AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE EFFECTS OF IMMEDIATE FEEDBACK VERSUS DELAYED FEEDBACK ON EFL STUDENTS’ SPEAKING PERFORMANCE

0
MINITRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING
VINH UNIVERSITY

LE THI NHAT LE

AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE EFFECTS OF
IMMEDIATE FEEDBACK VERSUS DELAYED
FEEDBACK ON EFL STUDENTS’ SPEAKING
PERFORMANCE

Field: Theory and Methodology of English Language Teaching
Code: 60.14.01.11

MASTER’S THESIS IN EDUCATION
Supervisor: Dr. Tran Thi Ngoc Yen

Nghe An, 2017


i
STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP
I hereby acknowledge that this study is my own work. The data and findings
discussed in the thesis are true, used with permission, and have not been published
elsewhere.
NgheAn, August 1st, 2017
Author

Le ThiNhat Le

ii
ABSTRACT
Feedback techniques have been considered as one of the major factors deciding
the success of speaking performance. Research in this area has concentrated on the
effects of immediate feedback and delayed feedback on students’ speed improvement,
but not on comparing the effects of the two techniques on students’ fluency and
accuracy. This study aims to examine the effects of the immediate feedback versus
delayed feedback technique on EFL high school student’s speaking competence. In
the experiment, a 6-week-speaking course was delivered to two groups. One group
was taught with immediate feedback and the other was taught with delayed feedback.
A pre-test and a post-test of speaking were administered and the participants’ fluency
and accuracy were measured. After having the six speaking sessions, the
participantswho were taught with the technique, were supposed to speak with or
without the teacher’s interruption and suggestions. Their speaking competence was
assessed and their achievements were recorded. A comparison between the average
total score of six sessions for both groups and the comparison between the average
scores of the last session and the average scores of the first session were made. The
average of the second half sessions and the average scores of the first half sessions by
both groups were also compared. It was found that both immediate feedback technique
and delayed feedback helped improve accuracy. However, the immediate feedback had
greater positive effects on accuracy than the delayed feedback. The results of the
research also showed that the immediate feedback hindered the participants’ fluency
while the delayed feedback enhanced it.


iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I gratefully acknowledge the encouragement and support of many individuals in
assisting me to accomplish this study.

First of all, I would like to express my deepest thanks to my beloved supervisor
Dr. Tran Thi Ngoc Yen for her valuable time, suggestions, guidance, and assistance in
this study. Without her help, the thesis would not have been completed.
I would also like to thank the students of the classes I taught in order to collect
information for my research. Without their help, this study could not have been
successful.
Finally, my thanks go to my colleagues, friends and especially my beloved
family. I feel greatly indebted to them for their essential help and encouragement.


iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP.............................................................................i
ABSTRACT..............................................................................................................ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS.....................................................................................iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS.........................................................................................iv
LIST OF TABLES...................................................................................................vii
LIST OF FIGURES..................................................................................................ix
CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION....................................................................1

1.1 Rationale.............................................................................................................. 1
1.2 Aims of the study.................................................................................................2
1.3 Research questions..............................................................................................2
1.4 Scope of the study...............................................................................................3
1.5 Method of the study.............................................................................................3
1.6 Thesis design.......................................................................................................3
CHAPTER 2

THEORETICAL BACKGROUND...............................................4

2.1 Speaking skill......................................................................................................4
2.1.1 Definition of the speaking skill.........................................................................4
2.1.2 Elements of speaking skill................................................................................5
2.1.3 Speaking competence vs speaking performance...............................................6
2.2 Assessing speaking ability...................................................................................7
2.2.1 Indicators of speaking ability............................................................................7
2.2.2 Fluency vs. accuracy in speaking assessment...................................................8
2.2.3 Rubrics for assessing EFL speaking ability....................................................10
2.3 Teaching Speaking.............................................................................................11
2.3.1 Teaching L1 speaking skill.............................................................................12
2.3.2 Teaching speaking to EFL learners.................................................................12
2.3.2.1 General outline of a speaking lesson............................................................14
2.3.2.2 Common techniques and methods...............................................................15
2.4 Feedback in teaching.........................................................................................18


v
2.4.1 Overview of feedback in teaching..................................................................18
2.4.2 Definition of feedback in language teaching..................................................18
2.4.3 Roles of feedback in language teaching..........................................................19
2.4.4 Types of feedback in language teaching.........................................................20
2.4.4.1 Immediate feedback.....................................................................................20
2.4.4.2 Delayed feedback........................................................................................20
2.5 Feedback in EFL speaking class........................................................................21
2.5.1 Immediate feedback in teaching speaking......................................................21
2.5.2 Delayed feedback in teaching speaking..........................................................22
2.5.3 Immediate feedback vs. delayed feedback in teaching speaking....................22
CHAPTER 3

METHODOLOGY...............................................................23

3.1 Research questions............................................................................................23
3.2 Participants........................................................................................................23
3.3 Materials............................................................................................................24
3.3.1 The general English test..................................................................................24
3.3.2 Pre-test and Post-test......................................................................................25
3.3.3 Textbook.........................................................................................................26
3.3.4 Lesson plans...................................................................................................27
3.4 Procedure...........................................................................................................28
CHAPTER 4

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION.............................................30

4.1 Results...............................................................................................................30
4.1.1 General English results...................................................................................30
4.1.2 Pre-test results................................................................................................31
4.1.2.1 Fluency........................................................................................................31
4.1.2.2 Accuracy......................................................................................................33
4.1.3 Post-test results...............................................................................................35
4.1.3.1 Fluency........................................................................................................35
4.1.3.2 Accuracy......................................................................................................37
4.1.4 The increases the two groups made................................................................38


vi
4.1.4.1 Fluency........................................................................................................38
4.1.4.2 Accuracy......................................................................................................42
4.1.5 The two group’s speaking performance during the treatment.........................45

4.1.5.1 Fluency........................................................................................................45
4.1.5.2 Accuracy......................................................................................................47
4.2 Discussion.........................................................................................................51
4.2.1 Fluency...........................................................................................................51
4.2.2 Accuracy.........................................................................................................54
CHAPTER 5

CONCLUSION............................................................................56

5.1 Conclusion.........................................................................................................56
5.2 Limitations........................................................................................................57
5.3 Further research.................................................................................................58
REFERENCES........................................................................................................59
APPENDIX A.........................................................................................................64
APPENDIX B.........................................................................................................69
APPENDIX C.........................................................................................................74
APPENDIX D.........................................................................................................79
APPENDIX E..........................................................................................................80
APPENDIX F..........................................................................................................81
APPENDIX G.........................................................................................................82
APPENDIX H.........................................................................................................93
APPENDIX I.........................................................................................................102
APPENDIX J.........................................................................................................104
APPENDIX K.......................................................................................................106


vii

LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1 Speaking Assessment Rubric...................................................................10

Table 2.2 General outline of a speaking lesson........................................................14
Table 3.1 The speaking topics of sixteen units in Tieng Anh 11..............................26
Table 3.2 Time proportion for the speaking lessons.................................................29
Table 4.1 The average total scores and standard deviations of general English test in
the two experimental groups....................................................................................30
Table 4.2 Means and standard deviations of the two experimental group’s results on
fluency on the pre-test.............................................................................................32
Table 4.3 Means and standard deviations of the two experimental group’s results on
accuracy on the pre-test...........................................................................................33
Table 4.4 Means and standard deviations of types of errors on the pre-test.............35
Table 4.5 Means and standard deviations of the two experimental groups’ results on
fluency on the post-test............................................................................................35
Table 4.6 Means and standard deviations of the two experimental groups’ results on
accuracy on the post-test..........................................................................................37
Table 4.7 Means and standard deviations of types of errors on the post-test...........38
Table 4.8 Means and standard deviations of the increase two groups made on fluency. . .38
Table 4.9 The increase difference between the post-test scores and the pre-test scores
on fluency by all participants (p) in both groups.....................................................40
Table 4.10 Summary of pre-test and post-test speeds and speed increases for both groups40
Table 4.11 Means and standard deviations of

the increase two groups made on

accuracy................................................................................................................... 42
Table 4.12 The increase difference between the post-test scores and the pre-test scores
on accuracy by all participants (p) in both groups...................................................43
Table 4.13 Summary of accuracy increases for both groups....................................44
Table 4.14 Numbers of participants with a decrease and participants with no decrease
in accuracy............................................................................................................... 44

viii
Table 4.15 Means and standard deviations of the two groups’ speaking fluency during
the treatment............................................................................................................45
Table 4.16 Mean scores in the 6 sessions by all participants (P).............................45
Table 4.17 The increase difference between the last session scores and the first session
scores by all participants (p) in both groups............................................................46
Table 4.18 Means and standard deviations of the two groups’ speaking accuracy during
the treatment............................................................................................................47
Table 4.19 Mean scores in the 6 sessions by all participants (P).............................48
Table 4.20 Mean scores of all participants for both groups.....................................49
Table 4.21Comparison of the two groups’ results on types of errors.......................49
Table 4.22 The increase difference between the last session scores and the first session
scores by all participants (P) in both groups............................................................50
Table 4.23 Summary of the increase levels of all participants for both groups........51
Table 4.24 Results by the participant who made improvement................................52
Table 4.25 Means and standard deviations of the first three tests and the last three tests
of the participant A7................................................................................................52
Table 4.26 Results by the participants who made no improvement in either the last
minus 1st score.........................................................................................................53
Table 4.27 Means and standard deviations of the two participants B5 and B6 on the
first three tests and the last three tests......................................................................54
Table 4.28 Means and standard deviations of the two participants A4 and B13 on the
first three tests and the last three tests......................................................................55


ix

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 4.1 Bar chart of the general English test scores for both groups.......................30

Figure 4.2 Pie chart of the general English test scores for both groups........................31
Figure 4.3 Bar chart of the pre-test results on fluency for both groups......................32
Figure 4.5 Bar chart of pre-test results on accuracy for both groups............................34
Figure 4.6 Pie chart of pre-test results on accuracy for both groups............................34
Figure 4.7 Bar chart of post-test results on fluency for both groups............................36
Figure 4.9 Bar chart of pre-test results on accuracy for both groups............................37
..................................................................................................................................... 37
Figure 4.10 Pie chart of post-test results on accuracy for both groups.........................37
Figure 4.11 Bar chart of pre-test results and post-test results on fluency for both groups.......39
Figure 4.12 Bar chart of pre-test results and post-test results on accuracy for both
groups.......................................................................................................................... 42
Figure 4.13Progress chart of participant A7/increase...................................................52
Figure 4.14 Progress chart of participants B5 and B6/decrease...................................53
Figure 4.15 Progress chart of participants A4 and B13/ increase.................................55


1
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Rationale
According to Brown and Yule (1983), spoken language production is often
considered one of the most difficult aspects of language learning. In reality, many
language learners find it difficult to express themselves in spoken language in the
target language. Ur (1996) stated that speaking seems to be the most important skill
of all the four skills (listening, speaking, reading and writing) because people who
know a language are usually referred to as speakers of that language. The major
goal of all English language teaching should be to give learners the ability to use
English effectively, fluently and accurately in communication (Davies & Pearse,
1998). However, not all language learners after many years studying English can
communicate fluently and accurately because they lack necessary knowledge.
In attempts to help teachers train their students speak better, numerous

researchers such as Lightbown and Spada (1999), Swain (1985), Long (1996)
focused on the ways of giving feedback on students’ speaking performance. Swain
(1985) also suggested that treatment of errors helps students learn better, whether
the feedback is explicit or implicit. Recasts as a way to provide learners with
feedback have also drawn considerable attention. Long (1996) believed feedback
can facilitate learning a second language. The findings of a host of other researchers
are also in line with what Long says. Some though have focused on the different
modes of corrective feedback and wished to find out which of the different methods
of giving feedback employed by the teacher is/are more fruitful.
In fact, English teaching and learning has been paid much attention to, which
is shown by remarkable changes in curriculum as well as teaching methods i.e. the
introduction of speaking skill in the new textbook to Lower Secondary, Upper
Secondary schools and the adoption of Communicative Language Teaching (CLT)
which “emphasizes communicative competence” (Richards & Rodgers, 1986, p.35).
As the matter of fact, speaking skill, “the most important aspect of learning a
second language” (Nunan, 1989, p.14), is still a challenge for Vietnamese learners.
Although teachers, in CLT approach, no longer play a dominant role in class, their


2
guidance and support have always been of beneficial help to students. Especially,
teachers’ feedback provision in response to students’ mistakes as well as good
performance is of significant importance. Considered, “an integral part of the
lesson” (Swain, 1985, p.4), teacher’s feedback is always in bad need, like
Thornbury (2000, p. 267) wrote “to teach is to provide feedback”. Teachers’
feedback falls into written and oral type and it can be delivered with or without
delay. Notably, oral feedback is the most common occurrence in classroom and
often employed in speaking lessons. Hence, studying on immediate and delayed
oral feedback is very practical. In addition, providing the correct answer as
feedback after students’ response further improve students’ speaking performance

(Butler, Karpicke, & Roediger, 2007; Butler, Karpicke, & Roediger, 2008; Butler
&Roediger, 2008). The correct answer to a question may be presented immediately
after the question is answered or after a subsequent delay.
Even though teachers’ feedback has been the subject of numerous studies,
most of them tackled the matter of immediate feedback only or delayed feedback
only. Work on contrasting immediate feedback versus delayed feedback in speaking
lessons is quite small in number. This indicates a need to examine the effects of
immediate feedback versus delayed feedback on EFL students’ speaking
performance. The study is expected to make a contribution to teaching and
learning English as a foreign language in Vietnam.
1.2 Aims of the study
This study aims at finding out the effectiveness of the two ways of giving
feedback to students’ mistakes in speaking lessons: immediate feedback and
delayed feedback. The findings of the research are expected to enrich the literature
in feedback in language teaching and EFL teachers to prove their teaching quality.
1.3 Research questions
The study seeks to answer the following research questions:
1) How does immediate feedback, compared to delayed feedback, affect EFL
high school students’ speaking fluency?


3
2) How does immediate feedback, compared to delayed feedback, affect EFL
high school students’ speaking accuracy?
1.4 Scope of the study
The study only focused on using immediate and delayed feedback to improve
English speaking skills for 11th grade students at Quang Ninh High School in Quang
Binh province. This study was set to investigate the effects of these two ways of
giving feedback on helping students to develop their speaking skill. Fluency and
accuracy are the two aspects examined in this study.

1.5 Method of the study
The main method employed in this study is experimental. All comments,
remarks, recommendations and conclusion were based on the data analysis. The
combination of different instruments used in this research helped to gain reliable
data.
1.6 Thesis design
The thesis consists of five chapters:
Chapter 1 presents the rationale and the overview of the thesis.
Chapter 2 is the literature review, speaking skill, assessing speaking ability,
teaching speaking and feedback in teaching are discussed.
Chapter 3 presents the methodology of the study. In this chapter, the
participants, materials and procedure are described in detail.
Chapter 4 deals with the findings and discussion after analyzing the data of
the experiment.
Chapter 5 contains the implications and suggestions.


4
CHAPTER 2. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
This chapter reviews the literature related to feedback.
2.1 Speaking skill
2.1.1 Definition of the speaking skill
It cannot be denied that speaking is the vital skill and the key to
communication and seems much harder than other skills. English is spoken all over
the world as an international language for people’s interaction purpose. Without
speaking, communication will become as silent as a grave.
Different people use the term “speaking” in different ways. According to the
Oxford Dictionary of Current English (2009, p. 414), speaking is “the action of
conveying information or expressing one’s thoughts and feelings in spoken
language”. According to Burn and Joyce (1997), speaking is an interactive process

of constructing meaning that involves producing, receiving and processing
information. Its form and meaning are dependent on the context in which it occurs,
including the participants themselves, their collective experience, the physical
environment, and the purposes for speaking. Swain (1985) defined speaking as to
utter words or articulate sounds, as human beings to express thought by words, as
the organs may be so obstructed that a man may not be able to speak. Chaney
(1998, p.13), however, considered speaking a process: “speaking is the process of
building and sharing meaning through the use of verbal or non-verbal symbols in a
variety of contexts”. Sharing the same viewpoint, Florez (1999, p. 1) added that
speaking is an “interactive” process, which consists of three main stages
“producing, receiving and processing information.” In language teaching and
learning, speaking is considered a skill to practice and master. In this light, Nunan
(2003, p. 48) put it that “speaking is the productive oral skill. It consists of
producing systematic verbal utterance to convey meaning.” Also considering
speaking as a skill, both Bygate (1987) and Hilferty (2000) reached the same
conclusion about the distinction between knowledge and skill in speaking lessons.
Bygate (1987, p. 3) considered speaking as crucial in the teaching of speaking.
Indeed, to be a good learner of speaking, studying knowledge of grammar,


5
vocabulary, pronunciation, intonation, etc. is not enough but the skill to use this
knowledge to communicate successfully is indispensable. Hilferty (2000)stated that
speaking is also understood is the productive skill in the oral mode. It, like the oral
skills, is more complicated than it seems at first and involves more than just
pronouncing words.
In conclusion, there are different concepts of speaking, i.e. speaking as an
action, a process and a skill. In this study, the term “speaking” will be used to refer
to a skill related to language teaching and learning process.
2.1.2 Elements of speaking skill

Fluency and accuracy are two important aspects of speaking performance.
The term “fluency” is widely used in language pedagogy and “fluent” is regularly
appeared in language testing and assessment. It seems that the meaning of fluency is
easily understood, however fluency is a construct with various definition and
applied to reading, listening and writing as well as speaking. In oral production, its
relationship to specific aspects of speech production (pronunciation, intonation and
hesitation) is dependent upon the definition of fluency that one chooses to work
with. Fillmore (1979, p. 93) defined four abilities that might be subsumed under the
term of fluency, the first of which is the ability to talk at length with few pauses.
The three other abilities include the ability to produce the sentences coherently and
semantically, the ability to have appropriate expressions in a wide range of context,
and finally is the ability to be creative and imaginative in language use. Nation
(1989) also provided three aspects of fluency: the speed and flow of language
production, the degree of control of language items i.e pausing, rhythm,
pronunciation and stress, and the way of content interrupting. So far, the definition
of fluency is developed into two main categories. One is called the narrow approach
(Lemon, 2000), which refers to the speaking speed and smoothness of the language
delivery.
The second aspect of speaking performance is accuracy. Accuracy is one of
the most important criteria to measure one’s linguistic ability and to shelter
language users from communication breakdowns. According to Richards (1992, p.


6
31), accuracy concerns “the ability to produce grammatically correct sentences.”.
In other words, accuracy in language means grammatical accuracy only.
Nevertheless, in Thornbury (2000), the terms “accuracy” seems to cover more than
that. Specifically, speaking English accurately means doing without or with few
errors on not only grammar but vocabulary and pronunciation, as well. He also set
the clear scale for assessment of accuracy. In the grammar field, students use correct

words order, tenses, tense agreement, etc. Students do not leave out articles,
prepositions, or difficult tenses. Besides, vocabulary is also concerned. Students
have a range of vocabulary that corresponds to the syllabus year list and uses words you
have taught. Pronunciation is one of the most important parts in a speech, most
people can understand students’ speaking easily if they have good pronunciation.
Along similar lines, Dedmon (1967, p. 23) defined accuracy as “the ability to use
correct forms in which utterances do not contain errors affecting phonological,
syntactic, semantic and discourse features of the language”. Many scholars like
Hemmens (2011) and Cotter (2013) have come up with the recommendation that
accuracy should be introduced first in the beginners levels and fluency comes along
as the learner progress. The reason being is that, as learners do not have much
vocabulary and knowledge of the language in the beginning, they are not really able
to engage in a lengthy conversation and thus, they should be first taught a few
basics and how to get them right and accuracy. For example, they will be taught
how to greet and reply greetings, how to ask for directions and also the present and
past tenses. Repetition is needed in the early stage as it will help learners to
remember and be familiar with the language. Once students get hold of the basic,
they will be wanting for more, they speak faster than before and this is when
fluency is at its early development. Students will need more speaking practice so
activities like public speaking, role play and group interaction should be
encouraged. Speakers who are in the advanced level will have perfect fluency and
this is when the focus is shifted again to accuracy.
2.1.3 Speaking competence vs speaking performance
Chastain (1988) showed that language competence is a term which includes


7
the linguistics or grammatical competence, discourse competence, sociolinguistics
competence and what might be called as textual competence. Language competence
refers to the knowledge of a language, cognitive aspect in learning a language, and

of course the ability to use that language to produce meaningful production and
language performance. In this light, Brown (2004, p. 15) believes that competence
is used to describe the learner´s capacity to produce a language.
Language performance can be realized by the meaningfulness of the
students’ classroom activities, assignment and task as the implementation and
application of language competence they have as a result of learning the language
grammatical rule, structure and vocabulary.
If the reality tells that English competence becomes the main goal of English
teaching and learning with lack of special attention of English performance. This
term is specified for speaking skills, it would approximate the language theory
refers to the structural view (Richards, 2001, p. 17) that language is a system of
structurally related element of coding of meaning. The target language learning is
seen to be the mastery of element of this system which is generally defined in terms
of phonological units, grammatical units, grammatical operations and lexical items.
Chomsky’s competence theory/ linguistics theory deals primarily with abstract
grammatical knowledge/ability the speaker poses that enable them to produce the
grammatically correct sentences in language (Richards,2001, p. 70). Chomsky’s
theory of transformational grammar proposed that fundamental theories of language
derived from innate aspect of the mind and the students learn underlie
“competence”. These theories that underline the English teaching as a foreign
language focusing on the structure and grammar as the essential competence which
students should master first.
2.2 Assessing speaking ability
2.2.1 Indicators of speaking ability
Brown (2004, p. 141-142) indicated that there are five fundamental
indicators of speaking ability: imitation, oral language production, conservation
response, transactional language and oral production development.


8

Imitation accepted as one of the indicators of speaking ability. Imitation, in
general, is the ability to imitate a word or phrase or possibly a sentence (imitative)
exactly the same way as it has been done before.
Oral language production can be considered as an indicator of speaking
ability. Producing short stretches of oral language design demonstrates the
competence in a narrow band of grammatical, phrasal, lexical, or phonological
relationship, for example, prosodic elements-intonation, stress, rhythm, juncture,
intensive ability (intensive).
Conservation response is the response of a very short conversation, standard
greetings and small talk, simple requests and comments, and the like (responsive).
Transactional language is defined astaking the two forms of either
transactional language which has the purpose of exchanging specific information, or
interpersonal exchanges which have the purpose of maintaining social relationships
(interactive).
Oral production development includes speeches, oral presentations, and
story-telling, during which the opportunity for oral interaction from listener is either
highly limited or ruled out together (extensive).
Language is of an acceptable level. Learners express themselves in
utterances that are relevant, easily comprehensible to each other, and of an
acceptable level of language accuracy.
2.2.2 Fluency vs. accuracy in speaking assessment
According to Ellis (2009), testing speaking ability has become one of the
most important issues in language assessment since the role of speaking ability has
become more central in language teaching and learning. There are three
characteristics that distinguish performance assessments from other types of tests.
They are focused mainly on content. However, testing speaking is difficult and
cannot be assessed as easily as other language skills. It takes considerable time,
effort and training (Hughes, 2003).
Obviously, accuracy is one of the most important criteria to measure one’s
linguistic ability and to shelter language users from communication breakdowns.

9
To evaluate the accuracy in speaking performance, students are supposed to
use correct grammar such as word order, tenses, tense agreement, etc. Especially,
they do not leave out articles, prepositions or difficult tenses.
To assess vocabulary, students have a range of vocabulary that corresponds
to the syllabus year list and uses words you have taught.
Moreover, students are required correct pronunciation so that most people
can understand what they speak.
Thornbury (2000) pointed out two criteria for assessing accuracy: number of
self-corrections, correct use of English (use of grammar, use of vocabulary).
Fluency is also used as a criterion to measure one’s speaking competence.
Speaking fluently means being able to communicate one’s ideas without having to
stop and think too much about what one is saying. Richards (1992, p.141) defined
that fluency as “the features which gave speech the qualities of being natural and
normal.”
Miller (1964) and Fulcher (1996) stated that speaking fluency can be used in
a range of senses. One of the narrowest definitions includes a few features, such as
pausing, hesitations and speech rate, whereas in a broad sense the reference is made
to speaking proficiency. Edge(1998) noticed speaking fluency often includes
references to flow or smoothness, rate of speech, lack of unnecessary pausing,
absence of distressing hesitation, length of utterances, and connectedness. These
characterizations are complex, however, because they are not simply descriptions of
a speaker’s speech but also of a listener’s perception of it. These studies indicate
that when speakers become more fluent their speech rate increases and the speech
flow contains fewer pauses and hesitations (Lennon, 1990). They also pause at
semantically sensible places, which listeners perceive as the speakers’ planning the
content of what they are saying rather than grouping for words. More fluent speakers
tend to speak more and their phrases are longer. Luoma (2004) stated fluency is

related to the way that speakers use words, and in particular ‘small words’. To focus
on the more lexical aspects of fluency, Thornbury (2000) also listed four criteria for


10
assessing fluency: number of words per minute, number of syllables per minute,
number of pauses of one/two second(s) or longer, number of repetitions.
2.2.3 Rubrics for assessing EFL speaking ability
With the aim of knowing the improvement of students’ speaking skills has
been made by the students after being treated by some problem sticks, their
speaking ability will be measured by speaking measurement adapted from Arthur
Hughes (2003) collaborating with FSI. There are five components with a rating
range from 1-6 with different weighting point from the lowest to the highest.
The speaking measurement contains of some component elaborated from
students’ skill including their pronunciation, grammar, vocabulary, fluency and
comprehension.
Table 2.1 Speaking Assessment Rubric
(Adapted from Communicative Language Teaching - Wood, L. W. (2007)).
Pronunciation
1
Pronunciation frequently unintelligible
2
Frequent gross errors and a very heavy accent make understanding difficulty
3
Frequent repetition
4
Marked foreign accent and occasional mispronunciations which do not
interfere with understanding
Grammar
1

2

Grammar almost entirely inaccurate expert in stock phrases.
Constant error showing control of very few major patterns and fluently

3

preventing communication.
Frequent errors showing some major pattern uncontrolled and causing

4

occasional irritation and misunderstanding.
Occasional errors showing imperfect control of some patterns but no

weakness that the cause misunderstanding.
Vocabulary
1
Vocabulary inadequate foe evens the simplest conversation.
2
Vocabulary limited to basic personal and survival areas (time, food,
3

transportation, family, etc.)
Choice of words sometimes inaccurate, limitations of vocabulary prevent
discussion of some common professional and social topics.


11
4

Professional vocabulary adequate to discuss special interest; general
vocabulary permits discussion of any non-technical subject with some

circumlocutions.
Fluency
1
Speech is so halting and fragmentary that conversation is impossible.
2
Speech is very slow and uneven except for shot or routine sentences.
3
Speech is frequently hesitant and jerky; sentences may be left uncompleted.
4
Speech is occasionally hesitant, with some unevenness caused by rephrasing
and grouping for words.
2.3 Teaching Speaking
According to Nunan (1991), teaching may be defined as “showing or
helping someone to learn how to do something, giving instructions, guiding in the
study of something, providing with knowledge, causing to know or understand”.
Teaching is also defined as one of the means by which education is achieved and
education is a common purpose of teaching. Teaching is the process of carrying out
those activities that experience has shown to be effective in getting students to
learn.
Teaching and learning have a close relationship. We cannot define teaching
apart from learning. Teaching is guiding and facilitating learning, enabling the
learners to learn, setting the conditions for learning. Your understanding of how the
learners learn will determine your philosophy of education, your teaching style,
your approach, methods and classroom techniques. If you look at learning as a
process of operant conditioning, through a carefully paced program of
reinforcement, you will teach accordingly. If you view second language learning as

a deductive rather than an inductive process, you will probably choose to present
copious rules and paradigms to your students rather than let them “discover” those
rules inductively.
Many language learners consider speaking ability the measure of knowing a
language. As for them, fluency is ability to converse with others much more than
the ability to read or write. They regard speaking as the most important skill they
can acquire and they assess their progress in terms of their accomplishments on
spoken communication. Therefore, if learners do not learn how to speak or do not


12
get any opportunities to speak in the language classroom, they may soon get demotivated and lose interest in learning. On the contrary, if the right activities are
taught in the right way, speaking in lass can be a lot of fun, raising general learner
motivation and making the English language classroom a fun and dynamic place to
be.
2.3.1 Teaching L1 speaking skill
There is a large body of research on how people learn their first and
subsequent languages in childhood. For instance, Lightbown and Spada (2006)
show that children acquire their first language in remarkably consistent stages.
Cognitive development plays an important role, e.g. children only start to use
adverbs of time such as ‘tomorrow’ when they have developed an understanding of
time. Another major factor which contributes to language development is repeated
exposure to words and phrases in context. As young people expand their knowledge
of the world, they learn to understand and use the language that goes with particular
contexts. By the time they reach adulthood, most people have acquired their first
language to a very high standard. They have a well-established command of the
language, and production and understanding will be automatic. If they have
weaknesses, the underlying cause is often a lack of exposure to situations where
more formal language is required. This can result in an inability to handle the full
range and register of the language, such as using formal language during a job

interview or writing a letter.
2.3.2 Teaching speaking to EFL learners
It is quite undeniable that English with the most speakers through the world
as a foreign language plays a significant role in the world. According to Richards
(2001, p. 6),"For many people the most important function of any language is
communication with other people when traveling, studying or working in a foreign
country. Therefore, the trend of learning English is increasing and the opportunities
for the actual use of the language are becoming more frequent". The most important
objective of language learning is to provide students with the opportunities to
activate their already learned knowledge and use the newly learned materials in


13
their real life situations. In the past, skills were taught individually and almost
always the focus was on improving one skill at a time viewing learning as mastery
of a single skill, such as reading or sub-skills, such as vocabulary items. Language
learning and content are not interwoven (Mohan, 1986). Isolated language skills are
taught either because discreet skills are believed to be learned more easily or
because it is difficult to cover different skills simultaneously. Then, the prevailing
belief was that language should be kept whole and "if language isn't kept whole, it
isn't language anymore" (Rig, 1991, p. 522, cited in Richards & Rodgers, 2001, p.
109).
Theorizers and practitioners began to understand the real nature of
communication in which a mixture of language skills and sub skills are used at a
given time to run a natural communication. Communication in nature involves the
integration of the four language skills and learners in an integrated-skill instruction
are exposed to authentic language and activities that are meaningful and interesting
(Shen, 2003). Integration of listening and speaking in real situation is a common
event experienced daily by everyone. Belasco (1967) describes the relationship
between listening and speaking, as actualized in real communication, as an

intertwined mutual relation in a way that achieving proficiency in listening would
result in speaking proficiency. As Chastain (1988) proposes reading as the
facilitation of communicative fluency that is going to include mental processes like
those of the other language skills. Hilferty (2000) also stresses the influence of
reading on speaking as a kind of reciprocal relationship and believes that speaking
and reading both need the same kind of abilities in order to process those kind of
materials that are phonologically difficult. One of the goals of speaking activities
integrated either with listening or reading in language classrooms, is the
development of fluency. Pawley and Syder (1983, p. 191) regard native-like fluency
as “the native speakers' ability to produce fluent stretches of discourse”. Lennon
(2000, p. 26), focusing on the importance of fluency, points out that “a working
definition of fluency might be the rapid, smooth, accurate, lucid, and efficient
translation of thought or communicative intention into language under the temporal


14
constraints of on-line processing”.
2.3.2.1 General outline of a speaking lesson
Kayi (2006) stated that in a speaking lesson, warm-ups are essential for all
aspects of ESL learning. They should be corporate into every lesson. Warm-up
activities are light switches in the students’ mind, which makes the other stages
more effective.
Pre-speaking is the stage in which the teacher presents new materials to the
students in an exciting and informative way and lay the foundation for the rest of
the lesson.
While-speaking is the stage in which the teacher lets the students begin to
practice the new materials in a guided way. The activities can be designed in pairs
or in small groups.
Post-speaking is where confidence plays a big role in the ability to
communicate.

Table 2.2 General outline of a speaking lesson
(Adapted from Teaching Speaking: Activities to Promote Speaking in a
Second Language-Kayi, H. (2006)).
The speaking session activities

Division of the session time

Classroom stabilization

2 minutes

Warm up

05 minutes

Pre – Speaking

Vocabulary

While - Speaking

Activity 1
Activity 2

8 minutes
15 minutes

Activity 3
Post – Speaking

13 minutes

Home work

2 minutes

2.3.2.2 Common techniques and methods
There are many techniques and methods in teaching speaking. There are
thirteen techniques of teaching speaking according to (Kayi, 2006). Based on some


15
experts’ statement, in his article in internet, he tells the techniques as follows:
First, discussion is one kind of activity that can stimulate students’ response
in speaking. After the content-based lesson teacher can set a discussion activity by
making some groups and holding question and answering related to the last lesson
they have learned. By using this activity routinely, students will use their speaking
in a more active way.
Second, role play is another kind of activity in which students pretend as if
they are in the real condition of society in various social contexts and have a variety
of roles. In role-play, the teacher gives information to the learners such as who they
are and what they think or feel. Thus, the teacher can tell the student "You are
David, you go to the doctor and tell him what happened last night, and…” .
(Harmer, 2007)
Third, simulation is almost like role play but there is a different between role
play and simulation. In simulation students ask to pretend as a character and make it
as in the real condition. For examples students act as a guitarist, then he must bring
property like a real guitarist.
Fourth, in information gap activity, students are supposed to be working in
pairs. One student will have the information that other partner does not have and the

partners will share their information. Information gap activities serve many
purposes such as solving a problem or collecting information. Also, each partner
plays an important role because the task cannot be completed if the partners do not
provide the information the others need.
Fifth, brain-storming is functioned to stimulate students’ knowledge about
the lesson that will be learned in the meeting. In brain-storming teacher asks some
questions related to the lessons or material they will have. Through brain storming
students are helped in understanding the material in an easier way. Brain-storming
also helps the students to practice their speaking in front of other people and
improve confidence. A point that the 63
teacher must remember is do not ever criticized students’ idea or opinion so
the students can explore their mind freely.