The Impact of Telegram as a Social Network on Teaching English Vocabulary among Iranian Intermediate EFL Learners
International Journal of Information and Communication Sciences
Volume 2, Issue 5, October 2017, Pages: 86-92
Received: Apr. 9, 2017; Accepted: May 11, 2017; Published: Oct. 31, 2017
Views 1682      Downloads 70
Authors
Farid Ghaemi, Department of English, Faculty of Literature and Foreign Languages, Islamic Azad University of Karaj, Karaj, Iran
Niloofar Seyed Golshan, Department of English, Faculty of Literature and Foreign Languages, Islamic Azad University of Karaj, Karaj, Iran
Article Tools
Follow on us
Abstract
To help students find language classes, especially vocabulary lessons more interesting in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) context, a study was conducted to investigate the effects of short massages services (SMS) via social networks on EFL learners' vocabulary learning process. To this end, an experimental approach was applied to assess the efficacy of SMS-based teaching on students' vocabulary learning. A PET proficiency test, two time-series vocabulary progress tests, and a post-test were applied to explore the effects of SMS on students' vocabulary learning process. Then the difference in mean scores was compared to answer the research question. The study has revealed that: (1) the use of SMS via social networks as a teaching tool had a positive effect on students' vocabulary learning; (2) the experimental group obtained somewhat higher scores in the post-test than in two time-series progress tests, making the difference between the progress tests and post-test significantly different; (3) the difference between the two progress tests and post-test for control group was not statistically significant; and (4) the experimental students were more differentiated than the control students, as shown by a statistically significant difference between the mean scores of both groups in post-test in favor of the experimental students.
Keywords
Vocabulary Learning, Social Networks, Mobile Assisted Language Learning (MALL)
To cite this article
Farid Ghaemi, Niloofar Seyed Golshan, The Impact of Telegram as a Social Network on Teaching English Vocabulary among Iranian Intermediate EFL Learners, International Journal of Information and Communication Sciences. Vol. 2, No. 5, 2017, pp. 86-92. doi: 10.11648/j.ijics.20170205.15
Copyright
Copyright © 2017 Authors retain the copyright of this article.
This article is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
References
[1]
Ahmad Jeddah, J. (2012). Intentional vs. Incidental Vocabulary Learning. ELT Research Journal, 1 (1), 71-79.
[2]
Attewell, J., Savill-Smith, C., & Douch, R. (2009). The impact of mobile learning, Examining what it means for teaching and learning. Retrieved from: http://www.caryloliver.com/Library/ImpactOfMobileLearning.pdf.
[3]
Begum, R. (2011). Prospect for cell phones as instructional tools in the efl classroom: a case study of Jahangirnagar University, Bangladesh, Canadian Center of Science and Education. English language Teaching, 4 (1), 105-116.
[4]
Chen, C., & Chung, C. (2007). Personalized mobile English vocabulary learning. Computers & Education, 51 (2), 624–647.
[5]
Begum, R. (2011). Prospect for cell phones as instructional tools in the efl classroom: a case study of Jahangirnagar University, Bangladesh, Canadian Center of Science and Education. English language Teaching, 4 (1), 105-116.
[6]
Chen, C., & Chung, C. (2007). Personalized mobile English vocabulary learning. Computers & Education, 51 (2), 624–647.
[7]
Coombe, C. (2011). Assessing vocabulary in the language classroom. In D. Anderson & R. Sheehan (Eds.), Focus on Vocabulary: Emerging Theory and Practice for Adult Arab Learners (pp. 111-124). United Arab Emirates, Dubai: HCT Press.
[8]
Cooney, G., & Keogh, K. A. (2007). Use of Mobile Phones for Language Learning and Assessment for Learning, A Pilot Project. The 6th international conference on mobile learning. Melbourne, Australia.
[9]
Crowe, A., & Van't Hooft, M. A. H. (2006). Technology and the prospective teacher: Using handheld devices in social studies education. Current Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 6 (1), 1-25.
[10]
Folse, K. (2003). The Influence of L2 research on vocabulary learning materials. Plenary presented at MLI Teacher2Teacher Conference, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.
[11]
Folse, K. (2004). Vocabulary myths: Applying second language research to classroom teaching. Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press.
[12]
Green, A. (2007). Washback to learning outcomes: a comparative study of IELTS preparation and university pre-sessional language courses, 14 (1), 75-97.
[13]
Houser, C., Thornton, P., & Kluge, D. (2002). Mobile learning: Cell phones and PDAs for education. Proceedings of the International Conference on Computers in Education, Australia, ICCE 2002, 1148-1149.
[14]
Klopfer, E., & Squire, K., Jenkins, H. (2002). Environmental Detectives – The development of an Augmented Reality Platform for Environmental Simulations. Educational Research Technology and Development. Los Alamitos, CA.: IEEE Computer Society Publications.
[15]
Kukulska-Hulme, A. &, Shield, L. (2007). An overview of mobile assisted language learning: From content delivery to supported.
[16]
Collaboration and interaction. European Association for Computer Assisted Language Learning 20 (3), 271-289.
[17]
Laufer, B. (1998). The development of passive and active vocabulary in a second language: Same collaboration and interaction. European Association for Computer Assisted Language Learning 20 (3), 271-289.
[18]
Lewis, M. (1997). Pedagogical implications of the lexical approach. In J. Coady & T. Huckin (Eds.), Second language vocabulary acquisition (pp. 255-270). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[19]
Morgan, B., & Ramanathan, V. (2005). Critical literacies and language education: Global and local perspectives. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 25, 151-169. dCambridge University Press.
[20]
Petrova, K. (2007). Mobile Learning Using SMS: A Mobile business application. Retrieved from: http://www.smartmobs.com/archives/002910.Html or different? Applied Linguistics, 12, 255-71.
[21]
Prenskey, M. (2005). What can You Learn from a Cell Phone? Almost Anything! The Innovative Gateway 1. Retrieved from: http://www.innovateonline.info/index.php.
[22]
Schmidt, R. (1990). “The role of consciousness in second language learning”. Applied Linguistics, 11(2), 24. Stahl, S., & Fairbanks, M. (1986). Effects of vocabulary instruction: A model-based meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research.
[23]
Thornton P., & Houser. C. (2005). Using mobile phones in English education in Japan. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21, 217-228.
[24]
Wanger, E. D., & Wilson, P. (2005). Disconnected: why learning professional need to care about mobile learning, American Society for Training and Development 59 (12), 40-43.
[25]
Willis, D. (1990). The lexical syllabus: A new approach to language teaching. London: Collins.
[26]
Willis, J., & Willis, D. (1989). Collins COBUILD English course. London: Collins COBUILD.
[27]
Yali, g. (2010). L2 Vocabulary Acquisition Through Reading—Incidental Learning and Intentional Learning, 33 (1), 25-48.
[28]
Yousefzadeh, M. (2012). Multimedia messaging service (MMS) VS. short message sending (SMS) and second language learners’ vocabulary. Journal of Educational And Instructional Students in The World, 2 (4), 89-99.
ADDRESS
Science Publishing Group
548 FASHION AVENUE
NEW YORK, NY 10018
U.S.A.
Tel: (001)347-688-8931