazier
and felt off the track. Other interviewees show high agreement with Hoa and
answered that they don‟t have any after- class learning experience. They don‟t know
how to prepare for a class and how to make use of the methods listed by the
researcher: keep a vocabulary notebook, listen to the radio, read newspaper, books,
watch English programs, write a diary, letter, etc.
Surprisingly, the teacher- related factors doesn‟t directly affect students‟
behaviour and the anxiety of making mistakes or losing face has low mean (2,18) or
little agreement from students. Teacher related factors focus on teachers‟
intolerance of silence (item 22- mean= 3,57), unclear explanation (item 23- mean=
3,55), boring lecture (item 26- mean= 3,54) and tendency to invite students who
volunteer first (item 27- mean= 3,41), rather than error correction methods (2,54),
teacher‟s characteristics (2,18) or his/ her overuse of Vietnamese and English
(2,03). Moreover, the relationship between students and teachers and students
themselves are reported to be pretty good, friendly and in perfect concord. Students
are neither scare of losing face while making mistakes in front of their friends nor
being corrected by their teachers. On the other hand, classmates- related factors
oriented around classmates‟ unwillingness to participate verbally (3,52) and
classmates‟ fast speech (3,47) rather than others.
Although more than half of the students agreed that they couldn‟t fully
follow the lessons most of the time and were often left behind, which led to their

28
reticence behaviour, a small number of respondents blamed it on English class-
related factors. To explain this contradiction, Tuấn said that he needed more time to
prepare before speaking out and so do his friends, but if the normal 45- minute class
lasted longer, everyone will feel even more tired. Mai added that:
“……The questions sound fun. How can the crowded class, the seat position, the
gender, the time alloted, or the uniform ever affect students‟ reticence
behaviour?.......”
“……(The poor facility) May be, but not much.”
Nam, Lan and Hùng shared this opinion in saying that those elements somewhat
contribute to reticence, but they are not the decisive factors. The questionnaire data
also exhibits that among all the English class- related factors the three most
powerful impacts are class atmosphere, studens‟ role in class and poor facility. The
former connected to the classmates- related factors mentioned above in the way that
students tend to reveal reticence in a silent classroom. When most of their
classmates don‟t voluntarily participate in the lesson, they fear having to break the
silent norm of the class. Furthermore, the higher position a student undertakes, the
more he/ she takes part in class activities. The third factor is classroom facilities,
especially audio visual aids, which encourage creativities, imaginativeness and
long- term memory. However, they all receive modest mean score of below 3.0.
Similarly, other factors such as lack of motivation, lack of experience, test anxiety,
introvert personality and health problems cause little influence on students‟
reticence behaviour. Different from other cases, 11th
graders at Toan Thang high
school showed that they are fully aware of the need to study English, to pass the
Speaking test in TOEFL, IELTS, or TOEIC. Although they have no chance to speak
English with foreigners or to attend any English club, they consider practising
English at school (3 to 4 lessons per week in the morning and 3 lessons per week in
the afternoon) is enough to gain required skills. Topic and question- related factor
receive higher mean of 2.56; but it links to the teacher questioning method as well
as the activities that teacher chooses to conduct the lesson, rather than stands alone.

29
3.1.3. Students’ expectation
After seeking for students‟ perspective toward their own learning behaviour
and factors affecting that behaviour, students‟ expectations are analyzed. In the first
part of the questionnaires, questions asking for students‟ opinions toward the
frequency of using English, the dream English class and suggestions for teachers go
along with other descriptive questions. Although half of them is open-ended
questions, students seems very enthusiastics when sharing their experiences; thus,
making the data collected more reliable.
Although in the question 1, students said that they rarely or never use
English in class; question 2 showed that they have high demand of using English
(95,44%). In question 9, 80, 16% of students prefer to study in an interactive and
communicative class where students actively speak out their ideas to construct the
lesson. This percentage is even higher in reality as some students choose answer D
and describe their own dream classes, which coincide with a communicative
classes‟ characteristics (described in chapter 2- Literature review). For instance, one
student depicted that his dream class should give him the opportunity to use the
language, productively and receptively, in unrehearsed contexts; but teachers and
good students must present the information clearly first, and the grammatical
structure and vocabulary should be repeated for several times in those different
contexts. Another student, agreed to work in a class with interactive mode, but
highlighted the importance of providing enough English knowledge in advance as
well as Speaking activities that are fun and doable. In short, students‟ dream English
class is described as a communicative class which is suitable for students‟ level. An
even higher percentage (98,66%), however, agree that it is necessary to move their
English Speaking classes to a more interactive mode.
Additionally, researchers found that students are aware of the disadvantage
of remaining silence and its consequence. For question 10, which asks the
respondents to state the advantages or disadvantages of the reticence issue in
English Speaking class, only 3 students (per 373 students in total) refuse to write

30
anything and 5 answers are short with few words. The rest are very sufficient and
useful to study. Respondents all see reticence as a shortcoming which leads to many
bad consequences. It makes teachers and other students feel uncomfortable,
unmotivated, frustrated and even ruins class activities. Reticence also impairs ones‟
communicative competence, creativity and meaning negotiation competence. One
student even emphasises that in an English class where no one dare to say anything,
their understandings will be limited and they can not enhance speaking ability and
other skills such as reading, listening and writing.
Furthermore, 97,86% students give suggestions to their English teachers.
Those proposals focus on five main categories: adding more funny and relaxing
activities (90, 54%), assigning easier tasks (67,78%), speaking slowly enough with
clear explanation (65,22%), give help to weak students more often than others
(65,19%) and instructing the weak students how to prepare for the next lesson
(63,46%). These percentages overlap each other, however, because one student
often gives more than one suggestion. Relating to this topic, interviewees also
contributed many valuable ideas. Lan, Mai and Hùng suggested that teacher should
design some funny activities; but she must anticipate how to keep the classroom
discipline as well. They were afraid of breaking the school‟s rules and studying in a
chaotic class. Hoa, Nam and Tuấn, on the other hand, put more emphasis on the
way teacher assigns homework. Hoa marked that teacher shouldn‟t give homework
only; she must teach us how to deal with it. Nam and Tuấn said that they wouldn‟t
do the homework if they thought that it did not relate to the next lesson.
3.2. Discussions
In this part, I will discuss three main issues based on data that I have just
made the short introductory presentation. All the phenomena, the divergence or
convergence in conceptualizations of participants will be highly investigated for
acceptable interpretations.

31
3.2.1. To what extent do the students remain reticent in English speaking
classes, and what activities make them the most reticent?
A main first impression of class observation was students‟ reticent
behaviour. When a question was raised, most of the students were neither volunteer
nor willing to contribute ideas. Their shyness and nervosity when being called
indicated that they were not ready to anwer at all. Even when games and Speaking
activities were implemented, working in groups or pairs did not produce the desired
effect. Students often chatted in Vietnamese or parrotted the textbook rather than
discussing and sharing opinions. Some students even sat quietly and did not mind
working with others or chose to do their own business. These manifestations are the
same as students‟ behaviour observed in many previous studies (Bui, 2004; Bao,
2013; Lương Trường Xuân, 2014). In short, the number of participants in each
lesson being investigated was below five. Most of the students revealed reticence in
their English Speaking class and this situation happened in different Speaking
activities, from answering questions and working in groups to competing in games.
3.2.2. What are students’ perception of their own learning behaviour and
factors influencing such behaviour?
It‟s surprising that students‟ perception toward their own learning behaviour
in this study is in contrast with teachers‟ opinions and researchers‟ viewpoint stated
in the previous studies (Jackson, 2002; Chen, 2003; Bui, 2004). Despite the
reticence displayed in classes, 11th
graders at this case refused to see themselves as
reticents. They shared that they were socially active and remained good relationship
with teachers and other colleague, but sometimes display reticent in certain
situations. Moreover, the amount of reticents per class is small, according to
students‟ inspection. In- class activities were advocated by students as they affirmed
that they were willing to participate. Such contradiction comments, in comparison
with observation, suggested that there might be some misunderstandings between

32
students and educators about the term “participation” as Javis, Little and Sanders
suggested (Jarvis, 1986; Little & Sanders, 1990). The researcher reckoned that
students in this study believed in traditional class participation such as listening to
teacher‟s lectures and taking notes. There were other misconceptions discovered;
for instance, respecting teachers and talented people means listen to them quietly
without any critical comments and display self- devaluation or learning speaking
stemmed from learning a huge amount of vocabulary and grammar.
Consider the latter part of this research question about factors that cause
reticence for 11th
graders at Toan Thang high school in speaking English, some
matters have stated out in the findings and the most popular ones are English
language competence and communicating competence as this concern was repeated
in most students‟ entries. Different from other studies‟ results where teachers‟ hash
comments or boring teaching methods dominated other factors (Cheng, 2003, Bao,
2014), these causes reveals the difficulty the teachers meet with to make the
teaching tasks comprehensible and workable in consideration of students‟ current
language and communicating competence of all levels. It also signified that
although students in this case study don‟t perceive themselves as reticents, they
showed no confidence in evaluating their ability. They view themselves as
incompetent communicators and English users and these are the main causes that
lead them toward reticent behaviour. Other reasons are also mentioned such as
learning habit, lack of preparation, teacher- related factors, class atmosphere and
students‟ role in the class. The seeming reticence is more likely to be the
performance of learners‟ habitual classroom behaviour resulting from the certain
learning environment, rather than the consequence of any inherent disposition of
learners themselves. Accordingly, classroom reticence can be changed if the
learning environment alters.
3.2.3. What are students’ perspectives on whether, and how, to move the
classroom to a more interactive mode?

33
It‟s predictable that a lot of students hope to achieve a more interactive role
in a communicative class; but it‟s unpredictable that this amount of students is
overwhelming and they asserted this desire by contributing a variety of suggestions
to their English teachers. They expected that their teachers can add more funny and
relaxing activities, as in previous studies‟ recommendations (Tomlinson & Bao,
2004; Tran & Baldauf, 2007; Lương Trường Xuân, 2014); but more importantly,
assign easier tasks, speak slowly enough with clear explanation, give help to weak
students more often than others and instruct the weak students how to prepare for
the next lesson.
Furthermore, what is unexpected is that the number of respondents who
choose the answer “Neutral” is relatively small in comparison with other choices.
Neutral choice in Likert scale such as “neither disagree nor agree” or “Undecided”
are thought to be suitable for those who (1) are really neutral about the issue, (2) do
not know enough, or (3) do not want to reveal their opinions. The students at this
case study are at first considered to be reticents, rarely give their own opinions and
often waver between two opinions. However, the data collected through two sets of
questionnaire disclose the fact that 11th
graders are assessible and easy to approach.
They are willing to share their own points of view and have high expectation toward
innovation. Their definitive answers in multiple choice questions as well as their
enthusiasm to provide much valuable information in open- ended questions signify
that 11th
graders at Toan Thang high school are neither introvert nor conservative
personalities. There is a pressing demand for teachers‟ understanding and sympathy
toward students‟ difficulties.

34
PART C: CONCLUSION
1. Conclusion
The research consisted of a survey at Toan Thang high school. The purpose
of the building level research was to use mixed methods to explore the students‟
attitudes toward English Speaking lessons and reticence‟s manifestation. To fit this
aim, the literature review was first carried out to build a fundamental knowledge
about how other researchers in Vietnam and all over the world dealt with this
problem as well as their findings and conclusions in different contexts. Some basic
definitions were mentioned such as the concept of reticence, interpretation of
reticence and consequences of reticence. Then students‟ reticence behaviour in
English Speaking lessons was brought into focus as the researchers looked for
experts‟ experiences towards students‟ participation in verbal interaction in other
pedagogical contexts and potential obstacles to their participation. Among those
obstacles, teachers‟ role played a crucial part in orienting students‟ misconceptions
and causing positive or negative impacts both directly and indirectly. Finally, some
other studies relating to students‟ reticence in English Speaking lessons were
employed to provide a panorama of the issue.
After achieving such background knowledges, the setting and the final aim
of this study were put into consideration to choose a suitable research methodology.
Data collection devices consistent with mixed methods and multiple sources
included: (1) the observations for an overall picture of English Speaking lessons in
reality and the extent to which the students remain reticence; (2) the questionnaires
for students‟ perception toward their own learning behaviours, their private reasons
and expectations; (3) the interviews for affirmation and clearer explanation.
All those mentioned scrutiny and techniques are for the benefit of exploiting
the potential and feasibility of English Speaking lessons for 11th
graders at Toan
Thang high school.
Tải bản FULL (86 trang): https://bit.ly/3YJ03SI
Dự phòng: fb.com/TaiHo123doc.net

35
Based on the analyses and discussions presented above, the following
conclusions can be reached.
First, although most of the 11th
graders at Toan Thang high school express a
strong willingness to participate in English class activities, they were observed not
to take part in any Speaking task and frequently reveal reticent in reality. Few
students agreed to respond actively to the teacher in class, especially when they
have to “stand out” from the crowd such as sharing their own view, asking for
explaination or giving feedback to teachers.
Second, students frequently held misconception about learning and
participation, which seems to belong to traditional learning methods: listen quietly
to teachers and talented students, and then try to memorize those sentences. In
addition, basing on students‟ experience, factors that affect their reticent behaviours
included low English language proficiency, low communicating competence,
traditional passive learning habit, unpreparedness and teacher- related factors. Most
of the students in this case lack of self- confident and still wonder whether they can
use the target language or not. Therefore, it‟s an urgent need that teachers should
explain more clearly and encourage students to actively take part in the
communicative Speaking class.
Third, the students shared that they valued interpersonal interactions highly,
but rarely do it due to several reasons mentioned above. A communicative class can
be created by funny and doable Speaking activities with clear explaination and
enough practice, as they suggested. The students under this case study display a
high demand toward being equipted with enough knowledge before leaving out
their reticence and contributing to the lesson actively. The teacher, therefore, should
guide students through misunderstandings and doubts about the Speaking task
requirements as well as stimulate their confidence and interest by providing suitable
activities with careful instructions.
Tải bản FULL (86 trang): https://bit.ly/3YJ03SI
Dự phòng: fb.com/TaiHo123doc.net

36
2. Pedagogical implications
Among the most important results of the study is the fact that the students
have the potential to change their current reticence behaviour. This knowledge
about students‟ perception toward teaching and learning in English Speaking
lessons and their expectation is useful in stimulating teachers‟ mindfulness of how
to move their class into a more interactive mode where students actively speak out
their ideas to construct the lesson.
First of all, it‟s important to know that passing on the stereotypes was more
impeding than helpful. What really help were not teacher‟s preoccupations about
students‟ reticence but teacher‟s effort to select a more effective method for the
class. Due to students‟ explanation of their reticence behaviour and their
suggestions for a more interactive class, it‟s clear that teacher should put more
emphasis on students‟ current English proficiency and their needs; rather than
concerning how to finish all the tasks in the textbook. In a lesson, there should be
completed pre- skill activities (e.g., brainstorming and suggesting appropriate
vocabulary that might be used, setting schemata), a main activity that fits the
performance level of students (giving a well- designed intermediate- level activity
to intermediate- level students), and then post- activity exercises (e.g. debriefing,
summarising). It will be much more efficient if those activities are a part of or a
modification of the original textbook tasks, and the rest should be left home.
However, homeworks must be clearly explained and instructed by the teacher
before being assigned to students to make sure they are able to do it. Remember that
most of the 11th
class at Toan Thang high school is mixed ability, which require
careful lesson plan and task redesign.
Second, the communicative approach must be considered carefully before
applying to real- world classroom in this case. In the west, class discussion and
interaction are taken for granted. However, in Vietnam, especially at Toan Thang
high school, this approach is still new and even strange to students. Although they
see the importance of taking part in discussions, their misunderstanding toward “the
6814562

An investigation into students’ reticence in English Speaking lessons- A case of Toan Thang high school.pdf

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to An investigation into students’ reticence in English Speaking lessons- A case of Toan Thang high school.pdf

Similar to An investigation into students’ reticence in English Speaking lessons- A case of Toan Thang high school.pdf (20)

More from HanaTiti

More from HanaTiti (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

An investigation into students’ reticence in English Speaking lessons- A case of Toan Thang high school.pdf