call & developing writing skils

CALL & DEVELOPING WRITING SKILLS

Facultad de Humanidades y Educación

Programa de Magister en la Enseñanza del Inglés como Lengua Extranjera

COMPUTER-ASSISTED LANGUAGE LEARNING & DEVELOPING WRITING SKILLS

A dissertation in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in TEFL

HUGO LÓPEZ POZO

Supervisor: Ethel Melej Gallardo

Santiago, Chile

2018

CALL & DEVELOPING WRITING SKILLS ii

This thesis is dedicated to my family, especially to my parents who have supported me all

since the beginning of my studies and never failed to give me the necessary strength and moral

support. Furthermore, I cannot find words to express my gratitude to my best friends who have

encouraged me to never give up. Finally, to my professors who enlightened me during my post-

graduate studies.

CALL & DEVELOPING WRITING SKILLS iii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Professor Ethel Melej has been my ideal thesis advisor. Her insightful criticism, patient

encouragement, and support aided the writing of this thesis. Indeed, she led me on the right

direction when I felt lost and never gave up on me or my project when I felt overwhelmed under

certain circumstances I faced during this process. Secondly, this thesis would not have been

possible unless the school and its students, where this research was done, had not been willing to

participate in this journey. Finally, I am grateful to the graduate program and professors at

Universidad Andres Bello.

CALL & DEVELOPING WRITING SKILLS iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abstract ......................................................................................................................................... vii

Resumen ....................................................................................................................................... viii

Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................... 1

1.0 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Rationale for the Study ..................................................................................................... 3

1.2 Significance of the Study ................................................................................................. 4

1.3 Research Aims.................................................................................................................. 4

1.4 Research Question ............................................................................................................ 4

1.5 Organization of the Study ................................................................................................ 5

Chapter 2: LITERATURE REVIEW.............................................................................................. 6

2.0 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 6

2.1 CALL: an Overview ......................................................................................................... 6

2.2 A Brief History of CALL ................................................................................................. 9

2.2.1 Behaviorist CALL ................................................................................................... 10

2.2.2 Communicative CALL............................................................................................ 11

2.2.3 Integrative CALL .................................................................................................... 11

2.3 CALL practices .............................................................................................................. 12

2.3.1 Computers ............................................................................................................... 14

CALL & DEVELOPING WRITING SKILLS v

2.3.2 Internet .................................................................................................................... 14

2.3.3 Word processing ..................................................................................................... 15

2.4 Learning Attitudes .......................................................................................................... 16

2.5 Writing as a Process ....................................................................................................... 17

2.6 Summary ........................................................................................................................ 18

Chapter 3: METHODOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK .................................................................... 20

3.0 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 20

3.1 Research paradigm ......................................................................................................... 20

3.2 Participants and learning context ................................................................................... 21

3.3 Sampling procedure........................................................................................................ 22

3.4 Methods .......................................................................................................................... 23

3.4.1 Writing procedure ................................................................................................... 24

3.4.2 Intervention ............................................................................................................. 24

3.4.3 Questionnaire .......................................................................................................... 24

3.5 Data collection and analysis procedure .......................................................................... 25

3.6 Ethics .............................................................................................................................. 26

3.7 Summary ........................................................................................................................ 27

Chapter 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ................................................................................. 28

4.0 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 28

CALL & DEVELOPING WRITING SKILLS vi

4.1 Research Question: What are the types of EFL 6th graders’ attitudes towards the use

of computers? ........................................................................................................................ 29

4.2 Discussion ................................................................................................................... 33

4.3 Research Question: What is the relationship between CALL and the enhancement of

EFL 6th graders’ writing skills? ............................................................................................ 34

4.3.1 Discussion ............................................................................................................... 39

4.4 Summary ........................................................................................................................ 40

Chapter 5: CONCLUSIONS ......................................................................................................... 41

5.0 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 41

5.1 Key findings ................................................................................................................... 41

5.2 Limitations ..................................................................................................................... 42

5.3 Final reflections .............................................................................................................. 43

References ..................................................................................................................................... 45

Appendices .................................................................................................................................... 50

Appendix A: Students’ online questionnaire (sample) ................................................................. 50

Appendix B: ESL Composition Profile ........................................................................................ 55

CALL & DEVELOPING WRITING SKILLS vii

Abstract

This study seeks to explore some possible relationships between Computer-Assisted Language

Learning (CALL) and the development of the writing skills in English. This investigation took

place in a private school in Santiago de Chile using a quasi-experimental methodology. The three

6th grade groups under observation went through a pre-test, intervention and a post-test. Due to

the nature of this study, the intervention itself consisted of developing writing skills that

promoted seeing not only writing as a product per se, but also as a process. Before the actual

intervention a Likert scale questionnaire was applied to elicit general attitudes towards the use of

computers. Data was collected at three different stages where participants produced three

different compositions which were assessed using the ESL profile Rubric (mechanics, language,

vocabulary, organization and content). Overall results in the Likert scale showed positive

attitudes towards the use of computers which was observed in students’ performance during the

intervention. Data yielded a favorable relationship between the use of CALL and participants’

engagement in the writing process. Furthermore, the statistical analysis of the three pieces of

writing in the control and experimental groups, showed a significant improvement only in the

latter. On the contrary, scores for the control group decreased in all five ESL profile dimensions.

As far as the research context is concerned, findings would suggest that CALL has an enhancing

effect on the writing process.

Key-words: CALL, word processor, attitudes, writing process.

CALL & DEVELOPING WRITING SKILLS viii

Resumen

Este estudio busca explorar algunas relaciones posibles entre el aprendizaje de idiomas asistido

por computadora (CALL) y el desarrollo de las habilidades de escritura en inglés. Esta

investigación se llevó a cabo en una escuela privada en Santiago de Chile utilizando una

metodología cuasi experimental. Los tres grupos de 6to grado en observación pasaron por una

prueba previa, intervención y una prueba posterior. Debido a la naturaleza de este estudio, la

intervención en sí consistió en desarrollar habilidades de escritura que promovieron ver no solo

la escritura como un producto por sí mismo, sino también como un proceso. Antes de la

intervención real, se aplicó un cuestionario de la escala Likert para suscitar actitudes generales

hacia el uso de computadoras. Los datos fueron recolectados en tres etapas diferentes donde los

participantes produjeron tres composiciones diferentes que fueron evaluadas utilizando el perfil

de ESL Rúbrica (mecánica, lenguaje, vocabulario, organización y contenido). Los resultados

generales en la escala de Likert mostraron actitudes positivas hacia el uso de las computadoras

que se observó en el rendimiento de los estudiantes durante la intervención. Los datos arrojaron

una relación favorable entre el uso de CALL y el compromiso de los participantes en el proceso

de redacción. Además, el análisis estadístico de las tres piezas de escritura en los grupos control

y experimental, mostró una mejora significativa solo en este último. Por el contrario, los puntajes

del grupo control disminuyeron en las cinco dimensiones del perfil ESL. En lo que respecta al

contexto de la investigación, los hallazgos sugerirían que CALL tiene un efecto de mejora en el

proceso de escritura.

Palabras claves: Aprendizaje de idiomas asistido por computadoras, procesador de texto,

actitudes, escritura como proceso.

CALL & DEVELOPING WRITING 1

Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION

1.0 Introduction

When mentioning technology in a classroom, your first tendency is to connect a machine

that projects audio and visual texts, the reason why is simply because those machines have

pervaded our daily workplace contexts and besides technology has not only affected our lives in

this way but also in the way we interact with other people. This is certainly the case when

working with technology. In other words, Brown (2001) stated that technology is what we know

today as computers. However, we should not only consider computers but also as a vast of other

resourceful devices to enhance learning.

Nowadays, technology also insures opportunities to look for a vary way of learning

enhancements. In this sense, even in depraved places computers and internet connectivity play a

big role in education. According to Enlaces (2013) these Information and Communications

Technology (ICT) tools can be found in more than 60% of Chilean schools. Therefore, during

the last decade technology in the education has become one of the greatest interests for both

teachers of English and students at schools. In the light of technology, myself as a teacher and

researcher, whose views are particularly hinged upon the impacts of ICT in pedagogy, I intend to

explain a particular type of connection between Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL)

and writing in English as a Foreign Language (EFL).

Many scholars consider that technology could be of great benefit if we want to facilitate

and enhance learning but has not been used wisely (Cheun & Slavin, 2012; Lee, 2004; Roed,

2003). On the contrary, the implementation of technology, particularly with the use of computers

as ICT tools, might be an impediment for teachers to have a natural pace in their lesson (Cuban

1986; Cuban, 2000). Hence, given my reflections as a practitioner and the vast amount of


literature examined regarding ICT and Second Language Acquisition (SLA), I intend to explore

the integration of technology and its use to foster a given skill in teaching.

This study aims to inform potential opportunities for learners to develop authentic pieces

of writing with the help of CALL approach that may become of extensive benefit for them in

order to improve writing skills in a second language. It is important to anticipate that my context

corresponds to a purely non-native English Language Learning (ELL) setting. As in Gass and

Selinker’s words (2001, p.1) of how a second language is learned “it is the study of the

acquisition of a non-primary language; that is, the acquisition of a language beyond the native

language”. In this sense, during this quasi-experimental research some EFL 6th graders will be

provided with powerful ICT tools and several interactive and intuitive approaches in order to

develop writing in a foreign language.

Amin and Golnar (2014) claim that a word processor is a piece of software that may

provide a tremendous advantage to develop writing skill, on the one hand, in those students who

work virtually with word processors who can easily type in, edit, review and have feedback all in

the same place; on the other hand, it can also be beneficial for those students whose learning

pace is different as they would be able to enhance their drafting and formatting steps faster and

easier with more than a dozen tools that facilitate their writing stages.

Traditionally, unlike some productive skills, writing tends to put off students’ interests in

learning a foreign language. In addition, writing makes them feel more reluctant to this receptive

skill where they think of this process as a tedious stage to come through. As a result of the above,

I am particularly interested in how CALL might have a positive cause and effect relationship

with the development on writing in ELT. On the one hand, the writing process comprises

different stages that follow a chronological order, these ideas can be traced back since the Greek


and Roman models of teaching rhetoric (Bloodgood, 2002; Winterowd & Blum, 1994). Some

scholars consider several stages from planning what the writers wants to outline to then finally

have a revised and clearer idea (Richards, 2002 & Ur, 1999). On the other hand, Seow (2002)

states that there are four main stages that are not sequential, he based on Krashen’s research

which suggested, “many good writers employ a recursive and non-linear approach – writing of a

draft may be interrupted by more planning, and revision may lead to reformulation, with a great

deal of recycling to earlier stages” (1984, p. 17). Participants with regard to the writing process

expect that CALL or the different uses of ICT resources will help them to plan, draft, edit and

revise – all in a non-linear process. Indeed, rationale strategies may be form.

In light of the above, exploiting the use of computers and applying the writing process

effectively are bound properly. However, not exempt of criticism, machines as computers can be

of great benefit for students when working all in the same place. Furthermore, Seow (2002)

considered that students can clearly respond to their drafts, edit them without retyping but just

moving and reflect on what is more important in the type of message they want to communicate.

1.1 Rationale for the Study

The idea of doing this research arose from the perceptions a teacher has about his

students’ learning process and how these might profit from technologies when learning EFL. The

idea that technologies might enhance students’ learning led the practitioner to research in this

respect. To that end, I intend to investigate any possible relationship between the use of CALL

and the development of writing skills in a quasi-experimental framework. Furthermore, this

study will try to determine the effects of how CALL might impact the process of writing short

compositions as well as understanding students’ perceptions of ICT in the classroom.


1.2 Significance of the Study

The importance of this study lays on the fact that to the best of my knowledge few

researchers have conducted studies with similar studies in Chile. In other words, the area in

which both technology and education may benefit students’ learning, is still rather unexplored.

Moreover, this research examines and provides insights of what has changed concerning the uses

of CALL with regard to educational purposes. For instance, teachers-researchers who might want

to work with developing their students’ writing skills may also consider some of the impact a

word processing software has over students writing process. In addition, it is hoped this study

promotes discussion that may encourage other researchers, practitioners and EFL stakeholders,

to construct learning on how a computer-assisted language learning lesson could be more

efficient and effective.

1.3 Research Aims

To explore the relationship between Computer-Assisted Language Learning (CALL) and

the development of EFL 6th graders’ writing skills.

To determine the effect of using a word processor on writing short compositions.

To understand the types of EFL 6th graders’ attitudes towards the use of computers.

1.4 Research Question

What is the relationship between CALL and the enhancement of EFL 6th graders’ writing

skills?

What are the types of EFL 6th graders’ attitudes towards the use of computers?

What is the effect of using a word processor on writing short compositions?


1.5 Organization of the Study

The study is organized in five chapters. Chapter 1 introduces and establishes the

significance of the research being conducted by summarizing current understanding about the

topic. It also states the research problem. Chapter 2, the Literature Review, analyses the

underpinnings of this study together with the attempting to provide a conceptual framework.

Chapter 3, the Methodology, examines the phases of this study in order to clarify the type of

paradigm that underpins this study and also its procedure with emphasis on the subjects under

discussion, the type of instruments, and considerations to possible constraints. Then, Chapter 4

presents the results and attempts to answer the research questions. Finally, Chapter 5 which

provides conclusions and suggests further research areas.


Chapter 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

2.0 Introduction

In the following sections, I will try to briefly unpack an overview of what CALL is and

explain the conceptualization of how its history has evolved, through some behavioral,

communicative and integrative paradigms. Additionally, I will explain the importance of CALL

in this research and some of its practices, e.g. software that was used in the past and what

constitutes CALL today, such as the role of the Internet, computers and word processors.

Moreover, given the nature of my study, I will intent to rationalize over the influences attitudes

might have on student’s learning skills, particularly to what writing respect over technological

devices, like computers. Finally, some useful ideas of how writing was viewed and the way it

will be introduced and applied in this study. In the end of this section, you will also encounter a

summary of this chapter.

2.1 CALL: an Overview

If we consider possible advantages as well as disadvantages in the use of technological

resources, there are many scholars who either support or disapprove of new teaching practices in

education as it is with technology. For instance, there are still teachers who would prefer

planning their lesson in a traditional method which complies with the use of a chalkboard and

being the center of the class rather than instructing students with the assistance of technologies,

just simply because they consider it difficult or new and they are required to do so many things

that is hard for them to focus on the purpose of the class, as it happens when working with

languages and technology all together (Becker, 2000). In this regard and at a certain moment I

would agree that at the very initial process at least, computers in the educational system were


difficult to work with. Among other possible aspects, they were big, noisy, and probably not

many people were trained to work with them. In this sense, there were people who never even

ask for computers, so why bother? (Beatty, 2010). On the contrary, there are teachers who have

considered implementing technological devices in their classroom and they are willing to see

whether they might come across some advantages within the process. Those educators who

strongly believe that there are benefits when varying and including for example, a computer,

internet connection, word processor, or any other type of resources. For instance, taking into

consideration that internet is the biggest resource of information and that it can be found in most

schools, little has been done in terms of implementing as useful tool. It is true that technology is

constantly challenging both teacher and students however, as Charupan, Soranastaporn, and

Swuattananand (2001) state as well as the use of internet in classes, technological materials are

resources that facilitate classroom instructions.

On the one hand, a possible impact that CALL might have on the development of English

as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners’ writing skills can be seen during implementation of word

processors. Fotos and Browne (2004) claim that word processors are pieces of software that

might improve learners writing skills, for instance, by providing feedback on their errors are

instant by the correction of a teacher who focuses on certain patterns like vocabulary, syntax,

among others. Learners are guided through the process of reviewing their writing and they can

put less effort when correcting them with comparison to those learners who only use a traditional

method, like a pen and a piece of paper. As well as the latter scholars, Cumming and Li (2001)

identify processes in which learners might also improve their writing skills in order to understand

and manipulate the target language, these are spelling and grammar checkers. Seemingly, it is

noticeable that learners are guided through the correction processes; however, it is also


distinguishable the fact that learner would have to be assisted the whole time. They might always

need someone to work with in order to edit correctly their writings. If we consider the fact that

some pieces of software are of great benefit for improving writing skills, we have to consider

that they are also required to be taught so as to know how to use them correctly. This demands

time and in-person sessions of feedback. Therefore, it would be also intriguing to discuss the

results on students’ short compositions, as well as learners who required more in-person

feedback due the fact that they do not work with computers and with the group of students who

might have feedback through the assistance of a computer.

On the other hand, negative aspects have been presented as opposing views to the

implementation of word processing software. Jarome, Woodruuf, Bryson and Lindsay (1991)

pointed out that word processors are more likely to have a superficial revision of learner’s tasks

other than a deeper understanding on learners’ improvements in discourse or high-quality texts.

In this sense, it would seem understandable to see that teachers might not ever be replaced by

machines as Cuban (1993) stated. Regarding this, it is a must that we would always find

opposing views on most of the topics discussed in educational aspects. However, I consider that

focusing only in the fact that there could only be a negative side and not on the positive one or

vice versa were trapped in vicious circle on trying to say “no” to a method that could give us

alternatives in providing more opportunities for our learners. Indeed, the purpose of this review

is to show both counterparts and try to elucidate theories and studies which would help us,

educators, who want to carry out similar studies with similar characteristics but with different

contexts.

All in all, through the process of understanding the positive and negative aspects that

technology and education might have on both teachers and students and in the process of


teaching learning. I consider that by the implementation of CALL, Computer-assisted

Instructions (CAI) and word processor, I would be able to promote on my students an

improvement on their writing in such a way that I could avoid ambiguity and promote a more

effective and efficient computer-assisted lesson. Additionally, with these sections respect I

would hopefully answer the ensuing questions in the research problem stated in the very first

section of this research and finally trying to cope with the issues that arouse during the

investigation of this matter.

2.2 A Brief History of CALL

A few decades ago computers had been widely used for the purposes of promoting learning

of Modern Foreign Language (MFL) and English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) in all

educational levels, i.e. elementary, middle-school, high school and mostly in undergraduate

levels, as it happened with universities that had the PLATO project (Davies, 2006). The PLATO

project was initiated in the University of Illinois and, as a milestone, today is known as CALL.

Not only the latter project mentioned was developed in the 60s but also several other software

that were industrialized to fulfill behavioral purposes, after a couple of years, were decaying into

an orthodox perspective since they were seen as exercises that led learners to work with drills,

multiple-choice exercises and Cloze exercises. Programs that focused on linguistics aspects only.

During the 80s CALL became more visible to the eyes of the practitioners due to the fact that

Higgins and Johns’ seminal work opened doors to new ways of seeing CALL as nondrill-based

approaches (1984) leaving the behavioral view left behind and started a new era of a more

constructivist alternative of teaching. Finally, one of the most influential triggers in the

development of technology and education was the arrival of the World Wide Web which was a

remarkable source of information that opened up a new range of tasks for learners of foreign


languages (Davies, 2006). In this respect, learners might be allowed to be interconnected when

learning simultaneously, integrating either speaking and listening or any of the four skills in

English.

Taking into consideration the aspects presented above, the following sections will describe

three stages of CALL, namely, behavioristic, Communicative and Integrative CALL.

2.2.1 Behaviorist CALL

Behaviorist opportunities to learn using CALL were envisioned in the 1950s, and applied

in the 1970s. CALL at that time was considered instructional rather than integrative or not even

communicative. At that stage, language was seen as a repetitive way to learn, drills respectively.

Students who were involved in this type of exercises were supposed to practice over repetition

and without any matter of comprehension. A prominent example of drilling was by translating

utterances (Warschauer, 1998). If the military approach was taken into consideration in this

subject, it would be clearer to see what CALL could have done at that time. For the purposes of

basic structural language, computers were machines that might replace tutors and could translate

languages much faster than what a person could be able to. Notwithstanding, those large

machines that translated material might not be the substitution for educators. Beatty (2010)

conceptualized machine translator (MT) as “the application of computers to the task of

translating texts from one natural language to another. The task is made difficult by the imprecise

nature of language, particularly, the use of sarcasm, puns, innuendo, idiomatic expressions and

rhetorical devices” (p. 19). Which at the same time that the behaviorist theories were being

rejected because results were far from satisfactory, new possibilities of communicative language

strategies looked as if they were a new beginning for CALL.


2.2.2 Communicative CALL

As controversial as language-teaching might have been along the 80s and 90s because of

its focus of drill-based and teacher-centered approaches, seemingly there was an essential

transition where the teaching moved onto learners-centered activities towards task-based or

exploratory approaches (Davies, 2006). Within these changes Higgins and Johns (1984) were

considered the first potential experts that tried to exemplify how these large machines might

adopt a new character in the classroom. Where they could be seen as informant devices that

provided input and which needed to be asked by the learners to have answers. In spite the fact

that communicative language teaching was focusing on seeing language forms implicitly and

where its main purpose was to communicate without understanding forms, many teachers were

moving away from the cognitive perspective of teaching to more authentic social contexts.

Resulting in developing language throughout all skills, such as: listening, speaking, writing and

reading. Therefore, CALL needed to have a change in the way it worked because it was not

being effective. So, educators had to tried to include a variety of new technological tasks where

learners worked with an ongoing process language use and not only viewing computers as

inaccessible machines that demanded instructional skills in order to be used.

While there may still be issues to solve regarding whether communicative CALL had a

real influence in learning, it led practitioners to move to a new phase, termed integrative CALL

(Warschauer, 1996).

2.2.3 Integrative CALL

According to Warschauer (1998) the aim of this integrative stage is the combination of all

three key elements in what CALL respects. This would enable an understanding for the


following: if we take into account behaviorist CALL as the first technology, Personal Computers

(PC) as the technology of communicative CALL and the multimedia as the technology of

integrative CALL. We might have the puzzle solved to an effective implementation of what

teachers called for in the classrooms. He referred to these three stages or phases as essential parts

in CALL as numerous opportunities for learners to integrate language in use. For instance, when

students are reading the newspapers in the World Wide Web, when they need to write an email

via internet - all through the use of a computer that interconnects a constant development of a

modern life.

On the one hand, it is also important to give emphasis to Bax (2003) opposing view in the

linear schemes that Warschauer proposed and what he called stages. Firstly, because neither

behaviorist, communicative nor integrative CALL can be rooted back in a specific time. In the

light of the analysis, we could expect Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) to be a central

part of today’s lessons. In addition, during the 80s and 90s the stress in teaching was CLT. On

the other hand, Bax (2003) agreed on the aspects that technology should be used for the use of a

variety of engaging learning tools and computers must not be seen as isolated machines.

2.3 CALL practices

CALL is a continuum process in growing interest in teaching, technology and language.

The different alternatives learners had with computers some years ago were just a few, and

teachers even though they knew how to use computers they could not incorporate computers to

their curriculum due to the fact that computers software were so limited. In the following, some

current practices will be mentioned to see how CALL progressed during the last few decades.


In this way, all three different paradigms stated above contributed to what CALL is now.

Indeed, even CALL stages were classified and they might be questionable how, Warshauer

(1998) claimed that educational administrators’ actual needs were to facilitate an integrative

solution for teaching and learning that will promote realistic learning environment. For example,

software that include curriculum, ways of assessments and record for students’ progress. These

include CALI’s ELLis, DynEd’s Dynamic, ESL 2000, among others. High among their future

plans were to have software that intended to provide a different curriculum, this is what made

them different from others educational programs. For instance, one of the most significant

applications in teaching and learning of language with the use of a computer was used on the

Programmed Logic/Learning for Automated Teaching Operations (PLATO) system which was

previously mentioned in the first section of this chapter (Beatty, 2010). Another useful tool that

was distinguished by Richards and Rodgers (1994) was the “Grammar Translation which

dominated the European and foreign-language teaching from the 1840s to the 1940s and in

modified form it continues to be widely used in some parts of the world today” (p.4)

To some extent, CALL could respond to the strains that teaching-learning demanded,

however CALL practices were still strictly linear which required learners to follow step by step

simple activities of repetition. Exercises were noted to be copies from textbooks so there was no

such a difference if you were using a computer or a book to learn a language.

Notwithstanding, one of the prominent priorities that could envision a new change for

CALL was the arrival of simulations in fiction games. Opportunities for learners to make

choices when playing was the future nature of what computers brought in learning. Exploration,

non-threatening ways to make error, encouragement to make different choices and collaboration

were essential to enter a new age into CALL (Beatty, 2010; Davies, 2006).


2.3.1 Computers

To begin with, many practitioners might have thought that such a machine like a

computer would never ended up in an essential part of our daily classes, nor have grown so

rapidly in the advances of education. This would not only tell that teachers could not keep up

with the field of CALL but also discourage might have felt when considering including

applications in their own teaching (Brown, 2001). During the period in discussion Beatty (2010)

reminded us of what a computer is, she classified computers into mainframe computers and

microcomputers. The former were machines that were built to meet education purposes in a

classroom. The latter are what we now know as a desktop or a PC. In the light of the above, it

also important that we might take into account the evolution of technological devices which now

are far more powerful than the very first machines, smaller and with a huge amount of capacity

to store data.

2.3.2 Internet

Eastment (1996) claimed that both computer-mediated communication and the use of

Internet have empowered the different uses of computers into education, particularly in the field

of language learning. Warschauer (1998) highlighted that with the imminence of the Internet

which influenced our classrooms and civilization, not only can we now have a processing

information tool but also have a processing information tool to communicate, reforming the way

of how learning a language can occurred. In this sense, all over the world a person can be

instantly communicating with others, or with a delayed of a few minutes messaging between one

another using authentic language. Both together also described as synchronous communication

and asynchronous communication.


2.3.2.1 Synchronous communication

Real-time communication never could happen before through application of computer-

based learning, nor a student or a single teacher could start a conversation through such a media

device. However, with the advent of internet in classrooms, today we can have computers

interconnected locally where instant communication could happen among learners. This is the

case of chats or computer-assisted discussion programs. Through synchronous communication

and computer-assisted classes learners could develop an interest in participation in writing, for

example. Many scholars’ discussion agreed upon the fact that everyone can speak using a

computer at their own pace without having to seize the floor. (Chun, 1994; Sullivan & Pratt,

1996; Warschauer, 1996)

2.3.2.2 Asynchronous communication

Asynchronous communication mostly happens in a non-instant time. There is normally a

delayed in time the addressee receives the information and the actual time that person reads it.

This regularly occurs via sending an email, writing questions on forums, sharing life event on

Bloggs, or even when you post a comment on a social network site. Warschauer (1997)

researched the use of electronic mails as a communicative tool to give feedback to his students

due to the rapid way answer questions or to solve problems. Despite the benefits student had, he

concluded that the advantages of this work were only merit of his willingness.

2.3.3 Word processing

Word processing is what every student today might have on their laptops to complete any

writing task at school or university, however as CALL needed to consolidate its effectiveness in

its use throughout years and years, word processors need it too. Beatty (2010) claims that word


processing application are in most computers pre-installed, frequently with Microsoft Word.

Such a powerful tool consists of having spelling and grammar checkers and thesaurus programs

that enhance the easiness of completion of any composition activity. Unfortunately, She also

complained about the lack of authenticity because word processors might not provide any

feedback when making error in writing. Nevertheless, Beuningen (2010) claims that having the

opportunity of error correction as a powerful too is a technique that provides feedback to

learners about their errors. This can be understood as combination of metalinguistic or correct

form of language.

One key aspect of word processing, according to Amin and Golnar (2014), is that

provides a likely idea of improving the development of writing skills when used effectively.

Besides, it grants students with opportunities to learn at their own pace by brainstorming,

drafting, reviewing, editing and writing again. Most prominently, it might be seen with writer’s

organization and rapidness.

2.4 Learning Attitudes

Hogg and Vaughan (2005) referred in their book ‘Social Psychology’ to Allport’s view of

attitudes are what we might conceive today, as the scientific study of the social psychology. So,

if we want to understand how people are influenced by attitude objects, we need to have

empirical evidence of individuals towards what makes them feel, act or believe in the way they

do towards somethings that they are exposed to. In that sense, as a teacher-practitioner, I intend

to do my best to understand how computers might influence the process of developing writing in

the ESL.


This would mean that if we wanted to understand the relationship between attitudes and

learning, particularly with the use of computers, we would need to take into account three

essential key aspects, such as: the affective component, the behavioral component and the

cognitive component – all well known as the ‘ABC’ model. For instance, the affective (A)

component involves a person’s emotions, likes, dislikes, and feelings towards an attitude object.

The behavioral (B) component referees to the how attitudes vary when someone is exposed to an

object that would influence a person in the way they act, speak or behave. The last component is

the cognitive (C) and it implies human’s beliefs, knowledge and perceptions about and attitude

object (Hogg and Vaughan, 2005).

In the light of the above, I will also strive to elucidating the importance of considering

computers as attitude objects that might have an impact on individuals’ attitudes. To that end,

firstly, I will aim to comprehend what my students feel about computers; Secondly, I will also

aim to explore how they act when using these machines, and thirdly, I seek to understand what

the perceptions my students have about computers either to do work with them or not - are.

2.5 Writing as a Process

The beliefs today we have when it comes to writing evolved from the 1970s’, when

writing was seen as an instructional model that was nondirectional. This means that writers

barely had an idea of what writing really constituted at that time. Teachers’ intervention was

little, writers’ strategies were not effective and the process of giving feedback was not

considered. Due to the lack of clearness in the writing as a process. Writing in education

emerged as an idea to a pedagogical approach that needed to facilitate much of a teacher and

student’s work that should be seen not only as a result but also as a process. (Pitchard &

Honeycutt, 2008).


Thus, this study seeks to understand what the writing process involves in order to be

effective, similarly when students follow a recursive guidance or when they must have some

strategies of what they need to do in order to connect their ideas. Consequently, brainstorming,

editing, and drafting throughout this process, would help them to organize what to do in their

writing. While some scholars may disagree, Mills (1953), Rohman (1965) and Ur (1999) agreed

on seeing writing as a model that consists of having learners to pre-write, write and rewrite and

teachers who classify writing stages to be stimulating and authentic.

Most of what has been said is what educators believe today, meaning that writing is a

recursive mental process. In other words, it entails strategies for completing a writing task that

might help individuals to have a self-regulated model. Taking into consideration all of the above

and student’s prior-knowledge put an end to the instructional model of the 1970s (Pitchard &

Honeycutt, 2008).

With regard to this study, I would like to explore how learners work, by focusing on

understanding if learners start making any sense of developing ideas of what actually writing

really involves. Similarly, as Nation (2009, p.113) stated about the focus of writing “the main

idea behind a process approach is that it is not enough to look only at what the learners have

produced. In order to improve their production, it is useful to understand how it was produced”.

By the same means, I intent to make student to write and see how they write using some

strategies with the use of EFL in CALL contexts.

2.6 Summary

The aim of this chapter was to explain the relevance of the empirical evidence that could

be found regarding CALL, attitudes, and writing as a process. The chapter approached the


discussion of what CALL is, along with its different paradigms. It also considered the significant

facts that helped to understand why attitudes were taken into consideration and how these might

affect this research. Along with several CALL practices mentioned, the computer and word

processing software were the main focuses on this section, due to their pivotal role in informing

how the research questions might be answered.


Chapter 3: METHODOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK

3.0 Introduction

The objective of this chapter is to present the methodological framework of this study.

Hence, I will discuss the paradigm underpinning my research, the participants, methods,

instruments as well as sampling procedure. This part also explains how data collection was

gathered and its analysis, besides the ethical considerations guiding the whole process.

3.1 Research paradigm

Following Muijs (2004), This study can be classified as quantitative research because it

seeks to answer and explain some phenomena in education by collecting numerical information

that is examined using mathematically based methods. Moreover, this project in embedded in a

positivistic frame but within both experimenting and non-experimenting designs as Cresswell

(2009) categories, it will be noticed that I used quantitative strategies because I intended to

measure, analyze, code and understand a type of relationship between some variables based on

statistical analysis and the natural sciences.

As well as the importance of the paradigm in which this research was carried out, it is

also fundamental to understand that the type of design that this study went through was quasi-

experimental. Muijs (2004) stated that a quantitative study whose research design consists of an

experimental group and a control group and that the methods and strategies are a pre-test,

followed by a treatment or intervention, and then followed by a post-test, the type of study is

certainly classified as a quasi-experimental design.

As can be observed, research questions on the previous sections are trying to understand a

potential cause-effect relationships among two variables in which an independent was identified


but not manipulated by the experimenter, and effects of the independent variable on the

dependent were likely to be measured, this means that data was collected and not only was

analyzed but also had to be coded in numbers in order to have statistical results, this is to say

again that the methodology in which this study may underpin is on a quasi-experimental study

conducted through a quantitative research paradigm, besides the implementation of a pre-test, a

treatment and a post-test. Additionally, the study attempted to be based upon scientific

observation and empirical evidence, as well as the relationship that it has to deal with the natural

and human sciences that share methodological principles that deal with facts and not with values

(Cohen & Manion, 2007).

3.2 Participants and learning context

Participants were 54 sixth grade students who took English classes seven hours weekly.

As far as this educational context is concerned, 6th year students are expected to reach A2 level

of English, based on the Association of Language Testers in Europe (ALTE) for schools. Till last

year, the school was an only boys’ school with the girls gradually incorporated in the pre-school

forms, hence, there were only boys participating in this stuy.

Three out of seven lessons were focused on enhancing reading comprehension skills and

speaking skills. One of those lessons was also intended to give students opportunities to be

working with technological devices, in a classroom equipped with computers and internet

connection. The following figure (1) on the next page shows how the classroom was set for that

purpose.


Figure 1. Research method – ICT room.

3.3 Sampling procedure

This study was introduced in the department of English language at a private school in

Providencia, Chile, in 2015. It lasted four months, from August to November. In this institution

there were three 6th grade groups of students, labeled with letters A, B and C. There were 36

students in each group. Additionally, half of each group was assigned to work with two different

teachers. Therefore, 54 students were at my disposal. There were 36 experimental and 18

students were control students.

Due to participants’ characteristics and the learning context previously described, there

was one way to opt for the method of sampling. According to Cohen, Manion and Morrison

(2007), there are two main methods of sampling probabilistic and non-probabilistic. The former

is more likely to be a random strategy and the latter is a purposive sample (Blaxter, Hughes &

Tight 2008). The strategy sampling taken during this study was non-probabilistic.

Computer

Student

Teacher


Therefore, there was one A and one B group of eighteen students each that were going to

be under observation and was part of the experiment as dependent subjects, then one last C group

of eighteen students. They were an independent variable of subjects and kept on working with

the same process they were used to (see figure 2).

Figure 2. Research method – control group and experimental groups.

3.4 Methods

Blaxter, Hughes and Tight (2010) claim that there is a distinction between methodology

and methods which seems pertinent. Indeed, in order to avoid confusion, they state that

methodology has a more philosophical meaning and it refers to the paradigm underpinning your

research. Methods, on the other hand, are more related to the tools the researcher uses when

gathering data, such as: interviews, surveys, questionnaires, etc. During this study, the methods

that were of a great help during the data collection were an online survey, and student’s

compositions during a pre-test, a treatment and a post-test.

A and B were

experimental groups.

(They were assisted

with CALL and word

processor)

C was a control group.

(They continued

working as usual)

C group - 18

students

B group - 18

students

A group - 18

students


3.4.1 Writing procedure

Participants had to work on three different compositions in order to see whether their

writing development was impacted. Mills (1953) understood that writing was a process and

discussed that “the basic failure in our teaching centers, in my judgement, is our unwillingness or

incapacity to think of writing in terms of process” (p. 19). Along with the process of writing

three compositions in a computer using a word processor or simply a pen and a sheet of paper,

they needed to send it and upload it to a webpage that was created for that purpose.

3.4.2 Intervention

As well as seeing writing as a process rather than a mere product, subjects under

experiment and control groups had to complete this task in 45 minutes. During the first writing

task, neither the experimental group nor the control group were treated or intervened yet. The

experimental group had to use computers and the word processor. The control group had to

complete every task in the traditional way using a pen and a sheet of paper. On the second stage,

the intervention itself, students from both groups were given feedback and told about importance

of a process in writing with its three key elements, namely, prewriting (freewriting), writing

(editing) and rewriting (product). On the one hand, during the second and third stage, the

experimental groups, were given feedback and assessed during those two assignments in order to

keep them implementing the three key steps in writing. On the other hand, the control group kept

working as usual.

3.4.3 Questionnaire

Along the intervention and in order to examine students’ attitudes towards computer, a

questionnaire was implemented in order to collect data that might be relevant to the intervention


of this quasi-experimental study. In accordance with Brown’s definition, Dörnyei (2003) states

that questionnaires are written instruments that respondents react to a series of questions or

statements by selecting from existing answers. In this sense, the Jones & Clarke Computer

Attitude Scale for Secondary Students (CASS) (1994) was evaluated, modified and implemented

with the purpose of maintaining the same attitude towards computer work.

3.5 Data collection and analysis procedure

During the first month this study was being carried out students had to answer an online

questionnaire, a Likert scale. They were shown a statement and they had to select the level of

agreement or disagreement towards computers. The preventive steps to make the instrument

reliable were: a) The piloting technique which such instrument delivered a smaller sample of

individuals; in this case the instrument was taken by two individuals, one seventh and one fifth

grader, b) Then, during the realization of the questionnaire notes were taken and questions were

answered and c) Finally, doubts and queries presented by the individuals were collected, revised

and modified in order to make a more accurate instrument. Also, the steps to verify the

instrument validity were: a) The experts’ judgment technique; the instrument was given to an

expert in the field to be analyzed, b) The instrument was previously taken from a web page.

However, it was modified and adapted to achieve the necessary requirements.

Moreover, both experimental groups had to write three compositions in a computer each

week. On the contrary, the control group had to write the same three compositions during the

same amount of time using pen and paper only. At the end of the process of gathering data, the

numerical results obtained will be presented as a summary of the most significant scores and the

ones that are strictly related to the research questions. Finally, standard deviation will be

presented as a way to analyzed them more robustly.


Last but certainly not least, figure (3) intends to illustrate the methodological frame of

this study.

Figure 3. Research method – design (adapted from A.F. Abuseileek, 2013).

3.6 Ethics

In every kind of investigation, ethical issues are going to be presented during various all

stages. Furthermore, bearing in mind participants are minors, the study was aware of any

possible impact the research could have on subject’s level of anxiety, embarrassment,

confidence, health, privacy, among others. Informed consent principles, which was the strict

protocol implemented for this study, is firmly related to subject’s freedom (Cohen et al. 2007).

Hence, both participants and administrators in the institution were all fully informed and taken

Problem

Aims

EmpiricalSupport

Experiment

Dataanalysis

1st stage

• Reflecting upon the issue encountered

• Investigating possible effect of the use of CALL to develop writing

2nd stage

• Questioannaire

• Pre-test

3rd stage

• Treatment or intervention

• Post-test

4rd stage

• Coding and understanding results

• Discussion and findings


into consideration when planning to do the research at this school. Firstly, participants were

informed at all moments of the investigation. The purpose of many of CALL tasks carried out

during this investigation were clearly presented as part of the study itself where queries and

doubts were constantly assessed in order to avoid any alteration. Administrators at this institution

were formally informed by means of consent which was then accepted and authorized.

3.7 Summary

This chapter aims to provide the reader with an understanding of the different

methodological considerations in the research design. Hence, the research paradigm and

participants were described. In addition, the type of treatment given to participants was

explained. Finally, it concluded with the data collection and analysis framework – together with

the ethical basis guiding this study


Chapter 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

4.0 Introduction

The objective of this section is to analyze the results obtained by a group of students in a

quasi-experimental investigation where data collected will be statistically analyzed. In this sense,

Blaxter, Hughes and Tight (2010) suggest that “data in their raw state do not constitute the

results of your research”, necessarily. Therefore, the considerable amount of data obtained, has

been narrowed down. Blaxter et al (2010), also considered that a researcher needs to be aware of

a procedure where two closely and related stages need to be followed. The first one is “managing

data by reducing size and scope” and “analyzing you managed set of data, by abstracting from it

and drawing attention to what is important” (Blaxter, Hughes and Tight, 2010. p.220). Therefore,

data presented in this section was analyzed to report upon adequately and usefully in quantitative

analytical methods – considering descriptive statistics framework where the mean or average and

standard deviation results as continuous data were examined. Both sets of results will be

illustrated in line graphs, bar graphs or tables.

As it was previously explained (see Ch. 3 – Figure 3), a survey was used to gather data

that measured some EFL 6th graders’ attitudes towards the use of computers. A pre-test was

implemented as a task to determine the level of their writing. Then, the treatment or intervention

was carried out as part of the process of seeing writing as a process rather than as a simple

product. Finally, a post-test was administered to see if there would be some type of impact on

students’ development in the process of writing.


4.1 Research Question: What are the types of EFL 6th graders’ attitudes towards the use

of computers?

A first framework in this section to take into account is to remember that students took an

online questionnaire related to their attitudes towards computers. This method of collecting

information provided three components of analysis. As suggested by Hogg and Vaughan (2005,

p. 150) in the ABC model, which stands for Affective, Behavioral, and Cognitive components, it

is indispensable to think of attitudes as “a relatively enduring organization of beliefs, feelings,

and behavioral tendencies towards socially significant objects, groups, events or symbols”, that

is to say, subjects’ responses were examined to see their attitudes towards significant objects, in

this case computers.

The affective and behavioral components of this tripartite model were implemented in ten

items each and the cognitive components were in eight items. All three components were in an

online Likert scale of twenty-eight statements where students needed to indicate their degrees of

agreement or disagreement. For instance, in item 1 “Los computadores me hacen sentir

decepcionado” students usually had to select from 1 to 5 to show their lowest or highest level of

agreement. In addition, as it had been mentioned already, only a few items were examined in

order to give a more noticeable observation of the results.

Table 1. Questionnaire - Affective components

Items

1* 4* 7 10 13* 16 19* 22 25* 27*

N 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54

Mean 4,50 4,33 4,11 3,56 4,69 2,26 4,81 2,07 4,65 4,65

SD 0,93 1,18 1,36 1,45 0,80 1,39 0,68 1,30 0,87 0,93

%

(responses) 68.5 68.5 59.3 35.2 81.5 46.3 90.7 48.1 83.3 83.3


Table 1 illustrates the results of the significant items regarding the affective component.

Still with Hogg and Vaughan (2005) affect involves a person’s emotions, feelings, likes, and

dislikes about an object. Hence, Items 1, 4, 13, 19, 25 and 27 show how students felt about

computers at that time and before giving them any possible treatment. Consequently, item 19

“Algunas veces los computadores me asustan” has the highest score with 90.7% of the students’

disagreement, meaning that out of 54 students 49 of them did not feel afraid of computers at all.

On the contrary, only one person indicated that he felt afraid of computers with 1.9% of the

responses. It also happens to be that the lowest standard deviation score is in item 19, noting that

responses are certainly close to the mean. Also, items 1, 4, 25 and 27 present that students were

in no discomfort, were not anxious or nervous at that point.

Table 2. Questionnaire - Behavioral Components

Items

3* 6 9 12* 15 18 21* 24

N 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54

Mean 4,13 2,83 3,78 2,50 3,57 3,54 2,56 3,67

SD 1,10 1,58 1,31 1,36 1,41 1,45 1,61 1,43

%

(responses) 51.9 33.3 38.9 31.5 37 38.9 44.4 38.9

Table 2 illustrates the results of the most significant items regarding the behavioral

component. Social psychologists Hogg and Vaughan (2005) introduced behavior as the second

aspect to understand what attitudes are and they state that attitudes are influenced in the way a

person might act, speak or behave. Additionally, based on this ABC Model it can be understood

that the way a person behaves might vary when exposed to an attitudinal object. In this concern,

results in item 3 “Aprendo nuevas tareas en el computador a través de ensayo y error, probando

y cometiendo errores” reveals that the majority of students with 51.9% of answers specified

“Totalmente de acuerdo” referring to learning though trial and error, meaning that students’


feelings and the way they act, speak or behave when using a computer continue to be positive.

Moreover, in item 3 the mean indicates that twelve students (22%) opted for “De acuerdo” a

slightly difference with the majority of students’ answers, so if considered, not only 12 but also

28 responses implicate that 40 out of 54 participants, showed that 74.1% of students would act

on the use of computers through trial and error as a process of learning.

Furthermore, item 21 “Si puedo, tomaré más ramos o cursos extras que me enseñen a

usar mejor los computadores.” yielded 44.4% of the particpants “Totalmente en desacuerdo”

with regard to this statement. A possible interpretation could be that, some students might not

ask for extra help when using computers and continue working through trial and error.

Another behavioral component, is presented item 12 “Cuando usamos computadores

tenemos mas contacto entre nosotros.”, shows the lowest percentage of the items, possibly

assuming that computers do not connect people in person. 31.5% of participants disagree on

seeing computers as a way of keeping in touch among them. Subsequently, 27.8% of students

strongly disagree on the same statements, meaning that 59.3% of subjects under examination

considered that working with computers would not allow them to stay in contact.

Table 3. Questionnaire - Cognitive Components

Items

2* 5* 8* 11 14 17 20* 23 26* 28

N 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54

Mean 2,89 4,22 4,44 1,96 2,44 3,24 4,63 3,80 4,13 4,24

SD 1,37 1,09 0,96 1,33 1,42 1,40 0,85 1,42 1,13 1,06

% 20.4 57.4 68.5 57.4 40.7 25.9 81.5 50 55.6 55.6

Table 3 shows the results obtained by the participants in the study and these items consist

of their last component necessary to understand attitudes – this is cognition and it involves


human’s beliefs, knowledge and perceptions about an attitude object (Hogg and Vaughan, 2005).

Thus, item 20 “Para utilizar computadores tienes que ser altamente calificado” reveals that

students indicated 81.5% by choosing “Totalmente en desacuerdo”, meaning that 44 students out

of 54 believed that computers are for everyone, moreover, that do not have to be highly qualified

to use them. Additionally, the standard deviation in this score is the lowest, i.e., responses are

very close to the mean and data is hardly spread out. As far as item 5 is concerned “Los

computadores son dificiles de entender” shows that 57.4% of students regarded computers as

devices that are not difficult to understand, 31 students indicate “Totalmente en desacuerdo”,

respectively. Moreover, the level of disagreement increases if connected to the other majority of

responses, indeed 24.1% of participants also indicated “Desacuerdo”. In this sense, 81.5% of the

participants’ responses show a very high degree of disagreement regarding item 5. In addition to

this, item 26 supports item 5 because it shows a slightly 1.8% of difference. Item 26 also helps to

understand students’ beliefs towards computers when a 55.6% of participants disagreed with the

notion that computers are considered a confusing, complicated or complex device. Item 8 –

which asks their degree of disagreement with the statement “Aprender acerca de las

computadoras es una pérdida de tiempo” is an even stronger result to confirm learners’

perceptions about how useful computer are. In fact, a 68.5% of responses disagreed with the

statement. The 0.96 standard deviation for this item, reveals that answers are close to the mean,

implying that there is a 14.8% of responses that also disagree with computers being a waste of

time or time consuming.

Notwithstanding the result above, item 2 “Todas las personas que trabajan con

computadores usan un lenguaje técnico extraño” yielded adverse scores; because students’ mean


is 2.89 which suggests that learners either agree or disagree with this statement but no further

analysis can be elucidated, at least with the current data.

4.2 Discussion

In 4.1 above, I attempted to answer the first research question. To do so, one needs to

understand that participants’ responses were analyzed under a tripartite model, namely, ABC

model. In addition to this analysis and as the results have been presented, most of the items in the

online questionnaire showed a positive impact on students’ affective, behavioral and cognitive

components. Evidently, subjects answered that either they did not feel afraid of working with

computers or were not uncomfortable, anxious or nervous when learning through computers. The

trichotomy of these three dimensions of feeling, acting and knowing is highly recommended to

understand how individuals’ overt actions can influence their attitudes towards a stimulus object,

through either observable or unobservable objects (Beckler, 1984). That is to say, as far as this

study is concerned, computers and word processors.

On the one hand, this section accounts for the results participants obtained before the

treatment itself in this research; neither while nor before. On the other hand, this study does not

account for results in a pre-test or post-test process by using this questionnaire and hence no

comparison between both stages are established. Therefore, this investigation would have had a

more prominent response to this query if the very same ABC model had been applied at the end

and when students were writing the last composition.

In order to explore students’ attitudes and to prevent any adverse reactions before

engaging them in the study an online questionnaire was applied. In other words, I wanted to

make sure no students felt extremely strongly against computers. In addition, its real queasy-


experimental view was applied with the process of writing through the use of CALL and which

leads us to the second research question of this research.

4.3 Research Question: What is the relationship between CALL and the enhancement of

EFL 6th graders’ writing skills?

A second framework to consider when it comes to understanding this study and its last

research question is that students who participated in the research, went through a quasi-

experimental process that consisted of three steps to gather information. These were a pre-test, a

treatment and the post-test (see Ch.3). In this sense, it is also important not to forget some

scholars’ views on noting that writing is not just a product but a process too (Mills, 1953; Ur,

1999; Richards, 2002). Based on these views, the development of writing needed to go through

the use of a word processor to facilitate this process of prewrite, write and rewrite. Therefore,

writing as a process through CALL encountered the following results on 6th graders’

compositions.

Figure 4. ESL profile score – Compositions results.

55,00

60,00

65,00

70,00

75,00

80,00

85,00

C 1 C 2 C 3

Exp. Group 72,96 76,91 78,87

Cont. Group 70,60 66,27 66,93

Mea

n

ESL profile score - Compositions results.


According to the results obtained (see Figure 4), it can be noticed in this graph chart that

the experimental group’s trend line showed an increasing tendency through the process, indeed,

students’ mean score was 72,96 in Composition 1 (C1) and after the treatment in Composition 3

(C3) students’ mean score was noticeably higher with 78,87 points. Both results were obtained

using the ESL composition profile scale of 100 points by Jacobs et al. (1981, p.30). However, the

control group which students’ mean score (70,60) was almost the same as the experimental

group in C1 at first, went down negatively tendency where these results decreased considerably

in C2 and C3 in the end. At that time, students obtained evident lower results of 66 points out of

100 points in the last two compositions and almost 12 points lower than the experimental group’s

C3.

Figure 5. Exp. Groups & Cont. Group – ESL profile score – Composition results

In light of the above, it seems clear that the experimental group increased its results and

the control group’s results decreased them. However, it is essential to perceive the understanding

of this study from a different perspective too. For this reason, it would not be as fair as one might

55,00

60,00

65,00

70,00

75,00

80,00

85,00

C 1 C 2 C 3

Exp. Group (A) 72,92 76,69 79,15

Exp. Group (B) 73,00 77,20 78,50

Cont. Group (C) 70,60 66,27 66,93

Mea

n

Exp. groups & Cont. group - ESL profile score -

Composition results


think it is when results are shown one way only. Therefore, Figure 5 presents three different

results which were examined separately in order to show them differently. On the one hand, both

experimental groups got almost the same results, with a little difference of one point per

composition.

Figure 6. Standard Deviation Results - Comparison.

On the other hand, and as it is seen in figure 6, which illustrates how spread out the

results are from the mean (see figure 4), the trend line and its consistency varies in both groups,

respectively. The control group’s results seemingly move apart more and more from the mean

score. This sustains and supports that not only the results obtained by participants in the control

group decreased but also they got more distant from the initial starting point, meaning that the

control obtained lower results and its SD got even more separated from the mean.

Another way to understand the association that writing might have had to the use of

CALL is in the way data was examined in general, but it had to be observed deeper, as well. In

this sense, figures (7 and 8 below) illustrate the criteria of how each composition was evaluated.

12,5013,46 13,10

8,42

11,73 13,39

0,00

2,00

4,00

6,00

8,00

10,00

12,00

14,00

16,00

C 1 C 2 C 3

SD

Compositions

Standard Deviation Results - Comparison

Exp. group Cont. group

Lineal (Exp. group) Lineal (Cont. group)


Consequently, it is essential to know that each participant in this study was evaluated with the

same ESL composition profile rubric with. A total score of 100 points. The rubrics is organized

into five categories, namely, mechanics, language use, vocabulary, organization and content.

Table 4 below shows the score distribution per dimension.

Table 4. ESL composition profile - Criteria

Score

Mechanics (M) 5

Language use (L) 25

Vocabulary (V) 20

Organization (O) 20

Content (C) 30

total 100

Figure 7. Experimental group – criteria analysis.

According to figure 7, which demonstrates the results obtained in all three compositions,

it is evident that participants’ results in each of the criterion has a favorable impact. This

suggests that students have a slight improvement in all of their writing criteria. For instance, the

major improvement can be seen in organization with 2.09 points higher in their last composition.

0,00

5,00

10,00

15,00

20,00

25,00

30,00

mechanics language vocabulary organization content

C1 3,33 17,67 14,67 15,00 23,25

C2 3,64 18,36 16,00 15,91 23,91

C3 3,45 18,82 15,27 17,09 24,82

Mea

n

Criteria

Experimetal group - ESL composition profile


Organization is one of the criteria that considered students’ logical sequencing, ideas clearly

stated or supported, and cohesion. Having said so, we should remember one of the main reasons

why a word processor was implemented as a way to benefit students’ writing, was because of

computers making it simpler to organize, edit, and rewrite ideas and in turn, approaching writing

as a process. Therefore, participants might have been perceived this favorable impact as having a

positive development in writing.

Figure 8. Control group – criteria analysis.

In figure 8, it can be understood that during the process of writing three different

compositions, control group’s results did not have a favorable impact on participant’s writing

development. Each criterion result decreased from C1 to C3. On the one hand, insights on an

unfavorable impact can evidence that organizational issues were presented as significant again.

This time, students under examination obtained 1,73 points lower in their last composition than

in their first writing composition.

0,00

5,00

10,00

15,00

20,00

25,00

30,00

mechanics language vocabulary organization content

C1 3,33 16,93 13,33 15,13 21,87

C2 3,07 15,53 12,67 13,87 21,13

C3 3,27 16,00 13,20 13,40 21,07

Mea

n

Criteria

Control group - ESL composition profile


4.3.1 Discussion

Due to these results, it can be said that students who completed their compositions

through the application of pre-writing, while-writing and post-writing; as well as the implications

of CALL; have become more efficacious and efficient in their writing. Their results have not

only been increased but also they have been favored by computers and a word processor in the

way they organize, support and connect their ideas. According to Fotos and Browne (2004) to

improve individuals’ writing abilities as well as enabling learners to produce, revise and

complete their written tasks with less effort than those who do it the pen a paper method. It is

worth remembering that the results on the experimental group were influenced positively and

while the control group’s results were influenced negatively.

Additionally, the data obtained was sorted out in order to have another perspective of the

experimental group’s results (see figure 5), moreover, the control group did not just widen its

disadvantage but it also evidenced that the results in all the criteria were lower. Despite the fact

that two of the groups were experimental and were also analyzed separately, they got the very

same results to a large extent. Nevertheless, the control group showed that working traditionally

(pen & paper) did not favor students’ writing performance along this process. In fact, what it

came out from this process was that students’ results decreased almost 4 points in their last

composition. Once again, the criterion that was the most positively influenced in the

experimental group was organization. Therefore, and bearing in mind the previous analysis, it

could be suggested that CALL and writing could positively influence students’ writing ability.


4.4 Summary

This chapter aimed to analyze the possible impact that the integration of writing as a

process as well as the implementation of CALL might have had over students on a quasi-

experimental study. In this section, data analyzed was explained and discussed taking into

account its positive or negative impact on participants when implementing CALL when produce

short compositions. Along with providing evidences data analyzed statistically through tables

and graphic charts for each Research Question, I attempted to. Concluded with a short discussion

for each of the questions.


Chapter 5: CONCLUSIONS

5.0 Introduction

I organized this section into three main aspects to conclude upon. Firstly, I will have a

look at its main findings regarding this study; the research questions that underpin the

understanding of CALL; and its impact concerning efficiency and efficacy in the writing process.

While I am novice researcher I strove to be rigorous throughout the study so I will also

acknowledge the limitations of this quasi-experimental research. Finally, the study closes with

some pedagogical reflections aiming at suggesting possible follow-up studies.

5.1 Key findings

This study aims at exploring some students’ attitudes towards computers and whether

they can benefit from such technological machines or not. Firstly, the survey implemented was

only a pedagogical way to assure that students’ attitudes towards computers were not obstacles

and that students when working with these types of devices would enhance their writing in the

L2 rather than as devices that would interfere with the way they feel, act or think when writing in

another language.

Despite the fact that the students’ results indicated that either they did not feel afraid of

working with computers nor were they uncomfortable before a possible intervention with said

devises, it would have been interesting to have had a second view of students’ attitudes after the

intervention using a second questionnaire, which due to time constraints unfortunately did not

happen. Additionally, it is important to bear in mind that the reason for applying this survey was

in order to attempt answering the first research question. In fact, the survey did fulfil its purpose,


yielding data concerning students’ perceptions about computers as a device that would be of

great influence in learning, i.e. not only for the usual purposes learners often use computers.

Another significant dimension resulting from this study may be found in the overall

scores obtained in all three compositions by the experimental group because, experimental

students who had to use a computer and a word processor to write their compositions scored

higher than the control group whose composition as already said, were just in a traditional form

of pen and paper. Therefore, one could say that using CALL as a way to enhance students’

writing skills is a highly effective way to make students improve their EFL writing development.

Not only can they enhance their overall results, but they also can enrich the way they organize

their writings. For instance, there is a quantitative and qualitative benefit, because if one

considers students’ scores and their overt behavior towards the implementation of writing as a

process, one could properly say that students believe that CALL and writing as a process are

learning tools that help them organize and refine their works more easily and faster than students

who write using a pen and a sheet of paper. In addition, students would rather work at their own

pace when drafting; they would correct their own work while editing; and they would finally

rewrite their own product as a result of this process.

5.2 Limitations

Despite the time constraints and methodological complications as a novice researcher-

practitioner I come across during the implementation of this study at school, it is interesting to

see that a single questionnaire provided me with sufficient information to be analyzed.

Notwithstanding, its data was only limited at its initial stage and it would have been more fruitful

if the very same questionnaire had been implemented upon finalizing the treatment. Therefore, I


would have disclosed a more useful comparison of how students’ attitudes were at the beginning

and at the end of this quasi-experimental study.

Another limitation found in this study was that the period of the intervention was rather

short. It would be interesting to see the same investigation through a longer time frame as other

studies have also suggested.

Another factor which challenged me and made this study rather demanding, was the

difficulty to cope with every student’s needs or attitudes. For instance, there were students who

did not participate during all of the intervention. Others were new students whose level of

English was very low, furthermore, these were students who usually struggle even with their

mother tongue. Given the nature of these students and for the simple reason that this study does

not intend to generalize its results, I chose to allowed them in this process but without

considering their results.

5.3 Final reflections

The idea of this study was to find out what types of EFL 6th graders’ attitudes towards

computers are and whether CALL has a positive impact over students’ writing skills or not. The

findings seem to suggest that students’ attitudes towards computers are not reluctant. Moreover,

they tend to think that computers facilitate their work and through writing strategies they can

improve their writing skills. Moreover, the use of a word processor can enhance their speed,

organization, and cleanliness when working with a computer. In this sense, some pedagogical

reflections can be suggested. To that end, I would like to suggest some lines of intervention.

As discussed in depth in chapter 2, computers are a great way to enhance both teaching

and learning. For example, these devices may help our students to work faster and simpler.


However, we have to be aware of that, despite the fact that most of the students know how to

work with computers, there may be students who do not. Therefore, one needs to make sure that

those students have to be trained before. In this respect, giving students the time they need is of a

great help and among students’ diversity seeing writing as a process is not just explaining how to

do things, on the contrary, it is the opportunity for teachers to give feedback to their students

about their learning. From another perspective, many students feel reluctant when it comes to

writing. So as to make it as user-friendly as possible teachers should have to explain each of the

writing processes which students need to consider when putting all their ideas together and

particularly allocating proper time to drafting and practicing.

Finally, reaching a deeper understanding on how to design the writing processes and how

to include CALL may certainly benefit EFL students more. From the learners’ perspective,

giving more opportunities to use may contribute to finding a more purposeful learning (as well as

teaching) aim. Therefore, CALL may have a positive influence on students’ writing development

and eventually on their learning as a whole.


References

AbuSeileek, A.F. (2013), Using track changes and word processor to provide corrective feedback

to learners in writing. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29, 319–333.

doi:10.1111/jcal.12004

Amin, Z., & Golnar, M. (2014). The Effect of Computer Assisted Language Learning on the

Development of EFL Learners’ Writing Skills. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.631

Bax, S. (2003). CALL – past, present and future. System 31, 13-28.

Beatty, K. (2010). Teaching and Researching. Computer-Assisted Language Learning. (2nd

Ed.). Pearson Education.

Becker, H. J. (2000). Findings from the teaching, learning and computing survey: Is Larry Cuban

right? Education Policy Analysis Archives, 8(51). Retrieved July, 20, 2015 from

http://www.crito.uci.edu/tlc/findings/ccsso.pdf

Blaxter, L., Hughes, C., & Tight, M. (2010). How to Research (4th Ed). New York: McGraw-Hill

Education.

Bloodgood, J. W. (2002). Quintillion: A classical educator speaks to the writing process.

Reading Research and Instructions, 42(1), 30-443.

Brown, D, L. (2001). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy

(2nd Ed.) White Plains, NY: Longman.

Charupan, S., Soranastaporn, S., & Suwattananand, N. (2001). The Use of the Internet for ELT

in Thai Public Universities. SLLT: Studies of Language and Language Teaching, 2.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.631

http://www.crito.uci.edu/tlc/findings/ccsso.pdf


Cheung, A., & Slavin, R. (2012). How features of educational technologies applications affects

student reading outcomes: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 7(3), 198-215.

Chun, D. (1994). Using computers networking to facilitate the acquisition of interactive

competence. System 22 (1), 17-31.

Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison K. (2007). Research methods in education. London:

Routledge.

Creswell, J. W. (2009) Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches (3rd Ed).

California, Sage Publications Ltd.

Cuban, L. (1986). Teachers and Machines: The Classroom Use of Technology since 1920. New

York: Teachers College Press.

Cuban, L. (1993). How teachers taught (2nd Ed.). New York: Teachers College Press.

Cuban, L. (2000). So Much High-Tech money Invested, so little Use And Change In Practice:

How Come? Paper prepared for the council of Chief State School Officer’ annual

Technology Leadership Conference. Washington D.C. (January)

Davis, G. (2006). Language education, Computer-assisted. Thames Valley University, London,

UK. Elsevier.

Dörnyei, Z. (2003). Questionnaires in second language research. New Jersey. Lawrence

Erlbaum Associates, Publishers

Eastment, D. (1996). The Internet and ELT: the impact of the Internet on English Language

Teaching. London: British Council English 2000 Publications.


Fotos, S., & Browne, C. M. (2004). New perspectives on CALL for the second language

classrooms. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Gass, M. S., & Selinker, L. (2001). Second Language Acquisition. An introductory course (3rd

Ed). (p. 1). New York and London: Routledge.

Hogg, M., & Vaughan, G. (2011). Social Psychology. (6th Ed.) Pearson Education Ltd.

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(02)00071-4

Jacobs. H. L., Zingraf, S. A., Wormuth, D. R., Hartfield, V. F., and Hughey, J. B. (1981). Testing

ESL Compositions: a practical approach. Rowley, Mass: Newbury House.

Jarome, E., Woodruff, E., Bryson, M., & Lindsay, P. (1991). The effects of revising with word

processor on writing composition. Research in the teaching of English, 26, 167-193.

Jones, T. & Clarke, V.A. (1994). A computer attitude scale for secondary students. Computer in

Education, 4(22), 315-318.

Kasper, L. (2000). New technologies, new literacies: Focus discipline research and ESL learning

communities. Language Learning and Technology, 4, 2, pp. 105–128. Retrieved on May

20, 2015 from http://llt.msu.edu/vol4num2/kasper/

Lee, H. K. (2004). A comparative study of ESL writers' performance in a paper-based and a

computer-delivered writing test. Assessing writing, 9(1), 4-26.

Li, J., & Cumming, A. (2001). Word processing and ESL writing: A longitudinal case study.

International Journal of English Studies, 1, 127-232.

Mills, B. (1953). Writing as a process. College English, 15(1), 19-56.

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(02)00071-4

http://llt.msu.edu/vol4num2/kasper/


Ministerio de Educación (2013). Enlaces, Innovación y Calidad en la Era digital, 20 años

Impulsando el Uso de las TICS en Educación. Comunicaciones de Enlaces, Centro de

Educación y Tecnología.

Muijs, D. (2004) Doing Quantitative Research in Education with SPSS. London, Sage

Publications Ltd.

Nation, P. (2009). Teaching EFL/ESL Reading and Writing. (p.115). New York and London:

Routledge.

Pritchard, R. & Honeycutt, R. (2008). The process approach to writing instructions, examining

its effectiveness. In MacArthur, Ch. (Ed.), Handbook of Writing Research (pp. 275-290).

New York. Guilford Press.

Richards, J.C. & Rodgers T.S. (1994). Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching.

Cambridge: Cambridge Press.

Roed, J. (2003) Language learners’ behavior in a virtual environment. Computer Assisted

Language Learning 16(2-3), 155-172.

Rohman, D. G. (1965). Pre-writing: The stage of discovery in the writing process. College

Composition Communication, 16(2), 106-122.

Seow, A. (2002). The writing process and process writing. In Richards, J. C. (Ed.), Methodology

in Language Teaching. An anthology of current practice (pp. 315-320). United States of

America: Cambridge University Press.

Sullivan, N., & Pratt, E. (1996). A comparative study of two ESL writing environments:

computer-assisted classroom and a traditional oral classroom. System 24 (4), 491-501


Ur, P. (1999). A Course in Language Teaching. Practice and Theory. Trainee book. United

Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.

Warschauer, M. (1996). Motivational aspects of using computers for writing and

communications. In Warschauer, M. (ed.), Telecollaboration in foreign language learning.

Honolulu, HI: Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center, University of Hawaii

Press. Retrieved on May 20, 2015 from the www.nflrc.hawaii.edu/NetWorks/NW01/

Warschauer, M. (1997). Electronic literacies: language, culture, and power in online education.

Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Hawai´i.

Warschauer, M. (1998). State of the art article. Computers and language learning: an overview

University of Hawai´i, USA. Cambridge University Press.

Winterowd, W. R., & Blum, J. (1994). A teacher’s introduction to the composition in the

rhetorical tradition. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.

http://www.nflrc.hawaii.edu/NetWorks/NW01/


Appendices

Appendix A: Students’ online questionnaire (sample)

Estimados alumnos de 6to año básico del Colegio San Ignacio El Bosque.

El presente cuestionario de opinión tiene como objetivo recolectar datos para el desarrollo de una

investigación sobre el uso de los computadores, como parte de mi programa de Magister. Las

respuestas de esta encuesta son totalmente confidenciales y solamente se usarán para el estudio,

respectivo y que no los afectara de ninguna manera. Por lo tanto, agradezco su colaboración

anticipadamente con las respuestas dadas.

Instrucciones: Lee cada afirmación atentamente, luego seleccionen haciendo clic, según tu nivel

de acuerdo o desacuerdo para cada una de los ítems.

¿Cuál es tu nombre? Nombre y apellido

¿Cuál es tu curso? Mi curso es 6to:

• A

• B

• C

1. Los computadores me hacen sentir decepcionado.

1 2 3 4 5

Totalmente de acuerdo Totalmente en desacuerdo

2. Todas las personas que trabajan con computadores usan un lenguaje técnico extraño. 1 2 3 4 5

Totalmente en desacuerdo Totalmente de acuerdo

3. Aprendo nuevas tareas en el computador a través de ensayo y error, probando y

cometiendo errores. 1 2 3 4 5



4. Cuando trabajo con el computador me siento tenso (no estoy relajado) e incómodo.

1 2 3 4 5


5. Los computadores son difíciles de entender.

1 2 3 4 5


6. Otros estudiantes me piden ayuda cuando tienen que utilizar el computador.

1 2 3 4 5


7. Me siento inútil cuando me piden ayuda con el computador.

1 2 3 4 5


8. Aprender acerca de las computadoras es una pérdida de tiempo.

1 2 3 4 5


9. Cuando tengo un problema con el computador, usualmente lo soluciono por mi cuenta. 1 2 3 4 5


10. Me siento importante cuando otros me piden información acerca de los computadores. 1 2 3 4 5



11. Las personas que trabajan con computadores son considerados más importantes que

aquellas que no lo hacen.

1 2 3 4 5


12. Cuando usamos los computadores tenemos más contacto entre nosotros.

1 2 3 4 5


13. Los computadores son una “lata” (aburridos).

1 2 3 4 5


14. Las personas que trabajan con computadores se sientan frente a una pantalla todo el

día. 1 2 3 4 5


15. Se me ocurren atajos y formas más eficientes, más prácticas para usar el computador

de mejor manera.

1 2 3 4 5


16. Cuando trabajo con computadores me siento aislado, alejado de otras personas.

1 2 3 4 5


17. Cuando trabajas con computadores significa que trabajas por tu cuenta, sin estar en

contacto con los demás.

1 2 3 4 5



18. Me gustaría pasar más tiempo usando un computador.

1 2 3 4 5


19. Algunas veces los computadores me asustan.

1 2 3 4 5


20. Para utilizar computadores tienes que ser altamente calificado.

1 2 3 4 5


21. Si puedo, tomaré más ramos o cursos extras que me enseñen a usar mejor los

computadores. 1 2 3 4 5


22. No soy bueno con los computadores.

1 2 3 4 5


23. Trabajar con computadores no me permite ser creativo.

1 2 3 4 5


24. Me gustaría aprender más acerca de los computadores.

1 2 3 4 5



25. Trabajar con computadores me pone nervioso.

1 2 3 4 5


26. Los computadores son confusos, enredados.

1 2 3 4 5


27. Los computadores me hacen sentir incómodo.

1 2 3 4 5


28. Son pocas las que personas pueden utilizar computadores.

1 2 3 4 5



Appendix B: ESL Composition Profile

ESL Composition Profile (Jacobs et al., 1981, p. 30)

call & developing writing skils

Documents