【Research Article】

Prompt-Related Challenges:
Using a Mobile Application to Measure Spoken Fluency
Heather Woodward
Joshua Rappeneker

Abstract
The language-based justification for Rikkyo University’s English discussion
class (EDC) is to build second language (L2) spoken fluency. However,
instructors lack a quantitative and objective method for monitoring theirstudents’ spoken fluency. Thus, assessing the EDC’s ability to increase L2
spoken fluency is challenging. One possible solution is to develop a mobile
application that measures students’ in-class L2 spoken fluency in terms ofspeech rate, pause frequency, and peer-based perceived fluency during the 3/2/1
activity, a modified version of the 4/3/2. When testing our mobile application inclass, one issue concerns the textbook prompts for the 3/2/1 activity. In thispaper, we investigate one participant’s spoken fluency for six weeks to exemplify
the prompt-based challenges, which include a) a lack of topic repetition, b) no
strategy training, and c) an under-utilization of formulaic utterances presented
in the textbook. Possible solutions include recycling previous prompts, adding
strategy training to the mobile application features, removing the third prompt,
and embedding target formulaic utterances. Implementing these changes to the
textbook might mitigate some issues experienced by mobile application users.
Keywords: Discussion, Speaking, 4/3/2

Introduction
There has been a growing interest in spoken performance assessment in the field of
second language (L2) development (Ogawa, 2022). During the speaking part of English
proficiency exams such as the International English Language Testing System, candidatesdeliver opinion-based monologues. Spoken fluency, as defined by the speed and ease ofspeech, accounts for a significant portion of the variance in human ratings of these opinionbased monologues, whereas accuracy and complexity account for only a small amount(Ogawa, 2022). Students at Rikkyo University desire to live abroad, work for international
companies, and make foreign friends, and by extension, they wish to build L2 spoken fluency
to meet the demands of real-world communication (Hurling, 2012). Throughout the Spring
2023 semester, we have been conducting tests on a beta version of our mobile application1

外国語教育研究ジャーナル

第4巻 （ JOURNAL OF FOREIGN LANGUAGE EDUCATION AND RESEARCH, VOL. 4）

designed to measure spoken fluency in classroom settings during their 3/2/1 activity. The
activity comprises speakers delivering the same monologue three times to three partners forthree minutes, two minutes, and one minute (Appendix A). The activity’s conditions of time
constraint and content repetition help speakers increase their utterance fluency, which,theoretically, streamlines their L2 speaking process.
English discussion class (EDC) instructors implement the activity for at least 13 of the
14 weeks. In the EDC textbook, there are three prompts for the activity. The first two prompts
are always opinion-based or experience-based questions (Appendix B). The third prompt
includes sharing three interesting ideas or facts from the reading passage (Sturges et al.,2023), which refers to the passage assigned each week as homework; it is designed to
introduce the topic for the next lesson (Hurling, 2012). As classes consist of 11 students, theinstructors participate in the activity as well; therefore, they might not notice the strategies
implemented by the students. For example, participants seem to approach the third prompt(i.e., share three ideas or facts from the EDC textbook’s reading passage) with differing
strategies, one of which is reading aloud from the passage in their textbooks. However,reading aloud inflates their fluency scores on the mobile application. Having accurate
representations of their current performance is important for a) monitoring students’ progress,b) providing useful instructions for improvement, and c) setting realistic spoken fluency
goals. Thus, our objective is to investigate participants’ transcripts and data to uncover issues
and present potential solutions. In the following literature review, we review the pivotal
studies on and theories for L2 spoken fluency development.

Literature Review
Earlier 4/3/2 Studies
Early studies have manipulated the 4/3/2 activity’s conditions of content repetition andtime constraint to investigate the efficacy of 4/3/2. This activity, similar to 3/2/1, consists of
speakers delivering the same monologue thrice to three different partners, but the duration isfour, three, and two minutes (Maurice, 1983). In de Jong and Perfetti’s (2011) study oncontent repetition, participants who repeat the same content for all three rounds retain spoken
fluency gains in a delayed posttest four weeks after the activity, whereas the participants who
deliver monologues on different content do not. They suggest that participants who repeat
language proceduralize the linguistic knowledge, thereby shifting their fundamental cognitive
processes, which leads to observable increases in fluency. The term “proceduralization”
refers to one of the processes in skill acquisition theory (SAT), a learning theory used todescribe skill development.
SAT proponents, such as DeKeyser (2017), believe that the process of acquiring any
skill, including the development of L2 spoken fluency, comprises three stages. The first stage
is referred to as the declarative stage, wherein students develop knowledge about theprocesses necessary for task completion. In the procedural stage, they begin to practice theseprocesses, and in the automatic stage, they perform the task consistently without any effort
by repeated practice. When researchers refer to repeated practice, the optimal level ofdifficulty varies with students’ prior learning, but generating skills or retrieving knowledge2Prompt-Related Challenges: Using a Mobile Application to Measure Spoken Fluency

from memory is desirable as long as students are equipped “by virtue of prior learning tosucceed at that generation” (Bjork & Bjork, 2020). Content repetition plays an important rolein moving formulaic utterances from the procedural stage to the automatic stage as it assists
with long-term memory formation. Certain aspects of speaking performance such as formulaic
utterances, when automatized, allow speakers to focus their attention on necessary features(Gatbonton & Segalowitz, 1988).
In other studies, Boers (2014) and Thai and Boers (2016) investigate the condition oftime constraint. Participants who deliver monologues under the decreasing time condition(i.e., 4/3/2) outperform participants’ spoken fluency who have performed under a constanttime condition (i.e., 3/3/3). Researchers use Levelt’s (1993) model of speech production to
explain the effects of manipulating task variables on cognitive processes involved in
producing speech. The main processes are the conceptualizer, formulator, and articulator. In
the first process of speech production, the conceptualizer organizes thoughts and ideas into
a coherent message, cultivating a pre-verbal message. Next, the formulator then transforms
the intended message into linguistic representations including selecting words and organizing
the structure of utterances. The articulator coordinates the motor movements for speech
production, involving muscle activation, timing, and communication of phonemes, syllables,
and words. In addition to utilizing the same cognitive processes of speech production,
Gatbonton and Segalowitz (1988) recommend mimicking psychological pressures of realworld communication.
For example, the act of conceptualizing can be cognitively demanding for both first
language speakers and L2 speakers as they carefully consider their intended speech before
expressing it (Bui et al., 2019). Formulating and articulating can also be challenging for L2
speakers due to the heightened cognitive demands of retrieving relevant L2 lexical andsyntactic information necessary for pre-verbal messages (Bui et al., 2019). Therefore, L2
speakers must allocate their attentional resources across the three stages of speech production(Ahmadian & Tavakoli, 2011; Skehan, 2014). L2 speakers might pay greater attention toformulating and articulating rather than conceptualizing by content repetition; this can lead
to automatized changes in fundamental cognitive processes. In addition to the benefits ofcontent repetition, Boers (2014) and Thai and Boers (2016) reason that the added timepressure condition of 4/3/2 might create the impetus to increase L2 spoken fluency automating
the cognitive processes of conceptualizing, formulating, and articulating.
Without any pedagogical intervention, de Jong and Perfetti (2011) acknowledge that
there exists uncertainty regarding exactly which lexico-grammatical items articulated during
students’ monologues have been proceduralized. To address the ambiguity, researchers
recommend supplying students with exemplars and encouraging integrating input intomonologues (Boers, 2014; Thai & Boers, 2016). From these early studies, researchersinterpret results based on SAT and Levelt’s (1993) model of speech production. They showthat the conditions of content repetition and time constraint help students build L2 spoken
fluency while acknowledging a need to incorporate pedagogical interventions to monitor theprocess of proceduralizing linguistic knowledge.

3

外国語教育研究ジャーナル

第4巻 （ JOURNAL OF FOREIGN LANGUAGE EDUCATION AND RESEARCH, VOL. 4）

Later 4/3/2 Studies
Reacting to these early studies’ demand for focusing on target linguistic forms,
researchers have explored the ability of pedagogical intervention to further L2 development.
In Tran and Saito’s (2021) study, providing corrective feedback on students’ lexicogrammatical accuracy after each round not only improves accuracy but also does not diminish
L2 spoken fluency gains. Researchers believe that incorporating formulaic utterances (i.e.,
automated language chunks) can increase students’ L2 spoken fluency (Tavakoli & Wright,2020). Ogawa (2019, 2021) investigates the extent to which encouraging the use of formulaic
utterances by way of pedagogical interventions improves L2 spoken fluency. She uses three
types of pedagogical interventions: input flooding, input enhancement, and peer feedback.
For input flooding, she provides the participants with many instances of target language
structures before the activity in exemplar monologues. For input enhancement, she highlights
the target language structures in these exemplar monologues via italicizing, bolding, oremphasizing voice. Lastly, for peer feedback, during the activity, listeners use a checklist to
indicate target language structures speakers use while delivering monologues. In the study,
the group with all three pedagogical intervention types shows the most spoken fluency gains
compared to the comparison group and the input-only group.
Unlike early studies of time pressure and repeated practice, pedagogical intervention is
not an inherent condition of the 4/3/2 activity. Students can complete three iterations of theirmonologues without receiving feedback, whereas without the decreasing time condition andcontent repetition condition, the activity is no longer considered to be 4/3/2. However,feedback as a pedagogical intervention can be one of the most effective tools for enhancing
students’ academic achievements (Hattie & Timperley, 2007). Effective feedback can help
students a) raise awareness of desired performance, b) know their current performance, andc) utilize strategies to bridge the disparity between their current performance and their goal,
thereby enabling them to adjust their future actions and behaviors (Brooks et al., 2019).
These three aspects of effective formative feedback are exemplified in the studies by Tran
and Saito (2021) and Ogawa (2019, 2021) insofar as researchers raise awareness of desired
performance, provide feedback on participants’ current performance, and help participants
utilize strategies to bridge the disparity.
One gap in the literature is to explore how instructors can use technology to provide
in-class feedback on students’ 3/2/1 performance. Using technology might assist the processof providing feedback by automating specific tasks such as analyzing speech rate, detecting
pauses, or mean length of run while also providing a platform for classmates’ perceived
fluency ratings. Currently, instructors can only feel that their students are becoming more
fluent. By leveraging mobile applications, instructors can streamline the feedback process
while providing detailed, objective assessments on current and desired performances. During
the pilot study, some challenges stem partially from the textbook prompts (Appendix B).
Therefore, the following research question might shed light on these issues: What textbookrelated challenges associated with the 3/2/1 prompts arise from providing participants’utterance fluency scores to track their monologic L2 speaking performance?

4

Prompt-Related Challenges: Using a Mobile Application to Measure Spoken Fluency

Methods
ParticipantsParticipants (n = 35; 20 females and 15 males) of the survey were first-year university
students at a private university in Tokyo, Japan, and enrolled in the authors’ EDC during
Spring 2023. They were at least 18 years old and had completed at least six years of formal
English as foreign language education prior to entering university (mean = 8.4). The
participants ranged from B1 to C1 on the common European framework of reference (CEFR).
The participant that we selected, pseudonym Jun, was from this pool of participants. The
criteria for selection were that the participant had to have signed the consent form, attended
all lessons, use the mobile application during the 3/2/1 activity, and exhibit patterns ofparticipants’ recordings and transcription. Before the semester, he passed Level 2 of theEiken and had completed B1 on the CEFR. Jun’s classmates (n = 11; 4 females and 7 males)
also participated in the study; they were B1 on the CEFR (i.e., a low Level 2 by Rikkyo
University’s system of labeling English proficiency). In total, 43 students from the authors’classes participated in the study. Three participants from Jun’s class participated in thesurvey.
Instruments
Mobile Application
Our spoken fluency application is designed to measure the utterance fluency of English
language learning students. The features include measuring untrimmed and trimmed speechrate, pause frequency, articulation rate, and listener-based perceived fluency to provide
feedback on students’ spoken fluency performance across the semester. The application is inbeta testing for iOS and thus has not yet been validated for in-class use. This semester, wehave gathered data to validate the mobile application for measuring in-class L2 spoken
fluency.
Audacity
Audacity is a free software by Audacity Team (https://audacityteam.org/) and is used for
multi-track audio editing and recording digital audio. It is compatible with macOS, Linux,
Windows, and other Unix-like operating systems. As of December 6, 2022, Audacity holds
the title of the most downloaded software at FossHub, with over 114.2 million downloads
since March 2015 (Appendix C).
WhisperX
Whisper is an open-source automated speech recognition system that has been trainedusing 680,000 hours of supervised data from various languages and tasks from the Internet(Radford et al., 2022). This has resulted in enhanced resilience to accents, background noise,and technical jargon. WhisperX, a variant of Whisper, provides word-level time stamps toincorporate precise temporal information (Bain et al., 2023). This system combines forced
phoneme alignment and voice activity detection techniques to achieve its performance inword segmentation and long audio transcription, thereby giving practitioners and researchers5

外国語教育研究ジャーナル

第4巻 （ JOURNAL OF FOREIGN LANGUAGE EDUCATION AND RESEARCH, VOL. 4）

a tool for quick and accurate analysis of spoken language data (Bain et al., 2023).
Praat
Praat is a free phonetics software tool used for speech analysis (Boersma & Van Heuven,2001). It is compatible with multiple operating systems and can examine and reconstructacoustic speech signals. It provides a wide array of functions, such as speech analysis,
manipulation, and synthesis, along with the capability to generate visuals.
SurveyThe survey was in English and Japanese (Appendix D). The participants (n = 35)
responded to our survey regarding reading aloud, which had the following two questions:a) W hen you were using the spoken fluency mobile application today, did you read
aloud from the textbook’s reading passages?
b) If you read aloud from the textbook while using the mobile application, what isyour reason for doing so? Reply in English or Japanese.
After the first survey, we created a second survey using the replies received to create
an updated checklist (Appendix D).
a) Below is a list of possible reasons for reading aloud while using the mobile
application during the 3/2/1 activity. If you read aloud, please check all the reasonsthat apply.
Procedures
After receiving approval from the Center for Foreign Language Education and Researchat Rikkyo University, participants met once per week for 14 weeks. During Week 1, theylearned how to use the mobile application. They participated in the 3/2/1 activity for the firsttime in Week 2. The instructions from the textbook were, “Talk to a partner. Say as much as
you can. Don’t worry about grammar or vocabulary” (Sturges et al., 2023). The goal was forparticipants to incorporate the formulaic utterances introduced in the EDC textbook and to
speak as quickly as they could (Appendix E). The survey was distributed via Google Forms
to participants during Weeks 6 and 7. The secondary author also conducted a follow-up
interview in Week 8 with Jun and his classmates regarding their transcripts and survey
results.
For every lesson, we used the prompts in the textbook (Appendix B). However, for
Week 7, we recycled the same prompts from Week 3 to compare spoken fluency performances.
We compared Week 3 performances because during Week 2, participants were still unfamiliar
with 3/2/1. Participants had no pre-planning time to replicate real-world speaking conditions.
After collecting the recordings, we transcribed them using WhisperX, then used a program
written by the secondary author to convert transcripts to TextGrid, a visual aid that matches
audio to transcriptions (Appendix F). We also used Audacity to view audio waveforms when
doing the initial analysis. TextGrids were manually reviewed in Praat to a) align word
6

Prompt-Related Challenges: Using a Mobile Application to Measure Spoken Fluency

boundaries with the audio, b) add any missing fillers (e.g., uhs and ums), and c) delete any
background voices. Then, we converted the file to JSON data to analyze the speech event
and analyze the data (e.g., mean length of run). These newly analyzed speech events werecollated into a single CSV file, further subject to statistical analysis.
Analysis
For the quantitative analysis, six utterance fluency features were chosen from Suzuki etal.’s (2021) study. In this study, certain features seemed more highly correlated to perceived
fluency than others. Hence, we selected trimmed speech rate, untrimmed speech rate, pause
frequency, length of run, and pause location. We added pause length to better explain the
results. For all graphs, we used untrimmed speech rate in syllables per minute (SPM) because
speech rate had been the strongest indicator of perceived fluency. We analyzed the spoken
fluency results using descriptive statistics. Table 1 explains the spoken fluency features.
Table 1
Utterance Fluency Measures
Type

Utterance Measure

Composite(speed andbreakdown)

Average Number ofTrimmed SPM

Composite(speed,breakdown,
and repair)

Average Number of
Untrimmed SPM

Composite(speed,breakdown,
and repair)Pure(breakdown)
Pure(breakdown)
Pure(breakdown)

Description
Delete needless repetition (i.e., as in clearly a result ofdisfluency, not for purposes of emphasis) and fillers(e.g., uh, um), then divide the total number of spoken
words by the duration, in minutes, of the speech.
Divide the total number of spoken words by the
duration, in minutes, of the speech. Total number ofwords includes fillers, false starts, and repetitions.

Calculate the average number of untrimmed syllables ineach uninterrupted speech segment between pauses,
then add one to the total number of pauses, indicating
Mean Length of Run the number of fluent sequences between silent breaks todetermine the run count. The total syllable count would
be divided by the run count. The syllable count can beverified on syllablecounter.net.
Fillers (e.g., um, uh) and silence were counted as
Average Frequency
pauses. Pauses were determined using Praat. Calculate
of Pauses per Minutethe average number of pauses divided by the time.
Average Number of Count the number of filled or silent pauses located in
Mid-Clause Pauses
mid-clause and divide the number by the total speaking
per Minutetime.
The length of silent pause was 300 ms as used in
Mean Length of
Ogawa’s (2021) study. Pauses were determined using
Pause
Praat. Calculate the average length of pauses by adding
all pause times and divide by the number of pauses.

For the qualitative analysis section, we categorized potential problems into themes (e.g.,
participants who read aloud during the third prompt and lack of formulaic utterance use).
7

外国語教育研究ジャーナル

第4巻 （ JOURNAL OF FOREIGN LANGUAGE EDUCATION AND RESEARCH, VOL. 4）

Survey questions and follow-up interviews with Jun and his classmates were categorizedusing thematic analysis to identify common themes, and the results were checked by both
authors to reach an agreement regarding the categories that the individual responses shouldbe placed in. Last, we used descriptive statistics to rank the most popular responses for the“select all that apply” question regarding their rationale for reading aloud.

Results and Discussion
Figure 1 shows the average untrimmed speech rate of Jun and his classmates (n = 11)
for all rounds of the 3/2/1 activity over a period of six weeks from Week 2 to Week 7.
Figure 1
Average Untrimmed SPM of Jun and His Classmates

Figure 1 revealed an uptrend in speech rate, with a slight decline observed in Week 5.
Based solely on this information, we cannot determine whether the 3/2/1 activity caused the
speech rate increase as this sample was limited to 11 participants from a single site (Appendix
G). The results aligned with previous 4/3/2 studies as they also showed that participants
increased speech rate. From Week 2 to Week 3, the increase might be because Week 2 was
the participants’ first time completing the 3/2/1 activity, so their initial performance gainmight be the result of increased activity familiarity. The decrease from Week 4 to Week 5
might be caused by unfamiliarity with the prompt topics (i.e., part-time jobs and selfsufficiency) and possibly due to the anxiety participants might have felt as Week 5 was theirfirst discussion test. Lastly, another possible explanation apart from the efficacy of 3/2/1 forthe increase from Weeks 3 to 7 is the amount of L2 exposure participants had throughout thesemester in other university English classes.
Although all participants increased their speech rate from Week 2 to Week 7, their8Prompt-Related Challenges: Using a Mobile Application to Measure Spoken Fluency

increases varied in degree. Figure 2 shows the individual progress of Jun and his classmatesin terms of untrimmed speech rate in SPM over six weeks for only the last round of 3/2/1.
Figure 2
Individual Untrimmed SPM of Jun and His Classmates

All participants had faster SPM in Week 2 than Week 7 (Appendix G). Moreover, from
Week 3 to Week 7, nearly all participants except User 334 (light blue triangles) performed
at a higher SPM. User 334 received a 110 SPM in Week 3 but 105 SPM in Week 7. Someparticipants recorded greater increases than others in SPM from Week 3 to Week 7. For
example, User 325 (lime green circles) received 124 SPM on the mobile application in Week
3 and increased to 172 SPM in Week 7, which was an increase of 48 syllables. According
to the secondary author, this participant worked hard and did relatively little reading aloudfor the third prompt as compared to the others. Jun, User 324 (dark blue triangles), received
103 SPM in Week 3, and 118 SPM for Week 7. Users 331 (purple triangles) and 326 (darkblue circles) respectively received an SPM of 98 and 130 in Week 3 and 108 and 137 in
Week 7; therefore, only a 10-syllable and 7-syllable increase was recorded.
To gain a better understanding of these results, we divided Jun’s monologue into thefirst and second prompts (personal opinions and experience-based prompts) versus the third
prompt (find three interesting ideas from the reading) to investigate Jun’s untrimmed speechrates (Figure 3).

9外国語教育研究ジャーナル

第4巻 （ JOURNAL OF FOREIGN LANGUAGE EDUCATION AND RESEARCH, VOL. 4）

Figure 3
Jun’s Untrimmed Speech Rate

Jun’s untrimmed speech rate for the first and second prompts increased sharply from
Week 2 to Week 3, perhaps in part due to the increased familiarity with the activity. After
Week 3, his SPM had steadily decreased, whereas for the third prompt, he had increased his
untrimmed speech rate from Weeks 5 to 7.
We further investigated this difference between the prompts across six utterance features.
In Table 2, we present a comparison of Jun’s performance in the third round of the 3/2/1
activity from Week 3 and Week 7, differentiating between the first and second prompts fromthe third prompt.
Table 2
Jun’s Utterance Fluency for the First, Second, and Third Prompts
Prompts
First and Second
Weeks
TotalsRaw% of37
Change Change
Untrimmed
Speech Rate
SPM
TrimmedSpeech Rate
SPM
Avg. Pause
Frequency

10

Third
Weeks
3

7

TotalsRaw% ofChange Change

156.5

136.7

19.8

(12.7)

139.5

209.9

70.4

50.5

118

108

10

(8.475)

140

180

40

28.571

25.0

21.5

3.5

(16.3)

17.2

19.8

2.6

15

Prompt-Related Challenges: Using a Mobile Application to Measure Spoken Fluency

Prompts
First and Second
Weeks
TotalsRaw% of37
Change Change
Avg. Pause
LengthAvg.
Mid-Clause
PausesMean Lengthof RunTime in
Seconds

Third
Weeks
3

7

TotalsRaw% ofChange Change

0.8

1.4

0.6

75

0.9

0.8

0.1

(11)

6

13.333

7.333

122.217

1

0

1

(100)

5.9

5.5

0.2

(6.8)

7.1

11.7

4.6

64.8

19.2

39.1

19.9

103.646

34.8

16.3

18.5

(53.2)

During Weeks 3 and 7, Jun experienced an undesirable outcome in five utterance
fluency measures for the first and second prompts, despite addressing the same 3/2/1
questions as he did in Week 3. These measures were untrimmed and trimmed speech rates,
pause length, mid-clause pauses, and length of run. However, one positive development wasthat he slightly reduced pause frequency. The secondary author noted that in class, he seemed
to become increasingly confident in his ability to answer the first two prompts. For the third
prompt, Jun always read aloud, resulting in a dramatic increase in his utterance fluency
measures. All but pause frequency were positively impacted. Moreover, without separating
the prompts, the application recorded 103 SPM in Week 3 and 118 SPM in Week 7. To
explain this result, although he answered the first and second prompts at a slower pace in
Week 7 compared to Week 3, he compensated by reading aloud during the third prompt more
quickly for Week 7 than Week 3.
To provide further clarification regarding the results, we included transcripts of Jun’s
1-minute speeches. The results were categorized into different prompts (Table 3). The bolditalics in the table signified instances when Jun borrowed lexico-grammatical items from theprompts. The prompts were as follows: “Did you study hard to get into university?”“Why did you decide to go to this university?” and “Share three interesting ideas orfacts from the reading.”
Table 3
Jun’s Untrimmed 1-Minute Transcripts
Week 3
Week 7
First
I didn’t study hard to get into
Yes, I did. I studied hard to get into
Prompt university because I don’t like studying. university because uh I failed to get
into university last year. So I uh muststudy hard last year.

11

外国語教育研究ジャーナル

第4巻 （ JOURNAL OF FOREIGN LANGUAGE EDUCATION AND RESEARCH, VOL. 4）

Week 3
Second I decided to go to this university
Prompt because uh I passed only thisuniversity in March.

Week 7uh I decided to go to this university
uh because I passed uh Rikkyo, Seijo,
and Toyo, so I uh selected Rikkyo
University.
Third
Uh I am interested in uh reading this uh I’m interested in first as the world
Prompt students who take entrance exams learn
becomes more connected to the Internet,
time management skills which are useful there will be many more examples in the
not just at university but for the rest of
future. Second, movie from Studio Ghibli
their lives. Universities are reviewing their and popular hits like Demon Slayer.
wall interesting systems that may lead to
new kinds of tests and vocational schools
are quicker and cheaper and.

As can be seen from the transcriptions, Jun changed the content of his answers. For
example, he said that he did not study hard to get into university because he did not likestudying; however, in Week 7, he responded that he studied hard because he failed to get
into university the previous year.1 For the second prompt, he said that he only passed Rikkyo
University, but in Week 7, he stated that he passed three universities and selected Rikkyo.
The secondary author asked Jun for his rationale for changing his response to these questions
to which he replied that formulating the response of not studying hard to get into university
was less challenging than failing to get into university. In other words, he created answers
that were inauthentic because the real answer was perceived by him to be too difficult to
explain in English. There might also be external reasons such as Jun feeling more familiar
with his classmates to share this information. Changing the content of his answers might beproblematic as according to the results of de Jong and Perfetti’s (2011) study, content
repetition with repeated practice helps build spoken fluency. From our results, students mightneed additional planning time to provide monologues authentic to their beliefs with linguistic
support from their instructor or peers to formulate their monologues. They also might benefit
from knowing the rationale behind 3/2/1 (e.g., advantages of content repetition).
Regarding reading aloud for the third prompt, we had expected participants would, toan extent, extract language from the first and second prompts for support, but we had not
expected that participants would rely on reading aloud from the textbook for the third
prompt. As a result, the feedback Jun received via the mobile application on his current
performance did not reflect his ability because reading aloud artificially boosted his fluency
as he could read aloud more quickly than he could generate speech. In the survey, we asked
participants, “How often do you read aloud from textbook reading passages during the 3/2/1
activity?” and 48.57% stated sometimes (n = 17), 25.71% stated rarely (n = 9), 14.29% said
often (n = 5), 8.57% said never (n = 3), and 2.86% said always (n = 1). In Table 4, the survey
question was as follows: “If you read aloud from the textbook while using the mobile
application during the 3/2/1 activity, what is your reason for doing so?” (Check all that
apply).
1 We double checked to ensure that this participant was in fact the same participant as Week 3 because his answers to
the same questions were contradictory.

12

Prompt-Related Challenges: Using a Mobile Application to Measure Spoken Fluency

Table 4
Participants’ (n = 35) Rationale for Reading Aloud
Rationale for Reading AloudMy mobile application score improves by reading aloud.
Reading aloud helps me to improve my spoken fluency.
I can answer the third prompt of three interesting ideas and facts.
It is difficult to recall the ideas from the reading passages.
I do not have enough of my own ideas to speak for the entire time.
I can help others understand my ideas better.
Speaking English is difficult.
There is no rule against reading aloud from the textbook.
I cannot summarize the ideas from the reading passage.
I have written my answers in the textbook.
Reading aloud is more enjoyable than speaking.

No. of% ofParticipants Agreement
18
58.06
16
51.61
14
45.16
14
45.16
9
29.03
9
29.03
8
25.81
7
22.58
3
9.68
1
3.23
1
3.23

From the results, 58.06% of participants stated that reading aloud improves their scoreon the mobile application, followed by 51.61% who felt that reading aloud during 3/2/1 helps
improve their spoken fluency. Further, 45.16% stated that they read aloud to answer the third
prompt tied with the belief that recalling ideas from the reading was challenging. From theresults, students might need an explanation of why they are not allowed to read aloud as they
believe that doing so helps them build their spoken fluency. In terms of Bjork and Bjork’s(2020) desirable difficulties, reading aloud would be less challenging than generating ideas
from memory, but low proficiency students might not be equipped to succeed in generating
contents of the textbook unless they have pre-planning time and additional strategies toexpand their answers. In the Rikkyo University (2021), textbook writers stated that for low
proficiency classes, instructors might consider allocating one minute pre-planning time toeither write down or think about their ideas, whereas higher proficiency classes can begin
speaking without planning time. Moreover, they wrote that instructors should consider the
temporary strategy of reversing the timing (i.e., 1/2/3 rather than 3/2/1), which would equate
to temporarily eliminating the condition of time constraint to support content expansion, tohelp low proficiency students speak for three minutes.
In terms of Levelt’s (1993) model, by reading aloud, students were not engaged in thesame cognitive speech production processes as they would be decoding, rather than encoding,conceptualizations and formulations; therefore, when answering the third prompt, they would
not experience the same psychological pressures when engaged in speech. One of theconditions of Gatbonton and Segalowitz’s (1988) creative automatization was mimicking
psychological pressures of real-world communication. Experiencing these pressures might
help further build their confidence when engaging in real-world communication. In the
Rikkyo University (2021), the writers stated, “The fluency questions are simple to allow
students to focus on improving fluency skills, rather than worrying about content or
vocabulary.” However, 45.16% of participants felt that recalling ideas from reading passages

13外国語教育研究ジャーナル

第4巻 （ JOURNAL OF FOREIGN LANGUAGE EDUCATION AND RESEARCH, VOL. 4）

was difficult, and 29.03% stated that they did not have enough of their own ideas to speak
for the entire time. However, textbook writers proposed that the three questions before andthe three after the reading could be suitable additional prompts for students (Rikkyo
University, 2021).
Utilization of EDC’s Formulaic Utterances Within 3/2/1
Apart from Jun’s change in the content of his responses and a reliance on reading aloudas a strategy to increase utterance fluency, we investigated the utilization of EDC’s formulaic
utterances (Appendix E). From Table 4, Jun used the EDC discussion skill of reasons within
his 3/2/1 monologues; however, if he were to incorporate additional formulaic utterances,
this integration might increase his spoken fluency (Ogawa, 2021). We analyzed the prompts
to count instances of formulaic utterance use embedded within the prompts (Table 5).
Table 5
Formulaic Utterance Use Within 3/2/1 Prompts
Formulaic
Utterances
Follow-up
Questions

What…? Who…? Is…?
How…? Would…? If…?
Which…? Do…? Did…?

Reasons

Why do you think so?

ExamplesFor example?

Opinions
Connecting
Ideas

What do you think about…?

Example 3/2/1 Prompts fromthe Textbook
Which social media do you
use? How often do you use
social media? Do you thinklearning a foreign language isimportant?
Why? Why or why not?
What examples of pop culture
do you like?
n/a

Do you agree/disagree with?

n/a

0

n/a

0

n/a

0

n/a

0

Viewpoints
Advantages/
Disadvantages
Source ofInformation

Textbook Examples of
Formulaic Utterances

How about from the viewpoint
of…?
What is one advantage/
disadvantage of…?
How do you know about that?

No. ofInstances

23

6
2
0

From Table 5, follow-up questions were the most prevalent 3/2/1 prompt-type with 23
instances. Unlike the other utterances, follow-up questions lacked any corresponding
responses. For instance, responses to opinions were as follows: “In my opinion…” and “I
think…” and for connecting the formulaic responses: “I disagree with… He said…, but I
think…” Follow-up questions, although prevalent in the EDC textbook’s 3/2/1 activity, might
not elicit the target linguistic forms (i.e., formulaic utterances) presented throughout EDC
because there were no corresponding responses. In Ogawa’s (2021) study, she had peers
provide feedback on the amount of formulaic utterance use, and participants did increase the14Prompt-Related Challenges: Using a Mobile Application to Measure Spoken Fluency

use of the formulaic utterances as a result. In addition to peer feedback, another possibility
would be to embed the formulaic utterances within the prompts and have a rating system
within the mobile application to rate the degree to which participants used the formulaic
utterances. These features might encourage students to utilize various target formulaic
utterances. Connecting ideas, viewpoints, disadvantages/advantages, and sources of
information were excluded from the current textbook’s 3/2/1 prompts. One potential solution
would be to include a diversity of formulaic utterances. An example of connecting and giving
reasons would be as follows: “Aki says that foreigners should visit Tokyo rather than Kyoto.
Do you agree with her? Why or why not?” (Appendix H).
Recycling EDC’s Prompts Across the Semester
Table 6 below revealed transcripts from Jun’s first, second, and third prompts. The firstand second prompts for Week 6 were as follows: “Would you like to go abroad? (e.g., totravel, to study, to work) Why or why not?” and “If you went abroad, would you go to an
English-speaking country or somewhere different? Why?” The third prompt was “Share threeinteresting facts or ideas from the reading.”
Table 6
Trimmed Transcripts of Jun’s First, Second, and Third Prompts
Prompts

First

Second3-Minute
I would not like to go
abroad because I’mafraid of plane. I don’t likehigh. I would not liketo go abroad.
If I went abroad, I
would go to an
English-speaking
country because I canspeak Japanese andEnglish, but I want tocommunicate, so I would
go to an Englishspeaking country. I’minterested in…

2-Minute
I would like to go
abroad to travel
because I want to see thepyramids and other things.

1-Minute
I would like to go
abroad to travel
because I want to see
pyramid.

If I went abroad, I
would go to an
English-speaking
country because I can
If I went abroad, I
speak Japanese and English wouldn’t go to
only, but I want tosomewhere different
communicate to abroad
speaking country
people, foreign people, so because I want to go to
I want to go to an
Egypt. I’m interested in …
English-speaking
country. I’m interested
in…

15外国語教育研究ジャーナル

Prompts

第4巻 （ JOURNAL OF FOREIGN LANGUAGE EDUCATION AND RESEARCH, VOL. 4）

3-Minute
One of the best ways tolearn a foreign language is
to experience the culture
and language together bystudying or living abroad.
Second, living in adormitory didn’t have to
use a foreign language toThirdcommunicate and did not
improve their language
skill much.
Finally, eating food fromhome country either fromrestaurants abroad or sentfrom home can also help
people overcome
homesickness.
If I went abroad, IFirst
would like to go to
Prompt abroad to travel
Revisited because I like castle. I
want to go to...

2-Minute
One of the best ways tolearn a foreign language is
to experience the culture
and languages together bystudying or living abroad.
Second, living in adormitory didn’t have to
use a foreign language tocommunicate and did not
improve their language
skills much.
Finally, eating food fromhome country either fromrestaurants abroad or sentfrom home can also help
people overcome
homesickness.

1-Minute

One of the best ways tolearn a foreign language is
to experience the culture
and languages together bystudying or living abroad.
Living in a dormitory
didn’t have to use a foreign
language to communicate
and did not improve theirlanguage skill much.
Eating...

As seen in Table 6, for the first prompts, Jun changed his answers again from notwanting to go abroad to wanting to visit Egypt. The secondary author stated that Jun changed
his opinion of not wanting to go abroad because after the first round, the author suggested
to him that if he did not like flying, he could instead go by boat. The idea of going by boatchanged Jun’s opinion. Later, however, he stated that he did not want to go to Egypt, but hefelt that the answer would be easier to say than that he did not want to go abroad becauseof his fear of heights. He also changed from wanting to go to an English-speaking country
to communicate in English to not wanting to go to an English-speaking country because hewanted to go to Egypt. One possibility is that he was persuaded by his classmates to change
his answers.
In addition to reading aloud, Jun also relied on the strategy of slightly altering theprompts to integrate them into his monologues. These slight changes were bolded anditalicized in Table 5. From the trimmed transcriptions of his three speeches, 122 syllables(23.02%) were derived from slightly manipulating the prompt, 272 syllables (51.32%) camefrom reading aloud from the textbook reading passage, and 136 syllables (25.66%) wereself-generated (i.e., without the help of the textbook or prompts). Slightly manipulating theprompt would be classified under Gatbonton and Segalowitz’s (1988) creative automatization.
To further support the automatization of these slightly manipulated linguistic items, recycling
the prompts might be helpful. Topics also vary in degrees of familiarity to participants; so,instead of the mobile application comparing performances between topics, comparing
performances within topics might represent participants’ utterance fluency gains.
16Prompt-Related Challenges: Using a Mobile Application to Measure Spoken Fluency

Bui et al. (2019) investigated the spaced learning effects of task repetition on accuracy,complexity, and fluency. They found that the time between initial and repeated performances
seemed to play a moderating role in the impact of task repetition on speed fluency.
Specifically, the benefit of increased speed fluency was most pronounced when there wereimmediate or shorter intervals between performances. However, for the measure of repair
fluency, scores were higher for one-week intervals between performances. From the resultsof their study, Bui et al. (2019) explained that as the interval between practice sessions
increases, lexico-grammatical items become less readily accessible for retrieval. With longer
intervals, it can be presumed that students would need to begin from the beginning andrecreate the process of conceptualization and formulation. Consequently, this would result in
noticeably reduced fluency in their spoken output. From some participant performances, we
believe that the effects of spaced learning might help automatize these prompt responses(Appendix H).
Limitations
This pilot study was subject to certain limitations. Firstly, the participant pool was
restricted to a limited number of individuals; moreover, these participants were from theauthors’ own classes. The study also relied on descriptive statistics rather than inferential
because of the small number of participants, and the sample was not multi-site, thereby
eliminating the generalizability of these findings beyond our participants. Although theseobservations were based on our participants, the prevalence of these practices such as reading
aloud for the third prompt remained uncertain, especially in the context of using the mobile
application. Another limitation pertained to the survey employed in the study, which was notformally validated. Therefore, there might have been alternative methodologically rigorous
approaches to generate reasons for reading aloud that could have been implemented.

Conclusion
Monitoring progress matters as the language-based rationale for EDC is to build theirspoken fluency, and with detailed feedback, instructors can make better pedagogicaldecisions. Hence, we developed a mobile application to measure in-class L2 spoken fluency
of monologic speeches during the 3/2/1 activity, a modified version of the 4/3/2 activity by
Maurice (1983). We investigated one participant’s monologic utterance fluency for six weeks
to exemplify the problems that occurred with monitoring his spoken fluency for formative
feedback purposes. The possible issues concerned a) a lack of repetition of topics, b) no
strategy training during pre-planning time, and c) an under-utilization of formulaic utterances.
Potential solutions included recycling previous prompts, removing the third prompt ofsharing three ideas and facts, and creating additional prompts embedded with target formulaic
utterances to encourage use. Avenues for future research include the effects of such changes
on mitigating issues experienced by mobile application users.

17

外国語教育研究ジャーナル

第4巻 （ JOURNAL OF FOREIGN LANGUAGE EDUCATION AND RESEARCH, VOL. 4）

References
Ahmadian, M. J., & Tavakoli, M. (2011). The effects of simultaneous use of careful online
planning and task repetition on accuracy, complexity, and fluency in EFL learners’ oral
production. Language Teaching Research, 15(1), 35–59.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168810383329
Bain, M., Huh, J., Han, T., & Zisserman, A. (2023). WhisperX: Time-accurate speechtranscription of long-form audio. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2303.00747
Bjork, R. A., & Bjork, E. L. (2020). Desirable difficulties in theory and practice. Journal ofApplied Research in Memory and Cognition, 9(4), 475–479.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2020.09.003
Boers, F. (2014). A reappraisal of the 4/3/2 activity. RELC Journal, 45(3), 221–235.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688214546964
Boersma, P., & Van Heuven, V. (2001). Praat, a system for doing phonetics by computer.
Glot International, 5(9), 341–347.
Brooks, C., Carroll, A., Gillies, R. M., & Hattie, J. (2019). A matrix of feedback for learning.
Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 44(4). https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2018v44n4.2
Bui, G., Ahmadian, M. J., & Hunter, A. (2019). Spacing effects on repeated L2 task
performance. System, 81, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2018.12.006
De Jong, N., & Perfetti, C. A. (2011). Fluency training in the ESL classroom: An experimental
study of fluency development and proceduralization. Language Learning, 61(2), 533–
568. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00620.x
DeKeyser, R. M. (2017). Knowledge and skill in ISLA. In S. Loewen & M. Sato (Eds.), The
Routledge handbook of instructed second language acquisition (pp. 15–32). Routledge.
Gatbonton, E., & Segalowitz, N. (1988). Creative automatization: Principles for promoting
fluency within a communicative framework. TESOL Quarterly, 22(3), 473–492.
https://doi.org/10.2307/3587290
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research,
77(1), 81–112. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487
Hurling, S. (2012). Introduction to EDC. New Directions in Teaching and Learning English
Discussion, 1(1), 2–10.
Levelt, W. J. M. (1993). Speaking: From intention to articulation. MIT Press.
https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/6393.001.0001
Maurice, K. (1983). The fluency workshop. TESOL Newsletter, 17, 429.
Ogawa, C. (2019). A one-semester form-focused intervention on the development of speaking
proficiency. [Doctoral dissertation, Temple University]. Temple University Libraries.
https://doi.org/10.34944/dspace/2025
Ogawa, C. (2021). Revised 4/3/2 task: Fluency training with formulaic language in the EFL
classroom. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 18(4), 1108–1127.
https://doi.org/10.18823/asiatefl.2021.18.4.3.1108
Ogawa, C. (2022). CAF indices and human ratings of oral performances in an opinion-basedmonologue task. Language Testing in Asia, 12(4).
https://doi.org/10.1186/s40468-022-00154-9
18

Prompt-Related Challenges: Using a Mobile Application to Measure Spoken Fluency

Radford, A., Kim, J. W., Xu, T., Brockman, G., McLeavey, C., & Sutskever, I. (2022). Robust
speech recognition via large-scale weak supervision. arXiv.
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2212.04356
Rikkyo University. (2021). Instructor Handbook: English Discussion Class.
Skehan, P. (2014). Processing perspectives on task performance. John Benjamins Publishing
Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.5
Sturges, J., Arthurson, D., Itoi, K., Koike, A., & Reid, S. (2023). What’s your opinion?
Interactive skills for effective discussion – Book II. (3rd ed.). DTP Publishing.
Suzuki, S., Kormos, J., & Uchihara, T. (2021). The relationship between utterance andperceived fluency: A meta-analysis of correlational studies. The Modern Language
Journal, 105(2), 435–463. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12706
Tavakoli, P., & Wright, C. (2020). Second language speech fluency: From research topractice. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108589109
Thai, C., & Boers, F. (2016). Repeating a monologue under increasing time pressure: Effects
on fluency, complexity, and accuracy. TESOL Quarterly, 50(2), 369–393.
https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.232
Tran, M. N., & Saito, K. (2021). Effects of the 4/3/2 activity revisited: Extending Boers(2014) and Thai & Boers (2016). Language Teaching Research.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168821994136

19

外国語教育研究ジャーナル

第4巻 （ JOURNAL OF FOREIGN LANGUAGE EDUCATION AND RESEARCH, VOL. 4）

Appendices
Appendix A: Spoken Fluency Mobile Application

Launch Screen

Settings Page

Speaker QR Scanner

Listener Scan Page

Speech Rate

Listener-based
Perceived Fluency
RatingListener-based
Comprehensibility
RatingCongrats – Top Score
Page

20

Prompt-Related Challenges: Using a Mobile Application to Measure Spoken Fluency

Appendix B: 3/2/1 Prompts in the EDC Textbook
Week/
Lesson
2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

3/2/1 Prompts▪ Who are your best friends? What do you talk about?
▪ Who do you talk to when you have a problem? Why?
▪ Share three interesting ideas from the reading.
▪ Did you study hard to get into university?
▪ Why did you decide to go to this university?
▪ Share three interesting ideas or facts from the reading.
▪ Before coming to university, did you think it would be easy or difficult to makefriends at university?
▪W hat do you want to do after you graduate from university? (e.g., job, family,
travel)▪ Share three interesting ideas or facts from the reading.
▪ What kind of part-time job would you like to try?
▪ In what ways are you independent? (e.g., living alone, doing housework, making
important decisions)▪ Share three interesting ideas or facts from the reading.
▪ Would you like to go abroad? (e.g., to travel, to study, to work) Why or why not?
▪ If you went abroad, would you go to an English-speaking country or somewhere
different? Why?
▪ Share three interesting ideas or facts from the reading.
▪ What examples of traditional culture do you like? Why?
▪ What examples of pop culture do you like? Why?
▪ Share three interesting ideas or facts from the reading.
▪ What customs do you follow? (e.g., on holidays, at festivals, in daily life)▪W hat customs from other countries have you experienced? (e.g., Halloween,birthday cake, Chinese New Year)▪ Share three interesting ideas or facts from the reading.
▪ Do you think learning a foreign language is important?
▪ What foreign languages have you studied? How did you study those languages?
▪ Share three interesting ideas or facts from the reading.
▪ Do you want to use a foreign language at work? Why or why not?
▪ How do you balance studying with other activities? (e.g., going to club activities,
working part-time, enjoying free time)▪ Share three interesting ideas or facts from the reading.
▪ Which social media do you use or not use? Why?
▪ How often do you use social media?
▪ Share three interesting ideas or facts from the reading.
▪W hat public rules do you usually follow? (e.g., at school, on trains, in restaurants,on the street)▪W hat are some common bad manners in public places? (e.g., on trains, in cafes, atuniversity)▪ Share three interesting ideas or facts from the reading.

21

外国語教育研究ジャーナル

Week/
Lesson13

14

第4巻 （ JOURNAL OF FOREIGN LANGUAGE EDUCATION AND RESEARCH, VOL. 4）

3/2/1 Prompts▪ Is poverty a problem in Japan?
▪ What can younger people do to help elderly people?
▪ Share three interesting ideas or facts from the reading.
▪ What is your best memory from your first semester at university?
▪ What was difficult about your first semester at university?
▪ What skills and personal qualities have you developed at university?

Note. Adapted from What’s Your Opinion? Interactive Skills for Effective Discussion—Book II, by
Sturges et al., 2023.

Appendix C: Copyright Notices

Audacity® software is copyright © 1999–2023 Audacity Team.
Web site: https://audacityteam.org/
It is free software distributed under the terms of the GNU General Public License.
The name Audacity® is a registered trademark.

Appendix D: Questions and Prompts for Survey on Reading Aloud
1

2

3

4

22

When you were using the spoken fluency mobile application today, did you read aloudfrom passages in the textbook? 今日、Spoken Fluencyモバイルアプリケーションを使用する際、教科書の文章を音読したのですか？ Yes, no, I don’t remember
When using the mobile application, how often do you read aloud from reading passages
in the textbook? モバイルアプリケーションを使用する際、教科書の文章を音読する
頻度はどのくらいですか？ Never, rarely, sometimes, often, always
If you read aloud from the textbook while using the mobile application, what is yourreasoning for doing so? (You can reply in Japanese or English) モバイルアプリケーショ
ンを使用しながら教科書を音読する場合、その理由は何ですか？（日本語でも英語
でも構いません。）(short answer response)
Below is a list of possible reasons for reading aloud while using the mobile application
during the 3/2/1 activity. If you read aloud, please check all that apply. 以下は、3/2/1の活動でモバイルアプリケーションを使用しながら音読をする場合に考えられる理由です。音読をされる方は、該当するものをすべてチェックしてください。
▪ I can improve my spoken fluency (speed of speech) by reading aloud. 私は、音読することでスピーキングの流暢さ（話すスピード）を向上させることができます。
▪ I am lacking enough content to speak for the entire given time. 与えられた時間のすべてを話すには、内容が不足している。
▪T he third question asks me about interesting facts and ideas from the reading. I cannot
recall the ideas and facts from the reading passages. 3つ目の質問は、読書から得た興
味深い事実やアイデアについて尋ねるものです。リーディングパッセージからア
イデアやファクトを思い出すことができない。
▪ Speaking English is difficult for me. 英語を話すことは私にとって難しいことです。
▪ I enjoy reading aloud more than speaking. 話すことよりも音読の方が楽しいです。
▪ I can improve my mobile application score by reading aloud. 音読をすることで、流暢な話し方のモバイルアプリケーションのスコアを向上させることができますね。
▪T here is no rule against reading aloud from the textbook. 教科書を音読してはいけな
いという決まりはありません。
▪ Other:Prompt-Related Challenges: Using a Mobile Application to Measure Spoken Fluency

Appendix E: Discussion and Comprehension Skills
Unit Goal

Lesson No.
1
2

Sharing andSupporting
Opinions

3
4
5
6
7

Organizing a
Discussion

8

9
10
11
Challenging and
Evaluating Ideas

12

13
14

Discussion Skill
ExamplesIntroduction to English Discussion Class
In my opinion, … I think…
Opinions
What do you think?
One reason/example is…
Supporting Opinions
Why do you think so?
What…? Which…? How…?
Follow-up Questions
Do you…? Can you…?
Do you understand?
Comprehension Skills
I see. I understand.
I agree/disagree. You said…
Connecting Ideas
What do you think of my idea?
Can I start? Can I say something?
Joining a Discussion
Would anyone like to ask a question?
What shall we discuss first/next?
Changing Topics
Is there anything more to add?
So, we agree/disagree about…
In other words...?
Paraphrasing
So, do you mean…?
I mean…
From (X’s) point of view…
Different Viewpoints
How about (X’s) point of view?
One advantage/disadvantage of…
Balancing Opinions
What’s one advantage/disadvantage?
According to…
Sources of Information I read/heard/saw/learned…
Where did you read/see/hear that?
Can you explain?
Clarification
What do you mean?
Could you repeat?
Review

Note. Adapted from What’s Your Opinion? Interactive Skills for Effective Discussion—Book II, by
Sturges et al., 2023.

Appendix F: Example Output Data From Automated Analysis
Transcript

Transcript (Raw)

PausesMy best friend is
My best friend is
1: Unfilled Pause redacted He is my high redacted He is my high[12.4–14.8] [Length:school student My high school student My high2.4]
school friends She
school friends She
2: Unfilled Pause knows a lot of things
knows a lot of things[16.4–19.2] [Length:
and intelligent [1] Why and intelligent Why are
2.8]
are they your friends
they your friends I
3: Unfilled Pause -Utterance
Fluencypause count22
total pause length
71.4
articulation rate23

外国語教育研究ジャーナル

Transcript

第4巻 （ JOURNAL OF FOREIGN LANGUAGE EDUCATION AND RESEARCH, VOL. 4）

Transcript (Raw)

PausesUtterance
Fluency[2] I think they know a think they know a lot of[25.7–28.6] [Length: 4.7
lot of things and they
things and they make
3.0]
make they make methey make me happy
4: Unfilled Pause mean length of
happy and [3] I feel I
and I feel I feel exciting[33.8–41.2] [Length: runfeel exciting when they when they when I talk
7.4]
10.4
when I talk to them [4] to them I talk to I I talk 5: Unfilled Pause I talk to I [5] I talk to to my high school[42.1–43.1] [Length: syllables
my high school friends friends when I have a
1.0](untrimmed perwhen I have a problem problem This is because 6: Unfilled Pause minute)This is because they
they know they know
[52.2–53.9] [Length: 241
know they know [6] me me they know a lot of
1.7][7] they know a lot of things about me and7: Unfilled Pause start time inthings about me andand they they can they
[54.4–56.5] [Length: seconds
and [8] they [9] they
can give me best advice
2.2]
3.8
can they can give me
for me And about about 8: Unfilled Pause best advice for me [10] about university[60.6–66.4] [Length: end time in
And [11] about about
universal universal
5.8]
seconds[12] about university
course I will I will talk 9: Unfilled Pause 157.4
universal universal
to I will talk to my[66.7–68.5] [Length:
course I will I will talk college friends when I
1.8]
speech rate
to I [13] will talk to my have a problem about
10: Unfilled Pause (trimmed percollege friends when I college about college[72.7–74.0] [Length: minute)have a problem about
and This is girls They
1.3]
94.2
college [14] about
are they are my they
11: Unfilled Pause college and [15] This is are same They are same
[74.2–76.2] [Length: Untrimmed total
girls They are they are They are same They are
2.0]
syllable countmy [16] they are same same So they know a
12: Unfilled Pause 153.6
They are same [17]lot of things about my[77.4–78.5] [Length:
They are same [18]courage But my high
1.1]
They are same So they school student is
13: Unfilled Pause know a lot of things
different High school[84.8–86.0] [Length:
about my courage [19] student is not my is not
1.2]
But my high schoolsame courage we can
14: Unfilled Pause student is different High we can not to talk about[92.5–93.6] [Length:school student is not
my problem I like she’s
1.1]
my is not same courage cute and she’s
15: Unfilled Pause [20] we can we can not intelligent and[94.7–98.8] [Length:[21] to talk about my
4.1]
problem [22] I like
16: Unfilled Pause she’s cute and she’s[101.1–102.4]
intelligent and and[Length: 1.2]
17: Unfilled Pause [104.8–106.0][Length: 1.2]
18: Unfilled Pause [106.5–109.7][Length: 3.2]
24

Prompt-Related Challenges: Using a Mobile Application to Measure Spoken Fluency

Transcript

Transcript (Raw)

Utterance
Fluency

Pauses19: Unfilled Pause [114.0–115.8][Length: 1.8]
20: Unfilled Pause [123.9–126.1][Length: 2.2]
21: Unfilled Pause [127.6–128.8][Length: 1.2]
22: Unfilled Pause [131.7–153.3][Length: 21.6]

Appendix G: Untrimmed Speech Rate (n = 11) Average of All 3/2/1 Rounds for Six
Weeks According to Automated Transcription Method
Users
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334

Week 2
63
102
108
91
74
117
101
92
67
89
67

Week 3
103
124
130
77
91
122
101
98
102
122
110

Speech Rates
Week 4
Week 5
111
99
153
135
132
108
90
94
112
113
138
141
125
130
101
89
130
100
136
112
142
123

Week 6
107
165
124
115
115
157
157
127
116
135
133

Week 7
118
172
137
117
113
159
152
108
151
144
105

Appendix H: New 3/2/1 Prompts
Week

2

3

Prompts▪ Who are your best friends?
▪W hat do you talk about with your best friends? (e.g., movies, music, classes, club
activities, relationships)▪ When you have a problem do you usually talk to your friends or family? Why?
▪ In your opinion, what is the importance of having friends?
▪ Who are your best friends?
▪ What do you talk about with your best friends?
▪ Did you study hard to get into this university? Why or why not?
▪ Why did you decide to go to this university?
▪ Do you think high school is stressful?
▪ What are examples of stressful experiences for high school students?
25

外国語教育研究ジャーナル

Week

4

5

6

7

8

9

26

第4巻 （ JOURNAL OF FOREIGN LANGUAGE EDUCATION AND RESEARCH, VOL. 4）

Prompts▪ Did you study hard to get into this university? Why or why not?
▪ Why did you decide to go to this university?
▪ Did you think it would be easy or difficult to make friends at university?
▪ Why did you think it would be easy or difficult?
▪W hat do you want to do after you graduate from university? (e.g., job, family,
travel)▪ Did you think it would be easy or difficult to make friends at university?
▪ Why did you think it would be easy or difficult?
▪ What kind of part-time job would you like to try?
▪ In what ways are you independent? (e.g., living alone, doing housework, making
important decisions)▪ Do you think it is important to be independent? Why or why not?
▪ What kind of part-time job would you like to try?
▪ In what ways are you independent? (e.g., living alone, doing housework, making
important decisions)▪ Would you like to go abroad? (e.g., to travel, to study, to work) Why or why not?
▪ If you went abroad, would you go to an English-speaking country or a non-Englishspeaking country? Why?
▪ What country would you visit? Why?
▪ Would you like to go abroad? (e.g., to travel, to study, to work) Why or why not?
▪ If you went abroad, would you go to an English-speaking country or a non-Englishspeaking country? Why?
▪W hat are your favorite examples of traditional culture? Why? (e.g., music, tea
ceremony, Obon festival, judo)▪ What are your favorite examples of pop culture? Why? (e.g., music, anime, manga)▪ Do you prefer traditional culture or pop culture? Why?
▪W hat are your favorite examples of traditional culture? Why? (e.g., music, tea
ceremony, Obon festival, judo)▪ What are your favorite examples of pop culture? Why? (e.g., music, anime, manga)▪ What Japanese customs do you follow? (e.g., on holidays, at festivals, in daily life)▪W hat foreign customs have you experienced? (e.g., Halloween, birthday cake,
Chinese New Year)▪ Do you prefer Japanese customs or foreign customs? Why?
▪W hat examples of Japanese customs do you follow? (e.g., on holidays, at festivals,
in daily life)▪W hat examples of foreign customs have you experienced? (e.g., Halloween, birthday
cake, Chinese New Year)▪ Do you prefer Japanese customs or foreign customs? Why?
▪ What foreign languages have you studied? Why?
▪ Do you think learning a foreign language is important? Why?
▪ In your opinion, what is the best way to study a foreign language? (e.g., watching tv,
reading, listening to music, making foreign friends) Why?

Prompt-Related Challenges: Using a Mobile Application to Measure Spoken Fluency

Week

10

11

12

13

14

Prompts▪ What foreign languages have you studied? Why?
▪ Do you think learning a foreign language is important? Why?
▪ Jun believes everyone should use a foreign language at work. Do you agree?
▪ Why or why not?
▪ From the viewpoint of university students, what are good ways to relax during thesemester? (e.g., going to club activities, hot springs, drinking tea, hanging out withfriends)▪ What are the advantages of relaxing during the semester?
▪ What are the disadvantages of relaxing during the semester?
▪ Jun believes everyone should use a foreign language at work. Do you agree?
▪ Why or why not?
▪ From the viewpoint of university students, what are good ways to relax during thesemester? (e.g., going to club activities, hiking, going to hot springs, drinking tea)
▪ What are some examples of social media?
▪ Ryo thinks the best social media for students is Instagram. Do you agree?
▪ Why or why not?
▪ What is one disadvantage of social media?
▪ What are some examples of social media?
▪ Ryo thinks the best social media for students is Instagram. Do you agree?
▪ Why or why not?
▪ What is one disadvantage of social media?
▪ What do you think about following public rules? (e.g., school rules, train rules)▪ Why?
▪ From the viewpoint of teachers, what are the advantages of following rules? (e.g.,doing homework)▪ What do you think about following public rules? (e.g., school rules, train rules)▪ Why?
▪ From the viewpoint of teachers, what are the advantages of following rules? (e.g.,doing homework)▪ Aki thinks that poverty is a problem in Japan. Do you agree?
▪ How do you know about that?
▪W hat can younger people do to help elderly people? (e.g., do household work, makeconversation, offer to buy groceries)▪ Aki thinks that poverty is a problem in Japan. Do you agree?
▪ How do you know about that?
▪W hat can younger people do to help elderly people? (e.g., do household work, makeconversation, offer to buy groceries)▪ How do you know about that?
▪ Who are your best friends?
▪W hat do you talk about with your best friends? (e.g., movies, music, classes, club
activities, relationships)▪ When you have a problem do you usually talk to your friends or family? Why?

Note. Adapted from What’s Your Opinion? Interactive Skills for Effective Discussion—Book II, by
Sturges et al., 2023.

27