VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES: FACULTY OF POSTGRADUATE STUDIES #0 THE THUY LINH PRAISE AS CLASSROOM COMMUNICATIVE REINFORCING DEVICE: PERCEPTION OF IIAIPHONG UNIVERSITY STUDENTS (hân thức gủa sinh viên trường Đại học Hải Phòng về lời khơn ngợi như là một phương tiên tăng cường giao tiếp trong lớp hoc) M.A MINOR PROGRAMME THESIS Ficld English Teavhing Methodology Code: 60.10 HANOI - 2010 VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONALE STUDIES FACULTY OF POSTGRADUATE STUDIES #0 THE THUY LINH PRAISE AS CLASSROOM COMMUNICATIVE REINFORCING DEVICE: PERCEPTION OF IIAIPHONG UNIVERSITY STUDENTS (hân thức gủa sinh viên trường Đại học Hải Phòng về lời khơn ngợi như là một phương tiên tăng cường giao tiếp trong lớp hoc) M.A MINOR PROGRAMME THESIS Ficld English Teavhing Methodology Code: 60.10 Supervisor: Phtng Ha Thanh, MEd HANOI - 2010 iv TABLE OF CONTENTS | Page Acknowledgements.ccnsnmsiinnsnennee vowed Dedlaratlon. neo aii Absiract -. 1H Table of contents - - - iv List of figures and tab! Vi TNTRODUCTION. Rationale of the study Purpose of the sludy & 1" Rescarch «qucstions.
wee Significance of the study - 3 CHAPTER 1: LITERATUEE EEVHEW. Teacher praise: delinitiem amtl imclions. Definition of teachel praise. Functions of teacher praise 4 1.
Classification of teacher praise - 6 1. Studenls` perception of catcher praise. A framework of students” peroepOp. Sudents® perception of teacher praise 8 1.
Resistance to teacher praise nine wineries rrirrrrrrrrroraol L 1. Guidelines for effective teacher praise 1 1 CHAPTER2: THE §TUDY.1, Sampling and defining the case - - - 15 2. Data analysis - - - 18 CHAPTER 3: RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS 3. Different types of teacher praise 3.
Studenls’ prefercnec for different types of teacher praise .3, Students’ emotional responses to different types of teacher pralse. Influences of different types of leacher praise on sluilents? self-concept 3. Influences of different types of teacher praise on students’ behaviour. High-achievers versus low-achievers in preference for teacher praise 3 Implications ¬ CONCLUSION.
Summary of the smdy 2. Limitations and Ñtture researcÌL.-: 22s de REFERENCES APPENDIX. INTRODUCTION 1, Rationale of the study It is human nature that actions bringing pleasure tend to be repeated. When @ porson cams praise for having donc something right, thal.
praise øels as ø rcinforoor stimulating that person to repeat the desirable behaviour, Every one of us desires praise at some level, and in one form or another. In a working environment, being praised for working well helps people to fecl worthwhile, They will fecl motivated fo continue working hard and will be cncouraged to do whatever necds to be donc to support the business. In educational settings, being noticed and appreciated for their good behaviour, students are willing to do more than they are asked, volunteer ideas and become more involved and committed to what they arc doing, Most educational psychologists and other sources of advice to classroom teachers siress the significance of teacher praise in communication Bansaction as il positively influences students’ academic achievement (Gettinger, 1983; Luiselli & Downing, 1980), on-task behaviour (Ferguson & Houghton, 1992, Vollmeyer & Rheinberg, 2005), pupil’s speceh (Moore, Knott. & MeNaughton, 1989), students’ parcoplions (Baker & Gruhn, 1987, Stipek & Muclver, 1989) and helps to provide cneouragement to students, to build self esteem and a close teacher-student relationship (Brophy, 1981).
Indeed, it is reported to be one of the most long — recognized and essential skill for language teacher and the strategy icachers find casies! 1 employ (Munroe, 1982). Research findings tend lo indicate that the simple act of praising a student can have both reinforcing and informative qualities My own thinking was no exception until one day, when I offered a student a statement of praise, he seemed indifferent to it. His facial expression and behaviour revealed that he did not like that praise at all. 1 felt quite embarrassed, and then | hooked on roscarch of praise right aflor gelling home.
In study affer study, T find aut that toacher praise is not always beneficial; even it does more hanm than good when teacher praise does not meet student’s expectation. Such researchers as Denny (1986), Gordon (1989), Mueller & Dweek (1998), Kamins & Dwock (1999), and Bumett (2002) argued that praise, CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW This chapter oul lo rey w the Hitcrature related to teacher prais fanctions, then discuss the classifications of teacher praisc and students’ perecption in previous studies.1, Teacher praise: definition and functions 1. Definition of teacher praise The tenn “praise” is derived from the Lalin verb “pretiare”, which means to value highly (Burnett, 2002), and involves “commending the worth af or lo express approval or admiration” (Brophy, 1981). By definition, praise is “positive evaluation made by a person of another's products, performances or attributes, where the evaluator presumes the validity of the standards on which the evaluation ts based” (Kanouse, Gumpert & Canavan Gumpert, 1981, p.
This was selected in part because it is comprehensive, and resonates well with commonsense conception ofpraise. According ta Hitz & Driscoll’s rescarch on the usc of teacher praise im the classroom (1989), cffcctive praise was thought to occur when the teacher positively acknowledged students’ work. They pointed oul that (his required Ieachers to be non —judgernental to prevent slalus being assigned to students. Functions of teacher praise Thers are twa main fimctions of teacher praisc: praise ax reinforcement and praise as wiformational feedback.
Along, with the development of language teaching, different methods and approaches have emphasized on different functions of teacher praise Praise as reinforcement Asa behaviorist, Skinner (19 4) was forming the belief that language was learnt throngh repetition and positive or negative reinforcement, Reinforcement is the process by which the likelihood of a certain response following certain stimuli is increased, Hence, in the time of Audio-Lingnal Method, reinforcement as the extrinsic approval and praise of the teachsr or fellow student or the intrinsic sel -satisfaction of targol language use is a vital element in the learning because it increases the likelihood that the behavior will occur again and become a habit, When administered properly, such positive reinforcement can suet fully modi fy behaviour and stimulate learning. In the cducational settings, this usc of praisc as a positive rcinforcement has been widely recommended as a teaching strategy. 1) stated that “the communication transaction af verhal praise ix an interpersonal experience and plays an important role in the reinforce ment process, which in tan affects the learning and behavioral activity af students.” Furthermore, ‘Thomas (1991) referred to praise as a kind of positive reinforecr, wilh consistem, praise thoughl to encourage desirable bebaviour, while extinguished undesirable behaviow. He suggested that praise could be a motivational tool in the classroom if reinforcement was descriptive and involved using the students’ name, choosing appropriate praise words carefully and desoribing precisely the dehaviour that merits the praise.
Similarly, Woolfolk (1987), quoted im Moor: (2007, p 202), discussed praise as reinforcement that teachers use a rewarding stimulus to motivate some action or behaviour. Numerous researchers have demonstrated that teacher praise can improve acadcmic behaviour. Blaney (1993) investigated the effects of teacher praisc on academie achievement of elementary students, comparing groups that were taught using high (., praising correct responses, providing corrective feedback for incorrect response) versus tow (Le. neutral feedback, such as “OK” for correct responses and “No” for incorrect responses) levels of teacher praise.
The author found that students in the groups that received higher rates of praise for correct responding performed significantly better on academic tests than did studonls who roeoivcd lower praise rales for corroel responding Praise as informational feedback In contrast lo behaviowisls, constructivisls in Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) emphasize interaction as both the means and the ultimate goal of learning a language. Therefore, the teacher acts as an advisor during communicative activity, a facititator of students” learning, ar 2 co-communicalor, and helps learners in any way thal motivates them to work with the language. So, praise in this approach is regarded as both communicative reinforcer and informational feedback. In ils osacnice, prise is “a form of feedback that conveys information about the correciness or appropriateness of amswers and other bebisiours, as well as information about the teacher's positive regard for the behaviours” (Emmar, 1988, p.
Eor again and become a habit, When administered properly, such positive reinforcement can suet fully modi fy behaviour and stimulate learning. In the cducational settings, this usc of praisc as a positive rcinforcement has been widely recommended as a teaching strategy. 1) stated that “the communication transaction af verhal praise ix an interpersonal experience and plays an important role in the reinforce ment process, which in tan affects the learning and behavioral activity af students.” Furthermore, ‘Thomas (1991) referred to praise as a kind of positive reinforecr, wilh consistem, praise thoughl to encourage desirable bebaviour, while extinguished undesirable behaviow. He suggested that praise could be a motivational tool in the classroom if reinforcement was descriptive and involved using the students’ name, choosing appropriate praise words carefully and desoribing precisely the dehaviour that merits the praise.
Similarly, Woolfolk (1987), quoted im Moor: (2007, p 202), discussed praise as reinforcement that teachers use a rewarding stimulus to motivate some action or behaviour. Numerous researchers have demonstrated that teacher praise can improve acadcmic behaviour. Blaney (1993) investigated the effects of teacher praisc on academie achievement of elementary students, comparing groups that were taught using high (., praising correct responses, providing corrective feedback for incorrect response) versus tow (Le. neutral feedback, such as “OK” for correct responses and “No” for incorrect responses) levels of teacher praise.
The author found that students in the groups that received higher rates of praise for correct responding performed significantly better on academic tests than did studonls who roeoivcd lower praise rales for corroel responding Praise as informational feedback In contrast lo behaviowisls, constructivisls in Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) emphasize interaction as both the means and the ultimate goal of learning a language. Therefore, the teacher acts as an advisor during communicative activity, a facititator of students” learning, ar 2 co-communicalor, and helps learners in any way thal motivates them to work with the language. So, praise in this approach is regarded as both communicative reinforcer and informational feedback. In ils osacnice, prise is “a form of feedback that conveys information about the correciness or appropriateness of amswers and other bebisiours, as well as information about the teacher's positive regard for the behaviours” (Emmar, 1988, p.
Eor whether intended or unintended, can produce a number of negative outcomes to students’ Icarning environments Being urged by the situation, I would like to avail mysclf of this opportunity to conduct a research study on students’ perception of different types of teacher praise in a university in Vielnam to see whether it motivales or demohvales sludents in classroom commuucation. 2, Purpose of the study This research is designed to investigate into teacher praise and students’ perception ina case of Haiphong University. ‘Ihe purposes of the study are: | to recognize different kinds of praise used by teachers at Llaiphong Univeristy recive different kinds of teacher 3, Research questions For such purposes, the study aims at answering the following questions: 3. are different types of praise that the teachers al Taiphong University offer in classroom? 3.
What is students’ preference for different types of teacher praise? 3. What are students’ emotional responses to different types of teacher praise? 3. To what axisnt is students” solf— concept influcnced by different lypes of lzacher praise? 3. ‘To what extent is students’ behaviour influenced by different types of teacher praisc? 3.
To what extent are high achievers different ftom low achievers in terms of their preference for different types of teacher praise? 4, Methodology ‘Vhe research employed case study, using observations and semi — structured interviews as instruments af dala collection. LIST GF FIGURES AND TABLES: Page Figure 1.1; Constructs of three components of mind.2: Guidelines for effective praise.1: Teachers’ profile 1á Table 3.1: Means and Standard Deviation for differen! Lypes of icacher praise 20 Table 3.
