a grounded theory study of thai efl student teachers’ lesson...

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

A GROUNDED THEORY STUDY OF THAI EFL

STUDENT TEACHERS’ LESSON PLANNING

BY

MR VACHIRA JANTARACH

A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT

OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPY IN

ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHING

LANGUAGE INSTITUTE

THAMMASAT UNIVERSITY

ACADEMIC YEAR 2017

COPYRIGHT OF THAMMASAT UNIVERSITY

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

THAMMASAT UNIVESRITY

LANGUAGE INSTITUTE

DISSERTATION

BY

MR VACHIRA JANTARACH

ENTITLED

A GROUNDED THEORY STUDY OF THAI EFL STUDENT TEACHERS’

LESSON PLANNING

was approved as partial fulfillment of the requirements for

the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in English Language Teaching

on 12 July 2018

Chairman

Member and Advisor

Member

Member

Member

Director

______________________________________

(Associate Professor Tipamas Chumworatayee, Ph.D.)

______________________________________

(Assistant Professor Kittitouch Soontornwipast, Ed.D.)

______________________________________

(Assistant Professor Apasara Chinwonno, Ph.D.)

______________________________________

(Assistant Professor Pragasit Sitthitikul, Ph.D.)

______________________________________

(Ajarn Supanit Kulsiri, Ph.D.)

______________________________________

(Associate Professor Supong Tangkiengsirisin, Ph.D.)

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

(1)

Thesis title A GROUNDED THEORY STUDY OF THAI EFL STUDENT TEACHERS’ LESSON PLANNING

Author Mr. Vachiara Jantarach

Degree Doctor of Philosophy

Major field/Faculty/University English Language Teaching

Language Institute

Thammasat University

Thesis advisor Asst. Prof. Kittitouch Soontornwipast, Ed.D.

Academic years 2017

ABSTRACT

Planning lessons for all subjects is a complex process, where teachers have to

employ both pedagogical and content knowledge. Planning English lessons for EFL

students requires teachers to create a situation for students to learn the target

language, which is rarely used outside classrooms. Student teachers with little

experience have been struggling to plan English lessons. However, there is little

qualitative research to explain EFL student teachers’ lesson planning processes,

especially those in the Thai context. The purpose of this study is to generate a theory

to explain Thai EFL student teachers’ lesson planning by using the grounded theory.

The research instruments were semi-structured interviews as well as observations of

twenty-two student teachers majoring in Teaching English. The data was analyzed by

means of coding to identify emerging categories and generate a substantive theory. A

constant comparative analysis of the data generated a grounded theory of EFL student

teachers’ lesson planning, showing a cyclical process of five stages. First, in the pre-

planning stage, personnel and institutions had an influence on student teachers’ lesson

planning by giving information necessary for planning. The information was

considered as both opportunities and constraints. Second, in the planning stage,

student teachers used a linear procedure and some others used alternative procedures.

They submitted plans to school supervisors and university supervisors, who gave

feedback for them on how to improve plans. Student teachers responded differently to

the feedback based on their beliefs. Third, in the implementing stage, student

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

(2)

teachers’ implementation of plans was observed by school supervisors and university

supervisors. Student teachers agreed, partly disagreed or entirely disagreed with

supervisors’ feedback. The student teachers decided to use or not use the feedback to

improve subsequent plans. Fourth, in the reflecting/evaluating stage, student teachers

used different modes of reflection to reflect upon difficulty or success, which

occurred during the implementing stage. Finally, student teachers used reflection

and/or feedback from school supervisors and university supervisors to design

subsequent plans.

Keywords: Lesson planning, student teachers, grounded theory, English as a Foreign

Language (EFL)

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

(3)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First, I would like to thank my advisor, Assistant Professor Dr. Kittitouch

Soontornwipast, who has shown enduring patience and guidance throughout the

entirety of my PhD study. Without him, I would not have had direction to complete

this dissertation. I also would like to thank all committee members for their comments

in the proposal defense, which helped me shape the methodology of this study.

Next, I express my gratitude to my parents and my sister, who traveled for

kilometers to keep me company and to cheer me up at the time that I really needed it.

With their love and support, I have been able to achieve my goal. I thank all my

family members, who live far away but give me moral support. Most of all, I thank

my partner, Mac, who gives me support by understanding the condition of my work

and takes care of me whenever I need.

Finally, I would like to thank my friends and colleagues at my workplace for

time and encouragement, especially Dr. Suneeta Kositchaiwat, who has helped me

with data analysis and with all the workload at the office, and has provided

encouragement and moral support; Miss Thamol Chatchawankijkul, who has helped

me arrange things at the office; and Mr. Philip B. Calabro, who has helped me

proofread the paper. Special thanks also goes to Nuna, Miss Thidaporn Komson, my

best friend, who always helps me and supports me through ups and downs. Thank you

very much everyone.

Mr. Vachira Jantarach

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

(4)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

ABSTRACT (1)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS (3)

LIST OF FIGURES

(7)

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 Background 1

1.2 Statements of the problem 7

1.3 Purpose of the study 15

1.4 Research questions 15

1.5 Significance of the study 16

1.6 Definitions 17

1.7 Organization of the study

18

CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE 20

2.1 Definitions of lesson planning 20

2.2 Importance of lesson planning 22

2.3 Lesson planning processes 24

2.4 Organization of a lesson plan 37

2.5 Components of a lesson plan 42

2.6 Student teachers’ lesson planning and supervision 45

2.7 Relevant studies on lesson planning

51

CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 54

3.1 Research design 56

3.2 Context 59

3.3 Participants 64

3.4 Data collection 66

3.5 Rigor of the study 74

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

(5)

Page

3.6 Reflexivity 76

3.7 Actions for ethical issues 82

3.8 Data analysis

83

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS OF THE STUDY 86

4.1 Research question 1 How do the Thai EFL student

teachers design their lesson plans?

87

4.1.1 Sub question 1.1 What factors influence the

student teachers’ lesson planning?

88

4.1.2 Sub question 1.2 What is the procedure in the

student teachers’ lesson planning?

213

4.2 Research question 2 How do the student teachers

implement the lesson plans?

226

4.2.1 Sub question 2.1 What do the student teachers

do before implementing a lesson plan?

226

4.2.2 Sub question 2.2 Is the lesson plan implemented

as planned? Why/Why not?

232

4.3 Research question 3 What action do the student teachers

take after implementing the lesson plans?

288

4.3.1 Sub question 3.1 How do the student teachers

evaluate their lesson plans?

288

CHAPTER 5 THEORY OF THAI EFL STUDENT TEACHERS’

LESSON PLANNING PROCESSES

304

5.1 An overview: Thai EFL student teachers’ lesson

planning processes

305

5.2 Pre-planning stage 307

5.3 Planning stage 330

5.4 Implementing stage 345

5.5 Reflecting/Evaluating stage 385

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

(6)

Page

5.6 Planning subsequent plans 387

5.7 Theory of Thai EFL student teachers’ lesson planning

processes

387

CHAPTER 6 DISCUSSION, IMPLICATIONS, LIMITATIONS,

RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSION

391

6.1 Summary of the theory of Thai EFL student teachers’

lesson planning processes

391

6.2 Discussion 392

6.3 Implications 419

6.4 Limitations 427

6.5 Recommendations 428

6.6 Conclusion

429

REFERENCES

430

APPENDICES 451

Appendix A 452

Appendix B 454

Appendix C 468

Appendix D 478

Appendix E 479

Appendix F 482

Appendix G 483

Appendix H 484

BIOGRAPHY 490

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

(7)

TABLE OF FIGURES

Figures Page

Figure 2.1: Model for research on teacher planning for instruction 25

Figure 2.2: Student teachers’ planning process 27

Figure 2.3: Model of teacher thought and action 29

Figure 2.4: The planning continuum 38

Figure 4.1: Factors influencing student teachers’ lesson planning 88

Figure 4.2: Factors influencing student teachers’ lesson planning: Personnel

(School supervisors)

90


(University supervisors)

130

Figure 4.4.: Factors influencing student teachers’ lesson planning: Personnel

(student teachers)

171

Figure 4.5: Factors influencing student teachers’ lesson planning: Institutions

(schools)

193


(Faculty of Education)

208

Figure 4.7: A replica of a worksheet for a matching activity 244

Figure 5.1: An overview: Thai EFL student teachers’ lesson planning

processes

305

Figure 5.2: Pre-planning stage 307

Figure 5.3: Influence of school supervisors on student teachers’ lesson

planning when giving information before planning

309

Figure 5.4: Influence of university supervisors on student teachers’ lesson

planning by giving information before planning

313

Figure 5.5: Influence of student teachers on their own lesson planning before

planning

316

Figure 5.6: Influence of student teachers’ classmates on student teachers’

lesson planning when giving information before planning

319

Figure 5.7: Influence of student teachers’ senior graduates on student teachers’ 322

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

(8)

Figures Page


Figure 5.8: Influence of schools on student teachers’ lesson planning when

giving information before planning

325

Figure 5.9: Influence of Faculty of Education on student teachers’ lesson


328

Figure 5.10: Planning stage 330

Figure 5.11: Planning stage with feedback from school supervisors and

university supervisors

333


planning by giving feedback on lesson plans

336


planning by giving feedback on lesson plans

341

Figure 5.14: Before implementation 345

Figure 5.15: Implementing stage 347


planning by giving feedback after observation

349


planning when university supervisors gave feedback after observation

352

Figure 5.18: Lesson plans implemented as planned due to conducive student

characteristics

355

Figure 5.19: Lesson plans implemented as planned due to appropriate

activities for phases of teaching

357

Figure 5.20: Lesson plans implemented as planned due to effective time

management for lesson planning

360

Figure 5.21: Lesson plans implemented as planned due to appropriate teaching

aids

363

Figure 5.22: Lesson plans implemented with difficulty due to unconducive

student characteristics

366

Figure 5.23: Lesson plans implemented with difficulty due to inappropriate


374

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

(9)

Figures Page

Figure 5.24: Lesson plans implemented with difficulty due to ineffective class

management

378

Figure 5.25: Lesson plans implemented with difficulty due to ineffective time

management

381

Figure 5.26: Lesson plans implemented with difficulty due to ineffective

teaching aids

383

Figure 5.27: Reflecting/Evaluating stage 385

Figure 5.28: Theory of Thai EFL student teachers’ lesson planning processes

389

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

When the quality of an educational system is required to improve, teachers are

the first group of personnel who are targeted to hold responsibility. The reason is that

the teachers’ qualifications account for success in developing students (Darling-

Hammond, 1997; Elmore and Burney, 1999). Teachers have direct interactions with

students in classrooms and create a pleasant atmosphere, design appropriate activities

and select effective materials to support students’ learning (Finocchiaro, 1989).

Recently, there have been changes concerning education internationally and

locally. One international concern, for example, is pressed upon 21st Century skills, of

which all learners in this era should be aware. The skills have been compiled by

policy makers and leaders in the business, education and workforce development

communities in order to shape qualified workers to survive economic uncertainties

(Partnership for 21st Century Skills, 2008). Panich (2012) discusses that the skills

include reading; writing; arithmetic; critical thinking and problem-solving; creativity

and innovation; cross-cultural understanding; collaboration, teamwork and leadership;

communications, information and media literacy; computing and ICT literacy; and

career and learning skills. 21st Century skills are also mentioned in Thailand’s

National Education Plan for the B.E. 2560–2579 phase, which requires teachers’

direct responsibility for teaching those skills to learners, so that they can become

members of a qualified workforce (Office of the Education Council, 2018).

Thailand has also faced another change in the local community—the creation

of the ASEAN Economic Community or AEC. All governmental organizations

relevant to education are aware of the change, highlighting the importance of teachers

being prepared for AEC. The Office of the Permanent Secretary (2013) asserts that at

the founding of AEC in 2015, Thailand would have witnessed a free-flowing transfer

of labor among the countries in Southeast Asia. Though there would be only seven

occupations to be legitimized by a mutual agreement for the start, namely engineers,

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

2

nurses, architects, explorers, doctors, dentists and accountants, other jobs would be

allowed in following years. Each country must impose criteria in assessing the

workers’ ability to meet standards acceptable among other AEC members,

accordingly.

To achieve such qualified labor, teachers have been one of the targets included

in Thailand’s very first strategic plans. Ratananukul (2012), who was then Deputy

Secretariat of the Higher Education Commission, projected one of the prior schemes

was to promote and improve education programs of English teachers and professional

development. The workers to enter the AEC need to have effective communication

skills in English. Likewise, teachers, as well as educational personnel, are also

mentioned in the National Education Plan for the B.E. 2560–2579 phase. The main

priority is to develop human resources, who have potential in competition and can

establish the nation’s stability in the economy and society in accordance with

Thailand’s 12th National Economic and Development Plan for the B.E. 2560–2564

phase (Office of the Education Council, 2018). To reach this goal, teachers are

expected to develop themselves and use their knowledge in teaching and in certain

fields to develop human resources. The strategy and practice include the development

of learning processes and design of various activities that improve learners’ thinking,

analytical skills and skills in subject matter. This pinpoints the importance of teacher

education programs, which could prove the success of improving students’ learning

and becoming members of a high-quality workforce.

One of the reasons why teacher education programs are important is that

teachers who have had more experience in teacher education programs seem to have

more productivity and that may lead to more knowledge to better tackle problems in

learning (Harris & Sass, 2008). Moughamin, Rivera and Francis (2009) and Perry

(2011) also argue that the teachers who undergo teacher education programs yield

higher productivity. Teacher education programs also serve well in terms of preparing

student teachers to bring about achievement for students’ learning (Brown, 1998;

Thomas, 2012; Harris & Sass, 2008).

Moreover, EMYA (2014) maintains that the quality of teachers directly affects

the whole community. Once qualified teachers educate students and assist student

learning in achieving outcomes, parents and school administrators are satisfied. The

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

3

most important consequence is that the students will become a qualified workforce for

the society and the nation. However, before students become such qualified workers

in certain fields, they have to learn a variety of knowledge, skills and values, which

enable students to acquire lifelong learning (Marope, 2016). Students need to learn

various subjects, including Mathematics, sciences, Social Studies and

English/Language Arts so that they can understand different contexts in the real world

and in the end select a career for their future life (Kate, 2016). Before students reach

this point, they need to be provided with the knowledge, skills and values imbedded in

the various subjects taught to them. Teachers, therefore, are the ones responsible for

educating students to understand the subjects (Heggart, 2016). English is one of the

subjects that is important to make students become qualified workers in the economic

and social changes mentioned earlier. The importance of language teachers is

highlighted accordingly. Smith et al. (2007) specify the importance of English

language teacher education programs for English teachers, citing that no matter if the

teacher is a native or non-native speaker, experiences in teaching a language class and

knowledge in language teaching are needed. A teacher should have adequate skills in

teaching to achieve students’ success in learning the target language. Not only do

English teachers need teaching skills to be successful in teaching, but the teachers also

need to master the target language (Simon, 2001). Knowledge about grammar, for

instance, can ensure that students will be presented with accurate linguistic analysis.

Some teachers may have one of each: teaching skills or the knowledge of language.

That is the reason teacher preparation is crucial in order to prepare prospective

teachers to be qualified, professions teachers.

Moreover, being a good teacher requires more than just teaching students in

class. Being a teacher is not intuitive (Hong, 2010). One needs to be educated in a

formal program, where course work and clinical work are provided (Darling-

Hammond, 2006). A person who has not been educated in a teacher education

program, can teach students but the results can never be guaranteed. Teacher

education programs are in need. Not only will prospective teachers learn to master a

subject matter, but knowledge of how to teach, pedagogical knowledge, is also to be

understood. A program to educate student teachers, therefore, takes a vital role in

reassuring the number of qualified teachers. Many researchers have outlined effective

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

4

features for a teacher educational program. One study focuses on the actual tasks in

the classroom and the process that allows student teachers to study what they are

doing. The student teachers will eventually become effective teachers during their

first year of teaching. According to the results from the quantitative study ‘Teacher

education and student achievement,’ Boyd et al. (2008) have found that teachers who

had had opportunities to gain actual practice, including planning, could gain higher

scores than those who had not. The scores refer to the differences of students’ gain

scores from tests. The fact that the teachers who gained higher scores mean they could

boost higher gain scores earned by the students than those who had not undergone a

formal teacher education program. To gain actual practices, prospective teachers need

to attend a formal teacher education program. Ball, Knobloch, and Hoop (2007) argue

that student teachers learn about theories, which are applied during practice in the

teacher education program. The student teachers need to bridge the gap between

theorized instruction and real world practice. The repertoire of applying pedagogical

knowledge and subject matter urges a teacher to think and plan before teaching.

Again, teacher education programs serve well in terms of preparing student teachers

to bring about achievement for their students.

Studies’ results indicate that it is vital that the teacher education program

needs to provide sufficient knowledge and opportunities to apply the knowledge, so

that skills for teachers can be developed (Saricoban, 2009; Tok, 2010; Waghorn &

Stevens, 1996). An important task for teachers is to provide high quality teaching

(Ballantyne, Sanderman & Levy, 2008). The teachers will never become successful in

their profession without well-planned teacher education programs. According to

Shulman (1987), the foundational knowledge for teachers includes content or subject-

matter knowledge and pedagogical knowledge. The first refers to expertise in the

subject being taught while the latter refers to expertise in teaching strategies and

tactics, usually taught in teacher education programs.

As for the teacher education in Thailand, the Office of the Education Council

(2015) reports that the process in educating prospective teachers or student teachers

should include organizing the supervision system since the very beginning of a

teacher education program. The program should provide an opportunity for student

teachers to learn to become facilitators in classrooms, to use technology to search for

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

5

more information for instruction, to learn and share knowledge among teacher

communities, and so on. The teacher education program in Thailand also focuses on

student teachers’ knowledge management and the student teachers’ planning for

students. Pornsrima, Dean of Teacher Education School at Phranakhon Rajabhat

University, maintains when we want students to have such skills, teachers should be

the ones who obtain those skills first. For example, now that 21st century skills have

been imposed on the curriculum, student teachers should be educated to have the

skills too (as cited in Information and Communication Technology, Ministry of

Education, 2017). As such, student teachers should be able to critically think and

solve problems while they are dealing with classroom instruction. They should have

creativity and innovative skills while planning activities for teaching. When working

with other personnel, they should have collaboration, teamwork and leadership skills.

Moreover, they should understand cross-cultural differences and the subject matter

that is relevant to the content of instruction. Finally, they should be able to use

communication, information and media to improve their teaching abilities.

Panichkul (2015) excerpts Christopher Wright, a renowned English tutor in

Thailand, who maintains that English teachers in Thailand need to improve their

English skills and knowledge concerning the target language. They should check

accuracy of the content for each plan before teaching. Moreover, they should provide

an opportunity for students to experience use of the target language in class so that

students can achieve all components necessary for English communication: skills,

knowledge and experience. Focusing on the teacher education program, student

teachers should learn to understand the curriculum as it guides content for instruction

and to adjust the content for student needs in the current situation. To illustrate, Thai

curricula emphasize academic English, that is the English language used in a formal

situation. The English language taught is for students to pass tests. Student teachers

should learn to adjust the content of such curricula by adding general social English

so that students have basic knowledge in English, which leads to an ability in learning

more advanced levels of the language, like professional English, in the future.

Similarly, Dr. Warakorn Samkoses, President of Dhurakij Pandit University, as cited

by Panichkul (2015), asserts that there are various levels of formality of English:

English for communicating in daily life or for negotiating in the business arena, for

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

6

example. To make students qualified members of the future workforce, teachers

should teach students to communicate in English in different situations using different

levels of the language, which is the ultimate aim of teaching English.

Torff and Sessions (2009) point out one important skill for teachers under the

pedagogical knowledge: lesson planning. Lesson planning is viewed as an indicator of

a good teacher because planning can guarantee the quality of teaching and learning

achievement (Jensen, 2001). A lesson plan demands a teacher to congregate subject-

matter knowledge and pedagogical knowledge in order to prepare the teacher to

educate students. A lesson plan also becomes a document which communicates a

teacher’s expectation to students. A plan identifies initial agreements and details of

tasks. Moreover, a plan also communicates to other personnel in a community as well,

such as the teacher’s colleagues, administrators, parents and local people. A lesson

plan also acts as a pact between the teacher and other stakeholders that the teacher

would teach as planned. In addition, a plan can be used for teachers’ evaluation and

schools’ educational quality assurance (Ball et al., 2007).

In Thailand, the Office of National Education Standards and Quality

Assessment imposes standards and indicators, against which the performance of all

schools must reflect and show evidence of adherence. One such form of evidence is

lesson plans in the standards concerning students, teachers and principals

(Pornrungroj, 2013). For the indicator ‘Teachers’ creation of learning environment,’

lesson plans are used to show an innovation in teaching. For the indicator ‘Teachers’

publicized works,’ lesson plans a teacher has written over a period of time can be

compiled and show to the public as evidence of learning management in the

classroom. Other than that, an indicator concerning administrative personnel dictates

that there must be evidence for the Internal Quality Audit and the External Quality

Audit. Lesson plans, therefore, become form of evidence. For example, objectives on

lesson plans can show whether or not experiences planned for students are in line with

learning standards in the national curriculum.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

7

1.2 Statements of the problem

Planning a lesson is a complex process. A teacher has to determine

components in systematic learning to achieve goals arranged in a logical, rational way

based on the needs of students, schools and society (Sudirman, 2017). To write an

effective plan, teachers have to undergo a process that demands many steps, including

integrating contents, connecting all items, clearly identifying methods of teaching in

steps, stating materials and indicating appropriate assessment (Kammanee, 2001;

Pilanthananon, 2002; Womack, Pepper & Hanna, 2015). Moreover, Brown (2011)

asserts that to design a lesson plan, teachers have to understand resources and know

how to use them; assess the classroom’s features beneficial to planning and its

limitations; consider possible alternatives; and develop teaching and learning

strategies (as cited in Santoyo & Zhang, 2016). As can be seen, writing a lesson plan

requires teachers to think about all components. To all subjects, lesson plans are

important because they are used to enable students to be inspired and to generate

success (Cunningham, 2009). Brown (1998) even specifies lesson planning is a

necessity for teaching and learning a language. Learning a language is different from

other subjects, such as Science or Mathematics, where problems or laboratory help

students envisage the core knowledge. Learning a language, on a contrary, has

obstacles as illustrated by Ciaffaroni (2004): students’ rare exposure to the target

language due to living in a non-English speaking environment, insufficient practice

due to too large classes and few sessions per week and students’ limited access to

scarce resources of the target language. Planning English lessons is very important

because teachers have to consider said obstacles and demands for students’

achievement in learning English. Even teachers with teaching experience report

difficulties in planning lessons (Sudirman, 2017). Student teachers who have little

teaching experience and still practice teaching English are struggling with lesson

planning. A teacher education program for teaching English, therefore, must enable

student teachers to cope with all problems in accordance with application of all kinds

of knowledge when they plan lessons. Therefore, this is the reason why planning is

very important for teaching a language.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

8

As can be seen, lesson planning is important for student teachers’ success in

teaching; however, there are studies that report on problems in lesson planning.

According to a study, whose samples were student teachers and novice teachers, Ball,

Knobloch and Hoop (2007) conclude that student teachers spent a very long time

thinking about the plan rather than writing one. The authors refer to the internal and

external processes. Though there are a number of influences on lesson planning,

namely knowledge and experience; schedules; school administrators; facilities,

technology and resources; students; personality; and impracticality of planning

methods, the main understanding the student teachers need to develop is of the

pedagogical content knowledge and planning strategies specific to the practice of

teaching. The authors, however, elaborated on neither how the internal thinking

process should be conducted nor how and what content knowledge and planning

strategies should be laid out for the student teachers to learn.

How student teachers’ prosperity of thinking for planning should be focused is

also asserted by Richards and Bohlke (2011). Focusing on teaching English, the

authors maintain that based on what student teachers have been educated during a

teacher education program, the student teachers adopt certain methods of teaching in

lessons. Still, the student teachers need to seek meaning of teaching languages by

using their beliefs. This is similar to Kim (2011), who argues that student teachers are

still developing their beliefs in teaching English and the knowledge of what and how

to teach English to students. They need to understand their own thoughts, focusing on

teaching the target language. Kim (2011) suggests that further studies be conducted

continuously to investigate student teachers’ thinking concerned with teaching

English to students throughout a teacher education program.

Another study, which points out the importance of lesson planning, was

conducted by Torff and Sessions (2009). The authors argue that when lesson plans are

used as a main item for evaluating a teacher’s classroom performance, principals will

gain first-hand knowledge of teachers’ work. The work includes preparation of lesson

plans and materials, lesson implementation and ability to establish rapport with

students and handle classroom-management challenges. However, Torff and Sessions’

survey reports that deficiencies in lesson planning skills need prior attention. Of all

the pedagogical knowledge, lesson planning is the only out-of-class component. As a

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

9

result, without an effective plan a teacher will never be successful in teaching a class.

The other three in-class components are lesson-implementation skills, ability to

establish rapport with students and classroom-management skills. Again, lesson

planning is being focused and more studies concerning lesson planning, especially of

student teachers, are recommended.

In Thailand, lesson planning is included in mandatory courses in many

institutions, such as General Methods of Teaching, Lesson Planning, Pedagogy,

Learning Process, etc. Provided the different course titles, every course has a common

aim, that is, to prepare student teachers’ skills in lesson planning. Student teachers are

expected to meet standards and qualifications as imposed by governmental offices.

However, teachers’ weaknesses in planning skills have been reported. The Office of

the National Education Commission (Ministry of Education, 1999) and the Office of

Basic Education Commission (Ministry of Education, 2006) report English teachers’

problematic areas, one of which is lack of ability in pedagogical knowledge. They

cannot transfer the aim of the core curriculum to activities in classroom teaching,

which is one of the components in the lesson planning process. The teachers also lack

skills in planning the English learning process, implementing curriculum as well as

managing classrooms to facilitate students’ learning.

Moreover, Faikhamta, Jantarakantee and Roadrangka’s (2011) study pointed

out that student teachers in a teacher education program in Thailand had positive

opinions towards the length of practicum and their own teaching practice. They could

develop lesson planning techniques, teaching strategies, student learning processes

and planning instructional materials. However, student teachers still had problems

with defining clear objectives in lesson plans; assessing students’ prior knowledge;

and managing classrooms. Likewise, Songserm (2012b) also reported a series of

student teachers’ problems in six components in planning lessons: standards and

indicators, learning content, identified content, learning tasks, assessment and

learning activities. However, the study by Songserm did not investigate the reasons or

factors affecting or causing student teachers’ problems in lesson planning. A study to

investigate such factors would provide better understanding to the student teachers’

planning.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

10

From a study by Chuachai (2008), a significant difference between the pre-

and post-tests was reported after the implementation of a teacher education course for

lesson plan writing by using an observational learning process. Chuachai attempted to

organize this preparation program for student teachers in a state university in Thailand

in the current trend by using an online network. A number of components were

identified in the program: goals, types of learning, instructional design, roles of

student teachers, roles of organizers, roles of speakers, reactions via cyber space,

network searching, computer technology and the networking system. The study

emphasized the process of instructing pre-service teachers through an online network

integrated with the thinking process. Despite the success in implementing the

processes, student teachers might need more than the components of the process to

meet expectations, that is, the pedagogical knowledge and the content knowledge or

the knowledge in subject matters. The process which student teachers underwent to

design a lesson plan is key to segregate parts or patterns in what they think about and

how they do it. Then, understanding actual student teachers’ lesson planning can be

achieved.

In fact, there are studies that investigate the process of lesson planning. Clark

and Yinger (1980) propose the planning process of teachers, which concerns overt

behavior while planning; thinking while planning; classroom instruction; and effects

of teaching on the teacher and student learning. Teacher planning is influenced by

teacher characteristics, student characteristics, curriculum characteristics and

environmental factors. Then, Clark and Peterson (1986) propose a process of thoughts

and actions of teaching for planning. There are three components in the process:

teachers’ thinking before planning and after planning; teachers’ thinking while

implementing lesson plans; and teachers’ knowledge of particular areas. There are

also problematic and supportive items that have an influence on the process. Based on

Clark and Peterson’s process, Ball et al. (2007) argue novice teachers should think

while planning a lesson. They should also think about the purpose of writing a lesson

plan; prioritize and conceptualize content; make daily or hourly plans; and adjust the

formal plan format to the practical format. What’s more, Ball et al. identify factors

that influence lesson planning: availability of facilities, technology and resources;

students; personality; and impracticality of planning methods. The process found in

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

11

by the previous studies focuses mainly on teachers or, to be specific, in-service

teachers, who have already become professional teachers.

A mixed-method study by Naeem (2014), however, focused on student

teachers majoring in Teaching English and their problems relevant to explain

implementation of plans. The problems included inadequate time for activities, new

teaching techniques unaccepted by school supervisors, supervisors’ absence during

implementation of plans, ineffective use of voice while implementing plans and

students’ problematic behavior. The study focused on pre-service teachers or

Teaching English student teachers, who were asked to complete a questionnaire and

to write reasons for the problems. However, the instruments of this study’s

quantitative and qualitative methodologies could not yield an in-depth insight to

explain what the sources of the reasons were or how the causes had occurred in the

first place.

For the Thai context, there were some studies that focused on student teachers

majoring in Teaching English and lesson plans; however, none of the studies focused

on generating a theory to explain the lesson planning process. According to Sarawan

(1978), the objective of his study was to compare classroom behavior of the first

group of student teachers, who took the Teaching English course and underwent a

micro-teaching session, and classroom behavior of the second group of student

teachers, who only took the Teaching English course. The student teachers in both

group were majoring in Teaching English. The student teachers in the first group had

the following classroom behaviors: teaching fun activities, including games and

songs, and having a variety of activities for the four skills. The student teachers in the

second group had lower frequencies of such classroom behaviors. Though classroom

behavior was one of the components regarding implementation of lesson plans in

some lesson planning models, Sarawan (1978) did not mention lesson planning in his

study. Moreover, though observation was a research instrument, an observatory and

analytical form of classroom behaviors in an English classroom was used in order to

find frequencies of the behavior by means of the equivalent performance categories—

a quantitative instrument. The behaviors were figured out but the author could only

speculate reasons or causes of such behaviors in the discussion. Actual explanations

from student teachers were not investigated.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

12

Another study by Nooyod and Hiranto (2017) focused on student teachers

majoring in Teaching English and lesson planning in the context of a teacher

education program in Thailand. Its research design was based on the qualitative

method. However, the purpose of the study was to study the results of developing

English instructional management skills based on communicative language teaching

using lesson plan study. Student teachers majoring in Teaching English and the

researchers worked together to design English lesson plans, implemented them in

classrooms and reflected on the implementation. The results revealed three phases.

First, the student teachers and the researchers designed lesson plans together based on

the Communicative Language Teaching approach. The lesson plans contained such

communicative activities as the jigsaw activity, role-play, matching games and so on.

Second, the student teachers and the researchers implemented the plans together in an

actual classroom. The implementation was recorded on visual files. Finally, all of

them reviewed the visual files, had reflections upon the implementation and discussed

problems and solutions to improve subsequent plans. Though the results presented a

process of lesson planning, it was predetermined by the lesson study approach

proposed by Baba (2007). The researcher did not generate the process from the data

but intended to study the results from administering the process with student teachers

majoring in Teaching English.

Another study that focused on student teachers majoring in Teaching English

and lesson planning was conducted by Uamcharown, Lowriendee and Mongkol

(2016), but again, the study did not present the results concerned with a lesson

planning process, nor did it explain the area of lesson planning in a specific context in

a teacher education program in Thailand. This study was conducted using a one group

pre-test post-test study to develop a constructivist learning model. Based on literature

review, the researchers designed a teaching model for developing lesson planning of

thirty student teachers majoring in Teaching English. In other words, the researchers

developed a short program, in which the student teachers were to participate. The aim

of the program was to develop the student teachers’ lesson planning by means of a

constructivist learning model. The study focused on the process where the program

was developed: analyzing data; designing and developing the program, implementing

the program and evaluating the program. Student teachers’ opinion was collected by

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

13

means of a quantitative method (e.g. a survey questionnaire). As such, the results

from this study did not reveal a theory to explain student teachers’ lesson planning

process.

Apart from the previous studies’ limitations, specific context of the problem

from the researcher’s workplace has been also reviewed. The university for which the

researcher of this study works, provides a teacher education program, where certain

points of lesson planning of student teachers majoring in Teaching English have been

found. According to the study, “A program evaluation of the bachelor of education

degree in English, the Faculty of Education, Silpakorn University” (Jantarach, 2011),

the employers, who were mostly school administrators, reported on a survey

questionnaire that their employees, did not really evaluate what they had taught in

order to improve teaching. The employees in that study referred to graduates from the

teacher education program provided by the university, where this current study’s

student teachers were studying. The results were figured out after the teacher

education program was implemented; therefore, the causes of the incidents were

clarified neither by the school administrators nor by the graduates. The results also

revealed the teacher education program’s effectiveness in preparing student teachers

for their workplace (e.g. schools) to some extent. Therefore, an evaluation of

graduates’ instruction should be conducted as well.

During the seminars held every term, the student teachers majoring in

Teaching English and university supervisors concluded similar problems during

practicum (Faculty of Education, 2011). One of the problems was concerned with

lesson planning. Student teachers could not adopt correct methods of teaching English

to a particular lesson, nor could they integrate various activities that promoted the

practice of certain English skills. Some student teachers claimed that they did not

understand how to apply theories or approaches; that they did not know how to select

items in a textbook to write a lesson plan; that they were not sure about how to plan

time management and student behavior; and so on.

According to formal talks from faculty meetings, the researcher knew that one

main problem student teachers have had is also lesson planning. The problems are the

same as reported by many studies mentioned above: lack of understanding of

curriculum and standards and indicators, objectives irrelevant to activities and

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

14

assessment plans or incorrect steps of teaching. Similar to Songserm’s results

(2012b), the plans consisted of all needed elements but lacked relationships among

the standards and indicators, the terminal objectives, the enabling aims, the learning

activities and the assessment. This becomes the main concern because lesson planning

has the most percentage points of all tasks for practicum: fifty percent. Lesson

planning is one of the tasks required of student teachers by the Commission on Higher

Education to fulfill (Department of Curriculum and Instruction, 2012). Other tasks

include academic projects for the local community (20%), classroom research (15%)

and administrative and self-development tasks (15%). The most percentage points of

the lesson planning task indicate most effort and time student teachers have to devote

to during practicum. Inevitably, the planning requires skills of other important tasks

that ensure students’ achievement in learning English: an analysis of curriculum,

design of learning activities and selection of materials. Other than that, from informal

talks, all of the researcher’s colleagues agree that the student teachers produced lesson

plans of poor quality.

The results from previous studies concerning lesson planning did not,

however, describe what student teachers were doing while they were planning or what

they did towards any factors involving lesson planning. The concerns over problems

on lesson planning were reported by means of both quantitative and qualitative

methods in such studies conducted by Chuachai (2008); Faikhamta et al. (2011);

Naeem (2014); and Songserm (2012a,b). The following studies, whose key words

were student teachers majoring in Teaching English and lesson planning, did not

reveal sufficient explanation for the lesson planning process in the context of

Thailand: Nooyod and Hiranto (2017); Sarawan (1978); and Uamcharown,

Lowriendee and Mongkol (2016). More investigation is needed to explain student

teachers’ lesson planning in an insightful point of view and in-depth data collection.

As can be seen, because the necessities from both external and internal factors

require a closer look at the teacher education program, the researcher for this study

asserts a study to investigate student teachers’ lesson planning is needed. The external

factors project many changes at both international and national levels: 21st Century

Skills and the arrival of AEC. Obviously, English learning has become a focus since

effective communication in the language is in strong demand. This requires a new set

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

15

of standards and qualifications for the future workforce, for whom teachers are

directly responsible for success and failure. However, one of teachers’ skills is lesson

planning, on which many studies have reported problems. Student teachers struggle in

lesson planning, which guarantees successful teaching and learning. Though previous

studies focused on lesson planning, in-service teachers were the participants for the

studies. Pre-service teachers or student teachers, in fact, should be the persons who

reveal the data. They have to take on lesson planning and tasks concerning lesson

planning in actual schools despite their low experience and the fact that they are still

learning. An in-depth study of student teachers’ lesson planning processes in a natural

setting should be conducted in the hope that there will be better understanding of the

lesson planning process and a theory will be generated for explaining what is going on

before, while and after student teachers plan a lesson.

1.3 Purpose of the study

To generate a theory to explain Thai EFL student teachers’ lesson planning.

1.4 Research questions

1.4.1 How do Thai EFL student teachers design their lesson plans?

1.4.1.1 What factors influence student teachers’ lesson planning?

1.4.1.2 What is the procedure in student teachers’ lesson planning?

1.4.2 How do student teachers implement lesson plans?

1.4.2.1 What do student teachers do before implementing the lesson

plan?

1.4.2.2 Are lesson plans implemented as planned? Why/Why not?

1.4.3 What action do student teachers take after implementing a lesson plan?

1.4.3.1 How do student teachers evaluate lesson plans?

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

16

1.5 Significance of the study

After this study is conducted, the results emerging from the data will yield a

theory to explain Thai EFL student teachers’ lesson planning. As this study is

conducted under an appropriate research methodology—the grounded theory method,

the results will reveal insightful views reported by student teachers majoring in

Teaching English in a teacher education program in Thailand. This study will fill in

the research gap and add to the literature concerning the lesson planning process, for

which few previous studies have been conducted by means of qualitative research

methodology to explain student teachers in a natural setting in Thailand. For this

study, student teachers will reveal in-depth information of how they design a lesson

plan. The step-by-step planning will be studied closely so that any other factors

involved in the lesson planning process may be found, apart from previous studies’

factors (Ball et al., 2007; Clark & Peterson, 1986; Clark & Yinger, 1980; John, 2006).

The lesson planning process formed from the data will help explain the

reasons for particular actions or what student teachers do to plan a lesson, where

school supervisors and university supervisors or any other relevant institutions have

expressed concerns. The results will also explain what previous studies found about

student teachers’ problems in lesson plans (Faikhamta et al., 2011; Ministry of

Education, 2006; Naeem, 2014; Songserm, 2012a,b). However, a gap exists where

previous studies could not explain the reasons, causes or factors that affected such

lesson planning. This study will be conducted to find an explanation for such

problems. Conversely, there may be other factors or supportive elements that result in

positive effects on student teachers’ lesson planning during the process. The study

will, then, investigate all aspects of the process. Not only will all kinds of factors and

components of designing a lesson plan be explained, but the results will also allow the

researcher to have reached the explanation of how the factors or the components

affect one another in the whole planning process. In the end, a theory of Thai EFL

student teachers’ lesson planning will be used to improve teacher education programs

as the necessity of such programs is vital to establish persons qualified for the era of

free-flowing manpower in the community of English communication.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

17

Moreover, the theory about Thai EFL student teachers from this study will

show practices for personnel and institutions involved in the lesson planning process.

For example, supervisors will understand specific causes of student teachers’

decisions made during each stage of lesson plan. The supervisors will be able to

assist, if needed, student teachers’ areas of difficulty in certain procedures of planning

a lesson. Student teachers will be aware of their own thoughts and actions in each

procedure of lesson plans. They will also realize the factors that have influence on

lesson plans so that they can plan to minimize or eliminate difficulty or to maximize

success for student learning. Institutions will have guidelines for organizing the

practicum course or providing field experience for student teachers that serve actual

student teachers’ needs based on the data from this study. In addition, the theory will

yield a viable proposition that relates to the personnel and institutions’ development

of the teacher education program. Program developers can set the appropriate

curriculum that provides student teachers with the knowledge and skills necessary for

each procedure of lesson planning. Lecturers, for example, in the teacher education

program will have guidelines for formulating courses whose content is specific

enough to develop student teachers’ lesson planning.

1.6 Definitions

The important terms for this study are defined below so that any researchers

who are interested in replicating this study will understand clearly the context in

which this study has been conducted.

1.6.1 ‘Lesson planning’ refers to the process, in which a teacher uses

pedagogical knowledge, including theories, methods and practices, to transform a

curriculum or a course syllabus into a guideline. The lesson plan, then, is

implemented in a classroom so that the teacher is to meet expectations, concerning

teaching and learning, of an institution, the teacher and students within a designated

time period in order to support student learning. In the end, the teacher is to self-

evaluate the implementation of the plan for improving the subsequent lesson plans.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

18

1.6.2 ‘Thai EFL student teachers’ refers to the students majoring in Teaching

English who have enrolled in the practicum courses provided by a undergraduate

teacher education program at a state university in the West of Thailand. After they

have enrolled in the practicum course in their first term, the students, then, become

‘student teachers.’

1.6.3 ‘Theory of lesson planning’ refers to a set of ideas that explain the lesson

planning processes from the beginning to the end. The ideas are based on data

collected from the student teachers majoring in Teaching English in a teacher

education program provided by the Faculty of Education of a state university in the

West of Thailand.

1.7 Organization of the study

There are five chapters in this study’s report. Each chapter shows necessary

components in research methodology. The detailed explanation is hoped to give a

clear picture to other researchers who wish to conduct a replication.

Chapter 1: Introduction. The first chapter includes an introduction to the

background of the study. The area of lesson planning is verified by review of previous

studies. Use of the grounded theory method for this study is also verified so that this

shows an appropriate statement to conduct this study. Other components of research

are also illustrated in the first chapter: background, statement of the problem, purpose

of the study, research questions, significance of the study, definitions and organization

of this study.

Chapter 2: Review of literature. The second chapter includes review of the

areas concerning lesson planning, including planning processes, components of lesson

plans, student teachers and supervision. Print and electronic resources, including

books and studies, will be researched, reviewed and presented, so that research

methodology in the third chapter will be based upon what has been found from

literature review. For example, questions for data collection should cover all steps in

designing a lesson plan.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

19

Chapter 3: Research methodology. The third chapter includes research design,

context of this study, participants, research instruments, data collection, rigor of the

study and data analysis.

Chapter 4: Results of the study. The fourth chapter includes the results which

are presented according to the research questions. At the end of the chapter, diagrams

are presented to illustrate lesson planning processes and other components involved in

the processes. At the end of the chapter, the theory to explain student teachers’ lesson

planning processes grounded on the data will be represented in diagrams as well as

detailed descriptions.

Chapter 5:Theory of Thai EFL student teachers’ lesson planning. The fifth

chapter includes the theory of Thai EFL student teachers’ lesson planning processes.

Based on the results from the fourth chapter, the theory is presented in detailed

diagrams followed by descriptions.

Chapter 6: Discussion, implications, limitations, recommendations and

conclusion. The final chapter includes discussion of the results. The implications are

also reported so that the results from this study can be applied in other similar

contexts. The limitations of this study are also presented. Moreover, the

recommendations are presented for any researchers who wish to study further on the

area of lesson planning. This chapter ends with the conclusion.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

CHAPTER 2

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

The literature has been reviewed to study the background of the area of lesson

planning. The literature review has been conducted so that the data could be compared

to previous studies relevant to the area. Not only was the literature used to make

questions for interviews and observations at the early stage, but it was also used to

confirm what has been found in the data. As some concepts kept appearing in the

data, the relevant literature has been searched and studied so that the researcher could

enhance sensitivity to a subtle difference in the data (Corbin & Strauss, 2015). The

main sources of literature were studies and textbooks concerning concepts derived

from the results. The scope of the literature ranges from international studies to the

Thai context concerning English as a Foreign Language or EFL.

The topics in this chapter include definitions of lesson planning, importance of

lesson planning, lesson planning processes, organization of a lesson plan, components

of a lesson plan, procedures of preparing a lesson plan and student teachers’ lesson

planning and supervision.

2.1 Definitions of lesson planning

Educators have proposed definitions of a lesson plan in both general and very

specific terms. Mostly, they include the following components to define a lesson plan:

a tool or a guideline, transformation of curriculum or syllabus, meeting expectations

and other components. Some may mention only some of the above components but

not all. Two general definitions are given by Tanni (2012) and Jensen (2001). While

the first focuses on teacher training, the other does not. Tanni maintains that “lesson

planning is a core issue in teacher training because of the challenge it poses to

beginning teachers. Teachers plan lessons to transform a curriculum or a syllabus,

institutional expectations and their educational conceptions into practical guidelines

for the classroom” (p. 2). On the other hand, Jensen defines a lesson plan as “an

extremely useful tool that serves as a combination guide, resource, and historical

document reflecting our teaching philosophy, student population, textbooks and, most

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

21

importantly, our goals for our students” (p. 403). Moreover, Serdyukov and Ryan

(2008) add the period of time as another component in lesson planning, defining that

“a lesson plan is a model of organized learning events within a standard time period

of a formal instructional process. Constructed by a teacher, it determines the structure

and sequence of the teaching and learning activities to be performed during that

period. Both the teacher and students will perform these planned activities intended to

achieve the learning goals and specific objectives of the lesson” (p. 2).

The similarity among these three definitions is that a lesson plan is viewed as a

tool of goals or expectations set up for the institution, the teacher and the students so

that they have it as a guideline to look forward to in the end.

Compared to other definitions, Harmer’s (2002) may be similar in terms of a

lesson plan being a tool for students to acknowledge what is going to happen in a

class; however, it is the only one that mentions “a lesson plan as “an identity which

students can recognize, work within, and react to.” Also mentioned is that “plans are

proposals for action rather than scripts to be followed slavishly, whether they are

detailed documents or hastily scribbled notes” (p. 308). This concept resembles

Woodward’s (2001) definition, which states an encouragement for teachers to develop

their own approach of lesson planning because she seems to understand the real

situation when teachers plan and teach, citing that they conceptualize language and

learning as a natural process that takes a long period to achieve. They also have their

own syllabus that can move around. Their major aim is to motivate students and make

the class interesting. Again, the concept of a lesson plan being a guideline is being

emphasised. A teacher should not stick to the plan rigidly without flexibility.

The following are the more specific definitions that mention other components

in lesson planning. SABES and ACLS (2008) maintains that, "a lesson plan describes

how learning is to be organized and facilitated in the classroom and documents

specific plans for teaching. It is a written document composed of learning objectives

that show alignment with the curriculum frameworks as well as descriptions of all

assessments, instructional activities, needed materials and resources, and wrap-

up/reflection activities for a particular class or series of classes" (p. 2). It illustrates to

readers clearly that the objective written for the lesson plan should be compatible with

many other components. Though it might look too elaborate, student teachers who are

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

22

showed with this definition may have clearer ideas of components to be put in their

lesson plans and relevance of them all to one another. Serdyukov and Ryan’s (2008)

second definition is that, “a lesson plan is a model of organized learning events within

a standard time period of a formal instructional process. Constructed by a teacher, it

determines the structure and sequence of the teaching and learning activities to be

performed during that period. Both the teacher and students will perform these

planned activities intended to achieve the learning goals and specific objectives of the

lesson” (p. 2). As can be seen, other components are added, such as assessments,

instructional activities, teaching methods, materials—both technology and non-

technology—and resources.

In conclusion, lesson planning is the way to transform a curriculum or a course

syllabus into a guideline which leads a teacher to meet expectations concerning

teaching and learning of an institution, the teacher and students within a designated

time period. The components of a lesson plan consist of objectives, instructional or

teaching methods, activities, assessment, materials and resources, including

technology applications.

2.2 The Importance of lesson planning

The following subtopics show various benefits of lesson plans to both highly

experienced teachers and novice teachers. The benefits include the lesson plan’s roles

to promote professional development, tools for evaluation, tools to meet expectations

and as guidelines for involved personnel.

2.2.1 For professional development. The most cited benefit is the fact that

lesson planning enhances teacher professional development. According to Shulman

(1987), the foundation knowledge for teachers includes content knowledge or subject-

matter knowledge and pedagogical knowledge. The content knowledge refers to

expertise in the subject being taught while the pedagogical knowledge refers to

expertise in teaching strategies and tactics, usually taught in teacher education

programmes.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

23

Torff and Sessions (2009) point out the importance of lesson planning and

lesson implementation, put under the pedagogical knowledge, which both directly and

indirectly accounts for students’ achievement. The reason is that lesson planning

enables teachers to develop a personal style as they distil knowledge of information,

resources and beliefs for teaching students at a particular time and place. This is like

the teacher has developed a state of art (Woodward, 2001). By planning lessons,

teachers have an opportunity to explore various aspects of pedagogical content

knowledge (Shen et al., 2007). First, the teachers think deeply about the subject

matter, including the way the subject matter is represented in particular textbooks or

in such aspects of the curriculum as standards and benchmarks. Second, the teachers

also have time to develop pedagogical activities or methods that enable students to

grasp the subject matter. Third, lesson planners can ponder what students know and

how the students may best understand the content (p.249).

2.2.2 For evaluation. From the articles by Darling-Hammond and Snyder

(2000), Denner, Salzman and Bangert (2001) and Ferrel (1992), it can be concluded

that planning becomes a main item being used for evaluating a teacher’s classroom

performance. Principals who observe a teacher in a classroom will gain first-hand

knowledge of the teacher’s work which includes preparation of lesson plans and

materials, lesson implementation and ability to establish rapport with students and

handle classroom-management challenges (Torff & Sessions, 2009, p. 130).

Therefore, to make the most usefulness of lesson planning, teachers should not be

instructed to write only a list of activities as told or as set up rigidly. Instead, the

teachers should prepare to use knowledge, both concerning the subject and the

pedagogical matters, in writing a lesson.

2.2.3 Tools to meet expectation. Lesson planning is also viewed as a tool to

prove that expectations towards the teachers are met. Vermette et al. (2010) focus

their work on novice teachers who have to show the ability to apply the instructional

strategies, content-based pedagogy and educational theory to teaching practice. In

other words, those inexperienced teachers have to bridge educational theories and

practice by writing a lesson plan. Lesson plans are part of preparation of a teacher

before coming to class. Because a teacher expects students to be prepared to learn,

students expect the same from their teacher (Jensen, 2001).

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

24

2.2.4 Guidelines, records and material for substitute teachers. Lesson plans

serve as maps or guidelines for teachers to follow (Jensen, 2001). The goals and

objectives are to show sequences of activities. Next, lesson plans show records of

what a teacher did in class. The plans become resources for planning assessments,

such as quizzes, mid-terms and final exams. The record can also help teachers avoid

repeating what was taught last time if the same course is run again. Finally, lesson

plans enable a substitute teacher to teach in the same path as a class teacher (p.403).

2.3 Lesson planning processes

Many educators propose a variety of lesson planning processes, which are

concerned with teachers or student teachers’ procedures in planning a lesson and its

components, decision-making and influences of beliefs.

2.3.1 Model for research on teacher planning for instruction. According to

Clark and Yinger (1980), studying teacher lesson planning is important because of the

following reasons. First, the study of teacher planning allows researchers to

understand a teacher’s thinking and the relationship between the teacher’s thoughts

and actions in teaching. Second, planning involves many elements in education, such

as teacher preparation time, teacher contract negotiations, educational administration

and so on. Studying teacher planning allows practitioners to understand the process of

instruction. Third, studying teacher planning provides additional aspects to

pedagogical knowledge. When comparing lesson plans to the implementation of the

plans, teachers can provide insights into implicit theories of teaching and learning.

Finally, research on planning shows possible actions as a link between research on

curriculum and research on teacher behavior. Teaching planning envisages how

teachers bring or do not bring curriculum and instructional performance together

during their planning activities.

Clark and Yinger (1980) propose the following model for research on teacher

planning for instruction (see Figure 2.1) to explain major components of lesson

planning from various studies.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

25

Figure 2.1: Model for research on teacher planning for instruction (Clark & Yinger,

1980, p. 16)

Influences on teacher planning The process of planning Classroom interaction Effects

Teacher characteristics

-Experience

-Personality

-Intellectual ability

-Knowledge of subject

-Problem-solving style

-Repertoire of teaching skills and

strategies

-Teacher implicit theories

Classroom interaction:

Jointly constructed by

teacher and students

Effects of teaching

on the teacher

Student characteristics

-Grade level

-Class size

-Cognitive readiness

-Social-emotional readiness

Teacher planning

-Overt behavior while

planning

-Thinking while

planning (content and

processes)

Student learning

-Cognitive

-Social-emotional

Curriculum characteristics

-Subject matter

-Materials

Environmental factors

-Classroom organization

-School schedule

-Time available

-Administrative regulations

-Accountability system

The teacher’s plan

Immediate effects of planning on the teacher

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

26

Before planning, teacher planning is influenced by various factors: teacher

characteristics, student characteristics, curriculum characteristics and environmental

factors. While in the processes of planning, teachers perform tasks or activities that

bring about lesson plans and at the same time, they are thinking about components in

lesson plans. When implementing the lesson plan, there are interactions between the

teacher and students. The effects of teaching on the teacher and student learning are

the results from reflection.

From their study, Clark and Yinger (1980) included the following findings: 1)

planning is important to teachers and generally invisible to everyone else, 2) planning

in practice differs from traditional prescriptions for planning, 3) planning during the

first weeks of school has long-term effects, 4) teacher planning transforms curriculum

into instruction, 5) routines can increase teacher efficiency and flexibility, 6)

communicating plans puts thought into action, and 7) teacher reflection aids teacher

development (p.5).

2.3.2 Student teachers’ planning process. John (2006) proposes student

teachers’ planning process that shows the nature of decision-making of the

experienced practitioners. After reviewing a number of studies, the author has

produced the model, which is used to explain that decision-making in the real world is

not designated in the same process. John suggests that the process not be fixed in an

order and that the process consist of sub-processes (p. 492).

According to Figure 2.2, there are three layers of circles, which suggest

components in a lesson plan. First, the main core includes the aims, objectives and

learning outcomes of a lesson plan. The second layer of circles indicates the

foundational components of a lesson plan: national curriculum, subject content,

resources, tasks and activities, classroom control or classroom management and

student learning. Finally, the outer most layer lays satellite components, which the

author asserts they are sub-divisions of the key components and can be changed or

developed according to different context.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

27

Figure 2.2: Student teachers’ planning process (John, 2006, p. 491)

There are two phases in this model. In the early phase, student teachers begin

with thinking about objectives of lessons. Then, the student teachers go back and forth

in many cyclical ways to visit and revisit certain components to complete a lesson

plan. The lightly shaded balloons contain the components for the student teachers to

think about as information of each component is available. John suggests that student

teachers can have access to the expert knowledge of school supervisors to help them

plan. This implies that student teachers gain some information necessary for planning

from school supervisors.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

28

Next, in the extended phase, as student teachers have more understanding of

the lesson plan, they explore through the components of the lesson plans again. Based

on their professional values, such as inclusion, equal opportunities and beliefs, student

teachers rethink more aspects to refine their lesson plans: differentiation, students’

learning styles, degree of difficulty of tasks and activities or conceptual understanding

of subject content. From Figure 2.2, all the lines connect all balloons. That indicates

the student teachers can revisit other components they had thought about during the

early phase.

John (2006, p. 494) verifies that the student teachers’ planning process model

shows all components and aspects relevant to produce a lesson plan. This provides

explicit guidance to student teachers or teachers in all different subjects and types of

teaching. Moreover, the model also points out the importance of student teachers’

metacognition when they evaluate and control their own thinking as they made

choices.

2.3.3 Model of teacher thought and actions. According to Clark and Peterson

(1986), what teachers think and how they act are influenced by the constraints and

opportunities in a context. The model (see Figure 2.3) explains how teachers’ thought

processes relate to the action of teacher planning. The processes of teacher planning

consist of teacher planning (preactive and postactive thoughts or thinking before and

after teaching), teachers’ interactive thoughts and decisions (decisions that teachers

make while teaching) and teacher’s theories and beliefs. Moreover, the effects of

teacher actions include students’ classroom behavior, student achievement and

outcomes and teachers’ classroom behavior and the outcomes and nature of teachers’

lesson plans.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

29

Students' classroom behavior

Student achievement

Teachers' classroom behavior

Figure 2.3: Model of teacher thought and action (Clark & Peterson, 1986, p. 13)

To understand the process, Clark and Peterson (1986) maintain that constraints

and opportunities should also be investigated. The physical setting or external factors,

such as the school, the principal, the community or the curriculum, often constrain

teachers’ actions. Making a decision is viewed as an important variable that is needed

for any model of teaching because responsibility and participation in the decision-

making process refer to both constraints and opportunities for effective schools (p.

258). Other than that, a teacher’s theories and beliefs also account for his/her thought

and action.

2.3.4 Novice teachers’ instructional planning. Based on the Clark and

Peterson model, Ball, Knobloch and Hoop (2007) conducted a study on lesson

planning of inexperienced teachers. The framework drawn from the study helps

finding the results for an investigation of what inexperienced teachers think about

planning and what they actually do. The following are the actions and features

occurring while planning a lesson.

2.3.4.1 Mental process. While planning, teachers are thinking about

what they want to achieve versus writing formal lesson plans. Writing a detailed

lesson plan seems to be negatively perceived. Gafoor and Farooque (2010) suggest

Teachers' interactive

thought and decision

Teachers' theories & beliefs

Teacher planning (Preactive &

postactive thoughts)

Teachers’ thought processes Teachers’ actions and observable effects

Opportunities & constraints

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

30

that student teachers can compare detailed lesson plans in a formal format and rough

lesson plans without a format. They can benefit from each kind of plan by themselves.

2.3.4.2 Prioritizing and conceptualizing content. Teachers need to

learn to conceptualize content to decide what is important to teach. Various resources

can be used to plan: texts from the Internet, local resources and so on. The standards

from the national curriculum must be prioritized; otherwise, the absence of the

standards may result in a poor lesson plan.

2.3.4.3 Daily or hourly planning. Teachers seem to plan on a daily or

even hourly basis. This is the notion of ‘just in time’ planning, where available

resources, such as movies, worksheets or informal activities, are used.

2.3.4.4 Coping and adaptations for planning. When teachers start their

teaching career, lesson plans are created in a similar way to what the teachers were

taught in their methods of teaching class. After a period of time, the formal and

detailed plans have become an outline of content to be taught.

To understand the actions, Ball et al. also describe the following influences on

lesson planning.

2.3.4.5 Knowledge and experience. Teachers with little experience

have difficulties in planning. A narrow scope of knowledge, both in content and

teaching areas, is adopted. The teaching methods or kinds of activities, therefore, are

limited to the teachers’ comfort levels.

2.3.4.6 Schedules. The following influence the planning process:

school’s daily schedule, the time of year, the calendar of the local community, the

national activities, school’s routines, etc.

2.3.4.7 School administrators. It is one of the requirements for teachers

to create lesson plans. Administrators request lesson plans as evidence for quality

insurance and professional development.

2.3.4.8 Facilities, technology and resources. Teachers plan in

accordance with the availability of facilities, technology, and resources at school.

2.3.4.9 Students. Lesson plans are created according to students’

interests, prior knowledge and experiences in order to gain positive classroom

interactions.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

31

2.3.4.10 Personality. Some teachers may plan in a more organized and

systematic way, while other teachers prefer to plan according to their own personal

teaching styles and flexibility.

2.3.4.11 Impracticality of planning methods. Teachers may plan

differently from what they were taught and what they experience in an actual

classroom. Some planning methods may be viewed as impractical; therefore, the way

a teacher plans may be changed.

2.3.5 Lesson planning as process of decision-making based on beliefs.

Teaching is a complex and contingent process involving cognitive skills that requires

teachers to think before, during and after class. This is a process of planning and

decision-making (Gűn, 2014). As shown in Figure 2.3 (Clark & Peterson, 1986),

teachers make decisions based on beliefs. The following is a review of studies that

propose concepts of decision making based beliefs.

According to Richards (2015), teachers shape their practice by using

information, attitudes, values, theories and assumptions about teaching and learning—

a belief system. The following items account for teacher beliefs: experience, school

practice, personality, thoughts about education, and other sources. Novice teachers,

for example, use their beliefs as basic components in viewing the content of the

teacher preparation programme and their experiences in language teaching. A teacher

preparation programme may be well constructed to serve a student teacher’s needs;

however, due to an individual’s beliefs, language, instruction and students, a student

teacher may interpret the programme differently and reconstruct it in their own way.

According to various studies on beliefs, Shinde and Karekatti (2012) conclude

that beliefs have an influence on teachers’ professional development and their

classroom practices. Based on their beliefs, teachers make decisions of the

components of teaching: managing classrooms, designing activities, allocating time,

planning lessons, judging general student understandings and so on.

As for EFL student teachers, they make decisions on beliefs that are based on

the experience they had when they were students learning English language

(Numrich, 1996). Moreover, EFL student teachers use teaching techniques or

activities that they had positive experience with when they were students. On the

other hand, they avoid using teaching techniques or activities that they had negative

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

32

experience with when they were students. Moreover, these beliefs become sources of

teachers’ reference, are established over a period of time and related to teachers’

theories of language, the nature of language teaching practices, roles of themselves as

teachers and relationship with their students. What’s more, Shinde and Karekatti

(2012) also conclude that language teachers’ beliefs are divided into three areas: about

language learning, about learners and about themselves (p.73).

Moreover, Schramm-Possinger (2015) maintains that student teachers’

practicum affects novice teachers’ beliefs. In other words, the experience a student

teacher had when he/she practiced teaching affects his/her beliefs when he/she

becomes novice teachers. This effect also lasts long in the teaching profession. For

example, when a teacher is assigned to teach different subjects at a different grade

level, he/she frequently holds on to pedagogical knowledge developed during

practicum (p. 75). Student teachers embrace perspectives that are congruent to theirs.

This behaviour results from school culture, characteristics and practices that the

student teachers underwent during practicum (Buehl & Fives, 2009, p. 367).

2.3.6 Student teachers’ reflections. Another applicable practice for lesson

planning is proposed by Gafoor and Farooque (2010), who asked a number of student

teachers to identify difficulties in planning and possible solutions. Before moving

away from planning for teaching to designing for learning, inexperienced teachers

should have opportunities to learn, inquire and reflect. By doing so Gafoor and

Farooque claimed that the pre-service teachers would build up knowledge as

explained in the four epistemological assumptions by Fosnot (1996). Catherine Fosnot

argued that learners can construct knowledge by physically involving in active

learning, symbolically making their own representations of action, socially conveying

their meanings to others and theoretically trying to explain things they do not

completely understand.

Gafoor and Farooque initiated a session where the student teachers discussed

and exchanged ideas about lesson planning. This obviously created an opportunity for

the student teachers to participate in learning and being responsible for finding what

they needed to share with the group. Moreover, this seminar allowed the student

teachers to have social contact with peers and revisit less understandable theories.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

33

Minott (2006) proposes reflective teaching in lesson planning by interviewing

novice teachers, who then reflected on problems and suggested solutions. Mark

Minott concludes from his study that teachers should make decisions and adjustments

to lesson planning from reflection, which helps the teachers develop self-awareness

and knowledge through personal experience.

Similarly, Campbell and Henning’s (2010) shared planning and teaching

framework seems promising for student teachers to develop self-understanding and

pedagogical knowledge. The steps are shown below.

(1) Each participant interviews three students using a structured

interview format.

(2) Student teachers are divided, by the class teacher and with

parental permission, into three groups: average, above average and below average.

(3) After implementing lesson plans, each student teacher

interviews three classmates. The question to ask is “What do you think you know?”

The classmates, then, will place ‘what they know’ on a line, on which the words

“more and less” are labelled at two ends to visualise how much the classmates

understand about a subject.

(4) The student teachers are asked to explain the content of

what they learned. The cognitive skills would enable the student teachers to be aware

of the content of what they are learning.

Reflection is involved in teacher education for it is a component that helps

student teachers actively and carefully think about the reason for their decision-

making. Dewey (1933, p. 9) asserts that reflection can be defined as “active, persistent

and careful consideration of any belief or supposed form of knowledge in the light of

the grounds that support it and further conclusions to which it tends” (as cited in

Roberts, 2016).

Roberts (2016, p. 20-1) concludes that student teachers should be encouraged

to reflect upon their performance so that they can connect knowledge and practice and

can review practice for improvement. To do so, student teachers need to understand

the definition of reflection for clearer understanding and reflection’s process of how

to reflect.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

34

Reflective thinking has been introduced to teacher education by Schön (1987),

who describes “practitioner reflection as a process of framing and reframing

problems, creating reflective conversations with oneself and with others, taking

actions to change one’s practice and evaluating the consequences of those changes”

(as cited in Ryken & Hamel, 2016, p. 31). From the definition, procedures of

reflecting thinking are suggested.

Having investigated various studies, Ryken and Hamel (2016) concluded the

theories of reflective thinking, which present procedures and levels of reflection. The

three intertwined levels of reflective thinking by Lee (2005) illustrate 1) recall level

(describing one’s experience), 2) rationalization level (identifying relationships across

experience and acknowledging the complexity of teaching) and 3) reflectivity level

(suggesting alternative approaches to teaching). The following are detailed

descriptions of Lee’s levels of reflection (Lee, 2005).

(1) “Recall level. One describes what they experienced,

interprets the situation based on recalling their experiences without looking for

alternative explanations and attempts to imitate ways that they have observed or were

taught.

(2) Rationalization level. One looks for relationships between

pieces of their experiences, interprets the situation with rationale, searches for “why it

was” and generalizes their experience or comes up with guiding principles.

(3) Reflectivity level. One approaches their experiences with

the intention of changing/improving in the future, analyzes their experiences from

various perspective and is able to see the influence of their cooperating teachers on

their students’ values/behavior/achievement” (p.703).

2.3.7 Teacher education and lesson planning in Thailand. According to the

conference “Teacher education for the learning reform of Thailand’s future

education,” General Dapong Rattanasuwan and speakers assert that teacher education

programs should be improved and focus on both subject matter and pedagogical

knowledge. For one thing, student teachers should be provided with proficiencies in

21st Century skills so that they become teachers who have ability in teaching students

to be able to be competitive in business. Teachers should have sufficient English

language so that they can teach students to communicate in English. The teacher

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

35

education program should educate student teachers to plan lessons full of various

techniques to motivate students to learn English (Ridman & Rohitsatian, 2016).

According to the teacher development project for local development for the

2016-2029 period, the Thai government imposes that the teacher education program

develop teachers who are qualified and inclined to sustain the teaching profession.

The teachers are to use information and communication technology in instruction as

well as to plan lessons to improve student learning, for which evidence of such

improvements are required (The Higher Education Commission, 2016). The teacher

development project also illustrates learning management for student teachers who

wish to attend the project. For example, lecturers who teach courses for the student

teachers should have expertise in certain areas in the courses. There should also be

supervisors, whom student teachers can consult during their coursework and the

practicum. The supervisory system should press accurate supervision procedures to

supervisors. The supervisors should be experts in academics; as a result, student

teachers will gain profound knowledge in teaching.

Moreover, the teacher education program should provide the following

knowledge and skills for the student teachers: various techniques in lesson planning,

language and communicative skills, critical thinking skills, use of technology for

learning, ethics for teachers, voluntary work, computerized research for instruction,

problem-solving skills, knowledge management skills, etc. After the student teachers

have attended the project, the supervisors will follow up on their teaching profession

so that they will have positive attitudes toward the profession and show their

qualifications based on the national qualifications framework for teacher education.

The Office of the Education Council, Ministry of Education (2017) reveals the

revised national qualifications framework for all professions. The framework is used

to propel the government’s Thailand 4.0 policy, where Thailand’s economics is

steered through innovations. The framework leads the policy to come into operation.

Learning outcomes are the focus. They refer to criteria that indicate learning and

outcomes of learning in each curriculum. There are three dimensions of the learning

outcomes. First, knowledge refers to the knowledge of facts, concepts, theories and

practices concerning the field of study or work. It emphasizes theoretical and/or

factual knowledge. Second, skills refers to a person’s ability to accomplish assigned

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

36

tasks. The person can manage the assignment and solve problems appropriately by

using cognitive skills; logical, intuitive and creative thinking; or operational skills.

Finally, application and responsibility refers to each person’s ability generated from

learning processes, application of knowledge and social skills in accordance with

his/her profession. The ability includes communication skills, leadership,

responsibility and autonomy (referring to making decisions and taking responsibility

for his/her own decisions).

The teacher development project (The Higher Education Commission, 2016)

and the revised national qualifications framework (Office of the Education Council,

Ministry of Education, 2017) interface directly with the institutions responsible for

developing teacher education programs. Both the project and the framework pinpoint

development of education programs to prepare teachers who can perform such

qualifications. The programs should be competency-based programs, where teachers

plan lessons or organize training to achieve the qualifications. The competency

includes core competency (e.g. knowledge, skills and application and responsibility at

work such as communicative skills, computing skills, use of information technology,

critical thinking skills, problem-solving skills, etc.); and occupational competency

(e.g. knowledge, ability and skills specific in each field of study or work or functional

competency). To achieve these competencies, the teacher education program should

provide opportunities for student teachers to prioritize learning by doing. The student

teachers themselves have opportunities to teach students in actual classrooms and to

plan lessons for students to experience actual practice in each field of study.

Since 2000, backward design for lesson planning was introduced in the

education field. In Thailand, it has been one of the procedures for writing lesson plans

among teachers and student teachers, who were exposed to teacher education

programs, since 2007 (Bullungpattama, 2012). The backward design was developed

by Grant Wiggins and Jay McTighe in 1998. The design refers to a lesson planning

process that has a start with students’ learning achievements with an evidence of the

achievements. Then, teachers or student teachers plan lessons that enable students to

have the evidence of their learning. To adopt the backward design, student teachers

have to use learning standards and indicators as a starting point of writing a lesson

plan (The 21st Century teachers, 2018). The standards and indicators are mentioned in

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

37

the curriculum for basic education in each country. In Thailand, the B.E. 2551 or C.E.

2008 core curriculum had been used since 2008. In 2017, the revised B.E. 2560 or

C.E. 2017 core curriculum was released. It is similar to the previous version, like

there are still eight subject areas (e.g. Thai language; Mathematics; Science; Social

Studies, Religions and Cultures; Health and Physical Education; Arts; Occupations

and Technologies; and Foreign Languages). However, the revised version emphasizes

practice or operational skills for students to achieve thinking skills and adds the

Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics or STEM approach and 21st

Century skills (HongKhunthod, 2018).

2.4 Organization of a lesson plan

A teacher needs to be aware of what practice is being done and what concepts

are acceptable and advantageous to lesson planning. The planning continuum below

(see Figure 2.4) shows practice of planning ranging from ‘no actual action’ to ‘full

action.’ Harmer (2002) asserts that the teacher who plans as ‘jungle path’ may come

in and ask “What did you do last week?” Then, use answers of students to continue.

They may benefit linguistically and psychologically from the fore thought the teacher

has given to the lesson but it would be an aimless lesson. The teacher who follows the

course book exactly may be helpful when under time pressure but using books

effectively is not very easy. The teacher who uses vague (corridor) plan usually plans

mentally and follows routines. This is good for experienced teachers. The teacher who

uses planning notes may scribble notes of activities to teach, questions to ask,

websites or sources to use in class. The teacher who writes a formal plan creates a

detailed lesson plan with all components.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

38

Figure 2.4: The planning continuum (Harmer, 2002, p. 143)

Jungle path Vague (corridor) plan Formal

plan

0%

100%

Follow the course book exactly Planning notes

Definitely, other practices for planning seem to have disadvantages for

inexperienced teachers, who struggle with writing an effective plan. It is

recommended that formal plan writing be instructed to novice teachers. From the

beginning, features of good lesson plans may be illustrated to the teachers.

A general organization of a lesson plan consists of beginnings, middles and

ends. The items under each stage proposed by many educators are quite similar

though some educators might reveal interesting practices for student teachers.

2.4.1 Beginning. Whereas Woodward (2001) proposes what actions should be

taken, Jensen (2001) illustrates items to be put at the beginning of a lesson plan.

Teachers should project ‘clear boundaries’ before any activities start by greeting

students and expecting greeting in return, calling the registration and introducing

yourself and the first activity. Any rules and regulations the teacher wants to clear

about should be presented at this moment because the students would realise the

teacher’s expectations and class and learning management would be carried out. For

example, the students would know what to do in case of excessive absences or

tardiness. This deals with how students behave in class both physically and mentally,

students’ confidence in learning, enjoyment of coming to school and students’

preference in learning (Woodward, 2001, p.75).

For the beginning of a lesson plan, there are the following items: name of

course/level; background of students; week, date and day of course; competencies and

standards; grammatical structures; key vocabulary; notes of what has been covered

during previous class or what students already need to know for the particular lesson

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

39

(review); aims and objectives; lists of texts, materials and equipment (teaching aids)

or steps of how to prepare materials or aids (if any); and homework or assignments to

be returned or collected. Moreover, as for the language concerns ‘skills’ should be

another item being added so that the teacher would know a main mode of

communication the students will be learning (Celce-Murcia, 2001).

On a contrary, instead of elaborating on a teacher’s action or items to write,

other organizations of lesson plans may focus on the importance of levels of the

objective of a lesson. Shen et al. (2007) and Vermette et al. (2010) prioritize learning

targets or objectives of a lesson at the beginning of the organization. The first stage is

named the cognitive and affective learning targets and instructional objectives,

respectively. Both Shen et al. and Vermette et al. present cognitive and affective

objectives but only Shen et al. argue there should be an ability objective (p.252).

Therefore, the beginning of a lesson plan should consist of the following parts that

concern 1) curriculum (standards, competencies, indicators, levels, name of course);

2) teacher (greeting, registration, rules, introduction to learning outcomes and

activities); 3) students (background, expected behaviors, preference in learning); 4)

language focus (grammar structures, vocabulary, skills); 5) learning outcomes

(cognitive, ability, affective objectives); 6) resources and materials (textbooks,

teaching aids, physical features of places); and 7) others (timeframe—week, date, day,

break—review, previous lessons, assignments from last class).

2.4.2 Middle. The middle of a lesson plan mostly deals with methods of

teaching, steps of teaching, teaching procedures or activities. The middle part usually

starts with how to motivate or have students engaged in activities. The rest of the part

consists of the PPP steps of teaching: presentation, practice and production (Jensen,

2001).

What’s more, the four teaching steps proposed by Woodward (2001) have a

similar concept but in different terms: exposure to language, noticing, remembering

(mental stage) and use and refinement. The difference is in the two steps in the

middle, where Woodward would like to students to notice the language being

presented or to which the students are exposed and then remember the form or

structure of the language, instead of practicing. In fact, these two steps could be

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

40

combined into one. During the practice stage, the students will have to remember the

language anyway.

Jensen (2001, p.405) argues that the three steps have come in various labels:

into, through, beyond (Brinton, Goodwin & Ranks, 1994); engage, study, activate

(Harmer, 1998); lead-in, elicitation, explanation, accurate reproduction, immediate

creativity (Harmer, 1991); and verbalisation, automatization, autonomy (Ur, 1996). In

the middle of a lesson plan Jensen also adds ‘evaluation,’ which the teacher and

students make decisions on how well the materials have been learned so as to

determine the directions of future lessons.

Most lesson plans are designed to have four phases of teaching, some of which

are similar in definitions but different in terms (Jensen, 2001):

information/motivation, input/control or presentation, focus/working or practice and

transfer/application or production (p. 411).

First, the information/motivation phase contains an activity that activates

students’ interests, experience, relevant language knowledge or background/world

knowledge. Information/Motivation activities include warming-up, questioning,

brainstorming or story-telling.

Second, the input/control or presentation phase gains students’ involvement.

Their understanding is deepened by close attention to details of language.

Input/Control or presentation activities include content explanation, role-play

demonstration, language modelling, dialogue/narrative presentation, question-answer

display or review.

Third, the focus/working or practice phase isolates individual linguistic and

thematic difficulties and examines them in depth. Focus/Working or practice activities

include translation, dictation, copying, reading aloud, drill, dialogue/narrative

recitation, cued narrative/dialogue, meaningful drill, game or referential question-

answer.

Fourth, the transfer/application or production phase provides an opportunity

for students to use new language knowledge and communicative abilities.

Transfer/application or production activities include information transfer, information

exchange, role-play, report, narration, discussion, composition, problem solving and

drama.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

41

Other than that, Jensen (2001) proposes some useful components to be

considered, especially the last one for novice teachers. First, transitions see activities

flow smoothly from one activity to another to have activities flow smoothly. For

example, listening strategies can be adapted as reading strategies. Second, time

management demands the teacher to wear a watch or see a clock regularly. If the time

is not enough, the teacher should think ahead of some activities to be shortened,

skipped or saved for next class. If there is time left, supplementary activities must be

planned—called over-planning. Third, class management notes help the teacher to

foresee students’ seating arrangements—individual, whole class, pair work, small

groups, big groups with a mixture of talkative versus quiet ones, language abilities or

personality. It is advisable to give instructions before breaking the class up; otherwise,

no one will listen. Last, anticipated problems and contingency plans must be

considered beforehand by asking the following questions: What part of the lesson may

be difficult for the students? What kinds of questions can the instructor expect? Will

there be problems with student-student interactions? What if technological equipment

were to breakdown?

Woodward (2001) also elaborates on the components the teacher should

consider when writing about the middle of a lesson plan. When designing an activity,

a teacher should have in mind that learning ‘little and often’ is more effective.

Students learn a new thing and then there are other activities that do not push the

students to try to understand the knowledge right away. Reviewing and extending the

understanding of the knowledge a little again is more fruitful. It is observed that after

we learn something hard and new at the first time, we found it easier when we come

back to the point again.

2.4.3 Endings. The final part of a lesson plan is endings. Both Woodward

(2001) and Jensen (2001) maintain that by the end of a lesson plan there should be a

wrap-up part consisting of a review or a summary of the lessons, teachers’ notes for

things to cover next time and homework. Homework should be posted before the class

ends at the same position on the board; otherwise, students may not pay attention busy

with packing up. Jensen also puts evaluation, which refers to reflection about the

lesson plan; things that worked or didn’t work and reasons; improvement or

modification of the lesson plan for next time; and students’ reactions.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

42

Similarly, Serdyukov and Ryan (2008) argue that at the closure of a lesson

plan there should be reflective assessment and evaluation to measure the efficacy of

the teacher’s teaching and student learning. The reflection assessment and evaluation

can be done in several forms like scores, grades or rankings and conducted by a

written test, examination or quiz. Other than that, the teacher can also assess students’

learning during the activity phase by observing the whole class or individual student’s

performance. An interesting mark is that it is an informal and on-going process which

requires the teacher’s competence in judgment and caring attitude (p.16). This would

remind any teachers of their duty: to support student learning. A lesson plan is not just

a tool for teaching but a part of a teacher’s commitment to anticipating a learning

environment to happen. Though the ending is usually the shortest in a lesson plan, it

guarantees the progress of learning will take place for the next meeting with students.

2.5 Components of a lesson plan

In general terms, teachers should acknowledge certain components before

planning as Harmer (2002) argues that teachers are demanded to have knowledge of

students, knowledge of the syllabus and the four components: activities, skills,

language and content. The components become practical realities, which will become

the plan.

2.5.1 Activities. The activities should be independent from language skills to

be taught (Harmer, 2002; Richards & Bohlke, 2011). Mostly, the activities are

concerned with types of students, class organization or movements of the class (what

to do, groups or pair work, moving around or sitting still). Making a decision on the

kinds of activities, a teacher should consider groups of students at a point of the lesson

or on a certain day. The best activity should engage or motivate students to participate

in a variety of movements within a class period: sitting at desks, standing up to

present, sitting in groups discussions and so on.

2.5.2 Students. Minott (2006) argues that one of the components for lesson

planning for student teachers is ‘students’ who are engaged in activities to gain

information. Though the term ‘activities’ is presented, the focus is on students, whose

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

43

well-being, welfare, roles and learning styles are concerned. In fact, while planning a

teacher should consider the students all along. This element, therefore, should focus

on the term ‘activities,’ which engages learning rather than the term ‘students.’

2.5.3 Context. Another element is the teaching context. Though other

educators do not use this term, the items described under the topic ‘element’ directly

refer to the context, in which lesson planning should take place. Student teachers

should consider both internal and external contexts referring to the institution, where

the teacher carries out the plan. The internal context covers the curriculum,

requirements or regulations imposed by the university, teaching and teaching material

or supplies, such as textbooks, worksheets or DVD or facilities. Other than that,

Minott (2006) argues that the following should be taken into consideration as well:

school responsibilities, school physical layout, school philosophy and the practice of

how a teacher interprets, conforms, interacts with and utilises these aspects. The

external context includes the essential components suggests by relevant bodies, like

the national education board or the teacher council (Gafoor & Farooque, 2010;

Richards & Bohlke, 2011).

2.5.4 Language element. Since the informants of this study are student

teachers of the Teaching English major. The content is mostly concerning the

language being taught. The researcher has selected Harmer’s (2002) work that gives a

clear description for the element to be considered as planning. Harmer proposes three

components for this element.

2.5.4.1 Skills. The syllabus or the course book will govern what skills

and sub-skills the teacher wishes the students to develop. The skills usually are co-

dependent with the content of lesson and with the activities.

2.5.4.2 Language. It is only one area that we need to consider when

planning lessons. The decision on the language includes what students should learn,

practice, research or use. As teachers make a decision on the language first, other

components may be designed to go along with the language. It is dangerous if the

lesson plan lacks variety and the aim might not be achieved.

2.5.4.3 Content. The topics or subjects of a lesson can create interest

and involvement among students. Mostly, teachers may follow the content from a

textbook; however, the teachers can predict if the topics will work or not.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

44

2.5.5 Class management. The classroom should be managed to provide

supportive environment in both the physical and social dimensions (Wright, 2005). To

achieve a positive atmosphere, the teacher and the students must build up rapport and

mutual trust. Lesson planning plays a part when a teacher has to think about how to

organize students’ behaviour, movement and interaction to avoid interruptions. The

success of classroom management depends on the kind of class, relationships among

the teacher and students and the teacher’s teaching style.

2.5.6 Personnel. Actually, five components of lesson planning have been

proposed so far. However, Gafoor and Farooque (2010) have made an interesting

point on how to prepare student teachers, citing that teacher mentors become one key

element for their success. Teacher mentors are the ones who check whether the lesson

is completed and is supportive to students’ learning and whether the lesson plan

covers the curriculum standards. It is true that the teacher mentors help shape the

student teachers’ practice. What the student teachers have learned during the lesson

planning period would become their beliefs, which will reflect in their future teaching

(Ball et al., 2007). The teacher mentors refer to both the lecturers from the university

and the teachers at school, where the student teachers practice teaching. The mentors

are important for helping student teachers to be successful through the process of

supervision.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

45

2.6 Student teachers’ lesson planning and supervision

A person who has total influence on student teachers’ performance is the

supervisor, who becomes a role model and/or a source of knowledge. Student

teachers’ professional growth depends heavily on their supervisors.

Supervision is vital to bringing about teachers’ development in the teaching

profession (Jatiwat, 2000, p.1). Based on Cogan and Goldhammer’s works in 1973

and 1969, respectively, Jatiwat maintains that the process of clinical supervision

consists of three phases: preobservation, observation and postobservation (pp. 114-

115).

2.6.1 In the preobservation phase, teachers and supervisors meet to build a

cordial relationship so that supervision is based on collaboration. Both supervisors

and student teachers help shape lesson plans. Student teachers consult their

supervisors on components in lesson plans: objectives or learning outcomes, methods

of teaching, teaching aids and assessment. Student teachers then submit lesson plans

to supervisors and receive feedback, on which rewriting of plans are based for

improvement.

2.6.2 In the observation phase, supervisors and student teachers talk and agree

on plans of observation. They talk about dates and times for observation of the

implementation of lesson plans. Supervisors usually take note during observations for

assisting student teachers’ lesson planning.

2.6.3 In the postobservation phase, supervisors and student teachers meet after

observation, together analyze classroom behavior and find out the behavior that needs

to be changed. Student teachers receive feedback from supervisors and consider it.

Supervisors and student teachers communicate at this point to clarify feedback.

Student teachers use the feedback as indicators to write more effective subsequent

plans.

After observation, student teachers may change their classroom behavior if

they are aware of their behaviors. However, the awareness of the teaching behaviors,

which are considered less than expectations, may not drive student teachers to change

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

46

by themselves. It is important that student teachers have to perceive feedback as

relevant and credible.

Concerning teachers, Bailey (2006) asserts the following possible outcomes

after teachers receive feedback based on observations.

(1) The teacher agrees with the supervisor and changes the

behavior completely and immediately.

(2) The teacher agrees with the supervisor and changes the

behavior gradually.

(3) The teacher somewhat agrees with the supervisor and

modifies the behavior partially but immediately.

(4) The teacher openly agrees with the supervisor, either

completely or partially and changes the behavior partially but slowly (either gradually

or not as quickly as the supervisor had hoped).

(5) The teacher disagrees with the supervisor about the value of

the action but agrees to change the behavior and do so.

(6) The teacher silently disagrees with the supervisor about the

value of the action and verbally agrees to change the behavior but fails to do so (or

choose not to do so), except when the supervisor returns to the class.

(7) The teacher openly disagrees with the supervisor and

refuses to change the behavior.

Eventually, a supervisor has to inform the teacher that his/her teaching

strategies were not effective after an observation. There should be the following

elements to support the supervisor’s comments: research results, well-known

educational standards, methodological prescriptions, school policies or legal

requirements. Otherwise, the teacher may think differently due to beliefs and attitudes

derived from experience and training. If the experience and training of the supervisor

is different from those of the student teacher, disagreement may occur (p.144).

From their study concerning the participants in an English Method course,

Doecke and McKnight (2002) reported student teachers tried to write the best plan

simply to impress the supervisors. When the plan yielded satisfactory results after

teaching, the student teacher could impress students in class and then feel impressed

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

47

about him/herself as well. Another aspect from the study is the personal relationship

between student teachers and supervisor being generated through discussion. They

should have time to have a conversation regularly. Other than that, the student

teachers should have a chance to observe how the supervisor teaches. By doing so, the

student teachers could learn about how a class could be managed and how planning

could work while teaching. The student teachers, then, realized how to interact with

students. However, what a supervisor was doing might not be viewed as positive. The

student teacher might be critically thinking about advantages and disadvantages of the

supervisor’s instruction. Doecke and McKnight concluded that the student teachers

could recognize the ‘rich complexities of classrooms’ by closely working with the

supervisors (p.6).

Observing English teachers, a supervisor needs to set up the areas beforehand

so that the teacher is aware of what he/she would be paying attention to. Since this

research study focuses on lesson planning, the item to be observed relies on how

teachers plan a lesson, implement the plan and act after teaching. Just as what was

found in Doecke and McKnight’s study, Marshall and Young (2009) found teachers

in favor of being observed and given constructive feedback to improve language

instruction. The observable areas for English teachers include classroom management

and organization, classroom interactions and student participation, student and teacher

attitudes, use of resources and materials, language teaching techniques and

methodologies, and evidence of language acquisition and learning (p.1). A main

question was ‘How well does the teacher implement the plan?’ One of the findings

showed the effectiveness of a teacher adopting the Total Physical Response method

(TPR). The teacher planned to use this instructional strategy regularly and when

observed, the strategy was being implemented. However, the study also reported that

some teachers failed to plan various activities. Marshall and Young suggested that

training on designing activities for language learning be provided to the teachers

accordingly.

Supervisors also try to defend student teachers’ poor performance. Personal

issues could influence the instruction process. From a study conducted by Danyluk et

al. (2015), both school and university supervisors elaborated on dissatisfactory

instruction of student teachers. Troubles in personal life might have had effects on

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

48

certain days of teaching. Each student, therefore, should have had an opportunity to

explain the actual cause for problems they had. Supervisors also had to spend more

time visiting the problematic students. Later, a solution package could have been

imposed for both student teachers and supervisors to follow. The mutual

understanding between student teachers and supervisors could be the key to success in

helping student teachers become effective teachers.

In their study about student teachers’ practicum, Thobega and Miller (2008)

found preferable methods of supervision performed by school and university

supervisors. The student teachers, who were the participants of this study, perceived

that school supervisors adopted contextual supervision but university supervisors

performed clinical supervision. To illustrate, school supervisors might have been

concerned more about variables that might have influence on student teachers’

teaching, such as school curriculum, administrative policies, personal relationships or

characteristics of student teachers. On the other hand, university supervisors, who

engaged in clinical supervision, seemed to set up clear steps in supervising student

teachers. There were usually three steps: 1) planning for the next lesson/pre-

observation; 2) classroom observation and 3) reflective, analytic post-observation.

However, the student teachers preferred one of the differentiated supervision styles—

collaborative supervision, where both a supervisor and a student teacher mutually

planned the assessment. In contrast, the student teachers did not prefer the directive,

directive information and non-directive styles, where supervisors assigned the

assessment plan, suggested what to be assessed and encouraged self-direction by

student teachers, respectively. The student teachers realized that all categories of

supervision were important to help them become successful teachers.

Many studies have been conducted to figure out problems and suggest

solutions on student teachers’ lesson planning.

Writing learning outcomes seems problematic for many novice teachers.

Boonmak, Tesaputa and Duangpaeng (2015) found teachers’ problems mostly

concerning the procedure in the pre-planning stage. The top ranked problem was that

teachers had difficulty in formulating objectives to meet students’ needs. Their study

did not elaborate on specific details of the problem; however, a solution was

suggested. School administration should provide consultation so that the objective

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

49

would cover knowledge, cognitive components, awareness in learning and certain

characteristics. Another problem was the fact that teachers were struggling in giving

feedback to students. The study suggested the school provide a training to help

teachers plan evaluation tools and a system to support supervision from administrators

and colleagues. Other problems found from the researchers’ survey were organizing

learning activities and designing content.

Likewise, teachers revealed that they needed help on lesson planning, class

management and time management (Range et al., 2014). The study did not elaborate

on the reason; however, the researchers of the study discussed that the teachers were

willing to be observed and receive constructive feedback from the principals. The

reason for that was the fact that the teachers felt feedback on the three issues were

easily observed and realised. The teachers could revisit the practice and make

changes.

Though a teacher plans the lesson well before teaching, the plan may not yield

satisfactory results. The cause may be the fact that the teacher does not know how to

consider a specific context. In a case study, Chen and Cheng (2013) found that a

novice teacher failed to plan the English lesson for advanced students put in a special

class in an elementary school. The data had been collected from classroom

observations made by a co-teacher and a supervisor. The study summarized the

teacher’s problems as follows.

(1) The teacher did not plan for actions during instruction. This

is concerning class management. Occasionally, the teacher turned her back to the

class and wrote something silently on the board. Questions asked at the beginning did

not also lead to the content of the lesson. The teacher should have also planned

various activities for assessing individuals. The whole-class interaction was mostly

adopted.

(2) A variety of teaching techniques should have been planned.

Most of the time the teacher asked her students to drill words and finish exercises

from a textbook. The teacher relied heavily on the textbook, which was considered as

her lesson plan.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

50

(3) Many sources of teaching aids should have been planned

and implemented in class. The teacher only elicited words from the students, who

cooperated well.

After being supervised, the teacher could improve her instruction; however,

she needed more time to adopt new teaching English techniques regularly so that she

would become familiar with the routine.

Student teachers may perceive a lesson plan as evidence to be assessed for

pedagogical and content knowledge. The qualification of supervisors who show

different results from assessing student teachers may be questioned. When the

supervisor fails to give specific feedback on teaching practice or subject matter, the

student teachers may feel dissatisfied. In Mudavanhu’s (2015) study, some

supervisors, however, argued that knowledge of subject matter was important but the

supervisors with experience in education were also very important. The practice in

classroom needs to be explained to student teachers, such as how to create a learning

environment or how to engage students. Because incorrect practice in teaching may

hamper success in learning, supervisors with background in education are vitally

needed for student teachers to correct misconceptions in instruction. Another

difference in perceptions between student teachers and supervisors was also reported.

Student teachers preferred experienced supervisors, viewed as being competent to

assess both pedagogic and content knowledge on lesson plans. According to the

student teachers’ perceptions, the plan was an important tool to show how theories

were used in actual instruction in classrooms. Not following the plan during teaching

might have resulted in lower marks; however, the supervisors showed different points

of view, citing that they preferred the teacher who had the ability to adapt and modify

the plan in accordance with different situations and needs of students.

What student teachers think they did or will do may not be what really

happens in the classroom. Student teachers may plan a lesson but act differently.

Furthermore, they acknowledge effective practice but fail to execute the practice.

Liaw (2012) reviewed EFL student teachers’ lesson plans, observed their instruction

and interviewed them. The researcher found only one person acting the way she

planned. Most student teachers realized the importance of speaking English during

class time, citing that would become input to students’ learning pronunciation and

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

51

speaking skills. In fact, all of the student teachers but one actually spoke English all

the time, using only the first language to communicate with students. Other than that,

the student teacher tried to adopt different approaches to Teaching English when

teaching, while others followed fixed, traditional patterns in giving exercises. The

student teacher revealed that she believed learning about theories in language teaching

was really helpful in her teaching practice because she could understand the

development and changes in history of language teaching. Liaw argued that what the

student teacher learned was the experienced she gained from training. The strong

concept of theories being adopted in the real class needs to be emphasized.

2.7 Relevant studies on lesson planning

To be able to point out the procedures of preparing a lesson plan, the

researcher of this study has reviewed studies whose participants were student

teachers. The authors of the studies propose frameworks that are claimed helpful for

developing student teachers’ skills in lesson planning.

2.7.1 The model by Isman. An interesting framework concerning lesson

planning for student teachers has been reviewed. Having developed his instructional

model from the ADDIE components—analysis, design, develop, implement and

evaluate, Isman (2012) claimed that his model promoted active learning among

student teachers and significantly improved skills in lesson planning.

2.7.1.1 Input. First, the input stage refers to the planning stage, where

needs, content, goals, methods and instructional media are to be identified.

2.7.1.2 Process. The second stage is the process step, which consists of

test prototypes, redesigning of instruction and teaching activities. Tests act as a

measure to find out what students want to learn. Though Isman did not elaborate on

the process, it could be presumed that a test can be conducted to see whether students

have achieved the objective of the test and the learning or not. An interview can also

be used to find out students’ opinions towards the instruction. Then, the instruction

can be redesigned and taught again. It is vital that the results of the test are used for

developing a course, rather than for determining the passing or failing grades for the

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

52

students. For the third step, the output is achieved by both formative and summative

assessments. Like many other principles for assessment, teachers are expected to use

the results to make decisions upon further instruction (Carr, 2011; Hughes, 2003).

Isman recommends that the instruction be revised at this stage. The fourth stage is

called ‘feedback.’ Any feedback found during the implementation are suggested to be

used to revise the programme. The concept of giving feedback regularly suggests a

cyclical process or ongoing assessment (as cited in Breen, 1989; Graves, 2000).

2.7.1.3 Long-term learning. Finally, the author claims that long-term

learning takes place because ‘the learning process involves full learning’ (Isman,

20011, p.142). The author reasons that once students learned as planned, the teacher

could continue with the new instruction and the process of developing the course

enables the teacher to do so. Isman did not, however, explain what ‘full learning’

referred to but claimed that this framework was based on Behaviourism, Cognitivism

and Constructivism. Presumably, if the teacher planned according to all the three

approaches, students would be exposed to all kinds of learning activities.

2.7.2 The Planned Learning Experience (PLE). Vermette et al. (2010) verify a

framework of the planned learning experience (PLE) as citing the constructivist

learning theory by the prominent educators in this area Bruner, Piaget and Vygotsky,

summative and formative assessment and strategies for building classroom

community. Vermette et al. also present the features, for which the PLE model could

be applied. Like what Darling-Hammond et al. (2005) and Gafoor and Farooque

(2010) argue, that student teachers should be exposed to actual teaching experience

before their study, Vermette et al. add that these experiences should also be outlined

for them. The experiences should not be a script to follow but should be what the

instructor has anticipated to happen. Then, the students will experience that in a real

classroom.

There might be concerns over what experiences should be selected. Gafoor

and Farooque (2010) found from their study that it was difficult for teachers to choose

appropriate learning experiences for learners. In this case, the student teachers will be

attending an actual English class and making an observation on activities. What’s

more, the students will be observing and reflecting on effective lesson plans written

and implemented by highly experienced in-service teachers. That is how the practice

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

53

of integration and cohesion of a teacher preparation course should be for assisting pre-

service teachers (Darling-Hammond et al., 2005, p.395).

Other features of the PLE model are a structured series of questions posted to

scaffold the student teachers’ vision of teaching and devices for constructivist lesson

plans. Adopting Flynn et al.’s (2004) two-step way of thinking about the flow of

activities in constructivist classrooms, Vermette et al. propose the three stages of

lesson planning: 1) cognitive and affective learning targets (presenting objectives that

are small and specific, act as scaffolds to concepts, teachable and learnable in a

relatively short period of time and assessable; 2) exploratory phase (providing

activities to gain student attention, elicit prior knowledge and assist students in

creating basic understandings for the lesson); and 3) discovery phase (having students

show ability to transfer understanding by providing evidence of success in learning

targets).

2.7.3 Repeating experiences. Darling-Hammond et al. (2005) argues student

teachers shape up beliefs and practice through ‘repeating experiences with conceptual

ideas, times for practicing skills or application of theories and continuously revisiting

key ideas’ (p.397). In other words, to help student teachers apply theories and

construct new knowledge the instructor should design activities that would activate

background knowledge of practice of teaching.

Having student teachers observe a real classroom would activate prior

knowledge or at least trigger how a practice of teaching is. If the student teachers still

struggle with showing ideas, the instructor should present relevant theories, which are

summarised by the student teachers and become key ideas for use. Repeating ideas is

a way to make the student teachers understand the theories better. The student

teachers will also be able to link the theories to real practice in a classroom observed

earlier. Therefore, when the student teachers write a lesson plan, certain theories of

teaching for activities may be appropriately selected.

Literature review allows the researcher to explore specific areas relevant to

lesson planning, including its definitions, importance, processes, organization,

component and procedures. Another relevant area is supervision. Textbooks and

studies concerning with student teachers’ lesson planning gave necessary information

for explaining the theory of Thai EFL student teachers’ lesson planning.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

CHAPTER 3

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

One of the important skills for teachers is lesson planning. It viewed as an

indicator of a good teacher because lesson planning can indicate the quality of

teaching and learning achievement of students. When a teacher plans a lesson, he/she

has to employ knowledge in teaching methodology and knowledge in specific content

areas. There are many components in the knowledge integrated in a teacher’s thoughts

to design a lesson plan. For example, the teacher has to connect many components,

such as student needs, class management, time management and materials; clearly

specify methods of teaching in steps; and select appropriate assessment. Moreover,

the teacher has to integrate and conceptualize content of knowledge in specific areas,

such as Social Studies, Science, Mathematics or Language Arts (e.g. English).

With the complexity of lesson planning, experienced teachers of all subjects

might have problems of planning from time to time; however, student teachers, who

have little experience in teaching, definitely have problems regarding planning

lessons. To illustrate, student teachers majoring in teaching various subjects have the

problems of identifying content or learning tasks relevant to indictors or the objectives

of a lesson plan. Moreover, the lesson planning process for student teachers majoring

in Teaching English is more demanding because they have to plan to make students

exposed to the target language, which is not used in students’ social environment. The

student teachers majoring in Teaching English must plan lessons carefully, so that

students have sufficient practice or to have sufficient access to scarce resources of the

target language. Or else, it is hard to foresee students’ achievement. With the

complexity of lesson planning and the demand for students’ achievement in learning

the target language, student teachers majoring in Teaching English should be the

targets for studies, so that ways to make better understanding of their planning can be

explained.

However, there are not sufficient previous studies to explain the process of

student teachers’ lesson planning, especially in context of student teachers who are

majoring in Teaching English in Thailand. The researcher, a lecturer in a teacher

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

55

education program, wanted to understand such processes performed by student

teachers studying in a teacher education program provided by the Faculty of

Education in a state university in the West of Thailand. The study was conducted to

gain better understanding of and generated a theory to explain the student teachers’

lesson planning process and was aimed to have found factors that had influences on

lesson planning, procedures, implementation and any other explanations of the student

teachers’ lesson planning. As a result, the theory to explain Thai EFL student teachers

would provide implications for personnel or institutions involved in designing a

teacher education program for educating EFL student teachers elsewhere to handle the

complex process of lesson planning and the demand for students’ achievement in

learning the target language.

The purpose of this study is to generate a theory to explain Thai EFL student

teachers’ lesson planning.

The research questions are as follows:

1. How do Thai EFL student teachers design their lesson plans?

1.1 What factors influence student teachers’ lesson planning?

1.2 What is the procedure in student teachers’ lesson planning?

2. How do student teachers implement lesson plans?

2.1 What do student teachers do before implementing the lesson plan?

2.2 Are lesson plans implemented as planned? Why/Why not?

3. What action do student teachers take after implementing a lesson plan?

3.1 How do student teachers evaluate lesson plans?

This chapter consists of the following topics: research design, context,

participants, data collection, rigor of the study, reflexivity, actions for ethical issues

and data analysis.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

56

3.1 Research design

This research used the grounded theory design for the gathering of data to gain

in-depth understanding of student teachers’ lesson planning process and to generate a

substantive theory to explain the lesson planning process.

The grounded theory was an appropriate research design for this study as Ary

et al. (2006) maintain: “The grounded theory type of study aims at developing a

theory of social phenomena drawn from a field data collected in a study” (p. 33).

From the definition, characteristics of the grounded theory are illustrated.

According to Ary et al. (2006) and Patton (2002), researchers who conduct qualitative

studies try to understand the meaning in a unique and particular context. The reason is

the fact that human behavior is bound to context and the meaning of such behavior is

the result of human experience in the context, in which society, history, politics and

cultures remain. Moreover, such behavior is found in real-world situations or natural

settings. The researcher, as a result, collects data by physically going to the people,

the setting or the organization. Therefore, to understand student teachers’ lesson

planning better, the researcher of this study planned to study the student teachers’

lesson planning process when they practiced teaching in the actual setting, that is, at

schools, where they had practicum.

In the beginning, all components or elements involving a particular concern

are studied without reservations. The study focuses on the human experience as a

whole. Lincoln and Guba (1985) assert that to collect the complexity of human

experiences and situations, a research instrument should be flexible enough. Data can

be drawn by interviewing people, observing activities, reading documents and

keeping information in various forms of records. The concept of people as research

instruments is appropriate, accordingly. This became the research instruments of this

study. The researcher collected data from interviewing student teachers about their

lesson planning, observing student teachers’ implementation of lesson plans and

reading lesson plans. Details of procedures or steps and factors involved in planning a

lesson plan were revealed by the student teachers.

Moreover, Lincoln and Guba (1985) maintain that the data from qualitative

research is usually written and think description because it is in the form of words or

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

57

pictures, quotes from documents or people or field notes and interviews. To present

the data, the research describes people, objects, events, places, conversation and so

on. Other than that, for making decisions, the researcher records personal or reflexive

notes of thoughts, feelings, assumptions, motives and rationale, so that biases are not

included in the results. As the data is being collected, the researcher analyses it

constantly. The data is collected and analyzed simultaneously, so that the researcher

can find the meaning of what is being studied, develop hypotheses and find

confirmation or nullification of the hypotheses in interviews or observations. Corbin

and Strauss (2015) maintain that an inductive analysis allows the researcher to reduce

and reconstruct the data through the process of coding and categorizing. Then, tied to

and grounded in the data, a theory is developed.

According to the first chapter of this study, background of the problem

illustrates how important the English language becomes when manpower with

communicative competence in the target language is demanded locally and

internationally. The importance of the teacher preparation program is highlighted

because teachers are considered to be responsible for educating qualified learners so

that they are able to use English to communicate in workplaces effectively. However,

educating the learners may not yield success for the teachers who fail to teach. Of all

components of pedagogical knowledge, lesson planning is viewed as the top priority

because a teacher has to put together the knowledge of pedagogy and subject matter

into a plan, which will be implemented in order to educate students and set up

expectations or goals for both the teacher and students to reach.

Studies show that teachers who had had an opportunity to practice teaching in

actual settings gained higher scores from tests. A reason could be that teachers who

participate in formal teacher education programs have learned to apply theories,

including lesson planning, into practice. To illustrate, to write a lesson plan, a teacher

needs to study content and integrate it with methods of teaching, select appropriate

materials and plan appropriate assessment. A plan should help students to be exposed

to use of the target language because access to the language may be limited in a

community, where English is used as a foreign language.

Though studies point out importance of lesson planning, rarely do the studies

reveal specific information for developing lesson planning of student teachers. For

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

58

example, factors that influence lesson planning have been found but the understanding

of how each factor influences what a student teacher is thinking to make a lesson is

rare.

In Thailand, a number of quantitative studies have been conducted to find out

about student teachers’ lesson planning. There are reports on problems concerning

nearly all components in lesson plans, such as formulating objectives, designing

activities, conceptualizing content and planning assessment. The researcher of this

study has also experienced student teachers’ problems in lesson planning too.

Therefore, it is better to understand the roots of problems and the meaning grounded

in the real situation, namely practicum, where student teachers plan lessons. The

grounded theory approach, therefore, is proper in these circumstances to answer the

research questions: (1) How do Thai EFL student teachers design their lesson plans?

(2) How do student teachers implement the lesson plans? and (3) What action do

student teachers take after implementing the lesson plans?

Above all, the answers to the questions are used to achieve the purpose of this

study: To build a theory in an area of EFL student teachers’ lesson planning in

accordance with what Ary et al. (2006) argue: The aim of grounded theory studies is to discover or build a theory in an

area. The theory is inductively built up from the data gathered from

people’s experiences in a particular context. The researcher does not

have presuppositions about what the theory will be. (p. 462)

The term ‘theory’ in the grounded theory study refers to a working theory of

action for a specific context (Gasson, 2009). It is also referred to as a substantive

theory, which has transferability. The elements in the theory can be transferred to

other contexts with similar characteristics. According to the grounded theory study,

the theory is generated from data collected from people in their natural setting. The

substantive theory is not aimed at generalizability. As compared to a substantive

theory, the formal theory is based on “validated, generalizable conclusions across

multiple studies that represent the research population as a whole, or upon deductive

logic that uses validated empirical theories as its basic axioms” (abstract). Glaser and

Strauss (1967) argue that the theory can appear in various forms, such as in “a well-

codified set of propositions or in a running theoretical discussion, using conceptual

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

59

categories and their properties" (p. 31). They maintain the theory should be in the

form of discussion for it is more comprehensible to readers and it is not restricted only

to a set of propositions.

To sum up, the grounded theory method was considered appropriate for

conducting this study because it allowed the researcher to explain EFL student

teachers’ lesson planning in a natural setting. After that, other components of the

research methodology were presented. One of the important components was context,

which is illustrated below.

3.2 Context

In order to better understand how people act or interact (e.g. saying, thinking,

feeling, and doing) in order to respond to difficult situations or events happening in

their lives, context needs to be studied or explained. Corbin and Strauss (2015)

maintain that context “includes events, the set of circumstances or conditions that

make up part of any situation, the meanings given to these (a problem, goal, etc.), the

action and interaction persons take to manage or achieve desired outcomes and the

actual consequences that result from their action” (p.155). Understanding the context

paves the way to better understanding a phenomenon being studied. The following are

details of the context in which this study was conducted.

3.2.1 Setting

Setting for this study consisted of the Faculty of Education, where student

teachers took the teacher education program, and schools, where the student teachers

practiced teaching.

The Faculty of Education in a state university is located in the West of

Thailand. It provides undergraduate teacher education programs for students. The

students are required to enroll in mandatory general foundation courses, mandatory

teacher foundation courses, teacher education electives, free electives and content

courses. These courses must be completed within four years. In their fifth year, the

students, now regarded as student teachers, are to enroll in the Practicum courses:

Practicum I and II in the first and second terms, consecutively.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

60

Students in different majors, including Teaching English, Teaching Social

Studies, Teaching Chinese, Teaching Thai, Elementary and Early Childhood

Education, are to practice teaching in schools around the city where the university is

located. For example, a school may receive three Teaching Thai student teachers, two

Teaching English student teachers and two Teaching Social Studies student teachers.

The student teachers in the same major may practice teaching at 9 – 12 different

schools, depending on the number of student teachers in each major.

As for this study, the participants practiced in nine schools, ranging from

elementary to secondary and high school levels. Three of them practiced teaching at a

vocational school. (There are two vocational schools in the city. One is run by the

Ministry to Education, the other by the city municipal administration.) Before student

teachers went to practice teaching at the schools, there were several steps, each of

which was conducted in a specific schedule.

3.2.2 Steps and schedule of practicum

Student teachers, who were enrolled in the five-year teaching education

program, were required to practice teaching at schools for two terms in their fifth

year. Before the first term of practicum starts and student teachers go to each school,

there are steps for practicum, which include administrative tasks of both schools and

the Faculty of Education within a designated schedule. Official contacts are

administered between the two institutions. The administrative tasks are shown below.

3.2.2.1 Contacting schools. First of all, the Faculty of Education files

an official letter to the schools, requesting cooperation in receiving student teachers

for teaching practice. The number of student teachers in each major are stated.

Usually, this step is administered in December or January each year.

3.2.2.2 Selecting schools. Then, after schools accept the request and

confirm the numbers of student teachers they can receive, student teachers in each

major will decide on who will be assigned to each school. The Faculty of Education

usually allows student teachers in each major to talk among their classmates to select

schools and classmates by themselves. This step is administered in January or

February.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

61

3.2.2.3 Confirming numbers of students. After that, names of student

teachers are sent via another official letter to schools, so that each school’s

administration can assign a supervisor to supervise each student teacher. At the same

time, the Faculty of Education will sort student teachers into supervision groups, in

which university supervisors are also sorted. This step is administered in January or

February.

3.2.2.4 Meeting with supervisors. Finally, student teachers, escorted by

university supervisors, have an official visit to their schools. The purpose of the visit

is for university supervisors, who act on behalf of the Faculty of Education, to

officially send student teachers off to the schools. School administrators, including

directors of schools or deputy directors of schools for academic affairs, are to meet

with university supervisors and student teachers to deliver a welcoming speech and an

orientation for student teachers. The official visit usually ends up with student

teachers meeting with school supervisors. At this moment, student teachers become

part of the schools. They will take up all responsibilities and work similar to what an

in-service teacher does. This step is administered in March.

However, during March, the Faculty of Education also holds an orientation for

student teachers, school supervisors and university supervisors. All of them,

especially student teachers, are to understand their general responsibilities and

schedules for tasks, such as seminars or grade submission. The information from the

orientation is presented in the Practicum manual, available for all personnel. The

official visit of some schools may be administered before or after the orientation,

depending on each school’s convenience. Moreover, before the start of each academic

year, usually in May, university supervisors also set up a meeting with student

teachers in each supervision group as well.

While conducting this study, ten schools were the locations for student

teachers to practice teaching. Most schools are located in Nakorn Pathom’s Muang

District (the central part of the province) but one is located in Salaya District, which is

about fifteen kilometers away from the central of the province. All of them are public

schools under the Office of the Basic Education Commission but one is under the

Office of the Vocational Education Commission. There are three large schools with

about 2,500 – 3,000 students, three medium-sized schools with about 1,500 – 2,000

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

62

students and four small schools with less than 1,500 students. Most students are from

the areas near the schools, except for a vocational school, where students from other

areas may study.

3.2.3 Supervisors

Supervisors can be divided into two groups, each of whom has slightly

different responsibilities for supervising student teachers’ lesson planning.

3.2.3.1 Groups of supervisors

There are two groups of supervisors: school supervisors and university

supervisors.

(1) School supervisors. The first group of supervisors refers to

school supervisors, who are teachers at schools, where student teachers practice

teaching. Normally, a school supervisor is to supervise a student teacher. The

regulation is imposed by the Office of the Higher Education Commission (OHEC),

which also rules that school supervisors must have been in-service teachers for three

years; otherwise, they cannot supervise student teachers. Moreover, each school

supervisor must hold a Bachelor’s or higher degree and teach courses in accordance

with the student teacher’s major. For example, school supervisors for student teachers

majoring in Teaching English must finish a degree in English language or English

Language Teaching and teach English courses at the school as well.

(2) University supervisors. The second group of supervisors

refers to lecturers at the university, usually giving instruction for content courses in

each major. For example, the lecturers in the Teaching English major are to teach two

groups of subjects: 1) English language courses, such as Advanced Listening and

Speaking, Critical Reading, Poetry, Phonology, Linguistics, English Structure, etc.;

and 2) Teaching English courses, such as Methods of Teaching English, Testing,

English Activities, Dramas for English Language Teaching, Innovation in Teaching

English, etc.

The lecturers also supervise student teachers, hence their being called

university supervisors. They are assigned to supervision groups. In fact, student

teachers were divided into the supervision groups first on condition that student

teachers practicing teaching at the same school are in the same group. Then, the

lecturers or university supervisors are assigned. For example, during data collection of

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

63

this study, there were three supervision groups in the Teaching English major, each of

which had 4 – 5 university supervisors and 8 – 12 student teachers. The supervision

group, in which the researcher of this study was grouped, had eight student teachers

practicing teaching in three schools.

3.2.3.2 Responsibilities of supervisors

Both school supervisors and university supervisors are mainly responsible for

checking student teachers’ lesson plans, observing student teachers’ implementation

of lesson plans throughout the two terms of practicum and giving feedback to student

teachers on lesson plans and on implementation of the plans. The frequency of

checking lesson plans and observing the implementation is different in each group of

supervision.

(1) School supervisors’ checking, observing lesson planning

and giving feedback. Each school supervisor is to mentor a student teacher under

his/her supervision. The student teacher will teach some English classes of the school

supervisor—about 2 – 3 classes for a week. Each class has 2 – 3 hours for the English

subject. In other words, each student teacher will prepare six to nine lesson plans a

week. The main responsibility of each school supervisor is to check all lesson plans

designed by the student teacher, to observe implementation of each lesson plan and to

give feedback on the lesson plans and the implementation of the plans. Since all the

classes the student teacher is planning and teaching are under the school supervisor’s

instruction, he/she is expected to observe implementation of all plans and provide

feedback on the implementation.

(2) University supervisors’ checking, observing lesson planning

and giving feedback. University supervisors are to supervise about 8 – 12 student

teachers in each supervision group. A university supervisor is to check 3 – 4 student

teachers’ lesson plans. All lesson plans are expected to be submitted to both university

supervisors and school supervisors at the same time. However, student teachers’

implementation of plans will be observed by university supervisors three times a term.

The university supervisors give feedback on the implementation of plans. As for each

university supervisor, the number of observation depends on the number of student

teachers in each supervision group. For example, in a group of 9 student teachers,

each student teacher has to be observed 3 times in a term. So, the total number of

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

64

observations is 27. If there are 4 university supervisors in the group, each supervisor

will observe 6 – 7 times a term.

3.3 Participants

The participants of this study were twenty-two undergraduate students

majoring in Teaching English in a teacher education program, which was provided by

the Faculty of Education of a state university located in the West of Thailand. This

was a Bachelor’s degree program, which took five years to complete. The students’

identification number was 55, which referred to the year—B.E. 2555 or A.D. 2012.

The students were from the provinces in the West, such as Rachaburi, Kanchanaburi;

the Central part, such as Nakorn Pathom, , Bangkok, Nonthaburi, Pathumthani,

Supanburi; and the South, such as Petchaburi, Nakornsrithamaraj, Prachuabkirikhan,

Panga and Trang. The first year of the students commenced in the 2012 academic

year. From the first year until the fourth year, the students enrolled in various teacher

education courses, including foundations courses, free electives, general teacher

education courses, English language courses and teaching English courses.

Before the fifth year started, the students enrolled in the Practicum course in

March 2016. At this moment, they became student teachers. Then, there were steps in

designated timeframes as mentioned earlier for practicum. For example, after schools

confirmed the numbers of student teachers they could receive, student teachers

selected schools and classmates. After they met with school supervisors during the

official visit to schools, their lesson planning officially commenced. They had

obtained materials and information ready for designing the long-range plan. By May,

when state schools were about to start, they were asked by school administration to

come to school and start their practicum being student teachers, who took

responsibilities like in-service teachers, right away.

Selection of the participants was based on the purposive sampling technique,

which was appropriate to gain a maximum insight and understanding of the area of

lesson planning (Ary et al., 2006, p.472). To be specific, the participants were

selected by the criterion sampling technique as Patton (2002, p. 238) maintains that

the criterion sampling technique is used to select participants who meet predetermined

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

65

criterion of importance and can provide rich information for each study. The student

teachers practiced teaching in an actual school setting. They underwent all procedures

in designing lesson plans, such as meeting with school administrators, school

supervisors and university supervisors; designing lesson plans or implementing lesson

plans. Therefore, the student teachers were the appropriate group of participants who

could provide insightful data for this study.

In fact, there were thirty Teaching English student teachers, whose

identification number was 55. The eight student teachers were under supervision of

the researcher, who was also a university supervisor and the interviewer of this study.

Eight of them were not selected because the researcher of this study tried to minimize

biasing effects. Their responses might contaminate the results due to their thoughts

being intentionally groomed for the interviewer’s satisfaction. The biasing effects can

have positive or negative results, which are caused by both interviewer and

interviewees’ preconceived notion about the interviewer’s role (Berg, 2007). For

example, the eight student teachers might overpraise the researcher’s supervision or

avoid to talk about its negative sides.

As for the sample size, Ary et al. (2006) and Best and Kahn (2006) state that

the size of the sample is not considered practical for qualitative studies. Data is

collected from the samples until there are no further emergent themes. That refers to

the fact that the data saturates.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

66

3.4 Data collection

For grounded theory research, researchers are engaged in data collection and

fieldwork strategies with personal experience as well as personal perspectives,

directly interacting with people, situations and phenomena of the study. Personal

experiences and perspectives enable the researchers to understand and interpret the

phenomena. The researchers look for primary information by asking questions about

an event, experience or social phenomenon through observations and interviews or

documentary materials. During an interview or observation, the researcher should

show neutrality and mindfulness. The researchers should have openness, sensitivity,

respect, awareness and responsiveness (Ary et al., 2006, p.463; Patton, 2002, pp.40-

41).

For this study, interviews and observations were used to collect data. The

researcher was aware that by collecting data from the participants (or Thai EFL

student teachers), the researcher, also a university supervisor, had direct contact with

the student teachers in an actual school setting, interviewing on site or observing their

implementation of lesson plans in classrooms. The purpose was to gain primary

information about influences on their lesson planning, procedures of lesson planning,

implementation and actions after implementation. The following are details and steps

of how data was collected for this study.

3.4.1 Research instruments

Considering the research questions, research instruments were designed in

order to collect data for the research questions. The data of this study was collected by

means of interviews and observations. To be specific, the semi-structured interview

and non-participant observation were administered in order to collect data.

3.4.1.1 Semi-structured interview

The semi-structured interview was used because it allowed more opportunity

for probes and elaborations. Besides, the researcher could gain in-depth information

that could not be obtained by other instruments. The objective of interviews is to

“access the perspective of the person being interviewed” (Patton, 1990).

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

67

As for the study’s semi-structured interview, Ary et al. (2006, p.467) and

Patton (1990, p.288) asserts the interviewer should specify topics and issues in

advance, in an outline form, and make decisions on the sequence of questions. The

interviewer can modify the format of questions while the interview process is being

administered. For interviews, open-ended questions allow the interviewer to gain

participants’ insightful perspectives, the meaning of events the participants are

involved in, information about the place or information on unexpected issues. The

benefit of the outline is the fact that the data collected is more comprehendible and the

data is collected in a systematic style for each participant. The outline also allows the

interviewer to anticipate logical gaps in data and try to close them by immediately

asking follow-up questions or asking for clarification of participants’ responses.

For this study, the questions were divided into two parts: the first part asking

about factual information and the second part asking about the research questions.

Part 1: Factual information. The questions for the interview schedule were

listed as a guideline for eliciting the student teachers’ factual information: 1) levels of

students; 2) number of students per class; and 3) number of teaching hours.

The objective of the first part was to find out about general factual information

from each participant. This concept was adapted from Dȍrnyei’s (2003)

questionnaires in second language research. The topics for asking student teachers’

information were a list of practices, where student teachers were engaged in

supervision or practicum at school. In fact, Dȍrnyei asserts the factual questions

should be close-ended because they are suitable for coding and do not cause rater

subjectivity (p.14). However, the researcher would like only to gain student teachers’

factual information concerning practicum practices for possible data analysis if

applicable. The researcher could not speculate answers for some questions, like

special assignments. Moreover, it was appropriate for administering open-ended

questions because data collection was an interview. Therefore, the factual questions

for this study were open-ended.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

68

Part 2: Research questions. The questions for the second part were generated

according to the research questions.

1 How do Thai EFL student teachers design their lesson plans?

1.1 What factors influence student teachers’ lesson planning?

1.2 What is the procedure in student teachers’ lesson planning?

2 How do student teachers implement lesson plans?

2.1 What do student teachers do before implementing the lesson plan?

2.2 Are lesson plans implemented as planned? Why/Why not?

3 What action do student teachers take after implementing a lesson plan?

3.1 How do student teachers evaluate lesson plans?

The objectives were to find out about the factors which influenced student

teachers’ lesson planning. The questions did not directly ask the student teachers to

reveal the factors but the research started with asking about the procedure they used to

write lesson plans. Then, any key words, which were probably factors, emerging from

the interview would be asked further for details. Next, the questions asked student

teachers about their implementation of lesson plans in actual classrooms. Questions

about practices before implementation were asked as well as details during

implementation. After that, the questions asked about the actions of student teachers

after implementing lesson plans. Noticeably, the questions covered four stages of

lesson planning: before planning, planning, implementing plans and after

implementing plans. This was derived from literature review. The questions for the

interview were shown in Appendix A: Interview schedule.

However, Patton (1990) also argues weaknesses of the semi-structured

interviews include omission of some important topics and flexible sequencing of

questions leading to different responses and an opportunity to compare responses. To

avoid the weaknesses, the researcher of this study, then, followed the guidelines

asserted by Patton (1990). The researcher introduced the topic of the interview first,

asked questions concerning the topic and then asked follow-up questions on the topic.

The purpose was to probe for further information or response. By doing this, the

researcher could make sure that participants gave information concerning important

topics. Though sequences of questions were different between participants, salient

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

69

topics were not omitted. Moreover, the researcher asked participants to provide

specific examples. While asking questions, the researcher interpreted the answers so

that important topics were not missed out (as cited in Best & Kahn, 2006).

The interview was also recorded on audio files for transcription. According to

Atkins and Wallace’s (2012) advantages of recording the interview, the researcher

could “capture the entire interview for careful review of data; make a complete

transcription possible; have accurate partial transcription or quotable extracts; check

accuracy of transcript with interviewees; and evaluate the researcher’s own interview

skills” (p.90). Atkin and Wallace (2012) also maintain disadvantages of recording the

interview, of which the researcher of this study was aware and tried to eliminate. For

example, the researcher checked the recording device and rechecked the audio files

once recorded for fear that technology might fail. It was noted that interviewees might

be self-conscious and restrain their responses at presence of the recording device;

however, long and multiple interviews could maximize the effect. After student

teachers had been interviewed for a period of time (e.g. one and a half to two hours)

and many times (e.g. at least two interviews per person), they could not maintain their

inhibition of responses. They tended to reveal the truth of their thoughts.

3.4.1.2 Observation

The objective of observation is to describe behavior in a specific natural

setting in order to reveal detailed and thick descriptions and profound inquiries of a

particular area of study. Researchers use narration or words to describe the setting, the

behaviors and the interactions in qualitative observations (Ary et al., 2006; Patton,

2002). Corbin and Strauss (2015) also assert that researchers can consider whether the

data gained from the interview of a person is congruent with what he/she does in

reality and observation is the only way to allow the researchers to confirm their

findings.

For this study, the objective of observation was to figure out what student

teachers were doing when they implemented lesson plans in actual classrooms during

practicum. The researcher wanted to observe the student teachers’ behavior as the

lesson plan was being implemented. The researcher was to investigate student

teachers’ actions versus what they had been planning. When the researcher was in the

classroom for observation, the student teacher provided the lesson plan being

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

70

implemented as well. The lesson plan was used as a prompt for the interview and a

guideline for the observation, so that the researcher could understand the student

teacher’s implementation. Moreover, the lesson plan was also used for the researcher

to generate more questions for further interviews (see Appendix B: Sample lesson

plan).

The researcher of this study used Best and Kahn’s (2006) guidelines in

observation. The following were what should be observed: interactions between the

student teacher and students, physical activities, planned and unplanned activities and

interactions. The researcher also observed ‘non-occurrences’ or ‘off-tasks,’ which

referred to things that should be done but were not done, as opposed to ‘on-tasks,’

which referred to assigned activities the student teacher planned for the lesson

(p.265).

As for observer roles, the researcher of this study became a passive participant

or non-participant. To collect data, the researcher was in the field of study, that is, the

classrooms. Therefore, the researcher’s role was known to the participants of the

study, or student teachers, and students in the classroom but the researcher collected

data without direct involvement with the implementation of lesson plans (Creswell,

2013; Roller & Lavrakas, 2015).

The observation was recorded on visual files for writing field notes. While

observing student teachers’ implementation of each lesson plan, the researcher made

brief notes and later expanded them into field notes, which included supplemental

information from video recordings. There were two parts of the field notes:

descriptive and reflective parts. First, in the descriptive part, the researcher described

the classroom setting, the equipment set up for implementation of a plan, the student

teacher, students, their behaviors and accounts of events, focusing on the congruence

of what had been planned and what was implemented. The second part of the field

notes was the reflexive part. The aim was to record the observer’s personal feelings or

impressions about the lesson plan and implementation of the plan and speculations

about further data collection (Appendix C: Sample field notes). More questions were

generated for further interviews in order to search for reasons, thoughts or beliefs to

explain such student teacher’s behavior. Each observation session was not longer than

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

71

an hour as suggested by Ary et al. (2006, p.477); or else, there would be too many

elements to be written about.

3.4.2 Procedures of data collection

After the research plan was completed, the researcher started the procedures of

data collection by seeking approval from sources and collecting data as planned.

3.4.2.1 Seeking approval and participation

First, the researcher of this study approached the chairperson of the teacher

education program in the Teaching English major in order to seek approval. A letter

requesting approval was also filed so that it was circulated to the chairperson

officially. Having received the letter, the chairperson called for a staff meeting

attended by all university supervisors of the program. The researcher also attended the

meeting and provided necessary information to the meeting for consideration, such as

the purpose of the study, participants, procedures for data collection, research

instruments and tentative questions for the interview. The meeting had a consensus on

the request. In the end, the chairperson of the program signed the letter of approval

(see Appendix D: Letter of approval).

Once the permission to collect data was granted, the researcher approached the

participants. They were the fourth-year student teachers majoring in Teaching

English, studying their second term. A meeting was set up. The researcher informed

the Teaching English student teachers of the purpose and procedures of the study and

then requested for their cooperation in the data collection process.

Moreover, the researcher made sure that the Teaching English student teachers

would not contaminate data with biases by reiterating that the results from the study

would not be judged, nor would they affect the Teaching English student teachers’

practicum grades (van Kammen & Stouthamer-Loeber, 1998). The student teachers

majoring in Teaching English were also notified that they could turn down or

withdraw participation in this study’s data collection anytime they wished. The

researcher delivered a speech in the meeting in a friendly and professional way so that

the student teachers felt at ease to make their decisions. They were not asked to reveal

their decision in the meeting but the researcher gave out a consent form for them to

consider and sign later (Appendix E: Consent form). The researcher also had an

informal talk with individual student teachers to give more information about the

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

72

study if they needed it. Eventually, all of the fourth-year Teaching English student

teachers accepted the request.

3.4.2.2 Collecting data

Data collection was divided into three phases: first interview, class

observation and second interview. Details of each phase are illustrated below.

(1) First interview

The researcher administered the first interview to gather data for the first

research question: How do the Thai EFL teachers design their lesson plans? The

objective of the first interview was to find answers for two sub questions of the first

research question: What factors influence student teachers’ lesson planning? What is

the procedure in student teachers’ lesson planning?

During the interview, the researcher made sure that the participants did not try

to reveal the information for the researcher’s satisfaction. Best and Kahn (2006) argue

that “one way to avoid this biased data is to explain how the results from the data will

not be held against the interviewee whatsoever” (p.266). The researcher reiterated

before each interview session that their information was confidentially kept. They

would not be affected by the information at all.

Moreover, to ensure their total anonymity, student teachers could select

pseudonyms to represent their data. For the first interview, the participants were asked

to reveal their factual information, which could be concluded in a table (see Appendix

F: Information of participants and schools). The interview was recorded on an audio

file for transcription. After that, each file was transcribed so that the researcher could

show the summary of transcriptions to each student teacher for checking at the second

interview. The summary of transcriptions included themes, categories and important

quotes.

(2) Class observation

The objective of class observation was to see implementation of lesson plans.

The results were answers for the second research question: How do student teachers

implement the lesson plans? The following sub questions were also answered: What

do student teachers do before implementing a lesson plan? Are lesson plans

implemented as planned? Why/Why not?

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

73

After the first interview, the researcher asked for permission from student

teachers to observe their classes. If granted, the researcher contacted the student

teachers to set a date for class observation. The researcher usually contacted each

student a day before the observation. Each student teacher’s timetable was known to

the researcher, who was also a university supervisor, because all student teachers

submitted their timetables to all university supervisors on the first week of practicum.

The reason for making contact on short notice was that the researcher tried to avoid

participants’ biases on implementation of lesson plans due to observer expectation.

They might think the observer expects such behavior in classrooms (Ary et al., 2006,

p.476). Apart from minimizing time before observation, the researcher suggested that

the student teachers behave in their natural ways. They could implement lesson plans

as they usually did. The implementation was not graded at all.

As for students in class, the researcher suggested that the student teacher for

each observation inform students of presence of the researcher in the classroom for

the day. Students usually were used to having a university supervisor in the classroom

because the student teacher was observed by other university supervisors regularly.

The observations were also recorded on visual files. On the day, the researcher went

into the classroom and set up a tripod for a recording device at the back of the room.

All student teachers were asked to prepare their lesson plans for the day to provide to

the researcher. Usually, the lesson plan was put on the desk at the back of the room.

Each observation lasted about forty-five to fifty minutes. After the class ended, the

researcher packed up the device and the lesson plan and walked out the room quietly.

(3) Second interview

The objective of the second interview was to collect more data for the third

research question and the sub question: What action do student teachers take after

implementing lesson plans? and How do student teachers evaluate their lesson plans?

After the observation, each student teacher was contacted again to set a date for the

second interview. Not only were student teachers asked to give answers for the third

research question, but they were also asked to explain the implementation of lesson

plans observed earlier. Some student teachers were asked to give more details on

follow-up interviews, which were short and specific so that the researcher could probe

unclear statements found in transcriptions.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

74

3.5 Rigor of the study

Buchanan (1992, p. 199) argues that “The quality of qualitative studies cannot

be determined by following prescribed formulas. Rather, its quality lies in the power

of its language to display a picture of the world in which we discover something about

ourselves and our common humanity” (as cited in Silverman, 1997, p. 380).

Qualitative studies also have validity and reliability to determine their quality;

however, researchers have used different terms and techniques in maintaining validity

and reliability of qualitative research. Creswell (2013) argues that the following terms

excerpted from Lincoln and Guba (1985) are still popular among qualitative reports:

credibility, transferability, dependability or trustworthiness and confirmability. The

researcher followed the guidelines from Ary et al. (2006), who also adopts Lincoln

and Guba’s terms, to maintain rigor in this grounded theory study.

3.5.1 Credibility. Credibility or truthfulness of the inquiry’s findings refers to

the fact that the researcher presents the realities of participants and establishes

confidence in the findings based on the research design, participants and context (Ary

at al., 2006, p.504). There were four techniques to maintain credibility for this study.

First, in order to have evidence based structural corroboration, the researcher

triangulated data by collecting data from interviews and observations to confirm the

data. For example, what a student teacher said he/she did in planning a lesson could

be confirmed with how he/she acted during implementation of a lesson plan. Second,

evidence based on referential or interpretive adequacy could be reached by allowing

participants to review and criticize transcriptions to see if the meaning they had

intended to convey during the interview was accurate or not. This technique is called

member checks. Moreover, direct quotations from the participants’ interview were

used to envisage the participants’ viewpoints, thoughts, feelings and experiences for

the researcher. Third, the researcher obtained evidence based on theoretical adequacy

by using various theories to explain the findings for better insights. For example, the

lesson planning processes theory generated from data were explained by reviewing

the teacher’s belief systems, supervision, lesson planning models, methods of

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

75

teaching English and so on. Finally, evidence based on control of bias could be

achieved as the researcher recognized his own biases by means of reflexivity. Self-

reflection was recorded in field notes, so that personal attitudes, preferences and

feelings that might affect interpretation of data were set aside.

3.5.2 Transferability. Transferability is “the degree to which the findings of a

qualitative study can be applied or generalized to other contexts or to other groups”

(Ary et al., 2006, p. 507). Although qualitative studies do not aim at generalizing the

findings, potential users should be able to compare or judge on similarities or

differences among studies. To obtain transferability for this study, the researcher

presented descriptive adequacy in the report, providing rich, detailed and thick

descriptions of context. Moreover, the findings were compared to previous published

studies in the area of lesson planning to claim transferability. The researcher was also

careful about a threat to the study called reactivity, which referred to the effect of the

research itself. To avoid the researcher’s influence on the findings, detailed

descriptions of observations and interviews were presented.

3.5.3 Dependability or trustworthiness. Dependability or reliability in

qualitative research refers to consistency in conducting a study. Ary et al. (2006)

maintain that “consistency is looked at as the extent to which variation can be tracked

or explained. To enhance reliability, the researcher wants to demonstrate that the

methods used are reproducible and consistent, that the approach and procedures used

were appropriate for the context and can be documented and that external evidence

can be used to test conclusions” (p.509). This study used the following techniques to

maintain dependability. An audit trail was used to aim at dependability through

documentation. The researcher presented all activities in details so that potential users

could make judgments on the study. For example, in the fourth chapter, the researcher

elaborately reported on decisions on how each category and subcategories were put

together to form a diagram or diagrams of lesson planning. Moreover, the following

data were also included for review by other readers: descriptions of participants,

methods of data collection, field notes on observations and descriptive transcripts.

The other technique was coding agreement. The researcher had experts in the teacher

education area to be raters to review codes of data by randomly selecting a transcript

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

76

and having another peer code the data (Appendix G: List of experts). The aim was to

see the similarities of codes labeled on the transcript.

3.5.4 Confirmability. Confirmability refers to the concept of objectivity or

neutrality, “the extent to which the research is free of bias in the procedures and the

interpretation of results” (Ary et al., 2006, p. 511). To obtain confirmability of this

study, the researcher compared the results to other studies investigating the same area.

As the theory of lesson planning processes was generated, various educators’ works in

the same area were used to compare with the results: Clark and Yinger’s (1980)

model on teacher lesson planning; John’s (2006) lesson planning process of student

teachers; and Ball, Knobloch and Hoop’s (2007) novice teachers’ instructional

planning. Moreover, the following methods were used to enhance confirmability of

this study: audit trail, triangulation, peer review and reflexivity as suggested above.

3.6 Reflexivity

Attia (2017) maintains “reflexivity involves a process of on-going mutual

shaping between researcher and research” (p. 1). Researchers should be aware of such

processes of interaction among relevant elements in context. They should stop and

consider current occurrences and take action to make decisions on his/her stance on

the study. Regarding reflexivity in a qualitative research study, Creswell (2013, p.

47) asserts that researchers position themselves by conveying their background, such

as work experiences or history, how it informs their interpretation of the information

in a study and what they have to gain from the study. Moreover, Creswell quotes

Walcott (2010) as saying readers have a right to know about the researchers. They

want to know what makes the researchers interested in the topics of investigation, to

whom they are reporting and what they personally stand to gain from the study (p.

36).

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

77

The researcher of this study maintained reflexivity in order to understand his

position and personal attributes which might affect data collection or data analysis.

The following topics are the researcher’s reflexivity on his work experience,

workloads and personal attributes, such as values, preferences or feelings, toward

student teachers’ lesson planning. The researcher also explained that he was conscious

of these attributes during data collection and data analysis.

3.6.1 Researcher’s work experience

The researcher used to work as a teaching assistant at an international school

in Bangkok for five years. His responsibilities included helping class teachers prepare

materials, making classroom displays, making sure students, aged between five to ten

years old, were in disciplines and teaching Creative Arts. He learned a great deal of

classroom language from his native colleagues. The researcher prioritized the

importance of developing students’ English by providing sufficient comprehensible

input. He witnessed the students’ success in listening and speaking skills after the

researcher had been speaking English to these young students for several weeks with

little Thai language spoken. When he observed student teachers, who did not speak

English much, he was upset and tried to point out the importance of student teachers’

crucial role in helping students to learn English by giving enough input. The

researcher realized his value of giving sufficient input to students affected the way he

generated questions to ask about student teachers’ implementation of plans. When the

researcher watched a video clip of a student teacher’s implementation of a lesson plan

and found students did not seem to respond to the student teacher’s English

instruction, he was thinking probably the student teacher had never spoken English to

students before. The question like “Do you speak English all the time like this?”

might convey a judgmental remark. The question, then, was changed into a more

observational inquiry to the student teachers’ implementation of the plan. The new

questions included “What happened when you told students to do the activity? What

happened here (showing a scene from the video clip), after you told them the

instructions?” The student teacher would not feel they were being judged by the

questions and felt free to reply to the questions generally asked them about the

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

78

situation in the classroom. In the end, the student teacher revealed one of the causes of

the incident was her lengthy instructions.

After that, the researcher worked as a lecturer at a college, teaching foundation

English courses for undergraduate students for the first time. His first class was

disappointing. Though he had planned the lesson and prepared worksheets for

activities, he did not know what to say. He had not practiced delivering instruction

through oral presentations. He realized that he had to plan every component carefully

and think about how to implement the plan. He had to practice speaking lines for

instruction in English too. Moreover, students’ characteristics played an important

role in the success of the implementation of lesson plans. Students in certain majors

paid more attention than those in others. At that moment, the researcher knew only a

few techniques to gain students’ attention. When students in certain majors did not

pay attention, showing inappropriate behavior, like chatting or defying instructions,

the researcher told them off. He was thinking it was the students’ duty to learn. They

must try to follow the instructions and be responsible for their own learning.

At the same time, the researcher had a chance to teach students in an English

program at a secondary school for a while. It was a part-time position. Because the

students were in the English program, he insisted that students try to listen to his

English instruction. He prepared many teaching aids to help students understand him

through examples or demonstrations. The plans worked well. Students followed the

lessons but there were times of difficulty due to students’ inappropriate behavior. The

researcher had to stop class and tell students off because they had been chatting too

much. The researcher wanted class in order. They should be quiet and listening to

instruction all the time. After a while, the researcher realized it was hard to maintain

the idealistic classroom. At this the moment, the researcher believed that one way to

make students learn was to prepare many activities with various techniques and

teaching aids, especially visual aids, so that students could follow English instruction

since they seemed to shift their focus from studying to chatting at times.

After teaching at the college and the school for a while, the researcher moved

to a new workplace, the current one, the Faculty of Education at a state university. At

first, he had many new things to learn. The scope of work was not limited only to

teaching foundation English courses but the researcher also had to teach a pedagogical

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

79

course for undergraduate students majoring in Teaching English. Moreover, there

were more responsibilities as a lecturer at the Faculty of Education: organizing

academic seminars or conferences to support the local teacher community, developing

curriculum, planning for student teachers’ practicum, supervising them and so on.

3.6.2 Researcher’s workloads

The researcher has been working at the Faculty of Education since 2005. The

undergraduate students he taught majored in Teaching English. In his first term, he

was assigned to teach a pedagogical course Textbook Analysis. Since he prioritized

planning before teaching, the researcher worked so hard on reading books relevant to

the subject, displaying the content on teaching aids, like worksheets or the PowerPoint

presentation, and designing activities for the undergraduate students to practice

analyzing textbooks. The researcher had a concept in mind that for undergraduate

students, the content should be full of academic concepts. It was appropriate for them.

After a while, the students complained to the chairperson of the teacher education

program. The researcher even worked harder to make the lecture easier to understand

by using easy words to explain. Still, he thought that there should be theories or

concepts to explain something; otherwise, what he taught to the undergraduate

students would be unreliable. The undergraduate students still had to learn theories

and concepts along with analyzing textbooks as an exercise.

The Textbook Analysis course was the researcher’s responsible only for a

term. After that, the new teacher education program was implemented nationwide.

The first five-year program for students majoring in teaching was implemented by all

Faculties of Education. After the undergraduate students completed their coursework

for four years, they were required to practice teaching at actual schools for two terms

or an academic year. The researcher, as well as other lecturers, also acted as a

university supervisor responsible for checking student teachers’ lesson plans and

observing their implementation of the plans.

The researcher was also assigned to teach the Methods of Teaching English

course. At this moment, the researcher even took on the importance of lesson

planning even more since it was one of the course’ topics. Moreover, one of the

student teachers’ tasks during the Practicum courses was planning lessons. The

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

80

researcher realized it was his primary duty to educate the undergraduate students to

become the student teachers who were able to ‘plan.’

For the Methods of Teaching English course, the researcher gave lectures on

teaching approaches and concepts of teaching English, demonstrating teaching

techniques and activities and organizing a micro-teaching session at a demonstration

school, at which student teachers practiced planning and implemented lesson plans.

The researcher expected the student teachers to adopt all teaching English approaches,

concepts, techniques and activities in their plans and to be able to implement plans

effectively in their real classroom during their practicum.

3.6.3 Researcher’s personal attributes towards student teachers’ lesson

planning

As mentioned above, the researcher prioritized lesson planning since it was his

own practice and his considering its importance for student teachers’ practicum. The

researcher expected great things from the student teachers in terms of planning

lessons.

However, having supervised student teachers for a while, the researcher found

student teachers’ practices questionable. They seemed to plan the activities that

required students to move around by running or walking to find something. When

asked after observation, student teachers just said they wanted students to enjoy

learning English. The researcher reminded them to focus on teaching language points

too. During data collection, the researcher found many student teachers planned

games that required students to compete with one another and activities that required

students to walk to find answers from reading paragraphs. The paragraphs were cut

out and posted on the walls. The researcher, then, probed into this practice, asking for

reasons. The student teachers said they wanted students to have fun. It was a way to

activate students to learn their English classes. Student teachers not only planned and

implemented the plans, but they also thought about students’ interests to obtain the

pleasant atmosphere for learning. This was what the researcher found out about the

doubt in student teachers’ practice.

The previous paragraph showed the researcher used his personal curiosity to

help seek more explanation for student teachers’ specific practice. At times, the

researcher had to downplay his bias against some issues. One time long before

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

81

conducting this study, the researcher, as a university supervisor, had found some

student teachers followed their university supervisor’s practice of writing the draft

plan format instead of the detailed plan format imposed by the Faculty of Education.

The researcher expressed a negative remark against the draft plan format to the

student teachers. They could not do anything more than saying that it was their

university supervisor’s practice inflicted to them. During data collection, the

researcher tried not to highlight this issue; otherwise, questions, like “What plan

format do you follow?” or “How do you feel about the plan format you are using?”

would be based on the researcher’s bias. Unexpectedly, a student teacher, who used

the detailed plan format, complained about writing detailed plans. He said it was time-

consuming and discouraging to write. He asked for reasons of imposing the detailed

plan format from the researcher, at the moment being an interviewer. The researcher,

who wanted to minimize his role as lecturer of the Faculty of Education, did not give

any reasons but asked the student teacher to elaborate on what he had done to explain

the detailed plan format being time-coming instead.

After the researcher observed difficulty in an implementation of a lesson plan,

based on the draft plan format, he thought about that he must carefully maintain his

objectivity in asking questions during data collection. Then, he avoided asking

questions like “Do you think your plan was effective enough?” or “What caused the

difficulty during the implementation?” Instead, the research let the student teacher

watch the implementation of her plan on the video clip and asked “What do you think

about your implementation?” Obviously, the student teacher could detect a difficulty

since students did not understand the lesson, nor could they complete tasks. All the

questions did not lead to the draft plan format at all. The researcher just maintained

his neutral position recognizing his own bias. When analyzing data, the researcher did

not also try to highlight the differences in the plan formats. However, in this report, a

sub category was university supervisor’s practice and its details pinpointed plan

formats. This was derived from student teachers’ interviews, where they mentioned

disadvantages or advantages of each plan formats. All the researcher asked about the

issue was “What do you think about that?” when they mentioned their university

teachers’ practice of focusing on certain plan formats.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

82

3.7 Actions for ethical issues

The researcher has considered ethical issues concerning this study since it

involved the participants and their teacher education program. The actions for this

study were adopted from the ethical principles of psychologists and the code of

conduct for research populations as well as the educational research association

standards: Research populations, educational institutions and the public (Ary et al.,

2006; Best & Kahn, 2006; James, Waring, Coe & Hedges, 2012). The following are

the actions taken to maintain ethics.

3.7.1 Teacher education program. Since the participants of this study were

personnel in a teacher education program, the researcher of this study issued an

official letter in order to request permission to collect data from the chairperson of the

teacher education program in the Teaching English major. The chairperson set up a

meeting attended by the university supervisors of the program. The meeting finally

had a consensus on the request. The letter was signed by the chairperson. The

signature of the chairperson on the letter was considered as consent for allowing the

researcher to collect data. The researcher also communicated the findings and any

practical significance to relevant personnel if required. This was to show honesty as

this study was conducted for educational purposes only.

3.7.2 Participants. The student teachers majoring in Teaching English of a

teacher education program were the participants of this study. They were informed

beforehand of an overview of the study, including its objectives and procedures. They

were provided with a consent form. The form informed the student teachers of

important issues for the study, such as background of this study, procedures, risks and

benefits of participating in the study, compensation, confidentiality, voluntary nature

of the study and contacts (adapted from Tweedy, 2015, p. 295). Most importantly, the

consent form also notified that withdrawal from participation could be made anytime

without any consequences to the practicum results. As for the time issue, the student

teachers spent time on practicing at schools as usual. The researcher observed their

implementation of lesson plans in the actual setting of their practicum. This

guaranteed that the student teachers’ time for teaching practice was not wasted while

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

83

being the participants of this study. The interview was administered in the evenings or

on weekends, when the student teachers had no more duty at schools. The final issue

was the anonymity. None of the participants’ names were revealed whatsoever in the

research report. Pseudonyms were used instead. The student teachers chose the

pseudonyms by themselves.

3.8 Data analysis

According to Ary at al. (2006) and Patton (2002), the data analysis for

qualitative studies is a cyclical process, where the researcher forms categories from

participants’ responses, among which similarities and differences are generated. This

refers to an inductive analysis and creative synthesis, where important patterns,

themes and interrelationships are discovered from rich data. The researcher sorts out

themes and relationships among the categories in order to have insights, conditional

propositions and questions for further data collection. Then, the researcher reaches

tentative theoretical statements about the relationships. As a result, further data

collection is conducted for theoretical propositions. By comparing with more data

collected later, the researcher tries to explain the theoretical constructs until there are

no more new emergent categories.

As for this study, the researcher used the principles of data analysis of the

grounded theory methodology to analyze data. After the audio files of the interview

were transcribed, the researcher began to look for similarities and differences from the

data. After that, the researcher examined themes and relationships among the

emerging categories and then gained an insight for more data collection. At this point,

the researcher constructed tentative theoretical statements, for which more data

collection was conducted to find meanings and understandings. The researcher then

tried to explain the theoretical constructs by comparing with more data until no more

new contributions from the data emerged. “This process of taking information from

data collection and comparing it to emerging categories is called the constant

comparative method of data analysis” (Creswell, 2003, p. 86). The process of data

analysis could be illustrated below based on Corbin and Strauss’ (2015, p. 220) three

levels of coding analyses.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

84

3.8.1 Open coding. To begin with, for open coding, the researcher read

through the transcription of a few interviews to identify differences or similarities

among the data. A variety of techniques were conducted to examine parts of the

transcriptions. For example, statements or phrases meaningful enough to become

categories were underlined and cut out. The categories were noted for the next step of

data analysis.

3.8.2 Axial coding. As for axial coding, Creswell (2013) asserts that the

categories could be divided into 1) causal conditions or the factors which are causes

of the core phenomenon; 2) strategies or actions taken in order to respond to the core

phenomenon; 3) contextual and intervening conditions or board, specific situational

factors that have an influence on the strategies; and 4) consequences or results gained

from using the strategies. “These categories relate to and surround the core

phenomenon in a visual model called the axial coding paradigm” (p.86). The

researcher used one category found in open coding, called the core phenomenon, to

find more categories around it or to find the connections among the new categories.

To do so, stripes of the statements or phrases, cut out earlier to represent categories,

were posted on big pieces of paper, so that categories, subcategories and their

relationships could be seen. The action was continually repeated in order to find more

subcategories through the process of asking questions and making comparisons.

3.8.3 Selective coding. The step of selective coding allowed the researcher to

identify and choose the core category and then systematically connect it to other

categories. The relationships of those categories were validated by further data

collection. For the final step, selective coding, the researcher used the model

assembled from axial coding to describe the interrelationships of the categories in the

lesson planning processes. A theory, as a result, was generated toward the end of this

study and presented in several forms, such as narrative statements and visual pictures.

To illustrate, the researcher asked the participants one of the questions from

the interview schedule, based on the researcher question: What is the process or steps

of your lesson planning? Student teachers or the participants revealed their responses,

in which factors or influences on their lesson planning were emerging in transcripts.

In the end, a category ‘personnel’ was formed, consisting of three sub categories:

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

85

school supervisors, university supervisors and student teachers. More subcategories

were discovered through further data collection. When all categories and

subcategories were put together, a diagram of lesson planning processes was

generated. There were also factors influencing student teachers’ lesson planning.

Then, further data was collected to add codes and categories. The steps of analysis

were not strictly in order. The researcher reexamined data, codes, categories and the

whole diagram. Then, the researcher could generate a theory to explain the lesson

planning processes (Appendix H: Sample open coding, axial coding and selective

coding).

The next chapter shows the results of data collection and data analysis in

forms of both descriptive statements and visual pictures. The results were explained

through descriptive narration. The researcher also used a number of detailed diagrams

to explain the theory discovered from the data. These diagrams illustrated how each

factor influenced components in lesson planning. The causes and consequences of

factors were also presented in the diagrams as well as thick descriptive narrations.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

CHAPTER 4

RESULTS OF THE STUDY

This chapter reports the results of data collection as planned in the third

chapter. The twenty-two student teachers were interviewed two times. The first

interview was conducted to answer the first research question: 1) How do the Thai

EFL student teachers design their lesson plans? There were also two sub questions:

1.1) What factors influence the student teachers’ lesson planning? and 1.2) What is

the procedure in the student teachers’ lesson planning? The research questions

identifies the lesson planning process, which consists of actions before planning,

during planning, during implementing plans and after implementing plans.

Then, the student teachers were observed in their actual instruction recorded in

visual files. Along with the observation, the researcher used each student teacher’s

lesson plan as a prompt to create more questions to be used in the second interviews.

The observation was conducted in order to collect data to answer the second research

question: 2) How do the student teachers implement the lesson plans? There were also

two sub questions: 2.1) What do the student teachers do before implementing a lesson

plan? and 2.2) Is the lesson plan implemented as planned? Why/Why not?

The second interviews were also administered to find out more data about

lesson planning concerning the implementation of plans and actions after the

implementation. The data collected was used to answer the third research question: 3)

What action do the student teachers take after implementing the lesson plans? There

was a sub question: 3.1) How do the student teachers evaluate their lesson plans?

Data collection and data analysis were conducted based on the three levels of

coding analyses, including open coding, axial coding and selective coding, and the

constant comparative method. While collecting data, data analysis had been

conducted in a cyclical process, where categories and subcategories were coded. The

categories which had been emerged from initial interviews were used to draw further

data from interviewees to form understanding of the data. The following are the

results of the study presented in the order of the research questions.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

87

Research question 1 How do the Thai EFL student teachers design their lesson

plans?

Sub question 1.1 What factors influence the student teachers’ lesson planning?

Sub question 1.2 What is the procedure in the student teachers’ lesson

planning?

Research question 2 How do the student teachers implement the lesson plans?

Sub question 2.1 What do the student teachers do before implementing a

lesson plan?

Sub question 2.2 Is the lesson plan implemented as planned? Why/Why not?

Research question 3

What action do the student teachers take after implementing

the lesson plans?

Sub question 3.1 How do the student teachers evaluate their lesson plans?

This chapter presents the results in the order of the research questions and sub

questions. The categories and sub categories from the results are also presented as the

headings of this chapter so that it is more convenient to follow the data.

4.1 Research question 1 How do the Thai EFL student teachers design their

lesson plans?

Research question 1 How do the Thai EFL student teachers design their lesson

plans?

The first research question was aimed to find out general information about

lesson planning of the student teachers. Questions asked the student teachers about

their pre-planning and while-planning actions. The focus of the first research question

was the factors and the procedures. There were two sub questions: What factors

influence the student teachers’ lesson planning? What is the procedure in the student

teachers’ lesson planning?

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

88

4.1.1 Sub question 1.1 What factors influence the student teachers’ lesson

planning?

During the interviews student teachers revealed the information that could be

categorized as the factors that influenced lesson planning. The following figure shows

two categories of the factors: personnel and institution.

Figure 4.1: Factors influencing student teachers’ lesson planning

1. Personnel

1.1 School supervisors

1.2 University supervisor

1.3 Student teachers

2. Institutions

2.1 Schools

2.2 Faculty of Education

From interviews, most student teachers used their teaching experience in

planning the next lesson. In other words, student teachers experienced how each

factor contributed to results in previous instruction. The next plan, therefore, was

carefully written as the student teachers were considering the past experience. This

was a cyclical process in planning.

1. Personnel. Personnel referred to persons who contributed to lesson planning

of the student teachers. According to the data, there were the following members:

students, school supervisors, university supervisors and student teachers themselves.

First, students were the persons in classrooms, where student teachers planned the

lessons for. The levels of students ranged from the elementary to high school. Second,

school supervisors were the persons assigned by each school to supervise each student

teacher. Usually, each school supervisor from the English department was to

supervise one student teacher. Third, university supervisors were the persons who

were assigned among the faculty members, where the student teacher were from. The

university supervisors worked in a university in the West of Thailand. They were

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

89

mainly to supervise the student teachers on lesson planning and instruction. Finally,

student teachers themselves had an influence on lesson planning. The student

teachers’ classmates and their senior graduates also accounted for lesson planning as

well.

Please see the figure below for Factors influencing student teachers’ lesson

planning: Personnel. The figure illustrates the personnel factor for ‘students.’


Student teachers reported that school supervisors were definitely the

personnel, who had a direct influence on student teachers’ lesson planning due to their

direct contact to one another for a term.

School supervisors were assigned by each school’s deputy director to

academic affairs to take care of student teachers while they were practicing teaching

at the school. The responsibilities of school supervisors included giving advice

concerning lesson planning, instruction and other school rules and regulations to

student teachers. Usually, a school supervisor was assigned to look after a student

teacher. Each student teacher knew who his/her school supervisor was on the first day

of an official meeting, which was set up before the term started—usually in March

each year. During the time before the term started, student teachers received the

information necessary for lesson planning from school supervisors.

Student teachers said that school supervisors provided the information about

textbooks, curriculum, students, facilities, technology and resources before planning.

Then, the student teachers used the information to write lesson plans. After that, they

submitted the plans to school supervisors, who then checked and gave feedback. Next,

the student teachers implemented the lesson plans in classrooms, where school

supervisors observed. After observation, the student teachers gained feedback about

the implementation of lesson plans from school supervisors. The following are the

results from data collection that revealed how influential school supervisors were

towards student teachers’ lesson planning.

Please see the figure below for factors influencing student teachers’ lesson

planning: Personnel. The figure illustrates subcategories for ‘school supervisors.’

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

90

Figure 4.2: Factors influencing student teachers’ lesson planning: Personnel (School

supervisors)


1.1.1 Influence on lesson planning at meetings with students teachers

1.1.1.1 Information affecting lesson planning at meetings

A. Information about textbooks

B. Information about curriculum

C. Information about students

D. Information about facilities, technology and

resources

1.1.1.2 No information affecting lesson planning at meetings

1.1.2 Influence on lesson planning after submitting lesson plans

1.1.2.1 Feedback on objectives

1.1.2.2 Feedback on content

1.1.2.3 Feedback on teaching techniques

1.1.2.4 Feedback on language use

1.1.3 Influence on lesson planning when giving feedback after

observation

1.1.3.1 Feedback on activities for phases of teaching

1.1.3.2 Feedback on teaching aids


1.1.1 Influence on lesson planning at meetings with students teachers

According to the results from interviews, student teachers revealed that school

supervisors helped them shape up their lesson plans by providing information about

textbooks; curriculum; students; and facilities, technology and resources during the

period before planning or class observation.

The information had a direct influence on lesson planning. For example, the

information about textbooks helped student teachers decide on amount of content for

plans. The information about curriculum guided student teachers to use indicators.

The information about students guided student teachers to plan appropriate levels of

content. Finally, the information about facilities, technology and resources helped

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

91

student teachers decide on appropriate teaching aids. Details for each heading are

illustrated below.

1.1.1.1 Information affecting lesson planning at meetings

Before the Practicum course began, student teachers, escorted by university

supervisors, officially visited schools, where student teachers practiced teaching for a

term or about twenty weeks. They had an opportunity to meet with school

supervisors, each of whom was assigned to supervise each student teacher. During

this time, the school supervisors and student teachers set up a meeting before the term

started. The school supervisors usually informed student teachers about things they

should know. They also exchanged phone numbers or Line accounts for making

contact later.

Student teachers said that at the first meeting, school supervisors introduced

textbooks to them, so that they knew content for writing lesson plans. The following

are details.

(1) Information about textbooks

According to student teachers, most schools provided textbooks for teaching

English for each level. A student teacher received the textbook used as a guide for

writing a long-range plan and daily lesson plans. School supervisors were in charge of

providing such textbooks to student teachers.

“My school supervisor gave the textbook to me on the first day

I visited school,” said all student teachers, except for Grace.

Amount of content for long-range plans

Once the textbook was received, student teachers received general guidelines

of how to use textbooks for long-range plans from school supervisors. The student

teachers said that they followed the suggestions due to necessity to start lesson

planning.

“I talked to my [school] supervisor the first day we went to the

school. She gave the textbook to me. She told me that the

school used four units for the term. … There are eight units. …

And I follow her suggestion. … umm … I don’t know what to

cover, so I have to follow that,” said Nicky.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

92

“Well, everyone uses four units. That’s what my [school]

supervisor told me. I have to follow this. … I just plan using

the amount she told me. I do the same, then, for a start,” said

Nicky.

“According to my [school] supervisor they, like teachers or the

head [of the English department] agreed to use only half of

units for the first term. I’m OK with it. … I mean I have to use

half of units as told,” said Anna.

Amount of content for daily plans

School supervisors also had an influence on student teachers’ daily lesson

plans as the amount of content from textbooks was informed. For example, Fasai said

that her school supervisor suggested that she stick to the linguistic elements presented

on the school’s textbook for unity in all teachers’ planning.

“The first unit had ‘He is from, She is from’ and I asked if it

was enough. She [school supervisor] said that was enough. She

said if there were only affirmatives in the book, we should

teach affirmatives. ... She said it would be fair to all students.

They learn the same thing from other teachers. … I write three

plans a week. Students have three English sessions per week,”

said Fasai.

Similarly, Nicky also revealed that her school supervisor told her specific

information about the number of plans for a unit.

“She [school supervisor] also told me to write about 10 – 12

plans for a unit. In fact, the number may be lesser,” said Nicky.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

93

Consequences: Adjustments made due to effects of unplanned schedule

When asked for the reason of reducing the number of units, Nicky said that the

action was caused by effects of unplanned school schedule. There were expected and

unexpected special events that interrupted time management.

“… There are a lot of special events, like holidays, academic

days, sports days and something like that, so the number of

plans may be lesser. … I write four plans a week because

students have two long sessions per week. Each session lasts

two hours. So, I write a plan for half a session,” said Nicky.

Andy seemed to make decisions on the number of lesson plans for a unit by

himself. The reason was that he adjusted the number according to the amount of the

content and time available.

“I was told [by school supervisor] there should be four lesson

plans for a unit, like ‘hanging out’ should have four lesson

plans, but I decide on the number by myself. It can be more or

less. Like this one ‘hanging out’, I think two plans should be

enough. This one about carnival should have four lesson plans

but I think two is enough, either. The other two lesson plans

were devoted to ASEAN. The textbook doesn’t have anything

about it [ASEAN]. I have to plan more. … That’s on the school

curriculum. I have to teach. … I reduce the number of units

because I do it for the time I have,” said Andy.

Focus on language points

A student teacher recalled that her school supervisor told her to focus on

grammar points from textbooks because the school focused on grammar. As a result,

the student teacher wrote lesson plans based on grammar and many grammar

exercises.

“My school supervisor told me that students must learn

grammar. I should plan grammar lessons. He said grammar was

focused of this school. We should teach grammar and let them

[students] do a lot of exercises to practice,” said Polita.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

94

When asked about her reactions, Polita said that she then planned lessons that

focused heavily on grammar points drawn from the textbooks.

“There are a lot of grammar points from the textbooks so my

lesson plans focus a lot on grammar points,” said Polita.

In another case, student teachers said that certain skills were focused. Their

school supervisors informed them to write lesson plans focusing on certain skills.

“My school supervisor told me to focus on reading skills. So, I

plan only reading skills. … The supervisor said once students

had learned grammar in secondary school, so we, then, focus

on reading at high school. … Of course, I do it [planning on

reading skills]. She told me to. I should follow her advice,” said

Boy.

“I teach reading too. My school supervisor told me the first

time we met that we focused on reading here. High school

students focus on reading. So, I plan only reading lessons but

she [school supervisor] told me if I wanted to teach some

grammar points, I’d be OK. … I just teach some structure if it

helps with reading. … I plan reading lessons, then,” said Andy.

“The school supervisor told me to focus on listening and

speaking. I plan only listening and speaking. But, sometimes,

they write too. … I mean I plan reading lessons and then during

the transfer phase, I plan writing activities. But, mostly, the

plans focus on reading and speaking. … Yes, I follow her

suggestion,” said Fasai.

At meetings, school supervisors provided student teachers with information

about textbooks, which included amount of content for long-range plans and daily

plans and language points to be focused. Student teachers followed the suggestions

received from school supervisors, accordingly, due necessity in starting lesson

planning. However, some student teachers adjusted the amount of content after they

considered effects of unplanned schedules.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

95

Apart from information about textbooks, school supervisors also gave

information about curriculum for student teachers to start designing lessons plans.

(2) Information about curriculum

In addition to information about textbooks, school supervisors also gave

information about the core curriculum and the vocational curriculum. The core

curriculum was focused for writing indicators. The vocational curriculum was not

really focused but textbooks were used instead.

Focus on core curriculum

School supervisors told student teachers to focus on the core curriculum,

regardless of school curriculum. Most student teachers revealed that after they had

asked about necessary materials for a start of lesson planning, they asked for school

curriculum. However, they were encouraged to use the core curriculum. It was the

B.E. 2551core curriculum, on which all curriculums of basic educational schools were

based.

“I asked for school curriculum but … umm the teacher [school

supervisor] didn’t’ say anything, she told me to look at the core

curriculum. So, I use the indicators [from the core curriculum] to

write objectives,” said Chanom, Moey and Nicky.

When asked what they did after they found out about the information about

the core curriculum from their school supervisors, the student teachers revealed that

they used the core curriculum as suggested because the practice was the same as what

they had been educated: writing objectives and indicators drawn from the core

curriculum.

Chanom and Nicky said similarly, “I had the indicators on the

lesson plan’s front page like before. They were drawn from the

core curriculum.”

Moey added, “… as I told you the school used the core

curriculum. We use the indicators from the core curriculum to

write on the lesson plan and the [school] supervisors checked

them. They were OK.”

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

96

Andy asked for the school curriculum from his school supervisor and he had

it. However, he refused to draw the indicators from the school curriculum.

“The school has its own curriculum but I don’t use it. … I use

the core curriculum [to find indicators]. … I asked for the

school curriculum from my school supervisor and she gave it to

me,” said Andy.

Andy explained the reason for not using the school curriculum.

“It’s because she [school supervisor] told me they were similar,

the core and school curriculums. … It’s like the school gains

the indicators from the core curriculum. She said it was the

same, so …,” said Andy.

When asked whether he compared the two curriculums, Andy said he

did not.

“… I didn’t. She told me so [both curriculums are similar]. So,

I didn’t. I just use the indicators from the core curriculum. In

fact, I learned it that way … from the core curriculum,” said

Andy.

As a result, student teachers used the core curriculum to write

indicators on lesson plans, no matter there was school curriculum or not.

Focus on textbooks not curriculum to write indicators

A group of student teachers practicing teaching at the same school revealed

that their school was a vocational school. Unlike the schools under Office of Basic

Education Commission, vocational schools had the B.E. 2556 vocational curriculum

for lesson planning instead of the core curriculum. School supervisors told the student

teachers to focus on textbooks, regardless of vocational curriculum.

“I asked for the school curriculum and the school supervisor

didn’t give any to me. She said the school used the vocational

curriculum. I never see it before. But, it’s Ok. My school

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

97

supervisor told me to use the textbook as a guideline for writing

indicators,” said Tharee, April and Grace.

The student teachers had different responses. Some of them thought that

lesson planning would not be different from how they practiced during the teacher

education course. They just looked at the textbooks and thought about a terminal

objective for a lesson plan and designed activities for teaching phases.

“… Well, it wouldn’t make any difference to me when the

[school] supervisor told me that [there is no curriculum

provided]. I just plan like before,” said Tharee and Grace.

Both Tharee and Grace explained that they knew that they had to look at

standards and indicators of a curriculum to plan in order to achieve each school’s

educational aim. They realized that since there was no curriculum provided and the

school supervisors did not seem to give priority to the curriculum, they thought they

just followed the supervisors’ instruction: using the textbook to plan.

“… I have to look for what … umm standards … it’s that right?

And … umm indicators … [laughing]. Yeah. I look at

indicators from the curriculum but no curriculum … I just

plan,” said Tharee.

Grace added, “… I asked for it [curriculum] because we were

taught to have it to write … umm objectives … I mean … we

use indicators. … I …. umm … my [school] supervisor said it

was OK to just use the book so I felt it was OK, just use the

book to plan. She [school supervisor] did not talk about the

curriculum at all. They [teachers] use textbooks to plan as

well.”

However, both Tharee and Grace admitted given no curriculum provided, they

had difficulty finding the right terminal objectives for writing lesson plans. Though

they knew for vocational schools the curriculum was different, they did not think they

could find the right indicators because they were not familiar with the curriculum.

Therefore, they did not look for the vocational curriculum to write plans.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

98

“… I know I can find the [vocational] curriculum from a

website but … I don’t … don’t find it. I … um … maybe … I

won’t understand it. I never saw it before. We used the

indicators from the core curriculum, right?, … when we studied

[at the university],” said Tharee.

“When I don’t have the curriculum, I can use the textbook to

write lesson plans. … Umm, it’s hard sometimes to write

objectives … terminal objectives. … We have to find right

verbs and so. … I don’t look it [vocational curriculum] up on

websites … because … I don’t know. The [school] supervisor

said it was OK to use the textbook, so I just use the textbook,”

said Grace.

Moreover, April added her school supervisor said that Office of the Vocational

Education Commission had imposed lists of publishers, which provided textbooks for

vocational schools. Using textbooks to plans, therefore, was eligible.

“My [school] supervisor explained that vocational schools were

under … err … Vocational Department … and they [the

vocational department] imposed lists of publishers that can be

trusted and the school chose textbooks from the list. … So, it’s

OK to use textbooks to plan because we will cover all content

imposed by the vocational curriculum. She said some books

might show indicators too,” said April.

However, when April saw the textbook for her class and some so-called

indicators, she felt disappointed because they were not applicable to write on lesson

plans. As a result, she had to try hard to write objectives.

“The indicators? What? [laughing] I saw the textbook and I was

like … disappointed. What’s that? They are not indicators from

the curriculum but I think they are … they are objectives for

each unit, like ‘to write negative sentences’ or to write yes-no

questions. I was like [laughing] stunned [laughing]. General,

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

99

too general … They are only actions for students to do. … I

think about writing terminal objectives … yeah … it’s hard

without curriculum … indicators in the curriculum to look at,”

said April.

Because the vocational curriculum was neither provided nor focused, student

teachers used textbooks to write objectives.


about curriculum for designing lesson plans. The information was concerned with the

core curriculum and the vocational curriculum. Some school supervisors did not

provide any school curriculum and encouraged use of the core curriculum, instead.

Student teachers, then, sought the core curriculum and used it for writing objectives.

This was congruent with student teachers’ knowledge. Planning was conducted

accordingly.

In case of vocational school, school supervisors told student teachers that the

vocational curriculum could be used for writing objectives. The student teachers, who

never used the vocational curriculum before, were encouraged by school supervisors

to use textbooks to write objectives, instead. Still, the student teachers reported they

struggled to plan.

Apart from information about curriculum, school supervisors also gave

information about students for student teachers to start designing lessons plans.

(3) Information about students

According to student teachers, school supervisors informed them about

students’ levels of English proficiency and behavior, which had an effect on lesson

planning. School supervisors suggested that student teachers make lesson plans

suitable for each level of proficiency and to think about variety of activities, pace of

instruction, amount of explanation for grammar, levels of difficulty of vocabulary and

structure.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

100

Various activities planned for intermediate students

Pooky revealed that her school supervisor suggested she planned activities

according to students’ levels of proficiency.

“My school supervisor told me to think of various activities

because students are good at English … most of them,” said

Pooky.

According to Pooky, the school supervisor explained that activities should

provide an opportunity for students to communicate in the target language. Pooky

agreed with the information because she learned to do so.

“… So, I plan various activities as told [by her school

supervisor]. Like, I planned to teach … err … I don’t

remember. It’s like I planned to teach a grammar point and I

should plan to have them [students] speak the grammar point in

a situation rather than having them write sentences to check

grammatical accuracy only. … It’s like what I studied before.

Students should communicate in the end,” said Pooky.

Linguistic explanation planned for intermediate students

Nicky said that her school supervisor gave information about more

explanation for language prepared for intermediate students to meet their needs.

“My school supervisor told me that students like to hear … take

notes about grammar rules. When I plan grammar lessons, I

have to prepare explanations for them. … Yes, they are

intermediate students. I have to prepare myself searching for

information about the grammar point I’m planning. They

[students] like to know more about grammar rules. I have to be

prepared,” said Nicky.

Simplification of content for beginner students

Student teachers said that school supervisors told them to simplify content on

lesson plans. They followed the information immediately because simplified content

was helpful to student learning.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

101

“I have to make things easy. My school supervisor tells me so.

She says students here have low English proficiency. They are

beginners. Easy, please. … Like, the words should be easy. We

should use easy words on lesson plans, such as eat, run, chair,

table, etc. … I plan like she says. If it’s too difficult, students

can’t learn. So, easy is good. Or else, they don’t understand,”

said Helen.

“My school supervisor tells me to use simple sentences or

structures. … Like, a sentence shouldn’t be too long. …

Structures on plans should be simple, not complex. … Like, a

subject and a verb. It [structure] should look easy. … Yes, I use

easy sentences. They [sentences] are helpful for them

[students]. … Well, easy sentences are like subject and verb. I

want to read a book. If it’s easy like this, they can read,” said

Tharee.

Slow pace of instruction planned for beginner students

Not only did school supervisors warn student teachers to simplify lesson plans,

they also asked for a slow pace of instruction. August revealed that her school

supervisor did not mention anything after checking her plans, but she mentioned pace

of instruction.

“My [school] supervisor saw my first plan and she said

nothing. She flipped each page quickly. I think she just looked

for difficult words or grammar. I didn’t have to correct

anything [on the lesson plan]. I know they [students] have

background knowledge informed to me by my supervisor …

She just said to me I had to go slowly. I have to teach slowly,”

added August.

When asked whether she knew what it meant by ‘slowly’, she replied that she

was thinking about delivering speech slowly. August slowed down pace of instruction

as told because she thought it would be helpful for students.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

102

“I think about speaking slowing or presenting sentences slowly

and so on, which is Ok. She [school supervisor] doesn’t say

anything I think I teach slowly enough. … It’s obvious that I

speak slowly and students will understand what I say. It’s

helpful, of course, so I do like she [school supervisor] told me,”

said August.

Tharee and Helen also added that their school supervisors recommended slow

pace of instruction for students with the low level of English proficiency. They were

thinking teaching slowly was helpful to students to understand the lessons.

“My school supervisor told me to teach slowly … because

students are really low. I plan each step slowly. I think about

explaining each step slowly. And I can give more examples and

explain more… It’s OK for students. They need time to

understand. When I talk slowly, they can catch up with the

lesson,” said Tharee.

“My school supervisor told me to teach slowly. The students

are not good at English. They are low. … That makes me teach

slowly. I have to explain a lot to help them. … I think about it

[teaching slowly]. I don’t write on the plan,” said Helen.


about students for designing lesson plans. The information was concerned with how

to plan for intermediate and beginner students. Student teachers used the information

as it helped students learn the target language. For example, activities should be

various and more explanation should be added for intermediate students. Plans should

be simplified, implemented with slow pace of instruction and filled with examples

and explanations for beginner students.

Apart from information about curriculum, school supervisors also gave

information about facilities, technology and resources for student teachers to start

designing lessons plans.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

103

(4) Information about facilities, technology and resources

School supervisors also gave information about availability or readiness and

unavailability of facilities, technology and resources in schools. Provided the

availability, student teachers could plan lessons with ease and convenience. On the

other hand, the unavailability forced student teachers to think carefully and think

about other alternatives for planning teaching aids

Availability of electronic devices and office supplies

Student teachers reported that school supervisors informed them roughly about

electronic devices and office supplies available for lesson planning. Planning became

easy, accordingly.

“It is easy to plan lessons when my [school] supervisor tells me

there are computers and visualizers,” said Gasoline, Chanom,

Tharee, Jane, Katy, Anna, April and Tiny.

Gasoline added he liked to use electronic devices due to convenience.

“When my [school] supervisor told me that I could use Power

Point Presentations, I went ‘Yeah!’. It’s convenient to prepare,”

said Gasoline.

Availability of sound labs

Student teachers revealed that when school supervisors told them about the

availability of sound labs, full with electronic devices, they were thinking about using

the electronic teaching aids on their lesson plans.

“She [school supervisor] told me that the sound labs were

available. I, then, plan about using Power Point files to teach,”

said Moey.

“I’m thinking about using the sound labs. She [school

supervisor] told me all devices, like computers, speakers and

microphones, were good,” said Anna.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

104

Consequences: More visual aids planned

As a result, student teachers planned to use more pictures and audio/video

clips to teach. The main reason was that the visual aids were interesting for students.

“I can think about using more audio and video clips [to teach

students]. Students like to watch clips,” said Paul, Kara and

Tiny.

“I plan to use a lot of pictures on the Power Point files,” said

Paul, Moey and Anna.

Consequences: Language notes on sheets planned

Student teachers revealed that their school supervisors also informed them of

the availability of paper for photocopying machines. The information helped them

plan easily because they could think about preparing notes about for linguistic

elements.

“My school supervisor told me that the Xerox machine was

available. I can plan to have explanation on sheets and

worksheets. … They [sheets] are for students to see and

practice grammar,” said Nicky and Pooky.

Consequences: Time managed easily

Nicky and Pooky also added that having worksheets was very convenient

because they could use the worksheets as teaching aids for each step. Students would

use the worksheets to manage learning easily.

“It’s good to have worksheets because the time can be

managed as planned. … It’s like we have notes on the sheets.

Students can look at the notes right away. They don’t have to

… I don’t have wait for them trying to copy my notes from the

board,” said Nicky.

Similarly, Pooky said, “The worksheets are very helpful

because the teaching steps are like that. … I mean when I want

them [students] to see explanation of grammar rules, I can let

them see from the sheet. They don’t have to copy from me

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

105

again. … And when they do the worksheets, they [worksheets]

are ready. By doing so, I can manage time easily.”

Availability of paper for printer

Student teacher revealed that their school supervisors told them about the

availability of paper for printers. The student teachers were allowed to use paper for

writing plans or teaching aids. This resulted in convenience for planning.

“The school supervisor said I could use the printer. It’s

convenient that the school provide paper. I can plan and print

my plan at school,” said Kara.

“… It’s easy to print teaching aids, like sheets, cue cards at

school,” said Kara and Paul.

However, the student teachers said that they had to be considerate when

planning to use paper despite availability of paper for printer.

“The school supervisor told me before we started the term that

we had to be careful … when using paper for printing—not too

much. Otherwise, it’s bad because there are many teachers

using the printer too,” said Paul and Kara.

Paul and Kara practiced teaching at the same school.

Strict rules of using paper

Student teachers also revealed that the school supervisors also informed them

about strict rules of using paper for the photocopying machine. According to the rules,

student teachers had to undergo several steps of document circulation.

“I have to do many things to have worksheets photocopied. So,

I have to plan in advance about 2 – 3 weeks before. … The

process includes filling a form; submitting the form to be

signed off by my school supervisor, the head of the English

department, the head of the material and equipment

department; and passing the form to a staff member to

photocopy. … We have to fill in the form: a number of pages, a

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

106

number of copies, the date of submission and the date to

receive copies,” said Pooky.

“… For me, I start the process about two weeks or … three

weeks. Yeah. The process takes a long time, so I have to plan in

advance. … The reason … umm … I think the school wants to

make sure that student teachers use paper for teaching … for

good reasons only,” said Nicky.

Consequences: Paper as part of teaching aids planned beforehand

As a result, the student teachers said that had to plan ahead of time if they

wished to use sheets or worksheets on lesson plans. They said they never had

problems with the rules.

“I never have any problems about this [filling in forms for

photocopying]. I can have worksheets on time of use,” said

Nicky and Pooky.

Limited amount of paper

Another case was recalled by Katy and Jane, who also practiced teaching at

the same school. They said that their school supervisors on the first day of meeting

told them that office supplies were limited. Student teachers were encouraged to use a

minimum amount of paper for photocopying.

“When the [school] supervisor told me A4 paper was provided,

I … like Great! But only fifty sheets. I … like … what?! I’ll

finish them in a week,” said Jane.

“She [school supervisor] told me so [fifty sheets a term]. I …

umm … OK … fifty sheets … for three classes … I mean six

lesson plans. It’s gone quickly [laughing]. It’s better than

nothing [laughing],” said Katy.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

107

Consequences: Notebooks used instead

As a result, the student teachers had to plan to use other teaching aids or have

students do exercises on notebooks. They did not want to pay for additional

worksheets by themselves.

“I thought I had to pay for plans … for aids and so by myself.

It’s so bad. … Well, I still have to plan. … Umm … the paper

is not enough. I have to plan to have students do exercises on

their note books. … If I use other ways to do exercise, like big

paper, I have to pay by myself,” said Jane and Katy.

Unavailability of electronic devices

Student teachers also revealed that school supervisors told them about the

unavailability of electronic devices, such as computers, visualizers, microphones or

speakers in some classrooms. The information had a direct influence on lesson

planning.

Consequences: Alternative plan of utilization of classrooms and of personal

items

When school supervisors told student teachers that the school did not provide

electronic devices in all rooms, the student teachers had to think carefully about

choices of teaching aids and how to manage use of classrooms. The reason was that

teaching aids were necessary to assist student learning.

“I have to think this plan is better to teach with the PowerPoint

files or not. … There should be more pictures, clips for students

to watch. So, I have to swap rooms in advance. … Teaching

aids are helpful to make students understand lessons,” Tharee,

April and Grace.

According to Grace, the room must be changed every time because she was

assigned to teach the listening and speaking skills. On an assumption of student

interest, she managed utilization of classrooms to assist student learning.

“I change rooms every time because I teach listening and

speaking. … I give input to students by letting them listening

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

108

and watching clips. I want them to see and listen to English …

a lot of English. It’s more interesting, isn’t it? They can learn

better,” said Grace.

Sometimes, it was hard to find a room with the electronic devices, Grace said

that she had to use her own laptop computer. Though students might not see a clip or

listen to a conversation clearly, it was necessary for her to rely on electronic teaching

aids.

“… If I can’t find a room [with the electronic devices], I have

to use my own laptop computer. … I turn on the clip and let

them [students] watch or listen. … I have to use it because I

teach listening. I should let them listen to English

conversations, shouldn’t I? … But, there is no problem using

the laptop computer because I have only … thirty students. In

some classes there are twenty five or twenty something …

small room. They can hear clearly,” said Grace.

Consequences: Paper-based teaching aids used

Student teachers revealed that in some schools, school supervisors informed

them in advance of electronic devices’ poor quality. The information forced the

student teachers to plan to use non-electronic teaching aids instead.

“At first, some computers worked well and then they didn’t

work at all. My school supervisor told me that. She said they

[computers] were broken. … The visualizer … [laughing] no

clue. … I think about using paper-based aids,” said Katy.

“I plan to use paper as teaching aids first when my school

supervisor said not all computers and visualizers worked well,”

said Jane.

Katy explained the definition of paper-based aids and gave some examples.

“The paper-based aids? … They are like flash cards or sentence

stripes. Sometimes, I use pictures I have to draw by myself,”

said Katy.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

109

The main reason for using paper-based teaching aids was more convenience as

compared to using electronic teaching aids.

“… It’s more convenient. I just decided to plan to use paper

instead of the PowerPoint files. They [computers] don’t work,

anyway,” said Katy.

“I know the computers are broken. … It’s better … easier to

use paper aids, isn’t it?” said Jane.

Consequences: Classrooms swapped

Katy and Jane also revealed that provided they had known the electronic

devices might not work well, it was necessary to use electronic teaching aids. The

reason was the fact that they wanted to assist student learning by offering a variety of

teaching aids. Therefore, subsequent actions for the decision must be taken.

“… But, sometimes, I have to use the PowerPoint files to teach.

I have to check the flash drive is working with the computer or

not. I have to check everything, like the computer the visualizer

or the speaker. … I have to change my classroom but I still

have to check the devices,” said Katy.

“… I use the PowerPoint files sometimes too, not very often.

… I want students to see various teaching aids. It’s boring to

see only paper, isn’t it? … If the computer in my room is

broken, I have to change the room. … Yes. I still have to check

the computer and so on. As I said, the school supervisor said

that they [electronic devices] were so bad. If it wasn’t

necessary, I wouldn’t use them,” said Jane.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

110

Consequences: Other equipment prepared and back-up plan sorted

Katy added that she had to think about preparing hard copies of electronic

teaching aids and stationary in case of problems.

“I print my PowerPoint slides in case the computer doesn’t

work. … I don’t print the whole file. I print … like … pictures

from the file just in case,” said Katy.

When asked why she had to print the slides as long as she had checked the

electronic devices beforehand, Katy replied that she could not rely on the computer.

“… [laughing] I know I check. But, I can’t trust the computer.

It may be working when I check using the flash drive with it,

but it may not work when I implement the plan. Having the

printed paper is safer,” said Katy.

When facilities, technology and resources were not available, student teachers

had to think about other choices to plan lessons, especially for teaching aids.

Finally, at meetings, school supervisors provided student teachers with

information about facilities, technology and resources for designing lesson plans. The

information was concerned with availability and unavailability of facilities,

technology and resources, which had an influence on design teaching aids, including

electronic or non-electronic ones, and on student teachers’ behaviors on lesson

planning (e.g. planning in advance, thinking for alternatives, having self-discipline).

Above is concerned with information school supervisors also provided to

student teachers so that they could start designing lessons plans; however, a student

teacher reported that she did not receive such information. Details are shown below.

1.1.1.2 School supervisor did not give the information that affected

lesson planning at meetings.

At the first time, student teachers were escorted to schools to meet with school

administrators and school supervisors. Usually, school supervisors gave information

necessary for writing lesson plans at the meeting. However, a student teacher reported

that no information was given.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

111

A student teacher said though school supervisors were supposed to meet with

student teachers on the first day they visited each school, a supervisor did not meet

her. Grace reported that on the first day, when a university supervisor escorted her and

her classmates to have an official visit to the school, the school principal, deputy

director to academic affairs, English department head and three school supervisors

had a meeting to receive the visit. After an official talk among the key persons, school

supervisors were expected to meet with each of their student teachers. The necessary

information about the school, like rules and regulations, would be delivered.

However, her school supervisor refused to talk to her. This caused difficulty

for her lesson planning because she needed some information and materials to help

her write the long-range plan for a start and daily lesson plans later on.

The reason for Grace’s school supervisor could not meet her was the fact that

he was busy.

“On the first day, we all went to the school and the principal

told us about rules and things. And we were supposed to meet

with our school supervisors, right? But my supervisor said he

couldn’t talk with me. He said he was busy with grading exam

papers. … I was … like … but my friends could chat with their

supervisors. How about me?” said Grace.

Consequences: Student teacher seeking information from other sources

Also eager for information to start writing lesson plans, Grace sought

information from her classmates and other school supervisors. She received

information as she needed.

“At the first meeting, I was told to have a textbook for writing a

long-range plan. I was like …. I must have it [textbook]. I

joined April talking to her supervisor. … I, then, knew about

rules. We have to signed in before 8.30. … It’s late because we

don’t sing the national anthem here because it’s vocational

school. There are only high school students. … After that, I

talked to April too. She told me about other things, like rooms

and so,” said Grace.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

112

In the end of the first meeting, textbooks were provided to both of her

classmates. At this point, Grace felt like she must have the textbook but she did not

want to disturb her school supervisor, who was busy grading exam papers. She asked

April’s school supervisor what she should do. Grace recalled the response as shown

below:

“She [April’s school supervisor] suggested that I wait. … But I

couldn’t wait. The van was leaving,” said Grace.

Grace referred to the fact that the van was a vehicle that took the university

supervisor and the student teachers to the school and after the meeting was over, all

must ride on the van and go back to the university together at the same time. Grace,

therefore, couldn’t wait for her school supervisor to finish grading. Besides, she was

not sure whether he would talk to her later on. She decided to leave the school with

her classmates.

“I wasn’t sure if he would meet me after he graded exam

papers. I left the school with my friends,” said Grace.

Later that week, Grace returned to the school and asked for the textbook from

her school supervisor. Finally, he gave her a textbook. They had a brief talk.

“I was like … I must have the book. I needed it for writing the

long-range plan. So, I called April’s supervisor and asked her to

tell him [Grace’s school supervisor] to give me one. … I went

to the school and saw him. He gave me the book but didn’t say

anything. So, I asked him about the units to cover, the students

and so on. … Then, I left,” said Grace.

Not all school supervisors provided support to student teachers once they were

assigned the job. When school supervisors did not provide information, student

teachers had to seek for it from other sources. Otherwise, lesson planning would not

be commenced. It was necessity that drove student teachers to seek for information

they needed for designing lesson plans.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

113

Above is school supervisors’ influence on student teachers’ lesson planning

concerning information. School supervisors also had an influence on lesson planning

after student teachers submitted lesson plans.

1.1.2 Influence on lesson planning after submitting lesson plans

After student teachers had received the necessary information from their

school supervisors, lesson planning began. The following is what student teachers

reported after they finished lesson plans. The complete lesson plans were submitted to

school supervisors first because both student teachers and school supervisors were

physically close.

According to student teachers’ interviews, after checking lesson plans, school

supervisors gave feedback to student teachers, who used the feedback to make

changes as recommended or to improve the next lesson plans. However, some student

teachers did not seem to agree with the feedback. Some of them disagreed with

feedback but still inclined to make changes while the others refused to change

anything on the lesson plans based on the received feedback. The following are topics

of feedback: feedback on objectives, feedback on content, feedback on teaching

techniques and feedback on language use.


After receiving a lesson plan checked by school supervisors, student teachers

looked at the feedback on the lesson plan.

Using content on a textbook to write objectives

A feedback was concerned with objectives. A school supervisor said that she

received feedback on objectives. A school supervisor directly suggested that a student

teacher write objectives using content units from a textbook. The student teacher

agreed with the advice because of convenience.

“My school supervisor told me to use the content of units to

write objectives. You can see from the textbook. I write easy

ones [objectives]. … Like, the grammar is about quantity of

food, using some, any, countable or uncountable nouns and so

on. I have to write an objective, like to use some or any. … It’s

convenient to write objectives this way,” said Fasai.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

114

Specifying topics for objectives in a unit of the textbook

Fasai also said that her school supervisor gave a suggestion to her. She told

Fasai to write objectives of a unit; however, Fasai disagreed with the objectives

suggested because they did not show connection of content in reality. In the end, she

still made changes to meet her school supervisor’s expectation.

“She [school supervisor] told me to use the topics of nutrients

and quantity of food to design the first two plans. Like, for

breakfast I drink milk so I get protein from milk. In the next

plan, she suggested that I plan the topic of asking about prices.

I was thinking the topics were not connected: talking about

nutrients and then asking about prices. I planned to teach words

of nutrients, like protein, carbohydrate, and foods that have the

nutrients. And I planned to teach quantity of food and

countable nouns, uncountable nouns. But, the third plan was to

teach asking questions or asking about prices. We don’t say

that in real life, do we? Telling about nutrients and then asking

about prices! Not connecting. … I wrote the objectives as told

anyway. … That’s what my school supervisor told me, so I

have to follow,” said Fasai.

Revisiting a verb on objectives

A student teacher revealed that her school supervisor gave her feedback on

objectives. The school supervisor suggested that the student teacher revisit a verb on

objectives she wrote. The student teacher partly disagreed with the feedback due to

incongruence to knowledge from her university supervisor.

“My school supervisor says ‘identify’ is too general. She says I

should rethink about it. … Like, I write ‘Students are to

identify the meanings of the words or to identify the grammar

structure from example sentences.’ I think ‘identify’ is OK. I

learned this from the Methods of Teaching course. The

university supervisor said we could use it but I don’t

understand why she [school supervisor] still says it’s too

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

115

general. … She says I should use such verbs as to tell or things

like this. I think they’re [two words] the same, just formal or

informal ones,” said August.

August, then, said that in the end she made changes on the plans that were

submitted to her school supervisor earlier and use the verb suggested by her school

supervisor on subsequent plans.

“I made changes on the plans submitted earlier. … I also write

to tell as suggested by her [school supervisor] on next plans too

in case she checks the plans and she sees the verb again,” said

August.

After receiving suggestions about writing objectives from school supervisors

(e.g. using content from a textbook to write objectives), a student teacher agreed with

the suggestion and wrote objectives as told. However, she disagreed with a suggestion

(e.g. writing objectives for a unit) but she still wrote the objectives as suggestion to

meet the school supervisor’s expectations. Moreover, a student teacher disagreed with

her school supervisors’ feedback on a verb used on her objectives (e.g. a verb ‘to

identify’ too general). She still made changes as suggestion to meet expectations.

Apart from suggestions and feedback on objectives, student teachers also

reported that they received feedback on content after submitting lesson plans to school

supervisors. Details are shown below.


After student teachers submitted their lesson plans to school supervisors, they

received feedback on content in the lesson plans too.

Adding Thai context

After a student teacher submitted her lesson plan on a specific topic, her

school supervisors suggested that she add The Thai context. The student teacher

agreed with the feedback due to congruence to a concept of personalization she

learned from the teacher education program.

“My school supervisor suggested that Thai food be included

along with the foreign food in the book. I see that I had only

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

116

western foods, like pizza, spaghetti, sandwich as examples. I

thought she was right. I didn’t have any Thai food. This was

what I learned from the university as well. We have to make

content relate to the Thai context. It’s about students’ life,” said

Fasai.

After considering the feedback, Fasai decided that she added the Thai context

on her lesson plan.

“… I, then, changed some [western] foods to Thai foods, like

Tom Yam Kung. … I planned to use pictures and English

names too … umm … like … shrimps in … err … spicy soup.

Is that right?” said Fasai.

Andy also echoed what Fasai said. He agreed that Thai context should be

added to an English lesson because this could assist student learning.

“My school supervisor said there should be Thai sports. So, I

agreed and added Sepak takraw. … It was a lesson about sports

but the textbook had only general sports, like tennis, football

and so on. She saw my lesson plan and suggested that I use

some Thai sports. … It was good because students could

understand what I was teaching from the plan. It’s what they

know. They could understand the lesson better. … Well, when

they heard ‘takraw’ and, they repeated the word. I asked them

to give more sports. They could understand and give some

examples of sports,” said Andy.

Student teachers agreed with school supervisors’ feedback on personalizing

learning by using the context of students’ background (e.g. adding the Thai context in

lesson plans). The student teachers made changes as suggested. The reasons included

the feedback was congruent with their knowledge and personalizing learning would

assist student learning.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

117

Apart from feedback on content, student teachers also reported that they

received feedback on teaching techniques after submitting lesson plans to school



After student teachers submitted lesson plans, school supervisors also gave

feedback on teaching aids. The following are details of the feedback.

Revisiting a technique in teaching reading

After submitting a lesson plan, which was checked by her school supervisor,

Katy said that her school supervisor suggested that she revisit a teaching technique for

a reading lesson plan because of its complication to follow by students.

“My school supervisor told me to think about a reading lesson

plan again. She said the activity was too complicated. It’s hard

for students to follow. … She said students might not be

familiar with this technique before. … Well, I planned to have

students work in groups. Everyone in the group had to read a

paragraph. After that, all group members were to form a new

group. This new group must have members, who read each

paragraph before, like one who read the first paragraph, one

who read the second paragraph, and so on. The members of the

new group must help one another to understand the whole

reading passage,” said Katy.

In the end, the student teacher agreed with the feedback. She made changes as

suggested by her school supervisor.

“I think so. It was too complicated for students to follow. Even

when I talk, it sounds like there are so many things to do

[laughing]. So, I changed the activity to reading and answering

questions instead,” said Katy.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

118

Changing an activity and using a kind of teaching aid

Moreover, Katy also received feedback about another lesson plan from her

school supervisor, who told Katy to change an activity during the pre-reading phase.

Instead of focusing only on teaching pronunciation or words, the school supervisor

suggested that Katy use flash cards and a matching activity.

“One time I planned to teach students to pronounce words and

then repeat the words after me. My supervisor told me not to do

that. Students mayn’t know words before they read the passage,

she said. She told me to use flash cards to introduce the words

and have them do a matching activity,” said Katy.

Katy agreed with the feedback because she thought about its effectiveness too.

She then changed the activity as suggested.

“… She [school supervisor] told me I’d rather have them

[students] match words and pictures to help them see the

meanings. I think it was a good idea. It’d be good. … Like, the

word ‘telescope’ is on a card and I show its picture too. When

students see this word in the reading passage, they’ll know the

meaning of the word. … I changed the activity like I was told,”

said Katy.

A student teacher agreed with her school supervisor’s feedback on a teaching

technique and on an activity (e.g. revisiting a teaching technique due to complication,

using cue cards and a matching activity). She agreed with the feedback because the

feedback was congruent with her thought. She made changes as suggested.

Revisiting a lengthy activity for teaching vocabulary

Anna also recalled a lesson plan checking by her school supervisor and

feedback provided along with the checked lesson plan. Her school supervisor

suggested that she revisit her activity for teaching vocabulary due to its lengthiness.

Anna defended the technique she planned against her school supervisor’s feedback.

“She [school supervisor] told me to omit an exercise. I planned

to have students fill in the blanks using the words I taught

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

119

earlier. … It was a reading lesson plan. Anyway, she said the

activity was too long. … Students were to look at the words

and pictures, match them and do a filling in the blanks exercise.

She was afraid that the activity was too long. … I said I wanted

students to use the words and they would know the words while

they are reading. … She said I should cut the activity short. …

Well, I think my activity is effective,” said Anna.

In the end, Anna said that she disagreed with the feedback because she

believed in what she learned from a university supervisor. Anna learned the concept

of teaching vocabulary from a university supervisor and she wanted to use the concept

in her plan. She believed in its effectiveness. She did not make any changes due to

another reason: her school supervisor’s rare rechecking lesson plans and observing the

implementation of the plans.

“…I learned this from the course taught by … [name of a

university supervisor]. When we teach students vocabulary, we

present words and meaning, have students practice the words

and have them use the words. In the activity, I let students see

words and meanings presented in pictures, have them match the

meanings and words to practice and have them fill in the blanks

using the word. I believe this is effective. Students could

remember the words before they read. So, the activity I planned

was like that. … umm … She doesn’t really recheck the plan.

Whether I rewrite it or I don’t rewrite it, she doesn’t recheck it

anyway. In fact, she rarely checks my lesson plans. I put them

on her desk. You’ll see stacks of my plans on her desk. Some

of them have never been read. … She doesn’t observe all of my

class, either. When I implemented this plan, she didn’t observe

it,” said Anna.

The student teacher entirely disagreed with her school supervisor’s feedback

on her lengthy activity for teaching vocabulary. The reasons included that her belief in

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

120

effectiveness of the concept of teaching vocabulary learned from a university

supervisor and school supervisors’ rare checking and implementing of lesson plans.

Apart from feedback on teaching techniques, student teachers also reported

that they received feedback on language use after submitting lesson plans to school



After student teachers submitted lesson plans to school supervisors, they

received feedback, one of which was concerned with language use.

Simplifying sentences

After Fasai received a lesson plan checked by her school supervisor, she saw

feedback on the plan, which labeled an inappropriate level of difficulty to a question.

The school supervisor also suggested a simpler version of the question. When she saw

the simpler question, she agreed with feedback and made changes as suggested

because it was congruent with the student teachers’ needs.

“After my school supervisor checked one of my plans, she

wrote ‘too difficult’ for the students. She asked me to simplify

it and she also wrote a simpler version as well. … I wrote

‘What does the food pyramid suggest you?’ I didn’t know it

was difficult but when I saw the simpler version, I like, ‘Well,

mine is difficult to understand really.’ …. She wrote ‘What

food group do we eat the most or the least a day?’ … Yes, it

has the same meaning as my first question but this one [simpler

version] was easier. When I see this one, I think I need to

replace mine. Students understood when they read it. … I made

changes as suggested,” said Fasai.

Moreover, a student teacher described an example of simplifying sentences.

She said that her school supervisor gave a feedback on instructions of her lesson

plans. She mentioned an inappropriate length and complication of directions on a

lesson plan. The student teacher agreed with the feedback because she thought of the

school supervisor as a resource of lesson planning. Though this school supervisor did

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

121

not show any acceptable rewritten version of the directions, the student teacher

managed to write new directions. She thought that the new version of the directions

was better.

“My school supervisor said the instructions were confusing and

hard to understand. I think they were too long. I made them

shorter like suggested. … umm … When I saw the feedback, I

agreed with it right away… I wrote on the plan, like … I want

you to write sentences … 6 sentences in the past simple tense

… umm … to tell us about your weekend or vacation … last

weekend or vacation. Supposing that you are writing an email

to talk to friends … things like that. I also wrote about things to

write about: Tell friends about your activities you did using the

past simple tense. … I agreed with the feedback because it’s

what the school supervisor told me. … umm … I see my

directions were confusing too. It was so long! When I rewrote

it, it looked better,” said Tharee.

Another example of simplification of sentences was also mentioned. Paul

reported that his school supervisor wrote feedback in general focusing on

simplification of language on his plans. However, Paul refused to make any changes

because the source of content for writing his plans was at the appropriate level of

difficulty.

“She [school supervisor] usually writes on lesson plans ‘too

difficult’ or ‘make it easy.’ I know it’s about the language I

write for teach grammar lessons. But, I don’t change anything.

… It’s because the language is easy enough it’s drawn from the

textbook. I can’t make it easier. It’s easy enough,” said Paul

Another reason for not making any changes on the plans included his school

supervisor’s rare checking and rechecking plans. The school supervisor claimed that

university supervisors had been responsible for checking lesson plans well.

“She [school supervisor] hardly checks my lesson plans. She

says, ‘Usually, university supervisors check lesson plans, so I

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

122

just let them do it. They do a better job than I do.’ … She

checked my plans once or twice, having a quick look at them

[lesson plans] and said … things like … ‘OK but don’t make it

too difficult.’ The grammar shouldn’t be too hard. … I just

gave her a nod said yes, yes. I didn’t change anything, though,”

said Paul.

After submitting lesson plans to school supervisors, student teachers received

feedback on language use (e.g. simplifying sentences). Student teachers agreed with

school supervisors’ feedback because it was congruent with their needs and thought of

school supervisors as resources for lesson planning. They saw a rewritten version

provided by school supervisors and a new version rewritten by themselves. The

feedback was what they needed to improve the lesson plans. However, a student

teacher received feedback (e.g. simplifying lesson plans) and he entirely disagreed

with the feedback because of incongruence to his thought (e.g. content drawn from

the textbook easy enough) and the school supervisor’s rare checking and rechecking

lesson plans and rare observing implementation of plans. Interestingly, the school

teacher made a remark on university supervisors’ responsibility for checking lesson

plans.

To sum up, student teachers received feedback and thought about it. They

agreed with the feedback and made changes as suggested because they thought the

change was appropriate. However, some student teachers might partly disagree with

feedback but made changes, eventually. However, some of them entirely disagreed

with the feedback and did not made any changes on lesson plans due to feedback

incongruent with what they had learned from the teacher education course and beliefs

in what they planned. Rare checking lesson plans could also lead to lack of making

changes on lesson plans. Moreover, when student teachers did not receive feedback

from school supervisors, they looked at university supervisors’ feedback instead.

Above is school supervisors influencing student teachers’ lesson planning by

giving feedback on lesson plans. The following is school supervisors’ influence on

lesson planning when they gave feedback to student teachers after observation of

implementation of student teachers’ lesson plans.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

123

1.1.3 Influence on lesson planning when giving feedback after observation

Student teachers revealed that after they submitted lesson plans to school

supervisors, they either rewrote the lesson plans as suggested by school supervisors or

did not rewrite the plans. Next, they implemented the plans in actual classrooms. The

implementation was observed by school supervisors, who later gave feedback. This

section is devoted to school supervisors’ influence on lesson planning of student

teachers when they gave feedback on some components of lesson plans after

observation. There are three topics: feedback on activities for phases of teaching,

feedback on teaching aids and feedback on language use.


Adding practice activities focusing on the sentential level

After a student teacher implemented her lesson plan, she received feedback

from her school supervisor. The student teacher said that her school supervisor

suggested that she plan more practice on speaking at the sentential level.

“After observation, my school supervisor told me to plan for

more practice. Students were struggling following my lesson. It

was a speaking lesson and I had them create a conversation.

They couldn’t do it. My school supervisor said my plan

might’ve been too difficult. … She told me to try to have

students see a picture and say a sentence at a time. It doesn’t

have to be the whole conversation for the beginning of the

term,” said Nicky.

As a result, Nicky said she added more practice activities at the sentential

level. The result was satisfying. The reason she followed the feedback was that she

needed suggestion for improving problematic activity.

“So, for next classes, I planned to have students speak a

sentence for each picture. Students practiced by looking at a

picture and the whole class helped say a sentence. … To

describe the picture, yes. They could speak only a sentence. It

was better. … umm … I knew the plan wasn’t good, so my

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

124

school supervisor gave me the suggestion. So, I could rewrite

the plan,” said Nicky.

Using rote learning

After observation, Andy reported that his school supervisor gave feedback on

an activity and suggested a teaching technique: rote learning. The technique was

aimed to help students memorize target words in a short time.

“One time, I taught about ‘free time.’ She [school supervisor]

saw me introduced spare time and leisure time. She told me that

I should call on some students and have each of them utter the

words. Like, a student could say free time, another one spare

time and the last one leisure time. Then, I could have another

set of threes say each word. … Yes, just say a word each, no

repeating. She wanted students to memorize the similar

meaning of the three words in a short time.

Andy agreed on the rote learning technique suggested by his school supervisor

because he thought about the effectiveness of the technique.

“I used it as suggested. It was OK. I think it could work so I

used it. Students could remember the words. … During the

class, students used the words in sentences. I think they knew

the words right then,” said Andy.

Designing less complicated activities

After Helen’s school supervisor observed her implementation of a lesson plan,

she gave Helen feedback on an activity. The school supervisor suggested that Helen

design less complicated activities.

“The school supervisor observed my class and she told me to

design activities that are less complicated. She saw my students

walk around and chat loudly. … I had students walk around to

match a word with an appropriate word to make a sentence. For

example, the word ‘He’ on a card matches with the word ‘is.’

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

125

But, some students just stood right there, having no idea what

to do. She said the activity should be changed,” said Helen.

After talking to her school supervisor, Helen decided to change the activity on

the thought that the feedback was positive on class management.

“So, I changed it to writing sentences instead of walking

around. Students sat at their desks and just wrote sentences. …

umm … I think the feedback was OK. The supervisor that class

would be managed easily and I agree with her,” said Helen.

Student teachers agreed with school supervisors’ feedback on activities for

phases of teaching: focusing on practice at the sentential level, using the rote learning

technique and planning less complicated activities. Student teachers made changes in

subsequent plans as suggested. The reasons for agreeing with the feedback included

congruence to student teachers’ needs to improve lesson plans, thoughts about

effectiveness of suggested teaching techniques and thought about effectiveness of

class management.

Apart from feedback on activities for phases of teaching, student teachers also

reported that they received feedback on teaching aids after school supervisors

observed their implementation of lesson plans. Details are shown below.


Preparing worksheets to teach words on grammar lessons

After a student teacher, Anna, implemented a lesson plan, her school

supervisor suggested that Anna prepare worksheets to teach words in grammar

lessons. The school supervisor reasoned that the worksheets were to assist student

learning.

“The plan was about teaching a grammar point. The

implementation of the plan went well. Students could follow

her activities. But, she [school supervisor] suggested that I

prepare worksheets for words. I asked her back what she meant.

She talked about the words or phrases in each unit. Like, if the

unit is about activities for holidays, there may be to go

swimming, ride a bicycle, go rafting, do yoga or go

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

126

rollerblading and so on. She said it was for helping students

learn better. They should know the meanings of words before

studying grammar,” said Anna.

In the end, Anna did not plan more worksheets as suggested by her school

supervisor. Her reason was that her plan to present words in grammar sentences was

sufficient to help students learn such grammar lessons.

“I think I can write words on the board or use the PowerPoint

slides, don’t you? Why worksheets? The teaching aids are

enough. I present phrases or words related to the grammar

point. The words are in sample sentences. Students can learn

the words from that. I think that’s enough. … No, I never do

that [preparing worksheets for words in grammar lessons],”

said Anna.

A student teacher entirely disagreed with feedback on teaching aids: preparing

worksheets for teaching words on grammar lesson plans. She did not prepare any

worksheets as suggested. The suggest was incongruent with her thought that she had

planned sufficient teaching aids for the lesson and that words could be presented on

other teaching aids, such as the board or the PowerPoint slides.

Apart from feedback on teaching aids, student teachers also reported that they

received feedback on language use after school supervisors observed their

implementation of lesson plans. Details are shown below.


Speaking more slowly while implementing lesson plans

Student teachers said that after they implemented lesson plans, school

supervisors gave feedback on pace of speech. They warned student teachers to speak

slowly and to keep pace at a slower rate for fear that beginner students might not be

able to catch up.

“She [school supervisor] talked to me right after I finished

teaching. She warned me not to speak so fast [laughing]. I

should speak slowly. She was afraid were not familiar with

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

127

English instruction. They might not understand if I spoke too

fast,” said August.

As a result, the student teacher thought that speaking slowly would help

students listen to her instruction; therefore, she tried to slow down her speech rate.

“I think so. Students can learn to listen to English too. So, I

speak slowly. I slow down when speak each sentence,” said

August.

Similarly, Andy said his school supervisor also asked him to slow down after

the first few plans were implemented. At first, Andy did not realized that his speech

rate was inappropriate. Then, he was considering the feedback might be eligible.

Andy said that he did not realize how fast or slowly he delivered speech, except being

observed by others. He agreed with feedback and started to articulate his speech while

implementing a lesson plan

“I remember one time she [school supervisor] popped a talk

after I taught. ... She just said I had spoken so fast. I asked her,

‘I did?’ I didn’t know. I thought I’d spoken normally. … I

understood she was sitting there [in the classroom] the whole

time, she must have heard me speak fast. I didn’t realize that

unless I was observed by other people. So, I think she was

right, so I speak slowly. … I speak normally but I stress words

clearly so that students can catch up,” said Andy.

Speaking more English while implementing lesson plans

After a student teacher was observed by his school supervisor, he received

feedback concerning language use during implementation of lesson plans. Boy said

that his school supervisor told him to speak English all the time while implementing

lesson plans.

“The school supervisor suggests that I speak a lot of English.

She doesn’t observe my instruction, teaching aids or how I

teach. She warns me to speak English with students all the

time. She says I’m still young. I should speak English a lot. …

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

128

Maybe, she wants students to have an opportunity to listen to

more English. … One time, she saw me spoke Thai to students.

I had to because they didn’t understand some points. After that,

she told me to speak English,” said Boy.

In the end, Boy said that he agreed with the feedback, reasoning that would

assist student learning. He also reported his use of a code-switching strategy to help

students learn the lesson.

“So I do. I speak English all the time. Students here are OK.

They try to listen. They understand me. But, if the grammar is

hard to understand, they’ll say ‘I don’t understand.’ Then, I

have to explain in Thai. But, most of the time, I give instruction

in English. They can learn English more if I speak English. It’s

good for them,” said Boy.

After observation, student teachers also received feedback on language use

from school supervisors (e.g. speaking slowly or speaking more English). Student

teachers agreed with the feedback because it was congruent with their thought about

assisting student learning. An interesting point was made by a student teacher, who

valued the practice of observation. He said that a person did not realize what he/she

did unless observed by others.

According to submission of lesson plans, student teachers received feedback

on objectives, content, teaching techniques and language use. According to

observation of implementation of lesson plans, student teachers received feedback on

activities for phases of teaching, teaching aids and language use. After considering

feedback, student teachers agreed or partly disagreed with the feedback and rewrote

the lesson plans. The reasons included feedback helpful for student learning or

appropriate to student levels. Moreover, student teachers entirely disagreed with the

feedback and did not rewrite the lesson plans. The reasons were the fact that they

thought the plan was effective enough and that lesson plans were not checked and

rechecked. Also, some school supervisors rarely observed implementation of plans. In

case of no feedback provided, student teachers looked at university supervisors’

feedback instead.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

129

Above are the results concerning school supervisors’ influencing student

teachers’ lesson planning by giving feedback after observation. The following are the

results concerning school supervisors’ influence on student teachers’ lesson planning

when they assigned special tasks to student teachers.

From above, school supervisors had an influence on student teachers’ lesson

planning before they planned. Then, school supervisors gave feedback on lesson plans

and feedback on implementation of plans. The following is an influence of university

supervisors on student teachers’ lesson planning.

1.2 University supervisors

University supervisors also had an influence on student teachers’ lesson

planning in all steps. Before planning, university supervisors provided information

about knowledge, rules and practice. Other than that, they provided feedback on

lesson plans submitted by student teachers and on implementation of lesson plans as

shown in the following figure.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

130


(university supervisors)

1.2 University supervisors

1.2.1Influence on lesson planning before planning

1.2.1.1 Information provided before planning

A. Information about teaching English and English

language

B. Information about rule and practice

1.2.1.2 No information provided before planning

1.2.2 Influence on lesson planning by giving feedback on lesson plans





1.2.2.5 Feedback on language use in lesson plans

1.2.2.6 Feedback on assessment plan

1.2.3 Influence on lesson planning when giving feedback after

observation



1.2.1 Influence on lesson planning before planning

According to the results of the interviews, student teachers revealed before the

term started, university supervisors provided information necessary for designing

lesson plans. However, some university supervisors did not provide them with any

information. Details are shown below.

1.2.1.1 Information provided before planning

Student teachers said that university supervisors provided information for

them before planning and they used the information to plan. The information was

concerned with teaching English and English language; and a rule and a practice of

plan submission.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

131

(1) Information about teaching English and English language

According to the interviews, student teachers said that they gained information

about teaching English and English language from university supervisors, who

provided them with the information through courses from the teacher education

program.

Concepts of teaching English

Student teachers said that they gained the concepts of teaching English from

the Methods of Teaching English course taught by a university teacher before

practicum.

“Well, I got this concept [of teaching English] from the

[Methods of Teaching English] course,” said Tharee, Chanom,

Nicky, Anna, Boy and Gasoline.

Moreover, they mentioned applying the methods and techniques learned from

the course in writing lesson plans. Student teachers applied the concept about the four

phases of teaching English on lesson plans. (Notes: The four phases of teaching

English consist of 1) the motivation/information or motivation phase, 2) the

input/control or presentation phase, 3) the focus/working or practice phase and 4) the

transfer/application or production phase.) Student teachers said the information was

necessary for them. Without the knowledge, they would not have any ideas to design

a lesson plan.

“The motivation phase is for motivating students. The input

phase is for giving input to students. The focus phase is for

practicing. Am I right? [laughing] The last phase … working

…. oh, no! … the transfer phase is for … I’m not sure

[laughing]. I know students have to use English. It’s

production. Is that right? … This knowledge … umm … It

helps me write plan correctly. I mean steps by steps of

teaching. If I hadn’t known it [concept], I wouldn’t have had

any ideas to design a lesson plan. I would know what to write

first or next,” said Tharee.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

132

Communicative activities

Student teachers said also learned about a concept of teaching English from a

university supervisors and that had an influence on their lesson planning. To illustrate,

Chanom said that he learned communicative activities from the Methods of Teaching

English course taught to him by a university supervisor. He, then, explained what the

communicative activity was.

“I tried to make my activities communicative as I learned from

the university. … Students should communicate to each other.

The activity should let students talk to each other. … Yes, like

my activity,” said Chanom.

When asked for the reason, Chanom mentioned practicality of the concept. He

said that students should be provided with an opportunity to practice speaking;

therefore, they would be able to communicate using English.

“… We should let them [students] have a chance to practice

speaking. They will be able to communicate using English if

they practice a lot. So, that’s why I like to plan communicative

activities. … Students have to produce language in the end. Or

else, learning English will not be successful” said Chanom.

Teaching grammar

Nicky talked about the concept of teaching grammar she gained from a

university supervisor who lectured on the Methods of Teaching English course as

well. She applied the concept in writing grammar lesson plans.

“I tried to make the activities like ‘use of grammar.’ … I got

this from the Methods [of Teaching English] course. … We

have to teach form, meaning and use. Is that right? … Umm,

form is the structure of a sentence, like a subject, a verb be and

a progressive verb for the present continuous tense. Meaning is

why we use the grammar point. … Like, the present continuous

tense is used when we want to tell what we are doing. Umm, …

and we want to talk about a near future action. Like, I’m going

to see a movie. Oh, no! … I’m seeing a movie tonight. … Use?

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

133

Umm, … use is the way we use the grammar. Oh! It’s the same

as meaning. … I take that back. Meaning is the meaning of the

tense and use is the way we use the tense. Like, we use it to tell

the near future action. Am I right? [laughing] If I’d known this,

… umm … I would’ve planned to show form and exercises,

like Grammar Translation. The teacher [university supervisor]

emphasized on teaching grammar like this. It’s correct like

theories,” said Nicky.

When asked what she thought about the concept, Nicky had positive response

to the practicality and benefits of the concepts to student learning.

“What do I think about the concept? What do you mean? …

Umm, like I like it or not? … It was from the course. I think it

is practical and beneficial to students. It is good for students to

know all three, form, meaning and use, of the grammar point.

Before I only had students practice but when I learned about

the concept, I thought yeah I should put English in a situation

too. … Like I said, the teacher [university supervisor] repeated

the concept so many times during the course that I can

remember this. When I design grammar lesson plans, I think

about this [concept] and use it to write plans,” said Nicky.

Teaching vocabulary

Anna said she got the concept of teaching vocabulary from a university

supervisor who lectured on the Methods of Teaching English course too. She used it

for designing lesson plans, especially for reading lessons.

“I got this from the Methods [of Teaching English] course. …

After I present new or unknown words, students should practice

and we should have an exercise, like fill in the blanks, to let

them [students] use the words. There can be sentences with

blanks. They will remember the meaning and try to put the

words in the blanks. … I use this concept in writing reading

plans mostly,” said Anna.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

134

When asked why she insisted to use the concept in her plan, Anna said that she

thought the concept must be effective because she experienced its effectiveness when

she implemented the concept in her classrooms.

“… That’s because it worked! I wrote it in a lesson plan and

students could remember the words. … I taught them some

words, about festivals … umm, yes, and we did an exercise.

They could fill in blanks. … At first, I showed them words and

pictures with definitions and then I had them [students] match

the words with the pictures. Finally, I had them fill in the

blanks. I think it’s normal students can remember the words

because they’ve seen the words many times. When they read [a

passage], they remember the words,” said Anna.

Teaching techniques gained from teaching English courses

Moreover, an additional example shows that student teachers’ lesson planning

was influenced by knowledge they received from university supervisors. A university

supervisor introduced a technique for teaching reading, in which a student teacher

used in his lesson plans. He reported he modified the technique to make it suitable for

students’ learning style.

“I teach only the English reading course at this school, so I

have to look for various reading techniques to plan. I’ve got the

SQR3 technique from the Methods [of Teaching English]

course but I modify it a bit,” said Boy.

Boy also explained that he omitted a step in the technique because of its

impracticality. Students did not respond to the step. It was not practical to help student

learn reading skills.

“I don’t use the Q step. It’s questioning. Students are not

familiar with making questions, I think. Once, they asked why

they had to make questions before reading. They were

supposed to answer questions after reading instead. And the

questioning step took a long time when the plan was

implemented one time. So, I don’t use the Q step in my plan

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

135

anymore. I feel good, of course [to have learned the technique].

I wouldn’t have the idea and I don’t know how to teach them

read [students]. I like the way teachers [university supervisors]

taught us various techniques so that we can use in planning,”

said Boy.

In fact, when asked to elaborate on the other steps, Boy admitted that some

other steps were omitted too. The modified technique was more practical to students.

“… In the plan, I had students survey things, like the title or

the pictures and then … err … read the passage. Then, students

answered some questions. … For R3, reading, … err … re …

re … I don’t remember but when they [students] answered I

told them to look back at the passage and find the answers. It’s

… err … reviewing? I’m not sure. … These steps are more

appropriate to students. If I plan for them to do more than these

steps, they may not be able to follow the lesson. They may take

too long on each step and not finish the lesson. … Yes, I tried it

before. … Err … I had them survey, question and read but the

question step took too long,” said Boy.

Moreover, Nicky used a reading technique taught by a university supervisor

on her lesson plans. Before she used it in a lesson plan, she adjusted the technique to

make it appropriate to her students’ learning style.

“I remember a technique Miss … [name of university

supervisor] taught me in Critical Reading. I used that in my

plan. … It was like she had us [student teachers] read and

express our opinion. We took turns to talk about a reading

passage and we had to say that we agreed or disagreed with a

person’s opinion expressed before us. … No, I cannot use the

whole technique because my students are not that good. I asked

them to express an opinion on the reading passage, not on

friends’ opinions. … That’s because … umm … they don’t

want to say against their friends’ opinions or things like that, I

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

136

think. … I did! They didn’t say anything so I stopped it at

giving opinion on the reading passage. … It [reading passage]

was about … umm … teens’ activities … umm … in the US

when they have free time. It went out OK. At first, they didn’t

want to say anything. But, after I use it [the technique] a few

times, they know what to do. Oh! I use this activity in groups.

One member has to say an opinion. Working in groups is

better,” said Nicky.

Additionally, there was another example of how university supervisors had an

influence on student teachers’ lesson planning. A university supervisor introduced a

teaching method in a course and it was used in designing a lesson plan. A student

teacher said that he gained the idea of his lesson plan from the general teaching

course.

“I’ve got the idea from the course taught by Ajarn … [name of

the instructor]. He introduced the task-based learning method. I

thought about it when I wrote the lesson plan. … Umm, I

couldn’t remember what he taught me. … It’s like what I wrote

on the plan. I taught students and in the production phase I had

them do a task. It was about describing a person,” said

Gasoline.

Moreover, university supervisors provided knowledge of English

language to student teachers. The knowledge affected student teachers lesson

planning. Student teachers reported that they gained knowledge from English

skills courses, which enabled them to plan lessons smoothly. The English

skills courses were lectured by university supervisors for practicum.

Speaking skills gained from speaking and drama courses

Student teachers also reported that they learned speaking skills from English

skills courses and used the skills in lesson planning. For example, Chanom said that

he combined speaking skills he learned from Advanced Speaking and Drama in lesson

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

137

planning to deliver speech of instruction during implementation of plans. He also

reported success from using the speaking skills.

“I try to speak [English] slowly and exaggerate gestures. They

smile. They try to communicate in English. … I learned this

from English Drama. We learned to articulate if we need to

convey meanings or if we want to emphasize on important

words. … Sometimes, I articulate words slowly to that they

[students] could catch up with my English. … We learned to

use our gestures to help communicating to others too. It’s non-

verbal language. … I learned this from Drama or Advanced

Speaking. I use overacting gestures and students smiled about it

[using gestures]. We played pantomime. I taught my students to

mime words and they had to do it over the top. They had fun,”

said Chanom

Reading skills facilitating conceptualization of content gained from reading

courses

Boy talked about using a reading skill gained from the Critical Reading course

taught by a university supervisor. The skill helped him conceptualize content in

reading lesson plans.

“I learned a skill of conceptualizing content from Critical

Reading. We learned to think about background of the story,

like when it [the story] happened or what the author’s purpose

was. In one class, Miss … [name of a university supervisor]

had us search for history behind a reading text. I use that in

planning a reading lesson. I searched for information about

history of costumes more and presented to students. They were

interested in the history. … It [reading text] was about history

of costumes in Europe … in the West. So, I thought I should

give them [students] more details … more background. I

searched for more history for the costumes. Like, swimming

suits in the past looked funny. They looked like normal clothes

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

138

covering up everything and I told them [students] more about it

was illegal to show legs in public. … They [students] liked the

historical stories I showed them, apart from the text. They

seemed interested. It [lesson plan] was successful,” said Boy.

In addition, Anna also showed an example of how knowledge from university

supervisors influenced her lesson planning. She talked about a genre she learned from

an English literature course, which also helped her conceptualizing content for a

reading lesson.

“I taught prosody to my students once. I learned it from Poetry.

There was a poem on the textbook but I was thinking it wasn’t

interesting. I searched for a new one. … The poem in the

textbook was short and there was nothing much to teach. The

objective was to introduce prosody to students, so there

should’ve been more than that. I then used ‘The Daffodils’ to

teach. I designed the plan to teach rhyming words, stanza and

meaning. There were a lot more to talk about. … I planned to

have them [students] work in groups. They helped interpret the

meaning. I also taught them about symbols in the poem too.

You see there are more things to teach. The poem in the book

was short. It teaches only rhyming words. … The lesson was

OK. They [students] said it was difficult. They hadn’t read any

poem before, I think. But, at least they knew about the prosody

for poems. I’m OK with it. … I mean it was successful,” said

Anna.

University supervisors provided information about teaching English and

English language in teacher education courses to student teachers, who used the

information to plan lessons. The information included knowledge of teaching English

concerning designing lesson plans, communicative activities, teaching vocabulary,

teaching grammar and teaching techniques. Student teachers thought about the

following elements of the information before taking actions: necessity, practicality

and benefits to student learning. Moreover, they also experienced impracticality of

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

139

techniques; as a result, they omitted some steps or modified teaching techniques, so

that they were appropriate to students’ levels and practical to assist student learning.

Apart from information about teaching English and English language,

university supervisors also provided information about a rule and a practice to student

teachers. The information had an influence on student teachers’ lesson planning

before planning.

(2) Information about rule and practice

University supervisors also gave information about rule and practice to student

teachers before the start of lesson planning. When a practicum schedule was released,

student teachers knew university supervisors they had to work with or they had to

submit lesson plans to. Usually, each university supervisor set up an appointment with

student teachers under his/her supervision in order to inform what student teachers

were expected to do for lesson planning. The information about a rule and a practice

included submission of plans and change in plan formats.

Submission of lesson plans

Regarding to submission of lesson plans, university supervisors informed

student teachers about timing and frequency for submitting plans. Before the term

began, usually university supervisors set a meeting with student teachers to clarify

practice for submission of lesson plans. Student teachers revealed that some university

supervisors set up a meeting; some didn’t. The student teachers, who had a meeting

with university supervisors, said that the meeting helped them to know what

university supervisors expected from them in regard to timing and frequency of

submission of plans.

“She [university supervisor] didn’t have a meeting but we

talked on the phone. Umm actually, I left a message on her

email and she replied, like, I have to submit lesson plans every

week … umm two weeks before. … We know that about two

weeks beforehand. … umm … That’s what we have to do. We

have to write plans,” said Paul.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

140

“I met my university supervisor too. She told me to submit

plans every week. And what she wanted to see on the plan,”

said Mali, Helen and View.

“My university supervisor met me to talk about how to submit

plans and so. … She told me to submit plans two weeks before

and to meet her every week to listen to feedback. … I think it’s

good. We know what the university supervisor expects,” said

Andy.

As a result, student teachers revealed that after meeting with university

supervisors, they were informed of the rule and they had self-discipline in prioritizing

submission of plans. Student teachers had to follow the feedback because planning

was compulsory and it was to meet university supervisors’ expectations.

“… I have to plan everything ahead of time to meet what she

[university supervisor] expects. … I have to think about setting

times to do lesson plans. … This is our duty. We are student

teachers. We have to write plans,” said Paul.

“… I have to submit plans every week, so I must be busy with

writing plans [laughing]. That’s what I have to do, so I should

put my own timetable to do lesson plans,” said Mali.

Helen and View also had a similar response: “She [university

supervisor] sets the time already. We should follow it.”

“… I think that [submitting lesson plans as expected] makes me

have more discipline. I know my university supervisor wants

me to submit plans and if I don’t submit them on time, it’s not

good. I want to submit lesson plans as told,” said Andy.

Change in plan formats

In addition to timing and frequency of submission of plans, student teachers

were informed of changes in plan formats. Four student teachers revealed that their

university supervisors had told them to change the lesson plan format. A student

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

141

teacher said that the format was slightly changed but three student teachers, who had

the same university supervisor, said the format was completely changed. The change

had a direct influence on their lesson planning.

A student teacher revealed that she was told by her university supervisor to

change the format of the lesson plan template. The change was slight as she had to

change the five teaching phases from the lesson plan. The new template was based on

the PPP procedures. (Notes: The PPP procedures refer to presentation, practice and

production.)

“My university supervisor told me to change from phases of

teaching from what we usually use to PPP. … He didn’t tell me

the reason. … I feel … I feel OK. To my knowledge, both

formats are similar. So, … it’s not different for me,” said

Pooky.

Pooky also said that her university supervisor told her to have the motivation

phase at the beginning of a plan and wrap-up at the end, but changed the three phases

in the middle to the PPP procedures. The former three phases of the former plan

format consisted of input/control, focus/working and transfer/application.

Moreover, Pooky said that her university supervisor told her to write

everything in details. Pooky thought about the details plans as both opportunities and

constraints. The detailed took time to finish; however, the detailed dialogue was

beneficial for implementation of plans.

“He [university supervisor] told me to write everything in

details. Students do things or the teacher does anything. … The

actions for students and the teacher must be put in each column,

separate from the content. … And I have to write what the

teacher says, what the students say. … yeah, in a dialogue.

Every word that I’ll say must be written. Every sentence or

word as examples or teaching aid must be written on the plan. I

was really worried when I knew I had to write all this. … It

takes a long time to finish a plan. Actually, writing in dialogues

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

142

has benefits. I remember what to say when I implement the

plan,” said Pooky.

Moreover, a pair of student teachers, who had the same university supervisor,

reported a change in the plan format as well.

According to two student teachers, their lesson plan format was completely

different from others. The two student teachers—Helen and View—used the PPP

procedures for teaching phases, omitted several topics on a lesson plan and write only

sentences for teaching.

Helen and View explained that several topics on the old format were changed.

First, the language focus was omitted. Usually, student teachers were supposed to

write what linguistic elements were focused on each lesson plan, such as any of the

four skills, vocabulary, grammar points or pronunciation. When asked without

language focus, how they would know what to teach, the following are their

responses.

“The objectives will say to speak, to write … and the grammar

point is stated in the objectives too. So, I know it [language

focus] from there,” said Helen.

“I know grammar or skills from the objectives and … and from

the content too. When we write the content, we mention the

grammar and students … what students have to do. Right?

Words too. We write words to teach in the content,” said View.

Second, interactions and class management were also omitted from the new

format. Usually, there was a column stating how students would be interacting with

one another or with the teacher. However, the two students said their university

supervisor told them to omit the column. Again, they said interactions and class

management could be found in the content of the lesson plan.

“I can write how to have students work in groups or individual

work or pair work in the instructions on the content column,”

said Helen and View.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

143

Third, the topics of expected behavior and anticipated problems were also

omitted. Usually, student teachers were supposed to think about behavior they

expected from students. In other words, student teachers should think and write what

they wanted their students to be able to do to complete learning objectives in class.

The two student teachers had a similar point of view on the change when asked

whether any problems arose.

“If we write the instructions clearly, students will follow our

teaching easily. So, they behave like we expect. That’s right?

… Problems, umm. I do. I have problems in class but … not

writing problems … umm … I think it’s the same for me. To

write it or not to write it, I still have problems [laughing],” said

Helen.

“… My friends write them [expected behavior and anticipated

problems] and they still have problems. All classes have

problems. So, it’s OK not to write them,” said View.

Finally, the dialogue style was changed to statements or instructions. Usually,

student teachers were trained to write a dialogue to show possible statements a student

teacher would say and possible responses from students. The two student teachers

were asked to write only instructions, laid-out in statements separated by dashes. The

reasons included that scripts were unnecessary; and a lesson plan was shorter and

saved paper.

“She [university supervisor] said greetings were different

every day. I can greet students without scripts. So, there’s no

need to write in conversations,” said View.

As a result, omitting some topics on lesson plans allowed student teachers to

plan faster. They did not have to spend a long time on writing a plan. The change

resulted in student teachers’ courage to write lesson plans.

“It [shortened format] is better. I write instructions with dashes.

Previously, I wrote conversations between me and students and

I used ten to twelve pages. Now I use less paper,” said Helen.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

144

“It’s so good to write lesson plans in a shorter version like this.

I spend lesser time than my classmates [who had other

university supervisors]. They envy us. They write detailed

plans and they have problems. Well, all of us have problems

sometimes. So, long or short plans … umm … I think …

doesn’t affect our teaching. … We should design good

activities. That’ll help. … I think I’m motivated to write lesson

plans when the plans are short like this,” said View.

University supervisors also provided information about rule and practice to

student teachers so that they fulfilled practicum commitments and behaved to meet

expectations. The rule included regular submission of plans, which resulted in student

teachers’ self-discipline. The practice included change in plan formats, from which

student teachers gain benefits in terms of assistance in implementation of plans and

courage to write plans.

Before planning, student teachers received information about teaching English

and English language and information about rule and practice from university

supervisors. However, some university supervisors did not provide any information

before student teachers started to plan. Details are as follows.

1.2.1.2 No information provided by university supervisors before

planning

Some student teachers said that their university supervisors did not set up any

meetings to give them information before a start of planning. They said they had

known the university supervisors’ styles before: not having meeting and not checking

plans regularly. They also realized they could seek feedback on lesson plans from

school supervisors if needed. The student teachers also said that they still submitted

plans regularly because it was a commitment of practicum.

“Umm … He [university supervisor] didn’t meet with me

though I send emails to him. … He answered back, eventually.

… Umm after … after umm about a month or a month and a

half [nervously chuckling], he said I could send lesson plans

via emails. … Yes, I do. I submit lesson plans on-line regularly.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

145

He rarely gives feedback, though. I talk to my school

supervisor, intead. She checks lesson plans and gives feedback

regularly. … It’s what we are supposed to do, isn’t. So, I still

submit plans,” said Nicky.

“I know he [university supervisor] doesn’t usually check lesson

plans. … I know it from senior student teachers, who had him

before. So, it doesn’t matter he had no meeting. Nicky told me

we sent to him via emails. He might not check the plans, either.

… [Name of school supervisor] will look at my plans. I don’t

feel anything. … I mean I can have feedback from my school

supervisor,” said Gasoline.

“No, there was no meeting. … Umm … To be honest, I know

that she doesn’t really check lesson plans. I’m alright with it. I

write lesson plans as usual. That’s what we have to do. … She

[university supervisor] told me to put the plans in a basket in

front of her office,” said Kara.

“I didn’t meet with her [university supervisor] before the term

started. She was busy. She told me. … I knew that before. …

From senior graduates. They had her last year. … I still design

plans as usual. We have to submit all plans by the end of term,

anyway. I submit them [lesson plans] at her office. I put them

in a basket in front of her office,” said Tiny.

Student teachers who did not have any meeting with university supervisors

said that they designed lesson plans as usual. The reason was that lesson planning was

a task student teachers had to do. They continued writing lesson plans and submitted

them to university supervisors, whether or not they would receive any feedback.

Above are the results of university supervisors’ influence on student teachers’

lesson planning before planning. They provided information for student teachers to

start designing lesson plans. After that, student teachers submitted the lesson plans to

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

146

university supervisors. That resulted in university supervisors’ influence on lesson

planning by giving feedback on lesson plans as shown below.

1.2.2 Influence on lesson planning by giving feedback on lesson plans

Student teachers reported that after checking their lesson plans, university

supervisors had feedback on many elements on each part of a lesson plan. All of

student teachers agreed with the feedback but the change might or might not be done

depending on other situations. There were details of feedback on objectives, content,

teaching techniques, teaching aids and language use.


After checking student teachers’ lesson plans, university supervisors had

feedback on objectives. According to the feedback, student teachers had to think

about the following items in objectives: having unity in objectives, focusing on skills

rather than activities and adding ways to manage class.

Having unity in objectives

Andy recalled a feedback concerning objectives from his university

supervisor. The university supervisor suggested that Andy considered about unity

when writing objectives. Andy explained that there should be connection of the

components in all phases.

“She [university supervisor] also tells me to have unity in a

lesson plan. When I think about activities, the activities should

relate to all materials. The teaching aids I use should be the

same. … For example, the terminal objective is about

vacations. The activities should be about vacations too. I can

show them [students] VDOs about vacations, like on holidays,

what do people do as activities? … The materials, like the

reading passages, should be about vacations too. … umm …

That’s it. The lesson plan has unity when the activities in all

phases link,” said Andy.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

147

Andy said that he remembered this concept taught to him in the teacher

education program. He thought about this concept of having unity in objectives after

his university supervisor told him since then.

“I remember that we should have unity in all components in our

lesson plans. When my university supervisor told me, I

remembered it. … I think about it [having unity on plans] when

I planned,” said Andy.

Likewise, Paul said that his university supervisor told him to have unity of

objectives to all activities in phases of teaching. He thought that the feedback was

helpful to student learning.

“He [university supervisor] tells me to have unity in a lesson

plan. He suggests me to think about the skills or topic of the

whole lesson plan. Like, if I write a plan about the present

continuous tense, the objectives should have activities for the

tense. … I wrote … umm … affirmatives, negatives and

interrogatives in the same lesson plan. The tense was the same

but it was too much. The objectives were like to learn about

affirmatives and then to write negatives or interrogatives. He

told me there were too many language points in a lesson plan.

Students could receive too many things in a plan. … The

objectives should focus on affirmatives or negatives or

interrogatives first and I should think about activities for the

point. … I think it’s good for students. They have time to

practice a lot for each point. They practice one point at a time,”

said Paul.

Focusing on outcomes rather than activities

A university supervisor suggested that a student teacher write objectives

focusing on outcomes rather than activities. August recalled the feedback: the

objective should state what students should achieve at the end or behavior students

should be able to perform as a result of the lesson plan.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

148

“My university supervisor tells me to write objectives using

outcomes students will achieve but I use the transfer [or

production] activity as the objective. … Like, I wrote ‘To fill in

a mind map after reading the text’ but he suggested that I write

… umm … focus on reading skills, instead. … umm … Maybe,

it was changed to ‘To read and transfer information from the

text to a mind map.’ More or less, it’s like this,” said August.

When asked for her opinion on the feedback, August said she accepted the

feedback because she really wrote action of the activity on objectives. She made

changes as suggested.

“I usually write action verbs as the terminal objective but he

[university supervisor] tells me to think about the outcomes

students should have. … I make changes like he says but …

umm … I’m still not sure sometimes what to write—action or

what I should write [chuckling]. … I mean if I don’t write

action verbs, like to fill in, to write a paragraph, what should I

write? To write is OK because it’s a skill. Am I right?” said

August.

Adding ways to manage class

Polita said that her university supervisor suggested that she add how to

manage class in the objective as well. She said it was helpful when she wrote detailed

plans later.

“For objectives, she [university supervisor] tells me to add

group work too. Like, I have students work in groups, so I write

‘To … umm .. do something in groups.’ … Maybe, she wants

me to put everything on the objective, so I know what to do. …

It’s good. It’s helpful for writing lesson plans later in details

because I know, yes, I have group work. So, I write group work

in class management,” said Polita.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

149

Student teachers received feedback on objectives from university supervisors.

The feedback included having unity, focusing on outcomes rather than activities and

adding ways to manage class. Student teachers considered the feedback could help

student learn better (e.g. students learning one language point at a time and having

enough practice for the language point). Moreover, objectives could guide every

component in lesson plans, including skills and class management. All student

teachers agreed with feedback and made changes as suggested.

In addition to feedback on objectives, university supervisors also gave

feedback on activities for phases of teaching for student teachers after they submitted

lesson plans.


University supervisors gave feedback on activities for phases of teaching to

student teachers. The feedback was concerned with presenting English expressions

uttered by native speakers, presenting language in real life context, planning more

communicative activities and making level of difficulty of content appropriate to

student learning.

Presenting English expressions used by native speakers

University supervisors told student teachers to add more real life expressions

in activities. Grace and April reported that their university supervisor suggested that

they introduce as many English expressions used by native speakers on lesson plans.

“Ajarn … [the university supervisor] tells me to list more

expressions that sound like native speakers on the plans. She

says the language doesn’t sound natural. … Umm it’s like

‘Would you like anything to drink?’ In real life, people can say

‘What about your drink? How about drinks? What do you want

for drinks?’ Or in short like ‘Drink?’ I got only statements from

the textbook. It’s not enough,” said Grace.

“Ajarn … [university supervisor] told me to add more useful

expressions. … Umm she said the expressions that were usually

spoken by native speakers, the expressions that sounded

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

150

natural. … I have to think about idioms and so when I plan for

speaking lessons,” said April.

The student teachers agreed with the usefulness of English expressions to

student learning as suggested by the university supervisor. As a result, they searched

for more expressions. A student teacher also reported that she gained benefits from

searching for the content as well.

“She [university supervisor] said that it [presenting English

expressions] would help students use English like native

speakers. … I have to work hard [laughing]. Ajarn …

[university supervisor] told me to find more expressions, like

idioms. … I try to find some that are relevant to my lesson plan

… on the lesson I’m going to teach. … I can learn more

English from the expressions too,” said Grace.

“I searched for them [English idioms and expressions] from

the Internet. … I have to look for the same situation, like

talking about cultures. … The lesson plan was to read a passage

about … umm … I’m not sure … culture … umm and I had

them [students] talk about culture … like you should do … or

you shouldn’t do,” said April.

Presenting language in real life context

Andy also reported that his university supervisor also gave feedback on his

lesson plans concerning content in activities for phases of teaching: language

presented in real world situations.

“He [university supervisor] suggested that I plan real world

situations. Like, students should do this but I forgot to write it

down. … For example, … umm … when I planned the simple

present tense, I let students do exercises. For the transfer

activity, I … err … planned to have students write sentences

about activities they usually do,” said Andy.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

151

Andy talked about the feedback related to the concept of communicative

English he learned from a teaching English course. Therefore, he followed the

feedback.

“That’s what I learned from a course. … We should think about

a situation, where a language point is being used. Like, the

simple present tense is used to describe what we usually do,

like habit. So, I have to think about a situation and maybe tell

students about the transfer [production] activity, about what the

situation is. … Yes, I try to think about a situation for certain

language points,” said Andy.

A student teacher recalled his university supervisor’s feedback on a

teaching technique. His university supervisor suggested that he design activities that

appealed to students’ life.

“At first, I planned to have students write a timeline for the

history of chocolate but my university supervisor said that the

activity should relate to students. … Like, they should have

ideas to write about,” said Boy.

Boy agreed with the university supervisor’s suggestion because the feedback

was practical for students, who would definitely have ideas about themselves. He

made changes on the lesson plan.

“They [students] should be able to write about themselves,

shouldn’t they? If they had to write about anything else, they

mayn’t have any ideas. … So I did and I planned to have

students write a timeline about their life, like what he

[university supervisor] said. Students read about timeline in the

text. Then, they should do the timeline again. They were

familiar with timeline. … They were all right. They could write

about their own timelines. … It was practical,” said Boy.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

152

Planning more communicative activities

University supervisors told student teachers to plan more communicative

activities. A student teacher reported that her university supervisor suggested that she

revisit grammar lesson plans, which was written based on the Grammar Translation

approach.

“Ajarn … [university supervisor] told me to use other kinds of

activities. … Umm she means communicative activities … not

for all lesson plans but for some plans. … She said umm … my

plans are based on only Grammar Translation,” said Polita.

Polita explained that in her lesson plans, she used the Presentation-Practice-

Production procedure (PPP). She also used grammar exercises as tasks.

“I write lesson plans … umm … like the PPP. First, I present

the grammar and have students do exercises for practice. Then,

I … umm they [students] will do more exercises if we have

enough time,” said Polita.

Polita emphasized on writing lesson plans based on grammar points and

exercises for practice because she said the grammar-based lesson plans could be

implemented in time allotments. That was the reason she did not focus on planning

many communicative activities.

“When I see the feedback, I still teach grammar. On my lesson

plans, … umm … I still write structures and exercises. We have

a lot of grammar points to teach in a term. We don’t have

enough time. So, … it’s necessary to teach grammar … to write

grammar lesson plans,” said Polita.

Making level of difficulty of content appropriate to student learning

A university supervisor commented on inappropriate level of difficulty of

content in activities for phases of teaching planned by a student teacher. Moey said

that her university supervisor told her that the content on her lesson plans was too

easy.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

153

“I was told [by university supervisor] that the content of my

lesson plans was too easy. I use easy methods of teaching. I

should have more techniques. I don’t have many techniques,”

said Moey.

Moey admitted that grammar content in the textbook was easy; therefore, she

selected teaching techniques and activities in lesson plans in accordance with the level

of difficulty of content in the textbook. Moreover, the content on her plans was

appropriate to students’ level of proficiency. Moey admitted that that was the reason

for not following the feedback.

“It’s because the textbook is very easy for students in this

school. Anyway, I plan activities in lesson plans based on the

level of the content in the textbook. … umm … So, I still plan

that way. I don’t know if it’s too easy or not. It [content] is

appropriate for the students. Students can do activities. Some of

them can’t even follow my lessons [laughing],” said Moey.

Similarly, Helen said that her university supervisor suggested that she make an

activity more challenging.

“Actually, she [university supervisor] told me to change it

[post-reading activity]. She said it was too easy. It should’ve

been more challenging. She suggested that students write a

movie review,” said Helen.

Helen agreed on the feedback but did not make any changes because the level

of difficulty of the activity she had planned was appropriate for her students’ level of

proficiency.

“I thought so. It [post-reading activity] was quite easy but I

wanted the students to be able to do it. The review was hard for

them. They wouldn’t have done it. … They don’t know

anything about movies. They said they didn’t go to the cinema

before. … And they couldn’t write sentences … umm … They

couldn’t do it. … I didn’t change the activity, then. … I didn’t

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

154

see her [university supervisor]. She wrote the feedback on the

lesson plan,” said Helen.

Another case was recalled by April. Her university supervisor told her to

design simpler activities for fear that the rules were too complicated for students to

follow. The university supervisor suggested that she change the activity.

“I watched this game show [Four to Four Family] and I thought

it’d be fun. But, my university supervisor was worried. She

thought it was confusing. … She told me to just let students

choose their favorite toppings but I thought it was too easy. I

needed something fun. Maybe, the way I wrote the rules was

confusing. … I wrote students worked in groups. Each group

was to choose the topping that had the most points. The topping

should be voted the most popular. I wrote longer than what I

said. Maybe, she was confused,” said April.

However, April did not make any changes on the lesson plan because she

assumed that students were familiar with the activity, which was adapted from a

famous TV game show.

“But, I told her [university supervisor] that students knew this

TV game show and they did. Most of them understood the rules

immediately because it [game show] is famous. They could

play the game. I just explained only once and they knew it.

Some students didn’t understand. They asked friends what?

What? So, I spoke Thai right away and had another classmate

to show them. They understood right after that,” said April.

University supervisors gave feedback on content for student teachers to look at

after they submitted their lesson plans. The feedback was concerned with presenting

English expressions uttered by native speakers, presenting language in real life

context, planning more communicative activities and making level of difficulty of

content appropriate to student learning. Some student teachers agreed to make

changes on lesson plans as they thought that more English expressions would support

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

155

student learning. However, some feedback focused on adding communicative

activities and making lessons more challenging. Student teachers entirely disagreed

with the feedback. The reason was concerned with appropriateness of students’ level

of proficiency. For example, actual communicative activities were too difficult for

students. Content drawn from textbooks was appropriately easy for students.

In addition to feedback on activities for phases of teaching, university

supervisors also gave feedback on teaching aids for student teachers after they

submitted lesson plans.


After submitting lesson plans to university supervisors, student teachers

received feedback concerning teaching aids as well. The main topic that the feedback

covered pictures used as teaching aids.

Selecting more interesting pictures

Student teacher reported that university supervisors gave feedback on pictures

used as teaching aids on lesson plans: the pictures should be more interesting. When

asked for additional details, student teachers said that interesting pictures referred to

the fact that pictures for action verbs should really show the action, colors in pictures

should be bright, and pictures should be clear enough. The student teachers agreed

with the feedback. They thought interesting pictures would gain student attention.

“At first, he [university supervisor] saw the pictures on a lesson

plan and he said the pictures were not clear enough. … I

planned to teach … umm … the present simple … or … umm

… present continuous tense. I’m not sure. Anyway, the pictures

of actions or verbs were not clear. … It’s because some pictures

… like … running should show a person running. Maybe, the

picture I used wasn’t clear. It was a cartoon character. … So, I

used the pictures of real persons doing the verbs, like running,

walking, swimming instead,” said Tharee.

“My university supervisor saw the pictures and told me to

select the pictures that looked bright. He meant colors should

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

156

be bright and clear. He said there were a lot of good pictures

from Google. I should spend time select nice pictures. … The

pictures are interesting now. Students like them. When they see

interesting pictures, they pay attention,” said Katy.

“When I used some pictures on lesson plans, my university

supervisor commented that the pictures were not interesting

enough. So, he explained that the quality of images was not

clear. Maybe, the pictures were too small and I extended them

[pictures]. They didn’t look so good,” said Jane.

“One time I used pictures of fruits. She [university supervisor]

gave me a compliment, saying that I had selected nice pictures.

But, she also said the pictures could have been more interesting

if the colors were brighter. I think the printer wasn’t working

well. The colors, then, were not very bright. … I don’t know.

Anyway, when I used them for the PowerPoint slides, I

changed to use brighter colors of fruits. … The background was

white. There! The colors were so bright. It’s better. … It’s

better because they are clear and nice and students can see them

better,” said Andy.

Using pictures to convey meanings of concrete nouns

A university supervisor suggested that a student teacher use pictures to

represent meanings for concrete nouns. According to the university supervisor,

pictures of objects were more effective than descriptions. Andy specified a kind of

pictures used for certain vocabulary teaching.

“… I had a comment [from university supervisor] this [teaching

vocabulary]. The slide should show pictures rather than lengthy

descriptions of the meanings. She [university supervisor] told

me that the long meaning, for like ‘float,’ was confusing.,” said

Andy.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

157

Andy recalled that he had been taught about using pictures to convey

meanings of concrete nouns before. It was helpful for students to learn new

words. In the end, he agreed with the feedback and made changes.

“I remembered the university supervisor told me in a course

before. He said if we were to teach concrete nouns, we should

use pictures. There’s no need to put sentences of meanings.

Students see the pictures and they know what the object is

immediately. It helps students learn new words. … Like, float

is something that …. Blah, blah. The meaning was so long. I

changed it to use only pictures. Students saw the picture and

they understood. They tried to speak its [float’s] Thai word

right away,” said Andy.

University supervisors gave feedback on teaching aids, such as pictures used

as teaching aids: selecting pictures, which were interesting, colorful and clear.

Moreover, pictures could be used to convey meanings of concrete nouns. Student

teachers agreed with the feedback and made changes as suggested. The reasons were

that the teaching aids could draw student attention and could be helpful for students to

learn vocabulary.

In addition to feedback on teaching aids, university supervisors also gave

feedback on language use in lesson plans for student teachers after they submitted

lesson plans.

1.2.2.4 Feedback on language use in lesson plans

Checking grammatical mistakes

Student teachers revealed that they had received feedback from their

university supervisors on language use after they submitted lesson plans. The

feedback was mainly concerned with grammatical mistakes. University supervisors

told student teachers to be careful about English language written on lesson plans and

to check the language thoroughly before submission.

“My university supervisor tells me to be careful about use of

English on my lesson plans. There are some mistakes,” Tharee,

Mali, View and Andy.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

158

The mistakes were mostly concerned with grammatical inaccuracy: omission

of helping verbs after question words, antecedent pronouns used without head nouns,

wrong articles or omission of articles. Details are shown below by each student

teacher.

“I usually make mistakes about … questions. I write questions

without helping verbs. … Like, ‘Where he went to last

weekend?’ I forgot to write ‘did’ [laughing],” said Tharee.

“My mistakes? … umm … I don’t remember … Maybe …

wrong grammar … [laughing] … Like, I use pronouns but there

are no head nouns. … It’s like when I give examples of

sentences, I write ‘He goes shopping with his friends.’ My

[university] supervisor tells me to use a name or something

before mentioning ‘He,’ said View.

“…A lot of mistakes, I think [laughing] but I try to correct

them. … Like, … umm … [pausing very long] … I forgot to

write an article, a, an, the, like I don’t know. … Or I wrote

wrong sentences. … Umm …Like, I write wrong grammar. …

Example? … umm … I don’t remember … umm … I can’t

really recall one. Let me think. … Like, I have students to do

things. It should be I have students do things,” said Mali.

“… He [university supervisor] also told me to be careful about

my language, like grammar mistakes. … Sometimes, I write

wrong grammatical sentences. … umm … Like, there’s no ‘do’

in questions. … When I write a question, like What do you eat

for breakfast? … err … Maybe, it’s not this question but it’s

just an example. I omit ‘do’ before you,” said Andy.

As a result, the student teachers said that after they had had feedback from

university supervisors, they became more aware of repeated mistakes and tried to

check language use on lesson plans before submission. They also said that the

feedback was important.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

159

“I’m more careful about my mistakes. I try to read the lesson

plans again before submitting them to my university

supervisor,” said Tharee, View and Mali.

Mali also added: “If the university supervisor sees that I write

wrong sentences again and again, it won’t be good. I should try

to check the mistakes myself.”

“I try to check for mistakes. Actually, I check lesson plans

before submitting but still he [university supervisor] can point

out mistakes. … We are English teachers. We should be good

at English, shouldn’t we? So, we should do like the university

supervisor suggests us,” said Andy.

University supervisors gave feedback on language use: correcting grammatical

mistakes. Student teachers agreed with the feedback and made rewrote the mistakes.

In addition to feedback on language use in lesson plans, university supervisors

also gave feedback on assessment plan for student teachers after they submitted lesson

plans.

1.2.2.5 Feedback on assessment plan

After submitting lesson plans to university supervisors, student teachers

received feedback on assessment plan they wrote on the lesson plans. The feedback

focused on irrelevance of assessment plan and inappropriateness of assessment plan.

Assessment plan irrelevant to objectives

After submitting lesson plans to her university supervisors, a student teacher

said that her university supervisor gave feedback on assessment plan. The university

supervisor suggested that she revisit assessment plan because it was irrelevant to

objectives. A student teacher said the irrelevance resulted from her careless selection

of the criteria from a source.

“My university supervisor said that the assessment plan is not

relevant to objectives. He doesn’t say anything much. He just

wrote ‘Not relevant to objectives’ by the assessment plan. I

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

160

copied the criteria from websites. Maybe, I didn’t look

carefully [laughing]. … It was a writing lesson. I planned to

have students write about something for a paragraph but the

criteria were for an essay. … I’m not sure. The objective …

umm … was to write a paragraph about … something …

maybe … about students’ activities on weekend. I just wanted

them to use ‘will.’ It was a future tense lesson,” said Mali.

The student teacher admitted that she did not know how to plan appropriate

assessment. In the end, she agreed to replace the criteria. She said she followed the

feedback immediately.

“Honestly, I don’t really know about assessment. I don’t know

what to write. Can I just write I check grammar points

[laughing]? … umm … I just copy another one from a website

to replace the first one. … This time I looked carefully. I

checked if it [criteria] was about grammar. … umm … I don’t

know if the new one was right or wrong. … I changed it

[criteria] because my university supervisor told me so. I should

follow that,” said Mali.

Inappropriate assessment plan

Another case was recalled by Kara. She received an unclear feedback from her

university supervisor: not appropriate. However, she did not ask for clarification.

“One time, she [university supervisor] wrote a question mark

and ‘not appropriate’ on the assessment plan. I’m not sure what

she meant. … I didn’t ask her,” said Kara.

Though Kara did not ask her university supervisor for clarification, she

managed to verify accuracy of her assessment plan. Therefore, she did not make any

changes.

“I think the criteria were OK. I got them [criteria] from

websites. I don’t know. When I have students speak, I have the

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

161

criteria for speaking. So, they were OK. … I didn’t rewrite the

assessment plan,” said Kara.

Student teachers had feedback on assessment plan from university supervisors.

They thought about it and made decisions. A student teacher agreed with her

university supervisor’s feedback: the assessment plan irrelevant to objectives. Then,

she made changes as suggested. However, another student teacher disagreed with

unclear feedback. She insisted that her assessment plan was accurate because it

assessed what was stated on the objectives. In the end, she did not make any changes

on the assessment plan.

Above are the results of university supervisors’ influence on student teachers’

lesson planning by giving feedback on lesson plans. After student teachers received

feedback, they either rewrote or did not rewrite the lesson plans according to the

feedback. Then, they implemented the plans in actual classroom. University observed

the implementation. The following section is devoted to university supervisors’

influence on lesson planning when they gave feedback after observation.

1.2.3 Influence on lesson planning when giving feedback after observation

After university supervisors observed implementation of lesson plans, they

gave feedback to student teachers. The feedback had a direct influence on student

teachers’ lesson planning because they could agree with the feedback and make

changes in subsequent plans. Some student teachers might disagree with feedback and

refused to consider the feedback for improving subsequent plans. Feedback given by

university supervisors after observation included the following components: activities

for phases of teaching and language use.


University supervisors gave feedback on activities for phases of teaching after

observing student teachers’ implementation of lesson plans. Details are shown below.

Planning more various activities

A student teacher recalled that two observers (or university supervisors), one

of whom was her university supervisor, gave feedback on a lesson plan after

observing a class, saying that her lesson plans were heavily based on grammar points.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

162

(Notes: A student teacher’s implementation of plans was observed three times a term.

The student teacher reported the feedback she received from two observers (or

university supervisors), who observed her implementation of two lesson plans.)

“The university supervisors [already observed the student

teacher] told me that the lesson plans were based on grammar

or structure too much. … Yes, it was after they observed my

class. The plans were about teaching a grammar point. … I

have students do worksheets after presenting grammar points to

them [students],” said Polita.

One of the university supervisors, then, suggested that Polita add more various

activities. Polita admitted that she did not plan a variety of activities in subsequent

plans. The reason was the fact that her school supervisor also employed grammar-

based instruction.

“… I don’t really design other activities for lesson plans [after

being observed]. It’s hard for me to change the plans because I

do grammar plans like my school supervisor. And he [school

supervisor] also tells me to focus on grammar and use exercises

as tasks for students to practice,” said Polita.

When asked what the reaction of the university supervisor was, Polita said that

the university supervisor did not say anything to the point that she did not make any

changes on the plans or she did not add various activities on subsequent lesson plans.

“…She [university supervisor] is OK. She doesn’t say anything

when she sees my plans are the same. I still don’t plan to have

students do role-play,” said Polita.

Polita explained more that her school supervisor told her that there were many

grammar points to cover in a term; therefore, teaching students grammar was the most

practical way for the timeframe.

“… I have to follow my school supervisor because he always

says that there are many grammar points to cover in a term. So,

we have to teach students grammar … like presenting input and

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

163

let them do exercises. Otherwise, we don’t have enough time to

teach all grammar points,” said Polita.

Writing different versions of a lesson plan for students’ different levels of

proficiency in each class

A university supervisor suggested that a student teacher write several different

versions of a lesson plan to suit students in different classes. One class might contain

many students with sufficient English proficiency and could follow each lesson plan

easily. The other might contain many beginner students, who had low English

proficiency, and they had difficulty in learning.

“My university supervisor told me to have three plans … umm

… or two plans because I told the three classes had different

English levels. … I have a class with good students … a lot of

good students. They can study so well. … They can follow all

activities on my plans easily. But, I have low students in some

classes too. … It’s hard to teach them. They can’t do like I

planned,” said Tharee.

Tharee said that eventually she did not write different versions of any lesson

plans as suggested by her university supervisor because she did not have enough time

to do so.

“I don’t have time to write many versions [laughing]. I mean to

do like he [university supervisor] said. … It’s hard to find time.

Writing a lesson plan is hard enough. It takes a long time for

me to think and design a plan. If I have to write three versions,

[laughing] it’ll take forever [laughing],” said Tharee.

Writing different levels of questions or activities for students’ different levels

of proficiency

According to student teachers, their university supervisors gave feedback

about planning differentiation for classes with diverse levels of English proficiency of

students. To illustrate, university supervisors had observed student teachers’

implementing lesson plans and found that not all students could follow the lessons.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

164

The university supervisors, then, suggested that student teachers plan questions or

activities with different levels of difficulty for students, who had different levels of

English proficiency.

“My university supervisor told me to plan questions for all

students. … Students mightn’t understand my lesson. … Not all

of them could understand the lessons. She [university

supervisor] observed me and we talked after. I told him

[university supervisor] some students didn’t understand what to

do. … They [students] couldn’t answer questions. … He

[university supervisor], then, told me next time I should plan

three different levels of difficulty, like one very easy question,

a few average questions and one very difficult question. … I

plan as suggested,” said Katy.

Similarly, Jane’s university supervisor also told her to plan different levels of

difficulty of questions or activities by her university supervisor. Jane and Katy had the

same university supervisor. They agreed with the feedback viewed as beneficial for

students.

“I try to plan like what my university supervisor told me too. …

She’s right. Maybe, there should be easy and difficult questions

for low and high students [beginner and intermediate

students],” said Jane.

“I do like she [university supervisor] told me. She said it was

helpful for students,” said Katy.

As a result, Jane and Katy said they tried to write questions with different

levels of difficulty. When asked for some examples, Jane and Katy admitted that three

levels of difficulty of questions were practical to plan. They could show some

examples of questions for a reading activity.

“… Like, questions for a reading activity can be asking about

words. … umm … What does it mean?’ … Yes! That was for

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

165

the easy level. And the difficult one can be … umm … asking

for details?,” said Katy.

“… Examples? …. Umm … I remember he [university

supervisor] told me about questions for reading. We can write

questions to ask easy questions, like they [students] can see …

can skim the text and find the answers easily. … We can ask

about details and numbers or … things they [students] have to

read … to scan for answers. … ummm … That’s the difficult

ones, I think [laughing] ,” said Jane.

Adding more communicative activities

After observation, student teachers, Tharee, April and Grace, said that their

university supervisor, Ms. A, told them to consider planning more communicative

activities. They explained that the university supervisor wanted the student teachers to

design an activity, where students could create a conversation or communicate to one

another using English. (Notes: Tharee, April and Grace had the same university

supervisor.)

“Ms. A [university supervisor] had seen my implementation

plans and the English expressions I added as she had suggested.

But, she still told me to design more communicative activities,”

said Grace.

“Ms. A told me to add more communicative activities after she

observed me,” said Tharee.

“Ms. A told me to plan an activity that let students speak to

each other. They should use English together or talk together,”

said April.

However, Grace was reluctant to plan communicative activities. Grace said

that she was not sure about planning communicative activities like her university

supervisor suggested for fear that students might not be able to attend the activity due

to their narrow vocabulary or knowledge of grammar. For the reason, she did not

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

166

follow the feedback. She chose to plan simple activities, where students could use

English at the sentential level.

“… ummm … I don’t know. I don’t think it’d work for my

students. Most of them are beginners. They don’t know words

and grammar. They can’t create sentences. They can’t speak a

sentence. It’s hard for them to communicate in English. The

activity may fail. … Letting them speak … having them

chatting spontaneously in English is hard. … So, I plan to have

them [students] speak in sentences … I mean speak a sentence

and change some words [substitution drills]. Speaking a

sentence at a time is OK,” said Grace.

Likewise, one of Ms. A’s student teachers, April, said that she agreed with

planning communicative activities. April said that she planned to have students

converse in English in the post phase.

“When Ms. A [university supervisor] told me to have more

communicative activities, I said OK. So, then, I plan more

communicative activities. … For the post-reading activity,”

said April.

April explained that having students say a sentence was communicative

enough. Students could use English and that was appropriate to their level of

proficiency.

“… I have them [students] speak together. … Like, a student

says … a suggestion … for … good health, for example. I don’t

really remember the exact task. They can say some suggestions,

like ‘Don’t stay up at night so late’ or ‘Don’t eat too much junk

food.’ That’s enough for them [students]. It’s communicative,

isn’t it? … The students can speak some sentences and that’s

appropriate to them … for their levels of English,” said April.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

167

Handling problematic behavior immediately

A university supervisor observed a student teacher and suggested that the

student teacher act upon problematic behavior immediately, if the behavior arose

again, and revisit her lesson plans. Katy recalled that there was a case of a group of

students, who displayed inappropriate classroom behavior but she did not do

anything.

“A boy in my class acted as a leader, who told jokes for his

friends to laugh about. They chatted loudly though my

university supervisor was observing the class. … Umm, he

[university supervisor] told me to take action at the scene right

away if it happened again. … [laughing] I didn’t do anything. I

was concentrating with my teaching [laughing]. Anyway, he

[university supervisor] also told me to think about my plans to

see the activities were effective enough or not,” said Katy.

Eventually, Katy tried to design activities that could draw student attention

and she could see success.

“I try to write a plan with fun activities, like passing the parcel.

It’s made of sheets of paper wrapped on one another. I turn on

the music, students pass the parcel around. Once the music

stops, the person with the parcel has to peel a sheet, read an

instruction and follow it. I intentionally stopped the music at

the leader of the problematic group. He walked to the board and

wrote a sentence. It was about his plan for the weekend. I gave

him an extra mark for that by writing his name on the board. He

and his close friends were obviously delighted. … He acts

better now. He cooperates in activities. Well, not all activities.

When it was about grammar or writing or reading, they are

bored and started to chat. I have to think about planning fun

activities to draw student attention,” said Katy.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

168

After observing student teachers’ implementation of lesson plans, university

supervisors gave feedback on activities for phases of teaching and student teachers

responded to the feedback differently. Some student teachers agreed with feedback,

including acting upon problematic behavior immediately or planning interesting

activities to draw student attention. Other student teachers partly disagreed with

feedback (e.g. planning differentiation lessons for different levels of students’

proficiency and writing communicative activities) and did not consider using

feedback to write subsequent plans. The reason was that no time for designing

different plans and inappropriateness of actual communicative activities for students’

level of proficiency. Moreover, a student teacher entirely disagreed with feedback

(e.g. planning various activities, not focusing only on grammar exercises). The reason

was that a school supervisor directed the focus on grammar exercises.


University supervisors gave feedback about language use sometimes. The

feedback mostly focused on use of English spoken during implementation of lesson

plans.

Speaking more English while implementing lesson plans

Student teachers reported that university supervisors told them to speak more

English; however, they did not really follow the feedback due to students’ limited

English proficiency. They implemented lesson plans in English and code-switched in

Thai when students needed.

“My university supervisor tells me to speak more English,” said

Fasai, Kara, Tiny, Helen and Tharee.

“I speak English but I have to translate into Thai. They

[students] don’t try to listen to my English. They’ll wait for me

to speak Thai one more time. So, … then … I stop speaking

English. … The students have no ideas. They don’t know easy

words. Plus, we don’t have much time. I just speak Thai most

of the time,” said Fasai.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

169

“I used to speak English at the beginning of the term but then I

was like … students didn’t understand me. They kept asking

‘What? What?’ in Thai. Their English is not very good, you

know? I speak Thai mostly,” said Kara.

“I speak English too when I teach. But, when I was observed

[by university supervisor], I taught a class with many beginner

students. I had to speak Thai too; or else, they didn’t

understand the lesson,” said Tiny.

“It’s because I teach in Thai. She [university supervisor] wants

me to speak English a lot so that students will learn too. … I …

umm … Normally, they [students] want me to speak Thai.

They respond well when I speak Thai. When I speak English,

they ask me to speak Thai,” said Helen.

“Students in some majors, like Hotel, are OK. I can speak

English when teaching. But, still I can’t speak English all the

time. I have to switch to Thai from time to time. They don’t

know many words. They’d say, ‘Ajarn, speak Thai, please.’ I’m

like … speaking Thai. OK! It [implementation of plan] goes

faster too when I speak Thai,” said Tharee.

When asked about specific points university supervisors asked them to use

spoken English for, some student teachers said instructions should be spoken in

English to promote classroom language.

“She [university supervisor] tells me to speak English a bit

more. I’ll try though I know I have to switch to Thai. It’s like

they don’t understand. … She didn’t say to speak English all

the time. She just said, ‘Try to speak English.’ I didn’t speak

English at all when she observed me. … umm … I … try [to

speak English] a bit,” said Fasai.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

170

“She didn’t say anything much. And I didn’t ask her anymore,”

said Kara.

“I didn’t ask her about it [speaking English]. She just gave

feedback: I should speak English more. … I … umm … give

instructions in English. That’s what I was taught in the

Methods [of Teaching English] class,” said Tiny.

“I speak more English, especially when I give instructions. She

[university supervisor] tells me instructions should be in

English. Students will learn English from listening to you

[student teacher]. I know it’s good for them. … Like, open the

book to page … or … work together in groups and the like. … I

do. I try to speak more English as suggested,” said Helen.

“I speak English and then translate into Thai. I give instructions

in English [laughing]. He [university supervisor] didn’t really

tell me to speak more English but he asked, ‘Do you speak Thai

when you teach?’ I spoke English too when he observed but the

student kept asking me. They said they didn’t understand so I

taught in Thai. … It was about … umm .. half of the time

[laughing]. They didn’t understand. I don’t know what to do,”

said Tharee.

After observing student teachers’ implementation of lesson plans, university

supervisors gave feedback on language use: speaking more English during

implementation. Student teachers partly disagreed with feedback due to concerns over

students’ limited ability to listen to the target language. The feedback was beneficial

for student learning. They spoke English while implementing lesson plans so that

students could learn to listen to the target language. University supervisors also

emphasized that student teachers should give instructions in English to promote

classroom language. However, some student teachers spoke Thai when students

showed that they needed it.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

171

From above, university supervisors had an influence on student teachers’

lesson planning before they planned. Then, university supervisors gave feedback on

lesson plans and feedback on observation of implementation of plans. The following

is an influence of student teachers on student teachers’ lesson planning.


Student teachers themselves also had an influence on their own lesson

planning. Some had personal problems, which had negative effects on lesson

planning. They also reported on supporting qualities for designing lesson plans.

Moreover, not only did the student teachers and their classmates have effects on

lesson planning, but their senior graduates also provided information that affects the

practice of writing lesson plans as shown in the following figure.

Figure 4.4: Factors influencing student teachers’ lesson planning: Personnel (student

teachers)


1.3.1 Student teachers

1.3.1.1 Student teachers’ knowledge of teaching English

1.3.1.2 Student teachers’ knowledge of English language

1.3.1.3 Student teachers’ personality

1.3.1.4 Student teachers’ motivation

1.3.2 Student teachers’ classmates

1.3.2.1 Classmates at the same school

1.3.2.2 Classmates on social networking

1.3.3 Student teachers’ senior graduates

1.3.3.1 Information about each supervisor’s supervision style

1.3.3.2 Information about each supervisor’s favorite techniques

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

172

1.3.1 Student teachers

Student teachers said that the following topics had an influence on their lesson

planning: knowledge of teaching English, knowledge of English language, personality

and motivation. Details are shown below.

1.3.1.1 Student teachers’ knowledge of teaching English

Student teachers revealed that they were uncertain about applying knowledge

of teaching English when designing lesson plans. However, others said that they were

confident that they had knowledge of teaching English that was used to design lesson

plans.

Uncertain about using knowledge to plan

Some student teachers reported that when they were not certain about using

methods of teaching English in lesson plans. Therefore, they lacked confidence in

using concepts or techniques in designing lesson plans.

“I’m not sure if the activity I plan is OK. It’s communicative or

not. … It’s right or not,” said Mali.

Mali mentioned uncertainty about design an activity for a lesson plan. The

problem was that she was not sure if the activity enabled students to communicate in

the target language.

“… I’m not sure if students will communicate in English or not.

… No. I mean I don’t know if the game can make students

communicate. … Now I’m confused. … I can’t think of the

plan I was doing. … It might be a game that I had students run

to find answers or something like it. Is it communicative?

[giggling],” said Mali.

As a result, nothing was done to check whether the activity was

communicative or not. Student teachers thought that checking was unnecessary as

long as the activity served the learning as planned.

“… Umm … I … umm … just plan and the activity … the

game I planned made students enjoy. Then, I think it’s OK. …

Like, I have them answer questions. … They [students] run to

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

173

find answers, so the activity made students learn. So, it’s OK.

… I’m not sure it was probably a grammar lesson. … Umm …

They run to fetch answers for … umm … a negative sentence

… or … to fill in the blanks. I’m not sure. … Anyway, they

enjoyed the game. I think the plan is OK,” said Mali.

Similarly, Tharee also admitted that she was not confident in using some

techniques in teaching English.

“I don’t know. … I ‘m not confident in using some techniques

or … planning … err an activity, like job interview. I don’t

know if it’s too far away from students,” said Tharee.

When asked to explain more, Tharee reiterated that she thought the topic was

not relevant to students.

“… When thinking about real life, we would interview what

job. Is that right? … errrr … When students interview err, it’s

too far away from them. First-year students [vocational school]

would ask about jobs or not. They are studying at the moment.

Why job interview? Not their real life. Am I right? Or not? …

I’m not sure [laughing],” said Tharee.

As a result, nothing was done to check the knowledge, either. When asked

what she had done to check her questioning, Tharee admitted that she had planned to

ask her supervisors, either from the school or from the university, but she did not,

eventually.

“…[laughing] … I … wanted to ask my supervisors. Anyway,

both of them … err … haven’t been asked [laughing]. … I

don’t have time. I have to plan and teach, so I have no time to

make an appointment. I’m so busy. … I just planned and used

the plan [laughing],” said Tharee.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

174

Certain about using knowledge to plan

Moreover, other student teachers were certain that they had knowledge of

teaching English. This helped them plan activities that were effective and various.

Some student teachers had knowledge of teaching English, which guided them to

write lesson plans using effective activities that helped students learn English. Student

teachers revealed that they could remember the content from their university’s one of

teacher preparation courses Methods of Teaching English. The principles from the

course guided them to plan the activities that helped students learn English.

“I think I remember what I learned from the Methods of

Teaching English course. I plan activities that help students

learn English,” said Anna.

“… I’ve got this [the idea of planning activities] from the

Methods [of Teaching English] course,” said Chanom.

As a result, student teachers felt at ease to plan effective activities. The student

teachers could give features of effective activities that were based upon the principles

from the course: students’ familiarity with activities; students’ having opportunities to

produce language in classrooms and to communicate beyond classrooms.

“For example, I use the examples that students are familiar

with. I plan the activities that allow students to speak. … I think

because I use the principles from the course, I can plan easily,”

said Anna.

“I should plan communicative activities. Students should have

a chance to communicate to others or to the world. … So, I

plan the activities that help students have fun and learn too. …

Umm … It’s from the course, so I guess I use the knowledge to

plan … to help me plan,” said Chanom.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

175

1.3.1.2 Student teachers’ knowledge of English language

Writing ungrammatical sentences on lesson plans made student teachers a

little bit discouraged but more careful. Student teachers revealed that sometimes they

wrote ungrammatical sentences. Some of them felt discouraged when they saw

feedback from university supervisors. However, the discouragement was only at a

minimum degree.

“I have a problem in writing lesson plans in English. I don’t

know how to write nice sentences. … err … The sentences are

grammatical, I mean. Sometimes my sentences are confusing.

… I feel like … I have to try more [laughing],” said Tharee.

“Writing lesson plans is hard when I write grammatical

sentences. … It’s like sometimes I make mistakes and my

university supervisor gave feedback. … I … feel like I don’t

want to write the plans sometimes but it’s OK. … Just a little

bit. … Yeah! I feel discouraged a little bit. I’m an English

teacher but I make grammatical mistakes [laughing],” said

Jane.

“I wrote ungrammatical sentences sometimes. … Umm … At

first, I think I’m an English teacher but why I make mistakes

like this. I felt like discouraged a bit,” said Tiny.

“I’m not confident in my English when I got feedback from my

university supervisor. … There were some grammatical

mistakes,” said Andy.

As a result, student teachers tried to be more careful and to self-edit language

on lesson plans. However, grammatical mistakes were still found by university

supervisors. Some student teachers said it was an opportunity for them to improve.

“I have to be more careful. I try to check the lesson plan after I

write it,” said Tharee, Jane and Tiny.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

176

“I still make some mistakes, though [laughing]. It’s hard

[laughing] … writing the plan in English [laughing] but I still

try. I can be better at planning too,” said Tharee.

“… I have to be careful but I’m still afraid of making mistakes.

There are still some. I ask my mother to help check my

grammar. … Like, on the plan, I wrote ‘You have three minutes

for do. She [mother] corrected ‘to do.’ And I planned to teach

about national flags. What is the flag of Singapore? She

rewrote ‘Which flag is Singapore?’ It looked better. I think it

is,” said Andy.

“Some mistakes can be found but … umm … They [mistakes]

are not many. It’s getting better. I think my plans became better

than before. … It’s normal to have mistakes [laughing]. …

Like, I forgot an article, something like that. So, it’s a minor

mistake, isn’t it?” said Tiny.

1.3.1.3 Student teachers’ personality

Student teacher reported that their personality had both positive and negative

effects on their lesson planning.

Personality that enhances lesson planning

Regarding student teachers’ personality, a student teacher, who was flexible,

could plan various activities and thinking about possible results. A student teacher

understood lesson planning could be flexible because there were unexpected things

happening.

“I understand plans should be flexible because there may be

things that we don’t expect to happen,” said Chanom.

As a result, Chanom tried to plan many kinds of activities to see if they work.

“… I try to plan many kinds of activities to see if the work. … I

try to plan various activities to see if they work. If one works, I

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

177

may use it again on a future plan. It’s like a test to see the

activity is workable,” said Chanom.

Chanom also gave an example of his being flexible with lesson plans. He

accepted the unexpected results from implementing a lesson plan.

“[Students were to compare pictures of things from the same

categories, like animals, fruits, vehicles or houses, using

comparatives.] One pair compared an apple with a car. Ha ha

ha. It was funny. An apple is smaller than a car. I laughed. I

liked it. It was their creativity, unexpected creativity. I should

encourage this, shouldn’t I?” said Chanom.

In addition to be flexible, student teachers also revealed that they loved to

explore new things useful for writing lesson plans. This personality led student

teachers to search for more effective activities or techniques to help students learn

English.

“I like to search for more activities from websites and use them

[activities] to plan,” said Anna, Chanom, Mali and Nicky.

Chanom and Nicky gave the reason for searching for more activities that

repeated activities might bore students.

“I don’t want them [students] to get bored in class. If we use

the same activity, they will be bored. … When I am planning

the same activity, I’m bored too. Students should feel the same

when they join the activity that is repeated many times,” said

Chanom and Nicky.

Similarly, Mali said that she loved to explore new teaching techniques for her

plans because she had no ideas of planning. That activated Mali to search for sources

of ideas for planning.

“I don’t have ideas about activities, so I have to search for

sources of ideas for teaching. … That makes me like to explore

new techniques, I guess,” said Mali.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

178

Mali also gave an example of a source she found useful for lesson planning.

“… I search for ideas from many other sources. … Like, one is

called Teacher TV. There are professional teachers

demonstrating teaching techniques on CD-ROMs. We can find

clips from the Internet too,” said Mali.

Personality that impedes lesson planning

What’s more, some student teacher reported that they had personality that

impeded lesson planning. The personality was concerned with character traits and

speech. The student teachers thought that their certain traits might not support them to

design some activities.

“It’s hard for me to think of the motivation activity. I try to

make it fun but it’s hard. Probably, it is because I’m not

funny,” said Tharee.

When asked for the reason, Tharee could not explain anymore. She insisted

that she was not a funny person and planning the motivation activity could be easier

for funny people. She could not make the activity fun enough for students. The

activity, then, became direct.

“…I don’t know. I’m not funny. I don’t tell jokes and things.

Some of my classmates are funny, like …[names of

classmates]. They can design funny activities for the motivation

phase. I can’t. … I just ask questions. … Yeah! For the

motivation activity, I just ask questions. … It’s for letting

students know about what we are going to learn today. It’s

direct, I know, but can’t make it funnier. It’s hard, teacher

[laughing],” said Tharee.

As a result, Tharee tried to find a way to make activities funny for students.

She reported use of visual aids in order to achieve students’ positive affectivity.

“When I can’t think of anything [for the motivation/information

phase], I let students watch VDOs. They like to compete in

groups to find answers. They are very happy,” said Tharee.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

179

In addition, a student teacher, Tiny, reported that she was a soft-spoken person

and it was hard for her to control or manage class. Though she was thinking about

how to control class, she found it was hard to implement the plan.

“I’m a soft-spoken person. I speak softly and students are so

loud. I can’t make them quiet. … Though I was thinking about

what to do to control class, it was hard to implement the plan,”

said Tiny.

Tiny explained that a difficult situation in class and her school supervisor’s

assistance to minimize it.

“…I try to shout but they [student] are not listening to me. My

voice is not audible to them, maybe. My school supervisor

came in the class sometimes and told them [students] to be

quiet. … Still, I have to think about how to control students by

myself, don’t I?” said Tiny.

Tiny thought about an advantage of an electronic device to solve the problem

but there was a problem of its availability. However, she conceded that the noise was

normal for students as long as their tasks were completed.

“I use the microphone sometimes but it’s not available in all

rooms. Using my voice is necessary. It’s not serious. They

[students] are loud as normal. They chat and shout sometimes.

I’m just afraid that my neighbors may be annoyed. … But, if

they can finish all works, it’s OK for me,” said Tiny.

Similarly, a student teacher had a character trait and that influenced her lesson

planning. Mali also reported that she was a lenient teacher. It was hard for her to

control class.

“I think it was me. I’m lenient. I’m not strict. Maybe, I’m so

kind to them [students]. They don’t show respect to me

[laughing]. … ,” said Mali.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

180

Mali reminded of difficulty when she was implementing a plan. However,

when asked about her next plan, she replied that she still planned such activities that

might activate students’ physical movements and noise.

“… umm … I still plan fun activities, like lots of movements

and so on. I like to see students have fun. They are happy. …

umm … I may think more about how to control class ... or how

to manage class better [laughing]. … Still, they [students] are

so loud [laughing]. It’s inevitable when they play games,” said

Mali.

1.3.1.4 Student teacher’s motivation

Student teachers revealed that they had motivation and that led to planning

effectively.

Motivation to be a professional teacher activated student teachers to design

good lesson plans. Student teachers revealed that being a professional teacher was the

ultimate aim because it was what they had been studying for. A desire to become a

good teacher had a direct effect towards lesson planning. Student teachers tried to

improve lesson plans so that they could use them when they became in-service

teachers in the future.

“… In the future when I’m recruited as a state teacher, I can use

my good lesson plans immediately. That’s the reason why I’ve

tried hard to search for new activities on the plans. … I’ve

always wanted to be a teacher. That’s why I become an

Education student,” said Chanom.

“I want to be a professional teacher, so I think that’s why I try

to search for new ideas for lesson plans. I want my plans to

look good. … Umm … The activities are effective. Students

enjoy my class and so on. … I try to make lesson plans better.

If they [lesson plans] are good, I can always use them. … Err

… I can use them when I become an in-service teacher,” said

Nicky.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

181

Some student teachers, whose parents were teachers, were inspired to achieve

the teaching career. They had their parents as role models and were inspired to

become professional teachers.

“… A reason for me to be a professional teacher was my

parents. Both of them are teachers. That’s why I want to be a

teacher like them. … I’ve seen them teach since I was young. I

went to their schools. They teach at the same school. So, I

guess I’ve absorbed an eager to become a teacher from them.

… Both of them teach Maths,” said Chanom.

Additionally, Andy explained his inspiration to become a teacher as well.

Likewise, the result was the fact that he wanted to improve his lesson plans because

he wanted to be as good as his mother, who use English as a second language. Being

half Thai half Filipino drove Andy to check grammar mistakes on his lesson plans, so

that no one could make fun of him.

“My mother is my role model. I want to be a teacher because of

her. … I want to be a teacher by myself. She teaches English.

… I have her check my lesson plans sometimes but I have to

try to write lesson plans without grammatical mistakes. …

She’s from the Philippines. … You see? I’m half Thai half

Filipino. People expect me to be very good at English. I’m

supposed to use English as fluently as my mother. It’s her

second language. … I don’t want anyone to make fun of me. If

I make mistakes, it’s not good. … That’s the reason I have to

write good lesson plans. I want to be as good as my mother. …

Yes. …Good both at English and at being a teacher,” said

Andy.

Student teachers’ knowledge and personality had an influence on designing

lesson plans. Such character traits could lead to struggling in thinking about activities

or controlling class. The fact that student teachers lacked or were not certain about

knowledge concerning pedagogy or subject matter affected their planning in terms of

confidence and accuracy in language use.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

182

Student teachers who had support qualities had knowledge and motivation

concerning planning. Knowledge enabled them to design effective plans. Motivation

drove them to explore new teaching techniques and be determined to design good

plans in order to use in their teaching profession in the future.

Apart from student teachers themselves, student teachers also reported that

their classmates also had an influence on their lesson planning.

1.3.2 Student teachers’ classmates

Student teachers’ classmates also had an influence on lesson planning. Student

teachers’ classmates were divided into two groups, based on the venues they shared

the information for writing lesson plans: classmates at the same school and classmates

on social networking. Mostly, student teachers shared the information that could be

practical for each one’s lesson plans.

1.3.2.1 Classmates at the same school

Usually, a few student teachers were located at the same school for the

Practicum course. They consulted with classmates about problems or shared ideas of

lesson planning.

Student teachers consulted with classmates about working hard on

plans and other responsibilities. They talked about elements relevant to lesson

planning: problems, students, objectives, activities, additional assignments, school

rules, textbooks or information from school supervisors. As a result, they had moral

support and ideas for designing lesson plans.

The following are the findings from the individual interviews with two groups

of student teachers who practiced teaching at the same school: (1) Jane and Katy and

(2) April and Grace.

“My classmates and I talk to each other a lot about problems

concerning lesson planning. It’s like we have someone to talk

to. ... We talk about students, mostly. Students in this class are

so weak. Students in this class are so good, things like that. …

When we don’t have class, we can talk, like at lunch,” said

Jane.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

183

“I’m quite close to Katy. That’s why we chose to teach at the

same school. … It’s very helpful to have her [Katy]. I can talk

to her about things in school. … About the plans too. We

complain to each other how hard it is [laughing]. … We talk

about writing objectives or how I can’t write the objectives or

activities. … We usually talk at lunch time. Luckily, we have

the lunch break at the same time every day,” said Katy.

“Yeah, working with friends is good. We chat about students or

persons [laughing]. … It’s always about how difficult it is to

plan activities. We complain … no … exchange ideas about our

works, like extra responsibilities. … Like, we have to decorate

bulletin boards in short notice. So, we sort of talk about it

[laughing]. … Usually, we talk after school … only if we don’t

a meeting. At other times, we are busy teaching,” said April.

“I talk to April about everything, like school rules, textbooks or

… everything. … About the plans? Yes! It’s all about plans

[laughing]. The textbooks are good [laughing] as a resource …

[laughing]. … Nothing! I just gave you an example. We chat

about things. That’s all. … I don’t know. We talk every time

we meet. … umm … I think we talk when we meet. Like, when

we don’t have a class at the same time. … Yes, after school

too,” said Grace.

Though they did not have any solutions to problems, they had someone to talk

to.

Student teachers shared information from school supervisors. Student teachers

from the same school revealed that they shared information from school supervisors

because a student teacher’s school supervisor hardly gave the information for lesson

planning. The student teacher had to seek for necessary information from her

classmate, who had received the information from her own school supervisor.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

184

“My school supervisor doesn’t really help me out when I want

something to start with. … I talk to April. She tells me about

the information I need. … That’s because her school supervisor

told her many things. So, I have to ask for things from her,”

said Grace.

The information Grace was talking about included school rules, textbooks or

anything that April’s school supervisor told her. Grace said that the information was

helpful for her at the beginning of the term to start her long-range plan and daily

plans.

“... She [April] told me about school rules, textbooks or

everything that her school supervisor told her. … It was helpful

for me to start writing the long-range plan and daily plans,”

said Grace.

April also reaffirmed that she had relayed what her school supervisor told her

to Grace because Grace’s school supervisor was busy at the beginning of the term.

April concluded that there was no problem sharing the information from her school

supervisor to Grace. They were close friends.

“Yes, I relayed what my school supervisor told me to Grace.

She usually asks me about what’s new, any agendas, what’s

going on and so on. … Grace said that her school supervisor

was busy. He works and marks papers … a lot. Anyway, it’s

not a problem at all. I can help her. We are close friends,” said

April.

Apart from talking to classmates, a student teacher gained ideas for planning

by observing his classmate’s implementation of a lesson plan. Andy revealed that the

location of her office gave him a chance to observe his classmate’s class. Andy’s

office was located in the sound lab, where any teachers could use the room for daily

instruction. Andy’s classmate called Boy happened to use the room for his class

regularly. Andy, then, could observe how interesting some activities Boy

implemented from the plan were.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

185

“… I got the idea from Boy my classmate. I saw he taught a

class once. … I saw him because my office was located in the

sound lab. Anyone can use the sound lap and Boy used the

room regularly,” said Andy.

Andy also added that he used the teaching aid as observing his classmate’s

class in order to create background knowledge for students before learning a reading

lesson.

“… I say Boy used a VDO clip that showed a city … the capital

city of Iceland was very well-structured. He described the city

and let students watch the VDO at the same time. Students

could watch the VDO and understand the reading passage

easily. It [VDO clip] was totally relevant to the reading text,”

said Andy.

As a result, Andy planned to use a VDO clip about National Day of Singapore

to make it relevant to the reading passage ‘What do they do?’ for a lesson. Andy

concluded that it was good to have the idea from her classmate. He also added that he

had talked to Boy and asked for his permission to use the idea. It was an informal

chat, which was what they usually did.

“So, I use the idea on my plan. I have a reading passage about

what they do in Singapore on the National Day. … They refer

to people of Singapore. Anyway, I let students see the VDO

that shows parades and fireworks and so on. … Yes, I talked to

Boy and asked him if I could use the idea. He said OK. It was

good for my plan as well. … [laughing] I didn’t really ask for

his permission but I just ask if it was good. It was like an

informal chat. We usually chat every time we meet,” said

Andy.

Similarly, Kara also talked about sharing ideas with her classmates teaching at

the same school.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

186

“I talk to my classmates too [at the same school] and everyone

says jigsaw, jigsaw. So, it’s like when I plan, it pops up in my

head. Oh! Jigsaw, then,” said Kara.

1.3.2.2 Classmates on social networking

Apart from classmates teaching at the same school, student teachers had a

chance to communicate to other classmates on a social networking website called

Line.

August, Kara, Tharee and Boy were some of student teachers, who revealed

that they usually chatted with other classmates on their group Line account about

schools, supervisors or workloads. Moreover, they could gain ideas for planning

lessons as well.

“We chat on the Line group account together,” said August,

Kara, Tharee and Boy.

“I complain about how many hours I have to teach a day. Of

course, all of us gossip about schools and our supervisors

[laughing],” said August.

“We talk about schools. Yeah, mostly. We also talk about

planning: what to teach, what technique to use, what question

for reading. I sometimes ask friends about techniques in

teaching reading,” said Kara.

“I talk to friends on Line and get ideas about how to teach

reading,” said Tharee.

“When I run out of idea, I ask my friend on the Line account,”

said Boy.

As a result, the student teachers gained new or different ideas to write lesson

plans from classmates on the social networking.

“… A friend told me to use the jigsaw technique. She put it on

her plan and the implementation of the plan went well. So, I

used it [jigsaw reading] in a lesson plan too,” said Tharee.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

187

“I asked them [friends] about chocolate. It was the history of

chocolate. How could I plan? They suggested that I use

timeline. It was what I wanted. Yeah! So, I used it. I planned to

have students write the timeline of chocolate,” said Boy.

Additionally, known techniques or activities were highlighted on social

networking and used on lesson plans. Chatting with classmates on the social

networking helped review activities for planning lessons. Student teachers became

confident to use the activities on lesson plans if classmates at the same school and at

other schools confirmed practicality and effectiveness of such activities.

“A technique, like the jigsaw reading, is one we chat about [on

Line account]. I talk to my classmates too [at the same school]

and everyone says jigsaw, jigsaw. So, it’s like when I plan, it

pops up in my head. Oh! Jigsaw, then,” said Kara.

“We talk about what to teach or what to plan. … Like, some

friends planned big paper and it worked. I used it in my plan

too. Actually, I learned this from the course already. When I

saw friends talked about it [big paper], I think about it … yes.

… I use it for a reading lesson. Students are to write answers …

umm … about a picture of … umm … a good restaurant … I’m

not sure and write describe about it [restaurant],” said August.

“I got a good idea from the Line account. It was called a

cyclone game. It was so good. Students loved the game. They

run around having fun,” said Mali.

Student teachers’ classmates also had an influence on planning when they

shared information that they lacked or shared ideas for designing lesson plans. Other

than that, they had moral support when talking to one another about problems or

personal stories they had experienced during practicum.

Apart from student teachers’ classmates, student teachers also reported that

their senior graduates also had an influence on their lesson planning.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

188

1.3.3 Student teachers’ senior graduates

Student teachers also had contacts with former student teachers or senior

graduates, who had practiced at the same school or who had been under supervision

of the same school or university supervisors. The following are the findings from the

interviews, in which student teachers talked about their senior graduate.

1.3.3.1 Information about each supervisor’s supervision style

Student teachers talked to their senior graduates and gained the information

about each supervisor’s supervision style. A style some student teachers talked about

was university supervisors being strict; therefore, they were demanded to submit

lesson plans regularly.

Information about strict university supervisors

Andy said his senior graduates informed him of how strict his university

supervisor was. That resulted in Andy’s disciplined behavior on submission of plans.

“When I know … Oh! I had …[supervisor’s name]… I called

my senior graduate. She was also under her supervision. She

said that my university supervisor was strict. I should submit

lesson plans on time. So, I have to be disciplined. I have to

submit plans on time, like 2 – 3 weeks before implementation.

If I submit plans close to the week of implementation, there

won’t be enough time to see feedback and rewrite the plan,”

said Andy.

While Andy became more disciplined, Katy and Jane, who had the same

university supervisor, said that they tried to be disciplined by submitting lesson plans

on time. However, they still had to rush writing lesson plans to meet deadlines.

“I talked to some senior graduates and they all said that my

university supervisor was so strict. They said I had to submit

things on time; otherwise, he [university supervisor] would call

me and ask for plans. But, I’m taking a long time to write a

plan. I have to rush to meet deadlines,” said Katy.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

189

“I know that this university supervisor is strict. I talked to some

senior graduates. They told I had to be punctual when

submitting lesson plans, like 2 weeks before. I have to write

plans to meet deadlines. It’s good for me to have this university

supervisor [laughing]. I have to set deadlines and try to finish

plans on time,” said Jane.

Information about lenient supervisors

Student teachers also revealed that their senior graduates told them about how

lenient some supervisors were. The student teachers also described behaviors of the

lenient supervisors.

“I learned that my [school] supervisor was lenient from my

senior graduates. They said that she didn’t check lesson plans

… umm … rarely checked plans. I knew that so when she told

me once to make it easy, I don’t change anything. … That’s

because I know she won’t recheck the plans,” said Paul.

As student teachers had lenient supervisors, they wrote the next lesson plans

without considering about the feedback.

“… So, when she told me once to make it [a lesson plan] easy, I

only listened and didn’t change anything,” said Paul.

Paul also added that he knew the supervisor’s supervision style from senior

graduates and he decided not to make any changes.

Anna also talked about that fact that her school supervisor gave her feedback

on a lesson plan. However, Anna did not make any changes because she also learned

the supervisor’s supervision style from senior graduates and from her experience.

“She [school supervisor] told me to prepare worksheets for

vocabulary for grammar. I think it’s unnecessary. … I didn’t do

anything. … I got this from my senior graduate. He told me

about the supervisor. She rarely checked plans and so on and I

learned that by myself too. So, I don’t make any changes on my

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

190

plans if I disagree. … It’s because she won’t recheck the plans

anyway,” said Anna.

Tiny also revealed a similar response after knowing her supervisor’s

supervision style. Senior graduates informed her of the university supervisor’s rare

checking on lesson plans. That resulted in the student teachers’ irregular submission

of plans.

“I try to submit lesson plans two weeks before implementation

but I’m busy. … Also, the university supervisor is busy too

[laughing]. … I mean she is busy and I don’t have plan checked

but I submit the plans regularly. … Sometimes, three weeks in

advance. Sometimes, I miss the deadline [laughing]. But, there

is no deadline. The supervisor doesn’t set a deadline. She says

she’s busy. I can just leave the plans in front of her office. …

Umm, not every week. I submit plans sometimes two plans this

week and another one in the next two weeks. … No, [laughing]

it’s not regular. … I know she [university supervisor] is like

this from senior graduates. So ... you know? It’s like that

[laughing],” said Tiny.

1.3.3.2 Information about each supervisor’s favorite techniques

Student teachers reported that they had the information about each

supervisor’s favorite teaching techniques from senior graduates as well. The

information was useful when student teachers wrote lesson plans because they wanted

to impress university or school supervisors.

According to Katy, she had been informed of her university supervisor’s

favorite teaching aids. She, then, wrote lesson plans using such teaching aids,

electronic ones, despite experiencing technical problems. The reason was that she

wanted to meet her university supervisor’s expectations.

“The senior graduates told me that …[name of university

supervisor] liked the PowerPoint presentation. I should use it as

teaching aids. So, I put that in my lesson plans. … Not in every

plan because, as I told you, the [electronic] devices at my

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

191

school are not very good. But, I must have it [PowerPoint

presentation] on the plan when he [university supervisor]

comes for an observation. … That’s because I’ll … umm …

It’s natural to show what other person wants to see. He likes the

PowerPoint presentation and I have it. I know that, so I should

use it. The observation would go well,” said Katy.

Likewise, Jane was also under the same university supervisor. She said that

she used VDO clips on lesson plans too.

“I use VDO clips on the lesson plan every times he [university

supervisor] comes to observe me. It’s because I know he likes

students to see clips. … The senior graduates told me about it

[using VDO clips on plans]. He usually said it to them in class.

And I also remembered he told me in the Methods of Teaching

English course,” said Jane.

Moreover, April and Grace, who had the same university supervisor, had been

informed of their university supervisor’s favorite activities. They, then, planned such

activities, accordingly.

“When we know …[name of the university supervisor]… is our

supervisor, we usually ask senior graduates for advice. We ask

what she [university supervisor] likes and so on. And they

[senior graduates] said she liked speaking activities for the

transfer phase,” said Grace.

“Though I teach the writing and reading course, I plan speaking

activities for the transfer phase. … At first, I planned

questioning exercises. Before the university supervisor came to

observe me, I had asked people about what she liked and they

said speaking activities. … The senior graduates, I mean. They

told me that,” said April.

The reason for asking senior graduates was to guarantee positive results of

observation, hence satisfactory grades for practicum.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

192

“I wanted to know what she [university supervisor] liked. So,

she saw I tried to teach well. Her idea should be effective,

shouldn’t it? … After students read, they should produce

something. So, speaking is good,” said April.

“I just asked the senior graduates at the first start. It’s what she

[university supervisor] likes. The plan can be like what she

expects. I want to make the impression that I plan appropriately

and the plan is implemented properly. … It’s because it [the

plan] is like the way she [university supervisor] likes,” said

Grace.

Student teachers’ senior graduates had an influence on lesson planning as they

provided information about school supervisors and university supervisors’ styles. For

example, strict supervisors made student teachers submit plans regularly whereas

lenient ones caused them to submit plans irregularly. However, some student

teachers’ submission was not different no matter how strict or lenient supervisors

were. Moreover, senior graduates also informed student teachers about favorite

teaching techniques, which they used in lesson plans in hopes of having better grades.

From above, student teachers, their classmates and senior graduates had an

influence on student teachers’ lesson planning. The following is an influence of

institutions on student teachers’ lesson planning.

2. Institutions

Apart from influences from personnel (e.g. students, school supervisors,

university supervisors and student teachers) on lesson planning, student teachers

revealed that institutions also had a direct influence on their lesson planning. The

institutions included schools, the academic institutions, where student teachers

practiced teaching, and the Faculty of Education, an academic institution, where

student teachers enrolled in the Practicum course.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

193

2.1 Schools

Schools referred to the academic institutions, where student teachers practiced

teaching. School administration directly affected how lesson plans were designed.

Each school administration imposed rules and practices for all student teachers to

follow as shown in the following figure.


(schools)

2.1 Schools

2.1.1 Rules

2.1.1.1 Submission of lesson plans

2.1.1.2 Facilities, technology and resources

2.1.2 Practices

2.1.2.1 No planned schedule for special events

2.1.2.2 No homework for students

2.1.1 Rules

Rules imposed by schools were concerned with submission of lesson plans;

and facilities, technology and resources. Student teachers had to follow the rules while

practicing teaching at school.

2.1.1.1 Submission of lesson plans

Student teachers revealed that rules on submission of lesson plans were

different in each school. Some student teachers were encouraged to write lesson plans

to meet deadlines as demanded by school or the others might plan as demanded by

each supervisor.

Strict rule of submission of plans

A school imposed that student teachers submit lesson plans in designated

deadlines before implementation. Three student teachers Nicky, Pooky and Gasoline

described the actions they took to follow such rule.

“Here at this school, there is a strict rule that all student

teachers must submit plans three weeks before implementation

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

194

of the plans. We submit lesson plans to our school supervisors

and they have to check if we submit all plans or not. Then, they

write reports to many heads,” said Nicky, Pooky and Gasoline.

The student teachers explained that the reports made by school supervisors

were to be submitted to higher administrators. The reports as well as copies of plans

were kept for annual quality assurance.

“… Moreover, the school supervisor has to submit the report to

the head of the English section and to the deputy director to

academic affairs. By the end of the term, all plans must be

copied and submitted to the school for quality assurance held

every year,” said Nicky and Pooky.

Pooky added: “The plan must be checked already when it is

submitted to the next administrator. … I can submit three

weeks before [implementation] and my school supervisor

checks it. They [school administrators] leave three weeks for

this [checking and rewriting]. Then, I make copies for them.”

Consequences: Student teachers’ self-discipline

When asked for their response to the rule, Nicky and Pooky said that to be

able to comply with the rule, they learned to manage their time and to be more

disciplined.

“This rule activates me to write plans on time. I must plan my

timetable ahead so that I can write plans to meet deadlines,”

said Nicky and Pooky.

“I never have any problem meeting the deadline. I

acknowledged that rule before so it’s easy to follow,” said

Nicky.

“I think it’s good that they [the school] informed us before

what they expect, I can meet the expectation. … I try to plan

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

195

lessons before submission every time. Sometimes, I’ve planned

for four weeks in advance,” said Pooky.

Struggling to submit plans on time

Whereas Nicky and Pooky said they were activated by the rule to write lesson

plans to meet deadlines, Gasoline admitted that although he struggled to submit lesson

plans on time, he could not meet deadlines sometimes.

“… I know there is the rule but I have struggled to submit

lesson plans on time. Three weeks in advance is rushing for me.

… Sometimes, I’m a week late … umm … but I try not to be

two weeks late. I have to do it. … It’s because I’m very busy.

There are many things going on at the same time. I have to

think about plans. I have to do the research report and many

things. … I don’t know … It’s like I have so many things to

do,” said Gasoline.

When asked what the results for late submission were, Gasoline said that he

was warned by his school supervisor. In the end, he reported that he was still having

problems with meeting deadlines. The reason was that he could not handle writing a

lot of details for the detailed plan format.

“… My school supervisor warned me that I needed to submit

plans. … umm … He’s warned me often, yeah. … Well, I try to

rush writing the plans that missed the deadlines. … umm … I

have to … try to submit the plans as soon as possible. … I …

umm … submit lesson plans late … behind schedule. … Like,

this week I haven’t submitted any yet. … It’s because there are

many things to write … everything should be written in details.

I can’t finish it in … I don’t know two to three hours. It takes a

long time to write one plan,” said Gasoline.

Rules on submission of plans activated student teachers to design lesson plans

to meet deadlines; however, the rules might not affect everyone. Some student

teachers might still struggle to write plans and submit them to supervisors every week.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

196

2.1.1.2 Facilities, technology and resources

In addition to the rule regarding submission of plans, student teachers also

revealed that school administration’s rules on facilities, technology and resources

were influential to their lesson planning as well.

Redundant paper work on reporting equipment defects and physical settings

Two student teachers practicing teaching at the same school reported that

computers and visualizers at the school hardly worked. However, it was hard to have

the devices fixed because of redundant paper work.

“When it [electronic devices not working] happened, I had to

do something. I tried to have someone fix the computer and the

visualizer but I gave up. There were many processes, like filing

a memo to the department head. No, I couldn’t file it. My

school supervisor had to file it. Then, the memo went to the

deputy director to academic affairs for him to sign off, to the

equipment department for estimating expenses, to the head of

finance for approving budgets and the answer is … no. They

said there was no budget until the next academic year. That’s

why I gave up,” said Katy.

“I know the processes of filing memo is so complicated:

…[similar to Katy’s response]. I don’t try to have the

computers fixed. It’s impossible. They say there’s no budget.”

Said Jane.

Consequences: Use of non-electronic teaching aids

Consequently, both Jane and Katy said that after they experienced the problem

of prolonged paperwork circulation at school, they changed to use non-electronic

teaching aids in lesson plans instead. The reason included convenience.

“After I had the problem, I changed plans. Now, I plan to use

pictures printed from my computer or draw pictures by

myself,” said Katy.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

197

“Well, I’d better produce teaching aids by myself. You know?

… the aids that don’t need electronic devices to run, like

sentences on stripes of paper or pictures on paper or something.

The electronic devices don’t work and the regulation to file a

memo doesn’t help. How can I have the computers fixed?” said

Jane.

Technical problems

Some student teachers talked about technical problems, including blackouts or

devices not working and they caused difficulty for implementation of plans.

“The blackout happens occasionally. Though it doesn’t happen

often, it’s annoying. Students couldn’t study properly like I’d

planned. They were supposed to see pictures or watch VDO

clips. It was more interesting. It was my energy to prepare all

that,” said Mali.

Likewise, Chanom and August talked about the problems of computers at

schools as well.

“The light goes out sometimes and the computer doesn’t read

my flash drive. … Not good! Learning with visual aids is

better. I prepared the PowerPoint presentation but it couldn’t be

used. It was hard to implement the plan without power,” said

Chanom.

“The computer sometimes doesn’t read the file. … It doesn’t

read the flash drive that I saved the file … the PowerPoint file

in. I was like … I didn’t know what to do. So, I just taught the

lesson without visual aids. It was a chalk and talk lesson. Not

interesting, wasn’t it?” said August.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

198

Unavailability of supporting staff

When technical problems arose, the student teachers said school did not have

any supporting staff or technicians to help them due to limited resources of small

schools. However, despite having supporting staff, student teachers did not gain help

in time of problems due to an ineffective circulation of paper work.

“… No, there isn’t any technician. It’s a small school. The

school doesn’t recruit any one to help fix computers or

visualizers. … Umm, I think there may be a computer teacher

but it’s not his job to repair computers, I think. So, I didn’t

bother him,” said August.

“It takes ages for a technician to come. … Maybe, it takes days

or weeks. The process of filing memos takes a long time.

Anyway, I’m about to teach. I can’t wait for the technician. …

The technician should come to help us quickly at need but it’s

just like that. They don’t come,” said Chanom.

Consequences: Options planned

Having experienced the technical problems, the student teachers revealed that

they had to think of options and back-up plans in case there were technical problems.

The options included use of non-electronic teaching aids, preparation of their own

electronic devices or precautious acts before using electronic devices.

“… I have to plan to print out the PowerPoint slides. … I can

use things like pictures or sentences. … I write sentences on the

board instead,” said Mali.

“… I plan to bring my own notebook computer to class if I am

to use VDO clips. Just in case, the computer in the room

doesn’t work. … Umm, I planned to have students watch a clip.

They should watch it. It makes the lesson more interesting,”

said August.

“… I have to test the flash drive before implementing a plan.

Sometimes, it works when I test it. But, when I teach a class, it

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

199

mayn’t work. I just save the file on CDs. It works all the time

on CDs,” said Chanom.

“… I save the PowerPoint files on CDs instead. … Yes, the

computer seemed to read the files better on CDs. It works for

me,” said August.

“… I plan to test the computer and the visualizer before I

implement the plan. If the devices don’t work at all, I’m

thinking about changing the room. … I can ask for the

homeroom teacher to allow me to use the room. … The room

should have the computer and the visualizer that are stable. … I

mean they work well all the time … ready for use all the time,”

said Fasai.

The ineffective administrative system (e.g. redundant paper work) or limited

resources (e.g. lack of technicians) activated student teachers to use their own

experience in finding alternative plans to handle problems concerning facilities,

technology and resources.

2.1.2 Practices

Student teachers were expected to follow practices acceptable to all personnel

in school. The practices included no planned schedule for special events and no

homework for students.

2.1.2.1 No planned schedule for special events

Student teachers revealed that schools did not set any schedules for special

events, such as urgent meetings, cultural events, academic events, religious

ceremonies, etc. Special events were announced in short notice. Consequently, student

teachers had to cancel classes. This had a direct influence on lesson planning; some

lesson plans could not be implemented as planned. The problem of insufficiency of

time could occur; however, student teachers managed to solve the problems by

themselves.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

200

Cancellation of classes in short notice

According to student teachers, many classes were cancelled due to schools’

special events, which had been announced in short notice. Therefore, time for

implementing other lesson plans was insufficient.

“My classes are cancelled very often. One time, the school was

allocated as a test site for the national ethics test. It took a

week. The teachers of all classes, including my English class,

were cancelled. They [school administrators] had told us two or

three days before it happened. I don’t understand why they

didn’t know this before. I don’t have enough time to teach,”

said Moey.

Similarly, Anna, who practiced teaching at the same school as Moey,

reiterated that apart from the national ethics test, there were other occasions that

required cancellation of classes as well.

“…The national ethic test forced us to cancel classes for a

week. Along the way, there were some other occasions too, like

Suthornpu Day or Teacher Appreciation Day. Students asked

for cancellation because they wanted to make decorations. … I

had to give them permission because other teachers did so,”

said Anna.

In the same way, Paul, Kara and Tiny practiced teaching at the same school

and they also talked about cancellation of classes in short notice, too.

“This school asks for cancellation of classes very often. We had

a Buddhist session one day. We were teaching and then an

announcement went so loudly. We had to escort students to the

meeting hall. There are many more times that we had to cancel

classes,” said Paul.

“… My classes have been cancelled several times. … For

example, one day, someone made an announcement, asking us

to allow students to attend a … Buddhist teaching session or

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

201

something. No one had been notified this before. And there

were many more occasions that my classes were cancelled,”

said Kara.

“… We are called for meetings many times without notice.

Like, we were supposed to teach this afternoon but we were

called to attend a meeting. Naturally, all classes in the

afternoon had to be cancelled. … It [the meeting] was about

preparing things for Academic Day or Sports Days. They are

just like this. They want to call for meetings in short notice,”

said Tiny.

Andy and Boy, who practiced teaching at the same school, also reported the

same problem.

“Classes are cancelled without notice sometimes, like, the

Teacher Appreciation Day at the beginning of the term. This

month, there’ll be Sunthornpu Day. The school doesn’t cancel

the classes but students just don’t come to class. They say they

have to prepare. … I have to let them go because all teachers do

so,” said Andy.

“I was very angry. One day all students were gone. I found out

later that they’d gone to sell vegetables. This school wants

students to attend many special activities. They went out to sell

vegetables at nearby markets. No one ever told me about it. I

had to find the answer by myself. … Some students from the

next class told me. I knew not all of them were assigned at the

same time but I deducted their marks for the day’s lesson,

anyway,” said Boy.

Fasai and Chanom, who practiced teaching at the same school, also revealed

that classes were cancelled in short notice as well. The special events that urged for

the cancellation were similar to all schools.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

202

“The cancellation of classes is normal. We cancel classes for

cultural days, like a day before Teacher Appreciation Day or

days before big events. … We need time to prepare decorations

and so, I think. Both teachers and students want to have some

time to do bulletin boards or displays. Other classes are

cancelled and so are mine,” said Chanom.

“Here, classes are cancelled very often for Suthornpu Day, for

academic weeks and so on. Students want to have some days

off to prepare. Like, they wanted to cancel my class to prepare

the science project for the academic weeks,” said Fasai.

Consequences: Effective time management planned

Combining lesson plans

Moey, Kara and Tiny responded similarly to insufficient time for

implementing lesson plans. When they planned, they had to think about combining

some lesson plans so that students learned all content as planned. The practice of

combination could be done to the whole lesson plans or only to some skills.

“When I realized time wasn’t enough for the lesson plans, I had

to think about combining them [lesson plans]. … Like, a plan

was cancelled last week. I had to think about combining the last

week plan with a plan I was about to teach the week after,” said

Moey.

“… Time isn’t enough to teach all plans, of course. So, I

combine lesson plans. I have to think about combining two

lesson plans to teach on the same day,” said Kara.

“… When it’s short of time to teach, I have to combine lesson

plans. … I combine skills, like grammar on a plan and reading

on the other plan. I can implement a grammar lesson plan

cancelled before and use the reading passage to teach on the

same lesson,” said Tiny.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

203

Reducing time for each teaching phase

Student teachers reported that they had to plan to spend lesser time for each

teaching phase at time constraints.

“I plan to spend lesser time for each phase and I can finish a

plan in thirty minutes. So, two lesson plans could be

implemented within class time,” said Moey, Paul and Kara.

“… Like, I have to implement a plan in half of planned times.

For the input phase, I have to finish it in seven to ten minutes

instead of fifteen minutes,” said Moey.

“ … I have to go fast for each phase. The motivation activity

can be done in three minutes or one minute if necessary. And

the input phase must be done in ten and the focus phase in ten,”

said Paul.

“… When I combine classes, I have to spend lesser time for

teach phase. … Like, the practice phase is about ten minutes

long,” said Kara.

Reducing number of plans

At time constraints, Fasai revealed that she had to lessen the number of lesson

plans, which she had to write for a unit. To do so, the student teacher had to ask for

permission from her school supervisor.

“Maybe, I have to think about lessening the number of plans for

a unit. Like, for a unit I have to write five plans. I change the

number to four. But, I have to talk to my school supervisor. …

That’s because she told me. She was the one who set the

number of plans for a unit. I have to ask for her permission.

Usually, she doesn’t have any problem,” said Fasai.

When asked how she reduced the number of plans, Fasai revealed that she

could omit some parts in the textbook for the unit and focused only on main skills of

the course.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

204

“… I can omit some exercises that I don’t focus. I teach

listening and speaking, so this course doesn’t focus on reading.

I can leave out the reading passage and exercises concerning

the reading text from lesson plans,” said Fasai.

Focusing only on grammar

Student teachers revealed that when they did not have enough time, they had

to write lesson plans that focused mainly on grammar points. The main reason was the

fact that grammar points were regarded as the most important content for the English

courses.

“I have to focus on grammar points because they are a list of

what we have to teach in a term. I have to at least cover them

[grammar points],” said Polita and View.

“If my lesson plans cover all grammar points, that means I

teach everything for the course. The course focuses on

grammar,” said View.

“My school supervisor says we have to cover all the grammar

points. Students, then, will learn everything set for this course.

Grammar points are the main focus. They’re the most

important,” said Polita.

Omitting transfer or production phase

Student teachers also said that when they did not have enough time to cover all

components on a lesson plan, they seemed to omit the last teaching phase, that is, the

transfer or production phase.

“It’s hard to catch up with all content [on a plan], so I have to

think about leaving out some phases, like the transfer phase,”

said Kara.

“At time constraints, I don’t implement the production phase,”

said Tiny and Polita.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

205

When asked for reasons, the student teachers revealed that it was sufficient

for student learning if they spent time on the focus or practice phase and that the

practice and production phases were similar.

“… It’s because sometimes I see students practice so hard and

they haven’t finished the exercise, the practice exercise, yet. I

think they should keep practicing as long as they can. … I

mean as long as they need because they haven’t finished the

exercise yet. They should finish it [practice exercise] and they

can understand the language point thoroughly,” said Polity and

Kara.

“The practice and production phases are similar to me. …

Students practice the language point and then they have to do a

similar work in the production phase anyway,” said Kara.

“I don’t want to intervene with students’ practice. When I say

‘stop and do another work [production exercise], they

complain. They say they haven’t finished the practice exercise.

Why do they have to change to another exercise? Changing the

activity can damage student learning because they don’t finish

the practice exercise. If they change to the production exercise,

they may not understand it [production exercise] and that

doesn’t make them understand clearly. Probably!” said Tiny.

The fact that school did not set timetables for events could result in

cancellation of classes in short notice. The consequence was problems concerning

time constraints for implementation of plans. Having experienced the problems,

student teachers acted to solve the problems by planning to do the following actions:

combining lesson plans; lessening time for each teaching phase; lessening number of

plans; focusing only on grammar; and omitting transfer or production phase.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

206

2.1.2.2 No homework for students

In addition, student teachers also talked about an influence from school on

their lesson planning. A school imposed a practice for all teachers to follow: no

homework for students.

Instruction completed in class time

Student teachers revealed that a school imposed the no homework practice,

where teachers were encouraged to complete instruction in class time.

“This school has the no homework policy. We are not supposed

to give any homework to students. All teachers are encouraged

to finish teaching everything in class time. Homework

shouldn’t be assigned to students,” said Chanom and Fasai.

Chanom and Fasai explained that the policy was authorized by the government

or the Ministry of Education in order that students had time to join extracurricular

activities.

“… I think the [no homework] practice is good. Students

should spend time on their favorite subjects, like … clubs or

…. Umm, we have the English for Fun course after school too,”

said Chanom.

“It’s good for students. Kids these days are lucky. … I think the

practice comes from the government or the Ministry of

Education. They want students to enjoy learning rather working

all the time, even after school. Some students are stressful

because of so much homework,” said Fasai.

Consequences: Planning effective time management

Chanom revealed the consequence of the no home practice was that he had to

plan all activities in time allotted to each class effectively. Each teaching phase must

be timed so that a lesson plan could be implemented in designated class time.

“I have to plan all activities for all phases in the time allotted to

each class effectively. … For example, I plan to have students

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

207

read for fifteen minutes and I have to keep the time as planned.

The motivation activity mustn’t be longer than seven minutes

or so. I must plan each activity and time to be spent,” said

Chanom.

Consequences: Planning simple tasks; omitting some teaching phases; and

reducing time for activities

Fasai revealed that due to the no homework policy, she had to plan to finish

teaching each phase in time allotments. Eventually, she had to plan the activities,

which did not require complicated instructions or actions to complete, and to omit

some phases of teaching.

“I have to plan to finish all activities. So, I plan simpler

activities instead. … For example, for a reading lesson plan, I

have to plan to have students read and answer questions. It’s

easier to manage time than the jigsaw reading technique. …

Well, I can have students read the passage and write answers

for questions, say, five to six questions about the passage. But,

the jigsaw reading technique requires students to read in groups

and shared what they read. It took a long time for sure. Still, I

can’t finish teaching some activities in time. I’m so anxious

when I have to rush teaching. … I have to omit some teaching

phases, like the transfer phase, or the motivation activity may

be shortened. … It’s OK because we focus on the input and

focus phases. We have to finish everything. Is that right? … so

that there is no homework for students,” said Fasai.

A school’ no homework policy had an influence on student teachers’ time

management. At time restriction, they had to be vigilant in planning to implement

each phase of teaching in time allotments, to plan simple tasks for students to follow

and to omit some phases. The reason was that they could finish implementation of

each lesson plan in class time, leaving no off-classroom assignments to students.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

208

From above, schools’ rules and practices had an influence on student teachers’

submission of plans, plans for facilities, technology and resources and plans for time

management. The following is an influence of the Faculty of Education on student

teachers’ lesson planning.


Student teachers revealed that the Faculty of Education at a state university,

where they enrolled in the Practicum course, had an influence on their lesson

planning. The Faculty of Education imposed a rule and a practice that involved

designing lesson plans as shown in the following figure.

Figure 4.6: Factors influencing student teachers’ lesson planning: Institutions (Faculty

of Education)


2.2.1 Rule

2.2.1.1 Plan format

2.2.2 Practice

2.2.2.1 Selection of schools and classmates

2.2.1 Rule

Student teachers said that the Faculty of Education imposed a rule for all

student teachers to follow. The rule was concerned with the plan format.

2.2.1.1 Plan format

A rule imposed by the Faculty of Education had a direct influence on their

lesson planning because student teachers had to follow. It was the detailed plan

format, to which student teachers had both negative and positive responses.

Disadvantages of writing detailed plans

Some student teaches revealed that they spent a long time to write a detailed

plan. They also reported negative feelings against the expected dialogues between the

teacher and students on detailed plans. As the detailed plan format was compulsory,

the student teachers admitted that they had to write the detailed plan with difficulty. A

student teacher reported he was struggling to meet deadlines.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

209

“I wonder why we have to write detailed plans. I know it’s our

Faculty’s rule but … And the plan must be written in English. I

spend a long time writing plans. There are a lot of details to

write about. … I mean things to say, things to do, steps of each

activity and so on. I know what to say already, so I don’t want

to repeated writing things. It’s discouraging to write detailed

lesson plans,” said Andy.

“I have to spend time to write details on the plan, like teacher’s

instructions and students’ responses. I guess I work a lot on

writing a lesson plan and … umm … it takes a long time. … I’d

rather write the shorter plan format. I never meet deadlines. It

[writing detailed plans] takes up all my time,” said Gasoline.

“One more thing, teacher, writing details on plans is hard for

me. I don’t have ideas to write. … We have to write the

detailed format, don’t we? But, I … [laughing] … I don’t ….

I’m not good at it. … I mean writing a lot of details. … The

conversational style, I mean. It’s lengthy. I don’t know how to

write things in details but we have to do it. But, it takes a long

time for me to finish writing each plan,” said Tharee.

Advantages of writing detailed plans

Other student teachers talked about benefits of following the detailed plan

format. Most benefits were concerned with understanding methods of teaching and

speech for implementation of plans.

“Our faculty tells us to write plans in details. That’s what we

have to do. Am I right? We can’t change it. … I write detailed

plans but sometimes I may write shorter plans. I know what to

say when I teach, so I don’t really have to write anything. But,

it’s OK when I’m implementing lesson plans, I can remember

… oh! …I want to teach this, I want to say this,” said Kara.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

210

“I’m Ok with it [detailed plans]. At first, I don’t understand

why we have to write very long-range plans. I know it’s the

rule [imposed by Faculty of Education]. After I write detailed

plans for a while, I know what to write. It’s like a pattern.

Teaching reading needs vocabulary, questions, activities and so

on. It’s like we understand what we should teach to students,”

said April.

“I write detailed lesson plans as told by the Faculty of

Education. … It’s OK. When I write plans, I have to write in

steps of teaching. Each activity is presented in steps. Like for

the pre-reading phase, I write what I have to do. … Like, the

while-reading phase as I told you, I write instructions, … umm

… the name of the activity first, rules for games if there were

some or questions. Usually, there are questions or what they

[students] have to do, like filling in the blanks or in the table,”

said Boy.

“I write detailed lesson plans as I was told [by Faculty of

Education]. It’s the rule so we have to follow it. The detailed

plan helps us know steps of teaching and things to say while

implementing plans,” said Paul, Pooky, Nicky, Chanom and

Anna.

The Faculty of Education imposed a rule, which required student teachers to

write detailed plans. Student teachers talked about its disadvantages and advantages.

Some student teachers said it was time-consuming and they were discouraged to write

the lengthy plans, whereas others said detailed plans made them understand methods

of teaching and remember what to say while teaching.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

211

2.2.2 Practice

According to student teachers, the Faculty of Education also set up practices

for student teachers to do for practicum. The practice was to be administered before

the Practicum course started. It had an influence on lesson planning.

2.2.2.1 Selection of schools and classmates

Student teachers reported that the Faculty of Education allowed them to select

schools and classmates for practice teaching. Student teachers responded positively to

the practice.

“The Faculty allows us to choose school by ourselves. We can

choose classmates to teach at the same school too,” said Kara,

Tiny and Paul.

Moral support from classmates

Kara, Tiny and Paul described a benefit of being allowed to select schools and

classmates by themselves. They could go to the same school with close friends, who

could provide both ideas for planning and moral support for difficult times.

“We chose to come to this school together. Of course, it’s good.

When we have problems about planning, we talk to each

other,” said Kara and Tiny.

“We’re close, Kara, Tiny and I. When we don’t have any ideas

to write lesson plans, we talk to each other and share ideas. I

like the way we can select school and classmates by ourselves,”

said Paul.

“When I have problems about planning or anything else, I talk

to Kara. She cheers me up. Sometimes, we have a lot of things

to do and we talk about problems. We’ll say ‘Keep fighting’

[laughing]. I feel like I let it go by chatting with close friends.

… Definitely, I like the way we are allowed to select friends for

practicum [at same school],” said Tiny.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

212

Saving time for commuting

Student teachers said that they felt positive when the Faculty of Education

gave them freedom to choose a school for the Practicum course by themselves

because they could choose school that facilitated commuting.

“This school is far away from the town but it’s near my house.

It’s good. I feel so good. I could choose to practice teaching

here. I have time to plan, then. … It’s because I don’t have to

spend too long commuting to school. … I can relax and I guess

I have more time to plan,” said Fasai.

“I don’t mind she [Fasai] wanted to practice here. I can stay at

the dorm. The school has a dormitory for student teachers. It’s

easy for me to commute. I walk to classrooms in three minutes

[laughing]. … Yes, I have more time to plan lessons. … I think

it’s good that we know we don’t have to worry about

commuting. … It’s good to choose this school. Good that we

could choose this school by ourselves. … I have more time to

plan. That’s a good thing,” said Chanom.

The Faculty of Education had an influence on student teachers’ lesson

planning by imposing a practice for them to follow. Student teachers had positive

responses to select school and classmates by themselves. They could have resources

for planning, moral support during difficult times and saving time for commuting and.

In conclusion, to answer the research question “What factors influence the

student teachers’ lesson planning?” the researcher interviewed student teachers and

they revealed that factors that influenced their lesson planning included (1) personnel

(e.g. students, school supervisors, university supervisors and student teachers); and (2)

institutions (e.g. schools and the Faculty of Education).

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

213

4.1.2 Sub question 1.2 What is the procedure in the student teachers’ lesson

planning?

The research question asked student teachers to provide data about the

procedures they followed in designing lesson plans. According to the interviews,

student teachers revealed that there were steps in writing a lesson plan. The steps

covered the lesson plan components, including objectives, activities for phases of

teaching, time management, class management, teaching aids and assessment. The

results revealed that 1) some student teachers followed the linear process and 2) the

other student teachers did not follow the linear process for designing lesson plans.

They started with studying information obtained earlier from the personnel and

institution factors in the pre-planning stage. Then, they followed the steps in the two

processes shown below.

1.2.1 Following the linear process

According to the results, there were two groups of student teachers, who

followed the linear process: 1) the student teachers who followed the linear process

without switching any steps and 2) the student teachers who followed the linear

process with switching some steps. Details of each group are presented below.

1.2.1.1 Following the linear process without switching any steps

Student teachers studied the information obtained earlier from the personnel

and institution factors. After they knew the content of what to teach, they formulated

objectives; designed activities for phases of teaching along with planning time and

class management; designed and produced teaching aids; and planned assessment.

Some of them made notes and then typed the notes on electric files so that they had

complete lesson plans. Others typed the lesson plans at the same time of planning.

“I see the textbook first and think about the topic or skills to

teach, like the past simple tense. … Then, I think about the

terminal objective. Then, I design activities for each phase. … I

think about teaching aids and produce them later. The

assessment plan is written last. … (While I’m planning, I write

notes and then type them on files to have lesson plans.) (I type

my plans while I’m thinking),” said Andy, Katy, Pooky, Polita,

Anna, View, Mali and Tharee.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

214

The student teachers also concluded the reasons for using such steps below.

Linear process learned from the teacher education program

First, student teachers reported that the reason for following the steps

mentioned above was the fact that they learned to plan in steps of the linear process

from a course in the teacher education program.

“… I have been taught like this back at the Faculty of Education.

When I practiced back in class, I was told that I should come up

with the terminal objective and indicators. … After I see the

book, I see grammar points and think about the terminal

objective,” said Andy.

“… It’s supposed to be in these steps, isn’t it? I do it like I

always do. … Errr … We all do like this … from the Methods

[of Teaching English] course. When we know what to teach, we

think about the terminal objective, look for indicators and then

we design activities, time and class management and so on. …

Like, after that, I think about teaching aids, produce the teaching

aids and plan assessment,” said Katy.

“I do the plan in the steps … from the Methods [of Teaching

English] course. Yeah. We have to see the book before we have

the terminal objective. We design activities of all phases in the

order and then produce teaching aids. I plan assessment later,”

said Tharee and Mali.

“I follow the steps from the lesson plan. Like, I write the long-

range plan and then daily lesson plans. … I formulate objectives

and look for indicators. Then, I follow the components, like

activities for the motivation, input, focus and transfer phases and

put time and group work or individual work too. … I design and

produce teaching aids last. Oh! And assessment last,” said Anna.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

215

Plans completed before recorded on a big notebook

Second, a student teacher, Pooky, revealed that the big notebook format forced

her to follow the steps of the linear process. She scribbled her ideas on a piece of

paper and then copied the notes on the big notebook.

“I write plans on the notebook, right? So, I have to plan in the

steps. I have to write objectives first before I think about

activities. … Everything should be written on the big notebook

before I can produce teaching aids. … Again, objectives are done

and then I design activities. I plan assessment and then I think

about teaching aids. … I do time and class management when I

think about activities. They come together. … Yes, I produce the

teaching aids last. I have to finish everything before I write on

the big book,” said Pooky.

Pooky had revealed earlier that her university supervisor told her to write

lesson plans on a big notebook and submitted it to her school supervisor. Therefore,

she had to ensure that all components were planned prior to writing lesson plans the

big notebook for reasons of convenience.

“… Like I told you before that my university supervisor told me

to write lesson plans on a big notebook by hands, not by typing

on computer. So, I don’t want to write and rub my writing [on

the big notebook] too often. That’s why I have to scribble about

what I plan to teach, like activities for each phase … errr … on a

piece of paper and then I copy everything on the notebook,” said

Pooky.

Grammar lessons leading to steps in linear process

Third, a student teacher, Polita, explained that the steps came from the

procedures in grammar lessons. Polita had to complete all phases of teaching

grammar and then she produced teaching aids in the end. The phases included

motivation, input or presentation, focus or practice and transfer to production.

“These steps? I have to do it this way because I have to plan the

lesson first. I have to see all sentences or grammar. So, I can

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

216

produce worksheets. I put what I’ll teach on the worksheet, like

examples, sample sentences or grammar rules. … The worksheet

also has the transfer [production] activity for all my classes. …

OK. I look at the textbook and formulate the objectives. … I

write things down, yes. Then, I have activities for motivation,

input [presentation], … I think about rules of the grammar points

and then I have sentences for practice, for the focus [practice]

phase. Then, I think about the transfer [production] activity.

After that, I can produce teaching aids, using the content I’ve

planned in the worksheets [teaching aids],” said Polita.

Long-range plan leading to steps of the linear process

Fourth, a student teacher, Anna, revealed that she produced the long-range

plan by looking at textbooks, formulating objectives and designing activities. The

components in the long-range plan allowed her to write daily plans in the steps of the

linear process

Anna added, “… You see? I’m good at seeing objectives from

the textbook. I see … well … a tense, say, the present simple and

I can think about objectives or activities right away. When I have

the long-range plan, it’s easy to write daily plans for a unit. I

have all phases … activities and all already. So, I write the plan

and think about details, like group work or not. The teaching

aids, like the PowerPoint file or worksheets, come later.”

Time-saving when following steps of linear process

Finally, student teachers reasoned that the linear pattern saved time in case of

rewriting. Tharee, Mali and View said that the steps were more convenient because

the plan would lead to producing teaching aids immediately.

“It’s easier to write a plan first and then produce teaching aids. I

do like this: I plan and finish everything and I can produce the

PowerPoint file right away. There’s no need to go back and forth

between the plan and the file,” said Mali.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

217

1.2.1.2 Following the linear process with switching some steps

Some student teachers reported that they followed the linear process learned

from the teacher education program; however, they switched some steps of planning.

Similar to the group of student teachers, who followed the linear process

without switching any steps, the student teachers, who followed the liner process with

switching some steps, started with studying the information obtained earlier from the

personnel and institutions. Then, they looked at textbooks and thought about the

objectives. After that, they designed activities for phases of teaching, produced

teaching aids and planned assessment. Some students switched the steps of designing

activities and producing teaching aids for a reason, namely electronic problems, or

without any particular reasons. The following are the reasons for switching the steps

of designing activities and producing teaching aids.

Switching the steps of designing activities and producing teaching aids

because of electronic problems

First, student teachers reported that they switched the steps of designing

activities for phases of teaching and producing teaching aids due to electronic

problems.

“After I look at a unit, I think about what to teach. I have to think

about objectives first and sometimes I produce teaching aids

right away. … I think about them [teaching aids] and produce the

PowerPoint files and write activities for all phases. … It’s more

convenient,” said Jane.

Jane described the reason for producing the PowerPoint file right after

formulating objectives.

“… It’s more convenient because while I am producing the

PowerPoint file, I can write sentences, examples or pictures …

err … or find VDO clips to use on the lesson plan at the same

time. I can also think about the technique to use,” said Jane.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

218

However, when there were technical problems on electronic devices, Jane had

to think about other alternatives instead. This affected the order to steps of her

planning.

“But, when I don’t’ use electronic devices, I don’t usually

produce any PowerPoint file. I have objectives and I write

activities, like input or practice. I finish all activities and I start to

produce hand-made teaching aids. … No electronic aids! … I

follow these steps because at the school the electronic devices

don’t work well. I’d better finish a lesson plan and produce

teaching aids later,” said Jane.

Steps of designing activities and producing teaching aids switching without

reasons

Some student teachers produced teaching aids before designing activities and

vice versa. They could not specify a pattern for switching the steps, nor could they

inform a reason.

“I start with looking at content from the textbook and I

formulate objectives. I type them on the computer. Then, I

design activities for teaching phases. … Later, I produce

teaching aids. … Then, I plan assessment. … Sometimes, I

formulate objectives or think about the transfer phase and

produce the PowerPoint file right away. … I don’t know why.

… Maybe, I can think about what would be on the PowerPoint

slides at the same time. … It’s like teaching the present

continuous tense. I think about students seeing a picture and

writing about what people are doing, so I can teach sentences

and pictures for them to look at. So, I produce the PowerPoint

slides right away,” said Moey.

Fasai and Tiny said that sometimes, they followed the linear process learned

from the teacher education program. They started with writing a lesson plan by

looking at textbooks, formulating objectives, especially the terminal objective,

designing activities for phases and designing and producing teaching aids.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

219

“I look at the textbook first. Then, I think about the terminal

objective, activities for other phases and teaching aids. Then, I

produce teaching aids and plan assessment,” said Fasai and

Tiny.

However, Fasai said that after she studied content from the textbook, she

thought about the transfer or production activity, which was treated as the terminal

objective, and then produced the teaching aid and designed activities for phases of

teaching at the same time. Sometimes, she also completed the whole lesson plan and

then produced the teaching aid at the final step. She said these steps were better for

her.

“… Sometimes, I produce the PowerPoint file on the computer

after I have the transfer [production] activity. … It’s like the

terminal objective. Is that right? … I produce the PowerPoint

slides and find pictures. And I also design activities for phases

at the same time. I don’t produce only the PowerPoint file. … I

mean I write notes for the lesson plan. I write down what I will

teach for each phase, like listening, teaching vocabulary …

what words I have to teach, writing questions … I may go back

and forth writing a lesson plan and do the file too. … I don’t

know. It’s better for me. I find that I have to make changes and

I can change the PowerPoint file at the same time. … But,

sometimes I finish the whole plan and then produce the

PowerPoint file later. … It’s like I can finish all activities and

it’s done in one go. … By doing that, it’s like I have a focus to

finish the plan first. I don’t have to stop and worry or think

about producing the PowerPoint file. … That’s the last thing. I

plan assessment in the end,” said Fasai.

In addition, Tiny added that sometimes, after she formulated objectives, she

designed activities and designed and produced teaching aids at the same time.

“[After studying information]… I think about the terminal

objective. It’s like the transfer activity. So, now I know the

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

220

objective. Then, I think about the enabling aims and work on

activities. When I have finished the lesson plan, I can produce

the PowerPoint file. … I like to type the lesson plans.

Sometimes, while I’m typing the plan and I think about some

activities for the focus phase. Then, I start producing the

PowerPoint file, searching for materials at the same time. … I

don’t know. I do it like this. Like, I plan to teach words, so I

search for pictures or I make cue cards. … I can go back to

think about the motivation phase or assessment later,” said

Tiny.

To sum up, for the linear process, student teachers designed a lesson plan by

studying information from the pre-planning stage; formulating objectives; designing

activities for phases of teaching (along with planning time and class management);

designing and producing teaching aids; and planning assessment. The reason included

student teachers following the steps learned from the teacher education program;

completing a plan before recording on a notebook; following steps in grammar

lessons or long-range plans; and saving time from rewriting. There was also an

alternative to the steps. After studying information from the pre-planning stage and

formulating objectives, some student teachers designed and produced teaching aids

first and then designed activities for phases of teaching. Some student teachers said

that as electronic problems arose, they followed the alternative steps. However, some

student teachers could not identify any reasons.

1.2.2 Not following the linear process

For some student teachers who did not follow the linear process, after studying

the information gained from the personnel and institution factors, student teachers

designed activities for phases of teaching (along with planning time and class

management); and designed and produced teaching aids at the same time. Then, they

planned assessment. Designing activities and producing teaching aids, focusing on

electronic ones, occurred together while planning.

“I look at the textbook, think about activities for each phase

and then think and produce the PowerPoint file right away.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

221

When I design activities, I plan time and class management too.

… Then, I think about objectives. I follow the activities on the

PowerPoint slides to write objectives. Then, I plan assessment,”

said April, Paul, Kara, August, Helen, Grace, Chanom, Nicky,

Boy and Gasoline.

The reasons for not following the linear process were included below.

Convenient to produce teaching aids before other components

First, student teachers said that it was more convenient to producing the

PowerPoint file as a teaching aid, which contained content and activities following the

phases of teaching, before thinking or writing objectives or any other components of a

lesson plan.

“I think about what activities to teach but I don’t write the

objectives. I start with designing and producing the PowerPoint

file, thinking about activities on the slides. I think about how I

can teach students. The content for each phase is typed on the

PowerPoint slides. … These steps are more convenient,” said

April, Paul, Grace and Helen.

Student teachers said that it was convenient to produce the PowerPoint file

first before thinking or writing objectives or any other components of a lesson plans

because the file was used in class for teaching students right away. Moreover, the

PowerPoint slides could be used to produce a lesson plan, by copying and pasting the

slides onto the lesson plan’s content column.

“It’s convenient to write lesson plans this way. The PowerPoint

slides are in the order of teaching. I can teach without the

lesson plan. I can use the PowerPoint slides to teach right away.

… I look at the textbooks and type on the slides,” said Kara and

August.

“After I finish the PowerPoint file, I can use its slides to

produce lesson plans. … Like, I copy the slides and paste them

on the lesson plan, on the content column. I show content and

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

222

what I’ll use to teach. So, producing the PowerPoint files first

is convenient,” said Paul.

Moreover, the student teachers also explained that producing the PowerPoint

file first was more convenient for correction and the file showed the order of teaching

phases.

Kara added, “I used to write a lesson plan and produce the

PowerPoint file later. But, I had to come back and made

changes on the plan when I found mistakes. … While I was

producing the PowerPoint file, I looked at the completed plan,

which had been designed earlier. So, it was inevitable that I

might have detected mistakes. Waste of time to do that! It’s

better to finish the file and write the lesson plan later.”

August added, “I start with looking at the textbook and then I

produce the PowerPoint file. … Honestly, we use the

PowerPoint slides to teach students and we follow the slides on

the screen. … It’s the main aid. The lesson plan isn’t being

used in class. We use it for submitting to supervisors

[laughing].”

Teaching aids clearly presenting phases of teaching

Third, some student teachers also said that the PowerPoint slides used in class

delineated phases of teaching clearly.

“The PowerPoint slides delineate phases of teaching clearly.

They are in the order of instruction. If I put the activities in the

right order, the lesson plan will be implemented smoothly,”

said Boy and Nicky.

“Producing the PowerPoint file first is great! It’s better because

I can plan the lesson carefully and I’ll use them as a teaching

aid anyway. The order of the slides is like the teaching phases.

It’s step by step. If I produce a good PowerPoint file, I’ll have a

good lesson plan to teach. … I produce paper-based aids too

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

223

when I have the file. I think about what I can have for teaching

aids and produce more, like cards,” said Chanom.

“There are three formats for my lesson plans: grammar, reading

and listening or speaking. It’s like the PowerPoint file should

be done before the plan because I can see the phases of each

format easily. Like, a grammar lesson plan shows sentences …

a lot of sentences. It’s like … err … the inductive method and I

can write or think about sentences and type on the PowerPoint

slides. Students can see the sentences and tell me the grammar

structure. … For a reading lesson plan, I have clips, teach

vocabulary, have students read each paragraph and answer

questions. So, I know all steps. I just search for the clip or

pictures for vocab and put them on the slides. … The listening

or speaking lesson plan has the motivation phase, the

vocabulary phase, the listening phase, the questioning phase

and the transfer phase or ... the post-listening phase. I have

students create a conversation in pairs. I search for pictures to

teach vocab. So, I produce the PowerPoint slides in this order,”

said Kara.

Producing teaching aids helpful for thinking of activities

Forth, student teachers said that when they produced the PowerPoint file, they

could think about activities better than writing the whole lesson plan first.

“If I started with writing the whole plan, I’d not have any ideas

to write. Thinking about activities or what to say is hard,” said

Boy.

Boy added, “I start with looking at the textbook and know what

content I’m going to teach. I produce the PowerPoint file and

search for ideas for the plan. … I can just put what materials for

teaching on the file right away.”

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

224

“I start with looking at content from the textbook and think

about the transfer activity. Then, I produce the PowerPoint file

by searching for more materials from the Internet. … I may be

stuck there for hours if I write the plan first. Making the

PowerPoint and searching for materials are easier,” said

Gasoline.

“I can see what activities for each phase first and then start

searching for clips. I like students to watch clips. … And I start

producing the PowerPoint file at the same time. … The

PowerPoint file consists of all teaching phases. It’s easier to do

this way,” said Nicky.

Time-saving to produce teaching aids before writing objectives

Finally, student teachers said that producing the teaching aid before writing

the lesson plan was time-saving.

“After I finish writing a lesson plan, each PowerPoint slide will

be pasted on the plan. So, I can save time by having the

PowerPoint file ready first. … There may be changes or

rewriting on the PowerPoint file, but I try to make the file ready

… the file without any mistakes,” said Helen.

“I usually finish the PowerPoint file first. When I’ve already

produced the file, I think about … umm … some sentences are

not right. I go back [to the file] and change them. The

PowerPoint file should be correct and ready before I write the

lesson plan. The plan will be all correct. It helps me save time,”

said Paul.

“I used to write lesson plans before producing the PowerPoint

file. It took a long time. As I told you, I couldn’t think. I had no

ideas. But, when I produce the PowerPoint file, I have ideas. …

Yeah, I type the PowerPoint slides and design activities at the

same time. I know what to teach and I put content to teach on

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

225

the slides right away. … I search for materials and put them on

[the file]. It takes shorter time,” said Boy.

To sum up, for not following the linear process, student teachers design a

lesson plan by studying information from the pre-planning stage. The next step was

different from the linear process, student teachers designed and produced teaching

aids first and designed activities for phases of teaching (as well as planning time and

class management) at the same time. The teaching aids focused on the PowerPoint

files. In the end, they planed assessment. Student teachers also described advantages

of these steps. Designing activities and producing the teaching aid, focusing mainly

on PowerPoint files, was more convenient; could be used for teaching as the

PowerPoint files could show phases of teaching clearly; and saved time from

rewriting and making changes.

In conclusion, to answer the research question “What is the procedure in the

student teachers’ lesson planning?” the researcher interviewed student teachers and

they revealed two practices of designing a lesson plan during the planning stage: 1)

following the linear process and not following the linear process.

According to the results from the research question “What factors influence

the student teachers’ lesson planning?” student teachers revealed that school

supervisors and university supervisors had an influence on their lesson planning after

submitting lesson plans. They gave feedback after checking lesson plans. Then,

student teachers responded to the feedback differently. Figure 4.11 illustrates a

diagram of student teachers’ following the linear and not following the linear

processes included student teachers’ responses to feedback provided by school

supervisors and university supervisors.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

226

4.2 Research question 2 How do the student teachers implement the lesson

plans?

The second research question was aimed to ask student teachers’

implementation of lesson plans. Student teachers, the participants of this study, were

interviewed for data collection. Class observation was also administered. There were

two sub questions: 2.1) What do the student teachers do before implementing a lesson

plan? 2.2) Is the lesson plan implemented as planned? Why/Why not?

4.2.1 Sub question 2.1 What do the student teachers do before implementing a

lesson plan?

Student teachers revealed the practice before they implemented lesson plans.

They reviewed lesson plans by reading through the lesson plans, so that they could

remember teaching procedures, think about what to say while implementing

lesson plans, have a chance to make changes to assist student learning and have a

chance to look for mistakes. Moreover, they checked on teaching aids and set up

classrooms before implementing lesson plans. Details are shown below.

Reviewing by reading through lesson plans

Student teachers said that before they implemented each plan, they read it to

see what they had written.

“Before I implement each plan, I read it to see what I’ve

written. It’s like reviewing what I’ve done. I know what to

teach. I should know all the procedures in the plan,” said

Chanom, Tharee, Nicky, Anna, Jane, Boy and April.

Reasons: Remembering teaching procedures

The reason for reviewing lesson plans before implementation was that they

wanted to remember the procedures of instruction, which led to displaying

professionalism as a teacher.

“I want to know what I’m going to teach. I don’t usually put the

lesson plan on the desk. I can remember all procedures in the

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

227

plan. … Yes, I can remember because I wrote the plan myself.

… The implementation won’t go smoothly if I stop and look at

lesson plans very often,” said Anna.

“I don’t bring the copy of plans to because it doesn’t look

professional. … I read through the plan again and remember

the procedures, like what comes first and what’s next. I want

the lesson to smooth as planned. … It’s like if we keep looking

at the plans while teaching, students may think I’m not ready to

teach. In fact, I plan the lesson, so I have to show them that I

teach smoothly like a professional teacher,” said Nicky.

“I don’t put the plan … the whole plan on the desk. … It’s like

I am not prepared if I keep looking at the plan. … I think like

that. If I keep looking at the plan, it’s like students may think

I’m not sure about what to teach,” said Chanom.

“Students may think that I’m not prepared. I should show them

that I’m ready to teach. … I want them to know that I write

plans, I produce teaching aids and I don’t make mistakes. …

That way makes them respect me as a teacher,” said Tharee.

Additionally, Boy also explained his remark by giving a metaphor.

“… After I rewrite lesson plans a few times, I remember what

to do. I don’t have to look at the lesson plan. Students should

see me as a professional teacher. The classroom is like a

theatre, where a teacher acts for students. Students are the

audience. When we change the classroom, it’s like we change

the audience. Actors must remember lines to say. If students

saw the teacher looked at scripts, they [students] wouldn’t trust

the teacher. They mightn’t believe in what is taught. It’s like

students see that we’re not ready to teach. … It’s just like that.

Students see that and wonder why the teacher is not prepared.

Why does he keep looking at the plan? It refers to

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

228

unpreparedness. It’s not right. When I review a lesson plan, it’s

like I’m reviewing procedures of teaching,” said Boy.

Reasons: Thinking about what to say while implementing lesson plans

Student teachers reviewed lesson plans by reading through because they

thought about things to say. A student teacher also reported that she produced speech

for instruction and practiced the speech. The main reason was that her lesson plans

were not written in the detailed plan format. She did not write a dialogue between a

teacher and students based on activities of the lesson.

“Before everything [implementing a plan], I look at the

PowerPoint slides. I look at each slide and think about what I’m

going to say. It’s like a rough script because the lesson plan is

in the draft format. It’s not in details. There are no

conversations [between the teacher and students]. … Then, I

say the script out loud. … No, I don’t take notes. I just think

about it [script] and try to say it. … umm … I mayn’t know

what to say while I’m implementing the plan. I only have the

PowerPoint slides. I have to think about my lines. … For

example, if I was to teach the past simple tense, I’d think about

‘The verb must be added with ed or … [said in Thai]. We use

irregular verbs, something like that,” said Helen.

In addition, Helen also talked about the way she did not use notes while

implementing a lesson plan.

“When I implement the plan, I don’t use the notes because I

write the plan by myself. I can think about it and I can

remember all steps. Well, if I forgot what to say, I’d wait for a

moment and I can recall my lines,” said Helen.

Similarly, View echoed what Helen did before implementing each plan. She

said she also thought about scripts of teaching because the lesson plans were not

written in the detailed plan format.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

229

“I look at the lesson plan [before implementing] and think

about what to say. Like, I teach something. I think about

‘Students, look at the sentences and tell me the structure.’ I

have to think about what to explain to them, like ‘the subject he

… you have to use is.’ I have to [think about what to say]

because I mayn’t know what to say in class [laughing]. I may

be stuck … no words [laughing]. Sometimes, I take notes too. I

write what to say. … Only on pieces of paper. It’s like a list of

things to say. … That’s because the plans are not in details.

Miss … [name of university supervisor] tells us to use the draft

format, only dashes of things to teach. So, … I have to think

about what to say,” said View.

Reasons: Having a chance to make changes to assist student learning

Another reason for student teachers to review lesson plans before

implementation was that they had a chance to make changes on the plans in order to

assist student learning. A student teacher reported that she changed how to manage

class for an activity before implementing the plans to assist low-proficiency students

for fear that students might not be able to catch up with the activity.

“I planned to have students do pair work. I’d show the pictures

and they’d answer using the most or –est but for low students I

was thinking about calling some students to come forth and

write sentences on the board. I had to give them words on the

board and they rearranged and wrote a sentence on the board

[jumbled sentences],” said Tharee.

When asked for a reason, Tharee said that she knew students in certain rooms

might have low proficiency of English and they might have difficulty following pair

work. The change would assist student learning.

“That’s because I know them. Students in this class are low.

They can’t do it [the activity] for sure. They can’t do in pair

work. All of them have low proficiency [of English]. They

can’t work together. No ideas! … So, I was thinking about the

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

230

whole class help one another to write sentences on the board.

That way they could see examples too. … umm … I didn’t

rewrite the plan. I just thought about it and changed it in class. I

just implemented the change in class,” said Tharee.

Reasons: Having a chance to look for mistakes

In addition, student teachers gave another reason for reviewing lesson plans

before implementation. Student teachers said that before implementation of a lesson

plan, they looked for language mistakes and corrected them. Some student teachers

corrected the mistakes on teaching aids used during implementation.

“I read the plan again and check if there are any mistakes, like

grammar mistakes. … I check mistakes before I teach. I look at

the plan again. … Yes, I printed it out because I had to submit

it [lesson plan] to my school supervisor. So, the plans are

stacked on my desk. … No, not the desk in the classroom but in

my office. … If I found some [mistakes], I’d correct them on

teaching aids. I don’t have the plan with me to class but I use

the PowerPoint file as the teaching aid. So, I have to correct

mistakes on it if any,” said Tharee.

“I also check grammar points for teaching. I correct some

mistakes by myself. … Sometimes, my university supervisor

writes corrections. I might have forgotten to make changes …

like to make someone do something but I wrote to make

someone to do something. … But, it’s not what I’ll teach. It’s

just what I’ll make students do. … It was only the instruction,”

said Chanom.

“I check the language again, like pronunciation or stress on

each word … from the flash cards or from the PowerPoint

slides. I print them out. … I have to be sure my pronunciation

is correct because I’m a teacher. I have to be a good model,”

said Anna.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

231

“I submit the plans to my supervisors, wait for feedback and

make changes according the feedback. … If there’s no

feedback, I check the PowerPoint file because the content is in

there. I may put some effects on it [the file] and check for

mistakes. If there are mistakes, I make changes at this

moment,” said Boy.

Checking on teaching aids

Student teachers said that they also checked on teaching aids before they went

to class to implement lesson plans. The teaching aids that needed checking were

mostly electronic ones because there might be technical problems.

“… I test the flash drive or CD on the computer. … And of

course, I have to test turning on the computer and the

visualizer. … Yesterday, they [computer and visualizer]

worked well but today they mightn’t work at all,” said Chanom.

“I usually check on the electronic devices before I implement a

lesson plan. It never happens but I have to make sure. … The

technical problem, I mean,” said Nicky.

“I have to test the [PowerPoint] file on the computer. Then, I

practice using it. Like, I click open each slide and sort of

mumble what to say for each slide. … Nothing much.

Everything is on the slides. When I see them [slides], I can go

along. … I can say what to teach. I don’t take notes for speech

of instruction. I can teach by looking at the slides,” said Andy.

Setting up classrooms

Moreover, student teachers revealed that they arranged furniture and displayed

teaching aids for activities before class started or before each lesson plan was

implemented in a classroom.

“There are no chairs in my classroom. I must set up the tables.

Students have to sit on the floor. If I plan for group work, I

have to put tables together to make groups,” said Andy.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

232

“I also set up rooms before implementing plans. When I have

reading activities, I post pieces of paper on the walls. … Each

piece has one paragraph of a reading text. Students have to

walk around. … So, I have to post the paper on the walls before

I start,” said Boy.

Before implementing a lesson plan, student teachers reviewed the lesson plan

for many reasons. By reviewing lesson plans, student teachers could remember the

procedures of teaching; produce speech for instruction; make changes to assist student

learning; and look for mistakes. Moreover, they checked on teaching aids and set up

classrooms before class started. An interesting remark was that when they reviewed,

they wanted to show students their professionalism as a teacher if the implementation

of lesson plans was smooth and no mistakes were found. They also wanted to show

their preparedness on teaching aids and readiness to teach students.

4.2.2 Sub question 2.2 Is the lesson plan implemented as planned? Why/Why

not?

For the sub question 2.2 of the second research question, the aim was to ask

student teachers about implementation of lesson plans and whether the

implementation was administered as planned or not. Student teachers were

interviewed and also observed in actual classrooms for data collection. The

observation was recorded on visual files and the actual lesson plan implemented in

each observation was used as a prompt to create more interview questions, which the

researcher recorded in field notes.

According to the results student teachers said that 1) lesson plans were

implemented as planned and 2) lesson plans were implemented with difficulty. They

also revealed reasons and causes for lesson plans implemented as planned and lesson

plans implemented with difficulty.

1. Student teachers implemented lesson plans as planned.

Student teachers reported that the lesson plans were implemented as they had

planned before. They referred to it as success. Student teachers also revealed there

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

233

were four causes of success: conducive student characteristics, activities for phases of

teaching, time management and teaching aids.

1.1 Conducive student characteristics

Student teachers revealed many reasons, which accounted for success in

implementing lesson plans, which were concerned with conducive student

characteristics. The reasons included students’ sufficient proficiency; students’

motivation; plans adjusted to students’ different levels of proficiency; and student

teachers planning more for higher levels of students. Details are shown below.

Students’ sufficient proficiency

Student teachers said that students’ sufficient proficiency contributed to

success of implementing lesson plans. They could use language points right after

instruction, follow teaching procedures and get ready to learn as suggested by student

teachers. Student teachers could foresee success when planning for students with

sufficient proficiency.

“I planned a reported speech lesson and I remembered I was

thinking about writing ten questions. … Like, Tom said, ‘I

don’t want to go to school and students should rewrite the

sentence, like “Tom said he didn’t want to go to school.” The

class with many intermediate students could finish rewriting the

reported speech sentences without hesitation. They understood

the lesson right after I taught them. Theses students are good.

They can follow what I plan,” said Tharee.

“It depends on students. If there are many intermediate students

in class, the lesson plan will be implemented well. I planned a

good lesson and students in this class could read, play games

and answer questions easily,” said Andy.

“The lesson plan was implemented well. … It’s because of

students. They are good, paying attention and doing home

assignments. I usually tell them to be prepared or to read before

coming to class. The students are very good. They read the text

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

234

before. They could answer the questions really fast. … When I

plan, I think I can implement plan easily,” said Boy.

When planning for class full of intermediate students, a student teacher, Fasai,

said she had to prepare more to meet student needs, such as preparing explanation for

language.

“These students are very good. I have to be careful enough. At

first, I didn’t make enough [Power Point] slides. So, I had to

add more slides to show them. … They [intermediate students]

are good. They have enough English proficiency. I teach a

lesson as planned and they can follow … can use the language

right away. They keep asking me questions about the grammar

point I’m teaching. So, I have to prepare more explanation in

case they ask,” said Fasai.

The following is an example of an activity, for which intermediate students

required more explanation.

Fasai presented a language pattern and asked students to produce the target

language by means of speaking. The pattern is shown below:

A: How much does the lamp cost?

B: It is twenty dollars.

A: I want to buy it.

B: How would you like to pay?

A: By credit card.

B: All right.

For the task, Fasai asked students to work in pairs and speak a conversation by

making changes on the underlined words. Some students kept asking the following

questions: Do I have to copy the exact conversation like the sample? Can I ask ‘How

much?” for short? Can I say use Thai baht? I don’t have any dollars.

Fasai admitted that after implementing the lesson plan, she realized she should

have shown a variety of sentences which had similar meanings, like How much? How

much is this?

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

235

Moreover, after implementing a the plan, Fasai realized she failed to inform a

situation, where the language function could be used, to students. For subsequent

plans, she was thinking about being more careful and hoped that the plan could

provide what students needed.

“They [intermediate, motivated students] like to ask questions.

They are not shy at all. One time, a student asked ‘Why do we

have to speak English?’ and I knew right away I had forgotten

to tell them the situation for the language taught on the day.

Well, … um … it’s like we go abroad or something. … I told

them that later. It should be real life, shouldn’t it? They are

good. I should’ve been more careful. … Like, I have to think

more, like having more sentences for speaking. They can learn

more from my plan. I hope. … They can learn sentences that

can be spoken in real life as I’m careful to find more

[laughing],” said Fasai.

Students’ motivation

In addition to students’ proficiency, a student teacher also said that students’

motivation also contributed to success in implementation of plans. They paid attention

in lessons. The student teacher had positive feeling towards students’ response.

“I like to use VDO clips. … One time, I showed them [students

with motivation] a clip about illnesses. They were excited about

the words on the clip. They kept repeating the words with

friends, like ‘Rashes, influenza, chicken pox.’ They talked

about English names of illnesses and Thai words. I like to use

VDO clips a lot in my plans and I like it very much when

students respond well,” said Nicky.

Plans adjusted to students’ different levels of proficiency

Paul reported that he usually adjusted his lesson plans to suit students’

different levels of English proficiency. Paul had prepared some questions, which

demanded students to complete the task at the lexical level and the others at the

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

236

sentential level. Students of all levels could follow the lesson. The student teacher

said he would continue planning different levels of questions for other plans as well.

“This activity was filling in the blanks using should or

shouldn’t. Like, you blank speak on the phone in the classroom.

If students are beginners, I have them only fill in the blanks.

But, if they are intermediate, I’ll show only pictures and they

have to say sentences. They can do the task correctly. I know

students in some classes couldn’t write long sentences. I have

to adjust them questions to have them write only words. So, I

plan the questions like the eight ones on the plan. … umm … I

plan like this usually. I have questions like this, easy and

difficult too,” said Paul.

The following description of a class observation shows Paul’s implementation

of a lesson plan. He used a number of questions for beginner students to fill in words

and a number of questions for intermediate students to produce sentences. The

description also shows that the lesson was successful.

During class observation, Paul divided students into four groups by rows. In

English, he told them to fill in the blanks using should or shouldn’t. They had to look

at the picture to help them find the answers. Students seemed responsive. They

shouted, ‘Understood’ when Paul asked if they knew what to do. There were eight

questions. The first four had a statement each with a blank and a picture but the other

four had only a picture each. Students in each group took turns to answer the

questions.

In the lesson plan, Paul posted the eight PowerPoint slides to show the eight

questions. For example, a picture showed a teacher standing in front of class and

pointing at the whiteboard. There was a statement above the picture: The teacher and

students ___ speak English in English lesson. There were also two alternatives in big

boxes by the side of the slide: should and shouldn’t. There were three more pictures

with statements. Then, there were four more questions with only pictures posted. One

picture without any statement showed four kids sitting on the floor of a library,

reading books. The answer was supposed to be ‘You should be quiet in the library.’

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

237

Student teachers said that ‘students’ contributed to success in lesson planning,

such as students’ proficiency or students’ motivation. Students with sufficient

proficiency and with motivation could use language points, follow teaching

procedures and show readiness to learn. Moreover, student teachers students planned

different tasks to suit students with diverse levels of proficiency. Student teachers also

plan more to meet the needs of students with higher levels of proficiency.

In addition to students contributing to success in implementing lesson plans,

student teachers also said that appropriate activities in phases of teaching accounted

for success as well.

1.2 Appropriate activities in phases of teaching

Student teachers also revealed that effective activities could lead to

implementing lessons as planned. The features of such activities are following:

activities that related to students’ background, activities that students were familiar

with and activities that directed students’ movements.

Activities that related to students’ background

Student teachers said that if activities related to students’ background,

implementation of lesson plans would be successful. April also talked about a reading

text that was related to students’ background and that led to success in implementing a

lesson plan.

“This plan was successful. The students could finish the writing

in time. It was about computer games. Students have

background about this. They play games a lot. They understood

the text easily. I think that was because they know everything

about games on the text. They could do all activities easily. .. I

think they understood the text and activities very well. … I

usually find reading texts myself. I try to find reading stories

that students are interested in, like this one about game. I find

more like this for plans,” said April.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

238

The following description of a class observation shows that students’

background on the text, whose topic was about computer games, helped them learn

the reading activities the student teacher had planned. The plan was implemented as

planned.

During class observation, the student teacher started with asking a question:

Do you like to play games? What games do you like to play? How do you feel when

you play it? The questions were posted on the PowerPoint slide. A few students

shouted the answers. The motivation phase, then, took only a few minutes. After that,

six words were presented along with pictures: addicted, eyesight, fixed, opportunity,

hard-working and such. The student teacher presented a word at a time. Some

students shouted Thai meanings. Then, there was an exercise on the PowerPoint slide,

which required students to use the words. The students had to fill in the words in six

questions with blanks. There were pictures alongside the questions too. Most students

could answer correctly.

By the end of the pre-reading phase, the student teacher presented the

following guided questions and students gave answers. For the questions: What is the

passage about? Students did not respond well. Some of them said ‘Games. Playing

games.’ The student teacher asked the next question right away: Is it about good or

bad sides of playing computer games? Only a few students said, ‘Bad.’ Then, the

student teacher asked, How many problems of playing computer games are there?

Students said, ‘Two/Three problems.’ The student teacher said, ‘Yes, it’s about bad

problems of playing computer games. There are three problems.’

Then, four questions were posted on the screen for the next phase. During the

while-reading phase, the students were really quiet trying to read and find the answers

for the four questions. The students wrote the answers on their own notebooks. After

that, the student teacher showed the key answers on the screen.

Finally, during the post-reading activity, the student teacher asked students to

write a short paragraph about playing games. This was an individual work. She

reiterated to student, ‘Use your own ideas. If you think it’s good, it’s OK. If you think

it’s bad, it’s OK too. Just tell me the reasons too.’ Again, the students were attentive

working on their own writing work. They were quiet. There were only a few students

chatting. The student teacher monitored the room.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

239

In the lesson plan, April wrote the following questions for the while-reading

activity: If children are addicted to games, what can’t they do? What are the three

problems if children play games too much? Why does our eyesight become bad if you

play games too much? What is the main idea of this passage? As for the post-reading

activity, April wrote the following questions, which were aimed to help students

outline the short paragraph writing: How often do you play games? Do you think you

play games too much? Is playing games good or bad? Why? What are the good or bad

thinks that you get from playing games?

When asked about why she thought the lesson plan was a success, April

replied:

“They were trying to find the answers to the questions. They

could find three problems from the three paragraphs. … The

writing was OK. As I walked around, they asked for English

words and tried to write. They answered the questions [for

outlining]. It was about students’ experience. They could

answer. Some students needed to be activated. Like, the boy

there [pointing at the screen] sat still, so I walked to him and

ask a question. Do you play games? He said, ‘Yes.’ Do you

think it is good or bad? He said, ‘Good.’ Then, I told him to

write down: I play games every day. It is good because … He

said it helped him relaxed. So, I just urged him to write each

word.”

Additionally, View talked about success of the transfer or production activity

she had planned. The success resulted from students having background knowledge to

complete a task.

“I liked the transfer [production] activity. Students could finish

their work. … That was because the activity related to their

background. They understood the lesson for today. They could

follow all activities. And they drew a map from school to their

homes. It’s what they do every day. It’s like they wrote

sentences [to describe directions from students’ houses to

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

240

school] easily. … It’s because they have background about

what they were doing. … They drew easy maps and they had to

write a paragraph to describe the directions from here to their

houses. It’s like a foreign teacher will be visiting you

[students]. You have to write the map and describe how to go

to your homes,” said View.

The following is the description of View’s implementation of the lesson plan.

Students could follow all of the activities in the lesson plan. The transfer or

production activity was implemented with success like View said. Students drew

maps to tell directions from school to their homes. All students looked attentive to

finish this task.

At the beginning of the class, View turned on the computer set on the

teacher’s desk and turned on the visualizer. She inserted the PowerPoint file in the

computer and got ready for students to come. After nearly students entered the room,

View started the lesson by greetings students. The students responded. Then, View

followed all activities on her lesson plan. [Notes: View wrote the draft plan format,

which did not require student teachers to write detailed dialogues between the student

teacher and students. Moreover, the draft plan format was written in the Presentation-

Practice-Production procedure.]

During the presentation phase, View used the direction chart to recall

directions and prepositions. All the content was presented on the PowerPoint slides.

View showed a map and asked students to say prepositions of place. This was like a

review because nearly all students responded to her questions very well. When asked

about this activity, View admitted that this was really a review. In last session,

students learned the prepositions in a grammar lesson.

During the practice phase, View introduced a practice activity. Students were

asked to work in 3s or 4s. View provided them with worksheet, on which there was a

map of a small town. It was the treasure hunt game. View told students to find four

objects by reading the clues and pretending that the students were walking along the

road on the map. For example, in her lesson plan, a clue described ‘Go straight on.

Then turn left to Green Street at the traffic light Walk past the library and its’ the

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

241

building next to the library on the left. Mary’s wallet is in ___.’ Mary was a character

in the worksheet. She was hunting her belongings. Students could do the task by

themselves. View was monitoring the class and she looked at the works of some

groups. A few students stopped her and asked some questions. View said that they

just asked me to confirm if the answer was right.

During the production phase, View told students to draw a map identify

directions from school to students’ houses. View said the students should think about

the actual directions they used every day to commute. Students seemed responsive.

Some of them shouted they had live far away. Some said the task was easy for them

because they lived near school. After a while, all students settled down with the task.

They did the task attentively. There were a few students chatting. View walked by the

students and checked out their works. View revealed later that the students were

chatting as they normally did. She had a look at their work and found out they were

drawing the map or writing some sentences. Students wrote directions from school to

their houses using the sentence structure and prepositions of place they had learned

from the earlier session. For example, go out the gate, turn right, go past the

intersection. You will see a shop on the right. Turn left. And so on.’ Before the time

was over, nearly all of the students submitted the work to the student teacher.

View concluded that the implementation of was successful because students

had background knowledge about what to write about. Most of them used the

sentence structures and the prepositions to describe the directions correctly. All

students tried to do the activity b themselves because they had to write about the

directions to their houses. It was the knowledge each students knew about very well.

Activities that students were familiar with

A student teacher reported if students had participated in certain activities

several times, they would be able to follow the activities in next lesson plans. The

success occurred because students were familiar with such activities.

“When students participate in the same activities a few times,

they seem confident. They can complete tasks successfully. …

For example, I used the survey activity a few times and

students knew what to do. Some of them received the

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

242

worksheet and started to walk around to survey. … I think it’s

because students are familiar with the activity. It [survey

activity] has been repeated. They [students] are familiar with

what to do,” said Chanom.

According to class observation, students in Chanom’s class were taught about

daily routines. The lesson focused on the present simple tense and adverbs of

frequency, where students learned common phrases, such as to watch TV, go to

school, go to the market, do homework, play computer games and so on. For the

transfer or production phase, the student teacher assigned students to do the survey by

asking classmates: How often do you …? The students had a worksheet, in which the

daily routines were in the columns and the adverbs of frequency were in the rows of

the table. The students were asked to walk around to ask others and check the

frequency. The activity on the plan was well implemented.

Similarly, Andy and Boy said that familiarity with activities helped students

go along with activities despite that a task was complicated. The student teachers

tended to repeat the activities that students were familiar with and yielded success.

“… It was difficult at first. Students were puzzled with what to

do. They never had to read one paragraph per group. But, at

time constraints, we have to read in groups. I try to plan the

jigsaw reading technique very often. It [jigsaw technique] was

complicated at first but after a while, they [students] can do it.

They know what to do and can do the activity in the time limit.

… Maybe, after three or four times. … I plan the jigsaw

reading several times. I think it’s better than reading

individually,” said Andy.

“…I adjust the PowerPoint slides, changing colors or themes,

but the procedures are still the same. … It’s because students

are familiar with the activities or games. The pace of

instruction can go fast as planned,” said Boy.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

243

“I like to repeat plans. Some activities are repeated because that

makes students familiar with them [activities]. The lesson can

go fast because students know what to do,” said Kara.

Activities that directed students’ movements

Student teachers also revealed that a cause of implementing plans successfully

was concerned with activities that directed students to move around the classroom. A

student teacher said that she used activities that directed students to move around and

this resulted in success.

“When they [students] walk, they are happy. One time I had

them pair up. They had to pretend to visit a friend’s house and

compare A and B. … There were twenty pictures each on the A

set and the B set. And you [students] must find your match. It

might not be very purposeful but I just wanted them to move

around the classroom. That’s all. It’s better than having them sit

at the desks and work all the time,” said Jane.

To illustrate, Figure 4.7 shows a replica of the worksheet for this matching

activity. The student teacher prepared forty pictures of houses, on which many rooms,

pieces of furniture, gardens and so on were pasted. The houses were different in sizes

and kinds. The twenty pictures of the A set were labeled numbers 1 – 20 and the other

twenty ones of the B set labeled numbers 21 – 40.

To start the task, students had to walk around to find their matches, like A2

and B2, A14 and B14, A19 and B19, etc. The matches had no connection to one

another. The student teacher just used the numbers and the letters A/B to label each

picture so that students walked around to find their matches. For example, the A2 and

B2 pictures were pictures of different houses. When students were trying to find their

matches, they could speak Thai. The pair, then, had to stick the pictures with matched

labels on the space provided. After that, the pair of students sat at a desk and started to

help each other write sentences using comparatives, such as bigger, smaller, more, as

… as, etc.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

244

Figure 4.7: A replica of a worksheet for a matching activity

Picture A Picture B

Write your comparison:

_____________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________

Moreover, a student teacher revealed that activities that directed students’

movements were used to solve the problem of afternoon effects, where students

showed that they were not ready to study, affected by the afternoon time.

“I saw them [students] yawned. Someone rested her head on

the desk. I was thinking this wasn’t good. But, I couldn’t do

anything at the moment. I had to change the activity in the next

plan. … Umm, I mean I’m thinking about other activities in

next plans. … The activities that make them [students] walk

around. … So, I changes some activities that allowed students

to walk and talk. Some plans aren’t workable because students

sit in the chairs. There’s no movement or no interaction. I like

plans that urge students to move. They can talk and find

answers too,” said Tharee.

Mali also agreed that class with movements was considered successful.

“… They might be shouting and running around but I thought it

was better than seeing students looking bored. … When I

planned the activity, I wanted them [students] to have fun. I

couldn’t control them but it was OK as long as they had fun. …

I plan fun activities like this all the time. … Like, students

move to find things. They love it,” said Mali.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

245

Student teachers revealed that lesson plans could be implemented successfully

because of activities. They described the following activities that accounted for

success: activities that related to students’ background, activities that students were

familiar with and activities that directed students’ movements.

In addition to activities contributing to success in implementing lesson plans,

student teachers also said that time management for lesson planning accounted for

success as well.

1.3 Effective time management for lesson planning

Sufficient time allotted to planning process

A student teacher reported that success of implementation of lesson plans

resulted from well-planned lesson plans which were caused by student teachers’

ability to manage lesson plan time effectively, so they had enough time for writing

plans, gathering feedback from supervisors and improving their plans. The student

teacher usually planned in advance and managed sufficient time for a complete cycle

of lesson planning partly because he could see its effectiveness.

“The instruction for today was successful. The lesson plan was

implemented well because I’d written the plan weeks before.

So, my university supervisor checked and we had a talk. I made

adjustments on the plan. … I was prepared well. Anyway, I had

enough time to review and make changes. It [the lesson plan],

then, was implemented well. … I usually do like this. I set

enough time for writing plans and submitting them to my

university supervisor, like I said. … I think it’s better this way.

I can improve my plans. It [implementation] goes smoothly and

I think I should plan and rewrite it [plan] like this. … Like, I

changed the motivation activity. Before that I didn’t have any

ideas. I planned to ask questions about chocolate to students.

My university supervisor said it wasn’t interesting enough. So,

I changed it to the guessing game. I added some questions for

the skimming activity. Students could look for the words I just

taught. … The words that I presented before the skimming

activity. They [students] could do it. I also changed the while-

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

246

reading activity from asking questions into this [transferring

information from text to a timeline diagram]. … My university

supervisor suggested this to me. … The post-reading activity? I

rewrote this too [having students write their own major life

events into a timeline,” said Boy.

The following description of Boy’s class observation shows that the lesson

plan was implemented well as he said.

During class observation, students were attentive. They answered all the

questions the student teacher asked. They paid attention to all activities. The student

teacher smiled all the time and the students looked enjoyable with the activities,

which urged students to work in groups, except for the post activity, where each

student was to write a list of their major life events in the time order.

Boy also described how he shaped up this lesson plan through steps of making

changes and success due to the steps. In the motivation phase, he changed the activity

from asking questions about chocolate to the guessing game. Students had to guess

what the brand name of each chocolate bars, whose pictures were partly covered by

boxes. They participated in the activity attentively. They tried to guess the brands of

chocolate.

In the pre-reading phase, the student teacher had added the questions for the

skimming activity. Students saw the presentation of words excerpted from a reading

text and skimmed the text to answer questions. They looked for key words they just

learned to find the answers. Students followed the activities attentively. They

responded to the student teacher’s questions.

In the while-reading phase, Boy added a task, which required students to work

together to transferred information from the text into a timeline diagram. Students sat

in groups chatting to group mates and wrote answers on worksheets. They could give

out correct answers when the student teacher asked them. Before that, he had had only

questions for students to answers.

In the post-reading phase, Boy changed the transferring information activity to

writing one’s timeline. He also showed three examples of a person’s life timeline for

students to see and encouraged students to design interesting timelines of their own.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

247

The students worked on their work. They drew pictures on worksheets to start

designing their own timeline. Some students’ designs were interesting. They drew an

airplane, a tree or a bear. Then, they wrote sentences to show their major life events

labeled with years on the timeline.

A student teacher reported that effective time management for lesson planning

led to success in implementing lesson plans. When he managed time for designing a

lesson planning effectively, he had enough time to review lesson plans, gain feedback

from supervisors and rewrite the plans for better versions.

In addition to time management for lesson planning contributing to success in

implementing lesson plans, student teachers also said that teaching aids in phases of

teaching accounted for success as well.

1.4 Teaching aids

Student teachers also revealed that lesson plans were implemented as planned

because of appropriate teaching aids, which related to student interests, helped

students elicit ideas and provided background knowledge for students.

Teaching aids that aroused students’ interests

Tharee described the teaching aids she used to make students interested in

lessons. She selected pictures of popular stars and used them as part of a lesson plan.

Not only were students interested in the lesson, but they were also activated to

respond to a task as part of the activity. Tharee said she would use visual aids, which

students were interested in, in many subsequent plans.

“I used pictures of stars and students were happy. They looked

interested and follow the lesson right away. … When they see

pictures of their favorite stars, they are like, ‘Wow!’ Some of

them change from being sleepy into being energetic right away.

… When they look at the pictures, they can learn better. They

can answer my questions. They want to answer the questions.

… Like, sometimes, the pictures of stars are used to pretend to

show that they talk something and I put example sentences for

the stars to talk about. … It [implementation] is good, so I use

pictures in many lesson plans,” said Tharee.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

248

Teaching aids that helped student teachers elicit students’ background

knowledge, ideas or language

Chanom talked about a kind of teaching aids—visual aids—he used in lesson

plans and it helped the lessons implemented as planned. Providing real objects for

visuality, the teaching aids could help him elicit students’ ideas and language. The

student teacher, then, planned to use more visual aids.

“I provided an adjective like ‘big’ to each group and some

magazine pictures. The students were to compare things in the

pictures using the adjective. When they saw the pictures, they

tried to think about sentences to write. … I selected many

magazine pages and students could look at the pictures and

write sentences. There were pictures of fruits, cars, houses and

many more. They could have ideas when they looked at the

pictures. … For example, they wrote ‘The red car is bigger than

the white car. Doing this way, students can see real objects. It’s

more interesting. … Well, I know they [pictures] are effective.

It’s boring if we don’t have any things to see. I plan with

pictures all the time,” said Chanom.

August also talked about how she used a kind of teaching aids to elicit

students’ ideas and language.

“I have students work in groups. They help each other to draw

something. When they work with big paper, they are good. It’s

like they have to finish the work together. … I had them draw

pictures and write something about it. … umm … They were

supposed to draw things in a location and describe using there

is, there are. When they worked with big paper, they work

better. It’s like they think and write things together on the

paper. … I’ve used big paper several times … umm … because

I could see it worked. Students could work together. It’s better

than working alone,” said August.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

249

Teaching aids used to provide background knowledge

Student teachers used teaching aids to provide background knowledge to a

lesson. Not only were students interested in the teaching aids, but they were also

introduced to content of a lesson they were about to learn. Student teachers, who used

the teaching aids, whose content related to activities in the following phase of

teaching, reported success in implementing the lesson plans. They also tried to repeat

the technique of using teaching aids to provide background knowledge to students in

subsequent plans if the teaching aids were available.

Andy described how effective his teaching aid was during the motivation

phase. He selected a VDO clip, which provided background knowledge of the topic

on a reading passage. Students could read and understand the reading text better.

“I showed the VDO clip about the national day because I

wanted students to see the picture. When they read, they’d

understand better. It was the same content as the reading

passage. When I turned it [VOD clip] on, they were interested.

They liked it. They were watching it attentively all the time. …

Using VDOs? I plan using them [VDOs] in plans and if I could

find good ones to let students connect the content of the VDO

to the lesson, I’d use it. You see? I have to find VDOs that have

connection to the content I’m about to teach too. Sometimes,

it’s hard to find one,” said Andy.

The following description of Andy’s class observation shows that Andy used

the visual aid to provide background knowledge of Singapore national day. The

results were satisfying as students were interested in the VDO clip. They attentively

answered questions.

During class observation, Andy turned on the VDO clip about the national day

of Singapore. This was the pre-reading phase. The clip showed the main activities

Singaporean people did to celebrate the special day. The activities included parading

and watching fireworks. The parades took quite longer time than the firework show

did. Andy had the comment on that.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

250

“… Students saw the parades. There were troops marching and

decorated floats. I wanted them [students] to know the words

[parade, float] before reading,” said Andy.

The narration of the clip also presented the official language of Singapore and

its national flag. After watching the clip, the last PowerPoint slide for this phase

showed two questions: What are the official languages of Singapore? Which is the

flag of Singapore? For the first question, there were four alternatives: French,

Spanish, Malay and Arabic; the third one was the key. For the second question, four

pictures of flags were presented as alternatives. Students were attentively watching

the VDO clip as Andy claimed. They looked interested in the parades and the

fireworks. After watching the clip, the students could shout the correct answers for the

two questions.

Boy also supported the claim that effective teaching aids could lead to success

in implementing a lesson plan.

“This activity was good. The students were interested. They

could give the answers, … the correct answers,” said Boy.

Boy talked about the motivation activity, where he had students watch a VDO

clip relating the content of the lesson. VDO clips could be more understandable as

students could watch and make understanding of listening texts.

“While I was playing the VDO, I paused it from time to time

and gave remarks or asked questions to check them [students].

They could answer questions. I think that’s because they could

see the images and listen at the same time. It’s helpful when

they see. They understand and can answer questions,” said Boy.

Boy and April said that moving pictures made students more interested in

lessons.

“I used a GIF file once and students were laughing so hard.

They liked it. Since then, I’ve planned to use as many GIF files

as I could. I have to find ones [files] that suit the content. …

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

251

They like the moving pictures rather than the still ones as I’ve

noticed,” said Boy.

“One time, I put two words on the same [PowerPoint] slide.

The pictures were attached along with each word but students

were more interested in the moving picture. I observed that.

The other picture was a still picture, no movement but they

liked the moving one better. … It was the GIF file, which

showed movements of persons. It’s like a short clip. That’s why

I used the file again on this plan,” said April.

The following description of April’s class observation shows that moving

pictures could make students pay attention to the lesson.

During class observation, April showed the PowerPoint slides to introduce

words for the pre-reading phase. One slide displayed a GIF file of a boy playing a

VDO game in hands and suddenly his face falling into a rice bowl underneath his

chin. It was a short clip. The boy repeated this action several times until the student

teacher changed the slide. When students watched the short clip, they laughed loudly.

The student teacher explained the word ‘addicted’ using the boy as an example of

being addicted to VDO games. Some students shouted the Thai meaning of the word.

Student teachers reported that lesson plans could be implemented successfully

because of effective teaching aids, which were mostly visual aids, such as pictures,

moving pictures or VDO clips. The visual aids were effective because they related to

student interests, helped students elicit ideas and provided background knowledge for

to students.

To sum up, student teachers reported that lesson plans were implemented as

planned due to four reasons concerning students, activities for phases of teaching,

time management and teaching aids. First, students’ proficiency and motivation

accounted for success because intermediate students and students with motivation

could follow activities as planned. When student teachers adjusted plans according to

students’ different levels of proficiency, the implementation was successful.

Moreover, intermediate students to plan carefully. The plan, then, could be

implemented and provide what students needed. Second, activities, which were

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

252

implemented as planned, included the activities that related to students’ background,

the activities that students were familiar with and the activities that directed students’

movements. Third, time management helped student teachers implement lessons as

planned. When student teachers managed sufficient time for writing plans, submitting

them to supervisors, gaining feedback, having a conversation with supervisors and

rewriting the plans, the implementation was conducted with success. Finally, effective

teaching aids also resulted in success in implementing lesson plans. The effective

teaching aids included the visual aids, such as pictures, moving pictures or VDO clips.

They made students interested in the lesson, helped students elicit ideas and provided

background knowledge for to students.

Above was what student teachers reported on cause factors of successful

implementation of lesson plans. Student teachers also reported that they implemented

lesson plans and had difficulty as shown below.

2. Student teachers implemented lesson plans with difficulty

Student teachers revealed that there was difficulty when they implemented

lesson plans. Possible causes for the difficulty were reported. The causes were divided

into the following topics: students, activities for phases of teaching, class

management, time management and teaching aids. After thinking about the causes,

student teachers also used different strategies to solve problems so that the

implementation of lesson plans became successful.

2.1 Students

Student teachers reported that a factor that caused difficulty in implementation

of lesson plans was concerned with students: students’ low proficiency of English;

students’ inappropriate classroom behavior; and afternoon effects.

2.1.1 Students’ low proficiency of English

Student teachers reported that students’ low proficiency accounted for

difficulty in implementing lesson plans. Students had problems in all language

components: vocabulary, grammar, receptive skills (e.g. reading and listening) and

productive skills (e.g. speaking and writing). Details of each component are illustrated

below.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

253

Students’ problems concerning vocabulary

Student teachers reported that students had problems concerning vocabulary.

They could not pronounce easy words and they did not know meanings of easy words,

either.

Tharee said that students could not pronounce words though the words were

taught to them not long ago.

“They [students] can’t pronounce words though the words are

so simple. They don’t remember words I just taught them a

minute before. … You see? I just taught them ‘the most’, blah,

blah. A moment later they pronounced /mɔs/. But, the class had

to move on. I had to stop and correct the pronunciation. ... They

just didn’t get it. … I don’t know maybe they didn’t know

many words. They have very limited vocabulary,” said Tharee.

Solutions: Using recast for incorrect pronunciation

At the moment, Tharee heard the student pronounced the word incorrectly.

She solved the problem by using recast. The student teacher modeled the words that

students mispronounced and students were to repeat the correct pronunciation.

“… I had to stop and say the word again so that he can

pronounce the word correctly. I also said the word again to the

whole class too. So, all of them could pronounce ‘the most’

with me again. … When I hear mispronounced words, I

pronounce the words again correctly for them [students] to

follow,” said Tharee.

Student teachers also reported that students had problems concerning meaning

of words. They did not know the meanings of easy words, no matter where the words

were found (e.g. as individual words or in sentences).

“… The students asked me to translate the word ‘dangerous’

and I did. She, then, could answer the question right away.

They [students] don’t know a lot of words, not even simple

words, let alone the word dangerous,” said Tharee.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

254

Solutions: Using first language to help translate students’ unknown words

To solve the problem, the student teachers used the first language to assist

students. Student teachers said that use of L1 was necessary; otherwise, students could

not continue with their works. Offering L1 translation was conducted temporarily.

Student teachers urged students to learn by seeking answers for themselves by using

dictionary; however, some of them retreated and chose to stop working or asking

classmates’ assistance.

“… I just told them the meaning of the word in Thai. It’s the

easiest way. They [students] could continue working right

away. … When they find more unknown words, they ask me

again. I tell them to use their phone but they never did. I can’t

tell them every word. They just don’t’ want to work. They ask

their friends. If no one knows or they can’t find anything [on

phones], I’ll tell them the meaning but I won’t tell the

answers,” said Tharee.

“… I translate the questions into Thai. … I had to. Otherwise,

students couldn’t start doing the exercise. I had to save time. …

Sometimes. I translate words sometimes, if there’s no way else

to help them. But, if they ask me about what I just taught them,

I’ll guide them where to find the answers. ‘Here, I told you

about this already. Look!’ And they had to help themselves. …

Well, they look first by themselves, but if it’s hard to find the

meaning, I just tell them myself,” said Chanom.

Apart from students’ problems concerning vocabulary, student teachers also

reported that students had problems concerning grammar, which caused difficulty in

implementing lesson plans.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

255

Students’ problems concerning grammar

Student teacher revealed that students did not have adequate basic knowledge

of grammar. This resulted in that students did not understand grammar lessons being

taught. They kept asking specific questions about grammar points during the

implementation of lesson plans. This could lead to their inability to complete

grammar exercises.

“Many of them don’t have basic knowledge of grammar. While

I’m teaching a lesson plan, they keep telling they don’t

understand and asking me questions like, ‘Why do we add –

ed?’ or ‘Why do we change this verb not that verb?’ They were

talking about the simple past tense and irregular verbs. I tried to

tell them. This is the past time. OK? We can’t add –ed to this

verb but we have to use their irregular forms and blah, blah,”

said Helen.

“Some of them [students] don’t really have the knowledge of

grammar. They don’t even know a name! One time, I was

teaching the simple present tense. A student asked what Pam

meant. I was like What?! Pam is a name of a girl. So, usually

we use ‘she’ You see? That was a grammar exercise. Students

had to change verbs by adding –s, -es or –ies. Now that they

didn’t even know what storms meant. Well, they could look at

an s. It’s a plural noun. Right? We must use ‘they.’ They

[students] have to ideas. A student asked me what subject

pronoun he could use for a dog. I was puzzled. You don’t really

know the word [a dog]. Maybe, he didn’t really know it,” said

View.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

256

Solutions: Adding more examples and explanation as input

Helen explained that when she planned for class with a lot of beginner

students, she tended to added more examples of sentences in order to assist student

learning.

“… Like, I planned to teach the past simple tense. So, I wrote

sentences like ‘I walked to school yesterday,’ ‘I studied

English last Saturday.’ … Umm, I’d use the sentences to teach

how to add –ed and change y to i and add –ed too. … Oh, yes!

And I wrote ‘I went to bed late last night’ as an example of

irregular past verbs. … There were more like two or three for

each rule. … For example, I planned to use two sentences like

‘I walked to school yesterday’ and ‘I talked to my friend’ in a

lesson plan. But, if I was to teach low students, I had to add

two or three more sentences. … I added the verbs with –ed,

like ‘He washed the car, She watched the movie, or She

cleaned her room. … They understood the lesson. But when I

teach a new grammar point, they have problems again. I have

to explain more when they have problems with new grammar

points again,” said Helen.

After employing the solutions, student teachers found that students understood

grammar points, which were additionally explained at the moment of implementing

the lesson plans. However, students still showed uncertainty again about new

grammar points introduced in the next class.

A student teacher made use of “teaching moments” by immediately showing

real use of the future tense in context. He made sentences showing differences

between will and be going to.

“When it [difficulty] happens, I have to explain more right

away. Like, one time they didn’t understand the future with will

versus the future with to be going to. They got many wrong

answers. So, I had to explain again. I was thinking at the

moment about example sentences. I told them to look at the

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

257

cloud out the windows and asked ‘Will it rain?’ and then I drew

black clouds on the board and asked ‘Will it rain?’ They started

to understand. … It was really sunny on that day. Obviously, it

won’t rain. For the black clouds, I answered ‘It is going to

rain.’ Some students argued [in Thai] ‘Maybe, it won’t rain.

Sometimes, it’s so dark but it doesn’t rain. I retorted [in

English] ‘It’s going to rain.’ And I drew a tiny rain drop. They

laughed about it. … Yeah, they understood the grammar point,”

said Chanom.

Apart from students’ problems concerning grammar, student teachers also

reported that students had problems concerning receptive skills, which caused

difficulty in implementing lesson plans.

Students’ problems concerning receptive skills

Student teachers also reported that students had problems concerning receptive

skills, which caused difficulty in implementing lesson plans. The problems included

problems with reading skills and problems with listening skills.

Problems with reading skills

Student teachers said that students had the following problems concerning

reading skills. Students could not extract the meaning from texts and could not

understand meaning at the lexical and sentential levels of texts. They also refused to

start reading in a reading lesson.

“A reading lesson takes a long time because students can’t

read. It’s hard to teach reading. They [students] don’t know

how to gain the meaning from reading passages. They don’t

know how to read. When I implement a reading plan, they say,

‘Not reading!’ or shout ‘I can’t read! … They don’t know the

meaning many words. And when I tell them the meaning, they

still can’t gain the meaning from the sentence,” said Helen

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

258

“Some students never do anything since the start of the term.

I’ve tried to tell them to do exercises by themselves. Some of

them have a glance and try to translate. Some don’t want to

read anything at all. They just sit there, chatting with friends,”

said Andy.

Solutions: Use of L1

Student teachers said to solve problems concerning reading skills, student

teachers used L1. They translated English words into Thai for texts and questions for

students to continue with their reading task. However, when students saw more

unknown words, they struggled to read English texts. The students asked for help

from the student teachers again.

“I tell them Thai meanings of some words so that they can get

on with their reading tasks. But, when they don’t know the

meanings of more words. They ask me again. They take a long

time just to finish a paragraph," said Helen.

“I tried to walk around and activate them to work by

themselves. Otherwise, they’d do nothing as you saw.

Sometimes, they didn’t know the meanings of words and I

translated the words into Thai for them. They said they couldn’t

read the questions too. I had to help them translate the

questions,” said Andy.

Problems with listening skills

Student teachers also talked about students’ problems with listening skills. The

student teachers described the following situations of the problems. Students had no

response after student teachers gave oral instructions, however, a student teacher

found out that her instructions were too lengthy. Students did not understand lessons

delivered in English, either.

“…. After I said the instruction, they didn’t do anything. …

Maybe, the instruction was too long. I always have this

problem [laughing]. They [students] didn’t know what to do.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

259

They kept asking me, ‘Teacher, what am I to do?’ I was like …

I have to do something. They didn’t understand my English. …

The instruction was too lengthy, I think,” said Tharee.

The following is the content from Tharee’s lesson plan and she delivered the

instruction, which caused difficulty in implementing the plan. She read the instruction

from a PowerPoint slide on the screen.

In her lesson plan, the instruction was ‘Suppose you are editor of a magazine

and you want to promote Thailand. You have to write sentences to promote Thailand

using the superlatives.’ The questions were provided below the instruction as follows:

Where is the most interesting place? Where is the largest city? Where is the biggest

market? What is the tallest building?

During class observation, when Tharee delivered the instruction, she read the

instruction from the PowerPoint slide in one go. She paused a short while before

reading all the questions. Students started to asked in Thai about what to do. That was

what Tharee described earlier. It was difficulty during her implementation of this

plan.

Chanom also described difficulty in implementing his plans caused by

students’ problems with listening skills.

“Students asked me not to use English in class. I told them

[students] it was good for listening skills. They said they didn’t

understand the lesson when I speak a lot of English,” said

Chanom.

Solutions: Use of L1, non-verbal communication and effective speech

techniques

To solve problems concerning listening skills, student teachers repeated

instruction in L1 and gave examples. The solution was helpful but when unknown

words detected, students struggled to listen to English texts and tried to seek help

again. A student teacher also used non-verbal communication techniques and

effective speech techniques. He said the techniques were helpful and well-liked by

students. The students tried to communicate back to the student teacher in English.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

260

“I said it [instruction] again. … Some good students at front

understood when they saw worksheet. Most students still had

no idea. So, I said more and more in Thai this time. It’s tiring.

You know? … I also wrote examples on the board … like that

and it worked. Students started to know what to do but just

some did,” said Tharee.

“I try to speak [English] slowly and exaggerated gestures. I

also show various facial expressions. Like, when the sentence

is not right, I make faces like I’m confused. I don’t understand

the world [laughing]. They smile. They try to communicate in

English. … Like, if I have to explain a word … umm … like …

ballet, I try to say a dancer … in big costume. Well, it’s easier

to just mime to them. They see the action and they understand,

shouting ‘ballet, ballet.’ Sometimes, I articulate words slowly

to that they could catch up with my English. … I try to speak

English for directions or rules of tasks and sometimes explain

language points in Thai if students show confusion. I just tell

them the Thai meaning. They can listen to me more. But, if

they found more unknown words and they couldn’t understand

any further, I had to tell them the Thai meanings,” said Chanom

Students’ problems concerning productive skills

Student teachers also reported that students had problems concerning

productive skills, which caused difficulty in implementing lesson plans. The problems

included problems with writing skills and problems with speaking skills.

Problems with writing

Student teachers found that students did not know what to write easy

sentences. They kept asking for help with how to write English words though the

words appeared in the textbook. Students also had difficulty with spellings. Moreover,

they did not have ideas to write, even to write a sentence.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

261

“They [students] have problems with writing easy sentences.

Sometimes, the work is so easy but they still can’t do it. They

said they didn’t have any idea to write. … Only a few of them

[students] kept asking me what to do. … They said they didn’t

know how to write words in English. They have narrow

vocabulary. Like, they wanted to write ‘playing games is waste

of money’ but they didn’t know the words. Like, they don’t

know the word ‘money.’ Many of them don’t know how to

spell words,” said April.

Solutions: Providing assistance from student teachers or peers

The solution was to provide assistance from the student teacher or peers. The

student teacher found peer assistance workable sometimes but not all the time because

of peers’ lack of ideas to write too.

“I walked around to help them [students]. I told them the

English words. … They couldn’t spell the words … [shrieking].

I had to tell them to ask their classmates. Well, sometimes, they

don’t really know how to help friends, either. They can’t write

too,” said April.

Solutions: Helping students elicit ideas

April helped her students elicit ideas by asking guided questions so that the

students thought about answers. However, she did not check if students were

successful elicit ideas in the end because she had to monitor and offer help to others in

need too.

“… I had to help them arrange ideas. … We said in Thai and I

helped them to write words in sentences. I had to help them

think too. … Like, I asked, ‘What do you think?’ Is it good or

bad? And they said, ‘Good.’ Well, some said, ‘Bad.’ I tried to

let them say the answers by themselves but it took so long to

answer just yes or no. … Then, I asked them to say a reason. …

I insisted them answer. After a while, I left. … I had to walk

around. … No, I didn’t come back and check on them. … Well,

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

262

there were many more students that needed help. I had to walk

around to help others too,” said April.

Problems with speaking

Student teachers said that when they implemented speaking lesson plans, they

found that students could not produce conversation as planned.

“I realized students couldn’t do the activity when they asked

me what to write. … They couldn’t create the conversation,”

said Fasai.

The following is the description of Fasai’s implementation of a lesson, where

she explained difficulty. Her students could not produce a conversation during the

post-listening phase. They kept asking her what they were supposed to do.

During class observation, after Fasai implemented the activities in the

motivation, pre and while-listening phases, she instructed students to produce a

conversation for a cashier and a customer. After delivering the instruction in Thai for

a while, the students were still chatting loudly. They did not seem to concentrate on

the task. Fasai, then, walked around and answered some questions that the students

asked her. They asked, ‘What should I do? What should I write? What am I writing

about?’

Similar, August also experienced difficulty when she implemented a speaking

lesson. Students could not create a conversation.

“When I ask them [students] to create a conversation, they

can’t do it. They say it’s hard for them. They don’t know how

to say things in a conversation,” said August.

Solutions: Showing guided structures and sample conversations

To minimize the difficulty, student teachers offered guided structure, which

students could use as an example for practicing a speaking activity by replacing the

words that they wanted to say. The guided structures were helpful because students

only used the target language at the lexical level.

“… I asked the students to look at the conversation again. I had

underlined some words, like the price and the place, so that

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

263

they could replace the words with their own choices. … Like, I

told them to look at the conversation and they could change the

product. … They could use the conversation as a structure for

their own conversation. … After I told them each group, they

were OK. They could write the conversation,” said Fasai.

The following is the description of the implementation of Fasai’s post-

listening activity in line with her lesson plan. She showed the conversation with

underlined words, where students could replace with the words they wanted.

For the post-listening phase, students saw the instructions on the PowerPoint

slide. There was a picture of a grocery’s and the following statements.

If you are a customer, you want to buy ………………

Create a conversation between a cashier and a customer

a. Ask for the place

b. Ask for the price

In the lesson plan, Fasai attached a conversation as shown below.

Customer: Where is sugar?

Cashier: It’s next to the fridge.

Customer: How much is sugar?

Cashier: It is 3 dollars.

Moreover, student teachers gave sample conversations for students to look at.

They found the examples helpful. Students learned to replace words or sentences but

they did not really communicate to one another using English. They memorized the

conversations or read the conversations instead. The student teacher also learned that

she could give examples in subsequent plans to encourage students to have

meaningful practice on speaking tasks.

“So, in the class after the first one, I showed them some

examples. They [students] could look at the conversations and

they could change some words. … It turned out OK. They

could do the task. They changed words and use the

conversations as guidelines. But, when they presented the

work, they just read the conversation. … No, I didn’t give them

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

264

any choices. They just at the sample conversations and they

could put their own words to make the conversation meaningful

for them. The work was good. … So, I’ll give examples of

conversations for them. They can try to make the conversations

sound OK using their own words,” said August.

2.1.2 Students’ inappropriate classroom behavior

Student teachers reported that another cause of implementation of plans with

difficulty was students’ inappropriate classroom behavior. Student teachers explained

that students did not show readiness to learn, nor did they show willingness to

cooperate in any activities.

Solutions: Using punishment on grades

Moreover, Boy described how difficult implementation of his lesson plan was

due to students’ inappropriate behavior. They were not willing to complete

assignments. His solution was to inflict punishment on grades. The consequences

were satisfactory as the students improved his behavior, submitting works afterwards.

Boy insisted that punishment on grades be imposed for students at appropriate times.

“In a class, they [students] had to produce their own timeline,

talking about their life. But, half the students didn’t do

anything. The other half could do it [writing timeline] and

submitted the work in class time. The rest of them copied

friends’ works. … They were lazy. They didn’t want to do

anything. While I was walking around, I tried to tell them to do

the work. They just showed a bad facial impression to say that

they didn’t want to work,” said Boy.

The solution was punishment.

“… It [the work] was about each one’s life timeline. How could

it be the same? If they [students] copied friends’ works, I’d tell

them to do it again. … They must try to do the work; otherwise,

they had zero points Lazy or not lazy, good or bad, I don’t care.

They have to submit the work. … Eventually, they did submit

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

265

the work because I kept asking them all the time and

threatening about zero points. … The work was OK. They used

easy words, like I was born when … or I played football when I

was …, I went to a place, etc. … I usually do this punishing on

grades. They are students. They should be able to sort out their

priorities. This is school. They have to learn and work. I’ll use

punishment when students are so bad,” said Boy.

Solutions: Using corporal punishment and rewarding

Another case of students’ inappropriate classroom behavior, which caused

difficulty in implementing lesson plans, was reported by Moey. She said that a lesson

plan was being implemented and some students did not participate. They annoyed

class with loud chats. Similar to Boy’s solution, Moey inflicted punishment. To be

specific, her method to deal with the situation was to inflict corporal punishment.

However, she also used rewarding to solve the students’ inappropriate behavior.

“One time, while most students were joining an activity, a few

of them didn’t care to participate in. It was so bad. That could

affect my teaching. … All students were enjoying the activity.

We were playing the quiz game. Students helped group mates

to answer questions. But, they … actually only a student was

talking so loud to his friends while I was giving instruction.

They are very bad. They don’t want to study in any class. They

don’t want to cooperate when their friends work together or

even play games together. They are really bad,” said Moey.

In the end, Moey described two situations, where she used negative

reinforcement (e.g. corporal punishment) and positive reinforcement (e.g. rewarding)

to solve the problem. Moey also added she did not inflict anymore corporal

punishment since then. She gave rewards on grades regularly because students

behaved.

Situation1: “He was the one who doesn’t behave as well as a

few of his close friends. I couldn’t stand it when they talked too

much. I was so angry that I flog him but I asked for his

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

266

permission. I’m going to flog you. Alright? … I whipped his

hand with a book. … He was better. For some students, we

have to do this [flogging],” said Moey.

Situation 2: “The other day I said ‘… name of a student … [the

problematic students], come forth and write a sentence on the

board.’ And he did. I asked for his number so that I could give

him special points. Then, his friends in the gang saw that and

tried to ask for turns. They wanted to have special points too. It

was better, much better. At least, students here behave when

rewarded, so I give rewards on grades quite often. … No, I

never did it [corporal punishment] again. It was once and only I

did it,” said Moey.

No Solution

Some student teachers reported that when difficulty in implementing a lesson

plan occurred due to students’ inappropriate behavior. For example, students did not

try to comprehend student teachers’ instruction, nor did they try to complete tasks,

despite student teachers’ assistance. The student teachers said that they did not do

anything to solve the problem.

“… Though I wrote as many expressions as suggested by my

university supervisor, student didn’t try to use them

[expressions]. They didn’t try to say other choices I gave them.

They don’t have appropriate behavior. They don’t want to learn

English,” said April.

“… There are a few in this class. … umm … Actually, there are

a lot of them [students who had inappropriate behavior]. They

didn’t want to work on this exercise. … They didn’t try to do

anything. They [students] are lazy [laughing]. Maybe, Anyway,

they didn’t even try to use their phones. I allowed them to use

the phones to find the answers. The lazy ones—no, never” said

Tharee.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

267

In the end, April and Tharee admitted that they did not do anything to solve

the problem because they said they had assisted student learning by simplifying tasks

or giving choices to complete tasks already.

“… Nothing. … I gave choices [of expressions] but they

couldn’t try to read. I just did nothing. I let them [students]

choose to use whatever they could read. … Sometimes, I just

wrote sentences with blanks and let them put the words [in

blanks], say the words or write the words. … For example, I

give example expressions and students put the expressions in

the blanks. And they can say the sentences with partners like a

conversation. But, they just don’t want to work,” said April.

April gave an additional example of the task below.

A: (1) ________________.

B: I have (2) ___________.

A: You should (3) _______.

She explained that the numbers referred to the sets of expressions she

presented to students. The first category included ‘What’s the matter? What’s wrong

with you?’ The second category included the symptoms, such as a headache, a

toothache, a backache, etc. The third category included suggestions, such as see a

doctor, have some aspirins, have some rest, etc.

April concluded that she had helped students enough. That was the reason she

chose not to do anything to solve the problem of students not trying to do tasks.

“I think I help them by giving choices. It [the task] was easy

enough. They could just choose the choice. I don’t do anything

anymore to these students,” said April.

Tharee also echoed Apirl’s reason. She did not do anything to solve the

problem of students’ not trying to complete tasks.

“… I didn’t do anything. What could I do? … They don’t want

to work. … They don’t even look at the worksheet. … One

time, I told them off and they ignored me,” said Tharee.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

268

Apart from students’ inappropriate classroom behavior, student teachers also

mentioned afternoon effects, which caused difficulty in implementing lesson plans.

2.1.3 Afternoon effects

Student teachers also reported that implementation of lesson plans with

difficulty could be caused by afternoon effects. The period of time directly affects

students’ physical contributions to learning. Students did not seem to respond to

instruction. They felt sleepy in afternoons. Each student teachers had different

strategies to solve the problem.

Solutions: Gaining student attention by using music

A student teacher reported that drowsiness at noon was inevitable to happen

during implementation of lesson plans and it caused difficulty because students were

not ready to study his English class.

“Students are drowsy in the afternoon. It’s usual, isn’t it? …

Well, I plan to have them [students] play a game but if they

look like that [drowsy]. It’s like … no. It’s normal, I think. In

the afternoon, after students eat lunch, they feel drowsy,” said

Chanom.

Chanom said that the solution was to gain student attention. He made use of

music and the technique was workable for the time being.

“It’s like when it happens [students look drowsy], I’ll sing

‘Happy Birthday’. It’s a good technique. Once students hear the

song, they stop and try to find out whose birthday it is. They

sing along, being puzzled. … Well, they become attentive for a

while. In fact, I gave blessings for real once for a birthday girl.

… It helped. I could gain their attention for a while. They could

continue learning,” said Chanom.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

269

Solutions: Showing examples of being active to students

Moreover, Chanom added another solution to activate students from

drowsiness was to show the teacher’s energy. Chanom suggested that teachers display

positive non-verbal communication. Once he knew students liked his actions, he

performed the actions again later but with a specific purpose.

“… Students greet me ‘Good afternoon, teacher’ with very

slow, prolonged, stretched utterances. I have to greet them back

‘Good morning, students’ with loud and energetic intonation. I

smile at them, be a good model to them. … I think teachers

should be energetic showing good non-verbal language to

students, like facial expressions, smiling, or speaking with

active intonation, no monotone. … I do this again many times

but I don’t do it to make myself look funny. I do it when it’

necessary. … Like, when they look drowsy, I raise my voice

and act as if I was a TV host. Students laugh about that. They

ask which channel I’m working for,” said Chanom.

Furthermore, April described a case of difficulty in implementing a lesson

plan due to students’ drowsiness.

“Sometimes, they [students] look tired. It takes time for them to

get the textbook, open it and pay attention. They look away

from me. They look drowsy, having no energy to learn at all.

… They are tired, I think. It’s typical for afternoon classes.

They are sleepy,” said April.

Solutions: Gaining student attention by planning fun activities

April said that the solution was to plan fun activities. She found fun activities

workable as long as the activity was really interesting.

“I try to plan something different, like something fun. For

example, I used tongue twisters, adding sentences for them

[students] to utter. She sells seashells, like this. I let them watch

VDO clips and answer questions. It a game that lets them

compete. I’ve tried to plan fun activities, like more things than

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

270

only reading. … It goes well. When they play games, they look

energetic. It works every time if the activity is really

interesting, like a game show. They like to compete in … like

game shows. I try to think about new games while planning,”

said April.

Student teachers reported the following causes of implementation lesson plans

with difficulty, which were concerned with students. First, students’ low proficiency

of English resulted in students’ inability to read, pronounce or listen to simple words.

They could not produce language by writing or speaking, either. Student teachers,

then, conducted the following solutions during the implementation when difficulty

arose: recast, use of first language, use of non-verbal language, teacher assistance,

peer assistance and monitoring. Moreover, student teachers avoided using the

activities, which were implemented with difficulty. Second, students’ inappropriate

classroom behavior resulted in refusal to learn or cooperate. The solutions included

peer assistance, monitoring, punishment by reducing grades and change or adjustment

of activities. Finally, the environment factor, like the afternoon time, also caused

difficulty in implementation of plans. They had no response, nor were they willing to

work. The solution was to plan fun activities to gain student attention.

In addition to causes of implementing lesson plans with difficulty regarding

students, student teachers also mentioned activities for phases of teaching as causes

too.

2.2 Activities for phases of teaching

Student teachers reported that difficulty of implementation of plans involved

with activities for phases of teaching as well. The causes were divided into the

following topics: activities inappropriate to students’ age, activities inappropriate to

students’ levels of proficiency and activities inappropriate for each phase of teaching.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

271

Activities inappropriate to students’ age

A student teacher said that a cause that resulted in difficulty in implementing

lesson plans was concerned with activities that were inappropriate to students’ age.

Jane had implemented an activity with her classmates before they practiced teaching

and found the activity worked well. However, she found it unworkable with her

students and to all classes. Jane did not make changes once she experienced the

difficulty.

“I had played the cloth game with my classmates [about 21

years old] before we had practicum. We followed the rules

well. The students [in Jane’s class] were the 7th grade [about

12]. Oh, no! It was a chaos. … Two students from different

groups stood on the other sides, unable to see each other

because of a cloth blocking their view. The players had to try to

say the other’s name as fast as they could to win. … The

players had to just guess and shout the opponent’s name.

Anyway, other group members helped the players by shouting

the names. Worse, someone pulled down the cloth to see the

opponent and so on. They shouted and yelled. It was a disaster

[laughing]. … I didn’t change it [cloth game] for next classes

[laughing]. I implemented it to all class—the same disaster

[laughing]. … Well, I wanted them [students] to try to play the

game. I think it was fun … for them [laughing],” said Jane.

Solutions: Considering students’ age before planning activities

Jane said the solution was to take students’ age into consideration whenever

she planned a lesson. An example of considering students’ age before planning was

that Jane adjusted an activity, which was appropriate to high school or college

students, to suit her students, who were too young to follow strict rules. The adjusted

activity turned out to be effective for her younger students.

“It’s like at first I wasn’t thinking about it [students’ age]. After

I planned and implemented the plan, I learned which activity

was OK. I have to think carefully about student age for certain

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

272

activities. Like, young students cannot control themselves to

follow very strict rules. … For example, I adjusted the

whispering game a bit from whispering sentences to drawing

words. I thought students couldn’t control themselves to

whisper. They would shout the sentences for sure. Plus, they

couldn’t memorize sentences, so I changed it to words instead.

… They had to stand in groups. The first person saw a picture

of a word and draw it on paper. Then, he showed his drawing to

the next group mate and the next one looked at the drawing and

then drew another one until the last person. The last one wrote

the answer. … It went well. I had to tell them that they were not

allowed at all. Or else, they had zero point. They wanted to win

to they didn’t really make a sound. And I had to give them

different words for each group in case they looked at other

groups’ drawings. … When I design such activities, I have to

think if they’re OK for my students’ age,” said Jane.

The student teacher also verified the adjustments as well. She changed from

whispering into drawing for fear that students could not control themselves to

whisper. She changed from the sentential level into the lexical level because dealing

with words was more appropriate to students’ levels of proficiency.

“I’m sure they [students] can’t whisper. They will shout the

answer so that their other group mates hear it and they can win.

… Words are easier for my students, I think. Sentences are too

long for them. They can’t memorize the sentences,” said Jane.

Activities inappropriate to students’ levels of proficiency

Another cause for difficulty in implementing lesson plans was concerned with

activities which were inappropriate to students’ levels of proficiency. Fasai recalled

an activity, which required students to express opinions in a speaking lesson. Students

had no ideas how to begin because it was too difficult for their levels of proficiency.

“I planned for them [students] to share opinions. It was too

difficult for them. It was obvious. Students started to ask,

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

273

‘What am I to do? Why do I have to give opinion? Giving

opinions on what?’ … It was for the post-listening phase. I just

wanted students to give opinions towards what they’d heard but

they kept asking, ‘Why do we have to give opinions? … umm

… Maybe, they’d never given opinion before in an English

activity,” said Fasai.

Solutions: Giving examples of language function

In the end, Fasai had to solve the problem by giving examples of use of the

language function: giving opinion. She showed giving an opinion to a real situation

and students could continue with the activity.

“So, I told them about the news about the guy called ‘Keng

Gear R.’ It [news] was famous. So, I asked them [students] if

they agreed with him doing that. I show them a sentence to try

to speak. Like, I agree because … And I say ‘How about

having breakfast? Do you agree with this?’ I tried to show them

an example. … Yes, the guy who backed up his truck to hit the

other car at the back of his truck. … In the end, students said

things like ‘It’s [breakfast] good. It’s delicious. It’s good for

your health.’ That was OK for me. … Well, I think I’ll put

examples in next plans. When they [students] see examples,

they know how to start working,” said Fasai.

Activities inappropriate to each phase of teaching

Another case was reported by Helen, who revealed that difficulty during

implementation of a lesson was caused by students’ low levels of proficiency.

However, from class observation, the difficulty was actually caused by her

inappropriate teaching techniques that did not assist student learning. In the end,

Helen could not find any solution to solve the problem.

“Some … err … a few students could answer … but most of

them [students] didn’t respond well. They didn’t know the

answers. … umm … They couldn’t listen and make sentences.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

274

They are low students [students with low proficiency],” said

Helen.

The following was a description of Helen’s implementation of an activity,

which showed difficulty. During a pre-reading activity, students did not respond to the

questions she asked very well. The observation showed that the student teacher’s

technique to assist student learning was not appropriate. Instead of presenting

vocabulary for students, she chose to elicit three words from the reading passage by

asking students questions but the questions were unclear. The purpose of questioning

was not understandable to students. The answers were not used to become a start

point of vocabulary learning appropriately.

During class observation, at the beginning of a pre-reading activity, Helen

clicked at a file on the computer to play a VDO clip. While the VDO clip was being

played, some students kept asking, ‘What’s that?’ The clip showed the beginning of a

movie trailer of ‘Eragon,’ an adventure-fantasy film about a boy and his dragon in the

medieval period. After playing the clip for about a minute, a dragon appeared. The

student teacher paused the VDO clip, she asked the first question ‘What is it?’ Some

students shouted, ‘Mang-gorn’ (a Thai word for dragon. A student sitting at the front

could answer the English word correctly. Helen wrote ‘dragon’ on the board.

Then, Helen wanted students to see the special effect on the film. She, then,

played the VDO for another minute and asked students, ‘What is it?’ This time,

students were puzzled with the question. The student teacher said ‘Did you see from

the clip? The dragon?’ Students answered ‘Yes.’ Helen asked again ‘What is it?’ No

one could give the answer right to the target word ‘special effect’ as she planned to.

According to the observation, the clip had shown some dragons, a sorcerer,

who displayed his powers, and sceneries of forests. They were obviously computer-

generated images. However, the rest of the clip was characters talking. Clues to find

the answer were not enough.

Back to the observation, at the end of the pre-reading activity, Helen played

the rest of the VDO until the end and asked, ‘What are they doing?’ At this point,

most students did not seem to respond to the question. They were talking loudly. The

student teacher looked at the students sitting at the front and asked the question again.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

275

Some students shouted answers, which were inaudible. For a while, Helen was

waiting for the answer. She, then, gave the answer ‘They are fighting. It is ‘fight

scene,’ and wrote the noun phrase on the board.

Again, the student teacher did not ask the question that led to the word she

intended students to gain. The answer, which could be drawn from the clip, was ‘They

are fighting’ but the word which was aimed at was ‘fight scene.’ This was a word

from the reading text.

The activity was being implemented until the end with difficulty occurring all

along. However, the student teacher did not seem to detect any problems. Though

students could not respond to the questions, she chose to give out the answers right

away, so that she could continue the lesson. She still implemented the rest of the

activities as written on the plan.

The three words, dragon, special effects and fight scene, appeared in the

reading text. The student teacher did not highlight their use in the text at all. The pre-

reading activity ended at that point. This led to another difficulty.

Moreover, the student teacher described another difficulty in the while-reading

phase. Students did not know many other words from the text. Helen did not use

appropriate teaching techniques for the while-reading activity, either. However, Helen

still insisted that students’ low level of proficiency was the cause of the difficulty.

“It was the while-reading activity. I told the students to answer

the questions but … umm … they couldn’t. … As I told you

they had low proficiency of English, the students in this class.

They kept asking me, ‘What does this mean? What does that

mean?’ I taught them already the words. … umm … They

didn’t really understand the words. I had to tell them in Thai.

… They asked me the meaning of other words, like fantasy,

evil, whole and many more. They had no ideas. They asked me,

‘Who is Adam?’ I was like, ‘What?’ Some of them asked me

… err … something. What does it mean? It was the name of a

character. I was like … Oh, please!” said Helen.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

276

The following description of the observation showed that the student teacher

used an inappropriate teaching reading technique. Helen did not employ any teaching

techniques to help students learn reading skills. Students had to read and answer

questions right after the pre-reading activity. Consequently, they could not read and

find answers from the text.

According to the class observation, at the beginning of the while-reading

phase, Helen clicked the PowerPoint file to show four questions on the screen: What

type of film is it? What is it about? Who are the main characters? What does Adam

like in this film? Then, Helen gave out the handout. It was a worksheet, on which the

four questions were written.

Next, she asked the students to start reading the text in their textbooks and

write the answers. The activity required students to work in the groups. Many students

were chatting loudly. While she was walking around the classroom, some students

stopped Helen and asked her questions. Helen stopped and explained the questions in

Thai. She also pointed at the text and explained in Thai where to find the answers.

Nearly all of groups of students did not seem to understand the reading text. They

kept asking Helen what words, phases or sentences meant. After about ten minutes,

Helen asked each group to write the answers on the board. No group member came

forth to do so until Helen walked to each group and guided the students to see the

answers from the text.

Student teachers reported implementation of lesson plans with difficulty

concerning activities for phases of teaching. First, the activities were inappropriate to

students’ age. The solution was to consider students’ age carefully when planning.

Second, the activities were not appropriate to students’ levels of proficiency. The

solution was to present sufficient input to assist students. However, a student teacher

did not really do anything during implementation of a lesson plan when difficulty

arose. Finally, the activities were planned with inappropriate teaching techniques.

The solution was to plan lessons and think about appropriate teaching techniques.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

277

Apart from the cause of implementing lesson plans with difficulty concerning

activities, student teachers also revealed the following cause: class management.

2.3 Class management

Student teachers also reported implementation of lesson plans with difficulty

concerning class management. There were three causes: problems with class control,

no cooperation in group work and failure to consider physical settings.

Problems with class control

A student teacher reported that one of the causes resulting in difficulty in

implementing lesson plans was concerned with problems with controlling class. The

student teacher described the situation of the problems: students’ defiance of rules of

activities and students’ lack of attention to instruction. Noise produced by students

was an indicator of that class could not be controlled.

“It was a motivation activity. I had them [students] stand in

rows of their groups. There were four groups. They had to

stand in rows and run to touch words on the board. … The

words were about rooms in a house, like kitchen, bathroom,

bedroom, and I had to shout a word. Each group member had to

run the board and touch the picture of the word. But, they

didn’t wait for another word to be pronounced. They kept

nudging at one another and shouting. I tried to tell them to be

quiet but the class was out of control,” said Jane.

Solutions: Anticipating problems while planning

To avoid difficulty in next plans, Jane said that she should anticipate problems

so that adjustments of plans could be done before the plans were implemented. Jane

did not elaborate on the plan that she anticipated problems for. She seemed to use

activities that required movements. If so, she said she would consider anticipating

problems.

“Maybe, I didn’t think about possible problems while planning.

I thought it [activity] would be fun. It was fun, though, for

students [laughing], but I had a problem [laughing]. … I have

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

278

to anticipate problems in the activity like this … like the one

that activates students to move around. … Like, I have to think

about telling them [students] rules and … umm … things that

they shouldn’t do. … If I have them [students] run, I have to

think again. Maybe, not again! [laughing] But, if it’s fun,

maybe I’ll use it again [laughing]. I like it when students have

fun. … Like in the video, students had fun, didn’t they? But,

they weren’t just in order [laughing]. I know it was chaotic. …

Anyway, since then, I haven’t planned any activities for

students to run like that. So, I think I’ll think about problems if

I plan the activities like that,” said Jane.

No cooperation in group work or pair work

Moreover, student teachers reported that difficulty in implementing lesson

plans was caused by students’ lack of cooperation in group work or pair work.

Student teachers described situations, where some students did not cooperate in group

work because of their unwillingness to study; and an individual student did not work

with a certain person because of personal reasons.

“Students don’t participate in group work. They don’t help.

They don’t do anything. There are only a few in a group or so. I

don’t like this [students not helping in group work] to happen

in my class. … They are just like this in all classes. They don’t

want to study English, I think,” said Boy.

“She [a student] told me she did not have anyone to work with.

I said it was impossible. There were forty in this class. They

must be twenty pairs, then. I found out a student didn’t have a

partner either but she said, ‘It is OK. I can work alone.’ I told

her, ‘In the future you have to work with other people. You

should work with friends. She insisted she would work alone,”

said Kara.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

279

Solutions: Following up on students who lack cooperation in group work or

pair work

The student teachers, then, reported the ways to solve the problem when

students’ lack cooperation in group work or pair work. A student teacher chose to

follow up on the students’ in class right away. This solution was workable; therefore,

the student teacher followed up on students who lacked cooperation in group work

and inflicted punishment on grades.

“I’d walk to the students [who lack cooperation] and tell them

to help friends. … I can see them sitting still. Sometimes, group

members are attentive trying to write answers on the big paper

but they still don’t try to do anything. I can tell they are not

helping. I’ll mark their names and tell them off later. I talk to

them after class time and ask why they don’t help group mates.

I give a warning first. If they did the same thing, I’d deduct

their points or I have them work individually. They have to

complete the work and submit it to me. … It works out OK.

After I warn them, they try to help friends. … I do follow up on

these students. If they are laze and don’t help friends work, I

ask them to work and submit it to me. And I tell them I’ll

deduct their points again. It works all the time,” said Boy.

Solutions: Be flexible in students’ grouping choices

Another way to solve the problem when students’ lack cooperation in group

work or pair work was being flexible in the students’ offering their alternatives in

grouping methods.

“… I found out later that the two girls don’t like each other. I

asked some students and they said the two had a fight on

something. Since then, they didn’t talk or work with one

another. I was like … Why in my class [high-pitched]. … I let

it go because I wanted the lesson to go on. It was only this girl.

She refused to work with other pairs too. She insisted that she

work alone. … For the other girl, I allowed her to work in a

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

280

group of three. … That’s good. They could work as they chose

how to group with friends or to work alone. It’s up to them. As

long as they work, it’s fine by me,” said Kara.

Failure to consider classroom settings

Furthermore, a student teacher reported another cause of difficulty in

implementing a lesson plan was concerned with her failure to consider classroom

settings carefully before planning an activity.

“We were playing a game. … Yeah, it was a focus [practice]

activity. … [laughing]. Students went crazy. They were not

under control, absolutely out of control. The room is small. I

hadn’t thought about it when I planned this activity,” said Jane.

Jane described how the room setting was not appropriate for the activity.

“There were chairs in rows, I think … umm four rows. …

Students standing in rows … umm in groups stood in between

rows of chairs and one more group stood by the board. …

[laughing] I know there was not enough room. … I think the

room isn’t good for the activity. It’s too small. One group had

to squeeze their position along the board. It was disaster

[laughing]. … Well, I hadn’t thought about the problems to

happen. Next time, I’ll think about problems. It’s a part on the

lesson plan called anticipated problems, isn’t it? I have to think

about that for writing next plans,” said Jane.

The following description of an observation of Jane’s class illustrated how the

activity was not appropriate in the classroom setting. Students were divided into four

groups, whose members standing in rows. There was not enough room for all groups

to stand in the same position towards the board, where a member of each group had to

run and touch a word to win a point. The difficulty occurred because of the room

setting. (Notes: There were about 34 students, hence about 8-9 students in a group.

The classroom’s size was about twenty square meters—the standard size.)

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

281

During class observation, Jane gave instructions in English and in Thai, telling

students to participate in a focus or practice activity. Students were standing in rows

of their own groups. When she said the first word, a representative of each group

should stand in front of each row and run to touch a picture of the word uttered by the

student teacher. But, too many members from each group ran to the board. They all

shouted and yelled trying to give directions to group members. Moreover, some of

them nudged at friends and pushed other group members. After a word was

pronounced, students were supposed to go back to their rows and wait for another

word to be uttered. Students kept shouting and dispersing everywhere. The student

teacher kept shouting another word and another word. Each time, flocks of students

from the same group dashed to the board to touch the picture of the word first. To this

point, Jane tried to shout to control them or to tell them a correct instruction again but

no student listened. She, then, carried on shouting a new word. Students continued

shouting, running and fighting to touch the picture first.

The student teacher realized that the difficulty was caused by her failure to

anticipate problems while planning. Therefore, she thought about anticipating

problems in subsequent plans.

Solutions: Considering classroom settings when planning activities

To avoid the difficulty of managing classrooms effectively, Jane said she

should consider the classroom setting in her school carefully when planning activities.

“… Next time, I’ll think about an activity that is suitable for the

classroom. … I mean an easy activity, like students sitting at

their desks and answering the questions. It can still be a game,

like they compete. They like competition. … Yeah, with no

movement [laughing] because it’s hard to control them

[students]. … Since then, I haven’t planned any activities for

students to run like that. So, I think I’ll think about problems if

I plan the activities like that,” said Jane.


concerning class management. They had problems with controlling class and the

causes involved with personality of individual student teachers or lack of anticipated

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

282

problems in lesson plans. The solutions were school supervisors’ assistance and

writing anticipated problems. Next, student teachers experienced no cooperation

among students when doing group work. The solutions were monitoring and

encouraging cooperation, following up on individual students’ behavior after class

time and be flexible by accepting students’ choices of finding group mates. Finally,

student teachers also reported difficulty caused by their failure to consider physical

settings while planning. Some activities were not suitable for such small classroom

full with furniture. The solution was to consider features of classrooms before

designed activities.

In addition to class management, student teachers also revealed that one more

cause of difficulty in implementing lesson plans was concerned with time

management.

2.4 Time management


concerning time management. To be specific, they said the difficulty happened when

there was not sufficient time for each phase of teaching.

Time spent on previous teaching phases exceeding time for next phases

Student teachers reported they had spent more time for implementing the

previous phases than they had planned. One reason included students were so engaged

in activities, that student teachers allowed more time spent than expected. Student

teachers also spent extra time repeating explanation on language points, which

students did not understand. Moreover, students came to class late. As a result, time

for the next phase was not sufficient.

“It’s about time. I don’t have enough time to teach, especially

the last phase. Like, time for the focus [practice] phase is

implemented more than I thought. So, there’s not enough time

for the transfer [production] phase. … It’s because some games

[in the focus or practice phase] take too long. Students enjoyed

playing games so much and I didn’t stop them. Sometimes, I

explain so much in the input phase. It’s like if students don’t

understand, I have to spend more time repeating explanation.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

283

The practice activity is also important. Students have to

practice. Then, there’s no time left for the transfer [production]

activity,” said Mali.

“Yes, the time isn’t enough. There are so many things to cover

from the plan. I can’t implement the whole plan. … That’s

because students don’t understand some questions during the

while-reading phase. So, the time isn’t enough for the post-

reading phase. Plus, students usually come to class late. They

have to change rooms in all periods and they take ages to walk

to the next room,” said Boy.

Solutions: Omitting or changing activities in phases

To solve the problem concerning insufficient time during implementation of

lesson plans, student teachers said that they had to omit or change the activities for the

transfer or production phase or the post [reading or listening] phase. Students had to

do homework for the transfer/production activities or missed the transfer/production

activities. Students also had to do simple tasks for transfer/production activities. The

student teachers revealed that the solutions were implemented every time when there

was a case of time constraints. The main purpose was that the student teachers had to

try to cover all content designated by school.

“I have to find time to teach everything. There’s a lot of content

to teach. When there is not enough time, the transfer activity

has to become homework. Or sometimes I have to consider

omitting it [transfer activity]. … If the transfer activity is

similar to the practice activity, it [transfer activity] will be

omitted. … For example, in a speaking lesson, I taught students

to speak on the topic ‘going shopping.’ They can talk to me. I

asked them questions and the whole class can talk to me. …

Like, they took a role as shop assistants and they answered my

questions. I was a customer. It was like a role-play activity,

wasn’t it? The transfer activity was also role-play. It was

similar to the practice activity. I could omit it [transfer activity].

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

284

… Students have to miss the [transfer/production] activity,”

said Mali.

“… There’s no more time for the post activity. … The activity I

plan takes quite some time to finish. … For example, I planned

to have students work in groups and they have to design or

write things together. They have to present the work too. It

takes longer time. … Well, we have to finish half of the

textbook. Though I teach only reading, there are many passages

on the book to teach. I have to rearrange things to implement

all plans. I have to stop at the while activity. Sometimes, I have

to change the activity from what I plan to using the exercise

from the textbook. It’s like reducing time for the phase. The

exercise in the textbook consists of several questions, like

students write answers for the questions. It [exercise, is simple

for students to do,” said Boy.

Student teachers reported that the difficulty during implementation of lesson

plans was caused by insufficient time for each phase of teaching. The main reason

was that the time spent in previous phases exceeded time for the next phase.

Apart from time management, student teachers also revealed that another

cause of difficulty in implementing lesson plans was concerned with teaching aids.

2.5 Teaching aids

Student teachers revealed that while implementing lesson plans, there was

difficulty regarding teaching aids. They described the following incidents of

difficulty, all of which dealt with technical problems because they used electronic

files as teaching aids.

“At the beginning of the term, the projector didn’t work. I

produced a PowerPoint file and wanted them [students] to see

the list of statements for them to say. … It was a speaking

lesson,” said Fasai.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

285

“Once, there was a blackout. I couldn’t use the PowerPoint file I

planned. If I used the PowerPoint slides, I could show example

sentences or pictures. But, there was no power. … It happened

only a few times, not often. Usually, I use the PowerPoint slides

as the teaching aid,” said April.

Solution: Use non-electronic classroom resources instead

The student teachers said that at the moment of difficulty during

implementation of lesson plans, they had to think about some solutions so that they

could continue with the implementation. One of the solutions was to use non-

electronic classroom resources available at the time being and suitable for the lesson

plan. Consequently, the student teachers learned to be cautious about possible

technical problems and tried to avoid the problems by testing electronic devices

before use. Moreover, they learned to be flexible in using only resources available

when technical problems arose.

“So, I solved the problem by letting students see the textbook.

Luckily, it was a speaking lesson. So, I let them read the

textbook instead and speak after me. I listed words, questions

and answers on the board, like ‘I went to somewhere. I found

something. … I have to use the board instead because that’s all I

have. I didn’t have any big paper at that time. … If I plan to use

the PowerPoint file, I’ll try to check if the projector works or not

before I go to class,” said Fasai.

“I had to use the whiteboard instead. I must only write

[example] sentences on the board. I must explain more too

because when I use pictures [on PowerPoint files], it’s clearer for

students to see. But, without it [PowerPoint file], I have to

explain a lot. … It was inevitable to use only the whiteboard and

students had to listen to me. … I have to be flexible in using

whatever I have at the moment [of technical problems],” said

April.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

286

Solution: Student teachers acting as facilitators in case of technical

problems

Another case was a description from a class observation. A student teacher,

Paul, had difficulty when he turned on the PowerPoint slides on the screen. Some

parts of each slide were not on the screen. Students could not read what Paul

presented.

During class observation, Paul was about to start the input or presentation

phase. He clicked the mouse to show the PowerPoint slides. It showed pictures of two

Thai stars pretending to talk to each other. There were speech bubbles to show what

they were talking about. The light from the projector shone to the screen but some

parts of the slide were not in the frame of the screen. Some parts of the speech

bubbles could not be read. Some students shouted, ‘I can’t read, teacher.”

To solve the problem, Paul facilitated students by reading the sentences

himself, so that the lesson could continue.

“The projector couldn’t be adjusted. I tried to adjust it before the

class started but I didn’t know what to do. The sentences were

easy, though. I had to read them [sentences] to them [students].

They [students] could follow me. … I had to do something fast. I

wanted the class to continue,” said Paul.

Similarly, View also experienced technical problems on teaching aids she had

planned for a listening lesson. View described the difficulty while she was

implementing the plan.

“One time, in a listening class, the audio file worked but the

sound wasn’t audible to students. They kept asking me, ‘What,

teacher?’ I can’t hear anything. The sound was bad, really bad.

I can’t hear it, either. … It [sound] wasn’t clear. There were

cracks. It was because of the speakers. … I didn’t test it [audio

file] before implementing the lesson but I used the speakers

before. They were fine. But, on the day, they were very bad,”

said View.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

287

View, then, revealed how she solved the problems at the scene. She also

facilitated students by acting as a teaching aid herself, so that the class could move on.

“I was thinking fast. What should I do? I had the script with

me. I had to read the script myself. There were two characters. I

said the name of each character first and said the lines, like

‘Tom [blank] Where are you going?’ Things like this. … The

lesson went well. I think the students liked it better when they

listened to me [laughing]. I spoke more slowly and more

clearly,” said View.

Student teachers reported that when they implemented lesson plans, they also

had difficulty regarding teaching aids, which mostly related to technical problems due

to use electrical teaching aids. The problems included electronic devices not working

as planned. To solve the problems, the student teachers used non-electronic classroom

resources, such as the boards or textbooks, instead so that implementation of lesson

plans continued. Moreover, student teachers acted as facilitators when technical

problems happened. For example, they read sentences or scripts, which were

supposed to be delivered via electronic devices.

To sum up, for implementation, student teachers revealed two consequences:

implementation as planned and implementation with difficulty. First, student teachers

described the lesson plans implemented as planned as success, for which they thought

about its causes. As for difficulty, student teachers thought about causes and

solutions, which might be used to minimize the difficulty during implementation.

According to the results from the second research question “How do the

student teachers implement the lesson plans?” student teachers revealed that before

implementing a lesson plan, they reviewed the plan in order to know procedures of

activities, hence presenting teaching professionalism to students. Moreover, during

implementation of lesson plans, student teachers found that the plans could be

implemented as planned and with difficulty. They thought about causes and solutions.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

288

4.3 Research question 3 What action do the student teachers take after

implementing the lesson plans?

Research question 3 What action do the student teachers take after

implementing the lesson plans?

As for the third research question “What action do the student teachers take

after implementing the lesson plans?” there was a sub question: How do the student

teachers evaluate their lesson plans? The aim was to figure out more data about

implementation of lesson plans and actions after implementation. There was only one

sub question: How do the student teachers evaluate their lesson plans?

4.3.1 Sub question 3.1 How do the student teachers evaluate their lesson

plans?

According to the interviews, student teachers revealed they reflected upon

implementation of lesson plans. Their reflective statements were sorted into three

topics: modes of reflection, sharing of reflection and content of reflection.

1. Modes of reflection

After implementing lesson plans, student teachers reflected upon the

implementation through two modes of reflection. Some of them only thought about

the implementation before using what they thought to improve subsequent plans. The

other thought about the implementation and made notes onto lesson plans to comply

with a formal procedure in lesson planning. (Notes: In their teacher education

program, student teachers were taught to record after-teaching notes on the last page

of the lesson plan template to reflect upon implementation of lesson plans.)

The ways student teachers thought and wrote about the implementation were

called modes of reflection. According to the results, there were two modes of

reflection: reflecting in heads and writing out reflection.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

289

1.1 Reflecting in heads

Student teachers said that after implementation of a lesson plan, they thought

about what had happened in classrooms. They only thought about it without writing

the thought down. That referred to student teachers’ reflecting upon the

implementation in heads.

According to the results from the interview, student teachers said that they did

not write any notes on lesson plans. Instead, when they wrote subsequent lesson plans,

they were also thinking about what had happened during previous implementation.

Student teachers said the main reason for not writing after-teaching notes was time

constraints.

“I … umm … don’t do anything … umm … like writing after-

teaching notes? … umm … I … umm … don’t do anything

[laughing]. I don’t have enough time [laughing] but I think

about bad things that happened. … I remember this [difficulty

in implementation] and I’m thinking about this. I must be

careful next time,” said Tharee.

“… I don’t write any after-teaching notes. I just remember

what I want to improve for next plans,” Fasai.

“I know I have to write after-teaching notes, problems or so on

but I don’t have time. When I go home, I’m so tired. I know

what I should revisit. When I write the next plan, I think about

it. In next plans, I remember the points to improve the next

plans, like pictures should be better or VDOs should be better,”

said Andy.

“To be honest, I don’t do anything. After I implement a lesson

plan, I keep it on my profile. … I think about what worked or

what didn’t work. When I write next plans, I think about that,”

said View.

“After implementing a lesson plan, I just leave it right there

[laughing]. But after I teach the first class, I think about

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

290

workable things. I just think about them but I don’t make

adjustments. I think about what I should do next or think about

what I should adjust for next classes. I don’t write any notes,”

said August.

“I don’t do anything. I just keep it. … I adjust something when

I have feedback but I don’t write notes,” said Polita.

“I make changes on implemented lesson plans sometimes. I

change the plans for next implementation. Like, I change

questions for the pre-reading phase—the questions that didn’t

work. … Like, I asked ‘What is it [reading passage] about?’

Students didn’t answer. I don’t write this down. I just asked the

new question, like “What does he do? He is an Oscar winner.

Do you know him? Johny Depp,” said Gasoline.

“[After implementing a lesson plan] I don’t do anything but I

remember what students liked or were confused with. They

didn’t understand. Some activities were workable. They liked

the activities that allowed them to show off their personality or

the activities about stars, especially Korean stars. When I use

pictures of Korean stars, they scream with joy. They don’t like

the activities that involve speaking. They prefer listening. And

they don’t like to work in big groups but in small groups,” said

Kara.

“After implementing lesson plans, I sometimes make

adjustments. But, … umm … I don’t rewrite the plans. I think

about it [adjustment] and do it in class. … For example, I …

umm … planned to have students play a game but I didn’t write

the new game. I just thought about it. … [laughing] I had

planned to have students play a tornado game but it took a long

time. So, I thought about changing the game to running and

touching the answers, instead,” said Mali.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

291

In addition to reflection in heads, student teachers also revealed the other

mode of reflection. They also wrote out reflection upon what they thought about

implementation of previous plans.

1.2 Writing out reflection

Student teachers said that after implementing lesson plans, they wrote out

reflection by recording after-teaching notes, a part on the lesson plan template

introduced in the teacher education program. The notes were usually brief. However,

some student teachers did not write after-teaching notes regularly. The notes were

used to remind themselves of success or difficulty found during implementation of

lesson plans. As a result, they could improve subsequent lesson plans.

“For the after-teaching notes part, I write the notes sometimes. I

write something short. The same problems are repeated, like

students couldn’t read words. … umm … That’s what we have

to do, isn’t it? I just write the notes. … I mean when I found a

problem, a big one, I wrote it. … Like, umm … things that

didn’t work and things like that,” said April.

“I usually look at the plan one more time to see if there should

be any correction or adjustment … before I teach the next class.

… Yes, the same plan for next classes. That’s because I

implement a lesson plan for three different classes. … I write

after-teaching notes. Yes. … Not on every plan but sometimes

when I want to improve something. … Like, when I saw

students fought to play a game, I thought it wasn’t good. I

wouldn’t use games with competition anymore,” said Chanom.

“I think about making plans better. I want students to enjoy

learning English. … I write after-teaching notes sometimes. …

Like, I shouldn’t use this and that. … umm … For example, I

wrote: Students didn’t understand the reading,” said Helen.

“After implementation? … umm … If you ask about after-

teaching notes, I write something. Actually, I write something

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

292

for myself, but not in details. I think about what to change and

make changes right away. But for the [after-teaching] notes, I

write sometime, like the plan was success today. Students liked

the activity or things like this,” said Boy.

“After implementation, I write after-teaching notes but I don’t

write them every time. I think about what to change. After I

implement a plan, I know this is workable and I’ll use it again

on next plans. But, if it didn’t work, I’d think about it. …

Maybe, I’ll use that technique again. … I write notes after I

finish teaching class to remind myself,” said Anna.

Apart from modes of reflection (e.g. reflecting upon implementation in heads

or by writing it out), student teachers also revealed how they shared their reflection.

Details are shown below.

2. Sharing of reflection

According to the results, student teachers revealed that they also shared their

reflection occasionally. They shared reflection with classmates and also in seminars.

Some student teachers also reported that they did not really share reflection to anyone.

For the topic sharing reflection, there were three sub topics: sharing reflection with

classmates, sharing reflection in seminars and not sharing reflection.

2.1 Sharing reflection with classmates

Student teachers said that they reflected upon implementation of lesson plans

and then shared their reflection with classmates via face-to-face communication and

social networking. They shared success of implementation plans so that other

classmates could have ideas for planning. Student teachers reported that they shared

what they implemented successfully because they tried it before and proved that it

was effective.

Student teachers talked about that they shared successful activities to their

classmates.

“Yeah, I talked about the VDO clip activity to Andy [Boy’s

classmate]. I used the VDO clip about the capital of Iceland.

Students were interested. It was successful, so I talked about it

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

293

with Andy. … We usually talk to each other about which

activity works. When I have some fun activities and students

like them [activities], I talk about them to Andy. … Well, the

plan is successful, so we want to let our friends know. We can

use the idea to write our next plans,” said Boy.

“We chat on the Line group account every day. We talk about

what to teach, like activities to teach. … I tell them ideas about

planning, like games or speaking activities. … The A and B

students talking activity [two-way communication activity],

like I told you. … I told my classmates it [the activity] worked

well for me, so they could try it,” said Anna.

“I share many activities to my friends on our Line group

account. We talk about no ideas to plan lessons. I have some

ideas, so I tell them. … I used the activities before and they

were successful, so I tell my friends. … I tell them many

activities, like words on ice-cream sticks, describing pictures on

magazines. They never tell me if the activities were OK for

them [classmates] [laughing] but for me they [activities] work

well,” said Chanom.

In addition to sharing reflection with classmates, student teachers also said that

they shared reflection in seminars after they reflected upon their implementation of

lesson plans.

2.2 Sharing reflection in seminars

Student teachers said that they reflected upon implementation of lesson plans

and then shared their reflection in practicum seminars, in which student teachers and

university supervisors participated. (Notes: Practicum seminars referred to the

seminars organized by the Faculty of Education twice a term. Student teachers of all

majors were required to attend the seminar, which was divided into sessions for each

major. University supervisors also attended the seminars as well in order to listen to

students’ practicum and provided advice.)

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

294

“Our university supervisors told us to share our experience in

implementing plans with friends. So, we talk about it

[experience],” said Katy, Kara and April.

“Yes, I shared with my classmates in the seminar about the

problematic students. I talked about the parcel game and calling

on them to participate in the game,” said Katy.

“I shared with my friends in the seminar too. We all did

because our university supervisors told us to take turns to share

our experience. … I told them about students’ problems

[laughing]. Some girls were chatting all the time. I told them

what I did. … I talked to them nicely, like ‘Have you finished

talking? Work, please.’ They were OK. Things like this,” said

Kara.

“In the seminar, I talked about activities that worked, like the

Four to Four Family game. They [classmates] loved it. Some of

them used it in their lesson plans too. … umm … I didn’t ask if

it worked for them. But, I think it should. Students know this

game. It’s fun,” said April.

Some student teachers also talked about gaining ideas for planning from the

seminar. They also described success and problems when using the ideas to plan and

implementing the ideas.

“I heard my friend talk about her problematic students in the

seminar and I got the idea. I sort of use the tactic in class too.

… She talked about giving them work to do. So, I ask them to

help me post big paper on the board. … They are OK … for a

while [laughing] and they are talkative again,” said August.

“I had planned to have students play a tornado game but it

took a long time. So, I thought about changing the game to

running and touching the answers, instead. … I got it [the

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

295

tornado game] from my friends. … I’m not sure. We talked

about interesting games and so. Maybe, I got it from the

seminar. Many friends shared ideas about workable games

and activities in the seminar,” said Mali.

In addition to sharing reflection with classmates and in seminars, some student

teachers did not share anything.

2.3 Not sharing reflection

A few student teachers said that they did not share reflection with classmates

due to lack of ideas to share with. According to their interviews, the student teachers

reported that they were not confident to share any ideas to classmates.

“I don’t really talk with classmates on the Line group account. I

… err … don’t have time. I can access the account, though. I

read their messages. … I don’t know. It’s just I don’t really use

it [Line account]. … I have to search for ideas myself, so …

umm … I … umm … don’t really talk to friends about ideas to

plan,” said Gasoline.

“I usually gain ideas from friends. I have no ideas to plan

[laughing]. … I don’t really … umm … I don’t know. You

mean sharing ideas of planning to friends. … umm … I don’t

know. I don’t remember what I shared [laughing],” said Fasai.

Apart from the two main topics of reflection (e.g. modes of reflection and

sharing of reflection, the final topic was content reflection, which illustrated what

students reflected upon after they implemented lesson plans.

3. Content of reflection

According to the results from the second research question “How do the

student teachers implement the lesson plans?” student teachers talked about how

successful or difficult implementation of lesson plans were. The results from the

interviews revealed that when student teachers talked about success or difficulty, they

reflected upon components in lesson plans in steps of reflection. There were two sub

topics: reflection on success and reflection on difficulty.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

296

3.1 Reflection on success

According to the interviews, student teachers said after implemented lesson

plans, they thought how successful a lesson plan was. To be specific, they talked

about what components in each lesson plan brought about success. The results

reported that when student teachers reflected on success, they talked about success

factors (the component on a lesson plan that became workable); causes for the success

(the contributions to success); and evaluation the cause (the way student teachers used

the successful component in another lesson plan).

Use of teach aids leading to success

Student teachers reflected that they implemented lesson plans using teaching

aids. When they found using such teaching aids successful, they continued using the

teaching aids in subsequent plans.

For example, a student teacher used the same technique in producing the

PowerPoint slides after he found it was successfully implemented.

“Some lesson plans were implemented well. I’d use them as

examples for the next plans. For example, I adjust the

PowerPoint slides, changing colors or themes, but the

procedures are still the same. … I saw students were sleepy and

I thought this [changing colors or themes] might help. The

result was good. They looked interested. I used GIF files. They

like to see moving pictures. They laugh so hard. … So, I use

this when I produce the PowerPoint slides,” said Boy.

Nicky recalled implementation of a technique of using a kind of visual aid

successfully. She also described a success factor, a cause of success and an evaluation

of the cause.

“I planned to use VDO clips and prepared worksheets for

students to do during listening. They liked to learn. They

showed energy to attend the activity. … I think it was because

the VDO clips too. The clips were interesting. It’s not like

opening the textbook, learning grammar points and doing

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

297

exercises. This is boring. … Well, I use VDO clips in many

lesson plans. Students like to watch them. … Yeah, I see it

[using VDO clips] is successful, so I plan to use it in many

plans,” said Nicky.

Fun activities contributing to success

The following student teachers said that implementation of plans with success

resulted from fun activities, like games, and use of videos. Therefore, they tried to

plan subsequent lessons full of games and the teaching aids, which most students

enjoyed learning English and liked to participate.

“I implemented fun activities before and students liked to join

the games very much. … Well, they [students] looked energetic

… They were alert. They were eager to answer questions. …

So, I plan to use fun activities like this. Like, they [students]

like to watch VDOs and answer questions. They like the quiz

show game or competitions. I plan fun activities, like lots of

movements and so on. I like to see students have fun. They are

happy to learn English with me,” said Mali.

Boy also talked in general about a success factor and a cause, which was

concerned with activities. After he evaluated the activities, he, then, planned to use

the cause in many plans in hope that students would be happy in learning English.

“I plan to have fun activities in nearly all lessons. … I don’t

want students to feel stressful while learning English with me.

If the activity was fun, they’d enjoy; they’d want to participate

in; and they’d want to cooperate helping one another. I want

students to be happy. … They are kids. They like to have fun. If

I can make lessons fun, they’d want to study English. In my

lesson, I’d like to plan to have fun and knowledge too. They

can work together and talk to one another in English. … Well, I

think it [using fun activities] is successful, so I plan fun

activities in lessons,” said Boy.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

298

April also recalled success from implementing a fun activity, relating to

students’ background knowledge. She found that background knowledge was a

success factor of implementing an activity; therefore, she put background knowledge

in subsequent plans.

“I try to think about questions that relate to students’

background. Like, I list questions to ask them about Pokemon

Go. … The reading passage was about leisure activities.

Anyway, there was a reading passage about using crickets as

topping on ice-cream. It was really strange and interesting too.

So, on the plan, I had them play the Four to Four Family game.

I gave them [students] choices: strawberry, whipped cream, etc.

… Then, I let them choose. One of the choices was crickets, of

course, but no one chose it [crickets as a choice] for sure. It’s

too weird. But, when I showed the key, they all were surprised.

It was surprisingly strange. They were interested and wanted to

find out about the story. … I gave other choices too, like

sprinkles, almonds, all of which had points according to a

survey on a website. … umm … The crickets had some points.

They [crickets] didn’t have the most points. … Well, I think it’s

good to find something relating to students’ background

knowledge. I try to plan and try to find ways to give them

background before reading,” said April.

Moreover, Anna also talked about a success factor, its causes and evaluation

of the cause concerning fun activities.

“In a lesson, I planned to have a pair of students talk about two

similar rooms and identify differences. It was really fun. They

tried to give clues. One [student] had the picture A, the other

having the picture B. Like, there is a picture frame on the wall.

If there was a picture frame in a picture but wasn’t in the

other—they were different, it’d be interesting. They could talk

to try to find differences and circle them. I think it wasn’t

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

299

boring. The students asked questions and circled the differences

until they couldn’t find another one. I think it’s better than

students sit and ask like ‘What’s on the floor?’ We all know the

mat is on the floor. What’s the point of asking? But, this

activity was really good. They could really communicate. They

used English for a purpose. … I use this activity in other plans

too when I plan speaking lessons. They can speak with friends.

It’s real communicative,” said Anna.

Apart from reflection on success, student teachers also reflected upon

implementation of plans with difficulty. Details are shown below.

3.2 Reflection on difficulty

After implementing lesson plans with difficulty, student teachers reflected on

the problems by using the following steps: identifying problems, specifying causes,

seeking solutions and evaluating solutions. After evaluating solutions, they could

design subsequent lessons using the solutions to avoid difficulty. The interview

descriptions below show student teachers’ reflection on difficulty.

After implementing a lesson plan, student teachers thought there should have

been adjustments on teaching aids. For example, Chanom added more slides for

students’ better understanding.

“One time I added one or two PowerPoint slides to the plan,

like seeing a doctor and a question ‘What’s wrong with you?’

… I had a previous slide with a question ‘What’s the matter?’

… It was a conversation. I wanted them to understand more

clearly. … That’s because when I revisited the plan, I was

thinking by myself there should’ve been more. … Maybe, I

think it could’ve been clearer for students to understand. …

After that, it was OK. I used the plan again and students were

OK. … When I plan, I add more examples. … Like, more

sentences or more ways to ask the same question,” said

Chanom.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

300

Kara also reported that she improved her lesson plan by adding necessary

information on the PowerPoint slides, such as Thai translations. She learned this from

her past experience. The purpose was that students could learn without asking the

meaning of words, especially key words that were difficult to them.

“I was thinking key words should be translated into Thai. Like,

I wrote ‘giving advice’ in Thai on all slides. Students couldn’t

remember its meaning. They only remembered a friend getting

sick but they couldn’t say the topic was ‘giving advice.’ … I

got this from my past experience. Students kept asking the

meaning of words while I was teaching. … At that time, they

wanted to know what topic they were studying. They didn’t

know what to say. So, I thought I should’ve written the

meaning somewhere. … It helped. They didn’t ask me anything

because they could read Thai translations. … I only do this

[showing Thai translation] for difficulty words that I’m sure

they don’t know,” said Kara.

Student teachers said that additional explanation and teaching could be added

so that rules or content for teaching particular language components were complete.

Fasai said that her lesson plan contained too few example sentences for the

input phase and that led to difficulty when she implemented the plan. After thinking

about the cause, she added more examples and the results were satisfying.

“There were too few examples of sentences presented as input.

I must add more examples of how to speak later [in practice

phase]. … I was teaching … umm … prepositions, like

between, next to, near to describe a map. … They couldn’t

speak sentences correctly. They didn’t remember the meanings

of the preposition. … So, I put more sample sentences. … Yes,

I added on the PowerPoint slides and wrote on the lesson plan

too. … I gave one sentence for each preposition. Before that, I

had about 3 – 5 sentences. … It was OK. They [students] could

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

301

describe the map better. They could see the examples,” said

Fasai.

Similarly, Paul found difficulty during implementation of a lesson plan when

he did not show examples of a task and students had no ideas of the student teacher’s

expectation.

“I wrote there should be examples [on notes]. I didn’t have any

example for the first class. Students asked, ‘What should we

do?’ I realized at the moment, ‘Why didn’t I show examples?’ I

had to explain in Thai at the scene. Then, for the class after, I

added examples on the PowerPoint slide. They could do the

task so well. They helped each other to write sentences on a

piece of paper and submit it to me,” said Paul.

Paul also explained after he added examples, students could complete tasks

easily.

“A group had four pictures, like a gas station, a school, a park

and the like. … umm … So, they had to help each other to

write sentences. … There were seven or eight in each group, so

two students were to write a sentence for a picture. They could

finish the task on time. … When they saw the example

sentences, it [the task] became easy,” said Paul.

Avoiding activities causing difficulty

After reflection upon implementation of lesson plans, student teachers avoided

using the activities which were not workable in subsequent plans. A student teacher

reported that he avoided planning activities that required competition among students

after he implemented a plan and found it caused difficulty.

“I saw my students pushed, pulled or nudged one another when

they played a game. So, I don’t plan competitive activities

anymore. I’d rather design activities that they help in a team. …

I took notes on the mistake like this for my next plans,” said

Chanom.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

302

When asked to give some examples, Chanom said instead of rushing to write

words or sentences on the board like the previous activity, he planned to have students

help one another write mind maps or sentences on big paper.

“… I have them write mind maps, sentences or a paragraph on

a big sheet of paper. Some can write. Some can draw pictures.

They [students] help each other. It’s better than the previous

activity. Students rushed running to the board and fought to

write sentences first. It was chaotic,” said Chanom.

Nicky was also a student teacher who revisited the lesson plan implemented

and found difficulty concerning students’ inability to speak English. She, then,

thought about its cause and found a solution, which was having students speak at the

sentential level. After she found the solution helpful to the problem, she used it in

subsequent plans.

“Students didn’t speak English in a speaking lesson plan. … I

had students speak a sentence and write the sentence. … They

[students] were better. So, I change the plan to focus on

writing. I plan to teach only at a sentential level. ... umm … If

we force them too much, they couldn’t learn well. I’d better

reduce the level of difficulty and as a result, they learn better.

It’s better than giving them [students] too much but nothing

learned. I, like, … umm … feel OK. This is what they can do.

It’s OK,” said Nicky.

Tharee recalled a difficulty during implementation of a lesson plan, gave

reasons for it and found a solution. She described an activity that caused some

students to humiliate others by calling names. After that, she found a solution that was

giving strict rules before the activity started.

“For example, one time I asked students to draw a picture of a

classmate and write a short description. Then, they had to guess

who this was. They called friends names! They used rude

words. One description was ‘She is a liar.’ I felt uneasy. I

remember this and think I must be careful next time. … I

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

303

hadn’t thought about the problem. The students are like this.

Some of them don’t behave. How could you call friends

names? No good! … … In the class after, I told students the

rules: they must not use rude words. I asked them to write

about good things of their friends. The lesson was better. …

Well, they wrote ‘She is happy’ or ‘She is tall.’ It became better

than the previous class,” said Tharee.

To sum up, after implementing lesson plans, student teachers reflected upon

the lesson plans by two modes of reflection: reflecting in heads or writing out

reflection. They also shared reflection with classmates or in seminars. As for content

of reflection, they talked about problems and success of implementing lesson plans.

The fourth chapter shows the results of the study, which answered to the

research questions. The results revealed the factors that influenced student teachers’

lesson planning. Before planning, personnel, including school supervisor, university

supervisors and student teachers, and institutions, including schools and the Faculty of

Education, had influences on student teachers’ lesson planning by giving information.

School supervisors and university supervisors were also involved in the processes of

planning lessons and implementing lesson plans by giving feedback on lesson plans

and the implementations. Student teachers responded differently to the feedback. The

results also revealed different planning procedures used by student teachers. The

student teachers also revealed they implemented plans with success and difficulty.

They, eventually, reflected upon the implementation. Based on the results from this

chapter, a theory of Thai EFL student teachers’ lesson planning was generated.

Details of the theory are presented in the fifth chapter.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

CHAPTER 5

THEORY OF LESSON PLANNING PROCESSES

The purpose of this study was to generate a theory to explain Thai EFL student

teachers’ lesson planning based on the grounded theory research method. In the fourth

chapter, the results, collected by means of interviews and observations, were

presented with detailed descriptions with quotes from the participants—student

teachers majoring in Teaching English. The results were in the order of the research

questions as shown below.

1. How do Thai EFL student teachers design their lesson plans?

1.1 What factors influence the student teachers’ lesson planning?

1.2 What is the procedure in the student teachers’ lesson planning?

2. How do the student teachers implement lesson plans?

2.1 What do the student teachers do before implementing the lesson

plan?

2.2 Is the lesson plan implemented as planned? Why/Why not?

3. What action do the student teachers take after implementing the lesson

plan?

3.1 How do the student teachers evaluate the lesson plan?

The fifth chapter presents the theory of Thai EFL student teachers’ lesson

planning processes based on the results in the fourth chapter. The presentations are

illustrated in diagrams followed by descriptions to explain the diagrams. The

descriptions for were also discussed to obtain confirmability of the study. The

following are the topics of this chapter: Thai EFL student teachers’ lesson planning

processes, pre-planning stage, planning stage, implementing stage and

reflection/evaluating stage.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

305

5.1 An overview: Thai EFL student teachers’ lesson planning processes

According to the purpose of this study, a theory to explain Thai EFL student

teachers’ lesson planning processes was generated (see Figure 5.1) from the data

collected by means of the interview, the observation and reading documents (lesson

plans).

Figure 5.1: An overview: Thai EFL student teachers’ lesson planning processes

Figure 5.1 shows an overview of a theory of Thai EFL student teachers’ lesson

planning processes. The diagram specifies a cyclical process, in which there were five

stages. The first stage was the pre-planning stage. To design lesson plans, student

teachers gained information from various sources. The second stage was the planning

stage. Student teachers designed lesson plans, which consisted of components in a

lesson plan, such as objectives, activities, time management, class management,

teaching aids and assessment. In the process, student teachers also reconsidered the

components and rewrote them to improve the plan. The third phase was the

implementing stage. Student teachers implemented the lesson plans, which were

undergone the process of rewriting, in actual classrooms at schools, where they

practiced teaching. The fourth phase was the reflecting/evaluating stage. Student

Collaborating Conforming Confronting

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

306

teachers reflected upon the implementation of lesson plans. There might be success or

difficulty during the implementation and student teachers thought about the situation

of the implementation in classrooms. The final phase was the planning subsequent

plan stage. Student teachers used their reflection and evaluation on the

implementation of lesson plans as sources for designing subsequent lesson plans,

which fell under the next cycle of the processes.

In the middle of the diagram, there are three actions of personnel in the lesson

planning process. First, student teachers collaborated with school supervisors and

university supervisors on following practices of each supervisor’s supervision style.

Student teachers collaborated with their classmates on sharing ideas for planning.

There was also collaboration between school supervisors and university supervisors

but the level of collaboration varied. Second, student teachers conformed to rules

imposed by the institutions involving in the lesson planning process, such as schools,

where they practiced teaching, and the Faculty of Education, where they took the

teacher education course. Finally, student teachers confronted with difficulties in

procedures of lesson planning. They had to think about solutions so that lesson

planning could carry on.

Above is an overview of this study’s theory of Thai EFL student teachers’

lesson planning processes, where there were five phases: pre-planning, planning,

implementing, reflecting/evaluating and planning subsequent plans. Next, each phase

will be presented.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

307

5.2 Pre-planning stage

From the results, the first phase of this study’s theory of Thai EFL student

teachers’ lesson planning was the pre-planning stage (see Figure 5.2).

Figure 5.2: Pre-planning stage

Figure 5.2 illustrates the pre-planning stage, where personnel and institutions

had an influence on student teachers’ lesson planning. Personnel included school

supervisors, university supervisors and student teachers. Institutions included schools

and the Faculty of Education. Both personnel and institutions gave information, about

which student teachers thought. Student teachers made decisions on the sources.

When the information resulted in benefits to student teachers, it was labeled the

opportunity. On the other hand, when the information impeded lesson planning, it was

labeled the challenge.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

308

Above is the diagram of the pre-planning stage, where personnel and

institutions had an influence on student teachers’ lesson planning. The next section is

devoted to details of such influence of the personnel and the institutions.

5.2.1 Personnel. The influence of personnel on student teachers’ lesson

planning is presented and discussed first. There are three groups of personnel found

from the data: school supervisors, university supervisors and student teachers.

5.2.1.1 School supervisors. The first group of personnel that had an

influence on student teachers’ lesson planning in the pre-planning stage was school

supervisors (see Figure 5.3).

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

309



Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

310

Figure 5.3 illustrates an influence of school supervisors on student teachers’

lesson planning when giving information before planning. Student teachers had steps

of using information gained from school supervisors before designing lesson plans.

The information was regarded as opportunities (supporting lesson planning) and

constraints (impeding lesson planning). The information was concerned with

textbooks; curriculum; students; and facilities, technology and resources.

First, student teachers gained information about textbooks from school

supervisors. They told the student teachers about amount of content for the long-range

plan and daily plans. The information was necessary to start designing lesson plans as

the student teachers had not had any prior information before. Student teachers, then,

designed lesson plans according to the information. However, some students adjusted

content of a unit due to time constraints. This resulted from no planned schedule of

school. The student teachers had to reduce the number of plans for a unit. (Notes: No

planned schedule was one of schools’ influences on student teachers’ lesson planning.

Details are illustrated in the topic ‘Influence of institution, including school, on

student teachers’ planning.)

Second, student teachers gained information about curriculum from school

supervisors. Student teachers used the information because it was congruent with their

knowledge. Student teachers used the core curriculum to formulate objectives and

indicators. As for constraints concerning curriculum, student teachers were not

provided with any school curriculum, nor did they have information about the

vocational curriculum. They never learned about the vocational curriculum from the

teacher education program. However, it was necessary for student teachers to write

objectives and indicators on lesson plans. Their school supervisors also encouraged

them to use the core curriculum or textbooks as sources to write objectives or

indicators. The student teachers found another problem. The textbooks did not

provide objectives in general. In the end, student teachers had to design lesson plans

with difficulty.

Third, student teachers gained information about students from school

supervisors. The information included planning activities appropriate to students’ in

different levels of proficiency, slow pace of instruction or preparation of additional

content to meet student needs. The information was congruent with student teachers’

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

311

knowledge of assisting student learning by designing appropriate activities. Therefore,

they designed lesson plans, according to the information.

Finally, student teachers gained information about facilities, technology and

resources from school supervisors. The information about availability of facilities,

technology and resources was considered as congruent with student teachers’

knowledge of assisting student learning by using teaching aids. Therefore, student

teachers decided to make use of the availability on lesson plans. This facilitated

student teachers in using visual aids or electronic aids, adding more worksheets and

managing time effectively. Moreover, some student teachers received information

about strict rules of using paper. Although the information facilitated their planning to

use paper as teaching aids, they had to plan to use paper beforehand.

As for constraints, school supervisors informed student teachers of

unavailability of facilities, technology and resources and electronic devices that were

not in a good condition. Due to their knowledge, teaching aids were necessary to

assist student learning. Student teachers tried to think about solutions by using

alternative teaching aids, such as non-electronic aids or paper-based aids, or changing

rooms so that they could use electronic teaching aids with computers and visualizers

that were still working well. Some student teachers had back-up plans. They used

their own laptop computer, printed out hard copies of the PowerPoint slides or

prepared markers for writing on the whiteboard.

Furthermore, a student teacher did not receive information from a school

supervisor. With necessity to start writing lesson plans, the student teacher had to

think about solutions. She, then, sought information from other sources, including

classmates and other school supervisors.

Above are the diagram and description of an influence of school supervisors

on student teachers’ lesson planning. School supervisors gave information for student

teachers to design lesson plans during the pre-planning stage. Next is the diagram (see

Figure 5.4) and description of an influence of school supervisors on student teachers’

lesson planning when the university supervisors gave information to student teachers

during the pre-planning stage.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

312

5.2.1.2 University supervisors. During the pre-planning stage, one

more group of personnel that had an influence on student teachers’ lesson planning

was university supervisors. They gave information concerning a rule and a practice

for student teachers to comply with. Details are illustrated in the following diagram

(see Figure 5.4 on the next page).

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

313

Figure 5.4: Influence of university supervisors on student teachers’ lesson planning

by giving information before planning

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

314

Figure 5.4 illustrates an influence of university supervisors on student

teachers’ lesson planning by giving information before planning. The information was

viewed as both opportunities and constrains for lesson planning. University

supervisors gave information about the following components: teaching English;

English language; and rule and practice.

First, university supervisors provided information about teaching English,

including concepts of and techniques in teaching English. This was regarded as

opportunities for student teachers to think about necessity for designing lesson plans,

practicality of the concepts and techniques and benefits for student learning. The

student teacher, therefore, designed lesson plans according to the concept of the four

phases of teaching English and used the concepts and techniques in lesson plans.

As for constraints, student teachers reported that they tried using teaching

techniques, such as SQR3 or a discussion panel, gained from university supervisors

but they experienced impracticality of the techniques used in actual classrooms. Then,

they thought about solutions which were adjusted to suit students’ classroom

behavior: to omit some steps of SQR3 or to have students express opinions towards

reading texts instead.

Second, university supervisors provided information about English language

skills, which student teachers used in lesson planning. Student teachers gained the

information from the following courses: Advanced Speaking, English Drama, Critical

Reading and Poetry. Student teachers thought about facilitation of English skills in

planning lessons and implementing plans. For example, a student teacher gained

speaking skills from the speaking and drama courses and used them when delivering

speech of instruction while implementing lesson plans. Student teachers also gained

reading skills from the reading courses and used the skills to conceptualize content of

reading texts. As a result, student teachers applied English language skills while

planning or implementing plans.

Finally, university supervisors provided information about a rule and a

practice, including submission of lesson plans and change in plan formats. Student

teachers thought that lesson planning was compulsory and it was university

supervisors’ expectations; therefore, they had to write and submitted lesson plans

according to the timing and frequency of submitting plans as designated by university

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

315

supervisors. They must have self-discipline to fulfill the commitment and to meet the

expectations. Moreover, a university supervisor also gave information about change in

plan formats. There were two changed formats: 1) using the Presentation-Practice-

Product procedure (PPP) and omitting several components; and 2) using PPP and

writing detailed dialogues between the teacher and students. The student teachers

using the first format thought that the change was beneficial for them because they

could save paper and time while a student teacher using the second format thought

that detailed dialogues enabled her to remember what to say during implementation of

lesson plans. Therefore, they wrote lesson plans following the changed formats.

However, the second format could yield constraints. The student teacher found it

difficult to write dialogues and other components in details on lesson plans. She

experienced the detailed format being time-consuming. Still, she had to continue

writing the detailed plans because it was her university supervisor’s expectation.

Moreover, some university supervisors did not provide any information to

student teachers. They did not meet with student teachers, nor did they check lesson

plans regularly. Student teachers gained information about the supervision style from

senior graduates and experienced it themselves. However, they still had to write and

submit lesson plans to the university supervisors because they realized that writing

planning was the requirement student teachers had to meet.

Above are the diagram and description of an influence of university

supervisors on student teachers’ lesson planning. University supervisors gave

information for student teachers to design lesson plans during the pre-planning stage.

Next is another group of personnel that had an influence on student teachers’ lesson

planning during the pre-planning stage. The group of personnel was student teachers.

5.2.1.3 Student teachers. Student teachers also had an influence on

lesson planning. Three groups of student teachers were divided for members of each

group were different persons and the information they provided was both different

and similar: student teachers, student teachers’ classmates and student teachers’ senior

graduates.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

316

(1) Student teachers. The first group of student teachers

included the student teachers themselves. They had an influence on their own lesson

planning during the pre-planning stage. Please see Figure 5.5 for details.

Figure 5.5: Influence of student teachers on their own lesson planning before

planning

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

317

Figure 5.5 illustrates an influence of student teachers on their own student

teachers’ lesson planning before planning. The influence was concerned with student

teachers’ knowledge of teaching English, student teachers’ knowledge of English

language, student teachers’ personality and student teacher’s motivation.

The first component was student teachers’ knowledge of teaching English,

which was viewed as both opportunities and constraint. As for opportunities, student

teachers were certain about using knowledge to plan. They planned activities that

were effective and various and used the concepts from the teacher education courses

as guidelines to plan activities that helped students learn English. The concepts

included designing activities that students are familiar with, providing students with

opportunities to produce language in classrooms and to communicate beyond

classrooms, designing lesson plans based on concepts of teaching English. As a result,

student teachers designed lesson plans based on concepts of teaching English.

As for constraints, student teachers were uncertain about using knowledge to

plan. They lacked confidence in using concepts or techniques in designing lesson

plans. For example, they were unsure whether the activity they planed would enable

students to communicate in English or not. Student teachers did not do anything with

their uncertainty. They did not go back to review what they had learned in the teacher

education program, check knowledge of teaching English or ask their university

supervisors because they thought it was unnecessary. In other words, if students had

fun, the lesson plan was eligible. As a result, they designed lesson plans based on their

own knowledge.

The second component was student teachers’ knowledge of English language.

Student teachers considered the component only as opportunities. Student teachers

wrote ungrammatical sentences on lesson plans. They felt discouraged at a minimum

degree when university supervisors marked their ungrammatical mistakes. However,

student teachers tried to be more careful and to self-edit their own language on lesson

plans. As a result, student teachers wrote lesson plans and some grammatical mistakes

were still detected by university supervisors. This was an opportunity for them to

improve their lesson planning.

The third component was student teachers’ personality. As for opportunities,

student teachers were aware of personality that enhanced lesson planning such as

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

318

being flexible or loving to explore new things. Student teachers planned many kinds

of activities to see if they worked, accepted unexpected outcomes of implementing

lesson plans, searched for more effective activities or techniques to help students

learn. Therefore, student teachers designed plans with effective and various activities

to help students learn English.

As for constraints, student teachers were aware of personality that impeded

lesson planning such as not being funny, being soft-spoken or being lenient. Student

teachers had difficulty in planning fun activities, e.g. for the motivation activity, or

controlling class. They solved problems by planning a direct task (e.g. asking

questions for motivation activity), seeking school supervisor’s assistance to control

class or using electronic devices to use voice to control class. However, using

electronic devices, such as microphones or speakers, sometimes failed due to

unavailability of electronic devices in all classrooms. Student teachers, therefore,

planned activities making use of visual aids, such as using visual aids to make

students feel interested in lessons. Some of the student teachers conceded that noise

was normal for students as long as students completed tasks. As a result, student

teachers still planned activities that required movements and caused noise for students

to have fun.

The final component was student teacher’s motivation, which provided only

opportunities. Student teachers had motivation to be professional teachers and an

inspiration to become professional teachers like parents. Some of student teachers’

parents were teachers that taught other subjects and a parent that was half Thai half

Filipino and also taught the English subject. The student teachers were motivated to

design and improve lesson plans to be used when they became in-service teachers.

They also wrote plans and check language to have good lesson plans. As a result,

student teachers designed plans and improved plans as part of becoming profession

teachers.

Above are the diagram and description of an influence of student teachers on

their own lesson planning when they gave information about themselves during the

pre-planning stage. Next is the second group of student teachers, that is, student

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

319

teachers’ classmates, who had an influence on student teachers’ lesson planning when

they gave information to student teachers during the pre-planning stage.

(2) Student teachers’ classmates. The second group of student

teachers was student teachers’ classmates. They were the classmates, who had

enrolled in the Practicum course in the same period as the student teachers did.

Student teachers and their classmates practiced teaching at the same schools or at

different schools. Details are shown in the diagram (see Figure 5.6) below.

Figure 5.6: Influence of student teachers’ classmates on student teachers’ lesson


Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

320

Figure 5.6 shows classmates an influence of student teachers’ classmates on

student teachers’ lesson planning when giving information before planning. Student

teachers’ classmates could be divided into two groups according to the way they

communicated and the location: student teachers’ classmates at the same school and

classmates on social networking.

First, student teachers communicated to their classmates at the same school.

Student teachers talked about the following topics with classmates at the same school:

elements relevant to lesson planning, such as problems, students, objectives,

activities, special tasks, school rules, textbooks or supervisors. The student teachers

also shared ideas for planning lessons with classmates. Not only did they gain ideas

for planning but they also had moral support. As a result, student teachers designed

lesson plans with help from classmates viewed as resources for moral support and

ideas for planning.

Moreover, student teachers also communicated to their classmates, who

practiced teaching at the same school or at other schools, on social networking. They

communicated to one another via such social networking as a group Line account.

The topics they chatted about included lesson plans, schools, supervisors or

workloads. Chatting with classmates, who practiced teaching at other school,

provided more ideas for planning. After talking to classmates on social networking,

student teachers gained new or different ideas for planning lessons. They also

reviewed activities or techniques that they had known ready. For example, if the

practicality and effectiveness of activities were confirmed by classmates practicing

teaching both at the same school and at different schools, student teachers felt more

confident in including those activities in plans. As a result, student teachers designed

lesson plans with help from classmates who offered new ideas for planning or helped

review practicality of activities or techniques.

Above are the diagram and description of an influence of student teachers’

classmates on student teachers’ lesson planning when they gave information during

the pre-planning stage. Next is the last group of student teachers, that is, student

teachers’ senior graduates, who had an influence on student teachers’ lesson planning

when they gave information to student teachers during the pre-planning stage.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

321

(3) Student teachers’ senior graduates. The last group of

student teachers included student teachers’ senior graduates, who had an influence on

student teachers’ lesson planning during the pre-planning stage. Student teachers’

senior graduates referred to former student teachers who had finished practicum and

graduated from the teacher education program a year ago or longer than a year ago.

While the senior graduates were studying at the teacher education program, they knew

the student teachers or the participants of this study, because the senior graduates

were only a year older than the participants of this study. They usually communicated

to one another while they were studying at the teacher education program and when

they left the university. The following diagram (see Figure 5.7) illustrates kinds of

information they shared to the student teachers and that had an influence on the

student teachers’ lesson planning.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

322

Figure 5.7: Influence of student teachers’ senior graduates on student teachers’


Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

323

Figure 5.7 shows an influence of student teachers’ senior graduates on student

teachers’ lesson planning when giving information before planning. The information

could be divided into two topics: information about each supervisor’s supervision

style and information about each supervisor’s favorite techniques.

Student teachers received information about each supervisor’s supervision

style from their senior graduates. Senior graduates informed them of strict school

supervisors and university supervisors, who demanded that student teachers submit

lesson plans regularly. Student teachers under the strict university supervisors were

aware of the university supervisors’ expectations and became more disciplined, trying

to write lesson plans to meet deadlines. As a result, student teachers designed and

submitted lesson plans to meet deadlines.

Moreover, senior graduates informed student teachers of lenient school

supervisors and university supervisors, who rarely checked or rechecked lesson plans.

Student teachers did not make any changes whether or not student teachers received

feedback from school supervisors or university supervisors. Moreover, student

teachers designed subsequent plans without considering feedback. They also

submitted plans irregularly. As a result, the student teachers were not disciplined and

designed plans without using supervisors’ feedback to improve plans.

Student teachers received information about each supervisor’s favorite

techniques from their senior graduates. Senior graduates informed student teachers of

supervisors’ favorite teaching aids, such as using the PowerPoint slides in teaching,

and supervisors’ favorite activities, such as speaking activities for the transfer or

production phase. Student teachers planned according to supervisors’ favorite

techniques because they wanted to meet supervisors’ expectations and gained good

grades on the Practicum course. As a result, student teachers designed plans based on

supervisors’ favorite techniques.

Above are the diagrams and descriptions of influences of personnel, including

school supervisors, university supervisors and student teachers, such as student

teachers, classmates and senior graduates, on student teachers’ lesson planning when

they gave information during the pre-planning stage. Next are details of ‘institutions’

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

324

that had an influence on student teachers’ lesson planning when they gave information

to student teachers during the pre-planning stage.

5.2.2 Institutions. The influence of institutions on student teachers’ lesson

planning is presented and discussed in the next section. There are two institutions

found from the data: schools and the Faculty of Education.

5.2.2.1 Schools. Schools refer to the locations, where student teachers

practiced teaching during their practicum. The school is an administrative body that

imposes rules and practices for all personnel in its organization to follow. When

student teachers were practicing teaching at schools, they became personnel as well.

Therefore, schools had direct influences on student teachers’ lesson planning as

shown in the following diagram (see Figure 5.8).

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

325

Figure 5.8: Influence of schools on student teachers’ lesson planning when giving

information before planning

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

326

Figure 5.8 shows an influence of schools on student teachers’ lesson planning

when giving information before planning. There were two topics concerning

information schools provided student teachers: rules and practices, with which student

teachers were expected to comply. There were two rules and two practices.

The first rule was concerned with submission of lesson plans. This rule was

viewed as both opportunities and constraints to student teachers’ lesson planning. A

school had a rule that required student teachers to submit plans at a designated time.

They had to submit lesson plans to their school supervisors three weeks before

implementation. Regarding the rule as opportunities, two female student teachers

realized strictness of the rule because the plans would be submitted to higher

administrators that kept them as records for annual quality assurance. If plans were

not submitted on time, a warning was issued to school supervisors and to student

teachers. As a result, the student teachers became self-disciplined in managing time to

write plans, so that they could submit plans three weeks before implementation.

Regarding the strict rule of submission of lesson plans, a male student teacher

practicing teaching at the same school as the two female student teachers mentioned

above could not submit plans on time. The reason was that it took time for him to

write the detailed plan format. The student teacher, then, tried to comply with the rule.

He also received warnings for tardiness from his school supervisor. The student

teacher had to try to write plans and to submit them on time. Still, he reported that he

struggled to meet deadlines. He did not report any follow-up actions from school.

The second rule was concerned with facilities, technology and resources.

Schools had the following rules which became constraints to planning: prolonged

paperwork circulation on reporting equipment defects, no petty cash for emergent

cases for broken equipment and no supporting staff for repairing electronic devices.

Then, student teachers experienced the following difficulties. It was hard to have

broken devices fixed because of redundant paper work and no budget. There was no

one to help fix broken devices at times of need. The student teachers had to think of

the following back-up plans: using non-electronic teaching aids instead, preparing

their own necessary equipment and devices (e.g. laptop computers, flash drives, CDs),

checking on electronic devices before use (e.g. flash drives, computers, visualizers)

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

327

and changing to rooms, where needed devices available. The student teachers planned

lessons with precautious plans in case of technical problems.

There were two pieces of information regarding practices that influence

student teachers’ lesson planning.

The first practice was concerned with schools having no planned schedule for

special events, such as urgent meetings, cultural events, academic events, religious

ceremonies, etc. This was viewed as constraints. The consequences of the practice

was that student teachers’ classes were cancelled in short notice. As a result, lesson

plans could not be implemented in designated times. With necessity to cover content,

student teachers had the following solutions: combining lesson plans, reducing time

for each teaching phase, reducing number of plans, focusing only on grammar and

omitting the transfer or production phase. The student teachers had to execute

effective time management to handle the problems of insufficient time for

implementing lesson plans.

The second practice was concerned with that a school imposing that there be

no homework for students. All instruction must be completed in class time. This

practice was viewed as opportunities. Student teachers thought that the practice was

beneficial to students. Students could have time to join extracurricular activities. To

deal with the practice, student teachers had to plan simple tasks, omit some teaching

phases, such as the motivation phase or the transfer or production phase, or reduce

time for activities. The student teachers planned lessons with effective time

management.

Above are the diagram and description of an influence of schools on student

teachers’ lesson planning when they gave information during the pre-planning stage.

Next is another institution ‘Faculty of Education.’

5.2.2.2 Faculty of Education. The Faculty of Education refers to an

institution, which provides the teacher education program for student teachers.

According to the results, this institution also had a direct influence on student

teachers’ lesson planning as it provided information about a rule and a practice for

student teachers to follow. Please see details in the following diagram (Figure 5.9).

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

328

Figure 5.9: Influence of Faculty of Education on student teachers’ lesson planning

when giving information before planning

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

329

Figure 5.9 shows an influence of Faculty of Education on student teachers’

lesson planning when giving information before planning. The information included a

rule and a practice.

For the rule, the Faculty of Education informed student teachers of the plan

format. They had to use the detailed plan format to write all components in a plan in

details and write expected dialogue between the student teacher and students as well.

Regarding detailed plans as opportunities, student teachers thought that writing

detailed plans had advantages. They could understand procedures of teaching for a

lesson and know what to say for implementing plans. Therefore, student teachers

wrote detailed plans according to the information.

Regarding detailed plans as constraints, some student teacher thought that

writing detailed plans had disadvantages. It took a long time to write all details on a

plan. They said that writing expected dialogues was like repeating writing what they

had already known. They knew what to say for teaching already. Student teachers,

therefore, felt discouraged to write detailed plans. However, they still had to write

lesson plans because it was compulsory. Some of them could not submit plans on time

because they did not have ideas to write details. As a result, the student teachers

designed lesson plans with discouragement.

For the practice, the Faculty of Education allowed student teachers to select

schools and classmates. Student teachers thought the practice had the following

advantages. They had moral support and ideas to plans from classmates. They had

convenience due to teaching at school near accommodation. Student teachers planned

lesson plans with ease because they had moral support at difficult times and had ideas

for planning. Moreover, living near school saved time for commuting. That resulted in

more time for them to plan lessons. As a result, student teachers designed lesson plans

with facilitation of classmates and convenience from living near school.

Above is the pre-planning stage, one of the stages on this study’s theory of

lesson planning processes. The next section presents the next stage the planning stage,

where student teachers designed lesson plans and submitted them to supervisors to

seek for feedback.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

330

5.3 Planning stage

The planning stage was the second stage in the lesson planning processes.

According to the results, student teachers revealed they had different procedures in

planning a lesson. The components on a lesson plan were the same in all alternatives

of the procedures: studying information gained from the pre-planning stage;

formulating objectives; designing activities for phases of teaching along with planning

time and class management; designing and producing teaching aids; planning

assessment and having complete plans. However, student teachers went along the

order of designing each component in different ways. Please see Figure 5.10 for

details.

Figure 5.10: Planning stage

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

331

Figure 5.10 illustrates the planning stage of student teachers’ lesson planning.

It also shows the steps of how student teachers followed the linear and did not

followed the linear processes. The numbers by the arrows guide where each step goes

to.

1. For the first practice, student teachers studied information gained from the

pre-planning stage; formulated objectives; designed activities for phases of teaching

along with planning time and class management; designed and produced teaching

aids; planned assessment and had complete plans.

2. For the second practice, a student teacher, who was required by her school

supervisor to write lesson plans on a big book, studied information gained from the

pre-planning stage; formulated objectives; designed activities for phases of teaching

along with planning time and class management; planned assessment; and designed

and produced teaching aids.

3. For the third practice, some student teachers studied information gained

from the pre-planning stage; formulated objectives; designed and produced teaching

aids; designed activities for phases of teaching along with planning time and class

management; planned assessment and had complete plans. Please note that for the

third practice, the students switched the steps of designing activities and designing

and producing teaching aids as shown in the first practice.

4. For the fourth practice, student teachers studied information gained from the

pre-planning stage; designed and produced teaching aids; designed activities for

phases of teaching along with planning time and class management; formulated

objectives; planned assessment and had complete plans. While planning, student

teachers either thought about the components along the steps, made notes on a piece

of paper and then typed them on electronic files; or thought about the components and

typed the plan lessons on electronic files at the same time.

The planning stage mentioned above is only a part of the planning procedures.

According to the results of this study, feedback from supervisors was also mentioned

and the process of gaining feedback should be included in the planning stage as well.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

332

Apart from the planning procedures mentioned in Figure 5.10, student teachers

revealed more steps in this stage. After having a complete lesson plan, each student

teacher had to submit the plan to school supervisors and university supervisors. Both

supervisors were expected to check the plans and provide feedback so that student

teachers could use the feedback to improve their plans.

The following diagram (see Figure 5.11) is presented below to show the

extension of the planning stage when feedback from school supervisors and university

supervisors is integrated.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

333

Figure 5.11: Planning stage with feedback from school supervisors and university

supervisors

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

334

According to Figure 5.11, after student teachers finished designing a lesson

plan, they submitted the plan to both school supervisors and university supervisors.

After that, they received feedback concerning objectives, content, teaching

techniques, teaching aids and language use.

However, some student teachers did not receive feedback. They, then, looked

at feedback from other supervisors. For example, when student teachers did not

receive feedback from school supervisors, they looked at feedback from university

supervisors instead and vice versa.

Once they received feedback, student teachers thought about it. They agreed

or partly disagreed with feedback and made changes on certain components. The

dashed lines refer to student teachers’ rewriting the components. This suggests a

cyclical process of the planning stage. After student teachers rewrote the lesson

plans, they implemented the plans.

On the other hand, student teachers might entirely disagree with feedback

based on their belief systems. School supervisors or university supervisors might give

feedback on lesson plan components but student teachers considered that the feedback

was incongruent with what they knew or experienced before. For example, student

teachers refused to make changes on teaching techniques they insisted in its

effectiveness because they had learned the techniques from the teacher education

program. Moreover, student teachers refused to make content more challenging

because they said it was not appropriate to students’ levels of English proficiency.

When student teachers did not make any changes on the lesson plans, they

implemented the plans right away.

Above are the diagram and its description of the planning stage integrated with

the process of feedback given by school supervisors and university supervisors and

feedback received by student teachers. After considering feedback, student teachers

made decisions based on their beliefs and then they took actions. They either rewrite

lesson plans or did not rewrite lesson plans. This shows a direct influence of both

school supervisors and university supervisors on student teachers’ lesson planning.

The next section is devoted to influences of school supervisors and university

supervisors on student teachers’ lesson planning by giving feedback on lesson plans.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

335

5.3.1 School supervisors giving feedback on lesson plans. After a student

teacher finished writing a lesson plan, he/she was expected to submit the plan to

his/her school supervisor. Usually, both student teacher and school supervisor shared

the office. The actual practice for submitting plans was that the student teacher put the

lesson plan on the school supervisor’s desk; the school supervisor checked the plan

and gave feedback by writing on it; and put the checked plan on the desk for the

student teacher to pick up. The student teacher, then, looked at the checked plan and

feedback on it. They made decisions upon the feedback, eventually. As can be seen,

the school supervisor had an influence on student teachers’ lesson planning during the

planning stage of the lesson planning processes and the following diagram (Figure

5.12) is going to show feedback given to student teachers by school supervisors and

its effects on student teachers’ lesson planning during the planning stage.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

336

Figure 5.12: Influence of school supervisors on student teachers’ lesson planning by

giving feedback on lesson plans

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

337


giving feedback on lesson plans (continuing from the previous page)

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

338

Figure 5.12 shows an influence of school supervisors on student teachers’

lesson planning by giving feedback on lesson plans. The feedback was concerned

with the following components on lesson plans: objectives, content, activities for

phases of teaching and language use. The three shaded stripes indicate how student

teachers responded after they considered feedback: agreeing with feedback, partly

disagreeing with feedback and entirely disagreeing with feedback. Details for

feedback on each component are described below.

The first component was objectives. School supervisors suggested that student

teachers use content on a textbook to write objectives. The student teacher thought it

was convenient to use content on the textbook to write objectives. They, therefore,

agreed with the feedback and wrote objectives as suggested. Moreover, a school

supervisor specified topics for writing objectives in a unit of a textbook. The student

teacher thought that the topics were not connected in real life. She partly disagreed

with the feedback but she still wrote the objectives of lesson plans using the topics as

suggested. The reason for complying with feedback was that she wanted to meet her

school supervisor’s expectations.

The second component was content. School supervisors suggested that student

teachers add the Thai context to the content of lesson plans. The feedback was

congruent with student teachers’ knowledge of personalizing learning for students.

They also thought that the concept of personalizing learning would assist student

learning. Students would understand English lesson plans better when they saw some

Thai items. Therefore, the student teachers agreed with the feedback and rewrote the

content as suggested.

The third component was activities for phases of teaching. School supervisors

suggested that student teachers revisit a technique for teaching reading because the

activities that the student teachers had planned were too complicated for students to

follow. School supervisors also told student teachers to change an activity and use a

kind of teaching aid. The student teachers also thought that the reading technique was

complicated and the activity needed to be changed. They agreed with the feedback,

changed the activity and used the teaching aid as suggested. Moreover, a school

supervisor told a student teacher to revisit a lengthy activity she planned for teaching

vocabulary. However, the feedback was incongruent with her belief in knowledge

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

339

learned from university supervisors. She thought her technique was effective.

Additionally, the student teacher found that her school supervisor rarely checked and

rechecked her lesson plans and rarely observed implementation of the lesson plans.

That made the student teacher disagreed with the feedback. As a result, she did not

make any changes as suggested.

The final component was language use. School supervisors suggested that

student teachers simplify specific language elements on lesson plans. The feedback,

for example, was specific to making directions or questions easier. After receiving the

feedback, student teachers thought that the feedback was congruent with their needs

and school supervisors were resources of lesson planning. The feedback would help

them improve their plans. Therefore, they agreed with the feedback and made changes

as suggested.

However, a school supervisor suggested that a student teacher simplify

language elements on lesson plans as well. The feedback was not specific to any

elements. The school supervisor just told the student teacher to make lesson plans

easier. The student teacher considered the feedback and disagreed with the feedback

because it was incongruent with his thought and his school supervisor rarely checked

and rechecked lesson plans and rarely observed his class. The student teacher,

therefore, did not make any changes on lesson plans.

Apart from school supervisors’ influence on student teachers’ lesson planning

by giving feedback on lesson plans, university supervisors were also the persons who

had an influence on student teachers’ lesson planning. Details are shown below.

5.3.2 University supervisors giving feedback on lesson plans. University

supervisors had an influence on student teachers’ lesson planning by giving feedback

on lesson plans. After a student teacher completed designing a lesson plan, he/she

submitted the lesson plan to his/her university supervisor. Mostly, university

supervisors asked student teachers to print out plans and submit them at the office of

the Faculty of Education. Some university supervisors asked their student teachers to

send lesson plans on electronic files as emails to them. Either way would end up with

student teachers receiving feedback on the lesson plans. Next, student teachers

considered the feedback and either rewrote the plans or did not rewrite the plan. The

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

340

influence of university supervisors on student teachers’ lesson planning was obvious

in the planning stage. The following diagram (Figure 5.13) shows an influence of

university supervisors on student teachers’ lesson planning by giving feedback on

lesson plans.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

341


by giving feedback on lesson plans

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

342


by giving feedback on lesson plans (continuing from the previous page)

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

343

Figure 5.13 shows an influence of university supervisors on student teachers’

lesson planning by giving feedback on lesson plans. The feedback was concerned

with the following components on a lesson plan: objectives, activities for phases of

teaching, teaching aids, language use on lesson plans and assessment plan.

First, university supervisors provided feedback on objectives. University

supervisors told student teachers to have unity in objectives, to focus on outcomes

rather than activities in objectives or to add ways to manage class in objectives.

Student teachers thought that the feedback was helpful for student learning. For

example, regarding unity, students could learn one language point at a time or have

enough practice for the language point. Moreover, student teachers also thought that

objectives could guide components in lesson plans, including skills or class

management as suggested by university supervisors. As a result, student teachers

wrote objectives according to the feedback.

Second, university supervisors provided feedback on activities for phases of

teaching. University supervisors told student teachers to present English expressions

used by native speakers in activities and present language in real life context. Student

teachers thought that the feedback was useful for student learning. For example,

students could learn to use English in real situations and learn English sentences

uttered by native speakers so that they could sound like them.

Student teachers also thought that the feedback was related to the concept of

communicative English learned from the teacher education program. As a result, they

searched for more English expressions and plan activities relating to real life as

suggested.

Moreover, regarding feedback on activities for phases of teaching, university

supervisors told student teachers to plan more communicative activities or to make

level of difficulty of content appropriate to student learning.

Student teachers thought that the feedback was not practical for planning. The

reasons were mentioned as follows. A student teacher thought there were many

grammar points to cover in a term and it was difficult to design communicative

activities for all of grammar points. It was easier to present grammar points and to

have students practice exercises. Moreover, student teachers entirely disagreed with

the feedback that suggested that they make content in activities more challenging. The

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

344

reasons included that content for activities was drawn from textbooks, whose level of

difficulty was appropriate to students and that activities designed by the student

teachers were appropriate to students’ level of proficiency. As a result, the student

teachers did not plan many communicative activities, nor did they make content more

challenging as suggested.

In addition to feedback on activities for phases of teaching, a university

supervisor told a student teachers to change an activity for fear that the steps were too

complicated for students to follow. The student teacher assumed that students were

familiar with the steps of the activity well because the activity was adapted from a

famous TV game show. As a result, the student teacher did not change the activity.

Third, university supervisors provided feedback on teaching aids. University

supervisors told student teachers to select more interesting pictures, including a

picture of a person doing actions that represented an action verb, a picture that was

colorful or a picture that looked so clear. Moreover, university supervisors also told

student teachers to use pictures to convey meanings of concrete nouns because

pictures of objects were more effective than descriptions of meanings. The student

teachers thought that the feedback was practical because interesting pictures could

gain student attention. Pictures of concrete nouns were also helpful for students to

learn new words. As a result, the student teachers selected interesting pictures and

show pictures of concrete nouns to teach meanings of new words as suggested.

Fourth, university supervisors provided feedback on language use on lesson

plans. University supervisors told student teachers to check grammatical mistakes on

lesson plans. The examples of mistakes were omission of helping verbs after question

words, antecedent pronouns used without head nouns, wrong articles or omission of

articles. The student teachers became aware of importance of feedback and they

wanted to meet university supervisors’ expectations. As a result, the student teachers

were more careful and checked grammatical mistakes before submission of plans.

Finally, university supervisors provided feedback on assessment plan. A

university supervisor told a student teacher that the assessment plan designed by

student teachers was irrelevant to objectives. The student teacher realize her own

mistake. She carelessly selected the criteria from a source and did not check if the

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

345

criteria were relevant to the objectives. In the end, the student teacher agreed with the

feedback and changed the criteria. Another university supervisor told a student

teacher that her assessment plan was inappropriate. The student teacher considered the

feedback as unclear because the university supervisor only wrote the phrase ‘not

appropriate’ on the page of assessment plan. The student teacher, then, managed to

verify her assessment plan, saying that the skills on objectives were the same as the

skills on the criteria. As a result, she did not make any changes on the assessment

plan.

Above is the planning stage, one of the stages on this study’s theory of lesson

planning processes. In the planning stage, student teachers designed lesson plans and

submitted them to supervisors to seek for feedback. The next section presents the next

stage in the lesson planning processes ‘the implementing stage.’ Student teachers

implemented the lesson plans after undergoing the process in the planning stage.

5.4 Implementing stage

After student teachers planned, they went to the third stage of lesson

planning—the implementing stage.

5.4.1 Before implementation of plans. Student teachers revealed that before

implementation they had some actions as shown in Figure 5.14 below.

Figure 5.14: Before implementation

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

346

Figure 5.14 shows that before student teacher implemented lesson plans, they

reviewed the lesson plans by reading through them for four reasons. First, by

reviewing student teachers could remember the teaching procedures in the plans.

Second, they could think about what to say while implementing lesson plans. Third,

they had a chance to make changes on lesson plans to assist student learning. Finally,

they had a chance to look for mistakes. Moreover, student teachers also checked on

teaching aids and set up classrooms before implementing plans. Student teachers

wanted to show students that they had planned lessons and they were professional

teachers as well.

5.4.2 Implementation of lesson plans. The diagram on the next page (see

Figure 5.15) shows the procedure in the implementing stage. While they were

implementing lesson plans there were occasions that student teachers also thought

about success and difficulty in classroom. This was the reflecting/evaluating stage,

which will be presented later after the implementing stage for better understanding.

Figure 5.15 shows that after student teachers reviewed lesson plans, checked

on teaching aids and set up classrooms, they implemented lesson plans in classrooms.

The implementation was observed by school supervisors and university supervisors.

(Notes: The school supervisors were expected to observe every class that was taught

by student teachers. The university supervisors were expected to observe a student

teacher three times.)

After school supervisors and university supervisors observed student teachers’

implementation of lesson plans, student teachers received feedback concerning

components of lesson plans.

However, some student teachers did not receive feedback from school

supervisors; therefore, they looked at feedback from university supervisors instead.

Similarly, when student teachers did not receive feedback from university supervisors,

they looked at feedback from school supervisors.

When student teachers received feedback, they considered it based on their

beliefs and agreed or partly disagreed with feedback. Then, they used the feedback to

improve subsequent plans. On the other hand, some student teachers entirely

disagreed with the feedback as they used their beliefs to determine. As a result, they

did not use the feedback to improve subsequent plans.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

347

Figure 5.15: Implementing stage

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

348

The following are diagrams that show the influence of school supervisors and

university supervisors on student teachers’ implementation of lesson plans. They gave

feedback to the student teachers after they observed the student teachers’ teaching

classes using lesson plans.

5.4.3 Influence of school supervisors on student teachers’ lesson planning by

giving feedback after observation

The following diagram (see Figure 5.16) shows the influence of school

supervisors on student teachers’ lesson planning when they gave feedback to the

student teachers after they observed the student teachers’ implementation of lesson

plans.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

349



Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

350

Figure 5.16 shows an influence of school supervisors on student teachers’

lesson planning by giving feedback after observation. After student teachers received

feedback, they agreed, partly disagreed or entirely disagreed with the feedback. The

feedback covered three components on a lesson plan: activities for phases of teaching,

teaching aids and language use.

First, school supervisors gave feedback on activities for phases of teaching.

School supervisors suggested that student teachers add practice activities focusing on

the sentential level or use the rote learning technique to help students memorize new

words. This feedback was congruent with a student teacher’s needs. She wanted to

improve her plan, so the feedback was helpful. Another student teacher thought that

the technique was effective. The student teachers, therefore, agreed with the feedback

and use the activity or the technique in subsequent plans. What’s more, a school

supervisor suggested that a student teacher design less complicated activities. The

student teacher had planned an activity that demanded students’ movements. The

student teacher thought that the feedback was helpful for managing class. She agreed

with the feedback and changed the activity into the one that required students to sit

and work at their desks.

Second, a school supervisor gave feedback on teaching aids. The school

supervisor told a student teacher to prepare worksheets for teaching words on

grammar lessons. This feedback was incongruent with the student teacher’s thought.

She thought that the way she presented words in example sentences on the board or

the PowerPoint slides was sufficient for students to learn grammar points. In the end,

the student teacher entirely disagreed with the feedback and did not prepare the

worksheets as suggested.

Finally, school supervisors gave feedback on language use. School supervisors

suggested that student teachers speak more slowly or speak more English while

implementing lesson plans. The feedback was congruent with the student teachers’

thought about assisting student learning. By speaking slowly and speaking more

English, the student teachers would help students understand English and gave

opportunities for students to listen to English.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

351

5.4.4 Influence of university supervisors on student teachers’ lesson planning

by giving feedback after observation

The following diagram (see Figure 5.17) shows an influence of university

supervisors when they gave feedback to student teachers after they observed the

student teachers’ implementation of lesson plans.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

352


when university supervisors gave feedback after observation

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

353

Figure 5.17 illustrates an influence of university supervisors on student

teachers’ lesson planning when university supervisors gave feedback after

observation. The feedback focused on two components: activities for phases of

teaching and language use.

First, university supervisors gave feedback on activities for phases of teaching.

University supervisors told student teachers to plan more various activities, not

focusing only on grammar exercises; to write different versions of a lesson plan for

students’ different levels of proficiency in each class; and to add more communicative

activities. For example, student teachers could have students create a conversation or

communicate to one another using English.

However, the student teachers thought that the feedback was not practical

because

there were many grammar points to cover in a term and school supervisor focused on

teaching grammar points and having students do grammar exercises. Therefore,

teaching grammar points and having students do exercises was more practical in the

timeframe.

Regarding university supervisors’ recommendation to cater lesson plans for

students’ different levels of proficiency, student teachers thought that they did not

have enough time to write several versions of the same. Writing a plan at a time was

time-consuming enough for the student teacher because she lacked ideas to write

plans.

As for the feedback on adding more communicative activities, the student

teachers feared that students might not be able to produce language due to their

narrow vocabulary and limited knowledge of grammar.

As a result, the student teachers entirely disagreed with the feedback and did

not design various activities, write several versions of a plan or design communicative

activities. However, some student teachers designed an activity that required students

to use English at the sentential level.

Additionally, university supervisors also told student teachers to write

different levels of questions or activities for students’ different levels of proficiency;

and to handle problematic behavior immediately when it arose. Student teachers

thought that the feedback was beneficial for students. Student teachers agreed that

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

354

catering questions for students’ different levels of proficiency was more practical than

writing several versions of the whole plan for different levels of students’ proficiency.

The three levels of difficulty of questions or activities were practical to plan as the

student teachers received the information of how to write the three levels of difficulty,

such as writing one very easy question, a few average questions and one very difficult

question. As a result, they wrote questions with different levels of difficulty as

suggested.

As for a student teacher who faced students’ problematic behavior, she also

thought that the feedback was practical. As a result, she designed activities to draw

student attention and also planned to reward the students, who displayed inappropriate

classroom behavior, by giving them extra marks if they cooperated by participating in

activities.

The other component of feedback given to student teachers by university

supervisors was language use. University supervisors told student teachers to speak

more English while implementing lesson plans. Student teachers partly disagreed with

the feedback. They thought that the feedback might not be practical due to their

concerns over students’ limited ability to listen to English. However, they also

thought that the feedback was beneficial for student learning. By listening to their

English instructions, students would have opportunities to be exposed to English. As a

result, the student teachers spoke English when implementing plans and spoke Thai

when students showed that they needed it. For example, students showed sign that

they did not understand the lesson being taught.

After implementation, student teachers also revealed that lesson plans were

implemented as planned and with difficulty.

The following diagrams show details of student teachers implemented as

planned due to students, activities for phases of teaching, time management for lesson

planning and teaching aids.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

355

5.4.5 Lesson plans implemented as planned due to students

The following diagram (see Figure 5.18) shows student teachers’

implementation of lesson plans as planned due to conducive student characteristics.

Figure 5.18: Lesson plans implemented as planned due to conducive student

characteristics

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

356

Figure 5.18 shows lesson plans that were implemented as planned due to

conducive student characteristics. There were three topics concerning students:

students’ sufficient proficiency, students’ motivation and plans adjusted to students’

levels of proficiency.

First, lesson plans were implemented as planned due to students’ sufficient

proficiency. Student teachers described that students with sufficient proficiency could

use language points right after instruction, follow teaching procedures and get ready

to learn. For example, after a student teacher presented a new grammar point, reported

speech, students with sufficient proficiency could rewrite reported speech sentences

without hesitation. Students could also do home assignments before coming to class.

A student teacher had assigned students to read a passage beforehand and students

with sufficient proficiency could respond well by answering questions before reading.

Student teachers could foresee success when planning for students with sufficient

proficiency.

Second, lesson plans were implemented as planned due to students’

motivation. Students with motivation paid attention during implementation of

activities. For example, students with motivation were excited about seeing words on

a clip. They kept repeating the words with friends, like ‘Rashes, influenza, chicken

pox,’ talking about English names of illnesses. The student teacher, who had planned

using the VDO clip, had positive feeling towards the behavior of students with

motivation.

Finally, lesson plans were implemented as planned due to plans adjusted to

students’ levels of proficiency. A student teacher described how he catered tasks for

students with different levels of proficiency. He prepared some tasks that demanded

students to complete tasks at the lexical level and some tasks that demanded students

to complete tasks at the sentential level. Students of all levels could follow the lesson.

For example, general students, especially beginner students, could fill in blanks. As

for the task catered for students with sufficient proficiency, students with sufficient

proficiency saw visual aids, including pictures, and they had to produce sentences.

The student teacher reported he continued planning different levels of questions for

other plans because he experienced success.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

357

5.4.6 Lesson plans implemented as planned due to activities for phases of

teaching


implementation of lesson plans as planned due to appropriate activities for phases of

teaching.

Figure 5.19: Lesson plans implemented as planned due to appropriate activities

for phases of teaching

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

358


appropriate activities for phases of teaching. There were three topics concerning

activities for phases of teaching: activities that related to students’ background,

activities that students were familiar with and activities that directed students’

movements.

First, lesson plans were implemented as planned due to activities that related

to students’ background. When student teachers used the activities that students had

background on, the students understood the content of the activities well. They could

complete tasks, consequently. For example, a student teacher described a scene when

her implementation of a lesson plan was successful: Students could finish tasks in

time. According to the activity, she had students read a text about computer game.

She said they had background on playing games, so they understood text easily. They

knew many things about games, showing energy and trying to write sentences to show

opinions about games in the transfer or production phase. Consequently, the student

teacher selected reading texts that were related to students’ background for

subsequent plans.

Second, lesson plans were implemented as planned due to activities that

students were familiar with. After students participated in certain activities several

times, they would be able to follow the activities in next lesson plans. For example, a

student teacher used the survey activity a few times. Some of the students received the

worksheet and started to walk around to survey without waiting for the student

teacher to give instruction. The student teachers tended to repeat the activities that

students were familiar with and yielded success. Moreover, a student teacher made

some adjustments on teaching aids of the repeated activities. He changed colors or

themes on the PowerPoint slides but he did not change the procedures for the activity.

In subsequent plans, he tended to repeat the activities that students were familiar with

and the activities that were implemented successfully.

Finally, lesson plans were implemented as planned due to activities that

directed students’ movements. Student teacher used activities that directed students to

move around the classroom. They concluded the following benefits. When

participating in activities that urged them to move, students showed signs of

enjoyment, such as smiling or being active. When students were affected by afternoon

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

359

effects (being drowsy, bored or inactive due to the time in the afternoon, student

teachers used activities with movements to change students into energetic persons.

Moreover, students, who participated in activities with movements, could have

interactions with classmates. For example, they walked around to find their matches

on pictures. They had to talk to classmates. They could walk and find answers for

certain activities, which forced them to have interactions with classmates. Having

experienced success, student teachers repeated planning activities that required

students’ movements.

5.4.7 Lesson plans implemented as planned due to effective time management

for lesson planning


implementation of lesson plans as planned due to effective time management for

lesson planning.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

360

Figure 5.20: Lesson plans implemented as planned due to effective time

management for lesson planning

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

361


effective time management for lesson planning. A student teacher reported that he

allotted sufficient time to the planning process. He also described success resulted

from well-planned lesson plans caused by his ability to manage time for lesson

planning steps: writing plans, reviewing, gathering feedback from his school

supervisors and university supervisor and improving plans. The student teacher also

described a scene of a lesson plan implemented with success. He provided the

following signs of success. Students were attentive. They tried to answer all

questions. Students paid attention to all activities and they cooperated in completing

tasks.

The example below shows that the student teacher wrote a lesson plan on the

topic of chocolate, had it checked by the school supervisor and the university

supervisor, received feedback from the supervisors, made changes to improve the plan

and implemented the plan.

In the motivation phase, students attended a motivation activity, which was

about guessing brand names of chocolate. Students participated in the activity

attentively. They tried to guess the brands of chocolate. Regarding improving the

lesson plan, the student teacher said that he had changed the activity from asking

questions about chocolate to the guessing game.

In the pre-reading phase, students saw the presentation of words excerpted

from a reading text and skimmed the text to answer questions. They looked for key

words they just learned to find the answers. The students followed the activities

attentively. They responded to the student teacher’s questions. To improve the activity

for this phase, the student teacher had added the questions for the skimming activity.

In the while-reading phase, students worked together to transferred

information from the text into a timeline diagram. The students sat in groups chatting

to group mates and wrote answers on worksheets. They could give out correct

answers when the student teacher asked them. To improve the activity for this phase,

the student teacher added this task. Earlier, he had only questions for students to

answer.

In the post-reading phase, students wrote their own timelines. To improve the

activity for this phase, student teacher changed the transferring information activity to

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

362

writing one’s timeline. He also showed three examples of a person’s life timeline and

encouraged students to design interesting timelines of their own. The students worked

on their work. They drew pictures on worksheets to start designing their own timeline.

Some students’ designs were interesting. They drew an airplane, a tree or a bear.

Then, they wrote sentences to show their major life events labeled with years on the

timeline.

This resulted from steps in lesson planning that allowed the student teacher to

make changes on his plan for better implementation. As a result, the student teacher

usually planned in advance and managed sufficient time for a complete cycle of

lesson planning partly because he could see its effectiveness.

5.4.8 Lesson plans implemented as planned due to appropriate teaching aids


implementation of lesson plans as planned due to appropriate teaching aids.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

363

Figure 5.21: Lesson plans implemented as planned due to appropriate teaching

aids

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

364


appropriate teaching aids. Student teachers described the following teaching aids that

accounted for success in implementing lesson plans: teaching aids that aroused

students’ interests, teaching aids that helped students elicit ideas and teaching aids

used to provide background knowledge.

First, a student teacher used teaching aids that aroused students’ interests. A

student teacher selected pictures of popular stars and used them to make students

interested in a lesson. Some students showed that they were interested in the lesson

right away. The student teacher reported that pictures of stars activated students to

respond to a task. To illustrate, pictures of stars were posted on a screen to make them

look like they were talking to one another. The student teacher put speech bubbles

near each star to show what the two stars were talking about. The statements in the

speech bubbles represented the language function aimed for the lesson. The student

teacher thought about using pictures of persons, whom students were interested, in

many subsequent plans.

Second, student teachers used teaching aids that helped student teachers elicit

students’ background knowledge, ideas or language. The student teachers used visual

aids, such as pictures from magazines, or stationery, such as big paper, to help

students elicit ideas. To illustrate, a student teacher provided pictures from magazines

to students and then had the students look at the pictures and produce language using

a grammar point, such as comparison. The student teacher considered pictures from

the magazine as helpful to elicit ideas because the students could see real objects on

the pictures. For example, they compared two cars on different pages and wrote ‘The

red car is bigger than the white car.’ The pictures provided actual visuality of the cars,

which were helpful for students to have ideas for comparing the two objects.

Another student teacher provided big paper for students to draw pictures and

write sentences using a grammar point that was existential there. The student teacher

viewed big paper as an aid that activated students to think and work together. When

students in a group had a piece of big paper on the floor in front of them, they would

come up with ideas and produce sentences by writing on the big paper.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

365

Both of the student teachers planned to use more visual aids and stationery

because they experience success in implementing lesson plans using the teaching

aids.

Finally, student teachers used teaching aids to provide background knowledge

to students. Student teachers used teaching aids to introduced content for students.

The content in teaching aids related to the content in the activities in the following

phase of teaching. That helped students understand the content in the following

activities better. To illustrate, a student teacher used a VDO clip about the national

day of Singapore to introduce the topic before having students read a text of the same

topic. The students were able to read the text and answer questions correctly due to

that the clip and the reading text had similar details, such as activities on the national

day, including celebrating, marching, watching parades or fireworks. Having

experienced implementing lesson plans as planned, the student teachers tried to repeat

the technique of using teaching aids to provide background knowledge to students in

subsequent plans if the teaching aids were available.

The following diagrams show details of student teachers implemented with

difficulty due to students, activities for phases of teaching, class management, time

management and teaching aids.

5.4.9 Lesson plans implemented with difficulty due to unconducive student

characteristics


implementation of lesson plans with difficulty due to unconducive student

characteristics.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

366

Figure 5.22: Lesson plans implemented with difficulty due to unconducive student

characteristics

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

367

Figure 5.22: Lesson plans implemented with difficulty due to unconducive student

characteristics (continuing from the previous page)

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

368

Figure 5.22 shows lesson plans implemented with difficulty due to

unconducive student characteristics. There were three topics: students’ proficiency of

English, students’ inappropriate classroom behavior and afternoon effects.

Students’ proficiency of English could cause difficulty in implementing

lesson plans. Students’ proficiency of English was concerned with four topics:

students’ problems concerning vocabulary, students’ problems concerning grammar,

students’ problems concerning receptive skills and students’ problems concerning

productive skills.

The first topic relating to students’ proficiency of English that caused

difficulty in implementing plan was students’ problems concerning vocabulary.

Students could not pronounce easy words correctly. Student teachers had to stop and

correct pronunciation if it was a key to learning for a lesson. For example, in a

superlative lesson, some students pronounced ‘most’ incorrectly. The student teacher

had to correct the pronunciation immediately. Concerning meanings of words,

students did not know meanings of easy words.

To solve problems, student teachers used recast for correcting pronunciation.

To illustrate, the student teacher modeled the words that students mispronounced and

students were to repeat the correct pronunciation. Student teachers also used the first

language to help translate students’ unknown words. The first language was

considered as necessary; otherwise, students could not continue with works.

With assistance from student teachers using recast, students repeated words

modeled by student teachers and they could pronounce the words correctly.

With assistance from student teachers with L1 translation, students could

continue with works. However, if there were more unknown words, the students

started to ask for help from student teachers again. Student teachers also asked

students to learn by themselves. They were guided to seek meanings of words from

peers or devices, like dictionary on phones. Some followed the student teachers’

advice; others didn’t. The student teacher did not report any further of their actions

upon those students, who did not try to find meanings of words by themselves.

Subsequently, student teachers learned to model words for students to follow when

students pronounced words incorrectly and use L1 when students did not know words.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

369

The second topic relating to students’ proficiency of English that caused

difficulty in implementing plan was students’ problems concerning grammar.

Students did not have adequate basic knowledge of grammar. This resulted in that

students did not understand grammar lessons being taught; they kept asking what the

differences of the tenses were; they had no ideas about the singular third person for

the simple present tense; they had no idea about adding ed or irregular verbs for the

simple past tense; or they couldn’t do grammar exercises. For example, they were

unable to identify appropriate subject pronouns from head nouns or proper nouns, like

they for storms, it for a dog or she for Pam, hence hard for them to do exercises for

the present simple tense.

To solve problems, student teachers added more examples and explanation as

input for students. For example, student teachers used different sentences to teach

form of a tense, presenting many sentences with different simple past verbs to show

students how to add –ed or to change y to i and add –ed. A student teacher made use

of “teaching moments” by immediately showing real use of the future tense in

context. He made sentences showing differences between will and be going to by

pointing at the clouds out the windows on a sunny day and asking ‘Will it rain? The

answer was ‘No or maybe.’ Then, he drew black clouds on the board and asked ‘Will

it rain?’ Obviously, the answer was ‘It is going to rain.’

After employing the solutions, student teachers found that students understood

grammar points, which were additionally explained at the moment of implementing

the lesson plans. However, students still showed uncertainty again about new

grammar points introduced in the next class. Student teachers, then, learned to how to

explain language points when students had problems with new language points.

The third topic relating to students’ proficiency of English that caused

difficulty in implementing plan was students’ problems concerning receptive skills:

reading and listening. Regarding reading skills, students could not extract the meaning

from texts. They did not understand meaning at the lexical and sentential levels of

texts. They refused to start reading in a reading lesson. Regarding listening skills,

students had no response after student teachers gave oral instructions; a student

teacher found out that her instructions were too lengthy. Students did not understand

lessons delivered in English.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

370

To solve problems concerning reading skills, student teachers used L1. They

translated English words into Thai for texts and questions. To solve problems

concerning listening skills, student teachers repeated instruction in L1 and gave

examples. A student teacher also used non-verbal communication techniques, such as

exaggerated gestures, actions, facial expression, and effective speech techniques, such

as articulation, slow rate, inflected sounds to help students understand spoken texts.

He also said that monotone should be avoided when teaching students. Moreover,

regarding problems about reading skills, a student teacher avoided activities that were

not workable.

Regarding reading skills, student teachers found use of L1 helpful at the

moment of teaching. Student teachers gave L1 translations to unknown words. Then,

students could continue working because they knew the meaning of the unknown

words. However, when students detected more unknown words, they struggled to read

English texts and tried to seek help again.

Regarding listening skills, student teachers found use of L1 helpful at the

moment of teaching but when unknown words detected, students struggled to listen to

English texts and tried to seek help again. According to the student teacher, who used

a variety of speech techniques and non-verbal communication techniques, he said the

techniques were helpful and well-liked by students. The students tried to

communicate back to the student teacher in English.

The final topic relating to students’ proficiency of English that caused

difficulty in implementing plan was students’ problems concerning productive skills:

writing and speaking.

Regarding writing skills, students did not know what to write. They kept

asking for help from student teachers about how to write English words despite the

fact that the words were in the textbooks. Students did not know how to spell words.

Students lacked ideas to write only a sentence. Regarding speaking skills, students

could not produce conversation.

To solve problems, concerning writing skills, student teachers asked peers to

assist other students who needed help. Student teachers helped students elicit ideas by

asking guided questions so that students thought further for answers.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

371

To solve problems concerning speaking skills, student teachers offered guided

structure for students. The students could use the guided structures as an example for

practicing a speaking task. They could only replace the words that they wanted to say.

Regarding writing skills, student teachers found peer assistance workable

sometimes. In other times, classmates could not help one another because they also

lacked ideas to write as well. As for the student teacher who helped students elicit

ideas, she did not try to walk back to see the results because she said there were more

students who sought help from her during implementation of the plan too.

Regarding speaking skills, student teachers found guided structures helpful

because students only replaced words in guided structures. Student teachers also

found example conversations somewhat helpful. Students replaced words or sentences

but they were not really communicating to one another. They memorized or read the

conversations instead. Student teachers also learned that in organizing speaking

activities, it was possible to move from mechanical to meaningful practice activities.

Students’ inappropriate classroom behavior could cause difficulty in

implementing lesson plans. Students did not show readiness to learn. For example,

they were not attentive in instruction. They had no response to what had been taught.

They were talking too loudly. Moreover, students did not show willingness to

cooperate in any activities. For example, a student teacher reported that some students

did not do their own works but copied classmates’ works. Some students did not join

in activities, either.

To solve problems, a student teacher asked for works from the students tardy

in submitting old works; or else, he would inflict punishment on grades. He told the

tardy students that he would give zero for tardiness.

Additionally, a student teacher inflicted corporal punishment, such as flogging

at a student’s hand. The student was chatting too loudly in class while other students

were joining an activity. However, she managed to ask for the student’s permission

before flogging. The student teacher also rewarded the student, whose behavior

improved. She gave special marks as the student cooperated by writing a sentence on

the board upon request of the student teacher.

To solve the problem of students not joining activities, the student teacher

thought that some students did not join the activity because the students could not do

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

372

it; therefore, she solved students’ problems by presenting alternatives for an exercise,

such as providing many English expressions to replace in substitution drills.

In the end, the student teachers found asking for works from tardy students

and inflicting punishments on grades workable. Students submitted works, which they

used their own easy words to write. The student teacher said that he tended to impose

the practice in the future if inappropriate behavior arose.

The student teacher, who inflicted corporal punishment, found that helpful.

The student, who was chatting too loud, became quiet for a while. She also found

rewarding helpful as the problematic student along with his close friends, who were

also annoying other classmates by chatting too loudly, cooperated more, so that they

earned special marks from the student teacher.

As for the student teacher, who solved students’ problem by presenting

alternatives for an exercise, she found the assistance unworkable. Students still did not

work on the task, so the student teacher ignored the problematic students.

Afternoon effects could cause difficulty in implementing lesson plans. In the

afternoon, students did not seem to respond to instruction. For example, they did not

answer questions like they normally did in other class times. They felt sleepy, drowsy

and tired. They took a long time to get ready to learn, to get textbooks from their bags

or to open the page. They also looked away from student teachers too.

To solve problems, student teachers tried to gain student attention and activate

students by various means. A student teacher used music. One day, when he saw

students drowsy, he suddenly sang ‘Happy Birthday’ to activate students. The

students tried to find out whose birthday it was. This student teacher also displayed

his energy to students by raising his voice and role-playing as a TV host.

Moreover, a student teacher planned fun activities. She planned to have

students watch VDO clips and answer questions in a game, where students competed

against one another.

After employing the solutions, the student teachers found using music helpful

for gaining student attention for a while, but he said at least they could continue

learning at the moment. For displaying energy by role-playing as somebody else, he

found that workable as well. Students laughed at his acting and paid more attention

afterwards. The student teacher would do the same techniques in the future. He would

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

373

use the technique of raising voice and role-playing only for a specific purpose, not all

the time of instruction.

As for the student teacher, who planned fun activities, she found that workable

as long as the activity was really interesting.

5.4.10 Lesson plans implemented with difficulty due to inappropriate activities

for phases of teaching


implementation of lesson plans with difficulty due to inappropriate activities for

phases of teaching.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

374

Figure 5.23: Lesson plans implemented with difficulty due to inappropriate


Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

375

Figure 5.23 illustrates lesson plans implemented with difficulty due to

inappropriate activities for phases of teaching. There are three topics: activities

inappropriate to students’ age, activities inappropriate to students’ levels of

proficiency and activities inappropriate to each phase of teaching.

First, activities inappropriate to students’ age accounted for difficulty in

implementing lesson plans. Students did not follow rules of an activity, which a

student teacher had used it with her classmates before they practiced teaching and

found the activity workable. However, she found it unworkable with her students,

who were Mattayom 1 students aged between 11-12 years old. To illustrate, the

activities was called ‘the cloth game.’ The actual rules included two students from

different groups standing on the other sides of a cloth, unable to see each other

because of the cloth blocking their view. A player was to try to say the other player’s

name as fast as they could to win. However, the actual outcomes after implemented

included students in each group helping players in their groups by shouting the names

of other players. Some players pulled down the cloth to see the opponent. The student

teacher reflected upon the difficulty, saying that the game was appropriate for much

older students, like in high school or college, because there were strict rules to follow.

However, her students were too young to follow many steps in the game.

To solve the problem, the student teacher thought about considering students’

age before planning activities. The student teacher adjusted an activity, which was

appropriate to high school or college students, to suit her students. The adjusted

activity turned out to be effective for her younger students. To illustrate, the student

teacher adjusted the ‘Chinese whispers’ game, whose actual rules included the first

person in a group was to read a sentence and whisper the sentence to the next person.

The next person was to whisper what he/she heard to the next person until the last

person, who was to write what he/she heard on paper.

The student teacher revealed the adapted the Chinese whispers game to suit

student age. The first person was to see a picture of a word and draw it on paper.

Then, he/she showed the drawing to the next person. The next person looked at the

drawing and was to draw another picture until the last person, who wrote the answer.

The student teacher verified the adjustments as well. She changed from whispering

into drawing for fear that students could not control themselves to whisper. She

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

376

changed from the sentential level into the lexical level because dealing with words

was more appropriate to students’ levels of proficiency. Then, the student teacher

thought about writing examples for tasks in subsequent plans.

Second, activities inappropriate to students’ levels of proficiency also

accounted for difficulty in implementing lesson plans. Students were assigned to

express opinions in a speaking lesson. However, they had no ideas how to begin

because it was too difficult for their levels of proficiency. The student teacher

assigned students to express opinions on having breakfast or on having meals full of

nutrients. It was the topic for the lesson plan. The student teacher solved the problem

by giving sentences with blanks for practicing speaking.’ For example, the student

teacher presented the language function ‘giving opinion. She gave the example

structures, like ‘Breakfast is ___, a descriptive adjective needed and ‘It’s ___, a

reason needed.

Moreover, the student teacher solved the problem by showing an opinion to a

real situation and having students continue with the activity. In the end, students could

give opinions towards the topic using the example structure. They said, for example,

‘Breakfast is good. It’s delicious. It’s good for your health.’

Finally, activities inappropriate to each phase of teaching accounted for

difficulty in implementing lesson plans. Students had difficulty with following a

student teacher’s activities in two phases of teaching: pre-reading and while-reading.

The difficulty that occurred in the pre-reading phase led to another difficulty in the

while-reading phase. However, the student teacher did not detect any difficulties

along implementation of the plan

During the pre-reading phase, students did not respond to the questions the

student teacher asked. Instead of presenting vocabulary for students, she chose to

elicit students’ awareness of unknown words by asking students questions but the

questions were unclear. The purpose of questioning was not understandable to

students The answers were not used to become a start point of vocabulary learning

appropriately. To illustrate, the student teacher played a VDO clip showing characters

fighting. Then, the student teacher asked ‘What is it?’ instead of asking ‘What are

they doing?’ because the answer was supposed to be ‘They are fighting.’ In fact, the

student teacher aimed at introducing the word ‘fight scene’ in the reading text.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

377

During the while-reading phase, students could not do the reads task well

because they were not well prepared from the pre-reading phase. Students still did not

know many other words from the text. The student teacher clicked the PowerPoint file

to show four questions on the screen. Then, she gave out the handout. It was a

worksheet, on which the four questions were written. She asked the students to start

reading the text in their textbooks and write the answers. The activity required

students to work in groups. It turned out that students were chatting. Students stopped

the student teacher and asked her questions. She stopped and explained the questions

in Thai or pointed at where to find answers for the questions.

According to the interview, the student teacher misunderstood the cause of

difficulty. She thought that the cause of the difficulty was student’s proficiency;

therefore, she did not have any solution.

5.4.11 Lesson plans implemented with difficulty due to ineffective class

management


implementation of lesson plans with difficulty due to ineffective class management.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

378

Figure 5.24: Lesson plans implemented with difficulty due to ineffective class

management

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

379

Figure 5.24 illustrates lesson plans implemented with difficulty due to

ineffective class management. There are three topics: problems with class control, no

cooperation in group work or pair work and failure to consider classroom settings.

First, difficulty in implementing lesson plans could be caused by problems

with class control. Students defied rules of activities and lacked attention to

instruction. Noise was an indicator that class could not be controlled. For example,

during the motivation activity, a student teacher had students stand in rows of their

groups. There were four groups, whose members had to run to touch words on the

board. The students did not wait for another word to be pronounced before they could

start to run as they were supposed to. They kept nudging at one another and shouting.

Though the student teacher shouted ‘Be quiet!’ to calm them down, the class was out

of control. The student teacher realized that the difficulty was caused by her failure to

anticipate problems regarding student disciplines and class control while planning.

The student teacher still valued student interest. She still focused on students having

fun and did not deal with class control problems. Naturally, students had fun when

doing activities but not in the orderly fashion. Class was still chaotic. Therefore, the

student teacher thought about anticipating problems in subsequent plans if she was to

plan activities that directed students’ movements.

Second, difficulty in implementing lesson plans could be caused by no

cooperation in group work or pair work. Students did not cooperate in group work

because of their unwillingness to study and an individual student did not work with a

certain person because of personal reasons. To illustrate, students did not participate

in group work. They didn’t help out. They didn’t do anything.

Another case was that a student refused to work with a person she did not like.

A student teacher described the situation. The student teacher assigned pair work but

one student said she had no one to work with. The student teacher detected a problem

due to number of students in class—40. There should have been twenty pairs but one

girl insisted that she work alone. The student teacher found out that both students had

fought with each other before. That was the reason they did want to work with one

another.

To solve the problems of no cooperation, the student teacher followed up on

students who lacked cooperation right after class. He told them to help friends; or

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

380

else, he would deduct their marks. He insisted that the students submit the work as

well.

To solve the problems of the two girls refusing to pair up, the student teacher

tried to be flexible in students’ grouping choices on purpose that class had to go on.

One of the girls worked alone; the other worked in a group of three members.

The student teacher, who solved the problem of no cooperation in group work,

found following up on the students who lacked cooperation and punishment on grades

workable. The students submitted works as told, eventually. Since then, the student

teacher followed up on students, who lacked cooperation in group work and used

punishment on grades due to its effectiveness.

The student teacher, who allowed students to have their own choices in

grouping, found being flexible in students’ grouping choices practical for the moment

of implementation. She wanted the class to move on and all students were able to

work individually or in groups as they selected their own grouping methods.

Finally, difficulty in implementing lesson plans could be caused by failure to

consider classroom settings. Students were not under control. They were shouting,

running and pushing one another while playing a game. One of the causes pinpointed

classroom setting. The student teacher said the room was too small for class size of 34

students. The classroom was in standard size about 20 square meters. Furniture

included four rows of desks and chairs. Therefore, there were three aisles between

rows of chairs and desks.

As for the activity, students were divided into four groups, three of which

standing in the three aisles. One group had to stand along the length of the whiteboard

with the group’s tail going along one side of the walls. To play the game, one member

of each group had to run to the board and snap a word, uttered by student teacher. As

can be seen, unfairness occurred as the group was nearer to the board than any other

groups. That led to students fighting for better places.

The student teacher could not solve the problem at the scene. Students

participated the activity but were in the orderly fashion. She said she would consider

classroom settings when planning such activities. She did not elaborate on the plan

that she considered classroom settings, either.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

381

5.4.12 Lesson plans implemented with difficulty due to ineffective time

management


implementation of lesson plans with difficulty due to ineffective time management.

Figure 5.25: Lesson plans implemented with difficulty due to ineffective time

management

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

382

Figure 5.25 shows lesson plans implemented with difficulty due to ineffective

time management. Student teachers spent more time for implementing some phases

than they had planned. That resulted in insufficient time for the following phases.

There were three reasons for spending longer time than the time allotments the

student teachers had planned. One reason was that students were so engaged in

activities, that student teachers allowed more time spent than expected. Student

teachers also spent extra time repeating explanation on language points, which

students did not understand. The other reason that made implementation of lesson

plans difficult was that students came to class late.

The student teachers imposed the following solutions. They omitted activities

in the transfer/production phase or they made the transfer/production activities

become homework. If the transfer/production activity was similar to the practice

activity, it would be omitted. Students had to do homework for the transfer/production

activities or missed the transfer/production activities.

Moreover, a student teacher changed the regular transfer/production activity

into a simple task, such as completing exercises from textbooks. The regular

transfer/production activity might take a long time to complete, whereas the exercises

from textbooks were simpler and did not take long to finish. Students only wrote

answers for several questions in the textbooks. They only did simple tasks for the

transfer/production activities.

The student teachers found that omitting and changing some activities

practical as they had more time for implementing earlier phases for teaching

moments. For example, they had to explain more on language points for students who

did not understand the points.

The solutions were implemented whenever there was a case of time

constraints. The main purpose was that the student teachers had to try to cover all

content designated by school.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

383

5.4.13 Lesson plans implemented with difficulty due to teaching aids


implementation of lesson plans with difficulty due to ineffective teaching aids.

Figure 5.26: Lesson plans implemented with difficulty due to ineffective teaching

aids

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

384

Figure 5.26 shows lesson plans implemented with difficulty due to ineffective

teaching aids. Student teachers described the following implementation of lesson

plans with difficulty. All of them had technical problems with electronic devices

because they used electronic files as teaching aids to present the language point for

the day.

To begin with, the projector did not work due to technical breakdowns or

blackouts. Student teachers were unable to use their PowerPoint files, on which there

were statements for students to see and to use in saying a conversation. The student

teachers were unable to show example sentences or pictures on the electronic files,

either. The visualizer did not project some parts of the PowerPoint slides on the

screen. Students could not see or read some example sentences. Speakers did not

work well. Both a student teacher and students could not hear a conversation well

because the sound from the speaker was not clear and had cracks.

To solve the problems, student teachers had to improvise with available

resources at the moment of difficulty because they wanted class to continue. They had

the following solutions.

The student teachers used non-electronic classroom resources. For example,

they had students read English statements in the textbook instead and speak after the

student teachers. Student teachers also listed words, example sentences, questions and

answers on the board.

Some student teachers acted as facilitators in case of technical problems. For

example, they tried to read unclear sentences projected on the screen for students or to

read scripts of a conversation. A student teacher had to read lines of two characters by

saying the name of each character first and saying the lines.

The student teachers found using the board to teach inevitable at the moment

of technical breakdowns or blackouts because the board was the only available

teaching aid. Consequently, students had to rely more on student teachers’ verbal

explanation because all visual aids were unavailable.

Some student teachers found reading sentences for students practical. Students

could follow the student teachers’ reading. The students liked the student teachers’

reading better. The reason was that the students could catch up with the student

teachers’ slow and clear English utterances.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

385

Consequently, the student teachers learned to be cautious about possible

technical problems and tried to avoid the problems by testing electronic devices

before use. Moreover, they learned to be flexible in using only resources available

when technical problems arose.

Above is the implementing stage, next is the reflecting/evaluating stage. It is

the four stage in the theory of Thai EFL student teachers’ lesson planning processes.

5.5 Reflecting/Evaluating stage

After student teachers implemented lesson plans, they reflected upon the

implementation in the reflecting/evaluating stage. Details are shown in Figure 5.27.

Figure 5.27: Reflecting/Evaluating stage

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

386

According to Figure 5.27, after implementing lesson plans, student teachers

had two modes of reflection: reflecting in heads or writing out reflection. They

reflected upon lesson plans by either thinking or writing out after-teaching notes.

The figure also illustrates two practices: sharing reflection and not sharing

reflection. For sharing reflection on difficulty, student teachers identified problems;

specified causes; sought solutions; evaluated solutions, which were used in class to

check whether they were workable; and shared reflection with classmates (in private

time or via social networking) or in seminars, which were attended by student

teachers and university supervisors. Some student teachers shared reflection after they

specified causes and gained solutions from classmates or the seminar.

As for success, student teachers identified success factors; specified causes;

and evaluated causes by using them in implementation in other classes. For both

problems and success, after evaluating solutions or causes, student teachers use

information for designing future plans.

For not sharing reflection on difficulty, identified by the dashed lines, student

teachers did all steps of the process without sharing reflection with classmates or in

the seminar: identifying problems, specifying causes, seek solutions and evaluate

solutions. For not sharing reflection on success, also identified by the dashed lines,

student teachers all steps of the process without sharing reflection with classmates or

in the seminar: identify success factor, specify causes and evaluating causes.

In the end, after evaluating solutions for problems or causes for success, the

student teachers used information from reflection for designing subsequent plans.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

387

5.6 Planning subsequent plans

After student teachers went through all processes of lesson planning from the

pre-planning stage, the planning stage, the implementing stage, the

reflecting/evaluating stage, they came to the final stage that was planning subsequent

plans. The following figure is shown again to illustrate a cyclical procedure of the

lesson planning processes.

Now that all stages of lesson planning were illustrated with details, which

were put together, the theory of Thai EFL student teachers’ lesson planning processes

is generated.

5.7 Theory of Thai EFL student teachers’ lesson planning processes

According to the diagram “Theory of Thai EFL student teachers’ lesson

planning processes” (Figure 5.28), the theory of Thai EFL student teachers’ lesson

planning processes illustrates a cyclical procedure of lesson planning. Student

teachers started planning lessons from gathering information from personnel and

institutions. The student teachers considered the information as opportunities or

constraints, which supported planning or impeded planning, respectively. The

information regarded as opportunities was used in planning lessons, whereas the

Collaborating Conforming Confronting

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

388

student teachers had to find a way to solve any problems caused by the information

regarded as constraints. Then, they designed lesson plans.

Next, the student teachers used various procedures to plan each component of

lesson plans. Then, they submitted the lesson plans to school supervisors and

university supervisors, who gave them feedback on the components. The student

teacher thought about the feedback based on their beliefs. Some student teachers

agreed or partly disagreed with the feedback and rewrote the plan. The others entirely

disagreed with the feedback and decided not to rewrite the plan. After that, the student

teachers implemented the lesson plans.

When student teachers implemented lesson plans, school supervisors and

university supervisors observed their implementation. They gave feedback after the

observation to the student teachers. The student teachers used their beliefs to think

about the feedback and then they made decisions. Some student teachers agreed or

partly disagreed with the feedback and use the feedback to improve subsequent plans.

The others entirely disagreed with the feedback and decided not to use the feedback to

write subsequent plans.

Not only did student teachers think about feedback from school supervisors

and university supervisors to write subsequent plans, but student teachers also used

their reflection upon the implementation of the lesson plans. They went through the

steps of reflection on difficulty and success. In the end, the student teachers used the

solutions for difficulties in other classrooms or tried successful activities or

techniques again. If student teachers found the solutions, the activities or the

techniques effective, the student teachers would use them in writing subsequent plans.

As student teachers wrote subsequent plans, they began the pre-planning stage of the

lesson planning processes to complete the cyclical procedure.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

389

Figure 5.28: Theory of Thai EFL student teachers’ lesson planning processes

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

390

In conclusion, the theory of Thai EFL student teachers’ lesson planning

consisted of many processes including the pre-planning stage, the planning stage, the

implementing stage, the reflecting/evaluating stage and writing subsequent plans. The

following personnel and institutions had direct influences on all processes: school

supervisors, university supervisors, student teachers, schools and the Faculty of

Education. Student teachers thought about the information to write lesson plans.

When they received feedback from the supervisors, they used their beliefs to rewrite

or not to rewrite the lesson plans. The student teachers implemented the lesson plans

and received feedback from the supervisors, who observed the implementation.

Again, student teachers used the beliefs to think about the feedback to write

subsequent plans. Moreover, the student teachers also used their reflection upon the

implementation to write subsequent plans as they started another cycle of lesson

planning.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

CHAPTER 6

DISCUSSION, IMPLICATIONS, LIMITATIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS

AND CONCLUSION

In the fifth chapter, the theory of Thai EFL student teachers’ lesson planning

processes was presented in diagrams along with descriptions. This chapter includes a

summary of the theory of Thai EFL student teachers’ lesson planning processes,

discussion of the descriptions of the theory, implications, limitations,

recommendations and conclusions.

6.1 Summary of the theory of Thai EFL student teachers’ lesson planning

processes

According to the study’s results, the theory of Thai EFL student teachers’

lesson planning processes consisted of five stages in a cyclical procedure. Student

teachers gained information from personnel and institutions in the pre-planning stage;

designed lesson plans in the planning stage; implemented plans in classrooms in the

implementing stage; reflected upon the implementation in the reflecting/evaluating

stage; and planned subsequent plans based on reflection.

In the pre planning stage, student teachers gained information from personnel,

including school supervisors; university supervisors; student teachers; and

institutions, including schools and the Faculty of Education. The information was

viewed as opportunities and constraints. For opportunities, student teachers used the

information to plan. For constraints, student teachers had to find solutions to some

constraints and design plans.

In the planning stage, student teachers studied the information gained from the

pre-planning stage. Then, they followed the linear procedure in designing plans or

developed their own alternative procedures. School supervisors and university

supervisors influenced student teachers’ lesson planning by giving feedback at this

stage. Student teachers received the feedback and thought about it to make decisions.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

392

In the implementing stage, student teachers reviewed lesson plans and then

implemented them in classrooms. School supervisors and university supervisors

influenced lesson planning at this stage too as they observed implementation and gave

feedback. Student teachers also had success and difficulty while implementing lesson

plans.

In the reflecting/evaluating stage, student teachers reflected upon lesson plans,

analyzing both problems and success in implementing the plans. Then, they used the

reflection in planning subsequent plans.

6.2 Discussion

The discussion is presented in the order of the stages in the theory of Thai EFL

student teachers’ lesson planning processes.

6.2.1 An overview of the theory of Thai EFL student teachers’ lesson planning

process

According to this current study, the theory of Thai EFL student teachers’

lesson planning processes was conducted in a cyclical procedure of five stages: pre-

planning (gaining information about textbooks, curriculum, students, facilities,

technology and resources, teaching English, English language, rules and practices;

viewing information as opportunities and constraints); planning (designing

components, such as objectives, activities, time management, class management,

teaching aids and assessment, and reconsidering components based on feedback);

implementing (implementing plans and reconsidering feedback); reflecting (reflecting

upon implementation) and planning subsequent plans based on reflection.

The cyclical procedure is similar to John’s (2006) study on lesson planning

process of student teachers, which states student teachers plan in a cyclical procedure.

There are two stages. In the early stage, student teachers start with gathering

information and then design such components as objectives, student learning and

activities. In the extended stage, when they reconsider the plan, they reflect on the

components and make changes until the lesson plan is complete (p. 493). John’s

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

393

lesson planning process does not show implementations of plans. It focuses more on

student teachers going back and forth, revisiting the components several times.

The lesson planning processes of the current study, however, extended to the

implementation of lesson plans as well as reconsidering feedback and reflection in

order to improve subsequent lesson plans.

There are similar elements between the lesson planning processes of this

current study and Clark and Yinger’s (1980) model on teacher lesson planning. The

first similarity is that the first stage is pre-planning. According to Clark and Yinger’s

model, teachers gain information about students, curriculum and environmental

factors. The second similarity is that teachers think about the information gained from

the initial stage to design lesson plans. The plans, then, are implemented in

classrooms. The final similarity is that teachers have reflection on the implementation

of lesson plans as well. There are also differences between this study’s lesson

planning processes and Clark and Yinger’s model. This current study reveals a

cyclical procedure, which show student teachers went back and forth in designing and

rewriting a lesson plan. On the other hand, Clark and Yinger’s model is not a cyclical

procedure. Teachers gain information, plan a lesson, implement the lesson and reflect

upon the implementation.

The cyclical procedure is also consistent with Clark and Peterson’s (1986)

model of teacher thought and action that illustrates a teachers’ thought process. The

model focuses on teachers’ preactive thought and postactive thought, which refer to

the thought about planning during the time before implementing lesson plans and after

implementing lesson plans, respectively. Teachers also have interactive thought and

action, which refer to the thought and action during implementation of lesson plans.

Although Clark and Peterson’s model focuses on teachers’ thought and action based

on the timing of before, during or after implementation of plans, its cyclical procedure

conveys similar lesson planning processes like this study. For example, the preactive

thought is conducted before implementation. Similarly, in the current study, student

teachers gained information from sources during the pre-planning stage and they

thought about the information. The postactive thought is conducted after

implementation, just as the current study’s reflecting/evaluating stage. The interactive

thought and action is conducted during implementation, similar to the current study’s

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

394

implementing stage. Moreover, Clark and Peterson maintain that opportunities and

constraints have an influence on teachers’ decision-making.

6.2.2 Pre-planning stage

In the pre-planning stage, personnel, such as school supervisors, university

supervisors and student teachers, and institutions, such as schools and the Faculty of

Education, influenced student teachers’ lesson planning. Personnel and institutions

provided the following information: textbooks, curriculum, students, facilities,

technology and resources, teaching English language, rules and practices, teaching

techniques and activities for planning.

The results are in accordance with John (2006), who asserts that school

supervisors are sources of information for student teachers to design lesson plans. The

information includes subject content, curriculum, students’ learning and resources

available for producing instructional materials (p.491). Except for school supervisors,

John’s study did not mention other persons. It does not mention institutions, either.

Clark and Yinger’s (1980, p. 16) model on teacher lesson planning shows

more similarities to the influence of personnel (see also Gafoor & Farooque, 2010)

and institutions found in the current study. According to Clark and Yinger’s model,

teachers obtain necessary information for planning from the teachers themselves,

students and the school as an institution. The information includes experience,

personality, knowledge of subject, repertoire of teaching skills, student characteristics,

curriculum and environmental factors.

The results of the current study are also consistent with Santoyo and Zhang

(2016), who maintain that student teachers gain necessary information from teacher

education programs for designing lesson plans. The information includes knowledge

in teaching, knowledge and skills in subject matter and all elements concerning

teaching and student learning (p.4).

As can be seen, the current study found more in-depth data concerning factors

that provided information to student teachers during the pre-planning stage: student

teachers and the Faculty of Education. As for the information, all studies as well as

the current study reported similar kinds of information, but only in different terms.

‘Personality’ that is reported by Clark and Yinger (1980) was also found in the current

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

395

study. It will be discussed later under the topic ‘student teachers’ influencing their

own lesson planning.

6.2.2.1 Personnel

(1) School supervisors

The current studies found that school supervisors provided the following

information to student teachers: textbooks, curriculum, students, facilities, technology

and resources.

This is consistent to Glickman, Gordon and Ross-Gordon (2001), who found

that school supervisors gave advice on textbooks and instructional resources and

materials for student teachers. This advice refers to a form of direct assistance for

supervision. To be specific, school supervisors should provide, explain and

demonstrate all the necessary materials to student teachers. The action manifested by

a supervisor is called a supervisory activity, where student teachers are provided with

advice to use the resources and materials effectively. To plan to use content, student

teachers need individualized assistance from supervisors. The student teachers, then,

will be able to clearly understand techniques and correctly use the resources and

materials.

(2) University supervisors

According to the results, the current study found that university supervisors

had an influence on student teachers’ lesson planning by providing the following

information: knowledge of teaching English and English language, a rule of

submission of plans and a practice of changing plan formats.

Similarly, Ball (2000) maintains that to prepare student teachers, university

supervisors, who are personnel in the teacher education program, need to provide

student teachers with both pedagogical knowledge and subject matter or content

knowledge, integrated in disciplines and known as ‘pedagogical content knowledge or

PCK.’ Ball describes two aspects of providing such knowledge: delineation of content

knowledge to students and use of tasks for students (p.245).

Other than that, Carver and Feiman-Nemser (2009) contend that one of

supervisors’ responsibilities and roles is to provide information about school

regulations, rules and practices to student teachers, who will act to meet expectations.

The author did not mention details of the information. It can be assumed that

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

396

regulations, rules and practices are what student teachers are expected to comply with

(as cited in Hobson et al., 2012, p.69).

The current study found that some school supervisors and some university

supervisors did not provide any information for student teachers.

Similarly, Hobson et al. (2012) argue that when a supervisor is assigned to

supervise a student teacher, it does not mean the student teacher will be supervised

(p.68). Student teachers realize that poor supervisors and lack of supervision exist and

they think this is an obstacle to teaching (p.75).

(3) Student teachers

According to the current study, student teachers had an influence on their own

lesson planning. Student teachers had motivation to become professional teachers.

Therefore, they tried to learn part of teaching professionalism by improving their

lesson planning.

This is supported by Othman’s (2009) study on personality and teaching

effectiveness. According to the results, such teacher personality traits as

conscientiousness and openness to experience accounts for teaching effectiveness.

However, based on a statistical analysis, only conscientiousness has a significant

relationship to teaching effectiveness. Conscientiousness refers to the amount of

persistence, organization and motivation in goal-directed behavior; and openness to

experience refers to the proactive seeking and appreciation of new experiences (p.18).

Teaching effectiveness refers to the way teachers select and use teaching methods and

instructional strategies to help student learn. Though lesson planning is not directly

mentioned, the results imply that teachers, who have motivation to pursue the

teaching profession and explore new things, are likely to plan effectively by thinking

about effective methods of teaching.

The current study also found that some student teachers had their parents as

role models. They look up to their parents, who are also teachers, and they are

motivated and inspired to improve their lesson plans.

The results of the current study are supported by a study conducted by Manuel

and Hughes (2006), who contend that intrinsic motivation and a role model become

two of many factors that influence student teachers’ decisions. Student teachers who

like to pursue the teaching career have a talent for teaching and sustain academic

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

397

disciplines at ease. The demanding tasks of lesson planning, perhaps, can be accepted

by those who have the intrinsic motivation to become a professional teacher (p.11).

Manuel and Hughes do not mention parents as an inspiration to student teachers but

they assert when student teachers have good relationship with mentor teachers, they

look up to the role model teachers and decide to work as a teacher (p.15).

Concerning student teachers, the current study found that some student

teachers said they had personality traits that impeded lesson planning, such as

inability in designing some activities, uncertainty in using knowledge in planning a

lesson or lack of confidence in managing a class.

This is congruent to Othman’s (2009) study on personality and teaching

effectiveness. According to Othman’s study, personality has a relationship with

teaching effectiveness. Othman explains that neuroticism refers to a teacher who has a

negative view of self, lack of confidence and worries. The negative affectivity might

affect teaching effectiveness (p.25), which includes the way teachers select and use

methods of teaching to help students learn. The selection and use imply a process in

lesson planning. However, the relationship is not statistically significant due to other

factors’ influence as well.

Moreover, the current study’s results are also supported by Parmoothar’s

(2009, p. 33) study on problems in lesson planning. Teachers have problems

preparing English lessons because they do not have enough knowledge in teaching

English and English language. They are not confident to design lessons or some of

them do not prepare lessons at all. Moreover, many teachers do not review

pedagogical knowledge and English language prior to planning, such as use of media

or introduction to learning. The study, however, did not elaborate on solutions found

from the results.

Moreover, the current study found that student teachers had moral support and

gained ideas for planning from their classmates, who practiced teaching at the same

school or at other schools. They communicated to one another via face-to-face

communication and social networking.

This is similar to Liou et al.’s (2016) study about student teachers’ social

aspects which relates to teaching performance. The authors argue that student

teachers’ social relationships and perceptions of peer trust and productiveness

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

398

associate with teaching performance (abstract). The findings reveal that student

teachers, who have emotional support from associating with classmates, establish

social ties, peer trust and self-efficacy. This enhances their teaching performance

significantly and positively. Liou et al. did not mention the channels of

communication.

Other than that, according to the results of the current study, some student

teachers learned about each supervisor’s supervision style, such as strictness on

submitting lesson plans, from senior graduates. However, they still could not meet

deadlines.

This is consistent with Abas (2016), who reports on student teachers’ tardiness

and undesirable actions (p. 105). Though Abas does not specify what the tardiness

refers to, it can be assumed that submitting lesson plans late is also considered

tardiness. Abas (2016) does not mention senior graduates, either. However,

graduating student teachers’ points of view as well as school supervisors, university

supervisors and school administrators were mentioned as samples for this mixed

method study. In fact, the studies that specify an influence of senior graduates on

student teachers are really rare. Abas’ study is the only study that included student

teachers, who were about to graduate in providing data.

6.2.2.2 Institutions

(1) Schools

According to the current study, student teachers received information about

schools’ rules and practices, some of which negatively affected their time

management with regards to lesson planning. Student teachers had to find solutions to

cope with the difficulty.

This is consistent with Dias-Lacy and Guirguis (2017, p.268). When student

teachers received rules and regulations, they accept, act upon or adjust instruction

according to the rules and regulations right away. What student teachers do is called

coping with situations by means of accepting.

According to the current study’s results, student teachers’ time management

was affected by a school practice which required there be ‘no homework for students.’

They had to adjust time allotted for activities in phases.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

399

This is congruent to Tokmak and Karakus (2011), who found that student

teachers wanted to cover all activities as planned but they had problems with

insufficient time. Though Tokmak and Karakus do not mention a specific practice that

caused the problem in student teachers’ time management, the authors mention an

influence of administration on student teachers’ instruction. The imposition of content

for student teachers to cover in a term affected the way they could manage time for a

lesson. Student teachers found there were many aspects of content to teach but the

amount of content was not appropriate to the amount of time they had, hence their

problems in time management (p. 328).

(2) Faculty of Education

According to the results, the Faculty of Education imposed a rule that student

teachers had to write in a detailed plan format. However, some student teachers

revealed that they preferred writing in a draft plan format to the detailed plan format

for it was shorter and time-saving.

This is consistent to Ball et al. (2006, p. 55), who maintain that a majority of

student teachers prefer the planning format that is ‘less scripted, shortened and more

outlined.’

Moreover, according to the current study’s results, some student teachers felt

discouraged to write in a detailed plan format. However, some student teachers saw

its benefits. It implies that the Faculty of Education might have seen writing the

detailed plan format was beneficial for student teachers. This set a discrepancy among

student teachers because the results also revealed discouragement in writing lengthy,

detailed plans.

This is consistent to Hall and Smith (2006), who maintain that teachers and

administrative bodies have different points of view on the plan format. While student

teachers prefer the draft plan format, educators, school administrators and supervisors

expect student teachers to write detailed plans because the format shows

professionalism in teaching. However, there is no evidence to support whether or not

teachers who write detailed, elaborate plans are better in teaching students (p.429). In

fact, student teachers are at the beginning of their future profession. They should learn

to write detailed plans in their first year; otherwise, they will never learn to do so.

Still, when they become in-service teachers, they seem to prefer mental planning or

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

400

corridor plans, the plan that is created minutes before the teachers walk in the corridor

to classrooms.

6.2.3 Planning stage

The planning stage shows student teachers studied the information gained

from the pre-planning stage. Then, student teachers’ procedures in designing lesson

plans in a linear process started with studying information gained from the pre-

planning stage and formulating objectives. The rest of the procedures included

designing activities for phases of teaching along with planning time and class

management, designing and producing teaching aids, planning assessment and having

complete plans.

This is similar to Tyler’s (1949) lesson planning procedures “specifying

objectives, selecting learning activities, organizing learning activities and specifying

evaluation procedures” (as cited in Uhrmacher, Conrad & Moroye, 2013, p.11). The

final goal of this lesson planning procedures is to generate student learning

established by observing or measuring objectives (Tyler, 1949). John (2006) insists

that student teachers need to learn to employ the linear process in their lesson

planning before they can develop their own choices of processes (p. 487).

According to the results of the current study, some students started the

planning stage by studying information and formulating objectives as in the linear

procedure.

However, the current study also found an interesting alternative procedure,

which was not the linear process. Some student teachers started their lesson planning

procedure by studying information and designing and producing teaching aids before

formulating objectives. While designing and producing teaching aids, they were also

designing activities for phases of teaching as well as designing time management and

class management.

This is consistent to Clark and Yinger (1980), Hall and Smith (2006) and John

(2006). They specify that many experienced teachers and student teachers do not

adopt the linear process because there are more factors interrupting lesson planning:

time constraints, institutional concerns, attitudes, moods or expected events.

Moreover, McCutcheon (1980) concludes that there have been accumulated

evidence of teachers’ planning lesson without starting with objectives from

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

401

quantitative and qualitative studies. Teachers have focused more on students’ interests

and needs than what they should learn. Therefore, teachers start planning with

thinking about what students are to do (activities), not what students are to learn

(objectives) (p. 4).

This is also confirmed by the teaching’ planning models proposed by Zahorik

(1975). The author asserts that teachers think about activities as an important planning

decision. Designing activities is not made as a first decision. However, “if activities

are joined with the closely related area of materials, this combine decision still is only

made first” (p. 137). This implies that teachers make decisions on activities when they

are also producing materials for the activities. Zahorik also affirms that teachers do

not make decisions on objectives first. Instead, they made decisions on other

components on lesson plans first and more frequently than on objectives. Formulating

objectives is not a particularly important planning decision.

Current lesson planning procedures in Thailand

From the current study, student teachers followed both linear and non-linear

procedures in planning lessons. Some student teachers used standards and indicators

from the B.E. 2551 core curriculum to formulate objectives and then designed other

components on a lesson plan.

The procedures of planning by the student teachers are consistent to

Bullungpattama (2012), who maintains that the backward design for lesson planning

has been one of the procedures for writing lesson plans among teachers and student

teachers, who came across the teacher education program. Wiggins and McTighe

(1998) propose that the backward design refers to a lesson planning process that starts

with students’ learning achievements with an evidence of the achievements. Then,

teachers or student teachers plan lessons that enable students to have the evidence of

learning achievements. To adopt the backward design, student teachers have to use

learning standards and indicators as a starting point of writing a lesson plan (The 21st

Century Teachers, 2018). The standards and indicators are mentioned in the core

curriculum which has been used in Thailand since 2007 and the revised version has

been introduced in 2017. However, from the current study, some student teachers did

not follow the procedures of the backward design’s lesson planning, that is, looking at

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

402

content from textbooks and using the content to plan activities instead of using

standards or indicators to begin. Pusadee (2011) explains that some teachers plan

according to their own convenience. Konkayan, Pothiwat and Kaerahan (2013) add

that what teachers were trained or guided to do was not what they implemented in

their everyday instruction. The reasons include teachers’ lack of experience, decision-

making skills and problem-solving skills.

According to the results, student teachers did not receive feedback after they

submitted lesson plans to some school supervisors and university supervisors. The

student teachers, then, looked for feedback from other sources, such as from school

supervisors, if their university supervisors did not provide feedback and vice versa.

This is similar to Dias-Lacy and Guirguis (2017), who maintain that novice

teachers have a coping mechanism for handling problems. When novice teachers lack

support from experienced teachers, they would gain support from other sources (p.

268). Moreover, Freiberg, Waxman and Houston (1987) assert that when student

teachers find feedback insufficient or ineffective for helping them improve lessons,

they will search for feedback or relevant information from other sources, such as

supervisors, student teachers themselves or classmates. The approaches to searching

for alternative or additional feedback were important strategies student teachers

employed to assist themselves with obtaining necessary information they needed

about their classroom behavior (p. 79).

Observe, obey and omit

The current study also found that student teachers reacted to feedback

differently depending of their beliefs. Some student teachers observed the plan, the

feedback and the situation. If they agreed with feedback, they rewrote lesson plans.

Some partly disagreed with feedback but still obeyed and rewrote lesson plans.

However, some student teachers entirely disagreed with feedback and omitted to

follow the feedback or they refused to rewrite lesson plans.

This is consistent with Bailey’s (2006) outcomes of supervision. The student

teacher agrees with the supervisor and makes changes completely, gradually or

partially; or disagrees with the supervisor but still makes changes or disagrees and

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

403

refuses to change anything. The student teacher sees the value of changing as

suggested or he/she does not see the value of making changes (p.143).

Student teachers also made decisions based on their beliefs (Perry & Rog,

1992; Richards, 2015). They practice according to the information, values, theories

and assumptions about teaching and learning. Knudson (1998) also maintains that

student teachers receive feedback differently. Some have trouble accepting

constructive criticism. Those who receive feedback and communicate to supervisors

have a better chance to improve their teaching (p.59).

6.2.3.1 School supervisors and university supervisors’ influence on

student teachers’ lesson planning when giving feedback on lesson plans

According to the current study, student teachers for this study considered

feedback gained from supervisors. They needed the feedback to improve their plans

and solve problems. They made changes as suggested, they could also see a better

version of the lesson plan.

This is consistent with Hall, Hughes and Thelk (2017), who maintain that

school supervisors were seen as resources for supervising student teachers, especially

for planning a lesson. Feedback they give to student teachers is viewed as useful

because it is task-oriented. The feedback that is right to the purpose of a task can be

considered by student teachers as direct and useful (p. 89). Moreover, Shantz and

Stratemeyer (2000) maintain that student teachers articulate that they need feedback

that is positive and helpful, so that they can improve their practice based on the

feedback.

According to the results of the current study, one student teacher partly

disagreed with her supervisor’s feedback on writing objectives but she still wrote the

objectives following her school supervisor’s feedback. The reason was that it was her

school supervisor’s expectation she wanted to meet.

This is consistent to Richards (2015), who maintains that EFL teachers think

about their beliefs when making decisions. One of the elements that establishes

beliefs is expectations. Hudson (2013) explains that student teachers should realize

school supervisors’ expectations so as to achieve positive teaching experiences at

school. The university and university supervisors might provide guidelines and

expectations for student teachers to be engaged in school, but the expectations of

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

404

school supervisors should be communicated clearly from the school supervisors

themselves.

The fact that the student teacher, from the current study, wanted to meet her

school supervisor’s expectations is congruent with Hudson’s (2013, p. 107-8) study

on school supervisors’ expectations for student teachers. The study concludes that

planning and preparation for teaching is one of the desirable attributes and practices

that school supervisors expect for student teachers to follow. From the current study,

the student teacher did not want to defy her school supervisor’s advice. She wanted

her school supervisor to see that she followed the advice and so meet the school

supervisor’s expectations.

Cultural aspects in dealing with feedback

In terms of the Thai culture, the fact that the student teacher conformed to her

school supervisor although she partly disagreed with the feedback can be explained by

Luroj, Pak-ampai and Pakaew (2017). Thai students did not seem to question their

teachers because the students thought that teachers had the most authority. In Thai

culture, students respect teachers. They rather keep quiet in class (Phumchijzarnan, Z.

& Rangponsumrit, 2018). Therefore, teachers also expect students to listen to and

obey them. Based on their authoritarianism, teachers assume that their instruction or

feedback was always correct. The findings from the current study are also consistent

with Jantarakantee, Faikhamta and Roadrangka’s (2008) study on student teachers

perceptions toward their supervisors. Student teachers say that the supervisors think

that what they are thinking is correct. The supervisors do not accept student teachers’

opinions that are different from theirs. Perhaps, this becomes a reason for the student

teacher from this current study choosing to make changes as suggested by her school

supervisor despite her partial disagreement with the school supervisor’s feedback.

Student teachers’ beliefs

The current study found that before student teachers made decisions on certain

feedback, they thought about it. They considered feedback as convenient to practice,

congruent with their knowledge or their needs. The results conveyed that they agreed

with the feedback and made changes on lesson plans. On the other hand, some student

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

405

teachers might consider some feedback as incongruent with their knowledge and they

entirely disagreed with the feedback. The results included that they did not make any

changes on lesson plan.

This is consistent with Richards’ (2015) belief systems. EFL teachers make

decisions based on their beliefs. There are sources to shape up the beliefs:

information, attitudes, values, theories and assumptions. All the sources of beliefs

lead to an English teacher’s teaching classroom practice. Lesson planning is also

teacher practice. The way the student teachers of this study made decisions using their

reasons could be explained by Richards (2015) as well. As sources of beliefs shape up

EFL teachers’ classroom practice, the teachers set up principles that they use to make

decisions. These principles were what the student teachers had too when they made

decisions on agreeing or disagreeing with feedback. The principles are derived from

experience, school practice, personality, educational theory, reading and other

sources. The principles each EFL teacher set up are different among teachers

according to the amount of teaching experience or the teacher’s orientation to

teaching, such as English functional or structural based instruction (Richards, Tung &

Ng, 1992).

Furthermore, from the current study, student teachers used fun activities to

plan lessons. The reason was that they wanted to make students interested in the

lessons and motivated to learn English. One of the student teachers revealed she used

her experience in learning fun activities during her childhood to make decision on

planning such activities. Some other student teachers still planned fun activities,

which directed students’ movements despite supervisors’ feedback against such

activities for fear that class could not be controlled.

This is consistent to many studies on student teachers and teachers’ beliefs on

planning and instruction of English language. Numrich (1996) argues that one of EFL

student teachers’ sources of beliefs is the experience they had when they were

students learning English language. EFL student teachers use teaching techniques or

activities that they had positive experience with when they were students. On the

other hand, they avoid using teaching techniques or activities that they had negative

experience with when they were students. Moreover, these beliefs become sources of

teachers’ reference, which are established over a period of time and related to

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

406

teachers’ theories of language, the nature of language teaching practices, roles of

themselves as teachers and relationship with their students. However, Buehl and Fives

(2009) assert that student teachers prefer following the perspectives that are similar to

theirs. This behaviour results from school culture, characteristics and practices that

the student teachers underwent during practicum. Buehl and Fives’ assertion is not

congruent to the current study’s findings on student teachers’ insistence to plan

activities with movements. Student teachers’ beliefs on their past experience

surpasses their supervisors’ feedback against such activities.

Imbalance of power

Moreover, from the current study, some student teachers found that school

supervisors’ feedback was not congruent with university supervisors’ feedback. For

example, an activity was regarded as effective by a university supervisor, whereas a

school supervisor suggested that a student teacher revisit or change the activity.

However, the student teacher entirely disagreed with the school supervisor’s feedback

and decided not to rewrite the activity. As can be seen, there was imbalance of power

between school supervisors and university supervisors.

This is consistent to LaBoskey, Kroll, and Galguera’s (2002) case studies on

student teachers. The authors assert that the role of university supervisors is

prioritized in teacher education programs. Their feedback is highlighted as principles

to follow. However, the role of school supervisors or even student teachers is not

explicitly recognized in order to create principles for teacher education programs.

Bunsiripesutch (2013) also explains that student teachers perceive positively towards

their university supervisors at the high level. The student teachers reveal that the

university supervisors have expertise and show repertoire of a teacher role model. As

can be seen, the power between school supervisors and university supervisors does

not seem to balance since university supervisors have been highlighted by student

teachers.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

407

6.2.4 Implementing stage

According to the current study, before implementing lesson plans, student

teachers reviewed the plans because they did not want to have grammatical mistakes

in the content, which could be used to produce teaching aids. They said the mistakes,

appearing on teacher aids, might imply unprofessionalism to students.

This is consistent to Mergler’s (2012, p.72) teacher behavior models to

students in classrooms. Teacher behavior sends powerful messages about what is

acceptable and unacceptable. Teachers want to present to students values of education

by directly showing such actions to students. Similarly, if student teachers showed the

content drawn from well-planned instruction, they wanted students to treat them like

professional teachers in return. Moreover, Doecke and McKnight (2002) assert that

student teachers try to write the best plan simply to impress the supervisors. When the

implementation of the plans is successful, the student teachers could impress students

in class and then feel impressed about themselves as well.

Moreover, the study of stakeholders’ perceptions of effective EFL teachers

conducted by Kwangsawad (2017) also confirms that EFL student teachers prioritized

their professionalism in class. According to the study, EFL student teachers categorize

professional attributions as the top category indicating effective EFL teachers. The

subcategories include being able to project a professional image and willing to

participate in planning and assessment. The subcategories are rated some of the top

ranks, second only to being reflective practitioners (e.g. think about their teaching)

and collaborative. Other than that, the specific attributes EFL student teachers rated

among the top ranks include being well prepared and well planned and have a

thorough understanding of their subject area, second only to having good

communication skills (p. 168).

As can be seen, student teachers majoring in Teaching English place a

considerable importance on projecting professionalism as language teachers by using

lesson plans as a means to keep up a professional image. The lesson plans must be

written with accurate English because that shows that they have understanding of their

subject area.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

408

6.2.4.1 School supervisors and university supervisors’ influence when


The current study found that student teachers were recommended to speak

more English during implementation of lesson plans, according to supervisors’

feedback given after observation. The student teachers spoke both English and Thai

because students needed them to explain language points in Thai for better

understanding.

This is consistent to Liaw (2012), who found that most student teachers

realized the importance of speaking English during class time. They said that their

spoken English would become input to students’ learning pronunciation and speaking

skills. Moreover, Ketprasit’s (2007) study of problems of English teaching and

learning for primary school indicates that administrators impose that English teachers

teach lessons in English (p.86). It implies that the practice exposes students to English

listening because students do not have an opportunity to have contact with native

English speakers or to listen to English. However, English teachers say that they do

not speak only English in class but sometimes they speak Thai as well. The author did

not mention specific reasons.

The current study found that a student teacher, teaching young students aged

9-10 years old, received feedback from her university supervisor on her focusing

heavily on grammar exercises. The student teacher refused to add more various

English communicative activities and insisted that the lesson plans emphasize on

grammar points. The reason was that she preferred to follow her school supervisor

recommendations to emphasize on grammar points. It was more practical.

This is consistent to Castañeda-Trujillo and Aguirre-Hernández’ (2018) study

on pre-service English teachers’ voices about the teaching practicum. School

supervisors have a direct influence on student teachers’ practice because student

teachers learn from their supervisors’ skills and experiences. According to the study,

student teachers revealed that they looked up to their school supervisors as models.

When a student teacher observed a prepared teacher, she felt positively towards the

school supervisor and viewed the supervisor as her model. Another student teacher

emphasized that her school supervisor provided her tips in teaching (p. 164). This is

the transfer of practice from a school supervisor to a student teacher. The authors also

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

409

reveal that all of the student teachers had positive feelings towards what their school

supervisors practiced in classroom. They also used the practice in their

implementation as well.

The results were also supported by Sitirak (2015), who maintain that Thai

teachers focused on teaching grammar rules for a period of time since the method

serves the purpose that students could learn grammar rules first so that they use the

rules to help them understand English sentences by means of translation (p. 32). The

author also claims that the teachers reported the method was good for beginner

students. However, Okan (2018) found that teachers teaching young learners had a

tendency to teach indirect grammar to their students. They believed that it was more

effective to have students work out grammar rules by themselves in an indirect way

(p. 10). The author did not mention what kind of activity these teachers used to teach

young students grammar indirectly. On the other hand, teachers of adult students

tended to use the deductive method in teaching grammar so that the students could

learn to speak or write English with accuracy.

In conclusion, student teachers adopt their school supervisors’ practice in their

own classrooms. The student teachers are ready to learn from the school supervisors’

skills and experiences. When a school supervisor focuses on grammar-based exercises

rather communicative grammar activities, a student teacher has an impression that the

method is eligible to follow no matter how much a university teacher asks her to

change to communicative activities.

6.2.4.2 Lesson plans implemented as planned

According to the results, student teachers revealed that lesson planning could

be implemented as planned due to students’ motivation and proficiency. The students

with motivation and sufficient proficiency could follow teaching procedures, use

language points right after instruction, get ready to learn and pay attention during

implementation of lesson plans.

This is similar to Chang et al. (2014) and Meador (2017), who maintain that

planning and teaching students with motivation is easy because students with

motivation like to work hard, have positive learning attitude and are willing to learn.

When they are assigned to work with specific goals, they will try hard to achieve it.

As the student teacher gave them tasks to finish in class time, it is typical for students

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

410

with motivation to complete the tasks in order to overcome learning issues through

working hard. They also show eagerness and enthusiasm by asking questions about

what they want to know and try to do everything to achieve their goals.

Other than that, Scrivener (2011) argues that students with sufficient

proficiency of English have basic competence in speaking and writing. They are able

to fill in gaps in uncompleted listening and reading texts. Therefore, the

communicative activities, such as the two-way communication activity, can be

comprehensible to the students. However, Scrivener also warns that though students

with sufficient proficiency know more grammatical rules and have competence in the

productive skills, student teachers have to think about what they still need. These

students know a lot of linguistic elements; therefore, they may not see success easily.

Student teachers are told to help the students with sufficient proficiency to set up

goals and plan activities that help them achieve the goals. What’s more, Jensen (2001)

insists that novice teachers anticipate problems and write them in lesson plans. The

problem may not be concerned with inappropriate levels of difficulty but there are

more questions to ask while planning, such as ‘What kind of question can the teacher

expect? Will there be problems when a student interacts with his/her partner?’

6.2.4.3 Lesson plans implemented with difficulty

According to the results of this study, student teachers reported difficulty in

implementing lesson plans due to students’ levels of proficiency. As a result, the

student teachers had to plan lesson plans carefully and more strategically.

This is similar to Scrivener (2011), who maintains that students with limited

proficiency of English have some knowledge of English but in a basic level. The

student teacher experienced difficulty in implementing lesson plans with these

students. However, Scrivener suggests that students with limited proficiency can learn

language and their learning can be either successful or a failure. The assistance from

planning is needed. Moreover, Hanson (2018) asserts that planning for students with

limited proficiency must be done carefully. The teacher needs to realize that certain

students may need more time to learn and proceed to the next level. Therefore, it was

eligible as the student teachers tried to assist beginner students to be able to achieve

an objective by the end of a lesson by using simpler words and adding more examples

and explanations.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

411

From the results of the current plan, after student teachers gave sample

conversations to solve students’ problems with speaking tasks, the student teachers

learned to organize activities that moved from mechanical practice to meaningful

practice. This is consistent to Richards (2006), who asserts that practice activities

should have three levels. Mechanical practice is a controlled practice, which does not

require students to understand the language point they are using. For example, in

repetition and substitution drills, students only replace words to learn how certain

grammar points work. Meaning practice is also a controlled practice but students can

make their own meaningful choices. The practice is meaningful because students

respond to the use of language function rather than citing language structure.

However, the student teachers of the current study did not design the activities that

required students to do the third level of practice—communicative practice, in which

students are to exchange real information in a real communication context. The

communicative practice should be a freer activity, where there is no more control. Al-

Sobhi and Preece (2018) and Denkci and Coker (2016) found that a majority of EFL

teachers thought the Communicative Language Teaching approach was difficult to

adopt in their classroom context. They did not include enough communicative

practice for students. They still had to use the traditional Grammar-Translation

approach in teaching.

According to the current study, student teachers tried to solve the difficulty

during the implementation of lesson plans. One of the solutions was to monitor and

offer help to students in need. However, when students found other new language

burdens, they sought help again. Student teachers solved immediate problems they

faced in class without considering a solution for long-term effects. Therefore, the

problems still existed.

This is consistent with Brown’s (2000) study. The purpose of monitor is for

watching class. Teacher can sit at a desk and keep watching students or walk and talk

to students. Other actions for monitoring include having a glimpse at student work or

checking the answers. When students raise their hands, the students may need help, to

which the teacher walks towards them and offers it (p.7). However, student teachers

still faced other problems when students continued seeking help from them. Student

teachers did not try to find a solution that could solve the problems for long-term

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

412

effects. This approach to solving problems in classrooms was explained by Livingston

and Borko (1989). The decision making process of solving problems is similar in both

experienced teachers and novice teachers: having knowledge, thinking about

problems and acting upon the problems. However, teachers with little experience have

limited knowledge to help them understand and represent problems with a variety of

solutions. They tend to make decisions on problems with fragmented efforts. “Novice

teachers have less fully developed schemata. In this context schemata are described as

abstract knowledge structures that summarize information about many particular

cases and the relationships among them” (as cited in Richards, 2015, Teachers’

preactive decisions).

According to the results of this study, a student teacher reported difficulty in

implementing lesson plans due to afternoon effects. The student teacher had to think

about planning fun activities to deal with the problem. Moreover, student teachers

reported students with low motivation did not try to work on tasks. The student

teachers, then, tried to plan interesting activities for them.

Moreover, Dimitrova (2016) asserts that the afternoon time significantly

affects students’ productive performance in classrooms. It is inevitable for students to

have such unwanted behaviors in the afternoon as looking tired or drowsy. Students

who have studied in the afternoon are reported to have lower productivity in learning.

The study suggests that school administrations revisit scheduling courses which are

affected by the time-of-day effects.

However, the student teachers of this current study had to make decisions to

solve the problems of students’ being drowsy because they had to deal with the same

time of teaching. Changing students’ schedules was not an option. Student teachers’

decision to arouse students’ attention by planning fun activities was more appropriate.

This is in accordance with Keith, Wetherbee and Kindzia (1995), who

maintain that students with low motivation do not possess the following actions:

completing assignments, behaving according to others’ expectations in school, trying

their best in school, trying to get good grades and having good habits for working.

What the student teachers tried to do to assist students with low motivation in class

was in accordance with suggestions to motivate students. Teachers try to screen

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

413

students and identify lowly motivated or students with low motivation and try to make

them meet high educational aspirations and behavioral expectations. The activities

planned should arouse students’ desires to participate. They are supposed to follow

routines and rules accepted by teachers and students as usual too.

This current study also found that difficulty in implementing lesson plans was

caused by students’ inappropriate classroom behavior. Student teachers had to think

about solutions to solve the problems: handling inappropriate behavior at scene and

rewarding

Similarly, what the student teachers tried to do to solve the problems was also

in line with Harmer’s (2002) and Gower, Phillips and Walters’ (1995) suggestions for

dealing with problem behavior. Teachers should help students with low motivation

create self-esteem by planning a lesson, which the students can complete. For

example, a task should not be too difficult. If lack of motivation is caused by low

proficiency of English, the level of difficulty of the task should be appropriate to the

students’. When the students are encouraged to complete the task and they can

successfully do it. They receive approvals from the teachers and classmates. The

success, then, creates self-esteem. Moreover, problematic students can be put in

charge of routines, such as giving away handouts, collecting homework or chairing a

group discussion. The students will feel like being acknowledged in class and they are

responsible for doing something for the class community.

Rewarding is one technique to motivate students to participate in class

activities and to learn (Renard, 2017). If used appropriately, rewarding can yield

success in a classroom while implementing a lesson plan. For example, students, who

are rewarded, will behave according to expectations, participate in classroom

activities and feel proud and happy. When they have success, their self-confidence

and self-esteem will be increased, accordingly. They also feel encouraged to achieve

more goals.

From the results of the current study, student teachers had difficulty in

implementing plans because of time constraints, lack of experience in time

management and a high amount of content squeezed in each lesson. They had to think

of practical solutions.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

414

This is consistent with Tokmak and Karakus’ (2011) study, which state that

student teachers prepared many examples to show students and this could take longer

time than they expected. Moreover, they spent a long time to explain lessons to

students (p.328). This leads to insufficient time for the whole lesson. According to

their study, there was no report on omitting some activities as time was not sufficient.

However, according to the current study, a student teacher reported that he

changed an activity, which might take longer time to another activity, which would

spend shorter time. This is consistent with Chen and Wei (2015), who stated that time

constraint was a factor that influences teachers’ instruction. The teachers in this study

change some activities to save time, such as replacing group work to teachers’

demonstration (p. 207).

Finally, the current study also reported student teachers’ difficulty in

implementing plans due to technical problems with teaching aids.

This is consistent with Nina (2017), who maintains that when all teaching aids,

especially the electronic ones, fail, teachers must act as teaching aids by themselves.

Teachers are the best resources in classrooms. They can use the board and their own

speech to teach. This is also supported by Jalil (2018), who explains that teachers can

act as teacher aids and become more effective than the actual teaching aids. The

reason is that they can be available all the time using no electricity. Moreover, they

can involve more students in speaking lessons as they can adjust movement, body

language or speech.

6.2.5 Reflecting/Evaluating stage

In the reflecting/evaluating stage, student teachers reflected upon lesson plans,

analyzing both problems and successes in implementing the plans.

This stage is similar to Hall and Smith’s (2006, p.424) instruction process:

planning, instruction and reflection. Student teachers think about knowledge and

application, difficulties and solutions for improving the teaching profession (Roberts,

2016; Ryken & Hamel, 2016).

From the results of the current study, the process of reflection was to identify

problems, specify causes, seek solutions, evaluate solutions and use the information

for writing subsequent plans.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

415

It is similar to Lee’s (2005) process of reflective thinking: problem context,

problem reframing, seeking solutions, experimentation, evaluation and acceptance /

rejection; and similar to Schön’s (1987) reflective thinking approach: problematic

situation, frame / reframe the problem, experimentation and review consequences /

implementation (as cited in Lee, 2005, p.701). Though the terms are different, the

procedures in this study’s reflective process cover all actions of reflection. Lee and

Schön emphasize reflecting on problems; however, the results of this study revealed

reflection on success too. This is congruent with Wegner, Remmert and Strehlke

(2014), who describe a self-reflection process of student teachers, with assistance

from supervisors: implementing plans, reflecting on implementation and evaluating

plans in terms of both problems and successes, specifying reasons, comparing the

reflections to methodologies and considering ways for improvement (p.40). The

difference is that the student teachers in this study did not disclose how they

considered methods of teaching English related to their reflections, nor did they

mention anything about teaching English approaches or concepts concerning their

reflection.

Moreover, from the results of the current study, student teachers reflected by

thinking in their heads or writing out reflection.

This could be explained by Kanthorn (2015), who states that self or individual

reflection refers to a person thinking about things toward himself or herself. A person

can communicate his or her reflection by writing, called a reflection journal or a

written format, or by speaking, called an oral format (see also Lee, 2005, p.707). Of

all the methods of reflection, either by writing or speaking, student teachers gained

advantages of challenging their beliefs and knowledge used in classrooms. They

learned to think about what had happened in the classroom and felt more confident as

the process in the classroom was complete (Roberts, 2016).

Furthermore, student teachers also shared reflections with classmates in

private time and in seminars, where all student teachers and university supervisors

met and shared problems and success in lesson planning. Some student teachers

gained solutions from the sharing.

This is consistent to Freiberg, Waxman and Houston (1987), who argue that

student teachers search for feedback or relevant information from a classroom

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

416

analysis system with supervisors; self-analysis; and peer discussion such as in official

seminars (p.79). In the same way, Spangler (2013) asserts that seminars, organized by

a university, or any other teacher community systems, like online networking,

establish a platform for student teachers to share information and gain knowledge

about teaching and learning and problem-solving (p.87). Meyer and Sawyer (2006)

also support that reflection about teaching, with help from fellow student teachers and

supervisors, can improve future instruction (p.49).

Collaboration in teacher education

From the findings of the current study, student teachers showed that they had

collaborated among themselves in improving their lesson plans. Some student

teachers had informal observations on their classmates when they had an opportunity

to observe the classmates’ implementation of plans and gained ideas for their own

plans. This is supported by Jenkinson and Benson’s (2017) study on student teachers’

perceptions of effective supervision. The authors assert that student teachers benefit

from peer supervision. Le Cornu (2005) argues that while student teachers observe

and give feedback to their classmates, student teachers can motivate one another.

They are more passionate and engaged to the observation. The difference is that

Jenkingson and Benson’s and Le Corne’s studies focus on formal peer supervision

whereas the current study’s findings reveal informal methods.

However, from the current study, student teachers did not clearly reveal that

school supervisors and university supervisors collaborated with one another, although

in reality there was a certain level of collaboration between the supervisors. The

difference in their feedback reported was an example of limited collaboration among

the supervisors, where imbalance of power between school supervisors and university

supervisors caused student teachers to make decisions based on either school or

university supervisors’ feedback. The importance of collaboration is also reported.

Loughran (2011) maintains that collaboration among supervisors can help student

teachers think about intentions or what is planned for instruction and actions or how

to implement the plan. In other words, collaboration among supervisors and peer

observation among student teachers can minimize gaps between teaching intentions

and actions. In addition, Smith (2016) argues that there should be collaboration

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

417

among supervisors, e.g. school supervisors and university supervisors; among student

teachers; and between supervisors and student teachers in English teacher education.

When supervisors or student teachers have something effective, they can share the

information among themselves because the information can be helpful to student

teachers’ practice teaching. In the case of the current study, collaboration can be

conducted through communication among supervisors so that they can eliminate

imbalance of power when their sets of feedback are not compatible.

Student teachers’ skills in the lesson planning process

From the current study, student teachers showed that they relied on various

skills during the lesson planning process. Student teachers used reflective thinking

skills when they thought about implementation of lesson plans. They wanted to figure

out problems, causes of problems, solutions, successful activities, causes of the

success and evaluation of solutions and success. This is consistent with studies by

Rogers (2002), Taggart and Wilson (2005) and Töman (2014). Student teachers report

that they have reflective thinking skills, thinking about implementation of plans by

considering their reflective journals. As a result, they can design better learning

activities for students. From the current study, some student teachers tried to reflect

upon implementation of lesson plans but they could not figure out solutions to some

problems. This is congruent with Gungor (2016), who explains that student teachers

have little or no actual experience in teaching. The reflective process might be

difficult for them. Therefore, teacher education programs should provide reflective

thinking practices for student teachers so that they can develop their reflective

thinking skills.

While student teachers were reflecting upon implementation of lesson plans,

they also demonstrated problem-solving skills. According to the current study, student

teachers implemented lesson plans with difficulty in class. They tried to think about

causes and figure out solutions. They also tried to use the solutions in class as well to

see if the problem could be solved. What the student teachers did was also a reflective

practice, which is congruent to Burton (2009) and Lee (2007). The authors explain

that the following skills and concepts are involved with reflective practice: critical

thinking, self-direction, problem-solving skills and self-awareness. Cansoy and

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

418

Türkoğlu (2017) explain that student teachers use critical thinking skills to understand

what they are thinking. Critical thinking allows the student teachers to understand

their own thoughts, ensure sensibility of their ideas and then reach reasonable

decisions. When problems occur, student teachers use problem-solving skills to think

about the problems, find appropriate strategies to handle the problems and apply the

strategies in different situations.

Moreover, from the current study, student teachers showed that they had

adaptability and creativity. They adapted game shows to activities in lesson plans.

They also used creativity to plan activities that provided both fun and practice for the

target language. However, from the findings, some student teachers could show

adaptability and creativity while others struggled to plan such fun activities. This is

consistent with the Erylmaz and Kara (2017) study on a comparison between teachers

and student teachers’ personality traits and adaptability. The authors reveal that

student teachers have adaptability in the teaching career. Their career exploration and

lesson planning associate with personality traits. From the statistical data, the

personality traits, including extroversion and conscientiousness, significantly relate to

career adaptability. This can explain the reason for some student teachers from the

current study who claimed that their personality traits, such as not being a funny

person, accounted for difficulty in planning fun activities. On the other hand, some

student teachers liked to explore new techniques and activities and tried to adapt and

use them in lesson plans.

However, Erylmaz and Kara’s (2017) study reveals that teachers have a higher

level of adaptability than student teachers, whereas this current study’s findings show

that some student teachers creatively planned fun activities against supervisors’

feedback. Some fun activities adapted from game shows turned out to be effective in

student teachers’ points of view. Atmaca (2018) explains that English student teachers

think that they have the following roles: organizer, observer and supporter. The study

does not reveal what student teachers’ actions are to demonstrate such roles. It only

reveals that in-service English teachers do not see any of these roles in the teaching

career.

The difference between student teachers and in-service teachers is interesting.

Davies et al. (2014) asserts that teachers’ action of a role depends on their

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

419

professional competencies, student characteristics, classroom interaction and school

culture. These factors have an influence on teaching for creativity. Perhaps, student

teachers have caught up with 21st Century skills, one of which includes creativity, as

the governmental bodies in many countries around the world have imposed that the

skills be integrated in curriculums, such as the teacher education programs (Ridman &

Rohitsatian, 2016). The fact that some student teachers demonstrated their creativity

might have showed that there were traces of the integration.

6.3 Implications

The theory of Thai EFL student teachers’ lesson planning processes reveals

every procedure of student teachers’ designing of lesson plans, which has been

influenced by school supervisors, university supervisors, student teachers, schools and

the Faculty of Education. The personnel and institutions, viewed as opportunities or

constraints in a particular situation, are involved in establishing student teachers’

professional development as prospective in-service teachers through the procedures.

This substantive theory provides the following implications for all the personnel and

institutions.

For institutions

The theory of Thai EFL student teachers’ lesson planning processes reveals

that both the Faculty of Education and schools impose rules and practices for student

teachers to follow. Now that the whole lesson planning processes delineate the

importance of the rules and practices in all procedures of planning, both institutions

realize that the establishment of a systematic direction for all the personnel is more

practical than fragmented efforts in dealing with student teachers’ problems.

In an effort to provide systematic direction, before the Practicum course

begins, the Faculty of Education should organize an orientation and invites all

personnel directly relevant to the lesson planning processes, such as school

supervisors, university supervisors and student teachers, and directly relevant to

managing the lesson planning processes, such as support administrators and

executive administrators.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

420

The Faculty of Education should identify specific purposes of the orientation,

including rules and practices, which are imposed according to specific needs of

student teachers discovered from this study’s data collection. To illustrate, before

school visits, an official letter should not only notify dates and times for the visit but

also student teachers’ needs to collect information and materials necessary to start of

their long-range plans and weekly plans. Executive administrators in schools receive

the letter and inform school supervisors of student teachers’ needs so that they can be

prepared to provide such information and materials, such as textbooks or teaching

aids. It is an opportune time for schools to investigate their availability of facilities,

technology and resources for school supervisors to inform student teachers.

This direction is applicable for the Faculty of Education as well when student

teachers seeking information from university supervisors before the practicum begins.

Supporting administrators from the Faculty of Education become mediators, who

attempt to deal with the university supervisors who have not yet provided information

for student teachers.

In the orientation, the Faculty of Education should delineate every procedure

of student teachers’ lesson planning processes to all attendees so that they realize how

important their roles are. Apart from providing information and materials necessary

for student teachers to start designing lesson plans, school supervisors and university

supervisors are responsible for asking for plans from student teachers, checking plans,

providing feedback, following up on the feedback by checking student teachers’

rewriting (or not rewriting with acceptable reasons), observing implementation of

plans, giving feedback on the implementation and following up on subsequent plans.

Though some of these practices were mentioned in the Practicum manual,

never before were student teachers’ details of their needs illustrated in the manual.

The systematic direction is imposed in order to underline the importance of all

personnel factors in every single procedure of lesson planning.

The Faculty of Education can impose that supervisors give feedback to student

teachers which is an important as part of the student teachers’ teacher education. The

Faculty of Education should set up a systematic approach for supervisors to follow up

on other supervisors’ giving feedback to student teachers in a constructive way. For

example, a school supervisor can ask the student teacher if he/she has received

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

421

feedback from the university supervisor regularly or not. If so, the school supervisor

might ask to see the feedback so that the school supervisor could add feedback on

other components or confirm feedback on the same components made by the

university supervisor. Student teachers will realize that rewriting the component is

necessary. If the university supervisor did not provide enough feedback to the student

teacher for some reason, the school supervisor would realize that he/she is the only

source for feedback and should be vigilant in providing feedback to the student

teacher regularly. The systematic approach is set up to send a message to all personnel

that giving feedback on lesson plans and receiving feedback are prioritized.

For personnel

School supervisors, university supervisors and student teachers are to attend

orientations so that they know expectations of their responsibilities in student

teachers’ planning processes. Each procedure in the processes requires all personnel

to take specific actions, some of which have effects on one another.

For school supervisors

Based on the findings of this study, the theory of Thai EFL student teachers’

lesson planning processes provides the following implications for school supervisors:

Before the practicum begins, school supervisors should prepare information

and materials for student teachers at the first visit. The information should include

textbooks to cover in the long-range plan and the number of topics for daily plans.

Regarding curriculum, school supervisors should supervise student teachers on

formulating objectives in line with indicators in each school context using the school

curriculum or the core curriculum. Regarding students, school supervisors provide

information of students’ levels of proficiency, motivation, characteristics, personality

or learning styles of each classroom. School supervisors are the only ones who

understand students best since they have direct experience teaching the students. The

school supervisors, then, should suggest teaching techniques suitable for each

classroom to student teachers. Regarding facilities, technology and resources, school

supervisors should gather information from schools so that they can relay the

information to student teachers right away. In case of scarcity of resources, school

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

422

supervisors assist student teachers in adjusting components in lesson planning so that

students achieve learning in the target language without relying on the resources.

In the first few weeks of practicum, school supervisors should work closely

with student teachers’ initial period of planning so that lesson plans are shaped to suit

the school context. School supervisors follow the direction concerning procedures of

student teachers’ lesson planning imposed by the Faculty of Education and schools by

checking lesson plans, giving feedback and rechecking the plans to see if student

teachers use feedback to rewrite the plan or not. School supervisors verify the

feedback, which is supposed to be clear, helpful and direct to the task. General

feedback is not practical for adjusting lesson plans. School supervisors and student

teachers meet and exchange thoughts on feedback.

This study also finds that student teachers’ beliefs have an influence on their

decision-making. When they have a talk, school supervisors should figure out what

beliefs, whether they are from experience, personality, prior knowledge, school

practice, educational theories and so on, have influenced student teachers’ decision to

agree, partly disagree or entirely disagree with the feedback. School supervisors also

use their beliefs in guiding whether student teachers’ responses to feedback is eligible

for the school context or not.

School supervisors should recheck the lesson plan if rewriting is needed and

observe the implementation of the lesson plan. They, again, talk to student teachers

about practicality of specific components of the plans. Student teachers should reflect

upon the implementation of the plans. School supervisors also have an opportunity to

reflect upon their feedback, which is influenced by their beliefs as well. The reflection

should be conducted so that both school supervisors and student teachers should

consider the effectiveness of the experience, prior knowledge, school practice or

educational theories on lesson planning in the school context. The reflection on

difficulty and success of implementing such plans will be used to plan subsequent

plans.

School supervisors should also follow up on student teachers’ planning

subsequent plans, which have the similar language components on the previous plans,

to check if their reflection is effective or not.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

423

For university supervisors

What university supervisors can learn from the findings of this study is

concluded below.

Similar to school supervisors, university supervisors should go through all the

processes of the lesson planning: giving information on rules and practices, checking

lesson plans, rechecking plans, providing feedback and having a meeting with student

teachers to clarify the feedback and discussing sources of beliefs on student teachers’

decisions on agreeing or disagreeing on the feedback, rechecking rewritten versions

of lesson plans, observing implementation of the lesson plans, giving feedback on the

implementation, having meetings with student teachers and following up on

subsequent plans.

In addition, university supervisors should encourage student teachers to

complete the cyclical process of lesson planning by urging student teachers to reflect

on the difficulties and successes of implementation of lesson plans. After student

teachers evaluate effectiveness of solutions for difficulties or causes of success,

university supervisors should also ask them to share the reflections with others.

Other than that, the theory of Thai EFL student teachers lesson planning

processes reveals the specific results that provide the following implications for

university supervisors:

From the results, student teachers planned lessons focusing on students’

interests and affectivity; therefore, they planned fun activities, which resulted in

difficulty in class control and limited amount of language content learned. University

supervisors can take this as a starting point to provide techniques in planning

enjoyable activities for students, which also focus on the content and language

components to cover in a curriculum. Students can have fun from the English

activities and student teachers can plan to have the students learn language points

from the fundamental level, say, the lexical level or sentential level to the more

challenging level, such as activities demanding students to create conversations.

University supervisors should also guide student teachers to manage time and

class by considering school schedules, classroom settings, discipline, facilities,

technology and resources.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

424

Moreover, based on the findings of this study, a student teacher focused on

teaching grammar exercises because she followed her school supervisor’s practice and

necessity of the amount of grammar points to cover in a limited time. University

supervisors should provide planning techniques in communicative grammar activities,

which urge students to learn form, meaning and use of the grammar point.

As such, university supervisors should think about the content of courses in

their teacher education program. Knowledge of teaching English should not be only

put in the courses concerning teaching English methods but all language skills courses

should also integrate the pedagogical knowledge. For example, while a university

supervisor, who is also a lecturer in a reading skills course, is improving student

teachers’ reading skills, they should also model how reading skills can be taught

effectively. The university supervisor can provide practical English reading activities,

which student teachers can later adapt in planning lessons for each school context.

Student teachers should be given an opportunity to investigate various

problem behaviors and think of possible solutions. The problem-based learning can be

used to help the student teachers consider plausible answers to the problems. Actual

case studies can be demonstrated as well as concepts of motivating students. For

example, rewarding students to raise motivation is a possible solution; however, how

to reward productively should also be presented to student teachers. Otherwise, there

may be disadvantages from rewarding.

For student teachers

What student teachers can learn from the theory of Thai EFL student teachers’

lesson planning processes and find useful is as follows:

Student teachers should be aware of the influences of school supervisors,

university supervisors, schools and the Faculty of Education to their lesson planning

as well as their own influence on the specific procedures in planning lessons. They

should realize the importance of each procedure of lesson planning and follow the

procedure to meet expectations of the institutions and the personnel. For example,

they know it is their own commitment as well to seek information and materials

before planning. If the information or materials are not sufficient, they seek help from

relevant personnel immediately.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

425

While planning, student teachers design lesson plans, submit plans to

supervisors and seek feedback too. They should talk to supervisors to get clarification

on feedback and reveal their responses to the feedback. When receiving clarification

and explanation on their decisions from both school supervisors and university

supervisors, student teachers can improve plans based on actual practice in the school

context and the knowledge of teaching English and English skills, not only on their

own beliefs.

While implementing plans, student teachers should be aware of their position

in reflecting upon both difficulty and success and find solutions for difficulties or

causes of success within the classroom or after implementation. They can evaluate the

solutions and causes of success and then take the findings of the evaluation into

consideration in designing subsequent lesson plans. Therefore, the plans will contain

teaching techniques or activities proved effective as the cyclical lesson planning

processes are complete.

For the teacher education program

According to the findings of this study, student teachers showed concepts and

skills necessary for planning lessons and skills imposed by the Thai government

during the crucial time of change in the education and business arena, such as the

backward design procedures of lesson planning, the standards-based core curriculum

or the revised competency-based core curriculum or 21st Century skills. However,

only some student teachers demonstrated such concepts and skills. The program

developers for the teacher education program should design all components in the

program to ensure the implementation of all the concepts and skills to all student

teachers.

All the pedagogical or Teaching English courses in the teacher education

program should direct student teachers to use reflective practice. The instruction of

the reflection should be explicitly demonstrated. Student teachers should learn to

think critically. Actual cases concerning components in instruction should be

presented so that student teachers can use critical thinking skills. For example, student

teachers can consider problems in managing class or difficulty in planning activities

for certain phases of teaching and think about solutions. They can think about

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

426

sensibility of the solutions. It is a good way to enhance student teachers’ problem-

solving skills.

The courses concerning English skills should provide practice in applying

those skills in teaching practice too. The findings from this study suggested lesson

planning involved with student teachers’ prior knowledge and experiences. Student

teachers, who are instructed to use the knowledge of English skills in teaching, have a

better opportunity to plan effective English activities. To illustrate, some student

teachers mentioned techniques in a reading course used in reading activities. The

lecturer of the course should introduce the techniques to all student teachers and they

can use the techniques to develop their reading skills. Moreover, the lecturer should

guide them to use such techniques in planning activities for actual classrooms and

assess their understanding. Thus, student teachers will learn to use the techniques for

their own benefits and for assisting their future student learning. Lecturers of the

courses of all English skills, including speaking, listening, writing and reading, should

do the same. The whole program, then, promotes student teachers’ application of

theories in actual teaching. What’s more, the student teachers will learn to be

autonomous learners because they are encouraged to obtain adaptability for the

teaching careers regularly during the teacher education program.

According to the theory of Thai EFL student teachers’ lesson planning

processes generated from the data of this study, personnel (e.g. school supervisors,

university supervisors, student teachers, student teachers’ classmates and student

teachers’ senior graduates) and institutions (e.g. schools and the Faculty of Education)

are involved in all procedures in all stages of the processes. Collaboration among the

personnel and institutions is vital. The teacher education program developer should

design the practice that ensures collaboration of all involved parties. For instance, the

Faculty of Education should create a communication channel with schools. In addition

to circulating official letters, an administrator from each institution can be responsible

for regular contact via social networking to one another so that problems or issues that

affect lesson planning can be detected and solved immediately. The administrators

should be able to contact school supervisors, university supervisors and student

teachers freely as well.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

427

Moreover, the program developer should have all personnel involved. As

student teachers revealed that they gained information from senior graduates. The

teacher education program should provide an opportunity for the senior graduates to

deliver speeches to show techniques of how to prepare for practicum courses based on

the former student teachers’ point of view. The senior graduates should be able to

express their opinions on school supervisors and university supervisors’ supervision

styles or techniques in a seminar with their fellow student teachers. The program

developers can also gather the opinion by means of interviews or survey

questionnaires so that senior graduates in all academic years are included.

Finally, the program developer should delineate plans to have school

supervisors collaborate more with university supervisors. They should be encouraged

to communicate with one another. For example, the program can impose practices for

observation. When a university supervisor visits a school to observe a student

teacher’s implementation of a lesson plan, the university supervisor should spare time

before the observation to talk with the school supervisor. They can exchange student

teachers’ behaviors, plans, assignments and so on. After the observation, they can

meet again to share their feedback on the observation. They can discuss the student

teacher’s areas of strengths or areas for further development. By doing so, the student

teachers do not have to face an imbalance of power, where feedback of supervisors

contradicts one another and the student teacher have to make decisions difficultly.

6.4 Limitations

The limitation of this study includes the researcher’s role in data collection.

The researcher is also a lecturer at the Faculty of Education, where the student

teachers enrolled in the Practicum course. All of the participants had attended the

researcher’s courses. For this study, the researcher became the interviewer and the

video recording technician when collecting data. There might be a question of

personal bias towards effective lesson plans. Moreover, inevitably, student teachers

might recognize the researcher’s role as a lecturer, who gave lectures on lesson

planning, methods of teaching English and activities for teaching English. They might

reveal information in favor of the researcher. However, to set aside the researchers’

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

428

bias on evaluating the student teachers’ process of lesson plans, a section in the field

notes was designated for personal thoughts so as not to contaminate questioning for

further information in data collection, in keeping with Ary et al. (2006). The student

teachers were also informed that data collection was conducted without consequences

of grading in the Practicum, nor did it interfere with the student teachers’ normal

teaching practice. Moreover, eight student teachers under the researcher’s supervision

were left out from data collection to avoid the bias.

Moreover, the qualitative research might manifest difficulty concerning

verification. Creswell (1994, p. 158) asserts that qualitative research might offer

limitations in generalizing the findings (as cited in Feeler, 2012, p. 16). A reason

could be that for this study, the researcher interviewed and observed only 22

participants. However, the qualitative research has transferability—the degree to

which a qualitative study can be applied or generalized to other contexts or to other

groups” (Ary et al., 2006, p. 507). Though the purpose of qualitative studies is not to

generalize the findings, researchers or readers could compare or judge on similarities

or differences among other studies.

6.5 Recommendations

According to the results, many persons were mentioned in the theory of Thai

EFL student teachers’ lesson planning processes. Further studies involving all the

persons are recommended.

For further studies, an investigation can focus on the thought process of school

supervisors and university supervisors’ giving information to and supervising student

teachers. Administrators, who are involved with impositions of rules and practices

should also be studied. Moreover, studies based on a mixed methods design can be

conducted to test the theory in larger populations of student teachers and any other

personnel involved in the lesson planning processes.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

429

6.6 Conclusion

Lesson planning is a complex process, especially for student teachers who are

inexperienced and still learning. This study, therefore, generated a theory to explain

the process. The theory derived from interviews with student teachers and

observations of the student teachers, who implemented lesson plans in classrooms

during their practicum in the actual school setting. It explains student teachers’

cyclical lesson planning processes, consisting of four stages: pre-planning, planning,

implementing and reflecting/evaluating. Factors included personnel and institutions,

from whom/which student teachers receive information concerning components in a

lesson plan; knowledge of pedagogy and subject matter; rules concerning submission

and formats of plans; and practices about school schedule and selection of schools.

Student teachers also receive feedback from school supervisors and university

supervisors as well. However, their beliefs affect their decision-making: either they

will agree, partly disagree or entirely disagree with the feedback; or whether they will

improve the lesson plan or not.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

REFERENCES

Abas, M. C. (2016). Difficulties in field-based observation among pre-service

teachers: Implications to practice teaching. International Journal of

Evaluation and Research in Education, 5(2), 101-112. Retrieved from

https://eric.ed.gov/?q=pre+service+teacher+peer+support&id=EJ1108531

Al-Sobhi, B. M. & Preece, A. S. (2018). Teaching English speaking skills to the Arab

students in the Saudi school in Kuala Lumpur: Problems and solutions.

International Journal of Education and Literacy Studies, 6(1), 1-11.

Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?q=English+teacher+lack+communicative

+practice&ft=on&id=EJ1172338

Ary, D., Jacobs, L. C., Razavieh, A. & Sorensen, C. (2006). Introduction to research

in education. (7thed.). Belmont: Thomson Wadsworth.

Atkins, L. & Wallace, S. (2012). Qualitative research in education. London: Sage.

Atmaca, Ç. (2018). Contrasting perspectives of pre-service and in-service English

teachers: What should be an English teacher’s role? International Journal of

Languages’ Education and Teaching, 6(1), 143-153.

Attia, M. (2017). Be(com)ing a reflexive researcher: A developmental approach to

research methodology. Open Review of Educational Research , 4(1).

Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/23265507.2017.1300068

Baba, T. (2007). How is Lesson Study Implemented? Japanese Lesson Study in

Mathematics Its Impact, Diversity and Potential for Educational Improvement.

Singapore: World Scientific Publishing.

Bailey, K. M. (2006). Language teacher supervision: A case-based approach.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Ball, A. L., Knobloch, N. A. & Hoop, S. (2007). The instructional planning

experiences of beginning teachers. Journal of Agricultural Education, 48(2),

56-65. Retrieved from http://www.jae-online.org/attachments

/article/96/Greiman_Bedtke_49_4_47-59.pdf

Ball, D. L. (2000). Ridging practices: Intertwining content and pedagogy in teaching

and learning to teach. Journal of Teacher Education, 51(3), 241-247.

http://www.jae-online.org/attachments

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

431

Retrieved from http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/

0022487100051003013

Ballantyne, K.G., Sanderman, A.R., & Levy, J. (2008).Educating English language

learners: Building teacher capacity. Washington, DC: National Clearinghouse

for English Language Acquisition. Retrieved from

http://www.ncela.gwu.edu/practice/ mainstream_teachers.htm.

Best, J. W. & Kahn, J. V. (2006). Research in education. (10thed.). Boston: Pearson.

Berg, B. (2007). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences. Boston, MA:

Pearson Education.

Boonmak, T. Tesaputa, K. & Duangpaeng, A. (2015). The ultimate Impacts for Thai

teachers: Teachers development system in learning management. International

Education Studies, 8(12), 193-202. Retrieved from

http://eric.ed.gov/?q=teacher+supervision&ft=on&pg=3&id=EJ1083928

Boyd, D., Grossman, P., Lankford, H., Loeb, S. & Wyckoff, J. (2008).Teacher

Preparation and student achievement. Working paper. National Center of

Analysis of Longitudinal Data in Action Research.

Breen, M. (1989).The evaluation cycle for language learning tasks. In R. K. Johnson.

(ed.). The second language curriculum. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press, 187 – 206.

Brinton, D. M., Goodwin, J. & Ranks, L. (1994).Helping language minority students

read and write and analytically: The journey into, through, and beyond. In F.

Peitzman and G. Gadda. (eds.). With different eyes: Insights into teaching

language minority students across the disciplines. New York: Longman.

Brown, S. (1998). Experienced and inexperienced ESL teachers’ lesson planning for a

listening activity. ERIC. Retrieved from

http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED422739.pdf.

Brown, M. W. (2011). The teacher–tool relationship: Theorizing the design and use of

curriculum materials. In J. T. Remillard, B. A. Herbel-Eisenmann, & G.

M.Lloyd (Eds.), Mathematics teachers at work: Connecting curriculum

materials and classroom instruction (pp. 17–36). New York, NY: Routledge.

http://www.ncela.gwu.edu/


http://www./files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED422739.pdf

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

432

Buehl, M. M. & Fives, H. (2009). Exploring teachers’ beliefs about teaching

knowledge: Where does it come from? Does it change? The Journal of

Experimental Education, 77(4), 367-408. Retrieved from

http://dx.doi.org/10.3200/JEXE.77.4.367-408

Buchanan, D. R. (1992). An uneasy alliance: Combing qualitative and quantitative

research methods. Hlth Educat Q, Spring, 117-135.

Bullungpattama, T. (2012). Planning by backward design. GotoKnow. Retrieved from

https://www.gotoknow.org/posts/224435

Bunsiripesutch, S. (2013). Academic leadership of university supervisors in a teacher

education of Lampang Rajabhat University. Lampang Rajabhat University

Journal, 1(2), 72-86.

Burton, J. (2009). Reflective practice. In A. Burns & J. C. Richards (Eds.), The

Cambridge guide to second language teacher education (298-307). New

York: Cambridge University Press.

Campbell, C. & Henning, M. B. (2010). Planning, teaching and assessing elementary

education interdisciplinary curriculum. International Journal of Teaching and

Learning in Higher education, 22(2), 179-186. Retrieved

from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ930151.pdf

Cansoy, R. & Türkoğlu, M. E. (2017). Examining the relationship between pre-

service teachers’ critical thinking disposition, problem solving skills and

teacher self-efficacy. International Education Studies, 10(6), 23-36.

Carr, N. T. (2011). Designing and analyzing language test. Oxford: Oxford University

Press.

Carver, C. L. & Feiman-Nemser, S. (2009) Using policy to improve teacher

induction: Critical elements and missing pieces. Educational Policy, 23(2),

295-328. Retrieved from

http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0895904807310036

Castañeda-Trujillo, J & Aguirre-Hernández, A. J. (2018). Pre-service English

teachers’ voices about the teaching practicum. How, 25(1), 156-173. Retrieved

from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1166141.pdf

Celce-Murcia, M. (2001).Teaching English as a second or foreign language.

Singapore: Heinle & Heinle.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

433

Chang, C. S., Liu, E. Z., Sung, H. Y., Lin, C. H., Chen, N. S. & Cheng, S. S. (2014).

Effects of online college student’s Internet self-efficacy on learning

motivation and performance. Innovations in Education and Teaching

International, 51(4), 366-377. Retrieved from

https://scholar.google.co.th/scholar?q=chang+2014+students}motivation&hl=

en&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart

Chen, C. W. & Cheng, Y. (2013). The supervisory process of EFL teachers: A case

study. TESL-EJ, 17(1), 1-21. Retrieved from

http://eric.ed.gov/?q=English+teacher+supervision&ft=on&id=EJ1007569

Chen, B. & Wei, B. (2015). Investigating the factors that influence Chemistry

teachers’ use of curriculum materials: The case of China. Science Education

International, 26(2), 195-216. Retrieved from

https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1064037.pdf

Chuachai, S. (2008).A training model for lesson plan writing by using an

observational learning process via network for Faculty of Education students,

Chulalongkorn University. Education Research Databases: Education,

Religions and cultures. Retrieved from www.thaiedresearch.org/thaied

/indexid =thaied_articles%3Fid%s4552#

Ciaffaroni, M. T. (2004). A training lesson plan on virtual communities for EFL. The

Internet TESL Journal, X(7). Retrieved from http://iteslj.

org/Lessons/Ciaffaroni-Virtual.html

Clark, C. M., & Peterson, P. L. (1986). Teachers’ thought processes. In M. C. Wittrock

(Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching.(3rd ed.) (pp. 255-296). New York:

Macmillan.

Clark, C. M. & Yinger, R. J. (1980, May). The hidden world of teaching: Implications

of research on teaching planning. Available at

https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED200561.pdf

Cogan, M. L. (1973). Clinical supervision. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Communication Technology, Ministry of Education. (2017). Should the teacher

education program take four or five years? Retrieved from

http://www.moe.go.th/moe/th/news/detail.php?NewsID=49191&Key=news_r

esearch

http://eric.ed.gov/?q=English+teacher+supervision&ft=on&id=EJ1007569

http://www.thaiedresearch.org/thaied/indexid

http://www.thaiedresearch.org/thaied/indexid

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

434

Corbin, J. & Strauss, A. (2015). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and

procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among

five approaches. Los Angles: SAGE.

Cunningham, G. (2009). New teachers’ companion: Practical wisdom for succeeding

in the classroom. Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/publications/books

/109051/chapters/Lesson-Plans-and-Unit-Plans@-The-Basis-for-

Instruction.aspx

Danyluk, P. J., Luhanga, F., Gwekwerere, Y. N., MacEwan, L. & Larocque, S.

(2015). Failure to fail in a final pre-service teaching practicum. Canadian

Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 6(3), 1-17. Retrieved

from http://eric.ed.gov/?q=teacher+supervision&ft=on&pg=3&id=

EJ1084588

Darling-Hammond, L. (1997). Doing what matters most: Investing in quality

teaching. New York: National Commission on Teaching & America's Future.

Darling-Hammond, L. (2006). Constructing 21st century teacher education. Journal

of Teacher Education, 57(10), 1-15.

Darling-Hommond, L., Hammerness, K., Grossman, P., Rust, F., & Shulman, L.

(2005). The design of teacher education programs. In L. Darling-Hammond &

J. Bransford, (eds.), Preparing teachers for changing world: What teachers

should learn and be able to do. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 390 – 441.

Darling-Hammond, L., & Snyder, J. (2000). Authentic assessment in teaching in

context. Teaching and Teacher Education, 16:523 – 545. Retrieved from

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0742051X00000159

Davies, D., Jindal-Snape, D., Digby, R., Howe, A., Collier, C., & Hay, P. (2014). The

roles and development needs of teachers to promote creativity: A systematic

review of literature. Teaching and Teacher Education, 41, 34-41.

Denkci, A. F. & Coker, B. (2016). The use of communicative approach in 9th grade

EFL classes. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 65, 71-90. Retrieved

from https://eric.ed.gov/?q=English+teacher+no+communicative

+practice+for+students&ft=on&id=EJ1121908

Denner, P., Salzman, S., & Bangert, A. (2001). Linking teacher assessment to student

http://eric.ed.gov/?q=teacher+supervision&ft=on&pg=3&id=%20%20EJ1084588

http://eric.ed.gov/?q=teacher+supervision&ft=on&pg=3&id=%20%20EJ1084588

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

435

performance: A benchmarking, generalizablility, and validity study of the use

of teacherwork samples. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 15:

287 – 307. Retrieved from http://link.springer.com/article/

10.1023%2FA%3A1015405715614#page-1

Department of Curriculum and Instruction. (2012). Student’s manual: Teaching

practice. Nakorn Pathom: The Faculty of Education, Silpakorn University.

Dewey, J. (1933). How we think: A restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to

the educative process. Lexington, Massachusetts: D.C. Heath and Company.

Dias-Lacy, S. L & Guirguis, R. V. (2017). Challenges for new teachers and ways of

coping with them. Journal of Education and Learning, 6(3), 265-272.

Retrieved from file:///D:/My%20Documents/Downloads/Challenges

_for_New_Teachers_and_Ways_of_Copying_wi.pdf

Dimitrova, V. (2016). The afternoon effect: Differential impacts on student

performance in maths and history. Retrieved from

http://2017.economicsofeducation.com/user/pdfsesiones/047.pdf?PHPSESSID

=lt1udjb0njl0bvqi0sfn26gbi7

Doecke, B. & McKnight, L. (2002). Forming a professional identity: Conversation

between English Method students. Retrieved from

http://eric.ed.gov/?q=English+teacher+supervision&ft=on&pg=2&id

=ED473956

Dȍrnyei, Z. (2003). Questionnaires in second language research: Construction,

administration and processing. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum

Associates.

Elmore, R & Burney, D. (1999). Investing in teaching learning. In L. Darling-

Hammond & G. Sykes (Eds.). Teaching as a learning profession. San

Francisco: Jossey-Bass, pp. 236–291.

EMYA, European Practices of Mentoring with Young Adults. (2014). The importance

of teachers training, Education and Culture: Lifelong Learning Programme.

Retrieved from http://www.emya- mentoring.eu/articles/item/145-the-

importance-of-teachers-training.html.

http://link.springer.com/article/

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

436

Erylmaz, A. & Kra, A. (2017). Comparison of teachers and pre-service teachers with

respect to personality traits and career adaptability. International Journal of

Instruction, 10(1), 85-100.

Faculty of Education. (2011). The seminar for the English Practicum (Report on the

first seminar). Nakorn Pathom: Faculty of Education, Silpakorn University.

Faikhamta, C., Jantarakantee, E., & Roadrangka, V. (2011). The current situation of

field experience in a five-year science teacher education program in Thailand.

US-China Education Review, (6), 829-839. Retrieved from

http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED529358.pdf

Feeler, W. G. (2012). Being there: A grounded-theory study of student perceptions of

instructor presence in online classes. Educational Administration: Theses,

Dissertations, and Student Researcher. 122. Retrieved from

http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cehsedaddiss/122

Freiberg, H., Waxman, H., & Houston, W. (1987). Enriching feedback to student-

teachers through small group discussion. Teacher Education Quarterly, 14,

(3), 71-82.

Finocchiaro, M. (1989).English as a second/foreign language: From theory to

practice. (4thed.). London: Prentice Hall Regents.

Fosnot, C. (1996) Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice. New York:

Teachers College Press.

Flynn, P., Mesibov, D., Vermette, P. J., & Smith, R. M. (2004). Applying standards-

based constructivism: A two-step guide for motivating middle and high school

students. Larchmont, NY: Eye On Education.

Ferrell, B. (1992). Lesson plan analysis as a program evaluation tool. Gifted Child

Quarterly, 36: 23 – 26. Retrieved from http://gcp.sagepub.com/content/36/1/

23.abstract

Gafoor, K. A. & Farooque, U. (2010). Ways to improve lesson planning:

A student teacher perspective. Paper presented at the international seminar

conference on teacher empowerment and institutional effectiveness of the

All India Association for Educational Research, at Maharaja Madakarinayaka

FG/PG College, Chitradurga, Karnataka, India.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

437

Gasson, S. (2009). Handbook of research on contemporary theoretical models in

information systems. DOI: 10.4018/978-1-60566-659-4.ch003

Glaser, B. G. & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies

for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine Publishing.

Glickman, C. D., Gordon, S. P. & Ross-Gordon, J. M. (2001). Supervision and

instructional leadership: A developmental approach. (5th ed.). Massachusetts:

Pearson Education.

Goldhammer, R. (1969). Clinical supervision: Special methods for the supervision of

teachers. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Graves, K. (2000). Designing language courses: A guide for teachers. Boston: Heinle

& Heinle.

Gower, R., Phillips, D. & Walters, S. (1995). Teaching practice handbook. Oxford:

Macmillan Heinemann.

Gűn, K. (2017). Making sense of experienced teachers’ interactive decisions:

implications for expertise in teaching. International Journal of Instruction,

7(1), 75-91. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1085243.pdf

Gungor, M. N. (2016). Turkish pre-service teachers’ reflective practices in teaching

English to young learners. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 41(2),

136-152.

Hall, D. M., Hughes, M. A. & Thelk, A. D. (2017). Developing mentorship skills in

clinical faculty: A best practices approach to supporting beginning teachers.

Teaching English Journal, Spring 2017, 77-98. Retrieved from


Hall, T. J. & Smith, M A. (2006). Teacher planning, instruction and reflection: what

we know about teacher cognitive processes. Quest, 58: 424-442. Retrieved

from http://www.humankinetics.com/hall_smith_teacherplanning.pdf

Hanson, J. (2018). Ten steps to creating beginner ESL lesson plans. FluentU English

Educator Blog. Retrieved from https://www.fluentu.com/blog/ educator-

english/beginner-esl-lesson-plans/

Harmer, J. (1991).The practice of English language teaching. Harlow, UK:

Longman.

_______. (1998). How to teach English. Harlow, UK: Longman.

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

438

_______. (2002). The practice of English language teaching. Essex: Pearson

Education.

Harris, D. N. & Sass, T. R. (2008).Teacher training, teacher quality and student

achievement. National Center for Analysis of Longitudinal Data in Education

Research, Calder Urban Institute. Retrieved from https://idea

s.repec.org/a/eee/pubeco/v95y2011i7-8p798-812.html

Heggart, K. (2016). How important is subject matter knowledge for a teacher?

Teacher development, Edutopia. Retrieved from https://www.edutopia.org/

discussion/how-important-subject-matter-knowledge-teacher

Hobson, L. D., Harris, D., Buckner-Manley, K. & Smith, P. (2012). The importance

of mentoring novice and pre-service teachers: Findings from a HBCU student

teaching program. Educational Foundations, summer-fall, 67-80. Retrieved

from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1000231.pdf

Hong, D. (2010). The hardest job everyone thinks they can do. Musing of Life and

Love, WordPress. Retrieved from http://www.musingsonlifeandlove,com

/2010/09/13/the-hardest-job-everyone-thinks-they-can-do/

HongKhunthod, A. (2018). The B.E. 2551 core curriculum: B.E. 2560 revised edition.

Retrieved from http://krukob.com/web/revisededitioncorecurriculum

Hudson, P. (2013). Desirable attributes and practices for mentees: Mentor teachers’

expectations. European Journal of Educational Research, 2(3), 107-119.

Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1086325.pdf

Hughes, A. (2003). Testing for language teachers. (2nded.). Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.

Isman, A. (2011). Instructional Design in Education: New Model. The Turkish Online

Journal of Educational Technology, 10(1), 136 – 142. Retrieved from

http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ926562.pdf

Isman, A., Abanmy, F. A., Hussein, H. B. & Al Saadany, M. A. (2012). Effectiveness

of instructional design model (Isman – 2011) in developing the planning

teaching skills of teachers college students’ at King Saud University. The

Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 11(1), 71 – 78. Retrieved

from http://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ976571

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

439

Jalil, S. (2018). The teacher as a teaching aid. Teaching English. Retrieved from

https://www.teachingenglish.org.uk//article/teacher-a-teaching-aid

James, A., Waring, M., Coe, R. & Hedges, L. V. (2012). Research methods &

methodologies in education. Los Angeles: SAGE.

Jantarach, V. (2011). A programme evaluation of the bachelor of education degree in

English, the Faculty of Education, Silpakorn University. Nakorn Pathom: The

Faculty of Education, Silpakorn University.

Jantarakantee, E., Faikhamta, C. & Roadrangka, V. (2008). The state of professional

training experience management: The field experience: Observation and

practice in the classroom course in the five-year science teacher education

program. KKU Research Journal, 13(11): 1345-1358.

Jatiwat, W. (2000). 466 420 Supe rvision of English instruction. Nakorn Pathom:


Jenkinson, K. A. & Benson, A. C. (2017). The assessment and mentoring program

(AMP): Final year pre-service physical education peer mentors’ perceptions of

effective mentoring. Journal of the Scholarship of teaching and L earning,

17(2), 35-44. DOI: 10.14434/josotl.v17i2.20769

Jensen, L. (2001). Planning lessons. In M. Celce-Murcia (Ed.), Teaching English as a

second or foreign language. (3th ed.). New York: Heinle & Heinle, pp. 403–

413.

John, P. D. (2006). Lesson planning and the student teacher: Re-thinking the

dominant model. Curriculum Studies, 38(4), 483-498.

Kammanee, T. (2001). Innovations for learning for teachers at the era of educational

reforms. Bangkok: Chulalongkorn University Press.

Kanthorn, L. (2015). Reflective thinking for Learning and teaching. Available at

https://www.gotoknow.org/posts/590695

Kate, M. (2016). Why do high school students learn many different subjects? Quora.

Retrieved from https://www.quora.com/Why-do-high-school-students-learn-

many-different-subjects

Keith, P. B., Wetherbee, M. J. & Kindzia, D. L. (1995). Identifying unmotivated

students: planning school-wide interventions. Paper presented at the

Annual Meeting of the National Association of School Psychologists

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

440

(Chicago/ IL, 1995) Retrieved from


Ketprasit, P. (2007). A study of problems of English teaching and learning for

primary school in Ungpang, Tak (Master’s thesis). Utaradit Rajabhat

University, Utaradit.

Kim, Y. (2011). Developing a model of effective English teaching for pre-service teacher

education. Retrieved from http://topaz.educ.psu.edu/educ/c- and-

i/Home/copy_of_CV2012.pdf

Knudson, R. (1998). Secondary student teaching and the supervised experience. The

High School Journal, 82, (1), 49-61.

Konkayan, S., Pothiwat, S. & Kaerahan, W. (2013). Action research for developing

the teachers’ competency toward cooperative learning in Mathematics learning

substance Ban Lao School under Kumdahan primary educational service area

office. Warasarn Banditsuksa, 10(49), 35-43.

Kwangsawad, T. (2017). Stakeholders’ perceptions of effective EFL teachers. Journal

of Education, Mahasarakham University, 11(4), 115-135. Retrieved from


LaBoskey, V., Kroll, L., & Galguera, T. (2002). Assessing “good” student teaching

placements: A programmatic perspective. Paper presented at the annual

meeting of the American Education Research Association, Seattle, WA.

Le Cornu, R. (2005). Peer mentoring: Engaging pre-service teachers in mentoring one

another. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 13(3), 355-366. doi:

10.1080/13611260500105592

Lee, H. (2005). Understanding and assessing preservice teachers’ reflective thinking.

Teaching and Teacher Education, 21, (2005), 699-715.

doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2005.05.007

Lee, I. (2007). Preparing pre-service English teachers for reflective practice. ELT

Journal, 61(4), 321-329.

Liaw, E. (2012). Learning to teach: A descriptive study of student language teachers

in Taiwan. English Language Teaching, 5(12), 152 – 162. Retrieved from

http://eric.ed.gov/?q=English+teacher+supervision&ft=on&pg

=2&id=EJ1080090

http://eric.ed.gov/?q=English+teacher+supervision&ft=on&pg%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

441

Lincoln, Y. S. & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Liou, Y, Daly A. J., Canrinus, E. T., Forbes, C. A., Moolenaar, N. M., Cornelissen, F.,

Lare, M. V. & Hsiao, J. (2016). Mapping the social side of pre-service

teachers: Connecting closeness, trust, and efficacy with performance.

Teachers and Teaching, 23(6), 635-657.

DOI: 10.1080/13540602.2016.1218329

Livingston & Borko. (1989). Expert-novice differences in teaching: A cognitive

analysis and implications. Journal of Teacher Education, 40(4), 36-42.

Loughran, J. (2011). On becoming a teacher educator. Journal of Education for

Teaching, 37(3), 279-391.

Luroj, S., Pak-ampai, W. & Pakaew, P. (2017). Good students should obey teachers?

Kam Chat Luk, 27 September 2017. Retrieved from

http://www.komchadluek.net/news/edu-health/296987

Manuel, J. & Hughes, J. (2006). It has always been my dream: Exploring pre‐service

teachers’ motivations for choosing to teach. Teacher Development, 10(1), 5-

24. DOI: 10.1080/13664530600587311

Marope, M. (2016). What makes a quality curriculum? Current and Critical Issues in

Curriculum Learning, 2, 1-41. Retrieved from

http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0024/002439/243975e.pdf

Marshall, B. & Young, S. (2009). Observing and providing feedback to teachers of

adults learning English. Center for Adult English Language Acquisition.

Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/?q=teacher+supervision&

ft=on&pg=2&id=ED505392

McCutcheon, G. (1980). How do elementary school teachers plan? The nature of

planning and influences on it. The Elementary School Journal, 81(1), 4-24.

Retrieved from

https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/pdfplus/10.1086/461201

Meador, D. (2017). Personality types of students in a typical classroom. ThoughtCo:

Resources for educators. Retrieved from

https://www.thoughtco.com/personality-types-of-students-3194677

Mergler, A. G. (2012). What pre-service teachers need to know to be effective at

values-based education. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 37(8), 65-

https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2016.1218329

http://eric.ed.gov/?q=teacher+supervision&%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

442

81. Retrieved from

http://ro.ecu.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1801&context=ajte

Meyer, T., & Sawyer, M. (2006). Cultivating an inquiry stance in English education:

Rethinking the student teaching seminar. English Education, 39, (1), 46-71.

Ministry of Education, Office of Basic Education Commission.(2006). Strategic plan

for reforms of English teaching to enhance Thailand’s ability to compete

(2549 – 2553). Retrieved from http://www.moe.go.th

/web_studyenglish/p_eng_2549-2553.doc.

Ministry of Education, Office of the National Education Commission. (1999). Special

project on managing the teacher practice reform, the development of teachers

and educational personnel. Bangkok: ONEC.

Minott, M. A. (2006). The extent to which seasoned teachers in the Cayman Islands

use elements of reflective teaching in their lesson planning, implementation

andevaluation: Implication for teacher education and training globally and

locally. Dissertation, School of Education, University of Nottingham.

Retrieved from http://etheses.nottingham.ac.uk/227/1/Reflection

_and_Reflective_Teaching_Thesis.pdf.

Moughamin, A. C., Rivera, M. O., & Francis, D. J. (2009).Instructional models and

strategies for teaching English language learners. Portsmouth, NH: RMC

Research Corporation, Center on Instruction. Retrieved from

http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED517794.pdf

Mudavanhu, Y. (2015). Differences in perceptions of the importance of subject matter

knowledge and how these shaped supervision and assessment of student

teachers on teaching practice. Journal of Education and Training Studies,

3(1), 98 – 107. Retrieved from


Naeem, M. A. R. (2014). English preservice teaching: Problems and suggested

solutions. Retrieved from https://scholar.google.co.th/scholar?q=Naeem

+English+preservice+ teaching:+Problems+and+suggested+solutions.&hl=

en&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwitpJSytrnaAhUIr

o8KHXoYBgEQgQMIJTAA

http://www.moe.go.th/

http://etheses.nottingham.ac.uk/227/1%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%09/Reflection%20_and_Reflective_Teaching_Thesis.pdf

http://etheses.nottingham.ac.uk/227/1%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%09/Reflection%20_and_Reflective_Teaching_Thesis.pdf


https://scholar.google.co.th/scholar?q=Naeem%20+English+preservice

https://scholar.google.co.th/scholar?q=Naeem%20+English+preservice

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

443

Nina, M. K. (2017). The best teaching aid ever. Teaching English. Retrieved from

https://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/blogs/ninamk/best-teaching-aid-ever

Numrich, C. 1996. On becoming a language teacher: insights from diary studies. TESOL

Quarterly, 30(1), 131-153.

Nooyod, A. & Hiranto, N. (2017). A study of the result of developing on English

instructional management skill based on Communicative Language Teaching

using lesson study innovation for English major students, Faculty of

Education, Loei Rajabhat University. Journal of Education, Khon Kaen

University, 40(1), 60-72.

Office of Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Education. (2013). MoE’s Education

Development Plan No. 11 (B.E. 2555 – 2559). Retrieved

fromwww.pld.rmutt.ac.?wpfb_dl=210.

Office of the Education Council. (2015). Situations of teacher education in Thailand.

Bangkok: Prikwan Graphic.

Office of the Education Council, Ministry of Education. (2017). National

Qualification Framework (Thailand NQF): Revised edition. Bangkok:

Prikwan Graphic. Retrieved from http://tqf.hu.ac.th/File/GetFile/224

Office of the Education Council, Ministry of Education. (2018). National

Education Plans (B.E. 2560 – 2579). Retrieved from

http://www.onec.go.th/index.php/book/BookView/1540

Othman, F. B. (2009). A study of personality that influences teaching effectiveness

(Master’s thesis). Universiti Sains Malaysia, Malaysia.

Okan, Ö. (2018). Non-native English teachers’ beliefs on grammar instruction.

English Language Teaching, 11(5), 1-13. Retrieved from


Panich, W. (2012, November, 30). Ways to create learning skills for students in the

21st century. Bangkok: Sodsri-Saridwong Foundation.

Panichkul, I. (2015). English teachers: Educational crisis in Thailand. Post Today.

Retrieved from https://www.posttoday.com/politic/report/402500

Parmoothar, S. (2009). An analysis of problems in teaching English and the needs of

Prathom Suksa 6 teachers in Phosai District, Ubon Ratchathani province

http://www.pld.rmutt.ac./?wpfb_dl=210

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

444

(Master’s thesis). Graduate school, Ubon Ratchathani Rajabhat University,

Ubon Ratchathani.

Partnership for 21st Century Skill. (2008). 21st century skills, education &

competitiveness: A resource and policy guide. Retrieved

from http://www.p21.org/storage/documents/21st_century_skills_education

_and-competitiveness_guide.pdf

Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Thousand Oaks,

CA: Sage.

__________. (2002). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. (3rd ed.).

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Perry, A. (2011). Re: Vision, teacher preparation programs: A critical vehicle to drive

student achievement. The Hunt Institute’s, (1), 1 – 8. Retrieved from

http://www.hunt-institute.org/wp-content/uploads /2015/03/re

VISION-Number-1-November-20111.pdf

Perry, C. M. & Rog, J. A. (1992). Preservice and inservice teachers' beliefs about

effective teaching and the sources of those beliefs. Teacher Education

Quarterly, 19, (2), 49-59.

Phumchijzarnan, Z. & Rangponsumrit, N. (2018). Cultural differences in education: A

case study of Thai students and Spanish teachers in university-level Spanish

language classroom in Thailand. Journal of Letters, 47(1), 161-189.

Pilanthananon, N. (2002). From standards to classrooms. Bangkok: Thai Wattana

Panich.

Pornrungroj, C. (2013). Draft of KIP (the fourth round) for public hearing by Office

of National Education Standards and Quality Assessment. Retrieved

http://www.onesqa.or.th/upload/download/.file_75b5e8a566bf5d6c

63666cdd9a72e102.pdf

Pusadee, M. (2011). Academic affairs performance in career and technology content

area, Chakkham Khanathon School, Lamphun Province. FEU Academic

Review, 5(1), 93-106.

Range, B. G., Finch, K., Young, S. & Hvidston, D. J. (2014). Teachers’ perceptions

based on tenure status and gender about principals' supervision. International

Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation, 9(1), 1 – 18. Retrieved

http://www.p21.org/storage/documents/21st_century_skills_education

http://www.hunt-institute.org/wp-content/uploads

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

445

from http://eric.ed.gov/?q=teacher+supervision&ft=on&pg=2&id=EJ1024116

Ratananukul, P. (2012). Quality and standards of teachers for the ASEAN Economic

Community. Office of the Higher Education Commission. Electronic file

presented at the seminar on the ASEAN Economic Community, at the 50th

year Pansamakawachiralongkorn Building, the Faculty of Liberal Art and

Science, Nakorn Phanom University.

Renard, L. (2017). Using reward systems to motivate students. Book Widgets:

Interactive learning. Retrieved from https://www.bookwidgets.com

/blog/2017/01 /using -reward-systems-to-motivate-students

Richards, J. C. (2006). Communicative language teaching today. New York:

Cambridge University Press.

___________. (2015). Teacher thinking and foreign language teaching. MEXTESOL

Journal. Retrieved from http://www.professorjackrichards.com /wp-content/

uploads/Teacher-Thinking-and-Foreign-Language-Teaching.pdf

Richards, J. C. & Bohlke, D. (2011). Creating effective language lessons. New York:


Richards, J. C., Tung, P. & Ng, P. (1992). The culture of the English language

teacher: A Hong Kong sample. RELC Journal, 23(1), 81-103.

Ridman, O. & Rohitsatian, B. (2016). Teacher education for the learning reform of

Thailand’s future education. Office of the Education Council. Retrieved from

http://www.moe.go.th/moe/th/news/detail.php?NewsID=46007&Key=news_a

ct

Roberts, P. (2016). Reflection: A renewed and practical focus for an existing problem

in teacher education. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 41(7), 18-36.

Retrieved from http://ro.ecu.edu.au/ajte/vol41/iss7/2

Rogers, C. (2002). Defining reflection: Another look at John Dewey’s reflective

thinking. Teachers College Record, 104(4), 842-886.

Roller, M. R. & Lavrakas, P. J. (2015). Applied qualitative research design: A total

quality framework approach. New York: Guilford Press.

Ryken, A. E. & Hamel, F. L. (2016). Looking again at ‘surface-level’ reflections:

Framing a competence view of early teacher thinking. Teacher Education

Quarterly, 43, (4), 31-53.


http://www.professorjackrichards.com/

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

446

SABES & ACLS. (2008). Lesson planning resource guide. Retrieved

from www.doe.mass.edu/acls/lessonplanningguide.

Sarawan, S. (1978). A comparison between classroom behaviour of Teaching English

student teachers who underwent the Methods of Teaching English course

using the micro-teaching session and using regular lectures (Master’s degree

dissertation, Srinakharinwirot University, 1978). Retrieved from

http://tdc.thailis.or.th/tdc/dccheck.php?Int_code=2&RecId =476

&obj_id=4956&showmenu=no

Santoyo, C. & Zhang, S. (2016). Secondary teacher candidates’ lesson planning

learning. Teacher Education Quarterly, Spring, 3-27. Retrieved from


Saricoban, A. (2009). Pre-service ELT teachers’ concerns about student teaching

through classroom observations. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences,

1(2009), 703 – 707. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.

com/science/article/pii/S1877042809001256

Scrivener, J. (2011). Learning teaching: The essential guide to English language

teaching. (3rd Ed.). London: McMillan Education.

Serdyukov, P. & Ryan, M. (2008).Writing effective lesson plan: A 5-star approach.

Boston: Pearson.

Shantz, D. & Stratemeyer, E. (2000). Feedback, conversation and power in the field

experience of pre-service teachers. Journal of Instruction Psychology, 27(4).

Retrieved from http://www.freepatentsonline.com/article/Journal-

Instructional-Psychology/68998596.html

Shen, J., Poppink, S., Cui, Y., & Fan, G. (2007). Lesson planning: A practice of

professional responsibility and development. Educational Horizons,

87(Summer), 248 – 260. Retrieved from http://www.academia.edu

/6885429/Lesson_Plan_Learn_to_plan_planning_to_learn

Shinde, M. B. & Karekatti, T. K. (2012). Pre-service teachers’ beliefs about teaching

English to primary school children. International Journal of Instruction, 5(1),

69-85. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED529115.pdf

Schön, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner. San Francisco: Jossey-

Bass.

http://www.doe.mass.edu/acls/lessonplanningguide

http://www.sciencedirect/

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

447

Schramm-Possinger. M. (2015). Pre-service teachers’ humanistic vs. custodial beliefs:

Before and after the student teaching experience. Journal of Education and

Training Studies, 4(1), 74-88. doi:10.11114/jets.v4i1.1080

Shulman, L. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform.

Harvard Educational Review, 57: 1 – 22. Retrieved from

http://hepgjournals.org/doi/abs/10.17763/haer.57.1.j463w79r56455411

org/content/55/1/21.short

Silverman, D. (1997). Ensuring rigor in qualitative research. European Journal of

Public Health, 7(4), 374-384. Retrieved from https://watermark.silverchair

.com/7-4-379.pdf?

Simon, B. (2001). Self-perception and practice in teaching grammar. ELT Journal,

55(1), 21 – 29. Retrieved from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.

Sitirak, N. (2015). Grammar-Translation method in an EFL class in Thailand: A

glance at an English Song’s lyrics. Journal of Education Thaksin University,

15(2), 30-48. Retrieved from https://www.tci-

thaijo.org/index.php/eduthu/article/view/49296/40897

Smith, S. J. (2016). Cuban voices: A case study of English language teacher

education. The International Education Journal: Comparative Perspectives,

15(4), 100-111.

Smith, C., Butler, N. L., Hughes, T. A., Herrington, D. & Kritsonis, W. A. (2007).

Native vs. Nonnative English teacher in Polish Schools: Personal reflections.

Lamar University Electronic Journal of Student Research, Spring(2007), 1 –

7. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed. gov/fulltixt/ED495069.pdf.

Songserm, U. (2012a). Development of teaching learning process to enhance

students’ ability in writing lesson plans. Silpakorn Educational Research

Journal, 5(1), 93 – 108.

Songserm, U. (2012b). Development of teaching learning process to enhance students

ability in writing lesson plan (Doctoral dissertation, Graduate School,

Kasetsart University, 2012).

Spangler, S. (2013). With a little help from their friends: Making the transition from

student to teacher. The English Journal, 102, (3), 87-92.

http://eltj/

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

448

Sudirman, D. (2017). Efforts to improve teacher competence in developing a lesson

plan through sustainable guidance in SMKN 1 Mamuju. Journal of Education

and Practice, 8(5), 114-119. Retrieved from


Taggart, G. L. & Wilson, A. P. (2005). Promoting reflective thinking in teachers: 50

action strategies. California: Corwin Press.

Tanni, M. (2012). Teacher trainees’ information acquisition in lesson planning.

Information Research, 17(3), 1 – 19. Retrieved from

http://www.informationr.net/ir/17-3/paper530.html

The Higher Education Commission. (2016). Teacher development project for local

development (B.E. 2559-2572). Retrieved from

http://www.pkru.ac.th/education/images/Doc_download/2560-1.pdf

The 21st Century teachers. (2018). Planning by backward design. Retrieved from

http://www.peerapanasupon.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Backward-

Design-21stCentury.pdf

Thobega, M. & Miller, G. (2008). Perceptions of supervision practices by agricultural

education student teachers. Journal of Agricultural Education, 49(3), 65 – 75.

Retrieved from

http://eric.ed.gov/?q=teacher+supervision&ft=on&id=EJ839896

Thomas, L. (2012). Re-thinking the importance of teaching: Curriculum and

collaboration in an era of localism, RSA Projects. Retrieved

from http://www.thersa.org/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/570716/RSA-Re-

thinking-the-importance-of-teaching.pdf.

Tok, S. (2010). The problems of teacher candidate’s about teaching skills during

teaching practice. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2010), 4142 –

4146. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science

/article/pii/S1877042810006944

Tokmak, H. S. & Karakus, T. (2011). ICT pre-service teachers’ opinions about the

contribution of initial teacher training to teaching practice. Contemporary

Educational Technology, 2(4), 319-332. Retrieved from

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/29

ac/f5844eb50c715b9fe6ca4c2b8a505ffd3894.pdf

http://eric.ed.gov/?q=teacher+supervision&ft=on&id=EJ839896

http://www.thersa.org/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/570716/RSA-Re-

http://www.sciencedirect/

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/29

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

449

Töman, U. (2014). Analysis of pre-service science teachers’ views about the methods

which develop reflective thinking. International Journal on New Trends in

Education and Their Implications, 5(4), 162-173.

Torff, B. & Sessions, D. (2009).Principles’ perceptions of the causes of teacher

ineffectiveness in different secondary subjects. Teacher Quarterly, Summer:

127 – 148. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/

EJ858727.pdf

Tweedy, J. M. (2015). A qualitative grounded theory study in understanding the

teacher/student relationship in the college English freshman composition

classroom. Doctoral dissertation, Liberty University. Retrieved from

http://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/doctoral/1103/

Tyler, R. (1949). Basic principles of curriculum and instruction. Chicago, IL:

University of Chicago Press.

Uamcharown, S., Lowriendee, W. & Mongkol, P. (2016). The development of

constructivist learning model for the student teachers, Faculty of Education,

Silpakorn University. Silpakorn Education Research Journal, 8(1), 28-46.

Uhrmacher, P. B., Conrad, B. M. & Moroye, C. M. (2013). Finding the balance

between process and product through perceptual lesson planning. Teachers

College Record, 15(070303), 1-23. Retrieved from

http://www.crispateaching.org/uploads/1/3/6/4/13645071/finding_the_balance

_between_process_and_product_through_perceptual_lesson_planning.pdf

Ur, P. (1996). A course in language teaching: Practice and theory. Cambridge:


van Kammen, W. B., & Stouthamer-Loeber, M. (1998). Practical aspects of interview

data collection and data management. In L. Bickman & D. J. Rog (eds.).

Handbook of applied social research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Vermette, P. J., Jones, K. A., Jones, J. L., Werner, T., Kline, C., &D’Angelo, J.

(2010). A model for planning learning experiences to promote achievement in

diverse secondary classrooms. SRATE Journal, 19(2): 70 – 83. Retrieved

from http://corescholar.libraries.wright.edu/cgi/viewcontent.

cgi?article=1128&context=ejie

Waghorn, A. & Stevens, K. (1996). Communication between theory and practice:

http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/

http://corescholar.libraries.wright.edu/cgi/viewcontent.%20cgi?article

http://corescholar.libraries.wright.edu/cgi/viewcontent.%20cgi?article

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

450

How student teachers develop theories of teaching. Australian Journal of

Teacher Education, 21(2), 70 – 81. Retrieved from

http://ro.ecu.edu.au/ajte/vol21/iss2/7/

Walcott, H. F. (2010). Ethnography lessons: A primer. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast

Press.

Wegner, C., Remmert, K., & Strehlke, F. (2014). Professionalizing the self-reflection

of student teachers by using a Wiki. Educational Technology, 54, (4), 38-42.

Wiggins, G. & McTighe, J. (1998). Understanding by design. Alexandria, VA:

Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Womack, S. T., Pepper, S. & Hanna, S. L. (2015). Most effective practices in lesson

planning. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED553616.pdf

Woodward, T. (2001).Planning lessons and courses: Designing sequences of work

for the language classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Wright, T. (2005).Classroom management in language education. Basingstoke:

Palgrave.

Zahorik, J. A. (1975). Teachers’ planning models. Educational Leadership,

November: 134-141. Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/ASCD/pdf

/journals/ed_lead/el_197511_zahorik.pdf

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

451

APPENDICES

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

452

Appendix A: Interview schedule

Interview schedule 1

Questions for student teachers

[Interview 1]

Code INTV…/1

Pseudonym …

Part 1: Factual information

Levels of students ….

Number of students per class ….

Number of teaching hours per week ….

1. What factors influence your lesson planning?

2. How do the factors influence your lesson planning?

3. What is the procedure in your lesson planning?

4. Before you plan, what do you do?

5. What are you thinking about while you are planning?

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

453

Interview schedule 2

Questions for student teachers

[Interview 2]

Code INTV…/2

Pseudonym …

1. What do you do before you implement a lesson plan?

2. Are lesson plans implemented as planned? Why/Why not?

3. If lesson plans are implemented as planned, what do you think about that?

What do you do next?

4. If lesson plans are not implemented as planned, what do you think about that?

What do you do next?

5. What action do you take after implementing a lesson plan?

6. How do you evaluate lesson plans?

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

454

Appendix B: Sample lesson plan

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

455

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

456

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

457

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

458

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

459

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

460

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

461

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

462

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

463

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

464

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

465

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

466

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

467

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

468

Appendix C: Sample field notes

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

469

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

470

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

471

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

472

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

473

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

474

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

475

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

476

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

477

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

478

Appendix D: Letter of approval

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

479

Appendix E: Consent form

An Investigation of Thai EFL Student Teachers’ Lesson Planning

Principal researcher: Vachira Jantarach

Language Institute

Thammasat University

You are invited to be in a research study, which will investigate your lesson

planning process. The reason for inviting you is that you are a student teacher in the

up-coming practicum and you can provide information about how you design lesson

plans. Please read this form. Feel free to ask me any questions before you agree to be

a participant of this study.

This study is being conducted by Vachira Jantarach, lecturer of the Faculty of

Education.

Background information

The purpose of this study is to generate a theory of Thai EFL student teachers’

lesson planning processes. I would like to collect data from student teachers majoring

in Teaching English, who practice teaching at an actual school. During the practicum,

you will be designing lesson plans and implementing lesson plans. I would like to

understand what procedures you employ while you are designing lesson plans and

whether your lesson plans are implemented as planned. Moreover, I would like to ask

you about what action you take after you implement lesson plans.

Procedures

If you agree to be in a participant of this study, I would ask you to

allow me to interview you using the questions mentioned above about

your lesson planning processes, record the interview on an audio file,

and transcribe the interview for data analysis;

allow me to observe the implementation of your lesson plan, record

your implementation on a video file, take notes on your

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

480

implementation of the lesson plan and transcribe the video file along

with the notes into the field notes for generating more questions to ask

you;

and allow me to interview you one more time after the observation,

record the interview on an audio file, and transcribe the interview for

data analysis.

Risks and benefits of being in the study

The risk of being a participant of this study is no more than one would face in

everyday situations. The only risk may be that your students are alarmed of having the

third person in classrooms, apart from you and your school supervisor, and of being

recorded on the clip. However, since you regularly receive your university supervisor,

who observes your class, students may be accustomed to third person’s presence. You

may also assure your students that the video clip will not be publicized anywhere

whatsoever. It is used for academic purposes only.

There is no direct benefit to the participants who are involved in this study.

Compensation

Each participant will be compensated for their willingness to be involved in

this study with a gift pack of two liquid gel ink pens, red and blue, and a white-out

correction tape.

Confidentiality

The records of this study will be kept private. In any sort of report I might

publish, I will not include any information that will make it possible to identify a

subject. Research records will be stored securely and only the researcher will have

access to the records.

Voluntary nature of the study

Participation in this study is voluntary. Your decision of whether or not to

participate will not affect your current or future relations with the Faculty of

Education. If you decide to participate, you are free to avoid answering any question

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

481

you so desire, and you are able to withdraw at any time without affecting any

relationships.

Contacts and questions

The researcher conducting this study is Vachira Jantarach. You may ask any

questions you may have now. If you have questions later, you are encouraged to

contact him at this email address [email protected] or call him at 089-051-

0723. You may visit his office during regular office hours. The faculty advisor for

this study is Asst. Prof. Dr. Kittitouch Soontornwipast.

If you have any questions or concerns regarding this study and would like to

talk to someone other than the research, you are encouraged to contact Language

Institute, 2 Prachan Road, Bangkok 10200 Thailand at [email protected] or call

02-613-3101-3

Statement of Consent:

I have read and understood the above information. I have asked questions and

have received answers. I consent to participate in the study.

Signature:________________________________________Date: ____ /____ / ____

Signature of researcher

Investigator:_______________________________________Date____ /____ / ____

Code: ____________

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

482

Appendix F: Information of participants and schools

School

code

School size and

description

ID Code Pseudonym Levels of

students

Number of

students per

class

Number of

teaching hours

per week

A Large with about 2,500

– 3,000 students from

secondary to high

school

06 Moey M.1 30 – 35 8

05 Anna M.4 30 – 35 8

B Medium with about

1,500 – 2,000 students

from secondary to high

school

07 Andy M.4 30 – 35 6

07 Boy M.5 32 – 37 6

C Large with about 2,500

– 3,000 students in

secondary to high

school levels

02 Chanom M.3 40 – 46 8

04 Fasai M.1 40 – 46 8

D Large with about 2,500


secondary to high

school levels

12 Paul M.2 40 – 50 8

13 Kara M.1 40 – 50 8

14 Tiny M.5 40 – 45 8

E Small with about 500 -

600 students in

secondary to high

school levels

09 Nicky M.3, 17 – 35 8

10 Gasoline M.2 22 – 35 8

11 Pooky M.1 20 – 37 8

F Small with about 400

students only in

elementary level

18 Pollita P.4, P.5 30 – 33 8

G Medium with about

1,500 – 2,000 students

in secondary to high

school levels

03 Mali M.1 30 – 35 8

19 Helen M.2 30 – 33 8

21 View M.3 30 – 32 8

H Small with about 1,000


secondary to high

school levels

15 August M.1 30 – 40 8

I Medium with about

1,500 – 2,000 students

in secondary to high

school levels

22 Katy M.5, 20 – 30 8

20 Jane M.2 23 – 30 8

J Small with about 1,000

students only in

vocational level

01 Tharee M.4 13 – 40 6

16 April M.6 15 – 35 6

17 Grace M.5 15 – 40 8

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

483

Appendix G: List of experts

Dr. Suneeta Kositchaiwat Department of Curriculum and Instruction,

Faculty of Education, Silpakorn University

Dr. Saranabordin Prasarnsab Department of Curriculum and Instruction,


Mr. Philip B. Calabro Department of Curriculum and Instruction,


Assist. Prof. Wannaprapha Suksawas Department of English Language, Faculty of

Humannities, Naresuan University

Dr. Wipada Pulsakwarasarn Section of English Language, Christian

University (Former lecturer, now retiree)

Dr. Amornsri Sangsongfah Educational Service Areas Office,

Samutprakarn

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

484

Appendix H: Sample open coding, axial coding and selective coding

Research question 1. How do Thai EFL student teachers design their lesson plans?

Sub question 1.1 What factors influence student teachers’ lesson planning?

Open codes for RQ1 Sub RQ 1.1 Opening coding Properties Example of participants’ words or phrases

School supervisors

School supervisor giving

information about

number of units from

textbooks

Receiving information

about textbooks from

school supervisors

(amount of content for

long-range plans) before

planning

School supervisor giving textbook to me on

first day I visited school; school supervisor

telling me school using four units for a term;

everyone using four units, school supervisor

telling me


information about

amount of content from

textbooks



school supervisors

(amount of content for

daily plans) before

planning

School supervisor saying ‘He’s from, She’s

from’ enough for a unit; school supervisor

telling me to write about 10 – 12 plans for a

unit


information about

language points to focus

from textbooks



school supervisors (focus

on language points)

before planning

School supervisor telling me to focus on

grammar


information about core

curriculum


about curriculum for

writing

objectives/indicators

before planning

School supervisor telling me to look at core

curriculum, I using indicators from core

curriculum to write objectives; school

curriculum and core curriculum similar,

school supervisor telling me to use core

curriculum


information about

vocational curriculum


about vocational

curriculum for writing


before planning

School supervisors saying school using


Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

485

Opening coding Properties Example of participants’ words or phrases


information about


(viewed as constraints)

Finding information about


unhelpful for writing


before planning

Never saw vocational curriculum before;

school supervisor telling me to use textbooks

to write objectives/indicators, not helpful, too

general


information about

intermediate students


about intermediate

students before planning

School supervisor telling me to think of

various activities, to prepare explanations for

students


information about

beginner students


about beginner students

before planning

School supervisor telling me to make things

easy, to use simple sentences or structures, to

teach slowly; explaining each step slowly;

explaining a lot to help beginner students


information about

availability of electronic

devices


about facilities,

technology and resources

before planning

School supervisor telling me there are

computers and visualizers—easy to plan, to

use PowerPoint presentations—convenient to

prepare


information about

availability of office

supplies


about facilities,


before planning

School supervisor telling me Xerox machine

available—having explanation on sheets and

worksheets; School supervisor telling me I

could use printer—convenient for printing

plans and teaching aids at school


information about

availability of sound labs


about facilities,


before planning

School supervisor telling me there are sound

labs—planning to use PowerPoint files;

using computers, speakers and microphones;

using more audio and video clips; using a lot

of pictures;


information about

unavailability of

electronic devices


about facilities,


before planning

School supervisors saying electronic devices

unavailable—swapping to room with

working devices, using my own laptop, using

paper-based aids, having back-up plans

School supervisor not

giving information

Not receiving information

from school supervisor

before planning

School supervisor saying he unable to talk to

me—seeking information from classmates

and other school supervisors

University supervisors

University supervisors Receiving information Getting this concept [of teaching English]

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

486


giving information about

teaching English

about teaching English

before planning

from a course—helping me write plans

correctly; trying to make activities

communicative as learned from the

university; trying to make activities like use

of grammar, form, meaning and use;

knowing teaching vocabulary from a

teaching English course—presenting words,

practice words and using words; getting the

SQR3 (reading technique) from a teaching

English course



English language


about English language

before planning

Remembering reading techniques from a

reading course; learning this from a drama

course—trying to speak slowly and

exaggerating gestures; learning

conceptualizing content from a reading

course; learning prosody from a poetry

course



submission of plans


about rule and practice

before planning

University supervisors telling me to submit

plans every week, to submit plans two weeks

before implementation—planning ahead of

time, putting timetable for writing plans,

having more discipline



change of plan formats


about rule and practice

before planning

University supervisors telling me to change

from phases of teaching to PPP (short

version)—good for saving paper and time-

saving, to write everything in details

(detailed version)—good for remembering

what to say in class


not giving information

Not receiving information

from university

supervisors before

planning

University supervisors not meeting me;

university supervisors not checking plans

regularly—still writing plans and submitting

plans

Student teachers

Student teachers’

knowledge of teaching

English (uncertainty)

Realizing of having

insufficient of knowledge

of teaching English before

planning

Not sure if activity planned communicative

or not; not confident in using techniques—

real life or not?

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

487


Student teachers’


English (certainty)

Realizing of having


English before planning

Remembering planning activities to help

students learn English, planning

communicative activities

Student teachers’

knowledge of English

language

Realizing of having

insufficient knowledge of

English language before

planning

Having problem in writing lesson plans in

English; not know how to write grammatical

sentences; hard when writing grammatical

sentences; feeling like not want to write

plans sometimes; writing ungrammatical

plans—feeling discouraged; not confident in

English, grammatical mistakes found; more

careful; trying to check plans after writing;

still trying—able to be better at planning

Student teachers’

personality (viewed as

opportunities)

Realizing of own

personality affecting

planning

Understanding plans flexible due to

unexpected things happening—trying to plan

various activities; searching for more

activities from other sources

Student teachers’

personality (viewed as

constraints)

Realizing of own

personality affecting

planning

Not funny person—hard to design funny

activities; soft-spoken person—hard to

implement plans; lenient person—hard to

control class

Student teachers’

motivation

Realizing of own

motivation affecting

planning

Always wanting to be professional

teachers—writing good plans; parents

inspiring; mother being role model

Student teachers’ classmates

Student teachers’

classmates at same

school sharing

information

Gaining information from

classmates for planning

Classmates and I talking about problems;

talking about things at school with

classmates; we chatting about things—no

solutions for problems but moral support

gained; getting ideas of using video clips

from classmate; talking to classmate and

gaining ideas of using jigsaw reading for

planning

Student teachers’

classmates on social

networking sharing

information


classmates for planning

We chatting on Line: talking about schools,

complaining about things, gaining ideas for

teaching, when running of ideas; gaining

ideas for planning e.g. jigsaw reading,

writing timeline, using big paper, cyclone

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

488


game

Student teachers’ senior graduates

Student teachers’ senior

graduates sharing

information about each

supervisor’s supervision

style


senior graduates for

planning

Calling senior graduate to find out about

strict university supervisor—submitting

plans on time, more disciplined; talking to

senior graduates about lenient university and

school supervisors—not submitting plans on

time, not rewriting plans as suggested

Student teachers’ senior

graduates sharing

information about each

supervisor’s favorite

techniques


senior graduates for

planning

Senior graduates telling about university

supervisors’ favorite techniques e.g. using

PowerPoint presentation, video clips,

speaking activities for transfer activities

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

489

Axial codes and selective codes based on open codes (RQ1 Sub RQ 1.1) Open codes Axial codes Selective codes

School supervisors’ influence on lesson

planning at meetings with student teachers:

information about textbooks; information

about curriculum; information about

students; information about facilities,


School supervisors

(opportunities)

Personnel (that give

information to student

teachers during the pre-

planning stage)

information about textbooks (vocational

curriculum); information about facilities,

technology and resources (unavailability); no

information from school supervisor

School supervisors

(constraints)

University supervisors’ influence on lesson

planning at meetings with student teachers:

information about teaching English and

English language; information about rule and

practice


(opportunities)

No information from university supervisors University supervisors

(constraints)

Student teachers’ knowledge of teaching

English, personality

Student teachers

(constraints)

Student teachers’ knowledge of teaching

English, knowledge of English language,

personality, motivation

Student teachers

(opportunities)

Student teachers’ classmates at same school,

classmates on social networking

student teachers’ classmates

Information about each supervisor’s

supervision style; information about each

supervisor’s favorite techniques

student teachers’ senior

graduates

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

490

BIOGRAPHY

Name Mr. Vachira Jantarach

Educational background

2002 – 2004 M.A. (English for Careers)

Language Institute, Thammasat University

1992 – 1996 B.A. (Mass Communication)

Faculty of Humanities, Chiang Mai

University

Work experience

Mar 2005 – present Lecturer at Faculty of Education,

Silpakorn Uniersity

May 2004 – Mar 2005 Lecturer at Section of English Language,

Thongsook College

Mar 1998 – Apr 2003 Teaching Assistant at St. Stephen’s

International School

Dec 1996 – Feb 1998 Translator at SET Daily Section,

The Nation Multimedia, Plc

Academic works

Jantarach, V., Chalong, P., Chukaeo, O., Sitthitunyagum, B., Pandee, M. (2017).

Materials development: The advancement of the curriculum resources room

for student teachers. Veridian E-Journal, Silpakorn University, International

issue (Humanities, Social Science and Arts), 10(4), 377-393.

Jantarach, V. (2016). 466 371 Methods of Teaching English. Nakorn Pathom: Faculty

of Education, Silpakorn University.

Jantarach, V. (2011). A programme evaluation of the bachelor of education degree in

English, the Faculty of Education, Silpakorn University. Nakorn Pathom: The

Ref. code: 25605521320100HQK

491


Jantarach, V. (2011). Attitude towards the instruction in writing English in an English

foundation course. Veridian E-Journal, Silpakorn University, 4(2), 108-124.

Jantarach, V. (2011). Students’ opinion on the instruction in writing English in

English foundation courses. NakornPathom: Faculty of Education, Silpakorn

University.

Jantarach, V. (2007). The integration of MICE and English for tourism as an effective

task-based ESP course. Journal of Education Silpakorn University, 4 (1,2), 29-

38.