07 05

Vietnamese and American Students’ Debating - A comparative study
VIETNAMESE AND AMERICAN STUDENTS’ DEBATING IN CLASS
A COMPARATIVE STUDY
Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION
In recent years, there has been a greatly increasing interest in debates in general and
in classroom debate in particular, with several published and unpublished articles, and case
studies. This issue also appears on some websites like http://www.idebate.org/, or there is a
“Debate Central”, at University of Vermont (http://debate.uvm.edu/), which provides an
online database of arguments for and against a lot of topics, or links to research and
information. Some workshops and lectures about debating are organized by governmental
and private organizations in many countries in the world, such as America, British, Japan
and Australia, etc (source). That is to say debate specially attracts much concern of
researchers. The concerns have also been raised by several relevant bodies about the
“academic debate”. Many studies of debate, which will be mentioned in the next part of the
paper, have been so far done. However, there has been no study comparing the debating
styles between Vietnamese and American students. The considerable differences in cultural
values between Vietnam and America might cause the big differences beside apparent
similarities in debating styles. I, therefore, try to study how classroom debate can be
developed to support learning. Specifically, I want to explore and clarify the similarities and
differences of Vietnamese and American students’ debating in this study.
Trần Thị Mỹ Supervisor: Trần Quang Ngọc Thúy
-1-
Chapter 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
I. Definition of debate
A variety of definitions of the term ‘debate’ have been suggested. This has created
confusion in understanding its meaning accurately. In Thompson’s analysis how different
discussion and debate is outlined as follows:
1. In debate, participants argue for and against the pre-fixed proposition. In discussion,
participants look for a solution to a problem.
2. Consequently, debate considers two alternatives, while discussion considers multiple
alternatives.
3. Debate is usually regulated by strict rules about the time and order of speeches.
Discussion is conducted more freely with less formal rules.
4. In debate, the decision is made by the third party, which is based on the arguments
presented by the affirmative and the negative sides. In discussion, the purpose is to
reach an argument among participants.
(Thompson, 1971, p. 80, as cited in Narahiko, 1996)
Despite the differences between discussion and debate pointed out above, this paper
used the definition of “debate” as a synonym of discussion and argument (Oxford Advanced
Learners’ Dictionary 2006). In some sense, debate and discussion share a meaning that is to
look for the answer by raising voice. Besides, Jerome & Bhavini (2005) also agreed that
debate and discussion seem to be used almost interchangeably (p. 497). In the study “The
Structure of The Discussions That Promote Reasoning”, Anderson (1998) used the term
-2-
interactive argumentation to refer to discussions in which participants present reasons and
evidence for different positions (p. 317). He also pointed out that this means being willing
and able to consider and voice arguments on different sides of an issue in interactive
argumentation. According to Anderson (1998), there are many positions in an argument so
he had studied five reasons why students might verbalize arguments supporting two or more
different positions during the course of a discussion: the students may change their minds;
they may lose track of where they are in the overall argument; the students may criticize an
argument that supports their own position because they honestly believe it to be weak; it is
possible for the students to concede the strength of an argument that contradicts their
position, even though they are sticking with their position; and they are maybe withholding
judgment until they have had time to weigh all of the available evidence (pp. 338-339).
Besides, Kyudai (n. d.) divided debate into two kinds: formal and informal. He pointed out
the latter is a common occurrence, but the quality and the depth of a debate improved with
knowledge and skill of its participants as debaters. From what this author analyzed,
academic debate belongs to informal debate. From the above analyzing, this study uses the
definition of “debate” as a synonym of discussion and argument (Oxford Advanced
Learners’ Dictionary 2006) because of the fact that, in spite of such initial differences, they
all share a meaning, a decision-making process, a method, or a technique of looking for the
‘truth’, the answer. Allison (2002) also defined that a debate is simply a clash of ideas and
each side puts forward worthwhile reasons to support their point of view [in which] the class
audience then joins in to speak for, or against or to abstain … (p. 13). In addition, according
to Jerome and Algarra (2005), the term debate is itself used to denote any formal learning
-3-
situation in which the students are encouraged to express and respond orally to opinions on a
specific issue (p. 497). He also explained that the term discussion is to signify the informal,
opened-ended exchange of views and ideas (p. 497). Bakhlin and Skidmore (2000) said that
debating is defined as a process of seeking for the truth (p. 293). In other words, people
debate to find out the ‘truth’. However, the nature of this pursuit of ‘truth’ is individualistic
(Tweed & Lehman, n. d.), thus debate still remains. So the confusion over terminology
appears significant given the influential role of these pedagogical approaches (Jerome &
Bhavini, 2005, p. 497).
II. Benefits of debate
The benefits of debate have been studied by many authors in the world. As a result,
in recent years, many teachers have moved away from the use of the lecture format, “chalk
and talk” (Tumposky, 2004, p. 52) or “banking method of education” (Freire, 1970, p. 58, as
cited in Tumposky, 2004, p. 53). Anderson (1998) said that the discussions featuring
reasoned argumentation among students have the potential to increase the students’
motivation and to help them learn to reason well (p. 315). He also thought that there are at
least three reasons for the recent interest in interactive argumentation with groups. The first
reason is the increase of motivation in classroom. The second one is the importance of
interactive argumentation in everyday life. The last one which he especially emphasized is
that the interactive argumentation within groups may be the primary means through which
the students learn to reason (pp. 316-317). Besides, he added that one goal for the discussion
might be to have a mixture of collaboratively constructed and singly constructed arguments
(p. 342). At the beginning of his case study, Simonnaux (2002) affirmed that developing the
-4-
students’ argumentation skills helps them to contribute to the debate. He supported that the
teacher should help students to identify their emotional standpoint, the arguments used by
teachers, other students and by themselves, the validity of these arguments, and the different
stages in decision making (p. 9). Kyudai (n. d.) said that through cooperative debate students
could learn academic and critical thinking clearly about a subject. Also discussing the
benefits of debate form, Kyudai provided an interesting idea that debating has a potential of
connecting students to the world. That means the speaker might provide the audience a lot of
necessary and new information, and by this way they gain the knowledge well. Moreover, I
also agree with Jerome (2004) that once participants had overcome their initial nerves about
getting up and talking in public, it is fun. The reason is that you share your ideas with
someone in the audience who may be ‘smiling at you’ (p. ). In that way you find the
classes fun, effective, attractive, and helpful. In addition, the classes with debates can attract
students’ participation and attention. Through the debates the teacher can assess students
easily and quickly because they might prove their abilities and knowledge in debates.
Simonnaux also agreed that when students were free to express their own opinions, they
would be able to better express their arguments (p. 9). Perhaps, debating is really a good
teaching method so that students become the center of learning process and the teacher is
considered a ‘participant’, an ‘organizer’, or a “facilitator”. While mentioning many benefits
of debate Jerome & Algarra (2005) also gave its downside. They anticipated that there is
certainly a danger that young people may be limited in their understanding if they are
introduced to controversial public issues through a process of debate, which requires them to
pick or be assigned to one or two positions and to argue for or against a motion; he also
-5-
added while students can be taught to speak in certain code, this does not guarantee that they
will be heard and understood as they wish (Jerome & Algarra, 2005, p. 499). Nevertheless,
they did not deny the benefits of debate because such idea is given when debate is used as
the only method of teaching and learning process. In summary, so far to my best knowledge
in this field, there has not been any research in which researcher has refused benefits of
debate to teaching and learning.
III. Teachers’ role in classroom debate
Numerous studies have attempted to explain the role of debating in schools and
colleges (Algarra & Jerome, 2005; Allison, 2002; Narahiko, 1996; Simonneaux, 2002;
Tumposky, 2004). According to the idea from a piece of research, “Education for Citizenship
and The Teaching of Democracy in Schools”, schools have the role of promoting both the
skills and attitudes to support debate (Q. A. C, 1998, 1999, cited in Jerome & Algarra, 2005,
p. 498). This stated that there should be positive points of view about the classroom debates
and suitable policies should be designed so that debating form can be applied and developed
effectively in schools because students are young and need to help understand the benefits of
debating. Obviously, it is the teacher who plays a significant part in these policies. In the
discussion part of his thesis, ‘Analysis of Classroom Debating Strategies in The Field of
Biotechnology’, Simonneaux (2002) discussed that the main difficulty for the teacher in
classroom debates is to remain neutral when leading a debate. That is the teacher in a debate
does not more highly value one of two debaters. The teacher should be considered a
participant, an organizer. Other authors (Jerome & Alagrra, 2005) shared with Simonneaux
(2002) about such role of the teacher. They pointed out that one of the most effective
-6-
approaches requires the teacher to adopt the role of impartial facilitator, rather than
discussion leader. Meanwhile, the teacher can use these opportunities to listen to students’
talking as an indicator, albeit a partial one, on the speaker’s thinking (Fisher, 1993, p. 254, as
cited in Jerome & Alagrra, 2005, p. 496). However, the role is not really easy to be taken
upon. To clearly explain this idea, Simonneaux added that there could be a bias in students’
arguments stemming from their established relationship with the teacher. That is to say it
might be as well to agree with the teacher, and in any case, students will always attempt to
figure out their teacher’s opinion and will explicitly ask for it at the end of the activity
(Simonneaux, 2002, p. 11). The phenomenon is popular in many cases when students feel
difficult to have the last solution for themselves to a proposition. In this situation, the teacher
can give a good, reliable suggestion. It has conclusively shown that Simonneaux improved
Q.C.A’s opinion in detail. Ediger (1994) added that evaluation should not hinder the pupil
progress in revealing originality and being a quality member of a discussion group (p. 6).
On concluding his study, ‘Analysis of Classroom Debating Strategies in the Field of
Biotechnology’, Simonneaux (2002) suggested some ways so that the teacher can apply to
improve their role in classroom debate. He encouraged the teacher to adapt and change
materials and even cut out certain parts (p. 11). He hoped that the issue in this kind of
analysis is to help designers and users to become fully aware of the choices they make and
of the forms that reveal or support the teacher (p. 11). In the article, “Speaking and The
Pupil”, as discussing the relationship between the teacher and the students, Ediger (1994)
said that the teacher and the pupils in the classroom should support each other so that
satisfying experiences in oral communication are an end result and the learners should never
-7-
be minimized for mistakes made in oral communication. Rather support must be provided
for the pupils to improve oral communication skills with renewed confidence (p.1).
Moreover, Anderson (1998) had a special way to explore the role that the teacher played in
the discussion by raising the question “Do the teachers contribute equally to reasons and
support, challenges, and counterchallenges, or do they focus on just one type of rhetorical
move and leave the others to the students?”(p. 340). After his studying, he pointed out series
of ways that the teacher should follow such as to introduce new line of argument that the
children [students] had not thought of on their own; to help elaborate reasons and support
introduced by the students. However, he noted that the teachers stepped back and allowed
the students to construct most of the challenges and counterchallenges themselves (pp. 340-
341). He continued to list the ways that the teachers can use in the discussion. The teacher
might encourage students to explicitly consider which arguments are most worthy of further
development, what criteria should be used for deciding which arguments are worthy of
further development, and to consider whether the most developed arguments are as fully
developed as they would like (p.341).
One more of the teacher’s role in classroom debate is to choose the objectives or the
topics of a discussion or a debate. Ediger (1994) thought that the objectives need to be
carefully selected by those involved in teaching-learning situations, be it the teacher (p. 4),
[and] must be new, attainable by learners, should be arranged sequentially so that pupils
might be successful in goal attainment (p. 5). He also emphasized that the title/topic should
not be excessively difficult since the time limit for preparation might be rather short (p. 8).
To illustrate his ideas, Ediger (1994) gave a list of ten criteria that the students could apply
-8-
so that students’ discussions are successful. They are the prescribed time limits, the
meaningful content to the listeners, obtaining the listeners’ attention, being poised when
presenting the content in the ongoing talk and using notes, using notes when there is a need
to do so, using eyes contact, facing all listeners, using facial expressions and gestures as
needed, not exhibiting distracting mannerisms, and inviting questions after the
extemporaneous speech (p. 8-9). In addition, Allison (2002) agreed with Ediger that one of
the great advantages of debating diverse topics every week is that T.A.G (talented and
gifted) students learn to think clearly about the subject and to argue a perspective based on
the evidence (p. 13). Besides, Ediger (1994) stated that the discussion needs to follow
definite criteria so that the teacher may praise learner attainment in the discussion. These
criteria are listed below:
-The discussion should be stimulating to generate interest in content presented.
-Each student should be encouraged to join the discussion.
-No one should dominate the discussion.
-The learners need to develop feelings of belonging when participating in a
committee setting.
-The ideas in the discussion should circulate among all group members rather than
between a few members in the group setting, the content must be presented clearly to
the others, meaning needs to be present in learning,
-The respect and acceptance of others’ thinking.
-The teacher is a guide and not a dispenser of information.
-9-
-Evaluation of process in a discussion must always follow specific standards and
should be stressed frequently.
-The learners must attain and grow in becoming proficient in discussion setting (p.
6).
In summary, allowing students to debate and providing opportunities of classroom
debate is to help them become ‘the center of the process of teaching and learning’; also, the
nature of this pursuit of truth is individualistic, simultaneously, the teacher plays an
important role in promoting students to practice their duty accordingly.
IV. Relationship between cultural values and academic debate.
For the most part, past research in debates has mainly focused on the history of
debates, the benefits of debate, etc. Few researchers have looked directly at the influences of
cultural values on debating styles in each country. It is not the fact that multi-cultural
confusion will certainly be a stumbling block for those not prepared to deal with it. In his
case study of debates, ‘Traditions of debate in Japan’, Narahiko (1996) mentions the special
situation of Japan as an example why debating was not developed rapidly. The author
explains that the Japanese avoid verbal conflict and that tooron [debate] is not compatible
with their traditional communication patterns. He also shares his opinions with Adachi that
even today quite a few people disbelieve or even feel hostile to argument and dispute
(Adachi, 1984, p. 27-28, as cited in Narahiko, 1996). In order to support that attitude,
Narahiko (1996) gave some ethical sayings and proverbs that are popular in Japan such as ‘a
honey tongue’, ‘a heart of gall’, ‘silence is golden’, ‘actions speak louder than words’, etc.
In some sense, debating also exists in Japan. However, their conception of debate is
- 10 -
different. Narahiko points out in tooron (debate), people listen to one-to-one (Hashimoto,
1972, p. 274; translation by Inoue, cited in Narahiko, 1996). This means the Japanese
“debate” tradition is different from the western (Anglo – American) tradition (Narahiko,
1996). (Not clear.) Narahiko agreed with this idea that Japan had too much rhetoric based on
emotion and ethics (Sawada, 1983, p. 287, translation by Inoue, cited in Narahiko, 1996).
Especially, as comparing the concept of eloquence between Anglo-American and Japanese
traditions, Narahiko indicated that the debate in which the students’ opposing arguments
were examined and refuted did not become popular in Japan. He also adds that this may be
due to the tradition in which ‘rhetoric based on logic’ did not develop in Japan. Besides,
Nancy with her study, “The Debate Debate”, argued that debate carries the weight of
tradition, a powerful force affecting the teacher’s choice of both curriculum and instruction
style (Cuban, 1984, cited in Tumposky, 2004, p. ). On the other hand, teachers tend to
teach as they were taught, unless they have been consciously resocialized to do otherwise (p.
). That is cultural values partially affect students’ learning style in general, and their debating
style in particular through their teachers. In order to have a deep insight into the influences
of cultural values, let’s consider a case study of Confucian and Socratic approaches in
learning. In their major study, Rorger and Lehman (n. d.) compared and contrasted
Confucian framework and Socratic one, with respondent cultures, Chinese and a Western
one. They pointed out in Socrates’ Western culture; one frequently questioned others’ beliefs
and was proud of this tendency. Moreover, this framework evaluated the knowledge of each
particular individual by engaging in a dialogue in which a series of successively deeper and
more probing questions would be asked. In contrast, Confucius expected learners to respect
- 11 -
and obey authority figures. More clearly, within Confucius’ five ethical relations, people
were taught a duty to obey and respect those of higher status than themselves (Tweed &
Lehman, n. d.). This framework also emphasized that to honor those higher than ourselves is
the highest expression of the sense of justice. Consequently, the country which is influenced
by Confucius’ framework will adopt this conception. From the analysis mentioned above we
can partially see how cultural values influence people’s debating style and the development
of debates. Although the cultural values do not completely affect debating style, they might
be the main and significant factor in their conception of debating, which are denoted in some
sayings and proverbs. In this piece of research I focused on studying the influence of
cultures on students’ debating, Vietnamese and American students that has not been studied
so far. Specially, the paper focuses on answering the following questions:
1. How do students debate with each other in the classroom in Vietnam and in
America?
2. How do students debate with their teachers?
3. What influences students’ debating style?
4. How can Vietnamese students be encouraged to debate in the classroom?
- 12 -
Chapter 3: METHODOLOGY
I. Subjects
For the aim of this study is to find out the differences in debating style between Vietnamese
students and American students, the subjects are divided into two groups of students in each
country.
The first group is Vietnamese students at Hue University. They are chosen at random apart
from students of foreign languages who have learned and are directly influenced by other
culture from their syllabus. This group consists of forty respondents taking the discourse
completion test in Vietnamese. The second group who will take the English version is forty
American students at some universities in America. The subjects major in many fields in
order to provide the study with realistic data.
II. Data collection
1. Questionnaire
All of the participants were students studying at colleges in Vietnam and America. A
random group of forty students working in many different fields was selected from Hue
College of Pedagogy and Hue College of Agriculture and Forestry. Questionnaires
consisting of twenty-two questions in Vietnamese were handed to them. Forty American
students studying in America, who were also selected at random for this study, received the
English version of the questionnaire by emails. Its content is about the way of debating, the
participation in and students’ and teachers’ attitudes to classroom debate.
- 13 -
2. Interview
Two groups of students were all interviewed namely Vietnamese students and
American ones. The first group of students was interviewed face to face because the
researcher can easily contact them. The second one was interviewed by chatting on the
Internet. The duration of an interview was approximately one hour in an informal
environment to arouse and result in enriched data. This method also helps me get further
information that cannot be included in the questionnaire.
III. Data analysis
The questionnaire in Vietnamese version is handed out to more than 40 Vietnamese
students and American students received those in English version from their emails or
delivered directly in Vietnam. The data collected from questionnaire are analyzed first and
then I continued to investigate further information of students’ debating from interview some
Vietnamese and American students. Some invalid responses are excluded and 40 valid one
are used to analyze in this study. Especially, the data are presented in some fields in tables
and charts so that the information is valuable to research questions and it is easy to follow
findings and discussions.
- 14 -
Chapter 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
As mentioned in the literature review, the word “debate” was understood in some
different meanings. My expected interesting result is met that 97.5% American student who
responded my questions understood the meaning of the word “debate” as I meant.
Classroom debate is discussion or argumentation in which every student can join in to argue
for or against to express himself, or simply to share his opinions with other people. Some
others divided debate into two categories and responded the questions in their two ways.
After receiving a lot of information from Vietnamese and American students who took part
in responding the questionnaire, the present research focused on exploring some following
areas.
I. Students’ attitudes to classroom debate
An investigation of students’ attitude to classroom debate is to have background
information about students’ conception of debate and a base supporting other areas which
are going to be interpreted in next parts of the study. The data collected in the questions 1, 2,
6, 19 and 20 are used to through light on this issue.
Question 1: What do you think of classroom debate?

Good Bad Others:
Vietnamese students (V) -depend of the content of the lesson
75% 10%
-debate should be limited in time.
American students (A)
100% 0%
Question 2: Do you like to debate and to give your ideas freely in class?
Yes No
V 95% 5%
A 97.5% 2.5%
- 15 -
Question
Question
6: What
20: What
do you
do you
feel think
after aabout
classroom
a student
debate?
who disagrees with their teachers’
V A
ideas?
Satisfied whether you succeed or not. 60% 82.5%
Satisfied only when you succeed. V 15% A10%
Tired 10% 0%
Never want to repeat. Impolite 0% 0% 5% 0%
Others: Daring 25%15% 7.5%
5%
Normal 62.5% 70%
Others (V) 2.5% (A)20%

- want to know further information - good
-depend on debaters’ attitude and their - should be encouraged.
ways of debating. -
Question 19: According to you,and
-intelligent what is a good class?
good -
V A
A silent, obedient one 10% 7.5%

One in which there are exciting debates 80% 87.5%
V: 10% A: 7.5%
- A combination of debate and quiet. -Most of debates are not able to be won
- The teacher has a good transferring or lost. They leave us no clear conclusion
Others:
ability. just a better understanding.
- Debate in a serious -A combination of debate and quiet.
environment.
These significant figures give us overall information about students’ attitudes to
classroom debate. First, as seen in tables 1 and 2 above, most of students (75%) in Vietnam
and all in America agreed that classroom debate is good and they like to debate in class
(V=95% and A= 97.5%). That means most of students are conscious of debates’ significance
- 16 -
and benefits. However, some Vietnamese thought that classroom debate was bad that did not
appear in American students’ responses. Second, the responses to question 6 showed that a
majority of students (V=60% and A=82.5%) in the two countries have a positive conception
of debate. They seem satisfied when participating in debates. Nevertheless, there are a few
different views of debate. Some Vietnamese felt tired after in-class debates. Maybe they had
a hard psychology of classroom debate, whereas, American perceived more comfortably. In-
class debates made them pleased, engaged, interested and fine beside a group of students
who said that they were satisfied whether they succeed or not. They did not care if their
debate is successful, but the most attentive thing is that they had had better understanding.
They simply viewed that debate is for everyone to share his opinions and his points of view
of something. In brief, they are happy to do so. Final, students’ conception of a good class
may, I hoped, reflect partly students’ attitude to in-class debate. In general, the Vietnamese
(80 %) and the American (87.5%) valued debate in class. They all expected to have debate in
classroom. One viewpoint of a good class seem to appear in both countries is that a class in
which there is a combination of debate and quite is good.
The above information could help us reach a conclusion that both Vietnamese and
American seem to have a good attitude to classroom debate. The differences in figures also
suggested that American students appear to be eager and more positive about debate. The
reason supported this idea is that Vietnamese students’ debate is still limited in conception
such as a serious class environment, time and students’ attitude.
II. How popular is classroom debate in fact?
- 17 -
The questions relating to the popularity of debate of Vietnamese and American
students are hoped bring us an overall and objective portrait of debate in fact. The following
tables illustrated the data collected from two groups of subject.
- 18 -
Question 3: How do you contribute to the class?

V A
Raise your hand and speak when you have any idea 26.5% 70%
Only when you know the correct answer 35% 15%
When being asked by your teachers
32.5% 7.5%
When being asked by your group members 5% 7.5%
V A
- Only debate favorite problem or- Join in discussion
Other really reasoned argument - Just speak out or speak out without handing or
ways standing up.
The data in this question revealed us that Vietnamese still passively debate in class.
In particular, 27% students answered that they raise their hand and speak out when having
any idea. Many others informed that they would debate as being asked by others (by
teachers =32.5% and by friends =5%). Besides, some responses revealed that some
Vietnamese students are not really interested in debate because they only join in their
favorite reasoned argument. This information can bring us American conclusion that
Vietnamese were rather lazy at debating. In contrast, 70% American students chose the
pattern “Raise your hand and speak when you have any idea” and some other students said
that they would just speak out or speak out without handing. That means they are active and
interested in debate in class. Moreover, there are only 7.5%+7.5% students who would
express their ideas when being asked. They also explained that if they did not ask about what
they are thinking they would not know if they were correct. These responses suggested that
they debate in class for learning purpose and their understanding.

- 19 -
60 put forth the ideas
50 listen and question
40
just listen
30
ignore
20
dislike
10
reject the discussed
0 argum ent
V A
students students
Question 18: According to you, how do students in your country debate in class?
V A
Fiercely 0 12.5%
Excitingly 15% 50%
Normally, when being asked by teachers. 60% 37.5%
Insipidly 25% 0
Others Very insipidly 0
The information from table 5 provided a clear portrait of debate in fact. There are big
differences in reactions to debate between Vietnamese and American students. Only 10%
Vietnamese students “put forth ideas” and a half of them who responded the questionnaire
“listen and question” during arguments. However, there are still many students showing
passive and ignorant in classroom debates: 32.5% student listen, 5% student dislike and
2.5% student reject the discussed argument. In contrast, 45% American student take part in
putting forth ideas and 70% student appear to listen, question and even write down other
people’s argument when they need. These figures helped us imagine an exciting
environment in classes in America. Especially, no one ignores or dislikes classroom debate.
- 20 -
Hence, the data above can be used to reach a conclusion that Vietnamese students seem
much less active than American one in class. The former tend to keep quiet or harmonious in
class, or we could say Vietnamese students were passive reception of information in general.
Chart 8: How often do you debate with your teachers in class?
100
80
60
A
40
V
20
0
always often rarely never
Chart 11: How often do you debate with your classmates in class?
60
50
40
V
30 A
20
10
0
always often rarely never
- 21 -
Question 18: According to you, how do students in your country debate in class?
V A
Fiercely 0% 12.5%
Excitingly 15% 50%
Normally, when being asked by teachers. 60% 37.5%
Insipidly 25% 0%
Others Very insipidly
Moreover, the data in questions 8 and 11 supported this fact of debate in Vietnam and
in America again. There are more in-class debates in America than in Vietnam. The
popularity of debate in America happened not only among American but also between
students and teachers; meanwhile, classroom debate is not really popular in Vietnam
(Always=2.5 %, rarely=45.5% between teachers and students; always=15%, rarely=35%
among students). These figures said that debate between teachers and students happened
more rarely than those among students.
Due to my anticipation of Vietnamese students commented debating rarely
so I raised the question 19 to investigate the phenomenon. Results from the present data
supported our anticipation of explaining the reasons why Vietnamese students rarely debate
in class. The patterns chosen mostly belong to culture such as “They respect their teachers”:
15%, “They think that their teachers are always right”: 12.5%, “They are afraid that their
teachers and friends will have negative remarks on them”: 12.5%, “They are shy, timid”:
32.5%. Meanwhile, 20% students chose “They have no enough knowledge and words”. One
more interesting thing is that some Vietnamese students stated that they are passive in
learning; some said that their teachers do not provide opportunities to debate in class; and
others informed that the learning environment is not convenient enough. Surprisingly, the
- 22 -
pattern ‘shy and timid’ in question 19 of Vietnamese version was chose by many Vietnamese
students that made American students greatly surprise when informed this information in
interviews. On the contrary, when question 18 is raised, 12.5% American students chose the
pattern “fiercely” and 50% chose “excitingly”. No one chose “insipidly” or gave other ideas.
Unlike the American’s judgment, the Vietnamese did not choose “fiercely” but 50% judged
their debates normal when being asked by teachers.
From the above conclusion, we can affirm that the state of debate in Vietnam is rather
insipid, whereas American students themselves confirmed that classroom debate is exciting
and rather fierce. This conclusion helped us understand that students’ attitude to debate is not
completely similar to their debating in fact when looking back the result of the preceding
part.
III. The cultural values and classroom debate
In the previous section, I have provided an overall portrait of debate in students’
attitude and the popularity of debate in reality in Vietnam and America. In this part, some
cultural elements are continuously used to clarify the mentioned conclusions. Debating style
from my experience I see being influenced by some factors such as teachers’ and students’
attitude, position and posture as speaking, personality, knowledge, etc., so question 4 was
given. Resultantly, the above elements are all chosen by students in America and Vietnam.
- 23 -
Question 4: Which elements affect your debate? (You can choose more than
one thing)
V(times) A(times)
Teacher’s attitudes 30 30
Classmates’ attitudes 8 27
Knowledge 2 8
Your position and posture when talking 11 15
Personality 20 36
Others 0 0
As mentioned in the prior part, teachers’ and students’ attitude to classroom debate in
Vietnamese and American belong to conception of debate are different. The Vietnamese
seem not to highly value someone’s relief in a group. It is a popular characteristic of
collectivism in Vietnam.
In addition, the knowledge which is chosen most in American is the forth most chosen in
Vietnamese. This information implied that Vietnamese students debate less frequent than
American students but they are not less intelligent or acknowledged than the American.
Beside the aforementioned factors, the distance between teachers and students can play
an important role in motivating students to debate in class. In Vietnam, students’ obedience
is much expected. If some student cannot agree with his teacher and he tries to express his
ideas and to persuade his teacher in front of the class, his teacher can use his right to stop
him or even gives a negative comment on such his action. So, we could say that power
distance to teacher in Vietnam is really high that is always contained in attitude to teachers.
Moreover, position and posture are also partly decisive factors influencing students
debating style. A comparison should be done between Vietnamese and American students to
have a clear view. In Vietnam when students have any ideas and want to raise their voice
- 24 -
they must raise their hand and be invited or called by their teachers or friends and then they
could speak out. This process may limit the frequency of students’ debate. Sometimes, the
standing to speak is a difficult action for timid students. On the contrary to Vietnamese
classes, American students can just speak out their opinions without handing or standing up.
In this way teachers can elicit many ideas from students and shy students have more chances
to express themselves.
Question 17: Are you afraid of “losing face” when saying something wrong in your class?
V A
Yes 50% 12.5%
No 50% 87.5%
The data which were collected in question 3 showed that Vietnamese students (35%),
in general, seem to rarely express their opinions because they are not sure of their answers
beside many (32.5%+5%) debate only when being asked by other people. On the contrary to
Vietnamese students, American students (70%) raise their hand and speak out when having
any ideas, or some just speak out or naturally join in discussion.
A conclusion derived from the above mentioned figures is that there is a low-
uncertainty in Vietnam. One characteristic of high uncertainty avoidance can be used to
explain this completion is that it is less tolerance for people or groups with deviant ideas or
behavior. The proverb “curl you tongue seven times before speaking”, therefore, exactly
reflected Vietnamese culture. Other reason is that they are afraid of “losing face” if speaking
- 25 -
something wrong (50% in question 17). Besides, a common state in Vietnam that students
who, although, know correct answers or have a good idea do not volunteer to speak out. That
does not mean they are selfish and do not like to share their ideas but they are shy and timid
(the results in question 19). Some others are afraid of being judged boasting, “tỏ vẻ ta đây”,
or “thích chơi trội”. One more reason, like Tuong Hung Nguyen’s ideas (2002), is that
keeping quiet is also Vietnamese‘s way of respecting their teachers in particular and other
people in general. In contrast, “Debate is respectful” is a popular conception and debate is
simply to express themselves, to share ideas and to examine their thinking if it is correct in
American culture. They do not emphasize on winning or loosing but they participate in the
debate because it makes their class exciting and students easily receive knowledge.
Question 10: When you disagree with your teachers in class, how do you say?
V A
Say directly: “I don’t agree with you” 20% 65%
Say politely: “Excuse me, your ideas sound good but I don’t
45% 22.5%
agree completely”.
Keep silent 25% 10%
Others 10% 2.5%
Question 12: When you disagree with your classmate(s) in class you will:
V A
Say directly: “I don’t agree with you” 37.5% 65.5%
Say politely: “Excuse me, your ideas sounds good but I don’t agree 50% 22.5%
completely.
Keep silent 12.5% 12.5%
Others 0% 0%
- 26 -
Looking at tables 10 and 12, we can see some differences in the ways students
debating to their friends and teachers. The Vietnamese are used to indirectly saying when
they disagree to someone (45% to students and 50% to teachers) or other common fact that
in class, if students do not understand what their teachers are explaining most of them do not
volunteer to ask to do again or more clearly. They tend to push on asking the teacher to
someone else and then keep silent or talk to their friends. There are only few students
informing their teachers that they really need to be explaining again. In some cases the
student is prevented to debate by their classmates because they tend to keep harmony in
class. Other case is that if some student usually debating in class is negatively criticized by
many others who are influenced by the cultural feature “a talent person is not as good as a
group of ignoramus”. In addition, they seem to avoid saying directly and sometimes the
directness is judged rude or impolite in Vietnamese society. In contrast, the indirectness,
keeping quiet or just smiling is really popular in communication in Vietnam, especially
between the young and the elder, between a common man and a learned man. The
relationship between students and teachers is a specific example. They just keep quiet or talk
to their other classmates who are not the debater (teacher or student). Although 10% student
informed that they will debate by analyzing a specific example, these responses are not clear
if they are direct or indirect when debating to other people. On the contrary, the American
tend to directly speak to the debater when their ideas are not similar (65% responses to
teachers and 82.5% to students). This is cultural feature of high power distance in
communication between different statuses in society that is contrary to low power distance
in American society.
- 27 -
Question 13: How do your teachers affect your debate with your classmates?
V A
They encourage you to debate 47.5% 50%
They stop you from debating 15% 18.5%
They have no effect 32.5% 17.5%
Others: 5% 0%
Question 16: When you are going to be opposed to someone, what do other classmates
react?
V A
Encourage you to do 17.5% 45%
Prevent you from debate 15% 0%
Ignore 65% 45%
V A
Other ideas: - Contribute ideas - Contribute, support or oppose you
- Listen and join in on either side
Question 19: (Vietnamese version) According to you, why Vietnamese students rarely
debate in class?
They respect their teachers. 15%
They think that their teachers are always right. 12.5%
They are afraid that their teachers and friends will have negative remarks on
12.5%
them.
They have no enough knowledge and words. 20%
They are shy, timid. 32.5%
Others: -They are passive in learning.
- Their teachers do not give them enough opportunities.
- The classroom environment is not good enough.
- 28 -
Moreover, some common conceptions support classroom debate in America that
makes it really popular. First, American people value and encourage debating in class and
the data in question 13 and 16 (90% teacher and 45% classmate) can illustrate this idea. In
detail, 90% student responded that their teachers encourage them to debate and 45%
participant informed their classmates also stimulate them to do so. Each American student
himself, second, has a good perception of debate. He debates to prove his standing and
appearance in other people’s mind. He construed that everyone has right to give his own
ideas and feels happy as convincing other people with his own opinions. Third, as collected
in question 17, American students (87.5%) are not afraid of “losing face” when speaking
something wrong in class. They viewed that debate is to correct their thinking and to
exchange further ideas. Another surprising idea from American students is that is it
unfortunate for those who do not join in discussion or who are not debated.
- 29 -
Question 14: How do you feel when you are debated?

V A
Normal 70% 82,5%
Face-losing 7.5% 5%
V (22.5%) A (7.5%)
- Only debate with those who understand-Confident - Engaged
Others
me. -Pleased - Interested
- Tired.
Question 15: Does your debate affect your relationship with you debater?
V A
Yes 50% 25%
No 50% 75%
Finally, Vietnamese people value relationships in society. The responses to question
15 are rather different between the Vietnamese’s and the American’s. 75% Vietnamese
student replied that their debates affect their relationship with their debater. The effect is, of
course, negative because there must be an argument between them, or their arguments
proved that they are different in viewpoint of something. Hence, the Vietnamese accepted a
conception “Khôn độc không bằng ngốc đàn - Better foolish in all than wise in one” to
become a common member of their group. Moreover, many proverbs and sayings of
harmony and peace in Vietnamese community such as ‘Concord is a precious thing’, ‘silence
is golden’, ‘Một điều nhịn là chín điều lành-Endure once, live in peace’, ‘a honey tongue’, ‘a
heart of gal’, ‘Silence is golden’, ‘Actions speak louder than words’, ‘Xấu đều hơn tốt lỏi -
Better bad in all than good in one’, etc. They all deeply influenced Vietnamese people’s way
- 30 -
to behave each other in general and to debating style in particular and they seem to be
expected to be passive reception of information.
IV. Teachers’ participation in classroom debate
As a guide or a facilitator in class, the teacher plays a specific role in students’
classroom debates. In order to examine this role, the data in question 4 may supply us with
significant information. Both in Vietnam and America, the element “teachers’ attitude” is
chosen 30times and also, it is the most chose thing. This implies that students heighten
teachers’ role in their debating in fact, however how teachers affecting students’ debating in
classroom in reality maybe different. The result from question 13 can clearly illustrate this
judgment.
There are significant differences in teachers’ effect on students’ debating situation. In
Vietnam, only 47.5% student responded that their teachers encouraged them to debate in
class and the rest students judged that their teachers prevented them from debates or create
no positive effect or do not provide convenient condition of debate for them. Conversely,
most American teachers stimulate their students to have classroom debate (90%). This is to
say Vietnamese teachers have not positively affected students’ debates in class. The sate of
in-class debate in the two countries can be explained as above-mentioned reason that the
Vietnamese are not really cordial with debate. In addition, Vietnamese teachers and students
are used to traditional teaching and learning method, lecturing method in which there are
few arguments. On contrary, “Debate is respectful” is popular in America and debate is
popularly recognized a good learning and teaching technique in which students are really the
center of learning process. The fore-mentioned analysis emphasized teachers’ part as
- 31 -
motivating factor in students’ debates. Hence, the teacher in each country is hoped going to
find out suitable ways to stimulate their students in class.
As concluded in the previous part, Vietnamese students seem unfamiliar with
classroom debate. They are not really volunteer and eager to join in debate. They want to
mix into their group and become a common member of their community because they highly
value collectivist. In contrast, American students thought that everyone has his own ideas or
point of view about the world in general and about a problem in particular. Expressing
themselves is their right and interest. On the whole, American students felt happy, pleased
and great to share their opinions with other people as they are rarely influenced decisively by
other people. They have their own speaking and stand on their own thinking. All are to prove
that they are individuals and independent from others. One popular phenomenon in America
is that most of American students volunteer to debate in class that supports an American
cultural value, competition. That means they compete to express themselves, their opinions
to others to demonstrate their standing and existence. From the analysis above, we can reach
a conclusion that Vietnam is a collectivist country which emphasizes “we” identity and
collective judgment. They try to discourage individual accomplishment and emphasize
smooth inter-group relations. Contrast to Vietnam, America belongs to individual decision
making. For American culture, one person is an individual, an existence and an entity. He
has his own view and speaking. Some responses really surprised me that when American
students do not understand a problem or disagree with their teachers they just speak out or
ask without handing. In Vietnamese classes, this phenomenon will be judged “impolite and
disrespectful” by not only teachers, classmates but also everyone in the society. In additions,
- 32 -
American students said directly to their teachers “You are wrong” or “You are absolutely
wrong” when they do not agree with their teachers and think that their teachers are not right.
That seems never to happen in Vietnamese classes. From the analysis above, we can
conclude that high power distance deeply influences and dominates the relationship between
teachers and students in Vietnam.
IV. Some suggestions to motivate Vietnamese students debate in class.
In recent years, ways to motivate students in class have been studied by some authors
such as Downs (2000) with “Increasing Students Motivation”, Isull (2001) with
“Encouraging Student Voices in a Chinese Classroom”, etc. my present research continued
to give some suggestions in detail that maybe suitable to Vietnamese classes. The analysis,
so far, can lead us to a conclusion that some Vietnamese cultural features and values are
considered barriers which limit students’ frequency of debates in learning process. Due to
such cultural characteristics, some suggestions, I believed, can be applied to increase debates
in Vietnamese classes.
First, the teacher should frequently observe and interpret students’ facial expression.
There are some reasons to support this suggestion. We can use a Vietnamese author’s
explanation, Tuong Hung Nguyen (2002) to have a clear understanding. He stated that the
silence or the answer “Yes” may not only mean that they have understood the lesson or
teachers’ explanation, but could also be a polite reply used to avoid hurting or embarrassing
anyone.
- 33 -
Second, the teacher should regularly change students’ position in class and do not
overemphasize students’ posture. As I have observed for many years and in some classes I
have attended when doing this research students who seat at the fore part of the class debate
more frequently than those at the after part of the class. Hence, in a semester the teacher
could know who are passive or active and move their seats in class. By this way, passive
students are usually motivated and receive more opportunities and confidence to share their
ideas in class.
Third, due to Vietnamese people’s conception of respect to the teacher has influenced
deeply on students and even on teachers, the teacher should help students understand
correctly and positively about in-class debate’ significance and benefits. The teacher himself
must clearly distinguish between students’ debating and their attitude to the teacher because
the teacher and the student do not, in reality, accept debate as good speech act.
Forth, a close relationship should be established between the teacher and his students.
The above-data also support this idea. When students are not afraid of their teachers or when
the teacher help students feel comfortable in class whey will easily express themselves.
Fifth, the lesson should be designed into a series of questions and the teacher has duty
to guide students to argue for or against to find their own answer. After that the teacher
should provide enough time and opportunities for all students in class to express themselves.
This activity should often happen so that debate become students’ habit and they consider it
normal and interesting. This suggestion demands the teacher to be flexible in designing a
lesson.
- 34 -
Final, the activity of students’ participation should be marked. In most cases, when
debating is connected to students’ profits they may volunteer to debate in class and it is easy
to have debate when necessary.
- 35 -
Chapter 6: CONCLUSION
1. Summarizing the content
This study has investigated the differences and similarities in Vietnamese and
American students’ debating through the data collected from questionnaire and interviews.
After analyzing the data collected from the subjects, Vietnamese students and American one,
we can say that beside the similarities in general attitude to debate, there are some
significant differences in classroom debate. Firstly, the debate between teachers and those
among students have not been as popular in Vietnamese as in America despite the former’s
positive view about classroom debate. Secondly, the results from this study confirmed again
that there are some factors influencing on students’ debate in class, however, cultural
elements are dominant ones in students’ debating. Third, after analyzing the data of present
study, a conclusion of teachers’ role can be drawn that they can be motivating factors in in-
class debates. Finally, some suggestions basing on Vietnamese debating state are raised with
the hope of Vietnamese students’ overcoming the barriers.
The culture is not the whole elements but a minor or specific one. Basing on Tran
Ngoc Them’s study of an original interpretation to explain the differences in debating
between Vietnamese and American students, we can conclude that Vietnam is an agricultural
country with synthetic conception. The things which are interested are not separate elements
but their relationships among them. That means the Vietnamese highly value the relationship
in society and respect the quiet in their life. In contrast, American culture origins from
- 36 -
animal husbandry, so the subjects they are interested are individuals because relationships in
their community are natural, they think (2002, p. 45).
In brief, there is no completely pure culture. In some senses, this culture can borrow
some characteristics from others, neighboring or further countries. That is understandable
and acceptable.
2. Implications
The research determined the differences and similarities in students’ debating in
Vietnam and America but at the end of the study there are some suggestions to stimulate
Vietnamese students to debate in class. Hence, this research may be a valuable material for
those who are interested in cultural field or those working or being going to do in teaching
area in Vietnam. Vietnamese teachers can use the result of the study to support their
teaching. Firstly, teachers can help students understand their own debating state so that they
can increase debates in class. Teachers should, secondly, respect students’ ideas and
encourage them to comfortably express their opinions. When understanding Vietnamese
students’ characteristics in class, thirdly, the teacher can find suitable method to change their
teaching manner. Finally, other authors can use o\some cultural features in this result to
compare Vietnamese culture with other cultures in some area else.
3. Limitations of the current study
Finally, a number of important limitations need to be considered. First, the study used
a convenient sample that is hardworking and enthusiastic in learning in Hue library in
Vietnamese and those in American. Second, forty students for each country seem to be a
small sample because the study, I think, may be more interesting if I could have a large
- 37 -
sample. Final, due to limited time I could not have observation in some classes that might
make the data more realistic, accurate and convincing.
4. Recommendations for further work
This research has through up many questions in need of further investigation. First, this
study can be carried out with observing method which may reach more convincing result. Second,
since the term “debate” may not be familiar to Vietnamese students, it is suggested that a research
should be done on the feasibility of students at Hue College. Finally, meaning of “keeping quiet and
saying ‘Yes’” of Vietnamese people is also a relating field of this study.
- 38 -
REFERENCES
- 39 -

07 05

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Descrição original:

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

07 05

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Vietnamese and American Students’ Debating - A comparative study

VIETNAMESE AND AMERICAN STUDENTS’ DEBATING IN CLASS

“Debate Central”, at University of Vermont (http://debate.uvm.edu/), which provides an

differences of Vietnamese and American students’ debating in this study.

Trần Thị Mỹ Supervisor: Trần Quang Ngọc Thúy

Chapter 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

confusion in understanding its meaning accurately. In Thompson’s analysis how different

discussion and debate is outlined as follows:

participants look for a solution to a problem.

2. Consequently, debate considers two alternatives, while discussion considers multiple

Discussion is conducted more freely with less formal rules.

reach an argument among participants.

(Thompson, 1971, p. 80, as cited in Narahiko, 1996)

Trần Thị Mỹ Supervisor: Trần Quang Ngọc Thúy

interactive argumentation to refer to discussions in which participants present reasons and

argumentation. According to Anderson (1998), there are many positions in an argument so

definition of “debate” as a synonym of discussion and argument (Oxford Advanced

Trần Thị Mỹ Supervisor: Trần Quang Ngọc Thúy

Bhavini, 2005, p. 497).

II. Benefits of debate

might be to have a mixture of collaboratively constructed and singly constructed arguments

Trần Thị Mỹ Supervisor: Trần Quang Ngọc Thúy

considered a ‘participant’, an ‘organizer’, or a “facilitator”. While mentioning many benefits

Trần Thị Mỹ Supervisor: Trần Quang Ngọc Thúy

debate to teaching and learning.

III. Teachers’ role in classroom debate

Trần Thị Mỹ Supervisor: Trần Quang Ngọc Thúy

On concluding his study, ‘Analysis of Classroom Debating Strategies in the Field of

Trần Thị Mỹ Supervisor: Trần Quang Ngọc Thúy

developed as they would like (p.341).

Trần Thị Mỹ Supervisor: Trần Quang Ngọc Thúy

criteria are listed below:

-The discussion should be stimulating to generate interest in content presented.

-Each student should be encouraged to join the discussion.

-No one should dominate the discussion.

-The learners need to develop feelings of belonging when participating in a

the others, meaning needs to be present in learning,

-The respect and acceptance of others’ thinking.

-The teacher is a guide and not a dispenser of information.

Trần Thị Mỹ Supervisor: Trần Quang Ngọc Thúy

-Evaluation of process in a discussion must always follow specific standards and

should be stressed frequently.

In summary, allowing students to debate and providing opportunities of classroom

nature of this pursuit of truth is individualistic, simultaneously, the teacher plays an

important role in promoting students to practice their duty accordingly.

IV. Relationship between cultural values and academic debate.

Trần Thị Mỹ Supervisor: Trần Quang Ngọc Thúy

Especially, as comparing the concept of eloquence between Anglo-American and Japanese

particular individual by engaging in a dialogue in which a series of successively deeper and

Trần Thị Mỹ Supervisor: Trần Quang Ngọc Thúy

so far. Specially, the paper focuses on answering the following questions:

2. How do students debate with their teachers?

3. What influences students’ debating style?

4. How can Vietnamese students be encouraged to debate in the classroom?

Trần Thị Mỹ Supervisor: Trần Quang Ngọc Thúy

order to provide the study with realistic data.

II. Data collection

College of Pedagogy and Hue College of Agriculture and Forestry. Questionnaires

consisting of twenty-two questions in Vietnamese were handed to them. Forty American

participation in and students’ and teachers’ attitudes to classroom debate.

Trần Thị Mỹ Supervisor: Trần Quang Ngọc Thúy

Internet. The duration of an interview was approximately one hour in an informal