The effects of project based learning on the 12th graders’ speaking performance at the asian international school in ho chi minh city phan thi hue ; nguyen thi xuan lan supervisor

Innovations in teaching practice, hence, more focus on cultivating students’ ability to use the target language accurately, appropriately, and fluently in various real-life contexts Bach

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING

HO CHI MINH CITY OPEN UNIVERSITY

PHAN THI HUE

THE EFFECTS OF PROJECT-BASED LEARNING

ON THE 12 th GRADERS’ SPEAKING PERFORMANCE

AT THE ASIAN INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL IN HO CHI MINH CITY

MASTER OF ARTS IN TESOL

Ho Chi Minh City, 2021

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING

HO CHI MINH CITY OPEN UNIVERSITY

PHAN THI HUE

THE EFFECTS OF PROJECT-BASED LEARNING

ON THE 12th GRADERS’ SPEAKING PERFORMANCE

AT THE ASIAN INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL IN HO CHI MINH CITY

Major: TEACHING ENGLISH TO SPEAKERS OF OTHER LANGUAGES

Major code: 8 140 111

MASTER OF ARTS IN TESOL

Supervisor: NGUYEN THI XUAN LAN (PhD.)

TRƯỜNG ĐẠI HỌC MỞ CỘNG HÒA XÃ HỘI CHỦ NGHĨA VIỆT NAM THÀNH PHỐ HỒ CHÍ MINH Độc lập – Tự do – Hạnh phúc

KHOA ĐÀO TẠO SAU ĐẠI HỌC

GIẤY XÁC NHẬN

Tôi tên là: Phan Thị Huê

Ngày sinh: 16/08/1990 Nơi sinh: Bến Tre

Chuyên ngành: Mã học viên: 1881401110017

Tôi đồng ý cung cấp toàn văn thông tin luận án/ luận văn tốt nghiệp hợp lệ về bản quyền cho Thư viện trường đại học Mở Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh Thư viện trường đại học Mở Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh sẽ kết nối toàn văn thông tin luận án/ luận văn tốt nghiệp vào hệ thống thông tin khoa học của Sở Khoa học và Công nghệ Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh

Phan Thị Huê

………

CỘNG HÒA XÃ HỘI CHỦ NGHĨA VIỆT NAM

Độc lập – Tự do – Hạnh phúc

Ý KIẾN CHO PHÉP BẢO VỆ LUẬN VĂN THẠC SĨ

CỦA GIẢNG VIÊN HƯỚNG DẪN

Giảng viên hướng dẫn: Nguyễn Thị Xuân Lan

Học viên thực hiện: Phan Thị Huê Lớp: MTESOL18

Tên đề tài: “The effects of Project-Based Learning on the 12th graders’speaking performance at the Asian International School in Ho Chi Minh City”

Ý kiến của giáo viên hướng dẫn về việc cho phép học viên Phan Thị Huê

được bảo vệ luận văn trước Hội đồng:

Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh, ngày…… tháng …… năm 2021

Người nhận xét

Nguyễn Thị Xuân Lan

STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP

I certify that this thesis entitled “The effects of Project-Based Learning on the 12 th graders’ speaking performance at the Asian International School in Ho Chi Minh City” is my own work

Except where reference is made in the text of the thesis, this thesis contains materials published elsewhere or extracted in whole or in part from a thesis by which I have qualified for or been awarded another degree of diploma

No other person’s work has been used without due acknowledgement in the main text

of the thesis This thesis has not been submitted for the award of any degree or diploma

in any other tertiary institution

Ho Chi Minh City, 2021

Phan Thi Hue

I am also grateful to Dr Le Thi Thanh Thu, and Dr Nguyen Thuy Nga Their questions and comments in the proposal defense did provide me with a fresher and better look at this research paper

A very special gratitude goes out to my all students who were willing to take part

in my study My thesis could not have been finished without their great contribution Finally, last but by no means least, also to my beloved family members, my best colleagues, and my students at the Asian International School, who always stand by my side to support, encourage and motivate me on the progress of conducting this study Thanks for all your encouragement!

ABSTRACT

The teaching and learning of speaking have received more attention recently by language learners and instructors Providing successful speaking performances becomes an expected outcome at which language learners aim since it accelerates the effectiveness of communication in different fields of their life However, many students have some troubles in speaking as a because of the mismatch between their learning practice and teachers’ teaching strategies and methods Meanwhile, Project-Based Learning characterizes an effective teaching approach of speaking with the intensive exposure of real-life speaking contexts in order to maximize students’ speaking time through various forms of conservations

Basing on this theoretical background, the current study employs PBL as a teaching approach to improve students’ speaking performance The researcher chose to conduct the study at the Asian International School, where she is teaching with the participation of 48 twelfth graders The aim of the study was to investigate whether PBL has any significant impact on students’ speaking performance and their attitudes towards the use of PBL in teaching speaking The findings of the study indicate that students achieved improvements in their speaking The most significants developments includes better performance in the use of language features, the activeness in interaction and students’ interest in real life In addition, the questionnaire shows students’ positive attitudes towards PBL with the most agreement on their deisre to continuously learn with the approach, followed by the supports that PBL enhances their interation in speaking, the speaking aspects and their concerns for real life issues The findings support that Project-Based Learning is an effective teaching-learning approach in improving students’ speaking performance However, the study consists of limitations as a background for further studies on Project-Based Learning

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 Background of the study 1

1.2 Statement of the problem 3

1.3 Research aims 4

1.4 Research questions 5

1.5 Hypothesis 5

1.6 Organization of the thesis 5

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW 7

2.1 Teaching speaking skill 7

2.1.1 Speaking performance 7

2.1.2 Teaching speaking 9

2.1.3 The evaluation of students’ speaking performance 11

2.1.3.1 Criteria of evaluating speaking 11

2.1.3.2 Using a rubric in evaluating speaking 14

2.2 Project-Based Learning 16

2.2.1 Definition of Project-Based Learning 16

2.2.2 Characteristics of Project-Based Learning 17

2.2.3 The application of PBL in English speaking teaching 19

2.2.4 The evolution from CLT into TBLT and into PBL in teaching speaking 20

2.2.5 Types of project 22

2.2.6 The relationship between types of project and teaching speaking 24

2.2.7 Steps to implement Project-Based Learning in the classroom 25

2.3 Previous studies on effects of Project-Based learning on students’ speaking performance 27

2.4 Research gap 31

2.5 Chapter summary 32

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY 34

3.1 Research design 34

3.2 Research setting 36

3.3 Sampling 38

3.4 Participants 38

3.4.1 Control Group 40

3.4.2 Experimental Group 44

3.5 Project procedure 47

3.5.1 Project launch 49

3.5.2 Project development 50

3.5.3 Project presentation 52

3.5.4 Project evaluation 56

3.6 Research instruments 58

3.6.1 Speaking tests 58

3.6.2 Questionnaire 64

3.6.3 Piloting the questionnaire 68

3.7 Data analysis methodology 69

3.7.1 Quantitative analysis of the speaking tests 69

3.7.2 Quantitative analysis of the questionnaire 70

3.8 Reliability and validity 70

3.8.1 Reliability and validity of the tests 71

3.8.2 Reliability and validity of the questionnaire 71

3.9 Chapter summary 73

CHAPTER 4: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS 74

4.1 The analysis of the speaking tests 74

4.1.1 Independent sample t-test of the pretest score of CG and EG 74

4.1.2 Independent sample t-test of the posttest score of the CG and EG 76

4.1.3 Paired sample t-test of the pretest and posttest of CG 77

4.1.4 Paired sample t-test of the pretest and posttest of EG 77

4.1.5 Paired sample t-test of the pretest and posttest of CG and EG 78

4.2 Analysis of speaking components 80

4.2.1 Independent sample t-test of each component in the speaking 80

pretest and posttest 80

4.2.2 Paired sample t-test of each component in the speaking pretest 82

and posttest 82

4.3 The analysis of the questionnaire 85

4.3.1 Students’ attitudes towards the effects of PBL on their 85

speaking performance 85

4.3.2 Students’ attitudes towards the effects of PBL on the 87

interaction during their speech 87

4.3.3 Students’ attitudes towards the desire to learn with PBL 89

4.3.4 Students’ attitudes towards the desire to learn with PBL 90

4.4 The effect of Project-Based Learning on learners’ speaking performance 92 4.5 Learners’ attitudes towards the use of Project-Based Learning in speaking learning process 94

4.6 Chapter summary 97

CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSIONS, LIMITATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 99

5.1 Main conclusions of the study 99

5.2 Contributions and limitations 101

5.2.1 Contributions 101

5.2.2 Limitations 102

5.3 Recommendations for further studies 103

5.4 Chapter summary 104

REFERENCES 106

APPENDICES 120

APPENDIX 1 120

APPENDIX 2 123

APPENDIX 3 126

APPENDIX 4 127

APPENDIX 5 128

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 3 1 The product by group 1 namely “The cries from the 2019 Australian

bushfires” 53

Figure 3 2 The product by group 2 namely “Industrialization-a beneficial revolution or a potential disaster” 53

Figure 3 3 The product presentation by group 3 namely “Wildlife in help” 54

Figure 3 4 The product presentation by group 4 namely “For a green planet” 55

Figure 3 5 The product presentation by group 5 namely “Animals are crying” 55

Figure 3 6 Procedure of the project 57

Figure 4 1 Mean scores of the speaking pretest and posttest in CG and EG 79

Figure 4 2 Mean scores of the speaking component in pretest and posttest of EG 83

Figure 6 1 The relationship between the effects of PBL and students’ improvement in speaking 101

LIST OF TABLES

Table 3 1 The research design 36

Table 3 2 Demographic characteristics of the participants 39

Table 3 3 Procedure of activities in speaking classes of CG 43

Table 3 4 Procedure of activities in speaking classes of EG 47

Table 3 5 Working procedure of the CG and EG 49

Table 3 6 The description of two research instruments 58

Table 3 7 The description of the items in the questionnaire 67

Table 3 8 Reliability statistics for the pilot questionnaire 69

Table 3 9 Reliability statistics for the questionnaire 72

Table 3 10 Reliability of four themes of questionnaire 73

Table 4 1 Descriptive statistics of the pretest score of CG and EG 74

Table 4 2 Independent sample t-test of the pretest score of CG and EG 75

Table 4 3 Descriptive statistics of the posttest score of CG and EG 76

Table 4 4 Independent sample t-test of the posttest score of CG and EG 76

Table 4 5 Descriptive statistics of the pretest and posttest score of CG and EG 77

Table 4 6 Paired sample t-test of the pretest and posttest score of CG 77

Table 4 7 Descriptive statistics of the pretest and posttest of two groups 77

Table 4 8 Paired sample t-test of the pretest and posttest of EG 78

Table 4 9 Descriptive statistics of the pretest and posttest of two groups 78

Table 4 10 Paired sample t-test of the pretest and posttest of two groups 79

Table 4 11 Descriptive statistics of each component in the speaking pretest and posttest 80

Table 4 12 Independent sample t-test of each component in the speaking pretest and posttest 81

Table 4 13 Descriptive statistics of each component of before and after the treatment

82

Table 4 14 Paired sample t-test of each speaking component of two groups 84

Table 4 15 Students’ attitudes towards the effects of PBL on their speaking 86

Table 4 16 Students’ attitudes towards the effects of PBL on the interaction 88

Table 4 17 Students’ attitudes towards the effects of PBL on the awareness of real life issues 89

Table 4 18 Students’ desire of learning with PBL 90

Table 4 19 Average value of Mean and SD in four themes 91

EFL English as a Foreign Language

ESL English as a Second Language

MOET Ministry of Education and Training SPSS Statistical Package for the Social Science

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION

Chapter 1 presents general introduction of the study in six sections First, the study’s background and the statement of the problem explain the context along with the problems related to teaching and learning speaking, which allow the establishment of the conceptual framework of the current study Then, the aim of the study, in accordance with two research questions, demonstrates how the researcher carries out the study In the next section, a hypothesis illustrates a tentative prediction about an expected relationship between the effects of Project-Based Learning on students’ speaking performance Finally, there is a section of thesis structure in order to summary the organization of all chapters

1.1 Background of the study

English has become a lingual franca in the process of international connection, and mastering English is beneficial to many people in different fields People use English as a means of the intercultural communication, language of business, access to the global entertainment, or basic job requirement (Kachru & Nelson, 1996; Krebt, 2017; Yu, 2019) According to Kachru and Nelson (1996), people learn English for a variety of purposes, and communication more and more becomes a target of many language learners A high level of communicative competence in English, therefore, vigorously changes into an emerging demand of language learners to successfully communicate and accommodate themselves to different contexts of this globalized society

There exist many shreds of evidence that necessary changes have been made to meet the current demands of learning English Innovations in teaching practice, hence, more focus on cultivating students’ ability to use the target language accurately, appropriately, and fluently in various real-life contexts (Bachman & Palmer, 1996; Sun, 2014; Geng, 2017), which brings about the introduction of numerous teaching methods or techniques used for teaching speaking First, Ding (2018) supported the

effectiveness of using role-play in enabling learners to produce language orally Learners’ responses to problems or conflicts assumed orally in different settings contributes to shaping their personality (Tran, 2016; Rojas & Villafuerte, 2018) In addition, other techniques have been mentioned as some suggestions for teaching speaking including using oral report (Marzuli, 2017), presentation (Budiyanto, Saleh, Rukmini & Sofwan, 2018), or story telling (Zare-Behtash, Saed & Sajjadi, 2016) The authors pointed out the most significant outcome from these learning techniques is that they improve students’ ability to perform fluently and bravely in front of the audience

In another study, Silvana, Kustati and Darmayenti (2018) added that implementing group discussions and snowballing is another effective technique to motivate students’ speaking performance because of its benefits in terms of fostering critical thinking, developing cooperation and respects among students

However, teaching speaking is still facing certain challenges in relation with many academic and social aspects (Yu, 2019) First, according to Liu and Jackson’s research (2008), students are not willing to perform orally in front of their class The authors explained that oral activities provoke anxiety among learners since they lack self-confidence when required to speak out as second language learners Various reasons have been found to cause anxiety during students’ performances including the fear of negative evaluation (Liu & Jackson, 2008; Md, 2018), teacher’s hostile teaching practice (Young, 1991), teacher’s unsuitability of correction (Koch & Terrell, 1991), or the feelings that they lack vocabulary to express their ideas in front of other better learners (Price, 1991; Sadeghi & Richards, 2015; Md, 2018) Moreover, students’ poor performances in speaking results from the deficiency of an appropriate teaching method, teacher’s dominance in speaking situations (Supharatypthin 2014; Md, 2018) and the lack of implementing technological tools in order to motivate learners to speak (Supharatypthin 2014; Sadeghi & Richards, 2015; Md, 2018) Thus, there is a need to

find an appropriate teaching method that reduces the limitations of these teaching practices and helps learners to enhance their oral performances

1.2 Statement of the problem

Findings from above mentioned studies figured out current problems in teaching language in general and teaching speaking in particular First, communicative tasks, though used in teaching speaking, lack exposures and necessary instructions so that learners are able to overcome the anxiety and express the ideas orally with their self-confidence (Liu & Jackson, 2008, Md, 2018) As such, students’ ability to communicate crosses considerable limits due to the shortage of daily life interaction, which prevents them from achieving an expected level of using language fluently (Khan, 2011; Alrashidi & Phan, 2015; Bandar Mohammad & Abdul, 2018) In addition, according to Bandar Mohammad and Abdul (2018), it is ineffective teaching methods that affect students’ speaking ability as teachers still take the dominant role in learning situations or class activities while students tend to be passive in their seats to listen and copy what is explained These shortcomings, thus, becomes barriers for learners to improve their competence of using language in spoken contexts

In the Vietnamese educational context, regardless of numerous efforts made in education, there are existing problems in English teaching, especially teaching speaking in Vietnam (Van Van, 2010) According to Van Van, education in Vietnam pays more attention to the aim of passing the national graduation or university entrance examination, and language education at secondary or high school mostly exposes the Grammar Translation Method, in which teachers work as the lesson center with abundant explanation while students tend to listen, repeat, and perform mechanical drills with given structures In addition, communication skills are not noticed as much

as other learning outcomes and the language teaching in Vietnam tends to put more focus on knowledge retention (Phuong, 2017) Accordingly, both teachers and students regard memorization as a learning strategy that motivates language learners to use

English accurately, fluently, and confidently Van Canh (2009) and Phuong (2017) clarified that a lack of real contexts for students to practice speaking, along with the small number of language teachers who are not well-qualified for teaching oral skill, and frigid and traditional teaching methods are challenges that inhibit learners from being proficient in communication Furthermore, a study by Sullivan (2000) on the implementation of CLT in Vietnam showed that even teachers using this teaching method run into many difficulties These problems result in students’ limit language to communicate in real life situations

Among the solutions suggested to improve learners’ speaking ability, Based Learning (PBL) is one of the effective teaching approaches that can improve learners’ speaking performance (Siritararatn, 2015; Anuyahong, 2018) This is an instructional method in which learners are involved in working in groups or individually around a project to solve a problem, using their own understanding and knowledge of the language (Sirisrimangkorn, 2018) Numerous findings have proved the effects of PBL on language learning Specifically, the method improves learners’ language skills (Stoller, 2006; Imtiaz and Asif, 2012; Marwan, 2015) Alternatively, Sirisrimangkorn’s research (2018) showed that learning autonomy significantly promotes among learners who learn with PBL as they become more responsible for the given speaking activities to themselves and their teammates Moreover, the teaching method is effective in helping learners to the 21st century’s skills (Kapp, 2009; Markham, 2011; Tamin & Grant, 2013)

Project-1.3 Research aims

The current study is conducted for two purposes:

(1) to investigate the extent to which Project-Based Learning affects the speaking performance of high school learners

(2) to explore the participant students’ attitudes towards the use of this teaching approach in their process of learning speaking

1.4 Research questions

The study is conducted to answer two following research questions:

Research question 1: To what extent does Project-Based Learning affect the speaking performance of the 12 th graders at the Asian International School? Research question 2: What are the students’ attitudes towards the use of Project-Based Learning in the speaking learning process?

1.5 Hypothesis

Two hypothesizes are formulated in accordance with two research questions First, the twelfth graders at the Asian International School, who learn with PBL, will deliver a better performance in their speaking Second, the students may show positive attitudes towards teachers’ implementation of this approach in learning speaking

1.6 Organization of the thesis

There are six chapters in the current study

Chapter 1 namely the Introduction illustrates basic introduction of the study

including the study background, statement of the problem, the purpose for which the researcher conducts the study, two research questions and hypothesis of the study

Chapter 2 is the Literature Review, which reviews literature related to teaching

speaking including students’ speaking performance, the practice of teaching speaking, the evaluation of students’ speaking performance Then, the researcher reviews PBL with its definition, characteristics, types of project, the relationship between the project type and teaching speaking, important steps to implement the teaching method and previous studies on the implementation of PBL to teach speaking Finally, the research gap is presented as a necessity for this study

Chapter 3 is the Methodology, which provides information of the methodology

used to carry out the research The chapter consist of research site, sampling of the participants, the information of the participants in the EG and CG together with their learning activities during the study, the study design describing procedure of the

project The chapter also presents detailed information of two research instruments, the reliability and validity, and the way the collected data are analysed

Chapter 4 namely the Results and Findings demonstrates the analysis of the

data colleted from the speaking tests and questionnaire The details of results as well as the findings are clearly given

Chapter 5, which is the Discussion of findings, draw crucial findings of the

study in the relation with two research questions

Chapter 6 is the Conclusions, Limitations and Recommendations shows the

main conclusions of the research The limitations of the study and further recommendations for later studies are also mentioned in this chapter

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapter gives the information about the theoretical foundation of the study First, the researcher reviews the theory of teaching speaking including the literature of speaking performance, the practice of teaching speaking and speaking evaluation Next, Project-Base Learning is reviewed in terms of the definition, characteristics, types of project and the arguments for the project used in the current study Then, there

is a description of the important steps in order to conduct the project In the next part, the researcher reviews previous studies on teaching speaking with PBL in order to figure out benefits as well as disadvantages of the method

2.1 Teaching speaking skill

2.1.1 Speaking performance

Rochmahwati (2015) pointed out that speaking refers to the competence to use a language orally in communication It emphasizes the interactive function of language rather than its role as knowledge In another view, Astawa, Artini and Nitiasih (2017) defined speaking as a productive skill in which “a person interacts with others or influences someone by saying something which may affect someone else’s point of view or thought” (p 1147) The basic characteristic of speaking, according to Astawa, Artini and Nitiasih, is that it should be something threading onto others’ mind besides demanding normal interaction Thus, a successful speaking activity should be something that motivates EFL learners to perform language orally instead of focusing

on grammar only, and classroom is a trial context for them to experience authentic communication in spoken language (Ady Marcela & Gómez Rodríguez, 2017) Additionally, speaking ability is an act of using language verbally or non-verbally so that language learners can express themselves and convey certain implications in social and cultural contexts (Krebt, 2017) Speaking activity, therefore, presents a high level

of language acquisitions since it requires communicative competence, which not only

focuses on linguistic models but also encourages learners to perform language socially and conversationally

Theoretically, Richard (2009) defined the term “performance” in EFL teaching

as a public talk presented to an audience for the purpose of conveying the information that the speaker aims to express It is a concrete context where learners use language as

a means of delivering the speech In addition, the Oxford dictionary explains the term refers to how well or badly a person does something Similarly, authors such as Husnawati (2017) and Emirza & Sahri (2021) saw “performance” both as a function of speaking happened at public presentation and as a manifestation of language competence

In the relation between to the definition of speaking and performance, Koizumi (2005) defined speaking performance as “actual instances of producing oral language

in real time” (p 36) During these instances, learners not only give message but also encode the given information, following certain aspects of speaking concerning grammar, vocabulary, fluency, or pronunciation (Levelt, 1993; Koizumi, 2005) For a successful oral performance, Koizumi suggested that fluency and accuracy are two principal aspects that speakers need to achieve Significantly, fluency is related to speakers’ ability to perform the given tasks completely while accuracy requires their performance on the language form with correction In another definition by Sutarsyah (2017), speaking performance or oral performance involves the time when a speaker, using language orally, expresses his or her ideas at the same time he or she receives information from another In this case, Husnawati (2017) explained that “The function

of speaking as performance happened at speeches, public talks, public announcements, retelling story, telling story and so on” (p.13), so speaking performance contributes to improving the social interaction among learners through their speaking acts

2.1.2 Teaching speaking

Responding to using English as a means of communication, the teaching of EFL speaking puts more and more efforts on developing learners’ speaking production through different teaching approaches The ground on this is to minimize negative feelings and excite using the target language when they produce it in a verbal process (Ady Marcela & Gómez Rodríguez, 2017) Hence, the administration of a speaking class including organizing speaking tasks, getting students to use language willingly or preparing for a successful oral performance of students requires language instructors to

carefully examine necessities for their teaching practice of speaking

First, pedagogy in speaking needs to give more heed to the autonomy to use language orally among learners (Ahmed, 2018) It is learners’ activeness to apply the features of language to different speaking situations because they find it necessary to speak in the target language rather than being forced to use it According to Ahmed, students tend to be “obedient imitator” in speaking class where their teacher becomes

“teaching aid”, “language model” and “comprehensible input” (p.98) They lack spontaneous production of language and they put their best efforts to imitating what the teacher presents in speaking acts and performing in a similar way to the model performance as much as possible In addition, Yuniarti (2017) discussed the choice of material in teaching speaking in order to motivate students’ self-consciousness to speak He added that a successful speaking class should encourage students to explore the features of language used in their speaking performance by themselves including choosing materials and language sources that support them Once the teaching material

is inappropriate with learners’ ability and needs, it prevents them from produce the language verbally with their intention

Second, the practice of teaching speaking considers getting students to use

language with various authentic speaking situations as a target (Krebt, 2017; Ding 2018) Correspondingly, a chosen speaking topic should be authentic enough for

students to be immersed in real life contexts and to make them consider a speaking performance in classroom as a real life communication Therefore, previous studies have mentioned the improvements in teaching speaking when teachers employ different teaching methods and approach to bring authenticity to every speaking activities and tasks A role-playing activity, for example, offers students an opportunity

to assume different identities (Rojas & Villafuerte, 2018) while Task-Based Language Teaching gives learners more chance to practice using language in authentic situations

by accomplishing communicative tasks However, in role-playing technique and TBLT, students’ speaking acts is done after they finalize their acting or complete given tasks Students’ speaking time is limited in the classroom environment without having chance to produce ideas through language outside the classroom (Sirisrimakorn, 2018)

In other words, teaching speaking needs to make students use language in their life and apply what they know from real life to their classroom speaking performance

Third, speaking instruction focuses on the developments of both fluency and accuracy among language learners (Stoller, 1997) That students finally give a perfect conservation or a smooth presentation does not reflect a success of the teaching method Accordingly, the expected outcomes of the teaching speaking lie not just in students’ final production of language but improvements achieved in different stages of working toward the end point Later, Richards & Rodgers (2014) clarified that learners improve their speaking ability day by day through negotiation and interaction Students take part in meaningful communication activities in which many members of a group

or many classmates negotiate or debate the ideas orally regardless their proficiency During the assigned speaking activities, students may learn different knowledge of language from mistakes made by themselves and their friends in the target language In addition, by organizing more social interaction, teacher is able to evaluate what knowledge of language students learn during their work to make the oral speaking natural (Ady Marcela & Gómez Rodríguez, 2017) Hence, students can better use the

target language fluently and accurately after an abundant period of interacting orally

together

In short, teaching speaking to EFL learners is more and more demanding with

updated changes order to help learners expose their capacity of producing language in

different speaking contexts While previous teaching pedagogies appreciate teaching

practices that encourages students oral production in the target language, there is a

need of discovering teaching methods or approaches, which (1) bring high motivation

for students to become autonomous language speakers, (2) extend the relationship

between speaking language and learners’ real life so that they feel their speaking

practical and (3) promote learners’ speaking ability in different aspects through various

forms of interaction during a long-term learning process Corresponding to the

mentioned needs, the present study uses Project-Based Learning owing to the grounds

that the teaching approach tries to overcome shortcomings from previous teaching

method of speaking Rochmahwati (2015) figured out the values of PBL to improve

learners’ speaking capacity since PBL allows them to connect their learning with

interesting real word issues and become enthusiastic about expressing their ideas

through many opportunities of communication they establish in a long-term project

2.1.3 The evaluation of students’ speaking performance

Speaking evaluation or speaking assessment is a significant part in its relation to

improving language learners’ improvement (Matsugu, 2013) Thus, carrying out an

appropriate and reliable evaluation helps learners themselves identify their speaking

ability and provides teachers with guides for later teaching The following sections

review the practice of assessing speaking performance together with the factors that

influence testers’ speaking evaluation

2.1.3.1 Criteria of evaluating speaking

The practice of assessing speaking is under changes as a result of the innovations

in teaching and learning speaking Accordingly, speaking assessment needs to meet the

practical need of teaching language - measuring learners’ ability to use the target language in different contexts of the real life (Kim, 2011) New ways of evaluating speaking, consequently, are adapted, basing on various perspectives of educational experts

On the one hand, Lado (1961) proposed that language aspects like pronunciation, grammar, vocabulary, or cultural meanings are indispensable for acquiring the language knowledge, and testing speaking means measuring these separate features or their association in use Beside the accuracy in pronouncing the language, students need to show their ability of conveying the ideas grammatically accurate during their speech, where the word classes, word order, patterns and rules are systematically arranged (Lado, 1961; Brown 2010) Meanwhile, the range, appropriateness and the diversity of lexical resources significantly contribute to the test takers’ speaking performance (Lado, 1961; Brown 2010; Rahmawati & Ertin, 2014) Later, Savignon (1972) and Morrow (1979) share the same view that linguistic components build the communicative effectiveness The authors explained that whether learners successfully produce the language in communication depends on the way they use lexical, functional or phonetic items accurately and fluently By the same token, a research by Brown and Abeywickrama (2010) added another criterion in assessing speaking namely coherence and fluency, beside four assessment criteria of pronunciation, grammatical range and accurate, lexical resource and interaction The authors explained that learners’ speaking performance is successful when they not only show their profound knowledge of language but also produce language coherently and fluently This involves their ability to deliver their speech without hesitation and relate the ideas logically (Brown & Abeywickrama, 2010; Rahmawati & Ertin, 2014) Therefore, assessing learners’ oral performance should be based on their natural performance of language components

On the other hand, Clark (1975) rejected the perspective of evaluating students’ speaking performance basing on measuring their ability to perform language components separately Unlike the previous authors, Clark emphasized the pragmatic effectiveness in the speaking tests The author suggested that speaking evaluation should rely on real life performance or the way students demonstrate language in authentic situations In other words, "the student's ability to communicate accurately and effectively in real-life language-use contexts, especially in the face-to-face conversations typical of the great majority of real-world speech activities" (Clark,

1975, p 23) The argument for an authentic speaking performance was supported by Jones (1985) Accordingly, the language in the speaking tests that evaluate different elements of speaking is not authentic enough for the students to demonstrate their actual communicative ability (Clark, 1975; Jones, 1985) By contrast, a speaking test works effectively when it measures the learners’ practical use of language in different real-life situations

A new view by other authors, based on the teaching techniques teachers use during the teaching process, helped distinguish standardized speaking assessment from alternative one In particular, standardized speaking tests used in testing speaking are norm-referenced or criterion-referenced assessment in which the assessed tasks are usually in spoken types (Mager, 1997; Dunbar, Brooks & Kubicka-Miller, 2006) While criterion-referenced tests are for identifying students’ mastery over a certain level of speaking skill, normed-referenced type is in favor of comparing a student’s speaking performance to others, which reflects traditional measurements and do not check students’ oral ability in details In contrast, alternative speaking evaluation, which is traced back to performance-based assessment, provides a systematic evaluation of students’ performance through teacher’s observation (Brown, 2010) In such scenario, “standardized tests do not elicit actual performance on the part of test-takers”, which presses a demand for other ways of measuring their language

knowledge (Brown, 2010, p 254) Thus, alternative speaking tests reflect an air of authenticity with types such as self-assessment, peer-assessment, or oral presentation (Dunbar, Brooks & Kubicka-Miller, 2006; Brown, 2010; Matsugu, 2013) For example, students become more aware of recognizing the mistakes made during their own and friends’ performance in both quantitative and qualitative range, which motivates their learning autonomy, then they are better at monitoring their own progress and become more self-confident to produce language orally later (Fauzan, 2016) Musfirah (2019) added that it was the reflection in self-assessment and the comments in the peer-assessment that encourage students to deliver their speech self-confidently In addition, a research by Nakamura (2002, as cited by Matsugu, 2013) indicated that self-assessment or peer-assessment, when incorporated with oral presentation, is useful for improving classroom-speaking assessment thanks to the enhancement of confidence and the reduction of anxiety However, the assessment techniques are likely to be ineffective when students evaluate their speech themselves

or their friends’ production without receiving any training (Matsugu, 2013) Hence, it takes more time and preparation to assess students’ speaking

In short, assessment plays an integral part in improving learners’ speaking ability

No matter what methods the teacher use for assessing speaking, the process aims at evaluating students’ acquisition of language in oral form, and then provide both teacher and students the effects of the learning and teaching process (Rahmawati and Ertin, 2014) Thus, the researcher chose language components namely coherence and fluency, vocabulary, grammar, and pronunciation, for the purpose of the current study, as criteria for assessing students’ speaking performance

2.1.3.2 Using a rubric in evaluating speaking

Assessing oral performance is a challenging and sophisticated task According to Bailey (1998), speaking tests used in speaking assessment are more likely to be in criterion-referenced framework than in norm-referenced type In other words, these

tests aim at identifying the students who master certain requirements in speaking instead of comparing the students to others Tests more and more focus on measuring how students deal with required set of speaking skill in a range of authentic situations, rather than how they performed sampled speaking tasks (Fulcher, 2003) In addition,

“The testing of pronunciation (both segmental and suprasegmentals), spoken grammar, spoken vocabulary, and even sociolinguistic applications of speech all fall into the construct of speaking but largely require discrete test designs and measures” (Luoma,

2004, p.1) Therefore, there arises a need to have an effective rubric by which students’ speaking scores are given properly and accurately (Luoma, 2004; Dunbar, Brooks & Kubicka-Miller, 2006; Metruk, 2018) There are two most commonly used rubrics for evaluating students’ speaking performance, namely holistic and analytic rubric

Regarding the holistic scoring system, it provides an overall proficiency of language through oral or written skill (Latifa et al., 2015) According to Latifa, this rating rubric is more effective in the speaking tests that expect a variety of responses from test takers Later, Elsheikh (2018) and Metruk (2018) referred to this scoring framework as an overall evaluation, considering students’ performance globally without emphasizing the features separately Metruk also added that holistic way of scoring is time-saving and simple to conduct

However, both examinees and testers find the drawbacks in holistic rating rubric Particularly, it fails to figure out the instructions so that students can improve their speaking ability for later test (Tuan, 2012) It is the limited feedback from the test score that prevents the students from identifying their strength and shortcomings among different aspects of language, so it makes them curious after receiving the test score (Tuan, 2012; Latifa et al., 2015)

The analytic scoring rubric, on the other hand, is more and more favorable as it offers a practical guide of students’ language competence by evaluating individual components of performance (Tuan, 2012) The scoring scheme, therefore, is more

useful to supply the detailed profiles of students’ ability Obtaining the score, students are able to know what they are able to perform among the language aspects and what make them fail (Tuan, 2012; Elsheikh, 2018) Similarly, Taylor and Galaczi (2011), as cited by Metruk (2018) clarified that

“An analytic or profile approach, on the other hand, seeks to separate out salient features

of performance and to evaluate each one individually and independently on its own subscale; the analytic approach thus focuses attention on discrete qualities of performance, typically combining scores on the separate subscales to produce an overall score for speaking, and sometimes reporting the sub scores as well to provide a richer level of source information, which can be useful for diagnostic purposes to guide future teaching/learning objectives” (Taylor and Galaczi, 2011, p 177)

However, the analytic scoring rubric contains certain drawbacks itself, one of which is that it is time-consuming Tuan (2012) indicated that this scoring takes the teacher time to review different aspects of the communicative competence to determine the score for each part Thus, hardly can the rater review the students’ performance once (Tuan, 2012; Latifa et al., 2015)

2.2 Project-Based Learning

2.2.1 Definition of Project-Based Learning

As stated by Bell (2000), Project-Based learning refers to a teaching

approach where students learn language through a project To work on the project, according to Thomas (2000) and Nunan (2004), learners are required to work in groups

or individually in order to perform a collection of activities with a sequence of integrated tasks including designing, problem-solving, decision making or investigating to create a final product The ending product may include “small scale products such as a research topic or it could be extended to be larger-scale products such as exhibitions, murals, or even full plays” (Fischer, 2015) Larmer, Markham, & Ravitz (as cited in Astawa, Artini & Nitiasih, 2017) indicated that working around the

project, students have opportunities to plan, implement, reflect, and evaluate their own learning throughout the research and project phases in a whole term or academic year

In an additional view, Project-Based Learning is rather a constructivist teaching approach, in which “learning is a process of establishing a link between the new information and the information that exists in individuals” (Ayaz, 2015) In other words, the constructivist-teaching approach encourages learners to construct their own understanding and knowledge of the world As such, Project-Based learning is one of the most used strategies to meet the principles of constructivism including student-centered learning environment and real-life connection In PBL classroom, students become creators of the project (Pelavin Research Institute, as cited by Amalia & Apriani, 2016) Kim (2001) and Bas (2011) clarified that learners become center when being actively involved in the decision making process and the teacher, as a facilitator,

is responsible for providing opportunities to make sure that every step is going well

To summarize, many explanations have been provided as defined terms of PBL Understood in another way, PBL refers to a long-term learning approach in which students are engaged in collaborative work related to solving real-world issues or authentic tasks Compared with TBLT, whose central focus of the lesson is the task itslf, PBL requires learners to conduct a project, which serves as the basis for the whole semester’s teaching and learning objective (Ngoc & Iwashita, 2012; Viet & Barnard, 2015) In this student-driven and teacher-facilitated approach, learners develop their given topic through experiencing things and reflecting on those experiences under the

teacher’s supervision

2.2.2 Characteristics of Project-Based Learning

Project-Based Learning characterizes the features that agree with its definition (Rochmahwati, 2015) As such, four main characteristics of PBL include a) students become centered and self-responsible for learning; b) the project is from actual situations in real life and shows its connection with society; c) it should be in group-

work; and d) the project is conducted in a process and provides a shared product (Thomas, 2000; Krajcik & Blumenfeld, 2006; Rochmahwati, 2015; Eickholt, 2019) First, PBL offers a teaching and learning situation where students become more centered and self-responsible for their learning The learning approach shifts away from a traditional teacher-centered learning environment to motivate learners’ personal responsibility at a high level (Krajcik & Blumenfeld, 2006; Stoller, 2006) Under PBL, students experience a “collegial atmosphere” where “students actively engage inn substantive dialog with faculty members regarding their course work and the application of knowledge within the context of their project” (Barge, 2010, p.15, as cited by Marwan, 2015) For the most part, it requires the students to take their ownership of the learning process by making great efforts in order to complete the project (Amalia & Apriani, 2016) In addition, Hee (2017) added that students voluntarily perform the tasks, utilize the time, or carry out authentic research by themselves under the medication of PBL

Second, working on the project means that students are approaching actual situations in real life and become connected with society According to Bell (2010), PBL allows learners to apply knowledge to real contexts Not only do students complete both authentic tasks and activities but they also interact with the community where they are living, even wider real-world community during the steps of project (Thomas, 2000; Lam, 2011), and their performances, thus, are under real world relevance and utility

Third, PBL motivates the group-work among learners Krajcik & Blumenfelf (2006) compared the process of PBL as a social interaction made collaboratively by teacher, students, and community individuals to produce a shared understanding The working relationship, especially conceptual understanding among members, is established during the project (Krajcik & Czerniak, 2007; Karaçalli & Korur, 2014) Thus, students create a more productive achievement compared to when they work

separately (Kapp, 2009) For the same reason, Siritararatn (2015) and Hee (2017) supported that it is cooperation among learners that motivates both interpersonal relationship and individual development

Forth, it is a learning process that creates a product to be shared An accomplished project requires quite sustained efforts from students in period of working time with different stages (Bas, 2011; Marwan, 2015) According to the authors, students experience meaningful and authentic learning activities in which they debate, negotiate, search for statistics, make decision and come up with the solution The working process finally produces a significant product, which both reflects students’ attempts and is presented in publicity (Amalia & Aprania, 2016; Ady Marcela

& Gómez Rodríguez, 2017) In regarding to the product of the project, Amalia & Aprania (2016) and Hee (2017) defined a product as a media through which students present the knowledge they acquired after the approach to the real world The project product may be in small scale like a research topic or a larger extent form such as mural pieces, technological products, exhibitions or even drama and plays

2.2.3 The application of PBL in English speaking teaching

The nature of PBL lies in students’ working during different stages to complete a project, which makes the practice of teaching convenient in line with these stages According to Rochmawati (2015), application of PBL in teaching speaking focuses on choosing speaking topics that offer an “in-depth investigation” whose real-life topics are worth learners’ interest and attempt This is related to the language instructors’ consideration before implementing the learning approach and their explanation at the beginning of the learning course The first speaking lessons may start with an open-ended question about a concerned problem in students’ community or society, which presents challenges for students to deal with (Hee, 2017) Next, the step of developing the project includes the organization of various oral tasks or activities so that students experience as much using language-time as possible (Mali, 2017 & Vu, 2018)

Accordingly, taking part in debating in group, sharing the information, solving the problems in the projects or giving feedback for their friends’ performance helps maximize their using verbal language Finally, Sirisrimangkorn (2018) indicated the importance of facilitating the speaking practice during the phase of product presentation or project evaluation The suggested speaking activities in these stages including oral presentation, a play or an oral exhibit Hence, according to Dilekli (2020), the product may be in any forms as long as it reaches defined goals of the speaking course and demonstrates students’ deeper learning as well as their ability to solve a real-life issue after a long-term, cooperative and creative working process

2.2.4 The evolution from CLT into TBLT and into PBL in teaching speaking

Language teaching methods have experienced significant developments during the last 50 years, and teaching speaking has made new demands for both language teachers and learners According to Md (2018), teaching speaking requires teachers to implement “both transactional and interactional approach for ensuring its effectiveness and smooth performance” (p 97) In this regards, a variety of techniques has been employed in the process of teaching speaking, following the principles of new language teaching methods and approaches The implementation of PBL in teaching speaking is put in the comparison with using Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) and Task-Based Language Teaching (TBLT)

First, appearing in the 1980s to overcome weakness of the previous methods of teaching, CLT emphasizes the development of communicative competence among learners In particular, language learning considers oral production as the first goal and students learn to communicate by taking part in various activities where they are required to interact with their peers, using the target language In addition, activities in CLT are designed for the purpose of real communication while learners become center

to practice language exposed in various techniques including role-plays, conversations, presentations, games, pair and group work, etc (Natsir & Sanjaya, 2014; Richards &

Rodgers, 2014) The method, in this way, makes the classroom activities more interesting and then foster learners’ desire to communicate since they are more flexible

to choose vocabulary or the way they want to say, which remove similar limitations of the previous methods

Still, because of its goal in motivating the use of language, CLT creates “a relatively uncontrolled range of language use on the part of students, and thus expecting the teacher to be able to respond to any and every language problem which may come up” (Harmer, 1991, p.70) Thus, in the teaching contexts where there is a lack of native teachers, non-native ones are required to equip themselves with both psychological and pedagogical knowledge to have students’ language use become understandable and controllable Moreover, Thamarana’s (2015) reviews figured out the more effectiveness of this method for learners at higher level like intermediate or advanced students, but beginners It was explained by Thamarana that CLT emphasizes the functions of language in communicative situations in freer practice, which seems to

be challenging to beginners who are familiar with more controlled practice

Later, TBLT is an improvement of CLT to give learners more chance to practice using language in authentic situations by accomplishing given tasks (Namaziandost, Nasri, & Ahmadi, 2019) The approach focuses on the process of language acquisition rather than the product so that learners are able to develop their knowledge and skill, based on the way they mechanize their language in order to complete a task In the aspect of communication, their capacity to manage target language improves as a result

of various opportunities to associate with their partners (Nahavandi & Mukundan, 2012) Moreover, Nahavandi and Mukundan (2012) added that the tasks used in TBLT are required to be as communicative as possible, thus foster learners’ inspiration to convey in objective language

However, there exist uncertainties among teachers when applying this approach According to Littlewood (2007), its most concerned issue is teachers’ unclear

understanding of the concept of the task, which sometimes leads to a failure to distinct tasks and non-tasks Even when the concept of task makes sense to language teachers,

it is not always easy for them to interpret tasks to be communicative since these tasks

do not usually coincide with those set in the teaching curriculum or syllabus

In short, the limitations of previous teaching methods create a need for newer ones that contribute to fulfilling learners’ communicative competence Thus, PBL is likely to involve numerous success and overcome drawbacks from the earlier methods Under its characteristics, the teaching approach introduces a collaborative and long-term learning process where students work in an authentic learning environment with abundant time of using language orally Not only do learners experience different missions in the process like designing, investigating, problem-solving and decision making, but they also create a final product that can be orally

2.2.5 Types of project

Working on a project, as advantages of PBL mentioned above, helps foster various skills among learners Therefore, choosing an appropriate project among its various types is a vital decision of the teacher to encourage the benefits of the teaching approach Literature reviews mention different kinds of project in relation with the identified goals of the project

First, Haines (1989) and Legutke & Thomas (1991, as cited by Ke, 2010) proposed different kinds of projects according to the technique of collecting data As such, the required project can be a research, a text, a correspondence, survey or encounter one Later, Ke (2010) reviewed three types of projects including structured, unstructured, and semi-structured project, basing on the process in which the teacher organizes the tasks around the project and nature of these tasks In structured project, the teacher is responsible for determining the topic, clarifying materials or process, organizing related-project activities, and controlling the presentation of the product Unstructured project is mostly determined and completed by students themselves while

semi-structured project is finished by both the teacher and students, both of whom partly contribute to the project

In another view, according to Whitley (2006), depending on the way students present their final products, three common kinds of project that are used include production project, performance project and organizational project Later, Ke (2010) share the same view According to the two authors, production project requires students perform a set of activities and the learning outcome is a concrete product Ke (2010) added that the expected product may be constructive forms like maps, charts, diagram, models, etc or artistic products like a piece of music, poster, drawing, etc In the second type of project, students show their products in forms of language performance (Ke, 2010), which can be “a stage play, a news reporting program, an oral presentation” (Siritararatn, 2015, p 339) The organizational project expects students

to create “multiple and varied outputs with different and changeable skills and roles” such as “strategic consultancy, enterprise software, innovative business services” (Whitley, 2006, p 84)

Later, Foss et al (2008) analysed the project’s practical effectiveness and classified it into four types of project namely the Wikipedia Project, the Newspaper Project, the Small-Groups Video Project, and the Whole-Group Video Project According to the authors, working on a Wikipedia Project or Web – Based Project means that students have an opportunity to publish on Wikipedia, a mainstay for students to search for information, the findings of their research such as a university retreat entry The creation of the Wikipedia entry and the oral presentation of the outcome is effective in encouraging students to draw on English and developing their technological skill (Foss et al., 2008) The Newspaper Project, on the other hand, promotes learners’ reading and writing ability They learn about different real-world literary scenarios from a newspaper and experience the process of researching, designing, writing, and publishing a newspaper The Small-Groups Video Project is

similar to the first type in term of using technology However, this kind of project focuses on learners’ ability of producing a video or editing a computer software through which they practice writing the scripts for short films in small groups During the project, English is used as the language of debating, and students post their writing product to have it commented online by their friends via Nicenet Finally, the Whole-Group Project is a more extended project in which all students take part in one project, but the final goal is to produce only one piece of film or short movie Each student plays different role such as director, costume designer, camera operator, and editor and

so on

In short, the product of a project varies according to the goal of PBL No matter what forms of product are targeted, that students are able to create a tangible product is a manifestation of the effectiveness of PBL (Foss et al., 2008) Basing on the aim of implementing PBL, teachers identify an appropriate type of project so that students can make full use of the benefits of the teaching method in improving their learning achievements

2.2.6 The relationship between types of project and teaching speaking

Previous studies have presented how different types of projects influence students’ speaking ability The literature review by Ke (2010) emphasized the effectiveness of unstructured project in accelerating students’ role during the process Participating in the project, students are likely to structuring the process themselves, so they develop the ability of converting learning to problem solving context rather than speaking ability This kind of project, hence, is limited in providing students with various opportunities to perform language orally in publicity In the similar shortcoming, despite their usefulness in encouraging students to apply technology to the project creatively, the project types like Wikipedia Project, the Newspaper Project

or two types of Groups Video Project seem to fail to create a learning environment, which maximizes English-speaking time for students

Hence, for the purpose of this current study, which the researcher teacher decided to employ performance project in the combination with production project as the outcome of the learning process The explanation for this is that production project expects a creation of a concrete product in order that students are able to present it to others while performance type requires the product to be showed in the form of a language oral performance According to Stoller (1997), what makes PBL an efficient teaching approach in teaching speaking not only focuses on an end - product presented

in various oral forms but it also facilitates learners’ time to speak in English In addition, Foss et al (2008) emphasized the crucial role of technology skill during a project in order to accelerate the attractiveness of the oral presentation Therefore, technology is encouraged during the execution of the project The expectation for this combination is that students have the most chance of using language with PBL including the language use in group discussions, classroom activities and product display

2.2.7 Steps to implement Project-Based Learning in the classroom

Project-Based Learning is a language teaching approach that requires a collection of activities with a sequence of integrated tasks to solve a real-life problem,

so the implementation of PBL consists of several steps according to the learning objectives and schedule of the learning course Generally, teachers experience four main stages to implement the teaching approach

Step 1 Launching the project

Railsback (2002) indicated that this first stage is to explain to students the importance of the project Main requirements include the learning goals and objectives

of the project, the product evaluation, and the necessary instructions to complete it smoothly In respect with this, it is essential that students grasp thoroughly the required