Journal of Robotics, Networking and Artificial Life
Vol. 7(3); December (2020), pp. 199–203
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2991/jrnal.k.200909.012; ISSN 2405-9021; eISSN 2352-6386
https://www.atlantis-press.com/journals/jrnal

Research Article

A Study of Applying Computer-assisted Language Learning
to English Course for Junior College Students in Taiwan
Shu-Hua Huang1,*, I-Hsien Liu2
General Education Center, Air Force Institute of Technology, Gangshan Dist., Kaohsiung City 820, Taiwan
Department of Electrical Engineering / Institute of Computer and Communication Engineering, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan City, 70101, Taiwan

1
2

ARTICLE INFOABSTRACT

Article History

This study aims to explore the impact of the integration of computer-assisted language learning into traditional face-to-faceEnglish course on the learning effectiveness at Junior college in Taiwan. To achieve the above purpose, this study adopts thepre-experimental design with one-group pretest–posttest design. This study adopts quantitative and qualitative methods fordata analysis. The results indicated the application of English blended learning has positive and significant progress on students’English learning effectiveness and learning motivation.

Received 22 October 2019
Accepted 03 June 2020
Keywords
Blended learning
computer-assisted language
learning (Call)learning effectiveness
English course© 2020 The Authors. Published by Atlantis Press B.V.
This is an open access article distributed under the CC BY-NC 4.0 license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/).

1. INTRODUCTION
As education becomes a ubiquitous service through the global
network, different education forms and models must be developedfor better integration of the educational process. Blended learning
integrates the advantages of traditional face-to-face course andCall, enters the mainstream course. From the perspective of course
design, the blended course can be located anywhere between the
fixed continuum at opposite ends through a fully face-to-facecourse and fully Call. So how to combine face-to-face course andCall? To better cater for this uncertain need of blended learning,
the purpose of this study will discuss what may be the suitablebalance of activities in English blended learning settings. And thisstudy is also wonder whether the blended learning is really helpful to students’ learning effectiveness? Therefore, this study aims
to explore the impact of the integration of Call into traditional
face-to-face English course on the learning effectiveness at Juniorcollege in Taiwan.

2. LITERATURE REVIEW
Learning in this century should not be constrained to the fence ofa classroom, nor does it simply begin and end at an arranged hour.
The development of information technology and the Internet,
online learning has become a new emerging learning channel.
The online learning has provided as alternative forms of educationthat has brought traditional in-class learning platforms offered in
education out of the four walls of the classroom into the realm ofcyberspace [1]. But the anecdotal evidence indicates that blended
Corresponding author. Email: helloferny2016@gmail.com*

course instruction both offers more choices for content delivery
and may be more effective than courses that are either fully online
or fully classroom-based [2]. According to Garnham and Kaleta[3], blended learning is simply those in which a significant portionof the learning activities have been moved online, and time traditionally spent in the classroom is reduced but not eliminated.
The goal of blended courses is to join the best features of in-classteaching with the best features of online learning to promote active
independent learning and reduce class seat time [3]. Blended
courses offer the convenience and flexibility of wholly online
courses without the complete loss of face-to-face contact, afford
more student–teacher interaction, improved learning outcomes,
increase student engagement, and expand access to educational
offerings [4,5].
Osguthrope and Graham [6] asserted that blended learning musthave an appropriate balance between online and face-to-faceactivities. Because of each student’s prior knowledge and learningpace are different, through the application of information technology
and Internet, we can provide a customized learning model. And
online learning has a number of learning management systems
based on cloud applications that control learning activities andprovide the individual course content.
While many of disciplines already offer online coursework, adding
blended courses has the potential to meet the diverse learning needs of students and maximize available campus resources,
especially in English learning. There are so many online English
learning courses on the Web site. They can be used in Computerassisted English learning system to motivate the students throughinteractive learning, and enhance student’s learning effectivenessby immediate online learning feedback.

S.-H. Huang and I.-H. Liu / Journal of Robotics, Networking and Artificial Life 7(3) 199–203

200

Table 1 | Paired sample t-test
Paired differences

Pair 1Pretest and Posttest

Mean

Std.
deviation

Std. error
mean−22.091

12.1342.587

95% confidence interval of the difference

3. RESEARCH METHODSThis study adopted the pre-experimental design with one-grouppretest–posttest design.

3.1. Subject
There were one lecturer and 22 Junior college low achievement
students as the subjects.

3.2. Research Materials

Lower

Upper

−27.471−16.711

t

df

Sig.
(two-tailed)−8.53921

0.000

Table 2 | Correlation for percentage of progress and student timespent in online course
Percentage ofprogress

Time spent inonline course

1

0.439*
0.041
22Percentage of progress
Pearson correlation
Sig. (two-tailed)N
Student time spent in online course
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (two-tailed)N220.439*
0.041
22

1
22

Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (two-tailed).

*

There was a step-by-step curriculum layout, which guided thestudents to arrange their own study schedule based on their own
English proficiency.

3.3. Research Steps
The students would take the pretest in the beginning. Then thestudents experienced a 120 min per-week traditional face-to-faceEnglish courses for 18 weeks and finally took the posttest. The
students had to report their learning journals to show their own
progress every week. Finally, the posttest and a learning feedbackquestionnaire was conducted at the end of semester.

3.4. Data Analysis
The data were collected from pretest and posttest of English, theselection and compilation of Computer-assisted English learning
resources, classroom observation logs, teacher’s interview, students’
online learning records, the percentage of progress. This study
adopted quantitative and qualitative methods for data analysis. The
SPSS statistical software package was used for quantitative analysis.
First, descriptive statistics would be computed. Next, correlationand dependent sample t-test were calculated.

4. RESULTS

Table 1 shows the mean between the pretest and posttest of English
score was −22.091, t = −8.539 (df = 21, p = 0.000, <0.05). There
were significant differences between the pretest and posttest
English scores, and it means the posttest was significantly higher
than the pretest.

4.2. The Percentage of Progress
and Time SpentTable 2 showed the correlation between the percentage of progress
and the time students automatically spent on the Computer-assisted
English learning course was 0.439 (p < 0.05). It means when thestudents automatically spent more time on the Computer-assisted
English learning course, the more percentage of progress they made.

4.3. Learning Feedback Questionnaire
The following Table 3 are selected questions from surveys administered to students in the blended English courses at the end of
18 weeks (n = 22 for each question). To sum up, almost 80% students like the integration of face-to-face courses and Computerassisted English learning into English courses, they feel that the
instruction method is more interesting and helps them to learn
English more effective.

4.1. Pretest and Posttest

5. DISCUSSION

The results indicated that pretest score on the average (M =45.09, SD = 12.463) was lower than the posttest score (M = 67.18,
SD = 12.765). The posttest was higher than the pretest score.
The correlation between the pretest and posttest of English score
was 0.545 (p = 0.009, <0.05). It means the pretest and posttest ofEnglish score were significantly related.

The results showed that the blended learning improved students’English proficiency. The average posttest was significant higher
than the pretest. And the more time students automatically spenton the Computer-assisted English learning course, the more progress they made. The application of Computer-assisted English
learning system into traditional face-to-face course was positive

S.-H. Huang and I.-H. Liu / Journal of Robotics, Networking and Artificial Life 7(3) 199–203

Table 3 | Learning feedback questionnaire

I think the course is very interesting
I like to arrange the pace of my own
learning
I like to know the immediate learning
feedback
The course can stimulate my learning
motivation
The time I spent online would better
have been spent in class

Agree
(%)

Disagree(%)

Not
opinion
(%)

86

5

9

81

9

10

77

9

14

81

5

14

77

5

18

and significantly effective. That is, the blended learning mode was
efficient in English Learning.

5.1. Student
The blended learning combination of pedagogical methods seeks toencourage an active, engaged learning environment where students
potentially learn more than in a traditional on-campus classroom[7]. Based on the questionnaire and students’ learning journal, it
shows that blended learning do bring benefits to students. Overall,
the blended learning shows that almost 80% students do view the
new teaching method in a positive manner, they think the blended
learning mode can stimulate their learning motivation, let themknow the immediate learning feedback, and automatically spent
more time on online learning. An important aspect of blended
learning is that students should be able to learn independently andspend more time doing self-directed learning. And many students
reported blended learning enhance them in self-directed learningand improve time management skills.
Garnham and Kaleta [3] found that the principle reason that 80%of the students gave high level of satisfaction was the time flexibility provided by the blended mode. Time flexibility is defined as
the ability to control the pace of one’s learning, the convenience ofscheduling coursework and a decrease in time spent in commuting. In this experiment, 81% students strongly agreed that oneof the main benefits of blended learning was that they had more
flexibility in their study time and they could arrange the pace of
their own learning.
Spilka [8] noted that blended learning increases the opportunities
for self-directed learning and develops project and time management skills. It means participating in a blended course requires students to be self-directed learners with effective time management
skills. From students’ learning journal, many students reported
blended learning enhance them in self-directed learning andimprove time management skills.
But it is not generally common for Asian students. Prangpatanpon [9]reported there is a lack of self-directed learning activities among
Thai students, because they are used to authoritarian practice, andare willing to accept what their teachers said without questioning.
It is different from the result of Spilka’s experiment. In this case,Taiwanese students hope to have more flexible time and arrange
their own learning progress.

201

However, a change from a face-to-face classroom to student-centeredactive learning can constitute a radical change for some students.
If students who wish to take a traditional face-to-face study take a
blended learning course, this form of learning may be disappointing
and frustrating. Especially those students who are not used to being
responsible for their own studies. So the student’ characteristics
will influence their acceptance of blended learning mode, and theirlearning effectiveness. It may be a new direction for future research.

5.2. Teacher
From 18 classroom observation logs and three interviews with thelecturer, the study found blended instruction was a greater workload than face-to-face instruction. The lecturer indicated that she
spent much more time on blended instruction and on individual communication than she had in any face-to-face instruction.
In order for true blending learning to occur, the structure of thecourse must be carefully evaluated to determine which instructional objectives can best be met in an online environment andwhich are better suited to a traditional classroom environment[10]. Therefore, the blended course need to combine face-to-facecourse and Call course to enhance students’ learning effectiveness.
The lecture needs to redesign course, and to think about what may
be the appropriate balance of activities in English learning settings.
The lecturer indicated that the most important is need to take care
how to select activities which objectives can be met via Call andthose which will be enhanced in a traditional face-to-face format.
And course redesign also need to require a review of instructional
strategies and assessment modes as well as the limitations presented by the existing course management techniques and system.
The lecturer set the learning goal from all students’ English performance of last semester and pretest. Then she selected the appropriate textbooks, matched with the relevant Call course as English
teaching resources. The lecturer was build an introduction andschedule of course on the Web site. Using Call course, the lecturer
created a simple Web site of materials to be covered, then she created study sheets for the quizzes. The lecturer indicated those 22
students are low achievement of English, their grammars were sopoor. So she decided to focus on strengthen their grammar with
face-to-face course. Matching the Call course, to enhance students’words, phonetic, natural pronunciation and communication. The
Call course provided the step-by-step curriculum layout, visual
learning and directly response through online images, vigorously
develop the English learning effectiveness of students to listen,
speak, read and write.
Using the system of Call course, the instructor had the flexibility
to arrange the curriculum, exam type and difficulty levels, as
shown in Figure 1. She could create exams from the test bank of thewebsite. Through managing exam types, time and frequency, she
could fully understand the students’ learning status. And the students could arrange their own study schedules based on their own
English proficiency and tested themselves when they were ready.
The instructor could clearly know the grades, percentage of progress, correct rate, spending time, and the learning schedule ofeach student from the Web site, as depicted in Figure 2. The students could view their own progress and grades anytime. Besides,

S.-H. Huang and I.-H. Liu / Journal of Robotics, Networking and Artificial Life 7(3) 199–203

202

Through the hyperlink and AI calculus analysis from the online
education platform of big data, we can accurately meet the needsof students, create customized courses and textbooks, and provide
students with personalized courses in language learning. Even wecan analysis of the different needs and characteristics of online
learning for various ethnic groups and provide appropriate feedback to different ethnic and non-native language learner.

Figure 1 | Examination management on the Web site.

Although the present study has yielded findings that have practical implications of blended course, but an important area for
future research in the years to come will be in the refinement ofapproaches to the application of online course. Lecturers are thekey point to mastering the integration of information technology
and the Internet into instruction. The more humanized development of Internet technology, the lower of lecturer’s technological anxiety. Lecturers will be influenced by the habit of using theInternet to enhance the willingness and effectiveness of lectures tointegrate Internet technology into instruction.

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
The authors declare they have no conflicts of interest.

REFERENCES

Figure 2 | The learning schedule and spending time of each student.

the instructor could really grasp the extent of the progress of thestudent’s grades, and then modified the content and progress ofthe teaching. When some students had problems in certain area,
the instructor could help them individually. A few students haddifficulty with the technology, so the lecture walked them throughthe English course. Others blasted through with no problems at all.
The instructor also indicated that she always worked alone because
other colleagues were seemingly frightened by the new technology
and refused to apply Computer-assisted learning to the courses.
She coaxed into the teaching training, built the course and learned
to use what had become one of her best teaching tools.

6. CONCLUSIONEntering Education 4.0, learning has become highly customized
and individualized. The Call course used interactive approach as
instruction method to enhance students’ learning effectiveness.

[1] L.V. Fedynich, Teaching beyond the classroom walls: the pros
and cons of cyber learning, J. Instruct. Pedag. 13 (2014), 1–7.
[2] H. Singh, Building effective blended learning programs, Educ.
Technol. 43 (2003), 51–54.
[3] C. Garnham, R. Kaleta, Introduction to Hybrid Courses, Teachingwith Technology Today, University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee,
2002.
[4] A.P. Rovai, H. Jordan, Blended learning and sense of community:
a comparative analysis with traditional and fully online graduate
courses, Int. Rev. Res. Open Distr. Learn. 5 (2004).
[5] N. Vaughan, Perspectives on blended learning in higher education, Int. J. ELearn. 6 (2007), 81–94.
[6] R. Osguthorpe, C. Graham, Blended learning environments:
definitions and directions, Quart. Rev. Dist. Educ. 4 (2003),
277–233.
[7] C. Dziuban, P. Moskal, J. Hartman, Higher education, blended
learning and the generations: knowledge is power-no more,
in: J. Bourne, J.C. Moore (Eds.), Elements of Quality Online
Education: Engaging Communities, Sloan Center for Online
Education, Needham, MA, 2005.
[8] R. Spilka, Approximately “real world” learning with the hybrid
model, Teaching with Technology Today, 8 (2002).
[9] S. Prangpatanpon, Higher education in Thailand: traditional andbureaucracy, Int. Higher Educ. 6 (1996), 14–16.
[10] L. Lloyd-Smith, Exploring the advantages of blended instruction
at community colleges and technical schools, J. Online Learn.
Teach. 6 (2010).

S.-H. Huang and I.-H. Liu / Journal of Robotics, Networking and Artificial Life 7(3) 199–203

203

AUTHORS INTRODUCTION
Prof. Shu-Hua Huang

Dr. I-Hsien Liu

She is an Associate Professor at the General
Education Center, Air Force Institute ofTechnology in Taiwan since 1996. Her
specialties are psychology and education.
She got her Master’s degree in Psychology
at Chung Yuan Christian University in
Taiwan. She obtained her PhD at theInstitute of Educational Entrepreneurshipand Management in National University of
Tainan in Taiwan. She is interested in the fields of curriculum
and teaching, general education, military education, and cadets’traits. She would like to share ideas and experiences with people
who are interested in the same topics.

He is a reacher fellow in the Taiwan
Information Security Center @ National
Cheng Kung University (TWISC@NCKU)
and Department of Electrical Engineering,
National Cheng Kung University, Taiwan.
He obtained his PhD in 2015 in Computerand Communication Engineering fromthe National Cheng Kung University. His
research interests include Cloud security,
Wireless Network, Group Communication and Reliable
Transmission in Mobile ad hoc networks.