Project on oral testingSubmitted to: Maim Mehrunisa Zaid
6/2/2011Submitted From: Muhammad AsifRegd. No. met01103008
1 | P a g e
2
ABSTRACT:
The ability to speak English is a valued skill in English-medium universities overseas and is a major aim of their English for academic purposes (EAP) programmes. But it is rarely tested in these institutions because the task is considered too difficult with such large numbers of students. Failing to test the speaking skill results in inaccurate assessment of students and negative wash back effects on the teaching of oral skills. Here the purpose of this study is to highlight the problems that are hinder in introducing the oral skills in the class. The participants in this study were students and teachers. The instruments used were interviews and questionnaires to collect the opinion of the respondents. Two types of questionnaires were prepared. Teachers and students were selected randomly. The results indicates that the number of English language learning students has been steadily growing for years, but the resources to help them mastering it have not been growing at a comparable rate which results into their failure. And speaking and listening is more important in language learning and is always neglected.
MUHAMMAD ASIF
3
INTRODUCTION:
The language teaching task does not last only to the end of the class hour, but teachers also need to handle the whole teaching and learning processStarting with planning, then implementing the plan, assessing or evaluating it, reflecting on all data received, and finally revising the plan. The cycle requires teachers to extend their tasks to considerable work outside of the class. Especially, when it comes to the assessment, most language teachers may find it to be the most difficult task. Probably, because it involves a great deal working with numbers and calculations-to make a reliable and valid measurement. The term assessment usually refers to gathering and synthesizing the information about students and classroom. Information can be gathered by teachers through both formal and informal means such as homework, tests, written reports, observation, or verbal exchange. The assessment task is not only crucial for teachers, but also for students. How well students perform on tests, the grade they receive, and the judgments their teachers make have important consequences for both the students and teachers. Without proper assessments tailored to the needs of the students and language learning objectives, teachers are unable to plan instruction effectively. One of the assessments is oral testing.Oral testing is defined as evaluation of a student's speech production exclusively. It does not concern listening skill, which is some-times confused with oral testing when the evaluator uses the second language to test listening comprehension.The issue of oral testing highlights a major problem for educators in Korea, where an official policy to promote English oral skills at all levels of education has to be placed in the context of the traditional methods of testing which still prevail. Thus while secondary level teachers of English might be keen to employ contemporary communicative teaching methodology in their classrooms, they also have to ensure that their students acquire the necessary linguistic 'facts' to be able to answer the grammar-based multiple choice examinations which are universally prescribed, but which tend to be unrelated to the development of spoken English abilities. The result is that students in general arrive at University or their new place of work with undeveloped oral skills and with a
MUHAMMAD ASIF
4
debilitating awareness of this fact, which impedes motivation or further improvement.
Years of traditional translation-based teaching also encourage learning preferences in the students which, though acknowledged by them to be inefficient, are all that they know, and determine their perceptions regarding acceptable teaching and learning styles.
In order to break this self-confirming circle, and to motivate students to develop their oral skills, the situation needs to be addressed in its entirety. Teachers can find more and more interesting methods of teaching the spoken language; they can try to apply these in the classroom, advocating authenticity of materials, relevance of situation, cultural sensitivity, and other factors; they can make the learning environment as conducive to expression and language acquisition as possible. But the fact remains that Korean students are motivated mainly by the National exams they have to pass, and their entire educational experience confirms that this attitude is the 'correct' one.
MUHAMMAD ASIF
5
THE VIEW OF LITERATURE:
This literature review is intended to review the following,
a) Levels of oral proficiencyb) Difficulties in testing the speaking skillsc) Types of oral testsd) Oral testing methodologies
Levels of the oral proficiency:
There are four main levels and three sublevels within the first three main levels:
Levels:
i) Novice (0 ~ 1)ii) Intermediate (1 ~ 2)iii) Advanced (2 ~ 3) iv) Superior (3 ~ 4)
Sub-levels:
Low – just hanging on Mid – length and strength; some features of the next level High – functions most of the time at the next higher level The scoring system works out such that there are actually 11 categories: the superior level has no sub-levels while the other three levels each utilize the 3 sublevels (low, mid, high) and the 11th category is a hypothetical '0' or 'Zero Proficiency'.
There are five aspects to each of the four main levels as well: function, content, context, accuracy and text type distils these components in the following manner:
MUHAMMAD ASIF
6
Function' refers to what the learner can do with the language. 'Content' and 'context' refer to the range of topics (personal, professional, and abstract) the learner can handle with confidence and in what setting (formal or informal). 'Accuracy' describes the extent of phonological and syntactical precision. Finally, 'text type' refers to the discourse complexity of the tested, i.e. whether the subject speaks in discrete words, unconnected sentences or extended, planned paragraphs.
Difficulties in testing the speaking skills:
Since the reform and opening up, international exchanges become more frequent, the community of English proficiency, especially oral communication ability to the needs of increasingly urgent, English Teaching goals are also made adjustments, therefore, asked 'to reverse to read-based teaching model', clear that the 'current pay special attention to strengthening the cultivation of listening and speaking skills'. As students of the main course of oral communicative competence, how to carry out effective oral teaching is the majority of English teachers worthy of exploration and practice of a proposition. In this paper, adjust the teaching content, teaching methods and evaluation system for several aspects of oral teaching on how to improve vocational discussed. Vocational problems: The traditional oral teaching is mainly teacher-centered teaching model, teachers explain and account for most of the presentation of classroom time, and students at a state of passive acceptance, it is difficult to mobilize their enthusiasm and initiative to learn. Teaching methods monotonous, stiff, usually follows to read, imitate, repeat, recite and other mechanical training (mechanical practice) mainly, the lack of meaningful, communicative practice (meaningful and communicative practice), the students just to practice and practice, is not out of desire or need to communicate. On the other hand, teachers focus too much on communication in the form of, for example, the syntax is correct, but ignore the content of student exchanges, resulting in distortion of language communication. No student a positive input, the lack of meaningful communication, teaching results difficult to be guaranteed. In addition, the vocational English language base is relatively weak, and almost never before in the school system received oral training,
MUHAMMAD ASIF
7
widespread fear of the psychological fear mistakes, a fool of me, unwilling to take the initiative to conduct oral communication, the lack of in front of the courage to express ideas in English. Some of the students too heavy local accent, English pronunciation obscure, hindering the smooth progress of oral communication. Due to lack of language environment, the students after school is basically oral exercises carried out independently by individuals, which are greatly limited the Development of communicative competence of students and oral levels.
Administrator:
Ideally, tests should endeavor to help not only teachers or administrators, but also aid students in assessing their performance. Tests should serve both evaluative and educational functions. Unfortunately, many tests are designed primarily to dispense grades. Typically, students take a test at the end of one semester and receive a grade with no comments a few weeks later. Such feedback is of marginal value. Prompt feedback is crucial, since most students tend to forget the details of their tests soon after completing them. Unless feedback is specific and immediate, its pedagogical value is limited.
The evaluation of students’ pronunciation is not given the place it deserves in many EFL and ESL classes in probably elsewhere. It is supported by the fact that the purpose of testing pronunciation is not only to evaluate knowledge and award grades, but also, and probably more importantly, to motivate students to be sensitive to this aspect of English. Given that the motivation of many students for learning English is instrumental rather than integrative, pronunciation tends to be neglected by many learners as long as they know they will not be tested on it.
Obviously, pronunciation is tested globally in different types of conversational exchange, interview, reading aloud, etc., that go on in the classroom. What seems to be insufficient is the testing of accuracy-that is, testing to assess the learner’s management of specific features, segmental or suprasegmental. This insufficiency is due to two main causes.
First, many teachers do not consider it useful to test specific features. This attitude is based on the belief that the mastery of specific features, taken individually, does not matter much in real-life situations where the context always (?)
MUHAMMAD ASIF
8
It is possible for people to produce practically all the correct sounds but still be unable to communicate their ideas appropriately and effectively. On the other hand, people can make numerous errors in both phonology and syntax and yet succeed in expressing themselves fairly clearly.
The second, and surely more important, cause is the particular difficulties involved in testing oral skills. One of the greatest problems in oral testing is administration. It is often impossible to manage the large number of students to be tested. Testing equipment, like laboratories or tape recorders, is scarce in many Third World countries where English is taught. Even when such material is available, testing may be rendered impossible by the lack of even more basic facilities like electricity.
A further difficulty in oral testing arises when English is part of a school-leaving or promotion examination for an entire country. In most countries offering such examinations candidates over a large area have to respond, often in writing, to the same paper. This exacerbates the problem of logistics.
Taking segmental phonemes and word stress as illustrations, this article explores some ways of testing specific features of English pronunciation, both as a teaching activity and as part of an examination. The ideal way of testing pronunciation is to actually listen to the learner. But since this is not always possible or suitable, the alternatives discussed below can be used for testing segments and word stress. Throughout the discussion, the illustrations are based on pronunciation problems.
What is to be tested?
Following should be tested in oral class,
i) Pronunciationii) Grammariii) Vocabularyiv) Fluency
i) Fluency of Speech: This point of evaluation should be based upon the smoothness of speech, not speed, and take into account the normal use of hesitancy in conversation. If students cease their conversation to
MUHAMMAD ASIF
9
giggle, or if they have memorized their conversation and can not continue by relying upon their inherent communication skills then this should reflect in a lower rating. Students, who speak efficiently, and without awkwardness, should in turn be granted a higher rating.
ii) Grammar Use: It is unrealistic to expect that any Korean EFL student will come to an exam and speak without any grammar problems; emphasis should therefore be placed on being able to understand the student’s communicative intent even if grammar errors are present in sentence structures. However, continual use of the same grammar errors by a student, such as the use of simple past for all past tense terms, should reflect in a lower rating. Alternatively, those students who are able to recognize that they had made a grammar error, and correct it during conversation, should be provided a higher rating.
iii) Listening Comprehension: This phase of evaluation is initially tested during the prepared conversation section of the exam. As some students will not understand what their partners are saying. In some cases, Korean students will remain silent and wait for their partner to repeat their statement, and this should reflect in a lower rating. At other times a student may ask for clarification, or ask their partner to repeat what they had said, and this should reflect in a higher rating. Further more, this section of evaluation should be applied in the question/answer tasks of the exam. Some students may not understand the instructor's question, even after rewording, whereas other students will understand the same question immediately.
iv) Pronunciation: As native English speakers possess a high degree of tolerance to ambiguity accent is not considered a viable point of exam evaluation, except where it hinders communicative understanding in the case of radically influencing pronunciation. In situations where continual mispronunciation occurs, or understanding is lost due to incorrect pronunciation of terminology, students should be
MUHAMMAD ASIF
10
given a lower rating. Alternatively, if students correct their mispronunciation, or recognize their mispronunciation and attempt to correct it throughout the exam, then this should reflect in a higher rating.
v) Vocabulary Appropriateness and Complexity: Depending on the student choice of topic, certain terms or vocabulary items can be selected from the course materials and incorporated within student conversational presentations. If students use higher level vocabulary, and select terms taught from the textbook then they should receive a higher rating. If students employ very simple vocabulary terms for a complex topic, such as health, then this should reflect in a lower rating.
Types of oral tests:
Following types can be used in oral testing,
a) Monologue speakingb) Dialogue speakingc) Multilogue speaking
Monologue speaking:
A monologue (or monolog) is when the character may be speaking his or her thoughts aloud, directly addressing another character, or speaking to the audience, especially the former. Monologues are common across the range of dramatic media (plays, films, animation, etc.). It is distinct from a soliloquy, which is where a character relates his or her thoughts and feelings to him/herself and to the audience without addressing any of the other characters. It is also distinct from an apostrophe, wherein the speaker or writer addresses an imaginary person, or inanimate object, or idea.
Dialogue speaking:
The most popular type of oral test was that which tested the student's pro-duction of dialog material. Hearing recitation of memorized dialogs was the most-often used procedure
MUHAMMAD ASIF
11
Dialogue means how each character speaks. This not only helps to promote the speak and further the action, but exemplifies characterization as well. Instructions here apply to multi-genre speaking. That is, it applies to fiction, nonfiction, and all types of characters speak. These instructions have been industry standard speaking.
It irritates me that after learning a lot of obvious dos and don’ts of speaking, someone invariably comes along and tries to change the status quo. They wish to make inroads into the process, make their mark or reputation by putting a new spin on accepted norms.
While it is true that new input can improve certain things, with this aspect of writing, I say leave it alone. Dialogue in speaking has a certain duty to perform. The words spoken, and not the narration, do a much better job at building characterization. Beats and speaker attributions, which you will learn in the samples below, have their place in speaking, but must be used cautiously.
Multilogue speaking:
In this type there should be picture description, pictures differences or discussion on any topic in multi language. And then difference in fluency, vocabulary, grammar etc can be noted.
Oral testing methodologies:
Setting the scene
Language is culture in motion. It is people interacting with people. ... the most effective programs will be those that involve the whole learner in the experience of language as a network of relations between people, things, and events (Savignon 1983:187)
The success of this test would be judged primarily by its effectiveness in favorably affecting the student's perception of his/her spoken abilities, since a self-perceived improvement would result in increased confidence when using the language and would positively affect motivation to continue learning.
MUHAMMAD ASIF
12
2. The Test
Of the many possibilities open to testers in terms of elicitation techniques for oral testing, the methods adopted in this case were the oral report and inter-learner joint discussion, the latter reflecting the interactive aspect of language mentioned by Savignon (1985).
Two examiners were present for each test - the normal class teacher, and another 'visiting' examiner (who was also an instructor at the Center and known to the students by sight if not by acquaintance), providing both a subjective and an objective assessment of the students. Students were required to complete two stages. In the first stage each student had one minute in which to speak about him/herself, his/her family, hobbies, room, or lifestyle. These topics had been practiced and performed in the lessons during the first semester. In the second stage the group had three minutes to have a conversation about anything they wished. This was intended to promote interactive skills as well as speaking per se, and the groups were assessed as a whole for this task.
The tests were recorded on cassette tapes and the examiners made comments on a pre-prepared mark sheet which noted the conversational abilities of the students as they performed the two stages. Given that the students would be able to access these mark sheets in order to help in their own assessment of their performance, it was decided (by all the examiners) to use a simplified version of Lee's criteria, employing the categories of 'Listening comprehension', 'grammatical Appropriacy', 'Ease of Speech and Fluency', 'Content' and 'Conversation Skills'. Marking criteria were drawn up based on established principles.
3. SELF-ASSESSMENT
Self-assessment provides us with an interesting perspective on this issue, If the learners themselves determine what is to be learnt in the classroom, regardless of what the teacher brings into it and if their attitudes to learning are so formative, then it seems that we should be giving more attention to these matters, and focusing on ways of improving them.
MUHAMMAD ASIF
13
Self-assessment is a way of attending to such attitudes, since it encourages the student to become part of the whole process of language learning, and to be aware of individual progress,
1. raised level of awareness; 2. improved goal orientation; 3. expansion of range of assessment; 4. shared assessment burden;
Students should also allow to access to their mark sheets and to the cassette tapes of the testing sessions.
Problems with speaking activities:
1. Inhibition:
Learners are often inhibited about trying to say things in a foreign language in the class room. They are worried about making mistakes, fearful of criticism or losing face.
2. Nothing to say:
Even if they are not inhibited, we often hear learners complain that they cannot think of anything to say.
3. Low or uneven participation:
Only one participant talks at a time or he or she dominates the group while others speak very little or not at all. In a large group each member gets very little talking time.
4. Mother-tongue use:
In classes where all or a number of the learners share the same mother tongue, they are likely to use it. It is easier and it feels unnatural to speak to one another in a foreign language.
MUHAMMAD ASIF
14
Project Question:
a) Oral testing is time consuming and difficult to administer and difficult to maintain its accurate assessment.
Determine those causes which hinder introducing oral testing in your language classroom.
b) write down view points of different teachers about the oral testing whether it is successful or not in language teaching.
Objectives of the study:
The aim of the study is to analyze the problems and learning needs of oral testing in the class. The purpose is to find out the difficulties or barriers that hinder students’ progress in oral learning. It is intended to come up with possible solutions through recommendations.
Significance of the study:
This study will help in knowing the factors and difficulties face in oral skills. The material will provide an opportunity for the teachers in recognizing the factors and problems faced in oral testing in the class. Lastly, this study might raise questions for future inquiry.
Methodology and procedure:
This was an action research. Two types of questionnaire were prepared. One for the students and second for the teachers. The instructor himself went to different areas and got questionnaires filled by the students and the teachers.
MUHAMMAD ASIF
15
Data Analysis:
Student’s Questionnaire’s Result
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 100
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Agree
strong agree
disagree
strong disagree
MUHAMMAD ASIF
16
Graph showing the responses of all respondents (students)
Agree Strong agree disagree Strong disagree0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Series 1
1. Only 10% agreed and 25% strong agreed that listening and speaking should not be neglected in the exams. While 40% disagreed and 25% strong disagreed from this statement.
MUHAMMAD ASIF
17
Agree Strong agree disagree Strong disagree0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Series 1
2. 05% agreed and 90% strong agreed that oral production is an essential component of learning a foreign language and only 05% disagreed.
Agree Strong agree Disagree strong disagree0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Series 1
MUHAMMAD ASIF
18
3. 40% agreed and 30% strong agreed that classrooms should devote extended time to the development of speaking skills and 15% disagreed and 15% also disagreed.
Agree Strong agree Disagree strong disagree0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Series 1
4. 35% agreed and 40% strong agreed from the statement accuracy is more important in oral testing than fluency. Only 5% disagreed and 20% strong disagreed.
MUHAMMAD ASIF
19
Agree Strong agree Disagree Strong disagree0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Series 1
5. 25% agreed and the same strong agreed that oral testing should be task based. 40% disagreed and 10% strong agreed from this statement.
Agree Stron agree disagree Stron disagree0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Series 1
6. 35% agreed and 40% strong agreed that oral testing is easier in group activities. Only 10% disagreed and 15% strong disagreed.
MUHAMMAD ASIF
20
Agree Strong agree Disagree Strong disagree0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Series 1
7. 25% agreed and 65% strong agreed that confidence and grammar should always be focused. And only 10% disagreed.
Agree Strong agree Disagree Strong disagree0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Series 1
8. Only 15% agreed that our exams should be based on four skills. (listening, speaking, reading, writing). 50% disagreed and 35% strong disagreed from this statement.
MUHAMMAD ASIF
21
Agree Strong agree Disagree Strong disagree0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Series 1
9. 25% agreed and same strong agreed that pronunciation is more important than vocabulary, 35% disagreed and 15% strong disagreed.
Agree Strong agree Disagree Strong disagree0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Series 1
10. 30% agreed 60% strong agreed that the size of the class should not be more than 20. Only 10% disagreed.
MUHAMMAD ASIF
22
Findings:
Most of the students were not competent enough to express them properly. They were asked to speak few lines on a given topic. Some of the important findings are,
i) Insufficient vocabularyii) Wrong use of articlesiii) Inability of the students to grasp the ideas clearly.iv) Lack of confidence on the part of the students.v) Poor sentence structure.vi) Poor tensesvii) Poor pronunciation
Teachers used to explain complex areas and words from different angles so that it could be more clearly understood. The concepts of the students were clear but their majority lacked the ability to explain in English language. The strategies and methods used for teaching purpose were common and traditional. For example, grammar translation method was widely used.
MUHAMMAD ASIF
23
Teacher’s Questionnaire’s Result:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 100
20
40
60
80
100
120 YesNo
MUHAMMAD ASIF
24
Graph showing the responses of all respondents (teachers)
Yes No0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Series 1
1. 60% of the respondents told that English should be taught as a language, not as a subject. While rest of the teachers were not satisfied.
Yes No0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Series 1
MUHAMMAD ASIF
25
2. Only 10% teachers agreed that listening and speaking should be a part of syllabus.
Yes No0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Series 1
3. Only 25% teachers were satisfied that our exams should be based on four skills.
Yes NO0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Series 1
MUHAMMAD ASIF
26
4. All the teachers were agreed that English should be declared as an official language in the class.
Yes No0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Series 1
5. 70% of the teachers were agreed that teachers should focus on the nature of the language, not on the structure of the language.
Yes No0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Series 1
MUHAMMAD ASIF
27
6. 90% teachers accepted that teacher should provide the students with marking criteria.
Yes No0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Series 1
7. 75% teachers said yes that the teacher must not focus on the grammar translation method.
Yes No0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Series 1
MUHAMMAD ASIF
28
8. 60% of the teachers agreed that listening and speaking are more important than reading and writing.
Yes No0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Series 1
9. 85% of the teachers disagreed that there should be zero periods for oral testing.
Yes No0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Series 1
MUHAMMAD ASIF
29
10. All of the teachers were agreed that oral testing can reduce the hesitation of the students.
Findings:
The classes are not overcrowded in some schools while the case was quite opposite with the other schools. Teachers can handle large classrooms even. Some teachers do not find any difficulty in selecting teaching material still they limit themselves to textbooks only. They are not provided with the teaching aids most of the time but they do not seem to need any thing besides a chalk and a duster. They are not satisfied with the feedback they get. Most of the teachers dictated their students or wrote on the board. According to them it is not possible to pay attention to the individual weak students because of lack of the time. Most of the teachers do not feel the need of oral skills in the class.
MUHAMMAD ASIF
30
b) The oral test:
The level of the students:
Mixed students of intermediate and graduation.
The objective for introducing oral testing in the class:
Learning to speak a second language is recognized as an important goal of the foreign language curriculum.
So here my objective is to introduce the oral testing in the class, so that the students will be able to speak accurately in their society in their target language. For this purpose I introduced basic speaking skills. After that I checked them for their pronunciation, stress pattern and intonation etc. for this I located their status as English language speaker.
The procedure:
The procedure was made in two stages.
In the 1st stage I asked them to speak for one minute about their personal situation. After that they were asked to make conservation for three minutes.
In the 2nd stage they were asked to speak at the stage on a particular situation. They were given following situations,
Problems of terrorism
Family planning and Islam
Role of movies in our society
MUHAMMAD ASIF
31
Pro-forma used for assessment:
Sr. # Confidence (10)
Eye contact (10)
Introduction (10)
Fluency & accuracy (10)
Answers to inquiries (10)
MUHAMMAD ASIF
32
Observations made during oral testing:
I have made following observations in the class,
Most of the students used grammar translation method. There were repetition, hesitations and incomplete utterances when they were speaking. There was lack of confidence on the part of the students. They used wrong articles and their vocabulary was insufficient. Their sentence structure, tenses and pronunciation were poor.
Findings:
Most of the students were not competent enough to express them properly. They were asked to speak few lines on a given topic. Some of the important findings are,
i) Insufficient vocabularyii) Wrong use of articlesiii) Inability of the students to grasp the ideas clearly.iv) Lack of confidence on the part of the students.v) Poor sentence structure.vi) Poor tensesvii) Poor pronunciation
Factors of neglecting oral skills:
Due to following factors the teaching and learning of oral skills is neglected,
1. Oral skills are difficult to test because it is time consuming and teachers cannot focus on speaking same for every student.
2. Our examination system is only made on the basis of reading and writing skills.
3. In Pakistan mostly the teachers don’t know enough about language methodologies.
MUHAMMAD ASIF
33
4. In our especially in government institutions the classes are of large size. So it becomes very difficult to test oral skills.
5. As it is easier to ignore the spoken skills so it is neglected in th examinations.
6. The teacher may lack himself the necessary confidence in speaking.
7. It is very difficult to check the fluency and accuracy of speech.
Conclusion:
Due to big class sizes, tight schedule and the lack of the time it is very difficult to assess the oral skills. But oral production is an essential component of learning a foreign language. As such, it should have a central place in the foreign language classroom in both areas of instruction and assessment. While many classrooms devote extended time to the development of the speaking skill, the assessment practices have not always reflected how language was taught. When little time is devoted to the assessment of oral language, the underlying message that oral language is not important becomes clear. Assessment of oral language can and should be an integral part of language learning and teaching.
Suggestions:
1. There should be able teachers who can check all speaking skills.2. In our examination system there should be focussed on oral testing.3. In our all institutions there should be a period of oral skills.4. To create interest among the students, interested material should be
provided.5. Students should be kept speaking in the target language.6. Some instructions or training should be given to the teachers.7. The teachers should be familiar with new methodologies of teaching.8. Oral competitions can play a vital role for this purpose.
MUHAMMAD ASIF
34
References:
http://www.actfl.org/files/public/Guidelines.pdf
www3.telus.net/linguisticsissues/oraltesting.html
http://eng.hi138.com/?i93334
http://www.readinga-z.com/guided/fluency.html
http://myenglishguru.com/teacher-forum/teaching-speaking.html
Brown, H. Douglas. (1994). Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. 3rd Ed. USA: Prentice Hall, Inc.
Hubbard, P., Jones, H., Thornton, B., and Wheeler, R. (1996). A Training Course for TEFL. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Alderson, C. & B. North (eds.). 1991. Language Testing in the 1990's. Modern English Publications & the British Council.
Allwright, D. 1984. ¡°Why don't learners learn what teachers teach? - the interaction hypothesis', in Singleton, D.M. & D.G. Little.
Blanche, P. 1988. 'Self-assessment of foreign language skills: implications for teachers and researchers', in RELC Journal Vol. 19. No. 1, pp.75-93.
Brindley, G. 1984. 'Needs analysis and objective setting in Adult Migration Programs' Sydney: NSW Adult Migrant Education Service.
Carroll, B. 1981. 'Testing communicative performance'. Oxford: Pergamon.
Dickinson, L. 1987. Self-instruction in Language Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Finch, AE & Hyun Taeduck. 1997. Tell Me About It. Seoul: Karam Press.
MUHAMMAD ASIF
35
Harris, M. 1997. 'Self-assessment f language learning in formal settings' in ELT Journal Vol. 51/1, pp. 12-20. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Heaton, B. (ed) 1982. Language testing. Modern English Publications.
Hofstede, G. 1986. 'Cultural Differences in teaching and learning' in International Journal of Intercultural Relations, Vol. 10, pp. 301-20.
Horwitz, E.K. 1985. 'Using student beliefs about language learning and teaching in the foreign language methods course' in Foreign Language Annals, 18, No.4. pp. 333-40
Horwitz, E.K. 1988. 'The beliefs about language learning of beginning university foreign language students' in The Modern Language Journal, 72,iii,pp 283-93
Johnson, K. and K. Morrow, (eds) 1981. 'Communication in the classroom' Harlow: Longman.
MUHAMMAD ASIF
