CC BY
13Volume 8 Issue 3, 2024, pp. 73-85
doi: 10.22363/2521-442X-2024-8-3-73-85
Original Research
Unblocking fluency: The power of pairwork, group discussion, and presentation in boosting speaking skills
by Behnam Behforouz and Ali Al Ghaithi
Behnam Behforouz
ORCID 0000-0002-0078-2757 h [email protected] University of Technology and Applied Sciences, Shinas, Oman
Ali Al Ghaithi
ORCID 0000-0002-9653-508X h [email protected] Sohar University, Oman
Article history Received March 9, 2024 | Revised August 20, 2024 | Accepted September 2, 2024 Conflicts of interest The authors declared no conflicts of interest Research funding No funding was reported for this research doi 10.22363/2521-442X-2024-8-3-73-85
For citation Behforouz, B., & Al Ghaithi, A. (2024). Unblocking fluency: The power of pairwork, group discussion, and presentation in boosting speaking skills. Training, Language and Culture, 8(3), 73-85.
This study attempts to measure the three commonly used techniques: pairwork, group discussion, and presentation in speaking classes. In addition, it compared the techniques to find out which leads to better performance of students in speaking skills. To collect the required data, 48 Omani undergraduates were randomly assigned to three experimental and one control group, with 12 students each. To ensure similar speaking proficiency levels, pre-tests of speaking were conducted. During the treatment period, experimental group A engaged in pairwork activities to achieve the speaking tasks, experimental group B was exposed to the presentation preparations, and experimental group C was allowed to work on group discussion activities. The control group followed the in-class instruction similar to experimental groups but without conscious engagement in any specific technique. After two weeks of the treatment, post-tests of speaking were conducted. The results revealed that the group mainly focused on the pairwork achieved significantly better than the other groups. The presentation group was in second place regarding better speaking skills performance. Although the experimental group C (group discussion) and the control group showed slight progress in the post-test, their performance was insignificant. The findings of the study are insightful for teachers and students.
KEYWORDS: pairwork, group discussion, presentation, undergraduates, speaking skills
This is an open access article distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0), which allows its unrestricted use for non-commercial purposes, subject to attribution. The material can be shared/adapted for non-commercial purposes if you give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made.
Speaking is crucial for human communication because it is the most tangible way for humans to connect (Bohari, 2019). According to Ur (2000), as cited in Aristy et al. (2019), speaking is the most crucial of the four skills. Brown (2004) characterises speaking as an ability that can be examined both explicitly and empirically, which undermines the validity and reliability of an oral output exam. According to Harmer (2007), speaking is a skill that can be used to communicate fluently, which requires an understanding of language characteristics and the ability to organise information and language quickly. Speaking produces vocal sounds using various anatomical components, including the tongue, teeth, lips, vocal tracts, and vocal cords. Individuals can use it to articulate their ideas, perspectives, opinions, thoughts, and emotions and engage in dialogue. Information is
1. INTRODUCTION
frequently communicated through spoken language. Speakers can enhance the effectiveness of verbal communication by employing their speaking abilities to convey messages through passion, consideration, and persuasion. Given that speaking is the most prominent of the four language skills (listening, writing, speaking, and reading, among others), it can be asserted that competent and efficient speaking can significantly enhance an individual's values (Dewi, 2023). Additionally, it can afford the speaker significant benefits, such as the capacity to educate, establish connections with others, exert influence and direction, offer one's perspective on diverse subjects, differentiate oneself from others, advance one's career, satisfy personal needs and desires, and adapt appropriately to environmental demands. Given that learning is a process through which learners acquire various skills, speaking ability can be regarded as one of the most critical
© Behnam Behforouz, Ali Al Ghaithi 2024
Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
Volume 8 Issue 3, 2024, pp. 73-85 doi: 10.22363/2521-442X-2024-8-3-73-85
components of the learning process. Proficient speakers must be able to employ vocabulary, grammar and pronunciation, among other things, in an appropriate manner and within a proper context. Hence, imparting proficient speaking abilities to students through the instruction of speaking skills components, including grammatical rules, accurate vocabulary, comprehension, and fluency in pronunciation, becomes imperative (Borah, 2020).
The classification of speaking includes monologues and dialogues. The former entails delivering an interrupted oral presentation, while the latter involves conversing with other speakers (Nunan, 1999). In addition to transactional (information transmission) and interactional (social relationship maintenance) roles, speaking can also fulfil one of two primary purposes (Brown & Yule, 1983). According to Nunan (1999) and Burkart and Sheppard (2004), the capacity to conduct a conversation in the (target) language is an indicator of successful language acquisition. As a result, communication is likely to be the primary focus for most English language learners (Florez, 1999). Importantly, speaking instruction enables pupils to develop the necessary EFL speaking skills to communicate naturally and impromptu with native speakers. In addition, speaking can increase general learners' motivation and create a lively and entertaining environment in the English language classroom if appropriate speaking activities are incorporated into the curriculum (Nunan, 1999; Celce-Murcia, 2001). According to Gass and Varionis ( 1994), oral interaction has been identified as a significant determinant in the formation of learners' language development. For example, research has demonstrated that speaking instruction can facilitate growth in reading proficiency, writing ability, and listening aptitude (Newton & Nation, 2020).
The development of speaking proficiency is a fundamental skill that enables students to engage in effective communication across various contexts (Riadil, 2020). Speaking and communicating fluently and practically sounds crucial for foreign language learners. Speaking ability constitutes the primary expertise required to acquire a second language. Brown and Yule (1983) assert that speaking is the skill upon which students will be evaluated most of the time. Despite its considerable importance, speaking abilities have been undervalued, with most instructors continuing to teach speaking abilities like drill repetition or discourse retention. In light of the contemporary demand for students to possess relational skills, English instructors must impart these skills to enhance their students' speaking abilities and perform admirably in real-life situations. Currently, oral abilities are often disregarded in the teaching environment. Insufficient emphasis on crucial elements of language, including phonological, morphological, semantic, and syntactic aspects, has resulted in a substantial barrier for English Language Learners (ELLs) in attaining proficiency in spoken English among their peers. Following recognition of the importance of oral communication skills, there is currently a greater emphasis on developing students' speaking abilities to successfully pursue their academic endeavours and succeed in their chosen disciplines upon completing their education (Zannrni, 2022).
The student's capacity to communicate proficiently must be reinforced in the speaking class through efficient classroom management and instruction in speaking skills (Miranda & Wahyudin, 2023). Bueno et al (2006) stated that students' speaking abilities are often below standard due to numerous factors involved, including ineffective instructional methods. Instructors often failed to emphasise the importance of speaking ability, emphasising reading and writing instead. Additionally, lack of discipline was a factor when students had no opportunities to engage in speaking skills exercises. Lack of confidence and shyness were among the other reasons for this challenge.
Marzuki et al (2016) stated that academics have become much more interested in enhancing language learners' communicative competence during the teaching and learning process. Hence, numerous scholars, including Shahini and Riazi (2011) and Farida and Sofwan (2012), have focused on learners' speaking engagement and devised methods to enhance their speaking proficiency. Consequently, this perspective has garnered substantial support globally. For instance, Ko§ar and Bedir (2014) assert that enhancing learners' speaking proficiency is a critical skill that enables them to communicate directly. Similarly, Razm-joo and Ardekani (2011) asserted that there is a significant expectation for instructors to encourage students to express their thoughts and perspectives. Hence, fostering proficient communication has become critical in pedagogical and educational processes (Boonkit, 2010). As Richard and Renandya (2002) and Graham (2007) suggested, the imperative of acquiring proficiency in speaking must provide numerous benefits for the learning process, particularly regarding speaking ability.
For most students, acquiring the talent of speaking English is seen as challenging. That is why many students lack genuine passion in speaking activities. Consequently, many learners cannot communicate in English, even at a basic level. Most learners receive only a minimal amount of exposure to the language. They struggle to grasp authentic instances of English or apply this language in their everyday experience. These settings significantly hinder the effectiveness of the teaching and learning process, particularly in the speaking class (Febriyanti, 2012). Defrioka (2009) studied the difficulties learners face when speaking English. The research found that a common challenge for EFL teachers is handling passive classes, where learners are unresponsive and reluctant to interact with the teacher and their peers. This is particularly accurate when a teacher actively encourages engagement in teacher-student dialogue, such as posing questions to the entire class and anticipating a response from at least one student. Ur (2000) states several issues are associated with speaking activities. These include learners feeling hesitant to speak a foreign language in the classroom, lacking motivation to express themselves, low or unequal participation, and a tendency to rely on their native language. According to Padmadewi (1998), learners who participate in speaking classes typically experience anxiety because they feel pressured by the speaking assignments that require them to communicate separately and spontaneously within a limited timeframe.
by Behnam Behforouz and Ali Al Ghaithi
Speaking is a sophisticated ability that involves three main components: discourse and language understanding (including pronunciation, grammar, vocabulary, and discourse), fundamental speaking abilities (such as splitting, signalling intention, and turn-taking), and communication strategies (such as paraphrasing, rephrasing, and approximation) (Goh & Burns, 2012). Nevertheless, if speaking activities are conducted without a well-defined and organised pedagogy specifically targeting speaking abilities and tactics, students may have limited opportunities to enhance their proficiency in language and communication over time (Chou, 2021). Prior research has established that language acquisition is impossible without ample opportunity for meaningful repetition. Practice is critical for the internalisation of language. This is achieved through meaningful tasks that require oral language interactions and opportunities to produce language (Leong & Ahmadi, 2016). Asher (2003) supported the idea that learners tend to emulate spoken language immediately after their instructors' modelling. Therefore, the present study attempted to investigate the effects of the three most frequent engagement techniques - pairwork, presentation, and group discussion - on the speaking performance of undergraduate students. To this end, the following research questions (RQs) will be answered at the end of the study.
RQ1: Does pairwork in class improve the speaking performance of Omani undergraduate students?
RQ2: Does class presentation improve the speaking performance of Omani undergraduate students?
RQ3: Does group discussion improve Omani undergraduate students' speaking performance?
RQ4: Which technique prepares students for better speaking performance?
2. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
2.1. Pairwork and speaking
Pairwork is a method for increasing student participation and language use. This method can be implemented in many contexts, including speaking, reading, and writing. One approach used in Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) is pairwork. This requires students to work in pairs and complete teacher-assigned assignments through collaboration (Harmer, 2001).
According to Richards and Schmidt (2013), pair work is an educational activity in which students collaborate. According to Spada and Lightbown (1999), students can attain greater knowledge and performance when working in an interactive environment than when working independently. Therefore, this pair-work technique is appropriate for enhancing students' speaking skills, as the pairwork activity requires students to interact with their partners. Additionally, the teacher will have a simpler time exercising control, and every student will participate actively (Millah, 2009). Mulya (2016) found pairwork useful for enhancing students' speaking performance. Susanto (2013) subsequently argued that students' speaking proficiency could be enhanced via the pairwork technique. Baleghizadeh and Far-hesh (2014) concluded that pair work can increase students'
motivation. Pairwork was defined as any student-student interaction without the teacher's intervention. As a result, pairwork interactions occurred when learners engaged in independent, inperson work and exchanged information with minimal instructor intervention (Phipps, 1999).
Taka (2020) demonstrated that the pairwork technique is an effective method for instructing and fostering the development of student competencies. It is advantageous for students to learn collectively when collaborating with partners because it allows them to exchange ideas and provide mental support. Moreover, Baleghizadeh and Farhesh (2014) conducted a scholarly investigation to examine the impact of pairwork on EFL students' motivation. The findings suggest that students prefer to work in pairs because it allows for greater discussion and interaction. They also felt more at ease in conversing with their peers in English. Pairwork activities were found to impact students' motivation to learn positively. Furthermore, Achmad and Yusuf (2014) demonstrated that most students benefited from pairwork activities implemented by instructors. The manner and structure of the interaction significantly influence students' academic performance and language mastery in a classroom setting. Students can experience reduced anxiety and increased participation in the learning process by working in pairs (Rianti et al., 2022).
It is hypothesised that students will engage in more active collaboration with their companions during pairwork interactions, as opposed to individual or group work, in which certain students may exert dominance over the interaction episode while others remain apathetically passive. Therefore, pairwork assignments are anticipated to increase student motivation and alleviate monotony in teaching and learning processes (Jones, 2007).
2.2. Presentation skills and speaking
A presentation is a teaching approach in which the presenter uses words primarily to present, analyse, and explain specific subjects in an organised manner. The presentation approach remains a useful tool for knowledge exchange and comprehension among learners. With this approach, instructors can mentor students as they take on the role of presenters. Following each presentation, some teachers enabled the pupils to critique and comment each other's views while also asking pointed questions to which the presenter responded eloquently. This approach involves the learner (presenter) taking on a fully proactive role, from organising, gathering, and studying documents to delivering presentation content to the class (Huong & Thuy, 2024).
Presentations are a rigorously structured kind of public speaking that requires formal language and a systematic scientific approach to delivery. To deliver relevant content in a specified amount of time, the presenter will proactively make presentations understandable, appealing, and logical (Tuyen, 2010). Presenting techniques should always use the presenter's skills, such as in-depth knowledge, language, and a strong ability
Volume 8 Issue 3, 2024, pp. 73-85 doi: 10.22363/2521-442X-2024-8-3-73-85
to inspire others. Accordingly, this teaching approach will help students develop critical thinking and public speaking skills (Huong & Thuy, 2024).
Presentation is one of the most essential and crucial ways for students to learn a language, particularly to enhance speaking and presentation abilities. Students' linguistic and soft skills are trained using this method. These two elements give students courage, confidence, and practice in accurate and fluent presentation. Students discuss the subjects they deliver in their presentations. So, they must possess a broad vocabulary and precise comprehension of the material. They must also select words for presentations that are highly expressive and more valued than ordinary words. Over time, this will assist students in learning additional terms and applying words in different contexts. Students can also fix pronunciation and word usage mistakes through presentations. Given their important roles, presentation techniques are essential for teaching and learning because they give students the confidence to enhance their speaking abilities in a clear, concise, and fluent manner. In addition to mastering the material, students can enhance their listening comprehension to support their speaking abilities using a presentation approach (Huong & Thuy, 2024).
Students learn something new during an oral presentation, and when questions regarding the subject are posed by the audience, they may feel inspired to speak more. By employing this strategy, they would gain greater confidence and learn how to conduct a formal conversation in front of others. King (2002) stated that giving an oral presentation is a fulfilling and engaging experience that helps students gain confidence in front of the class and teachers improve their skills. Additionally, because oral presentation uses all four abilities in a naturally linked fashion, it aids students in gathering, researching, organising, and constructing information (Putri, 2019).
Oral presentations are now a practical and efficient means of improving students' knowledge of communication skills (Pu-tri, 2019). Miles (2009) states that oral presentations help students concentrate primarily on language development. This is a means of enhancing students' practical skills. Additionally, learners' performance skills were enhanced when they listened to the speakers. One of the exercises that students complete as part of classes to raise their proficiency levels is giving an oral presentation in front of the class (King, 2002).
Classroom presentations can help teachers improve students' linguistic proficiency in presenting ideas. Since students can listen to others' presentations and pick up the needed structures, presentations can help students improve their speaking abilities. Presentation is one activity that allows students to interact with other students in class and increase their willingness to learn the language (Brooks & Wilson, 2014). According to Girard et al. (2011), giving presentations encourages students to learn a language and gives them more opportunities to engage and participate in class. According to Sirisrimangkorn (2021), using presentations as a teaching and learning method helps students to become more proficient. It was found that students
could improve their self-confidence when speaking in front of their peers. Additionally, using this strategy, students who participate in speaking classes can fix their speaking problems more easily.
Mantra et al. (2022) stated that presentations are a highly helpful method for students to learn English and can be utilised by students at any level to improve their speaking skills. It was also asserted that well-prepared, organised, and delivered presentations boosted students' self-esteem and confidence in their ability to speak and to pronounce words correctly.
2.3. Groupwork and speaking
Harmer (1998) asserted that students have numerous opportunities to express their opinions and ideas during small group discussions, where interaction can develop unknowingly as they discuss the material collectively. Harmer (2001) asserts that the instructor may find small group discussions beneficial in structuring students' engagement in language activities involving role-play or narrative groups.
Teachers use small-group discussions to foster communication freedom, allowing students to speak their native tongues without inhibition in the classroom. Certain elements require attention when facilitating group discussions. These elements influence the responsibilities of the students, instructors, and classes. Regarding group discussions, instructors must possess class organisation skills. Typically, one group member and one leader participate in group discussions. For the discussion to be productive and efficient, students must be aware of their responsibility within the group (Crisianita & Mandasari, 2022).
Small group discussions serve social, emotive, and intellectual purposes. The discussion enhances participants' intellectual awareness by exposing them to various perspectives on a given subject. From an emotional perspective, participants may experience a degree of personal investment in learning. Establishing trust and cohesion with one another is a social necessity. Engaging in small-group discussions fosters the development of participants' interpersonal skills and self-assurance when expressing personal viewpoints (Dael et al., 2019).
According to Wilen and Kindsvatter (2000), students can assume greater responsibility for their learning, develop social and leadership abilities, and participate in a different learning approach through small-group discussions. Group discussions aim to facilitate the exchange and comprehension of information about a specific subject matter and evaluate and formulate general conclusions based on the information and supporting evidence (Dael et al., 2019).
Ur (2000) posited that small-group discussions provide students with greater opportunities for interaction, questioning, and elaboration with their peers, which enhances their understanding and learning beyond what they would experience in a teacher-centred setting. The small-group discussion learning method can inspire students to voice their thoughts and viewpoints. More meaningful learning will occur in the classroom when pupils dare to voice their opinions. Small group discussion learning
by Behnam Behforouz and Ali Al Ghaithi
methods are distinct from demonstration and lecture-based learning methods, in which students locate and organise their learning materials (Mogea, 2019).
Group discussions are essential for assessing students' ability to collaborate and express their viewpoints with their peers. Instructors may use group discussions as a learning tool for their students (Naibaho, 2019). The students with proficient speaking abilities aspire to assist their peers who struggle with speaking or are less receptive to the material explained by the instructor. Group discussions facilitate the development of each member's observations and responses (Narjes & Ebrahim, 2015, as cited in Sudirman, 2018).
3. MATERIAL AND METHODS
3.1. Participants
The sample population of this study was selected from 48 Omani undergraduate students who were studying at the Preparatory Studies Centre in one of the higher education institutes in Oman. Preparatory studies prepare the students for basic courses such as English, IT, and Mathematics to move to their specialisations in higher education departments. It is worth mentioning that before entrance to any proficiency level, the college gives the students a placement test, and based on the results, students are distributed to elementary, pre-intermediate, intermediate, and upper-intermediate levels.
The selected participants had intermediate English proficiency levels and spoke Arabic as their native language. The age range of the students was 20 to 22 years old.
The participants were randomly divided into four groups, including three experimental and one control with an equal number of 12 students.
Experimental group A had 12 students divided into six pairs. Three pairs were females, and three were male students. Experimental group B also had the same number of students, but they were the participants preparing themselves for presentations within the class. The students were a combination of six males and six females. Experimental group C consisted of 12 students divided into three groups: two groups of female students and one group of male students. Finally, 12 students were included in the control group, which consisted of a combination of 6 males and 6 females.
3.2. Instruments
3.2.1. Pathway series books
The study participants must be able to pass all the assessments related to the Pathway Series (Second Edition) developed by National Geographic Learning. There are two books at each level: one for reading and writing skills and the other for listening and speaking skills. Each book has different units, divided into three lessons: lesson A, lesson B, and lesson C. Each lesson starts with 10 new vocabulary units following a short matching activity of words and their meanings. Then, the listening section is available, which covers all of the 10 words from the lesson. After listening, there are speaking activities such as
presentations on graphs, group discussions, pairwork activities, and interviews, which help the students use the new words within the lesson.
3.2.2. Speaking tests
Since this study focused on the students' speaking skills, pre-tests and post-tests of speaking were conducted promptly. The researchers followed the university's speaking exam format and rubrics. The speaking exam for this proficiency level had three sections. In the first section, each student must introduce himself, followed by a common question related to his daily life. In the second section, students were given cue cards with a topic, a short explanation, and some questions as the guide. Each student had one minute to look at the card and take some notes on the piece of paper that the examiners provided. The final section, which usually lasted for 4 to 5 minutes, was dedicated to discussion related to the question of the previous section. The total speaking score was 20 for the intermediate students. Students' speaking ability was measured using the following criteria: fluency, coherence, lexical resources, grammatical range, accuracy, and pronunciation.
It is worth noting that before conducting the pre-tests, many of the topics were selected from the main source of the speaking exam folder, and their validity was confirmed by three Applied Linguistics experts within the department. In addition, two people were conducting the pre-tests and post-tests to ensure the objectivity of scores, similar to real speaking exam sessions.
3.3. Procedures
The present study was conducted during the spring semester of 2023-2024 in one of the higher education institutes in Oman. Before the treatment's implementation, the study's objectives were thoroughly explained to the students, and it was ensured that their performance in this study would not affect their regular, continuous assessment. Therefore, participation in this study was voluntary.
After explaining the process, a pre-test of speaking was conducted for three days to ensure the homogeneity of participants. The interviews were conducted for two hours, and each speaking session lasted 10 minutes.
After conducting the exam for all learners and collecting their scores, they were divided into three experimental and one control group. Although their seating patterns differed, they all received the same instruction, time allocated to speaking, and materials. In addition to each lesson unit, the teacher distributed extra materials to improve the students' speaking skills. For example, materials related to the use of effective utterances in presentation, using pause fillers, or appropriate eye contact were explained to all experimental and control groups. In these three experimental groups, the students received support from the teacher to monitor their progress. Experimental group A focused on speaking sessions using pairwork, experimental group B's focus was on presentation, and experimental group C worked on
Volume 8 Issue 3, 2024, pp. 73-85 doi: 10.22363/2521-442X-2024-8-3-73-85
group discussion techniques to improve speaking skills. Notably, the students in the experimental group worked alone to prepare presentations on the book's topics. Sometimes, these topics were on pie charts or bar graphs, and the participants in this group presented their understanding to the class.
In the control group, the participants followed the instructions from their teacher to cover the delivery plan and assignments within the book, and there were no extra materials for them. In addition, there were no specific grouping formats or group progress checks. The participants received only general tips on delivering better speaking skills.
Table 1
The Shapiro-Wilk test of normality in the pre-test of all groups
The whole experience lasted for two weeks; after that, another 3-day speaking session was conducted as a post-test to measure the effectiveness of the above techniques in improving speaking skills.
4. STUDY RESULTS
Before comparing the four groups based on their pre-test scores, it was necessary to find the appropriate parametric or nonparametric comparison test. To this end, the Shapiro-Wilk test of normality was conducted, and the results for the four groups are shown in Table 1.
GROUPS STATISTIC DF SIG.
Experimental A .933 12 .411
Experimental B .957 12 .738
Experimental C .930 12 .381
Control .953 12 .682
Based on Table 1, in all groups, sig. level is greater than the p-value (p>0.05). Therefore, it can be concluded that the data in all groups were distributed normally. Therefore, the parametric ANOVA test was the best option for comparison. Table 2 shows the results of the pre-test of all groups.
As shown in Table 2, sig. was 0.764, greater than 0.05, meaning there was no significant difference between the groups in the pre-test of speaking. Before measuring the post-test of speaking among the groups, a normality test was conducted to choose a suitable parametric or nonparametric test. Table 3 shows the Shapiro-Wilk test of normality.
As shown in Table 3, the significance level is greater than 0.05; therefore, it can be concluded that all sets have a normal data distribution. Based on these findings, a parametric one-way ANOVA test was selected. Table 4 shows the results of comparisons among all groups.
The results of the one-way ANOVA in Table 4 revealed significant differences between the experimental and control groups because the significance value of 0.000 suggested that the differences between the groups are highly observable. To measure the effect of this difference and to determine which group outperformed the others, LSD multiple comparisons were performed. Table 5 below shows the performance of each group from pre-test to post-test based on the mean difference.
As shown in Table 5, from pre-test to post-test, the greatest improvement was exhibited by Exp. A, as the average score increased from 9.7500 to 15.0000, a gain of 5.2500. In the next case below, a less dramatic improvement is seen in Exp. B: from 9.7500 to 12.7500. Exp. C gained 2.0833 points in the mean,
from 9.2500 to 11.3333; the control group appeared to show the least change, gaining 1.0000 points from a mean of 9.3333 to a mean of 10.3333. This data should show that the intervention used in Exp. A was most effective, followed by Exp. B and Exp. C, with the Control group being the least improved. Table 6 shows the results of the comparative analysis.
As shown in Table 6, the comparison of experimental groups with the control group showed significant differences in post-test performance. The results indicated a mean difference of 4.667 in Experimental A, 2.417 in Experimental B, and 1.000 in Experimental C compared to the control group. These results imply that compared to the control group, all experimental interventions resulted in noticeably higher post-test scores, except for experimental group C. The results of this group did not show any significant difference from the control group; therefore, it can be concluded that group discussion did not remarkably increase students' speaking performance.
Table 5 could also be used to compare all the experimental groups to measure the effectiveness of speaking techniques in teaching and learning processes. Based on the results, Experimental group A (pairwork) demonstrated a significantly high mean difference among the other groups. This revealed that pairwork in the speaking class helped improve students' performance. Experimental group B (presentation) showed intermediate performance, which was lower than that of Experiment A and higher than that of Experiment C. Among all groups, Experimental C (group discussion) showed the lowest mean scores, indicating that group discussion had the lowest impact on students' speaking performance.
by Behnam Behforouz and Ali Al Ghaithi
Table 2
One-Way ANOVA to compare the pre-test of all groups
SUM OF SQUARES DF MEAN SQUARE F SIG.
Between groups 2.562 3 .854 .386 .764
Within groups 97.417 44 2.214
Total 99.979 47
Table 3
The Shapiro-Wilk test of normality for all the groups in the post-test
GROUPS STATISTIC DF SIG.
Experimental A .910 12 .212
Experimental B PRE-TEST .957 12 .738
Experimental C .927 12 .348
Control .953 12 .682
Table 4
The results of one -way ANOVA in the post-test of all groups
SUM OF SQUARES DF MEAN SQUARE F SIG.
Between groups 147.396 3 49.132 24.132 .000
Within groups 89.583 44 2.036
Total 236.979 47
Table 5
The descriptive statistics of all groups from pre-test to post-test
MEAN N STD. DEV. STD.ER.
EXP. A pre-test 9.7500 12 1.48477 .42862
post-test 15.0000 12 1.20605 .34816
EXP. B pre-test 9.7500 12 1.42223 .41056
post-test 12.7500 12 1.42223 .41056
EXP. C pre-test 9.2500 12 1.54479 .44594
post-test 11.3333 12 1.55700 .44947
CON. pre-test 9.3333 12 1.49747 .43228
post-test 10.3333 12 1.49747 .43228
Volume 8 Issue 3, 2024, pp. 73-85 doi: 10.22363/2521-442X-2024-8-3-73-85
Table 6
The results of the comparison of groups on effect size
95% CONFIDENCE INTERVAL
(I) GOUPS (J) GROUPS MEAN DIF. STD.ER. SIG. _
LOWER BOUND UPPER BOUND
EXP. A Exp. B 2.250 .583 .000 1.08 3.42
Exp. C 3.667 .583 .000 2.49 4.84
Control 4.667 .583 .000 3.49 5.84
EXP. B Exp. A -2.250 .583 .000 -3.42 -1.08
Exp. C 1.417 .583 .019 .24 2.59
Control 2.417 .583 .000 1.24 3.59
EXP. C Exp. A -3.667 .583 .000 -4.84 -2.49
Exp. B -1.417 .583 .019 -2.59 -.24
Control 1.000 .583 .093 -.17 2.17
CON. Exp. A -4.667 .583 .000 -5.84 -3.49
Exp. B -2.417 .583 .000 -3.59 -1.24
Exp. C -1.000 .583 .093 -2.17 .17
5. DISCUSSION
The current study focused on comparing three techniques in teaching and engaging in speaking skills at the undergraduate level: pairwork, presentation, and group discussion. To achieve these goals, 48 undergraduate students were divided into four equal groups for a treatment period of two weeks. Experimental group A was engaged in pairwork speaking activities; experimental group B dealt with the presentations and preparations; in experimental group C, the learners formed 4-member groups to discuss the topics. Finally, 12 students were the study's control group. The study's findings revealed that the students performing pairwork performed better than the other groups. The second position of better performance was for participants to prepare their presentations individually. However, those students who had group discussions performed slightly better than their pre-test but liked the control group's results. These findings are justified in the following ways.
Among the four groups, Experimental Group A had the highest of all gains; it was the group participating in pairwork speaking activities. This group's mean score soared from an average of 9.7500 in the pre-test to an average of 15.0000 in the post-test, marking an incredible gain of 5.2500 points. Undoubtedly, this impressive improvement can be accounted for by the nature of pairwork itself, which inherently encourages more frequent and meaningful interactions between students. In pairwork, learners can exercise their speaking skills in a much more controlled and focused environment, where they can immediately get feedback from peers and self-correct in real-time. Each student in this study probably had more opportunities to speak, listen, and eventually fine-tune their language use because of the dyadic interaction model used in the pairwork activities. Furthermore, it creates an atmosphere less intimidating than larger groups, which reduces anxiety and encourages more
active participation. These factors combined likely contributed to the significant gains observed in this group, proving pairwork as an effective method for enhancing speaking skills.
For Experimental Group B, speaking skills also increased, and the mean score moved from 9.7500 in the pre-test to 12.7500 in the post-test, hence a gain of 3.0000 points. This increase, even if less spectacular compared with that of Experimental Group A, still means that preparation and delivery of presentations by students as individuals is a very effective way of improving speaking skills. Preparing a presentation will give them the experience of organising their thoughts, practising articulation, and considering the audience, which is basic for adequate speaking. Moreover, making a presentation in front of others will foster the student's self-esteem and build up a more assured command of the language under stress. That said, this slightly lower improvement compared to the pairwork could indicate that although the presentations were good in terms of perfecting linguistic skills, they did not offer quite the same opportunities for interactive practice as pairwork, which could be the reason behind the difference in performance. Nevertheless, the evident progress made by this group brought out the value of individual presentations to improve one's speaking skills.
In the case of experimental group C, which was involved in group discussions, there was an improvement in speaking skills, though of a lesser magnitude compared to that of Experimental Groups A and B. Its mean score moved from 9.2500 in the pretest to 11.3333 in the post-test, thus moving up 2.0833 points. Although this gain is encouraging, it is not as high as that in the other experimental groups. Group discussions provide a context of collaborative learning in which students share ideas, debate, and negotiate meaning. However, the fact that group discussions were much less structured than pairwork or presentations might have contributed to less equal participation, with some students
by Behnam Behforouz and Ali Al Ghaithi
dominating the conversation while others participated less actively. Moreover, the larger the group size, the less amount of speaking practice of each group member, leading to smaller overall gains. The moderate improvement in this group reflects the fact that, while group discussions can be very effective in provoking interaction and collaborative learning, they seem to be less effective for achieving a higher level of speaking practice, especially when individual speaking proficiency is considered.
The Control Group, which had no experimental speaking activities, manifested the least improvement among the four groups. Its mean score increased only from 9.3333 in the pretest to 10.3333 in the post-test, thus gaining a minimal 1.0000 points. This very small gain means that there is little scope for enhancing actual speaking abilities in a regular curriculum without specific speaking interventions. In the absence of structured activities aimed at developing speaking skills, it is unlikely that students in the control group would gain equal amounts of practice in developing language proficiency. As there were no significant improvements in this group, regular classroom activities alone probably could not make substantial gains in speaking skills within such a short period. This finding underlines the need for specific, structured speaking activities, such as those implemented in the experimental groups, if real effectiveness is sought in enhancing students' speaking. The results of the control group further set a stark contrast with the experimental groups with respect to the effect of interactive and targeted speaking practices for meaningful language development.
The findings of the study for the pairwork technique in the speaking classes align with Millah (2019), in which a pairwork strategy was used to improve students' speaking skills using descriptive material. It was tested on students from MA Walisongo Pecangaan, who served as the experimental group. It was intended to compare the achievement of students taught using the pairwork technique with those who were not taught this technique at the end of the training period. Based on the t-test and post-test results, it was possible to conclude that the pairwork technique successfully improved students' speaking skills in descriptive texts among tenth-grade students. In another study with similar results, Achmad and Yusuf (2014) watched, reported on, and discussed student activity and behaviour throughout the deployment of pairwork in an ELT classroom to improve students' speaking skills. The practical implementation of pair-work in a classroom for multilingual students was observed at a college in Glasgow, Scotland. The findings revealed that the teacher effectively used pairwork interactions with the pupils. Strategies and interaction patterns significantly impacted students' language learning achievement and competency in the classroom. Even if the session was slightly boisterous, it was clear that the learners had made every effort to communicate in English.
The current study's finding on presentation skills aligns with Farabi et al. (2017), who compared the effectiveness of free and guided oral presentations in improving the speaking skills of 60 pre-intermediate female learners in Ahvaz, Iran. The
researchers used guided and free presentations for the guided and free groups, respectively. The treatment consisted of 12 45-minute sessions guided by a supervisor. Following the treatment, a post-test was conducted to assess the influence on students' speaking skills. The study concluded with recommendations for teachers to employ guided presentations to improve the speaking skills of pre-intermediate-language learners. Similarly, Ati and Parmawati (2022) investigated students' presentations to improve their speaking. The researcher used qualitative research methods to collect data through observation. The findings revealed that students generally responded positively to the presentations. The students believed that this helped them evaluate their ability to speak English.
The results of this study based on the group discussion could be associated with studies such as the one by Crisianita and Mandasari (2022), who sought to identify students' development of speaking mastery after learning through small-group discussions. The participants were senior high school students from Lampung Province in Indonesia. Data were acquired using a questionnaire. The findings of this study indicated that using small-group discussions to improve speaking skills was beneficial because students were more confident in delivering their ideas and critiquing others' thoughts. In another similar study, Borah (2020) used group discussion to improve students' speaking skills. In this study, the researcher administered a pre-test before providing interventions through group discussions to improve students' abilities. After the treatments, a post-test was administered, and it was discovered that the students improved in different aspects of their speaking skills, such as pronunciation, organising ability, and language competence. Based on the study provided, it was evident that group discussion was a highly effective strategy for improving students' speaking abilities. The method helped overcome shyness and boost confidence. The method also assisted learners in enhancing their vocabulary and improving their fluency in the respective language. The students could rectify their pronunciation errors with the assistance of dedicated teachers and peers. Group discussions stimulated and augmented the pupils' aptitude for creative thinking. Additionally, learners had the opportunity to cultivate their sense of collaboration, unity, and teamwork.
In a similar study by Timbu et al. (2023), the application of the debate technique in the instruction of speaking skills was measured. This study was a form of classroom action research conducted in two cycles. Information was gathered using observation, exams, and interviews. The debate technique was applied in teaching speaking in class XI IPS 1 at the high school in Maumere. The study demonstrated that debating strategies might enhance students' oral communication abilities. This is demonstrated by the pupils' exam scores, which consistently rose with each cycle. The students achieved an average score of 54.37% in the first cycle and 69.37% in the second cycle. It may be deduced that using the debate technique can enhance students' enthusiasm for speaking and improve the overall classroom environment.
Training, Language and Culture Volume 8 Issue 3, 2024, pp. 73-85
'Based on the study provided, it was evident that group discussion was a highly effective strategy for improving students' speaking abilities. The method helped overcome shyness and boost confidence. The method also assisted learners in enhancing their vocabulary and improving their fluency in the respective language. The students could rectify their pronunciation errors with the assistance of dedicated teachers and peers. Group discussions stimulated and augmented the pupils' aptitude for creative thinking. Additionally, learners had the opportunity to cultivate their sense of collaboration, unity, and teamwork'
6. CONCLUSION
People in the age of globalisation require communication skills that play an important role. To succeed in their respective fields, everyone must master all aspects of language. Speaking is a fundamental aspect of these skills. Without this competence, the goal of communication cannot be accomplished effectively (Akhter et al., 2020). To this end, the present study compared three techniques of engaging students in speaking activities among 48 Omani undergraduate students to determine the efficiency of each technique, including pairwork, presentation, and group discussion. The results showed that students who worked in pairs outperformed the other two groups. Students who were preparing presentations performed better than those in the group discussions.
The findings of this research are of great value to both the educator and learner in providing evidence-based guidelines that relate to instructions that improve oral communication skills. Pairwork has substantial gains for the teachers and learners as well. For teachers, it represents an opportunity to offer individual focus and targeted feedback as they are better placed to control and manage two things better than a number. This kind of focused approach can thus help teachers to target the areas of weakness children have. Furthermore, pairwork inside the classroom is more viable and better utilised, and valuable class time can be used effectively to ensure smoother transitions between classroom activities. During classroom work, pairwork means actively working on speaking and meaningfully interacting with a partner. This provides students with an environment to practise spoken language and demonstrates their skills in public, rather than only in a classroom setup, which further contributes to their feeling of self-esteem and language competence.
Presentations have various advantages for both teachers and learners. The presentation allows a teacher to have a different platform to assess each student's ability to plan and express their thoughts coherently. The assessments give the teacher a clue of the level of preparedness and understanding a student has about the content, thereby enabling the teachers to track individual progress easily. Presentation skills are very important
rudn.tlcjoumal.org doi: 10.22363/2521-442X-2024-8-3-73-85
in developing skills such as critical thinking, organisation, and public speaking. It makes students more independent by forcing them to research, prepare, and deliver knowledge on their own. Further, the exercise builds self-confidence among students in public speaking, which is a very useful skill in an academic and professional environment.
Group discussions have a lot to bring into the classroom. They provide an interactive way of engaging the student in deeper learning since they encourage the exploration of multiple points of view. Discussion groups give the teacher an opportunity to assess students' collaboration skills and understanding of complex topics within a lively and interactive environment. Through the formation of group conversations, students can voice their ideas and respond to others immediately, promoting communication and social interaction skills. It also provides an opportunity for students to understand new perspectives and gain knowledge by interacting with each other and listening to different ideas. In general, group conversations promote a rather engaging and participatory learning environment, hence improving the educational experience.
Including such findings in curriculum design means putting much greater emphasis on pairwork activities as a major contributor to enhancing speaking skills because of the much greater improvements seen within this particular area. There is a need to incorporate regular pairwork activities throughout the course, using structured dialogues and role-plays, which should be included in weekly or daily lesson timetables, so the student practises on a regular basis. Moreover, the curriculum should incorporate individual presentation tasks as an aspiration in itself, acknowledging that they make an invaluable contribution to speaking ability. All this should be embedded within the project-based learning units, which will allow students to structure their thoughts and develop their speaking potential. This is a systematic way of ensuring that students are exposed to as many speaking activities as possible, hence leading to wholesome improvements. The teacher education courses should incorporate these findings by highlighting clearly the use of pairwork in speaking practice. In-service and pre-service teachers need training to employ pairwork effectively and efficiently, including techniques for organising pairwork, guiding interactions, and providing feedback to learners. In addition, training programmes should equip teachers with methods for facilitating and assessing individual presentations to ensure that they are capable of assisting students in acquiring effective public speaking skills. This can be achieved by focusing on these areas so that, as per the findings of the study, teacher training can help educators develop an effective dynamic learning environment.
This study had some limitations, which made the results difficult to generalise to the whole learning context in Oman. Despite the implementation of pre-tests to assure comparable levels of speaking skill across participants, the outcomes may have still been influenced by individual variances in language proficiency. The pre-tests may not have accurately measured the slight variations in students' linguistic ability, which could
by Behnam Behforouz and Ali Al Ghaithi
'Presentations have various advantages for both teachers and learners. The presentation allows a teacher to have a different platform to assess each student's ability to plan and express their thoughts coherently. The assessments give the teacher a clue of the level of preparedness and understanding a student has about the content, thereby enabling the teachers to track individual progress easily. Presentation skills are very important in developing skills such as critical thinking, organisation, and public speaking. It makes students more independent by forcing them to research, prepare, and deliver knowledge on their own. Further, the exercise builds self-confidence among students in public speaking, which is a very useful skill in an academic and professional environment'
have influenced their effectiveness in engaging with the given strategies and potentially biased the results. The study fails to consider participants' prior experience with interactive techniques such as pairwork, presentations, or group discussions. Students who had previous familiarity with these strategies may have felt more at ease and performed more efficiently in their assigned duties, therefore giving them a competitive edge over those with limited exposure. Prior acquaintance with the subject matter may have influenced the variations in speaking ability, regardless of the actual efficacy of the strategy. The study was conducted in a controlled classroom setting, which may have impacted the outcomes. The efficiency of each strategy could have been influenced by factors such as the dynamics inside the classroom, the contact between the teacher and students, and the physical arrangement of the classroom. For example, a classroom that encourages collaboration would naturally facilitate pairwork, whereas a more conventional environment might prefer presentations. The study did not account for these contextual characteristics, which restricts the applicability of the findings to various educational settings. Furthermore, the study's limited sample size and the exclusive selection of participants from a single college also pose notable drawbacks. The study encompassed a total of 48 students, who were separated into four groups, each consisting of 12 individuals. The limited sample size may reduce the statistical power of the findings, making it challenging to apply the results to a larger population. By increasing the size and diversity of the sample, the study could have obtained a broader spectrum of answers, resulting in stronger results regarding the efficacy of various speaking approaches. Furthermore, the study was done exclusively with students from a solitary college, hence limiting the generalisability of the findings in different educational environments. The unique attributes of the college, such as its academic ethos, pedagogical methods, and student composition, may have impacted the results. Consequently, the conclusions may not accurately reflect the experiences of students from various institutions or educational
settings. Future studies should aim to recruit participants from several colleges and possibly different areas to improve the gen-eralisability of the findings and gain a more comprehensive understanding of the effectiveness of these teaching strategies in various learning environments.
Given the constraints revealed in this work, some potential areas for further research are suggested: Subsequent investigations should incorporate a greater and more varied sample of students to augment the statistical potency and applicability of the results. Expanding the sample size would enable researchers to encompass a more extensive spectrum of student experiences and outcomes, resulting in more substantial conclusions regarding the efficacy of pairwork, presentations, and group discussions in enhancing speaking skills. In addition, forthcoming research should contemplate including participants from multiple colleges or universities. It helps to assess whether the observed effectiveness of the teaching strategies remains consistent in diverse educational environments characterised by varied academic cultures and student demographics. When doing future studies, it is important to consider the different degrees of competency among learners and their prior experience with interactive approaches. Studies should incorporate a comprehensive pre-assessment of these elements to have a deeper understanding of their impact on the efficacy of various speaking approaches. Furthermore, further research could investigate the customisation of these strategies to accommodate varying degrees of competency, thereby assuring that all students can derive advantages irrespective of their initial skill level. Additional research should investigate the effects of various classroom settings and interactions on the efficacy of collaborative activities such as pairwork, presentations, and group discussions. This could involve evaluating the results of these methods in conventional versus collaborative classroom settings or in situations with diverse levels of teacher-student engagement. The article proposes the utilisation of interactive methodologies such as pairwork, presentations, and group discussions. However, it lacks explicit instructions or tactics for effectively implementing these methods in various instructional environments. To address this disparity, further studies should prioritise the creation of comprehensive, contextually appropriate instructions that educators may employ to incorporate these methodologies into their instructional methodologies seamlessly. For instance, the research could offer detailed guidelines on how to effectively arrange and manage pairwork activities in both large and small classrooms, how to provide support for student presentations to enhance their confidence, or how to design group discussions in a way that maximises participation and learning.
Furthermore, further investigation could delve into the adaptation of these tactics for online or hybrid learning settings where conventional face-to-face interactions are not feasible. Future research can enhance educators' application of interactive approaches by offering specific and practical recommendations, leading to improved student outcomes in various educational environments.
Training, Language and Culture Volume 8 Issue 3, 2024, pp. 73-85
References
Achmad, D., & Yusuf, Y. Q. (2014). Observing pairwork task in an English-speaking class. International Journal of Instruction, 7(1), 151-164.
Akhter, S., Haidov, R., Rana, A. M., & Qureshi, A. H. (2020). Exploring the significance of speaking skill for EFL learners. PalArch's Journal of Archaeology of Egypt/Egyptology, 17(9), 6019-6030.
Aristy, I., Hadiansyah, R., & Apsari, Y. (2019). Using three step-interview to improve student's speaking ability. PROJECT: Professional Journal of English Education, 2 (2), 175-180.
Asher, J. J. (2003). Learning another language through actions (6th ed.). Sky Oaks Productions, Inc.
Ati, A., & Parmawati, A. (2022). The use of oral presentation in teaching English to improve students' speaking skill. Journal of English Education Studies, 5(2), 300-305. https://doi.org/10.22460/ project.v5i2.p300-305
Baleghizadeh, S., & Farhesh, S. (2014). The impact of pair work on EFL learners' motivation. MEXTESOLJournal, 38(3), 1-11.
Bohari, L. (2019). Improving speaking skills through small group discussion at eleventh grade students of SMA Plus Munirul Arifin NW Praya Journal of Languages and Language Teaching, 7(1), 68-81. https://doi.org/ 10.33394/jolltv7i 1.1441
Boonkit, K. (2010). Enhancing the development of speaking skills for non-native speakers of English. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2, 1305-1309. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016Zj.sbspro. 2010.03.191
Borah, B. (2020). A study on enhancing the speaking skill by using group discussion strategy among the upper primary students. International Journal of Scientific & Technology Research, 9(2), 3651-3657.
Brooks, G., & Wilson, J. (2014). Using oral presentations to improve students' English language skills. Kwansei Gakuin University Humanities Review, 19(1), 199-212.
Brown, G., & Yule, G. (1983). Discourse analysis. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0022226700010161
Brown, H. D. (2004). Teaching by principles: Language assessment. Pearson Education.
Bueno, A., Madrid, D., & McLaren, N. (Eds.). (2006). TEFL in secondary education. Editorial Universidad de Granada.
Burkart, G., & Sheppard, K. (2004). Content ESL across the USA A training packet. A descriptive study of content-ESL practices. National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition. http:// www.ncela.gwu.edu/pubs/cal/contentesl/
Celce-Murcia, M. (2001). Language teaching approaches: An overview. In M. Celce-Murcia (Ed.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (3rd ed.). Heinle & Heinle.
Chou, M. H. (2021). An integrated approach to developing and assessing EFL students' speaking ability and strategy use. Language Education & Assessment, 4(1), 19-37. https://doi.org/10.29140/ lea.v4n1.428
Crisianita, S., & Mandasari, B. (2022). The use of small-group discussion to improve students' speaking skill. Journal of Research on Language Education (JoRLE), 3(1), 61-66.
Dael, M., Astarini, S. A., & Husnussalam, H. (2019). Improving speaking skill using group discussion. PROJECT: Professional Journal of English Education, 2(4), 466-474. https://doi.org/10.22460/ project.v2i4.p466-474
Defrioka, A. (2009). Improving students' interaction in speaking class through information gap activities. Leksika Journal, 3, 33-45.
rudn.tlcjournal.org doi: 10.22363/2521-442X-2024-8-3-73-85
Dewi, Y. P. (2023). Improving students' speaking ability in expressing opinions through think pair share method. Journal of English Development, 3(1), 29-37. https://dx.doi.org/10.25217/jed.v3i0 1.3078
Febriyanti, N. Y. (2012). The use of multimedia teaching aids to improve the quality of the speaking teaching and learning process at the eighth-grade class of SMP N 6 Yogyakarta in the academic year of 2011/2012 [Doctoral dissertation, Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta]. Lumbung Pustaka UNY Repository. https:// eprints.uny.ac.id/9431
Farabi, M., Hassanvand, S., & Gorjian, B. (2017). Using guided oral presentation in teaching English language learners' speaking skills. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Learning, 3(1), 17-24. https://doi.org/ 10.5923/j.jalll.20170301.03
Farida, L. A., & Sofwan, A. (2012). Interactive materials for teaching spoken narrative texts based on Indonesian folktales. Lem-baran Ilmu, 41(1), 333-342.
Florez, M. A. (1999). Improving adult English language learners' speaking skills. ERIC Clearinghouse.
Gass, S., & Varonis, E. (1994). Input, interaction and second language production. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16(3), 283-302. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0272263100013097
Girard, T., Pinar, A. M., & Trapp, P. (2011). An exploratory study of class presentations and peer evaluations: Do students perceive the benefits? Academy of Educational Leadership Journal, 15(1), 77-93.
Goh, C. C. M., & Burns, A. (2012). Teaching speaking: A holistic approach. Cambridge University Press.
Graham, S. (2007). Developing speaking skills in the modern foreign language. In N. Pachler & A. Redondo (Eds.), A practical guide to teaching modern foreign languages in the secondary school (pp. 58-66). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003281399-9
Harmer, J. (1998). How to teach English. Longman.
Harmer, J. (2001). The practice of English language teaching (3rd ed.). Longman. https://doi.org/10.1177/003368820103200109
Harmer, J. (2007). The practice of English language teaching. Longman.
Huong, D. L., & Thuy, T. T. (2024). Using presentation assignment to improve students' English speaking skills. International Journal of Research Publication and Reviews, 5(1), 4163-4166.
Jones, L. (2007). The student-centered classroom. Cambridge University Press.
King, J. (2002). Preparing EFL learners for oral presentations. Dong Hwa Journal of Humanistic Studies, 4, 401-418.
Ko§ar, G., & Bedir, H. (2014). Strategies-based instruction: A means of improving adult EFL learners' speaking skills. International Journal of Language Academy, 2(3), 12-26.
Leong, L. M., & Ahmadi, S. M. (2016). An analysis of factors influencing learner's English speaking skill. International Journal Research in English Education, 2, 34-41. https://dx.doi.org/10.18869/acad pub.ijree.2.1.34
Mantra, I. B. N., Handayani, N. D., Suwandi, I. N., & Maba, W. (2022). Promoting students' academic speaking skills through project report presentation. International Journal of Linguistics and Discourse Analytics, 3(2), 94-100.
Marzuki, M., Prayogo, J., & Wahyudi, A. (2016). Improving the EFL learners' speaking ability through interactive storytelling. Din-amika Ilmu, 16(1), 15-34. https://dx.doi.org/10.21093/di.v16i 1. 307
by Behnam Behforouz and Ali Al Ghaithi
Miles, R. (2009). Oral presentations for English proficiency purposes. Reflections on English Language Teaching, 8 (2), 103-110.
Millah, M. N. (2019). The effectiveness of pair work technique in improving students' speaking skill on descriptive text: A quasi experimental study at tenth-grade students of MA Walisongo Pecangaan Jepara in the academic year of 2018/2019. Edulin-gua, 6(1), 28-36.
Miranda, J. A. M., & Wahyudin, A. Y. (2023). Pre-service teachers' strategies in improving students' speaking skills. Journal of English Language Teaching and Learning (JELTL), 4(1), 40-47.
Mogea, T. (2019). Enhancing students' speaking ability through small group discussion technique to the first-year students of SMA Negeri 1 Ratahan. Journal of Educational Method and Technology, 2(3), 41-54.
Mulya, R. (2016). The pairwork technique: A useful tool for enhancing students' speaking performance. English Education Journal, 7(1), 74-86.
Naibaho, L. (2019). The integration of group discussion method using audio visual learning media toward students' learning achievement on listening. International Journal of Research -GRANTHAALAYAH, 7(8), 438-445. https://dx.doi.org/10.29 121/granthaalayah.v7.i8.2019.697
Narjes, A., & Ebrahim, M. (2015). Comparison of influence of group discussion method with lecture method in relationship with peers. Journal of Current Research in Science, 3(1), 64-68.
Newton, J. M., & Nation, I. S. (2020). Teaching ESL/EFL listening and speaking (2nd ed.). Routledge. https://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9780 429203114
Nunan, D. (1999). Designing tasks for the communicative classroom. Cambridge University Press.
Padmadewi, N. N. (1998). Students' anxiety in speaking class and ways of minimizing it. Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan, 5, 60-67.
Phipps, W. (1999). Pairwork: Interaction in the modern languages classroom. Centre for Information on Language Teaching and Research.
Putri, A. F. D. (2019). Improving students' speaking ability through oral presentation. Tanjungpura University Press.
Razmjoo, S. A., & Ardekani, S. G. (2011). A model of speaking strategies for EFL learners. The Journal of Teaching Language Skills (JTLS), 3(3), 115-142. https://dx.doi.org/10.22099/jtls. 2012.380
Riadil, I. G. (2020). Does oral presentation affect the development of the students' ability to speak in EFL classroom? Social Sciences, Humanities and Education Journal (SHE Journal), 1(2), 13-21. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3822896
Rianti, R., Syahid, A., & Qamariah, Z. (2022). The effectiveness of pair work activities on students' speaking anxiety and speaking ability. Jurnal Educatio, 8(4), 1471-1477. https://dx.doi.org/ 10.31949/educatio.v8i4.376014721477 Richard, J. C., & Renandya, W. A. (2002). Methodology in language teaching: An anthology of current practice. Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J. C., & Schmidt, R. W. (2013). Longman dictionary of language teaching and applied linguistics. Routledge. https://doi.org/ 10.4324/9781315833835 Shahini, G., & Riazi, A. M. (2011). A PBLT approach to teaching ESL speaking, writing, and thinking skills. ELT Journal, 65(2), 170-179. https://doi.org/10.109 3/elt/ccq045 Sirisrimangkorn, L. (2021). Improving EFL undergraduate learners' speaking skills through project-based learning using presentation. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 12(3), 65-72. https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.alls.v.12n.3.p.65 Spada, N., & Lightbown, P. M. (1999). Instruction, first language influence, and developmental readiness in second language acquisition. Modern Language Journal, 83(1), 1-22. https://dx.doi.org/ 10.1111/0026-7902.00002 Sudirman, A. (2018). The influence of teaching tenses through group discussion method towards student's achievement in tenses mastery. Journal of English Education Studies, 1(2), 108-117. https://doi.org/10.30653/005.201812.22 Susanto, R. E. (2013). Improving students' speaking ability through pair work technique: A classroom action research for 7th-grade students of SMP Kristen Gergaji Semarang in the academic year 2011/2012. Diponegoro University Press. Taka, S. D. (2020). The efficacy of using pair work technique in teaching conditional sentences to Indonesian English as Foreign Language (EFL) students. IDEAS: Journal on English Language Teaching and Learning, Linguistics and Literature, 8(2), 602-610. https://doi.org/10.24256/ideas.v8i2.1690 Timbu, M. E. I., Bhoko, M. L., & Kel, E. W. (2023). Improving students' speaking skills through debate strategy. KLAUSA, 7(1), 90-99. https://doi.org/10.33479/klausa.v6i2.625 Ur, P. (2000). A course in language teaching: Practice and theory. Cambridge University Press. Wilen, W. W., & Kindsvatter, R. (2000). Dynamics of effective teaching
(4th ed.). Longman. Zannrni, I. M. (2022). The role of students' classroom presentations in developing their speaking skills. Cihan University-Erbil Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 6(1), 87-91. https://doi.org/ 10.24086/cuejhss.vol6n1y2022.pp87-91
Behnam Behforouz
ORCID 0000-0002-0078-2757 и [email protected] University of Technology and Applied Sciences, Shinas, Oman
Ali Al Ghaithi
ORCID 0000-0002-9653-508X и [email protected] Sohar University, Oman
