VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES FALCUTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES NGUYEN THANH BINH GIVING FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ WRITING AT A BILINGUAL HIGH SCHOOL IN HANOI: NATIVE AND NON NATIVE ENGLISH TEACHERS’ PERCEPTIONS AND PRACTICES Quan điềm và thực tiền của giáo viên ban ngữ va giáo viên ban dia về việc M.A MINOR PROGRAM THESIS Programe: 1 Field: English Teaching Methodology Code: 8140231.01 Ha Noi, 2024 VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES FALCUTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES NGUYEN THANH BINH GIVING FEEDBACK ON STUDENTS’ WRITING AT A BILINGUAL HIGH SCHOOL IN HANOI: NATIVE AND NON NATIVE ENGLISH TEACHERS’ PERCEPTIONS AND PRACTICES phản hồi sửa lỗi cho các bài viết của học sinh ở một trường THPT song ngữ tại Hà Nội M.A MINOR PROGRAM THESIS Programe: 1 Field: English Teaching Methodology Code: 8140231. Tran Thi Thu Hien Ha Noi, 2024 DECLARATION I hereby certify that this thesis entitled: “Giving feedback on students’ writing at a bilingual high school in Hanoi: Native and non native English teachers’ perceptions and practices” is honestly the result of my work. This thesis has not been submitted, either in whole or in part, for a degree or diploma at any other university or institution. All sources used or quoted have been indicated and acknowledged by means of complete references.
Hanoi, 2024 Nguyen Thanh Binh Approved by SUPERVISOR (Signature and full name) Dr. Tran Thi Thu Hien Date: .cccccccccssssssscsssssscccees ABSTRACT Despite extensive research on the effectiveness of teacher written feedback, there is a lack of studies exploring feedback from the perspective of teachers, especially whose beliefs vary in terms of sociocultural and linguistic backgrounds. This thesis investigates the perceptions of native and non-native English teachers regarding their feedback practices on students’ writing at a bilingual high school in Hanoi. The study aims to explore the differences and similarities in feedback approaches through a mixed-methods approach, including interviews, and analysis of feedback samples.
The findings show that while all teachers agree on the importance of feedback, they also acknowledge that providing it is a challenging and time-consuming task. NESTs and NNESTs have different preferences regarding the scope, focus, and strategies of feedback. The research provides insights into effective feedback strategies and contributes to the enhancement of writing instruction in bilingual educational settings. ii LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS CF Correct feedback ESL English as a Foreign Language IGCSE International General Certificate of Secondary Education Ll First language L2 Second language NESTs Native English Speaking Teachers NNESTs Non-native English Speaking Teachers WCF Written corrective feedback 1H TABLE OF CONTENTS DECLARATION 0115.
ii LIST OF ABBREYVIA TIONS. LH HH ng nhện iii TABLE OF CONTENTTS.-- LH HH HT HH HH HH HH Hư iv LIST OF TABLES1000. vi CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION0. Statement of the problem and rationale for the study.
Scope Of the 1. Aims and ObJ€CfIV€S. TH ng TH Hàn 3 I0 u00 1. Method of the Study.
Significance of the Study. -- G2 3111311311191 18 11 911 91 11 1H ng ng kg 4 1. Structure of the thesis .- GhiHgg 5 CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEẨW.HHH HH HH Hi, 6 2. Definition of feedback 1n Writing.
Typology of corrective feedaCKK.- - --- -- - + k0 ng ng ng kg 7 2. Factors affecting effective feedbaCK.- - ---- - kg ng giết 10 2. The definition of NESTs and NNESÏTS. The role of NESTs and NNESÏTS.11 2 HH HH Hi ng, 11 2.
The influence of NESTs and non-NESTs on English writing. Language Teachers’ P€rC€PfIOH. Previous studies on the topic and the research 8ap. 14 CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY.
Data collection and analysis. Data collection and anaÏS1S .-- ¿+ 52 +13 E1 kg ng re, 19 3. 19 CHAPTER 4: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS. The similarities and differences between NESTs and NNESTs’ beliefs about GIVING feedback oe ee eescceseescceseceseceseecesececeeseeceseceeeceseceaeceeeceaeceseeeeeeeeseceaeeeseeenas 21 4.
The similarities and differences between NESTs and NNESTs’ practices when giving feedback 0TT. The challenges of NESTs and NNESTs’ when giving feedback. NESTs and NNESTs’ beliefs/ practices regarding giving feedback. NESTs and NNEST’s challenges when giving feedback.
HH HH HH ngư 47 be on. Limitations and suggestions for other SfUCÏI€S.- 5 55 + £+£svsserseesers 50 REFERENCES ẺẺẼẺ 8e. I Appendix A: Semi-Structured Interview Guiding Questions .c:cccssessseeeteeeseeeeees I Appendix B: Samples of Marked Papers .c:ccescessccesceeeseeeseeeseeceaeeeseeeeseeeeeeaeenes H Appendix C: Participants’ Consent FOTI.- s5 + + +*£+x£*xE#vEEeeeeeekeskerkrek Il LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Participating teachers’ profile. The amount of feedback in collected papers by each teacher.
The amount of direct and indirect feedback .-- 5+5 «£+s<+seee+se 31 Table 4: Examples of direct and indirect feedback by NESTs and NNESTS. Focus of CF and amount of feedbaCK.- -- 5+ 6231 +s£svsseeseesske 36 Table 6: Examples of CF on grammar and vocabulary .c:ccesseesceceseeeneeeeeeeeneees 37 Table 7: Examples of CF on content and OrØan1Zaf1OI.-- 5 55s s£+s£++see+ss 38 Vi CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1. Statement of the problem and rationale for the study Feedback on writing is a critical component of language learning and development, serving as a bridge between instruction and student improvement. In the context of second language acquisition, particularly in English as a foreign language settings, written feedback from teachers plays a pivotal role in guiding learners through the complexities of writing in a non-native language.
The process of writing in a second language involves not only mastering grammar, vocabulary, and syntax but also understanding the nuances of tone, style, and organization. Effective feedback helps students navigate these challenges, offering them specific insights into their writing strengths and areas for improvement. Over the years, the practice of providing feedback on writing has evolved, with educators employing a variety of approaches to meet the diverse needs of learners. These approaches range from direct feedback, where errors are explicitly corrected, to indirect feedback, where students are encouraged to identify and correct their own mistakes.
Additionally, feedback can focus on local issues, such as grammar and vocabulary, or global issues, like content, organization, and coherence. The effectiveness of these feedback strategies is influenced by factors such as the teacher's background, the instructional context, and the students' proficiency levels. In bilingual educational settings, where students are taught by both native English speaking teachers and non-native English speaking teachers, the dynamics of feedback can be particularly complex. Each group of teachers brings unique strengths to the table—native English speaking teachers with their innate understanding of the language and cultural nuances, and non-native English speaking teacherswith their ability to empathize with learners’ struggles and provide targeted support (Cheng & Zhang, 2022).
The increasing presence of native English speaking teachers in these countries brings new perspectives to the teaching of this 1 language and encourages scholars to compare the teaching philosophies of both native English speaking teachers and non-native English speaking teachers (Clark-Gareca and Gui, 2019), especially given that sociocultural and language backgrounds influence teachers’ beliefs about written feedback (Lee, 2013, 2017; Hyland, 2019). In Vietnam and other Asian countries, although potential strengths and weaknesses of both native English speaking teachers and non-native English speaking teachers have sparked a controversial debate over the efficacy of each, little has been known as to how these teachers impact and cultivate students’ writing competence, to be specific, students at a bilingual school who study with both teachers everyday. To ensure confidentiality and privacy, the school being studied is referred to as School A - a bilingual high school in Hanoi, Vietnam. Since the implementation of the Cambridge curriculum in 2014, School A has prided itself in students’s English proficiency.
Writing, often regarded as the most challenging English skill, presents difficulties for students, including those at School A. Students stills have greatest problems with writing tasks, sentence structures, language adaptation to real-life contexts, as well as logical thinking skills used to make a written argument. To counter perceived problems, several changes were enacted such as increases in writing classes, changes in teaching materials and in native English speaking teachers and non-native English speaking teachers’ teaching hours. However, none of the attempts has been made to research how native English speaking teachers and non-native English speaking teachers teach and affect students differently.
From a teacher’s point of view, a lack of understanding of the dissimilarity can lead to a failure to complement each other or to make certain compromises for the sake of team harmony and students’ general growth, which can be true to School A’s circumstance. The rationale for this study stems from the understanding that native English-speaking teachers and non-native English-speaking teachers have distinct 2 perspectives on providing feedback on writing, and the methods for giving feedback. These differing perceptions shape their instructional practices, particularly in how they deliver feedback during writing lessons. Such variations in feedback approaches are crucial, as they can significantly impact students' learning experiences and their overall writing achievements.
Scope of the study The scope of the study is researching the native English speaking teachers and non-native English speaking teachers’ perceptions of giving feedback on students’ writing at a bilingual high school in Hanoi. Other language skills or contexts are not within the scope. The study’s participants were native English-speaking teachers and non-native English-speaking teachers who were co-teaching 10th graders. In academic school year 2022-2023, for in each 10th class, a foreign teacher and a native teacher were responsible for teaching English.
The primary data collection method used is qualitative approach. The data were collected from semi-structured interviews, students’ writing samples with teachers’ written feedback. Aims and objectives The study aims at exploring native English speaking teachers and native English speaking teachers’ perceptions on giving feedback on grade-10 students’ writing at a bilingual school in Hanoi. The interrelated objectives of the research are to examine the similarities and differences between the two groups of teachers’ written feedback perceptions in English writing settings, and to explore the challenges during the process of giving feedback.
Research questions RQ 1: What are the differences in the beliefs of native English-speaking teachers and non-native English-speaking teachers about giving written feedback on students' writing ? RQ 2: What are the differences in the practices of native English-speaking teachers and non-native English-speaking teachers when giving written feedback on 3 Studenfs' writing ? RQ 3: What challenges do native English speaking teachers and non-native English speaking teachers’ face when providing feedback on students’ writing? 1. Method of the study This study employs a combination of qualitative and quantitative research design to explore and compare the written feedback practices of native English speaking teachers and native non-English speaking teachers, among which, the primary method used is qualitative approach. The data were collected from semi-structured interviews, students’ writing samples with teachers’ written feedback. The qualitative approach allows for an in-depth understanding of the participants' experiences, perceptions related to written feedback while marked papers reveal their practices which are guided by their perceptions.
Significance of the study In terms of practical significance, the study holds important value for several key stakeholders in the field of English teaching, including teachers, students, educational administrators. The study provides detailed insights into the feedback practices of native English speaking teachers and non-native English speaking teachers, identifying strengths and areas for improvement. These insights can inform targeted professional development programs that help teachers refine their feedback techniques. By highlighting the different approaches and expertise of native English speaking teachers and non-native English speaking teachers, the study encourages collaboration between these two groups.
Teachers can learn from each other's strengths. In terms of theoretical significane, the study contributes to a deeper understanding of the perceptions and practices of native and non-native English-speaking teachers regarding written feedback. It adds to the existing body of knowledge by highlighting how cultural and linguistic backgrounds influence feedback strategies and effectiveness in bilingual educational settings and guide future. Structure of the thesis The present study consists of five chapters: Chapter 1: Introduction; Chapter 2: Literature review; Chapter 3: Research methodology; Chapter 4: Findings and discussions; Chapter 5: Conclusion.