English-Majored Students’ Perceptions of Discourse Markers in English Speaking

Abstract

"Discourse markers (DMs) play a crucial role in enhancing coherence, fluency, and interaction in spoken English. However, in EFL contexts, learners often demonstrate limited awareness and confidence in using a wide range of discourse markers, particularly those serving interactional and cognitive functions. This study investigates Englishmajored students’ perceptions of discourse markers in English speaking and examines their self-rated confidence in using discourse markers across different functional categories. A total of 145 undergraduate students from the School of Foreign Languages at a university in the Mekong Delta participated in the research, from first-year to fourth-year undergraduates. A descriptive mixed-method research design was employed. Data were collected through a questionnaire adapted from Truong (2022) and Fung and Carter (2007), consisting of four open-ended questions exploring students’ perceptions of discourse markers and 22 five-point Likert-scale items measuring their confidence in using discourse markers across four functional categories: interpersonal, referential, structural, and cognitive. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, while qualitative responses were analyzed thematically. The findings show that students retain generally positive perceptions of discourse markers, recognizing their use as idea connectors, coherence enhancers, or facilitators of natural communications. However, their knowledge mostly focuses on typical types of discourse markers, such as addition, contrast, cause-and-effect, and sequencing, with structural, cognitive, or interactional markers being relatively neglected. With regard to students’ perceptions of their self-efficacy, the study found that students’ self-efficacy beliefs were high towards the use of discourse markers linked with academic or logical purposes: adding information, contrasting, adding cause-and-effect explanation, sequencing arguments, adding examples. By contrast, their self-efficacy beliefs were relatively low with respect to discourse markers linked with socially oriented or interactional purposes, such as rapport-building, topic change, getting attention, or other types that might typically feature in more natural conversations. Finally, this study identifies the strengths and weaknesses of discourse markers used by students, implying the necessity for more extensive guidance, with greater integration of real communicative practices, and more opportunities for natural communication. This result draws significant implications for improvement in speaking education in Vietnamese EFL tertiary education"