APPLYING AUTHENTIC ORAL
PRODUCTION TO IMPROVE SPEAKING
FLUENCY THROUGH PROJECT-BASED
LEARNING APPROACH ON EFL
STUDENTS
APLICACIÓN DE LA PRODUCCIÓN ORAL AUTÉNTICA
PARA MEJORAR LA FLUIDEZ VERBAL MEDIANTE UN
ENFOQUE DE APRENDIZAJE BASADO EN PROYECTOS EN
ESTUDIANTES DE INGLÉS COMO LENGUA EXTRANJERA
(EFL)
Stanislaus Oshimeje
Universidad de Especialidades Espíritu Santo (UEES)
Ivanova Daniela Flores Barahona
Universidad de Especialidades Espíritu Santo (UEES)
pág. 2304
DOI: https://doi.org/10.37811/cl_rcm.v9i4.18849
Applying Authentic Oral Production to Improve Speaking Fluency Through
Project-Based Learning Approach on EFL Students
Stanislaus Oshimeje 1
soshimeje@uees.edu.ec
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6092-7180
Universidad de Especialidades Espíritu Santo
(UEES)
Ecuador.
Ivanova Daniela Flores Barahona
Ifloresb@uees.edu.ec
https://orcid.org/0009-0005-0361-6235
Universidad de Especialidades Espíritu Santo
(UEES)
Ecuador
ABSTRACT
This paper explores the influence of authentic oral production on speaking fluency through the
implementation of project-based learning (PBL) in an EFL classroom. Conducted in a private secondary
school in Machala, Ecuador, this action research involved 20 students aged 13–14 who had attained A2-
level English proficiency. Pre- and post-intervention tests were used to assess speech fluency using a
rubric that measured pronunciation, grammar, accuracy, speech rate, and repairs. Additionally, student
perceptions were evaluated through surveys. Results showed a marked improvement in speaking fluency
following the intervention. The students also reported increased confidence and engagement,
highlighting the effectiveness of combining authentic oral tasks with the PBL approach. The findings
suggest that this methodology not only enhances fluency but also fosters critical thinking, creativity,
and collaboration among learners.
Keywords: speaking fluency, authentic oral production, project-based learning, EFL, student-centered
learning
1 Autor principal
Correspondencia: soshimeje@uees.edu.ec
DOI: https://doi.org/10.37811/cl_rcm.v9i4.18849
Applying Authentic Oral Production to Improve Speaking Fluency Through
Project-Based Learning Approach on EFL Students
Stanislaus Oshimeje 1
soshimeje@uees.edu.ec
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6092-7180
Universidad de Especialidades Espíritu Santo
(UEES)
Ecuador.
Ivanova Daniela Flores Barahona
Ifloresb@uees.edu.ec
https://orcid.org/0009-0005-0361-6235
Universidad de Especialidades Espíritu Santo
(UEES)
Ecuador
ABSTRACT
This paper explores the influence of authentic oral production on speaking fluency through the
implementation of project-based learning (PBL) in an EFL classroom. Conducted in a private secondary
school in Machala, Ecuador, this action research involved 20 students aged 13–14 who had attained A2-
level English proficiency. Pre- and post-intervention tests were used to assess speech fluency using a
rubric that measured pronunciation, grammar, accuracy, speech rate, and repairs. Additionally, student
perceptions were evaluated through surveys. Results showed a marked improvement in speaking fluency
following the intervention. The students also reported increased confidence and engagement,
highlighting the effectiveness of combining authentic oral tasks with the PBL approach. The findings
suggest that this methodology not only enhances fluency but also fosters critical thinking, creativity,
and collaboration among learners.
Keywords: speaking fluency, authentic oral production, project-based learning, EFL, student-centered
learning
1 Autor principal
Correspondencia: soshimeje@uees.edu.ec
pág. 2305
Aplicación de la producción oral auténtica para mejorar la fluidez verbal
mediante un enfoque de aprendizaje basado en proyectos en estudiantes de
inglés como lengua extranjera (EFL)
RESUMEN
Este artículo explora la influencia de la producción oral auténtica en la fluidez del habla mediante la
implementación del aprendizaje basado en proyectos (ABP) en un aula de inglés como lengua extranjera
(EFL). La investigación-acción se llevó a cabo en una escuela secundaria privada en Machala, Ecuador,
con la participación de 20 estudiantes de entre 13 y 14 años que poseían un nivel de inglés A2 según la
certificación de Cambridge. Se aplicaron pruebas pre y postintervención mediante grabaciones orales,
evaluadas con una rúbrica que consideraba variables como la pronunciación, la gramática, la precisión,
la velocidad del habla y las autocorrecciones. Además, se aplicaron encuestas para conocer las
percepciones de los estudiantes. Los resultados revelaron una mejora significativa en la fluidez oral tras
la intervención. Asimismo, los estudiantes manifestaron mayor confianza y compromiso, lo que resalta
la eficacia de combinar tareas orales auténticas con el enfoque ABP. Los hallazgos sugieren que esta
metodología no solo potencia la fluidez, sino que también promueve el pensamiento crítico, la
creatividad y la colaboración en el aula.
Palabra Clave: fluidez, aprendizaje basado en proyectos, producción oral auténtica, enfoque centrado
en el estudiante
Artículo recibido 05 julio 2025
Aceptado para publicación: 25 agosto 2025
Aplicación de la producción oral auténtica para mejorar la fluidez verbal
mediante un enfoque de aprendizaje basado en proyectos en estudiantes de
inglés como lengua extranjera (EFL)
RESUMEN
Este artículo explora la influencia de la producción oral auténtica en la fluidez del habla mediante la
implementación del aprendizaje basado en proyectos (ABP) en un aula de inglés como lengua extranjera
(EFL). La investigación-acción se llevó a cabo en una escuela secundaria privada en Machala, Ecuador,
con la participación de 20 estudiantes de entre 13 y 14 años que poseían un nivel de inglés A2 según la
certificación de Cambridge. Se aplicaron pruebas pre y postintervención mediante grabaciones orales,
evaluadas con una rúbrica que consideraba variables como la pronunciación, la gramática, la precisión,
la velocidad del habla y las autocorrecciones. Además, se aplicaron encuestas para conocer las
percepciones de los estudiantes. Los resultados revelaron una mejora significativa en la fluidez oral tras
la intervención. Asimismo, los estudiantes manifestaron mayor confianza y compromiso, lo que resalta
la eficacia de combinar tareas orales auténticas con el enfoque ABP. Los hallazgos sugieren que esta
metodología no solo potencia la fluidez, sino que también promueve el pensamiento crítico, la
creatividad y la colaboración en el aula.
Palabra Clave: fluidez, aprendizaje basado en proyectos, producción oral auténtica, enfoque centrado
en el estudiante
Artículo recibido 05 julio 2025
Aceptado para publicación: 25 agosto 2025
pág. 2306
INTRODUCTION
Speaking fluency is a central concern in the field of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) instruction.
It refers to the ability to communicate ideas in a given language with ease, fluidity, and minimal
hesitation (Skehan, 1996). Despite its importance, fluency remains one of the most challenging language
skills for learners to acquire. In many classrooms, both teachers and students struggle with developing
this skill effectively. Teachers often lack updated methodologies to facilitate authentic speaking
opportunities, while students face heightened affective filters such as anxiety and frustration that impede
oral performance.
This issue is particularly acute in Ecuador. According to the 2021 English Proficiency Index, Ecuador
ranks among the lowest in Latin America in terms of English-speaking proficiency, just above Mexico,
with a score of 440 out of 1000. While teachers are aware of the need for students to develop fluency
and purpose in their speech, they are often constrained by traditional, teacher-centered instructional
models that limit student agency and engagement.
The theoretical framework underpinning this study is grounded in constructivist learning theories,
particularly those proposed by Vygotsky (1978), Dewey (1938), and Kilpatrick (1921). These theorists
emphasize the social and cognitive benefits of student-centered, activity-based learning. Within this
framework, Project-Based Learning (PBL) emerges as a robust methodology that encourages learners
to construct knowledge through meaningful, real-world tasks. When paired with authentic oral
production, PBL promotes autonomy, critical thinking, and increased linguistic confidence.
Several prior studies (e.g., Jin, 2006; Kellem, 2009; Christopher, 2020) have demonstrated the benefits
of practice and self-reflection in building fluency. However, much of the existing research on PBL and
oral production comes from Europe and Asia. There is a notable gap in the literature regarding its
application in Latin America, particularly in Ecuador, where educational contexts and technological
resources vary significantly.
This study seeks to address that gap by exploring the influence of authentic oral production through PBL
on speaking fluency among Ecuadorian secondary school students. Conducted in a private institution in
the city of Machala, the research involved 20 students with Cambridge-certified A2-level English
INTRODUCTION
Speaking fluency is a central concern in the field of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) instruction.
It refers to the ability to communicate ideas in a given language with ease, fluidity, and minimal
hesitation (Skehan, 1996). Despite its importance, fluency remains one of the most challenging language
skills for learners to acquire. In many classrooms, both teachers and students struggle with developing
this skill effectively. Teachers often lack updated methodologies to facilitate authentic speaking
opportunities, while students face heightened affective filters such as anxiety and frustration that impede
oral performance.
This issue is particularly acute in Ecuador. According to the 2021 English Proficiency Index, Ecuador
ranks among the lowest in Latin America in terms of English-speaking proficiency, just above Mexico,
with a score of 440 out of 1000. While teachers are aware of the need for students to develop fluency
and purpose in their speech, they are often constrained by traditional, teacher-centered instructional
models that limit student agency and engagement.
The theoretical framework underpinning this study is grounded in constructivist learning theories,
particularly those proposed by Vygotsky (1978), Dewey (1938), and Kilpatrick (1921). These theorists
emphasize the social and cognitive benefits of student-centered, activity-based learning. Within this
framework, Project-Based Learning (PBL) emerges as a robust methodology that encourages learners
to construct knowledge through meaningful, real-world tasks. When paired with authentic oral
production, PBL promotes autonomy, critical thinking, and increased linguistic confidence.
Several prior studies (e.g., Jin, 2006; Kellem, 2009; Christopher, 2020) have demonstrated the benefits
of practice and self-reflection in building fluency. However, much of the existing research on PBL and
oral production comes from Europe and Asia. There is a notable gap in the literature regarding its
application in Latin America, particularly in Ecuador, where educational contexts and technological
resources vary significantly.
This study seeks to address that gap by exploring the influence of authentic oral production through PBL
on speaking fluency among Ecuadorian secondary school students. Conducted in a private institution in
the city of Machala, the research involved 20 students with Cambridge-certified A2-level English
pág. 2307
proficiency. The local context, characterized by increased access to technology and a growing demand
for communicative English, makes this investigation particularly timely and relevant.
Guided by a participatory action research design and a mixed-methods approach, the study investigates
three core questions:
1. To what extent does authentic oral production influence speaking fluency?
2. How does Project-Based Learning improve speaking fluency?
3. How is PBL applied within the EFL curriculum?
By addressing these questions, the study aims to contribute to curriculum development and the adoption
of innovative pedagogical strategies that empower both teachers and students. Ultimately, it advocates
for a shift from rigid, product-focused instruction toward more dynamic, process-oriented language
learning environments in Ecuador and similar contexts.
Literature review
To establish a solid theoretical foundation for this study, the relationship between speaking fluency and
project-based learning (PBL) will be thoroughly examined. While recent literature has explored these
variables from various perspectives, this review focuses on the most relevant findings to inform the
research design and the interpretation of results.
Speaking: Definition and Nature
Speaking constitutes a fundamental productive skill in second language acquisition. It involves the
active construction and negotiation of meaning through real-time interaction, necessitating the
simultaneous engagement of cognitive and social faculties (Florez, 1999; Thornbury, 2005). As a
socially embedded process, speaking demands both linguistic competence and pragmatic awareness,
making it a complex skill to develop, particularly in EFL contexts.
Fluency: Definitions and Dimensions
Fluency represents a multidimensional construct in oral communication, generally defined as the ability
to produce language effortlessly and naturally. Fillmore (1979) emphasized the ability to speak
continuously with minimal pauses, while Segalowitz (2010) proposed a tripartite model comprising
cognitive fluency, utterance fluency, and perceived fluency. These aspects encompass both the speaker’s
internal processes and the listener’s subjective evaluation. Lennon (1990) further distinguished between
proficiency. The local context, characterized by increased access to technology and a growing demand
for communicative English, makes this investigation particularly timely and relevant.
Guided by a participatory action research design and a mixed-methods approach, the study investigates
three core questions:
1. To what extent does authentic oral production influence speaking fluency?
2. How does Project-Based Learning improve speaking fluency?
3. How is PBL applied within the EFL curriculum?
By addressing these questions, the study aims to contribute to curriculum development and the adoption
of innovative pedagogical strategies that empower both teachers and students. Ultimately, it advocates
for a shift from rigid, product-focused instruction toward more dynamic, process-oriented language
learning environments in Ecuador and similar contexts.
Literature review
To establish a solid theoretical foundation for this study, the relationship between speaking fluency and
project-based learning (PBL) will be thoroughly examined. While recent literature has explored these
variables from various perspectives, this review focuses on the most relevant findings to inform the
research design and the interpretation of results.
Speaking: Definition and Nature
Speaking constitutes a fundamental productive skill in second language acquisition. It involves the
active construction and negotiation of meaning through real-time interaction, necessitating the
simultaneous engagement of cognitive and social faculties (Florez, 1999; Thornbury, 2005). As a
socially embedded process, speaking demands both linguistic competence and pragmatic awareness,
making it a complex skill to develop, particularly in EFL contexts.
Fluency: Definitions and Dimensions
Fluency represents a multidimensional construct in oral communication, generally defined as the ability
to produce language effortlessly and naturally. Fillmore (1979) emphasized the ability to speak
continuously with minimal pauses, while Segalowitz (2010) proposed a tripartite model comprising
cognitive fluency, utterance fluency, and perceived fluency. These aspects encompass both the speaker’s
internal processes and the listener’s subjective evaluation. Lennon (1990) further distinguished between
pág. 2308
broad and narrow fluency, with the latter focusing on measurable aspects such as speech rate, pausing,
and repair patterns.
Strategies to Improve Fluency
Several pedagogical frameworks have been introduced to foster fluency in EFL learners. Notably,
constructivist approaches such as Project-Based Learning (PBL), Communicative Language Teaching
(CLT), Content-Based Instruction (CBI), and Task-Based Instruction (TBL) promote authentic and
learner-centered experiences. Scholars (Jin, 2006; Kellem, 2009; Christopher, 2020) have emphasized
the critical role of repetitive practice, linguistic immersion, and affective safety in developing oral
fluency.
Measuring Fluency
The assessment of fluency typically focuses on utterance-level indicators, including speech rate,
breakdown (pauses and hesitations), and repair (self-corrections). Tavakoli and Skehan (2005) defined
speech rate as the number of syllables produced per minute, while Cucchiarini et al. (2002) and Kormos
& Dénes (2004) have validated its significance as a predictor of fluency. Repair mechanisms, as
described by Schegloff et al. (1977), reflect the speaker’s effort to maintain coherence and intelligibility
under communicative pressure.
Project-Based Learning (PBL)
PBL emerges from constructivist learning theories and places students at the center of inquiry-based
learning. Early proponents such as Kilpatrick (1921) and Dewey (1959) advocated for learning through
meaningful activity, while Vygotsky (1978) emphasized the role of social interaction in cognitive
development. In the EFL context, PBL fosters linguistic engagement through authentic problem-solving,
collaboration, and reflection (Krajcik & Blumenfeld, 2006).
Critical and Creative Thinking
PBL also facilitates the cultivation of higher-order cognitive skills. According to Facione (1990), critical
thinking entails reasoned judgment and reflective decision-making, while creative thinking,
characterized by originality and flexibility, enables learners to approach problems from multiple
perspectives (de Bono, 1993). These skills are essential for autonomous learning and are nurtured
through the iterative and student-driven structure of PBL.
broad and narrow fluency, with the latter focusing on measurable aspects such as speech rate, pausing,
and repair patterns.
Strategies to Improve Fluency
Several pedagogical frameworks have been introduced to foster fluency in EFL learners. Notably,
constructivist approaches such as Project-Based Learning (PBL), Communicative Language Teaching
(CLT), Content-Based Instruction (CBI), and Task-Based Instruction (TBL) promote authentic and
learner-centered experiences. Scholars (Jin, 2006; Kellem, 2009; Christopher, 2020) have emphasized
the critical role of repetitive practice, linguistic immersion, and affective safety in developing oral
fluency.
Measuring Fluency
The assessment of fluency typically focuses on utterance-level indicators, including speech rate,
breakdown (pauses and hesitations), and repair (self-corrections). Tavakoli and Skehan (2005) defined
speech rate as the number of syllables produced per minute, while Cucchiarini et al. (2002) and Kormos
& Dénes (2004) have validated its significance as a predictor of fluency. Repair mechanisms, as
described by Schegloff et al. (1977), reflect the speaker’s effort to maintain coherence and intelligibility
under communicative pressure.
Project-Based Learning (PBL)
PBL emerges from constructivist learning theories and places students at the center of inquiry-based
learning. Early proponents such as Kilpatrick (1921) and Dewey (1959) advocated for learning through
meaningful activity, while Vygotsky (1978) emphasized the role of social interaction in cognitive
development. In the EFL context, PBL fosters linguistic engagement through authentic problem-solving,
collaboration, and reflection (Krajcik & Blumenfeld, 2006).
Critical and Creative Thinking
PBL also facilitates the cultivation of higher-order cognitive skills. According to Facione (1990), critical
thinking entails reasoned judgment and reflective decision-making, while creative thinking,
characterized by originality and flexibility, enables learners to approach problems from multiple
perspectives (de Bono, 1993). These skills are essential for autonomous learning and are nurtured
through the iterative and student-driven structure of PBL.
pág. 2309
Technology in PBL
The integration of digital technologies in PBL environments enhances access to resources, collaborative
learning, and multimodal communication. Solomon (2003) identified the pedagogical benefits of tools
such as word processors, databases, and online platforms, which enable learners to collaborate beyond
the confines of the classroom. These affordances have been corroborated by Sandholtz et al. (1997),
who highlight the role of technology in promoting learner autonomy and inquiry-based learning.
PBL and Speaking Fluency
Empirical findings support the efficacy of PBL in improving speaking fluency. Di Yang and Puakpong
(2016) demonstrated that project-based tasks, which promote autonomy and rehearsal, enhance learners'
oral proficiency. Similarly, Thornbury (2012) argued that repeated exposure to real-time interaction
leads to the development of automaticity, whereby learners produce language with minimal conscious
effort.
METHODOLOGY
The primary objective of this research is to evaluate the extent to which authentic oral production,
implemented through Project-Based Learning (PBL), contributes to the improvement of speaking
fluency in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners. Based on this premise, the following research
questions were formulated:
1. To what extent does authentic oral production influence speaking fluency?
2. How does project-based learning enhance speaking fluency?
3. How is project-based learning applied within the EFL curriculum?
This study is situated within the domains of Curriculum Development and Educational and
Technological Innovation, as it seeks to make meaningful contributions by proposing pedagogical
strategies and technological integrations that enhance oral communication and learner confidence. It
specifically aims to support teachers and students in fostering effective oral production through
innovative methodologies.
The research adopted an action participatory research design, a type of applied research that focuses on
addressing real-world educational challenges. According to Kothari (2004), applied research seeks to
provide immediate solutions to existing problems, particularly those arising from the lived experiences
Technology in PBL
The integration of digital technologies in PBL environments enhances access to resources, collaborative
learning, and multimodal communication. Solomon (2003) identified the pedagogical benefits of tools
such as word processors, databases, and online platforms, which enable learners to collaborate beyond
the confines of the classroom. These affordances have been corroborated by Sandholtz et al. (1997),
who highlight the role of technology in promoting learner autonomy and inquiry-based learning.
PBL and Speaking Fluency
Empirical findings support the efficacy of PBL in improving speaking fluency. Di Yang and Puakpong
(2016) demonstrated that project-based tasks, which promote autonomy and rehearsal, enhance learners'
oral proficiency. Similarly, Thornbury (2012) argued that repeated exposure to real-time interaction
leads to the development of automaticity, whereby learners produce language with minimal conscious
effort.
METHODOLOGY
The primary objective of this research is to evaluate the extent to which authentic oral production,
implemented through Project-Based Learning (PBL), contributes to the improvement of speaking
fluency in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners. Based on this premise, the following research
questions were formulated:
1. To what extent does authentic oral production influence speaking fluency?
2. How does project-based learning enhance speaking fluency?
3. How is project-based learning applied within the EFL curriculum?
This study is situated within the domains of Curriculum Development and Educational and
Technological Innovation, as it seeks to make meaningful contributions by proposing pedagogical
strategies and technological integrations that enhance oral communication and learner confidence. It
specifically aims to support teachers and students in fostering effective oral production through
innovative methodologies.
The research adopted an action participatory research design, a type of applied research that focuses on
addressing real-world educational challenges. According to Kothari (2004), applied research seeks to
provide immediate solutions to existing problems, particularly those arising from the lived experiences
pág. 2310
of a target population (Walker, 1993). This study identified a problem, posed relevant research
questions, and defined specific objectives to work toward a solution systematically. Data was collected,
analyzed, and used to design and implement an intervention, which was subsequently evaluated.
A mixed-methods approach was employed, incorporating both qualitative and quantitative data
collection techniques. Instruments such as surveys and evaluation rubrics were utilized to assess the
impact of PBL on speaking fluency. The sample consisted of 20 secondary school students, aged
between 13 and 14 years, from a public institution in Machala, El Oro Province, Ecuador. These ninth-
grade learners received approximately 10 hours of English instruction per week, exceeding the national
average. Most participants had previously attained A2-level certification, as assessed by Cambridge
English.
To evaluate the influence of authentic oral production, the first research variable, an assessment rubric,
was used to measure students’ speaking fluency throughout the PBL intervention. To examine the
impact of project-based learning, the second variable, an additional rubric and a structured survey, were
employed to evaluate student performance and collect observational data during the execution of the
projects.
The intervention spanned six weeks, during which students participated in weekly project-based tasks
that were integrated with their language curriculum. Each task encouraged collaboration, planning,
rehearsal, and culminated in students using an online multimedia tool called Vocaroo to record their
dialogues, fostering authentic oral communication. Throughout the process, the teacher acted as a
facilitator, supporting learners in project design, task completion, feedback sessions, and performance
reflection.
Pre- and post-intervention evaluations were conducted to measure changes in speaking fluency. The
rubric focused on key indicators, including speech rate, coherence, grammatical accuracy, and
interactional competence. Quantitative data from the rubrics were analyzed descriptively to assess
improvement. In contrast, qualitative data from surveys and observations were thematically coded to
uncover learner perceptions, behavioral changes, and levels of engagement throughout the PBL process.
of a target population (Walker, 1993). This study identified a problem, posed relevant research
questions, and defined specific objectives to work toward a solution systematically. Data was collected,
analyzed, and used to design and implement an intervention, which was subsequently evaluated.
A mixed-methods approach was employed, incorporating both qualitative and quantitative data
collection techniques. Instruments such as surveys and evaluation rubrics were utilized to assess the
impact of PBL on speaking fluency. The sample consisted of 20 secondary school students, aged
between 13 and 14 years, from a public institution in Machala, El Oro Province, Ecuador. These ninth-
grade learners received approximately 10 hours of English instruction per week, exceeding the national
average. Most participants had previously attained A2-level certification, as assessed by Cambridge
English.
To evaluate the influence of authentic oral production, the first research variable, an assessment rubric,
was used to measure students’ speaking fluency throughout the PBL intervention. To examine the
impact of project-based learning, the second variable, an additional rubric and a structured survey, were
employed to evaluate student performance and collect observational data during the execution of the
projects.
The intervention spanned six weeks, during which students participated in weekly project-based tasks
that were integrated with their language curriculum. Each task encouraged collaboration, planning,
rehearsal, and culminated in students using an online multimedia tool called Vocaroo to record their
dialogues, fostering authentic oral communication. Throughout the process, the teacher acted as a
facilitator, supporting learners in project design, task completion, feedback sessions, and performance
reflection.
Pre- and post-intervention evaluations were conducted to measure changes in speaking fluency. The
rubric focused on key indicators, including speech rate, coherence, grammatical accuracy, and
interactional competence. Quantitative data from the rubrics were analyzed descriptively to assess
improvement. In contrast, qualitative data from surveys and observations were thematically coded to
uncover learner perceptions, behavioral changes, and levels of engagement throughout the PBL process.
pág. 2311
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
This study was conducted in three stages, utilizing a Classroom Action Participatory Research
framework: planning, execution, and observation. During the planning stage, a lesson plan was
designed, and both a pretest and posttest were administered, along with a questionnaire to assess
students’ prior knowledge of Project-Based Learning (PBL) and their perceptions of English speaking
proficiency. In the subsequent execution stage, the lesson plan was implemented, and observations were
conducted using standardized rubrics aligned with each research question.
Research Question 1: To what extent does authentic oral production influence speaking fluency?
To assess the impact of authentic oral production on speaking fluency, an observation rubric was applied
to 20 students. Pre- and posttest audio recordings of students' spoken English were evaluated based on
seven fluency components: pronunciation, grammar, accuracy, speech rate, speech breakdown, self-
repairs (repetitions), and corrections.
Table 1
Speaking fluency level scale
Poor Fluency Level 1-7 points
Medium Fluency Level 8-14 points
High Fluency Level 15-21 points
In the pretest, 5 students scored in the poor fluency range, 13 in the medium range, and only 2 in the
high fluency range. Following the PBL intervention, the distribution shifted: 2 students remained in the
low category, 8 in the medium category, and 10 students advanced to the high fluency category.
Figure 1. Speaking Fluency Levels – Pretest
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
This study was conducted in three stages, utilizing a Classroom Action Participatory Research
framework: planning, execution, and observation. During the planning stage, a lesson plan was
designed, and both a pretest and posttest were administered, along with a questionnaire to assess
students’ prior knowledge of Project-Based Learning (PBL) and their perceptions of English speaking
proficiency. In the subsequent execution stage, the lesson plan was implemented, and observations were
conducted using standardized rubrics aligned with each research question.
Research Question 1: To what extent does authentic oral production influence speaking fluency?
To assess the impact of authentic oral production on speaking fluency, an observation rubric was applied
to 20 students. Pre- and posttest audio recordings of students' spoken English were evaluated based on
seven fluency components: pronunciation, grammar, accuracy, speech rate, speech breakdown, self-
repairs (repetitions), and corrections.
Table 1
Speaking fluency level scale
Poor Fluency Level 1-7 points
Medium Fluency Level 8-14 points
High Fluency Level 15-21 points
In the pretest, 5 students scored in the poor fluency range, 13 in the medium range, and only 2 in the
high fluency range. Following the PBL intervention, the distribution shifted: 2 students remained in the
low category, 8 in the medium category, and 10 students advanced to the high fluency category.
Figure 1. Speaking Fluency Levels – Pretest
pág. 2312
Note: Fluency distribution before the PBL intervention.
Figure 2. Speaking Fluency Levels – Posttest
Note: Fluency distribution following the PBL intervention.
Research Question 2: How Does Project-Based Learning Improve Speaking Fluency?
To examine how PBL contributed to improved fluency, a survey was carried out before and after the
intervention using a qualitative approach. The 14-question poll explored students’ knowledge of PBL,
perceptions of their speaking skills, confidence levels, and attitudes toward using technology for oral
practice.
To begin with, the survey results demonstrated a notable shift in students’ understanding and attitudes
following the PBL intervention. Not only did knowledge of PBL increase substantially, but this more
profound familiarity was also accompanied by measurable improvements in self-assessed speaking
confidence and skill. These findings provide a foundation for examining the specific ways in which
project-based learning led to enhanced fluency and more positive student perceptions, as detailed below.
Knowledge of PBL showed a marked transformation: while 20% of students initially reported little or
no familiarity with the approach, post-intervention results indicated that 100% of participants had
developed a clear understanding (see Figures 3 & 4).
Furthermore, self-assessment of oral production revealed a significant boost in confidence. After the
intervention, only 10% of students remained indifferent, whereas 90% either agreed or strongly agreed
that their oral skills had improved (see Figures 5 & 6).
In addition, the perceived importance of fluency was already robust prior to the intervention, and this
strong consensus was sustained in subsequent measurements (Figures 7 & 8).
Note: Fluency distribution before the PBL intervention.
Figure 2. Speaking Fluency Levels – Posttest
Note: Fluency distribution following the PBL intervention.
Research Question 2: How Does Project-Based Learning Improve Speaking Fluency?
To examine how PBL contributed to improved fluency, a survey was carried out before and after the
intervention using a qualitative approach. The 14-question poll explored students’ knowledge of PBL,
perceptions of their speaking skills, confidence levels, and attitudes toward using technology for oral
practice.
To begin with, the survey results demonstrated a notable shift in students’ understanding and attitudes
following the PBL intervention. Not only did knowledge of PBL increase substantially, but this more
profound familiarity was also accompanied by measurable improvements in self-assessed speaking
confidence and skill. These findings provide a foundation for examining the specific ways in which
project-based learning led to enhanced fluency and more positive student perceptions, as detailed below.
Knowledge of PBL showed a marked transformation: while 20% of students initially reported little or
no familiarity with the approach, post-intervention results indicated that 100% of participants had
developed a clear understanding (see Figures 3 & 4).
Furthermore, self-assessment of oral production revealed a significant boost in confidence. After the
intervention, only 10% of students remained indifferent, whereas 90% either agreed or strongly agreed
that their oral skills had improved (see Figures 5 & 6).
In addition, the perceived importance of fluency was already robust prior to the intervention, and this
strong consensus was sustained in subsequent measurements (Figures 7 & 8).
pág. 2313
Moreover, concerning pauses in speech, students reported a modest decrease in the frequency of
perceived pausing (see Figures 9 & 10).
Interestingly, error awareness exhibited a slight upward trend, with an increasing number of students
acknowledging frequent errors. This outcome may suggest heightened self-awareness rather than a
regression in proficiency (Figures 11 & 12).
Additionally, the value of recording for self-assessment gained universal endorsement by the end of the
intervention. While 20% of students had initially doubted the utility of recording their voices, post-
intervention, all students agreed that it contributed to improved fluency (Figures 13 & 14).
Similarly, both awareness and approval of the Vocaroo application as a speech recording tool increased
markedly following participation in the project (Figures 15 & 16).
From a technological perspective, appreciation for the use of ICT tools in language learning grew among
students, although their overall enjoyment of the process remained essentially unchanged (Figures 17 &
29).
Finally, agreement regarding the positive influence of PBL on fluency rose from 75% to 90% after the
intervention, further underscoring the efficacy of the approach (Figures 30 & 31).
Research Question 3: How is Project-Based Learning applied in the EFL curriculum?
During the execution phase, student performance in applying PBL methodology was evaluated using
observation rubric. Key indicators included critical thinking, collaboration, creativity, and coherence—
all competencies essential to 21st-century learning.
Out of the 20 participants, 12 students (60%) performed at the Excellent level, 6 students achieved Very
Good scores, and only 2 students performed Poorly. These results indicate that the majority of students
successfully engaged with the PBL methodology and demonstrated meaningful progress in collaborative
and communicative competence.
Moreover, concerning pauses in speech, students reported a modest decrease in the frequency of
perceived pausing (see Figures 9 & 10).
Interestingly, error awareness exhibited a slight upward trend, with an increasing number of students
acknowledging frequent errors. This outcome may suggest heightened self-awareness rather than a
regression in proficiency (Figures 11 & 12).
Additionally, the value of recording for self-assessment gained universal endorsement by the end of the
intervention. While 20% of students had initially doubted the utility of recording their voices, post-
intervention, all students agreed that it contributed to improved fluency (Figures 13 & 14).
Similarly, both awareness and approval of the Vocaroo application as a speech recording tool increased
markedly following participation in the project (Figures 15 & 16).
From a technological perspective, appreciation for the use of ICT tools in language learning grew among
students, although their overall enjoyment of the process remained essentially unchanged (Figures 17 &
29).
Finally, agreement regarding the positive influence of PBL on fluency rose from 75% to 90% after the
intervention, further underscoring the efficacy of the approach (Figures 30 & 31).
Research Question 3: How is Project-Based Learning applied in the EFL curriculum?
During the execution phase, student performance in applying PBL methodology was evaluated using
observation rubric. Key indicators included critical thinking, collaboration, creativity, and coherence—
all competencies essential to 21st-century learning.
Out of the 20 participants, 12 students (60%) performed at the Excellent level, 6 students achieved Very
Good scores, and only 2 students performed Poorly. These results indicate that the majority of students
successfully engaged with the PBL methodology and demonstrated meaningful progress in collaborative
and communicative competence.
pág. 2314
Pre and Posttest Survey: Knowledge of PBL.
Figure 3
Note: This figure illustrates the participants' prior
knowledge of PBL. Pre survey
Figure 4
Note: This figure shows the knowledge of
participants about PBL after the project. Post
survey
Pre and Posttest Survey : Participants´ consideration about their oral production.
Figure 5
Note: This figure shows the representation of the
participant´s consideration about their oral
production. Pre Survey.
Figure 6
Note: This figure shows the representation of the
participant´s consideration about their oral
production. Post Survey.
Pre and Posttest Survey: Knowledge of PBL.
Figure 3
Note: This figure illustrates the participants' prior
knowledge of PBL. Pre survey
Figure 4
Note: This figure shows the knowledge of
participants about PBL after the project. Post
survey
Pre and Posttest Survey : Participants´ consideration about their oral production.
Figure 5
Note: This figure shows the representation of the
participant´s consideration about their oral
production. Pre Survey.
Figure 6
Note: This figure shows the representation of the
participant´s consideration about their oral
production. Post Survey.
pág. 2315
Pre and Posttest Survey : Opinion of participants as to the importance of fluency at the moment of
speaking English.
Figure 7
Note: This figure shows the results of the opinion
of participants as to the importance of fluency at
the moment of speaking English. Pre Survey
Figure 8
Note: This figure shows the results of the opinion
of participants as to the importance of fluency at
the moment of speaking English. Post Survey
Pre and Posttest Survey : Opinion of participants on how they feel about the pauses they make while
speaking.
Figure 9
Note: This figure shows the results of the opinion
of participants on how they feel about the pauses
they make while speaking . Pre Survey
Figure 10
Note: This figure shows the results of the opinion
of participants on how they feel about the pauses
they make while speaking . Post Survey
Pre and Posttest Survey : Opinion of participants as to the importance of fluency at the moment of
speaking English.
Figure 7
Note: This figure shows the results of the opinion
of participants as to the importance of fluency at
the moment of speaking English. Pre Survey
Figure 8
Note: This figure shows the results of the opinion
of participants as to the importance of fluency at
the moment of speaking English. Post Survey
Pre and Posttest Survey : Opinion of participants on how they feel about the pauses they make while
speaking.
Figure 9
Note: This figure shows the results of the opinion
of participants on how they feel about the pauses
they make while speaking . Pre Survey
Figure 10
Note: This figure shows the results of the opinion
of participants on how they feel about the pauses
they make while speaking . Post Survey
pág. 2316
Pre and Posttest Survey: Consideration of Participants that they make many mistakes while speaking
or not.
Figure 11
Note: This figure shows the results whether the
participants consider that they make many
mistakes while speaking or not . Pre Survey
Figure 12
Note: This figure shows the results whether the
participants consider that they make many
mistakes while speaking or not . Post Survey
Pre and Posttest Survey : Consideration of Participants that listening to themselves can help improve
speaking fluency
Figure 13
Note: This figure shows the results whether the
participants consider that listening to themselves
can help improve speaking fluency . Pre Survey
Figure 14
Note: This figure shows the results whether the
participants consider that listening to themselves
can help improve speaking fluency . Post Survey
Pre and Posttest Survey: Consideration of Participants that they make many mistakes while speaking
or not.
Figure 11
Note: This figure shows the results whether the
participants consider that they make many
mistakes while speaking or not . Pre Survey
Figure 12
Note: This figure shows the results whether the
participants consider that they make many
mistakes while speaking or not . Post Survey
Pre and Posttest Survey : Consideration of Participants that listening to themselves can help improve
speaking fluency
Figure 13
Note: This figure shows the results whether the
participants consider that listening to themselves
can help improve speaking fluency . Pre Survey
Figure 14
Note: This figure shows the results whether the
participants consider that listening to themselves
can help improve speaking fluency . Post Survey
pág. 2317
Pre and Posttest Survey : How the participants feel regarding recording their voices.
Figure 15
Note: This figure shows the results of whether the
participants feel comfortable recording their
voices . Pre Survey
Figure 16
Note: This figure shows the results of whether the
participants feel comfortable recording their
voices. Post Survey
Pre and Posttest Survey : The participants have heard about the app Vocaroo.
Figure 17
Note: This figure shows the results on whether the
participants have heard about the app that was
used to carry out the project. Pre survey
Figure 18
Note: This figure shows the results on whether the
participants have heard about the app that was
used to carry out the project. Post survey
Pre and Posttest Survey : How the participants feel regarding recording their voices.
Figure 15
Note: This figure shows the results of whether the
participants feel comfortable recording their
voices . Pre Survey
Figure 16
Note: This figure shows the results of whether the
participants feel comfortable recording their
voices. Post Survey
Pre and Posttest Survey : The participants have heard about the app Vocaroo.
Figure 17
Note: This figure shows the results on whether the
participants have heard about the app that was
used to carry out the project. Pre survey
Figure 18
Note: This figure shows the results on whether the
participants have heard about the app that was
used to carry out the project. Post survey
pág. 2318
CONCLUSION
This study aimed to evaluate the impact of Project-Based Learning (PBL) on speaking fluency in English
as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners, proposing PBL as a student-centered pedagogical innovation to
address persistent challenges in oral communication. The findings indicate that implementing authentic
oral production tasks through PBL significantly enhanced students' speaking fluency. Participants
demonstrated notable improvements in pronunciation, grammar usage, accuracy, and speech rate, along
with a reduction in pauses and repetitions. These outcomes strongly suggest that PBL provides a
meaningful pathway toward achieving communicative competence in EFL settings.
Moreover, the data revealed that students’ ability to manage their learning processes was key to their
fluency development. By planning, rehearsing, and producing language in a project-driven format,
learners gained autonomy and confidence, an outcome consistent with the broader aims of
communicative language teaching and supported by prior studies (Gonzalez et al., 2017; Patton, 2012).
The integration of technological tools, such as Vocaroo, played a crucial role in this improvement.
Participants used these tools to record, review, and revise their spoken language, which promoted
metacognitive awareness and iterative self-correction. This practice helped reduce affective filters such
as fear and anxiety, thereby fostering a more comfortable learning environment. These findings are
supported by previous research (Lopez et al., 2021; Santos et al., 2022), which highlights the value of
student-produced audio and video recordings in enhancing oral fluency.
Lastly, the adoption of Maria Conca’s (2018) PBL framework within the lesson plan was central to the
success of the intervention. Students responded positively to their structured yet flexible steps, which
aligned well with their interests and learning preferences. This approach enabled learners to
contextualize their knowledge and engage meaningfully with the language, particularly when given the
opportunity to discuss topics of personal relevance.
Strengths and limitations
Strengths
• The participants' strong motivation to learn English due to aspirations of studying or traveling
abroad contributed significantly to the success of the intervention.
• The school’s provision of technological tools facilitated audio recording and revision, which
CONCLUSION
This study aimed to evaluate the impact of Project-Based Learning (PBL) on speaking fluency in English
as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners, proposing PBL as a student-centered pedagogical innovation to
address persistent challenges in oral communication. The findings indicate that implementing authentic
oral production tasks through PBL significantly enhanced students' speaking fluency. Participants
demonstrated notable improvements in pronunciation, grammar usage, accuracy, and speech rate, along
with a reduction in pauses and repetitions. These outcomes strongly suggest that PBL provides a
meaningful pathway toward achieving communicative competence in EFL settings.
Moreover, the data revealed that students’ ability to manage their learning processes was key to their
fluency development. By planning, rehearsing, and producing language in a project-driven format,
learners gained autonomy and confidence, an outcome consistent with the broader aims of
communicative language teaching and supported by prior studies (Gonzalez et al., 2017; Patton, 2012).
The integration of technological tools, such as Vocaroo, played a crucial role in this improvement.
Participants used these tools to record, review, and revise their spoken language, which promoted
metacognitive awareness and iterative self-correction. This practice helped reduce affective filters such
as fear and anxiety, thereby fostering a more comfortable learning environment. These findings are
supported by previous research (Lopez et al., 2021; Santos et al., 2022), which highlights the value of
student-produced audio and video recordings in enhancing oral fluency.
Lastly, the adoption of Maria Conca’s (2018) PBL framework within the lesson plan was central to the
success of the intervention. Students responded positively to their structured yet flexible steps, which
aligned well with their interests and learning preferences. This approach enabled learners to
contextualize their knowledge and engage meaningfully with the language, particularly when given the
opportunity to discuss topics of personal relevance.
Strengths and limitations
Strengths
• The participants' strong motivation to learn English due to aspirations of studying or traveling
abroad contributed significantly to the success of the intervention.
• The school’s provision of technological tools facilitated audio recording and revision, which
pág. 2319
were central to the methodology.
• The project-based format aligned well with learners' interests and offered authentic
opportunities for communication.
Limitations
• The small sample size (N=20) limited the generalizability of findings and made it difficult to
establish a control group.
• Scheduling conflicts due to extracurricular commitments (e.g., sports tournaments) disrupted
parts of the implementation.
• Learner diversity in commitment, learning styles, and levels of intrinsic motivation posed
challenges for consistent engagement throughout the project.
Future research directions
Future studies could explore the effectiveness of PBL and authentic oral production in improving
fluency among students with special educational needs, focusing on variables such as willingness to
speak, personality traits, institutional context (e.g., public vs. private schools), and learners' beliefs about
second language acquisition. Additionally, replicating the study with a more diverse and representative
sample, including multiple proficiency levels and larger class sizes, would enhance generalizability and
provide insights into how PBL functions across varied educational contexts.
REFERENCES
Abubakar, M. S. (2015). IMPROVING THE SECOND YEAR STUDENTS SPEAKING ABILITY
THROUGH PROJECT-BASED LEARNING (PBL) AT MTSN MODEL MAKASSAR.
ETERNAL (English, Teaching, Learning, and Research Journal), 1(2), 216-228.
Aldabbous, S. (2018). Project-based learning: Implementation & challenges. International Journal of
Education, Learning and Development, 6(3), 71-79.
Awang, H., & Ramly, I. (2008). Creative thinking skill approach through problem-based learning:
Pedagogy and practice in the engineering classroom. International Journal of Educational and
Pedagogical Sciences, 2(4), 334-339. Creative Thinking Skill Approach Through Problem-
Based Learning: Pedagogy and Practice in the Engineering Classroom (albany.edu)
were central to the methodology.
• The project-based format aligned well with learners' interests and offered authentic
opportunities for communication.
Limitations
• The small sample size (N=20) limited the generalizability of findings and made it difficult to
establish a control group.
• Scheduling conflicts due to extracurricular commitments (e.g., sports tournaments) disrupted
parts of the implementation.
• Learner diversity in commitment, learning styles, and levels of intrinsic motivation posed
challenges for consistent engagement throughout the project.
Future research directions
Future studies could explore the effectiveness of PBL and authentic oral production in improving
fluency among students with special educational needs, focusing on variables such as willingness to
speak, personality traits, institutional context (e.g., public vs. private schools), and learners' beliefs about
second language acquisition. Additionally, replicating the study with a more diverse and representative
sample, including multiple proficiency levels and larger class sizes, would enhance generalizability and
provide insights into how PBL functions across varied educational contexts.
REFERENCES
Abubakar, M. S. (2015). IMPROVING THE SECOND YEAR STUDENTS SPEAKING ABILITY
THROUGH PROJECT-BASED LEARNING (PBL) AT MTSN MODEL MAKASSAR.
ETERNAL (English, Teaching, Learning, and Research Journal), 1(2), 216-228.
Aldabbous, S. (2018). Project-based learning: Implementation & challenges. International Journal of
Education, Learning and Development, 6(3), 71-79.
Awang, H., & Ramly, I. (2008). Creative thinking skill approach through problem-based learning:
Pedagogy and practice in the engineering classroom. International Journal of Educational and
Pedagogical Sciences, 2(4), 334-339. Creative Thinking Skill Approach Through Problem-
Based Learning: Pedagogy and Practice in the Engineering Classroom (albany.edu)
pág. 2320
Barnes, D. (2008). The value of exploratory talk. In N. Mercer & S. Hodgkinson (Eds.), Exploring talk
in school (pp. 1-15). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
Barnes, D., & Todd, F. (1977). Communicating and learning in small groups. London, UK: Routledge,
Kegan Paul.
Barrows, H. (2003). Response To “The Problem with Problem Based Medical Education: Promises Not
Kept” by R.H Gkew. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education. Vol. 31, no.4, pp. 255-
256.
Brumfit, C (1984) Communicative methodology in language teaching: The roles of fluency and
accuracy, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Chamba, M., & Gavilanes, C. (2018). Authentic audio-visual material in the development of oral fluency
in university intermediate English students. Literatura y lingüística, 39, 199-223.
Christopher, H. (2020). How to speak English fluently: Steps and tips to improve your English fluency,
and talk like an American..
Conca, M. (2018). All about PBL: How to Learn a Language through Projects. International House
World Organisation. Retrieved March 25, 2023, from https://ihworld.com/ih-journal/ih-journal-
blog/all-about-pbl-how-to-learn-a-language-through-projects/
EF EPI 2022 – EF English Proficiency Index – Ecuador. (2022). EF Education First. Retrieved March
25, 2023, from https://www.ef.com.ec/epi/regions/latin-america/ecuador/
Cucchiarini, C., Strik, H., & Boves, L. (2002). Quantitative assessment of second language learners'
fluency: comparisons between read and spontaneous speech. The Journal of the Acoustical
Society of America, 111(6), 2862–2873. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.1471894
De Bono, E. (1993). Serious Creativity: Using the Power of Interal Thinking To Create New Ideas. New
York: Harper Collins.
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York, NY: Kappa Delta Pi. (Republished by Collier,
1963).
Dewey, J. How We Think: A Restatement of the Relation of Reflective Thinking to the Educative
Process; Health and Company: Boston, DC, USA, 1933.
Barnes, D. (2008). The value of exploratory talk. In N. Mercer & S. Hodgkinson (Eds.), Exploring talk
in school (pp. 1-15). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
Barnes, D., & Todd, F. (1977). Communicating and learning in small groups. London, UK: Routledge,
Kegan Paul.
Barrows, H. (2003). Response To “The Problem with Problem Based Medical Education: Promises Not
Kept” by R.H Gkew. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education. Vol. 31, no.4, pp. 255-
256.
Brumfit, C (1984) Communicative methodology in language teaching: The roles of fluency and
accuracy, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Chamba, M., & Gavilanes, C. (2018). Authentic audio-visual material in the development of oral fluency
in university intermediate English students. Literatura y lingüística, 39, 199-223.
Christopher, H. (2020). How to speak English fluently: Steps and tips to improve your English fluency,
and talk like an American..
Conca, M. (2018). All about PBL: How to Learn a Language through Projects. International House
World Organisation. Retrieved March 25, 2023, from https://ihworld.com/ih-journal/ih-journal-
blog/all-about-pbl-how-to-learn-a-language-through-projects/
EF EPI 2022 – EF English Proficiency Index – Ecuador. (2022). EF Education First. Retrieved March
25, 2023, from https://www.ef.com.ec/epi/regions/latin-america/ecuador/
Cucchiarini, C., Strik, H., & Boves, L. (2002). Quantitative assessment of second language learners'
fluency: comparisons between read and spontaneous speech. The Journal of the Acoustical
Society of America, 111(6), 2862–2873. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.1471894
De Bono, E. (1993). Serious Creativity: Using the Power of Interal Thinking To Create New Ideas. New
York: Harper Collins.
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York, NY: Kappa Delta Pi. (Republished by Collier,
1963).
Dewey, J. How We Think: A Restatement of the Relation of Reflective Thinking to the Educative
Process; Health and Company: Boston, DC, USA, 1933.
pág. 2321
EF EPI 2022 – EF English Proficiency Index – Ecuador. (2022). EF Education First. Retrieved March
25, 2023, from https://www.ef.com.ec/epi/regions/latin-america/ecuador/
EFFECTS OF PROJECT-BASED LEARNING ON SPEAKING ABILITIES OF NON-ENGLISH
MAJOR CHINESE STUDENTS Di Yang (didi089322@gmail.com) Suranaree University of
Technology, Thailand Nattaya Puakpong (nattaya@sut.ac.th) Suranaree University of
Technology, Thai
Ellis, R. (2017). Task-based language teaching. The Routledge handbook of instructed second language
acquisition, 108, 125.
Ennis, R.H. A taxonomy of critical thinking abilities and dispositions. In Teaching Thinking Skills:
Theory and Practice; Baron, J.B., Sternberg, R.J., Eds.;W. H. Freeman: New York, NY, USA,
1987; pp. 9–26.
Finocchiaro, M., & Brumfit, C. (1983). The functional-notional approach: From theory to practice.
Oxford University Press, 200 Madison Ave., New York, NY 10016.
from http://www.sfu.ca/educ260/documents/myths.pdf
Housen, A., Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I. (2012). Complexity, accuracy and fluency: Definitions,
measurement and research. In A. Housen, F. Kuiken, & I. Vedder (Eds.), Dimensions of L2
performance and proficiency: Complexity, accuracy and fluency in SLA (pp. 1– 20). John
Benjamins Publishing Company
https://ihworld.com/ih-journal/ih-journal-blog/all-about-pbl-how-to-learn-a-language-through-
projects/
https://scottthornbury.wordpress.com/2012/02/26/a-is-for-automaticity/
Jiménez-Aleixandre, M.P.; Puig, B. Argumentation, Evidence, Evaluation and Critical Thinking; Fraser,
B.,Tobin, K.G., Mc Robbie, Eds.; Second International Handbook of Science Education;
Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2012; Volume 2, pp. 1001–1017.
Katherine Gonzalez, D., Jhonatan Correa Molina, O., & Rojas Cardona, B. S. (2017). Project-Based
Learning to develop oral production in English as a foreign language. International journal of
education and information technologies, 11, 87-96.
Kelly, G. A. (1955). The psychology of personal constructs. New York, NY: Norton
EF EPI 2022 – EF English Proficiency Index – Ecuador. (2022). EF Education First. Retrieved March
25, 2023, from https://www.ef.com.ec/epi/regions/latin-america/ecuador/
EFFECTS OF PROJECT-BASED LEARNING ON SPEAKING ABILITIES OF NON-ENGLISH
MAJOR CHINESE STUDENTS Di Yang (didi089322@gmail.com) Suranaree University of
Technology, Thailand Nattaya Puakpong (nattaya@sut.ac.th) Suranaree University of
Technology, Thai
Ellis, R. (2017). Task-based language teaching. The Routledge handbook of instructed second language
acquisition, 108, 125.
Ennis, R.H. A taxonomy of critical thinking abilities and dispositions. In Teaching Thinking Skills:
Theory and Practice; Baron, J.B., Sternberg, R.J., Eds.;W. H. Freeman: New York, NY, USA,
1987; pp. 9–26.
Finocchiaro, M., & Brumfit, C. (1983). The functional-notional approach: From theory to practice.
Oxford University Press, 200 Madison Ave., New York, NY 10016.
from http://www.sfu.ca/educ260/documents/myths.pdf
Housen, A., Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I. (2012). Complexity, accuracy and fluency: Definitions,
measurement and research. In A. Housen, F. Kuiken, & I. Vedder (Eds.), Dimensions of L2
performance and proficiency: Complexity, accuracy and fluency in SLA (pp. 1– 20). John
Benjamins Publishing Company
https://ihworld.com/ih-journal/ih-journal-blog/all-about-pbl-how-to-learn-a-language-through-
projects/
https://scottthornbury.wordpress.com/2012/02/26/a-is-for-automaticity/
Jiménez-Aleixandre, M.P.; Puig, B. Argumentation, Evidence, Evaluation and Critical Thinking; Fraser,
B.,Tobin, K.G., Mc Robbie, Eds.; Second International Handbook of Science Education;
Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2012; Volume 2, pp. 1001–1017.
Katherine Gonzalez, D., Jhonatan Correa Molina, O., & Rojas Cardona, B. S. (2017). Project-Based
Learning to develop oral production in English as a foreign language. International journal of
education and information technologies, 11, 87-96.
Kelly, G. A. (1955). The psychology of personal constructs. New York, NY: Norton
pág. 2322
Kleiman, G. M. (2001). Myths and realities about technology in K–12 schools. LNT Perspectives, 14,
1–8. Retrieved
Kothari, C. R. (2004). Research methodology: Methods and techniques. New Age International.
Kuhn, D. The Skills of Argument; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1991.
Lennon, P. (1990). Investigating fluency in EFL: A quantitative approach. Language learning, 40(3),
387-417.
Lintunen, P., Mutta, M., & Peltonen, P. (Eds.). (2019). Fluency in L2 learning and use. Multilingual
Matters.
Littlewood, W., 1984. Foreign and second language learning: Language acquisition research and its
implications for the classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lopez, J. I., Becerra, A. P., & Ramírez-Ávila, M. R. (2021). EFL speaking fluency through authentic
oral production. Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Learning, 6(1), 37-55.
Mosquera Bargiela, I.; Puig Mauriz, B.; Crujeiras Pérez, B.; Blanco Anaya, P. Pensamiento crítico en
educación superior: Análisis de un grupo de discusión. Enseñanza de las ciencias 2017, extra,
2799–2804.
Piaget, J. (1951). The psychology of intelligence. London, UK: Routledge and Kegan Paul
Polanyi, M. (1958). Personal knowledge: Towards a post-critical philosophy. Chicago, IL: The
University of Chicago Press.
Saito, K., & Plonsky, L. (2019). Effects of second language pronunciation teaching revisited: A proposed
measurement framework and meta‐analysis. Language Learning, 69(3), 652–708.
https://doi-org/10.1111/lang.12345
Saiz Sanchez, C.; Fernández Rivas, S. Pensamiento Crítico y Aprendizaje Basado En Problemas
Cotidianos Critical Thinking and Everyday Problem Based Learning. Rev. Docencia Univ.
2012, 10, 325–346.
Sandholtz, J., Rignstaff, C., & Dwyer, D. (1997). Teaching with technology: Creating student-centered
classrooms. New York: Teachers College Press.
Santos, J., & Ramírez-Ávila, M. (2022). Improving speaking fluency through 4/3/2 technique and self-
assessment. Assessment, 26(2).
Kleiman, G. M. (2001). Myths and realities about technology in K–12 schools. LNT Perspectives, 14,
1–8. Retrieved
Kothari, C. R. (2004). Research methodology: Methods and techniques. New Age International.
Kuhn, D. The Skills of Argument; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1991.
Lennon, P. (1990). Investigating fluency in EFL: A quantitative approach. Language learning, 40(3),
387-417.
Lintunen, P., Mutta, M., & Peltonen, P. (Eds.). (2019). Fluency in L2 learning and use. Multilingual
Matters.
Littlewood, W., 1984. Foreign and second language learning: Language acquisition research and its
implications for the classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lopez, J. I., Becerra, A. P., & Ramírez-Ávila, M. R. (2021). EFL speaking fluency through authentic
oral production. Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Learning, 6(1), 37-55.
Mosquera Bargiela, I.; Puig Mauriz, B.; Crujeiras Pérez, B.; Blanco Anaya, P. Pensamiento crítico en
educación superior: Análisis de un grupo de discusión. Enseñanza de las ciencias 2017, extra,
2799–2804.
Piaget, J. (1951). The psychology of intelligence. London, UK: Routledge and Kegan Paul
Polanyi, M. (1958). Personal knowledge: Towards a post-critical philosophy. Chicago, IL: The
University of Chicago Press.
Saito, K., & Plonsky, L. (2019). Effects of second language pronunciation teaching revisited: A proposed
measurement framework and meta‐analysis. Language Learning, 69(3), 652–708.
https://doi-org/10.1111/lang.12345
Saiz Sanchez, C.; Fernández Rivas, S. Pensamiento Crítico y Aprendizaje Basado En Problemas
Cotidianos Critical Thinking and Everyday Problem Based Learning. Rev. Docencia Univ.
2012, 10, 325–346.
Sandholtz, J., Rignstaff, C., & Dwyer, D. (1997). Teaching with technology: Creating student-centered
classrooms. New York: Teachers College Press.
Santos, J., & Ramírez-Ávila, M. (2022). Improving speaking fluency through 4/3/2 technique and self-
assessment. Assessment, 26(2).
pág. 2323
Skehan, P. (1996). Second language acquisition research and task-based instruction. In J. Willis, & D.
Willis (Eds.), Challenge and Change in Language Teaching (pp. 17-30). Oxford: Heinemann.
Schegloff, E. A., Jefferson, G., & Sacks, H. (1977). The preference for self-correction in the organization
of repair in conversation. Language, 53(2), 361-382.
Siegel, H. Educating Reason: Rationality, Critical Thinking and Education; Routledge: New York, NY,
USA, 1988.
Solomon, G. (2003). Project-based learning: A primer. Technology and learning-dayton-, 23(6), 20-20.
Tavakoli, P., & Skehan, P. (2005). Strategic planning, task structure, and performance testing. In R. Ellis
(Ed.), Planning and task performance in a second language (pp. 239–276). John Benjamins
Publishing Company.
Tedick, D & Wesely, P. (2015) A review of research on content-based foreign/second language education
in US K-12 contexts, Language, Culture and Curriculum, 28:1, 25-40.
https://doi.org/10.1080/07908318.2014.1000923
Vygotsky, L. S. (1962). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Boundary.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Walker, M. L. (1993). Participatory action research. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 37, 2-2.
Skehan, P. (1996). Second language acquisition research and task-based instruction. In J. Willis, & D.
Willis (Eds.), Challenge and Change in Language Teaching (pp. 17-30). Oxford: Heinemann.
Schegloff, E. A., Jefferson, G., & Sacks, H. (1977). The preference for self-correction in the organization
of repair in conversation. Language, 53(2), 361-382.
Siegel, H. Educating Reason: Rationality, Critical Thinking and Education; Routledge: New York, NY,
USA, 1988.
Solomon, G. (2003). Project-based learning: A primer. Technology and learning-dayton-, 23(6), 20-20.
Tavakoli, P., & Skehan, P. (2005). Strategic planning, task structure, and performance testing. In R. Ellis
(Ed.), Planning and task performance in a second language (pp. 239–276). John Benjamins
Publishing Company.
Tedick, D & Wesely, P. (2015) A review of research on content-based foreign/second language education
in US K-12 contexts, Language, Culture and Curriculum, 28:1, 25-40.
https://doi.org/10.1080/07908318.2014.1000923
Vygotsky, L. S. (1962). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Boundary.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Walker, M. L. (1993). Participatory action research. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 37, 2-2.