146 ELT Journal Volume 56/2 April 2002

Oxford University Press

Cultures of teaching: voices
from Vietnam
Marilyn Lewis and Fiona McCook
Recent articles have commented on the lack of uptake by teachers in Asia of
Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) principles, as introduced during
teacher education programmes. One suggested reason for this is that teachers
may assume that there is an opposition between CLT and traditional
approaches. Studies on this topic draw on questionnaires, on the writers
teaching experiences, and on classroom observation. The present research
quotes from journals written by Vietnamese teachers of English during an in-
service course. The journals reveal that teachers do implement new ideas at the
same time as incorporating the traditional features valued in their educational
systems.
Teacher education The uptake or rejection of Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) in
and Communicative Asian classrooms continues to attract discussion, with China the most
Language Teaching studied example. Particular interest has been shown in the eect of in-
service courses on later practice. Chinese senior-middle school teachers
on a course taught by Hird (1995: 22) in Hangzhou saw only limited
possibilities for the use of Western methodology in their teaching. Hird
sums up the teachers doubts about CLT in relation to three factors: past
traditions, current practices, and the way in which CLT has been
interpreted. Lamb (1995) also refers to a clash between the new and the
traditional, illustrated by comparing in-service course content in
Indonesia with later classroom practice. The results of his enquiry a year
after the in-service course make discouraging reading. They include no
uptake, confusion, and adaptation and rejection, with only a few
teachers reporting a fundamental change in their approach to teaching
(Lamb 1995: 78).
In response to this mismatch Ellis (1996), whose experience was in
Vietnam, recommends that Western teachers should look for common
ground between Vietnamese cultural values and CLT. Holliday (1997)
too, having examined six communicative English language classes at
universities in India and China, suggests examining classroom culture in
terms of the wider culture to show the interrelationship between local,
national, international, professional, and academic cultures. This report,
therefore, continues with a review of Asian traditions of learning, and of
current interpretations of CLT, before discussing the specic
interpretations of one group of teachers.
Asian traditions of Cortazzi and Jin (1996) speak of a culture of learning in China which may
learning and determine students behaviour in language classrooms. When they asked
teaching Chinese students what was expected of a good student, the highest
scoring category (43%) from the list of eleven points was hardworking,
followed some distance behind by sociability/learning from and with
others (18.5%). Some researchers, however, point to the inuence of the
teacher in modifying traditional stereotypes of learners. For example,
Howe (1993), with experience of teaching in Vietnam, addresses the
commonly-held perception of passivity amongst Asian students, by
suggesting that whether language learners are passive or active in class
depends more on their teachers expectations than on culturally-based
learning styles.
Hirds (1995: 23) impressions are that traditional Chinese teaching styles
involve a meticulous analysis of meaning in all its minute detail, leading
to a painstaking understanding of every language item, in which
individual interpretations are not valued. Students are considered to be
in class to receive language rather than construct it. The value is on care
and certainty rather than on quantity, and on experimenting with
language. Output is expected to be error-free, and memorization is
valued. The teacher is at the centre of the process. In another China-
based study, Matalene (1985: 191) speaks from her own experience as a
foreign teacher. As she stood before her students she was aware of
unbroken cultural continuity for over 3,000 years: Over my head as I
stood at the yellow lectern with the red star were the thoughts of
Chairman Mao in eight large characters: Be united, Be alert, Be earnest,
Be lively.
Current Tradition is only one inuence on teachers interpretations of new ideas
interpretations introduced through in-service courses. Hird (1995) suggests that there is
of CLT a mismatch between what teachers believe CLT to be, and the way it has
evolved over a quarter century. In summary, he says, people assume the
following contrasts:
CLT emphasizes . rather than .
language use language knowledge
uency, appropriateness, spontaneity accuracy
oral communication written communication
interaction, informality formality
Some see CLT as failing to incorporate teaching and learning styles, such
as the skill of memorization, and the emphasis on perfection, which are
traditionally valued in Asian countries. This view was reinforced in
questions written by teachers during an earlier in-service course in
Vietnam (Lewis 1996). Asked to express any concerns they might have
had about implementing the ideas suggested in the course, teachers
asked how a communicative approach could work in monolingual
classes, and whether it was acceptable to include some traditional
methods in CLT.
In Hollidays (1994) observation of current interpretations of CLT, four
categories emerged: the place of text (oral or written, produced by the
teacher or by the students), accuracy and uency, lecturer authority and
Cultures of teaching 147
control, and cultural continuity. Holliday saw more communicative
involvement when there was a focus text than there was during oral
practice. He also found that communicative involvement can be achieved
even without group or pair work provided teachers do not dominate the
lesson discourse. The detail of where teachers stand, and how a large
class is seated, do not have to inhibit communicative engagement. His
nal observation was similar to Elliss (1996): that innovation will
succeed only if there is cultural continuity between CLT and more
traditional forms.
Planning the study The studies summarized above draw on a number of sources: classroom
observation, learners reports, and the impressions of local or overseas
teachers. The present study examines the views of 14 Vietnamese high
school teachers of English, as expressed in their journal entries during
ongoing in-service workshops. In examining their writing we ask the
following questions:
1 What beliefs and practices about language teaching and learning do
they express?
2 How do these compare with reports in the literature from various
parts of Asia?
The workshops were conducted by the primary researcher (McCook
1998), who was working on a teacher education project in Central
Vietnam, which was funded by New Zealand. Two of the teachers had
also attended a shorter in-service seminar conducted two years earlier by
the second researcher (Lewis 1996). The focus of the workshops was
CLT, and included attention to the written language. The role of the state
textbooks in secondary schools was acknowledged.
As a prompt to their writing, the teachers were provided with a written
guide that listed questions under three headings.
their teaching objectives, materials, language techniques, the lesson
plan (following or modifying it)
the students whether they were active, whether they understood the
lesson, what they learnt, liked, and didnt like
being a teacher sources of teaching ideas, development as a teacher.
In total, 260 journal entries referring to the students were extracted.
These entries were grouped under two headings which emerged from
the data: the learning focus, and the teachers understanding of what
makes a good student. The number of occurrences in each sub-topic
were not counted, since many comments touched on more than one sub-
topic. The results were then compared with the literature.
The teaching-learning Unlike the Indonesian teachers reported by Lamb (1995), these
focus Vietnamese teachers were clearly interested in applying the principles of
CLT that had been introduced during their workshop. At the same time,
they retained traditional aspects of language teaching. Their journal
entries emphasized uency and accuracy, contextualized language use,
and knowledge about language, oral and written language, and pair work,
as well as individual exercises marked on the board.
148 Marilyn Lewis and Fiona McCook
While not always satised with the results, the teachers had both
uency and accuracy of form as a focus of their teaching. Fluency
included reading aloud (They cant read uently.) and speaking
spontaneously (They could speak but a little but not very well and
naturally.). Some teachers consciously put aside their usual concerns
about accuracy (They made many mistakes on spelling but to make
them feel condent I didnt pay attention so much on it.). At other
times, form was denitely the focus, although students sometimes
pronounced badly and usually forget adding s at the noun. The
teachers role included modelling correct intonation. (I play the roles
of the persons in the dialogue saying the dialogue with correct
intonation.)
Other entries emphasized language in context and knowledge about
language. The teachers reported going beyond the textbook to create, or
help students to create, local contexts for language use.
The pupils practised in real situations I gave them.
Students had a lot of fun when I took real examples in the local area.
They could use this structure in real situation.
The traditional role of the teacher in explaining grammar was important.
(I used pictures and time-line to illustrate the use of this tense, so the
pupils could understand the lesson.) Again, success was mixed. (I think
they couldnt distinguish innitive from simple past.)
The teachers seem to have avoided the belief mentioned by Hird (1995),
that CLT only emphasizes oral language. Writing was a part of their
classroom practice (They could make sentences of their own.) as was
oral language, although it was sometimes in the context of repeating
xed dialogues. (I play the roles of people in the dialogue saying the
dialogue with correct intonation. I see that my students look more
interested in listening to me than they used to be.)
Continuing their balance between CLT and traditional methods, the
teachers mentioned memorizing and understanding as being important.
Dialogues, in particular, were memorized and then recited individually
and in chorus, sometimes successfully (They spoke out the conversation
naturally without looking at any words on the board.), and sometimes
not (Most of them couldnt remember the speech of dialogue.).
Students understanding was also valued, and in some cases its lack of
success was noted:
My pupils comprehended the contents of the text. But when I asked
them why? they couldnt answer correctly.
The lesson was successful because students used their own words to
summarise the text. One gives the rst idea, and others added next
ideas.
Understanding included the teachers explanations in English. (Its very
hard for them to understand my explaining, although I use very easy
simple sentences. They said they didnt hear the teacher speak in English
at secondary school.) Some tried English and then reverted to
Cultures of teaching 149
Vietnamese for greater understanding. (During the lesson the pupils
can only understand it when I explain in Vietnamese.)
The good student Cortazzi and Jin (1996) reported on expectations of the good student.
The highest scoring category from their study was hard work. The
Vietnamese teachers, too, valued hard work, which they measured partly
in terms of the amount of studying done outside class.
They didnt want to prepare the lessons at home
I asked him if he studied at home. He said yes, and he began to cry.
He said I studied them and I forget everything.
One teacher took the credit for this hard work: ( and I found that I was
successful because the students prepared the lesson at home very well.).
Being active in class as well as at home was valued by a number of
teachers in our study. (Most of the pupils were active during the lesson.)
However, in one comment the use of but suggested that liveliness and
happiness might not be the same thing. (The class time was quite [lively]
but they were very happy and clapped their hands aloud ) Does this
suggest that the word lively can have negative connotations, as in out of
control? Creating a positive learning environment, and motivating less
able students, were seen as essential parts of the teachers role:
My pupils were happy.
P is a weak student, but today he could answer.
I asked them to play a game of vocabulary to consolidate their
vocabulary. I found that they have not many words.
In his Vietnam study, Howe (1995) suggested that whether students
were passive or active depends on the teachers expectations. The
comments of these teachers suggests that they wanted, and worked
towards encouraging an active attitude in their students.
The second feature in the Chinese students list (Cortazzi and Jin 1996)
was sociability, and learning from others. These were also valued by the
teachers in our study. So they organized pair activities:
I think students really learned from the lesson because they can
practise with a partner uently.
My pupils worked in pairs to make up new conversations after they
saw me demonstrate with a pupil.
The teachers were on the lookout for anything that spoiled this co-
operation. One teacher was unhappy when humour was introduced at
the expense of particular students:
When they chose the weak students, it was seemingly that they made
jokes because the latter spoke stammeringly and unclearly.
At the same time as encouraging co-operation through pair work, the
teachers continued with traditional exercises marked on the board:
I asked some pupils to go to the blackboard to ll in. They did quite well.
Whether classroom initiative belongs to the students or the teacher is
150 Marilyn Lewis and Fiona McCook
sometimes described as a distinction between CLT and more traditional
methods. Some teachers in our study encouraged their students to
suggest activities and ask questions.
They often suggest me singing more songs.
pupils were allowed to ask any questions they like. So they asked
me many dierent words and phrases which they hear on TV from
the football commentator.
This policy did not always lead to the intended outcome.
the students were too embarrassed to answer my questions.
They didnt give many examples because they were afraid of speaking
English.
By contrast, other teachers liked to retain control of the topic and the
activity.
I had a big problem, because the students kept talking about the
pictures and got to another topic.
Summary and Table 1 uses Hirds (1995) summary of oppositions between traditional
discussion of results and communicative language teaching to summarize the emphases
mentioned by the teachers in our study.
CLT Traditional
Fluency Accuracy
Contextualized language use Knowledge about language
Oral language Written language
Understanding Memorizing
Students active and happy Students working hard
Pair work and co-operation Exercises
Student initiative Teacher control
Given Elliss (1996) advice to have cultural continuity between CLT and
traditional forms of teaching, we were interested to see that, collectively,
the teachers stated their roles in terms of both communicative and
traditional language-teaching principles. Like the teachers in Hirds
(1995) study, they seemed willing to take aspects of CLT and incorporate
them into their classrooms. However, Hirds reference to the
undervaluing of individual interpretations does not seem to be supported
in our study. While he found that the traditional role of students was to
receive rather than create language, these teachers in our study clearly
valued the use of authentic language by students. While Hird reported
Cultures of teaching 151
table 1
Teachers emphases
that the teacher was at the centre of the process, our journal entries
showed not only that the teachers used pair work, but also that they
encouraged the students to take the initiative in suggesting activities, and
in the choice of what vocabulary to learn.
The general picture of these Vietnamese teachers classrooms recalled,
from quite a dierent context, Matalenes (1985) reference to Chairman
Maos words about being united, alert, earnest, and lively. Perhaps this
illustrates Howes (1993) belief about the relationship between liveliness
and teachers expectations. As in the Cortazzi and Jin (1996) study of
Chinese students values, teachers in our study valued hard work in their
students, as illustrated by references to homework. The 18.5% of the
Cortazzi and Jin students who valued sociability, and learning from
others, seemed to be reected in the diary entries about co-operative
learning. One teacher was concerned when students laughed at
someone who spoke unclearly. In summary, the dated view of CLT
mentioned by Hirds teachers (1995) was not shared by the teachers in
our study.
Conclusion The present study records teachers attempts to implement CLT in one
region of one country. It is important to note that the diary entries were
written during the in-workshop period, and not, as in the case of Lambs
(1995) study, a year later. The results suggest that teachers were applying
what they had been introduced to, sometimes successfully, sometimes
less so. Their comments add to an understanding of the initial uptake of
ideas presented in a workshop. It would have been interesting to survey
those same teachers a year or two later, as in the Lamb (1995) study.
However, as neither of the researchers is working in the region now, that
would be impossible. A more ambitious study could compare the
language learning of students in these teachers classes with results from
colleagues who had not attended the workshop. This could be divisive, of
course, since other teachers would have liked to be selected for the
course, and would not want to be left behind, and seen as less successful.
A long-term study of these teachers classrooms would probably be
carried out more eectively by the local authorities, who have
responsibility for the ongoing in-service programme.
Final version received November 2000
152 Marilyn Lewis and Fiona McCook
References
Cortazzi, M. and L. Jin. 1996. Cultures of learning:
language classrooms in China in Hywel Coleman
(ed.). Society and the Language Classroom.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ellis, G. 1996. How culturally appropriate is the
communicative approach? ELT Journal 50/3:
21318.
Hird, B. 1995. How communicative can language
teaching be in China? Prospect 10/3: 217. Sydney:
NCELTR.
Holliday, A. 1994. Appropriate Methodology and
Social Context. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Holliday, A. 1997. Six lessons: cultural continuity
in communicative language teaching. Language
Teaching Research 1/3: 21238.
Howe, S. 1993. Teaching in Vietnam. Interchange
22: 2932.
Lamb, M. 1995. The consequences of INSET.
ELT Journal 49/1: 7280.
Lewis, M. 1996. Teaching English in Vietnam.
Occasional Papers: 1. Institute of Language
Teaching and Learning, University of Auckland.
McCook, F. 1998. A longitudinal study of
responses to in-service teacher education by
Vietnamese English language teachers.
Unpublished MA thesis. Massey University.
Matalene, C. 1985. Contrastive rhetoric: an
American writing teacher in China. College
English. 47/8: 789808.
The authors
Marilyn Lewis is a senior lecturer in the
Department of Applied Language Studies and
Linguistics at the University of Aukland. She has
taught in India, Cambodia, run workshops for
language teachers in several countries, and written
materials for language teachers and learners.
Email: mn.lewis@auckland.ac.nz
Fiona McCook has taught English and trained
teachers in Central Vietnam. She is now teaching
in Hanoi.
Email: onam@fpt.vn
Cultures of teaching 153