Tài liệu Application of google classroom in promoting independent learning of non english major students in english class in a police institution

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES **************** NGUYỄN DUY QUYNH APPLICATION OF GOOGLE CLASSROOM IN PROMOTING INDEPENDENT LEARNING OF NON-ENGLISH MAJOR STUDENTS IN ENGLISH CLASS IN A POLICE INSTITUTION (Ứng dụng công cụ Google Classroom trong việc nâng cao khả năng học tập độc lập của sinh viên không chuyên trong giờ học tiếng Anh tại một đơn vị giáo dục của Cảnh sát) M.A THESIS (Applied Program) Field : English Teaching Methodology Code : 8140231.01 Hanoi - 2020 VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES **************** NGUYỄN DUY QUYNH APPLICATION OF GOOGLE CLASSROOM IN PROMOTING INDEPENDENT LEARNING OF NON-ENGLISH MAJOR STUDENTS IN ENGLISH CLASS IN A POLICE INSTITUTION (Ứng dụng công cụ Google Classroom trong việc nâng cao khả năng học tập độc lập của sinh viên không chuyên trong giờ học tiếng Anh tại một đơn vị giáo dục của Cảnh sát) M.A THESIS (Applied Program) Field : English Teaching Methodology Code : 8140231.01 Supervisor : Assoc. Prof. Lê Văn Canh Hanoi - 2020 DECLARATION I hereby declare that the thesis entitled “Application of Google Classroom in promoting independent learning of non-English major students in English class in a police institution” is the result of my own research except as cited in the references. Whole or any part of the thesis has not been submitted before in order to qualify for any other academic degree. Hanoi, 2020 Nguyễn Duy Quynh i ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The completion of this research paper could not have been possible without the participation and assistance of people to whom I would like to express my sincere gratitude. My deep gratitude goes first to Associate Professor Lê Văn Canh, my supervisor, for his continuous support, patience and precious guidance which helped me in all the time of research and writing of this study. I would also like to extend my appreciation to all the research participants, students of class N01.D44, for their eager cooperation and valuable ideas in the questionnaires and interviews without which the study could not be completed. In addition, my thanks are also delivered to my colleagues at the Department of Foreign Languages of the People’s Police Academy for their kind support and constant source of inspiration. This last word of acknowledgement I have saved for my beloved parents and my dear wife who have been with me throughout stressful times, pushing me farther than I thought I could go. ii ABSTRACT This study was expected to investigate the application of Google Classroom to promote the independent learning of non-English major students studying in a police institution. More explicitly, the author attempted to carry out his intervention throughout one cyclical process of action research and targeted at examining 1) impacts of the application of Google Classroom on the students’ independent learning in their English class and 2) the students’ opinions towards the application of Google Classroom in their English learning. The data were collected from pre-intervention and post-intervention questionnaires delivered to the participants, and interviews with some of the students. The time span of the intervention was 14 weeks in total and all findings indicated in the study were interpreted as the result of one-cycle implementation of the action research project. It was concluded that the application of Google Classroom was beneficial to the majority of the students and their independent learning was positively influenced. The primary evidence was found in improvement of the students in terms of English task completion and their increasingly positive feeling and motivation. From the findings of the research, it is suggested that adapting a new approach in English language teaching should be considered in the context of the police institution. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS DECLARATION .................................................................................................. i ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .................................................................................. ii ABSTRACT ........................................................................................................ iii TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................... iv LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS........................................................................... vii LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES ............................................................... viii CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ...................................................................... 1 1.1. Rationale of the study .................................................................................. 1 1.2. Aims of the study .......................................................................................... 3 1.3. Scope of the study ......................................................................................... 4 1.4. Methods of the study .................................................................................... 4 1.5. Significance of the study .............................................................................. 6 1.6. Organization of the thesis ............................................................................ 7 CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW .......................................................... 8 2.1. An overview of independent learning......................................................... 8 2.1.1. Definition of independent learning ............................................................. 8 2.1.2. Influential factors in developing independent learning ............................ 10 2.1.3. Characteristics of independent learners in higher education .................... 13 2.2. Tassinari's Dynamic Autonomy Model (DAM) for independent learning ............................................................................................................................. 14 2.2.1. An introduction of DAM model ................................................................ 14 2.2.2. Components of DAM model ..................................................................... 15 2.3. An overview of Google Classroom ............................................................ 17 2.3.1. What is Google Classroom? ...................................................................... 17 2.3.2. Advantages of GC in English language teaching ..................................... 19 2.3.3. Relationship of GC and independent learning .......................................... 21 iv 2.4. Davis's Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) for evaluation of GC effectiveness........................................................................................................ 22 2.4.1. An introduction of TAM model ................................................................ 22 2.4.2. Application of TAM model adopted for measuring efficacy of GC......... 23 2.5. Previous studies .......................................................................................... 24 CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ........................................... 26 3.1. Context of the research .............................................................................. 26 3.1.1. Context of the police institution ................................................................ 26 3.1.2. Current English teaching and learning for non-English major students at the Academy .............................................................................................................. 27 3.2. Design of the research ................................................................................ 28 3.2.1. Rationale for the use of action research .................................................... 28 3.2.2. Procedure of the action research ............................................................... 29 3.3. Participants of the research....................................................................... 36 3.4. Instruments of the research....................................................................... 36 3.4.1. Description of the questionnaires .............................................................. 36 3.4.2. Semi-structured interview ......................................................................... 38 3.5. Procedures of data collection .................................................................... 38 3.6. Procedures of data analysis ....................................................................... 39 CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION .............................................. 40 4.1. Pre-intervention .......................................................................................... 40 4.1.1. The feasibility of the application of GC .................................................... 40 4.1.2. The action-oriented dimension before the intervention ............................ 40 4.1.3. The social and affective dimension before the intervention ..................... 45 4.2. Intervention and Post-intervention .......................................................... 46 4.2.1. Research question 1: How did the application of Google Classroom affect the students’ independent learning in their English class? ............................................. 46 4.2.2. Research question 2: What were the students’ opinions towards the application of Google Classroom in their English learning? ...................................................... 51 v 4.3. Summary of the findings ........................................................................... 54 CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION ......................................................................... 56 5.1. Conclusion ................................................................................................... 56 5.2. Pedagogical implications from the findings ............................................. 56 5.3. Limitations of the study ............................................................................. 57 REFERENCES .................................................................................................. 59 APPENDICES ...................................................................................................... I APPENDIX 1 ......................................................................................................... I APPENDIX 2 ....................................................................................................... II APPENDIX 3 ...................................................................................................... VI APPENDIX 4 ...................................................................................................... XI APPENDIX 5 .....................................................................................................XII APPENDIX 6 ................................................................................................... XIV APPENDIX 7 ................................................................................................... XVI APPENDIX 8 ................................................................................................... XIX APPENDIX 9 ................................................................................................ XXIV APPENDIX 10 ........................................................................................... XXVIII APPENDIX 11 .............................................................................................. XXIX APPENDIX 12 .............................................................................................. XXXI APPENDIX 13 ........................................................................................... XXXIII vi LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AR: Action Research DAM: Dynamic Autonomy Model EFL: English as a Foreign Language GC: Google Classroom ICT: Information and Communication Technology TAM: Technology Acceptance Model vii LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES Table 1: Mean scores of the 5 items in Planning component ........................................41 Table 2: Mean scores of the 6 items in Choosing materials and techniques component ..42 Table 3: Mean scores of the 6 items in Completing tasks component ..........................43 Table 4: Mean scores of the 4 items in Evaluating component.....................................44 Table 5: Mean scores of the 3 items in Cooperating component ..................................45 Table 6: Mean scores of the 3 items in Dealing with feeling and motivation component .46 Table 7: Mean scores of the 4 items in Planning component after application of GC ......47 Table 8: Mean scores of the 4 items in Choosing materials and techniques component after application of GC ..................................................................................................47 Table 9: Mean scores of the 5 items in Completing tasks component after the application of GC...........................................................................................................48 Table 10: Mean scores of the 3 items in Evaluating component after application of GC ..49 Table 11: Mean scores of the 3 items in Cooperating component after the application of GC ............................................................................................................................. 50 Table 12: Mean scores of the 3 items in Dealing with feeling and motivation component after the application of GC .........................................................................51 Table 13: Mean scores of the 13 items on the students' perception of GC application in English learning .............................................................................................................52 Figure 1: Student factors involving in independent learning. .......................................11 Figure 2: Hierarchy of enabling environment. .............................................................. 12 Figure 3: The Dynamic Autonomy Model ....................................................................16 Figure 4: Examples of classes on Google Classroom ...................................................18 Figure 5: Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) .........................................................23 Figure 6: Cyclical AR model based on Kemmis and McTaggart .................................29 Figure 7: Students’ difficulty in choosing materials, resources and techniques, strategies for learning English .......................................................................................42 Figure 8: The competence of evaluating materials, resources and techniques, strategies for learning English .......................................................................................................44 Figure 9: Following the English learning plan, post-intervention.................................47 Figure 10: The participants’ perspective on eagerness before and after GC intervention..51 viii CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1.1. Rationale of the study English language teaching, learning and using in today’s world has witnessed tremendous development of English varieties worldwide, featured by dominance of English in a modern technology era of borderless communication. According to Crystal (2005, 2011), digital revolution in an online world has given birth to a new branch of linguistics called “Internet Linguistics”. As an international language, or a lingua franca, English is now spoken by over two billion people all over the world (Parupalli, 2019), whereas 379 million of them are native English speakers (Statistics, 2019). In higher education, increase of demand in using English as a teaching and learning medium is considered to be a parallel and unavoidable process resulting in improvement of international academic communication worldwide (Balan, 2011). More opportunities of learning and using English through various sources requires English as a foreign language (EFL) teachers and students to implement a shifting focus from teachercentered approach to student-centered approach. Learners at all education levels have chances to get access to English contents outside of traditional class environment with their own control of time, activities and engagement, such as using the Internet, podcasts, online group discussions, TVs, electronic dictionaries, Skype, online news with multimedia (Nomass, 2012). For appropriate adaptation of those changes, it is necessary for EFL teachers in Vietnam to pay more attention to English students’ self-regulation, including their independent learning competence. Article 40 of Vietnamese Education Law stated methods of education in higher education, which also highlighted the importance of independent learning: “Training methods in higher education must be brought into play to foster the learners’ ability to be active learners, to study and to do research by themselves, and to foster their practical abilities, self-motivation, creative thinking, and ambition” (National Assembly of Vietnam, 2005:2). 1 In an attempt to inspire students’ engagement in English learning and ignite their independent learning skill, the author has discussed with many of nonEnglish major students who are following the training curriculum at the police institution in which he has worked for six years. While some students carry out active learning in English lessons and focus on using English for better job opportunities, there are a large number of students indifferent to improvement of self-regulation, stating that they learn English under constraint of training curriculum, not for other advantages. A considerable group of students reported that English, as a compulsory subject, is the most struggling one. Due to the dual objective of professional training knowledge in English (cognitive development) and practical language skills (linguistic development) within a course, many students reported that they need to remember a large number of vocabularies relating to police activities, for examples, crime scene investigation, drug-related crime, covert surveillance, cybercrime, human trafficking, forensic science and so on. Although supporting for the importance of English in today’s society, many of them showed unwillingness in English for the primary reason of its no use in their prospective career as police officers. Also, non-English major students in the institution tend to blame lack of communicative opportunities after in-class participation for their passive learning. The author believes that only practicing English in classroom is basically not enough. What makes an active student different from a passive participant is his or her collaborative attitudes and actions, eager to explore a subject by himself or herself with support of peers, mentors, or facilitators. As Lam (2013) explained, the majority of Vietnamese students cannot develop the independent learning skill, following the passive methodology, silent atmosphere and unresponsive students. As a result, the existing situation motivates the author to implement a model of teaching and learning which support students’ independent learning in English classes. At present, teaching and learning English is processed in an era where vast amounts of information are being accessed and transmitted electronically or 2 digitally. With rapid development and application of digitalization, many models of English teaching and learning regarding to information and communications technology (ICT) have been proposed by researchers, which also deals with independent learning. One of the tools for active learning is Google Classroom (GC), the virtual platform developed and announced by Google in 2014. It is emphasized that GC can bring effective supports towards changing the focus from teacher-centered approach to learner-centered one, opening to inquiry, dialogue, and autonomous learning on the part of learners as active participants (Shaharanee, Jamil, & Rodzi, 2016). Besides, it has been shown that GC has a high potential to engage low English proficiency learners (Bakar & Noordin, 2018) and “generate greater participation and interaction between students, and between students and their teachers” (Heggart & Yoo, 2018: 140). In general, the fact that researches have indicated positive responses from participants about benefits of GC in English teaching and learning, consolidates the author’s belief of adapting GC to impact on learner independence. In addition, advantages of technology in education are always welcomed at the police training institution, with the ultimate purpose of making good studying environments for students. However, to the best knowledge of the researcher, there is few comprehensive researches in application of GC in English teaching and learning at higher education institutions in Vietnam. Furthermore, no study on GC application in promoting students’ English learning competence has been conducted at the police training institution. Personally, the author decided to choose GC in his study among many other ICTs with a hope that it benefits non-English major students to improve their independent learning skills. 1.2. Aims of the study The study “Application of Google Classroom in promoting independent learning of non-English major students in English class in a police institution” was conducted to self-evaluate the impacts of the English teaching with support of Google Classroom on the independent learning skills of non-English major 3 second-year police students at the People’s Police Academy. The following objectives have been set in order to fulfil this aim: 1) To implement the application of Google Classroom under core components of independent learning into an actual English learning curriculum; 2) To collect and analyze data from the students’ responses of the usefulness of Google Classroom and its impacts on their independent learning as well. To its end, the research questions addressed in the present study are as follows: 1. How did the application of Google Classroom affect the students’ independent learning in their English class? 2. What were the students’ opinions towards the application of Google Classroom in their English learning? 1.3. Scope of the study Independent learning plays a vital role in the process of learning and using English either in daily communicative work or study. It would be challenging for EFL teachers if they do not pay much attention to the active role of students in learning progress. In the present study, the author does not mean to cover all the aspects of relating concepts. Because of time constraint, this action research was conducted to testify perceptions of 32 second-year non-English major police cadets at the People’s Police Academy about their independent learning skills before and after the application of GC during their second English semester. The research was carried out at the beginning of the first semester of the academic year 2019-2020. The author was also a participant in his research, playing the role of an English teacher assigned to be in charge of the class in English lessons. The instruments used in data collection comprise of survey questionnaires and semistructured interview to achieve aims of the research. In addition, GC activities were adapted as a kind of blended learning so that students could follow both inclass lessons and online participation in GC contents. 1.4. Methods of the study The research approach that the author employed is action research, following the procedures guided by steps in the action research cycle by Kemmis 4 and McTaggart (1988, as cited in Burns, 2010). To come to the analysis and findings, the questionnaires, and semi-structured interview were adapted as the data collection instruments. The action taken in the study was application of GC designed for the duration of 14 weeks. The author adapted Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) initiated by Davis (1989) to scale the effectiveness of GC application in the research. Also, the Dynamic Autonomy Model (DAM) by Tassinari (2012) was adapted to measure independent learning of the participants. The four stages of action research proposed by Kemmis and McTaggart (1988, as cited in Burns, 2010) were conducted as follows: Stage 1: Planning At the beginning, the pre-intervention questionnaire, adapted from the DAM model (Tassinari, 2012) and a preparation online survey about availability of preliminary technical requirements were distributed to participants for the purpose of initial understanding and measuring of the participants’ self-awareness of their own English learning. The data was then used for finding an appropriate plan to tackle the problem. From the responses, it is reasonable and appropriate to adopt necessary changes through use of technological applications such as GC. Stage 2: Acting In the second semester in which the action research was conducted, the English course was delivered to students in parallel mode: face-to-face English class was kept as scheduled and online topics in GC were added as extra activities for independent learning. Stage 3: Observing In this stage, the author composed an online observation rubric integrated into GC topics to evaluate responses of students in discussion and assignments to find out existing issues. While attending face-to-face class, the researcher also noted down existing issues that students had on their learning progress in GC and their recommendations of editing the lesson plans more appropriate to them. This contributes to a look insight of efficacy of English lessons because with close 5 observation of students’ learning products in GC, the author could decide what activities should or should not be done next in other units. Stage 4: Reflecting After the 14-week implementation of GC practice plan, the postintervention questionnaire was surveyed to participants, aiming at measuring students’ perceptions on effectiveness of the application of GC towards their independent learning skills. Three among the participants were randomly chosen to participate in the semi-structured interview, enabling the author to collect more supportive in-depth statistics. The research instruments would benefit to path the way of analysis process, contribute to find the answers of all research questions. 1.5. Significance of the study First, understanding how participants of the research perceive and selfregulate their independent learning in English class can help teachers and administrators design appropriate adjustments for the improvement of this competence. Several of the current researches have been attempting to enhance autonomous learning in Vietnam at different educational levels (Dang, 2010; Thanh, 2011; Dang, 2012; Lam, 2013; Le, 2013; Ly, 2018). However, to the best knowledge of the researcher, no comprehensive research in students’ independent learning skills in English learning and teaching has been conducted in all police training institutions in Vietnam. Thus, this study is hoped to provide an initial analysis of independent learning skills of police cadets in the Academy in particular and in Vietnamese police institutions in general. Second, this action research provides necessary insights into effectiveness of the application of GC from local students’ opinions, directly contributing to the English teaching and learning for non-English major cadets at the People’s Police Academy when enrolling in English class. Although many educational researchers and stakeholders in Vietnam have acknowledged the important role of technology-based methods in improvement of self-regulated learning, limited empirical study has been found focusing on applying GC application for 6 improving this aspect of English competence in Vietnamese higher education. By conducting this study, it is hoped that the findings may support EFL teachers to have a closer look at the recent situation of applying GC as a blended learning tool to motivate students’ independent learning efforts. 1.6. Organization of the thesis This thesis paper is organized into five chapters as follows: Chapter 1: Introduction The first chapter presents background, rationale, aims, research questions, significance, scope, and design of the present study. Chapter 2: Literature Review This chapter reviews relevant literature on independent learning, its construct and characteristics, presents an overview of applications of GC, its relationship with independent learning and introduces two recent models for evaluation of learner independence and technology acceptance as well. Chapter 3: Research Methodology It presents the research context, detailed description of the research design, the methodology that was employed in the research, its participants, instruments of data collection, ethical considerations, data collection and analysis procedure. Chapter 4: Results and Discussion The fourth chapter underlines a significant analysis of obtained data, followed by a discussion on the findings of the study. Chapter 5: Conclusion The final part, Chapter 5 highlights the main findings of the research, its limitations, and recommendations for future research in the field. 7 CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1. An overview of independent learning Independent learning and independent learning skills are significant topics in educational studies at present. As stated by Broad (2006:119), independent learning “is not a new concept, nor is it a concept where there is universal agreement on its meaning”. The initial theoretical framework of the study relates to definition, construct, and characteristics of independent learning. 2.1.1. Definition of independent learning Independent learning and independent learning strategies are multifaceted constructs which have been concerned by different researchers in the field of EFL practice and other educational practices as well. As Benson (2006) argued, the 20th and 21st centuries were marked by a significantly emerging interest in autonomous learning. However, it is still problematic to find an exact definition of “independent learning” because it is a broad concept in educational studies, often understood as other synonymous terms with various possible interpretations, for examples, “self-regulated learning” (Pintrich, 2000), “self-directed active learning” (Birenbaum, 2002), “self-access learning” (Chia, 2005), “studentcentered learning” (Black, 2007), “learning to learn” (Black et al., 2006), “learner autonomy” (Benson, 2001; Asuman, 2010; Kim, 2013). A collection of terms referring to “independent learning” was also introduced by Kesten (1987, as cited in Broad, 2006:119): “autonomous learning, independent study, self-directed learning, student-initiated learning, project orientation, discovery and inquiry, teaching for thinking, learning to learn, self-instruction and life-long learning”. Meyer et al., (2008) agreed that the terms “self-directed learning” or “learning how to learn” are sometimes used interchangeably with independent learning. Since synonymous terms mentioned share the same or similar notions with independent learning, recent researches have lengthy discussions and explanations regarding the definition of independent learning. Despite the matter 8 of different wording, to a great extent, all these terms basically describe the same theme and process which is synonymous with independent learning. Previous studies on independent learning have proven that students must be in charge of learning as active participants to manage their learning, taking responsibility for all the decisions concerning all aspects of their learning process. Focusing on students themselves rather than relying on teachers’ support have been targeted and emphasized (Perry et al., 2006; Quality Improvement Agency, 2008). Other researchers have come to the similar conclusion, that independent learning deals with the ability to take control of one’s learning (Holec, 1991, as cited in Qi, 2012) or self-responsibility of students for their own learning through making independent choices (Fotiadou, Mavroidis & Angelaki, 2017). Nevertheless, recent studies have shown that independent learning covers more than just selfawareness or learning in isolation. According to Sam et al., (2012), Thomas (2014), Hendrick (2016), independent learning does not only involve learners working individually. Instead, it is carried out by students, either on their own or with others (including teachers, peers, etc.) for social interaction. It does not mean less instructions from tutors but rather particular instructions with the goal of learner independence. In higher education, while definition of independent learning and the role of teachers and learners have been debating issues in foreign language teaching and learning, it is reasonable that independent learning needs to be promoted as a part of an ongoing, lifelong educational process, contributing to the gradual growth of students’ capabilities (Harvey & Chickie-Wolfe, 2007; Evrim, 2009; Sam et al., 2012; Minakova, 2013). In the context of university study, due to the variety of English teaching and learning strategies, it is important to equip a common definition for which EFL teachers and students agree on its meaning and interpretation. Without such a definition, as Souto & Turner (2000) claimed, misconceptions or misinterpretations would occur. In the current research, the terms “independent learning”, “learner autonomy”, “autonomous learning” and 9 other aforementioned terms are used interchangeably. From the author's viewpoint, independent learning is the shift of responsibility for the learning process from the teacher to the student. This shift in responsibility involves students having a comprehensive understanding of their learning, being motivated to learn, working actively with teachers and peers to formulate their learning environment. It means a lot more than students working solely on their own, rather it emerges when students play a significant part in choosing their learning plans, discovering learning resources, finding problems, deciding their learning methods and strategies, reflecting on the outcome of their learning process. 2.1.2. Influential factors in developing independent learning Independent learning has been viewed differently by contemporary studies in the aspect of its key elements, covering influences of socio-cultural factors on education in general and students’ learning in particular. It is not a simple concept but covers nexus of elements relating to students as a key subject or an active agent of learning process and environment elements surrounding them. Thanasoulas (2000) focused on internal elements consisting of learners’ cognitive and metacognitive strategies, attitude, motivation, and self-esteem. In the book titled “Fostering independent learning: practical strategies to promote student success”, Harvey & Chickie-Wolfe (2007:3) introduced factors relating to students involving independent learning (see Figure 1). In the dynamic system, a factor can mutually impact other factors. These factors comprise of holding positive learning motivations and emotions; setting goals, methods and strategies for learning; building academic skills; attending to and concentrating on instruction; employing effective cognitive and metacognitive strategies to assess learning and its efficacy; monitoring performance; conducting good time management; establishing productive working environment; using resources effectively; and collaborating for assistance from others when needed. In addition to the internal student factors shown in Figure 1, the external elements are factors influencing students’ independent learning. 10