Computer Assisted Language Learning

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: www.tandfonline.com/journals/ncal20

Evaluating a mobile instant messaging tool for

efficient large-class speaking instruction

Galip Kartal

To cite this article: Galip Kartal (16 May 2022): Evaluating a mobile instant messaging tool
for efficient large-class speaking instruction, Computer Assisted Language Learning, DOI:
10.1080/09588221.2022.2074463

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2022.2074463

Published online: 16 May 2022.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 720

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Citing articles: 1 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=ncal20
Computer Assisted Language Learning
https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2022.2074463

Evaluating a mobile instant messaging tool for

efficient large-class speaking instruction
Galip Kartal
Ahmet Keleşoğlu Faculty of Education, Department of English Language Teaching, Necmettin
Erbakan University, Konya, Turkey

ABSTRACT KEYWORDS
The overarching goal of this design-based research was to L2 speaking skills;
explore WhatsApp’s potential for facilitating and supporting pronunciation; mobile
speaking and pronunciation instruction in an EFL large-class instant messaging;
WhatsApp; large-classes;
speaking course. More specifically, this paper explored the design-based research
perceived learning outcomes of WhatsApp-supported ped- (DBR)
agogy in large English-speaking classes. Ninety-nine English
students practiced their English by recording themselves,
listening to the recordings, and comparing their recordings
to native speakers’ pronunciation. When satisfied with the
quality, they sent their own recordings to a five-member
WhatsApp group made up of their classmates. The record-
ings involved speed reading, singing a song or reading the
lyrics aloud, tongue twisters, and making a video summary.
Students listened to the recordings of the other four group
members and provided feedback on pronunciation. The data
were collected via an open-ended survey and individual and
focus-group interviews. Qualitative content analysis of the
data indicated that the vast majority of the participants
reacted positively and mentioned the following major con-
tributions to large speaking classes: (1) educational affor-
dances for pronunciation, speaking, motivation, vocabulary,
and reading; and (2) technological affordances, i.e. ease of
use and accessibility. The adopted approach supported
speaking and pronunciation instruction, specifically through
instructor and peer feedback, speed reading, and ease of
access. The paper concludes that it is rewarding to unravel
WhatsApp’s potential as a mobile instant messaging (MIM)
tool in large-classes.

1. Introduction
Speaking is a practical skill, and learning and teaching of practical skills
require practice. However, successful speaking practice is often challenged

CONTACT Galip Kartal [email protected] Ahmet Keleşoğlu Eğitim Fakültesi, Necmettin Erbakan
Üniversitesi, B/443, Meram, Konya, 42090, Turkey
© 2022 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
2 G. KARTAL

by time and space constraints of the physical classroom environment.

In order to overcome these restrictions, many practitioners have been
attracted to the integration of technology in speaking instruction (Akkara
et al., 2020; Andújar-Vaca & Cruz-Martínez, 2017). Mobile assisted
language learning (MALL) has become a powerful way to integrate
technology in higher education (Cheon et al., 2012) by providing learners
with more exposure and the opportunity to practice the language both
in and outside the classroom. Mobile devices, with their increasing
popularity, have prompted researchers and practitioners to utilize appli-
cations (henceforth, apps) that have the potential to allow collaborative
learning (Andujar, 2016), blended learning (Kim & Yoon, 2014), and
autonomous learning (Reinders & White, 2016). Mobile apps are effective
tools to fulfill MALL by positively affecting English as a foreign language
(EFL) learning (Klimova, 2018). Mobile instant messaging (MIM) tools,
such as WhatsApp and WeChat, are also commonly used by learners,
teachers, and researchers because they provide ‘a rich context for open
and transparent interaction that alerts communicants to the temporal
and time-span constraints of the interaction’ (Rambe & Bere, 2013, p.
546). Also, the use of MIM has the potential to increase motivation in
language education (Andujar, 2016). Drawing on WhatsApp’s nuanced
potential as a popular MIM tool, this study sets out to investigate the
role of using this platform in large speaking classes.
Getting the second language (L2) learners to speak in large classes
can be challenging due to an unwillingness to participate or reticence
(Zhang & Head, 2010). Language teachers can overcome this reticence
by giving students more say in choosing their materials and picking
or creating their own activities to practice speaking (Zhang & Head,
2010). Various technologies and digital tools have been used to create
such learning environments in language education contexts, as they are
increasingly widespread in language learning, positively influencing
learners’ motivation (Golonka et al., 2014). Similarly, Chapelle (2001)
regards language learning potential, learner harmony, and authenticity
as computer-assisted language learning (CALL) task appropriateness
criteria.
In Turkey, to enroll an English Language Teaching (ELT) program,
candidates are measured through multiple-choice questions that gauge
learners’ reading skills, including vocabulary and grammar knowledge.
This has consequences at the macro- and the micro-level of language
teaching and learning inside the classroom, such as forcing university
students to delay their productive skills, particularly speaking. Studies
on these productive skills are important since the Turkish assessment
and evaluation system does not measure pronunciation and speaking
skills (Bakla, 2018; Kartal & Özmen, 2018). From this viewpoint, it is
 Computer Assisted Language Learning 3

vital to provide learners with opportunities to interact and practice

language both in and outside the classroom.
There has been growing popularity in integrating mobile devices as
language learning tools because they help enhance student interaction
(Tang & Bradshaw, 2020) and teach language skills (Kartal, 2019) beyond
the language classes. Based on a survey study with university students,
Tang and Bradshaw (2020) conclude that both face-to-face communi-
cation and MIM allow for adequate meaningful team interactions about
coursework assessment projects. Active involvement of learners seems
to fluctuate in large classes, in which the time is limited, and it is dif-
ficult to involve all students equally. The teacher’s extra efforts are
critical in large classes (Biggs, 1999), and these efforts can be combined
with the power of using MALL, which allows learning anytime, anywhere
(Shippee & Keengwe, 2014).

2. Literature review
2.1. Theoretical perspective

This study is grounded mainly on the noticing hypothesis (Schmidt, 1990),

the socio-cultural theory (Vygotsky, 1978), and the self-determination
theory (SDT). The noticing hypothesis maintains that acquiring a language
feature requires becoming aware of it. The notion of noticing plays a
significant role in second language (L2) learning. It is a process of con-
sciously attending to linguistic features in the input (Schmidt, 1990). This
study subscribes to the noticing hypothesis, assuming that conscious
attention to accuracy will help one acquire the correct pronunciation.
Gass (2003) regarded noticing as a tool to mediate between communica-
tion and acquisition, which allows noticing the gap between the current
language and the target language. This study intends to make the partic-
ipants notice the particular features of L2, which is the main goal of
different techniques and interventions of the noticing hypothesis.
The socio-cultural theory attaches significance to the essential role of
learners’ cognitive development with other people’s help. To contextualize
this research study under the socio-cultural theory, it is necessary to con-
sider notions such as the zone of proximal development (ZPD), construc-
tivism, scaffolding, and interaction. Vygotsky (1978) defines the ZPD as
‘the distance between the actual developmental level as determined by the
individual’s independent problem-solving and the level of potential devel-
opment as determined through problem-solving in collaboration with more
capable peers’ (p. 86). Another fundamental principle in social construc-
tivism is the idea of scaffolding, which, according to Vygotsky (1978),
refers to the teacher or peer support that enables students to perform
increasingly well. Based on the socio-cultural theory, interaction plays a
4 G. KARTAL

significant role in L2 development (Swain, 1985), since it is a fundamental

factor that helps students construct knowledge actively. Previous research
revealed evidence on the effects of sociocultural factors on pronunciation
learning (Kennedy & Trofimovich, 2008; Munro et al., 2006).
The SDT (Ryan & Deci, 2009) can also explain the students’ moti-
vation to learn the language with movies; when pedagogical design
satisfactorily addresses learners’ needs, they are motivated to engage in
learning tasks. Ryan and Deci (2009) maintain that ‘SDT begins with
the presumption that human beings are inherently proactive and endowed
with a natural tendency to learn and develop as they engage not only
their outer environments, but also their inner world of drives, needs,
and experiences’ (p. 171). Therefore, when a task is self-determined, the
locus of causality is perceived as internal (Takahashi & Im, 2020). Since
using WhatsApp is already among learners’ behavioral patterns, bringing
daily routines to the learning environment may contribute to classroom
language learning because SDT predicts intended L2 learning efforts
(Takahashi & Im, 2020). The SDT is also related to online language
learning outcomes (Hsu et al., 2019). Self-direction, motivation, and
positive learning dispositions are among the students’ roles that gain
significance in an online learning environment (Chiu & Hew, 2018).

2.2. Speaking and pronunciation instruction in large classes

Promoting speaking skills in L2 learners is essential for all proficiency

levels (Nation & Newton, 2008) because it drives students to speed up
and automatize their language use. However, as the related literature
shows, several factors may interfere with L2 learners’ oral performance.
Specifically, in Turkish contexts, the development of oral communication
is the concern of many researchers (Kartal & Balçıkanlı, 2018). Despite
many attempts to increase English proficiency, Turkish learners of English
experience problems with oral communication (Coskun, 2016). Some of
the outstanding reasons are speaking anxiety, which mainly occurs due
to negative self-evaluation and perceived low proficiency (Subaşı, 2010),
fear of making a mistake (Dörnyei, 2001), negative judgments towards
EFL classrooms, and limited time to respond (Mak, 2011).
The time constraint is a significant problem in large classes. One way
of overcoming this problem is by exploiting peer correction. As a peda-
gogical application for boosting noticing and as a way of collaboration,
corrective feedback has been widely used in language learning (Ögeyik,
2018). Similarly, peer correction can be applied in pronunciation learning
(Juansyah, 2012; Martin & Sippel, 2021). Previous studies (e.g. Ahangari,
2014; Tost, 2013) found evidence that peer correction was even superior
to teacher correction. Using peer-mediated repeated oral reading, Tost
 Computer Assisted Language Learning 5

(2013) found evidence that peer-supported reading aloud could help stu-
dents improve their speaking and pronunciation. Peer correction is helpful
both for the receiver and the giver in pronunciation instruction (Martin
& Sippel, 2021). Considering the need of Turkish EFL learners to improve
their oral skills due to the constraints mentioned above, peer correction
would be an effective way of improving pronunciation skills. Moreover,
comparing self, peer, and teacher correction, Ahangari (2014) found that
peer correction was more effective on pronunciation than teacher-feedback.

2.3. The use of MIMs in foreign language classess

Previous research found empirical evidence that the MIM tool WhatsApp,
which offers users a very convenient mode of communication, could be
used to improve L2 speaking skills (Akkara et al., 2020; Andújar-Vaca
& Cruz-Martínez, 2017; Escobar-Mamani & Gómez-Arteta, 2020; Minalla,
2018). Following a mixed-methods approach, Akkara et al. (2020) exam-
ined whether collaborative learning activities and problem-solving tasks
facilitate teaching and speaking. Some of the tasks were pronounce it,
find the odd one, interviewing, 30-second presentation, text me what I
said, and word clouds. The results showed that interaction via WhatsApp
developed students’ speaking skills. In another study, Andújar-Vaca and
Cruz-Martínez (2017) designed an experiment in which the participants
were involved in daily interactions in a WhatsApp group for six months.
The results yielded significant improvements with regard to oral profi-
ciency. Escobar-Mamani and Gómez-Arteta (2020) aimed to improve
the speaking skills of Peruvian adolescents by using WhatsApp for
sending and receiving text and voice messages, emojis, calls, and video
calls. The authors found that WhatsApp developed the communication
skills of the participants. Minalla (2018) used WhatsApp for group chat
and confirmed enhanced verbal interactions outside the classroom.
A review of the empirical studies that used WhatsApp in language
learning by Kartal (2019) showed that WhatsApp was used to teach the
four main language skills, integrated language skills, and vocabulary. This
review also yielded positive effects on increasing learner autonomy,
decreasing anxiety, and increasing motivation. Applying a mixed-method
model, Cetinkaya and Sütçü (2018) compared WhatsApp and Facebook’s
use for vocabulary instruction. They found that WhatsApp was superior
to traditional teaching and via Facebook. WhatsApp was also found to
foster language learner autonomy by Hazaea and Alzubi (2018) through
accessing reading materials and peer and teacher interaction outside the
classroom. WhatsApp was also helpful to alleviate foreign language speak-
ing anxiety via dialogue activities (Han & Keskin, 2016). Moreover, the
majority of the studies on WhatsApp have shown that the participants
6 G. KARTAL

developed positive attitudes towards using WhatsApp for language learn-

ing. The critical analysis of WhatsApp research in language learning by
Kartal (2019) revealed that pronunciation is one of the less researched
language areas. In a qualitative study, Afifah (2021) investigated the role
of WhatsApp in language learning and concluded that it provided advan-
tages of time flexibility and easily accessed materials. Similarly, a class-
room action research study by El-Sulukiyyah (2016) revealed WhatsApp’s
effectiveness in pronunciation learning and increasing enthusiasm in
studying pronunciation. Using another MIM tool, Wang (2017) explored
the role of WeChat in learning pronunciation by Chinese English learners.
The results revealed that WeChat could help create a better autonomous
learning environment and enhance pronunciation learning flexibility.

2.4. The present study

Although numerous studies have utilized mobile technologies to sup-

plement classroom learning, this study is rare in exploiting MIM in
large-speaking classes. Similarly, there is a scarcity of research on
MIM tools in facilitating English pronunciation learning (Kartal, 2019;
Wang, 2017). Also, no previous research adopted a design-based
research (DBR) approach to address EFL learners’ needs and the
pedagogical requirements for developing speaking skills in a
large-speaking class. The DBR methodology requires iterations of
analyzing practical problems, developing solutions and prototypes,
testing and refinements. Previous research reveals a gap between
practical problems and developing solutions with learners. Addressing
these gaps by drawing on MIM’s nuanced potential for language
learning, this study investigated WhatsApp’s potential in facilitating
and supporting speaking and pronunciation instruction in large
English-speaking classes. Considering the needs of the participants,
the study employed the tasks of speed reading, singing a song or
reading the lyrics aloud, tongue twisters, and making a video summary
using WhatsApp. Students provided explicit correction on pronunci-
ation since L2 pronunciation instruction benefits from Schmidt’s
(1990) noticing hypothesis (Kartal & Korucu-Kis, 2020). Also, the
students focused on their speaking and pronunciation by utilizing the
socio-cultural theory’s tenets (i.e. interaction and collaboration). The
following research questions have guided the study:

1. What are the barriers or enablers for learners when using

WhatsApp in large English-speaking classes?
2. How do the learners view WhatsApp-supported pedagogy in
large English-speaking classes?
 Computer Assisted Language Learning 7

3. Method
This study adopts a DBR approach to address EFL learners’ needs and
the pedagogical requirements for developing speaking skills in a
large-speaking class. The DBR has been adopted as the research meth-
odology since it is ‘a systematic but flexible methodology aimed to
improve educational practices through iterative analysis, design, devel-
opment, and implementation, based on collaboration among researchers
and practitioners in real-world settings and leading to contextually-sensitive
design principles and theories’ (Wang & Hannafin, 2005, pp. 6–7).
Employing a case study approach, this DBR study focuses on a
large-speaking classroom as a case. An in-depth analysis of issues or
unique cases of a phenomenon is conducted (Given, 2008) by collecting
detailed information using various data collection procedures (Creswell
et al., 2007). The case study design requires describing the setting of
the cases within contextual conditions (Yin, 2003). The type used in
this study is the collective or multiple-case study, where the researcher
‘selects one issue or concern but also selects multiple case studies to
illustrate the issue’ (Creswell et al., 2007, p. 246).

3.1. Context and participants

This study was carried out at an ELT program of a state university in

Turkey, where these programs are regulated by the Turkish Council of
Higher Education (CoHE) and follow a top-down curriculum. Before
being placed in this program, the students take a national English lan-
guage test that only assesses reading, vocabulary, and grammar. The test
does not assess listening, speaking, and pronunciation skills. Therefore,
the students in ELT programs need to develop these skills because they
will be English language teachers. This test also has a negative washback
effect (Bakla, 2018), since it motivates students to study for the assessed
skills but not for listening and speaking skills. There were language skills
courses in the program, and this study was conducted in a mandatory
two-credit course named Oral Communication Skills. The course is one
of several compulsory courses (e.g. reading, listening, and writing) offered
in the first year of the program.
The study group consisted of 100 students enrolled in the first year of
this program. This group was divided into two sections, each consisting
of 50 students, but one of the students left the school; therefore, a total
of 99 conveniently-sampled students formed the sample size for the study.
A background survey was conducted in which the participants answered
questions about their demographic information, such as their age and
mobile device usage. Students were aged 18 to 24 years and consisted of
8 G. KARTAL

70 females and 29 males. All the participants had smartphones to support

educational purposes inside and outside the classroom. The analysis of
the frequency of daily uses of mobile devices and students’ readiness for
mobile learning shows that students are already using mobile devices for
educational purposes, i.e. sharing information about their courses, using
mobile apps. All participants had internet access, with 98% using their
mobile devices for social networking (Facebook, Twitter, or Instagram),
and all of them using WhatsApp.
In Turkish state schools, English language teaching starts in the second
grade. The students receive around 12 years of formal EFL instruction
before university education. The participants’ language proficiency levels
were assumed to be similar, as they entered the English Language
Teaching program by taking the same national standard test (University
Entrance Exam/Foreign Language Test) and earning similar scores. Also,
the students took an oral exam, and the ones who received more than
70 points out of 100 were admitted to the program. The ones who
received less than 70 points were enrolled in the English prep-class.
Two English professors conducted the oral exam, and the threshold level
of English language proficiency was approximately B2-C1 concerning
the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR). The partici-
pants’ level was satisfactory to use movies as authentic materials, and
these materials require high proficiency for higher learning gains (Bahrani
& Sim, 2012).

3.2. Procedure and the pedagogical rationale

The DBR proposes a series of principles, procedures, and practices that

guide an educational intervention design. As a methodology, the
four-phased DBR methodology was followed. The first phase requires
iterations to analyze practical problems, which was achieved via a com-
prehensive the literature review and context investigation. The imple-
mentation of this phase started with a needs analysis on the problem
in communicative skills, specifically pronunciation. A need of the learn-
ers in the Turkish context is the development of oral communication
skills. Despite many attempts to increase oral proficiency, Turkish EFL
learners experience oral communication problems (Coskun, 2016).
The second phase included the development of solutions and proto-
types utilizing existing speaking and pronunciation teaching and learning
principles. Develop solutions and prototype phase allowed the researcher
and participants to propose some suggestions, such as explicit correction,
group work, instant and continuous teacher and peer feedback. There
is a bulk of evidence in the literature informing the contributions of
MIMS (Cetinkaya and Sütçü (2018), peer correction (Martin & Sippel,
 Computer Assisted Language Learning 9

2021), and explicit teaching (Kartal & Korucu-Kis, 2020) to speaking

and pronunciation instruction. The participants suggested using a MIM
tool. WhatsApp was picked as the MIM tool as it easily allows sharing
information such as text and voice messages, videos, and documents.
Although several tools allow learners to send and receive voice record-
ings, WhatsApp was selected because, as previous studies showed, it is
one of the most convenient mobile apps that can be used for language
learners (Akkara et al., 2020; Andújar-Vaca & Cruz-Martínez, 2017; Han
& Keskin, 2016; Kartal, 2019). The study began with asking participants
to form WhatsApp groups of five members. The participants were
assigned to the groups randomly. The rules were determined since it is
essential to make the use of WhatsApp efficient. The participants were
asked to send the recordings on time, not to send irrelevant messages,
and to give their feedback in a timely manner. Before working on the
WhatsApp tasks, students were introduced to the tasks in the face-to-
face classroom. Every week the participants did the following tasks:
speed reading (reading aloud), singing a song, tongue twister, and sum-
marizing a video (any videos from TED Talks or news from the news-
papers of BBC, CNN, The Guardian, or the New York Times).
The third phase is preoccupied with tests and refinements. The
WhatsApp tasks were conducted for two weeks and the participants
provided feedback on the tasks. The participants offered opinions on
the initial design and suggested adjustments during the whole imple-
mentation with due regard for DBR. This iterative procedure provided
insights into the refinement of the design. The last phase involved
documentation and reflection to produce design principles based on the
analyses in phase three. In so doing, the iterations led to the last phase
in the form of a reflection to produce the principles for the design and
enhance solutions. For instance, as a result of the request of some par-
ticipants, the task of singing was no longer compulsory, and the par-
ticipants were allowed to read the lyrics aloud. Also, the participants
wanted to correct each other’s pronunciation mistakes by voice messages.
Some participants also sought teacher feedback in addition to their
peers. As a result of these and similar refinements, the following design
principles were determined as a requirement of the fourth phase of the
DBR: integrating in-class teaching practices with students’ out-of-class
self-learning, integrating peer-support into the WhatsApp tasks, guiding
students to out-or-class self- and peer-learning. The flowchart of the
whole procedure of the study is given in Figure 1.
The first task was speed reading, in which each group was asked
to find a short paragraph, and each member tried reading it aloud
as fast as possible. The aim of reading aloud with a speed reading
task was not developing overall reading skills but to improve students’
10 G. KARTAL

Figure 1. Flowchart of the procedures of the study.

physical fluency, which can be defined as the ability to produce the

sounds of the target language in a smooth speech. Reading a text
aloud contributes to pronunciation because it gives learners a context
that allows them to concentrate on pronunciation accuracy. They are
able to listen to and analyze their own speech, helping them develop
better control of the rhythm of English (Acton, 1984). Tran and
Nation (2014) revealed that an increase in a learner’s rate of reading
correlates with an increase in the language memory span. Han (2016)
suggested incorporating it into pronunciation instruction. Moreover,
the study participants were mispronouncing some words while reading
fast. The speed reading also aimed to follow the pronunciation of
participants in fast reading, which does not allow too much moni-
toring, just like fluent speaking. The participants were asked to
rehearse a few times before sending their recordings because sufficient
rehearsals are required to achieve a satisfactory gain in speed (Millett,
2008). When familiar enough with the text, they were asked to
shadow, i.e. they read the text aloud and listen to the recording
simultaneously (Luo, 2016). Shadowing is an effective tool for teach-
ing pronunciation (Foote & McDonough, 2017). The participants
were free to pick any texts they wanted from original English news-
papers or talks. The texts for each week were about 150–200 words.
Each week the members read/listened to the same text so they would
know what it was supposed to sound like. Additionally, the partici-
pants were asked to check their pronunciation by listening to the
paragraph’s narration by a native speaker. That is why the participants
read texts accompanied by native speaker narration. Therefore, the
texts were mainly from audiobooks, BBC Learning English, VOA
Learning English, and TED Talk captions.
As for the second task, the participants were asked to sing a song or
read the lyrics by paying attention to pronunciation. Doing something
with songs is important because music can support language learning
(Ludke, 2018) and singing provides opportunities for a particular kind
of sociability (Rampton et al., 2002). The third task was reading tongue
twisters. The participants recorded themselves and shared their recording
of a tongue twister. The last activity was summarizing a video. First, they
 Computer Assisted Language Learning 11

were asked to find a TED Talk and summarize it, but the participants
wanted to find their videos from other sources. This task was the only
one in which participants tried to speak fluently and accurately without
looking at a text. The teacher checked the videos of the summary record-
ing in order to ensure that the participants did not read the summary.
The video summary recordings were three to five minutes in duration
and included personal thoughts on the videos they watched. The partic-
ipants were given a guideline for each task. The participants conducted
all the tasks every week. The summary of the tasks is given in Table 1.
The pedagogical rationale for the adopted approach in this study comes
from the noticing hypothesis and socio-cultural theory. Also, the findings
of previous research guided the study. The abovementioned were used in
a large-speaking class because of the related literature on speed reading
and reading aloud (Kim & Krashen, 1997; Millett, 2008), singing a song
(Engh, 2012; Ludke, 2018), and tongue twisters (Mu’in et al., 2017). These
studies demonstrated the tasks’ contributions to oral skills. Related liter-
ature shows that some teachers already use all of these activities in their
pronunciation courses (Shabani & Ghasemian, 2017), and songs and tongue
twisters are the most preferred activities in a speaking class (Gudu, 2015).
This study integrated peer review into the tasks because it alleviates
the teacher’s feedback burden (Ricard, 1986). The participants were
trained about peer feedback before the implementation. Training for
giving peer feedback started with increasing awareness of the target
pronunciation and common errors. The students were also asked to give
metalinguistic feedback to prevent further mistakes. For instance, instead
of correcting the ‘should’ which is pronounced as/ for giving peer feed-
bac’l’, students were asked to say ‘the letter l is silent’. As for the speed
reading tasks, the feedback was limited to reminding the native speaker’s
pronunciation. In order to ensure that students were not giving inap-
propriate feedback to their friends, the researcher provided constant
feedback on the learners’ feedback. Since peer feedback was limited to
pronunciation, no rubric was used. The participants were asked to use

Table 1. The Whatsapp tasks.

Speed reading • Finding a text from BBC Learning English, VOA Learning English, or TED
Talk captions.
• The texts were narrated by native speakers
• Shadowing the narration of the native speakers
• Trying to read as fast as possible for a few times
• Recording when satisfied with the reading
Singing a song or reading • Finding an English song
the lyrics aloud • Working on the lyrics and meaning
• Recording the song by reading aloud or singing the song.
Tongue twisters • Finding a tongue twister using Internet search engines.
• working on the separate words
• Recording after feeling confident in reading it aloud
Making a video summary • Finding a short video on a topic
• Providing a short summary
12 G. KARTAL

an online dictionary (i.e. Longman, Oxford, Cambridge) or YouGlish (a

YouTube-based dictionary) and send correct pronunciation of the word
by using the link from these sources. All of the group members listened
to each recording, and the teacher ensured pronunciation error correc-
tion by checking the messages in regular classroom meetings. The
WhatsApp tasks were checked every week in the last 15–20 minutes of
the class. Students were randomly asked to play their recordings, and
the instructor provided feedback on the recordings and peer correction
during this time. The feedback sessions aimed at improving the quality
of the tasks and included comments on the format, peer-feedback quality,
and overall performance. Moreover, some students were randomly asked
to play their recordings to motivate them to do their tasks carefully.

3.3. Data collection and analysis

To evaluate the effectiveness of the WhatsApp-supported tasks, three kinds

of data were collected from the students: an open-ended survey and
semi-structured individual and group interviews. This ensured data source
triangulation (Carter et al., 2014), since it allowed comparing what par-
ticipants said in public (interviews) with what they said in private (anon-
ymous surveys) (Patton, 2015). The open-ended survey (see Appendix A),
which was designed to elicit participants’ evaluations, included six ques-
tions, and it was given to all of the participants. The survey items were
checked by an expert who had more than 20 years of experience in ELT.
After gathering responses from all participants, six focus-group interviews
(with the original WhatsApp groups consisting of five members) and 15
individual interviews were conducted. The sample size of participants for
the focus-group and individual interviews was considered acceptable, since
data saturation was accomplished with this number of participants
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Following Tomal’s (2010) recommendation,
the researcher conducted focus-group interviews with the WhatsApp
groups in a comfortable and non-threatening setting. The participants in
the focus group were chosen through convenience sampling. The inter-
viewer did not ask specific questions but instead asked participants to
share their feelings and perceptions about the use of WhatsApp and the
tasks conducted. The focus groups’ responses in the interviews were used
to prepare the questions for the individual interviews. The individual
interviews were also conducted to draw out the participants’ real views
that might not be obtained in a group setting (Tomal, 2010). To this end,
the researcher took notes, and these notes were used while formulating
the individual semi-structured interview questions (see Appendix B).
The data from the student survey responses and the interviews were
analyzed through a qualitative interpretive approach (Kern, 2006). This
 Computer Assisted Language Learning 13

required using the stages of qualitative content analysis (Dörnyei, 2007),

i.e. transcription of interview data, coding, and classification of data,
developing ideas, comparing categories, and finally, interpreting data
and making conclusions. The analysis began with examining the par-
ticipants’ answers to open-ended surveys by seeking commonalities
among the participants’ accounts. The researcher read the data to get
a general idea and assign open descriptive codes, followed by merging
them or excluding some codes to ensure homogeneity within each code.
The study followed Guba and Lincoln’s (1985) four criteria of estab-
lishing trustworthiness: credibility, transferability, dependability, and
confirmability. Credibility was ensured via data source triangulation,
member checking, and peer debriefing (Denzin & Lincoln, 2018).
Member checking is ‘having outside auditors or participants validate
findings’, and peer debriefing requires ‘independent analysis of data by
one or more researchers’ (Hannes, 2011, p. 4). Peer debriefing was
conducted via a colleague who has experience with the topic, population,
and method (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). Additionally, member checking
was conducted by allowing participants to review findings from the
data. A thick description of the process ensured transferability.
Dependability was met via data collection tools that were carefully
designed, commented on, and validated by experts. Dependability con-
cerns led to employ a noninterfering or receptive style during the inter-
views (Wengraf, 2001). With this in mind, the researcher paid utmost
attention to simple introductory questions to ensure a non-threatening
data collection process during the individual interviews. As for con-
firmability, transcript forms were created, and the experts and partici-
pants confirmed the forms’ accuracy. The qualitative data were digitized,
and the codes were counted to increase reliability. Regarding the ethical
concerns of coerced participation and biased reporting due to the dual
role as the instructor and researcher (Ferguson et al., 2004), this study
ensured voluntary participation, confidentiality, informing about the
purpose and progress of the research, written informed consent, and
the freedom to drop out of the study at any time.

4. Results
The findings are presented sequentially but under the same roof, main-
taining the integrity of WhatsApp’s mutual contributions, the tasks, and
the overall adopted approach. The analysis of how WhatsApp facilitates
learning in large English-speaking classes and how students view the
adopted approach yielded many themes (Table 2).
As shown in Table 2, the participants expressed mainly positive per-
ceptions and high satisfaction levels with the adopted pedagogy. The
14 G. KARTAL

findings are given under the main categories (affordances, challenges

and concerns, and task-preference) and themes.

4.1. Educational affordances

The data revealed five themes that benefit from WhatsApp-supported

pedagogy in large speaking classes. The participants saw educational
and technological value in integrating WhatsApp and the tasks, and
they reported that the tasks helped them concerning pronunciation,
speaking, motivation, vocabulary, and reading. Also, WhatsApp was
reported to have technological affordances of ease of use and accessi-
bility. These are discussed with exemplar quotes that were selected based
on their ability to represent the themes.

4.1.1. Pronunciation and speaking

The participants were asked to compare their pronunciation with a native
English speaker and provide peer correction. This form of pronunciation
error correction helped participants improve their pronunciation and
learn the correct pronunciation of commonly mispronounced words. The
participants stated their belief that they ignored the pronunciation of
some new words when they saw them during individual study. Focusing

Table 2. The list of categories, themes, and codes.

Themes Categories Codesa N
Educational Affordances Pronunciation Peer-correction (90), noticing (88), 93
exposure (82), collaboration (79),
recording (78), increased responsibility
(53)
Speaking Interactive (83), exposure (83), recording 85
(78), engaging tasks, stress-free (70),
increased responsibility (42), physical
fluency (42)
Motivation Stimulating participation (79), enjoyment 84
(78), liberating (70), the existence of
music (70), social presence (54),
flexibility (48)
Vocabulary Noticing novel lexical items (76), recalling 70
vocabulary (34), phrases (21),
Reading Fluency (52), increased attention (29), 57
motivation to read (37)
Technological Ease of Use Simple user interface (84) 84
Affordances Accessibility Ease of access (80) 80
Challenges & concerns Unwillingness to Irresponsible group members (8), the 21
participate in group anxiety of being observed by peers
work (14), preference for instructor’s
feedback (6), distractors (4)
Lack of non-verbal Lack body language (14), no facial 16
communication expressions (6)
Task-preference Appealing & Fun Sing a song (98), speed reading (95), 96
Content tongue twister (90)
Not appealing Video summary (24) 27
The numbers in parentheses do not show the number of participants, but rather the frequency with which
a

the expressions repeated. One person emphasized more than one expression. N shows the number of
participants mentioning the theme.
 Computer Assisted Language Learning 15

on the words’ pronunciation with the adopted approach resulted in more

effective learning of the new words’ pronunciation, as perceived by the
participants. The majority of the students believed that attaching signif-
icance to every word’s pronunciation in a text, audio, or video throughout
the term was beneficial. Therefore, peer correction was useful because
it increased attention and motivated them to learn the correct pronun-
ciation. They believed that these tasks helped them notice the mispro-
nounced words. They also improved themselves while giving feedback.
The following quotes are given as representative thoughts:
It [WhatsApp] is effective in terms of improving our pronunciations. I can always
record my voice and send it to the group so everyone can hear me and correct
me. We can discuss several topics or just daily stuff. We can always correct our
pronunciation errors. Recordings can be listened again and again to improve
ourselves. (Focus-group interview)

And in this text, we sometimes read the words incorrectly but we correct our
mistakes and we say the right pronunciation of these words. By this means, we
learned some mispronounced words. Although sometimes I find it hard to do
these assignments, again and again, it was really helpful, especially in improving
my pronunciation. Sometimes, our friends warned us about mispronounced words.
When giving feedback, I sometimes checked pronunciation of the words I did
not know. This allowed me to learn the correct pronunciation while correcting
my friends. (Semi-structured individual interview).

The abovementioned advantages show the role of collaborative and

cooperative learning. The findings also showed that the participants
noticed some common errors.
It was good for us to correct our friends’ word mistakes. Because, maybe we
were making those mistakes. But now we have learned the right one. So we can
continue to use WhatsApp, I find it useful. (Focus-group interview)

If our friends notice a mistake, they can correct us. Pronunciation is very import-
ant when learning a language so we should not ignore it. This way, we see our
mistakes. We learn faster because we force ourselves. It also allows us to learn
common mistakes. (Semi-structured individual interview)

It seems that the participants may not notice an error concerning

pronunciation during individual study. However, peer correction helped
them increasingly focus on these words. Some students also seem to
be reluctant to check every word’s pronunciation when others are not
observing them. The comments show that students were more careful
because their friends were going to check their pronunciation, and thus,
they made extra efforts to learn the correct pronunciation. The following
quotes bear a striking resemblance to most of the other participants’
commentaries, which mentioned that recording their speaking and
sending it to their peers for feedback encouraged them to speak
16 G. KARTAL

carefully, which resulted in some rehearsals and improvement before

sending it to their friends. The extracts below nicely illustrate the
common views among participants as to the role of the project:
We are crowded for a speaking class, that’s why not everyone is able to talk.
We have small groups in WhatsApp, and thus we have a chance to speak.
Furthermore, speaking can only be developed by speaking. Also, recording is
very effective. (Semi-structured individual interview)

We had to send the best recording of our reading and speaking, because our
friends will listen and our teacher may ask to play our recording in the classroom.
As the teacher can understand whether we spoke or read the video summary,
we tried to speak naturally and correctly. (Semi-structured individual interview)

4.1.2. Motivation
The students believe that the WhatsApp-supported tasks stimulated
participation and helped them enjoy the learning more. One student
said: ‘I enjoyed these tasks and as a result I wanted to do them on time
with pleasure’. A sense of social presence was another motivation source.
One student commented as follows:
Getting to know other classmates in a large class is difficult. This small WhatsApp
group and helping each other gave me a sense of belonging and group member-
ship. (Focus-group interview)

Another issue regarding motivation was music. Students mostly agree that
the use of music resulted in increased motivation. The following quote nicely
captures how the sing a song task motivated them to engage in the tasks.
I listen to songs all the time. When we listen specifically for learning purposes
I definitely enjoy this. Also, the lyrics of the songs… I learned from my friends,
which increased my attention. I learned many words and their pronunciation and
this increased my motivation. (Semi-structured individual interview)

The participants’ accounts of how they felt during the regular face-to-
face classroom discussions usually included such words as ‘crowded’,
‘peer-pressure’, ‘shyness’, ‘anxiety’, ‘stress’, ‘strain’, and so forth. However,
WhatsApp tasks yielded the adjectives of ‘interactive’, ‘enjoyment’, ‘lib-
erating’, ‘no stress’, flexibility’, ‘social presence’, and so on. These words
show how they began taking responsibility in a more flexible and lib-
erating environment. Two representative quotes were:
I pick the text and do speed reading. I select a video to talk about. I study with
the lyrics that belong to my favorite songs. I feel that I am taking control of my
learning. Also, I like doing the things I benefit more and I enjoy. (Semi-structured
individual interview).

I already use WhatsApp every day. Turning my daily routine into a win-win
situation helped me enjoy and feel socialized more while learning.
 Computer Assisted Language Learning 17

4.1.3. Vocabulary and reading

The data analysis revealed that conducting these tasks helped participants
learn new vocabulary items, as reported by the students. Similar to learning
pronunciation, the students tried learning every new vocabulary item
because their friends asked for some words’ meanings. For example, if a
word was unknown in a tongue twister, the others asked for that word’s
meaning. Therefore, these tasks also helped learners develop their vocabulary.
First of all, I think all tasks were beneficial for my improvement. And it helped
me with my pronunciation and I learned new words that I’d never heard before.
(Open-ended survey)

I have to learn all of the words because if my friends ask I should be able to
share the meaning of that word. Thanks to this I learned new words more care-
fully. (Semi-structured individual interview)

Another recurrent issue the students noted, pertinent to the benefits

of the adopted pedagogy, was their engagement in speed reading and,
as a result, an improvement in reading. The participants did not mention
an improvement in overall reading skills but reading fluency, increased
attention, and motivation to read as the strengths that were positively
affected. Here are the views:

Speed reading resulted in more attention while reading with correct pronunciation.
Also, we listened to our friends’ narrations and they also helped us increase our
reading fluency. (Semi-structured individual interview)

It was a speaking course but these tasks, especially speed reading, improved our
reading and I enjoyed this task so much. (Focus-group interview)

4.2. Technological affordances

In addition to the educational affordances provided above, the analysis

yielded technological affordances that refer to participants’ perceived
ease of using WhatsApp and accessibility. Most of the participants found
the interface of WhatsApp easy to use. Also, the temporal affordance
of accessibility helped participants benefit more and more. Here are the
views of the participants.
WhatsApp is very user friendly. The tool is opened quickly, and I can find
everything I look for. (Semi-structured individual interview)

I have access to Whatsapp every time. I can learn with my friends. I have extra
internet for my WhatsApp. I can continue using it even if I run out of internet.

I live with my phone. Whenever I use it I check my messages in WhatsApp. The

more I open it the more I see the messages.
18 G. KARTAL

4.3. Challenges and concerns

Even though the participants largely appreciated the WhatsApp-supported

tasks in speaking and pronunciation, a small group of participants
reported some challenges and concerns, i.e. unwillingness to partic-
ipate in group work and lack of non-verbal communication. This
group indicated some of the negative issues concerning their unwill-
ingness to participate in group work. These participants cited various
reasons, which mostly revolved around such issues as irresponsible
group members, the anxiety of being observed by peers, preference
for instructor’s feedback, and distractors. Here are some representa-
tive quotes:
Some of them [our group members] are so irresponsible about the tasks in the
group or preparing for the presentation. For example, someone in my group didn’t
do anything, she didn’t do her mission, she didn’t work with us, she didn’t even
try. All of us except her tried to cover up her irresponsibility; we had to do the
conversation texts for her. (Semi-structured individual interview)

To be fair, I haven’t enjoyed the WhatsApp tasks during this semester, even if it
was a joyful task like sing a song because it was like a compulsory thing. I feel
stressed because my friends check my performance, and I am reluctant while
I’m doing these tasks. (Focus-group interview)

We already have lots of groups and receive lots of messages. I got lost. Also,
maybe I would be more willing if my teacher was correcting us all the time but
not my friends. (Semi-structured individual interview)

The lack of non-verbal communication was also germane, including

the non-existence of eye-contact, body language, and facial expressions.
A few participants held the idea that non-verbal communication is
essential for successful oral language use. The following quote covers
the challenges regarding the lack of non-verbal communication:
This platform is not like the classroom. We cannot see each other. We need to
have eye-contact and use communication tools other than verbal ones. I think I
like facing the person when I say something. (Open-ended survey)

Although the participants believed that they were less nervous while
talking outside the classroom, a few thought that a teacher or a more
knowledgeable individual should assess their performance.

4.4. Task preference

The analysis also focused on how the participants acquainted themselves

with the tasks they completed on WhatsApp. The students chose the
topics themselves. Students were allowed to watch TED Talks or any
 Computer Assisted Language Learning 19

kind of video they wanted. They particularly liked the activities related
to speed reading and sing a song. In response to this question, almost
all participants stated that they mainly enjoyed singing a song and the
speed reading activity.
I think singing a song and speed reading were really beneficial but the summary
of a TED Talk was not so. We started to select our own videos. I like summa-
rizing the videos I selected. (Open-ended survey)

We did a lot of tasks in WhatsApp and I really took pleasure while doing speed
reading and reading lyrics. While doing it, we do a lot of tries again and again
because it takes some getting used to. Others are not as good as speed reading.
(Semi-structured individual interview)

I’m really enjoying our WhatsApp group and the tasks we did, except one. For
me ‘speed reading’ is the best task, I like to do it and I think it improves my
English. But I don’t like TED Talk summaries. Because every time I want to
choose the video that best suits me yet I’m having a hard time to find one. I
also think it doesn’t improve my English much. It was helpful after selecting the
videos from anywhere we want. (Semi-structured individual interview)

As for the contributions of the tasks, as discussed earlier, one of the

motives for task preference is germane to enjoying the task. Aside from
being perceived as a way of improving pronunciation skills, it turned
out to be the case that the participants displayed a proclivity toward
speed reading and sing a song, which were enjoyable for them.

5. Discussion
This study’s primary finding is that participants felt changes in their
pronunciation, speaking, motivation and vocabulary. The contribution
of the adopted approach to pronunciation supports the findings of
El-Sulukiyyah (2016), who found evidence about WhatApp’s role in
pronunciation learning and increasing enthusiasm in studying pronun-
ciation. The finding on speaking is parallel to previous research on the
effectiveness of WhatsApp on oral skills (Akkara et al., 2020; Andújar-Vaca
& Cruz-Martínez, 2017; Escobar-Mamani & Gómez-Arteta, 2020) and
vocabulary (Cetinkaya & Sütçü, 2018). The findings also revealed that
the use of tasks on WhatsApp increased motivation and willingness to
participate, which corroborates Andújar’s (2016) findings. These results
are understandable because the participants’ perception is closely related
to the students’ experiences (Hsu, 2013) and the ease of use (Camilleri
& Camilleri, 2017; Kartal, 2019). The increase in willingness to partic-
ipate is important to overcome reticence, which is a negative factor in
speaking classes (Zhang & Head, 2010).
20 G. KARTAL

Another perceived benefit of this project is that participants felt less

nervous and more flexible concerning time and place. They believed that
the entertaining nature of activities created a warm environment. This
finding is important because feeling ashamed of making mistakes is a
significant problem, affecting the interaction with others when using the
target language (Tum, 2015). It is reasonable to conclude that the learners
enjoyed the time and place flexibility, the absence of negative facial expres-
sions, and the stress-free environment offered by WhatsApp. This result
is parallel to the findings of Afifah (2021). The decreased levels of anxiety
are attributable to the research showing that language anxiety is not static
but ‘[depends] on the milieu, interlocutors, task and so on’ (Gregersen,
2020, p. 72). The findings also revealed perceived social affordances.
WhatsApp facilitated social presence as reported by the students. This
finding corroborates the findings of Tang and Hew (2019). An optimal
level of social presence is necessary for collaboration (Zhao et al., 2014).
When the usefulness of the tasks is considered, it is found that the
participants also reported the contribution of speed reading and songs,
which were the most preferred activities. Speed reading was found to
contribute to speaking skills in previous research (Tabata-Sandom, 2017).
Reading has numerous benefits, including improvement of speaking
(Kim & Krashen, 1997). The students were asked to rehearse speed
reading before recording and sending it to the WhatsApp group because
speed reading practice must be conducted frequently to create satisfac-
tory speed gain (Millett, 2008). The speed reading activity proved that
its impact was not restricted to the reading fluency but transferred to
the ability to produce sounds correctly in a fluent speech. Voice record-
ing was another tool used in this study, which is beneficial for promoting
fluency and one of the most common technology-assisted practices for
developing speaking skills (Tecedor & Campos-Dintrans, 2019). The
participants also used songs, as previous research has shown that engag-
ing in music activities improves speaking skills, intonation, and flow of
speech (Ludke, 2018). Although some students initially believed that
they would be too shy to participate, they preferred singing the song
instead of reading the lyrics aloud. This finding supports the previous
research on the positive impact of songs on the enjoyment of L2 material
(Engh, 2012; Ludke, 2018). The finding on enjoyment is important
because there has been an explosion of interest in the role that emotions
play in L2 learning (Dewaele & Li, 2018).
Although participants did not enjoy summarizing only TED Talks,
they reported positive views on summaries after being free to pick the
videos they want to summarize. This might be attributable to extensive
listening, which has links with self-selected materials (Waring, 2008).
Allowing students to choose their materials and freedom to pick their
 Computer Assisted Language Learning 21

own activities alleviates reticence (Zhang & Head, 2010). It is noteworthy

to mention a gap between the goal of the video summary task and its
perception by the learners. The learners mainly considered the task to
help them increase their speaking. This finding brings to light a very
important struggle that students face in the ELT programs in Turkey.
Before being placed in this program, the students take a national English
language test that only assesses reading, vocabulary, and grammar. The
test does not assess listening, speaking, or pronunciation skills. Therefore,
the students in ELT programs need to develop these skills because they
will be English language teachers. A study on ELT students’ agenda after
graduation revealed plans to develop speaking skills as they believed
that they were not proficient users of the language (Kartal &
Özmen, 2018).
Students listened to native speakers and their classmates. In doing
so, while they were practicing their speaking, the participants who were
listening to them were practicing their listening comprehension skills
at different levels, ranging from decoding phonics to implied meaning
or gist of the summaries. Luo’s (2016) findings showed that the majority
of the participants found listening to their peers’ recordings beneficial
for their own pronunciation. This corresponds to Rieber’s (2006) finding,
which implied that comparing native speakers’ pronunciation helps par-
ticipants revise their own pronunciation problems. The participants also
reported perceived benefits from giving feedback. This is parallel to the
findings of Martin and Sippel (2021), who found evindence that peer
correction in pronunciation learning is also helpful for the giver. The
participants reported that WhatsApp allowed them to listen to their
own recordings and be evaluated by their friends, which made them
feel good, and thus they could increase self-assessment and
peer-assessment. WhatsApp’s use as a feedback tool was found to be
effective (Soria et al., 2020).
The results also revealed the technological affordances of the WhatsApp,
i.e. ease of use and accessibility. The learners should focus on the learn-
ing process rather than the technological tools (Harris & Hofer, 2011)
in a learning environment because the technology itself does not embody
independent pedagogy (Reinders & Hubbard, 2013). Also, learners are
not eager to use technology they consider intrusive or difficult to use
(Kukulska-Hulme & Shield, 2007). On the other hand, WhatsApp was
already used by all of the participants. One of WhatsApp’s technological
affordances is that it can alert students immediately to a message, thus
allowing them to respond with one click easily. Also, the participants
mentioned accessibility as another technological affordance of WhatsApp.
Therefore, the current study’s findings showed that students’ perceptions
were concentrated on the learning dimension rather than on the
22 G. KARTAL

technology itself. A few participants stated some challenges and concerns

about unwillingness to participate in group work and distractors. Similar
findings were also found in previous studies. Cetinkaya and Sütçü (2018),
for instance, reported complaints about unnecessary messages in
WhatsApp.

6. Conclusions
In the spirit of the DBR, this study aimed to examine the potential of
WhatsApp-supported speaking practice with the tasks of speed reading,
singing a song, tongue twisters, and video summary with students in a
large speaking class. The results demonstrated that the students had
positive reactions to the adopted approach and saw benefits in pronun-
ciation and speaking. There are some implications of the findings. First,
these findings may encourage the use of WhatsApp in large EFL classes
because it is challenging for the teacher to deal with pronunciation in
these classrooms. Teachers can use the adopted approach with the same
tasks. In so doing, teachers can give sufficient feedback to each student,
which is a burden in large classes (Luo, 2016). In this study, all the
participants maintained that WhatsApp is one of the most frequently
used apps among their peers and integrating in-class learning with this
app helped them utilize the tenets of out-of-class learning more often.
Keeping this in mind, language teachers try to improve their teaching
methods to foster students’ success, enjoyment, and motivation (Ludke,
2018). The adopted approach showed that WhatsApp could be employed
to reach these goals. The findings showed that peer feedback abates the
teacher’s burden. Therefore, teachers may consider utilizing peer feedback
using WhatsApp. Another implication of the current study is that the
teacher should consider whether or not to correct pronunciation errors,
and if so, when and how. However, peer feedback should not result in
the constant interruption of the students’ performance.
Some limitations should be mentioned. First, communication was
asynchronous, i.e. students did not speak simultaneously. Second, the
study did not use a speaking test to track the improvement regarding
speaking skills. Lastly, this qualitative case study cannot show all the
complexities of students’ online learning. The findings and limitations
imply some future research directions. A future study may compare
whether students perform differently in synchronous and asynchronous
speeches. Future studies may collect quantitative data and conduct some
speaking and pronunciation tests. Also, a study may consider employing
simultaneous shadowing and synchronous communication with the same
tasks. Thus, future research can compare how learners perform differ-
ently in synchronous and asynchronous speaking. Despite these
 Computer Assisted Language Learning 23

limitations, when the context of the study and the general outputs of
the WhatsApp tasks are considered, it can be concluded that the adopted
approach demonstrates how WhatsApp can contribute to language learn-
ing in a large speaking class in the related context. Examining how the
adopted pedagogy helps EFL learners in different settings after addressing
the limitations is now needed.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Notes on contributor
Galip Kartal is an Associate Professor of English Language Teaching Department at
Necmettin Erbakan University, Konya, Turkey. He holds a BA, an MA, and PhD in
English Language Teaching. His research interests mainly cover: teaching vocabulary,
the design and applications of innovative language learning & teaching techniques, and
technology in second language teacher education. He published articles in the journals
of Instructional Science and Studies in Second Language Acquisition.

ORCID
Galip Kartal http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4656-2108

References
Acton, W. (1984). Changing fossilised pronunciation. TESOL Quarterly, 18(1), 71–85.
https://doi.org/10.2307/3586336
Afifah, A. (2021). The using of WhatsApp in teaching pronunciation practice to the
third semester students of tadris English study program in Iain Palu. Datokarama
English Education Journal, 1(2), 29–36. https://doi.org/10.24239/dee.v1i2.11
Ahangari, S. (2014). The effect of self, peer and teacher correction on the pronuncia-
tion improvement of Iranian EFL learners. Advances in Language and Literary Studies,
5(1), 81–88. https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.alls.v.5n.1p.81
Akkara, S., Anumula, V. S. S., & Mallampalli, M. S. (2020). Impact of WhatsApp in-
teraction on improving L2 speaking skills. International Journal of Emerging
Technologies in Learning (iJET), 15(3), 250–259. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v15i03.11534
Andujar, A. (2016). Benefits of mobile instant messaging to develop ESL writing. System,
62, 63–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2016.07.004
Andújar-Vaca, A., & Cruz-Martínez, M. S. (2017). Mobile instant messaging: WhatsApp
and its potential to develop oral skills. Comunicar: Media Education Research Journal,
25(1), 43–52. https://doi.org/10.3916/C50-2017-04
Bahrani, T., & Sim, T. S. (2012). Audio-visual news, cartoons, and films as sources of
authentic language input and language proficiency enhancement. Turkish Online
Journal of Educational Technology-TOJET, 11(4), 56–64.
Bakla, A. (2018). Can podcasts provide meaningful input in a listening and pronun-
ciation class? Journal of Theoretical Educational Science, 11(4), 772–788. https://doi.
org/10.30831/akukeg.382174
24 G. KARTAL

Biggs, J. B. (1999). Teaching for quality learning at university. Open University Press.
Camilleri, M. A., & Camilleri, A. C. (2017). Digital learning resources and ubiquitous
technologies in education. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 22(1), 65–82. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s10758-016-9287-7
Carter, N., Bryant-Lukosius, D., DiCenso, A., Blythe, J., & Neville, A. J. (2014). The
use of triangulation in qualitative research. Oncology Nursing Forum, 41(5), 545–547.
https://doi.org/10.1188/14.ONF.545-547
Cetinkaya, L., & Sütçü, S. S. (2018). The effects of Facebook and WhatsApp on success
in English vocabulary instruction. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 34(5),
504–514. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12255
Chapelle, C. (2001). Computer applications in second language acquisition. Cambridge
University Press.
Cheon, J., Lee, S., Crooks, S. M., & Song, J. (2012). An investigation of mobile learn-
ing readiness in higher education based on the theory of planned behavior. Computers
& Education, 59(3), 1054–1064. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.04.015
Chiu, T. K. F., & Hew, T. K. F. (2018). Factors influencing peer learning and perfor-
mance in MOOC asynchronous online discussion forums. Australasian Journal of
Educational Technology, 34(4), 16–28. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.3240.
Coskun, A. (2016). Causes of the ‘I can understand English but I can’t speak’ syndrome
in Turkey. i-Manager’s Journal on English Language Teaching, 6(3), 1–12. https://doi.
org/10.26634/jelt.6.3.8174.
Creswell, J. W., Hanson, W. E., Clark Plano, V. L., & Morales, A. (2007). Qualitative
research designs: Selection and implementation. The Counseling Psychologist, 35(2),
236–264. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000006287390
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2018). Introduction: The discipline and practice of
qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of
qualitative research (5th ed., pp. 1–26). Sage.
Dewaele, J. M., & Li, C. (2018). Editorial: Special issue ‘Emotions in SLA. Studies in
Second Language Learning and Teaching, 8(1), 15–19. https://doi.org/10.14746/
ssllt.2018.8.1.1
Dörnyei, Z. (2001). Motivational strategies in the language classroom. Cambridge
University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511667343
Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics: Quantitative, qualitative and
mixed methodologies. Oxford University.
El-Sulukiyyah, A. A. (2016). WhatsApp and its use to improve students’ pronunciation
ability. Jurnal Educazione: Jurnal Pendidikan, Pembelajaran Dan Bimbingan Dan
Konseling, 4(2), 89–97.
Engh, D. (2012). Why use music in English language learning? A survey of the liter-
ature. English Language Teaching, 6(2), 113–127. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v6n2p113
Escobar-Mamani, F., & Gómez-Arteta, I. (2020). WhatsApp for the development of oral
and written communication skills in Peruvian adolescents. Comunicar: Media
Education Research Journal, 28(65), 111–120. https://doi.org/10.3916/C65-2020-10
Ferguson, L. M., Yonge, O., & Myrick, F. (2004). Students’ involvement in faculty re-
search: Ethical and methodological issues. International Journal of Qualitative Methods,
3(4), 56–68. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690400300405
Foote, J. A., & McDonough, K. (2017). Using shadowing with mobile technology to
improve L2 pronunciation. Journal of Second Language Pronunciation, 3(1), 34–56.
https://doi.org/10.1075/jslp.3.1.02foo
Gass, S. (2003). Input and interaction. In C. Doughty & M. Long (Eds.), The handbook
of second language acquisition (pp. 224–255). Blackwell.
 Computer Assisted Language Learning 25

Given, L. M. (2008). The Sage encyclopedia of qualitative research methods. Sage. https://
doi.org/10.4135/9781412963909
Golonka, E. M., Bowles, A. R., Frank, V. M., Richardson, D. L., & Freynik, S. (2014).
Technologies for foreign language learning: A review of technology types and their
effectiveness. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 27(1), 70–105. https://doi.org/1
0.1080/09588221.2012.700315
Gregersen, T. (2020). Dynamic properties of language anxiety. Studies in Second Language
Learning and Teaching, 10(1), 67–87. https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2020.10.1.4
Gudu, B. O. (2015). Teaching speaking skills in English language using classroom
activities in secondary school level in Eldoret Municipality, Kenya. Journal of
Education and Practice, 6(35), 55–63.
Han, F. (2016). Integrating pronunciation instruction with passage-level reading in-
struction. In Jones T. (Ed.), Pronunciation in the classroom. The overlooked essential
(pp.143–151). Tesol Press.
Han, T., & Keskin, F. (2016). Using a mobile application (WhatsApp) to reduce EFL
speaking anxiety. Gist: Education and Learning Research Journal, 12, 29–50. https://
doi.org/10.26817/16925777.243
Hannes, K. (2011). Critical appraisal of qualitative research. In J. Noyes, A. Booth, K.
Hannes, A. Harden, J. Harris, S. Lewin, & C. Lockwood (Eds.), Supplementary guid-
ance for inclusion of qualitative research in cochrane systematic reviews of interventions.
Version 1 (updated August 2011). Cochrane Collaboration Qualitative Methods Group.
http://cqrmg.cochrane.org/supplemental-handbook-guidance
Harris, J. B., & Hofer, M. J. (2011). Technological pedagogical content knowledge
(TPACK) in action: A descriptive study of secondary teachers’ curriculum-based,
technology-related instructional planning. Journal of Research on Technology in
Education, 43(3), 211–229. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2011.10782570
Hazaea, A., & Alzubi, A. (2018). Impact of mobile assisted language learning on learn-
er autonomy in EFL reading context. Journal of Language and Education, 4(2),
48–58. https://doi.org/10.17323/2411-7390-2018-4-2-48-58
Hsu, L. (2013). English as a foreign language learners’ perception of mobile assisted
language learning: A cross-national study. Computer Assisted Language Learning,
26(3), 197–213. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2011.649485
Hsu, H. C. K., Wang, C. V., & Levesque-Bristol, C. (2019). Reexamining the impact
of self-determination theory on learning outcomes in the online learning environ-
ment. Education and Information Technologies, 24(3), 2159–2174. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s10639-019-09863-w
Juansyah, M. (2012). The effect of self correction and peer correction on pronunciation
of second semester students of English education study program, STKIP PGRI
Lubuklinggau. Jurnal Perspektif Pendidikan, 5(1), 1–10.
Kartal, G. (2019). What’s up with WhatsApp? A critical analysis of mobile instant
messaging research in language learning. International Journal of Contemporary
Educational Research, 6(2), 352–365. https://doi.org/10.33200/ijcer.599138
Kartal, G., & Balçıkanlı, C. (2018). Willingness to communicate and communication
anxiety of EFL learners in a virtual world. Educational Technology, 15(3), 7–25.
https://doi.org/10.26634/jet.15.3.14549
Kartal, G., & Korucu-Kis, S. (2020). The use of Twitter and Youglish for the learning
and retention of commonly mispronounced English words. Education and Information
Technologies, 25(1), 193–221. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-09970-8
Kartal, G., & Özmen, K. S. (2018). An investigation of the professional development
agenda of Turkish EFL student teachers. i-Manager’s Journal on English Language
Teaching, 8(3), 7–17. https://doi.org/10.26634/jelt.8.3.14498
26 G. KARTAL

Kennedy, S., & Trofimovich, P. (2008). Intelligibility, comprehensibility, and accentedness

of L2 speech: The role of listener experience and semantic context. Canadian Modern
Language Review, 64(3), 459–489. https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.64.3.459
Kern, R. (2006). Perspectives on technology in learning and teaching languages. TESOL
Quarterly, 40(1), 183–210. https://doi.org/10.2307/40264516
Kim, H., & Yoon, M. (2014). Adopting smartphone-based blended learning: An
Experimental study of the implementation of Kakao-Talk and Mocafe. Multimedia-Assisted
Language Learning, 17(2), 86–111. https://doi.org/10.15702/mall.2014.17.2.86
Klimova, B. (2018). Mobile phones and/or smartphones and their apps for teaching
English as a foreign language. Education and Information Technologies, 23(3), 1091–1099.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-017-9655-5
Kukulska-Hulme, A., & Shield, L. (2007, September). An overview of mobile assisted
language learning: Can mobile devices support collaborative practice in speaking and
listening?. Paper Presented at EuroCALL 2007, Conference Virtual Strand. https://
citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.84.1398&rep=rep1&type=pdf
Kim, H., & Krashen, S. (1997). Why don’t language acquirers take advantage of the
power of reading. TESOL Journal, 6(3), 26–29.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage. https://doi.
org/10.1016/0147-1767(85)90062-8
Ludke, K. M. (2018). Singing and arts activities in support of foreign language learn-
ing: An exploratory study. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 12(4),
371–386. https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2016.1253700
Luo, B. (2016). Evaluating a computer-assisted pronunciation training (CAPT) technique
for efficient classroom instruction. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 29(3),
451–476. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2014.963123
Mak, B. (2011). An exploration of speaking-in-class anxiety with Chinese ESL learners.
System, 39(2), 202–214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2011.04.002
Martin, I. A., & Sippel, L. (2021). Is giving better than receiving?: The effects of peer
and teacher feedback on L2 pronunciation skills. Journal of Second Language
Pronunciation, 7(1), 62–88. https://doi.org/10.1075/jslp.20001.mar
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation. John Wiley & Sons.
Millett, S. (2008). A daily fluency programme: The key to using what you know. Modern
English Teacher, 17, 21–28.
Minalla, A. A. (2018). The effect of WhatsApp chat group in enhancing EFL learners’
verbal interaction outside classroom contexts. English Language Teaching, 11(3), 1–7.
https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v11n3p1
Mu’in, F., Amrina, R., & Amelia, R. (2017). Tongue twister, students’ pronunciation
ability, and learning styles. Arab World English Journal (AWEJ), 8(4), 365–383. https://
doi.org/10.24093/awej/vol8no4.25
Munro, M. J., Derwing, T. M., & Morton, S. L. (2006). The mutual intelligibility of L2
speech. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28(1), 111–131. https://doi.org/10.1017/
S0272263106060049
Nation, P., & Newton, J. (2008). Teaching ESL/EFL listening and speaking. Routledge.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203891704
Ögeyik, M. C. (2018). The comparative effectiveness of noticing in language learning.
International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching (IRAL), 56(4), 377–
400. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2016-0049
Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research and methods: Integrating theory and practice.
Sage Publications, Inc.
 Computer Assisted Language Learning 27

Rambe, P., & Bere, A. (2013). Using mobile instant messaging to leverage learner
participation and transform pedagogy at a South African University of Technology.
British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(4), 544–561. https://doi.org/10.1111/
bjet.12057
Rampton, B., Roberts, C., Leung, C., & Harris, R. (2002). Methodology in the analysis
of classroom discourse. Applied Linguistics, 23(3), 373–392. https://doi.org/10.1093/
applin/23.3.373
Reinders, H., & Hubbard, P. (2013). CALL and learner autonomy: Affordances and
constraints. In M. Thomas, H. Reinders, & M. Warschauer (Eds.), Contemporary
computer assisted language learning (pp. 359–375). Continuum.
Reinders, H., & White, C. (2016). 20 years of autonomy and technology: How far have
we come and where to next? Language Learning & Technology, 20(2), 143–154.
Ricard, E. (1986). Beyond fossilisation: A course on strategies and techniques in pro-
nunciation for advanced adult learners. TESL Canada Journal, 3, 243–253. https://
doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v3i0.1009
Rieber, L. J. (2006). Using peer review to improve student writing in business courses.
Journal of Education for Business, 81, 322–326. https://doi.org/10.3200/JOEB.81.6.322-326
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2009). Promoting self-determined school engagement:
Motivation, learning, and well-being. In K. Wentzel & A. Wigfield (Eds.), Handbook
of motivation at school (pp. 171–196). Routledge.
Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied
Linguistics, 11(2), 129–158. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/11.2.129
Shabani, K., & Ghasemian, A. (2017). Teacher’s personality type and techniques of teaching
pronunciation. Cogent Education, 4(1), 1313560. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2017.1313560
Shippee, M., & Keengwe, J. (2014). mLearning: Anytime, anywhere learning transcend-
ing the boundaries of the educational box. Education and Information Technologies,
19(1), 103–113. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-012-9211-2
Soria, S., Gutiérrez-Colón, M., & Frumuselu, A. D. (2020). Feedback and mobile instant
messaging: Using WhatsApp as a feedback tool in EFL. International Journal of
Instruction, 13(1), 797–812. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2020.13151a
Subaşı, G. (2010). What are the main sources of Turkish EFL students’ anxiety in oral
practice? Turkish Online Journal of Qualitative Inquiry, 1(2), 29–49.
Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input
and comprehensible output in its development. In S. Gass, & C. G. Madden (Eds.),
Input and second language acquisition (pp. 235–253). Newbury House.
Tabata-Sandom, M. (2017). L2 Japanese learners’ responses to translation, speed read-
ing, and "pleasure reading" as a form of extensive reading. Reading in a Foreign
Language, 29(1), 113–132.
Takahashi, C., & Im, S. (2020). Comparing self-determination theory and the L2 moti-
vational self system and their relationships to L2 proficiency. Studies in Second Language
Learning and Teaching, 10(4), 673–696. https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2020.10.4.2
Tang, C. M., & Bradshaw, A. (2020). Instant messaging or face-to-face? How choice
of communication medium affects team collaboration environments. E-Learning and
Digital Media, 17(2), 111–130. https://doi.org/10.1177/2042753019899724
Tang, Y., & Hew, K. F. (2019). Examining the utility and usability of mobile instant
messaging in a graduate-level course: A usefulness theoretical perspective. Australasian
Journal of Educational Technology, 35(4), 128–143. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.4571
Tecedor, M., & Campos-Dintrans, G. (2019). Developing oral communication in Spanish
lower-level courses: The case of voice recording and video conferencing activities.
ReCALL, 31(2), 116–134. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344018000083
28 G. KARTAL

Tomal, D. R. (2010). Action research for educators. Rowman & Littlefield Education.
Tost, G. (2013). Bettering pronunciation through reading aloud and peer appraisal.
Bellaterra Journal of Teaching & Learning Language & Literature, 6(1), 35–55. https://
doi.org/10.5565/rev/jtl3.495
Tran, T. N. Y., & Nation, P. (2014). Reading speed improvement in a speed reading
course and its effect on language memory span. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language
Teaching, 11, 5–20.
Tum, D. O. (2015). Foreign language anxiety’s forgotten study: The case of the anxious
preservice teacher. TESOL Quarterly, 49(4), 627–658. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.190
Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.
Harvard University.
Wang, F., & Hannafin, M. J. (2005). Design-based research and technology-enhanced
learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53, 5–23.
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504682
Wang, K. (2017). Status Quo and prospective of WeChat in improving Chinese English
learners’ pronunciation. English Language Teaching, 10(4), 140–149. https://doi.
org/10.5539/elt.v10n4p140
Waring, R. (2008). Starting extensive listening. Extensive Reading in Japan, 1(1), 7–9.
Wengraf, T. (2001). Qualitative research interviewing. London: Sage.
Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and method. Sage.
Zhang, X., & Head, K. (2010). Dealing with learner reticence in the speaking class.
ELT Journal, 64(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccp018
Zhao, H., Sullivan, K. P. H., & Mellenius, I. (2014). Participation, interaction, and
social presence: An exploratory study of collaboration in online peer review groups.
British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(5), 807–819. https://doi.org/10.1111/
bjet.12094

Appendix A: Survey questions

1. What do you think about using mobile devices, especially
WhatsApp, for language learning?
2. What do you think about the WhatsApp-assisted tasks (speed
reading, sing a song, tongue twisters summarizing a video)?
3. What do you think about the impact of this implementation on
your speaking skills?
4. What do you think about the impact of this implementation on
your pronunciation?
5. How do you evaluate your motivation in the tasks?
6. What would you recommend to carry out this implementation
better?

Appendix B: Semi-structured interview questions

1. What do you think about the way you used WhatsApp?
2. What was something specific that you enjoyed about WhatsApp
and the tasks?
3. Did you observe any changes in your or others’ learning experi-
ence during this process?
 Computer Assisted Language Learning 29

4. What were some specific concerns or difficulties that you had

during this learning experience?
5. Do you find communicating via WhatsApp difficult or easy?
6. What do you think about the speed reading task?
7. What do you think about the sing a song task?
8. What do you think about tongue twisters?
9. What do you think about the task of summarizing a video?
10. Is there anything else that you would like to say about the
process?