Oral testing in the class

Project on oral testing
Submitted to: Maim Mehrunisa Zaid

6/2/2011
Submitted From: Muhammad Asif
Regd. No. met01103008

1|Page

ABSTRACT:

The ability to speak English is a valued skill in English-medium universities
overseas and is a major aim of their English for academic purposes (EAP)
programmes. But it is rarely tested in these institutions because the task is
considered too difficult with such large numbers of students. Failing to test
the speaking skill results in inaccurate assessment of students and
negative wash back effects on the teaching of oral skills. Here the purpose
of this study is to highlight the problems that are hinder in introducing the
oral skills in the class. The participants in this study were students and
teachers. The instruments used were interviews and questionnaires to
collect the opinion of the respondents. Two types of questionnaires were
prepared. Teachers and students were selected randomly. The results
indicates that the number of English language learning students has been
steadily growing for years, but the resources to help them mastering it have
not been growing at a comparable rate which results into their failure. And
speaking and listening is more important in language learning and is
always neglected.

MUHAMMAD ASIF
2

INTRODUCTION:

The language teaching task does not last only to the end of the class hour,
but teachers also need to handle the whole teaching and learning process
Starting with planning, then implementing the plan, assessing or evaluating
it, reflecting on all data received, and finally revising the plan. The cycle
requires teachers to extend their tasks to considerable work outside of the
class. Especially, when it comes to the assessment, most language
teachers may find it to be the most difficult task. Probably, because it
involves a great deal working with numbers and calculations-to make a
reliable and valid measurement. The term assessment usually refers to
gathering and synthesizing the information about students and classroom.
Information can be gathered by teachers through both formal and informal
means such as homework, tests, written reports, observation, or verbal
exchange. The assessment task is not only crucial for teachers, but also for
students. How well students perform on tests, the grade they receive, and
the judgments their teachers make have important consequences for both
the students and teachers. Without proper assessments tailored to the
needs of the students and language learning objectives, teachers are
unable to plan instruction effectively. One of the assessments is oral
testing.
Oral testing is defined as evaluation of a student's speech production
exclusively. It does not concern listening skill, which is some-times
confused with oral testing when the evaluator uses the second language to
test listening comprehension.
The issue of oral testing highlights a major problem for educators in Korea,
where an official policy to promote English oral skills at all levels of
education has to be placed in the context of the traditional methods of
testing which still prevail. Thus while secondary level teachers of English
might be keen to employ contemporary communicative teaching
methodology in their classrooms, they also have to ensure that their
students acquire the necessary linguistic 'facts' to be able to answer the
grammar-based multiple choice examinations which are universally
prescribed, but which tend to be unrelated to the development of spoken
English abilities. The result is that students in general arrive at University or
their new place of work with undeveloped oral skills and with a debilitating
awareness of this fact, which impedes motivation or further improvement.

MUHAMMAD ASIF
3

Years of traditional translation-based teaching also encourage learning
preferences in the students which, though acknowledged by them to be
inefficient, are all that they know, and determine their perceptions regarding
acceptable teaching and learning styles.

In order to break this self-confirming circle, and to motivate students to
develop their oral skills, the situation needs to be addressed in its entirety.
Teachers can find more and more interesting methods of teaching the
spoken language; they can try to apply these in the classroom, advocating
authenticity of materials, relevance of situation, cultural sensitivity, and
other factors; they can make the learning environment as conducive to
expression and language acquisition as possible. But the fact remains that
Korean students are motivated mainly by the National exams they have to
pass, and their entire educational experience confirms that this attitude is
the 'correct' one.

MUHAMMAD ASIF
4

THE VIEW OF LITERATURE:
This literature review is intended to review the following,

a) Levels of oral proficiency
b) Difficulties in testing the speaking skills
c) Types of oral tests
d) Oral testing methodologies

Levels of the oral proficiency:

There are four main levels and three sublevels within the first three main
levels:

Levels:

i) Novice (0 ~ 1)
ii) Intermediate (1 ~ 2)
iii) Advanced (2 ~ 3)
iv) Superior (3 ~ 4)

Sub-levels:

Low – just hanging on
Mid – length and strength; some features of the next level
High – functions most of the time at the next higher level

The scoring system works out such that there are actually 11 categories:
the superior level has no sub-levels while the other three levels each utilize
the 3 sublevels (low, mid, high) and the 11th category is a hypothetical '0'
or 'Zero Proficiency'.

There are five aspects to each of the four main levels as well: function,
content, context, accuracy and text type distils these components in the
following manner:

Function' refers to what the learner can do with the language. 'Content' and
'context' refer to the range of topics (personal, professional, and abstract)
the learner can handle with confidence and in what setting (formal or
informal). 'Accuracy' describes the extent of phonological and syntactical

MUHAMMAD ASIF
5

precision. Finally, 'text type' refers to the discourse complexity of the tested,
i.e. whether the subject speaks in discrete words, unconnected sentences
or extended, planned paragraphs.

Difficulties in testing the speaking skills:

Since the reform and opening up, international exchanges become more
frequent, the community of English proficiency, especially oral
communication ability to the needs of increasingly urgent, English Teaching
goals are also made adjustments, therefore, asked 'to reverse to read-
based teaching model', clear that the 'current pay special attention to
strengthening the cultivation of listening and speaking skills'. As students of
the main course of oral communicative competence, how to carry out
effective oral teaching is the majority of English teachers worthy of
exploration and practice of a proposition. In this paper, adjust the teaching
content, teaching methods and evaluation system for several aspects of
oral teaching on how to improve vocational discussed.

Vocational problems:

The traditional oral teaching is mainly teacher-centered teaching
model, teachers explain and account for most of the presentation of
classroom time, and students at a state of passive acceptance, it is difficult
to mobilize their enthusiasm and initiative to learn. Teaching methods
monotonous, stiff, usually follows to read, imitate, repeat, recite and other
mechanical training (mechanical practice) mainly, the lack of meaningful,
communicative practice (meaningful and communicative practice), the
students just to practice and practice, is not out of desire or need to
communicate. On the other hand, teachers focus too much on
communication in the form of, for example, the syntax is correct, but ignore
the content of student exchanges, resulting in distortion of language
communication. No student a positive input, the lack of meaningful
communication, teaching results difficult to be guaranteed.
In addition, the vocational English language base is relatively weak,
and almost never before in the school system received oral training,
widespread fear of the psychological fear mistakes, a fool of me, unwilling
to take the initiative to conduct oral communication, the lack of in front of
the courage to express ideas in English. Some of the students too heavy
local accent, English pronunciation obscure, hindering the smooth progress

MUHAMMAD ASIF
6

of oral communication. Due to lack of language environment, the students
after school is basically oral exercises carried out independently by
individuals, which are greatly limited the Development of communicative
competence of students and oral levels.

Administrator:

Ideally, tests should endeavor to help not only teachers or administrators,
but also aid students in assessing their performance. Tests should serve
both evaluative and educational functions. Unfortunately, many tests are
designed primarily to dispense grades. Typically, students take a test at the
end of one semester and receive a grade with no comments a few weeks
later. Such feedback is of marginal value. Prompt feedback is crucial, since
most students tend to forget the details of their tests soon after completing
them. Unless feedback is specific and immediate, its pedagogical value is
limited.

The evaluation of students’ pronunciation is not given the place it deserves
in many EFL and ESL classes in probably elsewhere. It is supported by the
fact that the purpose of testing pronunciation is not only to evaluate
knowledge and award grades, but also, and probably more importantly, to
motivate students to be sensitive to this aspect of English. Given that the
motivation of many students for learning English is instrumental rather than
integrative, pronunciation tends to be neglected by many learners as long
as they know they will not be tested on it.

Obviously, pronunciation is tested globally in different types of
conversational exchange, interview, reading aloud, etc., that go on in the
classroom. What seems to be insufficient is the testing of accuracy-that is,
testing to assess the learner’s management of specific features, segmental
or suprasegmental. This insufficiency is due to two main causes.

First, many teachers do not consider it useful to test specific features. This
attitude is based on the belief that the mastery of specific features, taken
individually, does not matter much in real-life situations where the context
always (?)

It is possible for people to produce practically all the correct sounds but still
be unable to communicate their ideas appropriately and effectively. On the

MUHAMMAD ASIF
7

other hand, people can make numerous errors in both phonology and
syntax and yet succeed in expressing themselves fairly clearly.

The second, and surely more important, cause is the particular difficulties
involved in testing oral skills. One of the greatest problems in oral testing is
administration. It is often impossible to manage the large number of
students to be tested. Testing equipment, like laboratories or tape
recorders, is scarce in many Third World countries where English is taught.
Even when such material is available, testing may be rendered impossible
by the lack of even more basic facilities like electricity.

A further difficulty in oral testing arises when English is part of a school-
leaving or promotion examination for an entire country. In most countries
offering such examinations candidates over a large area have to respond,
often in writing, to the same paper. This exacerbates the problem of
logistics.

Taking segmental phonemes and word stress as illustrations, this article
explores some ways of testing specific features of English pronunciation,
both as a teaching activity and as part of an examination. The ideal way of
testing pronunciation is to actually listen to the learner. But since this is not
always possible or suitable, the alternatives discussed below can be used
for testing segments and word stress. Throughout the discussion, the
illustrations are based on pronunciation problems.

What is to be tested?

Following should be tested in oral class,

i) Pronunciation
ii) Grammar
iii) Vocabulary
iv) Fluency

i) Fluency of Speech:
This point of evaluation should be based upon the smoothness of
speech, not speed, and take into account the normal use of
hesitancy in conversation. If students cease their conversation to
giggle, or if they have memorized their conversation and can not
continue by relying upon their inherent communication skills then
this should reflect in a lower rating. Students, who speak

MUHAMMAD ASIF
8

efficiently, and without awkwardness, should in turn be granted a
higher rating.

ii) Grammar Use:
It is unrealistic to expect that any Korean EFL student will come to
an exam and speak without any grammar problems; emphasis
should therefore be placed on being able to understand the
student’s communicative intent even if grammar errors are present
in sentence structures. However, continual use of the same
grammar errors by a student, such as the use of simple past for all
past tense terms, should reflect in a lower rating. Alternatively,
those students who are able to recognize that they had made a
grammar error, and correct it during conversation, should be
provided a higher rating.

iii) Listening Comprehension:
This phase of evaluation is initially tested during the prepared
conversation section of the exam. As some students will not
understand what their partners are saying. In some cases, Korean
students will remain silent and wait for their partner to repeat their
statement, and this should reflect in a lower rating. At other times a
student may ask for clarification, or ask their partner to repeat what
they had said, and this should reflect in a higher rating. Further
more, this section of evaluation should be applied in the
question/answer tasks of the exam. Some students may not
understand the instructor's question, even after rewording,
whereas other students will understand the same question
immediately.

iv) Pronunciation:
As native English speakers possess a high degree of tolerance to
ambiguity accent is not considered a viable point of exam
evaluation, except where it hinders communicative understanding
in the case of radically influencing pronunciation. In situations
where continual mispronunciation occurs, or understanding is lost
due to incorrect pronunciation of terminology, students should be
given a lower rating. Alternatively, if students correct their
mispronunciation, or recognize their mispronunciation and attempt

MUHAMMAD ASIF
9

to correct it throughout the exam, then this should reflect in a
higher rating.

v) Vocabulary Appropriateness and Complexity:
Depending on the student choice of topic, certain terms or
vocabulary items can be selected from the course materials and
incorporated within student conversational presentations. If
students use higher level vocabulary, and select terms taught from
the textbook then they should receive a higher rating. If students
employ very simple vocabulary terms for a complex topic, such as
health, then this should reflect in a lower rating.

Types of oral tests:

Following types can be used in oral testing,

a) Monologue speaking
b) Dialogue speaking
c) Multilogue speaking

Monologue speaking:

A monologue (or monolog) is when the character may be speaking his or
her thoughts aloud, directly addressing another character, or speaking to
the audience, especially the former. Monologues are common across the
range of dramatic media (plays, films, animation, etc.). It is distinct from a
soliloquy, which is where a character relates his or her thoughts and
feelings to him/herself and to the audience without addressing any of the
other characters. It is also distinct from an apostrophe, wherein the speaker
or writer addresses an imaginary person, or inanimate object, or idea.

Dialogue speaking:

The most popular type of oral test was that which tested the student's pro-
duction of dialog material. Hearing recitation of memorized dialogs was the
most-often used procedure

Dialogue means how each character speaks. This not only helps to
promote the speak and further the action, but exemplifies characterization
as well. Instructions here apply to multi-genre speaking. That is, it applies

MUHAMMAD ASIF
10

to fiction, nonfiction, and all types of characters speak. These instructions
have been industry standard speaking.

It irritates me that after learning a lot of obvious dos and don’ts of speaking,
someone invariably comes along and tries to change the status quo. They
wish to make inroads into the process, make their mark or reputation by
putting a new spin on accepted norms.

While it is true that new input can improve certain things, with this aspect of
writing, I say leave it alone. Dialogue in speaking has a certain duty to
perform. The words spoken, and not the narration, do a much better job at
building characterization. Beats and speaker attributions, which you will
learn in the samples below, have their place in speaking, but must be used
cautiously.

Multilogue speaking:

In this type there should be picture description, pictures differences or
discussion on any topic in multi language. And then difference in fluency,
vocabulary, grammar etc can be noted.

Oral testing methodologies:

Setting the scene

Language is culture in motion. It is people interacting with people. ... the
most effective programs will be those that involve the whole learner in the
experience of language as a network of relations between people, things,
and events (Savignon 1983:187)

The success of this test would be judged primarily by its effectiveness in
favorably affecting the student's perception of his/her spoken abilities, since
a self-perceived improvement would result in increased confidence when
using the language and would positively affect motivation to continue
learning.

MUHAMMAD ASIF
11

2. The Test

Of the many possibilities open to testers in terms of elicitation techniques
for oral testing, the methods adopted in this case were the oral report and
inter-learner joint discussion, the latter reflecting the interactive aspect of
language mentioned by Savignon (1985).

Two examiners were present for each test - the normal class teacher, and
another 'visiting' examiner (who was also an instructor at the Center and
known to the students by sight if not by acquaintance), providing both a
subjective and an objective assessment of the students. Students were
required to complete two stages. In the first stage each student had one
minute in which to speak about him/herself, his/her family, hobbies, room,
or lifestyle. These topics had been practiced and performed in the lessons
during the first semester. In the second stage the group had three minutes
to have a conversation about anything they wished. This was intended to
promote interactive skills as well as speaking per se, and the groups were
assessed as a whole for this task.

The tests were recorded on cassette tapes and the examiners made
comments on a pre-prepared mark sheet which noted the conversational
abilities of the students as they performed the two stages. Given that the
students would be able to access these mark sheets in order to help in their
own assessment of their performance, it was decided (by all the examiners)
to use a simplified version of Lee's criteria, employing the categories of
'Listening comprehension', 'grammatical Appropriacy', 'Ease of Speech and
Fluency', 'Content' and 'Conversation Skills'. Marking criteria were drawn
up based on established principles.

3. SELF-ASSESSMENT

Self-assessment provides us with an interesting perspective on this issue,
If the learners themselves determine what is to be learnt in the classroom,
regardless of what the teacher brings into it and if their attitudes to learning
are so formative, then it seems that we should be giving more attention to
these matters, and focusing on ways of improving them.

Self-assessment is a way of attending to such attitudes, since it
encourages the student to become part of the whole process of language
learning, and to be aware of individual progress,

MUHAMMAD ASIF
12

1. raised level of awareness;
2. improved goal orientation;
3. expansion of range of assessment;
4. shared assessment burden;

Students should also allow to access to their mark sheets and to the
cassette tapes of the testing sessions.

Problems with speaking activities:

1. Inhibition:

Learners are often inhibited about trying to say things in a foreign language
in the class room. They are worried about making mistakes, fearful of
criticism or losing face.

2. Nothing to say:

Even if they are not inhibited, we often hear learners complain that they
cannot think of anything to say.

3. Low or uneven participation:

Only one participant talks at a time or he or she dominates the group while
others speak very little or not at all. In a large group each member gets
very little talking time.

4. Mother-tongue use:

In classes where all or a number of the learners share the same mother
tongue, they are likely to use it. It is easier and it feels unnatural to speak to
one another in a foreign language.

Project Question:
a) Oral testing is time consuming and difficult to administer and difficult to
maintain its accurate assessment.

MUHAMMAD ASIF
13

Determine those causes which hinder introducing oral testing in your
language classroom.

b) write down view points of different teachers about the oral testing
whether it is successful or not in language teaching.

Objectives of the study:

The aim of the study is to analyze the problems and learning needs of oral
testing in the class. The purpose is to find out the difficulties or barriers that
hinder students’ progress in oral learning. It is intended to come up with
possible solutions through recommendations.

Significance of the study:

This study will help in knowing the factors and difficulties face in oral skills.
The material will provide an opportunity for the teachers in recognizing the
factors and problems faced in oral testing in the class. Lastly, this study
might raise questions for future inquiry.

Methodology and procedure:

This was an action research. Two types of questionnaire were prepared.
One for the students and second for the teachers. The instructor himself
went to different areas and got questionnaires filled by the students and the
teachers.

MUHAMMAD ASIF
14

Data Analysis:

Student’s Questionnaire’s Result

100

90 Agree
strong agree
80
disagree
70
strong disagree
60

50

40

30

20

10

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

MUHAMMAD ASIF
15

Graph showing the responses of all respondents (students)

45

40

35

30

25

20 Series 1

15

10

5

0
Agree Strong agree disagree Strong disagree

1. Only 10% agreed and 25% strong agreed that listening and speaking
should not be neglected in the exams. While 40% disagreed and 25%
strong disagreed from this statement.

MUHAMMAD ASIF
16

100

90

80

70

60

50
Series 1
40

30

20

10

0
Agree Strong agree disagree Strong disagree

2. 05% agreed and 90% strong agreed that oral production is an
essential component of learning a foreign language and only 05%
disagreed.

45

40

35

30

25

20 Series 1

15

10

5

0
Agree Strong agree Disagree strong disagree

MUHAMMAD ASIF
17

3. 40% agreed and 30% strong agreed that classrooms should devote
extended time to the development of speaking skills and 15%
disagreed and 15% also disagreed.

45

40

35

30

25

20 Series 1

15

10

5

0
Agree Strong agree Disagree strong disagree

4. 35% agreed and 40% strong agreed from the statement accuracy is
more important in oral testing than fluency. Only 5% disagreed and
20% strong disagreed.

MUHAMMAD ASIF
18

45

40

35

30

25

20 Series 1

15

10

5

0
Agree Strong agree Disagree Strong disagree

5. 25% agreed and the same strong agreed that oral testing should be
task based. 40% disagreed and 10% strong agreed from this
statement.

45

40

35

30

25

20 Series 1

15

10

5

0
Agree Stron agree disagree Stron disagree

6. 35% agreed and 40% strong agreed that oral testing is easier in
group activities. Only 10% disagreed and 15% strong disagreed.

MUHAMMAD ASIF
19

70

60

50

40

30 Series 1

20

10

0

7. 25% agreed and 65% strong agreed that confidence and grammar
should always be focused. And only 10% disagreed.

60

50

40

30
Series 1

20

10

0

8. Only 15% agreed that our exams should be based on four skills.
(listening, speaking, reading, writing). 50% disagreed and 35% strong
disagreed from this statement.

MUHAMMAD ASIF
20

40

35

30

25

20
Series 1
15

10

5

0

9. 25% agreed and same strong agreed that pronunciation is more
important than vocabulary, 35% disagreed and 15% strong
disagreed.

70

60

50

40

30 Series 1

20

10

0

10. 30% agreed 60% strong agreed that the size of the class
should not be more than 20. Only 10% disagreed.

MUHAMMAD ASIF
21

Findings:

Most of the students were not competent enough to express them properly.
They were asked to speak few lines on a given topic. Some of the
important findings are,

i) Insufficient vocabulary
ii) Wrong use of articles
iii) Inability of the students to grasp the ideas clearly.
iv) Lack of confidence on the part of the students.
v) Poor sentence structure.
vi) Poor tenses
vii) Poor pronunciation

Teachers used to explain complex areas and words from different angles
so that it could be more clearly understood. The concepts of the students
were clear but their majority lacked the ability to explain in English
language. The strategies and methods used for teaching purpose were
common and traditional. For example, grammar translation method was
widely used.

MUHAMMAD ASIF
22

Teacher’s Questionnaire’s Result:

120 Yes
No
100

80

60

40

20

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

MUHAMMAD ASIF
23

Graph showing the responses of all respondents (teachers)

70

60

50

40

30 Series 1

20

10

0
Yes No

1. 60% of the respondents told that English should be taught as a
language, not as a subject. While rest of the teachers were not
satisfied.

100

90

80

70

60

50
Series 1
40

30

20

10

0
Yes No

MUHAMMAD ASIF
24

2. Only 10% teachers agreed that listening and speaking should be a
part of syllabus.

80

70

60

50

40
Series 1
30

20

10

0
Yes No

3. Only 25% teachers were satisfied that our exams should be based on
four skills.

120

100

80

60
Series 1

40

20

0
Yes NO

MUHAMMAD ASIF
25

4. All the teachers were agreed that English should be declared as an
official language in the class.

80

70

60

50

40
Series 1
30

20

10

0
Yes No

5. 70% of the teachers were agreed that teachers should focus on the
nature of the language, not on the structure of the language.

100

90

80

70

60

50
Series 1
40

30

20

10

0
Yes No

MUHAMMAD ASIF
26

6. 90% teachers accepted that teacher should provide the students with
marking criteria.

80

70

60

50

40
Series 1
30

20

10

0
Yes No

7. 75% teachers said yes that the teacher must not focus on the
grammar translation method.

70

60

50

40

30 Series 1

20

10

0
Yes No

MUHAMMAD ASIF
27

8. 60% of the teachers agreed that listening and speaking are more
important than reading and writing.

90

80

70

60

50

40 Series 1

30

20

10

0
Yes No

9. 85% of the teachers disagreed that there should be zero periods for
oral testing.

120

100

80

60
Series 1

40

20

0
Yes No

MUHAMMAD ASIF
28

10. All of the teachers were agreed that oral testing can reduce the
hesitation of the students.

Findings:

The classes are not overcrowded in some schools while the case was quite
opposite with the other schools. Teachers can handle large classrooms
even. Some teachers do not find any difficulty in selecting teaching material
still they limit themselves to textbooks only. They are not provided with the
teaching aids most of the time but they do not seem to need any thing
besides a chalk and a duster. They are not satisfied with the feedback they
get. Most of the teachers dictated their students or wrote on the board.
According to them it is not possible to pay attention to the individual weak
students because of lack of the time. Most of the teachers do not feel the
need of oral skills in the class.

MUHAMMAD ASIF
29

b) The oral test:
The level of the students:

Mixed students of intermediate and graduation.

The objective for introducing oral testing in the class:

Learning to speak a second language is recognized as an important
goal of the foreign language curriculum.

So here my objective is to introduce the oral testing in the class, so that
the students will be able to speak accurately in their society in their
target language. For this purpose I introduced basic speaking skills.
After that I checked them for their pronunciation, stress pattern and
intonation etc. for this I located their status as English language speaker.

The procedure:
The procedure was made in two stages.

In the 1st stage I asked them to speak for one minute about their
personal situation. After that they were asked to make conservation for
three minutes.

In the 2nd stage they were asked to speak at the stage on a particular
situation. They were given following situations,

Problems of terrorism

Family planning and Islam

Role of movies in our society

MUHAMMAD ASIF
30

Pro-forma used for assessment:
Sr. # Confidence Eye contact Introduction Fluency & Answers to
(10) (10) (10) accuracy inquiries
(10) (10)

MUHAMMAD ASIF
31

Observations made during oral testing:
I have made following observations in the class,

Most of the students used grammar translation method. There were
repetition, hesitations and incomplete utterances when they were
speaking. There was lack of confidence on the part of the students.
They used wrong articles and their vocabulary was insufficient. Their
sentence structure, tenses and pronunciation were poor.

Findings:

Most of the students were not competent enough to express them properly.
They were asked to speak few lines on a given topic. Some of the
important findings are,

i) Insufficient vocabulary
ii) Wrong use of articles
iii) Inability of the students to grasp the ideas clearly.
iv) Lack of confidence on the part of the students.
v) Poor sentence structure.
vi) Poor tenses
vii) Poor pronunciation

Factors of neglecting oral skills:
Due to following factors the teaching and learning of oral skills
is neglected,
1. Oral skills are difficult to test because it is time consuming and
teachers cannot focus on speaking same for every student.
2. Our examination system is only made on the basis of reading and
writing skills.
3. In Pakistan mostly the teachers don’t know enough about language
methodologies.
4. In our especially in government institutions the classes are of large
size. So it becomes very difficult to test oral skills.

MUHAMMAD ASIF
32

5. As it is easier to ignore the spoken skills so it is neglected in th
examinations.
6. The teacher may lack himself the necessary confidence in speaking.
7. It is very difficult to check the fluency and accuracy of speech.

Conclusion:
Due to big class sizes, tight schedule and the lack of the time it is very
difficult to assess the oral skills. But oral production is an essential
component of learning a foreign language. As such, it should have a central
place in the foreign language classroom in both areas of instruction and
assessment. While many classrooms devote extended time to the
development of the speaking skill, the assessment practices have not
always reflected how language was taught. When little time is devoted to
the assessment of oral language, the underlying message that oral
language is not important becomes clear. Assessment of oral language can
and should be an integral part of language learning and teaching.

Suggestions:
1. There should be able teachers who can check all speaking skills.
2. In our examination system there should be focussed on oral testing.
3. In our all institutions there should be a period of oral skills.
4. To create interest among the students, interested material should be
provided.
5. Students should be kept speaking in the target language.
6. Some instructions or training should be given to the teachers.
7. The teachers should be familiar with new methodologies of teaching.
8. Oral competitions can play a vital role for this purpose.

MUHAMMAD ASIF
33

References:
http://www.actfl.org/files/public/Guidelines.pdf

www3.telus.net/linguisticsissues/oraltesting.html

http://eng.hi138.com/?i93334

http://www.readinga-z.com/guided/fluency.html

http://myenglishguru.com/teacher-forum/teaching-speaking.html

Brown, H. Douglas. (1994). Principles of Language Learning and Teaching.
3rd Ed. USA: Prentice Hall, Inc.

Hubbard, P., Jones, H., Thornton, B., and Wheeler, R. (1996). A Training
Course for TEFL. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Alderson, C. & B. North (eds.). 1991. Language Testing in the 1990's. Modern
English Publications & the British Council.

Allwright, D. 1984. ¡°Why don't learners learn what teachers teach? - the
interaction hypothesis', in Singleton, D.M. & D.G. Little.

Blanche, P. 1988. 'Self-assessment of foreign language skills: implications for
teachers and researchers', in RELC Journal Vol. 19. No. 1, pp.75-93.

Brindley, G. 1984. 'Needs analysis and objective setting in Adult Migration
Programs' Sydney: NSW Adult Migrant Education Service.

Carroll, B. 1981. 'Testing communicative performance'. Oxford: Pergamon.

Dickinson, L. 1987. Self-instruction in Language Learning. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.

Finch, AE & Hyun Taeduck. 1997. Tell Me About It. Seoul: Karam Press.

Harris, M. 1997. 'Self-assessment f language learning in formal settings' in ELT
Journal Vol. 51/1, pp. 12-20. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

MUHAMMAD ASIF
34

Heaton, B. (ed) 1982. Language testing. Modern English Publications.

Hofstede, G. 1986. 'Cultural Differences in teaching and learning' in International
Journal of Intercultural Relations, Vol. 10, pp. 301-20.

Horwitz, E.K. 1985. 'Using student beliefs about language learning and teaching in
the foreign language methods course' in Foreign Language Annals, 18, No.4. pp.
333-40

Horwitz, E.K. 1988. 'The beliefs about language learning of beginning university
foreign language students' in The Modern Language Journal, 72,iii,pp 283-93

Johnson, K. and K. Morrow, (eds) 1981. 'Communication in the classroom'
Harlow: Longman.

MUHAMMAD ASIF
35

Oral testing in the class

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked (14)

Similar to Oral testing in the class (20)

More from Muhmmad Asif (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Oral testing in the class