10122603 劉倪均internet based grammar instruction in the esl classroom(NEW)

Presenter: Ni-Jyun Cathy Liu Instructor: Dr. Pi-Ying Teresa HsuDate: October 8, 2012

Internet-based Grammar

Instruction in the ESL Classroom

Citation

Mohamad, F. (2009,December).Internet-based Grammar Instruction in the ESL Classroom. International Journal of Pedagogies and Learning,5(2), 34-38.

2

ContentsIntroduction

Literature Review

Purposes

Methodology

Result & Conclusion

Reflection

3

4

Introduction

Internet is proved to be an effective tool for language learning.

Conventional penBoard instruction

Internet-based

6

To find out the effectiveness of Internet-based grammar instruction (IBGI) on the learning of grammar

Purpose

7

Literature Review

Grammar explains how a particular language works, i.e., grammatical facts about that language.

(Fennell, 2002)

8

Grammar as a set of language patterns that show sensible sentence.

(Coelho & Rivers, 2003)

9

We must strive to answer the question “ What are the optimal conditions for overt teaching of grammar?”.

(Brown, 1994)

10

11

Methodology

A-Experimental Group1(EG1) ； B-Control Group (CG)；

O1-Pre-test ； O2-Post-test ； X1-treatment1

Group Pre-test Treatment Post-test

A O1 X1 O2

B O1 O2

Time

Design

12

week 1~week3

10 weeks

The items of grammar under study

Were learned.(2 hours)

Subject-verb agreement

was covered.

week 4~week6

Tenses were covered(simple, continuous,and perfect tenses).

week 7~week10

Procedure

13

14

Result&

Conclusion

15

Research Questions

Is IBGI more effective than CPBI in teaching parts-of-speech, subject-verb agreement and tenses?

In their essays, do students who are exposed to IBGI make fewer grammatical errors in parts-of-speech, subject-verb agreement and tenses those who receive CPBI?

16

Result

class N Mean

Total Gain Scores Internet-based 26 8.0000

Conventional 24 5.1667

Table1.The mean of the total gain scores of the groups

8.0000

17

t df Sig.(2-tailed)

Total Gain Scores 2.809 48 .007

Result

Table2.The t-test comparing the mean of the total gain scores of the groups

P<0.05

.007

18

Result

Area class N Mean

Internet-based 26 2.5769

Conventional 24 1.5417

Internet-based 26 3.1538

Conventional 24 1.5833

Internet-based 26 2.2692

Conventional 24 5.1667

Table3.The mean of the gain scores for each grammatical area of the groups

Parts-of-Speech

Subject-verb Agreement

Tenses

19

t df Sig.(2tailed)

Parts-of-Speech 2.273 48 .028

Subject-verb

Agreement2.794 48 .007

Tenses 0.517 48 .609

Result

Table4.The t-test comparing the means of the total gain scores for each grammatical area of the groups

.028

.007

0.609

P<0.05

Result

Table5.The mean scores for errors of the groups

Class NMean

(pre-test)

Mean

(Post-test)

Internet-based 26 8.2308 5.3077

Conventional 24 8.2083 6.5417

t df Sig.(2tailed)

Difference in Errors -2.297 48 .026

Result

Table6.The t-tests comparing the mean differences of the errors made

.026

22

Conclusion

Internet is an effective medium in teaching and learning grammar.

Not all items could be effectively learned using the Internet.

23

Reflection

Internet-based teaching could be convenient and useful in English teaching.

According to my teaching experience. Using Internet will be helpful in teaching.

Internet is a potentially effective teaching tool.

24

Thank you for your listening.

25

Always be the princess what I want to be.