Abstract:
English has achieved the status of most learned and studied language in the world. In Bangladesh, English is taught as a subject from primary to higher secondary level and the objective of the curriculum in secondary level is to develop learners’ communicative competence. Among the four skills (speaking, listening, reading and writing), speaking is one of the most fundamental skills for achieving communicative competence. The development of learners’ speaking skill is influenced by several factors. This study aims at finding out the institutional, socio-economic, affective and linguistic factors that impact the development of speaking skill at the SSC level in Bangladesh. Besides, it makes a comparative analysis between rural and urban students’ performance in speaking English as well as determines the reasons behind the difference in speaking performance. The study was conducted in mixed method approach by following convergent parallel design. The data were collected from 10 ELT classroom, 200 students and 20 teachers of secondary schools in Noakhali district and Dhaka city. Both qualitative and quantitative data were collected using questionnaires, speaking test, semi-structured interview and classroom observation checklist. The quantitative data was analyzed by using Microsoft Excel, SPSS 25 Version, and AMOS 26. Besides, simple statistics like frequency, mean, and percentage have been employed throughout the study. The qualitative data was analyzed using both content analysis and thematic analysis approach. The findings from the data analysis reveal that though socio-economic, affective and linguistic factors have influence in the development of speaking skill, institutional factors play the most influential role in developing learners’ English speaking skill at the SSC level in Bangladesh. Besides, the findings also affirm that the urban students do better than the rural ones in speaking performance. The main reasons of the difference between rural and urban students’ speaking performance are differences in teachers' qualification, training, and English language proficiency; learners' own linguistic knowledge and psychological issues; parents' education and income; and institutional facilities. The study concludes with some recommendations for the teachers, students, administrators and parents considering the findings of the study and some suggestions for further studies based on the limitations and findings of the study.
