الفهرس 
Language learning strategies (LLSs)Only 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 243 |  |  |
| | | from | 243 | | |
Abstract
The first section presents a summary of the study and its results. The second section presents the conclusions of the study. The third section presents the implications of the study as they relate to instruction and further research. I. Summary Statement of the Problem Even though English in the general secondary school has been taught according to the communicative approach that places much emphasis on communication skills, students, as the researcher observed while supervising teaching practice, still have difficulty expressing themselves in fluent oral English, an observation also raised by inmy EFL researchers. This observation was supported in a pilot study conducted by the researcher where a sample of first year secondary school students were interviewed in the second semester of the school year 2002. Another observation was that the students had a high level of speaking anxiety. The present study sought to investigate the extent to which training first year general secondary school students in naturalistic practice of English and compensation strategies would enhance their EFL speaking proficiency. The proposed training entailed that the existing speaking activities be substituted with other activities. The new activities were selected in the light of two main criteria or conditions. The first was the co~nmu~licativvea luc, so -- ! students could practice English naturalistically through the activities. The second criterion related to the possibility 017 practicing compensation strategies through the activities. That is, activities allowing for embedded compensation strategy training were selected. One more aim of the study was to test the contention that training students in naturalistic practice of English and compensation strategies would reduce their FL speaking anxiety. More specifically, thc stiidy addscsscd thc following main qucstion: The study addressed the following main question: ”To what extent would training secondaly school students in naturalistic practice of English and compensation strategies enhance their EFL speaking proficiency and reduce their speaking anxiety?” The following sub-questions were also addressed: Would training first year secondary school students in naturalistic practice of English and coinpensation strategies enhance their strategy awareness? Would training first year secondary school students ir.. naturalistic practice of English and compensatioi~ strategies enhance their strategy use? Would training first year secondaiy school students in naturalistic practice of English and coinpensatio n strategies enhance their speaking accuracy? Would training first year secondary school students in naturalistic practice . of English and compensation strategies enhance their speaking fluency? Would training first year secondary school students in naturalistic practice of English and compensation strategies reduce their speaking anxiety? 5 - Hypotheses To answer the research questions, the following hypotheses were tested at the 0.5 level: 1. There would ’be a statistically significant difference between the pretest and posttest mean scores of the experimental group on strategy awareness in favor of the posttest. 2. Therc would bc a statistically significant diffcrcncc between the pretest and posttest mean scores of the experimental group on strategy use in favor of the posttest. 3. There would be a statistically significant difference between the pretest and posttest mean scores of the experimental group on speaking accuracy in favor of the 4 posttest. 4. There would be a statistically significant difference between the pretest and posttest mean scores of the experimental group on speaking fluency in favor of tke posttest. 5. There would be a statistically significant difference between the pretest and posttest mean scores of the experimental group on overall speaking proficiency in favor of the posttest. 6. There would be no statistically significant differences between the pretest and posttest mean scores of the experimental group on speaking anxiety in favor of the posttest. 7. There would be a statistically significant difference between the posttest mean scores of the experimental and control groups on strategy awareness in favor of the experimental group. 8. There would be a statistically significant diffcrcnce between the posttest 111cat-1sc ores of the experituental and - = control groups on strategy use in favor of the experimental group. 9. There would be a statistically significant differencc between the posttest mean scores of the experimental and control groups on speaking accuracy in favor of the experimental group. 10.There would be a statistically significant difference between the posttest mean scores of the experimental and control groups on speaking fluency in favor of tte experimental group. 1 1 .There would be a statistically significant difference between the posttest mean scores of the experimental and control groups in overall speaking proficiency in favor of the experimental group. 12.There would be no statistically significant difference between the posttest mean scores of the experimental acd control groups in speaking anxiety in favor of the experimental group.