Elamur Research⌕
☰
home / papers / 2019 / Students’ need on basic English grammar teaching material based on interactive multimedia: an innovative design

Students’ need on basic English grammar teaching material based on interactive multimedia: an innovative design

Paper · 2019 · Yuli Tiarina, Hermawati Syarif, Jufrizal Jufrizal et al.

Summary

The paper asks what first-year English Department students at Universitas Negeri Padang want from Basic English Grammar teaching material built on interactive multimedia. The authors argue that earlier work tested media and methods but not complete multimedia teaching materials. They ran a shortened research-and-development study based on the Gall and Borg model, carrying out only the first two of its ten steps: needs analysis and an initial product design. Seventy-eight students, drawn by stratified sampling from four classes, filled in an open questionnaire that two grammar experts had validated. The questionnaire contained 14 statements about how the material should be approached and organised, plus 5 open questions on device access, learning style and media tastes. Respondents strongly favoured interactive multimedia material and mostly owned laptops. Their learning styles varied. From these answers the authors drafted a seven-phase lesson model built on YouTube clips, songs, games and immediate feedback. The work matters as a needs-driven starting point for materials design. Its effectiveness still has to be tested.

Key points

  • Method: a "small scale" version of the Gall, Gall and Borg (2003) R&D model, using 2 of its 10 steps; the questionnaire had 14 statements and 5 open questions.
  • Sample: 78 students from four classes.
  • Device access: about 91% owned a laptop or PC, 2.6% shared one with siblings, and 6.4% had none.
  • Learning styles: about 52.6% visual, 28.2% audio and 18% kinesthetic.
  • Proposed lesson model: Time to Watch → Time to Chat → Time to Focus → Time for Fun → Time for Practice → Time for Tube (self-study at home) → Time for Action. Most content would come from YouTube and grammar websites.

Interesting ideas

  • I1. Each lesson follows a fixed, named sequence of phases: exposure, discussion, explicit rule, practice, then a production task. This makes the route through a lesson predictable and easy to audit.
  • I2. The closing task asks learners to supply missing lines in a film they watched, or to write lyrics that use the target grammar. This checks real production rather than recognition alone.
  • I3. The paper separates intrinsic feedback (the program checks a given answer) from extrinsic feedback (the program responds to input the user enters, such as a word search). It stresses that feedback should come immediately.
  • I4. Grammar is treated as three linked dimensions: form, meaning and use. It is not presented as a list of form rules alone.
  • I5. The material is designed only after surveying the learners' actual needs and conditions. Here that meant devices, learning styles and tastes.

For Mova

How these ideas could serve Mova, our small open language model — its files, stages and tests:

  • I1 (answer): School-course readers could log each test item against named phases (read, locate, apply rule, produce answer), so every answer carries a traceable path.
  • I2 (back): Restoring deleted sentences from the meaning graph of the surrounding text would be a concrete test for the text → graph → text compressor.
  • I3 (learn): Repair-rule induction could pair each proposed rule with an instant check against the witness parsers, and keep that kind of signal separate from feedback on user queries.
  • I4 (frames): This supports keeping UD structure, VerbNet roles and pragmatic use as separate but linked layers, so an error can be traced to the layer that caused it.
  • I5 (learn): Before building training data, Mova could first profile the target texts (genres, frequent constructions, typical failures) and let that profile decide where silver data is collected.

Our summary of the paper, in our own words — not its text. The work belongs to its authors; read it at the links above.

 Institutions

Also on the byline: Universitas Negeri Padang.

📚 Shelves 3The field of science this work belongs to (OpenAlex fields).Computer Science · 9,086 worksArtificial Intelligence · 8,889 worksInformation Systems · 523 works

🧭 Topics 1Research subjects and languages the work is about.English · 1,373 works

Cite

Cite as Yuli Tiarina, Hermawati Syarif, Jufrizal Jufrizal and Yenni Rozimela. 2019. Students’ need on basic English grammar teaching material based on interactive multimedia: an innovative design. COUNS-EDU: The International Journal of Counseling and Education 4.

The paper itself, not this page. BibTeX from the library's record of the work.

@article{tiarina2019students,
  title = {{Students’ need on basic English grammar teaching material based on interactive multimedia: an innovative design}},
  author = {Yuli Tiarina, Hermawati Syarif, Jufrizal Jufrizal and Yenni Rozimela},
  journal = {COUNS-EDU: The International Journal of Counseling and Education 4},
  year = {2019},
  doi = {10.23916/0020190419310},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.23916/0020190419310}
}

References

62 references, 0 of them with a card of ours. ↗ leads to the work, «find» searches for one we have no id for yet.

  1. Arjulayana. (2018). Non-English learners’ needs in learning English as a foreign language. Asian EFL Journal, 20(4), 154–161. Retrieved from https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85063439759&partnerID=40&md5=72245e090112f7db5ce705f82bcb0d52 ↗
  2. Atmaca, H., & Gunday, R. (2016). Using literary text to teach grammar in foreign language classroom. Participatory Educational Research (PER)ISSN: 2148-6123, 127-133. find
  3. Becker, H. (2001). Pedagogical motivation for students computer use that lead to student engagement. Educational Technology, 19-43. find
  4. Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by principles (2nd ed). New York: Longman. find
  5. Budi Setiawan, A. (2018). English grammar on 2013 curriculum: The development of game based learning multimedia. MATEC Web of Conferences, 205. https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201820500011 ↗
  6. Burgess, J., & Etherington, S. (2002). Focus on grammatical form: Explicit or implicit. System, 30(4).http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(02)00048-9, 433-458. ↗
  7. Chang, M.-M., & Lin, M.-C. (2012). Integrating cognitive-motivational strategies into multimedia-based English instruction for low-achivers. 22-15 Agustus EUROCALL. Gothenburg: Research-publishing.net. find
  8. Chen, J.-A., Juan, C.-F., & Liang, J.-C. (2018). Exploring the relationships between EFL learners’ choices of multimedia and their approaches to learning english. ICCE 2018 - 26th International Conference on Computers in Education, Workshop Proceedings, 97–103. Retrieved from https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85060044813&partnerID=40&md5=5647e1c0ef476b2e7996f58b0ebdd1f8 ↗
  9. Christensen, C. M., Horn, M. B., & Johnson, C. W. (2011). Disrupting Class: How Disruptive Innovation Will Change the Way the World Learns. New York: McGraw Hill. find
  10. Collins, J., Hammond, M., & Wellington, J. (1997). Teaching and learning with multimedia. London: Routladge. find
  11. Cunningsworth, A. (1995). Choosing your coursebook. Oxford: Heinemann. find
  12. Deng, F., & Lin, Y. (2016). A comparative study on beliefs of grammar teaching between high school English teachers and students in China. English Language Teaching. 9(8) URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/elt.v9n8p1, 1-10. ↗
  13. Derewianka, B. (2014). Developing electronic materials for language teaching. In B. Tomlinson, Developing Materials for Language Teaching (pp. 199 - 218). London: Bloomsbury Academic. find
  14. Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ↗
  15. Fatemipour, H., & Hemmati, S. (2015). Impact of consciousness-raising activities on young English language learners’ grammar performance. English Language Teaching, 8(9)doi:10.5539/elt.v8n9p1 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/elt.v8n9p1, 1-10. ↗
  16. Gall, M. D., Gall, J. P., & Borg, W. R. (2003). Educational research: An introduction. Ed.7th. Boston: Pearson Education. find
  17. Hariguna, T., & Akmal. (2019). Assessing students’ continuance intention in using multimedia online learning. Telkomnika (Telecommunication Computing Electronics and Control), 17(1), 187–193. https://doi.org/10.12928/TELKOMNIKA.v17i1.10328 ↗
  18. Hartoyo, A. (2008). Individual differences in Computer-Assisted Language Learning (CALL) . Semarang: Universitas Negeri Semarang. find
  19. Herrington, J., & Herrington, A. (1998). Authentic assessment and multimedia: How university responds to a model of authentic assessment. Higher Education Research and Development, 17(3), 305-322. find
  20. Holguin, B. R., & Morales, J. A. (2014, October). Materials development in the Colombian context: Some considerations about its benefits and challenges. HOW: A Columbian Journal for Teaching of English, 21(2), 134-150. find
  21. Housen, A., Pierrard, M., & Van Daele, S. (2005). Rule complexity and the efficacy of explicit grammar instruction. In A. Housen, & M. Pierrard (Eds.) . Investigation in instructed language acquisitionAmsterdam: Mouton de Gruyter. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/9783110197372, 235-269. ↗
  22. Howard Chen, H.-J., Sarah Cheng, H.-W., & Chirstine Yang, T.-Y. (2017). Comparing grammar feedback provided by teachers with an automated writing evaluation system. English Teaching and Learning, 41(4), 99–131. https://doi.org/10.6330/ETL.2017.41.4.04 ↗
  23. Hua, C., & Li, B. (2015). Bringing Fun and Meaning into Grammar Learning: A Case Study of a Secondary-Level EFL Class in. Cogent Education, Vol. 2, No.1. find
  24. Huang, H. (2018). Computer multimedia aided word annotation for incidental vocabulary acquisition in english reading. Kuram ve Uygulamada Egitim Bilimleri, 18(6), 3417–3427. Students’ Need on Basic English Grammar Teaching Material Based on Interactive Multimedia... | 35 Indonesian Counselor Association (IKI) | DOI: https://doi.org/10.23916/0020190419310 https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2018.6.248 ↗
  25. Ibatova, A. Z., & Ivanova, N. L. (2018). Teaching English grammar to engineering students and improving its efficiency in the context of the educational program in Tyumen Industrial University. International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology, 9(4), 1117–1125. Retrieved from https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85046782869&partnerID=40&md5=05ea52a2b5720741b996eef843e9acbb ↗
  26. Jeong, K.-O. (2018). Developing efl learners’ communicative competence through multimedia-assisted language learning. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Information Technology, 96(5), 1367–1376. Retrieved from https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85044238424&partnerID=40&md5=f2c1c6348419f21252dd922854fcadd0 ↗
  27. Jingjit, M. (2015). The effects of multimedia learning on Thai primary pupils’ achievement in size and depth of vocabulary knowledge. Journal of Education and Practice (Online), Vol. 6. No. 32, (http://www.iiste.org), 72-81. find
  28. Kalyuga, S. (2009). Managing cognitive loading adaptive multimedia learning. Systemics, Cybernetics, and Informatics (Online), Vol. 7, No. 5 (http://www.iiisci.org), 16-21. ↗
  29. Kervin, L., & Derewianka, B. (2011). New technology to support language learning. In B. Tomlinson, Materials Development in Language Teaching (pp. 328-350). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. find
  30. Koehler, N. A., Thompson, A. D., & Phye, G. D. (2011). A design study a multimedia instructional grammar program with embedded tracking. Instructional Science: An International Journal of the Learning Sciences, 39(6), 939-974. find
  31. Krivochen, D. G. (2019). On trans-derivational operations: generative semantics and tree adjoining grammar. Language Sciences, 74, 47–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2019.04.002 ↗
  32. Larsen-Freeman, D. (2014). "Teaching Grammar". In M. Celce-Murcia, D. M. Brinton, & M. A. Snow, Teaching English as a second or foreign language (pp. 256-270). Boston: Heinle. find
  33. Lodhi, M. A., & Akash, A. (2019). Identifying language learning gaps of ESL students at intermediate level in Pakistani colleges. Bellaterra Journal of Teaching and Learning Language and Literature, 12(1), 44– 64. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/jtl3.783 ↗
  34. Lyashensko, M. (2016). Implementation of web-based technologies into teaching and learning practices in the university. International Journal of Information and Education Technology (Online), Vol. 6, No. 3, (http://www.ijet.org), 243-246. ↗
  35. Macrory, G. (2000). Learning to teach grammar in the Modern Foreign Language classroom and some implications for initial teacher education. Research in Education, 64, http://dx.doi.org/10.7227/RIE.64.1, 55-82. ↗
  36. MacSwan, J. (2018). Academic English as standard language ideology: A renewed research agenda for asset-based language education. Language Teaching Research. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168818777540 ↗
  37. Mayer, R. E. (2001). Multimedia Learning. New York: Cambridge University Press. find
  38. Mayer, R. E. (2005). Introduction to multimedia learning. Dalam R. E. Mayer, The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning (hal. 1-16). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ↗
  39. Mohamad, F. (2009). Internert-based grammar instruction in the ESL classroom. International Journal of Pedagogies and Learning,Vol. 5, No.2, 34-48. find
  40. Mohamadi Zenouzagh, Z. (2018). Multidimensional analysis of efficacy of multimedia learning in development and sustained development of textuality in EFL writing performances. Education and Information Technologies, 23(6), 2969–2989. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-018-9754-y ↗
  41. Motteram, G. (2011). Developing language-learning materials with technology. In B. Tomlinson, Materials Development in Language Teaching. 2nd Edition (pp. 303-326). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ↗
  42. Munir. (2010). Kurikulum berbasis teknologi informasi dan teknologi. Bandung: Alfabeta. find
  43. Naba'h, A. M. (2012). The impact of computer assisted grammar teaching on EFL pupils' performance in Jordan. International Journal of Education and Development Using Information and Communication Technology, Vol.8, No. 1, 71-90 Ninio, A. (2019). Complement or adjunct? The syntactic principle English-speaking children learn when producing determiner–noun combinations in their early speech. First Language, 39(1), 33–44. https://doi.org/10.1177/0142723717729276 ↗
  44. Parra, S. (2016). Use of student created video postcards to promoto language grammar acquisition in middle school. Florida: Unpublished Dissertation, ProQuest LLC, Nova Southern University. Students’ Need on Basic English Grammar Teaching Material Based on Interactive Multimedia... | 36 Indonesian Counselor Association (IKI) | DOI: https://doi.org/10.23916/0020190419310 ↗
  45. Phillips, R. (1997). The developers' handbook to interactive multimedia. London: British Library. find
  46. Qian, Y. (2018). Application research of E-learning network teaching platform in college english reading teaching. Kuram ve Uygulamada Egitim Bilimleri, 18(5), 1819–1827. https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2018.5.082 ↗
  47. Raftery, B., & Santos, J. (2015). Grammar games: A case for instructionist game models to enhance grammar awareness and acccuracy. Journal of Instructional Research, Vol.4. http//eric.ed.gov, 142-147. find
  48. Rasel, A. A., Saad Abdullah, M., & Chakrabarty, A. (2019). Learning dictionary for higher secondary school textbook in Bangladesh. 2018 Joint 7th International Conference on Informatics, Electronics and Vision and 2nd International Conference on Imaging, Vision and Pattern Recognition, ICIEV-IVPR 2018, 334–337. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICIEV.2018.8641029 ↗
  49. Reinders, H. (2014). Dipetik December 15, 2016, dari www.cambridge.org/discoveryreaders Saeedi, Z., & Biri, A. (2016). The application of techonology in teaching grammar to EFL learners: The role of animated sitcoms. Teaching English with Technology, Vo. 16, No. 2, 18-39. find
  50. Schwier, R. A., & Misanchuk, E. R. (1993). Interactive multimedia instruction. New Jersey: Educational Technology Publications. find
  51. Skehan, P. (1994). "Second language acquisition strategies, interlanguage development and task based learning". In M. Bygate, A. Tonkyn, & E. Williams, Grammar and the Language Teacher (pp. 175-200). New York: Prentice Hall. find
  52. Smaldino, S. E., Russell, J. D., Heinich, R., & Molenda, M. (2014). Instructional Media and Teachnology for Learning. Ed.10th. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. find
  53. Sudhata, I. G., & Tegeh, I. M. (2009). Dipetik March 12, 2017, dari http://test.elearning-ambarsrilestari.web.id/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Desain-Multimedia.pdf. ↗
  54. Thornbury, S. (1999). How to teach grammar. Harlow: Pearson Longman. find
  55. Tomlinson, B. (2011). Materials development in language teaching. Dalam B. Tomlinson, Materials Development in Language Teaching, second Ed. (hal. 1-24). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Turnbull, M., & Lawarence, G. (2002). Computers make sense according to brain research... But what do students think? Canadian Association of second Language Teacher. ↗
  56. Van Trijp, R. (2017). A computational construction grammar for English. AAAI Spring Symposium -Technical Report, SS-17-01-, 266–273. Retrieved from https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85028703667&partnerID=40&md5=222530a8c625ad639ca1c189e036e43f ↗
  57. Vanmassenhove, E., Du, J., & Way, A. (2017). Investigating “aspect” in NMT and SMT: Translating the english simple past and present perfect. Computational Linguistics in the Netherlands Journal, 7, 109–127. Retrieved from https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85032571980&partnerID=40&md5=286f4a73c3032ca7fd93266b36f62fa6 ↗
  58. Wang, Y., & Zhou, H. (2019). Study on the network-based English phonetics teaching mode for English-major students. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 14(5), 165–175. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v14i05.8277 ↗
  59. Wennerstrom, A. (2017). Intonation and language learning. In The Routledge Handbook of Contemporary English Pronunciation (pp. 154–168). https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315145006 ↗
  60. Widyasari, F. E. (2018). Musical intelligence based instructions to teach english to young learners. Asian ESP Journal, 14(3), 17–31. Retrieved from https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85056986801&partnerID=40&md5=7d05a7f90607402c5241a4fe8528ca19 ↗
  61. Wu, B. (2018). Construction of ecological teaching model for college english course under the background of internet plus. Kuram ve Uygulamada Egitim Bilimleri, 18(6), 3515–3521. https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2018.6.261 ↗
  62. Xiang, D., & Liu, C. (2018). The Semantics of MOOD and the Syntax of the Let’s-construction in English: A Corpus-based Cardiff Grammar Approach. Australian Journal of Linguistics, 38(4), 549–585. https://doi.org/10.1080/07268602.2018.1510726 Yunus, M. M., Hasyim, H., Embi, M. d., & Lubis, M. A. (2010). The utilization of ICT in the teaching and learning of English: TELL ME MORE. Procedia-Social and BehavioralSciences, 9, 685-691. Students’ Need on Basic English Grammar Teaching Material Based on Interactive Multimedia... | 37 Indonesian Counselor Association (IKI) | DOI: https://doi.org/10.23916/0020190419310 ↗

Updated

↑ back to top

This page in Markdown → https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/tiarina-2019-students-need-basic-english-grammar/