整合角色扮演策略、網路語音通訊與社群軟體促進英文寫作與口語技巧

全文

(1)國立臺灣師範大學資訊教育研究所博士論文指導教授：張國恩博士侯惠澤博士. Applying a role-playing strategy to enhance learners’ writing and speaking skills in EFL courses using social networking platform and VoIP tool. 研究生：顏嬿真撰. 中華民國一〇六年十月.

(2)

(3) 摘要整合角色扮演策略、網路語音通訊與社群軟體促進英文寫作與口語技巧顏嬿真在亞洲英文為外國語言(EFL)教學面臨了許多挑戰，因為多元文化和環境因素，諸如缺乏互動對話的環境、重視測驗分數和外語焦慮。本研究進行一個英文為外語教學的課程，藉由整合角色扮演教學策略、 Facebook(社群軟體)和 Skype(網路語音通訊軟體)作為學習環境，來促進英文寫作與口語技巧能力，並觀察學習成效與口說錯誤行為。本研究計劃由兩個子研究組成。在研究一，我們目標是在研究應用 Facebook 和 Skype 及結合角色扮演教學策略作為強化英文為外國語言學習者的口語和寫作技巧方法之效果。這研究由 42 位受試者組成，他們都選修了在臺灣一所商業大學的英語會話課程，我們將進行學習成效分析、相關分析和學習過程的質性內容分析，並且將會探索和討論學習者是否提升他們的口語和/或寫作技能。在研究一，我們主要聚焦在學習者的英文口語和寫作成效，但沒有對不同類型的口說錯誤類別進行深度分析。因此在研究二，我們將整合角色扮演教學策略和 Skype 來確認其對於學習者在英文口語進步上的影響，本實驗將對 52 位在相同的大學，已選修英語會話課程的英文為外國語言學習者進行研究。. i.

(4) 這些學習者們將會被隨機且均等分配在實驗組或控制組裡，此研究嘗試找出是否學習者在 Skype 的學習環境裡會比面對面(face-to-face)的環境裡提升他們口語表達能力，及減少口說錯誤的次數。實驗組將透過 Skype 進行線上口語討論活動，而控制組要在面對面的環境進行口語討論，本研究將在這兩種環境中分別逐字記錄所有學習者口語討論的內容，並編碼分析每個句子裡所出現的口說錯誤，也將探索學習者是否在 Skype 的學習環境或面對面學習環境裡會降低其口說錯誤的次數和提升口語表達能力。關鍵字：電腦輔助語言學習、英文為外國語言、角色扮演、網路語音通訊、社群軟體. ii.

(5) Abstract Applying a role-playing strategy to enhance learners’ writing and speaking skills in EFL courses using social networking platform and VoIP tool. Yen, Yen-Chen. English as a foreign language (EFL) instruction faces many challenges in Asia because of many cultural and environmental factors, such as the lack of interactive speaking environments, emphasis placed on test scores, and foreign language anxiety. The purpose of this research is to conduct an EFL instructional course by integrating Facebook (social network service) and Skype (voice over IP) as learning environment through which learners perform role-playing based learning activities and to observe the effects of the course on the challenges mentioned above. This research proposal consists of two sub-studies. In the study 1, we aimed to investigate the effectiveness of applying the role-playing instructional strategy to Facebook and Skype as a means to enhance learners’ speaking and writing skills in an EFL class. This study consisted of 42 participants who enrolled in an English conversation course in a business university in Taiwan. We conducted a learning performance analysis, correlation analysis, and qualitative content analysis of learning process, and explored and discussed whether the learners improved their speaking and/or writing skills. In study 1, we mainly focused on learners’ speaking and writing performance and did not have an in-depth analysis of different type of speaking error category. iii.

(6) Therefore, in study 2, we integrated role-playing and Skype to determine their impacts on the learners’ English speaking improvement. This experiment conducted on 52 young adult EFL learners registered in an English conversation course in the same university. These learners were randomly and equally assigned into the experimental or the control group. The research tried to find out whether the learners in the Skype learning environment outperform the learners in the face-to-face environment in terms of the occurrence of speaking errors in their oral productions. The experimental group undertook the tasks via Skype and the control group perform the tasks in a face-to-face environment. Verbatim data from the learners’ recorded utterances in two environments were analyzed. This study explored whether learners in the Skype learning environment and the face-to-face environment reduced their speaking errors and improve their oral performance. Keywords: CALL, Skype, Facebook, EFL, Role-playing. iv.

(7) Dedicated to My Beloved Parents, My Husband and My Lovely Daughter. v.

(8) ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS. I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my advisors, Prof. Kuo-En Chang and Prof. Huei-Tse Hou for their patience, motivation, inspiration, and continuous support of my Ph.D. study and research. Thanks for guiding me to find the right track and always being supportive and helpful in my study. Also, I would like to take this opportunity to thank my dissertation proposal and final defense committee, Prof. Yao-Ting Sung, Prof. Jie-Chi Yang, Prof. Yuan-Chen Liu, for their encouragement and insightful comments. Additional gratitude is given to my respectful mentor, Master Tin-Yin for her mental and spiritual support, and valuable guidance. She guided me to the straight path and taught me to how to cultivate myself. I truly appreciate her great wisdom and immense knowledge that she imparted to me. Finally, I would like to express the deepest appreciation to my father Vincent and mother Alice for their love, encouragement, endless confidence, and wise counsel throughout all my studies. Many thanks to my younger sister Anita and my younger brother Alex for cheering me up all the time. Thanks for always being there for me. Another special thanks to my husband Randy and my lovely daughter Lyla for their unwavering support, caring, and patience. I would never have been able to finish my study without the guidance of my advisors, help from friends, and fully support from my parents, siblings, husband, and daughter.. vi.

(9) Table of Contents List of Tables .................................................................................................................. x List of Figures ............................................................................................................... xi 1.. 2.. Introduction ............................................................................................................ 1 1.1.. Statement of the problem .................................................................................. 1. 1.2.. Statement of the purpose ................................................................................... 9. 1.3.. Research Questions ........................................................................................... 9. 1.4.. Hypothesis....................................................................................................... 10. Literature Review ................................................................................................ 11 2.1.. Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL) ............................................ 11. 2.2.. English as a Foreign Language (EFL) ............................................................ 13. 2.3.. CMC for EFL .................................................................................................. 15. 2.4.. SNS for EFL ................................................................................................... 18 2.4.1. SNS for Education ................................................................................... 18 2.4.2. Facebook for EFL .................................................................................... 19. 2.5.. VoIP for EFL ................................................................................................... 21 2.5.1. VoIP for Education ................................................................................... 21 2.5.2. Skype for EFL .......................................................................................... 22. 3.. 2.6.. Speaking Errors ............................................................................................... 24. 2.7.. Role-playing .................................................................................................... 27. Methodology ......................................................................................................... 30 3.1.. Study 1 ............................................................................................................ 30 3.1.1. Participants ............................................................................................... 30 3.1.2. Research Design....................................................................................... 30 3.1.3. Instructional Design and Procedures ....................................................... 30 vii.

(10) 3.1.4. Data Analysis ........................................................................................... 40 3.1.5. Content Analysis ...................................................................................... 41 3.2.. Study 2 ............................................................................................................ 41 3.2.1. Participants ............................................................................................... 41 3.2.2. Research Design....................................................................................... 42 3.2.3. Instructional Design and Procedures ....................................................... 42 3.2.4. Error Type Category................................................................................. 47 3.2.5. Data Analysis ........................................................................................... 50 3.2.6. Speaking Error Analysis .......................................................................... 51 3.2.7. Qualitative Content Analysis ................................................................... 51. 4.. Results and Discussion ......................................................................................... 52 4.1.. Study 1 ............................................................................................................ 52 4.1.1. Learning Performance Analysis ............................................................... 52 4.1.2. Correlation Analysis................................................................................. 52 4.1.3. Qualitative content analysis of writing process: peer-to-peer and self-correction .......................................................................................... 55 4.1.4. Qualitative content analysis of speaking process: peer-to-peer and self-correction .......................................................................................... 58 4.1.5. Attitude Analysis ...................................................................................... 61 4.1.6. Discussion ................................................................................................ 62. 4.2.. Study 2 ............................................................................................................ 64 4.2.1. Learning Performance Analysis ............................................................... 64 4.2.2. Speaking Error Analysis – Experimental Group ...................................... 67 4.2.3. Speaking Error Analysis – Control Group ............................................... 71 4.2.4. Qualitative content Analysis – Experimental Group ............................... 74. viii.

(11) 4.2.5. Qualitative content Error Analysis – Control Group ............................... 76 4.2.6. Discussion ................................................................................................ 78 5.. Conclusions and Future Works .......................................................................... 80 5.1.. Conclusions ..................................................................................................... 80. 5.2.. Future Works ................................................................................................... 82. References .................................................................................................................... 84 Appendix A: Writing Pretest Question (Study 1) ................................................... 102 Appendix B: Speaking Pretest Questions (Study 1) ............................................... 103 Appendix C: Writing Posttest Questions (Study 1)................................................ 104 Appendix D: Speaking Posttest Questions (Study 1) ............................................. 105 Appendix E: Attitude questionnaire form (Study 1) .............................................. 106 Appendix F: Vocabularies for the International Food Fair Activity (Study 2) ... 110 Appendix G: Food Adjectives Worksheet (Study 2) .............................................. 112 Appendix H: Example Questions for Discussion in Week 3 (Study 2) ................. 114. ix.

(12) List of Tables Table 1.1 The framework of study 1 and study 2 ............................................................ 6 Table 3.1 IELTS 9-band scale ....................................................................................... 32 Table 3.2 Pretest’s sample questions. ............................................................................ 34 Table 3.3 Delayed posttest’s sample questions ............................................................. 40 Table 3.4 Speaking Error Category ............................................................................... 48 Table 4.1 Paired t-tests of the pre- and posttest scores ................................................. 52 Table 4.2 Correlation analysis of learners’ performance and discussion frequency ..... 53 Table 4.3 Qualitative content analysis –Examples of learners’ peer-to-peer and self-correction in Facebook discussions ....................................................................... 56 Table 4.4 Qualitative content analysis –Examples of learners’ peer-to-peer and self-correction in Skype discussion .............................................................................. 59 Table 4.5 ANCOVA for pretest among control and experimental group ..................... 65 Table 4.6 ANCOVA for the control and experimental groups on the pretest ............... 66 Table 4.7 Paired t-tests of the pre- and posttest scores for each group ......................... 66 Table 4.8 Experimental group-comparison of all errors among stages......................... 67 Table 4.9 Control group-comparison of all errors among stages .................................. 72 Table 4.10 Examples of experimental group learners’ SS, ART, and PN in Skype discussions .................................................................................................................... 75 Table 4.11 Examples of control group learners’ PN and SS in face-to-face discussions .................................................................................................................... 77. x.

(13) List of Figures Figure 3.1 Study 1 – Experimental procedure .............................................................. 31 Figure 3.2 Study 1 - Team division ............................................................................... 35 Figure 3.3 Snapshot of the discussion on the Facebook “Wall”. .................................. 36 Figure 3.4 Snapshot of the students engaged in the role-playing activities using Skype............................................................................................................................. 39 Figure 3.5 Study 2 - Experimental procedure ............................................................... 44 Figure 3.6 Study 2 - Team division ............................................................................... 45 Figure 3.7 Snapshot of the control group students engaged in the face-to-face role-playing activities.................................................................................................... 46 Figure 3.8 Snapshot of the experimental group students engaged in the role-playing activities using Skype. .................................................................................................. 47. xi.

(14) 1. Introduction 1.1. Statement of the problem Due to globalization and the advancement of technology, people use English almost everywhere for international relations, local and foreign businesses, as the language is one of the global language today (Crystal, 2003). In non-native speaking countries, many students choose to learn English as a foreign language (EFL). English has become an important common language of communication among the people of different cultures. In order to provide better English teaching environments, the traditional teaching methods have been slowly changed with the development of multimedia technology (Pun, 2014). The modified types of teaching environment with technology, EFL learners would gain more confidence learning English. An essential strategy to the development of a foreign language is to incorporate social and cultural interactions for language learners. In Taiwan, English as foreign language learners are constantly challenged by the environment as it lacks a practical and suitable environment for students to practice their language development. A proper environment is one of the key elements for improving new language ability; hence students in Taiwan face obstacles of finding an appropriate environment to practice and improve English. (Yang & Chang, 2007). Therefore, EFL learners have less opportunities to collaborate, interact, and engage in classroom activities (Cloete, De Villiers & Rootd, 2009). Higgins (1995) suggested that technology played an important role addressing environment related challenges for EFL learners. For a long time, tools like computers have been utilized in learning forms of communications including oral, 1.

(15) listening. There seemed to be reduced availability of foreign language departments offering distance learning classes due to budget cuts, but seemingly the enrollments have increased resulting shortage of spaces for those who are interested, (Banados, 2006; Chenoweth, Ushida & Murday, 2006; Kraemer, 2008; Sanders, 2005; Strambi & Bouvet, 2003). The integration of technological advancement in communication and new EFL strategies called the Computer-Assisted Language Learning (CALL) is the new uprising method and has contributed many benefits to EFL instruction. The “Internet revolution” opened new opportunities for CALL applications such as text chats in which studies found helpful in language development, (Alwi, Adams & Newton, 2012). A popular product resulted from the “internet revolution” is the introduction of Social Networking Services (SNSs). These are web-based social networking platforms that enable users to grow and development a personalized social network through websites that allow users to share information, interact with others, and develop communities with similar interests. One of the most pronounced SNSs is Facebook. Despite the growing popularity with SNSs, there are not enough research studies on the potential usefulness of SNS in education and EFL instructions. Limited studies have concluded that Facebook and other SNSs have demonstrated significant potentials on how it may benefit EFL instruction. It is advised by many research studies that Facebook is powerful platform for EFL teaching used to enhance the students learning experience (Kabilan, Ahmad & Abidin, 2010). SNSs platform related studies suggested both entertainment and social perspectives is motivational for conducting EFL learning activities.. It can. keep the students interests and engaged with functions like instantaneous messaging between individuals and multiple members of a group. Yancey (2009) also suggested 2.

(16) that Facebook was a mean for students to improve their writing by linking the gaps between theoretical “writing” and outside “communication” providing learners with an authentic and personalized setting to practice. Writing skills are much emphasized in Facebook group participation, this tool could be helpful in enhancing and improving students’ writing skills (Yunus, Salehi, Sun, Yen, & Li, 2011). According to Hamada (2013), students more keen on becoming independent learners as Facebook could help students study and better their English ability feeling more effortless or less involuntarily. Consequently, Facebook effectively enhanced the EFL students’ writing abilities and helped them build positive attitudes toward language learning (Suthiwartnarueput & Wasanasomsithi, 2012). Overall, Facebook cultivated a positive environment and developed a system suitable for students to obtain new knowledge and thoughts from countless sources available on the platform (Al-Shehri, 2011). Most experts consider the speaking and listening aspects of EFL learning to be most essential. There are 3 ways of oral practices that could help students improve target learning language: comparisons of own oral production to target language, or by challenging the target language in various ways or by discussions about the language (Satar & Ozdener, 2008; Gánem Gutiérrez, 2003; Swain, 1997). In addition, many sociocultural studies recognized that speaking is a cognitive skill that can be used to regulate self, others, and objects such as language and tasks (Brooks, Donato, and McGlone, 1997). Vygotsky (1978) claimed that mental functions are developed through social settings, and that interactions with higher intellectual speakers would help build mental developments. The need for socialization may be satisfied with the introduction of voice over IP (VoIP) platforms, which is a great tool that transmits voice and multimedia over the Internet. It allows users to make 3.

(17) free or cheap reliable telephone calls worldwide. The technological advances, as Chun (2008) mentioned, are beneficial for research purposes as well as helpful in improving students’ pronunciation and speaking competence. A VoIP tool like Skype has embedded functionalities such as text and voice exchange, which can be used as a practice agent. The enabled function for verbal conversations can enhance the dimensions to EFL activities like listening and speaking. Skype provides the surveillance of multiple users’ voices, facial expressions, gestures and body language in real-time. Through network online chat-based interaction, learners can demonstrate improved grammatical competence (Lee, 2002; Pellettieri, 2000), build complex language structures (Sotillo, 2000), develop oral communication skills (Blake, 2000; Lee, 2002) and higher lexical capacity (Dussias, 2006). As a result, some students feel less pressure and become self-confident (Elia, 2006) speaking English via Skype rather than classroom setting, as there is no physical presence of the communicating party or parties (Bikowski & Kessler, 2002). Skype also can provide a cost effective means to practice English conversation courses anywhere at anytime. Another focus of this study is role-playing instructional strategy, which is critical for learners’ experience. Role-playing is an important strategy as it focuses on the ability to speak and communicate by playing different roles in real-world situation. It can correct stereotype concerns in China that college students can succeed in English classes because they are good test-takers but are poor communicators (Li, 2001). A common approach used to teach a foreign language is grammar translation approach where it targets on mastering language structure, vocabulary and understanding literature at the expense of speaking and communicating (Aliakbari & Jamalvandi, 2010). The trade-off is that students can 4.

(18) reproduce responses in predictable situational patterns but is challenged communicating effectively when put in unpredictable situations outside the classroom (Nunan, 2001). The task-based approach is a solution to improve speaking ability with optimal circumstances to “communicate effectively” and “communicate meaningfully” (Luchini, 2004). Both Skype and other VoIP platforms have also received attention for their potential in education and instructional design. Skype has voice and video functions and chat capabilities over the Internet; VoIP platforms actively engages listening and speaking during EFL activities. The benefit of the platform being Internet-based has many advantages, such as hosting a conversation class without teacher and students in a physical class and increased flexibility of course time and schedules. The combination of Skype and Facebook is a potential solution to overcome the limitations of online CALL strategies of EFL. The combination can create a familiar and less stressful environment used to practice the target language. This research proposal consists of two sub-studies as follows. Study 1: We focus on learners’ English speaking and writing performance. This study aims to investigate the effectiveness of applying the role-playing instructional strategy to Facebook and Skype as a means to enhance learners’ speaking and writing skills in an EFL class (see framework in Table 1.1). We explore and discuss whether the feature of Facebook and Skype demonstrate a platform that enhance learners’ learning experience and increase their motivation in EFL learning activities. During the role-playing interaction, we also analyzed whether learners experience peer-to-peer correction and realize self-correction processes. We conduct a. 5.

(19) quantitative and qualitative content analysis of the learning process and discuss whether learners improve their speaking and/or writing skills. There is one experimental group which Facebook and Skype are used to compare learners’ speaking and writing performance. Although there is no control group in this study, we planned to include it in our second study for an in-depth analysis of speaking error category.. Table 1.1 The framework of study 1 and study 2 (Part 1) Brief description Study 1. 1. We focused on learners’ English speaking and writing performance. 2. We integrated Facebook and Skype as learning environment. 3. We applied role-playing instructional strategy to Facebook and Skype to enhance learners’ English speaking and writing skills. 4. We analyzed whether the unique feature of Facebook and Skype demonstrate a platform that enhance learners’ experience and increase their motivation in the activities. 5. We analyzed whether learners experience peer-to-peer correction and realize self-correction processes. 6. We used oral interviews as the pre-test and post-test in this study. 7. We conducted a quantitative and qualitative content analysis of the learning process. 8. There were one experimental group, no control group. 9. Facebook and Skype were used for the experimental group. 6.

(20) (Part 2) Brief description Study 2. 1. We focused on learners’ English speaking performance and speaking errors. 2. We compared the effects of two different environments, i.e., Skype and face-to-face, on learners’ English speaking performance by assessing the frequency of errors (e.g., pronunciation, verb tense, and sentence structure) occurring in the learners’ oral productions during role-playing. 3. We applied role-playing instructional strategy in Skype and face-to-face to train learners’ speaking abilities and observe their interactive discussions. 4. We analyzed whether the learners’ could gradually reduce the number speaking errors and help improve their speaking skills in both Skype and face-to-face environments. 5. We analyzed whether the learners reached a peer-to-peer correction mechanism in order to reduce their speaking errors. 6. We used oral interviews as the pre-test and post-test in this study. 7. We conducted a quantitative and qualitative content analysis of the learning process. 8. There were one experimental group and one control group. 9. Skype was use for the experimental group and face-to-face is use for the control group.. 7.

(21) Study 2: Although qualitative research has been studied on EFL learning through CALL using role-playing based learning activities, there is not much quantitative research on the type and frequency of errors made and whether there is an improvement in error rate. This study mainly focuses on the Skype and its effectiveness towards English speaking errors. We divide errors into different classifications. In fact, language learning through online discussion on Skype has been extensively studied, but there is little quantitative research on the errors that these EFL learners made during the instructional course. In study 1, we discuss that learners might experience peer-to-peer correction. During the role-playing activity, learners might attempt to correct their partner’s grammar errors (e.g., pronunciation, sentence structure, verb tense…etc.) In study 2, we analyze whether the learners reached a peer-to-peer correction mechanism in order to reduce their speaking errors. We also compare the effects of Skype and face-to-face environments on learners’ English speaking performance by assessing the frequency of errors and the number of errors gradually reduced occurring in the learners’ oral productions during role-playing (see Framework in Table 1.1). The experimental group would be taught how to speak effectively by using the modern technological tools mainly Skype whereas the control group would be taught traditionally. Using a process-based quantitative content analysis and qualitative content analysis, we explored the effect of VoIP in EFL instruction through role-playing based activities on students’ speaking skills and whether they would help to reduce the number of errors.. 8.

(22) 1.2. Statement of the purpose Study 1 (S1) : S1-1. To conduct an EFL instructional course empirically by integrating Facebook and Skype as platforms through which students engage in role-playing based learning activities. S1-2. To explore and discuss whether the learners improved their speaking and/or writing skills in a SNS and VoIP environment. S1-3. To use SNS and VoIP to design an instructional activity to train EFL students’ speaking and writing abilities and observe students’ interactive discussions. Study 2 (S2) : S2-1. To use process analysis to carry out a quantitative and qualitative content analysis on the speaking errors made by EFL students over the entire EFL class. S2-2. To explore EFL learners’ speaking errors in the activity and determine which errors are reduced from pre to post-stage.. 1.3. Research Questions Study 1 (S1) : S1-1. Will conducting an EFL instructional course by integrating Facebook and Skype as platforms through which learners engage in role-playing based learning activities improve their speaking and/or writing skills? S1-2. Will the use of Facebook and Skype learning tools increase learners’ motivation in EFL learning? 9.

(23) Study 2 (S2) : S1-1. What are the types of speaking errors resulting from using CALL in role-playing based learning activities? S2-2. Do the learners in the Skype learning environment outperform the students in the face-to-face environment in terms of the occurrence of linguistic errors in their oral productions? S2-3. Will EFL learners’ speaking errors be reduced due to the instructional role-playing activities in Skype? S2-4. To what extent, do the learners in the Skype learning environment and the face-to-face environment improve their speaking skills?. 1.4. Hypothesis Study 1 (S1) : S1-1. Learners improve their speaking and writing skills through the combination of role-playing activities and the use of Facebook and Skype learning tools. S1-2. The unique feature of Facebook and Skype demonstrate a platform that enhance learners’ experience and increase their motivation in the activities. Study 2 (S2) : S2-1. Speaking errors are reduced by using Skype in EFL instruction through role-playing based activities. S2-2. Learners in Skype group show more improvement in their oral performance than learners in face-to-face group. 10.

(24) 2. Literature Review. 2.1. Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL) Technology has played a major role in addressing the above challenges faced by EFL learners and has transformed educational teaching and learning to the next level since the third millennium (Vrabcová, 2015). Technologies together with the introduction of Internet and electronical devices have changed the way we interact and collaborate with each other. Thus, the increased demands to learn English and growth in technological advancements, it is important to integrate both of these to help the learners. CALL is a form of language learning and teaching approach, in a highly interactive environment incorporating listening speaking, reading and writing skills Jafarian, Soori & Kafipour, 2012). The integration of instructional design into a CALL approach is therefore essential. The effectiveness of various CALL materials depends on instructional designs and how teachers apply these materials. When CALL and EFL pedagogy are appropriately used, learners can see improvements in their learning process have changed (Warschauer and Healey, 1998; Jafarian, Soori & Kafipour, 2012). In traditional language teaching, EFL teachers have limited time for error corrections and feedback for each individual EFL learner. CALL provides individualized instruction and immediate feedback as they complete the language learning tasks (Nagata, 1993). For instance, spelling errors and verb tense errors, can be identified and corrected in real time. This learning and teaching approach can overcome some shortcomings of traditional methods on feedback about errors and 11.

(25) recommendations in timely manner (Jafarian, Soori & Kafipour, 2012). Furthermore, CALL allows students to learn the target language at self-determined progress omitting the possible face-to-face interactions and it eliminates the anxiety of in-person interactions (AbuSeileek, 2007; Bikowski & Kessler, 2002). The technology has many benefits. CALL can customize the responses according to individuals and deliver contents and instructions repetitively without being tired. As we add the computer component into language learning, students would be more encouraged to contribute in live conversations. The increased Internet connectivity with evolved fresh learning methods for people. The network advancement enabled variations of CALL approaches like teaching in virtual environment unveiled the potential of technology has on EFL tool. (Gorjian, Moosavinia, Kavari, Asgari & Hydarei, 2011). Technology can connect larger groups of people for cooperative learning activities with the help of computerized instructions (Schcolnik & Kol, 1999). This ability of connecting people in more dynamic environment has increased learner satisfaction worldwide. The research had shown high CALL satisfaction scores amongst Italian and Japanese. (Morton, Davidson & Jack, 2008). Computer-based learning has limitations; the method is relatively new and requires further research. According to Blake (2008), extensive training of teachers and students is required to optimize the benefits of new learning technique since it is not a natural form of communication (Blake, 2008). Another limitation of CALL is the preferential challenge of virtual instructions instead of face-to-face instructions where most prefer in-person (Sanders, 2005). According to Baralt and Gurzynski-Weiss (2011), the result revealed that students’ foreign language anxiety. 12.

(26) was not significant lower in iChat interaction than face-to-face interaction. Therefore, the traditional method of face-to-face interaction might still be a beneficial form of communication among the students. This limitation should need more attention when using CALL with other strategies and different platforms.. 2.2. English as a Foreign Language (EFL) Vygotsky’s socio-cultural theory (1978) emphasized that social and cultural environment play a fundamental role in the development of an individual’s cognitive and mental function. Therefore, an appropriate learning environment would be essential for EFL learners to improve oral communications (Yang & Chang, 2007). Traditionally, English learning has been taking place in a classroom setting. However, most of these schools focus on the mastery of paper-and-pencil tests and sometimes neglected the students’ oral communication competence (Baker & Westrup, 2003). The shortage of interaction would affect other areas critical to language learning. In summary, deficient of an appropriate environment for language learning might hinder learners’ cultural experience and language acquisition and motivation (Kormos & Csizer, 2007). There are many research conducted on EFL instruction with respect to effective strategies and challenges (Shen & Suwanthep, 2011; Aliakbari & Jamalvandi, 2010; Liu & Jackson, 2008). Firstly, the interactive speaking and listening are important aspects of the learning experience since students have minimal opportunities to speak or write in English outside of the classroom. In traditional classrooms, students are asked to reproduce exactly what the teachers have taught in the class. Students taught in these classes have weaker communications due to infrequent use. 13.

(27) of English outside the classroom (Li, 2001). Hence, it is imperative to optimize classroom time and cultivate skills development related to speaking and writing (Erten & Altay, 2009). Language is a social mechanism of communication well connected with many cultural and social dynamics that have important consequences on the learning experience and learners often experience the “foreign language anxiety”. The anxiety would affect, emotions that control the students’ attention, influence their learning motivation, modify their choice of learning strategies and affect their self-regulation of learning (Pekrun, 2014). It is believed that learners with academic anxieties are faced with wide arrays of cognitive and emotional challenges that negatively affect completion of the task (Cassady, 2010). According to Macintyre and Gardner (1994), foreign language anxiety is complex and multidimensional referencing to “feeling of tension and apprehension specifically associated with second language contexts, including speaking, listening, and learning.” Horwitz, Horwitz, and Cope (1986) recognized three anxiety components of learning a new language: communication apprehension, test anxiety, and fear of negative evaluations. The test anxiety is associated with academic factors, which impacts test-taking ability rather than language skills. As per McCroskey (1977), the definition of communication apprehension is “the individual’s level of fear or anxiety associated with either real or anticipated communication with another person or persons.” When such anxiety reaches high level, learners would “withdraw from and seek to avoid communication when possible” (McCroskey, 1977). Another major concern is the cultural and academic emphasis on tests and quantifiable results in language learning. The emphasis rewards test-taking ability and English knowledge, instead of communication skill. The focus on test-taking ability adds 14.

(28) stress using English learning experience measured based test marks to compare with peers, which hinders students’ motivation. This is especially prevalent in Asian cultures. The cultural stigma associated with English in Asia creates unnecessary levels of stress and self-consciousness within EFL learners. Moreover, research shows that communication apprehension is common among language learners (Matsuoka, 2008) and Taiwan is no exception. Taiwanese EFL learners find it daunting to speak English because they are shy and anxious. They are afraid to receive negative evaluations and have the fear of being judged by others (Chu, 2008). These negative experiences and fear of negative judgment from others might hinder learners’ language learning and development (Hiew, 2012). A study by Chu (2008) showed a positive relationship between foreign language anxiety and learning where language proficiency of anxious language learners was often underestimated. However, Hadley (1992) mentioned that a moderate feeling of anxiety in EFL learning could help learners excite a passion for learning, and to get them to put more efforts to acquire the target language. There has been extensive research associated with new instructional strategies and technologies facing EFL challenges.. 2.3. CMC for EFL The introduction of computer-mediated communication (CMC) platforms addresses socialization needs, in which it provides opportunities for EFL learners to interact with other language learners or native speakers from all over the world. CMC is believed to provide a more relaxed environment, where students are less concerned about making mistakes, encourage peer learning, and feel less anxious. 15.

(29) (Kern, 1995). CMC would be a valuable tool cultivating learning from interaction between diverse and dispersed students in the form of online discussions (Wang, 2005). CMC can be categorized into two modes: synchronous or asynchronous. These two categories adopt extensive negotiation time between learners with increase talking time per learner, and more vocabulary variations compare to face-to-face communications (Abrams, 2003). Research studies show that both methods can effectively support language learning and teaching (Sun & Yang, 2015) and help EFL learners to develop social interaction both in and outside of the classroom (AbuSeileek & Qatawneh, 2013). Synchronous CMC mode may allow learners to participate in a real-time interaction and require immediate response by using tools such as Skype, FaceTime, or Zoom. Asynchronous CMC mode may allow learners to have more time to think, response, and uses external resources when they participate in an online conversation such as Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, MySpace, or Line (Abrams, 2003). The use of Internet technologies platforms for educational purposes can assist teachers with various possibilities to engage students to cooperate, collaborate knowledge building and knowledge sharing sessions (Sun & Yang, 2015). These platforms support the use of Internet technologies for educational purposes. It increased variations of teaching methods to engage students in cooperative and collaborative knowledge building and sharing environment (Sun & Yang, 2015). As for synchronous CMC, a research project was launched to understand online language exchange between Chinese English learners and Australian Mandarin learners (Tian and Wang, 2010). A survey responses from both groups indicated that language exchange via Skype improved their linguistic and intercultural competence. 16.

(30) Another project as per Yanguas (2010) compared conversations derived from task-based audio, video and face-to-face communications. The results in both audio and video communications had similar patterns to face-to-face communication, which indicated that this medium could be potentially be used for EFL teaching. The study by NetSupport School, developed an oral course based on cooperative CMC learning found that students had greater positive attitudes about the course and better linguistic abilities than those in a teacher-fronted CMC or traditional non-CMC classroom (AbuSeileed, 2007). According to Doughty and Long (2003), the main advantage of CMC language learning is learner’s experience in collaborative learning to interact, modify, elaborate conversations. As for asynchronous CMC, Godwin-Jones (2007) notes that YouTube is resourceful for language learning as the platform contains a huge multimedia database of real language use by real people. As suggest by Mayora (2009), the feature to post comments engages language learners in authentic writing tasks while practice listening skills browsing through the videos. Facebook is one of the asynchronous CMC, which provides individualized web space for learners. Several researches had shown effectiveness of this method. As Shih (2011) stated that Facebook’s blended learning experience was effective for EFL learners, who had moderate to high positive attitudes toward the instruction. The experience of the learners showed improvements in paragraph organization, content, vocabulary, spelling, and grammar. Facebook facilitated implicit peer assessment and serves as a motivation for EFL learners increase participation. Furthermore, Lai and Gu (2011) found that Facebook was one of the most frequently used communications methods outside the classrooms. From Facebook, students can self experiment with the target language tasks like self-evaluation on English 17.

(31) proficiency and connect speakers of the target language.. 2.4. SNS for EFL 2.4.1. SNS for Education Social Networking Systems (SNS), is web based social networking tool that offers the opportunity for users to flexibly re-structure hierarchies, inform and reconfigure communication, and maintain relationships of knowledge and people (Beer and Burrows, 2007; Cloete, De Villiers, & Roodt, 2009; Boyd & Ellison, 2010; Lim, 2012). The tool has the capability for users to uniquely reorganize knowledge according to users preference and understanding. One of the main educational benefits of using SNSs is that it provides learners with interactions opportunities that mirrors real-life common issues such as negotiating (Razak, Saeed & Ahmad, 2013). Another benefit of using SNSs s users can sign-up for new active learning environments of collaborative and interactive learning, often based on their interests and affinities which doesn’t have to be directly catered for in their immediate educational environment. Moreover, according to Beer and Burrows (2007), despite the current findings of the potential of SNSs learning methods, the areas around EFL context of SNS are yet fully explored. However, today, EFL learners have more opportunities to access SNS environment to learn and practice English. SNS encourages knowledge and information sharing through groups or communities (Selwyn, 2007). Essentially, SNSs provides EFL learners with the environment to be involved in online learning communities while practicing English and writing skill. This study adopted Facebook as a SNS language learning tool instead of other SNS platforms was because it is more suitable for online discussion. Unlike Twitter,. 18.

(32) it only allows users to update their messages up to 140 characters.. 2.4.2. Facebook for EFL Facebook has gained not only popularity, but also in utility in the past few years. The initial audience target was for the younger generation used as a mean to stay connected with each other. As the platform evolved, it became a mechanism of more than social interactions but that of international social change, organization, information. exchange,. and. even. trade.. Facebook. enabled. peer-to-peer. communication and collaboration (Golonka, Bowles, Frank, Richardson & Freynik, 2014). The fundamental functions allows individuals to express and tell their own stories to their social network instantaneously; users can also expand their network within their own interest groups, and maintain these relationships easier (Selwyn, 2009). It has become a staple in sustaining the basic human need to stay connected and be relevant in society. From these basic functions, it has progressed into a place to propagate individual and group thoughts and ideas, to coordinate meetings and discussions, even to organize social movements en masse. Facebook is one of the technology tools, which often used in EFL learning. Alsulami (2016) demonstrated that Facebook could easily develop learners’ writing, communication, and reading skills. Facebook’s powerful ability to group people and provide educational purpose simultaneously provoked this a subject interest in many previous studies (Kabilan, Ahmad & Abidin, 2010; Madge, Meek, Wellens & Hooley, 2009; Selwyn, 2009; Shih, 2011). The results from studies identified many great attributes of Facebook beneficial to EFL instructional strategies. For instance, the interface is familiar to many users, a ready-made, trustworthy communication. 19.

(33) platform where it would not require long adaption period. Although Facebook for educational purposes is not a new concept, it is only in its infant stages of research. Facebook now has roughly 850 million active users, a median that is familiar to many household and easy to grasp on with its user friendly interface. The easy accessibility and many fun factors do very well at engaging and retaining its audience. In Facebook, there are no pressures for immediate responses and apprehension from in-person communication. (Liu & Jackson, 2008). The lag gives the user time to formulate responses without pressure from negative evaluation; thereby decreased anxious behaviors associated with typical EFL students and are more inclined to communicate. (Liu & Jackson, 2008). These factors make. Facebook a viable candidate as a platform to build context for EFL learners to improve writing techniques (Shih, 2011). One of the key features of Facebook is its ability to allow multiple users to connect to the same group, each with the ability to contact all or individuals within group and share information. The feature allows users to conduct private and open group discussions online, an ideal platform for situated learning or role-playing instructional activities. Situated learning is defined as the acquisition of knowledge through a social or situational context (Brown, Collin, & Duguid, 1989). The use of Facebook (Shen & Suwanthep, 2011; Shih, 2011; Coll-Garcia & Linser, 2006) and content-based instruction (Deneme, 2011) are added incentives to EFL learning. As Facebook successfully engage its users, it indirectly increases the motivational effects on learners as well. Facebook can strengthen confidence and collaborative efforts but with limitations given its nature (Omar, Embi & Yunus, 2012). A limitation is that Facebook cannot cover full aspects of EFL learning, it is only effective for reading and writing and would require a different SNS tool to 20.

(34) cover the speaking and listening aspect of language learning.. 2.5. VoIP for EFL 2.5.1. VoIP for Education VoIP is synchronous CMC, which allows language learners with network access to communicate with other learners or speakers of the target language (Kern and Warschauer, 2000). VoIP tools provide voice and text chat for users anywhere in the world anytime. This specific feature makes VoIP a potential tool when teaching and learning English. For many learners, one of the primary purposes to learn a foreign language is to speak it. Thornbury (2005) affirms that speaking represents a real challenge to most language learners. When being able to speak a foreign language, communicating with people of other countries, ethnic groups, races, etc. becomes possible, the act of speaking a foreign language also might help individuals to build confidence, self-esteem, comprehension, and more (Vaseki, 2013). Lamy and Hampel (2007) affirm that VoIP fosters peer collaboration and can be use to give feedback to students. In addition, it helps learners to practice improve speaking, listening, writing and reading skills (Marín Ortiz, 2015). Agreed by many language teachers that speaking ability is sought to be one of the most difficult skill to obtain and teach when learning a new language. Regarding this, Brown and Yule (1983) stated, “learning to speak a foreign language is often considered to be one of the most difficult aspects of language learning for the teacher to help the student with.” Therefore, language teachers should try to create more circumstances to help students strengthen speech in the target language. Consequently, more interactive opportunities with others in various linguistic and. 21.

(35) social settings could practice language subsystems appropriately and spontaneously (Pawlak, Waniek-Klimczak, & Majer, 2011). VoIP tools provide many synchronous communications approaches for language teachers between students. The tool might help students who want to better their speaking skills by participating in online chats with native speakers or web lessons designed by the teachers. This study adopted Skype as a VoIP language learning tool instead of other VoIP platforms because it is a free, downloadable communication tool, and easier for learners to communicate in a cost-effective way.. 2.5.2. Skype for EFL Speech error provokes the highest anxiety amongst the four language skills by L2 learners (Macintyre & Gardner, 1991; Kessler, 2010). For many students, speaking practice takes place only in classroom settings due to lack of English-speaking environment. Consequently, the lack of practice hinders proficiency development hence increases anxiety source from self-awareness. (Peacock & Ho, 2003; Pong, 2010; Sun, 2009). Many real-time communication technologies can be used to train foreign language speaking skills, amongst that Skype is a popular tool with roughly 600 million users worldwide (Digital Company Statistics, 2016). Skype is a computer mediated synchronized communication platform (CMC) that links people from different places and is a great tool for learning language. In our study, we explored if instructional activities incorporating Skype could be useful for interactive learning when students are familiar with CMC environment. Skype generates fairly relaxing EFL learning environment, where the students are less apprehensive compared to the 22.

(36) physical classroom environment (Kern, 1995). The use of Skype as a voice-based CMC tool may increase learners’ motivation, let to higher linguistic achievement, and keep learning fresh and enticing. (Alastuey, 2011). One advantage of Skype is that it links people real-time from different places. A main feature is the real-time voice-message transmission and visual video connections from participating members and allows. Skype also facilitate learners to participate and interact via text chat, voice chat, voiced bulletin boards, or audio blogs (Levy, 2009). Learners can simply have a conversation, send text chat, or post a voice message in Skype. These features can combine with three important EFL activities: speaking, listening, and writing tasks. Payne and Ross (2005) claimed that instantaneous text chats might indirectly develop speaking ability, and enhance oral language production (Okuyama 2005; Payne & Whitney 2002). In Hussein and Elttayef (2016) study, Skype was chosen to motivate classrooms and demonstrate the friendly technology to learners used to learn the English language. This study was a mix of 70 males and female from Yarmouk University in Jordan; the goal was to use social tool like Skype to experiment on students to see the effects on English competency development. The results showed that learners in Skype chat group performed better on the post-test than those in the control group and had a positive impact on their discourse competence. In addition, the findings revealed that the learners acquired speaking skill more efficiently and effectively from Skype group chats. Another research by Gruban (2016), explored the types of e-Learning and learners’ attitude toward Skype lessons. This study investigated if learners find Skype lessons to be more interesting and educational compared to traditional lessons.. 23.

(37) The results showed that learners are more satisfied with Skype lessons and found them more interesting, more encouraging, and less tedious (Gruban, 2016). By comparing with regular lessons, findings showed that learners are more active in Skype lessons, and are more encouraged to speak up and express their ideas. In addition, Alsulami (2016) conducted a study to understand the association of SNS, online audio, and online video tools (i.e., Skype, Facebook, YouTube, MP3 players, smartphone) on learning English as a foreign language among 36 female EFL students at Effatt College. The findings revealed that 31 students (86.1%) agreed that online video and audio tools helped enhance their listening and speaking skills and have positive impact on their English language learning. Per study by Guth & Marini-Maio (2010), another advantage of adopting Skype in EFL learning is its potential for collaborative learning and for learners to interact, modify, elaborate their inputs, while engaging in meaningful “conversations” simultaneously. In the study, the learners pointed out that Skype could increase the accuracy in their oral skills and had helped them overcome the fear of speaking. The atmosphere may be more relaxed and EFL learners can communicate more freely. Therefore, most of the students enjoyed their language learning experience by using Skype (Ockert, 2015).. 2.6. Speaking Errors Ellis (2003) claimed that there are three good reasons to study learners’ errors: first, we would know why learners make errors; next, they could help teachers have better understanding of what type of errors learners usually make; lastly, learners learn to how to self-correct the errors they make. Brown (2000) believes that if 24.

(38) learners do not make errors or receive any feedback on errors, their learning progression would be hindered. In fact, making errors is a natural process of language learning (Eskey, 1983; Darus & Subramaniam, 2009) and is part of learning curve (Olasehinde, 2002). Therefore, the significance of studying these errors help highlights to teacher and students the weaker areas that requires attention during learning a new language. Otoshi (2005) highlighted five major error categories in grammar errors: verb errors, noun-ending errors, article errors, wrong words and sentence structures. He claimed that these error categories happen most frequently in learning second/foreign language. Dagneaux, Denness, and Granger (1998) mentioned that there are seven major error category codes in the order of, lexico-grammatical, formal, lexical, register, grammatical, word redundant and style; and are followed by one or more sub-codes. Examples include, GA for articles, GN for nouns, GV for verbs, GVT for verb tense errors, GVV for voice errors, etc. Chen (2006) developed a structured-linguistic error taxonomy, which divided into15 major categories inclusive of subgroups for each. The major error types are: errors in the use of nouns, articles, pronouns (incorrect case forms, missing possessives), verbs (tense, subject-verb agreement, auxiliary, verb omitted), prepositions (prepositions omitted, wrong prepositions, unnecessary prepositions), and conjunction (coordination, subordination, missing). According to Ferris and Roberts (2001), there are five major types of errors normally made by students:. 25.

(39) . noun endings errors - incorrect or unnecessary use of plural or possessive ending. . verbs errors- occur in the verb tense and form as well as errors related to subject-verb agreement. . article errors - the incorrect and/or unnecessary use of articles or other determiners such as some, any, etc.. . sentence structure errors -all errors related to sentence/clause boundaries, for example: run-ons, fragments, comma splices, word order, omitting words or phrases from a sentence and/or insertion of unnecessary words or phrases, and. . word choice errors -all types of lexical errors i.e., errors arising from the inappropriate use of prepositions and pronouns. In language learning errors types, speaking error categories are similar to. writing error categories, except that the spelling error category is omitted, as they cannot be evaluated via Skype. As there are many different types of errors, for our study, we focus on the study of speaking errors. Different approaches have been developed to describe language error types. The researchers found that EFL learners tend to make pronunciation errors on second language phonemes, which do not exist in their first language (L1) (Yoon, Hasegawa-Johnson & Sproat, 2010). Lyster (1998) separated errors into four categories, including grammatical error, lexical error (inaccurate choice of words), phonological error (misinterpretation leading to mispronunciation), and unsolicited used of L1 (errors not associated to content). According to Hiew (2012), those EFL learners hesitant to speak English with their teacher or classmates in and/or outside the classroom, they feel embarrassed. 26.

(40) about their low language proficiency and worried about making grammatical errors. Some researchers have observed that errors occur mainly caused by to first language (L1) influence (Chen, 2006; Lee, 2001; Lin, 2002; Kao, 1999). Therefore, the identification of speaking error types is significant for specific teaching and learning progression. Garett (1975) and Hamrouni (2010) claimed that there are nine types of speech errors: deletion, anticipation, shift, exchange, stranding, substitution, blend, and accommodation errors. Skype offers a platform that allows verbal conversation, so learners spelling of used words cannot be verified.. 2.7. Role-playing The many benefits of Skype and Facebook can offer, an appropriate instructional strategy is crucial to students’ experience and understanding. Role-playing is a great way to practice speaking and communication abilities. The use of role-playing instructional strategy increases students’ attention (Hou, 2011). It simulates a situation, requires students to focus on playing the role, hence, it diverts the attention to the act rather than the language used to complete the act. This strategy simulates real-world scenarios and puts learners on the spot and act out the position, known as task-based approach. Role-playing is a task-based approach learning that uses tasks to spark evocative interactions and negotiations (Aliakbari & Jamalvandi, 2010; Richards, 1999). For instance, a simulation task can be to replicate an act using the target language. Role-playing is a form of interactive learning, commonly used to help improve communication skills and develop problem-solving skills (Hou, 2012;. 27.

(41) Chien, Muthitacharoen & Frolick, 2003). Role-playing decreased levels of foreign language anxiety (Horwitz, Horwitz, & Cope, 1986) or anxiety rose from face-to-face interactions (Bikowski & Kessler, 2002). Larsen-Freeman and Anderson (2011) also indicated that role-playings are very important in communicative language teaching because they give students the opportunity to communicate in different social contexts and social roles. Role-playing resembles life more closely than other training procedures (Shaw, Corsini, Blake, & Mouton, 1980). As Ladousse (1987) stated, role-playing does not only encourage peer learning but also ask the teacher and students to share the responsibility in the learning process. Many studies has been focused on role-playing instructional strategies and situated scenario strategies from Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) to Task-based Language Teaching (TBLT) and the web-based applications (Shen & Suwanthep, 2011; Aliakbari & Jamalvandi, 2010; Coll-Garcia & Linser, 2006). These strategies are based on Constructivism, the theory argues that humans build knowledge through experience used to train areas such as teamwork and professional skills such as negotiation. Situational learning dictates that scenarios are developed to emulate experiences for the learner. The scenarios may be applied in two ways. First, the scenario can be an instruction to engage in collaborative discussions with peers to resolve the problem. Second, it can be roles of the hypothetical scenario assigning roles to the students whereby the problems is resolved together by acting out of the situation from their own relative perspectives (Hou, 2011). The study by Hou (2011), indicated that role-playing would increase the students’ level of focus as it would train students to concentrate on the task at hand, rather than on the language used to complete the task. These situated scenarios could 28.

(42) be applied in multifaced like in first-person (role-playing) format or through third-person discussion (Hou, 2011) and provide a learner with learning opportunity in many dimensions. The combination of high acceptance platform like Facebook and popularity and motivational tool like Skype could be an effective alternative to role-playing strategy for EFL instructional tool. This study aims to test the impacts of role-playing strategy on the learner’s experience and results.. 29.

(43) 3. Methodology. 3.1. Study 1 3.1.1. Participants The study involved 42 students registered to participate in an English conversation course at a Taiwanese business university. The students have sufficient functional familiarity with Facebook and Skype platforms.. 3.1.2. Research Design This study used quantitative and qualitative approaches to investigate the use of Facebook and Skype as a learning tool for online discussion to help students enhance their English proficiency and to understand students’ writing and speaking performance in two different environments. Three analysis methods: learning performance analysis, correlation analysis, and qualitative content analysis of learning process were adopted in this study. A single group pre-test and post-test design was used for learning performance analysis and Pearson correlation coefficient was used for correlation analysis. Among which, qualitative content analysis explores learners’ interaction in the role-playing speaking and writing activities. This seems to suit the purpose of this study as it aimed at seeking deeper insights and further understanding of the EFL learners’ speaking and writing skills.. 3.1.3. Instructional Design and Procedures The experiment breakdown into four phases: pretest and the initial classroom 30.

(44) lecture, Facebook private discussions within subgroups, Skype negotiations with opposing groups, and delayed posttest. The key research tool to assess the success of EFL strategy is framed by pretest and posttest conducted in writing and speaking forms. The entire process lasted 11 weeks (see Figure 3.1), and two hours class for each week.. Figure 3.1 Study 1 – Experimental procedure. 31.

(45) Phase 1: Pretest/lecture (weeks 1 to 5) In the first phase, every participant was given an IELTS-based test, which created by an EFL expert to assess the initial English writing and speaking levels. The course design is similar to IELTS focused on vocabulary, grammar, writing skills and composition requirements; individualized adjustments were made according to students’ English language level and learning needs. IELTS rates test scores on its 9-band scale (IELTS band scores, 2012), as shown in Table 3.1. The test emphasized on business-related vocabulary and communication skills in preparation for role-playing activities (see Appendix A). The speaking and the writing pretest would be conducted in week 1 and week 2, respectively (see Figure 3.1).. Table 3.1 IELTS 9-band scale (Part 1) Score. Description. 9. Expert user: has fully operational command of the language: appropriate, accurate and fluent with complete understanding.. 8. Very good user: has fully operational command of the language with only occasional unsystematic inaccuracies and inappropriacies. Misunderstandings may occur in unfamiliar situations. Handles complex detailed argumentation well. . 7. Good user: has operational command of the language, though with occasional inaccuracies, inappropriacies and misunderstandings in some situations. Generally handles complex language well and understands detailed reasoning. 32.

(46) (Part 2) Score. Description. 6. Competent user: has generally effective command of the language despite some inaccuracies, inappropriacies and misunderstandings. Can use and understand fairly complex language, particularly in familiar situations. . 5. Modest user: has partial command of the language, coping with overall meaning in most situations, though is likely to make many mistakes. Should be able to handle basic communication in own field.. 4. Limited user: basic competence is limited to familiar situations. Has frequent problems in understanding and expression. Is not able to use complex language.. 3. Extremely limited user: conveys and understands only general meaning in very familiar situations. Frequent breakdowns in communication occur.. 2. Intermittent user: no real communication is possible except for the most basic information using isolated words or short formulae in familiar situations and to meet immediate needs. Has great difficulty understanding spoken and written English.. 1. Non-user: essentially has no ability to use the language beyond possibly a few isolated words.. 0. Did not attempt the test: no assessable information provided. The four sub-dimensions of IELTS test were integrated into role-playing tasks,. which include Listening, Reading, Writing, and Speaking. The writing test of IELTS incorporated more contents related to daily life, and the speaking part was tested in-person with each student (see Appendix B). The course designed closely aligned to IELTS test, which is standardized 33.

(47) worldwide by applying in-person conversation testing methods to evaluate the speaking skills. This test arrangement mimics test takers for real-life situations. This might be particularly relevant to the students’ future career (when taking part in the job interviews, etc.). Thus, IELTS-based test was chosen instead of other assessment forms. English proficiency tests are crucial to non-native English speakers as they pave ways to future education. Therefore, this course would train students to take IELTS test also a requirement to the students to take it after they complete the course. This test was designed based on participants’ English levels. Table 3.2 shows the pretest’s sample questions.. Table 3.2 Pretest’s sample questions. Type of the test. Question. Writing Pretest. Your friend, Sally, is coming to visit Taiwan for 4 days and 3 nights. She needs you to arrange a one-day meeting for her with Dr. Wu. She'd also like to go sightseeing, have dinner at a nice restaurant, and go shopping. Please reply her with a detailed schedule by email.. Speaking Pretest. Have you bought anything over the phone? If not, would you? Why?. As shown in Figure 3.2, participants were put through a regimen of classroom lectures in week 3 to week 5. The lectures entailed learning the target language applying role-playing scenario (business-to-business, B2B, buyer/seller scenario). They also practiced speaking and writing in target language. Participants were expected to familiarize with the target language but not to the extent of fluency. The 34.

(48) goal of lectures was to introduce lexis required for subsequent role-playing activities. The students were not expected to have sufficient practice time in the classroom to fully acquire the target language by significant degree. Tasks to form teams, assign roles, and set-up scenario were completed in 5th week of this phase. Phase 2: Facebook discussions /Role-playing (weeks 6 and 7) Before entering second phase, the students were separated into two teams forming a buyer team and a seller team. The seller represented an office equipment company, and the buyer side represented a publishing company looking to setup a new department. The two teams were further separated into four subgroups representing product team consisted of 5- to 6-person in each subgroup. Each subgroup was assigned a leader to coordinate the buying or selling of an item listed as follow: a desktop computer, a printer, a camera, and a laptop (see Figure 3.2). Participants for an item could either role-play as a seller or a buyer. Hou (2011) hypothesized that as role-playing progressed, it was expected that the acts of self-correction and peer-to-peer correction would occur.. Figure 3.2 Study 1 - Team division. 35.

(49) Each subgroup of a team created a private chatroom on Facebook used for team discussions. Students were authorized to use Facebook functions such as commenting on “Wall” posts, and sharing information either by copying links, photos or ’sharing’ websites from other sources on Facebook. The “Wall” was used as an expression containing team thoughts and comments (See Figure 3.3). The students were prohibited to use private messages or text-based chats in order to ensure information are evenly distributed to the participants. Each communication posted by a member would be available for everyone to see and comment. The exercise would ensure everyone fully participates and engaged in collaborated discussion as studies showed that as Facebook is a mean to enhance learners’ confidence and increase collaborative efforts (Omar, Embi, & Yunus, 2012). All communication would be in English only.. Figure 3.3 Snapshot of the discussion on the Facebook “Wall”. 36.

(50) The teams were assigned tasks and objectives. The objectives were based on the overall scenario designed for this role-playing: 1.. a publishing company is in strategic interest to set-up a new marketing department, and it requires basic office equipment for new incoming staff;. 2.. an office equipment company carries surplus inventory of some products and it needs to sell-off surplus items before launching a new product line. Both sides had to decide in advance what was the preferred brand and model of. the items they were going to buy/sell. Challenges included getting the best price quotes possible for the buying team, meanwhile, the selling team had to make sure they attract customers without giving unreasonable discounts (possibly, by offering alternative products, free accessories, etc.) The above scenario is a mimic to a professional occurrence in a mid-sized company. The scenario was designed to develop various outlooks and strategies in multifaceted forms. The roles in the play entailed many elements for participants experience and sparks different interactions in each group. It is expected that each meeting group, participants would learn to adapt and respond with the focus language. The following two weeks prior to making contacts with opposing team, the teams were expected to assess the situation, to draft solutions to obstacles and establish a strategy plan to move forward. The leader of each team was instructed to ensure actions of the individual members when communicated and aligned for one-on-one negotiations on Skype. The teams were evaluated on the act of buying/selling of a particular product at price collectively agreed by the team. The participants hosted meetings on Facebook to determine the collective team price.. 37.