Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Speaking Practice Outside the Classroom: A Literature Review of…
Speaking Practice Outside the Classroom: A Literature Review of Asynchronous Multimedia-based Oral Communication in Language Learning
-
Findings
The methods found in this review were technical training, preparatory activities, project-based learning, and self-evaluation with revision activities.
The majority of previous studies demonstrating the effectiveness of these methods have relied on learner perceptions of language gains rather than on recordings of learner speech.
Asynchronous multimedia-based oral communication has been used in conjunction with a variety of instructional methods to promote language gains in terms of fluency, accuracy and pronunciation
Research
Lin (2015) lauded the affordances of oral computer-mediated communication (CMC: an important type of multimedia-based oral communication) in his meta-analysis, stating that the “features of CMC seem to provide opportunities to create a social interaction context with more flexibility that cannot be afforded in a traditional face-to-face environment” (p. 262).
Clark’s (1994) criticism of many media-related studies, that media itself does not influence learning. Rather it is the instructional method that influences learning. Referring to his previous studies, Clark summarized his argument, stating, “any necessary teaching method could be designed into a variety of media presentations (p. 22).
Hirotani and Lyddon (2013) argued that quality of practice, exemplified in their study by an awareness-raising activity, is an important factor in the language learning.
Graham (2006) stated that online learning environments provide learners with flexibility in communicating outside the classroom
Language practice is a necessary, but not sufficient, condition for learning” (Karweit, 1984: 33).
Lin (2015) stated that CMC “provides L2 learners with an environment to practice language production at a reduced rate. The relatively reduced rate of exchange and lag-time induced by the text-chat software allows L2 learners ‘more time to both process incoming messages and produce and monitor their output’ (Sauro & Smith, 2010: 557)” (Lin, 2015: 264).
Clifford described time on task, or quantity, as “the primary determiner of language acquisition” (2002)
Ziegler (2016) argued that CMC use provides learners with an opportunity to “notice [the] gaps between their interlanguage and the target language” (p. 575). Because of the time lag that Lin (2015) referred to, Ziegler (2016) found that CMC may be more beneficial to language learning than face to face communication in the target language in terms of developing productive language skills.
Communication types
Syncronous
-
-
Disposed to impromptu, informal evaluation
-
-
-
-