Cover not available
Article published In:
Australian Review of Applied Linguistics
Vol. 46:3 (2023) ► pp.395–423

Exploring a mobile-based language learning intervention to improve English language acquisition and acculturation among migrants in Australia

ORCID logo | University of Queensland
| Chatloop Ltd.
| Diamantina Shire Council

This exploratory Australian study tested a novel mobile-based language learning service intervention (via WhatsApp) called ‘Chatloop’ with 31 newly arrived migrants. This intervention was offered in tandem with the traditional Adult Migrant English Program (AMEP) classroom curriculum. A mixed methods approach was employed to trial the intervention of Chatloop with AMEP students at two Queensland TAFE campuses. Quantitative data were gathered to measure changes in participants’ English proficiency, and qualitative interviews gathered narratives about the experience of using Chatloop. Chatloop intervention group participants perceived it to be an interactive learning service that significantly improved their reading and writing skills, acculturation, and enhanced social connections. Being able to access Chatloop on their mobile device 24/7 was deemed to be an added advantage as compared to traditional classroom learning; it provided an opportunity to learn more about Australian culture and communication patterns, at their convenience. These findings suggest that such mobile interventions can be a valuable means of enhancing migrant’s English language learning and warrants future research.

Keywords: Australia, AMEP, mobile language learning, refugee, migrant, intervention
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Adult Migrant English Program (AMEP)
  • 3.Research aim
  • 4.Literature review
    • 4.1Role of MALL in enhancing learning
    • 4.2Impact of English language proficiency on migrant settlement
  • 5.Theoretical frameworks
    • 5.1Comprehension hypothesis, interactional approach, and the communicative approach
    • 5.2Theories of integration
  • 6.Methods
    • 6.1Procedure
    • 6.2Participant recruitment
    • 6.3Data collection
    • 6.4Participant profile
    • 6.5Quantitative data
      • 6.5.1Test construction and pilot
      • 6.5.2Pre- and post-test
    • 6.6Qualitative data
    • 6.7Data analyses
  • 7.Findings
    • 7.1Pre and post English language testing findings
      • 7.1.1Reading
      • 7.1.2Writing
    • 7.2Qualitative interview data
      • 7.2.1Shared themes across both group sets (all participants)
        • Importance of English language proficiency/acquisition in Australia
        • Role of AMEP in improving English language proficiency
        • Impact on integration
      • 7.2.2Themes from Chatloop intervention group
        • Was Chatloop helpful?
        • Using Chatloop in conjunction with AMEP for language learning
  • 8.Discussion
  • 9.Limitations and suggestions for future research
  • 10.Recommendations to policy makers
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 14 July 2022
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/aral.21017.heb
References
Adkins, M. A., Birman, D., Sample, B., Brod, S., & Silver, M.
(1999) Cultural adjustment, mental health, and ESL: The refugee experience, the role of the teacher, and ESL activities. Spring Institute for International Studies.Google Scholar
Ager, A., & Strang, A.
(2008) Understanding integration: A conceptual framework. Journal of Refugee Studies, 21 (2), 166–191. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Berry, J. W.
(2005) Acculturation: Living successfully in two cultures. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 29(6), 697–712. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Braun, V., & Clarke, V.
(2012) Thematic analysis. In H. Cooper, P. M. Camic, D. L. Long, A. T. Panter, D. Rindskopf, & K. J. Sher (Eds.), APA handbooks in psychology®. APA handbook of research methods in psychology, Vol. 2. Research designs: Quantitative, qualitative, neuropsychological, and biological (pp. 57–71). American Psychological Association. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Canale, M., & Swain, M.
(1980) Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1 1, 1–47. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Codell, J., Hill, R., Woltz, D., & Gore, P.
(2011) Predicting meaningful employment for refugees: The influence of personal characteristics and developmental factors on employment status and hourly wages. International Journal for the Advancement of Counselling, 33 (3), 216–224. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Croucher, S., & Cronn-Mills, D.
(2022) Understanding communication research methods: A theoretical and practical approach. Routledge.Google Scholar
Department of Home Affairs
(2019) Australia’s Offshore Humanitarian Program: 2018–19. [URL]
Dhanji, S.
(2009) Welcome or unwelcome?: Integration issues and the resettlement of former refugees from the Horn of Africa and Sudan in metropolitan Melbourne. Australasian Review of African Studies, 30(2), 152–178.Google Scholar
Gass, S. M., & Mackey, A.
(Eds.) (2013) The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition. Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hebbani, A., & Khawaja, N. G.
(2018) Employment aspirations of former refugees settled in Australia: a mixed methods study. Journal of International Migration and Integration, 20 (3), 907–924. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hebbani, A., Khawaja, N., Colic-Peisker, V., Obijiofor, L. M., Gallois, C., & MacKinnon, M.
(2016) Refugee settlers in South-East Queensland: Employment aspirations and intergenerational communication about future occupational pathways. School of Communication and Arts, The University of Queensland.Google Scholar
Jin, L.
(2018) Digital affordances on WeChat: Learning Chinese as a second language. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 31 (1–2), 27–52. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Khawaja, N. G., & Hebbani, A.
(2018) Does employment status vary by demographics? An exploratory study of former refugees resettled in Australia. Australian Social Work, 71 (1), 71–85. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2019) Factors impacting life satisfaction of refugees in Australia: A mixed method study. The Australian Community Psychologist, 30 (1), 30–50.Google Scholar
Khawaja, N. G., Hebbani, A., Gallois, C., & MacKinnon, M.
(2019) Predictors of employment status: A study of former refugee communities in Australia. Australian Psychologist, 54 (5), 427–437. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kim, D., Rueckert, D., Kim, D. J., & Seo, D.
(2013) Students’ perceptions and experiences of mobile learning. Language Learning & Technology, 17(3), 52–73.Google Scholar
Krashen, S. D.
(1985) The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. Longman.Google Scholar
Liu, P. L., & Chen, C. J.
(2015) Learning English through actions: A study of mobile-assisted language learning. Interactive Learning Environments, 23 (2), 158–171. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Long, M. H.
(1996) The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. Ritchie & T. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413–468). Academic Press.Google Scholar
Lyster, R., & Ranta, L.
(1997) Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in communicative classroom. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19 (1), 37–66. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Migration Heritage Centre
(2010) Australia’s migration history. [URL]
Ndofor-Tah, C., Strang, A., Phillimore, J., Morrice, L., Michael, L., Wood, P., & Simmons, J.
(2019) Home office indicators of integration framework 2019. Home Office.Google Scholar
Reynolds, B. L., & Anderson, T. A. F.
(2015) Extra-dimension in-class communications: Action research exploring text chat support of face-to-face writing. Computers and Composition, 35 1, 52–64. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Scanlon Institute
(2019) Australia’s English problem: How to renew our once celebrated Adult Migrant English Program. [URL]
Sevy-Biloon, J., & Chroman, T.
(2019) Authentic use of technology to improve EFL communication and motivation through international language exchange video chat. Teaching English with Technology, 19(2), 44–58.Google Scholar
Shadiev, R., Hwang, W. Y., & Huang, Y. M.
(2017) Review of research on mobile language learning in authentic environments. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 30 (3–4), 284–303. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Smyser, H.
(2019) Adaptation of conventional technologies with refugee language learners: An overview of possibilities. In E. Sengupta, P. Blessinger, & International Higher Education Teaching Learning Association (Eds.), Language, teaching, and pedagogy for refugee education (pp. 125–139). Emerald. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stockwell, G.
(2008) Investigating learner preparedness for and usage patterns of mobile learning. ReCALL, 20(3), 253-270. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2016) Mobile language learning. In F. Farr & L. Murray (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of language learning and technology (pp. 296–307). Routledge.Google Scholar
Taylor-Leech, K., & Yates, L.
(2012) Strategies for building social connection through English: Challenges for immigrants and implications for teaching English as a second language. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 35 (2), 138–155. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR)
(2014) UNHCR global trends 2013: War’s human cost. [URL]
VanPatten, B.
(2017) While we’re on the topic: BVP on language, acquisition, and classroom practice. The American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages.Google Scholar
Yang, M. K., & Shadiev, R.
(2019) Review of research on technologies for language learning and teaching. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 7 1, 171–181. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yates, L., Ficorilli, L., Kim, S. H. O., Lising, L., McPherson, P., Taylor-Leech, K., … & Williams, A.
(2010) Language training and settlement success: Are they related. Adult Migrant English Program (AMEP) Research Centre, Macquarie University.Google Scholar
Yates, L., Terraschke, A., Zielinski, B., Pryor, E., Wang, J., Major, G., & Tetteh, V. W.
(2015) Adult Migrant English Program (AMEP) longitudinal study 2011–2014: Final report. [URL]