Mai Phuong Tran
Exploring Young Learners' Informal Learning of English Language:
A comparative study on the perspectives of 11-13-year-old pupils in Finland and Vietnam
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 jointly implemented by the University of Eastern Finland and Herzen State Pedagogical University of Russia
Master’s thesis in Education May 2017
ITÄ-SUOMEN YLIOPISTO – UNIVERSITY OF EASTERN FINLAND
Tiedekunta – Faculty
Philosophical Faculty Osasto – School
School of Applied Educational Science and Teacher Education Tekijät – Author
Mai Phuong Tran Työn nimi – Title
Exploring Young Learners' Informal Learning of English Language
Pääaine – Main subject Työn laji – Level Päivämäärä
– Date Sivumäärä – Number of pages
Foreign language education Pro gradu -tutkielma X
15.04.2017 127 Sivuainetutkielma
Kandidaatin tutkielma Aineopintojen tutkielma Tiivistelmä – Abstract
The omnipresence of English on various means of media in many parts of the world nowadays is creating an ideal environment for informal learning of English language, a pre-condition for lifelong learning. While researchers are thrilled with the tremendous potential of these resources in enhancing foreign language learners’ learning experience, there is scepticism among teachers and learners regarding the actual benefits of the frequent, informal exposure to English in real life to the development of learners’ English proficiency. The aim of this comparative study of young learners’ perspectives of their informal learning experience, and the significance of informal learning in their overall learning process is to add to the body of research about the effects of informal foreign language learning. 11-13-year-old pupils in Finland (n = 38) and Vietnam (n = 165) were requested to report on their experience and self-assessment of their foreign language proficiency as well as the impact of informal learning in achieving their desired proficiency. For better comparability of the data collected in both countries, the data collected in Vietnam was obtained from two different groups of pupils. The first group is from a private institution (n = 41) whose socio-economic background is supposedly comparable to that of the Finnish pupils, and the second group is from a public school (n = 124) which represents the populace in urban areas in Vietnam.
It is found that the pupils in both countries generally engaged in similar informal learning activities outside school but the amount of contact with English differs among the three groups of pupils, i.e. the Finnish pupils and Vietnamese pupils reported to have much more access to English content in informal learning activities than the pupils from the Vietnamese public school. Consequently, the Finnish pupils and Vietnamese pupils from the private institution thought that informal learning had significant benefits to the development of their English proficiency whereas the Vietnamese pupils from the public school still considered school to be more important in their foreign language learning. A prominent difference between the informal learning habits of pupils in two countries is that Finnish pupils tended to take part in more online, functional practice activities (such as watching youtube and video blogs, reading blogs online, playing games etc.) while the Vietnamese pupils reported to engage in more offline activities (e.g., watching TV, movies and reading books) and resort to traditional textbook-based and form-focused practice (i.e., grammar and vocabulary drill exercises) more often. Particularly, virtually no Internet-based activities were mentioned by the Vietnamese pupils among the activities that they did
deliberately out of school to practice English. There is not much difference between the boys and girls in each country in terms of their informal learning experience and habits except for playing games, i.e. boys reported to be more frequent gamers than girls, and the unexpected popularity of reading books, stories and comics among the boys from the Vietnamese private institution.
It is found from the data that the pupils’ socio-economic background (i.e. trips abroad) and the education systems that they are in had certain relation to the types of informal activities they do or the perceived significance of informal learning in the development of their proficiency. The Finnish pupils were mostly concerned with their own interest and how to better themselves as foreign language users when reflecting on their learning experience as a whole. Thus, they would like the English lessons to include references that are more relevant to their life (such as using the Internet in classroom activities).
On the other hand, the Vietnamese pupils are very much concerned with good performance in examination. They wished that the teachers would teach what would be tested later at school and other international standardized tests even though they agreed that studying for exams would not prepare them to be proficient foreign language users. However, for them any attempts to revolutionize teaching in class without replacing the current forms of formal assessment applicable at school would do them more harm than good.
These results suggest that teachers in different countries are facing both similar and different learning demands. Hence, it is advisable that teachers be active agent in open communication with the pupils to understand their foreign language learning background. More empirical research on the relation between the students’ informal learning habits and their viewpoints and self-assessment of their learning experiences, preferences, and belief about effective learning methods in different countries will be useful for teachers who may need to work in a multicultural environment or different countries with vast socio-economic and cultural differences.
Avainsanat – Keywords: informal learning, foreign language learning, self-assessment, learning strategy
TABLE OF CONTENT
1 INTRODUCTION ... 1
2 THEORECTICAL BACKGROUND ... 6
2.1 Informal learning of English as a foreign language ... 6
2.1.1 Definitions... 6
2.1.2 Previous research on informal learning of English ... 12
2.1.3 Summary ... 22
2.2 Self-assessment and consciousness in informal language learning ... 22
2.3 Conclusion ... 26
3 RESEARCH QUESTIONS ... 27
4 METHODOLOGY ... 29
4.1 Mixed methods research approach and procedures ... 30
4.2 Research design ... 31
4.3 Participants ... 32
4.3.1 Finland ... 32
4.3.2 Vietnam ... 33
4.4 Data collection tools ... 37
4.4.1 Exploratory group discussion ... 38
4.4.2 Questionnaire design and administration ... 39
4.4.3 Semi-structure interviews ... 43
4.5 Data analysis ... 45
4.5.1 Quantitative analysis ... 46
4.5.2 Qualitative analysis ... 48
4.6 Validity and reliability of self-reported data ... 49
4.7 Ethical considerations ... 51
5 RESULTS ... 52
5.1 Similarities and differences in the informal learning of English of Finnish and Vietnamese 11 – 13 years old ... 52
5.1.1 Situations where Finnish and Vietnamese pupils are in contact with English .. 52
5.1.2 Activities deliberately chosen by the Finnish and Vietnamese pupils to practice and learn English ... 66
5.2 Self-assessment of English competency and the role of informal learning in acquisition of English by the Finnish and Vietnamese 11-13-year-old pupils ... 72
5.2.1 Pupils’ self-assessment of their English skills ... 73
5.2.2 Pupils’ self-assessment of the significance of informal learning in their acquisition of English ... 75
5.2.3 Correlation tests between informal learning and self-assessment of English competency ... 83
5.3 Elements of informal learning activities that may be utilized for classroom activities .. 88
6 DISCUSSIONS ... 90
6.1 Summary of the results ... 90
6.2 Discussion of results ... 95
6.3 Reliability of self-assessment and limitation of the study ... 98
6.4 Suggestions for future research ... 100
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 4.1. Research design. 29
Figure 4.2. Frequency of trips abroad by Finnish and Vietnamese pupils. 36 Figure 5.1. Extent of effects of informal learning activities on acquisition of English by
Finnish and Vietnamese pupils 123
Figure 5.2. Effects of Informal learning activities on Vocabulary 124 Figure 5.3. Effects of Informal learning activities on Listening Comprehension 124 Figure 5.4. Effects of Informal learning activities on Reading Comprehension 124 Figure 5.5. Effects of Informal learning activities on Writing 125 Figure 5.6. Effects of Informal learning activities on Spoken Production 125 Figure 5.7. Effects of Informal learning activities on Spoken Interaction 125
LIST OF TABLES
Table 4.1. Hours of Formal Instruction of English at School 119
Table 4.2. Mixed method data collection 37
Table 4.3. Summary of major information collected from the questionnaire 39 Table 4.4. Overview of quantitative dominant mixed analysis 46 Table 5.1. Summary of activities where Finnish and Vietnamese 11-13-year-old pupils
have most frequent contact with and highest exposure to English content 54 Table 5.2. Frequency and exposure to English in informal learning activities by Finnish
11-13 years old 119
Table 5.3. Frequency and exposure to English in informal learning activities by Vietnamese 11-13 years old from the private institution 120 Table 5.4. Frequency and exposure to English in informal learning activities by
Vietnamese 12-13 years old from the public school 121 Table 5.5. Extramural English Activity - Reading books, short stories, comics (Observed
frequencies) 58
Table 5.6. Situations where Finnish and Vietnamese pupils were in contact with English
by gender 60
Table 5.7. Activities deliberately chosen by Finnish and Vietnamese 11-13-year-old
pupils to practice and learn English 67
Table 5.8. Pupils’ self-assessment of English skills 73
Table 5.9. Pupils’ evaluation of their formal and informal learning of English 122 Table 5.10. Informal learning activities reported by most Finnish and Vietnamese pupils
to have positive impacts on their English skills 78
Table 5.11. Correlation between informal learning activities and self-assessment of
English skills 84
Table 5.12. Correlation between informal learning activities and self-assessment of
English skills by Finnish pupils 86
Table 5.13. Correlation between informal learning activities and self-assessment of
English skills by Vietnamese pupils 88
1
1 INTRODUCTION
My interest in exploring young learners’ current use and learning of English out of school stems from my own experience as an active learner and speaker as well as teacher of English. Having been a continuing learner for more than 20 years of my life, I cannot emphasize enough the importance of the amount of efforts I have invested on the various activities beyond the classroom to maintain and improve my language skills over the years, especially after high school. This is undoubtedly a common experience among successful, proficient foreign language speakers, and is generally consented to by language educators and researchers (Benson, 2011, p. 7).
As a language learner and teacher, I also notice the remarkable change in opportunities available for learners of English language nowadays. 20 years ago, in Vietnam, we had very few textbooks and resources available in English. They were expensive and hard to find even in big cities. However, in 10 years back with the widespread of technology, cable TV and the Internet, English has gradually become a natural part of life for people in the urban areas in Vietnam, especially the young. People can access numerous content in English on the Internet and social media, watch English language channels on TV with or without Vietnamese subtitle.
It is also very common to hear English references used in Vietnamese channels targeting the young. Furthermore, in several parts of Vietnam which are popular tourist destinations, one often encounters street children selling souvenirs and can have casual conversations with them in English (Le, 2004). In this aspect of English learning, the urban areas in Vietnam are catching up with the trends in other more economically developed countries in Europe and other parts of the world (e.g. Sundqvist & Wikström, 2015; Grau, 2009).
In some countries in Europe, there is evidence of children’s natural acquisition of English before receiving formal instructions at school (Kuppens, 2010 (Belgium); Lefever, 2010
2 (Iceland); Sundqvist, 2011, p. 106 (Sweden)). Researchers have also discovered positive correlations between students’ access to English in their leisure activities and their incidental acquisition of English vocabulary (Kusyk & Sockett, 2012; Olsson, 2011; Schwarz, 2013;
Sundqvist, 2009; Sundqvist & Sylvén, 2012a; Sundqvist & Sylvén, 2012b; Sylvén &
Sundqvist, 2012; Sundqvist & Wikström, 2015; Turgut & Irgin, 2009).
Such phenomenal changes in the children’s life have consequently caused changes in the classroom dynamics. Pupils nowadays come to class with diverse existing knowledge of the target language instead of a virtually empty mind waiting to be filled up by the teacher. Indeed, researchers (e.g. see Grau, 2009; Jakonen, 2014) have observed instances of students’ using knowledge learned outside school to communicate and discuss the content in the classroom.
Researchers give this phenomenon different names such as informal language learning (e.g.
Krashen, 1976), or learning beyond the language classroom (Benson, 2011) or extramural English – i.e. English outside classroom - to refer to all forms and characteristics of this phenomenon (Sundqvist, 2009).
It is commonly evident in the Nordic countries that the easy access to an excessive amount of content in English in real life makes it easier than ever for young English language learners to take up certain form of English learning out of school (Sundqvist & Wikström, 2015), which probably explains their mythical high proficiency in English. Ryan and Mercer (2011) referred to this as a “naturalness mindset” whereby “many learners may feel they learn English more easily outside of school in naturalistic settings, and therefore, they are likely to find this way of learning qualitatively more effective than learning in school” (Sundqvist, 2015, p.355-356).
However, the picture is not universal. In many Asian countries, teachers reported that students were not necessarily aware of the authentic, English-content rich environment surrounding them, and did not readily have the initiatives for self-learning (e.g. in Taiwan (Guo, 2011, p.252-253); Turkey (Ekşi & Aydin, 2013, p.205)). Moreover, whereas students criticized the
3 orthodox form-focused teaching method at school, they still resorted to traditional textbook exercises to practice their English at home (e.g. in Japan (Doyle, 2009; Doyle & Parrish, 2012)).
Research that investigated good language learners’ behaviours found that good language learners combined various formal and informal learning activities and strategies appropriately and skilfully to improve and maintain their language proficiency (Oxford & Lin, 2011, p. 158).
Therefore, the question concerning language learners nowadays is no longer restricted to the creation of an ideal language learning environment for learners but rather how learners take advantage and make good use of their immediate learning environment which is already conducive to language learning, both real and virtual. Modern language learners should be able to select learning activities and strategies wisely to achieve their targets in language learning among the numerous opportunities available to them (White and Cohen, 2008, p. 205). In other words, language learners should be trained to be active agents in their own learning journey, frequently evaluating and reflecting on their learning progress and available learning options to choose the methods and strategies that are most effective for them at a point in time. Such qualities are pivotal to lifelong learning - an indispensable attribute of 21th century citizens (Field, 2000, as cited in White, 2009, p. 15).
Consequently, the role of the teacher has changed accordingly. 21th-century teachers are expected to provide students with guidance on how to utilize their vast authentic resources available in their life more effectively in addition to formal instructions to best suit their learning needs and progress, and to prepare students well for the current fast changing world (Richards, 2014, p.17). Nevertheless, many teachers were surprisingly skeptical of the benefits that the informal settings offered their students for English learning (Grau, 2009, p.167), or did not utilize this source of knowledge in English lessons in school (Olsson, 2011) to make up for the limitations of the classroom setting in language teaching. Indeed, teachers and students often view the knowledge picked up by students in their real life to be illegitimate to be used
4 in class, and tend to separate classroom English from English available outside school (Grau, 2009). Consequently, such distinction between the two types of English is one of the causes of students’ demotivation in learning English at school (Sundqvist & Olin-Scheller, 2013).
Teachers’ reluctance to combine extramural English in classroom may be attributed to the lack of empirical studies on the effects of activities beyond classroom on students’ language proficiency (Sundqvist, 2011, p.107-108, Toffoli & Sockett, 2013), as well as the lack of know- hows or adequate curricular materials and tools to do so (Little, 2009, p. 224). Indeed, it was found that even though students relied on teachers for recommendations for learning tasks after instructed hours, many teachers were not aware of the alternatives for language learning outside the classroom, nor had they the skills to give students useful advice to take advantages of such opportunities (Ekşi & Aydin, 2013, p.206).
Researchers thus have been urging for more empirical studies into the informal learning of English to shed light on the relationship between inside classroom and out-of-class English (Higgin, 2009; Sylvén, 2004, p.234, as cited in Sundqvist, 2011, p.106). Moreover, the contrasting picture of students’ learning activities beyond the classroom in different countries emphasizes the need for more comparative study in this field.
Given my current access to Finnish and Vietnamese students, I would like to take this opportunity to conduct a small scale comparative study to explore the English learning habits of 11-13-year-old pupils in Finland and Vietnam to add to the body of research in this field.
This study focuses on the viewpoints of 11-13-year-old pupils in both countries about their experience of learning English at school and outside school. I am particularly interested to gain insights in how the students evaluate their learning experience and the impacts of the access to English in their leisure activities on their English skills.
5 The goal of this research is to explore different learning activities and strategies that students have utilized beyond the classroom to learn English, and what recommendations they have for the teaching and learning of English at school. I hope this comparative study on the perspectives of young learners’ in two countries with very different approaches to formal education will provide teachers in both Finland and Vietnam with interesting and useful insights and ideas for more flexible and innovative solutions to their teaching.
The thesis comprises 6 chapters. This introductory chapter is followed by chapter 2 which sets out the theoretical framework for this study where major concepts – foreign language learning, informal learning and self-assessment – are thoroughly discussed. Chapter 3 presents the research questions relating to pupils’ self-reported informal learning experience and self- assessment of the effects of their learning experience. Chapter 4 deals with the mixed method research design and methodology whereby the rationale for mixed method research and details of the data collection and analysis process are set out. Chapter 5 presents and discusses the results in relation to previous findings in the field to answer the research questions. Chapter 6 summarizes the main findings, discusses the limitations and reliability of the research findings as well as sets out implications for future research.
6
2 THEORECTICAL BACKGROUND
In this chapter, the major concepts and terms related to foreign language learning beyond the classroom, i.e. foreign language learning, informal learning, self-assessment, which sets the theoretical ground for this study are delineated. Then an overview of previous studies in the research field of informal learning of English as a foreign language is presented to lay the theoretical ground for the need to investigate Finnish and Vietnamese young learners’
perspectives and self-assessment of their own foreign language learning experience.
2.1 Informal learning of English as a foreign language 2.1.1 Definitions
2.1.1.1 Foreign language learning (FLL)
Before presenting the definition of foreign language learning upon which the thesis is premised, it is important to consider the component terms constituting FLL: foreign language and learning.
In the field of language education, “foreign language” (FL), “second language” (SL) & L2 are the common terms referring to a language that is learned after one person’s mother tongue. A foreign language implies the learning of a language outside the community where it is spoken.
A second language, on the other hand, refers to a situation where the learner lives in the community in which the language is spoken (Moeller & Catalano, 2015, p. 327). That means, English will be considered a foreign language if it is learned in non-English speaking countries (such as Finland and Vietnam) whereas English is referred to as a second language if it is learned in an English-speaking country. “L2” is commonly used to refer to any language learned after L1 – the native language.
Some scholars (Sundqvist, 2009a, p. 10; Sundqvist, 2015, p. 335-336) may view such distinction between second language and foreign language to be rather unnecessary or irrelevant in our current society given the extensive access to English in the young’s life. In many multilingual
7 societies (Council of Europe, 2001) including Finland, English could be deemed as a second language (Leppänen, 2007, p.149). However, despite the extensive access to English in daily life, Finnish and Vietnamese are still mainly used in virtually all aspects of life, and the way English is taught at school, and objectives of English lessons are still by large those of a foreign language in both countries. I, hence, contend that English as a foreign language is a more suitable term at the time being for both Finland and Vietnam. To avoid confusion, only the terms foreign language & L2 will be used interchangeably in this thesis.
Now, it is important to consider the term learning. When considering the definition of learning, some language educators tend to contrast and distinguish learning with acquisition. Among those, Krashen’s (1982, p.10) acquisition-learning hypothesis was the most well-known.
Krashen posited that acquisition was a subconscious process in which learners just "pick[ed] up a language” and were not necessarily aware of the language rules, and thus was equated to implicit learning. Learning, on the other hand, was the result of conscious study of linguistic features and rules, and could be described as explicit learning. Krashen (1982) further emphasized that learning and acquisition were two dichotomies in the development of second language competence.
Such claim by Krashen (1982) was criticized by theorists and researchers for the inconsistence in his explanation and lack of evidence to support his standpoint (Gregg, 1984, p.81-82), or the inadequate, simplistic distinction between conscious and unconscious processes concerning learning and acquisition proposed by him (McLaughlin, Rossman & McLeod, 1983, p.141). As regards to the role of consciousness in the development of L2, Schmidt (1990) disproved Krashen’s (1982) position, maintaining that there was no such thing as subconscious or subliminal learning, and that any learning involved certain level of consciousness starting from the lowest level of “noticing”.
8 Moreover, Bialystok (1978), though not directly contradicting Krashen’s hypothesis, proposed a model articulating the manner in which explicit linguistic knowledge might contribute to implicit linguistic knowledge. According to Bialystok (1978), learners might be able to transfer explicit linguistic knowledge to implicit domain through the use of formal practicing strategy such as drills and exercises so that the information could become automatic and be utilized in spontaneous communication (p.77).
On a similar note, Brown (1984, p.277) suggested that it would be wise to look at learning and acquisition as a continuum with numerous levels of compromises in between. Therefore, in this thesis, I will not use learning and acquisition to indicate different characteristics of learning.
Rather learning and acquisition or to learn and to acquire will be used interchangeably to denote
“an increase in knowledge and/or proficiency” (Lo14, p. 4) of the learners’ L2.
2.1.1.2 Informal language learning
The term informal language learning is often used to describe the learners’ acquisition of English through their contact with English in their daily life, and to contrast with the learning that occur in classroom or instructed settings (Benson, 2011). Therefore, to define informal learning, it would be useful to first look at the scope of classroom learning.
The definition of classroom can vary greatly from one country to another. In Nordic countries, such as Sweden or Finland, English language classroom is often understood as conventional classrooms (including free, extra language clubs organized in school at times) in conventional schools both public and private. Private tutors are often encountered as a “foreign” concept, and deemed to imply a situation where a student fails at school and requires extra support to catch up with his or her study. On the contrary, in many countries in Asia including Vietnam, it is not uncommon for people to learn English both in school and at English language centers or institutions (either government-run or privately run), or to have private tutors at home. These
9 additional classes, depending on contexts, can be viewed superior or inferior to school FL education by parents and educators (Rogers, 2004). In some extreme cases (e.g. urban areas in Vietnam), it is even deemed unorthodox or implies family’s weak financial condition that a student only attends English lessons at school.
Considering such diverse characteristics of classroom environment, Van Lier (1988, p.47) postulated a broad definition of a classroom as “the gathering, for a given period of time, of two or more persons (one of whom generally assumes the role of instructor) for the purpose of language learning”. Benson (2011), however, considered such definition to be too broad as it might cover many aspects which should be dealt with separately. According to Benson (2011), Van Lier’s definition implies that any learning with instruction involved should be treated as classroom language learning. This idea can be problematic given the complex nature of information sharing in informal public spaces such as the internet where anyone can take up a role of an instructor yet the characteristics of the instructor-learner interaction in this context is very much different from that of the classroom setting.
Another term which is commonly used in the field of classroom language learning research is instructed language learning. Loewen (2013, p. 2716) suggested that “the defining feature of L2 instruction is that there is an attempt by teachers, or instructional materials, to guide and facilitate the process of L2 acquisition”. In this definition, Loewen has cleared the physical distinction of a conventional classroom, and considered both teachers and instructional materials to take up the role of a language instructor. However, in doing so, Loewen has, at the same time, mingled individual self-instructed learning with interactive learning with teachers whose nature and dynamics are very distinct. Benson (2011) also pointed out that these two terms should not be treated as synonyms in certain cases, for instance, where classroom learning does not always require instructions, or that in the case of self-instructed materials, only the learner is present.
10 Based on these two definitions, the definition of classroom language learning or instructed language learning (and these two terms will be used interchangeably hereinafter) which this thesis is premised upon is narrowed down as follows: the gathering, often in institutional setting or at home, of at least 2 persons for a given period of time with one person explicitly assuming the role of a facilitator giving instructions or organizing tasks to guide and facilitate the process of L2 acquisition in accordance to certain designated programs or curriculums. This definition hence explicitly includes additional classes outside school and the case of private tutors at home while excluding the concept of self-instructed or self-directed learning with the use of instructional materials in any format. The latter will then belong to the concept of informal learning.
It is worth noting that opinions are divided in the research world about the characteristics of informal learning, i.e. whether learning should be incidental or intentional. The idea of incidental learning as opposed to intentional learning in determining the nature of informal learning has attracted lots of debates among researchers and language scholars. Hulstijn (2008, p. 357) pointed out the weak theories on which the term incidental learning was premised, and the lack of empirical evidence supporting such theoretical presumptions. Furthermore, researchers have raised attention to possibilities where incidental learning can become intentional learning, and vice versa. For example, Livingstone (2006, p. 217) referred to the “incidentally initiated informal learning processes” in which the learner began to acquire new knowledge or skill subliminally when engaging in certain activities, and then later turned their attention to and make effort to accomplish the skill or knowledge. Another situation could be like one mentioned by Benson (2011) - “self-directed naturalistic learning” (p. 11) - whereby the learner might have a specific goal in learning the target language but converted his/her attention to other things along the process, and might eventually do or learn something different from the original target.
11 Given such complication, Hulstijn (2013) challenges the significance of distinguishing incidental and intentional learning in applied linguistics. He considers the attempt to favor either form of learning by some authors pointless when most research done in the field has only dealt with short-term vocabulary acquisition. He further underscores that language proficiency is achieved and maintained through frequent contact and use, and not by how the language is acquired or learned in the first place.
Hulstijn’s (2013) contention resembles my idea of language learning, and will be used as the basis for this thesis. Instead of trying to distinguish the different characteristics of informal learning, I am interested in all sorts of learning activities that learners are engaged in, and which may contribute to their FL acquisition as the whole. Therefore, for the purposes of this thesis, I will adopt a definition of informal learning in its broad sense – a position similar to Benson’s (2011) - to cover all types of activities that learners are involved in beyond the classroom or instructed setting, and that may have effects on their learning and acquisition of English.
Another term which is becoming widely used and which has similar meaning to the concept of informal learning in this thesis is extramural English (EE) introduced by Sundqvist (2009).
Extramural English refers to “all types of English-related activities that learners come in contact with or are engaged in outside the walls of the English classroom, generally on a voluntary basis”
(Sundqvist & Sylvén, 2014, p. 4). Sundqvist (2009) intended for EE to have a broad meaning, i.e. emphasizing learners’ voluntary contact and involvement with English in out-of-class setting while not precluding learners’ deliberate intention to come in contact with English for learning purposes. In this sense, EE is synonymous with the definition of informal learning within the scope of this thesis, and thus EE and informal learning can be used interchangeably.
Two other popular terms out-of-school and out-of-class learning, which are used interchangeably as synonyms of informal learning in many studies (Grau, 2009; Jakonen, 2014; Sundqvist, 2011
12 to name a few), are clearly not synonymous within the scope of this study. Out-of-school will be understood to indicate any types of learning that happen outside the conventional schools, i.e.
including classroom learning at English centers or with private tutors. Out-of-class will be used to refer to learning that takes place out of the classroom or instructed setting, which covers the meaning of out-of-school. In this case, out-of-class can be treated as synonym of informal learning. The distinction between these two terms is important in this comparative study as the selection of the terms used in the questionnaire affected the students’ answers about their L2 learning experience and the interpretation of the results, which will be discussed in more details in the next section.
2.1.2 Previous research on informal learning of English 2.1.2.1 Research on informal learning of English around the world
Researchers have been advocating for ways to establishing links between language learners’ real life and classroom learning since early 1980s (Grau & Legutke, 2014, p.263). Indeed, in the field of applied linguistics and foreign language education, there have been urges by researchers for more research into the impact of instructed language learning on the learner’s out-of-class use of English (Higgin, 2009, p.402) and vice versa, i.e. effects of the extensive exposure to English in daily life on learners’ achievements in school (Sundqvist, 2009b, p.64; Sylvén, 2004, p.234, as cited in Sundqvist, 2011, p.106).
Research done over the years, the majority of which concentrated on learning habits of university students, has provided mixed results about the exciting yet idiosyncratic picture of students’
informal learning. Most strikingly, students around the world seemed to favor passive activities such as reading, listening, or watching.
13 Pickard (1996) investigated the out-of-class learning strategies by advanced English learners in Germany, and reported students to mostly engage in extensive reading and listening activities due to the limited availability of speaking opportunities in the country.
Two separate studies (Hyland, 2004; Wu, 2012) on the out-of-class English language learning of university students in Hong Kong rendered similar results. Students were reported to avoid face-to-face interaction and engage in more passive activities such as watching TV, reading and listening. Even though, most students acknowledged speaking to be beneficial to developing their proficiency in English, it was rarely employed. Similarly, Turkish students in Ekşi &
Aydin’s (2013) also stated non-face-to-face contact activities, such as listening to music and watching films, to be most frequently used to learn English.
Similarly, reading and listening activities were reported to be among the most frequent activities employed by Chinese students at a university in Australia in Pearson’s (2004) study despite the immersion in an English-speaking environment and abundant communicative opportunities in English. The top five out-of-class language activities done by the students to learn English were of receptive, but not productive, nature. Specifically, the most frequent activities in English engaged by the students were: (1) listening to/watching news on radio or TV; (2) studying in the library; (3) reading books magazines, or newspapers; (4) watching TV programs, videos or movies; and (5) listening to music or the radio. Pearson’s (2004) study was limited to the descriptive findings of the students’ out-of-class activities, and did not seek to investigate their connection with the students’ proficiency. However, it is noted in his findings that the choices of language learning activities for most students were influenced mostly by their desire to enter university, teachers’ advice and their proficiency levels. Pearson (2004) raised a concern about students with lower proficiency spending a substantial amount of time on activities (such as multiple-choice reading comprehension exercises) which might not be conducive for improvement.
14 On a similar note, in a survey on out-of-class activities by college students (n=316) in Taiwan (Shen et al., 2005), The researchers noticed a relation between the students’ learning habits and their entrance exam results where students who had higher scores tended to spend more time on out-of-class learning. Unlike the Chinese students in Pearson’s (2004) study, the Taiwanese in this study learned English mostly for their jobs in the future and out of the own interest. Hence, the activities reported to engage in frequently by the students were quite different. Many of the most popular activities were done online, i.e. watch English movies, reading English news online, writing emails in English, and study English online. Similar to Pearson’s (2004) concern, this study also questioned the effectiveness of self-study activities carried out by less competent learners especially with respect to writing and listening skills when the students reported to spend a substantial amount of time (~10 hours) to study English by themselves.
In light of the widespread of the Internet and online media, Toffoli and Sockett (2010, 2012) conducted a number of surveys and studies on university students’ online habits in relation to learning English in France (n=222 and n=45 respectively). It was found that the students listened to English more often than reading it, and the most common activities were watching American TV series and listening to on-demand music (rather than radio). There was also evidence of students’ practice of writing in interactive platforms such as instant messaging, social media, etc.
Despite the absence of information on the connection of such contact with English with the students’ language gains, the studies have partly captured an increasingly popular trend in learners’ informal learning of English in the world nowadays, i.e. online learning.
However, the use of electronic means or social media was unexpectedly completely absent from the activities reported by Japanese students to learn English (Doyle & Parrish, 2012). During the period of 2008 – 2011, Doyle and Parrish conducted a series of separate surveys with different groups of students (n=220 in total) in several universities in different cities in Japan about the ways Japanese students learned English after school. Data was collected with the same set of
15 open-ended questions, and was then triangulated by a close-response Linkert-scale questionnaire. The results obtained by both Doyle and Parrish strongly resembled. The Japanese students did not include electronic means or social media in their open-end response.
Nonetheless, when asked to rate a list of different activities in L2 learning in terms of “good ways” or “bad ways”, electronic and social media were listed among the good ways for language learning. From his data, Parrish identified another insight which resembled Pearson’s (2004) finding that more competent learners tended to take part in a wider range of learning activities.
Parrish, then, moved on to conduct another follow-up study with more advanced students to gain better insights in the activities employed by these learners. The students’ diary including their reflection on the actual use of English revealed that the students did mention involvement in a number of electronic and social media activities (e.g., watching news online, talking to siblings via Skype, and writing emails in English) after being introduced to them in the survey questionnaire. Yet, their preferred ways of learning were still more traditional, form-focused, and exam-orientated.
The diverse findings in the previous studies have provided teachers and educators with rich, up- to-date insights into the heterogeneity of learning habits and activities outside the classroom in different parts of the world. Still, certain important information is still missing from those studies. First, little is known on the connections between the out-of-class learning activities and students’ L2 proficiency and learning progress. Second, researches were conducted with adult learners whose cognitive ability and approaches to learning were substantially different from those of younger learners. The fact that young learners and teenagers learn a substantial amount of their English outside the classroom is by no mean a new phenomenon. A survey conducted in 8 European countries (including Finland) in 2002 revealed that most students claimed as much as nearly 50% of their English was acquired out of formal schooling with up to 35% through the means of media (Bonnet, 2002, p. 95). Surprisingly, the attention and amount of study done to
16 capture and explain this phenomenon, though increasing in the past years, is still much less than it deserves (Benson, 2011).
Among the few researches investigating this phenomenon, the studies carried out by Sundqvist and her colleagues are among the most extensive ones. For her doctoral dissertation, Sundqvist (2009a, 2009b, 2011) administered an extensive study investigating the various activities engaged by the 9th graders in Sweden (aged 15-16) (n=80) outside the instructed setting, and the relationship between those activities and the students’ oral proficiency and vocabulary size.
Several major findings were yielded in her study. First, a positive and statistically significant correlation was found between extramural English activities and the students’ vocabulary size as well as oral proficiency level. Detailed data analysis further showed that activities that required active participation by learners, including playing video games, surfing the internet, reading books, newspapers and magazines, were more important for the development of oral proficiency and vocabulary growth than activities in which the learners could be relaxed or passive such as listening to music, watching TV and watching films. Another interesting finding in her study was that there was a statistically significant difference in the types of activities engaged in by the boys and the girls. The activities the boys spent more time on were of productive nature, and especially conducive to oral proficiency and vocabulary building. It, hence, explained the stronger correlation between extramural English (“EE”) and the test scores for both oral proficiency and vocabulary for boys than for girls.
Based on her results and previous research, she went on to conclude that the amount of EE favorably affected oral proficiency and vocabulary development, while not eliminating the plausible, complex bidirectional relationship between these variables. She added a remark that more research should be done before a conclusive causal relationship between EE and students’
L2 acquisition was determined. However, the investigation on EE and the students’ background
17 rendered an important result that EE was independent from socioeconomic variables, which suggested a potential means for L2 learning for any student.
Inspired by the results from her doctoral study, Sundqvist and her colleague have extended their investigations on the EE activities with young learners from different age groups ranging from 10 to 16 years old, with a focus on the probable relationship between digital gaming habits and the students’ L2 vocabulary (Sundqvist & Sylvén, 2012b; Sundqvist & Sylvén, 2014; Sundqvist
& Wikström, 2015; Sylvén & Sundqvist, 2012). These studies showed that learners were already in substantial contact with English in their spare time activities from as early as 10 years old.
The results also yielded a recurrent pattern demonstrating a positive correlation between gaming habits with students’ motivation and L2 vocabulary, though more straightforward and stronger for boys than girls. The researchers, however, were cautious in their conclusion when warning the risk of simplistic generalization of the results due to the small research scales. They, instead, suggested that the observed connection between gameplay and L2 vocabulary should be treated as indicative of a possible explanation for students’ L2 proficiency, rather than conclusive evidence since there were apparently various factors that could account for students’ L2 acquisition such as leaners’ aptitude, motivation and individual needs to name a few.
The positive correlation between young learners’ access to and use of English in leisure activities on L2 proficiency and vocabulary acquisition were also recorded in some other studies. Kuppen (2010) scrutinized 11-year-old pupils’ incidental acquisition of English through their long-term informal contact with English in their leisure activities in the Flemish (Dutch-speaking) area in Belgium. The pupils (n=374) in her study had not received formal instruction hours in English.
The pupils were requested to fill in a survey about their contact with English and completed a proficiency test comprising tasks on vocabulary, oral translation from English to Dutch and vice versa, and grammar. The results revealed a linear regression between watching subtitled English television shows and movies and the results of both translation tests, and the effects was stronger
18 for girls than boys. Playing English computer games was also observed to correlate positively with the English-Dutch translation test results, though minimally. Kuppen’s (2010) findings demonstrated the benefits of long term consumption of English media, thus leading to implications for the potential use of certain means of media (e.g. subtitled TV, movies or clips) in the classroom to shorten the gap between formal and informal learning of English. Kuppen (2010), however, advised teachers to be mindful when considering applying these leisure activities in the formal organization of classroom learning given that the students’ primary motivation or intention in engaging those activities were for recreation purposes not learning, and there might be the risk of intruding on the students’ privacy.
Olsson’s (2011) small scale research featured a significant correlation between Swedish 16-year- old students’ (n=37) contact with EE and grades at school in Sweden. She specifically examined the effects of various EE activities on the students’ writing skill, and identified reading, writing and watching TV and films to be most favorable for the development of writing proficiency. The students with more EE exposure also demonstrated a wider vocabulary repertoire and better awareness of different registers in English. Schwarz (2013) found evidence of Austrian 13-15- year-old students’ (n=74) incidental acquisition of English vocabulary through listening to music but the amount of knowledge gain was rather marginal. She, nevertheless, concluded that even though the effect was small, music was still an enjoyable option for students to practice and expand their English vocabulary.
2.1.2.2 Research on informal learning of English in Finland
Language barrier has limited the literature review in this thesis to researches published in English only. However, from the literature summarized and mentioned in the studies that I have access to, I am under an impression that there has been very little research investigating teenagers and young learners’ informal language learning habits in Finland, and that the studies I have obtained are among the most prominent researches done in this area.
19 In Finland, early acquisition of English by pupils of primary school age before having English lessons at school was indicated in a study by Björklund (2000). There is indeed an increasing interest in the EE involved by Finnish students in their free time. However, researchers tended to pay more attention on the linguistic aspects and cultural awareness of students when engaging in the leisure activities in comparison with the knowledge taught at school. For example, Forsman (2000) reported that Swedish-Finnish students’ attitude towards language varieties and preference of American terminology over British was strongly influenced by their consumption of media outside the classroom. Similarly, Ranta’s (2010) and Sjöholm’s (2004) studies pointed out that both teachers and students were aware of the distinction between the types of English taught in school and that of real life, and that the two were generally kept separate from one another. However, Jakonen (2014) has provided evidence of content-language-integrated- learning (CLIL) students’ using daily conversational English in interactions with their peers in the classroom, and thus problematizing the notion of classroom to be a formal language learning setting where certain types of informal language might be considered inappropriate.
In recent years, several surveys within the scope of pro gradu theses have provided some interesting insights into the relationship between Finnish teenagers’ EE activities and their L2 proficiency. Linnakylä’s (2010) study with a group of 14-year-old Finnish pupils found that they were active multimedia consumers, and expressed high motivation to learn English out of school especially where it related directly to their interests and objectives. Even though the students reported to acquire a remarkable amount of English via multimedia means, the correlation tests which examined the relationship between various types of practice with the pupils’ English achievement at school proved the contrary. In fact, reading was found to have a strongest correlation with their achievement whereas their involvement with multimedia in English had limited impact on their grades in school. However, Linnakylä argued that schools and students had different criteria in assessing the students’ L2 knowledge, particularly where schools tended
20 to emphasize more formal structure and accuracy of language use whereas students tended to rate their abilities in accordance with communicative effectiveness. Therefore, she suggested that school achievement should not be the major driven factor determining the benefits and usefulness of students’ EE. Instead, students’ individual interests, needs and goals in language learning deserved more attention.
In his thesis, Uuskoski (2011) examined 16-year-old students’ (n=495) gaming habits and reported a positive correlation between playing computer games and the students’ achievements in school. His findings were in line with those found in studies done by Sundqvist and her colleagues. The results suggested that more frequent players performed better in English tests in school. Role-playing games appeared to associate with higher grade and according to the gamers, playing computer games was most beneficial for their L2 vocabulary growth.
For her master’s thesis, Ala-kyyny (2012) studied the role of English language music in adolescents’ L2 learning. The majority of participants (n=97) in her study reported to listen to music in English mostly due to its popularity in general. Most participants also thought that listening to English language music helped with their English to certain extent, particularly with respect to pronunciation, vocabulary, expressions and listening comprehension.
A more recent study by Vidgren (2014) shed light into the Finnish upper secondary school students’ out-of-school English learning. More than 60% of the respondents (n=244) claimed to acquire the majority of their English outside of school. Watching TV and films, browsing the Internet and listening to music were reported by the students to be the most beneficial activities for their English learning. Vocabulary knowledge was viewed to benefit the most from those activities, followed by reading and listening skills. It was discovered from the data that the time spent on informal learning activities and on homework or test preparation was negatively correlated, i.e. students with more involvement in EE activities did not spend much time and
21 efforts on homework tasks or study for tests. Moreover, the amount of time spent on out-of-class learning activities positively correlated with the students’ grades in school and their perceived level of difficulty of English. Specifically, students who took part more in EE activities tended to perform better in school, and English, thus, seemed to be easier for them.
The findings in these small-scale studies have provided important and interesting preliminary information for further, more extensive, and in-depth studies in learners’ informal learning and its effect on students’ L2 proficiency, motivation and life-long learning in the future.
As it can be clearly seen, most studies were restrained to secondary school pupils only. There is clearly a lack of research into younger learners’ informal language learning habits, which is the subject of the current study.
2.1.2.3 Research on informal learning of English in Vietnam
In Vietnam, to the best of my knowledge, there has not been any research or study recorded relating to young learners’ learning and acquisition of English in school and outside of school.
For purposes of one course in my current master’s degree program in February 2015, I interviewed 5 Vietnamese parents whose children were of primary school age about their children’s experience of learning and using English. It was interesting when all parents mentioned that they did not feel that the English programs at school provided their children with opportunities to learn English effectively. That probably explains why it is very common in big cities in Vietnam that parents send their children to extra English classes at private centers. Many parents even have their children attend English classes since as early as 3 years old.
Moreover, the parents in my interviews indicated that they noticed that their children acquired some English through watching cartoons and Youtube videos, singing songs or talking to their siblings or cousins in English. This has motivated me to carry out this research to gain more understanding of the children’s points of view on their own English learning experience.
22 Therefore, the current study may be considered one of the first attempts to provide preliminary ground for research in informal language learning in Vietnam.
2.1.3 Summary
Before concluding this section, it is essential to note that notwithstanding excessive exposure to the target language in the classroom and in real life, no effective and successful learning can be achieved without learners’ willingness and conscious attempts to practice the target language (Rubin, 1975; Stern, 1975 & Chamot (2005) as cited in Turula, 2016, p. 54) or to engage in meaningful communicative activities where the language is actively utilized (Milton, 2008, p.234). The findings in the previously mentioned studies about the effects of informal learning activities mainly implied certain positive effects of young learners’ exposure to EE on L2 acquisition. Little is known whether young leaners are conscious of the benefits from their out- of-school activities to their learning of English, and whether they have, to certain extent, already been utilizing these informal learning tools intentionally to improve their English skills.
It is for this reason that I was inspired to investigate the young learners’ perspectives of their own L2 learning experience and proficiency. Besides, the heterogeneous picture of learners’
informal learning found in different countries has intrigued me to conduct this comparative study.
2.2 Self-assessment and consciousness in informal language learning
Self-assessment is a concept whose importance in language learning has attracted much attention only since the 1980s (Oscarson, 2014, p.1), and is often considered to play an important role in the development of learner autonomy and life-long learning (Little, 2011, p. 26) – an essential trait that helps prepare leaners to respond effectively to the rapid changes in our current world (Oscarson, 1997, p. 176).
23 It is commonly agreed that self-assessment if used effectively by learners would improve learners’ awareness and understanding of the goals and expectations as well as their own progress in learning. The learners would then have a good idea of the kinds of supports and efforts required in attaining their objectives. Their sense of control over and positive attitude to learning will hence be fostered, and their motivation will be boosted. (Butler & Lee, 2010, p.8) There seems to be little disagreement about what the term “self-assessment” involves since much efforts have been poured in debates and discussions about its “validity and practicality”
(Oscarson, 2014, p.6). However, the ideas about self-assessments, though not explicitly expressed, appear to be divided and inconsistent (Tan, 2008, p. 16).
Some scholars view self-assessment in foreign language learning to be “an alternative and supplementary tool for assessing [L2] speakers’ ability” (Suzuki, 2015, p. 63). This approach to self-assessment thus spurred up loads of attempts from researchers to produce theoretical and empirical grounds that support self-assessment to work as an alternative to formal diagnostic tests (Ross, 1998, p. 1). Researches hitherto have yielded mixed results about the reliability and validity of self-assessment being a testing tool. Little (2015) posits that self-assessment when treated as a “self-rating” (p.129) limited to “the quantification and accuracy” (p. 126) of learners’
language skills will not produce practical and useful insights for pedagogical purposes (p.129).
Oscarson (1997, 2014) defines self-assessment as an internal assessment that comes from within the learner, and is based on the learner’s direct experience of his or her own ability. This learner- specific information together with objective, external testing and observation, will provide educators and teachers with a more comprehensive picture of the learners’ abilities. Approaching self-assessment from this perspective, Oscarson (1997, 2013) highlighted several important functions of self-assessment beyond a mere testing tool.
24 Apart from contributing to a more generative evaluation reflection of learners’ diverse learning experience and achievement as the whole, self-assessment serves well as an effective tool to gather insightful information in the field of qualitative research in education in addition to other techniques (Oscarson, 1997, p.175), and “a supplementary source of information for classroom teacher” (Oscarson, 2013, p. 8).
Taking the same stance, the present study relies on the students’ reflection on their learning experience to seek understanding of students’ different levels of consciousness with respect to the role of the out-of-class activities in their English acquisition. The different levels and forms of consciousness explained by Schmidt (1990) can serve as a helpful reference scale to scrutinize learners’ consciousness of their learning experience.
In his paper, Schmidt (1990) delineated and distinguished three types of consciousness, i.e.
“consciousness as awareness”, “consciousness as intention” and “consciousness as knowledge”
(p.131). Even though Schmidt’s theory about consciousness concerned more with the cognitive aspects of FLL, the distinction between “consciousness as awareness” and “consciousness as intention” provides a useful theoretical ground to examine and analyze the nature of students’
informal learning activities.
According to Schmidt (1990, p. 132), “consciousness as awareness” comprises three crucial levels: from perception to noticing and understanding. Noticing differs from perception in the extent of attention required and the subjective manner things are experienced. For example, when reading, a person is more aware of (notice) the content of the reading text rather than other elements in the surrounding, such as noises or furniture arrangements in the place. However, the person still perceives such external stimuli. Schmidt (1990, p. 132) noted further that something can be noticed but not necessarily be reported by the interested party, e.g. one may notice the difference between two wines yet is unable to describe the difference. Understanding, on the
25 other hand, involve both awareness of something as well as reflection upon such experience to be able to see the meaning of such experience. This level of consciousness is pre-conditioned for problem solving. These three levels of consciousness as awareness is deemed passive and in contrast with intentional behavior, which Schmidt (1990, p. 133) labeled as “consciousness as intention”. This term refers to deliberate attempts or actions that people do intentionally. Schmidt (1990, p.133) highlighted the importance of distinguishing “consciousness as awareness” and
“consciousness as intentional behavior” since “intentions may be either conscious or unconscious” and in many circumstances people gain awareness of things that they initially have no intention to notice.
Based on such scale, a number of scenarios can be contemplated. It is possible that leaners notice English in certain activities but do not ponder upon the benefits of such encounter or interaction with English on their knowledge, which is equivalent as “noticing” level. On the other hand, learners may somehow understand and see the impact of their frequent encounters with English on the development of their English proficiency but do not necessarily make use of such encounters systematically to enhance their English skills, which belongs to “understanding”
level. The most exciting scenario is where learners are fully aware of the benefits of EE in their daily life, and take initiatives to utilize such out-of-class activities for English learning purposes, which demonstrate learners’ conscious control over their learning process. Why is it important?
It is useful here to refer to Bialystok’s (1981) study on the effects of different conscious learning strategies on leaners’ language skills. In this acclaimed study, Bialystok (1981) found that learners’ conscious efforts to increase their use of the language in communicative situations i.e.
functional practicing (such as going to movies, reading books, or talking to native speakers) were essential for better performance on both receptive and productive tasks where attention to both meaning and form of the language was required. On the other hand, formal practicing (i.e.
activities that help learners improve their comprehension of the language code and structures,
26 such as drills and practice exercises in grammar books or online) only had limited effects on learners’ achievements in the target language. This means that formal practice stopped benefiting learners’ after learners had achieved certain level of proficiency. This probably explains the poor performance of learners who reported to rely heavily on formal practicing.
Bialystok’s (1981) findings provided a useful dimension to interpret and compare the Finnish and Vietnamese pupils’ self-reported ways to practice English beyond the classroom.
2.3 Conclusion
For foreign language educators and teachers to succeed in their quest to help language learners around the world prepare themselves well for effective, life-long learning, it is essential that they have useful informative insights into the learner’s perception and self-assessment of their own learning experiences. It is to state the obvious that eventually it is the learners who would make any learning work. Therefore, to do our roles well as educators and teachers, we need to know what the learners wish to achieve, what they believe to work for them and what might be critical in helping them to achieve their desired proficiency in a foreign language; how ready they are to become autonomous and make decisions about their learning independently; what may prevent them from achieving their goals, etc. There are so many questions that need answering.
Therefore, the researcher hopes to contribute a small step into the unknown with this research by starting with the pupils’ own perception and self-assessment of their learning experience and language abilities.
27 3 RESEARCH QUESTIONS
This small-scale study is carried out in connection with the joint research being conducted between the University of Eastern Finland (Joensuu, Finland) and Herzen State Pedagogical University of Russia (Saint Petersburg, Russia) on parents’ and children’s views on early foreign language education.
The learning of English of young learners has changed substantially over the year with the increasing omnipresence of English and widespread of the Internet and social media nowadays.
At the same time, incidents of learners having picked up a substantial amount of English beyond formal classroom instructions have been noticed in many non-English speaking countries. Therefore, it is time that we consider learners’ active participation in reporting and evaluating their own learning experience and the effectiveness of such experience (Oscarson, 2014, p.4; Little, 2011, p.26).
As the results, this small-scale study attempts to obtain certain insights into young learners’
perspectives of their own learning experience of English in Finland and Vietnam. Hence, the main research questions of this thesis are as follows:
1. How similar and different is the informal English learning experience of Finnish and Vietnamese 11 – 13 years old in respect of:
a. situations in real life where the pupils report to be in contact with English.
b. activities deliberately chosen by the pupils to practice and learn English.
2. How do the Finnish and Vietnamese 11-13-year-old pupils perceive the role of informal learning in their acquisition of English?
3. What elements of informal learning activities do the Finnish and Vietnamese pupils deem useful for English language classroom activities?
28 Since this is a comparative study, background variables are important to contextualize the results. Hence, several background variables and details (i.e. socio-economic backgrounds and education systems) are also discussed to provide contexts to the similarities or differences in the Finnish and Vietnamese pupils’ informal learning experience, as well as their perception of the significance of the informal learning in their learning of English. Hence, it will increase the understanding of the results.
In looking to answer the research question, I hope to obtain useful information for English teachers about the significance of informal learning in the pupils’ L2 acquisition. It is also hoped that the results will shed light on good informal learning activities that may be employed in the classroom to make in-school language learning experience more relevant to the pupils’
life.
