(1) You speak
clear and fluently.
(2) The way
you present (ppt design) is quite good.
(3) Good eye
did the author use two different materials on pre- and post- tests?
Strength: First, you have eye contact
with audiences. Second, you explained the contents by used your own words. Third,
the intonation and pronunciation are quite good.
Question: You just mention that the
number of fifteen participants is not enough. So how many participants are
suitable in the paper?
Dressed up formally
Handled the questions well
A few words under the figures or tables for
explaining would be helpful.
Time control is way better
Why did the author think he can improve the
participants’ pronunciation in a short time with a few weeks? Improving
pronunciation should spend at least years, do you agree?
How could the author know students practice
their English ability outside the experiment periods?
Do you agree that the result of the study is related to the participant's English proficiency?
Yes, I agree. Since the materials for reading aloud were taken from TV series or films, participants with different English proficiency might have different levels of acceptance with these materials.
Q: I don't understand the page 18, could you explain it ?
Answer: This figure explains the procedure to collect data from pretest and posttest. In the pretest, every participant recorded their voice reading aloud an excerpt from TV or film to get R1. In the posttest, every participant recorded their voice reading aloud the same excerpt in the pretest and giving a free speech for one minute to get R2 and FS.
Q : The result show not very high significant performance
if you are the researcher, what would you improve the design
of the Methodology ?
A: The main drawback of the research design in this study is the lack of control group, which makes it shaky to conclude that teaching pronunciation by reading aloud is effective. Hence, adding a control group and comparing the performance of the experimental group and control group is a perspective approach to improve the research design.