JAIST Repository
https://dspace.jaist.ac.jp/

Title

第二言語の同時習得のための一人二役型協調学習手法に関する研究

Author(s)BUI, HOANG ANH BA

CitationIssue Date2022-03

Type

Thesis or Dissertation

Text version

ETD

URL

http://hdl.handle.net/10119/17786

RightsDescription

Supervisor:西本一志

Japan Advanced Institute of Science and Technology

Doctoral Dissertation

Dual-role Collaborative Learning Model for
Simultaneous Second Language Acquisition and
Its Application to Speaking Skill Acquisition

BUI BA HOANG ANH

Supervisor: Professor Kazushi Nishimoto

School of Knowledge Science
Japan Advanced Institute of Science and Technology

Jan 2022

Abstract
It is becoming increasingly obvious that knowing more than one language isbeneficial. Some conventional ways of learning languages have been applied such asattending classes, group discussion and learning, self-study. Apparently, there is not themost appropriate method, people learn in different ways at different paces, and the mosteffective way may involve not one but a mixture of different techniques. Therefore,
people tend to find chance to practice speaking second language with native speakers
through informal communication to better improve their speaking skills. However, it is
not always easy to get an opportunity of speaking with native speakers face-to-face;
using some on-line communication systems is a promised way. The era of globalization
opens up solid collaborations between Japan and oversea corporations or entrepreneurs.
Japanese people and foreigners visiting Japan should mutually give and take their
linguistic knowledge and skills, and we should create opportunities for interactions.
However, such bidirectional interactions are seldom carried out; learning (teaching)language is usually carried out in a unidirectional manner so far. In this dissertation, I
would like to propose a theoretical model of dual-role collaborative learning to enhancesimultaneous acquisition of speaking skill of second language learners. Specifically,learners will play two roles in the conversation: facilitators in their first language andreceivers in their second language. This model cannot be easily achieved with normal
face-to-face communication. Some supporting features need to be provided followed
by a Computer-supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) we created named Bitak. It
is a video chat system to facilitate strict turn-taking dual-lingual communication for
language speaking practice. From the experiment result analysis, it was demonstrated
that simultaneous acquisition of speaking skill of two different languages can beachieved by employing dual-lingual communication. Furthermore, although it was not

1

supported by the quantitative analyses results based on the rubric scores, the qualitative
results based on the interview and the transcriptions supported that CSCL BiTak isuseful to carry out dual-role communication as a method of the second language
learning. By using BiTak, all of the subjects gradually had sense of learning, not simply
gossiping on the account of the proposed features of BiTak as well as realizing theirrole of facilitators and receivers; such things have not been observed in the cases of thegroups without BiTak. Thus, these results proved that dual-role collaborative learningis effective in simultaneous second language acquisition.
Keywords: Dual-role Collaborative Learning, Simultaneous Second Language
Acquisition, Speaking skill, Dual-lingual Communication, Strict Turn-taking

2

Table of Contents
ABSTRACT

1TABLE OF CONTENTS

3

LISTS OF FIGURES

6
CHAPTER 1:

INTRODUCTION

7

1.1

PROLOGUE

71.2

BACKGROUND

9

1.2.1

Dual-lingual Communication

12

1.2.2

Strict Turn-taking

13

1.2.3

Assessment of Second Language Speaking Proficiency

15

1.3

OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

16

1.4

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

16

1.5

ORGANIZATION OF THE STUDY17

CHAPTER 2: RELATED
WORKS

18

2.1

SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION RESEARCH

18

2.2

COLLABORATIVE LEARNING

20

2.3

COMPUTER SUPPORTED COLLABORATIVE LEARNING (CSCL)

22

2.4

COMPUTER SUPPORTED COLLABORATIVE LEARNING IN SECOND LANGUAGEACQUISITION

23

2.5

29

REMAINED PROBLEMS AND POSITIONING OF MY STUDY

3

CHAPTER 3: DUAL-ROLE COLLABORATIVE LEARNING
MODEL

31
CHAPTER 4: PROPOSEDSYSTEM

35

4.1

INTRODUCTION

35

4.2

STRICT TURN-TAKING FUNCTION

40

4.3

TEXT CHAT FUNCTION RELATED TO EACH RECORDED UTTERANCE

40

CHAPTER 5: EXPERIMENT AND RESULTANALYSIS

42

5.1

EXPERIMENT PROCEDURE

42

5.2

RESULT ANALYSIS

46

5.3

5.2.1

Result of Rubric

46

5.2.2

Results from individual semi-structured interviews

54

5.2.3

Analysis of the transcript

62

DISCUSSION

68

CHAPTER 6: VALIDITY OF DUAL-ROLE COLLABORATIVE LEARNING
MODEL

71
CHAPTER 7: CONCLUSION AND FUTURE

WORKS

75

7.1

CONCLUSION

75

7.2

FUTURE WORKS76

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT78

REFERENCE

80

4

PUBLICATION LIST93

APPENDIX

95

5

Lists of figures
Figure 1: Dual-lingual communication concept in my study
Figure 2: Example of Instant Annotation
Figure 3: The design of Xpress
Figure 4: Dual-role Collaborative Learning Model
Figure 5: ChaTel system
Figure 6: The homepage of BiTak
Figure 7: The user interface of BiTak
Figure 8: Filters function
Figure 9: An example of recording link
Figure 10: Rubric for Testing Speaking Skill
Figure 11: Questions in the Rubric Evaluation Interview
Figure 12: Scores of participants in Relevance & Content
Figure 13: Scores of participants in Vocabulary & Word Choice
Figure 14: Scores of participants in Fluency
Figure 15: Scores of participants in Interview
Figure 16: The improvement difference between pre-experiment and post-experimentscores in Relevance & Content
Figure 17: The improvement difference between pre-experiment and post-experimentscores in Fluency
Figure 18: The improvement difference between pre-experiment and post-experimentscores in Vocabulary & Word Choice
Figure 19: The improvement difference between pre-experiment and post-experimentscores in Interview
Figure 20: An example of correcting mistakes by typing in the side chat bar
Figure 21: Dual-role Collaborative Learning Model in Writing Practice
Figure 22: Dual-role Collaborative Learning Model in Reading Practice
Figure 23: Dual-role Collaborative Learning Model in Listening Practice6

Chapter 1: Introduction
1.1 Prologue
As we are living in a hyper-connected and fast-paced world, it is becoming
increasingly obvious that knowing more than one language is beneficial for manyreasons. The demand of choosing a good method of learning second language is also
increasing. Apart from many traditional ways, people tend to find chance to practice
speaking second language with native speakers through informal communication tobetter improve their speaking skills. It is the most popular way to learn a language aswell as effective way most people use when they live in the country where the languageis spoken. However, it is not always easy to get an opportunity of speaking with native
speakers face-to-face.
The era of globalization opens up solid collaborations among international
corporations or entrepreneurs. As a result, for example in Japan, more and more
promising careers involved in foreign language-speaking environment are offered withhigh competition, which contributes to the current increasing need of learning foreign
language. On the other hand, Japan has recently accepted more and more foreigners
and they want to master Japanese for their profession, language choice or living inJapan. Hence, there potentially exists mutual benefits for Japanese people and thevisiting foreigners: the Japanese people can learn foreign languages from the foreigners,
and the foreigners can learn Japanese from the Japanese people. They should mutually
give and take their linguistic knowledge and skills, and we should create opportunities
for interactions.
However, such bidirectional interactions are seldom carried out; learning(teaching) language is usually carried out in a unidirectional manner. For example, a7foreigner works as a lecturer of a language school and teaches his/her native language
to Japanese students. On the other hand, he/she goes to a Japanese school to study
Japanese. These activities are carried out separately and unidirectionally. There haveno attempts, to the best of my knowledge, to satisfy both requirements simultaneously.
Hence, I have been studying on a method of “simultaneous second language
acquisition” for enhancing mutual benefits of inhabitants and foreign visitors by
improving efficiency of their second language acquisition. To acquire the second
language, we have to master four skills, i.e., speaking, listening, reading and writing.
These four separate language skills are also commonly referred as the productive andreceptive skills. The receptive skills are listening and reading, because learners do notneed to produce language to do these, they receive and understand it. These skills are
sometimes known as passive skills. They can be contrasted with the productive or
active skills of speaking and writing. Speaking and writing are known as the
productive skills as they both require some form of language output, in other words,
learners doing these need to produce language. These second language skills are bestacquired if speaking skill is considered a major and critical component of the learning
process. In other words, it is essential step for learners to be able to get a good graspof the language to be proficient in both oral and written communication. Learning to
speak moves the student on to develop other language skills such as reading, writing
and listening. Therefore, my research focuses on simultaneous acquirement of the
speaking skill during the conversation between people whose mother tongues aredifferent, such as Japanese speakers and English speakers.
In this dissertation, I would like to propose a theoretical model of dual-rolecollaborative learning to enhance simultaneous acquisition of speaking ability of
second language learners. Specifically, learners will play two roles in the conversation:8

facilitators in their first language and receivers in their second language. This modelcannot be easily achieved with normal face-to-face communication; some supporting
features need to be provided. Therefore, followed by a Computer-supported
Collaborative Learning (CSCL), I created Bitak system, which is a video chat systemequipped with several functions to facilitate simultaneous acquisition of speaking
ability of second language based on the dual-role collaborative learning model.
This introductory chapter proceeds with the background motivation of thisstudy, followed by the major objectives, the significance of the study, and an outline ofthe organization of the whole dissertation.

1.2 Background
Talking fluently to native speakers is the popular target of many second
language learners. Nevertheless, formal language education and existing programs arestill inadequate for learning language for daily use. Therefore, people tend to findchance to practice speaking second language with native speakers through informal
communication to better improve their speaking skills. It is the most popular way tolearn a language as well as effective way most people use when they live in the country
where the language is spoken. Your vocabulary, grammar and way of forming
sentences, conjugating words might be improved through this kind of learning. In
addition, how to sound native and use appropriate slangs are the other advantages itbrings about.
Among the global community in which English is increasingly considered the
predominant international language, Japan presents a particularly compelling case oflearning English. The era of globalization opens up solid collaborations between Japanand oversea corporations or entrepreneurs. As a result, more and more promising9careers involved in English-speaking environment are offered with high competition,
which contributes to the current increasing need of learning English in Japan. On theother hand, more and more foreigners study Japanese for their profession, language
choice or living in Japan. There are many common reasons to explain the growing
motivation to learn Japanese of foreigners. As we already know, Japan is the cradle ofmanga and anime. Their influence has been world widely spread and inspired people toexplore Japanese culture and language. Northwood, B., & Kinoshita Thomson, C. [1]showed that “the predominant reason to continue was the hope to travel to Japan, but
an interest in Japanese culture and in Japanese popular culture (J-pop) products (e.g.,
anime, manga) also was prominent”. In addition, the impact of Japan on the global
economy is robust and steady as it is one of the biggest economies in the world.
Electronic and automotive companies such as Sony, Panasonic, Honda and Toyota are
known for their excellent quality and efficiency. Being able to speak Japanese will bea substantial advantage for non-Japanese speakers who want to work for Japanesecompanies. However, there are lots of difficulties to study languages. For instance,
Seward, J. [2] asserts that foreigners have to deal with language frustration whenstudying Japanese. They are afraid of borrowed words, male and female speech forms,
polite and non-polite speech, and anatomical terms, proverbs, dialects, and otheraspects of Japanese culture.
On the other hand, although there has been a huge economic and humanresources dedicated to studying English in Japan, Japanese still consider themselves as“poor speakers of English”. Most of them seldom or never confidently use written or
spoken English in real-time communication. The primary reason for this is “thewidespread use of traditional grammar-translation method of English language teachingin Japanese schools”[3]. The proportion of students who acquire certain confidence and10necessary skills are surprisingly low despite the fact that English classes are compulsory
in Japanese schools. Japanese people admit that the existing teaching style often limits
students’ ability. They just can gain passively from what little English they hear fromthe teachers and what words are put in front of them. Effective teaching method shouldincorporate as many senses as possible to deepen students into English. Besides,
Japanese students experience great obstacles in studying English, due to fundamental
differences in grammar and syntax, as well as important differences in pronunciation.
According to Galloway, N. [4], there are several factors influence Japanese students’attitudes in learning English such as pedagogical beliefs, stereotypes, future goals andmotivation.
These language barriers prevent people from communicating directly [5]. Some
conventional ways of learning languages have been applied such as attending classes,
group discussion and learning, self-study. Apparently, there is not the most appropriate
method, people learn in different ways at different paces, and the most effective way
may involve not one but a mixture of different techniques. Language learning, much
like language itself, might be an inherently social pursuit. Moreover, there have been
no methods that satisfy both requirements that meet the demand of both Japanese andinternationals. The ordinary methods satisfied only either requirement. Since there arecomplementary requirements, there should be a method that satisfies both requirements
at the same time. Kimber, L. [6] recommends providing more opportunities forinteractions between Japanese and internationals.
Being inspired by that recommendation, this dissertation suggests a novel
method for students to freely practice second languages. The method is “simultaneous
second language acquisition” for enhancing mutual benefits of inhabitants and foreign
visitors by improving efficiency of their second language acquisition. The term

11

“simultaneous second language acquisition” is normally used to mean the learning ofanother language available in the sociolinguistic environment at the same time as thelearner acquires the first language or mother tongue [7]. However, this term in thisdissertation is used in the context of people of different first languages simultaneously
acquiring their second languages during their communication with each other.
1.2.1

Dual-lingual Communication
We propose a concept of Dual-lingual Communication in this research, which

is defined as two languages being spoken in the conversation and understood byrespective participating parties (Fig.1). Namely, for example, Japanese students will
use English while foreign students will speak Japanese though they can switch to his or
her mother tongue at any time. This is different from bi-/multilingual communication.
Myers-Scotton [8] defines bi-/multilingual as “the ability to use two or more languages
to sufficiently carry on a limited casual conversation”.

Figure 1: Dual-ligual communication concept in my study

Using more than one language in a conversation has become ordinary andpopular for the sake of deeply understanding interlocutors. In Japan, there is a popular
free English and Japanese news podcast called Bilingual News. This program offers

12casual and unedited colloquial language learning experience through a weekly review
of relevant news topics. Their unique bilingual conversation style allows you tounderstand what they are talking about even if you understand only one of thelanguages. In an interview with Tokyo Weekender – Japan’s Premiere English
Magazine, the host of the program shared their purpose of creating this podcast: “On
the surface the podcast is about language study. We take turns summarizing news items
we have selected in both English and Japanese. We follow that up by having anauthentic conversation about the topic – I will speak in English and Mami will speak inJapanese. We’re both bilingual so we can communicate in real time using bothlanguages fairly comfortably. At a deeper level the podcast is about initiating a more
open conversation between Japanese people and the rest of the world.”
According to Li, N., & Rosson and M. B. [9], when people are aware of culturaldifferences between them and other interlocutors, it is likely that they may change theircommunication styles to adapt to the current environment. In other words, they may
shift their speech patterns toward other interlocutors so that they are more similar toeach other. Giles’ communication accommodation theory already asserted this aspectof accommodation behavior in cross-cultural communication – speakers may mimicother speakers’ language use, so that their communication styles are similar [10]. These
are the reasons why I believe that dual-lingual communication can be applied in second
language learning. During the conversation, Japanese and internationals will havechance to speak second language. They will help each others correct speaking mistakesby using their native language (in this case internationals using English). It will be agood opportunity for both parties to learn from each other to make comfortablecommunication.
1.2.2

Strict Turn-taking

13Turn-taking is one of the fundamental mechanisms to promote and maintain talkin conversations. Coulthard [11] defined it as one of the basic facts of conversation:
speakers and listeners change their roles in order to begin their speech. They usuallytake turn naturally and it is rare to realize any conventionalized arrangement of turns inan ordinary conversation. As a result, the current speaker might be overlapped orinterrupted by another speaker.
Talking naturally without caring overlapping usually brings about the comfort
of expressing ideas in an informal conversation. Smooth turn-taking is an essential
aspect to coordinate one’s communicative actions and interact successfully withothers. However, it is not always good for learning a language. You may hardly
recognize your speaking mistakes by yourself although the listeners can understandclearly. Moreover, in a cross-cultural group chat, people communicate at different
levels of proficiency then turn-taking may be seriously disrupted which causes
confusion and neglection of discussion point. Particularly, people seemed to be morehesitant when taking turns because they were not familiar with the other culture’s
communication style. As a result, it is harder for them to take turns at the suitable time.
In many researches of second language learning, the fact that turn-taking incommunication may affect the quality of group discussion between non-native andnative speakers has been taken into consideration. According to Mynard, J. [12],foreign students seemed “to be overwhelmed and even lost in parallel and fast
discussion, especially students who have slow keyboarding skills, slow
reading/writing skills, or different cultural backgrounds.” Hence, I would like tostrictly apply the turn-taking approach by using a supporting function that requires
people to entirely obey the turn-taking rule. I suppose that the unfamiliar way of strict
turn-taking will bring about unexpected but possible outcomes.

141.2.3

Assessment of Second Language Speaking Proficiency
It is possible to categorize language examinations based on their intended

purpose. According to Schoonen, R. (2011), test takers' linguistic abilities are inferredby test users in all circumstances [86]. The inferences, on the other hand, are put tovarious uses. In the research of Davies (1990, p. 20), testing is divided into four
categories, namely selection, feedback, evaluation, and experimentation [87].
Bachman & Palmer (1996) [88] refers to the different types of decisions we makebased on the inferences about language proficiency, namely selection, placement,
diagnosis, and progress and grading at the level of the individual test-taker. Test scores
are also used to evaluate therapy and teaching programs and "check scientific theories"
in addition to their individual application (Bachman, 1990) [89]. Most colleges anduniversities need test-takers to satisfy a specific standard or to achieve a certain grade
before admitting them. As long as the overall score accurately reflects the desired levelof expertise, a single score may be sufficient. According to James E.Purpura [13], theterm Language Assessment refers not only to formal tests like TOEFL, IELTS or an
end-of-chapter evaluation, but also to other methods of obtaining information aboutknowledge, skills, and ability of students such as observing second language
performance during pair work or by asking learners to report their understandings anduncertainties.
In this research, I would like to use Rubric: a scoring guide used to evaluate thequality of students’ constructed responses to assess their second language speaking
proficiency. The usefulness of Rubric has been recognized in the field of assessment
for many decades [14]. In order to give valid, reliable, and consistent assessment
findings that demonstrate the learners' speaking achievement/level, speaking
assessment is frequently reported as an overall mark on bands scales or score points

15

(Council of Europe, 2014) [90]. In general, there are two types of assessment measures
for speaking skills: holistic and analytic. When utilizing a Rubric, evaluators use ananalytic rating system whereby each component is scored individually or performanceis rated holistically on the basis of an overall impression [15].

1.3 Objectives of the study
This study intends to accomplish the following objectives:•

Achieve simultaneous second language acquisition by applying Dual-role
Collaborative Learning model.

•

Verify the validity of the theoretical model by the effectiveness of Duallingual Communication supported by the CSCL BiTak system.

•

Focus on communicative approach to enhance speaking skill•

Contribute to the Collaborative Learning research as well as deeply
exploring multiple language communication.

1.4 Significance of the study
Mastering a second language requires the accomplishment of many skills inwhich speaking is one of the most difficult skills. Speaking a new language also means
being confident and comfortable with being not afraid of making mistakes. Studying
cannot replace the practice that real life provides. By creating an online environment
using Dual-lingual communication and supporting features for students to openly
exchange language skills, the study aims to recommend an effective collaborative
learning method to enhance speaking ability of language learners. Besides, This
research is expected to provide more implications for facilitators to organize language
learning environments or create computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL)

16

tools to support second language acquisition. Furthermore, the research is hoped to givelanguage learners more confidence and motivation in studying a second language.

1.5 Organization of the study
This dissertation is organized into seven chapters. Following the researchbackgrounds and objectives and significance of the study of this introductory chapter,
Chapter 2 presents the review of relevant literature and correlates them with myproposed theoretical model and system. Primarily, this chapter is to present the related
works of Second Language Acquisition (SLA) research and to examine how Computer
Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) has been used to support second language
learning.
Chapter 3 and 4 present the description of Dual-role Collaborative Learningmodel and my proposed system called BiTak and explain its prominent features
specifically.
Chapter 5 describes the experiments to evaluate the theoretical model and the
proposed system as well as mentions their results. The effectiveness of the model isalso discussed in this chapter by comparing two experiment approaches, one using
BiTak’s features and one without using it.
Chapter 6 discusses the validity of Dual-role Collaborative Learning Model andpossible domains that this model can be applied
Finally, chapter 7 summarizes the overall findings of this study, and brings the
major findings into focus for future research.

17

Chapter 2: Related works
The purpose of this chapter is to present an overview research of Second
Language Acquisition (SLA) and the literature review to examine how Collaborative
Learning and Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) has been used tosupport second language learning. From this, we will have an overview about the roleof this research. After all, summarization of the gap literature will be discussed.

2.1 Second Language Acquisition Research
The distinction between acquisition and learning was made by Krashen (1982)
who noted that acquisition occurs when learners focus on meaning in comprehensible
material, whereas learning occurs when learners focus on learning the language(knowledge about language gained through formal instruction or metalinguistic
analysis) [91]. Language development does not necessitate significant application of
conscious grammatical rules or painstaking drill. Acquisition necessitates meaningfulcontact in the target language - natural communication - in which speakers are moreconcerned with the messages they are expressing and understanding than with thestructure of their utterances. Research supports the idea that second language (L2)learners can acquire some linguistic features without any effort on their part or teacher
interaction.
It's possible for students to give each other feedback and opportunities forinteraction, do not necessarily make more errors than they do when communicatingwith the teacher and can provide answer in the form of clarification inquiries or
meaning negotiation (Gass and Varonis, 1994 [92]; Yule and Macdonald, 1990 [93]).
Although Oliver (1995) [94] showed that even young toddlers may use interaction toreceive appropriate input, the majority of this research has focused on adults. It has

18

been shown by Kowal and Swain (1994) that adolescents benefit from exercises
involving pair work, in which students work together to reconstruct dictated texts [95].
Research has examined the efficiency of "comprehensible input" in learning alanguage in several studies. Krashen and his colleagues have studied the value of indepth reading as a means of obtaining information that is easy to comprehend (e.g.
Krashen, 1989 [96]; Pilgreen and Krashen, 1993 [97]). The understandable input
hypothesis, particularly the corollary of the hypothesis that suggests "reading forpleasure" is the best type of comprehensible information, is supported by these studies.
Young second-language learners were read to or read to in the target language as partof a wide range of studies, including Elley's (1991). [98]. More reading activities wereassociated with higher levels of second language acquisition than audio-lingual
instruction, according to the findings. However, students gained much greater benefit
when their reading was accompanied by active participation from the instructor (Elley,
1989 [99]; see also Zimmerman,1997) [100].
According to Krashen (1991) [101] the key and necessary factor for language
acquisition is ‘comprehensible input.’ As a result, the greatest strategies are those thatprovide ‘comprehensible input’ in low-anxiety conditions, with messages that children
desire to hear. These strategies do not force pupils to produce in the second language
until they are ‘ready,’ knowing that improvement comes from providing
communicative and intelligible input rather than forcing and correcting creation.
Conversations with sympathetic native speakers who are eager to assist the acquirer
understand are extremely beneficial in the real world. In this approach, my researchwould like to focus primarily on those whose already have basic knowledge of a second
language. Hence, it would be a lot easier for students to exchange their languages in
simple and convinient instructions.

192.2 Collaborative Learning
Collaborative learning describes a variety of educational practices in whichinteractions among peers constitute the most important factor in learning, although
without excluding other factors such as the learning material and interactions withteachers. Collaborative Learning (CL) is defined as a situation in which two or more
people learn or attempt to learn something together [16]. More specifically, Mitnik, R.
et al [17] claimed that CL is based on the model that knowledge can be created in a
population where members actively interact by sharing experiences and take onasymmetry roles. Knowledge management is a dynamic and continuous social processthat entails the acquisition, organization, storage and retrieval of knowledge resources,
as well as its transmission to user groups with relevant feedback in order to fulfill
corporate goals (Ho, T. V. et al., 2015) [102], (Islam, S. et al.,2012) [103]. CL involves
the mutual engagement of all participants in a coordinated effort to solve the problem
together [18], which can be inferred everyone may get the same output experience. Thislearning approach has brought about many positive results. When students are working
in a group, they will be received benefit from each other in both academic and social
support [19]. They will not feel alone or isolated from the rest, which is an importantfactor to promote an active and responsible role of each student. In CL, students areencouraged or required to work together on learning tasks. It is necessary todifferentiate CL from some traditional 'direct transfer' models. While the instructor isassumed to be the distributor of knowledge and skills in the teacher-centered models,
CL focuses on a learner-centered model that treats the learner as an active participant.
The conversation, multiple perspectives, and argument that arise in cooperative groups

20

may explain why collaborative groups facilitate greater cognitive development than thesame individuals achieve when working alone [20].
Collaborative learning is used across all age levels of formal schooling, fromchildren doing handicrafts together to teams of university students carrying out aproject. In lifelong education, collaborative learning is a key paradigm in informal
learning (e.g. sharing knowledge among communities of practices) but has beensomewhat underutilized in corporate training.
Collaborative learning has already been widely applied in many language
learning classrooms. The learning process is enhanced thanks to group interaction when
they negotiate and share meaning socially [21]. In addition, increasing interaction
between students from different languages is also highly recommended. Kimber, L.
[22] suggests providing more opportunities for interactions between Japanese andinternationals to help each other speak. This method may satisfy both of theirrequirements at the same time.
Recent researches claims that small-group interactions in the classroom for
language acquisition proves that collaborative work will reduce dependence on teachersand stimulate the learners’ ability to participate actively in conversations [23].
Enhancing students’ communicative ability is always necessary to help themeffectively engage in any language situation. Collaborative Learning offers natural,interactive contexts where students listen to each other, ask questions and clarify issues.
According to a survey of research on pair/group work conducted by Long and Porter(1985), learners produce more longer sentence and do not speak any less grammaticallyin group work than they do in teacher-front lessons [24].

212.3 Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL)
Since Collaborative Learning theory has been well applied in standard,classroom-based groups, it opens up expectation of how well the benefits of CL willbring to the electronic environment [25]. With the advance of current technology,
Computer-supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) has become one of the popularapplications of the CL approach to shift from the traditional face-to-face group work
[26].
Koschmann (1996) recognized computer-supported collaborative learning(CSCL) as an emerging paradigm of educational technology [27]. Throughout history,
our conceptions about human cognition and learning have been related and shaped by
the development of technology [28]. This parallelism between our psychologicalunderstanding and the technologies available is clear in the field of computer-supported
collaborative learning, where technology meets psychology, philosophy and pedagogy.
Instructional designers and software developers, educational psychologists, learningtheorists, computer scientists, and even sociologists are interested in this rather new
area of research. It is hard to say when CSCL emerged as a separate field of study, oras an emerging paradigm of educational technology. The first CSCL workshop took
place in 1990 [29], and the first international CSCL conference was held 1995 inBloomington, Indiana. However, O’Malley and Scanlon already used the termcomputer-supported collaborative learning in 1989 [30].
How should one define computer-supported collaborative learning? Put briefly,
CSCL is focused on how collaborative learning supported by technology can enhancepeer interaction and work in groups, and how collaboration and technology facilitatesharing and distributing of knowledge and expertise among community members.

22

The connection of CL and CMC (computer-mediated communication)technology has been proved to be mutually beneficial by several researchers. CL helps
structure the on-line environment while CMC technology removes many barriers of CL[31]. Hence, CSCL is about how technology can be used to support CL [32]. Literally,
it is a pedagogical approach where in learning takes place via social interaction using acomputer or through the Internet. The sharing and construction of knowledge among
participants using technology as their primary means of communication or as a common
source characterize this kind of learning.

2.4 Computer

Supported Collaborative Learning in Second

Language Acquisition
Recent studies have suggested some implications for the design of tools thatmight enhance cross-cultural group chat (Li, N., & Rosson, M. B., 2012)[33]. They
recommended computer–mediated communication (CMC) tools as an important role inboth work and educational multilingual contexts. Specifically, CMC tools design such
as Instant Annotation (IA) for tagging or side-chatting or Thread Chat which helps
people organize their chat logs into thread may allow global organizations to help nonnative speakers be more comfortable and more effective members (Li, N., & Rosson,
M. B. (2014, April))[34]. The research result has shown that adding instant annotations
during real-time collaboration is both possible and has promising consequences for chatparticipants. In terms of cost, participants seemed able to multitask well between themain chatting window and the IA side bar. (See Fig.2)

23

Figure 2: Example of Instant Annotation
Recent researches have showed that computer-mediated communication tools
are considered as potential source for students to enhance their language proficiency.
Freiermuth, M., & Jarrell, D. (2006) in their research of second language learning
asserted that when compared with face-to-face communication, online chatting
provided a more comfortable environment for foreign students to make conversations[35]. In spite of facing the pressure of immediacy that is typically expected by speakers
in face-to-face communication, students found it less burden when communicating or
discussing through text chat. Online chatting has proved to be a promising tool tomotivate students’ interaction in the target language.
Besides, research in computer-mediated communication has also inferred that a
student’s willingness to communicate may be positively affected by computer.
Specifically, Freiermuth (1998, 2001b) claimed that when assigned a group task orpresentation, group language learners seemed more eager to communicate using
computer-mediated communication tool than using spoken language [36]. They felt
more freedom in expressing their ideas without being hindered from the teacher or other24

students or a plethora of other elements that might minimize the effect of the experience(Schwienhorst 2002) [37]. After making interviews about preference of media use of
non-native speakers, Setlock, L. D., & Fussell, S. R. [38] also showed that non-native
speakers preferred online chatting tools because these tools reduced the risk ofmisunderstandings that often caused by language problems.
The potential of computer-mediated communication tools in facilitating second
language acquisition has been mentioned in various current researches. Angelova, M.,& Zhao, Y. [39] conducted a collaborative online project between students from China
and United States of America. They were paired up to communicate using thediscussion board and e-mail tools for tutoring and learning different aspects of English
grammar and developing culture awareness. The American students tried to corrects
mistakes of their Chinese partners in writing introduction essays or cultural lessons.
The Chinese students used e-mail as well as Skype to communicate with their American
partners. Apart from the benefits collected from different aspects, the study concluded
that computer-mediated communication are used as a bridge to connect students fromtwo different countries and two different programs to improve the teaching skills of theAmerican as well as to enhance non-native speakers’ language skills. Another research
proposed a mobile system called Xpress to support second language learners gain
colloquial expressions by crowdsourcing native speakers [40]. The results of the study
indicated firmly Xpress’ potential in helping SL learners effectively learn colloquial
expressions by their design ideas (See Fig.4).

25

Figure 3: The design of Xpress
In addition, videoconferencing that has been called visual collaboration is
becoming noticeable in the benefits of online language learning. Hampel, R., &Stickler, U. (2012) conducted research about videoconferencing in supporting
multimodal interaction in an online language classroom [41]. The study concentrated
on the use of videoconferencing in the context of a larger exploratory study to find out
how language learning interaction was influenced by the virtual learning environment.
The findings demonstrated how an online videoconferencing environment can beapplied in language teaching as well as how teachers and learners collaborate in online
environment.
Moreover, a significant amount of literature explored the potentials of computer
technology with regards to teaching and learning languages more effectively. Dunkel(1990), for example, asserted that the possibilities of computer technology as a tool
could include increasing language learners’ self esteem, vocational preparedness,language proficiency and overall academic skills [42]. Furthermore, the benefits ofmultimedia, the Internet, and various forms of distance education were explored by26

many others [43][44][45][46]. Educators were particularly interested in technology’s
interactive capabilities, such as providing immediate feedback and increasing learnerautonomy, in addition to the capability of simulating real-world situations via audio,
video, and graphics [47][48][49][50]. Moreover, discussions of the benefits ofcomputer technology included the exploration of the application of certain technologies
in specific language areas. Liu (1994) [51] introduced hypermedia technology with its
linking and interactive capabilities which was discussed as a tool to enhance vocabulary
learning, and reading comprehension [52]. Chun and Plass (1997) considered thepotentials of using video and audio to support text comprehension [53]. Kramsch andAndersen (1999) argued that multimedia technology could provide authentic culturalcontexts that are important for language learning [54]. Others advocated CALL
programs, especially voice-interactive CALL for improving learners' speaking skills[55]. Computer technology in combination with a conferencing system was consideredan effective means of providing goal-directed writing courses tailored to different
learning styles [56]. In addition, Cononelos and Oliva (1993) reported employing
usenet and email to connect students in an Italian class with native speakers in order tofacilitate discussions on cultural issues [57]. Others shared their personal experiencesin using electronic dictionaries for reading and writing [58], and Web Course in a Box
software to teach German [59].
The pedagogical benefits of computer mediated communication (CMC) as
facilitated through email and programs like Daedalus Integrated Writing Environment(DIWE), became one of the most commonly discussed topics in foreign language
literature [35]. Some language educators implemented this new medium in theclassroom

andreportedon

its

linguistic[60][61][62][63][64][65][66][67][68][69][70].

andUnlikepsychologicalmanyindividual

benefits
CALL

27

applications, CMC seems to promote meaningful human interaction that can foster the
language learning process. That is, advocates claim that CMC can be an excellent
medium for cultivating new social relations within or across classrooms, resulting incollaborative, meaningful, and cross-cultural human interactions among members of adiscourse community created in cyberspace [71][72][73][74].
As a matter of fact, the application of technology in language classrooms
included the use of film, radio, television, language labs with audio/video tapes,
computers, and interactive video became popular [75]. Various types of computerassisted language learning (CALL) also began to become more commonplace [76].
Although there were some innovative uses of software such as MacLang, the majority
of CALL uses were limited, in form, to drill and practice exercises. As the technology
advanced, we began to see more interactive uses of CALL as well as an increase in the
integration of various media into the computer system [77]. Computer technology
became more accessible to both individuals and schools. Moreover, our growing
understanding of its potentials has encouraged a shift in emphasis from computer
technology itself to its applications. That is, finding ways to use computers forenhancing teaching and learning has gained prominence in the research. Nowadays, theuse of multimedia, the Internet (especially the World Wide Web), and various forms of
distance learning are wide spread. Interest in using them as tools to support language
learning is growing, both from the perspective of a language educator and that of alanguage learner.
CSCL has been considered as potential source for students to enhance theirlanguage proficiency. In language learning, current studies in the computer-assisted
language learning (CALL) field suggest that the computer provides material andfeedback for learners to practice the target language in and outside the classroom and28

has been seen as a positive tool for language learners in their individual study. CSCL
in Language Learning offer the potential for interaction between the computer and thelanguage learner which refers to the learner’s responding questions and receiving
correct answers. Hence, the computer is also seen as a potential language tutor byproviding assessment for students’ responses [78]. In addition, students’ autonomous
language learning and self-assessment can be widely available through the web rather
than being tied to a particular class [79].
Besides, because of the spread of COVID-19, face-to-face schooling was
actively interrupted. This resulted in a significant shift to the online learning model, as
students and teachers remained at home for their own protection (Rugube et al., 2020;
Brief, P., 2020)[104][105]. Using digital tools to enhance group communication andcollaboration has been shown to increase student involvement in group activities. For
example, synchronous online collaborative writing may boost student involvement in
text-editing activities, leading to superior academic performance than face-to-facelearning (Han & Li, 2019)[106]. Using a text-messaging tool like Slack may help
students support each other. (Tuhkala & Kärkkäinen, 2018; Zhang et al,2019)[107][108].

2.5 Remained problems and positioning of my study
Although there are many advantages in CL and CSCL, there still remains
several problems. There are certain drawbacks to using CMC technology forcollaborative language learning. First, a technology glitch may impede learning.
According to Olaniran (2006)[109], a lack of knowledge about a communication
technology might generate anxiety in students before they become comfortable with it.
In this vein, Olaniran (2004)[110] believes that CMC instructors must be adaptive to29deal with unexpected events that may arise throughout a CMC course. In addition,
learner access, institutional security, and timetabling constraints might all be
problematic (I Solé, C. R., & Hopkins, 2007)[111]. The materials utilized may also
make it difficult to meet the needs of particular students. Choosing and adapting
materials in a CMC situation might be tough. It requires more time and effort than aface-to-face session since teachers must create more detailed criteria for their students.
The quantity and quality of materials may also be affected by computer technology.
Thorton (1999) asserts that not all students may take equal part in collaborative
activities [80]. Some passive students may feel hard to raise their voice or ones who
more active will dominate the conversation. Besides, few studies have aimed to utilize
CSCL for supporting simultaneous learning of multiple languages. Being inspired bythose findings of the preceding studies, we propose a theoretical model of dual-rolecollaborative learning to enhance simultaneous second language acquisition.
In addition, few studies have aimed to utilize video chat applications forsupporting simultaneous learning of multiple languages. My study proposes a video
chat system as a virtual turn-taking face-to-face environment for users to practicedual-lingual conversation. Instead of choosing one partner’s language over the other,
they practice “dual-lingual” pattern. It is a communication pattern in which eachpartner actively uses his or her second language and receives the partner’s second
language in response. This video chat system will support group turn-taking
conversations speaking Japanese and English in which their voices and images will be
intentionally recorded so that they can re-listen to utterances again at anytime.

30

Chapter 3: Dual-role Collaborative Learning
Model
In order to achieve simultaneous “give and take” of the linguistic knowledge
and skills, people whose first languages are different can play equal roles insimultaneous practicing second languages. Therefore, I propose a novel model ofcollaborative learning that is called “dual-role collaborative learning” (see Fig.4). In
this model, students are required to take two roles when practicing second language:facilitator in their first language (L1) and receiver in their second language (L2). The
key point of this model is that each student has to play these two roles simultaneously.
Namely, for instance, Student A whose L1 is Japanese will play a role of facilitator inJapanese as well as a role of receiver in English, while Student B whose L1 is English
will play a role of facilitator in English as well as a role of receiver in Japanese, in an
identical collaborative learning activity.

Figure 4: Dual-role Collaborative Learning Model
To put this model in practice, two languages have to be concurrently used in an identicalconversation and understood by respective participating parties instead of choosing one
partner’s language over the other, which is called “dual-lingual communication”.

31Simply speaking, the model is working on the collaboration in which every student
becomes both teacher and learner at the same time.
Learning by teaching is a teaching and learning approach established in Germanschools in the 1980s by French language instructor Jean-Pol Martin (Martin, 1985)[112]. Students take on the role of teacher in this method, which promotes their learningby motivating them to educate other students and collaborate with their peers. Since
1985, the "learning by teaching" method has been around. From its beginnings as a tool
solely for foreign language teachers, the program has grown to encompass a wide rangeof educational settings and disciplines, from elementary school through college andbeyond (Grzega, 2011)[113]. Unlike teacher-centered methods, this technique seems toconnect students more effectively (Martin, 2018)[114]. Students collaborate in pairs,
create posters, and educate through pantomimes and role-plays. Your presentation
confidence develops with each presentation. Classes are kept grade-free to keep pupils
calm. The evaluations are divided into phases. Because the difficult work draws thecouples together, and successful material mediations are praised vigorously by theirpeers and the teacher, the social requirements are better met. Self-realization is thus
made easier because each student can deliver the information using their own skills,
such as musical or graphic skills. Overall, all teaching activities seem to be embedded
in a demanding framework.
In cooperative learning methods in class, there is one popular technique that
also requires students to be both learners and teachers: Jigsaw technique. This technique
was invented by a social psychologist Elliot Aronson in 1971. It has been seen as themost flexible and widely-used teaching method compared with the other cooperative
learning strategies [81,82]. This technique includes the following steps: 1) the students
will be divided into groups; 2) group leaders will be assigned needed to provide

32

guidance and follow up on the given tasks; 3) lessons will be divided into segments; 4)each student will be given a specific segment to work on; 5) “expert groups” will bejoined together in order to discuss and comprehend the given segments; 6) students will
be brought back into their original “jigsaw groups”; 7) each student will be asked to
explain their segment to their group; 8) the instructor floats from one group to the otherto facilitate and observe the learning process; and 9) the instructor will assess thestudents using various assessment tools. According to Gocer [83], each student
becomes both a learner and a teacher as well. The class teacher is not the sole providerof knowledge due to the fact that the students themselves do most of the work. It isbeneficial to apply Jigsaw technique in teaching because it motivates the interaction
with peers, help to build interpersonal and interactive skills among students.
Nevertheless, the common problem of this technique is about the slow students in thegroup. It is important that each member needs to present the best possible report to thegroup. However, students with poor study skills may present inferior reports to theirjigsaw group. Meanwhile, in my model of Dual-role Collaborative Learning, allstudents have expertise of their first language. In other words, they are supposed to becompetent in the role of facilitators.
My approach is supposed to have contribution in real education that language
can be learnt by exchanging and teaching. In this rapid globalization, Japanese
universities have become increasingly diverse institutions, employing international
faculty members from a diverse range of ethnic and cultural backgrounds and attracting
students from all over the world. In order for possible cross-cultural connections to be
successful, increasing students' intercultural awareness has become increasingly
important (Egitim, 2021)[115]. As a result of this internationalization, English
education in college now places an emphasis on student-centered instruction and the33

facilitatory role of the teacher in helping students build their own learning strategies(Benson, 2013)[116]. By involving students in the debate and presentation of varied
multicultural themes, teachers focus on content-based language instruction. The
problem is that many students have become accustomed to teacher-controlled
instruction with an emphasis on admission exams, and thus have difficulty adapting toa learner-centered educational environment (King, 2013, Loucky & Ware,2016)[117][118]. Hence, amplifying the chance of this dual-lingual communication in
university campus would bring back lots of benefits. The international students can use
this communication to practice Japanese with Japanese students, while Japanese
students can study English from the foreign students in a more relaxed and less-stressful
setting.

34

Chapter 4: Proposed system
4.1 Introduction
It is probably possible to simply carry out the dual-lingual communication evenin a face-to-face communication. However, our objective is to make it effectively
possible to collaborative acquirement of the speaking skill of the second language
through the dual-lingual communication. For achieving this objective sufficiently, it isrequired to perfectly carry out the dual-lingual communication where several unusual
communication patterns are imposed on, such as the strict turn-taking where
overlapping of utterances is not allowed at all. Therefore, some functions that support
carrying out the unusual communication patterns for efficient acquirement of speaking
skill are required. Hence, we developed a web CSCL application called “BiTak” tofacilitate the dual-lingual communication for language speaking practice.
Ogura, K., & Nishimoto, K. developed a voice chat system named “ChaTEL,”
which can record the utterances for the re-listening to achieve multithreaded voicecommunication [84]. The ChaTEL system is equipped with a “ history of conversation”
as well as functions that specify receivers of messages and related messages whichmake it possible to simultaneously talk about multiple topics with voicecommunication. (See Fig.5)

35

Figure 5: ChaTel system
The aim of the study is to investigate whether multithreaded conversation can be done
by voice and to evaluate the usefulness and effectiveness of the newly added ChaTEL
recording/listening functions for facilitating multithreaded conversations. From theresults, they concluded that it is possible to simultaneously talk about multiple topics
with voice communication. The newly added recording function of ChaTel has inspired
me in thinking of creating a video chat system to support group conversations in which
their voice will be intentionally recorded so that users can watch their video talk again
to deeply understand the situation.
I developed “BiTak” using the open source from WebRTC, which is a free, open
project that provides browsers and mobile applications with real-time communications
with simple APIs. WebRTC provides the publish/subscribe model letting developers
implement many types of chat such as 1-1, group or random pairings. Fig.6 and fig.7
show the snapshots of the homepage and user interface of BiTak respectively.

36

Figure 6: The homepage of BiTak
The design of BiTak is aimed to be friendly to users. As can be shown from
Fig.6 all you need to do is just create any name for your room chat and click “Join”
button to access the chat room.
Having individual control over the layout, sizing and animation of eachindividual video stream allows the video chat to be a native and fully-integrated part of
the web experience.

37

Figure 7: The user interface of BiTak

As can be seen from Fig.7, there are various features provided:
Filters: this feature is used to change the screen chat color using theavailable colors in filters (Sepia, Inverted, Grayscale, Blur or None shown in
Fig.8) in order to give users some interesting experience while chatting.

38

Figure 8: Filters function

Start Speaking/Stop Speaking: when a person wants to talk, he/she needs
to click this button then his/her talk is automatically recorded.

Share Room Link: to copy the link for inviting people to join the chatroom

Text Chat: for typing the text conversation

The most prominent features of BiTak is following two functions: 1) a strict turntaking function by discretely recording each utterance and 2) a text chat function related
to each recorded utterance. In the following sections, these two functions are describedin detail.

394.2 Strict turn-taking function
To communicate in BiTak, all participants are required to take turn strictly.
When a person wants to talk, he/she just needs to click on the Speaking button
then the others’ microphone will be off; they can do nothing but listen to the speaker.
At the same time, his/her voice will be automatically recorded. After the speakerfinishes talking, he/she clicks the Speaking Button again, and then the recording link
(blue link) will appear in the main window chat (See Fig.6). The next person will taketurn to talk by repeatedly clicking the Speaking Button. Therefore, the communicationstyle with using BiTak is in a half-duplex manner similar to that of a transceiver. Eachutterance in BiTak is recorded in order to give participants a chance to watch the video
again to fully understand the dual-lingual situation. I created Speaking button in orderto make users follow strict turn-taking mechanism. However, they can also
communicate ordinarily to each other if they do not click the button.

4.3 Text chat function related to each recorded utterance
The recording link will lead users to another tab where they can re-watch thevideo (see Fig.9). Meanwhile, the main video chat will be still facilitated without any
interruption. If, for example, an utterance in English from a Japanese participant
includes some errors or unsuitable expressions, it should be corrected immediately. In
order to readily achieve it, we provide a text chat function to each recording link, notto entire recording links. The users can chat, ask or point out about any unclear points
by typing text in the chat bar right beside the recording video. This feature is separately
designed for each recording link with the hope of achieving deeper understanding. The
users can download all the recording videos for further reference.

40

Figure 9: An example of recording link

41

Chapter 5: Experiment and Result Analysis
This study aims to propose a theoretical model of dual-role collaborative
learning to enhance simultaneous acquisition of speaking ability of second language
learners. It is hypothesized that learners will play two roles in the conversation:
facilitators in their first language and receivers in their second language. This modelcannot be easily achieved with normal face-to-face communication so that some
supporting features need to be provided. As a result, based on the dual-rolecollaborative learning paradigm, we designed Bitak, a video chat system with multiple
functions to assist simultaneous development of speaking skills in a second language.
Through designing experiments and evaluations, this research intends to seek
answers for the following research questions:• Is it possible to achieve simultaneous second language acquisition by applying
Dual-role Collaborative Learning model?
• Is Bitak useful for carrying out Dual-role Collaborative Learning model toattain simultaneous acquisition of speaking ability of second language?

5.1 Experiment Procedure
To investigate the effectiveness of the proposed method for simultaneous
acquisition of speaking skill of the second language as well as to verify the validity of
BiTak system, we conducted user studies. There are 32 students participating in theexperiment process (16 Japanese with multi-level English abilities and 16 foreign
students mastering English) and were randomly divided in 8 groups of four. Each groupconsists of 2 non-Japanese students who speak English fluently as native speakers and2 Japanese students. All the chosen students were voluntarily participated in the project
and the equal level of second language proficiency between a pair of speakers in the42experiment is not necessarily required. It is better to test the effectiveness ofCollaborative Learning at different levels to see if they can help each other enhancetheir second language speaking skills.. I compared the experiences of the four 4member groups using all the functions of BiTak with the other four 4-member groups
who used just the interface of BiTak (i.e., a simple video conferencing system without
the strict turn-taking function and the recording function). Meanwhile, both of the twogroups were required to communicate in the dual-lingual communication styleregardless of with/without using the BiTak functions.
Each group was required to participate in a series of six experiments in which
they could discuss intensively the topics given in the evaluation interview using Duallingual Communication. Each experiment lasted about 90 minutes. To ensure unbiased
improvement, all subjects were requested not to use any other kinds of language
learning tools during the period of experiments.
All subjects were supposed to attend pre-experiment evaluation and postexperiment evaluation to measure the improvement of speaking skill before and after
the abovementioned experiment series. Specifically, the Japanese students wereinterviewed their English speaking skills by a certified English teacher and the nonJapanese students were interviewed their Japanese speaking skills by a certified
Japanese teacher. The interview questions during the two evaluations remainunchanged and their improvement is assessed followed a rubric for Testing Speaking
Skill specially designed for the task (See Fig.10 and Fig.11). The criteria for this study’s
analytic rubric were taken from the standards and practices outlined in the Common
European Framework of References (CEFR) for Languages (Council of Europe,2014)[119] with the most common criteria for oral performance assessment. The
analytical technique is used to evaluate students' performance by examining different
43portions separately first, then combining the outcomes of individual scores to obtain a
final total score. Criteria and scales are the two pieces of an analytical assessment
rubric. This technique of assessment offers students and teachers with vital information
regarding areas of strength and weakness. (Ulker, V., 2017)[120]In addition, after the experiment series, each subject was also asked to attend a
30-minutes individual semi-structured interview with the first author. The individualinterview questions were guided by the general themes which aim to gain thinking
about dual-lingual communication and BiTak’s features (strict turn-taking with therecording function). Besides, the questions were also open-ended enough for me to beable to pursue new topics raised by the participants. Each interview was recorded andtranscribed to text then the transcripts were informally analyzed.

44

Figure 10 Rubric for Testing Speaking Skill

45

Figure 11 Questions in the Rubric Evaluation Interview

5.2 Result Analysis
In this section I would like to present the score results from Rubric Evaluation
as well as the comments of the two evaluators. Besides, the analysis of semi-structureinterviews and experiment transcripts are also included.
5.2.1

Result of Rubric
The speaking performance of all subjects in the evaluations were assessed byfour criteria:•

Relevance & Content•

Fluency•

Vocabulary & Word Choice•

Interviews: Does interviewee understand question

Figures 12~15 show the specific scores of each participant evaluated before andafter the experiments in all four criteria mentioned above.

46

Figure 12 Scores of participants in Relevance & Content

Figure 13 Scores of participants in Vocabulary & Word Choice47

Figure 14 Scores of participants in Fluency

Figure 15 Scores of participants in Interview

48

As can be seen from the Figs. 12, 13, 14 and 15, a majority of participants showedsufficient improvement between the pre-experiment and post-experiment evaluation.
The distinctions also varied from small to big proportion in both groups.
The improvement difference of each participant between pre-experiment andpost-experiment based on their scores in Rubric was calculated. Here, considering theceiling effect, the students with pre-experiment score equal to or bigger than 8 were
eliminated. Those students with these high scores may have little room for
improvement and it is not the target of this study. After eliminating those students, thenumber of students in each group are not equal. The figures 16 to 19 describe
specifically the improvement difference of students between the pre-experiment andpost-experiment in each criteria (Relevance & Content, Vocabulary, Fluency andInterview). Basically, most of the participants’ skills were improved by the average(>0).

Figure 16 The improvement difference between pre-experiment and post-experimentscores in Relevance & Content
49Figure 17 The improvement difference between pre-experiment and post-experimentscores in Fluency

Figure 18 The improvement difference between pre-experiment and post-experimentscores in Vocabulary & Word Choice50

Figure 19 The improvement difference between pre-experiment and post-experimentscores in Interview

Basically, all the participants’ skills were improved by the average. I
statistically test these result by applying Kruskal-Wallis test. As a result, no significant
differences (SD) were found in all of the four criteria ( P-value (Relevance, Fluency,
V&C, Interview) > 0.05 for the 4 groups. It can be said that not only that there are no
SD between Japanese and Internationals, but also that there are no SD between BiTakand Non-BiTak. This result proves that there was no SD between the improvement ofJapanese and Internationals, which means they could simultaneously improve theirspeaking skill to almost the same degree through dual-lingual communication.
However, the same conclusion could not be given to the usefulness of BiTak.
Namely, there were no significant differences in improvement of using and not using
BiTak. It could not be concluded quantitatively that Bitak is useful for simultaneous
second language acquisition. The author would like to find it useful through qualitative
data (semi-structured interview and transcript analysis results).
51

Most of subjects received positive feedbacks from the two teachers for theirprogress during experiment period. I would like to present some noticeable commentsof the certified Japanese teacher for some of the foreign students in the pre- and postexperiments are as follows:
PariticipantNo.
1Pre-experiment evaluation

Post-experiment evaluation••

He wanted to speak.
He sometimes understoodonly a few words in thesentence but did notunderstandwhole
sentence.
This
causedhim
misunderstandinganddeviated answer.
4th question, he did notunderstand “shiawase”. I
explained in English, but
he had no answer.

•

He was the person who
responded only to what he
was asked.
He was not good atnumbers such as month,date…, but he could
describe his feeling.
She did not understand“kenkyuka“ “doushite”.
She could say “mouichido onegaishimasu”
when she didn’t catch thequestions.
Sheunderstood“shiawase” but could notdescribe in Japanese.
He mostly understood thequestions.

•

•

•

2

•

•

3

•
•

•

4

•

•

•

•

•
•

•
•

•

•

He was eager to speak
anyways.
He spoke more than I
asked. But it is often
grammaticallyincorrect.
He seemed to only listen
to the words, and hetalkedwithhisunderstanding.
His explanation about
shiawase was adequate
information.
He speaks more thanlast time.
His talking seems to bepracticed.
He mostly understands
the question.
She mostly understands
the question.
She could describe her
feeling by elementary
words.
She had communication
strategy.

He mostly understands
the questions.
52

•

•

5

•

6

•

It seemed that he could
not find the better words,
but he tried to answer by
the words which heknows.
He spoke slowly withremembering.

•

Lexical collocation getsbetterthan
firstinterview.

She understood most of
the questions properly.
But it seemed she wasgetting used to speaking.
She seemed not tounderstand fully thequestions but got some of
the words in one sentence
andguessedtheirmeaning.
It
wassometimes correct andsometimes incorrect.

•

She spoke like welltrained.

•She could
explainelement question stably.

Comments of the certified English teacher for some of the Japanese students in the
pre- and post-experiments are as follows:
PariticipantNo.
1Pre-experiment evaluation

Post-experiment evaluation•••

Answers were succinct,
Seemed to understand thequestion clearly.

••

Very fluent in English
Good communication,
understandquestionsclearly

•

•

2

•

English proficiency islimited, not so much
vocabulary,In
the
beginning,smooth talking but soon
got stuck,
Seemed to understandthemeaningofquestions, could not use
all the time for answer
Very
proficientinEnglish, almost no
problem

53

•

3

•
•

English proficiency ishighDependingonquestions.
fluencyvaried

•
•

•
•

4

•
•
•

5

•

•
•

6

•
•

5.2.2

Not confident in English
communication
No fluency
Probably the questions
were understood but
could
not
answerfluently with sufficient
contentsNotsmoothinresponding
tothequestions
Limited vocabulary
Using too much time forthinking, seemed tothink in Japanese andtranslate.
Understood questions
clearly,
Had some hesitation inanswering depending on
the topics, has things totalk about

•
•
•
•

Never losing timing incommunication, English
seems to be working likehis mother tongue
Answers were succinct.
Haveasmoothcommunicationin
English,Stated his own ideas
clearly
Never miss a timing
Vocabulary was limited,
Gaineddesiretocommunicate
Didnot use the given timeeffectively
Carry his own opinions.

•••

Desire to talk,
Pattern is think and speak
Vocabulary may belimited but seemed tounderstand the questions
clearly.

••

Smoothness was missing,
Essential
grammarunderstood.

Results from individual semi-structured interviews

The 30-minutes individual semi-structured interview was held with every member toobtain an insight of their feeling throughout the six experiments. The open-questions
related to dual-lingual communication and functions of BiTak were all mentioned such54

as their general feeling after using BiTak, the comfort of using Bitak or their opinionsof applying Bitak as a supporting tool to learn second languages.

Not-using-BiTak Groups:
These groups communicated using just the interface of BiTak like a normal
video-conferencing system, which means the strict turn-taking function and therecording function were not available.
Although all the subjects found that dual-lingual communication weird and hardat first, they gradually recognized it really helps people from beginner to intermediatelevel. The more familiar they get with BiTak, the more motivated they are to speak.
“The dual-lingual communication is interesting, at least we can understand if weare not good at other language because we can understand. I can learn language
from that communication to get vocabulary and sentence patterns.”“This kind communication may help some people who is not really confident orsomeone is easy to become nervous when speaking with foreigner. For instance, atthe 1st time Yuki-san was really shy and he could not say any word but now hegradually talks more.”“I can help people speak Japanese and gain more confidence. Honestly, I’m notgood at listening to English…. This kind of communication somehow helps me. It
reduces my stick perfection, I used to think how to speak English perfectly all thetime, but now I can ask people the word I don't know... Shun-san has goodpronunciation and a confident style so that I can learn from him.”“It is interesting and gives me good motivation, sometimes I don't know how to say
and they help me by writing in the text chat in Roma-ji, and then you can remember
but maybe forget later.”55

“Yes, I think it helps a lot. I myself know the meaning of word in Japanese but it’s
hard to put in sentence so thanks to having chance to talk with Japanese natives, I
can use those words correctly. And I think it has the same effect on Japanese ones.”“I got the chance to talk, they kind of encourage me to speak, they give me someanswers in Japanese word choice.”“Positively I can improve my Japanese by talking with natives. It’s a bit difficult
for me to talk about different topics, but I can make friends and improving myspeaking.”“At the 1st interview, I didn’t know much Japanese vocabulary, but now somehow
I know how to express, I like this kind of experience, I learn how native says andhow Jap use English….. I gain more confidence, I become friends with groupmembers, they’re funny, interesting. I feel relaxed talking with them.”

When being asked about helping to correct others’ mistakes, some of subjects
in the group revealed that they hesitated to do that due to they were in the middle ofconversation. They sometimes recognized their friends’ mistakes but neglected them towait for the conversations to finish then unintentionally forgot the errors.
“I feel hesitate and not try to correct their mistake because don’t want to interrupt
and make them feel shy.”“I didn't correct so much because they didn't talk much in details, just use simple
sentences”.

Using-BiTak Groups

56

These groups communicated using BiTak with using all functions. Therefore,
they were forced to obey the strict turn-taking rule that was systematically imposed on
by BiTak.
For the first time, it was really difficult for those groups to use strict turn-taking.
However, the members gradually reported that this system aims to learn language, notmerely for chatting. When they did the presentation using BiTak, only one person had
to talk. They felt that it was a good challenge for them because they could do a lot ofpresentation to train their speaking skill.
They all agreed with the idea of dual-lingual communication can help themlearn speaking skill of second languages. Japanese students normally do not havechance to speak English much and vice versa for foreign students so it has mutual
benefits. They could gain some new words and correct the mistakes they usually madebefore. In their opinion, this kind of communication may not be comfortable forchatting but effective for learning languages.
“I think it’s good. I can have the feeling of study…It is not normal
communication. It’s good for study.”“I also think it’s good. I do not have much vocabulary… I cannot make thesentence. I cannot express my idea clearly. After two experiments, I can gradually learn
how to make the sentence…”“I am not good at listening. If just one person talk at a time, I feel more focus
on what they are speaking. This way really suits me.”
“I had no problem with the dual-lingual communication as well as strict turntaking. When I clicked the Recording button, just only me is speaking. I felt comfortablebecause no one is overlapping me…I can slowly speak Japanese…”

57

As can be inferred from the answers of subjects, dual-lingual communication
was not a hard approach to be reached. Most participants felt comfortable tocommunicate in this way. They almost follow the strict turn-taking appropriately.
All group members pointed out that strict turn-taking feature gave them time tothink carefully before raising their voice. They consequently had confidence in
expressing their ideas.
“I need another system to compare. Of course I feel it’s good but I have nothing
to compare. However, I feel it is easy to use this new system for the first time using it.
The Recording function is really good because I can check my pronunciation and takecare of my sound. When I check past information, I can access the data, but thefrequency may not high … but it is really useful when I want to do that.”“ After listening again the recording videos, I even downloaded the videos…I
want to watch them again after the experiment ”
One more interesting point the subjects found was recording link. Most of themfelt this feature was really important because they could listen again their friend’s
presentation all the time to recognize and corrected mistakes for each other. Someparticipants were aware of the function of downloading videos and he even downloads
some from the experiment for further reference. Besides, they have gradually realized
the language learning atmosphere from the conversation, not just the informal
communication as usual. Moreover, they are getting used to Recording function andwant to use the Recording. They were willing to listen again the recording video.
Meanwhile, they even write the word they want to correct for others on the side chatbar (see Fig.12).

58

Figure 20: An example of correcting mistakes by typing in the side chat bar

59

“When I don't have any word to explain my mind, somebody can help me writein the text chat and I see that and understand to speak it out, I feel good. I like this app
because I don't like face-to-face communication, this app makes me feel comfortable.”
More interestingly, after watching again each recording video of everyone,people did not hurry to click the recording button for another turn-taking. They wanted
to correct the mistakes of others by speaking either both languages in ordinary
conversations. They deliberately discuss the way to communicate in BiTak without any
instructions of the authors to make the communication went smoothly: applying duallingual conversation with strict turn-taking for presentation, using recording link forrealizing mistakes and normal conversation for correcting mistakes and discussion.
“I think we connect very fast. The first day with them was a bit hard because it
was new, we were shy. But in the second time, we were explaining further and using
the function, the first time is really difficult because nobody knew using it correctly, but
the second it improved, and in the third experiment, we were actually using Recording
function. And because the guys are willing to improve their speaking skill, they paid
much attention, wanted to listen to the video again… The good thing in BiTak is you
have to set your mind in a different way, you have to prepare to come to theexperiment… I have the feeling if we know the topic in advance, you can prepare somesentences. So when we are doing experiment, the other guys can listen easier andcorrect the mistakes for you… So what I want to suggest is like, for future users, it isbetter to prepare a couples of sentences and then speak them out but not more than 3
or 4 minutes each time or else people will get tired when listening. And after that, weshould come back to the normal conversation to discuss about the utterances.”
As can be understood from his answer, all participants became more and more
active through the consecutive experiments. They were better aware of the Recording60

function, using it for checking again the speaker’s talk and fixing the mistakes if
possible. This kind of function is kind of unfriendly function for everybody but they
managed to use it. This feature is not easy to use because it will interrupt the normal
conversation. However, the subjects already immersed in the virtual online learning
environment, not just informal conversations.
In addition, one participant even expressed his suggestion for future users. Fromthe experiment results, it can be admitted that incorporating the dual-lingual
communication and the normal communication at the same time is an interesting point:
Using strict turn-taking to assure everyone can talk, recording to listen again, andnormal conversation for further discussion.
They eagerly continued to help other fix mistakes by listening the recording
together, just used normal bilingual conversation to discuss the flaws and wrote theword they wanted to correct on the side chat bar.
“I really enjoyed the third and fourth experiment… Everyone know how to use
the system actively…I prefer preparing for the recording in advance, speak for 1 minutelong, for sure it will be more perfect, and experiment will be more interesting… Prepare
before coming to experiment…Speaking Japanese in front of Japanese people is really
useful. I feel more confident in spite of my limited Japanese speaking ability.” (English)“I found it interesting to use the system… Recording function is useful.
However, the recording link is a bit ambiguous for me. It is difficult to find the link I
want to listen again. It would be better if we can name each recording link specifically.”(Japanese)“I have more intention of speaking English than before. The strict turn-taking
allows me to fully express my idea…I like to check recording video again, find flaw foreach other, have common purpose… good system!” (Japanese)
61

“Very useful…I am pushed to speak English more, gain more vocabulary andmake sentences, chance to learn speaking, translation…I felt very comfortable while
communicating ...But in my opinion, recording function is good for talk long sentences,
it is not convenient for short or response quickly” (Japanese).
“In this kind of discussion, I think strict turn-taking is important, we have time
for ourselves to think, when s.o is talking we will not interrupt, meanwhile we can takenote what we want to say next. It’s going well in my group.”
In general, after finishing the experiments, all participants gave out positive
feedbacks about the dual-lingual communication and CSCL BiTak. Everyone used thesystem more and more actively throughout experiments. For internationals, it was agreat experience to practice speaking Japanese with native speakers. The Japaneseparticipants felt more confident in speaking English. However, the recording link did
not satisfy all the subjects. One claimed that it is difficult to differentiate each recording
link that often made her confused in choosing the video she wanted to watch again.
Another member suggested that Recording link was suitable for making long sentences
like presentations and it is not convenient to talk or response quickly with short
sentences.

5.2.3

Analysis of the transcript
In addition to the above-mentioned basic analyses, I carried out an in-depth

analysis of the transcript in order to achieve a deeper insight into the process ofimprovement of learners. Based on this analysis, the dual-role collaborative learning
method as a novel learning style is naturally and clearly applied in the dual-lingual
communications where the BiTak is used.
Not-using-BiTak Groups:
62

Here are some examples from the transcript:
A) E1: “let’s start” wa nan desu ka?
J1: Hajimemasho
E2: “Accomodation” wa nan desho?
J2: In Japanese… “Shukuhaku shisetsu”
B) J1: When did you go to Japan?
E1: kotoshi, shigatsu…san nichi??
J1: Mikka.
E1: ah, shigatsu no mikka, arigatouC) J1: If I have money, I want to go to Germany.
E1: “Germany?” Doko?
J1: Eh?
E1: “Germany” wa doko?
J1: Doitsu no doko?
E1: Ah…
D) J1: How about winter in Japan?
E2: Samui desu. Arerugi ga arimasu.
J2: What is “arerugi” written in English?
E2: It’s allergic.
E) E1: yasumijikan wa nani o shi masu ka?
J1: I sleep. Hmm.. I feel sleepy…
E1: “I often feel sleepy.”
J2: In my case, for relax, for example, walking or swimming…hmm…
E2: Ah, you usually go swimming or walking in your freetime?..
J2: Oh, yes, yes…
63

J1: I usually driving around ... the town.
E1: “Driving license” wa nihongo wa nan desu ka?
J1: Unten menkyoshō desu.
E1: Ah… arigatou.
F) E1: Tomi no hito wa “not always”..How to say “not always”?
J1: (write in the text chat) ..itsumo..dewanai
E1: Ah, tomi no hito wa itsumo shiawase dewa nai.
G) E1: rirakkusu no tame ni nani o shimasu ka? (What do you do to relax?)
E2: “tame ni” wa nan desuka? (What does “tame ni” mean?)J1: it means “about” or “for”. For example in my case, I go walking or
swimming for relaxing.
E2: Ah.
J2: I go to my bed to relax. (slight grammatical mistake but there’s nocorrection from Es)
As mentioned in 5.1, Not-using-BiTak were required to use Bitak as a normal
video chat application without using the strict turn-taking function and the recording
function, and to communicate with each other through dual-lingual pattern. The result
from transcript revealed that they had good experience with dual-lingual
communication. However, they may not notice the intention of language learning
clearly. They followed our requirement to talk in group with various topics provided.
As can be seen from example A to F, if one member had difficulty in finding the suitable
word, they mostly raised their voice to ask for help, otherwise the others just ignored
the member’s mistakes (example G). From some typical examples above, it is clear torealize that they usually asked for unknown vocabulary, no more getting deeper in word
using and keep continuing the conversation topic by topic. They easily finished64

discussing the topic questions in the time limit as normal chatting. They did not caremuch about others’ mistakes. It was alright as long as they understood and then they
gradually forgot to correct mistakes for each other. It is not good for language learning.
It was difficult to conclude the facilitator in this collaborative group because their roles
were not clearly identified.
In addition, there were many times that participants did not have theirconcentration on the given topic. They kept talking and gossiping, gradually forget thequestions they have to answer. Let’s take example (H) in consideration (they wererequired to discuss about the question “What kind of TV program is a waste of time”):
H)

J1: Did you watch TV when you were a child?
E1: Arimasu/Yes. (two pp answer at the same time)J2: what program did you like?
E1: Anime, Watashi no childhood wa Pokemon, Doraemon.
J2: Is it famous in your country?
E1: Hai…WWE mimasuka?
E2: Wakarimasen.
J1: America’s programs? Yeah I know. I like it.
E1: Watashi wa maigatsu mimasu.
J1: You mean Every month? It’s maitsuki.
E1: Kana-san mo nani wo mimasu ka?
J1: When I was an elementary student, I like to watch quiz show, very easy

quizshow for elementary students. I also like watching anime or drama because thosekinds of thing I can make every single story…
J2: Do you like watching Youtube? I like it very much.
E1: Watashi mo suki.
65E2: Watashi wa indo no channel ga suki.
E1: Watashi wa ryori channel yoku mimasu.
J1: Can you cook? Japanese food or Myanmar food?
E1: Hai. Oishikunai to omoimasu.
J1: I like music videos.
E2: Watashi mo ongaku suki desu yo.
J2: Me too.
E2: youtube de…(people cannot understand. They keep aksing what??)(One member even opened the music to show others the music he liked. The gossip time
last too long, no longer serious in the questions provided. The experiment time wasended without finishing the topic questions).

Using-BiTak Groups
Here are some examples from the transcript:I) J1: Modern lifestyle gives us so many time to relax… in the past has to do manything, for example, do laundry…But now we don’t need to do in many time.
E2: shabete no toki wa Subject wa arimasen ne. You should say “in the past
people had many thing to do..”J1: Ah, I see.
J) E1: (misused between ippai and isogashi)
J1: “Shigoto ga ippai” means I have a lot of work. “Shigoto ga isogashi” means
I am very busy. So it’s different.
E1: naruhodo. Sorekara, Shigoto ga ippai na no de, isogashi desu.
J2: Oh yes.
E2: Hai, arigatou…
66K) E1: Saigo no bun no imi wa chotto wakarimasen.
J1: Ah I said “I travel to foreign country about one time a month”
E1: You said “one time”, I think “once” is better.
E1: Ryokou wa suki desu.
J2: I think instead of saying “wa”, you should say “(Watashi wa) ryokou gasuki desu.”
E2: Hai.
L) E1: Minasan wa shigoto shimashita ka?
J1: Hmm… “shigoto shimashita ka” means “Did you work yesterday?”. If you
want to ask about working experience, you have to say “Shigoto shitakoto ga arimasuka?”.
E1: Ah, naruhodo. Arigatou. ( Ah, I see, Thanks.)

Having different from requirements, Using-BiTak groups were asked to use all
the function of Bitak: strict turn-taking and recording function. Therefore, it took themlonger time to finish one question compared to Not-Using-BiTak groups. They hardly
finished half of the topic questions in the time limit. Each member had three or fourtimes to present ideas through presentation phase. Since they had to listen again therecording, they had more time to consider and find out mistakes for each other. The
content of correction was more specific than that of Not-Using-BiTak groups, focusing
on not only vocabulary but also grammatical mistakes (see example I and J). Besides,
example K and L proved that they intentionally helped each other as facilitators andreceivers. Japanese members became Japanese facilitators who recognized and gave
feedbacks of Japanese mistakes of foreign members while foreign members were
English facilitators who help correct mistakes of Japanese members. In other words,
67

their roles as facilitators and receivers have been successfully presented in this kind ofcollaborative learning.
As a matter of fact, by employing dual-lingual communication, dual-rolecollaborative learning naturally happens in most cases. However, the crucial difference
between both groups which made this dual-role collaboration more efficiently andclearly utilized is the usage of strict turn-taking and recording link. Members in UsingBiTak groups took the recording links into serious consideration. They wanted to makesure their friends know their mistakes and were willing to correct for them. All of them
gradually had sense of learning, not simply gossiping on the account of the proposedfeatures of BiTak．

5.3 Discussion
From the result analysis, it was demonstrated that simultaneous acquisition of
speaking skill of two different languages can be achieved by employing dual-lingual
communication. Furthermore, although it was not supported by the quantitative
analyses results based on the rubric scores, the qualitative results based on the interview
and the transcriptions supported that CSCL BiTak is useful to carry out dual-rolecommunication as a method of the second language learning. By using BiTak, all of
the subjects gradually had sense of learning, not simply gossiping on the account of the
proposed features of BiTak as well as realizing their role of facilitators and receivers;
such things have not been observed in the cases of the groups without BiTak. Thus,
these results proved that dual-role collaborative learning method is effective insimultaneous second language acquisition.
Dual-lingual communication is novel and effective in simultaneously acquiring
second language learning. During experiments, Japanese spoke English and68internationals used Japanese. This kind of communication is basically unnatural to
everyone, however, it seemed that no one faced any inextricable difficulties with thisdual-lingual pattern. More interestingly, when participants are required to practice duallingual communication they gradually realized the sense of learning second language,
not just using language to communicate. All members unconsciously set their mind instudying to improve their language ability.
The smooth turn taking system usually ensures that the flows of conversations
can naturally carry on unambiguously and coherently. However, in dual-lingual
communications, especially in using BiTak, users are required to obey strict turn-taking
to communicate. This communication manner is apparently unnatural in making
informal conversations and easy to make people feel annoyed or uncomfortable if they
have to wait until their turn to speak. On the contrary, the results from all experiments
have shown that strict turn-taking successfully facilitating the simultaneous second
language acquisition. Additionally, in the cases of using BiTak, the numbers of talkingturns increased throughout the experiments and the numbers of utterances in each turn
also were considerably high comparing to the cases without using BiTak. This alsomeans the BiTak function plays a considerable role in supporting users conveying theirideas or practicing second language.
The purpose of creating Recording function by pushing the Speaking button isto help users watch the video again in order to ask the others about what they are still
not clear or confused. The images of body language and sound in the videos can behints for users to improve their speaking skills. The recording function gained its
confirmation of efficiency through a long-term experiment. At first, people also felt
annoyed to be asked to watch again the recording video in the middle of conversation.
Nevertheless, their attitudes changed after realizing the atmosphere of language
69

learning when using BiTak. The importance of recognizing and correcting mistakes by
watching videos again was gradually stabilized throughout the series of experiments.

70

Chapter 6: Validity of Dual-role Collaborative
Learning Model
Implementation of collaborative learning structures in language may increase
student-student interaction, and a natural integration of speaking, listening, reading, andwriting— essential skills of language learning process. Learners have chances tointeract with peers through authentic communication, thus acquiring language naturally.
Traditionally, productive skills are the most strongly supported modes withincollaborative learning, but receptive skills also play roles. As long as students havewillingness to communicate and are autonomous enough to have responsibility in theirown learning, a collaborative learning approach would be an ideal option to achieve thepurposes of learners’ motivation and proficiency. The author would like to emphasize
the difference between this novel model and the normal Collaborative Learning inclassroom. The grouping or pairing learners for the purpose of collaborating orcooperating together to achieve the same learning goal has been widely researched andadvocated. Meanwhile, Dual-role Collaborative Learning Method offers opportunities
for learners to attain different goals in the same domain utilizing their roles of being
teachers and learners. They give and take complementary knowledge through that kindof interaction.
My dissertation has focused only on acquiring the speaking skill andsuccessfully proved the effectiveness of Dual-role Collaborative Learning Model to thisskill. However, it does not mean this model cannot be applied in the other three skills.
In fact, it is absolutely applicable in practicing both productive and receptive skills tosimultaneously acquiring their target language skills. The examples of the same context

71

of Japanese and English learners in the following figures could be taken into
consideration.

Figure 21: Dual-role Collaborative Learning Model in Writing Practice72

Figure 22: Dual-role Collaborative Learning Model in Reading Practice

Figure 23: Dual-role Collaborative Learning Model in Listening Practice

Simply speaking, this model might be easily applied in reading and listening (receptive
skills) because learners comfortably use their L1 to help their partners practice their73

target language (L2) and vice versa. The correction stage is not necessary here.
However, regarding to writing (the productive skill), learners are required to correct
their partners L2 writing as the same as the speaking practice conducted in this research.
In addition, it is proved that the novel collaborative learning model in my study
works well in the online environment. It is advisable to conduct this model in face-toface setting with some supporting or restricted features. Some implications for thismodel to be applied in the other domains should also be explored.

74

Chapter 7: Conclusion and Future works
7.1 Conclusion
In this research, I proposed a theoretical model named dual-role collaborative
learning that allows people who have complementary knowledge and/or skills tomutually give and take them at the same time. Based on this novel model, I proposed asimultaneous second language acquisition method by dual-lingual communication andimplemented a web CSCL system BiTak to facilitate the dual-lingual communications.
BiTak is equipped with three functions, i.e. the strict turn-taking function, the recording
function and text chat function related to each recorded utterance, for facilitating dualrole collaborative learning of speaking skill through dual-lingual communication. I
conducted experiments with 32 subjects to evaluate the effectiveness of the dual-lingual
communication in the second language acquisition and also to evaluate the usefulness
of BiTak. The learner’s progress is positively evaluated by certified language teachers
using a Rubric scoring framework. Based on the experiments results, I confirmed thatthe dual-lingual communication method allows people to acquire two different
languages simultaneously. In addition, the CSCL BiTak has changed the notion of users
from an ordinary video chat application to a collaborative learning system thanks to its
three prominent features and the learners became able to play their roles as facilitatorsand receivers to support each other’s speaking skill. These findings suggested that theDual-role Collaborative Learning model is feasible to give and take complementaryknowledge and skills at the same time.
From analyzing collected results, I come to a conclusion that it should berecommended to incorporate all the suggested features to achieve best results whenpracticing second language using BiTak: applying dual-lingual conversation with strict
75

turn-taking for presentation, using recording link for realizing mistakes and normal
conversation for correcting mistake and discuss. As a result, students can takeadvantage of their role of facilitators and receivers to simultaneously improve theirspeaking skill.

7.2 Future works
In this research, I proposed a dual-lingual communication method with strict
turn-taking for language speaking practice. This way of communication may sounds
inconvenient for users who are already familiar with natural conversation with smooth
turn-taking, even not to mention the dual-lingual communication when they have to
speak their partners’ language. Nevertheless, it was suggested that Dual-lingual
communication and the strict turn-taking successfully promotes speaking skills basedon the experimental results. This fruitful outcome will be a great motivation for me todeeper investigate which unnaturality of natural conversation can be beneficial insecond language learning in order to create an ideal environment for people practicing
languages. Everyday conversation is based on mutual contingency with equal
distribution of rights and duties. Unplanned nature and unpredictable outcomes
constitute primary characteristics of natural conversation. Instances of cultural
language differences are evidenced in that some languages have specific words forconcepts whereas other languages use several words to represent a specific concept.
For example, the Arabic language includes many specific words for designating acertain type of horse or camel. To make such distinctions in English, where specificwords do not exist, adjectives would be used preceding the concept label, such as
quarter horse or dray horse. In addition, difference in social roles, non-verbal cues76

(e.g.,facial expression) and contextual cues (e.g., shared experience) is also varied indifferent cultures. This may cause possible misunderstanding during Dual-lingual
communication. Talking while having cultural differences might make people feel
uncomfortable or unnatural. Last but not least, I am researching deeply about thecharacteristics of natural conversation with the hope of finding any unnaturality andanalyze whether they can be effective for second language acquisition.

77

Acknowledgement
Writing a dissertation is an enormous task, and I would like to acknowledge tothe cooperation and support I have received from many individuals throughout thisjourney though words cannot explain my gratitude.
I would like to express my deepest thanks and greatest appreciation to myresearch supervisor Prof. Kazushi Nishimoto, who has provided me with kindness,scholarly direction, and encouragement through the years of my master and doctoral
programs at JAIST. Without his continuous support and dedicated care, the researchwould not have been possible. Special thanks also go to my second supervisor Prof.
Van Nam HUYNH and my minor research supervisor Associate Prof. Yuizono Takaya,
who have provided me with proper guidance, sincere effort, valuable comments andsuggestions concerning my journal and research methodologies.
I am also very grateful to all participants joining my experiments. I deeply
acknowledge their contribution to this research. Especially, I would like to express mygratitude to Prof. Shungo Kawanishi and Ms. Masako Tsutsui who dedicatedly took
part in student evaluation process.
I would like to thank all members of Nishimoto Lab, my big sister Pham Bich
Hong and friends in JAIST for their continuous support and encouragement. Their
positive advice, scholarly discussions, comments and suggestions during the labseminars and presentations contributed a lot to my research.
My deepest gratitude to my beloved family, my dear partner and friends
whose love, support, guidance and sacrifices have always encouraged me in myendeavors. I am especially indebted to my besties, Nguyen Thi Khanh Ly and Le78

Nguyen Van Anh, who dedicated their time and energy to light my way and ease mydifficulties despite their heavy research and working load. Thanks to all of you.

79

Reference[1]Northwood, B., & Kinoshita Thomson, C. (2012). What keeps them going?
Investigating ongoing learners of Japanese in Australian universities. JapaneseStudies, 32(3), 335-355.

[2]Seward, J. (1969). Japanese in Action; An Unorthodox Approach to the Spoken
Language and the People Who Speak It.

[3]Landis, D., & Brislin, R. W. (Eds.). (2013). Handbook of Intercultural Training:
Issues in training methodology (Vol. 116). Elsevier.

[4]Galloway, N. (2013). Global English and English Language Teaching (ELT)–
Bridging the gap between theory and practice in a Japanese context. System, 41(3),786-803.

[5]Holman, C., Leibrock, J., Jimenez, J., Greitzer, D., & Haynes, T. (2011, May).
Lingua: cultural exchange through language partnerships. In CHI'11 Extended
Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1001-1006). ACM.

[6]Kimber, L. (2014). Attitudes and beliefs of students toward bi-/multilingualism at
an international university in Japan. Ritsumeikan Journal of Asia Pacific Studies,33, 139-152.

[7]Mushi, S. (2002). Simultaneous and successive second language learning: Integral
ingredients of the human development process. Early child development andcare, 172(4), 349-358.

[8]Myers-Scotton, C. (2006). Multiple voices: An introduction to bilingualism.
Malden: Blackwell Publishing.

[9]Li, N., & Rosson, M. B. (2012, October). At a different tempo: what goes wrong in
online cross-cultural group chat?. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM international
80conference on Supporting group work (pp. 145-154). ACM.

[10]Giles, H., Coupland, N., & Coupland, I. U. S. T. I. N. E. (1991). 1. Accommodation
theory: Communication, context, and. Contexts of accommodation: Developments
in applied sociolinguistics, 1.

[11]Coulthard, R. M. (1985). An Introduction to Discourse Analysis. London:
Longman.

[12]Mynard, J. (2002). Introducing EFL students to chat rooms. The Internet TESLJournal, 8(2).

[13]Purpura, J. E. (2016). Second and Foreign Language Assessment. The Modern
Language Journal, 100(S1), 190-208.

[14]Andrade, Heidi Goodrich. "Using rubrics to promote thinking andlearning." Educational leadership 57.5 (2000): 13-19.

[15]Pomplun, M., Capps, L., & Sundbye, N. (1998). Criteria teachers use to score
performance items. Educational assessment, 5(2), 95-110.Myers-Scotton, C. (2006).
Multiple voices: An introduction to bilingualism. Malden: Blackwell Publishing.

[16]Dillenbourg, P. (1999). Collaborative learning: Cognitive and computational
approaches. advances in learning and instruction series. Elsevier Science, Inc., PO
Box 945, Madison Square Station, New York, NY 10160-0757.

[17]Mitnik, R., Recabarren, M., Nussbaum, M., & Soto, A. (2009). Collaborative
Robotic Instruction: A Graph Teaching Experience. Computers & Education, 53(2),330-342.

[18]Roschelle, J., & Teasley, S. (1995). The construction of shared knowledge incollaborative problem sol- ving. In C. O’Malley (Ed.), Computer-supported
collaborative learning (pp. 69–97).
81

[19]Tinto, V., & Pusser, B. (2006). Moving from theory to action: Building a model of
institutional action for student success. National Postsecondary Education
Cooperative, 1-51.

[20]Harasim, L. (1997, May). Interacting in hyperspace: Developing collaborative
learning environments on the WWW. Paper presented at the Workshop on
Improving Economic Management Training, Marocco.

[21]A Stahl, G., Koschmann, T.,& Suthers,D.(2006). Computer-supported
collaborative learning: An historical perspective. Cambridge handbook of thelearning sciences, 2006, 409-426.

[22]Kimber, L. (2014). Attitudes and beliefs of students toward bi-/multilingualism at
an international university in Japan. Ritsumeikan Journal of Asia Pacific Studies,33, 139-152.

[23]Ibrahim, N., Shak, M. S. Y., Mohd, T., Zaidi, A., & Yasin, S. M. A. (2015). The
Importance of Implementing Collaborative Learning in the English as a Second
Language (ESL) Classroom in Malaysia. Procedia Economics and Finance, 31,
346-353.

[24]Long, M. H., & Porter, P. A. (1985). Group work, interlanguage talk, and second
language acquisition. TESOL quarterly, 19(2), 207-228.

[25]Brandon, D. P., & Hollingshead, A. B. (1999). Collaborative learning andcomputer‐supported groups. Communication education, 48(2), 109-126.

[26]Roberts, T. S. (Ed.). (2004). Computer-supported collaborative learning in higher
education. IGI Global.

[27]Koschmann, T. (1996). Paradigm shifts and instructional technology: An
introduction. In T. Koschmann, (Ed.), CSCL: Theory and practice of an emerging
82

paradigm, (pp. 1-23). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

[28]Bolter, J. D. (1984). Turing's man: western culture in the computer age. Chapel
Hill: The University of North Carolina Press.

[29]Koschman, T. (1994). Toward a theory of computer support for collaborative
learning. Journal of the learning sciences, 3, 219-225.

[30]O’Malley, C. & Scanlon, E. (1989). Computer-supported collaborative learning:
Problem solving and distance education. Centre for Information Technology in
Education. Report No. 75. Open University, Great Britain.

[31]Alavi, M. (1994). Computer-mediated collaborative learning: An empiricalevaluation. MIS quarterly, 159-174.

[32]Koschmann, T. D. (1994). Toward a theory of computer support for collaborative
learning. TheJournal of the Learning Sciences, 3,219-225.

[33]Li, N., & Rosson, M. B. (2012, October). At a different tempo: what goes wrong
in online cross-cultural group chat?. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM international
conference on Supporting group work (pp. 145-154). ACM.

[34]Li, N., & Rosson, M. B. (2014, April). Using annotations in online group chats.
InProceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing
Systems (pp. 863-866). ACM.

[35]Freiermuth, M., & Jarrell, D. (2006). Willingness to communicate: can online chathelp? 1. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 16(2), 189-212.

[36]Freiermuth, M. R. (2001). Features of electronic synchronous communication: acomparative analysis of online chat, spoken and written texts. ETD Collection for
Oklahoma State University, AAI3021616.

[37]Schwienhorst, K. (2002). Evaluating tandem language learning in the MOO:
83

Discourse repair strategies in a bilingual Internet project. Computer Assisted
Language Learning, 15(2), 135-145.

[38]Setlock, L. D., & Fussell, S. R. (2010, February). What's it worth to you?: the costs
and affordances of CMC tools to asian and american users. InProceedings of the2010 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work (pp. 341-350).
ACM.

[39]Angelova, M., & Zhao, Y. (2014). Using an online collaborative project between
American and Chinese students to develop ESL teaching skills, cross-culturalawareness and language skills. Computer Assisted Language Learning, (ahead-ofprint), 1-19.

[40]Chang, Y. J., Li, L., Chou, S. H., Liu, M. C., & Ruan, S. (2013, April). Xpress:
crowdsourcing native speakers to learn colloquial expressions in a second language.
In CHI'13 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 25552560). ACM.

[41]Hampel, R., & Stickler, U. (2012). The use of videoconferencing to support
multimodal interaction in an online language classroom. ReCALL, 24(02), 116-137.

[42]Dunkel, P. (1990). Implications of the CAI effectiveness research for limited
English proficient learners. Computers in the Schools, 7(1/2), 31-52.

[43]Armstrong, K. M., & Yetter-Vassot, C. (1994). Transforming teaching throughtechnology. Foreign Language Annals, 27(4), 475-486.

[44]Garrett, N. (1991). Technology in the service of language learning: Trends andissues. Modern Language Journal, 75(1), 74-101.

[45]Ruschoff, B. (1993). Language learning and information technology: State of theart. CALICO Journal, 10(3), 5-18.
84

[46]Sussex, R. (1991). Author languages, authoring systems and their relation to thechanging focus of computer-aided language learning. System, 19(1/2), 15-27.

[47]Chun, D., & Brandl, K. K. (1992). Beyond form-based drill and practice: Meaningenhancing CALL on the Macintosh. Foreign Language Annals, 25(3), 255-265.

[48]Hoffman, S. (1995/1996). Computers and instructional design in foreign
language/ESL instruction. TESOL Journal, 5(2), 24-29.

[49]Jones, F. (1991). Mickey Mouse and the state of the art: Program sophisticationand classroom methodology in communicative CALL. System, 19(1-2), 1-13.

[50]Legenhausen, L., & Wolff, D. (1990). CALL in use - use of CALL: Evaluating
CALL software. System, 18(1), 1-14.

[51]Liu, M. (1994). Hypermedia assisted instruction and second language learning: A
semantic-network-based approach. Computers in the Schools, 10(3/4), 293-312.

[52]Hult, S., Kalaja, M., Lassila, O., & Lehtisalo, T. (1990). HYPERREADER-An
interactive course in reading comprehension. System, 18(2), 189-198.

[53]Chun, D., & Plass, J. (1997). Research on text comprehension in multimedia
environments. Language Learning and Technology, 1(1), 60-81. Retrieved February
13,

2001

from

the

World

Wide

Web:

http://llt.msu.edu/vol1num1/chun_plass/default.html.

[54]Kramsch, C., & Andersen, R. (1999). Teaching text and context throughmultimedia. Language Learning and Technology, 2(2), 31-42. Retrieved February
13,

2001

from

the

World

Wide

Web:

http://llt.msu.edu/vol2num2/article1/index.html.

[55]Eshani, F., & Knodt, E. (1998). Speech technology in computer-aided language
learning: Strengths and limitations of a new CALL paradigm. Language Learning85and Technology, 2(1), 45-60. Retrieved February 13, 2001 from the World Wide
Web: http://llt.msu.edu/vol2num1/article3/index.html.

[56]Cornu, A. M., Decker, B., Rosseel, P., & Vanderheiden, M. (1990). Investigating
the teaching of writing techniques in a foreign language: A pedagogical issue.
System, 18(3), 361- 372.

[57]Cononelos, T., & Oliva, M. (1993). Using computer networks to enhance foreign
language/culture education. Foreign Language Annals, 26(4), 527-534.

[58]Hulstijn, J. (2000). The use of computer technology in experimental studies ofsecond language acquisition: A survey of some techniques and some ongoingstudies. Language Learning and Technology, 3(2), 32-43. Retrieved February 13,
2001 from the World Wide Web: http://llt.msu.edu/vol3num2/hulstijn/index.html.

[59]Godwin-Jones, R. (1999). Web course design and creation for language learning.
CALICO Journal, 17(1), 43-58.

[60]Salaberry, M. R. (1996). A theoretical foundation for the development ofpedagogical tasks in computer mediated communication. CALICO Journal, 14(1),5-36.

[61]Beauvois, M. H. (1992). Computer-assisted classroom discussion in the foreign
language classroom: Conversation in slow motion. Foreign Language Annals, 25(5),445-464.

[62]Beauvois, M. H. (1994). E-talk: Attitudes and motivation in computer-assistedclassroom discussion. Computers and the Humanities, 28, 177-190.

[63]Chun, D. (1994). Using computer networking to facilitate the acquisition ofinteractive competence. System, 22(1), 17-31.

[64]González-Bueno, M. (1998). The effects of electronic mail on Spanish L2
86

discourse. Language Learning and Technology, 1(2), 55-70. Retrieved February 13,
2001 from the World Wide Web: http://llt.msu.edu/vol1num2/article3/default.html.

[65]Gonzalez-Bueno, M., & Perez, L. C. (2000). Electronic mail in foreign language
writing: A study of grammatical and lexical accuracy, and quantity of language.
Foreign Language Annals, 33(2), 189-198.

[66]Kelm, O. R. (1992). The use of synchronous computer networks in second
language instruction: A preliminary report. Foreign Language Annals, 25(5), 441453.

[67]Kern, R. (1995). Restructuring classroom interaction with networked computers:
Effects on quantity and characteristics of language production. Modern Language
Journal, 79(4), 457- 476.

[68]Kroonenberg, N. (1994/1995). Developing communicative and thinking skills via
electronic mail. TESOL Journal, 4(2), 24-27.

[69]Sullivan, N., & Pratt, E. (1996). A comparative study of two ESL writing
environment: a computer-assisted classroom and a traditional oral classroom.
System, 24(4), 491-501.

[70]Van Handle, D., & Corl, K. (1998). Extending the dialogue: Using electronic mailand the Internet to promote conversation and writing in intermediate level German
language courses. CALICO Journal, 15(1-3), 129-143.

[71]Warschauer, M. (1995/1996). Comparing face to face and electronic discussion in
the second language classroom. CALICO Journal, 13(2&3), 7-26.

[72]Salaberry, M. R. (1996). A theoretical foundation for the development ofpedagogical tasks in computer mediated communication. CALICO Journal, 14(1),
5-36.
87

[73]Warschauer, M. (1997). Computer-mediated collaborative Learning: Theory andPractice. Modern Language Journal, 81(4), 470-481.

[74]Warschauer, M., Turbee, L., & Roberts, B. (1996). Computer learning networks
and student empowerment. System, 24(1), 1-14.

[75]Cunningham, D. (1998). 25 years of technology in language teaching: A personal
experience. Babel: Journal of the Australian Federation of Modern Language
Teachers' Associations, 33(1), 4-7, 35.

[76]Iandoli, L. J. (1990). CALL and the profession: The current state. French Review,
64(2), 261-272.

[77]Pusack, J. P., & Otto, S. K. (1990). Applying Instructional technologies. Foreign
Language Annals, 23(5), 409-417.

[78]Levy,

M.

(1997). Computer-assisted

languagelearning:

Context

andconceptualization. Oxford University Press.

[79]Chapelle, C. A. (2001). Computer applications in second language acquisition.
Cambridge University Press.

[80]Thornton, P. (1999). Reading together. In D. Kluge & S. McGuire (Eds.), JALT
Applied Materials: Cooperative Learning (pp. 23-36). Tokyo, Japan: Japan
Association for Language Teaching.

[81]Doymuş K (2007) Effect of a Cooperative Learning Strategy in the Teaching ofPhase and One-Component Phase Diagrams. Journal of Chemical Education 84:
1857-1860[82]Hedeen T (2003) The Reverse Jigsaw: A Process of Cooperative Learning andDiscussion. Teaching Sociology 31: 325-332.

[83]Gocer, A. (2010). Comparative research on the effectiveness of cooperative
88

learning methods and Jigsaw technique on teaching literary genres. , 5(8), 439-445.

[84]Ogura, K., & Nishimoto, K. (2006, April). ChaTEL: a voice communication
system for facilitating multithreaded conversation. In CHI'06 Extended Abstracts
on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1163-1168). ACM.

[85]Crystal, David. (1997). The Cambridge encyclopedia of language. (2nd edition.)
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Conclusion[86]Schoonen, R. (2011). How language ability is assessed. Handbook of research insecond language teaching and learning, 2, 701-716[87]Davies, A. (1990). Principles of language testing. Wiley-Blackwell[88]Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S. (1996). Language testing in practice: Designingand developing useful language tests (Vol. 1). Oxford University Press.

[89]Bachman, L. F. (1990). Fundamental considerations in language testing. Oxford
university press.

[90]Council of Europe. (2014) Education and Languages, Language Policy. Available
at: http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/CADRE1_EN.asp (Accessed: 1 December
2014)[91]Krashen, S. D. (1982). Acquiring a second language. World Englishes, 1(3), 97101.

[92]Gass, S. M., & Varonis, E. M. (1994). Input, interaction, and second language
production. Studies in second language acquisition, 16(3), 283-302.

[93]Yule, G., & Macdonald, D. (1990). Resolving referential conflicts in L2
interaction: The effect of proficiency and interactive role. Language learning, 40(4),539-556.

[94]Oliver, R. (1995). Negative feedback in child NS-NNS conversation. Studies in89second language acquisition, 17(4), 459-481[95]Kowal, M., & Swain, M. (1994). Using collaborative language production tasks topromote students’ language awareness. Language awareness, 3(2), 73-93.

[96]Krashen, S. (1989). We acquire vocabulary and spelling by reading: Additional
evidence for the input hypothesis. The modern language journal, 73(4), 440-464.

[97]Pilgreen, J., & Krashen, S. (1993). Sustained Silent Reading with English as a
Second Language High School Students: Impact on Reading Comprehension,
Reading Frequency, and Reading Enjoyment. School Library Media Quarterly,22(1), 21-23.

[98]Elley, W. B. (1991). Acquiring literacy in a second language: The effect of book‐
based programs. Language learning, 41(3), 375-411.

[99]Elley, W. B., & Croft, C. (1989). Assessing the difficulty of reading materials: The
noun frequency method.

[100]Zimmerman, C. B. (1997). Do reading and interactive vocabulary instruction
make a difference? An empirical study. TESOL quarterly, 31(1), 121-140.

[101]Krashen, S. D. (1991). Bilingual education: A focus on current research.
[102]Ho, T. V., Nakamori, Y., Ho, T. B., & Nguyen, S. D. (2015). The Effects of a
Knowledge Management-Based Model for Teacher Professional Development in
Hands-On Approach. International Journal of Knowledge and Systems Science(IJKSS), 6(1), 60-78.

[103]Islam, S., Kunifuji, S., Hayama, T., & Miura, M. (2012). An Adoption Model for
E-Learning and Knowledge Management Systems. International Journal of
Knowledge and Systems Science (IJKSS), 3(2), 51-66.

[104]Rugube, T., Mthethwa-Kunene, K. E., & Maphosa, C. (2020). Promoting90interactivity in online learning–towards the achievement of high-quality online
learning outcomes. European Journal of Open Education and E-learning Studies,5(2).

[105]Brief, P. (2020). Education during COVID-19 and beyond. United Nations(Accessed 2020, at https://www. un. org/development/desa/dspd/2020/04/socia limpact-of-covid-19.)[106]Han, M., & Li, Y. (2019). The effect of face-to-face and non-face-to-facesynchronously collaborative writing environment on student engagement andacademic performance. Journal of Education, Innovation, and Communication(JEICOM), 1(2), 65-74.

[107]Tuhkala, A., & Kärkkäinen, T. (2018). Using Slack for computer-mediatedcommunication to support higher education students’ peer interactions during
Master’s thesis seminar. Education and Information Technologies, 23(6), 23792397.

[108]Zhang, X., Meng, Y., de Pablos, P. O., & Sun, Y. (2019). Learning analytics incollaborative learning supported by Slack: From the perspective of engagement.
Computers in Human Behavior, 92, 625-633.

[109]Olaniran , B. A. (2006). Applying synchronous computer-mediatedcommunication into course design: Some considerations and practical guides.
Campus wide Information systems, 23(3), 210-220.

[110]Olaniran, B. A. (2004). Computer-mediated communication as an instructional
learning tool: Course evaluation with communication students. In Comeaux, P. (Ed.),
Assessing on-line teaching & learning (pp. 144-158). MA, Boston: Anker PublisherInc.
91[111]I Solé, C. R., & Hopkins, J. (2007). Contrasting two approaches to distancelanguage learning. Distance Education, 28(3), 351.

[112]Martin, J. P (2018). Learning by teaching (LdL): Conceptualization as a sourceof happiness.

[113]Grzega, J. (2005). Learning By Teaching. The Didactic Model LdL in University
Classes.

[114]Martin, J. P (2018). Learning by teaching (LdL): Conceptualization as a sourceof happiness.

[115]Egitim, S., & Garcia, T. (2021). Japanese University Students' Perceptions ofForeign English Teachers. English Language Teaching, 14(5), 13-22[116]Benson, P. (2013). Teaching and researching: Autonomy in language learning.
Routledge[117]King, J. (2013). Silence in the second language classroom. Springer.
[118]Loucky, J. P., & Ware, J. L. (2017). Flipped instruction methods and digitaltechnologies in the language learning classroom.

[119]Council of Europe. (2014) Education and Languages, Language Policy.
Available at: http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/CADRE1_EN.asp (Accessed: 1
December 2014[120]Ulker, V. (2017). The Design and Use of Speaking Assessment Rubrics. Journalof Education and Practice, 8(32), 135-141

92

Publication List
Papers published in academic journals, bookso Bui Ba Hoang Anh, and Kazushi Nishimoto: A Half-duplex Dual-lingual Video
Chat to Enhance Simultaneous Second Language Speaking Skill, in Uskov, V.
L., Howlett, R. J., and Jain L. C. (eds), Smart Education and e-Learning 2017,
Springer, pp.205-214, 2017. (Refereed)
Presentations at international conferenceso Bui Ba Hoang Anh, and Kazushi Nishimoto: A Half-duplex Dual-lingual Video
Chat to Enhance Simultaneous Second Language Speaking Skill, International
Conference KES-SEEL-17, 21-23 June 2017, Algarve, Portugal. (Refereed)o Bui Ba Hoang Anh, Kazushi Nishimoto: Dual-role Collaborative Learning in
Simultaneous Second Language Acquisition, JAIST World Conference 2018,
27th February, 2018. (Not refereed)
Presentations at academic conferences, symposium in Japano Bui Ba Hoang Anh, 西本一志：BiTak: A Half-duplex Dual-lingual Video Chatto Improve Languages Proficiency both of Japanese and International Students，
インタラクション 2016 論文集，1B16，pp.219-222, Tokyo, Japan, March2016.
o Bui Ba Hoang Anh, Kazushi Nishimoto: Strict Turn-Taking in A Half-duplex
Dual-lingual Video Chat : An Unfriendly User Interaction But Useful In
Enhancing Second Language Speaking, IPSJ SIG Technical Report, Vol.2016HCI-167, No.16, pp.1-8, Tokyo, Japan, March 2016.
o Bui Ba Hoang Anh, 西本一志: A Study On Enhancing Simultaneous Second
93Language Speaking Skill : Strict Turn-Taking in A Half-duplex Dual-lingual
Video Chat，インタラクション 2017 論文集, 2-508-38, pp. 514-519, TokyoJapan, March 2017.
o Bui Ba Hoang Anh, 西 本 一 志: Dual-role Collaborative Learning in
Simultaneous Second Language Acquisition，インタラクション 2018 予稿集，2P06，Tokyo Japan, March 2018．
o Bui Ba Hoang Anh, Kazushi Nishimoto: Collaborative Learning in
Simultaneous Second Language Acquisition by Impeding Smooth Turn-taking
in Communications，SSI2018 講演論文集，SS13-12，pp.1-6，計測自動制
御学会 システム・情報部門 学術講演会 2018, Toyama Japan, 201894

Appendix
Examples of Experiment Transcription
Using-Bitak Groups

1:28- 2:28

In my opinion, I think comedy in Japan is a waste of time. (A)

3:05-4:15

Jibun daisuki no bangumi wa…( I don't know how to say the name inJapanese) (B)

5:43- 6:45

Watashi wa TV bangumi wa ( a waste of time) comedy desu. Nihonno comedy chotto…(C)

9:43-10:30

I don’t usually watch TV almost for 2 years cuz I didn’t have TV in
my room. Usually I watch news, few times a week, one or two hours
each time I guess. (A)

11:28-11:50

Watashi wa TV wo mienai desu ke to, computer de America no
dorama wo mainichi ni jikan ni mimasu. (B)

12:40-13:27

Watashi wa TV wo mimasen. Demo watashi wa mainichi Youtube to
Netflix wo mimasu, san jikan gurai. (C)

13:56-15:06
95

I don’t really watch TV in my room. So the only time I can watch TV
is to eat my lunch in cafeteria at Jaist. But I like watching TV in myhouse when we got TV. So it’s fun to watch. So if I have money I
want to buy a TV someday. (D)
16:06- 16:40
My favorite TV program is TV news. I liked to watch news and want
to check information. Also because when I do laundry,..and when it
rains I can’t laundry much so I need to watch news. (A)
0:48- 1:15
um…watashi no daisuki dorama wa America comedy to saifai
dorama desu. Tatoewa Bigbang Theory… (C)
1:38- 2:03
Watashi no ichiban suki no TV bangumi wa America no dorama desu.
Izo desu. (B)
2:17-3:34
My favourite TV program is also TV series, especially TV series in
US and UK. May favorite TV series is Walking Dead, The Lost, You
know?... The reason I like TV series is because it’s exciting, makes
me forget about real life. And in order to do that, I need more
excitement. That’s the reason I like TV series. Thank you. (D)
4:02- 4:55
When I was a child, I watched animation. I love aninmation like
Drangon Balls or…I don't remember… I also watched old Japanese96

ones, American ones like Batman, Superman… Yes, I like watching
5:07- 6:13

animation. (A)Watashi wa kodomo no jikan no toki ni itsumo terebi ni mite
imashita. Demo wa watashi wa shogaku no toki, jikan ga nai,…
6:48- 7:50

mitenai, eh…(B)Watashi no kodomo no toki wa TV wo mimashita. Demo, heijitsu wa
amari mimasen desu ga, shuumatsu wa TV wo mimasu, yon jikan
7:58- 9:18

gurai mimasu…(C)Yeah, I was also watching so many TV when I was a child, both inweekend and weekdays and I also watch so many programs like
comedy, anime, documentaries… Actually sometimes I want to beback to my childhood cuz when I was a child, I can enjoy TV program
without worrying about anything. Now I couldn’t enjoy TV program
because when I watch TV, I don't know why but I couldn't think about
10:06- 11:20

the program. So I want to go back to my childhood. (D)OK so I love animation…I watch Discovery and… I don't know how
11:55-12:36

to say in English… That was fun watching it. (A)

13:00-13:45…manga wo mimashita, kodomo no toki. (B)97Watashi no kodomo no toki ni TV bangumi wa nihon no animation.
14:00- 14:57

Tatoewa Conan toka, Dragon Balls,…yea…(C)The TV program I watched when I was a child is comedy,
documentary, anime. The most frequency is anime. My most favorite
anime is the same with Nazif-san, it is Dragon Ball. I really like anime
15:20-16-55

in the past. (D)OK so what has changed in the past decade, is the rise of Netflix andinternet stuff. The TV program becoming more and more boring I
think. Because most of the fun it cost a lot of money and normal TV
station don’t want to put much money and effort on that. And Netflix
1:25- 2:55

has better stuff…(A)I’m not sure TV program changes in the last decades. I can feel somechange in Japanese TV program. That is the cost, amount of money
provided to make program. That money goes to Netflix, this kind of
online TV program. In the two decades at least, Japanese TV couldn’t
3:00-4:00

invest much money. Maybe that could leave…(D)Ah…E to…terebi wo mimasu ooi desu. Ima,…daitai hito wa internet
4:24-5:45

to de bangumi mimasu. (B)98

Ah…watashi wa Wagga-san to onaji desu. Watashitachi wa itsumo
6:13-7:13

terebi de mimashita, demo ima chotto benri…ah…uh…wa can watch
movie from, …ah… internet to de TV no bangumi mimasu. (C)Uhm…I’m not quite sure that change my life directly but maybe I
think I do get the influence from TV, I guess, don’t know it actually
gonna change the way of my life. But I sometimes feel like when
7:18- 7:42

watching TV, there something come out but you don't say it’s gonnachange my life, I think…(A)

8:47- 9:47

Watashi mo chenji ga wakarimasen desuketo benkyo ga zettai
arimasu. (B)I’m also not sure whether TV changed my life or not. Of course TVchanges has some influence on me. Not sure changed my life. There
were some influence on me. For example the Dragon Balls teach me
10:30- 10:51

justice, and (..) give me much fun time…anyway I’m not sure itchanged my life.

talkwatashi benkyo wa daitai America no dorama kara benkyoshimasu.

….

99

2:27- 3:48

I think a waste of time is …. (A)

4:09- 6:45

A no, donna terebi bangumi wa jikan wo kakarimashita? Mondai wa?
A no,story bangumi wa ichiban jikan wo kakaru to omoimashita.
Tatoewa, maishuu go go roku kara hachi ji made, bangumi ga arimasu
kara, ano shigoto wo owarimashita kara, ano ie e kaeritai, demo….ano…betsuni youji ga shimasen kara, …(B)

6:57- 9:34

donna bangumi ga amari jikan kakari wa …(C)

10:52- 14:01

I think…(long thinking time) I don’t like TV …sorry (D)talkdiscussion

16:06- 16:23

I don’t watch TV because I don't have TV in my room, justnewspaper.(A)talkasking…

1:19- 2:58

watashi wa ima, ah mukashi wa terebi wo mimasen deshita, demo
watashi wa kyonen yon gatsu kara nihongo de jimu wo miru ga
arimasu. Demo chotto muzukashi desu ne, nihongo bangumi, ano

100daitai wa nihongo no news wo mimasu, hai, ano ichinichi, tapun ichi
ji gurai, ni ji gurai. Hai, izo desu. (B)

3:16- 4:18

I don’t watch TV but recently I watch TV, I only watch TV
for…(keep repeating nonsense)

4:50- 5:40

watashi mo terebi amari mitenai. Kazouku to isshoni mimasu, gonen
kan mae gurai, izzo desu

talk

discussion,

11:15- 12:54

My favorite TV program …uhm nowadays I’m interested in lovestories. First of all I like reading books, nowadays some TV programs
are delivered in the form of story…(A)13:07- 15:36

Nanno terebi bangumi wa daisuki desu ka. Ano kokose no toki ni
yakyu game wa daisuki desu, america yakyu game daisuki, demo
jikan wa tapun wa gozen nana ji kara juu ji han made, kono jikan wa
ano gakko e iku jikan desu, demo watashi wa daisuki no theme gamega aru toki gakko e ikimasen deshita. Demo yakyu no miru jikan
tapun wa san ji han gurai, mukashi no jikan wa arimashita, demo ima
wa nagai jikan ga arimasen, chotto jikan aru, tatoewa ichi ji, ni
ji…saikin wa game highlight wo mimashita. (B)

15:48-17:55

101

Nanno terebi bangumi ga suki desuka. Watashi wa terebi, kankoku
no dorama ga suki desu. Demo love story dake, sonota dorama ga
amari suki janai desu. Watashi wa ii story no dorama ga suki de,tatoewa, dorama de aru…(C)2:01- 2:45
My favorite TV program is..because its great effect…I like cute…(D)talkdiscussion
8:57- 10:07
In my hometown, my house has TV and everyone like to watch TV
but my parents didn’t let me watch TV too much. Because I focus tosee TV without eating food…(A)
10:46-12:40
Kodomo no toki ano ryoushin wa terebi wo mite ikimasen, demo
ryoushin wa itekimasu, terebi wo mimasu. Soshite, demo watashi wa
oni ga imasu, ano onna no hito to otoko hito no bangumi no suki jigai
imasu. Oni no bangumi wa watshi wa kirai, ryoushin itekimasu no
jikan wa chisai kara demo, futari no jikan han, hai, totemo
talkchisai…(B)the speaker mistake about sister and brother ( ane and oni) and they
14:10- 15:57

fixed it for him…

102

Kodomo no toki wa kibishi no kazouku de benkyo wa ichiban taisetsu
de terebi wa chotto dake, shukujitsu toka nichiyoubi gurai dakemimashita. Sono toki ichiban suki wa nichiyoubi wa wa tashi wa
Christian node, mainichiyoubi wa kyoukai e ikimasu, asa hayaku
16:26- 18:50

okite, watashi to ane to imoto to issho suki no takusan mimashita. Hai
izo desu.

I watched TV when I was a child. I watched TV at dinner time…I
2:55- 4:25

haven’t watched TV for a long time. My little sister and brother don't
watch TV…

4:35- 6:05

When I was a child, I watched Doraemon, Dragon Balls. At that time,
Japanese channel number 3 was for children…

Kodomo toki wa zembu anime. Demo kosomo toki wa anime daisuki
desu demo ima wa anime wa zettai, ano amari suki janai. Tapun wa
6:10- 7:28

kodomo toki ni tomodachi itsumo mite, issho ni gakko ni sonna nostory hanashite, ima wa nai desu.

Chisai no toki ni tapun anime ya America no dorama wo mimasu.
America no dorama wa tokitoki ego de hanashite, sonotoki de eigo
wo benkyo shimasu. Sono terebi kara eigo wo benkyoshimashita.
7:34- 9:01

Ano terebi bangumi wa tabun okasan, chichi wa news ga suki,
tokitoki chichi miru toki, watashi wa mimasu.

103

talk

When I was a child, I watched animation. My family watched
together.

13:03-14:43
discussion
15:09-17:37
I might say yes…(need to check the sound again, too small to hear)watashi no kotae wa batsu(x). Terebi wa itsumo terebi, ima no sekaino joho wa juu nen mae yoro ooki narimashita, soshite terebi dake,ano terebi wo joho wo okurimashita no hoho wa ano dame, dame
janai, ano enough janai. Soshite iroiro na hoho wa tekimasu, tatoewa,
0:48- 4:06

ketai, internet, social networl, ano watashi no iken wa mono, monono aita ni software hoho wa kawateimasu ( change). Izo desu

Terebi bangumi wa mae to ima no wa onaji janai. Ima mukashi mono
4:18- 5:50

wa takusan ii joho wa terebi de moraimashita. Demo saikin terebi
bangumi ga amari ii to imasu.

9:18- 10:53
I also say yes to this question. I think the effect of media is getting
bigger in internet. TV is becoming…
Yes, I think TV does change my life. When I was a child, I cant readbooks because I don't know Japanese characters. I just understandHiragana and katakana. So when I was a chilad I can understand by104

11:13- 13:11

TV, very important to know the news. Now it has no use for me
because I can read kanji now…

Taiwan de ni nen yi kai senkyo ga arimase. Mukashi terebi de sefu
no joho kara moraimashita. Sonna toki ni jibun no iken ga terebi kara
eikyo wo ukerimashita. Demo sonna no iyu te, watashi no seigatsu
wa terebi de kawarimashita. Ima wa nihongo wo benkyo shitai kara,
13:21- 14:51

terebi de shimpun no mimashita, daitai wa ima wa seigatsu mokawarimashita. Hai izo desu.

terebi bangumi ga watashi no seigatsu soro kawari koto ga arimasu.
Tatoewa, animation wa nihon no ichiban yume desu ne. terebi deiroro na animation ga ate, hokano kuni wa technology mo wakari
14:56- 16.26

yasui to omoimase. Demo ima no saikin wa terebi wo minai desu.
Tabun watashi no seigatsu ima wa amari kawarimasen.

I would like to answer this question. My life also change because oftalk

TV. There are many topics on TV. TV is very common
nowadays…(thinking time)

discussion105

1:44- 4:13

Which TV program is a waste of time? I think … I’m not…I think…difficult…maybe love stories is waste of time TV program.
Because I don’t watch love stories. I watch only…love
stories…um…Sorry I can’t explain the reson but maybe I think lovestories is a waste of time.

talkdiscussion

7:37- 8:39

I think horror TV program is waste of time. The reason is so simple.
I hate scary things. So I don’t like ghost and something dark andmidnight. I couldn't watch horror TV program. So it is a waste of
time.

talk

discussion(The foreign student got difficult in explaining in Japanese and ask
for other members’s help. He explained his reason in English first.
The others wrote answer in the chat window)

12:56- 13:08

watashi wa horror no terebi bangumi ga jikan no muda to omoimasu.

discussion
talk

16:00- 17:02

106

I usually watch TV once or twice in a week. I usually watch Youtube
or some videos or I don't watch TV so much. So I watch TV once or
twice a week.
talk
discussion ( maybe youtube or Netflix is considered as TV
program?)
6:34- 7:54
You know I don't often watch TV but last month I was in India forexchange program. In India I sometimes watch TV programs,
comedy. I feel exciting, comedy is online in India. I watched twiceor three times in a week.
talk
discussion
9:51- 10:06
Comedy wa watashi no suki no bangumi desu.
talk
discussion
15:14- 17:40
My favorite TV program is documentary or travelling TV program
called ..(in Japanese name). There are some travellers, they are
crazy. Someone goes to North Pole…There are some crazy journey
documentary every month. It is exciting…
talk
discussion107

7:00- 7:48
Terebi no bangumi…Watashi wa sport program ga ichiban suki
desu.
talk
discussion
14:26- 15:15
Watashi ga daisuki na bangumi wa tokuni discovery toka, sportbangumi…soocer no bangumi wa yoku mimasu. Tokuni igrisu nosoocer ga suki desu. Hai izo desu.
talk
2:39-2:53

discussion ( They asked more questions)
Watashi wa terebi ga mimasen deshita.

talklong discussion
15:28- 17:24
The large TV company is NHK. They have two kinds of streams.
First is mainstream in TV, second is interact, education…It is TV
program for children, about history…educational TV program…I
watch this second stream in childhood sometimes. Maybe it changed
0:42- 2:07

my life

Watashi chisai no toki wa terebi wo mitara, yoku…tatoewa, eigo wobenkyosuru no toki, yoku BBC news toka wo mimasu. Sono108

3:42- 4:52

…Watashi daigaku kara hajime nihongo benkyosuru no toki wo,
yoku TV wo mimasu…

I am affected by anime, made by NHK. It called …(Jap name). It’sanime name. In their world, VR technology is very popular so theretalk

are many interesting things. I want to carry that technology to gameso I research here. So my life is changed by that TV program.

discussion. They cannot finish all the questions listed in the topic by
the designated time.

Not-using BiTak Groups

0:22-2.11

What kind of TV program is a waste of time?...wase of time is astrong statement for TV program.

disrupt

not clear utterance, talk at the same time, not clear turn.
Ex: amari mimasen, I don't watch TV, there’s no TV in my room.

4.10-4.25

Yes I always watch TV

4.27-4.29

TV arimasuka?

109

talk

cannot estimate turn cuz they speak the same time. Consider
discussion.

Did you watch TV when you were a child?

Arimasu/Yes. (two pp answer at the same time)

what program did you like?

Anime, Watashi no childhood wa Pokemon, Doraemon.

Is it famous in your country?

Doraemon, I know.

News wo mimasu ka?

I don't like news.

Watashi mo onaji.

…I like animation.

110

WWE mimasuka?

WWE? Fighter?Yeah I know.

Nihonjin no …

Wakarimasen.

America no program? Yeah I know. I like it.

Watashi wa maigatsu mimasu.

You mean Every month? It’s maitsuki.

Kana-san mo nani wo mimasu ka?

9:00- 9:50

When I was an elementary student, I like to watch quiz show, very
easy quizshow for elementary student. I also like watching anime ordrama because those kinds of thing I can make every single story…

Youtube? I likeMe too. Watashi mo suki.

111

Watashi wa indo no channel ga suki. (start speak in English).

Watashi wa ryori channel yoku mimasu.

Can you cook? Japanese food? Myanmar food?
Hai. Oishikunai to omoimasu.

I like music videos.

Un Watashi mo ongaku suki desu yo.

Me too.

youtube de…(people cannot understand. They keep aksing what??)(lots of out of topic questions, chaos, not focus on main point..)(One member even opened the music to show others the music heliked.)(They kept talking and gossiping about their music taste, graduallyforget the questions they have to answer)

112

(The gossip time last too long, no longer serious in the questions
provided)(the experiment time was ended without finishing the topic
questions).

1:56- 2:12

watashi wa hitori de no jikan ga suki desu.

2:37- 2:47

watashi wa hitori de amari suki janai.

3:01- 3:20

I like to be alone. However, sometimes I feel a little bit lonely so I try
to communicate with s.o else but mostly I like to be alone, playing
games…

3:29- 3:53

Um…Yes mostly I like to be alone. The reason is when I am alone I
can concentrate on myself without being interrupted with other pp but
I also like to be with friends but sometimes I feel tired even with thattype of pp.

113

How can I say I sometimes want to be alone in Japanese?....(type to
explain)any more question?...

5:41- 6:03

OK, when I am alone, I like to watch youtube, play games, listen tomusic. That's all.

6:15 – 6:40

hitori no toki de america no dorama ga miru koto to koto ga kangai
iru.

7:13 – 8:08

Actually I’m the same with you guys. When I’m alone, I watch
youtube and American TV series. But…how to say… but I likewatching to some youtube program that I cannot watch with myfriends for example some kinds of motivational videos, it’sembarrassing. Yes, that’s all.

8:39 – 8:56

Watashi wa hitori no toki gemu wo asobu to America no dorama omimasu.

talk

Do you guys have Netflix or sth? …I have…I share with my friends.
Any comments?...Ok next one..

1:13 – 12:02

114

Yes, I like to stay alone but if I stay alone too long, I get lonely sosometimes I spend time with my friends. Do some rubbish stuff like
12:43- 13:27

playing games, talking about job hunting…

watashi wa futari/futatsu mo suki desu. Tokitoki tomodachi to chatto
ga suki desu. Asobi to tomodachi to suki desu. Eh..tokitoki jibun de
13:56- 15:11

suki desu.

Yes I like staying at home but I also want to say I like spending timewith friends. The reason is sometimes unexpected things happens
when I’m with my friends. For example, yesterday, I talked all nightwith my Chinese friend, gossiping about one professor. Yes it was
fun. And then we said bye bye and I prepared to go home, and in thecorner, that professor was there, and heard all we were talking. That
15:28- 15:53

was terrible but it was fun.

watashi wa tomodachi to no jikan wa suki desu. Tatoewa, ie ni hitori
talkde onrai gemu de tomodachi to isshoni asobimasu.

3:01- 3:14

what kind of online do you play? Usually…(name)…

3:52- 4:16

saigo no hitori de wa ko no asa desu.

4:25- 4:45

the last time I was alone was this morning until 8:15 or …I guess

115

Yes, the same, last time was this morning maybe. And that time wasfinished by my professor in my lab. I was doing my report whole
4:58- 5:13

night…to finish my report.

talkwatashi wa saigo no hitoride no jikan wa kesa desu…this morning.

7:07- 7:22

okay let’s move on to the next question about teamwork.

eh saigo ni team de shigoto no wa ima desu. Jiken no team shigoto
8:14- 8:58

desu.

Apart from the experiment this time, my last time work in team waslast year December, I think, we discussed about the topic and didpresentation in front of class.

116