How group work is used in speaking lesson of the 1st-Year major students of English at Vietnam University of Commerce

s at Hanoi National University and other researchers. A number of studies have found that group work helps develop students’ speaking ability and increase the effectiveness of a speaking lesson. Huong (2006) found that when applying group work activities in speaking lesson, majority of the students are interested in discussion. Through group work, students have opportunities to help each other as well as exchange experience to find a good way to improve on their own communication problems. Bac (2005) reports that the use of group work had good effect on students’ participation, for instance, student-initiated interactions increased and contributions by students who were shy increased. Donough (2004) also reports clear positive effects that small group activities had on improvement of production of the target forms. Long, Adams, McLean, and Castanos (1976; cited in Long and Porter, 1985) found out that students not only talked more, but also used a wider range of speech acts in the small group work context. The studies mentioned above have firmly asserted the important roles of group work activities in improving learners’ speaking skill. Although they explored different aspects of group work, all suggested that the use of group work in language teaching and learning brought about a great deal of benefits. Firstly, group work helped to increase students’ participation in communicative activities in large classes, (Bac, 2005). Secondly, group work maximized the opportunities for students to communicate and exchange the information with each other, (Huong, 2006). Thirdly, according to Duong (2006), group work helped students to realize that they could work independently of the teachers and they could learn from other students and helped each other. In addition, group work created a good atmosphere in the speaking class and it also helped to build rapport among class members. Fourthly, learner-learner interaction through group work activities was useful for practicing oral communication skills, (McDonough, 2004). The findings of these studies contribute significantly to the literature because they suggested the conditions in which group work can be most beneficial to learners. However, most of these studies have not made clear what process teachers and learners went through when implementing group work. Understanding of the group work organizing processes would enable teachers to better facilitate learners in group work activities. 2.4.2. A process approach There have now been a few researches on the process of implementing group work in speaking lessons (Duong, 2006; Huong, 2006; Rob Watkins, 2005). Duong (2005) investigated the current situations of teaching and learning English through pair and group work of the first-year students at Hanoi Open University – Faculty of Tourism. She found out frequent use of group work by teachers. In term of pair and group work management, the teachers here often use three main stages: setting up (organizing the pairs and group/ giving instructions), monitoring (listening to the pairs/ groups during the activity and guiding / giving support/ making notes) and winding down (bring the activity to a close and providing feedback). Huong (2006) also took process of implementing pairs and group work in English speaking lesson into account. The results did show that the success of communicative pairs and group work activities is often determined by the work the teacher does before the students begins the activities itself. Rob Watkins (2005) suggested that the effectiveness of group work depends on the types of motivation the teacher use in the class and the way they design group work activity. These studies have touched upon a domain which has been much concerned lately: the implementation process of group work. However, these studies have focused on the process of group work implementation in speaking lesson of non-major English students. A research into this area for English majors is necessary in order to find out a better description and provide a deep understanding of group work implementation process in different teaching and learning contexts. 2.4.3. Summary In summary, all of the studies mentioned above only considered the use of group work in language teaching of English non-major students. Additionally, the current body of research mainly focuses on the product of group work implementation. Therefore, the researcher wants to investigate the use of group work in teaching speaking of English major students with a focus on the process of group work organization in hope of finding information which is necessary for teachers and students to improve their practice. 2.4.4. Research questions The present study is inspired by CLT theory and past research paradigm on group work use in speaking lesson. It aims to examine the procedures in organizing group work and shed the light on the areas that previous researches has not considered adequately. It also aims to find out any strategies that teachers use to encourage students to increase the English language use when carrying out a speaking task in groups. And difficulties that both teachers and students face in implementing group work were also addressed in this study. Specifically, the study aims to answer the following research questions: What procedures do teachers follow in organizing group work during speaking lessons for the 1st year students at University of Commerce? What strategies do teachers use to stimulate and foster English language use by the 1st year students at University of Commerce in group work? What hinders teachers at Faculty of English of the University of Commerce in implementing group work? What hinders the 1st year students at University of Commerce in conducting group work? CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY This chapter gives a thorough description of how the research was carried out. The first part is the description of the research context. The second part looks at the sample and sampling procedure. The next part concerns the research methods used in the study. Research materials are addressed in the forth part. The data collection procedure is followed and the data analysis is in the last part. The details are going to be presented as follows. 3.1. Research context The study was conducted at Vietnam University of Commerce. The Faculty of English at University of Commerce was newly established two years ago with more than 450 English major students. In the past, it was called the English Division which trained only English non-major students for other faculties of the University. There are now two main streams at VUC: English non-major classes and English major classes. All students of the former are required to complete six semesters of English as part of their general education requirements. In the first three semesters, students finish the General English program, which accounts for 7 credits. The remaining semesters are reserved for the ESP program with a total number of 6 credits. They follow a curriculum which focuses mainly on developing reading and writing skills. The students of English major classes use a curriculum which lays great emphasis on four skills including listening, speaking, reading and writing and other subjects related to English theoretical linguistics. The total time allocation and the training curriculum for these two streams are obviously different. The current teaching material for speaking skill in 6 classes of the first-year English major students is “Speaking I” collected by the two teachers who deliver speaking lessons and it is covered within one semester with 3 credits. There are about 50 students in each class of which 75% comes from the countryside. However, their English speaking ability is quite good and homogeneous. 3.2. Sample and sampling procedure At the moment, the number of teachers who teach English speaking skill for the first-year students is 6. The number of the first-year English major students is estimated at more than 300. They come from various parts of the country. Their levels of English proficiency differ, ranging from pre-intermediate, intermediate to advanced level. Motivation in these classes is generally high, most of the students have a strong sense of deriving or clear purposes for studying English since it is their main and specialized subject which helps much in their future job. Nevertheless, the results of a recent study carried out by the present researcher show the English major students have a lot of difficulties in learning the four language skills, of which speaking seems to be the most difficult. Hence, it is very important that the staff at the Faculty of English of VUC find out effective ways and strategies to help these students overcome all of their difficulties in speaking classes. Five female teachers and one male teacher of the Linguistic Practice Division of the Faculty of English at VUC were selected to take part in the study. They were selected as a convenient sample. The teacher participants’ age ranged from 23 to 38 years old. Two teachers have more than five years experience in teaching and the other four have teaching experience ranging from 1 to 5 years. Three teachers are post-graduates, one is pursuing the post-graduate degree and two are graduates. All of the teachers have experience with group work activity when they were students. The group of subjects for the student questionnaire included 89 female and 11 male freshmen from 6 classes. The student participants’ ages ranged from 17 to 21 years old. Most of them had been learning English for at least 3 years. They all had some experience in group work. To increase the reliability and validity of the research study and a random sampling procedure was applied. All the six teachers were invited to take part in follow-up interviews to find out more in-depth information about the stages or procedures they used in implementing group work, the strategies they used to promote students’ use of English language in group work and the difficulties they coped with. Moreover, 10 freshmen (5 males and 5 females) were then chosen randomly from the questionnaire sample as interviewees to gain information about their expected procedure in organizing group work as well as their difficulties when working in group work. They aged from 18 to 20 years old and had been studying English for at least three years. 3.3 Research methods Nowadays, it is increasingly common for researchers to report the study on both quantitative and qualitative findings, especially, in studies on English as Second Language (ESL) (Adams, Fujii and Mackey, 2005). Thus, in consideration of the research’s purposes, this study was done in the light of both qualitative and quantitative research in which the data is collected by means of questionnaires, classroom observations and interviews of both teachers and students. Survey questionnaire is one of the most effective instruments for collecting data in social science. Advantages of using questionnaires that Gillham (2000) highlights are: less pressure on respondents, not under pressure of bias, and analysis of answers is straightforward. Classroom observation is a useful way to investigate external factors in L2 learning. Through classroom observations, researchers can capture a wholistic picture of the natural setting. And classroom observations are often used to supplement data obtained from interviews and questionnaires. (Adams, Fujii and Mackey, 2005). Like questionnaire, interviews can allow researchers to investigate cognitive processes such as awareness or constructs such as perceptions or attitudes that are not directly observable. The purpose of using questionnaire, classroom observations and interviews as research materials to collect data in this study is to triangulate the data and to overcome the limitations or drawbacks of other methods because one can well support another which helps strengthen the research findings. 3.4. Research materials 3.4.1. Questionnaires The study employs two questionnaires, one for teachers and the other for students. The questionnaire for teachers, adapted from Mueller (1997), written in English consisting of 10 questions was delivered to 6 teachers who were teaching English speaking skill for the 1st-year students at VUC. The questionnaire was used to explore information about their attitudes towards group work use and their procedures in organizing group work during speaking lesson as well as the difficulties they have experienced when applying group work in speaking class. The survey questionnaire administered to 100 students including 8 questions with an aim to get information about students’ opinion on and students’ desires in leaning speaking skill through group work and difficulties students have experienced when working in group. 3.4.2. Interviews Another research tool employed in this study was semi-structured interviewing schedules. The follow-up interviews with teachers and students were carried out (6 items for the teachers and 6 items for students) to get more information about the procedures used in organizing group work in speaking lesson and difficulties they cope with. These questions were open enough to allow the interviewees to comfortably express their thoughts, feelings, or opinions. Before officially carrying out the interviews, the interview questions were piloted with one teacher and three students to identify the potential problems. 3.5. Data collection procedure In the first phase, questionnaires were administered to 100 VUC English major freshmen at the end of the first semester of the academic year 2008. The participants were asked to complete the questionnaire at home and returned their responses three days later so that they would have as much time as they needed. After the data collected were analyzed, in the second phase, 10 random informants were contacted for semi-structured interviews with the researcher in locations where they felt at ease and at a time they suggested. The interviews were all tape-recorded to free the interviewer to participate naturally in the discussion and to allow the content to be reviewed carefully. In addition, in order to capture the complexities of the respondent’s individual perceptions and experience, the ten interviews were conducted in Vietnamese. At the beginning of each interview, the students were explained clearly, explicitly and unambiguously about the nature of the study. During the interview, the researcher modified the questions and procedures according to the subjects’ responses. The length of each interview was from 10 to 15 minutes. Beside survey questionnaires and interviews, classroom observations were also carried out to collect more information about the exact procedures occurring in the real classes as well as difficulties the teachers coped with in practice. Each observation consisted of two steps: before the lesson and during the lesson. In before-the-lessons step, the researcher met the teacher to know her/ his aims in teaching the lesson, to read his/ her lesson plan. In the during-the-lesson step, the researcher observed and took note the students’ activities and participation when working in group and the teachers’ steps of group work implementation during speaking lesson. 3.6. Data analysis The data of the study was analysed both quantitatively and qualitatively. As for quantitative analysis, we used descriptive statistics to quantify the data in form of charts and figures. The qualitative data were reviewed carefully and repeatedly to identify patterns and information that helps to explain the quantitative findings. And at last, a comparison between the teachers’ present procedures used in organizing group work in the speaking lesson and the students’ desires when working in group was addressed. In short, the chapter has described in details the research context, sample and sampling procedure, the research methods, the research materials and data collection procedures used in this study. Major findings will be presented and discussed in chapter four. CHAPTER 4: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION This chapter is consisted of two sections of findings and discussion. It shows an attempt to answer the four research questions posed at the beginning of the study. 4.1. Group work organization procedure 4.1.1. The organization procedure of group work that teachers often used in speaking lesson Figure 1: Steps teachers followed in organizing group work The data in Figure 1 shows clearly that, 100 % of the teachers chose the same 6 steps: select the task carefully, state the objectives of the activity, give clear instructions, organize groups of students, go around monitoring students; performance and giving support and provide feedback in organizing group work in their speaking lesson. 50% of the teachers praise and encourage students. And providing the language students need to do the task accounted for only 16.6%. It is found from the teacher questionnaire that all of the teachers often used the same six steps in organizing group work as these might be the basic steps needed for it. In the interview, almost all of the teachers thought that providing the language students need to do the task is not very necessary, students can manage themselves with the needed new words for the task first. The teachers only provide students with the language in case they do not know. It seems that half of the teachers forgot to give complements when students did well in group work to encourage them. Figure 2: Activities teachers often selected for group work As for the kinds of activities used for group work, the given data in figure 2 implies that the most frequently-used activities among teachers (100%) in the speaking lesson were interviewing, problem solving and decision-making and discussing. Games and Role-play and simulations were followed by 50% and 90% respectively. Sixty six percent was the choice for information gap activity. Both projects and opinion exchange received the same percentage of 33.3 %. And drama activity had the least choice of 16.6%. Concerning the kinds of activities, the teachers all agreed that interviewing, problem solving and decision-making and discussing activities are useful for group work. They saw the effectiveness of games and role-play and simulations in engaging students in group work but they were afraid of making noise. Therefore, some of them ignored these activities. Some teachers also paid attention to the use of information gap or projects or opinion exchange if they had much time. Drama seems to be the most difficult activities to apply for group work because it is time-consuming and needs a lot of efforts from students. Figure 3: Ways teachers often used to group students As can be seen in Figure 3, the ways of grouping students varied from options to options. All of the teachers (100%) tended to group students sitting next to or near each other. And most of the teachers (83.3%) often grouped students of the same sex while 16.6% grouped students of different sexes. Concerning students’ English proficiency, 83.3 % favored students of different or mixed proficiency while 16.6 % favored students of the same proficiency. Only 16.6% decided to group students of different interests. 33.3% of the teachers adopted other way of grouping students which were to let students group themselves. None of the teachers mentioned grouping students of the same or different personality type, of the same or different prior learning experience, of the same interests and of the same or different ages. As for grouping students, all of the teachers supposed that the way which was the most convenient for both teachers and students was to group students sitting next to or near each other. It is the fact that almost all of the English majors (95%) are female so that grouping students of the same sex was also popular choice. And some teachers tended to group students of different or mixed proficiency, which could give students with low English proficiency chance to learn from the better ones. Gender was also a factor that teachers considered as it helps to boost group dynamics. Two teachers chose other ways to group students for its convenience. The teachers might think that students’ ages, interests, prior learning experience and personality type were not of great difference. Therefore, they did not pay attention to them as the ways of grouping students. The data from observations and interviews indicates that the teachers used the same or different procedures in organizing group work with their own explanation. All of the teachers agreed that there were six necessary and important steps to organize group work activity. Some of them suggested that it was essential to provide students with the needed language to do the task because their students were at the first year, they did not have wide vocabulary. Others, meanwhile, explained that the teachers should let students manage themselves, they only provided the language if necessary. Some students were also certain that giving students compliments when they did well in group was very important as it encouraged students to do better next time. Regarding the above mentioned activities, all of the teachers (L, M, P, B, N and D) stated that they really wanted to apply games activity for group work, but they still often used other kinds of activities such as interviewing, discussing, and problem solving and decision-making because they were afraid of making noise. In fact, I want to create a funny and interesting atmosphere for students by using games activity when they learn speaking skill, I want my students to feel free to speak and speak English in a natural way but I rarely used it because I did not want to be complained about making noise in the lesson by other teachers. (L) My students have to learn English all day and night so I like to help them learn practice speaking English through some kinds of games which make them relaxed and funny. However, I can not. (B) All the interviewees (L, M, P, B, N and D) said that they grouped students sitting next to or near each other regularly for its convenience. It was easy to ask students sitting next to each other to turn back and form a group, and it was also not time-consuming. The second way that majority of the teachers used was grouping students of different English proficiency because students with low English proficiency could benefit a lot from students of higher one. All of the teachers also explained that it was really difficult and took time to understand each student’s interests, personality, prior learning experience and ages. Therefore, it is not easy for them to group students by these ways. Two teachers chose other ways to group students. They let students group themselves 4.1.2. Students’ expected group work organization procedure. Figure 4: Steps students expected teachers to follow in organizing group work The data in Figure 4 showed clearly that 100% of the students thought teachers should follow 6 steps in managing group work: select the task carefully, state the objectives of the activities, give clear instructions, organize groups of students, go around monitoring students performance and giving support, and provide feedback. Eighty percent of students find “providing the language students need to do the task” an essential thing that teachers should do. More than half of the students (53%) preferred the teacher to praise and encourage them when they were well-done in group work. The data from questionnaire, the information collected from observations and interviews implied that all of the students hoped their teachers to use 6 steps in organizing group work: select the task carefully, state the objectives of the activities, give clear instructions, organize groups of students, go around monitoring students’ performance and giving support, and provide feedback. Almost all of students thought providing new words or expressions related to the task should also be done by the teachers. From the researcher’s observations, the students sometimes had to interrupt their teachers to ask for new words. And 5 among 10 interviewees (H, C, N, A and G) said that about 80% of the students in their classes come from the countryside and remote areas and they had a lot of difficulties with new words and language use. The language needed for the task in speaking lesson is necessary for me. I am now the first-year student so that I can not collect enough new words for myself to work in group. I need the help of the teachers before starting any speaking tasks. (H) If my teachers do not provide new vocabulary or brainstorm the topic, I will not know where to start. I am mostly in silence to listen to my friends and I sometimes speak if possible. (A) More than half of the students preferred their teachers to give complements, smile and to be open to them when they speak or ask questions. This can make them more confident and motivate them to speak a lot in the group. C- one of the interviewees - for example, said: I often feel very nervous when I speak in the group or in front of all my classmates and my teacher for being afraid of making mistakes and of teacher’s negative comments. One day, the teacher praised and encouraged me to speak with a nice smile and give me complements, I feel very pleased. For the next speaking lesson, I feel really confident to speak out in the group. (C) Figure 5: Ways students wanted teachers to put them in group As can be seen in Figure 5, students’ different opinions were given on the types of partners they wanted to work with. As regards students’ proficiency, 90% of the students responded that they preferred to work with students of mixed proficiency while only 10% answered they would prefer students of the same proficiency. And ninety percent wanted to be grouped with students sitting next to or near them. Working with partners of the same interests was the choice of 50% of the sample students. Surprisingly and interestingly, 80% of the students favored partners of different sexes. And around 80% of the students wanted their teachers to let students group themselves. None of the students (0%) chose to be grouped according to the personality, prior learning experience and ages. The data from questionnaire as well as the observations and interviews also revealed that most of the students wanted to be grouped with student of different or mixed proficiency and students of different sexes. For the former, they explained that they wished to work with students of better proficiency, which helps them a lot in their studying. The latter meant that the gender was an important factor to the students, but it seems to be impossible as the fact that 95% of English major students are female (or girls). Many students might be lazy and not want to move for group organization so that many of them (90%) chose to be grouped with partners sitting next to or near them. Around 80 students wished their teachers to let them group themselves, five student interviewees explained that this way of grouping often worked effectively since they could choose to work with their friends, rather than working with others whom they find unpleasant. All of the students did not care about ages, personality types and prior learning experience with the explanation that these factors did not cause them big problems when they worked in group. Figure 6: Activities students wished teachers to select for group work Students’ preferences for kind of activities for group work were indicated in Figure 6. All of the students (100%) chose role-playing, games, information gap, discussing, interviewing and problem solving to be their favorite activities. Opinion exchange was the choice of 60% of the students. And Drama and projects received only 10% and 20% of the students respectively. A variety of reasons were given to explain students’ high appreciation for teachers’ selection of games, role-playing, interviewing, information gap, problem solving and discussing for group work. First and foremost, they explained that these activities often create exciting atmosphere, especially games and interviewing, and they are also not too difficult and time-consuming for them to prepare and make presentation. Students sometimes wanted to exchange opinion on some speaking topics, and almost of them did not like drama and project activities as they are actually difficult and need much efforts to do. 4.1.3. Comparison between teachers’ group work organization procedure and students’ expectation Figure 7: Comparison between teachers’ steps in group work organization and students’ expectation Comparing the data from the teachers’ answer and students’ answer about the steps in organizing group work in Figure 7, we can see that all of the teachers and students (100%) shared the same view on six steps in organizing group work in speaking lesson: select the task carefully, state the objectives of the activity, give clear instructions, organize groups of students, go around monitoring students; performance and giving support and provide feedback. These numbers implies that both teachers and students have good understanding of necessary stages in implementing group work activity. Around half of the teachers and students (50% and 53% respectively) agreed that it was important to praise and encourage students when students worked effectively in group. However, for the fourth step – provide the language students need to do the task – there were a big difference. Eighty percent (80%) was the choice of students while only 20% of the teachers selected this step. This meant that most of the students thought it was crucial to be given the language needed to do the task because new words and expressions could help them do the speaking task with ease during group work. Meanwhile, almost all of the teachers did not realize the vital role of this step when organizing group work. They suggested that they wanted to let their students manage the language themselves, they just provided in case the students had difficulties with it. Figure 8: Comparison between teachers’ chosen group work activities and students’ expectation The data in Figure 8 shows the comparison of teachers’ answer and students’ answer about the activities selected for group work. As can be seen, there were different opinions between the teachers and students on the activities adopted for group work. 100% of the teachers and students chose three same kinds of activities such as interviewing, problem solving and discussing. This revealed that all the teachers and students favored these activities and these activities brought about effectiveness for their speaking lesson through group work. Role-play and simulations was also the favorite activity of both students and teachers, 100% was the choice of the students and 90% was for the teachers. It is obvious that the students and teachers did not share the same view on games, information gap and opinion exchange activities. The number of students’ choices was nearly twofold in comparison with teachers’. The percentage for these activities was 100% and 50%, 100% and 66.6%, and 60% and 33.3% respectively. This implies that teachers need to work closely to students when organizing group work in speaking lesson so as to understand more about their desires in learning speaking through group work. From that, teachers can change their selection of activities for group work to make the speaking lesson much more efficient. Nevertheless, teachers are more favored with the last two activities-drama and projects-than students. 16.6% of the teachers adopted games activity and students’ choice was 10%. And projects activity was selected by 33.3% of the teachers and 20% of the students. These numbers indicated that drama and projects were not both students’ and teachers’ favorite activities. They used these activities occasionally when they had much time and high motivation in learning speaking. Figure 9: Comparison between teachers’ grouping strategies and students’ expectation Organizing students in groups is also an important factor to teaching speaking skill through group work. The comparison of teachers’ and students’ answer about ways of grouping students is illustrated in Figure 9. The data in Figure 9 shows clearly that both students and teachers nearly shared the same opinions on two ways of grouping. The first way “group students of different English proficiency levels” was the choice of about 85% of the teachers and students. The second one “group students sitting next to or near each other” accounted for 100% of the teachers and 90% of the students. However, almost all of the teachers and students had different view on the way of grouping students of the same or different sexes. For the former, 83.3% of the teacher often grouped students of the same sex while only 20% of the students chose it and for the latter, group students of different sexes was the choice of 80% of the students but only of 10% of the teachers. In addition, 78% of the students wanted their teachers to let them group themselves sometimes while 33.3% teachers did it. 50% of the students wanted to be grouped with the partners of the same interest but there is only 20% of the teachers chose to do it. These numbers indicate that the teacher needs to find opportunities to discuss with students about learning strategies in an open and friendly way. The teachers can explain the objective reason why they often grouped students of the same sex to students and ask students to suggest strategies of learning speaking skills through group work. This will be beneficial to teachers when organizing group work activity. 4.2. Teachers’ strategies to foster and stimulate students’ English language use in group work. Figure 10: teachers’ strategies to foster and stimulate students’ English language use in group work As can be seen from the chart above, 100% of the teachers wanted to raise students’ awareness of the importance of using English. Almost all of them (90%) thought it was necessary to increase the amount of English use required by teachers and to establish a warning signal to remind students when they unconsciously switch from English to Vietnamese (L2 to L1). Half of the teachers (50%) recommended that it might be better if we let students suggest strategies that they would be willing to follow to increase the use of oral English in group work. And two last strategies, asking students to self-report on the percentage of L2 they use in group work and establishing contracts with students in which they indicate how much English they are willing to use accounted for 10% of the teachers. The findings indicate that the most regular strategy to foster students’ English use was to highlight the importance of using English to students. If students themselves have a full awareness of using English, they will use it more often and more effectively because they have motivation and they will try their best to practice speaking English. In addition, almost all of the teachers also understand that their students can use more English in group work when they required their students to increase the amount of English use day by day or when they reminded students not to use their mother tongue in group work. Asking students to self report on the percentage of L2 they use in group work and establishing contracts with students in which they indicate how much English they are willing to use are the two strategies that almost all of the teachers found impossible to do. In the interview, all of the teachers said that in order to increase the amount of English language use among students in group work is a problem to teachers who teach speaking skill. They have tried to make all efforts to encourage students to use English when organizing group work. But the teachers found that, at first, students often strictly followed teachers’ rules about using English but after only some minutes they switched from using L2 to L1 consciously or unconsciously. Therefore, it is necessary for teachers to find out some effective strategies to help students be more aware the importance of speaking English and they will themselves use it in group work voluntarily without teachers’ reminds and supervise. Figure 11: Strategies students expected teachers to use to foster and stimulate their English use in group work As apparent from the above Figure, the students valued the strategies which should be used by teachers in the almost similar same way as the teachers. All of the students (100%) wanted their teachers to raise their awareness of the importance of English use and give them the warning signal to remind them to use English when they switched to use Vietnamese in group work unconsciously. When being interviewed, they explained that they have good awareness of using English because they are English major students and they always tried to speak English in discussion through group work as much as they can. But, they sometimes could not find the equivalent structures between English and Vietnamese so they switched to use Vietnamese instead of English. They liked their teachers to remind them regularly about using English in group work. More than 80% of the students thought that the teachers should require them to increase the use of English and let them decide to choose the strategies they want. Students seemed to share the same view with their teachers on two strategies: ask students to self-report on the percentage of English they use in group work and establish a warning signal to remind them to come back their mother tongue. Therefore, only 15% of the students choose these answers. One of the interviewees gave reasons for explanation: “It is difficult for us to self-report or indicate how much English we can use in group work because the amount of English use depends on the difficulty level of the topic and students in the classes are too large so teachers could not have enough time to work with individual student.” (A) 4.3. Difficulties teachers experienced when organizing group work in speaking lesson. 4.3.1. Difficulties teachers encountered when organizing group work. Figure 12: difficulties teachers encountered when implementing group work As shown in this chart, all of the teachers (100%) considered students use too much Vietnamese during group work and students make so much noise, which sometimes make them lose control of the classes and lack of money for material and teaching aid development to be the biggest problem. A majority of teachers (83.3%) complained the difficulties of immovable seating arrangement. Concerning the constraints caused by the teachers themselves, 33.3% claimed that their lack of academic training in group work management and teaching experience caused the difficulties to their application of group work in speaking class. In respect of another difficulties caused by the students, half of the teachers (50%) alleged “it takes time and be chaotic to organize group work” was the hindrance of group work application. The other hindrance which was perceived by 16.6% of the teachers was low student English proficiency, competitive members are not willing to share information with others, quicker thinkers tend to overwhelm the slower ones and talkative students often dominate the process. 4.3.2. Teachers’ solutions to overcome their difficulties Figure 13: Teachers’ solutions to the difficulties All of the teachers said that they always managed to overcome the difficulties to make the organization of group work in speaking lesson more successful and efficient. The first and foremost solutions all of the teachers (100%) did are to make the tasks suitable to the students, to give strict rules about making noise in the class and to motivate students to participate in group work activities. A great majority of the teacher (83.3%) suggested that they often encouraged students with good English proficiency to help the lower-level one in the group and punished the lazy students at the same time. With regard to the difficulty of lacking material and teaching aid development, three teachers (50%) said that they asked the administrator to facilitate classroom conditions whenever they have meeting with the university administrator. And now their students can have opportunity to use visual aids such as projector to make their talk or presentation more interesting and more authentic. In term of grouping students, 33.3% of the teachers said that they often used a variety of ways to group students and they tried to give all the students equal chance to present the ideas. They supposed that these solutions were actually useful when they carried out group work activity in teaching speaking skills. 4.4. Difficulties students experienced when working in groups Figure 14: difficulties students experienced when working in groups An interesting fact drawn from Figure 13 was that almost all of the students (90%) agreed that the factors causing the difficulties were due to their passive learning style. This is not hard to understand because Vietnamese students are strongly affected by Confucianism that focuses on academic study of grammar and in-depth knowledge. Two interviewees confessed that: I often come to class expecting my teachers to explain the whole lesson and wish the teacher would not ask me to do any thing. (P) Actually, I am afraid of being called to answer the teachers’ question or to present in front of my friends. In my class, the number of students who are active in participating in group discussion is small. When working in group I want to be sit in silence and listen to my friends. (Q) Concerning the factors that caused the difficulties, 85% of the students supposed that they were because of their low English proficiency. The subject added that when they were at high school, they did not do group work activities so that anxiety and unfamiliarity with group work in the speaking class seemed to be the big problems. The objective factor like classroom conditions, textbook or learning aid and so on were also mentioned as one factor that affect the success of group work in the speaking lesson. This factor accounted for 85%. The lowest percentage was given to the factor of the teachers’ low proficiency and experience (40%). Nevertheless, this percentage deserved being taken into consideration. When being asked in the interview, some students reported that the teachers’ experience in conducting group work is a matter of bigger concern. Thus, the teachers need to keep mastering their English proficiency and methodology to meet the students’ requirements. CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION 5.1. Summary of the paper This study set three-fold purposes: Firstly, it aimed to clarify the procedures used in organizing group work in speaking lesson of 1st-year English major students by the teachers of English at VUC. Secondly, it aimed to identify teachers’ strategies to foster and stimulate students’ English language use in group work. Finally, it investigated difficulties teachers and students experienced when implementing group work. Thus, the population of this research study was teachers and English-major students at VUC. In this study, questionnaires, interviews and observations were used as research instruments. From their responses to the questionnaires, interviews and observations, it is found that all the teachers frequently used group work in their speaking lesson because they understood the importance of group work in teaching speaking skill. And they all followed the same basic steps in organizing group work activity. It is also interesting that games and role-play are favorite activities to all students meanwhile they were selected by only half of the teachers. However, the students and teachers share the same opinion on the ways of grouping, almost of them chose to group students sitting next to or near each other and students of mixed proficiency. As for strategies used to foster English use in group work, both teachers and students thought it was necessary to raise students’ awareness of the importance of English use. In addition, increasing the amount of English use required by the teacher and reminding students to switch back to English when they speak Vietnamese consciously and unconsciously are two strategies which almost all of the students and teachers highly appreciated. Regarding the difficulties, three factors “students use too much Vietnamese”, “students make too much noise” and “there is a lack of money for material and teaching aid development” were considered to be the biggest problems to all the teachers. And for students, their biggest difficulties were due to their passive learning style, their low English proficiency and classroom conditions and learning aid. Based on the findings of the study, a number of suggestions were given to teachers and students of English Faculty at VUC. 5.2. Recommendations for teachers From the findings, it is clear that the application of group work in speaking lesson was not totally efficient partly because of the teachers. Teachers play a very important role in organizing group work activity. A number of recommendations for teachers will be discussed below: a) Employ a variety of criteria to group students. Depending on the difficulty of the assigned tasks, teachers might group students basing on some criteria such as same common preferences, same or mixed level of proficiency, their position in classroom, or random grouping (Brown, 2001). Teachers should be flexible to decide what strategies they follow. b) Design and select appropriate activities A variation of activities that are suitable for students’ life and interest can motivate students work in group in an effective way. Therefore, teachers should find out more about their students’ interest in order to know what their favorite activities are. From that, teachers can select appropriate activities for their students. Moreover, they should spend a lot of time before lessons to prepare material and select suitable tasks and activities for mix-ability students. c) Raise students’ awareness of the importance of English use As students’ English use in speaking lesson comes from student’s self-consciousness, teacher can only encourage them to use English rather than to force them to. The first step to do this is to raise student’s awareness of the importance of English use for their own learning. They should be advised that they are the ones who are responsible for their success and failure, not the teachers or someone else. Then they will be willing to speak English as much as possible for their own sake. d) Train students group work skills. An effective group work needs good cooperation between the teacher and students. Therefore, the teacher should train and instruct their students some skills to work in groups. Teachers should also train the students to obey some rules in group work, for instance: start and stop work right after the teachers’ command; be quick when moving to another activity; be self discipline; and listen carefully teachers’ instructions. 5.3. Recommendations for students a) Cooperate with their teachers As students in a learner-centered class are the ones who are responsible for their success or failure in their learning, they should be aware of their active role in the process of learning by choosing good learning strategies, and more importantly, cooperating with their teachers to gain success. b) Train themselves to be effective students Each student should find a style of learning that suit him/her. When he is in a learning situation that he find difficult or boring, he is able to adapt it to his personal needs. In addition, students should actively involve in the language learning process. And they must understand how to improve their learning by emphasizing their strengths. 5.4. Limitations of the study There are two limitations that need to be acknowledged and addressed regarding the present study. The first limitation has to do with the extent to which the findings can be generalized beyond the samples studied. The number of teacher and student participants in the study was not big enough for broad generalization. Though all the teachers were invited, there were only 6 teachers teaching speaking skill for the first year English majors. And only 100 1st year English majors were selected as sample while there were no students came from the second or the third year. The second limitation concerns the scope that this study could cover. Due to the time constraints, many untouched issues on group work and the use of group work activity in other language skills such as listening, reading and writing were not explored. 5.5. Suggestions for further studies As group work is a very common activity of CLT approach so that it was applied widely in many kinds of language classes. Future researchers can further explore the untouched issues such as interaction process in group work, learner-learner interaction during small group activity, strategies to involve student in group work activity and so on. Researchers contemplating future studies in this area may wish to explore the use of group work activity in other language skills, namely writing, reading and listening. In conclusion, by using a combination of methods, this study has been able to contribute to our knowledge of CLT approach in general and group work activity in particular in ways that will benefit not only teachers but students of English as well. However, due to the limitation of time and experience, shortcomings are unavoidable. All comments, are therefore, greatly appreciated.