Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Students’ Perceptions of the Use of Video Recording in Additional Language Oral Assessments

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Literacy Unbound: Multiliterate, Multilingual, Multimodal

Part of the book series: Multilingual Education ((MULT,volume 30))

Abstract

This study adds resources to the current research on computer-aided second-language (L2) learning by focusing on a relatively under-explored area of online oral assessment using video recording. It fills the gap of existing literature by looking into the area through the lens of students’ perception. Drawing on data collected through questionnaires and interviews of students enrolled in Chinese and Japanese language programs at Curtin University, this study found that video-recorded oral assessments facilitated L2 learning by improving learners’ motivation and encouraging self-reflection. The study also sheds light on the importance of technical and teamwork guidance in maximising learning outcomes. Data variations between beginners and advanced learners who participated in this study gave weight to the argument that a ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach is not effective in online language learning, so facilitators may need to carefully evaluate the level of learners’ language competence when they are incorporating online components into their programs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    All first-year units are 111 (Semester 1) and 112 (Semester 2), second-year units are 211 (semester 1) and 212 (Semester 2), third year units are 311 (Semester 1) and 312 (Semester 2), and final-year units taken in either the third or fourth year are 321 (Semester 1) and 322 (Semester 2). Japanese 342 is an advanced course.

References

  • Almekhlafi, A. (2006). The effect of computer assisted language learning (CALL) on United Arab Emirates English as a foreign language (EFL) school students’ achievement and attitude. Journal of Interactive Research, 17(2), 121–142.

    Google Scholar 

  • Al-Musawi, A., & Abdelraheem, A. (2004). E-learning at Sultan Qaboos University: Status and future. British Journal of Educational Technology, 35(3), 363–367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Al-Senaidi, S., Lin, L., & Poirot, J. (2009). Barriers to adopting technology for teaching and learning in Oman. Computers & Education, 53, 575–590.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bani Hani, N. A. (2014). Benefits and barriers of computer assisted language learning and teaching in the Arab World: Jordan as a model. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 4(8), 1609–1615. https://doi.org/10.4304/tpls.4.8.1609-1615.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bánszki, F., Beilby, J., Quail, M., Allen, P. J., Brundage, S. B., & Spitalnick, J. (2018). A clinical educator’s experience using a virtual patient to teach communication and interpersonal skills. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 34(3), 60–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Becker, H. J. (1994). Computer-based integrated learning systems in the elementary and middle grades: A critical review and synthesis of evaluation reports. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 8(1), 1–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, A. (1997). Designing for learning: What are the essential features of an effective online course? Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 13(2), 115–126.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, D., & Warschauer, M. (2006). From the university to the elementary classroom: Students’ experiences in learning to integrate technology in instruction. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 14(3), 599–621.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bueno-Alastuey, M. C., & Kleban, M. (2014). Matching linguistic and pedagogical objectives in a telecollaboration project: A case study. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 29(1), 148–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chang, H., & Windeatt, S. (2016). Developing collaborative learning practices in an online language course. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 29(8), 1271–1286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chia, C. S. C., & Ellis, M. (2003). PRC students’ experience with independent learning at the National Institute of Education, Singapore. In Proceedings of the independent learning conference 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W. (2008). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Upper Saddle River: Pearson/Merrill Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • CTGV (Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt). (1990). Technology and the design of generative learning environments. Educational Technology, 31(5), 34–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dekhinet, R. (2008). Online enhanced corrective feedback for ESL learners in higher education. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 21(5), 409–425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erben, T., Ban, R., Jin, L., Summers, R., & Eisenhower, K. (2013). Using technology for foreign language instruction: Creative innovations, research, and applications. In T. Erben & I. Sarieva (Eds.), Calling all foreign language teachers: Computer-assisted language learning in the classroom (pp. 13–36). New York/London: Routledge.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Gu, P., & Xu, Z. (1999). Improving EFL learning environment through networking. In R. Debski & M. Levy (Eds.), World CALL: Global perspectives on computer-assisted language learning. Improving EFL learning environment through networking (pp. 169–184). Lisse: Swets & Zeiltlingers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guo, R. X. (2013). The use of video recordings as an effective tool to improve presentation skills. Polyglossia, 24, 92–101.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hafner, C., & Miller, L. (2011). Fostering learner autonomy in English for science: A collaborative digital video project in a technological learning environment. Language Learning and Technology, 15(3), 68–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heins, B., Duensing, A., Stickler, U., & Batstone, C. (2007). Spoken interaction in online and face-to-face language tutorials. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 20(3), 279–295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ilter, B. G. (2009). Effect of technology on motivation in EFL classrooms. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education (TOJDE), 10(4), 136–158.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jahnke, J. (2010). Student perceptions of the impact of online discussion forum participation on learning outcomes. Journal of Learning Design, 3(2), 27–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kearney, M., & Schuck, S. (2006). Spotlight on authentic learning: Student developed digital video projects. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 22(2), 189–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kessler, G. (2007). Formal and informal CALL preparation and teacher attitude toward technology. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 20(2), 173–188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kessler, G., & Bikowski, D. (2010). Developing collaborative autonomous learning abilities in computer mediated language learning: Attention to meaning among students in wiki space. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 23(1), 41–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khine, M. S. (2001). Attitudes toward computers among teacher education students in Brunei Darussalam. International Journal of Instructional Media, 28(2), 147–153.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, H. K. (2008). Beyond motivation: ESL/EFL teachers’ perceptions of the role of computers. CALICO Journal, 25(2), 241–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lai, C., & Kritsonis, W. A. (2006). The advantages and disadvantages of computer technology in second language acquisition. National Journal for Publishing and Mentoring Doctoral Student Research, 3(1). Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED492159.pdf

  • Lee, L. (2002). Enhancing learners’ communication skills through synchronous electronic interaction and task-based instruction. Foreign Language Annuals, 35, 16–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, L. (2005). Using web-based instruction to promote active learning: Learners’ perspectives. CALICO Journal, 23(1), 139–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leung, C., & Lewkowicz, J. (2006). Expanding horizons and unresolved conundrums: Language testing and assessment. TESOL Quarterly, 40, 211–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, J. (2016). Seven benefits of video-based assessment. Retrieved from file:///F:/Journal%20articles%20and%20submissions/Springer%20edited%20book%20-%20chapters%20etc/7%20Benefits%20of%20Video-Based%20Assessment%20_%20D2L%20Australia,%20New%20Zealand%20&%20Asia.html

    Google Scholar 

  • McNulty, A., & Lazarevic, B. (2012). Best practices in using video technology to promote second language acquisition. Teaching English with Technology, 12(3), 46–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meskill, C., Mossop, J., DiAngelo, S., & Pasquale, R. (2002). Expert and novice teachers talking technology: Precepts, concepts, and misconcepts. Language Learning and Technology, 6(3), 46–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Müller, A., & Habel, C. (2012). Gaming to learn: Language in a clinical context. In C. Nygaard (Ed.), Transforming university teaching into learning via simulations and games (pp. 123–138). Oxfordshire: Libri Publishing Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murday, K., Ushida, E., & Chenoweth, A. (2008). Learners’ and teachers’ perspectives on language online. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 21(2), 125–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newhouse, C. P., & Cooper, N. G. (2013). Computer-based oral exams and Italian language studies. ReCALL, 25(3), 321–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nikitina, L. (2011). Creating an authentic learning environment in the foreign language classroom. International Journal of Instruction, 4(1), 33–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nor, N., Hamat, A., & Embi, M. (2012). Patterns of discourse in online interaction: Seeking evidence of the collaborative learning process. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 25(3), 237–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norris, D. M., Mason, J., Robson, R., Lefrere, P., & Collier, G. (2003). A revolution in knowledge sharing. Educause Review, 38, 15–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norton, J. (2013). Performing identities in speaking tests: Co-construction revisited. Language Assessment Quarterly, 10(3), 309–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Penuel, W. R. (2006). Implementation and effects of 1:1 computing initiatives: A research synthesis. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 38(3), 329–348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Potter, J. (2005). ‘This brings back a lot of memories’: A case study in the analysis of digital video production by young learners. Education, Communication & Information, 5(1), 5–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Presby, L. (2001). Seven tips for highly effective online courses. Syllabus, 14(11), 17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Radinsky, J., Bouillion, L., Lento, E., & Gomez, L. (2001). Mutual benefit partnership: A curricular design for authenticity. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 33(4), 405–430.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reeves, T., Herrington, J., & Oliver, R. (2002). Authentic activities and online learning. In A. Goody, J. Herrington, & M. Northcote (Eds.), Quality conversations: Research and Development in higher education (Vol. 25, pp. 562–567). Jamison: ACT: HERDSA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sato, E., Chen, J. C. C., & Jourdain, S. (2017). Integrating digital technology in an intensive, fully online college course for Japanese beginning learners: A standards-based, performance-driven approach. The Modern Language Journal, 101(4), 756–775.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scheffler, F., & Logan, J. (1999). Computer technology in schools: What teachers should know and be able to do. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 31, 305–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shih, R. (2010). Blended learning using video-based blogs: Public speaking for English as a second language students. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(6), 883–897.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shrosbree, M. (2008). Digital video in the language classroom. The JALT CALL Journal, 4(1), 75–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swanson, P., & Early, P. (2008a). Digital recordings and assessment: An alternative for measuring oral proficiency. In A. Moeller, J. Theiler, & S. Betta (Eds.), CSCTFL report (pp. 129–143). Eau Claire: Central States Conference on the Teaching of Foreign Languages.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swanson, P., & Early, P. (2008b). Technology for oral assessment: Recapturing valuable classroom time. In C. M. Cherry & C. Wilkerson (Eds.), Dimension: Proceedings of the southern conference on language teaching (pp. 39–48). Valdosta: SCOLT Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weikart, L. A., & Marrapodi, M. (1999). The missing link: The technology infrastructure. Computers in the Schools, 15(2), 49–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitton, N. (2010). Learning with digital games: A practical guide to engaging students in higher education. New York: Taylor & Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wozney, L., Venkatesh, V., & Abrami, P. C. (2006). Implementing computer technologies: Teachers’ perceptions and practices. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 14(1), 173–207.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zapata, G., & Sagarra, N. (2007). Call on hold: The delayed benefits of an on-line workbook on L2 vocabulary. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 20(2), 153–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank Yuko Asano-Cavanagh for help with data collection, Aki Kaneko for help with literature review, John D. Ball for proofreading and all the students who participated in this research project. We acknowledge with gratitude the eScholar grant awarded by Curtin University in 2012.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Education, Curtin University, Perth, WA, Australia

    Qian Gong, Grace Zhang & Toni Dobinson

  2. School of Social Sciences, University of Western Australia, Perth, WA, Australia

    Kyoko Kawasaki

  3. Independent Researcher, Perth, WA, Australia

    Wai Ling Yeung

Authors
  1. Qian Gong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kyoko Kawasaki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Wai Ling Yeung
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Grace Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Toni Dobinson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Qian Gong .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. School of Education, Curtin University, Bentley, WA, Australia

    Toni Dobinson

  2. Department of Education, University of Bath, Bath, UK

    Katie Dunworth

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Gong, Q., Kawasaki, K., Yeung, W.L., Zhang, G., Dobinson, T. (2019). Students’ Perceptions of the Use of Video Recording in Additional Language Oral Assessments. In: Dobinson, T., Dunworth, K. (eds) Literacy Unbound: Multiliterate, Multilingual, Multimodal. Multilingual Education, vol 30. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-01255-7_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-01255-7_8

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-01254-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-01255-7

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation