King Saud University

Deanship of Higher Studies

Department of English




THE EFFECTIVENESS OF CALL IN THE EFL SAUDI FEMALE
STUDENTS' LISTENING AND SPEAKING SKILLS AT THE
COLLEGE OF HEALTH SCIENCES, ONAIZAH



A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the Masters degree in Applied Linguistics
in the Department of English at the College of Arts, King Saud University



Prepared by
Amal Othman Ibrahim Al-Bureikan, B.A.
424221220

Supervised by
Ibrahim Ali Haji-Hassan, Ph.D.
Assistant-professor in Sociolinguistics and Applied Linguistics





2008 / 1429
ii



.,s. a.ti s-t,
t,.sti t.i,ati .t.s|
,.yi i.ti ,. t,,i.,




,.s ,.stt a- tvi ,.tt, ,sati i.ti _
_ ..tui, _t..vi _,t,-
,.s, ,aati ;,.sti ,. t,ttat














:
/






/


THE EFFECTIVENESS OF CALL IN THE EFL SAUDI FEMALE
STUDENTS' LISTENING AND SPEAKING SKILLS AT THE
COLLEGE OF HEALTH SCIENCES, ONAIZAH


By
Amal Othman Ibrahim Al-Bureikan, B.A.
Thesis defended and accepted on March 9, 2008

iii



THE EFFECTIVENESS OF CALL IN THE EFL SAUDI FEMALE STUDENTS'
LISTENING AND SPEAKING SKILLS AT THE COLLEGE OF HEALTH
SCIENCES, ONAIZAH

Amal Othman Ibrahim Al-Bureikan, B.A.

Supervisor: Ibrahim Ali Haji-Hassan, Ph.D.


ABSTRACT

This study aims at investigating the effectiveness of a Computer-Assisted
Language Learning (CALL) program, Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9, in developing
the listening and speaking skills of female students at Onaizah College of Health
Sciences. It also investigates their attitudes toward the computer-assisted language
learning (CALL) program.
Thirty-three students of first-year classes participate in this study. They are
divided into experimental and control groups (17 and 16 participants respectively). The
experimental group is taught through using the CALL program and the control group
through a conventional method of learning. The study examines the students' listening
and speaking skills by conducting a pretest prior to using the program and a posttest
after using the program. In addition, students in the experimental group answer a
questionnaire at the end of the study to address the effectiveness of CALL in the classes
and their perceptions of the program that they have already used.
The study finds that within two months of the implementation of the CALL
program, participants in the experimental group have significant improvement in their
listening and speaking scores. Results show a significant difference between
experimental group and control group in favor of the experimental group (p < .05). The
iv



study also reveals that members of the experimental group have positive attitudes toward the
use of the CALL program for learning. They also have positive attitudes toward using
CALL in learning English in the future.
The study concludes with recommendations for using interactive multimedia
programs in improving college students' listening and speaking skills. The findings of
this study show that technology can be seen as value added to regular classes.


v








/




) Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9 (
.
.
.
:
.


.



) > , (




.
vi





.
.
vii



ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful
Throughout the process of preparing my dissertation, I have benefited from the
brilliance, generosity, insight, experience and knowledge of many. First and foremost, I
would like to express my deepest gratitude and thanks to Allah for the unmeasured
blessings bestowed upon me.

I would also like to express my sincerest thanks to the members of my thesis
committee for their guidance, feedback, professionalism, genuine concern in my
academic growth and exceptional patience. Dr. Ibrahim Ali Haji-Hassan, the chair of
my committee, has consistently and freely given his time and support far beyond what is
required or expected. He has supported and mentored me, at all stages, even when it
was, often, from a distance. My extended appreciation also goes to Dr. Mohammed Ziad
Kebbe and Dr. Mahmoud Ismail Saleh for their assistance and valuable comments. All
the members of my committee are tremendous scholars, excellent teachers, inspiring
guides, and, additionally, quite likable people.

I am deeply indebted to Dr. Aouda M. Aljohani for building such an outstanding
and dedicated linguistics and literature faculty. I truly have enjoyed my Applied
Linguistics studies and have applied this knowledge in my classrooms.

Thanks also to the people who helped me through out the process of my study
by recording dialogues with me, proofreading my English, and being helpful in the early
stages of piloting: Mrs. Muneera Al-Bargan, Mrs. Hanan Al-Waneen, Dr. Amal
Muhammed, and Dr. Fouziah Ahmad.

I am also extremely appreciative of the generosity of all the subjects in my
study, who participated in an entirely enthusiastic way.

As well, I am greatly indebted to my mother for her constant support and
sacrifices over the years affording me the determination and resources to be a success. I
truly could not have accomplished all that I have without her guidance, patience,
acceptance and encouragement. My late father, Othman, also had a huge influence on
me in his biased fatherly way of focusing on my strengths above all else. A special
thanks goes also to my brother, Abdullah, who has gone out of his way to help me
during my higher studies in Riyadh. I would also like to express sincere gratitude to my
brothers and sisters for their encouragement and love.

Finally, I thank my friends who stood by me, offered emotional support, cleared
the grammatical errors in every draft, and comforted my nerves: Reem Al-Moisheer and
Hessah Al-Ruwaili.

It goes without saying that I owe all these people a tremendous amount of
gratitude and appreciation. Their interest and understanding in my personal and
professional journey allowed me to reach my goal.
viii



DEDICATION


This publication is dedicated to my family
for always providing me with overwhelming support,
for giving me a childhood filled with an abundance of love,
enriching experiences, infinite encouragement,
and resources to realize my every dream.
















ix



TABLE OF CONTENTS



................................................................................................................................. Page
ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................. iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS........................................................................................... vii
DEDICATION............................................................................................................. viii
TABLE OF CONTENTS............................................................................................... ix
CAHPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION............................................................................. 1
1.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Statement of the problem..................................................................................... 2
1.3 Significance of the study...................................................................................... 4
1.4 Purpose of the study............................................................................................. 5
1.5 Hypotheses of the study....................................................................................... 6
1.6 Definition of terms adopted in the study............................................................... 7
1.7 Limitations of the study....................................................................................... 9
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW................................................................. 11
2.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................... 11
2.2 The importance of technology in English language learning and teaching .......... 11
2.3 The history of computer-assisted language learning (CALL).............................. 13
2.4 CALL and second language acquisition (SLA) .................................................. 17
2.5 Previous studies of the effectiveness of CALL................................................... 19
2.6 Previous studies of the effectiveness of CALL in the Saudi Arabian context ...... 22
2.7 Conclusion......................................................................................................... 27
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY....................................................................... 30
3.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................... 30
3.2 Participants........................................................................................................ 30
3.3 Research design................................................................................................. 31
3.4 Data collection................................................................................................... 33
3.4.1 Pretest ................................................................................................... 33
3.4.1.1 Part one: Listening .................................................................. 34
3.4.1.2 Part two: Speaking .................................................................. 34
3.4.2 Posttest .................................................................................................. 35
3.4.3 Post-questionnaire ................................................................................. 36
3.5 Questionnaire validity and reliability ................................................................. 37
3.6 Data analysis ..................................................................................................... 38
3.7 Summary ........................................................................................................... 39
x



CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS...................................................................................... 40
4.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................... 40
4.2 Research question one: Posttest differences in listening ..................................... 42
4.3 Research question two: Posttest differences in speaking..................................... 43
4.4 Analysis of listening and speaking changes resulting from the study.................. 44
4.5 Effect size.......................................................................................................... 46
4.6 Research question three: Attitudes toward the computer program...................... 47
4.6.1 Responses to close-ended questions....................................................... 47
4.6.1.1 Section A: General attitude toward the program..................... 48
4.6.1.2 Section B: Experience & interest in using the program........... 50
4.6.1.3 Section C: Multimedia content ............................................... 51
4.6.1.4 Section D: Program content.................................................... 52
4.6.1.5 Section E: Interactive activities .............................................. 52
4.6.2 Responses to open-ended questions........................................................ 53
4.7 Summary ........................................................................................................... 55
CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION............................................... 56
5.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................... 56
5.2 Discussion ......................................................................................................... 56
5.3 Pedagogical implications ................................................................................... 62
5.4 Recommendations for further studies ................................................................. 63
References .................................................................................................................... 66
Appendix A: Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9: An Overview....................................... 78
Appendix B: Official Letter........................................................................................... 86
Appendix C: Audio Script ............................................................................................. 88
Appendix D: Listening Test (pretest and posttest) ......................................................... 89
Appendix E: Speaking Test (pretest and posttest) .......................................................... 90
Appendix F: Participant Consent Form.......................................................................... 92
Appendix G: Rating Scales for the Speaking Tasks ....................................................... 93
Appendix H: Student Questionnaire (English Version).................................................. 94
Appendix I: Student Questionnaire (Arabic Version)..................................................... 98
Appendix J: Questionnaire Validation Form................................................................ 103
Appendix K: Raw Scores of Experimental and Control Groups Listening and
Speaking Test Scores .............................................................................. 104
xi



Appendix L: Independent Samples t-Test for Pre and Posttest Scores of
Two Groups .......................................................................................... 105
Appendix M: Paired-Samples t-Test for Pre and Posttest Scores of
the Control Group .................................................................................. 106
Appendix N: Paired-Samples t-Test for Pre and Posttest Scores of the
Experimental Group ............................................................................... 107
Appendix O: Participants' Response Results to the Closed-Ended Questions of the
Students' Questionnaire (N=17) .............................................................. 108
Appendix P: Participants' Responses to the Open-Ended Questions in the
Questionnaire........................................................................................... 111

xii



List of Tables

Table 1: Technical profile for Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9 multimedia
program ....79
Table 2: Reliability estimates (Cronbach's Alpha) for students' questionnaire ..38
Table 3: Mean scores and standard deviation for listening and speaking pretests .41
Table 4: Mean scores and standard deviation for listening posttest ...42
Table 5: Mean change for the listening scores............................42
Table 6: Mean scores and standard deviation for speaking posttest ...43
Table 7: Mean change for the speaking scores....43












xiii



List of Figures

Figure 1: Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9's title screen ...79
Figure 2: Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9's sign-in list screen ....80
Figure 3: Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9's home menu screen ......80
Figure 4: Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9's menu of comprehensive courses .........81
Figure 5: Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9's situational lessons for the beginning
course 1 81
Figure 6: Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9's activities of beginning course 1...82









1

CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION

1.1 Introduction
There are four main skills taught in the EFL classroom, reading, writing,
listening and speaking. Various methods have been employed for teaching these four
skills. All of these skills can be considered important components of EFL teaching, but
listening and speaking are the ones mostly used in the classroom. Whether the class
focus is on reading, writing, listening comprehension, or conversation, the skills of
listening and speaking are used in all areas to convey thoughts and ideas from the
teacher to the student or vice versa. Therefore, teaching listening and speaking skills
should be considered an important component of the language program.
Since English is the only foreign language taught in Saudi Arabian public
schools, it has been given a special emphasis by many educators and people in high
positions in the Saudi Ministry of Education. The overall goal of teaching English as a
foreign language in the Saudi public schools is to enable students to speak, read, listen
and comprehend simple correct English, and write correct, simple passages. Aldosari
(1992) suggests that EFL is taught in order to enable students to communicate with
other English speakers and to offer them a window on the world (Aldosari, 1992).
However, when we come to reality, the students' English proficiency does not
mostly reach this optimistic goal. At the end of the twelfth grade, the great majority of
students are able to produce only a few correct English sentences. Alfallaj (1998)
attributes this weakness in English proficiency to some factors. These factors include (a)
the heavy use of Arabic in instruction, English is only taught 2-4 hours a week, (b) no
use of even the simplest instructional technology (e.g., projector), and (c) the use of
2

traditional teaching methods such as grammar and vocabulary translation and audio-
lingual methods, which do not enhance communication (Alfallaj, 1998).
Keeping these points in mind, many English language researchers (Al-Juhani,
1991; Aljamhoor, 1999; Alluhaib, 1999) have been constantly working on improving
the English language curriculum. They have attended numerous conferences, seminars,
symposiums, and meetings to propose educational solutions to the problem of how to
achieve the goal of improving Saudi students' proficiency in English. Computer-assisted
language learning (CALL) has been the crucial issue proposed and offered as a possible
solution by these researchers. However, CALL has not yet come into actual use in Saudi
public schools. Thus, evidence of its effectiveness in language learning and teaching is
needed to substantiate the accuracy of the felt need for this kind of methodology.

1.2 Statement of the problem
In a country like Saudi Arabia, English is used as a foreign language because it
is not an everyday medium. Instead, it is used for international business and
communication purposes. English has been compulsory for all Saudi students to learn
from intermediate school level (and currently from sixth-primary level) to secondary
level, yet they fail to improve their English proficiency, especially listening and
speaking skills.
The ability to communicate effectively is considered critical to successful
performance in numerous occupations, including nursing. In nursing, the successful
performance of such tasks as gathering information about patients, discussing patient
needs, and communicating with all the medical staff depends to a considerable degree
on language proficiency. Consequently, it is necessary to observe how our own students
learn language and then evaluate which teaching methods give the best results for them
through what has been discovered.
3

Having taught the English Course focusing on listening and speaking skills to
students majoring in nursing in the language audio lab, the researcher has found that
most of the students have low motivation in learning the language. The only intention
they have is to pass the course without realizing how important English listening and
speaking skills are to them in the real world of their careers as nurses that require such
English proficiency. As a result, they pay less attention to listening to the cassettes and
the instructor and to speaking in pairs and small groups of three or four. When it comes
to speaking with the instructor, they are more likely to be shy and afraid to take risks. At
the end, their English comprehension and production do not show satisfactory outcomes
according to the total scores of monthly and final examinations.
Because of the importance of listening and speaking instruction as well as the
nature of Saudi students, particularly at Onaizah College of Health Sciences, certain
vocabulary and correct language patterns are needed to present to them the English
language required for everyday communication. Therefore, teaching by using a
computer program can be claimed to be suitable for our students. When teaching by
using a computer program, the instructor can control the class. Meanwhile, the students
will be watching CDs, working on repetition in drills and dialogs based on situations,
and getting reinforcement given by the computer. This process would motivate them to
learn the language and achieve comprehension and production at the targeted level.
Many English language researchers (Al-Juhani, 1991; Aljamhoor, 1999; Alluhaib,
1999) propose that students who use computer-assisted language learning programs will
achieve greater results in grasping English language proficiency. Further investigation
of this idea will trace the implications of this educational approach. Therefore, the
researcher taught the English Course focusing on listening and speaking skills by
employing Learn to Speak English program during the first semester of 2006.
4

Finally yet importantly, the medical field is chosen for this study primarily
because the level of English language used by medical professionals, including nurses
in Saudi Arabia, as elsewhere, is increasing. For example, Maher (1986) observes that
72.2% of the medical journals and magazines published worldwide in 1980 were printed
in English. He further adds that of 373 international conferences in all the Americas,
Europe, Asia, the Middle East, and Australia, all except one, specified English as the
official language or one of the official languages (Maher, 1986). Moreover, the use of
English in students textbooks of health sciences is increasing. For these reasons,
students of health sciences in Saudi Arabia must acquire a lot of medical terminology in
English and practice using English for many purposes to perform their duties as medical
professionals. Thus, there is a need to think about different means that may enhance the
listening and speaking skills of the students. One of these means is integrating
technology into language teaching at the Colleges of Health Sciences. It is the aim of
this study, therefore, to find out the effectiveness of Learn to Speak English program in
developing the listening and speaking skills of female students at Onaizah College of
Health Sciences. It also aims at finding their attitudes toward the CALL program used
in the present study.

1.3 Significance of the study
This study investigates the effectiveness of a multimedia program, Learn to
Speak English Deluxe 9, in developing the listening and speaking skills of female
students studying at Onaizah College of Health Sciences. It is significant for several
reasons:
1. Previous studies have shown the usefulness of technology integration in second
language learning. However, few studies have researched the effectiveness of
multimedia programs in listening and speaking skills of the EFL learner. Therefore,
5

this study is significant because there is a need to assess the usefulness of a modern
multimedia program (Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9) in English language
learning and teaching in order to assist students to meet the language requirement
and succeed in daily communication.
2. The study's data about the attitudes of EFL students towards using CALL will be
valuable to policymakers and teacher education coordinators seeking to find out
better ways for making the teaching and learning of the English language via
computer programs more interesting.
3. This study sheds light on a new and better approach to language instruction using
computer programs as a pedagogical tool. Related to this, the study's findings might
assist curriculum and software developers in designing appropriate tools to make
EFL teaching and learning in the Arab world context more effective.
4. The results of this study will hopefully encourage EFL learners to benefit from
English CALL programs which would help them foster their EFL study from their
homes.
5. The results of this study will hopefully contribute to the general field of foreign
language instruction and applied linguistics.
6. Finally, this study will provide insight into previous research on EFL/ESL teachers'
use of CALL programs by either supporting or challenging earlier findings. While
doing so, it may also shed light on other areas of related research in need of
investigation.

1.4 Purpose of the study
This study investigates the effectiveness of a multimedia program, Learn to
Speak English Deluxe 9, in the listening and speaking skills of female students at
Onaizah College of Health Sciences. It intends to contribute to improving English
6

language learning by focusing on females' listening and speaking skills. It particularly
seeks to determine the effect of technology, such as Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9
CD-ROM, on females' listening and speaking skills. The study also addresses the
participants' attitudes towards the CALL program to enhance their listening and
speaking skills.
The study examines the students' listening and speaking skills by conducting a
pretest prior to using technology and a posttest after using the program mentioned
before. In addition, students are given a questionnaire at the end of the study to address
the effectiveness of CALL in the classes and their perceptions of the program that they
already used. It is, thus, an attempt to answer the following main questions:
1. Is CALL efficient in improving listening skill of first-year students in Onaizah
College of Health Sciences?
2. Is CALL efficient in improving speaking skill of first-year students in Onaizah
College of Health Sciences?
3. What are the attitudes of the experimental group students toward the CALL
program after using it?

1.5 Hypotheses of the study
The following hypotheses guided the researcher in conducting this study:
1. There will be a statistically significant difference between the mean scores of
students who received their listening learning through CALL and those who
received their listening learning through conventional methods in favor of the
experimental group.
2. There will be a statistically significant difference between the mean scores of
students who received their speaking learning through CALL and those who
7

received their speaking learning through conventional methods in favor of the
experimental group.
3. Students who received their listening and speaking learning through CALL will
show positive attitudes toward it.

1.6 Definition of terms adopted in the study
Terms adopted and are necessary for a clear understanding of the research
conducted include the following:

1.6.1 Computer-Assisted Instruction (CAI)
Computer-Assisted Instruction refers to the use of computers in educational
settings to help teachers in delivering educational material in an electronic form.
Bucholtz (1998) defines Computer-Assisted Instruction (CAI) as:
an interactive instructional method that uses a computer to present
material, track learning, and direct the user to additional material
which meets the student's needs. It can also be used to describe
Internet-based instruction using web pages, web bulletin boards,
listservs and newsgroups, video and real audio, graphics, and
hands-on applications. Additionally, self-teaching programs on
CD-ROM or the emerging DVD round out the group of available
forms of CAI (p. 50).

Computer-Assisted Instruction is used in different disciplines to refer to the
same process, which is the use of a computer for the delivery of educational material.
Therefore, the term is broad in scope and refers to many educational fields in their
practical scope. However, when it comes to language learning, the term "CAI" is
replaced by a more specific term, Computer-Assisted Language Learning (CALL),
which is defined next.


8

1.6.2 Computer-Assisted Language Learning (CALL)
Computer-assisted language learning (CALL) is a form of CAI that refers to the
use of computer technology in language learning and teaching. Computer-Assisted
Language Learning (CALL) means "learners learning language in any context with,
through, and around computer technologies (Egbert, 2005, p. 4)." Therefore, CALL is
the term used in this study since computers are used in the EFL setting as a teaching
tool.

1.6.3 Second Language Acquisition (SLA)
Second language acquisition, or SLA, is the process by which people learn
languages in addition to their native tongue and the factors that influence these
processes.

1.6.4 English as a Second or Foreign Language (EFL/ESL)
English as a second language (ESL) is "English to people, who are living in an
English-speaking country, but whose first language is not English," (Fox, Manning,
Murphy, Urbon, & Marwick, 2003, p. 530).
English as a foreign language (EFL) is "English to people whose first language
is not English, and who do not live in an English-speaking country," (Fox et al., 2003, p.
503).

1.6.5 Multimedia, hypertext, and hypermedia
Tannenbaum (1998) defines multimedia as "an interactive computer-mediated
presentation that includes at least two of the following elements: text, sound, still
graphic images, motion graphics, and animation" (p.4). Ashworth (1996) distinguishes
among these three terms. He defines multimedia as combinations of sound, video, and
9

other resources; hypertext as the linking of text to text; and hypermedia as the linking of
all media.

1.6.6 Speech Recognition (SR)
Speech recognition technology evaluates the pronunciation of the speaker and
tells how well the speaker is speaking in the target language. Using this technology, the
speaker can record his/her pronunciation and compare it to a native speaker's.

1.6.7 Compact Disc-Read-Only Memory (CD-ROM)
Compact Disc-Read-Only Memory is a type of prerecorded, noneraseable
optical storage disk capable of storing large amounts of data, up to 650MB (megabytes)
(Ivers and Barron, 2003).

1.7 Limitations of the study
Although the data shows support for the effectiveness of the multimedia
program, Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9, in the teaching of listening and speaking
skills to female students, mention should be made of some of the limitations of this
study.
1. Study sample was taken from Onaizah, Al-Qassim. Therefore, results might be
generalizable only to Al-Qassim region.
2. The study was conducted in a health sciences college. Thus, results can not be
generalizable to all schools or higher educational institutions.
3. The study was conducted with EFL students whose mother tongue is Arabic.
Results might not be generalizable to non-Arabic speakers.
4. The study focused on female students. Results might not be generalizable to
both male and female students.
10

5. One more limitation of the study was time. This study occurred over 8 weeks.
Allowing for a greater length of time would help further to evaluate participants'
progress in improving their listening and speaking skills.

11

CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction
This chapter reviews the most relevant research in the area of technology
integration in English language learning and teaching. Such a review is necessary to lay
the foundation for the analysis in this study. It first sheds light on the importance of
using technology in English language learning and teaching. Second, it presents the
three phases in the history of CALL. Third, it addresses the relationship between CALL
and Second Language Acquisition (SLA). Fourth, it discusses the previous studies
related to multimedia CALL programs and their attributed effectiveness in language
skills and attitudes. Finally, it presents the studies about the effectiveness of CALL in
the Saudi Arabian context.

2.2 The importance of technology in English language learning and teaching
In recent years, there has been widespread interest in using computers to
enhance learning processes. This is due to the rapid growth of computer technology,
which led to more sophisticated, more user-friendly, more manageable in terms of size
and weight, and much cheaper machines.
This development has led foreign language researchers and teachers to try to
find ways of incorporating computers and information technology in general into the
educational processes, especially in cases when the language taught is not the students
mother tongue (Virvou, Maras & Tsiriga, 2000). For instance, Butler-Pascoe and
Wiburg (2003, p. 1) state that "The role of technology as resource for language teaching
is expanding as more of these educators recognize its ability to support both
independent and collaborative learning environments." Indeed, collaborative learning is
12

emphasized by Schiffrin (1994) who stresses that language teaching should change from
its traditional way where language is seen as words and sentences to a more
communicative way. Language, she observes, should be taught through discourse and
interaction within its context.
As an educational authority, The American Council on the Teaching of Foreign
Languages (1996) strongly recommends that all language teachers should utilize
technology in their language teaching:
Access to a variety of technologies ranging from computer-assisted
instruction to interactive video, CD-ROMs, the Internet, E-mails, and
the World Wide Web, will help students strengthen their linguistic
skills and learn about contemporary culture and every day life in the
target country (p. 31).

Such a recommendation does not come from a vacuum. For example, Sinclair
(1992, p.11) anticipated a promising future for computers: "the advent of computers has
improved the quality of many scientific disciplines in these years, but in none of them is
the effect so profound as in the study of language."
Technology's power in affecting language learning and teaching is not only in
introducing new ways of organizing existing methodologies of language teaching, but
also in influencing the methodologies it organizes. Kramsch (1988), for instance,
observes:
The computer can provide new theoretical information about the
psycholinguistic nature of language learning, the specific computer
capability of delivering instruction, and how this ability affects or
interacts with the learning process. It potentially can identify
differences in learning style, aptitude, and perception of the learning
task, and bring to light learning processing strategies (p.112).

Indeed, Anderson (1991) pushed educators forward to examining technology's
effectiveness in education:
Technology is changing so quickly, it is our task as administrators or
teachers to be aware of the waves, to look critically at them and
judge how effective these tools for teaching and learning are (p.25).

13

However, in discussing the interactive role that computer plays in language
learning and teaching, Kenning and Kenning (1983) state:
The unique property of the computer as a medium for education is its
ability to interact with the student. Books and tape recordings can tell
the student what the rules are and what the right solutions are, but
they cannot analyze the specific mistake the student has made and
react in a manner which leads him not only to correct his mistake,
but also to understand the principles behind the correct solution (p.
2).

As such Kenning and Kenning admit the importance of computers in
education, they, however, identify one shortcoming, i.e., the inability of
computers to provide explanation of the learners' mistakes.
As computer technology reaches global proportions, countries
around the world also realize the potential benefits of computer technology
for education and have begun to equip their schools with computers and
develop computer literacy program. Saudi Arabia is no exception in
embracing this trend (World Bank, 1995).

2.3 The history of computer-assisted language learning (CALL)
Computers were first introduced into classrooms as instructional technologies
aiding teachers in the 1960s (Cunningham, 2000). However, according to Warschauer
(1996), computers were used as tools for instructional purposes in the 1950s. He
categorizes the history of CALL into three distinct phases: Behavioristic CALL,
Communicative CALL, and Integrative CALL.
Behavioristic CALL was based upon behavioristic theories of learning. These
theories viewed learning as based upon observation and abstraction of input entering the
brain and on the resulting output (Knzel, 1995). Programs from this phase of CALL
were based on heavy repetition through drills and individual practice (Warschauer,
1996). Drill and practice exercises were based upon the premises of behaviorist learning
14

theory that stated that repeated exposure to the same material benefited learning. The
computer was ideal for delivering repeated drills because machines did not become
bored in presenting the same material over and over, and could present material on an
individualized basis, allowing learners to work at their own pace and use class time for
other activities (Warschauer, 1996).
The second phase, Communicative CALL, was based on the communicative
approach to teaching which became prominent during the 1970s and 1980s
(Warschauer, 1996). Behaviorist learning theory with its drill and practice programs did
not allow the use of enough authentic communication. Thus, Communicative CALL,
like the communicative approach, focused more on using forms rather than on the forms
themselves, taught grammar implicitly and not explicitly, allowed learners to create
language instead of merely using prefabricated expressions, and employed the target
language exclusively (Warschauer, 1996). Communicative CALL corresponded to
cognitive learning theory in that it emphasized learning as a process of discovery and
development (Warschauer & Healey, 1998). Communicative CALL seemed to be a
critical improvement over Behavioristic CALL; however, by the end of the 1980s many
educators felt that it was not as thought of. Rather than supporting the central elements
of the language teaching process, the computer was used in an ad hoc and disconnected
manner (Kenning & Kenning, 1990).
Integrative CALL, the present stage, arose in the mid 1990s and has been made
possible by the development of powerful desktop computers that support rapid use of
the Internet, local area networks (LANs), multimedia, and linked resources known as
hypermedia. One significant feature of the integrative stage is the use of language-
learning software and CD-ROMs that allow for flexible and self-paced access to
information for learners (Fotos & Browne, 2004). CALL encompasses applications
written specifically for language learning (Hall, 1998). Originally viewed as a
15

supplement to classroom instruction, CALL activities are now used in a variety of
instructional situations to promote learner autonomy and to encourage involvement with
the target language both inside and outside the classroom (Fotos & Browne, 2004).
Hall (1998) identified the advantages of implementing CALL and Information
Technology (IT) in language teaching and learning. First, the computer adds variety to
the language learning experience. Second, the computer individualizes learning. Third,
in CALL exercises, the computer can give immediate feedback for each answer. Fourth,
many aspects of work with computers have an interactive element, which is missing in
books, tapes, and television. Fifth, using the computer saves teachers time and work.
Sixth, many students are already familiar with computers and most students find them
stimulating and enjoyable. Last, students are motivated to use the computer for all types
of activities. In addition, Schwienhorst (2002) indicated that the ability to combine
sound and vision in computer-based applications liberates language learners from
traditional textbooks, tape recorders, and videocassettes. Computer technologies now
enable those traditional media to be easily combined into tidy self-study multimedia
packages or just websites.
Warschauer and Healey (1998), and Stepp-Greany (2002) indicated that CALL
offers an innovative and effective alternative for language educators. Cobb (2002)
pointed out that computer technology and CALL provide many benefits for the
acquisition and application of English language skills, and that teaching English with
computers can enhance students motivation and confidence in using the English
language. Breen (2005) asserted that CALL is indeed beneficial in the area of second
language acquisition (SLA). An increasing number of private and public organizations,
and educational institutions, are incorporating CALL technologies into their traditional
classroom setting to enhance learning outcomes. CALL has now become an important
component of second and foreign language learning pedagogy (Fotos & Browne, 2004).
16

Interest in using computers as tools to support language learning is growing,
both from the perspective of a language teacher and that of a language learner (Graham,
Lee, Liu, & Moore, 2002). One big advantage of using the computer is that it gives the
learners more confidence and freedom to manipulate the learning program. Having the
chance to work partly on their own and to get involved in the learning process, the
students are becoming more motivated and interested in learning the language (Hayati,
2005). Furthermore, a major education shift is taking place; a shift away from the
teacher-centered classroom towards a learner-centered system where the learner is in
control of the lesson content and the learning process (Fotos & Browne, 2004). Learners
are expected to be active participants in the learning process and should be encouraged
to be explorers and creators of language rather than passive recipients (Su & Kinshuk,
2002).
To facilitate language acquisition, students need substantial practice (Zhenhui,
1999). The Web allows repeated practice with a variety of materials that can supplement
and transcend what students receive in class or their local communities (Hubbard,
Kessler, & Madden, 2003). Developments in multimedia and Web technologies offer a
range of opportunities to develop speaking, writing, reading, and listening proficiency
in the target language. Currently, a typical multimedia language program might allow
students to do a reading assignment in the target language, use a dictionary, study
grammar and pronunciation related to the reading, and take a comprehension test on the
reading content, and receive immediate feedback, all within the same program (Fotos &
Browne, 2004).
CALL has become a critical part of language education. Warschauer (1996)
pointed out that we are at a point where it is no longer a question of whether to utilize
electronic technologies in foreign language instruction, but of how to manipulate them
according to our situational needs. The future direction of CALL should be toward the
17

true integration of CALL within language teaching and learning in which the
technology is invisible and truly integrated (Bax, 2003). With recent advancements in
software technology, multimedia, and extensive use of the Internet, computers have
become widespread in schools and language institutions, and their uses have expanded
so dramatically that language teachers must now reconsider the implications of using
computer technologies for teaching languages.
Burston (1993) points out that, despite the appeal of modern technological
CALL applications in all their forms, they must be judged on the basis of their
pedagogical validity, on their ability to either perform old tasks better than traditional
means, or on their ability to allow entirely new things to be done.

2.4 CALL and second language acquisition (SLA)
CALL did not emerge by itself and does not grow alone but is always linked to
the growth of a number of other disciplines and fields. These disciplines and fields are
much related to CALL. Levy (1997) lists the disciplines that have influenced CALL as
it emerged and continues to evolve as a field. These influential disciplines include
applied linguistics, artificial intelligence, computational linguistics, educational
psychology, instructional design, machine translation, and second language acquisition.
CALL alone does not have the theoretical background for language teaching. It
depends heavily on the theories of second language acquisition. This lack of theoretical
framework, McCarthy (1989) explains, represents a challenge to language educators in
finding ways to evaluate the effectiveness of CALL or finding means of implementation
and development (McCarthy, 1989).
Generally speaking, the implementation of CALL in language learning and
teaching depends mainly on the theories of learning. More specifically, it depends on
theories of second language acquisition. Larsen-Freeman and Long (1991) propose that
18

language acquisition theories could be applied, with some modifications and changes, to
CALL. However, Levy (1997) urges that educators should be more careful when
applying theories of SLA to CALL. Chapelle (1998) states that the pedagogical goal of
CALL is to:
Develop their [language learners] linguistic systems in the target
language by engaging in computer-mediated L2 talks... In other words,
it is useful to view multimedia design from the perspective of the input
it can provide learners, the output it allows them to produce, the
interactions they are able to engage in, and the L2 talks it supports (p.
6-7).

Garrett (1991) places the use of CALL within the framework of the four skills
approach to language learning and teaching: speaking, listening, reading, and writing.
Speaking has had great importance and priority in many language programs for some
time. The computer, as Garrett points out, is far from ready to substitute for a human
being in spontaneous authentic communication, but could be well implemented for
listening skills. CALL exercises can provide textual support such as transcripts, glossary
help, and structural clues. Implementation of CALL in this manner is particularly
valuable at more advanced levels of language learning where literacy and knowledge of
formal language have a greater role in comprehension (Garrett, 1991).
Many language educators and researchers have sought ways to adapt CALL to
second language acquisition and learning. The CALL theoretical framework is
adequately described, but this theory has many propositions. The major gap for the
theoretical literature is that there is not a reliable conceptual framework to develop
CALL, and there is poor linguistic modeling and a lack of learners' perspective for
CALL (Chapelle, 2001a). According to a meta-analysis of research conducted on CALL
programs from 1990-2000 (Graham et al., 2002), the following issues need to be
addressed: (1) research requires a solid theoretical foundation; (2) software must be
based on pertinent design principles; (3) future studies need to use valid and reliable
19

instruments; and (4) more research is needed in the skills areas of speaking, listening,
and culture. Future studies should be aware of CALL development and advances in the
direction of language learning, taking into consideration the strategies of CALL
facilitated learning, as well as learners' variables and discussions of CALL
conceptualization (Levy, 1997).
Recent advances in CALL allow the delivery of digital video and audio in the
same interface as written text. Such technological power has been adapted to the
purposes of EFL skills development on EFL CD-ROMs. These provide tasks, language
input and feedback on task success and other features via the computer screen. Although
such multimedia applications are being developed, marketed and used both in classes
and in self-access centers, there has been little empirical research into their
effectiveness. The use of these multimedia applications must be based on theory and
driven by pedagogy. Software which is not teacher designed nor purpose built cannot
match precisely the objectives of the English language curriculum (Wimberley, 2007).

2.5 Previous studies of the effectiveness of CALL
Though the aforementioned researchers believed in the potential of computers to
enhance language learning and teaching, it was not until the early 1990s that
quantitative studies began to provide evidence of the effectiveness of computer
technology in second/foreign language learning. As Graham et al. (2002, p. 259) noted,
in the early 1990s, focus shifted from whether to accept computer technology to, "how
to integrate technology more effectively into learning and teaching of languages."
The effectiveness of CALL programs in the basic skills attainment and the
enhancement of classroom activities has been the topic of only a few numbers of
previous investigations. However, most of these studies of CALL demonstrated a strong
co-relationship between CALL and improved academic performance. Also, these
20

studies have been designed to measure the extent to which the multimedia approach in
using computer technology is helpful for learning and teaching in ESL/EFL classrooms.
Burns (1996) reported that multimedia software that has sound and video
motivates nonnative speakers of English to learn. Students are able to correct their
pronunciation by repeating sounds to demonstrate any difficulties. One of the programs,
that he presented, was English Express. This multimedia software enables learners to
control the speed of their own oral communication skills.
Raphan (1996) developed a multimedia CALL program for the purpose of
conducting a pilot study that determines how adult ESL students would handle the
multimedia screen with simultaneous audio, visual, and note taking. Results showed
that students got used to the multimedia information so quickly. Raphan concluded that
learners learn best from presentations that most closely simulate reality. She
recommended the use of multimedia CALL as a supplementary teaching tool to enhance
ESL programs.
Brett (1997) investigated the effectiveness of computer-based multimedia in
listening in learning ESL. The results showed that learners' listening comprehension
increased after using multimedia. The use of multimedia helped learners in their ESL
listening skills more effectively than the other tools, such as audio.
Bagui (1998) reported that students' motivation increased and developed when
using animation, sound, and interactivity in learning. Cazade (1999) pointed out that
video and animated clips can be useful because they show the various positions of the
speaker's tongue and lips, as well as the airflow of the speaker's words. Ehsani and
Knodt (1998) argued that CALL programs, especially voice-interactive CALL, improve
L2 learners' speaking skills.
Klassen and Milton (1999) evaluated the effectiveness of an interactive
multimedia CD-ROM in an English language-learning curriculum at the University of
21

Hong Kong, and reported that students who used the program showed significant
improvement in listening skills compared to students given traditional classroom
instruction. They also found that the use of interactive multimedia programs helped
students develop positive attitudes toward CALL programs.
Many studies have discussed the benefits of multimedia CD-ROMS and
computerized media on learning a foreign language vocabulary. Among these are the
research studies made by Duquette, Renie, and Laurier (1998) and Al-Seghayer (2001).
Duquette et al. (1998) studied the impact of multimedia environment on learners'
vocabulary acquisition. The results of this study indicated that multimedia programs
assisted learners in the improvement of their vocabulary skills.
Al-Seghayer (2001) described the principle of learning a language using
multimedia techniques, and the effects of various modalities of multimedia on the
learning process. Used as a background, the research performed tested the question of
learning faster by video mode or still picture mode. The results indicated that video and
text combined are a faster way of developing comprehension and longer-term memory
than still pictures and text or text only. Al-Seghayer concluded that there are
pedagogical and theoretical implications for language learning using multimedia.
Pedagogical implications center on exposing learners to multiple modes of learning
produced an efficient language-learning environment. The theoretical implications
center on supporting the generative theory of multimedia learning proposed by Maher
(1986), the theory which suggests that the design of multimedia instruction affects the
degree to which learners engage in the cognitive process required for meaningful
learning.
In the fourth chapter of their book, Technology and Teaching English Language
Learners, Butler-Pascoe and Wiburg (2003) reviewed software programs that
emphasize the improvement of speaking skill of ESL learners. These programs, ESL
22

Pronunciation Online, Pronunciation Power, and Better Accent Tutor, include
interactive CD-ROM and Internet Web sites that are designed for non-speakers of
English to improve their oral communication.
Butler-Pascoe and Wiburg (2003) indicated that pronunciation programs enable
learners of a second language to make comparisons between their utterances and the
utterances of native speakers. Drill-and-practice programs are adjustable to meet the
level of proficiency of each student, who can choose various speed levels of timed
reading. Current multimedia software covers almost all areas of communication:
reading, speaking, writing, and listening. The writers stated that computer software and
CD-ROMs have been integrated in the curriculum to help students in learning a
language.
In Japan, CD ROM technology is used to create situations which allow Japanese
ESL students to improve their English skills, particularly with respect to writing and
speaking, by explaining a variety of topics about Japanese history and culture to foreign
English speaking visitors. The findings are positive with respect to pronunciation error
detection and intelligibility among Japanese ESL students (Masatake, Yasushi and
Tatsuaya, 2004).
The above discussed studies represent a portion of a wide range of studies on the
effectiveness of CALL in ESL/EFL students' skills. However, the use of computer
technologies and their relative effectiveness in the areas of listening and speaking has
been neglected to some extent in research, the area on which this study focuses.

2.6 Previous studies of the effectiveness of CALL in the Saudi Arabian context
Researchers went through different multimedia technologies and solutions
provided by educational software companies in an attempt to investigate their
23

effectiveness and the significance of using instructional technology to assist the
teaching of different subjects in the Saudi Arabian curriculum.
Al-Juhani (1991) conducted an experimental study exploring the effectiveness of
computer-assisted instruction (CAI) in teaching English as a foreign language in a Saudi
Arabian secondary school in Yanbou, an industrial city in the northwest of Saudi
Arabia. The instruments used in this study consist of a student questionnaire, a teacher
questionnaire, and an achievement test. The participants of the study were sixty male
students assigned to the second-year classes. They were divided equally into thirty for
the experimental group and thirty for the control group. The research used correlations
and t-tests for statistical findings of the study.
The findings of Al-Juhani's study indicated that the implementation of CALL in
teaching English as a foreign language in Saudi Arabian secondary schools would add a
valuable educational contribution to English language education in Saudi Arabian
schools. The main focus of the study was on the students' and instructors' attitudes and
feelings towards the use of technology in EFL classes. A five Likert-scale was used. It
included the liking, benefit, effectiveness, achievement, and fear scales. The CALL
program used in this study is called "Head and Tail." It was an educational program
developed by Sakhr Alalamiayh in the area of computers and EFL. The program used
was developed to help learners know the important aspects of English grammar through
different forms of vocabulary words when suffixes or prefixes are added. The program
was text-based. The utilization of multimedia technology was not present in the
program. This is attributed to the fact that multimedia technology was still not used at
the time the study was conducted. Computers did not have the capacity to handle
multimedia as they do at present.
Almutairi (1998) investigated the effects of using computer programs on the
achievements of sixth grade students. The effects of using computer programs were
24

positive compared to traditional methods. In the recommendation part of his
dissertation, Almutairi suggested providing a plan to improve methodologies of
teaching used in Saudi Arabian schools. He also recommended that the creation of
educational software should be based on guidelines provided by specialists in education,
CALL multimedia, and the disciplines for which those programs are going to be used.
Almutairi's recommendations also included the launching of teacher development
programs that contain instructional technology courses.
Alluhaib (1999) studied the influence of using English learning computer
software on the learning achievement of seventh grade students. His study examined the
effectiveness and impact of using an audio instructional software package called "Let's
learn English in Saudi Arabia" developed by Alalamiayh Software Saudi Company. The
software is also endorsed by the Saudi Arabian Ministry of Education as an approved
Saudi Arabian curriculum-based package. His findings indicated a high degree of
effectiveness of those educational technologies and a significantly positive impact on
the students' learning. The study recommended more cooperation between Saudi
Arabian Ministry of Education and developers of computer-based English learning
programs. The other recommendations are similar to those of Almutairi's study
regarding planning, teacher training development programs, and improving the schools'
infrastructure.
Aljamhoor (1999) investigated the effectiveness of using DowLog CALL
multimedia programs in teaching EFL to secondary school students in Riyadh. Sixty-
four students participated in the study. The study was presented at the Symposium on
Educational Technology and Information at Bahrain University. Aljamhoor concluded
that teaching EFL with CALL multimedia programs is superior to teaching EFL using
conventional methods of teaching. He suggested that the investigation of using
computers in education in general should be accomplished by specialists. This
25

suggestion was given in order to come up with an overall plan to use computers as
assisting tools for the teaching of other subjects. He also confirmed the important role
that specialists in applied linguistics would play if they participated in the development
of multimedia programs for EFL learning and instruction. Finally, the study referred to
the lacking of some students of basic experience with computer. The findings of
Aljamhoor's study support the inclusion of computer education in the curriculum of
primary schools.
Al-Jraiwi (1999) conducted a study investigating the influence of using
multimedia on the secondary school students' learning achievement in Riyadh area. His
study included sixty-two secondary school students divided into two groups: an
experimental group of thirty students and a controlling group of thirty-two. Al-Jraiwi's
study included a pretest and a posttest. The multimedia tools were used as a means of
instruction with the experimental group, while the controlling group was taught using
the conventional way of teaching. Al-Jraiwi concluded that multimedia technologies
were more effective. The study's recommendations addressed the Saudi Arabian
Ministry of Education, educational technology developers and manufacturers, and
parents. His suggestion to the Saudi Arabian Ministry of Education was that it should
encourage students to use computers for individual learning in which they work with
computers using different multimedia programs to foster their learning and correct their
learning problems. He also suggested that schools should work constantly toward the
establishment of appropriate individual learning environment in the school such as
computer labs and multimedia libraries. The study confirmed that the research and
development teams working for educational software companies should include some
specialists. These specialists should be specialized in education, multimedia technology,
psychology, and the subject matter for which the software developed. The study also
recommended testing in real learning contexts.
26

The effectiveness of using computer programs in teaching Arabic language
grammar for intermediate school pupils was studied by Attwaim (2000). This
experimental study included thirty pupils as a control group and thirty other pupils as an
experimental group at an elementary school in Riyadh. Attwaim found out that pupils'
achievement in the experimental group was significantly higher. Therefore, he
supported the integration of computer programs into the learning of Arabic grammar as
a learning tool. His recommendations called for further research to investigate the
significance of using computers to help teachers and benefit students in the language
skills like composition, literature, and spelling.
Al-Subeai (2000) investigated the effectiveness of CALL in improving
vocabulary learning, reading comprehension and reading speed among EFL Saudi
students of the Secondary Commercial Institute in Riyadh. Forty-six students
participated in the study. His study included a pretest and a posttest in vocabulary,
reading comprehension and speed. In addition, a survey questionnaire of 30 items was
administered to the experimental group students at the end of the experiment to detect
their attitudes towards the CALL program. The study concluded that the effects of the
CALL program were positive compared to traditional methods. It also found that the
experimental students showed positive attitudes toward the CALL program after using
it. The study's recommendations called for further research to be made of CALL
technologies in English language teaching in Saudi Arabia, especially in the areas of
reading comprehension and vocabulary enhancement. He also suggested that teachers
and students should be instructed in the design and use of CALL programs and
multimedia labs.
Taken together, these studies indicate the positive effectiveness of using
multimedia technologies in education in general and in EFL instruction in particular.
However, there appear to have been few studies of the effectiveness of CALL in
27

English language teaching and learning in the Saudi context, particularly in a
comparative study in a listening and speaking classroom. Most of the above reviewed
literature shows a lack of research in listening and speaking areas that are required in
English language learning and teaching, the two skills concentrated on in this study.

2.7 Conclusion
Most CALL-based teaching and learning focus on activities such as software or
Web-based reading, writing, or gap-filling type activities that do not depend on oral
communication. Oral activities such as conversation, pair and group role-plays, and
discussions have for the most part taken place in ordinary classrooms. Felix (2001, p.
47) lists "lack of speaking practice" as the first disadvantages of using Web-based
programs for language on the students' list, along with "distraction," "no interaction
with peers," "inadequate feedback," and "absence of teacher."
Teaching all the language skills has gone through a phase where it has to be
redefined as a response to the latest improvements in computer multimedia. However,
in the case of the speaking skill, it is merely taking a little longer (Barr, Leakey, and
Ranchoux, 2005).
Barr et al. (2005) indicate the reason that makes speaking development sounds
difficult via computer technology: "The technology for oral language development has
posed the greatest challenge to both hardware and software developers (p. 56)." More
specifically, according to Hincks (2003), one of the main challenges in this respect has
been the creation of speech recognition software that is accurate and sensitive enough
for language learning (Hincks, 2003). Barr et al. (2005) observe:
Speech recognition software lends itself mainly to drill-type
activities; further logistical and technological hurdles must be
crossed if one aims to get beyond purely text-based tandem
exchanges and encourage real-time oral communication across
campuses or across national boundaries (p.56).
28


Felix (2005) summarized the major findings arrived at by means of meta-
analyses and reviews since 1991. Many studies discussed the achievement of the visual
media in reading and vocabulary learning. A number of studies showed that online
communication improved writing skills of learners who had been given equal
opportunities to use the resource. However, Warschauer & Healey (1998) stated, few
studies discussed the integration of technology in listening and speaking. The
multimedia capabilities of CALL, Graham et al. (2002) proposed, enable learners to
engage in a complex listening experience, complete with visual cues and speech
recognition software. The general consensus is that, while this software shows promise
for future research, it is not yet sufficiently developed or reliable to justify its use in FL
studies (Graham et al., 2002).
While all of the language skills, excluding speaking, seem to be benefited by
learning and teaching with multimedia, there is some controversy about the speaking
skill, as mentioned by James (1996):
Opinion on the relevance of computers for the development of oral
skills is mixedwith earlier writers tending to be pessimistic.Other
writers have been more optimistic.The research on CALL and
speaking tends to support the pessimists rather than the optimists, (pp.
15-16).

However, James (1996) suggested that the technique used in conversation class
to assist oral interaction can be a good model for CALL programs targeting language
oral skill.
Chapelle (1997, p. 21) stated that "Time spent on learner talk is better than time
spent on teacher talk; learners should have the opportunity to comprehend a variety of
functions in the target language; learners should engage in communicative exchanges in
the target language." This means that practicing speaking skills in the target language is
29

very important. More time can be spent in verbal communication by using technology
because it provides the flexibility to practice.
Egan (1999, p. 277) pointed out that "speaking is the heart of second language
learning.It is arguably the most important skill.Despite its importance speaking
was until recently largely ignored in schools and universities." He observed that all of
the language skills, excluding speaking, seemed to be benefited by learning and
teaching with multimedia. Although these studies discussed the benefits of computer
technology in English language learning and teaching, they focused on skills that help
students to improve their writing, reading, and listening. However, there is a serious
problem facing students when speaking and communicating in English.
To conclude, the various studies discussed above show the potential benefits of
computer technology in teaching listening and speaking skills. They also suggest the
positive attitudes that student will show toward CALL. However, as far as the literature
review is concerned, there has been very little research conducted to investigate the
effectiveness of computer technology in the development of the listening and speaking
proficiency level of ESL/EFL learners. It has also shown that research in CALL
effectiveness has given very little attention to Saudi learners. Therefore, it is the aim of
this study to find out the effectiveness of Learn to Speak English software in developing
listening and speaking skills of female students at Onaizah College of Health Sciences.
It also aims at finding their attitudes toward the CALL program used in the present
study.
30

CHAPTER THREE
METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction
This chapter describes the methodology that the researcher used in the study.
The study used qualitative and quantitative approaches to investigate the effectiveness
of a multimedia program, Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9, in the listening and
speaking skills of female students at Onaizah College of Health Sciences. The
researcher selected the qualitative research to administer the open-ended part of the
questionnaire to the participants. The researcher deemed that qualitative research was
appropriate for this study because it would help to understand the effectiveness of the
multimedia program, Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9, in the listening and speaking
skills of the students, especially from the point of view of the participants. However, the
researcher also used additional measures: the listening and speaking tests, and the
closed-ended part of the questionnaire. The use of these additional measures helped to
triangulate the data. All data gathered were thoroughly analyzed. The results of the
study are reported in chapter 4 and discussed in chapter 5, where implications and
recommendations for future studies are also presented.

3.2 Participants
Participants chosen for this study are first-year students in Onaizah College of
Health Sciences. They are 44 students. They are divided into a control group and an
experimental group of about twenty-two students each. Students are randomly assigned
either to an experimental group or control group. Attrition resulting from students
dropping the class and absences during the experiment reduced the sample to 16
subjects in the control group and 17 in the experimental group. The small number of
31

participants reduced the power of the research, making it difficult to realize its results as
justifiable. It also reduced the ability to generalize the research. However, statistical
significance was obtained on this size sample. The number of participants was enough
to test the null hypotheses and to overlook weak treatment effects.

3.3 Research design
Chapelle (2001b) sets the principles that should underpin experimental studies
which investigate CALL's effectiveness by saying: "The most convincing way to
demonstrate the language learning potential of a CALL activity is through the study of
learning outcomes (p.74)." She suggests that researchers should conduct a pretest
ensuring that the learners who will be involved in the CALL activity, the "treatment
group", did not know the target forms before beginning to work with CALL. Then, upon
completion of the task, a posttest should be given to the learners, which would provide
evidence for the language learning potential of the task. In order to make the evidence
even stronger, the researcher should employ a contrasting group, the "control group",
who will not use the CALL task at all, or use the task in another form, and then compare
the differences in gains (Chapelle, 2001b).
This study was a pretest/posttest experimental/control group design. Using SPSS
11.5, two main types of data analysis were used: (a) paired and independent sample t-
tests, and (b) descriptive statistics.
The study lasted eight weeks, starting September 25, and ending December 10,
2006. Because of the difficulties in formulating a proposal that was acceptable to the
dissertation committee, the fact that the college timetable was not stable, the Eid break
which is an official break for all, the need to get a license from the General Directorate
of Health Sciences Colleges & Institutes to use the computer lab, only a small part of
32

the college year remained. Nevertheless, eight weeks were sufficient for valuable
patterns to emerge and for useful conclusions to be drawn.
The control group, consisting of sixteen students, was taught using the
traditional method and spent the exact same amount of time as the experimental group.
After completing the listening and speaking pretest, the instructor taught this group as it
is usually taught in a traditional language classroom. . The English curriculum for the
listening and speaking course was similar to the one taught to the experimental group.
After this, students took the listening and speaking posttest.
The experimental group, composed of seventeen students, was exposed to a
training session of one week for the purpose of acquainting them with the computer
program. The students then met in the computer lab for a period of fifty minutes, two
days a week during the 8 weeks. After the CALL session, students were given the
listening and speaking posttest; and then they filled in a post-questionnaire at their own
pace. The English curriculum for the listening and speaking course was presented
through a technological instrument called 'Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9'. An
overview of the program, its technical features, and its program features are included in
the appendixes (Appendix A). The researcher chose Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9
because it accommodated a wide range of competency levels. For example, participants
who knew more English began at a more advanced lesson than those who knew little
English. By doing so, Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9 optimized language learning
opportunities for each of the participants.
In short, the experimentation involving the implementation of a computer-
assisted language-learning program lasted for eight weeks (including the training
session). Learners completed a pretest and a posttest of their listening and speaking
skills. The control group members completed also the same pretest and posttest with
eight-week interval between them, but had no input from the software during the study.
33

Listening and speaking courses of the entry-level college students focus on both
English for everyday use and English for specific purposes. The level of their English
courses is lower-intermediate level. Therefore, the pretest and posttest used were
prepared for the intermediate level learners.
The researcher handled the teaching task of both the experimental group and the
control group.

3.4 Data collection
In preparation for data gathering, the researcher received a letter from General
Directorate of Health Sciences Institutes and Colleges, providing her with an official
permission that entitled her to use the computer lab of the college (Appendix B).
To conduct this research study, the researcher used two types of tools: (a)
research tools, and (b) one technology tool. The research tools consisted of: (1) a pretest
and a posttest for listening and speaking skills (quantitative treatment), and (2) attitude
questionnaire (qualitative and quantitative treatment). The technology tool was the
multimedia CD-ROM (Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9) (Appendix A).

3.4.1 Pretest
A Pretest was conducted to control the students' initial language proficiency
(listening and speaking) level. The pretest had the same type and number of questions as
the posttest. The anticipated differential performance of the pretest and posttest sheds
light on the relative learning efficiency of the two instruction methods. The pretest
consisted of two main parts:



34

3.4.1.1 Part one: Listening
The test consists of a 2.32-minute recorded dialogue (Appendix C) and ten
multiple choice (MC) questions (Appendix D). This test format is chosen because MC
has been the most widely used test format in EFL testing. The student had to select the
correct answers based on the recorded dialogue that had been previously played twice.

3.4.1.2 Part two: Speaking
The speaking test comprised two separate task types:
Task A: Read-aloud: In the first task, the participant saw a printed passage of about 400
words long and was given a few minutes to look over the text and read it silently. The
participant then read the passage aloud with attention to pronunciation, intonation, and
flow of delivery (Appendix E). Gibson (2008) states that by reading aloud longer
stretches of text, prosodic features (which occur in spontaneous speech as well as RA)
can be focused upon, with the aim of raising awareness of these and practicing them so
that the words flow in as natural-sounding a manner as possible. Chun (2002) uses read-
aloud for rehearsed speaking activities and to stabilize newly learnt speech patterns.
Task B: Answering questions: The second task required the participant to situate herself
in the position of being in an imaginary interview with the interlocutor who is the
researcher herself. The participant was required to respond to 10 questions and each
question was said twice (Weir & Milanovic, 2003, p. 336). Initial questions were related
to the content of the reading given in the previous task (Appendix E).
All the thirty three participants took the two tasks of the speaking test and were
audio recorded, too. Their permission to be audio recorded was first taken officially by
signing the consent forms (Appendix F). Thus, a total of 66 audio recordings were
collected, comprising 33 of Task A, and 33 of Task B. Three raters (including the
35

researcher herself) were trained to the scoring criteria of these tasks. They were then
invited to mark the audio recordings. Each rater marked a total of 66 audio recordings.
The raters were requested to mark each of the two tasks separately, with a score
for each task on a scale of 1 to 5. The modified operational rating scales adapted from
Weir's and Wu's (2006) rating scales were used by raters (Appendix G).
Inter-rater reliability was monitored during the study. Each audio recording was
marked by the three raters separately. Raters were not aware of the marks awarded by
the other raters. When two out of three raters agreed on a grade that measures the
performance of a particular student, this mark was registered. When the three raters
gave three different grades, the average of the three grades was registered. For example,
if the grades are 2, 3, 4, the student will have grade 3 registered for her.

3.4.2 Posttest
After the CALL session, students were given the listening and speaking posttest.
The posttest had the same type and number of questions as the pretest. This might
familiarize the students with the content of the test. This testing effect might have
threatened the internal validity of the experiment. However, such a threat was controlled
because a control group was already included. Johnson & Christensen (2004) propose
that any testing effect that might have occurred in the experimental group would have
also occurred in the control group (Johnson & Christensen, 2004). Moreover, the
following controls might also have limited the phenomena of testing effect: (a)
participants received no feedback about pretest responses prior to receiving the
treatment and taking the posttest, and (b) eight weeks passed between the pretest and
posttest.


36

3.4.3 Post-questionnaire
To define the impressions, remarks, criticisms and suggestions of the students as
precisely as possible, an attitude questionnaire was used. This questionnaire included
selected-response items and open-response items. Both types of items sought to collect
information on generalities (usage, presentation, interest, etc.), content (text, exercises),
and criticism and suggestions. The first 12 items were measured on a four-point Likert-
type scale ranging from 0 (Not at all) to 4 (a lot) (Appendix I). Items 13, 14, and 15
were also measured on a four-point Likert-type scale, but here the alternatives were
different, 0 (Not satisfied) to 4 (Very satisfied). The last three items required the
participants to provide answers as honestly as possible. Finally, the participants were
given a place where they can write any other comments that they might have.
The questionnaire items were translated into the students' native language for the
sake of making it clearer for them (Appendix H). Then, it was back translated into the
English version in order to make sure that the original meaning of it is preserved (Zaidi,
1972).
Thus, the researcher built the results of her study on the following criteria:
Independent Variables:
The teaching method was implemented through computer-assisted language
learning program called, Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9, and presented to the students
of the experimental group. The same course was offered to the students of the control
group, but through conventional methods.
Dependent Variables:
The three dependent variables in this study are:
1. Student attitudes toward the CALL program effectiveness: Two phases of the
student questionnaire were implemented. The first phase was a student questionnaire
intended to test the reliability of the questionnaire distributed to twelve subjects. The
37

second phase was a student questionnaire designed to determine the attitude of the
students toward learning English through using a computer-assisted language learning
program called, Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9. It was administered only to
students in the experimental group after administering the posttest.
2. Student listening skill: This was determined by comparing the mean difference
between the groups' pretest and posttest scores.
3. Student speaking skill: This was determined by comparing the mean difference
between the groups' pretest and posttest scores.

3.5 Questionnaire validity and reliability
Validity and reliability for use of the questionnaire with CALL participants were
established prior to administration of the questionnaire to the participants. The content
validity of the questionnaire was determined by a group of experts in the field of
English language and technology. They are two Ph.D. holders who have experience and
knowledge of instructional technology use and implementation in English language
classes and another three English language teachers. They reviewed the questionnaire
for appropriateness, relevance, and correctness of the content. They reported their
judgments using Questionnaire Validation Form (Appendix J). They reported that the
questionnaire was suitable for its intended purpose and that there were some minor
structural modifications to be made. The judgment was on face validity which came
from the expert judges.
The questionnaire for students was piloted in November 2006 in order to test its
internal reliability. The questionnaire was disseminated to twelve students. The result of
the student's pilot questionnaire is shown in Table 2. Table 2 reflects the alpha value for
the reliability estimated for the questionnaire. The measurement revealed that the
questionnaire was highly reliable at .9273. Given this result, the instrument was proven
38

to be acceptable for the actual study. There were some minor structural modifications of
the questionnaire based on feedback from students and some experts in the field of
teaching English.
Table 2: Reliability estimates (Cronbach's Alpha) for students' questionnaire

Alpha = .9273
Number of Cases: 12
Number of Items: 58


3.6 Data analysis
The results of this study were based on a student questionnaire (testing student's
attitudes toward CALL program), pretest, and posttest as instruments for data
collection. Raw scores on the listening and speaking skills were used for a number of
calculations, the most basic of which was to compare pretest scores of the two groups.
This was done to verify that the averages on the two skills of the two groups were
basically equal. Also, a t-test was used. T-test for independent means was used to test
the difference in the performance level of the experimental group and control group in
the pretest. A paired-samples t-test was also used to find out if there was improvement
in the listening and speaking skills of the two groups. More specifically, the t-test was
administered to compare the following:
1. The means of the pretest for both groups
2. The means of the pretest and posttest for the experimental group
3. The means of the pretest and posttest for the control group
4. The means of the posttest for both groups
In addition to the test of significance, an effect size (ES) analysis was also used
to determine whether there were improvements in pretest to posttest scores for the
experimental and control groups. An effect size (ES) analysis was also used to
determine whether there was a difference between the experimental and control groups
39

on the posttest scores of listening and speaking tests. The results of these analyses
addressed Research Questions 1 and 2.
Descriptive statistical frequency analyses were performed to demonstrate
participants' responses to each item of the questionnaire instrument. The results of these
descriptive statistics spoke to Research Question 3.

3.7 Summary
This chapter described the methodology needed to answer the research questions
related to the effectiveness of a multimedia program, Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9,
in the listening and speaking skills of female students at Onaizah College of Health
Sciences.
The chapter described the steps, the sample, and the software program that were
used in the study. The chapter described the major tools used in the study: (a) research
tools and (b) one technology tool. The research tools consisted of: (1) a pretest and a
posttest for listening and speaking skills (quantitative treatment); and (2) attitude
questionnaire (qualitative and quantitative treatment). The technology tool was the
multimedia CD-ROM (Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9).
40

CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS

4.1 Introduction
This chapter analyzed the results of the study and the degree to which the
findings answered the proposed research questions. It is divided into parts based on the
research question number. This study addressed the following research questions:
1. Is CALL efficient in improving listening skill of first-year students in Onaizah
College of Health Sciences?
2. Is CALL efficient in improving speaking skill of first-year students in Onaizah
College of Health Sciences?
3. What are the attitudes of the experimental group students toward the CALL program
after using it?
In order to answer the first and second questions of this study, descriptive
statistics are used. The following sections present means and standard deviations of the
pretest and posttest scores. The third question is answered by presenting the results of
the statistical analysis of the quantitative data (closed-ended questions) and qualitative
data (open-ended questions) from the students in the experimental group.
To test if there is a significant difference in the level of performance of the
experimental group and control group, the t-test for independent means was used. T-test
for independent means was used to test the difference in the performance level of the
experimental group and control group in the pretest. A paired-samples t-test was also
used to find out if there was improvement in the listening and speaking skills of the two
groups toward learning. A probability level of .05 was used to determine statistical
significance. Data analysis was handled by using the Statistical Program for the Social
Sciences (SPSS 11.5 for Windows).
41

Before the actual commencement of the study, it is evident from the raw data
that subjects in both groups had similar results in the listening and speaking pretest
(Appendix K). For the control group, the listening and speaking means and standard
deviations were 5.13 (sd= 1.586) and 2.94 (sd= 1.181) respectively, which made the
whole mean 8.07. On the other hand, the listening and speaking means of the
experimental group were 4.59 (sd= 1.873) and 3.06 (sd= 1.029) respectively, and the
whole mean was 7.65. Thus, both groups' scores were close (see Table 3).
Table 3: Mean scores and standard deviation for listening and speaking pretests
Variable Group N Mean Std. Deviation
CONTROL 16 5.13 1.586 Listening Pretest
EXPERIMENTAL 17 4.59 1.873
CONTROL 16 2.94 1.181 Speaking Pretest
EXPERIMENTAL 17 3.06 1.029

To ensure comparability of the control group and experimental group, a t-test
was conducted. The t-test conducted on the pretests scores of listening and speaking
[t(31) =.886, p= .383, = .05 and t(31) =.315, p= .755, = .05] indicated no significant
difference between the two groups (Appendix L).
In the parametric test described in Appendix L the p (Sig.) values for both the
listening and speaking pretests across the two groups are greater than 0.05, that is,
falling below acceptable confidence levels for us to infer a significant difference
between the two groups' sets of results. We then conclude that there was no significant
difference between the groups in listening and speaking at the starting point of the
study.



42


4.2 Research question one: Posttest differences in listening
To answer question one, H
1
"There will be a statistically significant difference
between the mean scores of students who received their listening learning through
CALL and those who received their listening learning through conventional methods in
favor of the experimental group." was tested using independent sample t-tests.
After the implementation of the study and on the examination of the data, it is
evident that there was an increase in the mean scores in listening from 5.13 to 5.69
(difference .56) for the control group. Similarly, for the experimental group, the mean
scores increased from 4.59 to 6.88 (difference 2.29). The experimental group started the
study with a lower mean score than the control group, and increased more (see Tables 4
& 5). The results of the two groups were both better than the previous mean scores.
Table 4: Mean scores and standard deviation for listening posttest
Variable Group N Mean Std. Deviation
CONTROL 16 5.69 1.740 Listening
EXPERIMENTAL 17 6.88 1.536

Table 5: Mean change for the listening scores
Pretest Posttest Change Section
Co. Ex. Co. Ex. Co. Ex.
Listening Skill 5.13 4.59 5.69 6.88 .56 2.29

Another t-test was conducted to determine if the posttest scores of the listening
skill for the groups were significantly different. In the t-test of the listening skill, t value
was 2.094 and the significance level was p= .045, = .05 (see Appendix M). The results
[t(31) = -2.094, p= .045 = .05] indicated that there was a statistically significant
difference in the performance of the two groups on the listening posttest. Because the
43

significance value of .045 is less than alpha = .05, we can conclude that there was a
significant difference between the groups in listening posttest.
In the parametric test described in Appendix L the p (Sig.) values for the
listening posttest across the two groups are less than 0.05, that is, falling within
acceptable confidence levels for us to infer a significant difference between the two
groups' sets of results.

4.3 Research question two: Posttest differences in speaking
To answer question two, H
2
"There will be a statistically significant difference
between the mean scores of students who received their speaking learning through
CALL and those who received their speaking learning through conventional methods in
favor of the experimental group." was tested using independent sample t-tests.
After the implementation of the study and on the examination of the data, it is
evident that there was an increase in the mean scores in speaking from 2.94 to 3.69
(difference .75) for the control group. Similarly, for the experimental group, the mean
scores increased from 3.06 to 5.41 (difference 2.35) (see Tables 6 & 7). The results of
the two groups were both better than the previous mean scores.
Table 6: Mean scores and standard deviation for speaking posttest
Variable Group N Mean Std. Deviation
CONTROL 16 3.69 1.302 Speaking
EXPERIMENTAL 17 5.41 1.278

Table 7: Mean change for the speaking scores
Pretest Posttest Change Section
Co. Ex. Co. Ex. Co. Ex.
Speaking Skill 2.94 3.06 3.69 5.41 .75 2.35

44

Another t-test was conducted to determine if the posttest scores of the speaking
skill for the groups were significantly different. In the t-test of the speaking skill, t value
was 3.839 and the significance level was p= .001 (see Appendix L). The results [t(31) =
3.839, p= .001, = .05] indicated that there was a statistically significant difference in
the performance of the two groups on the speaking posttest. Because the significance
value of .001 is less than alpha = .05, we can conclude that there was a significant
difference between the groups in speaking posttest.
In the parametric test described in Appendix L the p (Sig.) values for the
speaking posttest across the two groups are less than 0.05, that is, falling within
acceptable confidence levels for us to infer a significant difference between the two
groups' sets of results.

4.4 Analysis of listening and speaking changes resulting from the study
A paired-samples t-test on the pretest and posttest scores of the control and
experimental groups was conducted to find out if there was improvement in the
listening and speaking skills of the two groups. Since the p value in our compared
means tests for pretest and posttest scores across the two groups is less than 0.05 (i.e. at
a 95% or higher level of confidence.), it leads us to conclude that there is a significant
difference in the listening and speaking performance of the two groups (Appendixes M
& N).
For the control group, the paired samples t-test revealed a statistically significant
difference between the mean scores of listening pretest (mean= 5.13, sd= 1.586) and
posttest (mean= 5.69, sd= 1.74) that the students had, t(15) = -2.183, p = .045, = .05.
The paired samples t-test also revealed a statistically significant difference between the
mean scores of speaking pretest (mean= 2.94, sd= 1.181) and posttest (mean= 3.69, sd=
1.302) that the students had, t(15) = -5.196, p = .000, = .05 (Appendix M).
45

For the experimental group, the paired samples t-test also revealed a statistically
significant difference between the mean scores of listening pretest (mean= 4.59, sd=
1.873) and posttest (mean= 6.88, sd= 1.536) that the students had, t(16) = -6.738, p =
.000, = .05. The paired samples t-test also revealed a statistically reliable difference
between the mean scores of speaking pretest (mean= 3.06, sd= 1.029) and posttest
(mean= 5.41, sd= 1.278) that the students had, t(16) = -8.296, p = .000, = .05
(Appendix N).
Thus, both groups made improvement on their scores and the increase was
somewhat close (see Tables 5 & 7). In terms of statistical meaning, there was a
significant difference between the two groups in the posttest. In general, the
experimental group made more increases than the control group on the overall score.
Moreover, it is important to note that the experimental group showed greater
improvement on listening and speaking skills (4.64) than the control group (1.31).
Originally, the control group had a slightly better listening score than the experimental
group (5.13 and 4.59 respectively). After using the CALL program, the experimental
group did not just make a better improvement in listening and speaking, but it also
gained a higher mean score (6.06 vs. 5.55) than the control group. This result may be
attributed to the experimental group's use of the different features and activities in
listening and speaking during the implementation. The treatment was applied for only
eight weeks and the students had to adjust to the new technology and to the new way of
learning. However, the improvement noted indicates a potentially very positive
approach to mastering listening and speaking skills in English.




46

4.5 Effect size
In addition to the test of significance, an effect size (ES) analysis was also used
to determine whether there were improvements in pretest to posttest scores for the
experimental and control groups.
For the listening test of the experimental group, using Cohen's d (1988), we see
an effect size of 1.33. This indicates that, on average, the experimental students
increased from the 62
nd
percentile on the pretest to the 90
th
percentile on the posttest.
Thus, the experimental students showed large improvement in listening test scores from
pre to post.
For the speaking test of the experimental group, we see an effect size of 2.02.
This indicates that, on average, the experimental students increased from the 54
th

percentile on the pretest to the 97.7
th
percentile on the posttest. Thus, the experimental
students showed large improvement in speaking test scores from pre to post.
For the listening test of the control group, we see an effect size of 0.33. This
indicates that, on average, the control students remained at about the 62
nd
percentile
from the pretest to the posttest. Thus, control students did not show improvement in
listening test scores from pre to post.
For the speaking test of the control group, we see an effect size of 0.6. This
indicates that, on average, the control students increased from the 54
th
percentile on the
pretest to the 73
rd
percentile on the posttest. Thus, the control students showed medium
improvement in speaking test scores from pre to post.
An effect size (ES) analysis was also used to determine whether there was a
difference between the experimental and control groups on the posttest scores of
listening and speaking tests.
For listening, we see an effect size of 0.72. This indicates that the posttest mean
of the experimental group is at about the 76
th
percentile of the control group. Stated
47

another way, the score of the average student in the experimental group exceeded the
scores of 76% of the control group students on the posttest. Thus, the experimental
group showed higher listening posttest scores than the control group.
For speaking, we see an effect size of 1.33. This indicates that the posttest mean
of the experimental group is at about the 90
th
percentile of the control group. Stated
another way, the score of the average student in the experimental group exceeded the
scores of 90% of the control group students on the posttest. Thus, the experimental
group showed higher speaking posttest scores than the control group.

4.6 Research question three: Attitudes toward the computer program
To answer question three, H
3
"Students who received their listening and
speaking learning through CALL will show positive attitudes toward it." was
investigated by presenting the results of the statistical analysis of the quantitative data
(closed-ended questions) and qualitative data (open-ended questions) from the students
in the experimental group. The questionnaire sought to collect information on
generalities (usage, presentation, interest, etc.), content (text, exercises), and criticism
and suggestions.

4.6.1 Responses to close-ended questions:
All participants (N=17) in the experimental group were gathered in the computer
lab in their regular class time to conduct the questionnaire in the week after the posttest.
The participants were asked to finish all the questions. All participants answered the
closed-ended questions, which contained 58 statements intended to elicit information
about their attitudes in five categories. More specifically, the questionnaire was
segmented into the following sections:
1. Section A: General attitude toward the program
48

2. Section B: Experience & interest in using the program
3. Section C: Multimedia content
4. Section D: Program content
5. Section E: Interactive activities
The results of their responses are summarized and available in Appendix O.

4.6.1.1 Section A: General attitude toward the program
Questions one through ten were designed to elicit participants' attitudes toward
general items related to the program. Among the participants, about 41.2% of the
students stated they needed to a small extent a manual to use the program (a little), and
29.4% of the students said they somewhat needed a program manual. About 11.8% of
the students stated that they needed the manual a lot. Of the 17 students in the study,
17.6% reported that they did not need a manual to use the program at all.
Reviewing the students' responses related to whether they liked learning using
the program or not, almost 82.4% indicated their preference, 11.8% somewhat agreed
that they preferred using the program, and 5.9% liked using the program to a small
extent.
Having been asked if the program was easy to navigate or not, 47.1% of the
students strongly agreed (a lot), 35.3% somewhat agreed, and very few students
(17.6%) felt that the navigational feature of the program was easy to a small extent.
Responding to program feedback, 35.3% of the students stated that the feedback
of the program was fairly enough, 41.2% reported that the feedback was somewhat
enough, and very few students (17.6%) felt that they needed more feedback and that the
feedback of the program was to a small extent enough.
49

With respect to coming across any grammatical, numbering, or typographic
errors while using the program, all the students strongly stated that the program is free
from such errors.
Responding to the question on recommendation of the program to other EFL
learners, the majority (82.4%) of the students would recommend it, and 17.6% of them
would somewhat recommend the program to other EFL learners.
Speaking of the improvement in the listening skill that the students had since
they began using the program, 35.3% of the students found that their listening skill
improved a lot, 47.1% felt that they somewhat improved, and 17.6% found that their
improvement was to a small extent.
More than half (52.9%) of the students felt that their improvement in speaking
skill was somewhat noticeable, 23.5% found themselves very much improved, and
23.5% felt that their improvement was very limited.
Speaking about the general easy level of the English language used in the
program, 35.3% strongly agreed that the language was very easy, 52.9% felt that the
language was somewhat easy, and 11.8% found the language a little bit difficult.
Asked if the pace of lessons was quick from lesson to lesson, the majority
(64.7%) of the students rejected this statement and stated that it was not quick at all,
17.6% found the pace of lessons was somewhat quick, and 17.6% found it quick to a
small extent.
Overall, the responses on all the ten items indicate a positive and enthusiastic
impression of using the program. The fact that negative responses were minimal may be
considered an encouraging factor.



50

4.6.1.2 Section B: Experience & interest in using the program
The second category, questions eleven to seventeen, was designed to gain the
students' perceptions about their experience and interest that they had in using the
program with reference to different scales.
Responding to the first scale, if their experience with the program was
interesting or not, half (58.8%) of the students found it very interesting, 17.6% of them
felt that it was somewhat interesting, and 23.5% of the students perceived their
experience as interesting to a small extent.
With regard to whether they had a challenging experience or not, 47.1% of the
students had a very challenging experience, 41.2% found it somewhat challenging, and
11.8% experienced the challenging experience to a very small extent.
It is worthy to note that question 13 had a slightly higher positive response (a
lot: 82.4%; somewhat: 17.6%) and a much lower negative response (a little: 0.0%; not
at all: 0.0%). The responses to this scale (useful) may imply that most students
perceived that the program was effective in helping their listening and speaking skill.
Responding to the fourth scale (fun), the majority (76.5%) of the students found
the scale applicable to the experience they had in using the program, 17.6% found it
somewhat fun, and 5.9% of them found that there was a sense of fun to a very small
extent.
Items 15, 16, and 17 were constructed with a negative inference. That is why
more negative responses were generated than positive ones on these items. Thus the
scale had been reversed. For the 'boring' scale, half of the students (52.9%) revealed that
their experience was not boring at all, 35.3% of them reported that their experience was
somewhat not boring, 5.9% felt that it was boring to a small extent, and a small number
of the students (5.9%) found it boring.
51

The results for the 'confusing' scale showed that 58.8% of the students were not
having such experience at all, 35.3% felt that their experience was not very much
confusing, and 5.9% of the students found their experience confusing to a small extent.
Concerning the last scale 'frustrating', the majority (76.5%) of the students did
not experience it at all, 11.8% of them perceived that their experience was somewhat
not frustrating, 5.9% of them fount it a little bit frustrating, and 5.9% had a frustrating
experience.
The percentages of the positive responses were higher than those of the negative
responses although not extremely high. A moderate percentage of students believed that
their experience was a very interesting, challenging, useful, fun one, and that the boring,
confusing, and frustrating experience was very limited and was almost not present.

4.6.1.3 Section C: Multimedia content
This section of the questionnaire reflects the students' extent of satisfaction to
the multimedia content of the program (i.e. audio, photo, video, and audio recording). It
is worth noting that none of the students felt dissatisfied or little satisfied. The result
showed that 70.6% of the students were very satisfied with the audio, and 29.4%
moderately satisfied.
Concerning the use of photo in the program, 76.5% felt very satisfied, and
23.5% were moderately satisfied.
With regard to the use of video in the program, 64.7% of the students were very
satisfied with it, and 35.3% were moderately satisfied.
Among the respondents, 41.2% of the students were very satisfied with the
audio recording offered in the program, and 58.8% were moderately satisfied with this
multimedia content.

52

4.6.1.4 Section D: Program content
Students' responses to section D of the questionnaire reflect their satisfaction
with the content of each chapter in the program. Although 1.56% of students showed
negative responses, over 41% perceived that the content of all the chapters was very
satisfactory. Only low percentages of responses showing 'not satisfied' were seen on
these seven items (Q26: Not satisfied: 5.9%; Q27: Not satisfied: 5.9%; Q29: Not
satisfied: 5.9%; Q30: Not satisfied: 5.9%; Q31: Not satisfied: 5.9%; Q37: Not satisfied:
11.8%; Q46: Not satisfied: 5.9%).

4.6.1.5 Section E: Interactive activities
The fifth category, questions 52 to 58, was designed to gain the participants'
perception about the different interactive activities provided in each chapter. These
activities are as follows: 'Listen & Click,' 'See It, Say It,' 'Drag & Match,' 'How Do You
Say?,' 'Storyline,' 'Multiple Choice,' and 'Fill in the Blanks.'
The results showed that item 54 (Drag & Match) had the highest mean and
highest percentage of positive responses (64.7%) in this category; only 5.9% showed
negative responses. The responses revealed that participants perceived using the CALL
program activities helpful to some degree. Based on the responses to items 53, 54, 55,
56, 57, and 58, only a few participants had problems using the CALL program
activities. The responses to these items (Q53: Not satisfied: 11.8%; Q54: Not satisfied:
5.9%; Q55: Not satisfied: 23.5%; Q56: Not satisfied: 5.9%; Q57: Not satisfied: 5.9%;
Q58: Not satisfied: 5.9%) revealed that just a few participants were not satisfied with
these kinds of activities. Overall, results showed more positive than negative responses.



53

4.6.2 Responses to open-ended questions:
There were four open-ended questions at the end of the questionnaire. The first
two asked the participants about what they liked and did not like about using the
program. The last two gathered opinions and suggestions about the program for future
improvement. All participants were encouraged to respond to the open-ended questions.
However, all participants answered the first open-ended question, 6 participants
answered the second, 3 participants answered the third, 1 participant answered the
fourth, and only 1 participant wrote a comment for the fifth. The original responses in
Arabic are presented in Appendix P.
For the first question, four participants specifically pointed out that they liked
the listening exercises and test sections; one in this group expressed that using the
CALL program and the activities associated with each chapter, motivated her to learn
more; another also mentioned that she liked the quality of the audio streaming. Several
participants reported that they liked the CALL program because of its variety of
activities and convenience. They thought that using interactive exercises enhanced
learning interests and having the instruction clear with audio streaming energized the
class and made learning more interesting, effective, and convenient than traditional
classroom method. One participant pointed out that by using the CALL program, she
could learn to fit her own needs, which were missed in most traditional classrooms (i.e.
the content covered by the instructor is sometimes not what students need or want). One
participant reported that the exercises made learning more enjoyable. In addition,
responses also showed that participants liked the program and felt that it was helpful in
their English learning.
For the second question, two participants indicated that they did not like the
grammar exercises, but provided no further explanations. The most complained about
issue was the time allocated for using the program; several participants pointed out that
54

the time spent in learning using the program was too short. One participant complained
that it was inconvenient to look for the meanings of new vocabulary.
For the third question, two participants suggested that if possible, the program
should contain popular movie clips for future teaching and learning; they believed that
learning through watching popular movies would greatly increase their learning interest.
Another participant suggested that the program should add more functions to help
students find the information they need more easily and more conveniently.
For the forth question, only one participant suggested deleting some ethnic
beliefs that are prohibited in Islam such as drinking wine. This may justify the reason
behind the negative attitude toward some of the content as perceived in section D of the
closed-ended questions. From their answers to that section, only low percentages of
responses showed 'not satisfied' with the content of the program.
For the 'other comments' part, only one participant wrote her comment and
suggested using CALL programs not only for the listening and speaking skills, but also
for all the four skills.
Perhaps one of the more meaningful aspects of the program enjoyed by
participants was the use of computers in learning English. All of them had taken English
classes in the past. Unfortunately, numerous factors prevented them from learning
English effectively. For example, the classes did not consider individual learning styles;
each student was at a different level of English and the materials did not accommodate
that. The teachers did not engage them one on one, and the classes never focused on
speaking or listening as much as reading and writing. Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9,
they concurred, not only addressed the above-mentioned failures, but, more importantly,
it made them more familiar with computers. The experimental group revealed that each
participant wanted to continue learning English using the CALL program, Learn to
Speak English Deluxe 9.
55

In general, participants showed more positive than negative responses on all
items in the closed-ended question section. Even for the open-ended questions, more
positive feedback was shown than negative feedback. According to the results of the
questionnaire, most participants perceived that the computer-assisted language learning
program, Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9, was helpful and effective in their English
learning, especially in listening and speaking abilities, and that using the program
activities made the English class more interesting. Participants also observed that using
the CALL program for a longer time could help improve both their listening and
speaking abilities.

4.8 Summary
The results presented in this chapter suggest that, in general, CALL program had
positive effects on the listening and speaking skills for the experimental group when
compared with the control group which was taught using traditional ways of teaching.
This chapter presented the results of the study according to the study's research
questions. Research questions 1 and 2 were examined quantitatively. Research question
3 was examined quantitatively and qualitatively.
Based on the analyses of the data, chapter 5 provides a detailed summary of the
study's results and discusses the findings. It also presents the study's conclusions and
recommendations for future instructional technology research.
56

CHAPTER FIVE
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

5.1 Introduction
Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9 was a newly created educational and technical
training program designed to increase English language skills of non-English speaking
students. The program aimed to help participants learn English and at the same time
improve their listening and speaking skills. However, because of its novelty, the
effectiveness of the program as a means of teaching English remains unknown.
Evidence of program effectiveness was needed prior to implementing it in EFL classes.
The purpose of the study was to determine the effectiveness of a multimedia
program, Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9, in the listening and speaking skills of
female students at Onaizah College of Health Sciences. In carrying out this study, a
comprehensive review of related literature was conducted to gain insight and clarify the
parameters for this study. This chapter reviews and discusses the findings, based on the
analyses presented in Chapter 4, and relates them to previous research. This will be
followed by a discussion of pedagogical implications and recommendations for future
studies.

5.2 Discussion
Based on the results of this study, which are presented in chapter 4 above, it was
concluded that the use of the computer-assisted language learning program, Learn to
Speak English Deluxe 9, would bring about a fruitful educational contribution to the
teaching of listening and speaking skills. This section uses the study's three research
questions as a framework with which to discuss the study's findings. It puts forward
some possible explanations for the greater success rates of CALL program.
57

The following research questions provided a focus for the study:
1. Is CALL efficient in improving listening skill of first-year students in Onaizah
College of Health Sciences?
2. Is CALL efficient in improving speaking skill of first-year students in Onaizah
College of Health Sciences?
3. What are the attitudes of the experimental group students toward the CALL program
after using it?
The previous data of the pretests indicated that the control and experimental
groups were similar in overall listening and speaking skills' level (Control: 8.07;
Experimental: 7.65; only a .42-point difference). The results of t-test in the previous
listening and speaking scores confirmed that there was no significant difference
between the two groups before the study. In the listening as well as the speaking
sections, no remarkable difference was seen between the two groups.
After the implementation of the study and on the examination of data, results
showed that there was a significant difference in achievement between the control group
and experimental group. Thus, the following two proposed hypotheses were accepted:
1. There will be a statistically significant difference between the mean scores of
students who received their listening learning through CALL and those who
received their listening learning through conventional methods in favor of the
experimental group.
2. There will be a statistically significant difference between the mean scores of
students who received their speaking learning through CALL and those who
received their speaking learning through conventional methods in favor of the
experimental group.
After the eight-week period, both groups made some gains in their listening and
speaking scores (Control: posttest mean =9.38; Experimental: posttest mean
58

score=12.29). In general, the experimental group made slightly better progress in the
overall score than the control group; the difference between two groups increased from
.42 to 2.91. The results of the t-test analysis in the posttest showed that there was a
statistically significant difference in overall listening and speaking scores between the
two groups. It is necessary to mention that the control group originally had a slightly
better listening mean score than the experimental group (control: 5.13; experimental:
4.59). After the implementation of the CALL program, the experimental group gained a
higher listening mean score (experimental: 6.88; control: 5.69) than the control group.
The progress that the experimental group made in the listening section than the control
group could be reasonably attributed to the experimental group's use of the audio
streaming feature and the listening self-tests during the implementation of the study.
Moreover, almost all the students scoring higher than 80 were from the experimental
group. Only one student in the control group scored higher that 80 in the listening
posttest. It is difficult to say that all the increases were solely due to the CALL program,
but it was encouraging to see this outcome since the goal was partially met.
These were the anticipated results as had been predicted on the basis of
comparable studies. These findings are similar to what was found in most studies which
actually compare control groups with populations involved with CALL as discussed in
Chapter 2. In fact, these findings mirror what Klassen and Milton (1999) noted in their
study involving the effectiveness of an interactive multimedia CD-ROM in an English
language-learning curriculum at the University of Hong Kong. They reported that
students who used the program showed significant improvement in listening skills
compared to students given traditional classroom instruction. They also found that the
use of interactive multimedia programs helped students develop positive attitudes
toward CALL programs.
59

Other studies that have compared CALL with traditional classroom learning (Al-
Juhani, 1991; Almutairi, 1998; Aljamhoor, 1999; Alluhaib, 1999; Al-Jraiwi, 1999;
Attwaim, 2000; Al-Subeai, 2000) found significant differences in learning that could be
attributed to the computer-assisted language learning treatment. The overall findings in
a number of studies were that CALL students learned significantly better than
traditionally taught learners. The findings of the present study follow in the same vein.
Although a significant difference between the two groups is registered, the
presence of some threats to validity should be mentioned. The first threat to validity is
selection. A convenience sampling was used and not random sampling; therefore, the
results cannot be generalized. Further research should be conducted to investigate the
effectiveness of CALL program using random sampling. Another threat to validity is
pretesting. The same test was used for the pretest and posttest. This is a threat because
the pretest could have improved the performance in the posttest. However, such a threat
was controlled because a control group was already included. Johnson & Christensen
(2004) propose that any testing effect that might have occurred in the experimental
group would have also occurred in the control group (Johnson & Christensen, 2004).
Moreover, the following controls might also have limited the phenomena of testing
effect: (a) participants received no feedback about pretest responses prior to receiving
the treatment and taking the posttest, and (b) eight weeks passed between the pretest and
posttest.
The study also cannot claim full credit for these improvements in listening and
speaking. It was short-term, and students had only two periods each week, all of which
must claim some credit for the increase in listening and speaking level. The impact of
pedagogical interventions may not be visible in a single semester. In particular,
improved educational performance resulting from different types of instruction would
be visible only after a relatively prolonged period of time (Felix, 2005). A longitudinal
60

approach would allow a deeper understanding of the learning environment investigated
(Chapelle, 1998). This area should be considered for further study with a larger number
of students. However, the improvement noted indicates a potentially very positive
approach to mastering listening and speaking skills in English.
The positive impact of the CALL program on the students listening and
speaking skills may derive from the fact that the students become more confident and
motivated in learning the language because of the authentic environments, modified
interaction and enhanced motivation. The students get to practice their listening skills
through watching short movies instead of tape cassettes and working on repetition in
drills and dialogs based on situations. Every time they try to speak, they are positively
reinforced with the words, for example, 'good,' 'fantastic,' 'excellent,' and 'terrific.' These
allow them to break their barriers of risk-taking in speaking the language as well as to
boost up their English competence. Thus, this research has suggested that CALL
program may contribute to positive learning outcomes through authentic environments,
modified interaction and enhanced motivation.
The meta-analyses conducted by Felix (2005) revealed that though CALL has
been effective in teaching certain elements of the English language (i.e. reading,
vocabulary acquisition, and listening), few studies have focused on its effects on oral
communication. In this study, the researcher opted to have participants use the oral
component of Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9, which involved reading words and
sentences into a microphone. The researcher felt that this particular component of Learn
to Speak English Deluxe 9 was effective in promoting pronunciation or communication.
Students' positive attitude and satisfaction with CALL program were also tested.
Descriptive statistics were run and data showed that CALL program users had a positive
attitude toward CALL program, perceived its utility for helping them improve their
listening and speaking skills, and had a strong intention to use the program in the future.
61

This positive attitude and satisfaction with CALL program lead to high intention to use
CALL program in the future because of the benefits users perceived. In general,
participants showed more positive than negative feedback in all items in the close-ended
question section. Even for the open-ended questions, more positive than negative
feedback was shown. Despite the short exposure time, a considerable percentage of
participants expressed that using CALL program in listening and speaking classes was
better than traditional classroom teaching, and that the CALL activities were effective in
the improvement of their listening and speaking skills. Results of this study were in
agreement with other studies pertaining to attitude towards CALL program (Al-Juhani,
1991; Bagui, 1998; Klassen and Milton, 1999; Al-Subeai, 2000).
This positive attitude toward the CALL program may be also attributed to the
fact that during the class, students were positively reinforced by the computer, such as
excellent, very good, terrific and well done, whenever they try to speak. With the
positive reinforcements, students intrinsic motivation became promoted. Students had
the chance to learn the language for their own self-perceived needs and goals. This led
them to gaining positive attitudes towards the teacher, the class, the teaching method,
and of course, language learning. They finally participated in their learning for the
enjoyment it provided. This is in accordance with the overall findings from most
researches in the role of attitudes and motivation in foreign or second language learning
that positive attitudes and motivation are related to success in foreign or second
language learning (Gardner & Lambert, 1972; Richard-Amato, 1988).
The program's success was due in part to the fact that Learn to Speak English
Deluxe 9 program followed the conditions demonstrated by Egbert and Yang (2004) in
creating opportunities in a computer-assisted language learning (CALL) classroom. For
example, participants had enough time and feedback on their language proficiency and
content competence, they worked in an environment with little to no stress, they were
62

involved in authentic tasks, and they had the opportunity to interact with the computer
program. More importantly, the program supported their autonomy.
To summarize, this study finds that using the computer-assisted language
learning program in improving the listening and speaking skills of students produces
satisfying results among the participants of the study. Moreover, the findings of the
study generally supported scholars' findings in the fields of language learning and
computer-assisted language learning especially in the field of listening and speaking
skills. Language learners' attitudes toward using CALL program in learning English
language in general, and improving listening and speaking skill in particular, could be
an important factor in determining their achievements in learning language via CALL
programs. Finally, the findings of the investigation promote further research
development for new CALL technology to implement in the improvement of the
listening and speaking skills to reach a balancing act between theory and practice.
Research in computer-assisted language learning environments such as Learn to Speak
English Deluxe 9 which collects data on learners' processes for dealing with different
activities makes an important contribution to second language acquisition theory and to
the design of multimedia software for supporting the development of L2 listening and
speaking skills outside of formal classroom instruction. The integration of CALL-based
learning seems indeed to have contributed to students' learning in listening and speaking
course in the Saudi Arabian context. Thus, it is the researcher's hope that researchers,
educators, and foreign language learners will benefit from the findings and suggestions
presented here.

5.3 Pedagogical implications
Based on the results outlined, many pedagogical implications can be concluded:
1. CALL could be a very useful tool for teaching EFL.
63

2. The program's appropriateness and compatibility with students' cultural and
social norms was noted in the findings. Some students expressed apprehension
about the moralities and values that the program contains, which are against the
Saudi Arabian culture. The Saudi Arabian culture is considered Islamic and
conservative in nature. This point was expressed before by Thomas (1987). He
suggests that cultural conditions of developing societies should be considered
when technology transfers from industrialized societies into these societies. To
overcome this issue, EFL teachers in Saudi Arabia need to be informed about
the potential value of integrating CALL programs in their classes and how to
adjust their efficiency with students' needs and Islamic cultural and social
norms.
3. The study shows that students can use such program in the computer lab or at
home at a convenient time to improve listening and speaking skills. Using
CALL inside and outside the classroom will help EFL teachers meet individual
differences in learning styles as the use of CALL can satisfy visual learners,
auditory learners, and audio-visual learners.
4. Multimedia CALL programs can be used to supplement or complement
listening and speaking instruction.
5. Hiring native speakers of English to teach English language speaking in Arab
countries is expensive and the same goal can be accomplished by equipping
labs with sophisticated computers that have interactive multimedia CD-ROMs
and access to modern CALL programs.

5.4 Recommendations for further studies
The results of this study showed the effectiveness of a computer-assisted
language learning (CALL) program, Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9, in developing
64

the listening and speaking skills of female students studying at Onaizah College of
Health Sciences. Based on the findings of this study, the following recommendations
are made:
1. Further research should be conducted to investigate the effectiveness of CALL
program for different groups of students at various levels of education.
2. A replication of this study should be made to see if the results of this study will
be repeated.
3. This study was limited to 16 hours of CALL program integration in listening and
speaking class. Therefore, longer study is needed and regular class time is
recommended to investigate the impact of CALL program on listening and
speaking skills.
4. As this study was conducted with Arabic-speaking students. Further research is
needed to investigate the effectiveness of the CALL program in non-Arabic
speaking students.
5. Further research is needed to study the effectiveness of CALL program taking
gender into consideration. Comparing male versus female CALL program use
might shed some light on whether the program effectiveness in learning is
affected by gender.
6. Qualitative research such as observing students using CALL program is needed.
This kind of research is important as it might shed light on the best techniques
and strategies to use CALL program.
7. A similar study could be implemented taking teachers' attitudes into
consideration. This would contribute much to the development of English
education.
65

8. Recommendations for future study include also investigating more closely the
effectiveness of CALL program in the reading and writing skills of foreign
language learners.
9. Since this study used only the interactive software program available at the time
that the research was conducted, it is recommended to use more sophisticated
programs available on the market to determine whether these programs are
useful for Arab college students. Such programs are now under development but
were not available at the time of the study.
66

References

Aldosari. H. (1992). A sociolinguistic study of the attitudes of Muslim students,
teachers, and religious officials on learning and teaching English as a foreign
language in Saudi Arabia. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Pennsylvania State
University, Pennsylvania.

Alfallaj, Fahad. (1998). An evaluative study of the teaching of English as a Foreign
Language at the Junior College of Technology, Buraydah, Saudi Arabia. Doctoral
dissertation, Indiana University of Pennsylvania.

Aljamhoor, A. (1999). fa'iliyat alhassoob fi tadreess allughatil engliziyah litullab assaff
alawal thanawi: dirassah tajreebiyah 'The Effectiveness of Using Computers in
Teaching EFL to Secondary School Students: An Experimental Study.'
Proceedings of the Symposium on Educational Technology and Information,
Bahrain University. Riyadh: King Saud University Press.

Alluhaib, I. (1999). athar istikhdam baramij alhassib alali fi maddat alfizya ala tahsseel
tullab assaff alaual thanawi 'The Impact of Using Educational Software on the
Secondary School Students' Learning of Physics.' Unpublished master's thesis,
King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

Almutairi, S. (1998). athar istikhdam ihda barmajiyat alhassoob fi maddat aloloom ala
tahsseel tullab assaff assadis alibtiday 'The Effects of Using Computer Programs
in The Teaching of Science on the Learning Achievements of Sixth Grade Pupils.'
Unpublished master's thesis, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
67

American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages. (1996). Standards for foreign
language learning: Preparing for the 2l
st
century. Yonkers, NY: Author.

Anderson, J. (1991). Computer-based technologies: effective tools for teaching and
learning. In T. Le and M. McCauslanfd (Eds.), Language Education: Interaction
and development. Proceedings of the International Conference on Language
Educations: Interaction and development 21, 116-142. Ho Chi Minh City,
Vietnam

Ashworth, D. (1996). Hypermedia and CALL. In M. C. Pennington (Ed.), The power of
CALL (pp. 79-95). Houston, TX: Athelstan Publications.

Attwaim, A. (2000). athar istikhdam alhassoob ala tahseel tullab assaff assadiss
alibtida'y fi muqarrar qawa'id allughatul alArabiyah 'The Influence of Using
Computers on the Sixth Grade Pupils' Learning of Arabic Language'. Unpublished
master's thesis, King Saud University, Riyadh. Saudi Arabia.

Bagui, S. (1998). Reasons for increased learning using multimedia. Journal of
Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 7(1), 3-18.

Barr, D., Leakey, J. and Ranchoux, A. (2005). Told Like it is! An Evaluation of
Integrated Oral Develoment Pilot Project. Language Learning & Technology,
9(3), 55-78.

Bax, S. (2003). CALL - past, present and future. System, 31(1), 13-28.
68

Breen, P. (2005). Two examples of CALL use in the classroom. Asian EFL Journal, 6.
Retrieved February 25, 2008, from http://www.asian-efl-
journal.com/pta_august_05_pb.php

Brett, P. (1997). A comparative study of the effects of the use of multimedia on
listening comprehension. System, 25(1), 39-53.

Bucholtz, C. (1998). New Tricks for Teaching: Software Web-based Solutions Help
Growing Pool of Technicians Get up to Speed. Telephony, 234(11), 50.

Burns, D. (1996). Technology in the ESL classroom. Technology & Learning, 16, 50-
52.

Burston, Jack. (1993). Exploiting available technology. CALICO Journal, 11(1), 47-52.

Butler-Pascoe, M.E., and Wiburg, K. (2003). Technology and Teaching English
Language Learners. Boston: Pearson Education.

Cazade A. (1999). Sound waves and other speech oriented visual aids for the language
learner. Apprentissage des Langues et Systmes dInformation et de
Communication (ALSIC), 2(2), 3-32.

Chapelle, C. (1997). CALL in the year 2000: Still in search of research paradigms?
Language Learning & Technology, 1(1), 19-43.

69

Chapelle, C. (1998). Multimedia CALL: Lessons to be learned from research on
instructed SLA. Language Learning & Technology, 2(1), 22-34.

Chapelle, C. A. (2001a). Innovative language learning: Achieving the vision. ReCALL,
13, 3-14.

Chapelle, C. A. (2001b). Computer applications in second language acquisition:
Foundations for teaching, testing and research. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.

Chun, D. (2002). Discourse Intonation in L2; from Theory to Practice. Amsterdam and
Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Cobb, K. J. (2002). Facilitating second language acquisition through computer assisted
language learning. Action Research Exchange (ARE), 1(1). Retrieved February
29, 2008, from http://chiron.valdosta.edu/are/Artmanscrpt/vol1no1/cobb_am.pdf

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences (2nd ed.).
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Cunningham, Kevin (2000). Integrating CALL into the Writing Curriculum. The
Internet TESL Journal, 6(5). Retrieved March 17, 2006, from
http://iteslj.org/Articles/Cunningham-CALLWriting

70

Duquette, L., Renie, D., & Laurier, M. (1998). The evaluation of vocabulary acquisition
when learning French as a second language in a multimedia environment.
Computer Assisted Language Learning, 11(1), 3-34.

Egan, K. B. (1999). Speaking: A critical skill and a challenge. CALICO Journal, 16(3),
277-293.

Egbert, J. L. (2005). Conducting research on CALL. In J. L. Egbert & G. M. Petrie
(Eds.), CALL research perspectives (pp. 38). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Egbert, J., & Yang, Y. (2004). Mediating the digital divide in CALL classrooms:
Promoting effective language tasks in limited technology contexts. Recall, 76(2),
280-291.

Ehsani, F., & Knodt, E. (1998). Speech technology in computer-aided language
learning: Strengths and limitations of a new CALL paradigm. Language Learning
& Technology, 2(1), 45-60. Retrieved March 7, 2006, from
http://lll.msu.edu/vol2numl/article3/index.html

Felix, Uschi (2001). The Webs potential for language learning: the students
perspective. ReCALL 13(1), 47-58.

Felix, Uschi (2005). What do meta-analyses tell us about CALL effectiveness?
ReCALL, 17(2), 269-288.

71

Fotos, S., & Browne, C.M. (2004). New Perspectives on CALL for Second Language
Classrooms. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Fox, C, Manning, E., Murphy, M., Urbon, R., & Marwick, K. C. (Eds.). (2003).
Longman dictionary of contemporary English (New ed.). Essex, UK: Pearson
Education.

Gardner, R.C., & Lambert, W. (1972). Attitudes and Motivation in Second Language
Learning. Rowley, M.A.: Newbury House.

Garrett, N. (1991). Technology in the service of language learning: Trends and issues.
The Modern Language Journal, 75(1), 74-101.

Gibson, Sally (2008). Reading aloud: a useful learning tool? ELT Journal, 62(1), 29-36.

Gill, Mary McVey and Hartmann, Pamela. (Eds.). (2005). TAPESTRY: Listening &
Speaking 1: Middle East Edition. Heinemann Library.

Graham, L., Lee, S., Liu, M., & Moore, Z. (2002). A look at the research on computer-
based technology use in second language learning: A review of the literature from
1990-2000. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 34(3), 250-273.

Hall, C. (1998). Overcoming the grammar deficit: the role of information technology in
teaching German grammar to undergraduates. Canadian Modern Language
Review, 55(1), 41-60.

72

Hayati, A. (2005). The computer and language teaching. Asian EFL Journal, 4.
Retrieved February 29, 2008, from http://www.asian-
efljournal.com/pta_may_05_hm.php

Hincks, R. (2003). Speech technologies for pronunciation feedback and evaluation.
ReCALL, 15(1), 3-20.

Hubbard, P., Kessler,G., & Madden, J. (2003). Technology, techniques, and materials
for Web listening. TESOL 2003: Baltimore. Retrieved April 18, 2007, from
http://www.stanford.edu/~efs/tesol03listening/

Ivers, Karen, S. and Barron, Ann, E. (2003). Multimedia Projects in Education:
Designing, producing, and Assessing (2d ed.). Englewood, CO: Libraries
Unlimited.

James, R. (1996). CALL and the speaking skills. System, 24(1), 15-21.

Johnson, B., & Christensen, L. (2004). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative,
and mixed approaches (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education Inc.

Al-Jraiwi, A. (1999). athar alwassa'it almuta'addidah ala tahsseel talabat assaff alawal
athanawi fi maddat arriyadhiyat bi madeenat arriyadh 'The Influence of
Multimedia on the Secondary School Students' Learning of Mathematics in
Riyadh Area.' Unpublished master's thesis, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi
Arabia.

73

Al-Juhani, S. (1991). The Effectiveness of Computer-Assisted Instruction in Teaching
English as a Foreign Language in Saudi Arabian Secondary School. Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, University of Denver, Colorado.

Kenning, M. M. and Kenning, M. J. (1983). An Introduction to Computer-Assisted
Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Kenning, M. M. & Kenning M. J. (1990). Computers and Language Learning: Current
Theory and Practice. West Sussex, England: Ellis Horwood.

Klassen, J. & Milton, P. (1999). Enhancing English language skills using multimedia:
Tried and tested. Computer assisted language learning, 12(4), 281-294.

Kramsch, C. (1988). The cultural discourse of foreign language textbooks. In A.
Singerman (Ed.), Towards a new integration of language and culture (pp. 63-68).
Middlebury, VT: Northeast Conference.

Knzel, Sebastian. (1995). Processors processing: Learning theory and CALL. CALICO
Journal, 12(4), 106-113.

Larsen-Freeman, D. & Long, S. (1991). An introduction to second language acquisition
research. New York: Longman.

Levy, Michael. (1997). Computer-assisted language learning: Context and
conceptualization. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

74

Maher, J. (1986). The development of English as an international language of medicine.
Applied Linguistics, 7(2), 206218.

Masatake, D., Kawahara, T., & Tsubota, Y. (2004). An English pronunciation learning
system for Japanese students based on diagnosis of critical pronunciation errors
(pp. 1-16). Academic Centre for Computing and Media Studies, Kyoto University,
Kyoto Japan. Cambridge University Press.

McCarthy, R. (1989). Multimedia: What the excitement's all about. Electronic
Learning, 8(8), 26-31.

Raphan, D. (1996). A Multimedia approach to academic listening. TESOL Journal,
6(2), 24-28.

Richard-Amato, Patricia. (1988). Making It Happen: Interaction in the Second
Language Classroom from Theory to Practice. New York: Longman.

Schiffrin, D. (1994). Approaches to discourse. London: Basil Blackwell.

Schwienhorst, K. (2002). Why virtual, why environments? Implementing virtual reality
concepts in computer-assisted language learning. Simulation and Gaming, 33(2),
196-209.

Stepp-Greany, J. (2002). Student perceptions on language learning in a technological
environment: Implications for the new millennium. Language Learning and
Technology 6 (1), 16580.
75

Al-Seghayer, K. (2001). The effect of multimedia annotation modes on L2 vocabulary
acquisition: A comparative study. Language Learning & Technology, 5(1), 202-
232. Retrieved March 8, 2006, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol5num1/alseghayer/

Sinclair, J.M. (1992). The Automatic Analysis of Corpora. In J. Svartvik (Ed.),
Directions in Corpus Linguistics, Proceedings of Nobel Symposium 82 (pp. 379-
397). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Su, W.Q., & Kinshuk (2002). Web-based computer assisted language learning. In
Proceedings of the Distance Education Association of New Zealand Conference,
99-107. Wellington: New Zealand.

Al-Subeai, W. (2000). The effectiveness of CALL in improving vocabulary learning and
reading comprehension among EFL Saudi students' of the secondary commercial
in Riyadh. Unpublished master's thesis, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi
Arabia.

Tannenbaum, R. (1998). Theoretical Foundations of Multimedia. New York: Computer
Science Press.

Thomas, R. (1987). The Nature of Educational Technology. In R. M. Thomas & V. N.
Kobayashi (Eds.), Educational Technology-Its Creations, Development and
Cross-Cultural Transfer (pp. 1-23). Oxford: Pergamon Press.

Virvou, M., Maras D., & Tsiriga V. (2000). Student Modelling in an Intelligent
Tutoring System for the Passive Voice of English Language. Educational
76

Technology and Society, 3(4). Retrieved February 25, 2008, from
http://ifets.ieee.org/periodical/vol_4_2000/virvou.html

Warschauer M. (1996). Computer Assisted Language Learning: an Introduction. In
Fotos, S. (Ed.), Multimedia Language Teaching (pp. 3-20). Tokyo: Logos
International.

Warschauer, M., & Healey, D. (1998). Computers and language learning: An overview.
Language Teaching, 31(2), 57-71.

Weir, Cyril J. & Milanovic, M., (2003). Continuity and innovation: the history of the
CPE 19132002. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Weir, Cyril J. & Wu, Jessica R.W. (Eds.). (2006). Establishing test form and individual
task comparability: a case study of a semi-direct speaking test. Language Testing,
23(2), 167-197.

Wimberley, Anita, T. (2007). Analyzing computer applications in English as a second
language acquisition tool. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of
Louisiana, Lafayette.

World Bank. (1995). Will Arab Workers Prosper or Be Left Out in the Twenty-First
Century? World Bank Regional Perspectives on World Development Report,
Washington, DC: World Bank Publishing.

77

Zaidi, S.M. Hafeez (1972). Problems of Translation in Cross-Cultural Research. Journal
of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 3(1), 41-56.

Zhenhui, R. (1999). Modern vs. traditional. Forum, 37(3). Retrieved April 29, 2007,
from http://exchanges.state.gov/forum/vols/vol37/no3/p27.htm
78

Appendix A: Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9: An Overview
(Researcher's review)

Product Overview
Founded in Dublin in 1995, RiverDeep Interactive Learning Limited has been
the leading name in language-learning software. It is one of the fastest growing
education and consumer software companies in the United States. Its CD-ROM
solutions can be founded in thousands of schools in over 20 countries worldwide. It
owns, develops, and publishes many successful foreign language series products under
The Learning Company brand such as Reader Rabbit Reading Builder, Carmen
Sandiego, ClueFinders, Oregon Trail, Mavis Beacon Teaches Typing and Zoombinis.
The Learning Company brings to Riverdeep its outstanding, award-winning education
software, Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9.
The Learning Company assumes that learners can achieve the fluency they
desire quickly and conveniently with the effective and entertaining Learn to Speak
Deluxe program. For business, for travel or just for fun, it is the language learning
system that gets results fast.

Technical Features
Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9 comes in four CDs coupled with multimedia
hardware and a graphical interface like MS-Windows. It reflects an era where sound,
color, and even full-motion video are available on the desktop, along with a volume and
variety of text that itself is pretty amazing. Table (1) provides a technical profile for the
program.


79

Table 1: Technical profile for Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9 multimedia program
Activities Integrated; Listening, reading, fill-in exercises, listen and
click exercises, see and say exercises, drag and match
exercises, and how do you say exercises, dictation,
sentence editing, prediction, multiple choice, vocabulary,
pronunciation, dialogues, word study, games, speech
recording, and a talking dictionary.
Media Format (4) Compact Discs
Minimum Hardware
Requirements (Windows XP)
300 MHz PC with a 4x speed CD-ROM drive. Headset
and Microphones, 128 MB RAM, sound card & graphics
card.
Level from beginner to advanced ESL/EFL levels
Website http://rivapprod2.riverdeep.net/

Learn to Speak English software program was built according to the following
storyboards:
A title screen showing the logo of the program.








Figure 1: Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9's title screen
80

Next is the sign-in list screen. In this list, a new user has type his/her name next to
the cursor, then click on Start (or press Enter) to begin the program. If he/she used
Learn to Speak before, his/her name will already be on the sign-in list.









Figure 2: Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9's sign-in list screen
When the user clicks on Start (or presses Enter) to begin the program, a home menu
screen will appears









Figure 3: Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9's home menu screen
Next, the Comprehensive Courses' menu appears when it is selected from the home
menu screen. One of the three courses from two different tracks: General and
Specialty can be chosen. A description of the selected course appears in the text area
81

at the bottom of the screen. Once a Comprehensive Course is selected, it will appear
beneath Comprehensive Courses on the Home screen. Each Comprehensive Course
begins with a list of educational goals. The goals tell what one can expect to learn in
each lesson.









Figure 4: Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9's menu of comprehensive courses
Then, a list of situational lessons appears. These lessons are divided into chapters.










Figure 5: Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9's situational lessons for the beginning course
1.
82

When one of the courses is started, a selection of activities will appear around a
situational topic. The user can learn the activities in the order they appear, or he/she
can choose the activity to be practiced first.









Figure 6: Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9's activities of beginning course 1.

Program Features
The Learn to Speak English software program takes advantage of CD-ROM
storage to present speech utterances from a variety of speakers. Videos of different
speakers pop up as the course exercises go along. Each utterance can be heard as many
times as desired although for a given sentence, only one native speaker is available.
Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9 offers a quick diagnostic pretest to evaluate the
language skills that the learners have in order to determine the ideal staring point for
them. The learners are left with different two choices for learning. They can Learn
English by following the general track or focus on specific topics that interest them
most.
It contains simulated conversations where learners can hone their listening and
speaking skills in simulated real-world interactions with native speakers. It can simulate
83

authentic contexts using multimedia displays. Learners can participate in one-to-one
conversations with one or more simulated or videotaped interlocutors. The cue for the
student to speak can be realistic, such as having a character on the screen turn head and
eyes toward the user.
Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9 consists of 30 situational lessons related to
various topics and 16 Extended Practice lessons. Situational lesson titles include
Immigration and Customs, Changing Money, Public Transportation, Checking into a
Hotel, Making a Phone Call, Dining Out, Making an Appointment, At the Movies,
Shopping at the Mall, Meeting an Attorney, Finding an Apartment, Moving Day,
Shopping for Groceries, At the Laundry, Renting a Car, Applying for a Credit Card,
Asking for Directions, At the Gas Station, Car Trouble, A Washington Traffic Jam, A
Fender Bender, Invitation, A Flight to the West Coast, California Dreaming, A Business
Lunch, A Household Emergency, Under the Weather, At the Doctor's Office, At the
Dentist's Office, and Collecting the Inheritance.
Each situational lesson includes the following parts: Introduction to the setting,
Vocabulary, Drill 1, Story, Action, Drill 2, Grammar, Drill 3, Conversation, and Games.
The 16 Extended Practice lessons provide additional opportunities to practice
the English language. They are categorized into categories including General Interest,
Business, Social Interactions, Everyday Life, and Leisure.
In different parts of the software, the learners have the chance to see any word or
sentence, hear them, and then say them. Each lesson begins with new words, then
progress to phrases and beyond. Learners can click on the word or phrase they want to
learn. Record their pronunciation and compare it to a native speaker's, watch and hear a
native speaker use the word in a sentence, explore subtleties of the language with
convenient vocabulary notes, and easily access context-sensitive help. Buttons at the
bottom and top of each lesson screen allow users to move easily from one task to
84

another, as well as from one lesson to another. Also, menus and screens of the software
are colorful, attractive, intuitive and easy to use.
The extent and quality of the sound recordings is one of the foremost strength of
the software. Dialogues can be heard as complete conversation or separated into
sentence-sized chunks. Vocabulary part provides the lessons new vocabulary in a
scrolling field of words that can be heard one at a time, or in a conversational context.
Learners are given the chance to evaluate their progress with drills in each
lesson. Each lesson has three drills. The first two drills are based on the Dialogues.
These include 'Listen and Click,' 'See and Say,' 'Drag and Match,' and 'How Do You
Say?' In 'How Do You Say?' drill, learners are asked to type a sentence that is
appropriate to a communicative task, e.g., An American colleague tells you your
English has improved since you arrived. He says: The third drill is based on the
grammar topics being elaborated. It is mostly in the form of Fill in the Blank.
In Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9, users are given a non-threatening and
positive learning experience. Their answers given on the drill screens are scored as
correct or incorrect, and are not kept on file for later review. Teachers are not allowed to
test or grade their students, or to capture their activities on disk. This is because of the
availability of many other ways for teachers to test, evaluate, judge, and grade their
students.
Some grammar and usage material is given as a separate part in each lesson. The
information in this part is meant to provide a general review rather than to teach new
structures. The covered grammar ranges from irregular and plural forms of nouns in
Lesson 1, to direct and indirect speech in Lesson 30.
The cultural side is given part in this software. Learners can enrich their studies
with fascinating cultural movies exploring the sights and sounds of popular US cities.
Each cultural movie depicts different aspects of the target-language culture, people, and
85

countries. These movies use the vocabulary words and grammar that have been studied
in previous lessons. Learners will hear the movies in the target language to enhance
their listening and speaking skills.
Learning using this program is not boring. Learners are given the chance to
break up their lessons with a selection of refreshing games and puzzles. These games
and puzzles use the vocabulary words that have been studied in previous lessons to
foster learning.
Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9 contains a Talking Dictionary where the
learners can easily access translations and pronunciations to ensure they are never at a
loss for words. The dictionary incorporates all the vocabulary words from the program.
Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9 includes a printable workbook. It consists of
grammar exercises round out the reading and writing component of the Learn to Speak
curriculum.
Summary
The Learning Company describes Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9 as suitable
for learners from Beginner to Advanced levels. The sheer size of the four CD-ROM
based software, coupled with easy-to-use navigating features like click-on buttons,
makes it possible for learners to look around within a program for features that they
like, and that are appropriate for them.
Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9 is an example of a multimedia computer
software at its very best: clearly focused, easy to set up and use, and embodying sound
pedagogical principles. Far more than a thoroughly enjoyable toy, it is at once an
individual tester, a tool for the learners review, and above all a very adaptable tutor for
oral English skills.


86

Appendix B: Official Letter

87

Translation




Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
Ministry of Health
Date, 1/4/1427


Her Excellency Dean of Health Sciences College in Qassim, Onaizah
Peace and Blessings of Allah upon you.

With reference to your official letter of the 21
st
Safar 1427 and No. 613/48/45 in
which Ms. Amal Othman Al-Bureikan requested a permission to conduct a research
study investigating the effectiveness of computer in developing the listening and
speaking skills of first-year female students studying at Onaizah College of Health
Sciences, we would like to inform you that we have no objection to conducting this
research study using the computer lab, provided that this would not affect the schedule
of the teacher and the attendance of the students to other lectures.


Best greetings,

Director-General
Of health Sciences Colleges & Institutes
D. Khalid A. Al-Rshood





















88

Appendix C: Audio Script

Talking to a Doctor
(Adapted from Gill's and Hartmann's (2005) textbook
Listening & Speaking 1: Middle East Edition)


Doctor: Hello, Michelle. I'm Dr. Benson.
Michelle: Hi.
Doctor: How are you feeling today?
Michelle: Not so good.
Doctor: Well, what seems to be the problem?
Michelle: I have a bad cold.
Doctor: I can hear that. How long have you
had it?
Michelle: About three weeks. Every time I think it's
going away, I get sick again.
Doctor: OK, Michelle. I'm going to examine you
now.
Doctor: Michelle, we didn't find an infection. That's good. That means that you only
have a bad cold. That means that you don't need to take any medicine. But I know
that you don't feel very well. I want to ask you some questions, all right?
Michelle: OK.
Doctor: Has school been very difficult lately?
Michelle: Yes. I just finished taking my midterms.
Doctor: Have you been eating well?
Michelle: Well. . . not really. I've been drinking a lot of coffee to stay up late to study.
Doctor: What about exercise? Have you been able to get any exercise during midterm
exams?
Michelle: No. I've been studying so much I haven't had time.
Doctor: Well, Michelle. It sounds to me as though you've been studying so much that
you haven't given your body a chance to get better. When you're sick, you need to
pay attention to your body. I'm going to give you some advice. If you follow my
advice, you'll start to feel better soon. OK?
Michelle: OK.
Doctor: Well, first, you must sleep more. You need to get at least seven or eight hours
of sleep every night. You cannot study well if you don't get enough sleep.
Michelle: I know.
Doctor: Next, you have to eat better. Your body cannot work well if you don't give it
good food. Try to eat more vegetables and fruits. And limit your coffee to two cups
a day.
Michelle: OK.
Michelle: All right.
Doctor: Any questions?
Michelle: So you think I should sleep more, eat better, and exercise more. If I do those
things, I'll feel better?
Doctor: And you won't get sick as often, Michelle.
Michelle: Thanks a lot, Doctor.
Doctor: You're very welcome, Michelle. Take care.
89

Appendix D: Listening Test
(pretest and posttest)


Instructions:
You will listen (twice) to a conversation between a student and a doctor in the Student
Health Center. Then try to guess the right choice by checking () from the followings:

1. How did Michelle feel?
a She felt well.
b She felt bad.
c She did not tell.
2. What was her health problem?
a The flu.
b Trouble sleeping.
c A bad cold.
3. For how long she have been sick?
a She have been sick for three weeks.
b She did not tell.
c She have been sick for two weeks.
4. After being examined by the doctor, what was the result?
a She had an infection.
b She only had a bad cold.
c She had nothing at all.
5. Was she eating very well?
a She did not tell.
b Yes, she was.
c No, she was not.
6. What was she doing to stay up late to study?
a She was exercising.
b She was drinking a lot of tea.
c She was drinking a lot of coffee.
7. The normal number of sleep hours has to be:
a Six to eight hours.
b Six hours only.
c Seven to eight hours.
8. The doctor asked Michelle to limit the coffee she drinks to:
a Two cups a day.
b Three cups a day.
c Three cups a week.
9. The doctor told Michelle that her body cannot work well if:
a She gives it good food.
b She does not give it good food.
c She eats more vegetables and fruits.
10. If Michelle follows the doctor's advice, she will:
a Get sick again.
b Get bad cold again.
c Not get sick as often.

Answers
Item # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Answer b c a b c c c a b c
90

Appendix E: Speaking Test
(pretest and posttest)



To gain good marks in both tasks, try the following:
Try to talk good, clear language.
Listen carefully

Task A: Read-aloud:
You have one minute to read the following passage silently. Then, read it aloud as
clearly and fluently as possible:


Staying Healthy
(Adapted from Gill's and Hartmann's (2005) textbook
Listening & Speaking 1: Middle East Edition)


This lecture will give you advice on how to stay healthy. It will cover ten ways
to stay healthy.
First, exercise every day. Exercise will help you to maintain your weight. It will
also help you to prevent health problems such as cancer and heart disease. Finally,
exercise makes you feel good! So get a little exercise every day.
Second, get enough sleep. Most people do not get enough sleep. But sleep helps
you to think clearly and do good work. Your body needs to rest. Then you have
energy to do your best. So try to sleep at least seven or eight hours every night.
Third, eat green things. All green food is good for you. For example, spinach,
broccoli, green beans, artichokes, kale, cabbage, green apples, and grapes. Fruits and
vegetables are very important to your health. So eat some green things today!
Fourth, do not smoke. Smoking causes cancer and other diseases. It can hurt
your friends and family when you smoke. It costs a lot of money. So do not smoke.
Fifth, do not drink a lot of soft drinks. They can make you overweight. So drink
a little if you like. But don't drink a lot.
Sixth, wear a seat belt. Many people are injured or killed because they are not
wearing a seat belt. Do not drive with anyone who is not wearing a seat belt. And
make sure your passengers are all wearing a seat belt before you drive. Buckle up!
Seventh, drink lots of water. Everyone should drink 6-8 glasses of water every
day. Your body needs water to work well. Water also has no calories. People who
drink a lot of water do not feel as hungry. So drink up!
Eighth, visit your doctor for regular checkups. During a checkup your doctor
can give you tests and check your health. Many serious health problems are found
during a regular checkup. So do not go to the doctor only when you are sick. See the
doctor once a year for a checkup.
Ninth, reduce stress. Stress causes many serious health problems. It affects your
personal and professional lives. Try to have less stress in your life. Relax more!
Stress less.
Tenth, spend time with friends and family. We all need to enjoy our life with
others. Your friends and family will make you feel good. If you feel good, you will
stay healthy! So make time for your loved ones.
91

Task B: Answering questions:
In this task, you will have a conversation with the instructor. You will listen to 10
questions and have to answer them orally. Each question will be said twice:

1) Do you exercise? When?
2) Which way of the ten ways you have just read you already follow in your life?
3) Based on your reading, Can you give some of the good benefits of exercise?
4) You can see that there are a lot of benefits of exercises. So why not most people
exercise?
5) Do you think it is difficult to exercise often? Why or why not? Give me your reasons.
6) Name some examples of exercises?
7) As a student, what do you think are the most common health problems for students?
8) Have you ever been sick? If yes, what did you do?
9) Do you think doctors are important people in our life? Why? What do they normally
do?
10) Do you make a health checkup? How often? If not, why?
































92

Appendix F: Participant Consent Form


You have agreed to participate to aid the researcher to gather her data on the
effectiveness of a computer-assisted language-learning program in the entry-level
EFL Saudi female students' listening and speaking at Onaizah Health Sciences
College



You will be audio recorded for research purposes, but individuals will remain
anonymous. After completion the sessions, you will answer a questionnaire survey
which will take approximately 15 minutes.
Students will benefit by using computer software program to improve their
listening and speaking skills. This benefit is not limited to the experimental group but
may also benefit other students in the future.
The data collected in this presentation will be used in the research and it may be
used in publications and/or conference presentations with no monetary compensation to
you now or in the future. The audio records will be destroyed upon the completion of
the study.
By signing this consent form, you are demonstrating that you have read all the
information above and that you have agreed to be audio recorded. There is no risk to
you by participating in this research.

Please contact Amal Othman Al-Bureikan, the researcher at (xxx) xxx-xxxx or
albureikan@hotmail.com for more details about the research.


-------------------------- ------------------------------- ----------------
Participant's Signature Printed Name Date

-------------------------- ------------------------------- ----------------
Researcher's Signature Printed Name Date













93

Appendix G: Rating Scales for the Speaking Tasks
(Adapted from Weir's & Wu's (2006) modified rating scales)


Task A, read-aloud:
Rating Interpretation
5 Excellent Entirely intelligible pronunciation; very natural and correct intonation; the
candidate speaks fluently with minimal hesitations.
4 Good Generally intelligible pronunciation; generally natural and correct
intonation; the candidate generally speaks fluently hesitations may
sometimes occur.
3 Fair Some errors in pronunciation and intonation influence comprehensibility;
the candidate sometimes speaks fluently though unnecessary hesitations
still occur.
2 Poor Many errors in pronunciation and intonation; the candidate sometimes gives
up on reading words which he or she does not recognize; the candidate
doesnt speak with ease unnecessary hesitations occur frequently.
1 Very poor The candidate has little ability to handle the task; the candidate doesnt
speak with ease; unnecessary hesitations occur very frequently.
Task B, answering questions:
Rating Interpretation
5 Excellent Functions performed clearly and effectively; appropriate responses to
questions; almost always accurate pronunciation, grammar, vocabulary, and
fluency.
4 Good Functions generally performed clearly and effectively generally
appropriate responses to questions; generally accurate pronunciation,
grammar, vocabulary, and fluency.
3 Fair Functions performed somewhat clearly and effectively somewhat
appropriate responses to questions; somewhat accurate pronunciation,
grammar, vocabulary, and fluency.
2 Poor Functions generally performed unclearly and ineffectively generally
inappropriate responses to questions; generally inaccurate pronunciation,
grammar, vocabulary, and fluency.
1 Very poor Functions always performed unclearly and ineffectively inappropriate
responses to questions; almost always inaccurate pronunciation, grammar,
vocabulary, and fluency.
94

Appendix H: Student Questionnaire
(English Version)





Dear Student,


We would really like your help in better understanding student attitudes toward
learning English as a foreign language via computer-assisted language learning program
(Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9).
This is a survey asking about your opinion. It is not a test because there are no right
or wrong answers. Please answer the items as carefully and honestly as possible.
Please print your ID number at the top of this sheet, so that your survey will remain
confidential. It will have nothing to do with your grade in any course.
Thank you in advance for your cooperation, and I wish you all great success.


Yours Sincerely,
M.A. Candidate,
Al-Bureikan, Amal Othman
King Saud University























95



Place your ID label here --------------


How would you rate this program based on the following scales?
Section B: Experience and interest in using the
Program
A lot Somewhat A little Not at all
11) Interesting
12) Challenging
13) Useful
Section A: General Attitude Toward the Program A lot Somewhat A little Not at all
1) You need a manual to use this program.
2) You liked learning with the program.
3) The program was easy to navigate.
4) The feedback was enough.
5) There are grammatical, numbering, or
typographic errors.

6) You recommend this program to other EFL
learners.

7) You feel your English listening skill has
improved since you began using this program.

8) You feel your English speaking skill has
improved since you began using this program.

9) Was the English used in this program easy?
10) The pace of lessons was quick from lesson to
lesson.

Instructions:
Please check () in the box that best describes your level of perception of using Learn to Speak
English Deluxe 9 program:
96

14) Fun
15) Boring
16) Confusing
17) Frustrating
How satisfied are you with the quality of following?
Section C: Multimedia Content Very
satisfied
Satisfied A little
satisfied
Not
satisfied
18) Audio
19) Photo
20) Video
21) Audio Recording
How satisfied are you with the content of the following?
Section D: Program Content Very
satisfied
Satisfied A little
satisfied
Not
satisfied
22) Immigration and Customs
23) Changing Money
24) Public Transportation
25) Checking into a Hotel
26) Making a Phone Call
27) Renting a Car
28) Asking for Directions
29) A Flight to the West Coast
30) Making an Appointment
31) Meeting an Attorney
32) Applying for a Credit Card
33) A Washington Traffic Jam
34) An Invitation
35) California Dreaming
36) A Business Lunch
37) Collecting Your Inheritance
38) Dining Out
39) At the Movies
40) Shopping at the Mall
41) Finding an Apartment
42) Moving Day
43) Shopping for Groceries
44) At the Laundry
45) At the Gas Station
46) Car Trouble
47) A Fender Bender in Chicago
48) A Household Emergency
49) Under the Weather
50) At the Doctors Office
51) At the Dentists Office
How satisfied are you with the content of the following activities?
Section E: Interactive activities Very
satisfied
Satisfied A little
satisfied
Not
satisfied
52) Listen & Click
53) See It, Say It
54) Drag & Match
97

55) How Do You Say?
56) Storyline
57) Multiple Choice
58) Fill in the Blanks

59) What do you like about using this program?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
60) What don't you like about using this program?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
61) If you could add something to this program, what would it be?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
62) If you could take something out of this program, what would it be?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other Comments:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


The End
Thank you very much for your assistance!


Instructions:
Here are some questions about using Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9 program. Please answer
them as honestly as possible based on your experience with the program.
98

Appendix I: Student Questionnaire
(Arabic Version)


_._,.. ,:.L





) Learn to Speak
English Deluxe 9 ( . ...
.

. .





















99



= ... _.. .. _. --------------

|
:_:..: _...:: ..,L _...: .. _...: ._=
|
,..: _...: . _...: ,.-.. ,_.. :.:, ,,.: ., .. ..,. ;_:. ._:.,.
( ,....v :.:;

( _.-.:

.t,s .
.. _. .t:t ) ( g.t:, ,t.::.t . s., .t,L:t _:.. .., _.:t _,it ,
) Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9 (
. ,..: . _...: .., ,..: .,L.v ., .. ..,. ;_:. ._:.,.
( ,.; ,_.= _; _,... _...: .. ,.-..v

( _...: .. ,.-..., ,:..: ,,-

( :,. _...: ..=.. _..: .L ..=

( ._..= _.= _.__..: _...: ,

( _:;.; _.. ,. ..L- :... _.=

( .:: _.:..: _...: .. ,.-..., _-..: _..: .:= _:,,

( .., ... ... .. _:,, .::., ....v :.,. _ _.:
_...:: ..-..

( .., ... ... .. _:,, .::., :,.. :.,. _ _.:
_...:: ..-..

( _...: .. , ..-..: _:,, .:: _,... :,. ..=

( ... _.= - _; _, _. ....v _,...

100

( _..:

. ( _:..:

( _::

( _..: _,.:

( .,-,

|
:_:..: ...: :,,, _. :.. _....
,..: ,:..: . :,...: :..,: _.
.,
_. _.
;_:.
_.
_.
( ,.:

( ,.:

( ,._.:

( _:,.: __,..:

|
:_:..: ...: _,.- _. :.. _....
,..: _,: . _...: _,.- _.
.,
_. _.
;_:.
_.
_.
( Immigration and Customs

( Changing Money

( Public Transportation

( Checking into a Hotel

( Making a Phone Call

( Renting a Car

( Asking for Directions

( A Flight to the West Coast

( Making an Appointment

( Meeting an Attorney

( Applying for a Credit Card

( A Washington Traffic Jam

( An Invitation

( California Dreaming

( A Business Lunch

( Collecting Your Inheritance

( Dining Out

( At the Movies

( Shopping at the Mall

( Finding an Apartment

( Moving Day

( Shopping for Groceries

( At the Laundry

( At the Gas Station

( Car Trouble

( A Fender Bender in Chicago

101

( A Household Emergency

( Under the Weather

( At the Doctors Office

( At the Dentists Office

_:..: L.. _,.- _. :.. _.... :
,..: _... . _:....: L.. _.
.,
_. _.
;_:.
_.
_.
( Listen & Click

( See It, Say It

( Drag & Match

( How Do You Say?

( Storyline

( Multiple Choice

( Fill in the Blanks

|
( :_...: .. ,.-.. ,- ,,. _.:..
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
( :_...: .. ,.-.. ,- ,,. _.:..
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
( _...: .. _; ._ ...; : ..: ,: :_,= .,. ,..
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
( _...: _. ._ :; : ..: ,: :_,= .,. ,..
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


.t,s .
..: g.t.:, ,t.::..t _.. ::..vt _.. t..., , ) Learn to Speak English Deluxe 9 .( t.,:. .,t;t .t.:t
g.t::t _. :,, _:. t.t., _ts.;t .s ,st.., .
102

_- .._:.: .
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

5 ....: ;, =
103

Appendix J: Questionnaire Validation Form

Are the instructions of the questionnaire clear?
Yes No
Comments:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Are the questions clear or not?
Question #
(closed-ended
questions)
Clarity
C: Clear
N: Not Clear
Question #
(closed-ended questions)
Clarity
C: Clear
N: Not
Clear Section A: General attitude toward the
program
Question 16 C N
Question 1 C N Question 17 C N
Question 2 C N Section C: Multimedia content
Question 3 C N Question 18 C N
Question 4 C N Question 19 C N
Question 5 C N Question 20 C N
Question 6 C N Question 21 C N
Question 7 C N Section D: Program Content (22-51) C N
Question 8 C N Section E: interactive activities
Question 9 C N Question 52 C N
Question 10 C N Question 53 C N
Section B: Experience and interest in using
the program
Question 54 C N
Question 11 C N Question 55 C N
Question 12 C N Question 56 C N
Question 13 C N Question 57 C N
Question 14 C N Question 58 C N
Question 15 C N

Question #
(open-ended questions)
Clarity
C: Clear
N: Not
Clear
Question #
(open-ended questions)
Clarity
C: Clear
N: Not
Clear Question 1 C N Question 4 C N
Question 2 C N Question 5 C N
Question 3 C N

Comments:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
104

Appendix K: Raw Scores of Experimental and Control Groups'
Listening and Speaking Test Scores

ID Group
Exp. (2)
Co. (1)
Pretest
Listening
Percent % Posttest
Listening
Percent % Pretest
Speaking
Percent % Posttest
Speaking
Percent %
001 2 4 40.00% 4 40.00% 2 20.00% 6 60.00%
003 2 2 20.00% 6 60.00% 2 20.00% 4 40.00%
005 2 8 80.00% 9 90.00% 3 30.00% 6 60.00%
009 2 4 40.00% 8 80.00% 4 40.00% 5 50.00%
010 2 3 30.00% 5 50.00% 4 40.00% 4 40.00%
012 2 6 60.00% 7 70.00% 3 30.00% 4 40.00%
019 2 4 40.00% 7 70.00% 2 20.00% 4 40.00%
020 2 7 70.00% 8 80.00% 2 20.00% 4 40.00%
024 2 5 50.00% 8 80.00% 5 50.00% 8 80.00%
025 2 4 40.00% 7 70.00% 2 20.00% 6 60.00%
030 2 8 80.00% 10 100.00% 4 40.00% 8 80.00%
041 2 4 40.00% 5 50.00% 2 20.00% 5 50.00%
050 2 6 60.00% 6 60.00% 4 40.00% 6 60.00%
051 2 3 30.00% 7 70.00% 4 40.00% 6 60.00%
063 2 3 30.00% 6 60.00% 4 40.00% 5 50.00%
064 2 2 20.00% 6 60.00% 3 30.00% 6 60.00%
078 2 5 50.00% 8 80.00% 2 20.00% 5 50.00%
004 1 6 60.00% 8 80.00% 4 40.00% 5 50.00%
023 1 6 60.00% 8 80.00% 3 30.00% 4 40.00%
028 1 4 40.00% 4 40.00% 2 20.00% 3 30.00%
031 1 6 60.00% 6 60.00% 3 30.00% 4 40.00%
033 1 6 60.00% 7 70.00% 6 60.00% 6 60.00%
037 1 7 70.00% 7 70.00% 3 30.00% 4 40.00%
039 1 4 40.00% 5 50.00% 3 30.00% 3 30.00%
042 1 2 20.00% 3 30.00% 3 30.00% 3 30.00%
049 1 5 50.00% 5 50.00% 2 20.00% 3 30.00%
052 1 4 40.00% 5 50.00% 2 20.00% 3 30.00%
053 1 7 70.00% 5 50.00% 2 20.00% 3 30.00%
054 1 7 70.00% 9 90.00% 5 50.00% 7 70.00%
059 1 5 50.00% 5 50.00% 2 20.00% 3 30.00%
060 1 5 50.00% 5 50.00% 3 30.00% 3 30.00%
067 1 2 20.00% 3 30.00% 2 20.00% 3 30.00%
070 1 6 60.00% 6 60.00% 2 20.00% 2 20.00%







105

Appendix L: Independent Samples t-test for Pre and
Posttest Scores of Two Groups

Levene's
Test for
Equality of
Variances
t-test for Equality of Means
95%
Confidence
Interval of
the
Difference






F

Sig.

t

df

Sig.
(2-
tailed)

Mean
Difference

Std.
Error
Difference

Lower Upper
P
r
e

L
i
s
t
e
n
i
n
g

T
e
s
t

Equal
variances
assumed
Equal
variances not
assumed
.604 .443 .886

.890
31

30.677
.383

.380
.54

.54
.606

.603
-.699

-.694
1.773

1.767
P
o
s
t

L
i
s
t
e
n
i
n
g

T
e
s
t

Equal
variances
assumed
Equal
variances not
assumed
.376 .544 -2.094

-2.086
31

29.961
.045

.046
-1.19

-1.19
.571

.573
-2.359

-2.365
-.031

-.025
P
r
e

S
p
e
a
k
i
n
g

T
e
s
t

Equal
variances
assumed
Equal
variances not
assumed
.099 .755 -.315

-.314
31

29.816
.755

.756
-.12

-.12
.385

.387
-.907

-.911
.664

.669
P
o
s
t

S
p
e
a
k
i
n
g

T
e
s
t

Equal
variances
assumed
Equal
variances not
assumed
.022 .882 -3.839

-3.836
31

30.795
.001

.001
-1.72

-1.72
.449

.449
-2.640

-2.641
-.808

-.807











106

Appendix M: Paired-Samples t-Test for Pre and
Posttest Scores of the Control Group

Paired Differences
95% Confidence
Interval of the
Difference






Mean Std.
Deviation
Std.
Error
Mean
Lower Upper
t df Sig.
(2-tailed)
P
a
i
r

1

PRE
POST
Listening
-.56 1.031 .258 -1.11 -.01 -2.183 15 .045
P
a
i
r

2

PRE
POST
Speaking
-.75 .577 .144 -1.06 -.44 -5.196 15 .000





















107

Appendix N: Paired-Samples t-Test for Pre and Posttest
Scores of the Experimental Group

Paired Differences
95% Confidence
Interval of the
Difference



Mean Std.
Deviation
Std.
Error
Mean
Lower Upper
t df Sig.
(2-tailed)
P
a
i
r

1

PRE
POST
Listening
-2.29 1.404 .340 -3.02 -1.57 -6.738 16 .000
P
a
i
r

2

PRE
POST
Speaking
-2.35 1.169 .284 -2.95 -1.75 -8.296 16 .000





















108

Appendix O: Participants' Response Results to the
Closed-Ended Questions of the Students' Questionnaire
(N=17)
1= Not at all\Not satisfied, 2= a little\ a little Satisfied,
3=Somewhat\Satisfied, 4= A lot\Very Satisfied, M= Mean

Statement 1 2 3 4 M
Section A: General attitude toward the program
1. You need a manual to use this
program.
17.6% 41.2% 29.4% 11.8% 2.35
2. You liked learning with the program. 0.0% 5.9% 11.8% 82.4% 3.76
3. The program was easy to navigate. 0.0% 17.6% 35.3% 47.1% 3.29
4. The feedback was enough. 0.0% 23.5% 41.2% 35.3% 3.12
5. There are grammatical, numbering, or
typographic errors.
0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100% 4.00
6. You recommend this program to other
EFL learners.
0.0% 0.0% 17.6% 82.4% 3.82
7. You feel your English listening skill has
improved since you began using this
program.
0.0% 17.6% 47.1% 35.3% 3.18
8. You feel your English speaking skill has
improved since you began using this
program.
0.0% 23.5% 52.9% 23.5% 3.00
9. Was the English used in this program
easy
0.0% 11.8% 52.9% 35.3% 3.24
10. The pace of lessons was quick from
lesson to lesson.
0.0% 17.6% 17.6% 64.7% 3.47
Section B: Experience & interest in using the program
11. Interesting 0.0% 23.5% 17.6% 58.8% 3.35
12. Challenging 0.0% 11.8% 41.2% 47.1% 3.35
13. Useful 0.0% 0.0% 17.6% 82.4% 3.82
109

14. Fun 0.0% 5.9% 17.6% 76.5% 3.71
15. Boring 5.9% 5.9% 35.3% 52.9% 3.35
16. Confusing 0.0% 5.9% 35.3% 58.8% 3.53
17. Frustrating 5.9% 5.9% 11.8% 76.5% 3.59
Section C: Multimedia content
18. Audio 0.0% 0.0% 29.4% 70.6% 3.71
19. Photo 0.0% 0.0% 23.5% 76.5% 3.76
20. Video 0.0% 0.0% 35.3% 64.7% 3.65
21. Audio Recording 0.0% 0.0% 58.8% 41.2% 3.41
Section D: Program content
22. Immigration and Customs 0.0% 5.9% 52.9% 41.2% 3.35
23. Changing Money 0.0% 11.8% 52.9% 35.3% 3.24
24. Public Transportation 0.0% 29.4% 23.5% 47.1% 3.18
25. Checking into a Hotel 0.0% 5.9% 41.2% 52.9% 3.47
26. Making a Phone Call 5.9% 0.0% 52.9% 41.2% 3.29
27. Renting a Car 5.9% 11.8% 58.8% 23.5% 3.00
28. Asking for Directions 0.0% 23.5% 23.5% 52.9% 3.29
29. A Flight to the West Coast 5.9% 23.5% 35.3% 35.3% 3.00
30. Making an Appointment 5.9% 5.9% 47.1% 41.2% 3.24
31. Meeting an Attorney 5.9% 17.6% 41.2% 35.3% 3.06
32. Applying for a Credit Card 0.0% 17.6% 29.4% 52.9% 3.35
33. A Washington Traffic Jam 0.0% 11.8% 52.9% 35.3% 3.24
34. An Invitation 0.0% 17.6% 35.3% 47.1% 3.29
35. California Dreaming 0.0% 11.8% 41.2% 47.1% 3.35
36. A Business Lunch 0.0% 17.6% 47.1% 35.3% 3.18
37. Collecting Your Inheritance 11.8% 5.9% 35.3% 47.1% 3.18
38. Dining Out 0.0% 11.8% 64.7% 23.5% 3.12
39. At the Movies 0.0% 5.9% 35.3% 58.8% 3.53
40. Shopping at the Mall 0.0% 5.9% 41.2% 52.9% 3.47
41. Finding an Apartment 0.0% 5.9% 58.8% 35.3% 3.29
42. Moving Day 0.0% 5.9% 58.8% 35.3% 3.29
43. Shopping for Groceries 0.0% 11.8% 35.3% 52.9% 3.41
110

44. At the Laundry 0.0% 17.6% 41.2% 41.2% 3.24
45. At the Gas Station 0.0% 17.6% 41.2% 41.2% 3.24
46. Car Trouble 5.9% 23.5% 29.4% 41.2% 3.06
47. A Fender Bender in Chicago 0.0% 11.8% 52.9% 35.3% 3.24
48. A Household Emergency 0.0% 0.0% 52.9% 47.1% 3.47
49. Under the Weather 0.0% 5.9% 52.9% 41.2% 3.35
50. At the Doctors Office 0.0% 11.8% 41.2% 47.1% 3.35
51. At the Dentists Office 0.0% 5.9% 64.7% 29.4% 3.24
Total Percentage 1.56% 11.96% 44.70% 41.76%
Section E: Interactive activities
52. Listen & Click 0.0% 11.8% 29.4% 58.8% 3.47
53. See It, Say It 11.8% 5.9% 29.4% 52.9% 3.24
54. Drag & Match 5.9% 0.0% 29.4% 64.7% 3.53
55. How Do You Say? 23.5% 0.0% 29.4% 47.1% 3.00
56. Storyline 5.9% 5.9% 47.1% 41.2% 3.24
57. Multiple Choice 5.9% 23.5% 47.1% 23.5% 2.88
58. Fill in the Blanks 5.9% 5.9% 58.8% 29.4% 3.12















111

Appendix P: Participants' Responses to the Open-Ended
Questions in the Questionnaire

1. What do you like about using this program?
012

009


010

051


003


050
.
019

063

078

025

030

020

.

024

112

005

064

001

041

2. What don't you like about using this program?
003

019

020

064
.
001

030


3. If you could add something to this program, what would it be?
012


050
.

020


4. If you could take something out of this program, what would it be?
003


113

5. Other comments:
003