GRADUATION THESIS

DIFFICULTIES ENCOUNTERED BY IN-SERVICE

ENGLISH MAJOR STUDENTS WHEN LEARNING
SPEAKING SKILLS

SUBMITTED BY: NGUYEN QUAN KIET

COURSE: K2020 VB1 Đợt 2

CLASS: K2020 VB1/TP2 [Tiếng Anh thương mại]

ID NUMBER: HCMVB120202181

SUPERVISOR: ASSOC. PROF. NGUYEN HUYNH TRANG

HO CHI MINH CITY 2023

 DIFFICULTIES ENCOUNTERED BY IN-SERVICE ENGLISH MAJOR
STUDENTS WHEN LEARNING SPEAKING SKILLS

SUBMITTED BY: NGUYEN QUAN KIET

COURSE: K2020 VB1 Đợt 2

CLASS: K2020 VB1/TP2 [Tiếng Anh thương mại]

ID NUMBER: HCMVB120202181

SUPERVISOR: ASSOC. PROF. NGUYEN HUYNH TRANG

HO CHI MINH CITY 2023

 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

First and foremost, I would like to express my heartfelt gratitude to my instructor, Dr.
Nguyen Huynh Trang, for her guidance during my graduate thesis. Despite several
obstacles in this scientific study, I completed the research report with her assistance.
Dr. Trang was kind and patient, and she provided me with a great deal of helpful
advice. In addition to being devoted to solving students' queries, she spent time
evaluating my graduation thesis regularly. Her guidance taught me plenty about
scientific research methods and other valuable lessons.
Secondly, I sincerely thank the School of Foreign Languages and the University of
Economics in Ho Chi Minh City for allowing me to accomplish this graduation thesis.
As a result of that experience, I have acquired knowledge and skills in scientific
research methodology.
I appreciate my peers and colleagues who offered their critical perspectives and
suggestions. Their contribution enriched the depth and breadth of this study. Lastly,
I want to thank my family for always believing in me and supporting me as I went
through school. Their assistance kept me focused and reminded me how important
and valuable this study was.
 NHẬN XÉT CỦA GIẢNG VIÊN HƯỚNG DẪN
……………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………

TP. Hồ Chí Minh, ngày ….. tháng ..… năm 2023.

Giảng viên hướng dẫn

NHẬN XÉT CỦA GIẢNG VIÊN CHẤM 2

……………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………

TP. Hồ Chí Minh, ngày ….. tháng ..… năm 2023.

Giảng viên chấm 2
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT ........................................................................................................... 1

Chapter 1: Introduction ........................................................................................ 2

1.1. Research background ................................................................................. 2

1.2. Research gap ............................................................................................... 2

1.3. The aim of the research .............................................................................. 3

1.4. Significance of the research........................................................................ 3

1.5. Structure of the study ................................................................................. 3

Chapter 2: Literature Review ............................................................................... 5

2.1. Speaking skills ............................................................................................ 5

2.2. The importance of English-speaking skills ................................................ 6

2.3. Difficulties of students when speaking English ......................................... 7

2.4. Related studies ............................................................................................ 9

2.5. Theoretical background ........................................................................... 12

Chapter 3: Research Methodology ..................................................................... 13

3.1. Participants ............................................................................................... 13

3.2. Research instrument ................................................................................. 13

3.3. Research procedure .................................................................................. 14

Chapter 4: Results and Discussion ..................................................................... 16

4.1. Results ....................................................................................................... 16

4.1.1. Difficulties related to internal factors ............................................... 16

4.1.2. Difficulties related to external factors .............................................. 18

4.1.3. Difficulties related to common mistakes........................................... 22

4.2. Discussion.................................................................................................. 24
Chapter 5: Conclusion and Recommendation ................................................... 27
5.1. Conclusion ................................................................................................ 27

5.2. Recommendation ...................................................................................... 28

5.3. Limitations of the study............................................................................ 29

REFERENCES .................................................................................................... 30

APPENDICES ..................................................................................................... 34
 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

EFL: English as a Foreign Language

NESTs: Native English teachers
SPSS: Statistical Package for Social Science
 LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Characteristics of Student Participants

Table 2. The Reliability of The Survey Questionnaire
Table 3. Mean Score Interpretation
Table 4. Statistical Descriptions of Students' Challenges Due to Linguistic Factors
Table 5. Statistical Descriptions of Students' Challenges Due to Psychological
Factors
Table 6. Statistical Descriptions of Students' Challenges Due to Instructional
Methodologies
Table 7. Statistical Descriptions of Students' Challenges Due to Curriculum/syllabus
Instruction
Table 8. Statistical Descriptions of Students' Challenges Due to In-class English
Learning Environment
Table 9. Statistical Descriptions of Students' Challenges Due to Other Activities
Table 10. Statistical Descriptions of Students' Challenges Due to Common
 1

ABSTRACT
In today’s global context, learning English-speaking skills has gained increasing
significance among Vietnamese students. Many of them are in-service learners who
are working but wish to learn and enhance their speaking skills. The researcher
recognizes that they face many problems related to speaking abilities, but only a few
studies have been done to unveil these challenges. Therefore, this research is
conducted to analyze the difficulties encountered by in-service English major
students in practicing speaking skills. This investigation used a questionnaire,
including 31 closed and seven open-ended questions, to gather data on these
difficulties. The study recruited 100 in-service English major students at a public
university in Ho Chi Minh City to gain insights into their speaking-related struggles.
Preliminary findings indicated that these in-service students’ obstacles mainly came
from internal and external factors. Internally, linguistic factors (M = 3.64), such as a
lack of vocabulary, grammar, and pronunciation mistakes, and psychological factors
(M = 3.66), such as shyness and fear of negative evaluation, were the major
impediments students often faced. Externally, limited opportunities for in-class
English conversation (M = 3.90), inadequate teaching methodologies (M = 3.56), an
improper curriculum (M = 3.42), and an absence of in-class or extracurricular
activities (M = 3.56) were all obstacles to constraining students’ speaking
proficiency. Then, some recommendations were proposed to enhance the teaching
and learning of speaking skills among in-service English majors based on the findings
of the study.
 2

Chapter 1: Introduction
1.1. Research background
In recent years, there has been an increasing recognition of the crucial role of English
as a worldwide lingua franca (Harmer, 2007), leading to an increased focus on the
acquisition of diverse language competencies, with speaking skills particularly
emphasized. Speaking is the most significant aspect of language because it reveals a
person’s language proficiency (Shteiwi & Hamuda, 2016). Cultivating oral
communication abilities is frequently regarded as a crucial and arduous facet of
language acquisition within educational settings. On top of that, this demand has been
observed throughout various fields like international commerce, diplomacy, tourism,
and education. This rise in demand has underscored the significance of practical oral
communication skills, rendering speaking skills beneficial and essential, given that
people were likely assumed to be a speaker of a language if they were proficient in
that language (Ur, 2012). According to Abdulrahman (2013), every student struggles
when learning English.
The challenge intensifies for in-service English major students, who are not only
learning but also working at the same time. Even with their academic foundation in
English studies through the working environment, these students also encounter a
wide range of obstacles when practicing their oral communication skills.
1.2. Research gap
While other studies have given insight into the problems EFL students face when
learning English speaking skills, there is limited research regarding an in-depth
comprehension of the difficulties faced by in-service students who are working or
have other responsibilities. Unlike full-time students, these non-traditional students
frequently possess different learning needs and limits. They might not have much
access to traditional classrooms and English-speaking environments; therefore, it is
fundamental to discover how their unique situations affect the way they learn to speak
English. Previous studies have focused on EFL students’ impediments and their
 3

causes but have yet to address how to overcome these difficulties, especially in in-
service education.
Apart from that, a handful of studies indicate that the obstacles EFL students faced
chiefly came from internal and external factors. Thus, there is a significant disparity
regarding in-service learners’ difficulties in English-speaking contexts. In addition,
customized educational approaches and support systems that facilitate the
development of speaking skills will be required. There is widespread agreement that
such methods have the potential to improve English language instruction and make it
easier for instructors to satisfy the requirements of non-traditional students.
1.3. The aim of the research
The primary objective of this research is to identify and analyze the difficulties
encountered by in-service English major students when learning speaking skills.
Additionally, the following two specific research questions served as its direction:
1. What challenges do in-service English major students face when learning speaking
skills?
2. Which mistakes do they think they frequently make?
1.4. Significance of the research
It is indispensable for instructors and learners to comprehensively understand the
challenges of speaking skills encountered by English major students. By recognizing
these hurdles, instructors may adapt instructional methods, customize curricula to
address such issues, and give students a more thorough understanding of their areas
of weakness. Moreover, giving precedence to improving these students’ oral
communication skills is essential. This research will be a valuable reference for
broader English language instruction and acquisition.
1.5. Structure of the study
The present study comprises five distinct chapters, namely: (1) Introduction; (2)
Literature Review; (3) Research Methodology; (4) Results and Discussion; and (5)
Conclusion and Recommendations.
 4

Chapter 1 presents the research background, the research gap, the aims of the
research, the significance of the research, and the structure of the study.
Chapter 2 presents a literature review where previous studies on the challenges of
learning speaking skills are discussed.
Chapter 3 describes the research methodology, including participants, instruments,
and procedures.
Chapter 4 reports and discusses the results of the questionnaire.
Chapter 5 offers conclusions and recommendations based on the research findings.
 5

Chapter 2: Literature Review

2.1. Speaking skills
Speaking skills, also known as oral communication skills, are the ability to express
opinions, information, or ideas in words effectively and understandably (Manurung,
2015). This is an essential skill in people’s personal and professional lives, and it can
affect the ability to interact with others, communicate messages, persuade others, and
build public relationships. According to Bygate (2009), when we communicated, we
had to not only understand vocabulary and grammar rules but also be able to create
new ones as needed and adapt them to the situation. As soon as the speaker had
mastered the knowledge and abilities necessary to apply them, they could make
judgments quickly, carry them out easily, and adapt their discussion naturally (Ismaili
& Bajrami, 2016).
As Albino (2017) stated, speaking skill is the ability to use speech to convey opinions,
ideas, and information or to interact with others effectively and efficiently. It is an
essential aspect of communication skills and is frequently utilized in a variety of daily
situations, as well as at work, school, and social activities. According to Burn (2016),
speaking skills include using an appropriate vocabulary, proper grammar, and clear
pronunciation. It also requires listening and responding well to information from
others. In addition to using language correctly, speaking skills include the ability to
convey opinions, to express emotions, and to communicate with confidence.
Speaking skills are the ability to express and communicate using language. It included
pronouncing, using grammar and vocabulary correctly, and knowing how to express
opinions, ideas, or information clearly and effectively in conversation or presentation
(Goh, 2007). Comparing speaking to the three other language abilities of reading,
listening, and writing, the researcher can recognize that speaking is seen as being the
most important. As Suryanto (2015) stated, when someone spoke a language as if
they had included all other forms of knowledge, that person might be considered a
speaker of the language.
 6

Overall, it is vital to recognize the significance of oral communication skills in

various aspects of life, including interpersonal relationships, professional
development, self-expression, Etc. In order to sharpen speaking skills, people are
required to practice regularly and actively seek out opportunities for communication-
based activities.
2.2. The importance of English-speaking skills
Numerous aspects of contemporary life demonstrate the significance of English-
speaking abilities. It is not just a personal skill but also significantly affects future
possibilities and personal development.
According to Bueno et al. (2006), English was considered a global language widely
used in international situations, such as communicating with foreigners, traveling,
working in multinational schools, or participating in international events. Besides,
English-speaking skills help students and researchers have the ability to participate
in knowledge exchange and discussion with colleagues around the world. Brown and
Yuke (1983) argued, “Speaking was the skill that the students would be judged upon
most in real-life situations.”
According to Marcellino (2008), in business and work environments, being able to
speak English could open up many job opportunities. It enables students to compete
for more in the international labor market and potentially work for multinational
corporations. Additionally, as Nunan (2004) stated, the ability to speak English
confidently could boost personal confidence. Expressing opinions, participating in
discussions, and presenting ideas helps students feel more empowered in everyday
life.
As Rueschemeyer (2018) defined it, when we have proficient English-speaking skills,
we can communicate directly with foreigners, making building relationships and
connecting with others easier. English-speaking skills improve our ability to express
opinions, ask questions, and discuss important issues. This can help us engage in
problem-solving and decision-making at work and in life. Furthermore, according to
 7

Sharma (2018), English-speaking skills allow us to communicate our information and

ideas effectively and help us understand and respond to information from others. In
particular, English-speaking skills allowed us to participate in the global community
and contribute internationally to social and cultural issues (Hamouda, 2012).
The ability to speak English is not merely personal but also a crucial tool that can be
used to obtain employment, expand social connections, and engage in a society that
is becoming increasingly globalized.
2.3. Difficulties of students when speaking English
Regarding linguistic factors, one of the most prevalent difficulties is the ability to
pronounce English. English had a wide variety of sounds and intonations compared
to the student’s native language, making it challenging to communicate clearly and
be understood (Nordin, 2012). According to Zaremba (2006), pronunciation was a
crucial factor affecting the confidence and willingness of EFL learners to engage in
spoken communication. Moreover, students frequently lack the vocabulary and
grammar knowledge necessary to express their ideas accurately and with confidence.
According to Raja (2018) and Alqahtani (2015), vocabulary could be considered an
essential barrier to efficient communication for EFL learners. Due to the significant
discrepancies between the grammar of the student’s native language and that of the
EFL, most students found it challenging to express grammatically accurate phrases
(Manurung, 2015).
As for psychological factors, according to Rintaningrum (2016), a lack of confidence
was a significant barrier to speaking English, causing anxiety among EFL students.
In numerous instances, students frequently suffer from apprehension regarding
mispronunciation or incorrect use of vocabulary, which can affect their ability to
communicate. In non-native English-speaking environments, it was frequently
observed that many EFL students experienced anxiety and stress when participating
in English conversation (Ansari, 2015).
 8

With regard to instructional methodologies, León and Cely (2010) claimed that
games provided an enjoyable environment that encouraged students to talk. Tuan and
Mai (2015) emphasized the importance of correcting mistakes made by instructors in
speaking classes that would affect English learners’ progress. Mansor and Rahim
(2017) noted that Instagram offered students educational opportunities for language
acquisition. Handayani (2016) found that, unlike a traditional classroom, the flipped
environment encouraged greater student engagement in speaking activities. Othman
(2014) has demonstrated the usefulness of debate as a classroom activity for
improving and cultivating learners’ critical thinking and speaking skills.
Regarding curriculum or syllabus instruction, Gan (2012) revealed that if the
concentration of the English teaching curriculum was not on communicative skills,
then students’ speaking performance might be constrained. In another investigation,
Ambu and Saidi (1997) reinforced this worry by noting an improper distribution of
time for teaching speaking skills and the teaching curriculum that did not meet the
communicative requirements of English language learners. On top of that, Al-Abri
(2008) found that the absence of speaking activities in the content of the teaching
curriculum was a further vital issue that hindered students’ speaking abilities.
Concerning the in-class English learning environment, Luk (2001) discovered that
NESTs (native English teachers) were considered a valued commodity to students
because having NESTs as teachers improved their linguistic resources and personal
experiences. Kabir (2014) identified large classes as a factor that inhibited the
speaking performance of EFL students who had limited time to demonstrate their
speaking ability (Nguyen & Tran, 2015). Moreover, seating arrangements in the
classroom affected student learning, motivation, involvement, and teacher-student
and student-student interactions (Fernandes et al., 2011).
In addition, the limitations of extracurricular activities contributed to the difficulties
that EFL students faced in their speaking performances. Gan (2012), who conducted
research at Hong Kong University, found that it seemed unusual for these students,
who were all Chinese, to speak English outside of class, so it was necessary to create
 9

an outside-of-class English-speaking environment for these students in order to

improve their speaking skills as EFL learners. Besides, students had limited
opportunities for speaking practice in class and outside of school (Rojas, 2018). As a
consequence, students consistently need help with speaking. Additionally, Kabir
(2014) clarified that extracurricular activities could assist EFL students in enhancing
their speaking skills.
Furthermore, listening and responding quickly in English conversations is essential.
Students frequently struggled to keep up with the speaker’s speed and intonation
(Rintaningrum & Azhari, 2021). Occasionally, students may have difficulties
utilizing appropriate language for the context. This requires adaptability and a clear
understanding of the context and communication goals.
2.4. Related studies
Hamouda (2012) researched EFL students' difficulties when speaking English at a
university in Qassim, Saudi Arabia. The research sample included 159 first-year non-
English majors. They used a 66-item questionnaire to gather data on these obstacles.
The results showed that many EFL students found it difficult to react to their teachers
for a variety of reasons, including poor pronunciation (71.70%), apprehension about
speaking in front of others, fear of receiving a poor grade, shyness, a lack of
confidence and preparedness, concern about making mistakes (67.92%), and a lack
of vocabulary (74.21%, item 47). More than two-thirds of the students admitted that
due to plenty of reasons, like a lack of confidence, anxiety, cultural beliefs, a lack of
practice due to the large class size (67.92%) or class time (69.81%), and the lack of
extracurricular activities for practicing English (81.67%), the students were hesitant
to speak to the teacher and stayed silent until they were picked out to answer
questions. This study supports and recommends that dividing students into small
groups and creating more vocabulary-related activities in the classroom will help
students improve their speaking proficiency.
Similar problems affected EFL students who were reluctant to speak English in
Indonesia, and cultural issues impacted their learning. When learning English in
 10

class, students frequently used Bahasa Indonesia. Due to their conviction that a
teacher could never make a mistake, they became “unquestioning minds” in
conversation. The Indonesian cultural inclination toward enjoying peaceful
coexistence shaped the students’ thoughts and learning attitudes. Students took much
initiative in their learning because they preferred to follow their teacher’s
instructions. Rintaningrum and Nurani (2021) researched to investigate the
difficulties of speaking English among Indonesian students and gave solutions to the
problem of having difficulty speaking English. According to the findings, one of the
things that made it challenging for students to talk in English was their lack of
motivation, which made them lack confidence, feel ashamed, and fear being blamed
or made fun of when speaking the language. Other issues were the absence of
terminology and the poor teaching strategies used in classrooms and on campuses.
However, many options could be done, such as reading English-language articles,
watching English-language movies, singing in English, improving English with
friends, and using various social media platforms.
Furthermore, Kabir (2014) researched EFL learners' classroom difficulties in
speaking English at a university in Bangladesh. The participants included 60 students
randomly chosen from three secondary schools and one college. They used four
research techniques, including student questionnaires, focus group discussions,
interviews with instructors, and classroom observations, to collect data on the
problems students encountered. The findings revealed that seating arrangement was
crucial while practicing English in the classroom (88.32%), and limited English clubs
gained the agreement of 78.45%. Some students stated that due to the high number
of learners, they could not respond to their instructors effectively, and 41.66% felt
insulted when their classmates laughed at them whenever they made mistakes in
speaking classes. Several participants claimed that the syllabus did not focus on
speaking skills. Some teachers added that a lack of vocabulary, comprehension of
grammar and pronunciation, shyness, improper materials, and lack of motivation
were common problems students frequently faced when speaking English. In this
 11

research, they believed that more discussion and communication in English in class
was likely to enhance students' speaking skills.
Numerous studies on Vietnamese students’ struggles with learning English have been
conducted. Pham et al. (2021) studied the challenges pharmacy students at the Thai
Nguyen University of Medicine and Pharmacy had when practicing their English-
speaking abilities. This research recruited 160 students in K–15 Pharmacy. They
employed both qualitative and quantitative research techniques. The analysis of data
from K15 Pharmacy students revealed that the limitations in vocabulary (M = 4.22),
grammar (M = 4), and pronunciation (M = 4.02), as well as psychological factors
from the students themselves, fear of making mistakes (M = 3.63), and the lack of a
setting to practice English speaking (M = 3.93), limited time in speaking classes (M
= 3.76), and large size classes (M =3.43), were all causes of difficulties in performing
English speaking skills. They also reported that the primary barrier preventing
students from speaking English was not the English lecturer’s manner of instruction
(M = 2.67). They confessed that learning English speaking skills is pivotal for
students; creating more English zones and applying natural approach techniques to
their daily lives will benefit students’ speaking abilities.
In the same vein, Vo et al. (2018) conducted a research study concerning EFL
students’ speaking English difficulties at a Vietnamese university in the Mekong
Delta. The participants comprised 131 English-majored first-year students. They
employed the questionnaire (26 items), individual teacher interviews, and class
observation to collect data on these hurdles. The findings revealed that regarding
internal factors, most students agreed their main problems in speaking English were
due to a lack of vocabulary (79.4%); being shy (3.1%) and being afraid of making
mistakes (34.4%) were not their major concerns. The results also indicated that,
regarding external factors, most students admitted that difficulties related to
instructional methods (12.71%) and teaching curriculum (18.62%) did not affect their
speaking abilities. Besides, they also confessed that the number of foreign teachers
was still minimal (68.7%) and that large classes, the dominance of the best students,
 12

and the arrangement of tables were not the obstacles influencing their speaking
abilities (under 35.1%). One lecture also affirmed that there needed more places for
students to practice speaking English outside the classroom, but it was hard to propose
to the administrators. Participating in English-speaking clubs and growing students’
awareness of independent learning styles, in this case, helps students enhance their
speaking skills.
The study’s findings are highly pertinent to teaching and learning speaking abilities
and offer lecturers and students a more thorough understanding of how to get to the
necessary level through teaching and learning.
2.5. Theoretical background
This theoretical framework is established based on the Vo et al. (2018) framework.
Then, it is edited and supplemented depending on the following theories: Othman
(2014), Mansor and Rahim (2017), Tuan and Mai (2015), León and Cely (2010),
Handayani (2016), Luk (2001), Fernandes et al. (2011), Kabir (2014), Nguyen & Tran
(2015), Al-Abri (2008), and Gan (2012), as mentioned in Section 2.3.
 13

Chapter 3: Research Methodology

3.1. Participants
The researcher initially recruited 120 participants to collect data but only received
104 answers, of which four were inappropriate. As a result, the final data consisted
of 100 in-service students enrolled in a program focused on developing their speaking
skills at a public university in Ho Chi Minh City. These students are native
Vietnamese speakers and have chosen business English as their major field. The
participant information is summarized below in Table 1:
Table 1

Characteristics of Student Participants

Characteristics Number

Male 53

Gender Female 47

Under three years 24

Time of English study 04-10 years 61

Over ten years 15

3.2. Research instrument

The researcher used a questionnaire, including 31 closed and seven open-ended
questions, as the main research tool in this investigation. This questionnaire was
employed to gather data concerning in-service students’ speaking skills
challenges. The questionnaire was chiefly adapted from the framework of Vo et
al. (2018), which inspired the questionnaire’s questions.
 14

The questionnaire, composed in the English language, included three distinct

parts:

 The first part consisted of two multiple-choice questions about the student
participants' demographic information. These questions required students
to select the most suitable response.

 The second part encompassed inquiries related to difficulties arising from

both internal and external factors. In this section, students were required to
indicate their level of agreement on a 5-point Likert scale. (1) strongly
disagree, (2) disagree, (3) neutral, (4) agree, and (5) strongly agree.
 The third part addressed common mistakes frequently observed in students'
English-speaking abilities within speaking classes. Like the second section,
it utilized a 5-point Likert scale to gauge the level of agreement, ranging
from strongly disagree to strongly agree.
3.3. Research procedure
The research process spanned approximately two weeks. The researcher chose the
research topic first and then reviewed pertinent literature from online sources to create
a research framework. Subsequently, the questionnaire was arranged and handed over
to 100 in-service students enrolled in speaking skills courses at the outset of
September. Upon receiving the students' responses, the researcher analyzed and
coded data. Version 22.0 of Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) was applied
to analyze the information gathered. First, in order to determine the level of
questionnaire item reliability, the reliability coefficient test was conducted. The data
shown in Table 2 below demonstrates that the calculated value of Cronbach's Alpha
was 0.882, indicating an acceptable level of reliability.
Table 2
The Reliability of The Survey Questionnaire

Scale Cronbach’s Alpha Number of items

 15

Linguistic factors .857 4

Psychological factors .877 3

Instructional methodlogies .809 5

Curriculum/syllabus instruction .863 4

In-class English learning environment .860 4

Other activities .798 3

Common mistakes .938 6

Total .882 29

Then, the researcher ran descriptive statistic tests for each factor to gain an overview
of which difficulties affect students the most and least. The mean score interpretation
of Moidunny (2009), provided in Table 3 below, was utilized to interpret the mean
scores of the questionnaire data.
Table 3
Mean Score Interpretation

Mean Score Interpretation

1.00 – 1.80 Very low

1.81 – 2.60 Low

2.61 – 3.20 Medium

3.21 – 4.20 High

4.21 – 5.00 Very high

Finally, the researcher presented the research findings, discussed the difficulties
encountered by students, and formulated conclusions and recommendations based on
the study's outcomes in the next chapter.
 16

Chapter 4: Results and Discussion

4.1. Results
4.1.1. Difficulties related to internal factors
4.1.1.1. Linguistic factors
Table 4
Statistical Descriptions of Students' Challenges Due to Linguistic Factors

No. Items N Minimum Maximum Mean S.D

1 I lack the vocabulary to convey my
100 1 5 3.45 0.957
ideas
2 My grammar is not good enough 100 2 5 3.68 0.875
3 I am unable to pronounce words
100 2 5 3.74 0.824
correctly, so I am reluctant to speak
4 I cannot find less common words,
idiomatic expressions, and 100 2 5 3.72 0.817
colloquialisms to express my ideas
Overall Mean 3.64 0.064

Table 4 provides more specific information on the in-service learners’ perspectives

on the linguistic aspects of their speaking skills. The overall high mean score of 3.64
(SD = 0.064) indicated that most students faced challenges related to linguistic
factors.
The first question in the questionnaire is the idea: “I lack the vocabulary to convey
my ideas,” which obtained the lowest mean score (M) of 3.45 and the standard
deviation (S.D.) of 0.957, meaning that in-service students facing difficulties
conveying ideas were due to a lack of vocabulary.
The next item, “my grammar is not good enough,” was also supported by the research
group with a mean score (M) of 3.68 (SD = 0.856).
As for the view “I am unable to pronounce words correctly, so I am reluctant to
speak,” the mean score (M) was 3.74 with an SD of 0.824, ranking the highest mean
score compared to the previous two statements. This opinion was strongly advocated
 17

by the survey respondents, indicating that most students faced difficulty regarding
pronunciation. Thus, pronunciation can be seen as of paramount importance for
enhancing speaking skills.
Hardly finding less common words, idiomatic expressions, and colloquialisms to
convey ideas had a mean score of around 3.72 and an SD of 0.817, becoming the
second most vital aspect after pronunciation.
Furthermore, the responses to open-ended questions added, “I find it difficult to create
and link ideas” (Respondent 2).
4.1.1.2. Psychological factors
Table 5
Statistical Descriptions of Students' Challenges Due to Psychological Factors

No. Items N Minimum Maximum Mean S.D

1 I am anxious whenever I have to
speak English in front of my
100 2 4 3.35 0.575
classmates because most of them are
adults
2 I fear making errors and receiving
criticism from my classmates
100 2 5 3.68 0.649
because they are all experienced
individuals
3 I feel shy because most of my
classmates in my speaking class are 100 3 5 3.95 0.609
older than me
Overall Mean 3.66 0.037

Table 5 shows that the total mean score of participants’ obstacles due to psychological
factors is relatively high (M = 3.66, SD = 0.037). This finding indicates that most
students admitted to various psychological challenges when speaking English.
The opinion “I feel shy because most of my classmates in my speaking class are older
than me” ranked at the highest mean score (M = 3.95, SD = 0.609) of the three above.
This idea explains why some students remained silent during oral class activities.
 18

Furthermore, it has been noted that students were particularly anxious when required
to speak English in front of other individuals, albeit accounting for the lowest mean
score (M = 3.35, SD = 0.575). Fear of making errors and receiving criticism from
classmates had a mean score of 3.68 (SD = 0.649).
After observing the results from open-ended questions, one individual expressed, “I
tend to overthink my words, and it is hard for me to maintain focus and attention
during class; sometimes it causes negative thoughts about my progress in the class”
(Respondent 18). Another respondent added, “I often compare myself with others,
which affects my performance” (Respondent 5). This idea means there are still many
other psychological factors the researcher has not yet fully discovered. Thus,
psychological factors also play an essential role in practicing English-speaking skills.
4.1.2. Difficulties related to external factors
4.1.2.1. Instructional methodologies
Table 6
Statistical Descriptions of Students' Challenges Due to Instructional Methodologies

No. Items N Minimum Maximum Mean S.D

1 Instructors did not use activities or
games like Kahoot! to help students
100 1 5 3.52 0.835
practice vocabulary in speaking
classes.
2 Instructors did not correct the
speaking errors that I made in my 100 1 5 3.54 0.892
speaking classes
3 Instructors did not use social media
like Instagram to help students 100 2 5 3.40 1.025
enhance their speaking skills
4 Instructors did not apply the flipped
classroom approach to in-service
students because they have to work
100 1 5 3.90 0.835
in the daytime and do not have the
time to prepare homework in
advance
 19

5 Instructors did not organize debates

or activities to develop my critical 100 1 5 3.47 0.893
thinking skills
Overall Mean 3.56 0.077

As shown in Table 6, the overall mean score regarding the problems related to
instructional methodologies contributing to participant issues is relatively high (M =
3.56, SD = 0.077). The data collected revealed that pedagogical methodologies
mostly affected students’ English-speaking ability.
Due to time constraints, the instructors did not use the flipped classroom approach,
resulting in the highest mean score of 3.90 (SD = 0.835). This view was
straightforward to comprehend since most in-service learners had a job in the morning
and hardly completed homework ahead of time.
In addition, the fact that instructors did not use games like Kahoot or correct the
speaking errors in speaking classes made almost no difference (M = 3.52, M = 3.54,
respectively). The idea that instructors did not use Instagram to help students improve
their speaking abilities, despite receiving no ‘strong disagreement,’ represented the
lowest mean score (M = 3.40, SD = 1.025), indicating that the participants advocated
this viewpoint.
Besides, there were two opinions from open-ended answers suggesting that “the
instructional methodologies often prioritize grammar over practical conversation
skills” (Respondent 12) and “class activities sometimes feel repetitive and
monotonous” (Respondent 13).
4.1.2.2. Curriculum/syllabus instruction
Table 7
Statistical Descriptions of Students' Challenges Due to Curriculum/syllabus
Instruction

No. Items N Minimum Maximum Mean S.D

 20

1 The syllabus does not provide

enough time for learners to practice 100 1 5 3.49 1.020
the language
2 The evaluation of speaking practice
100 1 5 3.39 1.024
was not regularly carried out
3 The syllabus is not specially
100 1 5 3.42 1.027
designed for in-service students
4 The textbook is not suitable for
100 1 5 3.39 1.024
adults learning speaking skills
Overall Mean 3.42 0.002

The total mean score of hurdles related to curriculum or syllabus instruction leading
to participant concerns is high (M = 3.42, SD = 0.002), as indicated in Table 7. This
signifies that, on average, respondents concurred moderately with the difficulties
regarding the effectiveness of the language learning program.
The notion “The syllabus does not provide enough time for learners to practice the
language” received the most robust agreement, making up the highest mean score of
about 3.49 (SD = 1.020). This indicates that the curriculum played a vital role in
practicing speaking skills.
In addition, the mean scores of the two items (Item 2 and Item 4) were similar (M =
3.39) and reached the lowest mean score together. This demonstrates that the
participants moderately agreed with the setbacks regarding the frequent assessment
and the inappropriate textbook. The viewpoint that the course was not tailored to in-
service students had a mean score of 3.42, indicating that the designed syllabus was
only sometimes appropriate for in-service training.
Collecting the answers from open-ended questions, two respondents said that “the
syllabus did not cover many essential conversational topics for learners to practice”
(Respondent 8 and Respondent 9). This means that the textbooks still had many
limitations, and speaking skills were not emphasized in curriculum development.
 21

4.1.2.3. In-class English learning environment

Table 8
Statistical Descriptions of Students' Challenges Due to In-class English Learning
Environment

No. Items N Minimum Maximum Mean S.D

1 There are few native teachers for
100 1 5 3.78 1.001
speaking classes
2 Some of the best students dominate
class discussion because they are
100 1 5 3.89 0.973
experienced and have worked in an
international environment
3 The number of students in my
speaking class is high, so I do not
100 1 5 4.11 0.909
have more chances to practice
speaking in class
4 The arrangement of tables and chairs
in my class prevents students from 100 1 5 3.83 1.035
joining interactive activities
Overall Mean 3.90 0.053

According to Table 8, the overall mean score of participants’ issues caused by in-
class English learning environment variables is fairly high (M = 3.90, SD = 0.053).
This implies that, on average, respondents strongly agreed with the difficulties of the
English learning environment in the classroom.
Issues related to the vast number of students in speaking classes occupied the highest
mean score (M = 4.11, SD = 0.053), potentially interrupting students’ practice
opportunities and focus. The mean score of 3.89 shows that better students usually
controlled the activities that teachers organized, while the weak ones kept silent.
On top of that, the fact that there were a handful of native teachers for speaking classes
accounted for the lowest mean score (M = 3.78, SD = 1.001) of the four above.
The view “The arrangement of tables and chairs in my class prevents students from
joining interactive activities” reached a mean score of 3.83 (SD = 1.035).
 22

Apart from that, depending on results from the free-form questions, one student
expressed that “the classroom environment could sometimes be noisy and the
technology supporting interactive language learning was outdated” (Respondent 14).
4.1.2.4. Other activities
Table 9
Statistical Descriptions of Students' Challenges Due to Other Activities

No. Items N Minimum Maximum Mean Std.

Deviation
1 Lecturers do not provide
students with homework or
100 3 5 3.56 0.538
extracurricular activities to
enhance speaking skills
2 There are no English clubs for
100 2 5 3.55 0.592
in-service students to practice
3 There are few extra activities
100 2 5 3.57 0.624
for in-service students
Overall Mean 3.56 0.043

As shown in Table 9, it can be seen that most participants agreed with the opinion
that no English clubs, less homework, or extra activities can be considered as main
challenges when it comes to enhancing English speaking skills, accounting for the
slightly similar mean scores of 3.55, 3.56, and 3.57, respectively. Significantly, such
challenges received no ‘strong disagreement or disagreement,’ highlighting the
problems that most in-service learners faced with a total high mean score of
approximately 3.56 (SD = 0.043).
In addition, observing the results from the open-ended questions, one student said
that “there are no applications like language apps for in-service learners to practice
speaking skills” (Respondent 11).
4.1.3. Difficulties related to common mistakes
Table 10
Statistical Descriptions of Students' Challenges Due to Common Mistakes
 23

No. Items N Minimum Maximum Mean S.D

1 I make a lot of grammar mistakes,
such as errors with tenses, 100 3 5 4.15 0.730
complex structures
2 I do not know which word I
should use, and sometimes I use 100 2 5 4.13 0.774
vocabulary repetitively
3 I make many pronunciation
mistakes, such as errors with
100 2 5 3.99 0.870
individual sounds, word stress,
intonation, etc
4 I hesitate whenever I speak
100 1 5 2.90 1.000
English with my classmates
5 I do not know how to link my
100 2 5 3.65 0.869
ideas
6 I do not know how to develop
ideas with elaborate details and 100 2 5 3.81 0.734
examples
Overall Mean 3.77 0.104

Regarding common mistakes that in-service students thought they usually made, the
high mean score of 3.77 (SD = 0.104) implies that most students were aware of their
errors.
To be more specific, the ability to control grammar issues was one of the most
challenging aspects that students often made up, occupying the highest mean score
(M = 4.15). Following that was the hurdle with word choice and vocabulary
repetition; such problems ranked at the second-highest mean score of all items (M =
4.13). Besides, it should be noted that all the items from the questionnaire showed no
‘strong disagreement,’ except the idea “I hesitate whenever I speak English with my
classmates,” which accounted for the lowest mean score of around 2.90 (SD = 1000).
Moreover, the other challenges, like pronunciation mistakes, linking ideas, and
brainstorming ideas, also received strong agreement from participants, making up the
mean scores of 3.99, 3.65, and 3.81, respectively.
 24

According to the outcomes of the free-form questions, one respondent reported, “I

frequently lack confidence in my English presentation when interacting with a lot of
strangers” (Respondent 19).
4.2. Discussion
The first part of the discussion concerns the first research question, which seeks to
determine the challenges in-service students face when learning speaking skills. As
shown in Table 4 above, Item 1 gained a mean score of 3.45, suggesting that most
students faced difficulties due to a lack of vocabulary. This result is consistent with
previous studies, such as those by Raja (2018), Alqahtani (2015), Hamouda (2012),
Vo et al. (2018), and Pham et al. (2021), which cited vocabulary as a significant
hurdle to effective communication among EFL learners. Moreover, the other three
items also showed positive results, achieving mean scores of over 3.21. This implies
that in-service learners experienced the same issues about grammar and
pronunciation as those in Pham et al.’s (2021), Zaremba’s (2006), Manurung’s
(2015), and Nordin’s (2012) research.
The data from Table 5 offers a comprehensive insight into the psychological factors
that impeded in-service English major students from effectively communicating in
spoken English. Notably, all the items from Table 5 obtained high mean scores of
over 3.21. This is in line with the study of Pham et al. (2021) and Hamouda (2012),
emphasizing that making errors or feeling shy were substantial challenges EFL
students face, and is consistent with the prior research of Rintaningrum (2016) and
Ansari (2015), which stated that anxiety was the ultimate challenge frequently
occurring in a speaking class. However, this result differed from that of the studies of
Vo et al. (2018), which cited that being timid and worried about making errors were
not their primary concerns.
Regarding hurdles related to instructional methodologies, Table 6 shows that all the
items achieved mean scores of over 3.21. This means teaching methods partly
affected the speaking abilities of in-service students. This result is not in line with the
 25

studies of Pham et al. (2021) and Vo et al. (2018), who mentioned that teaching
methods were not considered the main challenge hindering students’ speaking skills.
All items in Table 7 show mean scores over 3.21 concerning the problems of
curriculum and syllabus instruction. It is inferred that in-service learners faced
difficulties with the syllabus or teaching curriculum as previous studies had, like Gan
(2012), Ambu and Saidi (1997), and Al-Abri (2008). Nevertheless, this finding was
inconsistent with the study of Vo et al. (2018), in which participants agreed on the
limitation of the syllabus under 35%.
As for the problem linked to the in-class English learning environment, all the items
from Table 8 achieve mean scores of over 3.21. This means that hardships like few
native teachers, the dominance of outstanding students, large classes, and the
arrangement of tables and chairs were all main challenges that in-service learners ran
into, which is consistent with the previous research by Pham et al. (2021), Vo et al.
(2018), Fernandes et al. (2011), Kabir (2014), Hamouda (2012), and Nguyen & Tran
(2015).
Outside the classroom, extracurricular activities are crucial in enhancing language
acquisition, mainly speaking abilities. The data in Table 9 provides insight into the
challenges encountered by in-service English major students. The overall high mean
score of 3.56 illustrates that most in-service learners faced challenges related to a few
extracurricular activities and limited English clubs. This result is similar to prior
studies by Gan (2012), Kabir (2014), Hamouda (2012), Pham et al. (2021), and Rojas
(2018).
The second part of the discussion focuses on the second research question, which
leads us to analyze their self-assessment of their frequent mistakes more profoundly.
The data from Table 10 obtained an overall high mean score (M = 3.77). This
elucidates the common errors that in-service English major students perceive in their
speaking endeavors. Such common mistakes from this survey, like grammar, the way
of using proper vocabulary, pronunciation, and how to link or generate ideas, were
all lined up, except Item 4, with those from the studies of Burn (2016), Nordin (2012),
 26

Zaremba (2006), Raja (2018), Alqahtani (2015), Ansari (2015), Manurung (2015),
Hamouda (2012), Pham et al. (2021), and Kabir (2014), cited in the literature review
section.
Interestingly, Item 4 reached a medium mean score of 2.90, suggesting that students,
despite their mistakes, were relatively confident in peer interactions. This is a positive
sign and can be attributed to the supportive classroom environment. Indeed, this sole
outcome was completely different from that of the studies mentioned above.
 27

Chapter 5: Conclusion and Recommendation

5.1. Conclusion
Throughout the research journey, various challenges in-service English major
students face when learning speaking skills have been meticulously investigated. The
study, rooted in a methodical approach, has shed light on internal and external factors
influencing students' speaking proficiencies.
Internal factors, mainly linguistic and psychological aspects, emerged as substantial
barriers, with the majority of participants encountering difficulties in this field. The
researcher found that vocabulary, grammar, and pronunciation were the primary
concerns for most in-service students, as in previous studies. Furthermore, it was
widely accepted that fear of making mistakes and shyness were commonly seen as
the real challenges among students when speaking English.
External factors, such as instructional methodologies, the curriculum's orientation,
and the in-class or extracurricular learning environment, had been identified as
pivotal in shaping students' speaking experiences. Notably, the researcher discovered
that, different from prior studies, pedagogical techniques like the use of games
(Kahoot), frequent correction, and the flipped classroom were not applied by
instructors in the setting of in-service education. This is mainly due to the fact that
in-service learners have to work during office hours and attend evening classes that
are held for a limited duration. Additionally, in-service learners also encountered
challenges on the syllabus or instructional program, as evidenced by prior research,
and they were relatively comfortable in interactions with their peers.
To conclude, while mistakes are inevitable during the learning process, recognizing
and correcting them is paramount. This survey's feedback helps educators grasp the
challenges that in-service English majors face and helps students recognize their own
mistakes. This is like a stepping stone to facilitating students on the road to improving
their speaking skills in an in-service setting.
 28

5.2. Recommendation
Given the findings derived from the questionnaire, there are some recommendations
that the researcher is eager to make.
Firstly, in order to diminish the difficulties regarding linguistic aspects, in-service
students are suggested to do more homework about grammar, read more grammar
books, and attend grammar workshops to address common grammatical challenges.
On top of that, in order to become familiar with idiomatic expressions and
colloquialisms, students should be exposed to real-life conversations, podcasts, and
talk shows in English. Besides, students should learn 1–2 new phrases or expressions
daily and spend time reviewing and revisiting previously learned vocabulary. As for
pronunciation, students should practice by watching YouTube videos in English and
applying the shadowing technique, imitating what the speaker says, to improve their
pronunciation. They can also consider participating in pronunciation classes offered
by native speakers. To reduce psychological barriers, students should engage with
larger groups more often and practice delivering presentations in English in front of
an audience.
Secondly, students are actively encouraged to participate in English-speaking clubs,
while teachers should extend invitations to foreign instructors willing to attend
classes weekly. This will provide students with valuable opportunities to engage with
authentic native speakers and enhance their English-speaking skills. Furthermore,
educators should provide an immersive English-language atmosphere for in-service
learners through English music, videos in instructional sessions, and games like
Kahoot! Besides, cutting-edge technologies are also required in speaking classes to
facilitate learners’ processes. Given the large class sizes, instructors can divide
students into smaller groups to facilitate English-speaking practice, as Hamouda
(2012) suggested. Such methods are believed to benefit students’ speaking skills and
their success later in life.
 29

5.3. Limitations of the study

Due to time constraints, this study only surveyed 100 students, a relatively small
sample size. Additionally, the study primarily utilized a questionnaire distributed
online through Google Forms for participants to fill out, limiting the number of
responses to open-ended questions. Furthermore, combining various research
methods, such as conducting interviews with teachers or class observation, would be
beneficial to gain deeper insights into students' challenges. When interviewing
teachers, they can provide valuable perspectives on difficulties students may not
know. Therefore, future research will aim to survey more students, integrate multiple
research methods, and delve more deeply into the issues that students are
encountering. As a result, this will assist learners in avoiding such obstacles and
increasing their speaking abilities.
 30

REFERENCES
Albino, G. (2017). Improving Speaking Fluency in a Task-Based Language Teaching
Approach: The Case of EFL Learners at PUNIV-Cazenga SAGE Open, 7(2).
Burn, A. (2016). Research and the Teaching of Speaking in the Second Language
Classroom In A. Burn (Ed.), Teaching in the Second Language Classroom
Bygate, M. (2009). Speaking. New York: Oxford University Press.
Goh, C. C. M. (2007). Teaching Speaking in the Language Classroom Singapore:
SEAMEO Regional Language Centre
Hamouda, A. (2012). An Exploration of the Causes of Saudi Students’ Reluctance to
Participate in the English Language Classroom International Journal of English
Language Education, 1(1)
Ismaili, M., & Bajrami, L. (2016). Information Gap Activities to Enhance the
Speaking Skills of Elementary Level Students, Procedia: Social and Behavioral
Sciences, 232, 612–616.
Manurung, K. (2015). Improving the Speaking Skill Using Reading Contextual
Internet-based Instructional Materials in an EFL Class in Indonesia, Procedia: Social
and Behavioral Sciences, 176, 44–51.
Nordin, N. A. (2012). Fulfilling the tasks of reading, writing, speaking, and listening
through a drama workshop. Procedia: Social and Behavioral Sciences, pp. 66, 196–
202.
Nunan, D. (2004). Task-Based Language Teaching. New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Pham, M.T., & Hoang, V.A. (2021). Challenges in practicing English-speaking skills
for pharmacy students (K15) at Thai Nguyen University of Medicine and Pharmacy
and suggested solutions The Journal of Science and Technology of Thai Nguyen
University, 226 (8)
Rintaningrum, R., & Vikri, A. F. (2021). Overview of Difficulties in Speaking English
among Students in the Conference Class
 31

Rintaningrum, R., & Nurani, S. (2021). An analysis of students’ difficulties in

speaking English and how to fix it Conference: class conference. Lombok Timur.
Rintaningrum, R. (2016). Maintaining English-speaking Skills in Their Homeland
through Technology: Personal Experience Asian EFL Journal, 2016 (Special
Edition), 107–119.
Rojas, M. A. (2018). The Influence of Implementing Role-Play as an Educational
Technique on EFL Speaking Development Theory and Practice in Language Studies,
8, 726–732.
Rueschemeyer, S.A. (2018). Speech Production. The Oxford Handbook of
Psycholinguistics, Oxford University Press
Sharma, D. R. (2018). Action Research on Improving Students’ Speaking Proficiency
in Using Cooperative Storytelling Strategies Journal of NELTA Surkhet, 5, 97–105.
Suryanto. (2015). Issues in Teaching English in a Cultural Context: A Case of
Indonesia The Journal of English Literacy Education (The Teaching and Learning of
English as a Foreign Language, 1(2), 75–82)
Wallace, C., & Nunan, D. (2001). The Cambridge guide to teaching English to
speakers of other languages Cambridge: Cambridge University.
Vo, P. Q., Pham, T. M. N., & Ho, T. N. (2018). Challenges to speaking skills
encountered by English-majored students: A story of one Vietnamese university in
the Mekong Delta CTU Journal of Innovation and Sustainable Development, 54(5),
38–44. https://doi.org/10.22144/ctu.jen.2018.022
Moidunny, K. (2009). The effectiveness of the National Professional Qualification
for Educational Leaders (NPQEL) Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Bangi: The
National University of Malaysia
Ur, P. (2012). A Course in English Language Teaching Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press
Harmer, J. (2007). The practice of English language teaching. England: Pearson
Education.
 32

Abdulrahman, H. (2013). What are the difficulties and problems with learning
English?
Shteiwi, A. A., & Hamuda, M. A. (2016). Oral communication problems encountered
by English major students: causes and remedies International Journal of Social
Science and Humanities Research, 4(2), 19–26.
Zaremba, A. J. (2006). Speaking Professionally. Thompson South-Western.
Alqahtani, M. (2015). The Importance of Vocabulary in Language Learning and How
to Be Taught International Journal of Teaching and Education, III, 21–34.
Raja, M. I. K., Noor, R. M. R., Muhammad, S., Aino, H. I., & Ghulam, M. (2018). The
role of vocabulary knowledge in the speaking development of Saudi EFL learners
Arab World English Journal, 9(1), 406-418.
https://dx.doi.org/10.24093/awej/vol9no1.28.
Ansari, M. S. (2015). Speaking Anxiety in ESL/EFL Classrooms: A Holistic
Approach and Practical Study International Journal of Educational Investigations, 2,
38–46.
Othman, M. (2014). Students’ Perceptions Toward Using Classroom Debate to
Develop Critical Thinking and Oral Communication Ability Asian Social Science,
11, 158–170.
https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v11n9p158
Mansor, N., & Rahim, N. (2017). Instagram in the ESL classroom. Man in India, 97,
107–114.
Tuan, N. H., & Mai, T. N. (2015). Factors Affecting Students’ Speaking Performance
at Le Thanh Hien High School, Asian Journal of Educational Research, 3, 8–23.
Handayani, F. (2016). Instagram as a teaching tool? Really? In Proceedings of the
Fourth International Seminar on English Language and Teaching (pp. 320–327)
León, W. U., & Cely, E. V. (2010). Encouraging teenagers to improve their speaking
skills PROFILE, 11-31.
 33

Gan, Z. (2012). Understanding L2 Speaking Problems: Implications for ESL

Curriculum Development in Teacher Training Institutions in Hong Kong. Australian
Journal of Teacher Education, 37(1): 43–59.
Ambu, B., & Saidi, B., 1997. Issues in teaching English in a foreign language
classroom: A questionnaire study in an Oman-published master’s thesis ELT
Curriculum and Methodology: College of Education of Sultan Qaboos University
Al-Abri, K. (2008). Teachers’ evaluation of EFL textbooks used in Omani basic
education schools (unpublished master’s thesis). ELT Curriculum and
Methodology—College Education of Sultan Qaboos University
Luk, J. (2001). Exploring the sociocultural implications of the Native English-
speaking Teacher Scheme in Hong Kong through the eyes of the students Asian
Pacific Journal of Language in Education, 4(2), 19–50.
Fernandez, AC, Huang, J., and Rinaldo, V. (2011). Does where a student sits really
matter? The Impact of Seating Locations on Student Classroom Learning
International Journal of Applied Educational Studies, 10(1)
Kabir, U.S. (2014). Challenges of speaking in Bangladeshi classrooms Unpublished
Master of Arts in TESOL
Nguyen, T., & Tran, M. (2015). Factors affecting students’ speaking performance at
Le Thanh Hien High School. Asian Journal of Educational Research, 3(2): 8–23
 34

APPENDICES
STUDENTS’ QUESTIONNAIRE

Part I: Demographic information

What is your gender? (T1)
A. Male
B. Female

How long have you been learning English? (T2)

A. Under three years
B. 04-10 years
C. over ten years

Part II: Difficulties related to internal and external factors

INTERNAL FACTORS
Linguistic factors Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly
disagree agree
I find it challenging when
practicing English
speaking skills in class
because…………
I lack the vocabulary to
convey my ideas (A1)

My grammar is not good

enough (A2)

I am unable to pronounce
words correctly, so I am
reluctant to speak (A3)
 35

I can not find less common

words, idiomatic
expressions, and
colloquialisms to express my
ideas (A4)
Others:

Psychological factors Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly

disagree agree
In English speaking
classes,………….

I am anxious whenever I
have to speak English in
front of my classmates
because most of them are
adults (B1)
I fear making errors and
receiving criticism from my
classmates because they are
all experienced individuals
(B2)
I feel shy because most of
my classmates in my
speaking class are older than
me (B3)
 36

Others:

EXTERNAL FACTORS
1. Challenges associated with the instructional methodologies
Instructional Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly
methodologies disagree agree
In my speaking classes, I
identify that……

Instructors did not use

activities or games like
Kahoot! to help students
practice vocabulary in
speaking classes. (C1)

Instructors did not correct the

speaking errors that I made in
my speaking classes (C2)

Instructors did not use social

media like Instagram to help
students enhance their
speaking skills (C3)
 37

Instructors did not apply the

flipped classroom approach to
in-service students because
they have to work in the
daytime and do not have the
time to prepare homework in
advance (C4)
Instructors do not organize
debates or activities to
develop my critical thinking
skills (C5)

Your own idea:…………….

2. Issues caused by curriculum/syllabus instruction

Curriculum/syllabus Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly
instruction disagree agree
When learning English
speaking skills, I recognize
that……

The syllabus does not

provide enough time for
learners to practice the
language (D1)
The evaluation of speaking
practice was not regularly
carried out (D2)
 38

The syllabus is not specially

designed for in-service
students (D3)

The textbook is not suitable

for adults learning speaking
skills (D4)
Your own idea:………….

3. Challenges associated with the in-class English learning environment

In-class English learning Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly
environments disagree agree

When learning English

speaking skills, I identify
that……
There are few native
teachers for speaking classes
(E1)

Some of the best students

dominate class discussion
because they are experienced
and have worked in an
international environment
(E2)

The number of students in

my speaking class is high, so
I do not have more chances
 39

to practice speaking in class

(E3)

The arrangement of tables

and chairs in my class
prevents students from
joining interactive
activities (E4)
Your own idea:………….

4. Challenges associated with other activities

Other activities Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly

disagree agree
When learning English
speaking skills, I recognize
that…….
Lecturers do not provide
students with homework or
extracurricular activities for
enhancing speaking skills
(F1)

There are no English clubs

for in-service students to
practice (F2)
 40

There are few extra

activities for in-service
students (F3)

Your own idea:………….

Part III: Some common mistakes that you frequently make when you speak English
in your speaking classes
Common Mistakes Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly
disagree agree
When I speak
English,…………

I make a lot of grammar

mistakes, such as errors with
tenses and complex
structures (G1)
I do not know which word I
should use, and sometimes I
use vocabulary repetitively
(G2)
I make many pronunciation
mistakes, such as errors with
individual sounds, word
stress, intonation, etc. (G3)
I hesitate whenever I speak
English with my classmates
(G4)
 41

I do not know how to link my

ideas (G5)

I do not know how to

develop ideas with elaborate
details and examples (G6)

Others: