ON SPEAKING

ON SPEAKING

When it comes to dealing with speaking, independently of approaches, and even methods, I have observed that we must always bear in mind not only the principle that the student should be led from the easiest to the most difficult aspects of the language (Situational and notional-functional don’t, for instance) but also that of taking him from the most controlled to the least controlled or freest speaking activities. Evidently, methods based on a behaviourist approach will favour the former, whereas those that follow cognitivism will prefer the latter.

Thus, to be effective, a syllabus should go through different phases: controlled, semi-controlled and free speaking activities, but also making sure that they do co-exist at the same level, although control may be reduced (oral drills) as the learner goes up the scale and eventually reaches, let me call it “the debate stage”.

Considering this coexistence, I have got to the conclusion that even at high levels, such as B2 (our old “cuarto” or upper-intermediate) and C1 (old “quinto” or advanced), very good results are attained not by favouring uncontrolled activities and ignoring controlled ones completely but resorting to both, especially those at the extremes: the most controlled of speaking activities, reading aloud, and the freest, debates.

The first one, the most controlled activity, (see post Controlled Speaking) if carried out as it should, within three or four months will prove to have been positive not only to many but also to a very wide range of students, for it can be used: a) as remedial work, for all those who have made it to the upper courses in spite of their grammar and pronunciation errors/mistakes (1), and b) as imitation activity for all those students who, even without the handicap of mistakes, could do still better when it comes to intonation. I have been told that this is used in drama classes in the student’s own language, and I myself have heard a famous Englishman (Sir George Martin) confess in an interview that he had resorted to something similar in order to improve his speech. Its downside is that one must rely absolutely on the learner’s consistency in his doing it at home, for, due to programs and number of students, it cannot be done in class. 

The other extreme activity mentioned above, free-speaking, should never be neglected, and debates, discussions, role plays must be organized with certain frequency.  The drawback to this activity is, usually, the number of students, to solve which the class may have to be divided into two groups, say, of 8-14 students each. The importance of these “Speaking Sessions” is clear: no books, no photos, no visual or audio material of any kind being allowed, they are the only activities in which the student must talk as he would do in real life. We must not expect accuracy: it is not the goal. For the goals of free speaking are different: on the one hand, fluency; on the other, a very important psychological factor: self-confidence, which undoubtedly affects every performance, even yours in your own language. These goals imply that the teacher must be both very careful and tactful at the time of correcting mistakes. With being “careful” I mean “the timing”, considering when a mistake must be corrected (usually at the end of the session, unless the mistake begins to spread); as to tactful, we must remember the second goal: self-confidence. The fact that many adults (and young adults, i.e. secondary school students) tend not to trust their English and to lose confidence when corrected before a class cannot be disregarded. The speaking session must flow as smoothly as possible; we, teachers, mere witnesses, noting down the possible errors and also correct uses of the language to comment at the end of the session, trying to avoid naming those who are responsible for mistakes.

To sum up, in B2 and C1, and I dare say even at lower stages, when it comes to dealing with speaking, these two extreme activities complement each other, one reinforcing accuracy, the other fluency.

(1)       Mistake: wrong production the student believes to be right (the highly contagious: I suggested them to stay).  Error: wrong production the student knows to be wrong (the popular “people is”).