跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(44.200.86.95) 您好!臺灣時間:2024/05/25 15:25
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::

詳目顯示

: 
twitterline
研究生:徐乃麒
研究生(外文):Naichi Hsu
論文名稱:電腦輔助溝通在第二外語口語能力習得之效益— 後設分析研究
論文名稱(外文):A Meta-Analysis Investigating the Efficacy of CMC on Second Language Speaking
指導教授:林惠芬林惠芬引用關係
指導教授(外文):Huifen Lin
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立高雄師範大學
系所名稱:英語學系
學門:人文學門
學類:外國語文學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2012
畢業學年度:100
語文別:英文
論文頁數:128
中文關鍵詞:電腦輔助語言溝通第二外語口說能力後設分析
外文關鍵詞:Computer-mediated communicationSecond language acquisitionSecond language speakingMeta-analysis
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:2
  • 點閱點閱:854
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:129
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:3
本論文使用後設分析之統計方法,探討電腦輔助溝通如何影響第二外語口語能力習得。本研究蒐集發表年份介於1990年至2011年之相關實證研究共二十篇。藉由此二十篇實證研究所提供之實驗資訊及結果,利用後設分析計算軟體計算出效果量,進而回答下列研究問題:〈一〉電腦輔助溝通對於第二外語口語能力習得之整體成效、〈二〉即時性和非即時性電腦輔助溝通是否對第二外語口語能力習得有不同效果、〈三〉電腦輔助溝通所使用之平台是否影響第二外語口語能力習得之成效、〈四〉電腦輔助溝通所進行之溝通性活動是否影響第二外語口語能力習得之成效、〈五〉是否有其它因素影響電腦輔助溝通對於第二外語口語能力習得之成效。在蒐集後設分析所需的實證研究的過程中,除了使用Google Scholar進行地毯式搜尋,本研究特別針對以下六個資料庫進行搜尋:Educational Resource Information Center (ERIC), ProQuest Digital Dissertation Full Text (PQDT), JSTOR-Arts &; Sciences III Collection, National Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations in Taiwan (NDLTD), Airiti Library, 和 Social Science Citation Index (SSCI)。
本實驗結果顯示,電腦輔助語言溝通對於第二外語口語能力習得有正面效果,且非即時性電腦輔助語言溝通之效果優於即時性電腦輔助語言溝通,以及進行自由聊天活動利於電腦輔助語言溝通在第二外語口語能力習得之效果。
根據本實驗結果,若未來語言教師欲將電腦輔助語言溝通納入課程活動中,建議使用非即時性電腦輔助語言溝通,並將學生分成不超過六人的小組。進行自由聊天活動或者是語音部落格,並且將溝通活動視為正式課程的一部分。
本實驗在某些方面仍有所不足,包括所收集的實證研究數量偏少,許多因素如第二外語學習者的母語未能內入考量,以及本實驗未能納入當今極受歡迎之電腦輔助溝通平台如Facebook。企望未來相關的實驗能補足本實驗的缺失,一同貢獻電腦輔助語言溝通在第二外語口語能力上成效之研究。










The present study adopts research synthesis and quantitative meta-analysis approaches to investigate the effects of computer-mediated-communication (CMC) on the acquisition of second language in terms of oral skills. It aims to synthesize CMC research on L2 oral skills published from1990 to present. A total number of 20 experimental and quasi-experimental studies which had used CMC as a language learning facilitation tool were included and carefully coded for the calculation of effect size, and for the examination of moderators including the CMC mode, mediums, and activities. A second coder was invited to ensure the inter-coder reliability. The data were retrieved from the following databases: (1) Educational Resource Information Center (ERIC), (2) ProQuest Digital Dissertation Full Text (PQDT), (3) JSTOR-Arts &; Sciences III Collection, (4) National Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations in Taiwan (NDLTD), (5) Airiti Library, and and (6) Social Science Citation Index (SSCI). A list of inclusion and exclusion criteria for deciding which primary studies are suitable for the present study was also included.

The purposes of the present study are to investigate (1) the overal effect of CMC on L2 speaking skills, (2) whether L2 speaking skills benefit more from synchronous CMC or asynchronous CMC, (3) whether the CMC platform play a key role in students’ learning process, through meta-analysis, and (4) whether the types of CMC activities affects the oral leaning outcome. The results indicated that CMC leads to more gains in L2 speaking proficiency. Moreover, the examination of moderators suggested that total sample size, grouping, CMC modes, CMC activity, treatment duration, and class requirement could have an effect on the oral learning outcomes.

The present synthesis is limited in certain aspects. First, the number of the primary studies included was considered too small. Second, the learners’ L1 wasn’t taken into consideration when examining the moderators. Third, the final included studies didn’t contain studies investigating some popular CMC platforms like Facebook and Twitter.

The present study offers a number of pedagogical implications. To begin with, incorporating CMC into language classrooms can be facilitative. Suggestions of how CMC should be conducted are as follows: Put students into smaller groupings no more than 6, choose ACMC over SCMC, adopt free chat or voice blog as the CMC activity, and use CMC as a class requirement instead of optional activity.

There are some suggestions for future studies as well. To contribute to meta-analysis, the future researchers are advised to conduct experimental studies with a real control group, record and report in detail the statistical results, and separate the different variables for the convenience of comparison.







ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS i
ABSTRACT (CHINESE) ii
ABSTRACT iv
LIST OF FIGURES ix
LIST OF TABLES ix
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION 1
Motivation and Background 1
Theories supporting CMC 3
CMC and its pedagogical features 3
CMC and language development 7
Benefits of CMC 7
CMC and speaking 8
Meta-analysis 9
Statement of the problem 10
Purposes of the study 11
Research questions 12
Significance of the study 12
Scope and limitations 13
Definition of terms 14
Glossary for abbreviations 15
Summary 16
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW 17
Definition of CMC 17
Different types of CMC 19
Computer-mediated communication platform 21
Theories and Hypothesis Supporting CMC in SLA 25
Speaking 31
The Task-based approach 35
CMC on speaking 37
Meta-analysis 38
Previous Meta-analysis studies on CMC 44
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY 46
Settling on a Topic of Interest 46
Searching and Selecting the Studies 47
Reading and Examining the Studies Retrieved 52
Coding the Eligible Studies 60
Inter-coder Reliability 62
Calculation of Effect Sizes 63
Glossary on Symbols 65
Analysis of the Effect Size Mean 68
Test for Homogeneity of the Distribution 70
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS 74
The research synthesis 74
Meta-analysis of Study Characteristics and Findings 77
The Examination of Moderators 79
CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION 92
Research question 1. How effective is CMC overall regarding the acquisition of L2 speaking ability? 92
Research question 2. What is the relative efficacy of different CMC modes of L2 speaking ability? 93
Research question 3. What is the role that CMC platform plays in L2 speaking acquisition? 95
Research question 4. What is the role that CMC activity plays in L2 speaking acquisition? 97
Research question 5. What are other moderators that might mediated the efficacy of CMC on L2 speaking? 98
Limitations of the Study 104
Pedagogical Implications 106
Suggestions for Future Research 107
References 109












LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. The process of learning implicit knowledge (p. 119) 28
Figure 2. Blue print for the speakers 33
Figure 3. A flow chart demonstrating the steps the researcher took in the first phase. 52
Figure 4. The flow chart demonstrating the screening process. 56
Figure 5. A flow chart summarizing the formulas used. 73
Figure 6. Publication frequency of experimental and quasi-experimental studies investigating the efficacy of CMC on L2 speaking 75

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. The Exclusion Criteria and Examples of the Studies Eliminated 54
Table 2. The Number of Studies and skills they focus on. 56
Table 3. A Brief Summary to the 20 Studies Included 58
Table 4. Descriptive Statistics of Treatment Effect Sizes 77
Table 5. The Homogeneity Test for Publication Year and Means 79
Table 6. The Homogeneity Test for Publication Type and Means 80
Table 7. The Homogeneity Test for Sample Size and Means 81
Table 8. The Homogeneity Test for Grouping 82
Table 9. The Homogeneity Test for Educational Level 83
Table 10. The Homogeneity Test for Target Language 83
Table 11. The Homogeneity Test for ACMC and SCMC 84
Table 12. The Homogeneity Test for CMC Medium 85
Table 13. The Homogeneity Test for CMC Platform 85
Table 14. The Homogeneity Test for CMC Activity 87
Table 15. The Homogeneity Test for CMC Setting 88
Table 16. The Homogeneity Test for Treatment Duration 88
Table 17. The Homogeneity Test for Class requirement of CMC 89


Abrams, Z. I. (2001). Computer-mediated communication and group journals: Expanding the repertoire of participant roles. System, 29(4), 489-503.
Abrams, Z. I. (2003). The effect of synchronous and aynchronous cmc on oral performance in german. The Modern Language Journal, 87(2).
Abramson, G. (2004). Metacognition and online communication. Journal of Instruction Delivery Systems, 18, 6-14.
*AbuSeileek, A. F. (2007). Cooperative vs. Individual learning of oral skills in a call environment. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 20(5), 493-514. doi: 10.1080/09588220701746054
Adkins, A. M. (2009). MySpace, facebook, and the strength of internet ties: Online social networking and bridging social capital. Master's thesis, The University of Akron.
*Ahn, H. (2006). The impact of individual learner characteristics and synchronous computer-mediated communication on language production in learners of English. Doctor of Philosophy, The University of Arizona.
*Alastuey, M. C. B. (2010). Synchronous-voice computer-mediated communication: Effects on pronunciation. CALICO Journal, 28(1), 1-20.
Alavi, M. (1994). Computer-mediated collaborative learning: An empirical evaluation. MIS Quarterly, 18(2), 159-174.
Arnold, M. N. (2002). Computer-mediated communication: Writing to speak without foreign language anxiety. The University of Texas.
Beauvois, M. H. (1998). Conversation in slow motion_computer-mediated communication in the foreign language classroom. Canadian Modern Language Review, 54(2), 198-217.
Best, A. C. (2006). Appropriate use of online communication methods in education. Journal of Instruction Delivery Systems, 20(4), 313-317.
*Blake, C. (2009). Potential of text-based internet charts for improving oral fluency in a second language. The Modern Language Journal, 93(2), 227-240.
*Blake, R., Nicole L. Wilson, P., Cetto, M., &; Pardo-Ballester, C. (2008). Measuring oral proficiency in distance, face-to-face, and blended classrooms. Language Learning &; Technology, 12(3), 114-127.
Blattner, G., &; Fiori, M. (2009). Facebook in the language classroom_Promises and possibilities. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 6(1), 17-28.
Brown, H. D. (2007). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedogogy (3rd ed.). New York: Pearson Education.
Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., &; Rothstein, H. R. (2009). Introduction to Meta-Analysis. Chichester, West Sussex, United Kingdom: John Wiley &; Sons, Ltd.
Burnett, C. (2003). Learning to chat: Tutor participation in synchronous online chat. Teaching in Higher Education, 8(2), 247-261. doi: 10.1080/1356251032000052474
Campbell, A. (2005). Weblog applications for efl/esl classroom blogging: A comparative review. TESL-EJ, 9(3), 1-11. Retrieved from http://www.teslej.org/wordpress/issues/volume9/ej35/ej35m1/
Celce-Murcia, M., Brinton, D., &; Goodwin, J. M. (1996). Teaching pronunciation: A reference for teachers of english to speakers of other languages: Cambridge University Press.
*Chang, Y. Y. (2008). A study of synchronous text-based computer-mediated communication and language learning outcomes. Tamkang University.
*Chang, Y. Y. (2007). The potential of synchronous text-based computer-mediated communication for second language acquisition. Issues in Information Systems, VIII(2), 355-361.
Chang, Y.-Y., &; Hsu, S. H.-H. (2008). The factors of synchronous computer-mediated communication on efl writing. Paper presented at the The Second Tamkang International Conference on Second Language Writing, Tamkang University.
Chapelle, C. A. (1998a). Analysis of interaction sequences in computer-assisted language learning. TESOL Quarterly, 32(4), 753-757.
Chapelle, C. A. (1998b). Multimedia call: Lessons to be learned from research on instructed sla. Language Learning &; Technology, 2(1), 22-34.
Chapelle, C. A. (2007). Technology and second language acquisition. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 27, 98-114.
*Chen, F. (2007). The effects of voice-based synchronous and asynchronous cmc on efl learners' oral proficiency. Master of Arts, National Taiwan Normal University.
Chen, Y. (2005). Computer mediated communication: The use of cmc to develop efl learners' communicative competence. Asian EFL Journa, 7(1).
Chun, D. M., &; Plass, J. L. (1996). Facilitating reading comprehension with mutlimedia. System, 24(4), 503-519.
Cooper, H. M., Hedges, L. V., &; Valentine, J. C. (2009). The handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis: SAGE.

Darhower, M. (2002). Interactional features of synchronous computer-mediated communication in the intermediate l2 class: A sociocultural case study. CALICO Journal, 19(2), 249-278.
Derwing, T. M., &; Munro, M. J. (2005). Second language accent and pronunciation teaching: A research-based approach. TESOL quarterly, 39(3), 379-398.
Derwing, T. M., &; Rossiter, M. J. (2002). Esl learners' perceptions of their pronunciation needs and strategies. System, 30(2), 155-166.
Ellis, R. (1997). Sla research and language teaching: Oxford Applied Linguistics.
Felix, U. (2005). Analysing recent call effectiveness research: Towards a common agenda. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 18(1-2), 1-32. doi: 10.1080/09588220500132274
Felix, U. (2008). The unreasonable effectivness of CALL: What have we learned in two decades of research? ReCALL, 20(02). doi: 10.1017/s0958344008000323
Gains, J. (1999). Electronic mail—a new style of communication or just a new medium?: An investigation into the text features of e-mail. English for Specific Pirposes, 18(81-101).
Gass, S., &; Selinker, L. (2001). Second language acquisition: An inroductory course (2nd ed.). Mahwah: NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Glass, G. V., McGaw, B., &; Smith, M. L. (1981). Meta-analysis in social research. Beverly Hills: SAGE.
Godwin-Jones, R. (2005). Messaging, gaming, peer-to-peer sharing: Language learning strategies &; tools for the millennial generation. Language Learning &; Technology, 9(1), 17-22.
Green, B. F., &; Hall, J. A. (1984). Quatitative methods for literature reviews. Ann Rev Psychol, 35, 37-53.
Hirotani, M. (2009). Synchronous versus asynchronous cmc and transfer to japanese oral performance. CALICO Journal, 26(2), 413-438.
*Huang, H.-T. D., &; Hung, S.-T. A. (2010). Effects of electronic portfolios on EFL oral performance_p192. Asian EFL Journal 12(2), 192-212.
Hymes, D. (1972). On communicative competence. Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin Books.
Jepson, K. (2005). Conversations and negotiated interaction in text and voice chat rooms. Language Learning &; Technology, 9(3), 79-98.
Johnson, G. M. (2006). Synchronous and asynchronous text-based cmc in educational contexts: A review of recent research. TECHTRENDS, 50(4), 46-53.
Jonassen, D. H. (2004). Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (2nd ed.).
Kabilan, M. K., Ahmad, N., &; Abidin, M. J. Z. (2010). Facebook: An online environment for learning of English in institutions of higher education? The Internet and Higher Education, 13(4), 179-187. doi: 10.1016/j.iheduc.2010.07.003
Kawase, A. (2006). Second language acquisition and synchronous computer mediated communication. Teacher College, Columbia University Working Papers in TESOL &; Applied Linguistics, 6(2), 1-27.
Kern, R. (1995). Restructuring classroom interaction with networked computers: Effects on quality and characteristics of language production. Modern Language Journal, 79(4), 457-476.
Kern, R. (2006). Perspectives on technology in learning and teaching languages. TESOL Quarterly, 40(1), 183-210.
Kim, Y. S. (1998). The effect of a networked computer-mediated discussion on subsequent oral discussion in the esl classroom. Doctor of Philosophy, University of Texas at Austin.
Kitade, K. (2000). L2 learners’ discourse and sla theories in cmc: Collaborative interaction in internet chat. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 13(2), 143-166.
*Kost, C. R. (2004). An investigation of the effects of synchronous computer mediated communication on interlangauge development in beginning learners of German: Accuracy, proficiency, and communication strategies., The University of Arizona.

Krashen, S. (1985). The input hypothesis. London: Longman.
Kreijns, K., Kirschner, P. A., Jochems, W., &; Buuren, H. v. (2004). Determining sociability, social space, and social presence in (a)synchronous collaborative groups. CyberPsychology &; Behavior, 7(2), 155-172.
Lai, C., &; Zhao, Y. (2006). Noticing and text based chat. Language Learning &; Technology, 10(3), 102-120.
Leahy, C. (2001). Bilingual negotiation via e-mail: An international project. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 14(1), 15-42. doi: 10.1076/call.14.1.15.5783
Lee, K. (2004). Computer mediated communication: Discussion tools in the second language classroom. STETS Language &; Communication Review, 3(1).
Lee, L. (2001). Online interaction: Negotiation of meaning and strategies used among learners of spanish. ReCALL, 13(2), 232-244.
Lee, L. (2004). Learners' perspectives on networked collaborative interaction with native speakers of spanish in the us. Language Learning &; Technology, 8(1), 83-100.
Lee, L. (2008). Focus on form through collaborative scaffolding in expert to novice online interaction. Language Learning &; Technology, 12(3), 53-72.
Lee, Y. (2005). Implementing synchronous chat-based curriculum in an advanced-level esl classroom. Doctoral dissertation, North Carolina State University.
Level, W. J. M. (1989). Speaking: From intentional to articulation. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
*Li, L.-C. (2008). The impact of different levels of instructional strategy on synchronous CMC in improving college students’ oral English proficiency and learning motivation. Master of Arts, National Cheng Kung University.
Li, S. (2010). The effectiveness of corrective feedback in SLA: A meta-analysis. Language Learning, 60(2), 309-365.
Lin, W. C. (2011). Effects of text-based synchronous computer-mediated communication on second language acquisition: A quantitative meta-analysis. Tsin-hua University.
Lipsey, M. W., &; Wilson, D. B. (2001). Pratical meta-analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Long, H. M. (1983). Native speaker/non-native speaker conversation and the negotiation of comprehensible input. Applied Linguistics, 4(2), 126-141.
Long, M. (1996). The role of linguistic environment in second language acquisition. San Diego: Academic Press.
*Lord, G. (2008). Podcasting communities and second language pronunciation. Foreign Language Annals, 41(2), 374-389.
Luppicini, R. (2007). Review of computer mediated communication research for education. Instructional Science, 35(2), 141-185.
Maranto, G., &; Barton, M. (2010). Paradox and promise: MySpace, facebook, and the sociopolitics of social networking in the writing classroom. Computers and Composition, 27(1), 36-47. doi: 10.1016/j.compcom.2009.11.003

Mason, R., &; Kaye, A. (1989). Mindweave: Communication, computers and distance education. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Meunier, L. E. (1998). Personality and motivational factors in computer-mediated foreign language communication Boston: Heinle &; Heinle.
Mitchell, R., &; Myles, F. (2004). Second language learning theories. London: Arnold Publishers: Oxford University Press.
Murray, D. E. (2000). Protean communication: The language of computer-mediated communication. TESOL Quarterly, 34(3).
Nguyen, L. V. (2008). Computer mediated communication and foreign language education: Pedagogical features. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 5(12), 23-44.
Norris, J. M., &; Ortega, L. (2000). Effectiveness of l2 instruction: A research synthesis and quantitative meta analysis. Language Learning, 50(3), 417-528.
Nunan, D. (2001). The Cambridge Guide to Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages. The Edingurgh Building, Cambridge , UK: Cambridge University Press.
O'Rourke, B. (2008). The other c in cmc: What alternative data sources can tell us about text-based synchronous computer mediated communication and language learning. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 21(3), 227-251. doi: 10.1080/09588220802090253
Ortega, L. (1997). Processes and outcomes in networked classroom interaction: Defining the research agenda for L2 computer-assised classroom discussion. Language Learning &; Technology, 1(1), 82-93.

Paver, J. A. (1991). The zone of proximal development in an online esl composition course. Master of Arts, University of Nevada.
Payne, J. S., &; Ross, B. M. (2005). Synchronous cmc, working memory, and l2 oral proficiency development. Language Learning &; Technology, 9(3), 35-54.
*Payne, J. S., &; Whitney, P. J. (2002). Developing l2 oral proficiency through synchronous cmc_output, working memory, and interlanguage development. CALICO Journal, 20(1), 7-32.
Pearson, J. (1999). Electronic networking in initial teacher education: Is a virtual faculty of education possible? Computers &; Education, 32(3), 221-238.
Peterson, M. (2001). Moos and second language acquisition: Towards a rationale for moo-based learning. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 14(5), 443-459. doi: 10.1076/call.14.5.443.5773
Pica, T., Kanagy, R., &; Falodun, J. (1993). Choosing and using communication tasks for second language instruction. In G. Crookes &; S. Gass (Eds.), Tasks and language learning: Integrating theory &; practice (pp. 9-34). Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.
*Pyun, O. C. (2003). Effects of networked language learning: A comparison between synchronous online discussion and face to face discussions. Master of Arts, The Ohio State University.
Robertson, C. E. (2008). Integration of moodle course management system (cms) into an efl writing class. The JALT CALL Journal, 4(1), 53-59.
Robinson, P. (1995). Attention, memory, and the “noticing” hypothesis. Language Learning, 45(2), 283-331.
*Satar, H. M., &; Ozdener, N. (2008). The effects of synchrnous cmc on speaking proficiency and anxiety: Text versus voice chat. The Modern Language Journal, 92(4), 595-613.
Savignon, S. J., &; Roithmeier, W. (2004). Computer mediated communication: Texts and strategies. CALICO Journal, 21(2), 265-290.
Schafer, W. D. (1999). An overview of meta-analysis. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 32(1), 43-61.
Schmidt, R. (1993). Awareness and second language learning. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 13, 206-226.
Schmidt, R. W. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11(2).
Schwienhorst, K. (2004). Native-speaker/non-native-speaker discourse in the moo: Topic negotiation and initiation in a synchronous text-based environment. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 17(1), 35-50. doi: 10.1076/call.17.1.35.29706
*Sequeira, C. A. (2009). Synchronous computer mediated communication and second language proficiency. Doctor of Education, University of Oregon.
Sierpe, E. (2005). Gender distinctiveness, communicative competence, and the problem of gender judgments in computer-mediated communication. Computers in Human Behavior, 21(1), 127-145.
Sinclair, B. (2000). Leaner autonomy: The next phase. London: Longman.
Smith, B. (2003). Features of cmc technologies and their impact on language learners' online interaction. Computers in Human Behavior, 19(6), 703-729. doi: 10.1016/s0747-5632(03)00011-6
Sotillo, S. (2005). Corrective feedback via instant messenger learning activities in ns_nns and nns nns dyads. CALICO Journal, 22(3), 467-496.
Sun, Y.-C. (2009). Voice blog: An exploratory study of language learning. Language Learning &; Technology, 13(2), 88-103.
Swaffar, J., Romano, S., Markley, P., &; Arens, K. (1998). Language learning online: Theory and practice in the esl and l2 computer classroom. Austin, TX: The Daedalus Group, Inc.
Swain, M. (1990). The language of french immersion students: Implications for theory and practice. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
Swain, M. (1993). The output hypothesis: Just speaking and writing aren't enough. Canadian Modern Language Review, 50, 158-164.
Tarone, E. (1988). Variation in interlanguage. London: Edward Arnold.
Tomlin, R. S., &; Villa, V. (1994). Attention in cognitive science and second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16(2), 183-203. doi: 10.1017/S0272263100012870
Toyoda, E., &; Harrison, R. (2002). Categorization of text chat communication between learners and native speakers of japanese. Language Learning &; Technology, 6(1), 82-99.
*Volle, L. M. (2005). Analyzing oral skills in voice e-mail and online interviews. Language Learning &; Technology, 9(3), 146-163.
Walther, J. B. (2007). Selective self-presentation in computer-mediated communication: Hyperpersonal dimensions of technology, language, and cognition. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(5), 2538-2557.
*Wang, C. Y. (2010). A study comparing the effects of synchronous CMC and FTF Interaction on L2 oral proficiency development for students with various working memory capacities. National Tsing Hua University.
Warschauer, M. (2000). The changing global economy and the future of english teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 34(3), 511-535.
Warschauer, M., Turbee, L., &; Roberts, B. (1996). Computer learning networks and student empowerment. System, 24(1), 1-14.
Weasenforth, D., Biesenbach-Lucas, S., &; Meloni, C. (2002). Realizing constructivist objectives through collaborative technologies: Threaded discussions. Language Learning &; Technology, 6(3), 58-86.
White, S. (2007). Critical success factors for e-learning and institutional change—some organisational perspectives on campus-wide e-learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(5), 840-850.
Willis, D., &; Willis, J. (2007). Doing task-based teaeching: Oxford University Press.
Wolf, F. M. (1986). Meta-analysis: Quantitative methods for research synthesis: SAGE.
*Xiao, M. (2007). An empirical study of using internet based desktop videoconferenceing in an efl setting. Ohio University.
Yamada, M., &; Akahori, K. (2007). Social presence in synchronous cmc-based language learning: How does it affect the productive performance and consciousness of learning objectives? Computer Assisted Language Learning, 20(1), 37-65.
Yang, M.-L. (2006). Exploring taiwanese efl students' response to synchronous cmc: Effects on language use, learning and transfer, and perceptions. Doctor of Philosophy, University of Texas at Austin.
Zhao, Y. (2005). The future of research in technology and second language education. Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing, Inc.
Zha, S., Kelly, P., PArk, M. K., &; Fitzgerald, G. (2006). An investigation of communicative competence of ESL students using electronic discussion boards. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 38, 349-367.

*Zheng, S. N. (2010). The transferability from synchronous computer-mediated communication to oral discussion. Master of Arts, National Tsing Hua University.



連結至畢業學校之論文網頁點我開啟連結
註: 此連結為研究生畢業學校所提供,不一定有電子全文可供下載,若連結有誤,請點選上方之〝勘誤回報〞功能,我們會盡快修正,謝謝!
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top