study on the development of oral proficiency in efl learners under call model zheng yurong harbin...

Study on the Development of Oral Proficiency

in EFL Learners Under CALL Model

Zheng YurongHarbin Engineering University

Yurong@hrbeu.edu.cn

Outline of the paper

Introduction Literature Review and Research

Questions Empirical study Discussions and Pedagogical

implications Conclusion

1. Introduction

International and domestic demands for university graduates;

College English Curriculum Requirements (CECR) (Ministry of Education, 2004);

A gateway to the breakthrough of oral English teaching .

2. Literature Review

Definition: Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL) refers to “any process in which a learner uses a computer and, as a result, improves his or her language” . (Beatty, 2005: 7)

Other related terms: CAI, CMC, CAT

2. Literature Review

Positive attitudes towards computer technology being used in the classroom and positive impact (Warden, 1995; Chen, 1988; Nash et al., 1989; Brady, 1990; Herrmann, 1987; Johnson, 1988; Phinney & Mathis, 1988).

Vocabulary learning (Liu, 1992) Grammar learning (Nutta,1998) Automatic Speech Recognition in teaching pronunciati

on(Dalby and Kewley-Port1999)

2. Research Questions

Can CALL model facilitate oral proficiency of EFL learners?

In which way is the facilitating effect obvious?

What kind of pedagogical implications can be found from their oral proficiency development?

3.Empirical Study

3.1 Subjects 67 non-English majors (26 females

and 41 males)

3.2 About the Courseware

Interactive interface involving listening, imitation and role-play;

Simulation of real situation( functional modular) ;

Speech recognition technology; Presenting in a game-like way.

3.3 Procedures

Longitudinal study: 10 months Pre-tests : Courseware placement test---Level

One Oral proficiency test--- 9-10 of 15. Post-tests: Recording and transcription Questionnaires

3.4 Instruments

Oral elicitation material--Comedy strip

Recording and transcription Oral proficiency indices Questionnaires SPSS12.0

Proficiency Indices

Temporal 1. mean length of runs (MLR) 2. average length of pauses (ALP) Linguistic 1. ratio of error-free T-units (REFT) 2. mean length of C-units after pruning

(MLCP) Performing 1. ratio of reformulation and replacement to

total repairs (RRR) 2. ratio of inaccurate pronunciation to

accurate pronunciation (RIP)(Zhang,2002)

Calculation of the Each Index

MLR=the total number of syllables/the total number of pauses ALP = the total amount of pause time/total number of pauses. REFT=the total number of error-free T-units /total number of T-u

nits. MLCP= the total number of words (after pruning) / total number

of c-units. RRR= the total number of reformulation and replacement / the tot

al number of repairs. RIP= the total number of incorrectly pronounced words/ total num

ber of correctly pronounced words

4.Findings and discussions

Students’ oral proficiency is closely related to the attainments (Levels and units) obtained in the courseware.

(p≤0.05 ) Students’ reaction to the

courseware is positive.

Post-test Students’ attainments in the courseware

7%

27% 25%31%

9%0%

50%

100%

Level2

Level3

Level4

Level5

Level6

Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 6

Post-test Students’ attainments in the oral test

20.4

10

37 39

10

0102030405060708090

100

8 9 10 11 above

891011above

Questionnaire Results

Stability of the courseware 68.77%; Design pattern of the courseware

92.39%; User-friendliness 93.86%; Interest-provoking 82.52%; Individuality 76.22%; Effectiveness on listening 66.99%; Effectiveness on speaking 71.17%;

Indices for Oral Proficiency

Top Group(27

subjects)

Bottom Group

(23 subjects)

Mean

SD Mean SD

1. mean length of runs (MLR) 6.81 1.23 4.07 2.07

2. average length of pauses (ALP)

0.79 0.76 2.02 1.12

3. ratio of error-free T-units (REFT)

0.34 0.12 0.31 0.97

4. mean length of C-units after pruning (MLCP)

9.49 1.87 8.17 2.79

5. ratio of reformulation and replacement to total repairs (RRR)

0.43 0.55 0.67 0.70

6. ratio of inaccurate pronunciation to accurate pronunciation (RIP)

0.058 0.049 0.059 0.078

Discussions

Exposure to CALL programs have improved students’ fluency considerably.

Students’ accuracy didn’t show much improvement after the exposure to CALL programs.

Pedagogical Implications

CALL courseware could, if applied properly, improve students’ oral proficiency to certain extent.

In face-to-face teaching, there should be a place for focus on forms.

Students’ autonomous learning could be facilitated by teacher’s prompt coaching.

The innovative and interactive interface should be enhanced.

Limitation of this research

Multiple variables Authentic test Shorter duration Small samples

Conclusion

Future developments in networked communication, multimedia, and artificial intelligence will likely create a potentially more central role for the computer as a tool for authentic language exploration and use in the second language classroom.

Strategy-training/inputting Individualized tutoring

Criticisms and suggestions are welcome!

Thanks !

Yurong@hrbeu.edu.cn