Speaking skills
What is speaking?
Speaking is commonly defined as a verbal exchange between communicators, encompassing both receptive and productive skills It involves the transfer of information through language, highlighting the interactive nature of communication.
According to Byrne (1976: 8), speaking is a dynamic two-way process that requires both the productive skill of the speaker and the receptive skill of the listener The speaker encodes their message using suitable language, while the listener decodes it to comprehend the intended meaning.
Scott (1981, cited in Johnson & Morrow) emphasizes that speaking is a dynamic activity between two or more individuals, where participants simultaneously act as both speakers and listeners This interaction requires quick responses and contributions, enabling each participant to achieve their communicative objectives and enhance their comprehension of the conversation.
Speaking skill is defined as the ability to communicate effectively using language A person with advanced speaking skills can express themselves fluently, accurately, and clearly in any context This mastery is a common goal for language learners Consequently, Bygate (1987:2) emphasizes that speaking is a skill that warrants as much focus as literary skills in both first and second languages.
Speaking skill in CLT
Among the four skills, speaking seems to be the most important that all learners want to achieve mastery A person who knows a language can be referred to as a
“speaker” of that language (Ur, 1996) Sharing the same opinion, Nunan argues that
Mastering the art of speaking is crucial for learning a second language, making it essential for language courses to include classroom activities that enhance learners' verbal expression Teaching speaking has garnered significant attention from various pedagogical approaches, but this research specifically examines the communicative approach to teaching speaking skills.
The communicative approach to speaking prioritizes the use of language in context, distinguishing it from the structural approach, which focuses solely on producing grammatically correct sentences While the structural approach includes dialogues, it lacks consideration for the speaker's intent and the communicative purpose behind the interactions In contrast, the communicative approach ensures that classroom interactions replicate real-life communication scenarios, shifting the emphasis from isolated utterances to the fluent selection of appropriate language for effective communication Consequently, learners are encouraged to engage with language as a tool for communication rather than merely mastering its forms.
To achieve oral fluency, students must progress beyond mere imitation of models or responding to cues, ultimately reaching a level where they can articulate their own ideas effectively.
Nunan (1989) suggests that even low-level students can enhance their speaking fluency through targeted exercises, offering them meaningful opportunities for communication The process of teaching speaking mirrors the stages of acquiring any other skill, which includes setting objectives and preparation.
- practice - transfer), but only in the case of teaching for communication, there is difference on types of language items and type of activities (Scott, p7, cited in Johnson
The term "communicative" has significantly influenced teaching methodologies for years While achieving "real communication" in a monolingual English classroom may seem unattainable, the communicative approach encourages language teachers to foster a more interactive learning environment Thus, even if "real communication" is not fully achievable, educators should strive to enhance communication in their classrooms.
Characteristics of a successful speaking activity
Ur (1996:20) points out some characteristics of a successful speaking activity as follows:
In evaluating the success of a speaking activity, one key criterion is the amount of talking time students engage in In a learner-centered approach, students take the lead in conversations, discussions, and interactive games, while the teacher's role is to act as a facilitator rather than the primary speaker This shift allows for greater student participation and enhances their speaking skills.
For a speaking activity to be successful, it is essential to ensure equal participation among all students in the classroom Activities should not be led by a few talkative individuals; instead, they should encourage balanced contributions from every student, fostering an inclusive environment where everyone has the opportunity to engage.
High motivation is essential for effective learning, as it reflects a student's desire and need to engage with the material According to Craft (1978), motivation serves as the driving force behind a student's hard work and attention Sources of motivation include interesting topics, encouragement, and rewards When learners are genuinely interested in a subject, they are more eager to participate in discussions and contribute towards achieving task objectives, rather than feeling compelled to do so.
Effective communication among learners is crucial, as they should be able to express themselves in relevant and easily understandable utterances while maintaining an acceptable level of language accuracy In speaking activities, it is important to accept errors that do not impede communication.
The communicative approach emphasizes the importance of effective communication skills, prioritizing language use for meaningful interactions rather than mere conversation It is essential to teach students strategic competencies, including how to initiate, terminate, repair, and redirect communication, along with the appropriate language for specific contexts.
Problems in teaching and learning speaking skill
Mastering speaking skills is often regarded as one of the most challenging aspects for students to develop As educators navigate the teaching and learning process, they inevitably face several practical challenges According to Ur (1996: 121), there are four key issues that teachers may encounter while instructing students in speaking skills.
Students often experience inhibition in class due to various factors, including the fear of making mistakes, concerns about criticism or losing face, and the shyness that arises from the attention their speech may attract.
Many students frequently express a feeling of having nothing to say, even when they are not feeling inhibited This indicates a lack of motivation to articulate their thoughts, driven more by a sense of obligation than genuine desire to communicate.
In group work settings, participation levels can be uneven, with only one person speaking at a time, which can result in some individuals dominating the conversation while others contribute very little or remain silent This dynamic often leads to low engagement among certain learners, particularly in larger groups.
In classes where students share the same mother tongue, they often revert to speaking it among themselves, feeling more comfortable and less exposed than when using a foreign language This tendency poses a challenge for teachers, particularly with less disciplined or motivated groups, as maintaining the target language during small group work becomes increasingly difficult.
Teaching and learning activities present various challenges for educators, particularly in addressing the factors contributing to students' low speaking proficiency Students often encounter numerous difficulties that hinder their ability to communicate effectively As highlighted by Thornbury (2005), these challenges require careful consideration and targeted strategies to enhance speaking skills.
39), the difficulties that the learner-speaker faces break down into two main areas:
- Knowledge factors: the learner does not yet know aspects of the language that enable production
- Skills factors: the learner’s knowledge is not sufficiently automated to ensure fluency
As a result, there may also be: Affective factors, such as lack of confidence or self- consciousness, which might inhibit fluency
Several factors contribute to students' difficulties in speaking English effectively According to Harmer (2007: 345), issues such as class composition, the relevance of the topic, task organization, and the presence of reluctant students can hinder the teaching of speaking skills.
According to Brown (2001), a significant challenge students face in learning to speak is the anxiety associated with the fear of making mistakes or saying something inappropriate Unlike reading or writing, speaking occurs in real-time, creating pressure as the listener awaits a response Additionally, unlike writing, where one can revise their thoughts, speaking does not allow for such corrections, making it a more daunting task for learners (Bailey, as cited in Nunan, 2003).
Speaking is a unique and challenging English skill that plays a crucial role in assessing language proficiency It is often the first aspect of language that others notice, making it essential for learners to develop strong speaking abilities Consequently, teachers face the significant challenge of implementing effective teaching strategies to enhance their students' speaking skills.
Principles for Teaching Speaking
When teaching speaking, it is essential for educators to align activities with students' needs According to Bailey (as cited in Nunan, 2003: 54-56), there are five key principles that should guide the teaching of speaking skills.
Understanding the distinctions between second language and foreign language learning contexts is crucial for effective teaching Speaking skills are developed in both foreign language and second language environments Therefore, it is essential for educators to identify whether they are teaching English as a second language (ESL) or English as a foreign language (EFL) to tailor their instruction accordingly.
To enhance language learning, it is essential to provide students with ample opportunities to develop both fluency and accuracy Teachers should implement various fluency-building exercises, emphasizing that making mistakes is a natural part of the learning process This approach fosters a supportive environment where students can confidently improve their language skills.
To enhance students' speaking skills, it's essential to prioritize group and pair work while minimizing teacher talk This approach allows for more practice time, as students engage in meaningful conversations in the target language By strategically limiting the time teachers spend speaking, educators can create an environment that fosters increased opportunities for students to communicate and collaborate effectively during their learning process.
To enhance language learning, plan speaking tasks that promote negotiation for meaning, which includes checking comprehension, clarifying understanding, and confirming interpretations among peers By encouraging students to ask for clarification, repetition, or explanations during conversations, they engage in meaningful dialogue that facilitates learning through accessible language.
Design classroom activities that incorporate both transactional and interactional speaking to enhance language proficiency It is essential to include speaking activities with these dual purposes, as students will encounter the target language in various real-life contexts, requiring them to effectively communicate in both transactional and interactional scenarios.
Information gap activities
Information gap activities are effective tools in language learning, where one participant possesses information that the other does not, necessitating the use of the target language for communication Thornbury (2005) emphasizes that this knowledge gap can only be bridged through language, requiring students to engage in dialogue to complete tasks Similarly, Richards (2006) notes that real communication often involves seeking information that one lacks Brown (2001) identifies two key characteristics of information gap activities: they prioritize content over language forms and emphasize communicative interaction to achieve specific objectives.
In communication, an information-gap occurs when only some participants possess certain knowledge, as defined by Richards, John & Heidi (1992) In Communicative Language Teaching (CLT), fostering genuine interaction among students requires an information-gap, whether between students or between students and the teacher Without this gap, classroom activities risk becoming mechanical and artificial, hindering effective communication.
Authors widely agree that an Information Gathering (IG) activity involves one individual possessing specific information that another lacks, necessitating the sharing of this information to complete a task effectively.
According to Harmer (2007), an information gap occurs when two speakers possess different pieces of information, and they can only achieve a complete understanding by sharing what they know This disparity in knowledge creates a "gap" between them that can only be bridged through communication.
Hubbard & Thornton (1987) highlight that information gap (IG) activities involve two or more students who possess different pieces of information, necessitating communication in English to complete a task When designed effectively, these activities require students to share and pool their knowledge, making the information gap a crucial component of many communicative practice tasks.
The following example will help us to have a better understanding about IG activities
If two students are looking at a picture of a street scene and one says to the other,
The question "Where is the dog?" lacks communicative value when both students can see the dog outside the post office However, if one student possesses a picture of the street scene while the other has a similar image with missing details, the question transforms into a meaningful and engaging inquiry as the second student seeks to gather information from the first.
Information gap activities play a crucial role in the language learning process by fostering student engagement and skill exploration According to Morrow (as cited in Larsen-Freeman, 2000), these communicative tasks share three essential features: an information gap, choice, and feedback They serve as effective speaking practice, mirroring real-life conversations and enabling students to exchange messages that reflect their intentions (Richards & Renandya, 2002) Furthermore, such activities encourage greater participation, as learners are often more motivated to communicate when they have a specific purpose, such as solving a problem or sharing necessary information with peers (Spratt, Pulverness, and Williams, 2005) Ultimately, incorporating information gap activities enriches the learning experience, making classes more enjoyable and dynamic.
Successful language teaching occurs when students achieve competence, comprehension, and production in the language, enabling them to communicate fluently Engaging in speaking activities is essential for fostering students' interest in learning any language According to Ur (1996) as cited in Raptou (2001), effective speaking activities possess specific characteristics that contribute to this success.
1 Learners talk a lot As much as possible of the period of time allotted to the activity is in fact occupied by learner talk
2 Participation is even Classroom discussion is not dominated by a minority of talkative participants: all get a chance to speak, and contributions are fairly evenly distributed
High motivation among learners drives their eagerness to speak, fueled by their interest in the topic and a desire to share new insights or contribute to achieving specific task objectives.
4 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
Effective speaking hinges on the ability to communicate clearly, and there are various methods to enhance this skill One effective approach is the Information Gap-spoken Activity, which encourages learners to seek out missing information necessary to complete a task According to Son (2009), this type of activity requires learners to engage in conversation with one another to gather the information they need, fostering both communication and collaboration skills.
This activity enhances learners' interpersonal skills by encouraging them to engage in communication to acquire necessary information for task completion According to Montoya (2011), effective communication often involves seeking out information that individuals do not already have.
Information gap activities are essential for enhancing speaking skills in language learning According to Stevic in Watamni & Gholami (2012), speaking represents the disparity between linguistic knowledge and teaching methods, emphasizing the importance of incorporating speaking activities into second language acquisition Communicative Language Teaching (CLT), as noted by Habermas, Hymes, Jakobovits, and Savignon, focuses on both the processes and goals of classroom learning, with communicative competence being a central concept introduced in the 1970s Mastering speaking skills is crucial for learners to achieve satisfaction in foreign language learning, as many students often feel dissatisfied despite their abilities in reading, writing, and listening Ur (1991) outlines the learning process of a skill as a three-stage journey: Verbalization, Automatization, and Autonomy, highlighting the need for learners to express their ideas verbally to feel fulfilled in their language learning experience.
There are some points dealing with the results of the research such as the following:
- Giving the chance to work on negotiating meaning
- Feeling more comfortable to speak
- The communicative practice will be maximal
- Learning to pay attention to communicating intended meaning
Understanding the social context of communicative events is essential for effective learning The benefits of implementing information gap activities in the classroom serve as a strong motivation for teachers to promote speaking tasks According to Son (2009), these activities offer several advantages that enhance student engagement and communication skills.
- Make learners to concentrate on the communication for information
- Learners talk a lot/ produce more speech
- Give students a reason to talk
- Represent real communication and factual learning
- Equal opportunities of learning for mixed ability classes
- Less intimidating than presenting in front of the entire class
- Comfortable, casual and non threatened atmosphere
- Free interaction with peers *Develop other sub-skills
The information gap activities facilitate the transfer of knowledge between individuals or across different formats and locations Each participant possesses unique information that others do not, and collaboration is essential to solve the problem effectively.
Teachers should embrace creativity when designing information gap activities, ensuring that they cater to the specific needs of their students and align with the classroom model being utilized.
2.3.3 Types of Information Gap Activities
Setting of the study
The research was conducted at Ha Huy Tap High School, located in the mountainous region of Cam Xuyen district, Ha Tinh Province Students at this school struggle with English speaking skills, primarily focusing on learning the language to succeed in their final examinations.
Like other schools in our country, English is a compulsory subject for the students at
Ha Huy Tap high school and English is a mandatory subject in the national GCSE.
Research questions
1 What are grade 10 students’ difficulties in learning English speaking skill at Ha
2 To what extent does the implementation of information-gap activities help to improve speaking ability of grade tenth students at Ha Huy Tap high school?
Participants
The Control Group
The Control Group was described in terms of gender, age and English-learning experience and summarized in the table below:
The experimental Group
Likewise, the Experimental Group was described in terms of gender, age and English - learning experience and recapped in the table below:
Age range All of the students are 16 years old
Table 3 : The Control Group’s background information
The analysis of the two groups reveals significant similarities across four key variables: student count, gender distribution, age range, and English-learning experience Both groups comprised nearly equal numbers of students, with females significantly outnumbering males by ratios of three to one and four to one, respectively Additionally, the majority of students in both groups were relatively young.
Materials
The research utilizes the textbook "Tiếng Anh 10," which encompasses 16 units, each covering distinct topics Each unit is designed to enhance four key language skills: reading, speaking, listening, and writing, alongside a dedicated language focus lesson that includes pronunciation and grammar components Each lesson lasts 45 minutes and concentrates on a specific topic, which aligns with the speaking topics presented in the textbook.
Age range All of the students are 16 years old
Table 3.2: The Experimental Group’s background information
Students are required to complete five tests each semester, including one oral test, three 15-minute tests, two 45-minute tests, and a final end-of-semester test These assessments evaluate reading, writing skills, vocabulary, and grammar The study focused on eight speaking lessons from the Tieng Anh 10 syllabus, specifically covering units 7 to 14, with each lesson addressing a distinct topic.
Procedure
Pre-test
The pre-test was a test that has 3 parts:
- Part 2: Talk about your family
- Part 3: After students had presented their speaking in part 2, teacher asked some other questions related to the topic
3.5.3 Progress test: There are two progress tests: progress test 1 and progress test 2
This test followed the same format as the pre-test and it had 3 parts:
Part 1: Introduce yourself Part 2: Talk about your hobby
Part 3: After students had presented their speaking in part 2, teacher asked some other questions related to the topic
Table 3.6: The experimental and control group’s Score in pre - test
Part 2: Talk about your favourite subject at school
Part 3: After students had presented their speaking in part 2, teacher asked some other questions related to the topic
Table 3.7: The experimental and control group’s Score in progress - test 1
DATA ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION
Students’ difficulties in learning speaking skill
To know the difficulties that my students face in learning speaking skill, the researcher did a small survey among the participants of the study The results of the survey
The survey results indicate that most students have limited opportunities to practice speaking English during lessons, often feeling apprehensive about making mistakes, which hinders their willingness to engage Additionally, students frequently lack the necessary vocabulary and social knowledge to effectively communicate and express their ideas in English Teachers typically do not provide sufficient opportunities or real-life contexts for interaction, leading to students' hesitance in speaking Consequently, these factors contribute to a stagnation in their speaking abilities.
Difficulties Always Usually Sometimes Never
Have no opportunities to speak
Table 4.1: Students’ difficulties in learning speaking skill
Results from the experiment
This study explores the effectiveness of information gap activities in enhancing the speaking skills of EFL students, utilizing a modified version of Harris's testing scale to evaluate oral performance The assessment focuses on five key criteria: comprehension, pronunciation, fluency, grammar, and vocabulary, with each criterion defined by four clear behavioral statements to ensure reliability and objectivity The collaboration between the researcher and the 10th-grade English teacher allows for an accurate evaluation of each student's speaking ability, assigning scores from 1 to 4 based on performance The maximum score for each question in the oral speaking test is 20, derived from the combined evaluation of the five speaking criteria.
This research aims to evaluate 10th-grade students' oral speaking skills through a specific set of criteria and a scoring scale It will also investigate the effectiveness of information gap activities in enhancing these speaking skills.
The treatment involved converting scores into standard measures to compare students' performances based on their grades Key comparisons were made to assess changes in participants' oral fluency scores throughout the course First, the average scores from all tests (Pre-test, Progress-test 1, Progress-test 2, and Post-test) for both the experimental and control groups were analyzed Next, the average score of the Pre-test was compared to that of Progress-test 1, followed by a comparison between Progress-test 1 and Progress-test 2 Additionally, the average scores of Progress-test 2 and Post-test were compared, as well as the average scores of the Pre-test and Post-test These comparisons aimed to determine the effectiveness of Information Gap activities in enhancing speaking skills for EFL students over the 8-week treatment period.
The oral speaking skills test was prepared by the researcher to measure the students’ performance level in the speaking skills
The Aim of the Oral Speaking Skills Test
The test serves as a key study instrument designed to assess the effectiveness of information gap activities in enhancing speaking skills among grade 10 students, aiding the researcher in addressing the study's research questions.
Table 4.1 displays the scores from the general English test, which was conducted to select participants for the experiment The scores are divided into two categories: the experimental group and the control group The control group achieved a highest score of 9 and a lowest score of 5, while the experimental group also had a highest score of 9 but a lower minimum score of 4 The mean score for the control group was 7.15, surpassing the experimental group's mean score of 6.9 Additionally, Table 4.1 highlights the mean scores for both groups in the general English test.
The average total scores and standard deviations of the general English test for both the experimental group and the control group are presented in Table 4.2 The data highlights the performance differences between the two groups, indicating the effectiveness of the experimental approach in enhancing English language proficiency.
SD 0.875 1.41 mean total score of the experimental group was 6.9 (SD=1.41) and the mean total score of the control group was 7.15 (SD=0.875) The average total score of control group was slightly higher than the average total score of the experimental group The average total score difference between two groups was 0.30 There was not much difference in the level of student in both groups
To ensure equivalence in English language proficiency between the two groups, an oral speaking test was conducted prior to the experiment The comparison of mean scores from the pre-test indicated that both the control and experimental groups scored significantly lower than the general test average, revealing their inadequate speaking abilities This deficiency stemmed from a secondary school curriculum that prioritized written English over speaking skills, leaving students unaware of the importance of verbal communication in language learning Consequently, during the pre-test, students struggled to articulate their ideas fluently, exhibited hesitance in speaking, and demonstrated limited vocabulary and poor pronunciation Many relied on a mix of Vietnamese and English, lacked logical presentation skills, and often resorted to memorization rather than natural expression Additionally, their shyness and lack of confidence further hindered their ability to convey their thoughts effectively.
As observed from the two previous tables, the statistical values in Table 4.2 showed that there was fairly much equivalence between the means of both the experimental and the
Levels of speaking skills Experimental Group Control group
Table 4.3 presents the average total scores and standard deviations of the pre-test, revealing no statistically significant differences between the experimental and control groups This suggests that both groups exhibited a similar capacity, which was relatively low.
The similarity in speaking abilities and key social variables among participants in both groups indicates their compatibility, making it suitable to conduct an experiment This study aimed to determine whether the application of semantic mapping in teaching methodology would lead to statistically significant differences in accuracy and fluency in speaking between the two groups.
4.2.3 The result of the progress - speaking test 1
Total scores of Speaking skill
Table 4.4: The average total scores and standard deviations progress test 1 of both group
Table 4.5:The average total scores and standard deviations progress test 2 of both
The comparison between pre - test and progress - test 1 for both groups 44
4.2.4 The result of the post - speaking test 2
Table 4.6: The average total scores and standard deviations post - test 2 of both groups
4.3 The comparison between pre - test and progress - test 1 for both groups
A comparison of the experimental and control groups reveals differences in their performance across three speaking topics, as indicated by the computed means of their scores The following table summarizes the means, standard deviations, medians, and modes for both groups, specifically highlighting the results from progress-test 1 in the control group.
The results indicate a noticeable improvement in the experimental group's speaking abilities after three speaking topics, with the overall average score rising from 5.55 to 6.75 Key criteria also saw enhancements, including comprehension increasing from 1.165 to 1.485, fluency from 1.2 to 1.415, and pronunciation from 1.01 to 1.275 In contrast, the control group's average score only marginally increased from 5.7 to 5.9, with comprehension rising slightly from 1.23 to 1.33, while fluency and vocabulary scores decreased from 1.22 to 1.19 and from 1.07 to 1.04, respectively These findings suggest that information gap activities positively impacted the students' speaking abilities in the experimental group after three topics.
Total scores of Speaking skill 5.55 0.887 6.75 0.716
Table 4.7 The average total scores and standard deviations of pre - test and progress - test 1in the experimental group
Total scores of Speaking skill 5.7 0.865 5.9 0.718
Table 4 8: The average total scores and standard deviations of pre - test and
Table 4.9: Means, standard deviations, medians and modes of score progress - test 1 for all groups
The results indicate a statistically significant difference between the experimental group, with a mean score of 6.75 (SD: 0.718), and the control group, which had a mean score of 5.9 (SD: 0.716), resulting in a difference of 0.85 Additionally, the table presents the median and mode for each group, highlighting that the median represents the central value of the scores while the mode reflects the most frequently occurring score The scores of the experimental group range from 6 to 8, establishing the median for this set.
7 The mode of the experimental group’s scores is 7 which is repeated 9 times Meanwhile, for the control group, the scores ranged from 5 to 7 which made the median of this set at the value 6 The mode of this group’s scores is 6 which is repeated
10 times This result shows that the use of information gap activities in speaking lesson greatly affected the increase of the students’ speaking ability especially student’s fluency
Table 3.5 presents a comparison of the score increases for each participant between the pre-speaking test and the post-speaking test, with individual data organized in two columns ranked from highest to lowest scores.
The experimental group consisted of 20 participants with the mean scores ranging from
The study involved two groups: an experimental group of 20 participants and a control group In the experimental group, the highest scores of 8 were achieved by participants A5, A13, and A16, while nine participants, including A4 and A2, scored 7 The lowest score in this group was 6, recorded by eight participants In contrast, the control group had a highest mean score of 7, attained by four participants (B5, B13, B4, B17), with the lowest score of 5 observed in six participants.
Average score of progress - test 1
Progress - test 1 score Experimental group Control group
Table 4.10 Total scores in the progress - test 1 by all participants (P)
Figure 3.1 The mean score of the pre - test and progress test 1 for both groups
The comparison between progress - test 1 and progress - test 2 for both groups 47 4.5 The comparison between the mean score of all aspects in the four
To assess student improvement after six speaking topics, I compared progress-test results between the control and experimental groups The data indicates a notable increase in the mean score of the experimental group, rising from 6.75 to 7.9, with significant advancements across all criteria: comprehension improved from 1.485 to 1.7, fluency from 1.415 to 1.675, grammar from 1.31 to 1.525, pronunciation from 1.275 to 1.435, and vocabulary from 1.265 to 1.565 In contrast, the control group showed only a slight increase from 5.9 to 6.15.
Table 4 11: The average total scores and standard deviations of progress - test 1 and progress - test 2 in the experimental group
Table 4 12: The average total scores and standard deviations of progress - test 1
The implementation of information gap activities across six speaking topics significantly improved students' speaking skills, as evidenced by the results of progress test 2 Students demonstrated increased confidence in speaking English and actively engaged in the learning process by asking and answering questions to gather information for their tasks Throughout these topics, they consistently learned vocabulary alongside pronunciation, leading to enhanced vocabulary and improved pronunciation Additionally, their grammatical structures and fluency in speaking showed notable advancements.
4.5 The comparison between the mean score of all aspects in the four tests for both groups: The following table presents the comparison of the students’ mean scores in the pre-test, the progress test, and the post-test with the gain score of each aspect
Tests Comprehension Fluency Grammar Vocabulary Pronunciation
Table 4 13: The average scores of all the aspects in all the test and gain score in the experimental group
Figure 3.2 The mean score of the progress test 1 and progress test 2 for both groups
The implementation of information gap activities significantly improved the speaking skills of the experimental group students, as evidenced by their mean scores in various aspects Fluency increased from 1.2 in the pre-test to 1.85 in the post-test, while comprehension rose from 1.165 to 1.775 Vocabulary scores improved from 1.045 to 1.685, and grammar scores increased from 1.113 to 1.64 Pronunciation also saw a gain, moving from 1.01 to 1.5 In contrast, the control group exhibited minimal improvements across all speaking aspects, with gains of only 0.065 in comprehension, 0.01 in fluency, 0.012 in grammar, 0.06 in pronunciation, and 0.18 in vocabulary The larger gain scores in the experimental group indicate significant differences between pre-test and post-test results, confirming that information gap activities effectively enhance students' speaking skills, particularly in fluency and vocabulary This finding aligns with previous studies by Defrioka (2009), Ekawati (2009), and Sari (2008), which also highlighted the effectiveness of such activities in developing speaking skills.
Tests Comprehension Fluency Grammar Vocabulary Pronunciation
Table 4 14: The average scores of all the aspects in all the test and gain score in the
Pre - test Pro - test 1 Pro - test 2 Post - test
Figure 3.3 The mean score of the all the tests for both groups
The data presented in the table and chart indicate a significant improvement in students' mean scores across various assessments, including the pre-test, progress tests, and post-test Notably, the post-test scores surpass those of both the pre-test and the progress tests Furthermore, the experimental group demonstrated a remarkable gain score of 2.70, significantly higher than the control group's gain score of 0.55 This suggests that the experimental group experienced more substantial and gradual improvements in their speaking skills, highlighting the effectiveness of implementing information gap activities in enhancing student performance.
The comparison between average score of the four tests for both groups 50
Table 4.15 illustrates the overall findings of students' average scores in the tests, highlighting the comparison between the experimental and control groups By calculating the mean scores of both groups, we gain insight into the differences observed across four tests following eight speaking topics The table includes key statistics such as means, standard deviations, medians, and modes for both the experimental and control groups, providing a comprehensive overview of their performance.
The results indicate a statistically significant difference between the experimental group, with a mean score of 7.15 (SD: 1.313), and the control group, which had a mean score of 6.0 (SD: 0.779), resulting in a difference of 1.15 Additionally, the median score for the experimental group is 7, while the mode reflects the most frequently occurring score within this group The scores for the experimental group range from 4 to 9.
8 which is repeated 24 times Meanwhile, for the control group, the scores ranged from 4 to
The application of information gap activities in speaking lessons significantly enhanced students' speaking abilities, as evidenced by a median score of 6 and a mode of 6, which occurred 41 times in the data set.
The table below presents a comparison of the increases in mean scores for each participant, organized from the highest to the lowest scores.
The study involved an experimental group of 20 participants with mean scores between 6.25 and 8.0, while the control group also had 20 participants with mean scores ranging from 5.0 to 6.75 In the experimental group, participant A16 achieved the highest score of 8.0, followed by participants A6, A10, A12, and A13, each scoring 7.75 Participants A2 and A5 scored 7.5, while the lowest score in this group was 6.25.
6 Average score on four tests
Table 4.16 presents the means, standard deviations, medians, and modes of test scores for all participants in groups A11 and A18 In the control group, participant B17 achieved the highest mean score of 6.75, while participant B1 recorded the lowest score of 5.0.
To enhance clarity and comprehension, the mean scores were organized into a table featuring five columns: the first column represents the group, the second column displays scores above 7.0, the third column includes scores ranging from 6.0 to 7.0, the fourth column contains scores between 5.0 and 6.0, and the final column lists scores below 5.0.
In a study involving 20 participants in an experimental group, the implementation of information gap activities during an 8-session speaking course yielded impressive results, with 70% of participants achieving scores above 7.0 Conversely, only 30% scored between 6.0 and 7.0, and notably, there were no participants with scores below 5.0.
Table 4.17 Mean scores in all the tests by all participants(P)
In Table 4.18, the mean scores of all participants across both groups remained consistent throughout the eight sessions Out of 20 participants, none achieved scores exceeding 7.0, while 14 participants, accounting for 70%, scored between 6.0 and just under that threshold.
7.0 and 6 students (370%) had their scores from 5.0 to lower than 6.0 And there was not any students had his score under 5.0 These results demonstrate that when the participants who use information gap activities in speaking lessons achieve better in learners’ oral proficiency, especially fluency than those who did not use this technique
The tables below demonstrates the score of each participant in the tests and his or her gain score after 8 speaking topic,
Students Pre - test Progress - test 1
Progress - test 2 Post - test Gain score
Table 4 19: The score of each participant in pre - test, progress test 1, progress test 2 and post test and the gain score of each participant in experimental group
Students Pre - test Progress - test 1
Progress - test 2 Post - test Gain score
The analysis of the pre-test and post-test scores reveals that participants in the control group exhibited less improvement compared to those in the experimental group Notably, students in the experimental group demonstrated significant progress throughout the study For instance, Student A1 improved from a score of 5 in the pre-test to 7 in the first progress test and further increased to 8 in the second progress test, highlighting the effectiveness of the experimental approach.
9 for the post - test Some other students in experimental group reached the gain score of 4 meanwhile in control group some students got no improvement and their scores even decreased.
The comparison between the average score of the pre and post
To determine the impact of information gap activities on students' speaking abilities, a comparative analysis was conducted using pre- and post-test scores from two groups The assessment of speaking skills focused on five key components: pronunciation, grammar, vocabulary, fluency, and comprehension To facilitate comparison, individual student performances were converted into standard scores relative to their grades The accompanying table illustrates the raw data collected from both the experimental and control groups.
Table 4 20: The score of each participant in pre - test, progress test 1, progress test
Measure Experimental group Control group
Table 4.21 Means and standard deviations of speaking accuracy of the pre-test and the post-test of both groups
From the data above, the mean score of the pre-test for the experimental group and for the control group were 5.55 and 5.70 Comparing the mean score of the pre-
Figure 3.4 The mean score of the pre - test and post for both groups
In a speaking test conducted between two groups, both exhibited similar mean scores, with a pre-speaking mean difference of just 0.15 After an eight-week treatment period, the experimental group's post-speaking test score rose to 8.40, reflecting a significant increase of 2.90 points from their pre-test In contrast, the control group's post-test score was only 6.25, showing a modest increase of 0.55 points This comparison indicates that the experimental group achieved a greater improvement in speaking fluency than the control group.
Figure 3.7 illustrates that the experimental group made a significant improvement in speaking ability while the control group made a smaller increase
The chart showed the general gain for two groups Both groups had increased but in the experimental group the mean score increased more considerably than in the control group
The experimental group demonstrated a significant increase in mean scores, rising from 5.55 in the pre-test to 8.4 in the post-test, while the control group showed a modest improvement from 5.70 to 6.25 The mean improvement for the experimental group was 1.70, compared to just 0.10 for the control group, indicating a substantial effect of information gap activities on enhancing speaking skills These activities not only improved participants' grammar and pronunciation but also boosted their fluency and vocabulary The statistical data clearly highlights the consistent improvement in the experimental group throughout the course, particularly in comparison to the control group.
P Pre - test Post - test Gain score P Pre - test Post - test Gain score
The increase levels of all participants for both groups were represented in table 4.21 and the results are summarized in table 4.22
The analysis of the data in Table 3.10 reveals significant differences in test score improvements between the experimental and control groups In the experimental group, 55% of participants (11 out of 20) achieved score increases of 3 to 4 points, while the remaining 45% saw improvements of 2 points Conversely, the control group showed no participants achieving a 3-point increase, with only 15% (3 participants) increasing their scores by 2 points or less Additionally, 45% of the control group improved by only 1 point, and 40% experienced no improvement or negative results Overall, the experimental group demonstrated a marked advantage over the control group in both pre-test and post-test score comparisons.
A comparison of the mean scores from the initial and final sessions, along with the individual score increases between the pre-test and post-test, demonstrates that incorporating information gap activities in teaching significantly enhances students' speaking proficiency.
This study is done with the purpose of seeking the effects of using information
Table 4 22: The result of the pre - test and the post - test by all participants ( P ) for
From 3 From 2 to From 1 to No to 4 under 3 under 2 increase
Table 4.23: Summary of the increase levels of all participants for both groups this experiment enhanced our understanding of the benefits of information gap activities in teaching speaking skill
The experiment demonstrated that participants' speaking proficiency improved significantly after the treatment, with information gap activities proving effective for EFL learners The experimental group achieved higher average scores compared to the control group, as evidenced by comparisons of means, modes, and medians Specifically, the mean score of the experimental group in the post-test exceeded that of the control group by 2.15, while the mode and median scores also favored the experimental group This indicates that the treatment contributed to the superior performance of the experimental group, highlighting the effectiveness of information gap activities in enhancing speaking abilities.
Before the treatment, a general English proficiency test indicated similar average scores for two student classes However, after a nearly 6-week treatment period, significant differences emerged between the groups In the experimental group, 60% of participants improved by over 3 points, while only 5% increased by 2 points compared to their initial scores In contrast, the control group showed no participants achieving a 3-point increase, with 30% improving by 2 points and 40% either making no progress or experiencing negative results These findings highlight that participants who received treatment demonstrated greater improvements in oral proficiency, while over half of those in the control group either showed minimal improvement or regressed.
The comparison of data between the first and second halves of the course revealed that the experimental group experienced significant improvement, with most participants showing a gradual or sharp increase in their speaking skills after eight topics, culminating in their highest scores during the post-test In contrast, the control group demonstrated little to no progress throughout the course This indicates that the experimental group benefited from information gap activities, leading to their overall improvement.
The experiment demonstrated a consistent improvement in participants' speaking abilities throughout the course, as evidenced by the comparison of average scores from pre-speaking and post-speaking tests for both groups This enhancement was measured across five key criteria: fluency, grammar, vocabulary, comprehension, and pronunciation.
The results indicated a significant improvement in the performance of the experimental group compared to the control group, as evidenced by higher scores A comparison of the means and standard deviations revealed that the experimental group consistently outperformed the control group, confirming that their mean score was superior.
The implementation of information gap activities significantly enhanced students' speaking skills, as evidenced by improved progress test results and increased confidence in speaking English Students became actively engaged in the learning process, expressing themselves through questions and answers, making lessons more effective and enjoyable Their enthusiasm for English classes grew, leading to higher participation rates in activities Additionally, consistent practice in speaking allowed students to improve their vocabulary and pronunciation, although some still relied on memorization Overall, the information gap activity proved to be an effective technique for fostering speaking abilities and increasing student engagement in learning English.
The implementation of information gap activities significantly enhanced students' speaking skills, as evidenced by improved performance in the post-test Many students demonstrated their ability to answer questions effectively without relying on notes or memorization, showcasing their use of appropriate vocabulary This led to better pronunciation and a gradual enrichment of their vocabulary and grammar Additionally, students actively participated in discussions, expressing their ideas more confidently, even if they occasionally resorted to Vietnamese Overall, they exhibited increased confidence and reduced shyness when speaking in front of the class.