Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
Validation of the Computer Assisted Language Learning Attitude Scale:
Focusing on Computer Anxiety and Accessibility
KAWAG...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Validation of the computer assisted language learning attitude scale: Focusing on computer anxiety and accessibility

486 views

Published on

Kawaguchi, Y. (2015, June). Validation of the computer assisted language learning attitude scale: Focusing on computer anxiety and accessibility. JALTCALL 2015. Kyushu Sangyo University, Japan.

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Validation of the computer assisted language learning attitude scale: Focusing on computer anxiety and accessibility

  1. 1. Validation of the Computer Assisted Language Learning Attitude Scale: Focusing on Computer Anxiety and Accessibility KAWAGUCHI, Yusaku (Graduate School, Nagoya University) y.kawaguchi@nagoya-u.jp  Computer Assisted Language Learning Attitude Scale (CALLAS)[1]  CALLAS has five subscales: a. Self-perceived computer skills (CS, k = 5) b. Beliefs about the social significance of computer skills (SS, k = 5) c. Beliefs about the effectiveness of CALL (EF, k = 4) d. Attitudes toward computer-mediated communication (CM, k = 3) e. Attitudes toward multimedia (MM, k = 3)  Computer Anxiety Scale (CAS) [2]  CAS has three subscales: a. Anxiety of computer operation (OP, k = 7) b. Anxiety of approaching computer (AP, k = 7) c. Anxiety of technology (TC, k = 7)  Hypothesis  The CALLAS shows the negative correlation with CAS, and the positive correlation with computer accessibility. This evidence supports the criterion-related validity of CALLAS. Background [1] Kawaguchi, Y., & Kusanagi, K. (2015). Developing a new scale for computer assisted language learning attitudes: Focusing on university-level EFL learners. Proceedings of 54th Annual Conference, the Japan Association for Language Education and Technology, 84–85. [2] Hirata, K. (1990). Konpyu-ta huan no gainen to sokutei [The concept and measurement of computer anxiety] Aichi Kyoiku Daigku Kenkyu Houkoku [Research Report, Aich University of Education], 39, 203–212. References  Participants  Undergraduate students (N = 59) taking English classes using CALL  Procedure  Questionnaire survey • CALLAS (k = 20) • CAS (k = 21) • Frequency of computer use, learning in Learning Management System(LMS), and e-Learning as computer accessibility  Analysis  Multiple variables correlation analysis (Using Spearman's rank correlation) Research  CALLAS – CAS  The negative correlations were observed between the following items. • CS–OP (ρ = -.75), TC (ρ = -.43), AP (ρ = -.39) • SS–AP (ρ = -.63)  EF, CM, MM did not show correlations with CAS.  CALLAS – Computer Accessibility  The positive correlations were observed between the following items. • CS–Frequency of computer use (ρ = .59) • EF–Frequency of computer use (ρ = .30)  Frequency of learning in LMS and e- Learning did not show correlation with CALLAS. Results  The criterion-related validity was partially supported.  Some factors of CALLAS were negatively correlated with CAS.  Some factors of CALLAS were positively correlated with computer accessibility.  Further research should focus on the relationship between CALL attitudes and learning outcomes. To confirm the criterion-related validity of the Computer Assisted Language Learning Attitude Scale. Purpose 0.3 0.31 -0.31 0.32 -0.39 0.4 -0.41 -0.43 0.59 -0.63 0.7 -0.75 CS SS EF CM MM APOP TC COM_Freq LMS_Freq eLNG_Freq M SD Min Median Max Skew Kurt α CO 3.92 1.29 1.20 3.80 6.60 0.08 -0.94 .86 SM 6.08 0.72 4.00 6.20 7.00 -0.69 -0.01 .80 EF 4.28 1.27 1.50 4.00 7.00 0.13 -0.63 .94 CM 4.93 1.78 1.33 5.00 7.00 -0.50 -0.91 .95 MM 4.59 1.44 1.00 5.00 7.00 -0.26 -0.26 .80 AP 3.57 0.85 1.29 3.57 5.71 -0.29 0.27 .66 OP 2.96 1.18 1.14 2.71 6.86 1.04 1.12 .87 TC 3.39 0.89 1.57 3.29 5.86 0.38 -0.19 .73 COM Freq 3.85 2.07 1.00 4.00 7.00 0.18 -1.23 LMS Freq 0.75 0.73 0.00 1.00 4.00 1.71 5.62 eLNG Freq 1.51 1.06 0.00 1.00 7.00 2.69 10.42 Conclusion

×