ENGAGING STUDENTS BY USINGHUMOROUS VIDEO ADS IN ENGLISH LISTENING SKILL SUBJECT : A Case Study at an Academy of Secretary in West Java, Indonesia.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

APPROVAL PAGE ………..…………...………..………....

DECLARATION ………...

PREFACE ………..

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ………

ABSTRACT ………...

TABLE OF CONTENTS ………..………....…...………...

LIST OF TABLE ………...………...………….…………...

Chapter I: Introduction …………..………...………...

1.1 Background ……….………..

1.2Research questions……….………...

1.3Purpose of the research ……….

1.4Significance of the research ……….. 1.5Definitions of the terms ……….... 1.6Organization of the research ………. Chapter II: Literature Review ………..………...

2.1 Listening ………

2.1.1 Difficulty found in listening ………...……… 2.1.2 Advantages and disadvantages of using authentic materials in listening

activity ………....

2.2 Video in listening activity ………

2.2.1 Video types ………

2.2.2 Advantages of using humorous video ads in ELS subject ………. 2.2.3 Procedures of viewing humorous video ads in ELS subject ………..

2.2.3.1 Pre-view ………..

2.2.3.2 While-view ………..

2.2.3.3 Post-view ……….

2.3 Research on using video in improving listening skills ………. 2.4Research on using video related to student engagement ……… .……. 2.5Research regarding the role of nonverbal aspects to understand verbal

expressions ………

2.6Humor ………...

2.6.1 Definition of humor ………...

2.6.2 Research regarding the use of humor in learning ……….. 2.6.3 Research regarding the use of humor in promoting student engagement …..

2.7 Student engagement ………..

2.7.1 Definition of student engagement ……...………... 2.7.2 Characteristics of student engagement ………... 2.7.3Types of student engagement………... 2.7.4 Dimension of student engagement ……….

2.8 Conclusion of chapter 2 ………

Page ii iii iv v vi vii x 1 1 4 4 5 5 6 7 7 8 10 12 13 13 14 15 15 16 17 22 24 26 26 27 33 35 35 37 40 41 43

Chapter III:Research Methodology ………...……… 3.1 Research design………..…………..……….... 3.2Research site and participants ……….………. 3.3Data collection………..…………..……….. 3.3.1 Observation………..………...……….……….. 3.3.2 Questionnaire………...

3.3.3 Interview ………...

3.4 Data analysis…………..…………..………... 3.4.1 Observation ..………...……...………... 3.4.2 Questionnaire ……..………...………...

3.4.3 Interview .………..

3.5 Conclusion of chapter 3 ………

Chapter IV: Findings and Discussions ………...………. 4.1Data presentation ……….………...………... 4.1.1 Data from observation………...………... 4.1.1.1Pre-view………...………... 4.1.1.2While-view ………...………... 4.1.1.3Post-view ………...………... 4.1.2 The data from questionnaire………...……… 4.1.3 The data from interview ………...………... 4.2Findings and discussions ………...………... 4.2.1 Humorous video ads engage students in the ELS subject ………... 4.2.1.1Discussion of observation data …...

4.2.1.1.1 Pre-view ………

4.2.1.1.2 While-view ………

4.2.1.1.3 Post-view ………...

4.2.1.2 Discussion of questionnaire data ………... 4.2.2 Disadvantages and advantages of using humorous video ads as perceived by students in ELS subject ... 4.2.2.1 Disadvantages of using humorous video ads as perceived by students in

ELS subject ………

4.2.2.2Discussion of questionnaire data ……….… 4.2.2.3Discussion of interview data ……….….. 4.2.3 Advantages of using humorous video ads as perceived by students in ELS

subject ……….………...

4.2.3.1 Discussion of questionnaire data ………. 4.2.3.2Discussion of interview data ………...

4.3 Conclusion of chapter 4 ………

Chapter V: Conclusion, Limitation and Recommendation………..

5.1 Conclusion……….………...

5.2 Limitation ………...……….. 5.3 Recommendation ……….………..………...

44 44 44 46 46 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 55 56 57 59 60 63 73 78 78 78 79 81 83 85 88 88 89 92 95 95 99 102 103 103 105 105

References ………...………... Appendix I : Humorous video ads ………... Appendix II : Observation data ………... Appendix III : Questionnairedata …...………. Appendix IV : Interview data ………..…….………….………

107 114 117 146 150

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

This chapter highlights six sections including background, research questions, purpose of the research, significance of the research, definition of the terms, and organization of the research.

1.1 Background

Listening is very crucial for human communication (Hyslop and Tone 1989; Robertson as cited in Timm and Schroeder, 2000). According to some research findings (Rankin, 1928; Bird, 1954; Hulbert, 1989; Janusik and Wolvin, 2009), around 45 percent of our waking time is spent on listening. This indicates that listening is one of the first skills which should be acquired (Nixon and West, 1989; Wolvin and Coakley, 2000).

The role of listening is even more crucial for students. Students who listen effectively in a learning process are more successful not only in their school works (Legge as cited in Wolvin and Coakley, 2000; McDevitt, Sheenan&McMenamin, 1991) but also in employment achievement and personal happiness (Berko, Wolvin, and Wolvin as cited in Curikis, 1992). Conversely, poor listening determines the failures of college students in their study (Barker, 1971; Conaway as cited in Timm and Schroeder, 2000).

Given the fact that listening is very important in learning, it should be taught in all levels of education starting from primary to tertiary education. However, some reports explain that so far listening is not taught in all schools or universities (Strother as cited in Timm and Schroeder,

2000). It is only taught at the schools and universities which have good infrastructures and human resources. On the contrary, it is not taught at the schools and universities which do not have good infrastructures and human resources. This imbalance circumstance, therefore, causes a gap in the teaching outcome (Timm and Schroeder, 2000).

Although some schools and universities have given listening lessons to their students as just mentioned, this does not assure that the process will be free from problems. Some studies report that students have faced some difficulties in following a listening activity (Hulbert, 1989; Hasan, 2000; Underwood as cited in Osada, 2004; Chen, 2005; Wang, 2007; Martinez, 2009). First, the teaching materials were too difficult to understand (Hulbert, 1989; Hasan, 2000; Martinez, 2009). Second, students lack engagement like affective and habitual problems during the learning process (Underwood as cited in Osada, 2004; Chen, 2005; Wang, 2007). These problems, to some degree, have resulted in low achievement in a listening lesson (Wang, 2007).

Likewise, some problems have also been encountered by students in the academy of secretary where the researcher teaches. Most students were found to have obstacles pertinent to engagement like affective and habitual problems while following the English listening skill

subject. The affective problem is related to students’ motivation (Johnson, 2001) while following

the learning process. This was identified when the students did not have any interest in the learning materials, so they did not enjoy the learning process. Meanwhile, habitual problem is

related to students’ behavior (Johnson, 2001) while following the learning process. In the

research site, this was recognized when the students did not pay attention to their lessons because they did inattentive body languages like playing their hair, writing, daydreaming, and sleeping. These problems had caused low class participation which resulted in low learning outcome in the English listening skill subject. The aforementioned problems were found by observing and

interviewing the students as well as by analyzing the questionnaire results which were conducted in the research site.

Given that those problems will cause more difficulties in teaching the English listening skill subject, as a lecturer of English in the research site the researcher thought that it is necessary that some measures be taken. One of the ways to reduce the problems is to use multimedia such as video in teaching the English listening skill including humorous video ads. The reasons for the use of humorous video ads were among others. First, “video has been closely associated with

listening skills” (Progosh, 1996; 34) and has many contributions to students’ learning process like developing students’ listening skills, presenting an exposure to a language use, stimulating language production, providing pleasure in language learning, providing knowledge of body language, providing repetition of lessons, and communicating meaning clearly (Willis and Willis, 1983; Gallacher, 2003). Second, humorous video ads contain humorous expressions which have made students enjoy the learning process (Bryant et al., 1980). Third, they combine several learning channels like audio, video, language, humor, and advertisement which have

enriched the students’ knowledge (Willis and Willis, 1983; Gallacher, 2003). Fourth, some research findings (Smeltzer and Watson, 1985; Gersten and Tlusty as cited in Richards and Patricia, 2003; Dikilitas and Duvenci, 2009; Wachob, 2011) report that the use of video has made the students engaged in the learning process.

Parallel to the four reasons as just mentioned, this research is intended to investigate the use of humorous video ads in the English listening skill subject. In this respect, the humorous video ads are used as a medium to engage the students in the English listening skill subject. Therefore, the foci of the investigation are to reveal how the humorous video ads engage the

students in the English listening skill subject and to know the disadvantages and advantages of using humorous video ads as perceived by students in the English listening skill subject.

1.2Research questions

To reach the aims of this research, two research questions are presented as follows:

1. How do humorous video ads engage the students in the English listening skill subject?

2. What are the disadvantages and advantages of using humorous video ads as perceived by students in the English listening skill subject?

1.3Purpose of the research

Based on the research questions above, this research has two purposes:

1. To investigate how the humorous video ads engage the students in the English listening skill subject.

2. To identify the disadvantages and advantages of using humorous video ads in the English listening skill subject.

1.4Significance of the research

It is expected that this research will have significance at least in three different aspects that is, theory, practice, and policy. In a theoretical perspective, this research will be an important work because the use of humorous video ads in an English listening skill subject has not been reported. Therefore, this research will contribute to the teaching of English listening skill subject. In a practical perspective, this research will be beneficial particularly to the researcher himself and other language teachers or lecturers in that this research uncovers three important aspects. First, it will show the ways how the humorous video ads engage the students in the English listening skill subject. Second, it will mention the benefits obtained by the students after studying

the humorous video ads in the English listening skill subject. Finally, it will describe the problems faced by the students while studying the humorous video ads. In a policy perspective, the results of the research will lead to the establishment of the teaching materials suitably taught in an English listening skill subject at an academy of secretary level or other institutions similar to it.

1.5Definitions of the terms

There are many special terms which are used in this research. To understand them, some terms are clarified as follows:

 English listening skill (ELS) is a subject conducted in a language laboratory and it focuses on listening words, phrases, sentences, stories, conversations, ads, movies, and etc., both auditory and audio-visual.

 Humor is the quality or content of something such as a story and performance which

elicit amusement and laughter (Martin, 2007).

 Humorous video ad is a video which contains humorous advertisement (O’Guinnet al.,

2003).

 Student engagement is students’ motivation which is manifested in their efforts and

commitments in following the learning process in order to reach better learning outcome (Jones, 2009).

1.6Organization of the research

This research is organized in five chapters. The organization of this research is as follows:

 Chapter I mentions the background of the research, research questions, purpose of the research, significance of the research, definition of the terms, and organization of the research.

 Chapter II describes the relevant literature comprising the theories which shape the framework of the research.

 Chapter III explains the methodology which is used in this research. The methodology consists of the design of the research, research site and participants, the procedures of data collection, and the procedures of data analysis.

 Chapter IV depicts the data presentation, findings, and their discussions.

CHAPTER III

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This chapter describes the research methodology, including research design, research site and participants, data collection, and data analysis.

3.1 Research design

Relevant to the purpose and research questions, a case study was employed as the research design. This was taken because this research has the characteristic of a particular case in a small scale (Frankel and Wallen, 1996; Marczyk, DeMatteo, and Festinger, 2005). The case which was investigated was the use of humorous video ads in an English listening skill subject.

3.2 Research site and participants

The research took place at the language laboratory in an academy of secretary in Bandung, West Java-Indonesia. The research site was chosen for two reasons. First, the researcher was one of the teaching staffs in that academy. Therefore, the researcher would have an easy access to the research site and it made this research feasible to be conducted (Bogdan and Biklen, 1998; Marczyk, DeMatteo, and Festinger, 2005; Silverman and Marvasti, 2008). Second, the academy had an English listening skill subject in which the research problems were investigated (Marczyk, DeMatteo, and Festinger, 2005).

The participants of the research were nine. The nine students were selected from the fourth semester students. There were two reasons behind this selection. First, they were chosen because at the time when this research was conducted, they followed the English listening skill

subject (Frankel and Wallen, 1996, Creswell, 2003; Marczyk, DeMatteo, and Festinger, 2005). Second, the nine participants were chosen from three different classes. Therefore, there were three students selected from each class. These three students represented three different categories of achievements, namely high, middle, and low. The creations of these categories were for the purpose of this research. Moreover, theselection was taken in order to represent the nature of class observed and to give the complete information as needed (Frankel and Wallen, 1996). Therefore, the student participants were chosen by a purposive sampling technique (Morse, 1989; Kuzel, 1992; Frankel and Wallen, 1996, Creswell, 2003; Dawson, 2009).

The participants were coded according to the class where they learned, namely R1, R2, and R3 were from A class; R4, R5, and R6 were from B class; and R7, R8, and R9 were from C class. Besides that, the participants were also categorized into their achievement levels, that is, R1, R4, and R7 were categorized into high achievers. R2, R5, and R8 were categorized into middle achievers and R3, R6, and R9 were categorized into low achievers. This categorization was based on their performance in the previous subjects and investigation before the research was conducted by holding a performance test. Furthermore, to avoid misleading judgment concerning the participant grouping, the researcher crosschecked the participants’ data to the lecturers who used to teach them and to the documents which were available at the administrative section related to their English grade.

3.3 Data collection

In answering the research questions, multiple data collections (Frankel and Wallen, 1996; Creswell, 2003; Silverman and Marvasti, 2008), namely observation, questionnaire, and

interview were used. The data collection was conducted for two months. For clarity, the data collection was clarified one by one in the following sections.

3.3.1Observation

Observation aimed to gain the data which could not be elicited by questionnaire and interview (Maxwell, 1996). Observations in this research were conducted in a language laboratory (see appendix II), the place where the participants took the English listening skill subject, and were followed by nine participants (R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7, R8, R9). Observations were intended to know the meanings, events, actions or processes being done by the participants (Alwasilah, 2006). In the observation phases the researcher conducted the detail analyses of the participants’ behaviors before, while, and after studying the humorous videos ads in the English listening skill subject. The researcher observed and analyzed how the humorous video ads engaged the participants in the English listening skill subject (Frankel and Wallen, 1996; Creswell, 2003).

During observations, the researcher was utilizing three procedures of viewing a video (Stoller, 1992; Tomalin, 1992; Stempleski, 2002; Koksal, 2004) such as pre-view activity, while-view activity, and post-while-view activity (see appendix II). In these phases, the student engagement indicators proposed by Jones (2009) were incorporated.

The pre-view activity observed the participants’ activities before following the while -view activity(Stoller, 1992; Tomalin, 1992; Stempleski, 2002; Koksal, 2004). The observation focused on the participants’ motivation which, to some extent, was represented by their attention or question toward the researcher’s explanation regarding the videos being watched. The while -view activity observed the participants’ activities while studying the humorous video ads. In this

phase, the observation focused on participants’ body language, consistent focus or attention, and fun and excitement (see section 2.7.2). Finally, the post-view activity observed the participants’ understanding toward the humorous video ads in terms of their verbal participation as well as their confidence when presenting the verbal participation (see section 2.7.2).

There were some steps done in the observation phases. These steps corresponded to the procedures of viewing video (Stoller, 1992; Tomalin, 1992; Stempleski, 2002; Koksal, 2004) such as pre-view, while-view, and post-view. The pre-view activity in the English listening skill subject followed several steps(Stoller, 1992; Tomalin, 1992; Stempleski, 2002; Koksal, 2004). First, researcher told participants the kinds of video which would be seen. Second, he gave them some hints regarding the vocabularies, words, and context which were usually used in the videos being discussed. Meanwhile, the while-view activity in the English listening skill subject followed several steps(Stoller, 1992; Tomalin, 1992; Stempleski, 2002; Koksal, 2004). First, he played the videos. Second, if the participants asked him to repeat the videos because they did not understand the videos, he repeated the videos. Finally, the post-view activity in the English listening skill subject followed one step(Stoller, 1992; Tomalin, 1992; Stempleski, 2002; Koksal, 2004). That is, he asked the participants to describe or to discuss the content of the videos after they had already watched the videos. This was taken to elicit the data related to the verbal engagement. To avoid losing the data, these activities were recorded. Therefore, a video-camera was operated while the observation was taking place.

The observation was conducted six timessince in the six-time observations the data had reached saturation point (Glaser and Strauss, 1967). The observation time was the same as the schedule of the English listening skill subject. Hence, the duration of time for each observation was 100 minutes. From all observation phases (see appendix II), it was found that some

participants were absent. These participants were R3, R5, R7, and R8. R3 did not attend the observation one time, R5 two times, R7 one time, and R8 one time.

Three humorous video ads were shown in every observation phase. Consequently, there were eighteen humorous video ads were played (see appendix I) in all observation phases. Regarding the assessment of students’ behaviors before, while, and after studying the humorous video ads, the characteristics of student engagement proposed by Jones (2009) and to some extent Skinner and Belmont (1993) were used as guidance as well as an analytical tool. Meanwhile, for the selection of the videos, the researcher used the criteria proposed by Arcario (1993) like watch ability, completeness, length, appropriateness of content, level of maturity, and availability of related materials. Even though, the researcher used the selection criteria as proposed by Arcario (1993), the researcher chose the humorous video ads by himself. This was the limitation of this research since this selection would cause bias.

3.3.2 Questionnaire

Questionnaire was used to answer the research questions and to support the observation data (Alwasilah, 2006). Questionnaire was administered to the nine participants (R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7, R8, R9). Five questions were addressed to every participant (see appendix III). Questions available in the questionnaire covered some aspects which were investigated in this research. The aspects which were included embraced the student engagement indicators, disadvantages, and advantages while and after the participants studying the humorous video ads in the English listening skill subject. The questionnaires were written in Indonesian to ensure the participants’ complete understanding of the items. The type of questionnaire used was a mixture from open-ended and close-ended type. This was chosen to make the participants able to give a

very complete and a truly free answer as well as certainty to their position (Frankel and Wallen, 1996).

The questionnaire data were gained in three steps (Bernhardt and Geise, 2009). First, the questionnaires were distributed to all participants. Second, the questionnaires were taken after being filled by the participants. Third, the questionnaires which had been answered were collected and submitted to the researcher.

3.3.3 Interview

Interview aimed to clarify the data gained from the observations and questionnaire (Frankel and Wallen, 1996). The interview was conducted in a semi-structured style with open-ended questions. The interview was followed by nine interviewees (R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7, R8, R9) and was conducted individually. It contained two questions (see appendix IV) and lasted for 5 minutes. Questions available in the interview covered some aspects investigated in this research. The aspects which were included embraced disadvantages and advantages while and after the interviewees studying the humorous video ads in the English listening skill subject. Furthermore, to avoid losing the information, the interview was recorded. Therefore, there was a voice recording which was used in this process.

The interview data were gained in some steps (Kvale, 2006; Folkestad, 2008). First, the researcher asked the availability of time from every interviewee. Second, he arranged the interview schedules. Third, he prepared the questions which would be asked in the interview. Fourth, he did the interview at the student’s organization room. Fifth, he recorded the interview. Sixth, he transcribed and sorted the interview data.

3.4 Data analysis

Data analyses were conducted during and after the data collection. It meant that the process of data analysis was simultaneous with the ongoing activities in the English listening skill subject. In analyzing the data, a qualitative method was used(Morse, 1989; Kuzel, 1992; Frankel and Wallen, 1996, Creswell, 2003; Dawson, 2009). The qualitative method was used to analyze the data collected from observations, questionnaires, and interviews. To increase the validity of data analysis, triangulation was applied at the end of the data analysis (Frankel and Wallen, 1996; Creswell, 2003; Silverman and Marvasti, 2008). As mentioned in section 3.3, three methods of data collections, namely observation, questionnaire, and interview were applied in this research. Therefore, the next sections would clarify how the data from these three data collections were analyzed.

3.4.1 Observation

Observations were conducted six times (see section 3.3.1). Therefore, data from the six observations were analyzed from nine participants (R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7, R8, R9). The analysis of data from observation was conducted with the ongoing activities in the English listening skill subject. Thus, the observation data were analyzed on going with the process of research(Frankel and Wallen, 1996; Creswell, 2003). The analysis of data from every observation was consisted of three phases that is, pre-view, while-view, and post-view(Stoller, 1992; Tomalin, 1992; Stempleski, 2002; Koksal, 2004). In the pre-view, the researcher analyzed whether the participants were motivated or not to follow the English listening skill subject. In this phase, the motivation was represented by two factors such as consistent gaze and verbal participation in the form of question. In the while-view, the researcher analyzed whether the

humorous video ads fulfilled the indicators of student engagement such as positive body language, consistent focus or attention, and fun and excitement. In the post-view, the researcher analyzed if the participants could participate in verbal participation phase and whether they showed confidence or not while presenting their verbal expressions. All of these viewing techniques, further, were analyzed by qualitative method(Morse, 1989; Kuzel, 1992; Frankel and Wallen, 1996, Creswell, 2003; Dawson, 2009).

To illustrate how the observation data were analyzed, the researcher took some steps (Creswell, 2003). First, the observation data were arranged according to name, class, level of listening ability, and time. Second, the observation data were presented and analyzed by referring to the viewing techniques (Stoller, 1992; Tomalin, 1992; Stempleski, 2002; Koksal, 2004) and by referring to the student engagement indicators (Skinner and Belmont, 1993; Jones, 2009). Third, the findings resulting from the data analysis were interpreted by the relevant theories and previous research findings provided in chapter 2. Fourth, the results of interpretation were used to answer the first research question.

3.4.2 Questionnaire

Questionnaires were addressed to nine participants (see section 3.3.2). Therefore, nine questionnaires were obtained and analyzed. The analysis of data from the questionnaires was conducted after all questionnaires were collected. The qualitative method (Morse, 1989; Kuzel, 1992; Frankel and Wallen, 1996, Creswell, 2003; Dawson, 2009)was applied to analyze the data from the questionnaires.

All questionnaire data were analyzed in some steps (Creswell, 2003; Bernhardt and Geise, 2009). First, the questionnaire results were checked in case they were not properly

answered. Second, the questionnaire results were coded by arranging them according to class, level of listening ability, and time. Third, after the data were coded, they were categorized according to the themes related to the characteristics of student engagement (see section 2.7.2) for the first research question and to disadvantages and advantages of using humorous video ads in the English listening skill subject for the second research question. Fourth, after the data had been categorized into those themes, they were, then, analyzed. Fifth, the findings resulting from the analysis of questionnaire data were interpreted referring to the relevant theories and the previous research findings provided in chapter 2. Sixth, the results of interpretation were used to answer all research questions.

3.4.3 Interview

Interview was followed by nine interviewees (see section 3.3.3) and was conducted individually. Therefore, nine interview data were obtained and analyzed. The analysis of data from interview was done after all interviews were conducted. The qualitative method (Morse, 1989; Kuzel, 1992; Frankel and Wallen, 1996, Creswell, 2003; Dawson, 2009)was applied to analyze the data from interview. There were some reasons to use interview data. First, the researcher was interested in knowing ‘direct’ point of view of the interviewees when they followed the English listening skill subject (Frankel and Wallen, 1996). Second, the interview data were used as the validation of questionnaire data (ibid).

All interview data were analyzed in some steps (Cohen and Manion, 1994; Creswell, 2003; Kvale, 2006; Folkestad, 2008; Silverman and Marvasti, 2008). First, the interview data were transcribed. Second, the interview data were coded according to the name, class, level of listening ability, and time. Third, after the data were coded, they were categorized based on the

disadvantages and advantages of using humorous video ads in the English listening skill subject. Fourth, after they were categorized into those themes, the data, then, analyzed. Fifth, the findings resulting from the analysis of interview data were interpreted based on the relevant theories and the previous research results provided in chapter 2. Sixth, the results of interpretation were used to answer the second research question.

3.5 Conclusion of chapter 3

This chapter has presented a brief discussion about the methodology used in this research embracing research design, research siteand participants, data collection, and data analysis.Regarding the data collection and analysis, three different instruments namely observation, questionnaire, and interview were applied. Those instruments were used to answer the research questions as depicted in the subsequent chapter.

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSION, LIMITATION, AND RECOMMENDATION

This chapter describes three significant aspects which will become the closing of this research. These aspects are conclusion, limitation, and recommendation. The conclusion summarizes the essences of the discussions in connection with the research problems. The limitation describes the obstacles which were encountered in conducting this research. Finally, the recommendation gives potential suggestions which are derived from this research.

5.1 Conclusion

The use of video in engaging students has become a major concern in language teaching because it plays an important role in making the teaching run successfully. Various attempts have been made in investigating this issue particularly in the domain of teaching listening skill. This research is not the exception. This research attempts to answer some problems related to the use of humorous video ads in engaging studentsin an English listening skill subject. To the most extent, the results of the findings in this research confirm the previous studies discussed in chapter 2. From the discussions in the previous chapter, especially in chapter 4, some conclusions can be drawn.

First, this research revealed that the humorous video ads have mostly engaged the students in the English listening skill subject. It was proven by the fulfillment of all student engagement indicators proposed by Jones (2009). The indicators were really manifested in the observation phases which were supported by the questionnaire results. This demonstrated that high level of engagement for the entire class period happened when the humorous video ads

were used as the teaching materials. At this point, the problems of engagement like affective and habitual problems possessed by the students in the English listening skill subject disappeared.

Second, this research uncovers that the students acquired some beneficial aspects when humorous video ads were used in English listening skill subject. The advantageous aspects obtained by the students were developing the ability to think critically, developing listening skill, stimulating language production, adding vocabulary, understanding other cultures, understanding verbal expressions through video display, having fun, and being excited and motivated to learn English. Again, these advantageous aspects implied that the humorous video ads gave positive results to the students’ learning process both cognitively and affectively. In cognitive domain, the students could gain knowledge relevant to the skills intended to learn such as listening ability which were followed by speaking ability. In affective domain, the students could get some excitement and motivation in following the learning process.

Third, despite the fact that the humorous video ads have mostly engaged the students in the English listening skill subject, some disadvantages were found while the students studying them. The encountered problems were difficulty of understanding colloquial language, accents, video display, speed of delivery, messages, vocabulary, and topics and background knowledge. These problems, for the teaching and learning process, implied that the humorous video ads presented in the English listening skill subject should meet several criteria. First,avoidusing humorous video ads which contain sensitive topics like gender, ethnicity, nationality, and creed.Second, avoid usinghumorous video ads which contain excessive humor.

Finally, engagement is a crucial factor which should exist in the process of teaching listening skill because if the students engage in the learning process they will perform much

better. To foster student engagement in a listening skill subject, a teacher or a lecturer can operate many media. One of them is to use humorous video ads in that the contents of humorous video ads embrace many aspects like audio, video, language, humor, and advertisement. The combination of those things reduce some problems related to engagement issues, as demonstrated by the results of this research, as well as enable students to learn holistically. Seeing these facts, therefore, the humorous video ads have a great impact on the teaching and learning process in the English listening skill subject.

5.2 Limitation

There are some limitations related to this research. First, this research was conducted only for nine fourth-semester students, and there was no control group. Therefore, the results of this research cannot be generalized. Second, the humorous video ads which were used in this research were selected by the researcher, as was depicted in chapter 3, no other parties were involved. This would cause a potential bias.

5.3 Recommendation

Based on the conclusions and limitations of this research, there are some suggested recommendations. First, if teachers or lecturers intend to use humorous video ads in their teaching processes, they should be aware of the problems which appear in the first use of humorous video ads. Some students lack confidence when they learn the humorous video ads in the initial stage, as revealed from the discussion in chapter 4. Therefore, it is recommended that the students be notified in advance concerning the use of humorous video ads.

Second, despite the fact that the humorous video ads could engage the students in the English listening skill subject, as depicted in chapter four, their use must be limited due to their

characteristics as the authentic materials which have their own delicacies. Therefore, if teachers or lecturers want to use humorous video ads in teaching listening skill, they should use them as an alternative not as the main teaching materials.

Third, if teachers or lecturers want to use humorous video ads in teaching listening skill subject, they should see the characteristics of the students in terms of their preferences toward humor, for instance what types of humor are preferred by the majority of the students. Therefore, the humorous video ads chosen will be preferred by them and eventually will make them enjoy the learning process.

Fourth, again, if teachers or lecturers want to use humorous video ads in teaching listening skill subject, they are supposed to consider the degree of difficulties in the humorous video ads chosen. One of the ways is first tochoose the easiest humorous video ads in terms of language complexities and displays, then continue to the more difficult ones. Therefore, it is expected that students will not face many problems when studying the humorous video ads.

REFERENCES

Alwasilah, C.A. (2006). Pokoknya Kualitatif: Dasar-Dasar Merancang dan Melakukan Penelitian Kualitatif. Jakarta: Pustaka Jaya.

Arcario.(1991). Video in Second Language Teaching and Learning. New York: TESOL INC. Bahrani, T. (2011).The Role of Audiovisual Mass Media News in Language Learning.English

Language Teaching, 4(2), pp.260-266.

Barker, L.L. (1971).Listening Behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Barkley, E.F. (2010). Student Engagement Techniques: A Handbook forCollege Faculty. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Bernhardt, V. L. and Geise, B. J. (2009).From Questions to Actions: Using Questionnaire Data for Continuous School Improvement. New York: Eye On Education.

Bird, D. (1954).Teaching Listening Comprehension.Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 30, pp.225-230.

Bogdan, R.C. and Biklen, S.K. (1998).Qualitative Research for Education: An Introduction to Theory and Methods. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by Principles: an Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy (second ed.). New York: Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.

Bryant, J., et al. (1980). Relationship between College Teachers' Use of Humor in the Classroom and Students' Evaluations of Their Teachers.Journal of Educational Psychology, 72(4), pp.511-519.

Caspi, A., Gorsky, P., and Privman, M. (2005). Viewing Comprehension: Students’ Learning

Preferences and Strategies when Studying from Video, Instructional Science, 33, pp.31-47. Check, J. (1997). Humor in Education.Physical Educator, 54(3), pp.165-167.

Chen, Y. (2005). Barrier to Acquiring Listening Strategies for EFL Learners and Their Pedagogical Implications.TESL-EJ. On Line: http://www.writing.Berkeley.edu/TESL-EJ. July, 23rd 2011.

Clark, A.J. (1989). Communication Confidence and Listening Competence: an Investigation of the Relationships of Willingness to Communicate, Communication Apprehension, and Receiver Apprehension to Comprehension of Content and Emotional Meaning in Spoken Messages. Communication Education, 38, pp.237-248.

Coates, H. (2006). Student Engagement in Campus-Based and Online Education. New York: Routledge.

Cohen, L. and Manion, L. (1994).Research Methods in Education. New York: Routledge.

Coniam, D. (2001). The Use of Audio or Video Comprehension as an Assessment Instrument in the Certification of English Language Teachers: a Case Study. System, 29, pp.1-14.

Creswell, J.W. (2003). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (second ed.). California: Sage Publication.

Curiskis, N.J. (2009). Importance of Effective Listening Infomercial.The International Journal of Listening, 23, pp.167-170. DOI: 10.1080/10904010903014491.

Dawson, C. (2009). Introduction to Research Methods: A practical Guide for Anyone Undertaking a Research Project (fourth ed.). Oxford: How To Books Ltd.

DeHaan, J. (2005). Acquisition of Japanese as a Foreign Language through a Baseball Video Game.Foreign Language Annals, 38(2), pp.278-282.

Dikilitas, K. and Duvenci, A. (2009).Using Popular Movies in Teaching Oral Skill.Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1, pp.168–172. DOI:10.1016/j.sbspro.2009.01.031.

Donahue, R., Kher, N., and Molstad, S., (1999). Using Humor in the College Classroom to Enhance Teaching Effectiveness in "Dread Courses".College Student Journal, 33(3), pp.400.

Folkestad, B. (2008). Analysing Interview Data: Possibilities and Challenges.Online Working Paper, 13, pp.1-16.Eurospere Working Paper Series. In http://eurospheres.org/files/2010/08/Eurosphere_Working_Paper_13_Folkestad.pdf

Fraenkel, J. R. and Wallen, N. E. (1996).How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education (third edition). USA. McGraw-Hill, Inc.

Gallacher, L. (2003). Video and Young Learners 1.In

http://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/articles/video-young-learners-1.

Gardner, R. L. (2006). Humor in Pedagogy: How Ha-Ha Can Lead to Aha. College Teaching, 54 (1), pp.177-180.

Gebhard, J. G. (2000). Teaching English as a Foreign or Second Language: A Self-Development and Methodology Guide (second edition). Michigan: The University of Michigan Press. Glaser, B. G. and Strauss, A. L. (1967).The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for

Qualitative Research. New Jersey: Rutgers.

Gregersen, T. (2005). Nonverbal Cues: Clues to the Detection of Foreign Language Anxiety. Foreign Language Annals, 38 (3), pp, 388-400.

Guo, N. (2005). An Investigation of Factors Influencing English Listening Comprehension and Possible Measures for Improvement.http://www.aare.edu.au/05pap/guo05088.pdf

Handelsman, M.M. et al. (2005). A Measure of College Student Course Engagement.The Journal of Educational Research, 98(3), pp.184-191.

Harmer, J. (2007).The Practice of English Language Teaching (third ed). Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.

Hasan, A. S. (2000). Learners’ Perceptions of Listening Comprehension Problems.Language,

Culture and Curriculum, 13, 137–153.

Hulbert, J.E. (1989). Barriers to Effective Listening.Business Communication Quarterly, 52(3),pp. 3-5. DOI: 10.1177/108056998905200202.

Hyslop, N.B. and Tone, B. (1989). Listening: Are We Teaching It, and if so, How? Business Communication Quarterly, 52(2), p. 45. DOI: 10.1177/108056998905200216.

Janusik, L.A. and Wolvin, A.D. (2009). 24 Hours in a Day: A Listening Update to the Time Studies. The International Journal of Listening, 23, pp.104-120. DOI: 10.1080/10904010903014442.

Johnson, K. (2001). An Introduction to Foreign Language Learning and Teaching. New York: Pearson Education.

Jones, R.D. (2009). Student Engagement: Teacher Handbook. New York: International Center for Leadership in Education.

Kelly, R. (1985). Video and Language Learning: An Approach to Viewing Comprehension. RELC Journal, 16(52). DOI: 10.1177/003368828501600105.

Koksal, D. (2004). To Kill the Blackboard?Technology in Language Teaching and Learning.TOJET, 3(3), pp.62-72.

Kong, S. and Hoare, P. (2011).Cognitive Content Engagement in Content-Based Language Teaching.Language Teaching Research, 15(3), pp.307–324. DOI: 10.1177/1362168811401152.

Koumi, J. (2006). Designing Video and Multimedia for Open and Flexible Learning. New York: Routledge.

Kuzel, A.J. (1992). Sampling in Qualitative Inquiry.In B.F. Crabtree&W.L.Miller (Eds), Doing Qualitative Research (pp.31-44).(Research Methods for Primary Case Series, vol.13). Newbury Park, CA:Sage.

Kvale, S. (2006).Interviews: An Introduction to Qualitative Research Interviewing. London: Sage Publication.

Lei et al. (2010). Humor on Learning in College Classroom: Evaluating Benefits and Drawbacks

from Instructors’ Perspectives. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 37(4), pp.326-331.

Marczyk, G., DeMatteo, D., and Festinger, D. (2005).Essentials of Research Design and Methodology. New York: John Wiley & Son.

Martin, R. A. (2007). Psychology of Humor: An Integrative Approach. New York: Academic Press.

Martinez, S.G. (2009). Tune In. Modern English Teacher, 18(1), pp. 30-32.

Maxwell, J. A. (1996). Qualitative Research Design: An Interactive Approach. London: Sage Publications International Educational and Professional Publisher.

McDevitt, T.M., Sheenan, E.P., & McMenamin, N. (1991). Self Reports of Academic Listening Activities by Traditional and Non-traditional College Students. College Students Journal, 25, pp.478-486.

Meadow, S.G. (1999).The Role of Gesture in Communication and Thinking.Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 3, 419–429.

Morse, J.M. (Eds). (1989). Qualitative Nursing Research: A Contemporary Dialogue. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Muqun, W and Lu, W. (2006).The Functions of Humor in Classroom Instruction.Asian EFL Journal [Teachers’ Articles][Online], 16(2), 9 pages. Available at http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/pta_october_06_wm&wl.php. [1st October 2010].

National Research Council Institute of Medicine.Committee on Increasing High School Students' Engagement and Motivation to Learn. (2004). Engaging Schools: Fostering High School

Students’ Motivation to Learn. Washington D.C: National Academy of Sciences.

Nixon, J.C. and West, J. F. (1989). Listening: Vital To Communication. Business Communication Quarterly, 52, pp.15-17. DOI: 10.1177/108056998905200206.

Nunan, D. (1998). Language Teaching Methodology: A Textbook for Teachers. Edinburgh: Pearson Education Limited.

O’Guinn et al. (2003).Advertising and Integrated Brand Promotion. New York: Thomson.

Osada, A. (2004). Listening Comprehension Research: A Brief Review of the Past Thirty Years.http://talk-waseda.net/dialogue/no03/2004/2004dialogue03k4.pdf. (5th February 2012). Pollak, J., and Freda, P. (1997).Humor, Learning, and Socialization in Middle Level

Classroom.Clearing House, 70(4), pp.176-179.

Progosh, D. (1996). Using Video for Listening Assessment: Opinions of Test Takers.TESL Canada Journal,14(1), pp.34–41.

Rankin, P. T. (1928). The Importance of Listening Ability.The English Journal, 17(8), pp. 623-630.

Richard, J. C. (2001). Curriculum Development in Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Richard, A. and Patricia, A. (2003).Making It Happen: from Interactive to Participatory Language Teaching. New York: Longman.

Ronald and Roskelly. (1985). Listening as an Act of Composing. Paper presented at the 36th Conference on College Composition and Communication. http://www.ericdigests.org/pre-928/listening.htm.

Saricoban, A. (1999). The Teaching of Listening.(Online). Available at: http://iteslj.org/articles/Saricoban-Listening.html.

Secules, T., Herron, C., & Tomasello, M. (1992).The Effect of Video Context on Foreign Language Learning.The Modern Language Journal, 76(4), 480–490.

Seo, K. (2002). Research Note, The Effect of Visual on Listening Comprehension: a Study of Japanese Learners Listening Strategies. International Journal of Listening, 16, pp.57-81. Shatz, M. and LoSchiavo, F. (2005). Learning through Laughter: Using Humor in Online

Courses Boosts Participation. Industrial Engineer, 37(9), p.66.

Silverman, D. and Marvasti, A. (2008).Doing Qualitative Research: A Comprehensive Guide. California: Sage Publications.

Skinner, E. A. and Belmont, M. J. (1993). Motivation in the Classroom: Reciprocal Effects of Teacher Behavior and Student Engagement across the School Year. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(4), pp.571-581.

Skinner, M. (2010).All Joking Aside: Five Reasons to Use Humor in the Classroom.The Education Digest, October. www.Eddigest.com.

Smeltzer, L. R. and Watson, K.W. (1985).A Test of Instructional Strategies for Listening Improvement in a Simulated Business Setting.Journal of Business Communication, 22 (4).pp.33-42.DOI: 10.1177/002194368502200405.

Stempleski, S. (2002).Video in ELT Classroom: The Role of The Teacher. In Methodology in Language Teaching: an Anthology of Current Practice. Richards, J.C.&Renandya, W.A. (Eds). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Stoller, F.L. (1992).Using Video in Theme-Based Curricula.In Stempleski, S. and Arcario, P. (Eds.).Video in Second Language Teaching: Using, Selecting, and Producing Video for the Classroom. Alexandria, VA: TESOL.

Sueyoshi, A. and Hardison, D.M. (2005).The Role of Gestures and Facial Cues in Second Language Listening Comprehension.Language Learning, 55(4), pp. 661–699.

Timm, S. and Schroeder, B.L. (2000).Listening/Nonverbal Communication Training.International Journal of Listening, 14, pp.109-128.

Tomalin, B. (1992). Teaching Young Children with Video.In Stempleski, S. and Arcario, P. (Eds.).Video in Second Language Teaching: Using, Selecting, and Producing Video for the Classroom. Alexandria, VA: TESOL.

Torok, S.E., McMorris, R.F., and Lin, W.C. (2004). Is Humor an Appreciated Teaching Tool? Perceptions of Professors' Teaching Styles and Use of Humor.College Teaching, 52(1), pp. 14-20.

Wachob, P. (2011). Using Videos of Students in the Classroom to Enhance Learner Autonomy.Teaching English with Technology, 11(2), pp.18-28.

Wagner, E. (2010). The Effect of the Use of Video Texts on ESL Listening Test-Taker Performance.Language Testing, 27(4), pp.493–513.DOI: 10.1177/0265532209355668. Wandersee, J.H. (1982). Humor as a Teaching Strategy.The American Biology Teacher, 44(4),

pp. 212-218.

Wang, X. (2007).Three Ways to Motivate Chinese Students in EFL Listening Classes.Asian EFL Journal, Volume 17 (1), pp.1-16.

Wanzer, M. B., Frymier, A.B., and Irwin, J. (2010). An Explanation of the Relationship between Instructor Humor and Student Learning: Instructional Humor Processing Theory. Communication Education, 59(1), pp. 1-18.

Willis, J. and Willis, D. (1983).Challenge and Change in Language Teaching. New York: Macmillan Heinemann.

Wolvin, A.D. and Coakley, C.G. (2000).Listening Education in 21st Century.International Journal of Listening, 14, pp.143-152.

Xiao, J. Y. and Gui, F. R. (2011). Strategies to Overcome Listening Obstacles and Improve the Listening Abilities.US-China Foreign Language, 9(5),pp. 315-323.

REFERENCES

Alwasilah, C.A. (2006). Pokoknya Kualitatif: Dasar-Dasar Merancang dan Melakukan

Penelitian Kualitatif. Jakarta: Pustaka Jaya.

Arcario.(1991). Video in Second Language Teaching and Learning. New York: TESOL INC. Bahrani, T. (2011).The Role of Audiovisual Mass Media News in Language Learning.English

Language Teaching, 4(2), pp.260-266.

Barker, L.L. (1971).Listening Behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Barkley, E.F. (2010). Student Engagement Techniques: A Handbook forCollege Faculty. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Bernhardt, V. L. and Geise, B. J. (2009).From Questions to Actions: Using Questionnaire Data

for Continuous School Improvement. New York: Eye On Education.

Bird, D. (1954).Teaching Listening Comprehension.Journal of the American Dietetic

Association, 30, pp.225-230.

Bogdan, R.C. and Biklen, S.K. (1998).Qualitative Research for Education: An Introduction to

Theory and Methods. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by Principles: an Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy (second ed.). New York: Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.

Bryant, J., et al. (1980). Relationship between College Teachers' Use of Humor in the Classroom and Students' Evaluations of Their Teachers.Journal of Educational Psychology, 72(4), pp.511-519.

Caspi, A., Gorsky, P., and Privman, M. (2005). Viewing Comprehension: Students’ Learning Preferences and Strategies when Studying from Video, Instructional Science, 33, pp.31-47. Check, J. (1997). Humor in Education.Physical Educator, 54(3), pp.165-167.

Chen, Y. (2005). Barrier to Acquiring Listening Strategies for EFL Learners and Their Pedagogical Implications.TESL-EJ. On Line: http://www.writing.Berkeley.edu/TESL-EJ. July, 23rd 2011.

Clark, A.J. (1989). Communication Confidence and Listening Competence: an Investigation of the Relationships of Willingness to Communicate, Communication Apprehension, and Receiver Apprehension to Comprehension of Content and Emotional Meaning in Spoken Messages. Communication Education, 38, pp.237-248.

Coates, H. (2006). Student Engagement in Campus-Based and Online Education. New York: Routledge.

Cohen, L. and Manion, L. (1994).Research Methods in Education. New York: Routledge.

Coniam, D. (2001). The Use of Audio or Video Comprehension as an Assessment Instrument in the Certification of English Language Teachers: a Case Study. System, 29, pp.1-14.

Creswell, J.W. (2003). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods

Approaches (second ed.). California: Sage Publication.

Curiskis, N.J. (2009). Importance of Effective Listening Infomercial.The International Journal

of Listening, 23, pp.167-170. DOI: 10.1080/10904010903014491.

Dawson, C. (2009). Introduction to Research Methods: A practical Guide for Anyone

Undertaking a Research Project (fourth ed.). Oxford: How To Books Ltd.

DeHaan, J. (2005). Acquisition of Japanese as a Foreign Language through a Baseball Video Game.Foreign Language Annals, 38(2), pp.278-282.

Dikilitas, K. and Duvenci, A. (2009).Using Popular Movies in Teaching Oral Skill.Procedia

Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1, pp.168–172. DOI:10.1016/j.sbspro.2009.01.031.

Donahue, R., Kher, N., and Molstad, S., (1999). Using Humor in the College Classroom to Enhance Teaching Effectiveness in "Dread Courses".College Student Journal, 33(3), pp.400.

Folkestad, B. (2008). Analysing Interview Data: Possibilities and Challenges.Online Working

Paper, 13, pp.1-16.Eurospere Working Paper Series. In http://eurospheres.org/files/2010/08/Eurosphere_Working_Paper_13_Folkestad.pdf

Fraenkel, J. R. and Wallen, N. E. (1996).How to Design and Evaluate Research in

Education (third edition). USA. McGraw-Hill, Inc.

Gallacher, L. (2003). Video and Young Learners 1.In

http://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/articles/video-young-learners-1.

Gardner, R. L. (2006). Humor in Pedagogy: How Ha-Ha Can Lead to Aha. College Teaching, 54 (1), pp.177-180.

Gebhard, J. G. (2000). Teaching English as a Foreign or Second Language: A Self-Development

and Methodology Guide (second edition). Michigan: The University of Michigan Press.

Glaser, B. G. and Strauss, A. L. (1967).The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for

Qualitative Research. New Jersey: Rutgers.

Gregersen, T. (2005). Nonverbal Cues: Clues to the Detection of Foreign Language Anxiety.

Foreign Language Annals, 38 (3), pp, 388-400.

Guo, N. (2005). An Investigation of Factors Influencing English Listening Comprehension and

Possible Measures for Improvement.http://www.aare.edu.au/05pap/guo05088.pdf

Handelsman, M.M. et al. (2005). A Measure of College Student Course Engagement.The

Harmer, J. (2007).The Practice of English Language Teaching (third ed). Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.

Hasan, A. S. (2000). Learners’ Perceptions of Listening Comprehension Problems.Language, Culture and Curriculum, 13, 137–153.

Hulbert, J.E. (1989). Barriers to Effective Listening.Business Communication Quarterly, 52(3),pp. 3-5. DOI: 10.1177/108056998905200202.

Hyslop, N.B. and Tone, B. (1989). Listening: Are We Teaching It, and if so, How? Business

Communication Quarterly, 52(2), p. 45. DOI: 10.1177/108056998905200216.

Janusik, L.A. and Wolvin, A.D. (2009). 24 Hours in a Day: A Listening Update to the Time Studies. The International Journal of Listening, 23, pp.104-120. DOI: 10.1080/10904010903014442.

Johnson, K. (2001). An Introduction to Foreign Language Learning and Teaching. New York: Pearson Education.

Jones, R.D. (2009). Student Engagement: Teacher Handbook. New York: International Center for Leadership in Education.

Kelly, R. (1985). Video and Language Learning: An Approach to Viewing Comprehension.

RELC Journal, 16(52). DOI: 10.1177/003368828501600105.

Koksal, D. (2004). To Kill the Blackboard?Technology in Language Teaching and Learning.TOJET, 3(3), pp.62-72.

Kong, S. and Hoare, P. (2011).Cognitive Content Engagement in Content-Based Language Teaching.Language Teaching Research, 15(3), pp.307–324. DOI: 10.1177/1362168811401152.

Koumi, J. (2006). Designing Video and Multimedia for Open and Flexible Learning. New York: Routledge.

Kuzel, A.J. (1992). Sampling in Qualitative Inquiry.In B.F. Crabtree&W.L.Miller (Eds), Doing

Qualitative Research (pp.31-44).(Research Methods for Primary Case Series, vol.13).

Newbury Park, CA:Sage.

Kvale, S. (2006).Interviews: An Introduction to Qualitative Research Interviewing. London: Sage Publication.

Lei et al. (2010). Humor on Learning in College Classroom: Evaluating Benefits and Drawbacks from Instructors’ Perspectives. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 37(4), pp.326-331.

Marczyk, G., DeMatteo, D., and Festinger, D. (2005).Essentials of Research Design and

Martin, R. A. (2007). Psychology of Humor: An Integrative Approach. New York: Academic Press.

Martinez, S.G. (2009). Tune In. Modern English Teacher, 18(1), pp. 30-32.

Maxwell, J. A. (1996). Qualitative Research Design: An Interactive Approach. London: Sage Publications International Educational and Professional Publisher.

McDevitt, T.M., Sheenan, E.P., & McMenamin, N. (1991). Self Reports of Academic Listening Activities by Traditional and Non-traditional College Students. College Students Journal, 25, pp.478-486.

Meadow, S.G. (1999).The Role of Gesture in Communication and Thinking.Trends in Cognitive

Sciences, 3, 419–429.

Morse, J.M. (Eds). (1989). Qualitative Nursing Research: A Contemporary Dialogue. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Muqun, W and Lu, W. (2006).The Functions of Humor in Classroom Instruction.Asian EFL

Journal [Teachers’ Articles][Online], 16(2), 9 pages. Available at http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/pta_october_06_wm&wl.php. [1st October 2010].

National Research Council Institute of Medicine.Committee on Increasing High School Students' Engagement and Motivation to Learn. (2004). Engaging Schools: Fostering High School

Students’ Motivation to Learn. Washington D.C: National Academy of Sciences.

Nixon, J.C. and West, J. F. (1989). Listening: Vital To Communication. Business

Communication Quarterly, 52, pp.15-17. DOI: 10.1177/108056998905200206.

Nunan, D. (1998). Language Teaching Methodology: A Textbook for Teachers. Edinburgh: Pearson Education Limited.

O’Guinn et al. (2003).Advertising and Integrated Brand Promotion. New York: Thomson.

Osada, A. (2004). Listening Comprehension Research: A Brief Review of the Past Thirty

Years.http://talk-waseda.net/dialogue/no03/2004/2004dialogue03k4.pdf. (5th February 2012). Pollak, J., and Freda, P. (1997).Humor, Learning, and Socialization in Middle Level

Classroom.Clearing House, 70(4), pp.176-179.

Progosh, D. (1996). Using Video for Listening Assessment: Opinions of Test Takers.TESL

Canada Journal,14(1), pp.34–41.

Rankin, P. T. (1928). The Importance of Listening Ability.The English Journal, 17(8), pp. 623-630.

Richard, J. C. (2001). Curriculum Development in Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Richard, A. and Patricia, A. (2003).Making It Happen: from Interactive to Participatory

Language Teaching. New York: Longman.

Ronald and Roskelly. (1985). Listening as an Act of Composing. Paper presented at the 36th Conference on College Composition and Communication. http://www.ericdigests.org/pre-928/listening.htm.

Saricoban, A. (1999). The Teaching of Listening.(Online). Available at: http://iteslj.org/articles/Saricoban-Listening.html.

Secules, T., Herron, C., & Tomasello, M. (1992).The Effect of Video Context on Foreign Language Learning.The Modern Language Journal, 76(4), 480–490.

Seo, K. (2002). Research Note, The Effect of Visual on Listening Comprehension: a Study of Japanese Learners Listening Strategies. International Journal of Listening, 16, pp.57-81. Shatz, M. and LoSchiavo, F. (2005). Learning through Laughter: Using Humor in Online

Courses Boosts Participation. Industrial Engineer, 37(9), p.66.

Silverman, D. and Marvasti, A. (2008).Doing Qualitative Research: A Comprehensive Guide. California: Sage Publications.

Skinner, E. A. and Belmont, M. J. (1993). Motivation in the Classroom: Reciprocal Effects of Teacher Behavior and Student Engagement across the School Year. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(4), pp.571-581.

Skinner, M. (2010).All Joking Aside: Five Reasons to Use Humor in the Classroom.The

Education Digest, October. www.Eddigest.com.

Smeltzer, L. R. and Watson, K.W. (1985).A Test of Instructional Strategies for Listening Improvement in a Simulated Business Setting.Journal of Business Communication, 22 (4).pp.33-42.DOI: 10.1177/002194368502200405.

Stempleski, S. (2002).Video in ELT Classroom: The Role of The Teacher. In Methodology in Language Teaching: an Anthology of Current Practice. Richards, J.C.&Renandya, W.A. (Eds). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Stoller, F.L. (1992).Using Video in Theme-Based Curricula.In Stempleski, S. and Arcario, P. (Eds.).Video in Second Language Teaching: Using, Selecting, and Producing Video for the

Classroom. Alexandria, VA: TESOL.

Sueyoshi, A. and Hardison, D.M. (2005).The Role of Gestures and Facial Cues in Second Language Listening Comprehension.Language Learning, 55(4), pp. 661–699.

Timm, S. and Schroeder, B.L. (2000).Listening/Nonverbal Communication Training.International Journal of Listening, 14, pp.109-128.

Tomalin, B. (1992). Teaching Young Children with Video.In Stempleski, S. and Arcario, P. (Eds.).Video in Second Language Teaching: Using, Selecting, and Producing Video for the

Torok, S.E., McMorris, R.F., and Lin, W.C. (2004). Is Humor an Appreciated Teaching Tool? Perceptions of Professors' Teaching Styles and Use of Humor.College Teaching, 52(1), pp. 14-20.

Wachob, P. (2011). Using Videos of Students in the Classroom to Enhance Learner Autonomy.Teaching English with Technology, 11(2), pp.18-28.

Wagner, E. (2010). The Effect of the Use of Video Texts on ESL Listening Test-Taker Performance.Language Testing, 27(4), pp.493–513.DOI: 10.1177/0265532209355668. Wandersee, J.H. (1982). Humor as a Teaching Strategy.The American Biology Teacher, 44(4),

pp. 212-218.

Wang, X. (2007).Three Ways to Motivate Chinese Students in EFL Listening Classes.Asian EFL

Journal, Volume 17 (1), pp.1-16.

Wanzer, M. B., Frymier, A.B., and Irwin, J. (2010). An Explanation of the Relationship between Instructor Humor and Student Learning: Instructional Humor Processing Theory.

Communication Education, 59(1), pp. 1-18.

Willis, J. and Willis, D. (1983).Challenge and Change in Language Teaching. New York: Macmillan Heinemann.

Wolvin, A.D. and Coakley, C.G. (2000).Listening Education in 21st Century.International

Journal of Listening, 14, pp.143-152.

Xiao, J. Y. and Gui, F. R. (2011). Strategies to Overcome Listening Obstacles and Improve the Listening Abilities.US-China Foreign Language, 9(5),pp. 315-323.