The Effectiveness of App-Based Language Instruction: A Blend of Productive Linguistic Knowledge Improvement and Users’ Perceptions and Experiences
محورهای موضوعی : آموزش زبان انگلیسی
Maryam khavaninzade
1
,
Mohammad Golshan
2
1 - Department of English, Maybod Branch, Islamic Azad University, Maybod, Iran
2 - Department of English, Islamic Azad University, Maybod Branch
کلید واژه: attitude, Busuu, computer-assisted language learning, EFL, language-learning application, mobile-assisted language learning, productive vocabulary knowledge ,
چکیده مقاله :
The growing popularity of language-learning apps among language learners has highlighted the need for rigorous evaluation of their efficacy in second language acquisition (SLA). This study combined quantitative measures to comprehensively understand the effectiveness of the Busuu app in improving the productive vocabulary of Iranian intermediate EFL learners with qualitative data from in-depth interviews to explore their perceptions and experiences while using the app. Forty-three learners (17 males and 26 females with a mean age of 27.53) were selected to assess the effectiveness of the Busuu app on learners’ productive vocabulary knowledge. Among them,15 participants (all female with a mean age of 29.40) agreed to be interviewed after the Busuu study to gain insights into learners’ perceptions and experiences with app-based learning. A pretest-posttest design using the LEX30 task, a standardized productive vocabulary assessment tool, was conducted before and after the Busuu study to evaluate participants’ productive vocabulary knowledge. Paired samples t-tests revealed no significant improvement in participants’ productive vocabulary knowledge. Nonetheless, the number of responses produced in the posttest was higher than in the pretest. According to the interview data, users rated vocabulary as the most favored feature of the app, while restricted access to premium content was noted as the least favored. Most participants acknowledged that the app exceeded their initial expectations before installing it. Additionally, improving vocabulary knowledge was the users’ primary expectation from utilizing the app. Furthermore, approximately all participants found the app beneficial for language learning. However, most of them reported low levels of enjoyment during app usage. The results can contribute to understanding what needs to be done to upgrade the quality and potential of the Bussu app, how the app can better support EFL learners in effectively activating their lexical knowledge, and what the users’ experiences and expectations from a language-learning app are.
The growing popularity of language-learning apps among language learners has highlighted the need for rigorous evaluation of their efficacy in second language acquisition (SLA). This study combined quantitative measures to comprehensively understand the effectiveness of the Busuu app in improving the productive vocabulary of Iranian intermediate EFL learners with qualitative data from in-depth interviews to explore their perceptions and experiences while using the app. Forty-three learners (17 males and 26 females with a mean age of 27.53) were selected to assess the effectiveness of the Busuu app on learners’ productive vocabulary knowledge. Among them,15 participants (all female with a mean age of 29.40) agreed to be interviewed after the Busuu study to gain insights into learners’ perceptions and experiences with app-based learning. A pretest-posttest design using the LEX30 task, a standardized productive vocabulary assessment tool, was conducted before and after the Busuu study to evaluate participants’ productive vocabulary knowledge. Paired samples t-tests revealed no significant improvement in participants’ productive vocabulary knowledge. Nonetheless, the number of responses produced in the posttest was higher than in the pretest. According to the interview data, users rated vocabulary as the most favored feature of the app, while restricted access to premium content was noted as the least favored. Most participants acknowledged that the app exceeded their initial expectations before installing it. Additionally, improving vocabulary knowledge was the users’ primary expectation from utilizing the app. Furthermore, approximately all participants found the app beneficial for language learning. However, most of them reported low levels of enjoyment during app usage. The results can contribute to understanding what needs to be done to upgrade the quality and potential of the Bussu app, how the app can better support EFL learners in effectively activating their lexical knowledge, and what the users’ experiences and expectations from a language-learning app are.
Azar, A. S., & Nasiri, H. (2014). Learners’ attitudes toward the effectiveness of mobile assisted language learning (MALL) in L2 listening comprehension. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 1836-1843. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.613
Basal, A., Yilmaz, S., Tanriverdi, A., & Sari, L. (2016). Effectiveness of mobile applications in vocabulary teaching. Contemporary Educational Technology, 7(1), 47-59. doi:10.30935/cedtech/6162
Burston, J. (2014). The reality of MALL: Still on the fringes. Calico Journal, 31(1), 103-125. doi:10.11139/cj.31.1.103-125
Busuu. (2023, November 10). Our 8th Anniversary - Busuu in numbers. Bolg Busuu. https://blog.busuu.com/8-years-busuu-numbers/
Castañeda, D. A., & Cho, M. H. (2016). Use of a game-like application on a mobile device to improve accuracy in conjugating Spanish verbs. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 29(7), 1195-1204. doi:10.1080/09588221.2016.1197950
Clenton, J. (2010). Investigating the construct of productive vocabulary knowledge with Lex30 (Doctoral dissertation, Swansea University).
Cobb, T. (n.d.). Web Vocabprofile, an adaptation of Heatley & Nation’s (1994) Range. https://www.lextutor.ca/vp/
Dashtestani, R. (2016). Moving bravely towards mobile learning: Iranian students' use of mobile devices for learning English as a foreign language. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 29(4), 815-832. doi:10.1080/09588221.2015.1069360
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behaviour. Plenum Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-2271-7
Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics. Oxford University Press.
Ebadi, S., & Bashiri, S. (2018). Investigating EFL learners ‘perspectives on vocabulary learning experiences through smartphone applications. Teaching English with Technology, 18(3), 126-151.
El Hariry, N. A. (2015). Mobile phones as useful language learning tools. European Scientific Journal, 11(16), 298-317.
Fan, M. (2000). How big is the gap and how to narrow it? An investigation into the active and passive vocabulary knowledge of L2 learners. RELC Journal, 31(2), 105-119. doi:10.1177/003368820003100205
Fitzpatrick, T., & Clenton, J. (2010). The challenge of validation: Assessing the performance of a test of productive vocabulary. Language Testing, 27(4), 537-554. doi:10.1177/0265532209354771
Fitzpatrick, T., & Meara, P. (2004). Exploring the validity of a test of productive vocabulary. Vigo international journal of applied linguistics, 1(1), 55-74.
Godwin-Jones, R. (2011). Emerging technologies: Mobile apps for language learning. Language Learning & Technology, 15(2), 2-11.
Gorjian, B. (2012). Teaching vocabulary through web-based language learning (WBLL) approach. Procedia Technology, 1, 334-339. doi:10.1016/j.protcy.2012.02.070
Hagtvet, B. E. (1982). On the relation between language comprehension and language production in a social psychological perspective. In Lowenthal, F., Vandamme, F., Cordier, J. (eds) Language and Language Acquisition (pp. 157-166). Springer, Boston, MA. doi:10.1007/978-1-4684-9099-2_22
Harmer, J. (2007). The practice of English language teaching. Essex. Pearson Education Limited.
Heidari, K. (2019). Willingness to communicate: A predictor of pushing vocabulary knowledge from receptive to productive. Journal of psycholinguistic research, 48(4), 903-920. doi:10.1007/s10936-019-09639-w
Hwang, W. Y., Huang, Y. M., Shadiev, R., Wu, S. Y., & Chen, S. L. (2014b). Effects of using mobile devices on English listening diversity and speaking for EFL elementary students. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 30(5), 503–516. doi:10.14742/ajet.237
Kenning, M. M. (2007). ICT and language learning. In ICT and Language Learning (pp. 135-170). Palgrave Macmillan. doi:10.1057/9780230591325_5
Khodarahmi, Z., & Heidari-Shahreza, M. A. (2018). Effect of MALL on the acquisition of word stress patterns of English by Iranian EFL learners: The case of Telegram. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Research, 5(1), 40-55.
Kim, H. S. (2013). Emerging mobile apps to improve English listening skills. Multimedia-Assisted Language Learning, 16(2), 11-30.
Kim, H., & Kwon, Y. (2012). Exploring smartphone applications for effective mobile-assisted language learning. Multimedia-Assisted Language Learning, 15(1), 31-57. doi:10.15702/mall.2012.15.1.31
Laufer, B. (1998). The development of passive and active vocabulary in a second language: Same or different? Applied linguistics, 19(2), 255-271. doi:10.1093/applin/19.2.255
Laufer, B., & Goldstein, Z. (2004). Testing vocabulary knowledge: Size, strength, and computer adaptiveness. Language learning, 54(3), 399-436. doi:10.1111/j.0023-8333.2004.00260.x
Laufer, B., & Nation, P. (1999). A vocabulary-size test of controlled productive ability. Language Testing, 16(1), 33-51. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/026553229901600103
Laufer, B., & Paribakht, T. S. (1998). The relationship between passive and active vocabularies: Effects of language learning context. Language learning, 48(3), 365-391. doi:10.1111/0023-8333.00046
Lee, S. H., & Muncie, J. (2006). From receptive to productive: Improving ESL learners’ use of vocabulary in a postreading composition task. TESOL Quarterly, 40 (2), 295–320. doi:10.2307/40264524
Lehmann, M. (2007). The lexical diversity of short texts: Exploring the productive-receptive continuum of lexical knowledge. In J. Horváth & M. Nikolov (Eds.), UPRT 2007: Empirical studies in English applied linguistics (pp. 293–305). Pécs: Lingua Franca Csoport.
Leis, A., Tohei, A., & Cooke, S. D. (2015). Smartphone assisted language learning and autonomy. International Journal of Computer-Assisted Language Learning and Teaching (IJCALLT), 5(3), 75-88. http://doi.org/10.4018/IJCALLT.2015070105
Lord, G. (2016). Rosetta stone for language learning. IALLT Journal of Language Learning Technologies, 46(1), 1-35. doi:10.17161/iallt.v46i1.8552
Mason, A. & Zhang, W. (2017). An exploration of the use of mobile applications to support the learning of Chinese characters employed by students of Chinese as a foreign language. In Q. Kan & S. Bax (Eds.) Beyond the language classroom: researching MOOCs and other innovations (99- 112). Research-publishing.net. doi:10.14705/rpnet.2017.mooc2016.674
Meara, P., & Fitzpatrick, T. (2000). Lex30: An improved method of assessing productive vocabulary in an L2. System, 28(1), 19-30. doi:10.1016/S0346-251X(99)00058-5
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). Sage.
Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9781139524759
Nielson, K. B. (2011) Self-study with language learning software in the workplace: What happens? Language Learning & Technology, 15(3), 110–129.
Pareja-Lora, A., Arús Hita, J., Martín Monje, E., Read, T., Pomposo Yanes, L., Rodríguez Arancón, P., Calle-Martinez, C., Pomposo, L., . . .Bárcena, E. (2013, September). Toward Mobile Assisted Language Learning Apps for Professionals that Integrate Learning into the Daily Routine. In Proceedings of EUROCALL (Vol. 20, pp. 206-210).
Pektaş, Ş. T., & Erkip, F. (2006). Attitudes of design students toward computer usage in design. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 16(1), 79-95. doi:10.1007/s10798-005-3175-0
Petersen, K. & Sachs, R. (2016). The language classroom in the age of networked learning. In Leow, R. P., Cerezo, L. and Baralt, M. (eds.), A psycholinguistic approach to technology and language learning. De Gruyter, 3–22.
Pignot-Shahov, V. (2012). Measuring L2 receptive and productive vocabulary knowledge. Language Studies Working Papers, 4(1), 37-45.
Read, J. (2000). Assessing vocabulary. Cambridge University Press.
Rezaei, A., Mai, N., & Pesaranghader, A. (2014). The effect of mobile applications on English vocabulary acquisition. Jurnal Teknologi, 68(2), 73-83. doi:10.11113/jt.v68.2912
Rosell‐Aguilar, F. (2017). State of the app: A taxonomy and framework for evaluating language learning mobile applications. CALICO Journal, 34(2), 243–258. doi:10.1558/cj.27623
Rosell‐Aguilar, F. (2018). Autonomous language learning through a mobile application: A user evaluation of the busuu app. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 31(8), 854–881. doi:10.1080/09588221.2018.1456465
Shadiev, R., Hwang, W. Y., Huang, Y. M., & Liu, T. Y. (2015). The impact of supported and annotated mobile learning on achievement and cognitive load. Educational Technology & Society, 18(4), 53–69.
Steel, C. (2012). Fitting learning into life: Language students’ perspectives on benefits of using mobile apps. In: M. Brown, M. Hartnett and T. Stewart, ascilite2012 Conference proceedings. Wellington, New Zealand, (875-880).
Stockwell, G. (2013). Technology and motivation in English language teaching and learning. In Ushioda, E. (Eds), International perspectives in motivation: Language learning and professional challenges (pp. 156- 175). Palgrave Macmillan. doi:10.1057/9781137000873_9
Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235–253). Newbury House.
Tang, S., Hanneghan, M., & El Rhalibi, A. (2009). Introduction to games-based learning. In Games-based learning advancements for multi-sensory human computer interfaces: Techniques and effective practices (pp. 1-17). IGI Global.
Uchihara, T., & Saito, K. (2016). Exploring the relationship between productive vocabulary knowledge and second language oral ability. The language learning Journal, 47(1), 64-75. doi:10.1080/09571736.2016.1191527
Walters, J. (2012). Aspects of validity of a test of productive vocabulary: Lex30. Language Assessment Quarterly, 9(2), 172-185. doi:10.1080/15434303.2011.625579
Webb, S. (2005). Receptive and productive vocabulary learning: The effects of reading and writing on word knowledge. Studies in second language acquisition, 27(1), 33-52. doi:10.1017/S0272263105050023
Xodabande, I., & Atai, M. R. (2020). Using mobile applications for self-directed learning of academic vocabulary among university students. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 37(4), 330-347. doi:10.1080/02680513.2020.1847061
Zhang, S. (2011). Attitudes of ESL students toward the use of computer-assisted language learning (CALL) in a university in China (pp. 1-133). Texas A&M University-Commerce.
Zhong, H., & Hirsh, D. (2009). Vocabulary growth in an English as a foreign language context. University of Sydney Papers in TESOL, 4, 85–113.
