INTRODUCTION
The
importance of this study is rooted in its dedication to comprehending the
manner in which role-playing activities can enrich English speaking skills, a
pivotal facet of daily communication. The cultivation of active engagement and
self-assurance in English speaking is of paramount significance, not only for
nurturing competency but also for fostering motivation in an increasingly
globalized world. It is imperative to recognize that English serves as a lingua
franca, with approximately 1.5 billion English speakers worldwide (Crystal,
2003). This research seeks to contribute to the broader understanding of how
role-playing can facilitate language acquisition and enhance communication
skills.
The
justification for this research endeavor lies in its innovative approach of
employing role-playing activities to enhance the speaking skills of indigenous
language speakers at Escuela de Formación de Soldados IWIAS, situated in the
Ecuadorian Amazon Region. This novel approach, primarily recruiting Kichwa and
Shuar-speaking students, marks a departure from conventional teaching methods
at the institution. Furthermore, there exists a notable dearth of prior
research in this specific context.
To
provide a theoretical foundation for the variables under investigation, on the
one hand, Ladousse (1987) underscores the dual nature of role-play, which
involves assuming the role of another person and creating a dynamic, engaging
learning environment. Role-playing facilitates the expression of experiences,
the portrayal of social relations, and the enactment of real-life situations.
Additionally, role-playing activities exhibit a "Low input high
output" nature, promoting language learning through extensive exposure to
spoken production.
Bailey
(2003) offers a comprehensive definition of role play as a conversational
activity where students take on different character roles, interact while
embodying those characters' qualities, and engage in the teaching of speech
acts, vocabulary, and grammatical structures. This makes role-playing a
practical and valuable tool for language learning. Moreover, role-playing
activities, as suggested by Harmer (2001), enable students to employ the target
language in real-life contexts. They simulate various scenarios, encouraging
students to act as if they were in different situations, thereby promoting
interaction through pair and group work and enhancing their speaking skills.
Ur
(1996) highlights the potential for increased spoken interaction as students
assume various roles and engage in outdoor activities, fostering active
cooperation and providing a dynamic, real-world language usage experience. In
the context of Communicative Language Teaching, role-playing activities enable
students to effectively use English to achieve communicative goals, helping
learners at various proficiency levels (Bailey, 2003).
Mugglestone
(1977) positions role-playing activities as a vital component of English as a
foreign language teaching, facilitating practice in real-life situations,
promoting free and creative spoken practice, and enhancing communicative
competence. Moreover, Larsen (2000) reinforces the significance of role-play as
a fundamental tool in Communicative Language Teaching, offering students
opportunities to practice communication in various social contexts and roles.
Role-playing
activities are suitable for large classes, often based on themes and activities
found in course books (Mani, Vijayakanthi, Vasanthi, Bertheu, & Parimalam,
2008). These activities stimulate students' speaking practice and encourage
interactions involving different social roles and everyday situations.
Furthermore,
role-playing activities allow participants to immerse themselves in
hypothetical events and act as characters different from their real lives. In
role plays, students receive role cards outlining specific circumstances and
interact to create scenes lasting at least four minutes (Nation and Newton,
2009). Specialized vocabulary and grammar content are often provided to
facilitate these activities.
On the
other hand, the art of effective communication through speaking is an
indispensable skill in daily life. People communicate daily, often producing
tens of thousands of words, making speaking the most fundamental and immediate
form of language expression (Thornbury, 2005). In language learning, the
importance of speaking is particularly pronounced, where it often encompasses
all aspects of language acquisition. As a result, foreign language courses, if
not all, prioritize the development of speaking skills (Bailey, 2003).
The
significance of speaking as a skill is apparent in its extensive usage across
various social and instrumental contexts. It is the primary means for
interpersonal communication, utilized for seeking information, asking
directions, or making purchases (Saville, 2006). Ecuador, a country frequently
visited by global tourists, relies on English as a medium of communication,
making it imperative for students to achieve proficiency in this oral skill.
Additionally,
in a world characterized by international communication, the ability to
exchange information effectively, both orally and in writing, is of utmost
importance (Modesti, 2015). Given the role of speaking as the immediate mode of
communication, students should attain a high level of competence in this skill
to convey information accurately.
It is
essential for teachers to create an environment that encourages students to
engage in creative communicative activities and step out of their comfort zones
(Nunan, 2015). Such tasks should cater to the students' needs, ensuring a
significant improvement in their speaking abilities, transforming them into
active participants in a student-centered setting.
Mastery
of the speaking skill is a fundamental goal for language learners, as it is a
key criterion for assessing their language proficiency (Richards, 2008).
Achieving a good level of oral proficiency is the ultimate aim of any foreign
language course. Evaluating whether students have reached the expected
proficiency level in speaking is one way to gauge their language competence.
Speaking, as a real-time action, presents unique challenges. It involves
immediate responses from interlocutors, limiting the chances for planning and
editing spoken output. This stands in contrast to most written communication,
where writers have opportunities for careful planning, editing, and revising
(Bailey, 2003).
In
addition to new learners, advanced students may also face challenges in
speaking, particularly when conversing with native speakers on diverse topics
(Kathleen, Bailey & Lance, 1994). Understanding others' words can be
challenging due to issues such as limited vocabulary and differing
pronunciations. Hence, speaking encompasses not only the pronunciation of words
but also the acquisition of vocabulary and grammatical structures.
Anxiety
can be a significant barrier to speaking confidently in a foreign language
classroom (Paradowski, 2015). Creating a positive learning environment where
students feel at ease is crucial for productive speaking practice, as
confidence is a key factor in skill improvement.
Activities
such as repeating the teacher's words, discussing weekend plans, listening to
recordings, having conversations in pairs or groups, and repeating difficult
sounds can help students build confidence (Scrivener, 2011). These activities
promote peer interaction and foster a comfortable and willing environment for
speaking.
The
implementation of role-playing activities in the classroom offers a multitude
of advantages for students, including heightened motivation, opportunities for
shy students to participate, and an expanded classroom vocabulary.
Additionally, role-playing activities can be seamlessly integrated with
technology, further enhancing students' creativity and communication skills.
These activities can be applied in large classes and cater to various
proficiency levels, making them a valuable tool in language education
MATERIALS
AND METHODS
This
research paper utilized a Quasi-experimental design, involving a population of
35 students who were divided into two groups: a control group consisting of 17
students and an experimental group comprising 18 students. The study was
conducted in the academic term May – Sep 2018 at Escuela de Formación de
Soldados IWIAS “CNRL. Gonzálo Barragán” located in the Ecuadorian Amazon
region, where the primary indigenous languages spoken among the students apart
from Spanish are Kichwa and Shuar.
Moreover,
throughout the course of this study, extensive bibliographical research has
been diligently conducted, enabling a thorough analysis and exploration of
concepts and insights from various authors. The information gathered originates
from international publications. This comprehensive review of the bibliographic
sources has facilitated the presentation of pertinent insights regarding the
relationship between the two variables under investigation. Notably, the
incorporation and examination of diverse author perspectives have greatly
enriched the quality and depth of this study.
This
study employed a mixed-methods approach, encompassing both qualitative and
quantitative research methodologies. In this investigation, a pre-test and a
post-test were concurrently administered to two distinct groups. Specifically,
the experimental group participated in a treatment involving role-playing
activities. Subsequently, the data collected from these assessments were
meticulously organized, analyzed, and interpreted in a quantitative manner. A
comparative analysis was then conducted to discern any disparities in the
scores achieved by students from both the control and experimental groups.
This
research can be classified as descriptive since its primary objective is to
substantiate the validity of the formulated hypothesis. As a result, a
statistical analysis of both pre-test and post-test results becomes imperative.
Additionally, a t-test has been conducted to assess the viability of the
alternative hypothesis. Moreover, this study adopts an applied research
approach, chosen for its emphasis on reporting the outcomes derived from data
analysis and its pursuit of solutions to issues arising from the implementation
of role-playing activities with students.
The
instrument was the speaking part of a mock KET test. The test has three
parameters (grammar and vocabulary, pronunciation, and interactive
communication) and each one is awarded 5 points, giving a total of 15 points.
Finally,
the research adopted a correlational methodology to examine the relationship
between role-playing and the development of English speaking skills. This
relationship was assessed following the implementation of role-playing
activities as a treatment. Consequently, we were able to investigate the
association between the independent and the dependent variable. This study
aimed to observe both the effects and the influence of role-playing within the
context of English classes.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
|
TEST/GROUP
|
Grammar
and Vocabulary
|
Pronunciation
|
Interactive
Communication
|
|
Pre-test
control group
|
2,530
|
2,000
|
2,470
|
|
Post-test
control group
|
3,650
|
3,530
|
3,530
|
|
Pre-test
experimental group
|
2,220
|
2,000
|
2,560
|
|
Post-test
experimental group
|
4,280
|
3,940
|
4,060
|
Table 1. Comparison of
averages out of 5 points obtained in the parameters of grammar and vocabulary,
pronunciation and interactive communication in the pre-test and the post-test.
Analysis
and interpretation
Table 1 shows that both groups have almost similar averages in the
pre-test. Nevertheless, some differences are shown in the post-test scores. It
can be seen that the control group obtained better results in relation to the
pre-test. However, the experimental group obtained much higher scores in the
three categories in the post-test than the control group comparing with the
pre-test grades. These results start to give an idea that the treatment applied
to the experimental group has had good results.
|
Parameters
|
Scores
|
|
Control
group
|
Experimental
group
|
|
Pre-test
|
Post-test
|
Pre-test
|
Post-test
|
|
Mean
|
7,00
|
10,71
|
6,78
|
12,28
|
|
Variance
|
0,63
|
0,60
|
0,18
|
0,57
|
|
Standard
deviation
|
0,79
|
0,77
|
0,43
|
0,75
|
Table 2.
Mean,
variance and standard deviation from the control and experimental group’s
scores in the pre-test and post-test: grammar and vocabulary, pronunciation and
interactive communication.
Analysis
and interpretation
According to the data presented in Table 2, the average of the results
from the control and experimental group in the pre and post-test can be
observed and compared. The following data corresponds to the control group’s
post-test’ results: mean 10.71, the variance was 0.60 and the standard
deviation was 0.77. It shows a small difference with the pre-test results.
Apart from that, it can be seen that the experimental group achieved a
significant increment in the post-test scores with a mean of 12.28, the
variance was 0.57 and the standard deviation was 0.75. These results clearly
show that the difference between the results obtained in the post-test by the
experimental group may be seen as a significant improvement made by this group.
|
Likert scale
|
Control
group
|
|
Experimental
group
|
|
Pre-
test
|
Post-
test
|
|
Pre-
test
|
Post-
test
|
|
FQ
|
%
|
FQ
|
%
|
|
FQ
|
%
|
FQ
|
%
|
|
Excellent (A)
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
0
|
0
|
1
|
6
|
|
Good (B)
|
0
|
0
|
9
|
53
|
|
0
|
0
|
17
|
94
|
|
Satisfactory (C)
|
0
|
0
|
8
|
47
|
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Needs Improvement (D)
|
12
|
71
|
0
|
0
|
|
14
|
78
|
0
|
0
|
|
Unsatisfactory (E)
|
5
|
29
|
0
|
0
|
|
4
|
22
|
0
|
0
|
|
|
17
|
100
|
17
|
100
|
|
18
|
100
|
18
|
100
|
Table 3. Frequencies
from the total scores obtained in the pre-test and post-test by the control and
experimental group.
A:
Excellent 15-14 points,
B:
Good 13-11 points
C:
Satisfactory 10-9 points
D:
Need improvement 8-7 points
E:
Unsatisfactory 6-0 points.
FQ:
Frequency.
%:
Percentage of frequency.
Analysis
and interpretation
In table 3, it can be observed the frequency of the total grades
obtained by the students from both groups. First of all, in the pre-test, one
part of the control group obtained grades from 7-8, this represents 71% of
results and is marked as need improvement. Another portion of them obtained
grades form 0-6; this represents 29% and is marked with the scale
unsatisfactory. Whilst in the post-test, this group was categorized with 47%
(grades 9-10) of the results as satisfactory and 53% (grades 11-13) as good.
The comparison of these results shows an increment in the grades.
Second, in the pre-test, one part of the students from the experimental
group obtained grades from 7-8, this represents 78% and is in the scale of need
improvement. Another portion of this group obtained grades form 0-6; this
represents 22% and is in the scale of unsatisfactory. On the other hand, in the
post-test, 94% of this group was in the scale of good, with grades 11-13 and 6%
was in the scale of excellent (grades 14-15). The comparison of these results
clearly shows a difference in the scores and an increment in the grades in both
groups. However, the experimental group obtained better grades and reached the
scale of excellent. It could suggest that the treatment with role-playing
activities affected positively on the students’ scores.
The hypothesis verification had to be developed. For that to be done;
it was necessary to compare the means from both the control and experimental
group; thus, a t-test for two small samples was employed for the post-test’s
results of the control and experimental group. Besides, a t-test for paired
samples was employed for the pre and post-test’s results of the experimental
group. Moreover, the means of both groups needed to be compared to see if they
are different in the post- test. It was necessary to verify if the treatment
with role-playing activities affected positively the students’ speaking skills,
because it is vital to have a statistically evidence to verify whether the null
hypothesis is rejected or not.
T-test
The post-test from the control and experimental group’s scores were
used to develop a t-test for small samples as well as the pre-test and
post-test’s results from the experimental group for the t-test for
paired samples. The results are shown in the following graphs.
|
Parameters
|
Control group
Post-test
|
Experimental group
Post-test
|
|
Mean
|
10,70588235
|
12,27777778
|
|
Variance
|
0,595588235
|
0,565359477
|
|
Standard deviation
|
0,771743633
|
0,751903901
|
|
Observations
|
17
|
18
|
|
Grouped variance
|
0,580015845
|
|
|
Degrees of freedom
|
33
|
|
|
Statistics t
|
-6,10281791
|
|
|
P(T<=t) one tailed
|
3,5655E-07
|
|
|
T critical value (one tailed)
|
1,692360309
|
|
|
P(T<=t) two tailed
|
7,131E-07
|
|
|
T critical value (two tailed)
|
2,034515297
|
|
Table 4. T-test for
small samples (control y experimental group)
Analysis
and interpretation
The results of the t-test are shown in table 4. The control and
experimental group’s results are used in order to compare if there is any
difference between the means of the two groups. In the post-test, the control
group’s score was 10,71; whilst the experimental group’s result was 12, 28, it
is clearly higher than the latter group. It was observed that the statistics t
was -6, 10, it means there is a 95% of reliability for two tails which was 2,
03. Thus, the null hypothesis was rejected and the alternative hypothesis is
accepted due to the difference among the means. In the same way, the value of p=7,13E-07
is lower than a=0,05. This helps to reinforce that no
mistake was made when accepting the alternative hypothesis.
|
Parameters
|
Pre-test
|
Post-test
|
|
Mean
|
6,777777778
|
12,27777778
|
|
Variance
|
0,183006536
|
0,565359477
|
|
Standard deviation
|
0,427792631
|
0,751903901
|
|
Observations
|
18
|
18
|
|
Grouped variance
|
0,20319496
|
|
|
Hypothetical difference of means
|
0
|
|
|
Degrees of freedom
|
17
|
|
|
Statistics t
|
-29,69126856
|
|
|
P(T<=t) one tail
|
2,17085E-16
|
|
|
T critical value (one tail)
|
1,739606726
|
|
|
P(T<=t) two tail
|
4,34169E-16
|
|
|
T critical value (two tails)
|
2,109815578
|
|
Table 5. T-test for paired samples (pre-test y post-test) in
the experimental group.
Analysis and interpretation
The t-test for
paired samples determined an increment in the post-test’s grades in comparison
to the pre-test’s scores. In the pre-test the means were: 6.777 in the pre-test
and 12.277 in the post-test. When contrasted with the statistics t
calculated -29.69 and the critical value two tailed 2.109, it was observed that
the calculated t is in the rejected zone to a 95% of reliability. Thus,
the null hypothesis is rejected and the alternative hypothesis is accepted
because there is a visible difference in the pre and post-test’s scores.
Furthermore, the correlation’s coefficient of Pearson showed a result
of 0,203 which indicates that there is a weak relation between the two
variables (pre and post-test) and when contrasted with the p value for
two tailed with a significance level of 5% (p= p=4, 34E-16 < than a=0, 05). This suggests that the treatment with
role-playing activities contributed in the speaking skills improvement.
Similarly, when contrasting the p value, there is not any probability to
accept the null hypothesis. Thus, there is not any risk of accepting the
alternative hypothesis.
Discussion
The results presented in Table 1 provide valuable insights into the
effectiveness of a teaching intervention aimed at improving language skills.
The pre-test scores for both the control and experimental groups indicate that
the participants had similar levels of proficiency in grammar and vocabulary,
pronunciation, and interactive communication before the intervention. However,
the post-test scores reveal significant differences in the outcomes between the
two groups.
The control group exhibited noticeable improvements in their language
skills, as evidenced by the post-test scores. The mean scores increased from
7.00 in the pre-test to 10.71 in the post-test. While this demonstrates some
progress, it is essential to note that the variance and standard deviation
remained relatively stable, indicating that the control group's improvement was
modest and relatively consistent across participants.
In contrast, the experimental group experienced a substantial increase
in their language skills. The mean scores soared from 6.78 in the pre-test to
an impressive 12.28 in the post-test. This dramatic improvement is further
emphasized by the decrease in the variance and standard deviation, suggesting
that the experimental group exhibited a more consistent and substantial
enhancement in their language skills.
To further explore the significance of these findings, it is crucial to
consider the Likert scale results presented in Table 3. In the pre-test, the
majority of the control group fell into the "Needs Improvement"
category, with a smaller portion in the "Unsatisfactory" category.
However, in the post-test, the distribution shifted significantly, with most
participants now in the "Satisfactory" and "Good"
categories, indicating an overall improvement in language skills.
In contrast, the experimental group showed an even more pronounced
shift in categories. In the pre-test, the majority of participants were
categorized as "Needs Improvement" and "Unsatisfactory,"
while in the post-test, an overwhelming majority fell into the "Good"
category, and some even reached the "Excellent" category.
The statistical analyses, as presented in Tables 4 and 5, confirm the
significance of these results. The t-test for small samples (Table 4)
demonstrates a clear difference in post-test scores between the control and
experimental groups, with the experimental group outperforming the control
group. The t-test for paired samples (Table 5) further underscores the impact
of the intervention on the experimental group. The mean scores increased
significantly from the pre-test to the post-test, and the null hypothesis was
confidently rejected in favor of the alternative hypothesis.
The Pearson correlation coefficient indicated a weak relationship
between pre-test and post-test scores, further supporting the idea that the
treatment with role-playing activities contributed significantly to the
improvement in speaking skills.
CONCLUSIONS
Prior
to the intervention, students underwent a Key English Test (KET) assessment,
specifically focusing on their speaking abilities. This served as a diagnostic
tool to assess their proficiency in spoken English. The pre-test results, for
both the control and experimental groups, revealed that the average scores in
the three key test parameters - grammar and vocabulary, pronunciation, and
interactive communication - were notably low, resulting in ratings falling
within the "Need Improvement" and "Unsatisfactory"
categories.
Following
the completion of the role-playing treatment, students participated in a
post-treatment KET test. The results of this post-test clearly demonstrated the
positive impact of role-playing activities on the development of students'
speaking skills. Notably, a significant improvement was observed, with the
majority of students in the experimental group achieving "Good" and
"Excellent"
ratings. This underscores the effectiveness of the role-playing treatment in
enhancing students' speaking abilities.
A
comparison between the pre-test and post-test scores indicated a notable
increase in the latter. Statistical analysis employing the t-test revealed the
rejection of the null hypothesis and acceptance of the alternative hypothesis,
confirming a substantial relationship between role-playing and the development
of speaking skills. In essence, the practice of role-playing had a positive
impact on students' speaking proficiency.
The
advantages of incorporating role-playing in the classroom context became evident.
Notably, students engage in experiential learning, allowing for comprehensive
spoken practice. Role-playing scenarios can also be tailored to address
real-world situations, incorporating authentic vocabulary. Moreover, this
teaching approach is highly adaptable, suitable for various teaching materials
and course levels, from beginner to advanced. Consequently, it stands as an
effective tool to not only enhance students' communication skills but also to
nurture personal competencies and social skills.
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL
REFERENCES
Bailey,
K. M. (2003). Practical English Language Teaching: Speaking. (D. Nunan,
Ed.) New York: McGraw-Hill.
Crystal,
D. (2003). English as a Global Language. New York: Oxford University
Press.
Harmer,
J. (2001). The Practice of English Language Teaching. Harlow: Longman.
Kathleen,
A., Bailey, & Lance, S. (1994). New Ways in Teaching Speaking .
Virginia: Tesol.
Ladousse,
G. P. (1987). Role Play. Hong Kong: Oxford University Press.
Larsen,
D., & Anderson, M. (2011). Techniques & Principles in Language
Teaching. New York: Oxford University Press.
Mani
Nadar, N., Vijayakanthi, V., Vasanthi, T. L., Bertheu, & Parimalam
Rathibai, J. (2008). English Language Teaching. Chennai: Tamilnadu
Textbook Corporation.
Modesti,
S. (2015). Retrieved from
http://dspace.unive.it/bitstream/handle/10579/8105/834414-1193361.pdf?sequence=2
Mugglestone,
P. (1977). Games, Simulations and Role-playing. London: British Council
Printing and Publishing Deparment.
Nunan,
D. (2015). Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages. New York:
Routledge.
Paradowski,
M. B. (2015). Productive foreign language skills for an intercultural world
: a guide (not. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang GmbH.
Richards,
J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (1986). Approaches and Methods In Language
Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Saville,
M. (2006). Introducing Second Language Acquisition. Cambridge University
Press: New York.
Scrivener,
J. (2011). Learning Teaching - The Essential Guide to English Language
Teaching. Spain: Edelvives.
Thornbury,
S. (2005). How to Teach Speaking. London: Longman.
Ur, P.
(1996). A Course in Language Teaching: Practice and Theory. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.