An investigation into the use of presentation-reflection assignments in the American studies syllabus at ULIS-VNUH - Relevance and efficacy as perceived by lecturers and students.pdf

1. VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES
TRẦN HOÀNG ANH, K17A
AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE USE OF PRESENTATION-
REFLECTION ASSIGNMENTS IN THE AMERICAN STUDIES
SYLLABUS AT ULIS-VNUH: RELEVANCE AND EFFICACY AS
PERCEIVED BY LECTURERS AND STUDENTS
(Nghiên cứu về việc Sử dụng Bài tập Thuyết trình-Viết Thu hoạch trong Bộ môn Hoa
Kỳ Học ở Trường ĐHNN-ĐHQGHN: Độ Phù hợp và Hiệu quả từ Góc độ Đánh giá của
Giảng viên và Sinh viên)
M.A. Combined Program Thesis
English Language Teaching Methodology
60 14 10
HANOI - 2011

2. VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES
TRẦN HOÀNG ANH, K17A
AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE USE OF PRESENTATION-
REFLECTION ASSIGNMENTS IN THE AMERICAN STUDIES
SYLLABUS AT ULIS-VNUH: RELEVANCE AND EFFICACY AS
PERCEIVED BY LECTURERS AND STUDENTS
(Nghiên cứu về việc Sử dụng Bài tập Thuyết trình-Viết Thu hoạch trong Bộ môn Hoa
Kỳ Học ở Trường ĐHNN-ĐHQGHN: Độ Phù hợp và Hiệu quả từ Góc độ Đánh giá của
Giảng viên và Sinh viên)
M.A. Combined Program Thesis
English Language Teaching Methodology
60 14 10
Supervisor: Đặng Ngọc Sinh, M.A.
HANOI - 2011

3. iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS....................................................................................................i
ABSTRACT...........................................................................................................................ii
LIST OF FIGURES ...............................................................................................................v
PART A: INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................1
1. Background of and rationale for the study.....................................................................1
2. Aims of the research.......................................................................................................1
3. Significance of the study................................................................................................2
4. Scope of the research .....................................................................................................2
5. Organization of the study...............................................................................................3
PART B: DEVELOPMENT..................................................................................................4
CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW...............................................................................4
1.1. Key and related concepts ............................................................................................4
1.1.1. Content-based Instruction and the teaching context in ULIS-VNUH American
Studies courses ...............................................................................................................4
1.1.2. The presentation assignments.............................................................................11
1.1.3. Relevance and efficacy.......................................................................................15
1.1.4. English skills in sheltered course classes ...........................................................17
1.1.5. Interdisciplinary research skills..........................................................................18
1.2. How does this study fit into other research? .............................................................19
1.3. Summary ...................................................................................................................19
CHAPTER 2: METHODOLOGY.......................................................................................20
2.1. Research questions....................................................................................................20
2.2. Participants................................................................................................................20
2.3. Instruments................................................................................................................21
2.4. Data collection procedures........................................................................................29
2.5. Data analysis procedure ............................................................................................29
2.6. Summary ...................................................................................................................30
CHAPTER 3: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION...................................................................31

4. iv
3.1. Perceptions of teachers and students of the degree to which the presentation-
reflection assignments have helped to meet the couse's objectives .................................32
3.2. Perceptions of teachers and students of the degree to which the actual assignment
quality has met the assignments' requirements ................................................................45
3.3. What do teachers and students suggest about modifying the assignments? – Practical
implication and suggestions.............................................................................................48
3.4. Summary ...................................................................................................................50
PART C: CONCLUSION....................................................................................................51
1. Summary of findings....................................................................................................51
2. Limitations of the study ...............................................................................................52
3. Suggestions for further research...................................................................................52
REFERENCES ....................................................................................................................53
APPENDIX.............................................................................................................................I
Appendix 1. American Studies course outline....................................................................I
Appendix 2a. Survey questionnaire form – Student version.........................................VIII
Appendix 2b. Survey questionnaire form – Teacher version............................................X
Appendix 3a. Summary of questionnaire data – Students' Perception .......................... XII
Appendix 3b. Summary of questionnaire data – Teachers' Perception.........................XIII
Appendix 4. Median Values..........................................................................................XIV
Appendix 5. Correlation between efficacy index and presentation score...................... XV
Appendix 6. Summary of relevant suggestions from students......................................XVI

5. 1
Chapter 1: Introduction
PART A: INTRODUCTION
1. Background of and rationale for the study
n the world, research and teaching about the United States of America have a long
tradition, dating back to as early as the birth of the country. At the University of
Languages and International Studies – Vietnam National University, Hanoi (ULIS-
VNUH), however, this multi-disciplinary study field just entered the curriculum as a
subject for about a decade (Country Studies Division, 2009).
Throughout this period, the academic staff of the Country Studies division assigned to
implement the course have been constantly embarking on improving the course's contents,
through modifying the structure, updating and refining materials, and perhaps more
importantly, the teaching methods. This arduous task is bound to increase in intensity as
the division has to take the lead in designing an entirely new undergraduate program on
American Studies for the university, which will be launched around the 2012-2013
timeframe. Therefore, as a junior lecturer working in liaison with the group, the author had
the need to help revise some elements of the current teaching method used in the American
Studies courses, and so this thesis was an ideal chance to aid in the effort.
During the three recent academic years from 2008 to 2011, the majority of students' casual
feedbacks to teachers of American Studies courses mainly expressed concerns about
assignment requirements, assignment quality, and, naturally, assignment grading. Rather
than catering to the sporadic questions about different aspects of the course assignments,
this study took the chance to investigate the core and overarching dimensions of the course
assignments already in place, i.e. oral presentation and written reflection, as tangible and
available products of the teaching and studying processes.
2. Aims of the research
With said purposes, the study aimed at answering the three main questions below:
i. To what degree do American Studies lecturers and students at ULIS-VNUH think
the design of the courseworks have helped to meet the course's objectives?
I

6. 2
Chapter 1: Introduction
ii. To what degree do they think the actual assignment quality has met the
assignments' requirements?
iii. What do they suggest about modifying the assignments?
3. Significance of the study
The research did not aim to and thus did not suggest the best assignment design to be used
in the course. Instead, it was expected to have a certain impact on the way how the current
assignment types of American Studies courses – and even of similar courses offered by the
division e.g. British Studies or General Geography of the UK and the US – would be
designed, both in paper and practice, to better meet the preset course objectives. It also
served as a referential material for researchers and teachers alike who are interested in the
testing and assessment aspect of curriculum design.
4. Scope of the research
As stated, the study would look at the American Studies assignments in only two main
dimensions: relevance and efficacy – whose meanings within this research context would
be interpreted later in the next chapter.
In terms of research population, the study targeted at students and lecturers involved in the
American Studies courses at ULIS-VNUH. Specifically, for practical reasons, these are
students from the classes of QH081E, since they were the latest groups to take the courses
– while all the previous groups had graduated. As for the lecturers, all of them came from
the Country Studies Division – Faculty of Linguistics and Cultures of English Speaking
Countries.

7. 3
Chapter 2: Literature Review and Practical Basis
PART B: DEVELOPMENT
CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW
1.1. Key and related concepts
1.1.1. Content-based Instruction and the teaching context in ULIS-VNUH American
Studies courses
ince the early 1980s, there has been a growing interest in combining language and
content teaching. In the American context, programs, models, and approaches have
proliferated in all levels of instruction, creating various forms of incorporating language
and content teaching (Met, 1991). In the mid 1990s in European countries, curriculum
innovations have been directed toward the content and language integrated learning
approach, in which both curriculum content – e.g. science or geography – and English are
taught together (Graddol, 2007). All these forms of incorporating language and content
teaching fall under the heading of Content-based Instruction.
Overall, it is clear that the term CBI is commonly used to describe a curricula approach
which seeks to integrate language and content instruction. This paper thus adopts the view
similar to that of Curtain and Pesola (1994) in which CBI involves the curriculum concepts
being taught through the foreign language, appropriate to the grade level of the students.
Content
Met (1999) proposes that "…'content' in content-based programs represents material that is
cognitively engaging and demanding for the learner, and is material that extends beyond
the target language or target culture". This paper adopts the definitions of Met (1999),
Curtain and Pesola (1994), which is most relevant to the research context. Therefore,
"content" here is seen as materials, or specifically "curriculum concepts", that are
cognitively engaging and demanding for the learner, and is material that extends beyond
the target language or target culture.
S

8. 4
Chapter 2: Literature Review and Practical Basis
The rationale of CBI
Content-based instruction (CBI) bases its rationale on the premise that students can
effectively obtain both language and subject matter knowledge by receiving content input
in the target language. Although it has been recently recognised by influential authors such
as Rodgers as "one of the Communicative Language Teaching spin-off approaches"
(2001), some authors contemplate the paradigm within an even wider perspective:
according to Stryker and Leaver (1997), for instance, CBI "is a truly and holistic approach
to foreign language education … (which) can be at once a philosophical orientation, a
methodological system, a syllabus design for a single course, or a framework for an entire
program of instruction".
The benefits of the approach are directly or indirectly associated with an extensive body of
research from a variety of fields. Strong empirical support for CBI can be found in second
language acquisition research, in teacher training studies and in cognitive psychology, as
well as in the outcomes documented by successful programs in a variety of contexts and
levels of instruction (Adamson, 1993; Dupuy, 2000).
Classification of CBI and current teaching context
Through a careful review of related literature, this paper adopts the classification used by
Met (1999). Met (2007) has specified the approach as follows:
CONTENT-BASED LANGUAGE TEACHING:
A CONTINUUM OF CONTENT AND LANGUAGE
INTEGRATION
Content-Driven Language-Driven
Total
Immersion
Partial
Immersion
Sheltered
Courses
Adjunct
Model
Theme-Based
Courses
Language classes
with frequent use
of content
for language
practice
Among the models above, the actual instruction model seems to fit in most with the
Sheltered Courses as the latter is defined by Echevarria, J., Vogt, M.E., & Short, D. (2004)
(cited in Short, D. & Himmel, J., 2007) as shown above.

9. 5
Chapter 2: Literature Review and Practical Basis
Its neighbor, the adjunct model, can be refuted as being noted by Davies (2003) as "[its]
emphasis is placed on acquiring specific target vocabulary" and "they may also feature
study skills sessions to familiarise the students with listening, note taking and skimming
and scanning texts." These two characteristics are too distant from the course's objectives
(Country Studies Division, 2007).
1.1.2. The presentation assignments
Based on a review of theoretical foundation, the assignments for a typical American
Studies course include group presentations on a certain topic and individual reflection
essays of group members on that same presentation and topic. Other groups have to write
reports/evaluation on the presentation performances of their classmates as well. Both the
presentation and the reflection are graded (Dang, 2008). Since the last school year of 2010-
2011, another assignment has been integrated into the syllabus – which is essentially a
series of mini tests, called "quizzes". However, due to its relative novelty and experimental
nature, the assignment is not considered in the scope of this paper.
On a side note, beside presentation, the other assignment is known under several names in
different class – report, reflection, evaluation, comment sheet, etc. Nonetheless, for
convenience, this research report would use "reflection/report assignment", or simply,
"reflection assignment", with the intent to encompass all varieties of the name.
1.1.3. Relevance and efficacy
Relevance
Contextualized, in this research's terms, for both teachers and learners, the relevance factor
of the assignments referred to the degree to which the actual implementation of the
assignments can help realize the objectives set out for the course. Perception from both
sides regarding this factor, however, is treated separately then discussed jointly.
Efficacy
The term, particularly in this research, referred to the quality and quantity of work
performed by students in its relation with the assignments' requirements (level of
adherence to guidelines). It stems from the belief that if the requirements are stricly
followed, the intended results will be achieved.

10. 6
Chapter 2: Literature Review and Practical Basis
Accordingly, the following figure proposed another way to visualize the two concepts
relevance and efficacy in their relation to each other and to course objectives:
1.1.2. Notions behind the objectives
There are key concepts in ULIS' American Studies course objectives which might not be
readily obvious. Due to their importance, it is imperative that these concepts are made clear
in light of existing literature – "English skills" (in a sheltered instruction class context), and
"interdisciplinary research skills". Acknowledgedly, "presentational competencies" and
foci of American Studies were important concepts, too, but they were adequately defined
by the course syllabus already.
1.1.4. English skills in sheltered course classes
According to The Education Alliance at Brown University, Sheltered English instruction is
an instructional approach that engages English language learners above the beginner level
in developing grade-level content-area knowledge, academic skills, and increased English
proficiency. In sheltered English classes, teachers use clear, direct, simple English and a
wide range of scaffolding strategies to communicate meaningful input in the content area
to students. Learning activities that connect new content to students' prior knowledge, that
require collaboration among students, and that spiral through curriculum material, offer
English language learners the grade-level content instruction of their English-speaking
peers, while adapting lesson delivery to suit their English proficiency level.
Among all sheltered instruction models applied, the SIOP model by Echevarria, Vogt and
Short (2000) is widely considered to be one of the most effective (e.g. Pearson Education,
Power (Efficacy)
Course objectives
Assignment
Angle (Relevance)
Figure 1 - Relevance & Efficacy Concept

11. 7
Chapter 2: Literature Review and Practical Basis
2008; The Education Alliance – Brown University, 2006). The SIOP model identifies 30
important elements of sheltered instruction under eight broad categories.
It would not be of much benefit to us to explore into each and every category. The primary
concern of the moment is what the SIOP model suggests teachers to test in their students –
in terms of their language skills, specifically. Category VIII provides an answer.
i. Comprehensive review of key vocabulary
ii. Comprehensive review of key content concepts
iii. Regular feedback to students on their output
iv. Assessment of student comprehension and learning of all lesson objectives throughout the lesson
In language regard, it seemed to focus very much on students' vocabulary, and, possibly,
their grammar – in order that they could come up with adequate answers, rather than
language skills. Therefore, in the context of the American Studies course in question,
English skills might be understood narrowly as knowledge areas of grammar and (general
and technical) vocabulary – as other English language communication skills are covered
under the umbrella term "presentational skills" already.
1.1.5. Interdisciplinary research skills
According to Beckman, A. and Beckman, M. (2008), interdisciplinary research is a mode
of research by teams or individuals that integrates information, data, techniques, tools,
perspectives, concepts, and/or theories from two or more disciplines or bodies of
specialized knowledge to advance fundamental understanding or to solve problems whose
solutions are beyond the scope of a single discipline or area of research practice.
Larson, Landers, & Begg (2011) in their effort to "add clarity and develop a set of shared
definitions, values, and language about interdisciplinary research", have designed a list that
sketches major area of competencies for interdisciplinary research skills, with 17
competencies falling into 3 major areas.
Nevertheless, considering the practical situation of teaching and learning at ULIS, any
effort to enhance students' (interdisciplinary) research skills within a certain undergraduate
course would be limited only to integrating them into course assignments but not a full-
fledged research in cooperation with a large, diverse team of researchers with the highest
purpose of publication. Therefore, the interdisciplinary research competencies would be

12. 8
Chapter 2: Literature Review and Practical Basis
scaled down and understood in this context as: (the ability to) (i) integrate concepts and
methods from multiple disciplines in designing interdisciplinary research protocols, (ii)
read journals outside of his or her discipline, and (iii) engage colleagues (experts) from
other disciplines to gain their perspectives on research problems.
1.2. How does this study fit into other research?
This research would best contribute to, among all relevant studies, the body of researches
on sheltered instruction, which until recently dominated by commanding and
"enlightening" principles by Echevarria, Vogt and Short. Specifically, going along with the
order of the day – "think globally, act locally", this study will provide a very tangible
review of the testing and assessment facet of sheltered instruction classroom in a well-
defined, local context.

13. 9
Chapter 3: Methodology
CHAPTER 2: METHODOLOGY
he preceding chapter briefly reviewed the literature on the research topic for the
theoretical basis of the study. This chapter, on the practical side, discussed the
participants, the research instruments, and the procedure of data collection and data
analysis as a means to maximize the validity and reliability of the whole research.
2.1. Research questions
Again, this study aimed at answering the three main questions below:
i. To what degree do American Studies lecturers and students at ULIS-VNUH think
the design of the courseworks have helped to meet the course's objectives?
ii. To what degree do they think the actual assignment quality has met the
assignments' requirements?
iii. What do they suggest about modifying the assignments?
2.2. Participants
As the research scope indicated, there are two groups of stakeholders from the Faculty of
English Language Teacher Education and Faculty of Linguistics and Cultures of English
Speaking Countries that can participate in this research.
The first group composed of 532 students in 22 classes of QH081E – third year students at
the moment they participated in the survey. The research targeted at this group of students
as they were familiar the procedures and requirements in Country Studies courses as they
had taken two courses on General Geography of the UK and the US and British Studies in
the previous semesters and they had just completed the course in question of American
Studies before the end of their third year. These students were asked to participate in a
questionnaire survey, which is elaborated in the next parts.
The second group of participants are teachers of the Country Studies Division who taught
American Studies to the QH081E classes. Given the small number of teachers – 6 people –
and the research's concern, data yielded from this group of participants was treated
T

14. 10
Chapter 3: Methodology
qualitatively to provide deeper insights and explanation to the issues arose. Two of the
teachers have more than 10 years of experience in teaching these courses, while the others
range from 2 to 5 years. This group of teachers were invited to give responses to a
questionnaire survey, followed-up by a short in-depth interview.
2.3. Instruments
The methodology of this research is a combination of quantitative and qualitative
approaches – with the former played a more significant role, as it would provide large
sketches of the situation while the latter would provide a basis for further interpretation of
the situation. Three data gathering instruments were utilized to collect data needed to
answer the research questions as well as for the purpose of triangulation. The first one is a
questionnaire survey in two slightly different versions – one issued to students and the
other teachers. The second one is interview, carried out after each participating teacher
finished answering the survey. The last one is secondary analysis of data on students'
American Studies scores – most importantly the presentation-reflection scores.
2.3.1. Questionnaire
The central instrument was a questionnaire survey in two similar versions. It helped collect
data about teachers' and students' perceptions about the relevance and efficacy of the
American Studies assignments. Both versions were designed around the two core
dimensions. As a matter of course, the underlying connections of each question item to the
said dimensions were not disclosed. This instrument was chosen for its various advantages
and compatibility with the aim of the research.
The 5-point Likert scale was adopted as the core framework for the design of the
questionnaire. Most questions were formulated on this scale in form of statements, and
participants were asked to respond to these statements. Possible responses range from 1-
Strongly disagree to 5-Strongly agree. The last open-ended question was utilized in order
to gain more qualitative data for the third research aim. The questionnaire consisted of 40
questions. [See Appendix 1a and 1b for the final questionnaire forms].
About the two versions for students and teachers, the only significant difference among
them lied in the way in which each question was worded. The other minor variation was
the informational question on teaching experience for teachers and class for students.

15. 11
Chapter 3: Methodology
2.3.2. Interview
This instrument was used in this research as a small, supplementary tool to assist the
questionnaire survey. All 6 teachers participated in the research were invited to engage in
small talks in which they only needed to elaborate on one main question, which was an
expansion of the open-ended question in the questionnaire. Here they provided further
explanation to back up their comments. No student was invited to participate in the
interview.
2.3.3. Secondary data analysis
This study aimed at using QH081E students' presentation scores for the American Studies
subject with a purpose to look for any significant correlation among all the data gathered.
The data was archived by the Faculty of English Language Teacher Education.
2.4. Data collection procedures
The questionnaire survey was conducted in the following steps:
1. Introducing about the research via student mail group with the aid of a student
coordinator. This introduction reached all students of QH081E.
2. The coordinator forwarded the questionnaire form to monitor of each class.
3. All monitors then forwarded this form to their class' members, who later returned the
filled forms to their respective monitor.
4. All monitors packed the forms together and sent back to the researcher via email.
For teachers, the form was sent directly to each, who then returned the filled form directly
to the researcher. Later they were interviewed independently after their asnwers were read
thoroughly.
As for the data on students' American Studies scores, first, the researcher needed to gain an
authorization from the faculty. This was done after an archive access request form had
been filled and filed into the faculty office's archive. Then the researcher had full access
and the right to use all QH081E students' American Studies scores for the purpose of this
research.

16. 12
Chapter 3: Methodology
2.5. Data analysis procedure
Questionnaire and interview data
Data from questionnaire was first grouped together on "community" basis, i.e. students'
forms were grouped according to their class, while all teachers' forms were taken together
under the "teacher group".
Raw data was then sorted out and enumerated thoroughly with the aid of specialized
computer programs (primarily MS Excel – as it would take much more time with SPSS).
The nominal choices (1-Strongly disagree, 3-Uncertain, etc.) were converted to numeral
data.
Responses were also grouped into batches under the same principles presented in section
3.3.1 on how the questionnaire was formulated and analyzed quantitatively for meaningful
interpretation and discussion in the next chapter.
Responses from the open-ended question were taken into analysis in tandem with data
from interviews to shed light into the more in-depth issues. Due to the nature of open-
ended questions and the scope of interview, this data group was analyzed qualitatively,
with the focus zoomed in on what had been said rather than how many people said what.
Archive data
This type of data consist of all kinds of students' scores in this subject. However, this study
only took their presentation scores into consideration, because they were the given grading
to the presentation-reflection assignments. The average presentation scores of each class
and of the entire QH081E classes were calculated with the hope to find a sort of correlation
between presentation scores and efficacy index.

17. 13
Chapter 5: Conclusion
CHAPTER 3: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
lthough the research expected to receive survey feedbacks from 532 students, due to
some restraint in communication and cooperation, the research could just access 466
students in 20 out of 22 classes – which means a coverage rate of 87%. Furthermore,
among these 466 entries, after an arduous filtering process, 149 were considered to be
invalid because the participants simply copied the answer from each other. Eventually,
there remained only 317 valid entries, accounting for 60% of the original target population.
Still, this sufficed to draw up conclusions at confidence level of 95% and confidence
interval of 3.44.
In the other group, all 6 teachers were able to participate and their answers were all valid –
among them only 4 were able to join in the interview. Teachers' responses were all
analyzed qualitatively, because their small number would hardly make up many
statistically meaningful conclusions for the purpose of generalization to a larger (teacher)
population. They would be more meaningful in some situations where teachers' and
students' perceptions were collated. Therefore all of of the charts below dealt with data
from students' reponses only, unless noticed otherwise.
The analysis below was organized on the basis of solving each research question, using
relevant data from all three sources, in stead of data yielded from each type of instruments.
3.1. Perceptions of teachers and students of the degree to which the presentation-
reflection assignments have helped to meet the couse's objectives
Objective 1a – Providing students with general knowledge about the US in the past and at
the present
In the discipline of American Studies, as in many other content subjects, the first and
foremost concern was the amount (and quality) of knowledge passed on to learners. In the
context of the American Studies course at ULIS, this body of knowledge was generally
divided into two interconnected groups: (i) general knowledge – American geography,
A

18. 14
Chapter 5: Conclusion
demography and so on, and (ii) specific knowledge themes – with five predetermined foci:
history, beliefs and values, politics, economy, and education.
Questions 1 and 2 addressed the general knowledge group, by asking participants'
evaluation of the degree to which presentation-reflection assignments helped them to
acquire general knowledge about the US in considerable depth. The distribution of
responses was as follows:
Almost 70% agreed or strongly agreed that the presentation assignment did help them to
acquire the general knowledge adequately, compared to 46% with the reflection
assignment. It was also reflected in the median value of 3 for presentation (see appendix
4), this type of assignment was believed to be more effective in improving learners' general
American Studies knowledge than the reflection assignment (median value 2). A median
value of 2 meant that the majority of respondents chose option 3-Uncertain. When students
felt uncertain about their improvement, or lack of it, then it was impossible to assert that
the reflection assignment was able to help students with general knowledge.
Combined, presentation and reflection could only do a fairly good job in helping students
with general knowledge, with nearly 60% agreed that they did (combined median value
being 2.5). As for teachers, with the median value being 3, they seemed to believe a little
more robustly in the ability of the presentation assignment to help their students in the
general knowledge department.
Objective 1b – Providing students with knowledge about the US in some specific themes
As for the specific knowledge themes – the questions tried to differentiate perceptions
toward each of five major themes. The median values yielded show that all five themes
received 3 points, meaning they were more or less equally effective. However, the
distribution chart below showed that knowledge of history was the weakest points of all,
having only 60% respondents' rating agree or strongly agree – compared with 70-75% of
other knowledge foci. A hint for an proper answer lied in the responses to the open-ended
question. Although not relevant to the question being asked, some students commented that
lectures on history was the most boring of all.
Teachers had the same level of belief in this regard, with their median value being 3.

19. 15
Chapter 5: Conclusion
To sum up, overall, both teachers and students largely agreed that the two assignments
both helped to boost students' knowledge – with the reflection assignment being the
slightly weaker agent.
Objective 2 – Helping students develop presentational competencies
Presentational competencies were the second objective prescribed the syllabus. They were
identified as (i) writing skills, (ii) oral communication, (iii) visual representation, and (iv)
electronic discussion. It was here that we could see a clearer distinction between the roles
of the presentation and the reflection assignment in both students' and teachers' perception.
It could be seen clearly that oral communication and visual representation was believed to
be the two improvements triggered by presentation assignments (with both medians being
3). The improvement in oral communication received better rating with 78% respondents
agreed or strongly agreed and that of improvement in visual representation was 66%.
Writing skills and electronic discussion was neglected behind with the median values of 2
for both – especially the writing skills, with 32% disagreed or strongly disagreed, 40%
uncertain, and only 26.5% agreed and 1.5%. This could be explained through the nature of
the presentation assignment, in which the foci were on the elaboration of oral arguments
and/or information presenting and, to a lesser extent, the way visual aids were prepared.
Whilst, writing was limited to short sentences and box language. Not surprisingly, teachers
agreed totally with students on this (with median values being 2, 3, 3, 2 respectively).
On the other hand, we could have a different perspective into the presentational skills –
from the regard of reflection assigments. Students only acknowledged reflection
assignment's role in enhancing their writing skills (median 3 with 64% agreed or strongly
agreed), while remained unclear in the other three components (all three medians being 2).
Teachers, on the hand, seemed to be more vehemently by opining that while the reflection
assignment helped students improve their writing skills, it did not directly help students
improve the other three. Their median values for writing skills was 3, oral communication
and visual representation were 1, and electronic discussion was 1.5.
Because these two types of assignment were designed to complement each other, the
combined effect of both helped students to improve their writing skills, oral
communication and visual representation within the context of presentational skills.

20. 16
Chapter 5: Conclusion
However, there was the "electronic discussion" skill untouched. Although listed in the
course objectives, the concept of electronic discussion was left blank, and hardly any effort
to integrate this skill into the process of doing these assignments could be seen in the
syllabus. In reality, the researcher had to explain to the students the definition of electronic
discussion as meant implicitly in the syllabus before issuing the questionnaire.
We could also see that when contrasting with the presentation assignment, the reflection
assignment lagged behind in terms of improving students' presentational skills. It would be
partly explained by some students that the report assignment was uninspiring and they
generally could not reach the required depth, or it was neglected by teachers because much
more in class time, effort and focus was reserved to the presentation assignment.
Objective 3a – Offering the students opportunities to improve their English languages
The third objective was essentially a combination of two smaller objectives. The first one
was offering students opportunities to improve their English languages. Since it would be
impossible to "count" opportunities, the corresponding questions aimed directly at how the
participants perceived the degree to which their English capacity was improved (or
degraded) owing to the assignments in question.
For both types of assignments, the perception was very favorable to "improving general
vocabulary" – median 3 for students and median 3.5 for teachers with presentation and
both median 3 for both students and teachers with reflection. To "improving terminologies
and grammar" through presentation, students were divided, as there were no clear trend of
agree or disagree as with general vocabulary. Both their medians stayed at 2. It would be
the same for the reflection assignment if not for the observation that students believed their
grammar had got better thanks to the assignment. A considerable 61% either agreed or
strongly agreed with the statement, giving it a median value of 3.
Taken together, both presentation and reflection had relatively positive influence on
students' English capacity – so they perceived, with around 55% agreed or strongly agreed
and around 10% disagreed and 2.5% strongly disagreed. Presentation helped students to
improve their general vocabulary, while reflection their general vocabulary and grammar.
The capacity of wielding terminologies, despite an important aspect of any specialized
content subject, was not believed to be better. Teachers, nevertheless, believed rather

21. 17
Chapter 5: Conclusion
strongly that the assignments helped build students' English capacity in all three aspects,
especially in terms of general vocabulary.
Objective 3b – Offering the students opportunities to improve their interdisciplinary
research skills
It could be seen that the order of manifestation of the three competencies, from highest to
lowest frequency, was as follows: using documents from other fields of study was the most
popular, with nearly 70% agreed or strongly agreed; using concepts and methods from
other fields of study came second, with 55% agreed or strongly agreed; and consulting
with teachers or experts from other fields of study came last, with only about 42% agreed
or strongly agreed. However, if we look at their median values, then consultation was the
method largely ignored by students in doing their presentation-reflection assignment
(median 2), and thus, logically, the corresponding competency would not develop as a
result of these assignments. For the two other competencies, their medians were both 3, so
in a large sense, the assignments did help them to hone some of their interdisciplinary
research skills, although very restrictively.
Considered all three competencies together, around 55% respondents agreed that the two
courseworks had helped them to achieve certain improvement in their interdisciplinary
research skills, with an average median of 2.67. This is a positive yet not satisfying signal
to the contribution of the assignments to realize the course's objective. Teachers,
alternatively, evaluated the realization of these competencies on relatively lower scale
values. Their corresponding median values for (the use of) "Concepts and Methods",
"Documents", "Consultation" were 2.0, 2.5, and 2.0. This implied their uncertainty of the
students' application of these research methods. The highest ranking, "Documents", could
only received a 2.5, so it was not enough to conclude that the teachers thought the course
was successful in this objective.
Objective 4 – Preparing students who are interested in American Studies for their further
study of the discipline
Question 25-28 corresponded to the forth objective – preparing students who are interested
in American Studies for their further study of the discipline. These questions yielded rather
consistent responses from both students and teachers, with more than 60% student

22. 18
Chapter 5: Conclusion
respondents agreed or strongly agreed with the respective statements across all four
categories: (the preparation for further study in terms of) knowledge, English skills,
interdisciplinary research skills, and presentational skills. The medians were all even at 3,
indicating that both teachers and students were satisfied with what the assignment had
helped the students prepare for their further study in the discipline (if they had a chance
to). It seemed that when judging things in a larger perspective, both students and teachers
tended to be less critical than when focusing on each.
3.2. Perceptions of teachers and students of the degree to which the actual assignment
quality has met the assignments' requirements
Efficacy, or the ability of assignments to be carried out along the lines laid out in the
syllabus, was a vital index to show the degree to which the assignments could contribute to
the achievement of preset objectives or not. Students' and teachers' perception in this
regard was gauged through 8 questions for the presentation assignment and 3 questions for
the reflection assignment. And the result was positive.
The presentation assignment
As for the presentation assignment, most (approximately 70%) students agreed or strongly
agreed that they had followed the guidelines very strictly, with median values across 8
items being seven 3's and one 4 (average 3.1). Teachers even had slightly stronger
appreciation of their students' adherence to the presentation guidelines (average median of
3.3).
The report/reflection assignment
The reflection assignment efficacy received slightly less positive evaluation from students
and teachers. Around 60% student respondents agreed or strongly agreed that their pieces
of reflection had met the requirements of the assignment. Consequently, the median values
were 2.7 among students and 3.0 among teachers.
Correlation between efficacy index and presentation score
In an attempt to find the correlation between the efficacy (perception) index and students'
presentation scores, which took both assignments – presentation and reflection – into
Tải bản FULL (43 trang): https://bit.ly/3KmtUvU
Dự phòng: fb.com/TaiHo123doc.net

23. 19
Chapter 5: Conclusion
consideration, the researcher used students' official presentation scores (as filed by the
faculty) jointly with data yielded from the questionnaire survey.
In this calculation, means were used to calculate average scores and average efficacy
indexes for each class. This enabled the calculation of the differences between the scores
and efficacy indexes of each class and the average scores and efficacy indexes of the whole
20 classes (See Appendix 5 for details).
With this method, positive correlations between the efficacy indexes and presentation
scores were identified:
 A 1 point increased in presentation efficacy index would yield 2.14 points
increased in presentation score.
 A 1 point increased in reflection efficacy index would yield 0.85 points increased in
presentation score.
 A 1 point increased in presentation-reflection combined efficacy index would yield
1.54 points increased in presentation score.
These correlations strengthened the validity of the efficacy indexes in the way that the
better a student believed to adhere to the requirements set out, the better the score he/she
received. The relations might be interpreted in two ways: (i) students with higher efficacy
perception indexes were more likely to actually follow the guidelines better – while the
guidelines provided the basis for grading, and (ii) those students were more likely to be
confident and assertive, which would benefit almost any type of presentational
assignments.
Tải bản FULL (43 trang): https://bit.ly/3KmtUvU
Dự phòng: fb.com/TaiHo123doc.net

24. 20
Chapter 5: Conclusion
3.3. What do teachers and students suggest about modifying the assignments? –
Practical implication and suggestions
Due to an influx in qualitative data from students, the suggestions are highly diversified
and thus, not all are relevant to the question being asked. Please see Appendix 6 for a
summary of relevant suggestions from students, with some effort invested in to paraphrase
and re-organize this mass of data. Only relevant suggestions together with suggestions
from teachers yielded from questionnaire and interview are discussed here.
About the presentation assignment
The most urgent problem with the presentation assignment is that some students, and 3 out
of 4 teachers commented that most presentations were shallow. Students suggested that
there should be new requirements to promote "research content" in presentations (or better
support with proper facts and figures), demand better sharing and discussion about the
topic before presentation, increase discussion time and effort after each presentation, or
simply replace them with seminars. Teachers shared the same view but had different
approaches.
About the reflection assignment
The only major complaint from students was that reflection assignments are tedious and
useless, because, as they reported, a lot of students simply copied works from each other
and there was no effective monitor measure in place for appropriate subsequent grading.
Their suggestions focused on removing the assignment entirely, and, for some, replacing it
with a reflective essay assignment after each of the teacher's lectures, which would then be
graded for individual scores. Teachers' solutions, on the other hand, seemed to be less
radical and rather soft-handed.
About teachers, and other factors that related to the either or both of the assignments
Students, when looking at teachers to make suggestions, seemed to focus more on their
teachers' degree of effort invested in helping them.
Although the suggestions may stem from the negligence, mistakes, or even the teaching
methods of some certain teachers and not every teacher else, it is still a noteworthy
checklist for all to bear in mind and adapt appropriately to their own classroom context.
6812679