Audiotaped Dialogue Journal: A Technique to Improve Speaking Skill of Iranian EFL Learners

Document Type : Research Paper


Islamic Azad University-North Tehran Branch


This study attempted to investigate whether there was any significant difference between the speaking achievement of learners who were trained by means of audiotaped dialogue journal, dialogue journal writing, or traditional free speech. The participants, 45 male and female students aged between 21 and 32, were selected by random sampling from among free speech classes in an English teaching Institute in Tehran. On the basis of the scores obtained from an oral interview, a one way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was performed, and it was proved that the three groups were homogeneous in terms of their speaking ability. Yet, the ANOVA performed on the scores of the learners after the treatment showed that the oral proficiency of the three groups differed significantly. A follow-up Tukey test revealed that the audiotaped dialogue journal group did not have any advantage over the dialogue journal writing group, whereas there was a statistically significant difference between the audiotaped dialogue journal group and the traditional free speech group.


Brown, C, Garver, P. & Sagers, S. (1996). Audiotaped dialogue journals: Lexical, grammatical, and affective benefits. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages. Chicago, IL.
Egbert, J. (1992). Talk to me: An exploratory study of audiotaped dialogue journals. Journal of Intensive English Studies, 6, 91-100.
Fulwiler, T. (1999). Teaching writing as a liberal art: Ideas that made the difference. A lecture presented for the Tenth Anniversary Annual Colloquium of the Center for Interdisciplinary Studies of Writing, Minneapolis.
Fulwiler, T. (2000). The personal connection: Journal writing across the curriculum. In T. Fulwiler & A. Young (Eds.) Language connections: Writing and reading across the curriculum (pp. 15-30). WAC Clearinghouse Landmark Publications in Writing Studies.
Garmon, M. A. (2001). The benefits of dialogue journals: What prospective teachers say. Teacher Education Quarterly, 28(4), 37-50.
Gholami Mehrdad, A. (2008). The effect of dialogue journal writing on EFL students’ writing skill. The Journal of Applied Linguistics, Tabriz Islamic Azad University 1(1), 34-44.
Hiemstra, R. (2001). Uses and benefits of journal writing. In L. M. English & M. A. Gillen (Eds). Promoting journal writing in adult education, (pp. 19-26). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Ho, Y. (2003). Audiotaped dialogue journals: an alternative form of speaking practice. ELT Journal, 57 (3), 269-277.
Homaeian, P. (2006). The impact of dialogue journal writing on Iranian EFL learners’ writing ability. Unpublished master’s thesis, Islamic Azad University, North Tehran Branch, Iran.
Lingley, D. (2005). Spoken features of dialogue journal writing. [Electronic version]. Asian EFL Journal, 7(2) 3.
Mirhosseini, S.A. (2003). Critical pedagogy and EFL dialogue journal writing in an Iranian high school: A microethnographic inquiry. Unpublished master’s thesis, University of Tehran, Iran.  
Peyton, J. K. (1986). Literacy through written interaction. Passage: A Journal for Refugee Education, 2 (1), 24-29.
Peyton, J. K. (2000). Dialogue journals: Interactive writing to develop language and literacy. National Center for ESL Literacy Education. ESL resources. Retrieved December 5, 2008 from http:// ERIC Web Portal.
Peyton, J.K., Staton, J., Richardson, G., & Wolfram, W. (1990). The influence of
     writing task on ESL students' written production. Research in the Teaching of English
     244(2), 142-171.
Reid, L. (1997). Exploring the ways that dialogue journaling affects how and why students write: An action research project. Teaching and Change, 5(1), 50-57.
Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: HarvardUniversity.