i

University of Southampton, 2017

FACULTY OF HUMANITIES AND

SCHOOL OF MODERN LANGUAGES

Synchronous Computer Mediated Communication

for improving language proficiency: Investigating
mature students' reasons for choosing online
bespoke English classes.

An independent dissertation research project

by

Rachel Boyce

A dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for

MA English Language Teaching (Online)
 iii

ABSTRACT

We live in an ever-changing environment of technological change and advancement where

the use of the internet to study languages has been growing exponentially, as more and more
people are constantly connected and want to learn according to their own specific needs,
schedules and preferences.

The aim of this study was to look at the profile of the typical online learner who is taking lessons
via synchronous computer mediated communication (SCMC) and to understand better what
their specific needs, scheduling issues and preferences were. There was a close focus on
trying to understand if the bespoke nature to address contexts of use is a driving motivator for
the students to take lessons, via this means, and at this time in their lives.

The findings of this study have revealed that the learners are predominantly males, graduates,
in their 30s, married and not studying for an English exam but having real, tangible and
immediate needs to transform themselves from language learners to effective language users
within specific contexts of use. They expressed that the online learning environment,
specifically bespoke lessons via SCMC on an individual basis, are perfectly aligned to
resolving their problems. In fact, this was shown to be so much so, that learners indicated they
would be extremely hesitant to return to traditional lessons having now tried this style of
learning, mostly due to the ability to connect with a native teacher and the greater opportunity
to practice speaking which is directly relevant to their individual needs.
 iv

Table of Contents
Page
ACKNOWLEDGMENT ii
ABSTRACT iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS iv

Chapter One.......................................................................................................................................... 1
1. Introduction................................................................................................................................ 1
1.1. Background ........................................................................................................................... 1
1.3. Rationale ................................................................................................................................ 2
1.4. Purpose and Research Questions..................................................................................... 2
1.5. Outline of the Dissertation................................................................................................... 3
Chapter Two.......................................................................................................................................... 6
2. Literature Review ..................................................................................................................... 6
2.2. Synchronous Computer-Mediated Communication (SCMC) ......................................... 7
2.3. Online Learners .................................................................................................................... 9
2.4. Skype™ ................................................................................................................................. 9
2.5. Motivation & Age ................................................................................................................ 12
2.6. Contexts in Use .................................................................................................................. 15
Chapter Three ..................................................................................................................................... 19
3. Methodology ............................................................................................................................ 19
3.1. Background ......................................................................................................................... 19
3.2. Research Design ................................................................................................................ 19
3.3. Data Collection ................................................................................................................... 19
3.3.1. Quantitative Research ............................................................................................... 20
3.3.2. Qualitative Research.................................................................................................. 21
3.4. Research Questions .......................................................................................................... 21
3.5. Participants.......................................................................................................................... 21
3.6. Ethics.................................................................................................................................... 22
Chapter Four ....................................................................................................................................... 24
4. Results ..................................................................................................................................... 24
4.1. Quantitative Data Analysis ................................................................................................ 24
4.2. Qualitative Data Analysis .................................................................................................. 38
4.2.1. Student Interviews ...................................................................................................... 38
 v

4.2.2. Teacher Interviews ..................................................................................................... 45

Chapter Five........................................................................................................................................ 49
5. Evaluation & Discussion ............................................................................................................ 49
5.1. Response to the Research Questions. ........................................................................... 49
5.1.1. Question 1: .................................................................................................................. 49
5.1.2. Questions 2 & 3: ......................................................................................................... 51
5.1.3. Question 4: .................................................................................................................. 54
5.2. Additional Considerations ................................................................................................. 55
Chapter Six.......................................................................................................................................... 57
6. Conclusion ............................................................................................................................... 57
6.1. Summary of the Study ....................................................................................................... 57
6.2. Limitations & Suggestions for Future Research ............................................................ 59
References .......................................................................................................................................... 61
Appendices.......................................................................................................................................... 73
Appendix 1 - Student Online Survey Questionnaire – List of questions ................................ 73
Appendix 2 - Student Online Survey - Quantitative Raw Data Results ................................. 77
Appendix 3 - Student Interviews - Qualitative Results ............................................................. 78
Student A ..................................................................................................................................... 78
Student B ..................................................................................................................................... 81
Student C ..................................................................................................................................... 83
Student D ..................................................................................................................................... 86
Student E ..................................................................................................................................... 89
Student F ..................................................................................................................................... 92
Student G..................................................................................................................................... 95
Student H ..................................................................................................................................... 98
Appendix 4 - Teacher Interviews - Qualitative Results ............................................................ 99
Teacher A .................................................................................................................................... 99
Teacher B .................................................................................................................................. 101
Teacher C .................................................................................................................................. 103
 1

Chapter One
1. Introduction

This chapter provides an overview of the study by describing the background, rationale,
purpose and research questions.

1.1. Background

This research seeks to fill a niche area to examine synchronous computer mediated
communication (SCMC). Until recently, studies in this area have predominantly been the focus
of research based within an institutional setting, in a traditional classroom environment, as a
form of blended learning, or used for examination of cultural exchange. Such example studies
are the NIFLAR project (2009-2013), the TILA Project (2013-2015), work by Warschauer
(1996), Bax (2003), Baker (2011), Blake (2011) and Meskill & Anthony (2010) to name but a
few. However, in contrast, the focus here is with SCMC as a learning environment in its own
right, as a chosen route to second language acquisition (SLA) by adult learners with specific
contexts of use.

In order to pull together details from the findings here, including strengths and weaknesses
that relate to this area, this study looks at some of the broader issues that affect SLA via
SCMC, such as motivation, age and focus on form/s. Focus on form (FonF) is a central aspect
of task-based language teaching (Long, 1991) which makes reference to the learners’
attention being directed to linguistic forms as they engage in tasks and activities. This is in
contrast with the structure-based approach called focus on forms (FonFs) which involves
linguistic forms or grammar being directly and explicitly taught (Sheen, 2002). Lessons via
SCMC seem to require a mixture of both. However, they go one step further in focussing on
context of use, which, as the findings here will show, stands as the most pertinent attraction
of SCMC. This research is hoped to provide helpful questions for evaluation, highlight areas
of importance, and give direction for an objective viewpoint on the issues at play, where it fits
with other work, and show relevance to the future of SLA via SCMC.

1.2. Context

I work predominantly in an e-learning context, using Skype™ to reach students who are
located all over the world. I originally trained and worked as a typical institution-based
 2

classroom teacher, but, specifically over the past 4 years, I have moved to teaching more and
more online, finding this medium much more flexible and preferable with a wider learner-reach
due to lack of geographical boundaries. I predominantly use a professional and highly
esteemed online learning platform called italki (www.italki.com) for connecting with potential
learners globally. I joined this organisation due to its prestige and reputation for being a
forerunner in the field of e-learning, effectively connecting learners with teachers, providing a
constant source of inspiration, motivation, and opportunities for challenge.

1.3. Rationale

The learning environment for this research is the context of e-learning via SCMC, conducted
via Skype™, and connecting with learners from all over the globe, regardless of their first
language (L1), nationality or location. It is considered that the English Language Teaching
(ELT) community may need to recognise these new learners, who are making new learning
choices, with very specific and individual learner needs, which require experienced and
computer-savvy teachers to serve them.

1.4. Purpose and Research Questions

This research project sought to understand more about the profile of the wholly online SCMC
student in direct relation to current levels of technology. This means knowing what their
specific needs are, to explore their reasons for choosing this way of studying, to consider the
challenges they face, and finally indicate what all this information might mean for the ELT
profession going forward.

Bradley & Thousény (2013) focussed on computer assisted language learning (CALL) and
how future advances in technology may result in an even more positive impact on language
learning. It seems only time and further research will tell, but pressing considerations that
stand before the English Language Learning (ELL) community are the need to understand,
accept and be prepared to directly serve mature learners who are returning to ELL via online
routes, in particular SCMC.

One point of interest for this research project lay in viewing language learning as a
sociocultural phenomenon, where the choices behind taking lessons were not only matters of
internal linguistics, as in formal and more traditional classroom based courses, but related to
how language learning interacted with external factors, the contexts for learning, which can
 3

be perceived as rapidly changing with new and better forms of technology for communication
(Gass & Mackey, 2016). It could be thought that mature learners were actively pursuing
language learning more due to these changes as it provided an opportunity that was previously
not available to them. The need was there but it was not previously fulfilled, rather than being
a new phenomenon that had conversely been born out of the rise of good technology.

Other thoughts could be that besides the issue of flexibility and contact with native speaker
(NS) teachers, which SCMC provides, there were many other drivers that brought learners to
actively prefer lessons via SCMC, such as issues of face, motivation, individual attention, error
correction, pronunciation and even personal preparation for specific scenarios (Yang et al.,
2012).

This research project sought to test these beliefs, including the need to address very specific
forces driving a learner’s English proficiency via this learning environment, as it is only now
that they are starting to become language users: at work, for higher levels of study, to move
aboard etc. This means that they have very unique and individual contexts of use, and
bespoke online lessons offer a very direct and immediate way to resolve issues they face,
providing good quality practice, and a great way to boost overall speaking confidence.

1.5. Outline of the Dissertation

The intention of this study was to recognise, examine and explore for better understanding the
reasons behind, the relevant connections with, and variables between 3 key areas:

1. Discover why mature students (aged 30+) select bespoke computer assisted language
learning (CALL) in the form of e-learning / synchronous video and audio computer
mediated communication (SCMC) lessons (via Skype™ or Google Hangouts™) over
traditional classroom standard one-size-fits-all based courses perhaps situated locally
to them, or found online in the form of MOOC courses.
2. Identify factors which brought them to improve their English at this time in their lives,
3. Understand whether preparation for specific contexts in use was a driving motivator.

The reason why this was important is that it was believed that there was a new phenomenon
in SCMC, relating to adult learners returning to second language learning (SLL) seeking
bespoke lessons that assist with practice of English as a Second Language (ESL) in specific
contexts of use. It was considered that this need should be identified so that it could
 4

subsequently be appreciated, understood and addressed by the academic field of English

Language Teaching (ELT). In order to cater for the practical and affective needs of this specific
group of learners, there was the potential that the application of the results of the study could
be wide-ranging.

From personal observations made when comparing my learners and teaching context to those
of my peers on the MA course, I saw a clear difference in the kind of students, not just in age,
but reasons for learning and type of activities that had proven to be effective. It was perceived
that this may have arisen due to 3 reasons:

1. Application of use following mainstream education being delayed,

2. Matters of authenticity needing to be addressed,
3. Requirement for individual and bespoke lessons.

Therefore, it was suspected that mature learners choose e-learning SCMC lessons for a
mixture of reasons such as:

- Comfort factor – taking lessons in the privacy and comfort of their own homes,
- Flexibility – no fixed courses, variable times, days and hours,
- Native Speaker Contact – ability to connect with a native speaker (NS) teacher without
locational issues.
(Chomsky, 1965; Gardner, 2001)

However, more importantly, it was subsequently suspected that they took these lessons now
because:

- They were returning to English following a gap since they had left education,
- They needed to use English specifically for their work,
- They desired individual attention and bespoke preparation and practice for specific
contexts in use which previous ELL had not been able to prepare them for.

(Long, 1981, 1996 and 1997)

As Hassan (2014) notes, the growth of e-learning must be recognised, more than just as an
element of blended learning, for collaboration or cultural exchange as it was credited some 20
years ago, since online offerings are now becoming distributed in all areas of education, not
just language learning.
 5

It would seem that for the immediate future, the use of SCMC via Skype™ or other similar
programs will play an increasing role in language learning, due to advances and access to
technology which connect learners and teachers from around the world. Hence the world of
academia needs to fully consider the wholly online learning environment (Harasim, 2012). As
such, this research may go some way to indicate what elements are important to the online
learner, how the teaching community could meet these needs, and why this may prove
important in connecting the world of global business to the field of SLL.
 6

Chapter Two
2. Literature Review

This chapter demonstrates the review of the literature, serving as part of the rationale and
framework for the analysis of this study. Firstly, it depicts a clear understanding of what this
project and others mean by e-learning and SCMC, including the definition of how this works
in practice. Then it looks at the online learners themselves in this context, the technology
behind the process and the key areas of focus for this study, namely motivation, age, and
contexts of use, thus putting the literature into frame of reference with this study.

2.1. E-learning

Learning with computers is nothing new, as they have been used in language teaching since
the 1980s, if not longer in specialist language areas (Warshauer & Healey, 1998). The
definition of computer mediated discourse is simply when people interact by computer
(Herring, 2011). This can be asynchronous (participants messaging at different times) or
synchronous (simultaneous communication). My context uses Skype™ for live audio & video
SCMC. However, SCMC was noted by Smith back in 2005 as something that only meant
synchronous messaging, or written, communication. So, in as little as 10 or so years there has
been a dramatic shift in this definition.

According to Adkins (2014) the global market for English e-learning reached $1.8 billion in
2013 with a worldwide five-year annual growth rate of 11%. Growth was subsequently
predicted to double by 2018. In fact, this research reported that while the worldwide language
learning market (all languages combined) was a $56.3 billion industry in 2013, this market was
shrinking as learners opted to transfer to cheaper technology-based learning routes, moving
away from the classroom and use of printed products. So, e-learning appears to already be a
dominant choice for learners, which could only get stronger going forward, presenting
concerns over teacher-training, course design and lesson delivery (Helms, 2014). Quality
assurance is also an issue (Shattuck, 2014), although young adults (aged 30+) are at a prime
age to feel not only comfortable in using technology but have the ripened confidence to take
ownership of their learning.
 7

2.2. Synchronous Computer-Mediated Communication (SCMC)

During the 90s and the turn of the millennium, SCMC was just a reference within ESL research
relating to synchronous chat communication held over the internet. There was no reference to
the use of any audio or video elements, or attempts to mimic telephone calls or face-to-face
encounters (Walther, 1995; Herring, 1996; Darhower, 2002). By 2009 Yamada had actually
divided the term into 4 types: ‘videoconferencing (image and voice), audioconferencing (voice
but no image), text chat with image (image but no voice), and plain text chat (no image and
no voice)’, (Yamada, 2009, p1). Most recent works, such as by Lin et al. (2013) have now
made the acronyms clearer.

The definition for my study is one which refers to videoconferencing (image and voice)
communication, using 'voice over internet protocol' (VoIP) technology, via a free programme
developed in 2003 and subsequently purchased by eBay in 2009, and then Microsoft in 2012;
namely Skype™ (Baset & Schulzrinne, 2004). Skype™ allows users to communicate over
the Internet by voice using a microphone, by video using a webcam, in addition to also
allowing text-chat by instant messaging. Skype™-to-Skype™ calls (calls between users) are
free of charge (Skype™, 2017).

Skype™ is well known and widely used by anyone who has any of the latest technological
devices such as modern laptop computers, tablets and smartphones. Often families make use
of Skype™ as a highly economical way to keep in contact with family and friends who are in
different geographical locations, mostly abroad or overseas, and since it has been around for
over a decade now it is trusted and reliable. In terms of teaching purposes, this makes it ideal
as there is less of a cognitive load on learners from the outset in terms of learning how to use
the programme.

Whilst Skype™ by itself is not a virtual learning environment, it can permit screen sharing and
exchange of files and documents. It can also be used at the same time as other programmes
in order to create a holistic learning experience. Thus, for this research study the definition of
SCMC is in using Skype™ to create learning conditions as close to being side by side for the
teacher and student as is possible via the internet.

Over the past decade there has been an increase in the amount of research in the use of
SCMC in language learning. Chappelle’s (2009) review of 2 decades of SLL gives positive
suggestions for the effective use of CALL. Refence was specifically made to four approaches:
cognitive-linguistic, psycholinguistic, learning style and the sociocultural, which are pivotal
 8

considerations for this research, making direct reference to the real potential of the ever-
increasing reliance and daily use of technology, with how this, if used effectively in SLA
contexts, can provide positive leverage over communicative competence. An overview of the
most recent research in relation to communicative competence in the SCMC learning
environment was completed by Sauro (2011) but the conclusion disappointingly just saw a
heavy focus on grammatical accuracy and application.

Mitchell et al. (2013) consider that a better understanding of SLL supports a greater
appreciation of the intimate relationships at play. Learners in the context of this study seem to
be part of a distinct group, seeking particular needs, and subsequently, teachers may be more
effective in their efforts to help them by understanding their own individual relationship
framework. According to Alonso et al. (2008), a teacher working in this environment has the
title of a ‘live e-learning' teacher. So, the 'classroom' is a connection made over the internet
with an attendance of 1. As such, the teacher must be aware of the potential impact of factors
that influence the ease, speed, and success of the learning process for those who choose
SCMC, as noted by Mitchell et.al (2013). This works hand in hand with competence and
performance, as noted by Chomsky (1965).

According to Kozar (2012) the use of technology in schools and other educational institutions
has been encouraged for improving second language (L2) proficiency, specifically with
regards to accuracy, grammatical complexity and overall fluency. In fact, over the last 5 years
there has been a huge expansion of the phenomenon of language learning via SCMC
worldwide. Kozar and Sweller (2014) concede that research presently can't seem to fully
understand the true nature and characteristics of this type of language learning. However,
they too investigated the possibility that there is a particular and exceptional connection
between mature learners, their goals, prior learning experiences and future lives that is
entwined with the process of learning a language via SCMC. They examined private online
learners in Russia. My study here builds on that research.

Kozar and Sweller (2014) perceived they were the first to try to better understand this new age
where language learning is progressively linked to the use of the internet, with private tutoring
becoming a growing online teaching sector, confirmed by Pappas (2015). My research aspires
to contribute to understanding in this sphere by hoping to be one of the next to focus on this
area and interpret things with a more global perspective. Capturing this need may prove to
promote acceptance from the academic sphere, pushing for recognition, and the very real
need for both regulation and teacher training for this platform going forward.
 9

2.3. Online Learners

Online learners are described here as people who wish to learn a language via the internet.
Dabbagh (2007, p218) defined this more clearly as a distance education learner ‘characterised
as emerging, responsive to rapid technological innovations and new learning paradigms.’
Whilst there are many resources to learn languages online, such as informatic websites, video
(YouTube channels) and massive open online courses (MOOCs), as well as dedicated spaces
on social media, all of which do not have direct teacher contact, the focus here is on the
learners that do seek out that direct and individual contact with a teacher, and that these
learners choose the route of SCMC precisely because they will receive personal attention to
their intimate SLA needs.

Mitchell et.al. (2013) say that learners should be seen as language processors, and whilst all
have a similar developmental path, the speed of their progress and the final result will depend
on a variety of issues. This is a reference to cognitive and affective factors, to where learners
find themselves at this point in their lives (age related - cognitive) or a challenge they need to
overcome (motivation related - affective). Mitchell. et. al (2013) say that these can work
positively together to both boost confidence and minimise speaking anxiety, and as Cook
(2016) argues, this is vital since these are key hurdles language learners often need to
overcome to become effective language users. Few would argue against Cook’s (2016) idea
that SLA has little value if learners can't use it assuredly and productively. Now these learners
are turning to technology to fulfil those needs by the most effective, direct and personal means.
In fact, as early as 1998 Cronin noted that online learners were usually drawn from a more
mature age-range than traditional face-to-face private students. He however perceived these
to be mostly female due to their availability to learn in relation to family and financial
obligations. My research sought to challenge these assumptions, to find out if the situation
has changed.

2.4. Skype™

Skype™ is the most popular of many free computer programmes that use 'voice over internet
protocol' (VoIP) technology. Skype™ enables the teacher to conduct lessons with learners
and make use of live video interaction with the instant messaging function, by noting any
additional vocabulary, corrections and errors encountered during the session, in addition to
the sharing of files or even screen-shots as required. It is also possible to offer the learner the
opportunity to have the lesson recorded, which is easily done by the installation of an add-on
application, so they can then review the lesson again at any time afterwards. The users can
 10

permit others to join the call to enable tandem or group lessons (noted to be beneficial by Elia,
2006) used for L2 to L2 interaction practice, which can be invisibly supervised and supported
by the teacher, as they can see the video and hear the audio, but do not necessarily need to
participate (Lee, 2013).

The opportunity to have direct contact and close observation of learners in the context of
SCMC is pivotal to being able to act at the right moment. Teachers can really take advantage
of being able to be up close and personal to individual learners to address the needs of
immediacy of use and aid rapid advancement, exemplifying the ideas of Vygotsky (1978) in
giving the learner the right help at the right time.

Hinkel (2011) noted that advances in technology, above all the internet, have become vital
tools for educational improvement, as well as giving rise to greater advances in learning
opportunities. Specifically, for formal and informal adult learners, it provides a route to learning
that fits with their highly demanding work lives, providing flexibility in scheduling options,
affordability and immediacy in provision, as well as a direct connection to a native speaker
teacher without the need to overcome locational issues (Wang, 2015). However, there still
seems to be a lack of clear data collected on growth, student demographics, and learning
characteristics. Much of this seems to be due to the fact that it is a very recent, yet rapid,
occurrence. Data needs time to be collected, but technological advances and subsequent
uses are exceeding the ability to quantify these. In fact, there seems to be exponential growth
with the world of academia and business considering it a vital factor going forwards, with
parallel concerns over teacher training, course design and lesson delivery via online means,
in comparison to traditional classroom environments (Salbego & Tumolo, 2015; Helms, 2014).

Earlier studies have looked at factors such as socialisation via Skype™ chatrooms (Jenks,
2009), conversation analysis of web interaction (Negretti, 1999), and the value of tandem
Skype™ exchanges (Thomas, 2009), as well as a plethora of work on CALL. Yet all of this
has predominantly been based within institutional learning environments or traditional
classroom settings. However, Nunan and Richards (2015) note that there is a clear benefit
from Skype™ lessons outside of normal educational framework as these can provide
language experiences that are realistic and pedagogically structured. They also indicate that
SCMC enables ‘post active’ learners to become autonomous as well as proficient. This means
learners who have completed their formal education and subsequently not been in a learning
environment where they were provided with opportunities to speak, so have, as a result,
struggled when learning a language (Nunan, 2004).
 11

Wildner-Bassett’s (2005, in Blake, 2013) research noted in particular that using SCMC as a
means of taking lessons gradually increases learner independence, boosting their confidence
due to the fact that they are presented with an immediate performance stress factor. Yet this
is something that still allows them to reflect, analyse their linguistic abilities, to identify and
subsequently help move them forward more quickly towards their individual goals. She defined
this route as a specific environment that helped reveal how they could apply their learning and
critically view their own performances in terms of what they ultimately wanted to achieve.
Although, there were notes that guidance from a professional teacher was vital for this result
to come to fruition (Blake, 2013), so again this issue presented direct links to earlier theories
of Vygotsky (1978).

Sociocultural theory as a creation of Vygotsky (1978), an idea based on the concept that
language development is highly dependent on social contact and interaction, can be viewed
in relation to the SCMC context as a speedy route to SLA and L2 success, as development
occurs as the result of meaningful verbal interaction between the novice (the learner) and
more knowledgeable interlocutor (the teacher). Sociocultural theory also emphasises that
success is born out of the product of interaction. The ability to have flexibility and close
observation of the learners in this context is key to being able to act at the right moment, so
the teacher can really take advantage of being able to be in tune with needs and bring to the
forefront the immediacy of use which exemplifies the ideas of Vygotsky (1978) in giving the
learner the help they need to advance.

Since interaction is considered a vital practice to becoming not only a proficient but authentic
and effective language user (Van Lier, 2014), technology like Skype™ can now provide
learners with a very real, immediate and valid opportunity for interaction, between educators
and learners, native and non-native speakers, despite hurdles of location, time or
convenience, and bring people together for very personal and private communicative
exchanges. However, this is the point in time where this medium now presents itself as a
challenge to become fully realised in terms of best design and delivery by language
professionals (Molony & Xu. 2015).

Considerations include social and interpersonal factors in determining why a learner would
prefer these types of lessons. It also gives reason to consider the following issues: the affective
filter (Krashen, 1982), best motivational practices (Dörnyei 1998; Ushioda, 2008; Dörnyei &
Ushioda, 2013), and understanding how age can affect SLA (Singleton, 2001). There may
also be some further debate over the end of the critical period and lack of access to Universal
Grammar (Chomsky, 1965), as well as matters of input and output as part of interaction
 12

(Swain, 1993 & 2000). Any, or all, of these could have an impact on the end results of whether
this type of e-learning helps or hinders linguistic exposure and acquisition.

2.5. Motivation & Age

Some of the learners who come to SCMC have not been required to use their language
competence before in the workplace. They panic as they need to refresh their understanding
and improve their acquisition in urgency. Others have had incomplete success, where native
speaker goals were desired but never reached, something research has shown to be almost
unobtainable after the critical period (Singleton, 2005). Lenneberg (1967) proposed the Critical
Period Hypothesis, to address why some parts of grammar are harder for adults to acquire,
as a biologically determined period of life where it is easy to learn a language. Ellis (1997)
defines this as the period during which competence in an L2 can only be achieved if learning
commences before a certain stage, usually puberty.

Since researchers have drawn conclusions that the vast majority of success or failure in SLA
is in part due to differences between individual learners, we could perceive that these either
rise from or have an impact on social and interpersonal factors (Lantolf et al., 2015). One
overriding factor is that of confidence, which is often drawn from the matters of motivation and
age. As something that was first identified by Clement et.al. (1980), Ushioda (2008) proposed
that there can be many social and personal reasons behind the choices someone makes, why
they take part in some activities and avoid others, or include themselves in certain endeavours,
what may make them continue, persevere or be determined to succeed, alongside the fact
that some learners are strong in some areas, yet weak in others. However, these can all be
influenced by the choice of the learning environment, of which some are more favourable to
bringing about the result of a proficient L2 user, a mixture of drivers; personal or inherent
(internal), and environmental or situational (external). Some of these are more or less poignant
in having an impact on a learner at a specific time and juncture of their lives.

Motivation is considered the driving force from a social cognitive perspective, as confirmed by
Cook (2016) when he states, quite logically, that learners who are motivated do better than
those who are not. However, we need to know if there are specific and/or different motivators
for the learners who select the learning path of SCMC. Another interesting consideration
comes from the work of Gardner (2001) who tried to understand more about learners wanting
to get closer to the community of the language they are studying, and how that can be an
integrative motivator, or the issue of a practical need to communicate in the L2 which would
act as an instrumental motivator. Other research has shown that learners are using English in
 13

their own country, predominantly with other non-native speakers as explored by Jenkins
(2015) so this may have an impact on my research if learners don’t have any tangible matters
of integrative motivation. My learners study more in line with instrumental motivation, although
the perceived desire to have a native speaker teacher seems to hint that there is some
attraction drawn from integrative motivation.

One of the key motivators, as noted in the study completed by Wu and Marek (2009) was that
Skype™ enables direct contact with native speaking teachers. They stated that learners
strongly desire this, and whilst they may have access to native speaker teachers locally to
them, the use of technology makes the matter of choice easier and more comfortable for them.
For those who don’t have native speakers in their locality the internet simply crosses
boundaries and borders.

Alternatively, Dörnyei (2005) and Dörnyei & Ushioda (2013) present more ideas for us to
consider, of motivation as something not just seen as being a simple or linear process, but
instead as a phenomenon that is both forceful and variable, that includes more cognitive
aspects such as factors of individual nature, perhaps similar to those first suggested by
Meunier (1998). They also address more complex matters of acquisition, such as learners
having multiple goals, different styles and preferential behaviours. Thus, a conclusion for
teachers is to scrutinise all internal, social and contextual factors, since these bring students
to make new learning choices in the modern age of technology.

When understanding student motivations behind other means of language learning online,
namely MOOCs, it can be seen (Zheng et al. 2014) that two key drivers are professional need
and preparing for the future, which include impressing potential employers and future
academic goals. These motivations translate to the SCMC platform, but in essence as a place
to practice, since MOOCs cannot always have that individual reactive presence of the teacher
and learner communicating together. This is of relevance as a consideration as it is possible
that learners may have tried other online means of learning, such as MOOCS, before coming
to private individual lessons via SCMC. This research hoped to see if there was any relevance
in this supposition, as it could support the principals of the research argument here.

In addition, there is the matter of learning strategies to consider, as put forward by Weinstein
et al. (2000, in Dörnyei, 2006) who proposed three essential elements: goal-directed,
intentionally invoked and effortful. These are all applicable to the SCMC learning environment
as learning activities become strategic when they are specifically appropriate to the learner in
question. This seems to embody the concept of bespoke lessons.
 14

Traditional classrooms can never be wholly appropriate purely due to the ‘en-mass’ nature of
the learning environment. Ehrman et. al (2003) summed this up perfectly by stating that the
SCMC bespokeness can be viewed as a strategy that is useful as it relates to language that
needs to be learnt, it is delivered by the means that fit the learner’s preferences and is related
to other relevant activities, such as their context of use. All of this falls under the aim of
language use rather than just language learning (Dörnyei 2005). Dörnyei and Ushioda (2013)
note that researchers are only recently beginning to think about this relational perspective
between the interactions of individual language learners and the context in which they must
operate, since every person and the context in which they must perform is unique. This
relational approach is something that bespoke lessons via SCMC are perfectly positioned to
deliver.

Ushioda (2011) did further research to study the combination of motivation and autonomy in
relation to learning a language. Her work attempted to understand more about the synergy
between cognitive and constructivist ideas that work behind a learner’s mental processing,
their learning behaviours, their objectives and outcomes. This was focussed on contexts of
use as well as the individual needs and preferences of learners. This is an area that could
have direct relevance with my explorative research work here. Ushioda (2011) concluded,
along with Cook (2016), that motivation and independence work in unison, but direct links
were made between these factors and the activity of interaction. Ushioda took a perspective
of focussing on specifics rather than taking an overview, which is in direct alignment with
bespoke assumptions, and placed great value on engagement in communicative activities.
This included building up a clear picture of the personality and character, personal goals and
learning preferences, future ambitions and direction of the individual learner. This would align
well with my research presented here. This coincidence was of note and interesting to see if
it remained on completion of my study.

Of particular interest when looking at the influence of age on SLA is the work of Krashen
(1976) who presented an overview of studies into the optimum environment for the adult
language learner. He looked at formal and informal factors, with a comparison of types of
instruction, error correction, and feedback. In conclusion, he stated that there were two prime
considerations, firstly that an informal environment could be extremely effective for the more
mature learner, but secondly that formal study was more efficient in increasing proficiency.
Krashen’s (1982) ideas have a bearing on understanding of SCMC by forming a background
for my study, about the optimum results from lessons via SCMC as a learning environment,
with the dichotomy of informal practice for formal goals and results. This may prove to explore
 15

how social and interpersonal factors could have an influence on the effectiveness of language
learning for adult students.

When looking at interaction we must also take some aspects from Krashen (1982) over his
ideas behind SLA, in particular his idea of the affective filter. It is very important to understand
that if a student is to benefit from interaction, to help facilitate successful information
processing, storing and retrieval, that they should feel at ease, in a safe learning environment,
which is exactly where this lower affective filter can be sustained (Lightbown & Spada, 2013).
The context in which an activity is carried out can be a key factor in the success of language
acquisition and levels of competency obtained. SCMC has this comfortable and safe
environment. The student is not only in their own surroundings, where they relax best, but
helps them to feel as if they are there alone with the teacher. There is no element of stress,
pressure to perform, or threat of formal or peer evaluation. This means the affective filter could
be at the lowest level achievable giving the highest possibility for learning. Other advantages
for adult learners are that they have more pragmatic skills and analytical ability to assist them
through the learning process. They each have a unique motivation with some very tangible
opportunities and outcomes if they succeed (Singleton, 2001).

Some research has shown that it is not yet possible to clearly define if the initial rate of learning
is better for older learners or whether the focus should be on the ultimate goal or level of
achievement (Saville-Troike, 2012). It could be that, just as Schleppegrell (1987) confirmed,
older learners have very specific goals in mind if they are continuing their language learning,
and that these are almost always connected to some specific purpose, which is personal to
their context of use.

2.6. Contexts in Use

Long (1997) discussed how a lack of focus on meaning would impact on competence.
Although, he suggested that this could be overcome via timely attention to language points,
recommending that learners not only look at linguistic structures, but also have specific
meaning-focused lessons. In this way, learners will have their attention brought to linguistic
factors set in specific contexts. There is definitely consideration to be drawn from the benefits
and drawbacks of a structure-oriented approach versus a communication-driven approach in
relation to lessons via SCMC. Certainly, most learners could be seeking a direct mix of both
of these.
 16

There is another ‘mix’ to consider in the SCMC context. At the turn of the millennium one of
the most pertinent concerns in the area of SLA was how to effectively teach grammar,
particularly in communicative classrooms (Doughty & Williams, 2000; Lightbown, 1998 &
2000; Norris & Ortega, 2000). Thornbury (2010) places the definition of communicative as any
activity in which learners are interacting with one another. However, he feels there are specific
realistic qualities in the exchanges that need to be evident. Both Doughty & Williams (2000)
and Lantolf et al. (2015) note that the best concept may be to mix cognitive and communicative
approaches, to best ensure effective language uptake, by which means learners could note
their own improvement and measure their success. As such SCMC could be seen to address
both social and interpersonal factors so making the optimum SLA mix for the individual leaner.

In support of the lessons via SCMC that we see in my research study, Thornbury (2010) also
argues that ‘real’ communication connected to the contexts in use that the learner needs will
directly stimulate the cognitive and affective issues to not only motivate but also actively
encourage SLA. It may be more engaging, as the learner can make that direct connection
between the practice and the real-world application, and fulfils the tangible return on
investment (ROI) of their time and effort for studying with success and progress in application.
Some learners are only now coming to realise that long past school proficiency does not mean
immediate and successful application at a much later date. Something has been lost in the
middle due to lack of use (Soler & Jorda, 2007).

My research seeks to suggest that there is real value in student-initiated focus on form.
Loewen (2011) and Ellis (2001) suggest the use of both reactive and preemptive approaches.
This is precisely relevant to specific contexts in use because learners can state for themselves
what linguistic areas are the most challenging for them, which they recognise are vital to know.
This approach would also seem to prove most beneficial to resolve concerns and raise
awareness of specific uses of some grammatical structures, also perhaps suggesting that this
may indicate readiness for uptake, so proving more effective and worthwhile. Schmidt’s (2012)
noticing hypothesis would support the idea of guiding students to identify specific language
patterns for themselves, which can improve over time. This is relevant to the area of focus in
my research study as the use of technology allows for learners to be monitored via video
and/or audio means, so they can revisit a lesson, in whole or in part, at any time they like after
the session, plus see tangible results of progress over time as these recordings act as a
‘snapshot’ of their performance skills. They can not only be told about the errors they make,
but also see and hear for themselves, being able to pass judgement on their own
performances. This reflective process is very useful in driving learning points home, ensuring
changes in speaking practices, and encouraging faster progress and overall improvement,
 17

exactly as Loewen (2011) and Ellis (2001) suggest. The learners can directly match their
performance ability to their desired goal and make their own learning recommendations
accordingly.

When looking at FonF versus FonFs many researchers, such as Long (1991), Doughty &
Williams (2000), DeKeyser (1998), Ellis (2001) and Spada (2011) have examined the depth
and poignancy of directing a learner’s attention on grammatical elements yet still keeping them
on task in terms of effectively communicating. One concern with research in relation to the
study completed here is the date. Overall, studies are not keeping pace with developments in
technology and teaching. Technology has advanced immensely and with it the ways that
learners choose to study languages. Research that can form a solid background to the
learning environment and teaching practices of SCMC would have to have been conducted at
least on or after 2013 to exactly assess the capabilities and functionalities of what is possible
right now in 2017. There are obvious SLA theories, models and approaches but these can
only provide an insight or understanding to the effectiveness of the means and potential of
SLA applied in today’s SCMC learning environment.

Thus, as Swain & Lapkin (1995) proposed, the best approach seems to be more than just
engaging in communicative language practice but also attending to matters such as form, and
much more. Norris and Ortega (2000) went on to examine multiple studies and found
effectiveness was notably lower when assessed in terms of ability to use specific structures in
spontaneous communication, however it would be interesting to see how such an experiment
would fare via SCMC, with mature learners who are specifically trying to hone their
spontaneous communicative skillset.

Long & Robinson (1998) and Doughty & Williams (2000) make valid points when they suggest
that FonF is also necessary. One problem in looking at these studies is the majority of them
are conducted within classroom or institutional educational environments. The very individual
essence of SCMC could bring back a whole different set of results, notwithstanding the
different, more mature, aspects of the learner and their specific focus on contexts in use would
have on a study such as this. In this setting, as Ellis et al. (2002) concluded, the teacher is not
just a communicative partner, they have to engage, be the native speaking expert, bring FonF
and FonFs, through both conversational and didactic means, implicitly and explicitly, and the
dependence on the when and how is drawn from each individual learner separately and
uniquely. Some require more pre-emptive work, others learn best if they initiate the attention
to form themselves, since they know what they need and are looking for.
 18

In fact, Spada and Lightbown (2008) highlighted the increasing importance of lessons having
both context and linguistic objectives. SCMC and the mature learners who use this means,
seem to provide the perfect opportunity to examine more thoroughly how effective this could
be on an individual and case by case basis, as advocates of context based instruction have
long supported.

It would seem that the true motivational key for adult learners is the process of establishing
socio-pragmatic competence (the ability to adjust their communicative approach depending
on the different social variables; such as the demands of the scenario, social standing between
participants, as well as individual rights and obligations in communication) with pragma-
linguistic competence (such as how to convey a message with the right words, intonation and
stress) and the ability to be able to put this all to effective use in real interaction (Kasper &
Roever, 2005). As adults, a learner therefore seems to need a cognitive basis with
sociocultural consideration. SCMC could be seen to provide perfect preparation for that.
 19

Chapter Three
3. Methodology

This chapter describes the methodology of this study, including the research design, data
collection, data analysis, and limitations.

3.1. Background

New technology and the internet have become very important parts of educational
improvement bringing advances in learning opportunities (Hinkel, 2011). Specifically, for
formal and informal adult learners, it provides a route to learning that fits with their highly
demanding working lives, providing flexibility in scheduling options, affordability, and
immediacy in provision (Blake, 2011), as well as a direct connection to a NS teacher without
the need to overcome locational issues (Wang, 2015).

3.2. Research Design

This study was a small-scale project that included a mix of quantitative and qualitative
research, all completed online as this mirrors both my own and my learners’ working
preferences. It would therefore overcome time and financial constraints, and combat
geographical issues (Janghorbagan et al., 2014).

3.3. Data Collection

Cohen et al. (2007) suggest research requires different data sets to answer questions posed.
It was therefore perceived that these could be met via a survey in the form of a questionnaire
issued to online learners, supplemented by interviews with some of these learners as well as
a handful of fellow online teachers of English. This formed an approach of research that looked
at both the student and teacher viewpoints, in order to ensure different perspectives of the
learning relationship were considered, opening the doors to statistical data and interpretive
analysis.

The data of this study was collected in two phases. Initially, questions from the quantitative
data collection asked the ‘what’ and acted as a precursor to the qualitative data collection,
which was designed to provide the ‘why’, for which 23 specific questions (see appendix) were
 20

defined and pre-tested for clarity. The rigour of the data collection was set to be via the
correlation of the what with the why, so the survey questions were very carefully crafted,
supported and followed by guided Q&A style interviews where participants were encouraged
to speak freely.

The quantitative data was collected from all nationalities, regardless of personal situations, in
the hope that if individual background seemed to have an impact on reasons for choosing e-
learning or not, such an inclusive approach would inspire further research.

The qualitative data participants came from a mixture of present and past students. In total 10
learners volunteered for the qualitative interviews, and fortunately, just by chance, they
represented a variety of nationalities, backgrounds and professions.

3.3.1. Quantitative Research

Quantitative Research was used to collect facts and broadly study the relationships
surrounding perceptions of learners. Results were gathered in response to clearly defined
questions which had been pre-tested in consultation with 2 former learners and 2 colleagues,
that were outside of the target data collection area, to check for understanding and coherence.
In addition to asking present and past learners to complete the survey, italki, an online
language learning platform, were kind enough to support this research.

Italki promote themselves as ‘a web-based service that enables language learners to find
teachers of foreign languages and schedule one-on-one online classes with them direct’
(Mehoke, 2017), with opportunity to engage and find support from the wider language learning
community encouraged around the brand. Users currently stand at around the 2 million mark
(italki, 2016).

Italki sent out a direct email, on behalf of my research project, to about 1500 English language
learners based on the following criteria, selected to capture those who were currently active,
serious about their learning intentions, and had proceeded past the single trial lesson stage:

• Aged 25 and older

• Had bought italki credits within the last year
• Had logged in within the last 2 weeks
• Had completed at least 5 online lessons
 21

The assistance and support from italki for this data collection was vital, as it was considered
that if the invitation to complete the survey came direct from the company the participation
rate would be higher. In total, 171 learners completed the questionnaire.

3.3.2. Qualitative Research

Qualitative research was used to dig deeper into the argument in hand, initially via an
interview, then followed by written feedback, to try to explore, explain, find evidence and facts
to either support, or deny, assumptions, as promoted by Cohen et al. (2007) and Bell & Waters
(2014). It has been suggested by Ross (1992, in Brown & Rogers 2002), that combining
quantitative with qualitative research brings forth the possibility to ‘provide alternative views
on the same phenomenon’ (p249), which was exactly the aim here.

The initial interviews were specifically directed from 4 research questions, kept to a basic Q &
A format to keep responses clear. This was supplemented by a follow-up written feedback
request which was more open ended. The written feedback was chosen to encourage a more
targeted, considered and succinct response than a conversation may have instigated, whilst
also allowing the learner to put forward their own ideas by reflecting on the previous face-to-
face interview and without the pressure of the teacher being in front of them as they replied.

3.4. Research Questions

4 research questions were defined:

1. Why do mature students - aged 30+ (so post-graduate/family age) - select individual and
private bespoke computer assisted language learning (CALL) in the form of e-learning /
synchronous video and audio computer mediated communication (SCMC) lessons (via
Skype™) as a means to improve their English proficiency?
2. What are the factors which bring them to improve their English at this time in their lives?
3. Is preparation for specific contexts in use a driving motivator for these lessons?
4. Have new ways to use technology for language learning created, or simply satisfied, this
need to learn English now?

3.5. Participants

For the qualitative interviews, permission was sought from italki to contact students who had
taken lessons with me, both past and present, as well as contacting a selection of other online
 22

teachers from their platform. An invitation was sent to encourage participation, and positive
respondents subsequently received an information page with a request for them to complete
a consent form.

The teacher interviews were with other native English speakers; Australian, Irish and
Canadian. The question to these teachers was to simply describe their average online learner
profile. This was then used with the aim of exploring the extent to which these views would
provide a comparison to assumptions from my own experience and learner base.

3.6. Ethics

The ethical considerations from this research were as follows:

• Research Ownership – the nature of the agreement for quantitative data to be gathered
with the assistance of the e-learning company, establishing the research ownership
between all parties before data was collected. Italki was notified that I stood as an
independent researcher and thanks to their support in granting permission to contact their
learning and teaching pool for qualitative participants, as well as assisting in sending out
the quantitative survey for data collection to a greater reach of learners than I could ever
possibly hope to contact by myself, meant that I felt indebted to them and wanted to share
the results of this research with them in the hope that it could help with future developments
in SCMC for learners and teachers alike. Individual identifiable student data is not to be
shared with italki, only anonymous and general results, as permission would be needed
from participants to share any data which identified them.

• Research Contract – with italki to establish what data could be collected, the questions
that were to be issued to the participants, the length and depth of research and how and
when the results were to be used. This was completed via email conversation with Tracy
Mehoke as the Teacher Services Co-ordinator, where all details of the research involving
italki participants was pre-agreed prior to any direct contact being made, the data collection
criteria were clearly established, including the actual wording of all communications that
were issued publicly via the platform.

• Informed Consent / Confidentiality & Anonymity – ensuring qualitative participants of

confidentiality and anonymity since interviews were videoed to assist with analysis and
transcription. For Skype™ interviews, ethical issues were the same as in face-to-face
 23

interviews. The individuals who participated in the qualitative interviews, teacher and
learners alike, were asked to read an information sheet and then sign and return a consent
form.
 24

Chapter Four
4. Results

This chapter presents the results of the data collection, and is comprised in two parts, both
based on the methodology proposed in the previous chapter. The first section presents the
quantitative data analysis and results of the student survey. The second part sets forth the
discussion from the qualitative student and teacher interviews.

4.1. Quantitative Data Analysis

A total of 171 responses were received which represented roughly a 10% return on survey
reach. The first question from the survey presented the expected result of learners being
mostly male, by a ratio of 60.8% to 39.2% female, as shown in figure 1. Of these, of equal
proportions (31.6% and 54 respondents respectively) were students in their 20s and 30s.
Learners in their 40s, 43 respondents, were just slightly less at 25.1%, with 13 respondents
being in their 50s, and 7 being aged 60 or above – see figure 2.

Figure 1:

Between figures 1 and 2 (above and see next page), we can see that the learners who were
aged in their 20s, exactly twice as many were male than female (36 to 18), and almost the
same split could be seen between respondents in their 30s (34 male to 20 female).

However, once you moved into the 40s the split was more balanced (24 male to 20 female).
62.4% of respondents (106 learners) were living with a partner or were married, with the next
highest portion being those who were living alone – see figure 3.
 25

Figure 2:

Figure 3:

The conclusion drawn is that online learners in this study are predominantly male, married and
aged between 20 to 39, which directly challenges the situation described by Cronin (1998).
Since the survey only gave a response option within bands of 10 years (20-29 / 30-39 etc.)
yet it was sent out to learners with a profile age of 25+ then this average learner result could
actually be narrowed to be within the 25-39 age range. It appears to be mostly males who are
seeking to improve their language skills, as they are the driving force to take their family to a
new level of wealth and happiness, either via promotion, further education, or moving to a new
country, all of which require English for one reason or another. This was confirmed by the
teacher interviews of their perceptions of their average student profile.

When looking at nationality, the top nationality had indeed been Russian, at 24.8%, followed
by Italian at 20% and Brazilian at 10.3%, and Spanish 8% - see figure 4. The major part of the
responses to the survey were driven by a mass mailing via italki, and as such were not driven
 26

by any predilections or preferences. No one nationality was significantly higher than any other,
so it is difficult to identify the nationality of an average student. However, conversely the results
would suggest that almost all nationalities have a real and viable interest in learning English,
and are actively doing do via SCMC.

Figure 4:

Russian
Spanish

Italian Brazilian
+ 23 other nationalities

When looking at the level of education of learners, the response was that an impressive 85.9%
were of graduate or postgraduate level. So, this would suggest that learners see a vested
interest in education and their English language skills are something that are not yet complete,
- see figure 5. This would suggest they are experienced, self-directed learners who are more
autonomous and motivated. Lamb & Reinders (2008) note this as ‘persons who possess both
the capacity and the freedom to steer their own direction’ (p22). In all, 29 different nationalities
were present within the data collected.

Figure 5:
 27

When looking at the next set of results, which examined the respondents own perceptions of
their English language level right now, a notable amount, 66.7% (114 learners), felt they were
already B2 level or above. Of these 28.7% (49 respondents) felt they were C1 advanced or
higher. Only 4.7% (8 respondents) felt they were A2 level, thus regarded as beginners. If you
factor in the consideration that most learners underestimate their level of language ability, as
noted by MacIntyre et al. (1997), then it is even more surprising that such advanced level
students still feel they need to be taking lessons and learning more. This links directly back to
the research questions posed here in my study in that there would appear to be an ingoing
need related to the context in which the learners are trying to become effective language
users.

Figure 6:

When we go on to look at the reasons respondents are taking lessons, why they are studying
English, the results were a clear majority of 41.5% for work – see figure 7. This, again, supports
the argument, as noted by Cook (2016) and previous responses (figure 5), that only when
people have left education and gone into the workplace do they start to become real English
language users, see the gap between what they know and what they can do, in comparison
to the English language needs of their field of work.

Only 3.5% were interested in learning for travel. 23.4 % considered that they were learning for
a hobby, however the student interviews gave further insight into this result when more than
one learner stated that his hobby was also a means to keep options open for further
employment possibilities in the future. So it is not strictly just for hobby reasons. An additional
category of ‘for future work possibilites’ may have proven to divide this result up further. The
 28

category of ‘to live in another country’ went some way to support this, which if added to the
current ‘work’ category represents 56.7% of respondents.

In addition, the fact that only 29.8% of those surveyed were studying for an English exam or
certificate, seemed to suggest the reason for learning was something more personal and/or
immediate - see figure 8. 70.2% (120 our of 171 respondents) said that they were not studying
for an exam. So, it may be something that is not covered by academic English lessons, normal
courses, or something unique to the position that they find themselves in when they are
required to use English.

Figure 7:

Figure 8:

When asked what respondents thought of online lessons (meaning via SCMC since the
request was sent to active italki learners) the result was resoundingly positive, with 97.7% of
 29

respondents classing them as 4 or more out of 5 stars. 67.3% (115 respondents) gave them
5 out of 5 – see figure 9:

Figure 9:

Respondents were then asked to volunteer in their words to how individual online lessons
were different to traditional classroom lessons. 125 out of 171 responded. The most popular
response was due to them being more ‘personal’ with their being a priority on speaking, next
was the matter of flexibility and comfort, and finally price.

To quote some:

• They are more customised and I can easily match with my agenda
• Flexible at the student discretion and pace upon his/her schedule
• You can schedule them when you have spare time, the logistic is extremely
comfortable
• I can decide the day and time.
• I start and stop when I want to do this.
• You have more flexibility in terms of time as well as the option to choose your teacher
among the others. Traditional classrooms are more likely to be quite boring as well.

Comments were made about the bespoke element of the lessons:

• Tailored materials and flexible exercises

• Dedicated teacher all for me
• I seek related material easily.
 30

• The student can get the personal attention of his teacher and navigate the subject of
discussion with more flexibility rather than in classroom lesson
• Individual online lessons are totally focused on my needs.
• I can talk about things that are more important to me.
• It can help me to improve my weak point specifically.
• I can concentrate on my personal preference of study.
• The teacher gives me special care and attention.
• You have the opportunity to have lessons just designed for you in order to achieve
your goals.
• Individual online lessons give the possibility to follow a very specific training.

Comments were made about the key teaching differences:

• You can try different teachers.

• It's a personal approach to a student, you can choose a particular teacher for your
needs and change him very quickly and without problem if you want.
• I can choose any teachers, with whom I would like to learn.
• Generally, traditional classroom lessons focus in the teaching of grammar and not in
normal life conversation.
• An opportunity to have the same teacher when moving places and countries.
• Much more interactive than the traditional education systems.
• More intensive because you use [all] the time… instead to waste time
• More native teachers
• They give the opportunity to meet professional teachers from all over the world,
different accents and ways of teaching

Key matters were noted about certain features and abilities:

• I can speak more.

• 100% conversation. I can concentrate for me.
• I get to practise my English much more thoroughly.
• More speaking based, no group acitivities [sic]
• Very motivating
• More intresting [sic]
 31

• It's very different because I have the opportunity to talk with my English teacher one to
one for an hour...., without interruption and sharing news, personal experiences or new
cultures. It's very enjoyable.

There were, of course, some unexpected responses, such as:

• Someone can come right in underpants and sneakers...And we will don't know about
this fact.
• They are confidential
• Traditional classroom lessons are kind of out-moded, [sic]
• In 21 century it's almost the same

In summary, students seem to prefer SCMC due to the flexibility of timing, the choice of
teacher, the fact that they can get to know their teacher well, or even change the teacher
without delay or disruption. They preferred the personalised aspect, the 100% focus on them
and the clear advantage in speaking opportunities. They seemed to be more motivated, find
the lessons more interesting and believed that they got better, and faster, results via SCMC
than by traditional means.

When looking at other ways respondents had already tried, before taking online lessons, the
results were 62.6% had tried group courses locally to them and 39.2% had tried private
individual lessons locally to them. Only 25.7% had tried an online course without direct teacher
contact – see figure 10.

Figure 10:
 32

Online platforms such as italki offer ratings to potential learners about the quality of teachers.
Thus, for a teacher you cannot afford a bad lesson as this will get you a bad rating or review
following the session. On a positive note this does promote high standards, transparency in
quality and the repeat booking of lessons by learners is reward in itself for the teachers. So, it
is a mutually beneficial system. The learner seeks out a teacher that fits their personality,
learning style and preferences, while the teacher gets immediate feedback.

Figure 11.

Figure 11 shows that while just over half of all learners had tried 3 or more teachers, and
34.7% of these had tried 4 or more. It would have been good to have provided evidence rather
than assumption as to why learners have changed teachers, however, in contrast a solid
25.9% had only ever tried one teacher.

Figure 12:

Figure 12 shows strong results where 94.7% of respondents said that they prefer individual
lessons. This is supported by responses given to the question posed in figure 9 (asking the
 33

overall opinion of online lessons). However, in figure 13 we can see more clearly the
quantitative reasons for this. 69.6% prefer lessons via SCMC due to comfort and flexibility,
that the lessons fit in with their schedule, and that basically the learner, not the teacher nor
the institution, is in control of the day, time, frequency and length of the lessons. Only 18.7%
stated that privacy, or personalisation, was a top factor, since the question asked the
respondent to choose the TOP reason, then there may have been a trade-off here. This is
concluded from the results of the following question – see figure 14.

Figure 13:

Figure 14:

Here respondents had to note the top PROBLEM with traditional classroom-based course and
the highest response here was in fact related to the lack of individual attention, to the amount
of 39.4%. Second was lack of general flexibility at 22.4%, followed by the travel aspect of
21.2%.
 34

When asked what respondents hope to do in the future with their English skills, the responses
were overwhelmingly about confidence and effective communication – see figure 15. 45.6%
want to be more confident when they speak, so the nature of 1-to-1 practice via SCMC was
perfectly aligned to their goals. Communicating better was 35.1% which when combined with
the matter of confidence overshadowed all other results by reaching a sum of 80.7% of all
respondents. Other matters, such as understand more, getting to know people and studying
for exams paled in comparison.

Figure 15:

Figure 16:

With regards to the longevity of online lessons, respondents were asked how long they had
been learning via SCMC – see figure 16: The response was quite surprising and was quite
evenly spread, with 33.3% being what may be considered as new starters, 30.4% having
studied for the equivalent length of time as the average course duration offered by local
institutions. 25.1% had been studying for over a year, which represented a considerable
 35

amount of money, time and effort, thus supporting the idea that if you offer comfort, flexibility
and personalisation of this service, you boost motivation and ensure continuation.

There also appeared to be consistency in effort as 44.4% of respondents took regular lessons
of 1 of week – see figure 17. Following this 32.2% took 2 a week. Those who were taking 3
lessons a week, and had been doing so for up to 6 months were predominantly doing so for
work, thus supporting the immediacy of need to become language users without delay. The
average lesson time was 60 minutes - see figure 18.

Figure 17:

Figure 18:

When learners were asked what they would do if they could not take lessons via SCMC, 49.4%
stated that they would just study alone. This was surprising as it seemed to contradict the
expressed need to be more confident and communicate better. Only 24.1% noted that they
 36

would seek out face-to-face private lessons locally, and 21.2% stated that they would seek to
join a group class nearby.

Figure 19:

With regards to the individual nature of the lessons via SCMC, where respondents could
choose more than one answer, 68.4% expressed the key attraction was the ability to have
contact with native speakers, quickly followed by 66.1% noting speaking with a teacher 1-to-
1 as almost equally important. In addition, 45% noted the bespoke nature of the lessons was
more important than matters of comfort, price or flexibility – see figure 20.

Figure 20:

Perhaps one of the key results for companies who offer online learning platforms using the 1-
to-1 aspect of Skype™ lessons was the result from the question about how learners came to
study via SCMC. Only 11.8% responded to an advert. This was superseded by
 37

recommendations from a friend (20%) but both of these were vastly overshadowed by the
62.4% who simply did an online search for ways to learn English. This would suggest that
search engine optimisation (SEO) for language learning platforms should be a priority over
any marketing or advertising campaign - see figure 21.

Figure 21:

Figure 22:

The final question (figure 22) asked if learners, based on their experiences, would ever return
to traditional classroom lessons in the future. A resounding 87% were either undecided or
would prefer not to, of which the ‘no’ responses were 59.4%. It seems that those who come to
SCMC, have a good experience and like studying with SCMC, and would prefer to
subsequently remain learning via SCMC.
 38

4.2. Qualitative Data Analysis

10 students responded to the advertisement for interview participants. Of these, 9 successfully

completed the interview. However, unfortunately 1 recording failed due to system/mechanical
failure of the recording equipment.

Subsequently, the 9 students were asked to send written responses to follow-up questions. 7
of them completed this request.

In addition, 3 teachers were interviewed to gauge their perceptions of online learners; their
profiles, their age, background, goals and aspirations.

4.2.1. Student Interviews

The students were asked 4 questions and prompted to give open and detailed responses in
their own words.

1. Why do mature students - aged 30+ (so post-graduate/family age) - select individual and
private bespoke computer assisted language learning (CALL) in the form of e-learning /
synchronous video and audio computer mediated communication (SCMC) lessons (via
Skype™ or Google Hangouts™) as a means to improve their English proficiency?

More than one student spoke about the bespoke requirements they had for English language
learning and related it specifically to their language use in their context of use at work. Student
A refers to the need to ‘cherry pick’ at the specific problems they face, the mistakes they make,
and go deeply into personal requirements within the lessons – appendix Student A [lines 8 to
16]. To support this, Student C was very clear about needing personal attention on their
language learning, noting that traditional classroom lessons made it,

‘difficult to butt in when 15 people are in a classroom and the teacher only… can pay
attention for a…couple of students at a time’
– appendix Student C [lines 9 and 10]

They clearly wanted to be the centre of attention and the prime candidate for speaking
opportunities.
 39

Student D confirmed this personal focus was a priority, preferring the fact that via SCMC they
can speak about their own work and interests, adding that when you are using English for
work purposes, this professional context raises the standards even higher than usual. They
said,

‘I think that… when you write something for private it’s ok you can make mistakes but
when you write for a big company or event for international participants… it has to look
professional.’
- appendix Student D [lines 16 to 19]

Student E very clearly confirms this aspect as an advantage when they say,

‘to have very targeted classes… to be followed just by one person so… I am convinced
that it helped me to improve my English better than when I was in a group.’

- appendix Student E [lines 8 to 10]

Another focus of bespoke lessons was to be able to address concerns and progress learning
faster than any other way. Student A states that they are one of many who have problems to
fit learning into their busy lives,

‘I don’t have time for… general classes’

- appendix Student A [lines 16 to 18]

Student C also notes negative aspects of traditional classroom lessons as a place where,

‘most of activities is divided by pairs and taking turns to… have a conversation and
it’s… easy to pick up… the other people mistakes and... I think it’s a main disadvantage
of having a class... in a group.’
- appendix Student C [lines 10 to 14]

Student E goes one step further to compare SCMC 1-to-1 lessons with face-to-face 1-to-1
lessons, saying,

‘I’ve already done one-to-one lessons with a physical person… but it’s less flexible
than online lessons, and because we have Skype and the video… it is exactly the
 40

same, because I see your face, I see your facial expression, so I know how to react or
there is an interaction between the two of us.’
- appendix Student E [lines 17 to 21]

A lot of comments were about the choice of teachers, especially around the possibility to make
contact with native speaker teachers. Student C talks about the range of choices with SCMC,

‘choices in terms of… teachers from different countries, so for example, from Canada,
or from the States, or from Great Britain.’
- appendix Student C [lines 10 to 14]

This is confirmed by Student D who says,

‘it’s very interesting because I also can select a teacher from England, or from New
Zealand or from America and… it’s so interesting… to meet different teachers’.

- appendix Student C [lines 12 and 13]

However, there were also comments about choosing the right person for other reasons, which
have more of a basis in the region of motivation than linguistics. For example, from Student A
who says it’s about finding, ‘the right person’. They go on to say,

‘I’ve had so many teachers in my life. Some were ok, you know… but it’s… finding the
person who will empower you... to want to... progress further.’

- appendix Student A [lines 20 to 22]

Student F praises SCMC for the ability to connect with NS teachers, lamenting that in her
home country,

‘it’s really hard to find…a native speaker.’

- appendix Student A [lines 13 and 14]

2. What are the factors which bring you to improve your English at this time in your lives?
&
3. Is preparation for specific contexts in use a driving motivator for these lessons?
 41

These questions were met with positive responses directly related to very immediate contexts
of use by learners. Student A states quite clearly,

‘right now, because it’s really important for my career and I’m… writing in English so I
really need to excel and to achieve the… highest level of mistake-free writing and
speaking.’
- appendix Student A [lines 26 to 28]

Student B also had immediate and very unique needs, as they were relocating for work,

‘I… decided to go abroad to an English-speaking country…. I was preparing for the

Canadian immigration process basically,’ continuing to describe their current needs,
‘at work… writing… technical specifications. So, it’s technical concepts… technical
reports… and it goes even in the direction of contracts.’

- appendix Student B [lines 18 to 27]

The link between working, having a good job with a position of responsibility, but also a
requirement for speaking English, as well as having little free time was reiterated in the reply
from student C talking about their lessons via SCMC,

‘it saves time… it’s cheaper and it’s for your own need, so it’s… tailor made and… the
full attention of the teacher on you’
- appendix Student C [lines 16 to 18]

There also seemed to be an element of motivation from the teacher as a counsellor or advisor
too, on an adult to adult basis, as confirmed by student D when they say,

‘as you know it is important for me for our events. I have to speak… about events
and… about the work around the events and before the events for example for
sponsorship… I have to make interviews in English, to ask people about their
experiences in English and…sometimes it is interesting to speak with somebody...
outside of this mess because when I am inside the business also with other people we
always look in this direction and not enough… in the wide.’

- appendix Student D [lines 40 to 51]

 42

Student F had a complex mix of needs that were related not only with work but with family life,
so others depended on their English language skills on a daily basis. They explain this when
they say,

‘it is the study process of my small daughter because in the Netherlands children…
start to go to the school at 4 years old and she’s now 3 years and 3 months so… next
year… we need to join to school and of course I need... my English for this process.
It’s… maybe… not so important but… you need it… every day... to go to the shop and
to ask something, you need to read the news on English of course and… I will try to
find a job here and… so I need too, my Business English according this profession.’

- appendix Student F [lines 37 to 44]

4. Have new ways to use technology for language learning created, or simply satisfied, this
need to learn English now?

Student A was really enthusiastic about learning via SCMC.

‘It’s absolutely brilliant. I mean technology has empowered us to... talk to each other…
like we are sitting next to each other.’
- appendix Student A [lines 38 to 42].

They go on to express the increased motivation they have found by learning via this means,

‘I would say that it is both for satisfied because… those who don’t want to learn,
technology it won’t even interest them... but also because then it exposes you to so
many options then it creates more curiosity… gets you addicted to progress … that
you experience … in your writing, in your speaking… and it gets you connected to
people.’
- appendix Student A [lines 47 to 54].

Student D refers to the ‘catch 22’ situation of working with technology, so having to learn
English as that is the key language of technology, but also saying that using technology has
made them want to learn English more, and found learning easier too. They say,
 43

‘I have to learn English… and… the technology makes it possible to learn in this way I
can learn today’
- appendix Student D [lines 56 to 59].

Student F follows on the same thread saying,

‘it’s not about only satisfaction it’s... the technologies push you to study English and I
think it’s good… it’s your day’s motivation.’
- appendix Student F [lines 50 to 53].

So again, motivation is mentioned and seems to be an integral part of the learning experience
via SCMC.

The students were then sent follow up questions to reply in written format.

1. If you were telling a friend about your experience with online lessons, what would you say
to them?

Student A starts off by talking about the ease of using technology for learning English. They
say that,

‘technology has enabled me to have trial lessons with different teachers, assessing
various teaching styles, whether somebody's personality and teaching approach suits
me, and from all parts of the world’.
- appendix Student A [lines 64 to 66]

So, the theme of comfort and reaching native speakers across global divides is present again,
however they go on to add,

‘For smokers, this is an ideal option… I like online lessons because they
eliminate awkwardness which always exists when you are sitting too close to
somebody who is a stranger, at the beginning at least.’

- appendix Student A [lines 63 to 69]

 44

So, the comfort is not just about ease of travel, of familiarity, of having personal attention, but
also the barrier of the camera presenting a comfortable divide as it eliminates some of the
more unpleasant sides of face-to-face contact.

For student D, the matter of error correction is important, which they illustrate when they say,

‘in the chat, I can see corrections of my teacher and save them for later. All this is more
flexible than in a normal school class.’
- appendix Student D [lines 66 to 69]

2. If you had to change anything about your online lessons, what would that be.

Student B helps us focus on the fact that things are still changing, they say,

‘internet bandwidth is often an issue. It is amazing that one can have a video chat with
somebody on the other side of the world, but there is room for improvement.’

- appendix Student B [lines 51 and 52]

Student D is quite positive about this aspect saying,

‘I think the next years this offers will increase and more and more people will go this
way for learning languages. Sometimes the online connections are not so good but the
next years also this will change.’
- appendix Student D [lines 78 to 80]

Student F says the same,

‘if the Skype connection was more stable it would be perfect.’

- appendix Student D [line 75]

Student A has a very positive approach to problems with technology. They say,

‘we've all experienced the situations of losing the Internet connection in the middle of
the class, but that's okay, no big deal. Bad experiences are not related to technology,
 45

but to a human factor - arrogant and often rude teachers, who look down on you, and
so on; also. It's all about people, forever and ever, not technology.’

- appendix Student A [lines 77 to 80]

4.2.2. Teacher Interviews

3 teachers, one from Canada, one from Ireland and one from Australia, were interviewed to
ask them in general about their perceptions of the average learner via SCMC. All 3 teachers
confirmed that their top student nationality seemed to be Russian, which matched with the
results from the learner data survey (figure 3, page 3). However, teacher C made the comment
that,

‘I think that if I go back, when I started, the first year, it was a big mix with I’d say a lot
of Russians at that stage, but then… the currency conversion thing, the Russian
market went a bit uh-uh, and even one or two of them said that it’s getting difficult for
them because of that.’
– appendix Teacher C [lines 10 to 13]

Teacher A stated that their profession was also mostly related with technology,

‘Generally, they’re in their … mid to late 20s… most of them are working in IT’

– appendix Teacher A [lines 6 to 9]

Profession was not a question asked in the student survey, however teacher B confirmed this
propensity of IT related backgrounds, as well as confirming that learners were mostly male
(as noted in the student survey, figure 1, page 2),

‘in terms of their jobs or the reasons that they’re doing it I would say the vast majority
of them … are men… maybe 80% working in IT… planning on immigrating.’

– appendix Teacher B [lines 14 to 17]

 46

Teacher B felt that this predilection for IT professionals was sometimes a mixed challenge,
saying,
‘I actually do like my students a lot even though I don’t have a background in IT and I
can’t say that I find it particularly interesting, they’re still funny people and they’re not
like incapable of … talking about things that are not IT related and… I don’t mind having
to explain… things that are not… super exciting like workplace etiquette, for example,
in Canada, stuff like that.’
– appendix Teacher B [lines 33 to 37]
Teacher A noted that the time schedule that the teacher worked in, related not only to their
own work preferences, but perhaps also spare time, especially if teaching was their second
job, and the time-zone that they worked in would have an influence on the nationality of the
learners they get, as well as some learners choosing specific native teachers due to the added
attraction of inside information on that culture and/or how to move to that native speaking
country.

‘Right now, it’s six thirty at night in Russia, so… for most people, it suits them to come
home from work and be able to do lessons at this time… the second group in China.
Probably the third group that I teach are actually in Australia… generally… immigrants
that have moved to Australia, and… needing to do the IELTS exam to get… their
permanent residency visa or I get quite a lot of students as well, who moved to Australia
and then discover that... they really can’t understand Australian English, and so they
need help with that.’
– appendix Teacher A [lines 11 to 17]

Teacher A also echoed some of the same benefits or advantages of teaching via SCMC that
were mentioned by the students (figure 9, page 7 / figure 13, page 11 / figure 14, page 12)
especially as a preference over teaching in traditional classroom learning environments. They
say,

‘I guess the benefits are that I can choose my own hours… I can work from home, I
don’t need to travel to go anywhere, as long as I’ve got an internet connection and …
if I go away or whatever and for some reason I do need to still teach I can do it from…
anywhere in the world so those are the big advantages of it I guess from my
perspective. Teaching in Thailand is not that easy in the schools… the children tend to
be a bit unruly and wild and… teaching 40 of them in a class is not an easy slog’

– appendix Teacher A [lines 21 to 27]

 47

Teacher B preferred online teaching, saying,

‘what I do like about teaching online is that… I don’t have to do a lot of prep beforehand.
So, for example all my materials on the computer. I just send them with the click of a
button. I don’t have to think, oh I have to print this off and this off and this off, and if I
come into a situation where I realise midway through the lesson that something is too
easy for the student or maybe the student hasn’t done their homework, so I prepared
something and they’re not ready for it… then it’s… quite easy for me to come up with
something else to do… Whereas... when you’re teaching offline, if something like that
happens, like… you’ve sort of misjudged the level of the student… they haven’t done
your homework, you’re like ok, well, you know.’
– appendix Teacher B [lines 40 to 46]

Teacher B went on to note some negative aspects about learning via SCMC, in particular for
beginners, expressing that in their opinion there would always be a place for traditional
classroom learning environments even for adult learners, when they say,

‘I think for adults there are some similar things, like... I don’t like teaching… adults with
very low levels of English… it is something that can be done… and there are… some
people who are ok with it, but generally speaking… I would say that… if you speak
really no English at all… it would be better for you and probably also cheaper to take
a class in your country, just to get… that foundation.’

– appendix Teacher B [lines 63 to 68]

All three teachers seemed to have come to online teaching on their own, with one saying they
had no exposure or reference to this way of working during teaching training and the others
saying it was just mentioned in passing. However, there were positive remarks from all of
them, saying that it had proven to be a good and economically viable source of employment.
Teacher B had one additional comment though which brought to light that the price of lessons
may be factor on the type of students some teachers get. They say,

‘When I started on italki… I initially started with very low prices and… I didn’t have any
certification and then I got… a TEFL certificate… after that… one thing that I really
noticed was that the profile of my learners really changed quite a lot as my prices went
up, so now that my prices are fairly high… I’ve noticed a lot more IT people, whereas
when they were lower they were much more diverse, particularly in terms of what
 48

people were doing for a living… but I wouldn’t have said that the students I had… at
the beginning were not necessarily serious, it was just that they were poor… so I was
getting people, for example, like journalists in Brazil… now I only get people like,
working in IT, and… sometimes I think about diversity and… feel slightly bad about the
fact that there’s a lot of people out there that I know just can’t afford… to learn English.’

– appendix Teacher B [lines 19 to 31]

This is a valid point which could take benefit from being part of further research in the future,
as financial and lifestyle reasons must surely be challenges for new ways of study in
comparison to traditional offerings.
 49

Chapter Five
5. Evaluation & Discussion

This research has focussed on three key aspects behind learners using SCMC for English
Language acquisition. These were namely their age, the matter of motivation, and the contexts
in use for the language application. I hypothesised that the SCMC learner had a particular
profile, being of a certain age, with certain skills and motivations, and with a need for
application that was very unique to them in a personal or professional capacity, and this
research sought to understand whether this was the case. In this section I will present my
findings in relation to each of my research questions.

5.1. Response to the Research Questions.

5.1.1. Question 1:

Why do mature students - aged 30+ (so post-graduate/family age) - select individual
and private bespoke computer assisted language learning (CALL) in the form of e-
learning / synchronous video and audio computer mediated communication (SCMC)
lessons (via Skype™ or Google Hangouts™) as a means to improve their English
proficiency?

Research completed prior to the internet explosion of the last decade, such as that by Cronin
(1998), seemed to suggest that online learners were both female and at home with children,
using this time to better themselves before returning to the workplace (Dang 2007, and
Elbadawy et al. 2009). This is in contrast to the results found here. To reiterate, the findings
of this study have revealed that the learners were predominantly males, graduates, in their
30s, and married, not studying for an exam but learning for reasons related to their current or
future careers.

My research has found that the age of learners via SCMC was notably higher than previous
research may have suggested, however Kozar and Sweller (2014) put forward the idea that
there could have been a shift in age of learners, due to the increase in students taking their
degrees online. So, one use of technology is promoting further use of technology. They
reported findings from analysing the average age of people enrolling in online courses, and
perhaps since the growth of these is currently unprecedented, as noted by Zheng et al. (2015),
so those actively seeking online and remote ways of taking private lessons has increased.
 50

Respondents in my study were asked what they had tried before (figure 10, page 33). Whilst
only 25% said they had tried an online course before (described as being with no direct teacher
contact), 62.4% had searched online for ways to take private lessons. So, this would need
further investigation as a phenomenon.

What was interesting to note was the fact that learners were mostly not taking an exam, but
the results gathered gave indication that they had come to take English lessons due to the
need to be proficient language users in their current or future workplace. The use of SCMC
made it easier for them to take lessons, due to the flexibility and comfort factors in relation to
other commitments in their lives. Whilst my study is, to the best of my knowledge, only one of
a handful that have recently looked at the phenomena of learning via SCMC as defined here,
it attempted to examine these learners and report back on their key characteristics, as well as
some of their expectations, when they come to choose and use this learning environment.

My study has shown that sometimes the position where the learners need to use English has
been given to them because of their existing linguistic aptitude, sometimes it has been
delegated to them, but they always want to succeed as they see the real, tangible results and
benefits in their career and status if they succeed. The learners want a personal but variable
or bespoke solution to the very immediate challenges they face and my research has gathered
data to demonstrate the high level of satisfaction of SCMC in providing the solution here. The
best delivery is, as noted by Spada & Lightbown (2008), a mix of integrated or isolated form
focused instruction as something that is valued by both learner and teacher. This research
suggests that despite any difference in personal situations between individuals, and
regardless of level and aptitude, a matter of mixing and flexibility is what is best to achieve
optimum results, yet we can go further to say that communicative delivery is what the learners
value. As discussed earlier there seems to be a role for communicative language teaching
and communicative based instruction using both isolated and integrated form focused
instruction via SCMC, and it could be considered highly superior as a way to provide the best
learning experience due to the very bespoke nature of needs being met.

The research in this study clearly indicates that there is a world of difference between a second
language learner and a second language user. That is why some learners seem to be
returning to SLL. Maybe they were proficient, but no longer. Unfortunately for institutional
environments the teacher does not know what the learner is going to do or become so there
is no way that they can prepare them individually. The learner often does not either, and if
they do they most likely don't have a true sense of 'reality'. Here Lynch (1996) notes that
language users need to understand the nuances of negotiation of meaning, involving skills in
 51

adjustment, accommodation and simplification amongst many factors that make up the
complexity of the comprehension process, including things that are not even spoken, such as
gestures, facial expression, tone of voice, so the real skill is not only understanding the
implications of all of this, but being able to put them to effective use too. This is what the
participants in my research here seem to be looking for practice and preparation for, but all
within their own personal context of use. The very tangible collaborative effort by teacher and
student in this learning environment helps hone interaction and communicative competence
in a very specific and targeted way, a way that gives greater opportunity for growth,
achievement and motivational satisfaction.

5.1.2. Questions 2 & 3:

What are the factors which bring them to improve their English at this time in their lives,
and is preparation for specific contexts in use a driving motivator for these lessons?
(These questions were combined as the results proved the answers were interdependent.)

We can see that mature learners are selecting SCMC to improve their English for specific
goals and objectives, which they take very seriously as they are very personal to them. The
reason for this seems to be that they can see tangible rewards for success not only in career
progression but in their wider lives and future opportunities which are the factors which bring
them to make this decision to study English more at this time in their lives. Preparation for
contexts in use is definitely a motivator for them and the situation seems to be additionally
beneficial for teachers as they get immediate and consistent feedback on their efforts, get to
personally experience learner success, have a closer and more effective relationship with their
students and seem to make a real impact on people’s lives. There are responses to my study
that support both learner and teacher satisfaction from learning and teaching via the SCMC
environment.

In fact, the results of my work go somewhat to echo and support the findings of Kozar and
Sweller (2014, p39) who stated that,

‘there are theoretical and practical reasons to study these students as it will (i)
contribute to our understanding of a new social practice in the field of language learning
and (II) inform a wider educational community about a shifting demographic of current
language learners.’
 52

Kozar and Sweller’s study was only based on SCMC language learners in Russia. My study
here has a more global perspective and has come to the same conclusion. This is a growing
area that the field of SLA, not just ELL, needs to recognise, address with teacher training,
regulate for quality standards, and embrace as a preferred option for mature learners who
have exited the standard educational stream, a growth potential initially only identified back in
2010 by Ventura and Jang.

In addition, the research results from my body of work have shown that there is still a place
for the traditional classroom environment, as the old ways of studying languages can still
provide the groundwork of language acquisition and a more general approach. Yet the
learners who come to SCMC that have been studied here by me have provided responses
that suggest they require much more specific and targeted needs, with growth showing that
they are turning in high numbers to technology as an immediate and personal solution, all
specifically demonstrated by citing the findings and wider reading from this research.

Gardner & Lambert in 1972, and Gardner in 2001, noted that the matter of motivation was the
success born out of a learner’s expectations being met with real tangible and practical
outcomes. At that time, with the consideration of the lack of technological ability that we have
today, they could not have perceived that their ideas would perfectly fit the matter of ELL via
SCMC. Their idea of instrumental motivation stands firmly at the root of the reason why
learners today are turning to SCMC for bespoke lessons, why they are doing it at that specific
time in the lives and what they expect as the fruit of their labours, translated into immediate
performance as language users. Some may say that the other idea of that time, the matter of
integrative motivation, falls away with this new definition of the average SCMC language
learner, but that is not so, as sometimes these bespoke goals are driving the learner to live
and work in another country. Whilst further research would need to be done on the destination
hotspots for these learners, we can at least draw some tentative conclusions from the data
collected here. Where 41.5% of respondents stated that they were studying English for work,
another 15.2% stated this was to help them live in another country. There is nothing to say
that the first 41.5% would not in the future be living abroad, nor that the 15.2% were simply
not yet employed and were looking to emigrate and subsequently find work.

Dörnyei (2005 & 2009) picked up on the students’ learning experience as something that was
key to motivation in language learning, confirming that success is translated as learners
attaining ‘the attributes that one would ideally like to possess’ (2009, p13). The idea of lessons
via SCMC being very up close and personal to the very real hurdles the learner wishes to
overcome enables this success to arguably be more achievable and realistic.
 53

The results from my research seem to indicate that there is a very real sense of reaping
financial as well as social benefits from learning English, since the spread of learners was
across the globe. This could suggest, along with the majority of respondents to the survey and
comments from the teacher interviews, that there was a preference to improve English for
work purposes and specific contexts of use, and that this subsequently confirms the spread of
English playing a continuing important role in world socio-economics (Heller, 2010 &
Canagarajah 2007).

My work is in line with the study completed by Kozar and Sweller (2014, p48), as they too felt
it was possible to ‘draw broad conclusions’ about the goals, aspirations and professional
backgrounds of those choosing to learn English via SCMC. They saw the following responses:

- Improving job-related English skills was a driving motivator

- Being able to have lessons before or after work was an attraction
- Previous experience in traditional classroom settings had brought them to seek an
alternative learning environment.
Kozar and Sweller (2014, page 48)

One argument, discussed earlier, in relation to form focused instruction (Spada and Lighbown,
2008) has been that it acts as a motivating force for learners. My research leads the argument
to go further to say that if that is directly linked to the context of use for any one specific learner,
then the motivational factor increases significantly, as they connect with language that they
have a very immediate need to understand and make use of. Learners via SCMC are looking
for meaningful practice and to make direct connections with real communicative exchanges,
which can have hefty results if errors or misunderstandings occur.

Ideas suggested by Dörnyei & Ushioda (2009) of the person-in-context relational view of
motivation seem to align factors of seeking bespoke lessons that address contexts in use. It
could be that these are things that bring these learners to meet their current or immediate
future goals, driven by professional ideals or benchmarks. Kozar and Sweller (2014) also saw
results, as my research did, of learners who were not using English in their current positions
but were still studying in the event of future opportunities and alternative careers. This would
suggest that SLA, specifically of English, is something this research could suggest is being
used to train and prepare individuals, to improve and enhance their skills and abilities, both in
their current positions and as part of the résumé for future work opportunities to advance their
careers in light of a globalised economy.
 54

With regards to anxiety, a study by Terantino (2014) suggested findings that offered up
Skype™ as a suitable alternative to face-to-face encounters, as it did not appear to have any
negative impact on learners. The results from my research completed here would argue that
since Skype™ lessons can be taken in the learner’s own home, or other preferred location,
that anxiety levels are reduced, so it should have a positive attraction for more sensitive
speakers.

Terhune (2016) went further to examine the motivational aspects of SCMC, who noted that
whilst speaking via videocall was not something that everyone felt comfortable with, those that
did, found motivation waned due to lack of specific goals and tasks. The contradiction to this
set forth by my study is that students have brought their own agenda to the lessons, so their
own set of goals, for which the teacher has to provide suitable tasks to complete attainment
of said objectives, so the motivation is dually assured by the learner and the teacher working
in collaboration.

5.1.3. Question 4:

Have new ways to use technology for language learning created, or simply satisfied,
this need to learn English now?

When understanding student motivations in relation to technology, we must revisit the

decisions behind online language learning. As we discussed before (Zheng et al. 2014) there
are two key drivers, which are professional need and preparing for the future, and these
include impressing potential employers or future academic goals. It was clearly seen from my
research results that the lessons via SCMC are used not just as a place to practice and
prepare for such situations but as a means to build confidence in overall language exchange.
So, in answer to the question of whether new ways to use technology for language learning
have created or simply satisfied this need to learn English now, it would appear to be the latter.
This is good news for ELT as it would seem to suggest that there is a wider reach and a
previously unfilled need is being met by SCMC.

One thing we do have to consider here is that the survey was of active participants in SCMC.
By being active this would suggest they are positive in their opinions of this form of learning.
Hence caution must be taken to consider the possible bias in the results which would give a
limited representation, albeit they are ‘real’ SCMC learners.
 55

Additionally, Kozar and Sweller (2014) noted that there could be a link with economics. As
access to the internet becomes more than just a luxury but a day-to-day need or even a
common right in society, the opportunity for online learning widens. However, as the teacher
surveys echoed, there is still the matter of affordability of lessons which comes into play when
looking at those who do proceed to take lessons via SCMC. Internet access may be relatively
cheap, Skype™ may be a free VOIP programme but the lessons themselves can still be costly.
It may not be those who need language lessons who are actually getting language lessons,
and matters of career progression and future employment could be changed if that imbalance
could be addressed on a more personal level. For now, the luxury of bespoke lessons seems
to be reserved for those who can afford it. It was noted from the student interviews that online
lessons were cheaper than face-to-face lessons locally, however without evidence to prove
this, it may be questionable, and suggest that perceptions are being blurred here by matters
of convenience and comfort. It is easier to hunt online for a teacher you can afford than to find
and travel to one locally to you. It is perceived that the reality would be much more comparable,
however that would be another study of economics and geographical boundaries.

With regards to meeting student expectations, the opportunity to takes trials, see teacher
videos and read other student reviews, plus message the teacher and chat about needs before
starting lessons, helps ensure that the teacher matches the learner.

5.2. Additional Considerations

There was a strong preference from the survey respondents in my study to have native
speaker contact, or a native speaker teacher. However, it would be interesting to take this
further with subsequent research to understand what the average profile of the SCMC teacher
is, as well as what the learners would prefer, and see if this matches up. Kozar and Sweller
(2014) did some analysis towards this in their research and suggested that the teacher profile
was a female British or American, aged between 30 and 49. This age range matches a lot of
teachers that can be seen on the online teaching platform where I work. However, it will be
interesting to see if this age-range changes as time goes on. This represents the age of people
who grew up with technological advances in the internet and are computer savvy. Older
teachers may not be so, and as such will not currently be found on such platforms with such
regularity. In the future, as everyone is internet literate this may change, including some
blurring of the lines between personal and professional use of the internet, moving from a view
of digital natives and digital immigrants, as noted by Prensky (2001), to a view recently up
updated by White and Le Cornu (2011) as digital visitors and digital residents. Right now,
students may subconsciously be choosing teachers who reflect what they consider as ‘the
 56

right age’ to be a teacher, in addition to being someone who has a good understanding of how
to use the internet. It would be interesting to see how this changes in decades to come.

Linking directly to the four research questions as a whole we can see that the results of the
quantitative data collection via the student survey, and the subsequent student and teacher
interviews, have not entirely answered all the questions, as subsequent ones have been
raised. However, they have gone some way in part to understand better the profile of the
SCMC learner. The have highlighted why learners choose this learning environment, what
some of the benefits and drawbacks are from both sides of the experience, as well as shining
a light on the rising need for bespoke lessons to truly turn language learners into effective
language users past the age of formal education.

Whilst Kozar and Sweller themselves noted in 2014 that there is considerably less research
in the sphere of SCMC, in the form that it is defined here, they state that the reason for this is
‘due to the unregulated and free-lance nature of private tutoring’ (p40). This can be confirmed,
as while platforms such as italki do make the division between tutors (unqualified) and
professional teachers (qualified) requiring the submission of a teaching certificate, it seems
that there are no checks made on the true validity of these, and the price and process of
picking up a TEFL certificate these days is rather too easily done.

Finally, the rainbow of issues within SLL have been under scrutiny for many years, if not
decades now. However, with the mode of learning changing, as this research proffers to
suggest will increase even more so in the coming decades, then so this matter must again be
considered under new, as well as old, parameters.
 57

Chapter Six
6. Conclusion

This chapter concludes my study by summarising the research, giving implications for ELT
and teacher training, as well as limitations and suggestions for future research.

6.1. Summary of the Study

My research sought to understand more about the reasons mature learners choose online
bespoke English classes. A rigorous approach was applied to a sizeable data sample and the
outcomes of this study can now contribute to further understanding about the learning
environment of SCMC and those that choose this path for ELL. The goal here was to explore
the phenomena and bring understanding closer to the truth, and the belief was that unique
learner traits would emerge that were directly linked to the nature of online lessons via SCMC.

Specific comparison of the data collected can be made with the work completed by Wu and
Marek (2009), Terantino (2014) and Terhune (2016), for a comparison of the learners selecting
SCMC. In addition, it has built on and broadened the results of the study completed by Kasper
& Roever (2005) who focussed on a similar phenomenon of SCMC learners, but in Russia
alone. There has also been examination of motivational drivers, such as aspects highlighted
in research by those such as Dörnyei (1998, 2005), Ushioda (2011) and Dörnyei & Ushioda
(2013) to ascertain if there was any advantage or particular benefit by learning via SCMC. In
specific correlation to assumptions about the age of online learners, the profiles, goals and
forces behind reasons for selecting this learning environment have been examined in relation
to issues noted by the likes of Singleton (2001) and Bardovi-Harlig (2015). Finally, this
research has attempted to address the matter of going beyond the argument of focus-on-form
(FonF) or focus-on-formS (FonFs) and clarify assumptions of the value of communicative
activities with the additional element of context in use, in comparing results with research
completed by Long (1991, 1996 & 1997), Doughty & Williams (2000), Ellis (2001), Thornbury
(2010) Loewen (2011) and Lantolf et al. (2015).

The overriding conclusion from the work completed here is that SCMC seems to be a
particularly unique learning environment, which due to expanding growth and popularity has
yet to realise its full potential in offering a route to success with SLA for adult learners,
especially with regards to focussing on contexts of use. It is hoped that Vygotsky (1978) would
 58

have seen this as the new cultural tool (the internet) facilitating SLA to a successful outcome,
with the potential to provide a specific route for those learners who need to overcome factors
that actually stop them engaging in situations which they could take benefit from.

My study has shown that the learners that come to SCMC are predominantly male, with an
upper-intermediate English language level, post-university age (25-39), mostly married with
full-time work that requires English language either now or for future progression. Sometimes
the position where they need to use English has been given to them because of their good
linguistic aptitude, sometimes it has been delegated to them, but they always want to succeed
as they see the real, tangible results and benefits in their career and status if they succeed.
Spada and Lightbown (2008) found that whether integrated or isolated form focused
instruction, neither learner nor teacher expressed a ‘consistent’ preference and in fact valued
both. My research would concur with that, despite the difference in personal situations
between individuals, and regardless of level and aptitude, a matter of mixing and flexibility is
what is best to achieve the optimum result, yet we can go further to say that the application
could depend on the matter in hand and the context in use.

Overall, my research has provided additional lines of consideration, such as whether SLA
research may have focused too much on processes of acquisition and not enough on actual
application, formation and success by the language user (Ushioda, 2011). However, it may be
that until matters of authenticity of practice and ways to deal with the delay on application are
addressed - as learners move from the context of mainstream education into the workplace -
then the true analysis of social and interpersonal factors cannot be entirely appreciated. It is
curious to note that there is a dichotomy between the world of academia behind the teaching
professionals (being mostly institutionally focussed), and the goals and aspirations of the
learners via SCMC, as my research indicates. One side objective of this work is to perhaps
highlight the reality of what mature students want, their own perceived needs, and how these
thoughts work in direct opposition to what some of the current ideology in the field of ELT
currently proposes and provides. The independent teacher is filling a growing gap here, often
untrained, unregulated and unrecognised. Islam (2011) noted that learning through the
internet is becoming a more and more important consideration for academics in the role of
ELT, as it challenges the institutional norms as well as flying in the face of traditional holistic
learning approaches. Mahdi (2014) has been the most recent to look at the current situation
in this field and concluded, like myself, that even more research is still required.

The world of language teaching cannot ignore that things are changing, and Murphy (2015)
has been one of the latest to look directly at this shift from face-to-face instruction to online
 59

learning, in trying to provide support for teachers in this new environment, looking at aspects
of theory, practice, tools, tasks, and skills development that can help with the transition. In
contrast to this positive outlook there is also a very critical review of the expectations and
responses of learners, which can have serious repercussions on teacher-learner experiences
and relationships. Nonetheless, my study goes somewhat towards directly addressing the
rainbow of aspects that this new, unique, and still evolving context of e-learning brings forth,
so the views, discussion points and suggestions are invaluable to add into the discussion.

6.2. Limitations & Suggestions for Future Research

This research was predominantly limited by the fact that more empirical studies need to be
carried out in order to extend and confirm findings.

As noted before, we have to consider that this study was of active participants in SCMC. By
being active this would suggest they are positive in their opinions of this form of learning.
Hence caution would have to be taken to consider the possible bias in the results which would
give a limited representation.

In addition, the participants were self-selecting, but were inherently positive to SCMC by
nature of the fact that they were already using this means for ELL. Hence further research
might be a comparison with a group of non SCMC learners.

One of the areas noted from this study that could be a possible area for future research is the
level of conversion of online learners without direct teacher contact, such as those using
platforms like MOOCs, to direct teacher contact lessons such as via SCMC.

Another would be to assess the growing relevance of SCMC to mature learners in examining
the differences in delivery, speed, and ultimate levels attained as a route to SLA.

In addition, as technology becomes even more accessible and affordable for all it would be
interesting not only to revisit the financial and lifestyle reasons as challenges for new ways of
study in comparison to traditional offerings, but to see how the traditional classroom learning
environments have changed.

For me, the subject was and still is interesting, as it presents an area that is expanding and
merits further research. I wanted to ascertain whether this was a new need that had arisen out
of greater connectivity through the internet and technology, or whether this was a need that
 60

had always been there but was only now being fulfilled. As I suspected it was the latter, so
this presents an important factor that the field of SLL does not appear to have fully addressed
up till now. The basis of any focus going forward should be on the proficient language user in
contexts of use and not just the process of acquisition resulting in competence that would
subsequently be at risk of not being applied.

Finally, it is finally interesting to note that if you compare SCMC as the new paper-free learning
environment which assists distance learners via the use of modern technology, with the
original definition of distance learners via postal means back in 1926, the average student was
again classified with a profile of being mid-30s, predominantly male, having a decent level of
education and most likely married than not (Lambert 2000, in Dabbagh 2007). This is exactly
the same as we have found here, so maybe things have not changed as much as come full
circle. However, it is clear that SCMC as a route for mature learners to become effective and
proficient language users is a phenomenon that is forming an even greater part of the offerings
from the world of language teaching.

Word Count: 19,978

 61

References

Adkins, S. (2014). The 2013-2018 Worldwide Digital English Language Learning Market.
Ambient Insight: Washington, USA. Available online at:
http://www.ambientinsight.com/Resources/Documents/AmbientInsight-2011-2016-
Worldwide-Digital-English-Language-Learning-Market-Overview.pdf [Accessed on 21 March
2017].

Alonso, F., Lopez, G., Manrique, D. & Vines, J. (2008). Learning objects, learning objectives
and learning design. Innovations in Education and Teaching International. Vol. 45 (4),
pp.389-400.

Baker, W. (2011). Using e-learning to develop intercultural awareness in ELT: a critical

evaluation in a Thai higher education setting. ELT Research Papers Vol. 12 (3). Available at:
http://englishagenda.britishcouncil.org/sites/ec/files/B375%20ELTRP%20report%20-
%20Baker%20A4%20ONLINE_V5.pdf [Accessed 31 March 2017].

Bardovi-Harlig, K. (2015). One functional approach to SLA: the concept-orientated approach.

In VanPatten, B. and Williams, A. (eds). Theories in second language acquisition: an
introduction. New York: Routledge. pp.54-74.

Baset, S. & Schulzrinne, H. (2004). An analysis of the skype peer-to-peer internet telephony
protocol. arXiv preprint cs/0412017.

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

Bell, J. & Waters, S. (2014). Doing Your Research Project: A Guide for First-Time
Researchers. Glasgow: Open University Press.

Blake, R. (2011). Current Trends in Online Language Learning. Annual Review of Applied
Linguistics, Vol. 31, pp.19-35.

Blake, R. (2013). Brave new digital classroom: Technology and foreign language learning.
Washington, D.C: Georgetown University Press.

Bradley, L. & Thousény, S. (2013). 20 Years of EURCALL: Learning from the Past. Looking
to the Future: 2013 EUROCALL Conference. Evora - Research Publishing: Portugal.
 62

Brown, J. & Rodgers, T. (2002). Doing Second Language Research. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.

Canagarajah, A. (2007). The ecology of global English. International multilingual research

Journal, Vol. 1 (2), pp.89-100.

Chappelle, C. (2009). The Relationship Between Second Language Acquisition Theory and
Computer-Assisted Language Learning. The Modern Language Journal, Vol. 93 (1), pp.741-
753.

Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of Theory of Syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Clement, R., Gardner, R. & Smythe, P. (1980). Social and individual factors in second
language acquisition. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science. Vol. 12 (4), pp.293-392.

Cohen, L., Manion, L. & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education.

Cook, V. (2016). Second Language Learning and Language Teaching. 5th Edition.
Routledge: London.

Cronin, B. (1998). The electronic academy revisited, Aslib Proceedings, Vol. 50 (9),
pp.241 – 254.

Dabbagh, N. (2007). The online learner: Characteristics and pedagogical implications.

Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education [Online serial], Vol. 7 (3),
pp.217-226.

Dang, H. (2007). The determinants and impact of private tutoring classes in

Vietnam. Economics of Education Review, Vol. 26 (6), pp.683-698.

Darhower, M. (2002). Interactional features of synchronous computer-mediated

communication in the intermediate L2 class: A sociocultural case study. CALICO journal,
pp.249-277.

De Bot K., Ginsberg R. & Kramsch C. (Eds.) (1991). Foreign language research in cross-
cultural perspective. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
 63

DeKeyser, R. (1998). Beyond focus on form: Cognitive perspectives on learning and

practicing second language grammar. In Williams, C. D. J. (Ed.), Focus on form in classroom
second language acquisition pp. 42-63. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Dörnyei, Z. (1998). Motivation in second and foreign language learning. Language

Teaching, Vol. 31, pp.117-135.

Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The Psychology of the Language Learner: Individual Differences in

Second Language Acquisition. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Dörnyei, Z. (2006). Individual differences in second language acquisition. AILA review, Vol.
19 (1), pp.42-68.

Dörnyei, Z. (2009). The L2 motivational self-system. Motivation, language identity and the L2
self, Vol. 36 (3), pp.9-11.

Dörnyei, Z. & Ushioda, E. (2009). Motivation, language identity and the L2 self. Bristol:
Multilingual Matters.

Dörnyei, Z. & Ushioda, E. (2013). Teaching and researching: Motivation. London: Routledge.

Doughty, C. & Williams, J. (2000). Focus on Form in Classroom Second Language

Acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Ehrman, M., Leaver, B. & Oxford, R. (2003). A brief overview of individual differences in
second language learning. System, Vol. 31 (3). pp.313-330.

Elbadawy, A., Ahlburg, D., Levison, D. & Assaad, R. (2009). Private and group tutoring in
Egypt: Where is the gender inequality. In XXVI IUSSP International Population Conference,
Marrakech, Morocco Vol. 27.

Elia, A. (2006). Language learning in tandem via Skype™. The Reading Matrix, Vol. 6 (3),
pp.269-280.

Ellis, R. (1997). Second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

 64

Ellis, R. (2001). Introduction: Investigating Form-Focused Instruction. Language learning,

Vol. 51 (1), pp.1-46.

Ellis, R. Basturkmen, H. & Loewen, S. (2002). Doing focus on form, System, Vol. 30, pp.419-
432.

Gardner, R. (2001). Language Learning Motivation: The Student, the Teacher and the
Researcher. Texas Papers in Foreign Language Education, Vol. 6. pp.1-18.

Gardner, R. & Lambert, W. (1972). Attitudes and Motivation in Second-Language Learning.

Michigan: Newbury House Publishers.

Gass, M. & Mackey, A. (2016). Input, interaction and output in second language acquisition.
In VanPatten, B. and Williams, J. (eds). Theories in Second Language Acquisition. New
York: Routledge. pp.180-206.

Harasim, L. (2012). Learning Theory and Online Technologies. London: Routledge.

Hassan, S. (2014). The Impact of Computer-Mediated Communication Environments on

Foreign Language Learning: A Review of the Literature, World Journal of English Language,
Vol. 4 (1), pp.9-19.

Heller, M. (2010). 15 Language as Resource in the Globalized New Economy. The

handbook of language and globalization, Vol. 58, pp.349.

Helms, S. (2014). Blended/hybrid courses: A review of the literature and recommendations

for instructional designers and educators. Interactive Learning Environments, Vol. 22 (6),
pp.804-810.

Herring, S. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Linguistic, social, and cross-cultural

perspectives. Vol. 39. John Benjamins Publishing.

Herring, S. (2011). Computer-Mediated Conversation: Introduction and Overview.

Language@Internet, Vol .8 (2). Available from
http://www.languageatinternet.org/articles/2011/Herring [Accessed on 31 March 2017].
 65

Hinkel, E. (2011). Handbook of Research in Second Language Teaching and Learning, Vol.
2, Routledge: London.

Italki (2016). Available at: www.italki.com Press Release [email]

Islam, M. (2011). Independent English Learning through the Internet. Journal of Language
Teaching and Research. Vol. 2 (5), pp.1080-1085.

Janghorbagan, R., Roudsari, R. & Taghipour, A. (2014). Skype™ interviewing: The new
generation of online synchronous interview in qualitative research. International Journal on
Quality Studies on Health and Well-being. Available at:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3991833/ [Accessed on 20 March 2017].

Jenks, C. (2009). Getting acquainted in Skype™ casts: Aspects of social organisation in

online chatrooms. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, Vol. 19 (1), pp. 26-46.

Jenkins, J. (2015). Global Englishes. 3rd Edition. London: Routledge.

Kasper, G. & Roever, C. (2005). Pragmatics in second language learning. In Hinkel, E. (ed).
Handbook of Research in Second Language Teaching and Learning. London: Routledge.
pp.317-334.

Kozar, O. (2012). Use of synchronous online tools in private English language teaching in
Russia, Distance Education, Vol. 33 (3) pp.415-420.

Kozar, O. & Sweller, N. (2014). An exploratory study of demographics, goals and

expectations of private online language learners in Russia. System. Vol. 45, pp.39-51.

Krashen, S. (1976). Formal and Informal Linguistic Environments in Language Acquisition

and Language Learning, TESOL Quarterly, Vol. 10 (2), pp.157-168.

Krashen, S. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Oxford:

Pergamon. Available online at:
http://www.sdkrashen.com/content/books/principles_and_practice.pdf [Accessed on 6 March
2017].

Lamb, T. & Reinders, H. (2008). Learner and Teacher Autonomy: Concepts, Realities, and
Responses. (Vol. 1). John Benjamins Publishing.
 66

Lambert, M. (2000). The home study inheritance. In Moore, M & Shin, N. (Eds.) Speaking
personally about distance education foundations of contemporary practice. Pennsylvania:
The American Centre for Study of Distance Education.

Lantolf, J., Thorne, S. & Poehner, M. (2015). Sociocultural Theory and Second Language
Development. In VanPatten, B. & Williams, J. (eds). Theories in second language
acquisition: an introduction. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. pp. 207-226.

Lee, (2013). Skype™ in the Classroom: Options for Language Teaching and Learning.
TESL-EL. Vol. 17 (1).

Lenneberg, E. (1967). Biological foundations of language. New York: Wiley and Sons.

Lightbown, P. (1998). What kind of focus and on which forms? In Doughty, C. and Williams,
J. (eds). Focus on Form in Classroom Second Language Acquisition. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.

Lightbown, P. (2000). Anniversary article. Classroom SLA research and second language
teaching. Applied linguistics, Vol. 21 (4), pp.431-462.

Lightbown, P. & Spada, N. (2013). How Languages Are Learned, fourth edition. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.

Lin, W., Huang, H. & Liou, H. (2013). The effects of text-based SCMC on SLA: A meta-
analysis. Language Learning & Technology, Vol. 17 (2), pp.123-142.

Loewen, S. (2011). Focus on Form. In Hinkel, E. (ed). Handbook of Research in Second

Language Teaching and Learning, Vol. 2. London: Routledge.

Long, M., (1981). Input, interaction and second language acquisition. In Winitz, H. (Ed.),
Native language and foreign acquisition. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 379,
pp.259–278.

Long, M. (1991). Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology. In de

Bot K., Ginsberg R., Kramsch C. (Eds.), Foreign language research in cross-cultural
perspective. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
 67

Long, M., (1996). The Role of the Linguistic Environment in Second Language Acquisition.
In Ritchie, W. and Bhatia, T. (eds.), Handbook of Second Language Acquisition. San Diego:
Academic Press, pp.431-468.

Long, M. (1997). Focus on Form in Task-Based Language Teaching Available at:

http://www.mhhe.com/socscience/foreignlang/top.htm [Accessed on 30 March 2017].

Long, M. & Robinson, P. (1998). Focus on Form: Theory, research and practice. In Doughty,
C. and Williams, J. (eds). Focus on Form in Classroom Second Language Acquisition.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Lynch, T. (1996). Communicating inside and outside the classroom. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.

Mahdi, H. (2014). The Impact of Computer-Mediated Communication Environments on

Foreign Language Learning: A Review of the Literature, World Journal of English Language,
Vol. 4 (1).

MacIntyre, P., Noels, K. & Clément, R., (1997). Biases in self‐ratings of second language
proficiency: The role of language anxiety. Language learning, Vol. 47 (2), pp.265-287.

Mehoke, T. (2017). Italki background information. [email].

Meskill, C. & Anthony, N. (2010). Teaching Languages Online. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.

Meunier, L. (1998). Personality and motivational factors in computer-mediated foreign

language communication (CMFLC). In J. Muyskens (Ed.), New ways of learning and
teaching: Focus on technology and foreign language education, Boston: Heinle & Heinle.

Mitchell, R., Myles, F. & Marsden, E. (2013). Second Language Learning Theories, third
edition. Abingdon: Routledge.

Moloney, R. & Xu, H. (2015). Exploring Innovative Pedagogy in the Teaching and Learning
of Chinese as a Foreign Language. Multilingual Education. Springer: London.

Murphy, L. (2015). Online Language Teaching: The Learner’s Perspective in Developing

Online Language Teaching. New Language Learning and Teaching Environments, pp.45-62.
 68

Negretti, R. (1999). Web-based activities and SLA: A conversation analysis research

approach. Language Learning and Technology, Vol. 3 (1), pp. 75-87.

NIFLAR project (2009-2013). Available at: http://niflar.eu/ [Accessed 4 March 2017]

Norris, J. & Ortega, L. (2000). Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and
quantitative meta-analysis. Language learning, Vol. 50. pp. 417-528.

Nunan, D. 2004. Task-based Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Nunan, D. & Richards, J. (2015). Language Learning Beyond the Classroom. ESL &
Applied Linguistics Professional Series. London: Routledge.

Pappas, C. (2015). The Top eLearning Statistics and Facts For 2015 You Need to Know.
Available at: https://elearningindustry.com/elearning-statistics-and-facts-for-2015. [Accessed
on 30 March 2017].

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants part 1. On the horizon, Vol. 9 (5), pp.1-
6.

Salbego, N. & Tumolo, C. (2015). Skype™ Classes: Teachers and Students’ Perceptions on
Synchronous Online Classes in Relation to Face-to-face Teaching and Learning,
International Journal of Language and Applied Linguistics, Vol. 1 (3), pp. 36-45.

Sauro, S. (2011). SCMC for SLA: A research synthesis. CALICO Journal, Vol. 28, pp. 1-23.

Saville-Troike, M. (2012). Introducing Second Language Acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.

Schleppegrell, M. (1987). The Older Language Learner, ERIC clearinghouse on Languages

and Linguistics, Available at https://www.ericdigests.org/pre-927/older.htm [Accessed 30th
March 2017].

Schmidt, R. (2012). Attention, awareness, and individual differences in language

learning. Perspectives on individual characteristics and foreign language education, Vol. 6.
 69

Shattuck, K. (2014). Assuring Quality in Online Education: Practices and Processes at the
Teaching, Resources and Program Levels. Online Learning and Distance Education. Stylus
Publishing: London.

Sheen, R. (2002). “Focus on Form” and “Focus on Forms”. ELT Journal, Vol. 56 (3). pp.303-
305.

Singleton, D. (2001). Age and second language acquisition. Annual Review of Applied
Linguistics, Vol. 21. pp.77-89.

Singleton, D. (2005). The Critical Period Hypothesis: A coat of many colours. International
Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, Vol. 43 (4). pp.269-285.

Skype (2017). Skype website. Available at: https://www.skype.com/ [Accessed 4 May 2017].

Smith, B. (2005). The Relationship between Negotiated Interaction, Learner Uptake, and
Lexical Acquisition in Task-Based Computer-Mediated Communication. TESOL Quarterly,
Vol. 39 (1), pp. 33-58.

Soler, E. & Jorda, M. (2007). Intercultural Use and Language Learning. London: Springer
Science & Business Media.

Spada, N. (2011). Beyond form-focused instruction: Reflection on past, present and future
research. Language Teaching, Vol. 44, pp. 225-36.

Spada, N. & Lightbown, P. (2008). Form-Focused Instruction: Isolated or Integrated? TESOL

Quarterly, Vol. 42 (2). pp.181-207.

Swain, M. (1993). The output hypothesis: Just speaking and writing aren't enough. Canadian
modern language review, Vol. 50 (1), pp.158-164.

Swain, M. & Lapkin, S. (1995). Problems in output and the cognitive processes they
generate: A step towards second language learning. Applied linguistics, Vol. 16 (3), pp.371-
391.

Swain, M. (2000). The output hypothesis and beyond: Mediating acquisition through
collaborative dialogue. Sociocultural theory and second language learning, Vol. 97.
 70

Terantino, J. (2014). Skype™ Videoconferencing for Less Commonly Taught Languages:

Examining the Effects on Students' Foreign Language Anxiety, Dimension, pp.135-154.
Available at http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1080185.pdf [Accessed 30th March 2017].

Terhune, N. (2016). Language learning going global: linking teachers and learners via
commercial Skype™-based CMC. Computer Assisted Language Learning, Vol. 29 (6),
pp.1071-1089.

Thomas, M. (2009). Handbook of Research on Web 2.0 and Second Language Learning.
ERA Collection. IGI Global: London.

Thornbury, S. (2010). C is for Communicative. Available at:

https://scottthornbury.wordpress.com/2010/08/15/c-is-for-communicative/
[Accessed 2 April 2017].

TILA Project (2013-2015). Available at: http://www.tilaproject.eu/ [Accessed 4 March 2017].

Ushioda, E. (2008). Motivation and good language learners Lessons from Good Language
Learners. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Vol. 4 (3). pp.19-34.

Ushioda, E. (2011). Motivating learners to speak as themselves. In: Murray,

Garold and Gao, Xuesong and Lamb, Terry, (eds.) Identity, Motivation and Autonomy in
Language Learning. Bristol, U.K.: Multilingual Matters, pp.11-24.

Van Lier, L., (2014). Interaction in the language curriculum: Awareness, autonomy and
authenticity. Routledge.

Ventura, A. & Jang, S. (2010). Private tutoring through the internet: Globalization and
offshoring. Asia Pacific Education Review, Vol. 11 (1), pp.59-68.

Vygotksy, L. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Walther, J. (1995). Relational aspects of computer-mediated communication: Experimental

observations over time. Organization science, Vol. 6 (2), pp.186-203.
 71

Walther, J. (2011). Theories of computer mediated communication and interpersonal

relations, In Knapp, M. & Daly, J. (eds.) The Handbook of interpersonal communication,
fourth edition. London: Sage.

Wang, V. (2015). Handbook of Research on Learning Outcomes and Opportunities in the

Digital Age. Advances in Educational Technologies and Instructional Design. IGI Global:
London.

Warschauer, M. (1996). Comparing face-to-face and electronic discussion in the second

language classroom. CALICO journal, Vol. 13, pp.7-26.

Warshaeur, M. & Healey, D. (1998). State of the Art Article: Computers and Language
Learning an Overview. Language Teaching. Cambridge University Press. Vol. 31. pp 57-71.

Weinstein, C. Husman, J. & Dierking, D. (2000). Self-regulation interventions with a focus on

learning strategies. In Dörnyei, Z. (2006) Individual differences in second language
acquisition. AILA review, Vol. 19 (1), pp.42-68.

White, D. & Le Cornu, A. (2011), Visitors and Residents: A new typology for online
engagement. Available at: http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/3171/3049
[Accessed 19 May 2017].

Wildner-Bassett, M. (2005). CMC as Written Conversation: A Critical Social-constructivist

View of Multiple Identities and Cultural Positioning in the L2/C2 Classroom. In Blake, R.
(2013). Brave new digital classroom: Technology and foreign language learning.
Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.

Wu, W. & Marek, M. (2009). The Impact of Teleconferencing with Native English Speakers
on English Learning by Taiwanese Students. International Journal on E-learning, Vol. 8 (1),
pp.107-126.

Yamada, M. (2009). The role of social presence in learner-centred communicative language

learning using synchronous computer-mediated communication: Experimental
study. Computers & Education, Vol. 52 (4), pp.820-833.
 72

Yang, Y., Gamble, J. & Tang, S. (2012). Voice over instant messaging as a tool for
enhancing the oral proficiency and motivation of English‐as‐a‐foreign‐language
learners. British Journal of Educational Technology, Vol. 43 (3), pp.448-464.

Zheng, S., Rosson, M., Shih, P. & Carroll, J. (2015). Understanding Student Motivations,
Behaviours, and Perceptions in MOOCs. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM conference on
computer supported cooperative work & social computing. pp. 1882-1895.

Zheng, Z., Vogelsang, T & Pinkwart, N. (2014). The impact of small learning group
composition on student engagement and success in a MOOC. Proceedings of Educational
Data Mining, Vol. 7.
 73

Appendices

Appendix 1 - Student Online Survey Questionnaire – List of questions

What is your gender? : Male / Female

What is your age?

Are you:
• Living alone
• Living with parents
• Living with a partner or married
• Living with children - single parent
• Other: _____________

What is your nationality?

What is your highest level of education?

• School • Postgraduate
• University • Other: _____________

What do you think is your English level right now?

• A2 - Beginner • C1 - Advanced
• B1 - Intermediate • C2 - Upper Advanced / Fluent
• B2 - Upper Intermediate

Why are you studying English?

• For work • As a hobby
• To travel • To live in another country
• For study • Other: _____________

Are you studying for an English exam? (e.g. IELTS, PET, FCE, CAE, TOEFL etc.) :Yes / No
 74

What do you think of online lessons? : Bad to Excellent (scale of 1 to 5)

How are individual online lessons different to traditional classroom lessons?

Open answer: ______________________________________________________

Which of these ways to learn English have you already tried before taking online lessons? *
(multiple options allowed)
• A group course in the local area near to my home.
• Private individual lessons with someone who lives in the local area, near to my home.
• An online course that does not give you direct teacher contact.
• Group online lessons.
• Other: _____________

How many teachers have you tried / taken lessons with online?
• Just 1 • 3
• 2 • 4 or more

Which type of lessons do you prefer?

Individual / Group

Which of these factors do you feel is the TOP reason you take lessons online?
• Flexibility
• Price
• Comfort (lessons where you want to take them, at home / at work etc.)
• Privacy (the lessons are just for you)
• Other: _____________

What is the TOP problem for you with traditional classroom-based courses?
• The times are not flexible.
• I have to travel to and from the class.
• I don't get individual attention.
• They are expensive.
• Other: _____________
 75

After taking lessons online, what is the TOP thing you hope to be able to do in the future?
• Be more confident when you speak in English
• Communicate better.
• Understand more.
• Get to know more people who speak English.
• Study more, such as take more lessons, another course or exam.
• Other: _____________

How long have you taken lessons online?

• 1-3 months • 6-9 months
• 3-6 months • A year or more

How many lessons do you take in a week?

• Less than 1 • 3
• 1 • 4 or more
• 2

How long are your lessons?

• 30 minutes each • 60 minutes each
• 45 minutes each • 90 minutes or more each

If you could NOT take online lessons which one of the following would you do instead?
• Attend a group class locally
• Take private lessons locally
• Study alone
• Not study English
• Other: _____________

Which of these things makes individual online lessons special for you?
• You can select multiple options.
• Speaking with a teacher 1-to-1
• Having contact with a native speaker.
• The lesson content is dedicated to your needs
• You can change the time, or day of the lessons, stop or take more when you want
• Other: _____________
 76

How did you decide to start taking online lessons?

• A friend recommended them to me
• I searched on the internet for ways to learn English
• I saw an advertisement.
• Other: ____________

Based on your online learning experience, will you return to traditional classroom lessons in
the future?
Yes / No / Undecided
 77

Appendix 2 - Student Online Survey - Quantitative Raw Data Results

Follow the link to view the Excel spreadsheet with all the survey data:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/a0ntyualfelo66i/Student%20Online%20Lesson%20Survey.xlsx?
dl=0
 78

Appendix 3 - Student Interviews - Qualitative Results

1 Student A - Interview – Spoken Q&A session

2
3 1. Why do mature students - aged 30+ (so post-graduate/family age) - select individual and
4 private bespoke computer assisted language learning (CALL) in the form of e-learning /
5 synchronous video and audio computer mediated communication (SCMC) lessons (via
6 Skype™ or Google Hangouts™) as a means to improve their English proficiency?
7
8 So… um… first of all because… er… as mature students… um… am as mature er…
9 individuals… er…already progressing in their careers, we have reached… I I I can, I can speak
10 in my personal… erm… you know… my personal opinion… I have reached certain level of
11 English proficiency, er… that… er… makes me… er… somehow confident in my daily…
12 er…work and er… communication with people, but, er… and er… I... I as many people who
13 rely on context meaning that a lot of mistakes er… small things…er… I keep on repeating, not
14 being aware of them and… and the people I talk er… get my er… meaning er… what I wanted
15 to say from the context, so to to cherry pick those small details it’s really important to really go
16 deeply into erm… now I’m like… you know…it really go deeply into er… into into that. Also as
17 er… people who progress in their careers I’m time limited, so I don’t have time for… er… some
18 more general classes. Er… that’s two… so these... these are these are two reasons. The third
19 reason is for me... er… it’s not online or… erm… er… somebody whom I would meet in person
20 it’s just finding the right person, and it’s not because I’m talking to you but it’s really, I mean
21 I’ve had so many teachers in my life. Some were ok, you know and er never but it’s… finding
22 the person who will empower you to... to want, you know, to... progress further, you know.
23
24 2. What are the factors which bring you to improve your English at this time in your lives?
25
26 Erm...right now because it’s really important for my career and I’m er… writing in English so I
27 really need to excel and to achieve the level of mis, the most, the highest level of mistake-free
28 writing and speaking as… as much as I can.
29
30 3. Is preparation for specific contexts in use a driving motivator for these lessons?
31
32 Well, I’m… I’m looking for this form of the most advanced… er… er… vocabulary. The problem
33 is I am the problem. I am not… er… er… committed enough I I believe and erm… yeah that’s
34 it.
35
 79

36 4. Have new ways to use technology for language learning created, or simply satisfied, this
37 need to learn English now?
38
39 Right it’s brilliant. It’s absolutely brilliant. I mean technology has empowered us to... I mean sit
40 in Dubai and in Rome and to… to talk to each other once, like we are sitting next to each other.
41 That’s one but also in, in my daily task, I mean, Google is, in just for research basis and
42 checking and all, the websites that you send me, like collocations etc., it’s, it has absolutely
43 contributed to… learning in some many ways, you know.
44
45 But does that mean, created or satisfied, or is it a bit of both? Did you have this need before
46 and then technology has fulfilled it, or have you …
47
48 Yeah, yeah… yeah yeah yeah, both, I would say both. I would say that it is both for satisfied
49 because… those who don’t want to learn, technology it won’t even interest them, you know,
50 they will… won’t find that avenue. So, it satisfied what I initially obviously had since I’m taking,
51 I’ve…I’ve taken this part in my life, but also because then it exposes you to so many options
52 then it creates more curiosity… erm… more erm… er… gets you addicted to progress er…
53 that... that you experience and that... that you feel… er… in your writing, in your speaking…
54 er… and it gets you connected to people, I mean, then… you know like... like these free
55 lessons that you’re organising, er… so it works on so many levels.
56
57 Follow-up – written responses from the student (1 week later)
58
59 1. If you were telling a friend about your experience with online lessons, what would you say
60 to them?
61
62 I would say that it is about convenience to start with. You don;t loose time meeting with the
63 professor, you don;t sit in somebody's house, but in the comfort of your own home. For
64 smokers, this is an ideal option. Also, technology has enabled me to have trial lessons with
65 different teachers, assessing various teaching styles, whether somebody's personality and
66 teaching approach suits me, and from all parts of the world. Imagine if I had to travel so much
67 (around the globe) just for a class :) Also I like online lessons because they
68 eliminate awkwardness which always exists when you are sitting too close to somebody who
69 is a stranger, at the beginning at least.
70
71 2. If you had to change anything about your online lessons, what would that be.
72
 80

73 I wouldn't change anything. It's great.

74
75 3. Do you have anything more you want to say, good or bad, about your experience with
76 online lessons?
77
78 Well, we've all experienced the situations of loosing the Internet connection in the middle of
79 the class, but that's okay, no big deal. Bad experiences are not related to technology, but to a
80 human factor - arrogant and often rude teachers, who look down on you, and so on; also. It's
81 all about people, forever and ever, not technology.
 81

1 Student B - Interview – Spoken Q&A session

2
3 1. Why do mature students - aged 30+ (so post-graduate/family age) - select individual and
4 private bespoke computer assisted language learning (CALL) in the form of e-learning /
5 synchronous video and audio computer mediated communication (SCMC) lessons (via
6 Skype™ or Google Hangouts™) as a means to improve their English proficiency?
7
8 Because it is, it has multiple benefits, it is easy to organise, it is affordable, and it has, um… a
9 lot of choices.
10
11 Ok, like what? What do you mean ‘choices’?
12
13 Choices in terms of… um… teachers from different countries, so for example, from Canada,
14 or from the States, or from Great Britain.
15
16 2. What are the factors which bring you to improve your English at this time in your lives?
17
18 Well, for… for me it was obviously because I, er… de... er… decided to go abroad to an
19 English-speaking country, so it um… [cough – ‘excuse me’] … I was also preparing um… for…
20 um… Canadian um… immigration. So therefore, I was preparing for the Canadian immigration
21 process basically.
22
23 3. Is preparation for specific contexts in use a driving motivator for these lessons?
24
25 One very important aspect for me is at work um… writing… um… technical specifications. So,
26 it’s um… it’s technical concepts, it’s... it’s technical reports, it’s technical specifications, um…
27 and it goes even in the direction of contracts.
28
29 4. Have new ways to use technology for language learning created, or simply satisfied, this
30 need to learn English now?
31
32 Well that’s a, that’s a good question. I think it’s… it’s mainly the English itself, so um… basically
33 there was always technology in form maybe that you have like um… videos in English, or…
34 or um… yeah, other content that you get, other English content you… you would get over via
35 technology, like internet sites and download services and tools and whatnot but um… it didn’t
36 that much, so I just, it is really though, like the interest in English that makes you look for the
 82

37 technology I believe. So, do you know I… I’ve been, for example, watching English movies for
38 a long time, and I feel it didn’t improve my English.
39
40 Follow-up – written responses from the student (1 week later)
41
42 1. If you were telling a friend about your experience with online lessons, what would you say
43 to them?
44
45 I would recommend online lessons because there is a great selection of teachers and classes
46 can be scheduled easily and often on short notice. Considering it is a one-on-one lesson,
47 prices are often very affordable.
48
49 2. If you had to change anything about your online lessons, what would that be.
50
51 Internet bandwidth is often an issue. It is amazing that one can have a video chat with
52 somebody on the other side of the world, but there is room for improvement.
53
54 3. Do you have anything more you want to say, good or bad, about your experience with
55 online lessons?
56
57 In conclusion, I would recommend online classes and platforms such as iTalki
 83

1 Student C - Interview – Spoken Q&A session

2
3 1. Why do mature students - aged 30+ (so post-graduate/family age) - select individual and
4 private bespoke computer assisted language learning (CALL) in the form of e-learning /
5 synchronous video and audio computer mediated communication (SCMC) lessons (via
6 Skype™ or Google Hangouts™) as a means to improve their English proficiency?
7
8 Well, because I’ve everything, I’ve tried er… a class er… Eng- English class and um… hm…
9 it’s uh… difficult to butt in when 15 people are in a classroom and the teacher only um… can
10 pay attention for a…I think a couple of students at a time, so... uh… you… and most of
11 activities is divided by pairs and taking turns to uh… have a conversation and it’s er… easy to
12 pick up er… not only to fossilize your own mistake but to just er… pick up er… the other people
13 mistakes and it’s er… er.. I think it’s a main disadvantage of having a class er... with a… in a
14 group but when you study individually face-to-face er… doesn’t matter whether it’s online
15 course or just er… um… conventional course with er… when you travel to some place or even
16 teacher come to you, comes to your place um… so er… and it’s saves, it saves time, it saves
17 it’s cheaper and it’s er… for your own need, so it’s er… as you said, it’s bespoke, tailor made
18 and you er… um… er… for you the full attention of the teacher on you.
19
20 2. What are the factors which bring you to improve your English at this time in your lives?
21
22 Hm… duh… it... it have started almost 8 years ago, er… when er… I don’t think I was aware
23 that er… er… I need English, I just er… I was influenced by other people, by my circumstance,
24 people at the time started talking about on their own of studying languages in to get some
25 prospects, scope, at work and um… further studying, so I just er… I… this er… er… attitude
26 er… rubbed on me, yeah so, I just er… tried myself, I… I went… er… enrolled a course, and
27 then I just, the English, I fell in love with this language so and I... I… after that some point and
28 I can’t say at what, at when that point was but at some point, I thought that it’s definitely the
29 language I want to speak fluently. I want to er… meet people and practice English and so I’m
30 here.
31
32 3. Is preparation for specific contexts in use a driving motivator for these lessons?
33
34 Yes, er… during er… travelling er… during that, at that time I brought, I feel that er… I needed
35 to er… maybe to brush up on my language but it’s er… er… happens naturally I mean, I d-
36 don’t specifically prepare myself for travelling abroad but er… at that time I feel especially this
 84

37 need of er… er… studying English and er… it’s a good way to… er… to check, er… to… er…
38 yeah… er… to examine your knowledge, because you’re out and er… in the open and you
39 need something and you, and it’s not only about English but… but your own ability to um… to
40 hold yourself in some different situation er… for example to get…to have approach some
41 people you just um… er… spend more time prepare for er… asking question whether it’s too
42 formal or informal way that I should use er… this er… whether I choose that phrasal verbs or
43 I wouldn’t be understood.
44
45 4. Have new ways to use technology for language learning created, or simply satisfied, this
46 need to learn English now?
47
48 Oh almost entirely er… because er… we not only have Skype, er… we can use some other
49 resources er… like er… some videos. We can share screens, we can go er… on
50 thesaurus.com and to check on some synonyms and I can even check myself er… er… of the
51 cuff, I mean, immediately er… and to Google it, and er… I think er… er… I don’t use er… all
52 resources but I use Anki, the repetition er… Wordsworth edition resource which helps, helps
53 you to learn some vocabulary, erm… and er… I, yeah, I suppose I don’t use er… er… the full,
54 all this resources but what I have tools, I have at hand, is definitely facilitate more learning.
55
56 Follow-up – written responses from the student (1 week later)
57
58 1. If you were telling a friend about your experience with online lessons, what would you say
59 to them?
60
61 Apart from all I've already mentioned before about studying online (convenience, a bespoke
62 study plan, fees, etc.), I'd tell my friend that he's spoiled for choice going online. He would
63 never find so many teachers/tutors in his area, as opposed to available on the Internet. It's
64 very important not only to be assisted by an experienced teacher, but the one you trust and
65 feel comfortable with.
66
67 2. If you had to change anything about your online lessons, what would that be.
68
69 Maybe it would be a log of vocabulary we've already learnt or come across in the lessons. It
70 could be a notepad file that we'd open from time to time and rehearse vocabulary, as frequent
71 repetition is probably the best way to remember.
72
 85

73 3. Do you have anything more you want to say, good or bad, about your experience with
74 online lessons?
75 I can give only positive feedback on online lessons. Only one thing probably, people who
76 seeks to study online and their language at pre-intermediate level yet can fall into the trap of
77 finding a tutor with a little qualification or with no at all. It would take them a while to cotton on
78 to it. Having said that, this can be avoided by using trusted sources like Italki.
 86

1 Student D - Interview – Spoken Q&A session

2
3 1. Why do mature students - aged 30+ (so post-graduate/family age) - select individual and
4 private bespoke computer assisted language learning (CALL) in the form of e-learning /
5 synchronous video and audio computer mediated communication (SCMC) lessons (via
6 Skype™ or Google Hangouts™) as a means to improve their English proficiency?
7
8 The first thing is I’m more flexible and the next thing I can… I can select from a lot of teachers
9 online, I can… try um… there affects to me um… speak me with the same language and er…
10 can I speak about my um… my… my work, my interests… and um… in addition I’m a… I’m a
11 woman I often work in front of the computer and I think this a technique for the next years and
12 it’s very interesting because I also can select a teacher from England, or from New Zealand
13 or from America and it’s… it’s so interesting to… to meet different teachers but my problem is
14 more I… um… I do not um… I do not learn regularly. I should speak every week… and yes…
15 this is my problem, I have to pay more lessons my… my speaking, it should more important
16 in my schedule. Erm… I think that the discussion in… in the internet on Facebook or on the
17 website is um… when you write something for private it’s ok you can make mistakes but when
18 you write for a big company or event for international participants, it had, it has to… to look
19 professional.
20
21 2. What are the factors which bring you to improve your English at this time in your lives?
22
23 Yes, I always was working on my English. Um… in the school I learned Russian because I’m
24 from East Germany and after the school I worked in um… computer company and I had to
25 learn English, I tried it with some um… courses um… in the… in a school, normally school
26 and after that I was for two weeks in England but it’s a too short a time to learn a language
27 and after that I tried always with reading and listen to… and always a little bit not… not too…
28 to focus and… this is a problem I explained to you, I should more focus to learn and I have
29 the possibilities today. Online I can manage my time, but I take it too easy, and then I’m angry
30 about me, that I’m not able to speak, in a good way to other people in English on the Ski
31 Marathon there are a lot of Russians and Norways, and um… Finland…
32
33 Yeah, Finnish, Finnish people, people from Finland.
34
35 … and I’m a little bit ‘can you help me with this’ and ‘can you explain me this’… no. It works
36 but I was not satisfied.
 87

37 3. Is preparation for specific contexts in use a driving motivator for these lessons?
38
39 Yes, as you know it is important for me for our events. I have to speak er… about events and
40 er… about the work around the events and before the events for example for sponsorship I
41 talk with I don’t like any more, and um… other very important I recognise that last er… days I
42 have to make interviews in English, to ask people about their experiences in English and…
43 yeah and… this was good I can speak with you about this topics and er… you always
44 interested in…
45
46 Yeah, definitely.
47
48 … would discuss with me and you had some advices and um… sometimes it interesting to
49 speak with somebody his outside of this mess because when I am inside the business also
50 with other peoples we always look in this direction and not enough er… in the… in the wide.
51
52 4. Have new ways to use technology for language learning created, or simply satisfied, this
53 need to learn English now?
54
55 Oh, I think in my case it’s both. I have to learn English because of the techno… technology…
56 technology, yes, and on the side the technology makes it possible to learn in this way I can
57 learn today… and sometimes I had to go to school or to a private teacher and today I can
58 learn with the technology.
59
60 Follow-up – written responses from the student (1 week later)
61
62 1. If you were telling a friend about your experience with online lessons, what would you say
63 to them?
64
65 While taking Online Lessons I can select the time and the teacher. In the chat I can see
66 corrections of my teacher und save them for later. All this is more flexible than in a normal
67 school class. In addition I can discuss topics of my interest and save time for travelling to a
68 class room.
69
70 2. If you had to change anything about your online lessons, what would that be.
71
72 What would I do? I don't know. You are always flexible and also interested in a lot of things. I
73 enjoy the lessons. I should changes something ... book more regular :-)
 88

74 3. Do you have anything more you want to say, good or bad, about your experience with
75 online lessons?
76
77 I think the next years this offers will increase and more and more people will go this way for
78 learning languages. Sometimes the online connections are not so good but the next years
79 also this will change
 89

1 Student E - Interview – Spoken Q&A session

2
3 1. Why do mature students - aged 30+ (so post-graduate/family age) - select individual and
4 private bespoke computer assisted language learning (CALL) in the form of e-learning /
5 synchronous video and audio computer mediated communication (SCMC) lessons (via
6 Skype™ or Google Hangouts™) as a means to improve their English proficiency?
7
8 To have very targeted classes, erm… to be followed just by one person so I think it’s er… I
9 have thought and I am convinced that it helped me to improve my English better than when I
10 was in a group. You have better opportunity to speak and I think when you are not living in an
11 English country, you know that to-to be good in English it’s important to practice English
12 therefore I have already, I have before been in a group at the University. It was good as the
13 teacher was really nice, he’s got the CELTA, he’s got all these kinds of teaching methods but
14 we were a group of 24, so… even if he tried to make everybody speak at least once, once is
15 not, is not enough I think. And it’s more flexible, er… now that I have a kid I save time because
16 I have no driving or no having to-to take the bus to go somewhere… erm… it is for all these
17 reasons I’ve chosen online lessons. And being online lessons, I’ve already done one-to-one
18 lessons with a physical person, er… but it’s less flexible than online lessons, and because we
19 have Skypes and the video I don’t catch… be with the same person in the same room, it is
20 exactly the same, because I see your face, I see your facial expression, so I know how to react
21 or there is an interaction between the two of us.
22
23 2. What are the factors which bring you to improve your English at this time in your lives?
24
25 Erm… in the future I couldn’t because of my job because I was leaving home at 7 and going
26 back it was 9 o’clock in the evening so I didn’t have time and-and on Saturday… at the
27 weekend I like to relax a bit. Erm… the 2 years before I have taken English lessons, but not
28 online because I didn’t know that you could, that-that… er... that it exists… I did not know
29 about italki. I have known italki with er… it was er… er… a pensioner guy who was taking
30 English lessons at the University and er… er… the first year was great because we had a very
31 good teacher, the second year was er… bad. It’s not that she wasn;t good but that she didn’t
32 know how to teah people so all the classes were really boring, and after 2 hours I was lost and
33 er… she wasn’t good to explain grammar point or even vocabulary or anything which you don’t
34 understand do I get confused each time I-I am, I… um… I finished classes with her, I get
35 completely confused when I get home so I say there is no point and this guy told me about
36 italki so I try once. I exited during 2 or 3 months and then I, then I… I’ve decided to-to have a
 90

37 go, and I find you and I’m really happy with it. If I had known about this before I would have
38 start 2 years ago just with online lessons and I think my project will have er… er… um… I will
39 have achieved my goal, I think, before.
40
41 3. Is preparation for specific contexts in use a driving motivator for these lessons?
42
43 Yes, I think so, because altogether I have got several different projects in my mind and the
44 first ones to be a teacher, so I try to find a position there, a permanent one and some temporary
45 one. Then when Cami will grow up I will have more time for myself and I want to study er…
46 legal English, erm… maybe to use it as a translator. So, I think it-it is a, it’s difficult in France
47 I think to find er… somebody who specialise in legal English so erm… by using the internet
48 and all the different platform that offers online course I think I can find, I have more opportunity
49 to find a teacher.
50
51 4. Have new ways to use technology for language learning created, or simply satisfied, this
52 need to learn English now?
53
54 For me it’s always working like this, I need something and I… and I go to look for what I-I need.
55 Er… It’s like for marketing. I’m not receptive to marketing, at all. If I don’t need a product I’m
56 not going to buy the product. So, it’s the same. I have a need so I look how I will er… fulfil this
57 need.
58
59 Follow-up – written responses from the student (1 week later)
60
61 1. If you were telling a friend about your experience with online lessons, what would you say
62 to them?
63
64 Go for it. It is convenient, flexible and easy to book. You also save time, have a wide choice
65 of fully qualified native speaker and focus on exactly the type of English you need. In addition,
66 you receive quite individual attention from your teacher. As for the cost, you have very few
67 quality things for free now. In my point of view, it is a budget but an affordable one. In any
68 case, I find that it’s worth it.
69
70 2. If you had to change anything about your online lessons, what would that be.
71
72 I would not say the same with others teachers. I am still desperately looking for an engaging
73 and efficient speaking lesson online, which I have not found yet. Most of the speaking lessons
 91

74 are based on a text or a video. You look for the vocabulary than you discuss the topic. It is
75 fine to improve the fluency and improve your confidence. On the other hand, it seems to me
76 that it has not help me to learn and reuse vocabulary, typical phrases that native speakers use
77 to debate, in their everyday speaking speech.
78
79 3. Do you have anything more you want to say, good or bad, about your experience with
80 online lessons?
81
82 Through online lesson, I have found a very dynamic way of learning language and I would not
83 go back to another way of learning. I am fully satisfied
 92

1 Student F - Interview – Spoken Q&A session

2
3 1. Why do mature students - aged 30+ (so post-graduate/family age) - select individual and
4 private bespoke computer assisted language learning (CALL) in the form of e-learning /
5 synchronous video and audio computer mediated communication (SCMC) lessons (via
6 Skype™ or Google Hangouts™) as a means to improve their English proficiency?
7
8 The first reason is er… it’s er… you spend time less when you use online version because
9 you don’t spend time to travel to your teacher… er… you don’t spend time to erm… I don’t
10 know how to say erm… er to…. er… pre-lesson, so like coffee and tea and…. it’s not bad but
11 it’s always spend your time when you are come to school and the second one is erm… you
12 er… have more choice, when you er… when you try to find er… your teacher er… you have
13 so many er… possibilities when you use online. For example, when I lived in Moscow it’s really
14 hard to find a-a teacher er… I mean native speaker. It’s a lot of teacher who speaks Russian
15 and English worse but it’s really hard to find somebody who er… was native speaker, and it’s
16 more more less than you do it online. Erm… is the second one erm….
17 The third I think is about money. It’s always my-my experience in Moscow, it was really
18 expensive er… to get er… studies with native speaker er… in Moscow, er… and it’s really
19 hard to erm… to match our schedules, and it’s er… more useful and more comfortable to do
20 online.
21
22 2. What are the factors which bring you to improve your English at this time in your lives?
23
24 I tried to improve my, my English er… when I lied in Moscow firstly because I need... needed
25 to use it in my everyday job but er… when I moved to Netherlands it’s necessary, because I
26 can’t to er… work here on Russian so, er… the-the main reason is to find a job. And the
27 second reason, of course, is erm.. is more easy to travel because the er… the… I think it’s
28 common language is English right now and it er… it’s better to understand it’s er…more
29 comfortable to you to come to hotel and to er… hear excursion on English because er… not
30 always in museums for example you er... can find on Russian audio guide for example but it’s
31 always on English.
32
33 3. Is preparation for specific contexts in use a driving motivator for these lessons?
34
35 All about my life er… the first of all is connected with medicine because you need to go to the
36 doctor and you need to er… ready to explain... what with you and what is not so good… and
 93

37 the second one is the study process of my small daughter because in the Netherlands children
38 are er… start to go to the school at 4 years old and she’s now 3 years and 3 months so er…
39 next year er… we need to join to school and of course I need er.. my English for this process.
40 It’s er… maybe it’s erm… not so important but it’s er… you need it er… every day to... to go
41 to the shop and to ask something, you need to read the news on English of course and er…
42 the last one of course I-I try… I er… I will try to find a job here and er… I er… right now I need
43 to-to er… choose in which erm… profession… profession I can join in here so I need too my
44 Business English according this profession. Business English in general of course and erm...
45 across near by my profession at all.
46
47 4. Have new ways to use technology for language learning created, or simply satisfied, this
48 need to learn English now?
49
50 Erm… it’s not about only satisfaction it’s er… always about to… um… er… the technologies
51 push you to study English and I think it’s good, because er… er… you erm… for example, see
52 er… on the morning on your telephone and you er… saw the er… you-you will have the lesson
53 with Rachel today… and it’s your day’s motivation.
54
55 Ah, right ok, so it gives you a little prod!
56
57 Yeah, yeah… yeah!
58
59 Follow-up – written responses from the student (1 week later)
60
61 1. If you were telling a friend about your experience with online lessons, what would you say
62 to them?
63
64 The first of all, it is safe the time. For ex., don't need to spend it to move to courses, and it is
65 about from 20 min to 1 hour nearby my area. The second point is wider range of teachers and
66 native speakers. It is possibility to choose accent or more comfortable time and subject for a
67 lesson. The third one is about widening of horizons. To contact different people in different
68 countries give a chance to join other traditions, cultures and et. Good example is our talking
69 of using the words subordinates and staff) Sometimes it is cheaper way to find native speakers
70 (not for every country, but for Russia it is really advantage). Fourthly, you could find new
71 friends or interesting people.
72
73 2. If you had to change anything about your online lessons, what would that be.
 94

74 I think I can't affect it) But if the skype connection was more stable it would be perfect.
75
76 3. Do you have anything more you want to say, good or bad, about your experience with
77 online lessons?
78
79 The main ideas are subscribed in the point 1. Online studying is not only about online lessons
80 it is also using different online free or not free courses, reading news, watching different
81 videos. it is alternative. If something doesn't fit you, you will change it and move on.
 95

1 Student G - Interview – Spoken Q&A session

2
3 1. Why do mature students - aged 30+ (so post-graduate/family age) - select individual and
4 private bespoke computer assisted language learning (CALL) in the form of e-learning /
5 synchronous video and audio computer mediated communication (SCMC) lessons (via
6 Skype™ or Google Hangouts™) as a means to improve their English proficiency?
7
8 It’s erm… the first erm… reason is erm… that I’m flexible, it’s erm.. very good for me erm… in
9 the evening or Saturday, Sunday. I prefer at the moment the Sunday morning, and erm… this
10 is very good for me, but it’s not in from Monday to Friday, and erm… this is the first aspect
11 and the other aspect is I’m erm… I had er… I have… I had a little experience with er… erm...
12 evening school, in my home town and the problem was we-we were in a big class, say 50
13 persons and in-in the front was the teacher, and erm… it… only the same erm… experience
14 for me. You have in the… in the class a persons erm… this intermediate stage, and er…I was
15 a beginner so and the same persons in there did the all lessons and erm… all the questions
16 answered the … answered the questions and erm… this was not a confidence for me and
17 erm… it was erm… it was a feeling from erm… I’m too old, er… stupid… I’m… and erm… so
18 erm… normally erm… it is so that you have a er… you have a test in er… before and then you
19 can see I’m a beginner or I’m intermediate or I’m ok, one or 2, B1… and I talked with this
20 person from the evening schools and he said to me his experience is that many English
21 schools erm… or many English er… pupil… pupils?
22
23 Pupils, yeah
24
25 …pupils… are wrong in this class… why… they are better… she she…. erm… she are
26 better… so and er… she started in the beginner class and this erm… this is wrong… they
27 erm.. to start in the intermediate class… but they do it not… so… and erm… so the class is
28 this better pupils and this erm… bad pupils…. bad… and so this was a-a… this was not a
29 convenient experience for me and er… atmosphere. So, I started erm… I think twice or three
30 times and erm… so I was in different classes but er… always the same experience… so and
31 I did an interrupt and I was learning with this internet tool from erm… Link Q… the name from
32 this… this is a… erm… tool from... from a man from Canada and this was the start for me to
33 learn in erm… this-this internet.
34
35 So, you were one of the first!
36
 96

37 This is me, yeah… and for four… two years I started this-this in my job… a little bit English
38 contact to other colleagues and so I have private lessons in Hanover, but it’s very expensive
39 and erm… yeah this, I think it was erm… the wrong teacher for me… and so I erm… from Link
40 Q I heard a podcast, a story from a man from Australia and he erm… talked about er… Italki
41 and so this was the door opened for me and I have had a look of you.
42
43 2. What are the factors which bring you to improve your English at this time in your lives?
44
45 At the… the kick off was through my er… new job for-for 2 years ago and er this was the start
46 for me erm… to do er… a little bit for-for me and for my convenience to speak to understand
47 English better, so this was the kick-off for me. So… at the moment it’s er… it’s a hobby.
48
49 3. Is preparation for specific contexts in use a driving motivator for these lessons?
50
51 Erm… no it’s not economics or medicine or other things. Erm… I talk mostly time about the
52 news in er… in er… yeah what-what is actual in the... in the world, and er… every wekk I talk
53 with my-my contact, this is my English teacher from Australia and we, yeah… I-I search topics
54 for-for Sunday and we talk about, and this is er… koala bears or it’s-it’s er… a drone… a drone
55 in Dubai… or it’s er… windsurfing. Last week we talk about windsurfing and walking, hiking
56 and er… bars in-in near from me or music.
57
58 4. Have new ways to use technology for language learning created, or simply satisfied, this
59 need to learn English now?
60
61 Erm… yeah I was er… the aim for me is was the target I should speak with other peoples all
62 over the world, and convenience, so this is er… that I can’t write words and my vocabulary is
63 a little bit erm… bigger and so yeah… I am… I’m relaxing speaking English with the other side.
64
65 Follow-up – written responses from the student (1 week later)
66
67 1. If you were telling a friend about your experience with online lessons, what would you say
68 to them?
69
70 I would tell him, that online lessons having several advantage.
71 - you can talk with different teacher and you can choose a native speaker.
72 - you can book a lesson to any time, which is good for you (maybe midnight in your timezone).
73 You will have time for all like family, job, learning.
 97

74 - the timeframe for a lesson is flexibel, 30minutes or 1hour.....

75 - it's convenient, because you must not going to a school or place and you could talk in jogging
76 trousers if you like.
77 - for every lesson you can choose the topic, like conversation, grammar or develop your
78 weakest habit.
79
80 2. If you had to change anything about your online lessons, what would that be.
81
82 In further lesson I want more focus, that my teacher help me to speaking confidence. I guess
83 it's better to have a shorter lesson about 30minutes, because 60minutes is sometimes very
84 heavy.
85
86 3. Do you have anything more you want to say, good or bad, about your experience with
87 online lessons?
88
89 See my answer to question one.
 98

1 Student H - Interview – Spoken Q&A session

2
3 1. Why do mature students - aged 30+ (so post-graduate/family age) - select individual and
4 private bespoke computer assisted language learning (CALL) in the form of e-learning /
5 synchronous video and audio computer mediated communication (SCMC) lessons (via
6 Skype™ or Google Hangouts™) as a means to improve their English proficiency?
7
8 Er… I think er… good communication skills er… with my teacher, erm… it’s true. It’s erm…
9 intuition er… choose. I think… because er… I-I see comfortable er… er… speakers against
10 me. Not against… direction?
11
12 In front of me.
13
14 In front of me yes, and friendly… friendly, open communicate, yes.
15
16 2. What are the factors which bring you to improve your English at this time in your lives?
17
18 Because erm… I will plan to change my job and I understood that for me we need to know
19 English.
20
21 3. Is preparation for specific contexts in use a driving motivator for these lessons?
22
23 After 2 years, for me more interesting own English, when-when I start er… we need to
24 Business English. Er… now I-I understood that if er… I finish my work in international company
25 er… I er… will follow er… education English.
26
27 4. Have new ways to use technology for language learning created, or simply satisfied, this
28 need to learn English now?
29
30 It depend what include in this words because er… you use different types… formats er… for
31 writing, er… our lessons and this is technology very, very like and erm…. interesting. It… if
32 this include I can er… transfer a little words, it’s comfortable because maybe it’s er… more
33 er… faster first. Second, this is erm… erm… more erm… confident er… more confident if, for
34 example, you are explain me translate this mean… mean?
35
36 Meaning yeah.
 99

Appendix 4 - Teacher Interviews - Qualitative Results

1 Teacher A - Interview – Spoken Q&A session

2
3 1. What would you say is your average student profile?
4
5 Sure, well most of my students are Russians, er… and most of them are planning on
6 emigrating to Australia, so yeah… erm… Generally, they’re… they’re in their kind of… mid to
7 late 20s, erm… most of them are working in IT, erm… yeah… that’s the… the typical sort of
8 profile from most of my students so, probably, I would say about 50% of my students er… are,
9 yeah… fit that profile er… so, then, yeah… the… the second probably most popular country
10 would be China, wh-where my students come from. I guess part of it is because of the time-
11 zone where I work. Right now, it’s six thirty at night in Russia, so yeah, for-for most people, it
12 suits them to come home from work and be able to do lessons at this time, erm… So, yeah…
13 the second group in China. Probably the third group that I teach are actually in Australia, er…
14 generally yeah… immigrants that have moved to Australia, and either are… needing to do the
15 IELTS exam to get th-their permanent residency visa or I get quite a lot of students as well,
16 who moved to Australia and then discover that they... they really can’t understand Australian
17 English, and so they need help with that.
18
19 2. What is your opinion of the experience of working online as a teacher?
20
21 Erm… so yeah… I guess the benefits are that I can choose my own hours, erm… yeah, I
22 can… I can work from home, I don’t need to travel to go anywhere, as long as I’ve got an
23 internet connection and yeah… if... if I-I need, if I go away or whatever and for some reason I
24 do need to still teach I can do it from… from anywhere in the world so those are the big
25 advantages of it I guess from my perspective. Teaching in Thailand is not that easy in the
26 schools, er… the children tend to be a bit unruly and wild, and yeah… teaching… teaching 40
27 of them in a class is not an easy slog, so…
 100

28 3. Did you receive any training for teaching online?

29
30 Hmm… there was a little bit of er… it was mentioned… er… but – but… yeah... it was
31 mentioned as a possibility when I… when I did a TESOL certificate, but it really, back then it
32 wasn’t as popular as it is now, like there is nowadays there’s online schools opening up evey
33 day it seems, it really is becoming much more popular, so yeah… no… I didn’t really get any
34 specific training, it was… you know…basically I – I worked out what my students wanted and...
35 and… yeah, kind of my… my programme evolved from their needs.
 101

1 Teacher B - Interview – Spoken Q&A session

2
3 1. What would you say is your average student profile?
4
5 I have in particular a lot of Russians, er… Russians and Ukrainians, Belarusians, just ex-
6 Soviet Union kind of places, but only the European parts. Erm… after them come Brazilians.
7 I have a fair number of Brazilians, a few less now that I’m not… I’m not living in Canada at the
8 moment, but when I… when I was in Canada I had a lot of Brazilians indeed, erm… and then
9 after that, a few... a few people... you know… scattered around the world, erm… a couple of
10 people from France, a couple of people from China, Japan… erm… and I think that’s mostly
11 just as a result, the-the French people just as a result that I speak French. China and Japan,
12 I’m… I’m not quite sure why.
13
14 And then, in terms of their jobs or the reasons that they’re doing it I would say the vast majority
15 of them, yeah… are men, erm… but not maybe…. Not the vast majority I should say, maybe
16 60% men… erm… generally working in IT, maybe 80% working in IT, erm… often planning
17 on, having immigrated or planning on immigrating to Canada.
18
19 One thing that I have noticed, erm… when I started on italki two-and-a-half years ago I initially
20 started with very low prices and also I didn’t, I didn’t have any certification and then I got erm…
21 a TEFL certificate, erm… after-after that , er… and one thing that I really noticed was that the
22 profile of my learners really changed quite a lot as my prices went up, so now that my prices
23 are fairly high, by erm…italki English teacher standards, at least for back, in, you know... for
24 standards of Canadians and Americans working on the site, erm… I’ve noticed a lot more IT
25 people, whereas when they were lower they were much more diverse, particularly in terms of
26 what people were doing for a living erm… but I wouldn’t have said that the students I had kind
27 of at the beginning were not necessarily serious, it was just that they were poor, erm… so I
28 was getting people, for example, like journalists in Brazil, now I… now I only get people like,
29 working in IT, and also I have to say though that sometimes I think about diversity and also
30 that I feel slightly bad about the fact that there’s a lot of people out there that I know just can’t
31 afford, you know, to-to learn English.
32
33 Erm… on the other hand I-I really, I actually do like my students a lot even though I don’t have
34 a background in IT and I can’t say that I find it particularly interesting, they’re still funny people
35 and they’re not like incapable of … erm… talking about things that are not IT related and also,
 102

36 I don’t… I don’t mind having to explain erm… you know, things that are not, not super exciting
37 like workplace etiquette, for example, in Canada, stuff like that.
38 2. What is your opinion of the experience of working online as a teacher?
39
40 Erm… I don’t teach offline right now, er… I have in the past… erm… what I, what I do like
41 about teaching online is that all my… I don’t have to do a lot of prep beforehand. So, for
42 example all my materials on the computer. I just send them with the click of a button. I don’t
43 have to think, oh I have to print this off and this off and this off, and if I come into a situation
44 where I realise midway through the lesson that something is too easy for the student or maybe
45 the student hasn’t done their homework, so I prepared something and they’re not ready for it,
46 erm… then it’s… it’s quite easy for me to come up with something else to do.
47
48 Whereas when you’re... when you’re teaching offline, if something like that happens, like you…
49 you’ve sort of misjudged the level of the student, erm… they haven’t done your homework,
50 you’re like ok, well, you know… erm… so yeah, so I-I do like the fact that I can sort of… I don’t
51 have to spend a lot of time erm… of course I do preparation but it’s… it’s not the same. There
52 are students that I get where I feel like maybe online learning isn’t the best choice for them,
53 particularly…particularly with children, erm... I have some kids that it works really well for
54 erm… that are generally quite extrovert, they like to talk, they don’t feel weird about talking to
55 someone online erm… and then I sometimes will have parents email me like, oh can you be
56 an English teacher for my son or my daughter, erm… and we have a lesson and either their
57 level of English is very low, which is very hard to work with, um… or their level of English is
58 not so bad but they’re just quite shy and it’s… it’s hard to prompt them out of their bubble, or…
59 erm... you know where… whereas in-in real life, we have recourse, things like let’s play a
60 game, you know… let’s get up, let’s do some jumping jacks, or whatever. You cannot, you
61 can’t do that over-over Skype.
62
63 Yeah and I think… I think for adults there are some similar things, like erm… I particularly, I
64 don’t like teaching erm… adults with very low levels of English, erm… it is, it is something that
65 can be done, erm… and there are some, some people who are ok with it, but generally
66 speaking I think, I would say that in most cases er… if you speak really no English at all erm…
67 it would be better for you and probably also cheaper to take a class in your country, just to get
68 that, that foundation.
 103

1 Teacher C - Interview – Spoken Q&A session

2
3 1. What would you say is your average student profile?
4
5 The… I was thinking about this yesterday, I think the majority of stu---, well… let’s say over
6 50%, I think are definitely in-in their… around 30, 30-35, erm… and they’re doing, a lot of
7 them are doing the Cambridge exams or the IELTS and the most common exam would be
8 the C1, I think. That’s what I see erm… and most of them doing… I find them, that most of
9 them studying for a purpose, so it’s either a visa or it’s to move to England or something like
10 that, or for University as well. I think that if I go back, when I started, the first year, it was a big
11 mix with I’d say a lot of Russians at that stage, but then erm… the currency conversion thing,
12 the Russian market went a bit uh-uh, and even one or two of them said that it’s getting difficult
13 for them because of that, so since then the majority, if I think now and in the last year I-I get
14 mostly Europeans, so it’s Italians, Germans, Switzer-Swiss people, generally it’s-it’s the
15 Europeans now. The Russians, they’re still on the fringes but it’s much much less.
16
17 2. Did you receive any training for teaching online?
18
19 It was a… I don’t remember studying anything was aimed at online. No. I wouldn’t say so.

103