The effects of classroom interactional tasks on medical students’ english fluent speaking

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING VINH UNIVERSITY PHAN THI LAN ANH THE EFFECTS OF CLASSROOM INTERACTIONAL TASKS ON MEDICAL STUDENTS’ ENGLISH FLUENT SPEAKING MASTER’S THESIS IN EDUCATION Long An, 2018 MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING VINH UNIVERSITY PHAN THI LAN ANH THE EFFECTS OF CLASSROOM INTERACTIONAL TASKS ON MEDICAL STUDENTS’ ENGLISH FLUENT SPEAKING Major: Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL) Code: 8.14.01.11 MASTER’S THESIS IN EDUCATION SUPERVISOR: Nguyen Gia Viet, Ph.D Long An, 2018 DECLARATION I declare that the thesis titled “The Effects of Classroom Interactional Tasks on Medical Students’ English Fluent speaking” is submitted to the Thesis Assessment Council, Vinh University in fulfilment of the degree MA in TESOL This paper is the result of my personal investigation; it has not been presented and submitted wholly or in part for any other degree PHAN THI LAN ANH i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This thesis could not have been accomplished without the contribution of many people and for whom thanks cannot be enough to express my deep gratitude First of all, I would like to express my sincere appreciation to my supervisor, Ph.D Nguyen Gia Viet for his encouragement, support, advice and guidance I would like to express my open-hearted gratitude and respect to all Master’s Thesis examiners of Vinh University, who have kindly accepted to examine this study I would like also to express my warm thanks to all my colleagues and students of Tien Giang Medical College for the nice times of the collaboration Finally, I would like to extend my deep appreciation to all the staff members of the libraries of Vinh University and Tien Giang Medical College Without their help, this study would have been impossible ii ABSTRACT Classroom interaction is an essential ingredient in second or foreign language classes The classroom interactional tasks (CITs) become more and more popular in supporting students to develop their potential in language use Nowadays many researchers claim that through CITs, students’ language knowledge can be constructed and communication skills can be developed In this context, learners are supposed to be given opportunities to use the language naturally other than only memorizing dialogues and pattern practices The experimental study was conducted to measure the impacts of CITs on the improvement of speaking skill among the first year students of Tien Giang Medical College, as well as to investigate their attitudes towards using CITs in English speaking classes A pre-test, post-test and an attitude questionnaire was employed The data obtained from the tests were analyzed quantitatively by using T-test and the data from the questionnaire were analyzed by Likert-scale system The results revealed that CITs can be a best pedagogical strategy not only to enhance the students’ fluent speaking skill, but also to develop their confident communication in specific situations iii TABLE OF CONTENTS DECLARATION i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ii ABSTRACT iii TABLE OF CONTENTS iv LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS vi LIST OF TABLES vii LIST OF FIGURES viii CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1.1 Rationale 1.2 Statement of the Problem 1.3 Aims of the Study 1.4 Research Questions 1.5 Research Hypothesis 1.6 Significance of the Study 1.7 Structure of the study CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW AND THEORETICAL BACKGROUND 2.1 Classroom interactional tasks (CITs) 2.1.1 Definitions of classroom interaction 2.1.2 The nature of classroom interaction 10 2.1.3 Types of classroom interaction 13 2.1.4 Some classroom interactional activities and tasks for practising speaking skill 17 2.2 Speaking skill 21 2.2.1 Definitions 21 2.2.2 The importance of Speaking skill 22 iv 2.2.3 Types of Speaking 24 2.2.4 Criteria to assess oral language production 25 2.2.5 Speaking difficulties in FL learning 29 2.3 Previous studies on effects of classroom interactional tasks 31 CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY 37 3.1 Methods of the Study 37 3.2 Research Sample 37 3.3 Research Instruments 38 3.4 Research Procedures 39 3.5 Data Analysis 42 CHAPTER 4: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS 43 4.1 Findings 43 4.1 The Description of the Results of Pre-test and Post-test 43 4.1.2 Results from the Questionnaire Data 50 4.2 Discussions 55 CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION 60 5.1 Summary of the Findings 60 5.2 Implications 60 5.3 Recommendations 61 5.4 Limitations of the Study 63 5.5 Further Research 63 REFERENCES 64 APPENDICES 69 v LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS CITs Classroom Interactional Tasks CLT Communicative Language Teaching EFL English as a Foreign Language FL Foreign Language L1 First Language L2 Second Language SLA Second Language Acquisition TL Target Language TEFL Teaching English as a Foreign Language EC Experimental Class CC Control Class vi LIST OF TABLES Table 4.1: Overall average mean score and standard deviation of the EC and CC in the pre-test 43 Table 4.2: Independent sample t-test of the EC and CC in the speaking performance test prior to experiment 44 Table 4.3: Overall average mean score and standard deviation of the EC and CC in the post-test 44 Table 4.4: Independent t-test of the EC and CC in the post-test 45 Table 4.6: Paired sample t-test of the CC in the post-test and pre-test 46 Table 4.7: Overall average mean score and standard deviation of the EC in the post-test and pre-test 47 Table 4.8: Paired sample t-test of the EC in the post-test and pre-test 47 Table 4.9: Overall average mean score and standard deviation of the EC on the fluency criterion of the post-test and pre-test 48 Table 4.10: Paired sample t-test of the EC on the fluency of the post-test and pre-test 48 Table 4.11: Overall average mean score and standard deviation of the EC on the interactive communication criterion of the post-test and pre-test 49 Table 4.12: Paired sample t-test of the EC on the interactive communication criterion of the post-test and pre-test 49 Table 4.13: The EC students’ gender 50 Table 4.14: Students’ general thinking 51 Table 4.15: Students’ intention 52 Table 4.16: Students’ experience 53 Table 4.17: The total score and mean score of the students’ responses towards CITs in speaking classes 54 vii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2.1: Interaction between teacher and students 14 Figure 2.2: Interaction between students 15 viii know how to create motivation among students to make them communicate frequently 5.4 Limitations of the study This study was conducted only in two pharmacist classes, where students did not have to get clinical practice or take night shifts in hospital, so they had more time for learning English The research will be more authentic when it is conducted to students in other fields, such as nursing and midwifery, who not have much exposure to English outside the classroom due to frequently attending night shifts in the central general hospital and practising at public health centres The researcher only found out the EC students’ attitudes after the experiment We should compare students’ opinion of both EC and CC before and after the experiment This is to provide sufficient evidence of how CITs can improve students’ attitudes better than the conventional method in speaking classes 5.5 Further research The foregoing discussion implies that not only does CITs develop medical students’ speaking skill, but can strongly and indirectly enhance their ability to analyze and solve specific problems Hence, future research should also focus on whether the same results will be yielded by investigating the effects of CITs on other English skills such as reading and writing The application of CITs should be tested on different levels of education, such as elementary, secondary and higher education, in different places such as urban, rural areas This study only lasted for eight weeks Therefore, prospective researchers should take a longer time to cross validate the results of the current study 63 REFERENCES Adaba, H.W (2017) Exploring the practice of Teacher-Student classroom interaction in EFL to develop the learners’ speaking skills in Tullu Sangota primary school grade eight students in focus Arts Social Sci J 8: 295 doi: 10.4172/2151-6200.1000295 Al-Ghamdi, H A (2017) Investigating the impact of teachers’ interaction strategies on enhancing Efl students’ contributions at King Abdulaziz University: A classroom discourse analysis International Journal of English Language Education, 5(2), 83-101 Baker, J and Westrup H (2003) Essential speaking skills: a handbook for English language teachers London: Continuum International Publishing Brown, H (2001) Teaching by principles White Plains, NY: Longman Brown, H D (2007) Principles of language learning and teaching Pearson Education: Longman Chaudron, C (1987) Second language classroom: Research on teaching learning Cambridge University Press N.Y Ellis, R (1994) The study of second language acquisition Oxford: Oxford University Press Ellis, R (2003) Task-based language learning and teaching Oxford: Oxford University Press Ellis, R., & Barkhuizen, G P (2005) Analysing learner language Oxford University Press Fulcher, G (2003) Testing second language speaking London: Longman/Pearson Education Johnson, K E (1995) Understanding communication in second language classroom Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 64 Gibbons, P (2003) Mediating language learning: Teacher interactions with ESL students in a content-based classroom TESOL Quarterly, 37(2), 247-273 Guay, F., Chanal, J., Ratelle, C F., March, H W., Larose, S., & Brown (2010) Intrinsic, identified and controlled types of motivation for school subjects in young elementary School British journal of educational psychology, 80(4), 711-735 Gudu, B O (2016) Teaching speaking skills in English language using classroom activities in secondary school level in Eldoret Municipality, Kenya Journal of Education and Practice, 6(35), 55-63 Harmer, J (2009) How to teach English London: Longman Kispert, R J (2004) Universal language World book online reference centre World book, Inc 12 September 2004 http://www.aolsvc.worldbook.aol.com/wb/Article?id=ar576960 Kouicem, K (2010) The Effects of Classroom Interaction on Developing the Learner’s Speaking Skill: The case of third year LMD students of English at Constantine University Unpublished MA Thesis Mentouri University, Constantine Kumpulainen, K., & Wray, D (2002) Classroom interaction and social learning: From theory to practice London: Routledge Luoma, S (2004) Assessing speaking Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Lourdunathan, J., & Menon, S (2005) Developing speaking skills through interaction strategy training The English Teacher, 34,1-18 Naegle, P (2002) The New Teacher’s Complete Sourcebook USA: Scholastic Professional Book Najizade, Z (1996) The effect of role-play technique on the acquisition of English language structures 65 by intermediate EFL learners (Unpublished master’s thesis) Allameh Tabatabaii University, TehranIran Nisa, S H (2014) Classroom interaction analysis in Indonesian EFL speaking class English Review: Journal of English Education, 2(2), 124-132 Nunan, D (1989) Designing tasks for the communicative classroom Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Nunan, D (1991) Language teaching methodology New York Prentice Hall Nunan, D (1992) Research methods in language learning Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Oradee, T (2012) Developing speaking skills using three communicative activities (discussion, problem-solving, and role-playing) International Journal of Social Science and Humanity, 2(6), 533-535 Porter-Ladousse, G (1987) Role-play Oxford: OUP Rabab’ah, G (2005) Communication problems facing Arab learners of English Journal of Language and Learning, 3(1), ISSN 1740-4983 Redmond, M.V & Vrchota, D (2007) Everyday Public Speaking England: Pearson Education Revel, J (1979) Teaching techniques for communicative English Macmillan Richards, J., & Rodgers, T (1986) Approaches and methods in language teaching Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Richards, J C & Rodgers, T (2001) Approaches and methods in language teaching (2nd Ed.) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Richards, J C & Lockhart, C (1994) Reflective teaching in second language classroom Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Richards, J C (2006) Communicative language teaching today New York: Cambridge University Press 66 Rivers, W M (Ed.) (1987) Interactive language teaching New York: Cambridge University Press Robinson, H A (1994) The Ethnography of empowerment - The transformative power of classroom interaction (2nd Ed.) Sage Publications Newbury Park, U.S.A Saeed, K M., Khaksari, M., Eng, L S., Ghani, A M A (2016) The role of learner-learner interaction in the development of speaking skills Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 6(2), 235-241 Scrinvener, J (2005) Learning teaching UK: Macmillan Education Skehan, P (1996) A framework for the implementation of task-based instruction Applied Linguistics, 17, 38-62 Swain, M (1985) Communicative Competence: some roles of comprehensible output in its development In S Gass, & C Madden (Eds), Input in second language acquisition (pp 235-257) Rowley, Mass: Newbury House Publishers Thornbury, S (2005) How to teach speaking New York: Longman Tran, T T T (2008) Exploring strategies used by ESP teachers in teaching large classes at Hue University College of Economics Unpublished MA thesis in education College of Foreign Languages, Hue University Tran, T T.T & Le, P H H & (2013) Managing strategies in teaching English in large classes at College of Economics, Hue University Journal of Science, 88(10) Ur, P (1996) A course in language teaching Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Ur, P (2000) A course in language teaching: Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 67 Practice and theory Van Lier, L (1988) The classroom and the language learner: Ethnography and second language classroom research Longman Van Lier, L (2014) Interaction in the language curriculum: Awareness, autonomy and authenticity Routledge Walsh, S (2013) Classroom discourse and teacher development: Edinburgh University Press Widdowson, H.G (1978) Teaching language as communication Oxford: OUP Woolfalk, A (2004) Educational psychology London: Longman Zareie, B., Gorjian, B & Pazhakh, A (2014) The effects of interactional and transactional speaking strategies on teaching speaking skills to Iranian EFL learners at senior high school level International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World, 5(2), 443-459 Zhang, S (2009) The role of input, interaction, and output in the development of oral fluency English Language Teaching, 2(4),91-100 68 APPENDICES Appendix THE PRE-TEST AND THE POST-TEST The Pre-test Topic: What things you think are important for an ideal friend? Talk about it with your partner You can have your own idea, but there are some suggestions that you can talk about: personality, study habits, life style, interests and hobbies The Post-test Topic: What can you to help the environment? Talk about it with your group members You can have your own idea, but there are some suggestions that you can talk about: things you recycle at home, things you stop using, things you not waste at school 69 Appendix PRE-TEST RESULT OF THE CONTROL CLASS Students St1 St2 St3 St4 St5 St6 St7 St8 St9 St10 St11 St12 St13 St14 St15 St16 St17 St18 St19 St20 St21 St22 St23 St24 St25 St26 St27 St28 St29 St30 St31 St32 St33 St34 St35 Speaking performance scores Pronunciation Grammatical Vocabulary Fluency Interactive accuracy communication 1.00 1.00 0.50 2.00 1.00 1.00 0.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.75 1.00 1.00 1.50 1.00 0.50 1.00 1.25 1.00 1.00 0.75 1.00 0.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.25 1.50 1.00 1.25 1.00 1.50 1.25 1.00 1.00 1.50 1.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.00 1.00 1.50 1.00 0.75 1.50 1.25 1.00 1.00 1.50 1.00 2.00 1.50 1.50 0.75 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.50 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 0.50 1.50 1.00 1.00 1.50 1.00 1.00 1.25 1.00 2.00 1.25 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.25 70 1.00 0.50 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.00 1.50 0.75 2.00 1.00 0.75 0.50 1.00 0.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.50 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.50 0.50 1.00 1.00 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.50 0.75 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.75 0.50 1.50 0.75 2.00 1.00 1.00 0.50 1.00 0.50 1.00 1.00 1.50 1.00 1.00 1.25 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.75 0.50 1.00 1.00 0.75 1.00 1.00 1.50 0.75 Total score 6.00 5.00 5.00 6.00 5.00 5.00 4.00 6.00 5.00 8.00 5.00 5.00 4.00 6.00 5.00 5.00 4.00 6.00 5.00 5.00 6.00 5.00 7.00 5.00 5.00 6.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 6.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 7.00 5.00 Appendix PRE-TEST RESULT OF THE EXPERIMENTAL CLASS Students St1 St2 St3 St4 St5 St6 St7 St8 St9 St10 St11 St12 St13 St14 St15 St16 St17 St18 St19 St20 St21 St22 St23 St24 St25 St26 St27 St28 St29 St30 St31 St32 St33 St34 St35 Speaking performance scores Pronunciation Grammatical Vocabulary Fluency Interactive accuracy communication 1.25 1.00 0.75 1.50 1.00 1.00 1.50 1.50 1.00 1.50 1.00 1.50 1.25 1.00 1.00 0.75 2.00 1.00 1.50 1.00 1.25 2.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 1.00 0.50 1.00 1.25 1.25 1.00 1.00 1.50 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.50 1.00 1.50 1.00 1.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.50 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.50 1.00 1.50 1.75 1.00 1.50 1.00 0.75 1.00 1.50 1.50 1.25 1.25 1.00 1.50 1.00 1.25 1.50 1.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.75 1.00 2.00 1.50 1.25 1.50 1.25 1.00 1.50 1.00 1.25 0.75 1.50 1.00 1.50 1.25 1.00 1.25 1.00 1.25 1.00 1.50 1.50 1.25 1.50 2.00 71 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.50 1.00 1.00 1.50 0.50 1.00 1.25 1.00 1.50 0.75 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.50 0.75 1.50 1.00 2.00 0.75 0.50 0.50 1.00 1.25 1.00 1.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.25 0.75 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.50 1.00 2.00 0.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.50 0.50 0.75 1.50 1.00 1.50 1.00 0.75 1.25 1.00 2.00 1.25 0.50 0.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Total score 6.00 5.00 5.00 7.00 5.00 5.00 8.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 5.00 8.00 5.00 5.00 6.00 5.00 7.00 5.00 5.00 7.00 5.00 9.00 5.00 6.00 5.00 5.00 7.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 7.00 6.00 5.00 6.00 6.00 Appendix POST-TEST RESULT OF THE CONTROL CLASS Students St1 St2 St3 St4 St5 St6 St7 St8 St9 St10 St11 St12 St13 St14 St15 St16 St17 St18 St19 St20 St21 St22 St23 St24 St25 St26 St27 St28 St29 St30 St31 St32 St33 St34 St35 Speaking performance scores Pronunciation Grammatical Vocabulary Fluency Interactive accuracy communication 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.50 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.50 1.00 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.00 1.50 1.00 1.50 1.00 1.00 1.50 1.00 1.25 1.00 0.75 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.50 1.25 1.50 1.00 2.00 1.50 1.00 1.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.25 1.00 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.25 0.75 1.00 0.75 1.50 1.00 1.00 1.25 1.00 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.00 1.50 2.00 1.50 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.50 1.25 1.50 2.00 1.50 1.50 1.25 1.50 1.25 1.25 1.50 1.00 1.00 1.50 2.00 1.50 1.00 1.00 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.00 1.00 1.50 1.00 1.75 1.00 1.50 72 1.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.50 1.00 1.00 0.75 2.00 1.00 1.50 0.75 1.50 1.00 1.00 0.75 1.25 1.00 0.75 2.00 0.50 2.00 0.75 1.50 1.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 0.75 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.25 1.50 1.00 1.00 1.50 1.00 1.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.50 0.75 1.50 1.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 1.00 0.75 1.50 0.50 2.00 1.00 1.50 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 0.50 1.50 1.00 2.00 1.25 Total score 8.00 7.00 6.00 7.00 6.00 6.00 5.00 7.00 5.00 9.00 6.00 7.00 5.00 7.00 6.00 5.00 5.00 7.00 5.00 5.00 7.00 5.00 8.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 5.00 6.00 5.00 8.00 5.00 6.00 6.00 8.00 7.00 Appendix POST-TEST RESULT OF THE EXPERIMENTAL CLASS Students St1 St2 St3 St4 St5 St6 St7 St8 St9 St10 St11 St12 St13 St14 St15 St16 St17 St18 St19 St20 St21 St22 St23 St24 St25 St26 St27 St28 St29 St30 St31 St32 St33 St34 St35 Speaking performance scores Pronunciation Grammatical Vocabulary Fluency Interactive accuracy communication 1.50 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.50 1.00 1.50 1.25 2.00 1.50 1.25 1.50 1.00 1.00 1.50 0.75 1.50 1.50 1.00 1.50 1.00 2.00 2.00 1.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.50 1.00 1.50 1.50 2.00 1.00 1.50 1.00 1.50 1.50 1.00 1.50 1.25 1.00 2.00 0.75 2.00 1.50 1.00 1.50 1.50 1.00 1.50 0.75 2.00 1.00 1.50 1.50 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.50 1.50 1.00 1.00 1.50 2.00 1.50 1.50 1.00 1.00 1.50 1.00 1.50 1.50 1.00 2.00 1.75 1.00 1.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 1.75 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.50 1.50 1.00 1.50 1.00 2.00 1.50 2.00 1.50 2.00 1.50 1.50 2.00 1.50 1.50 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.50 1.00 1.50 73 2.00 1.50 1.50 2.00 1.50 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.50 1.50 1.00 2.00 1.50 1.00 1.50 1.00 1.50 1.50 2.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.50 1.00 0.50 2.00 1.50 1.50 1.50 2.00 2.00 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.50 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 1.50 1.50 2.00 1.50 2.00 1.50 1.50 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.50 1.00 Total score 8.00 7.00 6.00 9.00 7.00 5.00 9.00 5.00 8.00 8.00 6.00 9.00 6.00 5.00 8.00 5.00 8.00 7.00 7.00 9.00 6.00 10.00 7.00 8.00 6.00 5.00 8.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 9.00 8.00 7.00 7.00 6.00 Appendix STUDENTS’ QUESTIONNAIRE Dear students, You are kindly requested to fill in this questionnaire to express your attitude toward the effects of classroom interactional tasks on developing EFL learners’ fluent speaking Your answers are very important for the validity of this research We hope that you will give us your full attention and interest Please use a cross (×) to indicate your chosen option, according to the statements and scale in the levels as follows: 5= strongly agree; = agree; = not sure; = disagree; = strongly disagree May I thank you in advance for your collaboration Please specify whether you are: A Male  B Female  Students’ Attitude towards the effects of CITs on developing fluent speaking Statements Strongly Agree agree I think classroom interactional tasks make the learning experience easier Dialogues, role-plays, debates and discussions, and presentations help enhance good working relationships among students 74 Not Disagree Strongly sure disagree 3 Creativity is facilitated in classroom interactional tasks Student-student interaction makes silent students more confident Peer interaction helps students obtain a deeper understanding of the material I like my teacher to correct only serious mistakes when students are interacting in class I willingly participate in classroom interactional tasks I prefer that my teachers use more group activities / assignments I prefer that my teachers use verbal communication for task instructions rather than other aids (e.g blackboard, pictures, video, etc.) 10 To support students’ fluent speaking, teachers should act as a language 75 model and informant, as a corrector, as a provider of feedback on group and individual performance 11 When I work with other students, I achieve more than when I work alone 12 The students in my class try to help each other if they have difficulties in expressing themselves orally 13 My level of speaking ability improve as a result of classroom interactional tasks 14 Regular interaction in the classroom helps me to reduce my speaking mistakes 15 Over- correction can demotivate my speaking fluency and confidence 76 Appendix QUESTIONNAIRE RESULT OF THE EXPERIMENTAL CLASS Sts Sex Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15 St1 St2 St3 St4 St5 St6 St7 St8 St9 St10 St11 St12 St13 St14 St15 St16 St17 St18 St19 St20 St21 St22 St23 St24 St25 St26 St27 St28 St29 St30 St31 St32 St33 St34 St35 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 77 ...MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING VINH UNIVERSITY PHAN THI LAN ANH THE EFFECTS OF CLASSROOM INTERACTIONAL TASKS ON MEDICAL STUDENTS’ ENGLISH FLUENT SPEAKING Major: Teaching English to Speakers of Other... MASTER’S THESIS IN EDUCATION SUPERVISOR: Nguyen Gia Viet, Ph.D Long An, 2018 DECLARATION I declare that the thesis titled ? ?The Effects of Classroom Interactional Tasks on Medical Students’ English Fluent. .. deviation of the EC on the interactive communication criterion of the post-test and pre-test 49 Table 4.12: Paired sample t-test of the EC on the interactive communication criterion of the post-test