The impact of opinion-gap, reasoning-gap, and information-gap tasks on EFL learners’ speaking fluency

Abstract

This study was an attempt to compare the effects of using opinion-gap, reasoning-gap, and information-gap tasks on Iranian EFL learners’ speaking fluency. To fulfill this objective, 140 intermediate EFL learners were selected and subsequently divided into three experimental groups including opinion-gap group, reasoning-gap group, and information-gap group, plus one control group. Afterward, the participants of all the groups were given a speaking pre-test, followed by the intervention, where the experimental groups received their specific treatments and the control group was exposed to the placebo. After the intervention ended, a speaking post-test was given to all the groups in order to measure the effects of the treatments on their speaking fluency. The results of one-way ANOVA indicated that the three experimental groups outperformed the control group on the post-test. In addition, the results uncovered that information-gap tasks were more effective than opinion-gap tasks and reasoning-gap tasks. In light of these findings, the researchers suggested some recommendations that are hoped to help syllabus designers, supervisors and English language teachers in developing teaching speaking skills.