Linguistic and Sociolinguistic Competence of Senior High

School Students
Io n e l l J ay R . Te rogo, Cris m a e Am or C. Elimino, John Paul o M. Tal l o,
J o h a n n a A . S a c a l, a nd Cha rle s M a r tin Jos e ph E . B al ahadia
Un i ve r s i t y o f S an Jos e - R e cole tos
j ay. te ro g o@ u s j r.e du.ph

Abstract

This study aims to identify whether the Senior High School students are Linguistically,
Discursively, Sociolinguistically or Strategically Competent in English. Quantitative and
qualitative research methods were used to collate a survey that would sure mend the study.
With comprehensive computation of the random datasets, almost every Senior High School
student achieved a satisfactory rating in both the Perceptions and Abilities Categories. A Chi-
Square Statistic was also used and yielded maximum values which consequently, resulted
to low p-values, suggesting the negation of the study’s null hypothesis. The result is further
supported using the correlation statistic which corresponds to a high correlation between
the students’ Perceptions and Abilities in their speaking competence. The outcome of the
summary of all competencies shows that the Linguistic Competence contributed the most
to the overall language intents of the students with Sociolinguistic competence giving the
least, which results in Linguistic Competence being the widely used language competency
and sociolinguistic as not often practiced language skill amongst the students. With this,
the Senior High School students are far more competent in phonetics, pronunciation,
Phonology, Morphology, Syntax and Semantics rather than on the socio-cultural aspect
such as vocabulary, politeness and language style.

Keywords: speaking competence, K to 12 curricula, linguistic competence, sociolinguistic

competence, discourse competence, strategic competence

1.0 Introduction in building one’s personal and professional future.

In the 21st century where English in the With the advent of the Senior High School program
Philippines is becoming one of the most widely used in all schools in the Philippines, it is vibrant that from
languages as a means to communicate, it has become the claim of Payne (2006), speaking competence
clear that every Filipino graduate should possess the amongst students must be enriched well. With this,
necessary tools to meet global standards, especially communicative competence must be achieved
in oral communication. As stated by Payne (2006), effectively and efficiently in any authentic setting to
oral communication is one of the essential parts of utilize the ability of the language as stated by Hymes
everyday life because every conversation has an effect (1972) and Lasala (2013). Wang (1986) even stressed
28 Recoletos Multidisciplinar y Research Journal June

out that speaking competence is very significant. Thus from Pastrana (1980) and Prejoles (1997).
it is both the primary and final goal of English language With this, the researchers’ aim to know the ways
teaching. With the role of societal standards and on how the millennial students embrace the various
cultural elements in identifying a person’s capability, tracks in the 21stcentury was visualized. The goal of
it is also important for individuals to incorporate identifying the capacity of the students and the extent
the different 21st-century skills to be at par with the of the K to 12 curricula toward the four competences
standards of today’s society. The stated facts, therefore, of Hymes (1972) cited by Lasala (2013) possessed
led to the purposes of this study. The research aims to the challenge of the study. Moreover, as Lasala
determine whether the Senior High School students (2013) pointed out the disparity of the competence
are competent in all the areas of Hymes’communicative of the student’s communication under the RBEC
competence. Also, the researchers would want to (Revised Basic Education Curriculum), strategies
know if the respondents in the 21st-century scale are and the pedagogies used for the remediation of
good speakers and at the same time competent in the communicative competence deficiency will no longer
language because students in the present generation apply to the millennial students in the present. To
must possess these qualities to have an edge among continue, unlike the RBEC (Revised Basic Education
other learners. Curriculum), the K to 12 curricula introduces new
To explain further, Tongco, as cited by Lasala sets of communicative skills training. Thus new sets
(2013) stated the fact that despite the teachers’ of strategies are manifested. Since the 21st-century
different teaching pedagogies and various ways to students are no longer under the previous curriculum,
relate the language in a real-life set up until today, the the result of the study is expected to be greater.
communicative competence of the students still poses Also, the researchers considered the changes of
a challenge. He also pointed out that the best way for the mindset of the students under the K to 12 curricula.
the students to acquire and understand the language is Although the existence of the Oral Communication
through application and making the students feel the subject in the Senior High School curriculum continues
improvement of learning regarding communication to be helpful to the learners, still the researchers
rather than the mastery of the vocabulary through aim to (a) identify the Senior High School students’
written exercises. It was even emphasized by Shu perception regarding their speaking competence, (b)
and Zhuang (2001) as cited by Jiayan and Jianbin current speaking competency in terms of Linguistic,
(2010), that the current trends of today encourage Sociolinguistic, Discourse, and Strategic Competences,
intercultural communication with English as the most (c) the strength of the relationships between the
commonly used medium and so, individuals must students’ perceptions of their speaking competence
have the mastery of the language. Shu and Zhuang and their current speaking ability and (d) the dominant
(2001) claimed that cross-cultural communicative and weakest speaking competencies.
competence should also be given importance in
English language teaching. As a basis of students’ 2.0 Conceptual Framework
acceptable mark in speaking ability, Lasala (2013) used This study is anchored on Dell Hathaway Hymes’
a teacher-made instrument structured from Pastrana Theory of Communicative Competence cited by Lasala
(1980) for both written exercise and interview, based (2013) and got its support from the Components of
2018 Terogo, Elimino, Tallo, S ac al & B alahadia 29

Language Competence of Lyle Bachman and the Swain, 1980).

Model of Communicative Competence by Michael Indeed, when student’s speaking capacity has
Canale and Merrill Swain. It explains that there are reached the optimal use for communicative tasks,
four communicative competences that a person must their linguistic, sociolinguistic, and pragmatic aspects
possess to be a competent speaker such as linguistic, of language will surely be comprehensible. Also, the
sociolinguistic, discourse, and strategic (Hymes 1972, students’ prior knowledge, contexts, experience, socio-
cited by Lasala, 2013). Linguistic competence focuses cultural conditions and skills in all areas act together
on phonetics which deals with the knowledge of to form part of their language competence (Vallejo
sound and pronunciation as well as phonology which & Martinez, 2011; Nuñez Franco, 2011). With this, one
concerns on the interactions and patterns of sounds. must
It also involves the ability to form words, known as know how to use the language in an actual
Morphology; the ability to structure sentences, known performance of communication. Individuals
as Syntax; and ability to comprehend the meaning must not only know the language but also
of the text, known as Semantics. On the other hand, use it in an actual setting because learning
sociolinguistic competence is the capacity to use and without application is still not learning
respond to language appropriately. It also includes (Canale and Swain, cited in Ohno, 2011).
mastery of socio-cultural code languages such as
vocabulary, politeness, and style. Also, discourse Communicative competency in the area of
competence is knowledge of producing and speaking is known as the goal of every classroom.
comprehending oral and written texts in speaking, To entice the students to participate in oral
writing, listening and reading. Furthermore, strategic communication activities, one must let the students
competence is the ability in recognizing and repairing realize the importance and significance of the activity
communication breakdowns such as background (Brown, 1994). Moreover, authentic tasks should be
noise that hinders communication before, during, or employed for the students to appreciate the relevance
after it overpowers the speaker. of the activities for their future use and to emphasize the
It also explains that Lyle Bachman’s Components various classroom settings and strategies that should
of Language Competence played a role in Hyme’s be used to serve a variation of strategies depending
Theory. Herein, grammatical competence is about on students’ need (Lasala, 2013). About this, Dörnyei
the recognition and production of the grammatical and Thurrell (1991) made mention of an outlook
structures of a language and textual competence is the towards strategic competence, wherein a person must
knowledge of conversations from the beginning to the realize the importance of repairing communication
end of communication. Also, pragmatic competence breakdowns. Furthermore, Canale and Swain (1980,
focuses on the relationship between what the speaker p.30) emphasized that “verbal and non-verbal
says in his or her communicative acts and what he or communication strategies are required to compensate
she performs through various utterances (Bachman, communication breakdowns due to performance
1990). Also, the textual competence of a child and his/ aspects or too incapable competency.” Herein, a lack
her grammatical competence refer to the conscious of strategic competence affects the situations of
or unconscious understanding of language (Canale & students who get stuck on the inability of repairing
30 Recoletos Multidisciplinar y Research Journal June

communicative intent. Moreover, Mede and Dikilitas well as the ability to use the language linguistically and
(2015) claimed that sociolinguistic competence played socially, regardless of the knowledge of code used in a
a great role in communicative competence, thus country. These concepts are presented below:
involves pragmatic and sociolinguistic knowledge as

Figure 1. Conceptual Framework Diagram

3.0 Research Design and Method students under the strands of ABM (Accountancy,
The study utilized both the quantitative and Business, and Management), STEM (Science,
qualitative survey methods wherein, a survey Technology, Engineering and Mathematics),
questionnaire assessing the selected two hundred HUMSS (Humanities and Social Sciences) and TVL
eighty-two students in Senior High School (Technical Vocational Track).
department was used. The survey questionnaire
involved answering of self-assessment survey on
Table 1. Research Repondents
the students’ speaking competence based on their
perception and the assessment of their actual SHS Strands Population Percentage
speaking ability through an impromptu speaking HUMSS 70 24.82%
activity, graded using a rubric validated by an STEM 117 41.49%
expert. Using the formula of Cronbach alpha, the TVL 13 4.61%
survey questionnaire was tested to be valid and ABM 82 29.08%
reliable for actual data gathering. Total 282 100%
The research involved Senior High School
2018 Terogo, Elimino, Tallo, S ac al & B alahadia 31

Table 1 above shows the random sampling The researchers, hence, assumed that there
of the respondents. Because they were the first is no significant correlation between students’
absorbers of the K-12 program under the Senior speaking competence and their perceptions
High School Department, they were chosen as the about their oral speaking competence. Another
respondents. assumption is that there is no dominant or
To determine the students’ speaking subservient speaking competence. This led the
competence based on their perception, the researchers to conduct the study objectively.
researchers utilized the weighted mean formula. To
determine the students’ actual speaking capability, 4.0 Results and Discussion
the researchers used the chi- square method. To With the computation of random datasets,
determine the strengths of the students’ speaking Table 2 to 5 show the Weighted Mean calculation
capacity based on their perception and actual and interpretation of the Senior High School
speaking skill, the researchers use linear regression. students’ perception of their speaking competence
Pearson’s correlation formula was also used in in each category.
determining the correlation.

Table 2. Weighted Mean on Linguistic Competence

Indicators Weighted Mean (WM) Interpretation
1. extensive vocabulary 2.81 Satisfactory
2. rules of grammar 2.96 Satisfactory
3. sentence construction 3.08 Satisfactory
4. pronunciation 3.10 Satisfactory
5. word meanings 2.91 Satisfactory
6. analyze word structure 2.81 Satisfactory
7. understand word meanings 3.07 Satisfactory
8. keen in detecting grammatical errors 2.98 Satisfactory
9. word choice 2.90 Satisfactory
10. actualize ideas 2.96 Satisfactory
General Weighted Mean 2.96 Satisfactory

Table 2 above shows the result of the Senior High School students have an extensive
Senior High School students’ current speaking vocabulary and have the ability to analyze word
regarding Linguistic Competence as satisfactory. structures. However, they are not so equipped
It displays that the lowest weighted mean is 2.81, in pronunciation. It implies that the Senior High
under extensive vocabulary and word structure School students are more exposed to oral/
analysis, while the highest weighted mean is 3.10 recitations rather than written exercises, making
under pronunciation. The result means that the their word structure analysis to be not that
32 Recoletos Multidisciplinar y Research Journal June

extensive. This outcome agreed to the Linguistic to be accomplished in sound, pronunciation and
competence of Hymes (1972), cited by Lasala sentence structure.
(2013), wherein extensive knowledge must have

Table 3. Weighted Mean on Sociolinguistic Competence

Indicators Weighted Mean Interpretation
1. decode colloquial language 2.67 Satisfactory
2. extensive informal language knowledge 2.64 Satisfactory
3. adapting to cultural barriers 2.91 Satisfactory
4. awareness of other culture’s taboos 2.77 Satisfactory
5. proper usage of political terms 2.50 Fair
6. expression of attitude in conversation 3.06 Satisfactory
7. polite communicate to foreigners 3.17 Satisfactory
8. knowledge of sociocultural code 2.66 Satisfactory
9. knowledge of sociocultural language of other countries 2.46 Fair
10. adjustments on social language norms 2.77 Satisfactory
General Weighted Mean 2.76 Satisfactory

Table 3 above shows the current level of regarding their society. It implies that because the
the Senior High School Students’ Sociolinguistic Senior High School students do not have academic
Competence. It does infer that proper usage of subjects on knowing the other country’s languages,
political terms and knowledge on the sociocultural they are not that equipped with the background
code of other countries achieve fair interpretation. of other country’s language code. It also implies
The lowest weighted mean is knowledge on the that the politeness of Filipinos makes the Senior
sociocultural language of other realms with a High School students attain satisfactory rate in
weighted mean of 2.46. The highest weighted communication to foreigners. This result is negated
mean is 3.17 under the politeness to communicate by a study of Mede and Dikilitas (2015) wherein
with foreigners. The result shows that in the learning pragmatic languages, not of too much-
interaction with non-nationals is where the Senior required knowledge on sociocultural code, must
High School Students perform best and the trait to be used linguistically and socially appropriately.
be improved is to know the code of other countries

Table 4. Weighted Mean on Discourse Competence

Indicators Weighted Mean Interpretation
1. produce impromptu 2.81 Satisfactory
2. explain and retell situations 2.96 Satisfactory
3. comprehend oral texts 3.08 Satisfactory
2018 Terogo, Elimino, Tallo, S ac al & B alahadia 33

4. create and manage conversations 3.10 Satisfactory

5. distinct accent 2.91 Satisfactory
6. understand written texts 2.81 Satisfactory
7. pick out crucial details 3.07 Satisfactory
8. speak clearly and confidently 2.98 Satisfactory
9. free of filler expressions 2.90 Satisfactory
10. free of speech alterations 2.96 Satisfactory
General Weighted Mean 2.96 Satisfactory

Table 4 shows the current level of the Senior conversations during class collaborations, yet they
High School Students’ Discourse Competence. The are not that exposed in answering individually due
lowest weighted mean falls under impromptu to fear of committing mistakes. The results support
speaking and reading comprehension with ratings Canale and Swain (1980) theory wherein one must
of 2.81, while the highest falls under creating and know how to use their knowledge on an area
managing conversations with a mark of 3.10. The through actual performance of communication
result means that the students are more skilled and using the language well and not mainly knowing
capable in the field of starting and managing the about it. Speakers must be more attuned with
interaction with other individuals while producing understanding, speaking, reading, and writing the
of on-the-spot speeches are to be improved. language because learning without application is
It implies that the Senior High School students still not learning.
are trained to manage how to start and end

Table 5. Weighted Mean on Strategic Competence

Indicators Weighted Mean Interpretation
1. cope with communication problems 2.74 Satisfactory
2. repair and restore interrupted
communication 2.79 Satisfactory
3. keep communication channel 2.95 Satisfactory
4. communication breakdown awareness 3.15 Satisfactory
5. focus on conversation 2.96 Satisfactory
6. maintain train thoughts 2.79 Satisfactory
7. keep communication channel open 2.85 Satisfactory
8. respond to multiple listeners 2.68 Satisfactory
9. repairing communication 2.66 Satisfactory
10. stay away from places with
communication breakdown 2.96 Satisfactory
General Weighted Mean 2.85 Satisfactory
34 Recoletos Multidisciplinar y Research Journal June

Table 5 above shows the current level with these hindrances. It implies that the students
of the Senior High School Students’ Strategic are exposed to conducive learning environments,
Competence. The lowest weighted mean falls thus only knew the communication breakdowns
under the skill of repairing communication with and not on repairing them because they were not
the rating of 2.66, while the highest falls under exposed to a noisy classroom. The results agreed to
the knowledge of the different communication Canale and Swain’s strategic competence wherein
breakdowns with 3.15 rating. The result shows without the presence of strategic ability, students
that the students are only limited to knowing what with strong knowledge of grammar and wide
the communication breakdowns are (e.g. noise, range of vocabulary, get trapped and paralyzed
distractions, etc.) without knowing how to deal with communicative intent.

Table 6. Chi-Square Statistic

Categories Chi-Square Statistic P-Value
Less than
Linguistic Competence 51.418
0.00001
Less than
Sociolinguistic Competence 116.33
0.00001
Less than
Discourse Competence 85.801
0.00001
Less than
Strategic Competence 73.887
0.00001

Table 6 above shows the chi-square statistic to the rejection of the proposed Null Hypothesis
for every competence. Linguistic Competence which states that both the perceptions of
category attained 51.418 chi-square statistic being students in their ability to communicate and own
the highest and Sociolinguistic Competence communicative competence are not interrelated.
attained 116.33 being the lowest. The result leads

Table 7. Correlation between Perceptions and Abilities

Computed Critical
Variables Df N x̅ SD R Decision Interpretation
t-value Value
Perceptions 281 282 28.44 5.39 0.98 1.972 0.4265 Accept There is a
Abilities 281 282 11.53 2.59 0.98 correlation
between
students’
perceptions
and abilities.

Table 7 above shows the average scores their communicative abilities and Y representing
of all students in all four competencies with X the students’ innate communicative capacities.
representing the students’ perceptions towards The data gathered yielded a correlation value of
2018 Terogo, Elimino, Tallo, S ac al & B alahadia 35

0.978143 which when interpreted, gives out a high competence as highly correlated to their actual
correlation between Perceptions and Abilities. speaking competency. The result agreed on Lyle
The outcome implies that the Senior High School Bachman’s Components of Language Competence;
students were trained well to speak the language wherein there is relationship between what a
and were introduced to competent teachers. speaker says towards his or her communicative acts
This reality led their perception on their speaking and his or her performance through his utterances.

Table 8. Summary of all Competencies using Regression Analysis

The regression equation is

Speaking Abilities = 2.17 + 0.151 Linguistic Competence
+ 0.041 Sociolinguistic Competence - 0.056 Discourse Competence
+ 0.110 Strategic competence

Predictor Coef SE Coef T P

Constant 2.1652 0.2072 10.45 0.000
Linguist 0.15108 0.09650 1.57 0.119
Sociolin 0.0408 0.1039 0.39 0.695
Discours -0.0557 0.1137 -0.49 0.625
Strategi 0.1102 0.1187 0.93 0.354

S = 0.5633 R-Sq = 14.3% R-Sq(adj) = 12.9%

Table 8 above shows the summary of all difference to label their most refined skill or their
the calculated average of the four competencies. least. The result is because of the fact that it yielded
It also presents that the students’ perception of to a few difference amongst the four competencies
their speaking competency contributed 14.3% with all four ranging around the 39-42 margins. The
to their level of proficiency namely, linguistic, margin scale means that all respondents are more
sociolinguistic, discourse and strategic. or less equally skilled in the four Communicative
After synthesizing all results, it is imperative to Competences of Dell Hathaway Hymes.
discuss that the majority of the Senior High School
Students both in the Perceptions and Abilities 5.0 Conclusion
categories acquired a satisfactory rating in all four With the advent of the 21st century, English
competencies with only a few with a fair rating. has become one of the core standards. With this
Also, the students’ perceptions of their abilities truth, it has become clear that communicative
contributed 14.3% to their actual innate skills in all proficiency in English is an essential skill to
four competencies. However, while the respondents become a globally competitive individual. In the
lean most to their linguistic competence and least case of the Philippines, students have been shown
to their sociolinguistic competence, it makes little to gain exceptional grades in the English subject,
36 Recoletos Multidisciplinar y Research Journal June

but when asked to exhibit their actual abilities, References

they fall short of what was expected of them. The Bachman, L. (1990). Fundamental considerations in
information is mostly seen in the students of the language testing. Oxford: Oxford University
old curriculum namely the RBEC (Revised Basic Press.
Education Curriculum) and most probably even
the ones before that. But with the K-12 curriculum Brown, H. D. (1994). Teaching by principles: An
that focuses on fixing that problem by allowing interactive approach to language pedagogy.
students to be more active in class through various Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall Regents.
constructivist, collaborative, and integrative
activities, the students of today have shown to Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases
be more open and well-versed in the English of communicative approaches to second
language. From the results that were gathered, language teaching and testing. Applied
calculated, and interpreted, it was affirmed that Linguistics, 1(1), 1-47.
there is a definite relationship between a student’s
perceptions of his communicative competence Dornyei, Z., & Thurrell, S. (1991). Strategic
and his actual communicative competence. competence and how to teach it. ELT Journal,
Furthermore, results show that linguistic 45(1), 16-23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/
competence has the highest rating, making it the elt/45.1.16
most widely used language ability amongst the
respondents, with sociolinguistic competence Hymes, D. H. (1972). On communicative
coming in as not practiced often. Senior High competence. In Pride, J. B., & Holmes, J. (Eds.),
School students have learned how to deal on Sociolinguistics: Selected reading (pp. 269-
English grammar and word meaning all throughout 293). Baltimore, USA: Penguin Education,
their school life. They can speak and pronounce Penguin Books Ltd.
words well and even deliver the lines with better
understanding. However, they do not have much Jiayan G., & Jianbin H. (2010). On communicative
knowledge of other countries’ language code, competence in curriculum design: A
making it difficult to communicate to foreigners of comparison of the college english curriculum
various kinds. This outcome tells us that the school’s requirements and the english curriculum
English program is doing an exceptional job in standards. Polyglossia International Journal,
enhancing the students’ linguistically, but falls short 18, 73-86.
in the sociolinguistic department. Therefore, it was
suggested and imposed that improvement in the Lasala, C.N. (2013). Communicative competence
program concerning sociolinguistic competence of secondary senior students: Language
must continue. instructional pocket. Procedia – Social
and Behavioral Sciences, 134, 226-237.
Retrieved from https://www.scribd.com/
document/355014624/Communicative-
2018 Terogo, Elimino, Tallo, S ac al & B alahadia 37

Competence-of-Secondary-Senior-Students- Prejoles, Corazon A. (1997). The oral discourse

Language-Instructional-Pocket-pdf proficiency of the lower level 12 students
in English (Master’s thesis, Cebu Normal
Mede, E., & Dikilitas, K. (2015). Teaching and learning University). Retrieved from https://www.
sociolinguistic competence: Teachers’ critical researchgate.net/publication/263281846_
perceptions. Participatory Educational Communicative_Competence_of_
Research, 2(3), 14-31. Retrieved from https:// Secondary_Senior_Students_Language_
www.researchgate.net/publication/2832459 Instructional_Pocket
85_Teaching_and_Learning_Sociolinguistic_
Competence_Teachers’_Critical_Perceptions Shu, D. F. & Zhuang, Z. X. (1996). Modern language
teaching theory, practice and methods.
Nuñez Franco, Y. (2011). Constructing social Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language
interaction by enhancing the communicative Education Press.
competence through authentic tasks at IED
La Belleza-Los Libertadores. (Master’s thesis, Vallejo, G. M. & Martínez M. J. (2011). Tarea y
Universidad Distrital Francisco Jose de competenciacomunicativas:reflexionesdes
Caldas). Retrieved from http://repository. deungrupo focal (Communicative task and
udistrital.edu.co/bitstream/11349/2318/1/ competence: Reflections from a focal group).
Nu%C3%B1ezFrancoYised2015%20.pdf Íkala, 16(28), 161-197.

Ohno, A. (2011). Communicative competence and Wang, D. (1986). Optimal language learning
communicative language teaching. Retrieved based on the comprehension-production
last, December 2, 2011 from http://cicero.u- distinction. In Brumfit, C. (Ed.), The practice of
bunkyo.ac.jp/lib/kiyo/ fsell2002/25-32.pdf communicative teaching (pp. 99-122). Oxford:
The British Council &Pergamon Press.
Pastrana, C. (1980). Determinants of linguistics
and communicative competence of second
language learners of english in the University
of thePhilippines Integrated School (Doctoral
thesis, University of the Philippines).
Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.ne
t/publication/263281846_Communicative_
Competence_of_Secondar y_Senior_
Students_Language_Instructional_Pocket

Payne, T. (2006). Exploring language structure: A

student’s guide. Cambridge University Press:
London.