Abdallah Abu Naba'h1, Jebreen Hussain1, Aieman Al-Omari2, and Sadeq Shdeifat1
1
Department of Curricula and Instruction, The Hashemite University, Jordan
2
Department of Educational Foundations and Administration, The Hashemite University, Jordan
Abstract: This study aimed at investigating the effect of using an instructional software program of English language on the
achievement of secondary students in Jordan. The sample of the study consisted of (212) students distributed randomly on four
experimental groups and four control groups. The instruments of the study were an instructional software program for
teaching the passive voice and an achievement test. An Analysis of covariance was used to find out the effect of the
instructional program on the students’ achievement in the passive voice. The findings of the study revealed that: 1. there were
statistically significant differences (α < 0.05) between the students' achievement mean scores in grammar attributed to the
instructional method of teaching. This difference is in favor of the students in the experimental group 2. there were statistically
significant differences (α < 0.05) between the students' achievement mean scores in grammar attributed to gender. This
difference is in favor of male students. 3. there were statistically significant differences (α < 0.05) between the students'
achievement mean scores in grammar attributed to stream of study. This difference is in favor of the scientific stream students.
In light of the findings of the study, it was recommended that TEFL teachers use CAI lessons in their instruction.
Keywords: Computer assisted language learning, achievement, use of instructional program.
Received November 21, 2007; accepted May 25, 2008
1. Introduction
Jordan has realized the fundamental role of
information and communication technology in the
global econo0my where knowledge is becoming the
primary engine of growth and development [25]. They
are so widespread that one feels outdating if not using
them [20]. The influence of these over powerful
technological tools has pervaded all aspects of the
educational, business, and economic sectors of our
world [28]. There is no doubt that just as the computer
has established itself firmly in the world of business
and communication technology, it has also succeeded
in acquiring a fundamental role in the educational
process. This role is becoming more powerful as
computers become cheaper, smaller in size, more
adaptable and easier to handle. Computers are
becoming more appealing to teachers because of their
huge capabilities and extensive effectiveness [10].
The idea of using computers for teaching purposes
in subjects like modern languages arouses mixed
feelings and meets with a variety of reactions [17]. The
fact that computers are used in the teaching of other
subjects and are put to a great many applications in
society makes one suspect that no field lies completely
outside their scope and that they might indeed be of
some use [8]. To many, the prospect of using
computers is not without appeal; it is the kind of
challenge which one feels drawn to respond to. At the
same time the technology frightens us; we are afraid
that it may come to dominate us, we have qualms
about dehumanization in a subject which is concerned
above all with human communication, and we may
even be afraid of losing our jobs. It is also known that
language teaching does not escape the waves of
fashion; we remember the errors of the past, the
theories and inventions which failed to come up to
expectations [16]. Is the use of computers in language
teaching, as some critics say, “the language laboratory
all over again”? [18].
Such anxieties can be dispelled only by a proper
acquaintance with the facts. To begin with, a computer
is nothing more than a tool, an aid to be used or not, as
the teacher thinks fit [11]. The computer, like any
other electrical or mechanical gadget, provides a
means of amplifying, or extending the effectiveness of,
our natural talents and capabilities. And like other such
machines, without the human input and control they
are useless. Used properly, however, they can be very
effective indeed, enabling the individual to carry out
tasks inconceivable by other means [16]. Finally,
computers are technologically different from language
laboratories [4]. Not only do they involve primarily the
written language, they are much more versatile; their
The International Arab Journal of Information Technology, Vol. 6, No. 4, October 2009
impact on language teaching and language learning
therefore likely to be very different [9]. There is no
reason to believe that history will necessarily repeat
itself; everyone is aware of the mistakes which were
made, and those engaged in computer assisted
language teaching are the first to stress that computers
are not a universal panacea [18].
Few teachers nowadays, at least in the Western
world, rely solely on chalk and blackboard [17]. Over
the years, more and more technical inventions have
taken their place among the educational aids with
which teachers surround themselves, so as to make
their teaching more effective. What distinguishes the
computers from other pieces of equipment, such as
tape recorders and film projectors, and what forms in
fact the basis of its being an educational aid is its
interactive capability:
“The unique property of the computer as a medium
for education is its ability to interact with the student.
Books and tape recordings can tell a student what the
rules are and what the right solutions are, but they
cannot analyze the specific mistake the student has
made and react in a manner which leads him not only
to correct his mistake, but also to understand the
principles behind the correct solution” [22].
The computer gives individual attention to the
learner at the console and replies to him. Traditionally,
it acts as a tutor assessing the learner's reply, recording
it, pointing out mistakes and giving explanations. It
guides the learner towards the correct answer, and
generally adapts the material to his or her performance
[9]. This flexibility, which can include allowing the
learner to choose between several modes of
presentation, is something impossible to achieve with
written handouts and worksheets; it would require
huge "scrambled books" with pages and pages of
mostly unnecessary explanations, together with an
extremely complicated system of cross-references. Nor
would the learner get the instant feedback so beneficial
to the learning process which the computer provides.
The computer thus promotes the acquisition of
knowledge, develops the learner's critical faculties,
demands active participation and encourages vigilance
[14]. Gonglewiski [12] maintained that computer-
mediated instruction can provide a very valuable
language learning experience.
Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL) is
the acronym for computer assisted language learning
and it is related to the use of computers for language
teaching and learning. Significant use of CALL began
in the 1960s. Since then, the development of CALL
software has followed the changes in teaching
methodologies [14]. As teaching methods changed to
audio - lingual and communicative approaches, CALL
software included simulations and more interactive
programs. Research has shown that learning strategies
employed in CALL can affect the quality of learning
the language. However, it still lacks methods and a
clear theoretical foundation [7].
2. Statement of the Problem
In the light of the information revolution and the
scientific challenges of the 21st century, there is a
sweeping trend to use computers in al aspects of life
and education is no exception. On the other hand, the
world is heading towards knowledge economy and a
lot of money will be invested in computer assisted
language learning instructional software programs.
Therefore, it is worth investigating the effectiveness of
such CALL programs on the performance of learners.
2.1. Aims of the Study
The general aims of this study are the following:
• Developing an instructional program for teaching a
grammatical item of English language which is the
passive voice, and
• Investigating its effect on developing students'
achievement in English grammar.
All in all, the study attempts to answer the following
questions:
• Are there any statistically significant differences (α
< 0.05) between the students' achievement mean
scores in grammar attributed to the instructional
method of teaching (traditional& computerized)?
• Are statistically significant differences (α< 0.05)
between the students' achievement mean scores in
grammar attributed to the stream of study (scientific
& literary)?
• Are there any there any statistically significant
differences (α< 0.05) between the students'
achievement mean scores in grammar attributed to
gender (male & female)?
2.2. The Importance of Study
The domain of CALL in Jordan is in need of more
research. To the researchers' best knowledge, studies
about computer-based instruction in Jordan are not so
many. A few studies about the use of CALL in
teaching grammar to Jordanian EFL learners have been
conducted. It is anticipated that this study will shed
light on the benefits of using computers in language
learning in general, and in learning English grammar
in particular. This study also attempts to bridge the gap
between the theoretical and practical sides of using
CALL in teaching grammar.
Thereupon, the findings of this study may be
functional for different categories of people; it may
help EFL curricula designers and EFL methodologists
develop teaching materials which suit various ways of
teaching and match students’ level of achievement in
English language in general and in grammatical
The Effect of Computer Assisted Language Learning in Teaching English Grammar on the…
structures in particular. Moreover, this study may help
teachers by facilitating their role as well as students by
helping them absorb the structures and rules of English
quite easily and smoothly. Finally, this study may
encourage other researchers to conduct further studies
on the same topic, which will enrich both the local and
international literature.
3. Limitations of the Study
This study has the following primary limitations:
• This study is confined to the first secondary
students in the academic year 2005/2006. In Al-
Zarqa Directorate of Education.
• The results of this study may be confined to the first
secondary stage students only.
• The study is restricted to one aspect of language
which is the passive voice.
4. Review of Related Literature
Many researchers are interested in using computers as
a medium for teaching / learning. Therefore, many
studies were conducted on using CALL for teaching
English. To the researchers' best knowledge, a few
studies were conducted on using CALL in teaching
English grammar in Jordan. However, this section
contains studies conducted on teaching other
components of the language via computer. Pattern and
Cadienno [24] compared the relative effectiveness of
traditional instruction and processing instruction, both
for interpreting and producing Spanish object
pronouns in OVS and OV order .The traditional
instruction involved grammatical explanation and
output practice, while the processing instruction
involved grammatical explanation and comprehension
practice.
The
processing
group
performed
significantly better than the traditional group.
[7] Investigated the achievement of fifth grade
students who used computer in different subjects with
their colleagues who only followed traditional
methods. The students were distributed into three
groups; group 1 use computers for 60 minutes every
week, group 2 use the computer in less duration and
fewer tasks, and group 3, the control group, use
traditional instructions. The results show significant
differences in the achievement of students in favor of
the groups who use computers.
[19] Investigated the use of computer-based L2
grammar instruction. The results of these studies seem
to indicate that computer-based grammar instruction
can be as effective as or more effective than
traditional instruction (e.g., workbooks and lectures).
[21] Conducted a study concerning the relative
effectiveness of computer-assisted production (output)
practice and comprehension (input) practice in second
language acquisition. The results of the study indicate
that the output-focused group developed more
grammatical skills than the input-focused group,
suggesting that the production practice required more
syntactic processing on the part of the learner than the
comprehension practice. [26] Replicated Van Pattern
and Cadierno's study. He found no significant
difference between the input processing group and the
output-processing group. [3] Investigated the effect of
using computers in the teaching of L2 composition on
the writing performance of learners. The findings
revealed that there are considerable differences for
using computers as an effective writing tool. [23]
Conducted a study comparing the computer-based
grammar instruction and the teacher-directed grammar
instruction .The results showed that for all levels of
English proficiency, the computer - based students
scored significantly higher on open-ended tests
covering the structures in question rather than the
teacher-directed instruction. The results indicate that
computer-based instruction can be an effective method
of teaching L2 grammar. [1] Conducted a study to
explore the effect of a CALL program on students'
writing ability in English by teaching the program
cooperatively and collectively. The findings of the
study revealed that there were statistically significant
differences between the experimental group, who
studied via computer, and the control group, who
studied in the traditional method. The difference was
in favor of the experimental group who studied via
computer.
Al-Qumoul [2] conducted a study to investigate the
effect of an instructional software program of English
language functions on tenth graders' achievement. .
The results reveal that the students who studied the
English language functions through CAI lessons
performed better than those who learnt by the
traditional method. [27] Examined the overall effect of
using e-mails on the writing performance of Taiwanese
students in English. The major findings demonstrated
that students made improvements on syntactic
complexity and grammatical accuracy. The results also
revealed that the e-mail writing was a positive strategy
that helped improve their foreign language learning
and attitudes towards English.
In conclusion, having reviewed the above studies,
we find that many researchers assert the importance of
computer-assisted language learning. It is clear from
the studies that using CALL is more beneficial and
helpful than using the traditional methods, e.g., [17],
Pattern and Cadienno, [24], [7], [21], [3], [23], [1], [2].
However, only few of them report that there are no
significant differences between the CAI lessons and
the traditional methods of instruction, e.g., [19].
This study is different from the previously
mentioned studies. It deals with a component, which
was neglected by many researchers, English grammar.
To the researchers' best knowledge; a few studies were
conducted on teaching grammar through computer in
The International Arab Journal of Information Technology, Vol. 6, No. 4, October 2009
Jordan. For this purpose, the researchers developed an
instructional program for teaching the passive voice.
5. Methodology and Procedures
5.1. Sample of the Study
Four public schools were purposefully chosen from the
Educational Directorate in Zarqa for convenience. In
addition, the schools were equipped with computer
labs .Consequently, students are supposed to have
previous experience in using software.
The sample of the study consists of (212) first
secondary students assigned randomly to eight
sections. Four sections were randomly assigned to the
experimental group (scientific, literary males and
scientific, literary females); each section consists of
(20) students selected and assigned randomly, and four
assigned to the control group (scientific males (20
students), literary males (27 students), scientific
females (45 students) and literary females (40
students)). The experimental groups were taught the
passive voice via computer while the control groups
were taught the same grammatical item by the
traditional method. The sample students were chosen
from Al-Zarqa Directorate of Education.
5.2. Research Instruments
To implement this study successfully, the researchers
have developed two types of instruments: an
achievement test, and a software program.
5.2.1. The Achievement Test
The test was designed by the researchers. It was used
as both a pre-test and a post-test to find out the impact
of the software program on students’ achievement.
The test comprises (30) multiple-choice items of
four alternatives. At the beginning of the test paper, the
instructions of the test were introduced. The subjects
were asked to choose the correct answer. The time
allocated for the test was (50) minutes. Concerning the
marking scheme, there is one mark for each item, so
the total score is out of (30).
The students’ previous knowledge was assessed by
the pre-test administered to both groups (control and
experimental) before the study started. The objective
of the pre-test was to assess the students’ background
knowledge of the passive voice.
The same pre-test was used at the end of the study
as a post-test to assess the students’ achievement on
the topic, the passive voice. The objective of the post-
test was to assess the effect of both instructional
methods (contemporary and computerized) on
students’ achievement.
5.3. Test Validity
The test content was validated by a team of English
language specialists. The team was asked to validate
the content of the test with regard to test instructions,
the relevance of questions to content, its suitability to
the research goals and objectives, the number and
arrangement of questions, and the suitability of the
time allocated to the test. The remarks of the validating
team, their notes and suggestions were taken into
consideration, and the researchers made the necessary
modifications before applying the test.
5.4. Test Reliability
The test reliability was obtained through a test-retest
method, which was applied on a pilot group of (25)
students who were randomly chosen from the
population of the study and excluded from the sample.
The test was repeated on the same group to check its
reliability two weeks later. The reliability correlation
coefficient of the test-retest was calculated using
Pearson correlation formula. It was found to be (0.81),
which is considered to be suitable from a statistical
point of view for the purpose of this study.
5.5. The Software Program
For the purpose of this study, the researchers
developed an instructional program to teach the
passive voice and find out its effect on the
achievement of students in the first secondary stage.
The program was based on Macro- Media Flash
Professional Version 6. The program is organized in
the following way:
Introduction
Construction
Use
Agent
Present Verbs in the Passive
Past Verbs in the Passive
Modal Auxiliaries in the Passive
Problematic Issues Regarding the Passive Voice
Explanation and Examples
Exercises
Drills and Practice
Test yourself
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
The program also provides model answers for the
items presented in the exercises. Moreover, the student
receives feedback for his achievement simply because
the program contains a system for correction. The
student can easily get his/her scores when he/she
finishes any exercise.
5.5.1. The Design of the Software Program
When developing the software instructional program,
the researchers took into consideration the following:
The Effect of Computer Assisted Language Learning in Teaching English Grammar on the…
Windows/buttons/colors/font type.
The interface to be user-friendly.
The sequence of the screen to be logic.
Allow users browse without getting lost and users
always know where they are.
• The program easy use.
• The use of the items to be correct.
5.5.2. Validity of the Software Program
The content of the program was validated by TEFL
and curricula designing specialists. The validating
committee consisted of two PhD holders in curricula
and instruction, one of them is specialized in
educational technology, four highly qualified teachers
of English, and four supervisors in the Ministry of
Education in Jordan.
5.5.3. Findings Related to the First Question
The first question asks about the existence of
statistically significant differences (α < 0.05) between
the students' achievement mean scores in grammar
attributed to the instructional method of teaching
(contemporary & computerized). Analysis of
COVAriance (ANCOVA) was performed to test the
significance of the differences between the
experimental groups who were taught the passive
voice via computer and the control groups who studied
the same grammatical item using the contemporary
method. Table 1 presents the means and standard
deviations of the experimental and control groups for
students' achievement in the post-test.
Table 1. Means and standard deviations in the post-test according
to the method applied.
Computerized
Contemporary
Difference
As indicated in Table 1, there are statistically
significant differences between the mean scores in the
achievement test of both the experimental group who
used the computer and the control group who were
taught by the contemporary method. The mean scores
of the experimental group is (26.21) while it is (23.95)
for the control group. The difference between the two
groups' mean scores is (2.26).
To find out the statistical significance of this
difference, the researchers employed the 3-Way
ANCOVA to the results of the post-test according to
the variables of the study (method, gender, stream of
study) The variance among the dependent variable
groups (achievement in the post- test) is the same,
since the calculated significance level (0.122) was
Std.
Deviations
Means
26.21
23.95
2.26
Number
2.26
2.06
0.2
80
80
-
greater than the postulated significance level (α <
0.05). The results of the analysis of covariance are as
shown in Table 2.
Table 2. 3-Way analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) for students’
achievement in the post-test.
Source
of
Variance
Method
Gender
Stream
Pretest
Table 2 shows that there are statistically significant
differences (α < 0.05) between the mean scores of the
students who were taught the passive voice via computer
(the experimental group) and those who were taught the
same grammatical item using the traditional method (the
control group).
The computed (F) value was (75.47) which is
statistically significant at (α < 0.05). This shows that
there is a significant effect of the use of a
computerized software program on the achievement of
students. This effect is in favor of the experimental
group who were taught via computer.
5.5.4. Findings Related to the Second Question
The second question asks about the existence of
statistically significant differences (α< 0.05) between
the students' achievement mean scores in grammar
attributed to gender (male & female). To test this
question, the researchers calculated the students’ mean
scores and standard deviations in the post-test for both
groups of study (male and female students). The
findings are as shown in Table 3.
Table 3. Means and standard deviations in the post-test for male
and female students.
Gender
Male
Female
Difference
Table 3 indicates that there is a difference between
the mean scores of both male groups and female
groups in the post-test. This difference was (1.24) in
favor of the males. The mean scores of the males was
(25.7) while it was (24.46) for the females. To reveal
the statistical significance of these differences, the
researchers employed the 3-Way ANCOVA to the
results of the post-test according the variables of the
study (method, gender, and stream).
Table 2 shows that there are statistically significant
differences (α < 0.05) between the mean scores of both
Sum of
Squares
Df
148.737
1
30.196
1
31.405
1
314.972
1
Mean
Squares
148.737
30.196
31.405
314.972
Means
25.7
24.46
1.24
Std. Deviations
2.39
2.34
0.05
The International Arab Journal of Information Technology, Vol. 6, No. 4, October 2009
male and female students. The calculated (F) value
was (15.353) which is statistically significant at (α <
0.05).
This proves that there is an effect on students’
achievement attributed to gender. This effect is in
favor of male students.
5.5.5. Findings Related to the Third Question
The third question asks about the existence of
statistically significant differences (α< 0.05) between
the students' achievement mean scores in grammar
attributed to the stream of study (scientific & literary).
To test this question, the researchers calculated the
students’ mean scores and standard deviations in the
post-test for both groups of the study (scientific, and
literary). The results are as shown in Table 4.
Table 4. Means and standard deviations in the post-test for
scientific and literary students.
Means
Std. Deviations
25.56
24.6
0.96
Number
2.54
2.24
0.3
80
80
-
Table 4 shows that there is a significant difference
between the mean scores of both scientific group and
literary group in the post-test. This difference was
(0.96) in favor of the scientific stream students. The
mean scores of the scientific students was (25.56)
while it was (24.6) for the literary stream students. To
find out the statistical significance of these
differences, the researchers employed the 3-Way
Analysis of Covariance to the results of the post-test
in terms of the variables of the study (method, gender,
and stream of study).
Table 2 shows that there are statistically significant
differences (α < 0.05) between the mean scores of both
scientific students and literary students in the post-test.
The calculated (F) value was (15.968) which is a
statistically significant value at the significance level
(α < 0.05). This indicates that there is an effect on
students’ achievement attributed to the stream of study
(scientific, literary). This effect is in favor of the
scientific stream students.
6. Discussion and Recommendations
6.1. Discussion of the Findings Related to the
First Question
ANCOVA results showed that there are statistically
significant differences in the achievement mean scores
of the subjects of the experimental group who studied
the passive voice via computer and the control group
who studied the same grammatical item using the
contemporary method. This difference was in favor of
the experimental group. A quick look at the students'
scores on the pre-test, shows that there were no
statistically significant differences between the mean
scores of the experimental group and the control
group. The scores were (22.09) and (21.66)
respectively.
This result indicates that the subjects had the same
background concerning their knowledge of the passive
voice before implementing the experiment. This also
indicates that both groups were equivalent in this
regard. The figures also postulate that any gain in the
academic achievement in the field of the passive voice
could be attributed to the method employed.
The total mean scores of the experimental groups in
the post-test was (26.21), while it was (23.95) for the
control groups, This means that the achievement in the
post-test for both the experimental and control groups
is attributed to the treatment. It can be easily noticed
that the extra gain in the experimental group's mean
scores is higher than the extra gain in the control
group's mean scores. This improvement is attributed to
the method employed This means that the use of the
software program has noticeably enhanced the abilities
of the students of the experimental group regarding the
passive voice.
One possible explanation for the effect of using
computers for teaching English grammar is that
computers enable each individual to work according to
his own pace. The user may move freely from one
component to another as he wishes and according to
his needs. This characteristic makes CALL programs
cater for individual differences.
Another possible explanation for the considerable
differences in the above findings is that CALL method
makes it possible for the learner to use the program
whenever he wants at any place.
The computer method, unlike the contemporary
method, enables the learner to get feedback easily,
which develops self-reliance skills. Using the
computer gives the student the chance to use many
senses during the learning process. The use of the
computer screen which is accompanied by animation,
pictures, colors, music and sounds attracts students’
attention and empowers faculties of retention to them.
The researchers believe that students can learn more
efficiently and effectively on their own with additional
resources which technology makes available. Using
software programs applies “Learning by Doing”
method, since learners use the keyboard and the mouse
to click or to print their answers. Computer
instructional programs are interactive. Learners can
easily go forward or backward according to their needs
and requirements.
When comparing the results of this study with the
results of the previous related literature, we find that
this study is consistent with many practical studies
which were conducted before. It is consistent with [23]
who proved experimentally that computer-based
instruction can be an effective method of teaching the
The Effect of Computer Assisted Language Learning in Teaching English Grammar on the…
grammar of a second language. It is also consistent
with McEnry, Baker& Wilson [19], [1], [21], and
Pattern and Cadienno[24] who say that the processing
group performed significantly better than the
traditional group. The study is also consistent with [2],
[17], [5], and [7] who emphasize that the computerized
method is more beneficial for students than the
traditional method. However, the results of the present
study in this regard are different from the results
reported by [26] who found no significant differences
between the computerized group and the traditional
one. Also, this study is inconsistent with McEnry,
Baker & Wilson [19] who found that the computer-
based grammar instruction could be as effective as or
more effective than traditional instruction. Perhaps the
difference in these results is due to the differences in
culture.
6.2. Discussion of the Findings Related to the
Second Question
The findings of the ANCOVA for the scores of the
subjects in the achievement test revealed that there are
statistically significant differences attributed to the
gender variable in favor of the males over the females.
The mean scores of the female students in the post-test
was (24.46) while it was (25.7) for the males in the
same test. This means that male students have higher
scores than female students in the post-test regardless
of the way of teaching used.
Possible explanation for this finding is the fact that
male students are more serious in their learning
process. They do their best to seize every possible
opportunity to increase their knowledge.
Another explanation for this finding is that male
students are incredibly interested in computers and
multi-media programs. They got bored of the
traditional method that is why they showed a high
level of interest and curiosity when they were being
taught via computer. [29] is in line with the above
view. He found no statistically significant differences
between students' mean scores attributed to gender in
their comparative studies. However, the above view is
inconsistent with [2], [1], [21] and [24] who believe
that female students were superior to male students in
their academic achievement.
6.3. Discussion of the Findings Related
to the Third Question
The findings of the ANCOVA for the scores of the
subjects in the achievement post-test revealed that
there are statistically significant differences attributed
to the stream of study variable. This difference was in
favor of scientific students over literary students.
A look at the findings of the analysis of covariance
for the students' scores in the post-test proves this
viewpoint. The mean scores of the scientific students
in the post-test were (25.56) while the mean scores of
the literary students in the post-test were (24.6). This
means that scientific students have higher marks than
literary students regardless of the gender or method of
teaching.
One possible explanation for the above point of
view is that the scientific stream students, generally
speaking, have relatively higher mental abilities than
literary stream students, this is shown by the fact that
they were accepted in the scientific stream which
demands higher grades. Another possible explanation
is that the scientific stream students are much more
interested in studying and learning in general and
better in learning languages in particular. The finding
of this study in this regard is consistent with [3] who
statistically proved that scientific stream students were
superior to literary stream students in their academic
achievement.
7. Recommendations
Based on the findings discussed a
suggest the following recommendations:
• Researchers should conduct other studies on the
effect of computerized programs on the students'
achievement in English language grammar,
focusing on other grammatical items in other
regions in Jordan in order to generate a more
comprehensive idea about the effect of CAI method
on teaching English grammar in Jordan.
• The use of software programs in language teaching
should be investigated further. Researchers should
conduct further studies on the effectiveness of CAI
method on teaching language skills and other
components of the language.
• Teachers are advised to vary their methods,
techniques and ways of teaching, according to their
students' needs and interests. They are also advised
to use the computerized method more intensively
and more frequently.
References
[1]
Abu-Seileek A., “Designing a Computer Assisted
Language Learning Program and Testing its
Effectiveness on Students' Writing Ability in
English,” PhD Thesis, Amman Arab University
for Graduate Studies, 2004.
Al-Qomoul M., “The Effect of Using an
Instructional Software Program of English
Language Functions on the Basic Stage Students’
Achievements,” PhD Thesis, Amman Arab
University for Graduate Studies, 2005.
Alsouki S., “The Effect of Using Computers in
the Teaching of L2 Composition on the Writing
Performance of Tenth Grade Students in Amman
[2]
[3]
The International Arab Journal of Information Technology, Vol. 6, No. 4, October 2009
Private Schools,” MA Thesis, University of
Jordan, 2001.
Ariew R., “A Management System for Foreign
Test,” Computers and Education Journal, vol. 6,
no. 3, pp. 117-20, 1982.
Bald W., Cobb D., and Schwarz A., Active
Grammar, Longman, London, 1986
Chapelle G., “CALL in the Year 2000: Still in
Search of Research Paradigms,” Language
Computer Journal of Learning and Technology,
vo1. 11, no. 3, pp. 19-43, 1997.
Christopher K., “The Effect of Time on
Computer Assisted Instruction for Risk
Students,” Computer Journal of Research on
Technology in Education, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 85-
98, 1995.
Davies D. and Higgins J., “Computers Language,
and Language Learning,” Center for Information
on Language Teaching and Research, London,
1980.
Demaiziere F., “An Experiment in Computer
Assisted Learning of English Grammar at the
University of Paris VII,” Computers and
Education Journal, vol. 6 no. 3, pp. 121-125,
1982.
Dhaif H., “Computer Assisted Language
Learning: A Client's View,” Computer Journal
Assisted Language Instruction Consortium, vol.
7, no. 2, pp. 467-469, 2004.
Farrington B., “Perspectives for Computer Based
Learning of Languages,” Computer Journal of
Modern Languages in Scotland, vol. 21, no. 2,
pp. 116-124, 1981.
Gonglewski M., Meloni C., and Brank J., “Using
E-Mail in Foreign language Teaching: Rationale
and Suggestions,” The Internet TESL Journal,
vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 115-118, 2007.
Haas W. “The Potential and Limitation of
Computer Assisted Instruction in the Teaching of
Foreign Languages,” Education Resources
Information Center (ERIC), pp. 239-269, 1976.
Hah M., “Strategies Employed by Users of a
Japanese Computer Assisted Language Learning
Program,” Australian Journal of Educational
Technology, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 25-34, 1996.
Harmer J., Teaching and Learning Grammar,
Longman, London, 1987.
Kenning M. and Kenning J, “Computer Assisted
Language Teaching Made Easy,” British Journal
of Language Teaching, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 119-
123, 1981.
Kenning M. and Kenning J., An Introduction to
Computer Assisted Language Teaching, Oxford
University Press, London, 1983.
Marty F. “Reflections on the Use of Computers
in Second Language Acquisition,” The Internet
TESL Journal, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 85-98, 1981.
[19] McEnery T., Barker A., and Wilson A., “A
Statistical Analysis of Corpus Based Computer
versus Traditional Human Teaching Methods of
Part of Speech Analysis,” Computer Journal
Assisted Language Learning, vol. 8, no. 2, pp.
259-274, 1995.
[20] Moras S., “Computer Assisted Language
Learning and the Internet,” Karen's Linguistics
Issues, pp. 25-30, 2001.
[21] Nagata N., The Relative Effectiveness of
Production and Comprehension Practice in
Second Acquisition, University of San Francisco,
USA, 1996.
[22] Nelson E., Ward M., and Kaplow R., “Two New
Strategies for Computer Assisted Language
Instruction,” Computer Journal of Foreign
Language Annals, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 28-37, 1976.
[23] Nutta J., Is Computer Based Grammar Instruction
as Effective as Teacher Directed Grammar
Instruction for Teaching L2 Structures, University
of South Florida, USA, 2001.
[24] Patten B. and Cadierno T., “Explicit Instruction
and Input Processing,” Computer Journal of
Studies in Second Language Acquisition, vol. 15,
no. 3, pp. 225-243, 1993.
[25] Rousan B., “Research and Development
Strategy for Information and Communication
Technology,” Government Press, Jordan, 2006.
[26] Salaberry R., “CALL in the Year 2000: Still
Developing the Research Agenda,” Computer
Journal of Language Learning and Technology,
vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 104-107, 1999.
[27] Shang H., “An Exploratory Study of E-Mail
Application on FL Writing Performance,”
Computer Assisted Language Learning, vol. 20,
no. 1, pp. 79-96, 2007.
[28] Singhal M., “The Internet and Foreign Language
Education: Benefits and Challenges,” Teaching
English as a Second Language Journal, vol. 53
no. 3, pp. 241-267, 2004.
The Effect of Computer Assisted Language Learning in Teaching English Grammar on the…
Abdallah Abu Naba'h is assistant
professor at the Department of
Curricula & Instruction. Graduated
from the University of Baghdad in
1972, obtained his MA in English
from North Texas State University
in USA, and got his PhD from the
University of Wales in (TEFL) in 1988. Taught
English for different levels in different Arab countries.
Jebreen Hussain is associate
professor at the Department of
Curricula & Instruction, Faculty of
Educational
Sciences at the
Hashemite University in Jordan. His
research
interests
include
educational technology and its
applications in teaching and learning.
Aieman Al-Omari is assistant
professor and chairperson of the
Department
of
Educational
Foundations and Administration, the
Hashemite University, Jordan. He
earned his PhD from Washington
State University, USA, in 2005. His
research interests include higher education
administration, student's affairs administration,
educational leadership, and strategic planning.
Sadeq Shdeifat ia assistant professor
at the Department of Curricula &
Instruction, dean's assistant for
practice teaching at the Hashemite
University, Jordan. He obtained his
PhD from the University of
Huddersfield, UK in 2005. His
research interests include Islamic education, teachers'
training, and curriculum design.
