Supervisor: Nor Fadzlinda Ishak Prof. Paul Seedhouse

advances in digital technologies are changing the profession of English language teaching and applied linguistics (Chapelle, 2003) the practices of teaching and learning will undergo a technology revolution (Siemens and Tittenberger, 2009). We live in a world of constantly emerging new technologies that challenge the field of education while at the same time present exciting opportunities. Strategic use of new educational technologies can enhance learning and teaching… (Webster and Murphy, 2008, p.1).

the utilization and integration of Instructional Computer Technology (ICT) tools in English lessons has proven to be effective in assisting learners in acquiring English language competency as well as enhance the quality of their learning experience (Zaiton and Samuel, 2006). integrating ICT tools in teaching can lead to increase learners learning competencies and increase opportunity for communication (Jorge et al., 2003).

The technology is adapted from the Newcastles existing Ambient Kitchen. The kitchen speaks to the users and give them step-by-step instructions on how to cook. Sensors are attached to all equipment and ingredients.

to address the universal problem of classroom language teaching. to bring Task-Based Language Teaching (TBLT) out of the classroom.

How much more can the digital kitchen offer when compared to a normal everyday kitchen after one cooking session?

This comparative study focuses on the question: What is the outcome of the same task when it is carried out in a normal kitchen and a kitchen equipped with digital technology? Thus, the main purpose of the research is to determine the impact of utilizing the digital kitchen towards the students: - Achievement in the vocabulary tests. - Interaction.

1) What is the impact of using the digital kitchen towards incidental vocabulary learning? - Does the use of digital kitchen have a positive or negative impact on student learning in terms of test scores? - Will the students able to retain the new lexical items learned through the cooking task?

2) To what extend does the technology help to promote interaction? How much language was generated in terms of word counts? Do the learners negotiate to decide on the meaning of any new vocabulary? How? Is explicit clarification of the meaning of unfamiliar vocabulary through negotiation necessary for acquisition of the vocabulary?

Mixed Method Study Quantitative- The pretest, posttest and delayed posttest results Qualitative – The interaction (focusing on vocabulary learning)

Pre-pretest -To decide on the lexical items to be tested in actual study. Pretest, posttest and delayed posttest - The same test to be administered before, after and a week after the lesson. Video recording of the lesson – the interaction will be transcribed and analysed.

TBLT theories Input hypothesis (Krashen) Interaction hypothesis (Long, Ellis and Nunan) Output hypothesis (Swain) Task-types and Language output (Skehan et al, Robinson, Martyn) Incidental Vocabulary learning theory Involvement Load hypothesis (Laufer & Hulstjin, 2001) Derived from the depth of processing (Craik & Lockhart, 1972) and elaboration (Craik & Tulving, 1975) cognitive notions.

32 intermediate learners of English from the Pre-sessional English Course offered by the INTO Newcastle University learning centre will take part in the study. They are all volunteers who will then randomly assigned to Experimental and Control groups. Matching participants approach will also be considered when putting them into pairs.

The participants will sit for a vocabulary knowledge pre-test at least a week before they carry out the task. Prior to cooking, they will watch a video on preparing the same recipe It is a pair work: They have to use English to interact while carrying out the cooking task. While waiting for the food to cook in the oven, they will do some vocabulary exercises. A post-test will be administered a day after the cooking session. A delayed post-test will be carried out after one week.

newcastle.ac.uk