Biological students’ perception of the advantages and disadvantages of learning English with native and non-native English-speaking teachers

TRƯỜNG ĐẠI HỌC SƯ PHẠM TP HỒ CHÍ MINH 
TẠP CHÍ KHOA HỌC 
HO CHI MINH CITY UNIVERSITY OF EDUCATION
JOURNAL OF SCIENCE
ISSN: 
1859-3100 
KHOA HỌC GIÁO DỤC 
Tập 16, Số 4 (2019): 5-17 
EDUCATION SCIENCE
Vol. 16, No. 4 (2019): 5-17
 Email: tapchikhoahoc@hcmue.edu.vn; Website:  
5 
BIOLOGICAL STUDENTS’ PERCEPTION OF THE ADVANTAGES 
AND DISADVANTAGES OF LEARNING ENGLISH WITH NATIVE 
AND NON-NATIVE ENGLISH-SPEAKING TEACHERS 
Pham Cu Thien*, Tran Thị Thanh Tuyen, Ly Nhut Thien 
Ho Chi Minh City Unversity of Education 
* Corresponding author: Pham Cu Thien – Email: thienpc@hcmue.edu.vn 
Received: 20/12/2018; Revised: 20/4/2019; Accepted: 24/4/2019 
ABSTRACT 
A research on 126 students from Department of Biology, Ho Chi Minh City University of 
Education on the advantages and disadvantages of learning English with native and non-native 
English-speaking teachers was carried out in January, 2018. Data on their perceptions towards the 
reasons why they liked studying with teachers were gained from questionnaires. Thirty students in 
this research were also randomly selected for interview to get their suggestions for the better ways 
of teaching English. The result showed that biological students preferred learning pronunciation 
(88.1%), listening (64.2%), speaking (59.5%) and reading (57.9%) with native English-speaking 
teachers. However, most of them indicated preference to study grammar (63.5%) and writing 
(43.7%) with non-native English-speaking teachers. Students also suggested some effective ways of 
teaching English including choosing practical and interesting topics, applying good method of 
teaching, increasing time of teaching, transferring lesson by using games, stories, picnics, and so 
on. The findings will help Deans take into consideration the importance of teachers in teaching 
English. 
Keywords: student’s perception, biological student, teacher of English. 
1. Introduction 
English is an international language and it has been widely used as an important 
means of communication all over the world (Xue & Zuo, 2013; Tosuncuoglu, 2017). It 
becomes a basic skill in the work place (Foley, 2011) and demands on an employee’s 
competence in English are increasing (Graddol, 2000). Therefore, a lot of people try to 
learn English as it is useful for their work. Students at Ho Chi Minh City University of 
Education also have to learn English because of different reasons, but the common one is 
that it is one of their subjects in the training program. When they study English, they 
understand that teachers have individual differences and their work is very important 
(Harmer, 2010). There are two main kinds of teachers in the class including the native and 
non-native English-speaking teachers. Luk & Lin (2007) defined that the term “non-native 
speaker” is in contrast to the “native speaker” in language. The native English-speaking 
teachers have played a key contribution to English teaching in the world (Albakrawi, 
TẠP CHÍ KHOA HỌC - Trường ĐHSP TPHCM Tập 16, Số 4 (2019): 5-17 
6 
2014), but the number of non-native English-speaking teachers has been increasing and 
having higher numbers than native English-speaking teachers (Canagarajah, 1999; Ma, 
2012; Ur, 2012; Richardson, 2016). Different teachers are succeeded in different ways and 
their strengths or weaknesses depend on how students view (Medgyes, 1994; Harmer, 
2010, Tosuncuoglu, 2017). The question is that the students in Department of Biology in 
Ho Chi Minh City University of Education prefer studying English with native or non-
native English-speaking teachers. No research has been done before to answer this 
question. Therefore, a study on students’ perception of the advantages and disadvantages 
of learning English with native and non-native English-speaking teachers at Department of 
Biology was carried out. 
2. Literature 
A lot of good research on learners’ perception of the advantages and disadvantages 
of learning English with native and non-native English teachers have been done in the 
world. The study on “Teacher and student preferences of native and non-native foreign 
English teachers” showed that students’ preferences for native teachers increased with 
academic level (Madrid and Canado, 2004). The research by Alseweed (2012) in Qassim 
University with 169 Saudi male university students (non-English major) to get their 
perception when studying English in the classroom with native and non-native English-
speaking teachers indicated that they liked studying with native English teacher, especially 
in the higher level. Çakir and Demir (2013) researched on Turkish students and found that 
native English-speaking instructors considered to teach speaking, listening, pronunciation 
and vocabulary better. Albakrawi (2014) said that native English-speaking teachers played 
a main role in improving the learners’ communicative competence. Sevy-Biloon (2017) 
stated that native English-speaking teachers had better fluency and pronunciation than 
Ecuadorian non-native English-speaking teachers. However, learners also interested in 
studying with non-native English speakers because these teachers provided the serious 
learning environment and clear answer for students’ asking. The disadvantages of this 
group were the advantages of the other groups in terms of the English proficiency, the 
communication and the solution for students’ problems in the research of 184 non-English 
major students on Taiwanese University students’ perception toward native and non-native 
English-speaking teachers (Tsou, 2013). The differences about teaching approaches, 
teaching objectives and classroom atmosphere between two kinds of teachers were found 
in the research by Ma (2012) on the differences about “perceived teaching behavior of 
native and non-native English - peaking teachers in Hong Kong”. The study on 76 
university students, in which there were 38 students majoring in English, showed that they 
liked studying with English-speaking teachers of the combination of both groups 
(Lasagabaster and Sierra, 2002). The research result from Xiaoru (2008) with 75 university 
students majoring in English was that each kind of teachers had its own strengths and 
TẠP CHÍ KHOA HỌC - Trường ĐHSP TPHCM Pham Cu Thien et al. 
7 
weaknesses, so they should complement each other when teaching English. Clouet (2006) 
also stated that both native and non-native English-speaking teachers should be in the same 
class so that students could get the better knowledge because each teacher had different 
advantages. 
In Vietnam, Thien and Hung (2018) found that most of 26 master students major in 
English preferred studying with teachers from the United States of America, and the most 
popular reason was that teachers could use English more accurately. Walkinshaw and 
Duong (2014) studied on 50 Japanese and 50 Vietnamese university students and the 
results were that non-native English-speaking teachers were better in explaining grammar 
and classroom interaction, while the other was good at pronunciation, language use and 
culture. Walkinshaw and Duong (2012) carried out a research on 50 junior English major 
students in two universities in Vietnam about their preference to the studying of English 
with native and non-native English-speaking teachers. The findings were that English 
competence was the one that students chose for native English-speaking teachers, the other 
qualities including teaching experience, qualifications, friendliness, enthusiasm, the ability 
to deliver interesting and informative classes were valued for both groups of teachers. 
The literature reviewed some of the advantages and disadvantages of studying 
English with native and non-native English-speaking teachers in Vietnam and in the world. 
However, there was no research on biological students’ perception in Ho Chi Minh City 
University of Education. This study will find their perceptions of learning English with 
native and non-native English-speaking teachers and also give some suggestions for better 
ways of teaching English so that the Dean can take into consideration the importance of 
teaching English. 
3. Methodology 
 Settings and participants 
All students who had experiences working with foreign English speakers in 
Department of Biology, Ho Chi Minh City University of Education participated in the 
study in January, 2018. The participants belong to four batches of 40, 41, 42 and 43 in this 
University at the time of research. 
 Data collection 
Data collection was done by using the questionnaire and interview at one point of the 
time in January, 2018. All the students who had experiences working with foreign English 
speakers in Department of Biology in Ho Chi Minh City University of Education filled in 
the questionnaire at the classroom of the school. The implementation of the data collection 
referred to the Five steps in the Process of Data collection (Creswell, 2012). The 
questionnaire was written in Vietnamese to prevent from misunderstanding then it was 
translated into English later for the paper. After the questionnaire was designed, it was 
showed to five experts on TESOL teaching for comments. After correcting following their 
TẠP CHÍ KHOA HỌC - Trường ĐHSP TPHCM Tập 16, Số 4 (2019): 5-17 
8 
comments, the questionnaire was tested by ten testers to know whether they could 
understand or not, also to be sure that the questionnaire was good enough. The unclear 
questions were explained directly to the participants. Thirty students in this research were 
also randomly selected for interview to get their suggestions for the better ways of teaching 
English. 
 Data analysis 
Microsoft Office Excel and SPSS software (Statistical Package for Social Sciences 
version 20; SPSS Inc., Chicago, Illinois) were used for data entry and statistical analyses. 
Double entry was done to prevent from errors. Descriptive analysis was mainly used for 
data analysis. Cronbach’s Alpha was calculated to determine the reliability of data from 
questionnaire. The alphas in this research were from 0.705 to 0.837 > 0.700 and it means 
that the items are reliable (Fraenkel & Wallen, 2009). The mean scores in this research 
were calculated with the range from 1 (completely disagree), 2 (disagree), 3 (neutral), 4 
(agree) to 5 (completely agree). 
4. Results 
4.1. General information 
 Participants’ information 
There were 203 students from Department of Biology, Ho Chi Minh City University 
of Education at the time of research, in which 126 students (62.1%) already had 
experiences working with English speakers joined the research including 17.5% freshmen, 
32.5% sophomores, 29.4% junior students and 20.6% senior students. 
 Percentage of students already worked with foreign English speakers (N=126) 
All of 126 students had a chance working with foreign English speakers from 18 
countries. Most of them were from the United States of America (50.8%), England 
(47.6%), Australia (31.0%) and the Philippines (11.9%). The others with lower percentage 
were from South Korea (5.6%), India (4.0%), Singapore (3.2%), China (3.2%), Canada 
(2.4%), France (1.6%), Japan (1.6%), New Zealand (0.8%), the Netherlands (0.8%), Spain 
(0.8%), Belgium (0.8%), Germany (0.8%), Russia (0.8%) and Brazil (0.8%). 
 The subjects which students had already practiced with foreign English speakers 
(N=126) 
Speaking skill is the most popular one that students from Department of Biology had 
a chance to practice with foreign English teachers (N=66), next is listening skill (N=60). 
There were 46 students who had conversation with foreign English speakers. Students also 
studied with foreign teachers in pronunciation (N=38), reading (N=19), grammar (N=14) 
and writing (N=13). 
4.2. Students’ perception of studying English with English teachers 
4.2.1. Students’ perception of studying pronunciation with English teachers 
TẠP CHÍ KHOA HỌC - Trường ĐHSP TPHCM Pham Cu Thien et al. 
9 
Most of biological students preferred studying pronunciation with native English-
speaking teachers (88.1%) with two main reasons: the first one was that those teachers 
could pronounce more accurately (4.33/ 5.0 points) and the other was relating to the ease 
of practice pronunciation (4.05/ 5.00 points) (Table 1). Very few students wanted to study 
pronunciation with non-native English-speaking teacher (1.6%) and the students who liked 
studying with both kinds of teachers were low at 10.3% with the similar reason that the 
native ones gave the good way of practice pronouncing with the help from the Vietnamese 
teacher (4.23/ 5.00 points). 
Table 1. Biological students’ perception of studying pronunciation with English teachers 
Students’ perceptions 
when studying pronunciation with 
all English 
teachers 
(n=126) 
native English- 
speaking 
teachers 
(n=111) 
non-native 
English- 
speaking 
teachers (n=2) 
both kinds 
of teachers 
(n=13) 
Study well faster 3.46 ± 0.91 3.46 ± 0.90 3.50 ± 0.71 3.46 ± 1.05 
Pronounce more accurately 4.21 ± 0.79 4.33 ± 0.64 3.50 ± 0.71 3.31 ± 1.25 
Easy to understand 3.36 ± 1.01 3.35 ± 1.00 4.00 ± 0.00 3.31 ± 1.18 
Easy to practice 
pronunciation 
4.07 ± 0.86 4.05 ± 0.87 4.00 ± 0.00 4.23 ± 0.83 
Good method of teaching 3.17 ± 1.09 3.19 ± 1.10 4.00 ± 0.00 2.85 ± 0.89 
4.2.2. Students’ perception of studying grammar with English teachers 
It is interesting that 63.5% of biological students wanted to study grammar with non-
native English-speaking teacher because they thought this kind of teacher made them 
understand grammar lessons (4.48/5.00 points) and practice grammar easily (4.18/ 5.00 
points). Both kinds of native and non-native English-speaking teachers were chosen by 
15.9% students with the same reasons (4.30/ 5.00 points), they also said that they could 
study grammar well faster if they studied with both of these teachers (4.15/ 5.00 points). 
The ones chose native English-speaking teachers were higher at 20.6% but all points were 
lower than 4.00 (Table 2). 
Table 2. Biological students’ perceptions of studying grammar with English teachers 
Students’ perceptions 
when studying grammar with 
all English 
teachers 
(n=126) 
native English- 
speaking 
teachers (n=26) 
non-native 
English- 
speaking 
teachers (n=80) 
both kinds of 
teachers 
(n=20) 
Study well faster 3.85 ± 0.76 3.42 ± 0.70 3.91 ± 0.73 4.15 ± 0.75 
Easy to understand 4.26 ± 0.75 3.58 ± 0.70 4.48 ± 0.59 4.30 ± 0.86 
Easy to practice grammar 4.13 ± 0.70 3.88 ± 0.65 4.18 ± 0.69 4.30 ± 0.73 
Good method of teaching 3.65 ± 0.78 3.38 ± 0.64 3.69 ± 0.82 3.85 ± 0.75 
TẠP CHÍ KHOA HỌC - Trường ĐHSP TPHCM Tập 16, Số 4 (2019): 5-17 
10 
4.2.3. Students’ perception of studying listening skill with English teachers 
The students who liked studying listening with native English-speaking teachers 
occupied the highest percentage at 64.2%; however, all the points for choosing were lower 
than 4.00. Only one reason “to understand lesson easi ... hem because the belief was that they 
were better (Merino, 1997; Tajeddin & Adeh, 2016), especially at speaking and listening 
(Çakir & Demir, 2013), they also had a greater self-confidence (Madrid & Canado, 2004), 
and used it as a natural means of communication in class (Árva & Medgyes, 2000; Madrid 
& Canado, 2004). However, all the average scores were less than 4.00 points for all 
reasons they selected. It can be explained that the acquisition of a native-like accent is not 
the main objective of most of the language learners and people’ s need is that they can 
communicate successfully with other people who have different L1 language instead of 
treating a native norm as the goal of studying foreign language (Jenkins, 1998). Moreover, 
both groups of teachers had good qualities of teaching experience, qualifications, 
friendliness, enthusiasm, and ability to deliver interesting and informative classes 
(Walkinshaw & Duong, 2012). Therefore, scoring for each reason to choose native 
TẠP CHÍ KHOA HỌC - Trường ĐHSP TPHCM Pham Cu Thien et al. 
13 
English-speaking teachers is not important anymore, even some students gave high marks 
for choosing non-native English-speaking teachers such as easy to understand reading 
(4.46/ 5.00 points) and listening lessons (4.10/ 5.00 points), and easy to practice speaking 
(4.44/ 5.00 points). 
For grammar and writing, most of the students liked studying with non-native 
English-speaking teachers as they were better in teaching grammar (Cheung, 2002; Liaw, 
2012; Walkinshaw and Duong, 2014) and clear answer for students’ asking (Alseweed, 
2012). Walkinshaw and Duong (2014) also found that students liked studying English with 
these teachers because they were hard working, good communicator, experienced ESL 
learner and insightful teacher. It is clear that non-native English-speaking teachers already 
had experiences in studying foreign language so it is very easy for them to know what 
mistakes to minimize and try to use the best way to transfer knowledge to the learners. 
Furthermore, these two skills were highly required to the students because of the tradition 
way of studying to pass the test at school and the entrance examination to universities or 
colleges and students usually studied with non-native English-speaking teachers. If 
students have some difficulties in learning or doing exercises or even the content of the 
lesson, non-native English-speaking teachers can find suitable ways to show them to 
understand faster. They also had the ability to use the students’ first language when 
necessary (Marino, 2011; Walkinshaw and Duong, 2014), especially at the beginning 
stages of teaching to assist student (Tosuncuoglu, 2017). These problems may not be 
solved easily by native teachers in details because of the language barrier. Moreover, 
native teachers were lack of knowledge of the students’ mother tongue, this influenced the 
lack of sympathy between the teacher and students (Madrid and Canado, 2004). 
In all English skills and aspects in the research, some students also wanted both kinds 
of teachers in the same class because they thought that each kind of teachers had its own 
strengths and weaknesses (Clouet, 2006; Xiaoru, 2008). Biological students would like to 
have both native and non-native English-speaking teachers in the same class because they 
thought that it was easy for them to practice pronunciation (4.23/ 5.00 points), grammar 
(4.30/ 5.00 points), speaking (4.12/ 5.00 points), and reading (4.33/ 5.00 points). It was 
also easy to understand grammar (4.30/ 5.00 points) and reading (4.00/ 5.00 points). They 
thought they could study grammar better (4.15/ 5.00 points) and the teachers had good 
method of teaching speaking skill (4.29/ 5.00 points). These choices proved that up to 80% 
of English teachers are non-native English-speaking teachers (Richardson, 2016) have 
played a key contribution to English language teaching, especially grammar and writing in 
Department of Biology, Ho Chi Minh City University of Education and also it may be 
across the globe. Tsou (2013) agreed that both kinds of teachers had their own strengths, 
the disadvantages of this group are the advantages of the other groups in terms of the 
English proficiency, the communication and the solution for students’ problems; therefore, 
TẠP CHÍ KHOA HỌC - Trường ĐHSP TPHCM Tập 16, Số 4 (2019): 5-17 
14 
they should complement each other when teaching English (Xiaoru, 2008; Tosuncuoglu, 
2017), and it is definitely ideal if both kinds of teachers share the same class (Clouet, 
2006). 
Biological students suggested that teachers should use practical and interesting topics 
in the class, and they considered these were the most important one for better teaching. 
According to Ur (2012), teachers should design a good topic, which could relate using 
ideas from their own experience and knowledge, to make students happy to learn and 
stimulate discussion. Harmer (2010) also agreed that teachers should introduce good 
reading texts, listening lessons, writing and speaking tasks which can introduce interesting 
topics, excite imaginative responses and provide the springboard for fascinating lessons. 
Good method of teaching also considered one of the top suggestions when teaching 
English. Teachers can train students to be the excellent ones if they have the good methods 
for each skill or aspects. There are a lot of common and effective methods and teachers 
should use the suitable ones for teaching. The right methods should be applied for different 
skills in teaching English like teaching grammar, vocabulary, listening, reading, writing, 
speaking and pronunciation (Doff, 1988; Ur, 2012). Some students thought that the time 
for teaching English at school was not enough for them to gain enough knowledge. 
However, this macro issue needs to be discussed more as it relates to the national training 
strategy. For the time of being, students should develop their autonomy and try to absorb 
all the knowledge in the current English training program. The next suggestion with high 
votes to improve teaching effectiveness was that students would like to study English 
through telling stories, playing games, picnic. Ur (2012) stated that teachers should use 
game-like activity, tell stories, sing a song, watch films, theater and video when teaching 
English to make students more interest as they experienced a feeling of playing a game and 
motivated them to make effort to understand. Scrivener (2011) also agreed that teachers 
should use flashcards, picture stories, storytelling, films and videos so that students can 
improve their English effectively. 
6. Conclusion 
Biological students preferred learning pronunciation (88.1%), listening (64.2%), 
speaking (59.5%) and reading (57.9%) with native English-speaking teachers. Most of 
them liked studying grammar (63.5%) and writing (43.7%) with non-native English-
speaking teachers. To get better ways of teaching English, students suggested that teachers 
should choose practical and interesting topics, apply good method of teaching, increase 
time of teaching and transfer lesson by using games, stories, picnics. The implication of the 
study is that the research results will help Deans take into consideration the importance of 
teachers and methods in teaching English for students. Further study on students’ 
preference from the other fields should be done to find the whole pictures of students’ 
perception of learning general English. 
TẠP CHÍ KHOA HỌC - Trường ĐHSP TPHCM Pham Cu Thien et al. 
15 
 Conflict of Interest: Authors have no conflict of interest to declare. 
REFERENCES 
Albakrawi, H.T.M. (2014). Is there a difference between native and non-native English teachers in 
teaching English? Journal of Scientific Research and Studies, 1(6), 87-94. 
Alseweed, M. A. (2012). University students’ perceptions of the influence of native and non-native 
teachers. English Language Teaching, 5(12), 42-53. 
Árva, V. & Medgyes, P. (2000). Natives and non-natives teachers in the classroom. System, 28(3), 
355-372. 
Çakir, I. & Baytar, B. (2014). Foreign language learners’ views on the importance of learning the 
target language pronunciation. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 10(1), 99-110. 
Çakir, H. & Demir, Y. (2013). A comparative analysis between NESTs and NNESTs based on 
perceptions of students in preparation classes. The International Journal of Social Sciences, 
14(1), 36-47. 
Canagarajah, S. (1999). Revisiting Linguistic Imperialism in English Teaching. Oxford: Oxford 
University Press. Xue, J. and Zuo, W. (2013). English Dominance and Its Influence on 
International Communication. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 3(12): 2262-2266. 
Cheung, Y.L. (2002). The attitude of university students in Hong Kong towards native and 
nonnative teachers of English. Master thesis. The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, 
Hong Kong. 
Clouet, R. (2006). Native vs. non-native teachers: a matter to think over. Revista de Filologia, 24, 
69-75. 
Creswell, J.W. (2012). Educational research – Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative 
and Qualitative Research. Pearson Education, Inc.. 
Foley, J.A. (2011). Unscrambling the Omelette. Second language acquisition: Social & 
Psychological Dimensions. Assumption University Press. 
Fraenkel, J. R. & Wallen, N. E. (2009). How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education. New 
York. McGraw-Hill Companies. 
Graddol, D. (2000). The future of English? A guide to forecasting the popularity of the English 
language in the 21st century. The British Council. 
Harmer, J. (2010). How to teach English. Pearson Education Limited. Editorial development by 
Ocelot Publishing, Oxford, with Helena Gomm. 
Jenkins, J. (1998). Which pronunciation norms and models for English as an international 
language. ELT Journal, 52(2), 119-126. 
Lasagabaster, D. & Sierra, J. M. (2002). University Students’ Perceptions of Native and Non-native 
Speaker Teachers of English. Language Awareness, 11(2). 
Liaw, E. (2012). Examining student perspectives on the differences between native an dnon-native 
language teachers. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 9(3), 27-50. 
Luk, J. C. M. & Lin, A. M. Y. (2007). Classroom interactions as cross-cultural encounters: Native 
speakers in EFL lessons. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. 
TẠP CHÍ KHOA HỌC - Trường ĐHSP TPHCM Tập 16, Số 4 (2019): 5-17 
16 
Ma, L.P.F. (2012). Perceived Teaching Behaviour of Native and Non-native English-Speaking 
Teachers in Hong Kong: Are There any Differences? Hong Kong Journal of Applied 
Linguistics, 14(1), 89-108. 
Madrid, D. & Canado, M.L.P. (2004). Teacher and student preferences of native and nonnative 
foreign English teachers. Porta Linguarum, 2, 125-138. 
Marino, C. (2011). Reflecting on the dichotomy native0non nagive speakers in an EFL context. 
Anagramas, 10(19), 129-142. 
Medgyes, P. (1994). The Non-native teacher. London: MacMillan Publishers. 
Merino, I. G. (1997). Native English- speaking teachers versus non-native English-speaking 
teachers. Revista Alicantina de Estudios Ingleses, 10, 69-79. 
Richardson, S. (2016). Plenary: The “native factor”: the haves and the have-nots and why we 
still need to talk about this in 2016. In T. Pattison (ed.) IATEFL 2016 Birmingham 
conference selections, 79-89, Faversham: IATEFL. 
Scrivener, J. (2011). Learning Teaching – The Essential Guide to English Language Teaching. 
Macmillan Publishers Limited. 
Sevy-Biloon, J. (2017). Educators and students’ perceptions about Ecuadorian NEST knowledge 
and quality in terms of effective teaching. The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language 
Studies, 23(3), 123-132. 
Tajeddin, Z. & Adeh, A. (2016). Native and nonnative Emglish teachres’ perceptions of their 
professional identity: Covergent or divergent? Iranian Journal of Language Teaching 
Research, 4(3), 37-54. 
Thien, P.C. & Hung, H. C. M. (2018). Students’ perception of the advantages and disadvantages of 
studying pronunciation and speaking with foreign teachers. In proceedings: Open TESOL – 
The sixth international open TESOL conference proceedings 2018 – Language learning and 
teaching transformation in the post – method era. Publishing House of Economics, ISBN 
978-604-922-644-1, 295-310. 
Tosuncuoglu, I. (2017). Non-native & Native English Teachers. Journal of History Culture and Art 
Research, 6(6), 634-638. 
Tsou, Shih-Yun (2013). Taiwanese University students’ perception toward native and non-native 
English-speaking teachers in EFL contexts. A dissertation for the degree of Doctor of 
Education. College of Graduate Studies Texas A & M University – Kingsville. 
Ur, P. (2012). A Course in English Language Teaching. Cambridge University Press. 
Walkinshaw, I. & Duong, T.H.O. (2012). Native and non-native speaking English Teachers in 
Vietnam: Weighing the benefits. The Electronic Journal for English as a second language, 
16(3),  volume16/ ej63/ ej63a1/ 
Walkinshaw, I. & Duong, T.H.O. (2014). Native and Non-Native English Language Teachers: 
Student Perceptions in Vietnam and Japan. SAGE Open, 
doi.org/10.1177/2158244014534451 
Xiaoru, C. (2008). A survey: Chinese college students’ perception of non-native English teachers. 
CELEA Journal (Bimonthly), 31(3), 75-82. 
Yazawa, O. (2017). Students’ perception of native English-speaking teachers and Japanese teachers 
of English: The Effect on students’ self-efficacy and emotional state. Eruditi, 1(3),61-72. 
TẠP CHÍ KHOA HỌC - Trường ĐHSP TPHCM Pham Cu Thien et al. 
17 
NHẬN THỨC CỦA SINH VIÊN SINH HỌC VỀ THUẬN LỢI VÀ BẤT LỢI 
KHI HỌC TIẾNG ANH VỚI GIÁO VIÊN BẢN NGỮ VÀ GIÁO VIÊN KHÔNG PHẢI BẢN NGỮ 
Phạm Cử Thiện*, Trần Thị Thanh Tuyền, Lý Nhựt Thiện 
Trường Đại học Sư phạm Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh 
* Tác giả liên hệ: Phạm Cử Thiện – Email: thienpc@hcmue.edu.vn 
Ngày nhận bài: 20-12-2018; ngày nhận bài sửa: 20-4-2019; ngày duyệt đăng: 24-4-2019 
TÓM TẮT 
Nghiên cứu trên 126 sinh viên Khoa Sinh học– Trường Đại học Sư phạm Thành phố Hồ Chí 
Minh về thuận lợi và bất lợi khi học tiếng Anh với giáo viên bản xứ và không phải bản xứ được 
thực hiện vào tháng 01/2018. Dữ liệu về nhận thức của sinh viên và lí do chọn giáo viên được thực 
hiện bằng cách sử dụng bảng câu hỏi soạn sẵn. Ba mươi sinh viên trong nghiên cứu đã được chọn 
ngẫu nhiên để tham gia phỏng vấn lấy ý kiến đề xuất cách dạy tiếng Anh hiệu quả hơn. Kết quả cho 
thấy sinh viên Sinh học thích học phát âm (88,1%), nghe (64,2%), nói (59,5%) và đọc (57,9%) với 
giáo viên bản xứ. Tuy nhiên, hầu hết sinh viên muốn học ngữ pháp (63,5%) và viết (43,7%) với 
giáo viên người Việt. Sinh viên cũng đề nghị nên chọn chủ đề thực tế và thú vị khi dạy, áp dụng 
phương pháp phù hợp, tăng thời gian dạy ở lớp, dạy học qua trò chơi, kể chuyện, dã ngoại Kết 
quả nghiên cứu giúp cho Ban Chủ nhiệm Khoa lưu ý đến tầm quan trọng của giáo viên khi dạy 
tiếng Anh cho sinh viên. 
Từ khóa: nhận thức của sinh viên, sinh viên Sinh học, giáo viên tiếng Anh.