The document summarizes a proposal to evaluate the effectiveness of using computer assisted pronunciation training (CAPT) tools to improve English pronunciation among vocational college students in Taiwan. It outlines a study that would involve a pre-test and post-test of pronunciation quality for an experimental group receiving 12 weeks of blended CAPT and teacher-led instruction, compared to a control group receiving traditional teacher-front instruction. Reliability of scoring would be assessed using Cronbach's alpha. ANOVA analysis would examine differences in pre-test and post-test scores between the groups to evaluate if CAPT is effective in improving pronunciation.

1. Effectiveness Evaluation of
Learning Pronunciation for
Vocational College Students via
Computer Assisted Pronunciation
Training
Presenter: Sze-Chu Liu
Adviser: Dr. Po-Yi Hung
Instructor: Dr. Pi-Ying Teresa Hsu
Date: June 17, 2013

2. Content
Introduction
Literature Review
Methodology
2Proposal Presentation2013/6/17

3. INTRODUCTION
Definition of the Terms
Background of the Study
Purposes of the Study
Research Question
2013/6/17 3Proposal Presentation

4. Definition of the Terms
 CALL = Computer Assisted Language
Learning
 CAPT = Computer Assisted
Pronunciation Training
4Proposal Presentation2013/6/17

5. Background of the Study
A report recently released shows that the
proficiency of English of Taiwan adults is
ranked 30 and categorized into
“intermediate-low level”, falling behind
neighboring countries such as Japan and
Korea.
(Education First, 2012)
5Proposal Presentation2013/6/17

6. Background of the Study
The students from private vocational
colleges and universities scored an
averaged 434 points in 2011 TOEIC
tests, the lowest among all kinds of
colleges and universities.
(ETS statistics, 2012)
6Proposal Presentation2013/6/17

7. Background of the Study
The importance of teaching pronunciation
is emphasized by Audioligualism and
Oral Approach.
(Celce-Murcia, Brinton,
& Goodwin, 2010, p. 3)
2013/6/17 7Proposal Presentation

8. Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study is to evaluate
the performance of learning English
pronunciation by CAPT for vocational
college students in central Taiwan.
8Proposal Presentation2013/6/17

9. Research Question
Are CAPT tools effective in improving
pronunciation quality for vocational
college students?
9Proposal Presentation2013/6/17

10. Hypothesis
 Pronunciation quality of students in a
vocational university is significantly
improved after a training course using
CAPT tools.
2013/6/17 10Proposal Presentation
Teaching
Pronunciation
with CAPT
Pronunciation
Quality

11. Literature Review
An important tenet of structural linguistics
was that the primary medium of language
is oral: Speech is language.
(Richards & Rodgers, 2001, p.55)
11Proposal Presentation2013/6/17

12. Literature Review
The advantages of CALL-based
pedagogy over conventional materials are
in the provision of self-paced learning,
patient tutoring, immediate and
individualized instruction, and detailed
records of achievement.
(Nunan, 2011, p.216)
2013/6/17 12Proposal Presentation

13. Literature Review
Teaching pronunciation with CAPT
Pronunciation of difficult and unknown
words significantly in a time period
(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
(Hardison, 2004)
2013/6/17 13Proposal Presentation

14. METHODOLOGY
Participants
Research Design
Instruments
Procedures
Pilot Study
Statistical Analysis
2013/6/17 14Proposal Presentation

15. Participants
Experimental
Group
Control Group
Participants
First-year students in a vocational
university
Numbers 45 45
15Proposal Presentation2013/6/17

16. Participants
Experimental
Group
Control Group
Sampling
 Ranked and listed according to
their English scores of the
Joint Entrance Examination
 Systematic sample with a
random start combined with
stratification from the middle
50%
16Proposal Presentation2013/6/17

17. Research Design
17Proposal Presentation
Experimental Group Control Group
2013/6/17
Pretest Pretest
CAPT Teaching Teacher-front
Teaching
Posttest Posttest
Compare
Compare

18. Instruments
MyET
18Proposal Presentation2013/6/17

19. The Scoring System in MyET
Stage 1:
Database
constructing
Stage 2:
Phonic symbol
labeling
Stage 3:
Pronunciation
comparison
19Proposal Presentation2013/6/17

20. Procedures
20Proposal Presentation
Pre-test
Training
Procedure
Post-test
2013/6/17

21. Training Procedure
21Proposal Presentation
Experimental
Group
Control Group
Teacher Taught by the same teacher
Syllabus Elementary level oral practice
Period One session per week for 12 weeks
Teaching
 Blended
teaching with
CAPT
 40 minutes
teach-led
 40 minutes with
CAPT
 Traditional
teaching
 80 minutes
per
session
2013/6/17

22. Rating Procedure
Sentence#1
Sentence #2
Sentence #50
S2S1 S90
Audio file #1
Audio file #2
Audio file #50
The pronunciation quality of each utterance is scored on a 100-point scale.
2013/6/17 22Proposal Presentation

23. Rating Procedure
23Proposal Presentation2013/6/17

24. Rating Procedure
Three English teachers grade the
pronunciation by the recordings.
Grading items
Word-level pronunciation (35%)
Intonation (25%)
Fluency (25%)
Volume (15%)
24Proposal Presentation2013/6/17

25. Pilot Study
One class of students attending Practical
English Fall semester 2013 will be studied.
The pronunciation quality of the class
before and after using CAPT for six weeks
will be measured and compared.
25Proposal Presentation2013/6/17

26. Statistical Analysis
Cronbach alpha test
On the scores given by three raters and MyET
To test the reliability of measurements
ANOVA (F-test)
On the pretest and posttest scores
To examine the difference of learning
performance between the experimental group
and control group
26Proposal Presentation2013/6/17

27. Thank you for listening!