Investigating external motivating factors in CALL settings

Dr George S. YpsilandisDept. of Italian Studies

Aristotle University of Thessalonikiypsi@itl.auth.gr

The Background: IntroductionVocational Education Polytechnics Technical

Universities

Vocational Education Vocational

Schools

GeographyVocational

SchoolsSecondary Education

Technical Universities Universities

The situation

English language Problematic

Lack of suitable material

Mixed ability groups

Vocational Schools

clientele from secondary education

Schools whereFrench lang. English lang.

Placement Test

Beginners 5 hours per week

Advanced 2 hours per week

Beginners + Advanced for ESP

Again mixed ability

The teaching method

Course bookGrammar oriented

The problemThose students with HIGH

interlanguage level thought they had nothing

to learn

Those students with LOW interlanguage level

thought they could not learn

Motivation was very low

Indicators of low Motivation

Class attendance

was lowWillingness

to participate in class

activities was low

Motivation is contagious

… and so is lack of

motivation

Motivation is increased by “unique combination of tutorial, interactive, and visual capabilities” Kenning & Kenning (1983:3)

Low student motivationNeither instl nor integr

Internal or external

Any negative reactionwas attributed to technophobia of students or teachers

Teacher motivation

Computer

Enthusiasts by increasing self confidence (Ahmad et al. 1985)

“an innate attraction... (especially for teenage boys..)” Roberts (1981:121)

• Language as a subject of study and not as a medium

• Not giving ‘voice and identity’• Or ‘engage in future selves’

Teacher Reaction

Employ engagement / pedagogical strategies to

enhance motivation

“there is no evidence whatever in the extensive research literature on the affective and motivational aspects of second language

acquisition (see e.g. Gardner 1979; Heckhausen and Weiner 1972), to suggest that the

computer - or any other extrinsic motivator - will have more than a very short-term effect in

enthusing the jaded language learner” (Thomas1986:117).

Scholfield, P.J. & Ypsilandis G.S. (1994) "Evaluating Computer Assisted Language

Learning from the Learners΄ Point of View" in Graddol, D. and Swann, J. Evaluating Language

Multilingual Matters LTD. pp. 62-74.

Traditional Use

At a later stage

1st Stage

2nd Stage1st MC 1. Ind. 2. Group

2nd SB 3. Ind. 4. Group

3rd GF 5. Ind. 6 Group

The experiment: 3 stages

1st Stage Vocabulary, Grammar, Cultural

HyperTexted Material

Practice: Testing Software

2nd Stage Preparation Stage of a topic

Some Linguistic Input

3rd Stage Class discussion

Teacher’s Role: Offer Extra Feedback

Teacher’s Role: Assist Preparation

Teacher’s Role: Coordination discussion in target language

Data Collection

Class Observations

28 items QuestionnaireOdell’s (1986)• Technical•Pedagogical

Results: General Indicators of Motivation change from observations

Class attendance

was increased Class

participation was

increased

• Students used their break to study the

material!!!!!

Results: Technical Design Features

Loading the program

Get Help

Quitting the program

Repeating the program

Following the instructions

Opti

ons o

ffere

d

Manipulating the Cursor

Screen Layout

Generally Positive in all seven groups

Strong disagreement of first 6 with 7

Compatibility of program with other teaching.

Adequacy of feedback provided by program

1 2 3 4 5 6 701020304050

1 2 3 4 5 6 701020304050

Kruskal-Wallis’s test (p= .0000).

Mann-Whitney’s test p=.0001.

Kruskal-Wallis’s test (p= .0000).

Mann-Whitney’s test p=.0002.

Strong disagreement of first 6 with 7

Suitability of program to personal needs

1 2 3 4 5 6 7010203040

Intrinsic interest of program

1 2 3 4 5 6 70

1 02 03 04 05 0

Kruskal-Wallis’s test (p= .0298). Mann-Whitney’s test showed that wasdue to marked correlations between the subjects 2,4,5,6

Kruskal-Wallis’s test (p= .0002).

Mann-Whitney’s test ALL 6

Strong disagreement of first 6 with 7Motivating quality of

computer task

1 2 3 4 5 6 701020304050

Preference for computer based learning

1 2 3 4 5 6 701020304050

Kruskal-Wallis’s test (p= .0000).

Mann-Whitney’s test p=.0007.

Kruskal-Wallis’s test (p= .0000).

Mann-Whitney’s test ALL 6

Suitability of content to objectives

1 2 3 4 5 6 701020304050

Suitability of content to task

1 2 3 4 5 6 70102030405060

Kruskal-Wallis’s test (p= .0000).

Mann-Whitney’s test 2,4,5,6

Kruskal-Wallis’s test (p= .0006).

Mann-Whitney’s test 4,6

Some agreement of traditional with experimental

Further exploration of the Data, Exploratory Correlations among Dependent variables (Spearman)

Program useful to needs

Thematic content suited to objectives

(p=0.04)

Linguistic content suited to student level

(p=0.02)

Preference for computer-based learning

(p=0.09)

Found the task motivating

Further exploration of the Data, Exploratory Correlations among Dependent variables (Spearman)

Words/text useful regardless of the

activity

Linguistic content suited to student level

(p=0.08)

Preference for computer-based learning

(p=0.005)

Found the task motivating

Conclusions: Impact of motivation theory on CALL?

Motivation seems to be a ‘multidimensional construct closely linked with the content of task which needs to satisfy learner’s personal needs and be at the right level.

Giving voice and identity to what the learner wishes to do

with language

The type of activity does not add to motivation if the above is missing.

Activities need to be meaningful

Further conclusions

integrating CALL material with what is going on in the rest of a language course is seen positively by users. CALL to match method of teaching

The more elaborate feedback does not pass unnoticed by CALL users and indeed receives a more favourable reaction.

Feedback seems to be playing a major role in subjects’ attitudes (positive or negative) to CALL software.

LimitationsPPP approach…. Now out of fashion

The questionnaire was very general and, therefore, it could not provide an in-depth analysis of any area. Rather it has played a reconnaissance role, in spotting areas of difficulty with possible suggestions, which, however, need further experimentation and evaluation.

This procedure does not tell us much about the learning process itself which could be the target in future CALL research

Finally

Technology by itself does not add to motivationHowever

It may have a possible effect as a pedagogical / engagement strategy