radio program final document july1114

8/13/2019 Radio Program Final Document July1114

1/132

ANALYZING THE INFLUENCE OF A RADIO PROGRAM PRODUCTION AS A

NATURALLY-OCCURRING DISCOURSE ACTIVITY ON THE IMPROVEMENT OF

THE EFL SPOKEN INTERACTION COMPETENCE: A PILOT STUDY

CERN CHVEZ JULIN MAURICIO

FLREZ VIDAL CARLOS ANDRS

JALBIN COLLAZOS LEIDY JOHANA

SOLARTE NAVARRO LILIANA

VARN GUZMN MARGARET SOFA

UNIVERSITY OF CAUCA

SCHOOL OF HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES

POPAYN, COLOMBIA

JULIO 2012


2/132


3/132

i

UNIVERSITY OF CAUCA

The Undersigned Committee of the School of Humanities and Social Sciences approves theThesis of Carlos Andres Flrez Vidal, Julian Mauricio Cern Chvez, Leidy Johana Jalbin

Collazos, Liliana Solarte Navarro and Margareth Sofa Varn Guzman, entitled

Analyzing the Influence of a Radio Program Production as a Naturally-OccurringDiscourse Activity on the Improvement of the EFL Spoken Interaction Competence: A

Pilot Study

____________________________________Pablo Enrique Acosta Acosta, Chairperson

Department of Foreign Languages

____________________________________James Rodolfo Rivera Zambrano Department of Foreign Languages

____________________________________Richard William Mejia Ramrez Department of Foreign Languages

____________________________________lvaro Gerardo Fernndez Snchez

Department of Social Communication

_______________Approval Date


4/132


5/132

iii

give up; He opened doors everywhere and gave me all of that happiness and satisfactions

hands full. (Sofa)


6/132

iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We want to thank our dear Chairperson Pablo Enrique Acosta Acosta who kindly

decided to work with us in our research project, showing great interest and entire

commitment to the development of this study, sharing with us all his experience and

knowledge as an educator and researcher. We thank him for his support, engagement, and

patience, and for the advice, opinions, and recommendations he gave us to make such an

excellent scientific work of our study. We also want to thank our readers James Rodolfo

Rivera Zambrano, Richard William Mejia Ramrez, and lvaro Fernndez for the attentive

reading of our research project, their valuable advice and recommendations were very

helpful for the improvement of our study. Finally, we want to thank Mr. Nestor Velasco

from Radio Universidad del Cauca Station for caring about the radio broadcasting details;we appreciate his cooperation, help, and enthusiasm very much.

Where would I be without my family? My parents deserve special mention for their

inseparable support and motivation. First place my father, Carlos Flrez who is the person

that has given me the basis in my life; my mother, Luz Yenny Vidal, the one who sincerely

raised me with her caring and gently love. Pablo and Erika Flrez, thanks for being an

example to follow in my academic life. I wish to express my deepest gratitude to my

classmates Sofi, Lili, Leidy, and Mauricio for giving me the opportunity to work whit them,


7/132

v

for sharing their incomparably knowledge and for their patience and friendship. Finally, I

would like to thank everybody who was important to the success of this project. (Carlos)

I would like to thank to my parents Pedro Antonio Cern and Rosalba Chvez for

being there and for loving me. I want to thank my awesome brothers because they as well

as my parents always encourage me and support me in everything. To my friends Liliana,

Sofia, Carlos, and Leidy for sharing all those awesome moments we spent when we were

working on this project. And finally I would like to thank all the wonderful people that play

an important role helping us to finish this project. (Julian)

I would like to thank God because he has always been my guide; my mother Ana

Collazos, my father Ary Jalbin, and my sister Anglica for supporting and loving me as

only they can do, and for their help when I needed it the most. Finally, I would like to thank

all my dearest friends for being part of this long process and for giving me the best

moments of my life. (Leidy)

I want to thank to my parents Blanca Nubia Navarro and Jos Constan Solarte for

their endless unconditional love and support; to my brother and sisters for being there when

I needed them. Thanks to my nieces and nephews for existing and making my life worth

living. I also want to thank my friends for being the funniest part of my life. And finally I

want to thank Frasquitos, Tablitas, Caloritas, and Espiralitos for all the snacks, the jokes

and the laughing during this process. (Liliana)

I want to thank to all of those people who were there throughout my degree, their

advice, recommendations, and motivation to keep going until now. Thank to my partners


8/132

vi

and friends Mauro, Lili, Leidy, and Carlos for being always patient with me, they will stay

in my heart forever. Thanks for the jokes, laughs, recordings, and everything that built this

friendship. (Sofa)


9/132

vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

Approval I

Dedication

Acknowledgments

Table of contents

List of appendix

List of abbreviations

ii

iii

v

viii

ix

ABSTRACT x

RESUMEN xi

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1CHAPTER 2: SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY 3

CHAPTER 3: THE PROBLEM 6

3.1 Problem Statement 6

3.2 Research Questions 7

3.3 Objectives of the Study 8

3.3.1 General Objective 8

3.3.2 Specific objectives 8

CHAPTER 4: CONCEPTUAL, THEORETICAL, AND CONTEXTUAL9


10/132

viii

FRAMEWORK

4.1 Theoretical Approach

4.2 State of the Art4.3 Argument 9

4.4 Naturally Occurring Discourse 9

4.5 Radio 11

4.6 English as a Foreign Language EFL 12

4.7 Pilot Study 12

4.8 Communicative Competence 13

4.9 Spoken Interaction Competence 14

CHAPTER 5: RESEARCH METHOD 16

5.1 The Research Method 16

5.2 Community and Sam 18

5.2.1 Community 185.2.2 Sample 18

5.3 The Elements of the Study 19

5.3.1 Hypotheses 19

5.3.1.1 Working Hypotheses 19

5.3.1.2 Null Hypotheses 19

5.3.2 Variables 19

5.3.2.1 Dependent Variable 19

5.3.2.2 Independent Variable 19


11/132

ix

CHAPTER 6: THE INTERVENTION:METHODOLOGY BASED ON THE

ACTION RESEARCH METHOD 21

6.1 Generalities of the RP 216.2 Methodology 24

6.2.1 Instruments 26

6.2.1.1 Participant Observation 26

6.2.1.2 Narrative Inquiry 27

6.2.2 Agenda

6.2.2.1 Proposal

6.2.2.1.1 First Activity

6.2.2.1.2 Second Activity 29

6.2.2.1.3 Third Activity 30

6.2.2.2 Implementation 30

6.2.2.3 Analysis 306.2.2.4 Redesign 30

6.3 Self-Assessment of the RP 31

CHAPTER 7: DATA ANALYSIS

7.1 Pre-test

7.1.1 Pre-test - Task 1



7.2 Intervention Phase Analysis


12/132

x

7.2.1 Collective Narratives

7.2.1.1 Collective Narrative: Cycle 1






7.2.2 Analysis of the Process

7.2.2.1 Analysis of the Process: Cycle 1





7.2.2.6 Analysis of the Process: Cycle 6 7.3 Posttest

7.3.1 Posttest - Task 1



7.4 Pre-test and Posttest Results and Analysis

7.4.1 Task 1: Pre-test and Posttest Results

7.4.2 Task 1: Analysis of the Pre-test and Posttest Results

7.4.3 Task 2: Pre-test and Posttest Results


13/132


14/132

xii

LIST OF APPENDICES

APPENDIX 001: Rating Guide Rubric

APPENDIX 002:

APPENDIX 003:

APPENDIX 004:

APPENDIX 005:

APPENDIX 006:

APPENDIX 007:

APPENDIX 008:

APPENDIX 009:

APPENDIX 010:

APPENDIX 011:

APPENDIX 012:

APPENDIX 013:

APPENDIX 014:

APPENDIX 015:

APPENDIX 016:

APPENDIX 017:

APPENDIX 0018:


15/132

xiii

APPENDIX 019

APPENDIX 020:

APPENDIX 021:APPENDIX 022:

APPENDIX 023:

APPENDIX 024:

APPENDIX 025:

APPENDIX 026


16/132

xiv

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

CC: Communicative Competence

CEFR: Common European Framework of Reference

EFL: English as a Foreign Language

IP: Intervention Phase.

MLP: Modern Languages ProgramNOD: Naturally-Occurring Discourse

RP: Radio Program

RPP: Radio Program Production

SIC: Spoken Interaction Competence


17/132

xv

ABSTRACT

Having the Common European Framework features for proficient language users on

spoken aspects as the referent where spoken interaction is defined as the construction of

discourse conjointly , the present Quasi-Experimental pilot study focused on determining

the influence of a Radio Program Production (RPP) as a Naturally-Occurring Discourse

(NOD) activity on the improvement of the EFL Spoken Interaction Competence (SIC). We

hypothesized that the RPP in English could bring] about NOD that empower participants to

improve their EFL Spoken Interaction Competence (SIC) level. In order to test our

hypothesis, a group, formed by five students from the Modern Languages Program, who

were the same researchers, produced a Radio Program (RP) weekly for six weeks. The

study was developed in three stages the pre-test stage which determined the initialstudents

Spoken Interaction Competence (SIC) level; the second stage was the implementation of a

methodology based on the Action Research Method; and finally the posttest stage which

determined the SIC level of the participants after the implementation of the proposed

methodology, in order to prove whether or not the hypothesis worked. At the end of the

study, the data demonstrated that the participants significantly improved their SIC level by

means of the production of a radio program in the target language.

Key words: Naturally-Occurring Discourse (NOD), Spoken Interaction Competence (SIC),

Radio Program Production (RPP), communicative competence.


18/132

xvi

RESUMEN

Teniendo al Marco Comn Europeo como referente en relacin a los aspectos de habla de

una lengua en usuarios competentes (con alto dominio) -donde se define la interaccin oral

como la construccin conjunta de discurso- el siguiente estudio piloto de corte cuasi-

experimental se enfoca en determinar la influencia de la produccin de un programa de

radio, como una actividad donde el discurso sucede de manera natural, en el mejoramiento

de la Competencia de Interaccin Oral (CIO) en ingls como lengua extranjera. La

hiptesis plante que la produccin de un programa de radio conduca a un discurso natural

permitiendo a los participantes mejorar su nivel de CIO. Para comprobar la hiptesis, un

grupo conformado por cinco estudiantes del programa de Lenguas Modernas de la

Universidad del Cauca llev a cabo la produccin de un programa radial semanal durante

seis semanas. El estudio fue efectuado en tres etapas: la etapa del pre-test la cual permiti

conocer el nivel inicial del CIO de los participantes; la segunda etapa consisti en la

aplicacin de una metodologa basada en el Mtodo de Investigacin en Accin; y por

ltimo, la etapa del post-test, que determin el nivel de CIO de los participantes luego de la

implementacin de la metodologa propuesta. Al final de este estudio los datos demostraron

que los estudiantes mejoraron significativamente su nivel de CIO a travs de la produccin

de un programa radial en ingls.


19/132

1

1.

INTRODUCTION

This research project aimed at determining the influence of a Radio Program

Production (RPP) as a Naturally-Occurring Discourse (NOD) activity on the improvement

of the EFL Spoken Interaction Competence (SIC). Knowing that spoken language was a

key element in the construction of social relationships and interaction among people when

learning a foreign language (Brown and Yule, 1), we intended to look for a different way to

improve SIC in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learning process. Nevertheless, SIC

was more complicated than it seemed to be because it involved more than just pronouncing

words; it entailed a team work where it was necessarya collective creation of meaning by

the establishment of some degree of common mental context, in real time , according to the

Common European Framework of Reference (84).

Our experience during four years in the Modern Languages Program English-

French at the University of Cauca showed us that the SIC was underestimated and we

considered that the Program did not provide enough opportunities for students to use the

English language in real time and context. Being conscious of this problem, we proposed

the production of a Radio Program as a suitable space where students could improve their

SIC. The radio program required a group effort through a series of meetings and activities

in which the participants practiced constantly argumentation, debating, talking, and

discussing. Moreover, it implied a constant interaction among participants encouraging


20/132

2

them to be prepared to interact with others, allowing NOD to happen. Finally, it also

required the organization of the participants thoughts, ideas, and speech in order to be

clear, consistent, and convincing for the audience. In this way the Radio ProgramProduction (RPP) could became a creative, fun, and accessible tool to improve SIC.

The study consisted of 3 stages: a pretest, an intervention, and a posttest (see figure

1: Research Phases, page 19). The pre-test and posttest involved the data collection for

further analysis and interpretation about the level of the participants regarding their SIC. On

the other hand, the intervention stage was a process based on the Action Research Method.

This method has been generally applied in academic contexts, used as a research method in

specific class situations, and due to its nature we adopted it in order to construct a

methodology characterized by the construction of knowledge right through self-reflection

and active participation allowing us to create an environment to improve the SIC level. This

methodology offered us a cyclic process that consisted of four steps: a proposal of tasks and

activities, a way to implement them, an analysis plan of the processes and outcomes, and a

re-design scheme that permitted us a constant feedback of the process (See figure 2:

Intervention Phase Schema, page 45). These series of steps based on the Action Research

methodology played an important role in the improvement of the SIC due to the constant

spoken interaction developed among the participants and the construction of awareness

about their learning processes. This awareness in particular was the product of the analysis

step that allowed the design of a self assessment moment in which participants told ,wrote

and shared with the group their own experiences and perceptions. In this step participants

realized about their strengths, weaknesses, problems and opportunities when improving


21/132


22/132

4

2. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

When teaching and learning in EFL contexts, teachers and students deal with

different aims concerned with the spoken form of language. For instance, those related to

grammar, phonetics, rhythm, intonation, and even pragmatics and sociolinguistics; and it

seems that foreign language learner s goals involve being fluent in the target language. The

spoken form of language interest is due to the remarkable role of oral speech in human

communication, since it helps interaction among people and that is stated by Rebecca

Hughes asan innate, universal human capacity and primary language faculty that projects

the self into the world (8, 14) .

In foreign language learning and teaching contexts, it can be seen how speakers

adapt themselves and their language choices to the cultural and social patterns of behavior

of the target language for successful communication to take place. Moreover, the spoken

form of language is fundamentally temporary, dynamic, spontaneous, and context

dependent and for this reason, it represents, at some point, the main source of innovation

and language change. These changes can be seen in an educational field, for example, when

teachers and students look for updated material which contains new idiomatic expressions,

words, and grammatical issues developed at the level of the speech. Nowadays, this

particular characteristic not only becomes a key feature that concerns foreign language

learners about learning the spoken form of language but also is closely related to the


23/132

5

influence of new media trends such as e-mail, Twitter, and text messages on mobile phones

that become an important element in the speed change of a language.

Taking into account the importance of some characteristics of the spoken form of

language presented above, we could realize that the relevance of the study of the spoken

competence in human communication and particularly foreign language learning contexts

consisted on establishing the kind of interpersonal and interactive strategies we had to

develop to improve the Spoken Interaction Competence SIC, which is the construction of

meaning through discourse. As the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR)

states, the spoken interaction is the oral communication given between two or more

interlocutors, where they act as speakers and listeners alternatively, in which it is necessary

the construction of conversational discourse in a conjoined way through the negotiation of

meaning, following interactive strategies such us co-operation, mutual understanding, and

asking for clarification (73).

In order to construct a proper environment for spoken interaction to take place, we

believe that the RPP is a significant element that encourages a Naturally-Occurring

Discourse (NOD) when people orally interact, since the production of a RP involves

interaction among the producers (Luis Lpez Forero, 318). The significance of our proposal

lied in the fact that the collaboration is not reduced only to the strictly technical aspect but

it also implies the creation of steps that demands constant spoken interaction such asreunions, debates, searching for information on the web, investigation, critical debates, and

the need to cooperate and decide about the information that is managed in the RPP. In this


24/132

6

way, EFL learners were involved in a dynamic learning process that let them to appropriate

the target language in a real context.

Besides, the implementation of a methodology based on the Action Research

Method allowed us to construct knowledge and awareness of the process through reflection

and active participation in the RPP and the self-assessment through the implementation of a

continuous cyclic process. This was precisely one of the most outstanding aspects of this

research, because of the importance of self-assessment as a metacognitive exercise that

permits the students to assimilate their knowledge in a significant way.

Finally, this proposal allowed us to be immersed in an environment that encouraged

real time communication, providing contextualized material, active participation in the

formulation of activities and meaningful learning when developing a RPP that intended to

improve the SIC of foreign language learners in EFL contexts. Besides, the Methodology

became an innovative way of learning and teaching the spoken form of a language that

could be considered one of the main aims when learning a foreign language.


25/132

7

3. THE PROBLEM

This chapter states the problem we encountered when trying to construct well-

structured discourse conjointly in the exercise of interaction. It also presents the research

question and the objectives of the study, both general and specific.

3.1 Problem Statement

Regarding the importance of the spoken language,considered as the primary form

of language (Rebecca Hughes, 13), we believed that the Modern Languages Program

English-French from the University of Cauca did not provide us enough opportunities to

improve our SIC level. Some of those opportunities were limited to the academic context

such as interventions in the classroom, role plays and presentations. However, according to

our personal experiences most of the time we felt under pressure when we tried to

memorize and hence we could not produce a natural discourse. Some role play activities

were intended to allow interaction between students according to the curriculum but we felt

that these activities did not help us improve our SIC. These experiences showed that we

needed different opportunities characterized by interaction in real time in order to permit us

to acquire spontaneity and fluency, making our speech more natural and authentic.

We as current students and future EFL teachers think that the SIC is a key aspect

when teaching and learning English. It is essential for the teacher to know in order to


26/132

8

teach a foreign language how the individuals of that determined culture act and react

towards different interactional contextual situations. Consequently, we believe that NOD

and SIC play an important role to students and teachers when trying to learn or teach thespoken form of language in EFL contexts.

3.2 Research Question

How does the Radio Program Production as a Naturally-Occurring Discourse

activity influence on the improvement of the EFL Spoken Interaction Competence?

Objectives of the Study

3.2.1 General Objective

To determine the influence of a Radio Program Production as a Naturally-

Occurring Discourse activity on the improvement of the EFL Spoken

Interaction Competence.

3.2.2

Specific Objectives To design a Methodology that allowed us to use English while producing a

Radio Program in English.

To produce a radio Program in English in order to improve our EFL Spoken

Interaction Competence.

To relate the Methodology we designed with the improvement of our EFL

Spoken Interaction Competence.


27/132

9

4. STATE OF THE ART AND CONCEPTUAL, THEORETICAL, AND

CONTEXTUAL FRAMEWORK

This chapter deals with the theoretical and contextual concerns that are essential for

the support, clarification, and argumentation of the core concepts of this study. In that way

we provide the theoretical bases that guided this research project.

4.1 Theoretical Approach

This research project was framed in the constructivism approach which emphasizes

on the primacy of each individuals construction of reality arguing that all human beings

construct their own version of reality, and therefore multiple contrasting ways of knowing

and describing are equally legitimate (Brown, 11). Two of the emblematic researchers of

this school of thought differ in the extent to which each emphasizes social context. Piaget

thought that social interaction only was a trigger to the cognitive development of

predetermined stages in time, but this was, at the end, a solitary act (Brown, 11). On the

contrary, Vygotsky said that social interaction was foundational in cognitive development

(Brown, 11). Even when there is no way to affirm if a single paradigm or theory is right or

wrong, we believe that this research project had a social constructivist approach due to thenature of the proposal which looked for an improvement of the Spoken Interaction

Competence level through the production of a Radio Program.


28/132

10

Regarding the nature of our research, we also included metacognition into the

theoretical framework in order to support the methodology we wanted to implement.

Metacognition is the ability to self-regulate our own learning it means to plan and applydifferent strategies to learn according to the situation. It also involves controlling and

evaluating the learning process in order to detect possible difficulties to finally modify our

performances (Son and Schwartz, 16). In general researchers have held the notion that

people do have an ability to look at their cognitions and make somewhat accurate

assessments about them (Son and Schwartz, 19). Consequently, in our research we

pretended to reach a level of consciousness of our own learning process through personal

and group reflections and assessments for further modifications of the implemented

learning strategies related to the SIC. At the end of the project we were able to regulate the

way we learnt by a metacognitive exercise that permitted us to be conscious of our

strengths and weaknesses in the strategies we used to learn EFL.

4.2 State of the art

One of the previous research projects that helped us to build an idea of a RP

proposal is Jvenes, Radio y Ciudadana 1 by Alexander Buenda (Buenda, ). This research

project in particular encompassed three thematic areas: the young people, the radio, and the

city. Besides, it tried to explore the interrelations that occur between those three

components, to comprehend what happens when young people design a radio program foryoung people, and to test how the producers of radio programs assume the interaction in

different contexts with the young people and the city. We considered that although this

1Youngsters, Radio and Citizenship.


29/132

11

research did not deal with teaching and learning a foreign language, it gave us a different

perspective about what a radio program was and its importance as a mass media.

Regarding the lack of experience in the production of a radio program, Radio

Ciudadana 2 constituted a guide for producing our radio program (Ministerio de Cultura,

2010). It gave usa general view related to the systematization of the activities performed

by the participants during the Intervention Phase (IP) (the creation of a schedule for

searching, sharing, organizing ideas and information). Moreover, this book helped us to

understand the process of technical issues such as writing scripts, choosing music and

special sound effects, among others.

For supporting our proposal, we presented some previous experiences about the use

of radio in the improvement of the proficiency of EFL learners. The first one, ESL Radio:

Innovations in the application of ICT to the learner- centered curriculum, was a project

that looked for maximizing the language learning opportunities through a radio program.

This experience showed us that a radio program could be used as a useful tool for the

improvement of the EFL competences. Besides, the experience gave us the idea of putting

the radio program online instead of broadcast it on a traditional radio station, taking into

account that Internet is a more accessible media not only for the producers but also for the

listeners.

Another experience we took into account was the work done by one of our

professors, which consisted of a radio program using only the English language for

communicating (Acosta, 2004). This program was broadcasted at the Radio Universidad

2 Citizen Radio


30/132

12

del Cauca station, and it was called Magic Time. This experience, closer to our context,

showed us that it was possible to make a radio program in a foreign language, with foreign

nonnative language speakers that could amuse not only the audience but also the producers by presenting an attractive, fresh, and varied format. In this way these previous experiences

became an important referent in the construction of our research proposal.

4.3 Argument

An argument is the way people present a spoken or written opinion mainly for

persuading. According to Bruce Stirling (Stirling, 2) there are two types of arguments: thefirst one is the Personal Opinion Argument used for the purpose of persuading an audience

and the second one is called Fact Based Argument used for informing by presenting facts.

An argument must be coherent, clear and logic. So the person could demonstrate their

English language proficiency.

4.4 Naturally

Occurring Discourse

NOD refers to the discourse that has not been affected by the interests and

formulations of the researcher (Acosta, 39). The data from NOD allows researchers to

obtain more valid and reliable results, showing a realistic use of the language with probably

more spontaneous occurrences. The data collected from NOD is also useful for its

reliability, validity, and naturalness.3 In this case, this type of discourse can be obtained

through interaction strategies that we carried out during the production of our RP.

AGREGAR COMMENT SOBRE CUANDO VA RADIO `PROGRAM Y CUANDO RP

3 In our specific case, this type of discourse could be obtained through interaction strategies that we, as participant-researchers, carried out during the weekly activities of the Intervention Phase


31/132


32/132

14

preparation are required to achieve a radio broadcast that is defined as a group of emission

techniques of hertzian waves that allowwords and sound transmission (Romo Gil, 23).

An important element of the production of a radio program has to do with the group

work that is involved during the early stages of the creative process. This team-oriented

production integrates the development of the technical aspects such as audio editing and the

use of digital audio effects, and the construction of sessions for communication and

expression of ideas.

During the radio production process the participants are immersed into akind of work that requires, necessarily, other people collaboration. This fact can

be applied to any kind of radio product, and the collaboration is not just reduced

to the strictly technical aspect but, in this case, it implies possible modifications

over the essence of the created ideas (Lpez Forero, 318).

4.6 English as a Foreign Language

English as a Foreign Language (EFL) is a term used to denote the process of

teaching and learning English in environments where the language of the community and

the school is not English. It is usually used for the purposes of academic advancement,

career advancement, and traveling abroad. EFL is usually learned in environments where

the language of the community and the school is not English.

4.7 Pilot Study


33/132

15

A pilot study is a mini version of a full scale study or a trial done in preparation of a

complete study. It is also called a feasibility study. It can also be a specific pretesting of

research instruments, including questionnaires or interview schedules. The general goal of a pilot study is to provide information, which can contribute to the success of the research

project as a whole. The pilot study will thus follow after the researcher has a clear vision of

the research topic and questions, techniques and methods, which will be applied and how

the research schedule will look like.

Blaxter, Hughes, and Tight (Blaxter, Hughes, and Tight, 1997:121, cited by Calitz,

256, 257) state that in a pilot study the researcher tries out all the research techniques and

methods they have in mind to see how well they will work in practice. If necessary it can

still be adapted and modified accordingly. Taking into account the previous information,

our research fitted into the pilot study definition because of the nature of our work and also

because we pretended it to be developed into some more extensive research for whoever

wanted to continue with this topic.

4.8 Communicative Competence

When we talk about communication we refer to something that, as Thao L says,

permeates virtually in all human interaction activities (L, 1). It is a complex process not

only cognitive but also social and emotional since it deals with the way we think and feel,

and how we express those thoughts and feelings. Besides, in communication, language use

involves, according to the Common European Framework, the actions performed by

persons who as individuals and social agents develop a range of competences ( Common


34/132


35/132

17

relation and personal attitudes (Brown and Yule, 1). The latter, according to some

researchers, is considered a necessary factor that enables social relationships to take place.

The spoken form of language that includes an interactional function is more

complicated than it seems at first, and involves more than just pronouncing words (Orwig ,

1998, web). According to the Common European Framework of Reference (73) spoken

interaction is the oral communication given between two or more interlocutors, where they

act as speakers and listeners alternatively, in which it is necessary the construction of

conversational discourse in a conjoined way through the negotiation of meaning following

the co-operative principle.

Spoken interaction entails the collective creation of meaning by the establishment

of some degree of commonmental context, in real time (C ommon European Frame of

Reference, 84) and face to face communication. Hence the importance of the spoken

interaction, since it requires the constant use of interactive strategies in order to permit a

process of socialization in which a common mental context is constructed.

As for the interactive strategies used during the spoken interaction, the Common

European Framework of Reference (Common European Frame of Reference, 222)

describes them as:Taking the floor when language users adopt turn taking strategies in

order to obtain the discourse initiate; Co-operating interpersonal related to the

collaboration in the task and how to keep the discussion on course; Co-operating

ideational : when helping mutual understanding and maintain a focused approach to the

task at hand , and finally Asking for clarification. Some examples of interactive activities


36/132

18

include: casual conversations, formal and informal discussions, debates, negotiations, and

practical goal-oriented co-operations, among others. These activities were useful during the

Intervention Phase (described in chapter 6 of this document) in order to establish thedifferent ways in which every one of us interacted as a member of the RPP group.

For further information see Appendix


37/132

19

5. RESEARCH METHOD

The role of the research method is to create a systematic inquiry from framing the

research question to finally analyzing and reporting the data collected in order to revise or

discover consequences, facts, causes, and further applications of the discoveries. This

chapter gives a concrete idea of the research method we implemented to carry out the study.

It shows the reason why the Quasi-Experimental design was adopted. At the end of this

chapter we present the elements of the study.

5.1 The Research Method

Our research project aimed at analyzing the influence of a radio Program as a

Naturally-Occurring Discourse (NOD) activity on the improvement of the EFL Spoken

Interaction Competence (SIC) level. The philosophic reference for this study was the

Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) due to its international importance

and validity. That was a document developed by European researchers who intended to

improve the language teaching and learning processes and also the ways how people from

their different countries communicated among them.

This research was framed in a quasi-experimental design in which the experimental

group played the role of participants and researchers. The study consisted of 3 phases: pre-

test, the intervention, and the posttest (See Figure 1: Research Phases, page 19). The pretest

and posttest involved data collection for the further analysis and interpretation of the

obtained information. For this reason it was imperative to have a valid and reliable test


38/132

20

which measured the initial and final level of the participants regarding the SIC level. Thus,

the research project adapted the speaking rubrics taken from the TOELF international test

2010; and it also adopted the concept of the SIC given by the CEFR. (See Appendix 001:Rating Guide Rubric).

Figure 1: Research Phases

The pre-test consisted in 3 tasks in which we had to test our capacity ofargumentation, interaction, to make questions, to take the floor, to follow others ideas, to

correct mistakes, etc. The first task consisted on a meeting, in which we were giving a

hypothetical problematic situation that we had to analyze individually taking into account

all the situation aspects, then we had to socialize our ideas and finally we tried to get to an

agreement. The second task was very similar to the first one differing only on the nature of

the topic given because now it was a real problematic situation. And the last task we were

giving a picture in which we had to analyze, socialize and final conclude our ideas about


39/132

21

the possible meaning of the picture. The three tasks had duration of one hour. The posttest

was the same in order to be able to contrast our performance before and after the IP.

After the intervention phase, we implemented the posttest, using the rubrics

mentioned before, which threw statistical data, in order to contrast the initial and final

impressions for statistical analysis (descriptive statistics) and the interpretation of the

results. (See Appendix 001: Rating Guide Rubric.)

5.2 Community and Sample

5.2.1 Community

Our research emphasized on the Modern Languages Program (MLP) since it was

the Institution where we were carrying out our professional studies and we cared about the

level of the students SIC. The MLP is part of the Humanities and Social Sciences School

of the University of Cauca and has a trajectory of thirty-nine years with a laborious

commitment to students and the society. The education, investigation, qualification, andextension activities of the MLP follow the needed standards asked for the University of

Cauca whose main task is the social and professional development of students through

investigations that helps them construct a specific knowledge and subsequent improvement

in society. The MLP has seventeen teachers, five French teachers and eight English

teachers; two French native speakers, and one native English speaker. It also has around

one hundred and ninety-eight students, and once a year the Program welcome fifty fresh

students.


40/132


41/132

23

5.3.2 Variables

5.3.2.1 Dependent Variable

The improvement of the EFL Spoken Interaction Competence

5.3.2.2 Independent Variable

The Naturally-Occurring Discourse that is brought about by the production of a

Radio Program in English.


42/132

24

6. THE INTERVENTION: METHODOLOGY BASED ON ACTION

RESEARCH METHOD

In this part we present to the reader an idea of our radio Programs and describe the

different aspects of the production and implementation of our methodology taking into

account every element that took part of it.

6.1 Generalities of the RP

The program was born from the idea of five students of creating a RP in English for

the community of the Modern Language Program. It ended up being a proposal for a

research directed towards our own improvement of the Spoken Interaction Competence.This research allowed us to play both roles as investigators and participants at the same

time. We saw that the communicative competence presented during the production of the

RP was a practical, experimental, and agreeable experience that could help us improve our

SIC level.

The RP was totally in English; it was presented in a magazine format, with a host

and four co-hosts that talked about a different topic every week, and was aimed to a variety

of young people (ages, professions and personal interests). The RPs name was Natural

Waves and it was divided in three sections. The first and second sections showed a


43/132


44/132

26

interludeThe NerdySectionBumper

Classical music up and down and a man saysThe Nerdy Section musicfades out

Moderator The moderator invites the participants to submit or show unknown wordsused during the previous part. This lasts for 6 minutes. Eventually, themoderator concludes the Program and invites the listeners to an upcomingissue.

LastLiner

Fxs of a modem and a radio station tuning. Music. Different voices: five,four, three, two, one. This was Natural Waves. A man says: One topic, fiveways. Music fades out.20 sec.

Table 1: Radio Program Script

The Program began with a 20 seconds liner; when it finished a musical interlude

began for the introduction for about 15 seconds and it faded out. For around two minutes

the main moderator (who changed each week) greeted and presented the whole radio

Program including the sections and songs playing. After the first interaction, the musical

interlude turned up for 5 seconds and then, faded out.

The first section bumper called The Lounge entered and after it finished, the

moderator presented the main agenda item. The participants interventions start ed in a

conversational style. This section lasted for about 10 minutes. Then, the first section

finished and a musical theme started to play for about one and a half minute. Another

bumper announced the second section called The Nerdy Section, and the moderator

invitedthe participants to submit or show unknown words used during the previous part.

This lasted for 6 minutes. Eventually, the moderator concluded the program and invited the

listeners to an upcoming show. The program ended with the last liner fading out.


45/132

27

Our radio program was online and could be tuned on

http://www.wix.com/flushedshame/radioproject permanently. Every week during six weeks

we, five students from the Modern Language Program got together to present a differentexperience in creating radio and, at the same time, to enhance and improve our SIC level.

The aim was to do a quality product, so the listeners wanted to hear the program again. The

audience that listened to radio stations online could find a space where a lot of global

content topics were treated in an amusing but professional way. For that reason, our work

team was committed to investigate about the topics and also about the radio program

production process. The local context was Popayn and the global context was the whole

world since the Radio Program was broadcasted online. The program was recorded at one

of the studios from the University of Cauca radio station.

The inquiry and producer team was composed by five students. The participants

from the team carried out all the needed functions for a Radio Program Production

(moderator, presenters, investigators, participants), these roles rotated from one participant

to another allowing them to be constantly active in the RPP. The whole team created an

agreeable environment during the RPP which was reflected in the final product every week,

making it felt a good experience for the listeners.

6.2 Methodology

As we already stated in chapter 5, this research project had three moments (pretest,

intervention, and posttest). In this section we describe the second moment called the

Intervention Phase (IP). The IP included a methodologybased on the Action Research
http://www.wix.com/flushedshame/radioprojecthttp://www.wix.com/flushedshame/radioprojecthttp://www.wix.com/flushedshame/radioproject


46/132

28

Method. That methodology was characterized by the construction of knowledge right

through reflection and active participation. The methodology we used for this research was

the Action Research Method. This methodology encompassed two functions: thedevelopment of a RPP and the self assessment through cycles. As seen in Chart 3, each

cycle consisted of four steps that were developed through meetings: 1) proposal, 2)

implementation, 3) analysis and 4) re-design.

Figure 2: Intervention Phase Schema (steps)

The proposal was the starting point of each cycle; in this step we decided the main

topic of the program, and the activities that were carried out during the pre-production4 of

the RP. The following were some of the interactive activities that we took into account,

4 Preproduction is the first stage before the actual production. Here, every product is prepared. It is right before the recording of the product, in this case, the radio program


47/132

29

proposed by the CEFR in order to improve the SIC: debates, forums, interviews,

conversations formal or informal, negotiation and co-planning.

In the implementation step, the recording of the RP was executed, reflecting the

work done during the proposal. The RP was recorded live and uploaded online on a

webpage, created by the group.

The analysis step involved both the evaluation of the RP produced and our self-

assessment regarding the SIC. Here, we analyzed whether the proposed interactive

activities helped improve our SIC or not. In order to do this, we used the adapted rubrics ofthe pre-tests and posttests, as a validated instrument of measurement and analysis. The

observations from both the cycles and the program were collected in a log for further

analysis. It was during this moment when we carried out the metacognitive exercise.

The last step was the re-design. Taking into account the RP analysis and the self-

assessment results we reconsidered the activities and proposed topics for the next cycle.There were six cycles that enriched the understanding of the data analysis and the final

findings by clarifying the different activities of the experience. It also helped us construct

awareness of the processes we had gone through.

6.2.1 Instruments

6.2.1.1 Participant Observation

We used this instrument because it permitted us to hear, see, and begin to

experiment reality; it also offered the opportunity to learn directly from our own

experience, providing new opportunities to get closer to unknown aspects of the research.


48/132

30

In our case, we were not only the researchers but also the participants in the

research so we had to play those two roles at the same time. As participants, we were

evaluated with the pretest and the posttest. During the intervention, we developed a RPP byimplementing the methodology based on the Action Research Method. Besides, as

researchers, we analyzed the results of the pre and posttest and also the radio program

recording every week.

6.2.1.2 Narrative Inquiry

Narrative inquiry is an interdisciplinary method which assumes that people

construct their realities through narrating their stories (Qualitative Inquiry, 116). This

method values the signs, the symbols, and the expression of feelings in language

(Qualitative Inquiry, 116) and it allows validate the way how the narrator constructs

meaning.

In this case, where we were researchers and participants, we used this instrumentwhen we wrote our experiences during the project and after finishing it. This helped us to

analyze the individual and group process by collecting the reflections and perceptions,

related to the intended SIC improvement during the IP of the research project.

6.2.2 Agenda

The main purpose of the RPP as a NOD activity was to improve our EFL SIC level.In that sense, we considered that it could be achieved by interacting and communicating all

the time in the target language. For that reason we planned to meet four times per week

with the following steps which can be eventually modified partially or completely if we


49/132

31

considered it necessary for the improvement of our process and/or our inquiry. Each

meeting or step was interrelated with one interactive activity which helped us to construct

conjointly conversational discourse improving, thus, our SIC. See Table 2: Agenda andSelf-Assessment Schedule.


50/132


51/132

33

vocabulary related to the topic. We talked the whole time in English. In this meeting we

clarified the ideas and concepts we wanted to discuss in the RP although it was not

imperative to choose them in this first meeting.

6.2.2.1.2 Second Activity

The meeting was done on Thursdays from 10:00 am to 11:00 am. We had a debate.

It could be formal or informal depending on the topic. The topic was specific. Each

participant had to have ideas so that we could defend our points of view, positions, and

opinions. We practiced our capacity of argumentation, articulating speech in a coherent,clear, and elaborate way. This meeting ended up with the final statement we discussed in

the radio program.

6.2.2.1.3 Third activity

This meeting was on Friday from 10:00 am to 11:00 am. Since we already had the

final statement for the RP each participant had to have a clear position about the topic. It

included the use of specific vocabulary, the ability of discussing and arguing through the

whole meeting. The participants had to have the ability to understand, express and interpret

concepts, thoughts and feelings related to the topic.

6.2.2.2 Implementation

We recorded the Radio Program on Monday from 8:00 am to 9:00 am in one of the

recording studios from the University of Cauca. The program was recorded live and


52/132

34

broadcasted on internet. The program could be heard at

http://www.wix.com/flushedshame/radioproject.

6.2.2.3 Analysis

The analysis was held on Tuesdays from 8:00 am to 10:00 am. We listened to the

Radio Program and reflected about the work done. In this step we analyzed how the

participants interact with each other in an individual and group form and if the activities

planned on the proposal helped us improve our SIC.

6.2.2.4 Redesign

The redesign was on Tuesday from 10:00 am to 12:00 pm. taking into account the

results from the analysis; we re-structured the activities of the proposal for a new cycle. The

redesign implied a constant change of the activities or strategies that helped us improved

our SIC during the proposal step. During this step we chose the topic and the most pertinent

music that fit it.

6.3 Self-Assessment of the RP

This stage was based on the Methodology created from action research method.

During this last task we pretend to have the evaluation of the recorded radio program so

that we could improve or change thing for the next agenda; this space was held in different

schedules during the week. It was also a complement of the activities carried out in the

agenda. See Table 2: Agenda and Self-assessment Schedule, page 31).
http://www.wix.com/flushedshame/radioprojecthttp://www.wix.com/flushedshame/radioprojecthttp://www.wix.com/flushedshame/radioproject


53/132

35

Self-assessment 1: on Mondays from 9:00 am to 11:00 am. During this meeting we

listened, what we did on the radio program. On Wednesdays from 9:00 am to 10:00 am and

Thursdays and Fridays from 11:00 am to 12:00 am we wrote and socialized the process wewere implementing in the RP.


54/132

36

7. DATA ANALYSIS

This chapter presents the analysis of the data obtained during the process by means

of recordings from the pretest analyzed into three tasks, through the implementation stage

divided into six cycles until the posttest also analyzed into three tasks.

7.1 Pre-test

7.1.1 Task 1

Task 1 consisted of an hour meeting divided in three parts. In this task we were

given a hypothetical problematic situation that we had to analyze individually taking into

account all the situation aspects. After doing that we socialized our ideas expressing/telling

our arguments, trying to defend them and forcing our partners to do the same. Finally we

tried to get to a common agreement.

7.1.2 Task 2

The second task was very similar to the first one (one hour meeting, divided in three

parts) differing only on the nature of the topic because in this one the participants were

given a problematic situation taken from a real context. In this case we were supposed to

use previous knowledge since the situation provided a trendy and common topic.

7.1.3 Task 3

The third task was also a one hour meeting with three different activities. For this

task we were given a picture that we had to analyze, socialize, and conclude our ideas about

the possible meaning of the picture. The first part of the task was to give an individual idea


55/132

37

of what the image meant for every one of us. Then we proceeded socialize our thoughts

about it, and finally we had to arrive to some agreements related to the meaning of the

image.

7.2 IMPLEMENTATION STAGE: METHODOLOGY

7.2.1 COLLECTIVE NARRATIVES

During the Intervention Phase (IP) we wrote the memories of what we felt using the

instrument of narrative inquiry because we felt the need to put into written words, the

feelings, sensations and thoughts about our process along the research project. Thisreflective exercise was done individually, but we decided to put it together in order to arrive

to a group identity. Following are the collective narratives.

7.2.1.1 COLLECTIVE NARRATIVE - CYCLE 1

After the socialization of every participants personal reflections, we can say, as a

group, that one of the most important aspects that affected our performance during the

recording of Natural Waves was the topic. For the first program we decided to talk about

disability/disabled people but the truth is we were never really attached to that topic so it

became a problem because it generated a lack of interest that was shown in the RP. Some of

us just did not do the activities we had planned for the pre production week such as reading

about the topic in order to have clear information to share with the group and with the

audience. And we could notice that when we are not ready to talk about some particular

issue we remain silent or we say rare things when we participate. So, if we are not well

prepared, our ideas are not going to be clear, not well structured and not well organized. If


56/132

38

we had been really engaged to the RPP, our lexicon would have been increased but it did

not.

Considering that the topic was not polemic, there was not any possibility to discuss

and show different points of view, because during the RP the whole group agreed on

everything said. That obviously affected the interaction because it seemed that every

member of the group was trying to throw in their two cents without trying to construct a

collective discourse, which was what we pretended.

Other aspect that was important for us in this collective perception was that most ofus spoke very slowly and used a lot of fillers especially when we could not find the

required word at certain moment and we did not want to say a wrong word. This aspect

affected the fluency of our speech. When trying to find a reason for this problem we agreed

that it was a low self confidence issue because we were afraid of making a mistake when

we were talking.

We also found some difficulties when trying to use some vocabulary related to the

radio production and at the end we forgot that we had an audience and that we should talk

to them instead of talking to ourselves. This aspect was important since we were making a

radio program that would be heard by a lot of people.

Finally, we arrived to some conclusions about our performance in this first

broadcast of Natural Waves. The first one was related to the topic which, we thought, must

be attractive to us; it must be appealing so we could feel comfortable when developing the


57/132

39

activities of the pre-production. The topic also should be not only interesting but polemic in

order to give us the chance to adopt different positions to defend in front of the others.

We should prepare some basic material to have something to say in the recording of

the radio program because if we did not know anything about the topic then we were not

going to have anything to say about it and we ended up saying things with no sense; and

that was not the idea because we were producing a radio program for the audience not only

for our group.

Related to the self-confidence, we must let our fears aside when we are speaking in public because a low self-confidence can make us speak slower and use a lot of fillers when

there is no need. We must believe in ourselves and talk, it does not matter if we are wrong

or not, because practicing is the only way to improve our spoken interaction.

And finally, regarding the aspect of the radio production vocabulary, we must

research about it in order to become more familiar with the media we are working on.


The most important element in this program was selection of the topic. It was

closest to us, updated and interesting so the investigation for every one of us was

motivating and it helped us to have more clear and organize ideas about the things to say;

Taking this into account our participations improved and the discourse was a little moreclear and sustained it made this program better than the previous one.


58/132


59/132

41

better and concise interventions including argumentation, we are trying to go beyond

isolated opinions.

For the next program we have to find something not really polemic but something

more related to our likes no so heavy. We agreed also that previous reading increase our

level of argumentation, fluidity and self-confidence, the lack of it shows problems during

interventions.


We realized that the topic is really important when trying to interact with others.

The topic was Movies based on books that was really fun and appealing to everyone in

the group allowing us to talk more, to talk from our experiences, to felt relax and more

confidence when trying to speak. The topic allows us to have our ideas clear and help us to

be more clear and consistent during the interventions. We could notice that we all talk more

than we used to in the other programs. One of the other important things was that all of usdidnt read about the topic, and that was why we felt stuck at some points of the

interventions. At the end we did some changes for the next program; the topic must be

related more about our personal interest because when we have the chance to talk about

things we like, we think our speech is more fluent. We also get to the conclusion that we

need to be more conscious about the importance of reading more about the topic, because

that will help us improve our vocabulary, and also to be surer about things we are going to

say.



60/132


61/132

43

The last program gave us the chance to work with an unplanned topic that was

Politics and Terrorism, according to the reality or our country. Unfortunately the topic was

not appealing enough for some of us so it generated some difficulties during the recordingof the radio program. Again, we felt that the topic was an important issue not only because

the attractiveness of a topic help us to talk more but because if it is polemic, it enriches the

discussion. When a topic offers the possibility to the participants to take sides the

discussion is supposed to be more interesting, because everyone can give arguments trying

to defend their positions and trying to defeatothers (las posiciones de los dems).

However, we must recognize that in this opportunity the topic was polemic but we, as a

group, were not able to take sides and obviously we could not defend the positions we did

not take. Somehow we failed because our speeches were superficial and even when there

were some attempts to generated discussion, we could not handle it and we ended up

jumping from one idea to another without giving a clear idea of what we wanted to say.

Another possible explanation for this difficulty was that the topic could be restrictive, it

means that we could not affirm a lot of the things we were saying and everything was based

on our beliefs not in actual facts. Obviously, that restricted our discourse and ability to

argument and contra argument.

This time we did not prepare the topic in order to make our discourse more

spontaneous and we think that was one of the reasons why we talked in a very superficial

way. Some of us talked more than the previous programs but we did not go beyond; we

were just describing things, events, people, but we never went deeper and we did not focus

on an idea. We think that probably we did not understand each other, even when sometimes


62/132

44

we tried to make ourselves clear. At the end, we were not able to construct a discourse as a

group.

A positive point has to do with the fact that we are better at the moment of taking

the floor, and during this program we could see that we have learnt when to start an

intervention and how to finish; and also how to interrupt the other when we want to add

something.

Finally, at this point, the nervousness and the anxiety have almost disappeared and

we were more relaxed when talking to a microphone knowing that a lot of people werelistening to us. This is reflected in the length of the speeches that were longer. And we

could also hear how the vocabulary and the grammatical structures have improved a lot.

We think that this improvement is due to the preproduction activities and to the

responsibility we must have when producing a radio program.

7.2.2

ANALYSIS OF THE PROCESS7.2.2.1 CYCLE 1

The first cycle of the implementation finished with the self-assessment of our

performance during the recording of the first radio program. For this self-assessment

process, we took into account the rubrics (see appendix 001) we adapted and adopted from

international tests and that matched the characteristics of this research project. This process

was aimed at confirming whether or not the working hypothesis was true or not. It may be

important to recall that we hypothesized that the production of a radio program in English


63/132

45

would bring about Naturally-Occurring Discourse that could empower participants to

improve their EFL Spoken Interaction Competence (SIC) level.

It is pertinent, at this point, to talk about the activities carried out during the first

cycle because they were an important part of the process of improving our SIC through the

production of a radio program. Thus, at the beginning of this research project we proposed

three previous activities in preparation for the recording of the radio program in order to

improve our SIC. The first activity we carried out was an informal discussion in which we

talked about the selected topic in a general way with the intention of arriving at more

specific issues of that topic that could deserve our attention. The second activity was

another informal discussion but with a slight variation from the first one. This time, the idea

was that we went deeply into the topic by talking about the specific issues we had

highlighted as crucial during the previous session. This activity should have led us to a

more organized, clear, and consistent discourse; however, it was not the case, according to

the analysis of this cycle. The third activity we carried out right before the recording of the

radio program was a debate. We chose a debate because it was supposed to be an excellent

method to construct arguments in an interactive and representational way. Moreover, it was

also expected to give us the chance to defend and attack positions about the topic, not only

by giving opinions but by giving strong, reasonable, and coherent arguments.

In this way we started by evaluating the concept ofdelivery (see appendix 002)related to the fluency, pronunciation, and automaticity in the target language. On the one

hand, sincedelivery involved important elements of language, we noticed that it was

necessary to make an extra effort to progress in this aspect of the SIC. In fact, we were


64/132

46

concerned about how to improve our utterances, showing them naturally with little

hesitation and few repetitions, correct intonation and rhythm patterns, and a mechanized

use of expressions in English. On the other hand, we noticed that most of us onlysometimes showed a consistent and accurate fluency, pronunciation, and automaticity. So,

we were in the middle of the rating scale and it showed that we were having problems when

trying to express, coherently and meaningfully, what we wanted to say. We also noticed

that the informal discussions and the debate proposed to improve this aspect of the rubric

did not work very well because the results were not completely positive.

Another aspect that we took into account during the assessment of this cycle was the

unity synthesis (see appendix 003).The relevance of this aspect is due to the importance of

connecting and linking ideas in a coherent and cohesive way when producing discourse.

Nevertheless, after listening to the radio program and having personally and collectively

reflected on it, we noticed that we needed to develop a better grammatical and topical

synthesis because the data, in the light of the rubrics, showed that only sometimes we were

able to establish accurate and clear relationships between ideas in terms of topics and

grammar. Regardinglanguage use (see appendix 004), we learned that we had to do

something to improve this aspect in the next cycle because we discovered that we seldom

used clear and accurate language, showing a lot of mistakes in word choice or syntax,

which affected the meaning or coherence of our speech. As with thedelivery aspect, the

activities carried out to improveunity synthesis were not enough to get a good performance.

The descriptor calledawareness of connotative levels of meaning (see appendix

005) led us to evaluate whether or not we had a good command of idiomatic expressions


65/132


66/132

48

sustain our positions. Thus, we understood that if we did not have a clear method to

organize our thoughts, it could be pretty difficult to construct a deeper discourse; and we

could end up giving just superficial views about a topic that we could not sustain in a clearway. Organization andargumentation were intended to be improved during the first cycle,

but we could notice that the activities carried out did not work in an appropriate way, since

the results were not what we expected.

According to the element of spontaneity (see appendix 010), the data showed that

our discourse was seldom natural, probably because the topic did not fulfilled the

expectations of the group or because it was not appealing enough to make us talk about the

issue without restraint. Furthermore, we noticed the need to improve the aspects related to

taking the floor (see appendix 011) when interacting orally. Although these aspects helped

us to initiate, maintain, and end our interventions appropriately, we only sometimes used

them effectively. Knowing thattaking the floor is a key aspect when we study the SIC, we

knew that we should do something to improve our performance in this descriptor. These

two aspects of the rubrics were worked with the activities proposed for this cycle. However

the activities did not fulfilled the expectations, so they needed to be reorganized for the next

cycle.

Another essential issue that made part of our SIC wasasking for clarification (see

appendix 012). This element allowed us to understand the importance of what the otherswere saying and the role of making questions in order to clarify any doubts. This led us to

observe that this was the most critical of all the aspects we had assessed before because we

never asked follow-up questions to check if our partners had understood what we intended


67/132

49

to say. The possible causes we found for this behavior were associated with the lack of

vocabulary to utter these clarifications, and also the unawareness about the importance of

this issue when interacting in a foreign language. The results related to this aspect of therubrics led us to think that the activities carried out during this cycle should be reconsidered

in order to get a better performance in the next cycles.

The last aspect of the SIC assessed in this cycle wascooperating (see appendix

013). This issue led us to reflect on the importance to construct a mutual understanding and

to maintain a group goal when carrying out a discourse task, in our case the discussion of a

topic during the radio program production. However, the results proved that only

sometimes we could relate our own contributions skillfully to those of other speakers by

giving feedback, confirming comprehension, and following up statements and inferences.

But knowing the importance of co-operation in an interactive discourse for EFL contexts,

we felt that we had to make a stronger effort if we wanted to construct conjointly

conversational discourse in order to improve our SIC during the production of a radio

program in English. These results showed that the informal discussions chosen to improve

ourco-operating aspect of the SIC were not useful this time.

Finally, according to the data collected in this cycle, we could notice that the three

activities carried out in the first week (general informal discussion, particular informal

discussion, and debate) were not very useful for improving our SIC since the resultsshowed that most of the times, we were in the lower rates of the rubrics scale. However, we

took into account that this was a process and it was necessary to observe the following

cycles in order to know if the activities worked or not.


68/132

50

To conclude the analysis of this first cycle it is important to highlight that the fact of

having reflected on our performance during the recording of a radio program was a

metacognitive exercise where we learnt how we were learning an EFL. This is a remarkableaspect of our research project because here we started to monitor our learning process and

we were also able to control that process in order to improve our SIC.

7.2.2.2 CYCLE 2

After listening to the second program we decided to focus on some specific aspects

of the rubrics rather than to look at all of them. We observed that all the aspects of the SICwere dynamically linked because while we tried to improve some of them, we could

improve other aspects indirectly. However, we determined that the descriptordelivery was

going to be evaluated during the whole process all the cycles because we considered that

it involved important characteristics when constructing a discourse without deliberate effort

at a natural speed with little hesitation and a correct rhythm and intonation, and those were

precisely some of the aspects that were going to help us improve our SIC. Hence, the result

of the delivery analysis during the first cycle showed that most of us demonstrated a

consistent and accurate fluency, pronunciation, and automaticity, but only sometimes.

According to the data, we decided to implement two different activities to improve this

aspect.

The first activity consisted of a controlled practice, both individual and group, full

of repetitions or drills. This task helped us to review the pronunciation, rhythm, and

changes in tone of particular and difficult words or sentences in the foreign language. Once


69/132

51

we had analyzed the form of the words we tried to take them by using them in a debate. As

we mentioned before, the second activity involved a debate that allowed us to create a more

sophisticated arguing context where we could put into practice strategies of pronunciation,fluency, and automaticity. However, the result of the analysis of this second cycle (see

appendix 014) showed that we did not achieve any improvement in this aspect since the

results remained the same.

Moreover, during the activity of analysis of the radio program, we realized that most

of us had some problems when trying to use the English language appropriately, organizing

ideas in a coherent way, and getting other participants attention by turn -taking accurately.

For this reason, we felt that the other aspects that needed to be analyzed during this second

program werelanguage use (see appendix 015),organization (see appendix 016), and

taking the floor (see appendix 017). These aspects were part of the strategies that were

going to empower us to facilitate a proper organization of the discourse with a clear and

accurate language choice and the collaboration needed to keep the discussion with a

reciprocal understanding.

The results forlanguage use (see appendix 015) demonstrated that most of us

usually had a clear and accurate language use and the minor errors that we might had made

did not affect the meaning and coherence of discourse while speaking. It is worth

highlighting that even when the activities were planned only to improvedelivery , the participants showed a much better performance regardinglanguage use in this cycle. In

fact, it seemed that the implementation of the debate, the second activity of the

preproduction, generated a more complex level of argumentation and association of ideas;


70/132


71/132

53

commands and activities, showing a good level of SIC. Besides, this second analysis helped

us to use specific activities to improve particular aspects of the discourse.

7.2.2.3 CYCLE 3

Considering the results obtained in the analysis of cycle 2, we decided to start this

new cycle by implementing two activities with the purpose of reinforcing and improving

particular features of our SIC. Since the aspect ofdelivery did not show positive results we

determined to implement a gathering, a get-together informal discussion . This activity

was supposed to involve a task for sharing ideas and providing critical and supportivefeedback in a more relaxed and comfortable environment which could lead us to reach a

better pronunciation, automaticity, and fluency in the target language. In the second activity

we returned to the debate. As we noticed in previous analysis it was a key element when

trying to improve most aspects of our discourse (such usorganization , argumentation ,

taking the floor and co-operating ). In this cycle the dynamics of the debate generated a

controversial discussion that influenced positively our progress in terms of organization of

ideas, construction of convincing arguments, and clarification of imprecise or ambiguous

points of view.

During the third cycle we continued assessing the aspect ofdelivery (see appendix

018). We compared the features of fluency, pronunciation, and automaticity of our

discourse in this program with those in the second radio program. Here we discovered that

we had a significant improvement indelivery because we went from being in the middle of

the rating scale sometimes to being able to demonstrate a consistent and accurate fluency,


72/132

54

pronunciation, and automaticity almost all the time during the third radio program (see

appendix 014). It also implied that the possible minor errors we made, did not affect the

meaning or coherence of our speech. Thus, the group was situated in a positiveusuallyresult. Therefore, we could prove that the activity planned was useful to improve the

delivery aspect of our discourse.

Probably the most outstanding aspect of our performance in the third radio program

was the one related to the ability oftaking the floor (see appendix 019). Here, we observed

that the debate was a crucial element of the preproduction and we noticed that we had

improved in a significant way, since we could always initiate, maintain, and end discourse

appropriately with effective turn taking when interacting orally. Also, we could always

preface our participations with what our partners had previously said. This issue was

reflected in the construction of a dynamic development of the discussion through the

negotiation of ideas, opinions, and points of view.

In contrast, the assessment of the organization aspect (see appendix 020) of our

performance showed that we still had problems when trying to demonstrate a clear and

consistent method of organization. Indeed, we stayed in the same rating of the previous

cycle (see appendix 016) which evidenced that our group just sometimes had consistency

when organizing ideas. However, we did not see these results as a negative experience; on

the contrary, it gave us the strength and the awareness to work harder in order to improvethis aspect of the SIC in next programs. Besides, although the activity of debating did not

accomplish the purpose of improvement, this fact represented an opportunity to review our

process and to look for new and pertinent tasks and dynamics.


73/132

55

The last aspect we analyzed in this cycle wasrepair interaction (see appendix 021)

which is the capacity to be conscious of our mistakes and to be able to backtrack and

restructure when we make those mistakes. The results showed that we were seldom able torepair our interventions when we were wrong, and just like in the first cycle (see appendix

007), we were not aware of our difficulties. Concerning this aspect, the assessment

demonstrated how this continued to be a critical characteristic of our performance since we

did not have any progress as compared with the first radio program. Hence, the debate as an

activity demonstrated not to be enough for improving our capacity to correct and

restructure our interventions.

Finally, we must highlight the noticeable and significant improvement on the

aspects ofdelivery and taking the floor . It seemed that both the activities carried out during

the preproduction stages and the self-reflection processes allowed us to be aware of our

own problems related to these features of our SIC, giving us the opportunity to look for

pertinent activities to improve them. Nevertheless, this assessment showed us difficulties

concernedorganization and repair interaction which led us to find new possibilities to

enhance these aspects in our discourse.

7.2.2.4 CYCLE 4

In the previous cycle we could see that we were making significant improvements in

every aspect evaluated in each cycle so far. For the fourth cycle we chose to analyze five

aspects of the rubrics:delivery (see appendix 022),unity synthesis (see appendix 023),

spontaneity (see appendix 024), formality (see appendix 025), andco-operating (see


74/132

56

appendix 026). These aspects were considered important to analyze because they were key

elements in the SIC and promoted a natural and accurate discourse at a natural speed with

mutual collaboration and understanding of the speakers. We selected two different activitiesto improve previous problematic aspects in our oral production. The idea was to prove if

those problems were solved by the activities carried out during the preproduction phase of

the radio program.

In the preceding cycle we showed improvement in thedelivery (see appendix 022)

aspect of the SIC, because wereached a Usually in the rating scale. Knowing that the goal

was to arrive to the highest level of the rating scale, but also being conscious that this was a

process, we decided to keep on working with the debate as an activity to improve and

reinforce this feature. However, the activity was not enough and the results showed that we

remained in the same rating scale of the previous cycle demonstrating consistent and

accurate fluency, pronunciation and automaticity just usually. We must say that the idea to

continue carrying out debates was to push ourselves to be more prepared and more

responsible respect to the radio program, because that activity obliged us to be informed

about different topics, to take positions and to defend those positions with clear arguments.

Obviously that exercise was not easy and since we knew that it was a learning process, we

decided to go on doing debates.

As we wanted to reinfo

radio program final document july1114

Documents