English Language Teaching and Linguistics Studies ISSN 2640-9836 (Print) ISSN 2640-9844 (Online) Vol. 5, No. 2, 2023 www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/eltls 12 Original Paper Factors Hindering Implementation of Communicative Language Teaching in Secondary Vocational Schools of Science and Engineering in China Jiaying Wang 1* 1 Guangzhou Information and Technology Vocational School, Guangzhou City, China * Jiaying Wang, E-mail: 973582085@qq.com Received: February 21, 2023 Accepted: March 9, 2023 Online Published: March 13, 2023 doi:10.22158/eltls.v5n2p12 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.22158/eltls.v5n2p12 Guangzhou Educational Planning Project+ Research on the Design Strategy of Interdisciplinary Integration Teaching Activities of English and Chinese in Secondary Vocational Schools Based on Subject Core Competencies─Taking Modern Communication Technology Application Major as an Example+202214988 (广州市教育科学规划课题+基于核心素养的中职英语和语文跨学科融合教学活动设计策略研究 ─以现代通信技术应用专业为例+202214988) Abstract Without the pressure to help more students to be competitive in College Entrance Examinations, teachers in secondary vocational schools are supposed to spend more time improving students’ communicative competence in English which is more practical for students’ future career. Although communicative language teaching (CLT) approach has been added to the syllabus for over 30 years in China, however, the implication of it is hardly witnessed in English classes in secondary vocational schools of science and engineering (SVSSEs). By handing out questionaries to eight English teachers and over 300 students in my school, four restraints which prevent the application of CLT in SVSSEs have been concluded which are knowledge restraints, restraints related to the educational system, restraints by students and restraints related to teachers’ attitude and concerns. Key words communicative language teaching, communicative competence, restraints www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/eltls English Language Teaching and Linguistics Studies Vol. 5, No. 2, 2023 13 Published by SCHOLINK INC. 1. Introduction Teaching English as a foreign language in secondary vocational school is quite a different experience compared with that in high school where all the students have the motive to do well in English to pass the College Entrance Examination. Students in secondary vocational school are always struggling with English, especially those majoring in science and engineering. They prefer to learn work-related skills instead of learning theoretical knowledge. Therefore, as a general fundamental course, English course is quite painstaking for them especially when the lectures are still given in those traditional approaches like Grammar-Translation Method (GTM). As a matter of fact, most of the students in Secondary Vocational School of Science and Engineering (SVSSE) will become blue-collar workers after graduation, so Communicative Competence (CC) in English would be a priority for them rather than focusing too much on forms. The approach of Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) approach has been emphasized in the syllabus for more that 30 years in China. Adamson (2004, p. 172) points out the exact year when CLT led to a new syllabus: A more communicative approach was seen by the CTMRI as the way to improving what Hymes (1972) terms the “communicative competence” of students, and a new syllabus was to be drafted accordingly in 1987 (although it was not published until 1993). However, “many studies have reported that CLT has undergone a tough time as teachers attempt to live it in China” (Li, 1997; McPherron, 2008; Sun & Cheng, 2002, cited in Wei et al., 2018). As we all know, the assessment in high school in China is still examination-oriented, which may justify why it is difficult to promote CLT in high school, whereas in SVSSE, learners don’t need to take the College Entrance Examination, then what are the contributing factors? This essay focuses on exploring some relevant constraints preventing the application of CLT in SVSSE by doing survey with teachers and students in Guangzhou Information and Technology Vocational School (GZITVS), which is the largest secondary vocational school in Guangzhou with five campuses located in four districts of Guangzhou. 2. Theoretical Framework 2.1 Communicative Competence (CC) CC can be understood as the goal of implementing CLT. To have a better understanding of CC, we can compare it with Grammatical Competence (GC), which focuses on grasping the grammar rules of a language but not the application of language in different meaningful situations or contexts. “Communicative competence is defined as the ability to interpret and enact appropriate social behaviors, and it requires the active involvement of the learner in the production of the TL” (Canale & Swain, 1980; Celce-Murcia et al., 1995; Hymes, 1972, cited in Brandl, 2008, p. 5). Richards (2005, p.4) elaborated the four aspects of CC:  knowing how to use language for a range of different purposes and functions www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/eltls English Language Teaching and Linguistics Studies Vol. 5, No. 2, 2023 14 Published by SCHOLINK INC.  knowing how to vary our use of language according to the setting and the participants (e.g., knowing when to use formal and informal speech or when to use language appropriately for written as opposed to spoken communication)  knowing how to produce and understand different types of texts (e.g., narratives, reports, interviews, conversations)  knowing how to maintain communication despite having limitations in one’s language knowledge (e.g., through using different kinds of communication strategies) For students of SVSSE with weak English foundation, CC matters much more than GC for their future career. And only authentic communicative activities can promote language learning and help the learners apply what they learn into daily work and life. Therefore, how to cultivate their CC despite their limitation in language knowledge is the core of teaching objectives. 2.2 Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) In China, English is taught as a foreign language. It is much more difficult to improve English proficiency in an EFL environment than in an ESL environment because for EFL learners, they don’t have the daily-life environment to apply the target language. So, creating a communicative environment in the classroom even in the campus for students to develop their CC should be the priority for the EFL classes. Although many teachers claim they adopt communicative approaches, not all of them really understand CLT. It is not easy to define CLT since it may be a mixture of different approaches. Richards (2005) divided CLT into two main categories: Process-based CLT, which focuses on classroom-process, and product-based CLT, which deals with course design. The former category includes content-based instruction and task-based instruction, while the latter includes text-based instruction and competency-based instruction (Richards, 2005). You may be confused by so many different types of CLT and frustrated when it comes to decide whether your teaching approach belong to CLT, Richards and Rodgers (2014, p. 105) provides five principles for you to follow:  Learners learn a language through using it to communicate.  Authentic and meaningful communication should be the goal of classroom activities.  Fluency is an important dimension of communication.  Communication involves the integration of different language skills.  Learning is a process of creative construction and involves trial and error. Wei (2011, cited in Wei et al., 2018) pinpoints four key version of features for you to distinguishing CLT from other language teaching approach:  Communicative classroom activities,  Learner-centered approach  Authentic teaching materials  Error toleration. www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/eltls English Language Teaching and Linguistics Studies Vol. 5, No. 2, 2023 15 Published by SCHOLINK INC. Harmer (2015, p, 58) created a “communication continuum” shown in Figure 2.2.1 for teachers to design communicative activities. Figure 2.2.1 The Communication Continuum In communicative activities, students’ CC is fostered unconsciously as they manage to fix the ‘information gap’ between themselves and the interlocutors. Therefore, they concentrate more on the content by using various skills and knowledge of the target language instead of focusing on the form. Teachers can either be facilitators or participants but not process intervener; the task materials for the students will not describe specific forms for students to follow either. The ultimate purpose of those activities aims to replicate authentic communication. 2.3 Review of Relevant Research in Asian Language Classroom My research is developed from Some articles focusing on barriers of implementing CLT in Asian countries. Some explore the general situation in Asian countries. For example, Littlewood (2007) pointed out the key concerns of implementation of CLT in East Asian classrooms: classroom management, teachers’, and students’ avoidance of English due to lack of confidence and proficiency, minimal demand on English proficiency, incompatibility with public assessment requirements and conflict with traditional educational values. Some conducted research covering primary school, middle school and high school in a specific Asian country (Huang, 2011; Mehtab, 2012; Jin, 2019). Some searched for the possible challenges of CLT application only for high schools in an Asian country (Whiteheard, 2017; Afnesha & Suparmi, 2020). Some explored the obstacles in universities (Vongxay, 2013; Sultana, 2015). And some carried out surveys on a specific group of teachers (Cook & Gulliver, 2014). All of them discovered similar difficulties and challenges relevant with teachers, students and the educational systems when implementing CLT. For example, teachers’ inadequacy of English proficiency and misunderstanding of CLT, too many students sharing the same L1 in a class with different English levels, standardized written paper assessment, time cost of preparation for CLT materials and constraints from traditional beliefs. All the above-mentioned articles designed questionnaire only for teachers. However, since some barriers are contributed by students, it would be advisable for us to get to know the students’ perception and reconcile the results with teachers’ perspective. What’s more, so few people carried out research to www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/eltls English Language Teaching and Linguistics Studies Vol. 5, No. 2, 2023 16 Published by SCHOLINK INC. find out the obstacles for CLT application in secondary vocational school for EFL learners except Du (2012) who attributes difficulties of implementation of CLT to teachers, students and text materials. She figures out that with low English grades, students in secondary vocational school don’t think English is useful and show no interest. Since the questionnaire for the teachers in her article is so simple that she only locates two main teachers related problems: lack of sufficient English proficiency and training on CLT. 2.4 Significance of the Study This thesis aims to figure out:  Whether those difficulties or challenges for CLT implementation mentioned in those literature reviewed in other kinds of school in Asian countries also exist in secondary vocational school in China?  Whether those students-related disincentives from teachers’ perspective reflect the real situation of students? 3. Study 3.1 Study Context: The EFL Context in SVSSE in China According to the reform of Chinese education system in recent years, half of the students will be enrolled into vocational school after middle school, while in the past only 30% will explore a different path other than studying for universities. With the increased number of the enrolment, the class size has been increasing to 45 to 60 students per class, therefore students must squeeze between rows of desks to walk around and there is no space for classroom activities. As a general foundation course for the non-English majors in vocational school, there are only two periods (80 minutes in total) of English each week. And for those who choose to major in science and engineering, they never do well in subjects of liberal arts before, such as Chinese and English. More than half of the students in GZITVS don’t pass English examination in high school entrance examination. In China, English is a foreign language instead of a second language, so students neither have an English-speaking environment to practice in daily life nor feel the pressure to grasp it. However, the New English Curriculum Standard for Secondary Vocational School (2020) (NECSSVS (2020)) was released in 2020 and emphasizes four core competencies for the first time: Language communication competency in workplace, perception of differences in thinking, cross-cultural understanding competency and competency of independent learning, which fall into the criteria of CC. We can see that CLT is the exact approach to facilitate the cultivation of those four core competencies. A new set of national textbooks was published last year based on the NECSSVS (2020) with different modules related to daily life and work. However, the assessment in most secondary vocational schools in China still relies on written tests. Vocabulary and grammar still take up the most percentage and speaking is not tested. www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/eltls English Language Teaching and Linguistics Studies Vol. 5, No. 2, 2023 17 Published by SCHOLINK INC. 3.2 Methodology This section focuses on elaborating the research design, information of participants and research instruments. 3.2.1 Research Design This research mainly adopts quantitative method since we can collect more data in a short time and avoid subjective influences which may be caused by interviews. Anonymous e-questionnaires were sent to teachers in GZITVS and each of them sent the questionnaire for students to one of their classes randomly. Anonymous questionnaire could encourage the participation, especially for students majoring in science and engineering who are not so communicative. What’s more, most of the students are under 18 years old, so we asked the headmasters of the above-mentioned eight classes to forward the parent-consent form on a mini-program (Appendix III) to the parents’ We chat groups for them to sign to agree for their kids to answer the questionnaire. 3.2.2 Participants The eight teachers are all English teachers in GZITVS. Their age distribution is as shown in Table 3.2.2.1, and seven of them are over 30 years old, which means that most of the teachers in our school are experienced teachers with more than eight years of teaching practice. Moreover, 62.5% of them are postgraduates (Figure 3.2.2.1). 10 years ago, most of the teachers in our school were English majors with a bachelor’s degree and even non-English majors could teach English in our school, that’s why there are two teachers who are neither English majors nor TESOL-related majors among the eight participants. However, in recent years, a postgraduate degree has become a condition for new recruits. Therefore, most of the teachers in our school are competent for teaching English to students of secondary vocational either in educational degree or working experience. Table 3.2.2.1 Age Distribution of the 8 Teachers Age Group No. of Teachers Under 30 1 30-39 3 40-50 4 Total 8 www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/eltls English Language Teaching and Linguistics Studies Vol. 5, No. 2, 2023 18 Published by SCHOLINK INC. Figure 3.2.2.1 Educational Degree of the 8 Teachers Each of the above-mentioned teachers randomly selected one class to hand over e-questionnaires for students. The student-participants are freshmen or in their second year of study and major in Telecommunication, Computer and Internet, Urban Rail Transportation etc. There are about 40 to 55 students in each class (the response rate is more than 85%), and 313 students have completed the questionnaire. 76% of the participants are male since most students in SVSSE are male. The reasons why I could not get a 100% response from all the students from the eight classes is that there was a student infected with Covid-19 before the survey and the whole school were under a lock-down for a week, consequently, those students quarantined in the dormitory didn’t receive the e-questionnaire. Although I am one of the English teachers in this school, my role in administering the questionnaire was limited to designing, providing clear instructions and collecting data without any interference to the subjects. 3.2.3 Instruments The reason why I adopted questionnaire as the research instrument can be illustrated by Walker (1985, p. 91, cited in Abahussain, 2016): On the other hand, it offers considerable advantages in administration - it presents an even stimulus, potentially to large numbers of people simultaneously, and provides the investigator with an easy (relatively easy) accumulation of data. Several types of questions are included in the two questionnaires: multiple choice and dichotomous questions as well as rating scales (closed questions). “The closed questions, which call for short, check-mark responses, were used because they are easy to fill out, take little time, keep the respondents on the subject, are relatively objective, and are fairly easy to sort and analyze” (Best & Kahn, 1989). Since this research was conducted during a serious outbreak of pandemic in Guangzhou, so online questionnaire was adopted and subjects could just scan a QR code to answer the questionnaire by cellphone, which is quite participant-friendly. Therefore, larger sample can be reached in a short time. Moreover, since some statements in the teacher’s questionnaire are more related to personal viewpoints, answering it in an anonymous way would encourage the response rate from teachers. The Structure of Teachers’ Questionnaire: The questionnaire of the Status Quo and Difficulties of CLT Implementation in Secondary Vocational School (Appendix I) adapted from Mehta (2012) was administered. There are 66 items in the modified questionnaire which is divided into four parts. A www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/eltls English Language Teaching and Linguistics Studies Vol. 5, No. 2, 2023 19 Published by SCHOLINK INC. 5-point Likert-scale ranging from strongly agree to strongly disagree is adopted from Part III to Part IV for participants to choose one response from the scales provided. SA stands for strongly agree (5), A means agree (4), N equals to neutral (3), D shows your disagreement (2) and SD expresses strongly disagreement (1). Part I contains 6 items related to the subjects’ basic background information: age, years of teaching, educational degree, university of undergraduate, graduate school, average number of classes each term, and average number of students in each class. Part II consists of 3 sections (the third section is a 5 Likert Scale) getting to know the subjects’ actual practice in classroom. Part III contains 42 items investigating teachers’ opinions about difficulties and challenges on CLT application related to the educational system, students or the teachers’ attitude and concern. Part IV is composed of 15 items which are designed to collect information of what support or resources teachers want to receive in order to facilitate the practice of CLT. The Structure of Students’ Questionnaire: The students’ questionnaire is modified from Du (2012) to reconcile with those student-related difficulties and challenges from teachers’ perspective. Part I keeps record of some basic information of the students: gender, age, class and major. Part II consists of 16 items. Item one to four gets to know students’ opinions of the importance of English. Item five to eleven investigate their interest in English, their motivation in class participation, as well as whether they have confidence in learning English well and why. Item 12 to item 13 are designed to know students’ feeling about speaking in English. Item 14 to item 15 is about classroom activities. And item 16 is about their preference of assessment method. 4. Data Analysis 4.1 Teacher’s Actual Practice in Classroom Based on Figure 4.1.1 with from section two of Part II in the questionnaire (Appendix I), we can see that most of the classroom practice is dominated by GTM, which can be reflected in their choices. 100% of them explain language points and the meaning of new words (B), and 87.5% of them translate the new words and texts into Chinese(C) for the students, although the actual classroom practice of some teachers may be mixed with some classroom activities (E). Moreover, based on Table 4.1.1 which summarizes the frequency of implementations of different teaching methods from a 5-point Likert scale matrix (Appendix I), we can see that the mean for the grammar translation (3.88) is only second to Audio-lingual method. www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/eltls English Language Teaching and Linguistics Studies Vol. 5, No. 2, 2023 20 Published by SCHOLINK INC. Figure 4.1.1 What Teachers Normally Do in Class Table 4.1.1 Teaching Methods Implemented in the Subjects’ Classes Methods\Frequency A O S R N Mean Grammar translation 1(12.5%) 5(62.5%) 2(25%) 0(0%) 0(0%) 3.88 Audio-lingual method 2(25%) 4(50%) 2(25%) 0(0%) 0(0%) 4 Direct method 1(12.5%) 3(37.5%) 4(50%) 0(0%) 0(0%) 3.63 Communicative Language Teaching 0(0%) 4(50%) 4(50%) 0(0%) 0(0%) 3.5 Silent Way 0(0%) 0(0%) 4(50%) 3(37.5%) 1(12.5%) 2.38 Total Physical Response 1(12.5%) 0(0%) 2(25%) 4(50%) 1(12.5%) 2.5 Total 5(10.42%) 16(33.33%) 18(37.5%) 7(14.58%) 2(4.17%) 3.31 In order to clarify whether teachers who claim to mainly adopt B and C in Figure 4.1.1 know they are applying GTM or not, let’s set option B and option C as X and GTM as Y to have a cross-over analysis. 75% of them who adopt the practice of B claim to always or often apply GTM and the nearly 72% for choice C. Therefore, we can conclude that most of the teachers are still using traditional teaching approaches such as GTM instead of CLT which they are conscious of. Next, we should try to find out www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/eltls English Language Teaching and Linguistics Studies Vol. 5, No. 2, 2023 21 Published by SCHOLINK INC. the reasons. Table 4.1.2 Cross-over Analysis Between Figure 4.1.1 and Table 4.1.1 X\Y A O S R N Total Mean B. Explain language points and the meanings of new words and sentences; 1(12.5%) 5(62.5%) 2(25%) 0(0.00%) 0(0.00%) 8 3.88 C.Translate the new words and texts into Chinese; 1(14.29%) 4(57.14%) 2(28.57%) 0(0.00%) 0(0.00%) 7 3.86 From the item 15 and 16 in students’ questionnaire (Appendix II) you many confirm that that students also acknowledge that teachers often using non-CLT teaching methods like taking turns to answer questions (70.93%), translating texts and sentences (67.09%) and taking notes (63.26%) (Figure 4.1.2). However, those activities that most students prefer (games (60.06%), role-play and storytelling) indicate that CLT would be more suitable for students in SVSSE (Figure 4.1.3). Figure 4.1.2 Which Classroom Activities Teachers Often Adapt in Class from Students’ Perspective www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/eltls English Language Teaching and Linguistics Studies Vol. 5, No. 2, 2023 22 Published by SCHOLINK INC. Figure 4.1.2 Which Classroom Activities Students Prefer in English Class 4.2 Restraints on CLT This part focus on analyzing data in Part III collected of the questionnaire to find out whether those common restraints for implementation of CLT in Asian countries summarized from the literature reviewed plus some obstacles perceived by the author from teaching experience are also considered to be the barriers for teachers in SVSSE. 4.2.1 Knowledge Restraints The first 12 items in the questionnaire (Appendix I) are designed to survey the teachers’ knowledge of CLT. Since statement 2,8,10,11 and 12 are negative, we should interpret their means in the opposite way. We can see that the means for most positive statements are higher than 3.5, while those for most negative ones are lower than 3 (Table 4.2.1.1). Therefore, we can be assured that most of the subjects have some basic knowledge about CLT. However, for the negative statement 2, 37.5% of the teachers choose neutral which means they are not sure about the answer, and even 12.5% agree with it, which means half of the participants don’t master the correct scale to handle student’s mistakes during communicative activities. The same problem applies to statement 8 where half express uncertainty while a quarter agree that CLT only involves group or pair work. We can infer the same problem from statement 12. Moreover, we can see that there is at least one teacher choosing neutral for 11 statements out of the 12. Therefore, we can conclude that, at least some teachers don’t have clear understanding of CLT due to lack of training or teaching practice. We can name it knowledge restraints. Table 4.2.1.1 Teachers’ Knowledge of CLT Statements\Options SA A N D SD Mean 1.In drill type activities, the mistakes or errors students made 0(0%) 2(25%) 5(62.5%) 1(12.5%) 0(0%) 3.13 www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/eltls English Language Teaching and Linguistics Studies Vol. 5, No. 2, 2023 23 Published by SCHOLINK INC. can be left unattended. 2.During a communicative activity, whenever you find a mistake or error, no matter in what sense, grammatical or cultural or any other aspect, you stop the student and correct it. 0(0%) 1(12.5%) 3(37.5%) 2(25%) 2(25%) 2.38 3.CLT is student/learner-centred approach. 3(37.5%) 4(50%) 1(12.5%) 0(0%) 0(0%) 4.25 4.CLT emphasizes appropriacy over accuracy. 0(0%) 7(87.5%) 1(12.5%) 0(0%) 0(0%) 3.88 5. CLT emphasizes communication in a second language (L2). 0(0%) 7(87.5%) 1(12.5%) 0(0%) 0(0%) 3.88 6. CLT relies heavily on speaking and listening skills. 0(0%) 4(50%) 4(50%) 0(0%) 0(0%) 3.5 7. CLT requires teachers to have a high proficiency in English. 0(0%) 5(62.5%) 3(37.5%) 0(0%) 0(0%) 3.63 8. CLT involves only group work or pair work. 0(0%) 2(25%) 4(50%) 2(25%) 0(0%) 3 9. CLT requires higher knowledge of the target language culture. 1(12.5%) 6(75%) 1(12.5%) 0(0%) 0(0%) 4 10. CLT involves no grammar teaching. 0(0%) 1(12.5%) 1(12.5%) 5(62.5%) 1(12.5%) 2.25 11. CLT involves teaching speaking only. 0(0%) 1(12.5%) 0(0%) 4(50%) 3(37.5%) 1.88 12. CLT is basically an ESL methodology, not EFL. 0(0%) 1(12.5%) 4(50%) 3(37.5%) 0(0%) 2.75 Total 4(4.17%) 41(42.71%) 28(29.17%) 17(17.71 %) 6(6.25%) 3.21 4.2.2 Restraints Related to Educational System Item13 to 21 in Part III (Appendix I) investigate to what extent do some expected factors related to educational system impede the application of CLT in SVSSE. All the means (Table 4.2.2.1) for the www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/eltls English Language Teaching and Linguistics Studies Vol. 5, No. 2, 2023 24 Published by SCHOLINK INC. statements are over 3 which means they are all recognized as contributing factors. And the top three factors are statement 16, 15 and 19 which are about class size, traditional educational view and the inapplicability of western educational assumptions in Asian culture. Statement 14 and 21 reflect that the textbooks are not CLT-related and are far above students’ English level. What’s more, class meeting time has been really an agony for English teachers in secondary vocational school for many years since there are only two periods (80 minutes) of English per class per week, and teachers must rush to teach all the language points in the textbooks which are beyond the student’s English level. Moreover, written tests are still dominant. However, according to student’s questionnaire (Appendix II), the preferred assessment are texts simulating communicative situation of daily work and life. All in all, the survey confirms that those 9 factors attribute to challenges for teachers in SVSSE in China to adopt CLT in classroom. Table 4.2.2.1 Quantitative Data of Restraints Related to Educational System Statements \Options SA A N D SD Mean 13. There is a lack of enough support 0(0%) 4(50%) 2(25%) 2(25%) 0(0%) 3.25 14. I think the lack of authentic materials and CLT-related textbooks make CLT’s implementation difficult. 0(0%) 5(62.5%) 1(12.5%) 2(25%) 0(0%) 3.38 15. Traditional view on teachers’ and learners’ role is not compatible with CLT. 0(0%) 6(75%) 2(25%) 0(0%) 0(0%) 3.75 16. Classes are too large for the effective use of CLT. 2(25%) 6(75%) 0(0%) 0(0%) 0(0%) 4.25 17. I think the class meeting time is too short for me to conduct CLT activities. 0(0%) 4(50%) 1(12.5%) 3(37.5%) 0(0%) 3.13 18. Grammar-based examinations have a negative impact on the use of CLT. 0(0%) 4(50%) 1(12.5%) 3(37.5%) 0(0%) 3.13 19. Western educational assumptions are not suitable within Asian contexts. 3(37.5%) 1(12.5%) 3(37.5%) 1(12.5%) 0(0%) 3.75 20. The lack of English 0(0%) 3(37.5%) 2(25%) 3(37.5%) 0(0%) 3 www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/eltls English Language Teaching and Linguistics Studies Vol. 5, No. 2, 2023 25 Published by SCHOLINK INC. teaching equipment hinders me from using CLT. 21.The textbooks are far too above our student’s English level, so it’s impossible to implement CLT based on the tasks in the textbooks. 1(12.5%) 3(37.5%) 2(25%) 2(25%) 0(0%) 3.38 Total 6(8.33%) 36(50%) 14(19.44%) 16(22.22%) 0(0%) 3.44 Figure 4.2.2.1 Which Assessment Method for English Students Prefer 4.2.3 Restraints by Students Next, we will reconcile teachers’ perspective (Appendix I) of those barriers caused by the students themselves with students’ answers from the questionnaire for students (Appendix II). Item 22 to 32 of the questionnaire explore students related factors from teachers’ perspective. Based on the means in Table 4.2.3.1, most of the teachers agree with the following 11 student-related factors. The top five factors’ teachers agree the most are: statement 26, 30, 22, 27, 31 (whose means are all over 4). Table 4.2.3.1 Quantitative Data of Restraints by Students from Teachers’ Perspective Statement\Options SA A N D SD Mean 22. My students don’t think being able to communicate in English is important in their daily life 2(25%) 5(62.5%) 0(0%) 1(12.5%) 0(0%) 4 23. My students’ low English 1(12.5%) 6(75%) 0(0%) 1(12.5%) 0(0%) 3.88 www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/eltls English Language Teaching and Linguistics Studies Vol. 5, No. 2, 2023 26 Published by SCHOLINK INC. proficiency hinders me from using CLT. 24. My students’ passive or indifferent attitude toward English learning hinders me from teaching English communicatively. 0(0%) 5(62.5%) 2(25%) 1(12.5%) 0(0%) 3.5 25. My students’ unwillingness to speak or ask questions in English hinders me from teaching communicatively. 1(12.5%) 3(37.5%) 2(25%) 2(25%) 0(0%) 3.38 26. When having group discussion, my students tend to communicate in Chinese. 2(25%) 5(62.5%) 1(12.5%) 0(0%) 0(0%) 4.13 27. When asking my students questions in English, they usually answer me in single word, two-word phrase or even in Chinese. 3(37.5%) 3(37.5%) 1(12.5%) 1(12.5%) 0(0%) 4 28. My students’ heterogeneous English proficiency is a problem for practicing CLT activities. 1(12.5%) 5(62.5%) 2(25%) 0(0%) 0(0%) 3.88 29. My students’ heterogeneous English skills (listening, speaking, reading and writing) make the CLT’s implementation difficult in my classroom 1(12.5%) 4(50%) 3(37.5%) 0(0%) 0(0%) 3.75 30. When carrying out CLT activities, some of my students engage actively while some just sit to idle their time. 2(25%) 5(62.5%) 1(12.5%) 0(0%) 0(0%) 4.13 31. When carrying out CLT activities, the interactions are usually dominated by one or two able students. 2(25%) 4(50%) 2(25%) 0(0%) 0(0%) 4 32. My students’ putting pressure on me to teach English based 0(0%) 4(50%) 2(25%) 2(25%) 0(0%) 3.25 www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/eltls English Language Teaching and Linguistics Studies Vol. 5, No. 2, 2023 27 Published by SCHOLINK INC. on exams hinders me from using CLT. Total 15(17.05%) 49(55.68%) 16(18.18%) 8(9.09%) 0(0%) 3.81 However, there are three differentiations which are not mentioned in the literature reviewed. The first one is that teachers believe that students don’t think communication ability in English is important in their daily life (item 22 in Table 4.2.3.1) while 80.19% of the 313 students consider English to be important. 73.16% of the students realize the importance of English in job hunting and 74.76% of them consider it to be useful in future job (item one to three in Appendix II). Figure 4.2.3.1 The Importance of Learning English From students’ Perspective Figure 4.2.3.2 Whether English Is Helpful for Job Hunting from Students’ Perspective www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/eltls English Language Teaching and Linguistics Studies Vol. 5, No. 2, 2023 28 Published by SCHOLINK INC. Figure 4.2.3.3 Whether English is Useful in Future Job from Students’ Perspective Figure 4.2.3.4 Whether Students Lack Motivation in Classroom Activities The second interesting point deserves our attention is that teachers are so annoyed that some students refuse to participate in classroom activities and the interactions are dominated by one or two students (item 30 and 31 in Table 4.2.3.1), whereas only 34.19% of the students admit that and 34.5% are not sure whether they are active or not (Figure 4.2.3.4). Let’s set students’ responses to item “Do you lack motivation in the classroom activities?” (Appendix II) as X, and their responses to item 8 “I don’t want to take part in classroom activities because my English is poor.” (Appendix II) as Y. We can infer from Table 4.2.3.2 that, 70.09% of the students admitting that they are not active in classroom activities owe it to their poor level of English, while 70.41% of those who are active in classroom activities don’t think poor English level is the factor preventing them from participating in classroom activities. Therefore, students’ perception of their own English level affects their activeness in classroom activities which become obstacles for CLT application. www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/eltls English Language Teaching and Linguistics Studies Vol. 5, No. 2, 2023 29 Published by SCHOLINK INC. Table 4.2.3.2 Correlation between Students’ Lack of Motivation in Classroom Activities and Their Perception of Their English Level X\Y A.True B.Not true C.Don’t know Total A.True 75(70.09%) 23(21.50%) 9(8.41%) 107 B.Not true 15(15.31%) 69(70.41%) 14(14.29%) 98 C.Don’t know 42(38.89%) 31(28.70%) 35(32.41%) 108 The last differentiation can be discovered from statement 25 to 27 in Table 4.2.3.1 which complain that’s students are unwilling to speak in English or response in Chinese. The reasons could be explained by the data from students’ questionnaire: firstly, 25.56% of them feel pretty much uneasy and 57.16% of them feel a little uneasy when speaking English (Figure 4.2.3.5). Secondly, when it comes to question 13 (Are you afraid of making mistakes while speaking English?), only 17.25% of them choose “no” (Figure 4.2.3.6). Therefore, we can conclude that students’ uneasy feeling and fear for making mistakes instead of unwillingness are the actual factors hindering the teachers from implementing CLT. Figure 4.2.3.5 Students’ Uneasiness When Speaking English Figure 4.2.3.6 Students’ Fear for Making Mistakes When Speaking English www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/eltls English Language Teaching and Linguistics Studies Vol. 5, No. 2, 2023 30 Published by SCHOLINK INC. 4.2.4 Restraints Related to Teachers’ Attitude and Concerns This part of questionnaire focuses on teachers’ attitude towards CLT and their concern of implementation. Statement 34,39,40,41and 42 are negative (Table 4.2.4.1), so we should interpret their means in the opposite way. It seems teachers in GZITVS don’t hold those negative attitude towards CLT as concluded from the literature reviewed, although one or two of them choose neutral which may indicate that training may be needed for some teachers. From statement 33 and 36, we can see that teachers’ top concerns are lack of instruments to assess CC and CLT-related training. They also concern about their oral proficiency, group management ability and insufficient English usage knowledge (item 37 to 39). Table 4.2.4.1 Difficulties & Challenges Related to Teachers’ Attitude and Concerns Statement\Option SA A N D SD Mean 33. There is a lack of effective and efficient instruments to assess communicative competence. 1(12.5%) 4(50%) 1(12.5%) 2(25%) 0(0%) 3.5 34. I don’t see the need to teach my students communicatively because being able to communicate in English is not important in their daily life. 0(0%) 1(12.5%) 2(25%) 4(50%) 1(12.5 %) 2.38 35. When doing group or pair activities, classroom management is a problem to me. 0(0%) 4(50%) 3(37.5%) 1(12.5%) 0(0%) 3.38 36. So far, most of the workshops I have attended are not CLT-related. 2(25%) 2(25%) 2(25%) 2(25%) 0(0%) 3.5 37. My lack of oral communication proficiency hinders me from using CLT. 1(12.5%) 3(37.5%) 2(25%) 2(25%) 0(0%) 3.38 38. My lack of knowledge related to appropriate English usage hinders me from teaching English communicatively. 1(12.5%) 2(25%) 1(12.5%) 4(50%) 0(0%) 3 39. Since oral proficiency is not 0(0%) 1(12.5%) 2(25%) 4(50%) 1(12.5 2.38 www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/eltls English Language Teaching and Linguistics Studies Vol. 5, No. 2, 2023 31 Published by SCHOLINK INC. tested at the school I teach, it won’t be necessary to teach English communication ability. %) 40. As a teacher, I should be the dominator in my classroom; therefore, I do not allow any learner-centered activities advocated by CLT. 0(0%) 0(0%) 1(12.5%) 5(62.5%) 2(25%) 1.88 41. I believe the implementation of CLT will lead to the failure in teaching reading and writing. 0(0%) 0(0%) 2(25%) 3(37.5%) 3(37.5 %) 1.88 42. To me, using the games and activities embedded in CLT to teach English is not teaching at all. 0(0%) 0(0%) 1(12.5%) 4(50%) 3(37.5 %) 1.75 Total 5(6.25%) 17(21.25%) 17(21.25%) 31(38.75%) 10(12.5 %) 2.7 5. Conclusion 5.1 Summary of the Study From the above study, we can conclude that most of the teachers in GZITVS still adopt GTM in classroom practice, which they are fully aware of. And the quantitative data from the two questionnaires for teachers and students respectively provide four restraints preventing the implementation of CLT: knowledge restraints, restraints by educational system, restraints by students and restraints related to teachers’ attitude and concerns, most of which are quite similar to those mentioned in the literature reviewed with some differentiations. Firstly, most of the teachers seem to grasp some basic knowledge about CLT while some need further raining. The second restraints are those obstacles posed by the educational system: lack of support and teaching materials, incompatibility with traditional views, large class size, short class meeting time, written test etc. Thirdly, obstacles caused by students are related to their various English levels、their indifference to English class and classroom activities, their unwillingness to respond in English etc. Lastly, constraints from teachers’ attitude and concerns include lack of instruments to assess CC and CLT-related training, their concern about their oral proficiency, group management ability and insufficient English usage knowledge. However, we can discover two discrepancies here from the students’ questionnaire. One interesting differentiation is that students never deny the importance of communicative ability in English. And the reason why students are not active in classroom activities is because they don’t have confidence in their www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/eltls English Language Teaching and Linguistics Studies Vol. 5, No. 2, 2023 32 Published by SCHOLINK INC. English level. The other is that students’ seeming unwillingness to respond in English is due to their uneasiness and fear for making mistakes when speaking English. 5.2 Limitation of the Study The first concern is related to the sample because the research is conducted in only one SVSSE. Although it is the largest one in Guangzhou, there is on research evidence to prove that it represents all the SVSSEs in China. However, there should be some common barriers among all the SVSSEs since from those literature reviewed, some common factors for CLT implementation in Asian countries were discovered by researchers who only carried out researches in their own countries or even in a single school. So, the result may not be fully representative, but I believe it could be a basis for future study. Another concern is that due to the pandemic outbreak, I don’t use interviews and classroom observation to make up for the deficiency of the questionnaire. On one hand, quite a few teachers may not know CLT before, however, they would go through some basic information about CLT before they answer the questions. On the other hand, students sometimes would choose those choices that they consider to be correct instead of those they really prefer. 5.3 Suggestions for Future Study Given the above-mentioned limitation of the study, two directions for future study could be considered. The first proposal is for cooperation research study with the English teachers in other vocational schools of science and engineering in China to obtain more sampling data to get to know whether those four restraints are representative among all SVSSEs in China and whether there are new restraints. And the second proposal is to perform classroom observations to get to know whether teachers are putting any effort to overcome those obstacles for CLT. Reference Abahussain, M. O. (2016). Implementing communicative language teaching method in Saudi Arabia: Challenges faced by formative year teachers in state schools (Ph.D. thesis). University of Stirling. Adamson, B. (2004). China’s English: A history of English in Chinese education. Hong Kong University Press. Afnesha, N. C., & Suparmi, S. (2020). The Implementation of Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) and Factors Hindering Teachers from implementing it in High School. Al-ta’dib, 13, 46-56. https://doi.org/10.31332/atdbwv13i1.1598 Best, J., & Kahn, J. (1989). Research in Education. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Brandl, K. (2008). Communicative language teaching in action (2nd). NJ: Upper Saddle River. Cook, M., & Gulliver, T. (2014). Helping Japanese teachers of English overcome obstacles to Communicative Language Teaching in overseas teacher development programs. Asian EFL Journal Professional Teaching Articles, 79, 24-46. Du, Y. (2012). A Study on Communicative Approach to English Language Teaching in Secondary Vocational Schools (Ph.D. thesis). Sichuan Normal University. www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/eltls English Language Teaching and Linguistics Studies Vol. 5, No. 2, 2023 33 Published by SCHOLINK INC. Huang, S. H. (2011). On the applicability of communicative language teaching (CLT) pedagogy in rural Taiwan (Ph.D. thesis). Indiana University. Harmer, J. (2015). The practice of English language teaching (5 th ). Harlow: Pearson Longman. Jin, Y. J., & Yoo, I. W. (2019). Why Communicative Language Teaching Has Yet to Work in Korea: Exploring Teachers’ Viewpoints. Journal of Asia TEFL, 16(4), 1332-1347. https://doi.org/10.18823/asiatefl.2019.16.4.17.1332 Khatib, M., & Tootkaboni, A. A. (2019). Attitudes toward Communicative Language Teaching: The Case of efl Learners and Teachers. Íkala: revista de lenguaje y cultura, 24, 471-485. https://doi.org/10.17533/udea.ikala.v24n03a04 Mehtab, S. (2012). Difficulties and challenges in implementing CLT in Bangladesh (Ph.D. thesis). BRAC University. Ministry of Education of the People’s Republic of China/MoE. (2020). New English Curriculum Standard for Secondary Vocational School. (2020). Beijing, Higher Education Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009024532 Richards, J. C. (2005). Communicative language teaching today. Singapore: SEAMEO Regional Language Centre. Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2014). Approaches and methods in language teaching. Cambridge university press. Sultana, M. S. (2015). Meeting the challenges of reconstructing English proficiency to the university students fossilized by the Inapt CLT implementation at school and college levels in Bangladesh. Language in India, 15, 133-165. Vongxay, H. (2013). The implementation of communicative language teaching (CLT) in an English department in a Lao higher educational institution: A case study (MS thesis). Wei, L., Lin, H. H., & Litton, F. (2018). Communicative language teaching (CLT) in EFL context in asia. Asian Culture and History, 10(2), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.5539/ach.v10n2p1 Whitehead, G. (2017). Teachers’ voices: Obstacles to communicative language teaching in South Korea. Asian EFL Journal, 19(4), 5-31. Appendix I Questionnaire for Teachers: The Status Quo and Difficulties of CLT Implementation in Secondary Vocational School Dear participant, You are invited to participate in a research study that investigate the factors that hinder the English language teachers to implement suitable teaching methods for students of secondary vocational school. Your participation will be through a questionnaire to find out your viewpoints. Participation in this study is voluntary. I will take care to ensure the confidentiality of all data gathered for this study and any comments you make will be kept strictly confidential, and no specific references involving your www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/eltls English Language Teaching and Linguistics Studies Vol. 5, No. 2, 2023 34 Published by SCHOLINK INC. name will be made in my study. Any information you give will only be used for the purposes of the study. Also, all the data gathered during this study will be securely stored in a password protected computer. Thank you in advance for your contributions! Part I: Background Information 1. Your age:________years old 2. Educational degree: undergraduate graduate 3. University of undergraduate study:_____________ 4.Graduate School:_______ 5.Years of teaching English:________ years 5. Average number of classes you teach each term:________ 6. Average number of students in your class: fewer than 40 40-50 50-60 more than 60 Part II: Teacher’s Actual Practice in Classroom 1. What’s your opinion of the following description?(Please choose one answer which is close to your opinion) A. Fluency is more important than Accuracy B. Accuracy is more important than fluency. C. Fluency has the same importance as accuracy. D. That depends. 2. What do you normally do in class?( You can choose more than one answer) A. Read out the new words and texts to the students to set up an example of pronunciation and intonation; B. Explain language points and the meanings of new words and sentences; C. Translate the new words and texts into Chinese; D. Conduct a drilling exercise after the introduction of a new language point; E. Organize students to do activities by giving instructions; F. Give examples of how to do an activity after the explanation and instruction; G Elicit ideas from students; H. Walk around the classroom, when the students are doing activities, to see if any of them needs help, both in ideas and language; I. Give feedback and deal with errors; J. Take part in the students’ discussion or conversation if necessary; K. Change the pace of the class by various means (e.g. use a combination of fast and slow activities); L. Maintain discipline; www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/eltls English Language Teaching and Linguistics Studies Vol. 5, No. 2, 2023 35 Published by SCHOLINK INC. M. Give encouragement and suggestions during an activity. 3. What teaching methods are you implementing in your classes? (Please specify how frequently you are using a particular method.) Always Often Sometimes Rare Never Grammar translation 5 4 3 2 1 Audio-lingual method 5 4 3 2 1 Direct method 5 4 3 2 1 Communicative Language Teaching 5 4 3 2 1 Silent Way 5 4 3 2 1 Total Physical Response 5 4 3 2 1 Part III: Difficulties & Challenges On Communicative Language Teaching Please respond to each statement according to the scale provided. SA= strongly agree, A=agree, N=neutral, D= disagree, SD= strongly disagree. I. Teachers’ Knowledge of CLT What is involved in CLT methodology in your view? SA A N D SD 1. In drill type activities, the mistakes or errors students made 5 4 3 2 1 can be left unattended. 2. During a communicative activity, whenever you find a mistake 5 4 3 2 1 or error, no matter in what sense, grammatical or cultural or any other aspect, you stop the student and correct it. 3. CLT is student/learner-centered approach. 5 4 3 2 1 4. CLT emphasizes appropriacy over accuracy. 5 4 3 2 1 5. CLT emphasizes communication in a second language (L2) . 5 4 3 2 1 6. CLT relies heavily on speaking and listening skills. 5 4 3 2 1 7. CLT requires teachers to have a high proficiency in English. 5 4 3 2 1 8. CLT involves only group work or pair work. 5 4 3 2 1 9.CLT requires higher knowledge of the target language culture. 5 4 3 2 1 10. CLT involves no grammar teaching. 5 4 3 2 1 11 CLT involves teaching speaking only. 5 4 3 2 1 12.CLT is basically an ESL methodology, not EFL. 5 4 3 2 1 II. Difficulties & Challenges Related to Educational System SA A N D SD 13. There is a lack of enough support. 5 4 3 2 1 14. I think the lack of authentic materials and CLT-related 5 4 3 2 1 textbooks make CLT’s implementation difficult. 15. Traditional view on teachers’ and learners’ role is not 5 4 3 2 1 www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/eltls English Language Teaching and Linguistics Studies Vol. 5, No. 2, 2023 36 Published by SCHOLINK INC. compatible with CLT. 16. Classes are too large for the effective use of CLT. 5 4 3 2 1 17. I think the class meeting time is too short for me to conduct 5 4 3 2 1 CLT activities. 18. Grammar-based examinations have a negative impact on the 5 4 3 2 1 use of CLT. 19. Western educational assumptions are not suitable within Asian 5 4 3 2 1 contexts. 20. The lack of English teaching equipment hinders me from using 5 4 3 2 1 CLT. 21. The text-books are far too above our students English level, so 5 4 3 2 1 it’s impossible to implement CLT based on the tasks in the text-books. III. Student-related Difficulties & Challenge SA A N D SD 22. My students don’t think being able to communicate in 5 4 3 2 1 English is important in their daily life. 23. My students’ low English proficiency hinders me from using 5 4 3 2 1 CLT. 24. My students’ passive or indifferent attitude toward English 5 4 3 2 1 learning hinders me from teaching English communicatively. 25. My students’ unwillingness to speak or ask questions in 5 4 3 2 1 English hinders me from teaching communicatively. 26. When having group discussion, my students tend to 5 4 3 2 1 communicate in Chinese. 27. When asking my students questions in English, they usually 5 4 3 2 1 answer me in single word, two-word phrase or even in Chinese. 28. My students’ heterogeneous English proficiency is a problem 5 4 3 2 1 for practicing CLT activities. 29. My students’ heterogeneous English skills (listening, 5 4 3 2 1 speaking, reading and writing) make the CLT’s implementation difficult in my classroom. 30. When carrying out CLT activities, some of my students engage 5 4 3 2 1 actively while some just sit to idle their time. 31. When carrying out CLT activities, the interactions are usually 5 4 3 2 1 dominated by one or two able students. 32. My students’ putting pressure on me to teach English based 5 4 3 2 1 on exams hinders me from using CLT. IV. Difficulties & Challenges Related to Teachers’ Attitude and Concerns SA A N D SD www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/eltls English Language Teaching and Linguistics Studies Vol. 5, No. 2, 2023 37 Published by SCHOLINK INC. 33. There is a lack of effective and efficient instruments to assess 5 4 3 2 1 communicative competence. 34. I don’t see the need to teach my students communicatively 5 4 3 2 1 because being able to communicate in English is not important in their daily life. 35. When doing group or pair activities, classroom management 5 4 3 2 1 is a problem to me. 36. So far, most of the workshops I have attended are not 5 4 3 2 1 CLT-related. 37. My lack of oral communication proficiency hinders me from 5 4 3 2 1 using CLT. 38. My lack of knowledge related to appropriate English usage 5 4 3 2 1 hinders me from teaching English communicatively. 39. Since oral proficiency is not tested at the school I teach, it 5 4 3 2 1 won’t be necessary to teach English communication ability. 40. As a teacher, I should be the dominator in my classroom; 5 4 3 2 1 therefore, I do not allow any learner-centered activities advocated by CLT. 41. I believe the implementation of CLT will lead to the failure in 5 4 3 2 1 teaching reading and writing. 42. To me, using the games and activities embedded in CLT to 5 4 3 2 1 teach English is not teaching at all. Part IV: Supports and Resources Teachers Want to Receive SA A N D SD 1. I think our government should offer more funding for English 5 4 3 2 1 teaching equipment. 2. I think our government should offer English teachers the 5 4 3 2 1 opportunities of overseas study programs to English speaking countries. 3. I think our government should offer regularly CLT-related 5 4 3 2 1 trainings and workshops. 4. I think English textbooks should be modified to be more 5 4 3 2 1 CLT-relating. 5. I think CLT-related trainings should cover issues, including 5 4 3 2 1 classroom management and techniques dealing with problems of students’ unwillingness to speak, speaking in Chinese or idling around at class...and so on. 6. If possible, I would like to attend English classes or training 5 4 3 2 1 taught by native English speakers to improve my own oral proficiency and enhance knowledge related to appropriate English usage. 7. I would like ‘seed teachers’ to come to my school to do 5 4 3 2 1 CLT-related teaching demonstrations for me. www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/eltls English Language Teaching and Linguistics Studies Vol. 5, No. 2, 2023 38 Published by SCHOLINK INC. 8. I think CLT will be more applicable if class size is reduced. 5 4 3 2 1 9. To make CLT more possible at English classes, students should 5 4 3 2 1 be regrouped according to their English proficiency. 10. To make CLT more applicable, English class meeting times 5 4 3 2 1 should be increased. 11. I think teachers should be given more authority for English 5 4 3 2 1 assessment. 12. To make CLT more possible, tests of students’ oral proficiency 5 4 3 2 1 should be included. 13. I think learners need to be re-cultivated the importance of 5 4 3 2 1 learning English and developing communication ability. 14. I would like to co-teach with other English teachers (either 5 4 3 2 1 native or nonnative) to make CLT more applicable. 15. To make CLT more applicable, I think more teachers of 5 4 3 2 1 oversea studying experience should be hired. Appendix II Questionnaire for Students 同学你好，感谢你在忙碌的学习中抽出时间填写这份问卷。这是一份关于你英语学习情况的调查 表。本调查仅做研究之用，目的为了更好地帮助大家学好英语。和你的学习成绩评价无关，并采 取匿名方式。因此，你无须有任何顾虑，请以你的真实想法填写，谢谢大家的合作。 First, please fill out the following blanks (请填写以下信息) Gender (性别)：———————— Age (年龄)：—————————— School (学校)：———————— Class (班级)：————————— Major (专业) :——————————— The following are some questions about your English study. This is just for a research purpose. There is no “right” or “wrong” answer, so you are asked to answer the questions honestly. (以下问题是关于你 的英语学习。这些问题只是为了研究，选项没有对和错之分，所以你只要如实作答就行了.) 1. Do you think it very important to learn English? (你认为学习英语非常重要吗？) A. Yes (是的) B. No (不是) C. Don’t know (不知道) 2. Do you think English is helpful for finding a job? www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/eltls English Language Teaching and Linguistics Studies Vol. 5, No. 2, 2023 39 Published by SCHOLINK INC. (你觉得英语对你未来找工作有帮助么？) A. Yes (是的) B. No (不是) C. Don’t know(不知道) 3. Do you think English is useful in your future job? (你觉得英语对你未来的工作有用么？) A. Yes (有的) B. No (没有) C. Don’t know(不知道) 4. Which skill in English is more important for your future work and life? (下列哪一种英语技能对你未来的工作和生活有帮助?) Your can choose more than one answer. (可以多选) A. Reading (阅读) B. Writing (写作) C. Listening (听力) D. Speaking (口语) 5. Are you interested in learning English? (你对英语学习感兴趣吗?) A. very much (非常) B. a little (一点点) C. no (不) 6. Do you lack of motivation in the classroom activities? (你缺乏参与课堂活动的动机吗？) A. True (对的) B. Not true (不对) C. Don’t know (不知道) 7. I don’t want to take part in classroom activities because my English is poor. (我不想参与英语课堂活动因为我的英语不好.) A. True (对的) B. Not true (不对) C. Don’t know(不知道) 8. I don’t think I can do better in English in secondary vocational school. (我不认为在中职学校我能把英语学好。) A. True (对的) B. Not true (不对) C. Don’t know (不知道) 9. The reason why I loose confidence in learning English in secondary vocational school is that I www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/eltls English Language Teaching and Linguistics Studies Vol. 5, No. 2, 2023 40 Published by SCHOLINK INC. always failed in the English exams in junior high school. (我之所以没信心在中职能学好英语是因为我在初中通常英语考试不及格.) A. True (对的) B. Not true (不对) C. Don’t know (不知道) 10. The English textbook is too difficult for me in secondary vocational school. (中职的英语教材对我来说太难.) A. True (对的) B. Not true (不对) C. a little (一点点难) 11. Are you always uneasy when you speak English? (说英语时你总是感到紧张不安吗?) A. very much (非常) B. a little (一点点) C. no (不) 12. Are you afraid of making mistakes while speaking English? (说英语时你害怕犯错误吗?) A. very much (非常) B. a little (一点点) C. no (不) 13. If your future job requires you to communicate in English, are you willing to try your best to improve your oral English? (如果你未来的工作需要你用英语交流，你愿意尽最大努力提升英语口语吗？) A. Yes (会的) B. No (不会) C. Don’t know (不知道) 14. Which classroom activities does your teacher often adapt in class? (你们老师经常采用哪些课堂活动?) A. reading the text aloud (大声朗读课文) B. jigsaw(拼图) C. taking notes (记笔记) D. Games(玩游戏) E. Translating texts and sentences(翻译课文和句子) F. answering questions in turn(轮流回答问题) G. chain game(接龙游戏) H. taking a dictation (听写) www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/eltls English Language Teaching and Linguistics Studies Vol. 5, No. 2, 2023 41 Published by SCHOLINK INC. I. story telling (讲故事) J. information gap (信息差沟通活动) K. personal information exchange (个人信息交换) L. Interview (面试) M. role-play (角色扮演) N. Drama (戏剧表演) O. making sentences following the given pattern (仿造句子) 15. Which classroom activities do you prefer in English class? (你更喜欢以下哪种活动出现在英语课堂?) A. reading the text aloud (大声朗读课文) B. jigsaw (拼图) C. taking notes (记笔记) D. Games (玩游戏) E. Translating texts and sentences (翻译课文和句子) F. answering questions in turn (轮流回答问题) G. chain game (接龙游戏) H. taking a dictation (听写) I. story telling (讲故事) J. information gap (信息差沟通活动) K. personal information exchange (个人信息交换) L. Interview (面试) M. role-play (角色扮演) N. Drama (戏剧表演) O. making sentences following the given pattern (仿造句子) 16. Which assessment method for English do you prefer? (哪种英语考查方法你更喜欢？) A. Written exams without listening (没有考听力的笔试) B. Written exams includes listening (包括听力的笔试) C. Tests include listening and speaking (听力和口语考试) D. Speaking test (口语考试) E. Tests of simulation of communicative situation of daily work and life (模拟日常工作和生活的交 际情景的考试) Appendix III Consent Form for Parents (English Version) Who is conducting the research and why? My name is Wang Jiaying who is an English teacher in Guangzhou Information and Technology www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/eltls English Language Teaching and Linguistics Studies Vol. 5, No. 2, 2023 42 Published by SCHOLINK INC. Vocational School, and I am writing to you to approach your child to take part in my research project, which is about the implementation situation of communicative language teaching approach in secondary vocational school of science and engineering in China and serves as a basis for us to improve classroom teaching in our school. I sincerely hope that you could allow me to do the questionnaire with your child. This information sheet will try to answer any questions you might have about the project, but please do not hesitate to contact me if there is anything else you would like to know. Please think carefully and consider whether you agree that I could approach to your child. Why my child is being invited to take part? The aim of this study is to find out student’s perspective of English learning and classroom teaching approach. 8 classes of students from our school have been randomly selected to join in the questionnaire. Will anyone know my child has been involved? Your child’s participation and contribution in this study will be known by me only. All participants ‘contribution that will be used in this research will remain anonymous. Names of participants will not be shared nor published on the dissertation and data will not be shared with my research parties during and after the research period. Could there be problems for my child if he/she take part in the research? There will be no physical nor emotional harm to be caused by conducting this research. Participants just need to finish the questionnaire online by using their cellphones or computers. Does my child have to take part? It is entirely up to your child whether to choose to take part. If your child does not choose to take part, it will not influence his/her grades nor school profile. Your child’s participation is voluntary, and he/she is free to withdraw at any time. Thank you very much for taking the time to read this information sheet. If you agree that I approach your students to be involved, please. sign this electronic consent form in the mini program.