Effectiveness Evaluation of
Learning Pronunciation With
Computer Assisted Pronunciation
Instruction for
Vocational College...
Content
Introduction
Literature Review

Methodology
2013/12/31

2
3
Introduction
Background of the Study
Purposes of the Study
Research Questions
Significance of the Study
2013/12/31

4
Background of the Study
EF English Proficiency Index 2012
Intermediate-low

30

■ 台灣

52.42

(Education First, 2012)
2013/...
Background of the Study
Global TOEFL Scores in 2012
Total

Reading

Listening

Speaking

Writing

Region
and
Country

Scor...
Background of the study
Average Scores of 2011 TOEIC
638

700
600

567

557

507
434

500
400
300
200
100
0

Overall
2013/...
Background of the study
Taiwanese’s poor English speaking skill
Common among Asian learners of English
Grammar-Translation...
Background of the study
Speaking ability was considered as the one that
should be improved by 83.7% of the college student...
Background of the Study
The importance of teaching
pronunciation is emphasized
by Audioligualism and Oral
Approach. (Celce...
Background of the Study
Computer assisted language learning
has attracted interest from language
teachers and learners bec...
Background of the Study
In Taiwan, studies on the effectiveness of
applying computer technology to teaching
pronunciation ...
Purposes of the Study
To evaluate the effectiveness of learning
English pronunciation with computer assisted
pronunciation...
Research Questions
RQ1:

Is computer assisted pronunciation instruction
effective in improving pronunciation quality for
s...
Significance of the Study
Students of
private
technological
universities

Computer
Assisted
Pronunciation
Instruction
2013...
16
Literature Review
Components of Teaching Pronunciation
Computer Assisted Pronunciation Training
(CAPT)
Effectiveness of CA...
Components of Teaching
Pronunciation

An central idea of structural
linguistics was that the primary
medium of language is...
Components of Teaching
Pronunciation
The aspects of teaching pronunciation

Segmental

• Individual phones (phonemes)

Sup...
Segmental features
Phonological errors were the most frequent and the
most difficult parts to resolve in inter-language
co...
Suprasegmental features
Suprasegmental features
(e.g., stress, intonation, rhythm) are the key
factors of predicting speak...
Balanced aspects

2013/12/31

(Celce-Murcia, Brinton, &
Goodwin, 2010;
Derwing, Munro, & 22
Computer Assisted
Pronunciation Training (CAPT)
The advantages of computer-based
pedagogy
Self-paced learning
Patient tuto...
Computer Assisted
Pronunciation Training (CAPT)

Computer
Assisted
Pronunciation
Training
(CAPT)

Exposure to
oral demonst...
Effectiveness of CAPT
Pronunciation of difficult and unknown words
was significantly improved after computer
assisted pron...
Hypotheses
RQ1: Is computer assisted
pronunciation
instruction effective in
improving
pronunciation
quality for students o...
Hypotheses
RQ2: Are the students able
to increase the
awareness of the
feature in their
pronunciation after
receiving comp...
Hypotheses
RQ3: Do the students think
of computer assisted
pronunciation
instruction as useful
tools to improve their
pron...
Hypotheses
Framework of the Study
H1

Learning
Pronunciation
with CAPT

H2

H3
2013/12/31

Pronunciation
Quality

Phonolog...
30
Methodology
Experimental Design
Participants
Instruments
Procedures
Pilot Study

Data Analysis
2013/12/31

31
Experimental Design

Week 1

Pretest

Compare

12-week MyET

Week 14
2013/12/31

Posttest

Pretest

No treatment

Compare
...
Participants

EFL
Students

2013/12/31

• No = 70
• First-year in a technological
university
• Aged 19
• Below elementary-...
Participants

Teachers

2013/12/31

• No. = 3
• Teach first-year General
English in the university
• At least 3 years of
f...
Participants

Raters

2013/12/31

• No. = 3
• Expert judges
• To score the productions
of the participants in the
pre- and...
Participants
Sampling

College 1 & 2

College 3

College 4

Class A1

Class A3

Class A5

Class A2

Class A4

Class A6

A ...
Participants
Matching
Class B2

Class B6

Class B7

2013/12/31

Pretest
Pretest Scores

37
Participants
Matching

Experimental Group

Control Group

Equal Pretest Score
Class B2

Class B6

Volunteers

Class B7
201...
Instruments
MyET

2013/12/31

39
Instruments
The Scoring System in MyET

Stage 1:
Database
constructing

2013/12/31

Stage 2:
Phonic symbol
labeling

Stage...
Instruments
Questionnaire

Part 1

• Personal information

Part 2

• Awareness of phonological
features (8 items)
• Percei...
2013/12/31

42
2013/12/31

43
Procedures

Pretest

2013/12/31

Training
Procedure

Posttest

44
Training Procedure
Items
Number of
samples
Profile
Course
Teacher
Material
Teaching
activities

Treatment
2013/12/31

Expe...
Training procedure

Learning
with
MyET

2013/12/31

• 12-week extra-class learning
sessions
• Tasks
• Repeating (4 lessons...
Testing Procedure

An example item for MyET test

Students hear:
Students speak and record:
2013/12/31

47
Testing Procedure
S1

S2

S 50

Sentence#1

Audio file #1

Sentence #2

Audio file #2

Sentence #50

Audio file #50

The p...
Testing Procedure
Score of MyET

Score

Pronunciation
Intonation
Fluency
Waveform of teacher’s sound

2013/12/31

Waveform...
Testing Procedure
Human rater’s score
Item

Percentage
Individual sound quality
35%
Intonation
25%
Fluency
25%
Volume
15%
...
Pilot Study
Approximately 30 students
Take pretest provided by MyET
Respond to the questionnaire afterwards
Spring 2014
20...
Data Analysis
Cronbach’s
α Test

ANOVA
(F-test)

2013/12/31

• To test the reliability of the scores
given by three raters...
Data Analysis
Descriptive
Statistics

Regression
Analysis
2013/12/31

• On the questionnaire results
• To investigate the ...
Thank you for listening!
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Proposal rehearsal sze_chuliu 1021216(ver. 2.1)

231
-1

Published on

This is rehearsal for thesis proposal, presented on Dec 16, 2013.

Published in: Education, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
231
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Proposal rehearsal sze_chuliu 1021216(ver. 2.1)

  1. 1. Effectiveness Evaluation of Learning Pronunciation With Computer Assisted Pronunciation Instruction for Vocational College Students Presenter: Sze-Chu Liu Advisor: Dr. Po-Yi Hung Committee: Dr. Chin-Ling Lee Dr. Chin-Ying Lin Date: December 31, 2013
  2. 2. Content Introduction Literature Review Methodology 2013/12/31 2
  3. 3. 3
  4. 4. Introduction Background of the Study Purposes of the Study Research Questions Significance of the Study 2013/12/31 4
  5. 5. Background of the Study EF English Proficiency Index 2012 Intermediate-low 30 ■ 台灣 52.42 (Education First, 2012) 2013/12/31 5
  6. 6. Background of the Study Global TOEFL Scores in 2012 Total Reading Listening Speaking Writing Region and Country Score Rank Score Rank Score Rank Score Rank Score Rank Singapore 98 1 24 1 25 1 24 1 25 1 India 91 2 22 2 22 2 24 2 24 2 Republic of Korea 84 8 21 6 21 6 20 19 22 8 Taiwan 78 20 20 9 19 13 20 21 20 21 Japan 70 28 18 23 17 25 17 30 18 30 2013/12/31 (Educational Testing Service, 2013) 6
  7. 7. Background of the study Average Scores of 2011 TOEIC 638 700 600 567 557 507 434 500 400 300 200 100 0 Overall 2013/12/31 (ETS statistics, 2012) National Comp. Universities Private Comp. Universities National Tech. Universities Private Tech. Universities 7
  8. 8. Background of the study Taiwanese’s poor English speaking skill Common among Asian learners of English Grammar-Translation Method Joint University Entrance Examination 2013/12/31 (Cappelle & Curtis, 2000; Jones, 1995;Lin, 1995) 8
  9. 9. Background of the study Speaking ability was considered as the one that should be improved by 83.7% of the college students. (Wang, 2003) University students in higher classes perceived speaking skill as more important than reading. (Chia, Johnson, Chia, & Olive,1999) Most of the college interviewees thought of “poor English pronunciation” as the common problems encountered during English learning. (Wu, 2000) 2013/12/31 9
  10. 10. Background of the Study The importance of teaching pronunciation is emphasized by Audioligualism and Oral Approach. (Celce-Murcia, Brinton, & Goodwin, 2010) 2013/12/31 10
  11. 11. Background of the Study Computer assisted language learning has attracted interest from language teachers and learners because it can provide individual instruction and immediate feedback on the correctness of a learner’s response to computerized tasks. (Nagata, 1993) 2013/12/31 11
  12. 12. Background of the Study In Taiwan, studies on the effectiveness of applying computer technology to teaching pronunciation have mostly focused on the learners in elementary schools and high schools. (Huang, 2003; Pang, 2005) Very few studies on applying computer technology to the pronunciation teaching of vocational college students are conducted. 2013/12/31 12
  13. 13. Purposes of the Study To evaluate the effectiveness of learning English pronunciation with computer assisted pronunciation instruction for the students of private technological universities in Taiwan To investigate the phonological awareness and perception of the participants on the usefulness of computer assisted pronunciation 2013/12/31 13
  14. 14. Research Questions RQ1: Is computer assisted pronunciation instruction effective in improving pronunciation quality for students of private technological students? RQ2: Are the students able to increase the awareness of the feature in their pronunciation after receiving computer assisted pronunciation instruction? RQ3: Do the students think of computer assisted pronunciation instruction as useful tools to improve their pronunciation? 2013/12/31 14
  15. 15. Significance of the Study Students of private technological universities Computer Assisted Pronunciation Instruction 2013/12/31 To improve pronunciation quality To enhance English oral skills To inspire passion of learning English 15
  16. 16. 16
  17. 17. Literature Review Components of Teaching Pronunciation Computer Assisted Pronunciation Training (CAPT) Effectiveness of CAPT Hypotheses 2013/12/31 17
  18. 18. Components of Teaching Pronunciation An central idea of structural linguistics was that the primary medium of language is oral: “Speech is language.” (Richards & Rodgers, 2001, p. 55) 2013/12/31 18
  19. 19. Components of Teaching Pronunciation The aspects of teaching pronunciation Segmental • Individual phones (phonemes) Suprasegmental • Stress (force of articulation) • Intonation (patterns of pitch on words or longer utterances) • Rhythm(timing) 2013/12/31 19
  20. 20. Segmental features Phonological errors were the most frequent and the most difficult parts to resolve in inter-language communication. (Jenkins, 2002) Adult Japanese learners of English improved their performance at both controlled-speech as well as extemporaneous-speech tasks after receiving explicit instruction on a target sound of English. (Saito and Lyster, 2012) 2013/12/31 20
  21. 21. Suprasegmental features Suprasegmental features (e.g., stress, intonation, rhythm) are the key factors of predicting speakers’ proficiency and comprehensibility. (Kang, Rubin, & Pickering, 2010) The suprasegmental instruction seems to provide the learner with skills that can be applied in extemporaneous speech production. (Derwing, Munro, & Wiebe, 1998) 2013/12/31 21
  22. 22. Balanced aspects 2013/12/31 (Celce-Murcia, Brinton, & Goodwin, 2010; Derwing, Munro, & 22
  23. 23. Computer Assisted Pronunciation Training (CAPT) The advantages of computer-based pedagogy Self-paced learning Patient tutoring Immediate and individualized instruction Detailed records of achievement (Nunan, 2011) 2013/12/31 23
  24. 24. Computer Assisted Pronunciation Training (CAPT) Computer Assisted Pronunciation Training (CAPT) Exposure to oral demonstrations Extension of the teacher’s speech in class Virtual interaction with native speakers (Derwing & Munro, 2005) 2013/12/31 24
  25. 25. Effectiveness of CAPT Pronunciation of difficult and unknown words was significantly improved after computer assisted pronunciation training. (Neri et al., 2008) Acquisition of second language prosody and generalization to segmental accuracy and novel sentences with automatic visual display of the speaker’s intonation was observed. (Hardison, 2004) 2013/12/31 25
  26. 26. Hypotheses RQ1: Is computer assisted pronunciation instruction effective in improving pronunciation quality for students of private technological students? 2013/12/31 H1: Pronunciation quality of students in a private technological university is significantly improved after computer assisted pronunciation training. 26
  27. 27. Hypotheses RQ2: Are the students able to increase the awareness of the feature in their pronunciation after receiving computer assisted pronunciation instruction? 2013/12/31 H2: The students’ perception students’ on phonological perception on features is increased after using phonological features is computer assisted increased after a pronunciation training. training course using computer assisted pronunciation instruction. 27
  28. 28. Hypotheses RQ3: Do the students think of computer assisted pronunciation instruction as useful tools to improve their pronunciation? 2013/12/31 H3: The students perceive computer assisted pronunciation instruction as a useful tool to improve their pronunciation after computer assisted pronunciation training. 28
  29. 29. Hypotheses Framework of the Study H1 Learning Pronunciation with CAPT H2 H3 2013/12/31 Pronunciation Quality Phonological Awareness Perception on Usefulness 29
  30. 30. 30
  31. 31. Methodology Experimental Design Participants Instruments Procedures Pilot Study Data Analysis 2013/12/31 31
  32. 32. Experimental Design Week 1 Pretest Compare 12-week MyET Week 14 2013/12/31 Posttest Pretest No treatment Compare Posttest 32
  33. 33. Participants EFL Students 2013/12/31 • No = 70 • First-year in a technological university • Aged 19 • Below elementary-level proficiency • Studied English for at least 6 years • Chinese native speakers 33
  34. 34. Participants Teachers 2013/12/31 • No. = 3 • Teach first-year General English in the university • At least 3 years of formal teaching experience 34
  35. 35. Participants Raters 2013/12/31 • No. = 3 • Expert judges • To score the productions of the participants in the pre- and post- tests 35
  36. 36. Participants Sampling College 1 & 2 College 3 College 4 Class A1 Class A3 Class A5 Class A2 Class A4 Class A6 A Level Sampled Class B1 Class B5 Class B7 Class B6 Class B8 Class C1 Class C3 Class C5 Class C2 Class C4 Class C6 B Level Class B2 ~50% Class B3 Class B4 C Level 2013/12/31 36
  37. 37. Participants Matching Class B2 Class B6 Class B7 2013/12/31 Pretest Pretest Scores 37
  38. 38. Participants Matching Experimental Group Control Group Equal Pretest Score Class B2 Class B6 Volunteers Class B7 2013/12/31 38
  39. 39. Instruments MyET 2013/12/31 39
  40. 40. Instruments The Scoring System in MyET Stage 1: Database constructing 2013/12/31 Stage 2: Phonic symbol labeling Stage 3: Pronunciation comparison 40
  41. 41. Instruments Questionnaire Part 1 • Personal information Part 2 • Awareness of phonological features (8 items) • Perceived usefulness (10 items) (Hardison, 2005; Tanner & Landon, 2009) 2013/12/31 41
  42. 42. 2013/12/31 42
  43. 43. 2013/12/31 43
  44. 44. Procedures Pretest 2013/12/31 Training Procedure Posttest 44
  45. 45. Training Procedure Items Number of samples Profile Course Teacher Material Teaching activities Treatment 2013/12/31 Experiment group Control group ~35 ~35 •19-year-old Chinese native speakers •At least 6 years of EFL classes General English (2-credit, 2 hrs/wk) Same teacher (pairwise) Same curriculum and material (pairwise) Same instruction (pairwise) 40-minute extra practice per No extra treatment week learning with MyET 45
  46. 46. Training procedure Learning with MyET 2013/12/31 • 12-week extra-class learning sessions • Tasks • Repeating (4 lessons) • Answering questions (6 lessons) • Reading aloud(2 lessons) • Mock tests (8 times) 46
  47. 47. Testing Procedure An example item for MyET test Students hear: Students speak and record: 2013/12/31 47
  48. 48. Testing Procedure S1 S2 S 50 Sentence#1 Audio file #1 Sentence #2 Audio file #2 Sentence #50 Audio file #50 The pronunciation quality of each utterance is scored on a 100-point scale. 2013/12/31 48
  49. 49. Testing Procedure Score of MyET Score Pronunciation Intonation Fluency Waveform of teacher’s sound 2013/12/31 Waveform of student’s sound Volume 49
  50. 50. Testing Procedure Human rater’s score Item Percentage Individual sound quality 35% Intonation 25% Fluency 25% Volume 15% 2013/12/31 50
  51. 51. Pilot Study Approximately 30 students Take pretest provided by MyET Respond to the questionnaire afterwards Spring 2014 2013/12/31 51
  52. 52. Data Analysis Cronbach’s α Test ANOVA (F-test) 2013/12/31 • To test the reliability of the scores given by three raters and MyET • To test the reliability of the questionnaire • To examine the difference of pronunciation improvement • Between pre- and post- tests • Between the experimental and control groups • Between overseas experience of different durations H1 52
  53. 53. Data Analysis Descriptive Statistics Regression Analysis 2013/12/31 • On the questionnaire results • To investigate the phonological awareness and perceived usefulness of the students • To examine the relationship between phonological awareness, perceived usefulness and the improvement of pronunciation H2 H3 53
  54. 54. Thank you for listening!
  1. A particular slide catching your eye?

    Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.

×