Conversational Competence through Role Play Activities*

Jack C. Richards
Department of English as a Second Language
University of Hawaii
at Manoa

1. Introduction
A problem in many ESL/EFL conversation courses is how to provide
opportunities for learners to engage in meaningful conversation practice.
Conversational activities are often difficult to arrange in large classes.
There may be no obvious motivation for learners to speak to each other
in English, and they may not be sufficiently fluent to carry on spontaneous
interaction in a foreign language. As a result the &dquo;conversation lesson&dquo;
may consist of little more than dialogue readings or question and answer
sessions in which the teacher rather than the learners, does most of the
talking. Researchers have emphasized that the patterns of teacher-learner
interaction and the kinds of discourse that results from such activities,
appear to lack many of the features needed for the acquisition of conver-
sation skills (Long et al. 1976: Richards 1980: Richards 1983(a): Brown
and Yule 1983). Many conversation classes consequently focus on the
formal aspects of conversational language (vocabulary, grammar, con-
versational phrases and expressions) rather than the processes of conver-
sational interaction (e.g. how to open a conversation appropriately, how
to show politeness or informality). They do not give learners oppor-
tunities to participate in the collaborative aspects of conversational inter-
actions (e.g. how to take turns appropriately). Nor do they allow learners
to practise the negotiation of conversational meanings and messages (e.g.
how to introduce and change topics, how to indicate lack of under-
standing or the need for clarification, how to clarify meanings and inten-
tions). The kind of discourse learners produce may also be very different
from natural conversational discourse. It may be characterized by short
turns of a single utterance rather than longer turns containing several ut-
terances, and by clause and sentence features typical of written rather
than spoken English (Brown and Yule 1983: Pawley and Syder 1983).

In recent years, methodologists from a variety of persuasions have

suggested alternative classroom arrangements and activities as one way
of engaging learners in more authentic conversational interaction in the
classroom. Canale and Swain (1980: 33) argue that classroom activities
should be characterized by &dquo;aspects of genuine communication such as
its basis in social interaction, the relative creativity and unpredictability
of utterances, its purposefulness and goal-orientation, and its authentic-
ity&dquo;. Communication activities which have been proposed for classroom
*A paper presented at the Japan Association of Language Teachers’ International Con-
vention, Tokyo, November 1984.

82
use include group work, pair work, problem solving tasks, discussions,
drama, role plays, and simulations (Rogers 1978: Littlewood 1981:
Krashen and Terrell 1983: Ur 1981). These activities have some of the
following features:
they provide opportunities to practice strategies for opening, developing,
and terminating conversational encounters;
they require learners to develop meanings collaboratively;
they necessitate the use of turn taking rules;
they practice use of conversational routines and expressions;
they involve learners in different kinds of roles, necessitating use of dif-
ferent styles of speaking;
they require negotiated completion of tasks;
they involve information sharing;
they focus on comprehensible and meaningful input and output;
they require a high degree of learner participation.
Particular communication activities have been examined for the
kinds of interactional and conversational features they produce when used
by ESL learners. Long et al. (1976) examined conversational interaction
generated by learners working in pairs on a discussion task, and found an
increase both in the quantity and quality of talking they did when com-
pared with language use in traditional teacher-dominated classrooms.
They found that in the pair-work arrangement, learners had more oppor-
tunities to talk and had to do more conversational work such as keeping
the discussion going, requesting clarification, confirming, interrupting,
repeating or completing another’s utterance and so forth, all of which
are characteristic of genuine conversational interaction and are hence

likely to contribute to conversational proficiency. Examples from Long

et al’s data of the kinds of interaction that was observed include the
following categories:
student competes for the floor
student interrupts
student completes other’s unfinished utterance
student contradicts
student invites participation by other students
student explicity expresses agreement
student makes explicit reference to other’s contribution
student encourages other
student explicitly supports other’s assertion with evidence
student jokes
student avoids discussion
student repeats
student confirms
Long et al. 1976:145.
83
 Scarcella (1978) discusses an activity she calls &dquo;socio-drama&dquo; - a
type of role play activity based on having students react to a situation or
dilemma, choose roles, and enact solutions. From analysis of video-tapes
of socio-dramas in use, she observed that in such activities learners help
each other communicate by supplying vocabulary items and expressions,
they incorporate grammatical forms and expressions used by other
students in their own production, and develop strategies for attention
getting, turn taking, topic initiation, and topic change. Porter (1883)
discusses &dquo;ranking-activities&dquo;
-
a type of discussion procedure used in
intermediate and advanced classes, in which students work in groups or
pairs on ranking a list of items, such as discussing which items would be
essential to save from a sinking ship in preparation for survival on an
isolated island. She examined pairs of ESL learners carrying out such ac-
tivities, comparing learners interacting with others at different levels of
proficiency. Porter found that in carrying out such tasks, the language
and interaction that resulted contained a number of features believed to
be important in promoting second language acquisition. Porter documented
such dimensions as correcting and monitoring strategies, negotiation of
meaning, and expression of politeness. She found learners did provide
comprehensible input for each other, although advanced learners provided
better quality input, suggesting the advantage of pairing learners of dif-
ferent levels of proficiency for communicative tasks. The learners did not
however get much opportunity in practicing sociolinguistically appro-
priate forms.
2. Role Play as a Communicative Activity
The project described here was prompted by the need for classroom
activities and materials in an intermediate level ESL conversation course.
Role play is one of a variety of communication activities being used in
the course. My purpose here is to provide a rationale for the use of role
play activities, to examine the potential contribution of role play activities
to conversational proficiency, and to describe how such activities can be
developed and used in the classroom.
2.1. The class
The learners are a group of foreign students enrolled in an ESL
proficiency program in Hawaii. With one exception they are Japanese
college graduates, aged from between 19 and 24 years old. Their profi-
ciency level can be characterized in the following terms:
Can understand enough to manage very simple exchanges concern-
ing matters familiar to him/her without frequently having to ask
for repetition, but comprehension very insecure outside familiar
areas.

Relies heavily on stressed words and context to deduce meaning.

84
 Able to ask simply for clarification, sometimes using speaker’s
words, when having difficulty understanding. _

Can follow very simple, slowly spoken verbal instructions only if

supported by context.
Lacks awareness of social conventions in polite conversation (turn
taking, agreeing etc). Often fails to recognize intonational cues and
to respond appropriately to conversational openers, small talk etc.

Could get gist of short simple recorded passages about familiar

subjects but would need to hear more than once and would pro-
bably miss details.
Has difficulty producing longer sentences and utterances of more
than a single turn.
Syntax fragmented, inflections and word endings frequently om-
mitted.
Does not understand or produce many colloquial or idiomatic ex-
pressions apart from a few which occur in everyday situations.
Able to operate only in a very limited capacity within predictable
areas of need.
Pronunciation strongly influenced by the first language and often
unintelligible.
(adapted from Brindley 1982: ACTFL 1984)
The activities described here are only a part of a comprehensive profi-
ciency program the learners are enrolled in, and hence do not address all
the proficiency components described above. The conversation compo-
nent of the program seeks to bring the learners to a level where they:

have a productive and receptive vocabulary for use in social sur-

vival situations;
ask and respond to Wh and Yes-No questions on social survival
topics;
handle basic social-survival transactions; face to face formal and
informal conversations; telephone conversations; interviews; ser-
vice encounters;
produce and understand turns consisting of several utterances;
produce and understand short monologues;
use conversationally appropriate utterances, routines and for-
mulae ;
use formal and informal conversational styles.

85
 2.2. The case for role play
Role play activities would appear to offer a means of dealing with
many of the dimensions of conversational interaction discussed above, as
well as meeting some of the goals of the course we have described. Role
plays typically involve; a) a situation in which a setting, participants, and
a goal or problem is described; b) descriptions of the role of each of the
participants and the tasks he or she has to accomplish. Participants then
complete the task assigned to them, drawing on whatever language
resources they can and improvising suitable responses to the situation as
it develops (Livingstone 1983). A variety of speech events can be practised
in a role play format, including conversations, interviews, debates,
meetings and discussions. The nature of role play tasks requires learners
to:

make their meanings clear to other participants, using whatever

language they can.
resources

attend to the other participants’ contributions, since their response

will depend upon what others have said.
use conversational management techniques to handle such features
as openings, turn taking, requests for clarification, closings.

be creative, improvising on the basis of how the activity develops.

Role play can hence be described as a fluency activity. It focuses on

using language and conversational resources in order to make oneself
understood and in order to accomplish a task. It is also a practice or revi-
sion activity rather than a teaching activity. It is more suitable as a means
of consolidating and practicing aspects of conversational proficiency
than of teaching new forms. However limitations of the role play format
should also be kept in mind.

Some teachers and students find role play an artificial activity,

unrelated to real world language needs. In other words, the way the
learners handle a task in the classroom may be very different from what
actually happens when they attempt a similar task outside the classroom.
It may also be objected that it provides opportunities for learners to pro-
duce and practice ungrammatical or inappropriate forms, and the provi-
sion of feedback is difficult and often not very productive. It may also be
more suited to learners from cultures where drama activities and learner-
directed activities in teaching are common. Another objection is that it is
a &dquo;throw-away&dquo; activity, which does not allow for follow up. Once the
task has been completed, the language that the learners used to enact it is
not generally available for further use or development. In an attempt to
make use of the positive potential of role play and to minimize its nega-
tive features, we will describe a sequence of activities for use with role
plays which attempts to extend the ways in which role play is typically used
in the foreign or second language classroom.

86
2.3. Developing and using role play activities
In planning conversation activities for the present group of learners
a range of representative topics and transactions was first selected, based
on existing needs analyses of the target group. Topics included such

things as shopping, meals, recreation, health, people, plans, and the

apartment. Transactions refers to tasks to be accomplished within each
topic area. Transactions related to the topic of health, for example, in-
clude &dquo;describing a health problem to the doctor&dquo;, and &dquo;asking a friend
how to use a medication&dquo;. In developing role play activities for use
within the conversation course, preliminary tryouts suggested that the
only serious limitation of role play activities as a course component
related to the issues of feedback and follow up. The learners had no dif-
ficulty in entering into the role play situations. The language they pro-
duced seemed to be quantitatively and qualitatively different from that
which occurred in other class activities, and the transactions that resulted
appeared to have reasonable face validity. In an attempt to allow better
preparation for the role play task and to allow for feedback and follow
up activities, the following format was developed for each role play ac-
tivity (see Appendix A for example).
(a) Learners first take part in a preliminary activity which introduces
the topic, the situation, and the &dquo;script&dquo; (cf. Richards 1983b) which will
subsequently appear in the role play task (section 1 Topic Talk, in the
sample). Such activities are of various kinds, including brainstorming,
ranking exercises, and problem solving tasks. The focus is on thinking
about a topic, generating vocabulary and related language, and develop-
ing expectations about the topic. This activity therefore prepares learners
for the role play task by establishing schema of different kinds.

(b) Learners then read a dialogue on a related topic. This serves

both to model the kind of transaction the learner will have to perform in
the role play task, and to provide examples of the kind of language that
could be used to carry out such a transaction.

(c) Learners now perform a role play. The format which has been
found to be most effective is one in which as little language support as
possible is provided on the role cards. It was found that if the role cards
provide too much information, the task involves too much reading and
learners tend simply to reproduce sentences from their cue cards rather
than create their own language.

(d) Learners then listen to recordings of native speakers performing

the samerole play. This is an important variation on how role plays are
typically used. By having learners listen to native speaker (NS) versions
of the tasks they have just practiced, they are able to compare differences
between the way they expressed particular functions and meanings and

87
the way the native speakers performed. The NS versions are spontaneous
unscripted enactments of the role’plays in which the native speakers enact
a role play from identical cue cards to those used by the learners. These
NS versions contain language much more fluent and complex than the
learners themselves are able to produce. However since the learners have
been well prepared for the listening task, the NS versions are comprehen-
sible and can be used as a basis for follow up and feedback activities.
(See Appendix B for a transcription of the NS versions of the role plays
used in the sample materials).

(e) Feedback and follow up activities (entitled Listen for It in the

sample), consist of listening for and identifying specific conversational
forms used by the native speakers and listening for the gist of what the
speakers said. Exercises of the first kind focus on listening for idioms,
spoken forms of words, conversational expressions and routines. A variety
of exercise types are used for gist-listening activities, including True-
False and multiple choice formats.

The sequence of (b) to (e) is then repeated with a second transaction

on the same topic, and the unit is completed with a further role play on
the same topic. In this version the cueing is in the form of a description
of the role play situation. It follows a less structured format, allowing for
a more creative and spontaneous interpretation by the learners. More
fluent performance is expected at this stage and learners can attempt to
use some of the conversational strategies and routines they have practiced
previously.
2.4. Evaluation. Evaluation data is presently being collected for a
representative sample of role play activities. This includes (a) descriptive
data, consisting of the teacher’s record of how each activity was used in
the classroom; (b) observational data, consisting of an observer’s record
of the type of conversational interaction and discourse that resulted from
each activity. Preliminary analysis of a sample of pilot activities with
another group of ESL learners indicates that in carrying out such activities,
learners are indeed maintaining important features of conversational dis-
course when they perform the role play tasks. For example:
use of polite forms and politeness strategies
May I know the exactly place? ’

May I know what floor its on?

I want to make an appointment with you on Saturday morning.
Is it OK?
Could you please take the helmet off.
topic switch and topic nomination
By the way, my name is Anoni. What’s your name?
Umm. Can I ask something ... ?
Oh, I like to ask you something.

88
 request for clarification
Em ... and can you er, can you be more specific? -

Is he bleeding, or something?
Excuse me?
You mean water or electricity or water AND electricity?
restating a question in a different way to assist comprehension
And how’re you going to look for your job? ... Have you checked
the newspapers yet?
self-repair
Mm ... I would like to get a job in an offish offish
-

office.
-

I’ll get a ambassy - ambulance there immediately.

clarification check
He needs an ambulance, right? .

Please don’t move the victim, OK?

long turns
It’s very near from the bus stop, it’s only five minutes ... walk
and ten minutes from shopping centre, mm, it’s very convenient,
don’t worry.
Oh, it’s all furnished. And, er, the bedroom each have two beds,
closets, carpets, and the living room we have two sofas, tv,
bookshelf and curtains. Got beautiful curtains in our house.
Umm, let me see. I have a friend who’s now working in the, er,
state government and who’s doing a sort of secretr secretary job,
-

umm, I might ask her, er, well, and then if I find out anything I’ll
let you know as soon as possible. Could I have your number?
closings
A. OK then. I’ll see you Friday afternoon.
B. Fine.
A. OK. Bye.
B. Bye.
A. Oh, that’s good. Yer, I think I will do this. Thank you for
your help.
B. Er, you’re welcome. Good luck on you job hunting.
A. Thank you. Bye.

While the learner discourse that is produced in the role plays is not always
grammatically correct, for the present group of learners it appears to be
no less so than that resulting from other kinds of classroom activities.
Since the focus of the role play activities is on fluency rather than accuracy,
this is not therefore seen as a serious limitation. Furthermore, the
possibilities provided by the use of native speaker models in the follow
up phase of each role play enables the teacher to deal indirectly with
grammatical problems, if desired.

89
 Conclusions
I started out by noting the need to provide opportunities for learners
to practice conversational interaction in a conversation class. A wide
variety of classroom activities are currently being explored for their
potential role in promoting communicative classroom interactions (Long
and Porter 1984). Role play appears to offer many advantages as a way
of stimulating authentic learner-to-learner conversational interaction,
which many see as providing the foundation for second language acquisi-
tion. The sequence of activities described here goes beyond the ways in
which role plays are typically used in the ESL classroom, but such activities
are not particularly difficult to prepare or to implement. Although we do
not as yet have a complete picture of the effectiveness of these activities
with learners at different levels of proficiency, preliminary observation
suggests they have much to offer the teacher of intermediate ESL
learners.

References
American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages. 1984. The
ACTFL Provisional Proficiency Guidelines.

Brindley, Geoff. 1982. Listening proficiency descriptions. Sydney: NSW

Migrant Education Service.
Brown, Gillian, and George Yule. 1983. Teaching the Spoken Language.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Canale, M. and Swain, M. 1980. Theoretical approaches to communica-
tive language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics. 1, 1: 1-47.
Krashen, S.D. and Terrell, T. 1983. The Natural Approach, Oxford:
Pergamon.
Littlewood, W. 1981. Communicative Language Teaching. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Livingstone, Carol. 1983. Role Play in Language Learning. London:
Longman.
Long, Michael H., Leslie Adams, Maralyn McLean and Fernando Castanos.
1976. Doing things with words: verbal interaction in lockstep and
small group classroom situations. In On TESOL ’76. Ruth Crymes
and John Fanslow (eds.). 137-153. Washington, DC.: TESOL.
Long, Michael H. and Patricia Porter. 1984. Group work, interlanguage
talk and second language acquisition. Paper presented at the 18th
annual TESOL Convention, Houston, March 6-11, 1984.

90
Pawley, Andrew and Frances Syder. 1983. Two puzzles for linguistic
theory: nativelike selection and nativelike fluency. In Jack C. Richards
and Richard W. Schmidt (eds.). Language and Communication.
London: Longman. 191-226.
Porter, Patricia A. 1983. Variations in the conversations of adult learners
of English as a function of the proficiency level of the participants.
Ph.D dissertation. Palo Alto: Stanford University.
Richards, Jack C. 1980. Conversation. TESOL Quarterly. 14, 4: 413-
432.
Richards, Jack C. 1983(a). Communicative needs in foreign language
teaching. English Language Teaching Journal. 37, 2: 111-120.
Richards, Jack C. 1983(b). Listening comprehension: approach, design,
procedure. TESOL Quarterly. 17, 219-240.
Rogers, John. 1978. Group Activities for Language Learning. Singapore:
RELC.
Scarcella, Robin. 1978. Socio-drama for social interaction. TESOL
Quarterly. 12, 1: 41-46.
Ur, Penny. 1981. Discussions that Work. Cambridge: Cambridge Uni-
versity Press.

91