INTRODUCTION
Rationale
Spoken language production is often regarded as one of the most challenging aspects of language learning, as highlighted by Brown and Yule (1983) Many learners struggle to express themselves verbally in their target language Ur (1996) emphasized that speaking is the most crucial skill among the four language skills—listening, speaking, reading, and writing—because individuals proficient in a language are typically identified as its speakers Therefore, the primary objective of English language teaching should be to equip learners with the ability to communicate effectively, fluently, and accurately in English (Davies & Pearse).
1998) However, not all language learners after many years studying English can communicate fluently and accurately because they lack necessary knowledge.
Numerous researchers, including Lightbown and Spada (1999), Swain (1985), and Long (1996), have explored effective feedback methods to enhance students' speaking skills Swain (1985) emphasized that addressing errors, whether through explicit or implicit feedback, significantly aids student learning Recasts have emerged as a popular feedback strategy, and Long (1996) argued that feedback is essential for second language acquisition Additional studies support Long's findings, while some researchers have specifically investigated various modes of corrective feedback to determine which methods yield the best results for learners.
English teaching and learning have gained significant attention, evident in the notable changes to curricula and teaching methods This includes the introduction of speaking skills in new textbooks for Lower and Upper Secondary schools, alongside the adoption of Communicative Language Teaching (CLT), which prioritizes communicative competence (Richards & Rodgers, 1986).
Speaking skills are crucial for Vietnamese learners of a second language, yet they remain a significant challenge In the Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) approach, teachers take on a supportive role rather than a dominant one, providing essential guidance to students Feedback from teachers, whether addressing mistakes or acknowledging good performance, is vital for effective learning As noted by Swain (1985), feedback is an integral part of the lesson, and Thornbury (2000) emphasizes that teaching involves providing feedback This feedback can be categorized as written or oral, with oral feedback being the most prevalent in speaking lessons Therefore, examining the effects of immediate versus delayed oral feedback is particularly relevant in enhancing speaking skills.
Providing immediate or delayed feedback with the correct answer after students respond significantly enhances their speaking performance, as demonstrated by research from Butler, Karpicke, and Roediger (2007, 2008).
While extensive research has focused on teachers' feedback, there is limited exploration of the effects of immediate versus delayed feedback in speaking lessons This gap highlights the necessity to investigate how these types of feedback influence EFL students' speaking performance The findings of this study aim to enhance the teaching and learning of English as a foreign language in Vietnam.
Aims of the study
This study investigates the effectiveness of two feedback methods—immediate and delayed—on students' speaking mistakes The research findings aim to enhance the existing literature on feedback in language teaching and support EFL teachers in improving their instructional quality.
Research questions
The study seeks to answer the following research questions:
1) How does immediate feedback, compared to delayed feedback, affect EFL high school students’ speaking fluency?
2) How does immediate feedback, compared to delayed feedback, affect EFL high school students’ speaking accuracy?
Scope of the study
This study aimed to evaluate the impact of immediate and delayed feedback on enhancing English speaking skills among 11th grade students at Quang Ninh High School in Quang Binh province By focusing on these two feedback methods, the research sought to determine their effectiveness in improving students' fluency and accuracy in speaking.
Method of the study
This study primarily utilized an experimental method, with all findings, observations, suggestions, and conclusions derived from thorough data analysis The integration of various instruments in the research contributed to the acquisition of reliable data.
Thesis design
The thesis consists of five chapters:
Chapter 1 presents the rationale and the overview of the thesis.
Chapter 2 is the literature review, speaking skill, assessing speaking ability, teaching speaking and feedback in teaching are discussed.
Chapter 3 presents the methodology of the study In this chapter, the participants, materials and procedure are described in detail.
Chapter 4 deals with the findings and discussion after analyzing the data of the experiment.
Chapter 5 contains the implications and suggestions.
THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
Speaking skill
2.1.1 Definition of the speaking skill
Speaking is an essential skill for effective communication, often perceived as more challenging than other language abilities As the global lingua franca, English facilitates interaction among diverse populations Without the ability to speak, communication becomes stagnant and lifeless.
The term "speaking" is interpreted in various ways by different individuals The Oxford Dictionary of Current English defines it as the act of conveying information or expressing thoughts and feelings through spoken language Burn and Joyce describe speaking as an interactive process of meaning construction that involves the production, reception, and processing of information, influenced by context, participants, their experiences, the physical environment, and the purpose of communication Swain further elaborates that speaking involves articulating sounds and words to express thoughts, noting that physical obstructions can hinder this ability.
Speaking is defined as a process of constructing and conveying meaning through verbal and non-verbal symbols in diverse contexts (1998, p 13) Florez (1999, p 1) supports this perspective, emphasizing that speaking is an interactive process comprised of three key stages.
“producing, receiving and processing information.” In language teaching and learning, speaking is considered a skill to practice and master In this light, Nunan
Speaking is recognized as a vital productive oral skill that involves systematically producing verbal utterances to convey meaning (2003, p 48) Both Bygate (1987) and Hilferty (2000) emphasize the importance of distinguishing between knowledge and skill in speaking lessons Bygate (1987, p 3) highlights that mastering speaking is essential in language education, as effective communication requires not only knowledge of grammar, vocabulary, pronunciation, and intonation, but also the skill to apply this knowledge successfully Hilferty (2000) further elaborates that speaking is a complex productive skill that encompasses more than merely pronouncing words.
In summary, speaking can be understood in various ways, including as an action, a process, and a skill This study will specifically focus on speaking as a skill pertinent to the language teaching and learning process.
Fluency and accuracy are crucial components of effective speaking performance While the concept of fluency is commonly understood in language education and assessment, it encompasses various definitions applicable to reading, listening, writing, and speaking In oral production, fluency relates to specific speech production aspects such as pronunciation, intonation, and hesitation, depending on the chosen definition Fillmore (1979) identified four key abilities associated with fluency: the capacity to speak at length with minimal pauses, the ability to construct coherent and semantically meaningful sentences, the use of appropriate expressions across diverse contexts, and the creativity and imagination in language use.
In 1989, three key aspects of fluency were identified: the speed and flow of language production, control over language elements such as pausing, rhythm, pronunciation, and stress, and the ability to manage content interruptions This definition has evolved into two primary categories, one of which is the narrow approach (Lemon, 2000), focusing specifically on the speaking speed and smoothness of language delivery.
Accuracy is a crucial component of speaking performance, serving as a key indicator of linguistic ability It plays a vital role in preventing communication breakdowns among language users, ensuring effective interaction As highlighted by Richards (1992), maintaining accuracy is essential for successful communication.
31), accuracy concerns “the ability to produce grammatically correct sentences.”.
Accuracy in language extends beyond mere grammatical correctness; it encompasses vocabulary and pronunciation as well Thornbury (2000) emphasizes that speaking English accurately involves minimizing errors across these areas Assessment of accuracy includes proper word order, tense usage, and the inclusion of articles and prepositions Additionally, students should possess a vocabulary that aligns with their syllabus and effectively utilize the words taught Pronunciation plays a crucial role in communication, as clear pronunciation enhances understanding Similarly, Dedmon (1967) defines accuracy as the ability to use correct forms without errors that impact phonological, syntactic, semantic, and discourse elements of the language.
According to Hemmens (2011) and Cotter (2013), it is essential to prioritize accuracy in language learning at the beginner level, with fluency developing as learners progress Initially, students have limited vocabulary and knowledge, making it challenging to engage in extended conversations Therefore, instruction should focus on foundational skills, such as greetings, asking for directions, and understanding present and past tenses Early repetition is crucial for helping learners retain and familiarize themselves with the language As students master these basics, their desire to communicate increases, leading to early fluency development as they begin to speak more quickly To further enhance speaking skills, activities like public speaking, role play, and group interactions should be promoted At the advanced level, learners achieve fluency, prompting a renewed emphasis on accuracy.
2.1.3 Speaking competence vs speaking performance
Language competence, as defined by Chastain (1988), encompasses various dimensions including linguistic, discourse, sociolinguistic, and textual competence It refers to an individual's knowledge of a language and the cognitive processes involved in learning it, as well as the ability to effectively use the language for meaningful communication Brown (2004) further emphasizes that competence reflects a learner's capacity to produce language.
Language performance is significantly influenced by the meaningfulness of students' classroom activities, assignments, and tasks These elements serve as practical applications of the language competence acquired through learning grammatical rules, structures, and vocabulary.
The primary goal of English teaching and learning is to achieve English competence, often overlooking the importance of performance, particularly in speaking skills This aligns with the structural view of language, which posits that language is a system of interrelated elements that convey meaning Mastery of the target language involves understanding phonological units, grammatical structures, and lexical items Chomsky’s competence theory emphasizes the abstract grammatical knowledge that enables speakers to construct grammatically correct sentences His transformational grammar theory suggests that fundamental language principles stem from innate cognitive aspects, guiding students in their learning process.
“competence” These theories that underline the English teaching as a foreign language focusing on the structure and grammar as the essential competence which students should master first.
Assessing speaking ability
Brown (2004, p 141-142) indicated that there are five fundamental indicators of speaking ability: imitation, oral language production, conservation response, transactional language and oral production development.
Imitation is widely recognized as a key indicator of speaking ability, reflecting an individual's capacity to replicate words, phrases, or sentences accurately as they were originally spoken This skill demonstrates proficiency in language acquisition and communication.
Oral language production serves as a key indicator of speaking ability, reflecting competence in various linguistic aspects such as grammar, vocabulary, and phonology This includes the mastery of prosodic elements like intonation, stress, rhythm, and juncture, which are crucial for effective communication.
Conservation response is the response of a very short conversation, standard greetings and small talk, simple requests and comments, and the like (responsive).
Transactional language encompasses two main forms: one aimed at exchanging specific information and the other focused on maintaining social relationships through interpersonal interactions.
Oral production development includes speeches, oral presentations, and story-telling, during which the opportunity for oral interaction from listener is either highly limited or ruled out together (extensive)
Language is of an acceptable level Learners express themselves in utterances that are relevant, easily comprehensible to each other, and of an acceptable level of language accuracy.
2.2.2 Fluency vs accuracy in speaking assessment
Testing speaking ability has emerged as a crucial aspect of language assessment, reflecting its central role in language teaching and learning (Ellis, 2009) Performance assessments, which prioritize content, differ significantly from other testing types However, evaluating speaking skills poses challenges, as it requires substantial time, effort, and specialized training (Hughes, 2003).
Obviously, accuracy is one of the most important criteria to measure one’s linguistic ability and to shelter language users from communication breakdowns.
To assess speaking performance accuracy, students must utilize proper grammar, including correct word order, tense usage, and tense agreement It is crucial for them to incorporate all necessary elements, such as articles, prepositions, and complex tenses, to ensure clarity and coherence in their speech.
To assess vocabulary, students have a range of vocabulary that corresponds to the syllabus year list and uses words you have taught.
Moreover, students are required correct pronunciation so that most people can understand what they speak.
Thornbury (2000) pointed out two criteria for assessing accuracy: number of self-corrections, correct use of English (use of grammar, use of vocabulary)
Fluency is a key indicator of speaking competence, allowing individuals to express their ideas seamlessly without frequent pauses for thought According to Richards (1992, p.141), fluency encompasses the characteristics that make speech sound natural and normal.
Speaking fluency encompasses various definitions, ranging from specific features like pausing, hesitations, and speech rate to a broader understanding of speaking proficiency (Miller, 1964; Fulcher, 1996) Edge (1998) highlighted that fluency involves elements such as flow, smoothness, speech rate, minimal unnecessary pauses, and the length and connectedness of utterances These characteristics are complex, as they reflect both the speaker's delivery and the listener's perception Research indicates that increased fluency correlates with a higher speech rate and fewer interruptions, with fluent speakers pausing at meaningful points, suggesting thoughtful content planning (Lennon, 1990) Additionally, more fluent speakers tend to use longer phrases and speak more extensively Luoma (2004) emphasized that fluency is also linked to word usage, particularly "small words," while Thornbury (2000) identified four criteria for assessing fluency: words per minute, syllables per minute, pauses of one to two seconds or longer, and repetitions.
2.2.3 Rubrics for assessing EFL speaking ability
This study aims to assess the improvement in students' speaking skills after addressing specific challenges To evaluate their speaking abilities, a measurement adapted from Arthur Hughes (2003) in collaboration with the Foreign Service Institute (FSI) will be utilized The assessment comprises five components, each rated on a scale from 1 to 6, reflecting varying levels of proficiency from lowest to highest.
The speaking measurement contains of some component elaborated from students’ skill including their pronunciation, grammar, vocabulary, fluency and comprehension.
(Adapted from Communicative Language Teaching - Wood, L W (2007)).
2 Frequent gross errors and a very heavy accent make understanding difficulty
4 Marked foreign accent and occasional mispronunciations which do not interfere with understanding
1 Grammar almost entirely inaccurate expert in stock phrases
2 Constant error showing control of very few major patterns and fluently preventing communication.
3 Frequent errors showing some major pattern uncontrolled and causing occa- sional irritation and misunderstanding.
4 Occasional errors showing imperfect control of some patterns but no weak- ness that the cause misunderstanding.
1 Vocabulary inadequate foe evens the simplest conversation
2 Vocabulary limited to basic personal and survival areas (time, food, trans- portation, family, etc.)
3 Choice of words sometimes inaccurate, limitations of vocabulary prevent discussion of some common professional and social topics.
4 Professional vocabulary adequate to discuss special interest; general vocabu- lary permits discussion of any non-technical subject with some circumlocu- tions
1 Speech is so halting and fragmentary that conversation is impossible
2 Speech is very slow and uneven except for shot or routine sentences
3 Speech is frequently hesitant and jerky; sentences may be left uncompleted
4 Speech is occasionally hesitant, with some unevenness caused by rephrasing and grouping for words.
Teaching Speaking
Teaching, as defined by Nunan (1991), involves assisting individuals in the learning process by providing guidance, instructions, and knowledge to help them understand and master new skills or concepts.
Teaching serves as a fundamental method for achieving educational goals, with education being the primary objective of teaching It involves implementing effective strategies and activities that have proven successful in facilitating student learning.
Teaching and learning are inherently interconnected, as teaching serves to guide and facilitate the learning process Your understanding of how learners acquire knowledge shapes your educational philosophy, teaching style, and classroom techniques For instance, if you perceive learning as operant conditioning, you will design your teaching around structured reinforcement Conversely, if you view second language acquisition as a deductive process, you are likely to present numerous rules and paradigms to students instead of allowing them to discover these rules through exploration.
Many language learners view speaking ability as the primary indicator of language proficiency, prioritizing fluency in conversation over reading or writing skills They measure their progress based on their spoken communication achievements, and a lack of speaking opportunities in the classroom can lead to demotivation and decreased interest in learning Conversely, when engaging speaking activities are implemented effectively, they can enhance motivation and transform the English language classroom into an enjoyable and dynamic environment.
Research indicates that children learn their first language in consistent stages, with cognitive development significantly influencing this process For example, children begin to use time-related adverbs like "tomorrow" only after grasping the concept of time Additionally, repeated exposure to words and phrases in context is crucial for language development, as it helps young learners connect language with specific situations By adulthood, most individuals have mastered their first language, achieving automaticity in both comprehension and production However, weaknesses in language skills often stem from insufficient exposure to formal language contexts, which can hinder their ability to navigate various registers, such as during job interviews or formal writing.
2.3.2 Teaching speaking to EFL learners
It is quite undeniable that English with the most speakers through the world as a foreign language plays a significant role in the world According to Richards
The primary function of language for many individuals is effective communication while traveling, studying, or working abroad, leading to a growing trend in English language learning (2001, p 6) The key goal of language education is to enable students to apply their existing knowledge and newly acquired skills in real-life contexts Historically, language skills were taught in isolation, focusing on one skill at a time, such as reading or vocabulary, rather than integrating various skills This approach stemmed from the belief that discrete skills were easier to learn, despite the understanding that language learning should encompass a holistic perspective (Mohan, 1986; Rig, 1991, p 522, cited in Richards &).
Effective communication is characterized by the integration of language skills, where listening, speaking, reading, and writing work together in authentic contexts (Shen, 2003) Daily interactions highlight the intertwined relationship between listening and speaking, as proficiency in one often enhances proficiency in the other (Belasco, 1967) Additionally, reading plays a crucial role in fostering communicative fluency, involving similar mental processes as other language skills (Chastain, 1988) Hilferty (2000) emphasizes the reciprocal influence of reading on speaking, noting that both require comparable abilities to navigate complex phonological materials Ultimately, the aim of integrating speaking activities with listening or reading in language classrooms is to cultivate fluency, akin to the native-like fluency described by Pawley and Syder (1983).
Fluency is defined as the swift and seamless conversion of thoughts or communicative intentions into language, executed with precision and clarity, particularly within the time constraints of real-time processing.
2.3.2.1 General outline of a speaking lesson
According to Kayi (2006), incorporating warm-up activities into every ESL speaking lesson is crucial for enhancing the overall learning experience These activities serve as mental switches for students, significantly improving the effectiveness of subsequent lesson stages.
Pre-speaking is a crucial stage where the teacher introduces new materials to students in an engaging and informative manner, setting the groundwork for the remainder of the lesson.
Speaking activities provide an opportunity for students to practice new materials in a structured environment These activities can be effectively organized in pairs or small groups, fostering collaboration and enhancing learning outcomes.
Post-speaking is where confidence plays a big role in the ability to communicate.
Table 2.2 General outline of a speaking lesson (Adapted from Teaching Speaking: Activities to Promote Speaking in a Second Language-Kayi, H (2006)).
The speaking session activities Division of the session time
Teaching speaking involves various techniques, with thirteen distinct methods identified by Kayi (2006) According to expert insights shared online, these techniques are essential for effective language instruction.
Discussion activities effectively stimulate student engagement in speaking After a content-based lesson, teachers can facilitate discussions by organizing students into groups and conducting question-and-answer sessions related to the material covered Regularly incorporating this activity encourages students to speak more actively and enhances their communication skills.
Role play is an engaging educational activity where students simulate real-life social situations by adopting various roles In this interactive approach, the teacher provides students with specific identities and scenarios, guiding them on how to express their thoughts and feelings For example, a teacher might instruct a student by saying, "You are David; you visit the doctor and explain what happened last night." This method not only enhances communication skills but also fosters empathy and understanding of different perspectives.
Simulation closely resembles role play, yet there is a distinct difference between the two In a simulation, students are required to embody a character and replicate real-life scenarios For instance, when a student takes on the role of a guitarist, they must bring authentic props to enhance the experience, mirroring the conditions of a real guitarist.
Feedback in teaching
2.4.1 Overview of feedback in teaching
Feedback is a crucial element in the learning process, significantly influencing student achievement (Hattie & Kimberley, 2007) Teachers' feedback not only enhances learners' accuracy and language acquisition (Friermuth, 1998) but also provides essential insights into their performance By highlighting both strengths and weaknesses, feedback guides students in their learning journey Moreover, untreated mistakes can negatively impact the entire class, as incorrect language usage may be adopted by peers.
Students who lack teachers' feedback are at a significant risk of losing direction in their learning According to Moss (2002), teacher feedback accelerates language acquisition by offering essential insights into language rules and usage boundaries, insights that would take students considerable time to figure out independently.
Teachers' feedback is essential for enhancing student learning, as highlighted by Tunstall and Gips (1996) Providing effective feedback is a crucial responsibility of educators (Al Fahdi, 2006) However, not all teachers excel in this area, raising concerns about the types and content of feedback they provide.
2.4.2 Definition of feedback in language teaching
In language education, feedback is crucial for guiding learners' progress and identifying areas for improvement According to Littlewood (1981) and Lewis (2002), feedback involves informing students about their achievements and highlighting their mistakes Similarly, Ur emphasizes the importance of feedback in the learning process, underscoring its role in enhancing language acquisition.
Feedback is defined as information provided to learners regarding their performance on a learning task, aimed at enhancing that performance (1996, p 242) This broad definition emphasizes that learners are the primary recipients of feedback, highlighting its crucial role in the learning process.
The primary goal of feedback is to enhance learner improvement, emphasizing the importance of quality feedback It is crucial to differentiate between feedback and criticism; as Robert (2003) noted, feedback should solely serve as a foundation for improvement and not be confused with negative criticism Supporting this view, Bound (2000) highlighted that effective feedback is devoid of personal judgment, grounded in facts, and remains neutral, objective, and constructive, focusing on future growth.
Criticism is inherently personal and often subjective, focusing on fault-finding and emotional responses, which can lead to destructive outcomes Unlike feedback, which is intended to provide constructive input for personal growth, criticism serves a negative purpose and is typically delivered inappropriately.
In summary, this study focuses on the feedback exchanged specifically between teachers and students within the teaching-learning process, highlighting its importance in educational interactions.
2.4.3 Roles of feedback in language teaching
Harmer (2007) stated that feedback is an essential part of effective learning.
Understanding the course material is essential for students, as it provides clear guidance on enhancing their learning experience According to Keane (2008), when students are well-informed about their academic progress, they can focus on areas that require improvement, thereby identifying their strengths and weaknesses This clarity fosters greater confidence in students as they strive towards their educational goals.
Effective feedback is essential for students to reach their full potential, as it enhances their awareness of strengths and areas for improvement By motivating learners and enriching their knowledge, skills, and behaviors, feedback serves as a valuable tool that addresses weaknesses and encourages ongoing motivation throughout the learning journey.
2.4.4 Types of feedback in language teaching
Immediate feedback involves teachers providing on-the-spot comments when students make a good point or a mistake According to Rodgers (2001), this type of feedback is particularly useful during lessons focused on accuracy, such as drilling target language and guided practice Richards (2001) highlights that spontaneous correction helps learners recognize their mistakes immediately The benefits of immediate feedback include offering support and encouragement to confused students, motivating them, and ensuring comprehension However, it also has drawbacks, such as potential miscommunication, where students may misinterpret the teacher's intent Additionally, Richards notes that immediate feedback can discourage students from speaking freely, as they may feel that every word is subject to judgment.
In the fluency stage of a speaking lesson, it is advisable to avoid immediate feedback and instead opt for delayed feedback to enhance learning Spontaneous feedback may sometimes have negative effects, so employing effective delivery techniques is crucial According to Ur (2006), utilizing structured approaches to feedback can lead to more positive outcomes in language acquisition.
To maintain students' "flow," feedback should be unobtrusive, as highlighted by Rodgers (2001) He differentiates between on-the-spot and delayed feedback, noting that the former is typically used for individual performance, while the latter is more suited for group work While delayed feedback can prevent immediate setbacks for students, it also has its drawbacks; if provided too late, students may not effectively process the feedback, particularly in speaking activities where they might forget their earlier mistakes.
Feedback in EFL speaking class
2.5.1 Immediate feedback in teaching speaking
Beare (2003) identifies three common types of mistakes students make: grammatical, vocabulary, and pronunciation errors Teachers should focus their immediate oral feedback on these areas For grammatical mistakes, attention should be given to verb tense and preposition usage When addressing vocabulary errors, feedback should include incorrect collocations and the use of idiomatic phrases Lastly, pronunciation feedback should concentrate on basic pronunciation issues, word stress, rhythm, and pitch.
As for mistakes on meaning, Edge, in his book “Mistakes and Correction”
In 1998, research identified two scenarios where linguistic mistakes arise The first scenario involves a speaker employing a correct linguistic form that fails to convey their intended meaning The second scenario occurs when a speaker uses a correct form that is socially unacceptable, highlighting issues related to politeness in communication.
From the researcher’s perspective, students often struggle with three key areas: the clarity of their ideas, the organization of those ideas, and the logical flow between them When students present ideas that are linguistically correct but difficult for others to understand, teachers should focus on clarifying these concepts Additionally, teachers need to assess how well students organize their thoughts to ensure that their presentations are coherent and easy for listeners to follow Finally, corrections should also address the logical connections between ideas, as a lack of coherence can hinder effective communication.
2.5.2 Delayed feedback in teaching speaking
Holtzman (1960), Dedmon (1967), and Reid (1971) emphasized the importance of providing feedback after each speech, suggesting that peer criticism can influence future speakers A study by Miller (1964) examined the impact of positive and negative feedback on a confederate's speech, revealing that the subsequent speaker's performance was not significantly affected by the feedback received by their predecessor However, speakers who received the same type of feedback as their predecessors exhibited fewer non-fluencies and a higher rate of speech utterance compared to those who received more or less favorable responses.
2.5.3 Immediate feedback vs delayed feedback in teaching speaking
Hattie and Timperley (2007) highlight that extensive research has focused on different types of feedback, especially the comparison between immediate and delayed feedback However, much of this research has overlooked the various levels of feedback For example, while immediate error correction can accelerate task acquisition, it may hinder the development of automaticity during fluency building.
The efficacy of immediate versus delayed feedback remains inconclusive, but it is suggested that immediate feedback does not necessarily hinder fluency work, contrary to some claims Research by Ellis, Basturkmen, and Loewen (2001) supports this notion, while Ellis (2009) emphasizes a consensus that immediate correction is beneficial in accuracy-focused tasks Providing prompt feedback on students' responses, addressing inconsistencies in their reasoning, and encouraging them to explain their answers can significantly enhance their performance.
METHODOLOGY
Research questions
The study aimed to seek the answers to the following questions:
- How does immediate feedback, compared to delayed feedback, affect EFL high school students’ speaking fluency?
- How does immediate feedback, compared to delayed feedback, affect EFL high school students’ speaking accuracy?
Participants
The study involved eighty 11th-grade students from Quang Ninh High School, divided into two classes of forty each The researcher selected fifteen students from each class for closer observation during the experiment Despite having studied English for at least six years, the participants exhibited low and mixed proficiency levels, with limited opportunities to communicate in English Their shyness and fear of making mistakes stemmed from inadequate social and language skills, compounded by a lack of motivation to engage with peers The curriculum primarily emphasized grammar, with assessments conducted solely through written tests, leading students to perceive speaking as unnecessary.
Before taking part in the experiment, they all had passed the general English test This test found no statistically significant difference between two groups
In a study involving two experimental groups from classes 11A2 and 11A3, each consisting of 15 participants, distinct teaching techniques were employed to assess their impact on English speaking skills Group 1 received immediate feedback during their lessons, while Group 2 experienced delayed feedback Both groups were at the same English proficiency level and participated in one speaking session for every five lessons based on their textbook, with a total of three English lessons conducted each week.
Materials
The speaking course is structured around six lessons from the Tieng Anh 11 syllabus, with each lesson focusing on a specific topic These topics include celebrations, the post office, nature, energy, sports, and hobbies, providing a comprehensive framework for enhancing speaking skills.
The English proficiency assessment utilized the Key English Test (KET) Book by Collins (2014) for the general test and the IELTS Practice Test (2015) for the pre-test Participants presented on ten familiar topics, including family, friendship, daily life, entertainment, hobbies, sports, jobs, music, books, and films The post-test maintained the same difficulty level as the pre-test, ensuring consistency in evaluation.
Before conducting the experiment, eighty students from classes 11A2 and 11A3 completed a 45-minute test to select thirty students with similar English proficiency The test consisted of five parts assessing general English knowledge: Part 1 involved matching sentences to signs or notices, while Parts 2 and 3 required students to fill in missing words in sentences and select appropriate responses in conversations, respectively Part 4 featured a short text with ten numbered spaces for missing words, and Part 5 focused on gap-filling Each part awarded one mark for every correct answer, ensuring a comprehensive evaluation of the students' English skills.
In Part 5 of the test, students were tasked with completing a letter containing ten missing words, earning one mark for each correct answer The section included five questions, with a total of five marks available Participants were given a time limit of forty-five minutes to complete the test, which aimed to assess their proficiency and ensure they met the required speaking level for the course.
This test found no statistically significant difference between two groups. These scores of general English test of two groups were illustrated in detail in the results section.
The study involved selecting participants based on their scores from a general English writing test at the Key English Test level A total of 30 students, comprising 15 from class 11A2 (A1-A15) and 15 from class 11A3 (B1-B15), qualified to participate in the experiment, ensuring that all participants were at the same English proficiency level.
3.3.2 Pre-test and Post-test
The study investigates the effectiveness of immediate versus delayed feedback techniques in enhancing speaking skills among EFL students It evaluates fluency by measuring the number of words spoken per minute and assesses accuracy by counting the number of errors per 100 words.
In a pre-test exercise, participants were instructed to choose a topic provided by the teacher and present their ideas within two minutes, while the teacher discreetly evaluated their fluency and accuracy The students were unaware that they were being assessed, and their presentations were recorded for subsequent analysis To gauge fluency, the number of words spoken per minute was calculated, while accuracy was assessed by noting the errors made during the talks These errors were categorized into various types, including word choice, pronunciation, and stress errors, for further evaluation.
In the post-test, participants were asked to present their topics within a two-minute timeframe, while the researcher focused on their speaking speed and various types of errors The topics for the post-test matched the difficulty level of those in the pre-test, and participants' performances were evaluated based on the criteria established during the pre-test.
The Vietnamese Ministry of Education and Training has recognized the crucial importance of enhancing English language proficiency in the context of integration and globalization This has led to significant improvements in language teaching and learning Notably, since the 2006-2007 academic year, the high school curriculum has undergone a transformation, moving beyond a focus solely on reading and grammar to encompass a more comprehensive approach.
The "TiengAnh 10," "TiengAnh 11," and "TiengAnh 12" textbooks emphasize four essential English skills: reading, speaking, listening, and writing Each unit begins with reading, followed by speaking, listening, and writing, with language focus on pronunciation and grammar concluding the lesson Each class lasts 45 minutes and centers on a specific topic, providing structured learning The textbook "TiengAnh 11" includes various engaging topics for speaking practice.
Table 3.1 The speaking topics of sixteen units in TiengAnh 11
16 The wonders of the world
In giving treatment, the writer carried out teaching based on these teaching lesson plans This work extended approximately twelve weeks from December, 25 th ,
2016 to March 25 th , 2017 There are six speaking sessions in six units of TiengAnh
11 Each session consists of two lesson plans for two groups Group 1 received immediate feedback and group 2 received delayed feedback In the teaching process, each session started with some kind of friendly greetings in order to reduce students' stress Then the speaking part was performed through three steps First of all, the teacher provided pre- speaking activities which provided explanations of vocabulary and structure The second activity was for students talking about the content of the topic Afterwards, the performances were done by the students and a set of exercises were to be done individually, in pairs or groups within a time limit set by teacher The third activity uses the technique immediate feedback for experimental group 1 and the technique delayed feedback for experimental group 2. The testing method that used in the third activity in this class for the experimental groups at the end of the term is immediate feedback and delayed feedback without telling the students about the teacher’s intention Immediate feedback involves the following steps First, the representatives of groups are asked to present their groups’ topics The teacher listen to their talks and give feedback immediately by praising students if they speak well (Ex Good! / Very good! / Excellent!/ Good job,
In the classroom, teachers can enhance student confidence and communication by providing immediate feedback through techniques such as prompting students with questions like "Do you mean ?" and interrupting to correct pronunciation, grammar, or word usage errors Additionally, delayed feedback involves allowing students to express their ideas without interruption, after which the teacher collects mistakes for later correction However, some students may not engage with these techniques, leading the teacher to consistently apply these methods across six speaking lessons to reinforce learning and improvement.
Upon completing the speaking lessons, the teacher can easily assess students' speaking performance in terms of fluency and accuracy by analyzing the post-test results The performance of two groups was evaluated using means and standard deviations, reflecting the average scores from all tests The findings and discussion section presents these results visually through charts.
Procedure
Before the treatment, eighty students took a general English test, but only thirty participated in the experiment All participants completed a pre-test where they presented familiar topics such as family, school, and hobbies for three minutes, during which their speaking accuracy and fluency were discreetly recorded After the treatment, participants underwent a post-test, presenting similar topics to those in the pre-test, with different subjects assigned The recordings were transcribed to analyze the impact of correction methods on speaking accuracy and fluency, measured by the number of words spoken per minute and the number of errors per 100 words.
Then, the researcher delivered six speaking lessons in the syllabus
In the "TiengAnh 11" study, students from both groups presented topics during each lesson, with their discussions recorded for analysis Fluency was assessed by counting the total number of words spoken, while accuracy was evaluated by calculating the number of errors per 100 words Each lesson followed a carefully designed time allocation to facilitate effective learning.
Table 3.2 Time proportion for the speaking lessons
(Adapted from Language teaching methodology, Nunan (1991))
Activities Division of the session time
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
Results
Table 4.1 The average total scores and standard deviations of general
English test in the two experimental groups
The analysis reveals that the mean total score for experimental group 1 was 25.47 (SD = 4.88), while experimental group 2 had a mean total score of 25.53 (SD = 5.89) This indicates that group 2's average score was marginally higher than that of group 1, with a minimal difference of just 0.06 between the two groups.
Figure 4.1 Bar chart of the general English test scores for both groups
Figure 4.2 Pie chart of the general English test scores for both groups
In the general English test, participants from Group 1 achieved scores ranging from 17 to 32, while Group 2 had scores from 17 to 33 In Group 1, 27% of participants scored between 17 and 24 marks, 40% scored between 25 and 30 marks, and 33% scored above 30 marks Similarly, Group 2 had 6 participants scoring between 17 and 24 marks, 5 participants scoring between 25 and 30 marks, and 4 participants scoring above 30 The results demonstrated that both groups exhibited a comparable level of English proficiency.
Fluency, as defined by Paul Nation in 1989, involves assessing the number of words spoken per minute alongside the frequency of hesitations, repetitions, and false starts per 100 words However, this research focused solely on measuring fluency through the rate of words spoken per minute The findings are presented in the table below.
Table 4.2 Means and standard deviations of the two experimental group’s results on fluency on the pre-test
Table 4.2 (refer to Appendix G) shows that the average pre-speaking test scores for both groups were nearly identical, with group 1 scoring 44.73 and group 2 scoring 44.67 The minimal mean difference of just 0.06 indicates that both groups performed at a comparable level on the pre-test.
Figure 4.3 Bar chart of the pre-test results on fluency for both groups
Figure 4.4 Pie chart of pre-test results on fluency for both groups
In the pre-test analysis, Group 1 exhibited a distribution of speaking speeds with 33% of participants speaking less than 40 words per minute, 27% between 40 to 50 words per minute, and 40% exceeding 50 words per minute Conversely, Group 2 had only 3% speaking below 40 words per minute, 40% in the 40 to 50 words per minute range, and 27% surpassing 50 words per minute While Group 1 had a higher percentage of participants achieving the fastest speeds, it also had more individuals at the lower end of the spectrum This indicates that both groups had similar initial levels of English speaking proficiency.
Paul Nation (1989) mentioned that accuracy was measured by calculating the errors per 100 words
Table 4.3 Means and standard deviations of the two experimental group’s results on accuracy on the pre-test
The pre-test results revealed that Group 1 had a mean score of 23.47, while Group 2 scored slightly higher with a mean of 24.47 This comparison indicates that both groups performed at a similar level in the pre-speaking test.
In this research, the errors were classified into pronunciation errors, word choice errors and stress errors.
Figure 4.5 Bar chart of pre-test results on accuracy for both groups
Figure 4.6 Pie chart of pre-test results on accuracy for both groups
The results indicated that both groups exhibited similar error rates, with 13% of participants making fewer than 20 errors per 100 words spoken, 80% making between 20 to 30 errors, and 7% making just one error Overall, the findings suggest that participants across both groups committed a comparable number of errors.
The errors that the participants in the two groups had were classified into pronunciation errors, word choice errors and stress errors.
Table 4.4 Means and standard deviations of types of errors on the pre-test
Table 4.4 reveals that both groups exhibited a higher frequency of stress errors compared to pronunciation and word choice errors Specifically, group 1 had a greater number of pronunciation errors (8.47) than group 2 (7.33), while group 1 made fewer word choice errors (6.73) compared to group 2 (7.47) and also recorded fewer stress errors (8.47) than group 2 (9.67).
Table 4.5 Means and standard deviations of the two experimental groups’ results on fluency on the post-test
After a six-week experimental period, group 1 achieved an average post-speaking test score of 40.87, while group 2 scored 51.67 The findings revealed that participants in group 1 experienced a decrease of 4 words per minute (wpm) in their speaking abilities, whereas those in group 2 demonstrated an average improvement of 7 wpm.
Figure 4.7 Bar chart of post-test results on fluency for both groups
Figure 4.8 Pie chart of post-test results on fluency for both groups
In group 1, 47% of participants spoke at a rate of less than 40 words per minute, while 40% achieved a speed of 40 to 50 words, and 13% exceeded 50 words per minute In contrast, group 2 showed that only 13% spoke under 40 words, 33% ranged from 40 to 50 words, and a significant 54% surpassed 50 words per minute.
The comparison of pre- and post-speaking test scores reveals a significant contrast between the two groups; group 2 demonstrated an improvement in speaking fluency, while group 1 experienced a decline Notably, the score differential between the two groups was 11 words per minute (wpm).
Table 4.6 Means and standard deviations of the two experimental groups’ results on accuracy on the post-test
From the data above, after a six-week experimental period, the score of the post-speaking test for group 1 was 18.67 and the score of group 2 was 20.20.Group
Group 2 demonstrated a reduction of 5 errors, while Group 1 reduced their errors by 4 The data indicates that Group 1 achieved a greater improvement in speaking accuracy compared to Group 2, with a difference of 2 errors per 100 words between the two groups.
Figure 4.9 Bar chart of pre-test results on accuracy for both groups
Figure 4.10 Pie chart of post-test results on accuracy for both groups
In group 1, 60% of participants spoke at a rate of fewer than 20 words per minute, while 40% managed between 20 and 30 words, with none exceeding 30 words In group 2, 53% of participants spoke less than 20 words per minute, 40% spoke between 20 and 30 words, and only 7% achieved a rate of more than 50 words per minute.
From the results above, it can be seen that both groups made increases in speaking accuracy However, the participants in group one made more improvement than those in group 2.
Table 4.7 Means and standard deviations of types of errors on the post-test
Table 4.7 illustrates that both groups of participants exhibited a higher frequency of stress errors compared to pronunciation and word choice errors Notably, participants in group 1 made more pronunciation errors (6.53) than those in group 2 (6.13), while also committing fewer word choice errors (5.47) and stress errors (6.80) than group 2, which had 6.53 word choice errors and 7.53 stress errors.
4.1.4 The increases the two groups made
Table 4.8 Means and standard deviations of the increase two groups made on fluency
Table 4.8 illustrates that group 2 made an improvement in speaking fluency while group 1 made a decrease.
Figure 4.11 Bar chart of pre-test results and post-test results on fluency for both groups
In Group 1, the average decrease in words per minute (wpm) was 4, highlighting a consistent decline in fluency across tests The initial test recorded an average of 44 wpm, followed by 46 wpm in the second test, 45 wpm in the third, 43 wpm in the fourth, 42 wpm in the fifth, and an increase to 48 wpm in the final test Notably, the scores from the first test were generally higher than those in subsequent tests, with only one participant experiencing a negative result.
Discussion
This section highlights the contrasting effects of immediate and delayed feedback on speaking fluency, noting that immediate feedback can hinder fluency while delayed feedback tends to enhance it Additionally, it discusses the unique outcomes of three participants whose results deviated from their group's improvement trends, specifically focusing on participant A7 from the group.
1, the participants B5 and B6 from group 2 While most of the participants in group
1 made decreases in fluency, the participant A7 made an increase On the other hand, most participants in group B made increases in fluency, the participants B5, B6 made no improvement.
First, the only participant in group 1 who made fluency improvement in the course was A7 The result are shown in the following table:
Table 4.24 Results by the participant who made improvement
Average of the last test minus average of the 1 st test 8
Figure 4.13Progress chart of participant A7/increase
Table 4.24 reveals that only one participant, A7, achieved an increase of 8 words per minute (wpm) Additionally, a comparison was made between the average speeds of the first three tests and the last three tests.
Table 4.25 Means and standard deviations of the first three tests and the last three tests of the participant A7
The first three tests Mean 59.00
The last three tests Mean 67.33
The participant demonstrated significant improvement, achieving higher scores in the last three tests compared to the first three Notably, they recorded both the highest initial and final scores, showcasing how a strong foundation in English enabled them to fully leverage the techniques taught.
This section examines the outcomes for participants who showed no improvement during the course While the majority of participants in group 2 experienced increased fluency, two individuals, B6 and B7, did not demonstrate any progress Notably, participant B5 initially outperformed participant B7 in the first test, yet both participants exhibited similar growth in the number of words spoken per minute by the final assessment.
Table 4.26 Results by the participants who made no improvement in either the last minus 1 st score
Average score of the last test minus average of the 1 st test -5 -9
Figure 4.14 Progress chart of participants B5 and B6/decrease
According to Table 3.13, this analysis utilized data derived from the difference between the last and first score measurements Notably, 13% of participants in group 2 showed no improvement in fluency Additionally, a comparison was made between the average speeds of the initial three tests and those of the final three tests.
Table4.27 Means and standard deviations of the two participants B5 and B6 on the first three tests and the last three tests
The first three tests Mean 35.67 29.67
The last three tests Mean 36.67 24.67
The analysis of the participants' test scores reveals that both B5 and B6 performed better in the last three tests compared to the first three Participant B5 initially achieved high marks in the first two tests but experienced a decline in scores towards the end, likely due to unfamiliarity with the topics and a lack of guidance from the teacher, which hindered their presentation Conversely, participant B6 struggled throughout, with consistently low scores attributed to inadequate speaking skills.
The study revealed that participants in a speed speaking course experienced increased speaking rates when taught using delayed feedback, while those receiving immediate feedback showed decreased speaking rates This aligns with findings from Rahimi (2012) and Zareian (2015), which suggest that immediate feedback hinders speaking fluency due to participants' lack of confidence and fear of making mistakes Conversely, delayed feedback enhances speaking fluency by allowing participants to speak without interruptions.
Both participant groups showed improvements in accuracy, but group 1 exhibited a greater reduction in errors per 100 words Participant A4 from group 1 had the highest number of errors on the pre-test (32 errors) and reduced this to 23 errors on the post-test, resulting in a decrease of 9 errors In contrast, participant B13 from group 2 started with 38 errors on the pre-test and decreased this to 33 errors on the post-test, reflecting a reduction of 5 errors Overall, participant A4 demonstrated more significant improvement compared to participant B13, as illustrated in the accompanying progress chart.
Figure 4.15 Progress chart of participants A4 and B13/ increase
The difference between the average scores of the first three tests and the last three tests of the two participants were also compared
Table 4.28 Means and standard deviations of the two participants A4 and
B13 on the first three tests and the last three tests
The first three tests Mean 30.00 36.67
The last three tests Mean 26.33 35.00
The results indicate that participants improved their accuracy over the last three tests, as evidenced by a decrease in the number of errors made Notably, participant A4 demonstrated a greater improvement than participant B13, recording 4 errors per 100 words compared to 1 error per 100 words Additionally, the mean scores reveal that participants who received immediate feedback achieved higher accuracy levels than those who received delayed feedback, aligning with the findings of Erev, Luria, and Erev (2006), which suggest that immediate feedback significantly enhances performance during practice and transfer.