Communicative language teaching and artificial intelligence on the development of the speaking skill in senior high school students

Susana del Rocío  Chacha Carrillo; Erika Patricia  Tenezaca Yadaicela

doi:10.32645/13906925.1485

Authors

Susana del Rocío Chacha Carrillo Colegio Militar N°6 “Combatientes de Tapi” https://orcid.org/0009-0001-5419-431X
Erika Patricia Tenezaca Yadaicela https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4785-2038

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.32645/13906925.1485

Keywords:

Communicative language teaching (CLT) approach, communicative activities, Artificial Intelligence, speaking skills, Vidnoz

Abstract

In today’s globalized world, English has consolidated its role as the principal medium of international communication, to a growing emphasis on the development of oral profiency within English as a Foreign Language (EFL) educational settings. The present research examined that many secondary level learners continue to demonstrate limited speaking competence, often as a result of instructional practices that prioritize grammatical accuracy over meaningful communication. In response to this issue, the present study addressed the following research problem: to what extent does the implementation of Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) supported by digital platforms, influence the development of speaking skills among high school EFL students in an Ecuadorian context?. Accordingly, the study tested the alternative hypothesis that students exposed to CLT based instruction integrated with digital tools would show a statistically significant improvement in their speaking performance compared to those receiving traditional instruction.

Accordingly, the research was conducted in an Ecuadorian high school with a sample of 47 participants, divided into an experimental group and a control group. While the experimental group engaged in CLT-based speaking activities, the control group followed instructional tasks that did not incorporate communicative principles. Data were collected through a pre-test and the application of analytic speaking rubrics, with the VIDNOZ digital platform used as part of the assessment process.

The findings indicated that the implementation of CLT activities, as conceptualized by Littlewood (2013) and Richards (2014), in combination with technology-enhanced evaluation tools, had a positive influence on learners’ oral performance. These outcomes suggest that the integration of communicative methodologies and digital resources constitutes an effective pedagogical strategy for improving speaking skills in EFL classrooms, offering practical implications for teachers, learners, and future researchers in similar educational contexts.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Ahn, S. Y., & Kang, H. S. (2017). South Korean university students’ perceptions of different English varieties and their contribution to the learning of English as a foreign language. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 38(8), 712-725.

Burns, A. (1998). Teaching speaking. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 18, 102-123.

Celce-Murcia, M., Brinton, D. M., & Goodwin, J. M. (2010). Teaching pronunciation: A course book and reference guide (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.

Chaney, A. L., & Burk, T. L. . (1998). Teaching Oral Communication In Grades K-8. Eric.

Dewaele, J. M. (2017). Psychological dimensions and foreign language anxiety. In The Routledge handbook of instructed second language acquisition. Routledge., pp. 433-450).

Ellis, R. (2009). Task-based language teaching: Sorting out the misunderstandings. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 19(3), 221–246.

English, C., & Symonds, Q. . (2016). English at work: Global analysis of language skills in the workplace. Cambridge English Language Assessment.

Finocchiaro, M., and Brurnfit. . (1983). The Functional Notional Approach: FromTheory to Practice. New York: Oxford University Press.

Fitria, T. N. (2021). Lecturer’s pedagogic competence: Teaching English in online learning during pandemic Covid-19. Journal of English Education, 6(2), 100-108.

Fryer, L., & Carpenter, R. (2006). Bots as language learning tools.

Godwin-Jones, R. (2020). Emerging technologies: Artificial intelligence and language learning. Language Learning & Technology, 24(3), 5–14.

Hadijah, S. (2014). Investing the problems of English speaking of Islamic Boarding School Program at STAIN Samarinda. Dinamika Ilmu: Jurnal Pendidikan, 14(2), 240–247.

Harmer, J. (2001). The Practice of English language teaching (3rd ed.). Harlow: : Pearson Education Limited.

Horwitz, E. K., Horwitz, M. B., & Cope, J. (1986). Foreign language classroom anxiety. The Modern language journal, 70(2), 125-132.

Jiménez, R. T., García, G. E., & Pearson, P. D. (1996). The reading strategies of bilingual Latina/o students who are successful English readers: Opportunities and obstacles. Reading Research Quarterly, 31(1), 90-112.

Kayi, H. (2012). Teaching Speaking: Activities to promote Speaking in a second language. Новейшие научные достижения.

Kayum, M. A. (2015). Error analysis and correction in oral communication in the EFL context of Bangladesh. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Development, 2(3), 125-129.

Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Oxford, UK: Pergamon.

Li, J. (2022). Artificial intelligence in language education: Opportunities and challenges. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 13(2), 238–245.

Littlewood, W. (2013). Developing a communicative classroom. Routledge.

Littlewood, W., William, L., & Swan, M. . (1981). Communicative language teaching: An introduction. Cambridge university press.

Logan, Lillian M.; Logan, Virgil G (1972). Creative Communication: Teaching the Language Arts. Toronto: McGraw Hill Ltd.

MacIntyre, P. D. & Serroul, A. (2015). Motivation on a per-second timescale: Examining approachavoidance motivation during L2 task performance. In Z. Dörnyei, P. D. MacIntyre & A. Henry (Eds.), Motivational dynamics in language learning. (pp. 109-138).

Ortega, L. (2009). Understanding second language acquisition. London: Hodder Education.

Richards, J. C. (2005). Communicative language teaching today.

Richards, J. C. (2006). Communicative Language Teaching Today. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2014). Approaches and methods in language teaching (3rd ed.). Cambridge University Press.

Savignon, S. J. (2002). Interpreting communicative language teaching: Contexts and concerns in teacher education. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Shen, M. Y., & Chiu, T. Y. (2019). EFL learners’ English speaking difficulties and strategy use. Education and linguistics research, 5(2), 88-102.

Songsiri, M. (2007). An action research study of promoting students’ confidence in speaking English. Victoria University.

Taguchi, T., Magid, M., & Papi, M. (2009). Iranian Learners of English: A Comparative Study. Motivation, language identity and the L2 self. 36, 66.

Yingsoon, G. Y. (2021). Using AI technology to support speaking skill development for the teaching of Chinese as a foreign language. In Multidisciplinary functions of blockchain technology in AI and IoT applications. IGI Global Scientific Publising, (pp. 209-227).

Zawacki-Richter, O., Marín, V. I., Bond, M., & Gouverneur, F. (2019). Systematic review of research on artificial intelligence applications in higher education – Where are the educators?. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16(39), 1–27.