The Speaking Task That Was Too Polished
Bu Rina is preparing her Year 12 Indonesian beginners class for the school-assessed oral interaction. One student, Adi, submits a draft script for a 4-minute conversation about his part-time job at a bakery. The script is fluent and largely accurate, but Bu Rina notices that Adi has memorised long stretches of formal written-style Indonesian ("Saya berpendapat bahwa pekerjaan paruh waktu memberikan pengalaman berharga") and that his planned partner turns are only single words like "Ya" and "Oh begitu". The task description requires students to sustain an unrehearsed-like interaction using level-appropriate language, negotiate meaning, and respond to unpredictable prompts. Adi's parents have asked whether he can read the script during the assessment because he is anxious. The school's assessment policy says oral tasks must allow students to demonstrate spontaneous communication.
1. Identify the two main problems with Adi's preparation and explain why each matters for the school-assessed oral task.
Read the worked answer
Problem 1: Over-reliance on memorised formal script. The phrases Adi has learned are written-register Indonesian ("berpendapat bahwa", "memberikan pengalaman berharga") rather than the conversational register expected at beginners level. Memorised chunks do not demonstrate the ability to construct meaning, and they collapse if the conversation goes off-script.
Problem 2: Partner turns are too thin. Single-word responses like "Ya" and "Oh begitu" do not show interactional skills such as asking follow-up questions, seeking clarification, or sustaining a turn. The task explicitly requires negotiated interaction, so the partner role is part of the evidence.
Why it matters: The school-assessed oral task is designed to elicit spontaneous communication. A polished script masks whether Adi can actually communicate, so the evidence would not be valid against the performance standards.
2. Recommend a concrete plan Bu Rina could give Adi (and his parents) that respects his anxiety while still producing valid assessment evidence.
Read the worked answer
A defensible plan would:
- Keep preparation but change its purpose. Adi can prepare vocabulary and a few key ideas, not a full script. He should practise generating sentences from cue cards rather than reciting.
- Build in predictable unpredictability. Bu Rina can give Adi a bank of 10 possible follow-up questions and rehearse responding to them cold, so he experiences being surprised in a safe setting.
- Strengthen the partner role. Adi's partner should practise asking at least three follow-up questions and one clarification request per turn cycle.
- Address the parents' request directly. Reading a script would invalidate the task. Instead, offer a short familiarisation session, a checklist of useful phrases, and reassurance that pauses and self-correction are acceptable and even expected.
- Document the adjustment. Note the support provided so the assessment remains fair and transparent.