PEER FEEDBACK THROUGH VOKI - Casa Grande

Running head: PEER FEEDBACK THROUGH VOKI

Peer Feedback through Voki Tool to Improve Students’ Awareness of the Register in Spoken

Activities

Student: Darwin Germán Gaona Vásquez

Guide: Jazmin Camchong, Ph.D.

Author’s Note:

Research Paper Presented as Partial Fulfillment for the Degree of Magíster en Pedagogía de

los Idiomas Nacionales y Extranjeros con Mención en la Enseñanza de Inglés. CES: RPC-SE-

01-N˚.014-2020. Cohort 2017 -2019. Guayaquil, November 4th, 2020.

PEER FEEDBACK THROUGH VOKI

1

Abstract

This study examines peer-feedback as an effective strategy to improve students’ awareness of

the register in a speaking context, with the support of a technological tool called Voki. A total

of 50 high school students participated in the research (25 for the experimental and 25 for the

control group). The objective of this study is to enhance oral register applying the peer-

feedback as a pedagogical strategy facilitated by Voki. Pre- and Post- tests indicated a steady

improvement in the discourse of students. The results showed that the implementation was

highly significant (effect size Cohen’s d=3.34). Therefore, it is concluded that the peer-

feedback strategy combined with a technological tool like Voki were two decisive

components to create an effective learning atmosphere where students were able to share

their knowledge, strengthen oral communication, and have fun while learning. The findings

also showed that this research study has implications for educators, English directors and

principals of institutions who are interested in improving the way they teach English

language.

Keywords: peer- feedback, register, Voki, speaking, EFL


2

Resumen

Este estudio examina la retroalimentación entre pares como una estrategia efectiva para

mejorar la atención de los estudiantes del registro en un contexto de conversación, con el

apoyo de una herramienta tecnológica llamada Voki. Un total de 50 estudiantes de colegio

participaron en la investigación (25 para el grupo experimental – 25 para el grupo control). El

objetivo de este estudio es mejorar el registro oral aplicando como estrategia pedagógica la

retroalimentación entre pares facilitado por Voki. Las pruebas previas y posteriores indicaron

una mejora constante en el discurso de los estudiantes. Los resultados mostraron que la

implementación fue altamente significativa (tamaño del efecto Cohen´s d= 3.34). Por lo

tanto, se concluye que la estrategia de retroalimentación entre pares combinada con la

herramienta de apoyo Voki fueron dos componentes decisivos para crear un ambiente de

aprendizaje efectivo en el que los estudiantes pudieron compartir sus conocimientos,

fortalecer la comunicación oral y divertirse aprendiendo. Los hallazgos también mostraron

que este estudio de investigación tiene implicaciones para educadores, directores de inglés y

directores de instituciones que están interesados en mejorar la forma en que enseñan el

idioma inglés.

Palabras claves: retroalimentación en pareja, registro, Voki, habilidad del habla, inglés

como lengua extranjera.


3

Peer Feedback through Voki Tool to Improve Students’ Awareness of the Register in

Spoken Activities

English speaking is an essential learning domain needed in English acquisition (Saville-

Troike, Muriel, & Barto, 2016). It aids at producing the language (Devi, Kalpana, & Rao,

2018). It is also a component that fosters input development (Long, 1996). Oral interviews,

group discussions, and role playing are useful ways to help students interact and participate

actively in communication. On the other hand, peer- feedback is a strategic method that

makes one student provide pieces of constructive advice to another one in order to improve a

topic (Smith, 2017).

Technology is constantly evolving, becoming an important tool in the development of

several fields such as education, medicine, astronomy, and telecommunication. It has

provided meaningful benefits to society. In the case of education, technology has provided

many ways to try to change old paradigms in order to establish a new environment for more

efficient learning. According to Bahadorfar and Omidvar (2014), “Technology gives learners

a chance to engage in self-directed actions, opportunities for self-paced interactions, privacy,

and a safe environment in which errors get corrected and specific feedback is given” (p. 11).

Technology can be a supporting tool to learn a second language that is applied in real life to

practice with students. Richards (2015) added that technological tools provide learners

opportunities to practice authentic language that can be practiced in the classroom.

In Ecuador’s public schools, learners believe that communicating ideas in English is

challenging (Ministerio de Educación, 2016). Learners believe speaking in a second language

is extremely difficult and that they do not have enough knowledge to face that barrier.

English speech practice may be hindered if students do not want to make mistakes when

expressing their thoughts, if students do not feel confident in their speaking abilities, or if

they do not feel motivated to practice (Tok, 2009). The participants of this study shared the


4

same difficulties. Thus, this study aimed to strengthen speaking skills in a public high school

using peer feedback and the support of an engaging technological application.

The pedagogical innovation that was analyzed in this study was based on the

educational quality standard established by the Ecuadorian Ministry of Education,

specifically in the part that states “using resources and technology Effectively in English and

Content Instruction- 3c.4. Use technological resources (e.g., internet, software, computers,

and relative devices) to enhance language and content-area instruction for students”

(Ministerio de Educación, 2012, p.5).

Voki is the name of a blended learning tool that encourages intrinsic motivation to

practice speaking (Yoshida, 2018). Teenagers were provided with many options, colors, and

shapes to create a virtual character (avatar) and in that way to engage their creativity.

It is important that teachers are aware that technological resources do not guarantee an

improvement in students’ speech skills, unless optimal teaching strategies are applied

properly. Feedback is an effective method that maximizes students’ learning process, by

monitoring the progress of the acquired knowledge to compare the educational performance

to an established standard (Hepplestone, Glover, Irwin, & Parkin, 2016). One of the types of

feedback is peer feedback which, according to Smith (2017), it consists in engaging one

student critically with the work of another partner and in this way the feedback provider is

able to know, investigate, verify, and give solid arguments about a specific topic. Peer

feedback is a fundamental stage which helps understand the register in a spoken context. It

focuses on the proper use of formal and informal English. There are four research questions

that are taken into consideration for the analysis of the current study:

There are four research questions that are taken into consideration for the analysis of

the current study:


5

1. To what extent does peer feedback through Voki improve students’ awareness of

the register?

2. What is students’ perspective toward the components of this innovation?

3. What is the impact of peer feedback in students’ fluency?

4. What is the impact of peer feedback in students’ pronunciation?

Literature Review

Currently, technology support can help learn a new skill. In the case of Voki, Aikina

and Zubkova (2015) emphasized that this Web 2.0 tool enables eager students who want to

express their opinions but are not confident to talk in front of the class, because they do not

like the way they speak in English. Likewise, Yona and Marlina (2014) conducted a study

that focused on the way students are influenced by this tool in the elaboration of oral

descriptive texts, lowering the “affective filter” to become students more secured in the way

they use language. This tool makes students feel safe when they make mistakes and entrusted

to interact and exchange opinions with peers (Ni, 2012).

As it is referred in the dictionary (Merriam Webster Dictionary, 2018), the register is

any of the language varieties that a speaker uses in a specific situation. This speaking sub-

skill, which will be analyzed in this study, is centered in the way a person communicates their

thoughts according to the circumstances. Thornbury (2005) stated that the register is

determined by the actor, the message, and the way it is transmitted. The context of the speech

is quite vital to identify the level of formality and informality of the language.

Other important aspects regarding English speech are pronunciation and fluency.

According to Pourhosein (2016), pronunciation must be the real purpose of oral interaction

because if learners get more interested in their pronunciation, they will focus in the way they

articulate the words and consequently they will improve the way they speak. Nation and

Newton (2008) suggested that fluency is bound to the speaking development because when


6

the students speak without hesitation and without interruption, they have the chance of

strengthening and increasing their own language vocabulary.

Another important pedagogical characteristic, that was analyzed in this study, was

collaboration. Spies and Xu (2018) emphasized that collaboration is correlated to real

communication, also it is relevant to emphasize that one type of collaboration is feedback,

which according to Sardareh (2018), it aids to enhance students’ learning, providing useful

information in the course of acquiring the necessary knowledge. Smith (2017) agreed that the

feedback a teacher provides is not enough, therefore collaborative feedback among peers is

necessary to develop the comprehension of a topic in an effective way. However, significant

feedback cannot occur spontaneously, it is necessary to follow a structure. Allen, Blythe,

Dichter, and Lynch (2018) suggested that the ladder of feedback protocol which is a

necessary procedure to build peer feedback among students, concerns four easy steps: asking

clarifying questions, stating strengths of the work, raising any concerns, and finally making

suggestions.

Peer feedback is a contemporary strategy, especially for large classes, that is very

useful for its characteristics to supervise every student’s result (Smith 2017). This strategy is

quite beneficial not only for students but for teachers, who want to implement a closer

monitoring to student knowledge (Rollinson, 2005); the good application of peer feedback

can be quite beneficial for checking students' understanding.

Regarding the teaching theory, the constructivism was very appropriate to apply in the

classes because it is characterized for focusing on learning assistance and the capacity of each

student’s experiences to foster a clear understanding of the topic (Zajda, 2018). Taking into

consideration the context of the Ecuadorian English Learning, the Communicative Language

teaching (CLT) is the most suitable method because it mainly focuses on the acquisition of

communicative competences and not on language translation (Alamri, 2018). Harmer (2010)


7

acknowledged that CLT provides enough exposure and opportunities for language learning. It

means, the knowledge exchange among the participants will provide a learning atmosphere

where meaningful communication and real-life situations are the fundamental pillars.

Voki is a technological resource that, according to Tingen, Philbeck and Holcomb

(2011), may contribute to the communication learning by focusing on the 21st century skills

such as creativity and collaboration. Voki allows students to record their voices and create an

image that can be characterized with similar movements and gestures as humans. Because

Voki provides users the opportunity of applying their voice in an animation, it can be a

potential assistance to maximize speaking skills.

Speaking is one of the most important abilities within the learning process of English as

a second language. In the classroom students must be involved in oral communication

procedures to ensure their learning. There are two basic components that contribute to the

oral production. First, pronunciation, which is the way in which an individual produces the

spoken sound of the words. According to Levis and Grant (2003), pronunciation is vital to

successful communication and it is an important part of learning to speak. The second

component that contributes to oral production is fluency, which Albino (2017) stated it is

when students speak coherently without the need of searching for words. Teachers must

monitor and guide learners to improve these two aspects of oral production, pronunciation

and fluency, in a suitable way.

Teachers also must consider that speaking can create a tense atmosphere because of

shyness, anxiety, and lack of confidence (Juhana, 2012). These issues limit learners to

produce oral communication. For that reason, Tomlinson (2013) stated that teachers should

recognize all the pressure that speaking can produce and, in this way, create strategies to

decrease anxiety.


8

Based on the literature reviewed, this study focused in creating a communicative

atmosphere to analyze the effects of implementing peer- feedback as a classroom strategy and

Voki as a technological tool in order to learn how the register was used in spoken context, as

well as to improve the pronunciation and fluency with the final purpose of engaging students

to practice oral communication in a second language.

Objectives

General Objective:

● Determine the effect of using peer feedback through Voki, on speaking skills in

students learning English as a Foreign Language.

Specific Objective:

● Examine peer feedback features and the way this strategy can strengthen

speaking skills including fluency, and pronunciation.

● Analyze the register (formal and informal English) in a spoken context

Innovation

The first topic that was addressed in the lesson involved the effective application of

feedback. Here, the teacher taught the students about how to give feedback, using the ladder

feedback protocol.

1. The teacher provided a paper that explained the ladder of feedback, so that the

students learnt about how to give feedback. The teacher explained and monitored all

the processes.

2. The first activity involved the students, who filmed a video, introducing themselves

and their family.

3. Next, the teacher divided the students into pairs, so they gave and received feedback

about each other’s work.


9

Once, the students learned how to provide feedback, they were introduced the use of

formal and informal register in a spoken context.

The students had to watch a video about people talking in different registers (formal

and informal English).

1. The students exchanged opinions through a collaborative activity in order to better

understand the message of the video. To be very clear about the understanding of the

theme, the teacher organized a paired activity.

2. After that, the students wrote on a post-it note the phrases they mostly liked.

3. Next, students were divided in groups of 5 to listen different traits of formal and

informal register to finally write down on a big piece of paper the different examples.

In this part of the plan, the students learned about the Voki resource and incorporated what

they had learned before (use of register).

1. Voki was introduced through a video. Students found out how to use the application

to voice recording and to create an avatar. After that, the students experienced some

minutes with the platform to practice and design a first version of the avatar and in

turn to record their voices.

2. The peer feedback is a key point to internalize the knowledge. Hence, the next step

was to have the students gathered in groups to talk and to give feedback about the

recording (they should have used the ladder of feedback). Next, students had to create

and record a final version of the avatar. This time, they followed instructions that

included roles to differentiate situations and to use either formal or informal speech.

3. The last version had to be uploaded in the course Facebook page.

4. Finally, students showed to the class a final version of the avatar, which has been

programmed to use phrases under formal or informal speech.


10

The lesson plan is attached on the appendix No 1 with a more accurate description of

the learning procedures. The surveys - appendix 2, the tests - appendix 3, the ladder of

feedback – appendix 4, and the rubrics are on the appendix No 5.

The rubrics were designed to measure two important aspects. First, the formative

assessment in which students had to practice how to give feedback, identify formal and

informal register, and record their voices. The second one concerns to the summative

assessment where students were capable to show a final presentation in which students

applied what they had learned in the previous sessions. The teacher took into consideration

the communicative topics that students developed in the Voki avatar. Also, there were some

remarkable assessment points that were included in the assessment plan to have a general

overlook of how the progress of the students’ learning was evaluated.

Methodology

The current study used qualitative and quantitative approaches to analyze the data.

Under the qualitative research approach, the current study applied action research. Stringer

(2008) defined this method as a “systematic approach to investigation that enables people to

find effective solutions to problems they confront in their everyday life” (p. 1). It also

followed a complete cycle process that offers opportunity for continued students’ reflection.

Action research is considered a very appropriate method for this research study because it is

focused on the constant analysis of the effects of using the peer- feedback procedure to

improve students’ speaking skills.

The quantitative research approach is used in the current study because it compared the

effects of applying the learning strategy in the control and the experimental groups, as well as

the results of the spoken register tests which measured students’ capacity of using formal and

informal English in speaking context. There were some statistical tests such as mean,

standard deviation, independent sample t-test which helped evaluate the project and the


11

program which was used to calculate the results was (SPSS) Statistical Package for the Social

Science.

The current project aimed to answer the following four research questions:

1. To what extent does peer feedback through Voki improve students’ awareness of

the register?

2. What is students’ perspective toward the components of this innovation?

3. What is the impact of peer feedback in students’ fluency?

4. What is the impact of peer feedback in students’ pronunciation?

This project was conducted in a public high school. The high school was located in the

city of Duran, in the Guayas province, in the coastal region of Ecuador. For this research

study, there were two groups of students (experimental - control group). The sample of

students was represented by 25 teenagers with ages between 12 and 13 years old. Fifteen girls

and ten boys for the experimental group and twelve girls and thirteen boys for the control

group. Even though a large percentage belongs to a low socioeconomic status, 40% of

students of the experimental group and 42% of the control group have a computer at home,

46% of students of experimental group and 48% of students of the control group have access

to internet.

As the participants studied in a public institution, they followed a curriculum that

demands that the English classes must be five hours a week from Monday to Friday. This

educational policy has been established for about seven years. To know their English level,

students took an online test which confirmed that all of them were A2 which, according to the

Council of Europe (2020) corresponds to basic users of the language who can communicate

ideas in simple term aspects and in familiar context.

The students got access to do the internet test in EF Education First (Education First,

2020).This web site is a worldwide language organization that is recognized for taking free


12

online proficiency tests that specializes in giving reference of the English language level of

learners. For the purposes of this project, the test was administered to have a clear definition

of the level of English each candidate had.

It is important to highlight that there were three requirements to participate in the

research study. At first instance, students must have studied in a high school located in

Durán. Second, they had to study in tenth grade of basic section; and finally, they must have

reached the A2 level of English proficiency.

Instruments

Spoken register tests.

The spoken register tests were divided into two parts. First, the pre-test consisted in a

couple of situational questions that students had to work in pairs defined by the teacher. The

activity consisted in creating a dialogue using formal and informal English phrases to finally

present in front of the teacher. Second, the post-test was a pair activity that consisted in

creating two avatars using the Voki resource. The talks were about a situation in which

students included formal and informal register phrases.

Rubric for spoken performance

Two rubrics were designed to grade the oral performance. The first rubric focused on

the way students recorded their voices in the platform. The students recorded their voices in

the Voki platform, the instructor listened the recordings, and analyzed the components such

as pronunciation, fluency, and vocabulary to grade their work. The score ranged from 1 that

represented the lowest grade to 4 that was the highest grade, being 12 the total grade of the

final record. For the pre-test and post-test, there was a different rubric that was used in which

some elements were examined such as, fluency, vocabulary, pronunciation, originality and

content, with a minimum score of 0,5 and a maximum of 2, being 10 the highest grade.

Pre and post- survey


13

The Pre-survey included 18 questions that measured the students’ prior knowledge of

the research that analyzed the effectiveness of peer feedback strategy through Voki tool to

improve students’ awareness of the register in spoken activities. Also, there were three

questions that were related to their demographic data such as genre, age, level of English

proficiency; and two questions that involved internet and computer access.

The Post-survey was applied after the intervention and it was made of 18 questions too.

The method used to collect data for the 18 questions was a Likert scale which, according

Boone and Boone (2012), it is composed by four or more Likert-type items that are associate

with a composite variable that helps generate a quantitative measure of a personality trait.

The variable options were classified by numbers, 5= totally agree, 4= agree, 3=undecided,

2=disagree and 1= totally disagree. The Cronbach Alpha was another important method

which is described by Cortina (1993) as the best way to evaluate the grade of reliability of a

quantitative scale of measurement (Likert scale). The Cronbach Alpha result of this survey

was 0.788 which, in accordance with Tavakol and Dennick (2011), is considered acceptable,

it means that the survey measured effectively the variables of interests.

Data Collection Procedures

The students completed the tests during school hours and the person who collected the

data was the teacher. The data results were entered in an Excel spreadsheet document and

exported to the Statistical Package for the Social Science (SPSS) program where they were

examined using descriptive statistics, including the mean, frequency, and standard deviation.

The pre- and post-test were assessed using a rubric. The outcomes of the pre and post-survey

were analyzed through a Likert scale which ranged from 5 = totally agree, 4= agree, 3=

undecided, 2= disagree and 1= totally disagree.

Ethical Standards


14

In order to make sure of the transparency and reliability of this research study, it was

necessary to fulfill the following ethical standards. First, a consent letter was submitted to the

principal who is the main authority of the institution. Second, the students were informed that

the results they were going to obtain in this research study were confidential. Finally, there

was a short text emphasizing that students’ participation was free and voluntary in the

different surveys. Therefore, all participants provided consent to be part of the research study.

Results

The research outcomes aimed to investigate the effect of implementing peer feedback

strategy through the use of the Voki to improve the students’ awareness of the register in

spoken activities. To answer the first question, to what extent does peer feedback through

Voki improve students’ guidance of the register? It is important to see the results shown

below.

Table 1.

Pre and Post test results of Control and Experimental group

Experimental Group Control Group

N Min Max M SD N Min Max M SD

Pre-test 25 2 5.5 3.88 1.043 Pre-test 25 2 5 3.34 .812

Post-test 25 6 10 7.86 1.229 Post-test 25 3 6 4.34 .838

Note: N= Sample. Min= Minimum. Max= Maximum M= Mean. SD = Standard Deviation.

Regarding the 25 participants of the experimental group, the pre-test and post-test give

some important figures (Table 1). It is noticeable that the mean of the pre- test (3.88) is very

low and it happened because most of the grades were not good enough, giving evidence that

students needed an educational strategy to learn the topic. On the other side, the posttests


15

gave another perspective, because the mean was higher (7.86) and the standard deviation of

1.22 shown that most of the students’ answers were homogenous.

Table 2.

Results according to each element of the rubric: vocabulary, fluency, pronunciation, content

and originality.

The table above shows a sustained improvement in all the elements after the

implementation of the innovation. For instance, in the case of content, there was an increase

of 1.02 points between the two tests (from 0.78 to 1.80), it is the highest value among all the

categories. In terms of fluency it was also a considerable growth of 0.96 points (from 0.7 to

1.66). Similarly, the vocabulary increased 0.8 points between the pre and post- test (from

0.76 to 1.56). Finally the last two aspects that were impacted in a minor proportion were

originality with 0.8(from 0.78 to 1.80) and pronunciation with 0.54 (from 1.02 to 1.56).

PRE-TEST POST-TEST

N Min Max M SD Min Max M SD

Vocabulary 25 0.5 1 0.76 0.25 0.5 2 1.56 0.50

Fluency 25 0 1 0.7 0.33 1 2 1.66 0.49

Pronunciatio

n

25 0.5 2 1.02 0.39 1 2 1.56 0.51

Content 25 0.5 1 0.78 0.26 1 2 1.80 0.44

Originality 25 0 2 0.80 0.47 1 2 1.60 0.49


16

Table 3

Paired Sample Test

Paired differences

Mean S.D.

Standar

d Mean

Error

95% Confidence

Interval of the

Difference

t gl

Sig. (2 -

tailed) Lower Upper

Par 1 Post-

Test

-

Pre-

Test

3.9800 1.510

2

.3020 3.356

6

4.603

4

13.177 24 .000

The paired T test to related samples revealed that the intervention of the innovation was

highly reliable with a result of 1.76 E-12 (p<0. 05). It means that the results are statistically

significant. The students increased their knowledge considerably and they learned and

internalize the different dimension of oral communication as well as speaking register.

Taking the data from the experimental and control group and doing the appropriate

calculation, a highly significant Cohen’s d effect size of 3.34 was obtained which means that

peer feedback and the support of Voki provided a positive impact in the learning of the

speaking register.

Regarding the second research question, what are the students’ perspective toward the

components of this innovation? This study used a survey to get explicit information from the

perspective of students. The structure of the survey was based on the Likert scale, because it

allowed the participants to select among the level of acceptance and disagreement of


17

pedagogical innovation. The questions were grouped into four categories which are described

in detail in Table 4.

Table 4.

Description of Categories

Categories Description

Level of Pronunciation It involves the sound words are pronounced

Level of Fluency It involves the speed words are pronounced

Knowledge of Feedback It involves if participants recognize peer-feedback

Knowledge of Speaking register It involves if participants recognize register in

spoken context.

In the experimental group, the first results of the survey determined that for the question

that states if students need to improve their level of pronunciation, the answers provided an

average of 4.36 (agree), and for the question that asked if the students consider if they need to

improve their level of fluency, the answers provided an average of 4.68 (totally agree- agree).

After applying the innovation, the students were asked if they have improved their

pronunciation, for that question they provided a more realistic answer with an average of 4.12

(agree). Furthermore, they were asked if they have improved their fluency, they critically

responded with a total average of 4.12 (agree).

Table 5

Percentage of Pronunciation and Fluency

Categories Pre-Survey Post-survey

Level of Pronunciation 4.36 4.12

Level of Fluency 4.68 4.12

Knowledge of Feedback 1.88 4.16

Knowledge of Speaking Register 1.52 4.08


18

With regard to the question that if students know what peer feedback is, in the pre-test,

the students’ answers provided an average of 1.88 (totally disagree-disagree) and for the

question that if students know what the register was, the answers of students provided an

average of 1.52 (totally disagree- disagree). After applying the educational innovation, the

participants gave an average 4.16 (agree) for the question that if now they know what peer-

feedback is and how to apply and 4.08 (agree) for the question that if now they know what

register is (Table 5).

The answers to the open questions shown that from 25 participants, 23 declared that

with the application of the innovation, they felt more motivated and relaxed when speaking in

English. Moreover, these 23 students reported that this experience encouraged them to

continue to learn English in the future. Twenty-two students also said that now, they can

recognize the characteristics of formal and informal English and how to express them in

speaking activities. Twenty students met their expectations at using Voki and they considered

it an effective tool to improve speaking register.

Discussion

Taking in consideration the findings, this research examined whether peer-feedback

through Voki tool could improve students’ awareness of the register in spoken activities. The

mean comparison of the pre-test and post-test results shown that effectively the students who

were involved in this study had a considerable growth of 3.98 (difference between the means)

in their capacity of oral communication and knowledge of formal and informal register. This

positive effect provided evidence that supported what Hepplestone, Glover, Irwin, and Parkin

(2016) had expressed about feedback. Hepplestone et al (2016) said feedback is a useful

teaching strategy that helped increase the students’ learning by checking their progress. In


19

this study, feedback made a crucial difference that helped obtain the expected results that

implies students recognize formal and informal register through oral practicing.

Other relevant point to consider involved the Communicative Language Method (CLT)

which was fundamental to reinforce the class, providing what Harmer (2010) recognized as a

learning ambiance which the communicative real-life interaction is developed properly.

In qualitative terms, the results shown that students of the experimental group believed

that through communication production, they enhanced their pronunciation with a total

average response of 4.12 (agree) and fluency, with a total average response of 4.12 (agree).

This finding agrees with the thought of Pourhosein (2016) suggesting that oral interaction

must aim to foster the pronunciation constantly. Nation and Newton (2008) also stated that

fluency is an essential dimension to be included in the speaking skill.

Regarding the register, Thornbury (2005) stated that it can be identified according to

the background, person, and specific situation. This study used a specific situation where

students had the opportunity to recognize the formal and informal register in spoken

activities. That is why, most of the students agreed that they were aware what the register

was. Also, the feedback variable results shown that the average of responses of students, 4.12

(agree) of the experimental group could understand how to give and receive peer-feedback,

this finding coincided with what Allen, Blythe, Dichter, and Lynch (2018) mentioned in their

thesis, they said that the ladder of feedback protocol fosters effective feedback through

sequential scenarios that starts from asking questions to suggesting ideas.

The application of technology resources contributed in a remarkable change in the

learning progress of students, confirming what Bahadorfar and Omidvar (2014) said about

the role of technology. This researcher stated that Voki can be used as an engaging tool

where feedback can gradually be applied to improve learning.


20

Conclusion

In public institutions, there is a crucial need to improve speaking skills because it is

considered a natural way to convey information. Even though students struggle constantly to

acquire this ability, teachers should inspire an intrinsic motivation in teenagers to practice oral

activities. In this context, this research study analyzed the effects of applying an innovative

teaching strategy with the support of Voki to encourage students to participate in spoken

activities in English. The data collected in the literature reported that peer feedback is an

effective methodology that enhances learning and with Voki, as a technological aid, students

can have a motivating learning experience.

The current findings showed that despite the fact that students believe that

communicating ideas in English is very challenging, they could obtain a considerable oral

language achievement because of the application of the innovative learning strategy and also

the contemporary tool. This educational innovation can potentially reduce the gap between

students and the learning of English communication and enhance knowledge acquisition to

practice the register as well as improving pronunciation and fluency. Consequently, the

students felt comfortable in the moment of giving and receiving feedback, and their insecurity

for expressing ideas orally decreased considerably.

Another contribution of this study was the collaborative learning that students could

experience when using peer feedback. Students were able to learn about feedback through the

ladder of feedback protocol in which according to Allen, Blythe, Dichter, and Lynch (2018),

there were some phrases that, in a constructivist manner the peers applied to create a

sequential feedback and in this way to guide each participant to a concerted learning.

Finally, using Voki addressed one of the requirements in the Ecuadorian English

Teachers Standard regarding the importance of using technology in classes to improve

learning of the English language (Ministerio de Educación, 2012). However, it is necessary to


21

emphasize that if there is not a proper strategy in which a teacher can give guidance to

students to be independent learners, no technology resources will be very useful. This was

evidenced in the comparison results of the two groups (experimental, control).

In the surveys taken to the groups, it was determined that the students of the control

group had more computers at home and their access to internet was bigger than the students

of experimental group. However, the students of the experimental group who were taught the

topic using the peer feedback strategy with the support of Voki, had profitable results in the

post test than students of the control group who were taught the topic without implementing

the strategy.

Limitations

The study shown some limitations that involved three important issues such as,

computer lab availability, the fluctuating motivation of participants, and internet resource.

First, there were some days at the beginning of the project that the computer lab was

occupied by other activities such as teachers meeting and work presentations. This problem

delayed the project for several days and forced the researcher to reschedule the dates to use

the lab.

Another limitation involved the fluctuating motivation of participants. At first instance,

the students were very excited to participate in the research study but when the school classes

became very hard, they did not want to continue anymore. The problem was solved after

some talks with them and with their parents to indicate the great importance of being the first

ones in participating in a project like this.

Finally, even though one fundamental point of this research was based on the use of the

internet, sometimes it suffered some failures. For example, the signal was slow and at times

students had to wait several minutes to obtain internet access. The above issues prompted the

researcher to talk to the principal to highlight the advantages students will have of getting


22

involved in this research study and also to remind him about the consent letter he signed

where it was specified the time, the schedule, and the importance of institution cooperation.

After this meeting the researcher and students received the complete support and facilities to

finish this study.

Recommendations

This research case has some recommendations to consider. At first instance, the

researcher has to check with the authorities the dates in which the lab can be available to be

used. Another recommendation includes talking with the academic coordinator to provide

academic incentives to students, so they can feel encouraged to participate actively in the

research. Finally, testing with several anticipated weeks the correct function of all the

resources students are going to manipulate and if any of them do not work properly, talk to

authorities as soon as possible.


23

References

Aikina, T., & Zubkova, O. (2015). Integrating online services into English language teaching

and learning: The case of Voki. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in

Learning (iJET), 10(3), 66-68. Retrieved from

http://journals.sfu.ca/onlinejour/index.php/i-jet/article/view/4546/3535

Alamri, W. (2018). Communicative language teaching: Possible alternative approaches to

CLT and teaching contexts. English Language Teaching, 11(10), 132-138. Retrieved

from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1192263.pdf

Albino, G. (2017). Improving speaking fluency in a task-based language teaching approach:

The case of EFL learners at PUNIV-Cazenga. SAGE Open, 7(2), 1-11.Retrieved from

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/2158244017691077

Retrieved from https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/2158244017691077

Allen, D., Blythe, T., Dichter, A., & Lynch, T. (2018). Protocols in the Classroom: Tools to

Help Students Read, Write, Think, & Collaborate. New York, NY: Teachers College

Press.

Bahadorfar, M., & Omidvar, R. (2014). Technology in teaching speaking skill. Acme

International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 2(4), 9-13. Retrieved from

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Reza_Omidvar2/publication/315790125_TECH

NOLOGY_IN_TEACHING_SPEAKING_SKILL/links/58e526dd45851547e17f75e6/

TECHNOLOGY-IN-TEACHING-SPEAKING-SKILL.pdf

Boone, H. & Boone, D. (2012). Analyzing Likert data. Journal of Extension, 50(2), 1-5.

Retrieved from https://www.joe.org/joe/2012april/pdf/JOE_v50_2tt2.pdf

Council of Europe (2020). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages

(CEFR).The CEFR Levels. Retrieved from https://www.coe.int/en/web/common-

european-framework-reference-languages/level-descriptions.

http://journals.sfu.ca/onlinejour/index.php/i-jet/article/view/4546/3535

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Reza_Omidvar2/publication/315790125_TECHNOLOGY_IN_TEACHING_SPEAKING_SKILL/links/58e526dd45851547e17f75e6/TECHNOLOGY-IN-TEACHING-SPEAKING-SKILL.pdf



https://www.joe.org/joe/2012april/pdf/JOE_v50_2tt2.pdf


24

Cortina, J. (1993). What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and applications.

Journal of Applied Psychology 78(1), 98-104. Retrieved from

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/2e9a/ccd64f810f9ae12ab35d905e43ecea35b85a.pdf.

Education First. (2020).Quick-English-check. Retrieved from http://www.efset.org/es/ quick-

english-check/.

Harmer, J. (2010). How to Teach English (new edition). Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.

Hepplestone, S., Glover, I., Irwin, B., & Parkin, H. (2016). Setting out the role of feedback in

the assessment process through both the student and tutor perspective. Practitioner

Research in Higher Education, 10(1), 81-90. Retrieved from

https://eric.ed.gov/?q=Setting+out+the+role+of+feedback+in+the+assessment+proces

s+through+both+the+student+and+tutor+perspective&ft=on&id=EJ1129940

Heuristic. (n.d.). In Merriam-Webster´s online dictionary.Retrieved from

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/register

Juhana, J. (2012). Psychological factors that hinder students from speaking in English class

(A case study in a senior high school in South Tangerang, Banten, Indonesia). Journal

of Education and Practice, 3(12), 100-110. Retrieved from

https://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JEP/article/view/2887

Kalpana, G., & Rao, V. (2018). Integrated Approach-A Tool to Enhance English Speaking

Skills. i-Manager's Journal on English Language Teaching, 8(3), 1-6 Retrieved from

https://search.proquest.com/docview/2157724676?pq-origsite=gscholar

Levis, J & Grant, L. (2003). Integrating pronunciation into ESL/EFL classrooms. TESOL

Journal, 12(2), 13-19. Retrieved from

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/261285691_Integrating_pronunciation_into

_ESLEFL_classrooms


25

Long, M. H. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In

W. C. Ritchie, & T. K. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp.

413-468). New York: Academic Press

Ministerio de Educación. (2012). Estándares de calidad educativa [Standards of educational

quality]. Retrieved from Ecuadorian in-Service English Teacher Standards:

https://educacion.gob.ec/wp-

content/uploads/downloads/2012/09/estandares_2012_ingles_opt.pdf

Ministerio de Educación. (2016). English as a foreign language for upper level. Retrieved

from: https://educacion.gob.ec/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2016/08/EFL-for-

Subnivel-Superior-of-EGB-ok.pdf

Nation, I., & Newton, J. (2008). Teaching ESL/EFL listening and speaking. New York:

Routledge.

Ni, H. (2012). The effects of affective factors in SLA and pedagogical implications. Theory

& Practice in Language Studies, 2(7), 1508-1513. Retrieved from

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/8d1a/804def9080d8055ef2d673c00212eca4bde8.pdf/

Pourhosein, G. (2016). English pronunciation instruction: A literature review. International

Journal of Research in English Education, 1(1), 1-6. Retrieved from

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Abbas_Pourhosein_Gilakjani/publication/26772

2924_The_Significance_of_Pronunciation_in_English_Language_Teaching/links/594

687deaca2722db4a6011f/The-Significance-of-Pronunciation-in-English-Language-

Teaching.pdf

Richards, J. (2015). The changing face of language learning: Learning beyond the classroom.

RELC Journal, 46(1), 1-18. Retrieved from

https://eric.ed.gov/?q=The+changing+face+of+language+learning%3a+Learning+bey

ond+the+classroom.&pr=on&id=EJ1057006

https://educacion.gob.ec/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2016/08/EFL-for-Subnivel-Superior-of-EGB-ok.pdf

https://educacion.gob.ec/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2016/08/EFL-for-Subnivel-Superior-of-EGB-ok.pdf

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/8d1a/804def9080d8055ef2d673c00212eca4bde8.pdf/

https://eric.ed.gov/?q=The+changing+face+of+language+learning%3a+Learning+beyond+the+classroom.&pr=on&id=EJ1057006

https://eric.ed.gov/?q=The+changing+face+of+language+learning%3a+Learning+beyond+the+classroom.&pr=on&id=EJ1057006


26

Rollinson, P. (2005). Using peer feedback in the ESL writing class. ELT journal, 59(1), 23-

30. Retrieved from

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.453.9389&rep=rep1&type=

pdf

Sardareh, S. (2018). Formative feedback in a Malaysian primary school ESL context.

MOJES: Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 4(1), 1-8. Retrieved

from

https://eric.ed.gov/?q=Formative+feedback+in+a+Malaysian+primary+school+ESL+c

ontext&pr=on&id=EJ1088642

Saville-Troike, M. & Barto, K. (2016). Introducing second language acquisition. New York.

Cambridge University Press.

Smith, D. (2017). Collaborative Peer Feedback. International Association for Development of

the Information Society. Paper presented at the Fifth International Conference on

Educational Technologies, Sydney, Australia. Retrieved from

https://eric.ed.gov/?q=Collaborative+Peer+Feedback.+&pr=on&id=ED579292

Spies, T., & Xu, Y. (2018). Scaffolded academic conversations: access to 21st-century

collaboration and communication skills. Intervention in School and Clinic, 54(1), 22-

30. Retrieved from

https://eric.ed.gov/?q=Scaffolded+Academic+Conversations%3a+Access+to+21st-

Century+Collaboration+and+Communication+Skills.+&pr=on&id=EJ1188177

Stringer, E. (2008). Action research in education. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice

Hall.

Tingen, J., Philbeck, L., & Holcomb, L. (2011). Developing classroom web sites for 21st

century learning. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 47(2), 88-90. Retrieved from


27

https://eric.ed.gov/?q=Developing+classroom+web+sites+for+21st+++century+learni

ng.+Kappa+Delta+Pi+Record%2c&pr=on&id=EJ921662

Tok, H. (2009). EFL learners' communication obstacles. Electronic Journal of Social

Sciences, 8(29), 84 -100. Retrieved from

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.883.3920&rep=rep1&type=

pdf

Tomlinson, B. (2013). Applied linguistics and materials development. London: Bloomsbury

Academic.

Thornbury, S. (2005). How to teach speaking. Harlow: Longman

Tavakol, M., & Dennick, R. (2011). Making sense of Cronbach's alpha. International Journal

of Medical Education, 2, 53-55. Retrieved from

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4205511/.

Yona, S., & Marlina, L. (2014). The use of Voki website in teaching speaking on oral

descriptive text for junior high school students. Journal of English Language

Teaching, 3(1), 235-242. Retrieved from

http://ejournal.unp.ac.id/index.php/jelt/article/view/4381/3439

Yoshida, M. (2018). Choosing technology tools to meet pronunciation teaching and learning

goals. CATESOL Journal, 30(1), 195-212. Retrieved from

https://eric.ed.gov/?q=Choosing+Technology+Tools+to+Meet+Pronunciation+Teachi

ng+and+Learning+Goals.&ft=on&id=EJ1174226

Zajda, J. (2018). Effective constructivist pedagogy for quality learning in schools.

Educational Practice and Theory, 40(1), 67-80. Retrieved from

https://eric.ed.gov/?q=Effective+Constructivist+Pedagogy+for+Quality+Learning+in

+Schools&pr=on&id=EJ1191495

https://eric.ed.gov/?q=Developing+classroom+web+sites+for+21st+++century+learning.+Kappa+Delta+Pi+Record%2c&pr=on&id=EJ921662

https://eric.ed.gov/?q=Developing+classroom+web+sites+for+21st+++century+learning.+Kappa+Delta+Pi+Record%2c&pr=on&id=EJ921662

http://ejournal.unp.ac.id/index.php/jelt/article/view/4381/3439

https://eric.ed.gov/?q=Choosing+Technology+Tools+to+Meet+Pronunciation+Teaching+and+Learning+Goals.&ft=on&id=EJ1174226

https://eric.ed.gov/?q=Choosing+Technology+Tools+to+Meet+Pronunciation+Teaching+and+Learning+Goals.&ft=on&id=EJ1174226

https://eric.ed.gov/?q=Effective+Constructivist+Pedagogy+for+Quality+Learning+in+Schools&pr=on&id=EJ1191495

https://eric.ed.gov/?q=Effective+Constructivist+Pedagogy+for+Quality+Learning+in+Schools&pr=on&id=EJ1191495


Appendix No 1

Design from Your Goals [1]

Instructional design of units for transfer of learning to real life contexts

Available upon request.


Appendix No 2

SELF-VALORIZATION OF THE USE OF VOKI TO DEVELOP THE SPOKEN ABILITY

IN A SECOND LANGUAGE

Demographic Information/Información Demográfica




PRE SURVEY: SPEAKING –TECHNOLOGICAL TOOL – REGISTER-FEEDBACK

Instructions: Select one of the choices you believe fits best to you

(Instrucciones: Seleccione la opción más cercana a lo que Usted piensa respecto de cada una de las afirmaciones

siguientes)

TD=Totalmente en Desacuerdo D=en Desacuerdo Indeciso A=de Acuerdo TA=

Totalmente de Acuerdo (TD=Totally disagree D=Disagree I= Undecided A=Agree TA= Totally agree)


SELF-VALORIZATION OF THE USE OF VOKI RO DEVELOP THE SPOKEN ABILITY


POST SURVEY: SPEAKING – TECHNOLOGICAL TOOL




POST SURVEY: REGISTER- FEEDBACK



Appendix 3

PRE TEST

Name: Course:

Date:


POST TEST

Name: Course:



Appendix 4


LADDER OF FEEDBACK


Appendix 5

RUBRIC FOR THE RECORDING


RUBRIC FOR THE FINAL PRESENTATION OF VOKI


ASSESSMENT PLAN FOR SPEAKING (INNOVATION PROJECT)

Types of Evaluation

Task and

Product

Assessment

Tool

Evaluator Assessment

Date

Grade

Formative Assessment

Performance task Recording

V.1

Rubric

Recording

Peer and

instructor

To be defined -


V.2

Rubric

Recording

Peer and

instructor

-

Performance task Presentation

of Voki V.1

Rubric

Presentation

Peer and

instructor

-

Performance task Quiz Answer Key Peer and

instructor

Summative Assessment


Final Version

Rubric

Recording

Instructor 40%

Performance task Presentation

Final Version

Rubric

Presentation

Instructor 40%

Performance task Final Quiz Answer Key Instructor 20%

PEER FEEDBACK THROUGH VOKI - Casa Grande

Documents

Transcript of PEER FEEDBACK THROUGH VOKI - Casa Grande