Archives
Current issue
About
About us
Aims and Scope
Abstracting and Indexing
Editorial Office
Open Access Policy
Publication Ethics
Journal History
Publisher
Follow us: Twitter
Contact
For Authors
Editorial Policy
Peer Review Policy
Manuscript Preparation Guidelines
Copyright & Licencing
Publication Fees
Fee Waiver Policy for Doctoral Students
EJMSTE Language Editing Service
More
Statistics
Special Issues
Special Issue Announcements
Published Special Issues
RESEARCH PAPER
Research into the Effects of an ICALL Program on Teaching Word Classes to Learners of English
1
Cyprus International University, Lefkosa, NORTHERN CYPRUS
Online publication date: 2018-04-18
Publication date: 2018-04-18
EURASIA J. Math., Sci Tech. Ed 2018;14(6):2587-2598
KEYWORDS
ABSTRACT
This study investigated the effectiveness of an intelligent computer-assisted language learning (ICALL) program on learning word classes to Turkish learners of English. Learning word classes is a common problem for Turkish students, so the main aim of this research is to help students to overcome this problem. Within the scope of this research, an ICALL application with a word class analyzer was developed and used on Foundation English School Students to measure its effects on students’ achievement in the mastery of word classes and also their attitudes toward such an ICALL environment. The study employed a pre-test—post-test control group design. The sample consisted of 38 B1 level students who were divided into experimental and control groups. The t test was used to investigate the differences between the experimental and control groups. Learners’ achievements in the knowledge of word classes were measured. The results showed that the reading activities with this system had positive effects on students’ word classes learning and their attitudes toward the intelligent computer-assisted language learning tool. According to the statistical results obtained from the study, there is a significant difference between the groups in favor of the experimental group.
REFERENCES (61)
1.
Abraham, B. (2008). Computer-mediated glosses in second language reading comprehension and vocabulary learning: A meta-analysis. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 21(3), 199–226. https://doi.org/10.1080/095882....
2.
Ahmad, K., Corbett, G., Rogers, M., & Sussex, R. (1985). Computers, Language Learning and Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
3.
Alderson, J. C., Clapham, C. M., & Steel, D. (1997). Metalinguistic knowledge, language aptitude, and language proficiency. Language Teaching Research, 1, 93–121. https://doi.org/10.1177/136216....
4.
Al-Juhani, S. O. (1991). The effectiveness of computer-assisted instruction in teaching English as foreign language in Saudi secondary school (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), University of Denver, Denver, CO.
5.
AlKahtani, S. (1999). Teaching ESL reading using computers. The Internet TESL Journal, V(11), 1–10. Retrieved on October 23, 2017 from http://iteslj.org/Techniques/A....
6.
Aşkar, P., Köksal, M., & Yavuz, H. (1992). Students’ perceptions of computer assisted instruction environment and their attitudes towards computer assisted learning. Educational Research, 34 (2), 133-139. https://doi.org/10.1080/001318....
7.
Bax, S. (2011). Normalisation revisited: The effective use of technology in language education. International Journal of Computer-Assisted Language Learning and Teaching, 1(2), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijcall....
8.
Beatty, K. (2013). Teaching & researching: Computer-assisted language learning. London: Routledge.
9.
Bolhuis, S. (2003). Towards process-oriented teaching for self-directed lifelong learning: A multidimensional perspective. Learning and Instruction, 13(3), 327—347. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-....
10.
Busch, H.-J. (2003). Computer based readers for intermediate foreign-language students. Educational Media International, 40(3–4), 277–285. https://doi.org/10.1080/095239....
11.
Butler-Pascoe, M. E., & Wiburg, K. M. (2003). Technology and teaching English language learners. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
12.
Butler-Pascoe, M. E. (2011). The history of CALL: The intertwining paths of technology and second/foreign language teaching. International Journal of Computer-Assisted Language Learning and Teaching, 1(1), 16-32. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijcall....
13.
Calvo, M. V. (1997). Computer Assisted Language Learning: Revision of some theoretical principles from a practical case. Encuentro: Revista de Investigación e Innovación en el aula de idiomas, 9, 127-134.
14.
Chapelle, C. A. (2001). Computer applications in second language acquisition. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO978....
15.
Chapelle, C. A. (2008). Computer assisted language learning (pp. 585-595). Blackwell Publishing Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1002/978047....
16.
Choi, I.-C. (1991). CALLeui wisang gwa jeonmang [Current status and prospects of CALL]. English Teaching, 42, 69-87.
17.
Cummins, J. (2008). Computer assisted text scaffolding for curriculum access and language learning/acquisition. Retrieved on October 22, 2017 from http://iteachilearn.com/cummin....
18.
DeCapua, A. (2008). Grammar for teachers: A guide to American English for native and non-Native speakers. Springer Science & Business Media. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-....
19.
Derwing, T. M., & Munro, M. J. (2005). Second language accent and pronunciation teaching: A research--based approach. TESOL Quarterly, 39(3), 379-397. https://doi.org/10.2307/358848....
20.
Dudeney, G. (2007). The Internet and the language classroom (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
21.
Fotos, S., & Brownne, S. M. (2004). The development of CALL and current options. In S. Fotos & S. M. Brownne (Eds.), New perspectives on CALL for second language classrooms (pp. 3-14). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
22.
Fraenkel, J., Norman, E. W., & Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education. New York: McGraw-Hill.
23.
Francis, W. N. (1980). A tagged corpus–problems and prospects. Studies in English linguistics for Randolph Quirk, 192-209.
24.
Francis, W. N., & Kucera, H. (1982). Frequency analysis of English usage: Lexicon and usage. Houghton Mifflin.
25.
Gärdenfors, P. (2014). A semantic theory of word classes. Croatian Journal of Philosophy, 14(2), 179-194.
26.
Garside, R., L, G., & McEnery, A. (1997). Corpus Annotation. London and New York: Longman.
27.
Gattegno, C. (1972). Teaching foreign languages in schools: The silent way (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Educational Solutions.
28.
Gil, D. (2000). Syntactic categories, cross-linguistic variation and universal grammar. Empirical approaches to language typology, 173-216. https://doi.org/10.1515/978311....
29.
Gorjian, B. (2008). Developing linguistic and cultural perspectives of English as a foreign language through email discussion. The JALT CALL Journal, 4(3), 3–14.
31.
Haspelmath, M. (2001). Word classes/parts of speech. In P. B. Baltes, & N. J. Smelser (Eds.), International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences (pp. 16538-16545). Amsterdam: Pergamon Pr. https://doi.org/10.1016/B0-08-....
32.
Heward, V. (2003). Oscar Wilde’s short stories retold by Victoria Heward. Black cat publishing.
33.
Hockett, C. F. (1958). A course in modern linguistics. Language Learning, 8(34), 73-75. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467....
34.
Horowitz, D. (1986). Process, not product: Less than meets the eye. TESOL Quarterly, 20(1), 141-144. https://doi.org/10.2307/358639....
35.
Hsu, L. (2016). An empirical examination of EFL learners’ perceptual learning styles and acceptance of ASR-based computer-assisted pronunciation training. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 29(5), 881-900. https://doi.org/10.1080/095882....
36.
Inn-Chull, Ch. (2016). Efficacy of an ICALL tutoring system and process-oriented corrective feedback, Computer Assisted Language Learning, 29(2), 334-364. https://doi.org/10.1080/095882....
37.
Jurafsky, D., & Martin, J. H. (2000). Word classes and Part-Of-Speech Tagging. Ed. In Speech and Language Processing, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
38.
Lamy, M.-N., & Hampel, R. (2007). Online communication in language learning and teaching. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/978023....
39.
Lee, K. W. (2000). English teachers’ barriers to the use of computer-assisted language learning. The Internet TESL Journal, 6(12), 1-8.
40.
Levy, M. (1997). Computer-assisted language learning: Context and conceptualization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
41.
Marcus, M. P., Santorini, B., & Marcinkiewicz, M. A. (1993). Building a large annotated corpus of English: The Penn tree-bank. Computational Linguistics, 19(2), 313–330.
42.
Matthews, C. (1993). Grammar frameworks in intelligent CALL. CALICO Journal, 11(1), 5-27.
43.
McGlinn, J., & Parrish, A. (2002). Accelerating ESL students’ reading progress with accelerated reader. Reading Horizons, 42(3), 175–189.
44.
Mikk, J. (1997). Parts of speech in predicting reading comprehension. Journal of Quantitative Linguistics, 4(1-3), 156-163. https://doi.org/10.1080/092961....
45.
Mohammadzadeh, B. (2015). The Application of Pedagogical Stylistics in ELT Literature and Language Teaching Courses. International Online Journal of Primary Education (IOJPE), 4(1), 21-26.
46.
Murphy, E. (2000). Strangers in a strange land: Teachers’ beliefs about teaching and learning French as a second or foreign language in online learning environments (pp. 1-356).
47.
Naba’h, A. A., Hussain, J., Al-Omari, A., & Shdeifat, S. (2009). The effect of computer assisted language learning in teaching English grammar on the achievement of secondary students in Jordan. Int. Arab J. Inf. Technol., 6(4), 431-439.
48.
Nagata, N. (1996). Computer vs. workbook instruction in second language acquisition. CALICO Journal, 14(1), 53-75.
49.
Nutta, J. (1998). Is computer-based grammar instruction as effective as teacher-directed grammar instruction for teaching L2 structures? CALICO Journal, 16(1), 49-62. https://doi.org/10.1558/cj.v16....
50.
Önsoy, S. (2004). Students’ and teachers’ attitudes towards the use of computer- assisted language learning at the Preparatory School of Celal Bayar University (Unpublished master’s thesis), Bilkent University, Ankara, Turkey.
51.
Pirasteh, P. (2014). The effectiveness of computer-assisted language learning (CALL) on learning grammar by Iranian EFL learners. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 1422-1427. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbsp....
52.
Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (1987). Approaches and methods in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
53.
Schmidt, R. (2001). Attention. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 3–32). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO978....
54.
Simpson, P. (1997). Language through literature: An introduction. Psychology Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/978020....
55.
Stockwell, G. (2007). A review of technology choice for teaching language skills and areas in the CALL literature. ReCALL, 19(2), 105—120. https://doi.org/10.1017/S09583....
56.
Toole, J., & Heift, T. (2002). The tutor assistant: An authoring tool for an intelligent language tutoring system. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 15(4), 373-386. https://doi.org/10.1076/call.1....
57.
Van Lier, E., & Rijkhoff, J. (2013). Flexible word classes: A typological study of underspecified parts-of-speech. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
58.
Vermunt, J., & Verschaffel, L. (2000). Process-oriented teaching. In R-J. Simons, J. v. d. Linden, & T. Duffy. (Eds.), New learning (pp. 209-225). Netherlands: Kluwer Academic. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-306-....
59.
Vulanović, R., & Miller, B. (2010). Grammar Efficiency of Parts-of-Speech Systems. Glottotheory, 3(2), 65-80. https://doi.org/10.1515/glot-2....
60.
Warschauer, M., & Healey, D. (1998). Computers and language learning: an overview. Language teaching forum, 31, 57-71. https://doi.org/10.1017/S02614....
61.
Yang, Y. F. (2011). Computer Assisted Language Learning. College English, 24, 181-198.
Share
RELATED ARTICLE
| eISSN: | 1305-8223 |
| ISSN: | 1305-8215 |
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
