King Saud University Deanship of Higher Studies Department of English

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF CALL IN THE EFL SAUDI FEMALE STUDENTS' LISTENING AND SPEAKING SKILLS AT THE

COLLEGE OF HEALTH SCIENCES, ONAIZAH

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Master’s degree in Applied Linguistics

in the Department of English at the College of Arts, King Saud University

Prepared by Amal Othman Ibrahim Al-Bureikan, B.A.

424221220

Supervised by Ibrahim Ali Haji-Hassan, Ph.D.

Assistant-professor in Sociolinguistics and Applied Linguistics

2008 / 1429

ii

قدمت هذه الرسالة استكماال لمتطلبات الحصول على درجة الماجستير في علم اللغويات التطبيقية في قسم اللغة اإلنجليزية ، كلية اآلداب ، جامعةالملك سعود

إعداد أمل بنت عثمان بن إبراهيم البريكان

٤٢٤٢٢١٢٢٠

:إشراف إبراهيم علي حاجي حسن / الدكتور

اللغويات التطبيقيةلغويات اإلجتماعية ومساعد في الأستاذ

٢٠٠٨ / ١٤٢٩

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF CALL IN THE EFL SAUDI FEMALE STUDENTS' LISTENING AND SPEAKING SKILLS AT THE

COLLEGE OF HEALTH SCIENCES, ONAIZAH

By

Amal Othman Ibrahim Al-Bureikan, B.A.

Thesis defended and accepted on March 9, 2008

iii

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF CALL IN THE EFL SAUDI FEMALE STUDENTS' LISTENING AND SPEAKING SKILLS AT THE COLLEGE OF HEALTH

SCIENCES, ONAIZAH

Amal Othman Ibrahim Al-Bureikan, B.A.

Supervisor: Ibrahim Ali Haji-Hassan, Ph.D.

ABSTRACT

This study aims at investigating the effectiveness of a Computer-Assisted

Language Learning (CALL) program, Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9, in developing

the listening and speaking skills of female students at Onaizah College of Health

Sciences. It also investigates their attitudes toward the computer-assisted language

learning (CALL) program.

Thirty-three students of first-year classes participate in this study. They are

divided into experimental and control groups (17 and 16 participants respectively). The

experimental group is taught through using the CALL program and the control group

through a conventional method of learning. The study examines the students' listening

and speaking skills by conducting a pretest prior to using the program and a posttest

after using the program. In addition, students in the experimental group answer a

questionnaire at the end of the study to address the effectiveness of CALL in the classes

and their perceptions of the program that they have already used.

The study finds that within two months of the implementation of the CALL

program, participants in the experimental group have significant improvement in their

listening and speaking scores. Results show a significant difference between

experimental group and control group in favor of the experimental group (p < .05). The

iv

study also reveals that members of the experimental group have positive attitudes toward the

use of the CALL program for learning. They also have positive attitudes toward using

CALL in learning English in the future.

The study concludes with recommendations for using interactive multimedia

programs in improving college students' listening and speaking skills. The findings of

this study show that technology can be seen as value added to regular classes.

v

مهاريت االستماع واحملادثة يف تعلم اللغة املدعم باحلاسب اآليل مدى فعالية لطالبات كلية العلوم الصحية بعنيزة

آداب وتربيةأمل عثمان البريكان ، بكالوريوس

إبراهيم علي حاجي حسن/ الدكتور شرافإ

ملخص البحث

م اللغة المدعم تعلّ برنامجمدى فعاليةتهدف هذه الدراسة إلى التحقق من مهارتي االستماع والمحادثة في )Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9( بالحاسب اآللي

معرفة وجهة نظر أفراد عينة كما تهدف إلى . لطالبات كلية العلوم الصحية بعنيزة . تعلّم اللغة المدعم بالحاسب اآلليبرنامج استخدام حولالدراسة

تقسيم عينة تموقد . البة من طالبات السنة األولى ط٣٣شارك في هذه الدراسة بالطريقة االستماع والمحادثة تيمجموعة تجريبية درست مهار: الدراسة إلى مجموعتين

ولتحقيق . ا بالطريقة التقليديةيهم نفستينومجموعة ضابطة درست المهار، المحوسبةثر البرنامج أعرفة لمقبلي وبعدي للمجموعتين اختبار أجري ، أهداف الدراسة

تعلّم اللغة برنامج استفتاء لمعرفة آراء المجموعة التجريبية في كما أجري، المستخدم .المدعم بالحاسب اآللي

أن المجموعة التجريبية التي أجريت على مدى شهرين نتائج الدراسة كشفتاع تي االستمالتي درست بالطريقة المحوسبة حققت نتائج أفضل في امتحان مهار

فلقد أشارت النتائج ، من المجموعة الضابطة التي درست بالطريقة التقليديةوالمحادثةلمجموعتين بين ا) ٠,٠٥ <عند مستوى داللة ( فروق ذات داللة إحصائية إلى وجود

، وقد كانت هذه لمهارتي االستماع والمحادثةالتحصيل الكلي التجريبية والضابطة فيأن أفراد المجموعة أوضحت النتائج كما تجريبية،الفروق لصالح المجموعة ال

تعليم في فعال تعلّم اللغة المدعم بالحاسب اآلليبرنامج التجريبية يرون أن استخدام تعلّم اللغة يتطلعون إلى استخدام وأنهم ، باللغة اإلنجليزيةتي االستماع والمحادثةمهار

. مستقبالً المدعم بالحاسب اآللياإلنجليزية

vi

عدد من التوصيات التي يمكن األخذ بها حول خلصت الدراسة إلى، يراًأخ باللغة المتعددة في تطوير مهارتي االستماع والمحادثة التفاعليةامج الوسائطاستخدام برة ، يمكن استخدام التكنولوجيا الحاليدراسة إليه التوء ما توصلض ففي . اإلنجليزية

.إلضفاء قيمة على الفصول التقليدية

vii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful

Throughout the process of preparing my dissertation, I have benefited from the brilliance, generosity, insight, experience and knowledge of many. First and foremost, I would like to express my deepest gratitude and thanks to Allah for the unmeasured blessings bestowed upon me.

I would also like to express my sincerest thanks to the members of my thesis

committee for their guidance, feedback, professionalism, genuine concern in my academic growth and exceptional patience. Dr. Ibrahim Ali Haji-Hassan, the chair of my committee, has consistently and freely given his time and support far beyond what is required or expected. He has supported and mentored me, at all stages, even when it was, often, from a distance. My extended appreciation also goes to Dr. Mohammed Ziad Kebbe and Dr. Mahmoud Ismail Saleh for their assistance and valuable comments. All the members of my committee are tremendous scholars, excellent teachers, inspiring guides, and, additionally, quite likable people.

I am deeply indebted to Dr. Aouda M. Aljohani for building such an outstanding

and dedicated linguistics and literature faculty. I truly have enjoyed my Applied Linguistics studies and have applied this knowledge in my classrooms.

Thanks also to the people who helped me through out the process of my study

by recording dialogues with me, proofreading my English, and being helpful in the early stages of piloting: Mrs. Muneera Al-Bargan, Mrs. Hanan Al-Waneen, Dr. Amal Muhammed, and Dr. Fouziah Ahmad.

I am also extremely appreciative of the generosity of all the subjects in my

study, who participated in an entirely enthusiastic way. As well, I am greatly indebted to my mother for her constant support and

sacrifices over the years affording me the determination and resources to be a success. I truly could not have accomplished all that I have without her guidance, patience, acceptance and encouragement. My late father, Othman, also had a huge influence on me in his biased fatherly way of focusing on my strengths above all else. A special thanks goes also to my brother, Abdullah, who has gone out of his way to help me during my higher studies in Riyadh. I would also like to express sincere gratitude to my brothers and sisters for their encouragement and love.

Finally, I thank my friends who stood by me, offered emotional support, cleared

the grammatical errors in every draft, and comforted my nerves: Reem Al-Moisheer and Hessah Al-Ruwaili.

It goes without saying that I owe all these people a tremendous amount of

gratitude and appreciation. Their interest and understanding in my personal and professional journey allowed me to reach my goal.

viii

DEDICATION

This publication is dedicated to my family

for always providing me with overwhelming support,

for giving me a childhood filled with an abundance of love,

enriching experiences, infinite encouragement,

and resources to realize my every dream.

ix

TABLE OF CONTENTS

................................................................................................................................. Page

ABSTRACT ..................................................................................................................iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS........................................................................................... vii

DEDICATION.............................................................................................................viii

TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................... ix

CAHPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION ............................................................................. 1

1.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Statement of the problem ..................................................................................... 2 1.3 Significance of the study...................................................................................... 4 1.4 Purpose of the study............................................................................................. 5 1.5 Hypotheses of the study....................................................................................... 6 1.6 Definition of terms adopted in the study............................................................... 7 1.7 Limitations of the study ....................................................................................... 9

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW................................................................. 11

2.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................... 11 2.2 The importance of technology in English language learning and teaching .......... 11 2.3 The history of computer-assisted language learning (CALL).............................. 13 2.4 CALL and second language acquisition (SLA) .................................................. 17 2.5 Previous studies of the effectiveness of CALL ................................................... 19 2.6 Previous studies of the effectiveness of CALL in the Saudi Arabian context ...... 22 2.7 Conclusion......................................................................................................... 27

CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY....................................................................... 30

3.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................... 30 3.2 Participants ........................................................................................................ 30 3.3 Research design ................................................................................................. 31 3.4 Data collection................................................................................................... 33

3.4.1 Pretest ................................................................................................... 33 3.4.1.1 Part one: Listening .................................................................. 34 3.4.1.2 Part two: Speaking .................................................................. 34

3.4.2 Posttest .................................................................................................. 35 3.4.3 Post-questionnaire ................................................................................. 36

3.5 Questionnaire validity and reliability ................................................................. 37 3.6 Data analysis ..................................................................................................... 38 3.7 Summary ........................................................................................................... 39

x

CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS...................................................................................... 40

4.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................... 40 4.2 Research question one: Posttest differences in listening ..................................... 42 4.3 Research question two: Posttest differences in speaking..................................... 43 4.4 Analysis of listening and speaking changes resulting from the study.................. 44 4.5 Effect size.......................................................................................................... 46 4.6 Research question three: Attitudes toward the computer program ...................... 47

4.6.1 Responses to close-ended questions....................................................... 47 4.6.1.1 Section A: General attitude toward the program ..................... 48 4.6.1.2 Section B: Experience & interest in using the program........... 50 4.6.1.3 Section C: Multimedia content ............................................... 51 4.6.1.4 Section D: Program content.................................................... 52 4.6.1.5 Section E: Interactive activities .............................................. 52

4.6.2 Responses to open-ended questions........................................................ 53 4.7 Summary ........................................................................................................... 55

CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION............................................... 56

5.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................... 56 5.2 Discussion ......................................................................................................... 56 5.3 Pedagogical implications ................................................................................... 62 5.4 Recommendations for further studies ................................................................. 63

References .................................................................................................................... 66

Appendix A: Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9: An Overview....................................... 78

Appendix B: Official Letter........................................................................................... 86

Appendix C: Audio Script ............................................................................................. 88

Appendix D: Listening Test (pretest and posttest) ......................................................... 89

Appendix E: Speaking Test (pretest and posttest) .......................................................... 90

Appendix F: Participant Consent Form.......................................................................... 92

Appendix G: Rating Scales for the Speaking Tasks ....................................................... 93

Appendix H: Student Questionnaire (English Version).................................................. 94

Appendix I: Student Questionnaire (Arabic Version)..................................................... 98

Appendix J: Questionnaire Validation Form................................................................ 103

Appendix K: Raw Scores of Experimental and Control Groups Listening and

Speaking Test Scores .............................................................................. 104

xi

Appendix L: Independent Samples t-Test for Pre and Posttest Scores of

Two Groups .......................................................................................... 105

Appendix M: Paired-Samples t-Test for Pre and Posttest Scores of

the Control Group .................................................................................. 106

Appendix N: Paired-Samples t-Test for Pre and Posttest Scores of the

Experimental Group ............................................................................... 107

Appendix O: Participants' Response Results to the Closed-Ended Questions of the

Students' Questionnaire (N=17) .............................................................. 108

Appendix P: Participants' Responses to the Open-Ended Questions in the

Questionnaire........................................................................................... 111

xii

List of Tables

Table 1: Technical profile for Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9 multimedia

program ……………………………………………..……………………..…79

Table 2: Reliability estimates (Cronbach's Alpha) for students' questionnaire ……..…38

Table 3: Mean scores and standard deviation for listening and speaking pretests ….…41

Table 4: Mean scores and standard deviation for listening posttest ………………...…42

Table 5: Mean change for the listening scores…………………............................……42

Table 6: Mean scores and standard deviation for speaking posttest ………………...…43

Table 7: Mean change for the speaking scores…………………………………....……43

xiii

List of Figures

Figure 1: Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9's title screen ………………….……..……79

Figure 2: Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9's sign-in list screen ….…….…….….……80

Figure 3: Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9's home menu screen ………...……...……80

Figure 4: Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9's menu of comprehensive courses .........…81

Figure 5: Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9's situational lessons for the beginning

course 1 ………………………………………………………………………81

Figure 6: Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9's activities of beginning course 1…...……82

1

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Introduction

There are four main skills taught in the EFL classroom, reading, writing,

listening and speaking. Various methods have been employed for teaching these four

skills. All of these skills can be considered important components of EFL teaching, but

listening and speaking are the ones mostly used in the classroom. Whether the class

focus is on reading, writing, listening comprehension, or conversation, the skills of

listening and speaking are used in all areas to convey thoughts and ideas from the

teacher to the student or vice versa. Therefore, teaching listening and speaking skills

should be considered an important component of the language program.

Since English is the only foreign language taught in Saudi Arabian public

schools, it has been given a special emphasis by many educators and people in high

positions in the Saudi Ministry of Education. The overall goal of teaching English as a

foreign language in the Saudi public schools is to enable students to speak, read, listen

and comprehend simple correct English, and write correct, simple passages. Aldosari

(1992) suggests that EFL is taught in order to enable students to communicate with

other English speakers and to offer them a window on the world (Aldosari, 1992).

However, when we come to reality, the students' English proficiency does not

mostly reach this optimistic goal. At the end of the twelfth grade, the great majority of

students are able to produce only a few correct English sentences. Alfallaj (1998)

attributes this weakness in English proficiency to some factors. These factors include (a)

the heavy use of Arabic in instruction, English is only taught 2-4 hours a week, (b) no

use of even the simplest instructional technology (e.g., projector), and (c) the use of

2

traditional teaching methods such as grammar and vocabulary translation and audio-

lingual methods, which do not enhance communication (Alfallaj, 1998).

Keeping these points in mind, many English language researchers (Al-Juhani,

1991; Aljamhoor, 1999; Alluhaib, 1999) have been constantly working on improving

the English language curriculum. They have attended numerous conferences, seminars,

symposiums, and meetings to propose educational solutions to the problem of how to

achieve the goal of improving Saudi students' proficiency in English. Computer-assisted

language learning (CALL) has been the crucial issue proposed and offered as a possible

solution by these researchers. However, CALL has not yet come into actual use in Saudi

public schools. Thus, evidence of its effectiveness in language learning and teaching is

needed to substantiate the accuracy of the felt need for this kind of methodology.

1.2 Statement of the problem

In a country like Saudi Arabia, English is used as a foreign language because it

is not an everyday medium. Instead, it is used for international business and

communication purposes. English has been compulsory for all Saudi students to learn

from intermediate school level (and currently from sixth-primary level) to secondary

level, yet they fail to improve their English proficiency, especially listening and

speaking skills.

The ability to communicate effectively is considered critical to successful

performance in numerous occupations, including nursing. In nursing, the successful

performance of such tasks as gathering information about patients, discussing patient

needs, and communicating with all the medical staff depends to a considerable degree

on language proficiency. Consequently, it is necessary to observe how our own students

learn language and then evaluate which teaching methods give the best results for them

through what has been discovered.

3

Having taught the English Course focusing on listening and speaking skills to

students majoring in nursing in the language audio lab, the researcher has found that

most of the students have low motivation in learning the language. The only intention

they have is to pass the course without realizing how important English listening and

speaking skills are to them in the real world of their careers as nurses that require such

English proficiency. As a result, they pay less attention to listening to the cassettes and

the instructor and to speaking in pairs and small groups of three or four. When it comes

to speaking with the instructor, they are more likely to be shy and afraid to take risks. At

the end, their English comprehension and production do not show satisfactory outcomes

according to the total scores of monthly and final examinations.

Because of the importance of listening and speaking instruction as well as the

nature of Saudi students, particularly at Onaizah College of Health Sciences, certain

vocabulary and correct language patterns are needed to present to them the English

language required for everyday communication. Therefore, teaching by using a

computer program can be claimed to be suitable for our students. When teaching by

using a computer program, the instructor can control the class. Meanwhile, the students

will be watching CDs, working on repetition in drills and dialogs based on situations,

and getting reinforcement given by the computer. This process would motivate them to

learn the language and achieve comprehension and production at the targeted level.

Many English language researchers (Al-Juhani, 1991; Aljamhoor, 1999; Alluhaib,

1999) propose that students who use computer-assisted language learning programs will

achieve greater results in grasping English language proficiency. Further investigation

of this idea will trace the implications of this educational approach. Therefore, the

researcher taught the English Course focusing on listening and speaking skills by

employing Learn to Speak English program during the first semester of 2006.

4

Finally yet importantly, the medical field is chosen for this study primarily

because the level of English language used by medical professionals, including nurses

in Saudi Arabia, as elsewhere, is increasing. For example, Maher (1986) observes that

72.2% of the medical journals and magazines published worldwide in 1980 were printed

in English. He further adds that of 373 international conferences in all the Americas,

Europe, Asia, the Middle East, and Australia, all except one, specified English as the

official language or one of the official languages (Maher, 1986). Moreover, the use of

English in students’ textbooks of health sciences is increasing. For these reasons,

students of health sciences in Saudi Arabia must acquire a lot of medical terminology in

English and practice using English for many purposes to perform their duties as medical

professionals. Thus, there is a need to think about different means that may enhance the

listening and speaking skills of the students. One of these means is integrating

technology into language teaching at the Colleges of Health Sciences. It is the aim of

this study, therefore, to find out the effectiveness of Learn to Speak English program in

developing the listening and speaking skills of female students at Onaizah College of

Health Sciences. It also aims at finding their attitudes toward the CALL program used

in the present study.

1.3 Significance of the study

This study investigates the effectiveness of a multimedia program, Learn to

Speak English Deluxe 9, in developing the listening and speaking skills of female

students studying at Onaizah College of Health Sciences. It is significant for several

reasons:

1. Previous studies have shown the usefulness of technology integration in second

language learning. However, few studies have researched the effectiveness of

multimedia programs in listening and speaking skills of the EFL learner. Therefore,

5

this study is significant because there is a need to assess the usefulness of a modern

multimedia program (Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9) in English language

learning and teaching in order to assist students to meet the language requirement

and succeed in daily communication.

2. The study's data about the attitudes of EFL students towards using CALL will be

valuable to policymakers and teacher education coordinators seeking to find out

better ways for making the teaching and learning of the English language via

computer programs more interesting.

3. This study sheds light on a new and better approach to language instruction using

computer programs as a pedagogical tool. Related to this, the study's findings might

assist curriculum and software developers in designing appropriate tools to make

EFL teaching and learning in the Arab world context more effective.

4. The results of this study will hopefully encourage EFL learners to benefit from

English CALL programs which would help them foster their EFL study from their

homes.

5. The results of this study will hopefully contribute to the general field of foreign

language instruction and applied linguistics.

6. Finally, this study will provide insight into previous research on EFL/ESL teachers'

use of CALL programs by either supporting or challenging earlier findings. While

doing so, it may also shed light on other areas of related research in need of

investigation.

1.4 Purpose of the study

This study investigates the effectiveness of a multimedia program, Learn to

Speak English Deluxe 9, in the listening and speaking skills of female students at

Onaizah College of Health Sciences. It intends to contribute to improving English

6

language learning by focusing on females' listening and speaking skills. It particularly

seeks to determine the effect of technology, such as Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9

CD-ROM, on females' listening and speaking skills. The study also addresses the

participants' attitudes towards the CALL program to enhance their listening and

speaking skills.

The study examines the students' listening and speaking skills by conducting a

pretest prior to using technology and a posttest after using the program mentioned

before. In addition, students are given a questionnaire at the end of the study to address

the effectiveness of CALL in the classes and their perceptions of the program that they

already used. It is, thus, an attempt to answer the following main questions:

1. Is CALL efficient in improving listening skill of first-year students in Onaizah

College of Health Sciences?

2. Is CALL efficient in improving speaking skill of first-year students in Onaizah

College of Health Sciences?

3. What are the attitudes of the experimental group students toward the CALL

program after using it?

1.5 Hypotheses of the study

The following hypotheses guided the researcher in conducting this study:

1. There will be a statistically significant difference between the mean scores of

students who received their listening learning through CALL and those who

received their listening learning through conventional methods in favor of the

experimental group.

2. There will be a statistically significant difference between the mean scores of

students who received their speaking learning through CALL and those who

7

received their speaking learning through conventional methods in favor of the

experimental group.

3. Students who received their listening and speaking learning through CALL will

show positive attitudes toward it.

1.6 Definition of terms adopted in the study

Terms adopted and are necessary for a clear understanding of the research

conducted include the following:

1.6.1 Computer-Assisted Instruction (CAI)

Computer-Assisted Instruction refers to the use of computers in educational

settings to help teachers in delivering educational material in an electronic form.

Bucholtz (1998) defines Computer-Assisted Instruction (CAI) as:

an interactive instructional method that uses a computer to present material, track learning, and direct the user to additional material which meets the student's needs. It can also be used to describe Internet-based instruction using web pages, web bulletin boards, listservs and newsgroups, video and real audio, graphics, and hands-on applications. Additionally, self-teaching programs on CD-ROM or the emerging DVD round out the group of available forms of CAI (p. 50).

Computer-Assisted Instruction is used in different disciplines to refer to the

same process, which is the use of a computer for the delivery of educational material.

Therefore, the term is broad in scope and refers to many educational fields in their

practical scope. However, when it comes to language learning, the term "CAI" is

replaced by a more specific term, Computer-Assisted Language Learning (CALL),

which is defined next.

8

1.6.2 Computer-Assisted Language Learning (CALL)

Computer-assisted language learning (CALL) is a form of CAI that refers to the

use of computer technology in language learning and teaching. Computer-Assisted

Language Learning (CALL) means "learners learning language in any context with,

through, and around computer technologies (Egbert, 2005, p. 4)." Therefore, CALL is

the term used in this study since computers are used in the EFL setting as a teaching

tool.

1.6.3 Second Language Acquisition (SLA)

Second language acquisition, or SLA, is the process by which people learn

languages in addition to their native tongue and the factors that influence these

processes.

1.6.4 English as a Second or Foreign Language (EFL/ESL)

English as a second language (ESL) is "English to people, who are living in an

English-speaking country, but whose first language is not English," (Fox, Manning,

Murphy, Urbon, & Marwick, 2003, p. 530).

English as a foreign language (EFL) is "English to people whose first language

is not English, and who do not live in an English-speaking country," (Fox et al., 2003, p.

503).

1.6.5 Multimedia, hypertext, and hypermedia

Tannenbaum (1998) defines multimedia as "an interactive computer-mediated

presentation that includes at least two of the following elements: text, sound, still

graphic images, motion graphics, and animation" (p.4). Ashworth (1996) distinguishes

among these three terms. He defines multimedia as combinations of sound, video, and

9

other resources; hypertext as the linking of text to text; and hypermedia as the linking of

all media.

1.6.6 Speech Recognition (SR)

Speech recognition technology evaluates the pronunciation of the speaker and

tells how well the speaker is speaking in the target language. Using this technology, the

speaker can record his/her pronunciation and compare it to a native speaker's.

1.6.7 Compact Disc-Read-Only Memory (CD-ROM)

Compact Disc-Read-Only Memory is a type of prerecorded, noneraseable

optical storage disk capable of storing large amounts of data, up to 650MB (megabytes)

(Ivers and Barron, 2003).

1.7 Limitations of the study

Although the data shows support for the effectiveness of the multimedia

program, Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9, in the teaching of listening and speaking

skills to female students, mention should be made of some of the limitations of this

study.

1. Study sample was taken from Onaizah, Al-Qassim. Therefore, results might be

generalizable only to Al-Qassim region.

2. The study was conducted in a health sciences college. Thus, results can not be

generalizable to all schools or higher educational institutions.

3. The study was conducted with EFL students whose mother tongue is Arabic.

Results might not be generalizable to non-Arabic speakers.

4. The study focused on female students. Results might not be generalizable to

both male and female students.

10

5. One more limitation of the study was time. This study occurred over 8 weeks.

Allowing for a greater length of time would help further to evaluate participants'

progress in improving their listening and speaking skills.

11

CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction

This chapter reviews the most relevant research in the area of technology

integration in English language learning and teaching. Such a review is necessary to lay

the foundation for the analysis in this study. It first sheds light on the importance of

using technology in English language learning and teaching. Second, it presents the

three phases in the history of CALL. Third, it addresses the relationship between CALL

and Second Language Acquisition (SLA). Fourth, it discusses the previous studies

related to multimedia CALL programs and their attributed effectiveness in language

skills and attitudes. Finally, it presents the studies about the effectiveness of CALL in

the Saudi Arabian context.

2.2 The importance of technology in English language learning and teaching

In recent years, there has been widespread interest in using computers to

enhance learning processes. This is due to the rapid growth of computer technology,

which led to more sophisticated, more user-friendly, more manageable in terms of size

and weight, and much cheaper machines.

This development has led foreign language researchers and teachers to try to

find ways of incorporating computers and information technology in general into the

educational processes, especially in cases when the language taught is not the students’

mother tongue (Virvou, Maras & Tsiriga, 2000). For instance, Butler-Pascoe and

Wiburg (2003, p. 1) state that "The role of technology as resource for language teaching

is expanding as more of these educators recognize its ability to support both

independent and collaborative learning environments." Indeed, collaborative learning is

12

emphasized by Schiffrin (1994) who stresses that language teaching should change from

its traditional way where language is seen as words and sentences to a more

communicative way. Language, she observes, should be taught through discourse and

interaction within its context.

As an educational authority, The American Council on the Teaching of Foreign

Languages (1996) strongly recommends that all language teachers should utilize

technology in their language teaching:

Access to a variety of technologies ranging from computer-assisted instruction to interactive video, CD-ROMs, the Internet, E-mails, and the World Wide Web, will help students strengthen their linguistic skills and learn about contemporary culture and every day life in the target country (p. 31).

Such a recommendation does not come from a vacuum. For example, Sinclair

(1992, p.11) anticipated a promising future for computers: "the advent of computers has

improved the quality of many scientific disciplines in these years, but in none of them is

the effect so profound as in the study of language."

Technology's power in affecting language learning and teaching is not only in

introducing new ways of organizing existing methodologies of language teaching, but

also in influencing the methodologies it organizes. Kramsch (1988), for instance,

observes:

The computer can provide new theoretical information about the psycholinguistic nature of language learning, the specific computer capability of delivering instruction, and how this ability affects or interacts with the learning process. It potentially can identify differences in learning style, aptitude, and perception of the learning task, and bring to light learning processing strategies (p.112).

Indeed, Anderson (1991) pushed educators forward to examining technology's

effectiveness in education:

Technology is changing so quickly, it is our task as administrators or teachers to be aware of the waves, to look critically at them and judge how effective these tools for teaching and learning are (p.25).

13

However, in discussing the interactive role that computer plays in language

learning and teaching, Kenning and Kenning (1983) state:

The unique property of the computer as a medium for education is its ability to interact with the student. Books and tape recordings can tell the student what the rules are and what the right solutions are, but they cannot analyze the specific mistake the student has made and react in a manner which leads him not only to correct his mistake, but also to understand the principles behind the correct solution (p. 2). As such Kenning and Kenning admit the importance of computers in

education, they, however, identify one shortcoming, i.e., the inability of

computers to provide explanation of the learners' mistakes.

As computer technology reaches global proportions, countries

around the world also realize the potential benefits of computer technology

for education and have begun to equip their schools with computers and

develop computer literacy program. Saudi Arabia is no exception in

embracing this trend (World Bank, 1995).

2.3 The history of computer-assisted language learning (CALL)

Computers were first introduced into classrooms as instructional technologies

aiding teachers in the 1960s (Cunningham, 2000). However, according to Warschauer

(1996), computers were used as tools for instructional purposes in the 1950s. He

categorizes the history of CALL into three distinct phases: Behavioristic CALL,

Communicative CALL, and Integrative CALL.

Behavioristic CALL was based upon behavioristic theories of learning. These

theories viewed learning as based upon observation and abstraction of input entering the

brain and on the resulting output (Künzel, 1995). Programs from this phase of CALL

were based on heavy repetition through drills and individual practice (Warschauer,

1996). Drill and practice exercises were based upon the premises of behaviorist learning

14

theory that stated that repeated exposure to the same material benefited learning. The

computer was ideal for delivering repeated drills because machines did not become

bored in presenting the same material over and over, and could present material on an

individualized basis, allowing learners to work at their own pace and use class time for

other activities (Warschauer, 1996).

The second phase, Communicative CALL, was based on the communicative

approach to teaching which became prominent during the 1970s and 1980s

(Warschauer, 1996). Behaviorist learning theory with its drill and practice programs did

not allow the use of enough authentic communication. Thus, Communicative CALL,

like the communicative approach, focused more on using forms rather than on the forms

themselves, taught grammar implicitly and not explicitly, allowed learners to create

language instead of merely using prefabricated expressions, and employed the target

language exclusively (Warschauer, 1996). Communicative CALL corresponded to

cognitive learning theory in that it emphasized learning as a process of discovery and

development (Warschauer & Healey, 1998). Communicative CALL seemed to be a

critical improvement over Behavioristic CALL; however, by the end of the 1980s many

educators felt that it was not as thought of. Rather than supporting the central elements

of the language teaching process, the computer was used in an ad hoc and disconnected

manner (Kenning & Kenning, 1990).

Integrative CALL, the present stage, arose in the mid 1990s and has been made

possible by the development of powerful desktop computers that support rapid use of

the Internet, local area networks (LANs), multimedia, and linked resources known as

hypermedia. One significant feature of the integrative stage is the use of language-

learning software and CD-ROMs that allow for flexible and self-paced access to

information for learners (Fotos & Browne, 2004). CALL encompasses applications

written specifically for language learning (Hall, 1998). Originally viewed as a

15

supplement to classroom instruction, CALL activities are now used in a variety of

instructional situations to promote learner autonomy and to encourage involvement with

the target language both inside and outside the classroom (Fotos & Browne, 2004).

Hall (1998) identified the advantages of implementing CALL and Information

Technology (IT) in language teaching and learning. First, the computer adds variety to

the language learning experience. Second, the computer individualizes learning. Third,

in CALL exercises, the computer can give immediate feedback for each answer. Fourth,

many aspects of work with computers have an interactive element, which is missing in

books, tapes, and television. Fifth, using the computer saves teachers time and work.

Sixth, many students are already familiar with computers and most students find them

stimulating and enjoyable. Last, students are motivated to use the computer for all types

of activities. In addition, Schwienhorst (2002) indicated that the ability to combine

sound and vision in computer-based applications liberates language learners from

traditional textbooks, tape recorders, and videocassettes. Computer technologies now

enable those traditional media to be easily combined into tidy self-study multimedia

packages or just websites.

Warschauer and Healey (1998), and Stepp-Greany (2002) indicated that CALL

offers an innovative and effective alternative for language educators. Cobb (2002)

pointed out that computer technology and CALL provide many benefits for the

acquisition and application of English language skills, and that teaching English with

computers can enhance students’ motivation and confidence in using the English

language. Breen (2005) asserted that CALL is indeed beneficial in the area of second

language acquisition (SLA). An increasing number of private and public organizations,

and educational institutions, are incorporating CALL technologies into their traditional

classroom setting to enhance learning outcomes. CALL has now become an important

component of second and foreign language learning pedagogy (Fotos & Browne, 2004).

16

Interest in using computers as tools to support language learning is growing,

both from the perspective of a language teacher and that of a language learner (Graham,

Lee, Liu, & Moore, 2002). One big advantage of using the computer is that it gives the

learners more confidence and freedom to manipulate the learning program. Having the

chance to work partly on their own and to get involved in the learning process, the

students are becoming more motivated and interested in learning the language (Hayati,

2005). Furthermore, a major education shift is taking place; a shift away from the

teacher-centered classroom towards a learner-centered system where the learner is in

control of the lesson content and the learning process (Fotos & Browne, 2004). Learners

are expected to be active participants in the learning process and should be encouraged

to be explorers and creators of language rather than passive recipients (Su & Kinshuk,

2002).

To facilitate language acquisition, students need substantial practice (Zhenhui,

1999). The Web allows repeated practice with a variety of materials that can supplement

and transcend what students receive in class or their local communities (Hubbard,

Kessler, & Madden, 2003). Developments in multimedia and Web technologies offer a

range of opportunities to develop speaking, writing, reading, and listening proficiency

in the target language. Currently, a typical multimedia language program might allow

students to do a reading assignment in the target language, use a dictionary, study

grammar and pronunciation related to the reading, and take a comprehension test on the

reading content, and receive immediate feedback, all within the same program (Fotos &

Browne, 2004).

CALL has become a critical part of language education. Warschauer (1996)

pointed out that we are at a point where it is no longer a question of whether to utilize

electronic technologies in foreign language instruction, but of how to manipulate them

according to our situational needs. The future direction of CALL should be toward the

17

true integration of CALL within language teaching and learning in which the

technology is invisible and truly integrated (Bax, 2003). With recent advancements in

software technology, multimedia, and extensive use of the Internet, computers have

become widespread in schools and language institutions, and their uses have expanded

so dramatically that language teachers must now reconsider the implications of using

computer technologies for teaching languages.

Burston (1993) points out that, despite the appeal of modern technological

CALL applications in all their forms, they must be judged on the basis of their

pedagogical validity, on their ability to either perform old tasks better than traditional

means, or on their ability to allow entirely new things to be done.

2.4 CALL and second language acquisition (SLA)

CALL did not emerge by itself and does not grow alone but is always linked to

the growth of a number of other disciplines and fields. These disciplines and fields are

much related to CALL. Levy (1997) lists the disciplines that have influenced CALL as

it emerged and continues to evolve as a field. These influential disciplines include

applied linguistics, artificial intelligence, computational linguistics, educational

psychology, instructional design, machine translation, and second language acquisition.

CALL alone does not have the theoretical background for language teaching. It

depends heavily on the theories of second language acquisition. This lack of theoretical

framework, McCarthy (1989) explains, represents a challenge to language educators in

finding ways to evaluate the effectiveness of CALL or finding means of implementation

and development (McCarthy, 1989).

Generally speaking, the implementation of CALL in language learning and

teaching depends mainly on the theories of learning. More specifically, it depends on

theories of second language acquisition. Larsen-Freeman and Long (1991) propose that

18

language acquisition theories could be applied, with some modifications and changes, to

CALL. However, Levy (1997) urges that educators should be more careful when

applying theories of SLA to CALL. Chapelle (1998) states that the pedagogical goal of

CALL is to:

Develop their [language learners] linguistic systems in the target language by engaging in computer-mediated L2 talks... In other words, it is useful to view multimedia design from the perspective of the input it can provide learners, the output it allows them to produce, the interactions they are able to engage in, and the L2 talks it supports (p. 6-7).

Garrett (1991) places the use of CALL within the framework of the four skills

approach to language learning and teaching: speaking, listening, reading, and writing.

Speaking has had great importance and priority in many language programs for some

time. The computer, as Garrett points out, is far from ready to substitute for a human

being in spontaneous authentic communication, but could be well implemented for

listening skills. CALL exercises can provide textual support such as transcripts, glossary

help, and structural clues. Implementation of CALL in this manner is particularly

valuable at more advanced levels of language learning where literacy and knowledge of

formal language have a greater role in comprehension (Garrett, 1991).

Many language educators and researchers have sought ways to adapt CALL to

second language acquisition and learning. The CALL theoretical framework is

adequately described, but this theory has many propositions. The major gap for the

theoretical literature is that there is not a reliable conceptual framework to develop

CALL, and there is poor linguistic modeling and a lack of learners' perspective for

CALL (Chapelle, 2001a). According to a meta-analysis of research conducted on CALL

programs from 1990-2000 (Graham et al., 2002), the following issues need to be

addressed: (1) research requires a solid theoretical foundation; (2) software must be

based on pertinent design principles; (3) future studies need to use valid and reliable

19

instruments; and (4) more research is needed in the skills areas of speaking, listening,

and culture. Future studies should be aware of CALL development and advances in the

direction of language learning, taking into consideration the strategies of CALL

facilitated learning, as well as learners' variables and discussions of CALL

conceptualization (Levy, 1997).

Recent advances in CALL allow the delivery of digital video and audio in the

same interface as written text. Such technological power has been adapted to the

purposes of EFL skills development on EFL CD-ROMs. These provide tasks, language

input and feedback on task success and other features via the computer screen. Although

such multimedia applications are being developed, marketed and used both in classes

and in self-access centers, there has been little empirical research into their

effectiveness. The use of these multimedia applications must be based on theory and

driven by pedagogy. Software which is not teacher designed nor purpose built cannot

match precisely the objectives of the English language curriculum (Wimberley, 2007).

2.5 Previous studies of the effectiveness of CALL

Though the aforementioned researchers believed in the potential of computers to

enhance language learning and teaching, it was not until the early 1990s that

quantitative studies began to provide evidence of the effectiveness of computer

technology in second/foreign language learning. As Graham et al. (2002, p. 259) noted,

in the early 1990s, focus shifted from whether to accept computer technology to, "how

to integrate technology more effectively into learning and teaching of languages."

The effectiveness of CALL programs in the basic skills attainment and the

enhancement of classroom activities has been the topic of only a few numbers of

previous investigations. However, most of these studies of CALL demonstrated a strong

co-relationship between CALL and improved academic performance. Also, these

20

studies have been designed to measure the extent to which the multimedia approach in

using computer technology is helpful for learning and teaching in ESL/EFL classrooms.

Burns (1996) reported that multimedia software that has sound and video

motivates nonnative speakers of English to learn. Students are able to correct their

pronunciation by repeating sounds to demonstrate any difficulties. One of the programs,

that he presented, was English Express. This multimedia software enables learners to

control the speed of their own oral communication skills.

Raphan (1996) developed a multimedia CALL program for the purpose of

conducting a pilot study that determines how adult ESL students would handle the

multimedia screen with simultaneous audio, visual, and note taking. Results showed

that students got used to the multimedia information so quickly. Raphan concluded that

learners learn best from presentations that most closely simulate reality. She

recommended the use of multimedia CALL as a supplementary teaching tool to enhance

ESL programs.

Brett (1997) investigated the effectiveness of computer-based multimedia in

listening in learning ESL. The results showed that learners' listening comprehension

increased after using multimedia. The use of multimedia helped learners in their ESL

listening skills more effectively than the other tools, such as audio.

Bagui (1998) reported that students' motivation increased and developed when

using animation, sound, and interactivity in learning. Cazade (1999) pointed out that

video and animated clips can be useful because they show the various positions of the

speaker's tongue and lips, as well as the airflow of the speaker's words. Ehsani and

Knodt (1998) argued that CALL programs, especially voice-interactive CALL, improve

L2 learners' speaking skills.

Klassen and Milton (1999) evaluated the effectiveness of an interactive

multimedia CD-ROM in an English language-learning curriculum at the University of

21

Hong Kong, and reported that students who used the program showed significant

improvement in listening skills compared to students given traditional classroom

instruction. They also found that the use of interactive multimedia programs helped

students develop positive attitudes toward CALL programs.

Many studies have discussed the benefits of multimedia CD-ROMS and

computerized media on learning a foreign language vocabulary. Among these are the

research studies made by Duquette, Renie, and Laurier (1998) and Al-Seghayer (2001).

Duquette et al. (1998) studied the impact of multimedia environment on learners'

vocabulary acquisition. The results of this study indicated that multimedia programs

assisted learners in the improvement of their vocabulary skills.

Al-Seghayer (2001) described the principle of learning a language using

multimedia techniques, and the effects of various modalities of multimedia on the

learning process. Used as a background, the research performed tested the question of

learning faster by video mode or still picture mode. The results indicated that video and

text combined are a faster way of developing comprehension and longer-term memory

than still pictures and text or text only. Al-Seghayer concluded that there are

pedagogical and theoretical implications for language learning using multimedia.

Pedagogical implications center on exposing learners to multiple modes of learning

produced an efficient language-learning environment. The theoretical implications

center on supporting the generative theory of multimedia learning proposed by Maher

(1986), the theory which suggests that the design of multimedia instruction affects the

degree to which learners engage in the cognitive process required for meaningful

learning.

In the fourth chapter of their book, Technology and Teaching English Language

Learners, Butler-Pascoe and Wiburg (2003) reviewed software programs that

emphasize the improvement of speaking skill of ESL learners. These programs, ESL

22

Pronunciation Online, Pronunciation Power, and Better Accent Tutor, include

interactive CD-ROM and Internet Web sites that are designed for non-speakers of

English to improve their oral communication.

Butler-Pascoe and Wiburg (2003) indicated that pronunciation programs enable

learners of a second language to make comparisons between their utterances and the

utterances of native speakers. Drill-and-practice programs are adjustable to meet the

level of proficiency of each student, who can choose various speed levels of timed

reading. Current multimedia software covers almost all areas of communication:

reading, speaking, writing, and listening. The writers stated that computer software and

CD-ROMs have been integrated in the curriculum to help students in learning a

language.

In Japan, CD ROM technology is used to create situations which allow Japanese

ESL students to improve their English skills, particularly with respect to writing and

speaking, by explaining a variety of topics about Japanese history and culture to foreign

English speaking visitors. The findings are positive with respect to pronunciation error

detection and intelligibility among Japanese ESL students (Masatake, Yasushi and

Tatsuaya, 2004).

The above discussed studies represent a portion of a wide range of studies on the

effectiveness of CALL in ESL/EFL students' skills. However, the use of computer

technologies and their relative effectiveness in the areas of listening and speaking has

been neglected to some extent in research, the area on which this study focuses.

2.6 Previous studies of the effectiveness of CALL in the Saudi Arabian context

Researchers went through different multimedia technologies and solutions

provided by educational software companies in an attempt to investigate their

23

effectiveness and the significance of using instructional technology to assist the

teaching of different subjects in the Saudi Arabian curriculum.

Al-Juhani (1991) conducted an experimental study exploring the effectiveness of

computer-assisted instruction (CAI) in teaching English as a foreign language in a Saudi

Arabian secondary school in Yanbou, an industrial city in the northwest of Saudi

Arabia. The instruments used in this study consist of a student questionnaire, a teacher

questionnaire, and an achievement test. The participants of the study were sixty male

students assigned to the second-year classes. They were divided equally into thirty for

the experimental group and thirty for the control group. The research used correlations

and t-tests for statistical findings of the study.

The findings of Al-Juhani's study indicated that the implementation of CALL in

teaching English as a foreign language in Saudi Arabian secondary schools would add a

valuable educational contribution to English language education in Saudi Arabian

schools. The main focus of the study was on the students' and instructors' attitudes and

feelings towards the use of technology in EFL classes. A five Likert-scale was used. It

included the liking, benefit, effectiveness, achievement, and fear scales. The CALL

program used in this study is called "Head and Tail." It was an educational program

developed by Sakhr Alalamiayh in the area of computers and EFL. The program used

was developed to help learners know the important aspects of English grammar through

different forms of vocabulary words when suffixes or prefixes are added. The program

was text-based. The utilization of multimedia technology was not present in the

program. This is attributed to the fact that multimedia technology was still not used at

the time the study was conducted. Computers did not have the capacity to handle

multimedia as they do at present.

Almutairi (1998) investigated the effects of using computer programs on the

achievements of sixth grade students. The effects of using computer programs were

24

positive compared to traditional methods. In the recommendation part of his

dissertation, Almutairi suggested providing a plan to improve methodologies of

teaching used in Saudi Arabian schools. He also recommended that the creation of

educational software should be based on guidelines provided by specialists in education,

CALL multimedia, and the disciplines for which those programs are going to be used.

Almutairi's recommendations also included the launching of teacher development

programs that contain instructional technology courses.

Alluhaib (1999) studied the influence of using English learning computer

software on the learning achievement of seventh grade students. His study examined the

effectiveness and impact of using an audio instructional software package called "Let's

learn English in Saudi Arabia" developed by Alalamiayh Software Saudi Company. The

software is also endorsed by the Saudi Arabian Ministry of Education as an approved

Saudi Arabian curriculum-based package. His findings indicated a high degree of

effectiveness of those educational technologies and a significantly positive impact on

the students' learning. The study recommended more cooperation between Saudi

Arabian Ministry of Education and developers of computer-based English learning

programs. The other recommendations are similar to those of Almutairi's study

regarding planning, teacher training development programs, and improving the schools'

infrastructure.

Aljamhoor (1999) investigated the effectiveness of using DowLog CALL

multimedia programs in teaching EFL to secondary school students in Riyadh. Sixty-

four students participated in the study. The study was presented at the Symposium on

Educational Technology and Information at Bahrain University. Aljamhoor concluded

that teaching EFL with CALL multimedia programs is superior to teaching EFL using

conventional methods of teaching. He suggested that the investigation of using

computers in education in general should be accomplished by specialists. This

25

suggestion was given in order to come up with an overall plan to use computers as

assisting tools for the teaching of other subjects. He also confirmed the important role

that specialists in applied linguistics would play if they participated in the development

of multimedia programs for EFL learning and instruction. Finally, the study referred to

the lacking of some students of basic experience with computer. The findings of

Aljamhoor's study support the inclusion of computer education in the curriculum of

primary schools.

Al-Jraiwi (1999) conducted a study investigating the influence of using

multimedia on the secondary school students' learning achievement in Riyadh area. His

study included sixty-two secondary school students divided into two groups: an

experimental group of thirty students and a controlling group of thirty-two. Al-Jraiwi's

study included a pretest and a posttest. The multimedia tools were used as a means of

instruction with the experimental group, while the controlling group was taught using

the conventional way of teaching. Al-Jraiwi concluded that multimedia technologies

were more effective. The study's recommendations addressed the Saudi Arabian

Ministry of Education, educational technology developers and manufacturers, and

parents. His suggestion to the Saudi Arabian Ministry of Education was that it should

encourage students to use computers for individual learning in which they work with

computers using different multimedia programs to foster their learning and correct their

learning problems. He also suggested that schools should work constantly toward the

establishment of appropriate individual learning environment in the school such as

computer labs and multimedia libraries. The study confirmed that the research and

development teams working for educational software companies should include some

specialists. These specialists should be specialized in education, multimedia technology,

psychology, and the subject matter for which the software developed. The study also

recommended testing in real learning contexts.

26

The effectiveness of using computer programs in teaching Arabic language

grammar for intermediate school pupils was studied by Attwaim (2000). This

experimental study included thirty pupils as a control group and thirty other pupils as an

experimental group at an elementary school in Riyadh. Attwaim found out that pupils'

achievement in the experimental group was significantly higher. Therefore, he

supported the integration of computer programs into the learning of Arabic grammar as

a learning tool. His recommendations called for further research to investigate the

significance of using computers to help teachers and benefit students in the language

skills like composition, literature, and spelling.

Al-Subeai (2000) investigated the effectiveness of CALL in improving

vocabulary learning, reading comprehension and reading speed among EFL Saudi

students of the Secondary Commercial Institute in Riyadh. Forty-six students

participated in the study. His study included a pretest and a posttest in vocabulary,

reading comprehension and speed. In addition, a survey questionnaire of 30 items was

administered to the experimental group students at the end of the experiment to detect

their attitudes towards the CALL program. The study concluded that the effects of the

CALL program were positive compared to traditional methods. It also found that the

experimental students showed positive attitudes toward the CALL program after using

it. The study's recommendations called for further research to be made of CALL

technologies in English language teaching in Saudi Arabia, especially in the areas of

reading comprehension and vocabulary enhancement. He also suggested that teachers

and students should be instructed in the design and use of CALL programs and

multimedia labs.

Taken together, these studies indicate the positive effectiveness of using

multimedia technologies in education in general and in EFL instruction in particular.

However, there appear to have been few studies of the effectiveness of CALL in

27

English language teaching and learning in the Saudi context, particularly in a

comparative study in a listening and speaking classroom. Most of the above reviewed

literature shows a lack of research in listening and speaking areas that are required in

English language learning and teaching, the two skills concentrated on in this study.

2.7 Conclusion

Most CALL-based teaching and learning focus on activities such as software or

Web-based reading, writing, or gap-filling type activities that do not depend on oral

communication. Oral activities such as conversation, pair and group role-plays, and

discussions have for the most part taken place in ordinary classrooms. Felix (2001, p.

47) lists "lack of speaking practice" as the first disadvantages of using Web-based

programs for language on the students' list, along with "distraction," "no interaction

with peers," "inadequate feedback," and "absence of teacher."

Teaching all the language skills has gone through a phase where it has to be

redefined as a response to the latest improvements in computer multimedia. However,

in the case of the speaking skill, it is merely taking a little longer (Barr, Leakey, and

Ranchoux, 2005).

Barr et al. (2005) indicate the reason that makes speaking development sounds

difficult via computer technology: "The technology for oral language development has

posed the greatest challenge to both hardware and software developers (p. 56)." More

specifically, according to Hincks (2003), one of the main challenges in this respect has

been the creation of speech recognition software that is accurate and sensitive enough

for language learning (Hincks, 2003). Barr et al. (2005) observe:

Speech recognition software lends itself mainly to drill-type activities; further logistical and technological hurdles must be crossed if one aims to get beyond purely text-based tandem exchanges and encourage real-time oral communication across campuses or across national boundaries (p.56).

28

Felix (2005) summarized the major findings arrived at by means of meta-

analyses and reviews since 1991. Many studies discussed the achievement of the visual

media in reading and vocabulary learning. A number of studies showed that online

communication improved writing skills of learners who had been given equal

opportunities to use the resource. However, Warschauer & Healey (1998) stated, few

studies discussed the integration of technology in listening and speaking. The

multimedia capabilities of CALL, Graham et al. (2002) proposed, enable learners to

engage in a complex listening experience, complete with visual cues and speech

recognition software. The general consensus is that, while this software shows promise

for future research, it is not yet sufficiently developed or reliable to justify its use in FL

studies (Graham et al., 2002).

While all of the language skills, excluding speaking, seem to be benefited by

learning and teaching with multimedia, there is some controversy about the speaking

skill, as mentioned by James (1996):

Opinion on the relevance of computers for the development of oral skills is mixed…with earlier writers tending to be pessimistic….Other writers have been more optimistic….The research on CALL and speaking tends to support the pessimists rather than the optimists, (pp. 15-16).

However, James (1996) suggested that the technique used in conversation class

to assist oral interaction can be a good model for CALL programs targeting language

oral skill.

Chapelle (1997, p. 21) stated that "Time spent on learner talk is better than time

spent on teacher talk; learners should have the opportunity to comprehend a variety of

functions in the target language; learners should engage in communicative exchanges in

the target language." This means that practicing speaking skills in the target language is

29

very important. More time can be spent in verbal communication by using technology

because it provides the flexibility to practice.

Egan (1999, p. 277) pointed out that "speaking is the heart of second language

learning….It is arguably the most important skill….Despite its importance …speaking

was until recently largely ignored in schools and universities." He observed that all of

the language skills, excluding speaking, seemed to be benefited by learning and

teaching with multimedia. Although these studies discussed the benefits of computer

technology in English language learning and teaching, they focused on skills that help

students to improve their writing, reading, and listening. However, there is a serious

problem facing students when speaking and communicating in English.

To conclude, the various studies discussed above show the potential benefits of

computer technology in teaching listening and speaking skills. They also suggest the

positive attitudes that student will show toward CALL. However, as far as the literature

review is concerned, there has been very little research conducted to investigate the

effectiveness of computer technology in the development of the listening and speaking

proficiency level of ESL/EFL learners. It has also shown that research in CALL

effectiveness has given very little attention to Saudi learners. Therefore, it is the aim of

this study to find out the effectiveness of Learn to Speak English software in developing

listening and speaking skills of female students at Onaizah College of Health Sciences.

It also aims at finding their attitudes toward the CALL program used in the present

study.

30

CHAPTER THREE

METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction

This chapter describes the methodology that the researcher used in the study.

The study used qualitative and quantitative approaches to investigate the effectiveness

of a multimedia program, Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9, in the listening and

speaking skills of female students at Onaizah College of Health Sciences. The

researcher selected the qualitative research to administer the open-ended part of the

questionnaire to the participants. The researcher deemed that qualitative research was

appropriate for this study because it would help to understand the effectiveness of the

multimedia program, Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9, in the listening and speaking

skills of the students, especially from the point of view of the participants. However, the

researcher also used additional measures: the listening and speaking tests, and the

closed-ended part of the questionnaire. The use of these additional measures helped to

triangulate the data. All data gathered were thoroughly analyzed. The results of the

study are reported in chapter 4 and discussed in chapter 5, where implications and

recommendations for future studies are also presented.

3.2 Participants

Participants chosen for this study are first-year students in Onaizah College of

Health Sciences. They are 44 students. They are divided into a control group and an

experimental group of about twenty-two students each. Students are randomly assigned

either to an experimental group or control group. Attrition resulting from students

dropping the class and absences during the experiment reduced the sample to 16

subjects in the control group and 17 in the experimental group. The small number of

31

participants reduced the power of the research, making it difficult to realize its results as

justifiable. It also reduced the ability to generalize the research. However, statistical

significance was obtained on this size sample. The number of participants was enough

to test the null hypotheses and to overlook weak treatment effects.

3.3 Research design

Chapelle (2001b) sets the principles that should underpin experimental studies

which investigate CALL's effectiveness by saying: "The most convincing way to

demonstrate the language learning potential of a CALL activity is through the study of

learning outcomes (p.74)." She suggests that researchers should conduct a pretest

ensuring that the learners who will be involved in the CALL activity, the "treatment

group", did not know the target forms before beginning to work with CALL. Then, upon

completion of the task, a posttest should be given to the learners, which would provide

evidence for the language learning potential of the task. In order to make the evidence

even stronger, the researcher should employ a contrasting group, the "control group",

who will not use the CALL task at all, or use the task in another form, and then compare

the differences in gains (Chapelle, 2001b).

This study was a pretest/posttest experimental/control group design. Using SPSS

11.5, two main types of data analysis were used: (a) paired and independent sample t-

tests, and (b) descriptive statistics.

The study lasted eight weeks, starting September 25, and ending December 10,

2006. Because of the difficulties in formulating a proposal that was acceptable to the

dissertation committee, the fact that the college timetable was not stable, the Eid break

which is an official break for all, the need to get a license from the General Directorate

of Health Sciences Colleges & Institutes to use the computer lab, only a small part of

32

the college year remained. Nevertheless, eight weeks were sufficient for valuable

patterns to emerge and for useful conclusions to be drawn.

The control group, consisting of sixteen students, was taught using the

traditional method and spent the exact same amount of time as the experimental group.

After completing the listening and speaking pretest, the instructor taught this group as it

is usually taught in a traditional language classroom. . The English curriculum for the

listening and speaking course was similar to the one taught to the experimental group.

After this, students took the listening and speaking posttest.

The experimental group, composed of seventeen students, was exposed to a

training session of one week for the purpose of acquainting them with the computer

program. The students then met in the computer lab for a period of fifty minutes, two

days a week during the 8 weeks. After the CALL session, students were given the

listening and speaking posttest; and then they filled in a post-questionnaire at their own

pace. The English curriculum for the listening and speaking course was presented

through a technological instrument called 'Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9'. An

overview of the program, its technical features, and its program features are included in

the appendixes (Appendix A). The researcher chose Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9

because it accommodated a wide range of competency levels. For example, participants

who knew more English began at a more advanced lesson than those who knew little

English. By doing so, Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9 optimized language learning

opportunities for each of the participants.

In short, the experimentation involving the implementation of a computer-

assisted language-learning program lasted for eight weeks (including the training

session). Learners completed a pretest and a posttest of their listening and speaking

skills. The control group members completed also the same pretest and posttest with

eight-week interval between them, but had no input from the software during the study.

33

Listening and speaking courses of the entry-level college students focus on both

English for everyday use and English for specific purposes. The level of their English

courses is lower-intermediate level. Therefore, the pretest and posttest used were

prepared for the intermediate level learners.

The researcher handled the teaching task of both the experimental group and the

control group.

3.4 Data collection

In preparation for data gathering, the researcher received a letter from General

Directorate of Health Sciences Institutes and Colleges, providing her with an official

permission that entitled her to use the computer lab of the college (Appendix B).

To conduct this research study, the researcher used two types of tools: (a)

research tools, and (b) one technology tool. The research tools consisted of: (1) a pretest

and a posttest for listening and speaking skills (quantitative treatment), and (2) attitude

questionnaire (qualitative and quantitative treatment). The technology tool was the

multimedia CD-ROM (Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9) (Appendix A).

3.4.1 Pretest

A Pretest was conducted to control the students' initial language proficiency

(listening and speaking) level. The pretest had the same type and number of questions as

the posttest. The anticipated differential performance of the pretest and posttest sheds

light on the relative learning efficiency of the two instruction methods. The pretest

consisted of two main parts:

34

3.4.1.1 Part one: Listening

The test consists of a 2.32-minute recorded dialogue (Appendix C) and ten

multiple choice (MC) questions (Appendix D). This test format is chosen because MC

has been the most widely used test format in EFL testing. The student had to select the

correct answers based on the recorded dialogue that had been previously played twice.

3.4.1.2 Part two: Speaking

The speaking test comprised two separate task types:

Task A: Read-aloud: In the first task, the participant saw a printed passage of about 400

words long and was given a few minutes to look over the text and read it silently. The

participant then read the passage aloud with attention to pronunciation, intonation, and

flow of delivery (Appendix E). Gibson (2008) states that by reading aloud longer

stretches of text, prosodic features (which occur in spontaneous speech as well as RA)

can be focused upon, with the aim of raising awareness of these and practicing them so

that the words flow in as natural-sounding a manner as possible. Chun (2002) uses read-

aloud for rehearsed speaking activities and to stabilize newly learnt speech patterns.

Task B: Answering questions: The second task required the participant to situate herself

in the position of being in an imaginary interview with the interlocutor who is the

researcher herself. The participant was required to respond to 10 questions and each

question was said twice (Weir & Milanovic, 2003, p. 336). Initial questions were related

to the content of the reading given in the previous task (Appendix E).

All the thirty three participants took the two tasks of the speaking test and were

audio recorded, too. Their permission to be audio recorded was first taken officially by

signing the consent forms (Appendix F). Thus, a total of 66 audio recordings were

collected, comprising 33 of Task A, and 33 of Task B. Three raters (including the

35

researcher herself) were trained to the scoring criteria of these tasks. They were then

invited to mark the audio recordings. Each rater marked a total of 66 audio recordings.

The raters were requested to mark each of the two tasks separately, with a score

for each task on a scale of 1 to 5. The modified operational rating scales adapted from

Weir's and Wu's (2006) rating scales were used by raters (Appendix G).

Inter-rater reliability was monitored during the study. Each audio recording was

marked by the three raters separately. Raters were not aware of the marks awarded by

the other raters. When two out of three raters agreed on a grade that measures the

performance of a particular student, this mark was registered. When the three raters

gave three different grades, the average of the three grades was registered. For example,

if the grades are 2, 3, 4, the student will have grade 3 registered for her.

3.4.2 Posttest

After the CALL session, students were given the listening and speaking posttest.

The posttest had the same type and number of questions as the pretest. This might

familiarize the students with the content of the test. This testing effect might have

threatened the internal validity of the experiment. However, such a threat was controlled

because a control group was already included. Johnson & Christensen (2004) propose

that any testing effect that might have occurred in the experimental group would have

also occurred in the control group (Johnson & Christensen, 2004). Moreover, the

following controls might also have limited the phenomena of testing effect: (a)

participants received no feedback about pretest responses prior to receiving the

treatment and taking the posttest, and (b) eight weeks passed between the pretest and

posttest.

36

3.4.3 Post-questionnaire

To define the impressions, remarks, criticisms and suggestions of the students as

precisely as possible, an attitude questionnaire was used. This questionnaire included

selected-response items and open-response items. Both types of items sought to collect

information on generalities (usage, presentation, interest, etc.), content (text, exercises),

and criticism and suggestions. The first 12 items were measured on a four-point Likert-

type scale ranging from 0 (Not at all) to 4 (a lot) (Appendix I). Items 13, 14, and 15

were also measured on a four-point Likert-type scale, but here the alternatives were

different, 0 (Not satisfied) to 4 (Very satisfied). The last three items required the

participants to provide answers as honestly as possible. Finally, the participants were

given a place where they can write any other comments that they might have.

The questionnaire items were translated into the students' native language for the

sake of making it clearer for them (Appendix H). Then, it was back translated into the

English version in order to make sure that the original meaning of it is preserved (Zaidi,

1972).

Thus, the researcher built the results of her study on the following criteria:

Independent Variables:

The teaching method was implemented through computer-assisted language

learning program called, Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9, and presented to the students

of the experimental group. The same course was offered to the students of the control

group, but through conventional methods.

Dependent Variables:

The three dependent variables in this study are:

1. Student attitudes toward the CALL program effectiveness: Two phases of the

student questionnaire were implemented. The first phase was a student questionnaire

intended to test the reliability of the questionnaire distributed to twelve subjects. The

37

second phase was a student questionnaire designed to determine the attitude of the

students toward learning English through using a computer-assisted language learning

program called, Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9. It was administered only to

students in the experimental group after administering the posttest.

2. Student listening skill: This was determined by comparing the mean difference

between the groups' pretest and posttest scores.

3. Student speaking skill: This was determined by comparing the mean difference

between the groups' pretest and posttest scores.

3.5 Questionnaire validity and reliability

Validity and reliability for use of the questionnaire with CALL participants were

established prior to administration of the questionnaire to the participants. The content

validity of the questionnaire was determined by a group of experts in the field of

English language and technology. They are two Ph.D. holders who have experience and

knowledge of instructional technology use and implementation in English language

classes and another three English language teachers. They reviewed the questionnaire

for appropriateness, relevance, and correctness of the content. They reported their

judgments using Questionnaire Validation Form (Appendix J). They reported that the

questionnaire was suitable for its intended purpose and that there were some minor

structural modifications to be made. The judgment was on face validity which came

from the expert judges.

The questionnaire for students was piloted in November 2006 in order to test its

internal reliability. The questionnaire was disseminated to twelve students. The result of

the student's pilot questionnaire is shown in Table 2. Table 2 reflects the alpha value for

the reliability estimated for the questionnaire. The measurement revealed that the

questionnaire was highly reliable at .9273. Given this result, the instrument was proven

38

to be acceptable for the actual study. There were some minor structural modifications of

the questionnaire based on feedback from students and some experts in the field of

teaching English.

Table 2: Reliability estimates (Cronbach's Alpha) for students' questionnaire

Alpha = .9273 Number of Cases: 12 Number of Items: 58

3.6 Data analysis

The results of this study were based on a student questionnaire (testing student's

attitudes toward CALL program), pretest, and posttest as instruments for data

collection. Raw scores on the listening and speaking skills were used for a number of

calculations, the most basic of which was to compare pretest scores of the two groups.

This was done to verify that the averages on the two skills of the two groups were

basically equal. Also, a t-test was used. T-test for independent means was used to test

the difference in the performance level of the experimental group and control group in

the pretest. A paired-samples t-test was also used to find out if there was improvement

in the listening and speaking skills of the two groups. More specifically, the t-test was

administered to compare the following:

1. The means of the pretest for both groups

2. The means of the pretest and posttest for the experimental group

3. The means of the pretest and posttest for the control group

4. The means of the posttest for both groups

In addition to the test of significance, an effect size (ES) analysis was also used

to determine whether there were improvements in pretest to posttest scores for the

experimental and control groups. An effect size (ES) analysis was also used to

determine whether there was a difference between the experimental and control groups

39

on the posttest scores of listening and speaking tests. The results of these analyses

addressed Research Questions 1 and 2.

Descriptive statistical frequency analyses were performed to demonstrate

participants' responses to each item of the questionnaire instrument. The results of these

descriptive statistics spoke to Research Question 3.

3.7 Summary

This chapter described the methodology needed to answer the research questions

related to the effectiveness of a multimedia program, Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9,

in the listening and speaking skills of female students at Onaizah College of Health

Sciences.

The chapter described the steps, the sample, and the software program that were

used in the study. The chapter described the major tools used in the study: (a) research

tools and (b) one technology tool. The research tools consisted of: (1) a pretest and a

posttest for listening and speaking skills (quantitative treatment); and (2) attitude

questionnaire (qualitative and quantitative treatment). The technology tool was the

multimedia CD-ROM (Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9).

40

CHAPTER FOUR

RESULTS

4.1 Introduction

This chapter analyzed the results of the study and the degree to which the

findings answered the proposed research questions. It is divided into parts based on the

research question number. This study addressed the following research questions:

1. Is CALL efficient in improving listening skill of first-year students in Onaizah

College of Health Sciences?

2. Is CALL efficient in improving speaking skill of first-year students in Onaizah

College of Health Sciences?

3. What are the attitudes of the experimental group students toward the CALL program

after using it?

In order to answer the first and second questions of this study, descriptive

statistics are used. The following sections present means and standard deviations of the

pretest and posttest scores. The third question is answered by presenting the results of

the statistical analysis of the quantitative data (closed-ended questions) and qualitative

data (open-ended questions) from the students in the experimental group.

To test if there is a significant difference in the level of performance of the

experimental group and control group, the t-test for independent means was used. T-test

for independent means was used to test the difference in the performance level of the

experimental group and control group in the pretest. A paired-samples t-test was also

used to find out if there was improvement in the listening and speaking skills of the two

groups toward learning. A probability level of .05 was used to determine statistical

significance. Data analysis was handled by using the Statistical Program for the Social

Sciences (SPSS 11.5 for Windows).

41

Before the actual commencement of the study, it is evident from the raw data

that subjects in both groups had similar results in the listening and speaking pretest

(Appendix K). For the control group, the listening and speaking means and standard

deviations were 5.13 (sd= 1.586) and 2.94 (sd= 1.181) respectively, which made the

whole mean 8.07. On the other hand, the listening and speaking means of the

experimental group were 4.59 (sd= 1.873) and 3.06 (sd= 1.029) respectively, and the

whole mean was 7.65. Thus, both groups' scores were close (see Table 3).

Table 3: Mean scores and standard deviation for listening and speaking pretests

Variable Group N Mean Std. Deviation

CONTROL 16 5.13 1.586 Listening Pretest

EXPERIMENTAL 17 4.59 1.873

CONTROL 16 2.94 1.181 Speaking Pretest

EXPERIMENTAL 17 3.06 1.029

To ensure comparability of the control group and experimental group, a t-test

was conducted. The t-test conducted on the pretests scores of listening and speaking

[t(31) =.886, p= .383, α= .05 and t(31) =.315, p= .755, α= .05] indicated no significant

difference between the two groups (Appendix L).

In the parametric test described in Appendix L the p (Sig.) values for both the

listening and speaking pretests across the two groups are greater than 0.05, that is,

falling below acceptable confidence levels for us to infer a significant difference

between the two groups' sets of results. We then conclude that there was no significant

difference between the groups in listening and speaking at the starting point of the

study.

42

4.2 Research question one: Posttest differences in listening

To answer question one, H1 "There will be a statistically significant difference

between the mean scores of students who received their listening learning through

CALL and those who received their listening learning through conventional methods in

favor of the experimental group." was tested using independent sample t-tests.

After the implementation of the study and on the examination of the data, it is

evident that there was an increase in the mean scores in listening from 5.13 to 5.69

(difference .56) for the control group. Similarly, for the experimental group, the mean

scores increased from 4.59 to 6.88 (difference 2.29). The experimental group started the

study with a lower mean score than the control group, and increased more (see Tables 4

& 5). The results of the two groups were both better than the previous mean scores.

Table 4: Mean scores and standard deviation for listening posttest

Variable Group N Mean Std. Deviation

CONTROL 16 5.69 1.740 Listening

EXPERIMENTAL 17 6.88 1.536

Table 5: Mean change for the listening scores

Pretest Posttest Change Section

Co. Ex. Co. Ex. Co. Ex.

Listening Skill 5.13 4.59 5.69 6.88 .56 2.29

Another t-test was conducted to determine if the posttest scores of the listening

skill for the groups were significantly different. In the t-test of the listening skill, t value

was 2.094 and the significance level was p= .045, α= .05 (see Appendix M). The results

[t(31) = -2.094, p= .045 α= .05] indicated that there was a statistically significant

difference in the performance of the two groups on the listening posttest. Because the

43

significance value of .045 is less than alpha = .05, we can conclude that there was a

significant difference between the groups in listening posttest.

In the parametric test described in Appendix L the p (Sig.) values for the

listening posttest across the two groups are less than 0.05, that is, falling within

acceptable confidence levels for us to infer a significant difference between the two

groups' sets of results.

4.3 Research question two: Posttest differences in speaking

To answer question two, H2 "There will be a statistically significant difference

between the mean scores of students who received their speaking learning through

CALL and those who received their speaking learning through conventional methods in

favor of the experimental group." was tested using independent sample t-tests.

After the implementation of the study and on the examination of the data, it is

evident that there was an increase in the mean scores in speaking from 2.94 to 3.69

(difference .75) for the control group. Similarly, for the experimental group, the mean

scores increased from 3.06 to 5.41 (difference 2.35) (see Tables 6 & 7). The results of

the two groups were both better than the previous mean scores.

Table 6: Mean scores and standard deviation for speaking posttest

Variable Group N Mean Std. Deviation

CONTROL 16 3.69 1.302 Speaking

EXPERIMENTAL 17 5.41 1.278

Table 7: Mean change for the speaking scores

Pretest Posttest Change Section

Co. Ex. Co. Ex. Co. Ex.

Speaking Skill 2.94 3.06 3.69 5.41 .75 2.35

44

Another t-test was conducted to determine if the posttest scores of the speaking

skill for the groups were significantly different. In the t-test of the speaking skill, t value

was 3.839 and the significance level was p= .001 (see Appendix L). The results [t(31) =

3.839, p= .001, α= .05] indicated that there was a statistically significant difference in

the performance of the two groups on the speaking posttest. Because the significance

value of .001 is less than alpha = .05, we can conclude that there was a significant

difference between the groups in speaking posttest.

In the parametric test described in Appendix L the p (Sig.) values for the

speaking posttest across the two groups are less than 0.05, that is, falling within

acceptable confidence levels for us to infer a significant difference between the two

groups' sets of results.

4.4 Analysis of listening and speaking changes resulting from the study

A paired-samples t-test on the pretest and posttest scores of the control and

experimental groups was conducted to find out if there was improvement in the

listening and speaking skills of the two groups. Since the p value in our compared

means tests for pretest and posttest scores across the two groups is less than 0.05 (i.e. at

a 95% or higher level of confidence.), it leads us to conclude that there is a significant

difference in the listening and speaking performance of the two groups (Appendixes M

& N).

For the control group, the paired samples t-test revealed a statistically significant

difference between the mean scores of listening pretest (mean= 5.13, sd= 1.586) and

posttest (mean= 5.69, sd= 1.74) that the students had, t(15) = -2.183, p = .045, α = .05.

The paired samples t-test also revealed a statistically significant difference between the

mean scores of speaking pretest (mean= 2.94, sd= 1.181) and posttest (mean= 3.69, sd=

1.302) that the students had, t(15) = -5.196, p = .000, α = .05 (Appendix M).

45

For the experimental group, the paired samples t-test also revealed a statistically

significant difference between the mean scores of listening pretest (mean= 4.59, sd=

1.873) and posttest (mean= 6.88, sd= 1.536) that the students had, t(16) = -6.738, p =

.000, α = .05. The paired samples t-test also revealed a statistically reliable difference

between the mean scores of speaking pretest (mean= 3.06, sd= 1.029) and posttest

(mean= 5.41, sd= 1.278) that the students had, t(16) = -8.296, p = .000, α = .05

(Appendix N).

Thus, both groups made improvement on their scores and the increase was

somewhat close (see Tables 5 & 7). In terms of statistical meaning, there was a

significant difference between the two groups in the posttest. In general, the

experimental group made more increases than the control group on the overall score.

Moreover, it is important to note that the experimental group showed greater

improvement on listening and speaking skills (4.64) than the control group (1.31).

Originally, the control group had a slightly better listening score than the experimental

group (5.13 and 4.59 respectively). After using the CALL program, the experimental

group did not just make a better improvement in listening and speaking, but it also

gained a higher mean score (6.06 vs. 5.55) than the control group. This result may be

attributed to the experimental group's use of the different features and activities in

listening and speaking during the implementation. The treatment was applied for only

eight weeks and the students had to adjust to the new technology and to the new way of

learning. However, the improvement noted indicates a potentially very positive

approach to mastering listening and speaking skills in English.

46

4.5 Effect size

In addition to the test of significance, an effect size (ES) analysis was also used

to determine whether there were improvements in pretest to posttest scores for the

experimental and control groups.

For the listening test of the experimental group, using Cohen's d (1988), we see

an effect size of 1.33. This indicates that, on average, the experimental students

increased from the 62nd percentile on the pretest to the 90th percentile on the posttest.

Thus, the experimental students showed large improvement in listening test scores from

pre to post.

For the speaking test of the experimental group, we see an effect size of 2.02.

This indicates that, on average, the experimental students increased from the 54th

percentile on the pretest to the 97.7th percentile on the posttest. Thus, the experimental

students showed large improvement in speaking test scores from pre to post.

For the listening test of the control group, we see an effect size of 0.33. This

indicates that, on average, the control students remained at about the 62nd percentile

from the pretest to the posttest. Thus, control students did not show improvement in

listening test scores from pre to post.

For the speaking test of the control group, we see an effect size of 0.6. This

indicates that, on average, the control students increased from the 54th percentile on the

pretest to the 73rd percentile on the posttest. Thus, the control students showed medium

improvement in speaking test scores from pre to post.

An effect size (ES) analysis was also used to determine whether there was a

difference between the experimental and control groups on the posttest scores of

listening and speaking tests.

For listening, we see an effect size of 0.72. This indicates that the posttest mean

of the experimental group is at about the 76th percentile of the control group. Stated

47

another way, the score of the average student in the experimental group exceeded the

scores of 76% of the control group students on the posttest. Thus, the experimental

group showed higher listening posttest scores than the control group.

For speaking, we see an effect size of 1.33. This indicates that the posttest mean

of the experimental group is at about the 90th percentile of the control group. Stated

another way, the score of the average student in the experimental group exceeded the

scores of 90% of the control group students on the posttest. Thus, the experimental

group showed higher speaking posttest scores than the control group.

4.6 Research question three: Attitudes toward the computer program

To answer question three, H3 "Students who received their listening and

speaking learning through CALL will show positive attitudes toward it." was

investigated by presenting the results of the statistical analysis of the quantitative data

(closed-ended questions) and qualitative data (open-ended questions) from the students

in the experimental group. The questionnaire sought to collect information on

generalities (usage, presentation, interest, etc.), content (text, exercises), and criticism

and suggestions.

4.6.1 Responses to close-ended questions:

All participants (N=17) in the experimental group were gathered in the computer

lab in their regular class time to conduct the questionnaire in the week after the posttest.

The participants were asked to finish all the questions. All participants answered the

closed-ended questions, which contained 58 statements intended to elicit information

about their attitudes in five categories. More specifically, the questionnaire was

segmented into the following sections:

1. Section A: General attitude toward the program

48

2. Section B: Experience & interest in using the program

3. Section C: Multimedia content

4. Section D: Program content

5. Section E: Interactive activities

The results of their responses are summarized and available in Appendix O.

4.6.1.1 Section A: General attitude toward the program

Questions one through ten were designed to elicit participants' attitudes toward

general items related to the program. Among the participants, about 41.2% of the

students stated they needed to a small extent a manual to use the program (a little), and

29.4% of the students said they somewhat needed a program manual. About 11.8% of

the students stated that they needed the manual a lot. Of the 17 students in the study,

17.6% reported that they did not need a manual to use the program at all.

Reviewing the students' responses related to whether they liked learning using

the program or not, almost 82.4% indicated their preference, 11.8% somewhat agreed

that they preferred using the program, and 5.9% liked using the program to a small

extent.

Having been asked if the program was easy to navigate or not, 47.1% of the

students strongly agreed (a lot), 35.3% somewhat agreed, and very few students

(17.6%) felt that the navigational feature of the program was easy to a small extent.

Responding to program feedback, 35.3% of the students stated that the feedback

of the program was fairly enough, 41.2% reported that the feedback was somewhat

enough, and very few students (17.6%) felt that they needed more feedback and that the

feedback of the program was to a small extent enough.

49

With respect to coming across any grammatical, numbering, or typographic

errors while using the program, all the students strongly stated that the program is free

from such errors.

Responding to the question on recommendation of the program to other EFL

learners, the majority (82.4%) of the students would recommend it, and 17.6% of them

would somewhat recommend the program to other EFL learners.

Speaking of the improvement in the listening skill that the students had since

they began using the program, 35.3% of the students found that their listening skill

improved a lot, 47.1% felt that they somewhat improved, and 17.6% found that their

improvement was to a small extent.

More than half (52.9%) of the students felt that their improvement in speaking

skill was somewhat noticeable, 23.5% found themselves very much improved, and

23.5% felt that their improvement was very limited.

Speaking about the general easy level of the English language used in the

program, 35.3% strongly agreed that the language was very easy, 52.9% felt that the

language was somewhat easy, and 11.8% found the language a little bit difficult.

Asked if the pace of lessons was quick from lesson to lesson, the majority

(64.7%) of the students rejected this statement and stated that it was not quick at all,

17.6% found the pace of lessons was somewhat quick, and 17.6% found it quick to a

small extent.

Overall, the responses on all the ten items indicate a positive and enthusiastic

impression of using the program. The fact that negative responses were minimal may be

considered an encouraging factor.

50

4.6.1.2 Section B: Experience & interest in using the program

The second category, questions eleven to seventeen, was designed to gain the

students' perceptions about their experience and interest that they had in using the

program with reference to different scales.

Responding to the first scale, if their experience with the program was

interesting or not, half (58.8%) of the students found it very interesting, 17.6% of them

felt that it was somewhat interesting, and 23.5% of the students perceived their

experience as interesting to a small extent.

With regard to whether they had a challenging experience or not, 47.1% of the

students had a very challenging experience, 41.2% found it somewhat challenging, and

11.8% experienced the challenging experience to a very small extent.

It is worthy to note that question 13 had a slightly higher positive response (a

lot: 82.4%; somewhat: 17.6%) and a much lower negative response (a little: 0.0%; not

at all: 0.0%). The responses to this scale (useful) may imply that most students

perceived that the program was effective in helping their listening and speaking skill.

Responding to the fourth scale (fun), the majority (76.5%) of the students found

the scale applicable to the experience they had in using the program, 17.6% found it

somewhat fun, and 5.9% of them found that there was a sense of fun to a very small

extent.

Items 15, 16, and 17 were constructed with a negative inference. That is why

more negative responses were generated than positive ones on these items. Thus the

scale had been reversed. For the 'boring' scale, half of the students (52.9%) revealed that

their experience was not boring at all, 35.3% of them reported that their experience was

somewhat not boring, 5.9% felt that it was boring to a small extent, and a small number

of the students (5.9%) found it boring.

51

The results for the 'confusing' scale showed that 58.8% of the students were not

having such experience at all, 35.3% felt that their experience was not very much

confusing, and 5.9% of the students found their experience confusing to a small extent.

Concerning the last scale 'frustrating', the majority (76.5%) of the students did

not experience it at all, 11.8% of them perceived that their experience was somewhat

not frustrating, 5.9% of them fount it a little bit frustrating, and 5.9% had a frustrating

experience.

The percentages of the positive responses were higher than those of the negative

responses although not extremely high. A moderate percentage of students believed that

their experience was a very interesting, challenging, useful, fun one, and that the boring,

confusing, and frustrating experience was very limited and was almost not present.

4.6.1.3 Section C: Multimedia content

This section of the questionnaire reflects the students' extent of satisfaction to

the multimedia content of the program (i.e. audio, photo, video, and audio recording). It

is worth noting that none of the students felt dissatisfied or little satisfied. The result

showed that 70.6% of the students were very satisfied with the audio, and 29.4%

moderately satisfied.

Concerning the use of photo in the program, 76.5% felt very satisfied, and

23.5% were moderately satisfied.

With regard to the use of video in the program, 64.7% of the students were very

satisfied with it, and 35.3% were moderately satisfied.

Among the respondents, 41.2% of the students were very satisfied with the

audio recording offered in the program, and 58.8% were moderately satisfied with this

multimedia content.

52

4.6.1.4 Section D: Program content

Students' responses to section D of the questionnaire reflect their satisfaction

with the content of each chapter in the program. Although 1.56% of students showed

negative responses, over 41% perceived that the content of all the chapters was very

satisfactory. Only low percentages of responses showing 'not satisfied' were seen on

these seven items (Q26: Not satisfied: 5.9%; Q27: Not satisfied: 5.9%; Q29: Not

satisfied: 5.9%; Q30: Not satisfied: 5.9%; Q31: Not satisfied: 5.9%; Q37: Not satisfied:

11.8%; Q46: Not satisfied: 5.9%).

4.6.1.5 Section E: Interactive activities

The fifth category, questions 52 to 58, was designed to gain the participants'

perception about the different interactive activities provided in each chapter. These

activities are as follows: 'Listen & Click,' 'See It, Say It,' 'Drag & Match,' 'How Do You

Say?,' 'Storyline,' 'Multiple Choice,' and 'Fill in the Blanks.'

The results showed that item 54 (Drag & Match) had the highest mean and

highest percentage of positive responses (64.7%) in this category; only 5.9% showed

negative responses. The responses revealed that participants perceived using the CALL

program activities helpful to some degree. Based on the responses to items 53, 54, 55,

56, 57, and 58, only a few participants had problems using the CALL program

activities. The responses to these items (Q53: Not satisfied: 11.8%; Q54: Not satisfied:

5.9%; Q55: Not satisfied: 23.5%; Q56: Not satisfied: 5.9%; Q57: Not satisfied: 5.9%;

Q58: Not satisfied: 5.9%) revealed that just a few participants were not satisfied with

these kinds of activities. Overall, results showed more positive than negative responses.

53

4.6.2 Responses to open-ended questions:

There were four open-ended questions at the end of the questionnaire. The first

two asked the participants about what they liked and did not like about using the

program. The last two gathered opinions and suggestions about the program for future

improvement. All participants were encouraged to respond to the open-ended questions.

However, all participants answered the first open-ended question, 6 participants

answered the second, 3 participants answered the third, 1 participant answered the

fourth, and only 1 participant wrote a comment for the fifth. The original responses in

Arabic are presented in Appendix P.

For the first question, four participants specifically pointed out that they liked

the listening exercises and test sections; one in this group expressed that using the

CALL program and the activities associated with each chapter, motivated her to learn

more; another also mentioned that she liked the quality of the audio streaming. Several

participants reported that they liked the CALL program because of its variety of

activities and convenience. They thought that using interactive exercises enhanced

learning interests and having the instruction clear with audio streaming energized the

class and made learning more interesting, effective, and convenient than traditional

classroom method. One participant pointed out that by using the CALL program, she

could learn to fit her own needs, which were missed in most traditional classrooms (i.e.

the content covered by the instructor is sometimes not what students need or want). One

participant reported that the exercises made learning more enjoyable. In addition,

responses also showed that participants liked the program and felt that it was helpful in

their English learning.

For the second question, two participants indicated that they did not like the

grammar exercises, but provided no further explanations. The most complained about

issue was the time allocated for using the program; several participants pointed out that

54

the time spent in learning using the program was too short. One participant complained

that it was inconvenient to look for the meanings of new vocabulary.

For the third question, two participants suggested that if possible, the program

should contain popular movie clips for future teaching and learning; they believed that

learning through watching popular movies would greatly increase their learning interest.

Another participant suggested that the program should add more functions to help

students find the information they need more easily and more conveniently.

For the forth question, only one participant suggested deleting some ethnic

beliefs that are prohibited in Islam such as drinking wine. This may justify the reason

behind the negative attitude toward some of the content as perceived in section D of the

closed-ended questions. From their answers to that section, only low percentages of

responses showed 'not satisfied' with the content of the program.

For the 'other comments' part, only one participant wrote her comment and

suggested using CALL programs not only for the listening and speaking skills, but also

for all the four skills.

Perhaps one of the more meaningful aspects of the program enjoyed by

participants was the use of computers in learning English. All of them had taken English

classes in the past. Unfortunately, numerous factors prevented them from learning

English effectively. For example, the classes did not consider individual learning styles;

each student was at a different level of English and the materials did not accommodate

that. The teachers did not engage them one on one, and the classes never focused on

speaking or listening as much as reading and writing. Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9,

they concurred, not only addressed the above-mentioned failures, but, more importantly,

it made them more familiar with computers. The experimental group revealed that each

participant wanted to continue learning English using the CALL program, Learn to

Speak English Deluxe 9.

55

In general, participants showed more positive than negative responses on all

items in the closed-ended question section. Even for the open-ended questions, more

positive feedback was shown than negative feedback. According to the results of the

questionnaire, most participants perceived that the computer-assisted language learning

program, Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9, was helpful and effective in their English

learning, especially in listening and speaking abilities, and that using the program

activities made the English class more interesting. Participants also observed that using

the CALL program for a longer time could help improve both their listening and

speaking abilities.

4.8 Summary

The results presented in this chapter suggest that, in general, CALL program had

positive effects on the listening and speaking skills for the experimental group when

compared with the control group which was taught using traditional ways of teaching.

This chapter presented the results of the study according to the study's research

questions. Research questions 1 and 2 were examined quantitatively. Research question

3 was examined quantitatively and qualitatively.

Based on the analyses of the data, chapter 5 provides a detailed summary of the

study's results and discusses the findings. It also presents the study's conclusions and

recommendations for future instructional technology research.

56

CHAPTER FIVE

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

5.1 Introduction

Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9 was a newly created educational and technical

training program designed to increase English language skills of non-English speaking

students. The program aimed to help participants learn English and at the same time

improve their listening and speaking skills. However, because of its novelty, the

effectiveness of the program as a means of teaching English remains unknown.

Evidence of program effectiveness was needed prior to implementing it in EFL classes.

The purpose of the study was to determine the effectiveness of a multimedia

program, Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9, in the listening and speaking skills of

female students at Onaizah College of Health Sciences. In carrying out this study, a

comprehensive review of related literature was conducted to gain insight and clarify the

parameters for this study. This chapter reviews and discusses the findings, based on the

analyses presented in Chapter 4, and relates them to previous research. This will be

followed by a discussion of pedagogical implications and recommendations for future

studies.

5.2 Discussion

Based on the results of this study, which are presented in chapter 4 above, it was

concluded that the use of the computer-assisted language learning program, Learn to

Speak English Deluxe 9, would bring about a fruitful educational contribution to the

teaching of listening and speaking skills. This section uses the study's three research

questions as a framework with which to discuss the study's findings. It puts forward

some possible explanations for the greater success rates of CALL program.

57

The following research questions provided a focus for the study:

1. Is CALL efficient in improving listening skill of first-year students in Onaizah

College of Health Sciences?

2. Is CALL efficient in improving speaking skill of first-year students in Onaizah

College of Health Sciences?

3. What are the attitudes of the experimental group students toward the CALL program

after using it?

The previous data of the pretests indicated that the control and experimental

groups were similar in overall listening and speaking skills' level (Control: 8.07;

Experimental: 7.65; only a .42-point difference). The results of t-test in the previous

listening and speaking scores confirmed that there was no significant difference

between the two groups before the study. In the listening as well as the speaking

sections, no remarkable difference was seen between the two groups.

After the implementation of the study and on the examination of data, results

showed that there was a significant difference in achievement between the control group

and experimental group. Thus, the following two proposed hypotheses were accepted:

1. There will be a statistically significant difference between the mean scores of

students who received their listening learning through CALL and those who

received their listening learning through conventional methods in favor of the

experimental group.

2. There will be a statistically significant difference between the mean scores of

students who received their speaking learning through CALL and those who

received their speaking learning through conventional methods in favor of the

experimental group.

After the eight-week period, both groups made some gains in their listening and

speaking scores (Control: posttest mean =9.38; Experimental: posttest mean

58

score=12.29). In general, the experimental group made slightly better progress in the

overall score than the control group; the difference between two groups increased from

.42 to 2.91. The results of the t-test analysis in the posttest showed that there was a

statistically significant difference in overall listening and speaking scores between the

two groups. It is necessary to mention that the control group originally had a slightly

better listening mean score than the experimental group (control: 5.13; experimental:

4.59). After the implementation of the CALL program, the experimental group gained a

higher listening mean score (experimental: 6.88; control: 5.69) than the control group.

The progress that the experimental group made in the listening section than the control

group could be reasonably attributed to the experimental group's use of the audio

streaming feature and the listening self-tests during the implementation of the study.

Moreover, almost all the students scoring higher than 80 were from the experimental

group. Only one student in the control group scored higher that 80 in the listening

posttest. It is difficult to say that all the increases were solely due to the CALL program,

but it was encouraging to see this outcome since the goal was partially met.

These were the anticipated results as had been predicted on the basis of

comparable studies. These findings are similar to what was found in most studies which

actually compare control groups with populations involved with CALL as discussed in

Chapter 2. In fact, these findings mirror what Klassen and Milton (1999) noted in their

study involving the effectiveness of an interactive multimedia CD-ROM in an English

language-learning curriculum at the University of Hong Kong. They reported that

students who used the program showed significant improvement in listening skills

compared to students given traditional classroom instruction. They also found that the

use of interactive multimedia programs helped students develop positive attitudes

toward CALL programs.

59

Other studies that have compared CALL with traditional classroom learning (Al-

Juhani, 1991; Almutairi, 1998; Aljamhoor, 1999; Alluhaib, 1999; Al-Jraiwi, 1999;

Attwaim, 2000; Al-Subeai, 2000) found significant differences in learning that could be

attributed to the computer-assisted language learning treatment. The overall findings in

a number of studies were that CALL students learned significantly better than

traditionally taught learners. The findings of the present study follow in the same vein.

Although a significant difference between the two groups is registered, the

presence of some threats to validity should be mentioned. The first threat to validity is

selection. A convenience sampling was used and not random sampling; therefore, the

results cannot be generalized. Further research should be conducted to investigate the

effectiveness of CALL program using random sampling. Another threat to validity is

pretesting. The same test was used for the pretest and posttest. This is a threat because

the pretest could have improved the performance in the posttest. However, such a threat

was controlled because a control group was already included. Johnson & Christensen

(2004) propose that any testing effect that might have occurred in the experimental

group would have also occurred in the control group (Johnson & Christensen, 2004).

Moreover, the following controls might also have limited the phenomena of testing

effect: (a) participants received no feedback about pretest responses prior to receiving

the treatment and taking the posttest, and (b) eight weeks passed between the pretest and

posttest.

The study also cannot claim full credit for these improvements in listening and

speaking. It was short-term, and students had only two periods each week, all of which

must claim some credit for the increase in listening and speaking level. The impact of

pedagogical interventions may not be visible in a single semester. In particular,

improved educational performance resulting from different types of instruction would

be visible only after a relatively prolonged period of time (Felix, 2005). A longitudinal

60

approach would allow a deeper understanding of the learning environment investigated

(Chapelle, 1998). This area should be considered for further study with a larger number

of students. However, the improvement noted indicates a potentially very positive

approach to mastering listening and speaking skills in English.

The positive impact of the CALL program on the students’ listening and

speaking skills may derive from the fact that the students become more confident and

motivated in learning the language because of the authentic environments, modified

interaction and enhanced motivation. The students get to practice their listening skills

through watching short movies instead of tape cassettes and working on repetition in

drills and dialogs based on situations. Every time they try to speak, they are positively

reinforced with the words, for example, 'good,' 'fantastic,' 'excellent,' and 'terrific.' These

allow them to break their barriers of risk-taking in speaking the language as well as to

boost up their English competence. Thus, this research has suggested that CALL

program may contribute to positive learning outcomes through authentic environments,

modified interaction and enhanced motivation.

The meta-analyses conducted by Felix (2005) revealed that though CALL has

been effective in teaching certain elements of the English language (i.e. reading,

vocabulary acquisition, and listening), few studies have focused on its effects on oral

communication. In this study, the researcher opted to have participants use the oral

component of Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9, which involved reading words and

sentences into a microphone. The researcher felt that this particular component of Learn

to Speak English Deluxe 9 was effective in promoting pronunciation or communication.

Students' positive attitude and satisfaction with CALL program were also tested.

Descriptive statistics were run and data showed that CALL program users had a positive

attitude toward CALL program, perceived its utility for helping them improve their

listening and speaking skills, and had a strong intention to use the program in the future.

61

This positive attitude and satisfaction with CALL program lead to high intention to use

CALL program in the future because of the benefits users perceived. In general,

participants showed more positive than negative feedback in all items in the close-ended

question section. Even for the open-ended questions, more positive than negative

feedback was shown. Despite the short exposure time, a considerable percentage of

participants expressed that using CALL program in listening and speaking classes was

better than traditional classroom teaching, and that the CALL activities were effective in

the improvement of their listening and speaking skills. Results of this study were in

agreement with other studies pertaining to attitude towards CALL program (Al-Juhani,

1991; Bagui, 1998; Klassen and Milton, 1999; Al-Subeai, 2000).

This positive attitude toward the CALL program may be also attributed to the

fact that during the class, students were positively reinforced by the computer, such as

excellent, very good, terrific and well done, whenever they try to speak. With the

positive reinforcements, students’ intrinsic motivation became promoted. Students had

the chance to learn the language for their own self-perceived needs and goals. This led

them to gaining positive attitudes towards the teacher, the class, the teaching method,

and of course, language learning. They finally participated in their learning for the

enjoyment it provided. This is in accordance with the overall findings from most

researches in the role of attitudes and motivation in foreign or second language learning

that positive attitudes and motivation are related to success in foreign or second

language learning (Gardner & Lambert, 1972; Richard-Amato, 1988).

The program's success was due in part to the fact that Learn to Speak English

Deluxe 9 program followed the conditions demonstrated by Egbert and Yang (2004) in

creating opportunities in a computer-assisted language learning (CALL) classroom. For

example, participants had enough time and feedback on their language proficiency and

content competence, they worked in an environment with little to no stress, they were

62

involved in authentic tasks, and they had the opportunity to interact with the computer

program. More importantly, the program supported their autonomy.

To summarize, this study finds that using the computer-assisted language

learning program in improving the listening and speaking skills of students produces

satisfying results among the participants of the study. Moreover, the findings of the

study generally supported scholars' findings in the fields of language learning and

computer-assisted language learning especially in the field of listening and speaking

skills. Language learners' attitudes toward using CALL program in learning English

language in general, and improving listening and speaking skill in particular, could be

an important factor in determining their achievements in learning language via CALL

programs. Finally, the findings of the investigation promote further research

development for new CALL technology to implement in the improvement of the

listening and speaking skills to reach a balancing act between theory and practice.

Research in computer-assisted language learning environments such as Learn to Speak

English Deluxe 9 which collects data on learners' processes for dealing with different

activities makes an important contribution to second language acquisition theory and to

the design of multimedia software for supporting the development of L2 listening and

speaking skills outside of formal classroom instruction. The integration of CALL-based

learning seems indeed to have contributed to students' learning in listening and speaking

course in the Saudi Arabian context. Thus, it is the researcher's hope that researchers,

educators, and foreign language learners will benefit from the findings and suggestions

presented here.

5.3 Pedagogical implications

Based on the results outlined, many pedagogical implications can be concluded:

1. CALL could be a very useful tool for teaching EFL.

63

2. The program's appropriateness and compatibility with students' cultural and

social norms was noted in the findings. Some students expressed apprehension

about the moralities and values that the program contains, which are against the

Saudi Arabian culture. The Saudi Arabian culture is considered Islamic and

conservative in nature. This point was expressed before by Thomas (1987). He

suggests that cultural conditions of developing societies should be considered

when technology transfers from industrialized societies into these societies. To

overcome this issue, EFL teachers in Saudi Arabia need to be informed about

the potential value of integrating CALL programs in their classes and how to

adjust their efficiency with students' needs and Islamic cultural and social

norms.

3. The study shows that students can use such program in the computer lab or at

home at a convenient time to improve listening and speaking skills. Using

CALL inside and outside the classroom will help EFL teachers meet individual

differences in learning styles as the use of CALL can satisfy visual learners,

auditory learners, and audio-visual learners.

4. Multimedia CALL programs can be used to supplement or complement

listening and speaking instruction.

5. Hiring native speakers of English to teach English language speaking in Arab

countries is expensive and the same goal can be accomplished by equipping

labs with sophisticated computers that have interactive multimedia CD-ROMs

and access to modern CALL programs.

5.4 Recommendations for further studies

The results of this study showed the effectiveness of a computer-assisted

language learning (CALL) program, Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9, in developing

64

the listening and speaking skills of female students studying at Onaizah College of

Health Sciences. Based on the findings of this study, the following recommendations

are made:

1. Further research should be conducted to investigate the effectiveness of CALL

program for different groups of students at various levels of education.

2. A replication of this study should be made to see if the results of this study will

be repeated.

3. This study was limited to 16 hours of CALL program integration in listening and

speaking class. Therefore, longer study is needed and regular class time is

recommended to investigate the impact of CALL program on listening and

speaking skills.

4. As this study was conducted with Arabic-speaking students. Further research is

needed to investigate the effectiveness of the CALL program in non-Arabic

speaking students.

5. Further research is needed to study the effectiveness of CALL program taking

gender into consideration. Comparing male versus female CALL program use

might shed some light on whether the program effectiveness in learning is

affected by gender.

6. Qualitative research such as observing students using CALL program is needed.

This kind of research is important as it might shed light on the best techniques

and strategies to use CALL program.

7. A similar study could be implemented taking teachers' attitudes into

consideration. This would contribute much to the development of English

education.

65

8. Recommendations for future study include also investigating more closely the

effectiveness of CALL program in the reading and writing skills of foreign

language learners.

9. Since this study used only the interactive software program available at the time

that the research was conducted, it is recommended to use more sophisticated

programs available on the market to determine whether these programs are

useful for Arab college students. Such programs are now under development but

were not available at the time of the study.

66

References

Aldosari. H. (1992). A sociolinguistic study of the attitudes of Muslim students,

teachers, and religious officials on learning and teaching English as a foreign

language in Saudi Arabia. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Pennsylvania State

University, Pennsylvania.

Alfallaj, Fahad. (1998). An evaluative study of the teaching of English as a Foreign

Language at the Junior College of Technology, Buraydah, Saudi Arabia. Doctoral

dissertation, Indiana University of Pennsylvania.

Aljamhoor, A. (1999). fa'iliyat alhassoob fi tadreess allughatil engliziyah litullab assaff

alawal thanawi: dirassah tajreebiyah 'The Effectiveness of Using Computers in

Teaching EFL to Secondary School Students: An Experimental Study.'

Proceedings of the Symposium on Educational Technology and Information,

Bahrain University. Riyadh: King Saud University Press.

Alluhaib, I. (1999). athar istikhdam baramij alhassib alali fi maddat alfizya ala tahsseel

tullab assaff alaual thanawi 'The Impact of Using Educational Software on the

Secondary School Students' Learning of Physics.' Unpublished master's thesis,

King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

Almutairi, S. (1998). athar istikhdam ihda barmajiyat alhassoob fi maddat aloloom ala

tahsseel tullab assaff assadis alibtiday 'The Effects of Using Computer Programs

in The Teaching of Science on the Learning Achievements of Sixth Grade Pupils.'

Unpublished master's thesis, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

67

American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages. (1996). Standards for foreign

language learning: Preparing for the 2lst century. Yonkers, NY: Author.

Anderson, J. (1991). Computer-based technologies: effective tools for teaching and

learning. In T. Le and M. McCauslanfd (Eds.), Language Education: Interaction

and development. Proceedings of the International Conference on Language

Educations: Interaction and development 21, 116-142. Ho Chi Minh City,

Vietnam

Ashworth, D. (1996). Hypermedia and CALL. In M. C. Pennington (Ed.), The power of

CALL (pp. 79-95). Houston, TX: Athelstan Publications.

Attwaim, A. (2000). athar istikhdam alhassoob ala tahseel tullab assaff assadiss

alibtida'y fi muqarrar qawa'id allughatul alArabiyah 'The Influence of Using

Computers on the Sixth Grade Pupils' Learning of Arabic Language'. Unpublished

master's thesis, King Saud University, Riyadh. Saudi Arabia.

Bagui, S. (1998). Reasons for increased learning using multimedia. Journal of

Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 7(1), 3-18.

Barr, D., Leakey, J. and Ranchoux, A. (2005). Told Like it is! An Evaluation of

Integrated Oral Develoment Pilot Project. Language Learning & Technology,

9(3), 55-78.

Bax, S. (2003). CALL - past, present and future. System, 31(1), 13-28.

68

Breen, P. (2005). Two examples of CALL use in the classroom. Asian EFL Journal, 6.

Retrieved February 25, 2008, from http://www.asian-efl-

journal.com/pta_august_05_pb.php

Brett, P. (1997). A comparative study of the effects of the use of multimedia on

listening comprehension. System, 25(1), 39-53.

Bucholtz, C. (1998). New Tricks for Teaching: Software، Web-based Solutions Help

Growing Pool of Technicians Get up to Speed. Telephony, 234(11), 50.

Burns, D. (1996). Technology in the ESL classroom. Technology & Learning, 16, 50-

52.

Burston, Jack. (1993). Exploiting available technology. CALICO Journal, 11(1), 47-52.

Butler-Pascoe, M.E., and Wiburg, K. (2003). Technology and Teaching English

Language Learners. Boston: Pearson Education.

Cazade A. (1999). Sound waves and other speech oriented visual aids for the language

learner. Apprentissage des Langues et Systèmes d’Information et de

Communication (ALSIC), 2(2), 3-32.

Chapelle, C. (1997). CALL in the year 2000: Still in search of research paradigms?

Language Learning & Technology, 1(1), 19-43.

69

Chapelle, C. (1998). Multimedia CALL: Lessons to be learned from research on

instructed SLA. Language Learning & Technology, 2(1), 22-34.

Chapelle, C. A. (2001a). Innovative language learning: Achieving the vision. ReCALL,

13, 3-14.

Chapelle, C. A. (2001b). Computer applications in second language acquisition:

Foundations for teaching, testing and research. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press.

Chun, D. (2002). Discourse Intonation in L2; from Theory to Practice. Amsterdam and

Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Cobb, K. J. (2002). Facilitating second language acquisition through computer assisted

language learning. Action Research Exchange (ARE), 1(1). Retrieved February

29, 2008, from http://chiron.valdosta.edu/are/Artmanscrpt/vol1no1/cobb_am.pdf

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences (2nd ed.).

Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Cunningham, Kevin (2000). Integrating CALL into the Writing Curriculum. The

Internet TESL Journal, 6(5). Retrieved March 17, 2006, from

http://iteslj.org/Articles/Cunningham-CALLWriting

70

Duquette, L., Renie, D., & Laurier, M. (1998). The evaluation of vocabulary acquisition

when learning French as a second language in a multimedia environment.

Computer Assisted Language Learning, 11(1), 3-34.

Egan, K. B. (1999). Speaking: A critical skill and a challenge. CALICO Journal, 16(3),

277-293.

Egbert, J. L. (2005). Conducting research on CALL. In J. L. Egbert & G. M. Petrie

(Eds.), CALL research perspectives (pp. 3–8). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Egbert, J., & Yang, Y. (2004). Mediating the digital divide in CALL classrooms:

Promoting effective language tasks in limited technology contexts. Recall, 76(2),

280-291.

Ehsani, F., & Knodt, E. (1998). Speech technology in computer-aided language

learning: Strengths and limitations of a new CALL paradigm. Language Learning

& Technology, 2(1), 45-60. Retrieved March 7, 2006, from

http://lll.msu.edu/vol2numl/article3/index.html

Felix, Uschi (2001). The Web’s potential for language learning: the student’s

perspective. ReCALL 13(1), 47-58.

Felix, Uschi (2005). What do meta-analyses tell us about CALL effectiveness?

ReCALL, 17(2), 269-288.

71

Fotos, S., & Browne, C.M. (2004). New Perspectives on CALL for Second Language

Classrooms. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Fox, C, Manning, E., Murphy, M., Urbon, R., & Marwick, K. C. (Eds.). (2003).

Longman dictionary of contemporary English (New ed.). Essex, UK: Pearson

Education.

Gardner, R.C., & Lambert, W. (1972). Attitudes and Motivation in Second Language

Learning. Rowley, M.A.: Newbury House.

Garrett, N. (1991). Technology in the service of language learning: Trends and issues.

The Modern Language Journal, 75(1), 74-101.

Gibson, Sally (2008). Reading aloud: a useful learning tool? ELT Journal, 62(1), 29-36.

Gill, Mary McVey and Hartmann, Pamela. (Eds.). (2005). TAPESTRY: Listening &

Speaking 1: Middle East Edition. Heinemann Library.

Graham, L., Lee, S., Liu, M., & Moore, Z. (2002). A look at the research on computer-

based technology use in second language learning: A review of the literature from

1990-2000. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 34(3), 250-273.

Hall, C. (1998). Overcoming the grammar deficit: the role of information technology in

teaching German grammar to undergraduates. Canadian Modern Language

Review, 55(1), 41-60.

72

Hayati, A. (2005). The computer and language teaching. Asian EFL Journal, 4.

Retrieved February 29, 2008, from http://www.asian-

efljournal.com/pta_may_05_hm.php

Hincks, R. (2003). Speech technologies for pronunciation feedback and evaluation.

ReCALL, 15(1), 3-20.

Hubbard, P., Kessler,G., & Madden, J. (2003). Technology, techniques, and materials

for Web listening. TESOL 2003: Baltimore. Retrieved April 18, 2007, from

http://www.stanford.edu/~efs/tesol03listening/

Ivers, Karen, S. and Barron, Ann, E. (2003). Multimedia Projects in Education:

Designing, producing, and Assessing (2d ed.). Englewood, CO: Libraries

Unlimited.

James, R. (1996). CALL and the speaking skills. System, 24(1), 15-21.

Johnson, B., & Christensen, L. (2004). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative,

and mixed approaches (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education Inc.

Al-Jraiwi, A. (1999). athar alwassa'it almuta'addidah ala tahsseel talabat assaff alawal

athanawi fi maddat arriyadhiyat bi madeenat arriyadh 'The Influence of

Multimedia on the Secondary School Students' Learning of Mathematics in

Riyadh Area.' Unpublished master's thesis, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi

Arabia.

73

Al-Juhani, S. (1991). The Effectiveness of Computer-Assisted Instruction in Teaching

English as a Foreign Language in Saudi Arabian Secondary School. Unpublished

doctoral dissertation, University of Denver, Colorado.

Kenning, M. M. and Kenning, M. J. (1983). An Introduction to Computer-Assisted

Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Kenning, M. M. & Kenning M. J. (1990). Computers and Language Learning: Current

Theory and Practice. West Sussex, England: Ellis Horwood.

Klassen, J. & Milton, P. (1999). Enhancing English language skills using multimedia:

Tried and tested. Computer assisted language learning, 12(4), 281-294.

Kramsch, C. (1988). The cultural discourse of foreign language textbooks. In A.

Singerman (Ed.), Towards a new integration of language and culture (pp. 63-68).

Middlebury, VT: Northeast Conference.

Künzel, Sebastian. (1995). Processors processing: Learning theory and CALL. CALICO

Journal, 12(4), 106-113.

Larsen-Freeman, D. & Long, S. (1991). An introduction to second language acquisition

research. New York: Longman.

Levy, Michael. (1997). Computer-assisted language learning: Context and

conceptualization. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

74

Maher, J. (1986). The development of English as an international language of medicine.

Applied Linguistics, 7(2), 206–218.

Masatake, D., Kawahara, T., & Tsubota, Y. (2004). An English pronunciation learning

system for Japanese students based on diagnosis of critical pronunciation errors

(pp. 1-16). Academic Centre for Computing and Media Studies, Kyoto University,

Kyoto Japan. Cambridge University Press.

McCarthy, R. (1989). Multimedia: What the excitement's all about. Electronic

Learning, 8(8), 26-31.

Raphan, D. (1996). A Multimedia approach to academic listening. TESOL Journal,

6(2), 24-28.

Richard-Amato, Patricia. (1988). Making It Happen: Interaction in the Second

Language Classroom from Theory to Practice. New York: Longman.

Schiffrin, D. (1994). Approaches to discourse. London: Basil Blackwell.

Schwienhorst, K. (2002). Why virtual, why environments? Implementing virtual reality

concepts in computer-assisted language learning. Simulation and Gaming, 33(2),

196-209.

Stepp-Greany, J. (2002). Student perceptions on language learning in a technological

environment: Implications for the new millennium. Language Learning and

Technology 6 (1), 165–80.

75

Al-Seghayer, K. (2001). The effect of multimedia annotation modes on L2 vocabulary

acquisition: A comparative study. Language Learning & Technology, 5(1), 202-

232. Retrieved March 8, 2006, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol5num1/alseghayer/

Sinclair, J.M. (1992). The Automatic Analysis of Corpora. In J. Svartvik (Ed.),

Directions in Corpus Linguistics, Proceedings of Nobel Symposium 82 (pp. 379-

397). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Su, W.Q., & Kinshuk (2002). Web-based computer assisted language learning. In

Proceedings of the Distance Education Association of New Zealand Conference,

99-107. Wellington: New Zealand.

Al-Subeai, W. (2000). The effectiveness of CALL in improving vocabulary learning and

reading comprehension among EFL Saudi students' of the secondary commercial

in Riyadh. Unpublished master's thesis, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi

Arabia.

Tannenbaum, R. (1998). Theoretical Foundations of Multimedia. New York: Computer

Science Press.

Thomas, R. (1987). The Nature of Educational Technology. In R. M. Thomas & V. N.

Kobayashi (Eds.), Educational Technology-Its Creations, Development and

Cross-Cultural Transfer (pp. 1-23). Oxford: Pergamon Press.

Virvou, M., Maras D., & Tsiriga V. (2000). Student Modelling in an Intelligent

Tutoring System for the Passive Voice of English Language. Educational

76

Technology and Society, 3(4). Retrieved February 25, 2008, from

http://ifets.ieee.org/periodical/vol_4_2000/virvou.html

Warschauer M. (1996). Computer Assisted Language Learning: an Introduction. In

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

International.

Warschauer, M., & Healey, D. (1998). Computers and language learning: An overview.

Language Teaching, 31(2), 57-71.

Weir, Cyril J. & Milanovic, M., (2003). Continuity and innovation: the history of the

CPE 1913–2002. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Weir, Cyril J. & Wu, Jessica R.W. (Eds.). (2006). Establishing test form and individual

task comparability: a case study of a semi-direct speaking test. Language Testing,

23(2), 167-197.

Wimberley, Anita, T. (2007). Analyzing computer applications in English as a second

language acquisition tool. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of

Louisiana, Lafayette.

World Bank. (1995). Will Arab Workers Prosper or Be Left Out in the Twenty-First

Century? World Bank Regional Perspectives on World Development Report,

Washington, DC: World Bank Publishing.

77

Zaidi, S.M. Hafeez (1972). Problems of Translation in Cross-Cultural Research. Journal

of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 3(1), 41-56.

Zhenhui, R. (1999). Modern vs. traditional. Forum, 37(3). Retrieved April 29, 2007,

from http://exchanges.state.gov/forum/vols/vol37/no3/p27.htm

78

Appendix A: Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9: An Overview (Researcher's review)

Product Overview

Founded in Dublin in 1995, RiverDeep Interactive Learning Limited has been

the leading name in language-learning software. It is one of the fastest growing

education and consumer software companies in the United States. Its CD-ROM

solutions can be founded in thousands of schools in over 20 countries worldwide. It

owns, develops, and publishes many successful foreign language series products under

The Learning Company brand such as Reader Rabbit Reading Builder, Carmen

Sandiego, ClueFinders, Oregon Trail, Mavis Beacon Teaches Typing and Zoombinis.

The Learning Company brings to Riverdeep its outstanding, award-winning education

software, Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9.

The Learning Company assumes that learners can achieve the fluency they

desire quickly and conveniently with the effective and entertaining Learn to Speak

Deluxe program. For business, for travel or just for fun, it is the language learning

system that gets results fast.

Technical Features

Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9 comes in four CDs coupled with multimedia

hardware and a graphical interface like MS-Windows. It reflects an era where sound,

color, and even full-motion video are available on the desktop, along with a volume and

variety of text that itself is pretty amazing. Table (1) provides a technical profile for the

program.

79

Table 1: Technical profile for Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9 multimedia program

Activities Integrated; Listening, reading, fill-in exercises, listen and

click exercises, see and say exercises, drag and match

exercises, and how do you say exercises, dictation,

sentence editing, prediction, multiple choice, vocabulary,

pronunciation, dialogues, word study, games, speech

recording, and a talking dictionary.

Media Format (4) Compact Discs

Minimum Hardware

Requirements (Windows XP)

300 MHz PC with a 4x speed CD-ROM drive. Headset

and Microphones, 128 MB RAM, sound card & graphics

card.

Level from beginner to advanced ESL/EFL levels

Website http://rivapprod2.riverdeep.net/

Learn to Speak English software program was built according to the following

storyboards:

• A title screen showing the logo of the program.

Figure 1: Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9's title screen

80

• Next is the sign-in list screen. In this list, a new user has type his/her name next to

the cursor, then click on Start (or press Enter) to begin the program. If he/she used

Learn to Speak before, his/her name will already be on the sign-in list.

Figure 2: Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9's sign-in list screen

• When the user clicks on Start (or presses Enter) to begin the program, a home menu

screen will appears

Figure 3: Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9's home menu screen

• Next, the Comprehensive Courses' menu appears when it is selected from the home

menu screen. One of the three courses from two different tracks: General and

Specialty can be chosen. A description of the selected course appears in the text area

81

at the bottom of the screen. Once a Comprehensive Course is selected, it will appear

beneath Comprehensive Courses on the Home screen. Each Comprehensive Course

begins with a list of educational goals. The goals tell what one can expect to learn in

each lesson.

Figure 4: Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9's menu of comprehensive courses

• Then, a list of situational lessons appears. These lessons are divided into chapters.

Figure 5: Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9's situational lessons for the beginning course 1.

82

• When one of the courses is started, a selection of activities will appear around a

situational topic. The user can learn the activities in the order they appear, or he/she

can choose the activity to be practiced first.

Figure 6: Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9's activities of beginning course 1.

Program Features

The Learn to Speak English software program takes advantage of CD-ROM

storage to present speech utterances from a variety of speakers. Videos of different

speakers pop up as the course exercises go along. Each utterance can be heard as many

times as desired although for a given sentence, only one native speaker is available.

Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9 offers a quick diagnostic pretest to evaluate the

language skills that the learners have in order to determine the ideal staring point for

them. The learners are left with different two choices for learning. They can Learn

English by following the general track or focus on specific topics that interest them

most.

It contains simulated conversations where learners can hone their listening and

speaking skills in simulated real-world interactions with native speakers. It can simulate

83

authentic contexts using multimedia displays. Learners can participate in one-to-one

conversations with one or more simulated or videotaped interlocutors. The cue for the

student to speak can be realistic, such as having a character on the screen turn head and

eyes toward the user.

Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9 consists of 30 situational lessons related to

various topics and 16 Extended Practice lessons. Situational lesson titles include

Immigration and Customs, Changing Money, Public Transportation, Checking into a

Hotel, Making a Phone Call, Dining Out, Making an Appointment, At the Movies,

Shopping at the Mall, Meeting an Attorney, Finding an Apartment, Moving Day,

Shopping for Groceries, At the Laundry, Renting a Car, Applying for a Credit Card,

Asking for Directions, At the Gas Station, Car Trouble, A Washington Traffic Jam, A

Fender Bender, Invitation, A Flight to the West Coast, California Dreaming, A Business

Lunch, A Household Emergency, Under the Weather, At the Doctor's Office, At the

Dentist's Office, and Collecting the Inheritance.

Each situational lesson includes the following parts: Introduction to the setting,

Vocabulary, Drill 1, Story, Action, Drill 2, Grammar, Drill 3, Conversation, and Games.

The 16 Extended Practice lessons provide additional opportunities to practice

the English language. They are categorized into categories including General Interest,

Business, Social Interactions, Everyday Life, and Leisure.

In different parts of the software, the learners have the chance to see any word or

sentence, hear them, and then say them. Each lesson begins with new words, then

progress to phrases and beyond. Learners can click on the word or phrase they want to

learn. Record their pronunciation and compare it to a native speaker's, watch and hear a

native speaker use the word in a sentence, explore subtleties of the language with

convenient vocabulary notes, and easily access context-sensitive help. Buttons at the

bottom and top of each lesson screen allow users to move easily from one task to

84

another, as well as from one lesson to another. Also, menus and screens of the software

are colorful, attractive, intuitive and easy to use.

The extent and quality of the sound recordings is one of the foremost strength of

the software. Dialogues can be heard as complete conversation or separated into

sentence-sized chunks. Vocabulary part provides the lessons new vocabulary in a

scrolling field of words that can be heard one at a time, or in a conversational context.

Learners are given the chance to evaluate their progress with drills in each

lesson. Each lesson has three drills. The first two drills are based on the Dialogues.

These include 'Listen and Click,' 'See and Say,' 'Drag and Match,' and 'How Do You

Say?' In 'How Do You Say?' drill, learners are asked to type a sentence that is

appropriate to a communicative task, e.g., An American colleague tells you your

English has improved since you arrived. He says: The third drill is based on the

grammar topics being elaborated. It is mostly in the form of Fill in the Blank.

In Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9, users are given a non-threatening and

positive learning experience. Their answers given on the drill screens are scored as

correct or incorrect, and are not kept on file for later review. Teachers are not allowed to

test or grade their students, or to capture their activities on disk. This is because of the

availability of many other ways for teachers to test, evaluate, judge, and grade their

students.

Some grammar and usage material is given as a separate part in each lesson. The

information in this part is meant to provide a general review rather than to teach new

structures. The covered grammar ranges from irregular and plural forms of nouns in

Lesson 1, to direct and indirect speech in Lesson 30.

The cultural side is given part in this software. Learners can enrich their studies

with fascinating cultural movies exploring the sights and sounds of popular US cities.

Each cultural movie depicts different aspects of the target-language culture, people, and

85

countries. These movies use the vocabulary words and grammar that have been studied

in previous lessons. Learners will hear the movies in the target language to enhance

their listening and speaking skills.

Learning using this program is not boring. Learners are given the chance to

break up their lessons with a selection of refreshing games and puzzles. These games

and puzzles use the vocabulary words that have been studied in previous lessons to

foster learning.

Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9 contains a Talking Dictionary where the

learners can easily access translations and pronunciations to ensure they are never at a

loss for words. The dictionary incorporates all the vocabulary words from the program.

Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9 includes a printable workbook. It consists of

grammar exercises round out the reading and writing component of the Learn to Speak

curriculum.

Summary

The Learning Company describes Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9 as suitable

for learners from Beginner to Advanced levels. The sheer size of the four CD-ROM

based software, coupled with easy-to-use navigating features like click-on buttons,

makes it possible for learners to look around within a program for features that they

like, and that are appropriate for them.

Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9 is an example of a multimedia computer

software at its very best: clearly focused, easy to set up and use, and embodying sound

pedagogical principles. Far more than a thoroughly enjoyable toy, it is at once an

individual tester, a tool for the learners review, and above all a very adaptable tutor for

oral English skills.

86

Appendix B: Official Letter

87

Translation

Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Ministry of Health Date, 1/4/1427 Her Excellency Dean of Health Sciences College in Qassim, Onaizah

Peace and Blessings of Allah upon you.

With reference to your official letter of the 21st Safar 1427 and No. 613/48/45 in

which Ms. Amal Othman Al-Bureikan requested a permission to conduct a research study investigating the effectiveness of computer in developing the listening and speaking skills of first-year female students studying at Onaizah College of Health Sciences, we would like to inform you that we have no objection to conducting this research study using the computer lab, provided that this would not affect the schedule of the teacher and the attendance of the students to other lectures. Best greetings, Director-General Of health Sciences Colleges & Institutes D. Khalid A. Al-Rshood

88

Appendix C: Audio Script

Talking to a Doctor (Adapted from Gill's and Hartmann's (2005) textbook،

Listening & Speaking 1: Middle East Edition) Doctor: Hello, Michelle. I'm Dr. Benson. Michelle: Hi. Doctor: How are you feeling today? Michelle: Not so good. Doctor: Well, what seems to be the problem? Michelle: I have a bad cold. Doctor: I can hear that. How long have you had it? Michelle: About three weeks. Every time I think it's going away, I get sick again. Doctor: OK, Michelle. I'm going to examine you now. Doctor: Michelle, we didn't find an infection. That's good. That means that you only

have a bad cold. That means that you don't need to take any medicine. But I know that you don't feel very well. I want to ask you some questions, all right?

Michelle: OK. Doctor: Has school been very difficult lately? Michelle: Yes. I just finished taking my midterms. Doctor: Have you been eating well? Michelle: Well. . . not really. I've been drinking a lot of coffee to stay up late to study. Doctor: What about exercise? Have you been able to get any exercise during midterm

exams? Michelle: No. I've been studying so much I haven't had time. Doctor: Well, Michelle. It sounds to me as though you've been studying so much that

you haven't given your body a chance to get better. When you're sick, you need to pay attention to your body. I'm going to give you some advice. If you follow my advice, you'll start to feel better soon. OK?

Michelle: OK. Doctor: Well, first, you must sleep more. You need to get at least seven or eight hours

of sleep every night. You cannot study well if you don't get enough sleep. Michelle: I know. Doctor: Next, you have to eat better. Your body cannot work well if you don't give it

good food. Try to eat more vegetables and fruits. And limit your coffee to two cups a day.

Michelle: OK. Michelle: All right. Doctor: Any questions? Michelle: So you think I should sleep more, eat better, and exercise more. If I do those

things, I'll feel better? Doctor: And you won't get sick as often, Michelle. Michelle: Thanks a lot, Doctor. Doctor: You're very welcome, Michelle. Take care.

89

Appendix D: Listening Test (pretest and posttest)

Instructions: You will listen (twice) to a conversation between a student and a doctor in the Student Health Center. Then try to guess the right choice by checking (ü) from the followings:

1. How did Michelle feel? a¨ She felt well. b¨ She felt bad. c¨ She did not tell.

2. What was her health problem? a¨ The flu. b¨ Trouble sleeping. c¨ A bad cold.

3. For how long she have been sick? a¨ She have been sick for three weeks. b¨ She did not tell. c¨ She have been sick for two weeks.

4. After being examined by the doctor, what was the result? a¨ She had an infection. b¨ She only had a bad cold. c¨ She had nothing at all.

5. Was she eating very well? a¨ She did not tell. b¨ Yes, she was. c¨ No, she was not.

6. What was she doing to stay up late to study? a¨ She was exercising. b¨ She was drinking a lot of tea. c¨ She was drinking a lot of coffee.

7. The normal number of sleep hours has to be: a¨ Six to eight hours. b¨ Six hours only. c¨ Seven to eight hours.

8. The doctor asked Michelle to limit the coffee she drinks to: a¨ Two cups a day. b¨ Three cups a day. c¨ Three cups a week.

9. The doctor told Michelle that her body cannot work well if: a¨ She gives it good food. b¨ She does not give it good food. c¨ She eats more vegetables and fruits.

10. If Michelle follows the doctor's advice, she will: a¨ Get sick again. b¨ Get bad cold again. c¨ Not get sick as often.

Answers

Item # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Answer b c a b c c c a b c

90

Appendix E: Speaking Test (pretest and posttest)

To gain good marks in both tasks, try the following: • Try to talk good, clear language. • Listen carefully

Task A: Read-aloud: You have one minute to read the following passage silently. Then, read it aloud as clearly and fluently as possible:

Staying Healthy (Adapted from Gill's and Hartmann's (2005) textbook،

Listening & Speaking 1: Middle East Edition)

This lecture will give you advice on how to stay healthy. It will cover ten ways

to stay healthy. First, exercise every day. Exercise will help you to maintain your weight. It will

also help you to prevent health problems such as cancer and heart disease. Finally, exercise makes you feel good! So get a little exercise every day.

Second, get enough sleep. Most people do not get enough sleep. But sleep helps you to think clearly and do good work. Your body needs to rest. Then you have energy to do your best. So try to sleep at least seven or eight hours every night.

Third, eat green things. All green food is good for you. For example, spinach, broccoli, green beans, artichokes, kale, cabbage, green apples, and grapes. Fruits and vegetables are very important to your health. So eat some green things today!

Fourth, do not smoke. Smoking causes cancer and other diseases. It can hurt your friends and family when you smoke. It costs a lot of money. So do not smoke.

Fifth, do not drink a lot of soft drinks. They can make you overweight. So drink a little if you like. But don't drink a lot.

Sixth, wear a seat belt. Many people are injured or killed because they are not wearing a seat belt. Do not drive with anyone who is not wearing a seat belt. And make sure your passengers are all wearing a seat belt before you drive. Buckle up!

Seventh, drink lots of water. Everyone should drink 6-8 glasses of water every day. Your body needs water to work well. Water also has no calories. People who drink a lot of water do not feel as hungry. So drink up!

Eighth, visit your doctor for regular checkups. During a checkup your doctor can give you tests and check your health. Many serious health problems are found during a regular checkup. So do not go to the doctor only when you are sick. See the doctor once a year for a checkup.

Ninth, reduce stress. Stress causes many serious health problems. It affects your personal and professional lives. Try to have less stress in your life. Relax more! Stress less.

Tenth, spend time with friends and family. We all need to enjoy our life with others. Your friends and family will make you feel good. If you feel good, you will stay healthy! So make time for your loved ones.

91

Task B: Answering questions: In this task, you will have a conversation with the instructor. You will listen to 10 questions and have to answer them orally. Each question will be said twice: 1) Do you exercise? When? 2) Which way of the ten ways you have just read you already follow in your life? 3) Based on your reading, Can you give some of the good benefits of exercise? 4) You can see that there are a lot of benefits of exercises. So why not most people

exercise? 5) Do you think it is difficult to exercise often? Why or why not? Give me your reasons. 6) Name some examples of exercises? 7) As a student, what do you think are the most common health problems for students? 8) Have you ever been sick? If yes, what did you do? 9) Do you think doctors are important people in our life? Why? What do they normally

do? 10) Do you make a health checkup? How often? If not, why?

92

Appendix F: Participant Consent Form

You have agreed to participate to aid the researcher to gather her data on the effectiveness of a computer-assisted language-learning program in the entry-level EFL Saudi female students' listening and speaking at Onaizah Health Sciences

College You will be audio recorded for research purposes, but individuals will remain

anonymous. After completion the sessions, you will answer a questionnaire survey which will take approximately 15 minutes.

Students will benefit by using computer software program to improve their listening and speaking skills. This benefit is not limited to the experimental group but may also benefit other students in the future.

The data collected in this presentation will be used in the research and it may be used in publications and/or conference presentations with no monetary compensation to you now or in the future. The audio records will be destroyed upon the completion of the study.

By signing this consent form, you are demonstrating that you have read all the information above and that you have agreed to be audio recorded. There is no risk to you by participating in this research.

Please contact Amal Othman Al-Bureikan, the researcher at (xxx) xxx-xxxx or

albureikan@hotmail.com for more details about the research.

-------------------------- ------------------------------- ---------------- Participant's Signature Printed Name Date -------------------------- ------------------------------- ---------------- Researcher's Signature Printed Name Date

93

Appendix G: Rating Scales for the Speaking Tasks (Adapted from Weir's & Wu's (2006) modified rating scales)

Task A, read-aloud:

Rating Interpretation

5 Excellent Entirely intelligible pronunciation; very natural and correct intonation; the candidate speaks fluently with minimal hesitations.

4 Good Generally intelligible pronunciation; generally natural and correct intonation; the candidate generally speaks fluently، hesitations may sometimes occur.

3 Fair Some errors in pronunciation and intonation influence comprehensibility; the candidate sometimes speaks fluently، though unnecessary hesitations still occur.

2 Poor Many errors in pronunciation and intonation; the candidate sometimes gives up on reading words which he or she does not recognize; the candidate doesn’t speak with ease؛ unnecessary hesitations occur frequently.

1 Very poor The candidate has little ability to handle the task; the candidate doesn’t speak with ease; unnecessary hesitations occur very frequently.

Task B, answering questions:

Rating Interpretation

5 Excellent Functions performed clearly and effectively; appropriate responses to questions; almost always accurate pronunciation, grammar, vocabulary, and fluency.

4 Good Functions generally performed clearly and effectively؛ generally appropriate responses to questions; generally accurate pronunciation, grammar, vocabulary, and fluency.

3 Fair Functions performed somewhat clearly and effectively؛ somewhat appropriate responses to questions; somewhat accurate pronunciation, grammar, vocabulary, and fluency.

2 Poor Functions generally performed unclearly and ineffectively؛ generally inappropriate responses to questions; generally inaccurate pronunciation, grammar, vocabulary, and fluency.

1 Very poor Functions always performed unclearly and ineffectively؛ inappropriate responses to questions; almost always inaccurate pronunciation, grammar, vocabulary, and fluency.

94

Appendix H: Student Questionnaire (English Version)

Dear Student,

We would really like your help in better understanding student attitudes toward learning English as a foreign language via computer-assisted language learning program (Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9).

This is a survey asking about your opinion. It is not a test because there are no right or wrong answers. Please answer the items as carefully and honestly as possible.

Please print your ID number at the top of this sheet, so that your survey will remain confidential. It will have nothing to do with your grade in any course.

Thank you in advance for your cooperation, and I wish you all great success. Yours Sincerely, M.A. Candidate, Al-Bureikan, Amal Othman King Saud University

95

Place your ID label here --------------

How would you rate this program based on the following scales?

Section B: Experience and interest in using the Program

A lot Somewhat A little Not at all

11) Interesting ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ 12) Challenging ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ 13) Useful ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨

Section A: General Attitude Toward the Program A lot Somewhat A little Not at all

1) You need a manual to use this program. ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨

2) You liked learning with the program. ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨

3) The program was easy to navigate. ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨

4) The feedback was enough. ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨

5) There are grammatical, numbering, or typographic errors.

¨ ¨ ¨ ¨

6) You recommend this program to other EFL learners.

¨ ¨ ¨ ¨

7) You feel your English listening skill has improved since you began using this program.

¨ ¨ ¨ ¨

8) You feel your English speaking skill has improved since you began using this program.

¨ ¨ ¨ ¨

9) Was the English used in this program easy? ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨

10) The pace of lessons was quick from lesson to lesson.

¨ ¨ ¨ ¨

Instructions: Please check (ü) in the box that best describes your level of perception of using Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9 program:

96

14) Fun ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ 15) Boring ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ 16) Confusing ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ 17) Frustrating ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨

How satisfied are you with the quality of following? Section C: Multimedia Content Very

satisfied Satisfied A little

satisfied Not

satisfied 18) Audio ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ 19) Photo ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ 20) Video ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ 21) Audio Recording ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨

How satisfied are you with the content of the following? Section D: Program Content Very

satisfied Satisfied A little

satisfied Not

satisfied 22) Immigration and Customs ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ 23) Changing Money ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ 24) Public Transportation ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ 25) Checking into a Hotel ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ 26) Making a Phone Call ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ 27) Renting a Car ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ 28) Asking for Directions ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ 29) A Flight to the West Coast ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ 30) Making an Appointment ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ 31) Meeting an Attorney ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ 32) Applying for a Credit Card ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ 33) A Washington Traffic Jam ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ 34) An Invitation ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ 35) California Dreaming ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ 36) A Business Lunch ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ 37) Collecting Your Inheritance ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ 38) Dining Out ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ 39) At the Movies ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ 40) Shopping at the Mall ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ 41) Finding an Apartment ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ 42) Moving Day ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ 43) Shopping for Groceries ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ 44) At the Laundry ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ 45) At the Gas Station ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ 46) Car Trouble ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ 47) A Fender Bender in Chicago ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ 48) A Household Emergency ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ 49) Under the Weather ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ 50) At the Doctor’s Office ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ 51) At the Dentist’s Office ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨

How satisfied are you with the content of the following activities? Section E: Interactive activities Very

satisfied Satisfied A little

satisfied Not

satisfied 52) Listen & Click ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ 53) See It, Say It ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ 54) Drag & Match ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨

97

55) How Do You Say? ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ 56) Storyline ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ 57) Multiple Choice ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ 58) Fill in the Blanks ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨

59) What do you like about using this program? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 60) What don't you like about using this program? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 61) If you could add something to this program, what would it be? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 62) If you could take something out of this program, what would it be? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Other Comments: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The End

Thank you very much for your assistance!

Instructions: Here are some questions about using Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9 program. Please answer them as honestly as possible based on your experience with the program.

98

Appendix I: Student Questionnaire (Arabic Version)

عزيزتي الطالبة ،

الطالبـة نحـو تعلـم اللغـة التجاهـات نحتاج إلـى عونـك فـي تكـوين فهـم أفـضل في الحقيقة ــدعم االنجليزيــة كلغــة أ الحاســب اآللــي ب جنبيــة مــن خــالل الــتعلم المLearn to Speak

English Deluxe 9 . جـاء اإلجابـة علـى الر... للتعرف على رأيـك االستبيانولذلك صمم هذا .اإلمكانبنوده بأمانة قدر

أكتبــي الــرقم الخــاص بــك فــي أعلــى الــصفحة كــي يكــون اســتبيانك فــي غايــة فــضالً .كما أنه ليس له أي عالقة في درجاتك ألي مادة. السرية

شكراً لك مسبقاً على تعاونك، وأتمنى للجميع النجاح

المخلصة لكم ،

مرشحة الماجستير أمل عثمان البريكان جامعة الملك سعود

99

--------------

¨ ¨ ¨ ¨

¨ ¨ ¨ ¨

ü

Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9

١( ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨

٢( ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨

٣( ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨

٤( ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨

٥( ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨

٦( ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨

٧(

¨ ¨ ¨ ¨

٨(

¨ ¨ ¨ ¨

٩( ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨

١٠( ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨

100

¨ ¨ ¨ ¨

¨ ¨ ¨ ¨

¨ ¨ ¨ ¨

¨ ¨ ¨ ¨

¨ ¨ ¨ ¨

¨ ¨ ¨ ¨

¨ ¨ ¨ ¨

¨ ¨ ¨ ¨

¨ ¨ ¨ ¨

٢٢( Immigration and Customs ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ٢٣( Changing Money ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ٢٤( Public Transportation ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ٢٥( Checking into a Hotel ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ٢٦( Making a Phone Call ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ٢٧( Renting a Car ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ٢٨( Asking for Directions ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ٢٩( A Flight to the West Coast ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ٣٠( Making an Appointment ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ٣١( Meeting an Attorney ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ٣٢( Applying for a Credit Card ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ٣٣( A Washington Traffic Jam ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ٣٤( An Invitation ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ٣٥( California Dreaming ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ٣٦( A Business Lunch ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ٣٧( Collecting Your Inheritance ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ٣٨( Dining Out ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ٣٩( At the Movies ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ٤٠( Shopping at the Mall ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ٤١( Finding an Apartment ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ٤٢( Moving Day ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ٤٣( Shopping for Groceries ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ٤٤( At the Laundry ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ٤٥( At the Gas Station ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ٤٦( Car Trouble ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ٤٧( A Fender Bender in Chicago ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨

101

٤٨( A Household Emergency ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ٤٩( Under the Weather ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ٥٠( At the Doctor’s Office ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ٥١( At the Dentist’s Office ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨

٥٢( Listen & Click ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ٥٣( See It, Say It ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ٥٤( Drag & Match ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ٥٥( How Do You Say? ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ٥٦( Storyline ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ٥٧( Multiple Choice ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ٥٨( Fill in the Blanks ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9

102

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

5

103

Appendix J: Questionnaire Validation Form Are the instructions of the questionnaire clear?

¨ Yes ¨ No Comments: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Are the questions clear or not?

Question # (closed-ended questions)

Clarity C: Clear N: Not Clear

Question # (closed-ended questions)

Clarity C: Clear N: Not Clear Section A: General attitude toward the

program Question 16 ¨ C ¨ N

Question 1 ¨ C ¨ N Question 17 ¨ C ¨ N

Question 2 ¨ C ¨ N Section C: Multimedia content

Question 3 ¨ C ¨ N Question 18 ¨ C ¨ N

Question 4 ¨ C ¨ N Question 19 ¨ C ¨ N

Question 5 ¨ C ¨ N Question 20 ¨ C ¨ N

Question 6 ¨ C ¨ N Question 21 ¨ C ¨ N

Question 7 ¨ C ¨ N Section D: Program Content (22-51) ¨ C ¨ N

Question 8 ¨ C ¨ N Section E: interactive activities

Question 9 ¨ C ¨ N Question 52 ¨ C ¨ N

Question 10 ¨ C ¨ N Question 53 ¨ C ¨ N

Section B: Experience and interest in using the program

Question 54 ¨ C ¨ N

Question 11 ¨ C ¨ N Question 55 ¨ C ¨ N

Question 12 ¨ C ¨ N Question 56 ¨ C ¨ N

Question 13 ¨ C ¨ N Question 57 ¨ C ¨ N

Question 14 ¨ C ¨ N Question 58 ¨ C ¨ N

Question 15 ¨ C ¨ N

Question # (open-ended questions)

Clarity C: Clear N: Not Clear

Question # (open-ended questions)

Clarity C: Clear N: Not Clear Question 1 ¨ C ¨ N Question 4 ¨ C ¨ N

Question 2 ¨ C ¨ N Question 5 ¨ C ¨ N

Question 3 ¨ C ¨ N

Comments:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

104

Appendix K: Raw Scores of Experimental and Control Groups' Listening and Speaking Test Scores

ID Group

Exp. (2) Co. (1)

Pretest Listening

Percent % Posttest Listening

Percent % Pretest Speaking

Percent % Posttest Speaking

Percent %

001 2 4 40.00% 4 40.00% 2 20.00% 6 60.00% 003 2 2 20.00% 6 60.00% 2 20.00% 4 40.00% 005 2 8 80.00% 9 90.00% 3 30.00% 6 60.00% 009 2 4 40.00% 8 80.00% 4 40.00% 5 50.00% 010 2 3 30.00% 5 50.00% 4 40.00% 4 40.00% 012 2 6 60.00% 7 70.00% 3 30.00% 4 40.00% 019 2 4 40.00% 7 70.00% 2 20.00% 4 40.00% 020 2 7 70.00% 8 80.00% 2 20.00% 4 40.00% 024 2 5 50.00% 8 80.00% 5 50.00% 8 80.00% 025 2 4 40.00% 7 70.00% 2 20.00% 6 60.00% 030 2 8 80.00% 10 100.00% 4 40.00% 8 80.00% 041 2 4 40.00% 5 50.00% 2 20.00% 5 50.00% 050 2 6 60.00% 6 60.00% 4 40.00% 6 60.00% 051 2 3 30.00% 7 70.00% 4 40.00% 6 60.00% 063 2 3 30.00% 6 60.00% 4 40.00% 5 50.00% 064 2 2 20.00% 6 60.00% 3 30.00% 6 60.00% 078 2 5 50.00% 8 80.00% 2 20.00% 5 50.00% 004 1 6 60.00% 8 80.00% 4 40.00% 5 50.00% 023 1 6 60.00% 8 80.00% 3 30.00% 4 40.00% 028 1 4 40.00% 4 40.00% 2 20.00% 3 30.00% 031 1 6 60.00% 6 60.00% 3 30.00% 4 40.00% 033 1 6 60.00% 7 70.00% 6 60.00% 6 60.00% 037 1 7 70.00% 7 70.00% 3 30.00% 4 40.00% 039 1 4 40.00% 5 50.00% 3 30.00% 3 30.00% 042 1 2 20.00% 3 30.00% 3 30.00% 3 30.00% 049 1 5 50.00% 5 50.00% 2 20.00% 3 30.00% 052 1 4 40.00% 5 50.00% 2 20.00% 3 30.00% 053 1 7 70.00% 5 50.00% 2 20.00% 3 30.00% 054 1 7 70.00% 9 90.00% 5 50.00% 7 70.00% 059 1 5 50.00% 5 50.00% 2 20.00% 3 30.00% 060 1 5 50.00% 5 50.00% 3 30.00% 3 30.00% 067 1 2 20.00% 3 30.00% 2 20.00% 3 30.00% 070 1 6 60.00% 6 60.00% 2 20.00% 2 20.00%

105

Appendix L: Independent Samples t-test for Pre and

Posttest Scores of Two Groups

Levene's Test for

Equality of Variances

t-test for Equality of Means

95% Confidence Interval of

the Difference

F

Sig.

t

df

Sig. (2-

tailed)

Mean Difference

Std. Error

Difference

Lower Upper

Pre

Liste

ning

Te

st

Equal variances assumed

Equal variances not

assumed

.604 .443 .886

.890

31

30.677

.383

.380

.54

.54

.606

.603

-.699

-.694

1.773

1.767

Post

List

enin

g Te

st

Equal variances assumed

Equal variances not

assumed

.376 .544 -2.094

-2.086

31

29.961

.045

.046

-1.19

-1.19

.571

.573

-2.359

-2.365

-.031

-.025

Pre

Spea

king

Te

st

Equal variances assumed

Equal variances not

assumed

.099 .755 -.315

-.314

31

29.816

.755

.756

-.12

-.12

.385

.387

-.907

-.911

.664

.669

Post

Spe

akin

g Te

st

Equal variances assumed

Equal variances not

assumed

.022 .882 -3.839

-3.836

31

30.795

.001

.001

-1.72

-1.72

.449

.449

-2.640

-2.641

-.808

-.807

106

Appendix M: Paired-Samples t-Test for Pre and

Posttest Scores of the Control Group

Paired Differences 95% Confidence Interval of the

Difference

Mean Std. Deviation

Std. Error Mean

Lower Upper

t df Sig. (2-tailed)

Pair

1 PRE –

POST Listening

-.56 1.031 .258 -1.11 -.01 -2.183 15 .045

Pair

2 PRE –

POST Speaking

-.75 .577 .144 -1.06 -.44 -5.196 15 .000

107

Appendix N: Paired-Samples t-Test for Pre and Posttest

Scores of the Experimental Group

Paired Differences

95% Confidence Interval of the

Difference

Mean Std.

Deviation Std.

Error Mean

Lower Upper

t df Sig. (2-tailed)

Pair

1 PRE –

POST Listening

-2.29 1.404 .340 -3.02 -1.57 -6.738 16 .000

Pair

2 PRE –

POST Speaking

-2.35 1.169 .284 -2.95 -1.75 -8.296 16 .000

108

Appendix O: Participants' Response Results to the

Closed-Ended Questions of the Students' Questionnaire

(N=17)

1= Not at all\Not satisfied, 2= a little\ a little Satisfied,

3=Somewhat\Satisfied, 4= A lot\Very Satisfied, M= Mean

Statement 1 2 3 4 M

Section A: General attitude toward the program

1. You need a manual to use this

program.

17.6% 41.2% 29.4% 11.8% 2.35

2. You liked learning with the program. 0.0% 5.9% 11.8% 82.4% 3.76

3. The program was easy to navigate. 0.0% 17.6% 35.3% 47.1% 3.29

4. The feedback was enough. 0.0% 23.5% 41.2% 35.3% 3.12

5. There are grammatical, numbering, or

typographic errors.

0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100% 4.00

6. You recommend this program to other

EFL learners.

0.0% 0.0% 17.6% 82.4% 3.82

7. You feel your English listening skill has

improved since you began using this

program.

0.0% 17.6% 47.1% 35.3% 3.18

8. You feel your English speaking skill has

improved since you began using this

program.

0.0% 23.5% 52.9% 23.5% 3.00

9. Was the English used in this program

easy؟

0.0% 11.8% 52.9% 35.3% 3.24

10. The pace of lessons was quick from

lesson to lesson.

0.0% 17.6% 17.6% 64.7% 3.47

Section B: Experience & interest in using the program

11. Interesting 0.0% 23.5% 17.6% 58.8% 3.35

12. Challenging 0.0% 11.8% 41.2% 47.1% 3.35

13. Useful 0.0% 0.0% 17.6% 82.4% 3.82

109

14. Fun 0.0% 5.9% 17.6% 76.5% 3.71

15. Boring 5.9% 5.9% 35.3% 52.9% 3.35

16. Confusing 0.0% 5.9% 35.3% 58.8% 3.53

17. Frustrating 5.9% 5.9% 11.8% 76.5% 3.59

Section C: Multimedia content

18. Audio 0.0% 0.0% 29.4% 70.6% 3.71

19. Photo 0.0% 0.0% 23.5% 76.5% 3.76

20. Video 0.0% 0.0% 35.3% 64.7% 3.65

21. Audio Recording 0.0% 0.0% 58.8% 41.2% 3.41

Section D: Program content

22. Immigration and Customs 0.0% 5.9% 52.9% 41.2% 3.35

23. Changing Money 0.0% 11.8% 52.9% 35.3% 3.24

24. Public Transportation 0.0% 29.4% 23.5% 47.1% 3.18

25. Checking into a Hotel 0.0% 5.9% 41.2% 52.9% 3.47

26. Making a Phone Call 5.9% 0.0% 52.9% 41.2% 3.29

27. Renting a Car 5.9% 11.8% 58.8% 23.5% 3.00

28. Asking for Directions 0.0% 23.5% 23.5% 52.9% 3.29

29. A Flight to the West Coast 5.9% 23.5% 35.3% 35.3% 3.00

30. Making an Appointment 5.9% 5.9% 47.1% 41.2% 3.24

31. Meeting an Attorney 5.9% 17.6% 41.2% 35.3% 3.06

32. Applying for a Credit Card 0.0% 17.6% 29.4% 52.9% 3.35

33. A Washington Traffic Jam 0.0% 11.8% 52.9% 35.3% 3.24

34. An Invitation 0.0% 17.6% 35.3% 47.1% 3.29

35. California Dreaming 0.0% 11.8% 41.2% 47.1% 3.35

36. A Business Lunch 0.0% 17.6% 47.1% 35.3% 3.18

37. Collecting Your Inheritance 11.8% 5.9% 35.3% 47.1% 3.18

38. Dining Out 0.0% 11.8% 64.7% 23.5% 3.12

39. At the Movies 0.0% 5.9% 35.3% 58.8% 3.53

40. Shopping at the Mall 0.0% 5.9% 41.2% 52.9% 3.47

41. Finding an Apartment 0.0% 5.9% 58.8% 35.3% 3.29

42. Moving Day 0.0% 5.9% 58.8% 35.3% 3.29

43. Shopping for Groceries 0.0% 11.8% 35.3% 52.9% 3.41

110

44. At the Laundry 0.0% 17.6% 41.2% 41.2% 3.24

45. At the Gas Station 0.0% 17.6% 41.2% 41.2% 3.24

46. Car Trouble 5.9% 23.5% 29.4% 41.2% 3.06

47. A Fender Bender in Chicago 0.0% 11.8% 52.9% 35.3% 3.24

48. A Household Emergency 0.0% 0.0% 52.9% 47.1% 3.47

49. Under the Weather 0.0% 5.9% 52.9% 41.2% 3.35

50. At the Doctor’s Office 0.0% 11.8% 41.2% 47.1% 3.35

51. At the Dentist’s Office 0.0% 5.9% 64.7% 29.4% 3.24

Total Percentage 1.56% 11.96% 44.70% 41.76%

Section E: Interactive activities

52. Listen & Click 0.0% 11.8% 29.4% 58.8% 3.47

53. See It, Say It 11.8% 5.9% 29.4% 52.9% 3.24

54. Drag & Match 5.9% 0.0% 29.4% 64.7% 3.53

55. How Do You Say? 23.5% 0.0% 29.4% 47.1% 3.00

56. Storyline 5.9% 5.9% 47.1% 41.2% 3.24

57. Multiple Choice 5.9% 23.5% 47.1% 23.5% 2.88

58. Fill in the Blanks 5.9% 5.9% 58.8% 29.4% 3.12

111

Appendix P: Participants' Responses to the Open-Ended

Questions in the Questionnaire

1. What do you like about using this program?

أكثر شيء أعجبني في البرنامج هو قسم اإلمتحانات وتمارين اإلستماع 012

ئع وبالتحديد الجزء الذي يحتوي على اختبارات قصيرة وتدريبات على مهارة البرنامج كان را 009

اإلستماع

وجود مساحة كبيرة للتقييم وعمل اختبارات وكذلك تمكيننا من تقوية مهارة اإلستماع 010

أكثر شيء يدربنا على سماع كل شيء باللغة اإلنجليزية الصحيحة ويوفر إمكانية عمل امتحان 051

ئية نتعلمها بشكل جميلعلى كل جز

تعلم اللغة االنجليزية كلغة أجنبية من خالل البرنامج وتوفير األنشطة المختلفة بعد كل وحدة 003

حفزني أكثر لتعلم المزيد

الصوت كان ممتاز. اللي أعجبني في البرنامج هو جودة الصوت 050

سهولة استخدامة وتنوع تدريباته 019

ية متعددة واضحة وسهلة حتى األسئلة كنا نسمعها بصور واضح ومفهومتوفير أنشطة تدريب 063

طريقة األسئلة وتنوعها وكان استخدامة جدا ممتع لتعلم اللغة 078

سهل اإلستخدام ويوفر لنا نشاطات كثيرة تخلينا نتعلم أكثر وأسرع من الطريقة التقليدية 025

ألنه واضح وسهل ويعلم اللغة على شكل تمارين متنوعةأي واحد مايعرف البرنامج يقدر يعرف له 030

البرنامج أعطاني فرصة إني أتعلم الشيء الي أحتاجة بالوقت اللي أبي وعلى حسب تدرج فهمي 020

أقدر أتعلم . بمعنى أنه المعلمة ماتجبرني على فهم شيء أو الوصول لمرحلة بالفهم أنا توني عليها

سب استيعابيعلى حسب إمكانية فهمي وعلى ح

التمارين المدعمة جعلت التعلم أكثر متعة 024

112

البرنامج رهيب من جميع النواحي 005

أحس بالراحة مع التعلم بواسطة البرنامج يعني مافي قيود بالتعلم 064

التمارين كانت كثيرة وجميلة 001

البرنامج سهل 041

2. What don't you like about using this program?

أكثر شيء ماعجبني في البرنامج هو كثرة تمارين القواعد 003

أسئلة القواعد جدا كثيرة 019

الوقت ماكان يكفي للتدريب على مهارة اإلستماع والمحادثة 020

نحتاج وقت أكثر حتى نتطور أكثر. ساعتين باألسبوع قليلة 064

مات التي يقدمها البرنامجالوقت كان قليل ومايكفي إلستيعاب وتعلم كل المعلو 001

أكثر شيء كان يتعبني في البرنامج كثرة الكلمات الجديدة الي الزم أستوعبها وأبحث عن 030

معناها قبل أنتقل للمرحلة الي بعدها

3. If you could add something to this program, what would it be?

عامة تنفع لكل الثقافات مو بس الثقافة األمريكية األفضل لو قدم البرنامج مقاطع فيديو حديثة و 012

حتى يكون هناك متعة أكثر بالتعلم

حبذا لو كانت عامة للجميع حتى كل . أفالم الفيديو كانت مقتصرة على الثقافة األمريكية 050

متعلم من كل جنسية يستفيد من المعلومة المقدمة من خاللها

اتمنى أضيف خصائص جديدة للبرنامج تساعد الطالبات على إيجاد المعلومة بسهولة وراحة مثل 020

محرك بحث لموضوع معين أو كلمة معينة وأشوف المواضع اللي استخدمت فيها بالبرنامج

4. If you could take something out of this program, what would it be?

لفة للدين مثل شرب الخمر وغيرة الي أتمنها انها تحذف حتى كل الناس فيه بعض المفاهيم المخا 003

من جميع الديانات حتى اإلسالمية تستفيد منه

113

5. Other comments:

أتمنى أنه يكون تعلم اللغة اإلنجليزية دائما باستخدام برامج الكمبيوتر لجميع المهارات وليس 003

فقط المحادثة واإلستماع