Luận văn tiếng Anh: An investigation into the use of presentation-reflection assignments in the American studies syllibus 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 Thesis Linguistics: 60 14 10
Nhà xuất bản: University of Languages and International Studies
Ngày: 2011
Chủ đề: Tiếng Anh
Kỹ năng viết
Phương pháp giảng dạy
Bài tập
Miêu tả: 40 p. + CD-ROM
M.A. Thesis. English Language Teaching Methodology -- University of Languages and International Studies. Vietnam National University, Hanoi, 2011
American Studies is a relatively new discipline taught at ULIS-VNUH. As a result, the syllabus' many procedures and requirements are not well tested and established as most others. Yet its very flexibility offers an opportunity for change. This study aims at speeding up this process by trying to locate mismatches in the syllabus and the assignments going along with it. These probable mismatches were coined into two core terms: relevance – the degree to which the actual implementation of the assignments can Giúp realize the objectives set out for the course and efficacy – the level to which the actual implementation of the assignments adhere to the guidelines. The study was conducted with the use of three types of instruments: questionnaire, in-depth interview and second data (analysis) over 532 students and 6 teachers. The result was very positive for efficacy, indicating that students (were perceived to) followed the instructions quite closely, and it may influence their presentation score very positively. As for the relevance index, however, it could be observed that the assignments missed the objectives in some areas. Eventually, the research discussed several practical implications and suggestions for the improvement of these two types of assignment
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...................................................................31iv
3.1. Perceptions of teachers and students of the degree to which the presentationreflection 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
Ket-noi.com kho tai lieu mien phi Ket-noi.com kho tai lieu mien phiv
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE PAGE
Figure 1 - A continuum of content and language integration (Met, 2007)............................7
Figure 2 - A continuum of content and language integration (Met, 2007)............................8
Figure 3 - Relevance & Efficacy Concept ...........................................................................16
Figure 4 - General knowledge separate ...............................................................................32
Figure 5 - General knowledge combined.............................................................................33
Figure 6 - Specific knowledge separate...............................................................................34
Figure 7 - Specific knowledge combined ............................................................................35
Figure 8 - Presentation assignment influence on presentational skills ................................36
Figure 9 - Reflection assignment influence on presentational skills ...................................37
Figure 10 - Presentational skills combined..........................................................................38
Figure 11 - Presentation assignment's influence on English skills ......................................39
Figure 12 - Reflection assignment's influence on English skills .........................................39
Figure 13 - English skills combined ....................................................................................40
Figure 14 - Interdisciplinary research skills separate ..........................................................42
Figure 15 - Interdisciplinary research skills combined........................................................43
Figure 16 - Preparation for further study seperate...............................................................44
Figure 17 - Preparation for further study combined ............................................................44
Figure 18 - Presentation assignment efficacy......................................................................45
Figure 19 - Reflection assignment efficacy .........................................................................461
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 (ULISVNUH), 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 Giúp 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
Ket-noi.com kho tai lieu mien phi Ket-noi.com kho tai lieu mien phi2
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.3
Chapter 2: Literature Review and Practical Basis
5. Organization of the study
This research report is organized into three main parts:
Part A, Introduction, provides the rationale for, the aims, significance, scope and
organization of the study.
Part B, Development, comprises three chapters:
Chapter 1, Literature Review, presents related literature that provide the theoretical basis
for this study.
Chapter 2, Methodology, describes the research instruments, participants and the
procedures to conduct the research, including data collection and data analysis.
Chapter 3, Results and Discussion, presents and discusses findings to derive valid
implications.
Part C, Conclusion, summarizes the main findings, and draws out lessons and suggestions
for similar studies in the future.
Ket-noi.com kho tai lieu mien phi Ket-noi.com kho tai lieu mien phi4
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.
Content-based Instruction (CBI) is a curricula approach or framework, not a method.
While most foreign language curricula put focus on learning about language rather than
learning to use language for meaningful communication about relevant content, the CBI
approach seeks to reach a balance between language and content instruction.
Richard (2005), described Content-based Instruction (CBI) as a "process-based CLT
approach", an extension of the Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) movement
which takes different routes to reach the goal of CLT, i.e. developing learners'
communicative competence. This approach is the "integration of a particular content [e.g.
math, science, social studies] with second language aims. […] It refers to the concurrent
teaching of academic subject matter and second language skills" (Brinton et al, 1989).
Similarly, Crandall and Tucker (1990) define it as ". . . an approach to language instruction
that integrates the presentation of topics or tasks from subject matter classes (e.g. math,
S5
Chapter 2: Literature Review and Practical Basis
social studies) within the context of teaching a second or foreign language". Curtain and
Pesola (1994), however, use the term in a more restricted way, limiting it to only those ". . .
curriculum concepts being taught through the foreign language . . . appropriate to the grade
level of the students . . . ".
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
With the concept of "Content-based Instruction" defined, it is necessary to turn to the
concept of "Content". On the definition of content, different authors have different views
about what content should be. In Crandall and Tucker (1990), content is seen as "academic
subject matter" while in Genesee (1994), content ". . . need not be academic; it can include
any topic, theme or non-language issue of interest or importance to the learners". Chaput
(1993) defines content as ". . . any topic of intellectual substance which contributes to the
students' understanding of language in general, and the target language in particular". 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.
Overall, the various definitions of content do not conflict each other, in fact, they represent
the diverse characteristics of programs that integrate content and language (different
models of CBI), which will be presented in the later section.
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
Ket-noi.com kho tai lieu mien phi Ket-noi.com kho tai lieu mien phi6
Chapter 2: Literature Review and Practical Basis
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).
A synthesised, though still accurate revision of the benefits perceived in view of the
different areas is included in Grabe and Stoller (1997); the conclusions derived from these
findings lead these authors to suggest seven rationales for CBI that can be summarised in
the following points:
i. In content-based classrooms, students are exposed to a considerable amount of
language while learning content. This incidental language should be
comprehensible, linked to their immediate prior learning and relevant to their
needs. [. . .] In content-based classrooms, teachers and students explore interesting
content while students are engaged in appropriate language-dependent activities [. .
.]. The resultant language learning activities, therefore, are not artificial or
meaningless exercises.
ii. CBI supports contextualised learning; students are taught useful language that is
embedded within relevant discourse contexts rather than as isolated language
fragments. [. . .] Thus, CBI allows for explicit language instruction, integrated with
content instruction, in a relevant and purposeful context.
iii. [. . .] The use of coherently developed content sources allows students to call on
their own prior knowledge to learn additional language and content material.
iv. [. . .] In content-based classroom, students are exposed to complex information and
are involved in demanding activities which can lead to intrinsic motivation.7
Chapter 2: Literature Review and Practical Basis
v. CBI [. . .] lends itself well to strategy instruction and practice, as theme units
naturally require and recycle important strategies across varying content and
learning tasks.
vi. CBI allows greater flexibility and adaptability to be built into the curriculum and
activity sequences.
vii. CBI lends itself to student-centered classroom activities.
Classification of CBI and current teaching context
With the definition of CBI examined, this section deals with the classification of CBI and
locates where the teaching approach guiding the American Studies course stand among
those types. In accordance with the primary aim of the course, which is to provide students
with fundamental knowledge about the American country and civilization (Country Studies
Division, 2007), Content-Based Instruction was employed as the main teaching approach
throughout the course – and the question here is which model? Overall, there has been little
consistency in the CBI models classified and applied. Through a careful review of related
literature, this paper adopts the classification used by Met (1999). Met (2007) has specified
two contrary facets of the approach as follows:
CONTENT-BASED LANGUAGE TEACHING:
A CONTINUUM OF CONTENT AND LANGUAGE
INTEGRATION
Content-Driven
Content is taught in L2.
Content learning is priority.
Language learning is secondary.
Content objectives determined by course goals or
curriculum.
Teachers must select language objectives.
Students evaluated on content mastery.
Language-Driven
Content is used to learn L2.
Language learning is priority.
Content learning is incidental.
Language objectives determined by L2 course goals or
curriculum.
Students evaluated on content to be integrated.
Students evaluated on language skills/proficiency.
Figure 1 - A continuum of content and language integration (Met, 2007)
Ket-noi.com kho tai lieu mien phi Ket-noi.com kho tai lieu mien phi8
Chapter 2: Literature Review and Practical Basis
Nevertheless, in collating this bi-continuum with the actual method's features, it is
observed that the way the course is carried out falls to the grey area between the two ends.
This observation is proven most explicitly in the way students are expected to be evaluated
– with around 10% of the total assignment grade reserved for the command of English and
presentation skills (Dang, 2008). Therefore, a more detailed and thus more meaningful
continuum of the Content-Based Instruction method is needed to describe precisely how
the courses have been and are being taught in terms of content and language integration.
These models, according to Met, are diverse in characteristics and are put into a continuum
which illustrates the relative role of content and language with the content-driven program
at one end and the language-driven program at the other. These CBI models differ in the
degree to which outcomes determine priorities in designing instruction from the general to
the specific: units, lessons, tasks and activities. The continuum is summarised in the figure
below.
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
Figure 2 - A continuum of content and language integration (Met, 2007)
The different models are briefly elaborated as follows.
i. Total immersion
The Macmillan English Dictionary (ELT Terms) defines immersion as an approach that
. . . tries to reproduce the experience of being in the L2 country in class using these
techniques:
No textbooks or notebook, only authentic materials.9
Chapter 2: Literature Review and Practical Basis
No grading of the language.
Using several teachers who may have conversations between themselves, or
ungraded conversations with the students.
Only using L2.
No grammar or vocabulary explanations.
Total immersion programs, taking precedence from the 1960s French immersion
experiment in Canada, use the target language as a teaching tool, surrounding, or totally
"immersing" students in the second language.
ii. Partial immersion
This model reflects the total immersion model to a lesser extent, hence its name.
iii. Sheltered courses:
Case, Ndura and Righettini (2005) cited Echevarria, Vogt, and Short (2004) to explain the
ideas of sheltered courses as follows (emphasis added):
. . . the emphasis on teaching language first and then content is what separates content-based
instruction from the closely related sheltered-content instruction. That is, within a content-based
model, the teacher may create exercises or assignments that focus on teaching a particular feature of
language, whereas in a sheltered model, the emphasis is on teaching content by adapting the
language levels of grade-level texts first. Assignments meant to teach only language and absent
from the larger focus on content would not be included in a sheltered model.
iv. Adjunct model
According to Davies (2003), in his specific teaching contexts:
Adjunct classes are usually taught by ESL teachers. The aim of these classes is to prepare
students for "mainstream" classes where they will join English L1 learners. Adjunct classes
may resemble EAP or ESP classes where emphasis is placed on acquiring specific target
vocabulary; they may also feature study skills sessions to familiarise the students with
listening, note taking and skimming and scanning texts. Some adjunct classes are taught
during the summer months before regular college classes begin, while others run
concurrently with regular lessons.
v. Theme-based courses
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
The other concern in objective three was offering the students opportunities to improve
their interdisciplinary research skills. As discussed in the literature review, this research
adopted the model from the Delphi survey, which categorized interdisciplinary research
skills into three major components encompassing 17 core competencies. The model was
then adjusted to better suit the context of undergraduate programs at ULIS-VNUH, with
only three typical competencies reserved, which were measured through the degree of their
application. They are:
The degree to which students used concepts and methods from other fields of study
in the process of doing the presentation-reflection assignment.
The degree to which students read journals or other documents from other fields of
study in the process of doing the presentation-reflection assignment.
The degree to which students consulted with teachers or experts from other fields
of study in the process of doing the presentation-reflection assignment.
From the figure below, 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.
Ket-noi.com kho tai lieu mien phi Ket-noi.com kho tai lieu mien phi42
Chapter 4: Results and Discussion
Figure 14 - Interdisciplinary research skills separate
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.
0,00%
10,00%
20,00%
30,00%
40,00%
50,00%
60,00%
70,00%
80,00%
90,00%
100,00%
0 1 2 3 4
Interdisciplinary Research Skills Separate
Concepts and Methods
Documents
Consultation
C&M-Trend
D-Trend
C-Trend43
Chapter 4: Results and Discussion
Figure 15 - Interdisciplinary research skills combined
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
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.
3,58%
10,41%
30,81%
44,37%
10,83%
0,00%
10,00%
20,00%
30,00%
40,00%
50,00%
60,00%
70,00%
80,00%
90,00%
100,00%
0 1 2 3 4
Interdisciplinary Research Skills Combined
Trend
Ket-noi.com kho tai lieu mien phi Ket-noi.com kho tai lieu mien phi44
Chapter 4: Results and Discussion
Figure 16 - Preparation for further study seperate
Figure 17 - Preparation for further study combined
0,00%
10,00%
20,00%
30,00%
40,00%
50,00%
60,00%
70,00%
80,00%
90,00%
100,00%
0 1 2 3 4
Preparation for Further Study Separate
Knowledge
English Skills
Research Skills
Presentational Skills
K-Trend
E-Trend
R-Trend
P-Trend
1,50%
7,02%
28,08%
47,95%
15,46%
0,00%
10,00%
20,00%
30,00%
40,00%
50,00%
60,00%
70,00%
80,00%
90,00%
100,00%
0 1 2 3 4
Preparation for Further Study Combined
Trend45
Chapter 4: Results and Discussion
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
Figure 18 - Presentation assignment efficacy
4,73% 6,59%
19,20%
42,63%
26,85%
0,00%
10,00%
20,00%
30,00%
40,00%
50,00%
60,00%
70,00%
80,00%
90,00%
100,00%
0 1 2 3 4
Presentation Assignment Efficacy
Trend
Ket-noi.com kho tai lieu mien phi Ket-noi.com kho tai lieu mien phi46
Chapter 4: Results and Discussion
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.
Figure 19 - Reflection assignment efficacy
2,42%
6,62%
31,86%
44,90%
14,20%
0,00%
10,00%
20,00%
30,00%
40,00%
50,00%
60,00%
70,00%
80,00%
90,00%
100,00%
0 1 2 3 4
Reflection Assignment Efficacy
Trend47
Chapter 4: Results and Discussion
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
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.
Do Drive thay đổi chính sách, nên một số link cũ yêu cầu duyệt download. các bạn chỉ cần làm theo hướng dẫn.
Password giải nén nếu cần: ket-noi.com | Bấm trực tiếp vào Link để tải:
Nhà xuất bản: University of Languages and International Studies
Ngày: 2011
Chủ đề: Tiếng Anh
Kỹ năng viết
Phương pháp giảng dạy
Bài tập
Miêu tả: 40 p. + CD-ROM
M.A. Thesis. English Language Teaching Methodology -- University of Languages and International Studies. Vietnam National University, Hanoi, 2011
American Studies is a relatively new discipline taught at ULIS-VNUH. As a result, the syllabus' many procedures and requirements are not well tested and established as most others. Yet its very flexibility offers an opportunity for change. This study aims at speeding up this process by trying to locate mismatches in the syllabus and the assignments going along with it. These probable mismatches were coined into two core terms: relevance – the degree to which the actual implementation of the assignments can Giúp realize the objectives set out for the course and efficacy – the level to which the actual implementation of the assignments adhere to the guidelines. The study was conducted with the use of three types of instruments: questionnaire, in-depth interview and second data (analysis) over 532 students and 6 teachers. The result was very positive for efficacy, indicating that students (were perceived to) followed the instructions quite closely, and it may influence their presentation score very positively. As for the relevance index, however, it could be observed that the assignments missed the objectives in some areas. Eventually, the research discussed several practical implications and suggestions for the improvement of these two types of assignment
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...................................................................31iv
3.1. Perceptions of teachers and students of the degree to which the presentationreflection 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
Ket-noi.com kho tai lieu mien phi Ket-noi.com kho tai lieu mien phiv
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE PAGE
Figure 1 - A continuum of content and language integration (Met, 2007)............................7
Figure 2 - A continuum of content and language integration (Met, 2007)............................8
Figure 3 - Relevance & Efficacy Concept ...........................................................................16
Figure 4 - General knowledge separate ...............................................................................32
Figure 5 - General knowledge combined.............................................................................33
Figure 6 - Specific knowledge separate...............................................................................34
Figure 7 - Specific knowledge combined ............................................................................35
Figure 8 - Presentation assignment influence on presentational skills ................................36
Figure 9 - Reflection assignment influence on presentational skills ...................................37
Figure 10 - Presentational skills combined..........................................................................38
Figure 11 - Presentation assignment's influence on English skills ......................................39
Figure 12 - Reflection assignment's influence on English skills .........................................39
Figure 13 - English skills combined ....................................................................................40
Figure 14 - Interdisciplinary research skills separate ..........................................................42
Figure 15 - Interdisciplinary research skills combined........................................................43
Figure 16 - Preparation for further study seperate...............................................................44
Figure 17 - Preparation for further study combined ............................................................44
Figure 18 - Presentation assignment efficacy......................................................................45
Figure 19 - Reflection assignment efficacy .........................................................................461
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 (ULISVNUH), 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 Giúp 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
Ket-noi.com kho tai lieu mien phi Ket-noi.com kho tai lieu mien phi2
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.3
Chapter 2: Literature Review and Practical Basis
5. Organization of the study
This research report is organized into three main parts:
Part A, Introduction, provides the rationale for, the aims, significance, scope and
organization of the study.
Part B, Development, comprises three chapters:
Chapter 1, Literature Review, presents related literature that provide the theoretical basis
for this study.
Chapter 2, Methodology, describes the research instruments, participants and the
procedures to conduct the research, including data collection and data analysis.
Chapter 3, Results and Discussion, presents and discusses findings to derive valid
implications.
Part C, Conclusion, summarizes the main findings, and draws out lessons and suggestions
for similar studies in the future.
Ket-noi.com kho tai lieu mien phi Ket-noi.com kho tai lieu mien phi4
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.
Content-based Instruction (CBI) is a curricula approach or framework, not a method.
While most foreign language curricula put focus on learning about language rather than
learning to use language for meaningful communication about relevant content, the CBI
approach seeks to reach a balance between language and content instruction.
Richard (2005), described Content-based Instruction (CBI) as a "process-based CLT
approach", an extension of the Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) movement
which takes different routes to reach the goal of CLT, i.e. developing learners'
communicative competence. This approach is the "integration of a particular content [e.g.
math, science, social studies] with second language aims. […] It refers to the concurrent
teaching of academic subject matter and second language skills" (Brinton et al, 1989).
Similarly, Crandall and Tucker (1990) define it as ". . . an approach to language instruction
that integrates the presentation of topics or tasks from subject matter classes (e.g. math,
S5
Chapter 2: Literature Review and Practical Basis
social studies) within the context of teaching a second or foreign language". Curtain and
Pesola (1994), however, use the term in a more restricted way, limiting it to only those ". . .
curriculum concepts being taught through the foreign language . . . appropriate to the grade
level of the students . . . ".
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
With the concept of "Content-based Instruction" defined, it is necessary to turn to the
concept of "Content". On the definition of content, different authors have different views
about what content should be. In Crandall and Tucker (1990), content is seen as "academic
subject matter" while in Genesee (1994), content ". . . need not be academic; it can include
any topic, theme or non-language issue of interest or importance to the learners". Chaput
(1993) defines content as ". . . any topic of intellectual substance which contributes to the
students' understanding of language in general, and the target language in particular". 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.
Overall, the various definitions of content do not conflict each other, in fact, they represent
the diverse characteristics of programs that integrate content and language (different
models of CBI), which will be presented in the later section.
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
Ket-noi.com kho tai lieu mien phi Ket-noi.com kho tai lieu mien phi6
Chapter 2: Literature Review and Practical Basis
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).
A synthesised, though still accurate revision of the benefits perceived in view of the
different areas is included in Grabe and Stoller (1997); the conclusions derived from these
findings lead these authors to suggest seven rationales for CBI that can be summarised in
the following points:
i. In content-based classrooms, students are exposed to a considerable amount of
language while learning content. This incidental language should be
comprehensible, linked to their immediate prior learning and relevant to their
needs. [. . .] In content-based classrooms, teachers and students explore interesting
content while students are engaged in appropriate language-dependent activities [. .
.]. The resultant language learning activities, therefore, are not artificial or
meaningless exercises.
ii. CBI supports contextualised learning; students are taught useful language that is
embedded within relevant discourse contexts rather than as isolated language
fragments. [. . .] Thus, CBI allows for explicit language instruction, integrated with
content instruction, in a relevant and purposeful context.
iii. [. . .] The use of coherently developed content sources allows students to call on
their own prior knowledge to learn additional language and content material.
iv. [. . .] In content-based classroom, students are exposed to complex information and
are involved in demanding activities which can lead to intrinsic motivation.7
Chapter 2: Literature Review and Practical Basis
v. CBI [. . .] lends itself well to strategy instruction and practice, as theme units
naturally require and recycle important strategies across varying content and
learning tasks.
vi. CBI allows greater flexibility and adaptability to be built into the curriculum and
activity sequences.
vii. CBI lends itself to student-centered classroom activities.
Classification of CBI and current teaching context
With the definition of CBI examined, this section deals with the classification of CBI and
locates where the teaching approach guiding the American Studies course stand among
those types. In accordance with the primary aim of the course, which is to provide students
with fundamental knowledge about the American country and civilization (Country Studies
Division, 2007), Content-Based Instruction was employed as the main teaching approach
throughout the course – and the question here is which model? Overall, there has been little
consistency in the CBI models classified and applied. Through a careful review of related
literature, this paper adopts the classification used by Met (1999). Met (2007) has specified
two contrary facets of the approach as follows:
CONTENT-BASED LANGUAGE TEACHING:
A CONTINUUM OF CONTENT AND LANGUAGE
INTEGRATION
Content-Driven
Content is taught in L2.
Content learning is priority.
Language learning is secondary.
Content objectives determined by course goals or
curriculum.
Teachers must select language objectives.
Students evaluated on content mastery.
Language-Driven
Content is used to learn L2.
Language learning is priority.
Content learning is incidental.
Language objectives determined by L2 course goals or
curriculum.
Students evaluated on content to be integrated.
Students evaluated on language skills/proficiency.
Figure 1 - A continuum of content and language integration (Met, 2007)
Ket-noi.com kho tai lieu mien phi Ket-noi.com kho tai lieu mien phi8
Chapter 2: Literature Review and Practical Basis
Nevertheless, in collating this bi-continuum with the actual method's features, it is
observed that the way the course is carried out falls to the grey area between the two ends.
This observation is proven most explicitly in the way students are expected to be evaluated
– with around 10% of the total assignment grade reserved for the command of English and
presentation skills (Dang, 2008). Therefore, a more detailed and thus more meaningful
continuum of the Content-Based Instruction method is needed to describe precisely how
the courses have been and are being taught in terms of content and language integration.
These models, according to Met, are diverse in characteristics and are put into a continuum
which illustrates the relative role of content and language with the content-driven program
at one end and the language-driven program at the other. These CBI models differ in the
degree to which outcomes determine priorities in designing instruction from the general to
the specific: units, lessons, tasks and activities. The continuum is summarised in the figure
below.
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
Figure 2 - A continuum of content and language integration (Met, 2007)
The different models are briefly elaborated as follows.
i. Total immersion
The Macmillan English Dictionary (ELT Terms) defines immersion as an approach that
. . . tries to reproduce the experience of being in the L2 country in class using these
techniques:
No textbooks or notebook, only authentic materials.9
Chapter 2: Literature Review and Practical Basis
No grading of the language.
Using several teachers who may have conversations between themselves, or
ungraded conversations with the students.
Only using L2.
No grammar or vocabulary explanations.
Total immersion programs, taking precedence from the 1960s French immersion
experiment in Canada, use the target language as a teaching tool, surrounding, or totally
"immersing" students in the second language.
ii. Partial immersion
This model reflects the total immersion model to a lesser extent, hence its name.
iii. Sheltered courses:
Case, Ndura and Righettini (2005) cited Echevarria, Vogt, and Short (2004) to explain the
ideas of sheltered courses as follows (emphasis added):
. . . the emphasis on teaching language first and then content is what separates content-based
instruction from the closely related sheltered-content instruction. That is, within a content-based
model, the teacher may create exercises or assignments that focus on teaching a particular feature of
language, whereas in a sheltered model, the emphasis is on teaching content by adapting the
language levels of grade-level texts first. Assignments meant to teach only language and absent
from the larger focus on content would not be included in a sheltered model.
iv. Adjunct model
According to Davies (2003), in his specific teaching contexts:
Adjunct classes are usually taught by ESL teachers. The aim of these classes is to prepare
students for "mainstream" classes where they will join English L1 learners. Adjunct classes
may resemble EAP or ESP classes where emphasis is placed on acquiring specific target
vocabulary; they may also feature study skills sessions to familiarise the students with
listening, note taking and skimming and scanning texts. Some adjunct classes are taught
during the summer months before regular college classes begin, while others run
concurrently with regular lessons.
v. Theme-based courses
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
The other concern in objective three was offering the students opportunities to improve
their interdisciplinary research skills. As discussed in the literature review, this research
adopted the model from the Delphi survey, which categorized interdisciplinary research
skills into three major components encompassing 17 core competencies. The model was
then adjusted to better suit the context of undergraduate programs at ULIS-VNUH, with
only three typical competencies reserved, which were measured through the degree of their
application. They are:
The degree to which students used concepts and methods from other fields of study
in the process of doing the presentation-reflection assignment.
The degree to which students read journals or other documents from other fields of
study in the process of doing the presentation-reflection assignment.
The degree to which students consulted with teachers or experts from other fields
of study in the process of doing the presentation-reflection assignment.
From the figure below, 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.
Ket-noi.com kho tai lieu mien phi Ket-noi.com kho tai lieu mien phi42
Chapter 4: Results and Discussion
Figure 14 - Interdisciplinary research skills separate
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.
0,00%
10,00%
20,00%
30,00%
40,00%
50,00%
60,00%
70,00%
80,00%
90,00%
100,00%
0 1 2 3 4
Interdisciplinary Research Skills Separate
Concepts and Methods
Documents
Consultation
C&M-Trend
D-Trend
C-Trend43
Chapter 4: Results and Discussion
Figure 15 - Interdisciplinary research skills combined
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
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.
3,58%
10,41%
30,81%
44,37%
10,83%
0,00%
10,00%
20,00%
30,00%
40,00%
50,00%
60,00%
70,00%
80,00%
90,00%
100,00%
0 1 2 3 4
Interdisciplinary Research Skills Combined
Trend
Ket-noi.com kho tai lieu mien phi Ket-noi.com kho tai lieu mien phi44
Chapter 4: Results and Discussion
Figure 16 - Preparation for further study seperate
Figure 17 - Preparation for further study combined
0,00%
10,00%
20,00%
30,00%
40,00%
50,00%
60,00%
70,00%
80,00%
90,00%
100,00%
0 1 2 3 4
Preparation for Further Study Separate
Knowledge
English Skills
Research Skills
Presentational Skills
K-Trend
E-Trend
R-Trend
P-Trend
1,50%
7,02%
28,08%
47,95%
15,46%
0,00%
10,00%
20,00%
30,00%
40,00%
50,00%
60,00%
70,00%
80,00%
90,00%
100,00%
0 1 2 3 4
Preparation for Further Study Combined
Trend45
Chapter 4: Results and Discussion
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
Figure 18 - Presentation assignment efficacy
4,73% 6,59%
19,20%
42,63%
26,85%
0,00%
10,00%
20,00%
30,00%
40,00%
50,00%
60,00%
70,00%
80,00%
90,00%
100,00%
0 1 2 3 4
Presentation Assignment Efficacy
Trend
Ket-noi.com kho tai lieu mien phi Ket-noi.com kho tai lieu mien phi46
Chapter 4: Results and Discussion
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.
Figure 19 - Reflection assignment efficacy
2,42%
6,62%
31,86%
44,90%
14,20%
0,00%
10,00%
20,00%
30,00%
40,00%
50,00%
60,00%
70,00%
80,00%
90,00%
100,00%
0 1 2 3 4
Reflection Assignment Efficacy
Trend47
Chapter 4: Results and Discussion
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
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.
Do Drive thay đổi chính sách, nên một số link cũ yêu cầu duyệt download. các bạn chỉ cần làm theo hướng dẫn.
Password giải nén nếu cần: ket-noi.com | Bấm trực tiếp vào Link để tải:
You must be registered for see links
Last edited by a moderator: