RESEARCH OUTLINE

1. Research Title: Cohesive Devices in Written Discourse: A Discourse Analysis of a

Student’s Essay Writing
Researcher/s: Afnan Bahaziq English Language Institute, King Abdul Aziz University,
Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
2. Research Objectives/Statement of the Problem

Chapter 1
Discourse is essential in communicating thoughts and ideas. People around the world
communicate their ideas through stretches of language. To understand any discourse, it must
achieve cohesion. The purpose of this paper is to define and describe the cohesive devices based
on the work of Halliday and Hasan (1976). It also aims to emphasize the necessity of using these
devices by analyzing a Michigan English Language Assessment Battery (MELAB) sample
examination of a student’s essay writing. The student’s writing shows clear evidence of cohesion
and demonstrates the use of grammatical and lexical devices. It is noticed that the most
grammatical devices used are reference and conjunction. On the contrary, there is little evidence
of using lexical devices. Although the essay is somewhat cohesive, some areas still need
improvement.

Chapter 2
Introduction
English is considered the first language for most of the population in several countries and the
second language for others. Hence, English is becoming the language of communication
globally. Communication allows language users to interact with each other and in turn
understand what others are trying to convey. In other words, language could be understood
differently depending on the situation and context in which the discourse occurs. Discourse, then,
is any spoken or written language which includes verbal and nonverbal elements that are
meaningful. An English native speaker can easily identify whether a set of sentences are
unrelated or form a unified whole. The unity between these sentences is achieved using cohesive
devices. This paper aims to define and describe these cohesive devices based on Halliday and
Hasan’s (1976) work. It also aims to emphasize the necessity of using cohesive devices in
written discourse by analyzing a Michigan English Language Assessment Battery (MELAB)
sample examination of a student’s essay writing.
 Chapter 3
Research Methodology
A. Research Design
In linguistics, any spoken or written discourse that forms a unified whole is referred to as a text.
A text is not a grammatical unit, but rather a semantic unit of language, i.e. a unit of meaning,
not of form. Texture is what provides the text with unity and distinguishes it from a non-text.
Therefore, it is the cohesive relation that exists between units of a text.
B. Locale of the Study
The sample data is taken from The Michigan English Language Assessment Battery (MELAB),
which is a standardized examination of English as a foreign language (EFL). MELAB assesses
applicants’ writing, reading, listening, and speaking skills. It is held for adult nonnative speakers
of English, who are applying to universities in the United States, Canada, and the United
Kingdom.
C. Participants
Afnan Bahaziq, English Language Institute, King Abdul Aziz University, Jeddah, P.O. Box
42890, Saudi Arabia. E-mail: abahaziq@kau.edu.sa
D. Research Instrument/s
MELAB assesses applicants’ writing, reading, istening, and speaking skills. It is held for adult
nonnative speakers of English, who are applying to universities in the United States, Canada, and
the United Kingdom. Examinees undertake this test for the purpose of using English for
academic purposes at universities and colleges

E. Data Gathering Procedures

Under data, I shall present a critical analysis of the text and investigate the use of
grammatical and lexical cohesive devices. Then, I shall provide some recommendations based on
the correct and wrong usage of cohesive devices.
F. Analysis of Data
The data analysis used in this study reveals the importance of using cohesive devices to produce
effective writing. Although the essay demonstrates the use of these devices, it still needs
adjustments to reach a higher level of cohesion.

4. Result of the Study

There are more and more students travel to another country for study. They travel to another
country because they want to learn other language. If the students can speak more languages,
then they can talk to someone easier, and can learn more. Also, they can make some friends
easily. These are the advantages for learning more languages. International business is getting
common. There are more and more companies located in whole world. If the boss of the
company can speak more than one language, then the boss can find some parnets from different
countries, then the boss can have a successful business easily. Learning two languages is also
good for the people who is working. There is more and more information can find on the
internet. Some people will translate the information into their language. But sometimes they will
lose some important information. If we can know other language, then we can find more
resources for the information, and more detail. Learning more languages can also learn more
knowledge.
5. Conclusion
Cohesion occurs in a text if it has texture. In other words, a text is cohesive when the stretches of
language are hung together with ties (Hasan, 1968). According to Halliday and Hasan (1976),
these ties could be grammatical or lexical. Therefore, if the text makes sense to the reader, then
the writer accomplished the use of cohesive devices.

6. Recommendation/s
The analysis reveals that 71.08 % of the grammatical devices used in the essay is reference (see
Appendix 4). This might indicate that the writer has little background of the appropriate method
of using reference. The remaining percentage (28.92%) of the total grammatical devices applied
in the text is divided between conjunctions and ellipsis. However, there is no evidence of
substitution. In addition, the student demonstrates the use of the lexical device reiteration but
never tends to use collocation. It can be noted that repetition is used very frequently (see
Appendix 5). To some extent, repeating lexical items is acceptable, but repeating the same item
in a single paragraph more than twice could affect the cohesion of the text. This is clear in
paragraph three when the writer repeats the item the boss three times. It is suggested that the
student repeats the same items due to the limited knowledge of vocabulary. In order to improve
the writing, the writer could use synonymy or substitution to avoid repetition. Using substitution
adds variety and creates links between parts of the text. Also, the writer could refrain using the
same reference several times and refer to it with synonyms or superordinations. Overall, the text
is meaningful to the reader and shows evidence of cohesion, but it requires improvements
semantically and syntactically.

RESEARCH OUTLINE

1. Research Title: Spoken Discourse Analysis of Senior High Schools English Classroom
Purworejo, Central Java
Researcher/s: Sudar, English Education Study Program Muhammadiyah University
of Purwarejo Indonesia 
2. Research Objectives/Statement of the Problem
Chapter 1
Discourse analysis is one of the linguistics which investigate language use naturally. The
classroom interaction is one of the fields of the study of the language use naturally. How is the
English teachers and their students developed discourse pattern in the classroom interaction? The
purpose of this study is to describe the using of discourse pattern implemented in the classroom
by English teachers and their students. The results of this study give significant contribution to
the English teaching leaning process, particularly for the teachers in order that they can cultivate
and organize the classroom dynamically, further teachers and students are able to create
challenging classroom interaction. To analyze the data, the researcher used the qualitative
descriptive research. The researcher used the qualitative descriptive analysis which is developed
by Mile &Huberman, (1994). Based on the data analysis, it is funding that discourse pattern
whichis created by Siclair- Coulthard analysis model (1975) cited in (Charthy, 1993) is used by
English teachers and their students differently. It meant that the English teachers and their
student simplemented the discourse pattern in the classroom based on the setting of nine different
senior high schools in the different environments. Discourse pattern used in the excellent senior
high schools are different from the classical senior high schools in the southern part of central
Java,Indonesia.

Chapter 2
Introduction
The main aim of learning language is to use it for communication purposes in its actual class
setting in which classroom interaction is a key to achieve this. Basically, oral interaction is the
collaborative exchange of thoughts, feelings, or ideas between two or more people, leading to a
mutual effect on each other, (Lucha, 2015). Further, Luchasays that all over the world, classroom
interaction is usually dominated by question and answer, with teachers asking most of the
questions. It is because questions provide the practice and feedback essential for the
development. Question is a tool used in the direct interaction between the teacher and learners.
3. Research Methodology
A. Research Design
To analyze data, the researchers used the qualitative descriptive research. The
researchers used the qualitative descriptive analysis which is developed by Mile and Huberman
(1994).
 B. Locale of the Study
This research is conducted in the English classroom interaction. (Senior High Schools
English Classroom Purworejo, Central Java
C. Participants
The population of this research is the English teachers and students at senior high
schools in the southern part of central Java province in Indonesia.
D. Research Instrument/s
The instruments that the researcher used to analyze the utterances data are the
following. The first is the use of IRF/E pattern which was developed by Van Lier (1996: 149).
The researcher used this theory as an instrument to analyze the English utterances made by
English teachers and students in the English classroom interaction. Further, the researcher used
the analytical framework of peer-group interaction.

E. Data Gathering Procedures

This research is conducted in the English classroom interaction. The population of this
research is the English teachers and students at senior high schools in the southern part of central
Java province in Indonesia. The English teachers and students will be identified based on the
school’s location.
F. Analysis of Data
Related to the results of data analysis, teachers did not perform non-verbal response in
the classroom interaction: on the contrary, some students in the classroom interaction performed
non-verbal responses. It means that the students did not always perform verbal interaction in the
classroom, sometimes they used non-verbal response to react to their teachers’ ideas.
4. Result of the Study
English teachers and students of classical classroom interaction mostly used the old
philosophical value, only few of English teachers used the modern philosophical one. On the
contrary, in the acceleration English classroom interaction the English teachers and students used
modern philosophical value. It means that even in this modern era, both classical and modern
Philosophical values of IRF/E discourse pattern can be used simultaneously, it depends on the
input, the organizer, and the setting of schools.
5. Conclusion
Related to the result of data analysis, teachers did not perform non-verbal response in the
classroom interaction: on the contrary, some students in the classroom interaction performed
non-verbal responses. It means that the students did not always perform verbal interaction in the
classroom, sometimes they used non- verbal response to react to their teacher’s ideas.
6. Recommendation/s
Based on the data analysis, students were in high position to respond which means that the
students were more passive in the classroom interaction. Teachers were more active to initiate
the classroom interaction. Student’s initiation was lower than teacher’s initiation in the
classroom interaction. Students never developed the follow-up utterances. The follow-up
utterances were dominated by teachers. It means that teachers were more powerful to control the
students. The student’s follow-up were found only in the classroom interaction of senior high
school 7 and senior high school 2.It happened because the students had a chance to share with
their classmates in the group presentation about the topic of discussion.

 
 
EVALUATIVE RESEACH OUTLINE 

  
1. Research Title: Program Evaluation of the English Language Proficiency Program for
Foreign Students
   
Researcher/s: Esmaeel Ali Salimi1 Mitra Farsi 

   
2. Research Objectives/Statement of the Problem

    The objective of this study is to undertake a program evaluation of the English Language Proficiency
Program for Foreign Students, especially for foreign graduate students seeking admission to the UE
Graduate School. This study, which uses Daniel Stufflebeam’s Context-Input-Process-Product or CIPP
Model examined its effects on the academic performance of foreign students. It looked into its course
syllabi, goals and objectives, program content, strategies and methodology of instruction, faculty profile
and program duration, as these would arrest the competence and competitiveness of foreign students in
the English language. In the assessment of foreign students, this study will determine if the English
training programs pass William Dunn’s four evaluation criteria, namely: effectiveness, responsiveness,
appropriateness and adequacy.

3. Research Methodology 
            A. Research Design  
This study on evaluating an English program of studies for foreign students
seeking admission to the UE Graduate School attempts to examine the prevailing
conditions of foreign students in the UE Graduate School with respect to their
competence and competitiveness in English proficiency.
  
  
           
 B. Locale of the Study 
This study was conducted in the University of the East, Manila campus,
particularly in the Graduate School in three groups. All the three groups of respondents have
passed the ELPPFS before their admission to UE Graduate School and was enrolled second
semester of 2011-2012 in their respective Master and Doctorate courses.
  
  
            C. Participants 
Mitra Farsi, Department of English Language and Literature, Allameh Tabataba'i
University, Tehran, Iran

D. Research Instrument/s 
   The research instrument focuses on each criterion of the evaluation
framework, namely: effectiveness, responsiveness, appropriateness and adequacy. Each
criterion has indicators which the respondent is asked to rate, using Likert’s 4-Point Scale:
4 - strongly agree, 3 - agree, 2 - disagree, and 1 - strongly disagree.
  
            E. Data Gathering Procedures 
In another study conducted by A.A. Winke, and published as a
journal article in “Higher Education, 2009” Volume 31, no 3, 325-340, it investigated
associations between studying in a foreign English language and students' academic
achievement and behaviour. Data were gathered in the Netherlands, at the Delft University of
Technology (DUT).
  
  
            F. Analysis of Data
the researcher believes that the three groups of respondents show significant
positive changes in their level of academic performance as a result of their training in ELPPFS
program, although the Iranians admit that they have experienced less improvement. The same
table shows the computed value of 37.66 (or F-ratio) which is greater than the critical value of
5.49 based on a 99% level of confidence (0.01 Alpha). This means that the null hypothesis is
rejected because there is sufficient evidence to support the significant changes in the
respondents’ level of academic performance.  
  
4. Result of the Study 
Our results show that the three groups of respondents assess that there are
significant positive changes in their academic performance as a result of their training in the
ELPPFS program. Moreover, there are significant positive changes in the academic performance
of the three groups of respondents as a result of their ELPPFS training. The prevailing conditions
of foreign students enrolled in degree programs of UE Graduate School with respect to the
level of their academic performance clearly show satisfactory evaluation marks.
5. Conclusion

The objective of this study is to undertake a program evaluation of the English

Language Proficiency Program for Foreign Students or ELPPFS, specifically for international
students seeking admission to the UE Graduate School. This study, which uses Daniel
Stufflebeam’s Context-Input-Process-Product or CIPP Model examines its effects on the
academic performance of foreign students. It looks into its course syllabi, goals and objectives,
program content, strategies and methodologies, faculty profile and program duration, as these
would arrest the competence and competitiveness of foreign students in the English language. In
the assessment of foreign students, this study will determine if the English training programs
pass William Dunn’s four evaluation criteria, namely: effectiveness,
responsiveness, appropriateness and adequacy.
 
 
 
 
 
   APPLIED RESEARCH OUTLINE
 
  
1. Research Title: Oral presentation Vs. Free Discussion: Iranian intermediate EFL Learners
Speazi ng Proficiency and Perception.
   
Researcher/s: Elaheh Sotoudehnama and Maryam Hashamdar

2. Research Objectives/Statement of the Problem 

Speaking is a significant skill that many foreign language learners are trying
to master. In this study, the effectiveness of two different speaking activities, i.e. oral
presentation vs. free discussion, was investigated from quantitative and qualitative points
of view. To achieve this purpose, 44 intermediate learners from a language institute in Tehran
participated in the study. Half of the participants experienced oral presentation while the
other half (22 in two other classes) experienced free discussion for eight sessions. The two
activities were exchanged between the two groups after the end of the quantitative phase of the
study for eight more sessions. The results of an independent samples t-test performed on
the scores of the speaking section of a sample Preliminary English Test (PET, 2012 ) after the
first phase of the study (the first 8 sessions) indicated that the learners who experienced
oral presentation significantly outperformed the learners who experienced free discussion
though both activities proved to be significantly useful. Furthermore, the results of the interview
with 10 participants from each activity through purposeful sampling, after the second phase of
the study (the second 8 sessions) through thematic analysis indicated that both free discussion
and oral presentation activities had some merits and demerits. Based on the results it can be
advisable to include the two activities as complementary.
  
3. Research Methodology 
            A. Research Design  
Among the different English language skills, the speaking skill has the most
prominent and significant position. Achieving oral proficiency is clearly one of the main
interests and 212Applied Research on English Language AREL dreams of many English
language learners. They believe having the ability to speak a language is synonymous
with knowing that language and regard their speaking proficiency improvement as their
success in language acquirement (Richards, 2008; Ur, 1996). However, speaking in English
as a foreign language is a complex and multi-dimensional phenomenon and
providing a concise definition for it is very hard (Bygate, 2009; Thornbury & Slade,
2006). The difficulties and problems in managing speaking skill are due to different factors.
There is never the chance of revising and editing the output since it always takes place in real
time; in addition, it has unpredictable and transient features (Bailey, 2006; Bygate, 2009).
Shumin (2002) refers to the lack of sufficient exposure to the target language and contact with
native speakers as the major source of difficulty in speaking skill mastery. It is clear that this lack
of interaction and exposure to authentic oral communication in the foreign language
contexts has overwhelmingly increased the importance of communicative and
appropriate activities in the classrooms (Shumin, 2002). There are many researchers (Nunan,
1989; Thornbury, 2005; Ur, 1996) who highlight the significant role of effective oral
communication activities in the classrooms. According to Dornyei and Thurrell (1994), many of
the problems and difficulties in the conversation classrooms are the result of the lack of
appropriate syllabus and activities in the classroom. In the process of curricular and activities
planning and designing, fifferent learners� factors and their individual differences especially
their language proficiency and their perception have important roles, and the activity
designers, teachers, and the learners can benefit from being. aware of the.. .n fact, the
more the learners� perspectives are paid attention to, the more opportunities for language
improvement and achievement will be provided (Barkhuizen, 1998; Gentry, Gable, &
Rizza, 2002). However, unfortunately, evaluation ou classroom activities from the stddents�
died s is not uuch uealt with wwada & Okan, 2000; Gentry et al., 2002). Among all the
different activities which can be effective in spoken language, discussion and oral presentation
can specifically target aspects of speaking skill (Thornbury, 2005). Oral presentation and
discussion are two different types of seminar that participating in them is one of the most
problematic and difficult issues for EFL learners (Jordan, 1997). Looking at these two different
activities more meticulously, it can be concluded that they have some features such as fif
ferent types of learners� interaction, coppetit ion to take the floorf t,rns, and spontaneous talks
(Padilha & Carletta, 2002; Ur, 1981, 1996) that sometimes may bring
V. 5 N. 2 2016 213ARELthe possibility of considering them as two activities which are
at the opposite ends of a continuum. Based on these features, oral presentation and free
discussion may have different effects on the learners� speaking proficiency, especially
regarding the perception of the learners. This study investigated the effects of these
two activities on the speaking froficiency of the learners; moreover, it explorep the EFL
learners� perceptions of each of these two activities qualitatively.
  
  
            B. Locale of the Study 
Alzahra University, Tehran, Iran2 MA, Alzahra University, Tehran, Iran
   C. Participants 
   Forty-four intermediate female Iranian foreign language learners from four
different intact classes in one of the branches of Kish Language Institute in Tehran participated
in this study. In order to have an equal number of participants in each of the experimental and the
comparison group, two of these classes, consisting of 22 learners (one with 12 and the other with
10 learners) were considered as the comparison group (dealing with free discussion) and the
other two classes, including 11 and 11 learners, were considered as the experimental group of the
study (dealing with oral presentation).
  
            D. Research Instrument/s
  The approach of conducting these interviews was one-on-one in which the
participants were interviewed individually. This approach of interviews is popular but time-
consuming (Creswell, 2012). It is worth mentioning that for the purpose of achieving proper
data, all the interviews were conducted in Persian (Mackey & Gass, 2005), and they were
recorded and transcribed meticulously by the researcher for the further analysis.
  
  
            E. Data Gathering Procedures 
To measure the foreign langeage learners� oral eroficiency be.ore ane adter
experiencing the two different focused class activities, a speaking sample of the Preliminary
English Test (PET) (Universssity of Cambridge ESOL Examinations, 2012) was utilized as both
pre- and post-test in the quantitative phase of the study. The pre-test was administered with the
purpose of both ensuring the homogeneity of the learners and measuring their speaking
proficiency before the treatment, and the post-test was administered in order to measure the
effects of the two activities. In this study, the reliability of the speaking part of the sample test
was estimated through test-retest. The reliability correlation coefficient of the test-retest was
estimated using Cronbach�s plph a and turneu. out to be which was acceptable from a statistical
point of view (Larson-Hall, 2010)
  
  
            F. Analysis of Data 
These confirm the results of the study conducted by MacIntyre, Baker, Clément, and
Donovan (2002) who indicated that different factors mainly communication anxiety and
perceived communication coppete nce were the predictors of the learners� willingness to
communicate. Therefore, it seems that shyness and lack of self-confidence, which some learners
were sff fering from bbased on their talks and the researcher�s observation,, had negative
effects on the learners� willingness to participate in uiscussion. wowever, this is against what
Ur (1981) believes about discussions. He believes it is easier for the shy learners to speak and
express themselves in a small group discussion rather than to the teacher.
4. Result of the Study 
The results of an independent samples t-test performed on the scores of the speaking
section of a sample Preliminary English Test (PET, 2012 ) after the first phase of the study (the
first 8 sessions) indicated that the learners who experienced oral presentation significantly
outperformed the learners who experienced free discussion though both activities proved to be
significantly useful. Furthermore, the results of the interview with 10 participants from each
activity through purposeful sampling, after the second phase of the study (the second 8 sessions)
through thematic analysis indicated that both free discussion and oral presentation activities had
some merits and demerits. Based on the results it can be advisable to include the two activities as
complementary.

5. Conclusion 
This study was an attempt to shed some lights on the effects of oral presentation vs.
free discussion on the EFL intermediate learners’ speaking proficiency; moreover, it explored the
EFL learners’ perceptions of these two activities. The results of the first research question
indicated the significant superiority of oral presentation to free discussion activity; however, both
free discussion and oral presentation activities could affect and improve the speaking
proficiency. Furthermore, the result of the second research question indicated that both of the
activities had some merits and demerits from the learners’ point of view. Hence, since we usually
deal with learners who have different personalities in the same class, it can be recommended to
include both activities as complementary in classrooms though either one may not be to the favor
of some of the students. In this way, using one compensates for the shortcomings of the other.
Elaborating the objectives of including each activity can help the learners to be more cooperative
in class activities.

ACTION RESEARCH OUTLINE 

  
1.Research Title: Action Research on Improving Students Speaking Proficiency in using
Cooperative Storytelling Strategy 

    Researcher/s: Dhani Ram Sharma 

2. Research Objectives/Statement of the Problem 

   There are four skills in learning English they are listening, speaking, reading and
writing. Speaking is very important because speaking and human being cannot be separated from
each other. Speaking is used to express their ideas and to communicate to people in civilized
world. Students’ speaking problem can be solved by giving a lot chance to them for practicing
English either in the classroom or out of classroom. Practicing speaking English in the classroom
should be interested with appropriate technique in order to make students speaking skill can be
improved and the process of learning can be enjoyable. One of technique can be used in teaching
speaking is cooperative story telling.
3. Research Methodology 
            A. Research Design  
Speaking is the first way to interact with others in the social community.
Furthermore, the success in learning a language at first can be seen from the ability of the
learner’s speaking. However, it is very hard for the second language learners to speak the foreign
language, especially English. There are a lot of reasons why they get difficulties in speaking,
such as lack of ideas to tell, lack of vocabularies to express the ideas, lack of the exposure to
speak, and lack of the interesting teaching method or technique that can motivate them to speak.
Thus, this research applied Cooperative Storytelling Strategy to Improve Students' Speaking
proficiency of the students of grade 11in Nepal Rastriya Chandraganga Secondary School,
Gagretal, Surkhet. This research was a collaborative classroom action research whose main
purpose was to know whether or not storytelling strategy could improve the students’ speaking
skill. Meanwhile, the specific purposes consisted of describing: (1) To implement storytelling
strategy in 11th graders students at our School to improve their speaking skill. (2)To enhance
their confidence in speaking skill and create fluency in speaking. The data of this research were
got from the observations done by Storytelling contest and Speaking test. The result showed that
there was an improvement on students’ speaking proficiency after the implementation of
storytelling strategy. The speaking test result in cycle two explained that the students’ speaking
aspects got good progress. Storytelling improved their comprehension, fluency, vocabulary,
grammar, and pronunciation. Thus, it can be said that storytelling strategy could improve
students’ speaking skill.
  
  
            B. Locale of the Study 
  
   After the implementation of the storytelling technique to develop their proficiency
for two weeks, I conducted the story telling contest to observe their speaking proficiency. The
students took part in the contest and they were able to tell stories that they had heard before. I
also administrated post speaking test to measure their speaking skill. Finally, I analyzed the
result and found that they improved their speaking proficiency. After using this technique, I
found that my students were motivated to speaking English in and out of the classroom with
their friends. The shy students also started to speak English in the classroom. I administered pre-
test.
           

C. Participants 
Grade 11 sstudents of Nepal Rastriya Chandraganga Secondary School, Gagretal,
Surkhet.
  
  
            D. Research Instrument/s 
   Quantitative Research

  
      E. Data Gathering Procedures 
   Cycle of the action research
  
            F. Analysis of Data 
After the implementation of the storytelling technique to develop their
proficiency for two weeks, I conducted the story telling contest to observe their speaking
proficiency. The students took part in the contest and they were able to tell stories that they had
heard before. I also administrated post speaking test to measure their speaking skill. Finally, I
analyzed the result and found that they improved their speaking proficiency. After using this
technique, I found that my students were motivated to speaking English in and out of the
classroom with their friends. The shy students also started to speak English in the classroom. I
administered pre-test.
  
4. Result of the Study 
The result showed that the students scored 58.8% in comprehension, 60% in vocabulary,
54.8% in grammar, 51.30% in fluency and 45.60% in pronunciation. I found that the students'
speaking proficiency was increased through the use of cooperative story telling technique.

5. Conclusion
After analyzing the result obtained in the post speaking test, I found that it helped
for improvement, I will continue the techniques and I shared this idea with my fellow
teachers and my colleagues in the school. I followed the action plan as in my action research
proposal. My aim was to improve the students' speaking proficiency. As I conducted my
research, I found the result as I assumed. The interventions I applied in my students really
increased the participation in the speaking activities.