Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 90

UNIVERSITY OF LATVIA

FACULTY OF EDUCATION AND PSYCHOLOGY


TEACHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT

USING ROLE-PLAY AS A METHOD OF DEVELOPING SPEAKING


SKILLS IN BASIC SCHOOL

RUNĀŠANAS PRASMJU
ATTĪSTĪBA AR LOMU SPĒĻU PALĪDZĪBU.

DIPLOMA PAPER

AUTHOR: ANNA KOLMAKOVA


ID. NO. SkAn000046

ADVISER: Mg.paed. SANDRA KALNIŅA

RIGA 2008
DECLARATION OF ACADEMIC INTEGRITY

I hereby declare that this study is my own and does not contain any unacknowledged material
from any source.

Date: 4.01.2008

/Anna Kolmakova/ _________________


ABSTRACT

Speaking ability is regarded to be one of the basic measures of knowing a language,


and foreign language learners often find speaking as the most important skill they can acquire
in foreign language learning. The English language teacher’s task is to offer a wide variety of
communicative tasks including role-plays to facilitate their learners’ communicative
competence.
The aim of the present Diploma Paper is to examine the use of role-play as a method
of developing speaking skills in basic school. The present research is conducted on the basis
of a case study, which examines a case of teaching speaking skills through role-play in
Purvciems Secondary School in the period from September until October, 2007. The target
population of the research is sixteen 12-13 years old learners of the seventh form whose
English language proficiency level is Pre-Intermediate. The research data are collected by
means of carrying out pedagogical observation, analyzing the interview with the teacher, and
by means of applying a questionnaire regarding the development of speaking skills through
role-play, which was spread among the learners who took part in the case study.
The results of the present research prove that speaking skills should be regarded as
central to foreign language learning. Role-play is one of the most effective communicative
tasks that facilitate the language learners’ communicative competence. When performing a
role-play, a fluent speaker should produce spoken language with ease, speak with a good but
not necessarily perfect command of intonation, vocabulary, and grammar, communicate ideas
effectively, as well as produce continuous speech without causing comprehension difficulties
or a breakdown of communication. Therefore, role-playing should be incorporated into the
English language syllabus in basic school.
ANOTĀCIJA

Runāšanas prasme tiek uzskatīta par valodas zināšanas vienu no pamata vērtībām. Tie,
kas mācās ārzemju valodu, bieži uzskata runāšanu par vissvarīgāko prasmi, kas nepieciešama,
lai mācoties to. Angļu valodas skolotāja uzdevums ir piedāvāt dažādus komunikatīvos
vingrinājumus, kas ietver sevī arī lomu spēles, tādā veidā sekmējot skolnieku komunicēšanās
spējas.
Šā diplomdarba mērķis ir izvērtēt lomu spēļu izmantošanu, kā metodi, attīstot
runāšanas prasmi pamatskolā. Šis pētījums iepazīstina ar mācību pamatiem, kas tika izvērtēti,
mācot runāšanas prasmi caur lomu spēlēm, Purvciema vidusskolā laika periodā no 2007. gada
septembra līdz 2007. gada oktobrim. Pētījuma mērķauditorija ir skolēni vecumā no 12 – 13
gadiem, kuru angļu valodas zināšanu līmenis ir A2 (pirms sliekšņa līmenis) Pētījuma dati tika
apkopoti, veicot pedagoģiskos novērojumus, analizējot skolotāja interviju, un bez šaubām
izmantojot anketas saistībā ar runāšanas prasmes attīstīšanu caur lomu spēlēm, kas tika
izdalītas starp skolēniem, kas piedalījās šajā pētījumā.
Pētījuma rezultātā tika pierādīts, ka runāšanas prasme ir galvenā, mācot ārzemju
valodu. Lomu spēles ir viens no visefektīvākajiem komunikatīvajiem vingrinājumiem, kas
skolēnos veicina valodu komunicēšanās spēju. Kad izpilda lomu spēles, tas, kurš runā tekoši,
valodas sakāmo saka ar vieglumu, runā ar labu, bet ne pārāk ideālu intonāciju, izmanto
vārdnīcas, gramatikas un komunicēšanās zināšanas, tāpat, kā rada pastāvīgu sarunu, bez
saprašanas grūtībām vai nejaušas sarunas izbeigšanos. Tādā veidā lomu spēles ir jāiekļauj
angļu valodas mācību programmā pamatskolām.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction
1. Aspects of Teaching Speaking Skills in Basic School
1.1. Defining Conversational Competence in Language Teaching and Learning
1.2. Guidelines for Development of Speaking Skills
1.3. Techniques for Assessment of Spoken Language
2. Promoting Learner’s Speaking Skills through Role-play as a Communicative Task
2.1. Concept of Role-play
2.2. Structure and Stages of Role-play
2.3. Integrating Role-play into the Language Curriculum in Basic School
3. Research Case Study on Teaching Speaking Skills
3.1. Analyzing the Use of Role-play in the Language Classroom
3.2. Analyzing the Interview with the Teacher and Learners’ Questionnaires
Conclusions
Theses
Bibliography
Appendices
INTRODUCTION

Speaking skills can be regarded as central to foreign language learning, because


language learners often tend to assess their progress in terms of their accomplishments in
spoken communication. The learners’ ability to communicate in a foreign language greatly
depends on their conversational competence. To communicate successfully, speakers should
be able to understand their own language abilities, skills, personal features, as well as their
ability to socialize and to convey the intended message to the person they are speaking to. A
wide variety of communicative tasks including role-plays which can be practiced in the
English language classroom serve the purpose of facilitating the learners’ communicative
competence. In basic school, language learners may be unaware of the complexity of the
communicative competence. Therefore, the English language teacher’s task is to explain to his
or her learners all aspect of the communication process so that they could employ this
knowledge further in their life.
Communicative competence is defined differently. Richards, Platt, and Weber (1985)
supposes that a fluent speaker should produce spoken language with ease, speak with a good
but not necessarily perfect command of intonation, vocabulary, and grammar, communicate
ideas effectively, as well as produce continuous speech without causing comprehension
difficulties or a breakdown of communication. McDonough and Shaw (2003) suggest that
speaking should involve such areas of knowledge as mechanics (pronunciation, grammar, and
vocabulary), functions (transaction and interaction), and social and cultural rules and norms
(turn-taking, rate of speech, length of pauses between speakers, relative roles of participants).
Cruz-Ferreira and Abraham (2005) stress that in order to realize communicative intentions,
speakers have to display relevant communicative competences, such as personal competence
(self-identification, role identification, creativity, flexibility), language competence (discourse
proficiency, language proficiency), and social competence (realized through cooperativeness
and interactive capacity). Whereas Brown (2003) proposes that competent language speakers
should be able to use communicative language tools (pronunciation, grammar, and
vocabulary, paralinguistic features, kinesic language features, and pragmatics), select
communicative language choices (centring on the choices to be made due to differences in
settings, social, sexual, and psychological roles, as well as register and style), and apply
communicative language strategies (the abilities to use speed to their advantage, to use pauses
and hesitations efficiently, to give appropriate feedback, to repair competently, to clarify
effectively, and to negotiate for meaning when necessary). The author of the paper gives an
account of these various theoretical considerations for the English language teacher to take
into account when selecting and practicing speaking tasks in the classroom.
Role-playing is widely accepted to be one of the most effective methods of teaching
speaking skills. Role-play as a communicative task can be used not only for practicing
speaking skills, but also for their assessment. Language learners consider role-plays to be not
only purposeful and productive, but also motivating, because they feel that the outcome of
each activity depends on how effectively they will achieve the main goal, i.e. deliver the
message so that their partner(s) could understand them and give appropriate feedback.
Therefore, the author of the paper undertakes the present research to prove that role-playing
should be incorporated into the English language syllabus in basic school to facilitate the
development of the learners’ speaking skills.
The aim of the present Diploma Paper is to examine the use of role-play as a method of
developing speaking skills in basic school.
In order to achieve the aim, the following enabling objectives are set:

1) to review resources on the development of the learner’s communicative competence in


English language teaching;
2) to study role-play as an effective communicative task which promotes the learner’s
communicative competence;
3) to observe teaching techniques and principles that help the learners improve their
communicative competence in the English language classroom;
4) to pilot several role-plays in the classroom and analyze the results of the experiment;
5) to analyze the data received from the interview with the school teacher and from the
learners’ questionnaires on the development of English speaking skills.

The present research is carried out to answer the following questions:

1) What does conversational competence comprise?


2) What are the techniques and principles of teaching English in basic school to develop
the learners’ speaking skills?
3) In which way should assessment of oral skills be carried out?
4) What is the nature of role-playing? What are the stages of role-playing tasks?
5) How can role-plays be integrated into the English language curriculum in basic
school?

The author of the paper proposes the following hypothesis: Role-plays practiced in the
English language classroom help language learners develop their speaking skills effectively
and become competent for carrying out communication not only in the classroom but also
outside school.
The present research is conducted on the basis of a case study, which examines a case
of teaching speaking skills through role-play in Purvciems Secondary School in the period
from September until October, 2007. The target population of the research is sixteen 12-13
years old learners of the seventh form whose English language proficiency level is Pre-
Intermediate. The research data are collected by means of carrying out pedagogical
observation, analyzing the interview with the teacher, and by means of applying a
questionnaire regarding the development of speaking skills through role-play, which was
spread among the learners who took part in the case study.
The present Diploma Paper consists of three chapters.
The first chapter investigates various aspects of teaching speaking skills in basic
school. In this chapter, the author of the paper defines conversational competence as discussed
in foreign language teaching and learning, provides guidelines for development of speaking
skills, and mentions techniques for assessment of learners’ spoken language.
The second chapter gives an account on the concept, structure and stages of role-play
as a communicative task, provides considerations for designing of role-plays, and presents a
way of integrating role-play into the language curriculum in basic school.
The third chapter presents an account on the findings of the present research. In the
practical part, the author of the paper describes the case study undertaken for the purpose of
implementing the theoretical considerations on the development of speaking skills through
role-play in practice and the analysis of the pedagogical observation, interview with the
teacher and learners’ questionnaires.
1. ASPECTS OF TEACHING SPEAKING SKILLS IN BASIC SCHOOL

The first chapter investigates various aspects of teaching speaking skills in basic
school. In this chapter, the author of the paper defines conversational competence as discussed
in literature on foreign language teaching and learning, provides guidelines for development
of speaking skills, and analyzes techniques for assessment of learners’ spoken language.

It is widely recognized that communicative and whole language instructional


approaches promote integration of all language skills, namely, speaking, listening, reading,
and writing, in ways that reflect natural language use (Brumfit, 1984; Bailey and Savage,
1994; Brown, 2000). Speaking ability is regarded to be one of the basic measures of knowing
a language. Foreign language learners often consider speaking to be the most important skill
they can acquire in foreign language learning. Therefore, they tend to assess their progress in
terms of their accomplishments in spoken communication.
The author of the paper perceives speaking as one of the most important skills to be
acquired by language learners, because the learners’ ability to communicate in a foreign
language greatly depends on their conversational competence. Thus, the author of the paper
suggests that speaking skills should be a central point in foreign language curriculum in basic
schools of Latvia and comply with the national educational standards of this country.
The first subchapter deals with the definition of conversational competence, within
which the author of the paper discusses communicative language tools, choices and strategies
to be exploited by learners when wishing to effectively communicate in a foreign language.

1.1. DEFINING CONVERSATIONAL COMPETENCE IN LANGUAGE TEACHING


AND LEARNING

Speaking is considered to be “an interactive process of constructing meaning that


involves producing and receiving and processing information” (Brown 2006: 4). Its form and
meaning depend on the context in which it occurs, including the participants themselves, their
collective experiences, physical environment, and the purposes of speaking. It is often
spontaneous, open-ended, and evolving; however, it cannot be claimed to be always
unpredictable. As Gold (2003) points out, speaking requires that learners not only know how
to produce specific points of language such as grammar, pronunciation, or vocabulary
(linguistic competence), but also that they understand when, why, and in what ways to
produce language (sociolinguistic competence) (Gold 2003: 57). McCarthy (1990) also
underlines that speech has its own skills, structures, and conventions different from written
language (McCarthy 1990: 16).
According to Hartmann and Stork (1976), a person can be regarded as a fluent speaker
of a language when “he can use its structures accurately whilst concentrating on content rather
than form, using the units and patterns automatically at normal conversational speed when
they are needed” (Hartmann and Stork 1976: 86). Richards, Platt, and Weber (1985) define
fluency as “features which give speech the qualities of being natural and normal, including
native-like use of pausing, rhythm, intonation, stress, rate of speaking, and use of interjections
and interruptions” (Richards, Platt, and Weber 1985: 108). In second and foreign language
learning, fluency characterizes a person’s level of communication proficiency, including the
abilities to (Richards, Platt, and Weber 1985: 108-109):

a) produce written and/or spoken language with ease;


b) speak with a good but not necessarily perfect command of intonation, vocabulary, and
grammar;
c) communicate ideas effectively;
d) produce continuous speech without causing comprehension difficulties or a breakdown
of communication.

McDonough and Shaw (2003) suggest that speaking should involve the following
areas of knowledge (McDonough and Shaw 2003: 134):

1) mechanics (pronunciation, grammar, and vocabulary);


2) functions (transaction and interaction);
3) social and cultural rules and norms (turn-taking, rate of speech, length of pauses
between speakers, relative roles of participants).

McDonough and Shaw (2003) propose that mastering speaking skills should imply,
firstly, using the right words in the right order with the correct pronunciation (McDonough
and Shaw 2003: 135). Secondly, they stress the importance of learners’ knowing when clarity
of message is essential, i.e. transaction/information exchange, as well as when precise
understanding is not required, i.e. interaction/relationship building. And finally, learners have
to take into account who is speaking to whom, in what circumstances, about what, and for
what reason.
Thornbury (2005) advises that one should take into consideration two aspects of
speaking: what speakers do, and what speakers know (Thornbury 2005: 1, 11). This is
determined by a widely acknowledged proposition that speaking involves not only a command
of certain skills, but also several different types of knowledge. According to Thornbury
(2005), when speakers communicate, they display their skills in (Thornbury, 2005: 1-10):
speech production, conceptualization and formation, articulation, self-monitoring and repair,
automaticity, fluency, managing talk.
Thornbury (2005) maintains that effective communication also implies speakers’
extralinguistic and linguistic knowledge, and can be influenced by particular speech
conditions (Thornbury 2005: 11). Knowledge that is relevant to speaking can be categorized
either as knowledge of features of language (linguistic knowledge) or knowledge that is
independent of language (extralinguistic knowledge). The kinds of extralinguistic knowledge
that affect speaking include topic and cultural knowledge, knowledge of the context, as well
as familiarity with the other speakers (Hedge 2000: 261). Brown (2006) assumes that
sociocultural knowledge is an important aspect of communication, as this is the knowledge
about social values and the norms of behaviour in a given society, including the way these
values and norms are realized through language (Brown 2006: 177). However, it has to be
pointed out that sociocultural knowledge can be both extralinguistic and linguistic (Thornbury
2005: 12). Whereas linguistic knowledge comprises the following: genre knowledge,
discourse knowledge, pragmatic knowledge, grammar, vocabulary, phonology (Thornbury
2005: 13-26).
Moreover, Thornbury (2005) states that the conditions, in which speaking occurs, play
a crucial role in determining the degree of fluency that is achievable. Researchers have
divided the factors into three categories: cognitive factors, affective (i.e. emotional) factors,
and performance factors (Thornbury 2005: 25-26). To understand the function better, it is
necessary to consider each in detail, thus:

Cognitive factors:
• familiarity with the topic: the greater the familiarity, the easier the speaking task;
• familiarity with the genre: giving a lecture or a speech will be harder if you are
unfamiliar with those particular genres;
• familiarity with the interlocutors: the better one knows the people he or she is talking
to and the more shared knowledge one can assume, the easier it will be;
• processing demands: if the speech event involves complex mental processing, such as
that involved in describing a complicated procedure without resource to illustrations, it
will be more difficult than if not.

Affective factors deal with:


• feelings towards the topics and/or participants: if one is well disposed to the topic he
or she is talking about, and/or to the other participants, the easier it is likely to be;
• self-consciousness: being ‘put on the spot’ can cause anxiety which will have a
negative effect on performance; likewise, knowing or believing that one is being
evaluated can be prejudicial.

Performance factors include:


• mode: speaking face-to-face, where one can closely monitor his or her interlocutor’s
responses and where one can use gesture and eye-contact, is generally easier than
speaking over the telephone, for example;
• degree of collaboration: giving a presentation on your own is harder than doing it with
colleagues because in the former case, one cannot count on peer support;
• discourse control: it is often easier if one can control the direction of events, rather
than being subject to someone else’s control;
• planning and rehearsal time: the more time to prepare, the easier the task will be;
• time pressure: if there is a degree of urgency, it is likely to increase the difficulty for
the speaker;
• environmental conditions: trying to speak against a background of loud music or in
poor acoustic conditions is difficult.

Furthermore, Cruz-Ferreira and Abraham (2005) stress that in order to realize


communicative intentions, speakers have to display relevant communicative competences
(Cruz-Ferreira, Abraham 2005: 46):

• personal competence (self-identification, role identification, creativity, flexibility);


• language competence (discourse proficiency, language proficiency);
• social competence (realized through cooperativeness and interactive capacity).

Bailey and Savage (1994) emphasize the importance of fluency in the development of
learners’ speaking skills (Bailey, Savage, 1994: 22). Some methodologists define fluency in
contrast to accuracy (Fillmore, Kempler, Wang, 1979; Brumfit, 1984; Lennon, 1990).
Accuracy refers to the “ability to produce grammatically correct sentences, but it may not
include the ability to speak or write fluently” (Richards, Platt, and Weber 1985:109).
However, Brown (2003) argues that fluency can be best understood, not in contrast to
accuracy but rather as a compliment to it (Brown 2003: 2). Brown (2003) proposes to enlarge
and restructure methodological view of the components of language and the concept of what
fluency means. Before students can ever have any chance to improve their fluency in a second
or foreign language, teachers have to expand their traditional boundaries of accuracy to offer
rules of appropriacy, including the following (Brown 2003: 2):

- knowledge of the communicative language tools students have to be able to use;


- the communicative language choices they should be able to make;
- the communicative language strategies they have to use to compensate for the fact that
they, like all users of the language including native speakers, lack 100% knowledge of
the language.

Table 1.1. presents an expanded view of language fluency (Brown 2003: 3):

Table 1.1. Components of fluency

Communicative Language Communicative Language Communicative Language


Tools Choices Strategies
paralinguistic features settings using speed to advantage
kinesic language features social roles using pauses and hesitations
pragmatics sexual roles giving appropriate feedback
pronunciation (expanded) psychological roles repairing competently
grammar (expanded) register clarifying effectively
vocabulary (expanded) style negotiating for meaning

Communicative language tools are the components learners need in order to actually
use language (Brown 2003: 3). The teacher has to provide his or her students with all the
language tools available to successful language users. Native and non-native speakers exploit
a wide range of tools, which, apart from pronunciation, grammar, and vocabulary, also include
paralinguistic features, kinesic language features, and pragmatics. Bailey and Savage (1994)
underline that in order not to limit students’ linguistic options, the language teacher should
teach pronunciation, grammar, and vocabulary in their full versions: in spoken discourse, the
rules of conversational grammar, pronunciation, and vocabulary have to be taught and
practised (Bailey, Savage 1994: 34). Paralinguistic features, i.e. those features of spoken
language which are outside the actual sounds being made, are vital communication tools; thus,
facial expressions, head movements, hand gestures, eye movements, and eye gaze have to be
effectively employed by language learners (Clark, Clark 1977: 95). Kinesic language features,
including the communication facets of distance, touching, and posture, are also important,
because they can be used to communicate friendliness, concern, hostility, and many other
complex emotions (Clark, Clark 1977: 112). Pragmatics includes those facets of language that
are directly related to the particular contexts and social situations in which the language is
being used; learners have to be taught the pragmatic rules of different languages to avoid
problems in carrying out communication (Faerch, Kasper 1984: 223).
Communicative language choices are alternatives within sets of language tools that
students need to select due to the context in which communication is taking place (Brown
2003: 4). The choices that students make when they actually communicate in English have to
be based on expression rules, which centre on the choices to be made due to differences in
settings, social, sexual, and psychological roles, as well as register and style. According to
Folse (2006), settings are the places, in which communication takes place, e.g. in front of an
audience, in the street, at home, on the phone, at a doctor’s: there are certain differences in
language necessary in those various settings (Folse 2006: 51). Fillmore, Kempler, Wang
(1979) point at sexual, psychological, and social roles within different situations determining
the choices that people make when communicating (Fillmore, Kempler, Wang, 1979: 36-39).
The distinction in sexual roles determines differences in the ways women and men
communicate with others: the research indicates that the differences are expressed in the
amount of talk, interruption strategies, and coherence. Psychological roles differ in terms of
personality, aggressiveness, dominance, size; thus, various language choices may be based on
psychological roles, and students have to understand those differences, especially if those
roles are different in their own culture. The social roles that people play in life affect
communication to a great extent as well: when communicating, students make language
choices as they move from social role to social role. Finally, as McCarthy (1990) defines it,
register refers to differences in language choices based on membership in different
occupations, or areas of interest; whereas, style refers to differences in the level of formality:
the differences in style and register relate to the use of specialized grammar, and vocabulary
(McCarthy 1990: 84).
Communicative language strategies are abilities that students need in order to
maximize communication when they are less than a hundred percent accurate in their use of
language (Brown 2003: 7-8). Communicative language strategies can help learners
communicate fluently with whatever proficiency level they have at any given time. Brown
(2003) mentions six important strategies, including the abilities: to use speed to their
advantage, to use pauses and hesitations efficiently, to give appropriate feedback, to repair
competently, to clarify effectively, and to negotiate for meaning when necessary. Firstly,
students need understand that speaking fast does not mean speaking fluently; instead, the
appropriate speed is the speed at which speakers can think clearly and still succeed in getting
their message across. Secondly, students need understand that pauses and hesitations are
natural parts of spoken language to be employed: the reason for pausing and hesitating is that
people need time to think when they are talking, and native speakers use much pausing and
hesitating to give themselves that time. The use of fillers, e.g. okay, you know, well, so, also
gives them time to think. Thirdly, students have to be taught how to give feedback to indicate
that the message is or is not getting through. Feedback can express agreement or
disagreement, understanding or misunderstanding, comprehension or confusion; and the
signals used to express these meanings can include not only sounds and words, but also
gestures and facial expressions. Such feedback signals should be taught because they are clear
and obvious indicators of fluency that can make a person seem very foreign or very fluent
depending on how appropriately they are used. Furthermore, students need to be taught how to
correct their own errors, how to understand and accept corrections from others, and
eventually, how to correct errors that others make without creating offense. In addition,
students have to be able to exploit any strategies to clarify their message: rephrase, define
terms, summarize, use gestures, draw a picture, etc. Likewise, fluent speakers when failing to
understand something in a conversation will use whatever verbal signals, gestures, or facial
expressions to get the other speaker to clarify: this process of giving and taking in a
conversation, including various interactions of feedback, repair, and clarification, is called
negotiation. Typically, negotiation is focused on cooperating to get meaning across; in the
process, it sometimes centers on clarifying vocabulary, grammar, or even pronunciation
details.
To summarize, language instruction has to address the following oral skills and
knowledge (Brown 2000: 172):

a) producing the sounds, stress patterns, rhythmic structures, and intonations of the
language;
b) using grammar structures accurately;
c) assessing characteristics of the target audience, including shared knowledge or shared
points of reference, status and power relations of participants, interest levels, or
differences in perspectives;
d) selecting vocabulary that is understandable and appropriate for the audience, the topic
being discussed, and the setting in which the speech act occurs;
e) applying strategies to enhance comprehensibility, such as emphasizing key words,
rephrasing, or checking for listener’s comprehension;
f) using gestures or body language;
g) paying attention to the success of the interaction and adjusting components of speech
such as vocabulary, rate of speech, and complexity of grammar structures to maximize
the listener’s comprehensions and involvement.

The author of the paper suggests that learners’ conversational competence is based on
their accuracy and fluency in a foreign language. The author of the paper believes that in order
to help the learners develop their communicative skills, the language teacher has to
demonstrate them the complexity of the communicative competence, mentioned above,
starting from the very beginning of the language teaching and learning process. The learners’
understanding of all the aspects and factors of communicative competence will definitely
facilitate their learning of the foreign language.
In the following subchapter, the author of the paper provides guidelines for
development of speaking skills to be taken into account by the language teacher.

1.2. GUIDELINES FOR DEVELOPMENT OF SPEAKING SKILLS

Various resources on developing speaking skills in English language teaching list


possible difficulties for foreign language learners in relation to developing their speaking
skills. The outline of the proposed ideas on the strategies to be applied by the learners and the
techniques to be employed by the teacher is presented below.
Donald (2004) marks that students often highlight speaking to be their biggest problem
in language learning. Donald suggests that the teachers should include patterns of real
interaction in their language syllabi to meet the students’ needs in communication. According
to Donald, the students may need:

• practice at using native language strategies, which they do not automatically transfer;
• an awareness of formal/informal language and practice at choosing appropriate
language for different situations;
• the awareness that informal spoken language is less complex than written language, as
it uses shorter sentences, is less organized and uses more vague or non-specific
language;
• exposure to a variety of spoken text types;
• the ability to cope with different listening situations: though most communication is
done face-to-face, listening activities still involve students as ‘overhearers’;
• to be competent at both message-oriented or transactional language and interactional
language, language for maintaining social relationships;
• to be taught patterns of real interaction;
• to have intelligible pronunciation and be able to cope with streams of speech;
• rehearsal time: given guided preparation/rehearsal time, the students are more likely to
use a wider range of language in a spoken task.

Therefore, the author of the paper agrees with Donald (2004) who proposes the
following practical suggestions for teachers to take into consideration when preparing
speaking tasks:

• transferring L1 strategies:
When preparing for a spoken task, make students aware of any relevant L1 strategies
that might help them to perform the task successfully, e.g. rephrasing.
• formal/informal language:
Give students one or more short dialogues where one speaker is either too formal or
too informal. Students first identify the inappropriate language, and then try to change
it. The teacher may also demonstrate how disorganized informal speech is.
• vague language:
Using tape scripts of informal speech, focus on examples of vague language.
• different types of spoken texts:
Draw up a list of spoken text types relevant to the level of your class. Teach the
language appropriate for each text type.
• interactive listening:
Develop interactive listening activities. Face-to-face listening is the most common and
the least practiced by course books. Any form of live listening, e.g. the teacher
speaking to the students, is suitable.
• transactional and interactional language:
Raise students’ awareness by using a dialogue that contains both. It could be two
friends chatting to each other (interactional) and ordering a meal (transactional).
• real interaction patterns:
Introduce the following basic interaction patterns: Initiate, Respond, Follow-up, as
seen in the example below:
A: What did you do last night? (Initiate)
B: Went to the cinema. (Respond)
A: Oh really? (Follow-up)
What did you see? (Initiate)
B: Lord of the Rings. (Respond)
Have you been yet? (Initiate)
A: No it’s difficult for kids. (Respond)
B: Yeah of course. (Follow-up)
• understanding spoken English:
After a listening exercise, give students the tapescript. Using part of it, students mark
the stressed words, and put them into groups (tone units). You can use phone numbers
to introduce the concept of tone units. The length of a tone unit depends on the type of
spoken text. Compare a speech with an informal conversation. In the same lesson or
subsequent listening lessons, you can focus on reduction in spoken speech, e.g.
linking, elision, and assimilation.
• preparation and rehearsal:
Before a spoken task, give students some preparation and rehearsal time. Students will
need guidance on how to use it. A sheet with simple guidelines is effective.
• real-life tasks:
Try to use real-life tasks as part of your teaching.

The development of communicative ability is widely accepted to require a range of


suitable classroom activities (Brumfit, 1984; Bailey, Savage, 1994; Hedge, 2000; Folse,
2006). Klippel (1987) notes that activities selected for the classroom use should provide
learners with a degree of communicative urgency so that they have something interesting to
say and a reason to communicate with their partner (Klippel 1987: 3). Sadow (1982) adds that
an activity has to be purposeful: this can be achieved by involving learners in an exchange
which bridges an information, opinion, interest or solidarity gap (Sadow 1982: 13). Hedge
(2000) emphasizes that when carrying out a communicative task, learners have to be
motivated to communicate by the enjoyment of playing a game, the challenge and satisfaction
in solving a problem or completing a project (Hedge 2000: 183).
It is also necessary to think about the criteria for speaking tasks. Several authors have
treated this issue and the author of the paper has tried to compose an extensive list of these
criteria based on the literature studied, thus (Thornbury, 2005; Howarth, 2006; Skeffington,
2007):

1) Participation – given that language primarily exists to facilitate


communication, interaction in that language must have an important role to
play in developing a learner’s ability in that language. In other words, teachers
need to offer communicative tasks that promote learner interaction in order to
help the learners succeed.
2) Productivity – a speaking activity needs to be maximally language productive
in order to provide the best conditions for autonomous language use. If students
can do an information gap task by simply exchanging isolated words, or if only
a couple of students participate in a group discussion, or if learners are
speaking mainly in their native language, the tasks may hardly justify the time
spent setting them up.
3) Purposefulness – often language productivity can be increased by making sure
that the speaking activity has a clear outcome, especially one which requires
learners to work together to achieve a common purpose. For example, the aim
of having to reach a jointly agreed decision can give a discussion more point
and encourage the participation of all members. Requiring learners to report to
the class on their discussion is also an effective way of ensuring a greater
degree of commitment to the task. A competitive element – such as turning the
task into a competition – can also help.
4) Interactivity – activities should require learners to take into account the effect
they are having on their audience. If not, they can hardly be regarded to be
good preparation for real-life language use. Even formal, monologic speaking
tasks such as talks and presentations should be performed in situations where
there is at least the possibility of interaction, e.g. where there is an audience
present, one which can demonstrate interest, understanding, and even ask
questions or make comments at the end.
5) Collaboration – collaborative learning, particularly through the use of
collaborative tasks, fosters language development since learners can see a
reason to use language in order to interact.
6) Socialization – the concept of socialization is similar to the concept of
collaboration. Interaction does not only promote language development but it
also fosters the development of social skills, e.g. politeness, or respect for
others, that people need to operate successfully in any culture.
7) Challenge – the task should strain the learners so that they are forced to draw
on their available communicative resources to achieve the outcome. This will
help them experience the sense of achievement, even excitement that is part of
autonomous language use. However, if the degree of challenge is too high, this
can be counterproductive, inhibiting learners or reducing them to speaking in
their native language. The teacher needs to be sensitive to the degree of
difficulty a task presents individual learners and to adjust the task accordingly.
8) Motivation – motivation is a fundamental aspect of successful learning;
therefore, tasks need to motivate learners to a great extent. Interaction gives
learners the opportunity to use language successfully and to measure their
progress which in turn should lead to an increase in motivation.
9) Safety – while learners should be challenged, they also need to feel confident
that, when meeting those challenges and attempting autonomous language use,
they can do so without too much risk. The classroom has to provide the right
conditions for experimentation, including a supportive classroom dynamic and
a non-judgmental attitude towards error on the part of the teacher. The learners
also need to be secure in the knowledge that the teacher will always be there to
take over if things get seriously out of hand.
10) Authenticity – speaking tasks should have some relation to real-life language
use; otherwise, they are poor preparation for autonomy. Many classroom
activities, such as drills and language games, can be justified on the grounds
that they serve the needs of awareness-raising or appropriation. But learners
also need to experience a quality of communication in the classroom that is
essentially the same as communication outside the classroom. This means that
they will have to perform in real operating conditions, e.g. spontaneously,
unassisted, with minimal preparation, and having to do with their existing
resources. It also means that the kinds of topics, genres, and situations that are
selected for speaking tasks should bear some relation to the learners’ perceived
needs and interests.
11) Maximizing practice time – learners need to practice as much as possible if
they are to be successful in language. Interaction through pair and group work
maximizes the opportunities to practice for more of the time in class.

There is a variety of activities used to promote the development of spoken skills


(Sadow, 1982; Klippel, 1987; Bailey, Savage, 1994; Thornbury, 2005):

• dialogues,
• information gap activities,
• jigsaw activities,
• surveys,
• guessing games,
• presentations,
• talks,
• story-telling,
• drama,
• role-plays,
• simulations,
• discussions,
• debates,
• conversation,
• chat,
• outside-class speaking tasks.

Howarth (2006) admits that although student interaction is recognized to be desirable


and sensible in theory, language teachers all know that actually promoting and increasing
interaction in the classroom can be an uphill struggle. Several methodologists consider the
following reasons for students’ unwillingness to participate in speaking tasks in class (Donald,
2004; Howarth, 2006; Skeffington, 2007):

1) Student resistance:
Some learners are not enthusiastic about pair and group work, particularly in mono-
lingual classes in which it is a little unnatural to communicate to someone who speaks
the same language in a language they are both less proficient in. The learners may also
be reluctant to speak in pairs because they do not wish to learn mistakes from their
partners.
2) Self-consciousness:
There are many learners who become very nervous and embarrassed when asked to
speak English.
3) Large classes:
While theoretically the more students there are in a class, the more possibilities for
interaction there should be, this is not the case in practice. The more learners there are,
the more difficult developing interaction can be since there are more people to
monitor, and therefore, more chances of problems. In addition, there can be excessive
noise which can mask bad behavior and use of the native language.
4) Mixed abilities:
Pairing and grouping students appropriately in classes that have a wide variety of
levels is much more difficult than in small classes of a homogenous level.
5) Lack of motivation:
If learners have no need to interact or if they do not want to do it, they probably will
not communicate in class.
6) Insufficient language:
Students may not have the language they need to interact, and therefore, they will feel
unable to complete a task successfully.
7) Peer pressure:
Even native speakers take years to master their language; a foreign language learner
also makes a lot of mistakes before even managing to produce anything approaching
good English. The spontaneous nature of speaking means that the learners are likely to
make more mistakes than they would do otherwise. The teacher has to be sensitive
about the learners’ self-consciousness regarding speaking out in front of the class.
8) Lack of support:
There are two kinds of support: classroom atmosphere and linguistic support. It may
not be realistic to expect teenagers to provide the generous and patient atmosphere
ideal for language practice, but it is possible to encourage them to support each other,
for example, by working in teams. However, it is possible to provide linguistic support
in terms of words and phrases that are required for classroom interaction.

In order to overcome interaction problems in the classroom, the following solutions are
provided (Brown, 2003; Donald, 2004; Howarth, 2006; Skeffington, 2007):

• Explaining why interaction is important:


The teacher may expect how well the class will respond to the rationale behind his or
her teaching methods. It is essential to explain to the group of students what the
teacher is trying to achieve. However, it is accepted that not all students will react in
the same way: the underlying theory may motivate smaller groups within the class,
even though it might not appeal to the class as the whole.
• Setting attainable goals:
For very low proficiency levels, the aim may be to spend only ten minutes speaking
English per class. Initially, this may be spent presenting and practicing classroom
language, which then allows them to extend the time spent on English for themselves.
For higher levels, it is still worth identifying when it is worth using only English and
when it is possible to use their native language.
• Teaching process language:
This is similar to classroom language but it refers to the language that students need to
interact, e.g. “Do you want to start?”, “Sorry, can you say that again, please?” The
teacher may introduce and revise such phrases before starting tasks and leave them on
the board so that the learners could refer to them while speaking.
• Pre-teaching task language:
The teacher may try to analyze tasks before using them in order to predict what
language is critical to task achievement. If some of this language may be unfamiliar, it
should be pre-taught before the students set to the task. If there is too much language
for pre-teaching, the teacher may find another task.
• Giving preparation time:
Interaction may fail because the learners have not had time to think about what they
want to say and how to say it. The teacher should plan to give some thinking time
before starting a task during which the students can ask the teacher or peers for
support.
• Creating many opportunities for students to practice:
The teacher should provide ample opportunities for students to practice fluency
development. The teacher should avoid doing much of the talking and getting the
students to respond to him or her one at a time. Instead, the teacher has to offer
student-centered activities like pair work, group work, role plays, etc. to simply let the
students communicate with one another. Creating a relaxed classroom atmosphere, by
using humour, songs, personal interactions, smiles, cartoons, etc., helps promote
fluency as well.
• Creating activities that force students to get a message across:
Whether selecting fluency activities from sources or creating communicative activities
for a specific situation, the teacher should insure that all fluency activities focus the
students’ attention on getting their meaning across. A meaning focus can be achieved
by selecting or creating activities wherein students have a specific task to perform, a
particular problem to solve, or a clearly defined goal to reach.
• Providing a supportive atmosphere:
As well as providing language for tasks, where appropriate, the teacher may provide
ideas too. These can be brainstormed before the task and put on the board so that the
learners have plenty of things to talk about.
• Varying the interaction and repeating tasks:
When teaching large classes, the teacher may plan to move students around so that
they are not always talking to the same partner. Asking the learners to perform the
same task a number of times but each time with a different partner maximizes practice
of the language being worked on.
• Having different levels of task:
With mixed ability classes, the teacher may prepare an easy, medium, difficult version
of the same task so that students of different levels can interact together at a level
appropriate to their language level.
• Providing a reason to interact:
The teacher has to use tasks that actively provide the learners with a reason to speak
and listen. Working on information gap activities and carrying out project work are
good examples of a motivating and collaborative approach that promotes both realistic
language use and interaction.
• Encouraging students to go ahead and make constructive errors:
The teacher has to explain to his or her students’ native speaker error patterns,
minimize error correction, and treat error making as a skill that students need to
master.
• Accessing students’ fluency not accuracy:
In teaching fluency, the teacher may let go of some of the control in the classroom, let
the students do some work in situations in which fluency can develop to encourage
them to actually communicate.

Providing students with feedback and correction, as well as assessing their spoken
language is an important part of teaching speaking skills syllabus. The following subchapter
discusses several techniques for assessment of learners’ spoken language.

1.3. TECHNIQUES FOR ASSESSMENT OF SPOKEN LANGUAGE

Fulcher (2003) states that testing speaking skills, both formally and informally, takes
place at the beginning and at the end of most language courses, as well as at various times
during the course itself (Fulcher 2003: 4). A placement test with a spoken component provides
assessment of speaking skills in the beginning of a course. A progress test evaluates the
learners’ progress in the development of speaking skills during the course. And an
achievement test assesses overall spoken language proficiency at the end of the course.
However, Luoma (2004) notes that the inclusion of an oral component in a test
considerably complicates the testing procedure, both in terms of its practicality and the way
assessment criteria can be reliably applied (Luoma 2004: 113). If all students in the class are
to be interviewed individually, the disruption caused, and the time taken, may seem to
outweigh the benefits. In addition, different testers may have very different criteria for judging
speaking, such differences being not so acute when it comes to judging writing or grammar
knowledge, for instance. Nevertheless, where teachers or students are reluctant to engage in
much classroom speaking, the effect of an oral component in the final examination can be a
powerful incentive to practice more speaking in class. This is known as the washback effect of
testing: the oral nature of the test ‘washes back’ into the coursework that precedes it.
The most commonly used spoken tests are the following (O’Loughlin, 2001; Fulcher,
2003; Luoma, 2004; Taylor, Falvey, 2007):

- interviews,
- live monologues,
- recorded monologues,
- role-plays,
- collaborative tasks and discussions.

Taylor and Falvey admit that there are two main ways of assessing the learner’s
speaking ability (Taylor, Falvey 2007: 81):

- holistic scoring (giving a single score on the basis of an overall impression);


- analytical scoring (giving a separate score for different aspects of the task).

Taylor and Falvey (2007) note that holistic scoring has the advantage of being quicker;
therefore, it seems to be more appropriate for informal testing of progress (Taylor, Falvey
2007: 81). Analytic scoring takes longer, but it compels testers to take into consideration a
variety of factors, and if these factors are well chosen, it appears to be both fairer and more
reliable. Nonetheless, one disadvantage of analytical scoring is that the scorer may be
distracted by all the categories and lose sight of the overall picture. Thus, Thornbury (2005)
advises that four or five categories should be the maximum that scorers can handle at one
time, and these may include: grammar and vocabulary, discourse management, pronunciation,
and interactive communication (Thornbury, 2005: 127-129).
The Common European Framework of Reference for Languages offers useful
descriptors for different skills competences at each of the following proficiency levels: A
Basic User, A1 Breakthrough, A2 Waystage, B Independent User, B1 Threshold, B2 Vantage,
C Proficient User, C1 Effective Operational Proficiency, and C2 Mastery. Thornbury (2005)
proposes that these descriptors could provide language teachers with handy criteria for
assessing their learners’ speaking abilities (Thornbury 2005: 129). Table 1.2., based on the
guidelines of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages, displays the
descriptors for oral production at all levels:

Table 1.2. Overall oral production


C2 Can produce clear, smoothly flowing well-structured speech with an
effective logical structure which helps the recipient notice and remember
sinificant point.
C1 Can give clear, detailed descriptions and presentations on comple
subjects, integrating sub-themes, developing particular points and
rounding off with an appropriate conclusion.
B2 Can give clear, systematically developed descriptions and presentations,
with appropriate highlighting of significant points and relevant
supporting detail.
Can give clear, detailed descriptions and presentations on a wide range of
subjects related to his/her field of interest, expanding and supporting
ideas with subsidiary points and relevant examples.
B1 Can reasonably fluently sustain a straightforward description of one of a
variety of subjects within his/her field of interest, presenting it as a linear
sequence of points.
A2 Can give a simple description or presentation of people, living or
working conditions, daily routines, likes/dislikes, etc. as a short series of
simple phrases and sentences linked to a list.
A1 Can produce simple mainly isolated phrases about people and places.

Moreover, the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages also


distinguishes descriptors for spoken interaction, as opposed to one-way oral production, which
include such factors as turn-taking skills, communication strategies, spontaneity, asking for
clarification, information exchange, and politeness strategies.
Finally, students themselves should be encouraged to take responsibility for their own
assessment (O’Loughlin 2001: 94). One way of doing self-assessment is asking students to
record and assess themselves, using the criteria mentioned above. As more course books
incorporate the assessment guidelines, provided by the Common European Framework of
Reference for Languages, these guidelines are likely to become a familiar tool in testing
speaking abilities in future.
However, the author of the paper agrees with Brown (2003) who argues that students
need to be encouraged to go ahead and make constructive errors (Brown 2003: 7). Many
students ferociously concentrate on producing accurate grammar (Mendelsohn, 1992; James,
1998; Brown, 2003). In doing so, they may lose the chance of ever becoming fluent in a
foreign language. Brown (2003) proposes three strategies for the teacher to deal with the
problem of errors in speaking a foreign language (Brown 2003: 7-8):

(a) explain native speaker error patterns;


(b) minimize error correction;
(c) treat error making as a skill that students have to master.

One key to encouraging students to make constructive errors is to explain native


speaker error patterns, which involves at least four steps. Firstly, the students should be told
that native speakers of English make errors in pronunciation, word choice, grammar, even
logic. Secondly, since learners may not be close enough observers to recognize that native
speakers make errors, the teacher may have to illustrate that fact by pointing out errors in his
or her own speech or in tapes of other native speakers. Thirdly, the teacher has to do whatever
is necessary to help students recognize that it is acceptable for them to make production
errors, as it is a natural part of all communication, even among native speakers. Fourthly, the
students need to be told that if they remain unwilling to make errors, they will probably never
be able to become fluent, i.e., that sometimes they need to focus on accuracy but other times
they have to relax and practice the automaticity that is necessary for fluency development.
Another key to encouraging students to make constructive errors is to minimize error
correction. If teachers seriously want to foster fluency, they absolutely must limit error
correction to those errors that hinder communication. In a sense, the student’s responsibility in
fluency development is to bring the level of their English production in speaking up to the
level of their knowledge of grammar. During periods of fluency development, teachers should
therefore avoid yanking the students back to a focus on accuracy (which is what happens if
they correct trivial errors) because that might bring the whole fluency development process to
a halt.
A third key to encouraging students to make constructive errors is to treat error making
as a skill. Firstly, students need to understand that they can only learn fluency by making
errors and learning how to deal with those errors. Secondly, they need to understand that
errors are a natural component of language development, not an indication of their lack of
worth as human beings. Finally, they need to develop a willingness to make errors.

The author of the paper is assured that role-play is the most effective way of
developing speaking skills in basic school. Therefore, the following chapter is devoted to the
issue of promoting learner’s speaking skills through role-play as a communicative task.
2. PROMOTING LEARNER’S SPEAKING SKILLS THROUGH
ROLE-PLAY AS A COMMUNICATIVE TASK

The present chapter gives an account on the concept, structure and stages of role-play
as a communicative task, provides considerations for designing of role-plays, and presents a
way of integrating role-play into the language curriculum in basic school.

The overwhelming majority of methodologists admit that learning to communicate in


another language takes a long time (Rivers, Temperley, 1978; Savignon, 1983; Brumfit, 1984;
Celce-Murcia, 1991; Hadley, 1993). Burkart (1998) regards learning to communicate to be
one of the most challenging tasks that students are likely to undertake (Burkart 1998: 2).
However, as students set about communicative tasks, they can both employ the knowledge of
learning their own language and the language teacher’s help in learning the new language.
Since students have already learnt how to use their cognitive skills to analyze unfamiliar ideas
and experiences and integrate them into their existing knowledge, the language teacher can
help them use these cognitive abilities to build a road map through the uncharted territory of
the new language.
When selecting speaking activities, the English language teacher has to take into
consideration two factors (Rivers, Temperley 1978: 6). On the one hand, the students need
controlled practice with new language forms, but they also need opportunities to create and
innovate with the language, opportunities to express their thoughts. On the other hand, the
teacher has to explore the ways how innovative communicative activities can be incorporated
into their language curriculum to help the students succeed in the development of their
speaking skills.
Riggenbach and Lazaraton (1991) propose that the teacher might offer his or her
students such oral skills activities as drills, or linguistically structured activities (e.g.
structured interviews, and language games), performance activities (e.g. speeches, role-plays,
dramas, and debates), participation activities (e.g. guided discussions, conversations,
interviews, and oral dialogue journals), and observation activities (e.g. observation of a certain
situation) (Riggenbach, Lazaraton 1991: 127-132). The author of the paper considers that role-
play is one of the most effective ways of developing speaking skills in basic school.
Therefore, the following subchapter is devoted to the description of the concept of the role-
play.
2.1. CONCEPT OF ROLE-PLAY

As a performance-oriented activity, role-play allows students to refine their


communicative competence, which entails not only grammatical accuracy but also the
knowledge of sociocultural rules of appropriateness, discourse norms, and strategies for
ensuring that communication is understood (Savignon 1983: 169). Harmer (1991) stresses that
when performing role-plays, students strive to avoid confusion in the message (due to faulty
pronunciation, grammar, or vocabulary) and to avoid confusion in the message (due to
socially inappropriate style) (Harmer 1991: 66). The precise language that is used is often
unpredictable, and the participants have to listen to one another and shape their contributions
to suit the evolving communication information (Burkart 1998: 23).
Rivers and Temperley (1978) underline that many language teachers concentrate on
promoting communicative competence in language learners by using role-play as a
communicative activity which, in contrast to activities focusing strictly on accuracy (e.g.
memorization, repetition, and uncontextualized drills), rely more on the learners’ ability to
understand and communicate real information (Rivers, Temperley 1978: 47). Brumfit (1984)
reminds that the aim of role-play as a fluency activity is “to develop a pattern of language
interaction within the classroom which is as close as possible to that used by competent
performers in normal life” (Brumfit 1984: 69). When practicing role-plays, learners are
encouraged to use informal and unrehearsed language by taking turns to exchange information
in a relaxed classroom atmosphere; in other words, communication in the classroom through
role-playing mirrors the authentic communication that occurs in the real world (Ladousse
1988: 5).
According to Burkart (1998), “role-plays are mini-dramas, usually based on real life
situations” (Burkart 1998: 25). Students are assigned roles and put into situations that they
may eventually encounter outside the classroom. As role-plays imitate life, the range of
language functions that may be used expands considerably. The role relationships among the
students when they play their parts call for them to practice and develop their sociolinguistic
competence: they have to use language that is appropriate to the situation and to the
characters. Riggenbach and Lazaraton (1991) add that in some cases, students can write the
role-plays or dramas themselves, which may be especially appropriate in a course that is
organized around speech functions or conversational strategies, such as complimenting and
thanking behaviour, greetings, and closings (Riggenbach, Lazaraton 1991: 129). More
guidance should be provided for beginning learners if they are allowed to perform their roles-
plays from scripts they have at hand. While reading from the script is not encouraged, as long
as the teacher ensures that the content of the role-play is authentic, the activity can be
approached as another variation on the contextualized drill. Moreover, role-play as a
performance activity can use the techniques of peer evaluation, audiotaping, transcription,
sharing/ exchanging information, self-evaluation, and use of auxiliary techniques and devices
(e.g. mime, sound, objects, pictures, realistic documents, or information files) (Riggenbach,
Lazaraton, 1991; Kramiņa, 2000).
Ladousse (1988) marks that role-plays are also an ideal vehicle for practicing
pronunciation (Ladousse 1988: 122). Role-plays are fully contextualized, include gestures and
body language, and provide a multitude of opportunities for practicing natural speech.
Ladousse suggests that the taking on of a new identity might release some students from their
inhibitions and allow them to overcome constraints that might affect their pronunciation.
According to the studies carried out by the Council of Europe (1993), role-play
activities may vary in the degree of control over how learners act and speak: “the interaction
may be controlled by cues or guided by a description of a situation and a task to be
accomplished” (Council of Europe 1993: 158). As a result, role-play can be of two types:

a) predicable (pre-planned by the teacher);


b) negotiated by the learners (an open-ended scenario may allow learners to negotiate the
outcome in the course of the activity).

However, Burkart (1998) supposes that even a seemingly predictable transactional type
of role-play can be transformed into an interactional by an introduction of an element of
surprise which obliges learners to use various strategies to cope with the unexpected
development (Burkart 1998: 23).
Although the above mentioned authors accentuate that role-plays are practiced to
resemble communication in real life settings, Kramiņa (2000) indicates that “role-play
requires learners to project themselves into an imaginary situation where they may play
themselves or where they are required to play a character role” (Kramiņa 2000: 79). A
situation or scenario may be realistic (e.g. getting through to the right person on the phone and
having the planned conversation), but it might also be unrealistic for learners, appealing to
their sense of fantasy (e.g. you are a caterpillar about to become a butterfly…). According to
the studies carried out by the Council of Europe (1993), “all kinds of role-play are useful and
it is essentially a question of maintaining a balance between realistic activities and other
imaginative and interesting situations which provide motivation, enjoyment, and satisfaction
in the here-and-now of the classroom” (Council of Europe 1993: 158). Role-play, thus, is not
simply a rehearsal for future real-life transactions. It is a means of going beyond the valuable,
but necessarily limited, discourse of classroom socializing and activities such as surveys,
games, and discussions. It provides learners with opportunities to practice correct and
appropriate use of numerous functions, notions, and structures in a variety of contexts
(Kramiņa 2000: 79).
Language teachers advocate the use of role-play in the classroom for the following
reasons (Ladousse, 1988; Harmer, 1991; Burkart,1998; Thornbury 2006; Budden, 2007):

- role-plays are potentially highly language productive;


- they can be adapted to different topics;
- these activities allow learners to experience autonomy in the speaking skill;
- role-plays have the added advantage of requiring few or no materials, and hence can be
set up spontaneously and in most teaching contexts;
- such activities are usually highly motivating;
- quieter students get the chance to express themselves in a more forthright way;
- the world of the classroom is broadened to include the outside world, thus, offering a
much wider range of language opportunities;
- students are given a chance to rehearse their English in a safe environment where
mistakes can be made without drastic consequences;
- role-plays can be designed to be performed by students in pairs or in larger groups;
- the activities can be only a few exchanges in length, or they may run on for fifteen or
twenty minutes;
- they are a valuable addition to language learning activities at any proficiency level.

The ultimate aim of role-play, as of all speaking activities, is to involve learners in


fluent and creative expression in a way which can and should be enjoyable (Kramiņa 2000:
79). This requires a supportive classroom atmosphere where learners are not afraid ‘to have a
go’ and where the role-play mask can provide some relief, particularly for shy learners, from
the intensity of “I-centered” activities. Thornbury (2006) also considers that artifice may suit
the temperament of certain learners who may feel uncomfortable ‘being themselves’ in a
foreign language (Thornbury 2006: 96). On the other hand, there are also learners who feel
self-conscious performing in front of their peers, especially if this involves a degree of
improvisation: care has to be exercised in choosing and setting up such activities so as not to
make even more demands on the learners than speaking in another language normally
requires. Just as in the real theatre, a preparation stage, including rehearsal, is generally
recommended in advance of public performance.
Harmer (1991) emphasizes that while the students are likely to find role-plays to be a
motivating kind of activity, the language teacher has to prepare for them carefully (Harmer
1991: 68). With adequate preparation, students will be able to launch right into the role-play,
carry it out with good participation by everyone in the group, and bring it all to a satisfactory
conclusion. The following subchapter outlines the structure and stages of role-play to be taken
into account by the teacher when designing or selecting this type of communicative activities
for the practice in his or her English language classroom.

2.2. STRUCTURE AND STAGES OF ROLE-PLAY

Role-play requires careful planning to ensure that it is carried out properly (Ladousse
1988; Harmer, 1991). Table 2.1. illustrates the following structure and stages of role-play
(Kramiņa 2000: 81):

STAGE 1 Presentation/clarification of context, roles, task


1a. anticipation of language needs
1b. brief demonstration
1c. learners with the same roles prepare together
STAGE 2 Performance (pairs/groups) with minimal teacher’s intervention
(monitoring role of the teacher)
2a. documentation of the performance – observers recordings
2b. supplementary activity for early finishers
2c. public performance by some groups or individual participants
(depending on the type of the performance)
STAGE 3 Analysis of the performance
3a. self-assessment
3b. observers’ reports
3c. teacher’s feedback to learners
STAGE 4 Evaluation of the activity by learners
4a. evaluation of the activity performed in accordance with the
learners’ global needs and wants
4b. evaluation of the activity as regards to the learners’ language
knowledge level
STAGE 5 A follow-up activity
e.g. creating new texts, or remedial language work
Table 2.1. Structure and stages of role-play

The purpose and type of role-play influence the necessity of the above mentioned
stages (Ladousse, 1988; Harmer, 1991; Kramiņa, 2000). Where the emphasis is on practicing
role-play at an elementary level, most of the stages could be useful but with less emphasis on
the use of observers and a more active monitoring role of the teacher (Kramiņa 2000: 81).
James (1998) reminds that error correction should be confined to the main points not to
discourage learners from communication in a foreign language (James 1998: 103).
Ladousse (1988) emphasizes the importance of post-play analysis, in which learners
assess their performance and evaluate the accomplished activity (Ladousse 1988: 139).
Ladousse suggests the following aspects of the performed role-play to be discussed:

• the relevance of the activity to the learning goals;


• the effectiveness of the learners’ efforts in communication: appropriacy, accuracy,
fluency, use of communication strategies;
• the learners’ impressions on how they and their group mates interpreted their roles;
• the learners’ general feelings about the activity: its complexity, procedure, problems,
outcome, enjoyment, satisfaction;
• the productivity of cooperation;
• the teacher’s interventions.

The following subchapter presents a way of integrating role-play into the language
curriculum in basic school.

2.3. INTEGRATING ROLE-PLAY INTO THE LANGUAGE CURRICULUM IN


BASIC SCHOOL

Harmer (1991) recommends “balanced-activities” approach to teaching speaking skills


in the language classroom (Harmer 1991: 40-42). The approach focuses on language input,
language output, and communicative output as essential components in the language
curriculum. Language input (in such forms as teacher talk, listening activities, reading
passages, as well as the language heard and read outside the class) gives learners the raw
material they need to begin producing language on their own. Language output forces learners
to select and use the appropriate language items from their total existing store. Their ability to
use the language improves as the teacher or other communication partners provide feedback
on the success of the learners’ attempts to communicate. In a balanced-activities approach, the
teacher ensures that learners get a variety of activities from these different categories of input
and output. This variety is not only more motivating for learners of all proficiency levels: it is
also more likely to result in effective language learning.
Brown (2000) suggests that speaking lessons should follow the usual pattern of
preparation, practice, evaluation, and extension (Brown 2000: 58-59). The teacher can use the
preparation step to establish a context for the speaking task (where, when, why, and with
whom it will occur) and to initiate awareness of the speaking skill to be targeted (asking for
clarification, stressing key words, using reduced forms of words). In presentation, the teacher
can provide learners with a preproduction model that furthers learner comprehension and
helps them become more attentive observers of language use. Practice involves learners in
reproducing the targeted structure, usually in a controlled or highly supported manner.
Evaluation involves directing attention to the skill being examined and asking learners to
monitor and assess their own progress. Finally, extension consists of activities that ask
learners to use the strategy or skill in a different context or authentic communicative situation,
or to integrate use of the new skill or strategy with previously acquired ones.
Incorporating role-play into the classroom adds variety, a change of pace, and
opportunities for language production and motivation (Budden 2007). Budden supposes that
the teacher’s roles in presenting and practicing role-plays can be as follows:

1) Facilitator – students may need new language to provided by the teacher;


2) Spectator – the teacher watches the role-play and offers comments and advice at the
end;
3) Participant – it is sometimes appropriate for the teacher to get involved and take part
in the role-play him or herself.

Burkart (1998) proposes the following procedure of conducting a role-play during the
English lesson, described in detail in Appendix 2 (Burkart 1998: 26):

1) preparation,
2) performance,
3) evaluation,
4) follow-up.

As regards feedback, Budden (2007) suggests the following ways of error correction
when using role-play:

• Self-correction:
If the teacher has the equipment to record the role-plays either on audiocassettes or on
video, students can be given the opportunity to listen to the conversations again and
reflect on the language used. They may find it easy to spot their own mistakes.
• Peer-correction:
Fellow students may be able to correct some mistakes made by their peers. The teacher
needs to be careful to keep peer-correction a positive and profitable experience for all
involved.
• Teacher correction:
Making a note of common mistakes and dealing with them in future classes helps the
teacher ensure that the students do not lose motivation by being corrected on the spot
or straight after the role-play. The teacher should negotiate with students by asking
them how they would like to be corrected.

In addition, Thornbury (2006) offers the language teacher role-play for not only
practicing, but also testing learners’ speaking skills (Thornbury 2006: 126). Role-plays can be
a spoken component of a placement test in the beginning of the course, of a progress test
during the course, and of an achievement test in the end of a course. Since the students will be
used to doing role-plays in class, the same format can be effectively used for testing. The
other role can then be played either by the tester or another student. The role-play selected for
the purpose of testing the learners’ speaking skills should not require sophisticated
performance skills or a lot of imagination. Situations grounded in everyday reality are
considered to be the best during a test. Such role-plays might involve using data that has been
provided in advance, e.g. the student could use the information in a travel brochure to make a
booking at a travel agency. This kind of test is particularly valid if it closely matches the
learner’s needs.
As it has been mentioned earlier, the main aim of role-play is to develop learners’
autonomy in communication by applying various skills. Rivers and Temperley (1978) regard
role-play to be a communicative activity which bridges the gap between skill-getting and skill-
using (Rivers, Temperley, 1978: 5). Rivers and Temperley, however, assume that this process
is not automatic, as role-play serves to provide pseudo-communication that will lead naturally
into spontaneous communication activities. Appendix 3 demonstrates Rivers and Temperley’s
scheme of the processes involved in learning to communicate, which should be taken into
account by the language teacher when presenting and practicing role-plays in his or her
classroom. As these authors argue, all that the teacher can teach students in a foreign language
is how to construct the appropriate framework for the expression of meaning. The teacher
cannot teach students to express their own meaning, but he or she can provide opportunities
that stimulate motivation for a certain activity and help the students to improve the framework
so that it really carry the message intended. Role-plays should be integrated into the language
curriculum so that the students could construct various types of frameworks and see if they
can carry effectively the meanings they intend.
Moreover, as students need situations where they are on their own trying to use the
foreign language to exchange with others messages of real interest to them, methodologists
intend that role-plays should be conducted in the following natural interactional contexts
(Rivers, Temperley, 1978; Brumfit, 1984):

(1) establishing and maintaining social relations;


(2) expressing one’s reactions;
(3) hiding one’s intentions;
(4) talking one’s way out of trouble;
(5) seeking and giving information;
(6) learning or teaching others to do or make something;
(7) conversing over the telephone;
(8) solving problems;
(9) discussing ideas;
10) playing with language;
11) acting out social roles;
12) entertaining others;
13) displaying one’s achievements;
14) sharing leisure activities.

The application of role-plays, as well as of other communicative activities, implies that


classroom time and space need to be carefully planned by the teacher to maximize the
incentive for productive interaction (Savignon 1983: 215-217). A class cannot just ‘play a
game’. Nor should role-playing and other opportunities for interaction be saved for parties, a
rainy day, or the last few minutes of the class period. To be the most effective, role-plays
together with other communicative activities have to constitute an integral part of the
classroom programme. Classroom space should be planned as well as classroom time. Role-
plays require sitting arrangements other than the traditional straight rows of chairs all facing
the teacher. In the overwhelming majority of classrooms today, furniture may be moved about
to suit the activities. The diagrams below, provided by Savignon, suggest ways of arranging a
communicative classroom:

Figure 2.1. Ways of arranging a communicative classroom

Savignon (1983) also underlines that some experimentation has to be undertaken to


determine which activities work best with a particular groups, and how to how to incorporate
role-play properly into the classroom language programme (Savignon 1983: 216). If the
teacher is enthusiastic and open to suggestions, the learners will understand their involvement
and may prove to be the best source of creative ideas. Livingstone (1983) provides the
valuable suggestions for the English language teacher to succeed with role-plays in the
classroom (Livingstone 1983: 72-73):

1) Prepare carefully: Introduce the activity by describing the situation and making sure
that all of the students understand it.
2) Set a goal or outcome: Be sure the students understand what the product of the role
play should be, whether a plan, a schedule, a group opinion, or some other product.
3) Use role cards: Give each student a card that describes the person or role to be played.
For lower-level students, the cards can include words or expressions that that person
might use.
4) Brainstorm: Before you start the role play, have students brainstorm as a class to
predict what vocabulary, grammar, and idiomatic expressions they might use.
5) Keep groups small: Less-confident students will feel more able to participate if they do
not have to compete with many voices.
6) Give students time to prepare: Let them work individually to outline their ideas and the
language they will need to express them.
7) Be present as a resource, not a monitor: Stay in communicative mode to answer
students’ questions. Do not correct their pronunciation or grammar unless they
specifically ask you about it.
8) Allow students to work at their own levels: Each student has individual language
skills, an individual approach to working in groups, and a specific role to play in the
activity. Do not expect all students to contribute equally to the discussion, or to use
every grammar point you have taught.
9) Do topical follow-up: Have students report to the class on the outcome of their role
plays.
10) Do linguistic follow-up: After the role play is over, give feedback on grammar or
pronunciation problems you have heard. This can wait until another class period when
you plan to review pronunciation or grammar anyway.

Furthermore, guidelines for successful role-plays can be found in the Teacher’s


Resource Book Pre-Intermediate of the Wavelength series (Longman 2005):

• Before class, think what language and vocabulary students will need to do the role play
successfully and make a list.
• Ask lead-in questions to engage students’ interest in the situation and to set the context
of the role play. Never go into role plays “cold”.
• Build up the atmosphere and encourage the suspension of disbelief by using props
available in the classroom or by bringing them in, e.g. wine glasses, knives, forks,
spoons and plates for a restaurant role play.
• Explain the task clearly. Say who the students are and what they have to do. Get them
to think about the outcome by asking: What happens in the end? How does the
conversation/role play end?
• Assign roles or ask students to choose who they want to be. Ask a few quick questions
to check that everyone is clear about the activity, e.g. who are you? Who’s your
husband/wife?
• Pre-teach or check students know the language and vocabulary that you listed before
class. If it is a complicated role play, consider giving students prompt sheets with key
vocabulary/questions for their characters.
• Students who are playing the same character can prepare together in pairs or small
groups, e.g. “husbands” together and “wives” together. They can then help each other
with ideas and have extra speaking practice. Monitor this stage carefully and help with
ideas and language. If you feel your class needs more support in the way of ideas,
make cards for each character, e.g. you’re the wife. You and your husband both work.
Your husband spends a lot of money on clothes, going out to restaurants with
colleagues etc. He never spends any money on you or your home. How do you feel
about this? Do you ever have rows about it? What happens in the rows? Students then
pair up for the actual role play, e.g. a “husband” with a “wife”.
• Before students act out their role plays, encourage them not to stick too rigidly to the
materials they have prepared. They should not read out their notes. If something
interesting or funny comes up, they should react to it naturally and ask questions about
it, e.g. Oh, really?
• Whether or not everyone acts out their role play in front of the whole class will depend
on the size of your class and the time available. If you have a big class, you could ask
groups to rehearse acting out their role plays to each other before they face the class.
When students act out their role play to the class, make sure the class listens. Give
students questions to answer as they watch, e.g. what was the man complaining about?
Was he successful in the end? Or give students a task, e.g. the class is the audience for
a TV interview and can applaud, heckle, etc.
• Do not interrupt while students are acting out their role plays. If they have done their
preparation thoroughly, it should go smoothly.
• When you feedback, highlight the good things as well as the errors. Where possible,
avoid making students self-conscious. You could make a note of the grammatical
errors you hear during the role play and deal with these in a subsequent lesson. Your
immediate feedback can then be about the positive aspects of the language, the
students’ ideas, fluency, stress and intonation, facial expressions etc. The aim is to
boost students’ confidence so that they will be keen to do more role plays in the future.

The final chapter presents an account on the findings of the present research.
3. RESEARCH CASE STUDY

The final chapter presents an account on the findings of the present research. In the
practical part, the author of the paper describes the case study undertaken for the purpose of
implementing the theoretical considerations on the development of speaking skills through
role-play in practice and the analysis of the pedagogical observation, interview with the
teacher and learners’ questionnaires.

The present research has been conducted on the basis of a case study, which examined
a case of teaching speaking skills through role-play in Purvciems Secondary School in the
period from September until October, 2007. The target population of the research was sixteen
12-13 years old learners of the seventh form whose English language proficiency level was
Pre-Intermediate. The research data were collected by means of carrying out pedagogical
observation, analyzing the interview with the teacher, and by means of applying a
questionnaire regarding the development of speaking skills through role-play, which was
spread among the learners who took part in the case study.
The aim of the case study was as follows:

1) to observe a number of English language lessons in order to examine the ways of


developing the learners’ speaking skills at Pre-Intermediate level in basic school;
2) to interview the English language teacher about the development of communicative
competence in the language learners of basic school;
3) to teach several English language lessons to the learners of the given group in order to
implement theoretical considerations about the use of role-play in the development of
speaking skills in practice;
4) to ask the learners to complete questionnaires on the development of speaking skills in
English language;
5) to analyze the interview with the teacher and learners’ questionnaires and to draw
relevant conclusions.

3.1. ANALYZING THE USE OF ROLE-PLAY IN THE LANGUAGE CLASSROOM

During the pedagogical observation, the author of the paper observed eight lessons
taught by the English language teacher in the selected class, and demonstrated her own three
lessons where the focus was on role-play as a method of developing the learners’ speaking
skills. The aim of the pedagogical observation was:

1) to observe the English teacher’s lessons in order to gain teaching experience in the
development of language learners’ speaking skills;
2) to mark the teacher’s techniques that help the learners improve their communicative
competence.

Furthermore, the author of the paper aimed at piloting several role-plays in the
classroom and analyzing the results of the experiment.
The teacher spent approximately half of the classroom time on communicative tasks
which were aimed at integrating grammar and vocabulary into their speaking skills. The
communicative tasks involved dialogues, information gap activities, role-plays, presentations,
story-telling, and jigsaw activities among others. The selected activities promoted the learners’
interaction were maximally language productive, purposeful, and interactive, as well as
facilitated collaboration and socializing in the classroom. Moreover, several tasks were quite
challenging; the teacher managed to raise the learners’ motivation to such a degree that the
whole class was eager to participate in the solution of the problems offered by the teacher.
Several tasks also promoted the learners’ autonomy in a way that the learners had an
opportunity to experience a quality of communication in the classroom that would be
essentially the same as communication outside the classroom: the learners had to perform in
real operating conditions, e.g. spontaneously, unassisted, with minimal preparation, and
having to do with their existing resources.
The main focus of the role-plays which the teacher practiced in the classroom was on
developing the learners’ knowledge of the language mechanics (pronunciation, grammar, and
vocabulary), functions (transaction and interaction), and social and cultural rules and norms
(turn-taking, rate of speech, length of pauses between speakers, relative roles of participants).
Before the learners were engaged into a role-play planned for a particular lesson, the teacher
reminded the learners of the social and cultural rules and norms so that they had an
opportunity to revise these skills which, to a certain extent, would help them conform to the
expectations of the native speakers living in the English-speaking countries. The author of the
paper suggests that the teacher’s focus on the social norms and rules was determined by the
fact that in contrast to language mechanics and functions that are similar to Russian and
English languages, the social and cultural norms had to be demonstrated to the learners several
times until they got used to the cross-cultural differences between their mother tongue and the
foreign language.
The teacher did not attract the learners’ attention to all the skills necessary to perform
the role-plays and other speaking activities, offered in the course book, but she stressed the
importance of self-monitoring and repair by giving appropriate feedback on the learners’
speech errors. Other ways of speech error corrections were teacher’s remarks in relation to the
most common mistakes, and peer correction when the communicative tasks were carried out
in pairs or small groups.
What regards fluency and accuracy, the teacher promoted both fluency and accuracy in
the learners’ speech. When practicing role-plays and other speaking activities, the teacher
employed several techniques to promote fluency including:

a) raising the learners’ awareness that spoken language was easier than written language
in terms of grammar;
b) practicing communicative language strategies which would not automatically transfer
from their mother tongue into English;
c) accomplishing different types of speaking tasks so that the learners could get used to
the wide exposure of spoken text types;
d) teaching patterns of real interaction;
e) promoting the learners’ competence in relation to their language for delivering the
message and maintaining social relationships;
f) drilling pronunciation to help the learners cope with streams of speech;
g) providing sufficient rehearsal time.

The author of the paper can conclude that role-plays together with other
communicative tasks offered by the teacher promoted the learners’ personal, language, and
social skills, and taught them how to produce English spoken language with ease, speak with a
good command of intonation, vocabulary, and grammar, communicate ideas effectively, as
well as produce continuous speech without causing comprehension difficulties or a breakdown
of communication.
After the observation of the teacher’s lessons, the author of the paper demonstrated her
own lessons which focused on the development of the learners’ speaking tasks through role-
play. The learners practiced the following role-plays:

a) “It’s a Heat Wave” (see Appendix 4);


b) “Travel Trouble” (see Appendix 5);
c) “John and His New House” (see Appendix 6).
The author of the paper offered these role-plays for the particular group of learners
because their practice gave the learners the opportunity to communicate both under the
guidance and in a freer atmosphere, which showed their communicative competence best.
When performing the role-plays, the learners refined their communicative competence,
which comprised not only grammatical accuracy but also the knowledge of sociocultural rules
of appropriateness, discourse norms, and strategies for ensuring that communication was
understood. Although the precise language that was used in the role-plays was mainly
unpredictable, the learners tried both to avoid confusion in the message (due to faulty
pronunciation, grammar, or vocabulary) and to avoid confusion in the message (due to
socially inappropriate style). The author of the paper noticed that the learners exhibited these
skills in a proper way because they had practiced many role-plays before and had learnt to
apply appropriate communicative language strategies.
When assessing the learners’ speech during the role-plays, the author of the paper
focused on the learners’ ability to understand and communicate real information, rather than
on accuracy. The tasks were accomplished by using informal and, in some cases, unrehearsed
English language which resembled natural communication. The learners spent plenty of time
on practicing their pronunciation: the relaxed classroom atmosphere as well as the new
identity prescribed by the given role cards helped the learners overcome constraints
characteristic to speaking in a foreign language.
The author of the paper proposed different types of interaction in the role-plays. If in
the first role-play (“It’s a Heat Wave”) the learners’ interaction was rather predictable, the
other two role-plays (“Travel Trouble” and “John and His New House”) required a more
autonomous approach to accomplishing the tasks. The practice of the role-plays revealed that
the role-play “Travel Trouble” appeared to be the most interesting: the learners’ interest could
have been explained with their interest in the theme of travelling. However, the role-play
“John and His New House” happened to be the most difficult for the group: this can be
explained with the theme, which did not raise the learners’ interest, as well as with a high
level of difficulty of the task. The author of the paper would like to note that both guided and
autonomous ways of practicing role-plays brought good results: in the first case, the learners
followed the given patterns to learn new phrases; while in the second case, the learners
demonstrated what they had learnt and how effectively they could apply necessary skills and
their knowledge of English language in communication.
When working on the role-plays, the author of the paper kept to the following stages:

a) presentation,
b) performance,
c) analysis of the performance,
d) evaluation of the activity by the learners,
e) a follow-up activity.

After performing the role-plays, there were class discussions about the relevance,
productivity, and effectiveness of the role-plays as it appeared for the learners. The majority
of the learners admitted that they liked carrying out these activities, in spite of the difficulties
which the learners had encountered in performing them. The learners also considered the tasks
to be motivating, because they felt that the outcome of each activity depended on how
effectively they would achieve the main goal, i.e. deliver the message so that their partner(s)
could understand them and give appropriate feedback. The author of the paper concludes that
role-plays practiced in the language classroom do help language learners develop their
speaking skills effectively and become competent for carrying out communication in the
foreign language not only in the classroom but also outside school.

3.2. ANALYZING THE INTERVIEW WITH THE TEACHER AND LEARNERS’


QIESTIONNAIRES

The interview with the teacher was held prior to the lessons observed in the English
language classroom. The aim of the interview was as follows:

1) to find out why speaking skills development is important in the English language
classroom in basic school;
2) to discuss the learners’ communicative competence;
3) to discuss speaking activities, including role-play, which can be appropriate for the use
in the English language classroom in basic school;
4) to consider the issue of accuracy and fluency in language learners’ speech;
5) to deliberate the reasons of the learners’ unwillingness to participate in speaking
activities and the ways to cope with the problem;
6) to analyze the ways of assessing the learners’ speaking skills.

The interviewee had to answer eight questions (see Appendix 7). The results of the
interview are presented below.
The first question concerned the widely held learners’ belief that speaking ability
could be one of the basic measures of knowing English language. The teacher considered this
belief to be wide-spread because in real-life communication, when people meet, they talk with
one another. The teacher believed that the same pattern of communication should be in the
language classroom. Writing, listening, and reading could be considered to be important as
well, but these skills should not be developed at the expense of speaking. The teacher noticed
that at all English language proficiency levels, learners would need to be given plenty of
opportunities to improve their speaking skills so that they could use the foreign language not
only in the classroom, but also outside school.
The second question regarded the amount of time devoted to practicing speaking skills
at the interviewee’s English language lessons. As speaking could be the most important
component of one’s language ability, the teacher would spend approximately half of the time
on speaking activities in her classes.
The third question touched upon speaking activities the interviewee offered to her
language learners, and the main criteria for selecting such activities. The interviewee also had
to list speaking activities which, in her opinion, the learners would enjoy doing most. As the
teacher marked, there could be found various interesting speaking activities to be practiced at
English lessons: dialogues, jigsaw activities, presentations, drama, role-plays, debates, and
conversations among others. The interviewee supposed that any teacher might consult the
course book, different printed teaching materials, or the internet resources to find speaking
activities that would be appropriate for different levels of learners’ language proficiency. For
the interviewee, the main criteria for selecting such activities were productivity,
purposefulness, and interactivity. Moreover, the teacher reminded that speaking activities
should be challenging in order to motivate students to actively participate in them. On the
whole, her learners appeared to enjoy almost all speaking activities because they really liked
speaking out, especially if they knew language quite well for their level. Role-plays were
practiced in the classroom as well.
The fourth question discussed communicative competence and the importance of
teaching all the aspect of communicative competence to language learners in basic school.
The interviewee reckoned that the notion of speaking skills would not imply mere speaking.
The teacher pointed out that to be a successful speaker meant to be able to understand one’s
own language abilities, skills, personal features, as well as the ability to socialize and to
convey the intended message to the person one was speaking to. Therefore, the teacher
confessed that she tried to teach her learners all aspect of the communication process so that
they could employ this knowledge further in their life.
The fifth question compared the importance of fluency with the importance of
accuracy as aspects of speaking skills to be emphasized in the learners’ speech when they
role-played. The interviewee found both aspects to be equally important. The teacher
complained that nowadays, it could be considered enough if learners left school with the
ability of speaking a foreign language fast, regardless of the numerous mistakes they might
make in their speech. The teacher did not agree to this state of affairs and insisted on the
proposition that literacy should stand in the basis of all skills, be it reading, writing, listening,
or speaking. Thus, the teacher would focus on both fluency and accuracy in her learners’
speech when they performed role-plays or other speaking activites.
The sixth question mentioned Brown’s view of language fluency comprising
communicative language tools, choices, and strategies. The interviewee had to answer if she
agreed to approach language fluency from such a perspective, in case it helped her learners
improve their communicative competence through role-play. The interviewee found this idea
to be worth considering and added that although it might be difficult for the language teacher
to pay attention to all these aspects, the learners would only benefit if they were explained
these communicative language tools, choices, and strategies and were taught to apply this
knowledge in real life.
The next question asked if the interviewee encountered any problems in her classroom
regarding the learners’ unwillingness to participate in speaking activities, in general, and in
role-plays, in particular. If the answer was positive, then the interviewee had to explain how
she coped with such problems. The teacher said that like many other teachers, she came across
teaching situations when learners were not eager to take part in activities she offered. The
reasons could range from the lack of confidence in one’s speaking ability to unhealthy
atmosphere in the class. In every separate case, the teacher tried to solve the problem by
rearranging the tasks for participants, or by doing more thorough preparation for certain
speaking activities, which, as she anticipated, could be rather difficult for completion for a
particular group of learners. However, the teacher noted that she would never refuse from
implementing an activity if it seemed discouraging for some learners; instead, she would work
with these learners more closely to help them cope with the task eventually. The interviewee
underlined that she had seen how many positive feelings could be brought by the successful
completion of a task which had seemed to be difficult in the beginning, as the learners realized
that they had gone through it and managed to do it well.
The final question asked the interviewee to comment on the ways she assessed her
learners’ speaking skills in role-playing, and how she treated speech error correction. The
teacher shared her opinion about role-play as a suitable way of assessing learners’ speaking
skills. At the practice stage, the teacher would exploit several wide-spread techniques for
correcting the learners’ speech mistakes. But at the assessment stage, role-play could be
performed by two learners, while the teacher first of all noted down their performance
according to accuracy, appropriacy, range, size of language, as well as according to their
flexibility in response. In the end of the role-play, the teacher would give a separate score for
different aspects of the task, including the learners’ social and personal expression.
On the basis of the interviewee’s responses, the author of the paper has made the
following conclusions. At all English language proficiency levels, learners need to be given
plenty of opportunities to improve their speaking skills so that they could use the foreign
language not only in the classroom, but also outside school. There are various interesting
speaking activities including role-play that can be practiced at English lessons: the teacher can
consult the coursebook, different printed teaching materials, or the internet resources to find
speaking activities that will be appropriate for different levels of learners’ language
proficiency. Role-play as a communicative task can be used not only for practicing speaking
skills, but also for their assessment. The main criteria for selecting such activities can be
productivity, purposefulness, and interactivity. Moreover, speaking activities should be
challenging in order to motivate students to actively participate in them. If learners are
uneager to participate in a speaking activity, the teacher may rearrange the tasks for
participants, or do more thorough preparation for certain speaking activities, which, as he or
she anticipates, can be rather difficult for completion for a particular group of learners.
Furthermore, to communicate successfully, speaker should be able to understand their own
language abilities, skills, personal features, as well as the ability to socialize and to convey the
intended message to the person they are speaking to. That is why the teacher may explain to
his or her learners all aspect of the communication process so that they could employ this
knowledge further in their life. What regards the question of fluency and accuracy, both
fluency and accuracy should be taken into account by the English language teacher because
literacy should stand in the basis of all skills, whether it might be reading, writing, listening,
or speaking.
The aim of building the learners’ questionnaires was as follows:

1) to check the learners’ attitude towards speaking;


2) to examine the English language classroom routine regarding speaking activities;
3) to define language skills which may cause difficulty for the learners when performing
speaking activities;
4) to find out about the learners’ treatment of different aspects of communicative
language competence;
5) to analyze communicative strategies which may be employed to improve the learners’
speaking skills;
6) to discuss the question of accuracy and fluency, as well as the oral skills and
knowledge to be applied to successfully develop and maintain one’s speaking fluency.

The learners had to answer sixteen questions (see Appendix 8). The results of the
survey are presented below.
When answering the first question about the language skill which would form the basis
for the learning process in the English language classroom, the majority of the respondents
(44% of the learners) selected speaking, 10% of the respondents selected listening or writing,
and 14% of the respondents selected reading. However, 22% of the respondents admitted that
all the components, i.e. reading, writing, speaking, and listening were equally important for
the learning process. Figure 3.1. demonstrates the result of Question 1 graphically:

50

40

30

20

10

0
reading speaking listening writing all skills
Question 1
% 14 44 10 10 22

Figure 3.1. Language skills to form the basis for the learning process

When answering the second question, the learners had to evaluate their speaking skills.
Only 12% of the respondents regarded their speaking skills as excellent, while 38% of the
respondents considered their speaking skills to be very good. In addition, 36% of the
respondents admitted that their speaking skills were at the average level, and 14% of the
respondents marked their speaking skills as poor. The result of Question 2 is presented in
Figure 3.2.:
%

40

30

20

10

0
excellent very good average poor
Question 2
% 12 38 36 14

Figure 3.2. The learners’ evaluation of their speaking skills

The third question focused on the learners’ opportunities to speak English in the
classroom or outside school. 37% of the respondents answered that they spoke English a lot, at
every opportunity, and 25% of the respondents declared that they spoke English quite often.
11% of the respondents mentioned that they seldom had the chance to speak English, whereas
27% of the respondents marked that they almost never communicated in English because of
their poor knowledge of the language. The results of Question 3 are displayed in Figure 3.3.:

40

30

20

10

0
a lot quite often seldom almost never
Question 3
% 37 25 11 27

Figure 3.3. The learners’ pportunities to speak English

When answering the fourth question, the learners had to recall with whom they
communicate in English most: with native speakers, with foreigners for whom English is a
foreign language, or with classmates. The overwhelming majority of the respondents (88% of
the learners) marked that they spoke English with classmates most, while only 12% of the
respondents noted that they spoke English with foreigners most. No respondents chose the
first variant of the answer, i.e. no one dealt with native speakers. The results of Question 4 are
illustrated in Figure 3.4.:

100

80
60

40

20

0
with native speakerwoth foreigners with classmates
Question 4
% 0 12 88

Figure 3.4. Partners in communication in English

The fifth question examined if the learners liked speaking English in the classroom or
outside school. Again, the majority of the respondents (75% of the learners) answered in the
affirmative, while only 25% of the respondents denied that they would like to communicate in
English.
The sixth question was supposed for the respondents to mention how much time they
spent on speaking at an English lesson on the average. The results show that the class spent
25-50 percent of the learning process on performing speaking tasks.
In the seventh question, the learners were asked what kind of speaking activities they
were engaged more often in their English language classroom. According to the data received
from the completed questionnaires, the most common speaking activities in their classroom
are as follows (where 1=the most common speaking activity, and 16=the least common
speaking activity):

1) dialogues,
2) role-plays,
3) simulations,
4) information gap activities,
5) story-telling,
6) jigsaw activities,
7) conversation,
8) guessing games,
9) discussions,
10) drama,
11) presentations,
12) debates,
13) surveys,
14) talks,
15) chat,
16) outside-class speaking activities.

The eighth and ninth questions on communicative competence are interrelated. In the
eighth question, the learners were asked if their English language teacher helps them develop
their communicative competence of English language as the whole of personal, language, and
social competence. And the ninth question asked the learners if they needed communicative
competence to be developed as a combination of these three aspects. The class discussion
revealed that the learners were at a loss when trying to understand what communicative
competence comprised. Therefore, the learners had to be given situations to exemplify what
communicative competence means in all its aspects. After the discussion, the learners were
able to answer the questions. The eighth question was answered positively by 30% of the
respondents, while 70% of the respondents did not recognize that their English language
teacher helped them develop their speaking skills in this way. The ninth question, however,
was answered positively by 60% of the respondents, while 40% of the students answered in
the negative.
The tenth question studied the difficulties which the learners might encounter when
performing speaking tasks. The learners’ responses are demonstrated in Figure 3.5.:

35
30
25
20 %
15
10
5
0
self-monitoring

fluency
production

conceptualization

articulation

automaticity

managing talk
speech

and formation

and repair

Question 10
Figure 3.5. Language skills which may cause difficulty when performing speaking tasks

As it can be seen from the figure above, the learners’ responses regarding possible
difficulties in performing speaking tasks were divided as follows: speech production (30%),
conceptualization and formation (12%), articulation (8%), self-monitoring and repair (18%),
automaticity (5%), fluency (16%), and managing talk (11%).
Questions 11 and 12 related to the importance of accuracy and fluency in speech
production. The learners noted that their English language teacher emphasized both fluency
and accuracy, which coincided with their preferences: 64% of the respondents underlined that
both accuracy and fluency should be emphasized by the language teacher, while 22% of the
respondents marked the importance of fluency, and 14% of the respondents marked the
importance of accuracy. The learners’ preferences of accuracy or fluency as the most essential
aspects of speaking (question 12) are illustrated in Figure 3.6.:

70
60
50
40
%
30
20
10
0
accuracy fluency both accuracy and fluency

Question 12

Figure 3.6. The learners’ preferences of accuracy or fluency as the most essential aspects of
speaking

Before the learners had to answer questions 13, 14, and 15 about the communicative
language tools, choices, and strategies, the author of the paper discussed the notions with the
learners and presented them examples of situations where the tools, choices, and strategies
could be applied. As regards the rating of the most important communicative language tools
(question 13), the learners selected vocabulary (38%), grammar (28%), and pragmatics (14%)
to be the most important communicative language tools. The data also revealed that
pronunciation (8%), paralinguistic features (6%), and kinesic language features (6%) were not
considered to be difficult by the learners. The results of the learners’ responses are presented
in Figure 3.7.:
%

40
35
30
25
20 %
15
10
5
0
paralinguistic kinesic pragmatics pronunciation grammar vocabulary
features language
features

Question 13

Figure 3.7. The most important communicative language tools

When rating communicative language choices in order of importance (question 14),


the learners arranged the given choices in the following order: settings (36%), style (22%),
register (16%), sexual roles (14%), psychological roles (8%), and social roles (4%). The
results of the learners’ preferences are demonstrated in Figure 3.8.:

40
35
30
25
20 %
15
10
5
0
settings social roles sexual roles psychological register style
roles

Question 14

Figure 3.8. Communicative language choices in order of importance

The fifteenth question distinguished the communicative language strategies which


seemed to be the most difficult for the learners when they performed a speaking activity at an
English lesson. The learners arranged the communicative language strategies according to
their degree of difficulty in the following way: repairing competently (46%), using speed to
advantage (20%), negotiating for meaning (14%), clarifying effectively (10%), giving
appropriate feedback (6%), and using pauses and hesitations (4%). The results of the learners’
responses are presented in Figure 3.9.:

50
45
40
35
30
25 %
20
15
10
5
0
using speed using pauses giving repairing clarifying negotiating for
to advantage and appropriate competently effectively meaning
hesitations feedback

Question 15

Figure 3.9. Communicative language strategies according to their degree of difficulty

The final question was aimed at the identification of oral skills and knowledge
necessary for the development and maintenance of speaking fluency. According to the data
received from the completed questionnaires, the most commonly applied oral skills and
knowledge are as follows (where 1=the most commonly applied oral skill and knowledge, and
7=the least commonly applied oral skill and knowledge):

1) paying attention to the success of the interaction and adjusting components of speech
such as vocabulary, rate of speech, and complexity of grammar structures to maximize
the listener’s comprehensions and involvement;
2) selecting vocabulary that is understandable and appropriate for the audience, the topic
being discussed, and the setting in which the speech act occurs;
3) using grammar structures accurately;
4) applying strategies to enhance comprehensibility, such as emphasizing key words,
rephrasing, or checking for listener’s comprehension;
5) producing the sounds, stress patterns, rhythmic structures, and intonations of the
language;
6) assessing characteristics of the target audience, including shared knowledge or shared
points of reference, status and power relations of participants, interest levels, or
differences in perspectives;
7) using gestures or body language.
On the basis of the learners’ responses, the author of the paper has made the following
conclusions. The majority of the learners agree that speaking forms the basis for the learning
process in the English language classroom. However, only 12% of the learners evaluate their
speaking skills as excellent, while the majority of the learners assume that their speaking skills
are at the average or very good level. Such a good level of speaking skills can be explained
with the fact that the majority of the learners (62% of the learners altogether) speak English a
lot or quite often, although they have a chance to speak English mainly with their classmates.
At the same time, 75% of the learners confess that they like communicating in English either
in the classroom or outside school.
What regards practicing speaking skills during the learning process, the class admits
that they spend 25-50 percent of the learning process on performing speaking tasks. The most
common speaking activities performed in the English language classroom are dialogues, role-
plays, simulations, information gap activities, and story-telling. Although the majority of the
learners do not recognize that their English language teacher helps them develop their
communicative competence of English language as the whole of personal, language, and
social competence, 60% of the learners emphasize that they need to develop their
communicative competence in this way.
Furthermore, among the most possible difficulties in performing speaking tasks the
learners name speech production, conceptualization and formation, articulation, self-
monitoring and repair; whereas automaticity, fluency, and managing talk are not perceived to
be difficult communicative language strategies to be applied. In addition, the learners hold an
opinion that both accuracy and fluency need to be emphasized by the English language
teacher, and this specific learners’ need is met by their teacher. What concerns communicative
language tools, the learners select vocabulary, grammar, and pragmatics to be the most
important communicative language tools. When rating communicative language choices in
order of importance, the learners, first of all, pay attention to settings, style, and register. Such
communicative language strategies as the ability to repair competently, use speed to
advantage, and negotiate for meaning appear to be the most difficult strategies according to
their degree of difficulty. When identifying oral skills and knowledge necessary for the
development and maintenance of speaking fluency, the learners mark the necessity of paying
attention to the success of the interaction and adjusting components of speech such as
vocabulary, rate of speech, and complexity of grammar structures to maximize the listener’s
comprehensions and involvement, selecting vocabulary that is understandable and appropriate
for the audience, the topic being discussed, and the setting in which the speech act occurs, as
well as using grammar structures accurately.

The results of the present research prove that speaking skills should be regarded as
central to foreign language learning. In order to facilitate his or her learners’ communicative
competence, the English language teacher has to offer a variety of communicative tasks in the
classroom. Role-play has proved to be one of the most effective methods of teaching speaking
skills, and therefore, it should be incorporated into the English language syllabus in basic
school. The research has verified the hypothesis by proving that role-plays practiced in the
English language classroom help language learners develop their speaking skills effectively
and become competent for carrying out communication not only in the classroom but also
outside school.
CONCLUSIONS

The results of the present research prove that speaking skills should be regarded as
central to foreign language learning. At all English language proficiency levels, learners need
to be given plenty of opportunities to improve their speaking skills so that they could use the
foreign language not only in the classroom, but also outside school. There are various
interesting speaking activities including role-play that can be practiced at English lessons: the
teacher can consult the course book, different printed teaching materials, or the internet
resources to find speaking activities that will be appropriate for different levels of learners’
language proficiency. The main criteria for selecting such activities can be productivity,
purposefulness, and interactivity. Moreover, speaking activities should be challenging in order
to motivate students to actively participate in them.
Furthermore, to communicate successfully, speakers should be able to understand their
own language abilities, skills, personal features, as well as their ability to socialize and to
convey the intended message to the person they are speaking to. A wide variety of
communicative tasks which can be practiced in the language classroom serve the purpose of
facilitating the learners’ communicative competence. However, the results of the research
show that language learners may be unaware of the complexity of the communicative
competence. In such a case, the English language teacher may explain to his or her learners all
aspect of the communication process so that they could employ this knowledge further in their
life.
Role-play has proved to be one of the most effective methods of teaching speaking
skills, and therefore, it should be incorporated into the English language syllabus in basic
school. Role-play as a communicative task can be used not only for practicing speaking skills,
but also for their assessment. As a rule, the learners assume productivity and effectiveness of
the role-plays, and like carrying out these activities, in spite of the difficulties which they may
encounter when performing role-plays. The learners also consider role-plays to be motivating,
because they feel that the outcome of each activity depends on how effectively they will
achieve the main goal, i.e. deliver the message so that their partner(s) could understand them
and give appropriate feedback.
The author of the paper concludes that role-plays practiced in the language classroom
do help language learners develop their speaking skills effectively and become competent for
carrying out communication in the foreign language not only in the classroom but also outside
school.
THESES

1) Speaking skills can be regarded as central to foreign language learning, because


language learners often tend to assess their progress in terms of their accomplishments
in spoken communication.
2) The learners’ ability to communicate in a foreign language greatly depends on their
areas of knowledge as mechanics (pronunciation, grammar, and vocabulary), functions
(transaction and interaction), and social and cultural rules and norms (turn-taking, rate
of speech, length of pauses between speakers, relative roles of participants).
3) Competent language speakers should be able to use communicative language tools
(pronunciation, grammar, and vocabulary, paralinguistic features, kinesic language
features, and pragmatics), select communicative language choices (centring on the
choices to be made due to differences in settings, social, sexual, and psychological
roles, as well as register and style), and apply communicative language strategies (the
abilities to use speed to their advantage, to use pauses and hesitations efficiently, to
give appropriate feedback, to repair competently, to clarify effectively, and to
negotiate for meaning when necessary).
4) A wide variety of communicative tasks including role-plays which can be practiced in
the English language classroom serve the purpose of facilitating the learners’
communicative competence; the general criteria for selecting speaking tasks are
participation, productivity, purposefulness, interactivity, collaboration, socialization,
challenge, motivation, safety, authenticity, and maximizing practice time.
5) Role-playing is widely accepted to be one of the most effective methods of teaching
speaking skills; therefore, role-plays should be incorporated into the English language
syllabus in basic school.
6) As performance-oriented activities, role-plays are mini-dramas based on real life or
imaginary situations where learners may play themselves or where they are required to
play a character role.
7) Role-plays can be either predicable (pre-planned by the teacher) or negotiated by the
learners (an open-ended scenario may allow learners to negotiate the outcome in the
course of the activity).
8) When working on role-plays, the language teacher should keep to the following stages:
presentation, performance, analysis of the performance, evaluation of the activity by
the learners, and a follow-up activity.
9) Role-play as a communicative task can be used not only for practicing speaking skills,
but also for their assessment.
10) When performing a role-play, a fluent speaker should produce spoken language with
ease, speak with a good but not necessarily perfect command of intonation,
vocabulary, and grammar, communicate ideas effectively, as well as produce
continuous speech without causing comprehension difficulties or a breakdown of
communication.
BIBLIOGRAPHY

1) Bailey, K. M., Savage, L. (1994) New Ways in Teaching Speaking. Washington:


TESOL.
2) Brown, H. D. (2000) Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. Harlow: Pearson
ESL.
3) Brumfit, C. (1984) Communicative Methodology in Language Teaching: The Roles of
Fluency and Accuracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
4) Celce-Murcia, M. (1991) Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language. Boston:
Heinle and Heinle Publishers.
5) Clark, H. H., Clark, E. (1977) Psychology and Language. New York: Harcourt.
6) Council of Europe (1993) Communication in the Modern Languages Classroom.
Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
7) Cruz-Ferreira, M., Abraham, S. A. (2005) The Language of Language: Core Concepts
in Linguistic Analysis. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.
8) Faerch, C., Kasper, G. (1984) Pragmatic Knowledge: Rules and Procedures. Applied
Linguistics. Issue 15.
9) Fillmore, C. J., Kempler, D., Wang, W. S. Y. (1979) Individual Differences in
Language Ability and Language Behaviour. New York: Academic Press.
10) Folse, K. S. (2006) The Art of Teaching Speaking: Research and Pedagogy for the
ESL/EFL Classroom. Michigan: University of Michigan Press.
11) Fulcher, G. (2003) Testing Second Language Speaking. London: Pearson ESL.
12) Gold, M. (2003) Help for the Struggling Student: Ready-to-Use Strategies and Lessons
to Build Attention, Memory, and Organizational Skills. Bognor Regis: Jossey-Bass.
13) Hadley, A. O. (1993) Research in Language Learning: Principles, Processes, and
Prospects. Lincolnwood: National Textbook Company.
14) Harmer, J. (1991) The Practice of English Language Teaching. London: Longman.
15) Hartmann, R. R. K., Stork, F. C. (1976) Dictionary of Language and Linguistics. New
York: Wiley.
16) Hedge, T. (2000) Teaching and Learning in the Language Classroom. New York:
Oxford University Press.
17) James, C. (1998) Errors in Language Learning and Use. London: Longman.
18) Klippel, F. (1987) Keep Talking: Communicative Fluency Activities for Language
Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
19) Ladousse, G. P. (1988) Role Play. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
20) Lennon, P. (1990) Investigating Fluency in EFL: A Qualitative Approach. Language
Learning. Issue 40 (3).
21) Livingstone, C. (1983) Role Play in Language Learning. London: Longman.
22) Luoma, S. (2004) Assessing Speaking. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
23) McCarthy, M. (1990) Vocabulary. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
24) McDonough, J., Shaw, C. (2003) Materials and Methods in ELT: A Teacher’s Guide.
Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Limited.
25) Mendelsohn, D. (1992) Instruments for Feedback in Oral Communication. TESOL
Journal. Issue 1 (2).
26) O’Loughlin, K. J. (2001) The Equivalence of Direct and Semi-Direct Speaking Tests.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
27) Richards, J. C., Platt, J., Weber, H. (1985) Longman Dictionary of Applied Linguistics.
London: Longman.
28) Riggenbach, H., Lazaraton, A. (1991) Promoting Oral Communication Skills. In
Celce-Murcia, M., Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language. Boston:
Heinle and Heinle Publishers.
29) Rivers, W. M., Temperley, M. S. (1978) A Practical Guide to the Teaching of English
as a Second or Foreign Language. New York: Oxford University Press.
30) Sadow, S. A. (1982) Idea Bank: Creative Activities for the Language Class. Rowley:
Newbury House.
31) Savignon, S. J. (1983) Communicative Competence: Theory and Classroom Practice.
Boston: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.
32) Taylor, L., Falvey, P. (2007) IELTS Collected Papers: Research in Speaking and
Writing Assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
33) Tannen, D. (1994) Gender and Conversational Interaction. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
34) Thornbury, S. (2006) How to Teach Speaking. London: Longman.
35) Kramiņa, I. (2000) Linguo-Didactic Theories Underlying Multi-Purpose Language
Acquisition. Riga: University of Latvia.
36) Brown, J. D. (2003) Promoting Fluency in EFL Classrooms.
http://jalt.org/pansig/2003/HTML/Brown.htm.
37) Budden, J. (2007) Role Play.
http://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/think/speak/role_play.shtml.
38) Burkart, G. S. (1998) Spoken Language: What It Is and How to Teach It.
http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=E
D433722.
39) Donald, R. (2004) Teaching Speaking Skills.
http://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/think/speak/speak_skills2.shtml.
40) Howarth, P. (2006) Increasing Student Interaction.
http://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/think/speak/interaction.shtml.
41) Skeffington, C. S. (2007) Getting Teenagers Talking.
http://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/think/speak/teen_speak.shtml.
42) The Common European Framework of Reference for Languages.
http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/Illustrations_EN.asp#TopOfPage.
APPENDICES

APPENDIX 1
Overall Oral Production

C2 Can produce clear, smoothly flowing well-structured speech with an


effective logical structure which helps the recipient notice and remember
sinificant point.
C1 Can give clear, detailed descriptions and presentations on comple
subjects, integrating sub-themes, developing particular points and
rounding off with an appropriate conclusion.
B2 Can give clear, systematically developed descriptions and presentations,
with appropriate highlighting of significant points and relevant
supporting detail.
Can give clear, detailed descriptions and presentations on a wide range of
subjects related to his/her field of interest, expanding and supporting
ideas with subsidiary points and relevant examples.
B1 Can reasonably fluently sustain a straightforward description of one of a
variety of subjects within his/her field of interest, presenting it as a linear
sequence of points.
A2 Can give a simple description or presentation of people, living or
working conditions, daily routines, likes/dislikes, etc. as a short series of
simple phrases and sentences linked to a list.
A1 Can produce simple mainly isolated phrases about people and places.
(the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages,
http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/Illustrations_EN.asp#TopOfPage)
APPENDIX 2
Procedure of Conducting a Role-Play

The first few times the teacher does a role-play with his or her students, it may be a
good idea to provide them with a script: not a script for a play, with all the lines already
written out, but a script as a general description of how the scene will be played out. The
students may brainstorm the scenario themselves, with a little help from the teacher. At the
same time, they can think of the language they may need. For closely guided role-plays,
students can be given role cards. One can consider the following example of role-play:

The local school district threatens to close your


neighbourhood school. The building is old and in serious
need of repair, and the enrolment has fallen sharply in the
last few years. The district office has suggested that the
students could buss to a newer and much larger school
across the town. Many parents have protested, and a
meeting of parents and teachers is called by the school
authorities to discuss the problem.

The roles are:

- the school superintendent (who chairs the meeting),


- parents,
- and teachers.

As a class, the students may discuss the details of the situation. Consider the
proposed ideas below:

Old school New School

built in 1923 built in 1995

90 students 600 students

five rooms fifty rooms (including computer


lab, art and music studios,
modern sports gym)

no special facilities except a small all the newest equipment


park where students and teachers (including computers and
have lunch, etc. television)

used nightly for evening classes used nightly for evening


and all other community activities community classes; not used for
other activities
The teacher and students then explore the reasons that the school district and
superintendent may put forward to support the plan to close the school, as in the following
example:

- What are the disadvantages of staying in the present building?


- What are the benefits of moving to the newer school?
- What do parents think of the plan to close down the school? Do any of them support
it?
- Do the teachers share their views?
- Can anyone offer an alternative to the plan?

This discussion should be conducted in the target language. If the students lack any
language units necessary for the discussion, the teacher may make suggestions, or he or she
may allow time later for the students to fill in the gaps.
An alternative to this group exploration of language is to give the students role cards
and put them to work in pairs to prepare their roles, as in the example below:

Role 1
You are parents of children at the old school. Decide whether you are for or
against the move, and list your arguments. Be prepared to put your opinion
clearly and politely, and to counter any arguments against it.
Role 2
You are teachers at the old school. Decide whether you are for or against
the move, and list your arguments. Be prepared to put your opinion clearly
and politely, and to counter any arguments against it.
Role 3
You are the school superintendent. You have to chair the meeting. You
have to make sure that everyone’s views are heard. You yourself are for the
move but you have to appear to remain neutral. Remember to “open” and
“close” the meeting.
The students may make notes during their preparation, but they do not write out a
dialogue or series of planned speeches. The two students who prepare for the role of the
school superintendent may need extra help from the teacher on he language formulas used to
preside over a meeting.
When the role-play begins, the class splits into two groups, each group composed of
parents and teachers and presided over by a superintendent. The two groups run their role-
plays concurrently, with the teacher standing apart and discreetly eavesdropping on the
proceedings. The teacher does not interrupt the students, but if either of the groups gets
stalled, the teacher may provide a comment or ask a question as if taking the part of a parent
or teacher. At the end of an agreed period of time, the groups wind up their meeting,
regardless of whether they have reached a natural disclosure.
There can be two kinds of follow-up on the role-play, topical or linguistic. After the
given role-play it could be interesting for each group to report to the other on how its meeting
went. The groups could also discuss the arguments, proposed and reached. The linguistic
follow-up would depend on what the teacher ad noted in the way of language problems as he
or she eavesdropped on the proceedings. For example, the teacher might need to make
suggestions on appropriate ways of offering an opinion, or of agreeing or disagreeing with an
opinion offered by another speaker. The teacher also might choose no to say anything about
linguistic features for the moment waiting instead until a later session of practice output
activities to work on the relevant forms.

(adapted from Burkart 1998: 26-28)


APPENDIX 3
Scheme of the Processes Involved in Learning to Communicate

(Rivers, Temperley 1978: 4)


APPENDIX 4
Role-play 1: It’s a Heat Wave
(http://www.onestopenglish.com/section.asp?docid=149706)
APPENDIX 5
Role-play 2: Travel Trouble
(Davies, http://www.onestopenglish.com/section.asp?docid=145154)
APPENDIX 6
Role-play 3: John and His New House
(Porter, http://www.onestopenglish.com/section.asp?docid=145058)
APPENDIX 7
The Interview with the English Teacher

1. Why do you think students often evaluate speaking ability as one of the basic measures
of knowing English language?
2. On average, how much time do you devote to practicing speaking skills at your
English language lessons?
3. What kinds of speaking activities do you offer to your language learners? What are the
main criteria for selecting such activities? What kinds of speaking activities do you
think they enjoy doing most? Do you often practice role-plays?
4. What does communicative competence comprise? Is it important to teach all aspect of
communicative competence to language learners in basic school?
5. Fluency or accuracy: which of these aspects do you emphasize in your learners’ speech
when they do role-playing?
6. Brown offers an expanded view of language fluency which considers the necessity for
language learners to exploit communicative language tools (pronunciation, grammar,
vocabulary, paralinguistic features, kinesic language features, and pragmatics), to
select communicative language choices (centering on the choices to be made due to
differences in settings, social, sexual, and psychological roles, as well as register and
style), and to employ communicative language strategies (using speed, pauses and
hesitations efficiently, giving appropriate feedback, repairing competently, clarifying
effectively, and negotiating for meaning when necessary). Do you agree to approach
language fluency from such a perspective? Do you think it might help your learners
improve their communicative competence through role-play?
7. Do you encounter any problems in your classroom regarding the learners’
unwillingness to participate in speaking activities, in general, and in role-plays, in
particular? How do you cope with such problems?
8. In which ways do you assess your learners’ speaking skills in role-playing? How do
you treat speech error correction?
APPENDIX 8
Learner’s Questionnaire

Could you please, answer the following questions in the questionnaire:

1. Which of the following skills do you believe form the basis for the learning
process in the English language classroom:

reading
speaking
listening
writing
all the components, mentioned above, are equally important

2. How do you evaluate your speaking skills?

excellent
very good
average
poor

3. How often do you speak English in the classroom or outside school?

a lot, at every opportunity


quite often
seldom
almost never, because my English is poor

4. With whom do you communicate in English most?

with native speakers


with foreigners for whom English is a foreign language
with classmates during the English lessons

5. Do you like speaking English in the classroom or outside school?

yes
no

6. On the average, how much time do you spend on speaking at an English lesson
(i.e. how much time is devoted to practicing speaking skills in your English
language classroom)?

less than 25 percent


25-50 percent
more than 50 percent
7. What kind of speaking tasks do you perform more in your English language
classroom?

dialogues
information gap activities
jigsaw activities
surveys
guessing games
presentations
talks
story-telling
drama
role-plays
simulations
discussions
debates
conversation
chat
outside-class speaking tasks

8. Does your English language teacher help you develop your communicative
competence of English language as the whole of personal competence (self-
identification, role identification, creativity, flexibility), language competence
(discourse proficiency, language proficiency), and social competence (realized
through cooperativeness and interactive capacity)?

yes
no

9. Do you think you need to develop your communicative competence of English


language as the whole of personal competence (self-identification, role
identification, creativity, flexibility), language competence (discourse proficiency,
language proficiency), and social competence (realized through cooperativeness
and interactive capacity)?

yes
no

10. Which of the following skills may cause difficulty for you when performing
speaking activities in your English language classroom? (You may tick several
options.)

speech production
conceptualization and formation
articulation
self-monitoring and repair
automaticity
fluency
managing talk
11. Which aspects of speaking skills does your English language teacher emphasize?

accuracy
fluency
both accuracy and fluency

12. Which aspects of speaking skills do you need to develop more, in your opinion?

accuracy
fluency
both accuracy and fluency

13. Rate the following communicative language tools in order of importance (1=the
most important communicative language tool, 6=the least important
communicative language tool):

paralinguistic features
kinesic language features
pragmatics
pronunciation
grammar
vocabulary
14. Rate the following communicative language choices in order of importance (1=the
most important communicative language choice, 6=the least important
communicative language choice):

settings
social roles
sexual roles
psychological roles
register
style

15. Which of the following communicative language strategies seems to be the most
difficult for you when you perform a speaking activity at an English lesson?

using speed to advantage


using pauses and hesitations
giving appropriate feedback
repairing competently
clarifying effectively
negotiating for meaning

16. Which of the following oral skills and knowledge do you apply in order to develop
or maintain speaking fluency? (You may tick several options.)

producing the sounds, stress patterns, rhythmic structures, and intonations of the
language
using grammar structures accurately
assessing characteristics of the target audience, including shared knowledge or
shared points of reference, status and power relations of participants, interest
levels, or differences in perspectives
selecting vocabulary that is understandable and appropriate for the audience, the
topic being discussed, and the setting in which the speech act occurs
applying strategies to enhance comprehensibility, such as emphasizing key words,
rephrasing, or checking for listener’s comprehension
using gestures or body language
paying attention to the success of the interaction and adjusting components of
speech such as vocabulary, rate of speech, and complexity of grammar structures
to maximize the listener’s comprehensions and involvement

Thank you for your time and cooperation!

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi