THE ROLE OF POWERPOINT IN FOSTERING ORAL PRESENTATION SKILLS AMONG ENGLISH-MAJORED STUDENTS

Autores/as

  • Nguyen Truong Giang Faculty of Foreign Languages, Van Hien University, Vietnam

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.46827/ejel.v9i2.5353

Palabras clave:

PowerPoint, oral presentation, English-majored students, language education, communication proficiency

Resumo

In an increasingly globalized world, effective oral presentation skills are essential for English-majored students, both academically and professionally. Furthermore, the integration of technology into education has become ubiquitous, and PowerPoint has emerged as a prominent tool for enhancing the effectiveness of oral presentations.  This research study investigated the crucial role of PowerPoint in fostering oral presentation skills among English-majored students within the specific context of Van Hien University in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. With a sample size of 80 English-majored students in two separate classes, this research employed a mixed-methods approach with quantitative surveys and qualitative interviews to comprehensively examine the influence of PowerPoint on the development of oral presentation competencies. The results indicate that while PowerPoint can enhance visual support and organization, its excessive use may detract from students' verbal communication skills. This paper also provides recommendations for educators on how to optimize its integration to benefit English-majored students' overall communication competence.

 

Article visualizations:

Hit counter

Biografía do autor/a

  • Nguyen Truong Giang, Faculty of Foreign Languages, Van Hien University, Vietnam
    Mr. Nguyen Truong Giang is currently a full-time lecturer at Faculty of Foreign Languages, Van Hien University, Vietnam and also a PhD candidate in Education at Ho Chi Minh City University of Technology and Education (HCMUTE). He possesses a degree of Master of Arts in English Language, and his academic areas of interest are teaching methodology, English linguistics, as well as British and American literature.

Citas

Abdellatif, Z. (2015). Exploring students’ perceptions of using PowerPoint in enhancing their active participation in the EFL classroom: An action research study. Journal of Literature, Languages and Linguistics, 5, 36-39.

Apperson, J. M., Laws, E. L., & Scepansky, J. A. (2008). An assessment of student preferences for PowerPoint presentation structure in undergraduate courses. Computers & Education, 50, 148-153. DOI:10.1016/j.compedu.2006.04.003

Bartsch, R. A., & Cobern, K. M. (2003). Effectiveness of PowerPoint presentations in lectures. Comput. Educ., 41, 77–86. doi: 10.1016/S0360-1315(03)00027-7

Bayne, S. (2015). What’s the matter with technology-enhanced learning? Learning, Media and Technology, 40, 5-20. DOI: 10.1080/17439884.2014.915851

Christensson, P. (2008, May 5). PowerPoint definition. Retrieved from http://techterms.com

Chun, D., Smith, B., & Kern, R. (2016). Technology in language use, language teaching, and language learning. The Modern Language Journal, 100, 64-80. DOI: 10.1111/modl.12302

Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2000). Research methods in education. London: Routledge Falmer. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203224342

Corbeil, G. (2007). Can PowerPoint presentations effectively replace textbooks and blackboards for teaching grammar? Do students find them as an effective learning tool? Computer Assisted Language Instruction Consortium Journal, 24(3), 63-656.

Daffner, R. H. (2003). On improvement of scientific presentations: using PowerPoint. Am. J. Roentgenol., 181, 47–49. doi: 10.2214/ajr.181.1.18 10047

Duarte, N. (2008). Slide: Ology: the Art and Science of Creating Great Presentations. Toronto, ON: O’Reilly Media.

Elliott, S., & Gordon, M. (2006). Using PowerPoint to promote constructivist learning. Educational Technology Magazine, 46(4), 34-38.

Farkas, D. (2006). Toward a better understanding of PowerPoint deck design. Information Design Journal and Document Design, 14, 162–171. DOI: 10.1075/idj.14.2.08far

Fisher, D. L. (2003). Using PowerPoint for ESL teaching. The Internet TESL Journal, 9(4).

Gier, V. S., & Kreiner, D. S. (2009). Incorporate active learning with PowerPoint-based lectures using content-based questions. Teaching of Psychology, 36(2), 134-139. DOI: 10.1080/00986280902739792

Jenkins, G. D., & Taber, T. D. (1977). A Monte Carlo study of factors affecting three indices of composite scale reliability. Journal of Applied Psychology, 62(4), 392–398. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.62.4.392

Kirkwood, A., & Price, L. (2014). Technology-enhanced learning and teaching in higher education: What is ‘enhanced’ and how do we know? A critical literature review. Learning, Media and Technology, 39, 6-36. DOI: 10.1080/17439884.2013.770404

Lai, L. T., Le, H. T., Nguyen, A. V., Tran, T. T., Le, H. N., & Nguyen, V. K. (2021). Kỹ năng thuyết trình và làm việc nhóm. Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh: Viện nghiên cứu Kinh tế ứng dụng, bộ môn Kỹ năng mềm.

Lari, F. S. (2014). The impact of using PowerPoint presentations on students’ learning and motivation in secondary schools. International Conference on Current Trends in ELT. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 1672-1677. DOI: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.592

Mackey, A., & Gass, M. S. (2005). Second language research: Methodology and design. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Mackiewicz, J. (2007). Audience perceptions of fonts in projected PowerPoint text slides. Tech. Commun., 54, 295–307.

Marusic, M., & Slisko, J. (2012). Influence of three different methods of teaching physics on the gain in students’ development of reasoning. International Journal of Science Education, 34, 301–326. DOI:10.1080/09500693.2011.582522

Mayer, R. (2009). Multimedia Learning. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Muhlise, C. O. (2017). The effectiveness of PowerPoint presentation and conventional lectures on pedagogical content knowledge attainment. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 54(5), 503-510, DOI: 10.1080/14703297.2016.1250663

Nouri, H., & Shahid, A. (2005). The effect of PowerPoint presentations on student learning and attitudes. Global perspectives on accounting education, 2(1), 53.

Oppenheim, A. N. (2001). Questionnaire design, interviewing and attitude measurement. London and New York: Continuum.

Oppenheimer, D. M., & Frank, M. C. (2008). A rose in any other font would not smell as sweet: Effects of perceptual fluency on categorization. Cognition, 106, 1178–1194. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2007.05.010

Peoples, D. (2015). Guidelines for oral presentations. Ohio Wesleyan: Ohio Wesleyan University.

Sabri, M., Firdaus, M., & Shahrizal, M. (2019). Instructional feedback analysis of an online virtual language learning platform through EZ-Arabic among Malaysian teachers of primary schools. International Journal of Asian Social Science, 9(2), 204-212.

Savoy, A., Proctor, R. W., & Salvendy, G. (2009). Information retention from PowerPoint and traditional lectures. Computers & Education, 52(4), 858-886. DOI: 10.1016/j.compedu.2008.12.005

Song, H., & Schwarz, N. (2008). If it’s hard to read, it’s hard to do: processing fluency affects effort prediction and motivation. Psychol. Sci., 19, 986–988. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02189.x

Xingeng, D., & Jianxiang, L. (2012). Advantages and disadvantages of PowerPoint lectures to science students. Educational and Management Engineering, 9, 61-65. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5815/ijeme.2012.09.10

Descargas

Publicada

2024-05-06

Número

Vol. 9 Núm. 2 (2024)

Sección

Articles

Licenza

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

 

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.

 

  1. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

 

  1. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).