Vol. 12/ Núm. 3 2025 pág. 2545
https://doi.org/10.69639/arandu.v12i3.1491
Backward Design Model and Performance Tasks for
Developing Speaking Skills in A1 EFL Learners
Modelo de Diseño Inverso y tareas de desempeño para desarrollar las habilidades
orales en estudiantes A1 de inglés como lengua extranjera
Mónica Alejandra Morán Quiroga
mamoranq@ube.edu.ec
https://orcid.org/0009-0008-2449-278X
Universidad Bolivariana del Ecuador
Durán-Ecuador
Carlos Lenin Álvarez Llerena
clalvarezl@ube.edu.ec
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7263-2611
Universidad Bolivariana del Ecuador
Durán-Ecuador
Josué Reinaldo Bonilla Tenesaca
jrbonillat@ube.edu.ec
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6748-2345
Universidad Bolivariana del Ecuador
Durán-Ecuador
Diana Carolina Egas Herrera
dcegash@ube.edu.ec
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2878-0689
Universidad Bolivariana del Ecuador
Durán-Ecuador
Artículo recibido: 18 julio 2025 - Aceptado para publicación: 28 agosto 2025
Conflictos de intereses: Ninguno que declarar.
ABSTRACT
This study examined the effect of the Backward Design Model (BDM) and performance-based
tasks on improving speaking skills among A1-level English as a Foreign Language (EFL) students
at a private school in Ambato, Ecuador. An explanatory sequential mixed-methods design was
applied, combining pre- and post-test assessments, self-assessment surveys, and observation
checklists to evaluate students’ progress in fluency, pronunciation, vocabulary, grammar,
confidence, and creativity. Performance tasks were developed using the GRASPS framework and
aligned with WHERETO principles, both core components of BDM. These tools helped create
structured and purposeful learning experiences that increased students’ engagement and oral
performance. The findings showed that applying the BDM and its main components improved
students’ speaking skills, revealing greater participation, more frequent use of English, and
increased confidence while performing communicative tasks. Furthermore, students perceived the
Vol. 12/ Núm. 3 2025 pág. 2546
video-recorded role-play activities, based on the GRASPS framework, as an enjoyable and
motivating task that encouraged creativity, repeated practice, and reduced speaking anxiety. Most
of the students reported improvements in their speaking abilities and expressed a stronger
willingness to use English in class. This research supports the pedagogical value of the BDM as
a student-centered approach that promotes both linguistic development and learner autonomy. It
emphasizes the importance of designing instruction around clear objectives and integrating
meaningful, emotionally supportive activities into speaking lessons. Future studies are
encouraged to examine the long-term effects of BDM and its applicability to other language skills
and educational contexts.
Keywords: backward design model, english as a foreign language, learning objectives,
performance tasks, speaking skills
RESUMEN
Este estudio analizó el impacto del Modelo de Diseño Invertido (BDM) y de las tareas basadas
en el desempeño en el desarrollo de las habilidades orales en estudiantes de inglés como lengua
extranjera (nivel A1) de una institución privada en Ambato, Ecuador. Se empleó un diseño mixto
secuencial explicativo que incluyó evaluaciones pre y post-test, encuestas de autoevaluación y
listas de cotejo de observación para medir el progreso en fluidez, pronunciación, vocabulario,
gramática, confianza y creatividad. Las tareas se diseñaron utilizando el marco GRASPS y se
guiaron por los principios WHERETO, ambos elementos esenciales del BDM, con el fin de crear
experiencias de aprendizaje estructuradas y con propósito. Los resultados mostraron mejoras en
las habilidades orales, con un aumento notable en la participación, el uso frecuente del inglés y la
confianza al realizar actividades comunicativas. Los estudiantes describieron las dramatizaciones
grabadas en video, basadas en el marco GRASPS, como actividades agradables y motivadoras
que fomentaron la creatividad, la práctica repetida y la reducción de la ansiedad. La mayoría
reportó mejoras en su desempeño oral y mayor disposición para hablar inglés en clase. Estos
hallazgos respaldan el valor del BDM como enfoque centrado en el estudiante que promueve el
desarrollo lingüístico y la autonomía. Se resalta la importancia de planificar la enseñanza con
objetivos claros e integrar tareas significativas y emocionalmente favorables en las lecciones de
expresión oral.
Palabras clave: habilidades orales, inglés como lengua extranjera, modelo de diseño
inverso, objetivos de aprendizaje, tareas de desempeño
Todo el contenido de la Revista Científica Internacional Arandu UTIC publicado en este sitio está disponible bajo
licencia Creative Commons Atribution 4.0 International.
video-recorded role-play activities, based on the GRASPS framework, as an enjoyable and
motivating task that encouraged creativity, repeated practice, and reduced speaking anxiety. Most
of the students reported improvements in their speaking abilities and expressed a stronger
willingness to use English in class. This research supports the pedagogical value of the BDM as
a student-centered approach that promotes both linguistic development and learner autonomy. It
emphasizes the importance of designing instruction around clear objectives and integrating
meaningful, emotionally supportive activities into speaking lessons. Future studies are
encouraged to examine the long-term effects of BDM and its applicability to other language skills
and educational contexts.
Keywords: backward design model, english as a foreign language, learning objectives,
performance tasks, speaking skills
RESUMEN
Este estudio analizó el impacto del Modelo de Diseño Invertido (BDM) y de las tareas basadas
en el desempeño en el desarrollo de las habilidades orales en estudiantes de inglés como lengua
extranjera (nivel A1) de una institución privada en Ambato, Ecuador. Se empleó un diseño mixto
secuencial explicativo que incluyó evaluaciones pre y post-test, encuestas de autoevaluación y
listas de cotejo de observación para medir el progreso en fluidez, pronunciación, vocabulario,
gramática, confianza y creatividad. Las tareas se diseñaron utilizando el marco GRASPS y se
guiaron por los principios WHERETO, ambos elementos esenciales del BDM, con el fin de crear
experiencias de aprendizaje estructuradas y con propósito. Los resultados mostraron mejoras en
las habilidades orales, con un aumento notable en la participación, el uso frecuente del inglés y la
confianza al realizar actividades comunicativas. Los estudiantes describieron las dramatizaciones
grabadas en video, basadas en el marco GRASPS, como actividades agradables y motivadoras
que fomentaron la creatividad, la práctica repetida y la reducción de la ansiedad. La mayoría
reportó mejoras en su desempeño oral y mayor disposición para hablar inglés en clase. Estos
hallazgos respaldan el valor del BDM como enfoque centrado en el estudiante que promueve el
desarrollo lingüístico y la autonomía. Se resalta la importancia de planificar la enseñanza con
objetivos claros e integrar tareas significativas y emocionalmente favorables en las lecciones de
expresión oral.
Palabras clave: habilidades orales, inglés como lengua extranjera, modelo de diseño
inverso, objetivos de aprendizaje, tareas de desempeño
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. 12/ Núm. 3 2025 pág. 2547
INTRODUCTION
The ability to communicate successfully in English is essential for learners in non-English-
speaking countries like Ecuador, where the language plays a crucial role in academic,
professional, and global contexts. According to Karfa (2019), English has become a fundamental
tool for educational success and international participation. However, for EFL learners,
developing speaking skills remains a major challenge due to limited vocabulary, pronunciation
issues, weak grammar, and a lack of authentic opportunities for language use. As Suban (2021)
points out, many students avoid speaking because they fear making mistakes and often have
minimal contact in English outside their classroom.
In response to these challenges, the Ecuadorian Ministry of Education (MINEDUC)
implemented a communicative curriculum in 2016, which emphasizes oral interaction and
functional language use. Nevertheless, as noted by Rao (2019), classroom practices often were
teacher-centered and grammar-based, which limited the development of real speaking skills.
Additionally, as Acosta & Cajas (2018) observed, national assessments continue to prioritize
accuracy over communication, creating a mismatch between learning objectives and evaluation.
As a result, students become passive recipients of content, with few chances to engage in
meaningful conversations.
To address this gap, it is essential to adopt instructional models that promote
communicative competence, provide clear learning goals, and offer engaging, authentic tasks.
One such approach is the Backward Design Model (BDM), which, according to Wiggins and
McTighe (2005), involves designing instructions by first identifying desired learning goals and
then aligning assessments with activities accordingly. When combined with performance-based
tasks, the BDM can increase engagement, support language use in context, and scaffold speaking
development, particularly for students with low proficiency levels (Ziegenfuss, 2019).
This study was carried out with A1-level EFL students in a private school in Ecuador and
explored how BDM and structured performance tasks could support the development of speaking
skills. The intervention was designed following the principles of instructional alignment and
meaningful learning, incorporating the use of digital tools. According to Richards (2006),
communicative language teaching focuses on interaction as both the primary method for learning
a language and the goal of the learning process. In line with this, the tasks were designed using
the GRASPS framework of BDM to promote purposeful language use, helping students gain
confidence and express themselves more effectively.
Although various studies have analyzed BDM in higher education and teacher training
contexts, limited research has focused on its application to young learners' speaking skills in
Ecuador. This study aims to address that gap by offering empirical evidence of how BDM,
supported by performance tasks, impacts the development of oral proficiency at the A1 level. The
INTRODUCTION
The ability to communicate successfully in English is essential for learners in non-English-
speaking countries like Ecuador, where the language plays a crucial role in academic,
professional, and global contexts. According to Karfa (2019), English has become a fundamental
tool for educational success and international participation. However, for EFL learners,
developing speaking skills remains a major challenge due to limited vocabulary, pronunciation
issues, weak grammar, and a lack of authentic opportunities for language use. As Suban (2021)
points out, many students avoid speaking because they fear making mistakes and often have
minimal contact in English outside their classroom.
In response to these challenges, the Ecuadorian Ministry of Education (MINEDUC)
implemented a communicative curriculum in 2016, which emphasizes oral interaction and
functional language use. Nevertheless, as noted by Rao (2019), classroom practices often were
teacher-centered and grammar-based, which limited the development of real speaking skills.
Additionally, as Acosta & Cajas (2018) observed, national assessments continue to prioritize
accuracy over communication, creating a mismatch between learning objectives and evaluation.
As a result, students become passive recipients of content, with few chances to engage in
meaningful conversations.
To address this gap, it is essential to adopt instructional models that promote
communicative competence, provide clear learning goals, and offer engaging, authentic tasks.
One such approach is the Backward Design Model (BDM), which, according to Wiggins and
McTighe (2005), involves designing instructions by first identifying desired learning goals and
then aligning assessments with activities accordingly. When combined with performance-based
tasks, the BDM can increase engagement, support language use in context, and scaffold speaking
development, particularly for students with low proficiency levels (Ziegenfuss, 2019).
This study was carried out with A1-level EFL students in a private school in Ecuador and
explored how BDM and structured performance tasks could support the development of speaking
skills. The intervention was designed following the principles of instructional alignment and
meaningful learning, incorporating the use of digital tools. According to Richards (2006),
communicative language teaching focuses on interaction as both the primary method for learning
a language and the goal of the learning process. In line with this, the tasks were designed using
the GRASPS framework of BDM to promote purposeful language use, helping students gain
confidence and express themselves more effectively.
Although various studies have analyzed BDM in higher education and teacher training
contexts, limited research has focused on its application to young learners' speaking skills in
Ecuador. This study aims to address that gap by offering empirical evidence of how BDM,
supported by performance tasks, impacts the development of oral proficiency at the A1 level. The
Vol. 12/ Núm. 3 2025 pág. 2548
findings aimed to contribute to more effective speaking instruction and inform future pedagogical
decisions in EFL classrooms. Therefore, this research was guided by the following questions:
1. How does implementing the Backward Design Model develop A1-level students’ speaking
skills?
2. How do Backward Design-based performance tasks influence A1 students' oral
communication progress?
3. How do A1 students’ in-class speaking behaviors (e.g., frequency of voluntary
participation, use of L1 vs. English) evolve during BDM implementation?
Literature review
The Backward Design Model in EFL Instruction
The Backward Design Model (BDM) is a framework introduced by Wiggins & McTighe
(1998), which emphasizes planning instruction by starting with clearly defined learning goals. In
EFL contexts, this model helps teachers move away from memorization and grammar drills and
focus instead on communicative and performance-based outcomes (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005).
According to McTighe & Willis (2019), BDM promotes purposeful instructional planning where
each activity aligns with specific outcomes. In line with Hutchinson et al. (2002) this makes
lessons more coherent and meaningful for learners.
Ziegenfuss (2019) supported this view by stating that backward planning helps keep
instruction focused on results that can be measured, which is especially useful for skills like
speaking. In the same line, Ibrahim, (2022) described BDM as a flexible and teacher-friendly
model that supports lesson planning around clear, communicative goals.
Wilson (2023) also explained that BDM follows three main stages: (1) identifying desired
results, (2) determining acceptable evidence, and (3) planning learning experiences. This structure
helps ensure that activities and assessments stay aligned. As stated by Fox & Doherty (2012),
when used effectively, BDM can improve learning flow and prevent disorganized instruction.
Previous studies like the one by Sadik and Ergulec (2023) showed that BDM works well
in diverse classrooms, including settings with refugee or international students. Their research
found that combining BDM with real-life tasks and digital tools helped reduce student resistance
and increased active participation. This showed how BDM can support communicative teaching
by making tasks more relevant and engaging, also proved in the study of Michael & Libarkin
(2016).
Álvarez et al. (2024) applied BDM in teacher education programs to analyze their
discernment of its use in an English Skills Development course. The results demonstrated that
authentic performance tasks, especially those designed with the GRASPS model, improved
creativity, fostered learner´s autonomy skills and developed their critical thinking to manage real-
life situations, issues that are essential in modern language classrooms. This study demonstrated
findings aimed to contribute to more effective speaking instruction and inform future pedagogical
decisions in EFL classrooms. Therefore, this research was guided by the following questions:
1. How does implementing the Backward Design Model develop A1-level students’ speaking
skills?
2. How do Backward Design-based performance tasks influence A1 students' oral
communication progress?
3. How do A1 students’ in-class speaking behaviors (e.g., frequency of voluntary
participation, use of L1 vs. English) evolve during BDM implementation?
Literature review
The Backward Design Model in EFL Instruction
The Backward Design Model (BDM) is a framework introduced by Wiggins & McTighe
(1998), which emphasizes planning instruction by starting with clearly defined learning goals. In
EFL contexts, this model helps teachers move away from memorization and grammar drills and
focus instead on communicative and performance-based outcomes (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005).
According to McTighe & Willis (2019), BDM promotes purposeful instructional planning where
each activity aligns with specific outcomes. In line with Hutchinson et al. (2002) this makes
lessons more coherent and meaningful for learners.
Ziegenfuss (2019) supported this view by stating that backward planning helps keep
instruction focused on results that can be measured, which is especially useful for skills like
speaking. In the same line, Ibrahim, (2022) described BDM as a flexible and teacher-friendly
model that supports lesson planning around clear, communicative goals.
Wilson (2023) also explained that BDM follows three main stages: (1) identifying desired
results, (2) determining acceptable evidence, and (3) planning learning experiences. This structure
helps ensure that activities and assessments stay aligned. As stated by Fox & Doherty (2012),
when used effectively, BDM can improve learning flow and prevent disorganized instruction.
Previous studies like the one by Sadik and Ergulec (2023) showed that BDM works well
in diverse classrooms, including settings with refugee or international students. Their research
found that combining BDM with real-life tasks and digital tools helped reduce student resistance
and increased active participation. This showed how BDM can support communicative teaching
by making tasks more relevant and engaging, also proved in the study of Michael & Libarkin
(2016).
Álvarez et al. (2024) applied BDM in teacher education programs to analyze their
discernment of its use in an English Skills Development course. The results demonstrated that
authentic performance tasks, especially those designed with the GRASPS model, improved
creativity, fostered learner´s autonomy skills and developed their critical thinking to manage real-
life situations, issues that are essential in modern language classrooms. This study demonstrated
Vol. 12/ Núm. 3 2025 pág. 2549
that the BDM is an innovative framework which helps teachers to improve their educational
practices.
GRASPS and WHERETO: Structuring Performance Tasks
To apply the Backward Design Model (BDM) effectively in the classroom, teachers can
rely on two key planning tools: GRASPS and WHERETO, both proposed by Wiggins and
McTighe (2005). According to Dazeley et al., (2025) these tools help structure lessons in a way
that promotes real communication and supports learning outcomes.
The GRASPS framework stands for Goal, Role, Audience, Situation, Product, and
Standards. According to Wiggins and McTighe (2012) it helps teachers design authentic, real-
world tasks where students understand what they are doing, why they are doing it, and who they
are doing it for. For instance, a student might take on the role of a news reporter, create a video
interview for a teenage audience, and follow certain criteria or standards for success. This
structure gives purpose to speaking tasks and motivates learners to use the language in meaningful
ways.
On the other hand, the WHERETO framework offers guidance for sequencing learning
activities. It stands for Where and Why, Hook, Explore and Equip, Rethink and Revise, Evaluate,
Tailor, and Organize. As explained by McCreary (2022), this planning model helps teachers
create lessons that are engaging, focused, and adapted to students’ needs. It also encourages
reflection, feedback, and continuous improvement.
By combining GRASPS and WHERETO, teachers can design tasks that are goal-oriented,
creative, and student-centered. According to Sadik and Ergulec (2023), when performance tasks
are well-structured, students feel more motivated and less anxious. In this kind of environment,
they are more willing to take risks, express ideas, and participate actively.
Using these planning tools within the BDM allows educators to create a safe, dynamic
space where learners can develop speaking skills while gaining confidence and autonomy.
Speaking Skills in EFL and the Need for Communicative Approaches
Speaking is one of the most complex skills to develop in a second language. It requires
learners to express themselves spontaneously and effectively, often without much time to plan or
translate. As Rao (2019) explained, speaking involves not only knowing vocabulary and grammar
but also using them fluently in real communication. Shumway & Berrett (2004) added that the
difficulty increases when students lack strong grammatical or lexical foundations.
In many EFL classrooms, instruction still focuses more on reading and writing than on oral
communication. As stated by Rao (2019), this is partly due to standardized testing systems that
prioritize written skills, which leads teachers to adopt traditional approaches like grammar-
translation. As a result, students may perform well on paper but struggle to express themselves in
spoken English.
that the BDM is an innovative framework which helps teachers to improve their educational
practices.
GRASPS and WHERETO: Structuring Performance Tasks
To apply the Backward Design Model (BDM) effectively in the classroom, teachers can
rely on two key planning tools: GRASPS and WHERETO, both proposed by Wiggins and
McTighe (2005). According to Dazeley et al., (2025) these tools help structure lessons in a way
that promotes real communication and supports learning outcomes.
The GRASPS framework stands for Goal, Role, Audience, Situation, Product, and
Standards. According to Wiggins and McTighe (2012) it helps teachers design authentic, real-
world tasks where students understand what they are doing, why they are doing it, and who they
are doing it for. For instance, a student might take on the role of a news reporter, create a video
interview for a teenage audience, and follow certain criteria or standards for success. This
structure gives purpose to speaking tasks and motivates learners to use the language in meaningful
ways.
On the other hand, the WHERETO framework offers guidance for sequencing learning
activities. It stands for Where and Why, Hook, Explore and Equip, Rethink and Revise, Evaluate,
Tailor, and Organize. As explained by McCreary (2022), this planning model helps teachers
create lessons that are engaging, focused, and adapted to students’ needs. It also encourages
reflection, feedback, and continuous improvement.
By combining GRASPS and WHERETO, teachers can design tasks that are goal-oriented,
creative, and student-centered. According to Sadik and Ergulec (2023), when performance tasks
are well-structured, students feel more motivated and less anxious. In this kind of environment,
they are more willing to take risks, express ideas, and participate actively.
Using these planning tools within the BDM allows educators to create a safe, dynamic
space where learners can develop speaking skills while gaining confidence and autonomy.
Speaking Skills in EFL and the Need for Communicative Approaches
Speaking is one of the most complex skills to develop in a second language. It requires
learners to express themselves spontaneously and effectively, often without much time to plan or
translate. As Rao (2019) explained, speaking involves not only knowing vocabulary and grammar
but also using them fluently in real communication. Shumway & Berrett (2004) added that the
difficulty increases when students lack strong grammatical or lexical foundations.
In many EFL classrooms, instruction still focuses more on reading and writing than on oral
communication. As stated by Rao (2019), this is partly due to standardized testing systems that
prioritize written skills, which leads teachers to adopt traditional approaches like grammar-
translation. As a result, students may perform well on paper but struggle to express themselves in
spoken English.
Vol. 12/ Núm. 3 2025 pág. 2550
This challenge is especially present in Ecuador, where the classroom is often the only place
where students are exposed to English. In these contexts, it was crucial to design purposeful
speaking activities that support both fluency and confidence. Hidayat (2023) emphasizes that
incorporating speaking and listening tasks into daily lessons can help learners develop a more
balanced set of language skills and improve their overall communicative competence.
Communicative Language Teaching (CLT), as described by Richards (2006), places
interaction at the center of the learning process. However, in practice, many classrooms in
Ecuador still give more importance to grammar and writing than to speaking. This creates a gap
between the goals of the national curriculum and what happens in the classroom. As Martínez &
Vásquez (2025) pointed out, this disconnect makes it difficult for students to use English in real-
life situations.
Although the 2016 Ecuadorian curriculum emphasized communicative competence
(Ministerio de Educación del Ecuador, 2016), many students continued to show low oral
proficiency. According to Martínez & Vásquez (2025), this was because many teachers still use
teacher-centered methods and provide few opportunities for students to practice speaking. To
overcome this, it is necessary to implement strategies that focus on student participation, real
communication, and authentic language use.
Impact of BDM and Performance Tasks on Speaking Development
Integrating the BDM with performance tasks has shown significant potential to enhance
students’ speaking skills in EFL contexts. As Ziegenfuss (2020) reported, learners who engage in
communicative, real-world tasks tend to show improvement in fluency, interaction, and self-
confidence. In the Ecuadorian context, activities such as interviews, presentations, and video
recordings allow students to use the language with a real purpose, which contributes to better oral
performance (Fernández et al., 2025).
In this regard, Ibrahim, (2022) indicated that BDM supports linguistic competence and
emotional readiness to communicate for developing speaking skills, as recognized by the Comon
European Framework of Reference (Council of Europe, 2020). These authors highlighted the use
of BDM, along with its GRASPS and WHERETO components, helped align instructional goals
with effective lesson design. This model involves choosing the right materials, strategies, and
assessments that directly support students’ communicative needs. In this way, students are better
prepared to take part in meaningful speaking tasks. According to Jiang, X., et al. (2021) this
intentional approach not only reduces anxiety but also supports the development of fluency and
grammatical accuracy.
Furthermore, Sadik & Ergulec (2023) affirmed that backward planning fosters a strong
alignment between learning outcomes, classroom activities, and assessment tools. This coherence
ensured that students understood the purpose of each task and stayed focused on their
communicative goals. In this kind of learning environment, students feel more confident to
This challenge is especially present in Ecuador, where the classroom is often the only place
where students are exposed to English. In these contexts, it was crucial to design purposeful
speaking activities that support both fluency and confidence. Hidayat (2023) emphasizes that
incorporating speaking and listening tasks into daily lessons can help learners develop a more
balanced set of language skills and improve their overall communicative competence.
Communicative Language Teaching (CLT), as described by Richards (2006), places
interaction at the center of the learning process. However, in practice, many classrooms in
Ecuador still give more importance to grammar and writing than to speaking. This creates a gap
between the goals of the national curriculum and what happens in the classroom. As Martínez &
Vásquez (2025) pointed out, this disconnect makes it difficult for students to use English in real-
life situations.
Although the 2016 Ecuadorian curriculum emphasized communicative competence
(Ministerio de Educación del Ecuador, 2016), many students continued to show low oral
proficiency. According to Martínez & Vásquez (2025), this was because many teachers still use
teacher-centered methods and provide few opportunities for students to practice speaking. To
overcome this, it is necessary to implement strategies that focus on student participation, real
communication, and authentic language use.
Impact of BDM and Performance Tasks on Speaking Development
Integrating the BDM with performance tasks has shown significant potential to enhance
students’ speaking skills in EFL contexts. As Ziegenfuss (2020) reported, learners who engage in
communicative, real-world tasks tend to show improvement in fluency, interaction, and self-
confidence. In the Ecuadorian context, activities such as interviews, presentations, and video
recordings allow students to use the language with a real purpose, which contributes to better oral
performance (Fernández et al., 2025).
In this regard, Ibrahim, (2022) indicated that BDM supports linguistic competence and
emotional readiness to communicate for developing speaking skills, as recognized by the Comon
European Framework of Reference (Council of Europe, 2020). These authors highlighted the use
of BDM, along with its GRASPS and WHERETO components, helped align instructional goals
with effective lesson design. This model involves choosing the right materials, strategies, and
assessments that directly support students’ communicative needs. In this way, students are better
prepared to take part in meaningful speaking tasks. According to Jiang, X., et al. (2021) this
intentional approach not only reduces anxiety but also supports the development of fluency and
grammatical accuracy.
Furthermore, Sadik & Ergulec (2023) affirmed that backward planning fosters a strong
alignment between learning outcomes, classroom activities, and assessment tools. This coherence
ensured that students understood the purpose of each task and stayed focused on their
communicative goals. In this kind of learning environment, students feel more confident to
Vol. 12/ Núm. 3 2025 pág. 2551
participate, take risks, and express their ideas in English, especially when the tasks are designed
to be relevant and engaging.
METHODOLOGY
Research Design and Methodology
The research employed an explanatory sequential mixed-methods approach, beginning
with the collection and analysis of quantitative data and then utilizing qualitative data to provide
a deeper interpretation of the findings gathered. As Kazdin (2023) described, mixed methods
approach combines the strengths of both quantitative and qualitative strategies to provide a more
complete understanding of a research problem.
In the first phase, a structured questionnaire was used to gather quantitative data about
students' perceptions of the factors influencing their speaking development in English as a foreign
language. Then, in the qualitative phase, open-ended questions were used to explore students'
experiences in more detail and clarify trends found in the quantitative results. This integration of
both data types aligns with constructivist learning theory, which supports active learning,
scaffolding, and real-world tasks that develop critical thinking skills, principles also reflected in
Bloom’s Taxonomy (Jumaah, 2024).
To organize the process of applying the BDM in this study, the research followed a set of
clearly defined stages. Table 1 outlines each stage of the process, including the main activities
carried out and the people responsible.
Table 1
Research stages for implementing Backward Design Model (BDM) in EFL speaking instruction.
Stage Description Activities Performers
Delimitation of the
Problem
Define the problem and the
methodology to address it.
Define speaking skill
challenges and justify
BDM approach.
Classroom Observation (initial);
identification of speaking issues.
To determine BDM suitability
Researcher
Theoretical
Review
Establish framework for
BDM in EFL contexts.
To review BDM literature.
Analyze A1 speaking standards (CEFR)
To study tech-enhanced learning.
Researcher
Instrument Design
and Validation
Create and validate
assessment tools.
To design pre/post- tests rubrics
To develop student perception survey
To refine observation checklist
To validate with experts
Researcher,
experts (for
validation)
Intervention and
Data collection
Implement BDM and
gather evidence.
To administer pre-test (intro videos)
To deliver 5-week BDM lessons
To conduct observation(final)
To administer post-test (famous person
videos)
To collect surveys
Researcher
Data Analysis Evaluate BDM´s
Effectiveness
To compare pre/post-tests scores
(quantitative)
To analyze survey responses
(qualitative)
To triangulate with observation data
Researcher
participate, take risks, and express their ideas in English, especially when the tasks are designed
to be relevant and engaging.
METHODOLOGY
Research Design and Methodology
The research employed an explanatory sequential mixed-methods approach, beginning
with the collection and analysis of quantitative data and then utilizing qualitative data to provide
a deeper interpretation of the findings gathered. As Kazdin (2023) described, mixed methods
approach combines the strengths of both quantitative and qualitative strategies to provide a more
complete understanding of a research problem.
In the first phase, a structured questionnaire was used to gather quantitative data about
students' perceptions of the factors influencing their speaking development in English as a foreign
language. Then, in the qualitative phase, open-ended questions were used to explore students'
experiences in more detail and clarify trends found in the quantitative results. This integration of
both data types aligns with constructivist learning theory, which supports active learning,
scaffolding, and real-world tasks that develop critical thinking skills, principles also reflected in
Bloom’s Taxonomy (Jumaah, 2024).
To organize the process of applying the BDM in this study, the research followed a set of
clearly defined stages. Table 1 outlines each stage of the process, including the main activities
carried out and the people responsible.
Table 1
Research stages for implementing Backward Design Model (BDM) in EFL speaking instruction.
Stage Description Activities Performers
Delimitation of the
Problem
Define the problem and the
methodology to address it.
Define speaking skill
challenges and justify
BDM approach.
Classroom Observation (initial);
identification of speaking issues.
To determine BDM suitability
Researcher
Theoretical
Review
Establish framework for
BDM in EFL contexts.
To review BDM literature.
Analyze A1 speaking standards (CEFR)
To study tech-enhanced learning.
Researcher
Instrument Design
and Validation
Create and validate
assessment tools.
To design pre/post- tests rubrics
To develop student perception survey
To refine observation checklist
To validate with experts
Researcher,
experts (for
validation)
Intervention and
Data collection
Implement BDM and
gather evidence.
To administer pre-test (intro videos)
To deliver 5-week BDM lessons
To conduct observation(final)
To administer post-test (famous person
videos)
To collect surveys
Researcher
Data Analysis Evaluate BDM´s
Effectiveness
To compare pre/post-tests scores
(quantitative)
To analyze survey responses
(qualitative)
To triangulate with observation data
Researcher
Vol. 12/ Núm. 3 2025 pág. 2552
Final Report and
Conclusions
Present conclusions and
recommendations.
To synthesize findings
To prepare pedagogical
recommendations
To suggest future research directions
Researcher
Source: Author
Participants and Settings
The research was carried out at a private educational institution in Ambato, Ecuador,
involving a group of 18 seventh-grade students (10 males and 8 females) as it is showed in table
2. The participants were selected using a convenience sampling technique, which, according to
Rahman et al. (2022), refers to choosing individuals who are readily available and willing to
participate. This method is often appropriate for classroom-based research, where access to
participants is naturally limited to those enrolled in a specific class.
Table 2
Demographic information of the participants
Students name Gender English Level Age
a Grecia F A1 12
b Natalia F A1 11
c Valentina F A1 12
d Benjamin M A1 12
e Juan David M A1 12
f James M A1 12
g Jhon M A1 12
h Amelia F A1 14
i Keily F A1 12
j Daniel M A1 12
k Josafat M A1 11
l Brianna F A1 11
m Samantha F A1 12
n Juan Pablo M A1 12
o Mateo M A1 11
p Janice F A1 11
q Martín M A1 11
r Nicolás M A1 12
Source: Author
This intact group shared the same instructional environment and was available for the entire
duration of the intervention. In this context, English is taught as a foreign language through three
40-minute lessons per week. The study took place during the regular school year and integrated
seamlessly into the students’ English classes, ensuring that participation did not disrupt their
normal learning process.
Final Report and
Conclusions
Present conclusions and
recommendations.
To synthesize findings
To prepare pedagogical
recommendations
To suggest future research directions
Researcher
Source: Author
Participants and Settings
The research was carried out at a private educational institution in Ambato, Ecuador,
involving a group of 18 seventh-grade students (10 males and 8 females) as it is showed in table
2. The participants were selected using a convenience sampling technique, which, according to
Rahman et al. (2022), refers to choosing individuals who are readily available and willing to
participate. This method is often appropriate for classroom-based research, where access to
participants is naturally limited to those enrolled in a specific class.
Table 2
Demographic information of the participants
Students name Gender English Level Age
a Grecia F A1 12
b Natalia F A1 11
c Valentina F A1 12
d Benjamin M A1 12
e Juan David M A1 12
f James M A1 12
g Jhon M A1 12
h Amelia F A1 14
i Keily F A1 12
j Daniel M A1 12
k Josafat M A1 11
l Brianna F A1 11
m Samantha F A1 12
n Juan Pablo M A1 12
o Mateo M A1 11
p Janice F A1 11
q Martín M A1 11
r Nicolás M A1 12
Source: Author
This intact group shared the same instructional environment and was available for the entire
duration of the intervention. In this context, English is taught as a foreign language through three
40-minute lessons per week. The study took place during the regular school year and integrated
seamlessly into the students’ English classes, ensuring that participation did not disrupt their
normal learning process.
Vol. 12/ Núm. 3 2025 pág. 2553
Instruments
According to Wiggins & McTighe’s framework (2012), assessment aligned directly with
learning goals and authentic performance tasks. In this study, the instruments used were the
following: a pre- and post-test rubric, a student perception survey, and an observation checklist.
The rubric assessed speaking performance before and after the intervention, focusing on fluency,
pronunciation, vocabulary, grammar, confidence, and creativity. In the pre-test, students recorded
a short video introducing themselves and describing daily routines and hobbies, providing a
baseline of their oral skills. The post-test served as a culminating performance task: students role-
played as famous people in a simulated TV interview, providing personal details, describing their
routines, and discussing their hobbies. This format allowed them to apply language in a real-world
scenario while demonstrating progress in fluency, accuracy, and confidence. Both tasks were
assessed with a rubric using four performance levels: Excellent, Good, Satisfactory, and Needs
Support, ensuring comparability across stages.
The survey included six Likert-scale items and four open-ended questions to collect
students’ opinions about the learning experience with the activities based on the GRASPS
framework. The Likert-scale section asked students to rate their perceptions of progress and
engagement with the speaking performance tasks on a five-point scale, where 1 = Strongly
disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Neither agree nor disagree, 4 = Agree, and 5 = Strongly agree. This
instrument provided valuable insights into students’ confidence, fluency, vocabulary use, and
enjoyment of the activities.
The observation checklist was used during classroom sessions to track changes in students’
speaking behavior, focusing on voluntary participation, use of English over L1, confidence, and
peer interaction, all of which were based on the WHERETO guidance. Together, these tools
supported the triangulation of results with other data sources, ensuring a more reliable
understanding of the impact of the intervention.
The intervention was structured around performance tasks designed with the GRASPS
framework and guided by WHERETO principles. During five-week sessions, students engaged
in scaffolded activities that progressively built their speaking abilities. Initial sessions focused on
vocabulary activation, personal introductions, and daily routines, using interactive games, pair
work, and short video practices. As students advanced, they worked on hobbies and descriptive
language, integrating peer feedback and reflection on their pre-test videos to identify areas for
improvement. The final sessions emphasized clarity in pronunciation and confidence on camera,
culminating in the post-test role-play interview. This sequence ensured that students moved from
guided practice to independent performance, strengthening both linguistic competence and
communicative confidence through meaningful and enjoyable tasks.
The data were analyzed using a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods to
evaluate the effectiveness of the Backward Design Model in improving students’ speaking skills.
Instruments
According to Wiggins & McTighe’s framework (2012), assessment aligned directly with
learning goals and authentic performance tasks. In this study, the instruments used were the
following: a pre- and post-test rubric, a student perception survey, and an observation checklist.
The rubric assessed speaking performance before and after the intervention, focusing on fluency,
pronunciation, vocabulary, grammar, confidence, and creativity. In the pre-test, students recorded
a short video introducing themselves and describing daily routines and hobbies, providing a
baseline of their oral skills. The post-test served as a culminating performance task: students role-
played as famous people in a simulated TV interview, providing personal details, describing their
routines, and discussing their hobbies. This format allowed them to apply language in a real-world
scenario while demonstrating progress in fluency, accuracy, and confidence. Both tasks were
assessed with a rubric using four performance levels: Excellent, Good, Satisfactory, and Needs
Support, ensuring comparability across stages.
The survey included six Likert-scale items and four open-ended questions to collect
students’ opinions about the learning experience with the activities based on the GRASPS
framework. The Likert-scale section asked students to rate their perceptions of progress and
engagement with the speaking performance tasks on a five-point scale, where 1 = Strongly
disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Neither agree nor disagree, 4 = Agree, and 5 = Strongly agree. This
instrument provided valuable insights into students’ confidence, fluency, vocabulary use, and
enjoyment of the activities.
The observation checklist was used during classroom sessions to track changes in students’
speaking behavior, focusing on voluntary participation, use of English over L1, confidence, and
peer interaction, all of which were based on the WHERETO guidance. Together, these tools
supported the triangulation of results with other data sources, ensuring a more reliable
understanding of the impact of the intervention.
The intervention was structured around performance tasks designed with the GRASPS
framework and guided by WHERETO principles. During five-week sessions, students engaged
in scaffolded activities that progressively built their speaking abilities. Initial sessions focused on
vocabulary activation, personal introductions, and daily routines, using interactive games, pair
work, and short video practices. As students advanced, they worked on hobbies and descriptive
language, integrating peer feedback and reflection on their pre-test videos to identify areas for
improvement. The final sessions emphasized clarity in pronunciation and confidence on camera,
culminating in the post-test role-play interview. This sequence ensured that students moved from
guided practice to independent performance, strengthening both linguistic competence and
communicative confidence through meaningful and enjoyable tasks.
The data were analyzed using a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods to
evaluate the effectiveness of the Backward Design Model in improving students’ speaking skills.
Vol. 12/ Núm. 3 2025 pág. 2554
Quantitative data from the pre- and post-tests were processed using descriptive statistics. The
focus was on identifying changes in mean scores, score range, and standard deviation to determine
progress in fluency, pronunciation, vocabulary use, and confidence.
Qualitative data from the student surveys and observation checklists were analyzed
thematically. Open-ended responses were reviewed to identify common perceptions, while
classroom behaviors were categorized based on patterns observed during the intervention. To
enhance the validity of the findings, triangulation was applied by comparing results across the
three data sources. This allowed for a more accurate interpretation of how the BDM influenced
students’ speaking development from different perspectives.
Ethical Considerations
This study followed ethical procedures to ensure the protection and respect of all
participants, as recommended by Hasan et al. (2021). Informed consent was obtained from the
students’ parents, who were clearly informed about the purpose of the research and the voluntary
nature of their participation. Students were assured that their involvement would not affect their
academic performance. Confidentiality and anonymity were strictly maintained. No identifying
information was included in the data analysis or reporting process. The study was approved by
institutional authorities and conducted during normal class hours to avoid disruptions to the
students’ regular activities.
RESULTS
This study was guided by the following questions: 1. How does implementing the
Backward Design Model (BDM) develop A1-level students’ speaking skills? 2. How do BDM-
based performance tasks influence oral communication? 3. How do students’ in-class speaking
behaviours evolve during BDM implementation? To present the empirical results, evidence from
pre- and post-tests, observation checklists, and student self-assessments was analysed. As shown
in Table 3, students’ speaking performance improved after the intervention, with the pre-test mean
rising from 20.28 to 22.61 in the post-test. The reduction in range, variance, and standard
deviation also suggests that students’ scores became more consistent, indicating more uniform
progress across the group.
Table 3
Descriptive Statistics of Pre-Test and Post-Test Speaking Scores
Criteria Mean Sample
Maximum
Sample
Minimum Range Variance Standard
Deviation
Pre-Test 20,28 23 17 6 3,04 1,74
Post-Test 22,61 24 20 4 1,90 1,38
Note: The total number of participants was 18. The maximum possible score on each test was 24.
In addition, Table 4 displays the summarized results of the classroom observation checklist,
which tracked students’ speaking behaviours at the beginning and end of the intervention. The
Quantitative data from the pre- and post-tests were processed using descriptive statistics. The
focus was on identifying changes in mean scores, score range, and standard deviation to determine
progress in fluency, pronunciation, vocabulary use, and confidence.
Qualitative data from the student surveys and observation checklists were analyzed
thematically. Open-ended responses were reviewed to identify common perceptions, while
classroom behaviors were categorized based on patterns observed during the intervention. To
enhance the validity of the findings, triangulation was applied by comparing results across the
three data sources. This allowed for a more accurate interpretation of how the BDM influenced
students’ speaking development from different perspectives.
Ethical Considerations
This study followed ethical procedures to ensure the protection and respect of all
participants, as recommended by Hasan et al. (2021). Informed consent was obtained from the
students’ parents, who were clearly informed about the purpose of the research and the voluntary
nature of their participation. Students were assured that their involvement would not affect their
academic performance. Confidentiality and anonymity were strictly maintained. No identifying
information was included in the data analysis or reporting process. The study was approved by
institutional authorities and conducted during normal class hours to avoid disruptions to the
students’ regular activities.
RESULTS
This study was guided by the following questions: 1. How does implementing the
Backward Design Model (BDM) develop A1-level students’ speaking skills? 2. How do BDM-
based performance tasks influence oral communication? 3. How do students’ in-class speaking
behaviours evolve during BDM implementation? To present the empirical results, evidence from
pre- and post-tests, observation checklists, and student self-assessments was analysed. As shown
in Table 3, students’ speaking performance improved after the intervention, with the pre-test mean
rising from 20.28 to 22.61 in the post-test. The reduction in range, variance, and standard
deviation also suggests that students’ scores became more consistent, indicating more uniform
progress across the group.
Table 3
Descriptive Statistics of Pre-Test and Post-Test Speaking Scores
Criteria Mean Sample
Maximum
Sample
Minimum Range Variance Standard
Deviation
Pre-Test 20,28 23 17 6 3,04 1,74
Post-Test 22,61 24 20 4 1,90 1,38
Note: The total number of participants was 18. The maximum possible score on each test was 24.
In addition, Table 4 displays the summarized results of the classroom observation checklist,
which tracked students’ speaking behaviours at the beginning and end of the intervention. The
Vol. 12/ Núm. 3 2025 pág. 2555
table compared initial and final responses for five categories: voluntary participation, responses
in English, preference for English over L1, confidence, and peer interaction.
Table 4
Observation Checklist on Students’ Speaking Behaviors During Classroom Activities
Statement Before the
intervention
After the
intervention
Observed change
1. Voluntarily participates
in speaking activities
51% 71% Significant increase in
active participation
2. Responds appropriately
to teacher or peer questions
in English
55% 75% Improvement in interaction
quality
3. Speaks in English rather
than L1 during tasks
55% 72% Less use of L1; more target
language use
4. Demonstrates confidence
when speaking (e.g., eye
contact, steady voice)
45% 61% Notable improvement in
speaking confidence
5. Engages in English
interactions with classmates
during activities
55% 87% Strong increase in peer
interaction
Source: Author
As seen in Table 4, the final average between the initial and final observation checklists
indicated that students improved their speaking skills after applying the GRASP framework. The
statement “engaging in English interactions with classmates during performance tasks” showed
the greatest increase, with an improvement of almost 32%. The other four statements, including
voluntary participation in speaking activities, responding appropriately to teacher or peer
questions, speaking English rather than L1 during activities, and demonstrating confidence when
role-playing, each increased by approximately 20% from the pre-test to the post-test. These results
demonstrate that, at the end of the intervention, the BDM was effective in fostering more
consistent progress among participants.
To describe in depth the results of the pre- and post-tests, Table 5 presents a comparison
of students’ speaking performance before and after the intervention. The table illustrates the mean
scores for each criterion: fluency, pronunciation, vocabulary, grammar, confidence, and
creativity, along with the differences between the two assessments and the corresponding
performance trends.
Table 5
Results of the Pre and Post Tests
Criteria (mean) Pre-test Post-Test Difference Performance trend
Fluency 3,33 3,78 0,45 Improvement
Pronunciation 2,94 3,56 0.62 Significant Improvement
Use of Vocabulary 3,6 4,00 0.40 Improvement
Grammar 3,33 3,78 0.45 Improvement
Confidence 3,22 3,67 0.45 Improvement
Creativity 3,83 3,83 0 No change
Source: Author
table compared initial and final responses for five categories: voluntary participation, responses
in English, preference for English over L1, confidence, and peer interaction.
Table 4
Observation Checklist on Students’ Speaking Behaviors During Classroom Activities
Statement Before the
intervention
After the
intervention
Observed change
1. Voluntarily participates
in speaking activities
51% 71% Significant increase in
active participation
2. Responds appropriately
to teacher or peer questions
in English
55% 75% Improvement in interaction
quality
3. Speaks in English rather
than L1 during tasks
55% 72% Less use of L1; more target
language use
4. Demonstrates confidence
when speaking (e.g., eye
contact, steady voice)
45% 61% Notable improvement in
speaking confidence
5. Engages in English
interactions with classmates
during activities
55% 87% Strong increase in peer
interaction
Source: Author
As seen in Table 4, the final average between the initial and final observation checklists
indicated that students improved their speaking skills after applying the GRASP framework. The
statement “engaging in English interactions with classmates during performance tasks” showed
the greatest increase, with an improvement of almost 32%. The other four statements, including
voluntary participation in speaking activities, responding appropriately to teacher or peer
questions, speaking English rather than L1 during activities, and demonstrating confidence when
role-playing, each increased by approximately 20% from the pre-test to the post-test. These results
demonstrate that, at the end of the intervention, the BDM was effective in fostering more
consistent progress among participants.
To describe in depth the results of the pre- and post-tests, Table 5 presents a comparison
of students’ speaking performance before and after the intervention. The table illustrates the mean
scores for each criterion: fluency, pronunciation, vocabulary, grammar, confidence, and
creativity, along with the differences between the two assessments and the corresponding
performance trends.
Table 5
Results of the Pre and Post Tests
Criteria (mean) Pre-test Post-Test Difference Performance trend
Fluency 3,33 3,78 0,45 Improvement
Pronunciation 2,94 3,56 0.62 Significant Improvement
Use of Vocabulary 3,6 4,00 0.40 Improvement
Grammar 3,33 3,78 0.45 Improvement
Confidence 3,22 3,67 0.45 Improvement
Creativity 3,83 3,83 0 No change
Source: Author
Vol. 12/ Núm. 3 2025 pág. 2556
The data revealed students’ progress across specific sub-skills, highlighting areas of
notable improvement and those that remained stable. As shown in Table 5, pronunciation showed
the greatest improvement, increasing by 0.62 points from a pre-test mean of 2.94 to a post-test
mean of 3.56. Fluency, vocabulary use, grammar, and confidence also improved, with increases
ranging from 0.40 to 0.45 points. In contrast, creativity remained unchanged, with a mean of 3.83
in both the pre- and post-tests. This stability indicates that students were already highly creative
at the start and consistently demonstrated originality and innovative thinking throughout the
activities. Overall, the results suggest that the intervention effectively enhanced most speaking
sub-skills while maintaining students’ creative abilities.
Additionally, classroom observations supported these findings, as students spoke more
spontaneously and hesitated less during the performance activities guided by the GRASPS
framework. At the beginning of the intervention, most learners only responded when prompted;
however, by the end, many volunteered answers and engaged in short dialogues in English. For
example, Student B mentioned that they began speaking faster because the materials and activities
were directly related to the final video they had to record. Similarly, Student D noted that the
video tasks allowed her to speak more continuously without frequent pauses. These perceptions
indicate that students felt more confident and that their fluency improved through repeated,
structured practice in meaningful, goal-oriented tasks.
In the pronunciation criterion, the students improved their scores from 2.94 to 3.56,
showing significant progress. The observation checklist showed that students increasingly
articulated words clearly and corrected themselves after feedback. Common vocabulary from
daily routines (e.g., get up, take the bus, live) was pronounced with greater accuracy by the end
of the intervention. Student A mentioned repeating my sentences helped me pronounce better,
while Student F expressed that acting on camera made him care more about how the words sound.
These findings confirm that pronunciation benefited from the focused rehearsal encouraged by
the GRASPS designed video tasks.
In terms of vocabulary use, students showed a rise from 3.6 to 4.0 points. They incorporated
more topic-related expressions into their speech and relied less on Spanish to convey their
meaning. According to Table 5, the frequency of using English instead of L1 improved notably.
Student C shared, I learned new words and used them in the video, while Student G highlighted
that he liked acting because I could say new things in English. These comments reflect the impact
of the GRASPS framework, as the goal-oriented, performance tasks encouraged learners to apply
new vocabulary in meaningful contexts. Observations confirmed that students attempted to
integrate recently taught vocabulary when interacting with peers, demonstrating how
WHERETO-guided planning ensured tasks were purposeful, structured, and relevant, effectively
supporting lexical development.
The data revealed students’ progress across specific sub-skills, highlighting areas of
notable improvement and those that remained stable. As shown in Table 5, pronunciation showed
the greatest improvement, increasing by 0.62 points from a pre-test mean of 2.94 to a post-test
mean of 3.56. Fluency, vocabulary use, grammar, and confidence also improved, with increases
ranging from 0.40 to 0.45 points. In contrast, creativity remained unchanged, with a mean of 3.83
in both the pre- and post-tests. This stability indicates that students were already highly creative
at the start and consistently demonstrated originality and innovative thinking throughout the
activities. Overall, the results suggest that the intervention effectively enhanced most speaking
sub-skills while maintaining students’ creative abilities.
Additionally, classroom observations supported these findings, as students spoke more
spontaneously and hesitated less during the performance activities guided by the GRASPS
framework. At the beginning of the intervention, most learners only responded when prompted;
however, by the end, many volunteered answers and engaged in short dialogues in English. For
example, Student B mentioned that they began speaking faster because the materials and activities
were directly related to the final video they had to record. Similarly, Student D noted that the
video tasks allowed her to speak more continuously without frequent pauses. These perceptions
indicate that students felt more confident and that their fluency improved through repeated,
structured practice in meaningful, goal-oriented tasks.
In the pronunciation criterion, the students improved their scores from 2.94 to 3.56,
showing significant progress. The observation checklist showed that students increasingly
articulated words clearly and corrected themselves after feedback. Common vocabulary from
daily routines (e.g., get up, take the bus, live) was pronounced with greater accuracy by the end
of the intervention. Student A mentioned repeating my sentences helped me pronounce better,
while Student F expressed that acting on camera made him care more about how the words sound.
These findings confirm that pronunciation benefited from the focused rehearsal encouraged by
the GRASPS designed video tasks.
In terms of vocabulary use, students showed a rise from 3.6 to 4.0 points. They incorporated
more topic-related expressions into their speech and relied less on Spanish to convey their
meaning. According to Table 5, the frequency of using English instead of L1 improved notably.
Student C shared, I learned new words and used them in the video, while Student G highlighted
that he liked acting because I could say new things in English. These comments reflect the impact
of the GRASPS framework, as the goal-oriented, performance tasks encouraged learners to apply
new vocabulary in meaningful contexts. Observations confirmed that students attempted to
integrate recently taught vocabulary when interacting with peers, demonstrating how
WHERETO-guided planning ensured tasks were purposeful, structured, and relevant, effectively
supporting lexical development.
Vol. 12/ Núm. 3 2025 pág. 2557
On the other hand, grammar accuracy improved modestly, with scores increasing from
3.33 to 3.78. Although errors were still present, students showed better control of sentence
structures. The checklist indicated that responses became more coherent and aligned with
classroom instructions. For example, Student H noted, I tried to put the verbs correctly because I
knew I was recording. Student E added that feedback from the teacher helped her fix mistakes
before the video. The results suggest that scaffolded tasks, combined with opportunities for
revision and practice, support grammatical development.
The development of confidence showed a marked improvement, moving from 3.22 in the
pre-test to 3.67 in the post-test. Observations revealed that students made more eye contact, spoke
louder, and volunteered more often during class activities. Student J explained, I was nervous at
first, but the videos helped me feel less shy. Similarly, Student L said, I liked to speak because I
felt surer of myself. This indicates that performance tasks created an emotionally supportive
environment where students felt safe to take risks in English.
Another important factor was that creativity did not show a significant numerical change
(remaining at 3.83 in both pre- and post-tests). However, qualitative data revealed that students
used imaginative approaches in their video tasks, including role-playing different characters,
creating short dialogues, and adding gestures. Student K commented, I enjoyed acting as another
person because it was fun, while Student M shared, I liked recording videos with my friends.
These reflections suggest that while creativity levels were already high before the intervention,
BDM-based tasks maintained and supported this skill.
Together, Tables 3, 4, and 5 show that applying the Backward Design Model (BDM)
enhanced students’ speaking skills in multiple areas. Quantitative results confirmed
improvements across five out of six criteria, while qualitative evidence from observations and
self-assessments highlighted that video-recorded performance tasks encouraged participation,
reduced anxiety, and fostered authentic language use. The integration of WHERETO and
GRASPS principles was central in providing structured, goal-oriented activities that supported
students’ growth in speaking.
DISCUSSION
The findings of this study provided empirical evidence that the BDM can significantly
enhance the speaking performance of A1-level EFL learners. The improvement observed in
fluency, pronunciation, vocabulary, grammar, and confidence confirming the value of this
framework for communicative language instruction. These results align with Wiggins and
McTighe’s (2005) principles of backward design, which emphasize that instruction should be
structured around clear outcomes, evidence of learning, and purposeful activities.
The performance tasks designed with the GRASPS framework were essential in supporting
authentic and meaningful communication. As Wiggins and McTighe (2012) argued, GRASPS
On the other hand, grammar accuracy improved modestly, with scores increasing from
3.33 to 3.78. Although errors were still present, students showed better control of sentence
structures. The checklist indicated that responses became more coherent and aligned with
classroom instructions. For example, Student H noted, I tried to put the verbs correctly because I
knew I was recording. Student E added that feedback from the teacher helped her fix mistakes
before the video. The results suggest that scaffolded tasks, combined with opportunities for
revision and practice, support grammatical development.
The development of confidence showed a marked improvement, moving from 3.22 in the
pre-test to 3.67 in the post-test. Observations revealed that students made more eye contact, spoke
louder, and volunteered more often during class activities. Student J explained, I was nervous at
first, but the videos helped me feel less shy. Similarly, Student L said, I liked to speak because I
felt surer of myself. This indicates that performance tasks created an emotionally supportive
environment where students felt safe to take risks in English.
Another important factor was that creativity did not show a significant numerical change
(remaining at 3.83 in both pre- and post-tests). However, qualitative data revealed that students
used imaginative approaches in their video tasks, including role-playing different characters,
creating short dialogues, and adding gestures. Student K commented, I enjoyed acting as another
person because it was fun, while Student M shared, I liked recording videos with my friends.
These reflections suggest that while creativity levels were already high before the intervention,
BDM-based tasks maintained and supported this skill.
Together, Tables 3, 4, and 5 show that applying the Backward Design Model (BDM)
enhanced students’ speaking skills in multiple areas. Quantitative results confirmed
improvements across five out of six criteria, while qualitative evidence from observations and
self-assessments highlighted that video-recorded performance tasks encouraged participation,
reduced anxiety, and fostered authentic language use. The integration of WHERETO and
GRASPS principles was central in providing structured, goal-oriented activities that supported
students’ growth in speaking.
DISCUSSION
The findings of this study provided empirical evidence that the BDM can significantly
enhance the speaking performance of A1-level EFL learners. The improvement observed in
fluency, pronunciation, vocabulary, grammar, and confidence confirming the value of this
framework for communicative language instruction. These results align with Wiggins and
McTighe’s (2005) principles of backward design, which emphasize that instruction should be
structured around clear outcomes, evidence of learning, and purposeful activities.
The performance tasks designed with the GRASPS framework were essential in supporting
authentic and meaningful communication. As Wiggins and McTighe (2012) argued, GRASPS
Vol. 12/ Núm. 3 2025 pág. 2558
situates learning within real-world contexts, motivating learners to take on roles, address
audiences, and produce tangible outcomes. In this study, role-play and video recording activities
encouraged students to act creatively, and refine pronunciation, which directly supported their
oral performance. Similarly, the sequencing of lessons under the WHERETO framework
provided structured opportunities for rehearsal, revision, and evaluation, echoing McCreary’s
(2022) assertion that WHERETO fosters engagement and promotes reflection. The combination
of these two planning tools, like the study of Fazekas et al. (2020) created a low-anxiety
environment where students were able to practice and demonstrate growth in their speaking
abilities.
Another important contribution of this study is the confirmation of the motivational value
of performance-based tasks. Students reported that video-recorded activities reduced speaking
anxiety and encouraged greater participation, findings that resonate with Krashen’s (1982)
affective filter hypothesis. In addition, self-assessment surveys highlighted that student perceived
gains in fluency, vocabulary, and confidence, supporting Sadik & Ergulec’s (2023) claim that
backward planning fosters alignment between learning outcomes and assessments, increasing
student engagement.
The results also emphasized the broader importance of EFL learning. English is recognized
as a key skill that opens opportunities for education, employment, and international collaboration
(Karfa, 2019). As Rao (2019) pointed out, speaking is particularly critical because it enables
learners to communicate effectively in academic and professional contexts. By enhancing oral
skills, the BDM approach directly contributes to learners’ ability to access global opportunities
and adapt to diverse communicative situations.
While BDM has been extensively studied in contexts such as higher education, teacher
training, or international classrooms (Sadik & Ergulec, 2023; Álvarez et al., 2024), its application
in Latin American schools has been limited. Most empirical research on BDM has been conducted
abroad, leaving a gap in understanding how the model functions in local EFL contexts. This study
addresses that gap by demonstrating how BDM, supported by GRASPS and WHERETO, can be
effectively adapted for A1-level learners in Ecuador. These findings contribute to the regional
discussion on innovative pedagogical models and highlight the need for further research across
Latin America.
In summary, the results of this study confirmed the pedagogical value of the BDM as a
framework that fosters both linguistic and affective development in EFL learners. By aligning
instruction with clearly defined outcomes and embedding performance tasks that are engaging,
authentic, and student-centered, teachers can help students overcome communicative barriers,
reduce anxiety, and develop the oral skills necessary to thrive in academic and professional
domains.
situates learning within real-world contexts, motivating learners to take on roles, address
audiences, and produce tangible outcomes. In this study, role-play and video recording activities
encouraged students to act creatively, and refine pronunciation, which directly supported their
oral performance. Similarly, the sequencing of lessons under the WHERETO framework
provided structured opportunities for rehearsal, revision, and evaluation, echoing McCreary’s
(2022) assertion that WHERETO fosters engagement and promotes reflection. The combination
of these two planning tools, like the study of Fazekas et al. (2020) created a low-anxiety
environment where students were able to practice and demonstrate growth in their speaking
abilities.
Another important contribution of this study is the confirmation of the motivational value
of performance-based tasks. Students reported that video-recorded activities reduced speaking
anxiety and encouraged greater participation, findings that resonate with Krashen’s (1982)
affective filter hypothesis. In addition, self-assessment surveys highlighted that student perceived
gains in fluency, vocabulary, and confidence, supporting Sadik & Ergulec’s (2023) claim that
backward planning fosters alignment between learning outcomes and assessments, increasing
student engagement.
The results also emphasized the broader importance of EFL learning. English is recognized
as a key skill that opens opportunities for education, employment, and international collaboration
(Karfa, 2019). As Rao (2019) pointed out, speaking is particularly critical because it enables
learners to communicate effectively in academic and professional contexts. By enhancing oral
skills, the BDM approach directly contributes to learners’ ability to access global opportunities
and adapt to diverse communicative situations.
While BDM has been extensively studied in contexts such as higher education, teacher
training, or international classrooms (Sadik & Ergulec, 2023; Álvarez et al., 2024), its application
in Latin American schools has been limited. Most empirical research on BDM has been conducted
abroad, leaving a gap in understanding how the model functions in local EFL contexts. This study
addresses that gap by demonstrating how BDM, supported by GRASPS and WHERETO, can be
effectively adapted for A1-level learners in Ecuador. These findings contribute to the regional
discussion on innovative pedagogical models and highlight the need for further research across
Latin America.
In summary, the results of this study confirmed the pedagogical value of the BDM as a
framework that fosters both linguistic and affective development in EFL learners. By aligning
instruction with clearly defined outcomes and embedding performance tasks that are engaging,
authentic, and student-centered, teachers can help students overcome communicative barriers,
reduce anxiety, and develop the oral skills necessary to thrive in academic and professional
domains.
Vol. 12/ Núm. 3 2025 pág. 2559
CONCLUSIONS
This research demonstrated that the BDM is an effective and structured framework for
enhancing the speaking skills of A1-level EFL learners. By designing lessons around clear
communicative goals and using performance-based tasks supported by the GRASPS framework
and WHERETO principles, students showed notable improvement in fluency, pronunciation,
vocabulary, grammar, and confidence. Performance tasks created with the GRASPS framework
provided meaningful contexts for students to practice speaking and promoting active
participation. At the same time, the WHERETO framework ensured that lessons were carefully
planned, varied, and aligned with learning objectives, which increased motivation and helped
students see the relevance of each activity.
Quantitative results revealed significant gains in pre- and post-test scores, particularly in
pronunciation. Creativity remained stable throughout the intervention, reflecting that students
were already highly creative and consistently demonstrated originality in the performance tasks.
Classroom observations supported these findings, showing that learners spoke more
spontaneously, hesitated less, and volunteered answers more frequently. Students engaged
consistently in English interactions and interacted more with their peers, which highlighted the
effectiveness of structured, goal-oriented activities in supporting oral development.
Students’ perceptions also confirmed the positive impact of the intervention. Many of them
reported feeling more confident and motivated during performance tasks, that allowed them to
practice speaking in a creative environment. Learners indicated that these tasks helped them speak
more continuously and connect the activities to the outcome, fostering fluency and self-assurance.
These results illustrated that combining goal-oriented instruction, scaffolded practice, and
authentic speaking activities is an effective strategy for developing oral skills in early language
learners.
Based on the findings, it is recommended that EFL teachers and curriculum designers
incorporate the BDM to ensure alignment between goals, assessments, and learning activities.
Performance tasks, particularly those involving video-based role plays, should be used to make
speaking practice meaningful, engaging, and student-centered. A low-stress environment should
be promoted, allowing students to express themselves creatively. Regular opportunities for
speaking should be provided, emphasizing fluency and communication over grammar. Teachers
should also adopt reflective practices, adjusting lessons according to students’ responses and
observed behaviours. Future studies in Ecuador could explore the long-term effects of BDM on
speaking fluency and examine its impact on other language skills or contexts. Limitations of this
study include the focus on a specific group of A1-level students, which may restrict the
generalizability of the results, suggesting the need for broader investigations with diverse
proficiency levels.
CONCLUSIONS
This research demonstrated that the BDM is an effective and structured framework for
enhancing the speaking skills of A1-level EFL learners. By designing lessons around clear
communicative goals and using performance-based tasks supported by the GRASPS framework
and WHERETO principles, students showed notable improvement in fluency, pronunciation,
vocabulary, grammar, and confidence. Performance tasks created with the GRASPS framework
provided meaningful contexts for students to practice speaking and promoting active
participation. At the same time, the WHERETO framework ensured that lessons were carefully
planned, varied, and aligned with learning objectives, which increased motivation and helped
students see the relevance of each activity.
Quantitative results revealed significant gains in pre- and post-test scores, particularly in
pronunciation. Creativity remained stable throughout the intervention, reflecting that students
were already highly creative and consistently demonstrated originality in the performance tasks.
Classroom observations supported these findings, showing that learners spoke more
spontaneously, hesitated less, and volunteered answers more frequently. Students engaged
consistently in English interactions and interacted more with their peers, which highlighted the
effectiveness of structured, goal-oriented activities in supporting oral development.
Students’ perceptions also confirmed the positive impact of the intervention. Many of them
reported feeling more confident and motivated during performance tasks, that allowed them to
practice speaking in a creative environment. Learners indicated that these tasks helped them speak
more continuously and connect the activities to the outcome, fostering fluency and self-assurance.
These results illustrated that combining goal-oriented instruction, scaffolded practice, and
authentic speaking activities is an effective strategy for developing oral skills in early language
learners.
Based on the findings, it is recommended that EFL teachers and curriculum designers
incorporate the BDM to ensure alignment between goals, assessments, and learning activities.
Performance tasks, particularly those involving video-based role plays, should be used to make
speaking practice meaningful, engaging, and student-centered. A low-stress environment should
be promoted, allowing students to express themselves creatively. Regular opportunities for
speaking should be provided, emphasizing fluency and communication over grammar. Teachers
should also adopt reflective practices, adjusting lessons according to students’ responses and
observed behaviours. Future studies in Ecuador could explore the long-term effects of BDM on
speaking fluency and examine its impact on other language skills or contexts. Limitations of this
study include the focus on a specific group of A1-level students, which may restrict the
generalizability of the results, suggesting the need for broader investigations with diverse
proficiency levels.
Vol. 12/ Núm. 3 2025 pág. 2560
REFERENCES
Acosta, H., & Cajas, D. (2018). Analysis of teaching resources used in EFL classes in selected
Ecuadorian universities. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 8(1), 100-109.
https://doi.org/10.17509/ijal.v8i1.11469
Álvarez, C., Mirnic, B., Coutinho, J., & Pineda, T. (2024). Backward design and authentic
performance tasks to foster English skills: Perspectives of Hungarian teacher candidates.
Journal of Pedagogical Research, 8(3), 98-112. https://doi.org/10.33902/JPR.202427891
Brown, G. & Yule, G. (1983). Teaching the Spoken Language. Cambridge University Press.
Council of Europe. (2020). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages:
Learning, teaching, assessment – Companion volume. Council of Europe Publishing.
https://www.coe.int/en/web/common-european-framework-reference-languages
Dazeley, R., Goriss‑Hunter, A., Meredith, G., Sellings, P., Firmin, S., Burke, J., & Panther, B.
(2025). Agile backward design: A framework for planning higher education curriculum.
The Australian Educational Researcher, 52(5), 1489–1508.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-024-00772-7
Fazekas, J., Jessop, A., Pine, J., & Rowland, C. (2020). Do children learn from their prediction
mistakes? A registered report evaluating error-based theories of language acquisition:
Prediction based language acquisition. Royal Society Open Science, 7(11).
https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.180877
Fernández, D., Gómez, M., Ludeña, N. & Morán, M. (2025). Estrategias para la enseñanza del
inglés como lengua extranjera en contextos bilingües. Revista Social Fronteriza, 5(3), 1–
22. https://doi.org/10.59814/resofro.2025.5(3)711
Fox, B., & Doherty, J. (2012). Design to learn, learn to design: Using backward design for
information literacy instruction. Communications in Information Literacy, 5(2), 144–155.
https://doi.org/10.15760/comminfolit.2012.5.2.109
Hasan, N., Rana, R., Chowdhury, S., Dola, A., & Khan, M. (2021). Ethical Considerations in
Research. Journal of Nursing Research, Patient Safety and Practice, 1(01), 1–4.
Hidayat, A. (2023). Developing speaking skills through role play activities. Prima Magistral:
Journal Ilmiah Kependidikan, 4(3), 305-311. https://doi.org/10.37478/jpm.v4i3.2815
Hutchinson, S., Moon, B., & Shelton Mayes, A. (Eds.). (2002). Teaching, learning and the
curriculum in secondary schools: A reader. Routledge.
Ibrahim, H. B. (2022). Implementing Backward Design to foster intercultural communicative
competence in textbook-based curricula: A proposed framework for English language
practitioners. Intercultural Communication Education, 5(1), 1-16.
https://doi.org/10.29140/ice.v5n1.638
REFERENCES
Acosta, H., & Cajas, D. (2018). Analysis of teaching resources used in EFL classes in selected
Ecuadorian universities. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 8(1), 100-109.
https://doi.org/10.17509/ijal.v8i1.11469
Álvarez, C., Mirnic, B., Coutinho, J., & Pineda, T. (2024). Backward design and authentic
performance tasks to foster English skills: Perspectives of Hungarian teacher candidates.
Journal of Pedagogical Research, 8(3), 98-112. https://doi.org/10.33902/JPR.202427891
Brown, G. & Yule, G. (1983). Teaching the Spoken Language. Cambridge University Press.
Council of Europe. (2020). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages:
Learning, teaching, assessment – Companion volume. Council of Europe Publishing.
https://www.coe.int/en/web/common-european-framework-reference-languages
Dazeley, R., Goriss‑Hunter, A., Meredith, G., Sellings, P., Firmin, S., Burke, J., & Panther, B.
(2025). Agile backward design: A framework for planning higher education curriculum.
The Australian Educational Researcher, 52(5), 1489–1508.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-024-00772-7
Fazekas, J., Jessop, A., Pine, J., & Rowland, C. (2020). Do children learn from their prediction
mistakes? A registered report evaluating error-based theories of language acquisition:
Prediction based language acquisition. Royal Society Open Science, 7(11).
https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.180877
Fernández, D., Gómez, M., Ludeña, N. & Morán, M. (2025). Estrategias para la enseñanza del
inglés como lengua extranjera en contextos bilingües. Revista Social Fronteriza, 5(3), 1–
22. https://doi.org/10.59814/resofro.2025.5(3)711
Fox, B., & Doherty, J. (2012). Design to learn, learn to design: Using backward design for
information literacy instruction. Communications in Information Literacy, 5(2), 144–155.
https://doi.org/10.15760/comminfolit.2012.5.2.109
Hasan, N., Rana, R., Chowdhury, S., Dola, A., & Khan, M. (2021). Ethical Considerations in
Research. Journal of Nursing Research, Patient Safety and Practice, 1(01), 1–4.
Hidayat, A. (2023). Developing speaking skills through role play activities. Prima Magistral:
Journal Ilmiah Kependidikan, 4(3), 305-311. https://doi.org/10.37478/jpm.v4i3.2815
Hutchinson, S., Moon, B., & Shelton Mayes, A. (Eds.). (2002). Teaching, learning and the
curriculum in secondary schools: A reader. Routledge.
Ibrahim, H. B. (2022). Implementing Backward Design to foster intercultural communicative
competence in textbook-based curricula: A proposed framework for English language
practitioners. Intercultural Communication Education, 5(1), 1-16.
https://doi.org/10.29140/ice.v5n1.638
Vol. 12/ Núm. 3 2025 pág. 2561
Jiang, X., Li, F. & Wang, C. (2021). English Teachers´ Perceptions of their professional
development: A mixed-methods study. International Journal of TESOL studies,3 (1), 28-
42. https://doi.org/10.46451/ijts.2021.01.03
Jumaah, F. (2024). Exploring constructivist learning theory and its applications in teaching
English. The American Journal of Social Science and Education Innovations, 6(8), 7–19.
https://doi.org/10.37547/tajssei/Volume06Issue08-02
Karfa, A. (2019). The Communicative Orientation of English Language Teaching Classrooms in
Moroccan Secondary Schools. English Language Teaching, 12(11), 97.
https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v12n11p97
Kazdin, A. (2023). Qualitative and mixed-methods research. In Research design in clinical
psychology (pp. 321–355). Cambridge University Press.
Krashen, S. (1982). Principle and practice in second language acquisition. Pergamon Press.
Martínez, F., & Vásquez, F. (2025). English proficiency tests in assessing university students
speaking skills (Bachelor's thesis, La Libertad, Universidad Estatal Peninsula de Santa
Elena, 2025).
McCreary, M., (2022). Beyond Backward Design, or, by the end of this article, you should be
able to imagine some alternatives to learning objectives. To improve the Academy: A
Journal of Educational Development, 41(1). https://doi.org/10.3998/tia.454
Michael, N., & Libarkin, J. (2016). Understanding by design: Mentored implementation of
Backward Design methodology at the university level. Bioscene: Journal of College
Biology Teaching, 42(2), 44–52.
MINEDUC. (2016). English Language curriculum: Subnivel Elemental.
https://educacion.gob.ec/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2019/09/EGB-Eelemental.pdf
McTighe, J., & Willis, J. (2019). Upgrade your teaching: Understanding by Design meets
neuroscience. ASCD.
Rahman, M., Tabash, M., Salamzadeh, A., Abduli, S., & Rahaman, M. (2022). Sampling
techniques (probability) for quantitative social science researchers: a conceptual guideline
with examples. Seeu Review, 17(1), 42-51.
Rao, P. (2019). The importance of speaking skills in English classrooms. Alford Council of
International English & Literature Journal (ACIELJ), 2(2), 6–18.
https://www.acielj.com/article/the-importance-of-speaking-skills-in-english-classrooms
Richards, J. (2006). Communicative Language Teaching Paradigm. Cambridge University Press.
Sadik, O., Ergulec, F. (2023). Using Backward Design for Flipped Learning Environments. In J.
M. Spector, B. B. Lockee, & M. D. Childress (Eds.), Learning, design, and technology (pp.
2543-2562), Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17461-7_183
Jiang, X., Li, F. & Wang, C. (2021). English Teachers´ Perceptions of their professional
development: A mixed-methods study. International Journal of TESOL studies,3 (1), 28-
42. https://doi.org/10.46451/ijts.2021.01.03
Jumaah, F. (2024). Exploring constructivist learning theory and its applications in teaching
English. The American Journal of Social Science and Education Innovations, 6(8), 7–19.
https://doi.org/10.37547/tajssei/Volume06Issue08-02
Karfa, A. (2019). The Communicative Orientation of English Language Teaching Classrooms in
Moroccan Secondary Schools. English Language Teaching, 12(11), 97.
https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v12n11p97
Kazdin, A. (2023). Qualitative and mixed-methods research. In Research design in clinical
psychology (pp. 321–355). Cambridge University Press.
Krashen, S. (1982). Principle and practice in second language acquisition. Pergamon Press.
Martínez, F., & Vásquez, F. (2025). English proficiency tests in assessing university students
speaking skills (Bachelor's thesis, La Libertad, Universidad Estatal Peninsula de Santa
Elena, 2025).
McCreary, M., (2022). Beyond Backward Design, or, by the end of this article, you should be
able to imagine some alternatives to learning objectives. To improve the Academy: A
Journal of Educational Development, 41(1). https://doi.org/10.3998/tia.454
Michael, N., & Libarkin, J. (2016). Understanding by design: Mentored implementation of
Backward Design methodology at the university level. Bioscene: Journal of College
Biology Teaching, 42(2), 44–52.
MINEDUC. (2016). English Language curriculum: Subnivel Elemental.
https://educacion.gob.ec/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2019/09/EGB-Eelemental.pdf
McTighe, J., & Willis, J. (2019). Upgrade your teaching: Understanding by Design meets
neuroscience. ASCD.
Rahman, M., Tabash, M., Salamzadeh, A., Abduli, S., & Rahaman, M. (2022). Sampling
techniques (probability) for quantitative social science researchers: a conceptual guideline
with examples. Seeu Review, 17(1), 42-51.
Rao, P. (2019). The importance of speaking skills in English classrooms. Alford Council of
International English & Literature Journal (ACIELJ), 2(2), 6–18.
https://www.acielj.com/article/the-importance-of-speaking-skills-in-english-classrooms
Richards, J. (2006). Communicative Language Teaching Paradigm. Cambridge University Press.
Sadik, O., Ergulec, F. (2023). Using Backward Design for Flipped Learning Environments. In J.
M. Spector, B. B. Lockee, & M. D. Childress (Eds.), Learning, design, and technology (pp.
2543-2562), Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17461-7_183
Vol. 12/ Núm. 3 2025 pág. 2562
Shumway, S., & Berrett, J. (2004). Standards-based curriculum development for pre-service and
in-service: A “partnering” approach using modified backwards design. The Technology
Teacher, 64(3), 26–29.
https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1060&context=ncete_publica
tions
Suban, T. (2021). Teaching Speaking: Activities to promote speaking skills in EFL Classrooms.
Journal of Language and Language Teaching, 1(1), 41–50.
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (1998). Understanding by Design. Association for Supervision and
Curriculum Development.
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by Design. Association for Supervision and
Curriculum Development.
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2012). The Understanding by Design guide to advanced concepts
in creating and reviewing units. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Wilson, J. (2023). Using backward design to create a more diverse, equitable, and inclusive
principles course. The Journal of Economic Education, 54(4), 440–452.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00220485.2023.2243910
Ziegenfuss, D., (2019). Information Literacy and Instruction: Backward design: A Must-Have
Library Instructional Design Strategy for your pedagogical and teaching toolbox. Reference
& User Services Quarterly 59(2), 107–112. https://doi.org/10.5860/rusq.59.2.7275
Shumway, S., & Berrett, J. (2004). Standards-based curriculum development for pre-service and
in-service: A “partnering” approach using modified backwards design. The Technology
Teacher, 64(3), 26–29.
https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1060&context=ncete_publica
tions
Suban, T. (2021). Teaching Speaking: Activities to promote speaking skills in EFL Classrooms.
Journal of Language and Language Teaching, 1(1), 41–50.
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (1998). Understanding by Design. Association for Supervision and
Curriculum Development.
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by Design. Association for Supervision and
Curriculum Development.
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2012). The Understanding by Design guide to advanced concepts
in creating and reviewing units. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Wilson, J. (2023). Using backward design to create a more diverse, equitable, and inclusive
principles course. The Journal of Economic Education, 54(4), 440–452.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00220485.2023.2243910
Ziegenfuss, D., (2019). Information Literacy and Instruction: Backward design: A Must-Have
Library Instructional Design Strategy for your pedagogical and teaching toolbox. Reference
& User Services Quarterly 59(2), 107–112. https://doi.org/10.5860/rusq.59.2.7275