Attitudes toward the use of tell tools in english language learning among vietnamese tertiary english majors

VNU Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, Vol 5, No 5 (2019) 581-594

Attitudes toward the Use of TELL Tools in English Language
Learning among Vietnamese Tertiary English Majors
Tran Quoc Thao, Duong My Tham, Huynh Thi Thien Ngan*
Abstract: Technology plays a crucial role in the self-guided learning of a second language
in general and English in particular. Nevertheless, many students in different contexts still
ignore the application of technology-enhanced language learning (TELL) tools in
enhancing their foreign language proficiency. Therefore, this study is conducted to
investigate the attitudes towards the use of TELL tools in English-language learning (ELL)
among English majors at one university in Vietnam. To collect data, 197 English majors
participated in finishing the questionnaire, and 20 students were invited to join the
interviews. The findings are that the majority of students have positive attitudes towards
the use of TELL tools and the frequency of using these tools is very high. In addition, the
results also reveal that there is no significant difference in attitudes towards and frequency
of using TELL tools in learning English in terms of the year of study. However, students of
different levels of academic achievements have different attitudes towards using TELL
tools and use TELL tools to learn English differently.
Keywords: Attitude; English Major; English Language Learning (ELL); TELL; Vietnam.
Received 2nd May 2019; Revised 16th July 2019; Accepted 20th October 2019
DOI: />
in radical changes in language teaching and
learning, especially English language (e.g.,
Amiri
2012;
Warschauer
2000).
Accordingly, many hi-tech products, such as
laptops, desktop computers, tablets, and
smartphones have been used for different
purposes. As a result, the appearance of

technology-enhanced language learning
(TELL) is necessary and inevitable.
It is noted that several factors, namely
instructional method, aptitude, age and
affective variables (e.g. attitude, motivation,
& empathy) are considered significant in
language learning. Research on the
effectiveness of instructional methods shows
that there is no superior or ideal method
compared to any other approach in
education (Midraj 1998). Nevertheless,

1. Introduction


It is widely acknowledged that
technology
have
exerted
profound
influences on all sectors, including
education. As such, not only do innovative
technologies have potential to evolve
pedagogical practice, but they also
completely transform entire learning
environments (Groff 2013). What is more,
the development of technology has resulted


Tran Quoc Thao, Faculty of English language - Ho Chi

Minh City University of Technology (HUTECH);
email:
Duong My Tham, Nong Lam University - Ho Chi Minh
City.
Huynh Thi Thien Ngan, Faculty of English language - Ho
Chi Minh City University of Technology (HUTECH).

581


582 Tran Quoc Thao et al. / VNU Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, Vol 5, No 5 (2019) 581-594

examination of affective factors such as
attitudes could provide fruitful insights into
the complex issues that are critical to
success in language acquisition (Midraj
1998).
In the context of Vietnam, in alignment
with enhancing the quality of English
language
teaching,
the
Vietnamese
government has invested in computers in
schools nationwide, and teachers are
encouraged to apply technology into their
teaching instead of using traditional practice
(Peeraer and Tran Nu Mai Thy 2012).
According to some studies conducted in
Vietnam (e.g. Huynh Huu Thanh, 2016; Tri

Hoang Dang and Nguyen Thi Hong Nhung,
2014), TELL is an effective tool in learning
and enhancing skills of language learning
English as foreign language. It provides
learning efficiency, effectiveness as well as
motivation. More importantly, students tend
to have positive attitudes towards modern
technologies and think that technologies
make them proficient in learning EFL and
EFL acquisition can be increased through
TELL. On the other hand, the research on
TELL conducted by Mitchell (1992)
indicates that the attitude of learners towards
TELL plays a vital role in language
acquisition. Unfortunately, although there
are many studies carried out to explore the
effects of technology to language learning in
Vietnam, the use of technology in English
language education across educational levels
remains vague. For this end, this study aims
at exploring English majors’ attitudes
toward the use of TELL tools in English
language learning (ELL) at the context of a
university in Vietnam. The following
research questions need to be addressed:
i. What are the attitudes towards the use
of TELL tools in ELL among Vietnamese
tertiary English-majors?

ii. To what extent do Vietnamese English

majors use TELL tools in their ELL?
iii. Are there any differences in
Vietnamese English majors’ attitudes
towards the use of TELL tools in learning
English and their use of TELL tools in terms
of year of study and academic achievement?
If so, how?
2. Literature review
It is noticed that technology is anideal
assistant to enhance students’ learning
English (e.g., Afshari 2007; Hartman 2008;
Higgins 2012; Tran Quoc Thao 2018; Tran
Quoc Thao and Duong My Tham 2018).
According to Afshari (2007), technology not
only
enhances
interpersonal
and
communication skills but also provides
opportunities for cooperative learning.
Hence, the use of technology will increase
instructional effectiveness and efficiency.
Technology also provides ESL/EFL learners
with tools which can allow self-learning
(Higgins 2012). The use of technology aided
instruction tools also makes ESL/EFL
learners stay in control of what they learn.
At the same time, technology tools also
promote positive social interaction and
enhance students’ motivation for learning.

In line with this ideal, Hartman (2008) states
that institutions need to develop a systemic
approach for technology-based teaching that
provides many of the essential elements for
success, sustainability and quality.
What is more, the barrier of location for
people in different parts of the world has
been broken down by some latest
technology such as the Internet, mobile
devices, etc. (Çağıltay and Seferoğlu 2009).
Accordingly, ESL/EFL learners can
communicate as well as interact with


Tran Quoc Thao et al. / VNU Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, Vol 5, No 5 (2019) 581-594 583

English speakers from all over the world.
Additionally, the use of technology in
educational institutions helps ESL/EFL
teaching and learning become faster and
easier than ever before. Students can learn at
anywhere, and teacher can teach their
students from anywhere. As such, new
emerging educational technologies are
changing the way people learn. ELL has
become more flexible and fun. Hence,
students will not get bored while learning. In
other words, these educational technologies
help improve ESL/EFL learners’ attitudes,
which are considered as one of the most

important factors in ELL as discussed
above. ESL/EFL learners learn English not
only because of the necessary of it, but also
because they love it.
Previous studies (e.g., Barker et al. 2005;
Cavus & Ibrahim 2008; Eskandari & Rahimi
2012; Huertas 2014; Korkmaz 2010;
Kukulska-Hulme 2006; Lee 2001; Murday
et al. 2008; Pun 2013) have shown that
different aspects of technology in language
education have been conducted in different
contexts. In 2010, Monerah carried out a
study examining college ESL students’
attitudes towards the use of technology in
classrooms. A questionnaire including both
open-ended and closed-ended questions was
administered to 50 college ESL students.
This study indicated that participants’
attitudes were generally positive towards the
use of technology in classroom, and they
believed that technology was a very
important tool to assist in improving their
learning and make them more successful in
class. Orachorn (2015) carried out a study
on 192undergraduate students’ attitudes
towards using computers as a learning tool
at one university. The findings indicated that
participants realized the usefulness of using
computers as a learning tool, as can be seen
from their positive attitudes, and most of the

respondents liked to utilize computers in
their language learning because they could
look for information necessary for their
studies. Recently, Siros and Mansooreh
(2016) did a study investigating 638 Iranian
high school EFL students’ viewpoints on the
use of technology in their ELL. They found
that participants had positive attitude
towards using technology to study English
skills such as speaking, listening, reading
and writing skills, as well as to improve
their vocabulary and grammar. Moreover,
participants indicated that learning English
with the assistance of CALL was more
interesting than learning in a traditional way.
The students admitted that they felt
motivated to learn when CALL was used in
class.
In the context of Vietnam, a number of
studies on this area were found. Tri Hoang
Dang and Nguyen Thi Hong Nhung (2014)
conducted a study investigating 149 English
majors’ use of ICT in ELL at a university.
The study found that research participants
indicated their positive attitudes towards the
use of ICT in ELL and they wanted to use
ICT more often in class. In 2016, Huynh
Huu Thanh did a study examining the
application of technology in ELL among

250 English-majors at a university in
Vietnam. The results indicated that the
application of technology in teaching and
learning languages was in the process of
introducing technology into the classroom.
At the same time, this study also confirmed
that IT brought a revolution to teaching and
learning foreign languages.
3. Methodology
Research setting and participants
This study was conducted at the Faculty
of English language of one university in
Vietnam. This university has more than 200
classrooms, 60 experimental centres,


584 Tran Quoc Thao et al. / VNU Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, Vol 5, No 5 (2019) 581-594

workshops, and simulation rooms of
international standards, and the Faculty of
English language has more than 50 EFL
lecturers (including full-time and part-time
ones) and around 500 English majors. Each
classroom is equipped with a speaker
system, a LCD television or a projector, and
the university campus has many Wi-Fi
networks, which are free and open to all.

The purposively sampled participants
were 197 English majors from 1st to 4th year

The rationale for choosing the purposive
sampling is that this method can generate a
target group of participants as expected. The
following Table 1 describes the participants’
general information.

Table 1: Participants’ general information
No. Information
1

2

3

4

Male
Gender
female
1styear
2ndyear
Year of study
3rdyear
4thyear
Less than 2.0
2.0 – 2.49
GPA
2.5 – 3.19
3.2 – 4.0
Computer (desktop

Preference of using computer or laptop)
TELL tools
Smartphone (or tablet)
others

n=197
F
63
134
49
49
49
50
21
59
70
47

%
32.0
68.0
24.9
24.9
24.9
25.4
10.7
29.9
35.5
23.9

82

41.6

115
0

58.4
0.0

Note: F: frequency; %: Percent

Besides, 20 out of 197 participants (8
males: 40%; 12 females: 60%) were invited
for semi-structured interview. Among them,
interviewees from each academic year
accounted for 25% of the total number of
interviewees, and all interviewees are
voluntary.
Research instruments
Two instruments, viz. questionnaire and
semi-structured interview, were employed to
collect the data. The questionnaire, which
was adopted and adapted from previous
studies (Chiu 2003; Ghrieb 2015), aimed to
investigate the attitudes towards the use of

TELL tools in ELL among English-majors.
It consists of 30 questions and has three
parts: Part I asking about participants’

personal information and the realities of
using TELL tools in ELL; part II with 14
items in the form of a five-point Likert scale
(Strongly disagree to Strongly agree)
finding out participants’ attitudes toward
sthe use of TELL tools in ELL; part III with
10 items using a five-point Likert scale
(Never to always) exploring about frequency
of using TELL tools in ELL. The
questionnaire was translated in Vietnamese
so that the respondent did not have any


Tran Quoc Thao et al. / VNU Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, Vol 5, No 5 (2019) 581-594 585

difficulties in understanding the questions.
The Cronbach Alpha of this questionnaire is
.87. This indicates that the reliability of the
questionnaire is very high.
Regarding the semi-structured interview
which was designed based on the research
objectives, there are seven questions.
Data collection and analysis procedures
Before the main study took place, the
questionnaire and semi-structured interview
were conducted with ten students who had
similar characteristics with those in the main
study, in order to assure that the research
instruments were clear and valid. The main
study started with a question administered to

200 English majors; however, only 197
copies were returned. Semi-structured
interviews were then carried out with five
focus groups (20 participants); Vietnamese
was used for all interviews which were
recorded for later transcription.
With respect to data analysis, the
quantitative data generated from 197
questionnaires were analysed by SPSS
software version 22 in terms of means,
standard deviation, frequency and ANOVA
test. The score interval for mean scores of is
interpreted as 1.00 - 1.80: Strongly agree/
Never; 1.81 - 2.60: Disagree/Rarely; 2.61 3.40: Neutral/Sometimes; 3.41 - 4.20:
Agree/Often; 4.21
5.00: Strongly
agree/Always. Meanwhile, the qualitative
data gained from semi-structured interviews
were analysed by the method of content
analysis. Each interviewee was coded as S1,
S2 to S20.
4. Results and discussion
4.1. Results
4.1.1 English majors’ attitudes toward using
TELL tools in ELL
As seen from Table 2, the total mean
score is very high (M=4.08; SD=.26). This

means that English majors’ attitudes toward
using TELL tools in ELL are very positive.

Table 2: Attitudes toward using TELL tools in ELL
n=197
No.

8 items
Attitudes
toward
using TELL tools
in ELL

M

SD

4.08

.26

Note: M: mean; SD: Standard deviation

This information is supported by
interviewees’ comments. Most of them
expressed their positive attitudes toward
TELL. They mentioned about the necessity,
usefulness and important role of TELL tools
in ELL. They stated:
… I find it is really necessary to use
TELL tools in my ELL…. (S4)
…TELL tools play an important role in
promoting my English skills…. (S11)

…I think TELL tools are very useful….
(S8)
Nevertheless, many disadvantages of
TELL tools were also noted. Some of
interviewees shared that:
… there are too much learning English
apps, so I feel quite difficult to choose the
apps that are really effective and available to
me…. (S3)
…it takes lots of time to find out how to
use some TELL tools because I do not know
technology well…. (S1)
…I think it is not good for my health
when using TELL tools for a long time….
(S20)
Specifically, as regards Table 3, English
majors strongly agreed that “Using TELL
tools helps [them] to make an effort to learn


586 Tran Quoc Thao et al. / VNU Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, Vol 5, No 5 (2019) 581-594

English” (item L4: M=4.13; SD=.45).
Besides, participants agreed that using
TELL tools helped them to improve English
knowledge (item L2: M=4.12; SD=.55), and
finish assignments more straightforwardly
(item L8: M=4.12; SD=.38). They also
thought that using TELL tools “is very
necessary for [them] in learning English”

(item L1: M=4.09; SD=.66), “enhances
[their] English skills (item L3: M=4.09;
SD=.45), “helps [them] to learn English by

[themselves] in an active way” (item L5:
M=4.06; SD=.34), “helps [them] to explore
other cultures (item L6: M=4.04; SD=.39),
and “makes [them] update new English
materials (item L7: M=4.10; SD=.34). This
illustrates that the participants, generally
speaking, had positive learning attitudes
toward using TELL tools due to the huge
benefits brought by them.

Table 3: Learning attitudes toward using TELL tools in learning English
n=197
No.

Items
M

SD

L1

Using TELL tools is very necessary for me in learning English.

4.09

.66

L2

Using TELL tools improves my knowledge about English language.

4.12

.55

L3

Using TELL tools enhances my English skills.

4.09

.45

L4

Using TELL tools helps me to make an effort to learn English.

4.13

.45

L5

Using TELL tools helps me to learn English by myself in an active
way.

4.02

.43

L6

Using TELL tools helps me to explore other cultures.

4.04

.39

L7

Using TELL tools makes me update new English materials.

4.10

.34

L8

Using TELL tools in learning English makes me finish my
assignments quickly and easily.

4.12

.38

Note: M: mean; SD: Standard deviation

In addition, almost all interviewees
mentioned that TELL tools were really
useful in their ELL, especially their English
skills and knowledge of English grammar.
They commented as follows:
…since using TELL tools, my English
skills have been improved significantly….
(S2)
…TELL tools help me a lot in learning
English…. (S7)

… I can do my exercises more quickly
thanks to TELL tools. For example, using
electrical dictionary help me save time, and
some search engines like Google, CocCoc or
Yahoo help me find out information on any
subject I need…. (S6)
With respect to participants’ enjoyment
attitudes towards using TELL tools in ELL,
the results in Table 4 indicate that
participants agreed that they “like using


Tran Quoc Thao et al. / VNU Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, Vol 5, No 5 (2019) 581-594 587

TELL tools in learning English” (item E9:
M=4.05; SD=.38), and they believed that
using TELL tools makes “[their] learning
English more interesting” (item E10:

M=4.12; SD=.39) and English lessons
“easier to understand” (item E11: M=4.09;
SD=.39) and “more vivid” (item E12:
M=4.07; SD=.39). Additionally, respondents
thought that using TELL tools in learning
English “helps [them] gain new English

knowledge more easily’ (item E13: M=4.17;
SD=.21) and “enhances social interaction in
classroom” (item E14: M=3.91; SD=.49). In
general, the mean scores of participants’
enjoyment attitudes toward using TELL
tools are high, which means they really liked
and felt comfortable as well as interested
when applying TELL tools in learning
English.

Table 4: Enjoyment attitudes toward using TELL tools in ELL
No.

n=197

Items

M

SD

E9

I like using TELL tools in learning English.

4.05

.38

E10

Using TELL tools makes my learning English more interesting.

4.12

.39

E11

Using TELL tools makes English lessons easier to understand.

4.09

.32

E12

Using TELL tools makes English lessons more vivid.

4.07

.28

E13

Using TELL tools in learning English helps me gain new English
knowledge more easily.

4.17

.21

E14

Using TELL tools in learning English enhances social interaction in
classroom.

3.91

.49

Note: M: mean; SD: Standard deviation

Results from interview were also similar
to these findings. Most interviewees found it
interesting to use TELL tools in learning
English. They stated:
…I really like using TELL tools…. (S2)
…I love learning English thanks to
TELL tools…. (S5)
…using TELL tools help me learn
English more easily…. (S13)
4.1.2 English majors’ frequency of using

TELL tools in learning English
The results in Table 5 reveal that the total
mean score of frequency of using TELL
tools in learning English is 3.66 out of 5,
which is relatively high. This implies that

English majors used TELL tools at a high
frequency for various purposes of their
English language development.
Table 5: Total mean score of frequency of using
TELL tools in ELL
n=197
No.

10 items

Total

M

SD

3.66

.47

Note: M: mean; SD: Standard deviation

This information was backed up by
respondents’ comments in the interviews. In

particular, it was found that 7 (35%)
students always used TELL tools, 8 (40%)


588 Tran Quoc Thao et al. / VNU Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, Vol 5, No 5 (2019) 581-594

students often used TELL tools, 3 (25%)
students sometimes used TELL tools, and
only 2 (10%) students rarely used TELL
tools for their English learning purposes. For
example, they commented:
… I always use TELL tools to learn
English because it is really useful…. (S7)
… sometimes I use TELL tools to help
me do the exercises more quickly…. (S20)
…I rarely use TELL tools become I do
not get used to using modern devices….
(S16)
…I often use TELL tools in learning
English…. (S15)
Specifically, it is found in Table 6 that
participants sometimes used TELL tools to

“practice English pronunciation” (item U6:
M=3.28;
SD=.68),
“learn
English
pronunciation” (item U5: M=3.29; SD=.69),
and “prepare for international English tests

(e.g., IELTS, TOEIC, TOEFL, etc.)” (item
U10: M=3.32; SD=.78). Additionally,
activities that they often used TELL tools
are to enhance listening skill (item U1:
M=3.81; SD=.56), speaking skill (item U2:
M=3.76; SD=.56), reading skill (item U3:
M=3.77; SD=.65), and writing skill (item
U4: M=3.91; SD=.69), and learn vocabulary
(item U7: M=3.42; SD=.53) and grammar
(item U8: M=3.61; SD=.53). Most
significantly, participants always used TELL
tools to search materials for English learning
purposes (item U9: M=4.38; SD=.63).

Table 6: Frequency of using TELL tools in learning English
n=197

No.

I use TELL tools to…

U1

enhance English listening skill

3.81

.56

U2

enhance English speaking skill

3.76

.56

U3

enhance English reading skill

3.77

.69

U4

enhance English writing skill

3.91

.65

U5

learn English pronunciation.

3.29

.69

U6

practice English pronunciation.

3.28

.68

U7

learn English vocabulary

3.42

.57

U8

learn English grammar

3.61

.53

U9

search materials for English learning purposes

4.38

.63

U10

prepare for international English tests (e.g., IELTS, TOEIC,
TOEFL, etc.)

3.32

.78

M

SD

Note: F= frequency; %: percent

Qualitative data from interviews also are
in alignment with the above-mentioned
results. It is found that majority of
respondents used TELL tools for different
ELL purposes (e.g., improving language

skills, preparing for international English
tests) with different frequencies. As an
instance, they mentioned:
… I often use TELL tools to improve all
of my English language skills…. (S19)

Tran Quoc Thao et al. / VNU Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, Vol 5, No 5 (2019) 581-594 589

…I mainly use TELL tools for English
speaking and listening…. (S5)
…I prepare for IELTS through the
online course websites, and I also download
IELTS practice tests…. (S4)
4.1.3 Differences in attitudes toward and
frequency of using TELL tools in ELL in
terms of years of study and in terms of
academic achievement

As for the participants’ year of study, the
results from one-way ANOVA presented in
Table 7 show that there were no significant
differences in participants’ attitudes toward
(F=2.292; p=.079) and frequency of using
TELL tools in learning English (F=.673;
p=.673). This means that English students
had similar attitudes toward using TELL
tools and high frequent use of TELL tools in
ELL regardless of being in the first, second,
third or fourth year of study.

Table 7: Differences in attitudes toward and frequency of using TELL tools in ELL in terms of years of study
No.

Variables

1

2

n=197 - M (SD)
st

nd

F

Sig.

1 year

2 year

3rd year

4th year

Attitudes toward using
TELL tools in learning
English

2.292

.079

4.14

(.32)

4.03(.20)

4.03(.17)

4.11(.31)

Frequency of using
TELL tools in learning
English

.573

.633

3.63
(.51)

3.60 (.48)

3.70 (.37)

3.69 (.49)

Note: F-test; M: mean; SD: Standard deviation

Nevertheless, the results in Table 8 indicate that there were significant differences in
attitudes toward (F= 33.224; p=.000) and frequency of using TELL tools in learning English
(F=97.052; p=.000) in terms of academic achievement. This can be understood that students

from different levels of academic achievements had different attitudes toward the use of TELL
tools and used TELL tools differently to learn English.
Table 8: Differences in attitudes toward and frequency of using TELL tools in learning English in terms of
academic achievement
n=197 - M (SD)
No.

Variables

F

Sig.

Less
than 2.0

2.0 – 2.49

2.5–
3.19

3.2 –
4.0

1

Attitudes toward using
TELL tools in learning
English

33.224

.000*

3.78
(.42)

3.99 (.08)

4.09
(.15)

4.30
(.27)

2

Frequency of using
TELL tools in learning
English

97.052

.000*

2.83
(.26)

3.45 (.32)

3.81
(.30)

4.04
(.28)

Note: F-test; M: mean; SD: Standard deviation; * P<.01


590 Tran Quoc Thao et al. / VNU Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, Vol 5, No 5 (2019) 581-594

It is further noticed that with respect of
attitudes towards using TELL tools in
learning English, students with average
GPA less than 2.0 had the lowest mean
score (M=2.78; SD=.42), followed by those
in groups of GPA 2.0-2.49 (M=3.99;
SD=.08), 2.5-3.19 (M=4.09; SD=.15), and
3.2-40 (M=4.30; SD=.27). Likewise, as for
the frequency of using TELL tools in
learning English, the order of mean scores
from the lowest to highest are groups of
GPA less than 2.0 (M=2.83; SD=.26), 2.02.49 (M=3.45; SD=.32), 2.5-3.19 (M=3.81;
SD=.30), and 3.2-40 (M=4.04; SD=.28).
This can be interpreted that the better
students study, themore positive attitudes

the have towards the use of TELL tools in
learning English and use TELL tools in
learning English more frequently.

Results in Table 9 (Post hoc Tukey test)
also confirm the aforementioned findings.
The mean scores of four groups of academic
achievement were significantly different
from one another in terms of attitudes
toward the use of TELL tools and the use of
TELL tools in ELLT. That is to say that
students
having
different
academic
achievements had different attitudes toward
the use of TELL tools in ELL and used
TELL tools in ELL at different frequency.

Table 9: Post hoc Tukey test
Dependent variables

GPA

Less than 2.0

2.0 – 2.49
Attitudes toward the use of
TELL tools in ELL
2.5 – 3.19

3.2 – 4.0

Less than 2.0

Frequent use of TELL tools in
ELL
2.0 – 2.49

Mean
Difference

Sig.

2.0 – 2.49

-.215

.001*

2.5 – 3.19

-.315

.000*

3.2 – 4.0

-.519

.000*

Less than 2.0

.215

.001*

2.5 – 3.19

-.100

.044**

3.2 – 4.0

-.304

.000*

Less than 2.0

.315

.000*

2.0 – 2.49

.100

.044**

3.2 – 4.0

-.204

.000*

Less than 2.0

.519

.000*

2.0 – 2.49

.304

.000*

2.5 – 3.19

.204

.000*

2.0 – 2.49

-.619

.000*

2.5 – 3.19

-.980

.000*

3.2 – 4.0

-1.211

.000*

Less than 2.0

.619

.000*

2.5 – 3.19

-.360

.000*

3.2 – 4.0

-.592

.000*

GPA

Tran Quoc Thao et al. / VNU Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, Vol 5, No 5 (2019) 581-594 591

2.5 – 3.19

3.2 – 4.0

Less than 2.0

.980

.000*

2.0 – 2.49

.360

.000*

3.2 – 4.0

-.232

.000*

Less than 2.0

1.211

.000*

2.0 – 2.49

.592

.000*

2.5 – 3.19

.232

.000*

* P<.01; ** P<.05

4.2. Discussion
The findings of this study have revealed
some significant points. Firstly, the results
show that participants held the viewpoint
that TELL tools was really necessary and
useful for many different ELL purposes and
activities. Simultaneously, they were also
excited in using these tools. In other words,
students had positive attitudes toward using
TELL tools in ELL. These findings are in
alignment with the statements of researchers
(e.g., Almasri 2013; Korkmaz 2010;
Rossing et al. 2012; Huertas 2014) which
acknowledge that TELL tools are interesting
and helpful to use when learning English.
Therefore, due to these positive awareness,

it can be said that students may be willing to
apply TELL tools in their ELL.
Additionally, the findings also support the
idea that educators should integrate TELL
tools into ELL curriculums in order to create
a facilitating learning environment, and
promote
learners’
autonomy
and
centeredness. Secondly, it is found that the
frequency of using TELL tools in ELL was
very high, which indicate that that students
considered TELL tools as a priority to help
them enhance their English abilities. One of
the most intelligible reasons leading to the
pervasiveness of using TELL tools is the
immense benefits of TELL tools. For
example, the use of TELL tools make
learning helpful, flexible, fun, valuable,
effective, satisfactory and collaborative
(e.g., Barker et al. 2005; Cavus and Ibrahim

2008; Chen and Tsai 2009; Huertas 2014;
Steel 2012). Along this line, KukulskaHulme (2006) supplements that TELL tools
have advantage of anywhere and anytime. In
contrast, there were still a few students in
this study context never or rarely used TELL
tools in improving some English skills. The
reason for these cases may be the short of

instructions on how to use TELL tools in
ELL, as not knowing much about language
learning programs makes students use such
programs ineffectively. In their study, Milon
and Ipbal (2017) claims that training on
technology application in learning should be
given to all students. Another research
asserts that staring at a computer screen
causes eyestrain which is likely to occur if
computers are used excessively for learning
(Murday et al. 2008: 134). This also
explains for why some students do not
prefer of using TELL tools. In addition,
many students get used to the traditional
learning style, so they may be lazy to search,
update, and apply new learning approaches
including TELL tools. Furthermore, the
variety of TELL tools is also a double-edged
sword. This can make students confused
with their decisions for the available tools.
Another major finding is that that
participants in different academic years had
the same attitudes towards using TELL tools
and a high frequency of utilizing TELL tools
in learning English. It can be understood
that participants were the English majors so
that they would have high perception as well


592 Tran Quoc Thao et al. / VNU Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, Vol 5, No 5 (2019) 581-594

as frequency of using TELL tools which
help them to perfect their language
proficiency and their overall academic skills
in order to satisfy their careers in the future
(Galavis 1998; Dunken 1990). Apart from
this, it can be seen from the data that the
better GPA students obtained, the more
positive attitudes towards and higher
frequency of using TELL tools in ELL they
had. This can be explained that high
achievers are those who might often pay
more attention tomethods that can help them
promote their English abilities, in which
using TELL tools is one of the most popular,
available and applicable approaches. After
applying TELL tools in English learning
process, a variety of benefits of TELL tools
such as their being helpful, interesting,
accessible, enjoyable, fun, convenient,
useful, user-friendly, and affordable may be
recognized. As a result, their English
acquisition may become more efficient, and
they may get higher scores. Due to these
satisfactory results, they would have
positive attitudes towards using TELL tools
and share their desire to continue using
TELL tools in learning English. In other
words, they may have more English learning
passion and motivation, and this could lead

to the more frequent utilization of TELL
tools in ELL. This explanation corresponds
to many prior studies which asserts that the
benefits of technology use is an increase in
student
motivation
(Dunken
1990),
technology can
to improve language
learners’ academic ability (Lee 2001), the
utilization of technology can fully improve
the students’ thinking and practical language
skills (Pun 2013), the students in a
technology enhanced language learning
classroom perceived their classroom
learning environment more positively than
their regular no-tech class peers (Ebrahimi,
Eskandari, and Rahimi 2012).

5. Conclusion
This study found that students
recognized the usefulness as well as the
necessity of TELL tools, and they were
excited, delightful, and enjoyable when
using TELL tools in order to improve and
enhance
their
English
proficiency.

Participants were also found to employ
TELL tools in ELL at a high frequency.
What is more, students had similar attitudes
toward the use of TELL tools in ELL and
utilized TELL tools at a similar frequency;
notwithstanding, students with high
academic achievements had more positive
attitudes towards and a higher frequency of
using TELL tools in ELL than those who
had low GPA.
It can be recognized that the
effectiveness of applying TELL tools in
ELL is undeniable, and raising students’
attitudes toward TELL also has the
significant influences on the efficiency of
ELL. It is recommended, therefore, that
students should be encouraged to employ
TELL tools in ELL. More importantly, the
benefits of TELL tools in ELL should be
pointed out to students, and instruction or
training on how to use TELL tools should be
focused, as not all students are able to
explore the TELL tools by themselves.
Ultimately, the use of TELL tools in ELL
should be facilitated and monitored in
accordance to the students’ needs and
requirements of ELL.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to express their
deep gratitude to those who voluntarily

participated in this study and who supported
and gave constructive comments all along


Tran Quoc Thao et al. / VNU Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, Vol 5, No 5 (2019) 581-594 593

the research process. Without the
unconditional assistance, this study could
not have been carried out and done.
References
Afshari, Mojgan. 2007. “Factors affecting
teachers’
use
of
information
and
communication technology.” International
Journal of Instruction 2(1): 77-104.
Almasri, Rana. 2013. “The use of mobile
technology in education by international
students in United States universities:
Perceptions regarding mobile applications for
English language learning.” Ph.D. dissertation,
Robert Morris University.
Amiri, Eisa. 2012. “A Study of the application of
digital technologies in teaching and learning
English language and literature.” International
Journal of Scientific & Technology Research
1(5): 103-107.
Barker, Andrea, Krull, Greig and Mallinson,

Brenda. 2005. “A proposed theoretical model
for mLearning adoption in developing
countries.” Presented at the 4th World
Conference on mLearning-Cape Town, South
Africa, 25-28. Retrieved 15 December, 2018
( />df).
Çağıltay, Kürşat and Seferoğlu, Gölge. 2009.
“Mobile assisted language learning: English
pronunciation at learners' fingertips.” Eurasian
Journal of Educational Research 34: 97-114.
Cavus, Nadire and Ibrahim, Dogan. 2008.
“MOLT: A mobile learning tool that makes
learning new
technical English language
words enjoyable.” International Journal of
Interactive Mobile Technologies 2(4): 38–42.
Chen, Chih Ming and Tsai, Yen-Nung. 2009.
“Interactive
location-based
game
for
supporting effective
English learning”.
Presented at 2009 International Conference on
Environmental Science and Information
Application Technology 3(1): 523–526.

Chiu, Mei-wen. 2003. “Computer-assisted
language learning: Attitudes of Taiwanese
college

students.”
Ph.D.
dissertation,
University of West Florida.
Dunkel, Patricia. 1990. Computer-assisted
language learning and testing: Research issues
and practice. New York: Newbury House.
Ebrahimi, Nabi A., Eskandari, Zahra and Rahimi,
Ali. 2015. “The effects of using technology and
the Internet on some Iranian EFL students’
perceptions of their communication classroom
environment.”
Teaching
English
with
Technology 13(1): 3-19.
Ghrieb, El Boukhari. 2015. “Teacher’s and
students’ attitudes towards the use of mobile
assisted language learning.” Master thesis,
University of Biskra, Algeria.
Groff,
Jennifer.
2013.
“Technology-rich
innovative learning environments.” OCED
CERI Innovative Learning Environment
project, 1-30. Retrieved on 15 December, 2018
( />Hartman, Joel L. 2008. “Moving teaching and
learning with technology from adoption to
transformation.” EDUCAUSE Review 43(6):

24-25.
Higgins, Steve. 2012. Language learners and
computers. London: Longman.
Huertas, Edwin. 2014. “Mobile applications
development: Move over, Rosetta Stone:
Mobile language apps make learning fun.”
Retrieved
15
December,
2018
( />Huynh, Huu Thanh. 2016. “A survey of using
technology to assist language learning of
English major students at HCMC Open
University.” Unpublished Master thesis,
HCMC Open University.
Kukulska-Hulme, Agnes. 2006. “Mobile language
learning now and in the future.” pp. 295–310 in
Fran vision till praktik: Sprakutbildning och
Informationsteknik (From vision to practice:
language learning and IT), edited by S., Patrik.
Sweden:
Swedish
Net
University
(Năatuniversitetet).
Lee, Kuang-Wu. 2000. “English teachers’ barriers
to the use of computer-assisted language
learning.” The Internet TESL Journal 6(12).

594 Tran Quoc Thao et al. / VNU Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, Vol 5, No 5 (2019) 581-594

Midraj, SadiqHayder. 1998. “ESL students’
attitudes and communicative competence.”
Unpublished PhD dissertation, Indiana
university of Pennsylvania, Indiana, PA.
Milonm, Sayed Rafiqul and Hasanand Ipban,
Hafiz. 2017. “Students’ perception towards
technology in learning English as a foreign
language: A case study of higher secondary
students of Pabna, Bangladesh.” IOSR Journal
Of Humanities And Social Science 22(6): 4753.
Mitchell, Cristi. 1992. “The relationship of
computer-assisted
language
learning
environments and cognitive
style
to
achievement in English as second language.”
Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of
Miami, Miami, FL.
Monerah, Alduwairej. 2010. “Attitudes towards
the use of technology among college students
who study English as a second language
(ESL).” Master of Education Thesis, Cleveland
State University.
Mukhtar, Ibrahim Suliman Ahmed., Sahrir,
Muhammad Sabri., and Hassan, Fekri Abidin.
2008. “Issues and challenges of using CALL in

learning English: Considerations for content
development.” American International Journal
of Social Science 2(5): 76-88. Retrieved 15
December, 2018 ( />Murday,
Kimmaree, Ushida, Eiko and
Chenoweth, Ann. (2008). “Learners’ and
teachers’ perspectives on language online”.
Computer Assisted Language Learning 21(2):
125-142.
Orachorn, Kitchakarn. 2015. “EFL Learners’
attitudes towards using computers as a learning
tool in language learning.” Turkish Online
Journal of Educational Technology – TOJET
14(2): 52-58.
Rossing, Jonathan P., Miller, Willie M., Cecil,
Amanda K. and Stamper, Suzan E.. 2012.
“iLearning: The future of higher education?
Student perceptions on learning with mobile
tablets.” Journal of the Scholarship of
Teaching and Learning 12(2): 1–26.

Peeraer, Jef, Walle, Stefaan Vande and Tran Nu
Mai Thy. 2012. “How to Support Innovative
Practices of Learning and Learning to Live
Together? The Case of Capacity Development
of Teacher Education Institutions in Cambodia
and Vietnam.” Presented at 16th UNESCOAPEID International Conference "Learning to
Live Together”, Bangkok, Thailand.
Pun, Min. 2013. “The use of multimedia
technology in English language teaching: A

global perspective.” Crossing the Border:
International Journal of Interdisciplinary
Studies 1(1): 29-38.
Siros, Izadpanah and Mansooreh, Alvai. 2016.
“Student-engaged viewpoint on technology in
learning
English in Zanjan public high
schools.” Theory and Practice in Language
Studies 6(4): 854-860.
Steel, Carol. 2012. “Fitting learning into life:
Language students' perspectives on the benefits
of using mobile apps.” pp. 875-880 in
Future
challenges,
sustainable
future,
proceedings of ascilite conference Wellington
hosted by University of New Zealand, edited
by M. Brown, M. Hartnett and T. Stewart.
Tran Quoc Thao. 2018. “The roles of technology
in promoting English-majored students’ learner
autonomy: A critical look at HUTECH
context.” Proceedings of Conference on
Technology and Science 2018, pp. 344-348. Ho
Chi Minh City: Science and technology
publishing house.
Tran Quoc Thao and Duong My Tham. 2018.
“EFL learners' perceptions of factors
influencing learner autonomy development.”
Kasetsart Journal of Social Sciences XXX: 1-6.

( />Tri Hoang Dang and Nguyen Thi Hong Nhung.
2014. “An exploratory study of ICT use in
English language learning among EFL
university students.” Teaching English with
Technology 14(4): 32-46.
Warschauer, Mark. 2000. “The changing global
economy and the future of English teaching.”
TESOL Quarterly 34(3): 511.