The Effects of Computer-Assisted Pronunciation Readings on ESL Learners’ Use of Pausing, Stress, Intonation, and Overall Comprehensibility

Presenter: Sze-Chu Liu

Instructor: Dr. Pi-Ying Teresa Hsu

Date: October 14, 2013

Citation

Tanner, M. W., & Landon, M. M. (2009). The effects of computer-assisted pronunciation readings on ESL learners’ use of pausing, stress, intonation, and overall comprehensibility. Language Learning & Technology, 13(3), 51–65.

2

Content

IntroductionLiterature ReviewMethodResultsConclusionReflection

3

Introduction

Definition of the Terms

Background of the Study

Purposes of the Study

Research Questions

4

Definition of the Terms

CALL = Computer Assisted Language Learning

CAP = Computer Assisted Pronunciation

CPR = Cued Pronunciation Reading

5

Background of the Study

CALL is of interest to language teachers and learners because it can provide individual instruction and immediate feedback on the correctness of a learner’s response to computerized tasks.

(Nagata, 1993)

6

Nearly all CAP programs focus exclusively

on segmentals.

If intelligibility is prioritized above

accuracy, a focus on key words, stress,

rhythm, and intonation may be needed.

(Pennington, 1999)

Background of the Study

7

Background of the Study

Appropriate pausing patterns in native

English speech had a significantly greater

effect on non-native listener’s

comprehension than either syntactic

complexity or speech rate.(Blau, 1990)

8

Background of the Study

When native English speech was

manipulated to include incorrect lexical

stress, the ability of both NS and NNS

listeners to locate words in connected

speech was seriously affected.(Field, 2005)

9

Background of the Study

The importance of teaching intonation in

context, preferably at a discourse-level,

rather that within isolated sentences, has

been emphasized. (Levis, 1999; Levis & Pickering, 2004; Jenkins, 2004)

10

Purpose of the Study

This study aims at empirically evaluating a

self-directed, computer-assisted

technique that uses oral readings to

improve students’ perception and

production of pausing, word stress, and

sentence-final intonation.11

Research Questions

To what extent do CPR practiced in a self-directed

context affect intermediate ESL learners’…

perception of pausing, word stress, and sentence-final

intonation?

use of pausing, word stress, and sentence-final intonation

in controlled production?

perceived comprehensibility in spontaneous speech

tasks?12

Literature Review

Pronunciation instruction with greater focus on

prosody and general speaking characteristics

can effectively change fossilized pronunciation

patterns in individuals who have spent years in

an English speaking environment.

(Derwing, Munro, & Wiebe, 1997)

13

Literature Review

The global instruction (e.g., stress, intonation, rhythm) seems to provide the learner with skills that can be applied in extemporaneous speech production.

(Derwing, Munro, & Wiebe, 1998)

14

Literature Review

If the goal of pronunciation teaching is to help students become more understandable, then instruction should include a stronger emphasis on prosody.

(Derwing & Rossiter, 2003)

15

METHOD

ParticipantsResearch DesignCPR TasksPre- and Post- TestsRating Procedure

16

Participants

•No = 75•in a university ESL program•intermediate-level proficiency •age 17-54 •studied English for 2 months -17 years•native language backgrounds: Asian, Romance, and other languages

ESL Stude

nts

17

Participants

•No. = 10•Baseline•5 males and 5 females•A graduate TESOL program in western United States•Knowledge of linguistics•American English NSs

Informants

18

Participants

•No. =6•Each taught a different class•1-3 years of formal teaching experience•Randomly assign•3→control group 3→treatment group

Teachers

19

Participants

• No. = 10, 5 male, 5 female• Age 21 - 52 • Novice• To evaluate spontaneous speech

samples of ESL participants

Listeners Group 1

• No. = 2• expert judges • to classify segmental or

suprasegmental errors

Listeners Group 2

20

Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 Class 4 Class 5 Class 6

Participants

Treatment Group Control Group

21

Research Design

22

Treatment Group Control Group

Pretest Pretest

11-week CPR No treatment

Posttest Posttest

Compare

Week 13

Week 1

Compare

CPR tasks

11 extra-credit tasksA series of Powerpoint slidesAudio recordings from a NS modelSuprasegmental features markedParticipants readings recorded and saved

23

Example for CPR

24

Students hear:

Students see:

Students mark:

Students speak and record:

Pre- and Post-Tests

1 Perception Task

5 Spontaneous Speech Tasks

1 Controlled Production

Task25

Rating Procedure

26

Perception

Controlled Production

SpontaneousSpeech

• An error was counted for pausing, word stress and final intonation if a feature was missing or incorrect.

• An error was counted for stressing wrong syllables or using wrong intonation.

• A five-point Liktert scale (0-4) is used to rate the comprehensibility.

Results - Perception Task

Error Category Source df F p

Perception of Pausing Treatment 1, 71 9.07 .004

Perception of Word Stress

Treatment 1, 71 21.63 < .001

Perception of Sentence-

final Intonation

Treatment 1, 71 5.14 .027

27

Table 2. Analyses of Covariance for Perception Task

Results - Controlled Production Task

Error Category Source df F p

Production of Pausing Treatment 1, 67 2.22 .141

Production of Word Stress Treatment 1, 67 7.73 .007

Production of Sentence-final

Intonation Treatment 1, 67 0.33 .570

28

Table 3. Analyses of Covariance for the Controlled Speech Production Task

Results - Spontaneous Speech Task

ANCOVATreatment -- the independent variableMean gains in perceived comprehensibility

ratings -- the dependent variablePretest scores -- the covariate

The results of the analysis showed no significant effect of treatment (F(1,69) = 0.06, p = .802).

29

Conclusion

Treatment group participants made significant gains in three areas:Perception of pausingPerception of word stressControlled production of word stress

30

Reflection

Flow chart of my future study

31

Sampling

Population

Pairing

ExperimentGroup

ControlGroup

Pretest Pretest

Training /w MyET

Posttest Posttest

Data Analysis

1-year NKUT

70 Volunteers orsystem sampling

Balance

11 Weeks

Pretest & Posttest scoresANOVA

Thank you for listening!