WilleyFinalResearchProject-2

Phonological Awareness and Self-Assessment of English Pronunciation
and Its Effects on South Korean EFL Middle School Students
By
Brian Joseph Willey
An Action Research Project
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment
Of the Requirements for the Degree of
Master of Technology
MidAmerica Nazarene University
June 2007
Approved:
____________________________________
Project Advisor
____________________________________
Director of Graduate Advisor

Phonological Awareness and Self-Assessment 2

Table of Contents
Rationale …………………………………………………………………….….. 5
Literature Review ……………………………………………………………… 12
Introduction …………………………………………………….………. 12
Importance of English ………………………………………….…….. 13
Problems Learning English …………………………………………. 16
Assessments and Tools ……………………………………………… 23
Proposed Self-Assessment Technique ……………………………. 25
Conclusion ……………………………………………………………… 27
Methods and Timeframe ……………………………………………………... 28
Description of the Method and Intervention ……………………… 28
Reason for the Intervention …………………………………….……. 31
Timeframe for Intervention ……………………………………….….. 32
Persons Involved and Manner of their Involvement ………..…… 33
Resources Used and How They Were Acquired ……………….… 34
Triangulation Matrix …………………………………………….…….. 36
Results ………………………………………………………………….............. 37
Introduction …………………………………………………………….. 37
Results …………………………………………………………………... 38
Conclusion...…………………………………………………………….. 43
Recommendation………………………………………………………………. 45
Introduction……………………………………………………………… 45

Recommendation………………………………………………………. 46
Timeframe………………………………………………………………... 47
Resources……………………………………………………………….. 48
Conclusion………………………………………………………………. 49
References …………………………………………………………….………… 50
Appendices ……………………………………………………………………... 52

Rationale
Pronunciation has been a foundational step in learning to speak any language.
Clear and understandable pronunciation takes time and effort to learn. Learning English
as a Foreign Language (EFL) offers its own pronunciation challenges. Other language
groups may have similar phoneme sounds but not exactly the same as the English
language. Teaching students to pronounce certain English distinctions that are different
than the students’ native language has been vital for their learning to communicate
clearly. This clear communication leads to becoming fluent.
As English has predominately been the world language, fluency in English has
allowed students to communicate and clearly be understood by those they talk to around
the world. EFL teachers needed to determine how best to help their students learn
pronunciation of English. South Korean learners of English have had several challenges
that must be overcome: pronunciation and phonological awareness.
The Korean language is called Hangul, it is made up of 24 basic phonetic sounds
and other combinations there of. Several Hangul sounds are very similar but not the same
as English sounds and Koreans have a hard time pronouncing those distinctions. Hangul
has sounds that are combination of two English sounds put together. For example, the
rieul “ㄹ” sounds like /R/ and /L/ put together. This has caused many miscommunications
and misinterpretations of the English language.
Koreans have been able to interchange /R/ or /L/ when spelling or pronouncing
English words. For example the word “lot” can sound or has been spelled like “rot.”
Some other trouble spots have been the English /P/and /B/, /CH/ and /J/, and /T/ and /D/
sounds that have not been easily separable in Hangul. EFL teachers have needed to help

students learn how to distinguish these phonemes in English so that they could learn to
speak understandably.
Another factor has been the lack of phonological awareness. This problem has
stemmed from the absence of or quality of access to native English speakers. Students
have needed to hear native speakers to increase their phonological awareness as it has
been essential to acquiring English as a Foreign Language. Listening to native English
has helped accustom students to phonetic distinctions unlike texts or native Korean
English teachers that try to describe how English should be spoken. Subtleties of English
have generally been learned from quality input and having frequent interactions with
native speakers. After gaining awareness of English phonemes, students should be able to
mimic their teacher’s speech in order to train their tongue how to correctly pronounce the
words and sounds. Through assessments, teachers could then help correct EFL student’s
speech where errors have been found and prescribe interventions to meet their needs.
(Figure 1)
Figure 1. Issues surrounding Korean Pronunciation of English.

Many South Korean EFL students have not been confident in their ability to speak
or communicate in English. They have felt ashamed or embarrassed when trying to speak.
At times this has also leads to peers making fun of each other’s attempts, further
hindering their desire to try speaking. Many students have thought they could not speak
English well. With practice, assessment, and good native English speaker input their
confidence level could increase.
This study revolved around the concepts of increased native English speaker input
and self-assessment. EFL teachers have been able to identify errors in pronunciation and
have needed to prescribe targeted interventions that would make the students aware of
what corrections were needed. The basic idea has been to 1) increase phonological
awareness via increased native speaker input; and 2) increase listening to one’s recorded
voice to provide cues for self-assessment which in turn could lead to correction in
pronunciation. Hearing a native speaker has been crucial. Mimicking a native speaker
was the next step. The question was: would listening to one’s mimicked speech after the
native speaker’s voice give guidance to speak more clearly?
This self-evaluation idea came from a work related experience of the researcher.
In a public speaking job, the researcher was required to evaluate his own speech from a
recording. Listening for errors in his speech gave a clearer understanding of what was
incorrect. Through focused effort on adjusting targeted speech patterns, his pronunciation
became clearer. This was corroborated by assessments and by other listeners
understanding his speech, without asking him to repeat himself. Confidence and clearer
speech was achieved through this self-evaluation. If this technique could help a native
speaker speak more clearly, it may also help EFL students.

Specifically, South Korean EFL students have needed to learn to speak English
more clearly. This study used four commonly misspoken words, correctly spoken by a
native English speaker. The student’s then repeated words and were recorded and
assessed for clarity. Group 1 was the control group. They were asked to listen to each
word once and pronounce it three times in a row. Group 2 was asked to repeat the word
once each time after hearing the native English speaker’s voice. To increase phonological
awareness the same word was said and repeated three times in a row. Group 3 repeated
the word after the native speaker, as in Group 2, but then heard an immediate replay of
their voice. Each word was said three times (Chart 1, Figure 2). The groups’ voices were
recorded for three weeks. The first and third recordings were compared against each other.
Then the groups were compared against each other.
Chart 1. Desired pattern from each group.
Group 1 Group 2 Group 3
Native Speaker: rot
Student: rot, rot, rot
Native Speaker: rot
Student: rot
Native Speaker: rot
Student: rot
Native Speaker: rot
Student: rot
Native Speaker: rot
Student: rot
Replay: rot
Native Speaker: rot
Student: rot
Replay: rot
Native Speaker: rot
Student: rot
Replay: rot

Figure 2. Cycle of immediate audio feedback Group 3 used.
Two questions were proposed. 1) Does an increase in phonological input increase
clarity of pronunciation of the /R/ and /L/ phoneme difference for South Korean EFL
middle school girls? 2) Does an increase in phonological input combined with self-
assessment through the use of immediate personal audio feedback increase clarity of
pronunciation of the /R/ and /L/ phoneme difference for South Korean EFL middle
school girls?
Education has been very important in South Korean society. Most students have
gone to after school programs to increase their academics or for extra curricular activities.
After school English lesson have been highly sought after and South Koreans are known
for spending more money on those extra English lessons than other countries.. It has been
noted that for the money spent, the results are extremely low.

The students in this study were South Korean middle school students from an all-
girl school. The population of the school was approximately 1000 students all of which
were Korean. The school employed 46 teachers and class sizes were around 36 students.
Three main goals of the school were:
1. Our main focus is on student’s learning.
2. All students will learn and practice proper etiquette.
3. Our school will average the highest standardized test scores in the city.
The study used a sample of South Korean third-year middle school students of
varying levels of English competency. Their ages were 14 to 15 years. According to law,
each school was required to have at least one teacher who was a native English speaker.
All schools teach English grammar, reading and writing, which has been taught by a
native Korean teacher. Schools have been implementing conversation classes taught by
native English speakers.
The study was done with one conversation class that met once a week. The goals
for the English conversation class were:
1. Increase listening skills of students
2. Increase speaking / conversation skills of students
3. Develop more natural English accent
4. Decrease xenophobia through interaction with a Native-English speaker
5. Learn more about the culture of Native-English speaking countries
This study was to help with the first three goals of the school. The students had to listen
to a native speaker and practice speaking as in goals one and two. Goal three was where
the students were to hopefully see the most improvement. Through access to a native

English speaker coupled with self-assessment, students were to develop more natural
English accent. This was meant to boost confidence and to foster a desire to become
fluent in English.
National standards called for all high school students to have the ability to pass
one of two standards test: 1. Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL) or 2.Test of
English for International Communication (TOEIC). These tests have been required for
admittance to colleges and universities in U.S., Canada and other countries.
It was the hope of this study to find a useful technique that could target a common
pronunciation error and help South Korean’s acquisition of English. South Koreans desire
to speak English and they have pushed themselves to learn. The results they expected to
achieve have not been in line with what they paid for their education. Having access to
native English speakers has been vital to their success. Practice has been needed to build
confidence, fluency and a more natural English accent. Through targeted phonological
awareness and self-assessment, teachers and students could work to correct problem areas
which could help in achieving school and national standards.

Literature Review
Introduction
Have you ever heard jokes about “flied lice”? They were referring to a lack of
clear pronunciation of the English /R/ and /L/ sounds. When these phonemes (the
smallest phonetic sound that distinguish one letter from another) have not been distinctly
spoken, communication and understanding has been hindered. This particular error has
also signified a speaker as being from a native Asian language group, Chinese, Korean or
Japanese. Students in South Korea have needed help listening and speaking in English to
become fluent. It was the assumption of this study that with focused intervention and
access to native English speaking EFL teachers, more understandable speech could be
achieved.
This literature review looked at the importance of English as it pertains to South
Korea. Next it focused on some problems that prevent higher levels of English fluency.
Then it looked at current tools and assessment techniques that were available. Finally, the
project sought to provide a technique that was to meet the needs presented. The purpose
of this study was to look at a method that would help pronunciation of South Korean
learners of English. The focus was limited to one phonetic distinction between /R/ and /L/
in the English language, the Hangul letter rieul “ㄹ.”

Importance of learning English
According to a study done by Webber (2006), of the Top 10 languages in the
world, English has been the most influential. English, not just one nationality’s English,
has become the most influential language in the world. Webber was quick to point out
that importance of a language was not the issue, but rather the influence of the language.
Each language has importance for it users that cannot be measured against another
language’s importance. But factors come into play that has caused one language to have
greater influence in the world than others. Languages can expand or recede in world
influence. “Expansionism is what others do to you that you cannot do to them but would
if you could (Webber, 2006).”
His study sought to rank the influence of the Top 10 languages of the world. The
scale used to rank a language’s influence considered several factors: “Number of primary
speakers, Number of secondary speakers, Economic power of countries using the
language, Number of major areas of human activity in which the language is important,
Number and population of countries using the language, and Socio-literary prestige of the
language (Webber, 2006).” Based upon a weighted points scale, the most influential
language was by far English, with French coming in a distant second. Granted exact
numbers in these categories cannot be ascertained, but the margins in each language
group were consistent with each other and time had little effect on the variations of these
margins.
Many countries communicate with the world in English, included South Korea.
English has become the language of business, education and progress at the present time
and shows no sign of slowing.

A Korean manufacturer in an Athens hotel meeting the Brazilian buyer of
a Swiss-based conglomerate will not only negotiate but order dinner from his
room service in English. There may not be a single native English speaker in
the hotel, but all non-locals staying there communicate with each other in
English - as a matter of course. From, a certain level upwards, in business,
sport, politics, and many other fields, a knowledge of English has become not
a matter of prestige but of necessity.
(Webber, 2006)
Communications in English has needed to be clear in order to be understood. All
involved have needed to be able to clearly pronounce English so that communication
would be possible.
Webber (2006) showed that English has been the most influential language of
recent times and has shown no signs of slowing. Many countries prefer to do business in
English and in reality it has become necessary to do so. That led to the next thought,
South Korea has been desirous to use English to communicate in the world markets.
Brender (2005) wrote an article highlighting South Korea’s interest in world
English. South Korean universities have heavily incorporated English into their
educational practices, from using English on campus to promoting studying abroad in
English. Korea University has wanted to have at least two thirds of it classes taught in
English by the year 2010. That was up from it currently offered 30%. Almost all new
faculty members have been required to be capable of teaching in English. Korea
University also has used 20% of its total budget for scholarships and housing for student
learning abroad.
Studying abroad was viewed as important and Brender (2005) also noted several
observations about South Korea. One Korean university has sent an entire junior class of
800 students abroad. In an effort to learn world English and retain Korean culture, Seoul
National University has sent students to China to avoid Americanization. This has been

possible because English was a world language. By sending South Korean students to
China, the two Asian cultures had to heavily communicate through English. Also South
Korean universities have had a high percentage of professors who earned degrees abroad,
one as much as 80%.
The South Korean government has strongly focused on using technology in the
classroom as well as bringing foreign students to study in Korea. This was shown in
special funding to universities who integrate computers and the internet into all areas of
learning including online classes (Lassche, 2000). The government has also passed a law
to have at least one native English speaker in each school. Schools have been working to
comply. Enticing foreign students to come to study at South Korean universities has been
another way they have brought English into the country. The Korean government has
sponsored 10 recruitment fairs around the world in 2005. As of 2006, approximately
17,000 foreign students were studying in Korea and the government wanted that to
increase to 50,000 by 2010 (Brender, 2005).
South Korea has greatly desired and has increased its efforts to integrate English
in its universities and by sending students abroad. Many options have been made
available for learning English while retaining culture. There have been many indicative
plans that have shown South Korea’s commitment to English learning. One university
has 20% of their school’s budget dedicated to learning abroad. The government has
sought to almost triple the number of foreign students coming into South Korea. Much
technological advancement towards online classes has been put in place. The intention
has been clear, English was important.

Problems Learning English
The South Korean government and universities seem to have high expectations
and plans to incorporate English, yet the school system leading up to college has not fully
prepared students for the challenge. A problem has arisen when one looks at the disparity
between the efforts put forth and the results achieved. English tutoring has also been
sought outside of regular schooling, yet these efforts have not helped as much as desired.
In a conference address to Korean Teachers of English to Speaker Other Language
(KOTESOL), Park said “Korea is ranked the first to spend money for private English
lessons, but Korea is ranked 109th
among 153 countries in TOEFL results.
Communicative ability of Koreans is also internationally known to be very weak (Tarbet
and Won, 2006).”
Park (Tarbet and Won, 2006) said that only studying English (learning grammar
and sentence structures) will not promote fluency. This suggested that students had not
been given the necessary preparations for fluency or for entrance to coveted universities.
English fluency has needed to be “acquired” through consistent and high quality input
and appropriate content. Though Park focused on using movies as means to fluency, his
main idea has been to meet needs where they existed. Given how Korea has been ranked
in his study, there has been a great need to focus on the basics.
TOEFL or TOEIC tests have been required for some places of higher education
and for studying abroad at many English speaking universities. As Park (Tarbet and Won,
2006) shows the results have not been inline with the expenses paid. These tests were
meant to be all inclusive and to show English proficiency in reading, writing, listening,
and speaking. Yet, discrepancies have been seen in that listening is not fully tested and

even less is speaking. High scores in these tests have been obtained through reading and
comprehension. Even higher scoring students may have none or very limited ability to
listen or speak well (Kim and Margolis, 2000). This suggested that preparation in earlier
levels needed to be looked at.
Kim and Margolis (2000) studied how much exposure to English listening and
speaking Korean students have had before entering university. The results were
surprising. They found as of 2000 that South Koreans have three years of English in
middle-school and three years in high-school, totaling six years. Outside of school,
student could have had exposure to native English speakers or English speaking Korean’s
in after school programs. In their study, they took a survey that revealed that on average
the students had around 210 lifetime hours of English listening and speaking. When they
separated these hours into each category, one on one conversation with an English
speaker was shown to be between 3- 5 hours. If that time was divided up over the six
years of English learning, it would equal less than 1 hour per year speaking and listening
with an English speaker. Park (Tarbet and Won, 2006) noted that South Korean’s English
speaking ability has been considered low around the world.
So what has helped learners of English to become fluent? Black (2005) looked at
the needs of English as Second Language (ESL) students in America and said that
“easing ESL student into learning English well” required helping with foundation steps.
“All-age English learners benefit from the same kind of beginning reading instruction
that works for English-speaking children, but they need more of it and need immediate
intervention to correct pronunciation and other errors (Black, 2005)” (emphasis added).
Pronunciation has been shown to be a foundational step in learning language. English

learners who correctly pronounced phonetic sounds were more likely to create a strong
foundation. An immediate area for intervention for South Korean EFL students has been
the clear distinction of /R/ and /L/ pronunciation.
Black (2005) focused on ESL students living in America and said learning
English well was dependent upon student’s backgrounds and other factors which effected
the amount of time to reach grade level fluency from between two to five years. She
suggested that students who were encouraged to use their native language to help them
learn English would greatly increase their ability to become fluent rather than by
complete immersion. Kim and Margolis (2000) have shown that there needs to be greater
exposure to listening and speaking English in South Korea and reminds readers about the
average amount of time it takes children to learn their native language was around 3 years.
This research suggests that this fluency period will take a much longer time in a non-
native English speaking country such as South Korea. As such the need for early
correction of common errors as well as the need for more quality native English input
was evident.
One suggestion by Black (2005) was that foundational errors if caught early, will
help ease ESL student into learning English well. The application of these practices was
more likely to take a longer time in South Korea with EFL students. Kim and Margolis
(2000) suggested that for EFL students much more listening would be needed to develop
phoneme distinctions in order to be able to understand English in context of listening and
speaking. It was the assumption that if foundational issues such as phoneme distinction
and pronunciation could be corrected, the overall effort of South Korean’s learning
English would be boosted.

One area that has needed encouragement was South Korean’s confidence in
learning and speaking English. Asian language groups seemed to have lacked confidence
in their English abilities. In a study of Chinese ESL student in America, Huang (2006)
has shown that listening and speaking were the two factors that students rated as their
lowest ability. Reading and writing were higher. The students studied all received high
TOEFL scores; yet felt that they could only understand up to 70 % of lecture material at
their English university. This supports Kim and Margolis (2000) finding with South
Korean students.
Lack of confidence in listening and speaking has been common for South Korean
students. In personal conversations with South Koreans, the researcher often hears “I do
not speak English well.” In a letter to the Korea Herald, Symonds (2006) wrote that the
problem stems from an inconsistency in the lower levels of the South Korean educational
system. Namely that testing for oral proficiency was not done before reaching college
level. Testing was limited mostly to reading. This meant that students were expected to
learn something that the school system has not deemed necessary to test. Once these
students reach college level they have been thrust into environments that heavily rely on
their weakest areas. South Korean’s have studied English for many years, but with little
speaking assessment or practice, their abilities have been limited. Kim and Margolis
(2000) suggested that with so much studying of English and the lack of ability to oral
communicate has contributed to this overall lack of confidence in their English abilities
which has also diminish their motivation.
Creating a non-threatening learning environment has importance for helping
students with Second Language Acquisition (SLA). Finch (2001) looked at a myriad of

studies that talked about what created the best possible learning environment. The most
important factor was warm interactions with the teacher. The actual meeting place was
secondary. By mutual understanding and respect, mixed with good humor, teachers could
create a warm and inviting atmosphere.
Confidence has been important when learning a second language. Many stressors
have already been on the minds of SLA students, such as mastering different phonetic
sounds (Black, 2005), cultural differences (Brender, 2005), and not understanding the
meaning of other’s speech (Huang, 2006). ESL teachers have helped allay these fears by
listening to students, providing encouragement, giving guidance and correction, and by
making learning a meaningful process to the students (Finch, 2001). A silent period was
necessary while language learners become accustomed to the sounds of the new language
(Kim and Margolis, 2000). Being aware of this has been important for EFL teachers to
remember.
In America, one source of EFL and ESL teachers, schools have acquired a great
influx of foreign students. ESL has been becoming more prevalent in special needs
programs and at times has been mixed with learning disabilities (LD). Differentiation of
ESL needs from LD needs was hard to do because many issues are overlapping.
Case and Taylor (2005) looked at the shared symptoms of these two groups. One
symptom was pronunciation. “ESL students may struggle for many years with
pronouncing certain features of the English language with out developing a clear pattern
of pronunciation. Pronunciation difficulties mark the speaker as a non-native and are
identifiable to the ear of the teacher who is a native speaker” (Case and Taylor, 2005).
Sometimes this has been avoided if the ESL students have not gone through puberty yet.

Post puberty students have generally strived for intelligible pronunciation while retaining
some of their accent. As there was no “one” English accent this has been acceptable.
In summary, the world has continued to use English as its most influential
language and means of communication. South Korea has made efforts to incorporate
English into their educational systems. This was most evident in their universities plans
and from the government’s direction. Schooling leading up to college has attempted to
integrate more exposure to English, but has lacked in English speech and listening testing.
EFL students have experienced much anxiety while learning English. This has reached a
culmination when faced with university required tests for studying abroad. Lessening
this anxiety, building confidence and meeting the needs of EFL students have been
important to help ensure South Korean’s effective communication with the world.
Case and Taylor (2005) suggested access to native speakers and a slower
enunciation may help focus on pronunciation and differentiation of phonemes. Moore
(2001) noted that being able “to distinguish between phonemes and other simple sounds,”
was “the building blocks of language.” Moore studied sensory training and the use of
computers to help with language learning problems. He defines “‘sensory training’ to
mean the repetitious presentation of sensory tasks, with or with out feedback or
reinforcement.” Moore’s main focus was LD speech problems but his technique may
have benefits for EFL or ESL students. Segers & Verhoeven (2005) reported
“phonological awareness… has been shown to be an important predictor of success in
learning to read.” Phonological awareness is the ability to audibly distinguish between
sounds as well as recognize similar sounds. For EFL students this consistent input has
been very sporadic if there was limited access to native English speakers.

Adaptation of sensory training techniques could be applied to many types of
learning. Children produced more phonological awareness with the intervention than
without (Moore, 2001). Using such training was found to be most effective before
children started learning to read, but was still effective after learning to read with around
5 – 18 hours of application. Weaker results were show in languages other than English.
By targeting problem areas in South Korean EFL students’ pronunciation, this
project sought to make an effective application of sensory training to increase
phonological awareness. This gave direction to the present study and has been discussed
more in proposal section. It was the hypothesis that using a targeted repetitious feedback
to hone phonological awareness of EFL students may help in clearer pronunciation of the
/R/ and /L/ difference.

Assessments and Tools
The South Korean government in its focus on using technology in the classroom
has implemented a technology structure without much thought as to content or specific
applications for language learning (Lassche, 2000). Technology may be a useful
motivator in learning a foreign language (Samuel, 2001), but the current structures have
mainly focused on text driven websites for English comprehension and much less on the
actual communicative abilities of English as a spoken language. These uses of technology
have had mixed results. A focus on students’ needs should be considered (Lassche, 2000).
Other available English tools have tried to focus on students’ needs of listening
and speaking English. One web-based program sought to better incorporate English
speaking and listen. MyET (Lin and Chang, n.d.), or My English Tutor, program has been
available for several languages. The program has a speech assessment portion that
appeared to be very helpful. The students listen to a native English speaker (of their
choice, Boston, London accent…). Then they repeat what was said and the computer
records their response. Then it compared the waveform of their voice against the
prerecorded sample voice as well as allowing the student to listen to their recorded voice.
The program claimed to identify problem areas for the student to work on.
Another product that has been on the market was a tape player with an optional
voice recorder that would allow the student to record their voice and compare it with
what was just played on the tape (LanguageResourceOnline.com, n.d.) These
comparisons of speech products have been confirmation that the direction of the proposed
project had validity.

One other area that needed to be looked at before project was proposed was
assessment of speech. Assessment of pronunciation and speaking has been a part of being
an effective EFL teacher. Nelson (1998) looked at the validity of a teacher’s assessment
of several voice qualities in ESL students. By creating a five point scale, he found that his
abilities were adequate to give a fair assessment and could provide instructions based
upon those assessments that could help students.
Students increase their phonological awareness of the English language by
increasing their listening. This awareness was important for comprehending spoken
English and has been strengthened with comparison and self-assessment. Finch (2003)
found self and peer assessment by Korean students were helpful with English learning
and awareness. Nelson (1998) suggested that self-assessment helped the student with
awareness of their speech issues. With the help of an instructor, students needed to
develop self-assessment into a useful tool which would provide for better self direction in
learning.

Proposed Self-Assessment Technique
English has been important to South Korea in order to communicate with the
world markets. The government and schools have been incorporating English education
into their plans. Yet currently results have not been where they should be. Lack of access
to native English speakers and little listening or speaking opportunities has created
students who can read and write, but have little oral communication skills. This has been
changing and with access to technology and more native speakers the situation will
continue to change. Teacher and student self-assessments were needed to target specific
speech problems which would help to fix foundational pronunciation errors. With
understandable pronunciation and practice listening to and speaking with native English
speakers it was highly likely that more South Koreans will become fluent in English.
More and more access to native English speakers has become available.
Technology has already been a part of the Korean school system yet new techniques and
technologies have been needed to help with teaching EFL. MyET (Lin and Chang, n.d.)
and the Language repeater (LanguageResourceOnline.com, n.d.) were some current
technologies that have been made available. These both gave the student the ability to
record their voice and review it against a native speaker’s voice. This provided direction
for self-assessment. The logic was that with self-assessment student’s pronunciation
might improve.
The proposed project wanted to find a way for teachers to give guidance as well
as providing student self-assessment in a focused way. Teachers have identified such
speech pronunciation errors as the combination of English phonemes /R/ and /L/. With

this self-evaluation technique they would have a way to target a specific problem which
might help improve the student’s pronunciation.
EFL student’s pronunciation has been important. It was foundational to SLA
(Black, 2005). Okanagan College (n.d.) has some helpful curriculum that focuses on the
/R/ and /L/ issue for ESL students (Appendix A). Using some minimal pairs (rot, lot) and
words with both /R/ and /L/ phonemes (really, leery), student would be able to hear their
speech right after pronouncing. Self-assessment has been shown to be a valuable tool
(Finch, 2001, 2003).
What set this project apart from other available tools or software was that it
combined increased native English input with immediate audio feedback in a progressive
manner. MyET and the Language repeater allowed for one recording of the students’
voice to be replayed as the student wished. However, the proposed project had a native
speaker say a word, and then had the student repeat the word. Then the student heard an
immediate replay of their voice. This same sample word, speaker’s duplication and
immediate feedback happened three times per word. The assumption was that with each
progression the student would gain phonological awareness of correct speech along with
self-assessment of their pronunciation. The hope was to see if this led to more
understandable speech.
Three tests were recorded. The first and last recordings were reviewed. These two
samples were then assessed by a panel of native English speaking ESL/EFL teachers. A 5
point assessment scale that Nelson created was modified and used to grade students
(Nelson, 1998).

Conclusion
It was the assumption that with a proper focuses on student’s needs that English
pronunciation in South Korea could become more understandable. Pronunciation has
been foundational in learning any language. South Korean EFL students could benefit
from a technique that would allow them to gain English phonological awareness which
could help them learn to speak those differences distinctly. Through teacher guidance
and self-assessment, pronunciation errors could be overcome. EFL students needed
encouragement and practice to become fluent. The government and schools have been
busily implementing English and technology into the classroom. Those efforts seemed to
have fall short of producing the desired results. English has been the most influential
world language and South Koreans have needed to take the time to learn what will best
meet their English learning needs.

Method and Timeframe for Implementation
Description of the Method and Intervention
The project looked at the effects of an increase phonological awareness and self-
assessment methods using immediate audio feedback of the student’s voice. The students
were from Cheonan West Girls’ Middle School. This project took place during the spring
2007 semester. Class size was around 36 students with normal abilities that met for 50
minutes once a week. A sample of nine students was used.
This study underwent a pilot project in fall 2006. The final study was conducted
over a four week period, beginning March 12, 2007. The pilot helped to clarify some
parameters for the project. Due to the nature of the class and the time available to the
students, the project needed to be smaller than initially planned. Initially the study was to
cover the whole class of 36 students. Given the class time was 50 minutes once a week,
this was found logistically impossible. The sample was then limited to 9 students from
the class.
Two initial surveys were given to find out student’s perceived English ability and
also about how much lifetime exposure to English the students have had (Appendices B
and C). The sample was divided into three test groups. Group 1 was the control group.
Group 2 was exposed to increased native speaker input. Group 3 was exposed to the
audio feedback intervention three times per word. The audio samples were four words; a
set of minimal pairs (rot and lot) and two words with both /R/ and /L/ sounds (really and
leery).
Finch’s (2001) “My English Ability” survey was already translated into Korean
and the students provided usable data. However the Kim and Margolis (2000)

“Background Questionnaire” was not translated into Korean. During the pilot project the
whole class took the survey with the Korean teacher translating the questions in class.
The pilot project did not have any problems with this survey, but during the final project
only the students who participated in the study took the survey. The Korean teacher did
translate, but the results were found incomplete and many of the questions were left blank.
The only usable data was from the student’s motivation to learn English.
Three groups were observed. Week 1 students completed surveys about their
perceived English ability and their English background. Week’s 2-4 students were
recorded. The students were individually taken out of class to complete their recordings.
The control group, Group1, was exposed to the words and asked to repeat each word
three times consecutively. Group 2 experienced increased exposure to native speaker by
hearing each of the four words, three times a piece. Then they repeated the word each
time the native speaker said the word. The third group, Group 3, followed the same
procedure as two, but was additionally exposed to an immediate replay of their own voice
for self-evaluation after each pronunciation (Reference Chart 1).
Each week consisted of a 2-3 minute recording session with each student. Each
session was recorded, labeled with the student’s identification and date, and then stored
on a computer (Appendix D). Each word was recorded three times per session per student.
The word that was graded by the reviewers was the third word in the sequence e.g. 1.rot
2.rot 3.rot. This was to capture the most practiced pronunciation from each recording.
Translational issues arose during the pilot project. The PowerPoint instructions
for the recording sessions were in English and Korean, but the Korean translation did not
give accurate explanation and the student’s recordings were flawed because of that

inaccuracy. The translation was corrected for the final project and the students followed
the recording instructions as desired.
The testing was done over three weeks. The review of data and interpretation was
over another eight week period. The first session and third recording sessions were
randomly mixed for assessment and reviewed by four native English speakers. This was
to provided as accurate of a review as possible and eliminate inaccuracies of any one
reviewer. Nelson (2000) said two reviews of the same test provided a more accurate
picture. Reviewers listened to the recorded samples and graded them on a modified
Nelson five point scale. See Chart 2 for the Nelson’s scale adjusted for pronunciation of
words in this study (Appendix E). Figure 3 shows the letter grade for each score. Reviews
and survey data was put into Excel. The results were then reassembled to see if there was
any effect from using the interventions.
Rot
5 = Clear R/L distinction. Word was understood. Rot sounds like Rot.
4 = R can be heard, word was understood as Rot.
3 = R sound is stronger but was blending with L.
2 = Hard to distinguish, vaguely sounded like Rot.
1 = No R/L distinction. Rot not understood as Rot.
Really
5 = Clear R/L distinction. Word was understood. Really sounds like Really.
4 = R can be heard, word was understood as Really.
2 = Hard to distinguish, vaguely sounded like Really.
1 = No R/L distinction. Really not understood as Really.
Lot
5 = Clear R/L distinction. Word was understood. Lot sounds like Lot.
4 = L can be heard, word was understood as Lot.
3 = L sound is stronger but was blending with R.
2 = Hard to distinguish, vaguely sounded like Lot.
1 = No R/L distinction. Lot not understood as Lot
Leery
5 = Clear R/L distinction. Word was understood. Leery sounds like Leery.
4 = L can be heard, word was understood as Leery.

2 = Hard to distinguish, vaguely sounded like Leery.
1 = No R/L distinction. Leery not understood as Leery.
Chart 2. Nelson’s scale adapted to pronunciation of words.
Nelson Grading Scale
0
1
2
3
4
5
A B C D F
Letter Grade
PointValue
Figure 3. Grading scale based on Nelson (2001) that reviewers used to assess audio.
The first and third recording scores were then compared. Group 2 results were
compared with the control group to answer question 1. Group 3 results were compared
with the control group to answer question 2.
Reason for the intervention
The reason for this method of intervention was (1) to increase phonological
awareness of the English sounds /R/ and /L/ as in Groups 2 and 3 and (2) also to
determine if with the use of immediate audio feedback the student’s would self-assess
and more clearly pronounce the phoneme difference as in Group 3. Several assumptions
supported this project: a) EFL students who have been exposed to native English
speaker’s voice could gain more clarity of speech than those who were not exposed; b) by
targeting specific errors like the /R/ and /L/ phoneme differences, student’s pronunciation
could be strengthened; c) guided self-assessment could best help students to correct these
errors.

Timeframe for Intervention
Pilot Project
Fall 2006
Revised Project
Spring 2007
Phase1:
The Preparation Phase Action Plan
Week 1
March 12, 2007
a.) Took roll call
b.) Distributed Initial Survey
c.) Collected Survey
d.) Randomly divided class into 3
groups
e.) Assigned identification numbers to
group members
f.) Setup database
Phase 2:
The Implementation Phase Action Plan
Week 2
March 19, 2007
a.) First recording
b.) Coded recordings
Week 3
March 26, 2007
a.) Second recording
Week 4
April 2, 2007
a.) Third recording
Phase 3:
The Follow-Up Phase Action Plan
Week 5 (outside class)
April 9, 2007
a.) Randomized Recordings
b.) Created PowerPoint for review
Week 6
April 14, 2007
a.) 2 Panelists assessed recordings
Week 7
April 25, 2007
a.) 2 Panelists assessed recordings
Weeks 8
April 31, 2007
a.) Reassembled data for review

Week 9
May 7, 2007
a.) Reviewed data
Week 10
May 14, 2007
a.) Reviewed data
Week 11
May 21, 2001
a.) Begin report
Week 12
May 28, 2007
a.) Finalized report
b.) Presented findings
Chart 2. Timeframe of research project.
Persons Involved and Manner of their Involvement
The persons involved were students from Cheonan West Girls’ Middle School.,
the researcher, the panel of reviewers and the classroom teacher. The students
participated in the study as the subjects. The researcher facilitated the study, conducted
the recordings, assembled and reviewed the data, and finally presented the findings. The
native-English speaker panel of reviewers consisted of the researcher, the middle school
conversational English teacher and two other university conversational English
professors. These reviewers listened and evaluated the recordings. They used a modified
scale based upon Nelson’s (1998) assessment scale. The panel was needed to ensure a
quality review and to limit the errors of any one individual. Finally the teacher introduced
the researcher and recorded the initial sample audio words that the students listened to
prior to their voice recordings.

Resources Used and How They Were Acquired
The researcher used a few readily available tools for this study. The equipment
and software are listed below (Chart 3).
Equipment used Software used
⇒ One laptop computer
⇒ One Headset with
Microphone
⇒ Audacity
⇒ The Babbleback Machine
⇒ MS Office: PowerPoint,
Word, Excel
Chart 3. Resources used in study
Equipment
The laptop computer was owned by the researcher. Any computer with
microphone input, speaker output, and running Windows operation system should be
capable of doing this study. The laptop was used by the researcher for all voice
recordings, listening and replaying the audible feedback.
One headset and microphone designed for online chatting was used. This was
what the student used to listen to the audio sample, speak their reply, and listen to their
voice replay (Figure 4). A mid range set was used. The headset used was purchased at a
retail store. The price was around $15.00.
Figure 4. Setup of laptop hardware and software during student recordings.
Laptop Setup Sample audio is played
(PowerPoint)
Student’s voice replayed
(Babbleback)
Sample and Student’s voice
is recorded (Audacity)

Software
Audacity: http://audacity.sourceforge.net/
This study involved recording students’ voices for analysis. Audacity was a free
open source program that has capability of recording and editing audio. This program
captured the teacher’s initial sample audio and the student voices for review.
The Babbleback Machine: http://babbleback.sourceforge.net/wiki/
The audible feedback was provided by The Babbleback Machine. It was a free
open source program. This program provided instant replay or audible feedback of the
student’s response to the audio sample.
Microsoft Office
PowerPoint was used to provide the audio samples for the students and for the
reviewers. The audio samples were embedded into PowerPoint along with the words
visually displayed. The slide show was set to automatically advance and students
followed the PowerPoint to complete their assignments. Excel was used to keep track of
data.

Triangulation Matrix
Research Question Data Source #1 Data Source #2 Data Source #3
1) Does an increase
in phonological
input increase
clarity of
pronunciation of
the /R/ and /L/
phoneme difference
for South Korean
EFL middle school
girls?
Student Recording
Group 2
Recording session 1
Each third word
Student Recording
Group 2
Recording session 3
Each third word
Student Recording
Group 1
Control group data
2) Does an increase
in phonological
input combined
with self-
assessment through
the use of
immediate personal
audio feedback
increase clarity of
pronunciation of
the /R/ and /L/
phoneme difference
for South Korean
EFL middle school
girls?
Student Recording
Group 3
Recording session 1
Each third word
Student Recording
Group 3
Recording session 3
Each third word
Student Recording
Group 1
Control group data
Chart 4. Triangulation matrix for phonological and immediate feedback data.

Results
Introduction
South Korean EFL students must learn to distinguish and pronounce
English phonemes that are combined in Hangul. The focus of this study was on the rieul
“ㄹ” which has both /R/ and /L/ sounds. When these sounds are not distinctly separated
they can cause miscommunications and misinterpretations between English language
users. Because of such issues the perceptions of Korean English ability are low despite
the efforts and high prices paid for English education.
This study looked at two questions. 1) Does an increase in phonological input
increase clarity of pronunciation of the /R/ and /L/ phoneme difference for South Korean
EFL middle school girls? 2) Does an increase in phonological input combined with self-
assessment through the use of immediate personal audio feedback increase clarity of
pronunciation of the /R/ and /L/ phoneme difference for South Korean EFL middle
school girls?
In this study, the students were exposed to increased native English speaker input
focused on the problem area of pronouncing the /R/ and /L/ difference. The students were
exposed to four words (rot, lot, really and leery) that are typically hard to pronounce.
Then they were scored on a five point scale.

Results
Surveys
The student’s overall motivation to learn English was So-So to Very High based
upon the Kim and Margolis (2001) “Background Questionnaire.” 6 students said their
motivation was So-So, 2 said High and 1 said Very High.
Finch’s (2001) “My English Ability” survey showed a wide spectrum on
perceived English ability. On a 100 point scale, 100 being fluent and 0 being no English
ability, the average rating was 48. The high was 71 and the low was 25. The average
scores per word of the students show quite a broad spectrum as seen in Figure 5. The data
seemed jumbled and did not give a good reflection of overall pronunciation ability.
Student's Average Scores
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
01 02 03 05 06 07 08 09 10
Student ID
Scores
Lot Rot Really Leery
Figure 5. Average score for each word per student.
An interesting picture emerged with a composite average of the scores for all four
words. The composite average more accurately shows the overall pronunciation skills of
the student’s naturalness of English pronunciation (Figure 6).

Composite Average Score
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
01 02 03 05 06 07 08 09 10
Student ID
Scores
Figure 6. Composite average scores for all four words per student.
As pronunciation has been foundational to becoming fluent in English, the
researcher compared the student’s perceived ability against their composite average
pronunciation scores to see if there were any similarities. The composite average score
was adjusted from a 5 point scale to 100 point scale and then overlaid with the results
from the student’s perceived English ability survey. It was interesting to note the
similarities.
Figure 7 shows that a majority of student’s scores were higher than their
perception of their English ability. Two students, 02 and 09, both from Group 2 were
fairly accurate with their assessment of their abilities as they line up with their average
pronunciation scores. One student, 10, perceived her ability was higher than her scores
showed. Six students perceived their ability significantly lower than the scores indicated.
Other unknown factors may be at work that could account for these results.

Comparison of Scores to Perceived Ability
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
01 02 03 05 06 07 08 09 10
Student ID
100pointscale
Perceived Ability Average Score on 100 Point Scale
Figure 7. Comparison of average scores to perceived English ability.
Group 1 Pronunciation Scores
Group 1, the control group, showed slight increases in the scores: +5% for both
lot and rot, and +8% for really. The word leery showed a decrease by -8% in score and
dropped a letter grade (Figure 8). The data seems to show that with practice, slight
improvements were seen in three of the words. Although their changes are not very
significant, they do show an overall progression.
Group 1 average scores for each word
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
Words
Scoreon5pointscale
1st Score 2nd Score
Figure 8. Group 2 average change in scores for each word.

Group 2 showed much higher increases in score than did Group 1: +22% for lot,
+15% for really and +10% for leery. It was noted that these increases put the student into
higher letter grades, moving from a C to a B, for each of these words. Contrasting the
score for leery in Group 1 to Group 2 shows a quite significant difference of 18%.
“Rot’s” score remained about the same, only changing by -2% (Figure 9).
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
Words
Scoreon5pointscale
1st Score 2nd Score
Group 3 showed a decrease in score for all words. Lot, rot and really showed
slight decreases of -2%, -3% and -5% respectively. “Leery” seems to be the worst
affected, dropping by -27%, and lost 2 letter grades (Figure 10). This suggests that
immediate audio feedback in the form used may not be helpful for students.

0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
Words
Scoreon5pointscale
1st Score 2nd Score
To summarize, when contrasting the results of Group 2 against the Group 1, there
does seem to be a correlation between native speaker input and student pronunciation test
scores. A look at the average change in scores for each of the groups indicates that
student’s pronunciation improves with a focused increase of native English input as in
Group 2. Yet Group 3 with immediate audio feedback for self-assessment showed a
decrease in pronunciation scores (Figure 11).
Average change in scores
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
lot
rot
really
leery
Words
Scorechange
Group1 Group2 Group3
Figure 11. Average change in scores between groups 1, 2 and 3.

Conclusion
Black (2005) suggested that South Koreans ability to speak English was low.
Granted the survey comparisons were based on average pronunciation scores of a few
words against an overall feeling of English ability, but the correlation seems to support
that South Koreans generally perceive themselves to have lower confidence in their
abilities than they give themselves credit for. This could be hindering their efforts to
become fluent in English. A study needs to be done that would look at the relationship of
overall perceived English ability of South Korean students as it relates to phonological
awareness and increased scores from listening and speaking tests over time.
The student’s scores seem to indicate that increased input by native speakers may
produce significantly higher results with /R/ and /L/ pronunciation than without that input,
as seen in Group 2 results compared to Group 1 results, supporting Moore’s (2001)
assumption. This was encouraging to see as it tends to show a targeted input could help
increase clearer pronunciation of /R/ and /L/ phonemes which would be inline with the
middle school’s standards for English conversation class. These results also support
Black (2005) and Kim and Margolis’ (2000) assumptions. By increasing native speaker
input, more natural pronunciation could be achieved. As of this study, it appears that the
results for research question one have been positively answered. More research needs to
be done in order to see if this pattern would stay consistent with other students and or
other phonemes groups.
Finch (2003) and Nelson (1998) both agree that phonological awareness and self-
assessment was important. However it may be that immediate feedback as used in this
study has not been the best way to increase the student’s awareness of their pronunciation

errors, as seen in Group 3 results compared to Group 1 results. This format of immediate
feedback may have at least confused or at worst hindered progress in /R/ and /L/
pronunciation. As of this study, the results for research question 2 seem to be negative.
Further studies need to be done in order to determine what would be an appropriate form
of feedback and how it could best be used to produce positive results.
To answer the research questions:
1. Yes, an increase in phonological input does seem to increase clarity of
pronunciation of the /R/ and /L/ phoneme difference for South Korean EFL
middle school girls.
2. No, an increase in phonological input combined with self-assessment
through the use of immediate personal audio feedback does not seem to
increase, and may actually hinder, clarity of pronunciation of the /R/ and /L/
phoneme difference for South Korean EFL middle school girls.
This study seems to confirm that by increasing native English speaker’s input
student’s pronunciation scores can increase. The audio feedback in the form used in this
study tends to at best, confuse the students and at worst, hurt the student’s performance.
Further studies need to be done to find out if immediate audio feedback for self-
assessment has value with more specific or additional instructions, or as a longitudinal
study.

Recommendation
Introduction
Learning to speak English well has been important to South Korea. The most
influential language in the world has been English. Education and business success of
South Koreans depends on communication with the world. Fluency in English has been
more and more desired in all areas of Korean life. Many efforts have been put into place,
from government support to public schools initiatives to after school programs. The
efforts put forth have been quite substantial, yet their successes have not matched
expectations.
This study looked at clearer pronunciation for South Korean EFL students by
having them be exposed to increased native speaker input to boost their phonological
awareness of English, as well as, self-assessment of their speech in an effort to support
and facilitate changes that could lead to fluency in English. Pronunciation has been
shown to be foundational in acquiring a language and thus was this study’s focus. The
results seem to indicate that targeted increase in native speaker input did show positive
changes. However the use of immediate audio feedback in the form used was less
favorable.

Recommendation
This study provided direction for further study. Due to the time limit of this study
and the sample size, no recommendations for immediate action can be suggested. Instead,
the researcher proposes an additional study be done to look at the effects of targeted
native speaker input with several additional English phonemes. A 10 week study is
proposed. The first week, surveys will be given, and groups divided. Six weeks of the
same intervention that Group 2 from the previous study had will be given in two forms
phoneme groups. The first and last interventions will be recorded. The final 3 weeks are
for reviews analysis and reporting. The researcher and conversation English teacher
would be involved to continue the research.
This further study would test increased native speaker input with two test groups
and a control group over a period of six weeks. Control Group 1 would hear the words
only once a week. Pronunciation of the /R/ and /L/ differences would be tested with
Group 2. Group 3 would be tested with /P/ and /F/ phonemes. Both Groups 2 and 3 would
experience increased native English input in the same way as the previous study.
Using three computers to capture audio, 10 students for each group could be
accommodated within the class time. Week 2 recordings will be compared with the week
7 recordings. The difference in scores for Group 1 will be compared against Groups 2 and
3 to see the difference in pronunciation scores. Groups 2 and 3 will be compared to see if
there is any difference in scores of the different phonemes.

Timeframe
Pronunciation Project 2
Fall 2007
Phase 1:
The Preparation Phase Action Plan
Week 1
September 3, 2007
a.) Roll Call
b.) Give out modified survey
c.) Randomly divide class into 3
groups
d.) Assign identification numbers to
group members
e.) Setup database
Phase 2:
The Implementation Phase Action Plan
Week 2
September 10, 2007
a.) /R/and /L/; /P/ and /F/
Interventions
b.) First recordings
c.) Code recordings
Week 3
September 17, 2007
Interventions
Week 4
September 24, 2007
Interventions
Week 5
October 1, 2007
Interventions
Week 6
October 8, 2007
Interventions
Week 7
October 15, 2007
Interventions
b.) Second recordings
c.) Code recordings
Phase 3:
The Follow-up Phase Action Plan
Week 7 (outside class)
October 22, 2007
a.) Randomize recordings
b.) Create PowerPoint for review
Week 8
October 29, 2007
a.) 4 Panelists asses the recordings
b.) Data put into Excel

Week 9
November 3, 2007
a.) Review data
b.) Begin report
Week 10
November 10, 2007
a.) Finish report
b.) Present findings
Chart 5. Time table of proposed follow-up study.
Resources
Resources needed for this project are similar to the previous project. The only
difference will be two additional computers to accommodate the entire class into the
study. The school’s computer lab will be scheduled for use. The software used will not
include the feedback software. Recordings will be done on week 2 and week 7 only.
PowerPoint will be used to display the audio and visual intervention.
Software
Audacity: For audio recording and editing http://audacity.sourceforge.net/
Microsoft Office: For presentations, documents and spreadsheets
Equipment
3 computers (school computer lab): For recording and PowerPoint display
3 headsets with microphones: For recording audio and listening to native speaker
voice.

Conclusion
In order to address the English pronunciation difficulties of South Korean EFL
students, more research needs to be done to find effective means that offer correction in
phonological awareness and pronunciation, as well as boost confidence. This is a process
that requires meeting the needs of students and helping to fulfill goals 1, 2, and 3 of the
conversational English class as well as preparation for national standard for college and
university entrance requirements. South Koreans deserve to perform at levels that they
expect and pay for. Research in areas like phonological awareness and pronunciation
clarity will help to facilitate that progress.

References
Brender, A. (2005). To Compete, South Korean Universities Step Up Use of English.
Chronicle of Higher Education 52(17). Retrieved June 10, 2006, from EBSCOhost
database.
Black, S. (2005). Easing ESL Students into Learning English Well. Education Digest
71(1). Retrieved June 7, 2006, from EBSCOhost database.
Case, R., & Taylor, S. (2005). Language Difference or Learning Disability? Clearing
House 78(3). Retrieved June 7, 2006, from EBSCOhost database.
Finch, A. (2001). The Non-threatening Learning Environment. The Korea TESOL
Journal, 4(1). Retrieved June 26, 2006, from
http://www.kotesol.org/publications/journal/2001/korjrl_4_133-158.pdf
Finch, A. (2003). REFLective Instruments for Self-Assessment in Korean ESL
Classrooms. The Korea TESOL Journal, 6(1). Retrieved June 26, 2006, from
http://www.kotesol.org/publications/journal/2003/ktj6_063-86.pdf
Huang, J. (2006). ENGLISH ABILITIES FOR ACADEMIC LISTENING: HOW
CONFIDENT ARE CHINESE STUDENTS? College Student Journal 40(1).
Retrieved June 7, 2006, from EBSCOhost database.
Kim, D.D. I., & Margolis, D. (2000). Korean Student Exposure to English Listening and
Speaking: Instruction, Multimedia, Travel Experience and Motivation. The Korea
TESOL Journal, 3(1). Retrieved June 26, 2006, from
http://www.kotesol.org/publications/journal/2000/kojrl_3_29-54.pdf
LanguageResourceOnline.com (n.d.). MKL-02S Language Repeater. Retrieved October 6,
2006, from http://www.languageresourceonline.com/product.asp?specific=jrlnkqh4
Lassche, G. (2000). Web-based Language Learning in Korea: A pedagogical critique.
The Korea TESOL Journal, 3(1). Retrieved June 26, 2006, from
http://www.kotesol.org/publications/journal/2000/kojrl_3_55-76.pdf
Lin, Y.J., & Chang, C. (n.d.). MyET and English Pedagogy. Retrieved October 6, 2006,
from http://www.llabs.com/EN/myet/MyET%20and%20English-
Teaching%20Pedagogy.doc
Moore, D. (2001). Sensory training and special education – can practice make perfect?
British Journal of Special Education 28(3). Retrieved June 7, 2006, from EBSCOhost
database.

Nelson, P. (1998). Student Pronunciation: A Comparison of Evaluation Techniques. The
Korea TESOL Journal, 1(1). Retrieved June 26, 2006, from
http://www.kotesol.org/publications/journal/1998/nelson.pdf
Okanagan College (n.d.). Unit Three: /l/ & /r/. Retrieved June 29, 2006, from
http://international.ouc.bc.ca/pronunciation/EFLp025unit03.pdf
Samuel C. (2001). Computer-Mediated Communication: A Motivator in the Foreign
Language Classroom. The Korea TESOL Journal, 4(1). Retrieved June 26, 2006,
from http://www.kotesol.org/publications/journal/2001/korjrl_4_119-132.pdf
Segers, E., & Verhoeven, L. (2005). Long-term effects of computer training of
phonological awareness in kindergarten. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning
21(1). Retrieved June 7, 2006, from EBSCOhost database.
Symonds, J. (2006) Changes Needed in School English Exams. The Korea Times.
Retrieved October 6, 2006, from
http://times.hankooki.com/lpage/opinion/200606/kt2006060121035054060.htm
Tarbet, D., & Won, S. (Publicities). (2006). Proceedings from KOTESOL 2006. 2006
Korea TESOL National Conference. Park, K.: 5:00pm Session.
Webber, G. (2006). TOP LANGUAGES: The World’s 10 most influential Languages.
Retrieved October, 11, 2006, from
http://www.andaman.org/BOOK/reprints/weber/rep-weber.htm

Appendix A: Okanagan College Curriculum

Appendix A Continued: Okanagan College Curriculum

Okanagan College (n.d.)

Appendix B: My English Ability Survey

Appendix B Continued: My English Ability Survey
Finch, A. (2001)

Appendix C: Background Questionnaire Survey
Kim and Margolis (2000)

Appendix D: Research Checklist

Appendix E: Evaluation Form for Pronunciation
Evaluation of Audio Samples
Reviewed by: ________________________ Date:
_____________________
Naturalness Scale (Based off of Nelson)
5 = Clear R/L distinction. Word was understood. Rot sounds like Rot.
4 = R can be heard, word was understood as Rot.
2 = Hard to distinguish, vaguely sounded like Rot.
1 = No R/L distinction. Rot not understood as Rot.
Rot (“Excellent”) (“Good”) (“Adequate”) (“Weak”) (“Poor”)
Sample
#
5 4 3 2 1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
Totals

Appendix E Continued: Evaluation Form for Pronunciation
Naturalness Scale
5 = Clear R/L distinction. Word was understood. Really sounds like Really.
4 = R can be heard, word was understood as Really.
2 = Hard to distinguish, vaguely sounded like Really.
1 = No R/L distinction. Really not understood as Really.
Really
5
(“Excellent”)
4 (“Good”)
3
(“Adequate”)
2 (“Weak”) 1 (“Poor”)
Sample # 5 4 3 2 1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
Totals

Naturalness Scale
5 = Clear R/L distinction. Word was understood. Lot sounds like Lot.
4 = L can be heard, word was understood as Lot.
2 = Hard to distinguish, vaguely sounded like Lot.
1 = No R/L distinction. Lot not understood as Lot.
Lot
5
(“Excellent”)
4 (“Good”)
3
(“Adequate”)
2 (“Weak”) 1 (“Poor”)
Sample
#
5 4 3 2 1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
Totals

Naturalness Scale
5 = Clear R/L distinction. Word was understood. Leery sounds like Leery.
4 = L can be heard, word was understood as Leery.
2 = Hard to distinguish, vaguely sounded like Leery.
1 = No R/L distinction. Leery not understood as Leery.
Leery
5
(“Excellent”)
4 (“Good”)
3
(“Adequate”)
2 (“Weak”) 1 (“Poor”)
Sample # 5 4 3 2 1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
Totals

WilleyFinalResearchProject-2

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to WilleyFinalResearchProject-2

Similar to WilleyFinalResearchProject-2 (20)

WilleyFinalResearchProject-2