Cooperative vs. Individual Learning of Oral Skills in a CALL Environment
ABSTRACT
This study aims at finding out the extent to which two computer-mediated techniques
are effective. They are particularly designed for teaching and learning oral skills,
listening and speaking. The study also investigates students’ attitude towards
implementing CALL approach and techniques of teaching and learning oral skills.
Four small groups are involved using various techniques, cooperative computermediated technique, collective computer-mediated technique, cooperative traditional
technique, and collective traditional technique. Based on a limited number of
participants, findings of the study show that the cooperative computer-mediated
technique is an effective method for learning and teaching oral skills. The survey
conducted in the present study also indicates that students react positively to both
CALL approach and the cooperative computer-mediated technique. The study
recommends that CALL be integrated into oral curriculum.
THE AUTHOR
Ali Farhan AbuSeileek
King Saud University, College of Arts, Dept. of English Language and Literature
Dr. Ali Farhan Munify AbuSeileek is a Jordanian assistant professor working at the
Dept. of English Language in the College of Arts at King Saud University. His major
is TEFL / CALL. He has published relevant research works and designed several
CALL programs for EFL learners. His major research interest is CALL and its
application in ELT such as computer-based learning and testing, machine translation
and CALL software.
Correspondence:
Current Address
Kingdom of Saudi Arabia/ King Saud University/ College of Arts/ Department of
English Language and Literature/ P.O. Box: 2456, Riyadh 11451. Telephone: (office)
0096614675437 (work) 0096614675429
Mobile: 00966551464049
Permanent Address:
Jordan / Zarka / P.O.Box 7456
Tel. 00962 5 3654041
Email: alifarhan@mailcity.com , alifarhan66@gmail.com
Cooperative vs. Individual Learning of Oral Skills in a CALL Environment
ABSTRACT
This study aims at finding out the extent to which two computer-mediated techniques
are effective. They are particularly designed for teaching and learning oral skills,
listening and speaking. The study also investigates students’ attitude towards
implementing CALL approach and techniques of teaching and learning oral skills.
Four small groups are involved using various techniques, cooperative computermediated technique, collective computer-mediated technique, cooperative traditional
technique, and collective traditional technique. Based on a limited number of
participants, findings of the study show that the cooperative computer-mediated
technique is an effective method for learning and teaching oral skills. The survey
conducted in the present study also indicates that students react positively to both
CALL approach and the cooperative computer-mediated technique. The study
recommends that CALL be integrated into oral curriculum.
INTRODUCTION
In the 1980s, computer-assisted language learning (CALL) was introduced on a
limited scale because personal computers were scarce and CALL programs were still
maturing. During the last two decades, however, things have changed: computers
have become popular at both schools and homes. Learners receive training on how to
use them, and the industry of English language programs flourish. Higgins (1995)
reports that computers have become more and more popular for studying oral,
listening and speaking, language skills. Warschauer (1996), Levy (1997), Crystal
(2001), Na (2003) and Kedrowicz and Watanabe (2006) all point out that CALL is
useful for improving the learner’s varied linguistic skills. Vick, Crosby and Ashworth
(2000) also find that computer-mediated courses have a lot of potential as they
provide opportunities for learning in a cooperative environment and enable learners to
make synchronous and asynchronous communication between pairs and groups of
different learners.
The ultimate goal of learning language skills is to express “oneself effectively and
appropriately during oral conversational exchange with native or expert speakers of a
target language” (Payne and Ross, 2005: 35). CALL has many advantages in learning
oral skills compared to traditional learning methods. Jeon-Ellis, Debski and
Wigglesworth (2005) state that CALL-oriented projects have many advantages for
teaching oral skills such as enabling students to benefit from the abilities of their peers
when they interact around computers. Ewing (2000) quotes students as saying that
they find opportunities in a CALL environment to develop the four basic language
skills which are not equally available in a traditional L2 classroom. Not only can
learners receive immediate relevant feedback on their errors from their peers and the
system, but they are also allowed through CALL to work at their own pace.
CALL is helpful in learning and teaching oral skills cooperatively. It provides learners
with opportunities to use language interactively in authentic situations such as
watching movies, listening to and chatting with native speakers. Mueller-Hartmann
(2000) point out that CALL projects allow students to learn oral skills in authentic
situations, develop and express their views, and establish cooperatively meaningful
communication. Sierra (1999) notes that when students interact cooperatively in a
CALL environment, the effectiveness of performing a language task increases, and
the computer becomes an excellent tool for learning the skills of listening and
speaking in the classroom environment. Mercer, Fernandez, Dawes, Wegerif, and
Sams (2003) call for integrating computers into the teaching of oral skills, listening
and speaking. Gu (2002) also argues that CALL-oriented classes in an EFL setting
have provided students with opportunities to learn oral skills in authentic situations,
which increases their levels of input and output, and enhances motivation,
engagement, and willingness to learn collaboratively.
Oral interaction around computers sets among learners is based on the use of
cooperative -group or pair work- learning strategy where the computer stands for a
tool of communication between concerned members. According to Tan, Gall, Jacobs
and Lee (1999), cooperative learning is defined as a range of concepts and techniques
used for enhancing the value of learner-learner interaction. They also confirm that
cooperative learning develops the following six major aspects: achievement, liking for
school, inter-ethnic relations, thinking skills, self-esteem, and enjoyment. Moreover,
Phinney (1996) argues that cooperation and team effort should be the norm rather than
the exception in learning. He adds that the product of teamwork is usually greater than
what a single learner can produce. Schcolnik and Kol (1999) point out that teamwork
skills in computerized instruction are essential for learning, and cooperative group
learning should be the most commonly used technique in the teaching / learning of
EFL skills.
In the computer-mediated environment, learners can be taught based on two
techniques: the collective computer-mediated communication technique (ColCMC)
and the cooperative computer-mediated communication technique (CopCMC). In
ColCMC, the computer is used as a tool for communication between the teacher and
class. In other words, it is based on using the teacher to whole-class (collective)
method of learning in a computer-mediated fashion. It does not include a student’s
interaction with other classmates in groups or pairs; each student works on his own to
receive the questions, listen to the text, think of the answer, and report it to the
instructor. On the other hand, the CopCMC divides students into small groups or
pairs to perform a task through using the computer as a means for communication
between the pairs or members of the groups. The use of this technique in learning
oral skills enables students to work at their own pace. In this study, students who are
divided into cooperative groups are blinded about the identities of each other. Though
they sit in the same classroom, they might hardly see or know each other. They sit in
different places where they can chat. This would reduce their anxiety stemmed from
face-to-face cooperative debate. NetSupport School, the system to be used in this
study, enables the instructor to use the ‘electronic secret pals’ technique which
includes assigning students without revealing their identities. They are given numbers
instead of names to ensure anonymity.
Some learners are shy, passive and afraid to speak (Hata, 2003), inhibited (Wallace,
1999), and reluctant to participate (Roed, 2003) in foreign language conventional
classes. That is simply because they are worried in face-to-face cooperative debate.
Bikowski and Kessler (2002) report that CMC is distinguished over conventional
education by encouraging students to participate actively in communication.
Moreover, NetSupport School enables students to request help electronically and
individually from the instructor or other peers through sending oral or written
messages. Thus, students would be less embarrassed to participate or ask because
their identities are not disclosed. Using this technique would provide the learners the
opportunity to interact in a non-threatening atmosphere.
Pawling (1999, 166) states, “both the weaker and the more able pupils are required to
complete tasks that are not appropriate for their ability which leads to frustration or
boredom. Multimedia allowed for differentiation in that the pairs could work at their
own pace” and motivated the shy students to be self-conscious and very keen to work
in a non-threatening environment. In sum, oral interaction around computers has
threefold benefits: it gives the group members a chance to make use of each other’s
abilities and talents; learners will have the opportunity to have feedback through using
the bulk of information available on the system. This kind of feedback is always
available in a non-threatening atmosphere whenever the user wants it, and each
learner can work on his own pace.
CALL materials for learning oral skills have recently been developed to a great
extent. EFL learners can use audio or visual programs that enable them to produce
synchronous linguistic communication for learning oral skills in a cooperative way.
For example, Gruba (2006) reports that the interactive computer programs provide
activities for learning oral skills, as they help learners to interact in a communicative
way. They include sound, graphics, video, and animation. Ayres (2002, 242) points
out that “the combination of text, audio and video input make multimedia an excellent
format for language learning materials and have led to the birth of an industry in
computer-assisted learning (CAL)”. Tschirner (2001) also stresses that digital video
materials for computers have added a further dimension to the use of CALL. They
form an important part of the language learning process. This study is based on audio
and visual materials initially designed to learn oral skills cooperatively.
REFERENCES
Anderson, A., Tolmie, A., Mcateer, E. and Demisne, A. (1993). Software style and
interaction around the microcomputer. Computers and Education, 20 (3):235–250.
Adair-Hauck, B., Willingahm-McLain, L., and Youngs, B. (1999). Evaluating the
integration of technology and second language learning. CALICO Journal, 17 (2):
269-306.
Ayres, R. (2002). Learner attitudes towards the use of CALL, Computer Assisted
Language Learning, 15 (3): 241-249.
Bikowski, D. and Kessler, G. (2002). Making the most of discussion boards in ESL
classrooms. TESOL Journal, 11 (3): 27-30.
Barr, D., Leakey, J., and Ranchoux, A. (2005). Told like it is! An evaluation of an
Integrated Oral Development Pilot Project. Language Learning & Technology, 9 (3):
55-78.
Blanchard, J., Masonand G., and Daniel, D. (1988). Computer applications: Reading.
Newark, Delware: International Reading Association.
Coniam, D. (1998). Interactive evaluation of listening comprehension: How the
context may help. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 11 (1): 35-53.
Crystal, D. (2001). Language and the Internet. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Ewing, M. (2000). Conversations of Indonesian language students on computermediated projects: Linguistic responsibility and control. Computer Assisted Language
Learning, 13 (4): 333–356.
Fisher, E. (1993). Distinctive features of pupil-pupil classroom talk and their
relationship to learning: How discursive exploration might be encouraged. Language
and Education, 7 (4): 239–257.
Gruba, (2006). Playing the videotext: A media literacy perspective on video-mediated
L2 listening. Language Learning & Technology, 10 (2): 77-92.
Greenfield, R. (2003). Collaborative e-mail exchange for teaching secondary ESL: A
case study in Hong Kong. Language Learning & Technology, 7 (1): 46-70.
Gu, P. (2002). Effects of project-based CALL on Chinese EFL learners. Asian
Journal of English Language Teaching, l (12): 195-210.
Kedrowicz, A. and Watanabe, S. (2006). Infusing technical communication and
teamwork within the ECE curriculum. Turkish Journal of Electrical Engineering &
Computer Sciences, 14 (1): 41-53.
Khan, B. (1997). Web-based instruction. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Educational
Technology Publications.
Lasagabaster, D. and Sierra, J. (2003). Students’ evaluation of CALL software
programs, Educational Media International. Retrieved July 16, 2006 from
www.tandf.co.uk/journals.
Levy, M. (1997). Computer-assisted language
conceptualization. London: Oxford University Press.
learning:
Context
and
Liu, M., Moore, Z., Graham, L., and Lee, Sh. (2000). A look at the research on
computer-based technology use in second language learning: Review of literature
from 1990-2000. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 34 (3): 250-273.
McIntosh, S., Braul, B. and Chao, T. (2003). A case study in asynchronous voice:
Conferencing for language instruction. Education Media International. Retrieved
August 1, 2006 from http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals.
Mercer, N., Fernandez, M., Dawes, L., Wegerif, R., and Sams, C. (2003). Talk about
texts at the computer: Using ICT to develop children’s oral and literate abilities.
Reading, 37 (2): 81-89.
Mueller-Hartmann, A. (2000). The role of tasks in promoting intercultural learning in
electronic learning networks. Language Learning & Technology, 4(2): 129-147.
Zahner, C. Fauverge, A. and Wong, J. (2000). Task-based language learning via
audiovisual networks: The LEVERAGE project. In M. Warschauer and R. Kern
(Eds.), Netwrok-based language teaching: Concepts and practice (PP. 186-203).
Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.