Oral Communication in TESOL Integrating Speaking, Listening, And Pronunciation

Wiley and Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages, Inc. (TESOL) are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to TESOL Quarterly.

http://www.jstor.org

Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages, Inc. (TESOL)

Oral Communication in TESOL: Integrating Speaking, Listening, and Pronunciation Author(s): John M. Murphy Source: TESOL Quarterly, Vol. 25, No. 1 (Spring, 1991), pp. 51-75Published by: Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages, Inc. (TESOL)Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3587028Accessed: 19-02-2016 09:13 UTC

REFERENCESLinked references are available on JSTOR for this article:

http://www.jstor.org/stable/3587028?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents

You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/ info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

This content downloaded from 190.144.171.70 on Fri, 19 Feb 2016 09:13:09 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org

http://www.jstor.org/publisher/tesol

http://www.jstor.org/stable/3587028

http://www.jstor.org/stable/3587028?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp



TESOL QUARTERLY, Vol. 25, No. 1, Spring 1991

Oral Communication in TESOL: Integrating Speaking, Listening, and Pronunciation

JOHN M. MURPHY Georgia State University

This article discusses the teaching of oral communication skills (that is, speaking, listening, and pronunciation) in programs of English as a Second Language. The article is addressed to teachers who conduct courses in this area for ESL students in secondary schools, colleges, and universities although the guidelines presented can be adapted to other ESL contexts (e.g., continuing education, private tutorials). Speaking and listening are discussed as major skill areas; pronunciation is presented as a subset of both speaking and listening development. This article argues that attention to these three components of oral communication is viewed as indispensable to any coherent curriculum design. Although relative degrees of emphasis may vary for particular courses, speaking, listening, and pronunciation are characterized as reciprocally interdependent oral language processes.

Oral communication is a complex and multifaceted language process. In this discussion, references to speaking, signal activities that provide students opportunities for improving oral fluency through interpersonal communication. References to pronunciation signal activities that provide students opportunities for gaining accurate control over the sound system. This distinction parallels one widely accepted in the teaching of the ESL writing process. Writing teachers commonly distinguish between activities that focus upon skills of composing (e.g., free writing, brainstorming, elaborating, and revising content) and those that center upon the accuracy of the final product (e.g., grammar exercises, controlled composition, editing, and revising syntax). Though speaking activities and pronunciation activities are addressed separately here, the intention is not to imply that they are mutually exclusive. Jazz chanting (Graham, 1978, 1987), participating in communicative activities centered upon the sound system, and rehearsing dialogues

51



are a few examples of the many classroom procedures that embrace elements of both. For the purposes of the present discussion, speaking and listening can be defined as major skill areas of interpersonal communication; pronunciation encompasses subsets of both speaking and listening skill development. Due to the high degree of overlap among these areas, a fundamental premise underlying this article is that attention to speaking, listening, and pronunciation must proceed in an integrated fashion. The areas are, however, addressed separately in order to highlight some crucial differences. Each section begins with an historical methodological overview.

SPEAKING

The ability to speak coherently and intelligibly on a focused topic is generally recognized as a necessary goal for ESL students. Because many of them aspire to professional careers in English- dominant communities, the coming decade will see increasing pressure placed upon ESL high school, college, and university graduates to possess excellent skills in both speech and writing. ESL teachers of oral communication commonly turn to widely accepted L2 teaching methods and materials. For those unfamiliar with this area of the literature, Richards and Rogers (1986) present a useful framework for the systematic description and comparison of L2 methods. See Pennycook (1989) and Prabhu (1990) for critiques of the concept of method.

While examining L2 methods and approaches for the purposes of curriculum design and lesson planning, teachers of ESL oral communication need to keep at least two central considerations in mind. First, the various methodologies most widely discussed in the literature differ dramatically with respect to the role played by oral language in the classroom. Speakers and listeners are expected to interact with their peers, teachers, and other target language speakers in qualitatively different manners within diverse L2 methods. Teachers will need to make principled decisions as they review the literature, historical and current, on the following: Grammar Translation (no attention is given to speaking or listening activities at all); Total Physical Response (students rarely speak but are challenged to physically demonstrate listening comprehension); Audiolingualism (students repeat and orally manipulate language forms); the Direct Method and Situational Language Teaching (teachers do most of the talking while students engage in many controlled, context-explicit, speaking activities); the Comprehen- sion Approach (emphasizes listening and reading comprehension);

52 TESOL QUARTERLY



the Natural Approach (initially emphasizes listening comprehension, and later reading, while leaving room for guided speaking activities); the Silent Way (teachers rarely speak, while student speaking is focused upon grammatically sequenced language forms); Suggestopedia (very controlled speaking activities which are based upon lengthy written scripts and dramatic teacher performances); Community Language Learning (many peer-to- peer interactions that contribute to a community spirit among students, whereas the spoken forms incorporated into the syllabus are generated by students themselves); Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) (many peer-to-peer, guided, and free speaking activities which are organized around notional, functional, and/or linguistic considerations; and a Task-Based Approach (activities are centered upon practical tasks for students to perform that can be weighted to emphasize oral communication).

A second consideration is that whereas the various methods and approaches presented in the literature offer genuine alternatives for teaching learners at early stages of L2 proficiency, several seem less appropriate for intermediate or advanced levels of speaking proficiency (e.g., Total Physical Response, the Silent Way, or Suggestopedia). For example, Krashen and Terrell state explicitly that the Natural Approach "is for beginners and is designed to help them become intermediates" (quoted in Richards & Rogers, 1986, p. 134). Some adaptations of any approach will be necessary to meet the needs of particular groups of learners; moreover, these methods are founded upon diverse theories of language and language learning which individual teachers of ESL oral communication will need to evaluate for themselves.

Many student populations have significant spoken language needs at the intermediate, advanced, and professional levels. For example, ESL college students at many institutions are required to complete a basic speech course in order to fulfill core curriculum requirements. International teaching assistants need to develop effective styles for lecturing to monolingual English-speaking undergraduates. Those who major in business and marketing commonly are expected to demonstrate mastery of public speaking as part of the requirements of their academic departments. When these students participate in ESL programs, specialized courses need to be designed that focus upon requisite skills of oral communication.

Articles that address the teaching of speaking in ESL periodically appear in the professional journals (e.g., Bassano & Christison, 1987; Dubois, 1986; Gebhard, 1982; Maurice, 1983; Meloni & Thompson, 1980; Montgomery & Eisenstein, 1985; Murphy, in press; Richards,

INTEGRATING ORAL COMMUNICATION IN TESOL 53



1980; Scarcella, 1978; Taylor & Wolfson, 1978). Also, several L1 articles introduce speaking activities that can be adapted for use in ESL classrooms (Bytwerk, 1985; Hansen, 1982). Yook and Seiler (1990) discuss the needs and concerns of ESL students who participate in speech communication courses. These are rich sources for teachers to examine when they are exploring alternative classroom procedures. In addition, the American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL) provides English language proficiency guidelines for the teaching of speaking and listening. For both of these skill areas, the ACTFL Provisional Proficiency Guidelines (1982, reprinted in James, 1985) describe nine levels, ranging from novice through superior levels of proficiency, suggesting appropriate activities at most levels. The guidelines are illuminating since they indicate that some classroom procedures may be proficiency-level specific. For example, public speaking activities may be appropriate for high-intermediate, advanced, or superior-level L2 speakers but they are inappropriate for novice or low-intermediate level learners. On the other hand, activities such as role playing, collaborating with peers during interactive games, or singing popular songs may be adapted for classroom use across several proficiency levels.

In the L2 classroom, speaking activities can be planned to include everything from dyadic, to small-group, to whole-class interaction patterns. Byrne (1987), Klippel (1987), and Golebiowska (1990), for example, present teacher reference materials that are useful for getting ESL students to speak with one another in these different groupings. The L2 literature is rich in resources for engaging students in speaking activities such as rehearsing dialogues, completing information-gap activities, playing interactive games, discussing topical issues, problem solving, role playing, and completing speaking tasks. ESL speakers at lower levels of proficiency will probably feel more comfortable when they are provided with opportunities for expressing themselves in dyads and small groups since these formats are less intimidating than ones that require individual students to take turns speaking in front of an entire class. Ur (1981, 1988) describes several hundred classroom activities that can be adapted for the purpose of getting lower-level and intermediate-level students to speak communicatively in dyads and small groups. Nolasco and Arthur (1989) provide another teacher reference text devoted to activities for generating lively discussions between L2 learners.

In addition to working in dyads and small groups, students at higher levels of proficiency sometimes need to gain experience in expressing themselves in front of a whole class. Several writers take

54 TESOL QUARTERLY



the position that more proficient L2 speakers benefit from generating and developing their own topics to present in class (Dale & Wolf, 1988; Meloni & Thompson, 1980; Murphy, in press). Students can develop their topics through classroom procedures that are parallel to ones advocated in the teaching of the writing process (see, for example, Mangelsdorf, 1989; Zamel, 1987). A significant difference between an L2 writing course and this component of an advanced level L2 oral communication course is that in the case of the latter, a student's topic culminates as an oral, rather than as a written, presentation. Here, too, the delivery of a student's topic may be realized across a range of possible grouping patterns. If working in dyads or small groups, individual students can be provided with multiple opportunities for revising and elaborating their presentations through a process of delivering the same topic a number of times to different members of the class (for further discussion, see Murphy, in press). If addressing the whole class, a student has to cope with the kinds of affective pressures that are likely to be encountered in content-area courses and in nonclassroom settings. Teachers need to make decisions concerning how to integrate these alternative structures for speaking activities based upon knowledge of their students' proficiency levels and educational needs.

LISTENING

Listening instruction should play an important role in oral communication curricula because high school and college students are expected to enroll in lecture-centered courses during their earliest experiences within mainstream classrooms. Lecture-centered teaching in mainstream classrooms requires that ESL college students function effectively as listeners from the very beginning of their academic careers. Within most classroom settings, listening serves as a primary channel for learning. Because little attention is given to the students' listening abilities in other academic preparatory courses (Chamot, 1987), listening and connections between listening, speaking, and pronunciation emerge as central components of ESL oral communication.

The listening process currently is gaining attention as a major area of interest in the literature on speech communication for native speakers of English (Hunt & Cusella, 1983; Rubin & Roberts, 1987; Stewart, 1983; Streff, 1984). Because it is a pervasive language experience that operates in contexts ranging from simple conversations to academic debates, the listening process merits careful consideration. It has a primary role to play in the teaching of




ESL oral communication. Some researchers of second language acquisition and many L2 methodologists propose that a specific emphasis upon listening instruction, at both beginning and intermediate levels of L2 proficiency, greatly enhances the language learning potentials of ESL students (Dunkel, 1986; Krashen & Terrell, 1983; Nagle & Sanders, 1986; Winitz, 1981). For advanced students, ESL listening instruction should incorporate curricular purposes presently advocated for L1 learners-e.g., listening in order to empathize, to evaluate, to enjoy, to analyze, to critique, and to take written notes (Wolff, Marsnik, Tacey, & Nichols, 1983). Especially for ESL students who live and study in English-dominant communities, certain recurring L1 themes are appropriate goals for L2 classroom instruction: activities that encourage students to adapt to a speaker's appearance and delivery, to overcome external and internal distractions, to generate interest in what a speaker has to say, to listen for central concepts and the gist of messages, to anticipate what may be coming next, to pay attention to paralinguis- tic information, to give the speaker a chance before jumping to conclusions, to ask pertinent questions, to paraphrase for the benefit of others, and to synthesize new information in relation to what one already knows (see Wolff et al., 1983; Wolvin & Coakley, 1982).

Prior to the 1970s, it was common for listening to be characterized as a receptive language skill in which listeners were pictured as passively assimilating the messages presented to them by speakers (Morley, 1984). As information-transmission models of communication have been superseded by interactional, cybernetic, and transactional frames of reference, a new paradigm is emerging (Berko, Wolvin, & Wolvin, 1981; Brown, G., 1987). Current theorists describe listening comprehension as an interactive, interpretive process in which listeners engage in a dynamic construction of meaning. While attending to spoken language, listeners predict topic development (Crow, 1983; Goss, 1982), use a series of definable microlistening subskills (Richards, 1983), relate what they hear to their personal stores of prior knowledge (Dunkel, 1986; Nagle & Sanders, 1986), and creatively react to what speakers say (Murphy, 1989). Dirven and Oakeshott-Taylor (1984), Richards (1983), H. M. Taylor (1981), Morley (1980), Snow and Perkins (1979), and Tarone (1974) point out that microlevel listening subskills are just as critical to the overall listening process as macrolevel listening strategies. In a massive study of Korean ESL learners, Choi (1988) presents convincing evidence that practice with microlistening is indispensable for understanding fast, fluent, conversational speech. Microlevel phonological information carries necessary clues that target language listeners depend upon in order

56 TESOL QUARTERLY



to comprehend what they hear. Practice with recognizing and making efficient use of these clues is one way to lay a firm foundation for oral production activities. Because microlistening includes the aural discrimination of sound patterns within streams of speech, it is central to the teaching of accurate pronunciation. Richards (1983) defines and discusses over 50 separate microlistening subskills that ESL learners need to master in order to understand conversational as well as academic styles of discourse.' His work has been highly influential in this area (Powers, 1985). Many teachers find Richards' taxonomy especially useful since it presents general guidelines for assessing students' needs, formulat- ing objectives, evaluating materials, designing classroom procedures, and constructing listening tests (Dunkel, in press).

It is widely acknowledged that listeners use strategies for listening (Mendelsohn, 1984; Wipf, 1984). At least two separate research studies confirm that effective L2 listeners make better use of inferencing, self-monitoring, and elaboration strategies than do less effective L2 listeners (Murphy, 1987; O'Malley, Chamot, & Kupper, 1989). Expanding upon Lebauer's (1984) recommendations for classroom instruction, Murphy (1989) proposes a series of macrolevel strategic questions for L2 listeners to attend to while attending to academic lectures (see Appendix). Practice in implementing these questions is intended to help develop the metacognitive skills of L2 listeners, which can be used in the classroom as a basis for connections between listening and speaking activities.

Listening is thus a creative activity that can be analyzed and described. Resources such as those mentioned above provide teachers with necessary reference materials for designing L2 classroom listening activities. Rost's (1991) and Ur's (1990) teacher reference texts are especially useful since they include not only guidelines for designing listening activities but numerous lesson plans targeted for L2 classroom instruction. An important theme that the L1 and L2 literatures share in common is the mutually interdependent relationship between the processes of speaking and listening. In addition, increasing numbers of ESL methodologists argue that L2 pronunciation practice needs to be intimately linked with the listening process (Gilbert, 1984, 1987) and with genuinely communicative speaking activities (Acton, 1984; Celce-Murcia, 1 Richards' taxonomy is separated into (a) 33 microskills for conversational listening (e.g., discriminating distinctive sounds of the target language, recognizing the stress patterns of words, recognizing the rhythmic structure of English, distinguishing word boundaries) and (b) 18 microskills for listening to academic lectures (e.g., identifying the purpose and scope of a lecture, identifying the role of discourse markers, recognizing key lexical items, deducing meanings of unfamiliar words from context, detecting the attitude of a speaker toward subject matter).




1987; Pica, 1984). This theme leads to the next component under discussion.

PRONUNCIATION

Recently there has been a resurgence of interest in the teaching of pronunciation with adult second language learners, as evidenced by numerous survey articles and research reports appearing in a number of major publications (Avery & Erlich, 1987; Leather, 1983; Morley, 1987; Pennington & Richards, 1986). Some common themes are as follows:

1. Pronunciation needs to be approached from both macro- and microlevel perspectives. Morley (1987) indicates the primary role to be played by suprasegmentals (i.e., stress, rhythm, and intonation) in the teaching of pronunciation; she places vowel and consonant segmentals in a secondary, supporting role. In their discussion of "voice quality settings," Esling & Wong (1983) suggest that when learners are provided with opportunities to practice a small number of physical positionings for the tongue, throat, and mouth that are representative of U.S. and Canadian English speakers (e.g., spread lips, open jaw, palatalized tongue position, retroflex articulation, nasal voice, lowered larynx, and creaky voice), then the pronunciation of individual vowel and consonant sounds realized within these settings improves. Supra- segmental sound patterns and broadly focused voice quality settings are separate macrolevel components of pronunciation. Attention to these components can complement and set the stage for classroom activities that focus upon microlevel sound segments.

2. Attaining better pronunciation habits is intimately linked with learners' affective states. Stevick (1978) wrote over a decade ago that in the teaching of pronunciation,

all too often, self-consciousness leads to tension, tension leads to poor performance, poor performance leads to frustration, frustration leads to added tension, and so on around a downward spiral. (p. 146)

Teachers must be tactful when making decisions on how to correct students' errors and when to call students' attention to the nonstandard forms they produce. The embarrassment of students is widely recognized as being counterproductive and should be avoided as much as possible. Useful guidelines for deciding when and how to correct students' errors tactfully are presented by Chaudron (1988, pp. 135-153), Hendrickson (1987),

58 TESOL QUARTERLY



Brown, H. D. (1987, pp. 192-195), Krashen (1982, pp. 116-119), and Fanselow (1977).

3. Improvement in pronunciation depends upon significant com- mitments of both time and energy from learners themselves. Acton (1984) recommends that students commit themselves contractually to specified amounts of practice on a weekly basis if they are to overcome "fossilized" patterns. Improvement cannot be expected to take place overnight. Students' abilities to make sense of phonological explanations and to gain control over the forms practiced in class are slowly developing processes (Parish, 1977). Phonological "backsliding" and affective resis- tance to change, sometimes due to social pressures from native language and/or peer group communities, are to be expected (Beebe, 1988).

4. The cues of standard orthography coupled with consistent references to phonological information facilitate the teaching of both segmental and suprasegmental features of the sound system. Dickerson (1985) discusses the many accessible spelling patterns from which L2 speakers can learn to predict the pronunciation of even unfamiliar words. In their treatment of blending patterns across word boundaries (i.e., reduced forms), Hill and Beebe (1980) devote special attention to the principle that teachers make "maximal use of orthographic cues in the teaching of pronunciation" (p. 322). For example, they propose that teachers first introduce the concept of contractions, which are represented within the regular orthographic system (e.g., it's, that's, we're, I'd), before moving on to the vast number of blending patterns characteristic of conversational speech, which are not (e.g., Paul is going to [g6na] come too. We missed her [mistar] a lot. Did you eat

[d.iyt] yet?). Temperley (1987)

develops a similar argument and presents a useful model at the level of curriculum design in her discussion of linking and deletion in final consonant clusters. Dickerson (1989) provides a comprehensive ESL text which is aimed at high-intermediate students "whose nonnative rhythm and stress patterns damage the intelligibility of their spoken English" (back cover of the Teacher's Manual). The text begins with accessible word-level rules and practice activities, moves on to a parallel presentation at the phrase level, and culminates in a section that places within the grasp of ESL learners connections between orthographic forms and sentence-level suprasegmentals such as stress, rhythm, and intonation. This is an innovative presentation, one that uses predictable cues of the orthographic system to provide students




with firm control over both micro- and macrolevel features of the sound system. These writers emphasize that standard orthography coupled with accessible references to phonological information should be presented as a pronunciation resource for L2 learners. Training the eye, along with the ear, not only to recognize but to anticipate common phonological processes such as vowel reductions, assimilation of sounds, allophonic variations, ellipsis, parasitic consonants, phonetic syllabification, palatalized forms, stress patterns, and the rhythm of spoken Eng- lish is beneficial for many learners.

5. Practice on segmental as well as suprasegmental levels of the sound system needs to be integrated with broader level communicative activities in which speakers and listeners engage in a process of exchanging meaningful information (Pennington & Richards, 1986). This concern emerges partly in response to the literature on Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) which emphasizes purposeful and meaningful uses of language in L2 classrooms.

INTEGRATING SPEAKING, LISTENING, AND PRONUNCIATION

There are two major currents that run through any ESL course in oral communication. The first current focuses upon elements of phonological accuracy, a subset of both speaking and listening skill development, while the second focuses upon broader aspects of interpersonal communication, namely fluency in speaking and listening. Focusing on the first, many students benefit from an introduction to the phonological patterns of the target language and from opportunities to explore these patterns first hand. Based upon a needs analysis of such factors as the students' educational and social goals, their proficiency levels in oral language, and their preferred learning styles, the sound system can be introduced, examined, and practiced. As much as possible, this needs to be done in meaningful contexts and should emerge along with realistic concern for the role of pronunciation when people interact.

On the other hand, students need considerable practice with less tightly controlled opportunities to express themselves fluently and spontaneously via longer stretches of self-generated discourse. Of fundamental importance to this focus is practice in oral reports (Meloni & Thompson, 1980), role plays (Donahue & Parsons, 1982; Ladousse, 1989; Livingstone, 1983), information gaps (Yorkey, 1985), sociodramas (Scarcella, 1978), project work (Eslava &

60 TESOL QUARTERLY



Lawson, 1979; Fried-Booth, 1986), simulations (Crookall & Oxford, 1990), and other examples of person-to-person communicative activities are of fundamental importance.

In the teaching of ESL, speaking, listening, and pronunciation need to be placed within the broader context of oral communication. Although attention to one or more of these areas sometimes is neglected in the classroom, ESL teachers can highlight all three when they are designing course curricula and/or classroom activities. To facilitate integration it is necessary to examine simultane- ously the components of oral communication. Figure 1 is presented as a reference guide for teachers. It presents classroom activities for teaching oral communication arranged by proficiency level. Fluency activities appear under the major-skill headings of speaking and listening, and accuracy activities appear under the subskill headings of oral production and aural discrimination. Production activities are located on the left and attending activities are located on the right. Activities within each of the figure's four quadrants are arranged according to proficiency level, from beginning to advanced. Readers should note, however, the provisional nature of such a hierarchy. Specific activities can be adapted by resourceful teachers to fit the needs of students at different levels. However, based upon proficiency-level descriptions in the AC TFL Guidelines (ACTFL, 1982), Figure 1 is intended to present the activities on a continuum from beginning to advanced levels of proficiency. Practicing teachers should plan to examine the ACTFL Guidelines (ACTFL. 1982) for themselves in order to rearrange these listings of activities to fit their students' needs.

Though by no means exhaustive, the activities listed in Figure I suggest an ambitious scope for integrated courses in oral communication. In the classroom, one soon realizes that the various foci represented by each quadrant sometimes suggest competing directions. It falls to the teacher to decide when to work on pronunciation, when to work on broader skills of interpersonal communication, when to emphasize either speaking, listening, or pronunciation, and when to aim for varying degrees of integration. Well- informed decisions are grounded in (a) familiarity with the related literatures; (b) discussions of issues raised in the literature with colleagues; (c) teacher experimentation with different instructional options at the levels of approach, design, and procedure; and (d) regular revision of the curriculum. These efforts eventually lead to a necessary and pivotal tension that lies at the core of any course in oral communication designed for speakers of English as a second language. Teachers learn to coordinate many different concerns, sometimes working on the sound system (i.e., phonological




-o 00

Z k? o, a5~ Ca Q- ; ~ ~ -ot~ e - 0 5~ct

0 d c G * 8 0 0) 04 01 -1icv

S, c$E io ; r 7 Q)~0-

'C oc

0 , *d ed O QSO 55 Di c d E~ 0 ,~~, v, F5: F a- 9 0 C0.* ~ C 0. C *- 0baO S ~ ?c Q, v, O S M ~ Eto ZS e r

-ie a70 YQN, ba ~c o s ,E t-cC:

3 'a 3 ,x E

.er . l( , OuO e i

oE~i ~~O~m~a -~E E v, S



H

H z:

C) 0

0

z

H

0

z

H

0

C1

?~

FIGURE 1-Continued

Classroom Activities for Teaching Oral Communication Arranged by Proficiency Level

S Quadrant Three: ORAL PRODUCTION Quadrant Four: AURAL DISCRIMINATION

SRepeating after a speaker Identifying C isolated words, brief phrases, segmentals, syntactic patterns, formulaic word boundaries;

C '~ expressions, lines from dialogues boundaries between thought groups; Self-initiating the production of changes in pace, volume, & pitch;

U isolated words, brief phrases, formulaic expressions, brief stretches of segmentals in initial, medial, & word final positions; connected discourse consonant clusters;

R Practicing and producing vocabulary items from a predetermined list; stress patterns at word level, phrase level, sentence level; content words within streams of speech;

A reduced forms in appropriate locations; key words; function & content words; C intonation contours; word order patterns;

(most of the items listed in Quadrant Four) features of stress, rhythm, and intonation in: Y Practicing voice quality settings isolated words of one-, two-, and many syllables;

Vocally reading along with aural input short phrases; simple noun phrases; prepositional phrases; adjec- Practicing "read-and-look-up" activities (Fanselow, 1987, p. 308) tive + noun phrases; complete sentences; longer stretches of

A Reading out loud from written text discourse; Understanding and then responding to error corrections grammatical suffixes (e.g., plurals, past tense);

C Tracking with recordings of slow, deliberate speech; fast, fluent speech letters, spellings, abbreviations; Tracking with live material based upon slow, deliberate speech; fast, sound patterns with aid of orthographic forms;

T fluent speech numbers, times, dates; chronological information; geographic Practicing fast, fluent, conversational speech information; weights and measures;

I Practicing kinesthetic techniques (e.g., slow motion speaking, silent contracted forms; V tracking) errors in pronunciation or syntax;

Rehearsing one's speech patterns in front of a mirror special functional uses of intonation; I Practicing tongue twisters suprasegmental characteristics of slow deliberate speech, fast, fluent,

Rehearsing dialogue from plays conversational speech, academic speech; T Engaging in oral interpretation exercises Predicting sound patterns from orthographic forms

Practicing different dialect patterns (as in acting) Recognizing and understanding error corrections Monitoring the pronunciation patterns of others

E Monitoring one's own speech patterns via audio recordings, video recordings, live speech

S Self-monitoring kinesthetically Covertly rehearsing one's own speech patterns



contrasts, blending patterns, voice quality settings, rhythm patterns, suprasegmentals), and at other times concentrating on more conversational and communicatively more connected styles of speaking and listening. In the context of second language instruction, the various currents of oral communication can enrich both teaching and learning experiences by providing alternative focal points for classroom interactions. Classroom activities can be structured, timed, and interrelated so the currents may run in confluence rather than in opposing directions. This is where the analytic and intuitive skills of teachers will come into play to discover which activities are most appropriate at particular points in time.

As noted above, the sound system/pronunciation component of oral communication is currently receiving increased attention in the literature on teaching second languages. This renewed interest re- flects teachers' continuing conviction that students must be provided opportunities for increasing the linguistic accuracy of their speech. However, fluency components of speaking and listening continue to be the focus of ESL courses in oral communication. In fact, even a brief review of commercially available texts designed for teaching ESL oral communication demonstrates that activities centered around speaking and listening are vastly more common in these materials than are pronunciation activities. (For some recent examples of ESL texts see Dale & Wolf, 1988; Echeverria, 1987; Glass & Arcario, 1985; Kayfetz & Stice, 1987; Porter, Grant & Draper, 1985; Rooks, 1987. For some examples of teacher training resource texts, see Brown & Yule, 1983; Golebiowska, 1990; Klippel, 1987; Ladousse, 1987, 1989; Nolasco & Arthur, 1989; Pattison, 1987; and Wessels, 1987.) One of the more widely accepted and current approaches in the teaching of second languages, Communicative Language Teaching, is frequently criticized for overemphasizing the acquisition of spoken fluency while neglecting to address adequately issues related to gaining accurate control over phonology and syntax. One critic (Marton, 1988) states:

The most obvious risk attached to the use of the communicative teaching strategy is related to one of its fundamental principles, namely, that it forbids direct correction of speech errors and makes the teacher accept structurally erroneous utterances .... This principle is based on the assumption that learners' errors are caused by the processes of hypothesis testing and as such are transient in nature, with the corollary that they (i.e., speech errors) tend to disappear as the learner proceeds along the developmental path, getting ever more (comprehensible) input and constantly revising and correcting erroneous hypotheses. (p. 49)

64 TESOL QUARTERLY



A similar criticism is frequently directed toward other L2 approaches such as the Natural Approach and Counseling Learning/ Community Language Learning. Advocates for these might take issue with Marton's critique by pointing out that each has diverse applications and that some practitioners make successful attempts to address the issue of spoken accuracy effectively. Clarke (1984) in his discussion of what classroom practitioners owe to methodological theorists (e.g., Widdowson, Savignon, Stevick, Lazonov, Terrell, Krashen, or Curran) speaks to this issue when he points out that

it is the (individual, autonomous) teacher who is in the position of authority, because only the teacher can decide what to take and what to leave, whom to listen to and whom to ignore. (p. 591) How then are methods and approaches adapted by individual

teachers concerned with phonological accuracy who are equally committed to encouraging conversational fluency? The practice of indirect error correction through the teacher's systematic efforts to orally paraphrase, reformulate, and expand upon students' linguistically nonstandard utterances in the target language is one technique frequently discussed in the literature (Brown, H. D., 1987; Krashen & Terrell, 1983; Marton, 1988). When this "expansion" technique is handled effectively, L2 learners have access to phonological (as well as semantic and syntactic) conventions of the target language. Such exposure may be a necessary, though not necessarily sufficient, condition for learning to take place. As teachers deliberately attend to students' nonstandard language forms, rephrasing these into linguistically accurate target language patterns, students are presented with demonstrations of conven- tional speech. Such demonstrations of reliable L2 patterns are crucial sources of input for learners who are affectively prepared for, and open and sensitive to increasing their acquisition of the target language (for a related discussion, see Smith, 1982).

A very different alternative is explicit attention to phonological analysis, through student practice with contextualized forms, and integration of direct error correction into classroom activities. Those concerned by the proscriptions of CLT advocates, might appreciate the recommendations for methodological flexibility in H. D. Brown's (1977, 1987) recommendation that language teachers practice cautious, reasoned, enlightened eclecticism when making decisions that impact actual classroom practices.

There is ample support within the TESOL literature for classroom activities that focus explicitly upon both micro- and macrolevel features of the English sound system, especially when working




with an adult population. The point is that phonological accuracy need not be sacrificed at the expense of conversational fluency, nor should the opposite be the case. A similar situation is discussed by B. Taylor (1981) who provides a model for teachers of ESL composition in which writing instruction is depicted as unfolding along a "two way street." Taylor argues that writing teachers need to focus their efforts upon both the content of a writer's ideas and upon the linguistic forms through which those ideas are expressed (e.g., syntax, cohesion, rhetorical organization). In the case of oral communication, attention to linguistic forms sometimes focuses upon the phonological patterns of the target language, although matters of syntax, semantics, and communicative function deserve attention as well. Within the context of classroom interactions these various components need to be interwoven. The effective writing teacher, and in an analogous manner the effective teacher of oral communication, learns to coordinate a wide range of complemen- tary concerns.

When the sound system has been the focus of commercially available texts, the activities presented sometimes are criticized for being mechanical or too lacking in contextual/pragmatic relevance to hold students' interests (Morley, 1987). However, a number of writers have been successful in designing communicative materials and activities for enhancing ESL students' accurate control over the sound system (Celce-Murcia, 1983, 1987; Hecht & Ryan, 1979; Kenworthy, 1987; Pica, 1984; Wong, 1988). These writers describe diverse procedures, and familiarity with their work should help teachers to incorporate communicative components within pronunciation activities. Pica (1984) describes communicative activities centered upon role playing, problem solving, and interactive games that are intended for the teaching of pronunciation. After presenting examples and guidelines for designing similar exercises, Celce- Murcia (1987) reminds us that

the same types of activities used to teach other language areas communicatively can also be used to teach pronunciation." (p. 10)

At the other end of the spectrum, Acton (1984) and Morley (1984) introduce an activity they refer to as tracking that may be unfamiliar to many ESL teachers:

In tracking, learners attempt to repeat immediately after the speaker whatever the speaker says, on a word-by-word basis. It is an intense experience, one that eventually forces learners to focus on intonation contours, stress, and rhythm. (Acton, 1984, p. 77)

Tracking activities embrace elements of listening, speaking, and

66 TESOL QUARTERLY



pronunciation. They are not an example of, but rather an alternative to, classroom activities that are relatively more communicative. Since tracking is reminiscent of the roles of repetition and oral pattern practice in the out-of-fashion Audiolingual Method, some teachers might feel more comfortable if tracking is complemented by the communicative instructional styles that Celce-Murcia, Pica, and others describe.

Another practice that integrates the teaching of speaking, listening, and pronunciation is training ESL learners to self-monitor their private speech. Sometimes called "covert rehearsal" (Dickerson, 1989, p. vi), this is a metacognitive learning strategy encouraged by Morley (1988), Acton (1984), Yorio (1984), Stevick (1980), and others. While best suited to the kind of student Krashen (1982) has termed the "optimal Monitor user" (p. 19), it involves critical self-evaluation and self-correction in either classroom or nonclassroom settings. During moments of covert rehearsal a learner applies to self-initiated utterances his/her knowledge of past learning and memories of target language sounds. This ability is vitally important for some students, especially for those who aspire to improve the comprehensibility of their speech. As evidence that strategies for covert rehearsal can be taught in the classroom, Kenworthy (1987) introduces three practical classroom activities that are designed to enhance this ability through the guided, systematic, and focused analysis of audio recordings of students' speech patterns. Teachers can experiment with these activities, while exploring the classroom use of video, in addition to audio, recordings as another means for integrating the teaching of speaking, listening, and pronunciation.

CONCLUSION

The conceptual framework proposed here emphasizes that focused attention upon a single component of oral communication is insufficient. Pronunciation subskills, for example, are but slices of a significantly larger pie. The same is true for the major skill areas of speaking and listening. The potential for variety in classroom activities increases as teachers experiment with integrating options at the levels of curriculum design and lesson planning. The theory of language that underlies this framework acknowledges that oral communication is a composite of interconnecting language processes. Attention to one area of oral communication ought to be complemented by attention to others as systematically as is possible. Each subset of oral communication needs to be incorporated within any informed curriculum design. By interweaving




activities that practice speaking, listening, and pronunciation, teachers enrich classroom instruction. The search for ways to integrate these three areas will prove imperative as ESL teachers and methodologists attempt to clarify theoretical approaches, curriculum designs, and classroom practices while providing diverse opportunities for the development of oral language proficiency for second language learners of English. U

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to acknowledge Patricia A. Dunkel, Patricia Byrd, Joan Eisterhold Carson, Chris Kamerschen, Tina Renn O'Kelley, and two anonymous TESOL Quarterly reviewers for their insightful comments on earlier drafts of this article.

THE AUTHOR

John M. Murphy is Assistant Professor in the Department of Applied Linguistics and ESL at Georgia State University. His publications have appeared in English for Specific Purposes, TESL Canada Journal, and the TESOL Newsletter. His current focus is classroom centered research in programs of L2 teacher preparation.

REFERENCES

ACTFL. (1982). ACTFL provisional proficiency guidelines. Hasting-on- Hudson, NY: Author.

Acton, W. (1984). Changing fossilized pronunciation. TESOL Quarterly, 18(1), 71-86.

Anderson, F. E. (Ed.). (1990). Special issue: New perspectives in pronunciation [Theme issue]. The Language Teacher. 14(10), 1-62. Tokyo: Japan Association of Language Teachers (JALT).

Avery, P., & Ehrlich, S. (Eds.). (1987). The teaching of pronunciation: An introduction for teachers of English as a second language [Theme issue]. TESL Talk, 17(1). Toronto: Ontario Ministry of Citizenship and Culture.

Bassano, S.K., & Christison, M.A. (1987). Developing successful conversation groups. In M.H. Long & J. C. Richards (Eds.), Methodology in TESOL: A book of readings. New York: Newbury House.

Beebe, L. M. (1988). The sociolinguistic perspective. In L. M. Beebe (Ed.), Issues in second language acquisition: Multiple perspectives. New York: Newbury House.

68 TESOL QUARTERLY



Berko, R., Wolvin, A., & Wolvin, D. (1981). Communicating: A social and career focus (2nd ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Brown, G. (1987). Twenty five years of teaching listening comprehension. English Teaching Forum, 25(4), 11-15.

Brown, G., & Yule, G. (1983). Teaching the spoken language: An approach based on the analysis of conversational English. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Brown, H. D. (1977). Some limitations of CL/CLL models of second language teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 11(4), 365-372.

Brown, H. D. (1987). Principles of language learning & teaching (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Byrne, O. (1987). Techniques for Classroom Interaction. New York: Longman.

Bytwerk, R. (1985). Impromptu speaking exercises. Communication Education, 34, 148-149.

Celce-Murcia, M. (1983). Teaching pronunciation communicatively. MEXTESOL Journal, 7(1), 10-25.

Celce-Murcia, M. (1987). Teaching pronunciation as communication. In J. Morley (Ed.), Current perspectives on pronunciation (pp. 1-12). Washington, DC: TESOL.

Chamot, A.U. (1987). Toward a functional ESL curriculum in the elementary school. In M. H. Long & J. C. Richards (Eds.), Methodology in TESOL: A book of readings (pp. 86-95). New York: Newbury House.

Chaudron, C. (1988). Second language classrooms: Research on teaching and learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Choi, I. (1988). The necessity of teaching English fast speech phenomena for better aural comprehension skill in the Korean context. Unpublished master's thesis. The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL.

Clark, M. A. (1984). On the nature of technique: What do we owe to the gurus? TESOL Quarterly, 18(4), 577-594.

Crookall, D., & Oxford, R. (1990). Simulation, gaming, and language learning. New York: Newbury House.

Crow, J. T. (1983, April). Psycholinguistics and listening comprehension. Paper presented at the 17th Annual TESOL Convention. Toronto, Canada.

Dale, P., & Wolf, J. C. (1988). Speech communication for international students. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Dickerson, W. B. (1985). The invisible Y: A case for spelling in pronunciation learning. TESOL Quarterly, 19(2), 303-316.

Dickerson, W. B. (1989). Stress in the speech stream: The rhythm of spoken English (Student Book and Teacher's Manual). Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

Donahue, M., & Parsons, A. H. (1982). The use of roleplay to overcome cultural fatigue. TESOL Quarterly, 16(3), 359-366.




Dirven, P., & Oakeshott-Taylor, J. (1984). Listening comprehension: A state of the art article. Language teaching: The international abstracting journal for language teachers and applied linguistics, 17(4), 326-343.

Dubois, B. (1986). Needed: EST public communication for nonnative speakers of English. English for Specific Purposes, 5(1), 73-79.

Dunkel, P. A. (1986). Developing listening fluency in L2: Theoretical principles and pedagogical considerations. The Modern Language Journal, 70(2), 99-106.

Dunkel, P. A. (in press). Computerized testing of nonparticipatory L2 listening comprehension proficiency: An ESL prototype development effort. Modern Language ]ournal.

Echeverria, E. (1987). Speaking on issues: An introduction to public communication (ESL). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

Eslava, R., & Lawson, P. O. (1979). A project course in spoken English. TESOL Quarterly, 13(1), 65-72.

Esling, J. H., & Wong, R. F. (1983). Voice quality settings and the teaching of pronunciation. TESOL Quarterly, 17(1), 89-96.

Fanselow, J. F. (1977). The treatment of error in oral work. Foreign Lan- guage Annals, 10(4), 583-593.

Fanselow, J.F. (1987). Breaking rules: Generating and exploring alternatives in language teaching. New York: Longman.

Fried-Booth, D. L. (1986). Proiect work: Resource book for teachers. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Gebhard, J. (1982). Some suggestions for the EFL conversation class. Eng- lish Teaching Forum, 20 (April).

Gilbert, J. B. (1984). Clear speech: Pronunciation and listening comprehension in American English. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Gilbert, J. B. (1987). Pronunciation and listening comprehension. In J. Morley (Ed.), Current perspectives on pronunciation (pp. 29-40). Washington, DC: TESOL.

Glass, E., & Arcario, P. (1985). Speak freely: Conversational American English. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

Golebiowska, A. (1990). Getting students to talk. New York: Prentice Hall. Goss, B. (1982). Listening as information processing. Communication

Quarterly, 30(4), 304-307. Graham, C. (1978). Jazz chants. New York: Oxford University Press. Graham, C. (1987). Small talk: More jazz chants. New York: Oxford

University Press. Hansen, S. P. (1982). Small is beautiful in the speech classroom. Commu-

nication Education, 31, 67-71. Hecht, E., & Ryan, G. (1979). Survival pronunciation: Vowel contrasts

(Teacher's Guide and Student Workbook). Hayward, CA: Alemany Press.

Hendrickson, J. M. (1987). Error correction in foreign language teaching: Recent theory, research, and practice. In M. H. Long & J. C. Richards (Eds.), Methodology in TESOL: A book of readings (pp. 355-370). New York: Newbury House.

70 TESOL QUARTERLY



Hill, C., & Beebe, L. (1980). Contraction and blending: The use of orthographic clues in teaching pronunciation. TESOL Quarterly, 14(3), 299-324.

Hunt, G. T., & Cusella, L. P. (1983). A field study of listening needs in organizations. Communication Education, 32, 393-400.

James, C. J. (Ed.). (1985). The ACTFL foreign language education series: Foreign language proficiency in the classroom and beyond. Lincoln- wood, IL: National Textbook Company.

Kayfetz, J., & Stice, R. (1987). Academically speaking. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Kenworthy, J. (1987). Teaching English pronunciation. New York: Longman.

Klippel, F. (1987). Keep talking: Communicative fluency activities for language teaching. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Krashen, S.D. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. New York: Pergamon Press.

Krashen, S. D., & Terrell, T. D. (1983). The Natural Approach: Language acquisition in the classroom. New York: Alemany Press.

Ladousse, G. P. (1987). Speaking personally: Quizzes and questionnaires for fluency practice. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Ladousse, G. P. (1989). Role play: Resource books for teachers. New York. Oxford University Press.

Leather, J. (1983). State of the art article: Second-language pronunciation learning and teaching. Language Teaching, 16, 198-219.

Lebauer, R. S. (1984). Using lecture transcripts in EAP lecture comprehension courses. TESOL Quarterly, 18(1), 41-54.

Livingstone, C. (1983). Role play in language learning. New York: Longman.

Mangelsdorf, K. (1989). Parallels between speaking and writing in second language acquisition. In Donna M. Johnson & Duane H. Roen (Eds.), Richness in writing: Empowering ESL Students (pp. 134-145). New York: Longman.

Marton, W. (1988). Methods in English language teaching: Frameworks and options. New York: Prentice Hall International.

Maurice, K. (1983). The fluency workshop. TESOL Newsletter, 8, 29. Meloni, C. F., & Thompson, S. E. (1980). Oral reports in the intermediate

ESL classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 14(4), 503-514. Mendelsohn, D. J. (1984). There ARE strategies for listening. TEAL

Occasional Papers, 8, 63-76. Montgomery, C., & Eisenstein, M. (1985). Real reality revisited: An

experimental communicative course in ESL. TESOL Quarterly, 19(2), 317-324.

Morley, J. (1980). Improving aural comprehension. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.

Morley, J. (1984). Listening and language learning in ESL: Developing self-study activities for listening comprehension. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.




Morley, J. (Ed.). (1987). Current perspectives on pronunciation. Washington, DC: TESOL.

Morley, J. (1988). How many languages do you speak: Perspectives on pronunciation-speech-communication in EFL/ESL. Round Table on Languages, and Linguistics, and Literature, XI(2), 1-34. Nagoya Gakuin University, Nagoya, Japan.

Murphy, J. M. (1987). The listening strategies of English as a second language college students. Research & Teaching in Developmental Education, 4(1), 27-46.

Murphy, J. M. (1989). Listening in a second language: Hermeneutics and inner speech. TESL Canada Journal, 6(2), 27-44.

Murphy, J. M. (in press). Preparing ESL students for the basic speech course: Approach, design and procedure. English for Specific Purposes.

Nagle, S., & Sanders, S. (1986). Comprehension theory and second language pedagogy. TESOL Quarterly, 20(1), 9-26.

Nolasco, R., & Arthur, L. (1989). Conversation. New York: Oxford University Press.

O'Malley, J. M., Chamot, A. U., & Kupper, L. (1989). Listening comprehension strategies in second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 10(4), 418-437.

Parish, C. (1977). A practical philosophy of pronunciation. TESOL Quarterly, 11(3), 311-318.

Pattison, P. (1987). Developing communication skills: A practical handbook for language teachers. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Pennington, M.C., & Richards, J.C. (1986). Pronunciation revisited. TESOL Quarterly, 20(2), 207-226.

Pennycook, A. (1989). The concept of method, interested knowledge, and the politics of language teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 23(4), 589-618.

Pica, T. (1984). Pronunciation activities with an accent on communication. English Teaching Forum, 22(3), 2-6.

Porter, P. A., Grant, M., & Draper, M. (1985). Communicating effectively in English: Oral communication for non-native speakers. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Powers, D. E. (1985). A survey of academic demands related to listening skills (TOEFL Res. Rep. #20). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.

Prabhu, N. S. (1990). There is no best method-Why? TESOL Quarterly, 24(2), 161-176.

Richards, J. C. (1980). Conversation. TESOL Quarterly, 14(4), 413-432. Richards, J.C. (1983). Listening comprehension: Approach, design,

procedure. TESOL Quarterly, 17(2), 219-240. Richards, J. C., & Rogers, T. S. (1986). Approaches and methods in lan-

guage teaching: A description and analysis. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Rooks, G. (1987). The non-stop discussion workbook (2nd ed.). New York: Newbury House.

72 TESOL QUARTERLY



Rost, M. (1991). Listening in action. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Rubin, R. B., & Roberts, C. V. (1987). A comparative examination and

analysis of three listening tests. Communication Education, 36, 142-153. Scarcella, R.C. (1978). Socio-drama for social interaction. TESOL

Quarterly, 12(1), 41-46. Smith, F. (1982). Writing and the writer. New York: Holt, Rinehart &

Winston. Snow, B. G., & Perkins, K. (1979). The teaching of listening comprehen-

sion and communication activities. TESOL Quarterly, 13(1), 51-63. Stevick, E. W. (1978). Toward a practical philosophy of pronunciation:

Another view. TESOL Quarterly, 12(2), 145-150. Stevick, E. W. (1980). Teaching languages: A way and ways. New York:

Newbury House. Stewart, J. (1983). Interpretive listening: An alternative to empathy. Com-

munication Education, 32, 379-391. Streff, C. R. (1984). The concept of inner speech and its implications for

an integrated language arts curriculum. Communication Education, 33, 223-230.

Tarone, E. (1974). Speech perception in second language acquisition: A suggested model. Language Learning, 24(2), 223-233.

Taylor, B. (1981). Content and written form: A two way street. TESOL Quarterly, 15(1), 5-14.

Taylor, B., & Wolfson, Nessa. (1978). Breaking down the free conversation myth. TESOL Quarterly, 12(1), 31-40.

Taylor, H. M. (1981). Learning to listen to English. TESOL Quarterly, 15(1), 41-50.

Temperley, M. S. (1987). Linking and deletion in final consonant clusters. In J. Morley (Ed.), Current perspectives on pronunciation (pp. 59-82). Washington, DC: TESOL.

Ur, P. (1981). Discussions that work: Task-centred fluency practice. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Ur, P. (1988). Grammar practice activities. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Ur, P. (1990). Teaching listening comprehension. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Wessels, C. (1987). Drama. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Winitz, H. (Ed.). (1981). The comprehension approach to foreign language

instruction. Rowley, MA: Newbury House. Wipf, J. A. (1984). Strategies for teaching second language listening com-

prehension. Foreign Language Annals, 17(4), 345-348. Wolff, F.I., Marsnik, N.C., Tacey, W.S., & Nichols, R.G. (1983).

Perceptive listening. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. Wolvin, A., & Coakley, C. (1982). Listening (2nd ed.). Dubuque, IA:

Brown. Wong, R. (1988). Teaching pronunciation: Focus on rhythm and

intonation. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.




Yook, E., & Seiler, B. (1990). An investigation into the communication needs and concerns of Asian students in speech communication performance courses. Basic communication course annual, 2. Boston: American Press.

Yorio, C. (1984). The case for learning: A response to Krashen. Paper presented at the meeting of the Annual Applied Linguistics Conference of the New York TESOL Association. Teachers College, Columbia University Press.

Yorkey, R. (1985). Talk-a-tivities: Problem solving and puzzles for pairs. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Zamel, V. (1987). Writing: The process of discovering meaning. In J. C. Richards & M. H. Long (Eds.), Methodology in TESOL: A Book of Readings (pp. 267-278). New York: Newbury House.

74 TESOL QUARTERLY



APPENDIX

Model for Listening Strategies Used in Academic Settings

Recalling & Summarizing What is the general aim of this presentation? What is the speaker saying right now? Do I need to remember this? Is this important enough to write down? Have I read about this before? (Is it in my book?)

Speculating Where is the speaker heading in a general sense? How do I know? Can I relate any of this information to something I already know? Is it worth mentioning? Is

it worth writing down? Do I know of an example that might help the speaker make the topic clearer to understand? What will the speaker probably be saying next? How do I know? What is the point of this discussion?

Self-Examining Could I summarize what the speaker is trying to explain? Do I have any experience in this area? Am I getting most of this? Do I understand it well? Is there anything bothering me about this information? Am I staying on target with the speaker's topic, or am I drifting off and missing what the

speaker means to say?

Probing the Topic Is this important information? What are the key words being used? Which of the concepts being presented are relatively more important? Why is the speaker saying " .................. "? Do I see any connections between the ideas being presented? How does this idea fit into the speaker's overall plan? How has this presentation been organized?

Interacting with Others (While aiming to help the speaker make things clearer for myself and others) Is this a convenient time for me to speak up in class by:

summarizing some of the content being explained? asking a question? providing a new and different example? asking for help? pointing out a relationship between ideas that some listeners may be missing?

Note. From "Listening in a Second Language: Hermeneutics and Inner Speech" by J. M. Murphy, 1989, TESL Canada Journal, 6, pp. 39-40. Copyright 1989 by TESL Canada Journal. Reprinted by permission.




Oral Communication in TESOL Integrating Speaking, Listening, And Pronunciation

Documents

Transcript of Oral Communication in TESOL Integrating Speaking, Listening, And Pronunciation