1. Statement of the Problem

Le Quy Don Technical University is a multidisciplinary higher technical educational institution in which the teaching of foreign languages, in particular Russian, plays an important role in achieving the goals of international defense cooperation. Since the 1970s, the Ministry of National Defence and the Ministry of Education and Training of Vietnam have entrusted Le Quy Don Technical University with the language training of Vietnamese cadres and officers prior to their studies in the Russian Federation. Every year, about 150 preparatory-course students study for 450 instructional hours with the aim of reaching Level B1 of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR), corresponding to Level 3/6 of Vietnam’s National Foreign Language Proficiency Framework [Thông tư số 01/2014/TT-BGDĐT, 2014; Council of Europe, 2020].

However, teaching practice shows that these students encounter numerous difficulties: the Cyrillic alphabet differs entirely from the Latin alphabet of Vietnamese; the inflectional grammatical system, especially the case system, is complex; language practice is lacking owing to residence in boarding conditions; students tend toward natural-science and technical disciplines; and access to printed materials and the Internet is limited at the initial stage. These difficulties negatively affect learning motivation and learning abilities, which leads to a decline in learning outcomes at later stages.

Learning motivation is an important psychological factor that directly influences the effectiveness of the perception and application of knowledge. According to Schiefele, interest is a subject-specific motivational orientation that includes value-related and emotional components and promotes deeper processing of learning material (1991). Therefore, the search for methods of stimulating interest in learning Russian in the specific conditions of Le Quy Don Technical University is a pressing task.

2. Research Content

2.1. Theoretical Foundations

Active teaching methods are learner-oriented methods and techniques in which the learner actively participates in constructing knowledge through activity based on inquiry, cooperation and analysis [Prince, M., 2004]. According to Nguyen Van Cuong, they aim to activate learners’ cognitive activity, while the teacher’s role shifts from transmitting knowledge to organizing, guiding and unlocking learners’ potential [Nguyen Van Cuong, & Meier, B., 2010]. Theoretically, they are rooted in L. S. Vygotsky’s social constructivism (the zone of proximal development) and D. Kolb’s experiential learning theory [Vygotsky, L. S., 1999; Kolb, D. A., 1984]; in foreign language teaching they are closely connected with the communicative approach [Kryuchkova, L. S., & Moshchinskaya, N. V., 2017; Shchukin, A. N., 2017].

Learning motivation is a positive psychological state manifested in concentration of attention, effort and the desire to continue learning activity. The model of Hidi and Renninger describes the transition from triggered situational interest to stable individual interest [Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. A., 2006]. Active teaching methods affect motivation through the following mechanisms: increasing the sense of autonomy and competence in accordance with self-determination theory [Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L., 2000]; creating a positive social context through cooperative learning [Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T., 2009]; and reducing language anxiety through game-based activity and meaningful interaction [Horwitz, E. K., Horwitz, M. B., & Cope, J., 1986]. These mechanisms correspond to the psychological characteristics of students in boarding conditions, where disciplinary pressure may create psychological barriers.

2.2. Research Methods

The study used a quasi-experimental design with a control group, combined with literature analysis and a quantitative questionnaire survey. The participants were preparatory-course students of Le Quy Don Technical University over two consecutive academic years: the control group K60 (2024–2025), taught by traditional methods, and the experimental group K61 (2025–2026), in whose instruction active teaching techniques were integrated (Table 1).

Table 1

Information on the study sample

Learning motivation was measured by a questionnaire of 15 criteria on a five-point Likert scale (1: Strongly disagree — 5: Strongly agree) distributed across three subscales: A (Attitude toward learning activity and learning awareness, TC1–TC4); B (Degree of active participation in class, TC5–TC9); C (Independent learning activity outside class hours, TC10–TC15). Reliability was tested by Cronbach’s Alpha in accordance with Nunnally & Bernstein (1994): ≥0.70 — acceptable, ≥0.80 — good, ≥0.90 — excellent. The data were analyzed using the Independent Samples t-test (p<0.05) and Cohen’s d (0.2 — small, 0.5 — medium, 0.8 — large) (Cohen, J., 1988). The scale showed high reliability: α=0.912; A=0.861; B=0.886; C=0.841. The correlation coefficients of the criteria with the overall scale ranged from 0.631 to 0.783 (>0.30), and no criterion was excluded (Table 2).

Table 2

Results of reliability testing of the learning motivation scale (Cronbach’s Alpha)

2.3. Results and Discussion

The experimental group K61 showed a significantly higher mean score on the overall scale (M=4.13 ±0.52) than K60 (M=3.05 ±0.62; t=14.27, p<0.001, d=1.31 — large effect). Statistically significant differences (p<0.001) were found on all 15 criteria and all three subscales, with the greatest increase on subscale C (ΔM=1.14, d=1.29) (Table 3). Cohen’s d reached a large effect size (d ≥ 1.17) on all subscales, which confirms the practical effectiveness of active teaching methods, and not merely their statistical significance.

Table 3

Summary results of the independent-samples Student’s t-test and Cohen’s d by subscale

The distribution by level shows that in group K61 73.9 % of students reached a high/very high level of learning motivation, compared with 31.7 % in K60; the share of students with a low/very low level decreased from 29.6 % to 6.5 %.

Taking into account the students’ characteristics and teaching conditions, the study proposes eight techniques, each with a theoretical rationale and a simple implementation procedure [Kryuchkova, L. S., & Moshchinskaya, N. V., 2017; Shchukin, A. N., 2017; Prince, M., 2004]: educational game (selecting a game, 10–15 minutes, explaining the rules, conducting, summing up); mind map (non-linear note-taking for Russian vocabulary and grammar: central topic, first- and second-level branches); question posing (clear questions appropriate to the learners’ level); role-play (setting the situation, group script, presentation, discussion); flexible grouping (preventing the formation of permanent groups); one-minute paper (at the end of the lesson, 1 important point and 1 question); active writing (paraphrasing and summarizing, training written speech); and video material analysis (5–20-minute clips in Russian, notes and discussion). Their objectives, timing and priority skills are summarized in Table 4.

Table 4

Summary characteristics of the eight active teaching techniques: objectives, timing and priority skills

The results are consistent with studies and methodological works that emphasize the importance of variety of tasks, visual support, independent work and speech interaction in teaching Russian as a foreign language [Kryuchkova, L. S., & Moshchinskaya, N. V., 2017; Shchukin, A. N., 2017; Luu, T. T. M., 2018; Prince, M., 2004]. Subscale C, which characterizes independent learning activity outside class hours, showed significant improvement despite a low initial level, which indicates a stable influence on the formation of awareness of the value of the Russian language.

3. Conclusion

The study confirms the value and effectiveness of applying active teaching techniques in teaching Russian at the initial stage to preparatory-course students at Le Quy Don Technical University. The 15-criterion scale is highly reliable (α=0.912), and learning motivation in group K61 was significantly higher (d=1.31). Active teaching methods possess high practical applicability and effectiveness even under conditions of limited technological resources and a limited language environment in boarding conditions. To achieve a sustainable effect, the teacher needs to systematically include active teaching techniques in lesson planning, select them in accordance with the objectives of each lesson, and ensure coordinated interaction between the teacher’s activity and the learners’ learning activity. The study supplements the experimental base for applying active learning theory in specialized foreign language teaching, in particular elementary-level Russian language teaching in Vietnam.

References:

1. Vygotsky, L. S. (1999). Thinking and Speech (5th ed., rev.). Moscow: Labirint. 352 p. (in Russian)
2. Kryuchkova, L. S., & Moshchinskaya, N. V. (2017). Practical Methodology of Teaching Russian as a Foreign Language (7th ed., reprint). Moscow: FLINTA. 477 p. (in Russian)
3. Shchukin, A. N. (2017). Methodology of Teaching Russian as a Foreign Language (4th ed., reprint). Moscow: FLINTA. 509 p. (in Russian)
4. Bộ Giáo dục và Đào tạo. (2014). Thông tư số 01/2014/TT-BGDĐT ngày 24 tháng 01 năm 2014 ban hành Khung năng lực ngoại ngữ 6 bậc dùng cho Việt Nam [Circular No. 01/2014/TT-BGDĐT of 24 January 2014 promulgating the 6-level Foreign Language Proficiency Framework for Vietnam]. Hà Nội. (in Vietnamese)
5. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 567 p.
6. Council of Europe. (2020). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment — Companion Volume. Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publishing.
7. Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. A. (2006). The four-phase model of interest development. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 111–127. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4102_4
8. Horwitz, E. K., Horwitz, M. B., & Cope, J. (1986). Foreign language classroom anxiety. The Modern Language Journal, 70(2), 125–132. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540–4781.1986.tb05256.x
9. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2009). An educational psychology success story: Social interdependence theory and cooperative learning. Educational Researcher, 38(5), 365–379. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X09339057
10. Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
11. Luu, T. T. M. (2018). Overcoming the difficulties in teaching and learning Russian writing skill. The University of Danang — Journal of Science and Technology, 4(125), 16–20.
12. Nguyễn Văn Cường, & Meier, B. (2010). Một số vấn đề chung về đổi mới phương pháp dạy học ở trường trung học phổ thông [Some general issues of renewing teaching methods in upper secondary schools]. Berlin: Machmit Verlag. (in Vietnamese)
13. Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric Theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. 752 p.
14. Prince, M. (2004). Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(3), 223–231. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168–9830.2004.tb00809.x
15. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003–066X.55.1.68
16. Schiefele, U. (1991). Interest, learning, and motivation. Educational Psychologist, 26(3–4), 299–323. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.1991.9653136