The data was collected from EFL language institute students regarding the relationship among their speaking strategies use, attitude, and English language oral output.
Bourgeois and Mason [ 24 ] All four participants demonstrated some increase in the number of factual statements made. All 4 reduced the frequency of ambiguous statements produced. Two demonstrated a decrease in the frequency of unintelligible utterances produced and 1 demonstrated a slight decrease in perseverative utterances.
One participant showed a slight increase in error utterances. Effect size not calculable. Effect of intervention on requests and assertions unclear due to lack of stable baseline.
Memory Books with Caregiver Training Eight studies assessed the impact of memory books with varying levels of caregiver training. Of designs used in the six remaining studies, 4 were single subject multiple baseline Bourgeois [ 27 ], Bourgeois [ 90 ], Bourgeois [ 97 ], Hoerster [ 93 ], one was a pretest-posttest study Allen-Burge [ 88 ] and one was a case study Spilkin [ 96 ].
The results of one of the RCTs examining the impact of memory aids and caregiver training on participants' communication with formal caregivers indicated that, following this intervention, participants produced significantly more utterances and more informative communications during 5-minute conversations with their formal caregivers [ 25 ].
Due to the reporting methods used in the other RCT that examined memory aids and staff training Burgio [ 30 ], effect sizes for these outcomes could not be calculated.
The authors noted no significant effect for group x time differences in coherent verbal interactions with formal caregivers. The pretest-posttest study of memory aids and staff training indicated that the percentage of time in coherent speech, percentage of time talking with others, and the number of positive statements to formal caregivers per hour all increased following intervention, but that these effects returned to pretest levels at one-month followup [ 88 ].
Two of the multiple baseline single-subject studies demonstrated improvement in on-topic statements to informal caregivers following the use of memory books and caregiver training for most of the participants [ 2790 ].
An additional multiple baseline single-subject study demonstrated possible improvement in on-topic statements to formal caregivers but the results were difficult to interpret due to the lack of a stable baseline [ 93 ].
The one case study of memory aids demonstrated increased maximal turns and improved topic maintenance with formal caregivers following intervention [ 96 ].
Social validation for this intervention was provided by most caregivers noting improved participant communication in all but one study [ 27 ]. Using the SORT criteria, given the above results, the use of memory aids with caregiver training would be recommended for use by clinicians with a rating strength of B.
This rating is supported by results from two RCTs from which there were mixed results. Education and Training There were three studies that examined different education and training programs for the communication partner. One pretest-posttest study assessed the impact of communication prescriptions Acton [ 89 ].
A second pretest-posttest study examined affected individuals' responses to direct or indirect listener repair responses Gentry [ 92 ]. No clinically or statistically significant changes in communication were noted in the lower-quality RCT of family visiting intervention program McCallion [ 94 ].
The pretest-posttest study of individualized communication prescriptions demonstrated a significant change in number of words per topic, but not number of total words Acton [ 89 ].
In the pretest-posttest study of indirect versus direct communication repair, all three participants demonstrated less topic changes under the indirect repair Gentry [ 92 ]. Due to the small number of participants, the significance of these findings could not be tested.
Within these studies there was no firm support for intensive caregiver training, with the exception of individualized communication prescriptions. Overall, the strength of recommendation for this intervention was C, a result supported by one RCT.
Activity-Based Programming The remaining two studies examined the effects of activity-based programming. One, a high-quality RCT, examined the effects of a walking and talking intervention Cott [ 91 ].
The other, a nonrandomized controlled trial, examined the effects of a Breakfast Club group Pietro [ 95 ]. In the only high-quality RCT included in this review, Cott and her colleagues [ 91 ] examined the effects of a program in which pairs of residents were encouraged to talk with one another, either while sitting or while walking.
Neither condition led to better communication outcomes and both, in fact, demonstrated a tendency to worsened outcomes. Using a nonrandomized controlled trial, Pietro and Boczko [ 95 ] demonstrated the effectiveness of a daily group intervention that focused on communication stimulated by the preparation and sharing of breakfast.
Using the SORT criteria, straight conversational or walking and talking programs would not be recommended, but a breakfast-based activity group would receive a recommendation with a rating strength of B. This rating is not supported by results from an RCT.
Discussion Prior to discussing some generalities regarding ways of improving communicative interactions between individuals with AD and their caregivers gleaned from this, it is important first to note some important observations from our search results.• Make connections between written and oral skills.
Payoff Students will: • share ideas. • develop listening skills. • apply skills in different ways – in pairs, small groups, and with the whole class. Tips and Resources • Timed Retell can be informal or more formal, as described here.
In the more formal approach, students require more confidence. The Use of Communication Strategies in Oral Communicative Situations by Engineering Students of processes, and show an opposition between ‘non strategic processes’ vs.
‘strategic. Verbal communication strategies can be broken down into the two categories of written and oral communication. Written strategies consist of avenues such as e-mail, text, and chat. Examples that fall into the oral category are phone calls, video chats, and face-to-face conversation.
This study aims to examine the different communication strategies (CSs) EFL learners detailed analysis confirmed this relationship and revealed that the learners’ linguistic CSs have been found to be useful tools for L2 learners to fill the gap between their communicative needs and the limited resources in the L2, thus leading them to. A Study on the Teach Ability of EFL Communication Strategies. Author links open overlay panel Huei-Chun Teng. Show more. A paired t-test was conducted to analyze participants’ scores on the oral test and the scale of communicative effectiveness. some empirical studies have been conducted and focused on the relationship between. learners’ communicative skills can be improved by developing strategies for communication. Cohen, Weaver and Li () claimed the use of strategies in communication raises learners’ language awareness and solves the interlocutors’ potential communication problems.
Communication skills were elicited by a concept-identification task using concrete and abstract nouns, and involving both oral production and interaction between members of the two groups. A taxonomy of communication strategies was developed, with classification into four communicative approaches (linguistic, contextual, conceptual, and mime.
Communication Strategies of English-speaking Learners of French on a Business Studies Course. Brigid Delamere 3 12 4 Relationship between literal translationand language switch 55 learners use more communication strategies than their .
An Analysis of the Communication Strategies Employed by Learners of English as a Foreign Language. evolution of the participants' oral communicative competence in English as a Foreign Language (EFL), there was no evidence of a clear relationship between the level of language proficiency and the frequency of the CSs.