THE EFFECT OF COMPUTERIZED INSTRUCTION ON LEARNING

ENGLISH PREPOSITIONS

A SCIENTIFIC PAPER

BY
PIN KAN
2015-031-005

DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION

FACULTY OF EDUCATION AND LANGUAGE
ATMA JAYA CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF INDONESIA
JAKARTA
JULY, 2019
THE EFFECT OF COMPUTERIZED INSTRUCTION ON LEARNING
ENGLISH PREPOSITIONS

A SCIENTIFIC PAPER

BY
PIN KAN
2015-031-005

Presented to
The English Language Education Department
in partial fulfilment of the requirements
for the Sarjana degree in English Language Education

DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION

FACULTY OF EDUCATION AND LANGUAGE
ATMA JAYA CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF INDONESIA
JAKARTA
JULY, 2019
 THE EFFECT OF COMPUTERIZED INSTRUCTION ON LEARNING
ENGLISH PREPOSITIONS

INTRODUCTION

In the recent years, exploration on grammar instruction has been done in order

to help learners acquire the target grammar. The most frequently used grammar

instruction in second and foreign language classrooms is explicit grammar

instruction. It is a learning strategy for attracting students’ attention to focus more on

the linguistic norms (Ellis & Shintani, 2014).

Some other researchers found out that explicit grammar instruction is useful

although it is done traditionally. It is well known that according to traditional

grammar teaching pedagogy, language is seen as a learning object (Nassaji & Fotos,

2004). Based on Norris & Ortega (2000)’s comprehensive meta-analysis of effect of

instruction studies, explicit instruction has proved to be more effective than implicit

instruction. Another study also claims that there is a significant progress and

improvement on the level of proficiency from learners that were taught using explicit

instruction rather than those who were not (Ellis, 2006).

In the use of explicit grammar instruction, students will be trained through

presentation, drills, and practice. By doing this, it is expected that learners will

acquire the target language (Nassaji & Fotos, 2004). Therefore, this method will help

learners to make progress on their learning process.

1
 2

Despite the benefits of explicit grammar instruction, there still exist some

drawbacks which have to be addressed. It tends to be more teacher-centered than

student-centered. Students are able to make grammatical sentences but unable to

produce it for their daily conversation (Ling, 2015). Furthermore, instruction

typically occurs only in the classroom, so learners need to review it at home to make

the learning process effective.

With those in mind, there should be a way other than using instruction in

learning in order to encourage students to study by themselves outside the classroom.

In the era where most population of the world make use of technology at all times, it

is very possible for applying web-based language learning along with classroom

activity. This method is called experimental computer-assisted language learning

(eCALL) which has been argued to be an efficient method for learning English

grammar. This is an approach that can engage the students with computerized

pedagogical tasks. Moreover, studies have shown that the learning outputs from

eCALL can be compared to those gained from classroom course systems. Hence,

eCALL is applicable since it is specifically made for practicing on English skills

(Presson, Davy, & MacWhinney, 2013).

The advantages of using eCALL are verified if controlled experimental data

exists. However, there are only few studies that prove the efficacy of eCALL.

Moreover, eCALL was once used to teach prepositions and the result was positive.

But still, research about teaching and learning prepositions using explicit grammar

instructions through eCALL is still rare.

 3

To provide more evidence for the effectiveness of eCALL, the current study

aims to investigate the effectiveness of computerized instruction on learning English

prepositions for foreign language learners. The present study is to answer the

following questions:

1. Does explicit grammar online instruction effectively increase learners’

spatial sense comprehension as measured by the picture comprehension

task of in, on, and at?

2. Does explicit grammar online instruction effectively increase learners’

temporal sense comprehension as measured by the picture comprehension

task of in, on, and at?

3. Does explicit grammar online instruction effectively increase learners’

ability to use the spatial sense as measured by the picture description task

of in, on, and at?

4. Does explicit grammar online instruction effectively increase learners’

ability to use the temporal sense as measured by the picture description

task of in, on, and at?

Based on the research questions, it is expected that the present study will give

beneficial information for EFL teachers whether teaching preposition using explicit

instruction through eCALL can really improve students’ knowledge and use about

prepositions. Furthermore, this study hopefully can reveal which method that is

effective for foreign language learners in learning English prepositions.

 4

This study is restricted to teaching and learning prepositions in the foreign

language contexts using explicit grammar instruction delivered online. The

prepositions discussed in this study are only in, on, and at. The subjects of this study

are also limited to the 10th and 11th grade Senior High School students at BPK

Penabur Sukabumi. The result of this study is limited to the online tasks which was

adapted from the previous researchers used to collect data (Wong, Zhao, &

MacWhinney, 2018)

eCALL

It has always been interesting when learners can use technology as their part

of learning. Due to the rapid development of technology nowadays, there has been a

new approach called computer-assisted language learning (CALL) in language

learning. eCALL has proved to be a good method that can expedite language learning

from SLA research point of view. There are several important instructional factors in

eCALL which are corrective feedback, explicit instruction, repeated practice and

student modeling.

1. Corrective feedback

Corrective feedback is needed for learning in a classroom. It is important to

know that CALL can give immediate written feedback with high diagnostic accuracy.

CALL is beneficial not only for EFL learners but also for the teachers especially

when dealing with corrective feedback. For teachers, giving corrective feedback in

the classroom may take time since they should identify the learners’ errors first and
 5

then decide which feedback method to be used (Presson, Davy, & MacWhinney,

2013). These problems can be resolved if the corrective feedback is given through the

computer. It can give quick responses to students’ errors so that learning will become

more efficient. And for the learners, they will not feel ashamed because of the errors

they made and the feedback will be discovered on their computer, not discussed in

the classroom.

2. Explicit Instruction

MacWhinney (1997) summed up that if the target form was quite easy,

explicit instruction was really helpful for learners. As stated earlier, explicit

instruction can help the learners to improve their language acquisition through

presentation, drills and practice. By doing this, it is clear that learners will get

familiar with the rule from time to time. So, it is possible that the rule can stay longer

in learners’ working memory. Knowing that explicit instruction can play an important

role in the learning, it may give many advantages for the learners if explicit

instruction is given along with eCALL as the tool. The reason for this case is because

eCALL can provide various kinds of explicitness for the explanation of linguistic

patterns and rules.

3. Repeated practice and student modeling

The role of practice can be maximized through an eCALL program. eCALL

can be regarded as a tool to learn component of language skills especially speaking.

Yoshimura & MacWhinney (2007) asked Japanese English learners to read a

 6

sentence and say it from memory repeatedly. These repetitions have proved in

leading them to greater improvements not only in their fluency after repeating the

sentence but also accuracy in their phonological as well. Moreover, eCALL can also

be a tool for modeling the target language. In fact, there will be improvement on

learners’ accuracy and fluency if they practicing on what they hear from native

speakers (Presson, Davy, & MacWhinney, 2013).

Based on the factors (corrective feedback, explicit instruction, repeated practice and

student modeling) in eCALL, it is expected learners can learn independently and be

responsible for their own learning. Therefore, it is also expected that learners will

enjoy learning prepositions through eCALL, actively engaged, and increase their

motivation in the learning process (Stepp-Greany, 2002).

PREPOSITION

Prepositions are an important element in English language as the frequency of

its use in communication is high. Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary (2010)

interprets a preposition as “a word of group of words, such as in, from, to, out of and

on behalf of, used before a noun or pronoun to show a place, position, time or

method”. Matula (2007) also defines preposition as containing a relationship between

one object to another and that different prepositions will have different relationships

between the two objects.

However, foreign language learners perceive prepositions as one of the

English aspects that are difficult to acquire even for advanced learners. Prepositions
 7

with their various meanings and usages seem to be confusing for ESL learners

(Matula, 2007). Because of that, mastering native-like use of preposition is

considered as difficult since each preposition has different meanings (polysemy) if it

is applied in different contexts (Hung, 2017). For example, the preposition at build

upon Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary has 15 different meanings itself

(Hornby & Wehmeier, 2005). This requires learners to be able to analyze each use of

preposition that they are using and it is somehow complicated to ESL learners (Hung,

2017).

IN, ON, AT

Prepositions are classified into 3 uses; spatial, temporal, and abstract.

According to Cambridge Dictionary (Cambridge Dictionaries online, 2019), the first

type of preposition; spatial or prepositions of place is related to physical scenes (e.g.

at work, on the bed, in the drawer). Second, temporal or prepositions of time is used

to refer to time (e.g. at 3 o’clock, on Monday, in 2002). Lastly, the abstract

prepositions which is refer to a meaning that is not concrete (e.g. at leisure time, stays

on guard, I’m in love).

As stated before, some difficulties regarding various meanings and usages of

prepositions can cause some challenges in the learning process. The first challenge

stated by Matula (2007) is each prepositions have typical relationship among the first

and the second object and the relationship itself will change depending on the

preposition used.
 8

1. The captain is on the ship

2. The captain is in the ship

3. The captain is at the ship

The three sentences above show that the prepositions used can change the

relation between the two objects which are the captain and the ship. Moreover, if

those sentences are turned into pictures, the ship’s area will still remain yet the

captain’s area will change. Second, the three sentences below also represent that the

each preposition can be used not only for spatial relations but also temporal relations

(Matula, 2007).

1. on the table and on the 30th November

2. in the fridge and in April

3. at Hospital and at 12 o’clock

ESL/EFL learners face these challenges and some researchers believe that this

phenomenon arises because there are no correspondences between prepositions in

their own language and English language. Moreover, not only learners but also

teachers find it difficult to choose the proper preposition if the sentence is combined

with a noun, verb, or an adjectives (Saravanan, 2014).

THE COMPETITION MODEL

The competition model sees languages as a process that is continuously

changing or developing. It adopts a usage-based functionalist approach for processing

the language (MacWhinney, 1987, 2012). The processing depends on form–function

 9

mappings as it is seen in the sentence The police shot bullets at the terrorist,

preposition at can be mapped over its function. According to (MacWhinney, 1987),

this is called at-to target polyseme. This at-to target polyseme will be collide with at-

to position polyseme in the sentence We stopped at the rest area before continuing

our trip. From those two sentences, it is undeniable that preposition at can be mapped

to other functions and it can happen to other at’s polyseme and also other

prepositions.

Besides, there is further polysemic competition that is possibly happening

throughout the learning process. Sentences (1),(2),(3),(4),(5),(6) below show

distinction in terms of the connection between the form and the function.

1. She is on the train

2. She is in the train

3. The couple is walking at the beach

4. The couple is walking on the beach

5. My father is at the restaurant

6. My father is in the restaurant

Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary states the meaning of preposition in is

used within the shape of something, on is used in or into a position covering,

touching, or forming part of a surface, and at is used to say where

something/somebody is or where something happens. From (1) and (2), ESL learners

have to determine whether the subject, she, is inside the train or touches the train’s
 10

surface. They will probably choose in over on due to human’s perceptual senses that

view train as something that has boundaries while being on the train is more

commonly used in English.

For (3) and (4), learners have to choose whether the couple is walking directly

next to the beach or their standing location is near the beach area. If the couple is

walking with sand under their feet, it means that on wins over the preposition at. Last,

for (5) and (6), if the subject, father, is near the area of the restaurant, the preposition

at will be the most correct one to choose. It would be different if the subject, father, is

inside or within the restaurant, then in will be the preposition for the sentence. In

order to achieve higher proficiency of learners, they must know the differentiation of

the competing polysemes above. Once they have successfully achieved it, they will

be able to use them correctly in many contexts of conversation (Wong, Zhao, &

MacWhinney, 2018).

PREVIOUS STUDIES

Matula’s dissertation (2007) explored the effect of incorporating a cognitive

presentation of the spatial and temporal senses of the English prepositions on, in, and

at. The participants of this study were twenty intermediate level learners aged

between 18 and 54. They were separated into two groups with ten learners each; one

was cognitive group who received cognitive linguistic treatment and the other was

traditional group received treatment based on the existing curriculum. The course

lasted for four weeks with fifteen days of treatment. The participants were tested
 11

using pre-, post- and delayed post-tests. They were tested in the form of multiple

choice questions with pictures, fill in the gap task, two production tasks. Matula

discovered there was no significant difference between the performance of the

cognitive group and the traditional group. However, the cognitive group still showed

positive result in producing the correct use of spatial and temporal relations in

prepositions. This showed that the cognitive group benefited from the CL-based

instruction.

Wong, Zhao, and MacWhinney (2018) examined sixty-four Cantonese-

speaking intermediate learners of English in three sessions; a pretest (a sentence-level

cloze test), a training session (a sentence–picture matching task), and a posttest (a

translation test). This study was aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of a cognitive

linguistic approach to preposition instruction with online implementation. The

participants were divided into three treatment groups (i.e. schematic diagram

feedback, metalinguistic rule feedback, or correctness feedback) and one control

group. The three treatment groups were given preposition training with different

kinds of feedback according to their group’s name.

From the three groups, only the schematic diagram feedback group was

exposed to the spatial–nonspatial connection. On the other hand, the control group

did not receive preposition treatment but received computer-based English article

training. Both of the group had the same testing stimuli at the end. After the

treatment, Wong, Zhao, and MacWhinney (2018) discovered the treatment groups

outperformed the control group. The results from the cloze and translation test
 12

showed that the instruction worked effectively in the three feedback groups.

However, the result from the schematic diagram feedback group is better than those

who are in the correctness feedback group in the translation test. While in the cloze

test, there were no significant differences among the three groups.

Wijaya and Ong (2018) conducted a study on applying cognitive linguistics to

teaching English prepositions in the EFL classroom. This aimed to investigate the

effect of cognitive linguistics-grounded instruction on learning the prepositions in,

on, and at. Forty four junior high school students from a school in Indonesia were

involved in this study. They were tenth grade students, aged 14 to 15. This was a

quasi-experimental study where the participants were assigned into 2 groups which

are cognitive group as the experimental group and rule group. The instruments were

pre-, post-, and delayed post-tests focusing on the three uses of preposition; spatial,

temporal and abstract.

The tests were given in a fill in the gaps form. The researchers discovered that

the cognitive group performed better than the rule group. Instead of improvement in

both immediate and delayed post-tests, the cognitive group only improved

significantly in the immediate post-test. Besides, the rule group only showed a little

improvement in the immediate post-tests and even decreased in the delayed post-

tests. The results of this study still pointed to the value of using cognitive linguistics

in instructing prepositions even though the cognitive instruction did not have long-

term effects on learners’ ability to use the prepositions.

 13

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

Based on the three previous studies, there are several similarities and

differences to the present study which will be discussed in this section. First, the

study by Wijaya and Ong (2018) and Matula (2007) is similar in terms of the target

learning which focused on preposition in, on, and at. Wijaya and Ong (2018)’s study

took place in a senior high school setting which also be the same to the present study.

Second, the study by Wong, Zhao, McWhinney (2018) investigated the effectiveness

of learning preposition in, at and over using online implementation. The present study

also implemented online web-based language learning. However, the target

preposition is different from Wong, Zhao, and MacWhinney (2018). In the present

study the target preposition is in, on, at and the focus is only on metalinguistic rules

that usually appear in grammar book.

This study will examine whether teaching and learning prepositions using

computerized instruction lead to better learning outcomes than using textbooks. In

this study, students who received explicit instruction treatment will be compared to

students who received other topic beside prepositions. Both groups will receive the

treatment and material through computer-based tutorial system called eCALL.

 14

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This was an experimental-based study that aimed to investigate the

effectiveness of explicit grammar instruction in increasing learners’ comprehension

of in, on, and, at and learners’ ability to use it. The researcher collected the data

through online tasks and the result will be presented quantitatively.

Subjects

The participants of this research were tenth and eleventh grade students of

senior high school in BPK Penabur Sukabumi. They spoke Indonesian as their mother

tongue and learn English as their foreign language. They were aged between 16 and

17. The initial pool of this study is 34 students in total. At first, each of them was

given a consent form to sign as an agreement to participating in this study. After that,

their English proficiency was tested using Oxford Placement Test (OPT). Only

participants who received a score of 40 and above in the OPT test were analyzed.

This aimed to make sure a valid measurement of the students who were capable in

comprehending the learning materials. From the OPT test, it was revealed that there

are 21 students whose data can be analyzed. So, out of 34 students, this study only

selected 21 students who met pre-intermediate level. Then, the 21 students were

randomly assigned to the experimental group and control group. At last, there were

eleven students for the traditional group and ten students for the control group.
 15

Data

The data collected in this study were the students’ score in the pre-test and

post-test of both experimental and control group. The scores were obtained from the

first and second part of the test (picture comprehension test and picture description

test).

Research Instrument

In this study, pre-test and post-test were used to collect the data. The pre-test

was given in the hope that the participants could utilize their previous knowledge to

be able to answer the questions about preposition. Meanwhile the post-test was aimed

to know whether or not their knowledge increase after the treatment. The pre-test and

the post-test were divided into two parts: picture comprehension test and picture

description test. In the first part, there were 9 spatial and 6 temporal items. Here,

learners were provided with a contextual sentence containing a preposition in each

sentence. Their job was to choose the best picture that corresponds with the sentence.

In the second part, there were 10 spatial and 10 temporal items. The items in this part

were in the form of fill-in-the gap, so the learners were asked to fill the gap with the

correct preposition in each sentence.

Procedure

Both groups received 4 sessions in this experiment that lasted for two days.

The first session was testing their English proficiency using OPT test. After it was
 16

done, they were given the pre-test. Next, the researcher introduced and explained the

treatment and then followed by immediate post-test.

Before the experiment began, the researcher introduced herself and told them

the objective of this research. The researcher next wrote the links that they need to

open in order to do the tests. All the tests and the treatment were administered online,

so they did the tests using their own smartphones. The experiment started with the

OPT test as the first step of this experiment. However, due to the time constraint, the

OPT test was administered two times: on the first day and the second day. The total

numbers of the OPT test was 100, so 50 numbers were given in the first day and

another 50 were given in the second day. The time allocation of the OPT test was 30

minutes. This test was aimed to test their English proficiency level so it can be

revealed which participant’s data could be analyzed. Right after they had done the

OPT test, they were asked to do the pre-test in 30 minutes time. The pre-test ended

the first day of experiment.

On the second day, they were given the second part of OPT test and then

followed by the treatment. The researcher gave them the information that this session

was the treatment and that it was in a form of online task. Both the experimental and

control group were given the time allocation of forty-five minutes. Here, the

experimental group was provided with a picture and two sentences (see picture 1).
 17

Picture 1: Instruction and the sentences

They had to choose the sentence that described the picture or to analyze which

preposition that was suitable to describe the picture. Afterwards, they received the

metalinguistic rule feedback that appeared right after they determined the answer (see

picture 2).

Picture 2: Metalinguistic Feedback

They were also provided with the meaning of the prepositions in each

sentence so that they could choose the best answer according to the meaning of each

preposition given (see picture 3). After they gained the knowledge of the target

preposition, they were given their post-test and it lasted for 30 minutes.
 18

Picture 3: Definition of in and on

Data Analysis

Both pre-test and the post-test contained 35 numbers of picture

comprehension task and picture description task with two senses in each task: spatial

and temporal. Each correct answer was worth 1 point and each incorrect answer was

worth no points. The scores were automatically saved to the g-form system and I

input it to Microsoft Excel. I divided the scores based on the senses: spatial and

temporal in each task. After all the scores were recorded in the Microsoft Excel, I

counted the mean of each sense in each task.

The data were further analyzed with a statistical program, SPSS 17.0. Because

the data was not normal, two kinds of test were used to see the result: Wilcoxon

Signed Ranks-test and Mann-Whitney U-test. The first test, Wilcoxon Signed Ranks-

test, was executed on comparing the two tests: pre-test and post-test in each group to

see whether the participants in the treatment group had significant improvement after

the treatment. The second test, Mann-Whitney U-test, was run on comparing the

scores in each sense (PCT and PDT) between the two groups (treatment and control
 19

group) to see whether there was a significant difference between the post-test results

of the two groups.

FINDINGS

The results from the two groups are presented in the form of tables and

explained with a brief description.

Overview

Picture Comprehension Task: Spatial Sense

Table 1: Descriptive statistics for spatial sense in PCT

Experimental Control

Group M SD M SD

Pre-test 7.5 1.04 6.9 1.29

Post-test 7.6 1.03 6.8 2.10

Significance value is at p<0.05

As seen in Table 1, the pre-test scores of both groups show that the two

groups were at the same level of knowledge in using the spatial sense of prepositions

before the treatment. The difference was 0.6 point in the pre-test, but a Mann-

Whitney Test indicated that the difference was not significant u = 44, p = 0.419.

Moreover, the post-test score difference also was not significant u = 45, p = 0.468

although the post-test score of experimental group was 0.8 more points higher than

the post-test score of control group.

 20

In addition, the mean of the experimental group increased only 0.1 point from

7.5 in the pre-test to 7.6 in the post-test. A Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test indicated that

there was no significant improvement, z = -514, p = 0.607 in the experimental group

performance. Furthermore, the control group mean score decreased 0.1 point, z = -

171, p = 0.864 which was not considered as statistically significant.

Picture Comprehension Task: Temporal Sense

Table 2: Descriptive statistics for temporal sense in PCT

Experimental Control

Group M SD M SD

Pre-test 4.5 0.82 4.9 0.99

Post-test 4.8 0.75 4.4 1.51

Significance value is at p<0.05

Table 2 shows that the pre-test scores of both groups were not significant, u =

39, p = 0.235. Other than that, the post-test scores of both groups did not show any

significant difference, u = 50, p = 0.709. Additionally, there was also no significance

difference from the pre-test to post-test for each group. The mean of the experimental

group increased only 0.3 points, z = -1265, p = 0.206 while the mean of the control

group decreased 0.5 points, z = -857, p = 0.391.

 21

Picture Description Task: Spatial Sense

Table 3: Descriptive statistics for spatial sense in PDT

Experimental Control

Group M SD M SD

Pre-test 5.5 1.04 4.9 1.73

Post-test 6.0 1.10 5.1 1.10

Significance value is at p<0.05

Table 3 shows the two groups’ performances in the PDT task for the spatial

sense. The pre-test scores between experimental group and control group show that

they have 0.6 points difference. A Mann-Whitney Test indicated that the difference

was not significant, u = 42, p = 0.340. Also, there was 0.9 points difference between

the post-test means, u = 32, p = 0.085 and the difference was not significant

Additionally, we can see that after the treatment, the experimental group

gained 0.5 points in the post-test, z = -1200, p = 0.230. On the other hand, the control

group gained 0.2 points; however, the increase was not considered statistically

significant, z = -425, p = 0.671.

 22

Picture Description Task: Temporal Sense

Table 4: Descriptive statistics for temporal sense in PDT

Experimental Control

Group M SD M SD

Pre-test 7.3 1.19 7 2.16

Post-test 8.2 1.08 6.5 1.51

Significance value is at p<0.05

In Table 4, we can see that the pre-test’s score between experimental and

control group was not significant. The difference was 0.3 points, u = 53.5, p = 0.913.

On the other hand, there was a significant difference between the post-test scores of

both groups, u = 19, p = 0.009.

Table 4 also shows that the experimental group gained 0.9 in the post-test, z =

-1641, p = 0.101. Meanwhile, the control group decreased 0.5 points after the

treatment, z = -863, p = 0.388. A Wilcoxon Signed-Ranks Test indicated that these

differences were not significant.

DISCUSSION

The outcomes of this study are not in accordance with the initial hypothesis

that the experimental group will perform better than the control group. The study

found out that experimental group did not outperform the control group. The most

significant finding in this study was the experimental group improved significantly in
 23

the post-test score for temporal sense in PDT compared to control group’s post-test

score. This shows that explicit rule instruction and the set of examples that were

given in the treatment can improve learning (MacWhinney, 1997).

In the spatial case, the mean score from the table of spatial sense in PCT did

not represent their understanding towards spatial sense in PCT. For instance, number

1 in the sentence “There is a lady ……. the phone box” mostly got the wrong answer.

This might entail that the participants still could not get the meaning of “at”.

The same thing also happened for the spatial sense in PDT; 10 out of 11

participants answered “in” instead “on” for number 6 in the sentence “People ….. the

train”. This is related to the discussion about competition model (MacWhinney,

1987) that has been discussed previously. The preposition “on” and “in” competes

with each other and make EFL learners unsure of the correct preposition. The

participants might have viewed the train as something that has boundaries and

perceived the people was inside the train. Thus, they might choose the preposition

“in” rather than “on” which was the most suitable preposition according to the

meaning given.

The result was in line with (Wijaya & Ong, 2018)’s study where they

argued the reason for this might be because the participants in the experimental group

had learned prepositions in the same way before. Therefore, they might have paid a

little attention to the meaning and somehow ignored the examples given as they

thought they were familiar to the rules presented. This might become the main reason

why not all the results showed positive outcomes. The rules were not so helpful so

that it needs to be replaced with a more comprehensive and interesting meaning

 24

description. Although the result was not as expected, it is argued that explicit

grammar instruction is still needed to teach prepositions since it can assist learners’

understanding of grammar structures in prepositions.

CONCLUSION

The study was aimed to investigate the effectiveness of computerized

instruction on learning English prepositions for foreign language learners. The

findings show that the experimental group does not seem to be more superior to the

control group. However, the experimental group still performed better than the

control group for the temporal sense in PDT.

Furthermore, the limitations of this study should be pointed out. First, this

study only focused on the spatial and temporal sense. Thus, further research should

also include the abstract sense to know whether the technique used in this study

would be more effective with abstract sense. Second, there was no delayed post-test.

This study only investigated the immediate results to the treatment. It is expected

there will be a delayed post-test in the further research to know the long-term effect

of the treatment. Third, the subjects in this study were only 21 students. It would be

better if the further research may want to use greater number of students. A study

with a greater number of participants might yield different results. Last but not least,

Cognitive Linguistic approach may have to be included in the learning material as an

alternative to the traditional way of teaching prepositions.

 25

To sum up, although there is no significant difference between the

experimental and control group, it is proven that the experimental group performed

better than the control group. Therefore, classroom teachers may consider using

explicit instruction to teach prepositions for it can facilitate their learning process.

References
Cambridge University Press. (2019). Retrieved from Cambridge Dictionary:
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/grammar/british-grammar/prepositions

Ellis, R. (2006). Current Issues in the Teaching of Grammar: An SLA Perspective.

TESOL Quarterly, 83-107.

Ellis, R., & Shintani, N. (2014). Exploring Language Pedagogy through Second
Language Acquisition Research. Abingdon: Routledge.

Hornby, & Wehmeier. (2005). Oxford Advanced Learners’ Dictionary. Oxford:

Oxford University Press.

Hung, B. P. (2017). Vietnamese Students Learning the Semantics of English

Prepositions . Journal of Language Studies , 146-158.

Ling, Z. (2015). Explicit Grammar and Implicit Grammar Teaching for English
Major Students in University. Changchun University, 556-560.

MacWhinney, B. (1987). The Competition Model. In B. M. Whinney, Mechanisms of

language acquisition (pp. 249-308). Hillsdale: NJ: Erlbaum.

MacWhinney, B. (1997). IMPLICIT AND EXPLICIT PROCESSES. Studies in

Second Language Acquisition, 19, 277–281.

MacWhinney, B. (2012). The logic of the unified model. In B. MacWhinney, The

Routledge handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 211-227). New
York: Routledge.

Matula, S. (2007). INCORPORATING A COGNITIVE LINGUISTIC

PRESENTATION OF THE PREPOSITIONS. Georgetown University, 1-603.

Nassaji, H., & Fotos, S. (2004). Current Developments in Research on the Teaching
of Grammar. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 126-145.
 26

Norris, J. M., & Ortega, L. (2000). Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research

synthesis and quantitative meta-analysis. Language Learning, 417-528.

Presson, N., Davy, C., & MacWhinney, B. (2013). Experimentalized CALL for adult
second language learners. John Benjamins Publishing Company, 139-164.

Saravanan, J. (2014). The Use of English Prepositions: An Empirical Study. Journal

of NELTA, 158-168.

Stepp-Greany, J. (2002). MILLENNIUM, STUDENT PERCEPTIONS ON

LANGUAGE LEARNING IN A TECHNOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT:
IMPLICATIONS FOR THE NEW. Language Learning & Technology, 165-
180.

Wijaya, D., & Ong, G. (2018). Applying cognitive linguistics to teaching English
prepositions in the EFL classroom . INDONESIAN JOURNAL OF APPLIED
LINGUISTICS , 1-10.

Wong, M. H., Zhao, H., & MacWhinney, a. B. (2018). A Cognitive Linguistics

Application for Second Language Pedagogy: The English Preposition Tutor.
A Journal of Research in Language Studies, 438-468.

Yoshimura, Y., & MacWhinney, B. (2007). The Effect of Oral Repetition on L2

Speech Fluency: An Experimental Tool and Language Tutor . SLATE
Conference , 25–28
APPENDICES

APPENDIX I: Participant scores

Experimental Group

PCT Task

Version A Version B
PCT PCT
Pre Pre Post Post
NO NAMA Spatial Temporal Spatial Temporal
1 Bryant Alexander Dwi N. 6 5 8 6
2 Jeremy Khen 8 5 8 5
3 Joshia Mikhael Djuharto 9 6 6 4
4 Vania Clianta Putri 7 4 8 5
5 Winna Wirianta 8 3 7 4
6 Karen Semathea 7 4 9 5
7 Karina Olivia Thedy 7 5 9 6
8 Natan Jatmiko 8 4 8 4
9 Patrick Arba Nathanael 7 4 7 5
10 Raphael Yudija Bernazar 9 4 8 4
11 Subiyanto Arya 6 5 6 5
Total 7.5 4.5 7.6 4.8

PDT Task

Version A Version B
PDT PDT
Pre Pre Post Post
NO NAMA Spatial Temporal Spatial Temporal
1 Bryant Alexander Dwi N. 7 7 5 7
3 Jeremy Khen 6 9 8 8
5 Joshia Mikhael Djuharto 5 8 5 7
6 Vania Clianta Putri 6 5 5 8
8 Winna Wirianta 3 8 6 7
9 Karen Semathea 5 8 6 9
10 Karina Olivia Thedy 6 8 6 9
11 Natan Jatmiko 6 6 6 10
12 Patrick Arba Nathanael 6 7 8 9
13 Raphael Yudija Bernazar 5 8 5 9
14 Subiyanto Arya 5 6 6 7
Total 5.5 7.3 6.0 8.2
APPENDIX II: Test Forms (Version A)

PCT Task for spatial sense

And the other 6 similar questions in PCT task for spatial sense
PCT Task for temporal sense
And the other 2 similar questions in PCT task for temporal sense
PDT Task for spatial sense

And the other 7 similar questions in PDT task for spatial sense
PDT Task for temporal sense

And the other 7 similar questions in PDT task for temporal sense
(Version B)

PCT Task for spatial sense

And the other 6 similar questions in PCT task for spatial sense

PCT Task for temporal sense

And the other 2 similar questions in PCT task for temporal sense
PDT Task for spatial sense

And the other 7 similar questions in PDT task for spatial sense
PDT Task for temporal sense

And the other 7 similar questions in PDT task for temporal sense
APPENDIX III: Treatment

Spatial Task
And the other 18 similar tasks for spatial sense
Temporal Task
And the other 18 similar tasks for temporal sense