THE EFFECT OF CALL-BASED TASKS ON EFL LEARNERS’ GRAMMAR LEARNING

• Authors: Alian Jalal ed-din , Khodabandeh Farzaneh , Soleimani Hassan
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

In modern language teaching institutions and schools, the proficient language teachers apply different kinds of tasks to teach some skills and sub-skills. In the current study, the researcher investigated the effect of two different tasks, namely Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL)-based tasks and written questions tasks on students’ English grammar learning. The researcher in the control group asked the participants to answer the written questions in their workbooks and the participants in the experimental group do their assignments using the computers. Based on the post-test results, both CALL-based and written question tasks had positive effects on the participants. The study supports the idea that motivating tasks can have positive results toward language learning.

Keywords

EN

CALL; grammar; tasks; learners

• Publisher: IATEFL Poland Computer Special Interest Group & University of Nicosia
• Journal: Teaching English with Technology
• Year: 2018
• Volume: 18
• Issue: 3
• Pages: 54-68

Contributors

author

Alian Jalal ed-din

• Payame Noor University

author

Khodabandeh Farzaneh

• Payame Noor University

author

Soleimani Hassan

• Payame Noor University

References

• Abaylı, N. (2001). An Investigation of Students’ and Teachers’ Attitudes toward the Video Class. Unpublished Master’s thesis. Ankara: Bilkent University.
• Abu Naba’h, A., Hussain, J. , AI-Omari, A., & Shadeifat, S. (2009). The effect of Computer Assisted Language Learning in teaching English grammar on the achievement of secondary students in Jordan. The International Arab Journal of Information Technology, 6(4), 431-439.
• Akbulut, Y. (2008). Exploration of the attitudes of freshman foreign language students toward using computers at a Turkish state university. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 7, 18-31.
• Al-Mansour,N., & Al-Shorman, R. (2012). The effect of computer-assisted instruction on Saudi University students’ learning of English. Journal of King Saud University-Language and Translations. 24, 51-56.
• Bayraktar, S. (2002). A meta analysis of computer assisted instruction in evidence education. Journal of Research on Teaching in Education, 34(2), 173-188.
• Beatty, K. (2003). Teaching and Researching Computer Assisted Language Learning. New York: Longman.
• Branden, K. (2006). Task-based Language Education: From Theory to Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Bugler, D., & Hunt, A. (2002). Implementing Task-based Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Bygate, M., Skehan, P., & Swain, M. (2001). Researching Pedagogic Tasks: Second Language Learning, Teaching, and Testing. Harlow: Longman.
• Carless, D. (2002). Implementing task-based learning with young learners. ELT Journal, 56(4), 389–396.
• Carless, D. (2003). Factors in the implementation of task-based teaching in primary schools. System, 31(4), 485–500.
• Celce-Murcia, M. (2002). What it makes sense to teach grammar through context and through discourse. In E. Hinkel & S. Fotos (eds.), New Perspectives on Grammar Teaching in Second Language Classrooms (pp. 119-134). Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.
• Chikamatsu, N. (2003). The effect of computer use on L2 Japanese writing. Foreign Language Annals, 19(30), 583-599.
• Choo, J. P. L., & Too, W. K. (2012). Teachers’ perceptions in using task based instruction (TBI) for teaching grammar. Journal of Interdiciplinary Research in Education, 2(1), 47-64.
• Chun, D., Kern, R., & Smith, B. (2016). Technology in language use, language teaching, and language learning. The Modern Language Journal, 10(11), 64-80.
• Coniam, D. & R. Wong (2004). Internet relay chat as a tool in the autonomous development of ESL learners’ English language ability: An exploratory study. System, 32(3), 321-335.
• Ellis, R. (2002). The place of grammar instruction in the second/ foreign language curriuculum. In E. Hinkel & S. Fotos (Eds.), New Perspectives on Grammar Teaching in Second Language Classrooms (pp. 17-34). Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.
• Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based Language Learning and Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Felix, U. (2005). Analysing recent CALL effectiveness research – Towards a common agenda. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 18(1), 1-32.
• Hasan, A. (2014). The effect of using task-based learning in teaching English on the oral performance of the secondary school participants. International Interdisciplinary Journal of Education, 3(2), 250-264.
• Hewer, S. (2007). CALL methodology: integrating CALL into study programs. Module 2.1. In G. Davies (ed.), Information and Communications Technology for Language Teachers (ICT4LT). Slough, Thames Valley University. Retrieved from http://www.ict4lt.org/en/en-mod2-1.htm
• Hubbard, P. (2005). A review of subject characteristics in CALL research. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 18(5), 351-368.
• Hudson, R., & Walmsley, J. (2005). The English Patient: English grammar and teaching in the twentieth century. Journal of Linguistics, 41(3), 593-622.
• Karimi, F. (2010). The effect of using information-gap tasks on Iranian EFL lexical development. Retrieved May 10, 2015 from http://eslarticle.com/pub/english-language-learning-ell/4052-the-effect-of-using-information-gap-tasks-on-iranian-efl-lexical-devel.html.
• Korkgöz, Y. (2011). A blended learning study on implementing video recorded speaking tasks in task based classroom instruction. TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 10 (4). Retrieved May, 2013 at http://www.tojet.net/articles/v10i4/1041.pdf.
• Lee, I. L. (2005). A Study of Teachers’ and Students’ Perceptions of Task-Based EFL Instruction in Vocational High School (Unpublished Master’s thesis). Taiwan, National Chung Cheng University.
• Linse, C. T. (2005). Practical English Language Teaching: Young Learners. New York: McGraw-Hill.
• Liu, T.-Y., & Y.-L. Chu (2010). Using ubiquitous games in an English listening and speaking course: Impact on learning outcomes and motivation. Computers & Education, 55(2), 630-643.
• Lochana, M., & Deb, G. (2006). Task based teaching: learning English without tears. Asian EFL Journal, 8(3), 140-154.
• Lopez, J. (2004). Introducing TBI for teaching English in Brazil: Learning how to leap the hurdles. In B.L. Leaver & J. R. Willis (eds.), Task-based Instruction in Foreign Language Education (pp. 83-95). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
• Mann, G. (2006). A task-based approach to the development of the oral skills of international law participants. Research in Post-Compulsory Education, 11(2), 217-234.
• McDonough, K., & Mackey, A. (2000). Communicative tasks, conversational interaction and linguistic form: An empirical study of Thai. Foreign Language Annals, 33(1), 82-91.
• Nakata, T. (2008). English vocabulary learning with word lists, word cards and computers: Implications from cognitive psychology research for optimal spaced learning. ReCALL, 20(1), 3-20.
• O’Hara, S., & R. Pritchard (2008). Hypermedia authoring as a vehicle for vocabulary development in middle school English as a second language classrooms. Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 82(2), 60-65.
• Rahimpour, M. (2008). Implementation of task-based approaches to language teaching. Pazhuhesh-e-Zabanha-ye Khareji Journal, University of Tehran, 41, 45-61.
• Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. (2001). Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Robinson, P. (2005). Cognitive complexity and task sequencing: Studies in a componential framework for second language task design. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 43, 1-32.
• Ruso, N. (2007). The influence of Task Based Learning on EFL classrooms. Asian EFL Journal, 18. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED523922.pdf
• Samuda, V. (2001). Guiding relationships between form and meaning during task performance: The role of the teacher. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan, & M. Swain (eds.), Researching Pedagogic Tasks: Second Language Learning, Teaching, and Testing (pp. 119-134). Harlow: Longman.
• Samuda, V., & Bygate, M. (2008). Tasks in Second Language Learning. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Shehadeh, A. (2001). Self and other-initiated modified output during task-based interaction. TESOL Quarterly, 35(3), 433-57.
• Shenton, A., & Pagett, L. (2007). From ‘bored’ to screen: The use of the interactive whiteboard for literacy in six primary classrooms in England. Literacy, 41(3), 129-136.
• Skehan, P. (2001). Tasks and language performance assessment. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan, & M. Swain (eds.), Researching Pedagogic Tasks: Second Language Learning, Teaching, and Testing (pp. 167-185). Harlow: Longman.
• Stockwell, G. (2007). Vocabulary on the move: Investigating an intelligent mobile phone-base vocabulary tutor. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 20(4), 365-383.
• Tanyeli, N. (2009). The efficiency of online English language instruction on students’ reading skills. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1, 564-567.
• Torky, Sh, (2006). The Effectiveness of a Task-Based Instruction Program in Developing the English Language Speaking Skills of Secondary Stage Participants. Unpublished PhD. Dissertation, Cairo: Women’s College, Ain Shams University.
• Wang, F, (2010). The necessity of grammar teaching. Journal of English Language Teaching, 3(2), 78-81.
• Willis, D., & Willis, J. (2007). Doing Task-based Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Zhang, T., Gao, T., Ring, G., & Zhang, W. (2007). Using online discussion forums to assist a traditional English class. International Journal on E-Learning, 6(4), 623-643.