LINGUATECH - Revista Cientíca Internacional - Vol. 1, Núm.1 pág. 1
The Effect of Interactive Communicative Tasks on Oral Skill
Development in A1 English Learners
El efecto de las tareas comunicativas interactivas en el desarrollo de las
habilidades orales de estudiantes A1 de inglés
Josué Bonilla Tenesaca
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6748-2345
jrbonillat@ube.edu.ec
Universidad de Guayaquil
Ecuador – Guayaquil
Dolores Zambrano Miranda
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5276-3611
dzambranom@ube.edu.ec
Universidad Bolivariana del Ecuador
Ecuador – Durán
Javier Jiménez Peralta
https://orcid.org/0009-0001-4981-9020
Javier.jimenezp@ug.edu.ec
Universidad de Guayaquil
Ecuaador - Guayaquil
Rodrigo Guerrero Segura
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2698-5659
rodrigo.guerreros@ug.edu.ec
Universidad de Guayaquil
Ecuaador – Guayaquil
Artículo recibido: (la fecha la coloca el Equipo editorial) - Aceptado para publicación:
Conflictos de intereses: Ninguno que declarar.
ABSTRACT
This study examines the impact of interactive communicative tasks on the development of
speaking skills among A1-level English learners in a public-school setting. Recognizing that
beginner students often face challenges such as limited vocabulary, hesitation, and reduced
confidence, the intervention aimed to create meaningful opportunities for oral expression through
structured, task-based activities. A mixed-methods design was implemented, including pre- and
post-test speaking assessments, classroom observations, and student surveys. Over eight
instructional sessions, learners engaged in pair dialogues, role-plays, information-gap activities,
and guided communicative tasks that emphasized fluency, pronunciation, and vocabulary
development. Quantitative results show considerable improvements in students’ ability to produce
extended utterances, use basic connectors, and apply newly learned vocabulary spontaneously.
LINGUATECH - Revista Cientíca Internacional - Vol. 1, Núm.1 pág. 2
Qualitative evidence also highlights increased motivation, reduced anxiety, and greater
willingness to participate in oral tasks. Overall, the study suggests that interactive communicative
activities offer an effective, humanizing approach to enhancing oral performance in beginner-
level English classrooms.
Keywords: communicative tasks, speaking development, A1 learners
RESUMEN
Este estudio analiza el impacto de las tareas comunicativas interactivas en el desarrollo de las
habilidades orales de estudiantes de inglés nivel A1 en un contexto escolar público. Reconociendo
que los aprendices principiantes suelen enfrentar dificultades como vocabulario limitado,
vacilación frecuente y baja confianza para expresarse oralmente, la intervención se orientó a crear
oportunidades significativas de comunicación a través de actividades estructuradas basadas en la
interacción. Se empleó un enfoque de métodos mixtos que incluyó evaluaciones orales antes y
después de la intervención, observaciones de aula y encuestas estudiantiles. Durante ocho
sesiones, los participantes realizaron diálogos en parejas, juegos de rol, actividades de intercambio
de información y tareas comunicativas guiadas enfocadas en la fluidez, la pronunciación y el uso
del vocabulario. Los resultados cuantitativos evidenciaron mejoras importantes en la capacidad
de producir enunciados más extensos, utilizar conectores básicos y emplear vocabulario recién
aprendido de manera espontánea. Los datos cualitativos revelaron mayor motivación, reducción
de la ansiedad y mayor disposición a participar. En conjunto, los hallazgos sugieren que las tareas
comunicativas interactivas constituyen un enfoque efectivo y humanizador para fortalecer el
desempeño oral en estudiantes de nivel inicial.
Palabras clave: tareas comunicativas, expresión oral, aprendientes A1
INTRODUCTION
Developing oral communication skills at the beginner level remains one of the most persistent
challenges in foreign language learning. A1 learners often struggle with limited vocabulary,
fragmented speech, and anxiety when attempting to speak. These difficulties are exacerbated by
traditional teaching practices that emphasize grammar instruction and written drills over
meaningful communication (Harmer, 2001). In many educational contexts, students have few
opportunities to practice English in realistic or interactive situations, leading to low fluency and
reduced confidence. As Horwitz (2001) explains, anxiety can significantly restrict oral
participation, especially in classrooms where speaking is perceived as a high-stakes activity.
Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) frameworks propose that learners develop oral skills
more effectively when they engage in meaningful, purposeful interaction. According to Nunan
(1991), communicative tasks—defined as activities requiring learners to use language to achieve
LINGUATECH - Revista Cientíca Internacional - Vol. 1, Núm.1 pág. 3
an outcome—help students move beyond controlled practice and approach more authentic forms
of communication. These tasks include role-plays, information-gap exchanges, guided dialogues,
and other activities that require learners to negotiate meaning and co-construct language with
peers.
Interactive communicative tasks align with Vygotsky’s (1978) sociocultural theory, which
emphasizes that language learning occurs through social interaction and scaffolded support. When
learners collaborate, they gain access to peer modeling, immediate feedback, and shared problem-
solving, all of which enhance language development. This scaffolding enables beginners to
produce more language than they might be capable of individually, advancing their oral
competence within their Zone of Proximal Development.
Task-based learning also supports fluency development, as learners use language repeatedly in
meaningful contexts. Research by Graham and Santos (2015) shows that fluency grows when
students focus on conveying meaning rather than accuracy, decreasing hesitation and promoting
natural speech patterns. Furthermore, communicative tasks encourage the use of formulaic
expressions, discourse markers, and functional language, which contribute to more coherent
speech. This developmental process mirrors Nation’s (2001) assertion that vocabulary and fluency
improve when learners repeatedly encounter and utilize language in context.
Beyond linguistic benefits, interactive communicative activities play an important motivational
and emotional role. Students often describe communicative tasks as more enjoyable and less
intimidating than formal speaking evaluations. Deci and Ryan’s (1985) Self-Determination
Theory argues that motivation increases when learners experience autonomy, competence, and
relatedness—three conditions frequently met during collaborative communicative tasks. When
students feel supported and connected to their peers, their willingness to speak increases, lowering
affective barriers to learning.
Despite these advantages, many beginner-level classrooms continue to rely heavily on teacher-
centered instruction and mechanical speaking drills. As a result, learners may understand basic
grammar but lack experience applying it in meaningful communication. This study addresses this
gap by investigating how interactive communicative tasks contribute to the development of
speaking skills among A1 learners. Specifically, it examines improvements in fluency, vocabulary
use, pronunciation, coherence, and learner confidence.
METHODS
Research Design
This study employed a mixed-methods research design to investigate the impact of interactive
communicative tasks on the speaking development of A1 English learners. A mixed-methods
approach was selected because it enables researchers to integrate quantitative evidence of learning
LINGUATECH - Revista Cientíca Internacional - Vol. 1, Núm.1 pág. 4
gains with qualitative insights into students’ experiences, behaviors, and perceptions. As Creswell
(2014) explains, combining numerical and narrative data allows a more comprehensive
understanding of educational interventions, particularly those involving complex processes such
as second-language oral production. In this study, quantitative data were obtained through pre-
and post-test speaking assessments that documented measurable linguistic progress, while
qualitative data from classroom observations and learner surveys provided a deeper perspective
on engagement, confidence, and participation. By triangulating these sources, the design allowed
the findings to reflect not only what changed, but also how the learners emotionally and socially
navigated the communicative activities implemented throughout the intervention.
Participants
The participants were 22 A1-level English learners, aged 12 to 14, enrolled in a public middle
school. These students displayed characteristics commonly associated with beginner language
learners, such as limited vocabulary range, fragmented speech, long pauses during oral
expression, and a noticeable dependency on the teacher when initiating or sustaining
conversational exchanges. According to Harmer (2001), learners at early proficiency levels often
experience elevated levels of insecurity, as the fear of making mistakes in front of their peers
reduces their willingness to speak. In addition, most participants reported minimal exposure to
English outside the classroom, a condition that typically slows the development of oral skills in
foreign-language contexts. Participation in the study was voluntary, and informed consent was
obtained from parents or guardians, while institutional approval ensured that the intervention
aligned with school guidelines and respected students’ educational needs.
Instruments
To ensure data validity and triangulation, the study employed three primary instruments: speaking
tests, an observation checklist, and a student perception survey. The pre- and post-intervention
speaking tests required learners to complete short oral tasks such as guided descriptions, picture-
based narratives, and simple dialogues. An analytic rubric adapted from Luoma (2004) assessed
performance in terms of fluency, pronunciation, vocabulary use, and coherence, which allowed
for detailed identification of improvements within each domain. The observation checklist was
used systematically throughout the intervention to record indicators such as participation
frequency, willingness to speak, hesitation patterns, peer interaction, and the use of
communicative strategies. This instrument followed the classroom observation principles
described by Richards and Farrell (2011), emphasizing observable behaviors that reflect
engagement and communicative development. Finally, the student survey captured learners’
perceptions of the activities, their level of enjoyment, confidence when speaking, and any
perceived improvement. Drawing on qualitative research traditions, the survey combined open-
LINGUATECH - Revista Cientíca Internacional - Vol. 1, Núm.1 pág. 5
ended questions and Likert-scale statements, enabling a rich understanding of students’ affective
responses to communicative tasks.
Procedure
The intervention took place over eight instructional sessions, each embedded in the regular
English class schedule. The instructional sequence was designed according to communicative
language teaching principles, moving students gradually from controlled practice toward more
spontaneous oral interaction. Each session began with vocabulary activation and brief modeling
of functional language, which provided learners with the linguistic scaffolding needed to complete
the day’s task—an approach aligned with Vygotsky’s (1978) notion of supported performance
within the Zone of Proximal Development. Students then participated in communicative tasks
such as role-plays, information-gap exchanges, peer interviews, and guided dialogues. These
activities encouraged negotiation of meaning, turn-taking, and active language use, elements
highlighted by Nunan (1991) as central to communicative competence development. At the end
of each session, learners engaged in short reflective discussions where they identified challenges,
strategies used, and aspects they felt more confident about. This reflective component supported
metacognitive growth and helped students become more aware of their progress as speakers.
Data Analysis
Data analysis followed two complementary paths. The quantitative analysis relied on descriptive
statistics comparing pre- and post-test scores in fluency, pronunciation, vocabulary, and
coherence. This analytical approach aligns with Dörnyei’s (2007) recommendation for
exploratory classroom-based studies, particularly when sample sizes are small and the primary
aim is to observe general patterns of improvement rather than establish inferential significance.
Meanwhile, the qualitative analysis involved thematic coding of classroom observation notes and
student survey responses. Following the procedures outlined by Miles, Huberman, and Saldaña
(2014), emerging themes were identified, grouped, and interpreted to capture students’ emotional
engagement, confidence levels, willingness to participate, and perceptions of the communicative
tasks. The integration of both quantitative and qualitative findings strengthened the validity of the
study, allowing for a more nuanced interpretation of the pedagogical effects of interactive
communicative activities on beginner-level English learners.
RESULTS
The results of this study provide clear evidence that interactive communicative tasks had a
positive impact on the oral performance of A1 learners. This section presents quantitative and
qualitative findings derived from the pre- and post-test assessments, classroom observations, and
student perception surveys. The results are organized into four thematic areas: (1) overall
improvement across speaking components, (2) detailed performance patterns per linguistic
LINGUATECH - Revista Cientíca Internacional - Vol. 1, Núm.1 pág. 6
subskill, (3) comparative progress among students with differing initial proficiency levels, and
(4) qualitative changes in motivation, confidence, and classroom interaction. To ensure clarity,
the findings are supported by analytical tables that illustrate the measurable changes observed
throughout the intervention.
Overall Improvement in Speaking Performance
Across all evaluated components—fluency, pronunciation, vocabulary, and coherence—students
demonstrated consistent improvement from the pre-test to the post-test. These gains suggest that
the communicative tasks provided meaningful opportunities for oral practice, enabling students
to transition from fragmented speech with frequent hesitation to more continuous utterances
with emerging structure. Table 1 summarizes the mean scores obtained in the speaking
assessments.
Table 1. Pre-Test and Post-Test Mean Scores Across Components
COMPONENT
PRE-TEST MEAN
POST-TEST MEAN
IMPROVEMENT
FLUENCY
1.4
2.9
+1.5
PRONUNCIATION
1.7
3.1
+1.4
VOCABULARY
1.3
2.4
+1.1
COHERENCE
1.5
2.8
+1.3
These results reveal that fluency registered the greatest improvement, followed by pronunciation
and coherence. Vocabulary showed slightly more modest gains but remained significant. The
overall pattern indicates that repeated communicative exposure allowed learners to internalize
and access language more efficiently. Importantly, all components exhibited an upward trend,
demonstrating that interactive tasks supported the development of oral skills in a balanced and
meaningful manner.
Improvements in Fluency and Speaking Continuity
Fluency was the area with the most substantial growth, reflecting the effectiveness of tasks that
required learners to speak for extended periods, negotiate meaning with peers, and react
spontaneously to communicative demands. Students gradually reduced their dependence on
memorized phrases and began producing original utterances with clearer sequencing. Many
learners who initially paused excessively between words later demonstrated the ability to maintain
short but coherent stretches of speech. Table 2 highlights specific fluency indicators measured
during the intervention.
Table 2. Fluency Indicators Pre- and Post-Intervention
INDICATOR
PRE-TEST
LEVEL
CHANGE
DESCRIPTION
MEAN LENGTH OF
UTTERANCE
Very short
Longer, more connected
sentences
LINGUATECH - Revista Cientíca Internacional - Vol. 1, Núm.1 pág. 7
PAUSES PER
SENTENCE
Frequent
Reduced hesitation and
faster delivery
USE OF TIME
CONNECTORS
Minimal
Greater narrative and
descriptive flow
SELF-CORRECTION
ATTEMPTS
Rare
More confident repair
strategies
Students’ improved use of connectors such as then, after that, and finally contributed to longer
speech segments with clearer organization. These gains demonstrate that communicative tasks
helped learners develop pragmatic strategies often missing in early proficiency levels.
Observations further confirmed that students became more comfortable speaking without relying
on continuous teacher support, an important developmental shift in beginner oral production.
Growth in Pronunciation Accuracy and Speech Clarity
Pronunciation improvements were also notable. Learners developed clearer articulation of
common vowel and consonant sounds and demonstrated better control of basic word stress
patterns. Although they did not achieve full accuracy, the global intelligibility of their speech
increased. The repetitive nature of communicative tasks, particularly role-plays and guided
dialogues, exposed learners to frequent modeling and opportunities for mimicking natural speech.
Table 3 shows the progression of key pronunciation features assessed.
Table 3. Pronunciation Features Before and After the Intervention
FEATURE
PRE-TEST
DESCRIPTION
POST-TEST
DESCRIPTION
CHANGE
SUMMARY
SEGMENTAL
ARTICULATION
Frequent substitutions
and omissions
Fewer errors and
clearer articulation
Improved
intelligibility
WORD STRESS
Inconsistent
placement
Mostly correct in
familiar words
More predictable
stress patterns
RHYTHM AND
PACING
Choppy, uneven
More even and natural
Better flow and
continuity
INTONATION
Flat or erratic
Mildly varied with
rising/falling tones
Improved
expressive
quality
These improvements suggest that learners benefited not only from repetition but also from
increased comfort when speaking aloud. As their anxiety diminished, their pronunciation became
more natural and less constrained. Observational notes indicated that some students also began
using gestures to support meaning—an encouraging sign of developing communicative
confidence.
Comparative Progress Among Learner Subgroups
LINGUATECH - Revista Cientíca Internacional - Vol. 1, Núm.1 pág. 8
To better understand individual differences, learners were grouped into three categories based on
pre-test performance: Emerging A1, Mid A1, and High A1. Table 6 shows comparative
improvements.
Table 4. Improvement by Learner Proficiency Group
GROUP
FLUENCY
PRONUNCIATION
VOCABULARY
COHERENCE
EMERGING
A1
+1.6
+1.3
+1.0
+1.4
MID A1
+1.4
+1.5
+1.1
+1.3
HIGH A1
+1.2
+1.2
+1.0
+1.1
Emerging A1 learners showed the largest relative improvement, indicating that communicative
tasks provided essential scaffolding for students who initially struggled most with oral production.
Qualitative Findings: Confidence, Engagement, and Interaction
Qualitative data revealed substantial affective and behavioral changes. Students’ confidence
increased as they engaged in communicative activities that prioritized meaning over accuracy,
reducing the fear of making mistakes. Observation notes documented higher levels of
participation, greater enthusiasm during speaking tasks, and more frequent volunteering to answer
questions. Additionally, students demonstrated stronger collaboration during pair-work,
supporting each other in vocabulary retrieval and pronunciation attempts. Survey responses
confirmed that many learners perceived speaking in English as “less intimidating,” “more
enjoyable,” and “easier to understand” after completing the communicative sessions. These
changes reflect a shift not only in performance but also in learners’ identities as developing
speakers.
DISCUSSION
The results of this study indicate that interactive communicative tasks are highly effective in
promoting oral development among A1 English learners. The substantial improvements in
fluency, pronunciation, coherence, and vocabulary suggest that students benefit from
opportunities to use language in meaningful, purposeful ways rather than through isolated drills.
These findings align with the principles of Communicative Language Teaching, which emphasize
language use for genuine communication as a catalyst for oral proficiency development (Nunan,
1991). The observed reduction in pauses, increased use of connectors, and greater continuity of
speech demonstrate that communicative tasks helped learners internalize basic discourse patterns
necessary for constructing short but coherent utterances. This confirms Graham and Santos’
(2015) assertion that fluency emerges when learners focus on conveying meaning rather than
achieving perfect accuracy.
LINGUATECH - Revista Cientíca Internacional - Vol. 1, Núm.1 pág. 9
Pronunciation gains also support existing research showing that oral modeling, repetition, and
interactive speaking practice lead to more intelligible learner output (Derwing & Munro, 2015).
Students’ increased clarity and improved stress patterns reflect not only linguistic progress but
also greater willingness to speak, which is strongly influenced by affective factors. In line with
Horwitz (2001), many students initially exhibited anxiety and hesitation, but the communicative
nature of the tasks—especially pair and group interactions—helped reduce this pressure by
shifting attention away from error avoidance and toward shared meaning-making. The increase
in confidence observed in surveys suggests that the intervention positively impacted learners’
emotional relationship with speaking English, which is crucial for sustained oral development.
Similarly, the use of organizational elements such as sequencing words and topic maintenance
enhanced learners’ coherence, demonstrating that structured communicative tasks provide the
scaffolding needed for beginners to organize their thoughts. This finding resonates with
Vygotsky’s (1978) sociocultural theory, which highlights the supportive role of interaction and
peer collaboration in extending learners’ communicative capabilities. Students who initially
struggled to express even simple ideas became capable of crafting short narratives or explanations
because the tasks required negotiation, cooperation, and shared decision-making—all
communicative conditions that stimulate linguistic growth.
Vocabulary expansion, while more modest than gains in fluency or pronunciation, nonetheless
indicates that repeated lexical exposure within communicative contexts supports meaningful
retention and retrieval. This outcome aligns with Nation’s (2001) claim that vocabulary is best
acquired when learners encounter words in relevant and engaging situations. The thematic
structure of the tasks encouraged students to reuse key vocabulary naturally, leading to
improvement even among those with the lowest starting proficiency.
Overall, the study demonstrates that interactive communicative tasks not only foster linguistic
development but also contribute positively to learners’ motivation, confidence, and engagement.
These affective and cognitive interactions create a humanizing learning environment where
beginners feel supported and capable of participating actively in oral tasks. The findings reinforce
the need for pedagogy that prioritizes meaningful communication, social interaction, and learner
agency—particularly in contexts where students have limited exposure to English outside the
classroom.
CONCLUSION
The findings of this study demonstrate that interactive communicative tasks provide a powerful
and accessible approach to fostering oral development among A1 English learners. Through
meaningful exchanges, structured interaction, and opportunities for spontaneous language use,
students showed measurable improvement in fluency, pronunciation, coherence, and vocabulary.
LINGUATECH - Revista Cientíca Internacional - Vol. 1, Núm.1 pág. 10
These linguistic gains reflect the value of activities that require learners to negotiate meaning,
take communicative risks, and construct ideas in real time, rather than relying solely on controlled
or mechanical practice. The continued use of connectors, clearer articulation, and greater
confidence observed during the post-test support the argument that beginner learners benefit
significantly from communication-rich tasks that mirror authentic language use.
Beyond linguistic progress, the intervention also had a positive impact on students’ affective and
behavioral engagement. Learners reported feeling more motivated, less anxious, and more willing
to speak in English—changes that are essential for long-term oral proficiency development. The
collaborative nature of the tasks helped build a supportive classroom environment where students
felt safe to express themselves, even with limited linguistic resources. Overall, the study suggests
that integrating interactive communicative tasks into beginner-level English instruction is both
pedagogically sound and humanizing, offering an effective pathway for developing essential
speaking skills while nurturing learners’ confidence and autonomy.
REFERENCES
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Derwing, T. M., & Munro, M. J. (2015). Pronunciation fundamentals: Evidence-based
perspectives for L2 teaching and research. John Benjamins.
Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics. Oxford University Press.
Graham, S., & Santos, D. (2015). Strategies for developing speaking skills in the L2 classroom.
Language Teaching Research, 19(1), 26–44.
Harmer, J. (2001). The practice of English language teaching (3rd ed.). Longman.
Horwitz, E. K. (2001). Language anxiety and achievement. Annual Review of Applied
Linguistics, 21, 112–126. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190501000071
Luoma, S. (2004). Assessing speaking. Cambridge University Press.
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods
sourcebook (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge University Press.
Nunan, D. (1991). Language teaching methodology: A textbook for teachers. Prentice Hall.
Richards, J. C., & Farrell, T. S. C. (2011). Classroom observation tasks: A resource book for
language teachers. Cambridge University Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.
Harvard University Press.