Masyhur Masyhur


This paper identified attitudes toward CALL of students studying English as a foreign language (EFL) at FKIP Universitas Riau. Seventy students who were enrolled in the orientation year of an English program were chosen to participate in this study by expressing their attitudes toward CALL. Standardized and local instruments were used along with interviews and observation techniques to collect data. The results of the study revealed that students had positive attitudes toward CALL. Looking at the daily hours students spend using a computer, a slight correlation was found between this variable and the students’ attitudes toward CALL. Other variables, such as students’ background knowledge of English, ownership of a computer, and their computer knowledge, were found to be irrelevant to their attitudes toward CALL. These results were in line with previous research conducted by Al-Shammari (2007), Alrumaih (2004), and Almekhlafi (2006). The results reinforced conclusions about CALL revealed by researchers, such as Chen (2003), Chikamatsu (2003), Egbert (2005) and Levy (2005), who found that it helps students learn better and more independently, and gives them the ability to have more control of their learning and to have more opportunities to practice English.


attitudes, CALL, local instrument

Full Text:



Ahmad, K., Corbett, G., Rogers, M., and Sussex, R. (1985) Computers, Language Learning and Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Al-Khaldi, M., & Al-Jabri, I. (1998). The relationship of attitudes to computer utilization: New evidence from a developing nation. Computers in Human Behaviors, 17(4), 23-42.

Almekhlafi, A. G. (2001). Instructional media for teachers' preparation. International Journal of Instructional Media, 28(2), 191-207.

Al-Shammari, M. H. (2007). Saudi English as a Foreign Language Learners’ Attitudes toward Computer- Assisted Language Learning. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, West Virginia University, Morgantown.

Ayres, R. (2002). Learner attitudes toward the use of CALL. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 15(3), 241-

Bax, S. (2003). CALL - past, present and future. System, 31, 13-28.

Bayraktar, S. (2002). A meta-analysis of computer-assisted instruction in science education. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 34(2), 173-188.

Chapelle, C. (1997). CALL in the year 2000: Still in search of research paradigms? Language and Learning Technology, 1(1), 19-43.

Charischak, I. (2000). A look at technology's role in professional development of mathematics teachers at the middle school level. School Science and Mathematics, 100(7), 349-354.

Chen, J. F. (1996). CALL is not a hammer and not every teaching problem is a nail: Changing expectations of computers in the classroom. The Internet TESL Journal, 2(7), 1-4.

Chen, P. (2003). EFL Student Learning Style Preferences and Attitudes Toward Technology-Integrated Instruction. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from Dissertations Abstracts International, (2813).

Chikamatsu, N. (2003). The effects of computer use on L2 Japanese writing. Foreign Language Annals, 36(1), 114-127.

Cubillos, J. H. (1998). Technology: A step forward in the teaching of foreign languages? In J. Harper, M. Lively,& M. Williams (Eds.), The Coming of Age of the Profession: Issues and Emerging Ideas for the Teaching of Foreign Languages (pp. 199-223). Boston: Heinle & Heinle.

Cushion, S., & Hemard, D. (2002). Applying new technological developments to CALL for Arabic. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 15(5), 501-508.

Egbert, J. (Ed.). (2010). CALL in Limited Technology Contexts. San Marcos, TX: CALICO.

Egbert, J., Paulus, T. M., & Nakamichi, Y. (2002). The impact of CALL instruction on classroom computer use: A foundation for rethinking technology in teacher education. Language Learning and Technology, 6(3),108-126.

Egbert. J. (2005). CALL Essentials: Principles and Practice in CALL Classrooms. Virginia: TESOL.

Fenfang, H. (2003). Learners' behaviors in computer-based input activities elicited through tracking technologies. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 16(1), 5-29.

Fotos, S., & Browne, C. (2004). The development of CALL and current options. In S. Fotos & C. Brown (Eds.), New Perspectives on CALL for Second and Foreign Language Classrooms (pp. 3-14). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Jabir, M., & Omar, A. (2002). Students’ and teachers’ attitudes toward computers in the schools in southern governorates of Jordan. Dirasat: Educational Sciences, 27(2), 312-327.

Lee, K. W. (2000). English teachers’ barriers to the use of computer-assisted language learning. The Internet TESL Journal, 6(12). Retrieved from CALLbarriers.html.

Levy, M. (1997). Computer-Assisted Language Learning, Context and Conceptualization. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.

Levy, M. (2005). Why call CALL “CALL”?. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 18(3), 143-149.

Palaigeorgiou, G. E., Siozos, P. D., Konstantakis, N.I., & Tsoukalas, I.A. (2005). A computer attitude scale for computer science freshmen and its educational implications. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning,21, 330-342.

In S. Fotos & C. Brown (Eds.). New Perspectives on CALL for Second and Foreign Language Classrooms (pp. 69-92). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Robert, A. (2002). Learner attitudes towards the use of CALL. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 15(3),241-249.

Stevens, V. (1991). A study of student attitudes toward CALL in a self-access student resource centre. System,19(3), 289-299.

Warschauer, M., & Healey, D. (1998). Computers and language learning: An overview. Language Teaching, 31,57-71.


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2017 Proceedings of ISELT FBS Universitas Negeri Padang

This Proceedings is Currently indexed by:

Google Scholar.

The Proceedings of International Seminar on English Language and Teaching is registered at LIPI