The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/1175-8708.htm

ETPC
14,2

Teaching spoken English in
Iran’s private language schools:
issues and options

210

Karim Sadeghi
Urmia University, Urmia, Iran, andReceived 15 March 2015
Revised 5 July 2015
Accepted 5 July 2015

Jack C. Richards
University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
Abstract
Purpose – Mastery of spoken English is a priority for many learners of English in Iran. Opportunities
to acquire spoken English through the public school system are very limited, hence many students
enroll in “conversation” courses in private institutes. The purpose of this paper is to report a study of
how institute teachers address the teaching of spoken English.
Design/methodology/approach – Eighty-nine teachers completed a questionnaire on how theyteach spoken English. The information was supplemented with interviews and classroom observation.
Findings – Results suggest that institute courses reflect a poor understanding of the nature of spoken
interaction, which is reflected in speaking courses that are unfocused and that do not address key
aspects of conversational interaction.
Practical implications – Suggestions are given for a re-examination of the differences between“conversation” and “discussion” in spoken English classes as the basis for designing spoken English
classes and materials, as well as for the use of out-of-class learning opportunities to enhance the learningof spoken English in Iran and elsewhere.
Originality/value – This paper is based on the authors’ original research, and the authors believe thisis the first study of its kind in the Iranian context.
Keywords English teaching, Curriculum English, Spoken English, Training speaking teachers,
Teaching speaking, English in IranPaper type Research paper

1. Introduction
The ability to use English for spoken communication is one of the main reasons many
people around the world study English, and like people in other countries, Iranianlearners often evaluate their success in language learning, as well as the effectiveness of
their English course, on the basis of how well they feel they have improved in theirspoken-language proficiency. The role of English as an international language meansthat more and more people today find that fluency in spoken English is a necessity forsocial purposes, for travel, for work, for business or for education. The way spoken
English is used in these different situations is both varied and complex, and the ability
to function well in one situation (e.g. buying things in a store) does not necessarily
English Teaching: Practice &transfer to other situations (e.g. taking part in casual conversation). However, in
CritiqueVol. 14 No. 2, 2015
language classrooms, the teaching of speaking skills has often misrepresented thepp. 210-234© Emerald Group Publishing Limited nature of spoken English and spoken interaction, and, as a result, speaking classes are
1175-8708
DOI 10.1108/ETPC-03-2015-0019
most often little more than unfocussed discussion sessions, with little real teaching ofwhat oral proficiency in spoken English entails. This paper explores issues involved inteaching English in the Iranian context, and offers suggestion to improve approaches tothe teaching of spoken English. By so doing, the authors suggest that in Iran, “spoken
English” is generally identified with only one aspect of spoken English, namely,“discussion skills”. However the nature of discussion skills themselves has been poorly
articulated and understood, resulting in generations of teachers who have little
understanding either of what “speaking” consists or what “discussion skills” and“conversation” are, whether they need to be taught, and, if so, how they can be taught.
The first issue to be resolved therefore is to determine what aspects of spoken English
learners most need to master, whether it be small talk, casual conversation, telephone
conversations, transactions, discussions, interviews, meetings, presentations ordebates. Iranian professionals whose work takes them abroad, for example, will havevery different needs for spoken English from learners who want to learn spoken English
for purposes of tourism and travel or for arranging business transactions in English.
The Common European Framework of Reference identifies very different learning
outcomes for different genres of spoken interaction such as these.
2. Learning English in IranAs in other countries where English has the status of a foreign language, the demand forlearning English has greatly increased in Iran in recent years, as the importance ofEnglish has been acknowledged both at the national as well as the individual level. Thisis seen in the growth of the private language institute industry. In Urmia (the capital cityof West Azerbaijan province), for example, there are more than 50 private language
schools offering English courses at various levels and for various age groups (Sadeghi
and Richards, 2015). Learners attend English classes for a variety of reasons. For someyounger learners, it may be merely to follow the trend and they may have no immediate
practical need for spoken English. However, it represents a valued “idea” for them, andas their parents pay for the costs involved, they need not take it too seriously. A different
group of learners in the private sector are those who have a practical need for proficiency
in English. University students, for example, may take English classes to better preparethem for their university examinations or to prepare themselves for MA or PhD entrance
examinations. Some working adults may take English classes primarily to obtain acertificate of attendance, which can then be used for promotion purposes at work. Their
motivation to master a high level of proficiency in English may be relatively low due towork and family commitments as well as the fact that they may have had little contact
with English since high school and may find it difficult to move beyond thefalse-beginner level.
A third group of learners are those with a real desire to learn spoken English.
Members of this group include learners who may hope to work abroad or to live in an
English-speaking country as well those who have a strong personal interest in speaking
English. Others may be studying English to prepare them for international tests such as
IELTS and TOEFL or simply to improve their spoken English or their general level ofproficiency in English.
3. Opportunities to learn English
In an ideal world, learners aiming to develop their proficiency in spoken English would
take part in activities that systematically develop their understanding and use of spoken

Teaching
spokenEnglish
211

ETPC
14,2

212

English, as it is used for both transactional and interactional purposes. To do so, theircourses and course materials would provide opportunities to develop and practice avariety of different kinds of oral skills. Teachers teaching spoken English classes would
have a sound knowledge of the nature of communicative competence and the use ofcommunicative classroom activities, and learners would be motivated to practice theirspoken English skills both inside and outside of the classroom. In Iran, however, anumber of factors mitigate against the successful teaching of spoken English. These
include issues related to the curriculum and materials for teaching English, teacher
competence as well as the limitations of classroom-based learning.
Opportunities to learn English in Iran are provided in both the state educational
system as well as in the private sector. In the official curriculum of public education,
English is listed as one of the required courses for middle and high school levels (www.
talif.sch.ir). Students in middle and high schools take between two and four hours ofEnglish each week. The current “revised” syllabus used in public education aims tomove beyond a focus on reading skills and to develop basic English proficiency;
however, the course materials at middle school primarily address alphabet recognition,
pronunciation and limited vocabulary development, while those used at high school
continue to focus on reading comprehension, grammar and vocabulary development,with little emphasis on writing beyond de-contextualized sentence practice. Listening isalmost absent in the syllabus, and speaking is limited to a few drills (mainly intended topractice grammar) and short dialogues to introduce language functions. Consequently,
after six years of English instruction, unless students have taken additional courses in a
private institute, they normally have minimal communication skills in English. It is not
an exaggeration to claim that an Iranian student who graduates from high school (andwho has not attended any courses outside the formal education system) is hardly able tointroduce himself or herself in English or to express or understand more than a few
simple sentences, despite having studied English at school for at least six years (Ettelaat
Daily, 2011; Dorshomal et al., 2013). Discussing the problems of teaching English at
Iranian state schools in her Ettelaat Daily report, the author (Zahra Bagheri Shad) rightly
claims that the output of the Ministry of Education is so weak in foreign (English)
language education that a graduating student can hardly write a short letter. One of theauthor’s firsthand experience teaching at such schools attests to the reality that almost
no written/oral proficiency is gained by school students towards the end of their formal
school education unless they take English lessons outside the school system, which isincreasingly the case nowadays.
To develop practical skills in English, many young people take courses in private
institutes. Textbooks used in institutes are often locally printed and are unauthorizedversions of popular international courses such as Headway or Interchange [whatZandian (2015, p. 113) calls “pirated American ELT textbooks”]. In addition to studying
English at institutes, some parents employ private tutors to teach their children at home.
However, the complaint that one often hears from students attending courses in private
institutes is that while they expect to learn English (i.e. to learn how to “speak” English,
as Mirhosseini and Khodakarami (2015) claim), they are mainly taught grammar andvocabulary and take part in activities that do not develop their spoken English skills.
Razmjoo and Riazi’s (2006) study with 17 classes in five institutes in Shiraz, for example,
indicated that only less than 14 per cent of average English conversation classroom time
was spent on speaking, and the rest of the time was devoted to other skills and sub-skills,

including reading, writing, vocabulary, grammar and so on. Indeed, as Mirhosseini and
Khodakarami (2015) highlight, private language directors believe that they arepreparing their clients for English communication, without having a clear
understanding of what communication in English means.
Most classes in institutes are held in traditional classrooms where seats are arranged
in a linear format with students sitting back-to-face, with the teacher’s desk in a front
corner. When the number of students is fewer than 10, seats are often circular orrectangular (meeting-like). Almost all classes are equipped with a whiteboard; mosthave TV and video/CD-player facilities; a very limited number of institutes have accessto computers, the Internet, intelligent whiteboards and language laboratories.
(Language labs are generally found in universities or institutes of higher education
offering English programmes). In small cities, language schools use chalk boards and aportable CD player.
The teachers who teach “speaking” classes have typically received little training inwhat proficiency in spoken English entails and in how to teach an effective spoken
English course. Students often report that in such classes, they receive similar kinds oflessons to those encountered in high school, and many move from one institute toanother to find courses that will improve their spoken English. At most, they might beplaced in a “free discussion class”, the characteristics of which are similar to thosedescribed by House (2012, p. 198):
What thus often happens in secondary and tertiary education contexts is the incidental,
non-explicit teaching of oral skills, for instance, in so-called conversation classes. These
classes are often organized in a series of discussion groups with the structure of the course
being determined by the topics which are handled in turn. These are generally matters ofmoment, taken from newspapers, magazines, and other sources, and it is hoped that the input
materials will somehow generate interest and “engagement”, thus stimulating good
[discussions]. This model […] is of limited effectiveness in terms of improving oral skills.

The following is a segment of a longer speaking class we observed in a language
institute and is typical of the approach to “speaking” that House refers to. The classconsisted of 12 male students aged 14-16. The teacher started by drawing an “idea-map”
on the board. She drew a circle in the middle of the board and asked students to suggest
topics for discussion. Eventually the topic of “interests” was elicited and the teacher
provided prompts such as “I’m into […]”, “I’m interested in […]” and “I really like […]”.
The extract below is an example of the interaction between the teacher and the students:
T: What are the things and activities you like the best in your life?
S1: Different sports.
S2: I Like music.
S3: Music and sports are my favourites.
T: Which sports are interesting?
S4: Football is perfect because it is exciting.
S5: Basketball because it needs different skills.
T: What’s your idea about science?
S5: I hate science because it’s tiresome.

Teaching
spokenEnglish
213

ETPC
14,2

S6: Science can help us to get a job and make money.
S7: We can make money by other ways, for example painting.
S8: But painting is hard to learn but science is not.
T: Ok, so you think science is good as a profession. But what about science as a hobby (e.g.
reading scientific news or surfing the net for new discoveries in science).

214

S9: I prefer to read about other things such celebrities.
S10: Sometime it’s good to read scientific news.
S11: I like to read about science when there are a lot of pictures about it.

As House observes, it is difficult to see how activities of this kind can lead to
improvement in oral skills. Indeed they do little more than develop vocabulary.
4. The English teaching profession
English teachers in Iran can be categorized into four groups depending on the nature of
their duties:(1) those teaching at state schools;(2) those teaching at private institutes (also known as language centres);(3) those teaching at universities and other institutes of higher education; and(4) those teaching privately.
Many university and school teachers also teach private English classes; however, there
are a sizable number of teachers who work only in institutes or privately.
4.1 Teachers in state schools
Teachers in the state school system are employed by the Ministry of Education andteach general English at middle and high schools. Most of these teachers hold BA (andincreasingly MA) degrees in TEFL/ELT from Teacher Training universities in Iran. In
their English lessons, they follow a set syllabus and teach from the prescribed Ministry
textbook and almost all teaching is conducted in Persian with English as the “object” ofstudy. In the current syllabus, there is a focus on reading comprehension and grammar,with little attention paid to spoken communication skills. (The new revised syllabus
gives more emphasis to meaning-oriented communication; Sadeghi and Richards, 2015).
As the teachers are generally products of the same school system, their own spoken
English is generally minimal. The level of motivation is quite low among both teachersand students and student achievement is often unsatisfactory. Learning English at
school level is synonymous with memorizing lists of vocabulary items and grammar
rules to be able to pass final-term examinations (which include elements such as
spelling, reading, word definition and grammar). Speaking is largely absent both inteaching and testing, and the English teacher’s role is largely limited to leading students
through the textbook materials, conducting repetition and substitution drills andoccasional dialogue practice at best. According to Leather and Motallebzadeh (2015),
although the authors of the new English books for junior high school claim theirprogramme as being “a revolutionary process” where there is a shift from traditional tocommunicative approaches to teaching, the focus of teaching and learning is still on
reading, grammar and vocabulary.

4.2 Teachers in private institutes
The situation at private institutes is very different and the kind of classes a teacher
teaches depends on the level and age group he or she is teaching. Most language teachers
regardless of the level at which they teach follow a set syllabus adopted by the language
centre (which usually varies from one institute to another), typically an integrated
multi-skilled syllabus, with the core methodology being Communicative Language
Teaching and the major textbooks being American File, Top Notch and New
Interchange (Leather and Motallebzadeh, 2015). At lower proficiency levels, theemphasis is primarily on vocabulary and pronunciation, with reading, writing andgrammar receiving greater emphasis at intermediate levels and speaking at advanced
levels. At each level, skills are integrated – the curriculum does not include courses
addressing a specific skill such as speaking or writing. The closest one gets to a
speaking class would be a course focusing on “free discussion”. Some students,
however, may request a private course addressing specific needs they may have related
to spoken or written English.
English teachers in language centres are mainly contract teachers paid on an hourly
basis, often have a good and sometimes an excellent command of spoken English andare normally better qualified than teachers working in schools. At more prestigious
centres, English teachers are MA holders or PhD students in TEFL (some with PhD
degrees) and many may have lived or studied in an English-speaking country. Teachers
in this group are generally young (less than 35 years old) and motivated and theirstudents are more highly motivated than those studying English at school. At the best
institutes, there is strong competition for teaching positions and procedures for selecting
teachers are rigorous, including examinations, interviews and demonstration lessons.
However, unlike in the state school system, there is no job security in the private sector,
so teacher performance plays an important role. Teachers are supervised and they are
required to meet certain standards for promotion purposes or for contract renewal.
However, in some institutes, supervisors lack the professional knowledge required toprovide adequate leadership, as this institute teacher comments:
Most of the institutes have supervisors who do not have any language teaching knowledge anddon’t know anything in this regard. I once asked one of these supervisors “Which one is better:holistic or analytic?” and he even didn’t know what these terms were. He had not studied
English at all and after studying for several semesters at the language school, he had beenpromoted to the position of a supervisor […]. The supervisors are also main role players inplacement and most often they place students in the wrong level.

Hence a supervisor in a private language school may have a degree in English literature
but have no education in second language acquisition or language teaching methods
and pedagogy.
4.3 Teachers in universities
University English teachers usually hold a PhD in an English-related subject and teachgeneral English courses, ESP courses as well as English-related subjects in English
departments. Most general English teachers are contractual teachers (MA holders or
PhD students); ESP teachers are usually subject-matter teachers or academic staff
members who are also competent in English; and English-related subjects are mainly
taught by permanent faculty members of the English department. The language of
instruction in both general English as well as ESP courses is usually Persian with

Teaching
spokenEnglish
215

ETPC
14,2

216

substantial use of translation, as the aim is to enable students to read and understandmaterial related to their university major (Farhady et al., 2010). There is little or no
spoken English component in these courses. This differs from English courses in ELT or
English Literature departments, which are taught exclusively in English; however, inthese departments, the only course students can take that has a speaking component isgenerally the “English Conversation” course, also known as “Listening and Speaking”
or “Language Lab”.
4.4 Private English teachers
Private language teachers are often teachers who also work at institutes but lesscommonly at universities. There are also many English teachers who only teachprivately. Their clients often have specific needs, such as preparation for an
examination, an overseas trip or a work assignment. Private teachers are usually young
and highly motivated and can charge relatively high rates for their services.
Common to all of the teachers above is a very limited understanding of the nature of
spoken English, as depending on where they teach, it is generally assumed if a person
has some kind of relevant qualification, and in the case of institute teachers, evidence of
their ability to speak English, little more is generally expected. Their primary resourceis generally the coursebook they use in their classes, which may have been the same
book they studied as a student. Their training would not normally have included anawareness that what we understand by “speaking skills” covers a wide range ofdifferent genres of discourse, including small talk, casual conversations, telephone
conversations, transactions, discussions, interviews, meetings, presentations anddebates. They would be unlikely to recognize that each genre has distinct features andcharacteristics and that each poses quite different issues for teaching and learning. In
spoken English classes in Iran, as in many other countries as the quote from House
above illustrates, even if the topic of the course is “conversation”, the focus is not on
conversation as a distinct genre of spoken interaction but rather than on unstructured
question and answer exchanges prompted by a topic chosen by the teacher.
5. A survey of Iranian teachers of spoken English
To provide a clearer picture of how spoken English is taught in Iran’s private language
schools and the problems teachers typically report in teaching English, we conducted asmall survey of teachers of English in private institutes in Urmia, interviewed a sampleof the teachers and observed a number of “conversation” classes. We now turn to theinformation obtained from this investigation.
5.1 The questionnaire survey
The major aim of this study was to explore the nature of speaking classes in Iran’s
private English institutes. The researchers were interested to find out what resources
English teachers used to teach a typical spoken English lesson, what challenges they
faced in teaching speaking and what kind of assistance they thought they needed tobetter prepare them for such classes. For this purpose, we chose Urmia (in North-WestIran), where, like many other capital cities in Iran, there is a huge interest among theyoung generation in learning English and where there is a flourishing private ELT
industry (Sadeghi and Richards, 2015). Our assistants, who were either MA or PhD
students in TEFL, visited several institutes and administered the questionnaires
in-person to interested teachers.

Overall, 89 teachers, aged 19-39, agreed to complete the questionnaire on theirteaching experience as well as challenges they faced teaching spoken English. In
addition to a cover letter, the questionnaire was made up of four parts and included 64
items intended to elicit information on teachers’ background, the speaking course they
offered and the challenges they faced in teaching spoken English as well as theirsuggestions for future workshops they wished to have on the teaching of speaking. The
questionnaire was developed by the researchers themselves for the purpose of this study
and was piloted on a small group of teachers. Then, input from informal conversations
with the teachers who took the pilot questionnaire was used to further refine the finalquestionnaire (which appears in the Appendix AI). The reliability of the questionnaire
was estimated to be 0.937, using Cronbach alpha.
The data elicited through the questionnaire were analysed using descriptive
statistics. Table I presents information on the teachers’ background.
From the information provided by the teachers above, we can see that they reflect a
range of teaching experience, qualifications and professional knowledge. Some appear
to have had other career goals in mind and have qualifications in un-related fields –perhaps reflecting the uncertain job market in Iran in some professions and themarketability of English language skills in the private language industry. Many haveheavy teaching loads typical of teachers in private institutes, which leaves them withlittle or no time to spend on updating their knowledge base or attending professional
training courses. Almost half of the teachers are student teachers working part-time. In
Iran, while students (MA and PhD) are admitted to universities as full-time students,
they rarely study on a full-time basis and almost all have to work part-time, both to gain
experience and to support their studies, a situation which adversely affects both theirstudies and their teaching.
5.2 Teachers’ use of resources
The teachers described the resources they use, as presented in Table II.
As noted earlier, textbooks are the teachers’ primary teaching resources. Most
international textbook series are accompanied with video and audio resources and these
are likely to be those the teachers refer to. Computer-based materials are less often used,perhaps because most institutes have not invested significantly in technology due to its
high cost, nor trained teachers in the use of computers and other technology. Indeed in
the institutes where such technology exists, it often plays a more decorative than ateaching role.
5.3 Typical classroom activities in a speaking class
The activities speaking teachers reported they used in their classes are summarized inTable III.
These figures reflect, on the one hand, the predominance of dialogues, role-plays, pairand group work in the international textbooks widely used in private institutes in Iran.
On the other hand, such books do not typically contain drills of the kind found in theolder generation of audio-lingual materials, so it is possible that the high frequency ofdrills reported by the respondents suggests that many teachers often revert to an
audio-lingual drill-based mode of teaching in their spoken English classes. Thisobservation may also be due to the nature of speaking classes taught in one of the

Teaching
spokenEnglish
217

ETPC
14,2

218

Item

Option (%)

My present situation
Full-time teacher
Part-time teacher
Student teacher

38.8
48.3
14.9

My ELT qualificationsBA
BA studentMA
MA student
PhD student

37.3
6.0
34.9
34.9
3.6

My non-ELT qualifications
Microbiology
Mechanical engineering
Electrical engineering
Civil engineering
Veterinary medicine
English literature
Architectural engineering
Mining

12.5
12.5
12.5
12.5
12.5
12.5
12.5
12.5

My teaching experience in years
0-5
5-10
10-15
15-20
20⫹

42.0
38.3
12.3
4.9
2.5

My weekly teaching load (hours)
0-15
15-30
30-45
45-60
60⫹

32.6
50.6
11.2
1.1
4.5

Number of hours/credit units on ELT methodology during my university educationNone
1-2 credit units
3-5 units
6-9 unitsMore than 10

8.3
11.1
34.7
18.1
27.8

Number of hours I spend weekly reading professional literature
None
1-2
3-5
Table I.
Characteristics of the 6-9
participants taking
10⫹part in the survey
16⫹

32.2
31.0
26.4
3.4
14.0
23.4

institutes providing many of the teachers who participated in this study – where
speaking activities are largely drill-based.
5.4 Typical problems in teaching spoken English
The teachers also rated the difficulties they face in teaching spoken English. Table IV
represents the 17 most challenging problems (out of a total of 42 items on thequestionnaire) for at least 40 per cent of the teachers (based on the sum of ratings given
for the categories of “challenging enough”, “very challenging” and “extremely
challenging”) listed in a decreasing order of challenge.
The problems Iranian teachers report above are probably typical of teachers insimilar situations elsewhere (Safari and Rashidi, 2015) and reflect the difficulty ofteaching mixed-level classes, developing both accuracy and fluency, finding suitabletopics and encouraging learners to speak up in class. “Speaking” here is identified with“discussion skills” rather than with other aspects of speaking referred to earlier. On theother hand, a few items were rated by teachers as not posing a challenge in theirspeaking classes. The ten items mentioned in Table V were found to be the least
challenging for at least 60 per cent of the respondents, taking the sum score of thecategories of “not at all challenging” and “a little challenging” as the criterion.

Teaching
spokenEnglish219

5.5 Interviews
A follow-up group interview was carried out with five of the teachers (conducted in
Persian) to obtain further information on the problems they encountered in theirspeaking classes. The primary issues that emerged in the group discussion aresummarized as follows:• difficulty in finding suitable topics;• students have little to say about topics and lack relevant background knowledge(e.g. on topics such as globalization);(%)
Teaching resources

Never

Not often

Sometimes

Often

Textbook
VideosAudio material
Computer

0
13.5
5.6
47.2

0
28.1
3.4
18.0

10.1
40.4
28.1
15.7

89.9
16.9
62.9
13.5

Table II.
Teaching resources
used by speaking
teachers(%)
Typical classroom activities

Never

Not often

Sometimes

Often

Dialogues
DrillsPronunciation work
Role plays
Pair work
Group work

0
1.1
1.1
3.4
0
3.4

1.1
11.2
14.6
7.9
4.5
20.2

16.9
20.2
39.3
31.5
24.7
32.6

80.9
67.4
44.9
57.3
70.8
41.6

Table III.
Typical classroom
activities used byspeaking teachers

Table IV.
Typical problems
Iranian teachers facein teaching a
speaking class

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

Developing fluency in speaking
Dealing with mixed proficiency levels
Motivating students to speak out
Providing interesting practice activities
Encouraging weaker students
Developing accuracy in speaking
Dealing with lack of background/topical knowledge
Teaching speaking to a large class
Using sensitive topics for speaking
Lack of ideas on certain topics
Teaching beginning student
Lack of student interest in learning
Teaching appropriate use of forms
Finding engaging speaking activities
Maintaining use of English during the lesson
Teaching idioms
Using technology to teach speaking

10.1
6.7
14.6
19.1
6.7
9
13.5
18
18
19.1
22.5
10.1
19.3
20.2
19.1
19.1
21.3

24.7
30.3
25.8
23.6
36
31.5
28.1
29.2
24.7
27
22.5
37.1
34.1
38.2
40.4
37.1
31.5

A little
challenging
38.2
24.7
29.2
40.4
29.2
27
22.5
34.8
31.5
32.6
18
23.6
29.5
27
31.5
20.2
22.5

(%)
Challenging
enough
20.2
27
16.9
12.4
21.3
20.2
21.3
13.5
14.6
11.2
23.6
20.2
12.5
13.5
9
12.4
11.2

Very
challenging

4.5
10.1
10.1
3.4
5.6
6.7
10.1
4.5
5.6
7.9
9
6.7
1.1
1.1
0
7.9
6.7

Extremely
challenging

220

Typical problems I face in teaching a speaking class

Not at all
challenging(62.9)(61.8)(56.2)(56.2)(56.1)(53.9)(53.9)(52.8)(51.7)(51.7)(50.6)(50.5)(43.1)(41.6)(40.5)(40.5)(40.2)

SUM

ETPC
14,2

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

Using drills
Using pair activities
Lack of teacher interest in teaching
Using dialogues
Using a course book to teach speaking
Managing classroom discipline
Establishing a friendly atmosphere
Using group activities
Finding appropriate homework
Focusing on new vocabulary

Typical problems I face in teaching a
speaking class
55.1
47.2
40.2
48.3
32.6
30.3
46.1
32.1
33.7
38.2

Not at all
challenging
29.2
31.5
36
27
41.6
41.6
23.6
35.7
30.3
24.7

A little
challenging
5.6
12.4
13.5
16.9
14.5
20.2
18
22.6
25.8
22.5

Valid (%)
Challenging
enough
5.6
6.7
5.5
4.5
5.6
4.5
5.6
8.3
9
5.6

Very
challenging

SUM(84.3)(78.9)(76.2)(75.3)(74.2)(71.9)(69.7)(67.8)(64)(62.9)

Extremely
challenging
1.2
0
2.2
1.1
2.3
1.1
4.5
1.2
1.1
4.5

Teaching
spokenEnglish221

Table V.
Least challenging
issues for Iranianteachers in speaking
classes

ETPC
14,2

222

•
•
•
•
•

students are too shy to speak in front of their peers;
students are afraid of making mistakes;
students have insufficient vocabulary to express ideas;
students are not talkative in the L1; andthe difficulties of speaking in a mixed-level class.

A comparison of ideas coming out of the interview with survey results indicates that thechallenges for interview participants are almost the same as those identified byrespondents to the questionnaire: Difficulty in finding suitable topics was ranked as the
14th most challenging problem in survey data; mixed ability level classes came 2nd; andlack of background knowledge and topical ideas ranked 7 and 10, respectively, in thequestionnaire results. While interview data highlight learners’ affective factors such as
being shy or afraid of making mistakes and not being talkative in L1 as challenges forteaching speaking, these challenges do not surface in survey data probably because no
item existed for them in the questionnaire to be ranked by students.
In addition to sharing their experience of challenges of teaching a speaking class, theinterviewees also described a variety of strategies they used to encourage students to
speak, such as by giving students a coloured card whenever they initiated a discussion.
At the end of the lesson, students could see who had accumulated the greatest number ofcards. One teacher gave an example of the cultural inappropriacy of some topics ininternational coursebooks:
The topic was about animals and the general question was “What are the advantages anddisadvantages of having a pet?” Since nobody in the class has a pet as we don’t have this in our
culture, most students didn’t have anything to contribute.

6. Reconsidering the problem of teaching spoken English in Iran
The problems Iranian learners of English have in learning English have often beenraised at conferences and seminars in Iran and are generally attributed to obvious andwell-documented factors such as the limited time available for English instruction inschools, issues related to the curriculum, tests, teaching resources, teacher competence,teacher and learner motivation as well as to lack of opportunities to use English outsideof the classroom (Abbasi et al., 2009; Behroozi and Amoozegar, 2014; Fariadian et al.,2014; Tabatabaei and Pourakbari, 2012). For instance, Behroozi and Amoozegar’s
survey study with 180 EFL teachers coming from 150 schools indicated that English
teachers’ low proficiency in English, lack of technological resources at schools andinsufficient teaching time are some of the factors responsible for the ineffective English
education system in Iran.
Indeed, most research in this area has concentrated on problems of English teachersor learners in teaching/learning English (focusing on all its component skills/subskills),
with little attention paid to teaching or learning “spoken” English. Furthermore, almost
all studies in this regard have been devoted to challenges of learning/teaching English in
the state education system. This study fills these two gaps by highlighting the spoken
component of English (which for many learners is the most important skill to be
developed), on the one hand, and by addressing how private language schools (regarded
as more effective deliverers of English) have failed to deliver proper “speaking” lessons,on the other. We have little to add to the copious amount that has already been expressedabout the issues related to English at state schools, but would like to take the discussion
in a different direction by considering two issues that we consider central in addressing
the teaching of spoken English in Iran. One has to do with what we understand by“spoken English”, and the other deals with opportunities to extend learning beyond theclassroom.

Teaching
spokenEnglish7. Conversation and discussion compared
7.1 Conversation
Many learners identify “spoken English” with the ability to use English forconversation; yet, in language institutes, “spoken English” is largely identified with“discussion”. But how do these speech genres differ? If we were to compare them, we
would find a number of important differences. One of the most important aspects of
conversation is managing the flow of conversation around topics. Conversation involvesa joint interaction around topics and the introduction of new topics that are linked
through each speaker’s contributions. The skills involved include (adapted from Goh
and Burns, 2012, p. 180):• initiating a topic in casual and formal conversation;• selecting vocabulary appropriate to the topic;• giving appropriate feedback responses;• providing relevant evaluative comments through back-channelling;• taking turns at appropriate points in the conversation;• asking for clarification and repetition;• using discourse strategies for repairing misunderstanding;• using discourse strategies to open and close conversations; and• using appropriate intonation and stress patterns to express meaning intelligibly.

223

Learners need a wide range of topics at their disposal to manage the flow ofconversation, and managing interaction and developing topic fluency is a priority inspeaking classes. Initially, learners may depend on familiar topics to get by. However,they also need practice in introducing new topics into conversation to move beyond thisstage. Casual conversation between friends or people who know each other well has
these characteristics (Pridham, 2001, p. 64):
• topics switch freely;• topics are often provoked by what speakers are doing, by objects in their presenceor by some association with what has just been said;• there does not appear to be a clearly defined purpose for the conversation;• all speakers can introduce topics, and no one speaker appears to dominate theconversation;• speakers comment on each other’s statements;• topics are only elaborated on briefly, after follow-up questions or comments fromlisteners;• comments in response to a topic often include some evaluation;• responses can be very short;

ETPC
14,2

224

• ellipsis is common;• the speaker’s cooperation is often shown through speaker support and repetitionof each other’s vocabulary; and• vocabulary typical of informal conversation will be present, such as clichés, vague
language and, sometimes, taboo language.
Conversation also requires the use of a number of specific skills (Wajasath, 2005):• It requires being a good listener: This can be indicated through the use of
back-channel signals such as “well”, “I see” and “really”.
• It involves asking questions: Conversation develops through the participants
asking questions and following through on the answers they get with further
questions.
• It involves sharing of information: Participants are expected to share information
they have that is relevant to the topic being discussed.
Ways of teaching conversation include:• Awareness-raising activities: Students examine examples of conversation, either
recorded (audio or video) or transcribed examples, and look for examples of how
openings, topic introductions, back-channelling, etc., are realized, and forindicators of casual or formal speech.
• Dialogue completion: Students are given transcripts of conversations withselected features removed (such as openings, closings, clarification requests) andasked to try to complete them. They then listen to or read the completed dialogues,
compare and practise.
• Planning tasks: Students are given topics to include in a conversation and asked towrite dialogues that include them and that also include personal recounts. They
then compare and practise.
• Improvisations: Students are given skeleton dialogues or dialogue frames (e.g.
containing a sequence of topics or functions they should use in a conversation)and use them to improvise conversations
7.2 Discussion skills
Some learners may need English primarily for the purposes of managing discussions inEnglish. This is an important skill for students using English in school and academic
settings as well as for those using English for business communications. However,poorly planned discussion activities allow stronger students to dominate, are unfocusedand do not provide for systematic feedback. Discussion and conversation, however, arevery different modes of interaction. If discussion skills are to be taken seriously as animportant component of a spoken English course, rather than as a filler-activity, theirnature and features need to be addressed systematically.
A discussion is an interaction focusing on exchanging ideas about a topic andpresenting points of view and opinions. Of course, people often “discuss” topics in casualconversation, such as the weather or recent experiences, but discussions of that kind areoften merely “chit-chat” – a form of politeness and social interaction. They do not
usually lead to “real” discussions where more serious topics of interest and importanceare talked about for an extended period, to arrive at a consensus about something, solvea problem or explore different sides of an issue. It is discussions of this kind that are thefocus here, particularly those that take place in an educational or professional setting.
Skills involved in taking part in discussions include:• giving opinions;• presenting a point of view;• supporting a point of view;• taking a turn;• sustaining a turn;• listening to others’ opinions;• agreeing and disagreeing with opinions; and• summarizing a position.
Approaches to teaching discussion skills centre on addressing the following issues(Green et al., 2002):• Choosing topics: Topics may be chosen by students or assigned by the teacher.
Both options offer different possibilities for student involvement.
• Forming groups: Small groups of four to five allow for more active participation,and care is needed to establish groups of compatible participants. For some tasks,
roles may be assigned (e.g. group leader, note-taker, observer).
• Preparing for discussions: Before groups are assigned a task, it may be necessary
to review background knowledge, assign information-gathering tasks (e.g.
watching a video) and teach some of the specific ways students can present a
viewpoint, interrupt, disagree politely, etc.
• Giving guidelines: The parameters for the discussion should be clear so thatstudents are clear how long the discussion will last, what the expected outcomes
are, roles of participants, expectations for student input and acceptable styles ofinteraction.
• Evaluating discussions: Both the teacher and the students can be involved inreflection on discussions. The teacher may want to focus on the amount andquality of input from participants and give suggestions for improvement. Some
review of language used may be useful at this point. Students may comment on
their own performance and difficulties they experienced and give suggestions for
future discussions.
However, mastering discussion skills can be a challenge, particularly with moreadvanced-level learners. They can deal with the topic (they have something to say aboutit), they have an “opinion” and they can deal with the target language (they take pains to
use appropriate lexical and syntactic rules), but when it comes to the interactional
dimension of discussion, that is the ways by which speakers take note of and act upon
their partner’s discourse, they show a rather limited range of resources.
From the comments above, it should be clear that in planning courses in spoken
English, a sound understanding of the nature of the different genres of spoken English
is the required starting point. This is the domain of pedagogical content knowledge.

Teaching
spokenEnglish
225

ETPC
14,2

226

Without such a knowledge base, there is no foundation from which to develop relevant
course objectives, choose activities and materials and prepare teachers in appropriate
ways to teach specific genres of spoken English.
8. Learning spoken English beyond the classroom
In addition to the lack of the relevant pedagogical content, knowledge that is necessary
to develop sound approaches to the teaching of spoken English, the limitations ofclassroom-based learning have often been cited in relation to teaching English in Iranianschools and classrooms. As noted earlier, these include unfavourable class-size, time
limitations, inadequate teaching materials, the English teachers’ limited English
proficiency and a test-driven curriculum. The opportunities for learning or“affordances” available in the classroom are hence quite restricted, consisting of a
restricted range of discourse and literary practices. However, despite limitations
available in opportunities to learn English in the classroom in Iran, in our conversations
with young Iranians, we often meet people who are fluent and expert users of English,
despite the fact that they have never travelled abroad or had extended opportunities forinteraction with native speakers of English. What accounts for their mastery of spoken
English?
Common to every one of these individuals in our experience is four features that
contribute to their successful learning of English:(1) they have a strong motivation to learn English;(2) they set learning goals and targets for themselves;(3) they monitor their own progress and compare themselves with others; and(4) they look for opportunities to learn English outside of the classroom.
It is this last issue that we want to explore further here.
Today, the Internet, technology and the media and the use of English in face-to-face
as well as virtual social networks provide greater opportunities for meaningful andauthentic language use than are available in the classroom. As Lankshear and Knobel(1997) and Jones and Hanfer (2011) point out, these learning opportunities are more
likely to be interactive, social and multimodal. Learners can interact using English withpeople in almost every part of the world. They can download Apps that support many
aspects of language learning and can use these while waiting for the bus or train or
travelling to school. And when they get home, they may enter a chat room to interact
with other language learners or with native speakers, they may enter game sites andplay video games that require them to understand and use English or they may watch a
TV programme or movie in English, following with subtitles if necessary.
Anecdotal evidence often confirms the power of such out-of-class learning. For
example, it has been observed that young people in the northern European countries
such as Finland and Denmark have good listening skills and are often quite fluent inEnglish compared to their counterparts in countries such as Portugal and Italy(Richards, 2014; Nunan and Richards, 2015a, 2015b). The reason for this has beensuggested to be that in the northern countries, English language movies on TV andcinemas are shown in their original language with subtitles, while in many othercountries, they are dubbed, hence denying young people exposure to comprehensible
input in English. Researchers are increasingly focusing on these new opportunities tolearn English beyond the classroom. These opportunities for out-of-class learning are
fully described by Benson and Reinders (2011) and Nunan and Richards (2015a, 2015b)
as well as in many other sources and include activities such as the following:• participating in an on-line chat room in English;• using the resources of a self-access centre;• interviewing foreign visitors;• a period of stay in an English village (a residential village-like setting in thelearner’s country in which all activities are conducted in English);• playing on-line language-based digital games;• keeping listening logs (monitoring out-of-class experiences that involve listening,such as listening to airport announcements);• using on-line resources, such as Ted Talks;• using social media (e.g. interacting via a blog with the teacher and other students
and sharing reactions to an assigned reading or a video clip);• e-mediated tandem learning (linking up through Skype or e-mail with a learner inanother country;• making a video documentary in English; and• watching televisions series or movies in English.
Participating in an online chat room can, for example, be very motivating for a learner,
whereby in addition to enjoying a genuine communication, he or she can unconsciously
boost his speaking and listening skills. Similarly, interviewing foreign visitors can be afulfilling exercise for learners who have always looked for opportunities to use theirEnglish in a real context. Using social media not only can entertain language learners byallowing them to keep in contact with friends and group-mates, but also will offer them
ample practice opportunities either in writing (and reading) or in speaking (andlistening). In like manner, other out-of-class activities listed above can help incidentallydevelop language skills while the focus is not on learning the language but on enjoying
the activity.
The growth in affordance for out-of-class learning such as these provide many
opportunities for learners to extend their learning beyond the classroom and offer many
benefits for learners. For example, they allow for flexibility and convenience in learning
so that learners can manage their place, mode and manner of learning; they provide apleasurable and positive language use experience; they reflect learners’ needs andinterests; they reflect learners’ out-of class activities; they allow for social interaction
with others; and they help them recognize the role they can play in managing their own
learning. However, they create challenges as well as opportunities for teachers andlearners. New roles emerge for teachers, as learners become more actively involved inmanaging aspects of their own learning. A starting point is to recognize that language
learning can occur in many contexts beyond the classroom. Teachers need to become
familiar with the range of activities learners make use of and the potential such
experiences have for making connections with classroom-based teaching. Teachers may
also need to acquire the skills needed to guide their learners in effective ways of using
out-of-class learning to support their in-class learning. Such activities often involve

Teaching
spokenEnglish
227

ETPC
14,2

228

careful preparation and follow-up on the part of the teacher, and in this way, theout-of-class activities serve as additional input to classroom-based teaching.
9. Conclusions
There are many aspects involved in the mastery of spoken English in the Iranian
context. The classroom is the primary source of learning for many learners anddoubtless much can be done to improve the quality of teaching and learning that isprovided in Iranian classrooms. On the one hand, the language proficiency of teachers,
their use of teaching resources as well as the techniques they use in teaching spoken
English could surely all be improved through workshops and courses addressing theseand other issues. However, a more fundamental issue first needs to be addressed andthat has to do with the knowledge base teachers draw from in choosing materials andplanning their lessons. If curriculum developers and teachers have a confused orinadequate understanding of the nature of spoken English and the different genres of
spoken interaction, it is likely that they will similarly be confused regarding both theaims and means of teaching different genres of spoken language. Those responsible fortraining English teachers in universities and teacher training institutions need toreplace outmoded and inadequate conceptions of spoken English with better-informed
understandings of the pedagogical content knowledge they provide to teachers intraining.
Both teacher trainers and teachers should be made aware of the distinctions between“discussion” and “conversation” skills discussed above. One major reason why the
Iranian English institutes (and public education system) have failed in training“speakers” of the language is that the ability to develop speaking has been considered
the same as developing skills such as giving opinions, presenting a point of view,supporting a point of view, taking a turn, sustaining a turn, listening to others’ opinions,agreeing and disagreeing with opinions and summarizing a position, the skills which
are mainly characterized with “discussion”. To develop competence in “speaking”
English, however, English teachers should instead focus on such skills as initiating a
topic in casual and formal conversation, selecting vocabulary appropriate to the topic,
giving appropriate feedback responses, providing relevant evaluative comments
through back-channelling, taking turns at appropriate points in the conversation,
asking for clarification and repetition, using discourse strategies for repairing
misunderstanding, using discourse strategies to open and close conversations and using
appropriate intonation and stress patterns to express meaning intelligibly, the skills
which are associated with “conversation”, what counts as real “speaking” for mostlearners.
At the same time, the role played by out-of-class learning in the development of
spoken English needs to be acknowledged and better understood. Research in the useof out-of-class learning suggests that many out-of-class activities offer a wider range ofaffordances for language use and second language acquisition than are generally
available in the classroom (Raghini, 2015; Beatty, 2015; Sasaki, 2015; Webb, 2015;
Arnold and Fonseca-Mora, 2105). They can provide opportunities for learners to develop
aspects of linguistic, communicative and pragmatic competence; to learn throughinteraction and negotiation of meaning; to have extended contact with English; to makeuse of multimodal sources of learning; and to develop skills of autonomous learning. For
instance, television, which is the greatest source of first language input (Webb, 2015),

can play a significant role in developing pronunciation, vocabulary and listening
comprehension in L2 learning. Likewise, social media can offer learners the opportunityof “going public” by expressing themselves authentically through online resources suchas blogs and Facebook (Raghini, 2015). For individuals who are lucky enough to meet anative speaker of English in EFL contexts such as Iran, the enthusiasm to interact withsuch “sources of language”, even as a short interaction, can boost their motivation to
improve themselves for future encounters.
These new learning opportunities coupled with classroom methods that are informed
by a better understanding of the nature of spoken interaction will better provide learners
with learning experiences that are valid, authentic and relevant to their needs.

References
Abbasi, M., Ahmadi, G. and Lotfi, A. (2009), “English learning and teaching problems of Isfahani
students from the perspectives of teachers”, Science & Research in Education – Curriculum
Development, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 141-156.
Arnold, J. and Fonseca-Mora, C. (2015), “Language and cultural encounters: opportunities forinteraction with native speakers”, in Nunan, D. and Richards, J.C. (Eds), Language Learning
Beyond the Classroom, Routledge, New York, NY, pp. 225-234.
Beatty, K. (2015), “Essentially social: online language learning with social networks”, in Nunan, D.
and Richards, J.C. (Eds), Language Learning Beyond the Classroom, Routledge, New York,NY, pp. 95-104.
Behroozi, M. and Amoozegar, A. (2014), “Challenges to English language teachers of high schoolin Iran”, Procedia - Social and Behavioural Sciences, Vol. 136, pp. 203-207.
Benson, P. and Reinders, H. (Eds) (2011), Beyond the Language Classroom, Palgrave Macmillan,
London.
Dorshomal, N., Gorjian, B. and Pazhakh, A. (2013), “The role of pedagogical films in developing
pre-intermediate Iranian EFL learners’ speaking skill: the case of motivation”, International
Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World, Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 254-268.
Ettelaat Daily (2011), 25 December 2011, available at: http://semico.ir/Upload/Modules/News/
ImageGallery1471/p15.pdf
Farhady, H., Hezaveh, F.S. and Hedayati, H. (2010), “Reflections on foreign language education in
Iran”, TESL-EJ, Vol. 13 No. 4, available at: www.tesl-ej.org/wordpress/issues/volume13/
ej52/ej52a1/
Fariadian, E., Azizifar, A. and Gowhary, H. (2014), “The effect of anxiety on Iranian EFL learners
speaking skill”, International Research Journal of Applied and Basic Sciences, Vol. 8 No. 10,
pp. 1747-1754.
Goh, C. and Burns, A. (2012), Teaching Speaking: A Holistic Approach, Cambridge University
Press, New York, NY.
Green, C.F., Christopher, E.R. and Lam, J. (2002), “Developing discussion skills in the ESL
classroom”, in Richards, J.C. and Renandya, W. (Eds), Methodology in Language Teaching,Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, pp. 225-234.
House, J. (2012), “Teaching oral skills in English as a lingua franca”, in Alsagoff, L., Mackay, S.L.,
Hu, G. and Renandya, W.A. (Eds), Principles and Practices for Teaching English as an
International Language, Routledge, New York, NY, pp. 186-205.
Jones, R. and Hanfer, C. (2011), Understanding Digital Literacies: A Practical Introduction,
Routledge, London.

Teaching
spokenEnglish
229

ETPC
14,2

230

Lankshear, C. and Knobel, M. (1997), “Different words? Technology-mediated classroom learningand students’ social practices with new technologies in home and community settings”, in
Lankshear, C. (Ed.), Changing Literacies, Open University Press, Buckingham, pp. 164-187.
Leather, S. and Motallebzadeh, K. (2015), “Effecting methodological change through a
trainer-trainee project: a tale of insider-outsider collaboration”, in Kennedy, C (ed.), English
Language Teaching in the Islamic Republic of Iran: Innovations, Trends and Challenges,
British Council, London, pp. 161-170.
Mirhosseini, S.A. and Khodakarami, S. (2015), “A glimpse of contrasting de jure-de facto ELT
policies in Iran”, in Kennedy, C. (Ed.), English Language Teaching in the Islamic Republic of
Iran: Innovations, Trends and Challenges, British Council, London, pp. 23-34.
Nunan, D. and Richards, J.C. (2015), “Preface”, in Nunan, D. and Richards, J.C. (Eds), Language
Learning Beyond the Classroom, Routledge, New York, NY, pp. 11-16.
Nunan, D. and Richards, J.C. (Eds) (2015), Language Learning Beyond the Classroom, Routledge,
New York, NY.
Pridham, F. (2001), The Language of Conversation, Routledge, London.
Raghini, M.D.C. (2015), “The use of social media resources in advanced level classes”, in Nunan, D.
and Richards, J.C. (Eds), Language Learning Beyond the Classroom, Routledge, New York,NY, pp. 85-94.
Razmjoo, S.A. and Riazi, A.M. (2006), “On the teaching methodology of Shiraz EFL institutes”,
Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities of Shiraz University, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 58-70.
Richards, J.C. (2014), “The changing face of English: learning beyond the classroom”, RELC
Journal, Vol. 45 No. 1, pp. 1-18.
Sadeghi, K. and Richards, J.C. (2015), “The idea of English in Iran: an example from Urmia”,
Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development (in Press).
Safari, P. and Rashidi, N. (2015), “Teacher education beyond transmission: challenges, concerns,
and opportunities of Iranian EFL teachers”, Issues in Educational Research, Vol. 25 No. 2,
pp. 187-203.
Sasaki, A. (2015), “E-mail tandem language learning”, in Nunan, D. and Richards, J.C. (Eds),
Language Learning Beyond the Classroom, Routledge, New York, NY, pp. 115-125.
Tabatabaei, O. and Pourakbari, A.A. (2012), “An investigation into the problems of teaching andlearning English in the Isfahan province high schools, Iran”, Journal of Language Teaching
and Research, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 102-111.
Wajasath, A. (2005), “Small-talk: the passport to internationalization”, in Foley, J. (Ed.), New
Dimensions in the Teaching of Oral Communication, Regional Language Centre, RELC,
Singapore, pp. 161-194.
Webb, S. (2015), “Extensive viewing: language learning through watching television”, inNunan, D. and Richards, J.C. (Eds), Language Learning Beyond the Classroom, Routledge,
New York, NY, pp. 159-168.
Zandian, S. (2015), “Migrant literature and teaching English as an international language in Iran”,
in Kennedy, C. (Ed.), English Language Teaching in the Islamic Republic of Iran:Innovations, Trends and Challenges, British Council, London, pp. 113-122.
Appendix I. The questionnaire
Dear teacher
We would like to invite you to participate in a research project that will help us better prepareteachers for the problems they face in the English classroom.

We would first of all like to thank you for your valuable participation in this study and fortaking the time to answer the questions in this questionnaire.
Please note that your participation in this project is voluntary and that the information you
provide will be kept confidential. The information provided by you will be used for research
purposes only. We will be happy to share the findings with you.
In case you may have any questions concerning this project, please feel free to contact theon-site researcher (******) through email: *********
Thank you.
The researchers
Instructions
The questionnaire is made of four parts. Please read the questions/items carefully and thenprovide your answer in the space provided for the item or tick the right box. If you need more
space, you can use the reverse side of the page to provide additional information. If you haveproblems in understanding a question, you may ask the contact researcher (Karim Sadeghi) for
assistance. If you would like to take part in a possible follow-up interview, please provide yourcontact number and/or email address for further arrangements:

PART I: Background information
1. Number of months and years I have been teaching English: __________
2. Average number of hours I have been teaching English in a week: ___________
3. My age: _____
4. My gender:
Male 

Female 

5. My present situation:
Full-time teacher Part-time teacher Student teacher 

6. My qualification:a. University degree in TEFL/ELT:
BA 
MA 
BA student MA student 

PhD 
PhD student b. University degree in a different field (please specify) _______
c. Other qualifications: ________________

7. Number of hours/credit units I have had on ELT methodology during my university education:
No course on ELT methodology 
1-2 credit units 
3-5 credit units 
6-9 credit units More than 10 credit units 
8. Number of hours I spend every week reading papers/books related to ELT methodology:
None 
1-2 
3-5 
6-9 
More than 10 
9. Number of workshops/in-service training courses I have attended during the last one year:__________ hours
The duration of the courses/workshops altogether: ________________ hours

Teaching
spokenEnglish
231

ETPC
14,2

PART II: The speaking course
NOTE:
Please answer questions below with a speaking course (you are currently teaching or have recently
taught) in mind. If the course covers other skills as well, only focus on the speaking part of it while
doing the following parts.
1. Name of the course: _______________

232

2. Level of the class:
Basic Intermediate 

Advanced Mixed-level 

3. Goals of the course:_____________________________________________________________
4. Number of the students in the class: ________
5. Their average age: ______
6. Gender of the students:

Male 

Female 

Both 

7. Reasons they are taking this class:__________________________________________________
8. Typical length of a lesson (e.g. 90 mins.): ____________
9. Number of lessons per week: _____________
10. Teaching resources I use (please tick one box):

1
2
3
4

Teaching resources most often used
Textbook
VideosAudio material
ComputerOthers:Pleasespecify

Often

Some times

Not often

Never

Some times

Not often

Never

11. Typical classroom activities I use (please tick one box):

1
2
3
4
5
6

Typical classroom activities
Dialogs
DrillsPronunciation work
Role plays
Pair work
Group work
Others:Pleasespecify

Often

PART III: Typical problems I face in teaching a speaking class
The following table is a list of possible challenges teachers may face in a speaking class. Indicate towhat extent each item poses a challenge for you in your speaking class by ticking the relevant box infront of it. At the bottom of the list, there is space for you to add other challenge/s you face in yourspeaking class (in case they do not appear in the list) and to indicate the extent of the challenge. If you
would like to give additional explanation or comments on the items, feel free to add this in the‘Additional comments’ section which follows the table.
The challenge
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39

Teaching speaking to a large classFinding engaging topics
Maintaining use of English during the lesson
Providing interesting practice activities
Encouraging weaker students
Dealing with mixed proficiency levels
Giving feedback on performance
Finding engaging speaking activities
Assessing student performance
Finding suitable materials
Finding appropriate homework
Using a course book to teach speaking
Holding free discussion classes
Managing the class discipline
Managing the time
Using group activities
Using pair activities
Using dialogs
Using drills
Using communication activities
Developing fluency in speaking
Developing accuracy in speaking
Teaching advanced students
Teaching intermediate students
Teaching beginning students
Teaching idioms
Teaching pronunciation
Teaching grammar
Focusing on new vocabulary
Teaching politeness forms
Using technology to teach speaking
Using sensitive topics for speaking
Stopping chatterboxes
Motivating students to speak out
Running out of time
Dealing with student anxiety
Teaching appropriate use of forms
Dealing with lack of background/topical knowledge
Establishing a friendly environment in theclassroom
40 Lack of student interest in learning
41 Lack of teacher interest in teaching
42 Lack of ideas on certain topics
43
44
45

Additional comments:

Not at all
A little
Somewhat Very
Extremely
challenging challenging challenging challenging challenging

Teaching
spokenEnglish
233

ETPC
14,2

PART IV: Future study
If you had the chance to take a further course or workshop on teaching spoken English, what are some
topics you think such a course should include?
1.

.

234

2.

3.

4.

5.

Corresponding author
Karim Sadeghi can be contacted at: k.sadeghi@urmia.ac.ir

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com