Both teachers and students are positive about feedback efficacy and necessity. Both teachers and students are positive about explicit feedback types. Students value immediate feedback, while teachers prefer to delay their feedback. Teacher and learner beliefs are influenced by sociocultural and contextual factors. Teacher and learner beliefs are influenced by their experiences.

Recent decades have witnessed extensive research focusing on oral corrective feedback (CF), a key aspect of English as a second/foreign language (ESL/EFL) learning and teaching, but relatively little research has examined the relationship between learner and teacher beliefs about CF. The study reported in this article investigated the relationship between teacher and learner beliefs regarding the optimal targets and sources of CF in Vietnamese secondary EFL contexts. Data which were collected at four Vietnamese public high schools included questionnaires completed by 250 students, interviews with 15 of them, and interviews with 24 teachers. The findings showed that the students were happy to receive CF to all types of errors, including less important errors such as those not influencing their communicative success. The teachers were generally more selective in their choices of error types, but they sometimes faced some tensions between their overall teaching objective and the students' practical needs to learn the material that would be tested in subsequent exams. Regarding CF sources, the students preferred teacher correction to self-correction or peer correction although they believed that self-correction was effective for their learning and wished their teachers would provide them with training on how to conduct peer correction and self-correction. The teachers also thought that it was part of their role to be the main CF providers to ensure the accuracy of classroom feedback. Some teachers were skeptical about their students' ability to provide peer CF. Pedagogical implications are discussed.

No abstract

The role of teacher professional learning (TPL) in assisting teachers to teach pronunciation in English as a second/foreign language (ESL/EFL) contexts has received little attention. The study reported in this paper extends this line of research by investigating how six EFL teachers at a Vietnamese university transform and integrate the pronunciation pedagogical knowledge they received from a TPL workshop into teaching practice. It then examines the teachers’ perceptions of the impact of the workshop on their knowledge gains and pronunciation teaching skills. Data were collected from seven lesson plans designed by the teachers, video recordings of 24 subsequent classroom observations, and six individual semi-structured interviews. The study adopted a content-based approach to qualitative data analysis. The findings show that the teachers were all able to translate TPL into classroom practice of pronunciation teaching. The findings further show that workshops designed and implemented in accordance with research-based TPL principles can be effective for promoting teachers’ knowledge of pronunciation pedagogy and refining their pronunciation teaching skills. The study has implications for ESL/EFL teachers’ professional development in pronunciation teaching.

No abstract

Recent research has shown that cohesive devices contribute substantially to writing quality and reveal L2 writers' information, such as first or native language. This quantitative study adopted a cross-linguistic approach to investigating the use of cohesive devices in expository writing by Asian EFL teachers compared to native English teachers. The study involved 80 participants from three different L1 backgrounds, including 28 Vietnamese, 26 Filipino, and 26 native English teachers. The Vietnamese and Filipino teachers were at a comparable level of English proficiency. Around 800 words were randomly selected from each participant's reports for analysis. Results from One-Way ANOVA showed that the Vietnamese and Filipino teachers used a similar pattern of cohesion with lexical cohesion being used most frequently, followed by reference and conjunction. In contrast, the cohesive devices used by the native English teachers dispersed more widely across five main categories. The results further showed that the native English teachers used more cohesive devices in writing than the Vietnamese and Filipino teachers separately. Results from the Independent-Samples T-test showed omission and redundancy to be the two most common error types by both the Vietnamese and Filipino teachers. The study has implications for L2 writing and pedagogy.

Recent studies have sought to describe and understand English as a second/foreign language (ESL/EFL) teachers’ pronunciation teaching practices in different contexts, but much less research has examined how teachers and learners perceive pronunciation instruction at tertiary level, especially in EFL settings. The qualitative study reported in this paper extends this line of research by investigating the beliefs of teachers and learners with regard to pronunciation instruction in tertiary EFL education in Vietnam. Data were collected from individual semi-structured interviews with six EFL teachers and focus group interviews with 24 students (four students per group) at a Vietnamese university. The study adopted a content-based approach to qualitative data analysis. The findings show that both the teachers and students considered pronunciation instruction an important component in tertiary EFL programs, which deserves explicit and systematic delivery. The findings suggest that both groups of participants believed communicative pronunciation teaching to have the potential to improve learners’ pronunciation and facilitate their general communicative purposes. The study has implications for language curriculum design and L2 pronunciation teaching and learning.

<p>Recent years have seen increasing research interest in the teaching of pronunciation in English as a second/foreign language classes (Thomson & Derwing, 2014), with particular strands of this research focused on understanding how pronunciation is represented in instructional materials and actual teaching practices in a range of settings and in teacher cognition (e.g., Couper, 2017; Derwing, Diepenbroek, & Foote, 2012; Foote, Trofimovich, Collins, & Urzúa, 2016). The study reported in this dissertation extends this research by investigating pronunciation teaching in a context where it has hitherto been under-researched, namely tertiary EFL in Vietnam.  The research involved two phases. Phase 1 was an introductory situation analysis which investigated pronunciation teaching practices of six Vietnamese tertiary EFL teachers teaching six intact classes at a Vietnamese university. First, the representation of pronunciation features in prescribed textbooks and supplementary materials of the EFL programme were analysed. Six ninety-minute lessons (one from each of the teachers) were then observed, and the teachers and 24 students across the six groups interviewed. The teacher interviews included both stimulated recall and general questions probing their beliefs about pronunciation teaching. Students were interviewed in focus groups (four each) regarding their teachers’ pronunciation teaching and their own pronunciation needs. The focus of Phase 1 was on how the teachers taught pronunciation, the factors shaping their pedagogical choices, and the students’ beliefs about their teachers’ pronunciation teaching and their instructional needs. The findings revealed that pronunciation was largely absent from course books and curriculum documents and that the teachers’ beliefs were in contrast with what they actually did in class. The teachers reported that they would follow deliberate steps if they taught pronunciation explicitly such as listening discrimination followed by explaining places of articulation and then practice. However, in the observed lessons, they only corrected their students’ pronunciation errors through recasts and/or prompts, with little if any explicit or pre-planned pronunciation teaching. In the interviews, the teachers confirmed that they never used any other techniques and that this was typically the only way they taught pronunciation in class.  The teachers’ pronunciation teaching was textbook-driven and was shaped by contextual factors including the curriculum and the learners. Decision making by all the teachers reflected a general commitment to strictly follow the mandated curriculum, with little evidence of pronunciation being taught explicitly. All the teachers reported a lack of initial training and professional learning in pronunciation pedagogy. In addition, there was a mismatch between the teachers’ and students’ preferences and beliefs about pronunciation teaching. Whereas the teachers believed error correction through recasts and/or prompts was effective, the students did not, and expressed a strong need for more explicit, communicative teaching of pronunciation. This pronunciation instructional need and the teachers’ lack of initial training and PL in pronunciation pedagogy motivated the Phase 2 study.  Phase 2 was an intervention study conducted with the same teachers teaching different classes. At the beginning of Phase 2, the teachers attended a teacher professional learning (TPL) workshop in which they were introduced to a pedagogic framework for teaching English pronunciation communicatively proposed by Celce-Murcia, Brinton, & Goodwin (2010). The teachers then planned communicative pronunciation teaching (CPT) lessons using this framework, and were subsequently observed implementing these lessons in their classes. Both the workshop and subsequent classes of this phase were audio-video recorded. A total of seven lesson plans and 24 classroom observations were made across the six teachers (four observations each). Right after the classroom observations, the teachers were interviewed to obtain their views of the TPL workshop and their implementation of the CPT lessons. Twenty-four students across the six groups were interviewed to reflect on their experience with the CPT lessons.  Observational data showed that the teachers understood and were able to translate what they learned about CPT from the workshop into actual classroom practice as reflected in their lesson planning and subsequent teaching. The lesson plans designed by the teachers closely followed the principles of the communicative framework. Interview data showed that the CPT model was favoured by both teacher and student participants. On the basis of the teachers’ implementation of the CPT lessons, both the teachers and students were confident that CPT has the advantages for promoting learners’ pronunciation knowledge, fostering their phonological ability, and developing their oral communication skills. They also reported that CPT can arouse learners’ interest and engagement in classroom learning.  Taken as a whole, this research highlights the need for pronunciation to be given a more explicit place in teaching and learning in tertiary EFL programmes in Vietnam, and for teachers to be better equipped for teaching pronunciation. Findings from interviews with teachers and learners in the study suggest that they would be receptive to such changes.</p>