Thuy Thu Thi Huynh
Parental Views and Involvement Related to Early English Language Education in Vietnam:
A focus on public primary schooling
University of Eastern Finland Philosophical Faculty
School of Applied Educational Science and Teacher Education, Joensuu campus
Master‟s Degree Programme in Early Language Education for Intercultural Communication Master‟s thesis in Education
June 2019
1
ITÄ-SUOMEN YLIOPISTO – UNIVERSITY OF EASTERN FINLAND
Tiedekunta – Faculty Philosophical Faculty
Osasto – School
School of Applied Educational Science and Teacher Education
Tekijät – Author Thuy Thu Thi Huynh Työn nimi – Title
Parental Views and Involvement Related to Early English Language Education in Vietnam: A focus on public primary schooling
Pääaine – Main subject Työn laji – Level Päivämäärä – Date Sivumäärä – Number of pages
Education Pro gradu -tutkielma X 14.06.2019 137 + 5 appendices
Sivuainetutkielma Kandidaatin tutkielma Aineopintojen tutkielma
TIIVISTELMÄ – ABSTRACT
There is a wealth of research evidence confirming the ultimate role of parents in their children‟s education. Nonetheless, in Vietnam, parents seem to be underestimated or neglected in the planning and implementation of educational programs and projects of the country. At the moment, the national education system is in a chaotic situation caused by the ill-prepared national language project entitled
“Teaching and Learning Foreign Languages in the National Education System, Period 2008-2020”.
Many parties, institutions, experts, educators, stakeholders, etc. were asked for opinions. Still, parents‟ voice is missing.
This study aims to investigate Vietnamese parents‟ views and involvement regarding to early
education of English as a foreign language in public primary schools. 181 parents of the 3rd, 4th and 5th graders participated in the study. The study employed a mixed-method approach in data collection and analysis. Data were collected via paper questionnaires which included both close-ended questions (Yes/No and Likert-scale questions) and open-ended questions. In addition, classroom visit, lesson observation and semi-structured group interview with an English teacher and a classroom teacher contributed supplementary information to explain, compare and clarify the parents‟ answers.
Quantitative data were statistically analysed in descriptive analysis method whereas qualitative data were analysed via content analysis method. The findings reveal that the parents are highly aware of the importance of English in modern life and strongly approve of a younger starting age of English language education in public schools. The suggested starting age is 7 years old. They are also aware that the English language education has changed as compared to their school time. Yet, many of them do not really know how English is taught for their children at school due to a lack of cooperation and communication between teachers and parents. The parents are involved in their children‟s EFL learning in all aspects of cultural, social and emotional capital. However, outside-family social capital is rather low, which means that the parents do not actively contact and cooperate with the school and the teachers. As for their ideas for development, parents gave various ideas among which
communicative learning approach and better facilities to assist English learning are the most
commonly suggested. Suggestions for the parents, the English teachers, the school and the Ministry of Education and Training were provided at the end of the report. Guidelines for the parents and the English teachers were also added in the appendices.
Avainsanat – Keywords: early foreign language education, English language education, early EFL education, parental views, parental involvement, primary-school level
2
TABLE OF CONTENT
ABSTRACT ... 1
LIST OF TABLES ... 4
LIST OF FIGURES ... 6
1 INTRODUCTION ... 7
2 THEORETICAL BACKGROUND ... 9
2.1 A discussion of early foreign language education and early education of English as a foreign language ... 9
2.2 Early English language education in Vietnam: ... 11
2.2.1 Current situations of primary English language education in Vietnam ... 14
2.3 Parental involvement in education ... 17
2.4 Parental involvement in foreign language education ... 21
2.4.1 Parental views towards early EFL education ... 22
2.4.2 Parents‟ ways of involvement in their children‟s early EFL education ... 23
2.4.3 Influential factors for parental involvement in early English language education ... 25
2.5 Parental involvement under the perspectives of cultural, social and emotional capital ... 28
2.5.1 Parental involvement under the perspective of cultural capital ... 29
2.5.2 Parental involvement under the perspective of social capital ... 31
2.5.3 Parental involvement under the perspective of emotional capital ... 33
2.6 Parental views and involvement regarding early English language education in Vietnam ... 36
3 RESEARCH QUESTIONS... 39
4 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ... 40
4.1 The mixed method approach ... 40
4.2Data collection ... 42
4.2.1 Data collection tools... 42
4.2.2 Data collection procedure ... 47
4.2.3 Research participants ... 49
4.3 Data processing and analysis ... 53
4.3.1 Quantitative data processing and analysis ... 55
4.3.2Qualitative data processing and analysis ... 55
4.4 Research validity and ethical considerations ... 59
4.4.1 Validity of mixed method research ... 59
3
4.4.2 Ethical considerations ... 65
5 FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION ... 68
5.1 The Vietnamese parents‟ views about early EFL education ... 68
5.1.1 How approving the parents are of the early EFL education ... 69
5.1.2The parents‟ wishes and needs regarding early EFL education ... 70
5.1.3 The parents‟ awareness of the current EFL learning of their children ... 78
5.1.4 The parents‟ ideas for the improvement of the school‟s early EFL education ... 80
5.2 How the Vietnamese parents perceive and practise their role in their children‟s early English language education ... 91
5.2.1 The parents‟ perception of their role in their children‟s English language learning ... 92
5.2.2 The parents‟ involvement under the perspectives of cultural, social and emotional capital 93 6 CONCLUSION ... 114
6.1 Summary of the research results ... 114
6.2 Implications of the research results ... 115
6.2.1For the parents ... 116
6.2.2 For the English teachers ... 118
6.2.3For the school ... 119
6.2.4For the Ministry of Education and Training... 119
6.3 Strengths, limitations of the research and suggestions for future research ... 120
REFERENCES ... 122
APPENDICES ... 138
Appendix 1. THE QUESTIONNAIRE – ENGLISH VERSION ... 138
Appendix 2. THE QUESTIONNAIRE – VIETNAMESE VERSION ... 145
Appendix 3. IDEAS FOR THE SEMI-STRUCTURED GROUP INTERVIEW ... 152
Appendix 4. LETTERS OF PERMISSION IN ENGLISH AND VIETNAMESE ... 153
Appendix 5. GUIDELINES FOR PARENTS AND TEACHERS ... 155
4
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1 Age of starting primary education and EFL education in public primary schools in Vietnam.
Table 2.2 The communicative competence required for primary-graduate level in Vietnam Table 4.1 Question items to answer the research questions
Table 4.2 Ideas for the semi-structured interview Table 4.3 Data collection procedure
Table 4.4 Categories of question items used for answering the research questions Table 4.5 Procedure for qualitative content analysis
Table 4.6 Examples of the coding and categorizing of the data
Table 5.1 Ideas regarding the parents‟ views about early English language education Table 5.2 Variables to answer whether the parents support for early EFL education or not Table 5.3 Purposes of early EFL education collected from quantitative data:
Table 5.4 Purposes of early EFL education collected from qualitative data as compared to quantitative data
Table 5.5 Other purposes of early EFL education collected from qualitative data Table 5.6 The parents‟ awareness of the current EFL learning of their children Table 5.7 Parent‟s ideas for improvement from qualitative data
Table 5.8 Parents‟ ideas for improvement from quantitative data Table 5.9 Ideas of investigation in research question 2
Table 5.10 Variables to measure how parents view their role in their children‟s English language education
Table 5.11 Frequency of parents‟ answers in the aspect of cultural capital
5
Table 5.12 Frequency of parents‟ answers in the aspect of inside-family social capital Table 5.13 Frequency of parents‟ answers in the aspect of outside-family social capital Table 5.14 Occasions about English language teaching organized by the school
Table 5.15 Variables to investigate the emotional capital the parents possessed Table 5.16 Variables to investigate the emotional capital the parents gave their child Table 5.17 Parents‟ ideas of how they support their children‟s English learning from
qualitative data
6
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 4.1 The research procedure of the study
Figure 4.2 The process of building and translating the questionnaire
7
1 INTRODUCTION
As proficiency in foreign languages, especially in English is increasingly viewed as an important prerequisite to integrate in the globalizing world (Butler, 2015), the education of English as a foreign language (hereafter referred as EFL education) with a focus in young learners has become the global phenomenon. In fact, lowering age of starting English
language education is a hot trend in the world nowadays (Butler, 2015; Nikolov & Djigunovi
´c, 2011) and Vietnam stands nowhere out of this trend. With an ambition that “by the year 2020 most Vietnamese youth whoever graduate from vocational schools, colleges and universities gain the capacity to use a foreign language independently” (Decision No.
1400/QD-TTg, 2008, p.1), the Minister of Education and Training of Vietnam approved the national language project entitled “Teaching and Learning Foreign Languages in the National Education System, Period 2008-2020” (hereafter called the 2008-2020 national language project) in which the starting age of English language learning is lowered to grade 3 (8 years old) and even grade 2 (7 years old) in some cities (Decision No. 1400/QD-TTg, 2008, p.1).
Contrasting to the bright prospect the 2008-2020 national language project promised to bring about, the current situation is full of chaos and disappointment. A failure is easily predicted due to serious difficulties the country is facing such as inadequate funding, a lack of qualified teachers, facilities and teaching resources (Nguyen, 2011). In this circumstance, what do people, especially those directly influenced by the 2008-2020 national language project such as students, parents and teachers think? What are they doing in this situation? Is there anything that can be done to improve the situation? Those are the questions that
provoked the conduct of the current study. Wishing to learn voices from parents, the writer who is also the researcher of this study aims to find out parents‟ views and involvement regarding early EFL education at public primary schools in Vietnam. In particular, the writer would like to know (1) how supportive the parents are of early EFL education; (2) what the parents wish or need from early EFL education; (3) how aware they are of the current EFL learning of their children; (4) what their ideas for the improvement of the school‟s early EFL education are; (5) how they perceive their role in their children‟s early EFL education; and (6) what they do to support their children‟s EFL learning. The writer hopes that the research findings will contribute to the scarce literature about parents‟ voice and parents‟ involvement in English language education in Vietnam and give helpful suggestions for the development of the early EFL education from the parents‟ point of view.
8
The thesis report includes 6 chapters: introduction, theoretical background, research questions, research methodology, findings and discussion, as well as conclusion and
implementation. Chapter 1 is an introductory chapter followed by chapter 2 which lays out a theoretical background providing detailed information early EFL education in the world and in Vietnam, the importance of parental involvement in education and parents‟ views and involvement regarding early EFL education. Also in this chapter, the mechanism of parental involvement in terms of cultural capital, social capital and emotional capital is also carefully described, based on which the parents‟ ways of involvement are systematically categorized.
Chapter 3 presents the research questions regarding to the parents‟ views and involvement in their child‟s early EFL education. Chapter 4 outlines the mixed method used in this study.
Details about the rationale for the mixed method, process of data collection and analysis as well as research validity and ethical consideration are all provided in this chapter. Chapter 5 reports the research findings in comparison with previous research on the same topic. Chapter 6 concludes the research results, provides suggestions for the parents, the English teachers, the school and the Ministry of Education and Training toward an improvement of the early EFL education, as well as identifies strengths, limitations of the study and suggests possible direction for future research.
9
2 THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
2.1 A discussion of early foreign language education and early education of English as a foreign language
The history of early foreign language education can be traced back in three waves of policy (Enever, 2012, p. 11). The first wave occurred in 1960s when a number of countries including the United Kingdom approved the introduction of foreign language education at primary schools. However, in the light of the United Kingdom government-commissioned report, which revealed no benefit of early introduction of foreign languages, many primary schools cancelled their foreign language programs (Enever, 2012, p. 12). The second wave emerged in mid-1980s or early 1990s as a consequence of significant political changes in Europe and the expanding influence of globalization on economies all over the world. Many researchers re-examined early foreign language introduction and found evidence of its potential advantages, which initiated national policies toward a younger starting age of foreign language learning and compulsory foreign language programs for nine-year-old students or even younger in many countries. The third wave starting from early 21st century associated with the rapid growth of economies in Asia such as India, China, South Korea, Taiwan, and Vietnam. Lowering the age of foreign language introduction is the common trend in the educational policies of these countries (Enever, 2012, p. 12).
One of the driven forces for the promotion of early foreign language education is the belief that children learn a foreign language better at a younger age, which is greatly
influenced by the theory of a critical period for language acquisition promoted by Lenneberg (1967, see inVanhove, 2013, p. 1), who claimed that between age two and puberty was the sensitive period for language acquisition since it was in this period that cognitive processes or neural functions began to be specialized to each side of the brain, and the nerve connections were rapidly grown (see in Davies & Taronna, 2012, p. 13), which was favourable for the child‟s linguistic intake and development. Despite a lack of universally scientific evidence, (Davies & Taronna, 2012, p. 14), many researchers are still in favour of the existence of this critical period for foreign language acquisition (Davies & Taronna, 2012, p. 3; Muñoz &
Singleton, 2011, p. 1). According to them, after puberty, it is not really possible for learners to acquire high competence in the foreign language. Older starters of foreign language
learning may outperform younger starters in a short term; yet in the long run, younger starters gradually keep up with and surpass older counterparts (Davies & Taronna, 2012, p. 14;
10
European Commission, 2011). In addition, many of those who do not believe in the critical period hypothesis agree that there is a relationship between age and language learning in broad terms (Davies & Taronna, 2012, p. 14; Muñoz & Singleton, 2011, p. 1; Nikolov &
Djigunović, 2006; Edelenbos, Johnstone & Kubanek, 2006) and the most affected skill by age factor is pronunciation (Davies & Taronna, 2012, p. 14) since “[T]he younger children are exposed to different languages, the greater their ability to develop a feeling for the rhythm, the phonology and the intonation of the language” ( European Commission, 2011, p.10).
Besides age factor, early foreign language education is strongly promoted as it is believed to be a means of discovering the hidden potential and interests for multilingualism in every child, enhancing positive attitudes for language learning, fostering communicative ability, raising pupils‟ appreciation and motivation for foreign language learning at an early age, and deepening the relationship between the mother tongue and the target language, which helps to increase metalinguistic awareness of young learners (Edelenbos, Johnstone &
Kubanek, 2006). Early foreign language learning also shapes children‟s perspectives that are in favour of cultural diversity as well as develops their understanding, tolerance and respect for linguistic and cultural otherness (European Commission, 2011; Nikolov & Djigunović, 2006; Griva & Chouvarda1, 2012).
Furthermore, early foreign language education fosters children‟s cognitive development and metalinguistic consciousness, which assists the mastering of the first language as well as encourages children to further their language learning (Nikolov &
Djigunović, 2006; Griva & Chouvarda1, 2012). In terms of non-linguistic aspects, early foreign language learning can enhance children‟s capacity for communication, expression, comprehension, interaction and problem-solving (European Commission, 2011). They also become more conscious of their own identity and the cultural values they hold (European Commission, 2011).
Due to the significantly influential power of English speaking countries like the United States and England as well as the „lingua franca‟ role of English language in the globalizing world (Enever, 2007), English has been the core subject in the early foreign language
programs in most countries across the world even though there is no obligation of introducing English stated in policy documents of many countries (Enever, 2012; Griva & Chouvarda, 2012; Finardi, Leão & Pinheiro, 2016).
11
“Globally English has overtaken the provision of other languages since 1945 (in parallel with the growth of the United States as a global economic power). English was represented in only 32.8% of primary curricula during 1945–1969; growing to nearly 70% in primary curricula by 2005” (Enever, 2012, p.12).
In Asia, there is a social phenomenon so-called “English fever” (Butler, 2014, p.16) in which English language education has attracted great interest and investment from the governments, schools, teachers, parents and other stake holders in the societies. The Asian countries are also strongly committed to the promotion of an early starting age of English education (Hu & Mckay, 2012) since English language mastery is viewed as being vital for the modernization, the development and the integration into the globalized systems in all aspects such as culture, economy and politics of the nations. In addition, English is perceived as “a language of aspiration, a source of symbolic capital for individuals” (Hayes, 2017; p.
188). In other words, English competence is regarded as a gatekeeper of opportunity, status, wealth, power, material success and prosperity (Evans, 2011; Forey, Besser & Sampson, 2016; Hu & Alsagoff, 2010; Huang, 2013).
2.2 Early English language education in Vietnam:
Fully acknowledging the utmost importance of English for Vietnam‟s competitive advantages in international trades, politics, and education, Vietnam is strongly committed to English language education (Nguyen, 2011; Nguyen & Nguyen, 2007). This is obviously reflected via Article 7 in Educational Law No 38/2005/QH11, which states that “[F]oreign languages defined in educational programme are the languages used commonly in
international communication”. (Educational Law No 38/2005/QH11, 2005, p.4) as well as the Decision No 1400/QĐ-TTg on the Approval of the Project entitled “Teaching and Learning Foreign Languages in the National Education System, Period 2008-2020” (Nguyen, Hamid &
Renshaw, 2016, p. 4), which specifically named English language to be introduced in the national education system.
“Quy định môn ngoại ngữ được dạy và học trong các cơ sở giáo dục thuộc hệ thống giáo dục quốc dân là tiếng Anh và một số ngôn ngữ khác.”
(The foreign languages taught in the educational institutions that belong to the national education system are English and other languages.)
(Decision No 1400/QĐ-TTg, The Prime Minister, 2008, p.2)
12
Vietnam is also assertive about promoting early English language education (Nguyen, Hamid & Renshaw, 2016). With a desire to prepare Vietnamese people with advantageous English language capacity for the global market, on September 30th, 2008, Decision No 1400/QĐ-TTg that approved the national language project entitled “Dạy và học ngoại ngữ trong hệ thống giáo dục quốc dân giai đoạn 2008 – 2020”- “Teaching and Learning Foreign Languages in the National Education System, Period 2008-2020” (hereafter referred to as the 2008-2020 national language project) was issued by the Prime Minister, which took up a financial investment of 9,378 billion VND (comparable to 480 million USD) (Decision No 1400/QĐ-TTg, 2008; Nguyen, Hamid & Renshaw, 2016). One of the central goals of this 2008-2020 national language project is that by 2020, most young Vietnamese graduates from vocational schools, colleges and universities will have qualified foreign language abilities to independently and confidently communicate, learn and work in integrated, multilingual and multicultural settings as well as to serve the national industrialization and modernization (Decision No 1400/QĐ-TTg, 2008). Within the framework of the 2008-2020 national project, English language education is compulsory in public primary schools from grade 3 (8 years old) onwards (prior to the 2008-2020 national language project, English language had been offered as an optional subject in about 32.2% of primary schools country-wide (Vu & Pham, 2014). The total amount of primary English language education is 420 periods which is divided equally for grade 3, 4 and 5 with 120 periods each (MOET, 2010). Time allocation for primary English language education is 4 periods of 40 minutes per week (MOET, 2010;
Nguyen, Hamid & Renshaw, 2016) (see table 2.1 below). It was planned that the percentage of primary school students who would receive English language education was 20% between 2010 and 2011, 70% by 2015 and 100% by 2018 (Decision No 1400/QĐ-TTg, 2008;
Nguyen, Hamid & Renshaw, 2016).
13
Table 2.1 Age of starting primary education and EFL education in public primary schools in Vietnam.
Age of starting primary education Age of starting English learning and amount of English lessons at public
primary schools
- 6 years old - 8 years old (grade 3)
- 4 periods/ week (40 minutes/period)
It was also projected that primary school graduates would be at level A1 in the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages or level 1 in the Six level
Foreign Language Proficiency Framework for Vietnam (Decision No 1400/QĐ-TTg, 2008, p.
2; Hoang, 2016, p. 13). Details of communicative competence required for primary-graduate level are provided in table 2.2 below.
Table 2.2 The communicative competence required for primary-graduate level in Vietnam (taken from Hoang, 2016, p. 14)
Level Communicative competence required
Primary level
- Can understand and use familiar everyday expressions and very basic phrases aimed at the satisfaction of needs of a concrete type.
- Can introduce himself/herself and others and can ask and answer questions about personal details such as where he/she lives, people he/she knows and things he/she has.
- Can interact in a simple way provided the other person talks slowly and clearly and is prepared to help.
14
The Ministry of Education and Training also gives high level of autonomy for local authorities to implement the project in a flexible way so as to best suit local needs and conditions (MOET, 2010). In private primary schools, English can be taught from grade 1 and the amount of English instruction varies depending on the schools‟ policy and the parents‟ paying willingness (Nguyen, 2011, p. 228; Nguyen, Hamid & Renshaw, 2016, p.
195).
According to MOET (2010), English language education in primary schools aims to help students form and develop four communicative skills - listening, speaking, reading and writing skill in the target language. It is also a vital starting point for the formation and development of significant skills for life-long learning, future working and participating in social and cultural activities. Moreover, primary English language learning sets up a crucial ground for English language education in higher learning levels as well as for studying other foreign languages. In addition, primary English language education also fosters students‟
knowledge of English-speaking countries including their people and cultures, builds up positive feelings and perspectives towards English and foreign language learning as well as enhances understanding and affection for Vietnamese language.
The mandated teaching method for primary English language education is student- centred, Communicative language teaching methodology (MOET, 2010; Nguyen, Hamid &
Renshaw, 2016). Students learn linguistic skills by actively and initiatively participating in communicative activities. The teaching and learning should be derived from students‟
interests, hobbies and experience. Learning topics should be amusing, attractive and close to students‟ daily life (MOET, 2010). English lessons are organized in interactive activities such as games, songs, stories, quizzes, drawing, etc. which vary in terms of individual, pairing or grouping working styles. The teaching needs to form and enhance learning strategies for students. Teachers are also required to create as many opportunities for students to use English in class as possible. Students‟ performance is assessed via a combination of tests, examinations and teachers‟ observation throughout the school year. The assessment should be in diverse forms including both spoken and written types (MOET, 2010).
2.2.1 Current situations of primary English language education in Vietnam
After 10 years since the kickstart of the 2008-2020 national language project, contrary to the bright, attractive prospect it promised to bring about, what is often discussed on
popular news channels is chaotic, disappointing consequences that the costly 2008-2020
15
national language project has caused. The overall conclusion of the news is that the project has failed to achieve its fundamental goal, and that another failure is easily predictable in 2020 due to the fact that the targets were set too high whereas conditions in terms of teaching personnel, facilities, curriculum planning, etc. are still at far-low level to realise them (Thanh Nien News, 2014; Tuoi Tre News, 2016; Tuoi Tre News, 2018; VietNamNet, 2018). On November 16, 2016, the Minister of Education and Training, Mr. Phung Xuan Nha, also admitted of the drawbacks of the 2008-2020 national language project (Nguyen, 2017), given that in 2016, only 20% of third graders gained access to the English program; a little more than 20% of the third, fourth and fifth grade students learned four periods of English per week; and over 50% of English teachers in state schools was still under the standard of
language ability required for the 2008-2020 national language project (Tuoi Tre News, 2016).
Students‟ lacking motivation for learning English is also a worrying sign because they failed to see purposes of learning English or they were sceptical about the value of the localized certificates of language proficiency which was modified from the Common European Framework of Reference to match Vietnamese context (Tuoi Tre News, 2016). Questions may raise regarding whether the localized certificates would be recognized internationally and if language ability recognized by the localized certificates could actually enable
graduates to compete in the globally working environment. The other significant attribute to the lack of learning motivation for English is the wide gap between what is taught at class and what is actually tested in exams (Tuoi Tre News, 2016). While the English teaching and learning practice in classrooms is dedicated to developing four skills, the major examinations are often in written form, which obviously leaves speaking skill out.
Supporting what the media was concerned, research evidence, although it is rather limited, also pointed out the ineffectiveness of the 2008- 2020 national language project and serious obstacles the country was facing (Baldauf-Jr. et al., 2011; Nguyen, 2017; Nguyen, 2011; Nguyen & Bui, 2016; Nguyen, Hamid, & Renshaw, 2016; Nguyen, Le, Tran &
Nguyen, 2014; Vu & Pham, 2014). The biggest challenge was English teachers‟ professional capacity for early English language education (Nguyen, Hamid, & Renshaw, 2016). It was estimated that in 2010, the 2008-2020 national language project needed at least 17,000 well- qualified English teachers for the whole number of primary students throughout Vietnam (Nguyen, 2011). Yet, although the national project was implemented in 2008, there was not any pre-service training specially designed for primary English teachers until around 2011- 2012 (Nguyen, Hamid, & Renshaw, 2016; Vu & Pham, 2014). The majority of the current in-
16
service teachers were actually meant to be English teachers at secondary or higher school levels. Hence, “they lack professional capacity and expertise required for teaching young learners” (Nguyen, Hamid, & Renshaw, 2016, p.194; Nguyen, 2011; Nguyen, 2017; Nguyen
& Bui, 2016; Nguyen et al., 2014; Vu & Pham, 2014). Weaknesses regarding English
teachers‟ oral skills, pronunciation and linguistic knowledge, which are the big restraints of a successful implementation of communication language teaching approach were also found in some studies (Nguyen, 2011; Nguyen & Bui, 2016). The government is also trying to
improve the quality of English teachers through plenty of in-service training workshops and programs across the country. The fundamental goals of the in-service training are both improving teachers‟ language competencies and enhancing their teaching methodology (Bui, 2016). Despite moderately positive feedbacks from the trainees in one study, (Bui, 2016), the overall training outcome was reported as rather dissatisfying (MOET, 2014). Another severe obstacle is the increase of inequality as a result of Vietnam‟s policy that approves
privatisation and marketization of education (London, 2010; Nguyen, Hamid & Renshaw, 2016; Nguyen et al., 2014; Vu & Pham, 2014). To deal with issues of resource constraints and inadequacy of well-qualified teachers, “several public schools have collaborated with private education providers and have introduced different fee-based joint English
programmes for students […] [,which raises] concerns regarding inequality of educational opportunities among students of different socioeconomic status” (Nguyen, Hamid &
Renshaw, 2016, p.194; Nguyen et al., 2014). Moreover, the deficiency of English lessons at public schools may also lead to a “proliferation of „extra-study‟, consisting of the private provision of school lessons outside school hours by “public school teachers” (London, 2010, p.370). Extra-study has already been a persistent problem in Vietnam (Tran & Harpham, 2005) that promotes inequality in education since children‟s academic achievement is more contingent on household income (London, 2010). Inequality was also found between rural and urban areas regarding teaching and learning conditions, investment and engagement of different stakeholders (Nguyen et al., 2014; Vu & Pham, 2014). Small provinces are facing more obstacles concerning large classroom size, restricted specialized rooms and equipment to support language learning, inadequate investment, low level of involvement from
administrative leaders to parents as well as a scarcity of English-speaking environments for students to practise the target language for real life situations (Nguyen et al., 2014). Baldauf et al. (2011) also pointed out the unavailability of English-speaking environment for
communication outside school as a serious obstacle that not only Vietnam but also the whole Asia is facing. While the country adopts a communicative focus, English language
17
communication hardly ever goes beyond the classroom, especially in rural areas, which hinders the effectiveness of communicative teaching approach. The common conclusion from the majority of the pioneer studies about the introduction of English language as a mandatory subject in primary school level in Vietnam is also consistent with research findings about early English language education in Asia that decisions were made without thorough
consideration of availability of funding, qualified personnel, as well as teaching and learning resources (Hayes, 2017; Nunan, 2001; Nguyen, 2011; Nguyen & Bui, 2016; Nguyen, Hamid
& Renshaw, 2016).
It is noticeable that in most government‟s decisions, reports, news from media and even research studies, the listened voice was mainly of the government, experts, and teachers (Bui, 2016; Hoang, 2016; Nguyen, 2011; Nguyen, 2017; Nguyen & Bui, 2016; Nguyen, Le, Tran & Nguyen, 2014). Merely little space in the discussion table was devoted to students and parents who are directly influenced by the 2008-2020 national language project whereas according to scholars in the field of critical language policy and planning, “people who experience the consequence of language policy should have a major role in making policy decisions” (Nguyen, Hamid & Renshaw, 2016, p.210; Tollefson, 2006; Zhao & Baldauf, 2012). Moreover, Celaya (2012) raised some questions that deserves careful consideration:
“Why do we expect so much from their English classes? Why does society seem to blame teachers exclusively for the low levels of competence in EFL? Why, after all, are the schools held responsible – what about parents‟ interest and involvement?”
(Celaya, 2012, p. 10)
Obviously, parents should also take responsibilities for the English language education of their children since there are plenty of research findings confirming the positive association between parents‟ involvement in education with their children‟s learning outcomes.
2.3 Parental involvement in education
The term „parental involvement‟ has been defined differently depending on research intentions. General definitions of the term are “the dedication of resources by the parent to the child within a given domain” (Grolnick & Slowiaczek, 1994, p.238), “the parents‟ or caregivers‟ investment in the education of their children” (Larocque, Kleiman & Darling, 2011, p.116) or “parental participation in the educational processes and experiences of their children” (Wilder, 2014, p. 387). Some researchers clarify the term by separating home-based
18
involvement from school-based involvement as well as adding parental expectations for children‟s future learning and parents‟ attitudes towards their children‟s education, school and teachers (Berthelsen & Walker, 2008; Epstein, 2010; Topor, Keane, Shelton & Calkins, 2010; Wilder, 2014). Some researchers prefer to use „parental engagement‟ rather than
„parental involvement‟ (Harris & Goodall, 2008; Goodall & Montgomery, 2014). In the current paper, both terms „parental engagement‟ and „parental involvement‟ are employed interchangeably to refer to a combination of parental dedication of resources, their
participation in activities related to their children‟s education at home and at school, parents‟
attitudes towards education, school and teacher as well as parents‟ expectations for their children‟s achievement.
The significance of parental involvement in education is highly recognized by researchers, educators, policy makers and other stakeholders worldwide due to a wealth of research evidence that highlights the positive correlation between parental involvement and pupils‟ educational achievement and aspiration (Anderson & Minke, 2007; Berthelsen &
Walker, 2008; Cheung & Pomerantz, 2011; Clinton & Hattie, 2013; European Commission, 2011; Harris & Goodall, 2008; Harris & Robinson, 2016; Hornby & Lafaele, 2011; Niehaus
& Adelson, 2014; Njeru, 2015; Topor, Keane, Shelton & Calkins, 2010; Vera et al., 2012;
Wilder, 2014).
For instance, studying 1020 third-grade English language learners in the United States, Niehaus and Adelson (2014, p. 835) found that the more the parents were involved in their children‟s education, the fewer social-emotional difficulties the children encountered, which was linked to higher learning results. In order to investigate the relationship between parental engagement in students‟ learning and their educational attainment, Harris and
Goodall (2008) carried out a qualitative research using semi-interviews with 314 respondents including parents, students, teachers and support staff from 20 secondary schools in the UK.
Their findings underscored the considerably beneficial effects of home-based parental engagement on students‟ achievement. The researchers specified that “[w]hile involving parents in school activities has an important social and community function, it is only the engagement of parents in learning in the home that is most likely to result in a positive difference to learning outcomes” (Harris & Goodall, 2008, p.277). Moreover, the students were highly aware of the value of parental interest and engagement in their education as well as the positive link between that interest and engagement and their in-school behaviour and
19
achievement. In a quantitative study with 158 seven-year-old children, their mothers and their teachers, Topor et al. (2010) found a statistically significant correlation between parents‟
positive attitudes and a child‟s academic outcomes in reading and Mathematics. After synthesizing 11 meta-analyses that studied the impact of parental involvement on students‟
learning performance, Clinton and Hattie (2013) found a generalizable message across the meta-analyses that parents‟ expectations and participation in discussion about schooling and learning were significantly associated with their children‟s learning success. Yet, parents‟
over-controlling school work in fact negatively affected the children‟s learning. It was also found that the effects of parental involvement were higher at primary school level than secondary/high school levels. Another synthesis of nine meta-analyses of various studies examining the relationship between parental involvement and students‟ academic
achievement also echoed what previous research concluded (Wilder, 2014). Wilder also reported a positive connection between parental involvement and students‟ learning success across these studies no matter how the term „parental involvement‟ was defined and how achievement was measured. Also, the relationship between parental engagement and academic achievement was consistent across students‟ ages and ethnic groups. His findings also indicated that parental expectations for children‟s academic success had the strongest impact whereas parents‟ assistance with homework had the least influence on students‟
achievement. Nonetheless, he noted that the parents‟ involvement, particularly their
expectation may be closely attached to the subject area and suggested more research on this direction. Vera et al. (2012) conducted a survey with 239 immigrant parents of English language learners from various cultural backgrounds in four elementary schools in the United States. They stressed that it was parental aspirations about education, expectation for
children‟s academic success as well as parent-children communication about the value of schooling which affected students‟ learning outcomes more certainly than overt forms of involvement like checking homework.
Although it was found that parents‟ school-based involvement was not as remarkably beneficial for students‟ learning as home-based engagement in some studies (Clinton and Hattie, 2013; Harris & Goodall, 2008). Parents‟ participation in in-school activities is encouraged due to desirably direct and indirect educational consequences it can bring about as suggested by many researchers (Bryan & Henry, 2012; Epstein, 2010, 2013; Frederico &
Whiteside, 2015; Hornby & Lafaele, 2011). Specifically, parents‟ frequent interactions with schools and communities helped to reinforce the messages about the importance of education
20
and staying in school, the significance of schools, of working hard, of thinking innovatively and of being kind and helpful to other people towards their children (Epstein, 2010). In addition, by involving in school activities and school processes such as volunteering in school programs and events, being a representative in decision-making committees of schools, parents could gain a better communication about their children‟s progress and create a more supportive learning environment for their children, which in turn could benefit their
children‟s learning (Bryan & Henry, 2012). Moreover, other types of involving such as attending parent-teacher meetings or educational workshops for parents were found to have an advantageous impact on children‟s education (Hornby & Lafaele, 2011). Other benefits of not only school-based involvement but parental involvement in general were “improved parent–teacher relationships, teacher morale and school climate; improved school attendance, attitudes, behaviour and mental health of children; and, increased parental confidence,
satisfaction and interest in their own education” (Hornby & Lafaele, 2011, p. 37). Empirical evidence from the programs to build school-parents-community partnership also supported researchers‟ idea of improving parental participation at school and in community. For instance, in Victoria, Australia, a Community School Partnership (CSP) Program was built with an aim to “connect parents to schools and generate local community connectedness and social capital in order to improve school retention rates and educational outcomes” (Frederico
& Whiteside, 2015, p. 53). The program participants included local government, schools, local service providers, families of school beginners and other related organizations. The program involved families via a variety of activities such as “[p]lay groups, computer groups, multicultural morning teas, a student talent quest, family and fathers‟ barbeques, and
computer related training programs” (Frederico & Whiteside, 2015, p. 55). Despite many challenges, the program produced efficacious outcomes. First of all, the children were found to be more relaxed and confident at school; their social skills and behaviours were much improved; absenteeism rate decreased; and the younger children in the families participating in the program had an easier transition to school. Moreover, relationships between parents and schools, schools and community much improved after the program. The parents highly appreciated the opportunity to connect with other parents and learn more about the schools.
The teachers were also satisfied with positive results that the program brought about for the children and the schools (Frederico & Whiteside, 2015).
21
2.4 Parental involvement in foreign language education
Despite tremendous research interests in the area of parental involvement in
education, parental involvement in foreign language education, especially EFL education has not been sufficiently investigated (Forey, Besser & Sampson, 2016, p. 384). Even with limited literature about this specific domain, empirical evidence confirmed the positive link between parental involvement and students‟ success in learning English (Butler, 2014, 2015;
Celaya, 2012); Forey, Besser & Sampson, 2016; Griva & Chouvarda, 2012; He, Gou &
Chang, 2015; Huang, 2013; Xuesong, 2006).
Particularly, parents‟ positive feelings, attitudes and behaviour towards the foreign languages could strengthen their children‟s positive thinking about the foreign languages and stimulate their multilingual competence (Griva & Chouvarda, 2012). In addition, parents‟
positive attitudes for their children‟s personality and talents as well as parents‟
encouragement could increase children‟s motivation in foreign language learning as well as their level of proficiency in multi-languages (Griva & Chouvarda, 2012). Parental
expectation for their children‟s success in foreign language learning was also found to considerably affect students‟ motivation and learning outcomes. Parents‟ high expectation was able to bring about stronger motivation in learning English in Butler‟s studies with 572 fourth, sixth and eighth graders and their parents in China (2014, 2015). He revealed that Chinese parents strongly believed that a person‟s achievement in learning was mainly attributed to his/her efforts, not inborn talents or other factors. Parents with this viewpoint were found to set expectations for their children‟s success. They also perceived opportunities to learn as crucial component for achievement: the more opportunities their children had to learn, the higher achievement they could gain. Parents with higher expectation often encouraged their children to make more efforts in learning, which in turn improved their performance in English learning. Moreover, parental belief in their children‟s ability to succeed in English learning was revealed as a key predictor of students‟ good performance in all of four skills: listening, speaking, reading and writing (Butler, 2014, 2015). Nevertheless, too much parental control on children‟s learning failed to generate positive outcomes in terms of motivation for learning (Butler, 2015). Parents‟ spending time and communicating with their children in language learning activities at home was also highly advantageous for children‟s achievement of the target language. For example, in a project with Literacy Bags in which 18 Taiwanese parents were asked to read and do activities with their children using materials provided in the Literacy Bags such as an English children‟s picture book, CD or
22
audiotape, and some extension activities, Huang (2013) found that children‟s speaking skills and language usage were promoted. Furthermore, children‟s social interactions with parents and peers were enhanced, which was a great motivator for developing their oral language skills. Besides, parents‟ relationships with other parents and teachers were fostered, which in turn also positively affected children‟s learning motivation and learning outcomes. In the survey-study of He, Gou and Chang (2015) with 161 sixth graders and their parents in Taiwan, parental involvement in literacy related activities such as reading English to their children, playing games related to English rhymes, teaching pronunciations of phonemes and words was found to be a positive predictor of increased motivation, developed knowledge of English lexicon, enhanced skills of articulating English sounds and words, higher English literacy levels, higher confidence, and less cheating among children.
With the positive results which parents‟ emotion, time and effort investment in their children‟s English learning can bring about, it is understandable when Celaya (2012, p.10) argued that parents‟ interest and involvement should be taken into consideration as
determinants of the success or failure of EFL education. Therefore, the following sections are devoted to present literature about parents‟ views and ways of involving in early EFL
education in general and in Vietnam particularly.
2.4.1 Parental views towards early EFL education
Among a limited number of researches examining parental views about early English language education as a foreign language, research findings revealed huge parental demand for an as-early-as-possible introduction of English language (Carmel, 2007; Celaya, 2012;
European Commission, 2011; Griva & Chouvarda, 2012), especially in Asia where parents paid great interest in or even became obsessed about English language education (Butler, 2015; Hayes, 2017; Hu & Mckay, 2012). In Europe, parents realised that the acquisition of foreign languages opened their children‟s minds and horizons as well as benefited their children‟s social and working life in the future (European Commission, 2011). For instance, in the semi-interviews with Griva and Chouvarda (2012) in Greece, 50 randomly selected parents of first and second graders stated that proficiency in foreign languages, particularly English language would enable their children to communicate, travel abroad, find a good job more easily and broaden their horizons. In addition, early language learning was perceived to be profitable for the development of children‟s personality and future vocational
rehabilitation. However, some parents thought that the children were rather “immature”
(Griva & Chouvarda, 2012, p.11) to acquire a second language at the age of five or six years
23
old. In Poland, many parents believed that the younger the child started English language learning, the better he/she acquired the language. The parents also hoped that with English language proficiency, their child would have better employment opportunities, communicate well with people from other countries as well as gain confidence for later learning (Enever, 2007). A later qualitative study with 15 Polish parents of aged 3-6 children also revealed similar findings (Rokita-Jaśkow, 2015). Rokita-Jaśkow reported instrumental and integrative motives of parental support for early EFL education. While the former referred to practical purposes such as obtaining high status and getting well-paid employment, the later concerned with enabling the children to develop self-esteem, to function in the international society without complexes, to have international friends, to be a global citizen, to have “a bicultural identity” including “an international one on top of the national one” (Rokita-Jaśkow, 2015, p.
467). In a study in Spain, all participating parents were committed to “the earlier, the better”
notion (Celaya, 2012, p. 7) since they thought their unpleasing experience with foreign language learning at school was the consequence of their late start of exposing to the target language, and didn‟t want the same thing to happen to their children (Celaya, 2012). In Asia, parents saw early English language learning as a strategy to achieve future social mobility and economic prosperity (Hu & Mckay, 2012). Many parents also believed that future economy of a family obviously depended on English language proficiency (Baldauf-Jr et al., 2011). Hence, they strongly invested in their children‟s English language education from an early age.
Concerning the teaching and learning methods for early EFL education, suggestions for game-based learning, playful environment, more communicative approach and
appropriate teaching methodology for young children were the common themes in parents‟
answers in many studies (Griva & Chouvarda, 2012, p. 6 - 9; Tekin, 2015, p. 40). Making use of new technology like computer programs, movies, cartoons, interactive games, TV or radio programs was also highly recommended (Griva & Chouvarda, 2012, p. 6; Tekin, 2015, p.
40). Other suggestions for the improvement of early EFL education included efficient
curriculum, attractive textbooks, suitable learning materials (Griva & Chouvarda, 2012, p. 9), books reading activities, dramatic plays, English-only classrooms, mixed-nationality classes or groups and close home-school cooperation (Tekin, 2015, p. 40).
2.4.2 Parents’ ways of involvement in their child’s early EFL education
Research findings revealed a variety of ways parents got involved in their children‟s English learning. In Griva and Chouvarda‟s study (2012, p. 8) the majority of the parents
24
helped their children to understand new vocabulary and grammar, answered the children‟s questions and encouraged them to learn. A study in Taiwan revealed that many parents asked their children to memorize English vocabulary and grammar as well as stressed too much on accuracy, which reflected an English language education characterized by vocabulary memorization and grammar mastery (Huang, 2013, p. 258 – 259). In Korea, Korean mothers were so strongly committed to their children‟s English education that many of them became
“wild goose mother[s]” (Hu & Mckay, 2012) who left their husbands behind to follow their young children to English speaking countries primarily for English acquisition. The fathers would remain in the country to work to support the living and studying abroad of their wives and children (Butler, 2015; Hu & Mckay, 2012). Polish parents in Rokita-Jaśkow‟s study employed various ways to support their children‟s English education (Rokita-Jaśkow, 2015, p. 466 – 469). Those who had high competence of English transmitted their skills and knowledge to their children via directly teaching or speaking English with the children at home. They also tried to be a positive role model as proficient English users themselves for their children to follow. In addition, they raised the children‟s awareness of the usefulness of knowing foreign languages whenever possible such as in oversea holidays and social events.
Maximizing children‟s exposure to the target language was also important. At home, some parents engaged their children in listening to storybooks and watching cartoons in English.
Some other parents sent their children to private classes, schools (where there usually were native speakers), or foreign language courses abroad. Some parents even had some foreign guests to visit at home or took their children to meet their international friends in order for the children to experience an international community so that the children could develop their motivation for language learning as well as enrich their personality. Those activities reflected how actively involved the parents were in their children‟s English learning. Nevertheless, there still were some parents who placed the major responsibility for their children‟s English learning on school education. In a study with about 500 parents of children aged 5 – 8 years old, Forey, Besser and Sampson (2016, p. 393) found the majority of the parents agreed that parental involvement was crucial for the literacy progress in English of the children. The parents viewed parental involvement as direct teaching. Therefore, the most popular parental involvement practice was teaching the children to read English vocabulary. The second most common parental support was providing the children with models of standard, fluent English via visual media like English TV programs, English movies, English songs, cartoons, etc.
possibly because the parents were not confident with their English ability to teach their children. Reading English stories with their children was the third most popular activity.
25
Playing and singing in English with their children were not commonly practised at home (Forey, Besser & Sampson, 2016, p. 401 – 402). The researchers also pointed out the cultural influence on the way the parents perceived their roles in their children‟s English learning.
Some parents limited their roles to monitoring homework, teaching skills or organizing extra English lessons for their children because “[It] is very common in Hong Kong culture to delegate assistance in children‟s learning to tutors and tutorial centers” (p. 403). This finding was similar to what Chi and Rao (2003, p. 350) reported that Chinese parents, especially those in rural areas viewed their duty as paying fees whereas believed that it was teachers‟
responsibility to guarantee children‟s learning. In general, it seems that the parents managed to assist their children‟s English language learning in their own ability rather than
cooperating with the schools and the English teachers. In addition, although some parents were ready to participate in their children‟s English education, there were some factors that hindered their degree of involvement (Boivin, et al., 2014; Forey, Besser & Sampson, 2016).
2.4.3 Influential factors for parental involvement in early English language education It was commonly reported that the most common hindrance to parental involvement in their children‟s English language learning were parents‟ ability in the target language and family socioeconomic circumstance. In addition, time availability, parents‟ perception regarding their role and their children‟s capacity for learning as well as the feelings of being invited to participate by the teachers and the schools also influenced the degree of parent‟s engagement (Boivin, et al., 2014; Butler, 2014; Forey, Besser & Sampson, 2016; Hornby &
Lafaele, 2011; Huang, 2013).
Parents‟ language skills
There was a common assumption that parents with limited English language ability lacked appropriate knowledge and skills to support their children‟s English language learning. This insufficiency made the parents feel insecure about their self-efficiency in supporting their children‟s English learning (Boivin, et al., 2014, p. 49 – 50; Forey, Besser &
Sampson, 2016, p. 397 – 399). In Huang‟s study (2013, p. 260 - 261), the parents shared that they did not feel confident enough about their linguistic skills to assist their children‟s development of the target language in an accurate and appropriate way. They believed the children‟s English teachers would do it better than them. Noticeably, Chi and Rao (2003, p.
350) revealed that rural Chinese parents completely counted on English teachers to bring about a good EFL education for their children thanks to their professional expertise in
26
English teaching. Furthermore, some parents were afraid of losing face if they were in a circumstance where their children knew better than they did. This feeling prevented them from being involved (Forey, Besser & Sampson, 2016, p. 398).
Nevertheless, research evidence proved that parental involvement was actually beneficial to the language learning of their children regardless of their language capacity. In the context of bilingual learning of immigrant children in England, with evidence from semi- interviews with two immigrant families from South Asia, Conteh and Kawashima (2008) concluded that there was a diversity of ways the parents could do to support their children‟s learning of not only English language but also learning in general in spite of the parents‟
limited English skills. Their finding confirmed the viewpoint of Tizard and Hughes (2002, in Muschamp et al., 2007, p. 7) that merely simple activities between parents and children such as talking, discussing about past and future events, watching television etc. could actually be educationally advantageous. Vera et al. (2012) also argued for various simple ways that linguistically disadvantaged parents could do to support their children‟s English language learning such as monitoring children‟s bed time and entry to television and video games, scheduling the children‟s homework, providing opportunities for visiting libraries, museums, etc., and arranging people with more language capacity like older siblings, relatives, private tutors, people in the community to help or supervise the children with homework or learning.
One important point stated by the European Commission (2011) was that “[P]arents can even support their children‟s efforts and draw direct personal benefits by learning a second/foreign language with them” (p. 26). This can be inferred as another effectively supportive way that parents can do for their children in case they do not know the target language.
Parents‟ socioeconomic status
English language education, especially in Asia, was found to be under a substantial impact of parents‟ socioeconomic status (SES), which is generally measured by their education attainment, social resources and income (Butler, 2014). It was reported that high SES parents were engaged in their children‟s schooling more actively than those with low SES (Turney & Kao, 2009). Also, findings indicated that high SES parents could provide more resources and opportunities for their children to learn as well as have higher expectation than lower SES parents. Lower SES parents tended to lower their expectations regarding their children‟s ability to acquire English when their children got older or when their children failed in English learning. Yet, lowering expectation was in fact negatively affecting the
27
children‟s achievement (Turney & Kao, 2009). Moreover, parents with more advantaged SES were able to bring about more opportunities to expose to and use English outside school, which was remarkably beneficial for the development of children‟s motivation (Butler, 2015).
Time availability and other factors
Besides language ability and socioeconomic status, many parents claimed that due to work commitment, they didn‟t have time to fully engage in their children‟s English learning (Forey, Besser & Sampson, 2016, p. 387). Moreover, Hornby and Lafaele (2011) listed some other hindrances to parental involvement in education as follow. First of all, if parents only viewed their roles as getting their children to school or paying school fees, they did not actively involve in their children‟s learning. Secondly, parents with low level of confidence in their capacity to assist their children are more reluctant to contact their children‟s school and teachers due to their pessimistic thought that their efforts would not bring about any positive results.
Another determining factor for parental involvement was parents‟ beliefs in their children‟s intellectual abilities and in a possibility of developing such abilities. Parents who perceived their children‟s intelligence as a fixed mental capacity did not see the need of their engagement in their children‟s learning. According to those parents, children‟s innate
cognitive ability set a limit of their academic accomplishment, and educational success mainly depended on children‟s luck of having a high level of intelligence rather than efforts given for it. Hence, parental involvement activities such as “encouraging children to do their homework or attending parent–teacher meetings at school [..] [were] viewed as a waste of time” (Hornby & Lafaele, 2011, p.40). Conversely, parents who believed that their children‟s cognitive ability could always be developed and that essential components for children‟s achievement at school were their intellectual ability and hard work had a positive conception of parental involvement. They were aware of their significant role in their children‟s
academic success, therefore they became more active in support the children‟s learning.
Last but not least, parents judged teachers‟ actions and comments to make sure if they were genuinely welcomed to act in the school‟s educational processes. In any cases when they felt to be set aside from what was going on at school or to be kept in a superficial relationship with the teachers, their motivation for participation in their children‟s schooling would decrease. Alternatively, if parents received sincere invitation from teachers and
28
schools to involve in the schooling processes, they would actively and effectively contribute their time and energy for them (Epstein, 2001). Thus, mutual understanding, respects, trust and negotiation should be built up between family and school (Hornby & Lafaele, 2011).
In general, parental involvement in education and early EFL education in particular was investigated from different perspectives and in various aspects. Although this could bring about varied and diverse views, readers may not get a systematic perception of parental involvement. For example, the researchers reported several distinct ways that the parents involved in their children‟s learning, yet lacked a systematized categorization of the ways as well as explanation why such ways effectively worked. Besides, discussions in most research reports usually started by briefly introducing the term „parental involvement‟, then jumped right into listing beneficial aspects of it without explaining the mechanism of parental
involvement as well as how it worked in order to bring about such benefits. In addition, when presenting factors affecting the degree of parents‟ involvement in their children‟s English learning and the parent-teacher cooperation, many research papers didn‟t present the deep- rooted causes. For instance, the researchers stated parents‟ SES played an important role in parental involvement since abundant evidence showed that parents with low SES didn‟t involve in their children‟s learning as actively and effectively as those with high SES.
Nonetheless, deeper elements such as parents‟ cultural capital, social capital, and emotional capital that determine why and how parental SES influenced their involvement did not clearly discussed. Therefore, the following part is to discuss cultural capital, social capital and
emotional capital as mechanism of parental involvement based on which later findings in the current study will be analysed and categorized.
2.5 Parental involvement under the perspectives of cultural, social and emotional capital
Education can be referred as a social field in which the positions of its members and their interrelations are decided by their possession of different types of resources or „capital‟
(Addi – Raccah & Grinshtain, 2017). The more relevant capital an individual possesses, the more capable they are to take up, maintain and enhance their positions in that socially structured space as well as to decide what type of connections they cultivate with others in that space. In the field of education, various kinds of capital are identified, including economic, cultural, social and emotional capital (Addi – Raccah & Grinshtain, 2017;
Bourdieu, 1986; Coleman, 1988; Holt, Bowlby & Lea, 2013; Reay, 2000; Wang et al., 2017;
