Summary of main similarities and differences between the three centres

In this section, a summary of the main similarities and differences between Centres 1, 2 and 3 is provided in a grid. This format has been chosen as it is easy to read and to refer to in understanding the key similarities and differences found in the three case studies of English language centres in Vietnam. The following chapter will then be able to address these issues in order to draw up a draft ideal English language centre to present to a team of ELT experts for critique as below.

Summary of main similarities and differences between centres

Criteria Centre 1 Centre 2 Centre 3 1. Main reasons for

learning English

Students are mainly carrying a purpose of enriching English language in order to get a good job, maintain their current job, and further overseas study.

Students mainly have aspirations of getting highly paid work, ensure their current job, and pass compulsory subjects and exams.

As for centre 1 and 2

2. Teaching methods are being used in the centres

Student-centred approach is currently encouraged to use but cannot be applied due to objective reasons. The reading teacher focused on

explaining the meaning of the texts in English, the writing teacher used half Vietnamese and half English. They both did not give any

opportunity for students to practise as well as produce the language orally mentioned in Section 5.1.6.

Student-centred approach is believed delivering at the centre but it is not in reality. The reading teacher seemed to use English to explain the meaning and encourage students to produce English. The other used Vietnamese language most of the time to explain grammar points. They both did not provide any opportunity for students to

participate in discussion activities mentioned in Section 5.2.6.

Team teaching is currently operating at the centre which is equipped with a data show in each room. Two teachers observed used English to communicate with students. They expected students to think and work out the answers individually which means that students did not have time to share their ideas in groups or pairs before giving the answers mentioned in Section 5.3.6.

3. Students‟ perceptions of the kind of language

Students strongly agreed that teachers should use English in the classroom and they preferred to

As for centre 1 As for centre 1 and beyond that they consider that grammar rules help them build up sentences and

teaching they need participate in integration activities. structures stably. 4. Teachers‟

perceptions of how best to assist students to achieve their language goals

English language environment is good for students to be in with; therefore, using English to explain the lessons helps students improve their listening skills and encouraging students to understand issues in English contexts helps their fluency.

The reading teacher believes that teacher should understand students‟ purposes and desire of learning English and use relevant teaching materials which can meet students‟ interests. She addressed that English language environment is good for students; therefore, she tried to use English as much as she could in the classroom. The grammar teacher believes that grammar needs to be explained in Vietnamese so that students can understand the points quickly and easily.

The listening teacher created extra work which he believed meeting students‟ interests and needs thanks to the availability of teaching

facilities. He also requested students to use English to ask for the

meaning if not sure, not to rely much on the dictionary. Speaking teacher focused on fluency aspects.

5. Communicative language teaching approaches are valued and used in classrooms

Teachers had to follow the teaching syllabus which focused on exam purpose. Students had no chance to participate in speaking activities.

The reading teacher is flexible in choosing the materials of teaching. She can either lightly go through or skip what are not relevant to

students‟ interests and helps students with what they are interested. The teachers both did not provide

Teachers were partly delivering the communicative approach at its certain level. Students did not have time to figure out their answers in pair / group work. Teachers expected students‟ individual responses.

students with any opportunities to practise their communicative activities in pairs / groups. 6. What needs to happen for communicative approaches rather than grammar- translation methods to become the norm?

Integration skills need to be conducted and English needs to be used on the campus.

As for centre 1 in order to build up confidence for students in oral communication mentioned in Section 5.2.10.

As for centre 1 and centre 2, teachers should set up situations in which students can participate in pairs or groups to work out answers.

7. What other improvements can private centres make to better meet students‟ English learning needs?

Assessments will be conducted as what students have studied including four macro skills. A network centre for students and teachers will be built to bridge students‟ perceptions and centre‟s operation.

Placement and the end of term tests should be applied at the centre in which includes oral parts. Teaching materials have to be updated and not bilingual version. Teaching facilities are also paid attention to.

Placement test results should be remarked and used probably for its purpose. English speaking club should also be set up for students to have a place to practise their

communication skills. Teachers also need to focus on both fluency and accuracy aspects.

5.5. Summary of chapter

Chapter 5 deals with analysis of the case study results based on the three English language centres in Ho Chi Minh City. In particular, the researcher discusses the findings of each English language centre through classroom observations, responses to questionnaire by the students, and reports from teachers‟ and managers‟ interviews to point out the centre‟s strengths and weaknesses. It also compares and answers the seven aspects of the key research questions outlined in Chapter (1.2). Furthermore, this includes similarities and differences among three English language centres in order to form a foundation for the draft ideal language centre. The findings show that almost all students have the same purpose of learning English, to qualify for their job. They prefer communicative approaches in which they would like teachers to create

opportunities for them to work in pairs / groups to communicate with their peers in real life situations. They also prefer their teachers to correct their mistakes right away in order to understand their mistakes and improve. However, the observations show that students are not really active in classroom practice except those at Centre 3. They also indicate that teachers mostly use traditional methods of teaching even though they have good attitudes towards understandings of communicative approaches. In the next chapter, the researcher uses the findings to form a foundation for the draft ideal English language centre consisting of four fundamental elements as follows: students‟ purposes of learning English, centre management, teaching staff, and students.