How should Speaking Best Be Taught?

Discuss
Current Ideas and Debates, Backed Up With Example
Activities.
Introduction

Recent advances in languages learning have led to a shift away from traditional teacher
centred approaches (Mitchell and Myles, 1998) to more learner centred classrooms
(Fisher, 1995). This has led to widespread changes in syllabus design and changes in the
way language is taught. In this essay I will attempt to examine contemporary teaching
strategies in light of these changes with particular reference to the teaching of speaking.

In order to place the speaking tasks that I suggest in a relevant context I will examine,
albeit briefly, contemporary theories in language teaching. I will comment briefly on
relevant theories relating to the teaching of speaking in a communicative context. I think
it is important to show how the example activities I outline would fit into a modern EFL
curriculum.

Having outlined the main theories I will move to focus in on one specific type of
speaking activity, namely simulation. I have chosen this route because teaching speaking
is a vast area with multifarious possibilities and strategies. By focussing in on
simulations I will be able to look in depth at the theoretical basis of conducting such
types of activities, examine some practical examples and offer a full critical analysis of
simulation implementation strategies. I will give a context in which such activities could
be utilised for the benefit of language learners.

I will end with a brief conclusion summarising my findings and offering possible avenues
of future research.

Contemporary Theories in Language Learning

In line with the latest research and commentary in language teaching, I reject outright any
assertion that there is a ‘best’ way to teach language. Best is the superlative and I would
be far more comfortable dealing with the superlative better. In the words of Nunan ‘the
search for the one best method would seem to be well and truly dead (Nunan, 2001 in
Bax, 2003). Essentially Nunan was simply building on what had been said more than ten
years ealier by Prabhu (1990) who questioned the very idea of ever discovering a best
method. Indeed Bax (2003) goes further by condemning contemporary communicative
language teaching (CLT) approaches to the dustbin of history. In his article earlier this
year he puts the case for a complete rejection of CLT approaches in favour of a new
context based approach. Echoing some of these sentiments Klapper (2003) comments
that

1
 If it is possible to say anything with certainty about how languages are
learned, it is surely that there is no single, all-encompassing model
(Klapper, 2003, p40).

Despite holding that there is no best way, in line with what many influential theorists are
saying today, I do hold that CLT has a lot to offer and amongst the majority of linguists is
still considered the preferred option. As such, I will move to discuss below the historical
context of CLT and proceed to offer a comprehensive definition.

CLT- A Historical Context

Since the late fifties behaviouralist and grammar centred approaches to language learning
have been in decline. (Hughes, 2002). They have been replaced by more positive
communication centred paradigms that have occurred as a result of psycholinguistic
research beginning in the late fifties and early sixties (Brown and Nation, 1997). Of
particular influence was Chomsky’s reply to Skinner’s Verbal Behaviour, published in
1957. Chomsky’s works gave stimulus to research that has eventually resulted in the
formulation of new constructivist theories.

Two great theorists helped lay the foundations for recent research in constructivist theory,
Lev Vygotsky and Jean Piaget. Piaget arguments that children have critical periods when
they are most receptive to learning and that they develop through a universal sequence of
stages. Piaget saw children’s cognitive development as a purely an individual endeavour,
as lonely scientists readjusting their mental picture of the world to account for new
discoveries. Although Piaget’s theories have lost credibility in recent times his emphasis
on trying to get inside the teacher’s mind still stands. (Gold, 1997).

Vygotsky differed with Piaget about the role of language and social interaction in the
learning process. Vygotsky viewed children’s interactions with their teachers and peers
as being a vital component of their learning experience. Vygotsky put forward the theory
of the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD), where he stated that children would learn
more if they were given a challenging degree of mediation by teachers and peers (Fisher
1995). The key idea we want to take from this is that interaction with others, and in
particular what Fisher (1990) calls ‘peer tutoring’, greatly increases the learning
experience. This is one of the key basis’ of simulation activities, they greatly increase the
degree of interaction in class and hence affect in a positive fashion the learning
experience. I will comment on this further when I come to consider the theoretical
underpinnings of simulation activities.

Building on the ideas of Vygotsky many contemporary teaching methodologies are said
to be communicative (Larsen-Freeman,2001) or interactionist (Bygate, 1988) to the
extent that many ‘practitioners often feel uneasy if they have not found some way of
making their lessons ‘interactive’ or ‘communicative’’ (Dobinson, 2001). Whilst there is
no space here to enter into a full analysis of these developments, it must be stated that
there are those (e.g. Day, 1984) who claim that participation in interactive classroom
activities was unnecessary for learning. Although the research carried out by Day was

2
thorough and certainly did provide strong evidence for his thesis it has not gained wide
currency in the field of EFL teaching. Proof of this is the fact that almost all
contemporary literature appears to take the communicative approach as the starting point.
(Hughes, 2002).

In order to fully understand what a communicative curriculum is and where simulations

would fit in, it is necessary to spend some time discussing the nature and objectives of
such curricula. What I will do here is to outline in general terms the nature of a
communicative curriculum and then later, when I come to consider simulations in detail,
I will analyse in detail how they fit into this genre of curriculum.

The Nature of a Communicative Curriculum

A definition of a communicative curriculum is given by Breen and Candlin (2001) as

students ‘learning how to communicate as a member of a particular socio-cultural group’.
(Breen and Candlin, 2001,p10). This is a rather vague definition that does not really
explain the full nature of the communicative approach, for this I reproduce below a more
comprehensive explanation:

Communicative approaches:

 Place high value on language in use (as opposed to abstract,

isolated examples);
 assert that affective language acquisition (often opposed to
language learning) only takes place through language use;
 aim to foster and develop the learner’s communicative competence
(as opposed to the more abstract concept of linguistic competence);
 regard errors as a natural part of the progression towards a greater
understanding of the target language;
 link teaching methodologies to appropriate communicative tasks
(rather than seeing classroom tasks as a means of practicing a
particular grammatical feature);
 tend to favour inductive, student-centred routes to understanding
(rather than explicit, teacher-led explanations);
 place the learner at the centre of the learning process and assess
progress in relation to factors affecting the individual (for example,
levels of motivation). (Hughes, 2002, p.24).

Hughes (2002) goes on to mention that teacher facilitation as opposed to dominant

lecturers and pair and group work also characterise this approach. Essentially the
communicative approach was a move away from grammar based approaches such as
Situational Language Teaching and the audiolingual method (Richards and Schmidt,
2002). The definition given in the Longman Dictionary of Applied Linguistics is
essentially the same with one key addition, namely that one principle of the
communicative approach is that ‘authentic and meaningful communication should be the
goal of classroom activities’. (italics mine, Richards and Schmidt, 2002 p.90). The idea

3
of realism is embodied in the definition of the communicative approach and is vital to the
idea of simulation in the classroom, that is why I have included it here.

Simulation Definitions and Rational Behind Their Use

‘Simulation is like a strawberry, it has to be tasted to be appreciated’ (Jones, K, 1982 p7)

Various definitions of simulation exist, I reproduce below a small sample:

‘Simulation refers to a classroom activity which has two essential characteristics:

1. The participants have functional roles- survivor, journalist, judge,

fashion designer, Prime Minister.
2. Sufficient information is provided on an issue or a problem- memos,
maps, newspaper items, documents, materials- to enable the
participants to function as professionals.’ (Jones, K, 1987 p9).

‘In simulations, participants have roles [that] must be defined by the ongoing
structure based on the actual situation or system represented. Simulations differ
from some other forms of role play in that one is not asking the participants to
take on the roles or attributes of characters other than themselves.’ (Bambrough,
1994 pp14-15).

‘Simulations [are]:
classroom activities which reproduce or simulate real situations
and which often involve dramatization and group discussion. In
simulation activities, learners are given roles in a situation, tasks,
or a problem to be solved, and are given instructions to follow
(for example, an employer-employee discussion over wage
increases in a factory). The participants then make decisions and
proposals. Consequences are ‘simulated’ on the basis of
decisions the participants take. They later discuss their actions,
feelings and what happened’ (Richards and Schmidt, 2002
p487).

From the above definitions a few points can be deduced. Firstly, simulation is not drama
in the sense that students have the freedom to act as they wish in given situations. They
are expected to act in context, which means students are expected to be that person, what
Jones, K, (1982) calls ‘reality of function’. Since simulation is not drama then one could
consider it to be role play , and in this regard the literature is obscure. ‘There is little
consensus on the terms used in the role playing and simulation literature. Just a few of
the terms which are used, often interchangeably are “simulation”, “game”, “role-play”…’
(Tompkins, 1998, p1). Clearly whether or nor simulation is a sub-set of role play or a
different genre completely is not exactly clear. According to Jones, F.R., (1991) the
difference is one of length mainly, where lengthier simulations require a greater degree of

4
autonomy from learners. Black (1995) makes a similar assertion, ‘A simulation, then, is
a role play writ large’. I think that the key difference is the degree of realism involved.
In simulations, because they are longer than standard role plays, students are required to
live the role more. I think making this difference is a good idea since it allows us to
examine the whole idea of realism in simulations.

As to the purpose behind simulations then there appears to be a general impression that
simulations offer a means by which thinking and creativity can be increased in the
language classroom and an aid in the process of language acquisition (Jones, F.R., 1991,
Ho and Crookall, 1995, McDonough and Shaw 1993, Tompkins, 1998). They are also
seen ‘as an opportunity for the participants to practice a full range of language skills’
(Jones, L, 1990).

Importance of realism in simulations

Most authors stress the importance of realism in simulations, and many see realism as the
defining character; ‘A simulation is reality of function in a simulated and structured
environment’ (Jones, K, 1982 p5). The theory advanced by Krashen (1979) is of
particular relevance here, since he states that real language data are primary in language
acquisition. (Taylor, 1982). Arishi (1994) talks of a ‘desire for realism’ that has
appeared in recent EFL simulations. McArthur (1987) talks of the need for classrooms to
‘relate to real life out there’, beyond the four walls of the classroom. Realism and the
desire to link the classroom has become an integral part of contemporary ELF curricula
and pedagogies (Delk and Hoger, 2003) and many see it as a vital component in
simulations. Real life activities can also develop the critical thinking and problem
solving skills of students (Tompkins, 1998). Bearing all this in mind then it appears
important that any simulation has the capacity to simulate real life. This is linked to the
issue of motivation and the role motivation plays in language learning. I will consider
this next.

Motivation in Language Learning

Motivation is seen as one of the key reasons for using simulations in the language
classroom (Jones, K, 1982). Contemporary literature sees motivation as being inherent
within simulation activities. There is a strong link between realism in simulations, as
discussed above, and motivation. According to Jones, K., (ibid) the ability of students to
motivate themselves is based purely on the realism of the simulation, ‘It [motivation]
depends only on the participants accepting the reality of their functions’ (Jones, K, 1982,
p10). Jones, K., goes further and says that if this motivation is absent then the activity is
not a simulation (ibid). These ideas are echoed by Bambrough (1994) who says that
simulations are ‘highly motivating’ and that motivation in simulations is ‘entirely
intrinsic’. Robinson makes the point that to ensure their effectiveness, simulations should
be ‘useful’, meaning that they contain elements of interaction that students will find
valuable (Robinson, 1981). Motivation being a key aspect of language learning and
Hedge (2000) puts this into a more general context when she asserts that students with

5
‘natural, positive motivation are often quicker to pick up further ideas from peers or from
the teacher’ (Hedge, 2000, p100). Clearly then motivation is an important issue, can have
wide ranging affects on students abilities in language learning classrooms and activities
and their capacity to be successful in second language acquisition (SLA). From this
perspective simulations appear to be a valuable method of teaching speaking. Motivation
being linked to usefulness means selecting suitable simulations in a correct socio-cultural
context. Before giving an example of a simulation that would be useful in this regard, I
will outline below the context in which it will be used.

Short EAP Courses and British Studies

During the summer months I lecture at the University of Sunderland to oversees students
who enrol on the course out of a necessity to gain a level six point five in the IELTS
scoring system. Students need to attend since no unconditional offers are given by the
university without the required level of English proficiency. Students are mainly of
Asian origin and specifically from mainland China. Courses run for four weeks, between
ten O’clock in the morning until four thirty in the afternoon, with three breaks during the
day, two for light refreshments and one for lunch.

The course is intensive and based around learning objectives, attached as Appendix 1.
The course is designated as English for Academic Purposes (EAP) and British Studies,
which means that in a short space of time students are expected to gain proficiency to a
level that will allow them to function both in an academic context, namely the university
settings and in less formal social settings, hence the British Studies component.

Lecturers are given absolute flexibility in teaching methodology and practice. The only
requirement that the university sets is that each pupil must complete a portfolio of work
that can be assessed in all four key areas: reading, writing, speaking and listening. Other
than this the lecturers are free to teach what and how they wish.

It is in this context and with reference to the learning outcomes that I believe simulations
would be a good teaching method. Learning outcome number one states that on
successful completion of the module students will have demonstrated that they have:

An understanding of the English used in and around the university and that
they can make themselves understood sufficiently to be able to feel
confident in everyday situations using a range of listening and speaking
skills including accurate recognition and production of sounds and
standard patters of intonation, rhythm and stress.

It is also stated that

This course is designed to enable newly arrived international students to

become confident about using their existing English language competence
in and around the university. Initially the focus will be on everyday
situations such as making friends, opening a bank account, joining the

6
 library or sports centre and registering with the police. (For the full text
see appendix 2).

The use of simulations could be used in order to create for the students these experiences,
so that they can practice using the vocabulary they need which will in turn give them
extra confidence (Gonzalez and Pratt, 1994) in dealing with such situations;

‘If one treats simulations as real experiences, participants can be provided

with real insights into those experiences and the implications of them for
the other realities in which they interact in the world outside the structured
experience’ (Ruben and Lederman, 1990, p208)

The EAP course is of such a short duration that teaching of any structure is almost
impossible. Bearing in mind the academic nature of the course and the fact that students
are at university level, we assume that they arrive with a very strong grasp of grammar.
In this regard, what is required more than anything else, is the activation of what is
essentially passive knowledge. Students may possess a strong grasp of the tenses in
English but selecting and using these in the correct form in a real life situation can be a
very daunting task indeed to newly arrived international students. It is here that
simulations can be of such value. As a means of engaging students, who may have a
degree of jet lag, may be struggling to adjust and not be too interested in studying English
language since they may have been studying it for years in their native country, there is
no better way. The key is the motivational value simulations offer, especially if the
simulations are linked to the tasks that the students need to perform, such as opening a
bank account or registering with the police. There are a few constraints in this regard,
specifically regarding culture and I feel it is necessary to comment on this further.

Cultural Constraints in the Classroom

In view of the fact that almost all the students in my class were of Asian origin, a
question of the suitability of simulations arises. In view of what Liu (1998), and others,
have written one has to be careful that activities that work well in western classrooms are
not assumed to work well with students from other culturally diverse backgrounds. In
particular there is a stigma attached to Asian students that they prefer to be active
receivers of knowledge rather than active engagers. Liu refers to China in particular as
an example of ‘cultures with a long tradition of unconditional obedience to authority’
where the teacher is not seen as a facilitator but as a ‘fount of knowledge [to be]
delivered’ (Liu, 1998, p5). This entire thesis is challenged by Littlewood (2000). In a
revealing piece of research where he questioned students from a variety of backgrounds
as to their attitudes to learning he found that there was little difference between ‘western’
and ‘eastern’ students. His conclusion that ‘Asian students do not, in fact, wish to be
spoonfed from an all-knowing fount of knowledge’ (ibid, p34) appears to fly in the face
of what has unfortunately become accepted doctrine for many EFL practitioners. There
did appear to be severe limitations to Littlewood’s research, not least due to the fact that
his data was collected by questionnaire distribution to EFL students, and that it is indeed
possible that such students were in an EFL class, being taught most likely a

7
communicative curriculum and hence very receptive to interactionist ideas. A truer
sample would have been to take students from general education in different countries.
Despite such limitations, Littlewood’s research did offer an interesting new insight into a
much debated topic. Littlewood concludes his essay with the point that we can not deny
cultural influences on classroom behaviour but that these should not be simplified and
that ‘we still have a long way to go in exploring the nature and extent of this influence’
(ibid, p34). In line with these ideas Ho and Crookall (1995) examine the
implementation of interactive tasks in classrooms with Chinese students. In selecting
tasks that are suitable for use in my classroom I have taken, in line with the findings of
Ho and Crookall, cultural context into consideration;

In seeking to create learning environments that will facilitate and enhance

the development of learner autonomy teachers need to take into account
the obstacles that may impede its development. This includes the barriers
that are put up by cultural values and the norms for appropriate classroom
behaviour that reflects these values. (Ho and Crookall 1995, p238).

Example Activities

I have included as appendix 2 a sample simulation activity. The title of the activity is
World News Magazine. Since the course is designated as being EAP and British Studies,
it is with this latter aim in mind that I have selected this particular exercise. Through
interaction with regional and national media students will gain access to the main ideas
and themes of UK society. The example consists of several tasks but key to these are the
news stories around which the broadcast will be based. I will not be using the stories
outlined in the article but instead contemporary updated examples will be used. As for
the topic of the story, a good idea would be to consult students on what they are
interested in. If students, for example, are interested in sports, then sports articles will be
used etc. This concept of teaching to the students’ interests has been called
topicalisation, and ‘investigation of topicalisation…suggest that whatever is topicalised
by the learners, rather than by the teacher, has a better chance of being claimed to have
been learned’ (Slimani, 1989).

Generally simulations consist of three main sections or phases; preparation or briefing,

the simulation itself and the follow up or debrief (Jones, L., 1989). I will comment on
each of these briefly.

Briefing

One place to start with preparation may be to introduce students to the concept of
simulations, what they are about and the purpose behind them (Jones, K, 1987). This is
also an opportunity to emphasis the role of the teacher and that students need to run the
simulations themselves. Another key aspect of the simulation is the teaching of the
necessary vocabulary to be used. This is partly covered in the ‘useful language’ section,
although it does appear to be rather brief. I would expand this section to cover more
vocabulary, I would also cover in more detail the different vocabulary needs of the

8
students to ensure that it was clear to the students that this was not simply a game but was
a language learning exercise. One of the criticisms that could be made is that students
could easily misinterpret the exercise and simply use it as an excuse to relax or waste
time. If there is a strong focus on the language aims this can be avoided.

As part of the talking point, one change may be to introduce into the fray, in the high
technology environment of a university, information technology, by giving students the
opportunity to watch news broadcasts on the BBC’s website or similar sites and asking
them to detect certain language points or phrases with correct intonation. If made
interactive, in this way, it ‘is more likely that the information in the briefing will be
assimilated if there is active participation’ (Bullard, 1990, p55). This would also add to
the motivation of students The talking point is an important part of the simulation for it
introduces the topic to the students and can be vital in raising motivation (Jones, L,
1989).

Implementing a Simulation

There are a number of considerations for a teacher when engaging in a simulation, these
include but are not limited to language, role allocation, time limits etc. Of these the issue
of language perhaps offers the most important aspect with respect to language learning.
The idea of attempting to regulate the use of language in a simulation appears to be
somewhat of a paradox since the whole idea of a simulation is to give the students the
freedom to converse without restriction. The problem is that if you do not do control the
language there is no guarantee that there will be any recycling of the target vocabulary.
In the extreme a simulation becomes closer to a game than a learning exercise. This can
be overcome by working with the students on the target language in the briefing stage.
Stress can be laid on structures that students are expected to use, and in my academic
context I would even advise students that some of the structures must be used to ensure
decent marks in assessment. Again, this does appear to be somewhat of a paradox and so
there does appear to be a trade off here between allowing the simulation to run freely and
trying to hit language targets. It is for the teacher to decide which of these is more
important. If a class is really struggling with reticence, as some of my classes have been,
then it may be an idea to ignore language aims and allow the students a free reign in the
first instance in the belief that in subsequent simulations it will be easier to focus on
language items (Horner and McGinley, 1990).

Debrief

The debrief is a major component of the simulation (Jones, L, 1989), in fact Bambrough
(1994) sees it as the most critical component. There are two major components to
debrief, one is language the other is behaviour. (Bullard, 1990). Since these simulations
are to be carried out with university level students, the behavioural aspect can be as
important as the language briefing. There are generally a number of ways to debrief
(ibid) but despite the method the nature of the debrief remains the same. The debrief is
the opportunity for the teacher to ensure that target language is highlighted. Since the

9
teacher may have been a passive observer during the whole process this may be the only
opportunity to correct mistakes and suggest alternative behaviour or structures.

Conclusion

In this essay I have attempted to show how simulations are a good method of teaching
spoken language. I began by investigating the theoretical underpinnings of contemporary
curriculum design and found that whilst there was a move away from adopting a best
method approach to language teaching by some theorists the preponderance of literature
still favoured a CLT approach. Having shown this I then proceeded to offer a
comprehensive definition of what a communicative curriculum is.

I followed this by introducing the concept of simulations, explaining how they were
communicative tasks and hence good tools to teach spoken language. I deconstructed the
components of simulations and focussed in on the importance of realism in the
simulation. This was followed by a discussion of the link between realism and
motivation. The point was made that realism was a key factor in ensuring student
motivation.

At this point I explained the context in which I would implement the example simulation
given in appendix 2. I discussed the cultural composition of the class and then briefly
investigated the myth that Asian students were not interested in interactive tasks. I
supported the claim that this was not true by adducing some research which showed that
this was not necessarily the case. The final part of my assignment introduced the
example activity in detail and discussed the various phases of a simulation.

As possible future avenues of research, there is clearly a need to investigate Asian

attitudes to classroom interaction further and in particular the link between simulation
activity and second language acquisition in Asian classrooms. If sufficient proof can be
established as to their effectiveness as learning tools, reticence to simulations will no
doubt decrease.

10