CAVL: Does it develop learner’s attitude?

Year 2015, Volume: 16 Issue: 2, 122 - 136, 03.04.2015

Hojjat Malekı Ali Aaghar Ghasemı Mehdi Moharamı

https://doi.org/10.17718/tojde.18103

Abstract

Individual’s response to anything related to the immediate context can form attitudes
concerning the learning situation where the language is taught. As an attempt to shed
new light on the issues relevant to attitude, this study investigated the extent to which a
Computer-Assisted Vocabulary Learning (CAVL), Mandegar, can improve learners’
perceptions about the program. To fulfill the aim, eighty first-grade high school learners,
divided as control and experimental groups, were randomly selected. Two questionnaires,
in the first and last session adopted from Altiner (2011) and Bulut & Farhan (2007)
respectively, were administered to the participants to investigate their perception to use
CAVL in the future. The results, obtained using Paired Samples T-Test (p=0.002 < .05),
revealed a significant difference between CAVL users and nonusers in favor of the
experimental group. Students in the experimental group showed a positive attitude
toward CAVL and perceived its utility for helping them speed up vocabulary learning. The
present finding might have important implications for decision makers and teachers to
further involve Computer-Assisted based programs to increase Language learning.

Keywords

Attitude

Hojjat MALEKI Faculty of Language and Literature

Abstract

References

• Abraham, L. B. (2007). Second language comprehension and vocabulary learning with multimedia. HISPANIA, 90(1), 98-108.
• Allum, P. (2004). Evaluation of CALL: Initial vocabulary learning. ReCALL, 16(2), 488-501.
• Altiner, C. (2011). Integrating a computer-based flashcard program in to academic vocabulary learning. Iowa State University. Retrieved April. 22, 2013, from http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1122&context=etd
• Barani, G. (2013). The Impact of Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL) on
• Vocabulary Achievement of Iranian University Students EFL Learners. International Journal of Basic Sciences & Applied Research. Vol., 2 (5), 531-537. Blin, F. (1999). CALL and the development of learner autonomy. In R. Debski and M. Levy
• (eds.), World CALL: Global perspectives on computer-assisted language learning, lisse: Swets and Zeitlinger, pp.133-147. Bulut, D., & Farhan. A. (2007). Learner attitude toward CALL and level of achievement in basic language skills. Cambridge International Dictionary of English. (1995). CUP
• Davies, G. (2002). ICT and modern foreign languages: learning opportunities and Training needs.
• Dent, C. (2001). Student: classification v. categorization. Retrieved June 28, 2006, from http://www.burningchrome.com:8000/~cdent/fiaarts/docs/1005018884:23962.html
• Holmes, J. (1992). An introduction to sociolinguistics. London: Longman.
• Gardner, R. C., & Lambert, W. E. (1972). Attitudes and motivation in second language learning. Rowley, MA: Newbury house.
• Gardner, R. C., & Smythe, P. C. (1975). Motivation and second language acquisition.
• Canadian Modern Language Review, 31, 287-305. Gips, A., DiMattia, P., & Gips, J. (2004). The effect of assistive technology on educational costs: Two case studies. In K. Miesenberger, J. Klaus, W. Zagler, D. Burger (eds.),
• Computers Helping People with Special Needs, pp. 206-213. Gunduz, N, (2005). Computer assisted language learning (CALL). Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 1(2), 193-214.
• Higgins, J. (1995). Computers and English language learning. London: Intellect Ltd.
• Hubbard, P. (2009). A general introduction to computer-assisted language learning. In P. Hubbard
• (Ed.), Computer assisted language learning: Critical concept in Linguistics. (pp. 1-20). New York: Routledge. Hulstijn, J. H. (2001). “Intentional and incidental second-language vocabulary learning: a reappraisal of elaboration, rehearsal and automaticity‟, in P. Robinson (ed.), Cognition and Second
• Language Instruction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Johnson, K., & Johnson H. (Eds.). (1998). Motivation. In Encyclopedic Dictionary of
• Applied Linguistics. (pp. 219- 225). Oxford, England: Blackwell. Lee, K. (2000). English teacher's barriers to the use of computer-assisted language learning. Retrieved April. 09, 2013, from http://iteslj.org/Articles/Lee-CALLbarriers.html
• Leitner Box. (2013). Retrieved November 10, 2013, from http://leitnerbox.ir
• Levy, M. (1997). Context and conceptualization, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Lu, F. L. (2010). English learners' incidental vocabulary acquisition in the Video-based
• CALL program. Asian EFL Journal, 12(4) 51-66. Marty, F. (1981). Reflections on the use of computers in second language acquisition. System, 9(2) 85-98.
• Masgoret, A. M., & Gardner, R.C. (2003). Attitudes, motivation and second language learners: A meta-analysis of studies conducted by Gardner and associates. Language Learning, 53,123-163.
• Nakata, T. (2011). Computer-assisted second language vocabulary learning in a paired associate paradigm: a critical investigation of flashcard software. Computer Assisted
• Language Learning, 24(1), 17-38. Oblinger, D. (2005). Learners, learning & technology. EDUCAUSE Review, 40(5), 67-75.
• Oxford, R., & Shearin, J. (1994). Language learning motivation: Expanding the theoretical framework. Modern Language Journal, 78, 12-28.
• Roblyer, M. (2003). Integrating educational technology into teaching. Columbus, Ohio: Person Education.
• Sarason, I. G., & Sarason, B. R. (1990). Test anxiety. In H. Leitenberg (Ed.), Handbook of social and evaluation anxiety (pp. 475-493). New York: Plenum Press.
• Vallerand, R. J., & Reid, G. (1984). On the causal effects of perceived competence and task feedback on intrinsic interest. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 6, 94–
• Warschauer, M., & Healey, D. (1998). Computers and language learning: An overview. Language Teaching, 31, 57-71. APPENDIX A Questionnaire One