Teaching Speaking: From Accuracy vs. Fluency to Accuracy plus Fluency

Katsuhiko NakagawaYamaguchi Prefectural Hofu Senior High SchoolYamaguchi Prefecture
Under the Supervision of Dr. Benne Willerman
IntroductionWhat makes teaching speaking so difficult? Why are the ways to foster spoken language skills left relatively undeveloped in English education in Japanese high school, when they are the vital part of communicative competence? Compared to teaching listening skills, where varieties of techniques have been developed since the introduction of the oral communication courses, partly with the help of new technological devices such as the closed captioning system or mini disk, teaching speaking seems to be far behind.One reason for this stagnation is that there is no view commonly agreed upon of what successful speaking is. In other words, what should the goals of learning speaking in the Japanese high school be? One view is that the speech is thought to be successful as long as the learner can make himself/herself understood no matter how incorrect the language, while another view insists on correctness in every aspect of language ranging from grammar to pronunciation. The former is known as the fluency-oriented approach. From this viewpoint, small grammatical or pronunciation errors are insignificant, especially in the early learning stages. As a matter of fact, too much emphasis on correcting them is considered harmful rather than helpful, for it may cause excessive monitor in the mind, hindering the natural acquisition of spoken skills (Ebsworth, 1998). The fluency-oriented approach believes that spoken skills are developed meaningful communication. Naturally many EFL teachers support this viewpoint. The latter, on the contrary, places most emphasis on accuracy by pursuing mainly grammatical correctness. This view is called the accuracy-oriented approach. Practices that focus on repetition of newly introduced forms or grammatical structures are thought to help the learning. Although once supported by many linguists, nowadays it is seen as rather obsolete. Stern (1991) says that the teachers using this approach complained about the lack of effectiveness in the long run and the boredom they endangered among the students. Few EFL teachers, at least ostensibly, favor this viewpoint. In reality, accuracy and fluency are closely related, which leads us to the notion that accuracy as well as fluency is necessary for successful communication. As Ebsworth (1998) says, "A steady stream of speech which is highly inaccurate in vocabulary, syntax, or pronunciation could be so hard to understand as to violate an essential aspect of fluency being comprehensible. On the other hand, it is possible for the speaker to be halting but accurate... Sentence level grammatical accuracy that violates principles of discourse and appropriateness is also possible, but such language would not be truly accurate in following the communicative rules of the target language." Thus, it may not be too much to say one speak fluently without accuracy or vice versa.Consequently, we see the necessity of combining the fluency-oriented approach and accuracy-oriented approach by meticulously weaving certain language items into communication-oriented tasks. This research paper will discuss how we can develop learners' speaking by enhancing both accuracy and fluency. In the first chapter, the strength and weakness of these two approaches will be examined. Then, EFL learners' speech and major causes of inhibition will be analyzed, along with suggestions for remedies to reduce this inhibition. The second chapter will deal with how we can modify the existing learning tasks in order to implement these remedies.
Existing Approaches and Strategies:Fluency-oriented Approaches vs. Accuracy-oriented Approach
As is already mentioned, the fluency-oriented approach, which enjoys popularity in EFL classrooms, emphasizes two points that stem from the Natural Approach suggested by Krashen and Terrell. One is that meaningful communication is the key to develop spoken skills. The other is that the least amount of correction should be given, otherwise communication itself is hampered. Those who believe in the fluency-oriented approach value natural acquisition of a language. Errors are regarded as inevitable by-products observed in the natural process of development rather than simply avoidable mistakes.The fluency-oriented approach, however, is not free of weakness. Probably, the most crucial is fossilization, errors that have become a permanent part in the way a learner speaks (Nation 1989). Ironically, fossilized errors prevent the learner from bettering fluency, as higher accuracy is required for improving fluency in each level. It is doubtful that learners can naturally correct all of their errors for themselves in the course of time. If they can not, when should the errors be corrected and how?Another weakness is that communication in a target language is not always the most effective way to develop speaking skills. In fact, communication can be quite successful even if the speaker's skills are rather limited. If the goal is simply successful communication, what one should do is as easy as to avoid saying what is above his/her speaking skills. Needless to say, this will never bring development in language skills.Although the accuracy-oriented approach is rather neglected among the current EFL pedagogues, one can still see in it some advantages over the fluency-oriented approach, especially regarding the points mentioned above. First of all, feedback. Learners are provided an opportunity to correct errors. They will become conscious of repeated mistakes before fossilization takes place. It is true that correction of errors that are provided inadvertently May discourage learners from speaking. But correction itself can also be encouraging, given in an appropriate manner, for it enables learners to make sure where exactly the problem lies in their speech. Brown and Nation (199) claim that the instructor should decide whether the correction is worth interruption, and if it is, the instructor ought to consider possible causes and then think of appropriate ways of dealing with the error. Learners will also be fully aware of the target language items that they are trying to acquire in practice. This awareness will eventually facilitate the learning.
The Process of Speaking and Causes of Speech Inhibition The Analysis of the Speaking ProcessAlthough a number of studies have analyzed the process of native speaker's speech, the process of foreign language learners' speech is not yet completely elucidated. From one viewpoint, however, their speaking process is quite similar to that of native language speakers'. Since the aim of this paper is to suggest the ways to improve EFL learners' speech, some basic concepts of the foreign language learners' speaking process will be introduced here briefly. Many researchers agree that there are five stages in the speaking process: conceptualization, formulation, articulatory buffer, articulation, and auditory feedback. At the stage of conceptualization internal or external stimuli cause intention. It is generally believed that there is no intervention of language in conceptualization. Formulating is the second stage, where the intention is verbalized in the mind. In this stage verbalized concepts are formulated through reciprocal actions of the lexicon, the grammatical encoder, and the phonological encoder. The lexicon, the mental dictionary, supplies the speaker with necessary words, and the provided words are connected in the grammatically and phonologically correct order by the function of the grammatical encoder and the phonological encoder. Before it is uttered, the verbalized concept is temporarily stored in the mind. This stage is called the articulatory buffer. This function allows the speaker to make a certain length of speech as a unit. While the speech is being made, the speaker is incessantly monitoring his/her own speech. This function, auditory feedback, contributes to the smooth flow of the speech (Levelt, 1989).Presumably, a malfunction in the second, formulating stage is the main cause of speaking inhibition. In addition to the smaller lexicon, the weaker grammatical and phonological encoders deteriorate both accuracy and fluency. Thus, building a larger vocabulary and strengthening grammatical and phonological competence is one of the most immediate ways to the solution.
The Characteristics of an EFL Speaker's SpeechWhat is equally important to improve spoken skills is how to accelerate processing, which is the crucial part of fluency. To answer this question, arguments from those who focus on speech producing-procedures that are peculiar to foreign language speakers can be helpful. They might be the causes of delay in production of speech. For example, it is said that some foreign language speakers formulate the verbalized concept in their mother tongue and translate it into the foreign language, especially when they have to deal with complicated matters. Naturally, they need more time than other speakers no matter how fast they are as translators.Communication StrategiesThe Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics defines communication strategy as "a way used to express a meaning in a second or foreign language, by a learner who has a limited command of the language. In trying to communicate, a learner may have to make up for a lack of knowledge of grammar and vocabulary" by using such means as avoidance, topic conversion, paraphrasing and so forth. Paradoxically, some of the communication strategies are notable causes of inhibitions in developing foreign language speakers' spoken skills. While they facilitate harmonious communication, they sometimes turn out to be harmful to the development of both accuracy and fluency. For example, avoidance of the topic that is above the speaker's skills, which probably is the most commonly observed communication strategy. It allows the EFL learner to carry out successful communication. However, it also derives him/her of the opportunity to realize what exactly is lacking in his/her speaking skills in dealing with the very topic avoided. Paraphrasing, another communication strategy often employed by EFL speakers of intermediate or higher level, sometimes leads to fossilization as a result of successful communication without natural or correct use of language. Island of ReliabilityEFL speakers have set phrases that they often use in their speech. These phrases are so familiar to the speaker that he/she can use them almost instantly and unconsciously without searching for the right words in his/her mental lexicon or having to go carefully through the grammatical or phonological encoding process. These phrases are called islands of reliability by Dechert(1983). Islands of reliability contribute to the fluency of speech. The more islands of reliability the speaker has, the more fluently he or she can speak. Speakers with sufficient number of islands of reliability only need to find words or phrases that bind his/her islands of reliability. In order to increase the number of islands of reliability, EFL learners need to use certain phrases repeatedly until they attain familiarity. Sometimes undesirable phrases are fossilized as island of reliability and annoy the interlocutor.
Modification of Existing Speaking TasksWe have seen several clues that might be helpful in modifying existing tasks. The basic criterion is, as argued from the fluency-oriented view, tasks should be given in the form of meaningful communication. The natural development of three speech-producing devices, namely mental lexicon, grammatical encoder, and phonological encoder, is expected through meaningful communicative activities. At the same time, the tasks should include repetitive exercises that focus on target language items. Errors should be pointed out so that they will not end up being fossilized. None of the criteria should be imposed in a way that will discourage the learner. This chapter will examine how these criteria can be implemented.
Fluency plus Accuracy ApproachAlthough the fluency-oriented approach seems so different from the accuracy-oriented approach, introducing some elements of accuracy in it is feasible. In fact, this view is shared by many EFL teachers. Ebsworth has found that the majority of teachers surveyed favor the judicious use of grammar for accuracy within a meaning-centered communicative approach (1998). Moreover, many EFL teachers have already been practicing this. Let's take a look at this example. "I went a movie." is a plausible answer by an EFL student to the question, "What did you do during the weekend?" From the fluency-oriented view, the teacher is expected to ask about the movie rather than to correct the sentence. However, the teacher is most likely to say, "Oh, you went to see a movie," instead of jumping to the question, "What movie did you see?" This type of natural reaction, known as consciousness raising, (Rutherford 1987) works as feedback from the instructor, reminding the speaker of errors in a positive way. Learners, however, may still need some other opportunities to become fully aware of their errors, for the instructor's reaction cannot be sufficient. One reason is that the instructor can seldom imply all the errors that should be corrected, especially when the learner is telling a long story. The instructor should restate only a limited number of errors; otherwise the learner's motivation to talk will be fettered. The other is that the learner may not have a chance to repeat the correct sentence if he wants to continue his story. As long as communication is the main purpose, to give up the topic for a repeating exercise should be avoided. For these two reasons, the instructor's natural response cannot always fulfill the necessity of error correction.Since the instructor cannot give enough correction, it is necessary to seek other sourses for feedback. One possible alternative in the EFL class is peer feedback.Peer feedback needs to be controlled properly by the instructor, for it, like corrections by the instructor, can be detrimental to the learner's motivation. First, the instructor must make sure that adequate amount of feedback is given to the learner. Too many corrections may discourage the learner, while too few corrections will fail to do the trick. Secondly, the instructor should see if feedback is given in an appropriate manner. The instructor must avoid introducing such direct corrections among learners as may cause undesirable tension in the classroom.As it is possible to add accuracy elements to communicative activity, so is it to add communicative elements to repetitive practice. Since the problem of repetitive practice is that monotonous repetition causes lethargy, what the instructor has to do is to create a circumstance to carry out real communication, in which the learner can find the meaning in repeating what has already been said. For example, at a party one must repeat self-introduction each time he/she meets new people. This is real communication, and the person is not likely to get tired of saying the same thing as long as he/she wants to meet more people.The difficulty of introducing repetition in communicative work lies in how the instructor can build into repetitive communicative work the target language items that will be acquired. In other words, the learners should be able to carry out meaningful communication while they are repeatedly using the target language items that are yet to be fully acquired. For instance, those who have already experienced enough self-introduction will improve no further however many times they do the same self-introduction. To make them change the way of self-introduction without a proper reason may spoil the authenticity of communication. After all, target language items should be provided only when the learner realizes the necessity of the particular items, otherwise communication will lose its authenticity.
Task ModificationThree modes of activities to enhance speaking, namely imitation, rehearsal and extemporaneous speech are suggested by Morley (1991). Imitation, the most fundamental practice, requires the learners to copy a model speech. Rehearsal is the activity where pseudo-communication takes place in such activities as skits or role-plays. Extemporaneous speech activities provide an opportunity to improvise speaking and use language more freely and creatively. Here, task modifications will be attempted as per rehearsal and extemporaneous speech rather than imitation in order that implementation will be exercised on the basis of meaningful communication.A variety of speaking activities are found in an EFL classroom. Information gap game, show and tell, and skit playing are among them. These activities can be categorized into four groups by their speech forms. The first group is the activities defined as an impromptu monologue. Explaining a picture that is shown to the learner for the first time is an example of this group. An information gap game is among the second group of activities, where learners carry out unplanned conversation. Both of these two groups include extemporaneous speaking. On the other hand, the next two activities consist of planned speeches. Show and tell, which is a popular speech practice in EFL, belongs to the third category. This group is prefabricated speech activities. The fourth group is planned conversation. Skit-playing activities are among them. These two activities include rehearsed speech.The implication of the categorization is each of these four types of activities should have its own distinctive aims. Through conversation activities, learners can pick up phrases useful in conversation, while monologue activities tend to provide different types of expressions. An impromptu speech can both be diagnostic and confirmatory since it may reveal the weakness of the learner's speech as well as it shows what has already been acquired. However, it will not lead to the improvement of speaking unless the weakness is recognized by the learner. On the other hand, a prefabricated speech that includes newly introduced language items directly contributes to language acquisition. These characteristics of each activity should be taken into account in modifying speaking activities.Impromptu MonologueStory retelling is a speaking activity in which the learners retell the story that they have read, seen or listened to. This is considered an impromptu monologue activity. The easiest way is to have the learner summarize the story he/she has read, which, however, is regarded as a quasi-impromptu speech as the learner can use the words or phrases they encountered while reading the original story. The same activity can be done after the learner has listened to a story. Another popular way is to show the learner a picture, or pictures and have him/her explain what he/she saw. The problem of story retelling is that the retold story is rarely reviewed. When learner finishes retelling, the task is considered completed, and after all, the learner doesn't even realize errors were made. The learner may be happy with the fact that the task has been successfully completed, but the errors remain. To avoid this, the learner needs to be given proper feedback and another chance to tell the same story in which correct language is used.To introduce group work is one way to solve this problem. Suppose there are forty students in class. The instructor divides the class into five groups of eight learners. Each group has one speaker, and the other seven members are the listeners. The speaker tell a story to the others. The instructor sees that each speaker tells a different story from other speakers'. When the story retelling is over, the listeners rewrite the gist of the story, and give it to the speaker. The speakers, after reading the rewritten story by the listeners, move to the next group to tell the same story.This activity is validated on the premise that writing is grammatically more correct. Expectation is that some of the rewritten stories have corrected sentences where the speaker made errors, while others May have the same errors uncorrected. The speakers can compare all pieces of feedback to see where they had problems in their speeches. The speakers will also know how clear they have made themselves.Impromptu DialogueUnlike monologue activities, dialogue activities are done through conversation. Conversation requires quick response and hardly allows the speakers to reflect on their speech in the communication process. To foster accuracy in dialogue activities, the instructor has to create an opportunity for the learners to stop and think while the learners are engaged in conversation. Here is one example of a revised version of a common conversational activity known as find-someone-who.The learners are given a piece of paper that has such questions as "Who was brought up in a village?", "Who can hum the US Anthem?", and "Who doesn't want to get married?" The learners talk to one another to find someone who belongs to the categories. The learners sometimes have to paraphrase the question rather than simply use the same expressions. For instance, instead of "Can you hum the US Anthem?", the learner May need to ask, "Do you know the melody of the US national song?" if the words "hum" and "anthem" are not familiar to the interlocutor.In this activity, the authenticity of communication varies largely according to the provided questions. If the learners are given the same question, there will be no real communication, for the learners know the questions before they are actually asked. Though different questions to all the learners make communication authentic, the learners will have little chance to reflect on their use of language. As a consequence, the instructor should avoid these two extremes.By providing both the same and different questions, the learners can experience real communication and have a chance to correct their errors at the same time. Let's say the instructor prepares twenty different questions for forty students and give each student five of the questions randomly selected. Seventy-five percent of the activity will be real communication, while the other quarter will be chances where the learners are asked a question they are already familiar with. Listening to others ask the same question turns the learners to their errors. Prefabricated MonologueNo matter whether it is prefabricated or impromptu, monologue can be a real communicative activity if there is an audience. As the speaker is allowed time for preparation, a prefabricated monologue can provide a particularly good opportunity to acquire a large variety of new language items through real communication. It is also a chance for the learner to get familiar with more authentic language since the learner can choose the best way to say what he/she wants to say by rumination. Giving a speech in an oratorical contest is classified in this type of speaking activity. At the classroom level, the popular show and tell, in which the learner shows an object to the audience and tells a story about it can serve the purpose.Generally speaking, prefabricated monologues are longer and more complicated than improvisations, and they need more detailed feedback. Pair work may meet the necessity of detailed feedback from prefabricated monologue activity. Rather than merely writing down what has been heard, the listener plays a more active role of correcting and advising the speaker. The speaker, given advice, revises speech script before the next lesson and will do the same activity with a new partner in the next class. This technique can even be applied to such an easy activity as show and tell. Prefabricated DialogueThese types of activities, including drama-playing or skit-performing, are commonly used in the EFL classroom and are believed to facilitate the acquisition of communicative competence. Learners are put in such realistic situations as shopping, asking directions, or answering the telephone, to practice different sorts of conversation. Learning routine phrases in particular situations will surely help the natural flow of communication.However, the instructor should not overlook the innate discrepancy of the activities. The language per se is most colloquial and authentic while the activity itself is artificial. No matter how communicative it may look on the surface, the sequence of memorized phrases is essentially nothing but a recitation by several learners. Thus prefabricated dialogue activities should be revised to bear a certain amount of unpredictability. There are two major ways to reduce predictability in prefabricated dialogue activities. One is to have the learners prepare several different phrases to mean the same thing. The other is to integrate some elements of improvisation into planned conversation. Flexibility can be varied depending on the level of the learners in both ways. In the former case, the learners may either such a simple change as affirmative statement of "sure" to "yes" or rather a complex change such as "Can I smoke here?" to "Would you mind if I smoke here?", in which case the reaction should also be changed. The latter offers more diverse variation. With lower level learners, just a shopping item may be freely chosen. In the meantime advanced learners might be able to perform a part of skit without any prefabrication.
ConclusionAs Heidi Riggenbach and Anne Lazaraton claim, "Today, language students are considered successful if they can communicate effectively in their second or foreign language" (1991). It seems that the focus has swerved from accuracy to fluency. Grammar is disregarded, and communicative activities are prevalent in an EFL class.Yet, many would agree that accuracy is indispensable to improving fluency. It is not that accuracy or fluency but accuracy and fluency. In fact, they are mutually influential. Accuracy brings fluency and fluency brings further accuracy. Accuracy and fluency are not contradictory but rather like two pillars that support the spiral stairs toward communicative competence.In this research paper, suggestions are made in modifying existing speaking tasks, inclusive of four examples of modification. It is possible to foster accuracy in communicative activities. The crucial factors are real communication, framework on demand, encouraging error correction, and meaningful repetition. By implementing these factors, almost all the speaking tasks can be modified to enhance both accuracy and fluency.