Developing Strategic Competence through Multimodal Strategy-Focused Instruction in EFL Speaking Classrooms

Authors

Feng Hongtu

Language Academy, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Johor Bahru (Malaysia)

Nur Salwa Binti Abd. Wahid

Language Academy, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Johor Bahru (Malaysia)

Gao Ying

School of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Yulin University, Yulin (China)

Article Information

DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS.2026.100800523

Subject Category: Education

Volume/Issue: 10/8 | Page No: 8010-8027

Publication Timeline

Submitted: 2026-08-24

Accepted: 2026-08-29

Published: 2026-09-10

Abstract

Strategic competence enables EFL learners to sustain spoken communication when linguistic resources are insufficient, yet it remains unclear whether multimodal strategy-focused instruction offers benefits beyond conventional explicit communication strategy instruction. This study examined the effects of multimodal strategy-focused instruction on communication strategy use among Chinese first-year English majors and explored learners’ perceptions of the instructional approach. A sequential mixed-methods design was employed. The final sample comprised 30 students: the experimental group (EG; n = 16) and the control group (CG; n = 14). Over eight weeks, both groups received explicit instruction in the same eight communication strategies; the EG received systematic multimodal support through visual, auditory, linguistic, and gestural resources, whereas the CG received conventional strategy instruction. Communication strategy use was assessed through pre- and post-test speaking tasks and analysed using descriptive statistics, paired-samples t-tests, independent-samples t-tests, and Cohen’s d. Semi-structured interviews with eight EG participants were analysed thematically. Significant increases in fillers and hesitation devices and self-initiated repair were found in both groups. At post-test, the EG showed significantly higher use of circumlocution, meaning negotiation strategies, approximation, and non-linguistic means, while no significant between-group differences were found for fillers and hesitation devices, self-initiated repair, restructuring, or comprehension checks. Interview findings indicated that learners generally perceived multimodal strategy-focused instruction as engaging, cognitively supportive, and conducive to contextualised communication, while also identifying linguistic, affective, and practice-related constraints. Overall, the findings suggest that explicit strategy instruction can support strategic development under both instructional conditions, while systematic multimodal integration may provide additional benefits for strategies involving flexible meaning construction, interaction, and embodied communication.

Keywords

strategic competence, communication strategies, multimodal strategy-focused instruction, EFL speaking

Downloads

References

1. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1(1), 1–47. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/I.1.1 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Caprario, M. (2025). ELF communication strategies: A pedagogical intervention pilot study. TESOL Quarterly, 59(1), 359–377. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.3309 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Celce-Murcia, M., Dörnyei, Z., & Thurrell, S. (1995). Communicative competence: A pedagogically motivated model with content specifications. Issues in Applied Linguistics, 6(2), 5–35. https://doi.org/10.5070/L462005216 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Chen, W.-C. (2025). Verbal-visual skill-building and perceptional changes in English presentation. English for Specific Purposes, 77, 71–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2024.10.002 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Dörnyei, Z., & Scott, M. L. (1997). Communication strategies in a second language: Definitions and taxonomies. Language Learning, 47(1), 173–210. https://doi.org/10.1111/0023-8333.51997005 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Kress, G. (2010). Multimodality: A social semiotic approach to contemporary communication. Routledge. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Lee, S. S., & Azman, H. (2022). Introducing a responsive multimodal oral presentation pedagogy: Integrating TED videos with Web 2.0, collaborative learning and teacher feedback. RELC Journal, 53(3), 703–711. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688220945426 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Mei, A., & Nathalang, S. S. (2010). Use of communication strategies by Chinese EFL learners. Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics, 33(3), 110–125. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Milliner, B., & Dimoski, B. (2024). The effects of communication strategy training on speaking task performance. RELC Journal, 55(2), 344–363. https://doi.org/10.1177/00336882221085781 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Nakatani, Y. (2010). Identifying strategies that facilitate EFL learners’ oral communication: A classroom study using multiple data collection procedures. The Modern Language Journal, 94(1), 116–136. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2009.00987.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Peker, B. G., & Erdemir, N. (2021). Does compensation strategy instruction work? An action research study. ELT Journal, 75(3), 351–361. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccaa073 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Pu, P., & Chang, D. Y.-S. (2025). Effects of different input modes on blended EFL speaking instruction: A quasi-experimental study. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 38(5–6), 1223–1248. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2023.2273853 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Rahmanu, I. W. E. D., & Molnár, G. (2024). Multimodal immersion in English language learning in higher education: A systematic review. Heliyon, 10(19), e38357. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e38357 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Wang, J., Gao, Y., & Cui, Y. (2023). Classroom gesture instruction on second language learners’ academic presentations: Evidence from Chinese intermediate English learners. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 66, 101304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2023.101304 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Wang, Y., & Soo, R. S. (2024). Identifying Chinese college EFL students’ needs for an oral communication instruction module. Asian Journal of University Education, 20(3), 598–611. https://doi.org/10.24191/ajue.v20i3.27860 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

Metrics

Views & Downloads

Similar Articles