4.2.3.2. Designing supplementary materials 91
4.2.3.3. Adapting supplementary materials 95
4.2.4. The convergences and divergences between teachers’ beliefs and practice 98
4.2.4.1. Convergences 99
4.2.4.2. Divergences 100
4.3. Data triangulation 101
4.3.1. Teachers’ beliefs and practice about the concept of supplementary materials 102
4.3.2. Teachers’ beliefs and practice about the reasons to develop supplementary materials 104
4.3.3. Teachers’ beliefs and practice about the criteria for developing supplementary materials 106
CHAPTER V: DISCUSSION 110
5.1. Teachers’ beliefs about IELTS supplementary materials 110
5.1.1. Beliefs about the concept of supplementary materials 110
5.1.2. Beliefs about the reason to develop supplementary materials 111
5.1.3. Beliefs about the criteria for developing supplementary materials 113
5.2. Factors affecting teachers’ beliefs about IELTS supplementary materials ... 115 5.2.1. Contextual factors 115
5.2.2. Teachers’ experiences 116
5.2.3. Other factors 117
5.3. The relationship between teachers’ beliefs and practice 119
5.3.1. Convergences 119
5.3.2. Divergences 119
CHAPTER VI: CONCLUSION 121
6.1. Summary of the major findings 121
6.1.1. Teachers’ beliefs about developing supplementary materials for IELTS courses 121
6.1.2. The factors affecting teachers’ beliefs about developing supplementary materials for IELTS courses 122
6.1.3. Teachers’ actual classroom practices and their beliefs about developing supplementary materials for IELTS courses 124
6.2. Implications 125
6.3. Limitations of the study 130
6.4. Suggestions for further studies 130
References 132
APPENDICES 141
Appendix A: Teachers’ beliefs questionnaire 141
Appendix B: Personal Interview Questions 144
Appendix C: Interview protocol 147
Appendix D: Themes, subthemes, codes, and counts of the qualitative data 151
Appendix E: Coding System of the Interviews (presented with examples) 155
Appendix F: Examples of Interview Transcript 160
LIST OF ABBREVIATION
The International English Language Test | |
ELT | English Language Teaching |
UNCLES | University of Cambridge Local Examinations Syndicate |
CLT | Communicative language teaching |
SLA | Second language acquisition |
ESP | English for Specific Purposes |
CEFR | The Common European Framework of Reference for Languages |
Có thể bạn quan tâm!
-
An investigation into teacher's beliefs and practice about developing supplementary materials for ielts learners at language centers in Ho Chi Minh city - 1 -
Teachers’ Beliefs In English Language Teaching -
An investigation into teacher's beliefs and practice about developing supplementary materials for ielts learners at language centers in Ho Chi Minh city - 4 -
An investigation into teacher's beliefs and practice about developing supplementary materials for ielts learners at language centers in Ho Chi Minh city - 5
Xem toàn bộ 192 trang tài liệu này.
LIST OF TABLES
Table 3. 1 Demographic Characteristics of Participants in the Interview 48
Table 3. 2 Examples of data condensation 57
Table 3. 3 The categorization of themes in relation to the research questions 59
Table 4. 1 Teachers’ beliefs about the concept of supplementary materials 63
Table 4. 2 Teachers’ beliefs about the reasons to develop supplementary materials ... 64
Table 4. 3 Teachers’ beliefs about the criteria for developing supplementary materials
....................................................................................................................................... 65
Table 4. 4 The difference between the mean scores of male and female teachers regarding Concepts, Reasons, and Criteria of supplementary materials development . 66 Table 4. 5 The ANOVA results for teachers’ beliefs of Concepts, Reasons, and Criteria of supplementary materials development according to their level of education 67
Table 4. 6 The ANOVA results for teachers’ beliefs of Reasons and Criteria of supplementary materials development according to their teaching experience 70
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2. 1 Burns’ Model of intercontextuality of teacher thinking and beliefs 9
Figure 2. 2 Beliefs act as filters, frames, or guides 10
Figure 2. 3 Sheldon’s Textbook evaluation sheet 35
Figure 3. 1 Gender of participants 45
Figure 3. 2 Education level of participants 46
Figure 3. 3 Teaching experience of participants 47
Figure 3. 4 Coding tree representing the codes, subthemes, and themes 58
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION
1.1. Background to the study
In the language teaching context, most English courses use a combination of “published books and in-house produced material” (Jordan, 1997; Harmer, 2001). In Vietnam, while at public schools there is a must to use the official coursebooks offered by the Education Ministry, English centers appear to leave more room for directors, managers, or even teachers to select and develop their own teaching materials (McDonough, Shaw, & Masuhara, 2013, p. 53). Evidently, most language centers possess unique course books which are usually designed by famous publishers, namely Pearson, Cambridge University Press, or Oxford University Press. Textbooks, thus, become more and more powerful and are treated as selling points of a curriculum. Edward (2010), cited as a chapter introduction in McGrath (2013) (p. 15), remarks on the reality in which such a lot of institutions emphasize the role of “materials and equipment” over teachers and students. Despite their benefits and convenience, it is teachers who teach rather than materials themselves (ibid.). There has been doubt about the actual value of textbooks because they ostensibly include cultural bias (McGrath, 2013; Bao, 2016) or consume much time to be adopted. Some scholars even call for abandoning course books and replacing them with teachers’ resources. Such an approach may serve the needs of students better and thus be more flexible and learner-centered. The scenario can be straightforward for experienced teachers; however, novice teachers often have trouble dealing with it. Furthermore, additional administration resources will be needed to ensure teachers do not use the same materials in different classes. In order to compromise this dilemma, Thornbury and Meddings (2002), cited in McGrath (2013), propose a “Dogme” approach that “activities […] provide optimal exposure, attention, output, and feedback, thereby maximizing the chance of language emergence.” Other scholars such as Graves (2000), Nation and Macalister (2010), and McGrath (2013)
supported the notion of adapting coursebooks to mix and match with learners’ needs and learning outcomes. However, few studies have touched on the field of supplementary materials. A commercial textbook usually accompanies at least a workbook, other visual, audial, or online resources with the advent of technology. Those are typically considered supplementary materials. If making changes to a coursebook is often based on teachers’ beliefs (Harmer, 2001, p. 8-9), they may also influence the selection, adaptation, and design of supplementary materials.
1.2. Problem statement
Teachers’ beliefs have captured the interests of pedagogical researchers because they give valuable clues about teachers’ decisions and classroom practices (Richards & Rodgers, 2001; Nation & Macalister, 2010). There has been a large amount of literature on what teachers believe affects their instructional choices, feedbacks, learning, and learners (Borg & Al-Busaidi, 2011; Nobuhiro, 2014; Bai & Yuan, 2018). However, the gap between teachers’ beliefs and materials development is still a new issue in the pedagogical realm. It may be because language-learning materials have been neglected, and up until the mid-1990s, materials development was regarded as an independent field of research (Tomlinson, 2012).
Supported by the idea of using course books as a springboard for language instructions, developing supplementary material is of paramount significance. As for the scale of the classrooms, many teachers have familiarized themselves with the preparation of supplementary documents in order to bridge the gap between the preplanned textbooks and the actual needs and the ability of learners. The process, thus, centers more on learners and promotes teacher autonomy. McGrath (2013) notes that in the process of planning a lesson, “many teachers are subconsciously on the look-out for materials” (p.
83) because they may learn that particular exercises or activities in the textbooks are monotonous. It seems that the decision made by teachers in these situations is somewhat
based on instinct and experience as opposed to rational thoughts. If it is the case, the supplementary materials play only a role as fillers and have no contribution to learning experiences. However, according to the document published by the Vietnamese Ministry of Education and Training (Ministry of Education & Training, 2018), a teacher in a language center must meet two requirements:
Must have at least a degree of associate in the field of language teaching
Must have at least a degree of associate in the field of language and a teaching certificate
Another document by the Ministry about competencies and standards for language teachers (Ministry of Education & Training, 2014) also stressed that teachers must have adequate knowledge of “material design.” The subject is also incorporated in other private teacher training programs. Therefore, it is worth believing that the decision of teachers on supplementary materials is not entirely free from learning, teaching theories, and principles. As a result, there is a need to have a thorough understanding of how teachers articulate their beliefs in selecting, adapting, and designing supplementary materials, what salient factors contribute to their beliefs, and whether their beliefs align with practice.
1.3. Aims and Scope
The aim of the study is to (1) describe the beliefs of teachers in some English centers in Ho Chi Minh City regarding the selection of supplementary materials and how supplementary materials are adapted and designed; (2) identify the most influential sources of teachers’ beliefs; and (3) examine the convergence and divergence between teachers’ beliefs and their practice.
1.4. Significance of the study
The result from this study may contribute to teachers’ professional development and, at the same time, provide ideas for teacher training in terms of evaluating, adapting, and designing supplementary materials in language centers. In addition, it is also expected to contribute to the theory of materials development. As for a more local scale, the research’s outcomes will help IELTS course managers at English centers in Ho Chi Minh City to have a deeper understanding of teachers’ use of supplementary materials and form that they can have proper adjustments to the syllabus to promote teaching and learning experience.