Abstract:
This study investigated the effect of oral dialogue journals oncommunicative competence of Iranian EFL learners. Participants of this study were 80 students of two Payam-e-Noor Universities who were proved to be homogenous in the communicative competence based on TSE (Test of Spoken English) interview. The participants of one of these universities were considered as the experimental group. The experimental group practiced oral dialogue journals in addition to participating in Oral Reproduction of Stories 2 class. The comparison group just participated in Oral Reproduction of Stories 2 class. Both classes were conducted by the same teacher. At the end of the treatment two groups were interviewed based on TSE once more. The results revealed that the experimental group outperformed the comparison group significantly. Moreover it was revealed that this technique (oral dialogue journal) was significantly more beneficial for the low proficient speakers of English than the high ones though useful for the high ones, too
Machine summary:
"Through practicing oral dialogue journals, the students of the experimental group had to record their questions, comments, and ideas on tape in length of 5 to 10 minutes at home on a subject that they themselves had chosen for every session and the researcher gave comments on what they had said, asked some questions either to provoke more thinking or clarify what was not clear, and also used correct form of the students' errors in her response.
109 So it can be concluded that in fact the communicative competence of both students with high and low levels of speaking proficiency after the treatment was higher than before practicing oral dialogue journals.
6. Conclusion As this study demonstrates, practicing oral dialogue journals can be a technique for providing the opportunity of speaking for EFL learners when learners have limited time to speak in classes related to oral skills in general and for students in Payam-e-Noor universities specifically who in comparison with other university students have less contact with the teacher.
Often lacks detail; simple conjunctions used as cohesive devices, if at all Abrupt openings and closures Sociolinguistic competence: Speaker usually does not demonstrate audience awareness since register is often not considered; lack of linguistic skills generally masks sociolinguistic skills Strategic competence: Repair strategies excessive, very distracting, and ineffective Score (20) for the 4 components 6) 20= no effective communication; no evidence of ability to perform task, no effective use of compensatory strategies; speech almost always marked by non native characteristics."