AbstractThis paper investigates the benefits of using different teaching strategies to develop EFL learners’ vocabulary and speaking skills. Undeniably, there are some learners in grades 4-6 who have difficulties to speak and to learn new vocabulary in English classroom, due to many reasons. To examine the impact of different teaching strategies, an electronic research in educational databases ERIC via EBSCO was conducted. The materials used were peer-reviewed journal articles and literature. By examining and analyzing the different articles found, its evident that English teachers often focus on writing and reading activities instead of communicative activities. Some teachers often use the first language in the classroom and learners will do as their teachers. Factors such as large classroom sizes and limitation of communication tasks can motivated learners and make them less confident in speaking and practicing English. These can be the reasons why some EFL learners do not speak and use vocabulary during the communicative activities in the classroom. Thus, this paper clarifies teaching methods and strategies that teachers can use to increase vocabulary learning and speaking in the EFL classroom. Results have shown that the theory of Vygotsky’s sociocultural learning was beneficial to include all learner in authentic communicative activities, which also created an environment that was both communicative and supportive. The communication-based learning activities, such as songs, games, stories, pair work and project work, are useful for learners, since it establishes a communicative environment. Moreover, these activities increase the EFL learners’ motivation towards speaking.

The study analyzed activities of Spanish Level 1 textbooks used in high school to determine the extent to which they incorporate some of the most respected theories of communicative language learning, in particular the theories of Krashen, Swain, Long and Nunan. Five well known Spanish books were chosen: Realidades, Exprésate, Así­ se dice, Avancemos, and Aventura. For each book, Chapter 2 and Chapter 5 were chosen to be evaluated by two raters. The activities in these chapters were analyzed according to four criteria derived from the abovementioned theories. Results suggest that textbooks may not be in alignment with major theories of how language is acquired. The majority of the activities may fall under the category of meaningless drills, which it is claimed do not contribute to acquisition of a second language.

The aim of this thesis is to determine how English-language teaching in Sweden influences the subject-based communicative competence and language development in Swedish of upper secondary students. The focus is thus on the students’ mother tongue, i.e. the language which gets limited in the teaching practice within so-called content- and language-integrated learning (CLIL). Data was primarily collected by participatory observation in two science program classes, one taught in English and one in Swedish, during their three years in upper secondary school. Additional data was collected through interviews, questionnaires, audio taping of classroom interaction and writing tasks. This created conditions for a comprehensive and nuanced description and interpretation of the linguistic behaviour of teachers and students in the CLIL practice, as well as of the experiences and perceptions they report. Studies were carried out on classroom practice, student texts, and teacher and student experiences of CLIL instruction. These were linked to activity analysis, systemic-functional linguistics and ethnography of communication, i.e. research areas that emphasise the interplay between language, communication and social situation. The general conclusions are: (1) CLIL students use less relevant subject-based language in speech and writing than do control students. This holds for all subjects except Swedish, where both CLIL and control students share linguistic conditions; (2) Swedish is a prerequisite for the students’ own active, subject-based participation in classroom interaction. There is almost no interaction when the language of instruction is English; (3) English is an obstacle, and is also considered as such. The students avoid using English, and the teachers consistently use code-switching strategies in response to the policy that “language should not be an obstacle”. The results suggest that the CLIL environment is less conducive to learning, given current learning theories that focus on active participation. In the already teacher-dominated classroom, the linguistic and interactional demands that come with CLIL teaching seem to add to the challenge of assimilating advanced subject instruction.