The Effects of Synchronous CMC on

Speaking Proficiency and Anxiety:

Text Versus Voice Chat

MUAMMAR JUMRAN H. M¨ UGE SATAR

NESRIN¨ OZDENER

The Modern Language Journal

 Background
Computer Mediated Communication (CMC) tools continue to provide
an incentive for people to learn and use a foreign language by creating
an urge to share and know about others, thus providing a genuine
reason for language learning. The advancement in these tools has also
provided an opportunity for developing the productive skills of writing
and speaking via the computer, as well as the receptive skills of reading
and listening.
Focusing specifically on speaking, CMC is reasonably promising because
of its interactive and social nature. “Speaking is a social skill” (Valette,
1977, p. 119), and CMC is a tool for social interaction and is “a way to
negotiate meaning and to establish social relations with others.
 LITERATURE REVIEW
According to Wang (2005), CMC is a powerful tool in constructivist
learning “because of its capability to support interaction and
collaboration among diverse and dispersed students in the form of
online discussion”

Compton (2002) analyzed the participants’ output in written SCMC

practice discussions and following face-to-face discussions. The findings
indicate not only transfer from the participants’ own written text into
speech but also transfer from their partners’ written language output to
their oral production.
 The Problem
The hypotheses and the research question for the study were as
follows:

Hypothesis 1:At the end of the study, the speaking proficiency levels of
the students in the voice chat group will be higher than those of the
students in the text chat group and the control group.

Hypothesis 2:At the end of the study, the language anxiety levels of the
students in both the text and voice chat groups will decrease, while
those of the students in the control group will remain unchanged.

Research Question:What were the students’ experiences and

perceptions regarding the two chat tools: text and voice chat?
 METHODOLOGY
Research Design
The study had a posttest experimental design consisting of three
groups: voice chat (N=30), text chat (N=30), and a control group (N=30).
Questionnaires and open-ended questions were also used with the aim
of obtaining the gist of the participants’ experiences of using the tools.

participants
The study was conducted at a vocational high school in Istanbul, Turkey
during the 2005–2006 spring term, using a total of 90 participants.
Participants were 16 and 17 years old and were
predominantly from middle-class families
 METHODOLOGY
Data Collection Procedures
The study was carried out via a Web site created specifically for the
study, using Macromedia Flash 8 and Flash Media Server 2. The
participants entered the site via usernames and passwords.
The study lasted for 4 weeks with a total of four 40- to 45-minute
sessions
Speaking tests and anxiety questionnaires were administered before
and after the study
 METHODOLOGY
Data Collection Instruments
The Speaking Test
The general speaking proficiency scale developed by Hughes (2003),
consisting of five parts (pronunciation, vocabulary, grammar, fluency,
and understanding)

Foreign Language Learning Anxiety Scale.

The Foreign Language Learning Anxiety Scale, developed by Horwitz et
al. (1991), was administered. As the test was carried out in Turkish, the
Turkish version of the test by Aydın (2001) was employed, which had a
reliability coefficient of 0.92. The anxiety questionnaires were given to
the participants to complete at home and return the next day.
 METHODOLOGY
Questionnaires.
Two different kinds of questionnaire were used. The participants
completed
(a) open-ended questionnaires after each session
to have a record of what the students experienced by eliciting their
views immediately after the session and
(b) a Likert-type questionnaire on a scale from 1 to 3 at the end of
the study (to obtain a general insight into participants’ experiences)
 RESULT
The pretest results of the speaking test among the groups were
analyzed using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA)
RESULT
 RESULT

As the information in Table 3 suggests, although there was a decrease

of about 3.5 in the anxiety levels of the students in the voice chat
group, this difference was not statistically signify cant,t(29)=1.26,p>.05.
 RESULT

As shown in Table 4, by the end of the study, there had been a

significant decrease in the foreign language anxiety levels of the
students in the text chat group,t(29)=2.14,p<.05.
 RESULT

The relatedt-test results for the control group are presented in Table 5.
These results indicated that there was no significant difference
between the foreign language anxiety levels before and after the
study,t(29)=−0.29,p>.05.
RESULT
 DISCUSSION
The study showed that there was a significant increase in the
students’ speaking proficiency for both of the experimental
groups (voice and text chat). The results for the text chat
group affirmed the results of previous studies that text chat
improved speaking skills and that language transfer was
possible from the written environment of the text chat to
spoken language
The speaking results for both groups suggested that, for
beginner-level students, text chat can be as effective as voice
chat for the development of speaking skills.
 DISCUSSION
Regarding language anxiety levels, there was a significant
decrease only for the text chat group, and significant
differences were not observed for the voice chat and the
control groups.
 CONCLUSION
In general, the results of the study emphasize that when
guided with appropriate language learning tasks, SCMC (both
text and voice chat) can be an effective aid to improve
speaking skills, either for additional practice (when there is
insufficient class time to practice) or as part of a distance
language learning course
THANK YOU