Problematizing The Culture of Learning English in Vietnam: Revisiting Teacher Identity

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 2

12

Problematizing the Culture of


Learning English in Vietnam:
Revisiting Teacher Identity
Le Thi Thu Huyen and Phan Le Ha

English language learning in Vietnam has often been criticized for its ‘not
yet satisfactory’ quality, which is ascribed to a range of ‘traditional’ fac-
tors, such as large class size and inefficient and inadequate teacher training.
Especially, the ‘problematic’ learner tends to be the main target of blame:
In the literature, prevailing epithets for learners are ‘passive’, ‘traditional’,
‘mechanical’, ‘reactive’, ‘dependent’, ‘reticent’, ‘reluctant’. These learners are
said to lack confidence, to be dependent upon memorization and prone to
errors, to lack communicative skills and critical thinking. This alleged ‘cul-
ture of learning’ is viewed as being ‘difficult to change’, as it has, supposedly,
deep roots among Vietnamese learners and in the culture. This conceptuali-
zation seems problematic, not least because it seems to portray the learner as
having a fixed unitary identity. This chapter takes this as an issue for inves-
tigation, and it draws on a qualitative case study with Australian-trained,
ethnic Vietnamese teachers of English to ascertain whether and how the
stereotyped culture of learning ascribed to Vietnamese learners persists for
these teachers; the teachers have been exposed to English as an interna-
tional language (EIL), which should offer space for alternative frameworks
within which learners and teachers could view each other differently.

12.1 Overview of English language teaching and


learning in Vietnam

Recently, much literature about English Language Teaching (ELT) in Vietnam


has pinpointed how it is ‘problematic’ to enhance the quality of learning and
teaching English. One of the perceived causes may be ascribed to inadequate
teaching methodology or ‘faults’ of teaching methodology which is gram-
mar-based, textbook-focused, and examination-centred (Hoang, 2008; Le,
2004). Other suggested causes are, for example, the shortage of well-trained
teachers (Bui, 2006; Dang, 2006), the inadequacy of teaching facilities

248
M. Cortazzi et al. (eds.), Researching Cultures of Learning
© Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Macmillan Publishers Limited 2013
Revisiting Teacher Identity in Vietnam 249

and resources, and the lack of English speaking environment. As Nguyen


Xuan Vang (2004) points out, while the textbooks in use have attempted to
incorporate communicative language teaching (CLT), in Vietnam English
is rarely used in speaking or writing outside the classroom, so there is no
local English-speaking environment in which students might practise and
reinforce classroom teaching. This is one of the perceived obstacles faced by
teachers in ELT in Vietnam and in many other countries which has courses
of English as a foreign language (EFL). It means, for example, that in terms
of developing communicative skills there is a large gap between the rhetoric
and the reality (Nunan, 2003). The slogan ‘communicative’, with an inte-
grated four-skill focus, is the prevailing rhetoric in Vietnam; however, the
real focus is exclusively on reading (Nunan, 2003). ELT in classrooms is best
described as mostly ‘traditional’, with more focus on accuracy, form and
reading skills than on fluency, meaning and integrative skills (Bui, 2006;
Le, 2001; X.V. Nguyen, 2004). More problematically, language learners in
Vietnam are often portrayed as ‘passive learners’ whose roles are ‘to attend
class, listen to the teacher’s explanation, finish the assignment and pass the
final examinations’ (Pham, 2000). As is evident in Dang Van Hung research
(2006: p. 162), such words and phrases as ‘passive’, ‘traditional’, ‘mechani-
cal’, ‘reactive’, ‘reticent’, ‘reluctant’ and ‘lack of confidence’ frequently
emerge in the data as descriptors of students’ ways of learning. Moreover,
the rhetoric of the ‘deteriorated’ quality of English teaching in Vietnam has
been compounded by the traditional perception that there is a monolithic
English language methodology with the usual parameters of fluency and
accuracy. Deborah Cameron (2000) emphasizes a threat to the dominant
discourse in language teaching: the communicative model. She argues that
this model bears a simplistic and impoverished view of language learning:
the problems confronted by the learner are not just technical or mechanical
(‘How do I say X in this language?’), but involve complex issues of identity
(‘Who am I when I speak this language?’) – a non-linguistic aspect (ibid.: p.
91). The communicative approach, with its parameters that measure values
of foreign language proficiency, seems to govern local values in teaching
methodology. This fails to encourage the particularities of local situations,
problems and issues which are what critical pedagogies aim to develop.
In this chapter, we will focus on English language teacher identity, which
is deemed a crucial role to foster the learners’ identity. If a student fails to
thrive, the teacher the engagement with students rather than powerless-
ness (Norton & Toohey, 2004). The concepts of teacher and learner identity
should be discussed in tandem with English as an international language
(EIL): this shift in terminology from EFL to EIL reflects a tendency which
offers a platform for teachers and learners to understand themselves (and
their own identities) and the process of learning and teaching English in
an age of globalization. The Vietnamese participants in this study who
received training overseas and then returned to Vietnam to teach English

You might also like