Volume 8, Issue 3 (9-2023)
IJREE 2023, 8(3): 94-107 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Tizjang E, Bijani H, Bani Orabah S S. Examining the Impact of Implementing Nicenet on Teaching Grammar Structures to Develop Writing skill among Iranian EFL Intermediate Learners. IJREE 2023; 8 (3)
URL: http://ijreeonline.com/article-1-809-en.html
URL: http://ijreeonline.com/article-1-809-en.html
Assistant Professor, Department of English Language, Islamic Azad University, Zanjan Branch, Zanjan, Iran
Abstract: (1434 Views)
It is possible that technology possesses a unique place in language teaching and learning. Research on CALL in the Iranian L2 context is rather scarce. This research intends to explore the impact of administering Nicenet as one of the virtual learning environments (VLE)'s on linguistic use and grammar instruction in writing. The design of the research was quasi-experimental method having a pre-test and a post-test. The subjects were chosen through the convenience sampling strategy and were assigned randomly into experimental and control groups (female = 21, male = 21) and control (female = 21, male = 21). The independent variable in this research was the teaching linguistic use (grammar) through Nicenet. The dependent variable was the participants’ linguistic use (grammar) as reflected by the writing test. The participants were chosen concerning their performance on the Oxford Placement Test (OPT) and were homogenized accordingly. The outcome of inferential statistical tests, ran through Mann-Whitney, depicted that there was a statistically significant variation between the accomplishments mean scores of the learners of the experimental group who learned the grammar through computer and the control group who studied the same syntactic item utilizing the traditional strategy. The results also showed that the accomplishment in the post-test for both the experimental and control groups is related to the treatment. The results depicted that computer as an instrument and Nicenet as an application could assist learners to escalate their grammar acquisition.
Keywords: computer assisted language learning, e-learning, grammar, Nicenet, technology, virtual learning environment
References
1. Abu-Seileek, A. F. M. (2004). Designing a computer-assisted. University of Jordan: Jordan.
2. Abunabah, A. (2012). The impact of computer-assisted grammar teaching on EFL pupils' performance in Jordan. International Journal of Education and Development Using ICT, 8(1), 71-90. Open Campus, The University of the West Indies, West Indies. Retrieved September 15, 2023 from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/42299/
3. Ahmed, E. A. E. (2018). Integrating blended learning in EFL teaching and learning process: A case study of faculty of education EL Hassahiesa. Gezira, Sudan: University of Gezir.
4. Al Bataineh, K. B., Banikalef, A., & Albashtawi, A. (2019). The effect of blended learning on EFL students' grammar performance and attitudes: An investigation of Moodle. Arab World English Journal (AWEJ), 10(1), 45-63. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3367595 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3367595 [DOI:10.2139/ssrn.3367595]
5. Alavinia, P., & Sehat, R. (2012). A Probe into the main demotivating factors among Iranian EFL learners. English Language Teaching, 5(6), 9-35. doi:10.5539/elt.v5n6p9 [DOI:10.5539/elt.v5n6p9]
6. Alharbi, M. A. (2019). Integration of video in teaching grammar to EFL Arab learners. Computer-Assisted Language Learning-Electronic Journal, 20(1), 135-153. http://callej.org/journal/20-1/Alharbi2019.pdf
7. Alian, J., Khodabandeh, F., & Soleimani, H. (2018). The effect of CALL-based tasks on EFL learners' grammar learning. Teaching English with Technology, 18(3), 54-68. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1186370.pdf
8. Amiryousefi, M. (2016). The differential effects of two types of task repetition on the complexity, accuracy, and fluency in computer-mediated L2 written production: A focus on computer anxiety. Computer-Assisted Language Learning, 29(5), 1052-1068. [DOI:10.1080/09588221.2016.1170040]
9. Assiddiq, M. A. (2019). Authentic materials in reading comprehension classroom: Its effectiveness to Indonesian EFL students' achievement. International Journal for Educational and Vocational Studies, 1(7), 707-712. file:///C:/Users/SMA/Downloads/1676-6065-1-PB.pdf [DOI:10.29103/ijevs.v1i7.1676]
10. Beatty, K. (2003). Teaching & researching: Computer-assisted language learning. London: Routledge.
11. Bikowski, D., & Kessler, G. (2002). Making the most of discussion boards in the ESL classroom. TESOL Journal, 11(3), 27-30. Retrieved September 15, 2023 from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/95777/ [DOI:10.1002/j.1949-3533.2002.tb00093.x]
12. Boroujeni, F. A. (2012). Investigating controversies in teaching grammar: A case for the Iranian high school students. Theory & Practice in Language Studies, 2(8), 874-885. doi:10.4304/tpls.2.8.1570-1575 [DOI:10.4304/tpls.2.8.1570-1575]
13. Bowles, R. P., & Montroy, J. J. (2013). Latent growth curve modeling using structural equation modeling. Applied Quantitative Analysis in Education and the Social Sciences, 14(2), 277-315.
14. Celce-Murcia, M., & McIntosh, L. (1991). Teaching English as a second or foreign language. Oxford University Press.
15. Celce‐Murcia, M. (1991). Grammar pedagogy in second and foreign language teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 25(3), 459-480.
https://doi.org/10.2307/3586980 [DOI:10.2307/3586980 https://www.jstor.org/stable/3586980]
16. Chapelle, C. A. (2001). Computer applications in second language acquisition. Cambridge University Press. [DOI:10.1017/CBO9781139524681]
17. Crivos, M. B., & Luchini, P. L. (2012). A pedagogical proposal for teaching grammar using consciousness-raising tasks. MJAL, 4(3), 141-153.
18. Damavandi, J. A., Zolfigol, M. A., & Karami, B. (2018). Oxidation of 1, 2-dihydro quinolines under mild and heterogeneous conditions. Synthetic Communications, 31(20), 3183-3187. [DOI:10.1081/SCC-100105895]
19. Dizon-Ross, R. (2016). Parents' beliefs and children's education: Experimental evidence from Malawi. Unpublished Manuscript, University of Chicago.
20. Dornyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
21. Ebadi, S., & Rahimi, M. (2019). Mediating EFL learners' academic writing skills in online dynamic assessment using Google Docs. Computer-Assisted Language Learning, 32(5-6), 527-555. [DOI:10.1080/09588221.2018.1527362]
22. Ebsworth, M. E. (1997). What researchers say and practitioners do perspectives on conscious grammar instruction. Applied Language Learning, 8(2), 237-260. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/234665214_What_Researchers_Say_and_Practitioners_Do_Perspectives_on_Conscious_Grammar_Instruction_in_the_ESL_Classroom
23. Farrokhi, F., & Sattarpour, S. (2012). The effects of direct written corrective feedback on improvement of grammatical accuracy of high-proficient L2 learners. World Journal of Education, 2(2), 49-57. doi:10.5430/wje.v2n2p49 http://dx.doi.org/10.5430/wje.v2n2p49 [DOI:10.5430/wje.v2n2p49]
24. Ghafarpour, H. (2022). Interpersonal discourse markers in online vs. face-to-face EFL classes. Teaching English Language, 16(2), 63-84. doi:10.22132/tel.2022.155086
25. Ghahari, S., Khoshbin, L. S., & Forwell, S. J. (2014). The multiple sclerosis self-management scale: Clinicometric testing. International Journal of MS Care, 16(2), 61-67. doi: 10.7224/1537-2073.2013-019 [DOI:10.7224/1537-2073.2013-019]
26. Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (2000). The role of self-regulation and transcription skills in writing and writing development. Educational Psychologist, 35(1), 3-12. [DOI:10.1207/S15326985EP3501_2]
27. Gruba, P. (2006). Playing the videotext: A media literacy perspective on video-mediated L2 listening. Language Learning & Technology, 10(2), 77-92.
28. Kamil, S. A. (2021). Exploring the role of updated technology in university English language classrooms. Psychology and Education Journal, 58(1), 5647-5655. doi: [DOI:10.17762/pae.v58i1.1969]
29. Kedrowicz, A., Watanabe, S., Hall, D., & Furse, C. (2006). Infusing technical communication and teamwork within the ECE curriculum. Turkish Journal of Electrical Engineering & Computer Sciences, 14(1), 41-53. https://journals.tubitak.gov.tr/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3610&context=elektrik
30. Khodabandelou, R., Ab Jalil, H., Ali, W. Z. W., & Daud, S. M. (2017). Presence and perceived learning in different higher education blended learning environments. Blended Learning: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications, 7(4), 615-627. doi:10.4018/978-1-5225-0783-3.ch030 [DOI:10.4018/978-1-5225-0783-3.ch030]
31. Kilickaya, F. (2004). Authentic materials and cultural content in EFL classrooms. The Internet TESL Journal, X(7). https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED570173.pdf
32. Levy, M., & Stockwell, M. (2006). Effective use of CALL technologies: Finding the right balance. Changing Language Education through CALL, 1(18), 301-320.
33. Malmir, A., & Aghazamani, Z. (2019). Moodle implementation for L2 vocabulary development and retention: The effects on extroverted vs. introverted Iranian intermediate EFL learners. Teaching English Language, 13(1), 57-84. doi:10.22132/tel.2019.86986
34. McEnery, T., Paul Baker, J., & Wilson, A. (1995). A statistical analysis of corpus based computer vs traditional human teaching methods of part of speech analysis. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 8(2-3), 259-274. doi: 10.1080/0958822940080208 [DOI:10.1080/0958822940080208]
35. Meskill, G., & Mossop, J. (2003). Technologies use with learners of ESL in New York State: Preliminary report. Journal of Language and Teaching Practice, 26(1), 76-92. https://www.albany.edu/lap/Papers/technology%20use.htm
36. Mohan, B. (2019). Testing the effectiveness of pattern drills in the teaching of sentence structures in English. Indian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 45(1-2), 12-28.
37. Mollahossein, H., Alavinia, P., & Modirkhameneh, S. (2022). Etiquette and value-based online English language instruction in the university context across gender: Variations in attitudes. Teaching English Language, 17(1), 25-52. doi:10.22132/tel.2022.160902
38. Nagata, N. (2007). Input enhancement by natural language processing: Assessing the impact of input enhancement in second language education. Evaluation in Theory, Research, and Practice, 12, 153-167.
39. Nazari, A., & Allahyar, N. (2012). Grammar teaching revisited: EFL teachers between grammar abstinence and formal grammar teaching. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 37(2), 73-87. https://ro.ecu.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1691&context=ajte [DOI:10.14221/ajte.2012v37n2.6]
40. Nejati, R. (2022). The relationship between students' self-regulated learning and reading comprehension in Iranian online classes in the COVID era. Teaching English Language, 16(2), 85-109. doi:10.22132/tel.2022.155099
41. Nutta, J. (2001). Course websites: Are they worth the effort? NEA Higher Education Advocate, 18(3), 5-18.
42. Plog, S. (2001). Why destination areas rise and fall in popularity: An update of a Cornell Quarterly classic. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 42(3), 13-24. [DOI:10.1016/S0010-8804(01)81020-X]
43. Rashtchi, M., & Aghili, H. (2014). Computerized input enhancement versus computer-assisted glosses: Do they affect vocabulary recall and retention? Theory & Practice in Language Studies, 4(8) 780-791. doi:10.4304/tpls.4.8.1665-1674 [DOI:10.4304/tpls.4.8.1665-1674]
44. Shang, H. F. (2007). An exploratory study of e-mail application on FL writing performance. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 20(1), 79-96. [DOI:10.1080/09588220601118479]
45. Shen, Y. (2012). Reconsidering English grammar teaching for improving non-English majors' English writing ability. English Language Teaching, 5(11), 74-78. doi:10.5539/elt.v5n11p74 [DOI:10.5539/elt.v5n11p74]
46. Toyoda, E., & Harrison, R. (2002). Categorization of text chat communication between learners and native speakers of Japanese. Language Learning & Technology, 6(1), 82-99. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/84320882.pdf
47. Trosborg, A. (2011). Interlanguage pragmatics: Requests, complaints, and apologies. New York: Walter de Gruyter.
48. Vilmi, R. (2003). The international writing exchange project. Training, Language and Culture, 5(2), 72-90.
49. Zaini, A., & Mazdayasna, G. (2015). The impact of computer‐based instruction on the development of EFL learners' writing skills. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 31(6), 516-528. [DOI:10.1111/jcal.12100]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
