Improving Second Language Speaking Proficiency via Interactional Feedback

Abstract

Researchers have suggested that interactional feedback is associated with foreign/second language learning because it prompts learners to notice foreign/second language forms. Using Vygotsky's zone of proximal development and Long's interaction hypothesis as conceptual frameworks, this study explores the use of systematic explicit feedback to undergraduates (N = 1180) at three assessment points throughout one semester using digital voice recording technology for oral assessments. Results indicate that statistically significant differences were found in pronunciation, linguistic structure, and content from the first to last observation. Findings suggest serious implications for improving speaking proficiency, which promote the use of combining digital technology for oral language formative and summative assessment with quality, systematic, and in-depth feedback to students.guages. While 98% of Canadian residents speak at least one of the country's official languages, bilingualism in the two official languages is much less pervasive (Multiculturalism and Citizenship Canada, 2006). Unfortunately, the same is true in the United States and research indicates that the status of S/FL study as a school subject in many other English-speaking countries such as New Zealand is very low (Sun Hoe & Elder, 2008). LITERATURE REVIEWFor several decades there has been reference to communicative language teaching from around the world (Burnaby & Sun, 1989;Nunan, 1987; DOI: 10.4018/javet.2010100102 18 International Journal of Adult Vocational Education and Technology, 1(4), 17-30, October-December 2010 Copyright © 2010, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited. Sato & Kleinsasser, 1999). When S/FL instructors who claim to use a communicative approach are asked to define it, typically there are a variety of vague responses and many misconceptions such as they believe that as long as you do not teach grammar in the classroom, your approach is communicative. Furthermore, Gatbonton and Segalowitz (2005) find that genuinely communicative classrooms are in the minority. While communicative language teaching includes some focus on language structures through corrective feedback (Lightbown & Spada, 1999;Lyster & Ranta, 1997), it is important to note that the notion of communicative language teaching implies more than the mere transfer of information, and when applied to S/FL teaching, it entails the development of competence, not just skill. Savignon (1985) states that "interest in communicative competence has not only not waned, it continues to grow and has lead to the elaboration of descriptive models that have in turn provided frameworks for further research into the nature and acquisition of second language proficiency" (p. 129). In their definitions of communicative competence, some authors' mention interaction as a sine qua non quality (Rivers, 1973; Savignon, 1978). Others stress the need for this interaction to be meaningful (VanPatten,...

Measuring Language Learners’ Speaking Proficiency in a Second Language Using Economical Digital Tools

“…Such advances in the teaching and learning of languages have spawned a body of research centered on the multiple uses of emerging technologies and their potential uses within the context of oral proficiency and assessment (Chan, 2003;Kvavik, 2005;Volle, 2005;Zhao, 2005). This chapter is guided by my research with several colleagues on the integration of digital tools for oral language assessment Swanson, Early, & Baumann, 2011;Swanson & Schlig, 2010).…”

Digital Recording Platforms and Integrated Performance Assessments in Second/Foreign Language Learning

“…Among the research findings regarding the use of Audacity in S/FL teaching and learning, student performance anxiety had been found to decrease while learner confidence about their own success in the S/FL learning process had been found to increase (Swanson, Early, & Baumann, 2011). Additionally, the research indicated that instructors noted an increase in valuable instructional time, more flexibility when scoring student performances, and that having a digital artifact that was archivable led to more reliable scoring of student proficiency (Early & Swanson, 2008;Swanson & Schlig, 2010).…”

“…The author's research exploring the use of Audacity for assessing student speaking performance began in 2006 as faculty members at Georgia State University (USA) began to develop procedures and pilot test different voice recording systems in order to examine student speaking proficiency in more than a dozen languages and the effects of immediate instructor feedback (Swanson & Schlig, 2010). After carefully examining a variety of options, the Wimba ® voice recorder (Wimba, 2008) was selected because it could be embedded in the course management system (uLearn).…”

“…Combined with emerging technologies, the new labs revolutionized language teaching and learning in schools by allowing learners to become more integrated in the language learning process as they entered the worlds of blogging, podcasting, and creating and using thousands of apps designed for language learners. Such advances in language learning have generated a body of research that focuses on emerging technologies and their potential uses within the context of oral proficiency and assessment (Chan, 2003;Early & Swanson, 2008;Kvavik, 2005;Swanson & Schlig, 2010;Volle, 2005;Zhao, 2005).…”

Digital Recording Platforms and Integrated Performance Assessments in Second/Foreign Language Learning

“…For S/FL teachers, classroom time is lost when assessing students using the traditional face-to-face method. Assessing students' speaking proficiency using integrated performance assessments using free and open source digital recording platforms holds promise for P-20 instructors as well as language learners (Early & Swanson, 2008;Kvavik, 2005;Swanson, Early, & Baumann, 2011;Swanson & Schlig, 2010;Volle, 2005;Zhao, 2005). Such performance assessments may be able to decrease students' perceptions of irrelevance of language learning tasks, increase the reliability of the assessment, and provide important artifacts that can be used to document student achievement in the target language.…”