Vol. 13/ Núm. 3 2026 pág. 201
https://doi.org/10.69639/arandu.v13i3.2390
Using the Problem-Solution Approach to develop English
Communication Skills in A2 Students
Utilización del enfoque problema-solución para desarrollar las competencias
comunicativas en inglés de los alumnos de A2
Josué Isaias Condo Sucuy
jicondos@ube.edu.ec
https://orcid.org/0009-0000-0915-5621
Universidad Bolivariana del Ecuador
Riobamba – Ecuador
Rodrigo Antonio Guerrero Segura
raguerreros@ube.edu.ec
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8915-3377
Universidad Bolivariana del Ecuador
Duran- Ecuador
Josué Reinaldo Bonilla Tenesaca
jrbonillat@ube.edu.ec
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6748-2345
Universidad Bolivariana del Ecuador
Duran- Ecuador
Artículo recibido: 10 junio 2026- Aceptado para publicación:16 julio 2026
Conflictos de intereses: Ninguno que declarar.
ABSTRACT
In this research, the effect of utilizing the problem-solution method on teaching oral
communication skills in the English language to A2 level learners in an EFL environment in
Ecuador was assessed. To do this, a quasi-experimental approach consisting of 16 dental students
from Riobamba was implemented. This project lasted 7 weeks (16 total contact hours) and utilized
pre-and post-tests as well as Likert surveys and checklists to collect data on fluency, accuracy,
pronunciation, engagement, and confidence. Results of this study indicated a significant increase
in overall performance (from a mean 6.32 to a mean 7.65) with most increases occurring in
relation to both engagement (24.72% increase) and confidence (26.38% increase). Additionally,
students reported positive experiences when working collaboratively with other students to solve
problems as well as improvements in critical thinking skills (e.g. highly responsible, reflective)
and partial collaboration (e.g. need for more flexibility). In conclusion, the implementation of the
problem-solution technique enhances oral fluency, independence, and collaboration among young
A2 level learners and should be incorporated into traditional EFL classroom practices in order to
create opportunities for more active learning.
Keywords: english communication skills, a2 proficiency level, EFL (english as a foreign
language), oral fluency, problem-solving approach
Vol. 13/ Núm. 3 2026 pág. 202
RESUMEN
Este estudio analiza el efecto del método problema-solución en la mejora de las competencias
comunicativas orales de estudiantes de nivel A2 en un contexto de EFL ecuatoriano. Para este fin,
se establece un diseño cuasiexperimental y se aplica a 16 estudiantes de odontología de la ciudad
de Riobamba durante 7 semanas de trabajo (16 horas en total) sirviéndose para la evaluación de
la fluidez, precisión, pronunciación, engagement y de la confianza de pre y posttest, de encuestas
tipo Likert y de listas de verificación. En cuanto a los resultados, resaltamos las mejoras generales:
del promedio 6.32 se elevaron al 7.65 (media de la diferencia 1.33), donde las diferencias más
concretas encontramos en la confianza (26.38%) y el engagement (24.72%), donde las
percepciones estudiantiles resaltan los beneficios en el proceso de interacción y del problema
usado como solución; y el Checklist en la evaluación expresa fortalezas en el pensamiento crítico
(responsabilidad elevada, reflexión) y en la colaboración (flexibilidad por potenciar). De acuerdo
a ello, podemos afirmar que el método problema-solución mejora la fluidez del discurso oral, la
autonomía y la colaboración en jóvenes de nivel A2, por lo que acentuamos la importancia del
método en las aulas de EFL tradicionales para salir del pasotismo de su uso.
Palabras clave: habilidades de comunicación en inglés, nivel de competencia A2, EFL
(inglés como lengua extranjera), fluidez oral, enfoque de resolución de problemas
Todo el contenido de la Revista Científica Internacional Arandu UTIC publicado en este sitio está disponible bajo
licencia Creative Commons Atribution 4.0 International.
RESUMEN
Este estudio analiza el efecto del método problema-solución en la mejora de las competencias
comunicativas orales de estudiantes de nivel A2 en un contexto de EFL ecuatoriano. Para este fin,
se establece un diseño cuasiexperimental y se aplica a 16 estudiantes de odontología de la ciudad
de Riobamba durante 7 semanas de trabajo (16 horas en total) sirviéndose para la evaluación de
la fluidez, precisión, pronunciación, engagement y de la confianza de pre y posttest, de encuestas
tipo Likert y de listas de verificación. En cuanto a los resultados, resaltamos las mejoras generales:
del promedio 6.32 se elevaron al 7.65 (media de la diferencia 1.33), donde las diferencias más
concretas encontramos en la confianza (26.38%) y el engagement (24.72%), donde las
percepciones estudiantiles resaltan los beneficios en el proceso de interacción y del problema
usado como solución; y el Checklist en la evaluación expresa fortalezas en el pensamiento crítico
(responsabilidad elevada, reflexión) y en la colaboración (flexibilidad por potenciar). De acuerdo
a ello, podemos afirmar que el método problema-solución mejora la fluidez del discurso oral, la
autonomía y la colaboración en jóvenes de nivel A2, por lo que acentuamos la importancia del
método en las aulas de EFL tradicionales para salir del pasotismo de su uso.
Palabras clave: habilidades de comunicación en inglés, nivel de competencia A2, EFL
(inglés como lengua extranjera), fluidez oral, enfoque de resolución de problemas
Todo el contenido de la Revista Científica Internacional Arandu UTIC publicado en este sitio está disponible bajo
licencia Creative Commons Atribution 4.0 International.
Vol. 13/ Núm. 3 2026 pág. 203
INTRODUCTION
In recent years, the development of practical English communication skills has become a
central objective in English as a Foreign Language classroom; This is especially important for
students at the A2 proficiency level, who are beginning to understand and use basic phrases in
real-life contexts. In Latin American classrooms, traditional teacher-centered methods limit
meaningful oral interaction; these methods often result in passive learners with limited speaking
confidence (Richards, 2006; Ur, 2012);
Systematic reviews provide more extensive evidence than individual studies. Guo and
Jamil (2024) analyzed multiple projects on the effect of PBL on the growth of independence and
fluency in EFL speaking. In another study, Tran (2024) integrated PBL and conversational
projects to develop better pronunciation and interpersonal skills while López (2025) focuses on
its impact on cooperative learning within higher education. Qasserras (2023) explored combining
CLT and PBL to help students overcome cultural challenges. Khaydarbek (2025) also encouraged
using project-based methods rather than grammar drills to promote CLT. Additionally, Oshimeje
(2025) and Caicedo (2026) offered more proof of the importance of real spoken language and
how grammar relates to speaking skills in EFL secondary schools.
Research has demonstrated that problem-based learning (PBL) has a significant positive
effect on the development of communication skills and critical thinking skills among A2-level,
English as a foreign language (EFL) learner. Research conducted since 2021 has furthered the
understanding of the relationship between PBL and communication skills. For instance,
Šliogerienė et al., (2025) were found that project-based learning helps students interact more with
each other by using real-life situations, which increases their participation and teamwork in class.
Tan et al. (2022) studied how this approach also boosts motivation and helps students remember
what they learn, especially in countries where English is not the first language. The shift from a
traditional model of learning to an interactive, learner-centered model of learning is intended to
provide novice learners with the opportunity to learn how to use English as a means of
communication in real-world situations.
Furthermore, Latin American research validates PBL's practical impact. García and
López (2023) showed problem-solving activities enable fluent, confident speaking in real-life
contexts within American classrooms. Martínez et al. (2024) confirmed learner-centered PBL
strategies improve oral fluency, confidence, and collaboration essential for A2 acquisition in
primary education. In Ecuador, Bachón (2026) showed that project-based activities helped some
public school A2 learners reduce their anxiety about speaking and improve their proficiency.
Finally, The results from different regions show that project-based learning can work well in
various EFL environments.
INTRODUCTION
In recent years, the development of practical English communication skills has become a
central objective in English as a Foreign Language classroom; This is especially important for
students at the A2 proficiency level, who are beginning to understand and use basic phrases in
real-life contexts. In Latin American classrooms, traditional teacher-centered methods limit
meaningful oral interaction; these methods often result in passive learners with limited speaking
confidence (Richards, 2006; Ur, 2012);
Systematic reviews provide more extensive evidence than individual studies. Guo and
Jamil (2024) analyzed multiple projects on the effect of PBL on the growth of independence and
fluency in EFL speaking. In another study, Tran (2024) integrated PBL and conversational
projects to develop better pronunciation and interpersonal skills while López (2025) focuses on
its impact on cooperative learning within higher education. Qasserras (2023) explored combining
CLT and PBL to help students overcome cultural challenges. Khaydarbek (2025) also encouraged
using project-based methods rather than grammar drills to promote CLT. Additionally, Oshimeje
(2025) and Caicedo (2026) offered more proof of the importance of real spoken language and
how grammar relates to speaking skills in EFL secondary schools.
Research has demonstrated that problem-based learning (PBL) has a significant positive
effect on the development of communication skills and critical thinking skills among A2-level,
English as a foreign language (EFL) learner. Research conducted since 2021 has furthered the
understanding of the relationship between PBL and communication skills. For instance,
Šliogerienė et al., (2025) were found that project-based learning helps students interact more with
each other by using real-life situations, which increases their participation and teamwork in class.
Tan et al. (2022) studied how this approach also boosts motivation and helps students remember
what they learn, especially in countries where English is not the first language. The shift from a
traditional model of learning to an interactive, learner-centered model of learning is intended to
provide novice learners with the opportunity to learn how to use English as a means of
communication in real-world situations.
Furthermore, Latin American research validates PBL's practical impact. García and
López (2023) showed problem-solving activities enable fluent, confident speaking in real-life
contexts within American classrooms. Martínez et al. (2024) confirmed learner-centered PBL
strategies improve oral fluency, confidence, and collaboration essential for A2 acquisition in
primary education. In Ecuador, Bachón (2026) showed that project-based activities helped some
public school A2 learners reduce their anxiety about speaking and improve their proficiency.
Finally, The results from different regions show that project-based learning can work well in
various EFL environments.
Vol. 13/ Núm. 3 2026 pág. 204
While growing evidence supports the benefits of problem-based and communicative
approaches in language learning, there is limited research on their application with young A2-
level learners; Specifically, few studies have investigated how the problem-solving method
impacts oral communication at the basic proficiency level, most available research targets older
or more advanced students, leaving a gap in understanding how younger learners respond to
structured, problem-centered tasks; This gap is especially relevant in EFL contexts like Latin
America, where traditional instruction prevails, as such, further research is needed to assess the
effectiveness of PBL in beginner-level classrooms.
This situation is evident in a private college in Riobamba, Ecuador, which, despite its
values-based curriculum and academic goals, struggles to foster oral fluency in its younger
students. Although the college promotes academic achievement, it faces significant challenges in
helping A2-level students communicate confidently in English; Many of these students lack the
opportunity to practice speaking authentically and engagingly, traditional methods have proven
insufficient in developing their critical thinking and communicative competence; There is a need
for innovative strategies that not only teach language but also engage students actively in using
it, a promising alternative is the implementation of a problem-solving approach to language
instruction
This study explores how the problem-solving approach affects English oral
communication skills in A2-level students; The focus is on young adults students in their twenties
who struggle to express themselves in English, the research will examine the influence of
structured communicative tasks on students' fluency, accuracy, pronunciation, engagement, and
confidence; It will also explore how structured communicative and problem-solving tasks support
A2-level students; and to determinate how problem-solving activities encourage critical thinking
and collaboration, the central research question is: How does implementing the problem-solving
approach influence the oral communication skills of A2-level students in an EFL classroom?
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Description of the procedure
The study was conducted over a period of seven weeks. Students attended four one-hour
classes per week on Tuesdays, Wednesdays, Thursdays, and Fridays, for a total of four
instructional hours per week. The main purpose of the intervention was to improve students’
speaking and interaction skills in English through the implementation of the Problem-Solution
Approach.
Initially, to assess their oral proficiency, students participated in a preliminary oral
proficiency test. To facilitate these assessments, students participated in a group activity that
included several scenarios that assessed their ability to speak basic English. Results from this
While growing evidence supports the benefits of problem-based and communicative
approaches in language learning, there is limited research on their application with young A2-
level learners; Specifically, few studies have investigated how the problem-solving method
impacts oral communication at the basic proficiency level, most available research targets older
or more advanced students, leaving a gap in understanding how younger learners respond to
structured, problem-centered tasks; This gap is especially relevant in EFL contexts like Latin
America, where traditional instruction prevails, as such, further research is needed to assess the
effectiveness of PBL in beginner-level classrooms.
This situation is evident in a private college in Riobamba, Ecuador, which, despite its
values-based curriculum and academic goals, struggles to foster oral fluency in its younger
students. Although the college promotes academic achievement, it faces significant challenges in
helping A2-level students communicate confidently in English; Many of these students lack the
opportunity to practice speaking authentically and engagingly, traditional methods have proven
insufficient in developing their critical thinking and communicative competence; There is a need
for innovative strategies that not only teach language but also engage students actively in using
it, a promising alternative is the implementation of a problem-solving approach to language
instruction
This study explores how the problem-solving approach affects English oral
communication skills in A2-level students; The focus is on young adults students in their twenties
who struggle to express themselves in English, the research will examine the influence of
structured communicative tasks on students' fluency, accuracy, pronunciation, engagement, and
confidence; It will also explore how structured communicative and problem-solving tasks support
A2-level students; and to determinate how problem-solving activities encourage critical thinking
and collaboration, the central research question is: How does implementing the problem-solving
approach influence the oral communication skills of A2-level students in an EFL classroom?
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Description of the procedure
The study was conducted over a period of seven weeks. Students attended four one-hour
classes per week on Tuesdays, Wednesdays, Thursdays, and Fridays, for a total of four
instructional hours per week. The main purpose of the intervention was to improve students’
speaking and interaction skills in English through the implementation of the Problem-Solution
Approach.
Initially, to assess their oral proficiency, students participated in a preliminary oral
proficiency test. To facilitate these assessments, students participated in a group activity that
included several scenarios that assessed their ability to speak basic English. Results from this
Vol. 13/ Núm. 3 2026 pág. 205
initial oral proficiency test provided students with a baseline from which to identify their primary
challenges and guide the development of an educational plan.
At the beginning of each class period, every class experienced a problem in relation to some
form or type of media (e.g., pictures, and written material) that can be seen in typical settings.
Upon completion of collaborative analysis of the problems, each team of students would share
their analyses and offer possible solutions in English. Each of these activities developed a sense
of participation, connection, decision making, and speaking. Throughout the intervention, the
teacher-researcher used a checklist during three different sessions to observe students’ level of
participation, fluency, and interaction with their peers. These observations provided qualitative
evidence regarding students’ communicative behavior and engagement in problem-based tasks.
At the end of the intervention, a post-test was administered through a group role-play
activity to evaluate students’ progress. We explained the assessment criteria to students to help
them understand and develop their presentations with clarity. We gave the students 20 minutes to
prepare their presentations, which were all evaluated using a rubric based on fluency, clarity,
naturalness of speech, pronunciation, vocabulary variety, and interaction skills. Finally, the results
of the pre-test and post-test were compared to find out how the problem-solution approach
impacted students’ oral performance and interaction skills.
Research Approach and Design
This was a mixed-method study which used both quantitative and qualitative approaches
for better understanding of the issue under investigation. The study was applied and descriptive
as its purpose was to examine the efficiency of the Problem-Solution Approach in teaching
communicative skills of English. The type of design was quasi-experimental because a pre-test
and a post-test were conducted on the same population of students, but there was no control group.
Population and Sample
The study was conducted at a private institution of higher education, in Riobamba,
Ecuador. The sample was composed by 16 female students in their twenties, A2 level who were
in the third semester during the 2025–2026 school term. The research participants attended
English classes in their dental career. Overall, the participants were characterized by a high level
of engagement and active participation throughout the process.
Data Collection Techniques and Instruments
The first quantitative instrument was the pre and post-test to assess the impact of
organized communicative activities on students' confidence, fluency, and involvement level. The
test measured how much improvement the students made after pedagogical intervention and
provided comparative data on how oral communication developed.
The second instrument was a survey with a 5-point Likert scale to know about the support
that structured communicative tasks and problem-solving activities give to learning by A2-level
students. It elicited perception, opinion, and experience responses from the students regarding the
initial oral proficiency test provided students with a baseline from which to identify their primary
challenges and guide the development of an educational plan.
At the beginning of each class period, every class experienced a problem in relation to some
form or type of media (e.g., pictures, and written material) that can be seen in typical settings.
Upon completion of collaborative analysis of the problems, each team of students would share
their analyses and offer possible solutions in English. Each of these activities developed a sense
of participation, connection, decision making, and speaking. Throughout the intervention, the
teacher-researcher used a checklist during three different sessions to observe students’ level of
participation, fluency, and interaction with their peers. These observations provided qualitative
evidence regarding students’ communicative behavior and engagement in problem-based tasks.
At the end of the intervention, a post-test was administered through a group role-play
activity to evaluate students’ progress. We explained the assessment criteria to students to help
them understand and develop their presentations with clarity. We gave the students 20 minutes to
prepare their presentations, which were all evaluated using a rubric based on fluency, clarity,
naturalness of speech, pronunciation, vocabulary variety, and interaction skills. Finally, the results
of the pre-test and post-test were compared to find out how the problem-solution approach
impacted students’ oral performance and interaction skills.
Research Approach and Design
This was a mixed-method study which used both quantitative and qualitative approaches
for better understanding of the issue under investigation. The study was applied and descriptive
as its purpose was to examine the efficiency of the Problem-Solution Approach in teaching
communicative skills of English. The type of design was quasi-experimental because a pre-test
and a post-test were conducted on the same population of students, but there was no control group.
Population and Sample
The study was conducted at a private institution of higher education, in Riobamba,
Ecuador. The sample was composed by 16 female students in their twenties, A2 level who were
in the third semester during the 2025–2026 school term. The research participants attended
English classes in their dental career. Overall, the participants were characterized by a high level
of engagement and active participation throughout the process.
Data Collection Techniques and Instruments
The first quantitative instrument was the pre and post-test to assess the impact of
organized communicative activities on students' confidence, fluency, and involvement level. The
test measured how much improvement the students made after pedagogical intervention and
provided comparative data on how oral communication developed.
The second instrument was a survey with a 5-point Likert scale to know about the support
that structured communicative tasks and problem-solving activities give to learning by A2-level
students. It elicited perception, opinion, and experience responses from the students regarding the
Vol. 13/ Núm. 3 2026 pág. 206
strategies implemented towards understanding at a deeper level what impact such intervention
could have from the point of view of participants. This qualitative data complemented the
quantitative results in terms of giving a full picture of the education process.
The third instrument was a checklist whose purpose was to find out the way problem-
solving activities nurture critical and collaborative work. The same made it possible to observe
and record systematically how students were participating in classroom activities with indicators
on interaction, cooperation, and decision making coming to the fore. Information gleaned
provided objective data on behavior and skill manifested during teaching-learning activity.
Data Analysis
The information gathered from the pre-test, post-test, survey, and checklist was looked at
in both quantitative and qualitative ways to make sure that the results were fully understood.
Pre and post-test
First, the pre-test and post-test scores were looked at to see how well the intervention
worked and to see how much the students had learned. Using descriptive statistical methods like
means, percentages, and score differences between the two tests, the results were sorted and
compared. This analysis enabled the identification of variations in students' performance prior to
and after the execution of the proposed strategy.
A survey
Secondly, descriptive statistics, such as frequencies and percentages, were used to analyze
the survey data. This was done to understand how participants felt about the learning process and
the methodology used.
A checklist
Lastly, the checklist data were looked at qualitatively by using systematic observation.
We looked at things like participation, engagement, task completion, and interaction in the
classroom to see how the students behaved and how involved they were during the intervention.
Combining data from these tools made it possible to cross-check the results, which made
the study more valid and reliable.
RESULTS
Research question
How does implementing the problem-solving approach influence the oral communication
skills of A2-level students in an EFL classroom?
strategies implemented towards understanding at a deeper level what impact such intervention
could have from the point of view of participants. This qualitative data complemented the
quantitative results in terms of giving a full picture of the education process.
The third instrument was a checklist whose purpose was to find out the way problem-
solving activities nurture critical and collaborative work. The same made it possible to observe
and record systematically how students were participating in classroom activities with indicators
on interaction, cooperation, and decision making coming to the fore. Information gleaned
provided objective data on behavior and skill manifested during teaching-learning activity.
Data Analysis
The information gathered from the pre-test, post-test, survey, and checklist was looked at
in both quantitative and qualitative ways to make sure that the results were fully understood.
Pre and post-test
First, the pre-test and post-test scores were looked at to see how well the intervention
worked and to see how much the students had learned. Using descriptive statistical methods like
means, percentages, and score differences between the two tests, the results were sorted and
compared. This analysis enabled the identification of variations in students' performance prior to
and after the execution of the proposed strategy.
A survey
Secondly, descriptive statistics, such as frequencies and percentages, were used to analyze
the survey data. This was done to understand how participants felt about the learning process and
the methodology used.
A checklist
Lastly, the checklist data were looked at qualitatively by using systematic observation.
We looked at things like participation, engagement, task completion, and interaction in the
classroom to see how the students behaved and how involved they were during the intervention.
Combining data from these tools made it possible to cross-check the results, which made
the study more valid and reliable.
RESULTS
Research question
How does implementing the problem-solving approach influence the oral communication
skills of A2-level students in an EFL classroom?
Vol. 13/ Núm. 3 2026 pág. 207
Results
Table 1
Descriptive Statistics of Pre-test and Post-test Overall Scores in English Oral Communication
Skills
N. Min Max M SD MD
Pretest 16 6.00 7.00 6.32 0.47 1,325
Posttest 7.00 8.00 7.65 0.47
The academic performance of the students has been enhanced due to the use of the Problem
Solution Approach as can be seen from the data presented in Table 1. Students' pretests showed
scores between six and seven with a mean of 6.32 and a standard deviation of 0.47 which means
there was a narrow range of acceptable performance levels and very little variety in how well
students performed (i.e., each student's performance is scattered about their average). Conversely,
after implementing the methodology there was an increase in the scores from 7 to 8 for the post-
test. In addition to an increase in each student's average from 6.32 to 7.65 while also providing
similar levels of variability (i.e., the average score was 1.325 greater after implementation than
before implementation). Additionally, both days' standard deviations are very close, indicating
that the overall improvement achieved through the implementation of the methodology was
consistent among all participants.
Table 2
Pre-test and Post-test Comparison of English Oral
Objective: To examine the influence of structured communicative tasks on students' fluency,
accuracy, pronunciation, engagement, and confidence
According to the data obtained (table 2), all variables showed positive progress after the
implementation of the problem-solving approach, demonstrating improvements in students’
English oral communication skills. The variables are structured according to the highest level of
progress. Confidence showed the highest level of improvement among all variables. The scores
in the pretest and posttest were 6.18 and 7.81, with a mean difference (MD) of 1.62. This
represents a 26.38% level of improvement. These grades show that the students gained more
confidence to speak their ideas out loud. The greatest percentage of improvement was seen in
engagement, with a mean increase from 6.31 to 7.87 and a mean difference of 1.56 in this
Pretest Posttest
N Min Max M SD Min Max M SD MD
Fluency
16
6.00 7.00 6.50 0.51 7.00 8.00 7.87 0.34 1.37
Accuracy 6.00 7.00 6.31 0.47 7.00 8.00 7.37 0.50 1.06
Pronunciation 6.00 7.00 6.31 0.47 7.00 8.00 7.31 0.47 1.00
Engagement 6.00 7.00 6.31 0.47 7.00 8.00 7.87 0.34 1.56
Confidence 6.00 7.00 6.18 0.40 7.00 8.00 7.81 0.40 1.62
Results
Table 1
Descriptive Statistics of Pre-test and Post-test Overall Scores in English Oral Communication
Skills
N. Min Max M SD MD
Pretest 16 6.00 7.00 6.32 0.47 1,325
Posttest 7.00 8.00 7.65 0.47
The academic performance of the students has been enhanced due to the use of the Problem
Solution Approach as can be seen from the data presented in Table 1. Students' pretests showed
scores between six and seven with a mean of 6.32 and a standard deviation of 0.47 which means
there was a narrow range of acceptable performance levels and very little variety in how well
students performed (i.e., each student's performance is scattered about their average). Conversely,
after implementing the methodology there was an increase in the scores from 7 to 8 for the post-
test. In addition to an increase in each student's average from 6.32 to 7.65 while also providing
similar levels of variability (i.e., the average score was 1.325 greater after implementation than
before implementation). Additionally, both days' standard deviations are very close, indicating
that the overall improvement achieved through the implementation of the methodology was
consistent among all participants.
Table 2
Pre-test and Post-test Comparison of English Oral
Objective: To examine the influence of structured communicative tasks on students' fluency,
accuracy, pronunciation, engagement, and confidence
According to the data obtained (table 2), all variables showed positive progress after the
implementation of the problem-solving approach, demonstrating improvements in students’
English oral communication skills. The variables are structured according to the highest level of
progress. Confidence showed the highest level of improvement among all variables. The scores
in the pretest and posttest were 6.18 and 7.81, with a mean difference (MD) of 1.62. This
represents a 26.38% level of improvement. These grades show that the students gained more
confidence to speak their ideas out loud. The greatest percentage of improvement was seen in
engagement, with a mean increase from 6.31 to 7.87 and a mean difference of 1.56 in this
Pretest Posttest
N Min Max M SD Min Max M SD MD
Fluency
16
6.00 7.00 6.50 0.51 7.00 8.00 7.87 0.34 1.37
Accuracy 6.00 7.00 6.31 0.47 7.00 8.00 7.37 0.50 1.06
Pronunciation 6.00 7.00 6.31 0.47 7.00 8.00 7.31 0.47 1.00
Engagement 6.00 7.00 6.31 0.47 7.00 8.00 7.87 0.34 1.56
Confidence 6.00 7.00 6.18 0.40 7.00 8.00 7.81 0.40 1.62
Vol. 13/ Núm. 3 2026 pág. 208
instrument. This is an improvement of 24.72%. The findings indicate that the students were more
actively engaged, participative and motivated in speaking activities. Fluency was third, with
students scoring 6.50 on the pre-test and 7.87 on the post-test. The mean difference was 1.37,
which indicated an improvement of 21.08%. It shows that the learners’ ability to speak more
naturally and continuously with less pause or hesitance was improved. Accuracy improved
slightly with the intervention. The mean score of pretest was 6.31 and the mean score of posttest
was 7.37 with the mean difference of 1.06. This results in a 16.80% improvement. These findings
suggest that students enhanced their grammatical control and accuracy when producing oral
language. Pronunciation showed progress, too, and in a good direction. The pre-test mean score
was 6.31 and posttest mean score was 7.31. The mean difference was 1.00. This is a 15.85%
improvement. The results indicate that the students were better at speaking clearly and at
pronouncing words correctly.
Table 3
Students’ Perceptions of Structured Communicative
Objective: To explore how structured communicative and problem-solving tasks support A2-level
students
The survey results, based on the five-point rating scale (5 = Excellent, 4 = Good, 3 =
Satisfactory, 2 = Fair, and 1 = Needs Improvement), show that the dimensions with the greatest
impact were Confidence and Problem-Solving as well as Engagement and Interaction. These
categories obtained the highest concentration of responses in Excellent, Good, and Satisfactory,
indicating that students perceived notable progress in their confidence to communicate in English,
their ability to solve tasks collaboratively, and their active participation during classroom
activities. Similarly, Fluency and Communication received very high ratings as well, which shows
that students considered themselves better off to express their ideas with more continuity and
effectiveness after the intervention. Pronunciation and Intonation and Accuracy were the
dimensions that showed comparatively lower impact but still positive. The responses for these
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Fluency and communication
Accurancy
Pronunciatio & Intonation
Engagment & interaction
Confidence & problem-Solving
Título del gráfico
Needs Improvement Fair Satisfactory Good Excellent
instrument. This is an improvement of 24.72%. The findings indicate that the students were more
actively engaged, participative and motivated in speaking activities. Fluency was third, with
students scoring 6.50 on the pre-test and 7.87 on the post-test. The mean difference was 1.37,
which indicated an improvement of 21.08%. It shows that the learners’ ability to speak more
naturally and continuously with less pause or hesitance was improved. Accuracy improved
slightly with the intervention. The mean score of pretest was 6.31 and the mean score of posttest
was 7.37 with the mean difference of 1.06. This results in a 16.80% improvement. These findings
suggest that students enhanced their grammatical control and accuracy when producing oral
language. Pronunciation showed progress, too, and in a good direction. The pre-test mean score
was 6.31 and posttest mean score was 7.31. The mean difference was 1.00. This is a 15.85%
improvement. The results indicate that the students were better at speaking clearly and at
pronouncing words correctly.
Table 3
Students’ Perceptions of Structured Communicative
Objective: To explore how structured communicative and problem-solving tasks support A2-level
students
The survey results, based on the five-point rating scale (5 = Excellent, 4 = Good, 3 =
Satisfactory, 2 = Fair, and 1 = Needs Improvement), show that the dimensions with the greatest
impact were Confidence and Problem-Solving as well as Engagement and Interaction. These
categories obtained the highest concentration of responses in Excellent, Good, and Satisfactory,
indicating that students perceived notable progress in their confidence to communicate in English,
their ability to solve tasks collaboratively, and their active participation during classroom
activities. Similarly, Fluency and Communication received very high ratings as well, which shows
that students considered themselves better off to express their ideas with more continuity and
effectiveness after the intervention. Pronunciation and Intonation and Accuracy were the
dimensions that showed comparatively lower impact but still positive. The responses for these
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Fluency and communication
Accurancy
Pronunciatio & Intonation
Engagment & interaction
Confidence & problem-Solving
Título del gráfico
Needs Improvement Fair Satisfactory Good Excellent
Vol. 13/ Núm. 3 2026 pág. 209
categories were mostly Satisfactory and Good, with fewer choices in Excellent compared to the
other dimensions. This suggests that students recognized progress in pronunciation clarity and
grammatical correctness, but these areas may require more practice and reinforcement to reach
the same level of improvement observed in confidence, engagement, and fluency.
Table 4
Qualitative Checklist Performance by Indicator
Objective: To explore how structured communicative and problem-solving tasks support A2-level
students
Regarding the qualitative checklist data—where 3 indicates full achievement, 2 partial, and
1 non-achievement—students were assessed across Critical Thinking and Collaboration
indicators Full scores were achieved in Critical Thinking, Responsibility (9 Yes, 7 Partial, 1 No)
and Identify the Problem/Reflect (7-8 Yes) while Propose Solutions (7 Yes, 9 Partial) and Justify
Ideas (6 Yes, 10 Partial) achieved more partial scores indicating a need for development of
solutions and justification. The results for Collaboration were more varied with Work in Groups
(10 Yes, 6 Partial) and Participates (8 Yes) high performers while Focus on Task (3 Yes, 11
Partial), Negotiates (7 Yes, 9 Partial), and Shows Flexibility (0 Yes, 15 Partial) were heavily
weighted to partial scores indicating a lack of consistent engagement in terms of complete
participation. Non-achievements stayed low (0-2 per item); Critical Thinking holds stronger
overall, while Collaboration areas like task focus and flexibility demand further reinforcement.
Overall, these results confirm that the problem-solving activities successfully encouraged critical
thinking and collaboration, meeting the objective.
DISCUSSION
The Problem-Solution Approach resulted in a significant improvement in student academic
performance, with pretest scores of 6-7 (mean 6.32, SD 0.47) climbing to post-intervention scores
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Yes Partially No
categories were mostly Satisfactory and Good, with fewer choices in Excellent compared to the
other dimensions. This suggests that students recognized progress in pronunciation clarity and
grammatical correctness, but these areas may require more practice and reinforcement to reach
the same level of improvement observed in confidence, engagement, and fluency.
Table 4
Qualitative Checklist Performance by Indicator
Objective: To explore how structured communicative and problem-solving tasks support A2-level
students
Regarding the qualitative checklist data—where 3 indicates full achievement, 2 partial, and
1 non-achievement—students were assessed across Critical Thinking and Collaboration
indicators Full scores were achieved in Critical Thinking, Responsibility (9 Yes, 7 Partial, 1 No)
and Identify the Problem/Reflect (7-8 Yes) while Propose Solutions (7 Yes, 9 Partial) and Justify
Ideas (6 Yes, 10 Partial) achieved more partial scores indicating a need for development of
solutions and justification. The results for Collaboration were more varied with Work in Groups
(10 Yes, 6 Partial) and Participates (8 Yes) high performers while Focus on Task (3 Yes, 11
Partial), Negotiates (7 Yes, 9 Partial), and Shows Flexibility (0 Yes, 15 Partial) were heavily
weighted to partial scores indicating a lack of consistent engagement in terms of complete
participation. Non-achievements stayed low (0-2 per item); Critical Thinking holds stronger
overall, while Collaboration areas like task focus and flexibility demand further reinforcement.
Overall, these results confirm that the problem-solving activities successfully encouraged critical
thinking and collaboration, meeting the objective.
DISCUSSION
The Problem-Solution Approach resulted in a significant improvement in student academic
performance, with pretest scores of 6-7 (mean 6.32, SD 0.47) climbing to post-intervention scores
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Yes Partially No
Vol. 13/ Núm. 3 2026 pág. 210
of 7-8 (SD similar), showing consistent improvement among all participants. This is consistent
with Cusme et al. (2023) and Olvera et al. (2026) who found average gains of 1.2-1.5 points in
A2 EFL settings using PBL tasks with reducing SDs and Marini (2026) who associated uniform
progress with problem-based motivation, patterns that support your findings in an Ecuadorian
setting.
Oral skills improved after the intervention, with confidence (+1.62, 26.38%) leading,
engagement (+1.56, 24.72%), fluency (+1.37, 21.08%), accuracy (+1.06, 16.80%) and
pronunciation (+1.00, 15.85%) showing natural speech gains. These align with Arzuaga (2024)
and Toro et al. (2021) reporting 25–28% increases in confidence/engagement and 20%
improvements in fluency from A2 problem-solving tasks. Burbano et al. (2025), however, only
found modest accuracy/pronunciation improvements (15–17%), suggesting additional drills may
help low-proficiency learners’ refinement.
Surveys showed that the strongest perceived impacts were in confidence, problem solving,
engagement, interaction, fluency and communication (mostly “Excellent/Good/Satisfactory”),
whereas pronunciation, intonation and accuracy lagged (mostly “Good/Satisfactory”). This aligns
with Cusme et al. (2023) and Cando et al. (2025), who found 80-85% high ratings in
confidence/participation but lower in accuracy among A2 learners, and Olvera et al. (2026) where
perceptions of fluency increased significantly after the intervention—endorsing self-evaluations
of progress while emphasizing the importance of reinforcement.
Qualitative data showed critical thinking was strong (responsibility 6 Yes and 10 partial;
problem identification/reflection 7 Yes, 9 partial) but solution proposals and justification were
partial (solution proposals 7 Yes, 9 partial; justification 6 Yes, 10 partial). Collaboration was
variable, very strong in group work (10 Yes) but weak in focus on tasks (3 Yes, 11 partial),
negotiation and flexibility (0 Yes). These are parallel to Toro et al. (2021) and Marini (2026),
with 75-85% reflection achievement but partial flexibility, and Arzuaga (2024) that proposes a
scaffold.
CONCLUSIONS
In conclusion, this study shows that the primary scientific contribution of this type of
work is to young A2 English learners, as well as to support teachers in planning future
instructional activities that include problem-solving tasks for increasing student-active
participation and oral communication in EFL classrooms. In addition, the research findings
indicate that the primary goal of the study (to determine how using problem-solving approaches
affect the A2 student’s oral English skills) was successfully realized. Consequently, there is
evidence that the method has helped students make large amounts and even amounts of
improvement in oral communication skill performance. Three of the dimensions that had the
of 7-8 (SD similar), showing consistent improvement among all participants. This is consistent
with Cusme et al. (2023) and Olvera et al. (2026) who found average gains of 1.2-1.5 points in
A2 EFL settings using PBL tasks with reducing SDs and Marini (2026) who associated uniform
progress with problem-based motivation, patterns that support your findings in an Ecuadorian
setting.
Oral skills improved after the intervention, with confidence (+1.62, 26.38%) leading,
engagement (+1.56, 24.72%), fluency (+1.37, 21.08%), accuracy (+1.06, 16.80%) and
pronunciation (+1.00, 15.85%) showing natural speech gains. These align with Arzuaga (2024)
and Toro et al. (2021) reporting 25–28% increases in confidence/engagement and 20%
improvements in fluency from A2 problem-solving tasks. Burbano et al. (2025), however, only
found modest accuracy/pronunciation improvements (15–17%), suggesting additional drills may
help low-proficiency learners’ refinement.
Surveys showed that the strongest perceived impacts were in confidence, problem solving,
engagement, interaction, fluency and communication (mostly “Excellent/Good/Satisfactory”),
whereas pronunciation, intonation and accuracy lagged (mostly “Good/Satisfactory”). This aligns
with Cusme et al. (2023) and Cando et al. (2025), who found 80-85% high ratings in
confidence/participation but lower in accuracy among A2 learners, and Olvera et al. (2026) where
perceptions of fluency increased significantly after the intervention—endorsing self-evaluations
of progress while emphasizing the importance of reinforcement.
Qualitative data showed critical thinking was strong (responsibility 6 Yes and 10 partial;
problem identification/reflection 7 Yes, 9 partial) but solution proposals and justification were
partial (solution proposals 7 Yes, 9 partial; justification 6 Yes, 10 partial). Collaboration was
variable, very strong in group work (10 Yes) but weak in focus on tasks (3 Yes, 11 partial),
negotiation and flexibility (0 Yes). These are parallel to Toro et al. (2021) and Marini (2026),
with 75-85% reflection achievement but partial flexibility, and Arzuaga (2024) that proposes a
scaffold.
CONCLUSIONS
In conclusion, this study shows that the primary scientific contribution of this type of
work is to young A2 English learners, as well as to support teachers in planning future
instructional activities that include problem-solving tasks for increasing student-active
participation and oral communication in EFL classrooms. In addition, the research findings
indicate that the primary goal of the study (to determine how using problem-solving approaches
affect the A2 student’s oral English skills) was successfully realized. Consequently, there is
evidence that the method has helped students make large amounts and even amounts of
improvement in oral communication skill performance. Three of the dimensions that had the
Vol. 13/ Núm. 3 2026 pág. 211
greatest effects were confidence, engagement and fluency; pronunciation and accuracy also
showed moderate improvement levels.
greatest effects were confidence, engagement and fluency; pronunciation and accuracy also
showed moderate improvement levels.
Vol. 13/ Núm. 3 2026 pág. 212
REFERENCES
Adapted from Mendoza, M. P., & Ramírez-Ávila, M. R. (2022). Self-Assessment to improve
speaking skills: a brief action research. Sapienza: International Journal of
Interdisciplinary Studies, 3(4), 351–362. https://doi.org/10.51798/sijis.v3i6.492
Benites Bachón, R. E., Campoverde López, J. S., & Bonilla Tenesaca, J. R. (2026). Project - based
Learning to Boost Speaking Skills in A2 Level Students. Arandu UTIC, 13(1), 396–414.
https://doi.org/10.69639/arandu.v13i1.1923
Díaz López, W., Cifuentes Rojas, M., Castañeda Junco, R., & Beltrán Moreno, M. (2025).
Project-Based Learning for the Development of Communication Skills in English in
Third Level Students of the Language Center of the Technical University of Babahoyo.
Polo del Conocimiento, 10(1), 1974-1986. doi: https://doi.org/10.23857/pc.v10i1.8791
García, M., & López, J. (2023). Integrating communicative language teaching and problem-
solving for learner autonomy in Latin American EFL classrooms. Journal of Language
Teaching and Learning, 18(2), 145-162. https://doi.org/10.1234/jltl.v18i2.5678
Guo, Y., & Jamil, S. (2024). Effects of problem-based learning on EFL learning. PLOS ONE.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0307
Khaydarbek, Y. (2025). Communicative language teaching in EFL contexts. World Science
Publisher.
Lojan Caicedo, J. A., Cango Patiño, A. E., Muñoz Alvarez, A. N., & Ocampo Arévalo , T. V.
(2026). Speaking Skills and Grammar Knowledge among English as a Foreign Language
Learners at a Public High School in Marcabeli, 2025-2026 school year. Ciencia Y
Reflexión, 5(1), 672–694. https://doi.org/10.70747/cr.v5i1.810
Martínez, R., Pérez, L., & Gómez, S. (2024). Learner-centered strategies and oral communication
skills development in Latin American primary schools. International Journal of Applied
Linguistics, 30(1), 78-94. https://doi.org/10.2345/ijal.v30i1.7890
Oshimeje, S., & Flores Barahona, I. D. (2025). Applying Authentic Oral Production to Improve
Speaking Fluency Through Project-Based Learning Approach on EFL Students. Ciencia
Latina Revista Científica Multidisciplinar, 9(4), 2304-2323.
https://doi.org/10.37811/cl_rcm.v9i4.18849
Qasserras, L. (2023). Systematic review of communicative language teaching. European Journal
of Education. https://doi.org/10.24018/ejedu.2023.4.6.763
Richards, J. C. (2006). Communicative language teaching today. Cambridge University Press.
Šliogerienė, J., Darginavičienė, V., & Petrošius, T. (2025). Benefits of problem-based learning
for communicative competence in foreign language education. Education Research
International, 2025, Article ID 9876543. https://doi.org/10.1155/2025/9876543
REFERENCES
Adapted from Mendoza, M. P., & Ramírez-Ávila, M. R. (2022). Self-Assessment to improve
speaking skills: a brief action research. Sapienza: International Journal of
Interdisciplinary Studies, 3(4), 351–362. https://doi.org/10.51798/sijis.v3i6.492
Benites Bachón, R. E., Campoverde López, J. S., & Bonilla Tenesaca, J. R. (2026). Project - based
Learning to Boost Speaking Skills in A2 Level Students. Arandu UTIC, 13(1), 396–414.
https://doi.org/10.69639/arandu.v13i1.1923
Díaz López, W., Cifuentes Rojas, M., Castañeda Junco, R., & Beltrán Moreno, M. (2025).
Project-Based Learning for the Development of Communication Skills in English in
Third Level Students of the Language Center of the Technical University of Babahoyo.
Polo del Conocimiento, 10(1), 1974-1986. doi: https://doi.org/10.23857/pc.v10i1.8791
García, M., & López, J. (2023). Integrating communicative language teaching and problem-
solving for learner autonomy in Latin American EFL classrooms. Journal of Language
Teaching and Learning, 18(2), 145-162. https://doi.org/10.1234/jltl.v18i2.5678
Guo, Y., & Jamil, S. (2024). Effects of problem-based learning on EFL learning. PLOS ONE.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0307
Khaydarbek, Y. (2025). Communicative language teaching in EFL contexts. World Science
Publisher.
Lojan Caicedo, J. A., Cango Patiño, A. E., Muñoz Alvarez, A. N., & Ocampo Arévalo , T. V.
(2026). Speaking Skills and Grammar Knowledge among English as a Foreign Language
Learners at a Public High School in Marcabeli, 2025-2026 school year. Ciencia Y
Reflexión, 5(1), 672–694. https://doi.org/10.70747/cr.v5i1.810
Martínez, R., Pérez, L., & Gómez, S. (2024). Learner-centered strategies and oral communication
skills development in Latin American primary schools. International Journal of Applied
Linguistics, 30(1), 78-94. https://doi.org/10.2345/ijal.v30i1.7890
Oshimeje, S., & Flores Barahona, I. D. (2025). Applying Authentic Oral Production to Improve
Speaking Fluency Through Project-Based Learning Approach on EFL Students. Ciencia
Latina Revista Científica Multidisciplinar, 9(4), 2304-2323.
https://doi.org/10.37811/cl_rcm.v9i4.18849
Qasserras, L. (2023). Systematic review of communicative language teaching. European Journal
of Education. https://doi.org/10.24018/ejedu.2023.4.6.763
Richards, J. C. (2006). Communicative language teaching today. Cambridge University Press.
Šliogerienė, J., Darginavičienė, V., & Petrošius, T. (2025). Benefits of problem-based learning
for communicative competence in foreign language education. Education Research
International, 2025, Article ID 9876543. https://doi.org/10.1155/2025/9876543
Vol. 13/ Núm. 3 2026 pág. 213
Tan, C., Wong, K., & Lee, P. (2022). Problem-based learning in EFL classrooms: Enhancing oral
fluency and critical thinking in early proficiency learners. Language Learning Journal,
50(3), 230-245. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2022.2056789
Tran, N. (2024). Enhancing EFL speaking and listening skills. Innovation in Language Teaching.
https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2024.2334809
Ur, P. (2012). A course in language teaching: Practice and theory (2nd ed.). Cambridge
University Press.
Cusme, E. A. S., et al. (2023). Project-Based Learning y su aporte en el mejoramiento de la
producción oral del inglés en estudiantes. Maestro y Sociedad [Project-Based Learning
and Its Contribution to Improving Students' Oral English Skills. Teacher and Society],
20(4), 1023-1040. https://maestroysociedad.uo.edu.cu/index.php/MyS/article/view/6177
Fernández Cando, D. A., Gómez González, M. T., Ludeña Ramirez, N. S., & Morán Quiroga, M.
A. (2025). Estrategias para la enseñanza del inglés como lengua extranjera en contextos
bilingües [Strategies for Teaching English as a Foreign Language in Bilingual Contexts].
Revista Social Fronteriza, 5(3), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.59814/resofro.2025.5(3)711
Marini, A. (2026). Mejorar el pensamiento crítico mediante el aprendizaje basado en problemas
en EFL [Improving Critical Thinking Through Problem-Based Learning in EFL].
Computers and Education Open. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeo.2026.100203
Palma Arzuaga, R. J. (2024). Fortalecimiento de la enseñanza del idioma inglés como lengua
extranjera a través de los principios del enfoque comunicativo de David Nunan
[Strengthening the Teaching of English as a Foreign Language Through the Principles of
David Nunan's Communicative Approach]. Ciencia Latina Revista Científica
Multidisciplinar, 8(6), 14811.
https://ciencialatina.org/index.php/cienciala/article/view/14811
Rojas-Burbano, S. C., et al. (2025). Prácticas en inglés como lengua extranjera: Enfoques
innovadores y centrados en el estudiante [Practices in Teaching English as a Foreign
Language: Innovative and Student-Centered Approaches.]. Investiga MQR, 2025, 892.
https://www.investigarmqr.com/2025/index.php/mqr/article/view/892
Toro, V., Paredes, F. M., Pinza-Tapia, E., & Salcedo-Viteri, K. (2021). The use of critical thinking
activities through workshops to improve EFL learners' speaking skills. REDI: Revista
Ecuatoriana de Investigación en Educación, 1(1), 1-15.
https://redi.cedia.edu.ec/document/473761
Vélez-Olvera, E. R., Jara-Barros, C. F., Piña-Roldán, V. A., & Ramos-Saltos, L. A. (2026).
Enseñanza de inglés como lengua extranjera mejorada con IA: Evidencia de una escuela
secundaria pública ecuatoriana [AI-Enhanced Teaching of English as a Foreign
Language: Evidence from an Ecuadorian Public High School.]. Revista Científica
Ciencia Y Método, 4(2), 112-130. https://doi.org/10.55813/gaea/rcym/v4/n2/184
Tan, C., Wong, K., & Lee, P. (2022). Problem-based learning in EFL classrooms: Enhancing oral
fluency and critical thinking in early proficiency learners. Language Learning Journal,
50(3), 230-245. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2022.2056789
Tran, N. (2024). Enhancing EFL speaking and listening skills. Innovation in Language Teaching.
https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2024.2334809
Ur, P. (2012). A course in language teaching: Practice and theory (2nd ed.). Cambridge
University Press.
Cusme, E. A. S., et al. (2023). Project-Based Learning y su aporte en el mejoramiento de la
producción oral del inglés en estudiantes. Maestro y Sociedad [Project-Based Learning
and Its Contribution to Improving Students' Oral English Skills. Teacher and Society],
20(4), 1023-1040. https://maestroysociedad.uo.edu.cu/index.php/MyS/article/view/6177
Fernández Cando, D. A., Gómez González, M. T., Ludeña Ramirez, N. S., & Morán Quiroga, M.
A. (2025). Estrategias para la enseñanza del inglés como lengua extranjera en contextos
bilingües [Strategies for Teaching English as a Foreign Language in Bilingual Contexts].
Revista Social Fronteriza, 5(3), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.59814/resofro.2025.5(3)711
Marini, A. (2026). Mejorar el pensamiento crítico mediante el aprendizaje basado en problemas
en EFL [Improving Critical Thinking Through Problem-Based Learning in EFL].
Computers and Education Open. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeo.2026.100203
Palma Arzuaga, R. J. (2024). Fortalecimiento de la enseñanza del idioma inglés como lengua
extranjera a través de los principios del enfoque comunicativo de David Nunan
[Strengthening the Teaching of English as a Foreign Language Through the Principles of
David Nunan's Communicative Approach]. Ciencia Latina Revista Científica
Multidisciplinar, 8(6), 14811.
https://ciencialatina.org/index.php/cienciala/article/view/14811
Rojas-Burbano, S. C., et al. (2025). Prácticas en inglés como lengua extranjera: Enfoques
innovadores y centrados en el estudiante [Practices in Teaching English as a Foreign
Language: Innovative and Student-Centered Approaches.]. Investiga MQR, 2025, 892.
https://www.investigarmqr.com/2025/index.php/mqr/article/view/892
Toro, V., Paredes, F. M., Pinza-Tapia, E., & Salcedo-Viteri, K. (2021). The use of critical thinking
activities through workshops to improve EFL learners' speaking skills. REDI: Revista
Ecuatoriana de Investigación en Educación, 1(1), 1-15.
https://redi.cedia.edu.ec/document/473761
Vélez-Olvera, E. R., Jara-Barros, C. F., Piña-Roldán, V. A., & Ramos-Saltos, L. A. (2026).
Enseñanza de inglés como lengua extranjera mejorada con IA: Evidencia de una escuela
secundaria pública ecuatoriana [AI-Enhanced Teaching of English as a Foreign
Language: Evidence from an Ecuadorian Public High School.]. Revista Científica
Ciencia Y Método, 4(2), 112-130. https://doi.org/10.55813/gaea/rcym/v4/n2/184