KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Bartın Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi / 2026 / Volume: 14 Issue: 3

The Effect of Video Content Generation on the Speaking Development of Pre-Service EFL Teachers

Süleyman Eren Yürük(FIRAT UNIVERSITY)0000-0003-2414-0537
Rabia Meryem Yılmaz(ATATÜRK ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-0453-1357
Sayfa
—
Yayın Tarihi
2025-07-31
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

The study concluded that producing video content significantly improved students’ speaking skills, and several suggestions were offered for English teachers to incorporate video content production into their classroom practices.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:This study explores the impact of Video Content Generation (VCG) activities on the foreign language development of pre-service teachers.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:The study involves 30 students tasked with VCG activities.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:The study concluded that producing video content significantly improved students’ speaking skills, and several suggestions were offered for English teachers to incorporate video content production into their classroom practices.
🔬Tür:Research Article
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:social media · speaking development · student-generated content

Abstract

This study explores the impact of Video Content Generation (VCG) activities on the foreign language development of pre-service teachers. The research employs a mixed-methods approach, with a quantitative stage utilizing a single-group pre-test/post-test design and a qualitative stage employing a case study approach. The study involves 30 students tasked with VCG activities. Three experts assessed their speaking development (fluency, grammar, pronunciation, vocabulary, organization) using a rubric over eight weeks. The weekly scores obtained were analyzed using a repeated measures ANOVA test. Significant improvements were observed in fluency, vocabulary, pronunciation, and organization scores, particularly in later weeks, with medium to large effect sizes. However, grammar scores did not show significant differences. Qualitative data from focus group interviews with 11 female and 6 male students highlight the perceived benefits of VCG, particularly in terms of enhanced fluency and pronunciation practice. According to the interview findings, students stated that producing video content provided an opportunity to practice speaking outside the classroom, enabling them to speak more fluently and with more accurate pronunciation in front of a camera and an audience. They expressed positive feelings about having their own video channel. However, they also reported experiencing difficulties throughout various stages of the video production process, including selecting a topic, ensuring suitable conditions for recording, facing challenges during filming, and dealing with editing and sharing the videos. The study concluded that producing video content significantly improved students’ speaking skills, and several suggestions were offered for English teachers to incorporate video content production into their classroom practices.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

Yürük, S. E., Yılmaz, R. M. (2025). The Effect of Video Content Generation on the Speaking Development of Pre-Service EFL Teachers. Bartın Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, Volume: 14 Issue: 3. https://ajindex.com/articles/1121755

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (76)

  1. Akdeniz, N. Ö. (2017). Use of student-produced videos to develop oral skills in EFL classrooms. International Journal on Language, Literature and Culture in Education, 4(1), 43–53. https://doi.org/10.1515/llce-2017-0003
  2. Arruabarrena, R., Sánchez, A., Blanco, J. M., Vadillo, J. A., & Usandizaga, I. (2019). Integration of good practices of active methodologies with the reuse of student-generated content. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0140-7
  3. Astuti, E. S., & Pusparini, I. (2020). Video making task to decrease anxiety in students’ speaking performance. Journey (Journal of English Language and Pedagogy), 3(1), 52–56. https://doi.org/10.33503/journey.v3i1.705
  4. Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S. (1996). Language testing in practice: Designing and developing useful language tests (Vol. 1). Oxford University Press.
  5. Bárkányi, Z. (2021). Motivation, self-efficacy beliefs, and speaking anxiety in language MOOCs. ReCALL, 33(2), 143–160. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344021000033
  6. Berger, P. (2010). Student inquiry and Web 2.0. School Library Monthly, 26(5), 14–17.
  7. Berk, R. A. (2009). Multimedia teaching with video clips: TV, movies, YouTube, and mtvU in the college classroom. International Journal of Technology in Teaching and Learning, 5(1), 1–13.
  8. Biancarosa, G., & Shanley, L. (2016). What is fluency? In The fluency construct: Curriculum-based measurement concepts and applications (pp. 1–18).
  9. Boldan, M. N. (2019). A study on foreign language speaking anxiety of pre-service ELT teachers (Thesis No. 582430) [Master’s thesis, Balıkesir University]. Yükseköğretim Kurulu Ulusal Tez Merkezi.
  10. Brega, O. (2025). Student-generated video podcast in foreign language education for further engineers. Media Education – Mediaobrazovanie, 21(1), 12–21.
  11. Bromley, K. (2004). Rethinking vocabulary instruction. Language and Literacy Spectrum, 14, 3–12.
  12. Brown, H. D., & Lee, H. (2015). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy (4th ed.). Pearson Education.
  13. Bygate, M. (1987). Speaking. Oxford University Press.
  14. Can, E., & Can, C. I. (2014). Problems encountered in second foreign language teaching in Turkey. Trakya University Journal of Education, 4(2), 43–63.
  15. Chau, C. (2010). YouTube as a participatory culture. New Directions for Student Leadership, 2010(128), 65–74. https://doi.org/10.1002/yd.376
  16. Chusanachoti, R. (2009). EFL learning through language activities outside the classroom: A case study of English education students in Thailand [Doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University].
  17. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2004). A guide to teaching practice (5th ed.). Psychology Press.
  18. Dale, C., & Povey, G. (2009). An evaluation of learner-generated content and podcasting. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport and Tourism Education, 8(1), 117–123. https://doi.org/10.3794/johlste.81.214
  19. Darcy, I. (2018). Powerful and effective pronunciation instruction: How can we achieve it? CATESOL Journal, 30(1), 13–45.
  20. Dariyemez, T. (2020). The effects of teaching speaking skills through flipped classroom on EFL students’ autonomy, willingness to communicate and speaking anxiety [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Atatürk University.
  21. Debbag, M., & Fidan, M. (2021). Vlogs for enhancing trainee teachers’ motivational beliefs about school experience and teaching practice: They are on the factory floor for professional development. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2021.1911721
  22. Demirpolat, B. C. (2015). Türkiye’nin yabancı dil öğretimiyle imtihanı: Sorunlar ve çözüm önerileri. SETA.
  23. Dzekoe, R. (2017). Computer-based multimodal composing activities, self-revision, and L2 acquisition through writing. Language Learning & Technology, 21(2), 73–95.
  24. Epps, B. S., Luo, T., & Muljana, P. S. (2021). Lights, camera, activity! A systematic review of research on learner-generated videos. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 20, 405–427. https://doi.org/10.28945/4874
  25. European Commission. (2012). Avrupa’da okullarda dil öğretimi üzerine temel veriler: 2012 baskısı. Eurydice. https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/48511862-d614-4dc2-8b9a-511ed6d1a7d1/language-tr/format-PDF/source-258603904
  26. Fatayer, M. M. (2016). Towards a sustainable open educational resources development model: Tapping into the cognitive surplus of student-generated content [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Western Sydney University.
  27. Fikriah, F. (2016). Using the storytelling technique to improve English speaking skills of primary school students. English Education Journal, 7(1), 87–101.
  28. Fitriani, D. A., Apriliaswati, R., & Wardah. (2015). A study on students’ English language speaking problems in speaking performance. Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pembelajaran Untan, 4(9), 1–13.
  29. Gan, Z. (2012). Understanding L2 speaking problems: Implications for ESL curriculum development in a teacher training institution in Hong Kong. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 37(1), 43–59. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2012v37n1.4
  30. Gilakjani, A. P. (2011). A study on the situation of pronunciation instruction in ESL/EFL classrooms. Journal of Studies in Education, 1(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.5296/jse.v1i1.924
  31. 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.
  32. Grant, S., Huang, H., & Pasfield-Neofitou, S. (2014). The authenticity-anxiety paradox: The quest for authentic second language communication and reduced foreign language anxiety in virtual environments. Procedia Technology, 13, 23–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.protcy.2014.02.005
  33. Gündüz, U. (2017). The effect of social media on identity construction. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 8(5), 85–92. https://doi.org/10.1515/mjss-2017-0026
  34. Hadfield, C., & Hadfield, J. (2008). Introduction to teaching English. Oxford University Press.
  35. Ho, P. V. P., & Hong, N. T. T. (2019). The effects of peer-video recording on students’ speaking performance. International Journal of English Linguistics, 9(4), 178–191.
  36. Hockly, N. (2012). Digital literacies. ELT Journal, 66(1), 108–112. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccr077
  37. Huang, H. W. (2021). Effects of smartphone-based collaborative vlog projects on EFL learners’ speaking performance and learning engagement. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 37(5), 18–40. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.6623
  38. Kang, N. (2022). Promoting EFL learners’ self-regulated learning using a self-recorded video-speaking task in an online ESP course. The Journal of AsiaTEFL, 19(4), 1141–1162.
  39. Kara, E., Ayaz, A. D., & Dündar, T. (2017). Challenges in EFL speaking classes in Turkish context. European Journal of Language and Literature, 3(2), 66–74. https://doi.org/10.26417/ejls.v8i1.p66-74
  40. Kearney, M., & Schuck, S. (2006). Spotlight on authentic learning: Student developed digital video projects. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 22(2), 189–208. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.1298
  41. Koo, T. K., & Li, M. Y. (2016). A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. Journal of Chiropractic Medicine, 15(2), 155–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012
  42. Koumi, J. (2006). Designing video and multimedia for open and flexible learning. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203966280
  43. Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Pergamon. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-971X.1982.tb00476.x
  44. Kurt, M., & Bensen, H. (2017). Six seconds to visualize the word: Improving EFL learners’ vocabulary through VVVs. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 33, 334–346. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12182
  45. Lambert, C., Gong, Q., & Zhang, G. (2021). Learner-generated content and the lexical recall of beginning-level learners of Chinese as a foreign language. Language Teaching Research. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168820981407
  46. Lee, M. J., McLoughlin, C., & Chan, A. (2008). Talk the talk: Learner‐generated podcasts as catalysts for knowledge creation. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(3), 501–521. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2007.00746.x
  47. Murphy, P. (2010). Web-based collaborative reading exercises for learners in remote locations: The effects of computer-mediated feedback and interaction via computer-mediated communication. ReCALL, 22(2), 112–134. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344010000030
  48. Murray, G. (2008). Pop culture and language learning: Learners’ stories informing EFL. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 2(1), 2–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/17501220802158792
  49. Namin, A., Ketron, S. C., Kaltcheva, V. D., & Winsor, R. D. (2021). Improving student presentation skills using asynchronous video-based projects. Journal of Management Education, 45(6), 987–1010. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562920978805
  50. Nguyen, T. T. T. (2024). Using Flipgrid videos to enhance speaking and presenting in English for non-native learners. International Journal of Engineering Pedagogy, 14(2), 100–111.
  51. Nunan, D. (1989). Designing tasks for the communicative classroom. Cambridge University Press.
  52. Nunan, D. (2003). Practical English language teaching. McGraw-Hill.
  53. Oktay, A. (2015). Foreign language teaching: A problem in Turkish education. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 174, 584–593. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.587
  54. Oleiwi, R., & Bunari, G. (2022). Investigating the benefits of video-making projects in developing English communication skills. LSP International Journal, 9(1), 93–107. https://doi.org/10.11113/lspi.v9.18489
  55. Özdemir, N. (2018). The impact of video-based asynchronous computer-mediated communication on EFL learners’ oral language achievement and foreign language speaking anxiety [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Bahçeşehir University.
  56. Öztürk, G., & Aydin, B. (2019). English language teacher education in Turkey: Why do we fail and what policy reforms are needed? Anadolu Journal of Educational Sciences International, 9(1), 181–213. https://doi.org/10.18039/ajesi.520842
  57. Phillips, B. (2017). Student-produced podcasts in language learning – Exploring student perceptions of podcast activities. IAFOR Journal of Education, 5(3), 157–171. https://doi.org/10.22492/ije.5.3.08
  58. Privitera, G. J., & Delzell, L. A. (2019). Quasi-experimental and single-case experimental designs. Research methods for education, 333-70.
  59. Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1108/10748120110424816
  60. Ribosa, J., & Duran, D. (2022). Student-generated teaching materials: A scoping review mapping the research field. Education in the Knowledge Society, 23, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.14201/eks.27443
  61. Riyanto, E. D. (2020). The benefits of integrating video making in a speaking class. ELTEJ: English Language Teaching Educational Journal, 3(1), 64–73.
  62. Ryan, B. (2013). A walk down the red carpet: Students as producers of digital video-based knowledge. International Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning, 5(1), 24–41. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTEL.2013.055950
  63. Saienko, N., & Shevchenko, M. (2020). Authentic videos in teaching English to engineering students at universities. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 19(8), 350–370.
  64. Schuck, S., & Kearney, M. (2004). Students in the director’s seat: Teaching and learning across the school curriculum with student-generated video. https://opus.lib.uts.edu.au/handle/10453/14209
  65. Schuck, S., & Kearney, M. (2006). Capturing learning through student-generated digital video. Australian Educational Computing, 21(1), 15–20.
  66. Souzandehfar, M., Saadat, M., & Sahragard, R. (2014). The significance of multimodality/multiliteracies in Iranian EFL learners’ meaning-making process. Iranian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 17(2), 115–143.
  67. Tarone, E. (2005). Speaking in a second language. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 485–502). Lawrence Erlbaum.
  68. Tavakoli, P., & Foster, P. (2011). Task design and second language performance: The effect of narrative type on learner output. Language Learning, 61, 37–72. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2011.00642.x
  69. Vickery, J. R. (2014). The role of after-school digital media clubs in closing participation gaps and expanding social networks. Equity & Excellence in Education, 47(1), 78–95. https://doi.org/10.1080/10665684.2013.866870
  70. Wang, H. (2025). Multimodal digital storytelling as literacy learning and moral cultivation practices for university EFL students. Arab World English Journal, 16(1), 366–383.
  71. Wegerif, R. (2015). Technology and teaching thinking: Why a dialogic approach is needed for the twenty-first century. In R. Wegerif, J. Kauffman, & L. Liu (Eds.), Handbook of research on teaching thinking (pp. 427–440). Routledge.
  72. Wilz, B. (2000). Relationship between personality type and grade point average of technical college students [Unpublished master’s thesis]. University of Wisconsin–Stout.
  73. Yang, Y. T. C., Chen, Y. C., & Hung, H. T. (2020). Digital storytelling as an interdisciplinary project to improve students’ English speaking and creative thinking. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 35(4), 840–862. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2020.1750431
  74. Yeh, H. C. (2018). Exploring the perceived benefits of the process of multimodal video making in developing multiliteracies. Language Learning & Technology, 22(2), 28–37.
  75. Yu, B., & Zadorozhnyy, A. (2021). Developing students’ linguistic and digital literacy skills through the use of multimedia presentations. ReCALL. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344021000136
  76. Zghoul, W. M., & Bataineh, R. F. (2024). Flipgrid: Unlocking the English speaking potential of Jordanian adolescent EFL learners. Journal of Information Technology Education: Innovations in Practice, 23(1).