Authors : Desiree Joy S. Vasquez; Arlyn P. Dela Peña; Quinn Rose S. Dignos; Jeven Mae E. Traya; Mariano Montebon

Volume/Issue : Volume 11 - 2026, Issue 7 - July

Google Scholar : https://tinyurl.com/5rhjcyyy

Scribd : https://tinyurl.com/yk4c4adw

DOI : https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/26jul1492

Note : A published paper may take 4-5 working days from the publication date to appear in PlumX Metrics, Semantic Scholar, and ResearchGate.

Abstract : This study investigated the effectiveness of the 4/3/2 speaking technique in improving the oral fluency of Grade 7 students. It aimed to assess fluency levels before and after the intervention in terms of speed, accuracy, and smoothness, determine significant differences in performance, explore students’ perceptions, and develop an instructional resource. A mixed-methods approach was employed, combining pretest-posttest measurements with semi-structured interviews. Quantitative results showed significant improvement in all fluency indicators, confirming the technique’s effectiveness. Thematic analysis revealed initial challenges such as time pressure, nervousness, and stuttering, alongside gains in confidence, idea organization, and clarity of expression. Based on these findings, SpeakSmart: A Grade 7 Fluency Enhancement Module was developed, offering structured, time-bound, and progressive speaking tasks grounded in Automaticity Theory. The study concludes that the 4/3/2 technique is a practical and impactful strategy for fostering oral fluency, confidence, and communicative competence. Recommendations include continued assessment, supportive classroom practices, integration into regular instruction, and further research with larger and more diverse participant groups.

Keywords : 4/3/2 Speaking Technique, Oral Fluency, Grade 7 Students, English Language Learning, Automaticity Theory, Fluency Enhancement, Instructional Module, Speaksmart.

References :

1. Asri, A., & Muhtar, A. (2013). The effect of 4/3/2 technique on the students’ oral fluency at SMAN 2 Malang. SKRIPSI Jurusan Sastra Inggris-Fakultas Sastra UM, 1(1), 1-12.
2. Bangalao, A. P. (2025). Developing students’ fluency in speaking through the use of the 4/3/2 technique. International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology, 10(2), 41–43. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14874203
3. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203771587
4. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
5. Department of Education. (2024). Grade 8 learners’ fluency in delivering impromptu speech using the 3-2-1 technique. DepEd e-Saliksik. https://e-saliksik.deped.gov.ph/grade-8-learners-fluency-in-delivering-impromptu-speech-using-3-2-1-technique/?download=7957
6. Hong, M. N. T., & Le, K. D. (2025). Improving high school students’ English speaking fluency using the 4/3/2 technique. European Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 9(2).
7. Kapable. (2025). 200 public speaking topics: Unique speech ideas for students in English. Kapable. Retrieved August 27, 2025, from https://kapable.club/blog/public-speaking/public-speaking-topics
8. Kargar Behbahani, H., Namaziandost, E., & YarAhmadi, M. (2024). The effect of the 4/3/2 technique on Iranian EFL learners’ speaking fluency: The moderating role of working memory. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 16(33), 1–24
9. Köylü, Z., & Tracy-Ventura, N. (2022). Learning English in today’s global world: A comparative study of at home, anglophone, and lingua franca study abroad. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 44(5), 1330–1355. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263121000917
10. Labad, C. M. B., Rabena, R. P., Garduce, S. J. S., & Neri, E. (2024). Speaking difficulties and academic performance in English among junior high school students. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS), 8(3S), 2645–2656. https://doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2024.803192S
11. LaBerge, D., & Samuels, S. J. (1974). Toward a theory of automatic information processing in reading. Cognitive Psychology, 6(2), 293–323. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(74)90015-2
12. Maasin-Ceballos, M. J., & Ceballos, R. F. (2018). Learner-centered approaches: Their effect on the oral fluency of students. Journal of Language and Education, 4(1), 6–17. https://doi.org/10.17323/2411-7390-2018-4-1-6-17
13. Molina, M., & Briesmaster, M. (2017). The Use of the 3/2/1 Technique to Foster Students’ Speaking Fluency. I.E.: Inquiry in Education. 9(2), .1-13. https://digitalcommons.nl.edu/ie/vol9/iss2/8
14. Movahed, R., & Karkia, P. (2022). Reading/listening & the 4/3/2 on EFL students’ speaking skills. International Journal of Linguistics, 6(1), 53–66
15. National Center for Education Statistics. (2021). NAEP oral reading fluency scale. U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences. https://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/subject/studies/orf/2021025_orf_study.pdf
16. Olkkonen, S., Snellings, P., Veivo, O., & Lintunen, P. (2024). Cognitive fluency in L2: The effect of automatic and controlled lexical processing on speech rate. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 53, Article 66. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-024-10099-0
17. Peltonen, P. (2023). Fluency revisited. ELT Journal. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccad047
18. Saitongsuk, P., & Ekkayokkaya, M. (2021). Enhancing English speaking ability through task repetition using the 4/3/2 technique in public speaking activities. An Online Journal of Education, 16(1), Article OJED1601010. https://doi.org/10.14456/ojed.2021.10
19. Santos, J. C. (2023). Students’ perspectives on the 4/3/2 technique and self-assessment to improve English-speaking fluency. Studies in English Language and Education, 10(1), 41–59. https://doi.org/10.24815/siele.v10i1.25700
20. Santos, J. C., & Ramírez-Ávila, M. R. (2022). Improving speaking fluency through 4/3/2 technique and self-assessment. TESL-EJ, 26(2), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.55593/ej.26102a1
21. Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235–253). Newbury House.
22. Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257–285. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4
23. Takizawa, K. (2024). What contributes to fluent L2 speech? Examining cognitive and utterance fluency link with underlying L2 collocational processing speed and accuracy. Applied Psycholinguistics, 45(3), 516–541. https://doi.org/10.1017/S014271642400016X
24. Terzioğlu, Y., & Kurt, M. (2022). Elevating English language learners’ speaking fluency and listening skill through a learning management system. SAGE Open, 12(2), Article 21582440221099937. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440221099937
25. Wang, W., Mohammad Rezaei, Y., & Izadpanah, S. (2024). Speaking accuracy and fluency among EFL learners: The role of creative thinking, emotional intelligence, and academic enthusiasm. Heliyon, 10, e37620. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e37620
26. Yufrizal, H. (2018). The Application Of 4/3/2 Technique to Enhance Speaking Fluency of EFL Students in      Indonesia. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 5(10), 99-107.     https://doi.org/10.14738/assrj.510.5265