Perceived benefits and drawbacks of synchronous voice-based computer-mediated communication in the foreign language classroom

Computer Assisted Language Learning

Volumn 24, Issue 5, 2011, Pages 419-432

  Bueno Alastuey, M C ^a  

^a PUBLIC UNIVERSITY OF NAVARRE   (Spain)

Author keywords

computer mediated communication; non native non native CMC; oral skills; students' perceptions; voice based exchanges

Indexed keywords

EID: 84858809206     PISSN: 09588221     EISSN: 17443210     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09588221.2011.574639     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Abrams, Z. I. 2003. The effect of synchronous and asynchronous CMC on oral performance in German. Modern Language Journal, 87: 157-167.
2. Bax, S. 2003. CALL past, present and future. System, 31: 13-28.
3. Bueno, M. C. 2010. Synchronous voice computer mediated communication: Effects on pronunciation. CALICO Journal, 28(1): 1-20.
4. Cheon, H. S. 2003. The viability of computer mediated communication in the Korean secondary EFL classroom. Asian EFL Journal, 5: 1
5. Chiu, T., Liou, H. and Yeh, Y. 2007. A study of web-based oral activities enhanced by Automatic Speech Recognition for EFL college learning. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 20: 209-233.
6. Cohen, L., Manion, L. and Morrison, K. 2000. Research methods in education, 5th ed., London: RoutledgeFalmer.
7. Donitsa-Schmidt, S., Inbar, O. and Shohamy, E. 2004. The effects of teaching spoken Arabic on students' attitudes and motivation in Israel. The Modern Language Journal, 88: 217-227.
8. Dörnyei, Z. 2005. The psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in second language acquisition, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
9. Egbert, J., Huff, L., McNeil, L., Preuss, C. and Sellen, J. 2009. Pedagogy, process, and classroom context: Integrating teacher voice and experience into research on technology-enhanced language learning. The Modern Language Journal, 93: 754-768.
10. Erben, T. 1999. "Constructing learning in a virtual immersion bath: LOTE Teacher Education through Audiographics". In WORLDCALL: Global perspectives on computer-assisted language learning, Edited by: Debski, R. and Levy, M. 229-248. Lisse: Swets and Zeitlinger.
11. Gass, S. 2003. "Input and interaction". In Handbook of second language acquisition, Edited by: Doughty, C. and Long, M. 224-255. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
12. Greene, J. and McClintock, C. 1985. Triangulation in evaluation: Design and analysis issues. Evaluation Review, 9: 523-545.
13. Hampel, R. 2003. Theoretical perspectives and new practices in audio-graphic conferencing for language learning. ReCALL, 15: 21-36.
14. Hampel, R. and Hauck, M. 2004. Towards an effective use of audio conferencing in distance language courses. Language Learning and Technology, 8: 66-82.
15. Healy-Beauvois, M. 1992. Computer assisted classroom discussion in the foreign language classroom: Conversation in slow motion. Foreign Language Annals, 25: 455-464.
16. Jepson, K. 2005. Conversations-and negotiated interaction-in text and voice chat rooms. Language Learning and Technology, 9: 79-98.
17. Johnson, G. 2008. The relative learning benefits of synchronous and asynchronous text-based discussion. British Journal of Information Technology, 39: 166-169.
18. Kenning, M. 2010. Differences that make the difference: A study of functionalities in synchronous CMC. ReCALL, 22: 3-19.
19. Kern, R. 1995. Restructuring classroom interaction with networked computers: Effects on quality and characteristics of language production. Modern Language Journal, 79: 457-476.
20. Krashen, S. 1988. Second language acquisition and second language learning, New York: Prentice Hall.
21. Lee, L. 2004. Learners' perspectives on networked collaborative interaction with native speakers of Spanish in the US. Language Learning and Technology, 8: 83-100.
22. Leeser, M. J. 2004. Learner proficiency and focus on form during collaborative dialogue. Language Teaching Research, 8: 55-82.
23. Long, M. H. 1996. "The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition". In Handbook of second language acquisition, Edited by: Ritchie, W. and Bhatia, T. 413-469. New York: Academic Press.
24. Miles, M. and Huberman, A. 1994. An expanded source book: Qualitative data analysis, 2nd ed., Thousand Oaks: Sage.
25. Neri, A., Cucchiarini, C. and Strik, H. 2006. Selecting segmental errors in non-native Dutch for optimal pronunciation training. IRAL, 44: 357-404.
26. Neri, A., Mich, O., Gerosa, M. and Giuliani, D. 2008. The effectiveness of computer assisted pronunciation training for foreign language learning by children. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 21: 393-408.
27. Ortega, Cebreros A.M. 2003. Measuring language anxiety perceived by Spanish University students of English. BELLS: Barcelona English Language and Literature Studies, 12
28. Payne, J. S. and Whitney, P. J. 2002. Developing L2 oral proficiency through synchronous CMC: Output, working memory, and interlanguage development. CALICO Journal, 20: 7-32.
29. Rosell-Aguilar, F. 2005. Task design for audiographic conferencing: Promoting beginner oral interaction in distance language learning. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 18: 417-442.
30. Satar, H. M. and Özdener, N. 2008. The effects of synchronous CMC on speaking proficiency and anxiety: Text versus voice chat. Modern Language Journal, 92: 595-613.
31. Sauro, S. 2001. The success of task type in facilitating oral language production in online computer mediated collaborative projects, (Unpublished master's thesis). Iowa State University.
32. Schmidt, R. 1990. The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11: 129-158.
33. Smith, B. 2005. The relationship between negotiated interaction, learner uptake, and lexical acquisition in task-based computer-mediated communication. TESOL Quarterly, 39: 33-58.
34. Storch, N. 1999. Are two heads better than one? Pair work and grammatical accuracy. System, 27: 363-374.
35. Swain, M. 1985. "Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development". In Input in second language acquisition, Edited by: Gass, S. and Madden, C. 235-256. New York: Newbury House.
36. Tashakkori, A. and Teddlie, C. 1998. Mixed methodology: Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
37. Vinagre, M. 2005. Fostering language learning by e-mail: An English-Spanish exchange. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 18: 369-388.
38. Vygotsky, L. S. 1978. Mind in society, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
39. Warschauer, M. 1996. Comparing face-to-face and electronic discussion in the second language classroom. CALICO Journal, 13: 7-25.
40. Xiao, M. 2007. An empirical study of using Internet-based desktop videoconferencing in an EFL setting (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from http://etd.ohiolink.edu/send-pdf.cgi/Xiao%20Mingli.pdf?acc_num=ohiou1194703859
41. Yamada, M. 2009. The role of social presence in learner-centered communicative language learning using synchronous computer-mediated communication: Experimental study. Computers & Education, 52: 820-833.
42. Yamada, M. and Akahori, K. 2007. Social presence in synchronous CMC-based language learning-how does it affect the productive performance and consciousness of learning objectives?. Computer-Assisted Language Learning, 20: 37-65.
43. Yang, N. 1999. The relationship between EFL learners' beliefs and learning strategy use. System, 27: 515-535.
44. Yang, Y. C. and Chang, L. 2008. No improvement-reflections and suggestions on the use of Skype to enhance college student's oral English proficiency. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39: 721-725.
45. Young, D. J. 1991. Creating a low-anxiety classroom environment: What does language anxiety research suggest?. The Modern Language Journal, 75: 426-437.
46. Zhao, Y. 2005. Research in technology and second language education: Developments and directions, Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.