In S.M. Chang, D.S.D. Tseng, & B.C. Hwang (Eds.), Papers from the sixth conference on English language teaching and learning in the Republic of China (pp. 287-300).  Taipei:  Crane Publishing Co., Ltd, 1989.

Introduction and Background

Every year in the Republic of China we have countless speech contests and debates.  One of the newsworthy events of spring 1988 was the debate between students fro the Republic of China and students from Mainland China in Singapore; this event marked the first time students faced each other in competition after forty years of separation.  Less newsworthy are the numerous contests at each university, both in speaking Mandarin and in speaking English.  For English speech, the event of the year is the islandwide speech contest held at and by the Ministry of Education.

In addition to the prestige of participating in and winning one of the top prizes in the islandwide contest, the regard for good English speaking skills is evidenced by the Ministry of Education ruling that all university English majors are required to take and pass two semesters of English Speech.  Certainly with all this interest in public speaking in English, we teachers, too, can develop ways to make the English Speech course more interesting and profitable for our students.

When I began teaching English Speech at National Tsing Hua University four years ago, I found that the few pubic speaking texts available were grossly inadequate for my students, mainly because they were written for native speakers of English.  Although I myself could use them for a little background, they had three major drawbacks as EFL texts.  First, the language level was too high; words and phrases specific to the American context were sometimes used.  The level and style of writing was often beyond the level of our students.  For example, the idea so effectively expressed with a metaphor for a native speaker would be better expressed more directly and straightforwardly for EFL students.

Second, and more importantly, these texts were loaded with American cultural assumptions, such as references to the tradition and role of free speech and citizen participation in a democracy and references to American history--background that could not be assumed for students in Taiwan.  Third, and less obvious, were assumptions made about the collection, organization, and presentation of material.  That is, the texts assumed prior knowledge of, or at least exposure to, American or western forms of rhetorical organization.  Our students are not necessarily familiar with these same forms of organization.  Furthermore, the texts were about public speaking: they did contain some very good discussions of audience analysis, motivation, needs, nonverbal behavior, and so on, but they gave little direction on exactly how to go about putting a speech together.  They presented very little in the way of background and assignments for preparing and delivering specific types of speeches.  Our students need this basic instruction before we can go on about the details of voice quality or audience needs.  Sometimes suggested assignments were appropriate to the American setting but not the Taiwan setting.

Consequently, I found myself reverting to units I has used before in teaching ESL composition at a high intermediate/low advanced level in an intensive program in the United States in which we coordinated the composition and pubic speaking components (see Katchen, 1987), and in teaching freshman English composition for native speakers of English.  Both the ESL and native speaker programs used rhetorical modes (e.g., process, comparison and contrast, cause and effect) as the organization patterns for the courses and, since that was what I was most familiar with, I used them in organizing my English speech class and I have continued to do so as I have developed my course more fully.

This paper presents a summary of the course English Speech as it is now taught at National Tsing Hua University in Taiwan, R.O.C.  First, rationale for structuring the course according to rhetorical modes of organization is given, followed by an outline of the course content.  Next, a discussion of the evaluation procedures used in the course is presented.  Finally, concluding remarks are made.

Rationale

As it is now taught, the course English Speech has four objectives: 1) to help university students gain more mature critical and argumentation skills; 2) to teach students how to organize material according to American rhetorical patterns; 3) to advance students' English language skills (verbal); and 4) to develop students' presentation skills (nonverbal).  Surely for English language majors, advancement of English language skills is a proper goal for any English class.  Similarly, in a speech class, we expect presentation skills, including the nonverbal, to be one of the focal points of the class.  The objectives also include argumentation and rhetorical organization, skills often taught in the writing class, but included also in the speech class to supplement the writing classes for the following reasons.

First of all, research has shown that different cultures have different preferred ways of organizing information and argumentation (Kaplan, 1966; many others).  Thus the eight-legged essay expected of candidates for future government service in older Chinese times (Cheng, 1982) is not an appropriate form for the presentation of research results at a scientific symposium in the West today.  The teacher cannot expect the Chinese and the American patterns of organization to be identical, although just what the exact differences are is still a matter of debate (for example, Lin, 1987; Kuo & Tsun, 1987).

Our students are English majors; after graduation, most will either work with or for Americans or other westerners in Taiwan or go to the United States or other western countries for work or further study.  Students therefore need to know what argumentation patterns westerners will use and expect them to use, whether in preparing company reports or seminar papers.  The rhetorical organization must be presented and explained clearly, because students may have had little practice using the structure, or the structure may be different or not exist is their native language.  Even native speakers of English are taught rhetorical structures in university English courses because, although they have been exposed to the structures, they need practice producing them on their own.  Then how much more practice the speaker of English as a foreign language needs.

Teachers often say that students can't think.  Composition teachers especially complain that their students never seem to have anything to write about.  Indeed, Chinese students came from a system in which they have had to copy and memorize, from a tradition in which one learns to write well by copying the works of good writers.  Isn't it them the teacher's job to show students how to find something to write or talk about and how to develop it?  The problem is not unique to Taiwan.  American university teachers of freshman composition for native speakers often have the same complaint, that freshmen can't think.  Hasn't that always been the ideal role of the university--to teach one how to think so one goes on learning after graduation?

Teaching students to analyze a problem, look for its causes, and propose reasonable solutions, even if it is with a western structure, is one way to prepare them--future adult citizens--for participation in society.  Especially in Chinese society, where a high value is still placed on the educated person, the university students if today will indeed be the leaders of tomorrow.

Outline of Course Content

English Speech is a four-credit unit (two units each semester) two-semester course required by the Ministry of Education for English language majors in Taiwan.  It meets during the sophomore year once a week in a two-hour block.  A typical semester has between thirteen and fifteen class meetings (taking holidays into account).  AS class size is large (22-25 students), there is usually only time for each student to deliver four speeches each semester, and that is often rushed.  Basically, we work on informative speaking during the first semester and persuasive speaking in the second semester.  The types of speeches are shown below.

The Informative Speech

The first class period of the first semester is spent giving the students some background on the principles of public speaking.  For example, we talk about the relationship of the speaker to the topic, the audience, the purpose, and so on.  The introductory informative speech is just that--the first speech the students give.  Basically, the assignment is tell us about something, such as a specific activity you did on your summer vacation.  The speech should be three to five minutes in length but, since some students are more fluent than others, appropriate content, organization, and supporting evidence are more important than the actual length of time of the speech.  The purpose of the first assignment is to get the students speaking as soon as possible and to give them the experience of making a speech.  The assignment is simple because during the first few classes, we are still spending part of the class giving students background on the speech-making process.  For example, we spend time on brainstorming--thinking of a topic and the many possible ways to develop it.  We look at the elements of good introductions and conclusions.  We make outlines.

The Process Speech

Finally, we talk about the structure of the body of the speech, and the first example is the process speech.  Students are given a few process essays to read for homework and analyze the structure.  Because a process generally follows a chronological order, we work on useful transitions.  The assignment is either show us how to do something or show us how something is done.  Plenty of examples are given in class, and students choose their own topics.  Students are encouraged to choose something they know how to do, such as a process involved in a hobby, and share it with the class.  Past topics included How to clean a trumpet, in which the student actually cleaned the trumpet in front of us; How to do Chinese paper cutting, in which we were shown the complete process with the finished product for each step pre-prepared; and How to wash a dirty dog, in which there was no dog, but the young man gave a very humorous speech that included everything that could go wrong.  The process assignment is one that both students and teacher enjoy as the audience because of the variety of original topics.

In the process speech especially, students have the opportunity to work with visuals.  They are given some guiding comments in the preparation lecture, but, more importantly, they find out themselves what happens if someone writes on the board and then stands in front of it, if their materials are not large enough for the audience to see, and so on.  Some students come up with creative solutions to such problems, as the one who showed us a card game by previously putting strips of tape on the blackboard and sticking the cards to the tape so that all of us could see.  We all learn from the student's effective or ineffective use of visuals; we can then discuss how we could solve a particular technical problem with visuals or, occasionally, with sound.

The Comparison and Contrast Speech

In the preparation for the comparison and contrast speech, we learn about the part-to-part and whole-to-whole structures.  Students are assigned to compare two things or the same thing at two different times.  The use of description is important.  Because this speech is videotaped (for more about videotaping, see the section on evaluation procedures), the week before the taping we have a workshop session to ensure the students are following the assignment and are developing the topic adequately.  Students bring their topics and outlines and discuss each other's topics in groups of three or four while the teacher circulates around the room discussing each student's proposed speech with him and acting the devil's advocate.  Students do give each other ideas; students find the workshop extremely useful.

The Extemporaneous/Impromptu Speech

Students also need practice in speaking on a topic with very little preparation--the extemporaneous speech.  After all, in everyday conversations and discussions, there is no time to prepare, so e have to think fast in order to have something to say.  Students are encouraged to organize their speeches the way we have been organizing prepared speeches: support your argument with two or three main points plus examples and have a brief introduction and conclusion.  Each student chooses a card from a group of cards placed upside-down; on each card there is a different topic, such as How would you solve the traffic problems in Taipei? or Should the law requiring compulsory military service be changed? or Do mothers who work outside the home neglect their children? Generally, students seem to be able to talk about current social issues or interpersonal relationships, such as love and marriage.

After the student chooses a topic card, she has approximately ten minutes to prepare outside the classroom; she may take a dictionary and make notes.  Because each speech usually takes about two minutes, but there is no time limit, and we talk about it for a minute or two after the speech, this results in having four students outside the classroom preparing at any given time.  Once it gets going, before calling in the next speaker, we must remember to send another student out.  It may sound confusing the first time, but it does work.  If the classroom across the hall is not vacant, you can place a few chairs out in the hall for the students to use while preparing.  In formal speech contests, students prepare in the same room while other speeches are being given, but for teaching purposes, students should be able to concentrate in a somewhat quiet place.

The Persuasive Speech

Similar to the first semester, in the second semester the first speech, the persuasive speech, is introductory.  Students can choose to persuade us to do almost anything, from using Brand X shampoo to joining the folk dance club.  Meanwhile, some portion of the first few classes is spent in talking about evidence, such as statistics, examples, and citing the testimony of experts.

The Cause and Effect Speech

Preparation for the cause and effect speech includes examining logical fallacies and various kinds of causes, such as immediate and remote causes.  The students' assignment is to investigate why something may have come about.

The Problem and Solution Speech

Cause and effect analysis leads into the next assignment, the problem and solution speech.  Students may first need to convince the audience that a problem exists and to show the causes of a problem before they can propose a solution.  Students must show the feasibility of their solution, advantages and disadvantages, and superiority of their solution over other solutions.  Because these speeches are also videotaped, a workshop session is held before the taping, and students have a chance to discuss their solutions with others and think them through more thoroughly.

Students are encourages to choose topics on relevant social issues in Taiwan today and may work on the same topic for both the cause and effect and problem and solution speeches.  In Spring 1988 there were speeches on solving the problem of child abduction in Taiwan, implementing equal access for the handicapped on the National Tsing Hua University campus, and a proposal for different emphasis on elective course requirements for foreign language majors at Tsing Hua, which was later submitted to the department chairman by the officers of the foreign language students' association, most of whom were enrolled in our speech class at that time.

Debates

Debates give students a chance to use all their argumentation skills.  In a class of twenty-two students, we have three debates, two with two teams of four members and one with two teams of three members.  Students choose their own topics subject to the teacher's approval and their team must get together on their own time to prepare their arguments.  In Spring 1988 students debated whether a mother should work outside the home, and the advantages/disadvantages of engaging in premarital sex.  After each member presents her argument,, she is asked a question by a member of the other team.  Here the student must use extemporaneous speaking skills to answer the question to the questioner's satisfaction.  A member of the audience acts as timekeeper.  Out timed debates take a little over an hour, so only one is scheduled per two-hour class period.  The time left over, after other business is gotten out of the way, may be used to have members of that day's audience give extemporaneous speeches.  On evaluation forms given at the end of Spring Semester 1988, students rated problem and solution speeches and debates as the assignments they most enjoyed preparing and listening to.

Evaluation Procedures

In the course English Speech, students are evaluated in several ways, including in-class discussion, evaluation forms, audiotaping, and videotaping.  All four of these methods of evaluation are discussed below.

In-class Discussion

After each speech is given, the teacher and students spend about five minutes discussing the speech.  If the speech was very well done, what made it so good?  If a speech was poor, what factors made it so poor and how could it have been improved?  Often parts of the speech suggest teaching points.  For example, what are some other ways to develop the topic or to organize the content?   Can the tone be changed from serious to humorous?  It is important to get students to see alternate ways of developing and delivering a given topic so that they may have more flexibility in their own argumentation.  Although these discussions can be very productive, if the class is large, we cannot spend too much time on an individual speech.

Evaluation Sheets

While a speech is being given, the teacher jots down comments on an evaluation sheet (see sample evaluation sheets in the appendix).  It is designed to reflect the goals of the course: 50% on content and organization and 50% on presentation, which includes a linguistic (30%) and nonverbal (20%) section.  Thus students who are not particularly fluent in spoken English can still receive a passing grade by preparing the content and organization part of the speech well.  The evaluation sheets are slightly different for each speech, generally becoming more detailed to include points previously taught or structure/content necessary for a particular speech type.  For example, feasibility of solution is a criterion of evaluation for a problem and solution speech.

Audiotaping

It is difficult to make thorough comments on the evaluation sheet while a speech is being given.  By the second hour of a two-hour class, our attention may wander, especially with a boring speech or a nonfluent student.  And the interesting speech grabs our attention; we want to enjoy it, not spend the time writing.  Therefore, recording each speech on a portable tape recorder is mot useful.  The teacher must be sure to make comments on nonverbal behavior while the speech is being given, but for other aspects of the speech, she can listen again at her own convenience and make more thorough comments on the evaluation sheet, listening several times if necessary.  From these comments the student's grade is tallied.  During the next class, each student receives a copy of the evaluation sheet that includes the teacher's comments and the grade for the speech.  It is also possible to make a copy of the audiotape for students to listen to on their own time.

Videotaping

Students show great interest in watching videotapes of their speeches.  As the course runs now, we videotape only one set of speeches per semester, usually the next to the last, that is, the comparison and contrast speech in the first semester and the problem and solution speech in the second semester.  It normally takes two classes to videotape twenty-two speeches.  There are no comments by the teacher nor by students between speeches; these are reserved for the individual or small group sessions held evenings by appointment.  At that time teacher and student view the student's speech together  and discuss it.  In addition to the comments made by the teacher and the other students during the viewing, each student is given a copy of the evaluation form containing the teacher's comments and the grade for the speech, usually during the next class period.

There are two reasons why watching videotaped speeches as a whole class is not particularly productive.  First of all, each student is interested in seeing her own performance.  She has seen all other twenty-one speeches given before in class; to see all twenty-one again is boring.  While students can benefit from watching a few more speeches and hearing the teacher's comments, the maximum seems to be about four or five other speeches in one session.  After that, interest and attention are gone.

Second, seeing ourselves as other see us can be embarrassing.  Pointing out our own mistakes or hearing the teacher point them out in front of the whole class is particularly unpleasant.  Moreover the teacher is loath to spend too much time commenting on each student's speech for fear the student will lose face and the other students will lose interest.

For the individual sessions, appointments are scheduled at fifteen-minute intervals during the evenings.  Students often schedule their viewing in small groups of two to four students and view their speeches together.  It seems they are more willing to criticize themselves and ask questions in front of just the teacher and a few close friends, and the teacher can be more thorough.  There is more time to chat with students individually and cite their overall progress.  A group of twenty-two students who had viewed their speeches in the first semester as a whole class and in the second semester individually or in small groups were unanimous in their opinion that the latter situation made them feel more comfortable and that they learned more than watching the tape as a whole class.

Concluding Remarks

What has been presented above is only a brief summary of how National Tsing Hua University's course English Speech is now organized.  Each time it is taught, it is modified in some way, discarding or changing what did not work well before and trying out new ideas.  Because I do not use a textbook, I have gathered materials from various sources; each year the stock of background readings and exercises gets larger.  It is my goal to put all these ideas together eventually in book form.

So far we do have any good commercially produced videotapes of speeches for the teaching of public speaking.  However, videotapes of student speeches can be used for teaching future speech classes.  Specific speeches can be chosen to illustrate certain teaching points, especially to show a well-constructed, well-delivered speech.  Since students recognize their upperclassmen, it is best to use these tapes to show basically positive features.

In studying rhetorical organization, we can look at a few short essays that use the pattern being taught.  Since students write out their speeches before they give them (although I discourage word for word memorization) and are learning to use the same structures in the composition class, the extra reinforcement is useful.  Students can see that the organization pattern is the same whether written or spoken.

I occasionally give the students some exercises for homework, such as work with introductions or conclusions or on transitions.  Beyond that, there is really no time for detailed grammar work; that is done in the composition class.  We try to spend as much time as possible in student speaking activities.

The general guidelines for a speech are three to five minutes, but we do not time the speeches (with the exception of the debates).  A speech should not be so short that it is inadequately developed or supported.  Some speeches may run closer to ten minutes, especially the process speeches, where the students may also be making something, or the speeches in the second semester, where more detailed argumentation is called for.  Those students who can speak comfortably at length in English can serve as models for the less fluent, less well-prepared students.

Although English Speech is a required course, it gives students a chance to talk about topics that interest them and to learn how to argue and present these issues more effectively, while using (and practicing) English as the medium of presentation.  We have many objectives to meet, but we have two semesters to do it.  Other speech courses have different time constraints and other variables.  We hope that some of the ideas presented here may be useful to other EFL teachers of public speaking courses.

References

Chen, H. S.  (1981).  Great American speeches.  Taipei: Crane.

Cheng, P.  (1982).  Contrastive rhetoric: English and Chinese.  Paper presented at the Conference on Rhetoric and Composition, The Pennsylvania State University.

Ehninger, D., Monroe, A. H., & Gronbeck, B. E.  (1978).  Principles and types of speech communication. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman and Company.

Kaplan, R. R. (1966).  Cultural thought patterns in intercultural education.  Language Learning, 16, 1-20.

Katchen, J. E.  (1987).  Coordination in the EFL curriculum: Writing and public speaking.  In Papers from the Fourth Conference on English Teaching and Learning in the Republic of China (pp. 275-289).  Taipei: Crane.

Katchen, J. E.  (1988).  Teaching English--American style--at a Chinese university.  Paper presented at the Institute of Language in Education Fourth International Conference, Hong Kong.

Katchen, J. E.  (1989).  The video camera in the public speaking course.  Unpublished paper.

Kuo, S. L., & Tsun, S. T.  (1987).  Writing as a cognitive process: A protocol analysis.  In Papers from the Third Conference on English Teaching and Learning in the Republic of China (pp. 263-280).  Taipei: Crane.

Lin, C. Y.  (1987).  A second thought on Robert Kaplan's theory of Chinese thought patterns.  In Papers from the Third Conference on English Teaching and Learning in the Republic of China (pp. 187-196).  Taipei: Crane.

Lonergan, J.  (1984).  Video in language teaching. Cambridge University Press.

Memering, D., & O'Hare, F.  (1980).  The writer's work.  Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Minnick, W. C.  (1979).  Public speaking.  Houghton Mifflin Company.

Smalley, R. L., & Hank, M. R.  (1982).  Refining composition skills.  New York: Macmillan.

Appendix