Hindawi

Education Research International

Volume 2022, Article ID 5500077, 13 pages
https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/5500077

Research Article
The Impact of CALL on Vocabulary Learning, Speaking Skill, and
Foreign Language Speaking Anxiety: The Case Study of Indonesian
EFL Learners

Waode Hanafiah ,1 Muhammad Aswad ,2 Harlinah Sahib ,3 Abdul Hakim Yassi ,3

and Movahede Sadat Mousavi 4
1
Department of English Education, Universitas Unidayan, Bau-Bau, Indonesia
2
Department of English Education, Universitas Sulawesi Barat, Majene, Indonesia
3
Department of Cultural Science, Hasanuddin University, Makassar, Indonesia
4
Department of Foreign Languages, Allameh Tabataba’i University, Tehran, Iran

Correspondence should be addressed to Waode Hanafiah; waodehanafi[email protected] and Movahede Sadat Mousavi;
[email protected]

Received 29 November 2021; Accepted 24 December 2021; Published 21 January 2022

Academic Editor: Ehsan Namaziandost

Copyright © 2022 Waode Hanafiah et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License,
which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Using computer-assisted language learning (CALL) in English language learning has not received the attention it deserves in
Indonesian EFL context; thus, this study tried to inspect the impacts of CALL on Indonesian EFL learners’ vocabulary learning,
speaking skill, and speaking anxiety. To reach this end, the Oxford Quick Placement Test (OQPT) was administered to 103
Indonesian EFL students, and 60 of them whose English proficiency levels were intermediate were chosen as the respondents of
this investigation. They were divided into two groups: an experimental group and a control group. Then, a vocabulary test, a
speaking test, and a Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety Scale (FLCAS) questionnaire were administered to the groups as the
pretests of the study. After that, the conversations and the vocabulary items of six lessons of Family and Friends Book 6 were
taught to the experimental group by an online instruction (Skype application). On the other side, the same conversations and
vocabulary items were taught to the control participants by a conventional instruction (face-to-face class). After teaching the
conversations and vocabulary items, the posttests of vocabulary, speaking skill, and anxiety were administered to the groups to
determine the influences of the intervention on their vocabulary, speaking, and anxiety. The collected data were analyzed by
utilizing independent samples and paired samples t-tests, and the gained outcomes indicated that the experimental participants
outflanked the control participants both in the speaking and vocabulary posttests. Moreover, the outcomes of the questionnaire
demonstrated that the experimental participants had less amount of speaking anxiety compared to the control participants after
receiving the treatment. Finally, the implications and the conclusions of the results were explained at the end of the research.

1. Introduction learning of the students [1]. The usefulness of CALL in

learning English language has been examined by several
Recently, the enormous development of technology and investigations across the globe. Most research outcomes
communication has produced a great change not only in have confirmed the favourable roles of CALL in learning
communities and globalization but also in educational language and language proficiencies. Indeed, this type of
system. The application of computer and online tools in technology has boosted language teaching and learning in
instructional settings has risen increasingly that had a vital various EFL contexts, and also it has increased the creativity
impact on educational improvements. Computer-assisted and the productivity of the students and has contributed to
language learning (CALL) is one of the pivotal means and individual learning differences. CALL has been applied for
methods that has an important effect on improving language numerous purposes in language learning, including
2 Education Research International

language practices, teaching exercises, teaching methods, 2. Review of the Literature

and even as a useful instrument to cause discussions and
language interactions. Nowadays, utilizing computers is 2.1. CALL. Today, computers have a vital role in the educa-
appearing as an essential source in language learning and tional milieu. Prensky [15] stated that, in our time, education
teaching that has got lots of heed in the instructional without using computer, digital media, or the Internet is
contexts [2]. pointless for learners. Computers can back learners to per-
CALL is defined as a method of language learning and sonalize instruction as Vahdat and Eidipour [16] prove that
teaching in which the computers are applied as a tool for computer can assist immensely to the personalization of in-
presenting, reinforcing, and assessing the materials to be struction. Computer helps in the motivation of schoolchildren
taught, usually encompassing vital interactive elements [3]. over personalizing information, using alive things on the
CALL provides instructors with a specific instruction screen, and offering exercises which include challenges and
allowing people to study and learn at their own paces [4]. curiosity in certain circumstances. Likewise, CALL is a learner-
According to Tatiana Dina and Ciornei [5], CALL has the centered method of the education process, meaning that the
potentiality to cause the language interactions among in- learners are to control the learning pace and select what must
structors and students. CALL helps to use experimental be learned and in what ways they can learn it, which, in turn,
learning and practice in various fashions, provides helpful causes them feel more confident in learning [16].
feedbacks for students, encourages group and pair work, CALL is an effective instrument to increase the quality
develops effective and universal learning, boosts students’ the instruction. This is probably owed to the following
achievements, paves the way for reaching to the real re- points:
sources, facilitates effective interactions, individualizes in- (i) Computer can be an appropriate instrument to offer
structions, and motivates the learners [6]. useful classroom activities which help school-
Using CALL can develop EFL learners’ speaking skill as children learn skills of the language
a problematic skill for all language students, particularly
nonnative EFL students. Speaking is a crucial skill in En- (ii) CALL can help learners learn the materials even
glish language learning, and it is not a simple task and needs outside the instructional situations
much work to produce comprehensible words and utter- (iii) CALL can provide individualized, constant, and
ances. The learners of English language need to improve realistic tasks for the learners
their ability to speak proficiently, but they face different (iv) CALL reduces the indifference of the students and
difficulties while speaking English language. Anxiety is lack of engagement in the process of learning; thus,
considered as one of the primary difficulties which can CALL is a learner-oriented method
prevent learners from speaking well. Speaking anxiety (v) CALL can incorporate all language skills
inhibits interactions and communications in language
classrooms and consequently negatively influences the (vi) Computer can offer instant feedbacks [17]
learning process [7]. Anxiety can abandon students from Instructors and scholars have usually cited the advan-
the study of language and can affect their speaking per- tages of CALL; nonetheless, CALL has its own disadvan-
formance and proficiency in foreign language [8]. So, it is tages. For example, computers cannot usefully evaluate
significant to carry out researches on English language learners’ verbal communications with other students, and
learning in order to improve and develop students’ what is digitally uttered is totally distinct from that of in-
speaking skills and to offer students with facilitating and dividuals [18]. In addition, the quality and stability of CALL
comfortable environment in the classroom. software are controversial. The mercantile resources that
Some researchers [9–11] have confirmed the effects of some instructors count on may not educationally produce
utilizing CALL in promoting vocabulary knowledge. the desirable outcomes. Furthermore, some instructors and
Knowing vocabulary is a primary medium of the four main people do not have adequate computer literacy that can
skills of a language [12]. Vocabulary learning is considered as hinder the process of learning [18].
the first step in learning English as a foreign language. Regarding demerits reported above for employing
Vocabularies are referred to the words of a language which CALL, Al-Kahtani and Al-Haider [19] indicated that in-
can be in the forms of single items or phrases that transfer structors evade using technologies in classes for the sub-
special meanings [13]. We cannot overlook the strength of sequent reasons:
vocabulary in the students’ communications since, without
adequate vocabulary, people are not able to comprehend (i) They have not experienced CALL teaching
others or transfer their own opinions. Without vocabulary (ii) They have not been supported to use technology
knowledge, the speakers cannot manifest their intentions (iii) They cannot observe learners during applying
and purposes [14]. technology
Despite of its importance in language learning, CALL
(iv) Lack of CALL expert instructors to train computer
effectiveness has not been examined on vocabulary learning,
skills to students
speaking skill, and foreign language speaking anxiety of
Indonesian EFL learners; therefore, this investigation aimed (v) Lack of computer accessibility
at investigating the impacts of CALL on Indonesian EFL (vi) The expensive price of technology tools and the
students’ vocabulary learning, speaking skill, and anxiety. quick changes in technology
Education Research International 3

Moreover, Levy [20] reckoned some difficulties in using [30, 31]. Although speaking by the means of communication
CALL in the language classroom: (1) “material created by is necessary for everyone, applied linguistic students should
inexperience teachers (software), (2) poor development of focus more on the speaking skills because they should
natural language processing techniques, (3) poor linguistic represent the accurate and fluent way of speaking among
modeling, and (4) false starts and inadequate realizations of nonnative learners.
CALL. Computer’s limit ability in handling natural lan- Parmawati [32] indicated that speaking is the most
guage” (p. 2). significant skill of the English language since speaking is a
All things considered, CALL has both merits and de- communicative means in our routine life. Furthermore,
merits, but its merits are more. CALL can ease language Sartika [33] declared that speaking is the skill that the
teaching and learning, and using computers can have fa- learners will be assessed upon most in real circumstances. It
vorable effects on developing learners’ attainment [21]. The is a skill that is mainly utilized in communications. In
studies come to realize that the use of CALL does not evolving speaking skill, learners not only have to acquire and
eliminate the roles of the teachers since teachers can help master vocabularies, pronunciations, grammar, and other
people focus on the main objectives of communication and English skills but also need to shape their confidence, public
language learning [17]. Consequently, instructors should not speaking, and their speaking fluency [34].
be neglected or substituted by the computers. Speaking is an oral process to express thoughts and
emotions, to ponder on experiences, and to share facts. Ideas
are the core of what we are speaking about and words are
2.2. Anxiety. CALL can have a constructive effect on af-
tools to express them. Speaking is a sophisticated task as it
fective factors involved in language learning. The affective
encompasses the capability of thought process, discussions,
filter hypothesis was first presented by Dulay and Burt [22]
and social abilities [35]. Based on Hornby, Wehmeier, and
and was integrated by Krashen as one of his five input
Ashby [36]; speaking is talking to someone about something,
hypotheses in 1985. Krashen [23] stated that students learn
to have a dialog with a person.
L2 just when they receive comprehensible input, and if their
anxiety is very low, they will learn language successfully.
Based on Krashen, anxiety is one of the main affective filters. 2.4. Vocabulary Learning. CALL can be used to teach En-
Gardner and MacIntyre [24] described language anxiety as
glish vocabulary more efficiently to EFL learners. Vocabu-
an annoying worry encountered when a situation wants the
lary has a significant role in second language achievement
student to apply L2 in which he or she is not completely and academic attainment. This role has long been ignored
knowledgeable. Anxiety is a displeasing feeling that domi- [37]. Nevertheless, vocabulary has recently gained high at-
nates the excitement of the learners and finally makes worry tention in the language learning curriculum. This is because
about attaining his or her desires. When the feeling of of some reasons, including the effect of comprehension-
anxiety improves in a specific situation, the feeling of fear based methods in language improvement, the research effort
happens within a student [25]. Anxious students have a high in applied linguistics, and the enhancement of computer-
affective filter that hinders learning achievement to take based language corpus [38].
place. Some academics regard vocabulary understanding as the
Anxiety is defined by Horwitz, Horwitz, and Cope [26] most significant agent in schooling accomplishment for the
as the subjective feelings of tensions, apprehensions, and
students of a foreign or a second language. They show that
worries related to an arousal of the autonomic nervous
vocabulary understanding is highly associated with reading
system. As shown in this definition, anxiety has some main comprehension, and also it results in more achievements at
qualities such as worry, uneasiness, fear, and undesirable schools [39]. Vocabulary is a central part of language
conditions that can impede the abilities and performance of competence and how well a person speaks, listens, reads, and
learners in different settings. Anxiety is a psychological agent writes is relied upon vocabulary knowledge [40]. Based on
supposed to be useful in evaluating the level of success in Richards and Renandya [40]; without learning adequate
learning language process [27]. Young [28] explains anxiety vocabularies and approaches for mastering new vocabulary
in FL classes as a complex process that cannot be simply items, learners usually cannot develop their language
determined, but which certainly influences second language learning. Vocabulary acquisition has usually been a common
learning at different levels. topic in CALL instruction for forty years. In the arena of
learning foreign language, constant computer-assisted vo-
2.3. Speaking Skill. Speaking is one of the four macro- cabulary instruction (CAVI) instructions have been created
language skills that must be improved in English for Foreign to ease the intricate process of L2 vocabulary acquisition.
Language Learners (EFL) especially in nonnative countries CAVI is regarded an attractive application of CALL which
where people do not have access to feedbacks and real involves practices relating to using the computer for vo-
context [29]. According to the importance of speaking and cabulary learning and education objectives. Vocabulary
the purpose of communicating in English, many linguists learning/teaching is a greatly prevalent topic in CALL ap-
and experts believe that speaking is one of the vital skills for plications since the early stages of CALL [41].
each language learner in every stage of education, for in- Lack of vocabulary knowledge can restrict students’
stance in schools, language institutes, or even at the uni- comprehension and communication. Incorrect vocabulary
versity level, specifically for applied linguistics students use can cause a significant consequence for communications
4 Education Research International

because the vocabulary items carry the speakers’ or writers’ Zarei and Asadi Amani [47] examined the impacts of
intended and meaningful messages [42]. There are several different online strategies (word reference, media, and vo-
restrictions or problems encountered by instructors and cabulary games) on reading skills as well as vocabulary
students in applying different vocabularies [43, 44]. Many learning. For doing this study, 60 language students were
problematic challenges are related to the limited time and chosen and assigned to three groups, and every group was
opportunities to both learn and teach vocabulary. EFL in- randomly divided into one of the intervention situations.
structors do not have enough time to instruct all the vo- After selecting the participants, they were administered a
cabularies which are needed for the students. Vocabulary vocabulary test which was given as the pretest of the study.
learning is one of the boring learning activities which the Within the treatment, the students in those three groups
language students encounter. Vocabulary is hard for the sake were instructed via the online vocabulary games, online
of two significant reasons: one reason is that there are media with transcripts, and online word references. After the
numerous words to be learned, and the other reason is that treatment, a reading comprehension posttest, a vocabulary
not sufficient attention has been paid to the learners’ posttest, and a vocabulary production posttest were given to
challenges and difficulties in this regard [42]. Therefore, the groups to measure the treatment effects. The finding
teachers and researchers should use different and attractive revealed that the online media participants outflanked the
methods to teach vocabulary to the EFL learners. other participants. According to the results, it can be
inferred that various online instruments may have pivotal
impacts on mastering diverse aspects of language. This in-
2.5. Related Studies. Several experimental studies were car- dicates that using only one online tool may not essentially
ried out to inspect the effect of CALL on diverse skills and bring about favourable outcomes.
subskills of English language. Pahlavanpoorfard and Soori Alahmadi [2] investigated the effects of CALL on
[45] did an empirical study to examine the effect of utilizing grammar achievement for English as a foreign language
computers on word mastering of Iranian EFL learners. They (EFL) in a Saudi setting. The respondents of this investi-
selected 40 male and female participants on the basis of the gation were 150 female students from a preparatory year
OQPT. Then, they divided them into an experimental group who study English language as their foreign language. The
and a control group. The experimental participants were grammar points were instructed to the control participants
trained by two unlike methods such as software-based and via a printed form from the textbook. The experimental
game-based methods. The control participants received a participants received the grammar points via employing an
traditional instruction. The outcomes of the research indi- online learning management system. The findings of the
cated that those students who had used the computer out- posttest supported the hypothesis of this research so that
flanked those students who had used a traditional method. there was a considerable difference in the findings between
The results also demonstrated that using computer assisted the control and the experimental participants in the level of
the students to learn more vocabularies after the treatment. grammar learning for the grammatical rule and form.
Ghanbari, Shamsoddini, and Radmehr [37] intended to Enayati and Pourhosein Gilakjani [13] inspected the
investigate the impacts of a computerized program on effects of CALL on Iranian intermediate students’ vocabu-
boosting words and reading skill of Iranian EFL students. To lary knowledge. The researchers selected one experimental
do so, the researchers selected 60 first-grade high school group and one control group to do the research. The TEM
students in Bushehr, Iran. Then, the subjects were divided software was applied to train vocabulary items to the ex-
into two groups, and every group included 30 participants. perimental subjects, and the control subjects received a
The study findings depicted that the computerized programs conventional instruction. The gained outcomes showed that
were helpful in vocabulary developing and reading com- the experimental respondents outflanked the control re-
prehension skill for the experimental participants. Based on spondents and they held a positive attitude toward CALL.
these outcomes, the researchers commented that EFL Ira- Mahmoudi [48] studied the influences of online in-
nian instructors need to utilize CALL as an instrument struction through smartphones on Iranian EFL students’
particularly for improving learners’ lexis and reading skills grammatical accuracy development. To reach this objective,
and learning the language generally. the researcher utilized the experimental approaches and se-
Mousavi and Nemati [46] carried out a research to lected two groups of the upper-intermediate learners: one
explore the effects of applying vocabulary software on Ira- experimental group and one control group. The conventional
nian EFL students’ vocabulary knowledge. Fifty-four EFL instruction was applied in teaching grammar to the control
students including both girls and boys took part in the participants, while the online instruction was utilized to teach
investigation. The respondents were assigned to two groups. the experimental participants. The results indicated that there
After that, the groups were administered a researcher-made were remarkable differences between the experimental and
vocabulary pretest. The control respondents were trained the the conventional participants, and the experimental partici-
words in the typical way of a printed textbook, while the pants who used online instruction had better performances.
experimental respondents were trained by the software Çakmak, Namaziandost, and Kumar [49] aimed to ex-
version of the same coursebook. The results showed that amine the effects of using a CALL-enhanced L2 vocabulary
though both approaches had favourable effects on partici- learning program on EFL learners’ vocabulary enhancement.
pants’ word learning, applying the software was more helpful Seventy-six preintermediate EFL students took part in this
than utilizing the printed textbook. research and were assigned to two groups: the experimental
Education Research International 5

group and the control group. During the treatment, the 3. Method
experimental group was required to use a computer-en-
hanced flashcard software program on their laptops, mobile 3.1. Design of the Study. This study used a quasi-experi-
phones, or other mobile tools at their discretion. The control mental study with a quantitative method in the data col-
participants were taught by using a conventional method. The lection procedure. The design of this research was based on a
outcomes revealed that the experimental participants out- quasi-experimental method (pretest treatment posttest).
flanked the control participants in the posttest of vocabulary. This research had one control group and one experimental
Recently, Hashemifardnia, Shafiee, Rahimi Esfahani, and group, and it had the variable of CALL as the independent
Sepehri [1] examined the impacts of Massive Open Online variable and vocabulary learning, speaking skill, and
Course (MOOC) on Iranian EFL students’ speaking com- speaking anxiety as the dependent variables.
plexity, accuracy, and fluency (CAF). To do this study, the
researchers gave the OQPT to 130 Iranian EFL students and
selected 60 intermediate participants. Then, the participants 3.2. Participants. For performing this investigation, 60 In-
were divided into an experimental group (n � 30) and a control donesian intermediate EFL students were chosen from 103
group (n � 30). The experimental participants received the people at an English Language Institution in Indonesia. The
online-delivered treatment by utilizing Skype. On the other participants’ age was between 20 and 33, and their gender
side, the control participants did not receive an Internet-de- was male. The participants have studied English as a foreign
livered instruction, and they were trained traditionally via a language since 2014. The English language proficiency levels
face-to-face instruction. The findings of the one-way of the participants were assessed by giving the Oxford Quick
ANCOVA test showed that there were noticeable differences Placement Test (OQPT). The convenience sampling method
between the posttests of the experimental and the control was employed to choose the respondents since the re-
participants. The results indicated that the experimental par- searchers had easy access to them. The respondents were
ticipants considerably outperformed the control group randomly divided into two groups (experimental and
(p < 0.05) on the posttest. Moreover, the outcomes of the one- control), and there were 30 participants in each group.
sample t-test depicted that the participants held a significantly
desirable attitude toward applying MOOC education.
3.3. Instruments. The first instrument applied in the current
Based on the literature review, speaking is the main
research to homogenize the subjects was a proficiency test;
language skill; however, most people in EFL settings struggle
Oxford Quick Placement Test (OQPT). It was given to 103
to overcome their speaking problems because their exposures
learners to assess their English language proficiencies, and
to contexts where speaking skill can be practiced is rare
according to it, those students whose scores were between 30
[50, 51]. According to the reviewed literature, vocabulary
and 47 (out of 60) were regarded as the intermediate learners
learning in a foreign language is a difficult and time-con-
and were chosen as the target respondents of the control and
suming task. Therefore, utilizing a proper approach for
the experimental groups.
teaching and learning vocabulary is crucially needed. Tech-
The second tool for collecting the needed data was a
nology applications, especially CALL has lately activated some
teacher-designed vocabulary pretest that was created based
scholars to investigate the influences of CALL on vocabulary
on the participants’ textbook. This test included 20 objective
learning of EFL students. In the same vain, this study ex-
items. The reliability and the validity of the pretest were
amined the effects of CALL on Indonesian EFL learners’
tested. After making the test, it was examined by three
vocabulary learning, speaking skill, and anxiety. Accordingly,
English instructors for its face and content validity. In fact,
the following questions were posed in this research:
three English instructors read through the test and proposed
(i) RQ1: does using CALL affect Indonesian EFL some modifications concerning the clarity, simplicity, and
learners’ vocabulary learning positively? the representativeness. After that, the pretest was modified
(ii) RQ2: does using CALL affect Indonesian EFL and then piloted on the similar participants in another
learners’ speaking skill positively? institute whose textbook and English levels were similar to
the target participants. Eventually, the pretest was ready to
(iii) RQ3: does using CALL affect Indonesian EFL
administer to the respondents. Its reliability was measured
learners’ foreign language speaking anxiety
by using the KR-21 formula (r � 0.79).
positively?
The third tool that was applied in the current research
Based on the above-stated questions, the following null was a researcher-designed vocabulary posttest—the modi-
hypotheses were suggested: fied version of the pretest. It was given to assess the effect of
the treatment on the students’ vocabulary knowledge. All
(i) HO1: using CALL does not affect Indonesian EFL
features of the posttest were identical to the pretest. The only
learners’ vocabulary learning positively
difference was that the order of the items and the options was
(ii) HO2: using CALL does not affect Indonesian EFL changed to remove the potential recall of the pretest answers.
learners’ speaking skill positively The posttest was considered both reliable and valid because it
(iii) HO3: using CALL does not affect Indonesian EFL was the modified version of the pretest.
learners’ foreign language speaking anxiety The fourth tool utilized in this study was a questionnaire,
positively Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety Scale (FLCAS), made
6 Education Research International

by Horwitz, Horwitz, and Cope [26], was applied as the required the students to practice each conversation in pairs.
anxiety pretest of this study. There were 33 items in this five- After teaching all words and conversations, the posttests of
point Likert scale test. The validity of the FLCAS was verified vocabulary, speaking skill, and anxiety were given to the
by a group of English professors, and its reliability was participants to measure the impact of the instruction on their
computed by Cronbach Alpha (r � .86). It should be noted vocabulary, speaking, and anxiety.
that the FLCAS questionnaire was utilized twice in this The treatment lasted 17 sessions; the allocated time for
investigation; once as the pretest and once as the posttest. each session was 60 minutes. In the first session, the par-
The fifth tool that was employed in this research was a ticipants were homogenized; in sessions two to four, the
researcher-designed speaking pretest. The pretest contained pretests of vocabulary, speaking skill, and speaking anxiety
some items from the participants’ course book. The subjects were administered. In ten sessions, the treatment was
were required to speak about the subjects of the units about 2 practiced (teaching conversations and vocabularies through
to 3 minutes, and their speeches were recorded for the Skype). In the last three sessions, the posttests of vocabulary,
second-rater. The reliability of the speaking pretest was speaking skill, and speaking anxiety were administered.
confirmed by the conduct of the inter-rater reliability
(r � .83).
3.5. Data Analysis. The collected data were analyzed by
The sixth instrument was the speaking posttest. The
applying SPSS software, version 22. Firstly, descriptive sta-
topics of this test were selected from their course book. The
tistics were calculated. Secondly, independent samples and
difficulty levels of the topics were the same in the speaking
paired sample t-tests were utilized to determine the effects of
pre- and posttests. The posttest reliability was calculated by
the treatment on the students’ vocabulary knowledge,
using inter-rater reliability through using Pearson correla-
speaking skill, and anxiety. The independent samples t-test
tion analysis (r � .78). The validity of the pre- and posttests
was applied for comparing the performances of the control
was confirmed by three experienced English professors.
group with the experimental group both in the pretest and the
Three English professors checked the topics of the speaking
posttests. The paired sample t-test was run to measure if the
pre- and posttests and proposed some modifications con-
mean differences between two sets of observations were zero.
cerning the clarity and simplicity of the topics. After that,
two of the topics were changed and were rechecked by the
professors. Finally, they verified that the selected topics are 4. Results
suitable for the speaking tests.
Firstly, the Kolmogorov–Smirnov (K–S) test was utilized to
The researchers used the speaking checklist of Hughes as
inspect the quality of data normality before conducting any
the seventh instrument. They applied this checklist in order
data analysis. The obtained results depicted that the distribu-
to score the students’ speeches. The raters gave scores to the
tion of the data was normal because the sig. values were higher
students’ speeches according to the mentioned checklist.
than 0.05. Therefore, the researchers used paired samples and
independent sample t-tests to gain the final findings.
3.4. Procedure. In the first step, the OQPT was given to 103
Indonesian EFL students, and based on their performance in 4.1. Effects of CALL on EFL Learners’ Anxiety. To prove if
this test, 60 intermediate participants were chosen for the CALL had effects on Indonesian EFL students’ anxiety or
target population of the research. After choosing the target not, the FLCAS questionnaire was utilized once as the
respondents, they were randomly assigned to two groups: pretest and once as the posttest, and its collected data are
experimental and control. After that, all the respondents were analyzed in the following tables.
pretested by a vocabulary test, a speaking test, and an anxiety As data analysis in Table 1 shows, the mean score of the
test, and then the treatment was started. Regarding the experimental group is 70.56 and the mean score of the
treatment, the conversations and vocabularies of six lessons control group is 72.13 in the pretest of anxiety. It appears
from Family and Friends Book 6 were instructed to the re- that both groups had nearly similar anxiety scores prior to
spondents of the experimental group by using a CALL-based the instruction.
instruction. In fact, in each online session, one conversation According to the outcomes in the above table (Table 2),
and new words were sent to the experimental group via Skype sig. (0.50) is greater than 0.05; consequently, we can say that
application. The audio file of the conversation, the meanings, both experimental and control groups got the same anxiety
synonyms, and pronunciations of the vocabularies were sent scores before receiving the instruction. In other words, the
to the learners, and they were required to practice them. On participants of this study had the same level of speaking
the other side, the participants of the control group were anxiety before receiving the treatment.
deprived of the Internet and the Skype application, and they As depicted in Table 3, the mean score of the control
received a traditional conversation and vocabulary instruc- group is 75.23, and the mean score of the experimental group
tion. Indeed, the researcher held a face-to-face class for the is 112.60 in the posttest of anxiety. We can strongly claim
control group and attended the class personally and began that the experimental participants gained higher marks in
teaching the conversations and the vocabularies to this group. the posttest of anxiety.
The researcher provided synonyms and meanings for the According to the outcomes of independent samples t-
words and pronounced the new words for the participants. test displayed in Table 4, we can come to the conclusion that
Also, he played the audio files of the conversations and the experimental participants outflanked the control
Education Research International 7

Table 1: Descriptive statistics of the experimental and control groups in the anxiety pretests.
Group statistics
Groups N Means Std. deviations Std. error means
Control 30 72.13 11.61 2.12
Experimental 30 70.56 4.97 .90

Table 2: Inferential statistics of the experimental and control groups in the anxiety pretest.
Levene’s test for equality of variances t-test for equality of means
95% confidence
interval of the
F Sig. t Df Sig. (2-Tailed) Mean difference Std. error difference difference
Lower Upper
Equal variances assumed 0.62 0.43 0.66 58 0.50 1.53 2.30 −3.08 6.15
Equal variances not assumed 0.66 39.29 0.50 1.53 2.30 −3.13 6.19

Table 3: Descriptive statistics of the experimental and control groups in the anxiety posttests.
Groups N Means Std. deviations Std. error mean
Control 30 75.23 17.91 3.27
Scores
Experimental 30 112.60 43.75 7.98

participants in the anxiety posttest because sig. (0.00) is less conducted an independent samples t-test in the following table
than 0.05. This table shows that there are significant dif- to discover whether the differences between the vocabulary
ferences between the anxiety posttests of both groups in posttests of the groups were remarkable or not.
favour of the experimental group. As Table 9 depicts, the sig. (0.00) of the vocabulary
Table 5 displays that the differences between the anxiety posttest is less than 0.05; therefore, it can be said that the
pretest and posttest of the control group were not re- experimental participants did considerably better than the
markably significant since sig. (0.32) is higher than 0.05. control participants in the vocabulary posttest. According to
Based on the findings of this table, the differences between the outcomes, we can say that the CALL instruction helped
the anxiety pretest and posttest of the experimental par- Indonesian EFL learners develop their vocabulary learning.
ticipants were remarkable since sig. (0.00) is smaller than As shown in Table 10, sig. (.08) of the control group is
0.05. Based on the results, we can conclude that the treat- higher than 0.05; therefore, the differences between the
ment (CALL instruction) had positive impacts on Indone- speaking pretest and posttest of this group were considerable.
sian EFL learners’ speaking anxiety, implying that the CALL On the other side, the differences between the speaking pretest
instruction reduced their speaking anxiety. and posttest of the experimental participants were remarkably
considerable since sig. (0.00) is less than 0.05. Accordingly, we
can conclude that using CALL assisted Indonesian EFL stu-
4.2. Effects of CALL on EFL Learners’ Vocabulary Knowledge. dents to enhance their knowledge of vocabulary.
A vocabulary pretest and a posttest were administered to the
respondents to examine the influences of CALL on their
vocabulary development. The obtained data are analyzed in 4.3. Effects of CALL on EFL Learners’ Speaking Skill. To assess
the following tables. the impacts of CALL on Indonesian EFL learners’ speaking
Table 6 indicates that the mean score of the control group skill, a pretest and a posttest of speaking were given to the
is 12.56, and the mean score of the experimental group is respondents, and their collected data are analyzed in the
13.30 in the pretest of vocabulary. To see the differences following tables.
between the vocabulary pretest and posttest, an independent The descriptive statistics (e.g., means and standard de-
samples t-test was run in the following table. viations) of the control and the experimental groups are
An independent samples t-tests was run in Table 7 to find presented in the above table (Table 11). The control par-
out if the differences between the vocabulary pretest and ticipants’ mean score is 14.30, and the experimental par-
posttest of the participants were considerable or not. Based ticipants’ mean score is 14.16. It seems that both groups have
on the results, Sig. is 0.24 which is higher than 0.05, so there nearly similar mean scores in the speaking pretest.
were not a noticeable difference between the respondents’ To understand if there were any remarkable differences
vocabulary pretest and posttest. between the speaking pre-tests of both groups, an independent
Table 8 indicates that the means of the control participants samples t-test was applied in Table 12. Since sig. (0.76) is greater
and the experimental participants are 14.36 and 17.13, re- than 0.05, we can say that there were no significant differences
spectively. It appears that the experimental participants out- between the speaking pretests of the control and the experi-
flanked the control participants in the vocabulary posttest. We mental groups.
8 Education Research International

Table 4: Inferential statistics of the experimental and control groups in the anxiety posttests.
Levene’s test for equality of variances t-test for equality of means
95% confidence
interval of the
F Sig. t Df Sig. (2-Tailed) Mean difference Std. error difference difference
Lower Upper
Equal variances assumed 102.55 0.00 4.32 58 0.00 37.36 8.63 54.64 20.08
Equal variances not assumed 4.32 38.45 0.00 −37.36 8.63 54.83 19.89

Table 5: Paired samples statistics of the experimental and control groups in the anxiety pre and posttests.
Paired differences
95% confidence
interval of the t Df Sig. (2-Tailed)
Mean Std. deviations Std. error means differences
Lower Upper
Pair 1 Conpre-conpost 1.56 8.58 1.56 −4.77 1.63 1.00 29 0.32
Pair 2 Expre-expost 72.96 15.56 2.84 −78.77 −67.15 25.67 29 0.00

Table 6: Descriptive statistics of the experimental and control groups in the vocabulary preest.
Groups N Means Std. deviations Std. error means
Control 30 12.56 2.09 0.38
Experimental 30 13.30 2.68 0.48

Table 7: Inferential statistics of the experimental and control groups in the vocabulary pretest.
Levene’s
t-test for equality of means
test for equality of variances
95%
confidence
F Sig. t Df Sig. (2-tailed) Mean difference Std. error difference interval of the
difference
Lower Upper
Equal variances assumed 2.16 0.14 −1.18 58 0.24 −0.73 0.62 −1.97 0.51
Equal variances not assumed −1.18 54.81 0.24 −0.73 0.62 −1.97 0.51

Table 8: Descriptive statistics of the experimental and control groups in the vocabulary posttests.
Groups N Means Std. deviations Std. error means
Control 30 14.36 3.16 0.57
Experimental 30 17.13 2.44 0.44

Table 9: Inferential statistics of the experimental and control groups in the vocabulary post-tests.
Levene’s test for equality of variances t-test for equality of means
95% confidence
interval of the
F Sig. t Df Sig. (2-tailed) Mean difference Std. error difference difference
Lower Upper
Equal variances assumed 1.97 0.16 3.78 58 0.00 −2.76 0.730 −4.22 −1.30
Equal variances not assumed 3.78 54.51 0.00 −2.76 0.73 −4.23 −1.30
Education Research International 9

Table 10: Paired samples statistics of the experimental and control groups in the vocabulary pre- and posttests.
Paired differences
95% confidence
interval of the t Df Sig. (2-tailed)
Mean Std. deviation Std. error mean difference
Lower Upper
Pair 1 Conpre-compost −0.73 2.24 0.40 −1.57 0.10 1.79 29 0.08
Pair 2 Expre-expost −4.13 3.74 0.68 −5.53 −2.73 6.04 29 0.00

Table 11: Descriptive statistics of the experimental and control groups in the speaking pre-tests.
Groups N Mean Std. deviation Std. error mean
Control 30 14.30 1.68 .30
Experimental 30 14.16 1.78 .32

Table 12: Inferential statistics of the experimental and control groups in the speaking pretests.
Levene’s test for equality of
t-test for equality of means
variances
95%
confidence
F Sig. T Df Sig. (2-tailed) Mean difference Std. error difference interval of the
difference
Lower Upper
Equal variances assumed 0.12 0.72 0.29 58 0.76 0.13 0.44 −0.76 1.02
Scores
Equal variances not assumed 0.29 570.81 0.76 0.13 0.44 −0.76 1.02

In Table 13, the descriptive statistics of the speaking their vocabulary and speaking posttests compared to the
posttests of the control and the experimental are depicted. control group. The outcomes statistically indicated that the
The mean scores of the control and the experimental groups experimental participants outflanked the control partici-
are 15.13 and 18.43, respectively. According to this table, we pants in the anxiety posttest. Therefore, the research null
can say that the experimental participants outflanked the hypotheses are all rejected.
control participants in the speaking posttest. The outcomes of this study are supported by Mahmoudi
An independent samples t-test was run in Table 14 to [48] who investigated the effects of online instruction by
find out if there were any noticeable differences between the using smartphones on EFL students’ grammatical accuracy
speaking posttests of both groups. Since sig. (0.00) is smaller development. The outcomes showed that there was a con-
than 0.05, it can be said that there were significant differ- siderable difference between the experimental and the
ences between the speaking posttests of both groups in control participants and online instruction developed the
favour of the experimental group. grammar knowledge of the experimental group. Further-
The researchers applied a paired samples t-test in Ta- more, the outcomes of this research confirm the findings of
ble 15 for comparing the speaking pretest and the posttest of Zarei and Asadi Amani [47] who inspected the impacts of
the control group. The results of this test indicate that sig. different online strategies (word reference, media, and vo-
(0.11) is higher than 0.05; consequently, we can say that the cabulary games) on reading skill and vocabulary knowledge
differences between the speaking pre- and posttests of the of EFL learners. The outcomes of their research depicted that
control group were not considerable. The results of the the online groups outflanked the conventional groups after
second paired samples t-test reveal that sig. (0.00) is less than the intervention.
0.05; therefore, it can be claimed that there was a remarkable The findings of this investigation are in agreement with
difference between the speaking pretest and the posttest of Alipour who inspected the impacts of online and blended
the experimental participants. instructions on enhancing vocabulary learning among Ira-
nian intermediate EFL students. The results indicated both
5. Discussion of the Study online and blended learning groups outflanked the control
group. Besides, the findings of our research are advocated by
To answer the questions of the research, the researchers used Alahmadi [2] who surveyed the impact of CALL on
paired samples t-test and independent samples t-test. The grammar acquisition of Saudi EFL students and concluded
results showed that the experimental students who received that the empirical group substantially outperformed the
the instruction through CALL had better performances in control group in the grammar posttest.
10 Education Research International

Table 13: Descriptive statistics of the experimental and control groups in the speaking posttests.
Groups N Means Std. deviations Std. error means
Control 30 15.13 2.08 .37
Experimental 30 18.43 1.71 .31

Table 14: Inferential statistics of the experimental and control groups in the speaking posttests.
Levene’s
test for
t-test for equality of means
equality of
variances
95%
confidence
F Sig. t Df Sig. (2-tailed) Mean difference Std. error difference interval of the
difference
Lower Upper
Equal variances assumed 1.28 .26 −6.70 58 0.00 −3.30 0.49 −4.28 −2.31
Equal variances not assumed −6.70 55.97 0.00 −3.30 0.49 −4.28 −2.31

Table 15: Paired samples statistics of the experimental and control groups in the speaking pre- and posttests.
Paired differences
95% confidence
interval of the t Df Sig. (2-tailed)
Mean Std. deviation Std. error mean difference
Lower Upper
Pair 1 Conpre-conpost −.83 1.28 0.23 −1.31 −.35 3.54 29 0.11
Pair 2 Expre-expost −4.26 2.50 0.45 −5.20 −3.33 9.33 29 0.00

The findings of the present research are in agreement more commonplace in situations from elementary schools to
with Çakmak et al. [49], who investigated the effect of using a high schools and into postsecondary educations. Online
CALL-enhanced L2 vocabulary learning software program instruction is attractive and effective for different groups of
on the L2 vocabulary enhancement of students. Their the students where conventional instructions are deficient or
findings depicted that the experimental group had better incapable to meet their needs. The demand for online in-
performances than the control group in the vocabulary struction is stemmed from a push “to provide quality ed-
posttest. Furthermore, our results are congruent with ucation to all students, regardless of location and time”
Enayati and Pourhosein Gilakjani [13] who inspected the (Chaney [55], p. 21).
effects of CALL on Iranian intermediate students’ vocabu- Online instruction is a student-centered teaching
lary knowledge. Their outcomes of the investigation depicted method which can use online tools and resources to share
that the respondents of the experimental group outflanked information outside of the class regardless of constraints of
the control group, and they presented a positive attitude time and place among learners. This method mixes self-
toward CALL. study with asynchronous interaction to improve learning,
The outcomes of the current investigation are supported and it can be applied to facilitate learning in conventional
by Harasim’s [52] online collaborative learning theory that on-campus educations, distance educations, and continuing
confirmed the advantages of applying the Internet and educations. Online instruction permits learners to have
online instruction in the teaching and learning process. more freedom to perform their learning process without the
Based on this theory, learners can solve their difficulties time and space limitations (Ge, [56]). The use of online
cooperatively, and this cooperation can result in English education can be attractive for the people, it can involve
learning improvement. Also, our findings are advocated by them in learning outside of the class context, it can foster the
connectivism theory proposed by Siemens [53] asserting that cooperative learning among the students, it can encourage
students learn when they use online instruction and connect self-study among the people, and it can boost the self-
with their pairs and classmates. confidence of the students. The benefits mentioned for the
The development of Indonesian EFL students in the online instruction can be the reasons why the experimental
posttests of vocabulary, speaking, and anxiety can be as a participants gained better scores in their posttests com-
result of online instruction since online learning can be paring to the control participants. In other words, the ad-
attractive for EFL learners. As Gilbert [54] stated, online vantages reported for the online instruction can be the
instruction is appealing to many students and is getting reasons for the findings obtained in this study.
Education Research International 11

The other reason for the obtaining findings in this re- for the students to learn the lessons at their own speed. In
search can be that the online instruction allows the students addition, the outcomes of this research can persuade the
to learn at a place and a time that is congruent with their material designers to integrate online instructions into EFL
learning needs. Consequently, the speaking anxiety of the syllabuses.
students can be reduced. Online tools such as online English There were some drawbacks in this research. One of
language learning websites [57], electronic dictionaries [58], them was the relatively small number of the subjects that was
chatting and e-mail messaging programs, online games, due to the problem of accessibility of students. Therefore, the
presentation software, and online media [59] may be ef- representativeness of the participants must be regarded
fective learning tools that can facilitate learning by creating a carefully. Further studies can include more participants to
more motivating and less anxiety-inducing environment in get richer findings. This research was conducted in a private
which learners focus on new words and their contextual use. language institute; other studies need to be done among high
school and university students. This research applied pre-
6. Conclusions and Implications and posttests to gather its data; next, studies are strongly
offered to use other tools such as interviews and attitude
According to the outcomes obtained in this investigation, we questionaries to collect more exact data about the effec-
can conclude that applying online education as a branch of tiveness of CALL and online instruction. Future investiga-
CALL can bring about positive effects on Indonesian EFL tions can expand the treatment time and investigate the
students’ vocabulary learning, speaking skill, and speaking impacts of the CALL instruction on different skills and
anxiety. We can say that online instruction is a vital in- subskills of English language in different contexts.
strument that needs to be applied to supplement the EFL
face-to-face instruction. It encompasses different tasks and
Data Availability
resources that, if applied by the learners and controlled by
the teachers, it can improve the students’ language com- The data that support the findings of this study are available
petencies. As the universe develops, we should use tech- from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
nology to synchronize ourselves with it. In addition, it can be
concluded that diverse online instruments can have sub-
stantial impacts on the learning of the various aspects of Conflicts of Interest
language. Since all Indonesian schools and institutes are not The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
equipped with the Internet, computers, and other online
tools and the speed of the net is low in some places and some
students do not access to smartphones, tablets, and com- References
puter, a combination of online learning and face-to-face
[1] A. Hashemifardnia, S. Shafiee, F. Rahimi Esfahani, and
instruction is offered in Indonesian contexts.
M. Sepehri, “Effects of massive open online course (MOOC)
The findings of this research can help language learners on Iranian EFL learners’ speaking complexity, accuracy, and
to study anytime and anywhere. Conventionally, students fluency,” Computer-Assisted Language Learning Electronic
have to attend a class at a certain time and in a fixed place. Journal (CALL-EJ), vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 56–79, 2021.
But, if these places have the Internet and computers, stu- [2] N. S. Alahmadi, “The impact of computer-assisted language
dents can study and learn the same materials wherever they learning (CALL) on grammar acquisition by Saudi learners,”
are. Students can even study outside of schools if their International Journal of Language and Linguistics, vol. 6, no. 4,
personal computers have a connection to the system or pp. 151–158, 2019.
network in their schools. By using CALL, many funny games [3] G. Davies, “ICT and modern foreign languages: learning
and communicative activities are provided for the students opportunities and training needs,” IJES, vol. 2, no. l, pp. 1–18,
2002.
which can decrease the learning stress and anxiety.
[4] H. Nachoua, “Computer-assisted language learning for im-
The implications of this research can improve the proving students’ listening skill,” Procedia - Social and Be-
communication between instructors and people. Contrary to havioral Sciences, vol. 69, pp. 1150–1159, 2012.
the traditional second language classrooms, by online in- [5] A. T. Dina and S.-I. Ciornei, “The advantages and disad-
struction, people can study more independently, leaving for vantages of computer assisted language learning and teaching
the instructors more time to focus their attention on those for foreign languages,” Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sci-
elements of foreign language teaching that are still difficult ences, vol. 76, pp. 248–252, 2013.
or impossible by the computers, such as pronunciation, [6] K. W. Lee, “English teachers’ barriers to the use of computer-
work on spoken dialogues, and teaching for essay writing assisted language learning,” Internet TESOL Journal, vol. 6,
and presentations [60]. Such individualized education can no. 12, pp. 56–73, 2000.
develop learners’ active learning, enhance learning with [7] M. Ateyah Al-Hnifat, R. Rashid, and O. Al-Smadi, “Classroom
practices to decrease speaking anxiety among Saudi EFL.
comprehension, and permit learners to observe their
students: a study from learners’ perspective,” Trends in Social
progresses themselves. Sciences (TSS), vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 15–27, 2020.
The outcomes of this research can encourage English [8] M. Liu and J. Jackson, “An exploration of Chinese EFL
teachers to integrate technological-based methods into their learners’ unwillingness to communicate and foreign language
classrooms in order to gain better educational achievements. anxiety,” The Modern Language Journal, vol. 92, no. 1,
By supplying lectures online, instructors can pave the way pp. 71–86, 2008.
12 Education Research International

[9] C. D. Nguyen and F. Boers, “The effect of content retelling on [28] D. J. Young, “Creating a low-anxiety classroom environment:
vocabulary uptake from a TED talk,” Tesol Quarterly, vol. 53, what does language anxiety research suggest?” The Modern
no. 1, pp. 5–29, 2019. Language Journal, vol. 75, pp. 426–439, 1992.
[10] E. Peters and S. Webb, “Incidental vocabulary acquisition [29] H. Soodmand Afshar and M. Rahimi, “Reflective thinking,
through viewing L2 television and factors that affect learning,” emotional intelligence, and speaking ability of EFL learners: is
Studies in Second Language Acquisition, vol. 40, no. 3, there a relation?” Thinking Skills and Creativity, vol. 19,
pp. 551–577, 2018. pp. 97–111, 2016.
[11] F. Teng, “Vocabulary learning through videos: captions, ad- [30] N. Ahmed, Z. H. Pathan, and F. S. Khan, “Exploring the
vance-organizer strategy, and their combination,” Computer causes of English language speaking anxiety among post-
Assisted Language Learning, vol. 4, pp. 1–33, 2020. graduate students of university of Balochistan, Pakistan,”
[12] I. Miralpeix and C. Muñoz, “Receptive vocabulary size and its International Journal of English Linguistics, vol. 7, no. 2,
relationship to EFL language skills,” International Review of pp. 99–105, 2017.
Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, vol. 56, no. 1, [31] H. Khatoony and L. Rahmani, “Difficulties and weaknesses of
pp. 1–24, 2018. speaking skill among Iranian EFL learners: a review article of
[13] F. Enayati and A. Pourhosein Gilakjani, “The impact of com- speaking obstacles in applied linguistic students,” Interna-
puter assisted language learning (CALL) on improving inter- tional Journal of Language, Literature, Culture and History
mediate EFL Learners†vocabulary learning,” International Studies, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 59–69, 2020.
Journal of language Education, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 96–112, 2020. [32] A. Parmawati, “Using analytic teams’ technique to improve
[14] R. Kitajima, “The effect of instructional conditions on stu- students’ speaking skill,” Edulitics (Education, Literature, and
dents’ vocabulary retention,” Foreign Language Annals, Linguistics) Journal, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 21–25, 2018.
vol. 34, no. 5, pp. 470–482, 2001. [33] D. Sartika, “Teaching speaking using the information GAP
[15] M. Prensky, Digital Game-Based Learning, McGraw-Hill, technique,” English Education Journal, vol. 7, no. 3,
New York, NY, USA, 2000. pp. 273–285, 2016.
[16] S. Vahdat and M. Eidipour, “Adopting CALL to improve [34] A. Asysyifa, A. Handayani, and S. Rizkiani, “Students’
listening comprehension of Iranian junior high school stu- speaking anxiety in EFL classroom,” Indonesian EFL Journal,
dents,” Theory and Practice in Language Studies, vol. 6, no. 8, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 581–587, 2019.
[35] G. Ellis and B. Sinclair, Learning to Learn English Learner’s
pp. 1609–1617, 2016.
Book: A Course in Learner Training, Cambridge University
[17] N. Bani Hani, “Benefits and barriers of computer assisted
Press, Cambridge, UK, 1989.
language learning and teaching in the Arab world: Jordan as a
[36] A. S. Hornby, S. Wehmeier, and M. Ashby, Niu Jin Xian Dai
model,” Theory and Practice in Language Studies, vol. 4, no. 8,
Gao Ji Yin Han Shuang Jie Ci Dian: Oxford Advanced
pp. 1609–1615, 2014.
Learner’s English-Chinese Dictionary, Oxford University
[18] G. Bas, “Evaluation of DynED courses used in elementary
Press, Oxford, UK, 2005.
schools from the views of teachers in Turkey,” Journal of
[37] N. Ghanbari, M. Shamsoddini, and A. Radmehr, “The effect of
Language and Linguistic Studies, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 14–39, 2010.
CALL on vocabulary learning and reading comprehension of
[19] S. Al-Kahtani and S. Al-Haider, “Factors affecting the use of
Iranian EFL learners,” IOSR Journal of Research & Method in
CALL by EFL female faculty members in Saudi higher edu-
Education, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 95–103, 2015.
cation: current status,” The JALT CALL Journal, vol. 6, no. 3, [38] D. Nunan, Second Language Teaching and Learning, Heinle
pp. 153–170, 2010. and Heinle Publishers, Boston, MA, USA, 1999.
[20] M. Levy, Computer Assisted Language Learning: Context and [39] A. Tozcu and J. Coady, “Successful learning of frequent vo-
Conceptualization, Clarendon Press, Oxford, UK, 1997. cabulary through CALL also benefits reading comprehension
[21] N. Bani Hani, Designing an English Computerized Instruc- and speed,” Computer Assisted Language Learning, vol. 17,
tional Program for Jordanian Sixth Grade Students and no. 5, pp. 473–495, 2004.
Measuring its Effect on Their Achievement, Unpublished [40] J. ., C. Richards and W. ., A. Renandya, Methodology in
Doctoral Dissertation, Yarmouk University, Irbid, Jordan, Language Teaching, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge,
2009. UK, 2002.
[22] H. Dulay and M. Burt, Viewpoints on English as a Second [41] T. Cobb, “Breadth and depth of lexical acquisition with hands-
Language, Regents, New York, NY, USA, 1977. on concordancing,” Computer Assisted Language Learning,
[23] S. Krashen, The Input Hypothesis, Longman, London, UK, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 345–360, 1999.
1985. [42] M. H. Ko and J. Goranson, “Technology-assisted vocabulary
[24] R. C. Gardner and P. D. MacIntyre, “A student’s contributions learning and student learning outcomes: a case study,”
to second-language learning. Part II: affective variables,” Multimedia- Assisted Language Learning, vol. 17, no. 1,
Language Teaching, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 1–11, 1993. pp. 11–33, 2014.
[25] V. Ramamuruthy, “The effects of task-based approach on [43] I. S. P. Nation, Teaching Vocabulary: Strategies and Tech-
speaking anxiety among ESL low proficiency diploma stu- niques, Heinle Cengage Learning, Boston, MA, USA, 2008,
dents,” Universal Journal of Educational Research, vol. 7, no. 6, https://trove.nla.gov.au/version/4479%209110 Accessed.
pp. 1363–1375, 2019. [44] S. Thornbury, “How words are learned?,” in How to Teach
[26] E. K. Horwitz, M. B. Horwitz, and J. Cope, “Foreign language Vocabulary, J. Harmer, Ed., pp. 13–31, Pearson Education,
classroom anxiety,” The Modern Language Journal, vol. 70, Malaysia, 2002.
no. 2, pp. 125–132, 1986. [45] S. Pahlavanpoorfard and A. Soori, “The impact of using
[27] Z. Dörnyei, The Psychology of the Language Learner: Indi- computer software on vocabulary learning of Iranian EFL
vidual Differences in Second Language Acquisition, Lawrence university students,” International Journal of Applied Lin-
Erlbaum Associates Publishers, Mahwah, NJ, USA, 2005. guistics and English Literature, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 23–28, 2014.
Education Research International 13

[46] S. S. Mousavi and A. Nemati, “A comparative study of the

Iranian EFL learners’ vocabulary learning through two dif-
ferent formats: paper and pencil vs. software,” Journal of
Studies in Learning and Teaching English, vol. 6, no. 1,
pp. 113–131, 2017.
[47] A. Zarei and M. Asadi Amani, “The effect of online learning
tools on L2 reading comprehension and vocabulary learning,”
Journal of Teaching Language Skills, vol. 37, no. 3, pp. 211–238,
2018.
[48] M. Mahmoudi, “The effect of online learning on grammatical
accuracy among EFL upper-intermediate learners,” Journal of
Language Teaching and Research, vol. 11, no. 6, pp. 1011–1016,
2020.
[49] F. Çakmak, E. Namaziandost, and T. Kumar, “CALL-en-
hanced L2 vocabulary learning: using spaced exposure
through CALL to enhance L2 vocabulary retention,” Edu-
cational Research International, vol. 2021, pp. 1–8, Article ID
5848525, 2021.
[50] J. d. D. Martı́nez Agudo, “Which instructional programme
(EFL or CLIL) results in better oral communicative compe-
tence? Updated empirical evidence from a monolingual
context,” Linguistics and Education, vol. 51, pp. 69–78, 2019.
[51] L. Ding, E. Er, and M. Orey, “An exploratory study of student
engagement in gamified online discussions,” Computers &
Education, vol. 120, pp. 213–226, 2018.
[52] L. Harasim, Learning Theory and Online Technologies,
Routledge/Taylor and Francis, New York, NY, USA, 2012.
[53] Siemens, Connectivism: A Learning Theory for the Digital Age,
Siemens, Munich, Germany, 2004, http://www.elearnspace.
org/Articles/connectivism.htm Paper retrieved from.
[54] B. Gilbert, “Online learning revealing the benefits and chal-
lenges,” International Journal of Educational Research, vol. 3,
no. 5, pp. 29–38, 2015.
[55] E. G. Chaney, “Web-based instruction in a rural high school: a
collaborative inquiry into its effectiveness and desirability,”
NASSP Bulletin, vol. 85, no. 628, pp. 20–35, 2010.
[56] Z.-g. Ge, “Exploring e-learners’ perceptions of net-based peer-
reviewed English writing,” International Journal of Computer-
Supported Collaborative Learning, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 75–91,
2011.
[57] W. V. Wu, L. L. Yen, and M. Marek, “Using online EFL
interaction to increase confidence, motivation, and ability,”
Educational Technology & Society, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 118–129,
2011.
[58] A. Zarei and P. Mahmoodzadeh, “The effect of multimedia
glosses on L2 reading comprehension and vocabulary pro-
duction,” Journal of English Language and Literature, vol. 1,
no. 1, pp. 1–7, 2014.
[59] J. Wood, “Can software support children’s vocabulary de-
velopment?” Language, Learning and Technology, vol. 5, no. 1,
pp. 166–201, 2001.
[60] A. F. AbuSeileek, “Computer-assisted language learning:
merits and demerits,” Language in India, vol. 12, no. 4,
pp. 23–36, 2012.