Vietnamese English language teachers: insights into their language proficiency development

N. V. Trao, Mai Ngo
{"title":"Vietnamese English language teachers: insights into their language proficiency development","authors":"N. V. Trao, Mai Ngo","doi":"10.15405/EJSBS.164","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"1. IntroductionEnglish rose to the status of the most popular foreign language in Vietnam as early as 1990s. However, it was not until 2003 that English was officially included as an optional subject to be taught in primary education. In 2008, English was officially institutionalized in the primary education system with the projection that by 2018, 100% of students should be taught English (Vietnamese Government, 2008). In 2008, the nation-wide project 2020 was approved as the government's and MOET's latest attempt to promote English learning (Vietnamese Government, 2008). The planned outcome was to have students graduating from primary (6-10 years old), lower secondary (11-15 years old) and upper secondary (15-18 years old) schools reaching levels A1, A2, and B1 respectively of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment (CEFR). For undergraduate education, the target was set at level B1, B2, and C1 for graduates from, respectively, institutions not specializing in foreign languages, college (2 year) and university (4 year) programs with a specialization in foreign languages.2. Problem StatementThe rising need for English language learning reveals severe problems, including teachers' low language proficiency and inappropriate training. Limited studies at primary school level by scholars such as Nguyen (2011) and Le and Do (2012) revealed that teachers were not sufficiently prepared to teach English at the elementary level due to their weaknesses in pedagogical skills, vocabulary knowledge and pronunciation. These weaknesses were attributed to low-quality pre-service training, the lack of an environment for language use and practice, and isolation from the professional community. They called for intensive retraining of current in-service primary teachers regarding both language competence and language teaching methodology. Teachers need to be equipped with background knowledge of theories and methods of teaching English to young learners while priority should be put on the improvement of teachers' pronunciation and fluency. Attempts should also be made to establish communities of practice (Wenger, 1998) to promote teachers' self-engagement in the continuous development of knowledge and skills.Discussing the teaching of English in Vietnam in general, Le (2007) specified the lack of well-trained teachers as one of the three inherent problems accounting for the low quality of foreign language education in Vietnam. Indeed, questions have been raised concerning the ability of in-service teachers and the quality of pre-service teacher training programs. The media reported the shocking results of a nation-wide teachers' language proficiency assessment test in which, even in big cities like Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh, only a fifth of those tested qualified for the CEFR's B2 level of language proficiency. In one particular province, Ben Tre, only one teacher out of 700 tested passed this threshold level. Officials from MOET and project 2020 reported that 80 000 in-service teachers needed further training as 97%, 93%, and 98% of teachers at primary, lower secondary, and upper secondary respectively were underqualified (Nguyen & Dudzik, 2013). Criticisms were made, and plans were carried out to \"standardize\" teachers' language proficiency. However, what is missing from all these discouraging statistics and nationwide supporting programs is an account of teachers' own perception of their language proficiency and the kind of training and support they need. Do these teachers perceive that they need to improve their language proficiency? How they maintain and develop it? What are the challenges they face? What kind of training and support do they expect? All these questions were left unanswered. As the teachers are at the center of this language policy, it is crucial that their voices are heard so their needs can be catered for.The issue of non-native English speaking teachers' (NNESTs) language proficiency development is often emphasized in the literature. …","PeriodicalId":164632,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Social & Behavioural Sciences","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Social & Behavioural Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15405/EJSBS.164","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

1. IntroductionEnglish rose to the status of the most popular foreign language in Vietnam as early as 1990s. However, it was not until 2003 that English was officially included as an optional subject to be taught in primary education. In 2008, English was officially institutionalized in the primary education system with the projection that by 2018, 100% of students should be taught English (Vietnamese Government, 2008). In 2008, the nation-wide project 2020 was approved as the government's and MOET's latest attempt to promote English learning (Vietnamese Government, 2008). The planned outcome was to have students graduating from primary (6-10 years old), lower secondary (11-15 years old) and upper secondary (15-18 years old) schools reaching levels A1, A2, and B1 respectively of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment (CEFR). For undergraduate education, the target was set at level B1, B2, and C1 for graduates from, respectively, institutions not specializing in foreign languages, college (2 year) and university (4 year) programs with a specialization in foreign languages.2. Problem StatementThe rising need for English language learning reveals severe problems, including teachers' low language proficiency and inappropriate training. Limited studies at primary school level by scholars such as Nguyen (2011) and Le and Do (2012) revealed that teachers were not sufficiently prepared to teach English at the elementary level due to their weaknesses in pedagogical skills, vocabulary knowledge and pronunciation. These weaknesses were attributed to low-quality pre-service training, the lack of an environment for language use and practice, and isolation from the professional community. They called for intensive retraining of current in-service primary teachers regarding both language competence and language teaching methodology. Teachers need to be equipped with background knowledge of theories and methods of teaching English to young learners while priority should be put on the improvement of teachers' pronunciation and fluency. Attempts should also be made to establish communities of practice (Wenger, 1998) to promote teachers' self-engagement in the continuous development of knowledge and skills.Discussing the teaching of English in Vietnam in general, Le (2007) specified the lack of well-trained teachers as one of the three inherent problems accounting for the low quality of foreign language education in Vietnam. Indeed, questions have been raised concerning the ability of in-service teachers and the quality of pre-service teacher training programs. The media reported the shocking results of a nation-wide teachers' language proficiency assessment test in which, even in big cities like Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh, only a fifth of those tested qualified for the CEFR's B2 level of language proficiency. In one particular province, Ben Tre, only one teacher out of 700 tested passed this threshold level. Officials from MOET and project 2020 reported that 80 000 in-service teachers needed further training as 97%, 93%, and 98% of teachers at primary, lower secondary, and upper secondary respectively were underqualified (Nguyen & Dudzik, 2013). Criticisms were made, and plans were carried out to "standardize" teachers' language proficiency. However, what is missing from all these discouraging statistics and nationwide supporting programs is an account of teachers' own perception of their language proficiency and the kind of training and support they need. Do these teachers perceive that they need to improve their language proficiency? How they maintain and develop it? What are the challenges they face? What kind of training and support do they expect? All these questions were left unanswered. As the teachers are at the center of this language policy, it is crucial that their voices are heard so their needs can be catered for.The issue of non-native English speaking teachers' (NNESTs) language proficiency development is often emphasized in the literature. …
越南英语教师:语言能力发展洞察
1. 早在20世纪90年代,英语就成为越南最受欢迎的外语。然而,直到2003年,英语才被正式列入小学教育的选修课。2008年,英语在小学教育系统中正式制度化,预计到2018年,100%的学生应该学习英语(越南政府,2008年)。2008年,全国范围的项目2020被批准为政府和教育部促进英语学习的最新尝试(越南政府,2008年)。计划的结果是,从小学(6-10岁)、初中(11-15岁)和高中(15-18岁)毕业的学生分别达到《欧洲共同语言参考框架:学习、教学和评估》(CEFR)的A1、A2和B1水平。本科阶段,非外语专业院校、学院(2年制)和大学(4年制)外语专业毕业生的水平分别达到B1、B2和C1水平。问题陈述英语学习需求的增长暴露出严重的问题,包括教师的语言水平低和培训不当。Nguyen(2011)和Le and Do(2012)等学者在小学阶段进行的有限研究表明,由于教师在教学技能、词汇知识和发音方面的弱点,他们在小学阶段的英语教学准备不足。这些弱点是由于低质量的职前培训、缺乏使用和练习语言的环境以及与专业社区隔绝。他们呼吁就语文能力和语文教学方法加强对在职小学教师的再培训。教师需要掌握少儿英语教学的理论和方法的背景知识,同时应优先提高教师的发音和流利度。还应尝试建立实践社区(Wenger, 1998),以促进教师在知识和技能的持续发展中的自我参与。在讨论越南的英语教学时,Le(2007)指出,缺乏训练有素的教师是导致越南外语教育质量低下的三个内在问题之一。事实上,人们对在职教师的能力和职前教师培训项目的质量提出了质疑。媒体报道了全国教师语言能力评估测试的令人震惊的结果,即使在河内和胡志明这样的大城市,只有五分之一的人达到了CEFR的B2语言能力水平。在一个特殊的省,本特里,700名接受测试的教师中只有一名通过了这个门槛。MOET和project 2020的官员报告称,有8万名在职教师需要进一步培训,因为97%、93%和98%的小学、初中和高中教师不合格(Nguyen & Dudzik, 2013)。人们提出了批评,并制定了“规范”教师语言能力的计划。然而,在所有这些令人沮丧的统计数据和全国性的支持项目中,缺少的是教师对自己语言能力的看法,以及他们需要的培训和支持。这些教师是否意识到他们需要提高自己的语言能力?他们如何维护和发展它?他们面临的挑战是什么?他们希望得到什么样的培训和支持?所有这些问题都没有得到回答。由于教师是这项语言政策的中心,他们的声音被听到,这样他们的需求才能得到满足,这一点至关重要。非英语母语教师的语言能力发展问题在文献中经常被强调。…
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信