The Use of Video-mediated Communication (VMC) Tools for English Language Speaking Practice: A Systematic Review

Abstract

With the increasing integration of technology in foreign language instruction, video-mediated communication (VMC) has gained prominence as a means of delivering online education and improving speaking skills. This study systematically reviews research articles concentrating on the use of VMC in English language speaking practice. Based on predetermined inclusion criteria, thirty articles were included from three electronic databases. The selected articles published in the last ten years were analyzed, focusing on their publication trends, identifying commonly used VMC modes and tools, as well as their technical affordances and limitations. By qualitatively synthesizing the main implications of existing research, this systematic review also provides insights into the role of synchronous or asynchronous VMC tools in improving the speaking proficiency of English language learners. The findings revealed that the integration of VMC tools in-class activities or beyond classroom tasks is beneficial for foreign or second language speaking practice.

Keywords

• English language teaching
• speaking practice
• video-mediated communication (VMC)

İngilizce Konuşma Pratiği İçin Video Aracılı İletişim (VMC) Araçlarının Kullanımı: Sistematik Bir İnceleme

Abstract

Yabancı dil eğitimine teknolojinin giderek daha fazla entegre edilmesiyle birlikte, video aracılı iletişim (VMC), çevrimiçi eğitim sunmak ve konuşma becerilerini geliştirmede önemli bir yer edinmiştir. Bu çalışma, İngilizce konuşma pratiğinde video aracılı iletişim kullanımına odaklanan araştırma makalelerini sistematik olarak incelemektedir. Önceden belirlenmiş dahil etme kriterlerine dayanarak, üç elektronik veritabanından otuz makale dahil edildi. Son on yılda yayınlanan seçilmiş makaleler, yayın eğilimlerine odaklanılarak, yaygın olarak kullanılan video aracılı iletişim modları ve araçları ile teknik olanakları ve sınırlamaları belirlenerek analiz edildi. Mevcut araştırmaların temel çıkarımlarını nitel olarak sentezleyerek, bu sistematik inceleme aynı zamanda İngilizce dil öğrenenlerin konuşma yeterliliğini geliştirmede senkron veya asenkron video aracılı iletişim araçlarının rolüne ilişkin içgörüler de sağlamaktadır. Bulgular, video aracılı iletişim araçlarının sınıf içi etkinliklere veya sınıf dışı görevlere entegre edilmesinin yabancı veya ikinci dil konuşma pratiği için faydalı olduğunu ortaya koymuştur.

Keywords

• İngilizce dil öğretimi
• konuşma pratiği
• video aracılı iletişim (VMC)

References

1. Ahmad, N. A., & Lidadun, B. P. (2017). Enhancing oral presentation skills through video presentation. PEOPLE: International Journal of Social Sciences, 3(2), 385-397. https://doi.org/10.20319/pijss.2017.32.385397
2. Akiyama, Y., & Cunningham, D. J. (2017). Synthesizing the practice of SCMC-based telecollaboration: A scoping review. CALICO Journal, 35(1), 49-76. https://doi.org/10.1558/cj.33156
3. Alahmadi, N. S. & Alraddadi, B.M. (2020). The Impact of Virtual Classes on Second Language Interaction in the Saudi EFL Context: A Case Study of Saudi Undergraduate Students. Arab World English Journal, 11(3), 56-72. https://dx.doi.org/10.24093/awej/vol11no3.4
4. Alshahrani, A. A. (2016). Communicating authentically: Enhancing EFL students' spoken English via videoconferencing. CALL-EJ, 17(2), 1-17.
5. Andiappan, S., Hock Seng, G., & Ruey Shing, S. (2022). The use of vlogging to enhance speaking performance of ESL students in a Malaysian secondary school. Teaching English with Technology, 22(1), 23-39.
6. Bauler, C. V. (2021). “Flipgrid netiquette”: unearthing language ideologies in the remote learning era. English in Education, 55(3), 251-264. https://doi.org/10.1080/04250494.2021.1927698
7. Bayraktar-Çepni, S., Keles, N., & Çepni, G. (2022). Can asynchronous video-mediated oral book reports be the solution for foreign language speaking anxiety?. i-Manager's Journal on English Language Teaching, 12(2), 39-52.
8. Brown, H. D. (2000). Principles of language learning and teaching. Pearson Education.

9. Chen, C. Y., Chang, S. C., Hwang, G. J., & Zou, D. (2023). Facilitating EFL learners’ active behaviors in speaking: A progressive question prompt-based peer-tutoring approach with VR contexts. Interactive Learning Environments, 31(4), 2268-2287. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2021.1878232
10. Correia, A. P., Liu, C., & Xu, F. (2020). Evaluating videoconferencing systems for the quality of the educational experience. Distance Education, 41(4), 429-452. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2020.1821607
11. Croes, E. A. J., Antheunis, M. L., Schouten, A. P., & Krahmer, E. J. (2018). Social attraction in video-mediated communication: The role of nonverbal affiliative behavior. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 36(4), 1210-1232. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407518757382
12. Dekkers, R., Carey, L., & Langhorne, P. (2022). Making literature reviews work: A multidisciplinary guide to systematic approaches. Springer.
13. Dooly, M., & Davitova, N. (2018). What can we do to talk more?’: Analysing language learners’ online interaction. Hacettepe University Journal of Education (HUJE), 33, 215-237. doi:10.16986/HUJE.2018038804
14. Edwards, C. R., & Lane, P. N. (2021). Facilitating student interaction: The role of Flipgrid in blended language classrooms. Computer Assisted Language Learning Electronic Journal, 22(2), 26-39. https://callej.org/index.php/journal/article/view/344
15. EPPI-Centre. (2010). EPPI-centre methods for conducting systematic reviews. EPPI- Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London.
16. Flipgrid. (2023). Official Website. https://info.flipgrid.com/
17. Göktürk, N. (2016). Examining the effectiveness of digital video recordings on oral performance of EFL learners. Teaching English with technology, 16(2), 71-96.
18. Hampel, R., & Stickler, U. (2012). The use of videoconferencing to support multimodal interaction in an online language classroom. ReCALL, 24(2), 116-137. https://doi.org/10.1017/S095834401200002X
19. Hanh, L. T., & Huong, T. T. B. (2021). Applying flipgrid-based portfolio to improve Vietnamese EFL high school students’ speaking scores. 3L: Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 27(4), 85-100. http://doi.org/10.17576/3L-2021-2704-07
20. Hou, Y., & Yu, Z. A. (2023). Bibliometric analysis of synchronous computer-mediated communication in language learning using VOSviewer and CitNetExplorer. Education Sciences, 13(125), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13020125
21. Huertas-Abril, C. (2021). Developing speaking with 21st century digital tools in the English as a foreign language classroom: New literacies and oral skills in primary education. Aule Abierta, 50(2), 625-634. https://doi.org/10.17811/rifie.50.2.2021.625-634
22. Hung, Y. W., & Higgins, S. (2016). Learners’ use of communication strategies in text-based and video-based synchronous computer-mediated communication environments: Opportunities for language learning. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 29(5), 901-924. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2015.1074589
23. Jauregi, K., & Bañados, E. (2008). Virtual interaction through video-web communication: A step towards enriching and internationalizing language learning programs. ReCALL, 20(2), 183-207. doi:10.1017/S0958344008000529
24. Jung, M. Y. (2013). Videoconferencing improves students' language learning in the EFL classroom. TESOL Journal, 4(4), 743-751. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesj.112
25. Kato, F., Spring, R., & Mori, C. (2016). Mutually beneficial foreign language learning: Creating Meaningful ınteractions through video-synchronous computer-mediated communication. Foreign Language Annals, 49(2), 355-366. https://doi.org/10.1111/FLAN.12195
26. Kim, J., & Kweon, S. O. (2022). Effects of English proficiency on motivational regulation in a videoconference-based EFL speaking class. Education and Information Technologies, 28(1), 8401-8422. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11374-0
27. Kuckertz, A., & Block, J. (2021). Reviewing systematic literature reviews: Ten key questions and criteria for reviewers. Management Review Quarterly, 71, 519-524. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301-021-00228-7
28. Lee, E. J., & Oh, S. Y. (2015). Effects of visual cues on social perceptions and self-categorization in computer-mediated communication. In The Handbook of the Psychology of Communication Technology (pp. 115-136). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118426456.ch5
29. Lenkaitis, C. A. (2019). Technology as a mediating tool: videoconferencing, L2 learning, and learner autonomy. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 33(5–6), 483-509. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2019.1572018
30. Leong, L. M., & Ahmadi, S. M. (2017). An analysis of factors influencing learner’s English speaking skill. International Journal Research in English Education, 2(1), 34-41. https://sid.ir/paper/349619/en
31. Lian, C. K., Kathiyaiah, D., Hani, F., Chanderan, V., & Yunus, M. M. (2021). “Myscene Tube”- A web channel to enhance English speaking skills in an ESL classroom. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 17(3), 1141-1156. https://doi.org/10.52462/jlls.81 https://search.informit.org/doi/10.3316/informit.221447195840025
32. Lim, F. (2017). An analysis of synchronous and asynchronous communication tools in e-learning. Advanced Science and Technology Letters, 143, 230-234 http://dx.doi.org/10.14257/astl.2017.143.46
33. Lin, H. (2014). Establishing an empirical link between computer-mediated communication (CMC) and SLA: A meta-analysis of the research. Language Learning & Technology, 18(3), 120-147. http://llt.msu.edu/issues/october2014/lin.pdf
34. Lin, H. (2015). A meta-synthesis of empirical research on the effectiveness of computer-mediated communication (CMC) in SLA. Language Learning & Technology, 19(2) 85–117. http://llt.msu.edu/issues/june2015/lin.pdf
35. Liu, Z., Hua, J., & Zhang, Z. (2022). Scaffolding Instruction in Virtual Language Learning. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 13(2), 386-391. https://doi.org/10.17507/jltr.1302.20
36. Loewen, S., Buttiler, M., Kessler, M., & Trego, D. (2022). Conversation and transcription activities with synchronous video computer-mediated communication: A classroom investigation. System, 106, 102760. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2022.102760
37. Madzlan, N. A., Seng, G. H., & Kesevan, H. V. (2020). Use of video blogs in alleviating public speaking anxiety among ESL learners. Journal of Education and E-Learning Research, 7(1), 93-99. https://doi.org/10.20448/journal.509.2020.71.93.99
38. Mahardika, I. G. N. W., Widiati, U., Bhastomi, Y., & Suryati, N. (2021). Camera roll, action! non-specialist undergraduate English learners’ perceptions of using video production in learning English. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 18(3), 103-120. https://ro.uow.edu.au/jutlp/vol18/iss3/08
39. Mango, O. (2019). Students’ perceptions and attitudes toward the use of flipgrid in the language classroom. In K. Graziano (Ed.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 1970-1973). Las Vegas, NV, United States: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).
40. Manstead, A. S. R., Lea, M., & Goh, J. (2011). Facing the future: Emotion communication and the presence of others in the age of video-mediated communication. In A. Kappas & N. C. Kramer (Eds.), Face-to-face communication over the internet: Emotions in a web of culture, language and technology (pp. 144-175). Cambridge University Press.
41. McLain, T. R. (2018). Integration of the video response app FlipGrid in the business writing classroom. International Journal of Educational Technology and Learning, 4(2), 68-75. doi:10.20448/2003.42.68.75 Mekheimer, M. A. A. G. (2011). The impact of using videos on whole language learning in EFL context. Arab World English Journal, 2(2), 5-39.
42. Microsoft. (2018) Our Microsoft Blog. “Microsoft and Flipgrid unite to bring social learning to students around the world”. Retrieved from https://blogs.microsoft.com/blog/2018/06/18/microsoft-and-flipgrid-unite-to-bring-social-learning-to-students-around-the-world/
43. Nguyen, T. P. (2024). Video recording in EFL learners’ speaking skills development: A literature review. International Journal of AI inLanguage Education, 1(2), 52-76. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5066761
44. Nilayon, N., & Brahmakasikara, L. (2018). Using social network sites for language learning and video conferencing technology to ımprove english speaking skills: A case study of Thai Undergraduate Students. LEARN Journal: Language Education and Acquisition Research Network Journal, 11(1), 47-63. retrieved from https://so04.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/LEARN/article/view/135869
45. Ockey, G. J., Timpe‐Laughlin, V., Davis, L., & Gu, L. (2019). Exploring the potential of a video‐mediated interactive speaking assessment. ETS Research Report Series, 1, 1-29. https://doi.org/10.1002/ets2.12240
46. Ouzzani, M., Hammady, H., Fedorowicz, Z., & Elmagarmid, A. (2016). Rayyan—a web and mobile app for systematic reviews. Systematic Reviews, 5(210), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-016-0384-4
47. Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., & Mulrow, C. D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 2021;372:n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
48. Paneerselvam, A., & Mohamad, M. (2019). Learners’ challenges and english educators’ approaches in teaching speaking skills in an ESL classroom: A literature review. Creative Education, 10(13), 3299-3305. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2019.1013253
49. Panhwar, A. H., Ansari, S., & Ansari, K. (2016). Sociocultural theory and its role in the development of language pedagogy. Advances in language and literary studies, 7(6), 183-188. http://dx.doi.org/10.7575/aiac.alls.v.7n.6p.183
50. Petersen, J. B., Townsend, S. D., & Onak, N. (2020). Utilizing Flipgrid Application on Student Smartphones in a Small-Scale ESL Study. English Language Teaching, 13(5), 164-176. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v13n5p164
51. Pitura, J., & Chang, H. (2023). Tools for Scaffolding the Development of L2 Speaking in English-medium Higher Education: Lessons from Poland and Australia. Theory and Practice of Second Language Acquisition, 9(2), 1-35. https://doi.org/10.31261/tapsla.12816
52. ProQuest. (2023). ERIC. Retrieved from https://about.proquest.com/en/products-services/eric
53. Qiu, X., & Bui, G. (2022). Pre-task planning effects on learner engagement in face-to-face and synchronous computer-mediated communication. Language Teaching Research, 29(7), 3170-3189. https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688221135280
54. Ro, E. (2023). Topicalization as a practice for facilitating L2 discussion in video-mediated extensive reading book club meetings. System, 113, 102996, 1-27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2023.102996
55. Robillos, R. J. (2023). Improving students’ speaking performance and communication engagement through technology-mediated pedagogical approach. International Journal of Instruction, 16(1), 551-572. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2023.16131a
56. Rusk, F., & Pörn, M. (2019). Delay in L2 interaction in video-mediated environments in the context of virtual tandem language learning. Linguistics and Education, 50, 56-70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2019.02.003
57. Saito, K., & Akiyama, Y. (2017). Video-Based Interaction, Negotiation for Comprehensibility, and Second Language Speech Learning: A Longitudinal Study. Language Learning, 67(1), 43-74. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12184
58. Sari, A. B. P., Dardjito, H., & Azizah, D. M. (2020). EFL students' ımprovement through the reflective youtube video project. International Journal of Instruction, 13(4), 393-408. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2020.13425a
59. Sevy-Biloon, J., & Chroman, T. (2019). Authentic use of technology to improve EFL communication and motivation through international language exchange video chat. Teaching English with Technology, 19(2), 44-58.
60. Shanks, D. (2021). Technology-facilitated oral homework: leveraging technology to get students speaking outside the classroom. In T. Beaven & F. Rosell-Aguilar (Eds.), Innovative language pedagogy report (pp. 69-75). Researchpublishing.net. https://doi.org/10.14705/rpnet.2021.50.1238
61. Shin, J. L. K., & Yunus, M. M. (2021). The attitudes of pupils towards using flipgrid in learning English speaking skills. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 20(3), 151-168. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.20.3.10
62. Shuib, A., Ismail, L., & Abdul Manaf, U. A. (2020). Scaffolding speaking tasks using videoblog portfolio in an ESL classroom. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 8(1A), 44-52. DOI:10.13189/ujer.2020.081307
63. Spring, R. (2020). Can video-creation project work affect students' oral proficiency? an analysis of fluency, complexity and accuracy. TESL-EJ (Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language, 24(2), 1-17.
64. Strawbridge, T. (2021). Modern language: Interaction in conversational NS-NNS video SCMC eTandem exchanges. Language Learning & Technology, 25(2), 94-110. http://hdl.handle.net/10125/73435
65. Toland, S. H., Mills, D. J., & Kohyama, M. (2016). Enhancing Japanese university students' English-language presentation skills with mobile-video recordings. JALT CALL Journal, 12(3), 179-201.
66. Toleuzhan, A., Sarzhanova, G., Romanenko, S., Uteubayeva, E., & Karbozova, G. (2023). The educational use of YouTube videos in communication fluency development in English: Digital learning and oral skills in secondary education. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science, and Technology (IJEMST), 11(1), 198-221. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijemst.2983
67. Van Compernolle, R. A. (2015). Interaction and second language development: A Vygotskian perspective. John Benjamins Publishing Company.
68. Vázquez, L. Q. (2022). Synchronous computer-mediated communication in pronunciation teaching: A survey study. Journal of Learning Styles, 20(10), 123-134. https://doi.org/10.55777/rea.v15iEspecial.4431
69. Vissenberg, J., d’Haenens, L., & Livingstone, S. (2022). Digital literacy and online resilience as facilitators of young people’s well-being?. European Psychologist, 27(2), 76-85. https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040/a000478 Vygotsky, L. (1986). Thought and language. MIT Press.
70. Wang, M., & Devitt, A. (2022). A systematic review of computer-mediated communications in Chinese as a foreign language from 2008 to 2022: Research contexts, theoretical foundations and methodology, affordances and limitations. Language Teaching Research, 0(0), 1-29. https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688221132475
71. Yanguas, I. (2010). Oral computer-mediated interaction between l2 learners: It's about time! Language Learning & Technology, 14(3), 72-93. https://doi.org/10.64152/10125/44227
72. Yeh, H., & Lai, W. (2019). Speaking progress and meaning negotiation processes in synchronous online tutoring. System, 81, 179-191. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SYSTEM.2019.01.001
73. Ying, Y. H., Siang, W. E. W., & Mohamad, M. (2021). The challenges of learning English skills and the integration of social media and video conferencing tools to help ESL learners coping with the challenges during COVID-19 pandemic: A literature review. Creative Education, 12(7), 1503-1516. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2021.127115
74. Yousefi, S. (2014). Comparison of traditional and video mediated learning of English: Tracking a new approach. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 1940-1944. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.626
75. Yu, L. T. (2022). The effect of videoconferencing on second-language learning: A meta-analysis. Behavioral Sciences, 12(6), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs12060169
76. Zhang, Y. (2022). The influence of practice contexts on L2 learners’ compliment responses: Telecollaborative video-based practice versus face-to-face practice. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 37(1), 1-28. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2022.2152054
77. Zhu, J., & Liu, W. (2020). A tale of two databases: The use of Web of Science and Scopus in academic papers. Scientometrics, 123(1), 321-335. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03387-8
78. Ziegler, N. (2016). Synchronous computer-mediated communication and interaction: A meta-analysis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 38(3), 553–586. http://doi.org/10.1017/S027226311500025X