Skip to main content
Log in

Factors influencing Iranian teachers’ use of computer assisted pronunciation teaching (CAPT)

  • Published:
Education and Information Technologies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study examined the factors that influenced Iranian teachers’ use of computer-assisted pronunciation teaching (CAPT) in teaching English pronunciation. Iranian teachers have serious problems in teaching pronunciation such as lack of enough time, knowledge, experience, training, and suitable pronunciation materials. In this study, the researchers examined how the use of CAPT helped teachers to overcome these problems and improve their pronunciation instruction. Pronunciation Power 2 (PP2) was used for this purpose. First, a qualitative method was used. 15 Iranian teachers were chosen voluntarily from the Azad Universities of Guilan Province, Iran. Semi-structured interview questions were used as the instrument of qualitative method. The researchers collected data and analyzed them. The qualitative data analysis was done through the process of examining, organizing, listing, and identifying themes. The findings of qualitative method showed that Iranian teachers used PP2 well in teaching pronunciation through financial support, enough computers, the presence of computer experts in language lab, training, and enough time. The findings also indicated that teachers showed tremendous support and much enthusiasm for using the software in teaching pronunciation. Second, a quantitative method was followed in which two groups of Iranian learners (one experimental and one control) participated in this study. They were exposed to the treatment of a CAPT teacher and a non-CAPT teacher. A post-test of English pronunciation was administered to both groups. The data were analyzed via running a One-Way ANCOVA. The findings of quantitative study showed that learners in the experimental group outperformed the control group and indicated significant improvement in their pronunciation learning.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abdolmanafi-Rokni, S. J. (2013). The effect of listening to audio stories on pronunciation of EFL learners. MJAL, 5(2), 69–85 https://www.mjal.org/removedprofiles/2013/24.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Afshari, M., Abu Bakr, K., Wong, S. L., & Afshari, M. (2010). Principals’ level of computer use and some contributing factors. International Journal of Education and Information Technologies, 2(40), 121–128 www.naun.org/main/NAUN/educationinformation/19-324.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alonso, A. R. (2014). Teaching speaking: An exploratory study in two academic contexts. Porta Linguarum, 22, 145–160 www.ugr.es/~portalin/articulos/PL_numero22/10%20%20ROSA%20ALONSO.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Al-Qudah, F. Z. M. (2012). Improving English pronunciation through computer-assisted programs in Jordanian universities. Journal of College Teaching and Learning, 9(3), 201–208. https://doi.org/10.19030/tlc.v9i3.7085.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Atai, M. R., & Dashtestani, R. (2011). Iranian English for academic purposes (EAP) stakeholders’ attitudes toward using the internet in EAP courses for civil engineering students: Promises and challenges. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 26(1), 21–38. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2011.627872.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baradaran, A., & Davari, Z. (2010). The impact of utilizing computer assisted language learning on EFL learners’ foreign accent reduction. JELS, 1(4), 41–62 www.sid.ir/en/journal/ViewPaper.aspx?ID=287704.

    Google Scholar 

  • Behzadi, A., & Fahimniya, F. (2014). The effect of using two approaches of teaching pronunciation (intuitive-imitative and analytic-linguistic) on speaking fluency among Iranian EFL learners. Indian Journal of Fundamental and Applied Life Sciences, 4(1), 263–270 http://www.cibtech.org/jls.htm.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bergold, J., & Thomas, S. (2012). Participatory research methods: A methodological approach in motion. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 13(1), Art. 30. http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs1201302 https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-13.1.1801.

  • Breitkreutz, J., Derwing, T. M., & Rossiter, M. J. (2001). Pronunciation teaching practices in Canada. TESL Canada Journal, 19(1), 51–61. https://doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v19i1.919.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bryman, A. (2004). Social research methods. Oxford: OUP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butler-Pascoe, M. E., & Wiburg, K. M. (2003). Technology and teaching English language learners. MA Pearson Education, Inc.

  • Calvo, B., & Yolanda, J. (2016). Spanish students’ reflections on the importance of written and spoken skills in their EFL classes at high school and at university. Revista Electrónica de Linguística Aplicada, 15(1), 1–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Celce-Murcia, M., Brinton, D. M., Goodwin, J. M., & Griner, B. (2011). Teaching pronunciation (2nded). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chapelle, C. A. (2004). Technology and language learning: Expanding methods and agendas. System, 32(4), 593–601. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2004.09.014.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chun, D. M. (2012). Computer-assisted pronunciation teaching. In C. A. Chapelle (Ed.), The encyclopedia of applied linguistics. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (3rd ed.). Los Angeles: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dashtestani, R. (2012). Barriers to the implementation of CALL in EFL courses: Iranian EFL teachers’ attitudes and perspectives. JALT CALL Journal, 8(2), 55–70 journal.jaltcall.org/articles/8_2_Dashtestani.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dekaney, E. M. (2003). The effect of computerized versus classroom instruction on the phonetic pronunciation of English. JRME, 51(3), 206–217. https://doi.org/10.2307/3345374.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dooly, M., & Moore, E. (2017). Introduction: Qualitative approaches to research on plurilingual education. In E. Moore & M. Dooly (Eds), Qualitative approaches to research on plurilingual education (pp. 1–10). https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED573597.pdf

  • Dupin-Bryant, P. A. (2004). Variables related to interactive television teaching style: In search of learner-centered teaching styles. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 1(4), 3–14 www.itdl.org/journal/apr_04/article01.htm.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elimat, A. K., & AbuSeileek, A. F. (2014). Automatic speech recognition technology as an effective means for teaching pronunciation. JALT CALL Journal, 10(1), 21–47 https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1107929.

    Google Scholar 

  • Faizul, M. (2012). The use of pronunciation software to improve students’ pronunciation. Encounter, 3(2), 88–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fathiyan, M. (2004). The study of a desired pattern of computer literacy for Iranian teachers. The University of Science and Industry. The Ministry of Education. The Design, Development, and Application Office of Information and Communication Technology.

  • Finely, J. (2004). Pronunciation Power. Copyright Quadrant Educational Enterprises Inc.

  • Gilbert, J. B. (2008). Teaching pronunciation using the prosody pyramid. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, J. (2010). Pronunciation as orphan: What can be done? Speak Out!, 43, 3–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Golonka, E. M., Bowles, A. R., Frank, V. M., Richardson, D. L., & Freynik, S. (2014). Technologies for foreign language learning: A review of technology types and their effectiveness. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 27(1), 70–105. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2012.700315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gomes, C. (2005). Integration of ICT in science teaching: A study performed in Azores, Portugal. Paper presented at the recent research developments in learning technologies, Lisbon, Portugal (22–24 April).

  • Gooniband Shooshtari, Z., Mehrabi, K., & Mousavinia, S. R. (2013). A call for teaching pronunciation in Iranian schools. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 2(1), 454–465 www.hrmars.com/admin/pics/1684.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gorjian, B., Hayati, A., & Pourkhoni, P. (2013). Using Praat software in teaching prosodic features to EFL learners. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 84(9), 34–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.06.505.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graff, M. (2006). A study of Rosetta Stone’s effectiveness on improving English pronunciation. Unpublished master’s thesis, California State University, California, United States.

  • Harmer, J. (2015). The practice of English language teaching (5th ed.). Harlow: Pearson Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayati, A. M. (2010). Notes on teaching English pronunciation to EFL learners: A case of Iranian high school students. Canadian Center of Science and Education, ELT, 3(4), 121–126. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v3n4p121.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Hincks, R. (2005). Computer support for learners of spoken English. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, KTH School of computer science and communication, Stockholm, Sweden.

  • Hişmanoğlu, M. (2006). Current perspectives on pronunciation learning and teaching. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 2(1), 100–110 www.jlls.org/index.php/jlls/article/view/26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hismanoglu, M. (2012). Teaching word stress to Turkish EFL (English as a Foreign Language) learners through Internet-based video lessons. US-China Education Review, A(1), 26–40. http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED530678.pdf.

  • Hişmanoğlu, M., & Hişmanoğlu, S. (2011). Internet-based pronunciation teaching: An innovative route toward rehabilitating Turkish EFL learners’ articulation problems. European Journal of Educational Studies, 3(1), 23–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holliday, A. (2002). Doing and writing qualitative research. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hornero, A. M., Mur, P., & Plo, R. (2013). Oral skills in the spotlight: EFL in secondary education in a Spanish local context. Synergy, 9(2), 111–124.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobsen, D. M., & Lock, J. V. (2005). Technology and teacher education for a knowledge era: Mentoring for student futures, not our past. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 12(1), 75–87. Norfolk, VA: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education. Retrieved August 4, 2018 from https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/14634/.

  • Jamieson-Proctor, R., Albion, P., Finger, G., Cavanagh, R., Fitzgerald, R., Bond, T., & Grimbeek, P. (2013). Development of the TTF TPACK survey instrument. Australian Educational Computing, 27(3), 26–35 http://acce.edu.au/journal/27/3/development-ttf-tpack-survey-instrument.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jolley, C. (2014). The effect of computer-based pronunciation readings on ESL learners’ perception and production of prosodic features in a short-term ESP course. Unpublished MA dissertation, Brigham: Brigham Young University.

  • Kılıçkaya, F. (2011). Improving pronunciation via accent reduction and text-to-speech software. In M. levy, F. Blin, C. B. Siskin, O. Takeuchi (Eds.), WorldCALL: International Perspectives on Computer-Assisted Language Learning, 85–96. www.j-let.org/~wcf/proceedings/d-097.pdf

  • Kim, I. S. (2006). Automatic speech recognition: Reliability and pedagogical implications for teaching pronunciation. Educational Technology and Society, 9(1), 322–334 https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ836714.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, A. Y. (2012). Investigating the effectiveness of computer-assisted language learning (CALL) in improving pronunciation: A case study. Multimedia-Assisted Language Learning, 15(3), 11–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • King, K. (2003). Keeping pace with technology: Educational technology that transforms-The challenge and promise for higher education faculty (Vol. 2). Cresskill: Hampton Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Korte, W. B., & Hüsing, T. (2007). Benchmarking access and use of ICT in European schools 2006: Results from head teacher and a classroom teacher surveys in 27 European countries. E-Learning Papers, 2(1), 1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, S. (2008). Teaching pronunciation of English using computer-assisted learning software: An action research study in an Institute of Technology in Taiwan. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Australian Catholic University, Australia.

  • Liakin, D., Cardoso, W., & Liakina, N. (2015). Learning L2 pronunciation with a mobile speech recognizer: French /y/. Computer-Assisted Language Instruction Consortium (CALICO), 32(1), 1–25 https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1143784.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu, S. C., & Hung, P. Y. (2016). Teaching pronunciation with computer assisted pronunciation instruction in a technological university. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 4(9), 1939–1943. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2016.040902.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luo, B. (2016). Evaluating a computer-assisted pronunciation training (CAPT) technique for efficient classroom instruction. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 29(3), 451–476 https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1093565.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Luo, J. (2014) A Study of Mother Tongue Interference in Pronunciation of College English Learning in China. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 4(8), 1702–1706.

  • Mehrpour, S., Alavi Shoushtari, S., & Haghighat Nezhad Shirazi, P. (2016). Computer-assisted pronunciation training: The effect of integrating accent reduction software on Iranian EFL learners’ pronunciation. CALL-EJ, 17(1), 97–112 callej.org/journal/17-1/Mehrpour-Shoushtari-Shirazi2016.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mirzaei, F. Q., Jahandar, S., & Khodabandehlou, M. (2014). The effect of multiple intelligences on Iranian EFL learners’ pronunciation accuracy at intermediate level. Indian Journal of Fundamental and Applied Life Sciences, 4(2), 488–495 http://www.cibtech.org/jls.htm.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mompean, J. A., & Fouz-González, J. (2016). Twitter-based EFL pronunciation instruction. Language Learning & Technology, 20(1), 166–190 Retrieved August 3, 2018 from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/176114/.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neri, A., Cucchiarini, C., & Strik, H. (2002a). Feedback in computer assisted pronunciation training: when technology meets pedagogy. In Proceedings of CALL Professionals and the Future of CALL Research, 179–188. https://repository.ubn.ru.nl/handle/2066/76206

  • Neri, A., Cucchiarini, C., Strik, H., & Boves, L. (2002b). The pedagogy -technology interface in computer assisted pronunciation training. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 15(5), 441–467. https://doi.org/10.1076/call.15.5.441.13473.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neri, A., Cucchiarini, C., & Strik, H. (2006). ASR-based corrective feedback on pronunciation: Does it really work? Proceedings of international conference on spoken language processing 2006 (pp. 1982–1985). Pittsburgh.

  • Neri, A., Cucchiarini, C., & Strik, H. (2008). The effectiveness of computer-based speech corrective feedback for improving segmental quality in L2 Dutch. ReCALL, 20(2), 225–243 Retrieved August 3, 2018 from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/66365/.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nussbaum, L. (2017). Doing research with teachers. In E. Moore & M. Dooly (Eds), Qualitative approaches to research on plurilingual education (pp. 46–67).

  • O’Dwyer, L., Russel, M., & Bebell, D. (2004). Identifying teacher, school and district characteristics associated with elementary teachers’ use of technology: A multilevel perspective. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 12(48), 1–33. https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v12n48.2004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pennington, M. C. (1999). Computer-aided pronunciation pedagogy: Promise, limitations, directions. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 12(5), 427–440. https://doi.org/10.1076/call.12.5.427.5693.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Por, F. P., & Fong, S. F. (2011). Exploring the innovative multimedia pronunciation learning managements system on students with different psychological profiles. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2(24), 244–250.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pourasghar, H., & Abdolmanafi-Rokni, S. J. (2015). Hypermedia and its effect on EFL learners’ pronunciation accuracy. International Journal of Educational Investigations, 2(7), 1–11 www.ijeionline.com/attachments/article/44/IJEI_Vol.2_No.7_2015-7-01.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pronunciation Power. (2000). English Computerized Learning Inc, Publication Inc. Edmonton.

  • Roohani, A., & Rahimi, Z. (2019). Comparative effects of using pronunciation software on Georgian bilingual and Persian monolingual EFL learners’ pronunciation achievement. International Journal of Research Studies in Language Learning, 8(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.5861/ijrsll.2018.3005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Safari, H., Jahandar, S., & Khodabandehlou, M. (2013). The effect of using phonetic transcription of words as footnotes on Iranian EFL learners’ pronunciation improvement. Indian Journal of Fundamental and Applied Life Sciences, 3(2), 19–24 http://www.cibtech.org/jls.htm.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seferoglu, G. (2005). Improving students’ pronunciation through accent reduction software. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36(2), 303–316. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2005.00459.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seidlhofer, B. (2001). Pronunciation. In R. Carter & D. Nunan (Eds.), The Cambridge guide to teaching English to speakers of other languages (pp. 56–65). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheumaker, F., Slate, J. R., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2001). The role of in tech training in the integration of technology into instructional practices among Georgia middle school teachers. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 33(5), 1–12 Retrieved August 4, 2018 from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/94585/.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shin, H. J., & Son, J. B. (2007). EFL teachers’ perceptions and perspectives on internet-assisted language teaching. CALL-EJ Online, 8(2), 1–13 https://eprints.usq.edu.au/1924/1/Shin_Son.pdf.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Spada, N., & Lightbown, P. M. (2012). Second language acquisition. In N. Schmitt (Ed.), An introduction to applied linguistics (pp. 108–124). London: Hodder Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Talebi, F., & Teimoury, N. (2013). The effect of computer-assisted language learning on improving EFL learners’ pronunciation ability. World Journal of English Language, 3(2), 52–56. https://doi.org/10.5430/wjel.v3n2p52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tong, K. P., & Triniada, S. G. (2005). Conditions and constraints of sustainable innovative pedagogical practices using technology. Journal of International Electronic for Leadership in Learning, 9(3), 1–27 https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ985387.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsai, P.H. (2015). Computer-assisted pronunciation learning in a collaborative context: A case study in Taiwan. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology-TOJET, 14(4), 1–13.

  • Unamuno, V., & Patiño, A. (2017). Producing knowledge about plurilingualism with young students: A challenge for collaborative ethnography. In E. Moore & M. Dooly (Eds), Qualitative approaches to research on plurilingual education (pp. 129–149). https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED573606.

  • Underhill, A. (2013). Cinderella, integration and the pronunciation turn. Speak Out, 49, 4–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verdugo, D. R. (2006). A study of intonation awareness and learning in non-native speakers of English. Language Awareness, 15(3), 141–159. https://doi.org/10.2167/la404.0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vrasidas, C., & McIsaac, M. (2001). Integrating technology in teaching and teacher education: Implications for policy and curriculum reform. Educational Media International, 38(2/3), 127–132. http://vrasidas.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/07/integrateemi.pdf. https://doi.org/10.1080/09523980110041944.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xodabande, I. (2017). The effectiveness of social media network telegram in teaching English language pronunciation to Iranian EFL learners. Cogent Education, 4, 1347081. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2017.1347081.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yilmaz, N. P. (2011). Evaluation of the technology integration process in the Turkish education system. Contemporary Educational Technology, 2(1), 37–54 www.cedtech.net/articles/21/213.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zare-ee, A. (2011). University teachers’ views on the use of information and communication technologies in teaching and research. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 10(3), 318–327 https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ945006.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Abbas Pourhosein Gilakjani.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gilakjani, A.P., Rahimy, R. Factors influencing Iranian teachers’ use of computer assisted pronunciation teaching (CAPT). Educ Inf Technol 24, 1715–1740 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-018-09851-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-018-09851-6

Keywords

Navigation