11127-26622-1-pb

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

PROFILE PROFILE PROFILE PROFILE PROFILE 6 (2005):Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Facultad de Ciencias Humanas, Departamento de Lenguas Extranjeras

Developing Oral Skills throughCommunicative and Interactive Tasks

Desarrollo de las habilidades orales a través de tareas interactivasDesarrollo de las habilidades orales a través de tareas interactivasDesarrollo de las habilidades orales a través de tareas interactivasDesarrollo de las habilidades orales a través de tareas interactivasDesarrollo de las habilidades orales a través de tareas interactivas

Dorelly Gutiérrez GutiérrezDorelly Gutiérrez GutiérrezDorelly Gutiérrez GutiérrezDorelly Gutiérrez GutiérrezDorelly Gutiérrez Gutié[email protected]

Institución Educativa Distrital Britalia

This article describes a research project carried out with a group of ninth grade students atthe Institución Educativa Distrital Britalia, in Bogotá. The starting point was a needs analysiswhich revealed the lack of practice regarding speaking skills. Three interactive tasks, a freeconversational activity, and basic oral defenses were designed and implemented. Direct observation,videos and audiotapes provided evidence of the improvement of students’ oral communication.The changes in the pedagogical practice, in the role of the teacher, in the syllabus design and inlearners’ attitudes towards their learning process were recorded as the main results of the actionresearch project.

KKKKKey worey worey worey worey words:ds:ds:ds:ds: Oral communication, interactive tasks, task-based learning

Este artículo describe un proyecto de investigación desarrollado con un grupo de estudiantesde noveno grado en la Institución Educativa Distrital Britalia, en Bogotá. Se partió de un análisisde necesidades que reveló la ausencia de práctica en habilidades orales. Se diseñaron eimplementaron tres tareas interactivas, una actividad de conversación libre y sustentacionesorales básicas. La observación directa, los videos y audio casetes evidenciaron el mejoramientode la comunicación oral de los estudiantes. Los cambios en la práctica pedagógica, en el papeldel maestro, en el diseño del programa y en las actitudes de los estudiantes hacia su proceso deaprendizaje fueron los resultados principales del proyecto de investigación acción.

Palabras claves: Palabras claves: Palabras claves: Palabras claves: Palabras claves: Comunicación oral, tareas interactivas, aprendizaje basado en tareas

83-96

This article was received on April 06th, 2005 and accepted on August 16th, 2005.

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ 84GUTIÉRREZGUTIÉRREZGUTIÉRREZGUTIÉRREZGUTIÉRREZ PROFILEPROFILEPROFILEPROFILEPROFILE

INTRODUCTIONINTRODUCTIONINTRODUCTIONINTRODUCTIONINTRODUCTIONOne of the main necessities in the learning of a

foreign language is the development of the fourskills, which are listening, speaking, reading andwriting. But in the Colombian context, especiallyin public schools, those skills are not developedenough due to a set of factors such as the numberof students per classroom, the lack of learningresources, and the exaggerated use of grammarapproaches which cause some students to lackmotivation in the learning of English.

As a consequence, learners have manyproblems, especially in oral communication. Whenthey try to express themselves orally, they onlypronounce isolated words and disconnectedsentences making their production poor andmeaningless. Since speaking is required in academicand professional performances, the lack of oralproduction skills becomes a serious disadvantagewhen compared to private school students.

This project proposes the implementation of aresearch activity which includes the application of somecommunicative and interactive tasks directed toimprove oral skills. Bearing in mind task-based learningand communicative and interactive views, learners canapproach speaking as a way to negotiate meaning andto establish social relations with others.

RESEARCH QUESTIONSRESEARCH QUESTIONSRESEARCH QUESTIONSRESEARCH QUESTIONSRESEARCH QUESTIONS• What is the role of interactive tasks in

students’ oral production?• What are the teachers’ and learners’ roles

during the development of oral tasks?• In which way does feedback contribute to

developing speaking skills?

LITERALITERALITERALITERALITERATURE REVIEWTURE REVIEWTURE REVIEWTURE REVIEWTURE REVIEWLearners of foreign languages in our context

usually do not like to speak the L2 and most of thetime they exhibit a passive attitude in class. Trainingin oral skills which let them communicate andinteract in a meaningful and fruitful form, that is,exchanging information, negotiating meaning,supporting ideas, facing oral defenses, is a way to

motivate students to see the foreign language as avehicle for social interaction.

Humans are social beings who are in continuouscommunication and interaction with each other. Forthat reason, it is important to foster situations inwhich learners can face real communication in aforeign language. An argument that supports thisview is found in Bygate (1987: 1), who states: “Ourlearners often need to be able to speak withconfidence in order to carry out many of their mostbasic transactions. It is the skill by which they aremost frequently judged, and through which theymake or lose friends.”

“In interaction students can use all they possessof the language, all they have learned or casuallyabsorbed in real life exchanges” (Rivers, cited inBrown, 1994, p.159). This quote addresses theimportance of real interaction which gives the learnersthe opportunity to demonstrate what they can do inthe foreign language. Interaction is the basis of humancommunication and all elements of communicativeand interactive competence (grammar, discourse,sociolinguistics, pragmatics) are involved in humaninteraction. They must work together for successfulcommunication to take place.

On the other hand, it is important to create apositive environment to encourage the learners’interaction. As such, they can express their ideas,feelings and opinions without feeling afraid of makingmistakes. Students can also carry out communicativetasks in an effective way. Willis (1996) states thatcreating a low stress atmosphere and using thelanguage for real purposes are ways to get meaningfulcommunication and through interaction learners havethe chance to acquire discourse skills. Willis alsohighlights the essential conditions for effectivelanguage learning, such as exposure, use, andmotivation. With this view of language, task-basedlearning offers many advantages in the designing ofcommunicative activities and the development andimprovement of oral skills.

Nunan (1991: 279) says that task-based learningviews the learning process as a set of communicativetasks that are directly linked to the curricular goals

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○85PROFILEPROFILEPROFILEPROFILEPROFILE Developing Oral Skills through Communicative and Interactive Tasks

they serve. Task-based teaching involves anapproach where communicative tasks are importantbecause students need to engage in interactionsinside and outside the classrooms. This view changesthe approach of designing tasks to be developed inthe classroom. It means teachers and students mustbe engaged in tasks which involve meaningfulcontexts where learners use the foreign language ina real form not only for a grade but for their dailylife. Task-based learning lets the students develop aset of discourse strategies such as opening andclosing conversation, introducing a topic, etc. Also,the learners have the opportunity to interact indifferent situations, in different groups andaudiences. At this point I want to highlight theimportance of group work because when learnerswork in groups, they have the chance to rehearsetheir speech and also give and receive feedback.

METHODOLOGYMETHODOLOGYMETHODOLOGYMETHODOLOGYMETHODOLOGYSince the purpose of this research project was

to inquire about the development of oralproduction and how interaction and the task-basedapproach could contribute to improve the qualityand the development of students’ speaking skills,it was undertaken in the form of action research inwhich the teacher researcher reflected on thespeaking tasks carried out with ninth grade studentsat Britalia high school.

Kemmis and MacTaggar (1985), cited inJiménez, Luna, and Marín (1993) provide a viewof action research. It deals with understanding,changing, and innovating classroom processes bycollecting information in a spiral way. Moreover,action research allows teachers to inquire aboutlearning problems and reflect on their pedagogicalpractice. Action research is an ongoing processof continuous reflection, redesigning and rethinkingto improve pedagogical practice in each cycle. Theimplementation of each cycle of the researchproject let me reflect on students’ needs and, atthe same time, be aware of the main changesneeded in the pedagogical practice. For instance,in the first task (speaking about music), I perceived

that video was a good input for the activity. Thestudents enjoyed singing the Nirvana songs, butwhen they were required to speak about them, theywere very scared. For that reason, I had to lookfor alternatives which solved that problem. Ireflected on possible solutions such as interactionin small groups. Teacher and peer feedback werefruitful because in the second task, students weremore confident in their oral communication whenfacing the whole group.

Setting and PSetting and PSetting and PSetting and PSetting and PopulationopulationopulationopulationopulationThe research project was carried out at

Institución Educativa Distrital Britalia with a ninthgrade group. Forty students participated in theproject: twenty three girls and seventeen boys,whose ages ranged from 14 to 17 years old.Students share similar socio-economic status(middle – low). They receive three hours of Englishinstruction per week. The Institución EducativaDistrital Britalia is a public school located in theKennedy District, Bogotá.

Data Collection InstrumentsData Collection InstrumentsData Collection InstrumentsData Collection InstrumentsData Collection InstrumentsThe following list outlines the techniques and

instruments I used: (1) Questionnaires. They wereused in the needs analysis stage to inquire aboutstudents’ opinions and experiences related tospeaking skills. (2) Observation was carried outthrough proformas which gave me the chance toanalyze what was happening in the classes and thestudents’ attitudes toward the speaking tasks. (3) Ialso used a diary. It enabled me to reflect andrethink regarding my teaching practice and takenotes about special or meaningful teachingexperiences. (4) Videotapes and audiotapesbecame useful tools in the research project becauseI could capture valuable information and analyze itat different times.

PEDAGOGICAL DESIGNPEDAGOGICAL DESIGNPEDAGOGICAL DESIGNPEDAGOGICAL DESIGNPEDAGOGICAL DESIGNThe starting point was a diagnosis and needs

analysis activity whose results helped me to designthree communicative and interactive tasks which


let students explore their process of oralcommunication. The learners’ personal experienceswere of paramount importance in the planning andfurther implementation of new tasks. They wereasked about personal points of view, tellinginformation about past events and supporting ideas.

The first data were provided by needs analysisand a diagnostic activity. I used a questionnaire whichwas answered by forty students. They were askedabout speaking skills and oral communication (SeeAppendix 1). The activity showed that the majorityof students was conscious about the importance ofimproving speaking skills and the problems that theyhad in oral communication. Learners wanted tocommunicate in English and considered speaking inthat language an important skill. But they wanted tocommunicate in writing rather than orally becausespeaking involves good pronunciation and fluencywhich they did not have. What is more, they feltscared when they spoke in front of people or whenthey made pronunciation or grammar mistakes. Inaddition, teachers in public schools have an averageof 50 students per group so it makes it difficult totrain the students in oral skills. Speaking demands alot of time, especially when the students are not usedto working in groups and monitoring themselves;they are dependent only on the teacher’s feedback.

Among the favorite topics that learners liked tospeak about were music, literature, films, stories,sports, and important people. Students preferredto narrate and describe instead of supporting ideas.Some students said that they did not like tocommunicate in English with others because theydid not understand them. Consequently, they hadsome problems in listening skills too. Some of thempronounced isolated words or said incompletesentences. I could observe that learners made aset of grammar and pronunciation mistakes (SeeAppendix 2). Also, students showed a lack offluency and problems with word order, sentencestructure, transferences, omissions, and pet words.

I concluded that students needed to carry outnot only pedagogical tasks (tasks developed in theclassroom) but also target tasks (tasks that students

must accomplish beyond the classroom), whichinvolved independent study and practice. I wrotea general report about the first findings. Periodicalanalysis and reflection were carried out during andafter the implementation of each speaking task andtheir results were used to design the new actionsor new tasks.

Three tasks oriented to improving speaking skillswere designed and the following procedure wasimplemented:

In the first step, I looked for the students’preferred topics, the students’ weaknesses andstrengths, the available materials, and the designingof workshops and guides.

The second cycle was the implementation ofspeaking tasks. In the first task (speaking about music),students expressed their opinions about Nirvana, a rockmusic group and the principal singer, Kurt Cobain. Theyparticipated in different activities such a free conversationin small groups and giving points of view in a discussion.During the development of these activities, the majorityof the group was stressed, but little by little themembers avoided anxiety and were willing to participatein oral activities. The first participants were volunteers.In order to carry out this task, students required thefollowing skills: to produce speech in a natural way usingappropriate sentences and some cohesive devices inspoken discourse (See Appendix 3).

In comparison to the diagnostic stage, I couldperceive an improvement of sentence structure, thestudents pronounced short sentences and used someparalinguistic devices (gestures, eyes and handmovements). However, some of them did not handlecohesive devices. This fact gave me the idea toreinforce the use of linking words in oral productionand take advantage of writing as a strength in the group.The students could write a draft of their oralcomposition in order to give them constructivefeedback. It fostered improvement of word order,sentence structure and pronunciation.

The second task, a photo-story, consisted of thenarration of a story based on the students’ photographs.Students enjoyed it very much; they inquired aboutclassmates, family, childhood, elementary and primary


Before the Implementation of the ProjectBefore the Implementation of the ProjectBefore the Implementation of the ProjectBefore the Implementation of the ProjectBefore the Implementation of the Project

There was not a context of communication andinteraction in the classroom.

Speaking was assimilated as an isolated product.Students only repeated instructions and memorizeddialogues.

Students perceived speaking as an individual activity,and they did not interact using the foreign language.

There were not clear or evident phases in thedevelopment of speaking.

Students were not able to communicate orally. Theywere afraid of making mistakes and speaking infront of others.

Students’ oral production was poor; they onlypronounced isolated words or disconnectedsentences.

Students did not use paralinguistic resources intheir oral communication.

Students were not able to negotiate meaning andsupport their ideas.

After the Implementation of the ProjectAfter the Implementation of the ProjectAfter the Implementation of the ProjectAfter the Implementation of the ProjectAfter the Implementation of the Project

There was a context of communication andinteraction where students developed tasks focusedon the practice of oral skills.

Speaking involved learners’ experiences andinterests. They gave information about themselves,expressed their feelings, opinions and criticism.

Speaking was seen as a social skill, whereinteraction, feedback and group work played animportant role.

Exposure, interaction, feedback were useful phasesbefore oral production. They let students rehearseand refine their speech.

Students perceived speaking as a developmentalskill where pronunciation and grammar mistakesare part of the process of improvement.

Students improved their oral production. Isolatedand disconnected sentences turned into meaningfuland coherent texts.

Gestures, tone of voice, hand and eye movementscomplemented their oral communication.

Students exchanged information and negotiatedmeaning in their conversations. They expressedpositions in a basic way.

education, and the most important celebrations. Thisshowed that it was positive to implement tasks wherelearners involved personal experiences. Nunan (1991)brings out this aspect in the designing of tasks. Withthis activity, I could see that students had difficultiesrelated to fluency. They used pet words and repetitions.Although they tried as much as possible to keep correctword order, sometimes they did not remember specificwords in their tales. It broke the narration of the storyand the listeners became bored. The last situation gaveme cues to design activities oriented to practicenarration faster by using dumb stories to improve fluencyand speed. Ferdinand’s stories, for instance (SeeAppendix 4).

The final task was presenting a conversation aboutMaloka, a technological and interactive place inBogotá. Students exchanged information throughopen questions. They gave points of views andsupported their ideas orally. Students learned aboutsome research experiences and watched an interactivefilm. Then, they carried out an interactive activity ingroups of four people. Students had to discuss someopen questions related to technological advances andthe film. During the interactive phase, they receivedteachers’ and classmates’ oral feedback to rehearse,refine and improve their oral production. In order todevelop the ability to support ideas, learners alsocarried out some activities such as small debates

TTTTTable 1.able 1.able 1.able 1.able 1. Summary of the diagnostic stage and findings.


about the advantages and disadvantages oftechnology for human beings. Finally, they held agroup conversation, exchanging information andopinions about Maloka.

FINDINGSFINDINGSFINDINGSFINDINGSFINDINGSWith the information provided by the four

instruments implemented, I analyzed the data tohighlight the relevant information and establish thecategories. The following table summarizes thefindings before and during the implementation ofthe project. The information in the first column isthe result of the diagnostic stage and the teacher’sreflection regarding observation. The secondcolumn shows the most important findings duringthe development of the project taking as base thevideo and audiotapes and proformas.

On the other hand, I established some categoriesbearing in mind the collected information. Thecategories are related to the following stages toenhance oral communication among students:

Exposure: Students were put in contact with somepatterns of the foreign language which providedmodels and, at the same time, created a stimulatingcommunicative context. In that way, they weremotivated to communicate in English. For instance,in the implementation of the first task the learnersenjoyed listening to music and watching the videosand pictures of Nirvana. Some of them asked aboutthe history of the group, the lyrics and albums. At thebeginning, oral production was poor; students onlypronounced isolated words or disconnectedexpressions, so their oral production was notmeaningful for their interlocutors. Also, learners didnot have confidence to communicate in oral form.

Interaction: Students carried out the interactiveand communicative tasks practicing in small groupswhere they could speak without the teacher’scontrol or grades. This was the phase wherestudents ridded their fear and rehearsed theirspeech. In this phase, they improved their oralproduction due to the group work practice.Students exchanged information with differentlisteners using short sentences.

Feedback: It was one of the most important tools.Students received feedback from the teacher andtheir classmates because the development of thespeaking activities required different listeners’contributions in order to establish meaningfulinteraction and fruitful communication. Feedback alsocontributed toward giving confidence to learners and,at the same time, contributed toward improvinglanguage use. Students received feedback in allspeaking tasks (See Appendix 6). In this phase, theybegan to use connectors to make their oralproduction more coherent for their interlocutors.

Final Oral Production: Students incorporatedfeedback observations and refined their oral texts.They obtained fluency in their oral production andused pragmalinguistic devices to make theircommunication more effective. For example,students in the third task held oral defenses andsimple conversations supporting and defendingtheir ideas in front of others.

All interactive and communicative tasks involvedthe development of the following basic phases:exposure, interaction and feedback before the finalproduction. I consider them to be useful in theimplementation of activities because oral productionis a meaningful process which requires time andpractice.

CONCLCONCLCONCLCONCLCONCLUSIONSUSIONSUSIONSUSIONSUSIONSFollowing the cycles of action research helped

me to carry out the research and innovation projectwhich took into account the needs and interests ofstudents. It also let me reflect on my pedagogicalpractice and look for new alternatives to encourageoral communication among the learners.

The problems of the lack of an interactive andcommunicative context and speaking skills wereaddressed in this project. An approach to task-based learning proved to be effective for thepopulation of this study. So the three speaking taskswere activities which let students express theirideas, feelings and opinions freely.

The teacher was a facilitator of learning. Iinteracted with students giving feedback, offering


solutions and assessing speaking in a collaborativeway. Students were active participants during thecourse of the project. They interacted with othersand asked for information or feedback which letthem improve their oral production.

Feedback and group work let students assessthemselves, refine their oral production and getconfidence in speaking. They interacted all the timein a collaborative environment, leaving behind theirfear of making mistakes and perceiving speaking asa process of continuous practice.

By developing interactive and communicativetasks, the students of ninth grade of Britalia coulddevelop speaking skills, which let them interact indifferent situations using the foreign language in afruitful form. They asked and gave information,expressed their ideas and supported them.

During the research project learners wereencouraged to communicate in the oral form asmuch as possible. They used the foreign languageby engaging in situations that replicated normallanguage use; for instance, speaking about theadvantages and disadvantages of technology. Thus,I can conclude that the learners attained a certainlevel of knowledge and proficiency in the languageuse. But the most important point was that theycould express and communicate orally, without thepressure of time or grades. They used languagemeaningfully and effectively.

PEDPEDPEDPEDPEDAGOGICAGOGICAGOGICAGOGICAGOGICAL IMPLICAL IMPLICAL IMPLICAL IMPLICAL IMPLICAAAAATIONSTIONSTIONSTIONSTIONSThis project implied a set of tasks based on

interactive and communicative approaches with thepurpose of helping students improve their oralskills. The analysis of findings suggests theimplications for pedagogical practice as follows:

The creation of an interactive andcommunicative context contributes to thedevelopment of speaking skills and theimprovement of oral production. Students workin small groups. This, in turn, helps them toimprove oral production.

Task-based learning lets students carry outactivities around their personal experiences. It isthen important that teachers be aware of thestudents’ knowledge of foreign language and ofwhat they can do with it. For instance, when thestudents are able to interact with others or face anoral defense supporting their ideas.

Feedback is a useful element in foreign languagelearning. It lets students rehearse and assess theiroral production. Feedback lets teachers perceivelearning as a process. This way, they can analyzethe students’ mistakes and work based on theirstrengths and weaknesses to improve language useand communication.

Lastly, I can point out that the steps that teachersbear in mind in action research should become partof the daily teaching activity, especially for those whoare really engaged in making their teaching practicean environment of reflection and improvement.

ABOUT THE AUTHORABOUT THE AUTHORABOUT THE AUTHORABOUT THE AUTHORABOUT THE AUTHORDorelly Gutierrez GutierrezDorelly Gutierrez GutierrezDorelly Gutierrez GutierrezDorelly Gutierrez GutierrezDorelly Gutierrez Gutierrez holds a B. A. in

modern languages from the UniversidadPedagógica y Tecnológica de Colombia andparticipated in the “Red PROFILE” in-serviceprogram. She is working at the I.E.D. BritaliaKennedy. She is a master’s candidate in the MasterProgram in Applied Linguistics to TEFL at theUniversidad Distrital Francisco José de Caldas.

REFERENCESREFERENCESREFERENCESREFERENCESREFERENCESBrown, D. (1994). Teaching by principles: An

interactive approach to language pedagogy. NewJersey: Prentice Hall Regents.

Bygate, M. (1987). Speaking. New York: OxfordUniversity Press.

Jiménez, S., et al. (1993). Action researchguide. Bogotá: COFE Series publications.

Nunan, D. (1991). Designing tasks for thecommunicative classroom. New York: CambridgeUniversity Press.

Willis, J. (1996). A framework for task-basedlearning. London: Longman.


APPENDIX 1: NEEDS ANALAPPENDIX 1: NEEDS ANALAPPENDIX 1: NEEDS ANALAPPENDIX 1: NEEDS ANALAPPENDIX 1: NEEDS ANALYSIS SURVEYYSIS SURVEYYSIS SURVEYYSIS SURVEYYSIS SURVEY

The purpose of this survey is to inquire about the most important needs of the population and thestudents’ attitudes to speaking skills.

Please respond precisely.Grade: ________

1. Do you communicate in English?Yes ____ No ____Why

2. In which form do you communicate?Oral ____ Written ____Why

3. Do you consider oral communication important?Yes ____ No ____Why

4. What strategies do you use in oral communication?

5. What elements are required to express yourself effectively in oral form?

6. Do you speak with other people in English?Yes ____ No ____Why

7. Write some problems or difficulties that you face in oral communication.

8. What are the possible solutions to the above problems?

9. In your oral communication you prefer:a. To describeb. To narratec. To presentd. To supportWhy

10. What are your preferred topics in conversations or in oral defenses?

11. Would you participate in a speaking program oriented to improve your oral production?Yes ____ No ____Why


APPENDIX 2: TRANSCRIPTION OF THE DIAGNOSTIC ACTIVITY (FAPPENDIX 2: TRANSCRIPTION OF THE DIAGNOSTIC ACTIVITY (FAPPENDIX 2: TRANSCRIPTION OF THE DIAGNOSTIC ACTIVITY (FAPPENDIX 2: TRANSCRIPTION OF THE DIAGNOSTIC ACTIVITY (FAPPENDIX 2: TRANSCRIPTION OF THE DIAGNOSTIC ACTIVITY (Free speaking)ree speaking)ree speaking)ree speaking)ree speaking)

Students developed a simple speaking task. The patterns of oral language demonstrated that theyhave problems in their communication and their oral production was very poor.

Speech SampleSpeech SampleSpeech SampleSpeech SampleSpeech Sample

S1…Grunge movement (he moves his face)and breaks the conversation.

The majority of the students look at each otherand avoid the camera. Others hide their faces andwhen somebody speaks, they laugh very much.

S1: Nirvana was //…the Grunge…T: what is the idea?S1: Nirvana was one Grunge band.

Conventions// interruption… pause

CommentsCommentsCommentsCommentsComments

I perceived that the students have manyproblems in oral communication. They did notwant to speak because they are afraid to makepronunciation and grammar mistakes.

Students only used isolated words anddisconnected expressions. There was not acontext of communication and interaction whichencourages learners to speak.


APPENDIX 3: TRANSCRIPTION OF THE FIRST TAPPENDIX 3: TRANSCRIPTION OF THE FIRST TAPPENDIX 3: TRANSCRIPTION OF THE FIRST TAPPENDIX 3: TRANSCRIPTION OF THE FIRST TAPPENDIX 3: TRANSCRIPTION OF THE FIRST TASK (Speaking about music)ASK (Speaking about music)ASK (Speaking about music)ASK (Speaking about music)ASK (Speaking about music)

This extract illustrates oral production during the development of the first task. In this activity studentsbegan to use the foreign language to interact with each other.

Speech sampleSpeech sampleSpeech sampleSpeech sampleSpeech sample

S1: … the music is so depressed&

T: what are the reasons that Kurt Cobain musicwas depressed& or sad?

S1: but parents divorced& // in childhood…(she moves her hands)

depressed& Kurt Cobain.

S2: My opinion // it is interesant*… in theband ¡ violence& and problem in his family… (shemoves her eyes and face) and ¡ excellent band ofNirvana

T: Do you like that music?

S2: yes

T: What is your preferred music?

S2: Romantic

Conventions… pause& mistaken pronunciation// interruption* invented words¡ omitted word


I could observe that both speakers are in adevelopmental process. They make differentkinds of mistakes in their pronunciation andgrammar structures. They omitted some verbsand there are some disconnected sentences.However, there is a relative improvement in wordorder and sentence structure.

In the oral production, students tried toexpress their opinions leaving the limitations ofvocabulary or grammar structures and focusingon the messages. They used different resources(face, eye and hand movements, gestures, toneof voice and other ones) which helped them tocommunicate in an effective way and to improvetheir oral discourse.

I was aware of the lack of cohesive devices inthe oral texts. For that reason, in the next task,students will develop a workshop about thedifferent kinds of connectors in order to maketheir oral texts more meaningful and coherentfor their listeners.


APPENDIX 4: TRANSCRIPTION OF THE SECOND TAPPENDIX 4: TRANSCRIPTION OF THE SECOND TAPPENDIX 4: TRANSCRIPTION OF THE SECOND TAPPENDIX 4: TRANSCRIPTION OF THE SECOND TAPPENDIX 4: TRANSCRIPTION OF THE SECOND TASK (Photo storASK (Photo storASK (Photo storASK (Photo storASK (Photo story)y)y)y)y)

This extracts shows that students improved their oral production and fluency. They were veryencouraged speaking about their family, trips, memories of childhood and adolescence.


S5: …with my& family I ¿ work cared

to ¿ … I visited my& grandmother//

with my family… in the house. ( she movesher eyes and looks the photography)

S5: I ¡ six in mother house in company

The parents // After… I traveled with my&

Family in Girardot. (she looks the

photography) … On vacation I visited a

grandmother in the Boyaca. // I

celebrated bautism* “veinte de” july&

I eat& chicken in the restaurant with

godparents…

Conventions… pause& mistaken pronunciation// interruptions* invented word¿ misunderstand word¡ omitted word“” expression in Spanish


In this task, the student faced a presentationusing different photos. The student had fluencyin her speech; however, she used few connectors.

I could perceive an improvement in thesentence structure and word order. The studenttried to communicate by related sentences in eachphoto.

The student expressed as possible themessage in her presentation. Sometimes she usedher native language in order to continue her oraltext and avoid stops which could break thenarrative sequence.

In this stage of the project, students madepauses to express their thinking in English andavoid the direct translation from Spanish becausethey began to be aware about the differencesbetween their native and the foreign language.Some of them told me that it was a difficultprocess.


APPENDIX 5: TRANSCRIPTION OF THE THIRD TAPPENDIX 5: TRANSCRIPTION OF THE THIRD TAPPENDIX 5: TRANSCRIPTION OF THE THIRD TAPPENDIX 5: TRANSCRIPTION OF THE THIRD TAPPENDIX 5: TRANSCRIPTION OF THE THIRD TASK (Speaking about Maloka)ASK (Speaking about Maloka)ASK (Speaking about Maloka)ASK (Speaking about Maloka)ASK (Speaking about Maloka)

This pattern illustrates the production at the end of the speaking tasks. In this activity, students weremore confident in their interactions.


S4: Hello friends

S4: What is your opinion about Maloka?

S1: My opinion about Maloka is that it is a // agood place to learn. (he moves his eyes and hands)

S2: My opinion about Maloka is good, ¡ goodbecause… because it ¿ for its games andexperiments.

S3: My opinion about & Maloka ¡ is good forincent* technology.

S4: My opinion ¡ is wonderful and beautiful.

S3: What is the most important place for you?

S4: For me ¡ place was important is theatreand ¿

(students look each other and smile)

S1: The place many important for me was thecinema, because ¿ was a beautiful for yourºdecorations.

S3: My favorite place is electrocut* anddecoration…

S3: Did you like the film Dizziness?

S4: Yes, the film Dizziness is real andwonderful.


In the conversation, I perceived that studentsspoke spontaneously. They used differentpragmalinguistic resources to make theircommunication more effective.

Students smiled and moved their hands likenative language speakers; also their tone of voiceexpressed enthusiasm.

It was planned that students ask questions butnot only one member of the group. At thebeginning of the conversation, S4 began to askquestions and the rest of the students gave theiropinions. However, S3 decided to ask all thequestions. Perhaps it is the first time that studentsfaced an oral presentation and they needed todevelop other conversational activities.

In the oral production, I could analyze thatstudents improved their level of fluency. Therewas not a great number of interruptions andpauses despite their omitting words in somesentences and inventing new expressions.

Learners emphasized bits in the message.They defended their ideas with the use ofconnectors of reason.

Students highlighted Cinedomo as the mostimportant place in Maloka. Additionally, theyexpressed their opinions about the dependenceof men on technology. It is interesting thatstudents used the foreign language to makejudgments about the situation nowadays.


(Students look each other)

S3: What are the disadvantages& oftechnology?

S1: The disadvantage& of technology is thathuman depend of technology…

S3: What invention do you consider importantfor human beings&?

S1, S2, S4: Computer (they speak at the sametime)

S1: … ¡ Save information.

S3: And chat

Conventions… pause& mistaken pronunciation* invented word// interruption¿ misunderstand word¡ omitted wordº wrong word

Students tried to support their ideas, theyanswered yes – no questions and complementedthem with an additional explanation.


APPENDIX 6: FEEDBACK FORMAAPPENDIX 6: FEEDBACK FORMAAPPENDIX 6: FEEDBACK FORMAAPPENDIX 6: FEEDBACK FORMAAPPENDIX 6: FEEDBACK FORMAT FOR THE SPEAKING TT FOR THE SPEAKING TT FOR THE SPEAKING TT FOR THE SPEAKING TT FOR THE SPEAKING TASKSASKSASKSASKSASKS

Students received the form before the final production.

FEEDBACKFEEDBACKFEEDBACKFEEDBACKFEEDBACK

Fluency:

Pronunciation:

Interaction:

Vocabulary:

Use of language:

Coherence and cohesion devices:

Speed:

Suggestions:

11127-26622-1-pb

Documents