CURRENT RESEARCH JOURNAL OF PEDAGOGICS (ISSN: 2767-3278)
https://masterjournals.com/index.php/crjp
24
VOLUME:
Vol.06 Issue06 2025
10.37547/pedagogics-crjp-06-06-06
Page: - 24 -27
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Enhancing Students’
Speaking Competence Through
Balanced Language Activities and Small-Group Discussion
Techniques
Saxiyeva Nodira Bahtiyor qizi
Independent researcher, UzSWLU, Uzbekistan
Received:
23 April 2025
Accepted:
19 May 2025
Published:
21 June 2025
INTRODUCTION
In the domain of second language acquisition, speaking is
widely regarded as a crucial yet challenging skill to
develop. It requires not only grammatical accuracy but also
strategic
competence,
fluency,
and
sociolinguistic
awareness. According to Burkart (1998), effective
speaking instruction should integrate language input,
structured output, and communicative output. These
components
build
a
comprehensive
instructional
framework that scaffolds learners’ transition from passive
language reception to active, purposeful communication.
Within this framework, small-group discussion emerges as
a particularly effective technique for facilitating real-world
interaction and collaborative meaning-making in the
classroom.
Techniques
for
Teaching
Speaking:
Burkart’s
Framework
Language input refers to the exposure students receive to
the target language through various sources such as teacher
talk, listening exercises, and reading materials. Burkart
distinguishes between content-oriented and form-oriented
input.
Content-oriented input focuses on the transfer of
meaningful information (e.g., lectures, dialogues, or
weather reports) and can include descriptions of learning
strategies.
Form-oriented input, on the other hand, targets linguistic
elements such as vocabulary, grammar, pronunciation, and
conversational norms (e.g., turn-taking and pause length).
It
directly
supports
the
development
of
four
communicative competencies:
•
Linguistic competence: correct use of vocabulary
and grammar.
ABSTRAC
Developing speaking competence is a central objective in language education. Burkart (1998) advocates for a pedagogical
approach combining language input, structured output, and communicative output. This article explores these dimensions in det ail
and emphasizes small-group discussion as an effective instructional technique. Drawing from established educational theorists
and practical implementations, the article demonstrates how structured and communicative group discussions enhance linguistic ,
strategic, and sociolinguistic competencies among learners. It also outlines the key benefits of small-group work in improving
speaking proficiency, critical thinking, collaboration, and learner autonomy.
Keywords:
Speaking Competence, Second Language Acquisition, Small-Group Discussion, Burkart’s Framework, Language Input,
Structured Output, Communicative Output, Active Learning, Collaborative Learning, Group Dynamics, Language Anxiety, Willingness
to Communicate, Fluency and Accuracy, Peer Interaction, Classroom Implementation Strategies.
CURRENT RESEARCH JOURNAL OF PEDAGOGICS (ISSN: 2767-3278)
https://masterjournals.com/index.php/crjp
25
•
Discourse
competence:
organizing
ideas
coherently.
•
Sociolinguistic competence: using appropriate
expressions in social contexts.
•
Strategic
competence:
managing
miscommunications and clarifying meaning.
The quantity and complexity of input must align with
students' current language proficiency to be effective.
Structured output refers to student language production
that emphasizes accuracy. It usually occurs during the
transition between the presentation and practice stages of a
lesson. Students engage in activities where they use newly
introduced structures in controlled formats. For instance,
they might complete sentence prompts or dialogue scripts
that require specific grammatical constructions. While
response options may vary, they all rely on the target
structure, reinforcing both recall and accuracy in form.
Communicative output prioritizes fluency and meaning
over form. Students perform tasks such as role plays,
information-gap activities, or project-based tasks (e.g.,
planning a trip or conducting an interview), where the main
goal is to get the message across, regardless of minor
grammatical inaccuracies. This phase allows learners to
integrate both newly learned and previously acquired
language features in dynamic, real-world-like interactions.
Small-Group Discussion as a Speaking Technique
Small-group discussion is a pedagogical method in which
students are divided into smaller subgroups—usually
between 3 to 12 members—to engage in purposeful oral
interaction. According to Gulley (1960), a group is more
than a collection of individuals; it is a dynamic entity
characterized by mutual interaction and reciprocal
influence. In educational contexts, small groups are
structured to maximize each participant’s speaking time
and active engagement.
As Hoover (1964) states, a discussion involves talking
things over to reach understanding or make decisions.
Therefore, small-group discussion is best defined as the
exchange of ideas, opinions, and information among group
members, with the objective of problem-solving, decision-
making, or conceptual exploration.
Implementing small-group discussion provides several
pedagogical advantages:
Increased Speaking Opportunities: In large classes, not
every student gets the chance to speak frequently. Dividing
the class into smaller groups ensures more equitable
participation and lowers the affective filter associated with
speaking in front of the whole class.
Collaborative Learning: According to Kitzvatter (1996),
small-group discussion enhances learners’ responsibility,
social skills, and leadership potential. It encourages peer
learning through questioning, negotiation, and explanation.
Cognitive Development: Engaging in small-group
discussions
develops
higher-order
thinking
skills.
Alexander (1957) notes that learners improve their
problem-solving abilities by observing and participating in
how others approach tasks.
Attitudinal and Moral Growth: As learners negotiate ideas
and build consensus, they develop mutual respect and
confidence, which fosters a positive classroom culture
(Gulley, 1960).
Real-Life Communication Practice: Small-group tasks
often mimic real-world scenarios, helping learners practice
the target language in authentic contexts.
Competencies
Developed
through
Small-Group
Discussion
According
to
educational
research,
small-group
discussions contribute to the development of the following
learning outcomes:
Subject-Matter Mastery: Students better understand
academic concepts through peer discussion and shared
interpretation.
Problem-Solving Skills: Exposure to diverse perspectives
enhances critical thinking and the ability to tackle open-
ended questions.
Attitudinal Growth: Participation builds self-esteem,
fosters cooperation, and encourages active engagement.
Communication Competence: Learners improve their
speaking fluency, coherence, and ability to interact
meaningfully with others.
Furthermore,
discussion
provides
a
practice-rich
CURRENT RESEARCH JOURNAL OF PEDAGOGICS (ISSN: 2767-3278)
https://masterjournals.com/index.php/crjp
26
environment where learners can rehearse newly learned
structures in an interactive setting, supporting both
accuracy and fluency. To effectively use small-group
discussion in language teaching, instructors should:
•
Assign Clear Objectives: Each discussion should
have a specific goal or task that guides students’
interaction.
•
Structure Groups Thoughtfully: Group students by
skill level, interest, or learning style to maximize
collaboration.
•
Provide Linguistic Support: Offer sentence
starters, key vocabulary, or communication strategies to
scaffold learners’ output.
•
Monitor and Guide: Teachers should circulate,
observe group dynamics, and provide feedback or
clarification as needed.
•
Debrief as a Whole Class: After group tasks,
reconvene to reflect, summarize key insights, and correct
any widespread misunderstandings.
Active Learning Small-group discussion is a cornerstone
of active learning—an approach that engages students
directly in the learning process through meaningful
activities and reflection. Bonwell and Eison (1991)
emphasized that strategies like peer discussions, debates,
and role-playing are powerful complements to traditional
instruction, as they promote deeper cognitive engagement.
Through such activities, learners are not passive recipients
of
knowledge;
rather,
they
actively
construct
understanding by hypothesizing, questioning, and making
sense of language in a social context. When students
participate in structured discussions, they generate
meaning collaboratively, which makes the language input
more relevant and easier to retain.
Collaborative Learning Beyond active participation, small-
group discussions also exemplify collaborative learning—
a model rooted in the idea that learning is enhanced
through social interaction. Research shows that students
working collaboratively tend to achieve higher academic
outcomes, develop stronger critical thinking skills, and
foster more positive attitudes toward learning than those
working individually. Forming groups of three to five
students, whether by language proficiency, interests, or
learning styles, allows learners to contribute effectively
while benefiting from the ideas and language use of others.
Such collaboration fosters shared responsibility and
cultivates interpersonal skills crucial for language use in
authentic contexts.
Psychology of Group Interaction Group Dynamics and
Cohesiveness The success of small-group discussion also
relies on effective group dynamics. According to language
education scholar Zoltán Dörnyei, group cohesiveness—
built on mutual trust, shared purpose, and open
communication—is essential for maximizing group
performance. When students feel psychologically safe
within their group, they are more likely to take language
risks, express ideas freely, and engage in authentic
dialogue. Teachers play a key role in nurturing this
cohesiveness by designing icebreaker activities, carefully
selecting group compositions, and establishing norms for
respectful and constructive interaction. Over time, these
efforts contribute to a classroom culture where learners feel
both supported and empowered.
Overcoming
Speaking
Anxiety
and
Encouraging
Willingness to Communicate One of the greatest barriers
to developing speaking skills is anxiety. Many language
learners fear making mistakes or being judged, especially
in large group settings. However, research has consistently
shown that smaller group formats reduce speaking anxiety
and foster greater willingness to communicate. In these
more intimate settings, students often feel less pressure and
more support, which leads to increased confidence and
risk-taking. Studies comparing teacher-centered and
discussion-based classrooms report that learners engaged
in regular group discussions show greater improvement in
fluency and self-assurance. This supports Burkart’s model,
particularly the communicative output phase, where
fluency and meaningful interaction take precedence over
grammatical precision.
Empirical Impact of Small-Group Discussion The benefits
of small-group discussion are not only theoretical but also
strongly supported by empirical evidence. For instance,
studies conducted in Indonesian secondary schools
revealed that students who participated in regular small-
group discussions significantly outperformed their peers in
speaking assessments. One such study reported mean
scores of 65.1 in the experimental group compared to 57.5
in the control group. A similar study conducted at the
diploma level in Bandung found a striking difference in t-
values (–12.97 vs. 2.22), confirming the statistical
significance of this technique’s impact on oral proficiency.
CURRENT RESEARCH JOURNAL OF PEDAGOGICS (ISSN: 2767-3278)
https://masterjournals.com/index.php/crjp
27
These findings highlight the importance of integrating both
structured and communicative output stages in classroom
practice. By providing learners with opportunities to first
rehearse language forms and then apply them in
meaningful discussions, teachers create a learning cycle
that supports both accuracy and fluency.
To maximize the effectiveness of small-group discussion,
teachers can implement several practical strategies:
Proficiency-based Grouping: Arranging students by
similar or mixed ability levels helps ensure that all learners
can participate meaningfully while supporting peer
learning.
Turn-Taking Structures: Incorporating methods such as
speaking tokens, timers, or designated roles (e.g.,
facilitator, summarizer) can help ensure that all group
members have opportunities to speak, especially those who
are more introverted. Task Variety: Varying the types of
tasks—from debates and interviews to storytelling and
problem-solving projects—keeps students engaged and
allows for the practice of different speaking functions.
These practices support a student-centered learning
environment where each learner plays an active role in
their own language development.
Despite the proven benefits, small-group discussion does
not come without challenges—particularly in contexts
where exposure to authentic English use is limited, such as
in some EFL environments. Limited Input and Practice: In
regions like Uzbekistan, where learners may have minimal
interaction with English outside the classroom, techniques
such as role-playing can help simulate real-world
communication and bridge the gap. Managing Anxiety:
Teachers must design activities that gradually build
confidence. This can be achieved by scaffolding tasks,
starting with low-stakes practice, and offering supportive
feedback. Differentiation and Inclusivity: Recognizing the
diverse backgrounds, proficiency levels, and learning
styles in any classroom, educators should tailor discussion
topics and roles to align with students’ interests and
strengths. Doing so increases relevance and fosters
engagement. By addressing these challenges with
thoughtful planning, small-group discussion can become a
powerful tool in any language teacher’s toolkit—
transforming the classroom into a vibrant, interactive, and
empowering space for communication.
CONCLUSION
Teaching speaking requires a deliberate integration of
input, structured practice, and authentic communication
opportunities. As Burkart (1998) highlights, effective
instruction should blend form-focused and meaning-
focused activities. Within this framework, small-group
discussion stands out as a practical and impactful
technique. It not only enhances linguistic competence but
also fosters critical thinking, collaboration, and learner
independence. When implemented thoughtfully, small-
group discussion transforms the classroom into a vibrant,
communicative environment where language is not only
learned but also lived.
REFERENCES
Alexander, W. M. (1957). General education in the
secondary school. New York, NY: Holt.
Bonwell, C. C., & Eison, J. A. (1991). Active learning:
Creating excitement in the classroom (ASHE-ERIC Higher
Education Report No. 1). Washington, DC: George
Washington University.
Burkart, G. S. (1998). Spoken language: What it is and how
to teach it. Washington, DC: National Center for ESL
Literacy Education.
Dörnyei, Z. (1997). Psychological processes in cooperative
language learning: Group dynamics and motivation. The
Modern
Language
Journal,
81(4),
482–493.
https://doi.org/10.2307/328891
Gulley, H. E. (1960). Discussion, conference and group
process. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Hoover, K. H. (1964). The elements of discussion. Boston,
MA: Houghton Mifflin.
Kitzvatter, R. (1996). Instructional techniques for the
classroom. New York, NY: Allyn & Bacon.
Ornstein, A. C., & Lasley, T. J. (2000). Strategies for
effective teaching. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Schmuck, R. A. (2001). Group processes in the classroom.
Madison, WI: Brown & Benchmark.
