Learning Performance Enhancement Using Computer-Assisted Language Learning by Collaborative Learning Groups

被引:14
作者
Wang, Ya-huei [1 ,3 ]
Liao, Hung-Chang [2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Chung Shan Med Univ, Dept Appl Foreign Languages, 110,Sect 1,Jian Koa N Rd, Taichung 402, Taiwan
[2] Chung Shan Med Univ, Dept Hlth Serv Adm, 110,Sect 1,Jian Koa N Rd, Taichung 402, Taiwan
[3] Chung Shan Med Univ Hosp, Dept Med Educ, 110,Sect 1,Jian Koa N Rd, Taichung 402, Taiwan
来源
SYMMETRY-BASEL | 2017年 / 9卷 / 08期
关键词
computer-assisted language learning (CALL); collaborative learning; learning technologies; complementary competencies; STUDENTS PERCEPTIONS; OUTCOMES;
D O I
10.3390/sym9080141
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
This study attempted to test whether the use of computer-assisted language learning (CALL) and innovative collaborative learning could be more effective than the use of traditional collaborative learning in improving students' English proficiencies. A true experimental design was used in the study. Four randomly-assigned groups participated in the study: a traditional collaborative learning group (TCLG, 34 students), an innovative collaborative learning group (ICLG, 31 students), a CALL traditional collaborative learning group (C(ALL)TCLG, 32 students), and a CALL innovative collaborative learning group (C(ALL)ICLG, 31 students). TOEIC (Test of English for International Communication) listening, reading, speaking, and writing pre-test and post-test assessments were given to all students at an interval of sixteen weeks. Multivariate analysis of covariance (MANCOVA), multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA), and analysis of variance (ANOVA) were used to analyze the data. The results revealed that students who used CALL had significantly better learning performance than those who did not. Students in innovative collaborative learning had significantly better learning performances than those in traditional collaborative learning. Additionally, students using CALL innovative collaborative learning had better learning performances than those in CALL collaborative learning, those in innovative collaborative learning, and those in traditional collaborative learning.
引用
收藏
页数:16
相关论文
共 48 条
  • [1] Al-Mansour N.S., 2012, Journal of King Saud University - Languages and Translation, V24, P51, DOI DOI 10.1016/J.JKSULT.2009.10.001
  • [2] Alijanian E., 2012, THEORY PRACTICE LANG, V2, P1971
  • [3] Prospective English language teachers' views on computer and paper-based instructional materials in developing language components
    Arikan, Arda
    Khezerlou, Ebrahem
    [J]. INNOVATION AND CREATIVITY IN EDUCATION, 2010, 2 (02): : 4006 - 4009
  • [4] Relationship between Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL) and Listening Skill of Iranian EFL Learners
    Barani, Ghasem
    [J]. 3RD WORLD CONFERENCE ON EDUCATIONAL SCIENCES - 2011, 2011, 15 : 4059 - 4063
  • [5] Blankenship J. R., 1999, DISS ABSTR INT, V34, P9
  • [6] Budianto A., 2011, THESIS
  • [7] Students' perceptions of Blackboard and Moodle in a Portuguese university
    Carvalho, Ana
    Areal, Nelson
    Silva, Joaquim
    [J]. BRITISH JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY, 2011, 42 (05) : 824 - 841
  • [8] Applying the genetic encoded conceptual graph to grouping learning
    Chan, Teyi
    Chen, Chien-Ming
    Wu, Yu-Lung
    Jong, Bin-Shyan
    Hsia, Yen-Teh
    Lin, Tsong-Wuu
    [J]. EXPERT SYSTEMS WITH APPLICATIONS, 2010, 37 (06) : 4103 - 4118
  • [9] Chaplin S., 2009, Journal of College Science Teaching, V39, P72
  • [10] Chen A., 2009, HSIUPING J HUMANIT S, V13, P173