Gender difference in CALL Programs for English as a second Language Acquisition - Essay Example

?Gender Difference in CALL Programs for English as a Second Language Acquisition: Critique I: Summary Background: The natural differences between individuals is not limited to their personality, biological distinctions, physiological dissimilarities and differing characters but also involve their abilities, learning powers, inborn skills and communication patterns. There has been an increasing debate about gender differences and their effects on language use and learning. Lai and Kuo conducted this research in order to further evaluate the relationship between Language learning and gender difference. Evidences have been found to affirm that students’ gender affect their learning skills and behaviors. Lai and Kuo have struggled to further prove this claim by evaluating the learning outcomes of both male and female counterparts making use of CALL programmes. 2. Aim: The study is conducted to identify the effects of language learning through CALL programs on gender basis. Many researches provide evidence that gender does affect the learning process. The basic distinction of this research paper is the evaluation of English learning pace and attributes in second language acquisition using CALL programs. Which means that this study also incorporates the evaluation of computer based learning on gender basis. The study also aims to identify the differences in the attitudes of male and female students towards learning, their differing views about learning efficacy, their differing levels of learning anxiety in learning language via CALL programs and the different learning barriers they identified. 3. Methodology: Proper methodology is mandatory to produce valid results. Lai and Kuo used both quantitative and qualitative techniques to produce reliable results. To develop initial understanding, Lai and Kuo, used different studies conducted by various researchers. They produced proper setting and created an appropriate understanding of the importance given to this area of research. The quantitative data was collected from a sample of 200 students of which 166 were female and the rest of 34 were male. The participants were given a questionnaire to gather data about EFL & CALL. The qualitative data was collected by interviewing 10 participants including 5 males and 5 females. The qualitative data aimed to identify the key challenges that each gender faces in learning language through CALL programs. 4. Results: The results of this research were divided into 4 parts. The first part was about the learning attitudes of male and female participants using Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL) Programs. A fairly large number of male participants provided an affirmative result on the learning processes of language via CALL programs. In contrast to 91.1 percent males, only 42.7% females showed a positive result on using computer based learning for English language. Results on learning efficacy were also in line with this trend. Only 53.6 percent females believed that it may be helpful to increase learning efficacy whereas, 88.2 percent male participants believed that CALL programs are helpful in increasing the learning efficacy. A different result was found when the participants were asked about the learning techniques used in CALL programs. Both groups found it interesting to use computers in learning Language and a smaller population marked CALL programs as ‘boring’. In addition, majority believed that CALL programs may be more beneficial to enhance reading, writing and listening skills but less helpful in increasing speaking power. Learning anxiety was lesser in male (14.2%) counterparts on using computer as a learning tool as compared to female participants (19.2%). Learning barriers for female students was the difficulty of using the CALL programs’ software, whereas, the only big hurdle for the male participants was the availability of learning software due to expensive nature of new technologies. 5. Interpretation of Data: The results obtained by the authors were as expected if compared with other studies conducted earlier. The data is analyzed by simple calculation of percentages and no complex techniques are used. The explanation of the results is enough to provide a basic understanding of the research questions. II: Comments and Analysis The article provides a clear background of the relationship between Gender differences and language learning. This is a concise research which can help researchers continue their evaluation on the use of CALL programs as a learning tool and its effects on these two biologically and socially different groups (i.e. males and females). Design of the research investigation: The research design used is efficient but leaves room for improvement. The background, as set by the authors, provides great evidences on proving computer as a useful tool for language learners. However, it lacks providing evidence on the basis of explaining the relationship between computers based learning programs and gender differences. The methodology used is effective if other studies are considered. The idea of using both qualitative and quantitative data could have been more useful if it was implemented appropriately. The results obtained are similar to many other researches but cannot be held reliable as only 200 participants were observed. If we consider the male participants, results from only 34 participants were analyzed. A more precise picture of the issues raised can be viewed if a larger population is observed. The data is analyzed using the normal percentages and no correlations are calculated. A more accurate relationship could be observed using correlation and regression models. Theoretical Groundings: The qualitative data belongs to only 10 participants which clearly do not provide reliable information. The results obtained from smaller population cannot be relied upon if a larger population or national or international are under consideration. There has to be a greater evidence to take steps to start, promote or improve policies and programs to help English learners. Clarity: The article appears to be a good struggle and is easy to read and understand but it lacks logics and reliable data. The language used by the authors is clear and comprehensible but leaves space for other researchers to follow the track of this paper and produce more reliable results. In short, it can be said that this paper can be taken as a starting point for a research but not a complete and comprehensive piece of information. Measurement and Analysis: The explanation of results is another aspect which requires a closer look. The authors explained the results in an unbalanced manner. The explanations about the quantitative research do not involve reasoning and facts that were involved. The background information about participants and their social, economic and cultural backgrounds are not explained. The information about these attributes of participants can help understanding the reasons of barriers they faced while learning language via computers. Future Issues: When discussing technology it is important to consider the financial and educational backgrounds of people to identify the reasons of the poor learning level and speed. The article lacks this important information about the participants. For instance, the financial and educational backgrounds may have a greater impact on the learning through computers and other latest technologies. The results must have these aspects in view. Limitations: It is not clear if the population under consideration is comparable in terms of social, financial, educational and maturity. These things are important and must be considered as learning, speaking and behavioral skills of people are greatly dependent on these factors. As far as correlation between language learning and the two groups is considered, it is important to consider the unbalanced quantities of male and female participants used. The results of the qualitative data provided lack in clarity about the issues defined. The barriers that were stated under this section did not incorporate many issues that might be responsible for the poor learning and understanding of language through computer assisted language learning programs. The barriers that were enlightened required more comprehensive explanation. The barriers should have been discussed in more depth. The lack of explanation about barriers leaves many questions unanswered for the reader. There are many major points that are stated but not explained properly. This article provides information but lacks explanation. The reader may get a plenty of information but may not be able to understand it completely due to lack of explanation. Contributions: The article is useful for any reader who does not have information about the issue. It provides sufficient information about CALL programs and their use. The gender differences are explained and their learning abilities are also discussed. The article requires no prior knowledge to understand the theme of the paper. However, it leaves enough space to research on the issues raised. The language used is easy and interesting. The formation of the paper starts from the general understanding and motivates the reader to read till the end. The article raises many points in each step and helps motivating the reader. The article is concise and do not distract its discussions from the original aim at any point. It can be admired for its relevance to the topic. The previous studies are used properly to give meaning to the discussion. The proper use of references makes it more credible and reliable. The information gathered from other research papers make it more reliable in terms of the background information. This article is a good source of information for academic researchers, learners and others as it gives all the necessary information about the topic. My personal view about this article is quite satisfactory as for the students it provides sufficient information and uses appropriate language to develop awareness about the topic. It is a well structured paper that does not jumble up the many facts and abundant information revealed in it. For students, it is excellent as it is concise and does not require more time to acquire heaps of information provided by the authors. It is not lengthy and hence students can easily read the whole article without distracting their thoughts and getting bored. In addition, the easy language is also a positive factor to develop understanding among students. The analysis of data without complex techniques provides sufficient and clear results for the students and learners. III: Discussion and Conclusion The discussions about gender and language are increasingly becoming popular. The article in consideration is also an attempt to step forward with a topic related to this area. This article is easily understandable and provides necessary information about the topic. It produces evidence that women tend to perceive computer based language learning more complicated than men. The study provides evidence that female face these complications because of lack of technological information. Men members are more motivated to learn and use new technologies and have interest in it. However, the results of this paper are not found to be sufficiently reliable because of the smaller sample population observed. The data analysis tools used were simple mathematical calculation and do not provide any evidence about the correlation between two variables. The study could be improved by using a wider research population and separate identification of the relationship between gender and language learning and gender and computer use. In conclusion, it can be said that the research paper looks like an excellent source of information in the first glance but the in depth analysis reveals some major weaknesses that are required to be considered before relying on the results. Moreover, the paper is an excellent source for the researchers to carry out more researches to completely understand the link between language learning and gender difference. Bibliography: Lai, C.-C., & Kuo, M.-M. (January 01, 2007). Gender Difference in CALL Programs for English as a Second Language Acquisition. Technology and Teacher Education Annual, 5, 2833-2836. Read More