Video Chat for Language Learning

Annotation #3

Eröz-Tuğa, B., & Sadler, R. (2009). Comparing six video chat tools: A critical evaluation by language teachers. Computers & Education, 53(3), 787-798.

Two foreign language professors, Eroz-Tuga at Middle East Technical University in Ankara, Turkey and Sadler at University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, report the findings of their study comparing six different video chat tools in the context of language learning. All six tools are open access and free to the public, although some offer improved "member" services for a fee. The authors' major finding is that MSN (Windows Live) and Skype were the two best-performing computer-mediated communication (CMC) tools that offer synchronous video and audio communication. MSN was ranked #1 and Skype was ranked #2 with Yahoo a distant third. ICQ, CUWorld, and Paltalk were also evaluated but found wanting both on the fronts of educational use and user-friendliness. The methodology of the study appears sound in general, although the sample size of evaluators is small including eight Turkish grad students and ten US grad students of whom seven were not native English speakers. Nevertheless, it is my understanding from reading usability testing "best practices" that for most websites and applications, about 80-90% of usability problems can be discovered with a sample-size of only five testers.

This article discusses the advantages of using Skype and MSN for language learning. Advantages include the language learner's ability to:

1. use visual cues to practice correct pronunciation
2. interact across distance with native speakers in an authentic learning context
3. exchange cultural information by "showing" their campus/home culture (rather than telling)
   
4. motivate a younger generation of students with the newest computer tool
   

The study evaluates the six CMCs for technical performance, usability, and relevance to language learning. The findings indicate that Skype and MSN are statistically equivalent, although MSN slightly outranked Skype. Skype was ranked #1 in the user-friendliness of its website and in online help/support. MSN was ranked #1 in ease of installation and setup, ease of adding new members, ease of starting a conversation, and whether it was "frustrating" or "confusing" to use. (Skype was a close second). As for quality of audio and video, Skype's video quality was found to be problematic but ranked much better than Yahoo, ICQ and the other CMCs. MSN in contrast was criticized for not offering conference calling with multiple users; only one-to-one conversations are possible. Skype, in contrast offers conference audio calls without video. Both MSN and Skype were recommended by the researchers over Yahoo, ICQ, CUWorld, Paltalk for academic purposes because they were not part of an online community that contained anonymous chatrooms. The students conducting the study discovered that chatrooms quickly became "X-rated" and did not lend themselves to language learning-- at least not in an academic sense.

In general, I found this study very useful. It's one of the few to evaluate video chat tools quantitatively. I take issue with a few aspects of the study. First, as the authors admit, their student testers were already familiar users of MSN, Skype, and Yahoo which may have biased their perception of and increased their frustration with the other three CMCs. Second, a few technical criticisms of Skype clash with my personal experience and research. Students using Skype complained that their contacts would disappear when they switched computers. I have used Skype on several computers and the contacts always "follow" me; all I have to do is log in. Finally, there is little talk of interoperability in the article. The students were all using PCs running Windows. One major concern with MSN Windows Live is that the video chat feature is not available to Mac OS users, or at least, not available without a corporate account and a fee. Skype does offer Mac and Linux compatibility. http://www.microsoft.com/Mac/products/messenger/default.mspx

Last but not least, I was surprised that the authors did not mention the advantages of synchronous instant messaging along side video chat for language learning. Not only can students benefit from hearing native speakers and copying their pronunciation, but if a word is mispronounced, students can always IM each other, clarifying in a few seconds what might take several minutes to explain in a voice-only call. They can also share links to online dictionaries, articles, etc. that might facilitate the language-learning process. Overall, this article is very cutting edge as it is one of the few to effectively use data to show both the efficacy of language-learning via video chat and the usability of Skype compared to other CMCs.