FACULTY OF EDUCATION
DEPARTMENT OF ARTS AND HUMANITIES
FRENCH-ENGLISH OPTION
An Evaluative Study of Communicative Competence in Conversational
English among English Language Learners in the Literary Option:
The Case of Rusizi and Nyamasheke Districts
A dissertation submitted to the Faculty of Education in partial fulfilment of the
requirements for the award of a Bachelor's degree in French-English
Education
Submitted by
Valens NGABOYERA
Supervisor: Mr Emmanuel BATUNGWANAYO
Huye, December 2006
DECLARATION
I, Valens NGABOYERA, hereby declare that, this dissertation is original and
has never been presented in any university or other institution of higher
education. It is my own research whereby other individuals' works were cited
and references thereof provided.
I thus, declare that this work is mine under the supervision of Mr Emmanuel
BATUNGWANAYO.
Student's signature
........................................
DEDICATION
To
the Almighty God,
my father Canisius KANIHUZI,
my mother Blancile NYIRARANSABIMANA,
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The completion of this work is not the result of my own effort only. It is also a
result of the devotion of some other people to whom I address these
acknowledgements. Many members of academic faculties and staff at NUR
have given valuable assistance in the completion of this dissertation that it is
regrettably impossible to express my gratitude to all of them individually. I
would like to mention, in particular, my supervisor Emmanuel
BATUNGWANAYO for his invaluable criticisms and advice which greatly
contributed to bringing this paper to its present shape. In addition, I would like
to thank all the teachers who gave me knowledge and made me what I am
now.
My gratitude is also due to my parents, brothers, sisters and other family
members who supported me morally and financially all along my studies. They
did all they could for the sake of my welfare. God will reward them for that. I
would like also to express my gratitude to the respondents whose contribution
and help were invaluable to the completion of this work.
Moreover, I am very grateful to my classmates, especially Philothre
NTAWIHA, Vnuste NGENDAHIMANA, Innocent NSEKEYUKUNZE and John
NSENGUMUREMYI, for their moral and intellectual assistance. Last but far
from least, my heartfelt thanks go to VUMILIA choir for their particular spiritual
support during my academic life.
Many people contributed much to my studies and completion of this work;
however, it is not possible to acknowledge each of them by name. May God
remember their good deeds and bless them forever.
May God bless all of you!
Valens NGABOYERA
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Schools used in the research 34
Table 2: The number of students and teachers of English who make the
population 34
Table 3: The number of students who make the population according to their
classes 35
Table 4: The sample of the study 36
Table 5: Students' interest in using E.L. in real-life communication 41
Table 6: Students' feeling when speaking English out of the classroom
setting 42
Table 7: Students' choice between accuracy and fluency 43
Table 8: Availability of audio-visual equipment in schools 44
Table 9: The E.L. teachers' use of audio-visual equipment in teaching 45
Table 10: The importance of using audio-visual equipment in E.L. teaching
and learning 46
Table 11: The views of students about their teachers' emphasis on some of
the four skills 47
Table 12: The views of teachers about their emphasis on some of the four
skills 48
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DECLARATION i
DEDICATION ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iii
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS iv
LIST OF TABLES v
LIST OF APPENDICES vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS viii
ABSTRACT xii
CHAPTER ONE: GENERAL INTRODUCTION 1
2.3.2.2. Message 14
2.3.2.3. Channel 15
2.3.2.4. Noise 15
2.3.2.5. Context 16
2.3.2.6. Feedback 16
2.3.2.7. Effect 16
2.3.3. Types of Communication 17
2.3.3.1. Intrapersonal Communication 17
2.3.3.2. Interpersonal Communication 17
2.3.3.3. Public Communication 18
2.3.3.4. Oral Communication 18
2.3.3.5. Written Communication 19
2.3.4. Types of Communicative Activities 19
2.3.4.1. Functional Communication Activities 20
2.3.4.2. Social Interaction Activities 20
2.3.5. Essential Processes in Learning to Communicate 20
2.3.6 Language-based Barriers to Communication 21
2.4. Definition and Views on Communicative Competence 22
2.4.1. Definition of the Communicative Competence 22
2.4.2. Components of the Communicative Competence 23
2.4.2.1. Grammatical Competence 23
2.4.2.2. Sociolinguistic Competence 24
2.4.2.3. Discourse Competence 24
2.4.2.4. Strategic Competence 24
2.5. Language Acquisition and Language Learning 24
2.5.1. Definition and Views on Language Acquisition 24
2.5.2. Definition and Views on Language Learning 25
2.5.3. Oral Language Skills 26
2.5.3.1. Speaking 26
2.5.3.2. Listening 28
2.6. Instructional Technologies in Communicative Language Teaching 29
2.6.1. Audio Cassettes and Cassette Player 30
2.6.2. CDs and CD player 30
2.6.3. Video Cassettes and Video Player 31
2.6.4. Computer 32
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY 33
3.1. Introduction 33
3.2. Design of the Study 33
3.3. Area of the Study 33
3.4. Population of the Study 34
3.5. Sample and Sampling Technique 35
3.6. Instrument of Data Collection 37
3.6.1. Questionnaire 37
3.6.2. Test 37
3.7. Validity of the Instruments 37
3.8. Method of Data Collection 38
3.9. Method of Data Analysis 38
3.10. Limitations of the Study 39
CHAPTER FOUR:DATA PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND
INTERPRETATION 40
4.1. Introduction 40
4.2. Teachers and Students' Views on E.L. Learners' Use of English in Reallife Communication 40
4.2.1. Students' Interest in Using English Language in Real-life
Communication 40
4.2.2 Students' Feeling when Speaking English Out of Classroom Setting 41
4.2.3. Students' Choice between Accuracy and Fluency when They Are
Speaking in English. 42
4.3. Availability of Language Teaching Aids in Schools and the Use of these
Latter to Develop Oral Communicative Skills among E.L. Learners 43
4.3.1. Availability of Audio-visual Equipment in Schools 43
ABSTRACT
French, English and Swahili. On this, the NCS (2005) states that almost all the
residents of the country (99.7%) could speak Kinyarwanda in 2002. French,
English and Swahili were spoken only by 3.9%, 1.9% and 3% of the
population respectively. Among these languages, three are taught from the
Primary to the Tertiary level and they are used as Official Languages.
However, the use of Kinyarwanda in everyday life communication is still at a
high rate even in the intellectual community. This is remarkable in many
secondary schools where foreign languages seem to be used only in
classrooms when dealing with courses designed in those languages. Briefly,
the NCS (op cit.) says that the level of knowledge of foreign languages is far
too low in Rwanda.
As far as English Language is concerned, it is remarkable that there are some
people who are still considering it as a newly-introduced language in Rwanda.
The reason of this may be that there is no long time since the English
Language in Rwanda has been officially promoted after the 1994 Genocide
and the RPF victory. This promotion was mainly due to the coming back of
many Rwandan Refugees from English Language speaking countries. It is
also due to the role of the English Language in the globalisation policy. The
NCS (2005) emphasises this saying that, in this era of globalisation, fluency in
foreign languages (especially the English Language) is vital for easier
exchange of information among countries and for communication with other
nationals.
In addition, when compared with other foreign languages spoken in Rwanda,
English Language is not used by many people. Generally, English is only
used in schools by some school authorities and outside the school by some
businessmen from Anglophone countries. Furthermore, many of these English
Language users in Rwanda do not use it in real communication but, only, in
classes as a subject or a medium of instruction. Therefore, communicatively
unable learners with a mastery of structures are frequent in Rwandan
secondary schools, even in the Literary Option. This may be due to the fact
that teachers focus on teaching only grammar and few other linguistic features
of English language, neglecting oral language skills and their use in real
communication.
According to Ashworth and Wakefield (2005, p.3), A speaker of any
language can create and comprehend a number of utterances that can cover
a multitude of functions such as requesting, refusing, promising, warning,
denying, agreeing, disagreeing, and expressing emotions. In the contrary,
many Rwandan English Language Learners, especially those from the
countryside, use English only when they are in classes and they have no
other opportunity to express their everyday feelings in English but only in their
mother tongue.
Consequently, this weakness in the use of English Language for
communicative purposes can be observed to almost all categories and levels
of learners. Unfortunately, it is the same case for many of the Literary Option
learners whereas they are supposed to be more communicatively competent
than those of professional and science option.
2.1. Introduction
The present study is about the evaluation of communicative competence in
conversational English among English Language Learners in the literary
option. It involves notions such as language, communication, communicative
competence, the language learning and acquisition, and then, it involves
instructional technologies in communicative language teaching. Since the
above notions are almost repeated throughout the whole dissertation, this
chapter enables readers to understand better what each of these issues is
about.
2.2.4.2. Words
DeSantis defines the word as The symbol that stands for the objects or
concepts that it names. (op cit., p.106) He continues saying that a word can
represent an object, as the word chair represents the actual piece of furniture,
or it can represent an abstract concept, as freedom represents the intangible
qualities of self-determination and civil and political liberty.
Words are agreed-upon sound combinations within a language community.
For example, the sounds in the word help constitute a word because English
speakers agree that they do. On the other hand, zelp, while consisting of
common sounds in our language, is not a word because this combination of
sounds does not an agreed-upon meaning. (op cit.)
2.2.4.3. Grammar
While DeSantis (op cit., p.106) defines grammar as Rules that govern how
words are put together to form phrases and sentences, Roberts (1972)
defines grammar as the particular knowledge of how to assemble words in
sentences and how to pronounce these sentences. Therefore, according to
Roberts, saying that a person speaks English is to say that he has built into
him a set of rules that enable him to produce, or generate, English sentences
as he needs them. These rules enable him also to understand the sentences
of another person speaking that language.
He divides grammar into three components. The syntactic component
describes the parts of the sentence and the order in which they are arranged.
The phonological component tells us how the sentence is pronounced. And
then, the semantic component which tells us what the sentence means. (op
cit.)
In addition, Leech and Svartvik (1975, p.23) say that The grammar of spoken
sentences is simpler and less strictly constructed than the grammar of written
sentences. Therefore, since the modern society is in need of people who not
only read English well but also speak it fluently, E.L. learners have to make
any possible effort to increase their knowledge in oral language skills. (op cit.)
2.2.4.4. Meanings
Leech and Svartvik (1975) represent the different types of meaning in four
circles or sections. In the first section, the meaning is referred to as a concept.
Here we find the basic meaning categories like the number, the amount, the
time, the manner, the degree, etc. which identify aspects of our experience of
the world.
The second section represents logical communication where the basic
meaning categories of the first section are used to make judgments about
truth and falsehood, to give and elicit information about the world. It is the
case of categories such as statements, questions and responses, affirmation
and denial, etc.
The third section involves another aspect of communication: the attitudes and
behaviour of the speaker and the hearer. This section involves such speech
acts as commanding, suggesting, advising, threatening, promising, etc. Here
the logical meaning, presented in the second section, is extended or even
distorted to perform a different type of function. For example; a question,
which is logically designed to elicit information on a particular point, is adapted
pragmatically for the purpose of making an offer, making a suggestion, or
expressing a strong feeling.
The fourth section comprises the organisational aspect of communication. The
question here is about how to arrange thoughts and how to bind them
together in order to communicate in most appropriate way. Here it is the
textual or discourse aspect of communication because it concerns the
composition of a whole text not just the way we construct a single sentence.
2.2.5.2. Fluency
For Bailey (2005) fluency is the capacity to speak fluidly, confidently and at a
consistent rate with the norms of the relevant native speech community.
Richards et al (1985, p.107) say that Fluency is the features which give
speech the qualities of being natural and normal, including the use of pausing,
rhythm, intonation, stress, rate of speaking, and use of interjections and
interruptions. They continue saying that Fluency describes a level of
proficiency in communication, which includes:
The ability to speak with a good but not necessarily perfect command of
intonation, vocabulary and grammar;
The ability to communicate ideas effectively;
2.3.2.1. People
Gamble and Gamble (2002) say that the human communication involves
people, and those people are referred to as senders, persons who encode
messages and receivers who decode messages during every communication
event.
According to DeSantis (1999), the communication is made between two sides,
the source and the receiver. For him the source, which is the creator of the
message, performs four roles: determining the meaning of what is to be
communicated, encoding the meaning into the message, sending the
message, and perceiving and reacting to a listener's response to the
message. However, the receiver decodes the messages by analysing and
interpreting them. Then, the receiver has to store and recall the message, and
finally, to respond to the source, message, channel, environment, and noise.
Payne (2001) has also classified this component of communication as
composed of two elements namely, the sender that he considers as the
initiators of the communication and the receiver which he considers as the
target of the communication.
2.3.2.2. Message
According to Gamble and Gamble (2002), the message is referred to as the
content of a communication act. That is what you talk about, the words you
use, the sounds you make, the way you gesture, and your facial expression
during any communication act.
For Payne (2001, p.8), The message is whatever the sender communicates
to the receiver. DeSantis (1999, p.18) adds that A message is a stimulus
produced by the source. It comprises, words, grammar, organization of
thoughts, physical appearance, body movement, aspects of the person's
personality and self-concept, and the personal style
2.3.2.3. Channel
Gamble and Gamble (2002) say that the channel is the medium with and
through which we send and receive messages. The channel may be verbal
and nonverbal. Therefore, we are multichannel communicators because all
our senses can be used as channels of message transmission.
Likewise, Payne (2001, p.8) defines the `channel' as The mean used to
transmit the message from sender to receiver. DeSantis (1999, p.19) adds
that The channel is the route by which messages flow between sources and
receivers. The usual communication channels are light waves and sound
waves, which allow us to see and hear one another.
Similarly to Gamble and Gamble who say that the channel may be verbal and
non-verbal, DeSantis (op cit.) says that smelling, touching and tasting are also
channels through which we receive messages.
2.3.2.4. Noise
Gamble and Gamble (2002, p.9) say that The noise is anything that
interferes with or distorts one's ability to send or receive messages. This is
can be the case for a language learner when he misses proper language to
use for a given situation.
The noise, as an essential of communication, is what Payne (2001) calls
interference. He says that interference is anything which blocks or hinders
the reception of the message or the feedback. He adds that the interference
can possibly arise from the context, the sender, the receiver or the channel.
Similarly to Payne, DeSantis (1999) refers to the noise as interference. That is
anything that changes the meaning of an intended message. He adds that the
interference can be external and physical and/or internal and psychological.
Therefore, DeSantis continues saying that A person who speaks in aloud
voice to get someone's attention may create both physical and psychological
interference. If the receiver perceives the loudness as anger, the loud voice
creates not only a distraction from attending but also a distortion of
interpretation. (op cit., p.19)
2.3.2.5. Context
According to Gamble and Gamble (2002) the context is referred to as the
setting in which communication takes place. This setting may be natural or so
unnatural that it can affect communicators, causing them to alter their posture,
their manner of speaking, attire or means of interacting.
Payne (2001), talking about context, says that all communication occurs in a
specific time and space. He adds that there are social and psychological
aspects of context. Therefore, this has as synonyms, situation, environment,
occasion or setting.
For DeSantis (1999, p.21), The context is the broad circumstances or
situation in which communication occurs.(...) The number of people, the type
of communication, and the situation in which the communication occurs all
lend themselves to the context. Each context affects what we say and how we
say it.
2.3.2.6. Feedback
For Gamble and Gamble (2002), the feedback is referred to as information
returned to a message source. This can be positive feedback when it is
concerned with a behaviour enhancing a response, or negative feedback
when it is concerned with a response that extinguishes behaviour in progress.
The feedback can also be internal or external.
Payne (2001, p.8) defines feedback as The response the sender gets from
the receiver. Similarly, DeSantis (1999) says that the feedback is the
response to a message that a receiver sends back to a source. This enables a
sender to determine whether the message has been received and understood
as intended.
2.3.2.7. Effect
Gamble and Gamble (2002) say that the effect, during the communication
process, is the communication outcome. This means that communication has
always some effects on communicators. The effect can be emotional,
physical, cognitive or any combination of the three.
Therefore, a communicator should always take into account the effect of the
communication he is involved in. Hence, he must avoid everything that may
affect negatively the outcome of his communication. One of what he must
avoid is the bad use of language.
Cognition
Abstraction
Skill-getting Articulation
Production
(or Pseudo- Construction
Communication)
Reception Motivation to
Skill-using Interaction communicate
Expression
Source: Rivers (1983, p.43)
For Rivers, the ability to communicate, to interact verbally, presumes some
knowledge (cognition) both in the perception of units, categories, and
functions and in the internalizing of the rules relating to them. (It is a process
of abstraction). He adds that students learn to produce language sequences,
which means that they learn through doing. Then, to use the skill he has
already got, the learner must interact with other language users. Therefore,
through interaction he expresses himself and shows his ability to receive the
message from his interlocutor, and this enhances motivation to communicate.
(op cit)
the stimulus to the child's utterance is the desire to have a drink, he knows
that the form of his utterance has proved acceptable if the drink is provided.
(op cit.)
In a word, the language acquisition is a long process through which a child, at
his early age, acquires a language by relating his innate linguistic capacity to
the features of the language being used in the community he grows in. This
capacity for acquiring language is what Littlewood (1984) describes using the
term `Language Acquisition Device' often shortened to LAD.
2.5.3.1. Speaking
According to Ur (2002), speaking seems intuitively the most important of all
the four language skills. That is, people who know a language are referred to
as speakers of that language and many of most foreign language learners
are primarily interested in learning to speak.
Ur provides characteristics of a successful speaking activity as follows:
1. Learners talk a lot. As much as possible of the period of time allotted to
the activity is in fact occupied by learner talk. This may seem obvious, but
often most time is taken up with teacher talk or pauses.
2. Participation is even: Classroom discussion is not dominated by a
minority of talkative participants: all get chance to speak, and contributions are
fairly evenly distributed
3. Motivation is high: Learners are eager to speak: because they are
interested in the topic and have something new to speak about it, or because
they want to contribute to achieving a task objective.
4. Language is of an acceptable level: Learners express themselves in
utterances that are relevant, easily comprehensible to each other, and of an
acceptable level of language accuracy. (op cit., p.120)
In addition to these characteristics of successful speaking, he provides also a
list of four problems related to speaking activities:
1. Inhibition
Unlike reading, writing and listening activities, speaking requires some degree
of real-time exposure to an audience. Learners are often inhibited about trying
to say things in a foreign language in the classroom: worried about making
mistakes, fearful of criticism or losing face, or simply shy of the attention that
their speech attract.
2. Nothing to say
Even if they are not inhibited, you often hear learners complain that they
cannot think of anything to say: they have no motive to express themselves
beyond the guilty feeling that they should be speaking.
3. Low or uneven participation
Only one participant can talk at a time if he or she is to be heard, and in large
group this means each one will have only very little talk time. This problem is
2.5.3.2. Listening
According to Gamble and Gamble (2002, p.193), Listening is a deliberate
process through which we seek to understand and retain aural stimuli. Unlike
hearing, listening depends on a complex set of skills that must be acquired.
They also propose a scale that illustrates the listening levels-energy.
Figure 3: The scale of listening levels-energy
Listening to help others
Active(emphatic listening)
Listening to analyse and generate content
Listening to retain content
Listening to understand content
Hearing
Theatre show
Instructions
Telephone chat
Loudspeaker announcement
Lesson, lecture
Radio news
Conversation, gossip
Committee meeting
Watching television
Shopping
Story-telling
For Lonergan (1984, p.118), The term `hardware' is used to refer to the
machinery itself: the video recorder, the television set, and so on. Then,
materials are referred to as the software designed for language teaching
purposes and which are made active or productive when used with
appropriate equipment. That is why Lonergan (op cit., p.118) says,
The software is what is needed to make the hardware function. In the case of
video recorder, the software is the video tape.
2.6.4. Computer
Computer is the most important pieces of equipment of all instructional
technologies in that it can accomplish almost all tasks that should
accomplished by other audio and/or video teaching aids. Therefore, computer
can be used in various areas of language teaching process such as listening
comprehension, speaking, writing, vocabulary, and phonetics. Talking about
computer and teaching phonetics, for example, Leech and Candlin (1984),
cited in Muvandimwe (2005, p.20), gives reasons for using computer in
phonetics teaching:
First, the subject can be taught more effectively with a computer than
without;
Second, it is actually jolly good fun, and makes teaching more enjoyable
and more interesting than it was before;
Innovation and increased efficiency are essential if phonetics is to maintain
its position in linguistics and language teaching.
In addition, they argue that it is no doubt that Computer Assisted Language
Learning (CALL) is the lure which has attracted the ELT professions to the
computer for it processes information quickly. (op cit.) Furthermore,
Muvandimwe (op cit., p.10) citing Merril (1986) says that Some programs on
computer are designed to aid students in their use of subject matter.
Therefore, schools, especially those concerned much with language teaching,
should manage to bring some of computer programs designed for teaching
and learning language.
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
3.1. Introduction
The third chapter of this study describes the methods, and procedures used
by the researcher throughout the study. As it is said by Baily in Ndikubwimana
(2005), there are different methods of collecting data and they differ from one
to another. Therefore, the chapter discussed the design of the study, area of
the study, population of the study, sample and sampling techniques,
instruments of data collection, validity of the instrument, method of data
collection, method of data analysis, and limitations of the study.
3.2. Design of the Study
Hutton (1990, p.8) cited in Blaxter, Hughes, and Tight (2001, p.77) says that
Survey research... is the method of collecting information by asking a set of
pre-formulated questions in predetermined sequence in a structured
questionnaire to a sample of individuals drawn so as to be representative of a
defined population.
Then, Rosier (1988, p.107) cited in Blaxter, Hughes, and Tight (op cit., p.77),
says that Survey research in education involves the collection of information
from members of a group of students, teachers, or other persons associated
with educational process, and the analysis of this information illuminates
important educational issues
Therefore, this research was a survey study since it is concerned with the
exploration of the extent to which English language learners, in secondary
schools' letters option, are communicatively competent and the factors that
influence their competence in communicative English language.
3.3. Area of the Study
To achieve the objectives of this study the researcher decided to conduct the
research in secondary schools having the letters option. However, the study
was not done on all those schools in Rwanda, but in those located in Rusizi
and Nyamasheke districts. These districts are located in the Southern West of
Rwanda and they have four schools with letters option namely. Those are:
Collge de NKANKA, E.S.TYAZO, E.S.RANGIRO, and G.S.KARENGERA.
The table below shows these schools and their locations.
Table 1: Schools used in the research
Names of schools
Sector
District
Nkanka
E.S.RANGIRO
Nyamasheke Rangiro
E.S.TYAZO
Nyamasheke Kanjongo
G.S.KARENGERA
Nyamasheke Kirimbi
Collge de NKANKA
95
96
E.S.RANGIRO
40
41
E.S.TYAZO
103
104
G.S.KARENGERA
128
129
TOTAL
366
370
The table below shows the number of students, in the literary option of
schools concerned with the study, according to their respective classes.
Table 3: The number of students who make the population according to
their classes
Classes
Schools
Collge de NKANKA
57
38
95
E.S.RANGIRO
14
26
40
E.S.TYAZO
22
37
44
103
G.S.KARENGERA
40
38
50
128
TOTAL
133
139
94
366
Number of students
38
20
21
E.S.RANGIRO
26
14
15
E.S.TYAZO
37
19
20
G.S.KARENGERA
38
20
21
TOTAL
139
73
77
Many Students thought that responding to the questionnaire and doing the
test were tasks which they would be paid for. Therefore, the researcher
managed to explain them that the indirect benefit they would get from the
completion of this study is greater and more durable than the direct one.
CHAPTER FOUR: DATA PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND
INTERPRETATION
4.1. Introduction
This chapter deals with the presentation of data, the analysis and the
interpretation of findings. It presents the data from respondents collected
through questionnaires and the test. The questionnaires targeted respectively
students and English Teachers in the literary option whereas the test targeted
students only. Therefore, some of tables illustrate findings from both teachers
and students while others illustrate those from students only. Then, all the
headings and subheadings that make this chapter are structured according to
the questionnaire items and the distribution of results from the test among
different groups of student who have sat for it.
Answers from respondents were used to, both, answer to the research
questions and test the hypotheses of the research. For the sake of clarity and
simplicity, it is to be mentioned that percentages were presented in the tables
as they were exactly calculated but, for decimal numbers, only one decimal
was presented while the following ones were rounded up. For instance,
instead of writing 16.43836 % and 60.27397%, they were rounded and,
therefore, 16.4 % and 60.3 % respectively were written.
4.2. Teachers and Students' Views on E.L. Learners' Use of English in
Real-life Communication
As far as the students' use of English in real-life communication is concerned,
the researcher focused on investigating the following points: the extent to
which students are interested in using English in real-life communication, how
they feel when speaking English outside the classroom and what they
consider more important; either accuracy, fluency or the mixture of the both
when they are speaking.
4.2.1. Students' Interest in Using English Language in Real-life
Communication
To be communicatively competent, E.L. learner should be sufficiently
interested in using English in his everyday-life communication. Therefore, the
following table illustrates the extent to which E.L. learners are found interested
in using English to communicate.
Table 5: Students' interest in using E.L. in real-life communication
Students
Answers
Teachers
12
16.4
Often
13
17.8
Sometimes
42
57.5
100
Rarely
6.9
Never
1.4
Total
73
100
Answers
Teachers
Number of
respondents
Percentage
(%)
Number of
respondents
Percentage
(%)
They feel
proud
44
60.3
29
39.7
100
Total
73
100
100
As it is shown in table 6, 60.3% of students said that they feel proud when
speaking English out of classroom setting while 39.7% represent the number
of students who are shy. On the other side, a hundred percent of teachers
confirmed that students feel shy when they are speaking English out side of
classroom. This contradiction between students and teachers' answers should
be due to the fact that some students did not want to reveal their weakness
especially thinking that their schools would be negatively criticized thereafter.
Then, relying much on the teachers' assertion, one can say that students are
generally shy when using English outside the classroom. This observation
relates to `problems with speaking activities' stated by Ur (2002). These
Answers
Teachers
Number of
respondents
Percentage
(%)
Number of
respondents
Percentage
(%)
Accuracy
32
43.8
100
Fluency
10
13.7
31
42.5
Total
73
100
100
The table 7 above presented shows that 43.8% of students prefer to be more
accurate than fluent in their speech. However, a small percentage of 13.7
represent the number of students who prefer to be more fluent than accurate
in their speech. Then, 42.5% of students said that both accuracy and fluency
are the main goals in their speech. On the other side, a hundred percent of
teachers said that all students consider much more accuracy than fluency
when they speak. The fact that there is a small number of students who
regard fluency as an element of great importance in their speech allows the
researcher to confirm that students' communicative competence in
conversational English is low. This point of view goes hand in hand with that
of Richards et al (1985, p.107) who say that Fluency is the features which
give speech the qualities of being natural and normal, including the use of
pausing, rhythm, intonation, stress, rate of speaking, and use of interjections
and interruptions.
4.3. Availability of Language Teaching Aids in Schools and the Use of
these Latter to Develop Oral Communicative Skills among E.L. Learners
Talking about the language teaching aids, the researcher wanted to know the
extent to which schools access on audio-visual equipment, how schools use
this equipment and the extent to which teachers and students judge audiovisual equipment important in E.L. teaching.
4.3.1. Availability of Audio-visual Equipment in Schools
Students
Teachers
Equipment
Radio
56
76.7
100
Video player
55
75.3
75
CD player
37
50.7
Computer
58
79.5
75
A glance at the above table shows that 76.7 % of students and 100% of
English teachers agreed that their schools own radio cassette player. In
addition 75.3% of the students and 75% of teachers confirmed that video
player is available in their schools. Then, only 50.7% of students said that CD
player can be found in their schools. Moreover, 79.5% of students and 75% of
teachers stated that their schools own computers. However, no English
teacher agreed that CD player is available in his school. The reasons for this
may be that they are not interested in using such equipment, hence they
cannot know whether they are available or not.
In this light, it is clear that all schools own sufficient audio-visual teaching aids.
This sufficient ownership of the teaching aids should result in students'
sufficient practice of English language for communicative purposes. These
findings go hand in hand with the idea of Locatis and Atkinson (1984) who say
that audio media such as radio, record player and tape recorder are available
in most households and many people have sophisticated audio equipment in
their homes. However, the potential of audio media as an educational tool is
too seldom realised. Therefore, it is worth knowing whether the available
equipment is used for language teaching purposes.
4.3.2. Schools' Use of Audio-visual Equipment in E.L. Teaching and
Learning
As all schools do not access on audio-visual equipment, all schools that have
that access do not use this equipment in language teaching purposes.
Therefore, the table below shows the extent to which schools use audio-visual
equipment in language teaching purposes. .
Table 9: The E.L. teachers' use of audio-visual equipment in teaching
Answer Yes
frequency
Students
Teachers
Equipment
Radio
37
50.7
50
Video player
11
CD player
8.2
Computer
16
21.9
The above table shows that 50.7% of students and 50% of English teachers
said that radio is used for English language teaching purposes. 11% of
students asserted that video player is really used. Then, only 8.2% of students
said that CD player is used. Moreover, 21.9% of students responded that
computer is sometimes used for E.L. teaching purposes.
No English teacher said that Video player, CD player and computer are used
for E.L. teaching purpose while some students responded `yes'. The reason
for this may be that students use this equipment outside English class in their
spare time for example or in other courses. However, this poor use of audiovisual equipment in language teaching is very dangerous in development of
students' communicative competence in conversational English. This is not far
from the writings of Lonergan (1984) saying that with video player, the
combination of sounds and vision is dynamic, immediate and accessible.
Therefore, the communication can be shown in a context and various features
of communicative language can be perceived easily by the learner. Then, it is
to wonder whether both teachers and students are aware of the importance of
using audio-visual equipment in language teaching.
4.3.3. Importance of Using Audio-visual Equipment in E.L. Teaching and
Learning
Students and teachers do not have the same view on the importance of using
audio-visual equipment in English teaching and learning process. The
following table shows the level at which students and teachers agree that
using audio-visual equipment in E.L. teaching is important.
Table 10: The importance of using audio-visual equipment in E.L.
teaching and learning
Students
Answers
Teachers
Number of
respondents
Percentage
(%)
Number of
respondents
Percentage
(%)
Strongly Agree
32
43.8
100
Agree
25
34.3
Disagree
13
17.8
Strongly
Disagree
4.1
Total
73
100
100
From the result of this table, it is clearly shown that 43.8% of students and
100% of English teachers strongly agreed that audio-visual equipment is of a
paramount importance in E.L. teaching/ learning process. Only 34.3% of
students agreed with this assertion. Conversely, 17.8% of students disagreed
and only 4.1% of students strongly disagreed that audio-visual equipment is
important in E.L. teaching/learning process.
Writing
Reading
Speaking
Listening
Respondents %
Respondents %
Respondents %
Respondents %
Always
17
23.3
17
23.3
9.6
Often
24
32.9
17
23.3
13
17.8
12.3
Sometimes
25
34.2
24
32.9
30
41.1
4.1
Rarely
5.5
13
17.8
16
21.9
47
64.4
Never
4.1
2.7
9.6
14
19.2
Total
73
100
73
100
73
100
73
100
The table above shows that 23.3% of respondents agreed that their teachers
always emphasise writing skill in E.L. teaching process. 32.9% said that
writing is often emphasised, 34.2% confirmed that it is sometimes
emphasised. However, 5.5% said that writing is rarely emphasised while 4.1%
responded that writing is never emphasised. As far as reading is concerned,
23.3% of respondents agreed that reading is always emphasised by their
teachers. The same percentage said that reading is often emphasised. In the
same way 32.9% confirmed that reading is sometimes emphasised.
Conversely, 17.8% said that it is rarely emphasised and only 2.7% said that
reading is never emphasised in E.L. teaching/learning process.
Concerning speaking skill, 9.6% of respondents said that speaking is always
emphasised and 17.8% confirmed that it is often emphasised. A great
percentage of 41.1% confirmed that it is sometimes emphasised in their
language learning. On the contrary, 21.9% responded that speaking is rarely
emphasised and 9.6% answered that speaking is never emphasised in E.L.
teaching/learning process. For the listening skill, 12.3% said that it is often
emphasised and 4.1% said that it is sometimes emphasised in their language
Reading
Speaking
Listening
Respondents %
Respondents %
Respondents %
Respondents %
Always
50
25
Often
25
25
Sometimes 1
25
50
75
Rarely
25
100
Never
Total
100 4
Skills
Frequency
100 4
100 4
100
From the results of this table 50% of respondents agreed that they always
emphasise writing skill in E.L. teaching process. 25% said that writing is often
emphasised, 25% confirmed that it is sometimes emphasised. As far as
reading is concerned, 25% of respondents agreed that reading is always
emphasised. The same percentage said that reading is often emphasised. In
the same way 50% confirmed that reading is sometimes emphasised.
Concerning speaking skill, a great percentage of 75% confirmed that it is
sometimes emphasised in their language teaching. On the contrary, 25%
responded that speaking is rarely emphasised. As far as listening skill is
concerned, 100% of E.L. teachers said that it is rarely emphasised in their
language teaching process.
From the findings in table 11 and table 12, it is clear that the most emphasised
skills are writing and reading while speaking and listening are neglected. This
implies that students' communicative competence in conversational English
cannot be well developed.
4.4.2. The Frequency at which a Lesson on Oral Skills Is Planned
The researcher wanted to know the extent to which the lesson on oral skills is
prepared and taught by E.L. teachers. Therefore, the following table shows
the time during which E.L. learners have the lesson on oral skills.
Table 13: The frequency at which oral skills are taught
Students
Answers
Teachers
9.6
Often
11
Sometimes
25
34.2
50
Rarely
22
30.1
50
Never
11
15.1
Total
73
100
100
The above table reveals that 9.6% of students confirmed that they have
always a lesson on oral skills. 11% said that they have such lesson is often
given. In the same way, a great percentage of students and teachers said that
the lesson on oral skills is sometimes given. That is 34.2% for students and
50% for teachers. Nevertheless, 30.1% of students and 50% of English
teachers answered that the lesson on oral skills is rarely planned. 15.1%
remaining students said that a lesson on oral skills is never given.
In fact, taking into consideration the importance of oral skills in developing
students' communicative competence, insufficient frequency of planning a
lesson on oral skills may result in serious problem to the development of
communicative competence in conversational English. This is not in disparity
with the findings of Ur (2002) who says that speaking seems intuitively the
most important of all the four skills. That is, people who know a language are
referred to as `speakers' of that language.
4.4.3. Emphasis on either Speaking or Listening in E.L. Teaching and
Learning
A language teacher may be interested in developing his students' oral skills
but have difficulty to balance the emphasis to be given to each of these skills.
That is why the table below is used to show the emphasis on either speaking
or listening in E.L. teaching and learning process.
Table 14: Emphasis on either speaking or listening in E.L. teaching and
learning
Students
Respondents
Answers
Teachers
Speaking
41
56.1
100
listening
21
28.8
None of them
11
15.1
Total
73
100
100
The above table shows that 56.1% of students and 100% of teachers said that
speaking is emphasized. 28.8% of students agreed that listening is more
emphasised than speaking. Contrary to this, 15.1% of students said that none
of both speaking and listening is emphasized in E.L. teaching/learning
process.
This cannot help in developing communicative competence because the latter
involves the development of both proactive and receptive skills. In this light,
emphasizing speaking which is one of the productive skills, and ignoring or
neglecting listening which is one of receptive skills, is a serious problem in
language learning for communicative purposes. In this way, these findings
derive support from Byrne (1976) who states that oral communication is a two
way process between speaker and listener involving the productive skills of
speaking and receptive skills of understanding
F % F
Instructional aids
25
3 75 -
National exams
100
100
The following table shows the mean and the standard deviation calculated
from the students' marks in the test. Then, these marks are used to illustrate
the students' ability to use E.L. in everyday-life communication considering
different categories in which they are; that is, the category of sex, that of
residence area, and the one based on students' family level of literacy.`
Table 16: The mean of students' marks from the test
Marks obtained by students out of
20 (x)
fx
21
28
45
15
90
49
32
54
10
60
12
36
16
16
Total
N = 73
fx =
443
Mean ( )
=
= 6.1
The table 16 shows the mean calculated from the students' results is 6.1.
Knowing that the test has been done out of 20, the calculated mean is very
low. This implies that these students do not use English language in real-life
communicational context such as in friendly communication. It is worth to
mention that this poor communicative competence is due to various factors;
but to be clear and concise, the researcher wanted to find out different factors
which might influence the students' ability to use English in situations related
to friendly communication. These factors are the following: sex, students'
residence area and their family literacy.
4.5.1. Sex and Students' Ability to Use E.L. in Their Everyday-life
Communication
The table below shows the mean and the standard deviation calculated from
marks obtained respectively by female and male students who sat for the test.
Table 17: The mean of female and male students' marks
Sex of students N Mean
Female students 21
6.8
Male students
5.8
52
The table 16 reveals that the mean calculated from 21 female students' results
is 6.8. On the contrary, the mean calculated from 52 male students' results is
5.8. From these findings, it is to be mentioned that neither female nor male
students are communicatively competent in conversational English because
none of these groups got the mean of 10 out of 20. However, a significant
difference exists between the mean of female students and that of male
students who sat for the test.
Even though there is no clear reason for this difference between girls and
boys' results in the test, one can try to guess the reason: It may be that a
great number of boys who did the test do not like to use English when
conversing with their friends. They may have difficult to find particular words
or phrases to use appropriately to a given situation or context. This is so
because boys like freedom more than girls. Boys may like to speak paying
less attention on the appropriateness of their speech. Therefore, the
researcher has the reason to reject the first hypothesis saying that Sex is not
a significant factor influencing E.L. learners' communicative competence in
conversational English.
4.5.2. Students' Residence Area and Their Ability to Use E.L. in their
Everyday-life Communication
The following table shows the mean and the standard deviation calculated
from marks obtained respectively by students from rural residence area and
those from urban residence area.
Table 18: The mean of students' marks according to their residence area
Students' residence area N Mean
Rural residence area
43
30
6.2
The above table shows that the mean calculated from the results of 43
students from rural areas, is 6. However, the mean calculated from the results
of 30 students from urban areas, is 6. A glance at these findings allows the
researcher to say that there is no significant difference between students from
rural areas and those from urban areas in using English in real-life
communication. This assertion is proved by the fact that none of these two
groups got 10 out of 20.
This poor communicative competence between both students from urban
areas and those from rural areas is a serious problem which may be due to
the fact that all of them find it easier to communicate through the mother
tongue that to use English. However, students from urban areas should be
more communicative competence in conversational English than counterparts
because they have some facilities that should enable them to overcome this
problem. For example, those facilities are: they frequently encounter people
who do not use Kinyarwanda to communicate, they have sufficient access on
radio, television and video in their homes, and they can use these series of
equipment for language learning; many of them may have also learning
evening programmes where they speak English their home tutors. Hence,
relying on these findings, the second hypothesis is retained. It says that
There is no significant difference of communicative competence in
conversational English between E.L. learners from rural area and those from
urban area.
4.5.3. Students' Family Literacy and their Ability to Use E.L. in Their
Everyday-life Communication
The following table shows the mean and the standard deviation calculated
from marks obtained by students from families with different levels of literacy.
Table 19: The mean of students' marks according to their families'
literacy
The level of students' family literacy
N Mean
7.3
52
6.5
23
4.5
The above table shows that 29 students whose families have at least one
person who attended university or any other educational institution, got the
mean of 7.3. Then, 52 students whose families have at least one person who
finished the secondary school have the mean of 6.5. Finally, 23 students from
families where all other members finished the primary school only, have the
mean of 4.5.
From these results, it is worth to mention that the level of literacy in students'
families is an important factor that influences students' communicative
competence in conversational English. That is why the third hypothesis i
rejected. It says that There is no significant relationship between family
literacy and E.L. learners' communicative competence in conversational
English.
4.6. Summary of the Chapter
The fourth chapter, which is the core of this study, is concerned with the
presentation, analysis and interpretation of research data. Through this
chapter the emphasis was put on checking whether E.L. learners are
communicatively competent in conversational English.
In this regard, the researcher wanted to check the extent to which learners
use English in real-life communication. He wanted also to show the impact of
teachers' use of teaching aids on the learners' communicative competence in
conversational English.
Then, he tried to exhibit the language skills that are given much emphasis by
teachers and some of the factors that influence them in choosing skills to
insist on. Finally, it was noticed that E.L. learners do not generally use E.L. in
friendly communication whatever is the group of sex they belong to, their
residence area and the level of their family literacy.
CHAPTER FIVE: GENERAL CONCLUSION, RECOMMENDATIONS AND
SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER STUDIES.
The preceding chapter has dealt with the presentation, analysis and
interpretation of the data obtained from students and English teachers in
schools with the literary option in Rusizi and Nyamasheke districts. Then, this
chapter is going to deal with conclusion, recommendations and suggestions
for future researches.
5.1. General Conclusion
The main goal of this work was to evaluate the communicative competence in
conversational English among English Language Learners in the Literary
Option. To have this goal reached, two instruments for data collection: the
questionnaire and the test were resorted to. As far as data analysis is
concerned, specific software such as EPIDATA and SPSS designed for data
analysis have been used based on the responses provided by the research
informants, that is, by both students and English teachers.
Through the respondents' answers this study revealed that students are not
interested in using E.L. in real-life communication. The reason for this may be
that students have no motivation in using foreign languages in general and
English in particular. This relates also to the fact that many students feel shy
when using English outside the classroom. All these imply that many students
have poor communicative competence in conversational English which is also
due to their choice of accuracy by ignoring fluency which is, instead, an
important component of an effective oral communication.
In addition, from the findings of this study, it was noticed that all schools own
audio-visual teaching aids but teachers do not resort to them for E.L. teaching
purposes. However, both students and teachers are aware of a paramount
importance of using audio-visual equipment in E.L. teaching/learning in order
to develop communicative competence in conversational English.
Furthermore, it was found that writing and reading are the most emphasised
skills in E.L. teaching/learning process while speaking and listening are
neglected. This may be caused by the way English national exams are
constructed; that is, these exams have nothing to do with students'
competence in oral skills. Then, teachers are not familiar with language
teaching aids designed for oral skills development.
Finally, students' poor communicative competence is shown by their failing
marks in the test on their ability to use English in friendly communication.
Then, it was found that sex and students residence area are not significant
factors to students' communicative competence. However, the level of literacy
in students' families influences significantly the students' communicative
competence in conversational English.
5.2. Recommendations
After having drawn the conclusion of this study's findings, it is worth making
some recommendations to different educational stakeholders in order to help
secondary school students in general and particularly those of the literary
option; improve their communicative competence in conversational English in
case the made recommendations are taken into account. In this light, the
following recommendations are addressed to the Ministry of Education, the
National Curriculum Development Centre (NCDC), the National Examination
Council (NEC), school leaders and E.L. teachers.
5.2.1. To the Ministry of Education and the NCDC