Trần Thị Bích Hường Thesis Final Revise

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING
VINH UNIVERSITY
____________________________________________
TRẦN THỊ BÍCH HƯỜNG
APPLYING FLIPGRID - BASED PORTFORTLIO

TO IMPROVE EFL 12TH GRADERS’
SPEAKING SKILL
MASTER’S THESIS IN EDUCATION
Nghệ An, 2021

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING
VINH UNIVERSITY
____________________________________________
TRẦN THỊ BÍCH HƯỜNG
APPLYING FLIPGRID - BASED PORTFORTLIO

TO IMPROVE EFL 12TH GRADERS’
SPEAKING SKILL
Field: Theory and methods of teaching English

Code: 60140112
MASTER’S THESIS IN EDUCATION
Supervisor: LE THI TUYET HANH, Ph.D.
Nghệ An, 2021

i
STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP
I certify that the thesis entitled “Applying Flipgrid- based portfolio to

improve EFL 12th graders’ speaking skill” is the result of my own research. The
data and findings discussed in the thesis based on the result of the research. All
sources used in this research have been documented. This thesis has not been
submitted to any degree or diploma at university.
Nghe An, July 2021
Author’s signature
Trần Thị Bích Hường

ii
ABSTRACT
This quasi - experimental research aimed at investigating the impacts of

Flipgrid based portfolio to improve speaking skill. The data was collected from
a pretest, a posttest administered to 86 EFL 12 th graders, who were divided in
two groups, a control one and an experimental one. The questionnaires and the
interviews were conducted among 43 participants of the experimental group. In
order to find out students’ reflection on the application of the Flipgrid based
portfolio. The results showed that Flipgrid based portfolio significantly
improved students’ speaking performances in terms of five criteria included
grammar, pronunciation, vocabulary, fluency and idea development.
Additionally, all the participants in the experimental group had positive

attitude towards the use of this online platform. On the basis of the findings,
many pedagogical recommendations were put forward with the hope of pushing
the use of e-portfolio in English language teaching and learning.
KEY WORDS: Flipgrid, portfolio, e-portfolio, speaking skill, EFL high

school students, attitude
iii
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
From the bottom of my heart, it is a pleasure to acknowledge all the

following people who contributed to the completion of my thesis.
First and foremost, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my

supervisor Dr. Le Thi Tuyet Hanh for her valuable guidance, insightful
comments, constructive cristicism throughout the period of this investigation.
I am also highly thankful to all lecturers in Vinh university, those who

provided me with valuable sources of knowledge during the course. Special
thanks for great enthusiasm and eagerness for the research which the lectures
inspire me from the start of the course.
I am deeply grateful to the Board of Directors of 1-5 High School,

especially Mr. Le Thanh Huyen, the principal, who gave me the best condition
to complete my thesis.
I would like to show my gratitude to my all participants who accepted to

take part in my study with willing support and contribution during data
collection.
Last but not least, a heartfelt thanks to my family members is for their
encouragement and love, without which my thesis would not be completed
on time.
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP............................................................i
ABSTRACT.................................................................................................ii
ACKNOWLEDGMENT...........................................................................iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS...........................................................................iv
LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES........................................................vii
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION..............................................................1
1.1. Rationale...........................................................................................1
1.2. Objectives of the study.....................................................................3
1.3. Research questions............................................................................3
1.4. Scope of the study.............................................................................3
1.5. Significance of the study..................................................................3
1.6. Structure............................................................................................4
CHAPTER 2. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND AND
LITERATURE REVIEW...........................................................................5
2.1. Speaking skill....................................................................................5
2.1.1. Definition of speaking skill......................................................5
2.1.2. Aspects of speaking.................................................................6
2.2. Flipgrid.............................................................................................8
2.2.1. Definition of Flipgrid...............................................................8
2.2.2. Strengths of Flipgrid..............................................................11
2.3. Portfolio..........................................................................................12
2.3.1. Concepts of portfolio.............................................................12
2.3.2. Portfolio in education.............................................................14
2.3.3. E-portfolio and English language teaching............................15
2.4. Flipgrid and speaking skill..............................................................16
v
2.5. Previous studies on using Flipgrid in teaching and learning..........18

2.5.1. Related studies in the world...................................................18
2.4.2. Related studies in Vietnam....................................................19
CHAPTER 3. METHODOLOGY...........................................................21
3.1. Research design..............................................................................21
3.2. Research site...................................................................................21
3.3. Participants and sampling procedures............................................22
3.4. Teaching materials..........................................................................23
3.5. Teaching procedures.......................................................................23
3.6. Research tools.................................................................................26
3.6.1. Pretest and posttest.................................................................26
3.6.2. Questionnaire.........................................................................26
3.6.3. Follow- up interview..............................................................27
3.7. Data collection procedure...............................................................28
3.8. Data analysis procedure..................................................................29
CHAPTER 4. FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION......................................30
4.1. Students’ speaking performance before and after the application of
Flipgrid-based portfolio.........................................................................30
4.1.1. Pretest analysis.......................................................................30
4.1.2. Post-test analysis....................................................................32
4.1.2. EFL students’ motivation toward English speaking in Flipgrid
classroom.........................................................................................40
4.2. Discussion.......................................................................................55
4.2.1. The effects of Flipgrid- based portfolio on EFL 12th graders’
performance?....................................................................................56
4.2.2. Students’ motivation towards Flipgrid- based portfolio........57
CHAPTER 5. CONCLUSION.................................................................60
5.1. Summary.........................................................................................60
vi
5.2. Limitations......................................................................................61
5.3. Suggestions for further study..........................................................62
REFERENCES..........................................................................................64
APPENDIX................................................................................................69
Appendix 1. SPEAKING PRETEST FORM.........................................69
Appendix 2. SPEAKING POSTTEST FORM......................................70
Appendix 3. PRE- AND POST-TEST EVALUATION RUBRIC........71
Appendix 4. RESEARCH TOPIC: APPLYING FLIPGRID-BASED
PORTFOLIO TO IMPROVE EFL 12TH GRADERS’SPEAKING
SKILL....................................................................................................73
Appendix 5. STUDENTS INTERVIEW...............................................79
Appendix 6. ILLUSTRAED ACTIVITIES ON FLIPGRID-BASED
PORTFOLIO.........................................................................................80
vii
LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES
Figure
Figure 2.1: Shortcut of portfolio on Flipgrid..............................................17
Figure 2.2: Shortcut of speaking tasks on Flipgrid.....................................18
Figure 3.1: Shortcut of Flipgrid...................................................................24
Figure 3.2: Shortcut of Flipgrid - based portfolio classroom......................25
Table
Table 3.1. Item distribution in the questionnaire.........................................27
Table 4.1: Pre-test One- Sample T- test......................................................31
Table 4.2: Pretest - One - way ANOVA.....................................................32
Table 4.3: Posttest One - Sample - Statistics...............................................33
Table 4.4: Experimental group One - Sample Statistics.............................34
Table 4.5: The result of Independent T-test................................................34
Table 4.6: Pretest and posttest - Descriptive statistics................................35
Table 4.7. Fluency - ANOVA table............................................................36
Table 4.8. Vocabulary - ANOVA table.......................................................37
Table 4.9. Pronunciation- ANOVA table....................................................38
Table 4.10. Idea development- ANOVA table............................................39
Table 4.11. Grammar- ANOVA table.........................................................40
Table 4.12: Students’ motivation after applying Flipgrid based portfolio. .41
Table 4.13: EFL students’attitude toward English speaking in the Flipgrid
classroom.....................................................................................................42
Table 4.14: Question 11, 2, 5, 14- Frequency table....................................45
Table 4.15. Question 1, 4, 8 - Frequency table...........................................46
Table 4.16. Question 10,3, 5,13 - Frequency table.....................................48
Table 4.17. Question 7, 9, 6, 12- Frequency table......................................50
viii
Table 4.18. EFL students’ expectation for using Flipgrid based-portfolio. 51

Table 4.19. Question 17, 18, 19, 20 - Frequency table...............................52
Table 4.20. Students’ responses in the interviews.......................................53
1
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1. Rationale
It is common knowledge that the beginning of 21st century, especially

during 19 Covid pandemic, has witnessed the acceleration of wide application of
Information and Communication technology in education, including English
language teaching. In Vietnam, the application of Information Technology (IT)
with a view to enhancing learners’ communication skills is encouraged by the
Ministry of Education and Training (MOET). According to the Official Letter
No.1891/BGDDT-GDDH on 5 May 2017, the Ministry of Education and
Training (MOET) stated: “…Step up application of advanced technologies in
teaching and learning foreign languages with online educational resources
suitable to all target groups so that learners can study foreign languages, access
to native language anytime, anywhere, by any means, especially in the
development of listening and speaking skill”. Absolutely, the admission of
advanced technologies in learning foreign language aims at developing speaking
and listening. Among powerful ICT tools, Flipgrid is considered as an useful
online application created by Microsoft corporation. Stoszkowski (2018)
approved that Flipgrid is useful for facilitating social learning, video content
creation skills and for creating classroom community.
It goes without saying that the important role of English as one of the
means of global communication is not deniable. To be competent in English,
learners need to master all four skills, namely listening, speaking, reading, and
writing. Among these four skills, speaking is a foremost skill that bridges
students to the world (Leong & Ahmadi, 2016). However, it is undeniable that
the EFL students, especially the 12th graders at high schools, have been facing
2
with various problems in speaking lessons. At first, students have less

motivation for speaking assigments, so most of them find difficult to practise
speaking English in front of the whole class. Besides, speaking skill is still
considered to be passive in the classroom. They do not feel self- confident and
nervous when doing any speaking tasks. Moreover, the time of a speaking lesson
is not long enough for all students to take turn to practise speaking in the
classroom. It means that few students have chance to make their oral
presentation at the class. That’s why it is necessary to create a platform for
students to guide them to practise more regularly.
Along with the widespread application of ICT in education, educators in

all over the countries have tendency to use mobile apps and websites in teaching
process and making online students profiles. In the past, students had paper
folders following them from grade to grade, with samples of their writing. With
today’s technology, we can allow students to compile a digital portfolio full of
all sorts of skills: listening, speaking, writing and reading. There has been a
recent shift in pedagogy to alternative methods of assessment, which, among
other things, is believed to enhance learners’ metacognitive knowledge and
strategies leading to the development of lifelong learning skills (Council of
Europe, 2001). Digital portfolios are an excellent way for students to build
confidence and show growth over time. The large amount of storage available
and the digital nature provide students the opportunity to save all speaking
performance that portfolio can travel with them throughout their years in school.
In addition, it is essential for educators to evaluate students’ learning process
through their performance, interactions in a school year. Flipgrid, a new app of
Microsoft, is considered as one of the solutions for this requirement.
With the main reasons mentioned above, the researcher aims to conduct a
research on “Applying Flipgrid - based portfolio to improve EFL 12 th graders’
3
speaking skill” with the hope of making a little contribution to the improvement
of the quality of teaching and learning speaking skill for 12 th graders at upper
secondary schools where students have fewer opportunities to practise speaking.
1.2. Objectives of the study
The present study aims at investigating the impacts of Flipgrid- based

portfolio on speaking skill among EFL 12th graders during the 1st term of the
school year 2020-2021. Through applying Flipgrid- based portfolio, the study
makes recommendations to apply Flipgrid as students’ portfolios during
speaking lessons at high schools.
1.3. Research questions
The present study is to answer the following research questions:
- Does Flipgrid - based portfolio improve EFL 12 th graders’ performance?

If yes, to what extent?
- Does Flipgrid - based porfolio motivate the learners to speak English?
1.4. Scope of the study
This study investigates the impacts of Flipgrid based portfolio on EFL 12 th

graders’ speaking skill. It is carried out among EFL 12 th graders at 1/5 high
school in Nghe An province. The study is carried out within a period of 9
months during the first term of 2020-2021 academic year.
1.5. Significance of the study
It is expected that the present study could give a few benefits to the
English teaching and learning process in the following ways. First of all, the
study suggests a new way to use the tool “Flipgrid” to create a good English
speaking environment and students’ portfolios for EFL 12th graders with a view
to improving their speaking performance. In addition to this, It gives an
4
inspiration to the teachers of high schools to apply this tool in the speaking
teaching. Last but not least, the findings of the study are expected to contribute
the insights for enhancing the quality of teaching speaking skill.
1.6. Structure
The thesis consists of the following main parts. Chapter 1 is the overall
introduction consisting the rationale, the scope of the study, the objectives of the
study. The research questions and organization are also mentioned in this part.
Chapter 2 presents the literature review covering the concepts relevant to the
study. Chapter 3 focuses on the methodology used to implement the research
and ways of applying Flipgrid - based portfolio to improve speaking skill. The
quasi - experimental method in this chapter aims at investigating the effect of
Flipgrid - based portfolio on the experimental group in comparison with the
control group. Chapter 4 analyses the results of the research, reports findings
extracted from the use of Flipgrid - based portfolio and summaries all the
analysis. Chapter 5 summarises the findings and addresses the shortcomings of
the study. It also gives suggestions for further researches.
5
CHAPTER 2
THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
AND LITERATURE REVIEW
For the aims of the present study, some important theoretical framework
as well as empirical evidences are reviewed. This chapter discusses the literature
on definitions and conceptualizations of speaking skill, Flipgrid, portfolio and
reviews previous studies related to the research topic.
2.1. Speaking skill
2.1.1. Definition of speaking skill
Related to the definition of speaking skill, it is noted that different notions

refer to deducing this term. Overall, speaking is regarded as one of the
productive skills that have to be mastered by students in learning English. Cora
and Knight (2000) stated that speaking is a crucial part of second language
learning and teaching which involves producing, receiving and processing
information. At the same time, Harmer (2000) indicated that listening and
reading involve the ability to correctly receiving messages and they are therefore
referred to receptive skills, on the other hand, speaking and writing involve
language production referred to as productive skills.
Speaking is the means through which learners can communicate with

others to achieve certain goals or to express their opinions, intentions, hopes and
viewpoints. In addition, people who know a language referred to as “speakers”
of that language. Richards (2008) states that in speaking we tend to be getting
something done, exploring ideas, working out some aspects of the world, or
simply being together. Nunan (1993) says that the importance of speaking skill
is obviously noticed regarding the role of human as social being who depends
himself more on speaking rather than writing when interacting with people.
6
Speaking is necessary for effective communication in any language,

particularly when speakers are not using their mother tongue. Through speaking,
people can transfer ideas, opinion, and knowledge with others. Merriam-
Webster Dictionary (2018) indicated that through speaking students can express
their ideas, feelings, and thought orally. The way students express their ideas,
feelings, and thought orally is also called oral communication. According to
Cameron (2001) “speaking is the active use of language to express meanings so
that other people could make sense of them”. It means that speaking is a form of
expressing their ideas orally with the aim of making listeners understand what
speaker want to convey.
Based on the previous definitions above, it can be synthesized that

speaking is a form to say or talk something with expressing of ideas, opinions,
views and description to other for getting response or way of conveying message
in order to make understanding of wishes to other and to contribute to the other.
2.1.2. Aspects of speaking
In spoken language, there are some components of speaking to be scored.

They include grammar, pronunciation, vocabulary, fluency and comprehension.
According to the Cambridge speaking test rubric, it is noted that five criteria of
speaking test were used for examining speaker’s speaking performance.
Fluency is regarded as the main goal in teaching speaking. It is defined as

the ability to speak communicatively, fluently and accurately and usually refers
to express oral language freely without interruption. Hughes (2002:14) defines
fluency as “the ability to express oneself in an intelligible, reasonable and
accurate way without too much hesitation, otherwise the communication will
breakdown because listeners will lose their interest”. It indicates that the
speakers do not spend a lot of time to search or to think the idea when they
express the message or the talk accurately. Hedge Tricia (2000:54) adds: “The
7
term fluency relates to production and it is normally reserved for speech. It is

the ability to link units of speech together with facility and without strain or
inappropriate slowness, or undue hesitation.”
Grammar is the second main goal that should be considered by speakers.

Littlewood (1981) stated that “grammar is an essential resource in Chapter One
Literature Review 11 using language communicatively”. This means that
grammar is very important for communication and understanding. Thus, paying
attention to accurateness and to the completeness of the language is a must
during the conversation. It is generally known that accuracy of grammar adds
meanings that are not easily inferable form the immediate context. It enables
learners to use language accurately to describe what happens.
The third aspect is related to pronunciation. Pronunciation deals with

phonemes, phonemic patterns, intonation, rhythms, and stresses. According to
Dewing and Munro (2005), having a good pronunciation of the language can be
helpful in a normal communication. It means that the good pronunciation
showed the clarity of your words and your ideas. However, if you use the
incorrect pronunciation, the listener will not understand what are you talking
about because the accuracy is not achieved and then will break the conversation.
Redmond and Vrchota (2007:104) argued that: “it is imperative that you use the
correct word in the correct instance and with the correct pronunciation.
Pronunciation means to say words in ways that are generally accepted or
understood”. To sump up, pronunciation plays a vital role in order to make the
process of communication easy to understand.
The next aspect is vocabulary. Partin (2009) points out that “the
vocabulary task facing a learner of English is partly determined by the nature of
vocabulary in general and by the particular nature of English”. Accurate
vocabulary is a priority as long as information is successfully communicated.
8
Selecting and using the appropriate vocabulary are the things that should be
done by the speakers. Harris (1974) indicated that vocabulary means the
appropriate dictation used in communication. Without having a sufficient
vocabulary, one cannot communicate effectively or express their ideas both
orally and in written form. Having limited vocabulary is also a barrier that
precludes learners from learning a language. Without grammar very little can be
conveyed, without vocabulary nothing can be conveyed. Hence, they have to
enrich their vocabulary. Harmer (2007) argued that the knowledge of the word
classes also allows the speakers to perform well utterances. Willis (1990) added
that without grammar very little can be conveyed, without vocabulary nothing
can be conveyed.
Comprehension is one important thing to consider because the objective

of the speaking is to deliver information or the message. Comprehension helps
the listeners or the speaker in avoiding miss understanding. According to Oxford
Dictionary (2005), comprehension is the ability to comprehend something.
Comprehension is an ability to perceive and process stretches of discourse, to
formulate representations the meaning of sentences. Comprehension of a second
language is more difficult to study since it is not; directly observable and must
be inferred from overt verbal and nonverbal responses, by artificial instruments,
or by the intuition of the teacher or researcher. Comprehension refers to the fact
that participants fully understand the nature of the research project, even when
procedures are complicated and entail risks (Cohen et al., 2005:51). It can be
concluded that a speaker need to produce speaking which is clear and acceptable
for the interlocutor or the people who is intended to get the message.
2.2. Flipgrid
2.2.1. Definition of Flipgrid
Flipgrid is a video and audio-based learning tool developed in 2014 by

9
professor Charles Miller at the University of Minnesota, USA. Flipgrid is an

Internet application that can be used as a standalone app on smartphones and
other devices or as an integrated application. Stoszkowski (2018) indicated that
Flipgrid, an online video discussion platform, is designed to empower learners
and facilitate collaboration and social learning between students. Microsoft
acquired the platform in June 2018, making it freely available to educators
worldwide as part of Office 365 for Education. On Flipgrid, the tutor creates a
‘grid’ and then invites students to upload short video responses to “topics” via a
custom link. To upload responses to a topic, as well as replies to each other’s
responses, students use a simple video recorder in the Flipgrid app (Android and
IOS) or do so via any web browser. The user interface is intuitive and functions
like many other video-based social media platforms (e.g. You Tube, Instagram
and Snapchat). Students can pause while recording, with unlimited retakes
possible until they are ready to upload their video. “Grids”, which essentially
become collections of topics, are managed through an easy-to-navigate ‘teacher
dashboard’. When students “follow” their grid, they receive an email
notification whenever new content is uploaded. Video length can be limited
from thirty seconds to 10 minutes, which encourages more focused, less
ambiguous responses, as students must carefully consider how they
communicate their ideas. The ability to pause and re-record videos also helps
students to practise communication of their ideas before posting.
Flipgrid is a social learning platform that allows educators to ask a

question, then the students respond in a video. Students are able to respond to
one another, creating a web of discussion. According to Green & Green (2018),
Flipgrid can be used as an online video-based learning tool for discussions,
reflections, presentations, field based learning, and many other uses. The general
uses of Flipgrid all surround the foundation of non-textually based
10
communication for students. Flipgrid is useful for facilitating social learning,

video content creation skills, and for creating classroom community. In fact,
Flipgrid is a multi-media message board, which is called "grid". Teachers post
tasks or questions on their grid and students verbally complete the assignment
by creating a short video response. Many times students are put on the spot in a
classroom setting to prove their knowledge of the subject matter.
Besides, the student's nervousness, low self-confidence, or poor public

speaking skills can lead to the interference of the teacher's true understanding of
the student's skill mastery. McLain (2018) found that Flipgrid increased student
confidence in an English-based business writing course. Speaking time,
collaboration, student confidence, and pronunciation are all language skills
Flipgrid use could potentially benefit. Flipgrid eliminates these social factors,
because it allows students to perfect their response before posting to the
grid. Once posted, peers can view other responses to further their knowledge of
the subject matter by hearing other's points of views, strategies and beliefs.
Teachers can view the video reflections to check for skill mastery and pin-point
possible misconceptions. Flipgrid also understands the importance of feedback
and embeds features such as rubrics, reactions, and comment boxes to allow for
further growth of knowledge. The author highlighted that Flipgrid is a
powerful tool that may bring the back-row learners to the front of the class and
provides every student an opportunity to speak without the anxiety of being in
front of the class.
Mango (2019) emphasizes that Flipgrid provides an online video-

mediated discussion platform that facilitates learners to communicate with
each other through video messages that they can share with their classmates,
the teacher, and possibly other learners around the world. In this study,
Flipgrid is viewed as an online video-mediated communication tool that allows
11
EFL learners to have much time to practice speaking English outside the
classrooms in a comfortable and enjoyable environment. It is also considered
as a discussion platform in which EFL learners can interact with each other a
great deal in English.
It is concluded from the previous studies that Flipgrid, a social learning

platform, enables teachers to create a topic, collect learners’ responses, and
allow the participants to communicate using videos.
2.2.2. Strengths of Flipgrid
Flipgrid is seen as an effective tool to support the improvement of

speaking practice.
- Access: Students do not need to create an account or ‘sign-up’; they

simply need the web link for their grid, which is free to access. This helps
reduce any potential ‘overload’ of platforms in their existing digital ecosystem
(Stoszkowski, McCarthy & Fonseca, 2017).
- Convenience: As the discussion is asynchronous and not time- or place-

dependent, it benefits ‘commuter students’ who live off-campus and are more
likely to experience challenges in relation to their engagement beyond the
classroom (Thomas & Jones, 2017). Similarly, students who spend more time in
paid employment - and who typically report lower gains in learning (Neves &
Hillman, 2017) - appreciate the flexibility Flipgrid offers.
- Participation: Discussion is evenly distributed across the cohort. Those

students who might sit back or ‘free-ride’ in class-based discussions are more
involved, whilst those who might otherwise dominate discussion are less likely
to do so.
- Appeal: Students appear to prefer watching each other speak on video to

reading written material, which they perceive to be time-consuming and
12
‘boring’. Students with less developed writing and reading skills also appear to
prefer video-based interaction.
- Formative feedback: The ability to provide - easily - regular written

and/or video-based tutor feedback on videos, with the option to create custom
rubrics, is in keeping with an ethos of helping students take control of their own
learning (Nicol & Macfarlane-Dick, 2006). Feedback is emailed directly to the
students individually and only they can see it.
- Tracking: The number of views on each video, as well as total

engagement time across the group, is tracked automatically. This makes it easy
to monitor individual and group participation levels. Data can also be exported
to Excel, which is useful if participation is to be assessed or added to other
grading systems.
- Compatibility: Custom integration means Flipgrid can be embedded into

a range of other platforms in the students’ learning ecosystem (e.g. Blackboard,
Google Classroom and Microsoft Teams). YouTube/Vimeo videos, as well as
files and documents hosted on other platforms (e.g. Dropbox, GoogleDocs,
OneNote), can also be embedded in discussion starters.
It can be drawn a conclusion from the above studies that Flipgrid is a very
useful tool to facilitate social learning and help students develop video content
creation skills for the digital era. It is simple and intuitive to use, and students
appreciate its convenience and familiar user interface.
2.3. Portfolio
2.3.1. Concepts of portfolio
Relating to the term “portfolio”, it exists several different concepts.

According to Wolf & Siu-Runyan (1996), a portfolio is a document that can
range from a collection of personalized student products to an array of works
13
and teacher records. The purpose of the portfolio determines its contents and the
way it is organized; for instance, a portfolio that promotes self-assessment and
self-confidence will present a different structure than one that aims at providing
a valid and reliable basis for formal evaluation. Mabry (1999) defined portfolios
as “a collection of information by and about a student to give a broader view of
his/her achievement”. Tierney, Carter & Desai (1991) also suggested that
portfolios are collections of both teachers and students’ work and it is a
commitment to student involvement in self-evaluation and helping students to
become aware of their own development as readers and writers.
Along with these definitions of portfolios, a number of different portfolio

types have also been described. In a general sense, Tierney et al. (1991)
categorize the different types as “process” and “product portfolios.” In process
portfolios, students need to collect their artifacts (works or products) over a
period of time, get feedback, and then revise those works when necessary to
develop their own performance, while in product portfolios they simply collect
their work or performance outcomes and are graded based on these products.
In term of the classifications, O’Malley & Pierce (1996) also classified

portfolios into three groups. The first group is called showcase portfolios, in
which students display their best works to the school or the teacher. The second
type of portfolio is collection portfolios, in which students include all their
artifacts, so that they provide evidence of both process and products, but they
are not carefully planned and organized for a specific reason. The third type of
portfolio is named as assessment portfolios. Unlike the previous types, they
focus on systematic collections of student work, learners’ self-reflection, self-
assessment and teacher assessment. For the assessment portfolios, students need
to put all their products to show their progress in relation to the fulfillment of the
objectives set beforehand. Teachers might also use video recorded portfolios in
14
their speaking assignments. Video records could be stored and shared among
peers, which lends to a more visual and audio realism within the portfolios.
In the last two decades, with the advances in technology, computers or

video cameras have increasingly taken the place of paper portfolios, especially
in oral assessments. Therefore, some research has dwelled on the use of
technology based portfolios for the evaluation of speaking performance, using
for example, tape recorders, video recordings, and digital recordings on
computers. Oral portfolios are one of those designed to empower learners’oral
skills to communicate effectively (O’Malley& Pierce, 1996). Oral portfolios,
specifically, focus on the improvement of speaking skills, intended to improve
the learners’ oral skills, foster the reflection and evaluation skills, promote
autonomy and boost their motivation (Sibel, 2012).
2.3.2. Portfolio in education
In education, portfolio assessment has emerged for more than three

decades. It refers to one promising alternative approach to assessment in general
education. According to Trim (1997, p. 3) “a language portfolio is a document…
in which individual learners… can assemble over a period of time, and display
in a systematic way, a record of their qualifications, achievements and
experiences in language learning, together with samples of work they have
themselves produced”.
Lam (2018) affirmed that he basic idea of portfolio assessment is to

showcase a professional’s best performance through a compilation of work
which one has developed over time, be they print, non-print, multimedia or
Web-based documentation derived from one’s own daily practices. The purpose
of portfolio assessment primarily deals with enhancing teaching and learning in
specific subject domains, since it can flexibly serve as an innovative pedagogy, a
catalyst to promote quality learning or a downright tool generating quantitative
15
and qualitative learning evidence.
To discuss its purposes, Berry (2008) indicated that portfolio assessment

is expected to serve multiple roles, namely formative, summative and evaluative
ones. The formative purpose aims to enhance student learning development. The
summative purpose intends to judge and summarize student learning trajectories
near the end of a course/ programme, whereas the evaluative purpose attempts to
take up a reporting role wherein stakeholders can have a succinct understanding
of student learning outcomes by way of quantitative and qualitative feedback.
2.3.3. E-portfolio and English language teaching
In our decades, e-portfolio is regarded as an crucial tool which spreads all

over the world. The power of the 21st century technology has transformed old-
style language instruction methods. Technology provides a wide range way for
us to help learner to improve skills. E-portfolios are an alternative storage
system for traditional paper-and-folder portfolios. Buzzetto-More (2006) defined
that E-portfolios have been shown as a validity way in documenting student
progress, encouraging greater student involvement in the learning process,
showcase work samples, and providing a method of learning outcomes
assessment and curriculum evaluation. As demonstrated by Huang & Hung
(2010) in their study about the effects of electronic portfolios on EFL oral
performance, e-portfolio enables students to practice their own speaking before
uploading their works onto their e-portfolio. This additional practice leads to a
substantial increase in language production. Besides, an additional practice in
their speaking fosters them to speak more fluently by organizing their opinions
in expressing what they think. In term of lexical quantity, e-portfolio improve
students 'speaking vocabulary by preparing themselves to make use of more
16
diverse vocabulary to upload their recording for presenting themselves on a

better light online. Moreover, the ability to revise and submit their speaking
recording as many times as they pleased facilitate them to learn. Apart from
serving as a good tool, students consider that e-portfolio process motivates them
to engage better in the effective practice of their own learning.
Among digital tools, Flipgrid also allows many kinds of attachments

along with the video, making it a great digital portfolio tool in education.
Johnson & Skarphol (2018) indicated the effects of digital portfolio and Flipgrid
on student engagement and communication in a secondary art classroom. The
implementation of the digital portfolios and Flipgrid created an online learning
community. The digital portfolios are for students to have a place to collect and
organize their artwork and also to showcase the time, effort, and talent of these
students. Digital portfolios are also important to the creative reflection process
and engage the student in their artwork. However, no conducted research
focuses on creating a digital portfolio for students’ performance. With the help
of technology included Flipgrid app and online websites http://flipgrid.com, it is
necessary for English language teaching to adopt Flipgrid as a new application.
2.4. Flipgrid and speaking skill
Not only does Flipgrid provide an environment to practise speaking

English for students but also contains a web store to save video portfolios.
Indeed, Flipgrid is a social learning platform which enable students to express
your idea, feeling by recording their speaking to response to teacher questions.
This powerful tool is proved to allow teacher to create students’ oral portfolio
that consists of their videos with peer feedback, teacher’s feedback and score.
With Flipgrid, teacher can give feedback to students or their parents via email.
17
Feedback is an important aspect of teaching in order to improve students' study.
Figure 2.1: Shortcut of portfolio on Flipgrid
Comparing the traditional speaking assessment and face-to-face speaking,

the oral portfolio on the Flipgrid app could be created systematically in a grid.
By using the Flipgrid website, teacher can create a grid for student portfolios.
Within this grid, the teacher creates a topic for each student, and students post
videos explaining their work, demonstrating a recently learned skill, or
reflecting on an in-class experience. The teacher can share the link to a student’s
topic with their parents or guardians so they can view their child’s work
throughout the year. Since the topics can also be available to every student in the
class, students can observe their classmates’ work.
18
Figure 2.2: Shortcut of speaking tasks on Flipgrid
2.5. Previous studies on using Flipgrid in teaching and learning
2.5.1. Related studies in the world
From the invention of Flipgrid in 2018, there are some studies that have
been conducted on the use of Flipgrid app. Johnson & Skarphol (2018)
conducted the research to demonstrate the effects of digital portfolios and
Flipgrid. The purpose of the research was to determine the effects of connected
learning through the use of digital portfolios and Flipgrid on student engagement
and communication in the secondary art classroom.
Miskam & Saidalvi (2019) investigated the effectiveness of using Flipgrid

to teach oral presentation among engineering students. Their research provided a
new teaching methodology that integrates technology and online peer feedback
in overcoming the issue of engineering students “lack of oral presentation skills
and hence, improve the engineering students” English language competency.
19
Jacob, Simon & Natsumi (2020) did a research on utilizing Flipgrid

application on student smartphones in a small-scale ESL study. The authors of
the research approved that Flipgrid has provided ways for a teacher to set up
activities with the aim of prompting students to communicate with each other
inside and outside of the classroom. Not only were the Flipgrid assignments
successfully completed by the students, but the pilot has proven that such a class
is possible to be done only using student smartphones.
In term of the learners’ perceptions, Margaret, Amanda, Cameron &

Joshua (2020) stated the perceptions of students on the benefits of Flipgrid in
order to investigate the perceived effectiveness of Flipgrid, an online video
discussion board learning tool that can be utilized on a smart phone, in HyFlex
delivery modality business courses. A questionnaire containing both Likert-style
and open-ended questions were administered to ten unique undergraduate and
graduate business courses over a 2-year period. Results indicated that Flipgrid is
a beneficial learning tool and further timely research should be conducted with
HyFlex courses becoming more prevalent due to Covid-19. However, The
sample for this study was limited to one institution and two majors, Business
Administration undergraduates and Master of Business Administration (MBA)
graduate students.
2.4.2. Related studies in Vietnam
Pham, T. H. and Vu, N. T. (2019) conducted a research on using Flipgrid

app to increase learners' motivation to speak English. The study aimed at ten
English major second-year students at Nam Dinh College of Education, most of
whom are mainly at A2 level according to Common European Framework of
Reference. When experiencing in a wide range of activities, they were
encouraged to have close access to the use of Flipgrid application in order to
express their ideas on particular weekly topics which were provided with prompt
20
comments by teachers on the students’ spoken performance. With the data, the
research proved that Flipgrid has delivered a wide range of positive effects on
students’ motivations to practise speaking English.
Most recently Tran, T. B. T and Nguyen, D. K (2020) made the research

on the influences of the Flipgrid app on EFL learners’ speaking anxiety. This
research aimed at investigating whether Flipgrid helps the EFL high school
learners reduce their anxiety in learning English speaking and determine the
learners’ attitudes towards its usages. The research followed a combination of a
quasi-experimental method and a mixed-method with the participation of 60
EFL tenth-grade learners in a high school in the Mekong Delta. Three research
instruments namely the modified Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety Scale
(FLCAS), the questionnaire, and the interviews were employed in this study.
The findings showed that there was a decrease in EFL high school learners’
level of anxiety in learning English speaking after experiencing Flipgrid.
Moreover, the majority of the learners also showed their positive attitudes
towards the use of Flipgrid in learning English speaking and expected that
Flipgrid should be employed frequently to make learning English speaking
become more motivation
In Vietnam, there a few of studies relating to the use of the Flipgrid app to
increase learners’ motivation or the influences of the Flipgrid app on EFL high
school learners’ speaking anxiety. Nevertheless, none of the previous studies
have been made on using Flipgrid including Flipgrid app and the website
(www.flipgrid.com) as students’ portfolios with a view to improving learnners’
speaking skill.
21
CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY
3.1. Research design
The study was conducted with the quasi-experimental method which

consisted of the quantitative and qualitative method. According to Cook (2015),
Quasi-experiments usually test the causal consequences of long-lasting
treatments outside of the laboratory. However, unlike a true experiment where
treatment assignment is at random, assignment in quasi-experiments is assigned
to a group based on non- random criteria. Through the quasi - experimental, the
researcher would like to examine the effect of applying Flipgrid - portfolio on
students’ speaking performance. At first, an oral test considered as a pre - test
was utilized for one control group and one experimental group in order to
identify whether the speaking skill of both groups is similar or different. At the
end of the treatment, the posttest was carried out with aim to determine any
changes made as the result of the application they received.
In order to examine students’ attitude towards Flipgrid- based portfolio, A

questionnaire was conducted for the experimental group a week before the post-
test to investigate whether students in this group have positive attitude or
positive attitude towards applying Flipgrid - based portfolio. After the
questionnaire, the researcher selected 3 graders who have positive attitude and 3
graders who have negative attitude by counting the average score of the
questionnaire results. Six participants were interviewed to find out participants’
motivation on the course with Flipgrid-based portfolio and what they don’t like
about Flipgrid app.
3.2. Research site
This research was carried out at 1/5 high school which is one of the public
22
schools in Nghe An province. It is staffed by 80 teachers and administrators and

educates 30 classes of high school students. The majority of students enrolled in
this school are from the rural areas. The participants were the 12 th graders at the
age of 17 and 18 from the selected classes of 1/5 high school. The data were
collected during the first term of 2020- 2021 school year.
3.3. Participants and sampling procedures
Participants who were selected to take part in the research had been
chosen from two existing classes of 1/5 high school, a high school in the
Northwest of Nghe An province. They include 83 participants from two
different classes with the same level of English language. The first group was
chosen as an experimental group with 43 students and the second group
comprising of 43 students belongs to the control group. All the participants was
required to be involved in the pre-test to check whether their speaking skill is
equivalent or not.
All the participants were at the age of eighteen studying in Nghe An, at
12th graders. They have started learning English as a foreign language since
grade 3 at primary schools. Therefore, they were supposed to be at the same
level equivalent to B1 in the Common European Framework of Reference for
Languages (CEFR) or level 3 in Vietnamese Standardized Test of English
Proficiency (VSTEP). However, like many other students in Vietnam, EFL 12 th
graders at 1/5 high school spend 45 minutes for a speaking lesson, they have
very little time to speak English. They paid more attention to learn grammar and
vocabulary in order to prepare well for the National examination.
To improve EFL 12th graders’ speaking skill, the research applied Flipgrid
23
- based portfolio as a type of homework for the experimental group. This

application was carried out after seven speaking sessions during the first
semester of the academic year 2020-2021. In contrary, the control group still
followed the traditional homework. It means that teacher assigned the same task
as the experimental group and called anyone to speak in front of the class in the
next lesson.
3.4. Teaching materials
The first teaching material that the researcher utilized was the set of 11 th
English textbook. The textbook consists of 16 units in which there are 16
speaking lessons with the time duration of 45 minutes per each. According to the
national curriculum, seven units are taught in the first term of the school year
2020-2021. The fundamental material is Flipgrid app for students and the web
site http://flipgrid.com for teachers.
3.5. Teaching procedures
In this study, Flipgrid including the Flipgrid app and the website
http://Flipgrid.com was used as the main tool to teach speaking skill and assign
speaking tasks to students. This application aimed at providing outside class
activities like a new type of homework. Students’ video products in the
experimental group were saved and classified appropriately. The study was
conducted over a 8-month period during the first term of the academic year
2020-2021 for 86 students of the 12 th grade at 1/5 high school in Nghe An
province. Of all the participants, there are 43 students of experimental group and
43 students from control group. The procedure was put in practice as follow:
The first step- Getting started with Flipgrid: After conducting the pre-
24
test, the researcher guided the experimental group to get started with Flipgrid
app.
Figure 3.1: Shortcut of Flipgrid
The second step- Activities in face to face class: This step was done in the
same way with the control group. The English 12 textbook (MOET, 2018) was
considered as the key tool for speaking class. During the first term, learners took
part in 8 units with 8 speaking lessons. Each speaking lesson lasted 45 minutes
and followed 5 steps included warm up, pre- speaking, while- speaking, post-
speaking and consolidation.
The Third step - The application of Flipgrid - based portfolio for the
experimental group: At first, the researcher was implemented six speaking
assignments related to 6 speaking lessons in the 12 English textbook in the 1 st
term of academic year. After each speaking lesson, the same speaking task was
assigned for two groups. For the control group, the researcher called randomly
two students to speaking in the class in the next lesson. On contrary, for the
25
experimental group, Flipgrid was utilized for all the students to perform their
speaking tasks after class-speaking sessions. They signed in the Flipgrid
classroom to record their voice and submit their speaking videos on Flipgrid
app. Students’ videos are classified into a digital portfolio based the speaking
topics or students’ groups.
Assignment 1- Make an oral presentation about the topic “Family rules”
Assignment 2- Talk about the differences of marriage between Vietnam

and America
Assignment 3- Give compliments and responses: Each student
Assignment 4- Drawing the diagram and Making an oral presentation

about the Vietnam school education system
Assignment 5- Role-play about the topic “Admission process to

University”: Students work in groups of 3 or 4 to play the role related to
the topic.
Assignment 6- Saying what job you want to do and giving the reasons.
Assignment 7- Giving predictions for the future life

26
Figure 3.2: Shortcut of Flipgrid - based portfolio classroom

For the experimental group, each video was remarked and scored to
follow students’ improvement. Students may watch their portfolio on
https://my.flipgrid.com/ during the school year.
3.6. Research tools
3.6.1. Pretest and posttest
To compare students’ performance before and after the study, both chosen
groups implemented the pre-test and post-test before and after the treatment
respectively.
Prior the experiment, the participants were required to take an oral

proficiency test as the pretest. This ten- minute test was adapted to the
Preliminary English Test for Schools (PET) composed and provided by
Cambridge Assessment English PET particularly targets. The test focused on
five criteria included grammar, pronunciation, vocabulary, fluency and
comprehension. The pretest was considered as the first tool to prove that the
speaking skill of both two groups was equivalent to each other. The experiment
was conducted in seventeen- week period with 7 speaking sessions.
At the end of the first term, the posttest to identify the improvement was
employed after the treatment had been given. To gain the validity, the test was
measured by the second scorer.
3.6.2. Questionnaire
The questionnaire included a list of 20 questions which aimed at

investigating learners’ attitudes towards the application of Flipgrid portfolio.
The questions were divided into 2 themes: Students’ attitude towards the use of
Flipgrid-based portfolio in learning English speaking and learners’ reflection of
the use of Flipgrid-based portfolio. For the closed-ended questions, the
27
instrument used a five-point Likert-type scale (1= strongly disagree, 2=

disagree, 3= neutral, 4= agree, 5= strongly agree).
Table 3.1. Item distribution in the questionnaire
Focus Clusters Items
Students’ Students’ attitude towards the 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10,

attitude motivation raised from 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16
Flipgrid-based portfolio
Students’ attitude toward the

influence of Flipgrid-based
portfolio on English learning
Students’ For the future use of Flipgrid- 17, 18

expectation based portfolio
For the change of Flipgrid- 19, 20

based portfolio
3.6.3. Follow- up interview
The follow- up interview was used as a vital stage to make out students’
attitude towards Flipgrid-based portfolio after collecting the data from the
questionnaire. By using the mean scores from the questionnaires, the researcher
chose 3 students with the highest mean and 3 students with the smallest mean to
take part in the interview. Six participants were coded as SP1, SP2, SP3, SN4,
SN5, and SN6 to ensure the complete confidentiality. The interview stressed on
clarifying the finding from the mentioned questionnaire and figuring out the
difficulties some of them had during the experiment. On the other side, the
interview in this study was also considered as the tool to deepen the results from
28
the experiment on speaking skill of the participants.
3.7. Data collection procedure
To answer two research questions, the researcher conducted the treatment

and collected the data through administering the pretest, the posttest, the
questionnaires and the interview. First of all, the pretest was administered with
a view to identify whether students’speaking is equivalent or not. In scoring the
test, the researcher evaluated students’ speaking performance by using the
creteria provided by Cambridge Assessment English PET. Next, the treatment
was implemented after each speaking session during the first term of the
academic year 2020-2021. The experimental group was assigned the same tasks
with the control group. The difference is that Flipgrid- based portfolio was
applied for the experimental group to create video portfolios covering comments
from the classmates and the instructor according to the topic of unit in the
English 12th textbook. On contrary, the control group practiced speaking at home
and was called randomly to check their homework in the next lesson in the
classroom. Having led the 4 month treatment, the researcher made a
questionnaire in order to investigate EFL 12th students’ attitude towards the use
of Flipgrid- based portfolio in learning English speaking and learners’ reflection
of the use of Flipgrid-based portfolio in practicing Speaking skill. Then, on basis
of the average score of the questionnaire, the researcher invited 3 students with
negative attitude and 3 students with possitive attitude to take part in the
interview. The interview aimed at find out both the benefits and the drawbacks
they had during the treatment, which contributed to clarify the second question
research. At last, the posttest was administered for both of groups to explore
students’ discrepancies between the experimental and the control group. The
reseacher invited the second scorer to score the test with a view to guarantee an
29
unprejudiced scoring.
3.8. Data analysis procedure
The collected data was analyzed by the combination of the quantitative

and qualitative research methods. The software SPSS was used to analyze
quantitative data collected from the pre-test and post-test as well as the
questionnaire. To answer the first research question, the average score of the
pretest and the posttest had been calculated before quantitative test was
carried out statistically using t-test. From that, the quantitative data determined
whether the results of the two classes are significantly different before and after
the experimental research. To answer the second question, the data collected
from the questionnaire was divided into 2 themes to investigate Learners’
attitudes towards the use of Flipgrid- based portfolio in learning English
speaking and Learners’ reflection of the use of Flipgrid- based portfolio in
practicing Speaking skill. Quantitative analyses were implemented on the data
regarding mean and standard deviation for the 5 point Likert question items.
Besides, the qualitative data was utilized to find out the benefits and the
drawbacks, which restated the effect of using Flipgrid- based portfolio on
improving speaking skill.
30
CHAPTER 4
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
This chapter illustrates the findings of the research through the results of
the pre-test and the post-test, students’ questionnaires and interviews. The
quantitative data are analyzed thoroughly by SPSS software to answer the first
research question. The qualitative data from interview were themed and
analyzed to answer the second research question.
4.1. Students’ speaking performance before and after the application of

Flipgrid-based portfolio
In order to answer the first question “Does Flipgrid-based portfolio

improve EFL 12th graders’ performance?”, the data analysis of pretest and
posttest were run by SPSS software. The data were analysed in terms of the
correlation between two sets of scores to make sure the reliability of the
research. The first one was collected before the treatment and the other was
administered the measure after the treatment. According to Breakwell (2004),
the correlation between the two sets of scores obtained provides an accurate
representation of the test-retest reliability. A large positive correlation usually
indicates a high level of test-retest reliability. A smaller correlation coefficient
often suggests a lower level of test-retest reliability.
4.1.1. Pretest analysis
Before the application of Flipgrid-based portfolios, a one-sample T-test

was utilized to analyze students’ speaking competence through the pretest data
to ensure the readability of the research. All participants from both of groups
had to finish the same speaking test, including 43 students of the control group
and 43 students of the experimental group. The maximum score of the test is 20
31
points that comprises of 5 criteria: grammar (4 points), pronunciation (4 points),

vocabulary (4 points), comprehension (4 points) and Fluency (4 points). The
data of the pretest was run by SPSS software to collect the mean scores, SD
scores. From that collected data, the researcher made a comparison on the
gained score of speaking test between the control group and the experimental
group. Bland & Altman (1996) defined “the standard deviation in statistics is a
measure of the amount of variation or dispersion of a set of values”. As can be
seen from the following table, the mean scores of the control group and the
experimental group are 14.0 and 13.9 respectively.
Table 4.1: Pre-test One- Sample T- test
Pretest N Mean SD SM
Experimental group 43 13.9 2.3 0.36
Control group 43 14.0 2.0 0.31
Table 4.1 presents the data of the pretest One - Sample T-test after
conducting the pretest to both of groups. According to table 4.1, the mean score
of the experimental group’s pretest is 13.9 (SD= 2.3) and the mean score of the
control group’s pretest reaches 14.0 (SD= 2.0). It can be seen that the mean
score of the control group is higher than that of the experimental with the
proportion of Mean difference 0.1. This shows that the Mean difference from the
data of the One-sample T-test proved that the difference between the control and
the experimental group is not significant. Statistically, the researcher employed
the one-way analysis of variance to analyse the Means of two groups and the
hypothesis to determine whether the difference is significant. Warner (2013)
stated that One-way ANOVA is an omnibus statistical test meaning that they test
whether the explained variance in a set of data is significantly greater than the
32
unexplained variance overall.
Table 4.2: Pretest - One - way ANOVA
Sum of Mean
Pretest df F Sig.
Squares Square
(Combined) 16.4 8 2.0 0.32 0.85
Linearity 4.2 1 4.2 0.65 0.43

Between
Groups Deviation
Experimental
from 12.2 7 1.7 0.27 0.86
Control
Linearity
Within Groups 218.4 34 6.4
Total 234.8 42
The above table affirmed the reliability of the result derived from table
4.2. It can be seen from table 4.2 that Levene's test for homogeneity of variances
is acceptable as the sig value is 0.86. This means that the variances are not
significantly different. The assumption for using the one-way analysis of
variance is successful. On testing the second assumption, the significant value is
more than 0.05 (sig.> 0.05). This indicates that there is no significant difference
between the control group and the treatment group before applying Flipgrid-
based portfolio as a task out of the classroom.
4.1.2. Post-test analysis
4.1.2.1. Comparison within two groups
With the aim of conducting the quasi- experimental research, all the
conditions were the same for two groups, with the exception that the treatment
33
group was exposed to Flipgrid-based portfolio as homework whereas the control

group was not. After applying Flipgrid- based portfolio for EFL 12 th graders
during the a semester period of the academic year 2020-2021, the posttest was
carried out for both of groups: the control and the experimental group. The result
of the One- Sample- Statistics presents as the following:
Table 4.3: Posttest One - Sample - Statistics
Sig.(2-
Posttest N Mean SD SM
tailed)
Experimental group 43 14.6 2.98 0.46 .000
Control group 43 14.2 1.94 0.29 .000
It can be shown from table 4.3 that the mean score of the experimental
group is 14.60 (SD = 2.98) and the mean score of the control group is 14.20 (SD
= 1.94). Thus, it is concluded that the mean score of the treatment group is
higher than that of the control group. In addition, the values of standard
deviation spread out (SM= 0.46- 0.29). The significance level (Sig.) of the One-
sample T- test (Sig. < 0.05) states that this difference is statistically significant.
Eventually, the values in the table indicate that the discrepancies between two
groups were recognized in statistics. It means that the treatment group made
progress in comparison with the other one.
4.1.1.2. Comparison within the experimental group
To identify whether Flipgrid- based portfolio had positive impact on EFL

12th graders’ speaking performance, the post-test data were collected from the
One- sample statistics to compare with the pretest data within one group. The T-
34
test result was displayed in the following table:
Table 4.4: Experimental group One - Sample Statistics
Experimental group N Mean SD SM
Pretest 43 13.9 2.3 0.36
Posttest 43 14.6 2.98 0.46
To take the total mean scores of the experimental group in account at the
two points of measurement, the data were run as shown in table 4.3. The pre-
test score is 13.9 with the standard deviation of 2.4 whereas the posttest score
is 14.6 with the standard deviation of 2.98. It means that there was difference
between the measures at the two different points of time. It is clearly observed
that the average post-test score is higher than the average score of pre-test. In
order to determine whether this difference is significant or not, the researcher
examined the significance value as the test value is zero. The collected data were
shown in the following table:
Table 4.5: The result of Independent T-test
Test Value = 0
95% Confidence
Experimental
Sig. (2- Mean Interval of the
group t df
tailed) Difference Difference
Lower Upper
Pretest 38.6 42 .000 13.9 13.2 14.7
Posttest 32.0 42 .000 14.6 13.7 15.5
As can be shown in table 4.5, the significance value (2- tailed) is zero
(sig.< 0.05). This gave more evidences to demonstrate significant differences
35
between the pretest and the posttest means. Moreover, the lower score of pre-
test is 13.2 while the lower score of posttest is 13.7. The significant difference
was shown that the upper score of post-test (14.7) is higher than the upper score
of pre-test (15.5). It is statistically concluded that there is an increase in EFL 12 th
graders’ level of speaking skill after experiencing the application of Flipgrid-
based portfolio.
To provide more evidences for the 1st research question “Will Flipgrid -
based portfolio improve the learners' speaking performance?”, the data collected
from the experimental group were analysed statistically in terms of five criterion
included grammar, vocabulary, pronunciation, fluency, idea development as
well. Based on descriptive statistics, the difference among means value was
presented as follow:
Table 4.6: Pretest and posttest - Descriptive statistics
N Min Max M SD
Fluency_Pre 43 1.00 3.00 2.46 0.549
Fluency_Post 43 1.00 4.00 2.79 0.638
Vocabulary_Pre 43 2.00 4.00 2.81 0.627
Vocabulary_Post 43 2.00 5.00 3.12 0.625
Pronunciation_Pre 43 2.00 4.00 2.74 0.652
Pronunciation_Post 43 2.00 4.00 2.98 0.597
Idea development_Pre 43 1.00 4.00 2.55 0.665
Idea development_Post 43 1.00 4.00 2.70 0.637
Grammar_Pre 43 2.00 4.00 3.20 0.693
Grammar_Post 43 2.00 4.00 3.30 0.558

36
On considering the mean scores of each criterion in the descriptive

statistics, the posttest’s mean scores were higher than that of pretest in all five
critera. Indeed, the difference level between pretest and posttest ranged from
0.1 to 0.33. The highest difference belongs to fluency with the mean gap of
0.33, vocabulary (0.31) ranked second, pronunciation (0.24) ranked third,
followed by idea development (0.15) and grammar (0.1) respectively. It is
suggested that there was difference between the mean scores of each criterion
within two groups.
In order to test whether the difference of mean scores is significant,

testing the mean variances was carried out by using the analysis of variances
from One - way ANOVA. The results are shown in the following tables:
Table 4.7. Fluency - ANOVA table
Sum of Mean
Df F Sig.
Squares Square
(Combined) 3.765 3 1.255 5.479 0.003
Linearity 2.236 1 2.236 9.761 0.003

Between
Fluency_Pre Groups Deviation

from 1.529 2 0.765 3.338 0.046
Fluency_Post Linearity
Total 12.698 42
Of all criteria, fluency was found to be as the criterion with the highest
37
disparity level between the pretest mean and the posttest mean (0.33). As can
be seen from the table 4.7, the sig. value was 0.046 (Sig.< 0.05). It means that
the difference of the variances between groups was different. Besides, by
following Fliprid - based portfolio, the researcher found out that the last videos
were better than the previous videos on considering the fluency criterion.
Overall, it is obvious that the participants in the experimental group spoke
English more fluently.
Table 4.8. Vocabulary - ANOVA table
Sum of Mean
Df F Sig.
Squares Square
(Combined) 8.844 3 2.94 14.9 0.000
Linearity 7.277 1 7.28 37.1 0.000

Between
Vocabolary_
Groups Deviation
Pre
from 1.567 2 0.784 3.99 0.027
Vocabolary_
Linearity
Post
Total 16.512 42
In terms of vocabulary, table 4.6 displayed that the mean score of the
posttest was higher than that of the posttest. The posttest mounted 3.12 whereas
the pretest was 2.81. It is important to focus on determining whether the sig.
value was assumed to be significant. To ascertain this, Levene’s test in table 4.8
was counted for examining the significance value. As can be seen from table
4.8, the significance value is 0.027. The ANOVA analysis showed the sig. value
was smaller than 0.05. It is concluded that the difference between two mean
38
scores in terms of vocabulary was significantly different.
Table 4.9. Pronunciation- ANOVA table
Sum of Mean
df F Sig.
Squares Square
(Combined) 9.450 2 4.725 22.47 .000
Pronunciation Linearity 9.356 1 9.356 44.49 .000

Between
Groups
_Pre Deviation
from .094 1 0.094 0.447 0.51
Pronunciation Linearity
_Post Within Groups 8.411 40 0.210
Total 17.860 42
As displayed in table 4.9, using the one- way ANOVA was shown as the
evidence of testing the significance level of variances. The sig. value in table
4.9 was more than 5% (Sig.= 0.508), this means that there was no significant
difference between the means between groups. In contrary, the observation on
Flipgrid-based portfolio along with the mean scores in table 4.6 showed that
students made progress in pronouncing the ending sounds such as /t/, /k/, /s/,
/z/. They made less mistakes relating lexical resources about the topics they
were asked to record your voice. From the analysis of various tools, it is
affirmed that EFL 12th graders improved their pronunciation but the
39
improvement is not much.
Table 4.10. Idea development- ANOVA table
Sum of Mean
df F Sig.
Squares Square
Between
(Combined) 9.767 3 3.256 14.367 0.000
Groups
Idea
development Linearity 8.799 1 8.799 38.831 0.000
_Pre
Deviation
from .968 2 0.484 2.135 0.13
Linearity
Idea
development Within
8.838 39 0.227
_Post Groups
Total 18.605 42
As be illustrated in the above table, the One- Way Variance Analysis was
run after having found the difference between the pretest mean and the posttest
mean. Indeed, the table 4.7 indicated the means of two tests was 2.55 and 2.7
equivalently. Without a doubt, there was the difference between two means.
Nevertheless, the one-way ANOVA in table 4.10 revealed that the sig. value
was 0.13 (sig.> 0.05). Thus, it is suggested that the variances of two groups
differed from each other but this difference is not significant. In other ways,
40
participants got less improvement on this criterion than the others.
Table 4.11. Grammar- ANOVA table
Sum of Mean
df F Sig.
Squares Square
(Combined) 14.340 2 7.170 49.058 0.000
Linearity 14.307 1 14.307 97.890 0.000

Between
Deviation
Grammar_Pre Groups
from .033 1 0.033 0.225 0.638
Grammar_Post
Linearity
Total 20.186 42
On considering grammar, the result from the above ANOVA table

demonstrated that the significance level between the mean scores of grammar-
pre and grammar- post is less than 5 %. In details, the significance value is
0.021, which stated that the difference of variances was not significant.
Therefore, there is not statistically significant difference between grammar’s
pretest and posttest.
It makes sense to conclude that the treatment group must be responsible

for the improvement on all five criteria. The criterion that participants made
more progress is fluency and vocabulary. This improvement was explained
through the reliable analysis along with the observation on Flipgrid- based
portfolio.
4.1.2. EFL students’ motivation toward English speaking in Flipgrid

classroom
41
In order to answer the second research question “Does Flipgrid - based

portfolio motivate the learners to speak?”, the questionnaires were conducted
among 43 students from the experimental group. The data of the questionnaires
aimed at investigating EFL 12th graders’ attitude towards speaking performance
after applying Flipgrid-based portfolio to improve EFL 12 th graders’speaking
skill. The questionnaire consists of 20 closed questions following the the form of
a five-point Likert scale (Strong agree = 5, Agree= 4, Neutral = 3, Disagree= 2,
Strong disagree= 1). The table of questionnaires was divided into 2 parts namely
learners’ attitudes towards the use of Flipgrid- based portfolio in learning
English speaking and learners’ expectation. The result of the questionnaires was
summarised in the following table:
Table 4.12: Students’ motivation after applying Flipgrid based portfolio
Standard
Mean Min Max
Deviation
1. Learners’ attitude 3.73 0.45 2.5 4.5
2. Learner’s expectation 3.54 0.49 2.25 4.25
It can be seen from table 4.12 that the Mean data are respectively 3.73 for
learners’ attitude and 3.54 for learners’ expectation. The mean of each part takes
turns 0.45 and 0.49. It means that most of students had positive attitude toward
the items of the questionnaires. Moreover, the maximum degree of the 1 st group
mounts up 4.5 and that of the second group is 4.25. These figures show that
most participants in the experimental group have positive attitude towards the
application of Flipgrid-based portfolio.
By utilizing the data of frequency statistics, the researcher stressed on the

mean scores, significant Means and standard Means to measure the participants’
attitude towards the use of Flipgrid-based portfolio in learning English speaking.
42
To check the reliability of the data, a descriptive statistic was run to scrutinize at
every single item. To further explain the results from the questionnaire, the
follow- up interview was acquired deeper into the insights of learners’ attitudes
towards the use of Flipgrid during a process of experiencing the treatment. The
following table shows the descriptive coefficient of the collected data.
Table 4.13: EFL students’ attitude toward English speaking in

the Flipgrid classroom
Items Mean SM SD
11. I believe that Flipgrid has helped me better

4.09 0.124 0.81
improve my pronunciation.
2. I believe that Flipgrid makes me become

4.01 0.143 0.94
autonomous in English speaking practice
15. Flipgrid- based portfolio gave me a good

chance to review all of my submitted videos 4.01 0.139 0.91
and teachers’ feedback.
14. Learning using Flipgrid encouraged me to

4.0 0.133 0.87
practice speaking in English.
1. I believe that practicing English speaking

using Flipgrid has helped increase my
3.88 0.125 0.82
cooperation and communication with my
classmates
4. I am less frightened about making mistakes

when learning English speaking through the 3.88 0.177 1.16
use of Flipgrid
8. I believe that the use of Flipgrid has helped 3.88 0.142 0.93
me become self-confident in my speaking
43
Items Mean SM SD
performance.
10. I believe that Flipgrid has helped me speak

3.86 0.158 1.04
English more fluently.
3. I believe that learning English speaking will

3.84 0.129 0.84
be effective with Flipgrid- based portfolio
5. I consider Flipgrid as a great English

3.81 0.112 0.73
learning tool

using Flipgrid has helped me recognize 3.81 0.130 0.85
mistakes.
7. I believe that Flipgrid has helped me reduce

3.47 0.161 1.05
my nervousness in learning English speaking.
9. I am responsible for my English learning

3.47 0.174 1.14
when using Flipgrid.
6. I feel comfortable while speaking English

3.28 0.157 1.03
through Flipgrid app

using Flipgrid has helped me better 3.26 0.125 0.82
communicate
16. Flipgrid was a fun way of keeping people

3.09 0.162 1.06
engaged with each other.
Table 4.13 shows that the Mean scores are more than 3. The total mean
score for this scale was M = 3.73 which was over moderate level. None of the
items werewas under moderate level (3.0). It means that most of participants
have positive attitude towards using Flipgrid and Flipgrid- based portfolio. As
44
can be seen from the table 4.13, most of students agree with the items 1, 2, 3,
4,5, 7, 8, 9,11, 13, 14 (M> 3.81) meanwhile students have tendency to choose
“Neutral” attitude for the items 7, 9, 6, 12, 16 (3 < M< 3.5). In details, the
highest mean score belongs to the item 11 with the mean of 4.09 and the
standard deviation of 0.81. It is clear that most participants believed that Flipgrid
has helped them improve pronunciation. In fact, the results of students’ video on
Flipgrid proved that the pronunciation of participants was improved gradually
through their videos. The item 2 ranked second with the mean of 4.01 (SD=
0,94). The majority (65.1%) thought “Flipgrid makes me become autonomous in
English speaking practice”.
As quantatively shown, the smallest mean score (M= 3.09) relates to the
item 16, which indicates that most of students hesitate to say that Flipgrid was a
fun way of keeping people engaged with each other. This is in line with the
interview responses; there are 3 of 6 students feeling anxious about making
mistakes. In fact, all of them had negative attitude towards the use of Flipgrid-
based portfolio. They admitted that the fear of making mistakes was due to the
limitation of grammar, vocabulary and pronunciation they possessed. Student 5
said: “I am not good at English, so I don’t want to speak English in front of
everyone. I always feel worried about being laughed at by my friends or
criticized by the teacher.”
In addition to the analysis of students’ attitude, the data of frequency of

the aforementioned questions were analyzed as the following tables which are
divided into 2 groups based on the mean scores: positive attitude and negative
attitude. The percentage of each item is presented in each table to analyze what
extent the participants in the experimental group agree with. For the first group,
the mean scores ranged from 3.81 to 4.09. This demonstrates that most students
had positive attitude towards Flipgrid. They recognized the benefits of Flipgrid
45
for speaking skill. It consists of 11 items which were classified in descending

order in the table 4.9. They are the items 11, 2, 15, 14, 1, 4, 8, 10, 3, 5, 13.
Table 4.14: Flipgrid-based portfolio and EFL students’ practices Question

11, 2, 5, 14- Frequency table
Valid Cumulative
Items Statements Frequency
Percent Percent
Disagree 1 2.3 2.3
11. I believe that Flipgrid
has helped me better Neutral 6 14.0 16.3
improve my Agree 23 53.5 69.8
pronunciation.
Strong agree 13 30.2 100.0
Disagree 2 4.7 4.7
2. I believe that Flipgrid
makes me become Neutral 13 30.2 34.9
autonomous in English Agree 12 27.9 62.8
speaking practices
15. Flipgrid- based Disagree 3 7.0 7.0
portfolio gave me a good Neutral 9 20.9 27.9
chance to review all of
my submitted videos and Agree 17 39.5 67.4
teachers’ feedback. Strong agree 14 32.6 100.0
Disagree 1 2.3 2.3
14. Learning using
Flipgrid encouraged me Neutral 14 32.6 34.9
to practice speaking in Agree 14 32.6 67.4
English.
As can be seen from the table of frequency, for question 11, 30.2%
participants strongly agree that Flipgrid improves their pronunciation. 53.5% of
them choose agree with the question, 14% gives “neutral” idea when being
asked. Only one student (2.3%) think that Flipgrid doesn’t help him improve
pronunciation. 28 participants (65.1%) thought that Flipgrid made them become
46
autonomous. Only 2 students accounting for 4.7% expressed disagreement to the

mentioned question. The mean score of the question 15 reached 4.01 and 0.91 of
standard deviation. 31 students (72.1%) agreed with the benefit of Flipgrid-
based portfolio like the question 15. Only 3 participants (7%) refused to say
agreement to the item 15. Indeed, the results from the interviews were quite
similar to that of questionnaires. 100% students attending the interview said that
Flipgrid raised the autonomy of the learners thanks to speaking tasks that teacher
assigned after each face-to face speaking class. Besides, Flipgrid- based
portfolio gave students a good chance to review all of their submitted videos and
teachers’ feedback. Student 1PS stated “Flipgrid provides us with useful
environment to practise English with the classmates outside the classroom. The
thing it attracted me is that all of us can give heart, make comments on our
friends’ video like Facebook or Zalo”.
Table 4.15. Flipgrid-based portfolio and EFL students’ perceptions in

classroom Question 1, 4, 8 - Frequency table
Valid Cumulative
Percent Percent
1. I believe that practicing Disagree 1 2.3 2.3
English speaking using Neutral 14 32.6 34.9
Flipgrid has helped
Agree 17 39.5 74.4
increase my cooperation
and communication with
my classmates
4. I am less frightened Disagree 7 14.0 21.0
about making mistakes Neutral 4 9.3 23.3
when learning English
Agree 19 44.2 67.4
speaking through the use
of Flipgrid Strong agree 14 32.6 100.0
47
Valid Cumulative
Percent Percent
Disagree 3 7.0 3.0
8. I believe that the use of
Flipgrid has helped me Neutral 9 20.9 27.9
become self-confident in Agree 20 46.5 74.4
my speaking performance.
As can be seen from table 4.9 and 4.14, the mean score for the question 1
was 3.88 (SD= 3.82). 28 students (65.1%) agreed with the fact that practicing
English speaking using Flipgrid has helped increase cooperation and
communication with classmates. In fact, those students were aware of giving
feedbacks to their classmate. In Flipgrid based- portfolio, those students often
gave “ heart” symbols and feedback comments on the other’s video. 14 people
(32.6%) chose “neutral” and 2.3 % chose “disagree” scale. On taking the
question 4 into consideration, the research found that most of participants felt
less frightened about making mistakes when learning English speaking through
the use of Flipgrid. From the table 4.9, the mean was 3.88 (SD = 1.16). In
addition, the frequency data from the table 4.15 illustrated that 76.8% of
participants agreed with the item 4. 7 participants (14%) were frightened about
making mistakes. Those who expressed anxiety on their face when they
submitted their video on Flipgrid. Related to the question is whether the use of
Flipgrid has helped students become self-confident in their speaking

48
performance or not. The mean score of 3.88 in the table 4.9 showed that Flipgrid
helped them become self- confident after many times of speaking practice in
front of a camera. It can be seen from the table 4.16 that 31 participants (72.1%)
gave the answer with the scale 4, 5 and 20.9 chose neutral. 7% of them believed
that Flipgrid didn’t made them self- confident.
Table 4.16. EFL students’ perceived usefulness of Flipgrid-based

portfolioQuestion 10,3, 5,13 - Frequency table
Valid Cumulative
Percent Percent
Strong disagree 1 2.3 2.3

10. I believe that
Flipgrid has Disagree 2 4.7 7.0
helped me speak Neutral 9 20.9 27.9

English more Agree 20 46.5 74.4
fluently.
3. I believe that Disagree 1 2.3 2.3

learning English Neutral 16 37.2 39.5
speaking will be
Agree 15 34.9 74.4
effective with
Flipgrid- based
portfolio
5. I consider Disagree 1 2.3 2.3

Flipgrid as a great Neutral 13 30.2 32.6
English learning
Agree 22 51.2 83.7
49

tool
practicing English Neutral 11 25.6 32.6
speaking using
Agree 20 46.5 79.1
Flipgrid has
helped me
recognize Strong disagree 9 20.9 100.0
mistakes.
For the question 10, the mean was 3.86. This is to say that Flipgrid
contributed to improve students’ fluency. Indeed, 31of 42 students (72.1%)
believed that Flipgrid helped them speak English more fluently. Nevertheless, 3
of 42 students (7%) chose “disagree” and “strong disagree” for this item. On
observing on Flipgrid-based portfolio, the researcher realized that those students
were quite lazy and hardly gave video’ comments to their classmates. After
having been got familiar with Flipgrid-based portfolio for 17 weeks, most
students (70.5%) in the experimental group believed that learning English
speaking will be effective with Flipgrid-based portfolio. They got engaged
responsibly to the tasks assigned by the teacher. 16 of 43 students hesitated to
identify the effectivity of Flipgrid based-portfolio. 1 of 43 participants (2.3%)
thought negatively as this student had difficulty in learning English. The
observation for video portfolio showed the obstacle of grammar and
pronunciation that prevented students from speaking. Related to the mistakes
that students might make while speaking, the result of the question 13 in the
table 4.19 presented that 29 of 43 students (67.1%) thought practising with
Flipgrid helped them recognize mistakes. Indeed, Flipgrid based portfolio saves
50
a list of videos for students to review and correct themselves by observing

captions. 11 of 43 (25.6%) remained neutral. 3 of them (7%) disagree that
Flipgrid helped them recognize mistakes.
For the second part “learners’ expectation”, the mean scores ranged from
3.09 to 3.41. This demonstrates that most students had negative attitude towards
Flipgrid. From the table 4.13, it is clear to list out the item 7, 9, 6, 12 with the
smallest scores. With the aim of analysing the frequency of each item, the
following table was showed:
Table 4.17. Question 7, 9, 6, 12- Frequency table
Valid Cumulative
Percent Percent
Flipgrid has helped Neutral 11 25.6 41.9
me reduce my
nervousness in Agree 20 46.5 88.4
learning English
speaking.
Disagree 7 16.3 23.3
9. I am responsible
for my English Neutral 15 34.9 51.2
learning when using Agree 12 27.9 79.1
Flipgrid.
Disagree 7 16.3 23.3
6. I feel comfortable
while speaking Neutral 19 44.2 60.5
English through Agree 12 27.9 88.4
Flipgrid app
practicing English Neutral 24 55.8 67.4
51
Agree 11 25.6 93.0
speaking using Strong disagree 3 7.0 100.0

Flipgrid has helped
me better Disagree 7 16.3 21.3
16. Flipgrid was a
fun way of keeping Neutral 11 25.6 41.9
people engaged Agree 20 46.5 88.4
with each other.
Compared with the first group’s score, the second group’s means are
much lower. The figures in the table 4.20 illustrated that the percentage of
participants giving approval declined gradually. For question 7, more than a half
(58.1%) believed that Flipgrid helped me reduce their nervousness in learning
English speaking. In question 6, 48.8% students became responsible for their
English learning when using Flipgrid. Related to question 12, 39.5% students
felt comfortable while speaking English through Flipgrid app. In question 16,
only 32.6% of them identified that practicing English speaking with Flipgrid
helped me better communicate with my teachers. For question 16, 58.1%
recognized that Flipgrid was a fun way of keeping people engaged with each
other. On observing students’ video, the research found that the majority chose
“neutral” for the above items due to their anxiety. They were not confident and
felt anxious whenever they took part in Flipgrid video.
After experiencing Flipgrid for 15 weeks, all the 12 th graders in the

experimental group seemed to be convinced by Flipgrid- based portfolio. Most
of students expressed the hope of studying English speaking with it. With the
aim of investigating learners’s expectation, the questions from 17 to 20 were
collected and analysed as the following table:
Table 4.18. EFL students’ expectation for using Flipgrid based-portfolio

52
Items Mean SM SD
17. I would like to study English speaking
4.01 0.12 0.81
with Flipgrid- based portfolio.
18. I hope Flipgrid is used more frequently to
3.81 0.11 0.73
make English speaking learning more fun.
19. I hope Flipgrid will enable me to practise
3.86 0.12 0.83
English speaking more efficiently.
20. I think I will continue using Flipgrid for
3.84 0.13 0.84
English speaking learning in the future.
Total 3.88 0.12 0.80
As can be seen from the table, the means of four items related to learners’
expectation for the use of Flipgrid- based portfolio were 3.88, which are close to
the scale “agree”. It is suggested that the participants had rather high expectation
for the application of Flipgrid and Flipgrid- based portfolio as well. More
specifically, a large number of learners felt like studying English speaking with
Flipgrid - based portfolio, which was illustrated through the mean core (4.01) in
the item 17. The distribution of different choices was acceptable as the standard
deviation was 0.81. The analysis of frequency for the question 17 showed that
72.1% of students engaged in the treatment satisfied with using this tool. They
would like to use this treatment in learning process.
Table 4.19. Question 17, 18, 19, 20 - Frequency table

Valid Cumulative
Percent Percent
17.I would like to Disagree 3 7.0 7.0
study English Neutral 9 20.9 27.9
speaking with
Flipgrid- based Agree 17 39.5 67.4
portfolio. Strong disagree 14 32.6 100.0
18.I hope Flipgrid is Disagree 1 2.3 2.3
used more Neutral 13 30.2 32.6
53
Agree 22 51.2 83.7

frequently to make
English speaking Strong disagree 7 16.3 100.0
19. I hope Flipgrid Disagree 2 4.7 4.7
will enable me to Neutral 12 27.9 32.6
practise English
speaking more Agree 19 44.2 76.7
efficiently. Strong disagree 10 23.3 100.0
20. I think I will Disagree 1 2.3 2.3
continue using Neutral 16 37.2 39.5
Flipgrid for English
speaking learning in Agree 15 34.9 74.4
the future. Strong disagree 11 25.6 100.0
Related to the item 18 “Flipgrid is used more frequently to make English

speaking learning more fun”, the mean score in table 4.21 was 3.81 with the
standard deviation of 0.73. Furthermore, table 4.22 indicated that 267.5% of
students strongly agreed with this question. For the item 19, 67.5% of
participants hoped that Flipgrid will enable them to practise English speaking
more efficiently. 27.9% of students stayed balanced attitude. Only 2 of 43
(4.7%) didn’t give the hope of Flipgrid’s effectiveness. Similarly, the mean
score of the last item was 3.84 and the standard deviation was 0.84. This is to
say that the majority of students would like to continue using Flipgrid for
English speaking learning in the future. The table 4.22 revealed the percentage
of each scale for this question. 60.5% of students expected to accompany with
the treatment in the future. 16 of 43 students (37.2%) hesitated to choose yes or
no. Only 2.3% wanted to stop using Flipgrid.
However, some shortcomings were mentioned in their responses during
the interviews. Three negative attitude-oriented students (NAS) and three
positive attitude- oriented students (PAS) were invited to provide more related
information, which then were categorized and coded in Table 9.
Table 4.20. Students’ responses in the interviews
54
Sources Frequency Student code

Better online platform than PAS1, PAS2, PAS3,
6
the others NAS4, NAS5, NAS6
Have room for interactions PAS1, PAS2, PAS3,
5
with friends NAS4, NAS6
Receive feedback from
3 PAS2, PAS3, NAS4
Positive teacher
attitude Have more time for PAS1, PAS2, PAS3,
4
preparation and editing NAS4
Chance to correct PAS1, PAS2, PAS3,
5
themselves NAS4, NAS5
PAS1, PAS2, PAS3,
Gain more confidence 4
NAS4
Be afraid of making
3 PAS3, NAS5, NAS6
mistakes
Negative Fear of negative judgment
3 NAS4, NAS5, NAS6
attitude from friends and teachers
PAS1, PAS3, NAS5,
Slow video uploading 4
NAS6
All of the interviewees affirmed this difference between Flipgrid and the
other applications. Take PAS3 as an example:
“Flipgrid -based portfolio saved all my videos. When I got access to the
website http://myflipgrid.com, I could watch all easily. Watching again helps me
find out my mistakes and try better next time”. Student 5 said “Flipgrid is
different from Facebook or Zalo because videos are classified in the same
platform. Therefore, my videos are not drifted with the post”.
Four of them revealed that by utilizing Flipgrid, they have more chances
and sufficient time to be well prepared for their speaking practices. PAS 3 said
“we had enough time to gather ideas by asking our friends, seeing our friends’
postings, or searching for the internet, which helps us become more confident in
producing the target language”. NAS4 stated “ after each lesson in the class,
we have much time to complete their assignment prior to submitting to teacher.
55
We can have more time to prepare everything till we are ready to post on the
app Flipgrid”.
In terms of error finding, four out of six interviewees (66.7%) declared

that since attending the treatment, they have felt less worried about making
mistakes as Flipgrid allows them to restart their recording many times, and listen
to their voice, which helps them recognize the mistakes they made, and then
tried not to make the same mistakes on the next speaking attempts. Similarly,
PAS2 acknowledged “Flipgrid gives me a friendly and enjoyable platform to
practise speaking with teachers’ feedback, classmates’ feedback and immerse
reader and supports me to develop much more performance in public”.
Moreover, student 2 thought that having recorded speaking practices using
Flipgrid helped them not only gain confidence but also feel comfortable and less
nervous than speaking in the classroom.
Regarding the drawbacks that the interviewees faced during the treatment,
most of students indicated that they encountered some difficulties while they
were attending the treatment. Fear of making mistakes and negative judgements
from peers and teachers had the same frequency in the students’ interview
responses. NAS2 shared: I am not good at English, so I don’t want to speak
English in front of everyone. I feel always worried about being laughed at by my
friends or criticized by the teacher. Moreover, I sometimes thought that no one
would care of watching my videos as I never dare speak English in the face-to-
face class, so I am not invested too it. (NAS2). Another mentioned disadvantage
related to techniques. Four of six interviewees (PAS1, PAS3, NAS5, NAS6)
pointed out that Flipgrid requires much time to upload a video. They sometimes
had interruption when uploading their videos, which wastes much time for study
56
other subjects.
In a nutshell, it is undeniable that Flipgrid deters the users from the quick
access. Nevertherless, the most important thing is that Flipgrid based portfolio
has possitive impacts on students’ attitude towards speaking skill. As be
illustrated from the result of the questionnaire and the follow-up interview as
well, all participants were aware of the outcomes of Flipgrid based portfolio.
They also realised that Flipgrid overweighs the other tools such as Zalo,
Facebook... in term of a new type of digital portfolio.
4.2. Discussion
In this part, the discussion of the present research aimed at addressing

to the two research questions: Does Flipgrid- based portfolio improve EFL
12th graders’ performance? Does Flipgrid - based porfolio motivate the
learners to speak?
4.2.1. The effects of Flipgrid- based portfolio on EFL 12th graders’

performance?
One of the purposes of the present study examined the impacts of

Flipgrid-based portfolio application on EFL high school students’ speaking
skills in Vietnam. The results indicated that the experimental group had
significant improvement in comparison with the control group in terms of their
speaking performances. Prior to the treatment, the performance of both groups
was not significantly different. Yet, the results from the experiment data showed
there was a significant difference between the speaking scores of the
experimental group and the control group. In fact, Flipgrid- based portfolio was
used for the experimental group as a new type of assignment out of the
classroom. This was conducted during the first term of the academic year 2020-
57
2021. With videos portfolio, teacher observed students’ performance through

their videos and gave the necessary comments, while students themselves could
watch and learn from their peers’ videos, which is likely to lead to their
improvement. In other words, the treatment through Flipgrid platform seemed to
contribute to develop EFL high school students’ performances. Thus, for the
first research question, it can be concluded that the application of Flipgrid-
based portfolio has a significantly positive impact on learners’ speaking
performance. Those findings were in line with what found in the previous
studies (McLain, 2018; Miskam et al., 2019). One pedagogical implication is
that teachers and educators should take Flipgrid-based portfolio or other types of
e-portfolios into consideration when teaching speaking to EFL learners,
especially in the covid-19 era.
In addition, by comparing different components of speaking

performances, included grammar, vocabulary, pronunciation, fluency and idea
development, the total mean score of the post-test was all higher than that of the
pre-test and a significant difference existed in students’ pronunciation and
fluency. These results can be explained by the fact that the participants in the
experimental group had chance to record and re-listen to their performances,
they could learn from their mistakes for the next time, or even re-do the videos
before the submission. In terms of fluency, all the interviewees’ responses
indicated that the submitted products were not usually the first one they made,
students only posted what they felt satisfied with. All the rehearsals and
practices before the submission can be understood as the sources which helped
students increase their fluency during their speeches. This finding is in the same
vein with Nuraqilah, Aminabibi & Saidalvi (2019) and McLain (2018), which
declared that students’ oral presentation was enhanced through this type of
digital portfolio implementation. As a result, it can be stated that Flipgrid
58
generally exerts a positive impact on developing EFL learners’ English

competency, in which pronunciation and fluency should be paid attention to.
However, more studies need to be replicated for a firm conclusion.
4.2.2. Students’ motivation towards Flipgrid- based portfolio
The analysis of the questionnaires and interviews gave a variety of

information relating to students’ attitude towards Flipgrid in order to answer the
second research question. Through the data analysis, it is concluded that the
majority of participants were motivated by the use of Flipgrid in speaking
performance out of the classroom. As mentioned in the finding section, the mean
scores of two parts, included learners’ attitude and their expectation, indicated
their positive attitude towards the use of Flipgrid-based portfolio in learning
speaking skills. In addition to the descriptive statistics, the frequency statistics of
each question were taken into consideration to foster the reliability of the results.
One of the findings from the qualitative data analysis is that EFL high
school students indicated that the application of Flipgrid-based portfolio helped
them more autonomous and then more confident in their English learning. The
result, as a whole, supports the findings from earlier findings from previous
studies (Thomas & Jones, 2017). It is suggested that participants recognized the
benefits of Flipgrid-based portfolio for their speaking performance to the extent
that they had more chance to rehearsal and learn themselves. It is implied that
EFL students can gain more confidence and autonomy if they are given room
and tool to practice on their own. Accordingly, EFL teachers should provide not
only time but also a tool to students and guide them to practice out of the
classroom. The repetition of the tasks might be understood as a means to
improve students’ confidence time to time.
On the other hand, this study reported that some students expressed the
negative feelings towards the use of this online platform as they were afraid of
59
negative judgment from peers and friends. The posted videos might make them
lose face. That is why they still hesitated to agree that Flipgrid was “a fun way
of keeping people engaged with each other”. As quantitatively shown, half of
students remained neutral status or disagreed with the given statement,
suggesting that they still felt, to some extent, nervous and uncomfortable when
engaging in Flipgrid platform. This “side-effect” might imply that those
participants have some degree of foreign language anxiety (FLA) (Howitz et al,
1986). As a result, it is recommended that EFL teachers should consider the role
of anxiety in assessing their students’ speaking ability and should take into
account different strategies, such as relaxation techniques, to help learners
overcome that obstacle to perform as effectively as possible.
One noticeable finding is that many students appreciated the usefulness of

the Flipgrid flatform compared to other social networks in terms of peer
interactions and teachers’ feedback. This is consistent with a part of Johnson &
Skarphol’s (2018), who stated that the implementation of the digital portfolios
and Flipgrid created an online learning community, which increased student
engagement and communication, allowing for a positive connected learning
environment. It also can be understood that EFL students highly valued the
teachers’ feedback on their performances, and this e-portfolio offered them this
opportunity. As feedback is proved to be helpful in EFL learners’ English
learning, any chosen teaching tool, included Flipgrid-based porfolios, should be
taken by considering the feedback function. In addition, the uploading time
resulted in some unpleasant feeling among the participants in the study, more
improvement should be made for this flatform.
60
CHAPTER 5
CONCLUSION
In this chapter, the findings of the research in relation to two research

questions arewere discussed. From the found results, the suggestions were
drawn to address the issues determined in the study. The last part discussed the
study limitations and proposed some suggestions for further study.
5.1. Summary
The present research was an attempt to examine if Flipgrid-based

portfolio affected EFL high school students’speaking performances as well as
their attitude towards this online platform. The treatment was carried out for the
experimental group with 43 of EFL 12 graders and 43 students of the control
group in a high school. Along with the experiment, there was evidence that
positive impacts of Flipgrid-based portfolio were acknowledged through the
experiment results in this study to answer two research questions.
For the first research question, the result of the analysis of data obtained
through the tests showed that, applying Flipgrid- based portfolio contributed to
improve speaking performance for EFL 12th graders. As illustrated in chapter 4,
the mean score of posttest was greater than that of pretest. Likewise, the posttest
scores of experimental students was better than that of control students.
Furthermore, by using descriptive statistics and one-way- statistic ANOVA, it is
obvious that EFL 12 graders’ speaking skill gained improvement in terms of five
criteria such as pronunciation, fluency, Vocabulary, comprehension and
grammar. A significant improvement was found from the experiment findings in
terms of students’s pronunciation and fluency.
For the second research question, the findings showed from the data
analysis was that the vast majority of participants were motivated by Flipgrid-
61
based portfolio. It is noticeableed that most of them considered Flipgrid as one

of the useful tool to practise speaking. In addition, video portfolio on Flipgrid
helped them improve speaking skill, especially fluency and vocabulary, Flipgrid
motivated them to speak English by teacher’s feedback, peers’ feedback or
hearts… McLain (2018) found that with Flipgrid, speaking time, collaboration,
student confidence, and pronunciation are all language skills Flipgrid use could
potentially benefit. Nevertheless, through the interview, the outcomes or
drawbacks that students faced were gradually exposed. The first difficulty was
derived from technical limitation of the Flipgrid app. The second one was due to
fearing of wasting much time for studying Math, Litterature. Lastly, some of
students were anxious about losing face such as being critisised by teacher or
being laughed at by their classmates.
To sum up the present research stated the statistic evidence to prove that
the findings were completely significant in regard of the application of Flip-
based portfolio in the 4.0 area, especially during the Covid-19 pandemic. The
study proved that Flipgrid-based portfolio did not only have positive impacts on
12th graders’ performance but also motivate them to speak English.
5.2. Limitations
It goes without saying that everything has two sides. Beside the
meaningful results in statistics, the limitations in the present research are worth
being focused on. The first limitation belongs to the research frame. The
experiment was only conducted over a semester period, which is not long
enough to thoroughly examine the extent in which learners need more time to
show their improvement and the difficulties they had during the experiment. In
addition, the constraint of time is regarded as the obstacles discouraging the
researcher from generalizing the results of the treatment in the same context.
The other limitation is in regard to the sample size. The experiment was carried
62
out in two small size groups with only 86 students, the generalization of the
findings should be cautious accordingly. More studies need to be replicated to
confirm the findings in larger sample population in the similar research context.
Therefore, the researcher has a desire to provide a respected recommendation for
future studies.
5.3. Suggestions for further study
It’s worth saying that the findings of the present study might be regarded
as the beginning of a new research investigation based on the limitations and
shortcomings encountered and, therefore, would open window for further
research.
First of all, it is suggested that more studies with the same aims and
method should be conducted during more than a semester period to investigate
the complete findings of Flipgrid based portfolio. Of all criteria, there would be
the criteria that need more time to examine the extent of improvement.
Moreover, apart from the findings aligning with the utilization of Flipgrid, some
problems encountered during the treatment should be taken in consideration to
find out the solutions.
Secondly, it is necessary for the present study to have more foundations

for the findings of the application in the same context with larger size. On the
scale of the Master thesis, the researcher only applied and collected the data of
43 EFL 12th graders in high school. If there is another research with similar
findings, these found findings must be generalized to all EFL learners.
Lastly, one pedagogical implication from the findings is that teachers as

the portfolio managers should focus on encouraging students’ motivation by
giving encouraging feedback, gifts and heart icons to put them at ease. In fact,
students often feel worried about being criticized by teacher. The strong
63
feedback may make them lose face, which has detrimental impact on students’
performance. Therefore, positive feedbacks are considered as the catalysis to
motivate them to perform speaking task. By using Flipgrid, teacher can send
learners private comments by email as email is inserted to Flipgrid. This helps
teachers to avoid making students feel anxious. Moreover, teacher should focus
on some tactics to encourage students’ spirit. It includes small gifts for the best
speakers, much heart icons of classmates.
In conclusion, applying online platform in education becomes more

necessary during the 4.0 area, especially in the Covid-19 pandemic. It is a
recommendation that more research related to the use of Flipgrid in teaching and
learning process be implemented soon to provide the reliable background for the
generalization of the findings.
64
REFERENCES
[1]. Berry, R., (2008), Assessment for Learning. Hong Kong: Hong Kong
University Press.
[2]. Breakwell, G. M. (Ed.).(2004). Doing social psychology research. Oxford,

UK: British Psychological Society and Blackwell Publishing.
[3]. Buzzetto-More, N. (2006). Using electronic portfolios to build information

literacy. Global Digital Business Review, 1(1), 6-11.
[4]. Cohen, L., Manion, L.& Morrision, K. (2005). Research methods in

education. Newyork: Routlege.
[5]. Cook, D.T. (2015). Quasi-experimental design. 11(7). Doi:

https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118785317.weom110227
[6]. Cora, L., & Knight, P. (2000). Learning and teaching English, a course for
teachers. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[7]. Cameron, L. (2001). Teaching Languages to Young Learners. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/
CBO9780511733109
[8]. Cohen, R.S., Zhang, S., Dollar, G.L. (2005). The positional, structural,
and sequence requirements of the Drosophila TLS RNA localization
element. 11(7), 1017-1029.
[9]. Council of Europe (2001). Common European framework of reference for

languages. Retrieved from https://rm.coe.int/16802fc1bf
[10]. Green, T., & Green, J. (2017). Flipgrid: Adding voice and video to online
discussions. TechTrends, 62(1), 128-130. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-
017-0241-x
[11]. Harmer, J. (2000).How to Teach English. Foreign Language Teaching and

65
Research Press, Beijing.
[12]. Harris, M, D,. (1974). Testing English as a Second Language. New York:
Mc. Graw. Hill Book Company.
[13]. Hedge, T. (2000). Teaching and learning in the language classroom.

Oxford university press: Oxford.
[14]. Horwitz, E. K. (1986). Preliminary evidence for the reliability and validity
of a foreign language anxiety scale. TESOL Quartely, 20(3), 559- 562.
[15]. Horwitz, E. K., Horwitz, M.B. & Cope, J. (1986). Foreign language
classroom anxiety. The Modern Language Journal, 70(2): 125-132.
[16]. Huang, H, T. D., & Hung, S. T. A. (2010). Effects of electronic portfolios

on EFL oral performance. Asian EFL Journal, 12(2), 192-212.
[17]. Hughes, R. (2002). Teaching and Researching Speaking. Pearson

Education: Longman.
[18]. Jacob, P., Simon, T., & Natsumi, O. (2020). Utilizing Flipgrid application
on student smartphones in a small-scale ESL study. Canadian Center of
Science and Education, 13(5), 164-176. Doi: https://doi.org/10.5539/
elt.v13n5p164
[19]. Johnson, M., & Skarphol, M. (2018). The effects of digital portfolios and
Flipgrid on student engagement and communication in a connected
learning secondary visual arts classroom. Action research project. St.
Catherine University. Retrieved from https://sophia.stkate.edu/maed/270.
[20]. Kingen, S. (2000). Teaching Language Arts in Middle Schools.

Connecting and Communicating. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates, Publishers.
[21]. Leong, L.M., & Ahmadi, S. M. (2016). An Analysis of Factors Influencing

66
Learner’s English Speaking Skill. International Journal Research in

English Education, 2, 34-41.
[22]. Littlewood, W. (1981). Communicative language teaching. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.
[23]. Nation. I.S.P. (2005). Handbook of Research in Second Language

Teaching and Learning. Rouledge.
[24]. Neves, J. and Hillman, N. (2017). 2017 Student Academic Experience

Survey. York: Higher Education Academy.
[25]. Nunan, D. (1993). Introducing Discourse Analysis. London: Penguin

English.
[26]. Mabry, L. (1999). Writing to the Rubric: Lingering Effects of Traditional

Standardized Testing on Direct Writing Assessment. 80(90), (73-79).
[27]. Mango, O. (2019). Students’ perceptions and attitudes toward the use of
Flipgrid in the language classroom. In K. Graziano (Ed.), Proceedings of
society for information technology & teacher education international
conference (1970-1973). Las Vegas, NV, United States: Association for
the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved May 30,
2021 from https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/207916/.
[28]. Margaret, K., Amanda, W., Cameron, C., & Joshua, L (2020): Student
perceptions on the benefits of Flipgrid in a HyFlex learning environment
Journal of Education for Business. doi: 10.1080/08832323.2020.1832431.
[29]. McLain, T. R. (2018). Integration of the video response app Flipgrid in the
business writing classroom. International Journal of Educational
Technology and Learning, 4(2), 68-75. Doi:10.20448/2003.42.68.75.
[30]. Miskam, N. N., & Saidalvi, A. (2019). The use of Fipgrid for teaching oral
67
presentation skills to engineering Students. International Journal of Recent

Technology and Engineering, 8(2), 536-541.
[31]. Derwing, T. M., & Munro, M. J. (2005). Second language accent and
pronunciation teaching: A research-based approach. TESOL Quarterly,
39, 379-397. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3588486.
[32]. Neves, J. & Hillman, N. (2017). 2017 student academic experience survey.
York: Higher Education Academy. Retrieved from
https://www.hepi.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/2017-Student-
Academic-Experience-Survey-Final-Report.pdf.
[33]. Nicol, D.J. & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-
regulated learning: a model and seven principles of good feedback
practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31 (2), 199-218.
[34]. O' Malley, M., & Pierce, L. V. (1996). Authentic assessment for English
language learners: Practical approaches for teachers. Wesley.CA:
Addison.
[35]. P.T.Hue & V.N.Tung. (2019). Using Flipgrid app to increase learners'
motiavtion to speak English. Retrieved from
https://convention.viettesol.org/index.php/VIC/VIC2019/paper/view/598.
[36]. Redmond, M., & Vrchota, N.A. (2007). Everyday speaking public.Boston,
MA: Allyn& Bacon.
[37]. Richards, J. C. (2008). Second Language Teacher Education Today. RELC

Journal, 39, 158-177. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0033688208092182.
[38]. Stoszkowski, J. R. (2018). Using Flipgrid to develop social learning.

Compass: Journal of Learning and Teaching, 11(2), 1-4.
[39]. Stoszkowski, J., Mc Carthy, L. & Fonseca, J. (2017). Online peer

68
mentoring and collaborative reflection: A cross-institutional project in

sports coaching. Journal of Perspectives in Applied Academic Practice,
5(3), 118-121. Retrieved from https://jpaap.napier.ac.uk/index.php/
JPAAP/article/view/289.
[40]. Tierney, R. J., Carter, M., Desai, L. (1991). Portfolio assessment in the
reading writing classroom. Norwood, MA: Christopher Gordon
Publishers, Inc.
[41]. Thomas, L. & Jones, R. (2017). Student engagement in the context of

commuter students. London: The Student Engagement Partnership.
Retrieved from, https://www.lizthomasassociates.co.uk/projects/2018/
Commuter% 20student% 20engagement.pdf.
[42]. Trim, J. (1997). A European language portfolio: some questions relating to

its nature, function, form, preparation and distribution. In Council of
Europe (Ed.), The European language portfolio. Proposals for
development. (3-12). Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
[43]. T.T.B. Tuyet & N.D.Khang. (2020). The influences of the Flipgrid app on
vietnameses EFL high school learners’ speaking anxiety. European
journal of foreign language teaching, 5(1), 128-149.
[44]. Warner, R. M. (2013). Applied statistics: From bivariate through

multivariate techniques (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
[45]. Willis, D. (1990). The lexical syllabus. London: Collins.
[46]. Wolf, K., & Siu - Runyan, Y. (1996). Portfolio purposes and possibilities.
Journal of adolescent and adult literacy.(30-37).
69
APPENDIX
Appendix 1
SPEAKING PRETEST FORM
Part 1: General questions (2 minutes)

The examiner asks the candidates some questions about themselves
There are a few of following suggested questions:
- What’s your name?
- What do you like doing in your free time?
- How do you get to school every day?
- What subjects do you like most? Why
- What’s your favourite food?
- How often do you go online?
- What do you use the internet for?
- Do you like reading books? What books did you read as a child?
Part 2: Oral presentation about one of the following topics (8mns)
Candidates will choose randomly one of the topics in the cards that the
examiner gives. They are allowed to prepare their presentation in 3 minutes.
- Card 1: Could you talk something about your family?
- Card 2: Could you describe your best friend?
- Card 3: Talk about a kind of volunteer work your friends and you
usually do to help people.
- Card 4: Talk about Tet holiday in Vietnam
(All the given topics are derived from the 11th English textbook in
Vietnam)
70
Appendix 2
SPEAKING POSTTEST FORM
Part 1: General questions (2 minutes)

The examiner asks the candidates some questions about themselves
There are a few of following suggested questions:
- What’s your name?
- What do you like doing in your free time?
- How do you get to school every day?
- What subjects do you like most? Why
- What’s your favourite food?
- How often do you go online?
- What do you use the internet for?
- Do you like reading books? What books did you read as a child?
Part 2: Oral presentation about one of the following topics (8mns)
Candidates will choose randomly one of the topics in the cards that the
examiner gives. They are allowed to prepare their presentation in 3 minutes.
Card 1- Making an oral presentation about the topic “Family rules”
Card 2- Talking about the differences of marriage between Vietnam and
America
Card 4- Drawing the diagram and Making an oral presentation about the
Vietnam school education system
Card 5- Saying what job you want to do and giving the reasons.
(All the given topics are derived from the 12th English textbook in
Vietnam. All of them are speaking assigment for EFL 12th graders)
71
Appendix 3
PRE- AND POST-TEST EVALUATION RUBRIC
Pre-test □ Post-test □
Criteria Points
Fluency
5. The speaker speaks confidently and naturally with no distracting

hesitations. Ideas flow smoothly.
3. The speaker hesitates several times, but generally seems to 5

know the desired words, even if it is necessary to think about them
a bit.
1. The speaker has many hesitations and great difficulty

remembering or selecting words.
Pronunciation
5. Pronunciation is accurate, with correct inflections, numbers of

syllables and other correct nuances of pronunciation. 5
3. Pronunciation is satisfactory; however words sometimes have
incorrect inflections or are otherwise sometimes hard to
understand.
1. Pronunciation is very hard or impossible to understand by a

native speaker.
Grammar
5. The speaker speaks with no more incorrect grammar than a

native speaker would.
3. The speaker occasionally uses inappropriate verb tenses and/or 5

72
incorrectly uses parts of speech, however the speaker has the

ability to correct grammar without prompts.
1. The speaker makes frequent use of inappropriate verb tenses

and/or incorrectly constructs sentences or uses parts of speech.
Vocabulary
5. Vocabulary is sufficient to be understood in most settings and

words are used with their correct meaning. 5
3. Vocabulary is moderate, although the speaker sometimes needs
help identifying the correct words. There are only occasional
problems with correct meanings of words.
1. Vocabulary is very limited and/or incorrect words are often

used.
Idea development
5. The speaker is knowledgeable about the subject and provides a

significant level of detail, given the time available.
3. The speaker is aware of the subject and attempts to provide 5

relevant ideas about it. Provides some details.
1. Speaker seems to have little or no understanding of the subject.

Statements are superficial or not relevant.
Total 25
This rubric can be attributed to: Marek, M. W., & Wu, W. (2011, May
14). Using Facebook and SKYPE as Social Media in an EFL conversation class.
Paper presented at the 28th International Conference on Teaching and Learning
in the ROC, National Taichung University of Education, Taichung,Taiwan.
73
Appendix 4
RESEARCH TOPIC: APPLYING FLIPGRID-BASED PORTFOLIO
TO IMPROVE EFL 12TH GRADERS’SPEAKING SKILL
This research requests your assistance to help us to investigate EFL 12 th

graders’ attitude towards speaking performance after applying Flipgrid-based
portfolio to improve EFL 12th graders’speaking skill.
Your participation is voluntary. You are allowed to use Vietnamese,

besides English. If you agree to take part in this study, please kindly fill out the
questionnaire in which you are asked to indicate your attitude towards speaking
competence. It will take you about 10-15 minutes to complete.
The completion of the questionnaire indicates your given consent. Your

data will be used by only the student researcher, Tran Thi Bich Huong, for the
purpose of her thesis.
Thank you for giving your time.
LEARNERS MOTIVATION AND SPEAKING SKILL

QUESTIONNAIRE
Please fill in the information from 1- 5 in Part 1 first, before you continue to part
2 of the questionnaire
Part 1
1. Name:…………………………………………………………………..
2. Age:…………………………………………………………………….
3. Gender:…………………………………………………………………
4. Hometown :………………………………………………………….….
74
5. English Class:………………………………………………………..…
6. Time of learning English:……………………………………………...
Part 2
The following is a list of question which aims at investigating learners’

attitudes towards the use of Flipgrid-based portfolio in learning English
speaking and learners’reflection of the use of Flipgrid-based portfolio in
practicing Speaking skill. Please circle below one of the following numbers next
to your opinion. For the closed-ended questions, the instrument used a five-point
Likert-type scale. Circle your answer:
5: Strongly agree
4: Agree
3: Neutral
2: Disagree
1: Strong disagree
Learners’ attitudes
towards the use of
Strongly Strongly
Flipgrid- based portfolio Disagree Neutral Agree
disagree agree
in learning English
speaking
1 I believe that practicing 1 2 3 4 5

English speaking using
Flipgrid has helped
increase my cooperation
and communication with
75
towards the use of
Strongly Strongly
disagree agree
in learning English
speaking
my classmates
I believe that Flipgrid

makes me become
2 1 2 3 4 5
autonomous in English
speaking practices
I believe that learning

English speaking will be
3 1 2 3 4 5
effective with Flipgrid-
based portfolio
I am less frightened
about making mistakes
4 when learning English 1 2 3 4 5
speaking through the use
of Flipgrid
I consider Flipgrid as a
5 great English learning 1 2 3 4 5
tool
I feel comfortable while

6 speaking English through 1 2 3 4 5
Flipgrid app
7 I believe that Flipgrid has 1 2 3 4 5

76
towards the use of
Strongly Strongly
disagree agree
in learning English
speaking
helped me reduce my
nervousness in learning
English speaking.
I believe that the use of

Flipgrid has helped me
8 become self-confident in 1 2 3 4 5
my speaking
performance.
I am responsible for my
9 English learning when 1 2 3 4 5
using Flipgrid.
I believe that Flipgrid has

10 helped me speak English 1 2 3 4 5
more fluently.
I believe that Flipgrid has

11 helped me better improve 1 2 3 4 5
my pronunciation.
12 I believe that practicing 1 2 3 4 5

better communicate with
77
towards the use of
Strongly Strongly
disagree agree
in learning English
speaking
my teachers.
I believe that practicing

13 1 2 3 4 5
recognize mistakes.
Learning using Flipgrid

encouraged me to
14 1 2 3 4 5
practice speaking in
English.
Flipgrid- based portfolio

gave me a good chance to
15 review all of my 1 2 3 4 5
submitted videos and
teachers’feedback.
Flipgrid was a fun way of

16 keeping people engaged 1 2 3 4 5
with each other.
Learners’ reflection of Strongl Disagre Neutral Agre Strongl

the use of Flipgrid- y e e y agree
based portfolio in disagre
practicing Speaking
78
towards the use of
Strongly Strongly
disagree agree
in learning English
speaking
skill e
I would like to study

17 English speaking with 1 2 3 4 5
Flipgrid- based portfolio.
I hope Flipgrid is used

more frequently to make
18 1 2 3 4 5
English speaking
learning more fun.
I hope Flipgrid will

enable me to practise
19 1 2 3 4 5
English speaking more
efficiently.
I think I will continue

using Flipgrid for English
20 1 2 3 4 5
speaking learning in the
future.
Appendix 5
STUDENTS INTERVIEW
79
Questions Notes
1. What makes Flipgrid different from the other

tools such as Zalo, Facebook, …?
2. In your opinion, what are the benefits of

Flipgrid?
3. What are the shortcomings of Flipgrid?
4. Does Fliprid- based portfolio help you improve

speaking skill? Why yes/ why not?
80
Appendix 6
ILLUSTRAED ACTIVITIES ON FLIPGRID-BASED PORTFOLIO

Trần Thị Bích Hường Thesis Final Revise

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Trần Thị Bích Hường Thesis Final Revise

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING

TRẦN THỊ BÍCH HƯỜNG

APPLYING FLIPGRID - BASED PORTFORTLIO

MASTER’S THESIS IN EDUCATION

Nghệ An, 2021

TRẦN THỊ BÍCH HƯỜNG

APPLYING FLIPGRID - BASED PORTFORTLIO

Field: Theory and methods of teaching English

MASTER’S THESIS IN EDUCATION

Supervisor: LE THI TUYET HANH, Ph.D.

Nghệ An, 2021

I certify that the thesis entitled “Applying Flipgrid- based portfolio to

Nghe An, July 2021

Trần Thị Bích Hường

This quasi - experimental research aimed at investigating the impacts of

Additionally, all the participants in the experimental group had positive

KEY WORDS: Flipgrid, portfolio, e-portfolio, speaking skill, EFL high

From the bottom of my heart, it is a pleasure to acknowledge all the

First and foremost, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my

I am also highly thankful to all lecturers in Vinh university, those who

I am deeply grateful to the Board of Directors of 1-5 High School,

I would like to show my gratitude to my all participants who accepted to

2.5. Previous studies on using Flipgrid in teaching and learning..........18

LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES

Table 4.18. EFL students’ expectation for using Flipgrid based-portfolio. 51

It is common knowledge that the beginning of 21st century, especially

with various problems in speaking lessons. At first, students have less

Along with the widespread application of ICT in education, educators in

1.2. Objectives of the study

The present study aims at investigating the impacts of Flipgrid- based

1.3. Research questions

The present study is to answer the following research questions:

- Does Flipgrid - based portfolio improve EFL 12 th graders’ performance?

- Does Flipgrid - based porfolio motivate the learners to speak English?

1.4. Scope of the study

This study investigates the impacts of Flipgrid based portfolio on EFL 12 th

1.5. Significance of the study

2.1. Speaking skill

2.1.1. Definition of speaking skill

Related to the definition of speaking skill, it is noted that different notions

Speaking is the means through which learners can communicate with

Speaking is necessary for effective communication in any language,

Based on the previous definitions above, it can be synthesized that

2.1.2. Aspects of speaking

In spoken language, there are some components of speaking to be scored.

Fluency is regarded as the main goal in teaching speaking. It is defined as

term fluency relates to production and it is normally reserved for speech. It is

Grammar is the second main goal that should be considered by speakers.

The third aspect is related to pronunciation. Pronunciation deals with

Comprehension is one important thing to consider because the objective

2.2.1. Definition of Flipgrid

Flipgrid is a video and audio-based learning tool developed in 2014 by

professor Charles Miller at the University of Minnesota, USA. Flipgrid is an

Flipgrid is a social learning platform that allows educators to ask a

communication for students. Flipgrid is useful for facilitating social learning,

Besides, the student's nervousness, low self-confidence, or poor public

Mango (2019) emphasizes that Flipgrid provides an online video-

It is concluded from the previous studies that Flipgrid, a social learning

2.2.2. Strengths of Flipgrid

Flipgrid is seen as an effective tool to support the improvement of

- Access: Students do not need to create an account or ‘sign-up’; they

- Convenience: As the discussion is asynchronous and not time- or place-

- Participation: Discussion is evenly distributed across the cohort. Those

- Appeal: Students appear to prefer watching each other speak on video to