Chapter X Enhancing oral communication skills using mobile phones among undergraduate English language learners in Malaysia Ramiza Darmi and Peter Albion
1
Abstract The study introduced the use of mobile phones in an English language learning course to second language learners studying at a higher education institution in Malaysia. Mobile phones have multifunctional capabilities that can be used anytime and anywhere at the convenience of the learners; therefore, the study aimed to investigate the possibility of using mobile phones as tools to improve the oral interaction skills of the learners. The study explored the basic functions built into mobile phones relevant for an oral communication skills course. A class of 50 learners was assigned as the Treatment group and another class of 26 learners as the No Treatment group. The Treatment group was introduced to the audio recording devices in mobile phones and encouraged to practice the tasks assigned before the evaluation. This study adopted a quantitative research design and the tools employed were a survey questionnaire and the course assessments. Data in the classroom were collected over a ten-week period. The findings demonstrated an increase in the performance of the learners at the end of the semester; nevertheless, the results must be interpreted with caution as use of mobile phones only started in week five of the ten-week semester which may not have given learners sufficient time to master the skills required to use them optimally for language learning.
1
Introduction
The minister in the Prime Minister‟s Department of Malaysia, the honorary Datuk Seri Wahid Omar, reported that 161,000 local graduates aged between 20-24 years old from the total of 400,00 were unemployed (Bernama, 2015). Further, it was reported that the main factor contributing to the increase of the unemployment rate was the low quality of local graduates. An earlier survey administered to managers and senior managers across various industries in Malaysia reported that 70% of them agreed that the quality of the recent local graduates was only average (JobStreet, 2011). Another crucial finding from the survey was that the criteria used by both managers and senior managers when employing recent graduates included good interpersonal communication skills, good command of the English language and the right salary expectation. In Malaysia, it is widely believed among employers that graduates who have a good command of the English language required for success in the business environment are able to reflect their competence in their confidence and proficiency with which they respond when the job interview is conducted in English. In addition, a newspaper reported on a survey conducted in 2011 with 174,464 university undergraduates which found that 24.6% of them were still jobless within the first 6 months after graduation. The two main reasons identified were a lack of language proficiency, particularly in English, and insufficient knowledge and competency in the jobs they applied for (The Star, 2013). The media reports affirm that local graduates who demonstrate competence in the English language have an added advantage over less competent students when employing for jobs. R. Darmi (Corresponding author), Department of English, Faculty of Modern Languages and Communication, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Malaysia email:
[email protected] P. Albion School of Teacher Education and Early Childhood, Faculty of Business, Education, Law and Arts, University of Southern Queensland, Australia email:
[email protected]
1
Malaysia is situated in the South-east Asian region and is made up of Peninsular Malaysia and East Malaysia, was once colonised by the British, and achieved its independence on 31 August 1957. During the British administration, English was used as the official language throughout the nation, including for communication among the government sectors. Due to the widespread use of English language as the medium of communication, the British not only established English medium primary and secondary schools but also schools to cater for each of the three ethnic groups, the Malays, Chinese and Indians. The Malays are native to the region, whereas both Chinese and Indian people migrated to Malaya (the name for Malaysia before independence) due to trading activity during that era. Nevertheless, schools were allowed to use the language spoken by each of the ethnic groups as the medium of instruction. Post-independence governments implemented the National Language and National Education Policies for primary and secondary levels of education (Darus, 2009) and agreed on Bahasa Melayu as the national and official language of the country, whilst English was formally accorded the status of a second language (L2) for Malaysia (Darus, 2009; Thirusanku & Yunus, 2012). The three ethnic groups who had served in the British administration and had been using the English language for communication (Thirusanku & Yunus, 2012) generally accepted the decision for the English language as L2. The importance of the English language is greatly emphasised in the Malaysian education system. First, both Bahasa Melayu and the English language have been made compulsory language subjects to be learned in primary and secondary schools from the age of seven to seventeen years old. As a result, Malaysian learners who complete formal education at both levels would have learned the English language for eleven years. The recent plan of education development of Malaysia for 2012-2025 (Ministry of Education, 2012) again strongly emphasises literacy in the English language for Year 1 to Year 3 learners in the primary school plan, supporting the importance of the English language. One of the conditions to continue to pre-university programmes is that learners must obtain a pass in the English language in the national examination administered before the end of the upper secondary level known as the Malaysian Certificate of Education or Sijil Pelajaran Malaysia (SPM), which assesses academic subjects learnt in Form Four and Form Five of the upper secondary level. Subsequently, an entry requirement into undergraduate programmes at any local higher education institutions (HEIs) in Malaysia includes scoring between Band 1, the lowest score, and Band 6, the highest score in a national English language examination known as the Malaysian University English Test (MUET). It is a criterion-referenced test and each band reflects the individual learner‟s English language proficiency level. The achieved score is used to determine the different English language courses the learners need to complete at the undergraduate level. MUET measures four language skills; reading (45%), writing (25%), listening (15%) and speaking (15%). In recent years, there has been an increasing interest in mobile learning in the areas of education in general, and in the field of L2 learning specifically (Reinders & Cho, 2012). It is predicted that personal and portable mobile technologies can have a positive impact on learning when learning can take place outside of the classroom and in the learner‟s environment (Naismith, Lonsdale, Vavoula, & Sharples, 2004). The survey report on mobile phone users in Malaysia in 2014 revealed that the largest group of users were in the age group 20-24 (18.8%) followed by users in the age group 25-29 years old (16.3%) (Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission, 2015). The statistics reflect the increased ownership of mobile phones among Malaysians, signifying the adoption of these technologies as a necessary, rather than a luxury item. Undergraduate learners in HEIs in Malaysia are mostly in the age range of 20-30; therefore, mobile learning using mobile phones has become a central issue for educators to investigate for implementation in L2 learning contexts.
2
Review of the literature
The aim of this study was to explore the integration of mobile phones in the English language learning classroom with the purpose of assessing the impact of using mobile phones on oral interaction skills among Malaysian undergraduate learners. This section reviews past studies on oral interaction skills and mobile learning.
2
2.1 Oral interaction skills Oral interaction refers to spoken interaction in which the skills involve reciprocal activities of listening and speaking that are considered to be difficult for non-native learners (Chen, 2011). The difficulty is due to the need to understand a message that is not uttered in the mother tongue. As a result, learners find both skills difficult because they ought to understand the spoken statements and at the same time formulate a response with attempts to use the correct structure that the learners have been taught (Kern, 1995). In addition, L2 and foreign language learners find it challenging to interact in the English language as they encounter various linguistic problems that handicap and hamper their attempts to interact (Zhang, 2009). The common circumstance in non-English speaking countries is a lack of authentic target language environments for L2 learners to develop their interaction skills, creating an imbalance in classroom participation. Instead of being the avenue for learners to practise interacting in the target language while developing their proficiency and confidence in using the language, English teachers teach the target language as outlined in the school syllabus to prepare the learners for assessments (Puteh-Behak, Mohd Khaja & Darmi, 2015). There is no difference in learning the English language from other academic subjects at schools and learners are made aware of the importance of obtaining a pass in the English language examination. As a result, the teaching approaches make the learners become less active, restricting them from interacting in the target language and consequently affecting their fluency in the English language. Limited opportunities to use the English language in conversation contributes to low confidence levels in L2 learners about communicating in the target language (Barlow, Wisessuwan, & Tubsree, 2014; Boonkit, 2010; Chen, 2011). The learners avoid making mistakes when interacting in the target language, thus creating inactive English language learning classrooms due to limited participation from the learners. Other factors reported are negative experiences and perceptions of the learners toward their teachers and the language content, as well as the learning and teaching process (Kumaran, 2010; Samat, 2010; Yang, Li, & Hua, 2012). It is believed that L2 or foreign language learners experience language anxiety which according to Horwitz et al. (1986) is a situation-specific type of anxiety responsible for negative emotional reactions during language learning. Furthermore, researchers on L2 acquisition agree that language anxiety inhibits the learning and/or production of an L2 (Horwitz, 2010). Malaysian learners vary on the academic status and social life of the family. For example, those who study at schools located in urban areas are more prepared to use the English language even outside the classroom than those who study in rural areas. Though they are often reminded about the importance of the language in HEIs and later for careers, the English language is a foreign language to learners who study in the rural areas as the language is not widely spoken. This is in contrast to the learning approach by their counterparts in urban areas who easily gain benefits from social interaction. For oral interaction to be effective, L2 learners need to develop their ability to use the target language appropriately in social interactions and beyond the classroom walls. Competency in oral interaction skills demonstrates the extent of knowledge or the amount of acquired grammar and vocabulary, all of which lead to the construction of sentences that learners need to produce and adapt to the circumstances (Khamkhien, 2011). One of the initiatives an English language teacher introduced was preparing a flow-chart to assist her L2 learners (Kumaran, 2010). The flow-chart contained ideas on what to say using the target language. The study found that the learners who had the best language competence agreed on the use of the flow-chart in guiding them to speak but the learners who were less comfortable with the language structures experienced problems performing the activity. Nevertheless, the learners enjoyed, felt comfortable and were confident working with peers without worrying about making mistakes when they had to role-play. Similarly, the use of drama activities for teaching increased the involvement of both undergraduate and postgraduate learners and they showed greater interaction among themselves and improvement in their oral skills by the end of the semester (Gill, 2013). The use of drama scenarios encouraged speaking opportunities and as the learners engaged in cooperative learning with other group members, this boosted their confidence level to speak in the target language. Not only did they demonstrate better fluency in the target language but they also showed greater willingness to interact in the language during the communicative-drama activities than in earlier sessions without the drama lessons. With the advancement of technology, computer-mediated communication (CMC) offers opportunities for teachers to construct activities in order to help different types of learners to develop oral skills (Blake, 2009; Chen, 2011; Ko, 2012; Abu Bakar, Latiff & Hamat, 2013; Yang et. al., 2012). Synchronous CMC was introduced to Taiwanese learners who were learning French to acquire oral interaction skills. The finding from this study was that
3
students considered it useful in structuring conversation contexts, formulating thoughts and reflecting on French linguistic features (Ko, 2012). In addition, synchronous CMC was found to benefit intermediate level English proficiency learners in developing their oral fluency and the use of CMC in learning environments contributed to the improvement of fluency in the target language (Blake, 2009). Similarly, an asynchronous online discussion forum was found to benefit low proficiency English language learners as they could develop both audio and video recordings of their discussions and then listen to the recorded discussions (Abu Bakar et al., 2013). The learners viewed such a learning environment as a platform for them to practise speaking in English and develop their selfconfidence to interact in the target language. Low-intermediate level Taiwanese college learners had problems with English pronunciation and agreed that online and interactive exercises which provided immediate feedback on their performance were effective at enhancing their oral interaction skills (Chen, 2011). In addition, practice is also necessary for the development of fluency in the target language. Online discussions facilitated by English teaching assistants who act as models for the foreign language learners to imitate offered them opportunities to practise in the target language discussion, which further improved the confidence levels of students (Yang et al., 2012).
2.2 Mobile learning In recent years, interest has increased in mobile learning in the areas of education in general, and in the field of L2 learning specifically (Reinders & Cho, 2012). Since mobile learning has emerged as a new trend in learning, studies have been initiated on opportunities to support mobile learning as an extension to „learning that occurs in or outside of a classroom or formal education setting, is not fixed to a particular time or place, and is supported by the use of a mobile device‟ (UNESCO, 2012). There are multiple definitions of mobile learning given by researchers in mobile learning. Sharples et al. (2007) define mobile learning as a process of seeking knowledge through conversations across multiple contexts among people and personal interactive technologies. Brown (2005) labels mobile learning as an extension of elearning and accomplishing the learning using small and portable devices. According to Ally (2009), “mobile learning through the use of wireless mobile technology allows anyone to access information and learning materials from anywhere and at anytime” (p. 1). The concept of mobile learning encourages learners to take control of what they need to learn, access the learning materials and related information independently, and fosters learner autonomy. Figure 1 illustrates the essential elements for mobile learning that include the tools or technology (paraphernalia), the spatial dimension (location) and the participants (learners). Mobile learning takes place when learners use any technology to learn anywhere at any time necessary. In the classroom, research has witnessed the result of mobile learning when the learners become active rather than passive and voluntarily engage in the learning process (Embi & Panah, 2013).
Fig. 1 Diagram of mobile learning through paraphernalia, location and learners (Embi & Mohd Nordin, 2013). Reprinted with permission.
Past research studies have looked at learners’ perceptions and their acceptance towards mobile learning. At the initial stage of the introduction of mobile learning these assessments are crucial to language teachers and others considering the use of mobile learning for teaching (Corbeil & Valdes-Corbeil, 2007; Keller, 2011) because they provide information from the perspectives of learners about incorporating mobile technology as an additional learning medium (Abas, Peng, & Mansor, 2009). There are a range of mobile devices to choose from which are appropriate for various learning purposes, but they are only tools to enhance the learning process (Hussin, Manap,
4
Amir, & Krish, 2012). The choice of a particular mobile technology is not as important as making the learning experience compelling and encouraging effective interaction and engagement using the technology (Hussin et al., 2012; Wagner, 2005). In the context of Malaysian HEIs, a number of studies on the readiness of learners towards the implementation of mobile learning have been conducted. This includes studies with on-campus learners and distance learners. Undergraduate and postgraduate learners from two public universities in Malaysia revealed that 100% of the learners owned a mobile phone (Hussin et al., 2012). The basic functions they use on their mobile phones include 3G service (68%), multimedia messages (88%) and internet access (76%) which further confirmed that the mobile phones owned by the learners met the basic requirements for them to engage in mobile learning. Learners indicated their familiarity with the basic skills of using mobile phones including emailing, downloading files and reading online. 75% of the learners realised the benefits of mobile learning and about 50% of them indicated their readiness to allocate extra costs to spend on mobile learning, including a rise in phone bills at that time but other learners were not ready to accept the expense. In general, undergraduate and postgraduate learners were willing to engage in mobile learning but were not always able or willing to accommodate additional financial costs. A preliminary study on mobile learning using a survey analysed 713 complete questionnaires from Year 2 to Final Year undergraduate learners of Universiti Malaysia Sabah, East Malaysia (Choon-Keong, Ing, & Kean-Wah, 2013). The results indicated 60% of the learners owned either a tablet or smartphone with Wi-Fi access capability. In addition, 86% of the learners viewed mobile learning as beneficial and useful for managing time, 86% agreed that mobile learning was conducive to learning, 43% perceived motivation in learning, 86% commented on improving learners’ productivity, 84% would complete assignments faster and 87% said it was helpful to learning in the course. The learners considered that mobile learning would improve their productivity as it allows for retrieval of extra information through links given by course lecturers or through the help of online search engines such as Google. This was further affirmed by an interview respondent that mobile learning had facilitated her learning, enabling her to work quickly and more productively. In addition, mobile learning helped her to stay connected with friends at a distance besides making her learning meaningful through discussions. A survey was administered to 6000 undergraduate adult distance learners between 31 to 35 years old who were studying at 31 learning centres of the Open University Malaysia (Abas et al., 2009). A total of 2837 completed questionnaires were received and analysed. The findings revealed 99% owned a mobile phone and the majority used a prepaid service. In addition, 66% expressed their willingness to purchase a new mobile device since they realised the benefits of mobile learning, 43% agreed that mobile learning would better assist them in with managing their time, 43% were interested in learning using a mobile device and 50% believed that mobile learning offers flexibility in learning. A study compared the implementation of mobile learning between 69 undergraduate learners from science and social science disciplines using a questionnaire designed by Hussin et al. (2012) which has 45 items (α = 0.76) (Arif, Yazi, Radzi, Hussin, & Embi, 2013). The online surveys contained three domains of readiness, namely basic physical readiness (e.g. mobile-telephone properties), skill readiness (e.g. ability to make use of mobile devices), and psychological readiness (e.g. understand the idea of integrating learning and the use of handheld devices). The findings showed a significant difference on physical readiness between science and social science learners. The science learners showed greater readiness for mobile learning than those learners from the social science discipline, suggesting that learners from the science discipline were more eager to explore new mobile technologies than their social science counterparts. In regards to skill readiness, learners from the science discipline have greater ability to make full use of mobile devices (such as smartphones), to access the Internet and reading materials compared to learners from the social science discipline. However, there were no significant difference between the two disciplines on psychological readiness, suggesting that the learners were already prepared for, and have accepted the existence of, the technology. The study concluded that Malaysian learners at the HEIs have mobile language learning readiness and are open to accepting the use of technology for teaching and learning. Previous studies that have researched the use of mobile phones to improve different language skills included an exploration of reading skills (Bahrani, 2011; Chang & Hsu, 2011; Tsutsui, et al. 2012) and listening skills (Stockwell, 2013; Yamada et. al., 2011) but none for writing skills. Other past studies focused on English for specific purposes, for instance, English for Tourism (Hsu, 2012), idioms (Hayati, Jalilifar & Mashhadi, 2013); grammar (Gabarre & Gabarre, 2010) and prepositions (Begum, 2011). Two studies investigated the use of the video recording feature on mobile phones by Japanese advanced English language learners (Gromik, 2009). Both studies required individual learners to produce video productions from week 4 to week 13 of the course. After the production, they presented and discussed the videos with the teacher and
5
peers in the class and were given time to revise the production. For the first study, the length of the task was between 15 to 30-seconds and the aim was to assess the feasibility and suitability of the learning approach for the language class. The majority of the students agreed on the benefits even though some had reservations about the implementation such as expressing their opinion in the target language . For the second study, the task included a 30-second production every week based on a topic assigned by the teacher. The analysis of the video performances indicated an increase in the number of words the learners spoke in one monologue, 46% improvement in word production, and 37% increase in words uttered per second. Interviews with the learners after completion of the exercise indicated that participants were positive about the use of the mobile phones to support learning anytime anywhere and considered learning using a mobile phone to be an interesting and innovative concept. Subsequently, Gromik and Anderson (2010) carried out an action research study to identify the feasibility of integrating mobile phones to enhance language learning. The 14-week research project engaged second-year Japanese undergraduate learners who have studied the English language for seven years. The learners had autonomy over the design of their content and video production without receiving assistance with grammatical or linguistics features during the production of the videos from the teacher. The learners used mobile phones to produce videos from the second to the final week of the semester over three stages. The videos were examined in terms of length and the number of lines and words uttered. For analysis purposes, video productions submitted for these three stages -2, 5 and 7 - by 50 learners were selected. The teacher collected the first set of videos at stage 2 which were then ranscribed anf the speeches were coded. The results revealed an average speaking time of 20.7 s, the average speech line produced was 4 and the average word count per dialogue was 36.2 words. The final set of vieos were collected, transcribed and coded at stage 5. The results revealed average speaking time was 21.3 s, average speech lines produced was 4.2 lines and average word count per dialogue was 36.3 words. Results from both stages had not shown any major improvement on `the videos produced. To ascertain that learners had benefitted from the mobile phone-based learning activity, 16 learners were invited to deliver an impromptu speech on their opinion of the course with no time limit at stage 7. The impromptu speech did not allow the learners to write their speech which may have affected their speech production. The results revealed average speaking time was 27.1 s, average speech line produced was 5.06 and average word count 43.44 words. In general, the study discovered that the task was within the technological reach of the learners. The learners had access to electronic devices allowing them the opportunity to practise speaking, thinking and improving their linguistic performance in the target language. They were also able to review, evaluate and improve any aspects of their communicative performance before selecting and sending their best video performance to the evaluator. The research demonstrated that practice empowered the learners to improve their speaking ability. The past studies discussed in the section in on integrating mobile phones in speaking call for further research specifically to enhance oral communication skills to aid L2 or foreign language learners. In the Malaysian context, the most dominant users of mobile phones are in the age range of 20 to 30 years old, and past research studies on mobile learning readiness demonstrate student acceptance of mobile learning. As a result, the integration of mobile learning has become a central issue for educators to investigate including in the L2 learning context.
3
Research design
The research design of the study used quantitative methods. Data was collected via an online survey questionnaire using the Qualtrics online tool. The study used an experimental design aiming to investigate the effect of using mobile phones on oral interaction. Two groups are labelled as the Treatment and No Treatment where the former is exposed to the use of mobile phones and the latter was not, to provide a baseline for comparison.
2.3 Research context The study took place at a public HEI in Malaysia which is also one of the five designated research universities. All five research universities have the dual mission of leading research and providing an educational hub. Malaysia currently has a total of twenty public HEIs. The HEI where the study took place offers a preparatory science programme as well as undergraduate and postgraduate programmes.
6
2.4 Research participants The population of the study was L2 learners of an Oral Interaction course offered in Semester 1, 2012-2013 session. The oral interaction course is listed as one of the university courses that are compulsory for Malaysian learners who achieved Malaysian University English Test (MUET) bands 4 and below. The researcher was assigned two groups of learners who had enrolled in the course and embarked on the data collection after obtaining the ethical clearance from the relevant authorities. The first group was made up of 21 males and 29 females, and the second group was made up of 13 males and 13 females. The details of the English language proficiency of the learners are represented in Table 1 below. Table 1 English language proficiency of participants MUET result
Language user descriptor
Treatment group
No Treatment group
Band 4
Competent user
4
0
Band 3
Modest user
31
6
Band 2
Limited user
13
20
Band 1
Extremely limited user
2
0
50
26
Total
2.5 Instruments The main instrument used in the study was a survey questionnaire presented using the Qualtrics online tool. The questionnaire has three main sections. The first section sought background characteristics, level of education and English language proficiency based on national examinations. In addition, the data discussed in the study is based on the third section of the questionnaire which explores the learners‟ uses and readiness to use a mobile phone. The pretest survey questionnaire was available online once the semester commenced for four weeks and the post-test after the semester ended on week 14. Another instrument used for the study included the course assessment results of the English Oral Interaction course. The results of the assessments discussed in the study are pair conversation role play and group mock interviews which demonstrated the performance of the learners from both groups. The role play was assessed in week 8 and the mock interview was assessed in week 11. Results of the assessments are used to compare the Treatment group before and after integrating the mobile phones and between the Treatment and No Treatment groups. The learners from the former group were introduced to the use of mobile phones on week 3 after the semester commenced and used the technology for class activities for ten weeks. Participants underwent initial training on the use of mobile phone for the purposes of the study to familiarise students with the the technical and physical aspects of the mobile phones to achieve the research purpose. Participants were encouraged to use the mobile phones to record individual, pair, or class practices during the course of learning.
2.6 Data analysis The primary researcher adopted the „Description of performance level: Oral interaction‟ as described by Paltridge (1992) as the basis for assessing oral performance.The placement test had been administered for a total of 18 years in both its local context (New Zealand) and an international context (Japan). This established the reliability of the placement test. Prior to the evaluation, the main author briefed her colleague about the Oral interaction descriptor (Paltridge, 1992). The colleague was the teacher-participant for the study whose task was to do member checking on both course assessments. For the purpose of the current study, the researcher referred and identified the equivalent level of MUET band achieved by the learners to the descriptors set for the Oral interaction descriptor (Paltridge, 1992). The course
7
assessments administered in this study were graded according to the descriptor set for English for Academic Purpose placement testing.
4
Results and discussions
The study investigated the research question about the effects of integrating mobile phones with the aim of enhancing the oral interaction skills of Malaysian undergraduate learners. The use of mobile phones during the English oral interaction course took place with learners in the Treatment group. The participants were introduced to, and trained to use, the built-in features on the mobile phones, specifically using the audio/video recording features to record and review their oral interaction practices. For the first assessment, the task assigned to the learners was role play in a pair or trio. An example of the situation is as given in table 2. Table 2 Example of assessment task given to students for the first assessment Situation 4 Speaker A One of your friends missed the first lecture for the day. You meet him/her later. Ask him/her what happened in the morning. Maintain the conversation through follow-up questions. Speaker B On your way to class from Taman Sri Serdang, you stopped to assist an accident victim. As a result, you missed the first class for the day. Your friend asks you what happened. Explain to him/her.
With reference to the assessment task above, after the pair of learners received it, they were given 30 minutes to prepare and practise the dialogue, applying the conversation skills taught. As done for other classrooms tasks, the learners were encouraged to record the practice using the mobile phones then review it for improvement. The researcher did not contribute any ideas during the practice. After 30 minutes the pair was called to perform for assessment. At the initial stage of the study, the learners from the Treatment group were categorised into three English language proficiency levels, namely Elementary (32%), Intermediate (60%) and Upper Intermediate (8%). The assessment was performed in week 8 of the semester and the analysis revealed that they showed progress on their proficiency levels. The learners have progressed to Upper Intermediate (46%) and Advanced (54%), as indicated in figure 2. As for the No Treatment group, at the beginning of the semester, the learners were categorised into three English language proficiency levels, namely Beginner (3.8%), Elementary (88.5%) and Intermediate (7.7%). As shown in figure 3, at the end of the semester, they progressed to Upper Intermediate level (46.2%) and Advanced level (53.8%). These similar results with the Treatment group were assumed to be associated with having regular face-toface practices with their peers. At the same time, learners from both the Treatment and No Treatment groups were not restricted from accessing the supplementary materials uploaded by the researcher on the learning management system (LMS) of the university. The second task was the assessing mock interview. The learners were provided with instruction on interview skills which included best approaches to conducting interviews, common questions ask in an interviews, and professional skills to demonstrate during interviews. On week 11, the class was formed into groups of four learners for the assessment. Two of them were appointed as interviewers and two other learners were interviewees. The assessment from each group lasted for 20 minutes. An example of the interview task is shown in table 3.
8
Fig. 2 Changes in English language levels of Treatment group measured using role play
Fig. 3 Changes in English language levels of No Treatment group measured using role play Table 3 Example of assessment task given to students for the first assessment Mock interview You are interested in a temporary job (part-time or full-time) during the long semester break. Select a job advertisement that you are interested in (the job advertisement selected should contain some job description and required qualifications). Based on the chosen advertisement you are to: a. make a list of attributes/skills that are relevant to the job. b. write 5 possible relevant interview questions the interviewee may be asked for the selected position. c. write appropriate responses to each question in (b). d. write 3 questions an interviewee may ask at the job interview. e. write appropriate responses to each question in (d).
The group of learners received the mock interview task in the first class during the week. The assessment took place two days after the first class. Students were also required to apply the interview skills taught in class. As
9
students would complete the task outside class hours, they were provided with similar videos to watch to assist them with preparing for the completiong of the task. Students from the treatment group were encouraged to record the mock interview using the mobile phones then review it together for improvement. The researcher did not provide additional material or suggestions to support the role play component of the task. After 30 minutes the pair was called to perform the mock interview and was formally evaluated. For the Treatment group at the beginning of the semester, the English language proficiency levels of the learners were Elementary (32%), Intermediate (60%) and Upper Intermediate (8%). They progressed to Upper Intermediate (42%) and Advanced (58%) (see figure 4). Data collected at the beginning of the semester for the No Treatment group categorised the learners as Beginner (3.8%), Elementary (88.5%) and Intermediate (7.7%). They progressed to Intermediate (3.8%), Upper Intermediate (42.3%) and Advanced (53.8%) based on the results of the mock interview assessment (see figure 5).
Fig. 4 Changes in English language levels of Treatment group measured using mock interview
Fig. 5 Changes in English language levels of No Treatment group measured using mock interview
The analyses of both the role-play assessment and mock interview assessments demonstrated an improvement in English language proficiency for both the Treatment and No Treatment groups. However, the results of the Treatment group cannot be attributed to the use of mobile phones only. This may be explained by the fact that the
10
learners in the Treatment group technically started exploring their mobile phones on week 3 and did not have sufficiently extended exposure time to the skills of using mobile phones for that use to have significantly influenced their learning. They may not have felt comfortable with the use of the mobile phones to do the oral interaction practices. On the other hand, the No Treatment group may have applied alternative approaches to practice prior to both assessments such as practice face to face with the group member. To conclude the study, the results of both assessments must be interpreted with caution because learners from the Treatment group have not had sufficiently extended exposure time to the skills related to the use of the mobile phones during the course of study. Therefore, this study has not been able to demonstrate the positive outcome of augmenting mobile phones to enhance production in oral interaction. For future research, it is suggested to introduce the use of audio/video features as early as possible after first meeting with the learners. Consequently, learners should be offered the opportunity to practice using the features of the mobile phones until they feel comfortable. In addition, learners should be encouraged to share recording of tasks using mobile phones as to get insights into their use of these devices during the completion of the tasks.
5
Conclusion
Learning is an active process and according to constructivist theory learners actually learn when they construct knowledge, think and learn through experience. In addition, collaborative learning promotes social interaction. Mobile learning is a new pedagogical approach within the Malaysian educational context and additional time is required to develop strategies to use these technologies effectively in the course of learning. Past studies indicate that mobile technologies are readily accepted as potential tools to support learning and teaching. The mobile learning approach requires three basic elements namely, the learner, technology and location. As extended support to learn English language is recommended, the study introduced the use of mobile phones to L2 learners studying at HEI in Malaysia. Every learner owned at least a mobile phone; thus the technology was relevant to be used as a tool to enhance oral production. The most important factor to introduce any technology is convenience to use; thus, possessing own phone indicated that the learners psychologically accept it. Finally, the use of mobile phones allowed the practise the skills beyond the classroom context.
References Abas, Z. W, Peng, C. L, & Mansor, N. (2009). A study on learner readiness for mobile learning at Open University Malaysia. Paper presented at the IADIS International Conference Mobile Learning 2009, Barcelona, Spain, 26-28 February 2009. Abu Bakar, N., Latiff, H., & Hamat, A. (2013). Enhancing ESL learners speaking skills through asynchronous online discussion forum. Asian Social Science 9(9): 224-233. doi: 10.5539/ass.v9n9p224. Ally, M. (2009). Mobile learning: Transforming the delivery of education and training. Athabasca: AU Press. Arif, A., Yazi, N., Radzi, M., Hussin, S., Embi, M. A. (2013). The influence of demographics on mobile learning readiness: Science versus social science undergraduates. In MA.Embi, N. Mohd Nordin (Eds.), Mobile learning: Malaysian initiatives research findings (pp 39-48)., Putrajaya: Centre for Academic Advancement, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia & Department of Higher Education, Ministry of Higher Education.. Bahrani, T. (2011). Mobile phones: Just a phone or a language device. Cross-cultural Communication, 7(2), 244-248. doi:10.3968/j.ccc.1923670020110702.028. Barlow, D. M., Wisessuwan,, A., & Tubsree, C. (2014). Design of an English speaking skills development course for second language learners. HRD Journal, 4(2):73-81. Begum, R. (2011). Prospect of cell phones as instructional tools in the EFL classroom: A case study of Jahangirnagar University, Bangladesh. English Language Teaching, 4(1), 105-115. Bernama (2015, May 12). Graduates among 400,000 currently unemployed in Malaysia, says minister. http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/graduates-among-400000-currently-unemployed-in-malaysia-says-minister Blake, C. (2009). Potential of text-based internet chats for improving oral fluency in a second language. The Modern Language Journal , 93(ii), 227-240. Boonkit, K. (2010). Enhancing the development of speaking skills for non-native speakers of English. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2, 1305-1309. Brown, T. H (2005). Towards a model for m-learning in Africa. International Journal of E-learning, 4(3), 299-315.
11
Chang, C. –K., & Hsu, C. –K. (2011). A mobile-assisted synchronously collaborative translation-annotation system for English as a foreign language (EFL) reading comprehension. Computer-Assisted Language Learning, 24(2), 155-280. doi: 10.1080/09588221.2010.536952. Chen, H. H. -.J. (2011). Developing and evaluating an oral skills training website supported by automatic speech recognition technology. ReCALL, 23(01), 59-78. doi: 10.1017/S0958344010000285. Choon-Keong, T., Ing, N. S., & Kean-Wah, L. (2013). Readiness for mobile learning at a public university in East Malaysia. In M. A. Embi & N. Mohd Nordin (Eds.), Mobile learning: Malaysian initiatives and research findings (pp 27-38). Putrajaya: Centre for Academic Advancement, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia & Department of Higher Education, Ministry of Higher Education. Corbeil, J. R. & Valdes-Corbeil, M. E. (2007). Are you ready for mobile learning? 30(2), 51-58. Darus, S. (2009). The current situation and issues of the teaching of English in Malaysia. Paper presented at the International Symposium of the Graduate School of Language Education and Information Sciences, Ritsumeikan University, Kyoto, 7 November 2009. Retrieved from http://www.ritsumei.ac.jp/acd/re/k-rsc/lcs/kiyou/pdf_22-1/RitsIILCS_22.1pp19-27_DARUS.pdf Embi, M. A. & Nordin, N. M. (2013). Mobile learning: Malaysian initiatives research findings. Putrajaya: Centre for Academic Advancement, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia & Department of Higher Education, Ministry of Higher Education.. Embi, M. A. & Panah, E. (2010). Overview of Mobile Learning. In M. A. Embi & N. Mohd Nordin (Eds.), Mobile learning: Malaysian initiatives and research findings Putrajaya, Malaysia: (pp. 1-8). Putrajaya: Centre for Academic Advancement, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia & Department of Higher Education, Ministry of Higher Education. Gabarre, S., & Gabarre, C. (Eds.), Utilising mobile phones as a language learning tool. Saarbrucken: VDM Verlag Dr. Muller Gubh & Co. KG. Gill, C. (2013). Enhancing the English-language oral skills of International students through drama. English Language Teaching, 6(4), 29-41. doi: 10.5539/elt.v6n4p29. Gromik, N. (2009). Producing cell phone video diaries. In M. Thomas (Ed.), Handbook of research on web 2.0 and second language learning (pp. 259-273). Hershey: IGI Global. Gromik, N. & Anderson, N. (2010). Cell phone technology and second language acquisition: An action research experiment. Retrieved from http://www. Researchonlinejcu.edu.au Hayati, A. M., Jalulufar, A., & Mashhadi, A. (2013). Using short message service (SMS) to teach English idioms to EFL students. British Journal of Education Technology, 44(1), 66-81. Horwitz, E. k. (2010). Foreign and second language anxiety. Language Teaching, 43(02), 154-167. doi:10.1017/S026144480999036X. Horwitz, E. K., Horwitz, M. B., & Cope, J. (1986). Foreign language classroom anxiety. The Modern Language Journal, 70(2), 125-132. Hsu, L. (2012). English as a foreign language learners‟ perception of mobile assisted language learning: A cross-national study. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 26, 1-17. doi: 10.101080/09588221.2011.649485. Hussin, S., Manap, M. R., Amir, Z. , & Krish, P. (2012). Mobile learning readiness among Malaysian students at higher learning institutes. Asian Social Science, 8(12):276-283. Jobstreet (2011, June 6). Malaysians' English rank lower than neighbours. Retrieved from JobStreet.com http://www.jobstreet.com.my/aboutus/preleases154.htm Keller, J. (2011, May 8). The slow-motion mobile campus. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from https://www.chronicle.com/article/The-Slow-Motion-Mobile-Campus/127380. Kern, R. G. (1995) Restructuring classroom interaction with networked computers: Effects on quantity and characteristics of language production. The Modern Language Journal, 79(4):457-476. Khamkhien, A. (2011). Quantitative and qualitative views of Thai EFL learners' learning oral communication skills. Academic Research Journal, 1(1), 90-103. Ko, C. –J. (2012). A case study of language learners‟ social presence in synchronous CMC. ReCALL, 24(1), 66-84. doi.org?10.1017/S0958344011000292 Kumaran, S. R. (2010). Benefits and shortcomings of role-play as a speaking activity in English Language classrooms The English Teacher (Vol. XXXIX). Selangor: MELTA - Malaysian English Language Teaching Association. Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (2015) Statistical brief number seventeen - Mobile phone users survey 2014. Cyberjaya: Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission. Ministry of Education. (2012). Laporan Awal Pelan Pembangunan Pendidikan Malaysia 2013-2025.Retrieved from https://www.moe.gov.my/images/dasar-kpm/PPP/Preliminary-Blueprint-BM.pdf Nadzrah, A. B., Hafizah, L. & Afendi, H. (2013). Enhancing ESL learners speaking skills through asynchronous online discussion forum. Asian Social Science, 9((), 224-233. doi: 10.5539/ass.v9n9p224. Naismith, L., Lonsdale, P., Vavoula, G., & Sharples, M. (2004). Report 11: Literature review in mobile technologies and learning. Futurelab Series. Bristol, UK: University of Birmingham. Paltridge, B (1992) EAP Placement testing: An integrated approach. English for Specific Purposes,11, 243-268. Puteh-Behak, F, Mohd Khaja, F, Darmi, R (2015) Socio-cultural insights into conducting qualitative educational research in Malaysia. In Baguley, M. M., Findlay, Y. S. & Kerby, M. C. (Eds.), Meanings and Motivation in Education Research (pp. 91- 102). New York: Routledge. Reinders, H. , & Cho, M. Y. (2012). Enhancing informal language learning with mobile technology - does it work. Journal of Second Language Teaching and Research, 1(1), 3-29. Samat, N. A. (2010). Fostering oral communication amongst second language learners through process drama. The New Zealand Language Teacher, 36, 64-68. Sharples, M., Taylor, J., & Vavoula, G. (2007). A theory of learning for the mobile age. In R. Andrews & C. Haythornthwaite (Eds.),, The Sage Mobile book of E-learning Research (pp. 221-247). London: Sage. Stockwell. G. (2013). Tracking learner usage of mobile phones for language learning outside of the classroom. CALICO Journal, 118-136. The Star (2013, July 27) Close to half of Malaysian graduates either jobless or employed in mismatched fields. Retrieved from http://www.thestar.com.my/news/community/2013/07/27/close-to-half-of-malaysian-graduates-either-jobless-or-employed-in-mismatchedfields/
12
Thirusanku, J., & Yunus, M. (2012). The many faces of Malaysian English. International Scholarly Research Network, 1-15. doi: 10.5402/2012/138982 Tsutsui, E., Owada, K., Ueda, N., & Nakano. M. (2012). Using mobile phones in English reading class. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 17th Conference in Pan-Pacific Association of Applied Linguistics )pp. 67-68). Retrieved from http://www/paaljapan.org/conference2012/proc_PAAL2012/pdf/posters/P-10.pdf UNESCO. (2012). Turning on mobile learning in Europe - Illustrative initiatives and policy implications. Retrieved from http://www.unesdoc.unesco.org Wagner, E. D. (2005). Enabling mobile learning. Educause Review, 40(3), :40-53. Yamada, M., Kitamura, S., Shimada, N., Utashiro, T., Shigeta, K., Yamaguchi, E., Harrison, R., Yamuchi, Y., & Makahara, J. (2011). Development and evaluation of English listening study materials for business people who use mobile devices. A case study. CALICO Journal , 29(1), 44-66. Yang, Y., Li, C., & Hua, F. (2012) An introduction to spoken English in colleges and universities. Advanced Materials Research, 433-440, 5239. doi: 10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.433-440.5239 Zhang, Y.. (2009). Reading to speak: Integrating oral communication skills. English Teaching Forum, 47 (1), 32-34.
Cite this chapter as: Darmi R., Albion P. (2017) Enhancing Oral Communication Skills Using Mobile Phones Among Undergraduate English Language Learners in Malaysia. In: Murphy A., Farley H., Dyson L., Jones H. (eds) Mobile Learning in Higher Education in the Asia-Pacific Region. Education in the Asia-Pacific Region: Issues, Concerns and Prospects, vol 40. Springer, Singapore
13
