Results of Activities
Results of Activities
Learning Objective #1: Understand the purpose of the EduPREP training in connection with DOET’s English Speaking Contest and the upcoming English Summer Program.
The participants were attentive, engaged, and taking notes throughout the EduPREP training program. By the end of the session, they shared their feedback, reflection, and key takeaways. They described EduPREP as a valuable refresher course for teachers at FIS, a meaningful opportunity for them to learn from each other, a guiding framework for supporting students’ continuous improvement in English speaking skills, a starting point for preparing students to participate in contest environments, and a training initiative applicable to teaching English across all learner levels.
Learning Objective #2: Analyze common student speaking challenges and identify appropriate instructional strategies across linguistic, performance-related, and motivational domains.
The participants accurately identified the speaking challenges of the sample student profiles and proposed appropriate instructional strategies. Student A's challenge is linguistic, specifically a limited vocabulary range and frequent repetition. Teacher #1 recommended supporting the student in expanding vocabulary range and improving grammatical accuracy.
Student B, a shy but accurate speaker, was identified as having affective and performance-related challenges. To address this, Teacher #3 suggested oral reading practice combined with words of encouragement and positive affirmation, while Teacher Daisy recommended peer rehearsals for improved performance.
Student C has linguistic challenges due to inconsistent grammar and vocabulary use. Teacher #2 emphasized the need for support across all linguistic areas, including vocabulary range, grammatical accuracy, and pronunciation clarity.
Student D, who tends to exhibit "memorized speech syndrome," was identified as having performance-related challenges. Teacher Elio recommended reading practice to help prepare the student for speaking activities and contests.
Finally, Student E, described as a "high-pressure freezer," was found to face affective and performance-related challenges. Teacher #1 suggested building the student’s self-efficacy alongside consistent practice to strengthen performance under pressure.
Learning Objective #3: Use the DOET speaking rubric to evaluate student speeches and align classroom instruction with contest expectations.
The participants watched four student speaking videos sourced from YouTube, scored them using the DOET speaking rubrics in the EduPREP Training Booklet, and discussed their evaluations and rationale. Due to the unavailability of videos from DOET's previous English Speaking Contests, I chose videos as close as possible to the DOET speaking activities and those that could be assessed using the rubrics. The on-site attendees—both participating and facilitating teachers—chose to omit numerical scores and instead focused on identifying the strengths and weaknesses of the student speaking videos. They still used DOET's English Speaking Contest evaluation rubrics and criteria for judging (e.g., content, idea presentation and teamwork, creativity in message delivery, grammatical range/accuracy/lexical resource, vocabulary, pronunciation, intonation, fluency and coherence, performance, and technical audio and video quality).
Generally, the teachers shared similar feedback and comments—both positive and negative—for each video. Importantly, the facilitator, Teacher Elio, encouraged them to recommend classroom activities and instructional strategies that could help the students improve their English speaking proficiency and contest performance. Overall, the participants were able to comprehend the given videos, provide valuable rubric-based feedback, and suggest practical approaches for further speaking practice, which often included development in all factors—linguistic, performance-related, and affective. The facilitator was quick to think of a way to ensure the activity still aligned with the corresponding learning objective.
Learning Objective #4: Design a level-appropriate speaking activity and formative assessment tools that support student proficiency and contest readiness.
Teacher #1 entitled his high-school-level activity "Are You Smarter Than Grade 5 Students?" or "High Five" for short. Considering the low-level English skills of the high school students at FIS, he determined that the learning objective was to review vocabulary and formulate and answer yes-or-no questions based on given topics. He explained that this activity would address all skills (e.g., vocabulary, grammar, pronunciation, fluency, confidence, coherence, listening/speaking integration, and peer interaction). Although this activity aligns mainly with primary-level contest tasks and goals, he stated that it would be a good starting point for preparing high school students for DOET's English Speaking Contest.
Meanwhile, Teacher #2 shared that she did not design a new activity but instead reflected on her current experience preparing her secondary students for an English speaking contest scheduled for the next day (June 15). Expressing that she learned a great deal from the EduPREP training program, she noted that "What I [She] Should Have Done" included providing more reading materials to expand students' knowledge beyond what they study within the four walls of the classroom. Based on her experience, her students often fail to maximize their allotted speaking time (e.g., three minutes) because they lack sufficient background knowledge on the diverse range of topics that English speaking contests typically cover, despite having adequate English speaking skills. She emphasized the need for increased knowledge and information alongside the development of speaking proficiency. The teacher also stressed that educators must motivate and support students without spoon-feeding them, encouraging resourcefulness and independent research. Finally, she stated that she would integrate everything discussed during the training, such as rapid/timed word practice, reading activities, and mock contests, into her classroom instruction.
Lastly, Teacher #3, who admitted that she is still in a trial-and-error learning phase in teaching English to Vietnamese students, designed an activity suitable for kindergarten and lower primary classes in which she facilitates instruction on fundamental English knowledge and skills. Her activity, called "Photobook Presentation," aims to have students present different animals, name them correctly, use prepositions, and identify singular and plural forms. This activity aligns with the Picture Stories and Storytelling segments of DOET’s English Speaking Contest.
Learning Objective #5: Demonstrate the use of learned instructional strategies for developing students' English speaking proficiency in their own classrooms.
Strengths Observed
Subject Mastery & Delivery: Teachers demonstrated a strong command of subject matter, facilitating lessons that effectively covered all fundamental English skills (e.g., listening, speaking, reading, and writing);
Teaching Strategies & Materials: Activities facilitated using digital and physical resources were creative, varied, and interactive;
Student Engagement & Rapport: Teachers maintained positive rapport, especially through optimism, warm-up routines, group tasks, and positive reinforcement, resulting in active, attentive, and participative students, even in large or multi-grade classes;
Sensitivity & Adaptability: Teachers showed awareness of students’ backgrounds and needs (VIP students, low-level learners, new enrollees), and used Vietnamese translations or expressions to support understanding; and,
Classroom Management: Teachers maintained calm, confident, and professional classroom demeanor, managed allotted time well, and finished most lessons as planned, even under technical constraints or large class sizes.
Points for Improvement
Time & Tool Preparation: Prepare video materials and digital tools in advance to avoid delays or buffering; utilize larger screens or personal devices (tablet/laptop) for smoother control;
Content Differentiation: Avoid using identical warm-ups or content across grade levels; customize for learner maturity and language proficiency; use name cards or simple strategies to aid in student name recall and increase rapport;
Support for Low-Level Students: Increase encouragement for shy or struggling students to participate; offer simplified tasks or targeted support, especially in mixed-level or large classrooms;
Instructional Clarity: Minimize cognitive overload by writing only keywords on the board; improve board writing clarity—spacing, margins, and visibility; and,
Institutional Recommendations: Improve digital infrastructure, especially ensuring Smart TVs and internet connections function across classrooms; group students by level where possible (e.g., separate strong from weak students) or provide training in differentiated instruction for teachers handling mixed-ability classes.