Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages, Inc.

(TESOL)
Oral Communication in TESOL: Integrating Speaking, Listening, and Pronunciation
Author(s): John M. Murphy
Source: TESOL Quarterly, Vol. 25, No. 1 (Spring, 1991), pp. 51-75
Published by: Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages, Inc. (TESOL)
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3587028
Accessed: 19-02-2016 09:13 UTC
REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/3587028?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Wiley and Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages, Inc. (TESOL) are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize,
preserve and extend access to TESOL Quarterly.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 190.144.171.70 on Fri, 19 Feb 2016 09:13:09 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

TESOL QUARTERLY, Vol. 25, No. 1, Spring 1991

Oral Communicationin TESOL:

IntegratingSpeaking,Listening,
and Pronunciation
JOHN M. MURPHY

Georgia State University

This articlediscussesthe teachingof oral communication

skills
in programsof
and pronunciation)
(thatis, speaking,listening,
Englishas a SecondLanguage.The articleis addressedtoteachers
who conductcoursesin thisarea forESL studentsin secondary
schools, colleges, and universitiesalthough the guidelines
presentedcan be adaptedto otherESL contexts(e.g.,continuing
are discussed
education,privatetutorials).
Speakingand listening
as a subsetofboth
is presented
as majorskillareas;pronunciation
speakingand listeningdevelopment.This articleargues that
is
attentionto thesethreecomponentsof oral communication
viewed as indispensableto any coherentcurriculumdesign.
Althoughrelativedegreesof emphasismay varyforparticular
are characterized
and pronunciation
courses,speaking,listening,
as reciprocally
orallanguageprocesses.
interdependent
Oral communicationis a complex and multifacetedlanguage
process. In thisdiscussion,referencesto speaking,signal activities
that provide students opportunitiesfor improving oral fluency
throughinterpersonalcommunication.Referencesto pronunciation
signal activities that provide students opportunitiesfor gaining
accurate controlover the sound system.This distinctionparallels
one widely accepted in the teaching of the ESL writingprocess.
Writing teachers commonly distinguishbetween activities that
focus upon skillsof composing (e.g., free writing,brainstorming,
elaborating,and revisingcontent) and those that centerupon the
accuracy of the finalproduct (e.g., grammarexercises,controlled
composition, editing, and revising syntax). Though speaking
activitiesand pronunciationactivitiesare addressed separatelyhere,
the intentionis not to imply thattheyare mutuallyexclusive.Jazz
chanting (Graham, 1978, 1987), participatingin communicative
activitiescenteredupon the sound system,and rehearsingdialogues
51

This content downloaded from 190.144.171.70 on Fri, 19 Feb 2016 09:13:09 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

are a few examples of themanyclassroomproceduresthatembrace

elements of both. For the purposes of the present discussion,
speaking and listening can be defined as major skill areas of
interpersonalcommunication;pronunciationencompasses subsets
of both speaking and listeningskilldevelopment. Due to the high
degree of overlap among these areas, a fundamental premise
underlyingthis article is that attentionto speaking, listening,and
pronunciationmustproceed in an integratedfashion.The areas are,
however, addressed separately in order to highlightsome crucial
differences.Each section begins with an historicalmethodological
overview.
SPEAKING
on a focusedtopic
The abilityto speak coherentlyand intelligibly
is generally recognized as a necessary goal for ESL students.
Because many of them aspire to professionalcareers in Englishdominant communities,the coming decade will see increasing
pressure placed upon ESL high school, college, and university
graduatesto possess excellentskillsinboth speech and writing.ESL
teachersof oral communicationcommonlyturnto widely accepted
L2 teachingmethods and materials.For those unfamiliarwith this
area of the literature,Richards and Rogers (1986) presenta useful
frameworkfor the systematicdescriptionand comparison of L2
methods. See Pennycook (1989) and Prabhu (1990) forcritiquesof
the concept of method.
While examiningL2 methodsand approaches forthe purposes of
curriculumdesign and lesson planning,teachersof ESL oral communicationneed to keep at least two centralconsiderationsin mind.
First, the various methodologies most widely discussed in the
literaturedifferdramaticallywithrespectto therole played by oral
language in the classroom. Speakers and listenersare expected to
interact with their peers, teachers, and other target language
speakers in qualitatively differentmanners within diverse L2
methods. Teachers will need to make principled decisions as they
review the literature,historical and current,on the following:
GrammarTranslation(no attentionis given to speakingor listening
activitiesat all); Total PhysicalResponse (studentsrarelyspeak but
are challenged to physicallydemonstratelisteningcomprehension);
Audiolingualism(studentsrepeat and orally manipulate language
forms); the Direct Method and Situational Language Teaching
(teachers do most of the talkingwhile studentsengage in many
controlled, context-explicit,speaking activities); the Comprehension Approach (emphasizes listeningand reading comprehension);
52

TESOL QUARTERLY

This content downloaded from 190.144.171.70 on Fri, 19 Feb 2016 09:13:09 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

the Natural Approach (initiallyemphasizes listeningcomprehension, and later reading, while leaving room for guided speaking
activities); the Silent Way (teachers rarely speak, while student
speaking is focused upon grammatically sequenced language
forms); Suggestopedia (very controlledspeaking activitieswhich
are based upon lengthy written scripts and dramatic teacher
performances); Community Language Learning (many peer-topeer interactionsthat contributeto a communityspirit among
students,whereas the spoken formsincorporatedintothe syllabus
are generatedby studentsthemselves);CommunicativeLanguage
Teaching (CLT) (many peer-to-peer,guided, and free speaking
activitieswhich are organized around notional,functional,and/or
linguisticconsiderations;and a Task-Based Approach (activitiesare
centered upon practical tasks for studentsto performthatcan be
weightedto emphasize oral communication).
A second considerationis thatwhereas the various methodsand
approaches presentedin theliteratureoffergenuinealternativesfor
teachinglearnersat earlystagesof L2 proficiency,severalseem less
appropriate for intermediate or advanced levels of speaking
proficiency (e.g., Total Physical Response, the Silent Way, or
Suggestopedia). For example, Krashen and Terrellstate explicitly
thatthe Natural Approach "is forbeginnersand is designed to help
them become intermediates"(quoted in Richards& Rogers, 1986,
p. 134). Some adaptations of any approach will be necessary to
meet the needs of particulargroups of learners;moreover,these
methods are founded upon diverse theoriesof language and language learningwhich individualteachersof ESL oral communicationwill need to evaluate forthemselves.
Many student populations have significantspoken language
needs at the intermediate,advanced, and professionallevels. For
are required to
example, ESL college studentsat manyinstitutions
complete a basic speech course in order to fulfillcore curriculum
requirements.Internationalteaching assistantsneed to develop
effective styles for lecturing to monolingual English-speaking
undergraduates. Those who major in business and marketing
commonlyare expected to demonstratemasteryof public speaking
as part of the requirementsof theiracademic departments.When
these studentsparticipate in ESL programs,specialized courses
need to be designed thatfocus upon requisiteskillsof oral communication.
Articlesthataddress the teachingof speakingin ESL periodically
appear in theprofessionaljournals(e.g., Bassano & Christison,1987;
Dubois, 1986; Gebhard, 1982; Maurice, 1983; Meloni & Thompson,
1980; Montgomery& Eisenstein,1985; Murphy,in press; Richards,
INTEGRATING ORAL COMMUNICATION IN TESOL

This content downloaded from 190.144.171.70 on Fri, 19 Feb 2016 09:13:09 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

53

1980; Scarcella, 1978; Taylor & Wolfson, 1978). Also, several L1

articlesintroducespeaking activitiesthatcan be adapted foruse in
ESL classrooms (Bytwerk,1985; Hansen, 1982). Yook and Seiler
(1990) discuss the needs and concerns of ESL students who
participate in speech communication courses. These are rich
sources forteachersto examine when theyare exploringalternative
classroom procedures. In addition, the American Council on the
Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL) provides English language proficiency guidelines for the teaching of speaking and
listening.For both of these skill areas, the ACTFL Provisional
ProficiencyGuidelines (1982, reprintedin James, 1985) describe
nine levels, ranging from novice through superior levels of
proficiency,suggestingappropriate activitiesat most levels. The
guidelinesare illuminatingsince theyindicate thatsome classroom
procedures may be proficiency-levelspecific.For example, public
speaking activities may be appropriate for high-intermediate,
advanced, or superior-levelL2 speakersbut theyare inappropriate
for novice or low-intermediatelevel learners.On the other hand,
activities such as role playing, collaborating with peers during
interactivegames, or singingpopular songs may be adapted for
classroom use across several proficiencylevels.
In the L2 classroom,speakingactivitiescan be planned to include
everythingfromdyadic, to small-group,to whole-classinteraction
patterns.Byrne(1987), Klippel (1987), and Golebiowska (1990), for
example, present teacher referencematerials that are useful for
gettingESL studentsto speak with one anotherin these different
groupings. The L2 literatureis rich in resources for engaging
students in speaking activities such as rehearsing dialogues,
completing information-gapactivities,playing interactivegames,
discussing topical issues, problem solving, role playing, and
completing speaking tasks. ESL speakers at lower levels of
proficiencywill probably feel more comfortable when they are
provided withopportunitiesforexpressingthemselvesin dyads and
small groups since theseformatsare less intimidatingthanones that
require individual studentsto take turnsspeaking in frontof an
entireclass. Ur (1981, 1988) describes several hundred classroom
activitiesthatcan be adapted forthepurpose of gettinglower-level
studentsto speak communicativelyin dyads
and intermediate-level
and small groups. Nolasco and Arthur(1989) provide another
teacher referencetext devoted to activitiesfor generatinglively
discussionsbetween L2 learners.
In addition to workingin dyads and small groups, studentsat
higherlevels of proficiencysometimesneed to gain experience in
expressingthemselvesin frontof a whole class. Several writerstake
54

TESOL QUARTERLY
This content downloaded from 190.144.171.70 on Fri, 19 Feb 2016 09:13:09 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

the position that more proficient L2 speakers benefit from

generatingand developingtheirown topics to presentin class (Dale
& Wolf, 1988; Meloni & Thompson, 1980; Murphy, in press).
Students can develop theirtopics throughclassroom procedures
that are parallel to ones advocated in the teaching of the writing
process (see, for example, Mangelsdorf,1989; Zamel, 1987). A
significantdifference between an L2 writing course and this
component of an advanced level L2 oral communicationcourse is
thatin the case of the latter,a student'stopic culminatesas an oral,
ratherthan as a written,presentation.Here, too, the deliveryof a
student'stopic may be realized across a range of possible grouping
patterns.If workingin dyads or small groups,individualstudents
can be provided with multiple opportunitiesfor revising and
elaboratingtheirpresentationsthrougha process of deliveringthe
same topic a numberof timesto different
membersof theclass (for
furtherdiscussion,see Murphy,in press). If addressingthe whole
class, a studenthas to cope withthekindsof affectivepressuresthat
are likely to be encountered in content-area courses and in
nonclassroomsettings.Teachers need to make decisionsconcerning
how to integratethese alternativestructuresforspeakingactivities
based upon knowledge of their students'proficiencylevels and
educational needs.
LISTENING
Listeninginstructionshould play an importantrole in oral communicationcurriculabecause high school and college studentsare
expected to enrollin lecture-centeredcourses duringtheirearliest
experiences within mainstream classrooms. Lecture-centered
teaching in mainstream classrooms requires that ESL college
studentsfunctioneffectivelyas listenersfromtheverybeginningof
their academic careers. Withinmost classroom settings,listening
serves as a primarychannel forlearning.Because littleattentionis
given to the students' listening abilities in other academic
preparatory courses (Chamot, 1987), listening and connections
between listening,speaking, and pronunciationemerge as central
componentsof ESL oral communication.
The listeningprocess currently
is gainingattentionas a major area
of interestin the literatureon speech communicationfor native
speakers of English (Hunt & Cusella, 1983; Rubin & Roberts,1987;
Stewart, 1983; Streff,1984). Because it is a pervasive language
experience that operates in contexts ranging from simple
conversationsto academic debates, the listeningprocess merits
carefulconsideration.It has a primaryrole to play in theteachingof
INTEGRATING

ORAL COMMUNICATION

IN TESOL

This content downloaded from 190.144.171.70 on Fri, 19 Feb 2016 09:13:09 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

55

ESL oral communication.Some researchersof second language

acquisition and many L2 methodologistspropose that a specific
emphasis upon listening instruction, at both beginning and
intermediatelevels of L2 proficiency,greatlyenhancesthelanguage
learning potentials of ESL students (Dunkel, 1986; Krashen &
Terrell,1983; Nagle & Sanders, 1986; Winitz,1981). For advanced
students,ESL listeninginstructionshould incorporate curricular
purposes presentlyadvocated for L1 learners-e.g., listeningin
order to empathize, to evaluate, to enjoy, to analyze, to critique,
and to take writtennotes (Wolff,Marsnik,Tacey, & Nichols,1983).
Especially forESL studentswho live and studyin English-dominant
communities,certainrecurringL1 themesare appropriategoals for
L2 classroominstruction:
activitiesthatencourage studentsto adapt
to a speaker's appearance and delivery,to overcome externaland
internaldistractions,to generate interestin what a speaker has to
say, to listen for central concepts and the gist of messages, to
anticipatewhat maybe comingnext,to pay attentionto paralinguistic information,to give the speaker a chance before jumping to
conclusions,to ask pertinentquestions,to paraphraseforthebenefit
in relationto what one
of others,and to synthesizenew information
already knows (see Wolffet al., 1983; Wolvin & Coakley, 1982).
Priorto the 1970s,itwas common forlisteningto be characterized
as a receptive language skill in which listenerswere pictured as
passively assimilatingthe messages presentedto themby speakers
models of communica(Morley,1984). As information-transmission
tion have been superseded by interactional, cybernetic, and
transactionalframes of reference,a new paradigm is emerging
(Berko,Wolvin,& Wolvin,1981;Brown,G., 1987). Currenttheorists
describe listeningcomprehension as an interactive,interpretive
process in which listenersengage in a dynamic constructionof
meaning. While attendingto spoken language, listenerspredict
topic development (Crow, 1983; Goss, 1982), use a series of
subskills(Richards,1983),relatewhat they
definablemicrolistening
hear to their personal stores of prior knowledge (Dunkel, 1986;
Nagle & Sanders, 1986), and creativelyreact to what speakers say
(Murphy, 1989). Dirven and Oakeshott-Taylor(1984), Richards
(1983), H. M. Taylor (1981), Morley (1980), Snow and Perkins
(1979), and Tarone (1974) point out that microlevel listening
subskills are just as critical to the overall listeningprocess as
macrolevel listeningstrategies.In a massive studyof Korean ESL
learners,Choi (1988) presents convincing evidence that practice
is indispensableforunderstandingfast,fluent,
with microlistening
conversationalspeech. Microlevelphonologicalinformationcarries
necessaryclues thattargetlanguage listenersdepend upon in order
56

TESOL QUARTERLY
This content downloaded from 190.144.171.70 on Fri, 19 Feb 2016 09:13:09 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

to comprehend what they hear. Practice with recognizing and

making efficientuse of these clues is one way to lay a firm
foundationfor oral production activities.Because microlistening
includes the aural discriminationof sound patternswithinstreams
of speech, it is centralto the teachingof accurate pronunciation.
Richards (1983) defines and discusses over 50 separate microlisteningsubskills that ESL learners need to master in order to
understandconversationalas well as academic stylesof discourse.'
His work has been highlyinfluentialin this area (Powers, 1985).
Many teachers find Richards' taxonomy especially useful since it
presentsgeneral guidelinesforassessingstudents'needs, formulating objectives, evaluating materials,designing classroom procedures,and constructing
listeningtests(Dunkel, in press).
It is widely acknowledged thatlistenersuse strategiesforlistening
(Mendelsohn, 1984; Wipf, 1984). At least two separate research
studies confirm that effective L2 listeners make better use of
and elaborationstrategiesthando less
inferencing,
self-monitoring,
effectiveL2 listeners(Murphy,1987;O'Malley, Chamot,& Kupper,
1989). Expanding upon Lebauer's (1984) recommendationsfor
classroom instruction,
Murphy (1989) proposes a series of macrolevel strategicquestionsforL2 listenersto attendto while attending
to academic lectures (see Appendix). Practice in implementing
these questionsis intendedto help develop the metacognitiveskills
of L2 listeners,which can be used in the classroom as a basis for
connectionsbetween listeningand speakingactivities.
Listening is thus a creative activitythat can be analyzed and
described. Resources such as those mentioned above provide
teachers with necessary reference materials for designing L2
classroom listeningactivities.Rost's (1991) and Ur's (1990) teacher
reference texts are especially useful since they include not only
guidelines for designing listeningactivitiesbut numerous lesson
plans targeted for L2 classroom instruction.An importanttheme
that the L1 and L2 literaturesshare in common is the mutually
interdependentrelationshipbetween the processes of speakingand
listening.In addition, increasingnumbersof ESL methodologists
argue thatL2 pronunciationpracticeneeds to be intimatelylinked
with the listeningprocess (Gilbert,1984, 1987) and withgenuinely
communicative speaking activities (Acton, 1984; Celce-Murcia,
1 Richards' taxonomyis separated into (a) 33 microskillsfor conversationallistening(e.g.,
discriminatingdistinctivesounds of the targetlanguage, recognizingthe stresspatternsof
words,recognizingthe rhythmicstructureof English,distinguishing
word boundaries) and
(b) 18 microskillsforlisteningto academic lectures(e.g., identifying
the purpose and scope
of a lecture, identifyingthe role of discourse markers,recognizing key lexical items,
deducing meaningsof unfamiliarwords fromcontext,detectingthe attitudeof a speaker
toward subject matter).
INTEGRATING

ORAL COMMUNICATION

IN TESOL

This content downloaded from 190.144.171.70 on Fri, 19 Feb 2016 09:13:09 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

57

1987; Pica, 1984). This theme leads to the next component under
discussion.
PRONUNCIATION
Recentlytherehas been a resurgenceof interestin theteachingof
pronunciationwithadult second language learners,as evidenced by
numerous survey articles and research reports appearing in a
numberof major publications(Avery& Erlich,1987; Leather,1983;
Morley,1987;Pennington& Richards,1986). Some common themes
are as follows:
1. Pronunciationneeds to be approached from both macro- and
microlevel perspectives. Morley (1987) indicates the primary
role to be played by suprasegmentals(i.e., stress,rhythm,and
intonation)in the teaching of pronunciation;she places vowel
and consonant segmentalsin a secondary, supportingrole. In
theirdiscussionof "voice qualitysettings,"Esling & Wong (1983)
suggest that when learnersare provided with opportunitiesto
practice a small numberof physicalpositioningsforthe tongue,
throat,and mouththatare representativeof U.S. and Canadian
English speakers (e.g., spread lips, open jaw, palatalized tongue
position,retroflexarticulation,nasal voice, lowered larynx,and
creaky voice), then the pronunciationof individualvowel and
consonantsounds realized withinthesesettingsimproves.Suprasegmental sound patterns and broadly focused voice quality
settingsare separate macrolevel componentsof pronunciation.
Attentionto thesecomponentscan complementand set the stage
for classroom activities that focus upon microlevel sound
segments.
2. Attainingbetterpronunciationhabits is intimatelylinked with
learners'affectivestates.Stevick(1978) wrote over a decade ago
thatin the teachingof pronunciation,
all toooften,self-consciousness
leadstotension,
tensionleadstopoor
frustration
performance,
poor performanceleads to frustration,
leadstoadded tension,
and so on arounda downwardspiral.(p. 146)
Teachers must be tactful when making decisions on how to
correctstudents'errorsand when to call students'attentionto the
nonstandard forms they produce. The embarrassment of
studentsis widely recognized as being counterproductiveand
should be avoided as much as possible. Useful guidelines for
deciding when and how to correctstudents'errorstactfullyare
presentedby Chaudron (1988, pp. 135-153),Hendrickson(1987),
58

TESOL

QUARTERLY

This content downloaded from 190.144.171.70 on Fri, 19 Feb 2016 09:13:09 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Brown, H. D. (1987, pp. 192-195),Krashen (1982, pp. 116-119),

and Fanselow (1977).
3. Improvementin pronunciationdepends upon significantcommitmentsof both time and energy from learners themselves.
Acton (1984) recommends that students commit themselves
contractuallyto specifiedamountsof practice on a weekly basis
if they are to overcome "fossilized" patterns. Improvement
cannotbe expected to take place overnight.Students'abilitiesto
make sense of phonologicalexplanationsand to gain controlover
the forms practiced in class are slowly developing processes
(Parish, 1977). Phonological "backsliding" and affectiveresistance to change, sometimesdue to social pressuresfromnative
language and/or peer group communities,are to be expected
(Beebe, 1988).
4. The cues of standard orthographycoupled with consistent
referencesto phonological informationfacilitatethe teachingof
both segmental and suprasegmental features of the sound
system.Dickerson (1985) discusses the many accessible spelling
patternsfromwhichL2 speakerscan learnto predictthepronunciation of even unfamiliarwords. In theirtreatmentof blending
patternsacross word boundaries (i.e., reduced forms),Hill and
Beebe (1980) devote special attentionto the principle that
teachersmake "maximaluse of orthographiccues in theteaching
of pronunciation"(p. 322). For example, they propose that
teachers firstintroducethe concept of contractions,which are
representedwithinthe regular orthographicsystem (e.g., it's,
that's, we're, I'd), before moving on to the vast number of
blendingpatternscharacteristicof conversationalspeech, which
are not (e.g., Paul is going to [g6na] come too. We missed her
yet?). Temperley (1987)
[mistar] a lot. Did you eat
[d.iyt]
similar
and
a
argument
presentsa useful model at the
develops
level of curriculumdesign in her discussion of linking and
deletion in finalconsonantclusters.Dickerson (1989) provides a
comprehensive ESL text which is aimed at high-intermediate
students"whose nonnativerhythmand stresspatternsdamage
the intelligibilityof their spoken English" (back cover of the
Teacher's Manual). The text begins with accessible word-level
rules and practice activities,moves on to a parallel presentation
at the phraselevel, and culminatesin a sectionthatplaces within
the grasp of ESL learners connectionsbetween orthographic
formsand sentence-levelsuprasegmentalssuch as stress,rhythm,
and intonation.This is an innovativepresentation,one thatuses
predictable cues of the orthographicsystemto provide students
INTEGRATING ORAL COMMUNICATION IN TESOL

This content downloaded from 190.144.171.70 on Fri, 19 Feb 2016 09:13:09 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

59

with firmcontrolover both micro-and macrolevel featuresof

the sound system. These writers emphasize that standard
orthographycoupled withaccessible referencesto phonological
informationshould be presentedas a pronunciationresourcefor
L2 learners. Training the eye, along with the ear, not only to
recognizebut to anticipatecommonphonologicalprocessessuch
as vowel reductions, assimilation of sounds, allophonic
variations,ellipsis,parasiticconsonants,phoneticsyllabification,
palatalized forms,stresspatterns,and therhythmof spoken English is beneficialformanylearners.
5. Practice on segmental as well as suprasegmentallevels of the
sound systemneeds to be integratedwithbroader level communicative activitiesin which speakers and listenersengage in a
process of exchangingmeaningfulinformation(Pennington&
Richards,1986). This concern emergespartlyin responseto the
literatureon CommunicativeLanguage Teaching (CLT) which
emphasizes purposefuland meaningfuluses of language in L2
classrooms.
INTEGRATINGSPEAKING,LISTENING,AND
PRONUNCIATION
There are two major currentsthatrunthroughany ESL course in
oral communication.The firstcurrentfocuses upon elements of
phonological accuracy,a subset of both speaking and listeningskill
development, while the second focuses upon broader aspects of
interpersonalcommunication,namely fluency in speaking and
listening.Focusing on the first,many students benefit from an
introductionto thephonologicalpatternsof thetargetlanguage and
fromopportunitiesto explore thesepatternsfirsthand. Based upon
a needs analysis of such factorsas the students'educational and
social goals, their proficiencylevels in oral language, and their
preferredlearning styles, the sound system can be introduced,
examined,and practiced.As much as possible,thisneeds to be done
in meaningfulcontexts and should emerge along with realistic
concern forthe role of pronunciationwhen people interact.
On the otherhand, studentsneed considerablepracticewithless
tightlycontrolledopportunitiesto expressthemselvesfluentlyand
spontaneouslyvia longer stretchesof self-generateddiscourse. Of
fundamentalimportance to this focus is practice in oral reports
(Meloni & Thompson, 1980), role plays (Donahue & Parsons,1982;
Ladousse, 1989; Livingstone, 1983), informationgaps (Yorkey,
1985), sociodramas (Scarcella, 1978), project work (Eslava &
60

TESOL QUARTERLY

This content downloaded from 190.144.171.70 on Fri, 19 Feb 2016 09:13:09 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Lawson,1979;Fried-Booth,
(Crookall& Oxford,
1986),simulations
communicative
1990), and otherexamples of person-to-person
are offundamental
activities
importance.
In the teachingof ESL, speaking,listening,
and pronunciation
need to be placed withinthebroadercontextof oralcommunication.Although
to one or moreof theseareassometimes
attention
is
in
the
all three
neglected
classroom,ESL teacherscan highlight
when theyare designingcourse curriculaand/orclassroomactivities.
To facilitate
itisnecessary
toexaminesimultaneintegration
oforalcommunication.
ouslythecomponents
Figure1 is presented
as a reference
classroomactivities
for
guideforteachers.It presents
teaching oral communicationarrangedby proficiencylevel.
Fluencyactivities
appearunderthemajor-skill
headingsofspeaking
and listening,and accuracyactivitiesappear underthe subskill
Production
headingsof oral productionand auraldiscrimination.
activities
are locatedon theleftand attending
are located
activities
on theright.Activities
withineach ofthefigure's
fourquadrantsare
arranged according to proficiencylevel, from beginningto
advanced.Readersshouldnote,however,theprovisional
natureof
sucha hierarchy.
can be adaptedby resourceful
Specificactivities
teachersto fittheneeds of studentsat different
levels.However,
based uponproficiency-level
intheACTFL Guidelines
descriptions
(ACTFL, 1982),Figure1 is intendedto presenttheactivitieson a
continuumfrombeginningto advanced levels of proficiency.
Practicingteachersshouldplan to examinetheACTFL Guidelines
inordertorearrange
theselistings
of
(ACTFL. 1982)forthemselves
activities
to fittheirstudents'
needs.
theactivitieslistedin FigureI
Thoughby no meansexhaustive,
coursesin oralcommunisuggestan ambitiousscope forintegrated
cation.In the classroom,one soon realizesthatthe variousfoci
representedby each quadrant sometimessuggest competing
directions.
It fallstotheteacherto decidewhentoworkon pronuncommuniciation,whento workon broaderskillsof interpersonal
or pronunciacation,whento emphasizeeitherspeaking,listening,
Welltion,and when to aim forvaryingdegreesof integration.
informed
decisionsare groundedin (a) familiarity
withtherelated
with
literatures;
(b) discussionsof issuesraised in the literature
teacher
with
different
instructional
colleagues;(c)
experimentation
optionsat thelevelsof approach,design,and procedure;and (d)
These efforts
lead to
regularrevisionof thecurriculum.
eventually
a necessaryand pivotaltensionthatliesat thecoreof anycoursein
oral communication
designedforspeakersof Englishas a second
Teachers
learn
to coordinatemanydifferent
language.
concerns,
sometimesworkingon the sound system (i.e., phonological
INTEGRATING ORAL COMMUNICATION IN TESOL

This content downloaded from 190.144.171.70 on Fri, 19 Feb 2016 09:13:09 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

61

o,

0 cd

*G

S,
c$E io
0

C0.*

*ded O

?c Q,v,

ba

.er

oE~i

~c

-o

a5~; ~

80

0)

Ca

04 01 -1icv

,~~,
S Eto
M
~
0.
C

-ie

os
,E
t-cC:
l(

v, F5:
0baO

*-

Di

Q-

'Cr

oc

Q)~0-

E~0~

k?

~
-ot~
05~ct
00

'a

a70

ZS

YQN,
,x

OuO

~~O~m~a
v,

-~E

55
0

QSO d
a- 9
e r

This content downloaded from 190.144.171.70 on Fri, 19 Feb 2016 09:13:09 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

FIGURE 1-Continued

z:
H

Classroom Activities for Teaching Oral Communicat

Arranged by Proficiency Level

C)
0
0

z
H
C1

S
C
C

'~

0
?~

A
C

H
0

Y
A
C
T
V
I
T

Quadrant Three:

ORAL PRODUCTION

aftera speaker
SRepeating
isolated words, briefphrases,segmentals,syntacticpatterns,formulaic
expressions,lines fromdialogues
the productionof
Self-initiating
isolated words, briefphrases,formulaicexpressions,briefstretchesof
connected discourse
Practicingand producing
stresspatternsat word level, phrase level, sentencelevel;
reduced formsin appropriatelocations;
intonationcontours;
(most of the itemslistedin Quadrant Four)
Practicingvoice qualitysettings
Vocally reading along withaural input
Practicing"read-and-look-up"activities(Fanselow, 1987,p. 308)
Reading out loud fromwrittentext
Understandingand thenrespondingto errorcorrections
Tracking withrecordingsof slow, deliberate speech; fast,fluentspeech
Tracking with live material based upon slow, deliberate speech; fast,
fluentspeech
Practicingfast,fluent,conversationalspeech
Practicing kinesthetictechniques (e.g., slow motion speaking, silent
tracking)
Rehearsingone's speech patternsin frontof a mirror
Practicingtongue twisters
Rehearsingdialogue fromplays
exercises
Engaging in oral interpretation
Practicingdifferentdialect patterns(as in acting)
E

This content downloaded from 190.144.171.70 on Fri, 19 Feb 2016 09:13:09 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Quadrant Fou

Identifying
word bound
boundaries
changes in p
segmentalsi
consonantc
vocabulary
contentwor
key words;
word order
featuresof s
isolated w
short phr
tive + n
discour
grammatic
letters,spell
sound patte
numbers, t
informat
contractedf
errorsin pro
special func
suprasegme
conversat
Predictingsou
Recognizing a
Monitoringth
Monitoring o
recordings,
Self-monitor
Covertlyrehe

contrasts,blendingpatterns,voice qualitysettings,rhythmpatterns,
suprasegmentals), and at other times concentrating on more
conversational and communicativelymore connected styles of
speaking and listening. In the context of second language
instruction,the various currentsof oral communicationcan enrich
both teaching and learning experiences by providing alternative
focal pointsforclassroominteractions.Classroom activitiescan be
structured,timed, and interrelatedso the currentsmay run in
confluence ratherthan in opposing directions.This is where the
analytic and intuitiveskills of teachers will come into play to
discoverwhichactivitiesare mostappropriateat particularpointsin
time.
As noted above, the sound system/pronunciation
componentof
oral communicationis currentlyreceivingincreasedattentionin the
literatureon teachingsecond languages. This renewed interestreflectsteachers'continuingconvictionthatstudentsmustbe provided
opportunitiesfor increasingthe linguisticaccuracy of theirspeech.
However, fluencycomponentsof speakingand listeningcontinueto
be the focus of ESL courses in oral communication.In fact,even a
briefreview of commerciallyavailable textsdesigned for teaching
ESL oral communication demonstratesthat activities centered
around speaking and listeningare vastly more common in these
materials than are pronunciation activities. (For some recent
examplesof ESL textssee Dale & Wolf,1988;Echeverria,1987;Glass
& Arcario,1985;Kayfetz& Stice,1987;Porter,Grant& Draper, 1985;
Rooks, 1987. For some examples of teachertrainingresourcetexts,
see Brown& Yule, 1983;Golebiowska,1990;Klippel,1987; Ladousse,
1987, 1989; Nolasco & Arthur,1989; Pattison,1987; and Wessels,
1987.) One of the more widely accepted and currentapproaches in
the teaching of second languages, Communicative Language
criticizedforoveremphasizingtheacquisition
Teaching,is frequently
of spoken fluencywhile neglectingto address adequately issues
relatedto gainingaccurate controlover phonologyand syntax.One
critic(Marton,1988) states:
The most obvious risk attachedto the use of the communicative
is relatedto one ofitsfundamental
namely,
principles,
teachingstrategy
of speecherrorsand makestheteacher
thatit forbidsdirectcorrection
erroneousutterances .... This principleis based on
accept structurally

the assumptionthatlearners'errorsare caused by the processesof

in nature,withthecorollary
and as suchare transient
testing
hypothesis
thatthey(i.e., speecherrors)tendto disappearas thelearnerproceeds
along the developmentalpath, gettingever more (comprehensible)
erroneoushypotheses.
revisingand correcting
inputand constantly
(p. 49)
64

TESOL QUARTERLY
This content downloaded from 190.144.171.70 on Fri, 19 Feb 2016 09:13:09 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

A similar criticismis frequentlydirected toward other L2 approaches such as the Natural Approach and Counseling Learning/
CommunityLanguage Learning. Advocates for these might take
issue with Marton'scritique by pointingout that each has diverse
applications and thatsome practitionersmake successfulattempts
to address theissue of spoken accuracy effectively.Clarke (1984) in
his discussionof what classroom practitionersowe to methodological theorists(e.g., Widdowson,Savignon,Stevick,Lazonov, Terrell,
Krashen,or Curran)speaks to thisissuewhen he pointsout that
it is the (individual,autonomous)teacherwho is in the positionof
becauseonlytheteachercan decidewhatto takeand whatto
authority,
leave,whomto listento and whomto ignore.(p. 591)
How then are methods and approaches adapted by individual
teachers concerned with phonological accuracy who are equally
committedto encouragingconversationalfluency?The practice of
indirecterrorcorrectionthroughthe teacher'ssystematiceffortsto
orallyparaphrase,reformulate,and expand upon students'linguistically nonstandardutterancesin the targetlanguage is one technique frequentlydiscussed in the literature(Brown, H. D., 1987;
Krashen & Terrell, 1983; Marton, 1988). When this "expansion"
technique is handled effectively,L2 learners have access to
phonological (as well as semanticand syntactic)conventionsof the
target language. Such exposure may be a necessary,though not
necessarily sufficient,condition for learning to take place. As
teachers deliberately attend to students' nonstandard language
forms,rephrasingthese into linguisticallyaccurate targetlanguage
patterns,studentsare presented with demonstrationsof conventional speech. Such demonstrationsof reliable L2 patterns are
crucial sources of input for learnerswho are affectivelyprepared
for, and open and sensitiveto increasingtheiracquisition of the
targetlanguage (fora related discussion,see Smith,1982).
A very differentalternativeis explicitattentionto phonological
analysis,throughstudentpractice with contextualizedforms,and
integrationof direct error correction into classroom activities.
Those concerned by the proscriptionsof CLT advocates, might
appreciate the recommendationsfor methodological flexibilityin
H. D. Brown's (1977, 1987) recommendationthatlanguage teachers
practice cautious,reasoned, enlightenedeclecticismwhen making
decisions thatimpact actual classroompractices.
There is ample support withinthe TESOL literaturefor classroom activitiesthatfocus explicitlyupon both micro-and macrolevel featuresof theEnglishsound system,especiallywhenworking
INTEGRATING

ORAL COMMUNICATION

IN TESOL

This content downloaded from 190.144.171.70 on Fri, 19 Feb 2016 09:13:09 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

65

with an adult population. The point is thatphonological accuracy

need not be sacrificedat the expense of conversationalfluency,nor
should the opposite be the case. A similarsituationis discussed by
B. Taylor (1981) who provides a model for teachers of ESL
composition in which writinginstructionis depicted as unfolding
along a "two way street."Taylor argues thatwritingteachersneed
to focus theireffortsupon both the contentof a writer'sideas and
upon the linguisticformsthroughwhich those ideas are expressed
(e.g., syntax,cohesion, rhetoricalorganization).In the case of oral
communication,attentionto linguisticforms sometimes focuses
upon the phonological patternsof the target language, although
mattersof syntax,semantics,and communicativefunctiondeserve
attentionas well. Withinthe contextof classroominteractionsthese
various componentsneed to be interwoven.The effectivewriting
teacher, and in an analogous mannerthe effectiveteacher of oral
communication,learns to coordinatea wide range of complementaryconcerns.
When the sound system has been the focus of commercially
available texts,the activitiespresentedsometimesare criticizedfor
relevance
being mechanical or too lacking in contextual/pragmatic
to hold students'interests(Morley, 1987). However, a number of
writershave been successfulin designingcommunicativematerials
and activitiesforenhancingESL students'accurate controlover the
sound system (Celce-Murcia, 1983, 1987; Hecht & Ryan, 1979;
Kenworthy,1987; Pica, 1984; Wong, 1988). These writersdescribe
diverse procedures, and familiaritywith their work should help
teachersto incorporatecommunicativecomponentswithinpronunciation activities. Pica (1984) describes communicative activities
centeredupon role playing,problem solving,and interactivegames
thatare intendedfortheteachingofpronunciation.Afterpresenting
examples and guidelines for designing similar exercises, CelceMurcia (1987) remindsus that
used to teachotherlanguageareascommuthesame typesof activities
can also be used to teachpronunciation."
(p. 10)
nicatively
At the otherend of the spectrum,Acton (1984) and Morley (1984)
introduce an activity they refer to as tracking that may be
unfamiliarto many ESL teachers:
afterthespeaker
learnersattemptto repeatimmediately
In tracking,
basis. It is an intense
whateverthe speakersays,on a word-by-word
experience,one thateventuallyforceslearnersto focuson intonation
(Acton,1984,p. 77)
stress,and rhythm.
contours,
Tracking activitiesembrace elements of listening,speaking, and
66

TESOL QUARTERLY

This content downloaded from 190.144.171.70 on Fri, 19 Feb 2016 09:13:09 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

pronunciation.They are not an example of,but ratheran alternative

to, classroom activities that are relativelymore communicative.
Since trackingis reminiscentof the roles of repetitionand oral
patternpractice in the out-of-fashion
Audiolingual Method, some
teachersmightfeel more comfortableif trackingis complemented
by the communicativeinstructionalstylesthatCelce-Murcia, Pica,
and othersdescribe.
Another practice that integrates the teaching of speaking,
listening,and pronunciationis trainingESL learnersto self-monitor
their private speech. Sometimes called "covert rehearsal"
(Dickerson, 1989, p. vi), this is a metacognitivelearningstrategy
encouraged by Morley (1988), Acton (1984), Yorio (1984), Stevick
(1980), and others.While best suitedto thekind of studentKrashen
(1982) has termed the "optimal Monitoruser" (p. 19), it involves
critical self-evaluationand self-correctionin either classroom or
nonclassroom settings. During moments of covert rehearsal a
learnerapplies to self-initiated
utteranceshis/herknowledgeof past
learning and memories of targetlanguage sounds. This ability is
vitallyimportantforsome students,especially forthosewho aspire
to improve the comprehensibility
of theirspeech. As evidence that
strategies for covert rehearsal can be taught in the classroom,
Kenworthy(1987) introduces three practical classroom activities
that are designed to enhance this ability through the guided,
systematic,and focused analysis of audio recordingsof students'
speech patterns. Teachers can experimentwith these activities,
while exploringthe classroom use of video, in addition to audio,
recordings as another means for integratingthe teaching of
speaking,listening,and pronunciation.
CONCLUSION
The conceptual framework proposed here emphasizes that
focused attentionupon a singlecomponentof oral communication
is insufficient.
Pronunciationsubskills,forexample,are but slices of
a significantly
largerpie. The same is trueforthe major skillareas
of speaking and listening.The potentialfor varietyin classroom
activitiesincreasesas teachersexperimentwithintegratingoptions
at thelevels of curriculumdesignand lessonplanning.The theoryof
language that underlies this frameworkacknowledges that oral
communicationis a composite of interconnectinglanguage processes. Attentionto one area of oral communicationought to be
complemented by attention to others as systematicallyas is
possible. Each subset of oral communicationneeds to be incorporated withinany informedcurriculumdesign. By interweaving
INTEGRATING ORAL COMMUNICATION IN TESOL
This content downloaded from 190.144.171.70 on Fri, 19 Feb 2016 09:13:09 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

67

activities that practice speaking, listening, and pronunciation,

teachersenrichclassroom instruction.The search forways to integrate these threeareas will prove imperativeas ESL teachers and
methodologistsattemptto clarifytheoreticalapproaches, curriculum designs, and classroom practices while providing diverse
opportunitiesforthe development of oral language proficiencyfor
second language learnersof English.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would like to acknowledgePatriciaA. Dunkel,PatriciaByrd,JoanEisterhold
Tina Renn O'Kelley,and two anonymousTESOL
Carson,ChrisKamerschen,
on earlierdraftsofthisarticle.
comments
fortheirinsightful
reviewers
Quarterly
THE AUTHOR
of AppliedLinguistics
in theDepartment
Professor
JohnM. Murphyis Assistant
haveappearedinEnglishfor
His publications
andESL atGeorgiaStateUniversity.
His current
and theTESOL Newsletter.
SpecificPurposes,TESL Canada Journal,
of L2 teacherpreparation.
focusis classroomcenteredresearchinprograms
REFERENCES
ACTFL. (1982). ACTFL provisionalproficiencyguidelines. Hasting-onHudson, NY: Author.
Acton, W. (1984). Changing fossilizedpronunciation.TESOL Quarterly,
18(1), 71-86.
Anderson,F. E. (Ed.). (1990). Special issue: New perspectivesin pronunciation [Theme issue]. The Language Teacher. 14(10), 1-62. Tokyo:
Japan Associationof Language Teachers (JALT).
Avery,P., & Ehrlich,S. (Eds.). (1987). The teachingof pronunciation:An
introductionforteachersof Englishas a second language [Theme issue].
TESL Talk, 17(1). Toronto: OntarioMinistryof Citizenshipand Culture.
Bassano, S.K., & Christison, M.A. (1987). Developing successful
conversation groups. In M.H. Long & J.C. Richards (Eds.),
Methodology in TESOL: A book of readings. New York: Newbury
House.
Beebe, L. M. (1988). The sociolinguisticperspective.In L. M. Beebe (Ed.),
Issues in second language acquisition:Multipleperspectives.New York:
Newbury House.
68

TESOL QUARTERLY

This content downloaded from 190.144.171.70 on Fri, 19 Feb 2016 09:13:09 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Berko,R., Wolvin,A., & Wolvin,D. (1981). Communicating:A social and

career focus (2nd ed.). Boston: HoughtonMifflin.
Brown,G. (1987). Twenty fiveyearsof teachinglisteningcomprehension.
English Teaching Forum,25(4), 11-15.
Brown,G., & Yule, G. (1983). Teachingthespoken language:An approach
based on the analysisof conversationalEnglish.New York: Cambridge
UniversityPress.
Brown, H. D. (1977). Some limitationsof CL/CLL models of second language teaching.TESOL Quarterly,11(4), 365-372.
Brown,H. D. (1987). Principlesof language learning& teaching(2nd ed.).
Englewood Cliffs,NJ: PrenticeHall.
Byrne, O. (1987). Techniques for Classroom Interaction. New York:
Longman.
Bytwerk, R. (1985). Impromptu speaking exercises. Communication
Education, 34, 148-149.
Celce-Murcia, M. (1983). Teaching pronunciation communicatively.
MEXTESOL Journal,7(1), 10-25.
Celce-Murcia, M. (1987). Teaching pronunciationas communication.In J.
Morley (Ed.), Current perspectives on pronunciation (pp. 1-12).
Washington,DC: TESOL.
Chamot, A.U. (1987). Toward a functional ESL curriculum in the
elementaryschool. In M. H. Long & J. C. Richards(Eds.), Methodology
in TESOL: A book of readings(pp. 86-95).New York: NewburyHouse.
Chaudron, C. (1988). Second language classrooms:Research on teaching
and learning.New York: Cambridge UniversityPress.
Choi, I. (1988). The necessityof teachingEnglishfastspeech phenomena
forbetteraural comprehensionskillin theKorean context.Unpublished
master's thesis. The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign,
Urbana, IL.
Clark, M. A. (1984). On the natureof technique: What do we owe to the
gurus?TESOL Quarterly,18(4), 577-594.
Crookall, D., & Oxford, R. (1990). Simulation,gaming, and language
learning.New York: Newbury House.
and listeningcomprehension.
Crow, J. T. (1983, April). Psycholinguistics
Paper presented at the 17th Annual TESOL Convention. Toronto,
Canada.
Dale, P., & Wolf, J. C. (1988). Speech communicationfor international
students.Englewood Cliffs,NJ: PrenticeHall.
Dickerson, W. B. (1985). The invisibleY: A case forspellingin pronunciation learning.TESOL Quarterly,19(2), 303-316.
Dickerson, W. B. (1989). Stress in the speech stream: The rhythmof
spoken English (Student Book and Teacher's Manual). Urbana:
Universityof IllinoisPress.
Donahue, M., & Parsons,A. H. (1982). The use of roleplay to overcome
culturalfatigue.TESOL Quarterly,16(3), 359-366.
INTEGRATING ORAL COMMUNICATION IN TESOL

This content downloaded from 190.144.171.70 on Fri, 19 Feb 2016 09:13:09 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

69

Dirven, P., & Oakeshott-Taylor,J. (1984). Listeningcomprehension:A

stateof the art article.Language teaching:The international
abstracting
journalforlanguage teachersand applied linguistics,17(4), 326-343.
Dubois, B. (1986). Needed: EST public communicationfor nonnative
speakers of English.EnglishforSpecific Purposes,5(1), 73-79.
Dunkel, P. A. (1986). Developing listeningfluency in L2: Theoretical
principles and pedagogical considerations. The Modern Language
Journal,70(2), 99-106.
Dunkel, P. A. (in press). Computerized testingof nonparticipatoryL2
listeningcomprehensionproficiency:An ESL prototypedevelopment
effort.Modern Language ]ournal.
Echeverria,E. (1987). Speaking on issues:An introductionto public communication(ESL). New York: Holt, Rinehart& Winston.
Eslava, R., & Lawson, P. O. (1979). A project course in spoken English.
TESOL Quarterly,13(1), 65-72.
Esling,J. H., & Wong,R. F. (1983). Voice qualitysettingsand theteaching
of pronunciation.TESOL Quarterly,17(1), 89-96.
Fanselow, J.F. (1977). The treatmentof errorin oral work. Foreign Language Annals,10(4), 583-593.
Fanselow, J.F. (1987). Breaking rules: Generating and exploring
alternativesin language teaching.New York:Longman.
Fried-Booth, D. L. (1986). Proiect work: Resource book for teachers.
Oxford: Oxford UniversityPress.
Gebhard, J.(1982). Some suggestionsfortheEFL conversationclass. English Teaching Forum,20 (April).
Gilbert,J. B. (1984). Clear speech: Pronunciationand listeningcomprehensionin AmericanEnglish. New York:Cambridge UniversityPress.
Gilbert, J.B. (1987). Pronunciationand listeningcomprehension.In J.
Morley (Ed.), Current perspectives on pronunciation (pp. 29-40).
Washington,DC: TESOL.
Glass, E., & Arcario, P. (1985). Speak freely:ConversationalAmerican
English. New York: HarcourtBrace Jovanovich.
Golebiowska, A. (1990). Gettingstudentsto talk. New York:PrenticeHall.
Goss, B. (1982). Listening as informationprocessing. Communication
Quarterly,30(4), 304-307.
Graham,C. (1978). Jazz chants.New York: Oxford UniversityPress.
Graham, C. (1987). Small talk: More jazz chants. New York: Oxford
UniversityPress.
Hansen, S. P. (1982). Small is beautifulin the speech classroom.CommunicationEducation, 31, 67-71.
Hecht, E., & Ryan, G. (1979). Survival pronunciation:Vowel contrasts
(Teacher's Guide and Student Workbook). Hayward, CA: Alemany
Press.
Hendrickson,J.M. (1987). Errorcorrectionin foreignlanguage teaching:
Recent theory,research,and practice. In M. H. Long & J.C. Richards
(Eds.), Methodologyin TESOL: A book of readings(pp. 355-370).New
York: Newbury House.
70

TESOL QUARTERLY

This content downloaded from 190.144.171.70 on Fri, 19 Feb 2016 09:13:09 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Hill, C., & Beebe, L. (1980). Contraction and blending: The use of
orthographicclues in teachingpronunciation.TESOL Quarterly,14(3),
299-324.
Hunt, G. T., & Cusella, L. P. (1983). A field study of listeningneeds in
organizations.CommunicationEducation, 32, 393-400.
James,C. J. (Ed.). (1985). The ACTFL foreignlanguage education series:
Foreign language proficiencyin the classroom and beyond. Lincolnwood, IL: National Textbook Company.
Kayfetz, J., & Stice, R. (1987). Academically speaking. Belmont, CA:
Wadsworth.
Kenworthy, J. (1987). Teaching English pronunciation. New York:
Longman.
Klippel, F. (1987). Keep talking:Communicativefluencyactivitiesforlanguage teaching.New York: Cambridge UniversityPress.
Krashen, S.D. (1982). Principles and practice in second language
acquisition.New York:PergamonPress.
Krashen,S. D., & Terrell,T. D. (1983). The NaturalApproach: Language
acquisitionin the classroom.New York:AlemanyPress.
Ladousse, G. P. (1987). Speaking personally:Quizzes and questionnaires
forfluencypractice.New York: Cambridge UniversityPress.
Ladousse, G. P. (1989). Role play: Resourcebooks forteachers.New York.
Oxford UniversityPress.
Leather,J. (1983). State of the art article:Second-languagepronunciation
learningand teaching.Language Teaching,16, 198-219.
in EAP lecturecomprehenLebauer, R. S. (1984). Using lecturetranscripts
sion courses. TESOL Quarterly,18(1), 41-54.
Livingstone, C. (1983). Role play in language learning. New York:
Longman.
Mangelsdorf,K. (1989). Parallels between speaking and writingin second
language acquisition. In Donna M. Johnson& Duane H. Roen (Eds.),
Richness in writing:Empowering ESL Students (pp. 134-145). New
York: Longman.
Marton, W. (1988). Methods in English language teaching:Frameworks
and options.New York:PrenticeHall International.
Maurice, K. (1983). The fluencyworkshop.TESOL Newsletter,8, 29.
Meloni, C. F., & Thompson,S. E. (1980). Oral reportsin the intermediate
ESL classroom.TESOL Quarterly,14(4), 503-514.
Mendelsohn, D. J. (1984). There ARE strategies for listening. TEAL
Occasional Papers, 8, 63-76.
Montgomery,C., & Eisenstein, M. (1985). Real reality revisited: An
experimentalcommunicativecourse in ESL. TESOL Quarterly,19(2),
317-324.
Morley, J. (1980). Improving aural comprehension. Ann Arbor: The
Universityof MichiganPress.
Morley, J. (1984). Listeningand language learningin ESL: Developing
self-studyactivitiesfor listeningcomprehension.New York: Harcourt
Brace Jovanovich.
INTEGRATING

ORAL COMMUNICATION

IN TESOL

This content downloaded from 190.144.171.70 on Fri, 19 Feb 2016 09:13:09 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

71

Morley, J. (Ed.). (1987). Current perspectives on pronunciation.

Washington,DC: TESOL.
Morley, J. (1988). How many languages do you speak: Perspectives on
in EFL/ESL. Round Table on
pronunciation-speech-communication
Languages, and Linguistics,and Literature,XI(2), 1-34. Nagoya Gakuin
University,Nagoya, Japan.
Murphy,J.M. (1987). The listeningstrategiesof English as a second language college students. Research & Teaching in Developmental
Education, 4(1), 27-46.
Murphy,J.M. (1989). Listeningin a second language: Hermeneuticsand
innerspeech. TESL Canada Journal,6(2), 27-44.
Murphy,J. M. (in press). Preparing ESL studentsfor the basic speech
course: Approach, design and procedure.EnglishforSpecific Purposes.
Nagle, S., & Sanders, S. (1986). Comprehensiontheoryand second language pedagogy. TESOL Quarterly,20(1), 9-26.
Nolasco, R., & Arthur,L. (1989). Conversation. New York: Oxford
UniversityPress.
O'Malley, J. M., Chamot, A. U., & Kupper, L. (1989). Listeningcomprehension strategiesin second language acquisition.Applied Linguistics,
10(4), 418-437.
Parish, C. (1977). A practical philosophy of pronunciation. TESOL
Quarterly,11(3), 311-318.
Pattison, P. (1987). Developing communication skills: A practical
handbook for language teachers. New York: Cambridge University
Press.
Pennington,M.C., & Richards, J.C. (1986). Pronunciationrevisited.
TESOL Quarterly,20(2), 207-226.
Pennycook,A. (1989). The concept of method,interestedknowledge,and
the politicsof language teaching.TESOL Quarterly,23(4), 589-618.
Pica, T. (1984). Pronunciationactivitieswithan accent on communication.
English Teaching Forum,22(3), 2-6.
Porter,P. A., Grant,M., & Draper, M. (1985). Communicatingeffectively
in English: Oral communicationfor non-nativespeakers. Belmont,CA:
Wadsworth.
Powers, D. E. (1985). A surveyof academic demands related to listening
skills (TOEFL Res. Rep. #20). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing
Service.
Prabhu, N. S. (1990). There is no best method-Why? TESOL Quarterly,
24(2), 161-176.
Richards,J. C. (1980). Conversation.TESOL Quarterly,14(4), 413-432.
Richards, J.C. (1983). Listening comprehension: Approach, design,
procedure. TESOL Quarterly,17(2), 219-240.
Richards,J. C., & Rogers, T. S. (1986). Approaches and methods in language teaching: A description and analysis. New York: Cambridge
UniversityPress.
Rooks, G. (1987). The non-stopdiscussionworkbook (2nd ed.). New York:
Newbury House.
72

TESOL

QUARTERLY

This content downloaded from 190.144.171.70 on Fri, 19 Feb 2016 09:13:09 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Rost, M. (1991). Listeningin action. Englewood Cliffs,NJ:PrenticeHall.

Rubin, R. B., & Roberts, C. V. (1987). A comparative examinationand
analysisof threelisteningtests.CommunicationEducation, 36, 142-153.
Scarcella, R.C. (1978). Socio-drama for social interaction. TESOL
Quarterly,12(1), 41-46.
Smith, F. (1982). Writingand the writer.New York: Holt, Rinehart&
Winston.
Snow, B. G., & Perkins,K. (1979). The teachingof listeningcomprehension and communicationactivities.TESOL Quarterly,13(1), 51-63.
Stevick, E. W. (1978). Toward a practical philosophyof pronunciation:
Anotherview. TESOL Quarterly,12(2), 145-150.
Stevick, E. W. (1980). Teaching languages: A way and ways. New York:
Newbury House.
Stewart,J. (1983). Interpretivelistening:An alternativeto empathy.CommunicationEducation, 32, 379-391.
Streff,C. R. (1984). The concept of innerspeech and its implicationsfor
an integratedlanguage artscurriculum.CommunicationEducation, 33,
223-230.
Tarone, E. (1974). Speech perception in second language acquisition: A
suggestedmodel. Language Learning,24(2), 223-233.
Taylor, B. (1981). Content and writtenform:A two way street.TESOL
Quarterly,15(1), 5-14.
Taylor,B., & Wolfson,Nessa. (1978). Breakingdown thefreeconversation
myth.TESOL Quarterly,12(1), 31-40.
Taylor, H. M. (1981). Learning to listen to English. TESOL Quarterly,
15(1), 41-50.
Temperley,M. S. (1987). Linkingand deletionin finalconsonantclusters.
In J. Morley (Ed.), Currentperspectiveson pronunciation(pp. 59-82).
Washington,DC: TESOL.
Ur, P. (1981). Discussions thatwork: Task-centredfluencypractice. New
York: Cambridge UniversityPress.
Ur, P. (1988). Grammar practice activities. New York: Cambridge
UniversityPress.
Ur, P. (1990). Teaching listeningcomprehension.New York: Cambridge
UniversityPress.
Wessels, C. (1987). Drama. Oxford:Oxford UniversityPress.
Winitz,H. (Ed.). (1981). The comprehensionapproach to foreignlanguage
instruction.Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Wipf,J. A. (1984). Strategiesforteachingsecond language listeningcomprehension.ForeignLanguage Annals,17(4), 345-348.
Wolff, F.I., Marsnik, N.C., Tacey, W.S., & Nichols, R.G. (1983).
Perceptivelistening.New York: Holt, Rinehart& Winston.
Wolvin, A., & Coakley, C. (1982). Listening (2nd ed.). Dubuque, IA:
Brown.
Wong, R. (1988). Teaching pronunciation: Focus on rhythm and
intonation.Washington,DC: Center forApplied Linguistics.
INTEGRATING

ORAL COMMUNICATION

IN TESOL

This content downloaded from 190.144.171.70 on Fri, 19 Feb 2016 09:13:09 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

73

Yook, E., & Seiler, B. (1990). An investigationinto the communication

needs and concerns of Asian students in speech communication
performancecourses. Basic communicationcourse annual, 2. Boston:
AmericanPress.
Yorio, C. (1984). The case for learning:A response to Krashen. Paper
presentedat the meetingof the AnnualApplied LinguisticsConference
of the New York TESOL Association. Teachers College, Columbia
UniversityPress.
Yorkey,R. (1985). Talk-a-tivities:Problem solving and puzzles for pairs.
Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Zamel, V. (1987). Writing:The process of discoveringmeaning. In J.C.
Richards & M. H. Long (Eds.), Methodology in TESOL: A Book of
Readings (pp. 267-278).New York: Newbury House.

74

TESOL QUARTERLY

This content downloaded from 190.144.171.70 on Fri, 19 Feb 2016 09:13:09 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

APPENDIX
Model forListeningStrategiesUsed in AcademicSettings

Recalling& Summarizing
What is the generalaim of thispresentation?
What is the speaker sayingrightnow?
Do I need to rememberthis?
Is thisimportantenough to writedown?
Have I read about thisbefore? (Is it in my book?)

Speculating
Where is the speaker heading in a generalsense? How do I know?
Can I relateany of thisinformation
to somethingI already know? Is it worthmentioning?Is
it worthwritingdown?
Do I know of an example thatmighthelp the speaker make the topic clearerto understand?
What will the speaker probablybe sayingnext?How do I know?
What is the point of thisdiscussion?

Self-Examining
Could I summarizewhat the speaker is tryingto explain?
Do I have any experiencein thisarea?
Am I gettingmost of this?Do I understandit well?
Is thereanythingbotheringme about thisinformation?
Am I stayingon targetwith the speaker's topic, or am I driftingoff and missingwhat the
speaker means to say?

ProbingtheTopic
Is thisimportantinformation?
What are the key words being used?
Whichof the concepts being presentedare relativelymore important?
Why is the speaker saying" ..................
"?
Do I see any connectionsbetween the ideas being presented?
How does thisidea fitintothe speaker's overall plan?
How has thispresentationbeen organized?

withOthers
Interacting
(While aimingto help thespeaker make thingsclearerformyselfand others)
Is thisa convenienttimeforme to speak up in class by:
summarizingsome of thecontentbeing explained?
askinga question?
providinga new and different
example?
askingforhelp?
pointingout a relationshipbetween ideas thatsome listenersmay be missing?
Note. From "Listeningin a Second Language: Hermeneuticsand Inner Speech" by J. M.
Murphy,1989, TESL Canada Journal,6, pp. 39-40.Copyright1989 by TESL Canada
Journal.Reprintedby permission.

INTEGRATING

ORAL COMMUNICATION

IN TESOL

This content downloaded from 190.144.171.70 on Fri, 19 Feb 2016 09:13:09 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

75