Your browser does not support the PubReader view.
Go to this page to see a list of supporting browsers.
The Korean Association for the Study of English Language and Linguistics
[ Article ]
Korea Journal of English Language and Linguistics - Vol. 18, No. 4, pp.486-508
ISSN: 1598-1398 (Print)
Print publication date 31 Dec 2018
Received 30 Oct 2018 Revised 12 Dec 2018 Accepted 16 Dec 2018
DOI: https://doi.org/10.15738/kjell.18.4.201812.486

음성인식 피드백 프로그램을 활용한 영어 학습 프로그램 개발 연구

이경랑
교수, 영어영문학과, 세종대학교, 서울특별시, 광진구 군자동 98, Tel: 02) 3408-3118 kranglee@sejong.ac.kr
Developing English learning program using speech recognition-based feedback
Lee, Kyoung Rang
Professor, Dept. of English language and literature, Sejong University, Seoul, 05006, Gunjadong 98, Gwangjingu, Korea, Tel: 02) 3408-3118 kranglee@sejong.ac.kr

Abstract

Lee, Kyoung Rang. 2018. Developing English learning program using speech recognition-based feedback. Korean Journal of English Language and Linguistics 18-4, 486-508. This study was planned to explore whether a computer program using speech recognition-based feedback (ET-Bot) would improve Korean middle school English learners' speaking. The results of 46 middle school English learners were analyzed in terms of the accuracy and the time of pronouncing words, sentences, and a paragraph which had been carefully chosen, based on the previous studies and existing pronunciation diagnosis tools. Immediate feedback provided by the speech recognition tool right after participants read aloud seemed to motivate them to correct themselves. Even though there were not big differences in terms of gender as well as English performance scores, possible gender differences should be further explored in terms of their attitudes and affective factors to pronouncing English words and sentences. Also, the free speaking task that ET-Bot provided in addition to reading aloud tasks showed its possible usage to diagnose the participants' speaking proficiency. Using a speech recognition-based feedback program, this study hopes to provide a firm basis for future studies about helping English learners correct their own mistakes with the immediate feedback, helping teachers diagnose their students' speaking, and suggesting a new way to research on speaking by helping researchers transcribe easily. Detailed results and discussions are provided.

Keywords:

speech recognition, immediate feedback, English learning program, reading aloud, gender differences, ET-Bot

Acknowledgments

이 논문은 2017년 대한민국 교육부와 한국연구재단의 지원을 받아 수행된 연구임 (NRF-2017S1A5A2A01027326)

References

  • Abraham, L. (2008). Computer-mediated glosses in second language comprehension and vocabulary learning: A meta-analysis. Computer Assisted Language Learning 21, 199-226. [https://doi.org/10.1080/09588220802090246]
  • Beauvois, M. H. 1992. Computer-assisted classroom discussion in the foreign language classroom: Conversation in slow motion. Foreign Language Annals 25, 455-464. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.1992.tb01128.x]
  • Beauvois, M. H. 1998. Conversations in slow motion: Computer-mediated communication in the foreign language classroom. The Canadian Modern Language Review 54(2), 198-217. [https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.54.2.198]
  • Bernhardt, B. H. and G. Holdgrafer. 2001. Beyond the basics I: The need for strategic sampling for in-depth phonological analysis. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools 32, 18-27. [https://doi.org/10.1044/0161-1461(2001/002)]
  • Chappell, C. 2001. Computer Application in Second Language Acquisition: Foundations for Teaching, Testing, and Research. New York: Cambridge University Press. [https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524681]
  • Childs, M. 2010. Learners' Experience of Presence in Virtual Worlds. Doctoral dissertation, University of Warwick, UK.
  • Dudeney, G. and N. Hockly. 2012. ICT in ELT: How did we get here and where are we going? ELT Journal 66(4), 533-542. [https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccs050]
  • Ehrman, M. E. and Oxford, R. 1995. Cognition plus: Correlates of language learning success. The Modern Language Journal 79, 67-89. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1995.tb05417.x]
  • Eisenberg, S. L. and E. R. Hitchcock. 2010. Using standardized tests to inventory consonant and vowel production: A comparison of 11 tests of articulation and phonology. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools 41, 488-503. [https://doi.org/10.1044/0161-1461(2009/08-0125)]
  • Hewitt, E. and J. Stephenson. 2011. Foreign language anxiety and oral exam performance: A replication of Phillip's MLJ study. The Modern Language Journal 96(2), 170-189. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2011.01174.x]
  • Huang, H.-T. D. and S.-T. A. Hung. 2010. Effects of electronic portfolios on EFL oral performance. Asian EFL Journal 12(2), 192-212.
  • Kern, R. G. 1995. Restructuring classroom interaction with networked computers: Effects on quantity and characteristics of language production. The Modern Language Journal 79(4), 457-476. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1995.tb05445.x]
  • Klein, H. B. 1984. Procedures for maximizing phonological information from single-word responses. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools 15, 267-274. [https://doi.org/10.1044/0161-1461.1504.267]
  • Krashen. S. D. 1981. Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning. Oxford: Pergamon.
  • Lee, J. and S. Choi, 2010. The effects of using multimedia title on preschool children's English listening skills, vocabulary, story recall ability and affective domains. Multimedia-Assisted Language Learning 13(3), 237-252.
  • Lee, K. R. and S. Kwon. 2014. Effects of vocabulary memorizing tools on L2 learners' vocabulary size. The Journal of Asia TEFL 11(2), 125-148.
  • Li, J. 2010. Learning vocabulary via computer-assisted scaffolding for text processing. Computer Assisted Language Learning 23, 253-375. [https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2010.483678]
  • Lin, H. 2014. Computer-mediated communication (CMC) in L2 oral proficiency development: A meta-analysis. ReCALL 27(3), 261-287. [https://doi.org/10.1017/S095834401400041X]
  • Loewen, S. and R. Erlam. 2006. Corrective feedback in the cat room: An experimental study. Computer Assisted Language Learning 19(1), 1-14. [https://doi.org/10.1080/09588220600803311]
  • MacIntyre, P. D. and R. C. Gardner. 1991. How does anxiety affect second language learning? A reply to Sparks and Ganschow. The Modern Language Journal 79(1), 90-99. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1995.tb05418.x]
  • McCorkle, B. and J. Palmeri. 2016. Lessons from history: Teaching with technology in 100 years of English Journal. English Journal 105(6), 18-24.
  • Mehrgan, K. 2010. Computer-assisted language learning: A panacea for grammar development. Advances in English Linguistics 1(2), 25-29.
  • Nutta, J. 2001. Is Computer-based Grammar Instruction as Effective as Teacher-directed Grammar Instruction for L2 Students? University of South Florida: USA.
  • Peterson, M. 2009. Learner interaction in synchronous CMC: A sociocultural perspective. Computer Assisted Language Learning 22(4), 303-321. [https://doi.org/10.1080/09588220903184690]
  • Saito, H. 1994. Teachers' practices and students' preferences for feedback on second language writing: A case study of adult ESL learners. TESL Canada Journal 11(2), 46-70. [https://doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v11i2.633]
  • Sauro, S. 2009. Computer-mediated corrective feedback and the development of second language grammar. Language Learning & Technology 13, 96-120.
  • Sharples, M., I. Arnedillo-Sanchez, M. Milrad and G. Vavoula. 2009. Mobile learning: Small devices, big issues. In N. Balacheff, S. Ludvigsen, T. de Jong, A. Lazonder and S. Barnes, eds., Technology-enhanced Learning: Principles and Products, 233-249. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.
  • Smith, B. 2003. Computer-mediated negotiated interaction: An expanded model. The Modern Language Journal 87(1), 38-57. [https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-4781.00177]
  • Smith, B. 2004. Computer-mediated negotiated interaction and lexical acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 26(3), 365-398. [https://doi.org/10.1017/S027226310426301X]
  • Sullivan, N. and E. Pratt. 1996. A comparative study of two ESL writing environments: A computer assisted classroom and a traditional oral classroom. System 29, 491-501. [https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(96)00044-9]
  • Ulusoy, M. 2006. The role of computers in writing process. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology 5(4), 58-66.
  • Volle, L. M. 2005. Analyzing oral skills in voice e-mail and online interviews. Language Learning & Technology 9(3), 146-163.
  • Weinberger, S. 2015. Speech Accent Archive. George Mason University. Retrieved from http://accent.gmu.edu.
  • Wu, W. and M. Marek. 2009. The impact of teleconferencing with native English speakers on English learning by Taiwanese students. International Journal on E-learning 8(1), 107-126.
  • Xu, Y. 2018. Construction of a multiple English teaching mode based on cloud technology. iJET 13(8), 239-253.
  • Young. D. J. 1999. Affect in Foreign Language and Second Language Learning: A Practical Guide to Creating a Low-anxiety Classroom Atmosphere. Boston: McGraw-Hill.
  • Zahorik, J. A. 1987. Reacting. In M. J. Dunkin, ed., International Encyclopedia of Teaching and Teacher Education, 416-423. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
  • Ziegler, N. 2016. Synchronous computer-mediated communication and interaction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 38, 553-586. [https://doi.org/10.1017/S027226311500025X]
  • Zimmerman, S. and B. Howard. 2013. Implementing iPads into K-12 classrooms: A case study. In R. McBride and M. Searson, eds., Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2013, 2512-2516. Chesapeake, VA: AACE.