Content area
This research explores the use of reflective writing as a pedagogical tool to support Vietnamese EFL tertiary-level learners in improving their English pronunciation by gaining deeper insights into their individual learning experiences. Using an explanatory mixed-methods design, the study involved 94 English-major undergraduates. The quantitative dataset comprised students’ pretest and posttest scores, used to measure their pronunciation proficiency and evaluate the impact of reflective writing on specific aspects of pronunciation: accuracy, sentence stress, intonation, and aspects of connected speech (including rhythm, elision, and linking). The qualitative dataset included the learners’ reflective writings, analyzed thematically to identify pronunciation challenges, learners’ attitudes towards English pronunciation development, the influence of instructional approaches, the role of social and educational contexts, and the resources available for learning. Learners also voiced suggestions for improving pronunciation in an EFL context. Results confirm that reflective writing positively impacts learning outcomes, fostering improved pronunciation and promoting learners’ active engagement in their educational environment. The study introduces the R.E.F.L.E.C.T framework (Realization, Empowerment, Facilitation, Learning, Enhancement, Critical Thinking, and Transformation) to underscore the key values of reflection in higher education. While grounded in the Vietnamese EFL context, the findings contribute to the international literature on reflective practices, particularly in teaching and learning English pronunciation among EFL/ESL learners.
Introduction
Pronunciation plays a pivotal role in the acquisition process of English as a second/foreign language (ESL/EFL), representing a tangible reflection of students’ speech and a key element of their identities in the acquisition of a second language (Vitanova & Miller, 2002). Clear pronunciation is a fundamental prerequisite for effective oral communication, crucial for successful language acquisition (Derwing & Munro, 2015; Jones, 2018). Scholars have emphasized the detrimental effects of incorrect pronunciation on oral interactions. Insufficient proficiency in pronunciation not only undermines learners’ confidence but also discourages their active participation in spoken communication (Gilakjani, 2012). Consequently, substandard pronunciation can impede learners’ social, academic, and professional progression.
Previous studies have extensively documented the benefits of enhancing self-awareness and nurturing self-monitoring skills in pronunciation learning (Kennedy et al., 2014; Yule et al., 1987), emphasizing its role in fostering autonomous and proficient learners. Notably, the cultivation of self-awareness and self-correction skills has been highlighted as crucial for refining pronunciation in foreign language settings, as evidenced in the context of Vietnam (Nguyen & Newton, 2020). Morley (1994) stresses the incorporation of learner self-involvement and strategy training into pronunciation instruction and states that students should actively engage in their learning process by being equipped with the ability to self-assess and monitor their learning for ongoing development. Vitanova and Miller (2002) also emphasize the importance of recognizing learners as socio-culturally and emotionally complex individuals to truly comprehend their needs. Their study illustrates how reflections can serve as a tool to heighten students’ awareness in the pronunciation classroom, providing a platform for expressing their beliefs and concerns about pronunciation learning and teaching.
However, existing literature on English pronunciation primarily concentrates on teachers’ perceptions, methodologies, and professional development, leaving the issues concerning learners’ cognitive, social, and affective factors associated with pronunciation learning largely unexplored. Therefore, this study aims to bridge this gap in the current scholarship. The present study seeks to examine the impact of incorporating reflection as a tool to enhance learners’ pronunciation abilities and promote self-awareness and self-monitoring abilities among EFL learners during their pronunciation development in a specific setting of EFL education in Asia. Examining students’ perspectives in specific contexts, such as Vietnam, gains significance given the limited specialized training in pronunciation instruction and the minimal attention devoted to English speaking and pronunciation in classrooms (Uchida & Sugimoto, 2020). Equipping students with the ability to critically examine their language learning procedures is essential for fostering their continued development beyond the classroom setting (Vitanova & Miller, 2002). This study addresses two research questions: (1) How proficient is the Vietnamese EFL tertiary-level students’ pronunciation and to what extent does the incorporation of reflective writing as a pedagogical tool contribute to enhancing their English pronunciation? And (2) What do students’ authentic voices and perspectives, as captured through their reflective writings, reveal about their experiences with English pronunciation learning?
Literature review
Reflection: definitions and categories
The concept of reflection and reflective writing has been approached from various perspectives, each contributing valuable insights to the understanding of this multifaceted construct. Despite nuanced distinctions in definitions, a common emphasis emerges: reflective thinking and practices play a crucial role in facilitating continuous learning and fostering both personal and professional growth.
One foundational perspective is provided by Schön (1983), a classic authority on reflective practice, who defines reflection as the act of stepping back to analyze and evaluate an action, experience, or emotion. Similarly, Seibert and Daudelin (1999) frame reflection as a cognitive activity aimed at comprehending experiences, while Dinkelman (2003) highlights it as a self-directed inquiry where individuals systematically examine their own practices. These definitions collectively underscore the intellectual and introspective nature of reflective practices.
Building on these foundational views, educational scholars have further refined the concept within formal learning contexts. Morrison (1996) describes reflection as a purposeful process involving critical thinking and interpretation of experiences to facilitate learning. Moon (2007, p.192) extends this understanding by tailoring a definition for the academic context, emphasizing the structured and assessable nature of reflective work in education:
Reflection/reflective learning, or reflective writing in the academic context, is also likely to involve a conscious and stated purpose for the reflection, with an outcome specified in terms of learning, action, or clarification. It may be preceded by a description of the purpose and/or the subject matter of the reflection. The process and outcome of the reflective work are most likely to be a represented (e.g., written) form, to be seen by others and to be assessed. All of these factors can influence its nature and quality.
This educational focus naturally leads to the classification of different forms of reflection. Schön (1983) distinguishes between ‘reflection-in-action’—the immediate application of implicit knowledge during experiences—and ‘reflection-on-action,’ which involves retrospective contemplation. Cowan (1998) further expands this framework by introducing ‘reflection-for-action,’ which centers on planning future actions. These categories offer a comprehensive lens for understanding the reflective writings students produce in this study.
Finally, reflection can take personal, professional, or academic forms. Personal reflection emphasizes individual experiences and insights, while academic or professional reflection is more deliberate and evaluative (Ryan & Ryan, 2013). Notably, academic reflection often aims to effect change, blending text genres such as recounting, description, explanation, and discussion to promote deeper learning and self-assessment.
Reflection in higher education
Reflection has emerged as a significant and well-established approach in higher education, closely aligning with the key skills agenda within academic institutions. Its prominence has grown steadily, with written reflections now widely adopted for assessing experiential learning outcomes. Chan et al. (2021) highlight this increasing trend, which has become a standard practice across various disciplines, particularly in built environment professional programs and teacher education (Grossman, 2009; Hume, 2009). This evolving practice is exemplified by the integration of reflective tools such as learning journals and personal development plans (Moon, 2006). These structured approaches often adopt a narrative framework, supported by templates to guide comprehensive analysis and interpretation (Brockbank & McGill, 2007). Additionally, the process is enhanced through dialogue and feedback mechanisms, facilitating learners’ progression through the experiential learning cycle (McDrury & Alterio, 2003).
The pedagogical value of reflection extends beyond assessment, offering multifaceted benefits for students' intellectual and personal development. One of its primary functions is to act as a bridge between prior knowledge and new insights, promoting the meaningful integration of theoretical content with practical experiences (McGuire et al., 2009). The widespread incorporation of reflective learning across professional disciplines underscores its importance as a foundational skill in initial training (Brockbank & McGill, 2007). Beyond immediate academic gains, reflective practices foster lifelong learning, professional skills development, and problem-solving abilities essential for various fields (Rogers, 2001). In teacher education, the impact of reflection is particularly profound. It promotes personal growth, transformative learning, and critical thinking (Ryan, 2013), while also nurturing active learning, self-awareness, and the formation of professional identity (McGuire et al., 2009; Moussa-Inaty, 2015).
Among tertiary students more broadly, reflection serves as a catalyst for transforming acquired knowledge into actionable insights (Ertmer & Newby, 1996). Kalantzis and Cope (2008) advocate for a transformative learning approach to academic reflection, redefining pedagogy as a dynamic process of knowledge transformation. Through this lens, reflection empowers students to critically challenge prevailing ideologies and view themselves as proactive learners capable of effecting meaningful change (Taylor, 2006).
In the specific context of EFL education, reflective writing plays a pivotal role in enhancing academic performance. Research by Kim and Park (2019) demonstrates that engaging in reflective writing improves essential skills such as writing, vocabulary development, and the effective use of cohesive devices. Moreover, it fosters higher-order cognitive abilities, enabling students to articulate their ideas and emotions more effectively while developing metacognitive competencies and a deeper sense of self-discovery.
Previous studies
Previous studies highlight the positive impact of integrating reflective practices across educational settings. Sen (2010), for instance, investigated reflective written work by postgraduate management students specializing in librarianship at the University of Sheffield. Using quantitative analysis, the study identified significant correlations across seven of eight assessed outcomes, including academic learning, self-improvement recognition, tangible self-improvement, critical assessment, self-awareness of cognitive processes, decision-making, and personal empowerment. Participants perceived reflection as beneficial at individual, group, and professional levels, demonstrating its multifaceted value.
Beyond highlighting the benefits, other studies focus on methodologies for integrating and assessing reflective practices. Chan et al. (2021) examined evaluation methods for reflective assessments used by university educators in Hong Kong, while Heron and Corradini (2023) emphasized the importance of scaffolding to support professional reflective writing. Moussa-Inaty (2015) found that guiding questions significantly enhanced learners’ reflection quality, suggesting that structured prompts can facilitate deeper engagement with reflective processes.
In the context of EFL learning, reflective writing has been shown to promote skill development and critical analysis. Sudirman et al. (2021) demonstrated its effectiveness in improving writing skills and fostering self-exploration. Similarly, Ramlal and Augustin (2020) highlighted its cognitive and linguistic benefits, though they did not assess content retention. Ghanizadeh (2017) used questionnaires to investigate the role of reflective thinking in academic achievement, while Ayan and Seferoğlu (2011) and Yilmaz and Keser (2016) examined the positive impact of electronic portfolios and reflective practices in distance education. However, some studies, such as Yilmaz and Keser (2016), lacked clarity in assessing the depth of cognitive processes. Collectively, these findings affirm the role of reflection in enhancing critical thinking, metacognitive skills, and academic growth in EFL education.
Despite its widespread application, reflection is rarely integrated into pronunciation instruction. Notable exceptions include the studies by Vitanova and Miller (2002) and Nhat and Van Le (2023). Vitanova and Miller (2002) demonstrated that reflective practice heightened students’ awareness of socio-affective factors such as frustration and inadequacy in pronunciation learning. Their study, conducted with graduate students from diverse linguistic backgrounds, emphasized the importance of metacognitive strategies in overcoming these challenges. In contrast, Nhat and Van Le (2023) focused on EFL undergraduates studying phonetics and phonology. Their study found that biweekly reflective prompts significantly enhanced students’ engagement with higher-order thinking skills (HOTS), content retention, and intrinsic motivation. These findings suggest that reflective writing not only deepens learning but also improves students’ attitudes toward pronunciation learning. Both studies provide foundational evidence for the potential of reflective practice in pronunciation instruction, though their impact on pronunciation proficiency remains underexplored. Vitanova and Miller (2002) highlight socio-affective aspects, while Nhat and Van Le (2023) emphasize cognitive and motivational dimensions. These insights open new avenues for examining how reflective practices can be strategically implemented in pronunciation teaching.
However, current pronunciation instruction practices often remain reactive and fragmented. Research indicates that teaching frequently relies on spontaneous error correction and simplistic, repetitive exercises such as listen-and-repeat drills (Foote et al., 2016; Murphy, 2011). Additionally, there is a prevailing focus on segmental features, such as individual sounds, rather than the holistic aspects of prosody, including intonation, rhythm, and stress (Couper, 2019; Foote et al., 2016). Teachers may overlook these broader features that are critical for speech intelligibility, partly due to contextual and resource constraints (Couper, 2019; Rahmati et al., 2023). These limitations underscore the need for a more systematic and comprehensive approach to pronunciation instruction, one that recognizes the role of prosody and integrates reflective practices to foster more effective learning outcomes.
Method
Research context and participants
The study employed an explanatory mixed-method design and was conducted in the Faculty of Foreign Languages at a public university in Vietnam, focusing on the mandatory English Phonetics and Phonology module. This module, integral to the English major degree program, aimed to improve students’ comprehension and reproduction of English speech sounds and patterns, with Roach’s (2000) “English Phonetics and Phonology” as the main textbook. The ten-week course, held from April to May 2023, comprised two sessions per week, taught by one of the authors.
Participants comprised 113 third-year undergraduates majoring in English, selected via convenience sampling based on availability and willingness. They were from two of seven Phonetics and Phonology classes during the Spring 2023 Semester: A06 (n = 56) and A07 (n = 57). These students shared similar academic backgrounds and English proficiency levels, with limited prior reflective writing experience. Both groups were taught by the same instructor, followed the same syllabus, and received comparable classroom instruction, except for the inclusion of reflective writing in the treatment group (A06). This design aimed to isolate the effect of the intervention while maintaining consistency in other aspects of the learning environment. In the final week of the course, participants were emailed for consent to utilize their recordings, scores, and reflective writings for research purposes; emphasis was placed on voluntary participation and confidentiality. Thirteen students from A06 and seven from A07 who did not respond were excluded, resulting in a final participant count of ninety-four.
Data collection and data analysis
The study consists of two datasets: one quantitative, comprising pre-test and post-test scores from two groups; the second dataset comprises students’ reflective writings.
Quantitative data
Pronunciation assessments were conducted in the first and final weeks of the course. The pre-test gauged initial pronunciation skills, while the post-test evaluated the impact of reflective writing on pronunciation improvement. Participants orally articulated a designated passage in English and submitted recordings for evaluation. The same passage, Abraham Lincoln’s letter to his son’s teacher, was used in both tests for direct comparison due to its linguistic appropriateness and educational themes.
The evaluation of recordings used a consistent analytic rubric focusing on four features: accuracy, sentence stress, intonation, and aspects of connected speech (including rhythm, elision, and linking), aligned with course topics. Assimilation was deliberately omitted from assessment, as this phonological aspect is typically more noticeable in casual and rapid speech rather than in deliberate aloud reading scenarios. Each feature was scored out of 2.5, totaling a maximum of 10 for the overall assessment.
Previous research has emphasized various factors affecting EFL pronunciation evaluation, including raters’ language background (Winke et al., 2013), linguistic understanding (Isaacs & Thomson, 2013), target language proficiency (Foote & Trofimovich, 2018), experience in EFL learning (Saito et al., 2019), and EFL teaching background (Tsunemoto et al., 2023). To mitigate potential biases, two external Vietnamese college lecturers, both females, holding MA degrees in Applied Linguistics, were invited to rate the recordings. One has sixteen years of experience teaching Speech Training and the other has eleven years of teaching Speech Training and English Phonology to the Vietnamese undergraduates majoring in English.
The scores were recorded for each student. The assessments from both evaluators underwent internal consistency checks, with Cronbach’s α indicating satisfactory results for each aspect: pronunciation accuracy of sounds (α = 0.83), placement of sentence stress (α = 0.87), intonation patterns (α = 0.81), and elements of connected speech (α = 0.79). Following this, pronunciation evaluations were averaged across all 94 students individually, enabling criterion-based comparisons.
Scores from both the pre- and post-tests were collected and analyzed to assess students’ pronunciation ability. A quantitative statistical analysis initially evaluated their pronunciation skills, followed by paired sample t-tests to measure differences between pre- and post-test scores, exploring the influence of theoretical lectures on students’ pronunciation competence. Finally, an independent sample t-test assessed if incorporating reflection writing positively impacted students’ pronunciation proficiency.
Qualitative data
In this study, reflection is conceptualized as a cognitive process involving deep thought about a specific experience to improve performance (Moon, 2004; Moussa-Inaty, 2015). Reflective practice aimed to connect abstract concepts with personal learning experiences, crucial for effective pronunciation development (McCarthy, 2011). Reflective writing, utilizing open-ended prompts (See Appendix), was employed. Reflective Essay 1 allowed learners to critically analyze their learning experiences. This process fostered self-awareness and a deeper understanding of the challenges they faced, the methods that worked for them, and the individuals who influenced their learning journey. The reflective writing also encouraged students to assess their progress, identify effective strategies, and recognize areas for improvement, ultimately leading to more personalized and efficient learning. Reflective Essay 2 prompted learners to critically engage with course materials, enhancing their analytical skills. This exercise aimed to promote a deeper understanding of the mechanisms involved in accurate articulation of English vowels and consonants, such as voicing, manner of articulation, place of articulation, tongue positioning, tongue height, and lip rounding. Students applied their theoretical knowledge to evaluate contemporary English pronunciation textbooks. By reflecting on these resources, they assessed their effectiveness in meeting their learning needs. Reflective Essay 3 encouraged learners to connect theoretical knowledge of English phonetics and phonology with practical application. By reflecting on concepts such as syllables, strong and weak forms, assimilation, linking, elision, rhythm, and intonation, students gained a deeper understanding of how these elements influenced their pronunciation. This exercise fostered self-directed learning by enabling students to evaluate their own strategies and identify areas for improvement.
The participants, native Vietnamese speakers, wrote their reflections in English, the main language of instruction. Class A06 engaged in reflective writing, while Class A07 served as the control group. Reflective writings, submitted voluntarily, did not contribute to overall assessment. Submissions were made electronically via Google Classroom. After an announcement during the final meeting and subsequent email, 44 students from Class A06 consented to their reflections being used for research (77.2% response rate). Each writing was coded with the student’s final initial followed by the last four digits of his or her student ID. A total of 132 reflective pieces, averaging 324 words each, underwent qualitative analysis, totaling approximately 60,300 words.
The study utilized thematic analysis, a cyclical and iterative process of identifying and refining themes to analyze the qualitative dataset (Creswell & Poth, 2017). Initial themes emerged during the reading process and were refined iteratively. Each author independently tested themes on ten texts, consolidating findings and establishing agreed-upon themes for coding another set. Analysis of all pieces was conducted independently by the two authors. Disagreements were resolved through discussions. Seven final themes were identified. Data were coded based on these themes, achieving an inter-coder agreement exceeding 87%, meeting an acceptable threshold (Neuendorf, 2002).
Findings
Students’ pronunciation ability and impact of reflective writings
Statistical analysis (Tables 1 and 2) reveals a significant improvement in all features and the overall pronunciation performance of students in both classes following the completion of the phonetics and phonology course. Class A06, which engaged in reflective writing, demonstrated a more substantial advancement compared to Class A07, which served as the control group. This progress is evident in the mean scores, which increased from 4.466 to 6.966 for Class A06 and from 4.490 to 5.950 for Class A07, out of a possible 10, from pretest to posttest.
Table 1. Mean, standard deviation, and p-value of pre- and post-tests of class A06
Feature evaluated | Pre-test | Post-test | p |
|---|---|---|---|
Mean (SD) | Mean (SD) | ||
Accuracy | 1.148 (0.556) | 1.534 (0.150) | 0 |
Sentence stress | 1.148 (0.556) | 1.818 (0.495) | 0 |
Intonation | 1.182 (0.540) | 1.898 (0.489) | 0 |
Aspects of connected speech | 0.989 (0.511) | 1.716 (0.423) | 0 |
Overall score | 4.466 (1.850) | 6.966 (1.682) | 0 |
Table 2. Mean, standard deviation, and p-value of pre- and post-tests of class A07
Feature evaluated | Pre-test | Post-test | p |
|---|---|---|---|
Mean (SD) | Mean (SD) | ||
Accuracy | 1.130 (0.568) | 1.370 (0.676) | 0 |
Sentence stress | 1.100 (0.495) | 1.430 (0.495) | 0 |
Intonation | 1.208 (0.525) | 1.600 (0.452) | 0 |
Aspects of connected speech | 1.060 (0.531) | 1.550 (0.443) | 0 |
Overall score | 4.490 (1.920) | 5.950 (1.855) | 0 |
Despite this improvement, the mean scores suggest a relatively modest proficiency level in pronunciation among the students. With a pretest mean score below 5 out of 10, it is apparent that, on average, students’ pronunciation skills fell short of a satisfactory standard, indicating potential challenges across various aspects of pronunciation. Although there was a marked enhancement in pronunciation proficiency, the posttest means scores remaining well below the maximum of 10 highlight the existence of areas warranting further development in pronunciation skills among the students.
Table 3 presents a comparison of pretest and posttest scores for pronunciation skills between the experimental group and the control group. In the pretest phase, the experimental group demonstrated slightly higher mean scores across most variables compared to the control group, albeit without statistical significance, as indicated by p-values ranging from 0.549 to 0.935. However, in the posttest phase, significant improvements were evident in several aspects for the experimental group. Particularly noteworthy are the marked enhancements in Sentence Stress (M = 1.818, SD = 0.495), Intonation (M = 1.898, SD = 0.489), Aspects of Connected Speech (M = 1.716, SD = 0.423), and accordingly Overall Score (M = 6.966, SD = 1.682), with p-values < 0.05, signifying substantial gains. Conversely, while the experimental group displayed higher mean score in Accuracy (M = 1.534, SD = 0.150) compared to that of the control group (M = 1.370, SD = 0.676), the difference did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.162). These findings suggest that writing reflections had a notable impact on improving certain aspects of pronunciation skills, highlighting the benefits of the incorporation of reflection practice in this theoretical module in enhancing specific linguistic competencies.
Table 3. Pretest and posttest comparison between experiment and control groups
Feature | Pre-test | Post-test | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Experimental group—A06 (n = 44) | Control Group—A07 (n = 50) | p | Experimental group—A06 (n = 44) | Control Group—A07 (n = 50) | p | |
Mean (SD) | Mean (SD) | Mean (SD) | Mean (SD) | |||
Accuracy | 1.148 (0.556) | 1.130 (0.568) | 0.789 | 1.534 (0.150) | 1.370 (0.676) | 0.162 |
Sentence stress | 1.148 (0.556) | 1.100 (0.495) | 0.579 | 1.818 (0.495) | 1.430 (0.495) | 0.000 |
Intonation | 1.182 (0.540) | 1.208 (0.525) | 0.893 | 1.898 (0.489) | 1.600 (0.452) | 0.000 |
Aspects of C. S | 0.989 (0.511) | 1.060 (0.531) | 0.549 | 1.716 (0.423) | 1.550 (0.443) | 0.033 |
Overall score | 4.466 (1.850) | 4.490 (1.920) | 0.935 | 6.966 (1.682) | 5.950 (1.855) | 0.007 |
Bold values indicate statistical significance
The relative lack of improvement in accuracy, compared to other pronunciation components, may be due to two factors. Accuracy, specifically in terms of segmental features like individual sounds, often requires more targeted, explicit practice and immediate corrective feedback, which may not be as easily fostered through reflective writing alone. It is possible that the reflective writing process, while beneficial for metacognitive awareness, may not have provided enough focused attention on individual sounds required for accuracy. Furthermore, accuracy in pronunciation can be influenced by the learner’s native language, Vietnamese, which may interfere with their pronunciation due to ingrained habits from their first language. In contrast, other broader aspects of pronunciation such as sentence stress, intonation, linking, and elision may be more closely tied to learners’ understanding, HOTS, and practice, allowing for noticeable improvement over time.
Students’ perspectives about their experiences with English pronunciation learning
This subsection shifts the focus to a qualitative examination of students’ personal experiences and perceptions regarding their pronunciation learning journey. This section explores the subjective insights gained through students’ reflective essays.
The seven themes identified from the thematic analysis of the reflection writings unveil a wealth of insights into the realm of pronunciation pedagogy in the educational context of Vietnam from the perspectives of the learners as the active agents in the teaching and learning process.
General attitude towards English pronunciation learning
Learners universally recognize pronunciation’s vital role in effective communication. They emphasize the transformative role of pronunciation, often realized after encountering communication barriers despite possessing extensive vocabulary knowledge. Learners advocate for prioritizing pronunciation in EFL learning, emphasizing its significance for achieving proficiency and fluency in English communication.
Learners stress the importance of dedication, practice, and teacher support in this endeavor. Despite initial difficulties, gradual improvement leads to enhanced confidence. The journey involves overcoming communication obstacles posed by foreign accents, with phonics lessons proving particularly beneficial for refining sound distinction and pronunciation. However, some students express insecurity and concern regarding their pronunciation and overall language proficiency. Despite their efforts, they lack confidence in their pronunciation abilities and harbor worries about their language comprehension. This uncertainty reflects a common sentiment among language learners striving to enhance their pronunciation skills and overall language proficiency, acknowledging the need for extensive practice and identifying pronunciation errors.
Challenges
EFL learners face a variety of challenges in mastering pronunciation. Many struggle to distinguish sounds accurately. Difficulties with stress and intonation can significantly impact communication clarity, as stress variations can alter word meanings. Additionally, muscle control required for precise pronunciation, particularly when it differs from the learner’s native language, poses challenges. Despite extensive English learning, some learners still struggle with pronunciation, especially with sounds absent from Vietnamese. The complexities of English pronunciation, including stress, intonation, and articulation, remain persistent hurdles for learners, even those with extensive language study experience.
Teachers
EFL learners express varied experiences with English pronunciation teachers. Some highlight positive experiences with instructors who utilize interactive methods, such as practicing pronunciation symbols and gradually increasing reading speed for effective memorization. Others mention seeking private tutors or benefiting from interactions with both Vietnamese and foreign instructors to improve pronunciation, receiving guidance on intonation, stress placement, and natural speech patterns.
Social and educational context
The social and educational context in Vietnam significantly impacts English pronunciation among EFL learners. The lack of opportunities to practice English and limited exposure to native speakers hinder the development of a natural accent and intonation. Furthermore, phonetic transcriptions in textbooks often deviate from the original pronunciation, leading to confusion and mispronunciation among students. The practice of using Vietnamese spelling for foreign proper names in Vietnamese textbooks further complicates pronunciation, reinforcing incorrect pronunciation patterns.
How the learners have been instructed to develop English pronunciation
The reflection writings reveal a varied landscape of English pronunciation instruction in primary and secondary education. In primary classes, pronunciation teaching primarily involves teacher-led repetition, with some focus on specific pronunciation aspects like word endings. Additionally, students recall activities such as singing songs related to vocabulary themes. Teachers predominantly correct individual sound errors at the word level. There are limited opportunities for practice and correction. Moreover, the lack of standardization among teachers’ pronunciation models and a predominant focus on grammar and vocabulary contribute to inconsistencies and challenges in pronunciation development.
To address the constraints in formal classes, findings regarding how Vietnamese EFL learners independently improve their English pronunciation after formal classes reveal a diverse array of strategies and techniques. They employ a combination of active listening, imitation, self-assessment, and targeted practice to enhance their English pronunciation skills independently. Many learners engage with multimedia resources like YouTube, TikTok, and English movies, which provides them with engaging resources to imitate native speakers’ pronunciation and intonation patterns. Some learners work with native speakers directly or participate in conversation groups to receive feedback and practice speaking. Additionally, self-recording and self-assessment play a significant role, with learners regularly recording themselves speaking, comparing their pronunciation to native speakers, and identifying areas for improvement. Some learners also mention utilizing resources like IPA charts to understand phonetic transcriptions and practice pronunciation systematically. Furthermore, activities such as shadowing native speakers, singing along to English songs, and incorporating English into daily routines contribute to gradual pronunciation improvement.
Upon entering university, Vietnamese EFL learners are equipped with essential knowledge and techniques to improve their pronunciation accuracy and fluency. Teachers utilize resources like the IPA to help students understand and reproduce English sounds accurately. Additionally, learners are introduced to sound-producing systems, enabling them to comprehend the physiological mechanisms behind sound production. Practical activities, such as recording and practicing pronunciation, reviewing vocabulary with IPA transcriptions, and engaging in small group discussions, reinforce pronunciation skills. Furthermore, learners appreciate courses that provide opportunities to practice listening and speaking extensively.
The resources
Regarding the students’ evaluation and attitudes towards assessable materials on pronunciation, they express positive views on certain free online resources while displaying negative sentiments towards the English textbooks officially used in the national educational system. Generally, the descriptions provided by EFL students about the English 1–12 series reveal some critical perspectives, including concerns about the absence of clear phonetic transcriptions, insufficient explanations, and a perceived need for greater emphasis on pronunciation from an early stage. These critiques imply dissatisfaction with the materials’ clarity and inclusivity, particularly when contrasted with the more comprehensive and accessible approaches found in modern textbooks.
The participants highly appreciate ‘Family and Friends’ series for its effective methodology in improving pronunciation skills due to its structured framework, clear sound illustrations, and practical exercises, albeit noting occasional gaps in pronunciation coverage. Similarly, ‘Ship or Sheep’ earns high praise for its thorough treatment of vowel and consonant sounds, systematic organization, engaging exercises, and clear presentation of pronunciation rules and examples. Despite minor drawbacks such as limited illustrations and verbose lessons, students highly value the ‘American Accent Training’ series for its comprehensive approach, including extensive exercises, CD accompaniment, nationality guides, and theoretical explanations. Likewise, they appreciate ‘Mastering the American Accent’ for its detailed instruction and focus on correcting common pronunciation errors, finding it suitable for beginners. ‘English Pronunciation in USA’ is lauded for its structured learning routes, detailed explanations, and diverse practice exercises, emphasizing the importance of muscle training and listening practice. Furthermore, undergraduates regard ‘English Pronunciation in Use’ as a comprehensive guide, highlighting its clear organization, detailed explanations, practical exercises, and audio support, although some find certain sections challenging due to advanced vocabulary. Lastly, students highly praise ‘Better English Pronunciation’ by J.D. O’Connor for its comprehensive coverage, clear explanations, organized units, helpful illustrations, and audio resources, making it a valuable resource for intermediate learners.
Besides the books, EFL learners utilize a variety of resources to improve their pronunciation skills. Many leverage smartphone apps like Elsa Speak, Duolingo, and EVA for real-time feedback and interactive speaking exercises. Online platforms such as Forvo and Pronunciation Coach provide access to native speaker recordings, while educational videos on platforms like YouTube offer visual aids for understanding mouth positioning and pronunciation techniques. Some learners also engage in language exchange apps like Paltalk to practice with native speakers and receive personalized feedback. However, they caution against relying too heavily on automated tools like Google Translate, emphasizing the importance of dedicated pronunciation learning.
Suggestions on how to improve English pronunciation
The participants’ suggestions for improving English pronunciation can be grouped into six categories: (1) Practice and Exposure: Recommendations emphasize the importance of regular practice, exposure to native speakers through various media like movies, songs, and apps, and engaging in activities such as presentations and storytelling to enhance pronunciation skills. (2) Utilizing Resources: Suggestions are concerned with utilizing resources such as textbooks with audio recordings, pronunciation apps, websites, and materials incorporating phonetic symbols to aid in understanding and reproducing sounds accurately. (3) Studying IPA: Suggestions include learning the IPA and practicing pronunciation based on IPA representations. (4) Seeking Feedback and Support: Learners are encouraged to seek feedback from native speakers, utilize CDs and audio recordings for comparison, and engage in self-assessment to identify areas for improvement. (5) Educational System and Teacher Training: Calls for improvements within the educational system include providing additional classes focused on phonetics and pronunciation, training teachers adequately, and incorporating more attention to pronunciation within the curriculum. (6) Confidence Building: Participants suggested that teachers should cultivate a non-judgmental and encouraging atmosphere in classrooms. This includes providing constructive feedback and organizing collaborative activities like group discussions or role-plays where learners feel less pressure to perform individually.
Discussion
In this study, reflection was used for two primary aims: to explore its impact on tertiary-level learners’ English pronunciation and to gain insight into their depicted pronunciation learning experiences.
Improved pronunciation scores in both classes after completing the course on phonetics and phonology might be partially explained by the fact that the same passage was used in both pre- and post-tests. This may have given students familiarity with the content, leading to apparent improvements due to repeated exposure rather than solely the intervention itself. Additionally, the notable advancement in their pronunciation abilities could be attributed to a deeper knowledge of pronunciation concepts gained from the theoretical module and applied in their performance. However, the mean scores indicate a comparatively low proficiency level in pronunciation among the students, suggesting that their skills fall short of a satisfactory standard. Despite the noticeable increase in post-test mean scores, the discernible gap between the mean scores and the maximum achievable score suggests the existence of areas warranting further development in pronunciation skills.
The compelling connection between reflective writing and enhanced pronunciation skills identified in this study aligns with existing literature that emphasizes the importance of self-awareness and self-monitoring in pronunciation learning. Kennedy et al. (2014) and Yule et al. (1987) highlight the pivotal role of fostering autonomous and proficient learners through these skills. Reflective writing, as demonstrated by our findings, appears to cultivate metacognitive awareness of prosodic features, which is consistent with Morley’s (1994) assertion that active learner involvement and self-assessment are essential for ongoing pronunciation development. Furthermore, the findings suggest that students in the experimental group may have engaged in additional pronunciation practice outside of class, contributing to their enhanced performance. This could include activities such as watching English-language media, practicing pronunciation independently, or using online resources to improve their speech. Their engagement outside the classroom may have been fueled by increased motivation and intrinsic interest in pronunciation learning, distinguishing them from the control group. The heightened effort and enthusiasm likely played a critical role in their improved outcomes.
The greater effect of reflection on sentence stress and intonation compared to pronunciation accuracy resonates with Nguyen and Newton’s (2020) observation of the significance of self-correction skills in the Vietnamese EFL context. Reflective writing seems to provide learners with a platform to explore and articulate their pronunciation challenges and beliefs, thereby enhancing their awareness of stress patterns and intonation contours. This finding aligns with Vitanova and Miller’s (2002) assertion that reflection fosters greater learner awareness and confidence. Additionally, the differential impact on specific pronunciation features may be partly attributed to the nature of the reflective prompts employed in this study, which primarily enhanced metacognitive awareness of prosodic elements rather than segmental accuracy. Through reflective writing, students became more conscious of stress patterns and intonation contours, leading to improved performance in these areas. This study also partially aligns with Nhat and Van Le (2023), who assessed academic outcomes in terms of retaining theoretical knowledge. Their research convincingly argued that reflective writing fosters deep learning, bolsters students’ motivation, and reshapes their attitudes towards the subject matter. The integration of reflective writing and autonomous practice appears to create a holistic learning environment where students are motivated to engage actively and critically in their pronunciation development.
The observed positive correlation between writing reflections and an increase in pronunciation scores might also be attributed to the measures prudently followed when we integrated writing reflections in Class A06. As cautioned in previous studies (e.g., Chan et al., 2021), several strategies were implemented to build a supportive environment and facilitate students’ deep engagement in the higher levels of the reflective process. Initially, we provided exemplars showcasing exemplary reflective writing. These exemplars were drawn from previous years and represented varying degrees of reporting, responding, relating, reasoning, and reconstructing as outlined by Moon (2004), Bain et al. (2002), and Grossman (2009). Additionally, we followed the structuring strategy (McGuire et al., 2009) to facilitate the reflective process to enhance learning. This structuring included providing specific prompts or questions to focus student examination of issues most relevant to course content (See Appendix). Another crucial measure was that the students were granted ample and flexible time for submitting their reflections. Throughout the ten-week course, they were tasked with completing just three reflections. While late submissions incurred no penalties, students were encouraged to submit their work within two weeks. Constructive feedback was delivered, addressing both the quality of the reflections and the contents, focusing on the students’ learning experiences and their attitudes towards their learning journey. These measures collectively ensured a thoughtful and student-centered approach to reflective writing, making them suitable for recommendation as pedagogical strategies. Educators seeking to integrate reflective writing into pronunciation instruction could benefit from adopting these practices to foster deeper student engagement and promote meaningful learning outcomes.
Implementing reflective writing in pronunciation courses may face several challenges, including student resistance and time constraints. Students may view reflective writing as unrelated to pronunciation improvement, making engagement difficult. To address this, teachers can initially integrate reflection seamlessly into class activities by incorporating short prompts that encourage students to analyze their pronunciation progress. Providing explicit instruction and exemplars on effective reflective writing can help students see its relevance. Offering multi-modal reflection options, such as audio or video submissions, can enhance engagement while reinforcing speaking skills. Flexible deadlines combined with constructive feedback tailored to pronunciation goals can foster meaningful reflection. To address time constraints in evaluating students’ reflections and providing feedback, educators can adopt several practical strategies. One effective approach is to use rubrics with specific criteria that focus on key aspects of reflection, such as depth of analysis and connection to pronunciation goals. This helps streamline assessment and ensures consistency. Another strategy is to provide group feedback where common themes are addressed in a collective discussion in order to reduce extensive individual comments. Peer evaluation can further alleviate the teacher’s workload while fostering collaborative learning; students can exchange reflections and offer constructive feedback using the rubrics provided. Finally, establishing a feedback rotation system where detailed feedback is provided for only one or two submissions per student while offering concise comments for others can ensure that students still receive meaningful guidance without overwhelming teachers.
Writing reflections also allow students to use background materials relevant to their individual learning experiences (Hashemi & Mirzaei, 2015). In their reflective writings, the learners draw on background materials to deepen their understanding of the theories they were studying. For instance, they relate theoretical concepts to their own speaking and pronunciation skills. This allows the student to engage more deeply with the course material and make connections between theory and practice in their own learning journey. Through Reflective Essay 1, students may develop essential metacognitive skills by analysing their pronunciation journey, potentially enabling them to make more informed decisions regarding tools, resources, and strategies. This process seems to encourage active engagement and might support a more individualized and autonomous approach to learning. Reflective Essay 2 empowers students to critically assess the accuracy and relevance of existing pronunciation textbooks in Vietnamese EFL contexts. By identifying possible gaps in pronunciation instruction and proposing tailored improvements, students could enhance their ability to approach language acquisition from a learner-centered perspective. Additionally, the reflective task seems to have cultivated critical thinking and problem-solving skills, which may be particularly beneficial for future educators seeking to design more effective and context-sensitive teaching resources. Reflective Essay 3 facilitates a connection between theoretical concepts and practical applications, allowing students to evaluate the potential relevance of phonetic principles in their pronunciation practice. By reflecting on their personal experiences with theories such as syllables, rhythm, linking, elision, and intonation, students may identify effective strategies for improvement and recognize areas requiring further focus. This integration of theory and practice may better equip learners to apply their knowledge not only to improve their own pronunciation but also to support others in a teaching capacity.
Regarding the students’ perspectives on their pronunciation learning journey, the results of our investigation align with Vitanova and Miller’s (2002) findings, confirming the pivotal role of reflective practices in heightening students’ awareness within the realm of pronunciation pedagogy. This current study affirms that fostering a space for students to articulate their beliefs and concerns significantly enhances their engagement and comprehension. Notably, while Vitanova and Miller’s study encompassed participants from diverse linguistic and academic backgrounds at a mid-western university, our research differs in its focus on participants sharing homogeneous linguistic, educational, and socio-cultural backgrounds. Despite this distinction, our findings resonate with theirs, revealing a common thread of negative attitudes among students towards their pronunciation learning experiences—feelings of inadequacy, frustration, and despondency prevail. Furthermore, our study reinforces Vitanova and Miller’s insights into the pronounced influence of social and educational factors on pronunciation acquisition.
Aligning with the earlier findings, the present study reaffirms the effectiveness of detailed instruction and metacognitive strategies in improving pronunciation acquisition. The learners’ awareness of the crucial importance of pronunciation corresponds with previous studies involving EFL Vietnamese undergraduates (Nguyen, 2019; Nguyen et al., 2021). The students perceived proficient pronunciation as vital for oral communication, enhancing listening, speaking, confidence, and test performance. This finding is also consistent with results from studies conducted in alternative educational settings, as documented by Gilakjani (2012), emphasizing pronunciation’s role in communicative effectiveness over grammatical precision. The concern that Vietnamese secondary EFL teachers primarily prioritize teaching vocabulary and grammar while neglecting pronunciation corresponds with Nguyen’s (2019) findings. These students articulated a clear demand for more structured and comprehensive pronunciation instruction, indicating a desire for explicit and systematic lessons in this area. This discovery reinforces the argument that pronunciation holds significant importance in ESL/EFL education, as advocated by various scholars (Derwing, 2018; Foote et al., 2016; Jones, 2018). Students’ written reflections also highlighted socio-psychological factors in pronunciation acquisition, addressing a gap identified by Vitanova and Miller (2002) in pronunciation research and pedagogy.
Altogether, this study confirms the benefits of reflective writing in fostering heightened self-awareness, understanding of social interactions, situational awareness, and transformative thinking (Moussa-Inaty, 2015; Sen, 2010). Reflective essays demonstrate that reflection is a dynamic process, enabling learners to examine past experiences, assess current emotions and understanding, and consider future pathways within socio-cultural educational contexts (Power, 2017). In pronunciation learning, these advantages are particularly significant, as reflective practice helps students critically evaluate their challenges, recognize effective strategies, and connect theoretical concepts to practical applications. By fostering deeper self-awareness and encouraging continuous assessment of their progress, reflective writing supports the refinement of key pronunciation features, including articulation, rhythm, and intonation, ultimately enhancing overall proficiency.
Conclusion
The findings suggest that engaging Vietnamese EFL undergraduates in reflective writing as a pedagogical tool holds considerable potential for enhancing their pronunciation proficiency and deepening their understanding of the learning process. Regarding the first research question, the results indicate that the intervention had a measurable impact on targeted aspects of pronunciation proficiency. Reflective practice encouraged a more individualized and autonomous approach to learning while fostering active engagement with pronunciation tools and resources. It also enabled students to integrate theory and practice by applying phonetic principles to their own pronunciation development. Through this process, students developed essential metacognitive skills by analyzing their pronunciation journeys, critically assessing available resources, and identifying effective strategies.
As for the second research question, the students’ authentic voices and perspectives, captured through their reflective writings, revealed valuable insights into their experiences with English pronunciation learning. The reflections highlighted the influence of cultural and regional factors, feedback, and technology on their pronunciation development. Furthermore, they shed light on challenges in existing instructional materials, offering suggestions for improvements to better meet the needs of EFL learners. Viewed holistically, these qualitative findings may serve as a transformative resource for understanding the multifaceted process of pronunciation acquisition and for shaping more effective pedagogical approaches.
The findings highlight the pressing need for ongoing initiatives aimed at improving students’ pronunciation skills to achieve a greater level of proficiency. The study also confirms the positive impact of writing reflections on the learners’ pronunciation skills. We concur with Tsunemoto et al. (2023) proposal, advocating for the provision of opportunities within higher-education environments for pre-service teachers to engage in self-reflective practices and critically assess their existing beliefs about ESL/EFL pronunciation teaching, learning, and assessment.
From the results and discussion presented in this study, we would offer R.E.F.L.E.C.T as an acronym of the key values of reflection, standing for Realization, Empowerment, Facilitation, Learning, Enhancement, Critical Thinking, and Transformation, supporting the necessity for higher education to better equip EFL students in reflective writing. Developing reflection skills in higher education is imperative for preparing students for both their immediate needs, and their long-term professional growth and self-development (Chan et al., 2021; Hume, 2009; McGuire et al., 2009). By fostering a culture of critical reflection across modules within one faculty or/and across faculties, providing scaffolding, and offering professional development for educators, universities can effectively equip students with the necessary skills for success in an ever-changing world (Bain et al., 2002).
In this study, although pronunciation ability was holistically evaluated based on four features, a plausible limitation lies in the use of read-aloud tasks focusing on the same passage for both pre- and post-tests. Familiarity with the passage from the pre-test may have influenced participants’ pronunciation in the post-test, potentially skewing the results. Using a single passage might not fully capture learners’ pronunciation skills or variations in real-world contexts. Future research could address this by employing different passages for pre- and post-tests to mitigate the influence of familiarity and improve the validity of findings. Additionally, exploring the impact of reflective writing on delayed tests and spontaneous speech would help assess its effectiveness in retaining and applying theoretical content.
This study also acknowledges other limitations that should be addressed in future research. First, the exclusive focus on reflective writing as the sole pedagogical intervention, while effective, limits the exploration of its integration with complementary approaches such as peer feedback or group discussions. Incorporating these methods could foster a more collaborative and dynamic learning environment, potentially enriching the outcomes. Furthermore, the results suggest the need to explore reflective practice over extended periods, with larger samples, and across various linguistic modules. Engaging learners in reflective writing can bridge the gap between theoretical concepts and real-world applications, enhancing their understanding and overall language development experience. Finally, the assessment focused on four key pronunciation features, which were selected based on their alignment with the core objectives of the phonetics and phonology course. However, these metrics do not capture broader aspects of pronunciation proficiency, such as fluency, intelligibility, and listener comprehension, which are essential in real-world communication. This limitation is acknowledged, and future studies are encouraged to include these additional aspects to provide a more comprehensive evaluation of learners’ pronunciation abilities. Addressing these limitations would not only strengthen the study’s robustness but also increase its practical relevance and applicability.
Acknowledgements
We sincerely thank the anonymous reviewers for their insightful feedback and constructive suggestions, which have significantly improved the quality of our manuscript. The authors express sincere gratitude to Ms. Nguyen Hoang Thuy Linh for her invaluable expertise in conducting the professional analysis of the quantitative data, which significantly enriched the research findings. We also extend our heartfelt appreciation to our esteemed colleagues at Quy Nhon University, Ms. Nguyen Hoai Dung and Ms. Ha Thi Thanh Thuy, for their meticulous marking of the participants' recordings. Their dedication ensured the accuracy and reliability of the data, contributing immensely to the quality of this study.
Author contributions
T.N.M.N Conceptualization. Instruction: Responsible for conducting lectures, administering pre-tests and post-tests, and guiding the reflective writing. Data Collection: Managed the acquisition of data by communicating with students via email to obtain consent for the use of their recordings, scores, and reflective writings as study data. Data Analysis: Conducted thematic analysis of the reflective writings independently. Manuscript Preparation: Reviewed relevant literature and drafted the initial manuscript. H.T.T.H Data Analysis: Performed thematic analysis of the reflective writings independently. Manuscript Editing: Contributed to the editing process of the manuscript.
Funding
No funding was received for conducting this study.
Availability of data and materials
Availability of data and materials: The datasets utilized and analyzed during the current study are not publicly available due to the confidentiality agreement with the participants. However, these datasets are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. All students involved in the research provided voluntary consent for the utilization of their recordings, scores, and reflective writings as research data. Participation was entirely voluntary, and students were informed about the study's purpose during the final week of the course. Students granted permission for the use of their data with the understanding that their confidentiality would be upheld throughout the study.
Declarations
Ethics approval and consent to participate
This study was conducted in accordance with the ethical standards outlined in the APA Ethics Code for psychological research. All students involved in the research provided voluntary consent for the utilization of their recordings, scores, and reflective writings as research data. Participation was entirely voluntary, and students were informed about the study’s purpose during the final week of the course. Students granted permission for the use of their data with the understanding that their confidentiality would be upheld throughout the study.
Consent for publication
The authors confirm that this manuscript has not been previously published and is not currently being considered for publication elsewhere. All authors have reviewed and approved the final version of the manuscript and have given their consent for its submission and publication.
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
References
Ayan, D; Seferoğlu, G. Using electronic portfolios to promote reflective thinking in language teacher education. Educational Studies; 2011; 37,
Bain, J. D., Ballantyne, R., Mills, C., & Lester, N.C. (2002). Reflecting on practice: Student teachers’ perspectives. Post Pressed.
Brockbank, A; McGill, I. Facilitating reflective learning in higher education; 2007; Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press:
Chan, CKY; Wong, HYH; Luo, J. An exploratory study on assessing reflective writing from teachers’ perspectives. Higher Education Research and Development; 2021; 40,
Couper, G. Teachers’ cognitions of corrective feedback on pronunciation: Their beliefs, perceptions and practices. System; 2019; 84, pp. 41-52. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2019.04.003]
Cowan, J. On becoming an innovative university teacher: Reflection in action; 1998; Society for Research into Higher education and Open University Press:
Creswell, JW; Poth, C. Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches; 2017; Sage Publications:
Derwing, TM; Munro, MJ. Pronunciation fundamentals: Evidence-based perspectives for L2 teaching and research; 2015; John Benjamins Publishing Company: [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1075/lllt.42]
Dinkelman, T. Self-study in teacher education: A means and ends tool for promoting reflective teaching. Journal of Teacher Education; 2003; 54,
Ertmer, PA; Newby, TJ. The expert learner: Strategic, self-regulated, and reflective. Instructional Science; 1996; 24,
Foote, JA; Trofimovich, P. Kang, O; Thomson, RI; Murphy, JM. Second language pronunciation learning. The Routledge handbook of contemporary English pronunciation; 2017; Routledge: pp. 75-90. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9781315145006-6]
Foote, JA; Trofimovich, P; Collins, L; Urzúa, FS. Pronunciation teaching practices in communicative second language classes. Language Learning Journal; 2016; 44,
Ghanizadeh, A. The interplay between reflective thinking, critical thinking, self-monitoring, and academic achievement in higher education. Higher Education; 2017; 74,
Gilakjani, AP. A study of factors affecting EFL learners' English pronunciation learning and the strategies for instruction. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science; 2012; 2,
Grant, MJ. The role of reflection in the library and information sector: A systematic review. Health Information and Libraries Journal; 2007; 24,
Grossman, R. Structures for facilitating student reflection. College Teaching; 2009; 57,
Hashemi, Z; Mirzaei, T. Conversations of the mind: The impact of journal writing on enhancing EFL medical students’ reflections, attitudes, and sense of self. Procedia, Social and Behavioral Sciences; 2015; 199, pp. 103-110. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.07.493]
Heron, M; Corradini, E. A genre-based study of professional reflective writing in higher education. Teaching in Higher Education; 2023; 28,
Hume, A. Promoting higher levels of reflective writing in student journals. Higher Education Research and Development; 2009; 28,
Isaacs, T; Thomson, RI. Rater experience, rating scale length, and judgments of L2 pronunciation: Revisiting research conventions. Language Assessment Quarterly; 2013; 10,
Jones, T. Kang, O; Thomson, RI; Murphy, J. Pronunciation with other areas of language. The Routledge handbook of contemporary English pronunciation; 2018; Routledge: pp. 370-384. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9781315145006-23]
Kalantzis, M; Cope, B. New learning: Elements of a science of education; 2008; Cambridge University Press: [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511811951]
Kang, O; Thomson, RI; Murphy, JM. The Routledge handbook of contemporary English pronunciation; 2017; Routledge: [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9781315145006]
Kennedy, S; Blanchet, J; Trofimovich, P. Learner pronunciation, awareness, and instruction in French as a second language. Foreign Language Annals; 2014; 47,
Kim, YSG; Park, SH. Unpacking pathways using the direct and indirect effects model of writing (DIEW) and the contributions of higher order cognitive skills to writing. Reading and Writing; 2019; 32,
Mair, C. Using technology for enhancing reflective writing, metacognition and learning. Journal of Further and Higher Education; 2012; 40,
McCarthy, J. Reflective writing, higher education and professional practice. The Journal for Education in the Built Environment; 2011; 6,
McDrury, J; Alterio, M. Learning through storytelling in higher education: Using reflection and experience to improve learning. Routledge; 2003; [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9780203416655]
McGuire, L; Lay, K; Peters, J. Pedagogy of reflective writing in professional education. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning; 2009; 9,
Moon, J. A handbook of reflective and experiential learning: Theory and practice; 2004; Routledge:
Moon, J. Learning journals: A handbook for reflective practice and professional development; 2006; Routledge: [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9780203969212]
Moon, J. Getting the measure of reflection: Considering matters of definition and depth. Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice; 2007; 6,
Morley, J. (1994). A multidimensional curriculum design for speech-pronunciation instruction. In J. Morley (Ed.), Pronunciation pedagogy and theory: New views, new directions. Bloomington.
Morrison, K. Developing reflective practice in higher degree students through a learning journal. Studies in Higher Education; 1996; 21,
Moussa-Inaty, J. Reflective writing through the use of guiding questions. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education; 2015; 27,
Murphy, D. An investigation of English pronunciation teaching in Ireland. English Today; 2011; 27,
Nation, ISP; Newton, J. Teaching ESL/EFL listening and speaking; 2009; Routledge:
Neuendorf, K. The content analysis guidebook; 2002; Sage:
Nguyen, LT. Vietnamese EFL learners’ pronunciation needs: A teaching and learning perspective. TESOLANZ Journal; 2019; 27, pp. 16-31.
Nguyen, LT; Hung, BP; Duong, UTT; Le, TT. Teachers’ and learners’ beliefs about pronunciation instruction in tertiary English as a foreign language education. Frontiers in Psychology; 2021; 12, pp. 739842-739842. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.739842]
Nguyen, LT; Newton, J. Pronunciation teaching in tertiary EFL classes: Vietnamese Teachers’ beliefs and practices. TESL-EJ; 2020; 24,
Nhat, TNM; Van Le, T. Effects of reflective thinking on deep learning in theoretical linguistics classes. International Journal of Instruction; 2023; 16,
Power, JB. Not leaving the conversation behind: Approaching a decade of teaching reflective journal writing at a liberal arts college. Reflective Practice; 2017; 18,
Rahmati, P; Dalman, M; Saeli, H. Oral corrective feedback on pronunciation errors: Implications for teacher trainers. The Journal of Asia TEFL; 2023; 20,
Ramlal, A; Augustin, DS. Engaging students in reflective writing: An action research project. Educational Action Research; 2020; 28,
Roach, P. English phonetics and phonology: A practical course; 2000; Cambridge University Press:
Rogers, RR. Reflection in higher education: A concept analysis. Innovative Higher Education; 2001; 26,
Ryan, M. The pedagogical balancing act: Teaching reflection in higher education. Teaching in Higher Education; 2013; 18,
Ryan, M; Ryan, M. Theorising a model for teaching and assessing reflective learning in higher education. Higher Education Research and Development; 2013; 32,
Saito, K; Tran, M; Suzukida, Y; Sun, H; Magne, V; Ilkan, M. How do L2 listeners perceive the comprehensibility of foreign-accented speech? Roles of L1 profiles, L2 proficiency, age, experience, familiarity and metacognition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition; 2019; 41, pp. 1133-1149. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0272263119000226]
Schön, DA. The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Routledge; 1983; [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9781315237473]
Seibert, K. W., & Daudelin, M. W. (1999). The role of reflection in managerial learning: theory, research, and practice. Quorum.
Sen, B. Reflective writing: A management skill. Library Management; 2010; 31,
Sudirman, A; Gemilang, AV; Kristanto, TMA. The power of reflective journal writing for university students from the EFL perspective. Studies in English Language and Education; 2021; 8,
Taylor, B. Reflective practice: A guide for nurses and midwives; 2006; McGraw-Hill Education:
Tsunemoto, A; Trofimovich, P; Kennedy, S. Pre-service teachers’ beliefs about second language pronunciation teaching, their experience, and speech assessments. Language Teaching Research; 2023; 27,
Uchida, Y; Sugimoto, J. Non-native English teachers’ confidence in their own pronunciation and attitudes towards teaching: A questionnaire survey in Japan. International Journal of Applied Linguistics; 2020; 30,
Vitanova, G., & Miller, A. (2002). Reflective practice in pronunciation learning. The Internet TESL Journal, 8(1).
Winke, P; Gass, S; Myford, C. Raters’ L2 background as a potential source of bias in rating oral performance. Language Testing; 2013; 30,
Yilmaz, FGK; Keser, H. The impact of reflective thinking activities in e-learning: A critical review of the empirical research. Computers and Education; 2016; 95, pp. 163-173. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.01.006]
Yule, G; Hoffman, P; Damico, J. Paying attention to pronunciation: The role of self-monitoring in perception. TESOL Quarterly; 1987; 21,
© The Author(s) 2025. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.