Upload
cathy-liu
View
619
Download
2
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
NEW ONE
Citation preview
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.