Abstract :

The disconnect between formal language instruction and real-world communicative competence remains a core challenge in global EFL education. This convergent mixed-methods study examines an innovative experiential learning model at the TSES English Club in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam, where university students practise their English skills via structured, authentic interactions with international tourists in public spaces. The quantitative data, collected over an 18-week intervention period, comprised pre/post-test scores of 11 students assessed using a 100-point rubric, alongside student post-intervention perception surveys from 71 students and 7 expert facilitators. The qualitative data, gathered via semi-structured interviews with 3 facilitators and 5 students, underwent reflexive thematic analysis and were supplemented by ethnographic observation. Findings reveal significant practical communication score gains (t(10)=24.06, p<.001, d=7.25), indicating an extremely large effect. Post-intervention surveys indicated over 77% of students improved across all criteria. Thematic analysis revealed three primary catalysts: authentic communicative pressure, intrinsic motivation from meaningful cross-cultural exchange, and peer scaffolding with emotional support. Three principal barriers emerged: accent-triggered anxiety, cultural and pragmatic misunderstandings, and environmental noise. The study theoretically operationalises experiential learning and intercultural competence frameworks within this non-institutional, tourism-driven context. Practically, it offers ten evidence-based, actionable recommendations to maximise pedagogical impact for language clubs.

---

Keywords :

communicative performance, cross-cultural communication, English club, Experiential learning, international tourists, mixed-methods research.

---

References :

1. Bachman, F., & Palmer, A. S. (2010). Language assessment in practice. Oxford University Press.
2. Boussoulaim, , & Madoui, A. (2025). Exploring the role of foreign language clubs
3. (Master’s thesis).
4. Braun, , & Clarke, V. (2022). Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 18(3), 328-344.
5. Byram, (2021). Teaching and assessing intercultural communicative competence (2nd ed.). Multilingual Matters.
6. Canale, , & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches. Applied Linguistics, 1(1), 1-47.
7. Chomsky, (1965). Aspects of the theory of syntax. MIT Press.
8. Cohen, (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum.
9. Creswell, W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design (5th ed.). Sage.
10. Do, H. M. (2026). An ESP needs analysis for hotel front desk staff. English for Specific
11. Field, (2024). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS (6th ed.). Sage. Flick, U. (2022). An introduction to qualitative research (7th ed.). Sage.
12. Hammersley, , & Atkinson, P. (2007). Ethnography: Principles in practice (3rd ed.). Routledge.
13. Hidayati, , et al. (2023). Factors affecting English performance in tourist and non-tourist areas. Studies in English Language and Education, 10(2), 704-722.
14. Horwitz, K., Horwitz, M. B., & Cope, J. (1986). Foreign language classroom anxiety. The Modern Language Journal, 70(2), 125-132.
15. Hymes, (1972). On communicative competence. In Sociolinguistics (pp. 269-293). Penguin.
16. Kolb, A. (2015). Experiential learning (2nd ed.). Pearson.
17. Kolb, Y., & Kolb, D. A. (2017). Experiential learning theory as a guide for experiential educators. Experience-Based Learning Systems.
18. Kramsch, (2021). Language as symbolic power. Cambridge University Press.
19. Lantolf, J. P., & Poehner, M. E. (2014). Sociocultural theory and the pedagogical imperative. Routledge.
20. Larsen-Freeman, D. (2023). Conceptualizing language education. In The Routledge handbook of applied linguistics.
21. Lincoln, S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage.

 

22. Luu, M. V., Do, T. N., & Ngo, N. T. D. (2024). English-speaking barriers. TNU Journal of Science and Technology, 229(12), 468-476.
23. Nguyen, H., & Malabarba, T. (2024). Developing interactional competence at the workplace.
24. Nguyen, H. T. D., Nguyen, N. T. N., & Kieu, Q. M. (2024). English extracurriculars and anxiety levels. Cogent Education, 11(1).
25. Nguyen, V., & Habók, A. (2021). Vietnamese non-English-major students’ motivation. Heliyon, 7(4).
26. Patton, Q. (2015). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (4th ed.). Sage.
27. Tran, (2024). Teaching intercultural communicative competence in English for tourism classes. Hue University Journal of Science, 133(6B).
28. Tran, T., & Vi, T. T. (2022). Difficulties encountered by students in speaking English. International Journal of Social Science and Human Research, 5(3), 1013-1019.
29. Trang, T. T., & Phuong, V. T. (2023). Needs analysis about intercultural communicative competence. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 52(6), 2599-2620.
30. Trinh, N. B., & Pham, D. T. T. (2021). Challenges in speaking classrooms. Vietnam Journal of Education, 5(3), 37-42.
31. Van, V. T. H. (2018). An investigation into English language use in the Vietnamese hospitality industry. HO CHI MINH CITY OPEN UNIVERSITY JOURNAL OF SCIENCE, 8(2), 14-22.
32. VanPatten, , & Williams, J. (Eds.). (2014). Theories in second language acquisition (2nd ed.). Routledge.
33. Vietnam National Administration of (2025, January 7). Vietnam tourism completes growth targets.
34. Vy, , Ngoc, D., & Duyen, N. (2024). English speaking barriers. TNU Journal of Science and Technology, 229(12), 468-476.
35. Vygotsky, S. (1978). Mind in society. Harvard University Press.
36. World Medical (2013). Declaration of Helsinki. JAMA, 310(20), 2191-2194.
37. Xu, , & bt. Shapii, A. (2025). Exploring cross-cultural communication challenges. Frontiers in Psychology, 16.
38. Zainal, A. G. (2022). Cultural familiarity, foreign language speaking skill, and foreign language anxiety. Education Research International, 2022.