朝陽科技大學應用英語系...

朝陽科技大學

應用英語系

碩士論文

科技輔助英語課室學習成效研究：以運用行動裝置於

YouTube 短片製作活動為例

Implementing Mobile Technology through YouTube Video-

making Tasks in an EFL Classroom

指導教授：陳姿青博士

研究生：劉倪均

中華民國 104 年 7 月 28 日

朝陽科技大學應用英語系

Department of Applied English

Chaoyang University of Technology

碩士論文

Thesis for the Degree of Master

科技輔助英語課室學習成效研究：以運用行動裝置於 YouTube 短

片製作活動為例

Implementing Mobile Technology through YouTube Video-making

Tasks in an EFL Classroom

指導教授：陳姿青博士(Dr. Tzu-Ching Chen)

研究生：劉倪均(Ni-Chun Liu)

中華民國 104 年 7 月 28 日

July 28, 2015

I

摘要

建立於行動裝置可以提供學生學習機會，同時也能在任何地方跟教師及同

儕互動的基礎上(Cavus & Ibrahim, 2008, 2009; Kukulska-Hulme & Shield,

2008; Nihalani &Mayrath, 2010; Richardson & Lenarcic, 2008; Shih & Mills,

2007)。本研究旨在調查將行動科技融入英語課室學習之成效，藉由

YouTube 影片製作活動，探究學生對此活動運用之看法和其英語口語學習

的成效，看法部份分別以英語口語改善狀況、學習態度和學習動機三相關

因素進行深入探討。本研究主要採用行動研究法，以朝陽科技大學 58 位

應用英語系學生為對象，運用手機影片錄製功能，呈現影片製作結果並發

佈在 YouTube 上的方式進行。受試學生於分組後即各自選擇將拍攝的影片

主題，每兩週製作一個五分鐘的英語短片。研究數據透過多種管道收集，

包含：學期初及學期末托福口說考試(前後測)、YouTube 影片、教師課室

觀察日誌、與學生之半結構式訪談、學生 Facebook 回饋及課後問卷。前後

測分數以 t 檢定做分析，問卷內容以敘述性統計做分析，其他質性數據以

內容分析法進行分析。量化研究結果顯示學生在口說能力上有顯著的進

步，對於課程的學習成效、學習態度及學習動機都相當正面，而質性研究

結果顯示學生對於課程有相當高度的期待，在上課過程中也感受到自己口

說能力的進步。

關鍵字: 行動科技、影片錄製、口說能力、YouTube、EFL 大學生、台

II

灣

III

ABSTRACT

This study reported an action research conducted at Chaoyang University in

which 58 EFL students used the video recording feature on their cell phones to

produce bi-weekly video productions for posting on YouTube. Mobile

computing devices can provide educational opportunities for students to access

course content, as well as interact with instructors and student colleagues

wherever they are located (Cavus & Ibrahim, 2008, 2009; Kukulska-Hulme &

Shield, 2008; Nihalani &Mayrath, 2010; Richardson & Lenarcic, 2008; Shih &

Mills, 2007). This present study aimed at investigating the effect on the

integration of video recording feature into EFL classroom and discussing the

students’ perceptions of this YouTube video-making project. During the study

period, participants formed groups and produced one 5-minute video on a

student-selected topic every two weeks. Data was collected through multiple

sources: recordings of pre-and post-course speaking tests, analysis of the

YouTube videos of students’ speaking tasks, semi-structured interviews with the

students, teachers’ observation logs written by the researchers, Facebook

postings as student self-reflection journals, and a written end-of-semester course

evaluation survey. The quantitative data was analyzed by descriptive analysis

and inferential statistics, and content analysis was performed to analyze

IV

qualitative data. The quantitative result reported that students had significantly

improvement on speaking ability, and had positive achievement, attitude, and

motivation toward video-making project. The qualitative result reported that

students thought they were improving on speaking ability, and they had high

expectation toward this course. According to quantitative data analysis and

qualitative data analysis, this course brought students positive affection, and

decreased their anxious on practicing speaking ability.

keywords: Mobile technology, video recording, speaking ability, YouTube,

EFL university student, Taiwan

V

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would like to gratefully acknowledge many people who support me to

finish this thesis, without them, it would not have been possible for me to finish

this thesis.

First of all, I would like to thank my advisor Dr. Kate Tzu-Ching Chen for

her generous guidance and encouragement with my thesis over the past three

years. She not only offered her professional help in reviewing and editing my

thesis, but also encouraged me to face the difficulties in my life. Without their

help and support the completion of this thesis would not have been possible.

Second, I would like to thank the committee members, Dr. Yi-Nian Lee who

comes from Overseas Chinese University, and Dr. Po-Yi Hung who comes from

Chaoyang University of Technology, thanks for their friendly help and

professional opinions to make my study conducted smoothly.

Third, I am thankful to the students who participated in this study, they have

also helped to make this study possible. At last, I would like to show my

gratitude to my lovely family and friends for their endless love. All of my

friends and graduate school classmates gave me their time in listening to me and

helping me work out my problems. Last of my deepest thanks would go on to

my parents, my siblings and my boyfriend, Gorden. thanks for their loving

VI

considerations and great confidence in me, without my lovely family’s support, I

would not be able to complete my master degree.

VII

TABLE OF CONTENTS

摘要 ........................................................................................................................ I

ABSTRACT ........................................................................................................ III

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ................................................................................... V

TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................. VII

LIST OF TABLES .............................................................................................. XI

LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................... XII

CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION .................................................................... 1

Background of the Study .................................................................................... 1

The Purpose of the Study ................................................................................... 2

Research Questions ............................................................................................ 3

The Significance of the Study ............................................................................ 3

Definition of terms ............................................................................................. 4

Mobile Technology ......................................................................................... 4

EFL .................................................................................................................. 5

Mobile Assisted Language Learning (MALL) ............................................... 5

Learning achievement ..................................................................................... 5

VIII

Learning Attitude ............................................................................................ 6

Learning Motivation ....................................................................................... 6

Limitations of the study ..................................................................................... 7

CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW ........................................................ 8

Mobile Assisted Language Learning (MALL) .................................................. 8

Smartphone Based Learning ............................................................................ 11

The Use of Video Recording for Language Learning ..................................... 12

CHAPTER THREE METHODOLOGY ............................................................. 14

Participants ....................................................................................................... 14

The Research Setting ........................................................................................ 15

Instruments ....................................................................................................... 15

Procedure .......................................................................................................... 16

Data Collection and Analysis ........................................................................... 18

CHAPTER FOUR RESULT ............................................................................... 20

Quantitative Data Analysis .............................................................................. 21

Pre- and post-course speaking tests .............................................................. 21

End-of-semester course evaluation survey ................................................... 23

IX

Learning achievement .................................................................................. 23

Learning attitude ........................................................................................... 26

Learning motivation ..................................................................................... 29

Qualitative Data Analysis ................................................................................ 31

Student self-reflection journals on Facebook ............................................... 31

Semi-structured group interviews ................................................................. 34

Teachers’ observation logs ........................................................................... 37

CHAPTER FIVE CONCLUSION, DISCUSSION, SUGGESTION FOR

FUTURE STUDY ............................................................................................... 41

Conclusion ........................................................................................................ 41

Discussion ........................................................................................................ 42

Suggestions for Future Study ........................................................................... 43

REFERENCES .................................................................................................... 45

APPENDIX A: TOFEL Speaking Test ............................................................... 51

APPENDIX B: TOEFL Test Independent Speaking Rubrics ............................. 57

APPENDIX C: End-of-semester survey ............................................................. 58

APPENDIX D: Interview questions .................................................................. 63

X

APPENDIX E: Facebook posting examples ..................................................... 65

XI

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 Paired Samples t-test analysis of pre- and post-test scores .................... 22

Table 2 Descriptive data analysis of pre- and post-test scores ............................ 23

Table 3 Descriptive data analysis of Learning achievement ............................... 25

Table 4 Descriptive data analysis of Learning attitude ....................................... 28

Table 5 Descriptive data analysis of Learning motivation .................................. 30

XII

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. The flow chart of the study procedure ................................................. 18

Figure 2. Descriptive data analysis of Learning achievement ............................ 26

Figure 3. Descriptive data analysis of Learning attitude .................................... 29

Figure 4. Descriptive data analysis of Learning motivation ............................... 31

1

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

Background of the Study

In recent years, mobile technology has been widely applied as mobile

devices have become a ubiquitous presence in daily life (Irina, 2011). Mobile

technologies allow far greater access to information and provide students with

context-aware information at the most appropriate teachable moment (Ting,

2013). The study by the Educause Center for Analysis and Research (2013) also

supported this idea by claiming that students are ready to use their mobile

devices more in their academic studies, and they look to institutions and

instructors for opportunities and encouragement to do so.

The adoption rates for mobile devices have also increased enormously in

recent decades, especially those of smart phones. Gromik (2012) reported that

using a mobile phone video recording feature as a language learning tool

provided students with the opportunity to review themselves, to improve their

performance and to present their best performance for evaluation by their

teacher. The integration of learning technologies into language classrooms can

also improve learners’ language skills and confidence.

As Coombe, Folse and Hubley wrote in 2007, “In daily life, speaking is an

2

important channel of communication in a general English program.” As a

productive skill, speaking draws on the speaker’s knowledge, aptitude,

confidence, and recognition of appropriate context. However, as Yalçın and

İnceçay (2013) noted, English language teachers are aware of a phenomenon

called foreign language speaking anxiety among their students. Students tend to

fear speaking tasks more than other language skill tasks. Gaudart (1992) also

related the low participation in class discussions to the inability of learners to

function in oral communication. Therefore, the present study focused on

employing the video recording function of the mobile phone in the hope of

improving students’ speaking and dramatic performance abilities.

The Purpose of the Study

Integrating video recording into EFL classrooms can help students to find a

new direction in their language learning as well as improve their learning

motivation, attitude, and achievements. Thus, the purpose of the study is to

report the effects when integrating the mobile phone video recording feature into

EFL classrooms by observing the improvement in students during one semester

and discussing the students’ perceptions of a YouTube video-making project.

More specifically, the present study aimed to investigate the students’ oral

performances through video recording. Students’ attitude and motivation in

3

speaking courses and their perceptions toward this project were also discussed.

Moreover, this study sought to create a comfortable learning environment, and

encourage students to feel relaxed and happy during their learning.

Research Questions

This study reports the results of an action research conducted at a

Taiwanese university in which 58 EFL students used the video recording feature

on their mobile phones to produce bi-weekly video productions to be posted on

YouTube. The research questions were mainly concerned with the effects of EFL

students’ usage of their mobile phone’s video recording on their speaking and

performance abilities, plus the EFL students’ feedback on this learning method.

Therefore, the research questions in this study are:

1. To what extent does implementing the YouTube video project assist in

improving EFL students’ speaking abilities?

2. What are EFL students’ perceptions of the YouTube video project

regarding their spoken English improvement, learning attitude, and

learning motivation?

The Significance of the Study

Mobile phones today provide a wide range of functions, such as taking

pictures, writing notes, making voice recordings or short videos, listening to

4

music, watching audio-visual material, using bilingual dictionaries or language

study software, playing games, listening to radio broadcasts, sending text

messages, and engaging in social networking. Among these, video recording is

the most frequently used function, yet it has not been fully researched.

Therefore, the present study focused on employing the video recording function

of the mobile phone to improve students’ speaking and dramatic performance

abilities, and create a suitable learning environment to ease students’ nerves in

learning a new language.

Definition of terms

Mobile Technology

Mobile technology is the technology used for cellular communication.

Mobile code division multiple access (CDMA) technology has evolved rapidly

over the past few years. Since the start of this millennium, a standard mobile

device has gone from being no more than a simple two-way pager to being a

mobile phone, GPS navigation device, an embedded web browser and instant

messaging client, and a handheld game console. Many experts argue that the

future of computer technology rests in mobile computing with wireless

networking (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_technology). Mobile

computing by way of tablet computers are also becoming more popular. Tablets

5

are available on both 3G and 4G networks. Mobile technology is an approach to

language learning that is assisted or enhanced through the use of a handheld

mobile device (Chinnery, 2006).

EFL

EFL is the abbreviation of English as a foreign language. Fernandez (2012)

reported that EFL countries do not use English as a medium of instruction but

that English is taught in schools.

Mobile Assisted Language Learning (MALL)

Shield and Kukulska-Hulme (2008) reported that MALL is an

amalgamation of both mobile learning (m-learning) and computer-assisted

language learning (CALL). MALL has evolved to support students’ language

learning with the increased use of mobile technologies, such as mobile phones

(cell phones), MP3 and MP4 players, PDAs and other devices, such as the

iPhone or iPad. With MALL, students are able to access language learning

materials and to communicate with their teachers and peers at anytime,

anywhere.

Learning achievement

Förster and Souvignier (2014) define learning achievements as students’

outcomes in learning. According to GPA and Richardson, Abraham, and Bond

6

(2012), an academic achievement (in both traditional and online learning

settings) can be generally defined as achieving a particular result in an online

assignment, exam, subject, or degree, and is ordinarily expressed in terms of a

numerical grade or grade point average. In this study, learning achievement

refers to students’ improvements and their obtainments toward this course.

Learning Attitude

Ellis (1994, p197-p201) reported that learners’ attitudes have been identified

as a set of variables of major importance. Gardner (1985) claims that attitude is

an evaluative feedback to some referent or attitude object and is thus linked to a

person’s values and beliefs. Gardner (1985) reports that students’ attitudes

towards a specific language community will certainly influence the degree of

success when incorporating aspects of that language. In this study, learning

attitude refers to students’ attitudes toward the video-making project and

learning to speak English; it was evaluated by an end of term of survey.

Learning Motivation

Dörnyei and Ottó (1998) define motivation in second language (L2)

learning as "the dynamically changing cumulative arousal in a person that

initiates, directs, coordinates, amplifies, terminates, and evaluates the cognitive

and motor processes whereby initial wishes and desires are selected, prioritized,

7

operationalized and (successfully or unsuccessfully) acted out" (p. 65).

Individual motivation is another factor that is used to describe why some L2

learners are more successful than others (Saville-Troike, 2012, p85-p86). In this

study, learning motivation refers to students’ motivation toward the video-

making project and speech learning.

Limitations of the study

The limitations of the study included:

1. Students were allowed to complete the video recording after school and it

was possible that students might use video devices other than smart phones

to record their videos.

2. This study adopted non-random sampling, and the 58 students might not be

representative of all university students in Taiwan.

8

CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

Mobile Assisted Language Learning (MALL)

Chinnery (2006) reported that Mobile Assisted Language Learning

(MALL) is an approach to language learning that is assisted or enhanced

through the use of a handheld mobile device. Mobile technology was defined as

a device, such as a Personal Digital Assistant (PDA) or smart phone, which can

store, access, create, modify, organize, or otherwise manipulate data in various

forms from a location without the requirement to be tethered to any particular

spot (Tylar, 2002). Mobile technology is bringing convenience, ease and

effectiveness to our daily lives. Kukulska-Hulme (2006) reported that mobile

learning technology is more useful for activities outside the classroom. Such

activities enable learning to be more directly connected with real world

experiments. Learning through mobile phones outside the classroom has the

advantage of better exploitation of the learner's free time and even students on

the move can improve their learning skills.

Valk et al., (2010) claimed that mobile computing devices for language

learning included technologies that are transportable, such as cell phones and

smartphones. Gromik (2009) and Stockwell (2007, 2008, 2010) provide

9

convincing evidence that cell phones can be viable learning tools for enhancing

learning development. A cell phone can enhance learning motivation and

learning attitude. It provides a new way for students to increase their motivation

and achievement in language learning.

Improvements in mobile technology have also initiated an important role in

educational material. Reports from Motiwalla (2007), Oliver and Goerke (2008),

Pouezevara and Khan (2007), and Shudong and Higgins (2006) have indicated

that improvements in technology and practical applications are needed to render

cell phones as appropriate platforms to deliver educational material to students.

Students can use this new tool to discover their interests in learning, and to make

learning different and entertaining so that their learning motivation increases.

Some researchers have mentioned that mobile computing devices can

provide educational opportunities for students to access course content, as well

as interact with instructors and student colleagues wherever they are located

(Cavus & Ibrahim, 2008, 2009; Kukulska-Hulme & Shield, 2008; Nihalani &

Mayrath, 2010; Richardson & Lenarcic, 2008; Shih & Mills, 2007). Students

can interact with their cell phone and they can learn from it anytime and

anywhere, plus students can access their course wherever they are located.

From the aspect of language learning, Miangah & Nezarat (2012)

10

mentioned that “mobile devices have increasingly grown toward becoming tools

for education and language learning, and all users from teachers to students are

getting used to this new tool to make education as ubiquitous as possible”

(p.313). In fact, many advanced applications of mobile technology have been

proposed and implemented (Chen, Kao, & Sheu, 2003; Kozma & Anderson,

2002; Price & Rogers, 2004; Stuart, Brown, & Draper, 2004), and enormous

effort has been devoted to in-depth analyses of these applications in recent years

(Patten, Arnedillo Sánchez, & Tangney, 2006; Roschelle, 2003).

In term of increasing the convenience of communication, mobile technology

has presented additional possibilities for application in different educational

domains, such as foreign languages and second language studies (Abdous,

Camarena, & Facer, 2009; Evans, 2008; Kiernan & Aizawa, 2004; Gikas &

Grant, 2013; Lu, 2008; Motiwalla, 2007). Gromik (2009) and Stockwell (2007,

2008, 2010) indicated that a cell phone could be a viable learning tool for

enhancing communication for learning development. However, the earliest of

these opinions predate the touch-screen era. Given the speed of innovation in

mobile technology, it is clear that the applicability of mobile phones to

education requires constant examination.

11

Smartphone Based Learning

Traxler (2009) mentioned that mobile phones are increasingly being

recognized as a powerful way of empowering the engagement of students in

meaningful learning opportunities anywhere and at anytime. Mobile phones

have become one of the most important communication tools (Tosun, 2012). In

recent years, young people use them frequently because of their voice, text,

video, and internet functions. According to Vahey and Crawford’s research in

2003, teachers claimed that handheld devices can encourage students to share

ideas and information easily, enabling them to be more task-focused, and to

discuss directly and solve problems autonomously.

Nowadays, smartphones have become popular, and have been adopted at an

increasing rate amongst a growing demographic population over the last decade

(Falaki et al., 2010; Soikkeli, Karikoski, & Hämmäinen, 2013). Smartphones

can operate with a variety of mobile operating systems, such as Google Android,

Apple IOS, and Nokia Symbian, with the capacity to run numerous free and paid

applications, transforming the once dedicated mobile phone into powerful,

mobile personal computers (Ericsson, 2013; PC Magazine, 2013; Techopedia,

2014).

12

The Use of Video Recording for Language Learning

It was concluded by Gromik (2009) that cell phone technology empowers

owners to record events that enable them to develop an identity and a perception

of the environment in which they live. Gromik (2009) then created a project that

asked his students to use their cell phones to video record their thoughts and

opinions about various topics that were important to them. The results of his

study reported how the advantage of video recording is permanence, which

allows students to experience an event repeatedly by playing it back. Students

can observe their performance in the video and discover the errors to be

corrected. They can practice using the video and find out any errors they usually

make, enabling them to revise their mistakes immediately. When students tried

to correct their errors, they were also practicing their speaking ability.

Lonergan (1984), and Tomalin and Stempleski (1990) claimed that

integrating video-recording into a speaking class offered several benefits to the

students. Students could see themselves and their classmates’ performances,

following which teachers can help students to improve their speaking abilities

by reviewing their videos. Kırkgöz (2011) also mentioned how video recording

allows students to replay a video as many times as they need, enabling them to

make a self-evaluation of themselves as well as their fellow friends. It meant

13

students can become self-critical, detect their speaking problems and improve

them.

14

CHAPTER THREE

METHODOLOGY

Action research was used in this study and was defined by Sagor (2000) as a

disciplined process of inquiry conducted by and for those taking the action. The

primary reason for engaging in action research is to assist the “actor” in

improving and/or refining his or her actions. In this study, this method was used

to examine the effects of EFL students’ usage of mobile phones to produce video

recordings of their speaking and dramatic performance abilities and the EFL

students’ perceptions toward this video recording project.

Participants

A total of 58 EFL students participated in this study, comprising of 41

males and 17 females. They all came from the same class, and were separated

into two classes at the beginning of the semester depending on their school

number. By the time these students participated in this project, they were

sophomores and had studied English for more than eight years in mostly text-

based classes. Consequently, they had limited speaking and performance

training. Most of the students had majored in English since junior high school in

a limited English-speaking environment.

15

The Research Setting

The research took place at Choayang University of Technology. The course

was Practical English Listening and Speaking, and the instructor of the course

was an Associate Professor of the Applied English department. This course

aimed to improve students’ listening and speaking abilities in American English

through intensive pronunciation, intonation, and dictation drills. Students were

able to initiate, minimally sustain and close basic task related communications

as well as handle simple social situations. This course was held once a week.

Listening ability was taught in the first hour, and speaking ability was taught in

the second hour for 50 minutes per week. The research took 18 weeks. For the

purpose of investigating the influence of the video making task on speech, this

study focused on the second hour and only emphasized speaking ability.

Instruments

This research adopted an action study and used mobile technology, in this

case a cell phone, to record and upload a video onto YouTube as an alternative

learning activity to improve EFL learners’ speaking and performance abilities.

Two sets of the Test of Spoken English (TSE) from TOEFL were used as pre-

and post-tests to determine the students’ speaking abilities before and after the

study (Appendix A). The test score was graded using iBT/Next Generation

16

TOEFL Test Independent Speaking Rubrics (Scoring Standards) provided by

ETS (Appendix B). An end of semester survey was developed by the researchers

according to Hwang and Chang (2011) in order to collect information about the

students’ perceptions on the use of video recording to improve their speaking

and performance abilities. There are three dimensions, which are learning

achievement, learning motivation with video recording, and learning attitude

with video recording. The complete questionnaire scale is included in Appendix

C. An interview protocol was also developed according to Gikas and Grant

(2013) in order to conduct the group interview at the end of the semester and the

list of interview questions are included in Appendix D.

Procedure

The researchers conducted the pre-test with the first class and gave a course

orientation lesson to the students. The students were asked to bring their mobile

phones to class, and their answers would be recorded by their mobile phones.

After the test, students uploaded their answers to the iLms (Internet Learning

Management System) on the school’s website. The students were told that they

needed to produce a video bi-weekly, and had to write down their feedback for

the class on Facebook every week. The students were then divided into groups

of 5-7 and every group had to decide the topic for a total of seven videos to be

17

recorded during the semester.

The length of every video had to be approximately five minutes and had to

be watched in class twice a week. They also needed to create a playlist on

YouTube for a contest. The groups were ranked from No.1 to No.5 according to

the click rates. During the research, the students’ weekly written feedback

reports on Facebook were also reviewed and classroom observations were made

on a weekly basis.

The researchers undertook the observations and made a teaching log to

measure the classroom instruction as well as the students’ performances. The

content of the teaching log included the date, course description, students’

behavior, students’ reflection, video performance, speaking performance, and

their opinions of the course. Through the teaching log, the improvement in the

students from the beginning of the semester to the end of the semester was

recorded, and the researchers were able to identify any significant improvements

in the students over the period of the course.

At the end of the semester, the participants completed the post-test and

were then interviewed in their own groups. In this study, Krueger's (2002)

guidelines for focus group interviews were used, with a semi-structured protocol

established to provide a structure for the interview. The end of semester survey

18

was delivered straight after the post-test.

Figure 1. The flow chart of the study procedure

Data Collection and Analysis

Quantitative data was collected through the recordings of the pre- and post-

course speaking tests and the end-of-semester course evaluation survey. In

addition, qualitative data was collected through the student self-reflection

journals on Facebook, semi-structured group interviews, teachers’ observation

• Pre-test

• Mobile phone video performance bi-weekly

• Bi-weekly performance

• YouTube upload

• Facebook posting

• Teaching log

• Post-test

• End-of-semester survey

• Group Interview

19

logs, and the YouTube video samples. Qualitative data was also collected during

the 18 week study period.

After the quantitative data was collected from the tests and survey, it was

entered into SPSS. The test score was then analyzed by a sample t-test and the

survey was analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics. The qualitative

data was collected and analyzed using the content analysis method.

20

CHAPTER FOUR

RESULT

The data of this study was collected by quantitative and qualitative methods,

including the recording of pre-and post-course speaking tests and the end-of-

semester course evaluation survey, student self-reflection journals on Facebook,

semi-structured group interviews, teachers’ observation logs, and YouTube video

samples. The statistical data from students’ pre- and post-test scores and the end-

of-term survey response were collected and organized in SPSS for sample t-test

analysis. The findings from the pre- and post-test data presented the students’

academic achievements. The students’ bi-weekly video performances, as well as

their Facebook feedback concerning the video production process, were also

reported. Next, the semi-structured group interviews with the students and the

teachers’ observation logs written by the researchers were examined to

determine the students’ and teachers’ perceptions of the course and the benefits

of using the recording task as a learning activity. Finally, the results of the t-test

and content analysis were examined for any statistically significant differences.

The result of the data was used to answer the research questions, as follows:

1. To what extent does implementing the YouTube video project assist in

21

improving EFL students’ speaking abilities?

2. What are EFL students’ perceptions of the YouTube video project

regarding their spoken English improvement, learning attitude, and

learning motivation?

Quantitative Data Analysis

Pre- and post-course speaking tests

All students (n=58) participated in the pre-test during the first week of the

course and in the post-test during the final week by speaking into their cell

phones and recording their answers to the Test of Spoken English (TSE). The

results of the pre- and post-course speaking tests were analyzed to answer the

first research question: To what extent does implementing the YouTube video

project assist in improving EFL students’ speaking abilities? It demonstrated the

students’ improvements in speaking ability by making the video project. Their

recorded answers were then submitted to the learning management system

provided by the university. Two scorers were used to grade the answers using

iBT/Next Generation TOEFL Test Independent Speaking Rubrics. The grade for

each question was 4, and the total score was 24. Table 1 reports the results from

a paired-sample t-test conducted to compare the students’ pre-test and post-test

scores for English speaking using their cell phone recording feature after

22

regularly producing bi-weekly videos. There was a significant increase in

speaking achievement between the pre-test (M=10.75, SD=4.29) and the post-

test (M=13.09, SD=.999), t =-6.715, p<.05. After implementing the video-

making project into the EFL classroom, the average score increased, which

means students had improved after practicing their speaking ability during the

making of their videos.

Table 1

Paired Samples t-test analysis of pre- and post-test scores

Variable N M SD P

Pre-test 58 10.75 4.29 .000*

Post-test 58 13.09 3.96

*p<.05

Table 2 shows the descriptive data analysis of the pre- and post-tests,

reporting that the maximum score was 18 in the pre-test. In the post-test,

although the minimum score dropped to 0, the maximum score was elevated to

21, revealing that students had improved their score in the post-test.

23

Table 2

Descriptive data analysis of pre- and post-test scores

According to the students’ recorded answers, it appeared that students’ were

nervous during the pre-test, and some students even repeated the questions as

their answers. In the post test, students were more confident when answering

questions.

End-of-semester course evaluation survey

The descriptive results reported the students’ responses following the end-

of-term survey after 18 weeks of producing YouTube videos. This survey was

divided into three sections: learning achievement, learning attitude, and

learning motivation.


Items 1-8 were related to learning achievement, items 9-17 were related to

learning motivation, and items 18-26 referred to learning attitude. Table 3

Items N Minimum Maximum M SD

Pre-test 58 2 18 10.75 4.29

Post-test 58 0 21 13.09 3.96

24

shows the descriptive data analysis on learning achievement. Scores for

learning achievement (M=3.98), can be seen from the table, with the scores for

items 3, 4, and 5 particularly higher than the other items. Item 3 stated,

“Making videos helped me to improve my speaking in English”; item 4 stated,

“Making videos helped me to improve my pronunciation in English”; and item

5 stated, “Making videos helped me to increase my creativity.” Following this

class, students had started to feel that their speaking ability was improving,

including their pronunciation.

25

Table 3

Descriptive data analysis of the end-of-semester survey (Learning achievement)

Items N M SD

Item 1 58 3.79 .874

Item 2 58 3.71 .899

Item 3 57 4.40 .651

Item 4 58 4.19 .687

Item 5 58 4.45 .680

Item 6 58 3.74 .739

Item 7 58 3.74 .828

Item 8 58 3.83 .775

26

Figure 2. Descriptive data analysis of the end-of-semester survey (Learning

achievement)

Learning attitude

Table 4 shows the descriptive data analysis on learning attitude, with a

lower score for learning attitude (M=3.71). However, items 9, 13, 15 and 17

were particularly higher. Item 9 stated, “It is very difficult to make a good

English video.” Students thought that making good videos was difficult for

them. Item 13 stated, “It is convenient to upload videos on YouTube.” For

students, uploading videos on YouTube was convenient and they did not

encounter any barriers when uploading theirwork. Item 15 stated, “This course

27

is more interesting to me in comparison with other courses”, and item 17

stated, “I like this course design (video production project).” Students were

fond of this course, and enjoyed the video production project. Consequently,

they put a great deal of effort into this project and were willing to learn this

course. The table showed that the score for item 12 (“My teammates and I had

a lot of arguments and disagreements during the video making process”) was

the lowest. This implies that the students worked well together, demonstrated

cooperation in this project and did not argue with each other in order that the

videos could be made better.

28

Table 4

Descriptive data analysis of the end-of-semester survey (Learning attitude)

Items N M SD

Item 9 58 4.41 .859

Item 10 58 3.50 .960

Item 11 57 3.65 .834

Item 12 58 2.34 1.148

Item 13 58 4.17 .819

Item 14 58 3.22 .899

Item 15 58 4.21 .695

Item 16 57 3.81 .743

Item 17 58 4.09 .756

29


attitude)

Learning motivation

Table 5 shows the descriptive data analysis for learning motivation. The

score for learning motivation (M=4.07) was significantly higher, although the

scores for items 23 and 26 were lower. Item 23 stated, “This video production

project helped me to engage more in the learning of English.” Students might

not work hard when learning English, but they practiced many times whilst

making their videos. Even though they did not think they put much effort into

learning English, they put their best efforts into making the videos and

30

practicing their speaking abilities. Item 26 stated, “The improvement in my

learning achievement and my oral skills was because I didn’t want to fail this

class.” The score for item 26 was the lowest, which means the students were

not forced to learn or make the videos.

Table 5

Descriptive data analysis of the end-of-semester survey (Learning motivation)

Items N M SD

Item 18 58 4.47 .569

Item 19 58 4.53 .599

Item 20 58 4.02 .888

Item 21 58 4.14 .687

Item 22 58 4.14 .868

Item 23 58 3.76 .779

Item 24 58 4.14 .687

Item 25 58 4.33 .711

Item 26 58 3.29 1.060

31


motivation)

Qualitative Data Analysis

Student self-reflection journals on Facebook

Students posted self-reflection journals on Facebook after every class

(Appendix E), with most of the students recording a positive attitude

toward the video recording task. They thought the task helped them to

become more confident when speaking English and made them feel they

would like to speak English more. The students also expressed that they

gained a sense of achievement when the teacher gave them positive

comments. The positive outcomes also boosted their confidence when making

32

the next video. In addition, if the students did not do well, they would think

about what they could do to improve. The major advantage of the video-making

task was that it allowed students to play different roles, to achieve English

fluency, and to improve their spoken English. The students also felt that they

improved their abilities to complete the video-making tasks.

There were six most frequent Facebook postings. The top posting stated, “I

understand that we have a lot to improve according to the teacher’s

comments.” Another comment was, “Watching other teams’ videos also gave

me some ideas of how my team can improve. I am looking forward to

making the next video. Hope my group will be better and better!” About 21

students thought that they still needed to improve their video, and through other

groups’ videos, they could discover their shortcomings and fix them. According

to the teachers’ comments on their videos, they could improve their videos

further.

The second top posting stated, “I found that if you want the audience to have

a good impression of your video, the video needs to be able to touch the hearts

of the audience. It needs to either make them laugh out loud, or make them really

curious about what will happen next. The reaction of the audience helps to provide

information on what you can do to make a good video.” About 18 students

33

mentioned their findings on attracting an audience, with students understanding

that if they wanted their videos to be better, they had to know what their audiences

wanted to see.

The third top posting stated, “I'm so glad that we received a great evaluation

from the teacher this time. However, we still need to work hard on the next video.”

About 16 students thought that a great evaluation could help the students to have

a positive attitude and the motivation to do better with the next video.

The fourth top posting stated, “This time our group had a lot of problems

when making the video. We managed to overcome the problems and come up

with a good video. I have to thank my team for their great work and for being so

supportive.” About 14 students mentioned the importance of cooperation with

other students, the teamwork made them perform the project well.

The fifth top posting was, “My teammates did a really great job today.

Somehow I didn’t contribute much this time. I will try my best on the next video.”

About 12 students said that they could evaluate their efforts, sometimes they

might think they did not do well in the video, but they would be encouraged to do

better next time.

The sixth top posting was, “We watched the third video last week. Every

group tried their best to complete this video. Also, everyone did better than

34

before.” About 11 students not only encouraged themselves but also inspired other

groups so that all the class could improve their projects together.

Semi-structured group interviews

The findings of the semi-structured interviews with the students showed

that implementing YouTube video-making tasks in an English speaking course

may provide benefits but also present challenges.

The first interview question was: “How do you feel about implementing

YouTube video-making tasks in the English speaking course?” Most of the

students had a positive attitude to this question. About 22 students said, “I was

interested when I learned that we would be making videos to learn how to speak

English.” 15 students thought that it was exciting to use another way to practice

speaking English. Moreover, 12 students said, “It’s fun that we can practice

speaking through making videos!” Some of the students felt unsure when facing

the video making tasks, and 10 students said, “I was afraid of changing the way

of learning when I heard we had to do the videos.” It appeared that most of the

students felt this project was innovative. However, although some students

lacked confidence in making videos, they still accepted this new method and

wanted to try their best.

35

The second question was, “Tell me how it is different from a course without

video-making tasks.” Although some students were afraid of this learning

method, they still had a positive attitude toward changing their way of learning.

Most of the students said, “I think that video-making tasks are more interesting,

and I won’t be afraid of speaking English anymore.” Other students said, “This

is hugely different from traditional learning. I will make my greatest effort to

accomplish the tasks!” Students were already used to traditional learning

methods so making videos to improve their speaking ability was a whole new

idea for them. Some students felt uneasy about the idea whereas some students

felt it was exciting and interesting. However, both sets were willing to put their

best efforts into this new learning method.

The third question was, “Tell me what you liked about your role in the

video-making tasks.” In response, 16 students said, “I was responsible for

thinking up the story and although I played an insignificant role, I still got to

practice my oral skills.” Some students said, “I played different roles in each

video, but I enjoyed all of them.” Other students said, “I liked some of the roles

that I played, and I tried to do my best even in the roles that I disliked.” These

responses show that most of the students enjoyed the role they played in the

video-making tasks and even if they disliked their role, they still tried their best

36

to support their team. Most of the students pointed out that they did not play a

significant role, but they still could practice their oral skills. It appeared that no

matter what role the students played, they were also able to improve their

speaking abilities during the making of the videos.

The fourth question was, “Tell me about your teacher's expectations of your

performance in the video-making tasks. What did she expect from you?” 21

students said, “My teacher said we did a good job when making the videos,

and we improved a lot through the process. She was glad to know that we

were constantly improving.” 18 students responded, “The teacher thought our

videos were awesome, and we actually did a great job in preparing the videos

and practicing our oral skills.” Other students said, “The teacher thought we

needed to practice more to make better videos and improve our speaking

ability.” It appeared that most of the students were willing to put more effort into

this project to gain their teacher’s approval, and they believed they had really

done their best and would keep practicing their English speaking.

The fifth question was, “What changes did you see in your spoken

English?” All the students gave a positive response when answering this

question with most of the students stating, “I think most of my classmates put

great effort into learning to speak fluently. It’s definitely a positive change.

37

We all had a positive attitude toward the tasks, which is very different

from previous courses.” Other students said, “I feel that we are not afraid of

speaking English in front of others anymore and feel much more comfortable

when speaking English.” Through the seven videos, students felt more confident

when speaking English.

The five questions show that students had both positive and negative

perceptions of integrating video-making tasks in the English speaking course,

with most of students having positive perceptions of the video making tasks.

The students who had negative perceptions were afraid of this project at first,

but they had found their confidence by the end of the semester through

integrating the video-making tasks in the English speaking course.

Teachers’ observation logs

Some of the students demonstrated anxiety at the beginning of the semester.

On February 18th, at the beginning of the semester, the teacher first introduced

the course before asking the students to conduct the pre-test. Some students

were unsure during the pre-test and were afraid of getting low scores for the test.

During the test, the students could not answer the questions in one complete

sentence, and some even repeated the questions as the answers. After conducting

the pre-test, the students complained that the test had been too difficult. The

38

students then discussed the theme of the videos. Some students predicted they

would not do well in the video-recording tasks, while others thought they would

do well when making the videos but would not do well in the speaking tests.

However, most of them were still interested in discussing the themes. The

themes included a restaurant introduction, drama, song performance, and

cooking.

On February 25th, in the second class on the topic discussion, students all

had their own ideas about making videos and were discussing the topic

enthusiastically. Sometimes students were afraid of whether they would succeed

or not in making videos, but they were excited about doing the video recording.

On March 4th, the first videos were shown in the classroom and every group

gave unexpectedly good performances in their videos. The topics included a

story, a restaurant introduction, a song performance, or cookery teaching. The

intonation, pronunciation, and fluency of the students had already improved.

Some of the groups did not achieve their goal in making the videos. However,

the teacher gave them some suggestions and guided them in the right way of

making videos. After sharing their video, the students then started to discuss

their next video production.

39

On March 11th, the teacher showed a demo video to the students and helped

them to better understand how to complete the task. The students all responded

that they understood how to make better videos. Some students started to be

concerned about the grading as they thought that it would be unfair of the

teacher to grade their videos according to the number of views on YouTube. In

consideration of that point of view, the teacher decided to use another method of

grading the videos.

On March 18th, every group showed great improvements. The videos were

different from those in the first round. In the next class, they had different ideas

for their videos and were much more excited about discussing the video

production. In solving the grading problem, the teacher announced that the

scores would be graded by peers instead of the number of views on YouTube.

On April 1st, the third videos were shown. The videos had improved again

and the students’ speaking was becoming more fluent and confident. However,

there was still a problem in making the videos. The volume in the videos was

unsteady and the teacher reminded the students to solve this problem in order to

make the video better.

On April 15th, the fourth videos were shown. The volume problem had

improved, and most of the groups’ video performances had got better, although

40

some groups remained stable. In the following class, the students kept

improving their videos and their speaking. During the class, they no longer

exhibited anxiety over problems with the video recording or their speaking

performances.

41

CHAPTER FIVE

CONCLUSION, DISCUSSION, SUGGESTION FOR FUTURE STUDY

Conclusion

Mobile technology can be applied to many fields, and learners are becoming

increasingly familiar with utilizing the features of mobile phones to achieve

their learning goals. In an EFL learning environment, mobile technology can

provide learners with a way to develop creative learning materials and engage in

immediate communication with others.

In this study, the quantitative data showed that the students achieved lower

scores in the pre-test. However, over one semester, the score had significantly

improved between the pre-and post-tests. The recording of the students’ answers

in the post-test were better than for the pre-test, and their intonation, fluency,

and confidence had greatly improved. The end of semester survey also showed

that students had higher learning achievements, learning attitude and learning

motivation from making the videos. The qualitative data showed students had a

positive attitude during this new learning project, and most of the students

thought they had greatly improved their speaking ability. However, their

reflections on Facebook or in the group interviews demonstrated that most of the

students initially felt uncomfortable or were scared when making the videos

42

However, after they started, they gained in confidence, and they could feel the

improvement when speaking English in front of other people.

The students lacked confidence and were anxious when they took the pre-

test and when they first began to make the videos. However, after making videos

for a few weeks, they began to demonstrate more confidence and positive

attitudes toward their spoken English. The results of the end of semester survey

also indicated that students had significantly higher motivation. The feedback

from the students shows their attitudes clearly. At first, they were afraid of

making mistakes when making the videos, but they then felt more confident in

making and showing their videos in the next class.

In addition, the video-making tasks and YouTube contest significantly

increased the students’ speaking abilities. The video-making task appears to

have significant potential as an English learning tool for EFL learners in a

university context. It helps students to achieve progress in their speaking,

improves their learning attitude, and increases their motivation.

Discussion

In this study, quantitative and qualitative data methods were applied during

the research. The improvement between the pre- and post-tests showed that the

students’ speaking abilities, whether affected by the video-making or not, the

43

survey showed the students’ learning achievement, attitude, and motivation

toward this course. Besides the quantitative data, there was feedback from the

students on Facebook, group interviews, and class observations. From the

feedback of students on Facebook after every class, students were able to reflect

on their feelings toward the course, and could provide their opinions to the

researcher. Through the group interviews, the researcher was able to ask more

detail about the students’ feelings and their ideas so as to make up for any

insufficiencies in their Facebook postings. By observing the class, the researcher

was also able to record more detail about the attitudes and feelings toward this

course and record every student’s reflection immediately.

According to the quantitative data analysis and qualitative data analysis, it

was reported that some of the students revealed their anxieties and uncertainties

toward this course. However, after a few weeks, they started to gain confidence

and were more enthusiastic in making videos. Furthermore, they started to

experience improvements in their speaking ability.

Suggestions for Future Study

According to the students’ feedback and group interviews, most of the

students thought that seven videos over one semester were too many. For them,

it was not easy to finish seven videos in such a short time. Consequently, the

44

number of videos should be reduced to five. Some students thought that grading

according to the YouTube reviews was unfair, so future research should also take

peer reviews into consideration.

45

REFERENCES

Chen, Y. S., Kao, T. C., & Sheu, J. P. (2003). A mobile learning system for

scaffolding bird watching learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning,

19, 347–359.

Chinnery, G. M. (2006). archive. today. Language learning & technology, 10(1),

9-16.

Christopher Fernandez, "Of English Teachers Then and Now." The Star

[Malaysia], November 11, 2012

Coombe, C., Folse, K., & Hubley, N. (2007). A practical guide to assessing

English language learners. USA: Michigan Press.

Dahlstrom, E. (2013). ECAR study of undergraduate students and information

technology, 2013. Boulder, CO: Educause Center for Applied Research.

Ellis, Rod.1994. The Study of Second Language Acquisition. Oxford:

Oxford University Press.

Dörnyei, Z., & Ottó, I. (1998). Motivation in action: A process model of L2

motivation (Vol. 4, pp. 43-69). Working papers in applied linguistics.

Ellis, R. (1994). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford University

Press.

Ericsson. (2013). Smartphone usage experience: An Ericsson consumer insight

46

report. Stockholm, Sweden: Ericsson Publications.

Falaki, H., Mahajan, R., Kandula, S., Lymberopoulos, D., Govindan, R., &

Estrin, D. (2010, June). Diversity in smartphone usage. In Proceedings of

the 8th international conference on Mobile systems, applications, and

services (pp. 179-194). ACM.

Förster, N., & Souvignier, E. (2014). Learning progress assessment and goal

setting: Effects on reading achievement, reading motivation and reading

self-concept. Learning and Instruction, 32, 91-100.

Gardner, R. C. (1985). Social psychology and second language learning: The

role of attitudes and motivation. Arnold.

Gaudart, H. (1992). Persuading students to speak in English. In Teaching and

Learning English in Challenging Situations. Proceedings for the first

Malaysian English Language Teaching Association International

Conference.

Gikas, J., & Grant, M. M. (2013). Mobile computing devices in higher

education: Student perspectives on learning with cell phones, smartphones

& social media. The Internet and Higher Education, 19, 18-26.

Gromik, N. A. (2012). Cell phone video recording feature as a language learning

tool: A case study. Computers & Education, 58(1), 223-230.

47

Hwang, G. J., & Chang, H. F. (2011). A formative assessment-based mobile

learning approach to improving the learning attitudes and achievements of

students. Computers & Education, 56(4), 1023-1031.

Irina, A. (2012). A Cell Phone in the Classroom: A Friend or a Foe?. European

Association for Computer-Assisted Language Learning (EUROCALL).

Kirkgoz, Y. (2011). A Blended Learning Study on Implementing Video

Recorded Speaking Tasks in Task-Based Classroom Instruction. Turkish

Online Journal of Educational Technology-TOJET, 10(4), 1-13.

Kozma, R. B., & Anderson, R. E. (2002). Qualitative case studies of innovative

pedagogical practices using ICT. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning,

18, 387–394.

Kukulska-Hulme, A. (2009). Will mobile learning change language

learning?.ReCALL, 21(2), 157-165.

Lonergan, J. (1984). Video in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.

Miangah, T. M., & Nezarat, A. (2012). Mobile-assisted language

learning.International Journal of Distributed and Parallel Systems, 3(1),

309-319.

Motiwalla, L. F. (2007). Mobile learning: A framework and evaluation.

48

Computers & Education, 49(3), 581-596.

Patten, B., Arnedillo Sánchez, I., & Tangney, B. (2006). Designingcollaborative,

constructionist and contextual applications for handheld devices.

Computers & Education, 46, 294–308.

PC Magazine. (2013). Encyclopaedia: Definition of smartphone. Retrieved

January 10, 2014, from

http://www.pcmag.com/encyclopedia/term/51537/smartphone.

Price, S., & Rogers, Y. (2004). Let’s get physical: The learning benefits of

interacting in digitally augmented physical spaces. Computers &

Education,43(1), 137-151.

Richardson, M., Abraham, C., & Bond, R. (2012). Psychological correlates of

university students' academic performance: a systematic review and meta-

analysis. Psychological bulletin, 138(2), 353.

Roschelle, J. (2003). Keynote paper: unlocking the learning value of wireless

mobile devices. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 19, 260–272.

Sagor, R. (2000). Guiding school improvement with action research. Ascd.

Saville-Troike, M. (2012). Introducing second language acquisition. Cambridge

University Press.

Shield L. & Kukulska-Hulme A. (eds.) (2008) Special edition of ReCALL (20,

49

3: 2008) on Mobile Assisted Language Learning: http://www.eurocall-

languages.org/recall/r_contents.html#sep08

Shudong, W., & Higgins, M. (2006). Limitations of mobile phone learning.

JALT CALL Journal, 2(1), 3–14.

Stuart, S. A., Brown, M. I., & Draper, S. W. (2004). Using an electronic voting

system in logic lectures: one practitioner's application. Journal of

Computer Assisted Learning, 20(2), 95-102.

Soikkeli, T., Karikoski, J., & Hämmäinen, H. (2013). Characterizing smartphone

usage: diversity and end user context. International Journal of Handheld

Computing Research (IJHCR), 4(1), 15-36.

Techopedia. (2014). Technology dictionary: Smartphone definition. Retrieved

January 10, 2014, from

http://www.techopedia.com/definition/2977/smartphone.

Ting. Y. (2013). Using mobile technologies to create interwoven learning

interactions: An intuitive design and its evaluation. Computers &

Education. 60. 1-13.

Tyler, R. (2002). Mobile Tech - Defining Mobile Technology for Legal

Professionals. Retrieved June 3, 2002, from

http://www.llrx.com/columns/mobiletech.htm

http://www.llrx.com/columns/mobiletech.htm

50

Tomalin, B., & Stempleski, S. (1990). Video in action. London: Prentice Hall.

Tosun, N. (2012). The Effect of The Internet And Mobile Phones On The Habit

Of Teacher Candidates’ Using Turkish Language As Written Language.

Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 55, 766-775.

Traxler, J. (2009). Current state of mobile learning1. Mobile learning, 9.

Yalçın, Ö., & İnceçay, V. (2014). Foreign Language Speaking Anxiety: The case

of Spontaneous Speaking Activities. Procedia-Social and Behavioral

Sciences, 116, 2620-2624.

51

APPENDIX A

TOFEL Speaking Test (Pre-test)

54

TOEFL Speaking Test (Post-test)

57

APPENDIX B

iBT/Next Generation TOEFL Test Independent Speaking Rubrics (Scoring

Standards)

http://www.ets.org/s/toefl/pdf/toefl_speaking_rubrics.pdf

58

APPENDIX C

End-of-semester survey (Chinese version)

製作 YouTube 影片運用於英語口說學習之成效研究

(實用英語聽講課程問卷)

這個問卷的目的在了解同學們於實用英語聽講課程的學習狀況，希望可以藉

由同學們的意見，改進未來的相關課程，請同學們依據個人實際狀況作答，

本問卷之結果將保密且僅供研究之用。

第一部分背景資料

1. 班級 _____________________ 2. 性別 _____________________

3. 年齡 _____________________

第二部分影片用於英語口語學習相關問題 (請在適合你的選項上打”√”)

非

常

同

意

同

意

普

通

不

同

意

非

常

不

同

意

學習成效

1. 製作英語影片幫助我提升英文字彙量。

2. 製作英語影片幫助我提升英文聽力。

3. 製作英語影片幫助我提升英文口說。

4. 製作英語影片幫助我提升英文發音。

5. 製作英語影片幫助我提升創意。

6. 我確信我現在比較能用英文清楚表達我的想

法。

7. 製作影片增加我使用英文的信心。

8. 修完這堂課後，我比較不懼怕開口說英語。

學習態度

9. 製作一個好的英語影片是困難的。

10. 對於在鏡頭前表演我感到有趣及興奮。

11. 我很享受製作影片的過程，像是計畫內容及建

構行動次序等等。

12. 在製作影片過程中，我和我的組員會有許多爭

59

吵及意見不和。

13. 使用 YouTube 平台發布影片是很方便的。

14. YouTube 點閱率競賽會讓我想做好影片。

15. 對我來說，比起其他課程，這門課程較為有趣。

16. 修完這堂課後，我變得更喜歡英語了。

17. 我喜歡這門課的課程設計。

學習動機

18. 製作英語影片幫助我學習如何與同學合作。

19. 製作英語影片對我來說是有意義的學習經驗。

20. 我對於自己製作出來的影片感到滿意。

21. 製作英語影片增加了英文口說的學習樂趣。

22. 製作英語影片使團隊間的友情更為緊密。

23. 製作英語影片使我更努力學習英文。

24. 整體而言，製作英語影片對我的英文學習有幫

助。

25. 如果可以重新選擇，我還是會選擇這門課。

26. 在這堂課後，我的英語學習動機或口語能力的

提升，其實是因為我不想被當或想要拿高分。

第三部份問答題

1. 請說明課堂上運用製作英語影片活動對你有什麼影響或幫助?

2. 你對運用拍攝英語影片進行課堂活動有什麼感想?

3. 你有察覺從開學到現在，你的英語口說有什麼不同或進步嗎?

4. 整體而言，你對這堂課的教學方式有什麼感想?

5. 請問你對這堂課還有什麼任何其他感言、意見或建議

60

End-of-semester survey (English version)

The effect of implementing Video-making project into English speaking

(The questionnaire of Practical English Listening and Speaking course)

This questionnaire aims to understand learning situation of students in the Practical

English Listening and Speaking course and improve the future related course by

students’ opinions. Please answer the questions according to your real situation, the

result will be private and only provide for research.

Part1 Background

1. Class _____________________ 2. Sex _____________________

3. Age _____________________

Part2 Questions related to implement video-making project into English

speaking learning (Please click the answer you choose)

Stro

ngly

agree

Agree

Neu

tral

Disa

gree

Stro

ngly

disa

gree


1. Making videos helped me to improve my

vocabulary in English.


listening in English.


speaking in English


pronunciation in English.

5. Making videos helped me to increase

creativity.

6. I am certain that I will be able to get my ideas

across clearly when speaking English.


confidence in using English.

8. I am not afraid of speaking English after

finishing this course.

Learning attitude

9. It is very difficult to make a good English

video.

10. I am interested in acting and excited about

61

being in front of the camera.

11. I enjoyed the video production process, such

as plan the story and build the action

sequences.

12. My teammates and I have a lot of arguments

and disagreement during the video making

process.

13. It is convenient to upload videos on YouTube

14. The competition on YouTube makes me want

to do better in making the video.

15. This course is more interesting to me in

comparison with other courses.

16. I like English more after finishing this course.

17. I like this course design (video production

project).

Learning motivation

18. This video production project helped me to

learn to cooperate with others.

19. This video production project has been a

meaningful learning experience.

20. I am satisfied with the videos we made.

21. Making videos increased enjoyment in

learning speaking ability.

22. This video production project has tightened

friendship among teammates.。

23. This video production project helped me

more engaging in the learning of English.

24. This video production project helped me in

learning English.

25. If I get to decide all over again, I would still

chose to attend this course.

26. The improvement of my English learning

motivation or speaking ability due to I didn’t

want to be failed in this course.

Part3 Open Ended Questions

1. What’s the effect or help to you in making videos in the classroom?

2. How do you feel about filming videos in this classroom?

3. What difference or improvement did you see during this semester?

62

4. How do you feel about the teaching method in this class?

5. Any suggestions to improve the course design?

63

APPENDIX D

Interview Questions (Chinese Version)

1. 您對將製作影片融入英語口說課堂活動有什麼感想？

2. 請問您覺得如果課程不使用製作英語影片活動會有什麼不一樣？

3. 請說明在製作影片活動中您喜歡自己扮演的角色的哪個地方？

4. 請說明您的老師對於您在製作影片活動中的期待，她對您有什麼樣的期

待？

5. 請說明您察覺了自己在英語口說中有什麼樣的變化？

64

Interview Questions (English version)

1. What do you feel about implementing YouTube video-making tasks in the

English speaking course?

2. Tell me how that is different from a course without video-making tasks.

3. Tell me what you liked about your role in the video-making tasks.

4. Tell me about your teacher's expectations of your performance on the video-

making tasks. What did she expect from you?

5. What changes did you see in your spoken English?

65

APPENDIX E

Facebook posting examples

Apple Zang

Gina Shin

Lily Ting

66

Judy Chen

Mi Liu

Candy Lin

67

Eric Huang

Cindy Lin

Jessie Chen

朝陽科技大學應用英語系...

Documents

Transcript of 朝陽科技大學應用英語系...

朝陽科技大學 應用英語系...

Documents

Transcript of 朝陽科技大學 應用英語系...

朝陽科技大學應用英語系...

Transcript of 朝陽科技大學應用英語系...