Particular English language learners have a need to demonstrate high levels of accuracy in their written and spoken language production. Dynamic corrective feedback (dynamic CF) has been shown to facilitate L2 learner written accuracy attainment through providing manageable, meaningful, timely and constant feedback on authentic and frequent written language production. The research of this thesis examined the benefits of altering the dynamic CF model to be responsive to students' spoken production rather than solely their written production and measured the impact this adaptation would have on the established benefits of the instructional strategy on students' gains in written accuracy. The study also looked at the impact of both forms of dynamic CF on students' attainment of written complexity, fluency, and lexical development. The study included two groups of students whose language proficiency ranged from intermediate-low to advanced-mid who were studying English for academic purposes in an intensive English language program. These students participated in a one-semester Linguistic Accuracy course. Half of the students received the traditional form of dynamic CF in which they received feedback on only their written production, and the other half received a modified version of dynamic CF that provided students with feedback on only their spoken production. Before and after the treatment, samples of students' written production were collected through a thirty-minute essay test. These writing samples were analyzed for accuracy, fluency, complexity, and lexical development. Changes in each of these variables for both groups were contrasted using a mixed-model repeated measure Analysis of Variance (ANOVA). These tests revealed that there was not a significant difference in terms of the changes in accuracy or lexical development between the two groups; however, participants receiving the modified variation of dynamic CF did perform significantly better on the measurement of written complexity. Also, lower proficiency students receiving the modified version of dynamic CF did significantly better on the measurement of written fluency than students of a similar proficiency receiving the traditional form.

This study explores the weight of pronunciation in a speaking proficiency test at an English as a Second Language (ESL) Intensive English Program (IEP) in America. As an integral part of speaking, beliefs, practices, and research of pronunciation teaching have experienced shifts over the decades (Morley, 1991). Most studies concerning speaking have focused on intelligibility, comprehensibility, and accentedness of speaking, with attempting to address the role of pronunciation in oral communication. However, the degree to which pronunciation is weighed in determining speaking proficiency levels is unclear (Higgs & Clifford, 1982, Kang, 2013). In an effort to contribute to the understanding of this issue, the current study investigates the relationship between pronunciation and speaking proficiency ratings. The speaking proficiency ratings and pronunciation ratings in vowels, consonants, word stress, sentence stress, intonation, and rhythm of 226 speaking samples from English learners were collected at Brigham Young University's (BYU) English Language Center (ELC). The study confirms that suprasegmentals explain more variance than segmentals in English proficiency, and among those suprasegmental features, only the ratings of sentence stress increase incrementally with the proficiency levels without overlapping among proficiency levels.

This study deals with public speaking among teenagers. It is the sincere hope of the writer that this thesis may challenge young people and help motivate them to become better speakers. If it does this then it is partly successful. It may point out some weaknesses and habits in their own style of speaking that are handicaps rather than assets. It may also show some of the strong points of teenage public speaking in general, the writer hopes it will help young speakers want to overcome the trifles of poor speech habits to make their speaking nearer perfection.

Findings by the Swedish Schools Inspectorate (2011), show that some pupils in Sweden feel anxiety when speaking English. This is no surprise to Horwitz, Horwitz and Cope (1986) who state that speaking is regarded to be the scariest part of language learning. To understand the phenomenon of speech anxiety further and to contribute to existing research, the purpose of this study was to investigate what learner speech anxiety is according to four chosen teachers as well as their strategies in dealing with speech anxiety. The teachers play an essential role when dealing with learner anxiety. Not including the pupils themselves is not necessarily a limitation, but a strength: Young (1992) reports that the students’ perspectives have been well-documented, and that investigating the teachers’ point of view might offer new insights on the issue at hand.In retrieving information from the four teacher respondents, semi-structured interviewing was used, adopting pragmatic qualitative research as an approach as well as the two paradigms phenomenology and pragmatism.The teachers perceive speech anxiety in the subject of English to be the learners’ feeling of nervousness, worry and fear stemming from real or imagined insufficient language skills, a fear of making mistakes and being humiliated. To decrease anxiety, the teachers believed ample oral practice in small groups in a supportive environment to be part of the solution. There was, furthermore, strong mutual agreement regarding what not to do: forcing and pressuring pupils to speak when feeling uncomfortable with speaking in front of others.

The purpose of this case study is to investigate Waldorf pedagogy. In particular, it investigates how assessment of productive language skills, speaking and writing, is carried out at a Waldorf School. To this end, semi-structured interviews were conducted at a compulsory school. One in-depth teacher interview was held and one group interview with four students. Participants were observed in their natural classroom setting on a few occasions. The results indicate that how assessment is carried out depends on the class, situation and the task performed by students. There is a tendency to assess speaking on an individual level or in smaller groups. Findings indicate that personal texts written by students are somewhat more assessed and that communicative ability in general is more valued than accuracy. This study demonstrates that decisions are made when assessing different skills, where the teacher decides on what as well as how to assess. Focus on form/grammar has a role in assessment since distinctions are made between mistakes. Students have an informal yet clear understanding of how they are being assessed. In this Waldorf School we see that different educational techniques were employed by the teacher. For instance, different types of assessment were used. Discrimination of minor errors and those that interfere with communication were part of assessment sometimes. This study also shows that different parts of language were assessed and that the process of learning was given priority and therefore part of assessment.

Argumentativeness, or the predisposition “to advocate positions on controversial issues and to attack verbally the positions which other people take on these issues” (Infante & Rancer, 1982, p.72), has been associated with a number of positive outcomes. Research among student populations indicates that compared to people who are low in argumentativeness, people high in argumentativeness display higher ability to learn, higher self esteem, greater ability to creatively manage conflict, and higher ability to see both sides of a situation (Barden & Petty, 2008; McPherson Frantz & Seburn, 2003; Rancer, Whitecap, Kosberg, & Avtgis, 1997). Promoting argumentativeness among college students should prepare students to effectively handle conflict and enhance their overall communicative competence, thus setting students up for increased success in life (Rancer et al., 1997). Although much research exists on increasing argumentativeness, none could be found that specifically looked at content in the college level public speaking course in relation to increasing argumentativeness. Specifically, this researcher sought to determine whether instruction in Elaboration Likelihood Model as part of the persuasion unit in a college public speaking course increases student argumentativeness more than instruction in Toulmin’s model of reasoning/argument. Students in seven public speaking courses at a large Southeastern college were asked to complete the Argumentativeness Survey by Infante and Rancer (1982) after receiving instruction in either Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion or Toulmin’s model iii of reasoning/argument. Overall results did not indicate any difference between scores for students that received instruction in the two different content areas

Many intensive English language students take pretests and posttests at the beginning and end of each semester to determine proficiency gains. Nevertheless, it may not be clear what kinds of gains should be expected over the course of a single semester or how those gains might be influenced by factors such as the learner's first language (L1) or prior proficiency. This study used repeated measures ANOVA and nonparametric tests to examine the speaking and writing pretest and posttest scores of 2331 Novice Mid to Advanced Mid ESL learners over a 15-week semester. Results show that while students on average progressed in speaking and writing, they did not meet the curricular goal of advancing a full proficiency sublevel in these skills. Results suggest that though L1 may have a slight impact on language development over one semester, the effect of prior language proficiency was much more dramatic, with large gains for lower-proficiency learners compared to higher-proficiency learners who slowed or regressed in their proficiency, F(1,756) = 367.5, p < .001, ηp2 = .327. Findings have important implications for pedagogical expectations, especially for learners with a more advanced proficiency who may have different needs compared to lower-proficiency learners.

This research paper analyzes how different L2 textbooks in lower secondary school relateto speaking proficiency, in reference to the curriculum. It also investigates how thetextbooks approach speaking proficiency activities differently. The aim of my study istherefore to investigate if and how contemporary textbooks for learning English in lowersecondary school stimulate the development of speaking proficiency. To answer thesequestions, I compare four textbooks, through a content analysis based on the knowledgerequirements for speaking proficiency in English, in year 9. The results show that therecently published books have more activities that help develop speaking proficiency,namely Focus and Sparks. These books also have more activities in groups, which is adifferent approach than the textbook Primetime, which only provides activities in pairs.All books have activities connected to the requirements. However, Focus and Sparks havesignificantly more activities where all requirements are combined. This suggests that thetextbooks recently published prioritize speaking proficiency activities using discussions.The findings of this study are that the textbooks researched relate to the requirementsdifferently. More recent books follow the requirements to a greater extent, helpingstudents develop their speaking proficiency more efficiently.

No description available.

No description available.