Fostering verbal interaction in the efl classroom

Thus the objectives of this study are: 1 to examine the current status ofspeaking in the General English class at Ho Chi Minh City henceforth HCMCUniversity of Technology; 2 to find out

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY - HO CHI MINH CITY

UNIVERSITY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES AND HUMANITIES

t1 :lO.01 \/ /1 4 ,J) - 7

7 1):?

FOSTERltiG VERBAL ItiTERACTIOti

lti THE EFL CLASSROOM

A thesis submitted in partial fulillment of the requirements for

the degree of Master of Arts (TESOL)Submitted by NGUYEN TH! LAN HUONG

SupervisorNGUYEN HUYNH E>~T, ED M

Ho Chi Minh City - 2005

STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP

I certify that this thesis entitled

FOSTERUtG VERBAL I"TERACTIO" I" THE EFL

CLASSROOM

is my own work, and that it has not been submitted for the award of any degree

or diploma in any other institution

Ho Chi Minh City, October 30, 2005

Nguyen Thi Lan Hirong,

First and foremost, lowe an enormous debt of gratitude to Mr NguyenHuynh Dat, Ed.M ,my thesis supervisor, whose vigorous and consistent manners

inspired me with the strength and determination to accomplish this work

Burdened as he was with duties and responsibilities at the English Department,

he was still tolerant of my unexpected calls and careful about the proofreading of

my papers Without his invaluable criticisms and constant guidance, I could nothave finished this thesis

I am grateful to all my teachers for their devotion and helpful instructionduring the course

I would especially like to thank Professor Dennis F Berg, my instructor of

Technolog y and Teaching, for his insightful comments on my use of SPSS fordata analysis My sincere thanks are also due to Ms.Nguyen Thi Doan Thir,Ms.r.e Thi Thanh True, Ms VO Thi Phuong Oanh, Ms 86 CMu Cue Phuong, Mr.Trdn Minh Canh, Mr Tra Van Trung, Mr Huynh Cong Khanh, Mr Le Cong

Thien,Ms Tran Thi Dung, Mr Nguyen Nhu Tung, Ms Huynh Thi Bich Phuong,

Mr Le Vuong Nguyen, and Mr Pharn Xuan Thao, who helped with the data

collection and who suggested viable solutions to the investigated problem; to allthe students who participated in the study for their willing and productive

cooperation; and to all my friends and colleagues for their sharing and supportive

companionship

Last but not least, my heartfelt thanks go to my family for theirunwavering love, understanding, and encouragement

This thesis investigated verbal interaction in the EFL context of Ho ChiMinh City University of Technology The survey respondents include 104freshmen and 13 teachers of General English at Linh Trung branch Resultsindicate disparity between belief and practice Students' receptivity to thespoken language was impeded by perceived low English proficiency, obstructivedifficulties, and by an assessment system based on discrete-point tests Teachers,likewise, being driven by pressure of curriculum coverage and written evidence

of students' achievement in examination, failed to activate the use of English forcommunicative purposes in the classroom The study also suggests a number ofrecommendations so that instructors and learners can become fully committed toteaching and learning the communication skills The study is an effort to fulfillthe practicability of language teaching and learning

2.1 DESCRIPTION OF THE ENGLISH COURSE FOR FIRST-YEAR

2.2THE IMPORTANCE OF THE ENGLISH SYLLABUS AT

3.2.1The influence of syllabusand examination 1

4.2.3 Data Collection Procedure s 44

5.3 DIFFICULTIES HINDERINGACTIVE PARTICIPATIONIN SPOKEN

5.5.1Exten tOf Exposur e Given ToLearn er 585.5.2Correlation Of TeacherTalkAnd Student' s Use OfTarget

Student Questionnaire (in English translation) vTeacher Questionnaire (in Vietnamese) ixTeacher Questionnaire (in English translation) xii

Student's extra ideas on the reasons why they like to speakEnglish (in Vietnamese and in English translation) xvStudent's reasons to dislike speaking xviTeacher's justification on student's disfavor of speaking xviStudent's reactions to a vocabula ry problem in oral

Teacher's familiar mode of organizing classactivities xviiFrequency of teacher and student's use of English under

Teacher's suggestions for improving speaking (in

Teacher's suggestions for improving speaking (in English

Funny stories for pair work training xxv

A reading text for pair and group work training xxvi

A crossword for pair work training xxvii

A communication crossword (Student A) xxix

A communication crossword (Student B) xxx

LIST OF TABLES

CHAPTER 4

Table 4.1

Table 4.2

Personal characteristics of the teacher sample 41

"Do you give time for students to practice speaking in class? " 48Types of speaking activities used in class 48

Student's justification on their not always speaking English 58Evaluation of student's speaking proficiency 65Student's opinions about improving speaking ability 66

Reacti onsto a vocabulary problem inspeech production 56

Te acher' s famili ar mode of orga nizing class activities 57

Teacher' s use of English toteach othe r skills - compa ring bet ween

Teacher' s use ofEnglish to direct and ask questions - compa ring

betw een stude nt's and te acher' sideas 59

Te acher' s use ofEnglish to cha twith class- compari ng bet we en

stude nt' sand teacher' s ideas 59

De gree of corre lation betwe en te achertalk and stude nt's use of

Ho Chi Minh CityInformation TechnologyFirst Language

Foreign/ Second LanguageMaster of Arts

Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages

1.1 THE PROBLEM

Learning a language is, first and primarily, learning to communicate inthat language (Allwright and Bailey 1991; Shumin 1997; Zhenhui 1999; Rudder1999; Offner 2002) When Vietnamese students come to university, safe forthose who live in remote areas of the country, most of them have had a seven-year experience in English instruction At university, they are often supplied withnew up-to-date textbooks which focus on the communicative side of languagelearning Hence it can be expected that these students are fluent speakers ofEnglish Unfortunately, the reverse is the case Although they did an excellentjob in the written examination, which have a relatively important part on stressand pronunciation, the majority of non-English majors find it difficult to expressthemselves verbally Some can list pronunciation rules in the blink of an eye butapply deviant stress patterns when they speak and stumble over simple familiarwords

With a growing trend towards renovation and integration in Vietnam,more and more countries are coming to invest in the Vietnamese market, whiledomestic companies also develop trading with foreign countries within thenearby area or from all over the world The industrial and commercial shifts

have called for a workforce with specialization as well as communicativecompetence However, according to the statistics recorded at L&A recruitingcompany, only 10% of the engineering candidates for jobs are very good atEnglish, 10% are good, 20% are average, and the remaining 60% can hardlycommunicate in English at all (Pham Thi My L~ 2004) The fact that more andmore non-majored students of English finish the full English curriculum withoutbeing able to interact in English leads to a big question of whether verbalcommunication is properly woven into class activities Another question iswhether something can be done to gain better results.

1.2 AIMS OF THE STUDY

The purpose of this paper is to find out why after so many years oflearning English, students still cannot speak English, at least to an acceptablelevel Thus the objectives of this study are: (1) to examine the current status ofspeaking in the General English class at Ho Chi Minh City (henceforth HCMC)University of Technology; (2) to find out the difficulties students encounter inlearning the spoken language; and (3) to provide recommendations forimprovement of the teaching and learning English as interaction at TechnologyUniversity

To achieve these objectives, an investigation was carried out basing on:(1) a questionnaire asking students about their motivation, difficulties andlanguage learning priorities concerning oral communication; (2) a similarquestionnaire to get an understanding of the situation from teachers' viewpoint

as well as to seek for teachers' suggestions on how to improve oracy in this EFLsetting; and (3) informal talks with the students and teachers to get insights intotheir standpoints

1.3 RESEARCH QUESTIONS

One question guides this study:

Is it possible to enhance verbal interaction in an EFL classroom?

Five subquestions are also addressed :

(1) What is the status of oracy in the EFL class at HCMC University ofTechnology?

(2)What makes learners like or dislike the talking time in their EFL class?

(3) What difficulties do EFL learners encounter when practicing spoke nEnglish?

(4) What are preferable modes of learning and teaching of verb al inter action

in this context?

(5) Is there a relationship betw een the amount of teach er talk in English andthe quantity of stude nt's use of the targ et langua ge ?

as on certain predictions about the state of the artof oracy within theinvestigated

context First, it was possible that oracywas ignored in the General English class

at Technology University Second, it was probable that stude nts did the talkingbecause they knew it would be useful for their future jobs, they wanted toimprove their speaking ability, or they just wanted to please the teach er

Meanwhile, they might hate speaking because of an engagement problem(Gebhard 1996), grammar keenness, or a lack of examimation incentives Third,

they might find it impossible to verbalize because of bad pronunciation,ungrammatical utterances, or vocabulary shortage It was also guessed that thesestudents were not used to doing pair and group work and thus would not favorthese kinds of activities Still,it was really hoped that more English employed bythe teacher would lead to more verbal participation on the part of the students.Data was hence collected and analyzed to ascertain the above assumptions

1.4 METHODOLOGY

This is a descriptive and interpretative study based on a combination ofboth quantitative and qualitative research methods According to Doctor £>6 HuyThinh (1996), "multiple methods can contribute to methodological rigor; i.e.,

produce greater confidence in results, elicit creativity in problem definition,discover unusual or deviant dimensions of phenomena, and lead to moreinclusive theorizing" (p.14) Also, a descriptive-interpretative approach isjustifiable as "quantitative analyses give a solid empirical foundation to thefindings; non-quantitative analyses are required for the interpretation Eithertype of analysis in isolation gives an incomplete description" (Biber 1988: 52)

Data on students' attitudes, motivation and practice were gathered throughtwo sets of questionnaires: one to 104 students and the other to 13 teachers in thesame setting Unstructured interviews with the students and teachers were alsoheld throughout the General English course to get a more comprehensiveunderstanding of their profound beliefs and viewpoints A number of suggestedactivities in the recommendation section have actually been carried out in twopiloted classes.

1.5 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

1.5.1Theoretical Significance

As a current trend in second language acquisition research andeducational research in general, "the ways in which teachers and learnersinteract in the classroom have become a major concern in the attempt to makeeducational research more accessible and practical" (Brown and Rodgers 2002:79) The present study attempts to make a contribution to the general literature

of TESOL by giving a picturesque description of the teaching and learning ofEnglish as a foreign language in Vietnam along with previous research incountries such as South Korea, Japan, Hong Kong, and China

Also, that the amount of teacher's use of the target language correlatespositively with the quantity of learner's use of the target language, as is shown inZilm's (1989, reported in Nunan 1991) study with her German class, leads to aninteresting question of whether the same results will be seen in an English class

In this way, the study is meant as a link to previous studies

1.5.2Practical Significance

In Vietnam, within the context of Post Graduate Program at HanoiUniversity of Foreign Studies and HCMC University of Social Sciences andHumanities, there has been much research on English majors (Hoang Thi ThanhTrang 1999; Nguyen Thi Thtiy Ngoc 2000; Tr~n Kim Harig 2004) whosespeaking skills help to distinguish them from other English learners There hasalso been research on learners at foreign language centers (VO Thi Phuong Oanh2005) the majority of whom often have an immediate goal of mastering spoken

English for better job perspectives However, little attention has been paid tonon-English majors at colleges and universities who have been learning English

as a compulsory subject without very clear goals and objectives It is worthconsidering these students' practical needs and motivation

Furthermore, as emphasized by Doctor Nguyen The'Bao (2004), Head ofthe Foreign Language Center at HCMC University of Technology, a recent shift

of focus to communicative language teaching at the university is reasonable andessential, given the increasing needs to social transformation and internationalintegration Thus, further research is needed to investigate the effe ctive ness ofGeneral English instruction at the university in equipping stude nts with the oralproduction skills required for theirstudy and future employment

it However, as the 13 teachers involved in the study were teaching acrossdifferent majors, responses basing on their own classes may differ considerablyfrom those of the Computer Science subjects, considering their stude nts' lowerlevel of proficiency

Furthermore, there are a number of factors such as aptitude, cognitivestyles, personality, and self-esteem that may influence learners' ability to

develop the speaking skills Nonetheless, they are not within the scope of thepresent study It is therefore hoped that those issues will be addressed in futurestudies for empirical evidence.

1.7 DELIMITATION

This study confines itself to first-year students majoring In ComputerScience at HCMC University of Technology To some extent, it can begeneralized to all freshmen at HCMC University of Technology, Linh Trungbranch However, the findings of the study may not be generalized to universities

of a different context

1.8 DEFINITION OF VARIABLES

Communicative competence: communicative competence can be defined

as "the ability to function in a truly communicative setting - that is, in a dynamicexchange in which linguistic competence must adjust itself to the totalinformational input, both linguistic and paralinguistic, of one or moreinterlocutors" (Savignon 1972: 9)

Characteristics of communicative competence include: (a) knowledge ofthe grammar and vocabulary of the language; (b) knowledge of rules of speaking(e.g., knowing how to begin and end conversations, knowing what topics can betalked about in different types of speech events, knowing which address formsshould be used with different persons one speaks to and in different situations);(c) knowing how to use and respond to different types of speech acts such asrequests, apologies, thanks, and invitations; (d) knowing how to use languageappropriately

(Richards et al 1992: 65)Within the present thesis, 'communicative competence' is usedsynonymously with 'oral communication competence', 'oral competence', and'speaking competence.'

Similarly, "speaking skills ", "interactional communication skills ", "oralcommunication skills ", "interactional skills ", "spoken communication skills ",

"oral language skills", and "oral production skills" are used interchangeably

1.9 OVERVIEW OF THE THESIS

The thesis consists of seven main chapters as follows:

Chapter 1 identifies the problem, aims, research questions, methodology,significance, limitation, delimitation, definition of variables, and overview of thethesis

Chapter 2 serves as the background to the study with a description of theEnglish course for first-year non-English majors at HCMC University ofTechnology

Chapter 3 presents a review of the literature related to this study in sixsections: (1) interaction and acquisition; (2) status of oracy; (3) motivation; (4)difficulties; (5) pair and group work; and (6) teacher talk The chapter gives rise

to the need for further research in the Vietnamese context so as to continue theongoing dialogue among practitioners and researchers in order to better benefitlanguage learners and improve language teaching

Chapter 4 describes the methodology used in the study and establishes asound basis for the data collection process This chapter includes a presentation

of the research questions and design, and a report on the subjects, instruments,and data collection procedures

Chapter 5 analyzes the data collected and discusses the research findings

to answer previous queries in chapter 3

Chapter 6 discusses the implications of the findings and suggestsrecommendations to enhance students' ability to speak English

Chapter 7 draws a conclusion to the thesis

CHAPTER 2

BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY

This chapter presents the back ground inform ation essential for anunderstanding of the issues tobe discussed in the thesis.The chapter consists of

two sections The firstsectionis a brief description of the Gen eral English course

at HCMC University of Technology The second section discusse s theimportanc e ofthe English syllabus at the university

2.1 DESCRIPTION OF THE ENGLISH SYLLABUS FOR FIRST-YEARSTUDENTS AT HCMC UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY

2.1.1 The Course

All freshmen at HCMC University of Technology have to underg o a two

-semes te r curriculum of General English During each semes te r, the Englishcourse is taken over 14 weeks, covering 70 classroom periods There are twoclass meetings per week , one lasts for two 45-rninute peri ods and the othe r forthree peri ods

2.1.2 The Textbook

The textbook being used is En glish Kn owHow 2 (Nabe r and Blackwell

2004), including a Student Book and a Workbook, which ranks the third in a

series of four le vel s from beginning to intermedi ate ( KnowHow Op ener,

Kn owHow 1, Kn owHow 2, a nd Kn owHow 3) E nglish Kn owHow 2 hen ce

corresponds to the pre-intermediate level The whole book consists of 1 units to

be learnedover 2 semes ters

2.1.3 The Students And Exams

The number of students in each class goes between 35 and 45 At thebeginning of the first semester, students take a placement test includinggrammar, vocabulary and reading, and an auditory discrimination section Afterthe placement test, students are then divided into homogeneous classes Thosewhose language proficiency shown from the results of the placement test isbelow the pre-intermediate level will have to take an additional course of

English KnowHow 1 Throughout the course, two other tests are assigned: theMidterm Examination which takes up 20% of the total score and the FinalExamination bearing the remaining 80% All the three tests, namely PlacementTest, Midterm Examination and End-of- Term Examination are formatted in themultiple-choice form and marked by computers

TECHNOLOGY UNIVERSITY, HO CHI MINH CITY

At a special seminar on English Teaching at HCMC University ofTechnology in October, 2004, Mr Nguyen Thanh Nam, Head of AcademicAffairs Office noticed a difference in English proficiency among students uponcoming to the university He also acknowledged the fact that English instruction

at the university was still heavily conformed to formality and failed to addresslearners' needs (Nguyen Thanh Nam 2004) The need to learn interactiveEnglish was highlighted by the manager of a recruiting company present at theseminar, who claimed that 90% of want ads for engineers, either from domesticcompanies, joint-venture enterprises or international corporations, require good

or fluent English speaking ability as a prerequisite for employment (Pham Thi

My L~ 2005) As an initial step to reformation, the Academic Affairs Officedecided to implement a placement test to put students in even levels, and

increase the amount of the General English syllabus from 56 to 70 periods foreach semester More time was suggested to complete the whole series of thenew course book English KnowHow Hence from the schoolyear of 2005-2006,

all sophomores at the university will continue to learn English KnowHow 3 English KnowHow 2, which has been used since the previous year, affirms the

./ Challenge learners to become aware of language in context;

./ Build confidence with clear, step-by-step language presentations andcontrolled practice leading to free and creative language use;

./ Offer frequent opportunities for students to express their own ideas Inspeaking and writing;

./ Involve students in the learning process by providing tips for more efficientlearning and frequent opportunities for personalization;

./ Combine the best of the established and new in a coherent and logicalapproach to language teaching; and

./ Address the practical needs of teachers and students in a variety of learningsituations

(Adams 2004:IV)

On September 17, 2005, HCMC University of Technology organized aworkshop on teaching the English KnowHow series with the support of Oxford

University Press The Foreign Language Center is holding two more workshops

in the corning November and December and promises these will become regular

activities of the center so that teachers can share experience and improve theteaching quality (Nguyen The' Bao 2005).

2.3 SUMMARY

The chapter has provided descriptive information about the Englishsyllabus at Technology University, including the course, the textbook, thestudents and examinations The justification of the English syllabus withininstructional practices at the university has also been stated

CHAPTER 3

LITERATURE REVIEW

In chapter 1, the background to the study has been presented In thischapter, the literature relevant to the study is reviewed in six sections: 0)Interaction and acquisition; (2) Status of oracy; (3) Motivation; (4) Difficulties;(5) Pair and group work; and (6) Teacher talk The literature aims at providing atheoretical base for the subsequent chapters

3.1 INTERACTION AND ACQUISITION

Brown (994) defines interaction as, "the collaborative exchange ofthoughts, feelings, or ideas between two or more people, resulting in a reciprocaleffect on each other" (p.159) According to Ellis (990), "Any second languagethat takes place must in some way result from the process of interaction thelearner takes part in" (p 91) In Klippel's (984) belief, "Learning is moreeffective if the learners are actively involved in the process" (p 5) Also, Lewisand Hill (985) agree that "Effective language teaching means giving thestudents a chance to speak" (pAS) Thus as Lier (998) observes, "Most currentviews of language education are based on the assumption that social interactionplays a central role in the learning process" (p 157) The benefits of interactionare pinpointed in River's 0987, cited in Brown 1994: 159) remark:

Through interaction, students can increase their language store as they listen

to or read authentic linguistic material, or even the output of their fellowstudents in discussions, skits, joint problem-solving tasks, or dialogue journals

In interaction, students can use all they possess of the language - all theyhave learned or casually absorbed - in real-life exchanges

In other words, talk emerging from interaction helps learners to order andreorder their thinking, reasoning and problem solving, as such enables them totake an active and reflective role in their own learning (Grainger 2000).

Indeed, current literature on language learning and teaching has beenrepeatedly insisting that, "for most learners, acquisition of a second language willtake place only to the extent that those learners are exposed to and engaged incontextually rich, genuine, meaningful communication in that language" (Taylor1987: 46).In her study of Canadian immersion children in 1985, Swain wonderedwhy the children did not reach an expected level of second languagedevelopment Looking back at the classroom instructional patterns, she found thatthe teacher talked a great deal, but the children got a say very little On theground of this finding,Swain formulated the "comprehensible output"hypothesis,which suggests that opportunities to produce language were crucial foracquisition A number of researchers have taken up Swain's work andinvestigated in greater detail the impact of interactional opportunities in thetarget language on acquisition Hence, as it has been verified, chances to activateknowledge through output activities is a significant factor in acquiring a foreignlanguage (Zhou 1991; Wudung 1994; reported in Nunan 1999) Moreover,learner participation in class leads to dramatic progress in language proficiencyand noteworthy grammatical accuracy (Montgomery and Eisenstein 1985; Lim1992; reported in Nunan 1999)

Long (1985, reported in Nunan 1999) stresses the fundamental role ofnegotiated interaction in language acquisition His interactional hypothesis goes

as follows:

According to this hypothesis,language is acquired as learners actively engage

in attempting to communicate in the target language The hypothesis isconsistent with the experiential philosophy of 'learning by doing' Acquisition

will be maximized when learners engage in tasks that 'push' them to the limits

of their current competence

(Op cit :51)

Pica, Holliday, et al (1989, cited in Shehadeh 1999) also believe that thenegotiation of meaning help learners to "gain opportunities to attempt production

of new L2 words and grammatical structures "

From evidence of the above studies, Nunan (1999) argues, "In order tomaximize the effects of instruction, learners need opportunities to use thestructures they are learning in communicative interaction" (p.49)

Furthermore, given that language is used primarily as a tool ofcommunication, the capacity to communicate should be the ultimate goal of anyEnglish language course As Nunan reasons,

One of the major reasons for widening the scope of language context beyondgrammatical structures,lexis and pronunciation, to functions, notions, settings,and so on, was the fact that most learners seemed relatively ineffective atapplying their grammatical knowledge to communicative language use outsidethe classroom

(Nunan 1988: 78)

Indeed, learners have few conversational rights in traditional lessons.English is treated like an academic subject, and a lot of emphasis is placed onreading and translating Grammar rules are explained in the learner's ownlanguage New items of vocabulary are provided together with translationequivalents to be learnt by rote The teacher's role is a dominant lecturer and thestudents are passive listeners, being carried forward in the learning experience

by the teacher There is little evidence of opportunities for students to initiate,

control the topic of discussion or engage in meaning-focused interaction (Johnson1995) As a rule, the teaching of EFL in most East Asian countries is alsocharacterized by teacher centerness, grammar-translation method, and anemphasis on rote learning (Liu and Littlewood 1997, cited in Zhenhui 2002).Below are some excerpts of learners' reflection on what they did in the languageclass:

I learn English in school by, just by doing some exercises

Even in English lesson, we don't speak English

(Nunan 1999: 157)

As Nunan (1999: 74) points out, "In traditional language classroom,learners are taught chiefly about language and its rules They learn facts aboutlanguage rather than how to use it communicatively to express ideas, to talk andwrite to other people, to read and listen to real language, and to learn how tocooperate with others." The main kinds of speaking learners have in thetraditional lesson are to read orally, repeat after the teacher, and do grammardrills An ingenuous assumption that competence can be acquired solely byintensive practice of isolated forms is easily repudiated on evidence of either ofthese ineffective outcomes:

(I) the form is never learned;

(2) the form is learned but overgeneralized to the wrong contexts;

(3) the use of the form declines quickly after the intensive practicing ends;(4) one learned form may disappear when another related form is learned,almost as if the 15 form had never been learned, as is shown bycomparison with other learners who do not undergo the intensivepracticing:both groups of learners arrive at the same point

(Doughty 1998: 130)

Taylor (1987) shares Widdowson's (1981, reported in Taylor 1987) viewswhen he says, "the major weakness of grammar-based instruction is not that thefocus of attention is on structure, but rather that, in teaching, structures are oftennot represented as a resource to communicate meaning" (p 56) The result iseither learners fail to effectively utilize language knowledge, or they may beaccumulating knowledge that is inaccurate or ultimately unnecessary in theprocess of language acquisition (Doughty 1998) Followed is Wolfgang Kahler's(1993) argument:

If our students are to become effective communicators 10 the targetlanguage, we must provide them with ample opportunities to develop inthe classroom the communication in the 'real world.'

To Welker's (2002) belief, "A thousand meetings, the best textbooks,creative teaching materials, even native speakers visiting the classroom aren'tgoing to 'give' ESL students English communicative ability Only by usingEnglish communicatively with their teacher and classmates will students developthe ability to speak English "

Here is Catherine Doughty's (1998: 134) justification for the movementfrom highly structured, teacher-centered, grammar-based to communicativelearner-centered,meaning-based instruction:

The complete pedagogical swing from language in isolation to language ascommunication may have been inevitable in overcoming the constraints of thetraditional environment that made the classroom perhaps the worst place toacquire competence in a second language

Klippel (1984) stresses the importance of giving learners in speaking settings exposure in real communicative situations so that they can learn

non-English-to express their own views and attitudes It is also Zhenhui' s (1999) idea that "forthe students who are learning English in a non-English-speaking country,there islittle chance for them to learn an acceptable form of English outside theclassroom So, in order to achieve accuracy, students need rigorous languagetraining in their classes" (p 27) Classroom instruction, therefore, needs toincorporate the following features:

(1) opportunities for students to be exposed to real communication;

(2) opportunities for students to engage in using real communication; and(3) activities which are meaningful to students and which will motivate them

to become committed to sustaining that communication to accomplish aspecific goal, such as solving a problem or completing a task

(Taylor 1987:47)

3.2 STATUSOFORACY

The quiet buzz of voices from the classroom echoes down the hallway Thethirty some odd students in an intermediate English class in a Bangkok highschool are telling stories, joking, gossiping, talking about the latest popularsongs As the teacher walks in, the students suddenly fall silent, faceuniformly forward, and open their textbooks in anticipation of another Englishlesson, another day of reciting, repeating, copying, reading aloud, translatingsentences, and answering multiple-choice questions

(Brown 1994: 157)

Speaking in an L2 has occupied an outlandish position throughout much ofthe history of language teaching and learning, being overshadowed by readingand writing (for nearly 20 years the TESOL conference has hold annual seminars

on the teaching of reading and writing, but not on speaking and listening)(Bygate, 2001) Although Wilkinson et aI's suggestions of making oracy acondition of learning in all subjects in 1965 received general agreement amongeducationists and language researchers (Barnes et al 1969; Barnes 1976,reported in Grainger 2000), implementation did not happen until the NationalOracy Project of 1987-1993 Thus oracy has finally gained official recognition asthe first Attainment Target in English in the National Curriculum in the latetwentieth century Unfortunately, classroom practice in reality does not seem tooperate around this stated rationale There still exist a number of factors whichcan severely restrict and affect oracy development, among which are curricularrequirements and teaching and learning expectations.

3.2.1 The Influence Of Syllabus And Examination

Naturally, the goals of English courses in state schools and universities areoften established by national curriculum committees or school administratorsrather than by the students or classroom teachers (Johnson 1995).The quantity ofobjectives and emphasis on explicit teaching seem to reaffirm the persistentpattern of teacher-centered instruction (Grainger 2000) Institutional adherence to

a transmission mode of education is also reflected in the physical setting of theclassrooms (Nunan 1999) The result is, as Grainger (2000: 61) depicts,

"pressured practitioners, anxious to cover the detailed content, may be tempted

to inform, instruct, direct and demonstrate, returning to a 'chalk and talk'mentality."

Examination can also have an important effect on the lesson structure inthat the teacher's familiarity with the test formats will influence their choice ofpractice activity Unfortunately, the tests mostly measure vocabulary knowledge,reading and grammatical knowledge, which fail to reflect actual language use(Swain 1987; Nunan 1999) The fact that there is no formal oral test certainlyundermines the perceived status of speaking (Grainger 2000)

The situation is even more serious in EFL settings In Japan, for example,although English is considered one of the most important subjects in school, itsprominence is confined within the entrance examinations to Japanese highschools and universities only Hence, the preoccupation with preparing for theseexaminations has led to English curricula that are restricted primarily togrammar-translation and reading comprehension (Morrow 1987; Johnson 1995;Offner 2002) In South Korea, "Korean middle and high school teachers stillfavor the grammar-translation method, and prefer teacher-centered classrooms inwhich little English is spoken" (Niederhauser 1997: 8) Likewise, "Since mostlanguage teaching in China still focuses on national tests, language is treated as aknowledge subject - analyzed, explained, and practiced in much the same way asother subjects The communicative skills, which require learners to practice inreal situation, are totally ignored Oral English is taught and learned mostly inreading and reciting activities" (Shuying 1999: 22) As a consequence, althoughthey have completed six years of English classes, Korean students are "unable tocarryon simple conversations with native speakers" (Niederhauser 1997: 8)while Chinese students "find it hard to express themselves in oral English" (Zhou1999) Jiang Xia (1998) also comments that students at Xuzhou NormalUniversity, China, are "good at doing multiple-choice exercises but are poor atdoing exercises in which they are asked to produce and create in the language.

This weakness is due to the types of exams the students have to take at the end ofthe semester" (p 30) Similarly, Hong Kong has an extremely exam-driveneducational system,which is reflected in the perpetuation of a transmission-mode

of teaching In his study of 60 first year undergraduate Arts students at theUniversity of Hong Kong, Nunan (1996, reported in Nunan 1999) came up withthe subjects' reports that their prior language experience was directly governed

by examination forces:

In secondary school, in the lesson we only do exercise in order to meet theexam requirement.

In secondary school I hate English very much because I have to resit forvarious examination

In teaching grammar rules we give the students innumerable tests tomeasure the extent to which they have internalized these rules But this is notenough The next steps should encourage the students to use the tools we havegiven them - grammar rules, vocabulary, etc - to produce the languagethemselves

With groups as large as those we have in state schools,there is always thetemptation to just relax and teach in a traditional way - the grammar-

translation method - followed by tests that simply measure the students'passive knowledge, depriving them of the most creative part in the process oflearning a foreign language

(Izquierdo 1993:47)

3.2.2 Teacher And Student Expectations

As professionals, all teachers are compromised by the authoritarianism ofthe school tradition and the requirement to cover the curriculum (Grainger 2000).Constraints on ensuring there is written evidence of learning and to show model

classrooms of studious silence have directed teachers towards products notprocesses (Grainger 2000) In the case of Japan, most Japanese English teachersfeel compelled to prepare their students for the entrance examinations and thustend not to go beyond direct instruction in grammar rules and vocabulary(Steinberg 1985, reported in Johnson 1995) Hence,Johnson (1995:138) remarksthat "mandated curricula can act as a dominant force determining how secondlanguages are taught and learned "

The successful use of oracy also depends upon the status afforded to it bystudents themselves, who may not come to see the value of talk yet Students'past experience, both of education in general and of language learning inparticular, is crucial in shaping their preferred activities (Ellis 1994) Brindley(1984, quoted in Nunan 1988 and Richards and Lockhart 1994) documents someteacher's complaints and student's reasons for an obsession with grammar:

Teachers:

All they want is grammar

They didn't want to go on excursions They wanted to stay in the classroomand do grammar exercises

(Nunan 1988: 94)

Students:

Without the grammar, you can't learn the language

I want something I can take home and study We do a lot of speaking, but wenever see it written down

There is no system in these courses It's all 'bits and pieces'

(Richards & Lockhart 1994: 35)

So it is the teacher's responsibility to convince their learners that learning

a second or foreign language is not a matter of memorizing grammatical rules

F · : : · ·~ · ;~a ' s' ~ti~ · ~-;'~ J and cramming in as many lists of bilingual vocabulary as possible

1 : 6 - ( , ,

Rather, it is to engage in interactive communication so that they can integratethose separate rules and structures and isolated vocabulary items into a creativesystem for expressing meanings.

3.3 MOTIVATION

Motivation is a combination of the attitudes and affective states whichdetermine the degree of effort that learners make to learn an L2 Brown (1981,reported in Ellis 1985) identifies three types of motivation: global motivation ( ageneral orientation to the goal of learning an L2), situational motivation(associated with specific learning situation), and task motivation ( an interest inthe performance of particular learning tasks)

Motivation is an important factor in L2 learning (Ellis 1994).The commonkinds of motivation that language researchers often refer to are instrumental andintegrative motivation

Instrumental motivation involves an interest in how the second languagecan be a useful instrument towards furthering other goals, such as passing anexamination, gaining a necessary qualification or improving employmentprospects (Ellis 1994; Littlewood 1984; Ellis 1997)

Integrative motivation involves a sincere and personal interest in thesecond language community and a desire to learn their language in order tocommunicate with them more satisfactorily and to gain closer contact with themand their culture (Littlewood 1984)

Integrative and instrumental motivation can also be explained in terms of'communicative need for a second language' and 'attitudes towards the second

integrative and instrumental motivation can be referred to as internal andexternal motivation (Lightbown and Spada 1993) Moreover,Ellis (1997) definesanother kind of motivation as opposed to integrative motivation He calls it

'Machiavellian motivation', and explains it as 'the desire to learn the L2 in order

to manipulate and overcome the people of the target language.'

Integrative motivation is responsible for long-term success 10 languagelearning (Taylor, Meynard and Rheault 1977; Crookes et al 1991; Ellis 1997).According to Allwright and Bailey (1991), learners with integrative motivationare often more active in class, volunteer more, make more correct responses, andare less likely to drop out As a result, they receive more positive reinforcementand encouragement than the instrumentally motivated learners Littlewood(1984) notices that in EFL settings, English is used mainly to communicate withoutsiders rather than with people inside the learner's community, thereforelearners are less likely to be sharply aware of a communicative need for it Inother words, these learners' level of integrative motivation is rather low As theymay have little or no interest in the target language culture and few or noopportunities to interact with its members, instrumental motivation, on the otherhand, can be much more powerful in these contexts (Ellis 1994) In sum, learnerswith either integrative or instrumental motivation, or a mixture of both, willmanifest greater effort and perseverance in learning

There are also intrinsic and resultative motivation

Resultative motivation: motivation is not only the cause of L2achievement; it can also be a possible result of learning This means that whenlearners experience success in learning, they may become more motivated tolearn Thus there is an interactive relationship between motivation andachievement Whereas a high level of motivation does accelerate learning,perceived success in learning in turn helps to sustain and develop existingmotivation

Intrinsic motivation: Sometimes it may not be learners' general reasonsfor learning an L2 that are crucial in determining their motivation, because manylearners do not hold clear attitudes, whether positive or negative, towards the

target language group Instead, they may be intrinsically interested in specificlearning activities This is the case of intrinsic motivation (Ellis 1997) Ellis(1994), sharing McNamara's viewpoint (1973, quoted in Ellis 1994) that 'thereally important part of motivation lies in the act of communication', insists thatintrinsic motivation can be enhanced by providing learners with communicativeopportunities.

3.4 DIFFICULTIES

Amy Tsui (1996) remarks that, "Getting students to respond in theclassroom is a problem that most ESL teachers face" (p 145) As Byrne (1988)notices, "Outside the classroom, in the corridors, the playground, the street and athome, it is sometimes difficult to stop them (i.e students) from talking! But that is

in the mother tongue In the foreign language classroom, they can be strangelysilent, reluctant, too shy to open their mouths" (p 23) Brian Bresnihan andBarbara Stoops (1996: 30) insist that "One of the most difficult challenges inteaching a foreign language abroad is finding ways to help students improve theiroral fluency This is especially true in countries where students generally share acommon mother tongue and have little or no exposure to English outside theclassroom." Tsui (1996) also observes that, "The problem of getting students torespond is particularly acute with Asian students,who are generally considered to

be more reserved and reticent than their Western counterparts" (p 145) In herstudy with secondary school learners in Hong Kong, Tsui and her informantsidentified five major factors causing reluctance to speak in the classroom:

1 Student's low proficiency in English: Many teachers ascribed studentreticence to low English proficiency In some cases, the students werecapable of responding to teacher's questions in English, but they were notconfident enough to respond

2 Student's fear of mistakes and derision: Tsui noticed that, besides fear ofmaking fools of themselves in front of their friends, there was a culturalfactor inhibiting these Asian students from speaking up.

3 Teacher's intolerance of silence: many teachers realized they did not givestudents enough time to reply

4 Uneven allocation of turns: teachers tend to call on better students toanswer questions It was inferred that these teachers preferred to call uponbrighter students because they did not want to wait for a response orbecause they were afraid of confusion in their classroom during wait time

5 Incomprehensible input: The teacher's input was sometimes difficult forstudents to understand

Tsui attributed all the above five reasons of reticence to speak to languagelearning anxiety As she points out, language learning is "a process in whichindividual learners are constantly putting themselves in a vulnerable position ofhaving their own self-concept undermined and subjecting themselves to negativeevaluations This process is stressful and likely to generate much anxiety in thelearners" (Tsui 1996: 155)

3.4.1 Anxiety

Anxiety is 'a state of apprehension, a vague fear, a feeling of uneasiness,self-doubt and worry' (Scolvel 1978; Brown 1987; quoted in Gebhard 1996: 61),

as is shown in the confessions of secondary school learners in Algeria:

When the teacher is giving explanations my heart beats strongly and I keepsaying to myself:'It's going to be my tum now.'

Today the teacher has insisted a lot on tenses I had beads of sweat! Me andEnglish tenses have never agreed!

Today we had a quiz.It was very easy but I was so anxious about the secondexercise that I couldn't work

I'll never forget today and the shame I felt Everything started when the

Englishteacher asked me toread afew sentences on the blackboard

(Che rchalli 1988;quoted in Allwright and Bail e y 1991: 175)

Scarcella and Oxford (1992) acknowle dge that motiv ation and attitudesabout learning an ESLI EFL langu ag e are related to anxie ty The te acher's

communication Ellis (1994) refers to anxiety as a particular affective factorinfluencing L2 le arning He distin guishes thre e kinds of anxiety, nam el y traitanxiety, sta te anxiety and situational anxie ty Trait an xiety is a rather permanentcharacter trait which predispose s a person to fe ar of many things Stat e an xiety

can be pre sent at a defin ite time in a certain le arn ing situati on Situa tional a nxiety

arises in a particular type of situation or eve nt such as class participation,examinati on s, or public speaking (Ellis 1994;Scarcella and Oxford 1992) Bel ow

are some of the factors that could provoke anxiety in the languag e learner:

Inabilitytopronounce strangesoundsand words

Notknowingthe meaning of words orsentences

Inability tounderstand andanswer questions

Reputati onof the languageclassasa placeforfailure

Peer criticism

Not knowing orunderstanding coursegoalsor requirements

Testing,especially oral testing

Previousunsuccessfullanguage-leaming attempts

(Ge bhard 1996:61-62)

Although anxiety is harmful to the le arn ing proce ss, a low-an xiet y state(W illia ms 1991, reported in Ellis 1994), or 'a certa in amount of tension '(Sca rcella and Oxford 1992) can be helpful in prompting the le arn er to mak e

extra efforts to finish the new learning task (Ellis 1994) Anxiety is usuallyrelated to speaking in the target language as a result of fear or experience of'losing oneself' in front of the whole class As Littlewood (1984:58) puts it,

In the typical language classroom, learners are often asked to perform in astate of ignorance and dependence which may engender feelings ofhelplessness They have to produce unfamiliar sounds in front of an audience.When they do not perform adequately, they may be subjected to comment andcorrection, sometimes for reasons that are not clear to them Most of them donot possess the linguistic tools to express their own individuality In any case,there is usually little opportunity for this,since the interaction is dominated bythe teacher "

This reality puts the learner in a constant state of anxiety that may makethem feel they project a 'silly, boring image' (Littlewood 1984) and hencebecome withdrawn In the EFL setting, anxiety can create so much apprehensionthat the learner cannot act normally Possible sources of anxiety in the foreignlanguage class have been thoroughly investigated by a number of researchers.Gardner and Smythe (1975, reported in Ellis 1994), for example, studied EnglishUse Anxiety and English Test Anxiety Horwitz, Horwitz, and Cope (1986,reported in Ellis 1994) devise a Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety Scale with

33 items relating to 3 types of performance anxiety: communicationapprehension, test anxiety, and fear of negative evaluation MacIntyre andGardner (1991, reported in Ellis 1994) also use an extensive set of questionnaire

to measure various forms of anxiety

Referring back to Tsui' s (1996) classroom research on the relationshipbetween language anxiety and reticence from speaking, Tsui and her teacherstried six strategies for overcoming anxiety and reluctance to speak, including

len gthening wait time , improving questioni ng techniques, accepting a varie ty ofanswers, le ttin g learners reh earse their responses in pairs or small groups beforespeaking in front of the class, focusing on conte nt rath er than form, and finally,

establis hing good relationships with the stude nts These stra tegies are alsosuggeste d by Little wood (1984) and Da vies and Pearse (2000), who all agree themost import ant fac tor in encouragi ng stude nt voices is to create a low-anxiet yatmosphe re in the classroom Scarce lla and Oxford (1992) give a summary of

anxiety-reduction technique s from the works of Oxford (1990), Lavine andOxford (1990), and Horwitz (1990):

(1)Cre ate a positive learnin g environme nt This can be done by notdepreciating learners in front of thei r friends, by trying to rem ember

le arn ers' nam es, b using an encouragi ng rather than threatening style ofquestioning, by avoiding overcorrection, by avoiding mocke ry andintimidation, by testing fairly what the learner s know rather than giving'trick questions' ,and by addre ssing the le arning styles of all learner sin theclass

(2)Use coope ra tive and group le arn ing with paIr work, group work, orcooperative learning activities, which take the focus off the individual andwhichallow more stude nt-s tude nt inte raction ; and

(3)Praise le arn ers for a job well done

3.4.2The 'E nga ge m e n t' Problem

Quite a large number of stude nts come to the language class with little

experience in how to initiate and participate in English interaction.As such, theywill hesitate to interact, fearing that "things will become out of control, fre nzie d,and emba rrassing" (Ge bhar d 1996: 63) Followed is what a Taiwanese studentrecall s: