peer feedback through voki - casa grande
Post on 19-Apr-2022
5 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Running head: PEER FEEDBACK THROUGH VOKI
Peer Feedback through Voki Tool to Improve Students’ Awareness of the Register in Spoken
Activities
Student: Darwin Germán Gaona Vásquez
Guide: Jazmin Camchong, Ph.D.
Author’s Note:
Research Paper Presented as Partial Fulfillment for the Degree of Magíster en Pedagogía de
los Idiomas Nacionales y Extranjeros con Mención en la Enseñanza de Inglés. CES: RPC-SE-
01-N˚.014-2020. Cohort 2017 -2019. Guayaquil, November 4th, 2020.
PEER FEEDBACK THROUGH VOKI
1
Abstract
This study examines peer-feedback as an effective strategy to improve students’ awareness of
the register in a speaking context, with the support of a technological tool called Voki. A total
of 50 high school students participated in the research (25 for the experimental and 25 for the
control group). The objective of this study is to enhance oral register applying the peer-
feedback as a pedagogical strategy facilitated by Voki. Pre- and Post- tests indicated a steady
improvement in the discourse of students. The results showed that the implementation was
highly significant (effect size Cohen’s d=3.34). Therefore, it is concluded that the peer-
feedback strategy combined with a technological tool like Voki were two decisive
components to create an effective learning atmosphere where students were able to share
their knowledge, strengthen oral communication, and have fun while learning. The findings
also showed that this research study has implications for educators, English directors and
principals of institutions who are interested in improving the way they teach English
language.
Keywords: peer- feedback, register, Voki, speaking, EFL
PEER FEEDBACK THROUGH VOKI
2
Resumen
Este estudio examina la retroalimentación entre pares como una estrategia efectiva para
mejorar la atención de los estudiantes del registro en un contexto de conversación, con el
apoyo de una herramienta tecnológica llamada Voki. Un total de 50 estudiantes de colegio
participaron en la investigación (25 para el grupo experimental – 25 para el grupo control). El
objetivo de este estudio es mejorar el registro oral aplicando como estrategia pedagógica la
retroalimentación entre pares facilitado por Voki. Las pruebas previas y posteriores indicaron
una mejora constante en el discurso de los estudiantes. Los resultados mostraron que la
implementación fue altamente significativa (tamaño del efecto Cohen´s d= 3.34). Por lo
tanto, se concluye que la estrategia de retroalimentación entre pares combinada con la
herramienta de apoyo Voki fueron dos componentes decisivos para crear un ambiente de
aprendizaje efectivo en el que los estudiantes pudieron compartir sus conocimientos,
fortalecer la comunicación oral y divertirse aprendiendo. Los hallazgos también mostraron
que este estudio de investigación tiene implicaciones para educadores, directores de inglés y
directores de instituciones que están interesados en mejorar la forma en que enseñan el
idioma inglés.
Palabras claves: retroalimentación en pareja, registro, Voki, habilidad del habla, inglés
como lengua extranjera.
PEER FEEDBACK THROUGH VOKI
3
Peer Feedback through Voki Tool to Improve Students’ Awareness of the Register in
Spoken Activities
English speaking is an essential learning domain needed in English acquisition (Saville-
Troike, Muriel, & Barto, 2016). It aids at producing the language (Devi, Kalpana, & Rao,
2018). It is also a component that fosters input development (Long, 1996). Oral interviews,
group discussions, and role playing are useful ways to help students interact and participate
actively in communication. On the other hand, peer- feedback is a strategic method that
makes one student provide pieces of constructive advice to another one in order to improve a
topic (Smith, 2017).
Technology is constantly evolving, becoming an important tool in the development of
several fields such as education, medicine, astronomy, and telecommunication. It has
provided meaningful benefits to society. In the case of education, technology has provided
many ways to try to change old paradigms in order to establish a new environment for more
efficient learning. According to Bahadorfar and Omidvar (2014), “Technology gives learners
a chance to engage in self-directed actions, opportunities for self-paced interactions, privacy,
and a safe environment in which errors get corrected and specific feedback is given” (p. 11).
Technology can be a supporting tool to learn a second language that is applied in real life to
practice with students. Richards (2015) added that technological tools provide learners
opportunities to practice authentic language that can be practiced in the classroom.
In Ecuador’s public schools, learners believe that communicating ideas in English is
challenging (Ministerio de Educación, 2016). Learners believe speaking in a second language
is extremely difficult and that they do not have enough knowledge to face that barrier.
English speech practice may be hindered if students do not want to make mistakes when
expressing their thoughts, if students do not feel confident in their speaking abilities, or if
they do not feel motivated to practice (Tok, 2009). The participants of this study shared the
PEER FEEDBACK THROUGH VOKI
4
same difficulties. Thus, this study aimed to strengthen speaking skills in a public high school
using peer feedback and the support of an engaging technological application.
The pedagogical innovation that was analyzed in this study was based on the
educational quality standard established by the Ecuadorian Ministry of Education,
specifically in the part that states “using resources and technology Effectively in English and
Content Instruction- 3c.4. Use technological resources (e.g., internet, software, computers,
and relative devices) to enhance language and content-area instruction for students”
(Ministerio de Educación, 2012, p.5).
Voki is the name of a blended learning tool that encourages intrinsic motivation to
practice speaking (Yoshida, 2018). Teenagers were provided with many options, colors, and
shapes to create a virtual character (avatar) and in that way to engage their creativity.
It is important that teachers are aware that technological resources do not guarantee an
improvement in students’ speech skills, unless optimal teaching strategies are applied
properly. Feedback is an effective method that maximizes students’ learning process, by
monitoring the progress of the acquired knowledge to compare the educational performance
to an established standard (Hepplestone, Glover, Irwin, & Parkin, 2016). One of the types of
feedback is peer feedback which, according to Smith (2017), it consists in engaging one
student critically with the work of another partner and in this way the feedback provider is
able to know, investigate, verify, and give solid arguments about a specific topic. Peer
feedback is a fundamental stage which helps understand the register in a spoken context. It
focuses on the proper use of formal and informal English. There are four research questions
that are taken into consideration for the analysis of the current study:
There are four research questions that are taken into consideration for the analysis of
the current study:
PEER FEEDBACK THROUGH VOKI
5
1. To what extent does peer feedback through Voki improve students’ awareness of
the register?
2. What is students’ perspective toward the components of this innovation?
3. What is the impact of peer feedback in students’ fluency?
4. What is the impact of peer feedback in students’ pronunciation?
Literature Review
Currently, technology support can help learn a new skill. In the case of Voki, Aikina
and Zubkova (2015) emphasized that this Web 2.0 tool enables eager students who want to
express their opinions but are not confident to talk in front of the class, because they do not
like the way they speak in English. Likewise, Yona and Marlina (2014) conducted a study
that focused on the way students are influenced by this tool in the elaboration of oral
descriptive texts, lowering the “affective filter” to become students more secured in the way
they use language. This tool makes students feel safe when they make mistakes and entrusted
to interact and exchange opinions with peers (Ni, 2012).
As it is referred in the dictionary (Merriam Webster Dictionary, 2018), the register is
any of the language varieties that a speaker uses in a specific situation. This speaking sub-
skill, which will be analyzed in this study, is centered in the way a person communicates their
thoughts according to the circumstances. Thornbury (2005) stated that the register is
determined by the actor, the message, and the way it is transmitted. The context of the speech
is quite vital to identify the level of formality and informality of the language.
Other important aspects regarding English speech are pronunciation and fluency.
According to Pourhosein (2016), pronunciation must be the real purpose of oral interaction
because if learners get more interested in their pronunciation, they will focus in the way they
articulate the words and consequently they will improve the way they speak. Nation and
Newton (2008) suggested that fluency is bound to the speaking development because when
PEER FEEDBACK THROUGH VOKI
6
the students speak without hesitation and without interruption, they have the chance of
strengthening and increasing their own language vocabulary.
Another important pedagogical characteristic, that was analyzed in this study, was
collaboration. Spies and Xu (2018) emphasized that collaboration is correlated to real
communication, also it is relevant to emphasize that one type of collaboration is feedback,
which according to Sardareh (2018), it aids to enhance students’ learning, providing useful
information in the course of acquiring the necessary knowledge. Smith (2017) agreed that the
feedback a teacher provides is not enough, therefore collaborative feedback among peers is
necessary to develop the comprehension of a topic in an effective way. However, significant
feedback cannot occur spontaneously, it is necessary to follow a structure. Allen, Blythe,
Dichter, and Lynch (2018) suggested that the ladder of feedback protocol which is a
necessary procedure to build peer feedback among students, concerns four easy steps: asking
clarifying questions, stating strengths of the work, raising any concerns, and finally making
suggestions.
Peer feedback is a contemporary strategy, especially for large classes, that is very
useful for its characteristics to supervise every student’s result (Smith 2017). This strategy is
quite beneficial not only for students but for teachers, who want to implement a closer
monitoring to student knowledge (Rollinson, 2005); the good application of peer feedback
can be quite beneficial for checking students' understanding.
Regarding the teaching theory, the constructivism was very appropriate to apply in the
classes because it is characterized for focusing on learning assistance and the capacity of each
student’s experiences to foster a clear understanding of the topic (Zajda, 2018). Taking into
consideration the context of the Ecuadorian English Learning, the Communicative Language
teaching (CLT) is the most suitable method because it mainly focuses on the acquisition of
communicative competences and not on language translation (Alamri, 2018). Harmer (2010)
PEER FEEDBACK THROUGH VOKI
7
acknowledged that CLT provides enough exposure and opportunities for language learning. It
means, the knowledge exchange among the participants will provide a learning atmosphere
where meaningful communication and real-life situations are the fundamental pillars.
Voki is a technological resource that, according to Tingen, Philbeck and Holcomb
(2011), may contribute to the communication learning by focusing on the 21st century skills
such as creativity and collaboration. Voki allows students to record their voices and create an
image that can be characterized with similar movements and gestures as humans. Because
Voki provides users the opportunity of applying their voice in an animation, it can be a
potential assistance to maximize speaking skills.
Speaking is one of the most important abilities within the learning process of English as
a second language. In the classroom students must be involved in oral communication
procedures to ensure their learning. There are two basic components that contribute to the
oral production. First, pronunciation, which is the way in which an individual produces the
spoken sound of the words. According to Levis and Grant (2003), pronunciation is vital to
successful communication and it is an important part of learning to speak. The second
component that contributes to oral production is fluency, which Albino (2017) stated it is
when students speak coherently without the need of searching for words. Teachers must
monitor and guide learners to improve these two aspects of oral production, pronunciation
and fluency, in a suitable way.
Teachers also must consider that speaking can create a tense atmosphere because of
shyness, anxiety, and lack of confidence (Juhana, 2012). These issues limit learners to
produce oral communication. For that reason, Tomlinson (2013) stated that teachers should
recognize all the pressure that speaking can produce and, in this way, create strategies to
decrease anxiety.
PEER FEEDBACK THROUGH VOKI
8
Based on the literature reviewed, this study focused in creating a communicative
atmosphere to analyze the effects of implementing peer- feedback as a classroom strategy and
Voki as a technological tool in order to learn how the register was used in spoken context, as
well as to improve the pronunciation and fluency with the final purpose of engaging students
to practice oral communication in a second language.
Objectives
General Objective:
● Determine the effect of using peer feedback through Voki, on speaking skills in
students learning English as a Foreign Language.
Specific Objective:
● Examine peer feedback features and the way this strategy can strengthen
speaking skills including fluency, and pronunciation.
● Analyze the register (formal and informal English) in a spoken context
Innovation
The first topic that was addressed in the lesson involved the effective application of
feedback. Here, the teacher taught the students about how to give feedback, using the ladder
feedback protocol.
1. The teacher provided a paper that explained the ladder of feedback, so that the
students learnt about how to give feedback. The teacher explained and monitored all
the processes.
2. The first activity involved the students, who filmed a video, introducing themselves
and their family.
3. Next, the teacher divided the students into pairs, so they gave and received feedback
about each other’s work.
PEER FEEDBACK THROUGH VOKI
9
Once, the students learned how to provide feedback, they were introduced the use of
formal and informal register in a spoken context.
The students had to watch a video about people talking in different registers (formal
and informal English).
1. The students exchanged opinions through a collaborative activity in order to better
understand the message of the video. To be very clear about the understanding of the
theme, the teacher organized a paired activity.
2. After that, the students wrote on a post-it note the phrases they mostly liked.
3. Next, students were divided in groups of 5 to listen different traits of formal and
informal register to finally write down on a big piece of paper the different examples.
In this part of the plan, the students learned about the Voki resource and incorporated what
they had learned before (use of register).
1. Voki was introduced through a video. Students found out how to use the application
to voice recording and to create an avatar. After that, the students experienced some
minutes with the platform to practice and design a first version of the avatar and in
turn to record their voices.
2. The peer feedback is a key point to internalize the knowledge. Hence, the next step
was to have the students gathered in groups to talk and to give feedback about the
recording (they should have used the ladder of feedback). Next, students had to create
and record a final version of the avatar. This time, they followed instructions that
included roles to differentiate situations and to use either formal or informal speech.
3. The last version had to be uploaded in the course Facebook page.
4. Finally, students showed to the class a final version of the avatar, which has been
programmed to use phrases under formal or informal speech.
PEER FEEDBACK THROUGH VOKI
10
The lesson plan is attached on the appendix No 1 with a more accurate description of
the learning procedures. The surveys - appendix 2, the tests - appendix 3, the ladder of
feedback – appendix 4, and the rubrics are on the appendix No 5.
The rubrics were designed to measure two important aspects. First, the formative
assessment in which students had to practice how to give feedback, identify formal and
informal register, and record their voices. The second one concerns to the summative
assessment where students were capable to show a final presentation in which students
applied what they had learned in the previous sessions. The teacher took into consideration
the communicative topics that students developed in the Voki avatar. Also, there were some
remarkable assessment points that were included in the assessment plan to have a general
overlook of how the progress of the students’ learning was evaluated.
Methodology
The current study used qualitative and quantitative approaches to analyze the data.
Under the qualitative research approach, the current study applied action research. Stringer
(2008) defined this method as a “systematic approach to investigation that enables people to
find effective solutions to problems they confront in their everyday life” (p. 1). It also
followed a complete cycle process that offers opportunity for continued students’ reflection.
Action research is considered a very appropriate method for this research study because it is
focused on the constant analysis of the effects of using the peer- feedback procedure to
improve students’ speaking skills.
The quantitative research approach is used in the current study because it compared the
effects of applying the learning strategy in the control and the experimental groups, as well as
the results of the spoken register tests which measured students’ capacity of using formal and
informal English in speaking context. There were some statistical tests such as mean,
standard deviation, independent sample t-test which helped evaluate the project and the
PEER FEEDBACK THROUGH VOKI
11
program which was used to calculate the results was (SPSS) Statistical Package for the Social
Science.
The current project aimed to answer the following four research questions:
1. To what extent does peer feedback through Voki improve students’ awareness of
the register?
2. What is students’ perspective toward the components of this innovation?
3. What is the impact of peer feedback in students’ fluency?
4. What is the impact of peer feedback in students’ pronunciation?
This project was conducted in a public high school. The high school was located in the
city of Duran, in the Guayas province, in the coastal region of Ecuador. For this research
study, there were two groups of students (experimental - control group). The sample of
students was represented by 25 teenagers with ages between 12 and 13 years old. Fifteen girls
and ten boys for the experimental group and twelve girls and thirteen boys for the control
group. Even though a large percentage belongs to a low socioeconomic status, 40% of
students of the experimental group and 42% of the control group have a computer at home,
46% of students of experimental group and 48% of students of the control group have access
to internet.
As the participants studied in a public institution, they followed a curriculum that
demands that the English classes must be five hours a week from Monday to Friday. This
educational policy has been established for about seven years. To know their English level,
students took an online test which confirmed that all of them were A2 which, according to the
Council of Europe (2020) corresponds to basic users of the language who can communicate
ideas in simple term aspects and in familiar context.
The students got access to do the internet test in EF Education First (Education First,
2020).This web site is a worldwide language organization that is recognized for taking free
PEER FEEDBACK THROUGH VOKI
12
online proficiency tests that specializes in giving reference of the English language level of
learners. For the purposes of this project, the test was administered to have a clear definition
of the level of English each candidate had.
It is important to highlight that there were three requirements to participate in the
research study. At first instance, students must have studied in a high school located in
Durán. Second, they had to study in tenth grade of basic section; and finally, they must have
reached the A2 level of English proficiency.
Instruments
Spoken register tests.
The spoken register tests were divided into two parts. First, the pre-test consisted in a
couple of situational questions that students had to work in pairs defined by the teacher. The
activity consisted in creating a dialogue using formal and informal English phrases to finally
present in front of the teacher. Second, the post-test was a pair activity that consisted in
creating two avatars using the Voki resource. The talks were about a situation in which
students included formal and informal register phrases.
Rubric for spoken performance
Two rubrics were designed to grade the oral performance. The first rubric focused on
the way students recorded their voices in the platform. The students recorded their voices in
the Voki platform, the instructor listened the recordings, and analyzed the components such
as pronunciation, fluency, and vocabulary to grade their work. The score ranged from 1 that
represented the lowest grade to 4 that was the highest grade, being 12 the total grade of the
final record. For the pre-test and post-test, there was a different rubric that was used in which
some elements were examined such as, fluency, vocabulary, pronunciation, originality and
content, with a minimum score of 0,5 and a maximum of 2, being 10 the highest grade.
Pre and post- survey
PEER FEEDBACK THROUGH VOKI
13
The Pre-survey included 18 questions that measured the students’ prior knowledge of
the research that analyzed the effectiveness of peer feedback strategy through Voki tool to
improve students’ awareness of the register in spoken activities. Also, there were three
questions that were related to their demographic data such as genre, age, level of English
proficiency; and two questions that involved internet and computer access.
The Post-survey was applied after the intervention and it was made of 18 questions too.
The method used to collect data for the 18 questions was a Likert scale which, according
Boone and Boone (2012), it is composed by four or more Likert-type items that are associate
with a composite variable that helps generate a quantitative measure of a personality trait.
The variable options were classified by numbers, 5= totally agree, 4= agree, 3=undecided,
2=disagree and 1= totally disagree. The Cronbach Alpha was another important method
which is described by Cortina (1993) as the best way to evaluate the grade of reliability of a
quantitative scale of measurement (Likert scale). The Cronbach Alpha result of this survey
was 0.788 which, in accordance with Tavakol and Dennick (2011), is considered acceptable,
it means that the survey measured effectively the variables of interests.
Data Collection Procedures
The students completed the tests during school hours and the person who collected the
data was the teacher. The data results were entered in an Excel spreadsheet document and
exported to the Statistical Package for the Social Science (SPSS) program where they were
examined using descriptive statistics, including the mean, frequency, and standard deviation.
The pre- and post-test were assessed using a rubric. The outcomes of the pre and post-survey
were analyzed through a Likert scale which ranged from 5 = totally agree, 4= agree, 3=
undecided, 2= disagree and 1= totally disagree.
Ethical Standards
PEER FEEDBACK THROUGH VOKI
14
In order to make sure of the transparency and reliability of this research study, it was
necessary to fulfill the following ethical standards. First, a consent letter was submitted to the
principal who is the main authority of the institution. Second, the students were informed that
the results they were going to obtain in this research study were confidential. Finally, there
was a short text emphasizing that students’ participation was free and voluntary in the
different surveys. Therefore, all participants provided consent to be part of the research study.
Results
The research outcomes aimed to investigate the effect of implementing peer feedback
strategy through the use of the Voki to improve the students’ awareness of the register in
spoken activities. To answer the first question, to what extent does peer feedback through
Voki improve students’ guidance of the register? It is important to see the results shown
below.
Table 1.
Pre and Post test results of Control and Experimental group
Experimental Group Control Group
N Min Max M SD N Min Max M SD
Pre-test 25 2 5.5 3.88 1.043 Pre-test 25 2 5 3.34 .812
Post-test 25 6 10 7.86 1.229 Post-test 25 3 6 4.34 .838
Note: N= Sample. Min= Minimum. Max= Maximum M= Mean. SD = Standard Deviation.
Regarding the 25 participants of the experimental group, the pre-test and post-test give
some important figures (Table 1). It is noticeable that the mean of the pre- test (3.88) is very
low and it happened because most of the grades were not good enough, giving evidence that
students needed an educational strategy to learn the topic. On the other side, the posttests
PEER FEEDBACK THROUGH VOKI
15
gave another perspective, because the mean was higher (7.86) and the standard deviation of
1.22 shown that most of the students’ answers were homogenous.
Table 2.
Results according to each element of the rubric: vocabulary, fluency, pronunciation, content
and originality.
The table above shows a sustained improvement in all the elements after the
implementation of the innovation. For instance, in the case of content, there was an increase
of 1.02 points between the two tests (from 0.78 to 1.80), it is the highest value among all the
categories. In terms of fluency it was also a considerable growth of 0.96 points (from 0.7 to
1.66). Similarly, the vocabulary increased 0.8 points between the pre and post- test (from
0.76 to 1.56). Finally the last two aspects that were impacted in a minor proportion were
originality with 0.8(from 0.78 to 1.80) and pronunciation with 0.54 (from 1.02 to 1.56).
PRE-TEST POST-TEST
N Min Max M SD Min Max M SD
Vocabulary 25 0.5 1 0.76 0.25 0.5 2 1.56 0.50
Fluency 25 0 1 0.7 0.33 1 2 1.66 0.49
Pronunciatio
n
25 0.5 2 1.02 0.39 1 2 1.56 0.51
Content 25 0.5 1 0.78 0.26 1 2 1.80 0.44
Originality 25 0 2 0.80 0.47 1 2 1.60 0.49
PEER FEEDBACK THROUGH VOKI
16
Table 3
Paired Sample Test
Paired differences
Mean S.D.
Standar
d Mean
Error
95% Confidence
Interval of the
Difference
t gl
Sig. (2 -
tailed) Lower Upper
Par 1 Post-
Test
-
Pre-
Test
3.9800 1.510
2
.3020 3.356
6
4.603
4
13.177 24 .000
The paired T test to related samples revealed that the intervention of the innovation was
highly reliable with a result of 1.76 E-12 (p<0. 05). It means that the results are statistically
significant. The students increased their knowledge considerably and they learned and
internalize the different dimension of oral communication as well as speaking register.
Taking the data from the experimental and control group and doing the appropriate
calculation, a highly significant Cohen’s d effect size of 3.34 was obtained which means that
peer feedback and the support of Voki provided a positive impact in the learning of the
speaking register.
Regarding the second research question, what are the students’ perspective toward the
components of this innovation? This study used a survey to get explicit information from the
perspective of students. The structure of the survey was based on the Likert scale, because it
allowed the participants to select among the level of acceptance and disagreement of
PEER FEEDBACK THROUGH VOKI
17
pedagogical innovation. The questions were grouped into four categories which are described
in detail in Table 4.
Table 4.
Description of Categories
Categories Description
Level of Pronunciation It involves the sound words are pronounced
Level of Fluency It involves the speed words are pronounced
Knowledge of Feedback It involves if participants recognize peer-feedback
Knowledge of Speaking register It involves if participants recognize register in
spoken context.
In the experimental group, the first results of the survey determined that for the question
that states if students need to improve their level of pronunciation, the answers provided an
average of 4.36 (agree), and for the question that asked if the students consider if they need to
improve their level of fluency, the answers provided an average of 4.68 (totally agree- agree).
After applying the innovation, the students were asked if they have improved their
pronunciation, for that question they provided a more realistic answer with an average of 4.12
(agree). Furthermore, they were asked if they have improved their fluency, they critically
responded with a total average of 4.12 (agree).
Table 5
Percentage of Pronunciation and Fluency
Categories Pre-Survey Post-survey
Level of Pronunciation 4.36 4.12
Level of Fluency 4.68 4.12
Knowledge of Feedback 1.88 4.16
Knowledge of Speaking Register 1.52 4.08
PEER FEEDBACK THROUGH VOKI
18
With regard to the question that if students know what peer feedback is, in the pre-test,
the students’ answers provided an average of 1.88 (totally disagree-disagree) and for the
question that if students know what the register was, the answers of students provided an
average of 1.52 (totally disagree- disagree). After applying the educational innovation, the
participants gave an average 4.16 (agree) for the question that if now they know what peer-
feedback is and how to apply and 4.08 (agree) for the question that if now they know what
register is (Table 5).
The answers to the open questions shown that from 25 participants, 23 declared that
with the application of the innovation, they felt more motivated and relaxed when speaking in
English. Moreover, these 23 students reported that this experience encouraged them to
continue to learn English in the future. Twenty-two students also said that now, they can
recognize the characteristics of formal and informal English and how to express them in
speaking activities. Twenty students met their expectations at using Voki and they considered
it an effective tool to improve speaking register.
Discussion
Taking in consideration the findings, this research examined whether peer-feedback
through Voki tool could improve students’ awareness of the register in spoken activities. The
mean comparison of the pre-test and post-test results shown that effectively the students who
were involved in this study had a considerable growth of 3.98 (difference between the means)
in their capacity of oral communication and knowledge of formal and informal register. This
positive effect provided evidence that supported what Hepplestone, Glover, Irwin, and Parkin
(2016) had expressed about feedback. Hepplestone et al (2016) said feedback is a useful
teaching strategy that helped increase the students’ learning by checking their progress. In
PEER FEEDBACK THROUGH VOKI
19
this study, feedback made a crucial difference that helped obtain the expected results that
implies students recognize formal and informal register through oral practicing.
Other relevant point to consider involved the Communicative Language Method (CLT)
which was fundamental to reinforce the class, providing what Harmer (2010) recognized as a
learning ambiance which the communicative real-life interaction is developed properly.
In qualitative terms, the results shown that students of the experimental group believed
that through communication production, they enhanced their pronunciation with a total
average response of 4.12 (agree) and fluency, with a total average response of 4.12 (agree).
This finding agrees with the thought of Pourhosein (2016) suggesting that oral interaction
must aim to foster the pronunciation constantly. Nation and Newton (2008) also stated that
fluency is an essential dimension to be included in the speaking skill.
Regarding the register, Thornbury (2005) stated that it can be identified according to
the background, person, and specific situation. This study used a specific situation where
students had the opportunity to recognize the formal and informal register in spoken
activities. That is why, most of the students agreed that they were aware what the register
was. Also, the feedback variable results shown that the average of responses of students, 4.12
(agree) of the experimental group could understand how to give and receive peer-feedback,
this finding coincided with what Allen, Blythe, Dichter, and Lynch (2018) mentioned in their
thesis, they said that the ladder of feedback protocol fosters effective feedback through
sequential scenarios that starts from asking questions to suggesting ideas.
The application of technology resources contributed in a remarkable change in the
learning progress of students, confirming what Bahadorfar and Omidvar (2014) said about
the role of technology. This researcher stated that Voki can be used as an engaging tool
where feedback can gradually be applied to improve learning.
PEER FEEDBACK THROUGH VOKI
20
Conclusion
In public institutions, there is a crucial need to improve speaking skills because it is
considered a natural way to convey information. Even though students struggle constantly to
acquire this ability, teachers should inspire an intrinsic motivation in teenagers to practice oral
activities. In this context, this research study analyzed the effects of applying an innovative
teaching strategy with the support of Voki to encourage students to participate in spoken
activities in English. The data collected in the literature reported that peer feedback is an
effective methodology that enhances learning and with Voki, as a technological aid, students
can have a motivating learning experience.
The current findings showed that despite the fact that students believe that
communicating ideas in English is very challenging, they could obtain a considerable oral
language achievement because of the application of the innovative learning strategy and also
the contemporary tool. This educational innovation can potentially reduce the gap between
students and the learning of English communication and enhance knowledge acquisition to
practice the register as well as improving pronunciation and fluency. Consequently, the
students felt comfortable in the moment of giving and receiving feedback, and their insecurity
for expressing ideas orally decreased considerably.
Another contribution of this study was the collaborative learning that students could
experience when using peer feedback. Students were able to learn about feedback through the
ladder of feedback protocol in which according to Allen, Blythe, Dichter, and Lynch (2018),
there were some phrases that, in a constructivist manner the peers applied to create a
sequential feedback and in this way to guide each participant to a concerted learning.
Finally, using Voki addressed one of the requirements in the Ecuadorian English
Teachers Standard regarding the importance of using technology in classes to improve
learning of the English language (Ministerio de Educación, 2012). However, it is necessary to
PEER FEEDBACK THROUGH VOKI
21
emphasize that if there is not a proper strategy in which a teacher can give guidance to
students to be independent learners, no technology resources will be very useful. This was
evidenced in the comparison results of the two groups (experimental, control).
In the surveys taken to the groups, it was determined that the students of the control
group had more computers at home and their access to internet was bigger than the students
of experimental group. However, the students of the experimental group who were taught the
topic using the peer feedback strategy with the support of Voki, had profitable results in the
post test than students of the control group who were taught the topic without implementing
the strategy.
Limitations
The study shown some limitations that involved three important issues such as,
computer lab availability, the fluctuating motivation of participants, and internet resource.
First, there were some days at the beginning of the project that the computer lab was
occupied by other activities such as teachers meeting and work presentations. This problem
delayed the project for several days and forced the researcher to reschedule the dates to use
the lab.
Another limitation involved the fluctuating motivation of participants. At first instance,
the students were very excited to participate in the research study but when the school classes
became very hard, they did not want to continue anymore. The problem was solved after
some talks with them and with their parents to indicate the great importance of being the first
ones in participating in a project like this.
Finally, even though one fundamental point of this research was based on the use of the
internet, sometimes it suffered some failures. For example, the signal was slow and at times
students had to wait several minutes to obtain internet access. The above issues prompted the
researcher to talk to the principal to highlight the advantages students will have of getting
PEER FEEDBACK THROUGH VOKI
22
involved in this research study and also to remind him about the consent letter he signed
where it was specified the time, the schedule, and the importance of institution cooperation.
After this meeting the researcher and students received the complete support and facilities to
finish this study.
Recommendations
This research case has some recommendations to consider. At first instance, the
researcher has to check with the authorities the dates in which the lab can be available to be
used. Another recommendation includes talking with the academic coordinator to provide
academic incentives to students, so they can feel encouraged to participate actively in the
research. Finally, testing with several anticipated weeks the correct function of all the
resources students are going to manipulate and if any of them do not work properly, talk to
authorities as soon as possible.
PEER FEEDBACK THROUGH VOKI
23
References
Aikina, T., & Zubkova, O. (2015). Integrating online services into English language teaching
and learning: The case of Voki. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in
Learning (iJET), 10(3), 66-68. Retrieved from
http://journals.sfu.ca/onlinejour/index.php/i-jet/article/view/4546/3535
Alamri, W. (2018). Communicative language teaching: Possible alternative approaches to
CLT and teaching contexts. English Language Teaching, 11(10), 132-138. Retrieved
from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1192263.pdf
Albino, G. (2017). Improving speaking fluency in a task-based language teaching approach:
The case of EFL learners at PUNIV-Cazenga. SAGE Open, 7(2), 1-11.Retrieved from
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/2158244017691077
Retrieved from https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/2158244017691077
Allen, D., Blythe, T., Dichter, A., & Lynch, T. (2018). Protocols in the Classroom: Tools to
Help Students Read, Write, Think, & Collaborate. New York, NY: Teachers College
Press.
Bahadorfar, M., & Omidvar, R. (2014). Technology in teaching speaking skill. Acme
International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 2(4), 9-13. Retrieved from
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Reza_Omidvar2/publication/315790125_TECH
NOLOGY_IN_TEACHING_SPEAKING_SKILL/links/58e526dd45851547e17f75e6/
TECHNOLOGY-IN-TEACHING-SPEAKING-SKILL.pdf
Boone, H. & Boone, D. (2012). Analyzing Likert data. Journal of Extension, 50(2), 1-5.
Retrieved from https://www.joe.org/joe/2012april/pdf/JOE_v50_2tt2.pdf
Council of Europe (2020). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages
(CEFR).The CEFR Levels. Retrieved from https://www.coe.int/en/web/common-
european-framework-reference-languages/level-descriptions.
PEER FEEDBACK THROUGH VOKI
24
Cortina, J. (1993). What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and applications.
Journal of Applied Psychology 78(1), 98-104. Retrieved from
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/2e9a/ccd64f810f9ae12ab35d905e43ecea35b85a.pdf.
Education First. (2020).Quick-English-check. Retrieved from http://www.efset.org/es/ quick-
english-check/.
Harmer, J. (2010). How to Teach English (new edition). Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.
Hepplestone, S., Glover, I., Irwin, B., & Parkin, H. (2016). Setting out the role of feedback in
the assessment process through both the student and tutor perspective. Practitioner
Research in Higher Education, 10(1), 81-90. Retrieved from
https://eric.ed.gov/?q=Setting+out+the+role+of+feedback+in+the+assessment+proces
s+through+both+the+student+and+tutor+perspective&ft=on&id=EJ1129940
Heuristic. (n.d.). In Merriam-Webster´s online dictionary.Retrieved from
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/register
Juhana, J. (2012). Psychological factors that hinder students from speaking in English class
(A case study in a senior high school in South Tangerang, Banten, Indonesia). Journal
of Education and Practice, 3(12), 100-110. Retrieved from
https://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JEP/article/view/2887
Kalpana, G., & Rao, V. (2018). Integrated Approach-A Tool to Enhance English Speaking
Skills. i-Manager's Journal on English Language Teaching, 8(3), 1-6 Retrieved from
https://search.proquest.com/docview/2157724676?pq-origsite=gscholar
Levis, J & Grant, L. (2003). Integrating pronunciation into ESL/EFL classrooms. TESOL
Journal, 12(2), 13-19. Retrieved from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/261285691_Integrating_pronunciation_into
_ESLEFL_classrooms
PEER FEEDBACK THROUGH VOKI
25
Long, M. H. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In
W. C. Ritchie, & T. K. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp.
413-468). New York: Academic Press
Ministerio de Educación. (2012). Estándares de calidad educativa [Standards of educational
quality]. Retrieved from Ecuadorian in-Service English Teacher Standards:
https://educacion.gob.ec/wp-
content/uploads/downloads/2012/09/estandares_2012_ingles_opt.pdf
Ministerio de Educación. (2016). English as a foreign language for upper level. Retrieved
from: https://educacion.gob.ec/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2016/08/EFL-for-
Subnivel-Superior-of-EGB-ok.pdf
Nation, I., & Newton, J. (2008). Teaching ESL/EFL listening and speaking. New York:
Routledge.
Ni, H. (2012). The effects of affective factors in SLA and pedagogical implications. Theory
& Practice in Language Studies, 2(7), 1508-1513. Retrieved from
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/8d1a/804def9080d8055ef2d673c00212eca4bde8.pdf/
Pourhosein, G. (2016). English pronunciation instruction: A literature review. International
Journal of Research in English Education, 1(1), 1-6. Retrieved from
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Abbas_Pourhosein_Gilakjani/publication/26772
2924_The_Significance_of_Pronunciation_in_English_Language_Teaching/links/594
687deaca2722db4a6011f/The-Significance-of-Pronunciation-in-English-Language-
Teaching.pdf
Richards, J. (2015). The changing face of language learning: Learning beyond the classroom.
RELC Journal, 46(1), 1-18. Retrieved from
https://eric.ed.gov/?q=The+changing+face+of+language+learning%3a+Learning+bey
ond+the+classroom.&pr=on&id=EJ1057006
PEER FEEDBACK THROUGH VOKI
26
Rollinson, P. (2005). Using peer feedback in the ESL writing class. ELT journal, 59(1), 23-
30. Retrieved from
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.453.9389&rep=rep1&type=
Sardareh, S. (2018). Formative feedback in a Malaysian primary school ESL context.
MOJES: Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 4(1), 1-8. Retrieved
from
https://eric.ed.gov/?q=Formative+feedback+in+a+Malaysian+primary+school+ESL+c
ontext&pr=on&id=EJ1088642
Saville-Troike, M. & Barto, K. (2016). Introducing second language acquisition. New York.
Cambridge University Press.
Smith, D. (2017). Collaborative Peer Feedback. International Association for Development of
the Information Society. Paper presented at the Fifth International Conference on
Educational Technologies, Sydney, Australia. Retrieved from
https://eric.ed.gov/?q=Collaborative+Peer+Feedback.+&pr=on&id=ED579292
Spies, T., & Xu, Y. (2018). Scaffolded academic conversations: access to 21st-century
collaboration and communication skills. Intervention in School and Clinic, 54(1), 22-
30. Retrieved from
https://eric.ed.gov/?q=Scaffolded+Academic+Conversations%3a+Access+to+21st-
Century+Collaboration+and+Communication+Skills.+&pr=on&id=EJ1188177
Stringer, E. (2008). Action research in education. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice
Hall.
Tingen, J., Philbeck, L., & Holcomb, L. (2011). Developing classroom web sites for 21st
century learning. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 47(2), 88-90. Retrieved from
PEER FEEDBACK THROUGH VOKI
27
https://eric.ed.gov/?q=Developing+classroom+web+sites+for+21st+++century+learni
ng.+Kappa+Delta+Pi+Record%2c&pr=on&id=EJ921662
Tok, H. (2009). EFL learners' communication obstacles. Electronic Journal of Social
Sciences, 8(29), 84 -100. Retrieved from
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.883.3920&rep=rep1&type=
Tomlinson, B. (2013). Applied linguistics and materials development. London: Bloomsbury
Academic.
Thornbury, S. (2005). How to teach speaking. Harlow: Longman
Tavakol, M., & Dennick, R. (2011). Making sense of Cronbach's alpha. International Journal
of Medical Education, 2, 53-55. Retrieved from
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4205511/.
Yona, S., & Marlina, L. (2014). The use of Voki website in teaching speaking on oral
descriptive text for junior high school students. Journal of English Language
Teaching, 3(1), 235-242. Retrieved from
http://ejournal.unp.ac.id/index.php/jelt/article/view/4381/3439
Yoshida, M. (2018). Choosing technology tools to meet pronunciation teaching and learning
goals. CATESOL Journal, 30(1), 195-212. Retrieved from
https://eric.ed.gov/?q=Choosing+Technology+Tools+to+Meet+Pronunciation+Teachi
ng+and+Learning+Goals.&ft=on&id=EJ1174226
Zajda, J. (2018). Effective constructivist pedagogy for quality learning in schools.
Educational Practice and Theory, 40(1), 67-80. Retrieved from
https://eric.ed.gov/?q=Effective+Constructivist+Pedagogy+for+Quality+Learning+in
+Schools&pr=on&id=EJ1191495
PEER FEEDBACK THROUGH VOKI
Appendix No 1
Design from Your Goals [1]
Instructional design of units for transfer of learning to real life contexts
Available upon request.
PEER FEEDBACK THROUGH VOKI
Appendix No 2
SELF-VALORIZATION OF THE USE OF VOKI TO DEVELOP THE SPOKEN ABILITY
IN A SECOND LANGUAGE
Demographic Information/Información Demográfica
Available upon request.
SELF-VALORIZATION OF THE USE OF VOKI TO DEVELOP THE SPOKEN ABILITY
IN A SECOND LANGUAGE
PRE SURVEY: SPEAKING –TECHNOLOGICAL TOOL – REGISTER-FEEDBACK
Instructions: Select one of the choices you believe fits best to you
(Instrucciones: Seleccione la opción más cercana a lo que Usted piensa respecto de cada una de las afirmaciones
siguientes)
TD=Totalmente en Desacuerdo D=en Desacuerdo Indeciso A=de Acuerdo TA=
Totalmente de Acuerdo (TD=Totally disagree D=Disagree I= Undecided A=Agree TA= Totally agree)
Available upon request.
SELF-VALORIZATION OF THE USE OF VOKI RO DEVELOP THE SPOKEN ABILITY
IN A SECOND LANGUAGE
POST SURVEY: SPEAKING – TECHNOLOGICAL TOOL
Available upon request.
SELF-VALORIZATION OF THE USE OF VOKI TO DEVELOP THE SPOKEN ABILITY
IN A SECOND LANGUAGE
POST SURVEY: REGISTER- FEEDBACK
Available upon request.
PEER FEEDBACK THROUGH VOKI
Appendix 3
PRE TEST
Name: Course:
Date:
Available upon request.
POST TEST
Name: Course:
Available upon request.
PEER FEEDBACK THROUGH VOKI
Appendix 4
Available upon request.
LADDER OF FEEDBACK
PEER FEEDBACK THROUGH VOKI
Appendix 5
RUBRIC FOR THE RECORDING
Available upon request.
RUBRIC FOR THE FINAL PRESENTATION OF VOKI
Available upon request.
ASSESSMENT PLAN FOR SPEAKING (INNOVATION PROJECT)
Types of Evaluation
Task and
Product
Assessment
Tool
Evaluator Assessment
Date
Grade
Formative Assessment
Performance task Recording
V.1
Rubric
Recording
Peer and
instructor
To be defined -
Performance task Recording
V.2
Rubric
Recording
Peer and
instructor
-
Performance task Presentation
of Voki V.1
Rubric
Presentation
Peer and
instructor
-
Performance task Quiz Answer Key Peer and
instructor
Summative Assessment
Performance task Recording
Final Version
Rubric
Recording
Instructor 40%
Performance task Presentation
Final Version
Rubric
Presentation
Instructor 40%
Performance task Final Quiz Answer Key Instructor 20%
top related