Editor’s Note: Learning a second language provides challenges for teachers and instructional designers. It also introduces factors of cultural and age differences that impact teaching methods and learning environments. Computer assisted learning has much to offer because of its interactivity and ability to accommodate learner differences. It also facilitates performance so that observable and measurable evaluation can be easily accomplished.
Effects of CALL Method and Dyned Language Programme on Students’ Achievement Levels and Attitudes
Towards the Lesson in English Classes
Gökhan BAŞ and Orhan Kuzucu
The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of the Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL) method supported with the DynED language learning programme on students’ achievement levels and attitudes towards the lesson in the 6th grade students’ English lesson. The research was carried out in the 2008 – 2009 education-instruction year in Karatli Sehit Sahin Yilmaz Elementary School, Nigde, Turkey. A total of 60 students in two different classes in the 6th grade of this school participated in the study. The pre/post-test control group research model was used in this study. The data obtained in the study was analysed using the SPSS 11.0 statistics computer programme. The arithmetic means and standard deviations were calculated for each group. In order to test the significance between the groups, the t-test was used. The significance level was taken as .05. The results of the research showed a significant difference between the attitude scores of the experiment group and the control group. It was also found out that the CALL method supported with the DynED language learning programme was more effective in positive development of achievement levels of students. The research revealed that the students educated by the CALL method supported with the DynED language learning programme are more successful, have a higher motivation and better retention than the students who are educated by traditional methods of instruction.
Keywords: Computer Assisted Language Learning, English Teaching, DynED language learning programme, student achievement, students attitudes, online course, instruction method, English as a foreign language, elementary school, 6th grade students
The rapid growth of computers has aroused interest in the area of education (Acikalin, 2006; Baturay, 2007). Although the notion of face-to-face classroom instruction is still very prevalent in many organisational and educational settings, with a steady increase rather than a decrease, there is a rush and enthusiasm for computer-based ventures. The global popularity of the computer over the past decade has brought about innovative uses of the computer in education and in foreign language learning and teaching. Many studies affirm that learners consider the computer a useful tool to discover and learn new vocabulary (Alshwairkh, 2004; Baturay, 2007; Johnson & Heffernan, 2006; Kocak, 1997) and to supplement in-class instruction (Kung & Chuo, 2002). Computer use is increasingly embedded in everyday life. It is not surprising to find a similar trend in the academic world. In the last decade, research has illustrated how computer technologies supports meaningful educational experiences (Belz & Kinginger, 2003; Blattner and Fiori, 2009).
Computers are becoming important components of education and the number of computers used at schools is increasing. They are utilised throughout the field of education and in language learning and teaching (Baturay, 2007; Kocak, 1997; Makaraci, 2004; Tuzcuoglu, 2000). Computer technology can be regarded as an educational tool supporting English Language teaching (Liang and Bonk, 2009). In fact, a wide range of electronic technologies have been developed to supplement second language teaching and learning (Liang and Bonk, 2009; Warschauer, 1996). Although primarily used with adult language learners, these technologies include hardware delivery methods such as audiotape recorders, videotape recorders, computers and the Internet, combined with an educational approach to teaching other languages. In addition, there are many innovative electronic tools oriented to language such as speech production and recognition, text analysis, text translation, and software for visualisation and animation, electronic mail, listserve discussion groups, streaming audio and video and real-time synchronous as well as asynchronous communication opportunities that bring the target language environment to the learner (LeLoup & Porterio, 1997). One recent educational technology for language teaching, more specifically English Language teaching, is the Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL) method. In recent years, countries such as China, France, Malaysia, Korea, Miyanmar, and Turkey are using an English Language teaching computer programme named DynED, which stands for Dynamic Education. In these countries, this programme is used in a way that assists teaching English language in schools.
Computer Assisted Language Learning
Until quite recently, computer-assisted language learning (CALL) was a topic of relevance mostly to those with a special interest in computers. Recently, computers have become so widespread in schools and homes and their uses have expanded so dramatically that the majority of language teachers must now begin to think about the implications of computers for language learning (Warschauer, 1996).
CALL (Computer Assisted Language Learning) is the term most commonly used by teachers and students to describe the use of computers as part of a language course (Kocak, 1997). Computer-assisted language learning is a form of computer-based assisted learning with two important features: (1) bidirectional learning and (2) individualised learning. It is not a method. CALL materials are tools for learning. The focus of CALL is learning, and not teaching. CALL materials are used in teaching to facilitate the language learning process. It is a student-centered, self-paced learning material, which promotes accelerated learning (Alkan, 1997; Hardisty and Windeatt, 1989; Kocak, 1997; Levy, 1997). CALL originates from CAI (Computer-Assisted Instruction), a term that was first viewed as an aid for teachers. The philosophy of CALL puts a strong emphasis on student-centered lessons that allow learners to learn on their own using structured and/or unstructured interactive lessons. CALL can be used to reinforce what has been learned in the classrooms. It can also be used as remedial to help learners with limited language proficiency (Chapelle, 1990; Chapelle and Jamieson, 1986; Levy, 1997; Liddell, 1995).
The design of CALL lessons generally takes into consideration principles of language pedagogy, which may be derived from learning theories (behaviourist, cognitive, and constructivist) and second language learning such as “Krashen's Monitor Theory”. Others may identify CALL as an approach to teaching and learning foreign languages whereby the computer and computer-based resources such as the Internet are used to present, reinforce and assess material to be learned. CALL can be made independent of the Internet (Liang and Bonk, 2009). It can stand alone for example in a CD-ROM format. Depending on its design and objectives, it may include a substantial interactive element especially when CALL is integrated in a web-based format. It may include the search for and the investigation of applications in language teaching and learning (Warschauer, 1996). Except for self-study software, CALL is meant to supplement face-to-face language instruction, not replace it (Pius, 2003). CALL has also been known by several other terms such as technology-enhanced language learning (TELL), computer-assisted language instruction (CALI) and computer-aided language learning (CAL) but all of these are essentially similar (Ehsani and Knodt, 1998).
A number of pedagogical approaches have developed in the computer age, including the communicative and integrative/experimental approaches. Others include constructivism, whole language theory and sociocultural theory although they are not exclusively theories of language learning. With constructivism, students are active participants in a task in which they “construct” new knowledge based on experience in order to incorporate new ideas into their already-established schema of knowledge (Brooks and Brooks, 1999). Whole language theory postulates that language learning moves from the whole to the part rather than building sub-skills like grammar to lead toward higher abilities like reading comprehension. Whole language insists the opposite is the way we really learn to use language (Alkan, 1997). Students learn grammar and other sub-skills by making intelligent guesses based on the input they have experienced. It also suggests that the four skills (reading, writing, listening and speaking) are interrelated (Stepp-Greany, 2002). Social interaction involves second language (L2) learners’ interaction with others in social learning environments inspired by the concept of the zone of proximal development- i.e., context of assisted learning and development, socio-cultural theory states that learning is a process of becoming part of a desired community and learning that rules of behaviour for that community (Vygotsky, 1978).
The reasons for using Computer-Assisted Language Learning include: (a) experiential learning, (b) motivation, (c) enhancement of student achievement, (d) authentic materials for study,
(e) greater interaction, (f) individualization, (g) independence from a single source of information, and (h) global understanding. The barriers inhibiting the practice of Computer-assisted Language Learning can be classified in the following common categories: (a) financial barriers, (b) availability of computer hardware and software, (c) technical and theoretical knowledge, and (d) acceptance of the technology (Chapelle, 1990; Hardisty and Windeatt, 1989; Levy, 1997; Liddell, 1995; Warschauer, 1996).
Using CALL, visual and auditory input delivered in a well-ordered sequence can lead the learner to understand the grammar, syntax and vocabulary of the target language with no need for text support. Learners can interact with the presentation, and have their interactions recorded into their study records and even influence the pace and level of the presentation. (Knowles, 2004).
DynED Language Learning Programme
DynEd was founded in 1987 by the former director of the total immersion program at the Language Institute of Japan and a team of engineers. DynEd’s founders created the world’s first interactive multimedia language learning CD-ROM in 1988 and received a U.S. patent for this invention in 1991 (Stark, 2004).
From its inception, DynEd has been dedicated to quality and integrity. With the improvement of English language education as its mission, DynEd has teamed with leading authors and publishers in the field of English Language Teaching and developed courseware in line with the leading theories of language acquisition. Fundamentally, each DynEd course is based on sound, time-proven approaches to language teaching, curriculum design, and human interface design. Evidence for the effectiveness of its courseware is based on over twenty-five years of experience in language programs from around the world and on recent findings in the neural sciences (http://www.dyned.com/about/).
DynEd also has access to the real-time study records of thousands of students from around the world. DynEd's research-based courses cover all proficiency levels and include a range of age-appropriate courses, from kids in school to adults in leading corporations. In addition, DynEd courses are supported by an award-winning Records Management System, Mastery and placement tests, and extensive teacher-support materials, including teacher-training and mentoring (http://www.dyned.com/about/).
The program consists of ten increasingly advanced units. Students click on the appropriate unit and a screen appears with five choices for study: Warm-Up lessons, School-Life lessons, School-Subject lessons, World Talk Cards and Language Extension lessons, and Speaking Up lessons. There is constant audio support and feedback which users can choose to replay (Stark, 2004: 2).
In the Warm-Up Session, a narrator describes a scene, pausing about three seconds between statements for student processing. "It's very hot. It's very hot. The sun is shining and the water is clear." The next screen shows the same image with responses to an audio question. The student clicks on an answer. If it is incorrect, the student will hear, "No, that's not correct. Please try again." When the answers are correct, an encouraging voice will say, "That's right!" or another will say, "Good!", then a new image appears and the process is repeated (Stark, 2004: 3).
School-Subject lessons focus on math, English grammar, science, world history, and geography. Key vocabulary and grammar forms are recycled for each lesson, giving students exposure to the material in different contexts. The basic explanations also provide background knowledge for students who need it. Students learn the language of school instruction: explanations, giving examples, classification, comparisons, asking questions, and more. Lessons cover various areas of a subject. For instance, math will offer lessons on: geometric shapes, positive and negative numbers, fractions, temperature, measuring, and others (Stark, 2004).
World Talk Cards and Language Extension Lessons offer general topics such as preferences, weather, occupations, and places of business. The language is presented in a game format, usually "Concentration" and, like all the lessons, has frequent checks for comprehension. After the game, a grammar focus lesson explicitly addresses correct usage. Language Extension lessons and speaking up lessons allow students to profit from speech recognition technology to practice and perfect their speaking fluency and accuracy. It is not a pronunciation program, although students can compare their speech to the narrator's. There are three levels of expertise: beginner, intermediate, and expert. With each advancing level the feedback is more detailed and demanding. There are four mastery tests that assess two or three units at a time. The tests are challenging and require somewhat higher-level thinking--comprehension, and application as well as recall of the target language structures and information. If students achieve these tests after the stated units, they can pass to the next units (Stark, 2004: 4 -5).
DynED is a program designed to help English Language Learners (ELLs) aged between 11-18 acquire the language they need for success at school in their classes and with their new schoolmates. It is based on brain and language acquisition research, exploiting both to form a blended model where multimedia activities and classroom interaction complement each other. The language structures and vocabulary provided are specific for the content classes and for social situations that normally occur in classroom situations. It is common for ELL students to acquire basic English, but it is uncommon that they fulfil their academic potential. This comprehensive program addresses their need for a boost in academic and social language for academic use as they move into an English-speaking education system (Stark, 2004).
In this study, an experimental method and a control group have been used in order to find the difference between the students who were taught with the Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL) method supported with DynED education programme in the experiment group and the students who were taught by traditional language teaching methods.
Both groups were employed a pre-test prior to the experimental process. The subjects were given an achievement test and an attitude scale test towards English lesson as a pre-test. Meanwhile, the same tests (achievement and the attitude scale tests) were employed to both groups after the experimental process as a post-test.
Pre-test / post-test experimental design with a control group was used in the study. A small number of homogenous subjects provided us with information over a period of five months. To begin with, the subjects described what they actually did in the process of Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL) method supported with DynED education programme.
Subjects of the study
Individual EFL / ESL learners are the main source of the data in the study which requires the use of the Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL) method supported by the DynED education programme for data collection.
Two classrooms of 6th grade class students from Karatli Sehit Sahin Yilmaz Elementary School, Nigde, Turkey formed the sample of the study. The total number of the students participated in the study was 60. Thirty students from the 6-A class formed the experiment group and the thirty students from the 6-B class formed the control group in the study.
In order to investigate students’ achievement and attitudes towards English lesson, some spesific English lesson subjects in the elementary currciulum such as “school subjects, simple mathematical calculations, simple personel instructions (asking and answering questions, etc.), weather forecasts and occupations, vs.” which were taken by the 6th grade class students were selected. These subjects were also included in the DynED language learning programme.
The attitude scale test towards the English lesson consisting of 30 items and the achievement test containing 75 items were administrated to both groups in a single session as a pre-test. In four weeks, the experiment group was given various strategies for the Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL) method supported with DynED education programme in the teaching session, but not the control group. Five months later, each of the students was administrated the achievement test and attitude scale test towards the English lesson given as a post test. The difference between the pre-test and post-test results was accepted as an achievement.
Procedures of the study
In the experiment group, the following procedures were applied. In the control group, traditional language teaching methods have been used in the process of the study. The procedures in the experiment group are as follows:
First, the students were given both the pre-achievement test in English and pre-attitude scale towards the lesson.
The students were assigned to different computers to study the stated subjects. All of the necessary equipments such as microphones, headphones, etc. were supplied to the students.
The students were educated on the usage and the benefits of the DynED language learning programme for a week. For example, the students were instructed how to listen to tapescripts, and how to talk and record their speech on the programme.
The students were instructed in the stated subjects by some language teaching / learning methods two hours a week. Target vocabulary and grammar patterns were introduced to the students in these lessons. After that, the students were educated formerly two hours a week by using the DynED language learning programme. In this phase, the students found opportunities to practise their learning in English classes using the language learning programme after formal lessons.
The teacher visited all of the students using DynED language learning programme in the classroom and offered help when students needed it. The teacher also helped the students with technical problems.
Students practised their learning (especially the vocabulary) in the DynED language learning programme both at home and school.
Students discussed what they learned in the lessons and in DynED language learning programme at school.
Students took short exams after each unit and received feedback on their performance. Students who passed these exams took the next unit; if not, they had opportunity to practise until they passed to the next unit. Students passed if they achieved 70 points on the exam.
The students were given both the post-achievement test in English and the post-attitude scale towards the lesson.
The multiple-choice test included 75 items (each item is 1 point; total score is 75). Reliability and validity were verified before it was givien to the students. This test measured students’ achievement levels resulting from the CALL / DynED education programme.
The reliability of the achievement test was done by the KR-20 method (Yilmaz, 1998). The reliability value of the test was found to be r = .88 which confirmed that the test is reliable. It was given to students in both experimental and control groups.
Attitude Scale test
The attitude scale test has been applied to measure the attitudes of the students towards the English lesson. The scale test is a three-point Likert type scale (which was used to differentiate orientations from 1 as low and 3 as high) reliability and validity of which have been made by t-test, including 30 items that measure students’ interests / attitudes towards the lesson. The reliability value of the attitude scale test was found as r = .76 and the Cronbach Alpha value was found as a = .83. In light of these data, it can be said that the attitude scale test is both reliable and valid to be used in the current study.
Analysis of the data
In this study, the statistical techniques such as Mean (X), Standart Deviation (Std. Dev.) and t-test were used in the analysis of the data. P value was held as 0.05. The statistical analyses were accomplished using the SPSS 11.0 statistical package programme for windows.
Limitations of the study
A small sample size is one limitation of the study. The number of the participants in the study was limited to the number of 6th grade class students (total 60 students) in Karatli Sehit Sahin Yilmaz Elementary School, Nigde, Turkey. Another limitation arises from the subject of English course since “school subjects, simple mathematical calculations, simple personel instructions (asking and answering questions, etc.), weather forecasts and occupations, vs.” were used in the experiment and the control groups. In the experiment group, the Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL) method supported with the DynED education programme was used. In the control group, traditional language teaching methods were used. This study was limited to “First English software” of DynED language learning programe in the experiment group.
In order to identify the differences between the students of the experiment group and the students of the control group, following hypotheses were tried to be tested in the light of the acquired data in the study:
1. There is a significant difference between the achievement levels of the students in the experiment group and the students in the control group in terms of the usage of Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL) method supported with DynED language learning programme.
2. There is a significant difference between the attitude levels of the students in the experiment group and the students in the control group towards the lesson in terms of the usage of Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL) method supported with DynED language learning programme.
Findings of the Study
The results given in tables were obtained from the students’ answers to the achievement test and to the attitude scale test towards the English lesson. In this part of the study, the acquired data will be presented with calculated analyses in tables below.
Analysis of Hypothesis #1
The first hypothesis of the study was “There is a significant difference between the achievement levels of the students in the experiment group and the students in the control group in terms of the usage of Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL) supported by the DynED language learning programme”.
Comparison of pre-test achievement scores of students
in the experimental and control groups
*p > .05
Table 1 compares the pre-test achievement scores of the students in the experimental group and the control group. The average score of students in the experiment group was X = 18.4±12.6; and the average pre-test score of the students in the control group was X = 19.2±12.5. The difference between students of these two groups, analysed independently using a t-test, was t(58) = -0.237. According to these results, there is no statistically significant difference between the pre-test scores of the students of these two groups at the 0.05 level (p =.81; p> .05).
Pre-learning levels in English for both groups were equal.
Comparison of post-test achievement scores of students
in the experimental and control groups
Post-test achievement scores for students in experimental and the control groups are compared in Table 2. The average post-test score for students in the experimental group were X = 59.8±11.7; and the average post-test score of the students in the control group were X = 46.7±13.7. The difference between the two groups, analysed independently using a t-test, was t(58) = 4.01. Students in the experiment group (X = 59.8) showed significant achievement compared to the students in the control group (X = 46.7). These results showed a statistically significant difference between the post-test scores of the two groups at the 0.05 level (p = 0.0002; p< .05).
Comparison of achievement scores of students
in the experimental and control groups
Table 3 compares achievement scores and the t-values based on the pre-test and the post-test, The distribution of the post-test scores applied to both groups at the end of the research process. The average score of the experiment group was X = 59.8±11.7; and the average score of the control group was X = 46.7±13.7. Achievement was calculated using the difference between the pre-test and the post-test of the students in the experimental and control groups. The average achievement of students in the experimental group was X = 41.0±3.97; and the average achievement of the students in the control group was X = 28.0±4.48. The t-value between average achievement scores of the two groups was t = 4.670. This shows that the difference between the two groups is statistically significant (p = .000; p<.05). Students in the experimental group reached a significantly higher achievement level compared to those in the control group and showed that the Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL) method supported with DynED language learning programme, was more effective than the traditional language teaching methods in the control group. This finding supports first hypothesis #1..
Analysis of the Hypothesis #2
The second hypothesis of the study was “There is a significant difference between the attitude levels of the students in the experiment group and the students in the control group towards the lesson in terms of the usage of Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL) supported with DynED language learning programme”.
Comparison of pre-test attitude scores of students
in the experimental and control groups
*p > .05
Table 4 shows the pre-test attitude scores of the students in the experimental and control groups. The average pre-test attitude score for students in the experimental group was X = 1.53±0.571; the average pre-test attitude score for students in the control group was X = 1.57±0.568. The t-value between average scores of the two groups was t(58) = 0.227. This is not statistically significant at the 0.05 level since pre-test attitude scores of these two groups are similar.
Comparison of post-test attitude scores of students
in the experimental and control groups
Post-test attitude scores of students in the experimental and control group are shown in Table 5. The average post-test attitude score for the experimental group was X = 2.53±0.571; the average attitude post-test score of the students in the control group was X = 1.90±0.548. The t-test value obtained from the average scores of the two groups is t(58) = 4.38 which shows a statistically significant difference (p = .0001; p<.05). In light of data acquired in this research, it can be said that the students in the experiment group achieved higher attitude scores compared to those in the control group. The experimental method (Computer Assisted Language Learning supported with DynED language learning programme) enabled the students to develop a significantly better attitude towards the English lesson and supports the correctness of the second hypothesis.
Discussion and Conclusion
The conclusions stated below are based on the findings of this research:
1. There was a significant difference between the achievement levels of students educated using Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL) and the DynED programme and students who were educated using traditional language teaching methods. Students educated by CALL with DynED were more successful than the students educated by traditional language teaching methods. This confirms the findings of other researchers.
Kocak (1997) investigated the effects of Computer Assisted Language Learning on vocabulary instruction for Turkish EFL students. In his research, students who were educated by CALL had higher achievement levels on English vocabulary than those who learned using traditional language teaching methods.
Cevik (2001) investigated the effects of Computer Assisted Language Learning on students’ achievement in foreign language classrooms and found that CALL educated students had significantly higher levels of achievement than the students educated by traditional language teaching methods.
Studies by Kaplan (2002), Harmanci (2009), Yilmaz (2004), Inan (1997), Yarar (2005) and Kilickaya (2005) found a significant difference in knowledge learned by CALL (experimental group) and traditional language teaching (control group).
Makaraci (2004) investigated the effects of Computer Assisted Language Learning for learning grammar in English classes. Students educated by the CALL method achieved higher than students educated by traditional language teaching methods, but the result was not significant at .05 level. Makaraci (2004) found a significant difference between the retention levels of the students in the experimental and the control groups. Students educated by the CALL method had higher retention levels than students educated by traditional methods.
Ygit (2007) researched academic success and retention on primary school 2nd grade mathematics using educational computer games. Computer-aided math games were applied to the experimental group while the traditional (paper and pencil) methods were used by the control group. There was no significant difference between control and experimental groups in this study.
2. In terms of attitude towards English lessons, there is a significant difference between the experimental group and the control group. Students educated by Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL) supported with the DynED programme have more positive attitudes to English classes than those educated by traditional language teaching methods.
Kocak’s (1997) study investigated the effectiveness of CALL on vocabulary teaching and learning. The hypothesis was that students are more positively motivated to use software materials than the usual textbook and that vocabulary development would be significantly better for the software (experimental) group than for the textbook (control) group. Both groups were given pretest and posttest for 20 vocabulary items practised in isolation and in context over a two session, four-hour treatment period. The experimental and control groups were given a questionnaire to measure their attitudes towards using computers as a part of their course. It was found out that students educated by the Computer Assisted Language Learning method developed more positive attitudes towards the lesson than the students in the control group.
Pekel (2002) investigated students' attitudes towards web-based independent learning at Bilkent University School of English Language. In her study, fourteen volunteer upper-intermediate level prep students from different disciplines were the participants. A six-week web-based independent learning course was designed and implemented. The teacher and students communicated through e-mail only. The pre- and post-treatment questionnaires were analyzed quantitatively. Comparison of the results of initial and final questionnaires revealed that students’ attitudes towards web-based independent learning changed positively, and in particular, their knowledge of how to learn on the internet increased considerably as a result of the study.
Onsoy (2004), Yalcinalp (1993), Meyveci (1997) and Ayturk (1999) carried out studies to explore student’s attitudes towards lessons by Computer Assisted Language Learning. They found that there was a significant difference in attitudes. Students who were educated by CALL developed more positive attitudes towards the lesson than students who were educated by the traditional language teaching. These results correlate with the results of the current study. It can be said, based on the findings above, Computer Assisted Language Learning method was more effective on the development of students’ attitudes towards lesson than the traditional language teaching methods.
3. Other studies measured teacher attitudes. Tuzcuoglu (2000) investigated the teachers’ attitudes towards using Computer Assisted Language Learning in foreign language classes. This study revealed that the teachers at Osmangazi University Department of Foreign Languages, Eskisehir, Turkey had positive attitudes towards using CALL and were willing to teach in the computer lab for a few hours a week. They agreed that using CALL would increase students' interest and language learning abilities. The teachers wanted to use computers for both teaching and practising skills. They stated the most important skills to be focused on are grammar, reading and vocabulary. They indicated a need for computer training to be able to use CALL effectively.
Zereyalp (2009) studied teacher attitudes to reveal barriers to using CALL or computer technologies in their teaching in state universities in Turkey. This study was carried out with 80 teacher educators from English Language teaching departments in 13 Turkish State universities. The study found strong positive attitudes among teachers to use CALL in their instruction and identified barriers such as lack of hardware, lack of time, and insufficient technical and administrative support.
The findings of the current study, supported by the literature, conclude that Computer Assisted Language Learning helps to develop positive attitudes among students towards language learning. This method is supported by teachers because Computer Assisted Language Learning helps to motivate students and increase their learning and achievement.
In this study, the achievement level of experimental group students was significantly higher than the group taught using traditional language teaching methods. Students educated by CALL and the DynED programme were more eager to learn English and actively participate in learning. It was observed that students in the experimental group developed listening and speaking skills beyond those of the control group. The researcher did not find a significant difference in writing skills between the two groups. This may be because students educated with CALL and DynED did not need to use pencils. Both groups had chance for writing in formal instruction processes in class. Neither group received specific training to write better than the other.
In conclusion, on the basis of findings gathered in this study, it can be said that Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL) supported with DynED can be used advantageously in EFL / ESL classrooms. Researchers are encouraged to conduct further studies on Computer Assisted Language Learning and the DynED education programme in English classes and other subjects.
As a result of this study, the following suggestions are offered for additional research:
The teachers should use consider CALL and DynED to increase motivation and learning in language Instruction.
Seminars, courses, and in-service workshops should be organised upgrade computer skills and to train teachers to use CALL and DynED methods effectively in their classrooms.
Elementary English School curriculum in Turkey does not correlate with Computer Assisted Language Learning supported by the DynED programme. The elementary English curriculum should be integrated with the DynED language teaching programme fort schools.
English teaching classes are very limited (4 hours a week) at national schools in Turkey Duration of English lessons should be increased to better apply the Computer Assisted Language Learning method and DynED language teaching programme.
Students should be taught computer skills so they can effectively use computers for learning.
Opportunities should be created for students to discuss, reflect on, and share of what they learned.
Teacher education programmes should be reorganised to contain both the usage (practice) and the theoretical knowledge/framework of Computer Assisted Language Learning method and the DynED language teaching programme.
Most schools in Turkey are in need of computers and computer labs. The Ministry of National Education of Turkey, known as MEB, should develop the technological infrastructure to implement Computer Assisted Language Learning and DynED language teaching methods. CALL and DynED language teaching programmes should be mandatory for all schools.
Acikalin, M. (2006). “The Influence of Computer-Supported Instruction (CSI) on the Principles of Constructivist Pedagogy in the Social Studies Curriculum”. Ohio: Ohio State University Graduate School. (Unpublished PhD Dissertation).
Alkan, B. (1997). “The Investigation of the Comparision of Computer-Assisted English Language Learning and Teacher-Centred English Language Teaching”. Izmir: Dokuz Eylul Universitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitusu. (Unpublished Master’s Thesis).
Alshwairkh, S. A. N. (2004). “Learning Vocabulary through Internet Reading: Approaches and Attitudes of ESL MBA Students”. Indiana: Indiana University of Pennsylvania Graduate School. (Unpublished PhD Dissertation).
Ayturk, N. (1999). “Bilgisayar Destekli Ogretimin Ogrencilerin Ingilizce Basarisina, Ingilizce ve Bilgisayara Yonelik Tutumlarina Olan Etkisi”. Ankara: Ankara Universitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitusu. (Unpublished Master’s Thesis).
Baturay, M. H. (2007). “Effects of Web-Based Multimedia Annotated Vocabulary Learning in Context Model on Foreign Language Vocabulary Retention of Intermediate Level English Language Learners”. Ankara: Middle East Teachinal University Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences. (Unpublished PhD Dissertation).
Belz, J. A. & Kinginger, C. (2003). “Discourse Options and the Development of Pragmatic Competence by Classroom Learners of German: The case of Address Forms”. Language Learning, 53(4), 591–647.
Blattner, G. and Fiori, M. (2009). “Facebook in the Language Classroom: Promises and Posibilities”. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning. 6(1),17 – 28.
Brooks, J. G. and Brooks, M. G. (1999). In Search of Understanding: The Case for Constructivist Classrooms. (Revised Edition). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Cevik, A. (2001). “Yabanci Dil Ogretiminde Bilgisayar Destekli Ogrenme Yonteminin Ogrenci Basarisina Etkisi”. Eskisehir: Anadolu Universitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitusu. (Unpublished Master’s Thesis).
Chapelle, C. and J. Jamieson. (1986). “Computer-Assisted Language Learning as a Predictor of Success in Acquiring English as a Second Language”. TESOL Quarterly. 20, 27–46.
Chapelle, C. (1990). “The Discourse of Computer-Assisted Language Learning: Toward a Context for Descriptive Research”. TESOL Quarterly. 24(2), 199–225.
About DynED: English Language Learning Solutions [On-line]. (2009). Available: http://www.dyned.com/about/ .
Ehsani, F. and Knodt, E. (1998). “Speech Technology in Computer-Aided Language Learning: Strenghts and Limitations of a New CALL Paradigm”. Language Learning and Technology. 2(1), 45 – 60.
Hardisty D. & Windeatt S. (1989) CALL. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Harmanci, F. K. (2009). “The Effects of CALL on the Achievement of 7th Grade EFL Learners at Primary School”. Konya: Selcuk Universitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitusu. (Unpublished Master’s Thesis).
Inan, N. U. (1997). “Bilgisayar Destekli Ogretim Yonteminin Ingilizce Ogretiminde Etkililigi”. İstanbul: Marmara Universitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitusu. (Unpublished Master’s Thesis).
Johnson, A., & Heffernan, N. (2006). “The Short Readings Project: A CALL Reading Activity Utilizing Vocabulary Recycling”. Computer Assisted Language Learning.19(1), 63–77.
Kaplan, U. (2002). “The Effectiveness of Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL) in Grammar Instruction to Vocational High School EFL Students”. Gaziantep: Gaziantep Universitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitusu. (Unpublished Master’s Thesis).
Kocak, N. C. (1997). “The Effectiveness of Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL) in Vocabulary Instruction to Turkish EFL Students”. Ankara: Bilkent University Institute of Economics and Social Sciences. (Unpublished Master’s Thesis).
Knowles, L. (2004). “On the Cusp: New Developments in Language Teaching”. ESL Magazine. Issue 40, July/August.
Kung, S.C & Chuo, T.W (2002). “Students’ Perceptions of English Learning through ESL/EFL Websites”. Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language. 6(1A).
LeLoup, J. W., & Porterio, R. (1997). Internet Technologies for Authentic Language Learning Experiences. Washington, DC: ERIC Clearinghouse on Languages and Linguistics.
Levy, M. (1997). Computer-Assisted Language Learning: Context and Conceptualization. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Liang, M. and Bonk, C. J. (2000). “Interaction in Blended EFL Learning: Principles and Practice”. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning. 6(1), 3 – 15.
Liddell, P. (Ed.) (1995) CALL: Theory and Application. Victoria, BC: University of Victoria Press.
Makaraci, M. (2004). “Ilkogretim 2. Kademe Ingilizce Dersinde Gramer Ogretiminin Bilgisayar Destekli Ogretimle Yapilmasinin Akademik Basariya ve Kaliciliga Etkisi”. Adana: Cukurova Universitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitusu. (Unpublished Master’s Thesis).
Meyveci, N. (1997). “Bilgisayar Destekli Fizik Ogretiminin Ogrenci Basarisina ve Ogrencinin Bilgisayara Yonelik Ttumuna Etkisi”. Ankara: Ankara Universitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitusu. (Unpublished Master’s Thesis).
Onsoy, S. (2004). “Students’ and Teachers’ Attitudes Towards the Use of Computer-Assisted Language Learning at the Preparatory School of Celal Bayar University”. Ankara: Bilkent University Insttitute of Social Sciences. (Unpublished Master’s Thesis).
Pekel, N. (2002). “Students’ Attitudes Towards Web-Based Independent Learning at Bilkent University School of English Language”. Ankara: Bilkent University Institute of Economics and Social Sciences. (Unpublished Master’s Thesis).
Pius, T. H. (2003). “Computer-Assisted Language Learning and the Revolution in Computational Linguistics”. Linguistik Online. May, 17.
Stark, K. (2004). “English for Success Courseware”. TESL-EJ. September, 8(2).
Step-Greany, J. (2002). “Students’ Perceptions on Language Learning in a Technological Environment: Implications for the New Millenium”. Language Learning and Technology. 6(1), 165 – 180.
Tuzcuoglu, U. (2000). “Teachers’ Attitudes Towards Using Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL) in the Foreign Languages Department at Osmangazi University”. Ankara: Bilkent University Institute of Economics and Social Sciences. (Unpublished Master’s Thesis).
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Warschauer, M. (1996). “Computer-Assisted Language Learning: An Introduction”. In Fotos, S. (Ed.). Multimadia Language Teaching. Tokyo: Logos International.
Yalcinalp, S. (1993). “Effects of Computer Assisted Instruction on Students’ Chemistry Achievement, Attitude Toward CAI and Chemistry and Their Perception About the CAI Environment at the Secondary School Level”. Ankara: Middle East Teachinal University Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences. (Unpublished Master’s Thesis).
Yarar, G. (2005). “Ingilizce Gramer Ogretiminde Bilgisayar Destekli Ogretim Yonteminin Ogrenci Basarisina Olan Etkisi”. Bursa: Uludag Universitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitusu. (Unpublished Master’s Thesis).
Yigit, A. (2007). “Ilkogretim 2. Sinif Seviyesinde Bilgisayar Destekli Egitici Matematik Oyunlarinin Basariya ve Kaliciliga Etkisi”. Adana: Cukurova Universitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitusu. (Unpublished Master’s Thesis).
Yilmaz, O. (2004). “Yabanci Dilde Kullanilan Bilgisayar Destekli Egitimin Ogrenci Basarisi Uzerine Etkilerinin Arastirilmasi”. Sakarya: Sakarya Universitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitusu. (Unpublished Master’s Thesis).
Yilmaz, H. (1998). Egitimde Olcme ve Degerlendirme. Konya: Mikro Yayinlari.
Zereyalp, S. A. (2009). “EFL Teacher Educators’ Attitudes Towards CALL: Case of Turkish State Universities”. Adana: Cukurova University Institute of Social Sciences. (Unpublished Master’s Thesis).
About the Authors
Gökhan BAŞ is an English Language Teacher in Nigde city, Turkey. He has a BA in English Language Teaching from Anadolu University, Eskisehir, Turkey. He has taught English in various schools in Konya and Nigde cities. He hold an MSc degree in Educational Sciences from Selcuk University, Konya. He has had articles published in national and international journals. He is studying multiple intelligences, cooperative learning, Computer Assisted Language Learning, project-based learning, teaching-learning processes, statictisc, Instructional Leadership and the Turkish Educational System. He is still teaching English in Karatli Sehit Sahin Yilmaz Elementary School, Nigde, Turkey.
Orhan Kuzucu is an English Language Teacher in Nevsehir city, Turkey. He has a BA in English Language Teaching from Cukurova University, Adana, Turkey. He has taught English in various schools of Nevsehir and Van cities of Turkey. He is interested in foreign language learning and teaching, computer-based learning, vs. He is still teaching English in 30 Agustos Elementary School, Nevsehir, Turkey.