Is interactive learning also active learning?

432 Pages·2007·1.85 MB·English

by  Jane Vinther

Is interactive learning also active learning?
A quantitative and qualitative study in
computer assisted language learning

Jane Vinther

Ph.D. dissertation
Institute of Language and Communication
University of Southern Denmark
2007
Supervisors

Previous:
Fritz Larsen, Associate professor, Emeritus, University of Southern Denmark.
The late John M. Dienhart, Associate Professor, University of Southern Denmark.

Jane Pilgaard Vinther
Institute of Language and Communication
University of Southern Denmark
Campusvej 55
DK-5230 Odense M.

Tel.: [phone]
E-mail: [email protected]

© Jane Pilgaard Vinther 2007
2
Contents

List of tables 9
List of figures 13
List of TA Excerpts 14

Acknowledgements 15

PART ONE

1 Introduction and research questions 16
1.1 The paradigms 16
1.2 The methodological framework 20
1.3 Research questions 21
1.4 The structure of the thesis 23

PART TWO

2 Second language acquisition: Review 26
2.1 Instruction 27
2.2 The role of implicit and explicit knowledge in second language 28
acquisition
2.2.1 Definitions and constructs 28
2.2.1.1 Metalanguage 30
2.2.2 Interface positions between implicit and explicit knowledge 33
2.2.2.1 The no-interface position 33
2.2.2.2 The strong-interface position 35
2.2.2.3 The weak-interface position 35
2.3 Immersion 36
2.4 Focus on form 39
2.4.1 Attention, noticing, and awareness 40
2.5 Teachability 45
2.5.1 Sequences of learning 45
2.5.2 Complexity of rules 51
2.6 Summary 55

3 Computer assisted language learning: Review 57
3.1 History of CALL 57
3.2 CALL Research 60
3.2.1 Research paradigms 61
3.2.2 Efficacy 62
3.2.2.1 Computer versus classroom instruction 62
3.3 CALL and grammar 65
3
3.3.1 Feedback 65
3.3.2 Syntax 69
3.4 CALL at the tertiary level 70
3.4.1 English and CALL 71
3.4.2 Availability 72
3.4.3 Needs 73
3.5 Summary 75

4 The quantitative study 76
4.1 Background and aim 76
4.1.1 The two advanced study programmes selected 78
4.1.2 University entrance qualification 80
4.1.2.1 “Gymnasium” 81
(academically oriented secondary education)
4.1.2.2 “HF” (Higher Preparatory Exam) 82
4.1.2.3 “HTX” (Higher Technical Exam) 82
4.1.2.4 “HHX” (Higher Business Exam) 83
4.1.2.5 General comments 84
4.2 The subjects 85
4.3 Experimental groups 88
4.3.1 Practical constraints 89
4.3.2 Assignment to experimental groups 90
4.4 Treatment 91
4.4.1 Amount of input 91
4.4.2 The syntactical input 91
4.4.3 Procedure 94
4.4.3.1 The VISL groups 94
4.4.3.2 The NON-VISL groups 95
4.4.3.3 Observable differences between the VISL and the 96
NON-VISL groups
4.5 Designing the tests: Problems and considerations 97
4.5.1 The purpose of the tests 97
4.5.2 The method of testing 99
4.5.3 Sequence of items and the level of difficulty 99
4.5.4 Test items 104
4.5.4.1 Composing the tests 106
4.5.4.2 Underlying principles 107
4.5.5 Reliability 108
4.5.5.1 Evaluating pre-test against post-test 110
4.5.5.2 Rating the tests 114
4.5.5.3 Inter-rater reliability 117
4.6 Results of quantitative study: statistical description 117
4.6.1 Total test levels 119
4.6.1.1 Total pre-test levels 119
4.6.1.1.1 The Cand. Negot. cohort. Totals pre-test 119
4.6.1.1.2 The English cohort. Totals pre-test 120
4.6.1.1.3 VISL, NON-VISL, and BASIS 122
(Total pre-test) differences
4
4.6.1.2 Total post-test levels 124
4.6.1.2.1 The Cand. Negot. cohort. Totals post-test 124
4.6.1.2.2 The English Cohort. Totals post-test 125
4.6.1.2.3 VISL, NON-VISL, and BASIS 127
(Totals post-test) differences
4.6.1.3 Total gain levels 129
4.6.1.3.1 The Cand. Negot. cohort. Total gains 130
4.6.1.3.1.1 Relative gains. Total 130
4.6.1.3.1.2 Percentage points gains. Total 131
4.6.1.3.2 The English cohort. Total gains 132
4.6.1.3.2.1 Relative gains. Total 132
4.6.1.3.2.2 Percentage points gains. Total 133
4.6.1.3.3 VISL, NON-VISL, and BASIS 134
(Total gain) differences
4.6.2 Syllabus test levels 137
4.6.2.1 Syllabus pre-test levels 138
4.6.2.1.1 The Cand. Negot.cohort. Syllabus pre-test 138
4.6.2.1.2 The English cohort. Syllabus pre-test 139
4.6.2.1.3 VISL, NON-VISL, and BASIS 140
(syllabus pre-test) differences
4.6.2.2 Syllabus post-test levels 142
4.6.2.2.1 The Cand.Negot.cohort. Syllabus post-test 142
4.6.2.2.2 The English cohort. Syllabus post-test 144
4.6.2.2.3 VISL, NON-VISL, and BASIS 145
(syllabus post-test) differences
4.6.2.3 Syllabus gain levels 148
4.6.2.3.1 The Cand. Negot.cohort. Syllabus gains 148
4.6.2.3.2 The English cohort. Syllabus gains 149
4.6.2.3.3 VISL, NON-VISL, and BASIS 150
(syllabus gain) differences
4.6.3 Non-syllabus test levels 152
4.6.3.1 Non-syllabus pre-test levels 152
4.6.3.1.1 The Cand. Negot. cohort. Non-syllabus 153
pre-test
4.6.3.1.2 The English cohort. Non-syllabus pre-test 154
4.6.3.1.3 VISL, NON-VISL, and BASIS 155
(non syllabus pre-test) differences
4.6.3.2 Non-syllabus post-test levels 156
4.6.3.2.1 The Cand. Negot. cohort. Non-syllabus 156
post-test
4.6.3.2.2 The English cohort. Non-syllabus post-test 158
4.6.3.2.3 VISL, NON-VISL, and BASIS 159
(non-syllabus post-test) differences
4.6.3.3 Non-syllabus gain levels 161
4.6.3.3.1 The Cand. Negot. cohort. Non-syllabus 162
gains
4.6.3.3.2 The English cohort. Non-syllabus gains 163

5
4.6.3.3.3 VISL, NON-VISL, and BASIS 164
(non-syllabus gain) differences
4.6.4 Success rate (post-test) differences in syllabus and 166
non-syllabus results
4.6.4.1 VISL, NON-VISL, and BASIS syllabus success rate 166
(post-test) differences
4.6.4.2 VISL, NON-VISL, and BASIS non-syllabus success 169
rate (post-test) differences
4.6.5 Gain rate differences in syllabus and non-syllabus results 172
4.6.5.1 VISL, NON-VISL, and BASIS syllabus gain rate 172
differences
4.6.5.2 VISL, NON-VISL, and BASIS non-syllabus gain rate 173
differences
4.6.5.3 Correlating syllabus and non-syllabus gains 173
4.6.6 Results of discrete test item results 176
4.6.6.1 Initial knowledge 177
4.6.6.1.1 Initial knowledge: syllabus 177
4.6.6.1.2 Initial knowledge: non-syllabus 180
4.6.6.1.3 Initial differences in syllabus and 181
non-syllabus knowledge
4.6.6.2 The efficacy of the treatment on post-test results of 185
discrete items
4.6.6.2.1 Syllabus post-test item results across 185
treatment groups
4.6.6.2.2 Non-syllabus post-test item results across 188
treatment groups
4.6.6.3 The efficacy of the treatment on gain results of 192
discrete items
4.6.6.3.1 Syllabus item gain results 194
4.6.6.3.2 Non-syllabus item gain results 196
4.6.6.4 VISL, NON-VISL and BASIS discrete item result 201
differences
4.7 Attendance 204
4.8 Summary of results 207

PART THREE

5 Processes of learning: Review 210
5.1 Consciousness 210
5.2 Implicit vs. explicit learning 212
5.2.1 Implicit and explicit knowledge 214
5.2.2 The implicit-explicit interface 216
5.3 Artificial language learning 218
5.4 Automatisation 221
5.5 Summary 223

6
6 Introspection 224
6.1 Verbal report as a research tool 224
6.1.1 Levels of verbalisation 226
6.1.2 Character of reports 227
6.2 Retrospective reports 228
6.3 Concurrent reports 229

7 The qualitative study 233
7.1 The context 233
7.1.1 General 233
7.1.2 The design background 233
7.1.3 The preceding treatment 234
7.2 Methodology 234
7.2.1 Collecting the protocols 234
7.2.1.1 Rationale for the choice of type of protocol 234
7.2.1.2 Instruction 234
7.2.1.3 The recordings 235
7.2.1.4 The subjects 235
7.2.1.5 The subject-matter content 236
7.2.1.6 Task analysis 237
7.2.1.7 The role of the experimenter 239
7.2.1.8 Protocols 240
7.2.2 Content of the protocols 240
7.2.2.1 Elicitation of information 240
7.2.2.2 Categories of information 241
7.3 Interpreting the protocols 242
7.3.1 Dienes and Perner’s theory of implicit and explicit knowledge 245
7.3.2 Verbal manifestations and content categories 248
7.3.2.1 Fully explicit knowledge 248
7.4 Results 250
7.4.1 Inferences in the interpretation process 250
7.4.1.1 Self 250
7.4.1.2 Attitude 253
7.4.1.3 Content 256
7.4.2 Explicit knowledge and consciousness 265
7.4.3 Knowledge, accessibility and control 277
7.4.4 The differential effects of the treatment 284
7.4.4.1 The high-achievers 286
7.4.4.2 The middle group 290
7.4.4.3 The low-achievers 292
7.4.5 Summary of VISL and NON-VISL results 294

PART FOUR

8 Discussion and conclusions 297
8.1 Discussion of the findings for the research questions 297
8.2 Conclusions and perspectives 302
7
English summary 308

Danish summary 315

Bibliography 320

Appendices 338

I Analysed and quantified sentence corpus 338
II Key to VISL symbol set 369
III Pre-test 370
IV Post-test 377
V Overview of entrance levels A and B 384
VI English supplement to “Gymnasiebekendtgørelsen” 388
VII Easiness of items at pre-score and post-score by groups. 401
VIII Ranking pre-, post-, gain scores, syllabus and non-syllabus 408
IX Gains(%) by experimental group 411
X Think-aloud excerpts with their full protocols 413

8
List of tables

Table 4.1 Years of instruction prior to university. By treatment group. 85
Cand. Negot.
Table 4.2 Years of instruction prior to university. By treatment group. 86
English.
Table 4.3 Type of exam. By treatment group. Cand. Negot. 87
Table 4.4 Type of exam. By treatment group. English. 88
Table 4.5 Easiness of items at pre-score over all groups. 102
Table 4.6 Easiness of items at post-score over all groups. 103
Table 4.7 Pre-experimental test of easiness of pre-test and post-test. 111
Total result.
Table 4.8 Pre-experimental test of easiness pre-test and post-test. 111
Detailed results.
Table 4.9 Inter-rater reliability. Pre-test and post-test. 117
Table 4.10 Number of subjects per treatment per cohort. 118
Table 4.11 Cand. Negot. cohort. Pre-test levels. Point scores. 119
Total (max. 25).
Table 4.12 English cohort. Pre-test levels. Point scores. 121

Total (max. 25).
Table 4.13 Cand. Negot.cohort. Pre-test levels (percentage success rates). 122
Total (%).
Table 4.14 English cohort. Pre-test levels (percentage success rates). 123
Total (%).
Table 4.15 Cand. Negot. cohort. Post-test levels. Point scores. 125
Total (max. 25)
Table 4.16 English cohort. Post-test levels. Point scores. 127
Total (max. 25).
Table 4.17 Cand. Negot. cohort. Post-test levels. Success rates. 128
Total (%).
Table 4.18 English cohort. Post-test levels. Success rates. 128
Total (%).
Table 4.19 Cand. Negot. cohort. Relative gain levels. Total. 130
Table 4.20 Cand. Negot. cohort. Percentage point gain levels.Total. 131
Table 4.21 English cohort. Relative gain levels. Total. 132
Table 4.22 English cohort. Percentage points gain levels. Total. 133
9
Table 4.23 Cand. Negot. cohort. Comparison of per cent difference. 136
(Scheffe). Gain (%). Total.
Table 4.24 English cohort. Comparison of per cent difference (Scheffe). 136
Gain (%). Total.
Table 4.25 Cand. Negot. cohort. Pre-test levels. Point scores. 138
Syllabus (max. 16).
Table 4.26 English cohort. Pre-test levels. Point scores. 139
Syllabus (max. 16).
Table 4.27 Cand. Negot.cohort. Pre-test levels (percentage success rates). 141
Syllabus (%).
Table 4.28 English cohort. Pre-test levels (percentage success rates). 141
Syllabus (%).
Table 4.29 Cand. Negot. cohort. Post-test levels. Point scores. 142
Syllabus (max. 16).
Table 4.30 English cohort.Post-test levels. Point scores. 144
Syllabus (max. 16).
Table 4.31 Cand. Negot. cohort. Post-test levels. Success rate. 145
Syllabus (%).
Table 4.32 English cohort. Post-test levels. Success rates. 147
Syllabus (%).
Table 4.33 Cand. Negot. cohort. Gain levels. 148
Syllabus (%).
Table 4.34 English cohort. Gain levels. Syllabus (%). 149
Table 4.35 Cand. Negot. cohort. Comparison of per cent difference. 151
(Scheffe). Gain (%). Syllabus.

Table 4.36 English cohort. Comparison of per cent difference (Scheffe). 152
Gain (%). Syllabus.
Table 4.37 Cand. Negot. cohort. Pre-test levels. Point scores. 153
Non-syllabus (max. 9).
Table 4.38 English cohort. Pre-test levels. Point scores 154
Non-syllabus (max. 9).
Table 4.39 Cand. Negot. cohort. Pre-test levels percentage. 155
Non-syllabus (%).
Table 4.40 English cohort. Pre-test levels percentage. 156
Non-syllabus (%).
Table 4.41 Cand. Negot. cohort. Post-test levels. Point scores. 157
Non-syllabus (max. 9).

10