The Attitudes and Opinions of College-Age Japanese EFL Learners to Reading Aloud as a means of
Increasing Oral Fluency
Andy Rushton

Abstract
A lack of willingness to communicate or L2 anxiety amongst Japanese EFL learners has been noted in theliterature and a method is clearly required to address such issues. English language teaching (ELT)
techniques are subject to trends and in recent years reading aloud (RA) has fallen out of favor with Western
ELT methodology, and is often seen as traditional and thus no longer relevant. However, in other areas of
EFL, and on an individual level, many teachers and learners have found RA to be beneficial speaking
practice, if not in terms of creative meaningful production, then certainly by providing the necessary oral
practice of the sounds of English. A controlled RA program within the context of a university EFL class was
carried out. As a result of such practice, an increase in confidence by becoming accustomed to making
English sounds through RA was noted. This increase in confidence had a marked impact on learners’
perception of their own fluency, which directly affected learners’ willingness to communicate and L2
anxiety. It is proposed that RA offers a concrete method of dealing with these relevant issues in Japanese
EFL.
1. On fluency
Nunan [1] (1991) states: “To most people, mastering the art of speaking is the single most important aspectof learning a second or foreign language, and success is measured in terms of the ability to carry out aconversation in the language.” Hedge [2] (2000), defines this further as: “... responding coherently within theturns of the conversation, linking words and phrases, using intelligible pronunciation and appropriate
intonation, and doing all this without undue hesitation.” In common ELT parlance this is fluency - the ability
to not pause, repeat or self-correct too frequently, maintain an appropriate speaking speed, and achieving an
acceptable level of communicative competence, ([3]Hedge,1993).
In the Japanese EFL classroom, learners would certainly attest to the desirability of being able to speak
fluently ([4]Dwyer, Heller-Murphy, 1996), however, the key factors of learner variables such as anxiety,willingness to communicate, attitude, and motivation; and learning variables including instruction and taskcomplexity, influence their fluency development, ([5]Muller et al, 2014).
2. Learner variables
2.1 Willingness to communicate
Among Japanese university students, communication apprehension exists in both Japanese and English([6]McCroskey, Gudykunst and Nishida, 1985). Hardworking students with high test scores are frequently－ 19 －

believed to be reticent due to their fear of making a mistake in English in public, and in order to avoid thisembarrassment favor silence instead ([7]Matsuoka, Matsumoto, Poole, 2014). This maybe part of the greater
Japanese educational milieu, most likely shaped by cultural beliefs originating from Confucianism and its
effects on interactional behavior, which stymie students’ willingness to communicate in English,([8]Matsuoka 2009; [9]Yashima, 2002).
2.2 L2 Anxiety
Horowitz [10], (1986) believes the specific anxiety reaction of learning a foreign language is a hurdle todeveloping any spoken fluency, and which has been well noted by teachers, although research results remaininconsistent. As noted above, Japanese students have a perfectionistic view of speaking a language and feelthat they should not attempt to do so until they have a very high level of confidence usually in grammaticalaccuracy.
3. Learning variables
In a second language learning context, a lack of exposure to and sufficient practice in the target languagemeans improvements in spoken fluency become unlikely if not extremely difficult to achieve. A typicalJapanese university EFL oral communication course equates to only fifteen 90-minute lessons a semester topractice speaking English. Having come from high school where the grammar-translation tradition ofJapanese English classes focused almost solely on written university entrance examinations, oral
communication was superfluous, and marginalized, meaning learners entering university are unaccustomed
to and unprepared for oral communication in L2 within class time.
If learning variables such as the class size, duration and frequency, and learner variables such as willingness
to communicate, L2 anxiety and motivation are factored in, then the efficacy of those 15, 90-minute lessons
diminishes rapidly. Fluency is impeded by inadequate practice opportunity and L2 speech remains slow withfrequent pauses, hesitations and repeats. Consequently, a way of allowing Japanese EFL learners to increase
speaking practice time within a context which accommodates their cultural and restricted L2 exposure isclearly required.
4. Reading Aloud
Outside a university, or other EFL teaching environments which venerate ELT methodological literature,
independent L2 learners are known to actively engage in the practice of reading aloud (RA) as a means of
spoken L2 practice. One need only turn to social media and the internet where numerous personalendorsements of RA, albeit from highly motivated individuals, abound (Google search “reading aloud toimprove your speaking a foreign language”). They all share a similar experience with RA in an L2, and claim
it actually works to improve speaking confidence, fluency and pronunciation. Maybe such claims can belegitimized when ELT luminaries such as Stevick [11] (1989) produces anecdotal evidence from actual
independent learners as to their belief in the effectiveness of the routine practice of RA. Areas ofeffectiveness supposedly include: fluency, establishing good pronunciation and then recording one’s own
voice, reading comprehension; memorizing vocabulary; understanding grammatical structure; consolidating－ 20 －

written notes; a positive effect when using the same language later; and improving awareness of one’s own
speaking by self-monitoring. This would seem to fly in the face of contemporary ELT methodology which
would recommend against RA due to the detrimental effects of its bottom-up approach on reading
comprehension, reading speed, and pronunciation ([12]Klapper, 1992, [13]Eskey and Grabe 1998, [14]Grabeand Stoller 2002, [15]Celce-Murcia, Brinton, and Goodwin, 1996). Moreover, RA’s image within ELT
literature is somewhat traditional and thus synonymous with bad practice, regardless of its good points, ([16]Gibson, 2008). Despite RA not communicating the speaker's personal message, Swan[17] (1985) believes it
is possible for learners to acquire language skills through activities that do not utilize actual language use andpossess seemingly little immediate communicative value. An improved memory of vocabulary would
certainly be such a skill.
Very recently, cognitive psychologists, Forrin and MacLeod[18] (2018) at The University of Waterloo,
Ontario, have discovered the advantage of saying words aloud rather than reading silently as a means ofimproving the memory of a vocabulary set. This phenomena has been termed The Production Effect andsuggests that memory is improved through oral production because of the combination of “a motor (speech)
act and a unique, self-referential auditory input.”More recently, as perhaps a sign that RA is now being viewed by mainstream methodology as viable
practice, even if as only as a means of testing, The Pearson Test of English (PTE Academic) has a RA
component in its speaking test section. A text of up to 60 words appears on a screen which the candidate has
40 seconds to read silently to prepare, before being recorded reading it aloud.
Outside the realm of Anglophone-centred CLT, however, in second language classrooms around the world,
RA still continues to be viewed as a valid means to improving oral production, especially when related toreading strategies such as strengthening the connection between graphemes and phonemes to aid in reading
speed and pronunciation, ([19]Kailani, 1998). Interestingly, it is seen as a valid approach to reducing
speaking anxiety and improving the classroom atmosphere ([20]Gánem-Gutiérrez, 2009; [16] Gibson, 2008;[21] Huang, 2010), something that, as previously noted, Japanese EFL learners could clearly benefit from. In
fact, Yasukochi[22] (2013), remarking that Japanese EFL occurs mainly as the completion of grammar
exercises in silence, and knowing the propensity for anxiety related to trying to achieve grammaticalaccuracy, urges Japanese EFL learners to read aloud for at least 50% of their study time.
Until now, the efficacy of RA seems to be split into two camps - actual L2 learners who believe they havemade real gains in spoken fluency, and ELT researchers who would prefer to pigeon-hole RA with other now
less fashionable i.e. traditional L2 learning strategies. It remains to be seen, however, how RA might benefit
learners in a group context utilized as a mandatory technique to improve fluency through increased
confidence in uttering L2 sounds. Gabrielatos[23] (2002) warns that RA should not be used as the sole
opportunity for speaking practice in a group, unless learners mistakenly use it as a model of oral production,using Bygate’s [24](1987) insight that “speech is not spoken writing”. For Japanese EFL learners, RA is notabout providing a model of spoken L2 per se, but much more to do with causing physical production of
speech in the L2, which as previously mentioned, is often avoided, due to complex socio-cultural reasons,－ 21 －

([22]Yasukochi, 2013). Therefore, through the habit formation of L2 oral production provided by consistentand regular RA, it is hypothesized that learners could gradually feel more comfortable about producing L2
sounds which they can then personalize through their own production. RA is a supplementary activity, an
exercise to build the “speaking muscle”, and more often than not practiced away from class. RA could exist
as a kind of private experimentation that allows the learner to discover and become comfortable with their
L2 speaking voice, somewhat akin to Dornyei’s motivational Ideal L2 self presenting a “vivid and real
image: one can see, hear and feel one’s ideal self” ([24]Dörnyei et. al., 2009).
To investigate the efficacy of RA as a means to improve spoken fluency with learner variables such as
anxiety and WTC, a three-month homework RA program was set up.
5. The Research Methodology
5.1 Overall Research Aims
To investigate the attitudes and opinions of college-age Japanese EFL learners in a four-year university
English program on the effect of reading aloud on their English oral fluency.
5.2 Research Questions
1. What are the learners’ attitudes and opinions towards using RA as a means of improving their own
level of fluency, L2 anxiety, and willingness to communicate?
2. If perceived self-efficacy of RA exists, do learners feel they can continue to utilize it as a means of
future practice?
5.3 The Participants
Initially, there were 41 participants who completed the Pre-task questionnaire. They were Japanese female
students in the English and Tourism department (15 first year, 10 second year; 16 third year) from a four-year
women’s university in Western Japan. The students were expecting to enter the tourism and hospitality
sectors upon graduation and therefore have a potential real-life situational need for English. After threemonths the number of completed questionnaires was 32. Nine were discounted from the original 41 forreasons ranging from: less than 80% completion of actual read aloud activity away from class (1); absence(4); incorrect Post-task questionnaire completion (2); and outliers (2).
5.4 Research design
Two questionnaires were administered - one at the beginning of the research period to ascertain levels ofperceived pre-existing fluency, L2 anxiety and willingness to communicate. The second questionnaire wasadministered after a period of three months of regular RA had been carried out to gauge if the participants－ 22 －

were aware of any positive difference in their fluency levels and any changes in affective factors whichmight have previously been perceived to have adversely affected those levels.
RA practice was mainly carried out by students away from class although there were opportunities in thecourse of regular classroom procedures. Texts were supplied by the teacher and sources usually included
designated class texts from the Cutting Edge series (Pearson) at Starter, Elementary and Pre-intermediatelevels, and A Tale of Two Cities (Oxford Bookworm series). In the second half of the project audio-scripts
from the online listening website elllo.org (English Listening Lesson Library Online) were used. The texts
selected ranged from approximately one to two minutes of learner reading speed. The participants were
instructed to read aloud a minimum of three times a week, recording each attempt on a device such as asmartphone. The device provided the date, time and duration of each attempt and served as sufficient proofof task completion. At the beginning of each class, participants exchanged devices with a partner so that peer
checking could be carried out. This was also monitored by the teacher, this researcher, who also randomly
checked and listened to excerpts of recorded RA practice. The participants were awarded points forsatisfactory completion as part of the homework requirement of the course.
5.5 Questionnaire designs
The questionnaires used a four-point Likert scale: 1. Strongly disagree; 2. Disagree; 3. Agree; 4. Strongly
agree. The decision was taken to remove a neutral or midpoint (neither agree or disagree/ don`t know) as it
was felt it would present an option which was too convenient for Japanese learners to avoid giving an
opinion. Reid[25] (1990) states that Japanese respondents often select the neutral option when an odd
number system in a Likert-style questionnaire is implemented thus clouding an insight into clearly definedlearning attitudes. Both sets of questionnaires (Pre and Post-task) were completed anonymously but divided
by class.
5.6 Data analysis
Data collected from each Likert-type item was analyzed by both percentages and a mean score. The strengthof the respondents’ agreement to each item was calculated thus: strongly agree (four points); agree (threepoints); disagree (two points); disagree (one point).
5.7 Translation
To maximize the quality of the questionnaire data, translation from English to Japanese was necessary due tothe at times low English ability of the respondents. The translation was done by two native Japanese speaker
English teachers - one to carry out the initial translation, and the other to check it.
5.8 Administration
The questionnaire was paper-based and personally distributed during class time to ease the administering
process ([26]Dörnyei, 2007).

－ 23 －

6. Read Aloud Research Findings
Read Aloud Pre-task Survey N =41

Strongly
disagree

Item

Disagree

Agree

Stronglyagree

1. Speaking English is easy for me.

6
29
6(14.63%) (70.73%) (14.63%)

0

2. I feel confident speaking in English.

11
228(26.83%) (53.66%) (19.51%)

0

3. I speak English slowly.

02(4.88%)

2217(53.66%) (41.46%)

4. I’m nervous of making mistakes when I speak English

2(4.88%)

5. I make mistakes when I speak English

1(2.44%)

6. When I speak English my mind goes blank.

4(9.76%)

1420(34.15%) (48.78%)

3(7.32%)

7. I don’t like speaking English in class.

7
21
12(17.07%) (51.22%) (29.27%)

1(2.44%)

8. I often read aloud in English on my own.

4(9.76%)

9. I don’t like reading aloud in English in front of others.

7
19
11(17.07%) (46.34%) (26.83%)

4(9.76%)

10. I don’t like reading aloud in Japanese in front of others.

15
20(36.59%) (48.78%)

4(9.76%)

2(4.88%)

11. I want to speak English more confidently.

1(2.44%)

5(12.2%)

35(85.37%)

12. I’m satisfied with my current level of spoken English.

319(75.61%) (21.95%)

01(2.44%)－ 24 －

718
14(17.07%) (43.90%) (34.15%)
0

15
25(36.59%) (60.98%)

12
15
10
(29.27%) (36.59%) (24.39%)

0Read Aloud Post-task Survey N = 32
Strongly
disagree

Item

Disagree

Agree

Strongly
agree

1. Since I’ve been reading aloud on my own in English,
speaking English is easier for me.

0

10
19
(31.25%) (59.38%)

3(9.38%)

2. Since I’ve been reading aloud on my own in English, I
have more confidence speaking in English.

0

11
17
(34.38%) (53.13%)

4(12.5%)

3. Since I’ve been reading aloud on my own in English, I
speak English faster in conversation.

0

4. Since I’ve been reading aloud on my own in English, I’mless nervous about making mistakes when I speak English.

05. Since I’ve been reading aloud on my own in English, I
make fewer mistakes when I speak English.

2(6.25%)

6. Since I’ve been reading aloud on my own in English, it iseasier to think in English.

6179(18.75%) (53.13%) (28.13%)
13
14
5(40.63%) (43.75%) (15.63%)
8
(25%)

1
(3.13%)

0

11
18(34.38%) (56.25%)

3(9.38%)

7. Since I’ve been reading aloud on my own in English, I likespeaking English more in class.

0

10
14
(31.25%) (43.75%)

8
(25%)

8. It was easy to get into the habit of reading aloud in English
on my own.

0

5
18
9
(15.63%) (56.25%) (28.13%)

9. Reading aloud in English in front of others is easier since
I’ve been reading aloud on my own.

1
(3.13%)

5(15.63%)16(50%)

10. I think I will continue reading aloud in English because it
helps me speak English.

01(3.13%)

18
13(56.25%) (40.63%)

11. I think reading aloud in English is a waste of time.
12. I’m more satisfied with my level of spoken English than I
was three months ago..
13. I feel my English speaking level is the same as threemonths ago.

－ 25 －

21(65.65%)26
6(81.25%) (18.75%)
01(3.13%)

10(31.25%)0

0

19(59.38%)1(3.13%)

25
5(78.13%) (15.63%)

1(3.13%)

12(37.5%)

Read Aloud Post-task Survey N = 32 continued
14. Silent reading is better for me than reading aloud toimprove my spoken English.

22(68.75%)9(28.13%)1(3.13%)

0

15. Reading aloud in English should be recommended
more as a way of improving spoken English.

0

0

13
(40.63%)19(59.38%)

16. Reading aloud regularly on my own in English is aneffective way of improving my spoken English.

0

0

16
(50%)

16
(50%)

17. Since I’ve been reading aloud on my own in English, I
want to communicate more in English in class.

1(3.13%)

5(15.63%)19(59.38%)7(21.88%)18. It’s important to set a weekly read aloud assignment or
target.

02(6.25%)

20(62.5%)

10(31.25%)

19. I am less shy about speaking English than I was threemonths ago.

1
(3.13%)

4(12.5%)

16
(50%)

11
(34.38%)

20. Speaking English seems less daunting, since I’ve beenreading aloud in English.

04(12.5%)

21(65.65%)7(21.88%)

21. I enjoy reading aloud in English because I can hear
myself speak without mistakes.

1(3.13%)

8
(25%)

16
(50%)

7
(21.88%)22. Reading aloud in English helps me to acquire the habitof and feel comfortable with producing English sounds.

1(3.13%)

8
(25%)

15
(46.88%)8(25%)

23. Have you been on a homestay or study abroad
program in the last year?

YES
4

NO
28

24. Are you planning to study abroad within the next two
years?

YES
16

NO
16

25. Do you want to use English in your work in the future?

YES
29

NO
3

－ 26 －

6.1 Pre-task survey
Generally the findings from the 12 questions (Q1~12) were as would be expected from lower proficiency
second-language learners by exhibiting low confidence about their ability of spoken English.
1. Attitudes to confidence in English
The majority of the participants, mean score (M) 2, (85.36%) disagreed to some extent that speaking English
was easy for them (Q1), with 40 out of 41 respondents (97.56%) showing dissatisfaction with their current
level of English (Q12). This dissatisfaction could possibly have stemmed from insufficient confidence withspeaking in English, with 80.49% of respondents (M=1.93) remarking that they were not confident speakers(Q2), although 40 out 41 hoped that they could become confident (Q11). As well as a general lack ofconfidence, more specifically 78.05% (M=3.07) also stated that they were nervous of making mistakes when
they spoke in English (Q4), with just over half (56.1%) claiming their mind went blank when they came tospeak (Q6). Unsurprisingly for second-language learners, just under 98% (M=3.56) claimed they mademistakes when speaking (Q5), and 39 out of 41 respondents said they perceived themselves to speak slowly(Q3).
2. Attitudes to reading aloud and speaking in English
The respondents indicated they had prior experience with the activity of reading aloud in front of others inclass, both in Japanese and English, with students indicating some level of dislike of the activity at 14.64%
and 36.59% respectively (Qs 8 and 9). Interestingly, around 68% indicated a positive reaction to previous
experience of speaking in class in English (Q7) and just over 60% (M=2.76) claimed to have often readsomething aloud to themselves in English (Q8).
6.2 Post-task survey
Overall, there was a strong affective response amongst respondents that RA had had a positive effect on theirspoken English ability. The effect can be broken down and analyzed into six broad areas:
1. Confidence/ WTC; 2. Ease and speed of delivery (fluency); 3. Perceived amount of and affective reaction
to mistakes; 4. Enjoyment of speaking; 5. Perceived proficiency level; and, 6. Reading aloud as a method.
1. Confidence and WTC
Confidence in speaking English as a result of RA was perceived to have risen by 65.63% of respondents(M=2.78). A large number of respondents (81.26%) felt to some degree that they wanted to communicate
more (WTC) in class due to engaging in RA, with 27 out of 32 claiming they felt less shy about speaking
English than three months’ prior. Speaking English seemed less daunting for 87.51% of participants(M=3.09) since they had started regularly reading aloud in English for homework.

－ 27 －

2. Ease and speed of delivery (fluency)
For a lot of the respondents, the ease and speed in which they spoke and thought in English since starting toread aloud seemed to increase. For ease of speaking English, 22 respondents claimed to have perceived somebenefit, with 26 feeling the activity of reading aloud in English in front of classmates to be easier.
Interestingly, 81.26% of respondents felt they spoke English faster in conversation with others, with 65.63%
also feeling they could think faster in English too.
3. Number of and reaction to mistakes when speaking
While 23 out of 32 respondents felt that the number of mistakes they made when speaking English had notchanged since reading aloud, 19 (59.38%) felt they were less nervous about any possible errors that were
made.
4. Enjoyment of speaking
There was an increase in perceived enjoyment in speaking English in class reported by 22 out of the 32
respondents since engaging in regular reading aloud activities. The activity of RA itself produced enjoyment
as 71.88% (M=2.9) reported that they could hear themselves speak without any mistakes and the same
number said they could acquire the habit of and felt comfortable with producing English sounds.
5. Perceived proficiency level
Although impossible to measure accurately within the scope of this study, 62.51% of respondents claimed
that they were more satisfied with their level of spoken English than before the reading aloud task began. 26
out of the 32 respondents (M=2.19) disagreed with the statement that there had been no change in theirEnglish speaking level.
6. Reading aloud as a method.
The activity of RA as a self-study method to improve spoken English fluency was responded to positively bya high proportion of the respondents. All 32 respondents felt it was an effective, non-time wasting method
which should be recommended more for improving spoken English, with only one respondent preferring
silent reading. 30 respondents felt that having a weekly RA assignment or target number of times wasimportant, with 84.38% (M=3.13) feeling it was easy to establish a regular practice, no doubt with a pre-set
target.

－ 28 －

7. Discussion, Implications, and Recommendations for Reading AloudThe research project started out with the specific aim to investigate the attitudes and opinions of college-age
Japanese EFL learners in a four-year university English program on the effect of reading aloud on theirEnglish oral fluency. To do this two specific research questions were considered:
7.1 Research question 1
What are the learners’ attitudes and opinions towards using RA (read aloud) as a means of improving theirown level of fluency, L2 anxiety, and willingness to communicate?
It can be seen from the research results that a positive correlation between the learners’ attitudes and opinions
exist toward using RA as a means of enhancing their spoken English through improvements in their level offluency, L2 anxiety, and willingness to communicate. This would seem to corroborate both the literature andanecdotal claims regarding the positive effects of RA on learners’ perceived gains in fluency whencommunicating in English through a reduction in anxiety and WTC. RA would appear to be an ideal ongoing
activity that could be employed with minimal in-classroom preparation prior to out-of-class practiceallowing shy or anxious Japanese learners to acclimatize themselves to producing English sounds in thesafety of their own space outside the classroom.
It is worth noting that during the course of the research, the teacher, this writer was very aware of theincrease in confidence of the learners producing English and listening to themselves doing so. To check thatthe task was being correctly carried out, learners had to submit random segments of recordings upon request
as the teacher went around at the start of each class monitoring pairs of students as they checked each other’srecordings. This was an ideal opportunity to offer encouragement and praise and there was a distinct positivechange in learners’ willingness to allow their own voices to be heard albeit at a very low volume and only inthe presence of the teacher and a classmate. In fact, the quality of the English pronunciation was at a muchhigher level than during regular class speaking activities. As the semester proceeded, the volume of theplayback recordings increased as the learners’ anxiety visibly decreased, with some turning the volume tofull and clearly attracting the attention of the whole class. Overall, the teacher’s positive feedback,encouragement and praise is vital in affirming that the learners’ English sounds were understandable andtherefore acceptable spoken English.
7.2 Research question 2
If perceived self-efficacy of RA exists, do learners feel they can continue to utilize it as a means of future
practice?
With the positive response to research question 1, it can be clearly ascertained that the learners viewed RA
positively as a way of benefiting their spoken English. They recognized it as a viable method and perhaps
felt that they could have utilized it more in the past if they had been made aware of its benefits earlier in theirEnglish study careers.

－ 29 －

Of course, motivation is key when practicing any kind of study or method on one’s own away from a regularclass. A fixed class-task approach is certainly helpful to encourage less motivated learners with some
instrumental motivation to help them commit to a structured program of practice. Perhaps unsurprisingly,
learners who were preparing for lengthy study abroad programs scheduled for immediately after the semester
ended in which this research took place, often recorded themselves reading aloud far more than the required
minimum three times, in some cases as many as seven. Therefore it can be assumed that learners continuing
RA is certainly possible, but, as with all forms of continued skill practice, it depends heavily on some formof motivation. If intrinsic motivation is lacking, for example in the form of a voluntarily scheduled trip suchas study abroad to an L2-speaking country, it can be seen that the activity can be easily included in an oral
communication class with instrumental motivation provided by course grade outcome.
8. Limitations of the study and suggestions for further research
The research data presented is solely of learners’ attitudes and opinions to their perceived improvements intheir English speaking ability through a continued practice of RA, and in no way represents data pertaining
to an accurate measurable increase in fluency, in terms of speed rate and actual grammatical accuracy.
To ascertain whether any actual improvements in speed are possible as a direct result of RA, would require
further research by employing Praat, an automatic speech recognition software package to provide
quantitative data on various aspects of speech linked to speaking fluency. As for grammatical accuracy,
recordings of learner-generated speech (not RA) could be collected over the period in which a RA program isrunning and analyzed by human raters. It is difficult, however, to provide a definite correlation between RA
and its triggering improvements in grammatical accuracy.
Conclusion
There would appear to be a clear correlation between the effect of RA on EFL learners’ affective processes
regarding their L2 oral fluency. Furthermore, RA is easily implemented for both the implicitly andinstrumentally motivated Japanese EFL learner.

References[1] Nunan, D. (1991). Language Teaching Methodology: A Textbook for Teachers. NJ: Prentice Hall.
[2] Hedge, T. (2000). Teaching and learning in the language classroom Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[3] Hedge, T. (1993) ELT Journal, Volume 47/3, pp. 275–277－ 30 －

[4] Dwyer, E., & Heller-Murphy, A. (1996). Japanese learners in speaking classes. Edinburgh Working
Papers in Applied Linguistics, 7, 46-55.
[5] Muller, T., Adamson, J., Brown, P. S., & Herder, S. (Eds.). (2014). Exploring EFL fluency in Asia.
Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
[6] McCroskey, J. C., Gudykunst, W. B., & Nishida, T. (1985). Communication apprehension among
Japanese students in native and second language. Communication Research Reports, 2, 11-15.
[7] Matsuoka, R., Matsumoto, K., Poole, G., & Matsuoka, M. (2014). Japanese university students’
willingness to communicate in English: The serendipitous effect of oral presentations. Journal of Pan-Pacific
Association of Applied Linguistics, 18(1), 193-218[8] Matsuoka 2009, Japanese College Students’ Willingness to communicate in English. Kohn: Lambertacademic Publishing.
[9] Yashima, T. (2002) Willingness to communicate in a second language: The Japanese EFL context.
Modern Language Journal 86, 54-66.
[10] Horwirz, E. K. (1986). Preliminary evidence for the reliability and validity of a foreign language anxiety
scale. TESOL Quarterly, 22, 427-454.
[11] Stevick, E. 1989. Success with Foreign Languages: Seven who Achieved it and What Worked for Them.
Hemel Hempstead: Prentice Hall International.
[12] Klapper, J. 1992. ‘Preliminary considerations for the teaching of foreign language reading’. Language
Learning Journal 6: 53–6.
[13] Eskey, D. and W. Grabe. 1988. ‘Interactive models for second language reading’ in P. Carrell (ed.)
Interactive Approaches to Second Language Reading. Cambridge: Cambridge[14] Grabe, W. and F. Stoller. 2002. Teaching and Researching Reading. Harlow, Essex: Pearson Education
Ltd.
[15] Celce-Murcia, M., D. Brinton, and J. Goodwin. 1996. Teaching Pronunciation: a Reference for Teachersof English to Speakers of Other Languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[16] Gibson (2008), Reading aloud: a useful learning tool?, ELT Journal, Volume 62/1.
[17] Swan, M. (1985). “A critical look at the Communicative Approach (2)”. ELT Journal 39/2:76-87.

－ 31 －

[18] Forrin, N, MacLeod, C. (2018) This time it’s personal: the memory benefit of hearing oneself, Memory,
26:4, 574-579, DOI: 10.1080/09658211.2017.1383434[19] Kailani, Z. T. (1998). Reading Aloud in EFL Revisited. Al Quds Open University, Jordan.
[20] Gánem-Gutiérrez GA (2009) Repetition, use of L1 and reading aloud as meditational mechanism during
collaborative activity at the computer. Computer Assisted Language Learning 22(4): 323–348.
[21] Huang, L. (2010). Reading aloud in the foreign language teaching. Asian Social Science, 6 (4).
[22] Yasukochi, T. (2013) Retrieved from https://toyokeizai.net/articles/-/18077 on May 10th, 2018[23] Gabrielatos, C (2002) Reading loud and clear: reading aloud in ELT. Retrieved from ERIC database.
Available at: http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED477572.pdf Google Scholarrsity Press, 223–38.
[24] Dörnyei, Z., & Ushioda, E. (Eds.). (2009). Motivation, language identity and the L2 self. Bristol:Multilingual Matters.
[25] Reid, J. (1990) The Dirty Laundry of ESL Survey Research. Tesol Quarterly, 24(2), 323–338.
[26] Dörnyei, Z. (2007) Research methods in applied linguistics: Quantitative, qualitative and mixed
methodologies. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.

－ 32 －