Language Awareness

ISSN: 0965-8416 (Print) 1747-7565 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rmla20

Code-switching in Vietnamese university EFL

teachers’ classroom instruction: a pedagogical
focus

Lynn E. Grant & Thi Hang Nguyen

To cite this article: Lynn E. Grant & Thi Hang Nguyen (2017): Code-switching in Vietnamese
university EFL teachers’ classroom instruction: a pedagogical focus, Language Awareness, DOI:
10.1080/09658416.2017.1402915

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2017.1402915

Published online: 21 Nov 2017.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 10

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rmla20

Download by: [University of Florida] Date: 27 November 2017, At: 00:39

 LANGUAGE AWARENESS, 2017
https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2017.1402915

Code-switching in Vietnamese university EFL teachers’

classroom instruction: a pedagogical focus
Lynn E. Granta and Thi Hang Nguyenb
a
School of Language and Culture, Auckland University of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand; bCentre for
Foreign Languages and Informatics, Thai Nguyen University of Agriculture and Forestry, Thai Nguyen City,
Vietnam
Downloaded by [University of Florida] at 00:39 27 November 2017

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

This study examines the under-explored phenomenon in Received 14 April 2016
Vietnamese tertiary settings of code-switching practised by EFL Accepted 5 November 2017
(English as a foreign language) teachers in classroom instruction, as KEYWORDS
well as their awareness of this practice. Among the foreign Code-switching; teachers;
languages taught and learned in Vietnamese universities, English is affect; pedagogy; policy
the most popular. The research design involved data-driven analysis
of 12 teachers’ code-switching behaviour in the EFL classroom from
four different main sources of information: classroom observations,
class recordings, interviews with the observed teachers, and field
notes. The findings show that teachers practised code-switching
very commonly in their English instruction, for both pedagogical
and affective reasons. Code-switching, when done deliberately and
selectively, can be a positive strategy to use in the EFL classroom,
but not if done habitually and automatically. Since code-switching
is a natural occurrence amongst bilingual speakers, teacher training
programs may need to include code-switching as a deliberate
teaching strategy. In addition, before any government policy or
guidelines on code-switching are introduced, teachers need specific
training on strategies for its effect use. The interviews with the
Vietnamese university EFL teachers revealed key reasons for their
code-switching in the EFL classroom, which are similar to those
found in other studies. These are examined with a pedagogical and
affective focus.

Introduction
In September 2008, the Vietnamese Prime Minister approved a national project entitled
‘Teaching and learning foreign languages in the national educational system from 2008-
2020’ (Government of Vietnam, 2008). It calls for strategies and practices in innovating
and improving the teaching and learning of foreign languages at all levels of education in
Vietnam. This study examines something not noted in this government policy but fre-
quently practised by language teachers, that is the code-switching (CS) that occurred in a
Vietnamese university English as a Foreign Language (EFL) classroom. The focus of this
article is not on the types of CS used, but on the reasons why EFL teachers frequently

CONTACT Lynn E. Grant lynn.grant@aut.ac.nz

© 2017 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
 2 L. E. GRANT AND T. H. NGUYEN

code-switch in their language classrooms. At tertiary level in Vietnam, Le (2007) reported

that of four main foreign languages, English was the choice of 90% of students. However,
the rapid growth of English resulted in serious shortages of well-trained and qualified EFL
teachers for lower education levels (Tien, 2013), indicating that when students reach ter-
tiary level they may not have attained proficiency in the language.
English was selected as the foreign language to be taught and learnt in all the schools
of the university in Vietnam where this study took place. In the 10 schools offering differ-
ent training majors all, except for the School of Foreign Languages, teach English as a
compulsory subject in the first two semesters of the first academic year. The number of
students in each EFL class ranges between 25 and 60. The total time for teaching English
is limited to 45 h for each class per semester. In addition to this, Vu and Burns (2014) iden-
tify other concerns in the Vietnamese situation, including the fact that university students
have diverse educational and socio-economic backgrounds, that they come both from cit-
Downloaded by [University of Florida] at 00:39 27 November 2017

ies where English learning is better resourced and rural areas where it is not, and that
although not all students complete university English entrance examinations, they are all
enrolled in the same classes, regardless of their English level. The same situation would
apply to this study.
In the Vietnamese EFL teaching setting, code-switching (CS), that is, the alternation
between learners’ first language, Vietnamese, and their target language (TL), English, is a
common element in both schools and universities. However, as discovered, it is a practice
that the EFL teachers may not be aware of, and one that the government has no policy
on. Furthermore, this phenomenon is used by English teachers both in communicating
with other English teachers and, particularly, in their classroom instruction. While we
know a little about different forms of CS, how code-switching occurs, and when it occurs,
the reasons for why teachers CS, from a pedagogical viewpoint, and their awareness of it,
have not yet been fully explored in the context of the university English language class-
room in Vietnam. This article is an attempt to help fill that gap. After reviewing some of
the relevant literature on CS, we will look at the EFL teachers’ reasons – both pedagogical
and affective – for CS, as well as their attitude toward a government policy on CS.

Literature review
Vietnamese EFL teachers
Vietnamese teachers must be bilingual in order to teach English. Previous studies about
bilinguals have identified two types, those born into bilingual households and communi-
ties, and those bilinguals for whom CS is a learned skill carried out in specific contexts for
specific reasons with specific interlocuters (Kharkhurin & Wei, 2015). It is the second type
that would apply to the Vietnamese EFL teachers in this study. In addition, Rahimi and
Eftekhari (2011) found that when there is insufficient exposure to English, both teachers
and students were inclined to code-switch, and the same would apply to this Vietnamese
study. Furthermore, bilinguals are not two monolinguals in one person, shutting off one
language while using the other, but instead integrate knowledge from both languages to
communicate (Grosjean, 1998). This includes communicating teachers’ instructions to stu-
dents in the EFL classroom but as noted, ‘classrooms are usually compound bilingual
spaces in which code-switching is inevitable’ (Chimbganda & Mokgwathi, 2012, p. 22). To
 LANGUAGE AWARENESS 3

sum up, the bilingual EFL teachers in this study are those who have learnt English through
study, have limited exposure to it outside the classroom, and who are now attempting to
communicate their instruction of English to their students in their bilingual classroom
spaces. All of this involves CS.

Language teaching and code-switching

Simon (2001) describes foreign language teachers’ code-switching (CS) as the teachers’
choice of using the language being taught (the target language, TL), and the language of
the school/society (the teachers’ and students’ first language, L1). Previous studies of
teachers’ CS practices in classroom instruction have looked at types of CS or factors
behind it (Cheng, 2013; Horasan, 2014), teachers’ attitude towards CS (Bilgin & Rahimi,
2013) and CS in the management of learning (Carless, 2008; Ferguson, 2003; Lin, 1996,
Downloaded by [University of Florida] at 00:39 27 November 2017

1999; Liu, Ahn, Beak, & Han, 2004). Studies that examined CS in the Asian EFL teaching
and learning environment include the function of CS and teachers’ attitude towards it in
the Chinese (Cheng, 2013), Taiwanese (Raschka, Sercombe, & Huang, 2009; Tien, 2009), Sri
Lankan (Canagarajah, 1995), Malaysian (Lee, 2010), Thai (Tayjasanant, 2014), and Japanese
language classrooms (Hobbs, Matsuo, & Payne, 2010), although not necessarily teachers’
awareness of their CS. Previously, CS was frowned on in L2 classrooms (Nunan, 1991; Willis,
1981), and was strongly discouraged, if not forbidden (Cheng, 2013). However, Low and Lu
(2006) found that in spite of the ban imposed, CS was still used in the educational setting
in Hong Kong. Most reports in the past were about what teachers ‘should’ do, rather than
€ u
what they ‘actually’ do (Ust €nel & Seedhouse, 2005).

Pedagogy and code-switching

Xu (2012, p. 30) claims that teacher code-switching is a complicated language use which
serves a variety of pedagogical purposes. Ferguson (2003, p. 39) uses 3 categories: CS for
curriculum access (to help students understand subject matter), CS for classroom manage-
ment discourse (to motivate, discipline, signal change), and CS for interpersonal relations
(to humanise classroom climate, negotiate identities). Other studies identified similar ped-
agogical functions of CS (Ahmad & Jusoff, 2009; Rubdy, 2007, p. 322): to motivate, disci-
pline or praise students, to check for understanding, to explain difficult concepts (e.g.
grammar, vocabulary), for matters related to classroom management; to make learners
feel relaxed or to establish contact with them. Macaro (2014) proposes a framework for
teachers’ attitudes towards CS in the classroom where teachers take one of three posi-
tions: virtual (teachers avoid the use of the L1 as the classroom is considered the outside
world), maximal (the classroom is still considered the outside world but the teacher uses
the L1 because of low language proficiency of the learners), and optimal (the teacher is
aware of the advantages and disadvantages of CS which may facilitate or hinder students’
L2 learning and use).
It is the variety of pedagogical purposes that we are most interested in here. To date
only a few studies in the Vietnamese educational context have addressed the issue of
teachers’ CS practice at the tertiary level (Barnard & McLellan, 2014; Kieu, 2010; Le, 2014;
Nguyen, 2012). Therefore, this paper aims to add to the literature on CS in a Vietnamese
EFL tertiary setting by providing insights into the reasons for teachers’ code-switching in
 4 L. E. GRANT AND T. H. NGUYEN

their classroom instruction of English, and by investigating this with two slightly overlap-
ping strands – the pedagogical concerns and the affective concerns. We will look at the
methodology used to collect the data next.

Methodology
The present study addressed this overarching question:
How do we understand the practice of code-switching by Vietnamese university EFL teach-
ers in their classrooms?
To gain this understanding, we needed to determine in what situations the CS took
place, what forms it took, what functions it served, and why teachers code-switched in
their EFL classrooms.
To investigate these issues, an ethnographic approach was adopted as the methodol-
Downloaded by [University of Florida] at 00:39 27 November 2017

ogy as it involves studying people’s behaviour in everyday contexts and gathering data
from a range of sources such as observation and conversation (Hammersley, 1990, pp. 2–
3). As noted, ethnography is one of the major approaches to research on second language
learning and teaching (Harklau, 2005), and it is ‘typically small in scale and focused on a
single setting or group’ (Starfield, 2010, p. 51). The group in our study consisted of EFL
teachers at one university in Vietnam.

Participants
Purposive sampling, the strategy of sampling that draws on appropriate sections of the pop-
ulation (Merriam, 1998; Patton, 2002) was employed to recruit participants, in our case, EFL
teachers. First we applied for ethical approval from the university where one of the authors
was doing her PhD. After approval was granted, this same author returned to the university
in Vietnam where she was employed, and asked for volunteers to be involved in the study.
Because she had more volunteers than were needed, the ones chosen were those that
reflected the balance of male/female as well as of experienced/inexperienced EFL teachers
at that university. In the end, 12 teachers were chosen to be involved in this study. More
female participants were recruited (8) because this reflected the ratio of male (4) and female
EFL teachers in the university. Similarly, more teachers with five years of teaching experience
and above (9) were chosen than those with fewer than five years in their career (3) for the
same reason. All 12 EFL teachers participating in this study were given the Information
Sheet, describing the research, as well as a Consent form for them to sign.

Data collection
As a data collection method, ethnography involves multiple techniques to obtain informa-
tion. In this study, classroom observations, class recordings and interviews with teachers
along with field notes were used. The field notes were very descriptive and included
everything that happened during the field work procedures: gaining access to the field
(i.e., the university), recruiting participants (both teachers and students), data collection
processes, the exact time when CS occurred, reflection on the research procedures and
the data being collected, as well as the first interpretation of the data in the preliminary
data analysis.
 LANGUAGE AWARENESS 5

Twenty four class hours of the twelve teachers – two classes for each – were observed
and recorded on a digital voice recorder which was placed on the front desk in each class-
room. In the crowded tertiary classrooms (it was noted that classes often contained 50 or
more students), teachers’ movements are restricted so this placement worked well for
recording what each teacher was saying. The length of time of observing two classes for
each of the 12 teachers varied slightly, but overall each class was observed for approxi-
mately 45 min (about 90 min in total for each teacher), with observation time ranging
from the minimum of 76 min (2 classes of Teacher 6) to the maximum of 104 min (2 clas-
ses of Teacher 5). Observation recordings were transcribed and member-checked after
each class was observed. In addition, post-observation interviews with these twelve teach-
ers were carried out (see Appendix).
Information obtained from the semi-structured interviews was triangulated with what
was observed and recorded in the teachers’ class hours. The interviews were conducted in
Downloaded by [University of Florida] at 00:39 27 November 2017

the teacher’s preferred venue, for example in a cafe (6), teachers’ meeting room (2), teach-
ers’ classroom (2), or even in some of teachers’ houses (2). This made the conversations
less formal and allowed teachers to feel comfortable to share what they thought. The
length of the interviews ranged from 23 to 44 min.

Data analysis
In this study, the analysis of collected data involved two phases: preliminary (Grbich, 2007)
and post data collection analysis. As noted, this preliminary phase involved transcribing
the class recordings and the interview recordings, as well as member checking of the tran-
scripts with participants.
For the post-data-collection analysis, a thematic analysis method (Boyatzis, 1998; Gibson
& Brown, 2009) was applied to examine the EFL teachers’ practice of code-switching in their
English instruction. We did not investigate the CS behaviour of individual teachers, but
rather looked for patterns and trends among the whole group of teachers to discover the
commonalities and differences and the EFL teachers’ attitudes towards their CS practice.
To code the data, firstly we summarised the information from the interview in two sub-
samples. The first subsample included the observation and interview transcripts taken
from 3 teachers with field notes, while the second included the same from 3 different
teachers. For the class recording transcripts, we highlighted where teachers used both lan-
guages in the transcripts, and listed all instances of these teachers’ switches. As the EFL
teachers were teaching in English, the switches were always from English to Vietnamese
and then back to English. We labelled each CS instance as, for example, an utterance, part
of an utterance, a filler or a tag, noted what the teacher was doing when he/she code-
switched, and then listed all situations in which they switched.
This comparison between the subsamples allowed us to identify potential themes of
the two types of data (the interview transcripts and class recording transcripts), looking
for commonalities and differences in the information shared by the participants. For
example, we noted that the EFL teachers tended to code-switch in three particular situa-
tions: when explaining vocabulary (1), when explaining grammatical rules (2), and when
dealing with English pronunciation (3).
Thirdly, we compared these potential themes across the two subsamples (A and B), and
rewrote these themes, creating a code based on the theme that we had just rewritten. We
 6 L. E. GRANT AND T. H. NGUYEN

labelled each teacher (T1, T2, T3, etc.) and noted whether the themes were mentioned in
the teacher interviews (TI), or noted in the transcripts of the teacher class recording (TCR).
When a minus sign (-) was added, this indicated that it was not found in either the teacher
interviews (TI) or the teacher class recording (TCR). So while 11 of the total of 12 EFL teach-
ers interviewed showed that they code-switched in all three situations – explaining vocab-
ulary, grammar and pronunciation (1, 2, 3), for one teacher (T7) this was not noted in the
class recording or interview. Therefore that teacher was coded (1, -2TCR, -3TCR) to indicate
that this teacher code-switched while explaining vocabulary but did not code-switch
while teaching grammar or pronunciation in the two classes that were recorded.
Lastly, to determine the reliability of the code and minimise the possibility of missing
themes, we asked a colleague, not involved in the research project, to use the code on
another subsample (subsample C, comprised of the data collected from one teacher –
class recording, interview with that teacher, along with observation and field notes). There
Downloaded by [University of Florida] at 00:39 27 November 2017

were only minor differences between our colleague’s work and ours when we coded
independently.
The switches were counted manually; no software was used for this purpose.

Findings and discussion

Overall in the EFL classrooms, a wide range in the number of teachers’ switches were
noted. Some teachers (T1, T3, T10, and T11) code-switched frequently, ranging from 327
to 439 switches while one teacher (T7) code-switched far less often with only 10 instances
of switching (mostly involving fillers) in the two classes observed. The reason for this dif-
ference in switching could be the extent of the priority different teachers gave to English
in their classes, showing that some teachers translated their beliefs into practice to a
greater extent than others. Another explanation is that some teachers are unaware of the
frequency of their CS (Gardner-Chloros, 2009), in this case their use of Vietnamese in their
EFL classroom.

Code-switching situations
The pedagogical focus of this article addresses the Vietnamese EFL teachers’ pedagogical
concerns (to clarify instructions, to cover course content expediently, to encourage or
emphasise) and their affective concerns (to respond to teacher’s or students’ feelings, to
share identity and build rapport, to discipline or control the class, to respond by habit)
separately. Both categories will be used to explain the reasons the teachers gave in the
interviews for their CS. We will look first at the category we have called Pedagogical Con-
cerns, and following this at the Affective Concerns.

Pedagogical concerns
To clarify instructions and scaffold the learning
One of the most common reasons for teachers to code-switch is to clarify their instruc-
tions and to scaffold the learning of the target language, providing a bridge from the
known to the unknown, especially for a difficult concept (Gu & Benson, 2015; Horasan,
2014; Samar & Moradkhani, 2014; Vu & Burns, 2014). With some aspects of the language
 LANGUAGE AWARENESS 7

that are often challenging to learners with limited proficiency, CS has been shown to be
more effective than instruction in the target language only (Tian & Macaro, 2012). As
Macaro (2005) notes, CS can be used to reduce the ‘cognitive constraints imposed by
working memory limitations’ (p. 74). The Vietnamese teachers were concerned about the
low level of some of their students, and their ability to understand aspects such as vocab-
ulary or grammar. With the lack of any placement tests, and with differences in students’
previous exposure to English, it is inevitable that students’ level of English will vary.

T5: Actually, it depends on individual students. If students are at low level of English,
then I use more Vietnamese because they are not able to understand.
T10: Ah, for teaching vocabulary, I have used many different ways, for example, firstly I
explain simple sentences in English. If they (students) don’t understand, I will use
actions or pictures to facilitate their understanding. But if they still can’t understand,
Downloaded by [University of Florida] at 00:39 27 November 2017

then I will explain in Vietnamese. There’s one thing that if I don’t use Vietnamese to
emphasise some points, my students may not remember, especially some gram-
matical points. It would be not effective if I only explain grammatical points in
English, but it would be if I say again in Vietnamese.
T12: If I find that learners have not yet understood, then I have to explain in Vietnamese.
It will be Vietnamese.

As in other studies, the EFL tertiary teachers in Vietnam code-switched from English to
Vietnamese in order to make their teaching of important concepts such as grammar and
vocabulary clear, especially because of the mixed-ability levels in their classes.

To cover the lesson content in an expedient manner

The Vietnamese EFL teachers feel they have a lot of content to get through in each lesson,
which is made more challenging because of large class sizes and the mixed language pro-
ficiency of students. This leads to teachers CS for reasons of expediency, or ease of expres-
sion (as also noted in Cheng, 2013; Mujiono, Poedjosoedarmo, Subroto, & Wiratno, 2013;
Vu & Burns, 2014).

T3: …and to save time, I spoke in Vietnamese so that all of them can understand me.
T9: Apart from that, there’s pressure on the amount of the content that teachers have to
cover. My class is so crowded and I have only a little time, so obviously I have to find
the way to solve that problem, to accomplish my task. And then I switch so that it is
much faster and easier.

Therefore in order to get through the curriculum in the time allowed, the EFL teachers
frequently code-switched from English to Vietnamese.

To encourage and emphasise

Teachers also choose to code-switch in order to encourage or motivate students, or to
emphasise a teaching point, reasons also found in other studies (Horasan, 2014; Mujiono
et al., 2013; Samar & Moradkhani, 2014).
 8 L. E. GRANT AND T. H. NGUYEN

T7: I use Vietnamese here to praise my students when they have done a good job. Even
when they do not, I still motivate them by giving them praise in response to their will-
ingness to answer my questions.
T4: When I repeat, repeat again and again certain points, my students will know that such
information is very important, and that they need to pay attention to it.

Because of the varying standards of proficiency and the large number of students in
the EFL classes, teachers must be mindful of keeping as many students as possible inter-
ested and on task. To ensure that students know what is particularly important to learn,
teachers tend to emphasise and repeat – often through code-switching – certain aspects
of the lesson.

Affective concerns
Downloaded by [University of Florida] at 00:39 27 November 2017

EFL teachers also code-switch for reasons that, while important for the pedagogy, would
fall more under the Affective category, such as some of these reasons included here.

To respond to teachers’ or students’ feelings

Sometimes teachers choose to code-switch based on how the students or they them-
selves were feeling (Wilkerson, 2008; Gulzar, 2010; Mujiono et al., 2013).

T4: Whenever the students are in a bad mood, for example, or when they don’t concentrate
on the lesson very much, I can also use less English. …Here, in this situation, perhaps
because some students looked embarrassed, so I asked them in Vietnamese.
T3: I used Vietnamese to tell my students about my family matters and state of health. You
know, sometimes I arrive at class in a poor condition of health, my students keep talk-
ing while I am trying to explain the lesson. In that case I have to talk in Vietnamese so
that they sympathise with my situation.

If teachers notice that their students appear disinterested or not engaged in the lesson,
the use of CS may help recapture the students’ attention. Also, students are likely to relate
to their teachers and feel closer to or emphasise with them if they learn more about their
teachers’ lives outside of the classroom.

To share identity and build rapport with students

At times the reason for the EFL teachers to code-switch to Vietnamese relates to identity,
as found in other studies (Gu & Benson, 2015; Horasan, 2014; Jiang, Carcia, & Willis, 2014;)
or to building a rapport, sometimes including the use of humour (Bilgin & Rahimi, 2013;
Cheng, 2013; Littlewood & Yu, 2011). As noted (Rubdy, 2007), the classroom is a place
where teachers and students negotiate their identities and their relationships with each
other.

T4: Perhaps, it is very interesting, like this: when I insert Vietnamese into my utterance, I
have the feeling that we are Vietnamese, we are very close, and this removes the dis-
tance between us. …Maybe I feel that my insertion of Vietnamese has a good effect,
we are Vietnamese.
 LANGUAGE AWARENESS 9

T10: Many times I used Vietnamese to be more friendly with my students. When I speak in
Vietnamese to share my story, every student can understand what I mean and how I
feel.
T12: (Any are animals? in Vietnamese) Yes? Panda, panda, from? Kung Fu Panda. (loud
laughter from students, who were familiar with the movie)

In addition, having a good rapport with students makes a teachers’ job more enjoyable.
Students are also likely to enjoy the classroom more if it is clear that they have a shared
identity with their teachers, and code-switching to the students’ L1 makes this shared
identity clear.

To discipline students and maintain control

Teachers like to build a rapport with their students, but also need to maintain control of the
Downloaded by [University of Florida] at 00:39 27 November 2017

class and occasionally to discipline students. Large classes can lead to problems with this
control, as noted by others (Fersugon, 2003; Horasan, 2014; Kim & Elder, 2005; Rubdy, 2007).
While not given by the Vietnamese EFL teachers as a reason for CS, an example of this
was found in the ‘Field Notes’ taken during the study. That is, when one student arrived
late, the teacher code-switched to Vietnamese to chastise and criticise the student for his
late arrival, a reason that Rubdy (2007) also found.

To respond by habit or based on previous experience

Another affective reason for CS relates to how the Vietnamese teachers were educated
themselves, starting in primary school, and continuing in secondary school and teachers’
training. Hobbs et al. (2010) explained that the teachers’ culture of learning was a factor
that had an impact on their CS, which would also apply to the Vietnamese teachers of
English, sometimes one they are not aware of.

T1: Actually, it’s normal when I code-switch here because it’s something like my habit, my
habit. This habit is a habit that, it’s…, it’s…, how can I say, it’s because…It’s formed dur-
ing the time I teach and use Vietnamese so that my students can understand better. But
I myself, in my mind I don’t want to use Vietnamese like that, I don’t want it at all.
T8: I actually found that I had not had any ideas about this, switch, code, until I had a talk
with you. After having conversation with you about it, I found it very interesting. In
fact, I have never thought about it. I’ve never thought of how much English or Vietnam-
ese I am using in my classes.

The problem with this automatic CS is that it could lead to the students learning to
ignore the English and just waiting for the Vietnamese, as noted below.

T10: If we use too much Vietnamese, we will create a bad habit for our students. They will
become passive and lazy. When we say something in English and translate it into
Vietnamese, students will not pay attention to our first sentence in English, but just
wait for the second one in Vietnamese. Next time they will be waiting [for the Vietnam-
ese translation], yes, that’s it because they know for sure that their teachers will defi-
nitely do so.
 10 L. E. GRANT AND T. H. NGUYEN

Teachers were also aware of the amount of CS when they themselves had learnt
English.

T5: In secondary or high schools, teachers rarely instructed in English. What they focused
on is just teaching English grammar and vocabulary but not skills. Students didn’t
have chances to listen to teachers speaking English. My case is an example. When I
was a student at secondary school, and my class was chosen for learning English more
than the other classes [other classes are chosen for maths, physics, etc], even though
the teachers used very limited English in the class. When I became a student at teach-
ers’ training school, the teachers who guided me used very little English. It was so seri-
ous that when I spoke English in my class, it became an odd behaviour and my guide
teacher gave me negative comments on my teaching practice. I didn’t dare to use
much English then (laughs).
Downloaded by [University of Florida] at 00:39 27 November 2017

As well as asking the Vietnamese EFL teachers their attitude towards CS, they were also
asked how they felt about having a government policy on CS in the classroom.

Awareness of and attitudes towards government policy on code-switching

Previous studies have argued that CS can be the result of the lack of a clear government
policy on the amount of L1 to be used in the EFL classroom (Camilleri, 1996; Cheng, 2013).
This is especially in a situation where English is seen as being imposed on the school sys-
tem without regard for its use in the wider community (Chimbganda & Mokgwathi, 2012).
The same seems to be true of the policy – or lack of one – in Vietnam, as noted.

T1: It depends on the place where a policy is applied. For example, in my institution, it’s
very difficult to apply a policy of only English. It only suits with students of advanced
programme but not the entire students. It takes time for a policy to be introduced
widely. And I think if there’s a policy of using language, it should be applied to lower
level of education, primary schools, secondary schools.
T3: No policy, no guidance. No official documents. All we teachers, when talking to each
other, remind ourselves of using as much English as possible. But the point is it’s only
good if students are able to understand. …I think it should be flexible [what do you
mean?] It’s not real if English is forced to be used completely. Guidance should be flexi-
ble because situations in class vary for teachers, I mean if teachers speak in English all
the time but students have no idea about what they are saying, then Vietnamese can
help. It’s difficult to force teachers to do that. It must be flexible, a kind of guidance.
T10: It’s an interesting policy but I think it’s not practical in the Vietnamese educational envi-
ronment, in universities. In class sometimes teachers themselves break the rules speak-
ing Vietnamese, when they use Vietnamese to explain a certain grammatical point or
difficult words. One more thing is, getting out of classroom, there is no one to commu-
nicate with in English, all around is Vietnamese.

If asked, most teachers are likely to have suggestions regarding having a government
policy on CS in the classroom, especially one which raises their awareness of the practice.
Previously, one suggestion made by Cook (2001) is that teacher training programmes
could include CS techniques as part of teachers’ repertoire for teaching. The same
 LANGUAGE AWARENESS 11

suggestion was made by Malaysian teachers who argued that guidelines on the use of CS
should be included in the teacher training programme so that teachers could learn how
CS could be used effectively in the classrooms (Selamat, 2014). Similarly, Chitera (2009)
reasoned that since the use of the home language cannot be avoided in multilingual or
multilevel classrooms, ‘student teachers need to be engaged in language practices that
they are more likely to encounter when they begin to teach’ (pp. 437–438). Teachers in
one mini-course about critical language awareness for teaching identified ‘teaching stu-
dents about code-switching or how to code-switch’ as one of the most important things
they learned as they learned to value code-switching (Godley, Reaser, & Moore, 2015, p.
50). One of the Vietnamese EFL teachers commented about what is needed before having
a government policy.

T4: If this policy is applied, there need to have some preparation. The first is to get teachers
Downloaded by [University of Florida] at 00:39 27 November 2017

well-prepared. Teachers need to attend workshops on using languages, or code-

switching in the class so that they can be aware of this issue. They also need to be
trained to have good language skills so that they are able to use only English in every
situation appropriately and clearly to the learners. For the learners I think that if the
teachers are well prepared for their use of English, the learners will become familiar
with their teachers’ English use only. … There will be many problems if it is applied to
my school right now. The first problem is the teachers’ habit. Not all of them agree
that only English is good, so teachers themselves will have many different ideas about
this policy. …However, it is really difficult for all students to give up their learning habit
at the beginning. Teachers will also have difficulty as well, so we wish to have regular
workshops so that teachers can improve their knowledge related to English teaching
and they can have more materials which help them in their career in terms of using
English instead of Vietnamese.

As noted, teachers need to be aware of their practise of CS. It is likely that many EFL
teachers would support increasing their awareness of their own practice of CS, as well as
having training about the advantages of CS, or the opportunity to attend workshops on it
(Vu & Burns, 2014). The quote below shows that this EFL teacher was not aware that
switching from English to Vietnamese was known as code-switching:

T8: I actually found that I had not had any ideas about this, switch, code, until I had a talk
with you. After having conversation with you about it, I found it very interesting. In
fact, I have never thought about it. I’ve never thought of how much English or
Vietnamese I am using in my classes.

In fact, of the twelve teachers interviewed, two others also mentioned that they were
not aware of CS prior to their involvement in the study.
While it appears that raising awareness of teachers’ practice of CS is the place to start,
support for a government policy on CS would require that teachers be well-prepared in
advance. They would need to be informed of the government policy, told how it would
be applied in the EFL classrooms, and given staff development time to adjust to the appli-
cation of such a government policy. In addition, as found elsewhere (Willans, 2011), a gov-
ernment policy that bans the use of the students’ L1 in the classroom actually stifles their
 12 L. E. GRANT AND T. H. NGUYEN

opportunities to learn. Instead, we should be exploring pedagogical resources that can be

used for teaching languages bilingually (Creese & Blakledge, 2010).

Conclusion
As English is the chosen working language of ASEAN (Association of South East Asian
Nations) (Kirkpatrick, 2010) and is recognised as a global language of communication, it is
not surprising that many Asian countries teach it, nor that Vietnam has chosen it as their
main foreign language. However, the reality is that tertiary EFL classrooms are often
crowded with students from diverse backgrounds with varying amounts of previous expo-
sure to English and no entry level test before being assigned to a class. Perhaps partly as a
result of all of this, EFL teachers frequently code-switch between English and Vietnamese
for a number of pedagogical or affective reasons. These include students’ low level of
Downloaded by [University of Florida] at 00:39 27 November 2017

English, the need to cover the lesson content, students’ attitudes towards learning English,
their own emotions, and their lack of awareness of CS or the amount they are practising.
Awareness raising of teachers’ practice of CS is essential (Bahous, Nabhani, & Bacha, 2014;
Rudby, 2007), however in our study it was clear that 3 of the 12 EFL teachers interviewed
were either not aware of their own practice of CS, or of the frequency with which they did
it. Corcoll (2013, p. 29) notes that while the spontaneous use of the L1 in the language
classroom should be accepted, it is ‘only the directed and informed use of the L1, based
on pedagogic principles, which can make the teaching process more effective’. This study
gives support for that statement.
Therefore, two suggestions can now be put forward, the first relating to teacher train-
ees and practising teachers, and the second related to the government. First, teacher
training programs should include ways for trainees to use CS as a deliberate teaching
strategy in specific pedagogical or affective situations. This would help them move
towards Macaro’s (2014) optimal level of CS. At the same time, practising teachers should
critically analyse their present practice of immediately translating tasks and instructions
from the target language to the first language so that it does not become automatic and
demotivating for students who, in the Vietnamese situation, may learn to ignore the
English and wait for the Vietnamese translation. As Ngo (2015) has shown, the habit of
translating has had a detrimental effect on students’ listening skills in Vietnam. However,
if used deliberately in specific situations, this CS in the EFL classroom could be a way for-
ward (Vaish & Subhan, 2015). Second, the government should provide more staff develop-
ment for EFL teachers to raise their awareness of their own practice of CS, learn the value
of CS as a teaching tool, as well as the benefit of gradually removing some of the CS scaf-
folding and focusing more on the target language as the students progress through the
educational system from primary to high school to university. Raising teachers’ awareness
of the CS issue in the language classroom is the first step.

Limitations and future research

This study has several limitations. It involved only 12 EFL teachers at one university in
Vietnam. As well, it is possible that the EFL teachers who did show awareness of CS became
aware of their practice of CS after reading the Information Sheet in this study, informing
them of the research, and through answering questions about CS in the interviews.
 LANGUAGE AWARENESS 13

Future studies that focus on CS in Vietnam or elsewhere could investigate CS in primary

and secondary schools or involve more teachers and more universities. Such studies could
also be longitudinal, or could investigate how teacher education programs could raise
teachers’ awareness of the issue of CS. It is hoped that this particular study has helped to
fill a small gap and increase our understanding of pedagogical and affective reasons for
CS in the Vietnamese tertiary educational environment.

Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank the Vietnamese teachers who participated in this study, as well as
the reviewers who gave valuable feedback which led to improvements in the article.
Downloaded by [University of Florida] at 00:39 27 November 2017

Disclosure statement
No personal conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes on contributors
Lynn Grant is a senior lecturer at AUT. She has been teaching English as an additional language (EAL)
students in New Zealand for more than 30 years, as well as previously to students in Canada, Nigeria
and Spain. Her research interests lie in the areas of academic English, idiomatic language and corpus
linguistics.

Hang Nguyen is employed as Deputy Director at the Thai Nguyen University of Agriculture and
Forestry in Vietnam. Her research interests lie in the area of code-switching and how it affects
learning.

References
Ahmad, B. H., & Jusoff, K. (2009). Teacher’s code-switching in classroom instructions for low English
proficient learners. English Language Teaching, 2(2), 49–55.
Bahous, R. N., Nabhani, M. B., & Bacha, N. N. (2014). Code-switching in higher education in a multilin-
gual environment: A Lebanese exploratory study. Language Awareness, 23(4), 353–368.
Barnard, R., & McLellan, J. (Eds.). (2014). Code-switching in university English-medium classes: Asian per-
spectives. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Bilgin, G. P., & Rahimi, A. (2013). EFL teachers’ attitude toward code-switching: A Turkish setting.
International Journal of Linguistics, 5(5), 1–13.
Boyatzis, R. E. (1998). Transforming qualitative information: Thematic analysis and code development.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Camilleri, A. (1996). Language values and identities: Code switching in secondary classrooms in
Malta. Linguistics and Education, 8, 85–103.
Canagarajah, S. (1995). Functions of code-switching in ESL classrooms: Socialising bilingualism in
Jaffna. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 6(3), 173–195.
Carless, D. (2008). Student use of the mother tongue in the task-based classrooms. ELT Journal, 62(4),
331–338.
Cheng, X. (2013). Research on Chinese college English teachers’ classroom code-switching: Beliefs
and attitudes. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 4(6), 1277–1284.
Chimbganda, A. B., & Mokgwathi, T. S. (2012). Code-switching in Botswana’s ESL classrooms: A para-
dox of linguistic policy in education. International Journal of Linguistics, 2(2), 21–32.
 14 L. E. GRANT AND T. H. NGUYEN

Chitera, N. (2009). Code-switching in a college mathematics classroom. International Journal of Multi-

lingualism, 6(4), 426–442.
Cook, V. (2001). Using the first language in the classroom. Canadian Modern Language Review, 57,
399–423. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.57.3.402
Corcoll, C. (2013). Developing children’s language awareness: Switching codes in the language class-
room. International Journal of Multilingualism, 10(1), 27–45.
Creese, A., & Blackledge, A. (2010). Translanguaging in the bilingual classroom: A pedagogy for learn-
ing and teaching? The Modern Language Journal, 94(1), 103–115.
Ferguson, G. (2003). Classroom code-switching in post-colonial contexts: Functions, attitudes and
policies. AILA Review, 16, 38–51.
Gardner-Chloros, P. (2009). Code switching. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Gibson, W. J., & Brown, A. (2009). Working with qualitative data. London: Sage.
Godley, A. J., Reaser, J., & Moore, J. G. (2015). Pre-service English language arts teachers’ develop-
ment of critical language awareness for teaching. Linguistics and Education, 32, 41–54.
Government of Vietnam. (2008). Quyết định số 1400/QĐ-TTg của Thủ tướng chınh phủ: Về việc ph^e duyệt
n ‘Dạy va
đề a  học ngoại ngữ trong hệ thống gia o dục quốc da
^n giai đoạn 2008-2020’ [Resolution num-
Downloaded by [University of Florida] at 00:39 27 November 2017

ber 1400/QĐ-TTg by the Prime Minister: On the approval of the project ‘Teaching and learning for-
eign languages in the national education system in the period of 2008-2020’]. Retrieved from http://
vanban.chinhphu.vn/portal/page/portal/chinhphu/hethongvanban?_page=5&class_id=1 &documen
t_id=78437&mode=detail&org_group_id=0&org_id=0&type_group_id=0&type_id=0Project
Grbich, C. (2007). Qualitative analysis: An introduction. London: Sage.
Grosjean, F. (1998). Studying bilinguals: Methodological and conceptual issues. Bilingualism:
Language and Cognition, 1(2), 131–149.
Gu, M., & Benson, P. (2015). The formation of English teacher identities: A cross cultural investigation.
Language Teaching Research, 19(2), 187–206.
Gulzar, M. A. (2010). Code-switching: Awareness about its utility in bilingual classrooms. Bulletin of
Education and Research, 32(2), 23–44.
Hammersley, M. (1990). Reading ethnographic research: A critical guide. London: Longman.
Harklau, L. (2005). Ethnography and ethnographic research on second language teaching and learn-
ing. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research on second language teaching and learning (pp.179–
194). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Hobbs, V., Matsuo, A., & Payne, M. (2010). Code-switching in Japanese language classrooms: An exploratory
investigation of native vs. non-native speaker teacher practice. Linguistics and Education, 21, 44–59.
Horasan, S. (2014). Code-switching in EFL classrooms and the perceptions of the students and teach-
ers. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 10(1), 31–45.
Jiang, Y-L. B., Carcia, G. E., & Willis, A. I. (2014). Code-mixing as a bilingual instructional strategy. Bilin-
gual Research Journal, 37, 311–326.
Kharkhurin, A. V., & Wei, L. (2015). The role of code-switching in bilingual creativity. International Jour-
nal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 18(2), 153–169.
Kieu, H. K. A. (2010). Use of Vietnamese in English language teaching in Vietnam: Attitudes of
Vietnamese university teachers. English Language Teaching, 3(2), 119–128.
Kim, S. H., & Elder, C. (2005). Language choices and pedagogic functions in the foreign language class-
room: A cross-linguistic functional analysis of teacher talk. Language Teaching Research, 9(4), 355–380.
Kirkpatrick, A. (2010). English as an Asian lingua franca and the multilingual model of ELT. Hong
Kong Association of Applied Linguistics Research Forum, 12 December 2009, Hong Kong Poly-
technic University, Hong Kong.
Le, V. C. (2007). A historical review of English language education in Vietnam. In Y. H. Choi & B.
Spolsky (Eds.), English education in Asia: History and politics (pp. 168–180). Seoul: Asia TEFL.
Le, V. C. (2014). Codeswitching in universities in Vietnam and Indonesia. In R. Barnard & J. McLellan
(Eds.), Code-switching in university English-medium classes: Asian perspectives (pp. 118–131). Bristol:
Multilingual Matters.
Lee, H. L. J. (2010). Code switching in the teaching of English as a second language to secondary
school students. Malaysian Journal of ELT Research, 6, 1–45.
 LANGUAGE AWARENESS 15

Lin, A. M. Y. (1996). Bilingualism or linguistic segregation? Symbolic domination, resistance and code-
switching in Hong Kong schools. Linguistics and Education, 8(1), 49–84.
Lin, A. M. Y. (1999). Doing English lessons in the reproduction or transformation of social worlds?
TESOL Quarterly, 33(3), 393–412.
Littlewood, W., & Yu, B. (2011). First language and target language in the foreign language class-
room. Language Teaching, 44(1), 64–77.
Liu, D., Ahn, G. S., Beak, K. S., & Han, N. O. (2004). South Korean high school English teacher’s code-
switching: Questions and challenges in the drive for maximal use of English in teaching. TESOL
Quarterly, 38(4), 605–638. doi:10.2307/3588282
Low, W. W. M., & Lu, D. (2006). Persistent use of mixed code: An exploration of its functions in Hong
Kong schools. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 9(2), 181–204.
Macaro, E. (2005). Codeswitching in the L2 classroom: A communication and learning strategy. In
E. Llurda (Ed.), Non-native language teachers: Perceptions, challenges, and contributions to the pro-
fessions (pp. 63–84). United States of America: Springer. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/
0-387-24565-0_5
Downloaded by [University of Florida] at 00:39 27 November 2017

Macaro, E. (2014). Overview: Where should we be going with classroom code-switching research? In
R. Barnard & J. McLellan (Eds.), Code-switching in university English-medium classes (pp. 10–23).
Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
Mujiono, N., Poedjosoedarmo, S., Subroto, E., & Wiratno, T. (2013). Code-switching in English as for-
eign language instruction practiced by English lecturers at universities. International Journal of
Linguistics, 5(2), 46–65.
Ngo, N. T. H. (2015). Some insights into listening strategies of learners of English as a foreign lan-
guage in Vietnam. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 28(3), 311–326.
Nguyen, Q. T. (2012). English-Vietnamese code-switching in tertiary educational context in Vietnam.
Asian Englishes, 15(2), 4–29.
Nunan, D. (1991). Language teaching methodology: A textbook for teachers. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice Hall.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Rahimi, A., & Eftekhari, M. (2011). Psycholinguistic code-switching in Iranian university classroom
context. The Journal of Language Teaching and Learning, 1, 54–63.
Raschka, C., Sercombe, P., & Huang, C. L. (2009). Conflicts and tensions in codeswitching in Taiwanese
EFL classrooms. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 12(2), 157–171.
doi:10.1080/13670050802153152
Rubdy, R. (2007). Singlish in the school: An impediment or a resource? Journal of Multilingual and
Multicultural Development, 28, 308–317.
Samar, R. G., & Moradkhani, S. (2014). Codeswitching in the language classroom: A study of four EFL
teachers’ cognition. RELC Journal, 45 (2), 151–164.
Selamat, J. T. (2014). Code-switching in the Malaysian ESL classroom (Unpublished master’s disserta-
tion). University of Otago, Dunedin.
Simon, D. L. (2001). Towards a new understanding of codeswitching in the foreign language class-
room. In R. Jacobson (Ed.), Codeswitching worldwide II (pp. 311–342). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Starfield, S. (2010). Ethnographies. In B. Paltridge & A. Phakiti (Eds.), Continuum companion to research
methods in applied linguistics (50–65). London: Continuum.
Tayjasanant, C. (2014). Codeswitching in universities in Thailand and Bhutan. In R. Barnard & J. McLel-
lan (Eds.), Code-switching in university English-medium classes: Asian perspectives (pp. 92–104). Bris-
tol: Multilingual Matters.
Tian, L., & Macaro, E. (2012). Comparing the effect of teacher code-switching with English-only
explanations on the vocabulary acquisition of Chinese students: A lexical focus-on-form study.
Language Teaching Research, 16(3), 367–391.
Tien, C. (2009). Conflict and accommodation in classroom code switching in Taiwan. International
Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 12, 173–192.
 16 L. E. GRANT AND T. H. NGUYEN

Tien, L. H. (2013). ELT in Vietnam general and tertiary education from second language education
perspectives. VNU Journal of Foreign Studies, 29(1), 65–71.
€ unel, E., & Seedhouse, P. (2005). Why that, in that language, right now? Code-switching and peda-
Ust€
gogical focus. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 15(3), 302–325.
Vaish, V., & Subhan, A. (2015). Translanguaging in a reading class. International Journal of Multilin-
gualism, 12(3), 338–357.
Vu, N. T. T., & Burns, A. (2014). English as a medium of instruction: Challenges for Vietnamese tertiary
lecturers. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 11(3), 1–31.
Wilkerson, C. (2008). Instructor’s use of English in the modern language classroom. Foreign Language
Annals, 41(2), 310–319.
Willans, F. (2011). Classroom code-switching in a Vanuatu secondary school, conflict between policy
and practice. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 14(1), 23–38.
Willis, J. (1981). Teaching English through English. Harlow: Longman.
Xu, Q. (2012). A tentative analysis of code-switching in college bilingual education. Cross-Cultural
Communication, 8(4), 30–33.
Downloaded by [University of Florida] at 00:39 27 November 2017

Appendix. Interview guide for teachers

English version
Questions
When do you switch in classroom teaching?
Why do you switch?
Are there any official policies or regulations
that are used as guide to teachers’ use of
1st/2nd language in the classroom?
Prompts
 Do you use mostly Vietnamese or English in the classroom for English
teaching?
 Do you use Vietnamese at some points when teaching English to
students?
 What language do you use when you:
- introduce lessons to students
- teach, or explain, or expand vocabulary
- explain grammar rules
- find difficult communicating with students
- want to build relationships with students (e.g. expressing emotion,
making students relaxed, encouraging students, expressing
humour, building solidarity or gaining intimate relationship)
- manage, or organise classrooms
- make sure, or clarify students’ understanding, or highlighting
important information
 What other situations do you use Vietnamese when teaching English
to students in the classroom?
Now, let’s see this excerpt from a recorded lesson you taught on… .
.......
Why did you switch here? Were your switches to explain grammar, or
to encourage your students, or for other reasons?
......
 What are the advantages of your use of Vietnamese at some phases of
English teaching in the class?
 What are the disadvantages?
 What language do your students usually use to respond
- when you ask them in English?
- when you ask them in Vietnamese?
 How do you feel when you use Vietnamese at certain points to teach
English to students?
 What is your opinion about ‘using English only’ in English language
teaching classroom?
 in your university?
 in your country?
 Is it a necessity for teachers in your country in general and your
university in particular to have such policies or regulations?
 What is your suggestion?