USING GOOGLE SEARCH FOR ENGLISH GRAMMAR LEARNING
Abstract
Background/Purpose: Second/foreign language learners face problems in different areas such as correct word usage, grammatical accuracy, and pronunciation fluency. This paper responds to one of these problems by investigating the impact of strategic Google Search on Iranian English as a foreign language (EFL) learners’ grammar learning.
Methodology: Sixty Iranian intermediate EFL learners from a private English language institute in Isfahan, Iran were selected and randomly divided into two groups. To find which areas of grammar are most problematic among the participants, a multiple-choice grammar pretest which was validated by five English experts was given to them. Then 10 questions that most participants answered wrongly were selected as the most challenging ones. During 10 class sessions, the participants were taught how to select the correct choice through Google Search. In fact, each participant in the class had a laptop connected to the internet. The researcher taught them how to search on Google strategically and the participants found out that in Google sites there are some sentences which are grammatically wrong and they should not trust them. They learned how to search strategically for the correct choices. At the end of the sessions they answered a posttest containing different questions but in the same grammatical areas. The pretest and posttest both were conducted while the participants were connected to internet sites.
Findings: Data analysis was done through running t-test using SPSS software and statistically significant difference was revealed. The findings showed that those participants who were taught how to strategically use Google Search performed better in the posttest. Therefore, the results revealed that correct Google Search had improved the Iranian intermediate EFL learners’ grammar knowledge.
Contributions: This study has several implications for both language learners and teachers regarding the use of Google platform for English grammar learning. In addition, it contributes to the body of knowledge that strategic Google Search does not only improve the Iranian EFL learners’ English grammar but also make them less dependent on teachers thus promoting autonomous learning.
Keywords: Google search, EFL learners, grammar learning, intermediate EFL learners, Iran, web-based instruction.
Cite as: Tavakoli, M. (2021). Using Google search for English grammar learning. Journal of Nusantara Studies, 6(2), 318-339. http://dx.doi.org/10.24200/jonus.vol6iss2pp318-339
References
Armstrong, V. O., Tudor, T. R., & Hughes, G. D. (2021). Course retention in community colleges: Demographics, motivation, learning style, and locus of control. American Journal of Distance Education, 35(1), 32-47.
Ashikin Yusof, N., & Saadon, N. (2012). The effects of web-based language learning on university students' grammar proficiency. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 67(1), 402–408.
Bárkányi, Z. (2021). Motivation, self-efficacy beliefs, and speaking anxiety in language MOOCs. ReCALL, 33(2), 143-160.
Barrot, J. S. (2021). Social media as a language learning environment: A systematic review of the literature (2008-2019). Computer Assisted Language Learning.
Baturay, M. H., Daloglu, A., & Yildirim, S. (2010). Language practice with multimedia supported web-based grammar revision material. ReCALL, 22(3), 313-331.
Bibauw, S., Fran¸ C. T., & Desmet, P. (2015). Dialog-based CALL: An overview of existing research. In F. Helm, L. Bradley, M. Guarda, & S. Thoueesny (Eds.), Critical CALL – Proceedings of the 2015 EUROCALL conference (pp. 57–64).
Researchpublishing.net.
Bloch, J. (2009). The design of an online concordancing program for teaching about reporting verbs. Language Learning & Technology, 13(1), 59-78.
Chang, Y. (2020). The effect of ambiguity tolerance on learning English with computer-mediated dictionaries. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 33(8), 960-981.
Christiansen, I. M., & Els, R. (2021). The CALL of Zulu: Reflections on the development of a computer-assisted language learning package. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 34(3), 246-269.
Crossley, S. (2020). Linguistic features in writing quality and development: An overview. Journal of Writing Research, 11(3), 415–443.
Dollinger, M., Liu, D., Arthars, N., & Lodge, J. (2019). Working together in learning analytics towards the co-creation of value. Journal of Learning Analytics, 6(2), 10–26.
Ebadi, S., & Rahimi, M. (2018). An exploration into the impact of WebQuest-based classroom on EFL learners’ critical thinking and academic writing skills: A mixed-methods study. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 31(5/6), 617–651.
Ebrahimpour, A., Rajabali, F., Siamian, H., Rahbar, F., & Vahedi, M. (2019). The effect of social networks on the scientific research relations, prospectiveness, creativity and satisfaction of scientific position. International Journal of Medical Research &
Health Sciences, 5(7S), 413–418.
Farhady, H., Ja’farpur, A., & Birjandi, P. (1994). Testing language skills from theory to practice. The Organization for Researching and Composing University Textbooks in the Humanities.
Friðriksdóttir, K. (2021). The effect of content-related and external factors on student retention in LMOOCs. ReCALL, 33(2), 128-142.
Frigaard, A. (2016). Does the computer lab improve student performance on vocabulary, grammar, and listening comprehension? http://eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED476749.pdf.
Galbraith, D., & Baaijen, V. M. (2019). Aligning keystrokes with cognitive processes in writing. In E. Lindgren & K. Sullivan (Eds.), Observing writing (pp. 306–325). Brill.
Geluso, J. (2011). Phraseology and frequency of occurrence on the web: native speakers’ perceptions of Google-informed second language writing. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 26(2), 144–157.
Ghorbani, N., & Ebadi, S. (2020). Exploring learners’ grammatical development in mobile assisted language learning. Cogent Education, 7(1), 1-14.
Habash, M. (2015). Learning English vocabulary using mobile phones: Saudi Arabian EFL teachers in focus. European Scientific Journal, 11(5), 446–456.
Hatch, E., & Farhady, H. (1981). Research design and statistics for applied linguistics. Rahnama Publications.
Hong, J., Hwang, M., Liu, Y., & Tai, K. (2020). Effects of gamifying questions on English grammar learning mediated by epistemic curiosity and language anxiety. Computer Assisted Language Learning.
Kenning, M-M. (2007). ICT and language learning. from print to the mobile phone. Palgrave MacMillan.
Kim, H. S. (2015). Emerging mobile apps to improve English listening skills. Multimedia-Assisted Language Learning, 16(2), 11–30.
Knight, S., Shibani, A., Abel, S., Gibson, A., & Ryan, P. (2020). AcaWriter: A learning analytics tool for formative feedback on academic writing. Journal of Writing Research, 12(1), 141–186.
Kruk, M. (2018). The use of internet resources and browser-based virtual worlds in teaching grammar. Teaching English with Technology, 14(2), 52-67.
Lee, J. S., & Lu, Y. (2021). L2 motivational self system and willingness to communicate in the classroom and extramural digital contexts. Computer Assisted Language Learning.
Liu, D., & Jiang, P. (2016). Using a corpus‐based lexicogrammatical approach to grammar instruction in EFL and ESL contexts. The Modern Language Journal, 93(1), 61–78.
Lochana, M., & Deb, G. (2006). Task based teaching: Learning English without tears. Asian EFL Journal, 8(3), 140-154.
Lopez, J. (2014). Introducing TBI for teaching English in Brazil: Learning how to leap the hurdles. In B. L. Leaver & J. R. Willis (Eds.), Task-based instruction in foreign language education (pp. 83-95). Georgetown University Press.
Moussalli, S., & Cardoso, W. (2020). Intelligent personal assistants: Can they understand and be understood by accented L2 learners? Computer Assisted Language Learning, 33(8) 865-890.
Namaziandost, E., & Çakmak, F. (2020). An account of EFL learners’ self-efficacy and gender in the Flipped Classroom Model. Education and Information Technologies, 25(2), 4041–4055.
Namaziandost, E., Alekasir, S., Hassan Mohammed Sawalmeh, M., & Miftah, M. Z. (2020). Investigating the Iranian EFL learners’ attitudes towards the implementation of e-portfolios in English learning and assessment. Cogent Education, 7(1),
1856764.
Ngampornchai, A., & Adams, J. (2016). Students’ acceptance and readiness for E-learning in Northeastern Thailand. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 13(34), 1-13.
O’Dowd, R. (2021). Virtual exchange: Moving forward into the next decade. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 34(3), 209-224.
P’Rayan, A. (2003). The web-based English language learning (WELL) project at the Kigali Institute of Science, Technology and Management. In B. Morrison (Ed.), Directions in CALL: Experience, experiments and evaluation (pp. 97-115). The Hong
Kong Polytechnic University.
Perez-Llantada, C. (2009). Textual, genre and social features of spoken grammar: A corpus-based approach. Language Learning & Technology, 13(1), 40-58.
Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. (2001). Approaches and methods in language teaching. Cambridge University Press.
Sagarra, N., & Zapata, G. C. (2008). Blending classroom instruction with online homework: A study of student perceptions of computer-assisted L2 learning. ReCALL, 20(2), 208–224.
Schulz, R. A. (1996). Focus on form in the foreign language classroom: Students’ and teachers’ views on error correction and the role of grammar. Foreign Language Annals, 29(1), 343-364.
Sha, G. (2010). Using Google as a super corpus to drive written language learning: A comparison with the British National Corpus. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 23(5), 377–393.
Strepp-Greany, J. (2011). Student perceptions on language learning in a technological environment: Implications for the new millennium. Language Learning & Technology, 6(1), 165–180.
Suh, J. (2016). Effectiveness of CALL writing instruction: The voices of Korean EFL learners. Foreign Language Annals, 35(6), 669–679.
Sydorenko, T., Daurio, P., & Thorne, S. L. (2018). Refining pragmatically-appropriate oral communication via computer-simulated conversations. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 31(1-2), 157-180.
Taghizadeh, M., & Hasani Yourdshahi, Z. (2020). Integrating technology into young learners' classes: Language teachers' perceptions. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 33(8), 982-1006.
Wang, C., Yu-Ju, L., Tseng, W., Lin, Y. T. R., & Gupta, K. C. L. (2020). On the effects of 3D virtual worlds in language learning – A meta-analysis. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 33(8), 891-915.
Wang, N., Chen, J., Tai, M., & Zhang, J. (2021). Blended learning for Chinese university EFL learners: Learning environment and learner perceptions. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 34(3), 297-323.
Wang, Y. (2014). Developing and evaluating an adaptive business English self-learning system for EFL vocabulary learning. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 3(3), 1–7.
Wang, Y. H. (2019). Use of interactive web-based exercises for English as a foreign language learning: Learners’ perceptions. Teaching English with Technology, 14(3), 16-29.
Wang, Y., & Wang, C. (2010). Exploring EFL Taiwanese university students’ perceptions of a collaborative CALL environment. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, 6(4), 421-432.
Wu, S., Witten, I. H., & Franken, M. (2017). Utilizing lexical data from a web-derived corpus to expand productive collocation knowledge. ReCALL, 22(1), 83–102.
Xu, Y., Chiou, S., & You, M. (2020). Effects of improving the interactive design of a Chinese character learning system on the learning performance of Chinese as foreign language students. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 33(8), 916-935.
