The effectiveness of Problem-based learning approach in reducing students’ Communication apprehension and improving their Oral communication skills

EDU 702 : RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

The effectiveness of Problem-based learning approach in reducing students’ Communication apprehension and improving their Oral communication skills.

Prepared by: Student Name : Adibah Halilah bt. Abdul Mutalib Student ID : 2011587513 Submission Date : 23^rd June 2012

TABLE OF CONTENTS

List of Figures

1. 
   Chapter 1
   

1. 
   Introduction
   

With the current push for Malaysia to achieve Vision 2020, the demand to have more skilled workers is ever increasing. This will not only appeal to foreign investors, but it will also enable Malaysia to develop a level of competency that supersedes global requirements (Zuraidah, 2008). The idea that Malaysia is to cater to the needs of the global market is not without its difficulties. To compete in the world of globalization, one needs to be equipped with technical and language skills. Therefore Technical and Vocational Education and Training Programmes (TVET), such as German-Malaysian Institute, have included English for Specific Purposes as a language course to cater to this concern. The role of English for Specific Purposes (ESP) is to bridge the gap between language and technical know-how necessitated in the industries (Dudley-Evans & St John, 1998). Owing to the fact that the English Language is still the dominant language used in the global business and academic arenas (Crystal, 2003), especially in the field of engineering, English language has been chosen as the lingua franca at German-Malaysian Institute (GMI). The objective of ESP at German-Malaysian Institute is to facilitate the usage of the English language in acquiring real-life communication skills in the field of Engineering (German Malaysian Institute, 2012). Due to the overwhelming concern that students need to develop communications skills that mimic real workplace situations while gaining technical skills, the institute searched for a method which incorporated a combination of theory and practical skills. Thus, the method that is adopted to teach English for Specific Purposes at GMI is a combination of Problem/Project/Production-Based commonly known as Pro3BL learning approach (German Malaysian Institute, 2012).

Problem-based learning approach deals with combination of Problem/Project-Based Learning which stems from the constructivist theory of learning (Brown G. , 2004) (Fauziah, 2010). In PBL, groups of four to five students are formed to solve real-world type problems. Students are guided by self-inquiry, resources acquisition and multi-tasking. This style of learning promotes a range of skills including problem-solving, communication (written and oral), time managements, planning, decision making and organizing (Sirotiak, 2008). With the use of problem-based learning it is hoped that students can acquire a better range of English language skills. Since it is said that when learning a language, one needs to actively be involved with the learning process, problem-based learning approach can serve to stimulate the active learning process (Brown G. , 2004). With the knowledge acquired through their self-directed and active learning PBL approach, students are usually asked to present their findings via a discussion or presentation with their peers and or lecturers. This places a large amount of collaboration and communication for students.

However, since most Malaysian students are generally accustomed to a lecture-based approach, rote-learning and what is commonly known as spoon-feeding from Malaysian public schools (Yong, 2010), there is a sense that students enter GMI with high levels of trepidation about problem-based learning. Students are unaware of the demands of PBL and thus may exhibit an anxiety towards the new approach (Ahlfeldt, 2004).It also require students to be more independent in their learning and have a certain level of confidence. Students in general are also perceived to have a poor level of English communication and therefore do not fare well in PBL-based English for Specific Purposes as it requires frequent discussions, presentations of ideas and opinions and oral communication. It is also a concern that students exhibit difficulty in speaking due to a high level of anxiety when asked to present facts and knowledge through oral communication and presentations. This in turn affects the acquisition of English language, specifically in oral skills and in ultimately effects the overall objective of PBL learning. This study will thus explore the effectiveness of using PBL at German-Malaysian Institute in teaching English for Specific Purposes specifically in addressing students’ grasp of the English oral skills, and how in turn it helps to reduce students’ apprehension and anxiety of public speaking. The study will also look at the improvement of students’ oral skills in the PBL approach which will be evaluated using the National Communication Association (NCA) Speech evaluation form (Moore, Surges-Tatum, & Webster, 2007).

2. 
   Statement of Research Problem
   

As stated by Faridah Musa et al (2011), the job market not only requires employees to have basic academic skills like reading, writing, oral communication and listening but they also need to have higher order thinking skills like learning, reasoning, creative thinking, decision making and problem solving. With the future job requirements in mind, lecturers teaching English for Specific Purposes at GMI need to equip students with the necessary language and higher order thinking skills. Almost all GMI students have undergone the system of Education in the Malaysian public schools since Primary 1; however the existing level of English Oral communication skills at GMI still ranges from poor to intermediate. Together with students’ poor level of communication, students also display a high level of anxiety when speaking the language. This places an undue amount of strain on the Problem-based learning approach since it requires a fair amount of discussion and social interaction. Based on the premise that learning takes place via social interaction, students need to use the knowledge learnt in a decontextualized setting by engaging in language activities (Abdullah, 1998)

Many students who come from Malaysian secondary schools are more familiar with a teacher dependant approach (Yong, 2010) which relies on the teacher doing most of the talking. Nonetheless, as said by Vhanabatte (2011) a large component of the English language involves understanding the language and speaking it. Students need to be able to speak English in order to grasp the basic language skills. Most students state their apprehension in using English language in their learning process and owing to the fact that a new approach is introduced, students may observe anxiety and apprehension. (Brown G. , 2004)

3. 
   Research Objectives
   

Teachers are confronted with the notion that certain teaching approaches can churn out better results in communication activities. The approach is meant to produce the desired learning outcome where students will be able to use the English language, especially orally, in their desired work fields. When administering the correct approach, the belief is that students would acquire the desired language skills while achieving the objective of the task at hand. However to ensure that students fully develop their English speaking skills using the PBL approach, one needs to ensure that students are readily accepting of such an approach, and also students have low anxiety levels when applying such an approach. Another belief is that students will be able to overcome their anxiety levels and enhance their language skills via such an approach. Thus, the research objectives can thus be summarised into three areas:

1. 
   To measure the communication apprehension levels of the students’ when implementing PBL in English for Specific Purposes, pre and post PBL.
   

1. 
   To determine whether students’ oral skills have improved with the exposure to PBL approach in English for Specific purposes.
   

1. 
   To find out if there is a relationship between communication apprehension level and English oral skills when implementing PBL approach.
   

The research framework can best be represented in the figure seen below.


Post-PBL

Anxiety level

Related to

Communication

And

Oral communication

Pre- PBL

Anxiety level

Related to

Communication

And

Oral communication




PBL

Figure : Framework of Research Objectives

4. 
   Research Questions
   

The research will focus on the impact of Problem Based learning on students’ communication apprehension. Therefore the questions that will be asked in relation to this study is whether PBL can assist students speaking abilities and if so how much does it help students improve their speaking confidence, reduce their anxiety and also become overall better orators. The study will be compared to the traditional lecture method of teaching English public speaking, to see whether there is a significant difference in students speaking abilities between PBL approach and traditional lecture approach in teaching. The research questions can thus be classified into five points. Which are seen below:

1. 
   What are the students’ communication apprehension before using PBL and post PBL?
   

2. 
   Does PBL help reduce students’ communication apprehension in English for Specific class?
   

3. 
   What are the students’ communication skills before using PBL and post PBL?
   

4. 
   Does PBL help to increase students Oral communication skills?
   

5. 
   What are the relationships between Communication apprehension and Oral communication skills in a PBL and traditional based classroom?
   

5. 
   Research Hypothesis
   

The current literature on PBL state that Problem based learning can reduce students’ anxiety due to public speaking. It is also believed that with PBL, students will be able to improve their oral communication skills. Therefore this research will explore further the effects of PBL on vocational students’ public speaking skills and in turn how it may or may not reduce their anxiety levels in public speaking. Thus the research can be divided into three hypotheses which are as follows:

1. 
   Hypothesis 1
   

Students will show lower communication apprehension with the PBL approach as compared to the traditional lecture approach.
English is not the main language for most Malaysians. Malays in general tend to speak their Mother tongue, Bahasa Malaysia in their homes. Therefore the process of learning a second language such as English is the cause of much anxiety. Among all the second language(L2) skills acquisition, it was shown that 88% felt anxious about learning all the L2 skills, where speaking was rated as the highest among all language anxieties exhibited by first year College students in Malaysia. (Hamzah, 2007) According to Garner (1985), learning a language provides one of the biggest anxieties and thus becomes a definitive benchmark in language acquisition as cited in (Shafiq Hizwari, 2008). Therefore it can be said that the anxiety of speaking needs to be addressed before successful language is acquired. If PBL offers a method of tackling the communication apprehension then it should be means to further deliberate the usage of the PBL approach in the classroom. As stated by White (2001), PBL provides room for greater confidence as it allows students to confront their peers and also build their own confidence as cited in (Ahlfeldt, 2004).

2. 
   Hypothesis 2
   

Students will exhibit better oral communication skills with the PBL approach than the traditional lecture approach.
In the case of the International Islamic University Malaysia, law department, most students have been accepted to study law, with adequate English scores, yet they exhibit reluctance to speak the language. This therefore does not meet the workplace needs because employers often favour communication and cooperation in the workplace, which needs to be enforced in the university course (Ali, Kadir, & Zubaidah, 2005). According to Kayi (2006) speaking skills are important for the process of language learning to take place (Pattenpichet, 2011). The measurement of good oral communication skills must then be defined in order to diagnose oral competencies. Based on the National Communication Association’s Speakers’ Speech Evaluation form (Moore, Surges-Tatum, & Webster, 2007), students should be assessed based on eight competencies needed to achieve superiority in speech. It is befitting that objectives and needs analysis should be conducted to assure that the oral competencies for the specific academic field is attained, however for the purpose of a general education setting, the eight speaking competencies seen in NCA (2007) can be applied (Dunbar, Brooks, & Kubika-Miller, 2006). Thus with the necessary speech competencies measured, it will be determined whether PBL aids in achieving better oral communication. Since it is purported that PBL allows students to create communication opportunities between their peers and lecturers, PBL is particularly effective for students to express their results via presentations in the form of oral communication (Ali, Kadir, & Zubaidah, 2005).

3. 
   Hypothesis 3
   

Students with lower communication apprehension in PBL approaches will produce better Oral communication skills.
It is thought that students who are exposed to PBL method will be more familiar and experienced in speaking and presentations and will thus in turn lower their anxiety to public speaking. This means that a negative correlation between Public speaking anxiety and Oral communications skills in the PBL classroom should be obtained. Although based on (Ahlfeldt, 2004), anxiety cannot be entirely eliminated between both the PBL and traditional methods, anxiety level was reported much less in students that had undergone the PBL approach. Also as mentioned by Mckeachie, 2002 as cited in (Sirotiak, 2008), PBL helps expose students to different features of PBL techniques such as case method, role-playing, games and simulations which improved students overall motivation in a 16-week course. Based on this, it should show that student who use the target forms when undergoing the activities can encourage greater output in the form of speech, which will also attract more feedback from the lecturer and peers (Ainsworth, 2012).

6. 
   Operational Definitions
   

Certain definitions need to be made clear before we begin the study. The definitions that are most pertinent to the study are as follows:

1. 
   Problem-Based Learning(PBL)
   

PBL is a learner-centred teaching approach which makes the learner take in real life problems, conduct the necessary research and learn how to learn from them. (Demirel & Arslan Turan, 2010) Students are encouraged to work in groups, improve their communication skills, and learn to efficiently locate sources of information when they need it. (Whitfield, 2001). In this study Pro³BL used at GMI will be operationalized as PBL due to the fact that they both stem from constructivist theory of learning (Brown G. , 2004). According to Thomas (2000), project based and problem-based learning fall under the same model of instruction.

2. 
   Traditional lecture based learning (TLBL)
   

A method concerned with imparting knowledge from the teacher to the student, where the students’ achievement is the primary concern of the teacher and learning is in the hands of the teacher not the student (Brown K. L., 2003).

3. 
   Public Speaking Anxiety
   

Public speaking anxiety also termed, fear of speaking in public, fear of public speaking or fear of speaking in front of others (Bull, 2012), is taken as the fear of being evaluated and judged by people while delivering a speech or presentation (University of Wisconsin, 2012).

4. 
   Communication apprehension
   

As defined by McCroskey (1977) is cognitive-based anxiety which is exhibited

when one encounters real or anticipated communication with another person

or persons.

5. 
   Oral Communication
   

As stated by the National Communication Association (NCA), Oral communication is defined as ‘the art of expressing and exchanging ideas in speech. It involves the ability to compose, critically analyze and deliver information through verbal, vocal and visual interactions’ (Moore, Surges-Tatum, & Webster, 2007)

7. 
   Limitation of Study
   

The scope of the study is limited to the students of GMI. The population of GMI students in one semester intake ranges from 250 to 900 students, however the study shall only include students that are registered for English for Specific purposes during duration of 18 to 20 week study, which is during a span of one semester at German-Malaysian Institute. This will therefore limit the generalizability of the study to other populations. Also, since the study only includes students from GMI, it may not necessarily be applied to other settings and institutes within Malaysia or other countries.

Also, limitations of the study can be found in the number of classes that will be used for the experimental and control groups. Due to time constraints and also limit in budget, there will be only a maximum of four groups that will be selected for the study which thus limits the scope of generalizability.

The other factors that cause limitations to the study are the choice of instructors that will conduct all four classes. If GMI administration does not agree to the arrangement whereby four classes are to be taught by the same instructor, then the ideal conditions of the experiment will not have been met and may pose as a potential threat to the internal validity of the study (Yadav, Subedi, Lundeberg, & Bunting, 2011). To reduce such threat than the researcher could ensure that proper training and understanding of the PBL and traditional method is adhered and that all lessons and instruments are used accordingly, however to confirm that an Affective survey scale should be conducted (Ahlfeldt, 2004).

8. 
   Delimitations of Study
   

The delimitations of the study may lie with the assumptions that were made with regards to the objectives chosen for the study. The scope of the study is based on the objectives to explore the students’ language anxiety with respect to their speaking abilities. The study will not explore other language skills that may also play a role in oral communication. Oral communication goes hand in hand with other language skills such as reading, writing, and listening (Dunbar, Brooks, & Kubika-Miller, 2006). There is thus an assumption that student's other skills are not relevant or less importance in such a study which may be a contributing factor to students communication competence.

Another delimitation to the study is that students prior language acquisitions is not properly taken into consideration and this may in turn affect the outcome of the study. It is assumed that students enter GMI with similar or poor language skills and on top of that, it is assumed that students are not exposed to PBL approach, other than the time that is spent in the ESP courses. According to (Yadav, Subedi, Lundeberg, & Bunting, 2011), there is always the potential of diffusion, whereby students from the experimental group may discuss with the control group and also other external influence which may pose a threat to the internal validity of the study.

9. 
   Significance of Study
   

This study will help GMI and its teachers to understand the effectiveness in using the PBL approach in the learning of English for Specific Purposes. The main focus is to see whether PBL does in fact reduce students’ anxiety when speaking English, and to find out if it improves students’ overall speaking skills. If the results of the study show a high anxiety level at the pre-entry level then the issues will need to be better understood to assist students in their learning, which means that teachers may need to take time to reduce their anxiety in order for effective learning to take place. This could mean a need for a more comprehensive orientation about PBL and also how PBL should or can play a part in their learning process.

Tasks, instructions and activities may require fine-tuning to prepare for students that may have apprehension and anxieties with an approach that may not be so familiar. Teachers will then have to make an extra effort to reduce students’ anxiety levels to prepare students for learning at German-Malaysian Institute. Perhaps better scaffold of problems are needed and also facilitators may need to combine approaches instead of applying PBL alone.

It is also important that teachers are made aware of the implications of such a study so that students learning potentials are met. A combination of strategies may be necessary to ensure that learning takes place among GMI students.

In conclusion, to the best of my knowledge, no study has been conducted on the effectiveness of PBL approach in improving students speaking anxieties and oral speech in TEVT institutions. Based on similar studies conducted in (Ahlfeldt, 2004),

2. 
   Chapter 2
   

1. 
   Literature Review
   

1. 
   German-Malaysian Institute as Technical and Vocational Educational and Training (TVET)
   

German-Malaysian institute (GMI) which was established since 1991, is a collaboration between the government of Germany and Malaysia. It is an institution which has been set up to cater to the needs of the Malaysian sector where students are given hands on and theoretical training in Diploma of Engineering Technology (German Malaysian Institute, 2012). Currently GMI, is listed by the Malaysian government as one of the private providers of the TVET programmes in Malaysia, which aims to meet the demands for skilled workers in the industries (Zuraidah, 2008). With the government objectives to build a nation equipped with workers that possess technical and social human competencies, the National Dual Training System(NDTS) has been introduced in various TEVTs across the nation (German Malaysian Institute, 2012). The method which is executed by GMI is a coupling of Problem, Project, Production Based learning (Pro³BL) approach and the basis of the NDTS programmes which promote real-work situations in the industries. This not only prepares students for working life but it also helps develop necessary cognitive and social skills (Zuraidah, 2008).

The need for students to develop both theoretical and practical skills has been promoted in all fields of education. The research shows that, in order to prepare today’s workforce, change in our curriculum is needed (Ward & Lee, 2002). Therefore, Engineering fields are particularly looking at educational models that cater to a diverse range of students, and to fill the gap between institutes of higher education and the industries. Looking at the current education curriculum it is said that the Fordist-Tylorist industrial organization model is no longer applicable in our education programmes, as they cater for algoristic thinking which rely heavily on the heads of management to think. Therefore, due to globalization and an ever-increasing influx of information,industries today require all employees to be have a ‘new habit’ of thinking (Albassam, 2007) . This new habit involves employees to have the cognitive demands of the working world and also the soft skills to match (Ward & Lee, 2002). Achan, Philip and Gunjew (2003) as cited in (Kim, 2006) explain that a graduate must have range of skills that are flexible enough to adapt to a number of situations and positions. It is also mentioned that such skills should comprise of four branches of skills, which are interpersonal skills, self-managements skills, communications skills and problem-solving or metacognitive skills.Nonetheless,the notion that still prevails in Malaysia and many countries is that TVET programmes are for students who do not excel academically and therefore enter vocational institutes (Zuraidah, 2008). As a result students enter with the perception that vocational schools will accept students from diverse needs and varying qualifications but not necessarily have the academic prowess to boot. Although GMI has stipulated the minimum academic requirements, most students enter GMI with merely a pass in English (German Malaysian Institute, 2012).This creates a large amount of problems where by students that enter GMI may not have the academic flair, particularly in the English language. A situational analysis reveal that the existing English communication skills of students at GMI range from poor to intermediate. This then makes it difficult for students to engage in GMI activities that involve large amounts of speaking, even more so in the industries and future places of work. Though most have undergone the system of Education in Malaysian public schools since Primary 1, where English has been taught as the second language, many students are still using their first language to speak (Ali, Kadir, & Zubaidah, 2005).

1. 
   English for Specific Purposes (ESP)
   

GMI students are required to complete three levels of English for Specific Purpose courses during semester one, two and three respectively. English for specific courses in GMI serves to bridge the gap between students technical knowledge and English language. A summary of ESP as defined by Dudley-Evans (1997) is English language, centered on the learner’s specific needs. With this in mind, it can be divided into absolute and variables characteristics, which do not limit the use of the English language for a particular discipline, age group, methodology or language proficiency (although ideally students should have basic grasp of English concepts) cited in (Anthony, 1997). In other words, ESP is a language tool to help students acquire engineering skills

2. 
   Problem-based learning
   

1. 
   What is PBL?
   

It is reported that Socrates never lectured his students, he instead employed a method which included asking a series of questions, which led to finding answers to life-related problems (Ward & Lee, 2002). Based on this premise, it is believed that problem-based learning; linked to interdisciplinary education, is not a new concept since its foundations dates back to the 360 BCE. However with respect to education, it is still recent and slowly gaining popularity. The first usage of this approach can be seen among medical school students, where 20 years ago, it was thought to be an innovative way to solve real-life medical cases. Now, PBL is covering more ground, finding its way in the field of administration,management,optometry, arts, engineering and also social work (Whitfield, 2001). According to Brown,G (2004) types of learning which promote deep understanding are project and problem-based learning approaches. Both approaches have links to cooperative, interdisciplinary learning and also stem from the Constructivist learning theories (Fauziah, 2010). In this study, it must be understood that a combination of the three PBL models taken from McMaster ( Barrows & Tamblyn,1980), Torp&Sage Model (IMSA,1998) and Pastirik model (2006) have been modified to become the Pro³BL model at GMI (German Malaysian Institute, 2012). This model shall thus be used to answer the research questions in this study. Therefore for the purpose of this study, we shall herein take Pro3BL-problem/project/production-based learning as Problem-based learning (PBL). As even stated by (Sirotiak, 2008) and (Simpson, 2011), constructivism provides the theoretical framework of which project and problem-based learning stem from. Both types of approaches show a hands-on method which promote effective learning. It is no wonder that both happen to have the same abbreviation, PBL. While PBL here, focuses on solving problems and intiating a response, it also expects a delivery of findings and answers in a problem and project-based-learning and sometimes may lead to an end result of a project or product (Sirotiak, 2008) .In summary, the concept dictates that students will learn effectively by engaging in problem-solving activities (Ward & Lee, 2002). Based on Engel (1991), which are based on two precepts, one is to develop skills to solve problems deemed necessary to become a life-long learner and secondly, is to learn the required competencies as cited in (Ward & Lee, 2002). According to (Fauziah, 2010), in Malaysia, it is important to address the different theories used in PBL to ensure that the actual process is carried out effectively.

PBL has been successful in the impart of engineering knowledge mainly because the rate of attrition in engineering schools today has been caused by the lack of creative-thinking and ineffective curriculum designs that were once used to teach engineering students (Felder & Brent, January 2005). What PBL encourages in the learning of engineering topics, is deep approach of learning which probes student with new possibilities to diverge,assimilate, converge and accommodate new information’. The fact that PBL helps students answer the ‘what if’s makes for an ‘ideal pedagogical strategy for engineeering students (Felder & Brent, January 2005).

2. 
   PBL and language
   

A part of the engineering professions deals with engineers using soft skills in their constructing and designing work. As engineering students that will need to use language to obtain new skills (Sirotiak, 2008) which later will be applied in their future place of work.Thus language skills at GMI is crucial for one to be successful in the grasp of engineering skills and also when appling it to future work. According to (Faridah, Norlaila, Rozmel, & Mohamed, 2011) as students are seeking answers to their problems, they undergo a series of inquiries which is then translated into language skills as they present and perform their task.To obtain language-based knowledge that can be applied to real-world situations, students need to be actively involved in communicating, without being overtly concerned about grammar rules and accuracy. Thus, if the constructs of grammar rules are placed second to the application of the English languages, then an active learning method needs to be considered (Ainsworth, 2012).As a result, Problem-based learning is the approach which implements cooperative learning whereby gaps between learning activities and learning goals are cemented. According to (Abdullah, 1998), PBL method provides the link between the ‘unreal’ world of school and real world where they will use language to communicate what they need. By using PBL approach, students are able to impersonate workplace problems whilst gaining transferable skills such as public speaking, problem-solving, teamwork and self-motivation. (Trinitiy College Dublin, 2011).Based on the premise of constructivism; problem-based, project-based and production-based learning serve as a tool to develop deep and meaningful learning (Brown G. , 2004). According to George Brown (2004), how a student learns is important when considering the design, teaching and assessments. To ensure deep learning is achieved, teacher needs to include approaches such as group projects, projects, dissertations, problem-based learning, active learning which are known to develop deep understanding within the pockets of a subject area.Using the framework of Problem-based learning, students are required to attempt learning through independent research and present their ideas through verbal discourse.

3. 
   PBL and communication skills
   

"Regardless of the changes in technology, the market for well-crafted messages will always have an audience."

-Steve Burnett-
The aim of English for Specific Purpose at GMI is to accelerate the process of obtaining necessary language skills in the field of Engineering.As declared by Todd. L Sirotiak (2008), engineering is not only concerned with technical skills, but also the use of soft skills like communicative discourse. Furthermore, according to (Faridah, Norlaila, Rozmel, & Mohamed, 2011),the need for workplace skills is highly sought after by employers on all professions.With reiterations from Bell (2010), Faridah Musa et al (2011), states that the PBL form of learning promotes communication, collaboration and negotiation skills needed for the 21^st century workplace. As seen from this study, students who applied this type of learning improved their social skills which correlated with formal and informal language used in communicative discourse. Language skills can be broken up into four major skils,which are speaking, reading, writing and listening.When studying the effects of PBL be it problem-based or project-based learning, studies indicate a rise in speaking abilities after administering PBL in their English course (Simpson, 2011), (Ahlfeldt, 2004), (Sirotiak, 2008), (Kim, 2006).Communication involves a combination of experimentation and concrete experience (Ainsworth, 2012). Thus PBL not only enriches this belief, but it also entails an improvement in communication( written, listening and oral skills) whilst simultaneously improving skills such as decision-making, problem-solving, time management, planning and organizing which was rarely used in the traditional lecture-based delivery (Sirotiak, 2008). According toT.H. Allen (2002) as cited in (Ahlfeldt, 2004), the success of a students learning is very much dependant on their communication because speaking and listening skills will determine their success in college and beyond as few university students have the ability to excel in communication due to their lack of exposure in schools.

4. 
   Crafting the ‘problem’ and group work
   

The design of PBL is based on a few steps. First the problem must be ill-structured enough to serve as what is known as a ‘trigger’. Triggers function to ask students three fundamental questions “what they know” and “what they do not know” and “what they need to know”. These questions are meant to prompt students to think about what new ideas and innovative ways to solve the problem.As each stage of the inquiry process unfolds, facilitators may provide scaffolds, which guide the students to the answer with a set of WH-questions- the what, why, where, when and how (Kim, 2006). Next students have to relate the problem to the solution, in the form of searching for new knowledge and information .The process in which we learn, are directed in the steps that guide PBL. Students, search, skim, inquire, define and create hypotheses, refine, scan, and recreate hypothese, similarly as one would do in a normal learning scenario. This leads to an interdisciplinary approach to learning, which combines different knowledge,fusing it into new knowledge. (Ward & Lee, 2002). At this stage students should gather their findings in a group of four to five students and compare notes (Fauziah, 2010). It is also crucial that students are asked to showcase their findings in the form of a presentation or project, which thus emphasises the verbal communication skills and collaborative work. Most importantly, PBL is directed towards a set of resources that help the students obtain the relevant knowledge to solve their problems,which finally lead to sharing their solutions with their peers (Simpson, 2011). Stages in the PBL learning process carried out in GMI can be seen in Figure 2, below adapted from (Kim, 2006).

Introducing the Problem Statement ( ill-structured problem consisting of inquiring ‘triggers’

• 
  
  Scaffold 1
  
  Listing out the 3 K’s of the ill-structured problem:
  
  • 
    What students know?
    
  • 
    What they do not know?
    
  • 
    What they need to know?
    
  
  

Forming a group of 4-5 students, while defining the problem



Scaffold 2

Outsource information, evaluating and accessing information resources


Presenting new information to peers while reachin a consensus.


Scaffold 3




Synthesizng final proposal and presenting the ideas.



Evaluation of the problem

Figure : Design of a typical ‘Problem’ in PBL at German Malaysian Institute

The problem must be reflective of the outcomes of learning in the course outlines and must be applicable to real-world problems whilst still being able to be carried out in the classroom. Group work usually ranges between 2 to 5 members.

5. 
   Role of the student in PBL
   

Students are believed to be more empowered in their learning as the focus is now placed on the student instead of the teacher. Students are thus asked to be more actively involved in the learning of knowledge and generic skills which are thought to include, critical thinking, communication and problem solving. Students who are more involved will benefit further from the PBL method (Kim, 2006). Success in PBL of the student will be students who are aware of their own learning needs and are able to search for the relevant data to achieve the right knowledge needed. According to (Albassam, 2007), the student takes on the role of an active decision maker who is involved in the problem solving . Thus instead of being passive participants, they are the ones that personally construct their knowledge.

6. 
   Role of the teacher in PBL
   

The teacher, or more so known as facilitator, acts as the bridge which connect the students’ prior knowledge or lack of prior knowledge ( ‘what they know’ or ‘do not know’) to the new forming knowledge (Simpson, 2011). Teachers are now not in the spotlight, instead they are the ‘experts’ of the discussion that take a ‘back-seat’ in the process of problem-solving. Teachers are the consultants and will need not only to be knowledgable in their own field of study, but may need to be equipped with knowledge in other content areas and skills (Ward & Lee, 2002). This may create some unwillingness on the part of some lecturers that feel that their field of specialization may require a lecture-based approach. Nonetheless facilitators are able to guide students in the form of modelling and asking open-ended questions which promote students to think critically. Teachers are meant to maintain the momentum of the problem, yet not reveal the answers to the problem. Teamwork skills, self determination and access to broadbase of resources is essential in the success of the teacher’s role in PBL (Ward & Lee, 2002). As stated by Mardziah (1998), a facilitator in PBL does not teach. He/ she instead, remains in the background where he will help a student locate the relevant resources for the problem (Kim, 2006). Albassam (2007) states that the teachers is not the disseminator of the knowledge, but instead plays the role of cognitive or meta-cognitive coach, who always ensures that there is a problem to be solved.

7. 
   PBL method versus traditional lecture-based approach
   

The PBL method takes the form of a learner-centered approach which places the student in the central focus (Kim, 2006). This involves the students to be more aware and actively involved with their learning as opposed to being just receivers of knowledge seen in the traditional lecture methods. According to (Kim, 2006), there is a constant negotiation that occurs between the learner and the teacher in the PBL method which helps the teacher adjust the learning style according to the students needs. Therefore it can be said that the PBL method allows for a certain amount of fluidity between students, as the teachers will need to monitor students’ needs and adapt accordingly. In the case of the PBL approach to language learning, the method is functional as it caters to a wider group of students and not particularly to one learning style. This is crucial in GMI as it needs to involve a diverse group of students and students come from different backgrounds, education qualifications and language proficiencies.

The traditional, didactic, lecture-based approach involves the transference of content from the lecturer to the students ,with a focus placed more on students making connections with the teacher as opposed to the learning process itself. Student achievement is supposed to be the central focus of a lecture-based approach since content is heavily reliant on the work and skills of the students. Hoewever most teachers place accountability on the standards set by the curriculum which usually is at the expense of students needs (Brown K. L., 2003). Another downside to lecture-based approach especially when teaching language skills is the limited exposure to activities and practice which is important in acquiring communication skills. The main concern with lecture-based learning is the lack of opportunities for students to apply the language as it is a very inert method involving mainly rote learning. (Ali, Kadir, & Zubaidah, 2005)

In brief, both methods are aware that students play a big role in achievement of knowledge, however lecture based approach places more knowledge in the hands on the teacher and involves less student work (Brown K. L., 2003).

3. 
   Communication Apprehension related to public speaking
   

According to McCroskey (1970) communication apprehension is a multi-based anxiety which is linked to oral communication. Further to that, Arnold (2007) says, in the field of applied linguistics, the concept of communication apprehension is closely related to that of language anxiety. Therefore one can say that the fear of speaking in public is interconnected to communication apprehension and oral communication. Communication apprehension can be best defined by Berger,McCroskey, Baldwin (1984)as the the ‘feeling’ one gets when communicating and thus not how one communicates as cited in (P’Rayan & Shetty, 2008). Fear or anxiety in speaking can be related to a few factors, P’Rayan & Shetty (2008) states namely, a poor grasp of the target language, lack of practice, certain insecurities or a pre-programmed thought process. Among Malaysian students, anxiety can be attributed to one of the highest factors which dampen the success of student’s second language acquisition (Mustapha, Ismail, Singh, & @Alias, 2010). It has also been recorded that students that are so fixated on their speaking anxiety, tend to spend most of their time focusing on that instead of the task at hand, resulting in a reduction in retention of information and thus lower grades (Mustapha, Ismail, Singh, & @Alias, 2010). The need to use PBL in overcoming public speaking anxiety can be linked to studies that show students request more exposure and practice in overcoming their communication apprehension (P’Rayan & Shetty, 2008). In fact, among UiTM Johor university students, as in the study conducted by (Mustapha, Ismail, Singh, & @Alias, 2010), students claim that group discussions helped lower their communication apprehension and overall preparation was the best way to overcome their anxiety. Thus,in PBL, where students are encouraged to speak and mingle with peers and lecturers and given plenty of opportunity to practice English often should lessen anxiety of public speaking.

4. 
   Measuring Communication apprehension
   

According to (Ahlfeldt, 2004), public speaking is about ‘conducting and presenting a speech’. Therefore the test of public speaking is not in the knowledge they gain about public speaking, but in how they apply it. Communication apprehension as defined by McCroskey (1977) is a cognitive based measurement, although it can also be physiological and behavioural in nature.

Public speaking anxiety measurement cannot be entirely applied since it fails to consider individuals’ anxiety to speaking. This therefore makes it questionable on whether it is representative of communication apprehension (McCroskey, Beatty, Kearney, & Plax, 1985). Thus to measure the construct of communication apprehension with respect to public speaking and individual response to speaking anxieties, the students will be given the Personal Report of Communication Apprehension(PRCA). The PRCA has been adapted from the Public Speaking Anxiety Report (PRSPA) which is thought to be a more complete construct of communication apprehension. The PRCA model that is now further modified and widely used is the PRCA-24 (P’Rayan & Shetty, 2008). The purpose of the PRCA-24 will be to verify students’ anxiety levels within a set scale of low, moderate or high. It is divided into 24 questions which cover students feelings about communicating (McCroskey, Beatty, Kearney, & Plax, 1985) (see appendix B).

5. 
   Measuring improvements in Oral communication
   

Students speaking ability will be measured with the use of a rubric scoring sheet, which will look at the eight competencies recommended by the National Communication Association (Moore, Surges-Tatum, & Webster, 2007). The eight competencies which have been tested for validity and reliability (Dunbar, Brooks, & Kubika-Miller, 2006) in the NCA rubrics are; 1.Chooses and narrows a topic 2. Communicates thesis/specific purpose 3. Provide appropriate supporting material 4. Uses appropriate organizational pattern 5. Uses appropriate language 6. Uses vocal variety in rate, pitch and intensity 7. Uses appropriate pronunciation, grammar and articulation 8. Uses physical behaviours that support the message (Moore, Surges-Tatum, & Webster, 2007). The eight competencies have been selected to ensure that they reflect the current literature review concerning communication. When grading each competency, the following criterias must be considered, as suggested by the NCA (2007) manual:

Compentencies	Brief definition
Chooses and narrows a topic	The speaker choice of topic must reflect purpose with adjustments made to suit audience needs, within time limitations.
Communicates thesis/specific purpose	The introductory segment of the speech must deliberate to all audience members the specific purpose of the speech.
Provide appropriate supporting material	The use of electronic or non-electronic aids must enhance the credibility of the speaker and support the topic.
Uses appropriate organizational pattern.	The front, body and conclusion of the content of the speech should engage audience in a creative manner and clarity .
Uses appropriate language	The speaker uses the language that enhances understanding and enthusiasm while choosing words which exhibt exceptional nuances.
Uses vocal variety in rate, pitch and intensity	Varied pitches and tones that are well paced and appealing.
Uses appropriate pronunciation, grammar and articulation	Fluency and sound with no grammatical or pronunciation errors.
Uses physical behaviours that support the message	Uses the bodily gestures, eye contact, behaviour that support speech.

Table : Brief definition of Communication competencies NCA (2007)

6. 
   Conclusion of Literature Review
   

In conclusion, PBL is a form of learning which serves as a catalyst in a student’s learning process. In the process of scanning, skimming, obtaining, evaluating and synthesing new information, students become more aware of their learning goals as well as the process of searching for information. Concurrently,when faced with problems to real-life situations, students gain skills to solve the problem which not only sharpen their academic knowledge but also skills which benefit their social skills such as team membership, speaking, problem-solving and critical thinking. In turn, this is believed to help students gain a more wholistic perspective of their learning which is thought to be more deep and meaningful (Kim, 2006).

The following chapter will discuss the methods that will be administerd to collect data as well as the tests that will be used to analyse data acquired.

3. 
   Chapter 3
   

1. 
   Research Methodology & Design
   

1. 
   Variables
   

1. 
   Independant Variable
   

The independant variable in this study is the instructional approach applied to the groups. Since there will be two groups, the experimental group and control group, then the independant variable is the Problem-based learning and lecture-based approach respectively.

2. 
   Dependant Variable
   

The dependant variable in this study is the impact of the instructional approach on students communication skills and also the students communication apprehension. The dependant variables will be measured using the NCA(2007) Speech Evaluation form for the oral communication skills and with the PRCA-24 test for students communication apprehension.

2. 
   Method /Design of pre-test and post-test for the PRCA-24
   

Students are first required to fill out demographic surveys to record the data regarding groups characteristics such as gender, race, educational background (see appendix A). All groups will be required to fill in the survey form and demographic data will be collected at the beginning of the course.

An experimental pre-test and post-test method will be applied here to collect the data from the two groups. The purpose of the pretest-posttest design is to measure the change from experimental treatments (Dimitrov & Rumrill, 2003). In this type of design, the sample groups are broken into two distinctions. One will be the experimental group, receiving the treatment and the other group shall remain as the control group, consisting of students who will not receive the treatment. Therefore the experimental group, E (PBL group) shall be the group of students that are taught using the problem-based learning approach and C (non-PBL group) will consist of the group of student

that will be taught using the didactic, traditional lecture method. All groups shall be given the same course learning outcomes with the same lesson plans learning goals; however the tasks and activities shall both be carried out in different approaches, namely problem-based learning approach and traditional lecture approach. The instructor will also be maintained for all classes. The treatment, which is the problem-based learning approach, shall be given the denotation of T. Figure 3 and 4 both show the overall design structure of experimental group (E1):

Demographic data collected upon entry into the course.

Pre-test of Communication Apprehension

(PRCA-24)

Post-test of Communication Apprehension

(PRCA-24)

Task (T)


Figure : Communication Apprehension test design


Pre-test of Oral communication Skills (NCA-2007)

Post-test of Oral communication Skills (NCA-2007)




Task (T)

Figure :Oral communication skills test design

3. 
   Method and design for the pre test and post test Oral communication skills
   

Groups for the Oral communication skills tests will be maintained as mentioned for the test of Communication Apprehension seen in 3.1.2. However since the test will be administered via a rubric scoring sheet, then the instructor will have to observe all students during a delivery of a speech. All orators will be judged pre-treatment (PBL and lecture method) and a score will be collected. Only one researcher will be involved in the experiment and will also be the lecturer for all groups. As seen in (Pattenpichet, 2011), the students will be asked to perform 3 criterion-referenced test (Dunbar, Brooks, & Kubika-Miller, 2006) with regards to 3 speech topics: Talking about oneself, having a telephone conversation and talking about a topic in public. The speeches will be conducted one at a time and scored according to the rubric guidelines given with the NCA (2007) evaluation form.

Data will be collected in three areas for this study. The three areas are as stated below:

• 
  The demographic of the students under the study will be collected.
  
• 
  Students questionnaire with regards to their Communication Apprehension (PRCA-24)
  
• 
  Oral communications evaluation form from NCA (2007).
  

The instruments used to measure the three aspects of the study are as follows.

4. 
   Demographic Questionnaire
   

Firstly, students will be randomly given to the instructors by the GMI administration. All groups have enrolled in the first semester at GMI with the basic entrance requirements, with little or no exposure to PBL approach. Next, students are randomly assigned to control or experimental groups. Groups (E1 and E2; C1 and C2)will be determined via a demographic questionnaire. A equidistance sampling where extraneous variables are held constant , is used to divide the experimental groups (E1 and E2) and control groups (C1 and C2) [See 3.2 sampling]which will be selected based on likeness of English SPM results and education qualifications However since students are not placed according to certain characteristics by GMI administration then the first selection of groups will be accepted randomly. However threats to validity for both experimental and control groups were controlled using a randomized Solomon four group design (Dimitrov & Rumrill, 2003).

5. 
   Public Speaking Anxiety
   

To test the hypothesis with regards to students anxiety due to public speaking the Richmond & McCroskey (1995) Personal Report of Communication Apprehension-24 taken from (McCroskey, Beatty, Kearney, & Plax, 1985) will be used (See appendix B). The data will be collected using a closed ended questionnaire which students have to complete individually. The purpose of the questionnaire is to reveal the level of apprehension students have ranging from low to moderately low, moderate to moderately high and high. This was measured using 24 items. The items were marked using a 5 point Likert-scale of (1) Strongly Agree (2) Agree (3) Undecided (4) Disagree (5) Strongly Disagree. Lowest attainable score is 24 and highest is 120 on the PRCA-24 (P’Rayan & Shetty, 2008).

6. 
   Oral Communication
   

The National Communication Association (NCA) has devised a set of evaluation forms to measure oral communication. This instrument can be seen in Appendix C.The evaluation form, is devised based on eight competencies of speaking skills, four are dedicated to preparation and the othe four are measuring delivery. The form can be used by the evaluator as a ratio scale which measures between the eight compentencies and or can be given a weightage overall score. The eight competencies are rated according to 1-unsatisfactory, 2-satisfactory and 3-excellent. The minimum attainable score for the evaluation is 8 for unsatisfactory delivery of a speech, while the maximum attainable score for an excellent speech is 24 .

2. 
   Sampling
   

1. 
   Population
   

GMI students comprise of students from the Production Technology department and Industrial Electronics department. Each department in turn offers specialized trades within their department. After completing three years of study at GMI, students will have completed three levels of English for specific purposes (ESP). The students are not given any supplementary English classes in GMI other than ESP. Therefore upon their enrolment into ESP in the first semester their exposure to English is only what was obtained in their learning at secondary schools. All GMI students regardless of their department are required to complete three levels of English for Specific purposes, taken in semester 1, semester 2 and semester 3 respectively. Each semester, students meet for ESP classes for a total of 2 contact hours a week for a total of 18 weeks per semester. Students completing an ESP class in one semester therefore will have fulfilled a 36 hour class. The primary objective of the course is to ensure students enhance their four English language skills, i.e. Reading, Writing, Speaking and Listening and which in the long run will be transferable into the workplace.

The student majority mainly comprise of Malaysian Malays. There are also a small percentage of students who are bumiputras from Sabah and Sarawak, Malaysian Indians and Malaysian Chinese. The English entrance requirement for the diploma programme is a minimum pass, from SPM, SPMV, and Pre-diploma or Technical certificate. (German Malaysian Institute, 2012).

2. 
   Sample
   

The sample in the study shall comprise of first year, semester one students at GMI, enrolled in the compulsory core course English for Specific Purposes 1(ESP 2012). The students in one semester consist of 400 to 900 students, and are divided into classes of approximately 20 to 25 students. Therefore for each group, n= less than 30. The total number of students that shall be selected for the four groups, E1, E2 and C1 and C2 shall be estimated at a sample size of about 200 students. The groups E1, E2, C1 and C2 respectively will undergo a randomization selection where each group member will have an equal chance of being selected into the experimental or control group (Fraenkel, Wallen, & Hyun, 2012). This will decrease the threats to validity. However the demographic survey will be used to control extraneous variables such as English SPM results or education qualifications, which may have influence over outcomes. These variables will be maintained across the groups, so that they would minimize the extraneous variance within the two groups

(Dimitrov & Rumrill, 2003). Below is the Randomized Solomon four group model:

PBL Approach (Group E)
Traditional Approach (Group C)


Pre- Oral communication test

Pre Anxiety speaking test



Task

Task 1



Post- Oral communication test

Post Anxiety speaking test



Task

Task 1

Post Anxiety speaking test

Post- Oral communication test

Pre- Oral communication test

Pre Anxiety speaking test

Table : Experimental and Control Group Design 1

PBL Approach (Group E2)
Traditional Approach (Group C2)


Pre- Oral communication test

Pre Anxiety speaking test


Task 1



Post- Oral communication test

Post Anxiety speaking test



Task 1

Post Anxiety speaking test

Post- Oral communication test

Pre- Oral communication test

Pre Anxiety speaking test

Table : Experimental and Control Group Design 2

3. 
   Method of Data Processing and Analysis
   

1. 
   Oral communication skills
   

Firstly, the data that will be collected will need to be processed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS).To measure the pre- and post test oral communication score in the same group of students, a paired sample t-test within groups with the same participants can be used. (Sirotiak, 2008).The quantitative scores were used to find out if the post test data , t-value would show a significant level of difference of (p< .05) for post-test values in after PBL or after traditional lecture method.

Post test scores of the oral communication of the NCA(2007) will be compared based on the scores obtained from Speech evaluation form. A repeated measures ANOVA will be used to compare between the PBL and traditional method groups (Arnold, 2007).

2. 
   Communication Apprehension
   

The data that will be collected will need to be processed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS). The 24 likert scale items will be calculated for the overall score PRCA-24 will be collected as pre and post test scores and also collected between PBL group of students and Lecture-based students. A paired sample t-test is recommended between pre and post test scores of the PRCA-24 (Ahlfeldt, 2004), if there were significant difference between the mean scores of pre-treatment and post-treatment (Dunbar, Brooks, & Kubika-Miller, 2006); however a MANOVA is needed to check for the relation between the pre-posttest scores, interaction between the PBL and lectured based clases and also for significant difference within the groups (Ahlfeldt, 2004).

3. 
   Oral communication correlation and Communication Apprehension
   

Using the paired sample t-test for communication apprehension and oral communication, the effect size of the post-test scores can be compared for correlation between oral communication and communication apprehension as seen in (Pattenpichet, 2011).The correlation value is between two or more variables and will have a range of (-1/1) (Sirotiak, 2008). With the mean scores for the post test taken for communication apprehension and also oral communication skills, a Pearson correlation is taken into consideration, to calculate the relationship between communication apprehension and oral communication.

4. 
   Validity and Reliability of Method and Instruments used
   

1. 
   Demographic Questionnaire
   

Ideally students should comprise of groups that are randomized to maintain validity and reliability of testing, however due to administrations restraints, students will be taken from existing groups set by GMI administration therefore in a sense they were initially randomized into a group which increases the external validity. However due to the fact that E and C groups were selected based on similar traits, then the external validaty makes it more contrived and harder to be generalizable.

2. 
   NCA Speakers Evaluation Form
   

To maintain the reliability of the Evaluation form, two expert instructors that have fully read the NCA manual can record the rubric scoring sheet (Pattenpichet, 2011).

Threats to internal validity are in the maturation, pretest values, history. Based on the Solomon four group design, if D1, D2, D3 and D4 are denoted as the increased scores between the E1, C1,E2 and C2 respectively, so the factors that influence the internal and external threats can be monitored. It can be noted that the gain scores for each value is affected as such D1( pretesting, treatment, maturation and history), D2 (pretesting, maturation and history) D3 (treatment, maturation and history) D4 (maturation and history). Manipulating the difference between D scores can help us monitor the effect of treatment as suggested in (Dimitrov & Rumrill, 2003).

According to Berliner (2002), educational science is the ‘hardest science’ to measure since it is not ideally able to control a perfect experimental setting as cited in (Yadav, Subedi, Lundeberg, & Bunting, 2011). Nonetheless, having said that, it is still important to control any threats to validity by randomly assigning the groups if possible.

3. 
   Personal Report of Communication Apprehension
   

Due to possible threats to internal validity the research shall consist of two groups in the experimental group; E1 and E2 and two groups in the control group C1 and C2. As students who are exposed to the pre-test group may in fact be more prone to improve or may increase their awareness of PBL method upon completing the pre-test question, we shall try to reduce the possibility of pre-test effects by having only groups in C1 and E1 take the pre-test. However all four groups will be exposed to the post-test. This randomized design method is based on the Solomon four-group design (Dimitrov & Rumrill, 2003) and can be seen in Table 2 and 3.

4. 
   List of References