Investigating The Effectiveness of Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL) Using Drill in Enhancing Vocabulary-A Study on Junior High School

Yuri Lolita

Abstract

Vocabulary is one of English components which supports English skill. Teaching English vocabulary by using media has been interesting in research. This study tried to analyze the effect of CALL using drill and non-CALL using drill as media on teaching vocabulary to know whether it could increase students’ vocabulary retention in Junior High School. Computer-Assisted Language Learning (CALL) has evolved through various stages in both technology as well as the pedagogical use of technology (Warshauer & Healay,1998) Studies show that the CALL trend has facilities students in their English language vocabulary with useful tools such as computer based activities and word processing. Students are able to produce higher quality essays in a student-centered nature and less-intimidating manner (Braine, 1997).In line with this research, it was used quantitative design. This study also purposes to find out to how the students’ response towards using CALL. This study was investigated seventh grade students consist of 126 learn. There are A class consist of 30 persons, B class consist of 34 persons, C class consist of 32 persons and D class consist of 30 persons. English vocabulary with CALL using drill and non-CALL using drill. In conclusion, of students’ response toward using CALL, the experimental group students are agree that CALL using drill is effective media for learning vocabulary retention, and have positive response rather than control group students. Therefore, teacher should be more creative to teach the students vocabulary skill because it can give the students impact for teaching and learning process.

Full Text:

PDF

References

Balfanz, R., DePaoli, J. L., Ingram, E. S., Bridgeland, J. M. & Fox, J. H. (2016). Closing the college gap a roadmap to postsecondary readiness and attainment. Washington: Civic Enterprises.

Bowers C., Carper T. M., Gebrim J. B., Nicholson D., & Vogel-Walcutt J. J. (2010). Cognitive load theory vs. constructivist approaches: which best leads to efficient, deep learning? Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 27, 133–145.

Burke, R. (1982). CAI sourcebook. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

Bush M. D., & Terry, R. M. (Eds.). (1997). Technology Enhanced Language Learning. Lincolnwood, IL: National Textbook Company.

Celce-Murcia, M. (1991, 2001). Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language. Los Angeles: University of California.

Couillard, C. (2011, March). Collaborative Computing to Improve Work Process: Document Collaboration. University of Wisconsin-Stout.

Harmer, J. (1998). The Practice of English Language Teaching. Longman.

Levy, M. (1997). Computer-Assisted Language Learning: Context and Conceptualization. Clarendon paper backs.

Murphy, E. (1997). Constructivism: From Philosophy to Practice. Retrieved December 5, 2017, from www.stemnet.nf.ca/~elmurphy/emurphy/cle.html

Nunan., D. (1998). Language Teaching Methodology. London: Prentice Hall International.

Resnick, M. (1998). Educational Technology Research & Development. Technologies for Lifelong Kindergarten, 46(4).

Stevens, V. (1999). Language Learning Techniques Implemented Through Word Processing. Retrieved December 5, 2017, from http://www.netword.com/esl_home

Thompson, J. (2008). Don't Be Afraid to Explore Web 2.0. Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappan International Inc.

Warshauer, M., & Kern, R. (2000). Network-based language teaching: Concepts and Practice. New York: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524735

Warshauer, M., & Healey, D. (1998). Computer and Language Learning: An Overview. Language Teaching, 31, 57–71. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444800012970

DOI: https://doi.org/10.20961/seeds.v2i1.24650

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.