Speaking (Productive Skills)

“Okay class, now turn to your partner and talk about pollution for 10 minutes.” Predictably, a heavy silence fills the room. Two students whisper a single sentence, then stare at their desks. Asking learners to speak without establishing a clear communicative purpose, an information gap, or functional language support is a major cause of speaking task failure.

Core Theory & Terminology

1. Fluency vs. Accuracy

As Jack C. Richards (Communicative Language Teaching Today) and Scott Thornbury (How to Teach Speaking) delineate, speaking tasks generally target two distinct pedagogical goals:

• Accuracy-Focused Tasks: Emphasize correct grammatical form, precise vocabulary selection, and clear pronunciation. Immediate error correction is often employed.
• Fluency-Focused Tasks: Emphasize smooth, continuous communication, negotiation of meaning, and risk-taking. Interruption for error correction is strictly avoided until the post-task stage.

2. Essential Criteria for Authentic Communicative Speaking Tasks

According to Keith Morrow, an activity is truly communicative only if it contains three core elements:

1. Information Gap: One participant possesses information that the other does not.
2. Choice: Speakers have freedom over what language structures to use to bridge the gap.
3. Feedback: The listener’s reaction provides immediate confirmation of whether communication succeeded.

3. Task Types

• Information-Gap Pairwork: A/B pair activities (e.g., spot-the-difference, barrier games).
• Role-Plays & Simulations: Learners assume specific personas and social constraints (Tenor).
• Consensus / Problem-Solving Tasks: Groups must negotiate to select a ranking or solution (e.g., desert island survival task).

In the classroom

Teacher educators evaluate speaking task design rigorously during lesson observations:

1. In Formal Lesson Planning: Clearly state whether a speaking stage targets accuracy or fluency, and plan a corresponding error feedback mechanism.
2. On Observed Lessons: During fluency activities, monitor unobtrusively with a notepad (Delayed Error Correction) rather than teacher-fronting or interrupting.
3. Mentor Feedback: Observers check task scaffolding—ensuring learners have sufficient thinking time (planning time) and functional language input before being thrust into complex fluency interactions.

Practical Classroom Application

Delayed Error Correction Routine for Fluency Tasks

To maintain fluency during speaking while ensuring accountability, use this 3-step routine:

• Stage 1: Unobtrusive Monitoring (During Task): Walk around quietly with a clipboard. Write down 5-6 anonymized sentences containing common errors, alongside 2-3 examples of excellent language use.
• Stage 2: Post-Task Content Debrief: Focus first on the result of the communication: “Which group chose the best survival items?”
• Stage 3: Board Error Clinic: Write the anonymized sentences on the board:
  • In pairs, learners identify and correct the structural errors before open-class confirmation.

Reflection & Further Reading

Reflective Question

Are your classroom speaking activities genuine information-gap tasks with real communicative outcome goals, or are they disguised grammar drills?

Key Reference Areas

• Thornbury, S. — How to Teach Speaking.
• Richards, J. C. — Communicative Language Teaching Today.
• Harmer, J. — The Practice of English Language Teaching (Chapter 20).