I TECHNOLOGY MATTERS
Does Synchronous ComputerMediated Communication improve EFL learners' oral proficiency? Reza Norouzian and Dr. Zohreh Eslami investigate the benefits of S-CMC in classroom interaction.
F
or several years now, the global spread of communication technologies has altered the course of language teaching methods. This has fueled speculations about the effect of these technologies on EFL (English as a Foreign Language) learners' oral proficiency. Given this growing momentum, we sought to conduct a small-scale research project with 30 freshmen studying English translation to see if dyadic online textbased chatting works for a speaking course we ran at college.
Fostering interaction Increasing opportunities for learners to interact is central to most foreign language learning models. Yet, utterly consistent with this interaction idea is lowering the affective barriers to language learning. The initial impetus to promote the belief came from the Monitor Model (Krashen, 1977). In its simplest form, the theory is invoked to stress the overarching role of language input and affective filters. After this theory lost its edge in the 1980s, Long's (1983) Interaction Hypothesis added to the early literature that learners, in addition to receiving input, should engage in conversational interaction. At first sight, we may think we hold the key to the understanding of the problem. Nevertheless, the dilemma of interactive language learning is compounded by the
40
Modern English Teacher
lack of considered judgments on the implication of interaction. For the most part, this stems from the complex nature of in-class interactions themselves. Learning through interaction then becomes a challenging task when different constraints are brought to bear.
Problems with learners Learners are generally hesitant, cautious, and passive in classroom interactions. They tend to participate minimally or only when they are called upon. This being the case, the largest single concern for teachers is how to catch the student's interest and spark their enthusiasm so that they begin to speak in class. By far, most of the learners view language learning as reactive (see Mackey, 2007). Except for rare occasions, they formulate proper answers but this again comes in response to the teacher's initiated talk. In the opinion of many learners, the teacher should model everything. The teacher gives the instructions and learners have to answer his/her questions. Piecing these together, students are not accustomed to speaking in the English class. Additionally, learners' previous negative social experiences, anxiety about making mistakes in front of others, peer pressure, pressure to respond quickly with no wait time to construct the message, and above all low or uneven participation in the class discourse where one
person takes over, form the basis of the learners' affective barriers to successful learning.
Problems with teachers Interaction in the form of smallgroupwork presents so many problems for teachers. Virtually all English teachers concur in the belief that traditional settings make teachers reluctant to implement interaction in their classrooms. At its core, the problem is associated with teachers' having little time to cover the course syllabus compared to the number of students. A common scenario is that most groupwork activities might lead to partial loss of control in the class. Another problem is that, in groupwork, teachers cannot monitor and give the required feedback. Under these tightly-knit circumstances, not only do students' errors go unnoticed, but also there is the further risk of learners' use of their native language without the teacher's supervision. The last thing that might happen is that students, as we have seen, resort to at-the-same-level peers, which can be a misalliance. Often placed at the forefront of teacher characteristics is that there should be nothing doctrinaire about teachers' approach to teaching foreign languages. For this reason, technology would be an option to motivate the ever-present need for class interaction.
July 2013 Volume 22 No. 3
TECHNOLOGY MAnERS I
Synchronous ComputerMediated Communication (S-CMC) Computer-Mediated Communication (CMC) is communication that occurs through, or is facilitated by, computer. By contrast, synchronous CMC is electronic discourse happening in real time when all participants are online at the same time. Either way, CMC has the advantage of facilitating and fostering interpersonal communication. Without a doubt, CMC takes the learning process well beyond the four walls of the classroom. Likewise, S-CMC has enjoyed considerable attention within the realm of English language teaching. This is due in large part to its similarity with face-to-face interaction. The interlocutors sometimes can tackle the inaccuracy in their language right on the spot. In any event, S-CMC comes in different forms, namely chat groups, instant messaging and discussion groups.
"the problems of large cities". In the next session, we divided the students into 15 groups and had them engage in weekly online dyadic discussions for 45-60 minutes in the language laboratory. Six topics for six consecutive weeks were assigned (all topics appear in Appendix A). Students were required to send copies of each chatting session (chat logs) as email attachments. After the treatment period, students' scores on the post-test (second oral proficiency) were compared to those of their pretest (initial oral proficiency). Using a matched group t-test, a significant difference between participants' scores on the pre- and the post-test was observed. Also contrary to popular belief, the analysis of participants' chat logs coded both for the number of turns and number of words per student in an online session revealed that unequal participation related to differences in oral proficiency was present but not dominant.
Discussion and conclusion
To promote the use of technology in language learning, we used instant messaging in an exploratory study and examined its effect on students' oral language development.
We set out to investigate whether online dyadic text-based discussions can affect EFL learners' oral proficiency. In doing so, we selected 30 college freshmen students at the Azad University where one of us teaches speaking and listening courses to BA students of English translation. As a first step, we assessed learners for their initial oral mastery through a pretest. For the sake of convenience, we utilized Faraday's (1994) guideline for evaluating their oral proficiency. To make sure all learners were familiar with online instant messaging, we allocated one whole session to giving them instructions. We employed "Google Talk" for interaction through instant messaging.
At issue here is the pressing need for dispelling misconceptions and implementing positive changes in traditional EFL classrooms. Meanwhile, as technology smoothes the progress of learners' oral English, teachers should keep monitoring the online discussions and encourage students to use their linguistic mind. Perhaps, before we go on to the conclusion, this is the place to digress a little and talk about the taking of facts from other research findings. We have to answer one crucial question. It might defy logic that chat-based communications, which emerge in the written form, would push oral proficiency forward. The short answer is that Payne and Whitney (2002) were interested in exploring this from different angles and suffice it here to say that they proved S-CMC could advance the same kind of cognitive mechanisms used in and ideal for speaking.
In the orientation session, we asked everyone to exchange back and forth some information on the topic of
The findings of our multi-purpose piece of research suggest that S-CMC can be one solution to the
Putting S-CMC into use
July 2013 Volume 22 No. 3
viww.onlineMET.com
imbalance of interaction commonly tilted in favor of extroverts and proficient students. Overall, four main advantages accrue from using S-CMC in the EFL classroom: •
It minimizes the psychological, linguistic and cultural barriers of classroom interaction and creates a less threatening, less stressful environment, especially for the linguistically insecure and shy learners.
•
It indirectly helps stimulate the development of the oral proficiency of learners.
•
It boosts language production. As a result, it makes learners more observant about the language.
•
The environment is more learnercentered and thus elicits more honest communication (learners used more self-disclosure and expression of emotion). This way, it taps into learners' creativity in catering for the linguistic needs they encounter.
This approach, from the way it worked for our class, acknowledges that in clarifying laws of class interaction, the effect of individual factors may coalesce with the effect of affective factors. Thus in nearly every way, meaningful chat-based exchanges provide a unique medium with the power to cross diverse types of affective barriers. Placing these online tasks in a wider EFL/ESL context, however, does not necessarily increase the success rate in language proficiency but in all probability does modify the pattern of class interactions. It is our firm opinion that at least every two sessions of an EFL class per week should be devoted to online dyadic discussions. Further, teachers' scrutiny and ongoing assessment should be at the heart of these sessions. Still, caution must be advised that both fluency and accuracy especially at higher levels remain a high priority.
I TECHNOLOGY MATTERS
The final point by way of conclusion is that it would be a mistake to assume that all potential affective barriers are removed through simulated interactions. However, chat-based interaction is another invaluable vehicle for creating stress-free environments.
His main areas of interest are Written Feedback, ILP, Qualitative research and CALL He has published a number of articles in internationally renowned journals. Email:
[email protected]
REFERENCES
Long, M. H. (1983) Native speaker/ non-native speaker conversation and the negotiation of comprehensible input. Applied Linguistics 4, pp.126-41 Mackey, A. (2007) Interaction as practice. In R. M. Dekeyser (2007), Practice in a second language: Perspectives from applied linguistics and cognitive psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Discuss why each of these qualities is more or less important in your search fora future partner.
Discussion topic 3
Farhady, H., jafarpur. A., & Birjandi, P. (1994) Testing Language Skills: from theory to practice. Tehran: SAMT Publication Krashen, S. (1977) The monitor model for adult second language performance. In M. Burt, H. Dulay, and M. Finocchiaro, (eds.). Viewpoints on English as a Second Language, NY: Regents
Together decide which of these qualities are the most important in your partner and rank the others from the most important to the least.
Zohreh Esiami is an Associate Professor in the department of Teaching, Learning, and Culture at Texas AHM University in College Station, Texas. She has more than 15 years experience in language teacher education in the USA, Iran, and Qatar. She has numerous publications in the area of ESL/ EAP/EIL, intercultural pragmatics, pragmatics and language teaching and language teacher education. Email:
[email protected]
Please discuss with your classmate, which of the problems listed below are currently or have been major difficulties of our country. Try finding a solution for them with your classmate. Birth control. Border disputes. Crime, Diseases, Gap between poor and rich. Housing, Illiteracy, Immigration, Inflation, National debt, Natural disasters. Pollution, Unemployment, War.
Discussion topic 4 Who should decide basic things about teenagers' lives- what they major in, how they spend their money, who they go out with - the teenagers themselves or their parents?
Discussion topic 5 Payne, J.S. & Whitney, P.J. (2002) Developing L2 oral proficiency through synchronous CMC: output, working memory, and interlanguage development. CALIC journal, 20, pp.7-32
Reza Norouzian and Zohreh Esiami
APPENDIX Discussion topic 1 Discuss your wants with your classmate. The following questions can help you start the discussion. (Select just one of them). What do you want to change in your life physically, psychologically? What are your wishes? Is it better to have than wish? If your life were on a videotape and you could go back and edit parts out, what parts would you change? Is there anyone's advice, which you regret having or not having taken?
Discussion topic 2 Reza Norouzian is an Applied Linguistics PhD candidate at the University of Tehran. He currently runs EAP courses at the University of Tehran, Tehran University of Medical Sciences and at the English department of the Azad University.
Modern English Teacher
Please discuss with your classmate the characteristics that you think are important in your future partner? (Your husband or your wife). Please mention at least five or six characteristics.
Have you ever thought that how you can help street kids? While there are people who believe that it is just the responsibility of the government and special institutions to take care of them, many think that they cannot be indifferent to them. What do you think? Suppose for example that you see a kid or a teenager is stealing something from a shop, what will you do?
Discussion topic 6 Please discuss your opinion on telling lies with your classmate. Do you think lying is actually bad? Have you ever heard of white lies? What are they? According to you in which situations it would be convenient to tell white lies? Most people tend to show some reaction when they tell lies like they tend to avoid eye contact or they touch their nose or ears. How good are you at spotting these reactions?
July 2013 Volume 22 No. 3
Copyright of Modern English Teacher is the property of Pavilion Publishing & Media Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
