4.1.1 Lan – Being lost and overwhelmed with work

The main reason why Lan dropped out of the course was that she felt stressed, unable to keep up with the pace of the class, and thus lost motivation to study. Lan describes her feelings with words like “stressful” (L/10), “lost”, “overwhelmed”, and “falling behind” (L/12). Lan rated her academic performance lower than that of other students and considered herself to be quite timid and lacked confidence in her academic ability. Lan was self-aware that she needed to be self-directed in her studies, so she tried to complete the assigned exercises by herself. However, when there was a problem that needed an explanation, Lan chose to remain silent and try to solve the problem herself.

Lan faced difficulties in completing the tasks given: “the amount of homework is too much: exercises in face-to-face classes, on MyELT and the extra homework” (L/22) assigned by teachers. What is more, the teacher did not correct the exercises on the system, but only assigned the exercises for students to complete. This lack of feedback made it difficult for Lan to maintain her interest in completing the exercises. For example, in paragraph writing that requires a wide range of vocabulary, Lan said that she did not have enough vocabulary. Although Lan can use Google Translate, she did not think her writing skills could be improved because she did not know “how to write, how to choose the right words” (L/44). Thus, she often skipped the exercises. She felt that “I don’t have anyone to help me, so I am behind and become more and more behind every day” (L/12). Lan gradually lost motivation and chose to give up.

4.1.2 Kim – Limited autonomy and choices for self-study; teachers need to be a good coach

For Kim, the reason for stopping the course was largely because the course had little opportunity to develop learner autonomy and provide choices and support for learners in the self-study phase. Kim commented that although “the self-study component (MyELT) helps students to actively study at any time at their convenience” (K/16), it did not meet his expectations. In his opinion, the self-study part “should be called supplementary exercise, but this program considers it a mandatory part for learners” (K/8). According to Kim, while studying with computer-based exercises, students must actively learn, self-check, and rewrite the correct sentences, with restricted teacher support for the self-study phase. The teacher role should focus on “assigning tasks and paying attention to student attendance on the computer system, following the percentage of online exercises completed”, but not on “correcting paragraph errors or the exercises on the platform”. Kim believes that the role of the teacher is important in supporting these self-study modules, acting as “a good coach in sports” (K/20).

4.1.3 Tan – Teaching is traditional and book-based and does not do justice to a learner-centred approach

The biggest obstacle for Tan is the traditional way of learning, which is not consistent with the nature of the course. The course focuses on learning new vocabulary and grammar sections in class, which he finds unnecessary for him. Tan said that with the internet, students can look up and study by themselves. Moreover, there are abundant exercises or supplementary materials online. For him, the learning content was “repetitive, and also boring” because “the content in the book and the homework exercises on the computer are almost the same” (T/16).

Tan claimed that, in “the 4.0 technology era” (T/20), teachers need to take advantage of the strengths of technology in teaching. The traditional way of learning – that is, teachers providing materials for students, students gathering in class, students listening and being called to give answers – takes time while making students passive. He believes that for writing, “learning to write online is more effective”.

According to Tan, even while teaching online, teachers still teach in the traditional way, which means “too much dependence on the textbook”. In fact, “there is a lot of teaching, explaining, and careful teaching about sentence structures”. “Specifically, for speaking, based on specific topics, teachers give exercises, then prepare vocabulary, then divide students into groups. The organization seem [sic] dated and has not promoted the strengths of the students” (T/28).

4.1.4 Mai – Feeling sidelined and isolated and fails to catch up with learning

Mai dropped out because she felt sidelined and isolated in the class. She admitted to having a poor connection with the teachers and other students; hence, the communication between them was insufficient and inefficient. For example, when she was late for class or could not complete learning tasks, she did not get enough support or attention from the teacher. She expected her teachers to show more concern for her performance: “The teacher does not have any feedback if I do not come to class or come late. If they see that I don’t do my homework, they think I’m lazy” (M/30). Her feeling of isolation also came from her classmates who did not communicate with her frequently: “In classes when I have to work in pairs or in groups, I notice that many of my friends don’t seem to like working with me” (M/40).

Further, Mai admitted that she failed to “keep up with the intensity” (M/36) of her study. She explicitly complained about the number of tasks given: “There are many homework exercises and many online self-practice exercises” (M/36). As a result, Mai constantly faced the feeling of guilt for not completing the heavy workload assigned by the teachers. She was not comfortable with that feeling: “it’s like I don’t cooperate with the teachers, so I feel embarrassed too” (M/32). Gradually, Mai lost interest in learning and developed a feeling of isolation and redundancy. She explained her disappointment when not getting enough emotional support: “I feel my mood is gradually decreasing, I am not excited to go to class anymore” (M/40).

4.1.5 Viet – Expectations for a more flexible model with relevant learning contents

Viet discontinued his study mainly because he found the learning time not suitable and not flexible enough. Viet’s expectation when enrolling in the course was to participate in asynchronous online learning in which students can learn at their own pace and when they are free. He was disappointed when he had to “follow a fixed schedule”, “study at fixed hours”, and “go to campus to sit for exams”, which he thought was “very inflexible” (V/32). He could describe what he wanted very clearly: “I like the type of study that allows us to self-study when we have free time, but I don’t like to be confined to the specific hours and content of each day” (V/40).

In addition, Viet was disappointed with the learning content and learning activities. He believed that the learning content was not practical enough in comparison to his needs: “I found the contents of the course was not what I expected. I want them to be more practical” (V/42). He believed that even when he completed all the tasks and exercises, it would not help much in improving his proficiency and meeting his needs. His need was “simply to be good at writing letters in English and reading documents and giving presentations” (V/48). As for the learning activities, Viet believed that many of them were irrelevant to his needs or did not meet his desire: “Many classroom activities make me feel that there are contents that do not match my needs, and I like to learn according to my own abilities and needs” (V/48). Later, he provided some examples of irrelevant activities, such as “learning speaking by recording” (V/56), “finding stress”, and “identifying incorrect pronunciation” (V/72).

In the following, we will present the six common themes identified across the five cases. We found four reasons for dropout that indicate what students miss: first, the lack of teacher support and feedback and, second, the lack of learner-centredness/autonomy. The lack of interactivity in online materials (third) and the lack of complementarity and integration of face-to-face and online components of the blend (fourth) refer to the course design, whereas the last two reasons, the importance of interaction (fifth) and relationship with peers and teachers (sixth), draw attention to the learning environment.

4.2.1 Lack of teacher support and feedback

Participants mentioned that the online homework section lacks teacher support, both in terms of academic and emotional support. For example, Kim commented, “teachers don’t understand how students actually learn on their own, how they complete the exercises and how their language has improved through those exercises”. Moreover, “once teachers do not grasp the reality of what students need, what is missing, what is wrong, they certainly cannot shape and correct”, and “teachers can hardly follow the development of students’ language to have reasonable adjustments to support students in the following lessons” (K/12). For online speaking, for example, he said, “I don’t know what my weak points are that need to be improved, what my strengths are that need to be promoted” (K/14). Although Lan agreed that teacher support in face-to-face classes is good, for the self-study component, she would like “a coach so that I can ask for advice whenever I need” (L/38). Tan shared the same needs, claiming that “what I need is better teacher support for the self-study phase” (T/30).

For the self-study phase on the online platform, “teachers only check to see if students have completed the exercises or not but not correct student’s homework”. That is why Tan considers this type of learning to be “formal” but not effective because teachers do not know the actual level of students to give timely support (T/10). Likewise, Kim also believes that the software is considered an attendance requirement, based on the number of assignments completed, which is not reasonable (K/16).

4.2.2 Lack of learner-centredness/autonomy

Some of the participants felt that there was a lack of learner-centredness in the blended English class, in particular because of the heavy reliance on the textbook and the computer software. Tan, in particular, found that the course’s reliance on prefabricated materials can stifle students’ creativity and curiosity to find things out for themselves. He also found that the traditional teacher-centred teaching style during class time did not do justice to the blended learning environment. He wants the teacher to guide students in their learning: “so what teachers need is to suggest and guide students to actively learn on their own” (T/20). Kim echoed these views when he expected the teacher to be a “good coach in sports” (K/20).

4.2.3 Lack of interactivity in online materials

Participants reported that online exercises are not interactive. For example, Lan said that most speaking exercises are in the form of automatic speech tasks, focusing on pronunciation practice. Lan added, “I sometimes repeat the sentences or sometimes the machine gives me a topic. I must speak myself and record” (L/34). Similarly, Tan commented that “the speaking and writing parts are limited, the topic corresponds well to the content learned in class, which is good, but the speaking part is full of repetition, like pronunciation practice, no interaction” (T/24). The organization of “the student speaks – the machine asks – the student repeats the available answers, mainly for pronunciation practice” (K/10) results in “non-responsive act”, or “autism” (L/28). Viet, similarly, expressed that he preferred an “online speaking software that can help learners interact with each other more”, the one that “has the same features as talking with real people” (V/56). Furthermore, the online materials do not give feedback. For example, Lan said, “Many exercises on the online system only give answers without explaining why it is right, or why it is wrong” (L/16). Mai said she no longer “pay[s] attention to right and wrong anymore”, because “right or wrong is just the answer”, and she does not know “what should be done to make it right” (M/34). It seems as if the lack of feedback in the online materials aggravates the perceived lack of teacher feedback and support.

These quotations reflect that, for most of the participants, the speaking skill suffers in the online self-study environment. The speaking exercises are described as “monotonous” (M/44), “boring” (K/14), and “not beneficial” (V/56). Furthermore, “there is no flexibility of dialogue, real communication” (T/24). Kim considers the speaking activities “the same as practicing English alone, without communicating with anyone”. In his viewpoint, it is “more [...] interesting when there is a dialogue, a conversation exchange with each other“ (K/14). In addition, Mai feels that “the speaking part in MyELT is not very supportive. Many times, the device does not pick up the sound, so I have to say it over and over” (M/42). Lan often skipped the activities because “the activities are not responsive” (L/28).

4.2.4 Lack of complementarity and integration of face to face and online

In addition, the cross-case analysis shows that Kim, Tan, and Lan complained about the combination of face to face and online. In general, participants think that the combination of online and face-to-face components lacks rationality and is not effective. The combination is closed and mandatory, so it is difficult to address learners’ different learning spaces because “the content is designed for the whole group of students” (T/18). Since Tan proclaimed himself a good learner, he expected to be allowed to choose what he prefers to learn, what to discard, and what he finds unnecessary. For example, Tan said that “I don’t need to learn a lot of reading skills because I can read on my own time. I like to write long essays with content, but not writing in simple sentences” (T/18).

Tan assumed that it is more reasonable to combine the two pairs of skills of writing and reading, listening and speaking. This echoes Kim’s viewpoint that “the structure of the lessons should be divided into groups of skills (reading and writing), (listening and speaking) for a complementary [sic]”. However, “writing and speaking skills are taught in face-to-face classes separately while listening and reading skills are in Zoom classes in this course. Sometimes it’s confusing. The arrangement of teaching in pairs, which is speaking and writing, listening, and reading, is convenient for implementation, but it is not really connected, lacks logic and rationality” (K/8). According to Kim, to combine the two forms of learning more effectively, the face-to-face percentage should be reduced to the maximum. The face-to-face component is designed for necessary parts, which the machine cannot replace. In fact, “if combined appropriately, this type of learning is interesting”, he said (K/24).

4.2.5 Importance of interaction

Some participants stressed the importance of face-to-face interaction. Face-to-face interaction plays an “essential part for communication” (T/30). They viewed the interaction in their classes as positive and active. In general, the classroom atmosphere is seen as dynamic, inspiring classroom interaction and enhancing conversation exchange. For example, Lan complimented, “the class members are also enthusiastic, so when studying together, the class is very fun, and everyone interacts with each other quite a lot” (L/22). Similarly, Mai found the learning is “more useful because students have opportunity to interact with teachers and other classmates more easily” (M/54), resulting in more teacher support in “correcting and explaining in detail if anyone asks”. Mai said she learned a great deal from “those corrections and explanations” (M/58). Kim shared that he found face-to-face learning effective, and thus highly appreciated it. He provided a positive experience of teacher support and feedback when he explained, “I have more interaction with the teacher and other students. When we say the wrong things or don’t know how to express ourselves properly, we will be guided directly by the teacher”. In his opinion, “it is necessary to have face-to-face, emotions, gestures, body language. If the exercises are more interactive for the learners, it is much better” (K/18).

Some of the participants agreed that the interaction via Zoom is limited; however, it can be effective to some extent. Lan observed her class as less interactive and “not as exciting as before [i.e. in the first weeks of the semester when there was regular face-to-face learning]” in Zoom lessons, especially speaking, which was perhaps due to “students not having the habit of interacting online” (L/8), and “opening their cameras”, and students being “shy, or have little vocabulary” (L/22), and “passive” (V/96). Lan feels like she is talking to strangers. Both Tan and Kim found that the interaction via Zoom is less effective since “it is impossible for teachers to frequently observe and certainly not having enough time to visit all groups in group-work activities” (T/22). Additionally, Tan, Viet, and Kim reported preferring more “real-time interaction” as it is “more beneficial” (V/50). According to Tan, the learning “lacks interaction via group work or discussion” after the synchronous class time (T/28). Viet also misses interaction outside class time”: “Teachers only explain during class, outside of class it’s not convenient to ask teachers” (V/50), so “I want to have some online software that can help learners interact with each other more (V/56)”.

4.2.6 Need for a relationship with peers and teachers

Participants underscored the relationship between teachers and students but admitted that it is difficult to achieve online. They all agreed that teachers are generally enthusiastic and friendly. For example, Mai sees her teachers are “open and joyful” (M/62). When there are students who are afraid to communicate, teachers often encourage them. “The relationship between teachers and students is neither hierarchical”, or “powerful” (V/92), so the learning is “quite comfortable, not stressful” (M/62). Furthermore, the good relationship can create friendship among members in the class, so that students “find it easier to talk” (M/58), or “feel more connected”, so when studying online, they “feel easier to interact” (T/26), which has “significant impact on the learning outcomes” (K/20).

However, the switch to remote learning because of COVID-19 impacted on the relationship between peers and teachers. Mai and Lan, who preferred face-to-face interaction, felt “less inclusive [sic]” in Zoom classes (L/22). Using Zalo helped to “strengthen the relationship between students and teachers” and “exchange information” (K/20). While it was perceived as useful for “administrative matters like announcement of class schedules, submission deadlines, or personal information exchange” (K/20), it also added much-needed “emotional support, making learners feel more connected, making friends, chatting with each other” (M/66).