The Benefits of Integrating Video Making in a Speaking Class
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.12928/eltej.v3i1.1850Keywords:
ntegrated teaching, video making, action research, benefitAbstract
Integrated teaching has been advocated and implemented for decades. Lately it has been accelerated by the development of video making. This study aims to investigate the benefits of integrating video making in a speaking class of the 29 first semester students of a public university in Surabaya, East Java Province, Indonesia. It employed action research which was done to improve the quality of the teaching and learning process of the class. The data were collected through direct observation in the classroom, video reviews, and survey. The findings showed that the integration of video making in a speaking class gave benefits to students in the form of four components i.e. social, language and literary, psychological, and technical. The class has been successful in integrating the video making in a speaking class which means that the integration may be applied again in the same class in the future or for a wider scope with similar conditions or settings.
References
Brown, H. D. (1994). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy. Boston: Pearson Education.
Burns, A. and Joyce, H. (1997). Focus on speaking. Sydney: Macquire University Press.
Castañeda, M., & RodrÃguez-gonzález, E. (2017). L2 speaking self-ability perceptions through multiple video speech drafts. Hispania. 94(3), 483–501. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23032122
Chaney, A. (1998). Teaching oral communication in grades K:2005, Boston: Allyn & Bacon
Cooter, R B and Perkins, J. H. (2011). Editorial: Much done, much yet to do. The Reading Teacher, 8, 563–566.
Egan, Kathleen B. (1999). Speaking: A critical skill and challenge. CALICO Journal. Vol. 16, No. 3, Special Issue: Tutors that listen: Speech recognition for language learning. pp. 277-294.
Evans S., and Green, C. (2007). Why EAP is necessary: A survey of Hong Kong tertiary students. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 6, 3–17. doi:10.1016/j.jeap.2006.11.005
Florez, M. A. (1999). Improving adult english language learners’ speaking skills. Washington DC. National Clearinghouse for ESL Literacy Education.
Harmer, J. (2007). The practice of English language teaching (3rd ed.). Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.
Hinkel, E. (2006). Current perspectives on teaching the four skills. TESOL Quarterly, 40(1), 109. doi:10.2307/40264513
Hopkins, D. (2008). A teacher’s guide to classroom research, 4th edition. Open University Press. doi:10.1080/13674580300200452
Howarth, P. (2001). Process speaking, preparing to repeat yourself. MET, 1(10), 39–44.
James, M. A. (2012). An investigation of motivation to transfer second language learning. The Modern Language Journal, 96(1) 51–69. Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/41478805
Jany, B. (2015). And lights, camera, action: Toward active German language learning through digital media production. Die Unterrichtspraxis/Teaching German, 48(2), 244–254. doi:10.1111/tger.10198
Johnson, A. (2012). A short guide to action research (4th ed). Mankato. Pearson.
Leong, L.-M., & Ahmadi, S. M. (2017). An analysis of factors influencing learners’ English speaking skill. International Journal of Research in English Education, 2(1), 34–41.doi: 10.18869/acadpub.ijree.2.1.34
Littlewood, W. (1981). Communicative language teaching. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.
Murphy, John M. (1991). Oral communication in tesol: Integrating speaking, listening, and pronunciation. Tesol Quarterly, 25(1), 51-75.
Nowicki, E. A. (2003). A meta-analysis of the social competence of children with learning disabilities compared to classmates of low and average to high achievement. Learning Disability Quarterly, 26(3), 171–188. doi:10.2307/1593650
Oxford, R. (2001). Integrated skills in the ESL/EFL classroom. The Journal of TESOL France, 5–12.
Shakirova, Dilyara Sh. et.al. (2016). Teaching speaking through the communicative approach. The Turkish Online Journal of Design, Art and Communication-TOJDAC - November 2016. Special Edition. doi:10.7456/1060NVSE/160.
Su, Ya-Chen. (2007). Students’ changing views and the integrated-skills approach in Taiwan’s EFL college classes. Asia Pacific Education Review, 8(1) 27-40
Tatham, M. and Morton, K. (2006). Speech production and perception. New York. Palgrave McMillan.
Tochon, F. V. (2001). Education-research: New avenues for digital pedagogy and feedback in teacher education. International Journal of Applied Semiotics, 2(1-2), 9–28.
Watts, C. (1989). Interactive video: What the students say. CALICO Journal, 7(1), 17–20. doi:10.1558/cj.v7i1.17-20
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish in ELTEJ agree to the following terms: Authors retain copyright and grant the ELTEJ right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY-SA 4.0) that allows others to share (copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format) and adapt (remix, transform, and build upon the material) the work for any purpose, even commercially with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in ELTEJ. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in ELTEJ. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
