Table of Contents

List of TABLES and FIGURES

ABSTRACT

Chapter 1.

Abstract

A study of Developing Speaking Skills through Drama Activities

Kim, Seojin

Graduate School of TESOL

Sookmyung Women’s University

This paper aims to examine the effectiveness of drama activities, especially role plays in

English class by using role plays in the lessons and observing students’ participations in

classes and their attitudes towards English learning, and their communicative

competence development in order to realize communicative language teaching in

English class in Korean Elementary school. Four kinds of role plays—scripted, open-

ended, situational, and mapped role play—were used at the last period of each unit at

the 5th grade elementary school. The purpose of the thesis is to find out whether drama

activities in the EFL context (1) contribute to students’ speaking skills development and

(3) have positive influence on students’ attitude toward English learning and

motivation. Chapter two defines communicative competence and drama activities as

well as the effectiveness of drama activities and role plays in the second or foreign

1

language learning. In chapter three, the role plays and the procedures were displayed. In

chapter four, the results were presented by comparing experiment and control group.

The results reveal that role play, or drama activity has positive influence on both

students’ communicative competence development and their attitudes toward English

learning. This study concluded that drama activities in EFL context like Korea have

positive influence on students in terms of psycholinguistic.

Chapter 1 IntroductionEnglish is taught from 3rd grade of elementary school as a mandatory subjects and a lot

of students also learn English form earlier age in the private English institutes in Korea.

However, it has been reported that even though a lot of time, money and effort have

spent to learn English, speaking skills of Korean is still relatively low compared to other

Asian countries. According to Test Score Data Summary for TOEFL Internet-based

which were based on data between January and December 2007 by ETS (Education

Testing Service), Korea ranked 20 among 30 Asian Countries in speaking section. Quite

a lot of English teachers in Korea understand the importance and necessary of building

students’ speaking skills in English, but the importance of Korean SAT in students’

university entrance makes teachers to use Grammar-Translation Method to make their

students know ‘about’ the English language. Fortunately, elementary schools seem to

have less pressure from those constrains than those of other higher educational

institutions, and using Communicative Language Teaching is more feasible. Yet, most of

the activities that are used in the elementary schools merely support students to drill like

practice. Thus, students do not have sufficient opportunities to improve their

communicative skills. Since elementary school students are still beginner levels in

learning English and their communicative competence might be hard to measure

2

compared to university students, less research was done in the issue of the effectiveness

of drama-based approach to improve communicative competence. However, even in the

beginner’s level one could see the improvement of students although it is not such

salient. In addition, as the 7th national curriculum declared, in this stage making students

to have positive attitudes toward English is important as well.

Drama activities provide real-life like situation or let’s pretend situation in EFL

context like Korea, where students rarely have opportunities to use English outside

English classrooms. This study aims to implement drama-based English Language

Teaching in public elementary regular classes in order to see how it affects on

developing students’ speaking skills and their attitudes toward learning English

language. The specific research questions of the present study are as follows: (1) Do

drama activities in the EFL context contribute to develop students’ speaking skills

development?; (2) Do drama activities in the EFL context have positive influence on

students’ attitude toward English learning and motivation?

Among lots of different kinds of drama activities, role play were chosen, since

public elementary school students were familiar with this kind of activity with

experiences of other subjects such as Korean, social studies, and moral education.

However, this role play is strangely used as role-taking practice, which makes students

to just memorize given dialogues in English class. Thus, in this study, I would like to

introduce a role play activity, which is one kind of drama activities, to one of my

English class and see how students’ speaking skills and perceptions of English have

changed. Scripted, open-ended, situational, mapped role plays were implemented to

experiment group orderly and control group did not experience first three kinds of role

plays. The results of mapped role plays of experiment group and control group were

3

compared and all the processes of implementing other role plays were observed by the

researcher.

Chapter 2 Literature Review

2.1 Communicative competence

The concept of communicative competence was introduced by Hymes (1967), which

was against reaction of the Chomsky’s limited notion of competence as linguistic

aspects. Chomsky (1965) made a fundamental distinction between competence (the

speaker-hearer’s knowledge of his language) and performance (the actual use of

language in concrete situations) saying linguistic theory is concerned primarily with an

ideal speaker-listener, in a completely homogeneous speech-community. While Hymes

held that speakers are competent not only when they have the knowledge of

grammatical rules but also when they have the knowledge of how to use them

appropriately (Duranti, 2001). Hymes argue that communicative competence must

include not only the linguistic forms of a language but a knowledge of when, how and

to whom it is appropriate to use these forms (Paulston & Bruder, 1976). Savignon

(1976) also pointed out that communicative competence requires much more than a

knowledge of the linguistic code and the acquisition of the linguistic code is a part of

the acquisition of communicative competence as a whole.

Canale and Swain (1980) proposed a three-component framework for

4

communicative competence and Canale (1983) later extended this to four component

competence: grammatical, discourse, sociolinguistic, and strategic (Skehan, 1998). The

first two categories reflect the use of the language system itself; the last two define the

functional aspects of communication (Brown, 2000). Grammatical competence derives

from Chomsky’s linguistic competence. The second concerns the ability to handle

language beyond the level of the sentence, to understand the rules of discourse (Canale,

1983). Sociolinguistic competence is the knowledge of the sociocultural rules of

language and of discourse. Strategic competence has a slightly different role, since it

comes into play when the other competences are unable to cope directly (Skehan, 1998).

Canale and Swain (1980) defined strategic competence as the verbal and nonverbal

communication strategies that may be called into action to compensate for breakdowns

in communication due to performance variables or due to insufficient competence.

Canale and Swain’s model of communicative competence has been further

developed by Bachman’s (1990) schematization of language competence. Bachman

places grammatical and discourse (renamed “textual”) competence under one node,

organizational (code) competence. Canale and Swain’s sociolinguistic competence is

broken down into two separate pragmatic (contextual) categories: illocutionary

competence (which embrace functional aspects of learning) and sociolinguistic

competence (which deal with such considerations as politeness, formality, register, and

culturally related aspects of language) (Brown, 2000). More radical is the change that

Bachman proposes for the role of strategic competence; Bachman positioned strategic

competence as an entirely separate element of communicative language ability. It is

central to all communication carrying out a mediating role between meaning intentions,

underlying competences, background knowledge, and context of situation (Skehan,

5

1998).

On valance, communicative competence is defined as the ability to use language

in a variety of settings, taking into account relationships between speakers and

differences in situations (Lightbown & Spada, 2006), or the general ability to use

language accurately, appropriately and flexibly (Yule, 2006).

2.2 Communicative Language Teaching (CLT)

Communicative Language Teaching, or the communicative approach, developed in the

mid-1970s, is based on the social-interactionist theory which emphasizes the social

nature of language learning and interaction. The goal is to enable students to

communicate in the target language. Many textbooks based on the communicative

approach use a structural syllabus, often organized by linked topics and language

functions (Brewster at al, 2003). According to Littlewood (1981), one of the most

characteristic features of communicative language teaching is that it pays systematic

attention to functional as well as structural aspects of language, combining these into a

more fully communicative view.

The teacher facilitates communication in the classroom. In this role, one of the

responsibilities is to establish situations likely to promote communication (Larsen-

Freeman, 2004). Although there are many different versions of how to create

communicative experiences for L2 learners, they are all based on a belief that the

functions of language should be emphasized rather than the forms of the language (Yule,

2006). Fluency and accuracy are seen as complementary principles underlying

communicative techniques. At time fluency may have to take on more importance than

in order to keep learners meaningfully engaged in language use (Brown, 2001).

Lightbown and Spada (2006) says that, supporters of communicative language teaching

6

believe that the motivation of learners is often stifled by an insistence on correctness in

the earliest stages of second language learning arguing that it is better to encourage

learners to develop fluency before accuracy. They suggest that errors are a natural and

valuable part of the language learning process. In short, the essence of CLT is the

engagement of learners in communication in order to allow them to develop their

communicative competence (Savignon, 2001).

2.3 CLT and Second language learning

Communicative activities refer to the techniques which are employed in the

communicative method in language teaching (Wan, 1990). Littlewood (1981)

differentiated communicative activities from pre-communicative activities, which aim

to equip the learner with some of the skills required for communication, without

actually requiring him to perform communicative acts. Ellis (1988) proposes two sets of

cognitive processes contributing to a learner’s second language development (SLD):

primary processes and secondary processes. The first developmental route is likely to be

found in naturalistic L2 learning and leads to knowledge of a non-analytical type, and

secondary processes contribute directly to analytic L2 knowledge. Drama provides

learners with a very effective environment to develop their L2 through the route

involving primary processes. Primary processes and secondary processes could be

related to the Rivers’s (1972) differentiation of skill-getting and skill-using activities.

Rivers (1972) proposes methodological distinction between skill-getting and skill-

using activities. Through skill-getting activities, the teacher isolates specific elements of

knowledge or skills that compose communicative ability, and provides the learners with

opportunities to practice them separately. Thus, the learners are being trained in separate

7

steps of communication skills rather than practicing the total skill to be acquired. In the

skill-using stage, the learner should be on her own and not supported or directed by the

teacher. Consequently it offers an opportunity for language in real use (Atsuko, 2002).

Wan (1990) said that the use of drama and drama activities in TESL (Teaching English

as a Second Language) adhere to the principles of the communicative approach. One of

the aims (as it is in the communicative approach) is for the learner to achieve

communicative competence.

2.4 Drama in second or foreign language learning

The value of drama in language education stems from the opportunities it provides for

students to express themselves in English for a meaningful purpose, going beyond

vocabulary and grammar (Dodson, 2002). A great many studies show that drama

develops thinking, oral language, reading, and writing (Wagner, 2002). Wessels (1987)

listed the potential benefits of drama in language teaching as follows: the acquisition of

meaningful, fluent interaction in the target language; the assimilation of a whole range

of pronunciation and prosodic features in a fully contextualized and interactional

manner; the fully contextualized acquisition of new vocabulary and structure; an

improved sense of confidence in the student in his or her ability to learn the target

language.

Since, as is addressed by Wessels (1987), drama can generate a need to speak by

focusing the attention of the learners on creating a drama, dialogue, or role play, or

solving a problem, learners have to be active participants, using their imagination and

interaction communication skills in the foreign language. Conversation in drama is not

completely controlled by the teacher—and advantage in comparison to the teacher-

8

student interaction in more traditional pedagogical tasks, no single participant is

dominant in the activity. As a result, drama is less likely to produce “restricted

language” (Colyle & Bisgyer, 1984) in the classroom (Kao & O’Neill, 1998). According

to Byrne (1991), there are a few dramatized activities that can be used for language

learning purposes. Some of these activities like structured role play, scripted role play,

and scripted play seemed to provide learners with opportunities to memorize chunks of

language through repeated practicing.

Holden (1981) defined drama as any activity which asks the participant to portray

himself in an imaginary situation; or to portray another person in an imaginary situation.

Thus, drama in education puts an emphasis on the immediacy and informality of

improvised activities rather than on the quality of performance (Kao & O’Neill, 1998).

As Maley and Duff (1978) noted, drama is motivating since nobody can predict what

exactly will be thrown up in the way of ideas working through drama and enjoyment

comes from imaginative personal involvement. They also mentioned that the problem of

not wanting to speak or, more often, not knowing what to say is practically resolved

because the activity makes it necessary to talk. In addition, the drama activities give

students an opportunity to strike a balance between fluency and accuracy as well.

2.5 Role plays in second or foreign language learning

Role-play is one of the ways that can ease students’ transition into using English in real

world situations. Byrne (1986) defined role play as the activity which the participants

interact either as themselves in imaginary situations or as other people in imaginary

situations. Byrne said that like other dramatic activities, role play involves an element of

‘let’s pretend’. It is make believe and to take part, the learners have to imagine they are

9

somewhere other than the classroom on an imaginative level. It also provides

opportunities for the learners to develop fluency skills: to use language freely, because if

offers an element of choice; to use language purposefully, because there is something to

be done; and to use language creatively, because it calls for imagination.

Role plays are interesting, memorable and engaging, and students retain the

material they have learned. In their assumed role, students drop their shyness and other

personality and cultural inhibitions, making them, one of the best tools available for

teaching a second learning (Stocker, 2005). In addition, role play is one of a wide range

of communicative techniques involving student-student interaction that is used in the

second language classroom. It is a task-based rather than form-based activity that shapes

a context and simulates S-S interaction by providing a purpose or motivation to speak

through a series of relate cues (Hull, 1992).

2.6 Different types of role plays and two settings

Kang (2008) displays four types of role play activities for children: scripted role-plays

open-ended, situational, and mapped role play. First, students have to act as a role in the

script and use the language in the scripted role-play. It is useful for beginners and

intermediate level. Second, in an open-ended role play, only some parts of a script are

left for the learners to create a new story and to use language with their own choice. It is

used for bridging between pre-communicative and communicative tasks. Thus, this role

play enables learners to internalize the language they learned from the pre-

communicative activities. Thirdly, in this role play, there is no dialogue to use. Only a

situation is given. Finally, in a mapped role play, students have to use few maps of

situations. Students play role according to the situation from maps and choose their own

10

language to use for the situations. The map could be either picture or written maps.

In the role play, there are two types of settings: the emotional setting and the physical

setting. Maley & Duff (1978) defines emotional settings as the emotions including

personality, mood, role and status between the speakers. They also define physical

settings as the places in which the conversation actually takes place. Kang (2008) said

that these settings can make role play more creative and interesting to the students than

doing role plays by merely memorizing the given dialogue in the textbook.

11

Chapter 3 Methodology

3.1 Research Questions

This study examines whether drama activities in Korean Elementary school bring

positive effect in improving students’ speaking skills development and their attitudes

toward English language learning. According to Kang ( ), speaking skills can be

divided two; form and function. Students could increase their accuracy and enhance

their fluency by practicing both form and function. In addition, learners’ attitudes are

important element because their attitudes influence on effective language learning

significantly. To clarify the purpose of this study aims two questions as follow.

(1) Do drama activities in the EFL context contribute to students’ speaking skills

development?;

(2) Do drama activities in the EFL context have positive influence on students’ attitude

toward English learning and motivation?

3.2 Research Design

This study was conducted from March, 2008 to August, 2008. Table 3.1 presents the

specific procedures. Study of prior researches and material collections in the planning

stage is important because they give basic guideline to the research in the aspects of

data collection and analysis. Materials—scripts of situations of role plays—for the

research were created by the researcher considering the lesson’s objectives and

students’ interest. Both pre-surveys and post-surveys were taken in order to compare

12

students’ attitudes between before and after using the role plays that are designed by the

researcher and to see whether there is a gap between experiment and control group in

the perceptions of English language learning.

In order to examine whether drama activities enhance students’ speaking skills and

their learning attitudes, role plays were implemented to experiment group. There are

four types of role plays—scripted, open-ended, situational, and mapped role plays.

Among them, mapped role play was used as a test tool implemented to both experiment

and control groups. Table 3.2 shows the research procedure for experiment group.

Table 3.1 Research schedule

Steps Period Procedures

Planning March, 2008 Selection of research topics and questions

Study of prior researches and Material collections

Analysis of 5th grade curriculum and textbook

Design of lesson plan, evaluation materials

Acting April, 2008 ~

July, 2008

Execute pre-surveys and analysis

Selection of experiment and control groups

Implementation of lesson plan

Execute post-test and post-surveys

Evaluation August, 2008 Collection of data and analysis

Research questions testing and deduction of conclusions

and implications

Table 3.2 Schedule for experiment group

Steps Date Steps Date

Pre-survey 1 April, 4th Situational role play – Unit 7 June, 13th

Pre-survey 2 April, 7th Situational role play – Unit 8 June, 27th

Situational role play – Unit 3 April, 18th Mapped role play (post-test) July, 4th

Open-ended role play – Unit 5 May, 2nd Post-survey 1 July, 4th

Open-ended role play – Unit 5 May, 16th Post-survey 2 July, 4th

13

Open-ended role play – Unit 6 May, 30th Post-survey 3 July, 7th

3.3 Participants

The participants were 28 5th grade students in a public elementary school, Seoul, Korea.

Specifically, the school located in the east part of Korea and the students’ economical

backgrounds are middle-low or middle classes. Thus, parents are not eager to students’

education and students’ English proficiencies are not high compare to other areas in

Seoul. Two classes were chosen for this study and students have learned English at least

form 3rd grade in school and a few students have started to learn English before 3rd grade

at private institutes. Thus, there are gaps between students’ linguistic proficiency but

most of them are in the beginner’s level and none of them have lived English speaking

countries. One class is for experiment and the other is for comparison and both classes

have around 30 students as shown in table 3.3. In the 3rd and 4th grades, they learned

English only once a week at school and learn English two times a week from 5 th grade.

In the 3rd grade only oral languages were taught and reading and writing are introduced

in the 4th and 5th grade respectively. Each class is 40 minutes long.

Table3.3 Number of participants

Boy Girl Total

Experimental group 16 12 28

Control group 16 13 29

3.4 Data collection

3.4.1 Survey

In order to see how the students’ perceptions toward English learning and speaking

were changed before and after the role play lessons, and to investigate the differences

14

between experiment and control groups, pre-surveys and post-surveys were taken.

Students were asked to express their feelings about learning English in school, speaking

in English, doing role plays, and compare different types of role plays. Students were

also asked to write the reasons of their thinking.

After collected, their responses were analyzed and the responses of before and

after the lessons and the responses of two groups were compared. Pre-surveys were

taken two times before unit 3. Post-surveys were taken after doing mapped role play. To

obtain more information from experiment group, one more survey (Post-survey 3) was

taken. This survey asked students to compare role play in the textbook and the role

plays that they were done with the researcher without textbook. When doing survey, the

teacher explained the question both English and Korean, and students were allowed to

write in Korean. Survey questionnaire is shown in Appendix A, B, C, D and E.

3.4.2 Role plays

3.4.2.1 Organization of a textbook

8 units were provided for one semester and each unit is designed to be used for 4

periods. English class was scheduled 2 times for 40 minutes classes in a week. In 5 th

grade, all 4 skills—listening, speaking, reading, writing—is introduced to students

(Writing is introduced to students for the first time in this grade). Table 3.4 shows

organization of the textbook. The lesson of experiment group is different only at period

4 in each unit from 3 to 8: While control group do other activities or do usual role-

taking practices (which lacks the crucial elements of drama activities and just speak

their lines orderly), the experiment group do role plays in every 4 period.

15

Table 3.4 organization of a textbook (for each unit from 1 to 8)

Period 1 Period 2 Period 2 Period 4

Look and Listen

Listen and Repeat (1)

Let’s play (1)

Look and Speak

Listen and Repeat (2)

Let’s Sing/Chant

Let’s Read

Let’s Write

Let’s Play (3)

Role-play/Activity

Review

3.4.2.2 Organization of lessons for control group

Students of control group were taught and leaded by the teacher according to

modified lesson plans. The researcher has been modified the textbook activities (See

table 3.5) to give more varieties to class activities and provide more opportunities to

communicate in English in class keeping students’ motivation high. However, when

doing role play, the researcher followed the textbook role play activity making students

just memorizing scripts and speaking their own lines. It other words, the teacher used

the dialogues which the textbook provide without any modification and students just

memorize those lines by listening and repeating the dialogues. In this case, students do

not take the roles but just give and take the dialogues as a mechanical drill.

Table3.5 organization of modified teaching

Period Experiment group Control group

1

(Simple TPR activities)

Look and listen to the main dialogue

Repeat and shadowing the main dialogue

Word search or crossword puzzle / Word bingo game

2

Review- repeat and read the main dialogue

Listen and speak dialogue A, B (shorter than the main dialogue)

Sing or Chant

Read learned words

(Game – Snowball, I am ground…)

16

3

Review – Sing or Chant

Write alphabet letters or words

Game - board game, rand rush, riddles, omok…

Review lesson unit

4 Role play Role-taking practices / Activity (Survey,

Drawing…)

3.4.2.3 Organization of lessons for experiment group

In experiment group 3 different types of role-play were implemented; scripted role play,

open-ended role play, Situational role play. Table 3.6 shows specific role play for each

unit. Scripts and situations were chosen by the teacher according to the units target

functions and expressions.

Table 3.6 organization of lessons for experiment group

Unit 3 Unit 4 Unit 5 Unit 6 Unit 7 Unit 8

Scripted

Role playOpen-ended role play Situational Role Play

After examining units target expressions and dialogues, scripts, situation for role

plays were designed. Scripts and situations of the role plays were created by the

researcher in order to use English expressions of the units. The main goal of the

textbook is making students to learn English expressions as chunks of language rather

memorizing related vocabulary in each unit. Students’ interests were also considered to

make students participate more actively to the role plays. In unit, the researcher made

the dialogue between A and B without clear place expecting students to realize how

might be the conversation might be different according to different characters and

places. In unit 4, 5, and 6, the researcher made open-ended scripts using key English

17

expressions of the unit making students to complete the script. In unit 7 and 8, the

researcher created situation considering both students’ interests and the English

expressions that students might be able to use in those situations.

Nearly, twice a week (class were canceled when there were holidays or school

events), the experiment group students received 40 minutes of role play lessons. The

teacher collected students’ written scripts and observed their works and performances.

In the class, the teacher used both English and Korean to help the students understand

and students were allowed to use Korean while preparing role plays. Generally, the first

10 minutes of each lesson, the teacher introduced scripts or situations to students and

reviewed some expressions. The concepts of physical and emotional settings were

firstly indirectly introduced to students and later, the teacher instructed the concept more

directly. Then, next 15 or 20 minutes students practice and rehearsal role plays and the

time left were used for presentation. During warp up time, students reflected their

performances and exchange short comments with students. As mentioned above, all the

scripts and situations for the role plays were created by the researcher. The same

procedures were used in the same kinds of role plays at the lesson. Brief lesson plans for

each role play were shown in table 3.7 to 3.9.

Table 3.7 Lesson plan for unit3/period 4, scripted role play

Objectives Students will be able to use expressions “Where is ~?” and It’s on (under) the~.”

doing a role-play.

Materials script

Script to be

used

The script is created by the researcher based on the lesson’s main expressions and

function. The key expressions of lesson 3 are “Where is ~?” and It’s on (under) the~.”.A: Where’s my lunch?

B: What?

18

A: My lunch!!

B: Oh,,,Over there.

A: Where?

B: There. It’s on the table.

A: ….Oh, no!!

B: Ha ha ha…

Procedures 1. Activating schema & Introducing the script

2. Assigning a task

3. Choosing a role & Practice

4. Memorizing & Adding gestures

5. Rehearsals

6. Doing a role-play

Scripted role play

In scripted role play, scripts were given to students and students but students need

to think about two settings (Maley, 1978) of physical settings and emotional settings

(mood, attitude and feeling). First of all, present script on the white board and ask

students to read it. Then ask them to imagine who will A and B, and what the situation

might be activating their background knowledge. Ask students to work in pairs. In order

to create real life situation, students have to decide who A and B are, where they are,

how they feel. For example, when A is a victim and B is a thief, and in case of A and B

are friends, the emotions that the role players might feel are totally different and the

performances consequently are different. Likewise, when the two friends are in a street

and in a classroom, the situations are different although the lines are the same. After

choosing a role and creating a situation, students read their lines several times looking at

the script with their partners. Students memorize their lines firstly only verbally and

practice with their partners. After they are competent in memorizing, ask students to add

some gestures and show facial expressions trying to show feelings and the situation

19

clearly. Students do rehearsals several times without looking at the script with their

partners trying to make some improvements in performing. Each pair presents a role-

play in front of a class.

Table 3.8 Unit 4, 5, 6 / Period 4, open-ended role plays

Objectives Students will be able to create open-ended parts of the role-play using expressions

from the lesson.

Materials Scripts

Script to be

used

The researcher revises the role-play activity in the textbook into incomplete script (See

appendix F for unit 5, 6).

Unit 4A: What a nice day!

B: Look! What a beautiful flower!

A: Wow. It’s so beautiful.

B: Wow! What’s this?

A: It’s .

B: .

A: .

B: .

Procedures 1. Introducing the incomplete script

2. Brainstorming & Reviewing language

3. Assigning a task

4. Choosing a role & Making a script

5. Practice

6. Memorizing & Adding gestures.

7. Rehearsals

8. Doing a role-play

Open-ended role play

In open-ended role play, dialogues leave the learners free to decide how to develop them

(Byrne, 1986). In other words, contrary to scripted role play, some parts of scripts are

left for the learners to create a new story and to use language with their own choice.

20

Present the open-ended script on the white board and ask students to read it. Then, ask

questions which are related to physical and emotional settings of the dialogue such as

where they are, what the food might be, how they feel to activate their schema. Make

students to think about the language that might be used in the script. Have students to

look through textbooks to review what they have learned. Ask students to work with

pairs. Students have to decide who A and B are, where they are, how they feel trying to

fill the blanks. They also create an ending freely or add more lines on the dialog. After

choosing a role, students make up a story and write down on the small piece of paper

which the teacher gave each group. In this stage, using Korean is allowed to make

students interact each other more freely.

The teacher walks around the classroom to give assistance when students have

questions or find difficulties. From this stage, in the three kinds of role plays, all the

procedures are the same. Students read and memorize scripts firstly only verbally and

practice with their partners. After when they are competent in memorizing, they were

asked to add some gestures to show feelings. Each pair presents a role-play in front of a

class.

Table 3.9 Unit 7, 8 / Period 5, situational role plays

Objectives Students will be able to create dialogues according to the given situations using

expressions from the lessons.

Materials Situation cards, scripts, props

Situation to

be used

The researcher created the situations considering students’ interest.

(See appendix G for unit 8)

Unit 7You went to Lotteworld with your family. Your parents went to a

bathroom. There were a lot of people. Then, you lost your younger

brother. What would you do?

21

Procedures 1. Activating schema & Introducing the situation

2. Brainstorming & Reviewing language

3. Assigning a task

4. Choosing roles & Making a script

5. Practice

6. Memorizing & Adding gestures

7. Rehearsals & Preparing props

2.8 Doing a role-play

Situational role play

In situational role play, the participants interact either as themselves in imaginary

situations or as other people in imaginary situations. The students choose and create

their own roles to achieve the given task. During situational role play, dynamic

interaction between the students happens in authentic contexts. First, show pictures that

are related to the situations to activate students’ schema about the characters and

situations. For instance, in unit 7, the teacher showed pictures of Lotteworld with a lot

of people and the pictures of a boy crying. Then, present the situation on the white

board and ask questions about where they are, how would they feel about the situation.

Make students to think about the language that might be used in the situation. Have

students to look through textbooks and handouts to review what they have learned in the

lessons. However, I did not review the language as a whole class activity. Ask students

to work as pairs. Students decide settings and make up stories and write the scripts on

the paper to do a role play. Students choose their roles and make up a story. They write

down the script on their papers. Following procedures were the same with those of

open-ended role plays.

3.2.2.4 Post-test: mapped role play

22

To see the experiment results, post-test was done to both experiment and control groups

after unit 8 was finished. For comparison, mapped role play, which is a new kind of

activity for both groups to enhance reliability, was chosen. For this role play, 7

connected situations were designed using characters from one of the students’ favorite

movie ‘Shrek 3’ based on the essential communicative functions and expressions of

each unit that students are expected to learn after finishing each unit (See table 10).

Detailed lesson plan are described in table 3.4 below and this lesson is designed for two

class hours.

Table 3.10 Language objectives of each unit

Lesson Communicative function

11. How are you? I’m Fine, thank you.2. What’s your name? My name’s Joon.

21. What day is it today? It’s Monday.2. We have/don’t have English today.

3 1. Where’s my pencil case? It’s under the table.

41. What a nice day!2. It’s very tall.

51. Where is Namdaemun? Go straight and turn right.2. I’m sorry?

61. I get up at seven every day.2. What time do you go to bed?

71. She’s tall. 2. What?

81. Let’s go swimming.2. How about this afternoon?3. Sorry, I can’t./Sounds good.

Table 3.11 Post-test, mapped role play

Objectives Students will be able to use communicative functions for past 8 lessons doing role-

23

plays.

Materials Situation cards, Scripts, props, camera

Situations to

be used

Shrek 31. Shrek and Fiona invited Fiona’s friend, Sleeping beauty to their house.

2. Sleeping beauty visited their house on a wrong day.

3. Shrek and Fiona hurriedly cleaned their house while sleeping beauty

suddenly fell asleep.

4. Sleeping beauty awaked and they decided to go on a picnic to the wood.

5. Sleeping beauty wanted to go to a bathroom first.

6. She did not come back after few minutes past.

7. Fiona went to bathroom but sleeping beauty was not there. Shrek and

Fiona went outside to find her.

8. Create ending for yourselves.

Procedures 1. Activating schema & Introducing the map

2. Brainstorming & Reviewing language

3. Assigning a task

4. Choosing and creating roles & Making a script

5. Practice

6. Memorizing & Adding gestures

2.7 Rehearsals & Preparing props

2.8 Doing a role-play

Evaluation Record students’ performances and analyze their interactions.

First, show pictures of Shrek, Fiona, and sleeping beauty to activate students’

schema about the characters and situations. Then, pass out a handout of mapped

situation to students and ask questions such as where they are, how they feel to help

students to think about the physical and emotional settings. Make students to think

about the language that might be used in each situation. Have students to look through

textbooks and handouts to review what they have learned in each 8 unit. Ask students to

work groups of 4. Students decide settings and make up stories and write the scripts on

the paper to do a role-play. Students choose their roles and make up a story. They write

24

down the script on their papers. Students practice the dialog reading their lines several

times looking at the scripts that they were written on the papers. Following procedures

were the same with other role play lessons.

Each number of situations in mapped role play corresponded to each unit’s

communicative function. For example, the first situation is “Shrek and Fiona invited

Fiona’s friend, Sleeping beauty to their house.” And communicative functions of lesson

are “How are you? / I’m fine, thank you. / What’s your name? / My name’s Joon. ” The

teacher expected students to make dialogues such as “Hi, Sleeping beauty. How are

you?” Students have to make a role play making dialogues following sequenced

situations. However, students could use any expressions they want to use. Since students

were not familiar this type of activity each situation was fully explained by the teacher

both English and Korean. Students are also allowed to use Korean while they were

exchange their ideas and formulating dialogues. In addition, since there were only 3

characters (Shrek, Fiona, Sleeping beauty) in the given situations and there were 4

students in each group, students have to create one more role, which gives more

freedom of choice to students. Students’ performances were recorded as short movie for

analysis and comparison.

3.5 Data Analysis

3.5.1 Surveys

After collecting students’ written papers of survey, the researcher get the statistics of

each question. First, experiment group’s perceptions toward English language learning

and speaking were compared between before and after the role plays. Secondly,

experiment and control group’s evaluation about role play lessons were compared and

25

the differences between the responses of the two groups were highlighted.

3.5.2 Role plays

Students’ written scripts for each lesson were collected and used as data for judging

improvements and through observations of students’ role plays in the lessons, the

researcher could see how well students participate in the role plays. Theses participation

rate of experiment group was compared to those control group in each class.

3.5.3. Post-test

Videotaping was conducted at the post-test (mapped-role play) to compare two groups

more objectively. Students did not seem to have pressure about being videotaped since

the camera was located the back of the classroom and they rather enjoyed it.

In order to compare the performance of experiment and control groups’

performance at the mapped role play, criteria were decided. The factors were chosen

with reference to the assessment criteria of some standardized speaking tests such as

The ACTFL OPIc which is based on ACTFL Oral Proficiency Interview (OPI), MATE

(Multi-media Assisted Test of English), and SST (Standard Speaking Test) and a prior

research (Kouichi, 2003).

The OPIc is a global assessment that measures language holistically by determining

patterns of strengths and weaknesses, establishing a speaker’s level of consistent

functional ability within the Novice Low to Superior range of proficiency, and

compared to the ACTFL proficiency Guidelines-Speaking (Revised 1999). Though

holistically rated, there are four major categories of assessment criteria on which ratings

are focused-(1) the global tasks/functions performed with the language, (2) the social

26

context and content areas in which the language can be used, (3) the accuracy feature

which define how well the speaker performs the task pertinent to those contexts and

content areas, (4) and the oral text type (from individual words to extended discourse)

produced.

MATE is designed for the Korean market and primarily for Korean speakers of

English using Korea as the basic background context for the tasks. The MATE scale

consists of four major levels: Expert, commanding, moderate, and rudimentary. In

addition, there are two sub-levels each in the expert and rudimentary levels and four

sub-levels in each of the moderate and commanding levels. There are four groupings of

criteria that need to be considered when rating a speech sample at MATE.

1. The functions or global tasks the test-taker performs (the thins the test-taker can

actually do with the language)

2. The range of contexts and specific content areas in which the test-taker is able

perform

3. The accuracy, or relative correctness, with which the test-taker is able to

perform these tasks

4. The type of textual organization or discourse patterns which the test-taker is

able to produce

SST is based on the ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines for speaking and the Oral

Proficiency Interview (OPI). In the SST, the proficiency guideline defines 9 different

proficiency levels (Level 1 is the most basic). Each level is defined specifically in terms

of the following criteria: (1) text type, (2) accuracy, (3) pronunciation, (4) fluency, and

(5) overall task & function.

Considering most of the participants are in the beginner level and the purpose of

27

the research is targeting the development of students’ speaking skills development and

their attitudes toward learning English. The tree tests share the same categories of form,

function and discourse. The criteria of the mapped role play were created by modifying

the criteria of the three tests above. The four factors chosen were Task completion (OPIc

(1), MATE (1), SST (5)), Function (OPIc (2), MATE (2) ), Pronunciation (SST (3)), and

Language control (OPIc (3), MATE (3), SST (2, 4)) (See table 3.12).

Table 3.12 Post-test evaluation criteria

Criteria Definition

1 Task completion Sustenance of role play

2 Function Appropriateness, relevance of speech

3 Pronunciation Understandability and acceptability of speech

4 Language control Fluency & Accuracy

The first criterion task completion is created by modifying the global tasks and

functions factor because in this test the task is only one—doing a role play successfully.

While other tests, which contains more than one kind of task, or a question, students

have to accomplish different tasks through the test. For example, they have to support

opinions with details or narrate and describe in major time frames. For the first three

categories including task completion, 5 scale (excellent:5 / very good:4 / good:3 / so-

so:2 / poor:1) measurements were applied. Thus, when the students successfully

perform mapped role play having story structure that the written map displayed, they get

5 points in this criterion. 4 points were given, when they use 7 to 6 maps, 3 points were

given for 5 to 4 maps, 2 points were given for 3 to 2 maps, and 1 point was given for 1

to 0 maps.

To measure the first factor, task completion, the researcher analyze whether the

28

role play follow the flow of the story of the written map. For example, group 4 of the

experiment group gain 5 points at this criterion (See table 4.9) because they create the

dialog based on the map that they were given as shown in excerpt 4.1. In this dialogue,

Shrek and Fiona invited Sleeping beauty to their house (map 1), but she visited their

house on a wrong day (map 2). Then, Shrek and Fiona hurriedly cleaned their house

while sleeping beauty suddenly fell asleep (map3), and when she awaked, they decided

to go on a picnic (map 4). Finally, Shrek and Fiona went outside to find sleeping beauty

(map 7), when she did not come back after few minutes past after she went o the

bathroom (map 5, 6). Finally, they finished their role play by creating ending for

themselves—Shrek and Fiona found Sleeping beauty at the bath tub in the bathroom.

Excerpt 3.1 Group 4 of experiment group

Shrek, Fiona: Hi~. Slepping beauty! Inviting to the party at April nineteenth. It’s 6 o’clock. Sleeping beauty: Okay! See you there! (map1)Ding-dong~Shrek: What’s she doing? Is she goes my home? Sleeping Beauty: Hi~ (map2)Sleeping Beauty: Ah~am. ZzzzzShrek, Fiona: Hurry up! Hurry up! Finish~! (map3) Hello, Sleeping beauty. Do you do you sleep well?Sleeping beauty: Yes.Shrek, Fiona: Let’s go on a picnic! (map4)Sleeping beauty: Okay. I go to the bathroom! (map5)Shrek, Fiona: Why she did not come back! (map 6)Shrek: Oh my god! Where’s crazy crazy sleeping beauty? (pause) Let’s go outside!Fiona: Okay, go go go. (map 7)……Shrek: Oh, my god! She’s here.

29

Fiona: What? (map 8)

The second factor, contents, as in the MATE, refers to the topics or the themes

inherent in the task measuring whether the dialogues are functionally appropriate at the

given situations. It means that students are able to use learned expressions in appropriate

situations. In other words, when the students use the learned expressions in appropriate

situations, they get high score. For example, group 3 of the experiment group got only 1

point (see table 4.10) at this criterion because they suddenly started their role play

inappropriate expressions like below. To be specific, map 1 asked students to invite

sleeping beauty to Shrek and Fiona’s house and the excerpt shows that they do not

understand when and to use learned expressions.

Excerpt 3.2 Group 3 of the experiment group

Fiona: Oh~Shreck!Shreck: Why?Fiona: I’m cold.Shreck: That’s too bad.

The third factor, pronunciation is borrowed from SST. It means how the students’

role plays were audible or understandable to the researcher. To measure the third factor,

pronunciation, the researcher observed the role plays and decided whether the role play

is understandable. Group 4 of the experiment group get the highest score 5 at this

criterion because the two researcher could clearly understand students’ pronunciation,

while group 1 of the control group get only 2 points because the researcher and one

other teacher could not understand what they were saying and could not follow their

story lines (See table 4.9 and 4.10).

30

In the research of fluency and accuracy in the spoken English of Japanese high

school, Kouichi (2003) designed measurement method for fluency and accuracy. To

define the level of fluency, the following five variables were integrated into one value.

(1) Total number of words spoken in a fixed time

(2) The number of silent pauses for thinking

(3) The number of repetition of words, phrases or clauses

(4) The number of repair or reformulation for correction

(5) Mean Length of Utterance (MLU)

The factor of language control is considered crucial, and analyzed in detail. The

prior research of Kouchi was adapted—(1), (2), (3) variables were used and (4) and (5)

variables were omitted. Since participants are elementary school students in the

beginner’s level and it is not easy for students to create, and maintain sentences, the last

two variables were omitted. In addition, the number of repletion of words is also

counted as a number of words spoken. Thus, for measuring fluency following 2

variables were used; the total number of words spoken, and the number of silent pauses

for thinking (See 3.13). These two variables were integrated into one value as following

formula: the total number of words spoken − the number of silent pauses for thinking.

Table 3.13 Variables for fluency

(1) the total number of words spoken (including repeated words)(2) the number of silent pauses for thinking (e.g. Umm…Uh…)

To define the level of accuracy, the following three variables were integrated to one

value (see table 3.14). In order to obtain numerical values of accuracy, the number of

31

grammatical errors, and the number of vocabulary errors were calculated using

following formula: total number of words spoken / (the number of grammatical errors +

the number of vocabulary errors + 1). In both fluency and accuracy, the larger the

number is, the greater the degree of the sample’s fluency and accuracy are.

Table 3.14 Variables for accuracy

(1) the number of grammatical errors(2) the number of vocabulary errors(3) total number of words spoken

In order to decrease subjectivity of theses criteria and increase reliability, the

videotaping of the role plays was observer more than 5 times by the researcher and one

other teacher. The scores were obtained after coordinating the two people’s opinions. In

the case of language control (Fluency & Accuracy) the greater the number is, the better

the performance is and there are no limits at the scores. In the case of other factors, 5 are

the highest score.

32

Chapter 4 Results

4.1 Results of survey

4.1.1 Pre-survey 1

Table 4.1 and table 4.2 show the result of pre-survey 1 of the two groups. The question

number one was do the students like to learn English in school and the second question

was related with students’ feelings about speaking in English and the third one is the

reason for their responses to the question 2. The last question refers the students’ self

evaluation about their participation rate at the class (See appendix A).

Before the experiment, there are no significant differences between the two groups

in terms of their attitudes toward English language learning and participation in class.

60.7% of the experiment group and 62.1% of control group responded they like to learn

English in school and almost half of the students in each class said that they participate

well in class (Experiment group: 46.4%, Control group: 55.2%). However, the students

of experiment group had more negative attitude about speaking in English by more than

15 per cent (Experiment group: 60.7%, Control group: 44.8%).

Table 4.1 Experiment group, N=28

Question Response

1 Yes: 17 (60.7%) No: 11 (39.3%)

2

Positive emotions (39.3%) Negative emotions (60. 7%)

1. Fun: 8 (28.6%)

2. Difficult, but fun: 2 (7.1%)

3. Have to study hard: 1 (3.6 %)

1. Difficult: 5 (17.9%)

2. Cannot speak: 3 (10.7%)

3. Afraid of making mistakes:

3 (10.7%)

4. At a loss: 3 (10.7%)

5. Too complicated: 2 (7.1%)

6. Strange: 1 (3.6 %)

3 Well participate So-so Poor

33

13(46.4%) 2(7.2%) 13(46.4%)

Table 4.2 Control group, N=29

Question Response

1 Yes: 18 (62.1%) No: 11 (37.9%)

2

Positive emotions (55.2%) Negative emotions (44.8%)

1. Fun (good): 12 (41.4%)

2. Easy: 2 (6.9 %)

3. Difficult, but fun: 2 (6.9%)

1. Difficult: 8 (27.6%)

2. Cannot speak: 4 (13.8%)

3. Do not like: 1 (3.4%)

3Well participate So-so Poor

16(55.2%) 2(6.9%) 11(37.9%)

4.1.2 Pre-survey 2

Pre-survey 2 were designed to ask students about their experience of doing role-plays in

English classes. The first question asked students whether the students have experience

of doing role plays in English class. The second question asked their feelings about

doing it, and the third question asked the reason. The last question asked whether they

memorized given scripts or made their own scripts while doing role plays in the past

(See Appendix B). Table 4.3 and table 4.4 below show the results.

Table 4.5 Experiment group, N=28

Question Response

1 Yes: 11 (39.3 %) No: 17 (60.7%)

21. Fun (Exciting): 10 (90.9 %)

2. Great: 1 (9.1% )

∙

3 1. Work together with friends

2. Understand English better by doing

3. Better pronunciation

4. Main character

34

4

1. Memorize given scripts: 8 (72.7%)

2. No memorization, Read the scripts: 3(27.3%)

3. Create dialogues: None

Table 4.4 Control group, N=29

Question Response

1 Yes: 4 (13.8 %) No: 25 (86.2%)

21. Fun (good): 3

2. So-so: 1

∙3 No clear answers

4

3. Memorize given scripts: 2

4. No memorization, Read the scripts: 2

5. Create dialogues: None

The survey results show that less than half of the students of the students of experiment

group had experience of doing role-plays in school (39.3%) and most of the students

who had the experience of doing role-play, were just memorizing given dialogs

(72.2%). Only about 14 per cent of control group students had doing role-plays in

English class. Meanwhile, most of the students who had experience of doing role plays

in English class showed positive emotions and only one student responded so-so. The

most top reasons that they enjoyed role play were working together with friends and

understanding English by doing were fun and exciting. However, the results show that

most of the students used given dialogues and memorized them when they did role

plays.

4.1.3 Post-survey 1

Post-survey 1 (See appendix C) were implemented to both experiment and control

35

group after the post-test (mapped-role play). The first question was designed to examine

how much do students like to learn English in school at five scales. The second one was

related with their emotions about speaking in English. The first and second questions

were designed to compare students’ attitudes during the research. The third question

asked students to choose their best activity. The results were shown in table 4.5 and

table 4.6 below.

Table 4.5 Experiment group, N=28

Question Response

11 2 3 4 5

0 (0%) 1 (3.5%) 14 (50%) 5 (17.9 %) 8 (28.6%)

2

Positive emotions (64.3%) Negative emotions (35.7%)

1. Fun (good): 8 (28.6%)

2. Wonderful: 4 (14.3%)

3. Easy: 3 (10.7%)

4. Difficult, but fun: 3 (10.7%)

1. Difficult: 5 (17.9%)

2. Nervous: 4 (14.3%)

3. Do not understand: 1 (3.6%)

3

1. Game: 13 (46.4%)

2. Role play: 7 (25%)

3. Song & Chant: 5 (17.9%)

4. Test: 1 (3.6%)

5. None: 2 (7.1%)

Table 4.6 Control group, N=29

Question Response

11 2 3 4 5

1 (3.4%) 2 (6.9%) 3 (10.3%) 11 (37.9 %) 12 (41.5%)

2

Positive emotions (31%) Negative emotions (69%)

1. Fun (good): 7 (24.2%)

2. Easy: 1 (3.4 %)

3. Difficult, but fun: 1 (3.4%)

1. Difficult: 18 (62.1%)

2. Tremble to think: 2 (6.9%)

3 1. Game: 9 (31%)

36

2. Role play: 7 (24.2%)

3. Song & Chant: 6 (20.7%)

4. Word search: 3 (10.3%)

5. Copying words: 1 (3.4%)

6. Role-taking practice: 1 (3.4%)

7. None: 2 (6.9%)

When adding percentage of students who gave more than five scores, the results

show that students likes doing role-plays in general in both groups (Experiment group:

96.5%, Control group: 89.7%). Only less than 10 per cent students show negative

attitudes towards doing role-plays in English class in both groups. The meaningful

difference of the two groups was found in their attitudes toward speaking in English

after experiment. Figure 3 below shows the change of the students in terms of positive

emotions about speaking in English. Contrary to experiment group, the per cent is

decreased after post-test in control group. In addition, when considering children always

like game, the survey result displays that students consider role play as the best activity

(Experiment group: 25%, Control group: 24.2%).

Figure 4.3

4.1.4 Post survey 2

Post survey 2 (See appendix D) was only implemented to experiment group and the

results were shown in table 4.7. The first question was asked students whether they

37

enjoyed doing role plays in English class. The second question asked students the

reasons of their responses to the question number one. The third question displays the

parts that students like when doing role plays. The fourth question refers to the kinds of

role play that students liked to do most. The last question asked students to self evaluate

whether they participated in role plays well compared to other activities in class.

Table 4.7 Experiment group, N=28

Question Response

1 Yes: 21 (75%) No: 7 (25%)

2

1. Fun – my lines are fun, seeing other

student’s role plays were fun

2. like acting

3. cooperation

1. Difficult-speaking, memorization

2. Did not well in presentations

3

1. Acting: 8 (28.6%)

2. Seeing role plays: 7 (25%)

3. Speaking in English: 4 (14.3%)

4. Cooperation: 3 (10.7%)

5. Creating dialogues: 2 (7.1%)

6. I don’t know: 4 (14.3)

4.1-2

Scripted: 3 (10.7%) The script was fun

Open-ended: none

Situational: 5 (17.9%) Imagination, Fun

The situations were interesting

Mapped: 17 (60.7%) I could create scripts more freely

Improvisation

The situation, characters were fun

Dialogues were longer than usual

Other students’ role plays were fun

I like bigger group

5 Yes: 19 (67.9 %) No: 9 (32.1%)

38

Spoke a lot

Acted a lot

Create my lines

Speak in fun

Not active

No lines

The results show that three-quarters of the students responded they enjoyed the role

play lessons and the most important reasons for like role plays were it was fun. The

most top aspects that students liked were acting (28.6%) and seeing the role plays

(25%). More than three-quarters of students most like mapped role-play among four

kinds of role-plays that they were doing in class (60.7%). Students’ responses of the

reason show that students liked the freedom and fun elements of mapped role play. In

addition, more than three-quarters of the student responded that they participate well at

the role plays because they spoke and acted a lot while doing role play.

4.1.5 Post-survey 3

Post-survey 3 (See appendix E) were also conducted only to experiment group to gather

more information from the experiment group students. The question one was how much

they liked role plays and second question asked students which they prefer between

typical role-play, which students have to memorize given dialogue and role plays what

they did in English class. Table 4.8 displays the results.

Table 4.8 Experiment group, N=28

Question Response

11 2 3 4 5

2 (7.1%) 5 (17.9%) 7 (25%) 6 (21.4 %) 8 (28.6%)

2 Typical role-play: 8 (28.6%) Role-plays: 20 (71.4%)

39

1. Role-play is more difficult

2. More easy

3. Helpful in studying English

1. More fun

2. Speaking and acting myself

3. Each group’s story is different

4. I can make sentences

5. Easier to learn English

The results of question number one show more specific information about students’

emotions compared to the question number one of post-survey 2. In the post-survey 2,

students could only respond yes or no to show their feelings about doing role plays, but

in this post-survey 3, they could choose numbers from 1 to 5. The greater the number is,

students more liked it. The results agree with the results of post-survey2. When add

percentage of point 1 and to, the percentage is 25% and it is same with the percentage of

students who responded no to the question number in the post-survey2. The response of

question number two shows that almost three quarters of students answered that they

like the role plays that they did last semester without the textbook.

4.2 Results of role plays

The researcher collected students’ written scripts and observed each lesson carefully

comparing experiment and control group. Although there were no big differences

between two groups, as time goes on the researcher could observed that students of

experiment group more actively participate in English class including role play lessons

and other classes as well. The students more actively sang they spoke more frequently

than control group students.

4.3 Results of post-test

Post-test (mapped role play) was transcribed and analyzed according to the four criteria

40

as shown in table 4.9 (Experiment group) and 4.10 (Control group). Group 7 of control

group is a special case because one of the students is very enthusiastic in every activity

in English class and he led the group’s performance. Consequently, the group performed

for long compared to other groups. Considering this point, the results show that the total

scores of experiment group were generally higher than those of control group.

Table 4.9 Experiment group

Group Task completion Function PronunciationLanguage control

Fluency Accuracy

G1 4 2 4 82 10.9

G2 4 4 4 50 10

G3 1 1 2 8 8

G4 5 5 5 81 13.5

G5 4 3 3 70 8.9

G6 4 2 4 38 9.1

G7 3 4 4 40 9.3

Total 25 21 26 369 69.7

Mean

score3.6 3 3.7 52.7 10

Table 4.10 Control group

Group Task completion Function PronunciationLanguage control

Fluency Accuracy

G1 2 2 2 37 7.8

G2 4 5 5 80 9.4

G3 0 0 0 0 0

G4 2 3 2 19 6.4

G5 4 3 3 53 9.8

G6 0 0 0 0 0

G7 4 4 4 120 9.4

41

Total 16 17 16 309 42.8

Mean

score2.3 2.4 2.3 44.1 6.1

4.3.1 Task completion

The mean scores of task completion of experiment group got the lead by 1.3 point

(experiment group: 3.6, control group 2.3). The results of experiment group show that

when excluding the lowest group—group 3 (1 point)—there was no sharp discrepancy

in abilities between groups. While, two of the experiment group even did not perform

the role play in front of the class (group 3 and group 6: 0 point) and the gap between

groups were bigger than the experiment group—two groups scored 2 points and 4

groups scored 4 points.

4.3.2 Function

Although experiment group got higher score in this criterion than control group, the gap

is not that salient compared to other criteria (Mean score-experiment group: 3, control

group: 2.4). In this criterion, both classes showed irregular distribution and there are big

differences within each class.

4.3.3 Pronunciation

The mean scores of task completion of experiment group got the lead by 1.4 point

similar to the task completion results (experiment group: 3.7, control group 2.3). As the

case of task completion, the results of experiment group show that when excluding the

lowest group—group 3 (2 points)—there was no sharp discrepancy in abilities between

groups, while control group shows big discrepancy between groups. There is no even

42

score except for groups who got 0 point.

Figure 4.1 shows the differences between the two groups at the first three

categories using mean scores.

Figure 4.1

4.3.4 Language control

In case of both fluency and accuracy, the experiment group obtained higher score than

control group (Fluency-experiment group: 52.7, control group: 44.1, Accuracy-

experiment group: 10, control group: 6.1). To be specific, experiment group 7.6 points

and 3.9 points more in the criteria of fluency and accuracy respectively. In addition,

there are huge discrepancies between groups in control class compared to experiment

group and experiment group got almost twice mean score in accuracy.

43

Figure 4.2 shows the differences between the two groups in terms of language control—

fluency, and accuracy.

Figure 4.2

Chapter 5 Discussion

44

5.1 Research Question 1

The first research question was “Do drama activities in the EFL context contribute

to students’ speaking skills development?” This research question was supported by the

post-test results. The Experiment class demonstrated that the implementation of drama

activities, or role plays played a role in developing their speaking skills based on role

play lessons, and post-test results.

5.1.1 Mean scores of post-test

As one of four language skills—listening, speaking, reading, and writing, listening

skills gives basic information about the level of students’ English proficiency in general.

Table 5.1 reveals that there were no big differences between two classes before the

experiment. The results were taken from the English listening test that all of the 5 th

grade students were taken at the beginning of this semester (March, 2008).

Table 5.1 Listening test result at the beginning

Group

GradeExperiment group (N=28) Control group (N=29)

Very good 13 (46.4%) 11 (37.9%)

Good 7 (25%) 11 (37.9%)

Fair 4 (14.3%) 5 (17.2%)

Poor 4 (14.3%) 1 (3.4%)

However, the mean scores of four criteria of experiment group in the post-test were

higher than those of control group as shown in table 5.2 below. They were able to

complete the role play with expected story line (Task completion) use appropriate

45

expressions in given situations (Function). In addition, their speaking was more audible

to the researcher (pronunciation) and they manage conversation more fluently and

accurately (Language control: Fluency & Accuracy). These results demonstrate that

drama activities contributed to students’ speaking skills development.

Table 5.2 Mean scores of post-test

Criteria

GroupTask completion Function Pronunciation

Language control

Fluency Accuracy

Experiment group 3.6 3 3.7 52.7 10

Control group 2.3 2.4 2.3 44.1 6.1

In detail, the fact that experiment group got higher score means that the students

of experiment group are more able to communicate in English in real life situation.

Although the students of experiment group experienced three kinds of role plays and

control group was not, it is clear that mapped role play was new to both groups. The

scores of function tell that students of experiment group know when and how to use

English expressions better than control group. The researcher and one other teacher

could understand the role plays of experiment group better than those of control group.

Especially, the role play of group 1 (2 points) is almost inaudible.

Among the criteria, in language control, there were considerable gaps between

two classes. Excluding group 7 of control group as peculiar since they spent quite a lot

of time in presenting their role play compared to other groups, the two top groups of

experiment groups had scores around 83 in fluency and 12.5 in accuracy. While in

control group, only one group scored 80 in fluency and no groups had 10 points

including the group 7 in accuracy. In the case of the lowest groups, only one group had

scores below 10 in fluency and accuracy in experiment group, while 2 groups scored 0

46

in control group. The two groups of control group could not perform at all at the test

after preparation.

In depth, when fluency was scored, the number of repetition of words or phrases

was also counted because it tells that the student does not memorize his lines

mechanically but tried to communicate with other students. There was difference

between to groups in this aspect. Students of control group did not repeat their words

frequently compared to students of experiment group. It implies that students of control

group just memorized their lines, while students of experiment group tried to

communicate with other students at the role play. In addition, when it comes to the

quality of their speech, students of control group in most parts just used memorized

input without constructing the stories, while students of experiment group tried to make

a story according to the directions reconstructing memorized input.

In this experiment, the experiment group had a progress in speaking skills

compared to control groups while doing role plays in every unit.

2. Research Question 2

The second research question was “Do drama activities in the EFL context have positive

influence on students’ attitude toward English learning and motivation?” This research

question was supported by students’ survey responses and the degree of participation in

every role-play class and post-test. Experiment group students were more actively

participate in the post-test, while 2 groups of the control group even did not able to

perform. As shown in survey results (See figure 4.3), students of the experiment group

gained more competence in speaking in English, while students of the control group

rather loose their competence after doing mapped role play.

47

In detail, it seemed that there were no big differences in their characteristics and

participation at the beginning between experiment and control group. However, the

researcher could feel that students of experiment group have been more actively

participate in English class little by little. The students participated actively in most

every activities including role play. While students of control group have been more

quite in class although they answered to the questions or participated activities that were

given. Their attitudes revealed most obviously at the post-test and one other teacher

could see this as well. Thus, experiment groups scored almost twice points than control

group and it tells that role play had positive influence on students of experiment group.

The survey results also showed that students of experiment group have positive

emotions toward English especially in speaking. At first, there were more students of

experiment group who had negative emotions toward learning English than students

who had positive emotions. However, after the experiment more students had positive

emotions toward learning English—only one student responded that they do not like to

learn English at all. As showed in figure 3, students of experiment group had more

confident in speaking in English after the post-test, while students of experiment group

lost their confident in speaking in English.

Almost three quarters of students of experiment group responded that they like

role plays that they did in this semester compared to typical role taking practices in

class. They like the choices that they had in role play working with other students. They

knew that they do not practice in English but communicate with other students in

English.

Chapter 6 Conclusion

48

6.1 Conclusion

This study was aimed to examine whether drama activities contribute to students’

communicative competence development and positive attitudes toward learning English

in school. The development in fluency and accuracy as well as speaking skills such as

management of topics with motivation are the core of this experiment. During the

experiment, participants were encouraged to speak in English without restrictions and

make a script based on the situations given by the researcher using unit’s expressions. In

order to investigate their development more objectively, one other regular class was

chosen to control group and experiment group had 6 role play lessons and final post-test

of mapped role play.

The results demonstrated that role plays contribute to students’ speaking skills

development and their positive attitudes toward learning English in school. Experiment

groups had generally had high scores in the 5 criteria than control groups at the post-test

although mapped role play was both new to experiment and control group. They spoke

more fluently and accurately with high quality and more actively participated in role

play. They reconstruct the input they had trying to make a story. At the beginning,

students just used memorized chunks; however, when time goes on, students tried to

organize their story reconstructing learned expressions.

At the role plays students talked more than the teacher, while in regular class

teacher talk dominant. Students had reason to talk with other students and tried to

deliver their meanings. The characteristic that drama activities have make students to

more actively participate in class with motivation to speak in English. Many students

responded that they do not feel anxiety or fear in speaking in English. At first, a few

students do not want to present their role play. The students have not spoken anything in

49

English class. However, they have become participate role plays little by little with

other students encouragement and spoken in other cases as well.

Students have thought that the role plays of English class were different of the

role plays that they do in other classes such as moral education and social studies.

However, after the experiment, they feel that role play in English class is the same

which they are doing in other subjects. Role play is the one that they speak but not drill

in English. Students said what they want to say and no single role play was same

although they reviewed some expressions before making scripts. When students

experienced more drama activities, the results could be more supportive.

6.2 Suggestions

More empirical researches using drama activities on a long-term basis with different age

groups needed to be conducted to examine whether drama activities contribute to

students’ speaking skills supporting the research questions. In addition, after the

experiment, the fact that the nature of student-student interaction in drama activities

resembles real-life communication was also found. Thus, the more advantages of drama

activities could be found and demonstrated with more researches.

6.3 Limitations

Since the research took only few months, it might be hard to generalize these findings to

other classes. Their might be different findings with other teacher and students in other

contexts. However, the results of this research could influence on other teachers who try

to find methods that could benefit their students in learning English.

50

References

Nam-Joon, Kang (2008). Drama, Children and English. Seoul: Eduspa.

Byrne, D. (1986). Teaching oral English. Harlow: Longman.

Holden, S. (1981). Drama in language teaching. Harlow: Longman.

Kao, S. & O’Neill, C. (1998). Words into worlds: learning a second language through

process drama. Stamford: Albex

51

Littlewood, W. (1981). Communicative language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.

Maley, A. & Duff. A. (1978). Drama techniques in language learning. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

Paulston, C. B. & Bruder, N. M. (1976). Teaching English as a second language:

techniques and procedures. Massachusetts: Winthrop.

Wessels. C. (1987). Drama. Hong Kong: Oxford University Press.

Hull. J.C (1992). The learner-centered classroom: Is there a role for role-play?

Retrieved March 9, 2008 from http://sunzi1.lib.hku.hk/hkjo/view/10/1000047.pdf.

Hymes, D. (2001). On communicative competence. In A. Duranti (Eds.), Linguistic

anthropology: a reader (pp. 53-73). Cornwall: Blackwell.

Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the theory of syntax. Massachusetts: The MIT Press.

Duranti, A. (2001). Linguistic anthropology: a reader. Cornwall: Blackwell.

Canale, M & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to

second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1, 1-47.

Canale, M. (1983). On some dimensions of communicative proficiency. In J. M. Oller

(Eds.), Issues in language testing research (pp. 333-342). Massachusetts: Newbury

House.

Bachman, L. F. (1990). Fundamental considerations in language testing. China: Oxford

University Press.

Brown, H. D. (2000). Principles of language learning and teaching (4th ed.). New York:

Pearson Education.

Savignon, S. J. (April 23, 1976). Communicative competence: theory and classroom

practice. Keynote address at the central states conference on the teaching of foreign

language, Detroit.

52

Stocker, G (November, 2005). ESL role-play. Retrieved March, 9 from

http://ezinearticles.com/?ESL-Role-Play&id=99731

Yule, G. (2006). The study of language (3rd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press.

Spada, N. & Lightbown, P. M. (2006). How languages are learned (3rd ed.). China:

Oxford University Press.

Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Hong Kong: Oxford

University Press.

Brewster, J. , Ellis, G. & Girard, D. (2002). The primary English teacher’s guide (2nd

ed.). Harlow: Pearson Education.

Larsen-Freeman, D. (2000). Techniques and principles in language teaching. Oxford:

Oxford University Press.

Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by principles: an interactive approach to language

pedagogy (2nd ed.). New York: Addison Wesley Longman.

Savignon, S. J. (2001). Communicative language teaching for the twenty-first century.

In M. Cele-Murcia (Eds.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (3rd ed.,

pp. 13-28). Boston: Heinle & Leinle.

Rivers, W. M. (1972). Talking off the tops of their heads. TESOL Quartely, 6(1), 71-81.

Wagner, D. J. (2002). Understanding drama-based education. In G. Bräuer (Eds.), Body

and language: intercultural learning through drama (pp. 3-18). Westport: Albex.

Dodson, S. L. (2002). The educational potential of drama for ESL. In G. Bräuer (Eds.),

Body and language: intercultural learning through drama (pp. 161-179). Westport:

Albex.

Bailey, K. M. (2005). Practical English language teaching speaking, Singapore: The

Mcgraw-Hill.

53

APPENDICES

Appendix A – Pre-survey 1

Appendix B – Pre-survey 2

Appendix C–Post-survey 1

Appendix D–Post-survey 2

Appendix E–Post-survey 3

Appendix F– Scripts for Unit 5 and 6

Appendix G– Situation for Unit 7

Appendix H – Written scripts of the open-ended role play for unit 5 by students

Appendix I – Written scripts of the open-ended role play for unit 5 by students

54

Appendix J - Written scripts of the situational role play for unit 7 by students

Appendix K - Written scripts of the situational role play for unit 8 by students

Appendix L- Written scripts of the post-test by students of experiment group

Appendix M- Written scripts of the post-test by students of control group

Appendix A – Pre-survey 1

1. Do you like to learn English in school?

2. How do you feel about speaking in English?

3. How do you think about your participation in class?

Appendix B – Pre-survey 2

1. Do you have any experience of doing a role-play in English?

2. If you did, how did you feel about it?

3. Why?

4. Did you memorize given scripts or make your own?

Appendix C– Post-survey 1

55

For both experiment and control group

1=very much 5= no

1. How much do you like to learn English in school?

2. How do you feel about speaking in English?

3. What do you think might be the best activity?

Appendix D – Post-survey 2

For experiment group

1. Did you enjoy doing a role-play in class?

2.1 If yes, why?

2.2 If no, why?

3. What do you like the most when you doing a role-play?

4.1 What kinds of role-play do you like to do most? Write numbers from 1 to 4

(1=do not like, 4=like it very much)

① Scripted role-play ② Open-ended role-play

③ Situational role-play ④ Mapped role-play

4.2 Why?

5.1 Do you think you participated better while doing role-plays compared to other

activities in class?

5.2 Why?

Appendix E – Post-survey 3

1. How much do you like to do role-plays?

1=do not like to do 5=very much like to do

56

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

2.1 Which do you prefer to do, role-play in the textbook or the role-plays we did last

semester without the textbook?

2.2 Why?

Appendix F – Scripts for Unit 5 and 6

Unit 5

A: Excuse me. Can you help me, please?B: Sure.A: .B: I’m sorry?A: .B: Oh~. .A: Thank you very much.B: .

Unit 6

A: I’m sleepy.B: You always look sleepy.A: Wow. It’s so beautiful. What time do you go to bed?B: I go to bed at .A: .B: .A: .B: .

Appendix G – Situation for unit 8You are Kongjwi. Your step mom went out saying “Don’t go out. Do house chores. No house chores, no food.” But Padjwi continuously ask you to do other things together. What would you do?

57

Appendix H – Written scripts of the open-ended role play for unit 5 by students Group 1A: Excuse me. Can you help me, please?B: Sure.A: Where is my home?B: I’m sorry?A: Where. is. my. home?B: Oh, It ’ s over there. A: Where ? Where? Oh, thank you. Thank you very much.B: Your welcome.

Group 2A: Excuse me. Can you help me, please?B: Sure.A: Where ’ s 맥주 house? B: I’m sorry?A: 맥주 house Please~ B: Oh, Go straight!A: Thank you very much.B: I want a you …

Group 3A: Excuse me. Can you help me, please?B: Sure.A: What ’ s my name? B: I’m sorry?A: OK.B: Oh, You Creazy1!A: Thank you very much.B: 아웃 ! Oh Creazy …

Group 4A: Excuse me. Can you help me, please?B: Sure.A: Ware ’ s my mom? B: I’m sorry?

58

A: my mom Please.B: Oh, commonA: Thank you very much.B: That ’ s ok.

Group 5A: Excuse me. Can you help me, please?B: Sure.A: Where ’ s 소주 house? B: I’m sorry?A: 소주 house please~ B: Oh, Go straight!A: Thank you very much.B: I want a you …

Group 6A: Excuse me. Can you help me, please?B: Sure.A: Where ’ s supermarket? B: I’m sorry?A: Where ’ s supermarket? B: Oh, go straight.A: Thank you very much.B: No problem.

Group 7A: Excuse me. Can you help me, please?B: Sure.A: What ’ s your name? B: I’m sorry?A: What ’ s your name? B: Oh, My name is OOO.A: Thank you very much.B: No problem.

Group 8

59

A: Excuse me. Can you help me, please?B: Sure.A: 왜얼스 남대문 B: I’m sorry?A: 남대문 플리즈 B: Oh, 잇스 오벌 대얼 A: Thank you very much.B: 노 프라범 .

Group 9A: Excuse me. Can you help me, please?B: Sure.A: 윽 ..Where is nurse? B: I’m sorry?A: nurse1!B: Oh, I ’ m nurse. I ’ m cure you. A: Thank you very much.B: 훗 . I ’ m 적군 . I kill you! 탕 ! A: 으 아 아 아 아 악 !

Group 10A: Excuse me. Can you help me, please?B: Sure.A: Where is 이마트 B: I’m sorry?A: Where is 이마트 please B: Oh, 이마트 이즈 고 스트내이트 턴 라잇 앳 뱅크 A: Thank you very much.B: 쇼올 아이캔

Group 11A: Excuse me. Can you help me, please?B: Sure.A: Where is elementary school?B: I’m sorry?A: Where is elementary school?

60

B: Oh, school?A: Yes.A: Thank you very much.B: No problem.

Group 12A: Excuse me. Can you help me, please?B: Sure.A: Where ’ my baby? B: I’m sorry?A: My baby please.B: Oh, here you are.A: Thank you very much.B: Your welcome.

Group 13A: Excuse me. Can you help me, please?B: Sure.A: Where ’ s OOO. B: I’m sorry?A: Where ’ s OOO please. B: Oh, It ’ s over there. A: Thank you very much.B: No problem.

Group 14A: Excuse me. Can you help me, please?B: Sure.A: Where ’ s battlefield B: I’m sorry?A: battle field please.B: Oh, Go straight and trun right at the 하스피러 A: Thank you very much.B: oh wonderfull

Appendix I - Written scripts of the open-ended role play for unit 6 by students

61

Group 1A: I’m sleepy.B: You always look sleepy.

What time do you go to bed?A: I go to bed at ll o ’ clock. B: What time do you study?A: I study English at 3 o ’ clock. B: What time do you brush your teeth?A: I brush my teeth at 10:30.

Group2A: I’m sleepy.B: You always look sleepy.

What time do you go to bed?A: I go to bed at 9 o ’ clock. B: really? What time do you get up?A: I get up at 7:30 o ’ clock. B: Wow very good Job A: Thank you

Group 3A: I’m sleepy.B: You always look sleepy.

What time do you go to bed?A: I go to bed at 9 o ’ clock. B: really?A: YesB: Wow! everyday?A: oh! Yes!

Group 4A: I’m sleepy.B: You always look sleepy.

What time do you go to bed?A: I go to bed at 9 o ’ clock. B: really?

62

A: Yes!B: what time do you get up?A: I get up at 8 o ’ clock. B: Wow, 원더풀 !

Group 5A: I’m sleepy.B: You always look sleepy.

What time do you go to bed?A: I go to bed at ten.B: really? very very good job.A: thank you! A nd about you? B: I go to bet at eleven!A: 으하하 ~ You look so tired!

Group 6A: I’m sleepy.B: You always look sleepy.

What time do you go to bed?A: I go to bed at ten o ’ clock. B: At ten o ’ clock? A: What about you?B: At ten o ’ clock! A: oh! Very good!!

Group 7A: I’m sleepy.B: You always look sleepy.

What time do you go to bed?A: I go to bed at 튜엘브 떨리 . B: 앗 더 튜엘브 떨리 ? A: 예쓰 , 어바웃유 ? B: I ’ m at the 12. A: you sleepy late.

Group 8

63

A: I’m sleepy.B: You always look sleepy.

What time do you go to bed?A: I go to bed at 텐어클락 . B: At then?A: 예스 ~ 아함 ~ 왓어바웃유 ? B: I go to bed at 10 o ’ clock. A: 오 ! 쌤쌤 !! A, B: 쌔래 ~

Group 9A: I’m sleepy.B: You always look sleepy.

What time do you go to bed?A: I go to bed at 12 O ’ clock. B: Really? Wow! are you crazy. You have 다크써클 . A: um … I ’ m play computer games at 12 o ’ clock. B: Wow beautiful! Fantastic! Perfect. W onderful. V ery good! you go to hospital. Hurry up!A: No, I ’ m 폐인 . I ’ m not go to hospital.

Group 10A: I’m sleepy.B: You always look sleepy.

What time do you go to bed?A: I go to bed at 11o ’ clock B: 11o ’ clock? A: Yes. I ’ m 11 o ’ clock. B: oh your late sleepy.A: Yes I doA: ZZZZB: oh no~Get up get up get up!A: Oh, yes~

Group 11A: I’m sleepy.

64

B: You always look sleepy.What time do you go to bed?

A: I go to bed at 10 o ’ clock. B: At ten?A: Yes!B: I go to bed at 10 o ’ clock too A: oh reary? Don ’ t lie!!

Group 12A: I’m sleepy.B: You always look sleepy.

What time do you go to bed?A: I go to bed at one o ’ clok. B: Wow~! a wonderful!A: Oh~! thank you. What about you?B: I ’ m go to bed at two o ’ clok. A: Wow~! good job~!

Group 13A: I’m sleepy.B: You always look sleepy.

What time do you go to bed?A: I go to bed at 8 o ’ clock. B: at eight o ’ clock? A: And I get up at 9 o ’ clock. B: Really?A: But I do my homework.B: You are so study very hard.

Group 14A: I’m sleepy.B: You always look sleepy.

What time do you go to bed?A: I go to bed at 11. B: A: really.

65

B: A:

Appendix J - Written scripts of the situational role play for unit 7 by students

Group 1In amusment park.Me: Where is my brother? I should go to Missing children find center (미아 찾기 센터).Guide: What do you want?Me: My brother is gone. Please find my elder brother.Guide: Okay. What does he look like?Me: He is ugly and short. Sometimes he is crazy.Guide: Ok. I find your brother.

Group 2A: 너 이렇게 생긴 애 봤어. 키 작고 코 크고 안경을 꼈어.Excuse me. I here short big nose glassesB: 아니. 못 봤어.I don’t noA: 우리 같이 찾자.B: 어 저기 있다A: 어디?B: 슈퍼마켓 앞에A: 어 있네

Group 3A: Excuse me!!!B: Yes?A: Can you help me?B: OKA: my brather is lose!B: I seeA: my brather is faceB: Oh! he has big face! Look! Is this your brather?

66

A: Yes! Thank you!

Group 4A: Hell me~ Hell me~ My baby ummm…B: Oh. No~My 시스털

Group 5Kim: ra ra ra saha~Jun: Wow! wonderfulKim: Let’s go! Hey, Let’s play crazy bing bing cup!Jun: OK. Wow my had bing bing1시간 후~Kim: 아~ my brother is hangbangvollmang(행방불명). where is my brother?Police: He’s big mouth?Kim: yes. And three eyes.Police: three eyes? oh my got!Kim: and…short hair little bit nosePolice: Ok. oh? He’s on the vaieking? Kim: Oh! my got!

Group 6송, 이: 랄라라라.이: 두유 원 아이스크림?송: Okay이: 오 마이 브라덜. Wait. 오 마이 브라덜 플리즈송: 시스털이: 오 마이 갓

Group 7엄마: 유- 유- Where is? Hey! Hey-경찰: What?엄마: Where is 유-경찰: mmm..어떻게 생겼죠? What?엄마: he is glasses small nose…경찰: Oh-over there!엄마: Thank you.

67

Group 8장: 아이 윌 바이 썸 주스. 왜잇트안: 예스(누나가 갔더니 동생이 없어졌다)장: 오!! 마이 베이비!! 베이비!! (운다)안: 흑흑!! 시스털1! 시스털!! (갑자기 만난다)장: 쏘리. 쏘리. 오 마이 베이비!!

Group 9A: 흑..Excuse me, can you help me?B: Sure.A: Fine my brother please…B: What does he look like?A: Um..he is whort and he has a a big head. He is pretty.B: oh, I find your brother~ hereA: wow my brother OO! 흑흑흑

Group 10A: Hey 익스큐즈미? 마이 영걸 시스털 라스트

she has a pink cap, brown hair and pink TC: Hey Hey Look at that. Pink cap, brown hair, pink TA: Oh, thank you. Hey where are you going to???B: I’m sorry. I going a w.cA: ㅎㅎㅎ. oh, that’s a good.A, C: Thank you.

Group 11 None

Group 12A: Help me please~B: NoA: please…B: OK.

68

A: Thank you very much.B: What? Does baby has?A: my baby is short hair and blue T-shirt and pantsB; Oh! here you areGroup 13A: Where’s my sister. Where’s my sister Excuse. Can you help me please?B: Sure.A: Where’s my sister?B: What do your sister look like?A: my sister has long hair and big eyes and so cuteB: Oh! There!A: OO야~널 얼마나 찾았는지 아니?

Appendix K - Written scripts of the situational role play for unit 8 by students

Group 1 P: Le’s play outside.K: No, I can’t. I should do my house chores.P: Please. I am lonely.K: Umm…. How about this?P: What?K: Do house chores together, and play outside.P: Sounds great.

Group 2K: You meP:….

Group 3None

Group 4 & 12K: I’m so sorry. Sorry.P: Shut up. Let’s go pc room.

69

K: Sounds good~P: Oh~ Thank you.K: Let’s go!피시방에 갔다.P: Oh~ pc room in the momK: Oh~! Hi, mom.M: Are you home in work?K: I’m so sorry sorry.

Group 5K: Ymm first is Let’s play house chores! But don’t playingP: OK! Let’s wash a door.K: OK! 5 minute…ohhhhhh noooooo~!P: What’s wrong?K: I’m strongest and punch doorP: Oh~ my got!Mom: Kongjwi, Padjwi! Do you play the house chores?K: I’m sorry look at the here!Mom: Ohhhohohoh~!

Group 6 & 8계모: 콩쥐! 두 유얼 하우스 쵸월스!! 노푸드!!팥쥐: 플래이! 플래이 겜!콩쥐: 비 콰이어트!! (청소를 한다)(계모가 돌아온다)팥쥐: (우는 연기하며) 마미! 콩쥐 이즈 마이 맴매.계모: 오!! 콩쥐 맴매콩쥐: 으허엉 ㅠㅠ

Group 7콩쥐: No, No. Let’s play house chores.팥쥐: Why? Let’s play game!콩쥐: I’m sorry..팥쥐: Please~ Please콩쥐: Yes (힘없이).. Let’s play game~팥쥐: Yeah!

70

계모: You! No food.콩쥐: ㅠ-ㅠ…mom. Please food-.

Group 9콩쥐: Padjwi! But I do house chores.팥쥐: What! (콩쥐를 때린다.)콩쥐: 아앗…OK…I play with you! Let’s party time!팥쥐: Oh~ye~계모: What are you doing?팥쥐: Play with me!계모: Oh yes!!

Group 10팥: Hey Let’s playing콩: No I don’t I have a house chorse팥: Hey please playing콩: No No No I have a house chorese팥: Okay Let’s play 서든어택콩: Okay1시간 뒤콩: Oh my god I don’t house chors팥: hahaha my missun clear!

Group 11콩쥐: 아임쏠리 아임돈트 플레이 아임 하우스

Group 13팥쥐: Let’s go buy 신상구두!콩쥐: No! I do my work. (빨래하는 척)팥쥐: Let’s waching TV!콩쥐: No! No! I do my work.팥쥐: Let’s go outside!콩쥐: No No No!팥쥐: You die…콩쥐: OK! OK

71

Appendix L - Written scripts of the post-test by students of experiment group

Group 1Shrek: Oh. thank you.Shrek and Fiona go to swamp. There was an Aligator.Shrek: How are you today?Aligator: I’m good.Fiona: Do you know where is sleepy beauty?Aligator: How does she looks like?Fiona: She is tall.Aligator: Oh, I see she!Shrek: Where is she?Aligator: She is over there.Sleepy beauty was sleep in the swamp.Shrek: Wake up, sleeping beauty! Why are you sleep here?Sleeping beauty: I have sleepwalking.Fiona: let’s go the picnic.Shrek: What a nice day!They go to picnic.-The end-

Group 2슈렉, 피오나: 컴온요~잠자는 공주: 오케이잠자는 공주: 띵똥! 헬로우! 아임 컹.슈렉, 피오나: 왓!!!!!!잠자는 공주: 음냐 음냐 쿨 쿨~슈렉: 렛츠 클린 더 하우스! 헐리 업!피오나: 오케이. 음…렛츠 베큠.잠자는 공주: 아함~ 응? 하이…피오나, 슈렉: 하이! 굿모닝! 렛츠 고우 온 어 피크닉!잠자는 공주: 슈얼! 아이 고우 투 베쓰룸! 웨잇 어 미닛!슈렉: 웨얼 이스 잠자는 공주?피오나: 렛츠 파인드 잠자는 공주!슈렉: 오케이. 고고고!피오나: 렛츠 파인드 아웃사이드!

72

슈렉: 오예스~그 날 이후 잠자는 공주를 본 사람은 없었다.

Group 3(슈렉이 돌멩이를 던진다. 피오나가 그 돌멩이를 받는다.)피오나: Oh~!슈렉!슈렉: 와이?피오나: 아임 콜드.슈렉: 댓 스 투 배드.(피오나가 킥킥 웃으며 돌멩이를 다시 던진다.)피오나: (힘차게 말한다.) 아임 콜드…슈렉: 돈트 라이!!! 렛스 고 언 어 피크닉피오나: 오케이슈렉: oh…피오나: 와이?슈렉: 아임 콜드피오나: 돈트 라이(슈렉이 미친듯이 웃고나서 같이 소풍을 간다)피오나: 왓 어 나이스데이슈렉: 예스 왓 어 나이스데이피오나: 아임 헝그리슈렉: 렛스 잇 푸드피오나: 오케이(슈렉이 완전 빨리 음식을 먹는다)슈렉, 피오나: 얌얌슈렉: 아임 풀피오나: 미 투

Group 4슈렉, 피오나: Hi~ Sleeping beauty! In invitieding me to the party at 4월 19일 6시잠공주: OK! See you there!잠시 후슈렉: What’s she doing? Is she goes my home?띵똥슈렉, 피오나: Oh my god! Hurry up! She’s over there!!!잠자는 공주: Hi~아함~ 쿨 ZZ

73

슈렉, 피오나: hurry up! hurry up! finish~Hello~sleeping beauty Do you sleep well?공주: Yes.슈렉, 피오나: Let’s go on a picnic!공주: I go to the bathroom!슈렉, 피오나: Why she did not come back!슈렉, 피오나: Oh my god! Where’s crazy sleeping beauty? Let’s go Outside!

Group 5(슈렉이 글을 쓴다. 비행기를 던진다. 그리고 공주가 받아서 읽는다.)잠공주: 오우 슈렉 피오나 이즈 대이 하우스 인바이트.슈렉: 해이 프린세스. 마이 하우스 이즈 인바이트잠공주: 오예스~슈렉하우스 go(전화하는 척하며)헤이슈렉 me your hous go슈렉: 리얼리? 오노우 헤이 피오나 sleap 프린세스 이스 it here.피오나: 리얼리? 오노우 (슈렉, 피오나는 청소하는 척한다)용: Hey. What are you doing?잠공주: 슈렉, 피오나 렛츠고 피크닉 오캐이?용: 피크닉, 오 me together(고양이 등장) 고양이: Hey 피크닉 미 투슈렉: okay잠공주: Hey sorry I go to a beathroom슈렉: okay Sleap 프린세스 아웃 사이두 투. 파인드 헐피오나: reary용, 고양이, 슈렉, 피오나: Hey sleap 프린세스 왜얼 얼유

Group 6슈렉: Where is sleeping beaury?공주: 뿌지직~슈렉: Hey ddong?공주: Yes..나그네: Hey beauty공주: Why?나그네: Where are you from?공주: I’m from bathroom. Long long a time

74

슈렉: Where is sleeping beauty?공주: I’m here.슈렉: Oh~ my god.

Group 7슈렉: hm..Hello-피오나: beauty-How are you?미녀: Zzz (누워있음)슈렉: Oh-No피오나: Let’s play cleaned their house.2분간 청소함미녀: Oh…Sorry…슈렉, 피오나: That’s okay.미녀: Let’s go picnic!슈렉: Okay-피오나: Sounds great!미녀: Wait! bathroom!피오나: Okay-1분간 침묵슈렉: Where is beauty?피오나: mm..go bathroom슈렉: What? Where is?피오나: Hey! Hey! Where is beauty? She is tall!행인: No.슈렉: Oh…피오나: Where is.. beauty-

Appendix M - Written scripts of the post-test by students of control group

Group1슈렉: 슬리핑 뷰티 웨얼알유?피오나: 웨얼 이스 쉬?슈렉: 피오나 슬리핑 뷰티 웨얼 알유?피오나: 아이돈노…슈렉: 오 마이 갓!!왕자: 슬리핑 뷰티! 슬리핑 뷰티 웨얼알유? 틀리스 컴 투 벡 컴온

75

슬리핑뷰티: 커엄 ZZ왕자: 어! 커엄 사운드슈렉: 미투피오나: 렛츠고! 렛츠고!왕자: 슬리핑뷰티 웨이트 아임 커밍슬리핑뷰티: 커먼 커먼 ZZ~왕자: 프린세스 잇츠 미슬리핑뷰티: 어 어! 킹 할로우 아잇 러브악어: 아악슬리핑뷰티: 꺄악~유다이 퍽퍽 꺅~왕자: 프린세스~

Group 2Fiona: How are you?Beauty: I’m fine. And you?Fiona: I’m fine, too. Why are you come to with me today?Beauty: Oh. I’m sleepy. Zzz.Shrek: This time! Let’s clean the house ding-dongdonkey: Hey! I help you. I help clean the house.Fiona: Thank you.Beauty: Umm… I get up.Shrek: Oh good morning?Fiona: Let’s go picnic!Beauty: Where’s bathroom? I want to go bathroom.Fiona: Go straight.Beauty: Thank you.Shrek: What time is it?Fiona: thirty minuites.Shrek: Go inside.Fiona: Where is she?Shrek: Let’s go outside.Fiona: Oh police~Police: What’s wrong?Shrek: Oh~~~ I find. She’s in the bathtub.

76

Group 3None

Group 4잠자는 공주: How are you?피오나: I’m fine and you?잠자는 공주: I’m fine thank you.피오나, 슈렉: What’s up? today is Monday.잠자는 공주: Really?피오나, 슈렉: It’s clean room hurry up.잠자는 공주: O.K. I’m sleepy.잠자는 공주: I’m going to the wood.슈렉, 피오나: OK! Let’s move out!잠자는 공주: I want to first bathroom!피오나: Yes. First bathroom, and going to wood.슈렉: Where is the sleeping beauty?피오나: I don’t know! I’m going to bathroom!슈렉: OK.피오나: Sleeping beauty is don’t bathroom.Group 5Sleeping beauty: Hi, Fiona.Shrek, Fiona: Hi sleeping beauty, why do you come here?Sleeping beauty: What day is it today?Fiona: It’s monday.Sleeping beauty: It’s monday?? Sorry. I’m sleeping.Shrek: now. Let’s clean.Fiona: Where is my hat?Shrek: It’s under the table.Fiona: Where is my necklace?Shrek: It’s on the desk.Sleeping beauty: Oh, good moning?Fiona: Let’s go picnic.Sleeping beauty: Ok. Where is bathroom?Shrek: over ther.Fiona, Shrek: Where’s sleeping beauty and frense.Sleeping beauty: I’m here.

77

Group 6First, Shrek and Fiona go to the mountin.S, F: Sleeping beauty, were are you? But sleeping beauty is not there. Second, Shrek and Fiona go to the zoo.S, F: Were are you? Sleeping beauty?But Sleeping beauty is not there. Suddenly, one prince come to the S and F Prince: What happened?S and F spaking story. Prince is surprise.Prince: May i help you?S, F: Sure.Prince and F, S go to the swimming pool. Prince and F, S are very surprise. Because, Sleeping beauty is there. Prince: Why, you here?Sleeping beauty: I’m boring.Prince: Let’s go my castle.S, F: No, No, Your come to the my house!But Sleeping beauty is go to the Prince’s castle. S and F are sad. But they are go to the Shrek’s house.

국문 논문 초록

드라마 활동을 통한 말하기 능력 향상에 관한 연구

이 논문은 초등학교에서 의사소통중심의 영어 교육을 위해 드라마 활동, 그

중에서도 역할놀이를 도입하여, 그에 따른 학생들의 영어수업시간 참여 정도,

영어 학습에 대한 태도, 학생들의 의사소통능력의 향상 정도를 살펴 보아 영어

교육에서 역할놀이의 효용성을 알아보고자 했다. 4가지 종류의 역할놀이—

Scripted, Open ended, Situational, and Mapped role play—를

순차적으로 초등학교 5학년 영어 정규 수업의 각 단원의 마지막 차시에

도입하여 유의미한 결과를 도출해 내는지 살펴보았다. 이 논문의 목적은 드라마

78

활동이 (1) 학생들의 의사소통 능력향상에 기여하는지 여부, (2) 영어학습에

대한 긍정적인 태도를 형성하는데 영향을 미치는지 여부를 연구하는 것이다.

이에 2장에서는 먼저 의사소통능력과 드라마에 대한 정의를 내리고, 제2언어

학습에 있어서 드라마 활동의 효용성, 그 중에서도 특히 역할놀이의 효용성에

대해 살펴보았다. 3장에서는 연구에 사용된 역할놀이와 그 과정이 소개되며, 4

장에서는 실제 수업에서 사용된 활동과 그 결과를 실험 그룹과 대조 그룹과의

비교를 통해 기술하고 있다. 연구 결과, 영어 교육에서 역할놀이, 즉 드라마

활동의 도입이 학생들에게 의사소통능력면과 심리적인면에서 긍정적인 영향을

미침을 알 수 있었으며, 이에 한국과 같은 EFL 상황의 영어 학습에서 드라마의

사용이 심리언어학적으로 긍정적인 영향을 끼친다는 결론을 맺고 있다.

79