Pronunciation Achievement in Computer-Mediated Communication (CMC) Classrooms

International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Research

دوره 9، شماره 38، دی 2021، صفحه 193-204   

نوع مقاله: Research Papers

شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.52547/JFL.9.38.205

نویسندگان

Majid Zeinali Nejad¹؛ Mohammad Golshan^{* 1}؛ Amin Naeimi²

¹English Department, Maybod Branch, Islamic Azad University, Maybod, Iran

²English Department, Yazd Branch, Islamic Azad University, Yazd, Iran

چکیده

The current mixed method study investigated the use of synchronous/asynchronous computer-mediated communication as a method of L2 pronunciation achievement among medical students during COVID-19 pandemic lockdown. In so doing, the study utilized an experimental comparative design with two groups of 17 participants. There were two types of tests in this study: word stress test, and a semi-structured interview. The results showed the positive effect of computer mediated communication in pronunciation development among students of medicine. Moreover, the findings revealed more positive effect of synchronous computer mediated communication-oriented instruction compared with asynchronous computer mediated communication-oriented instruction on medical students' English language pronunciation development. It can be concluded that computer mediated communication especially synchronous mode is effective for pronunciation development of medical students since technology provides the opportunities through which medical students can notice the gaps in their current English language and thus produce modified output.
 
 

کلیدواژه‌ها

Medical students؛ pronunciation achievement؛ computer-mediated communication

مراجع

Abrams, Z. I. (2008). Sociopragmatic features of learner-to-learner computer-mediated communication. CALICO journal, 26(1), 1-27.

Alibakhshi, G., & Mohammadi, M. J. (2016). Synchronous and Asynchronous Multimedia and Iranian EFL Learners’ Learning of Collocations. Applied Research on English Language, 5(2), 237-254. doi:https://dx.doi.org/10.22108/are.2016.20428

Baron, N. S. (2002). Alphabet to email: How written English evolved and where it's heading: Routledge.

Beauvois, M. H. (1997). Computer-mediated communication (CMC): Technology for improving speaking and writing. In M. D. Bush & R. M. Terry (Eds.), Technology Enhanced Language Learning (pp. 165-184). Lincolnwood, IL: The National Textbook Company.

Beauvois, M. H. (1998) Conversations in slow motion: Computer-mediated communication in the foreign language classroom. Canadian Modern Language Review, 54(2): 198–217.

Blake, R. (2000). Computer-mediated communication: A window on L2 Spanish interlanguage. Language Learning & Technology, 4(1), 120-136. Retrieved from http://llt.msu.edu/vol4num1/blake

Chhetri, S. K. (2017). E-learning in neurology education: principles, opportunities and challenges in combating neurophobia. Journal of Clinical Neuroscience, 44, 80-83.

Coyle, Y., & Reverte Prieto, M. J. (2017). Children’s interaction and lexical acquisition in text-based online chat. Language Learning & Technology, 21(2), 179-199.

Creswell, J. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design. Choosing among five approaches (3e éd.). London: Sage. Approches inductives.

Dawson, K., Cavanaugh, C., & Ritzhaupt, A. D. (2008). Florida’s EETT leveraging laptops initiative and its impact on teaching practices. Journal of Research on technology in Education, 41(2), 143-159.

de la Fuente, M. J. (2002). Negotiation and Oral Acquisition of L2 Vocabulary: The Roles of Input and Output in the Receptive and Productive Acquisition of Words. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24, 81-112.

Doughty, C., Williams, J. (1998b). Issues and terminology. In: Doughty, C., Williams, J. (Eds.), Focus-on-form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 1–11). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Ene, E., & Upton, T. A. (2018). Synchronous and asynchronous teacher electronic feedback and learner uptake in ESL composition. Journal of Second Language Writing, 41, 1-13.

Ellis, R. (2001). Investigating form-focused instruction. Language Learning, 51(s1), 1-46.

Faraj, B. M. A. (2015). English for medical education in EFL context. Journal of Teaching English for Specific and Academic Purposes, 3(1), 121-148.

Gass, S., & Varonis, E. (1994). Input, interaction, and second language production. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16, 283–302.

Heung, V. C., Kucukusta, D., & Song, H. (2011). Medical tourism development in Hong Kong: An assessment of the barriers. Tourism Management, 32(5), 995-1005.

Hewitt, J. (2005). Toward an understanding of how threads die in asynchronous computer conferences. The journal of the learning sciences, 14(4), 567-589.

Hodges, C., Moore, S., Lockee, B., Trust, T., & Bond, A. (2020). The difference between emergency remote teaching and online learning. Educause review, 27, 1-12.

Hong, J., Aramesh, M., Shimoni, O., Seo, D. H., Yick, S., Greig, A., . . . Murphy, A. B. (2016). Plasma catalytic synthesis of ammonia using functionalized-carbon coatings in an atmospheric-pressure non-equilibrium discharge. Plasma Chemistry and Plasma Processing, 36(4), 917-940.

Hoyos, J. E. P. (2018). Error correction and repair moves in synchronous learning activities. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 15(1), 23.

Hurd, S. (2006). Towards a better understanding of the dynamic role of the distance language learner: Learner perceptions of personality, motivation, roles, and approaches. Distance education, 27(3), 303-329.

Jepson, J. (2005). Conversations—and negotiated interaction—in text and voice chat rooms. Language Learning & Technology, 9(3), 79-98. Retrieved from http://llt.msu.edu/vol9num3/jepson/default.html

Johnson, G. M. (2006). Synchronous and asynchronous text-based CMC in educational contexts: A review of recent research. TechTrends, 50(4), 46-53.

Johnson, S. D., & Aragon, S. R. (2003). An instructional strategy framework for online learning environments. New directions for adult and continuing education, 2003(100), 31-43.

Levis, J. M. (2018). Intelligibility, oral communication, and the teaching of pronunciation: Cambridge University Press.

Levis, J. M., & Grant, L. (2003). Integrating pronunciation into ESL/EFL classrooms. Tesol Journal, 12(2), 13-19.

Long, M. H. (1983a). Linguistic and conversational adjustments to nonnative speakers. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 5, 177–194

Long, M. (1991). Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology. In K. de Bot, R. Ginsberg, & C. Kramsch (Eds.), Foreign language research in cross-cultural perspective (pp. 39-52). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Long, M. H. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. Ritchie & T. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413–468). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Mackey, A. (1999). Input, interaction and second language development: An empirical study of question formation in ESL. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 557-587.

Mahmoodi, H., & Narafshan, M. H. (2020). Identity types and learners’ attitudes in language learning: Voices from students of medical sciences. Research and Development in Medical Education, 9(1), 17-17. doi:https://doi.org/10.34172/rdme.2020.017

Milosavljević, N. (2008). Interrelationship between learning English language and students' medical education. Srpski arhiv za celokupno lekarstvo, 136(7-8), 441-444.

Morse, K. (2003). Does one size fit all? Exploring asynchronous learning in a multicultural environment. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 7(1), 37-55.

Norris, J. M. and Ortega, L. (2000) Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and quantitative meta-analysis. Language Learning, 50: 417–528.

Nosratinia, M., & Zaker, A. (2014). AN ANALYSIS OF IRANIAN EFL LEARNERS’ PRONUNCIATION ERRORS. International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World (IJLLALW) , 5 (3), 97-108.

Nushi, M.,   Jafari , R., & Golesorkhi , z. (2019). Iranian EFL Learners' Beliefs towards Teaching and Learning of Pronunciation. Journal of English language teaching and learning, 11(23), 221-251.

Oye, N., Salleh, M., & Iahad, N. (2012). E-learning methodologies and tools. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications (IJACSA), 3(2).

Payne, J. S. and Ross, B. M. (2005) Synchronous CMC working memory and L2 oral proficiency development. Language Learning & Technology, 9(3): 35–54.

Payne, J. S. and Whitney, P. J. (2002) Developing L2 oral proficiency through synchronous CMC: Output, working memory and Interlanguage development. CALICO Journal, 20(1): 7–32.

Pellettieri, J. (2000). Negotiation in cyberspace: The role of chatting in the development of grammatical competence. In M. Warschauer & R. Kerns (Eds.), Network-based language teaching: Concepts and practice (pp. 59-86). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Pica,T.(1994a).Questions from the language classroom: Research
perspectives. TESOL Quarterly, 28, 49-79.

Rose, S. (2020). Medical student education in the time of COVID-19. Jama, 323(21), 2131-2132.

Schwier, R., & Balbar, S. (2002). The interplay of content and community in synchronous and asynchronous communication: Virtual communication in a graduate seminar. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology/La revue canadienne de l’apprentissage et de la technologie, 28(2).

Satar, H. M., & Özdener, N. (2008). The effects of synchronous CMC on speaking proficiency and anxiety: Text versus voice chat. The Modern Language Journal, 92, 595-613.

Sauro, S. (2001). The success of task type in facilitating oral language production in online computer mediated collaborative projects (Unpublished master’s thesis). Iowa State University, Ames, IA.

Smith, B. (2003). Computer–mediated negotiated interaction: An expanded model. The

            Modern Language Journal, 87(1), 38-57.

Smith, B. (2004). Computer-mediated negotiated interaction and lexical acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26, 365-398.

Sotillo, S. (2000). Discourse functions and syntactic complexity in synchronous and asynchronous com- munication. Language Learning & Technology, 4(1), 82-119. Retrieved from http://llt.msu.edu/ vol4num1/sotillo/default.html

Swain, M. (2005). The output hypothesis: Theory and research. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language learning and teaching (pp. 471-483). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Tudini, V. (2003). Using native speakers in chat. Language Learning & Technology, 7(3), 141-159. Retrieved from http://llt.msu.edu/vol7num3/tudini/default.html

Wallace, L. R., & Lima, E. F. (2018). Technology for Teaching Pronunciation. The TESOL Encyclopedia of English Language Teaching, 1-7.

Warschauer, M. (1996). Computer-assisted language learning: Aintroduction.        

           In S. Fotos (Ed.), Multimedia Language Teaching (pp. 3-20). Tokyo: Logos International.

            Retrieved from: http://www.ict4lt.org/en/warschauer.htm.

Google Scholar

Warschauer, M. (1997). Computer-mediated collaborative learning: Theory and practice. The Modern Language Journal, 81(4), 470–481. doi:10.2307/328890

Yang, Y. C., & Chang, L. (2008). No improvement—Reflections and suggestions on the use of Skype to enhance college student’s oral English proficiency. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39, 721-725.