Effects of Using Microsoft Flip on Undergraduate Students’ Speaking Skills

Authors

  • Santhoshkanth Kamaraj English Language Teaching Graduate Program, Faculty of Liberal Arts and Science, Roi Et Rajabhat University, Roi Et, Thailand https://orcid.org/0009-0004-0157-9242
  • Angcharin Thongpan English Language Teaching Graduate Program, Faculty of Education and Human Development, Roi Et Rajabhat University, Roi Et, Thailand
  • Sunchai Hamcumpai English Language Teaching Graduate Program, Faculty of Liberal Arts and Science, Roi Et Rajabhat University, Roi Et, Thailand

Keywords:

microsoft flip, speaking skills, teaching speaking framework, EFL, undergraduate students

Abstract

A persistent disparity exists between EFL learners' theoretical linguistic knowledge and their practical oral proficiency-a phenomenon often described as 'mute English.' This study addresses this critical gap by examining the efficacy of integrating Microsoft Flip, an asynchronous video discussion platform, into a structured teaching-speaking cycle model based on Goh and Burns’ (2012). The research aimed to (1) compare undergraduate students’ speaking skill scores before and after the intervention and (2) investigate students’ perceptions of the platform’s utility. Using a pre-experimental, one-group pre-test/post-test design, the study employed cluster random sampling to recruit 53 first-year nursing undergraduate students at a public university in Thailand. Over an eight-week intervention, participants engaged in asynchronous speaking tasks designed to foster planning, rehearsal, and reflection across eight thematic modules. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and a paired-samples t-test. Quantitative analysis revealed a statistically significant improvement in speaking proficiency, with mean scores rising from 10.23 to 16.56 (t (52) = 30.28, p < .001), representing a large effect size (Cohen’s d = 4.16). All sub-skills showed growth, with vocabulary exhibiting substantial gains. Furthermore, quantitative data from questionnaires indicated positive student perceptions (M = 3.96), particularly regarding the platform's ability to expand vocabulary (M = 4.17) and encourage regular practice. These findings suggest that combining asynchronous technology with teaching-speaking cycle instruction effectively ameliorates speaking deficits, offering a scalable pedagogical model for EFL educators seeking to enhance learner autonomy and oral competence in non-native contexts.

References

Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S. (1996). Language testing in practice: Designing and developing useful language tests. Oxford University Press.

Bailey, K. M. (2005). Practical English language teaching: Speaking. McGraw-Hill.

Brown, H. D. (1994). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy. Prentice Hall Regents.

Burns, A., & Joyce, H. (1997). Focus on speaking. National Centre for English Language Teaching and Research.

Bygate, M. (1995). Speaking, language teaching, a scheme for teacher education. (Eds. C.N. Candlin & H. G. Widdowson), Oxford University Press.

Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Houghton Mifflin.

Carver, L., & Pantoja, L. (2021). Visual and auditory production. In L. Carver & H. S. Atkins (eds.). Leading in the Digital Environment: Being a Change Agent (pg. 97-110). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

Chaisiri, P. (2023). Promoting Thai EFL learners’ willingness to communicate in the virtual classroom through technology-mediated oral tasks. LEARN Journal: Language Education and Acquisition Research Network, 16(1), 97-120.

Copland, F., Garton, S., & Barnett, C. (2024). Global practices in teaching English to young learners: Ten years on. British Council. https://doi.org/10.57884/JHCP-DS26

Crystal, D. (2003). English as a global language (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.

Damayanti, I. L., & Citraningrum, E. (2021, April). Flipgrid: A pathway to enhance students’ speaking performance. In Thirteenth Conference on Applied Linguistics (CONAPLIN 2020) (pp. 90-95). Atlantis Press.

Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford University Press.

Council of Europe. (2022). The importance of plurilingual and intercultural education for democratic culture, Recommendation CM/Rec(2022)1 and explanatory memorandum. [Document/Report number or series, if available]. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://ealta.eu/documents/resources/Threshold-Level_CUP.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwi9tfvHh8mQAxUDZvUHHXQ-CHMQFnoECBoQAQ&usg=AOvVaw3SJQmVbA-guKWjeC8i6iWM

Gilakjani, A. (2017). A review of the literature on the integration of technology into the learning and teaching of English language skills. International Journal of English Linguistics, 7(5), 95-106. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijel.v7n5p95

Gillis, G. (2013). The importance of speaking skills. http://www.geraldgillis.com/importance-speaking-skills

Goh, C. C. M., & Burns, A. (2012). Teaching speaking: A holistic approach. Cambridge University Press.

Graddol, D. (2006). Why global English may mean the end of “English as a Foreign Language”. British Council.

Hamilton, S., et al. (2024). Grammar challenges in the Thai EFL context. Asian EFL Journal, 28(1), 45-62.

Hammett, D. (2021). Utilizing flipgrid for speaking activities: A small-scale university-level EFL study. Theory and Practice in Language Teaching and Learning, 3(2), 51-64. https://doi.org/10.29140/tltl.v3n2.509

Harmer, J. (1983) The Practice of English Language Teaching. Longman.

Harris, D. P. (1974). Testing English as a second language. McGraw-Hill.

Hung, S.-T., & Huang, D. (2021). Exploring EFL learners’ willingness to communicate in multimodal videoconferences. International Journal of Computer-Assisted Language Learning and Teaching, 11(4), 79-99. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJCALLT.2021100106

Hyland, K. (2006). English for academic purposes: An advanced resource book. Routledge.

Khan, B. H. (1997). Web-based instruction. Educational Technology Publications.

Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Pergamon.

Littlewood, W. (1981). Communicative language teaching. Cambridge University Press.

Miller, J. S. (2021). FlipGrid [Review of the software Flipgrid]. The French Review, 95(1), 286.

Nithideechaiwarachok, B., Maneekanon, O., & Bubphada, T. (2022). Exploring English language proficiency, English language problems, and English needs among first-year undergraduate students. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 21(12), 273-290. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.21.12.15

Noom-ura, S. (2013). English-teaching problems in Thailand and Thai teachers’ professional development needs. English Language Teaching, 6(11), 139-147. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v6n11p139

Parvin, R. H., & Salam, S. F. (2015). The effectiveness of using technology in English language classrooms in government primary schools in Bangladesh. FIRE: Forum for International Research in Education, 2(1), 47-59. https://doi.org/10.18275/fire201502011049

Pornwasanying, K. (2023). Using Flipgrid to enhance students’ speaking performance in listening-speaking course. Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences for Sustainable Development, 6(2), 114-127.

Richards, J. C. (2008). Second Language Teacher Education Today. RELC Journal, 39, 158-177. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0033688208092182

Richards, J. C., & Renandya, W. A. (2002). Methodology in language teaching: An anthology of current practice. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511667190

Rinfret, S. R., & Forster, E. (2023). FlipGrid: Re-imagining online discussion forums for the public administration classroom. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 29(1), 92-106. https://doi.org/10.1080/15236803.2022.2063632

Robillos, R. J. (2023). Improving students’ speaking performance and communication engagement through technology-mediated pedagogical approach. International Journal of Instruction, 16(1), 551-572. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2023.16131a

Shen, M., & Chiu, T. (2019). EFL Learners’ English speaking difficulties and strategy use. Education and Linguistics Research.

Siddoo, V., Sawattawee, J., Janchai, W., & Thinnukool, O. (2019). An Exploratory Study of Digital Workforce Competency in Thailand. Heliyon, 5(5), 1723. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e01723

Soureshjani, K. H., & Riahipour, P. (2012). Demotivating factors on English speaking skill: A study of EFL language learners and teachers’ attitudes. World Applied Sciences Journal, 17(3), 327-339.

Stepp-Greany, J. (2002). Student perceptions on language learning in a technological environment: Implications for the new millennium. Language Learning & Technology, 6(1), 165-180.

Sudarmo, S. (2021). The importance of speaking in English as a foreign language between skillful and thoughtful competencies: Studying sociolinguistics perspectives. Linguistics and Culture Review, 5(S1), 113-124. https://doi.org/10.21744/lingcure.v5nS1.1321

Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235-253). Newbury House.

Thadphoothon, J. (2017). Thailand 4.0 and English language teaching: Impact and implications. International Journal of Languages, Literature and Linguistics, 3(1), 1-5.

Thornbury, S. (1999). How to teach grammar. Pearson Education.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. In M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner and E. Souberman (Eds.), Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Woodrow, L. (2006). Anxiety and speaking English as a second language. RELC Journal, 37, 308-328. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0033688206071315

Downloads

Published

2026-03-20

How to Cite

Kamaraj, S., Thongpan, A., & Hamcumpai, S. . (2026). Effects of Using Microsoft Flip on Undergraduate Students’ Speaking Skills. BRU ELT JOURNAL, 4(1), 21–37. retrieved from https://so14.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/bru_elt_journal/article/view/2574