Interactive Mobile Home Tasks vs. Individual Home Tasks in University Foreign Language Education at the Upper-Intermediate Level

Abstract

Homework, being an indispensable part of learning, needs special planning and modification in line with the latest educational development. In this view, we assume that mobile devices can provide ample opportunities for students to interact and collaborate with their group-mates to enhance learning outcomes in university foreign language education. Interactive mobile homework assignments combined with individual ones can noticeably improve these outcomes from different perspectives. They engage students in communicative foreign language usage, encouraging both receptive and productive speech acts, student-to-student cooperation in learning through communication, peer-teaching, and pooling resources which promote the amplification of the learning environment through content and language sharing. On the other hand, interactive mobile homework assignments also have certain risks that may decrease the quality of learning, such as possible error exchange, a superficial approach, a switch to use of native language, and chatting, etc. Nevertheless, interactive mobile homework assignments keep students on the task for a longer period of time because they require each student’s pre-task preparation, longer oral exchanges during the “while phase” and post-task individual summary, therefore providing more practice. The study described in the article highlights the characteristics of the interactive mobile homework tasks, suggests a list of homework task types, both individual and interactive, and compares the results of their practical application in university foreign language education. The authors attempt to identify a trend in their contribution to the learning outcomes achieved by the students while completing their homework, either interactively or individually.

1. Introduction

Homework remains an indispensable component of university education regardless of the subject or level of instruction. The overwhelming amount of hours in any curriculum is allocated to student out-of-class learning which is traditionally fulfilled individually. This amount may be two or three times as much as the amount of classroom hours. On the whole, homework management is carried out by the teacher who prescribes what students have to do for the next class. However, the actual homework fulfillment is the responsibility of the student who can complete it with a varied degree of diligence and accuracy which inevitably affects the quality of the learning outcomes. Among a great range of factors that have an impact on the process of homework completion as well as its outcomes, what matters a lot is the task that students are supposed to fulfill outside the classroom. Are the learners engaged enough in the process? Does the homework task fulfillment give them the feelings of progression and confidence which enhance learning? The affirmative answers to these questions depend on the tasks accomplished by the students who become real agents of their education and its quality.

In foreign language teaching, homework assignments include either language-focused practices or extensive input through listening and reading or oral and written preparatory work for further classroom output in the form of oral mediation, discussions or project presentations. Such assignments predominantly call forth individual student preparation even though the future classroom application of the homework outcomes suggests communication with others. Therefore, to make homework more interactive and communication-oriented which is in line with the goals of foreign language education, we propose to use the advantages of mobile learning (M-learning) based on the synchronous application of mobile devices to synergize out-of-class language learning spaces [1]. There is a general belief that M-learning has a positive effect on learners’ engagement, which makes learning more enjoyable and motivates them to more proactive participation [2,3,4,5,6].

Keeping in mind the importance of homework as an essential part of learning, in this study we set the goal to explore the benefits of interactive homework assignments in university foreign language education through the application of mobile devices in combination with individual fulfillment of homework tasks. The problem questions that we set out to answer in this research are as follows: (1) Do Interactive mobile homework tasks bring any benefits to university foreign language learning? (2) How do individual and interactive mobile home assignments contribute to the learning outcomes of foreign language education?

2. Literature Review

The key domains of the literature review in the context of the article are homework, interaction, and interactive tasks, as well as mobile learning in university foreign language education.

2.1. Homework

In university foreign language education homework which is commonly understood as a set of tasks to be completed by students outside the classroom [7,8] is an important part of learning. It is expected to engage students in active reinforcement and extension of the skills and sub-skills from the previous class and build a bridge to the next one [9] (p. 241). K. Cushman claims that homework relies on what was studied during the previous class through the “four Rs” of deliberate practice: readiness, repetition, review, and revision” [10]. The role of student independent learning (homework) is reconsidered and enhanced in the “flipped classroom approach” in which the individual learning space and activities transform the group space in the classroom into a dynamic, interactive learning environment where students engage creatively in the subject matter [11]. Researchers believe that, working on their own, students can study new content and significantly improve their subject-specific as well as soft skills.

What makes homework stand out among other forms of learning is a high degree of student self-management and self-regulation [2] when students learn to learn [12] (p. 26) thus promoting student authentic agency in self-directed learning [13]. Nevertheless, homework assignments may often fall short of their goals for a variety of reasons: teachers assign the same homework to all without making its purpose clear; students do not give enough thought to their homework, “repeating things by rote without knowing what they meant” [10] (p. 74) or students may not be motivated enough to work on their own. To overcome these weaknesses, researchers advise to focus on students’ needs while planning homework [10,14].

Researchers suggest different ways of diversifying homework assignments through assigning self-created homework tasks; student-initiated questions and explanations; transferring learning [10], or involving the community when students have to contact the real world outside and then share findings back in class [10,12]. One common collaborative homework assignment can be preparing projects [15].

Some researchers [16,17] draw attention to the significance of a more complex approach to designing student independent work, describing it as an individual learning route (or path) which relies on the learner’s needs and preferences. In the case where students can choose among several options or suggest ideas for their homework, they get an opportunity to effectively manage, direct, and monitor the outcomes of their learning [17].

Among numerous benefits of diverse and creative homework assignments, researchers mention amplification of the learning environment and development of effective learning strategies, fostering student responsibility [7,8,9,15,18,19].

Ensuring student engagement and achievement takes careful planning on the part of the teacher [7,19]. Borzova suggests assigning as homework those types of tasks which encourage students to fulfill a great variety of activities: language-focused, based on input (receptive) and output, communicative, cognitive (high order thinking), and creative [9] which are performed either individually or in pairs/small groups with their group-mates. A few studies also highlight carrying out homework in pairs or small groups because many students achieved more out of academic practice when they collaborated with others [12,20]. Such activities focus students on social interaction.

2.2. Interactive Tasks

The emphasis of our study is placed on oral interactive homework assignments which are rarely used in university foreign language education (see the results of the questionnaire below).

Social interaction has long been considered a key characteristic of efficient learning [21,22,23]. For the development of foreign language communicative competence, understanding interaction-as-dialogue [24] comes to the fore because it implies oral communication with someone while implementing dominant language functions (interpersonal, collaborative, and transactional) [25,26,27]. Through active engagement in social interaction with others, students develop a great variety of abilities to inform, consult, negotiate, and discuss using the foreign language while processing speech acts [28].

Another significant reason to use oral interactive tasks is related to the role of speaking as a form of interaction in learning foreign languages. Verbalization, or “self-directed speech”, implies expressing oneself in speech acts addressed to others. It requires clarification of thoughts, self-regulation, planning and coordination of thoughts and verbal actions which all together “enhance learning and cognitive development” [29] (p. 2), thus promoting better retention of meaning and language [30,31]. Interactive speaking practices, therefore, facilitate language acquisition because “they connect input (what learners hear and read); internal learner capacities, particularly selective attention; and output (what learners produce) in productive ways” [32] (pp. 451–452). As Skehan et al. prove in their study, preparation in the form of “speaking seems to be the most effective form of intervention”, bringing about better learning outcomes than spending time formally preparing [33] (p. 181). In sum, interactive speaking appears to be both a goal of foreign language education and a means of skill and language sub-skill reinforcement.

Interactive homework assignments, being a bridge between classes, are supposed to engage students in interaction (a) with language to enhance vocabulary and grammar sub-skills through language-focused assignments; (b) with information extracted from texts for listening and reading (receptive skills); (c) with other students through speaking in conversations, or mediating communication, or discussions [25] and writing (productive skills). However, traditional homework assignments embrace “a”, “b”, and partly “c” (writing) types of interaction, limiting speaking only to the preparatory stage performed by every student individually. Thus learner-content interaction prevails while learner–learner interaction [34] (p. 16–17) is absent, though in our reality there is an effective option to involve students in oral communication with one another by means of mobile devices or social networks.

2.3. Mobile Learning

Research on computer-mediated communication focuses on the use of electronic devices and on the effects of computer-supported communication technologies and formats (e.g., email, instant messaging, online forums, social networking, video chats, and audio calls) [35,36,37]. In education technology can function “(1) as a stimulus with which we can interact individually, (2) as a stimulus around which social interaction takes place (e.g., collaborating around computers), (3) as a medium through which social interaction takes place” [38,39].

Mobile Assisted Language Learning (MALL) is a comparatively new field in foreign language teaching methodology that is based on using mobile devices, various communication apps and social networks inside and outside the classroom for synchronous communication in anytime and anywhere learning [5,6,40,41]. There is general agreement that mobile apps should be integrated into education to facilitate independent learning in many ways because they meet the needs of the millennials who favor communication via technology [5] and allow students to learn on the move, shaping their learning styles [21]. Since they increase student-to-student communication and collaboration, based on understanding and immediate feedback, these devices offer a lot of teaching and learning options and create more autonomous learning environments for expanding personalized and flexible student experiences [5,21,42].

Nevertheless, researchers also mention their negative effects related to multitasking, task-switching, possible distractions, “googling” the solution for every problem which may shorten students’ attention span and result in the inability to focus on and analyze complex information, bringing about a decrease of the quality outcomes of the academic performance [5,43,44]. Haldane considers all digital tools to be “merely a medium through which interactivity may, to a greater or lesser extent, be afforded” [45] (p. 258–259) while the degree of interactivity is defined by the user. Therefore, the use of apps and digital technologies alone does not imply the shift to better pedagogy [46,47]. The design of the tasks which are used for interactive m-learning and the conditions of their completion come to the fore.

In general, there is little research on how teachers and learners have used smartphones to support learning activities and how this relates to academic performance. Researchers list a variety of possible applications of smartphones or i-pads by students for learning goals [48]. They allow the opportunity to provide, create, upload, download and share resources with their friends as well as to exchange and store content or instructions or written learning products, regardless of the format of learning (both in or outside the classroom) [5,48]. Mobile devices can involve a great variety of student activities: receptive, productive, creative, communicative and collaborative, entertaining and investigative, encouraging them to gradually take the position of the agent (or collective agent). Concerning the learning goals, vocabulary acquisition is the most targeted English sub-skill reported by researchers [1,2,21,41]. However, the possibility of oral exchanges for synchronous communication and learning has rarely been explored. Therefore, our study focuses on using smartphones or other gadgets or platforms as a medium through which social oral interaction takes place to accomplish homework assignments.

3. Rational

In our study we examine interactive mobile homework tasks vs. individual homework tasks in university foreign language education. Interactive mobile homework tasks are completed by means of communication apps and social networks with the aim to provide learning through video/audio student communication. They are conducted in pairs or small groups when the participants collaborate. Individual homework tasks are performed by students on their own. Task types are presented in

Table 1. Task types for homework.

Task Types Based on Goals and Stage of Studying a Topic	Individual Homework Assignments	Interactive Mobile Homework Assignments
1. Language-focused (sub-skills)	1-A. Vocabulary or grammar practice supported with self-monitoring	1-B. Vocabulary or grammar practice supported with self-monitoring and partner’s feedback (keys). Interaction for practicing language.
2. Input tasks (receptive skills). The texts/videos offered to different students can vary.	2-A. Students read texts/watch videos/listen to audio texts to understand their meaning using dictionaries, making notes, or filling out spiders or mind-maps. The texts/videos can be different.	2-B. Students together read texts/watch videos/listen to audio texts to understand their meaning using dictionaries, making notes or filling out spiders or mind-maps, etc. They can stop at any time to clear up understanding with one another. The texts/videos can be different.
3. Preparation for the classroom mediation and discussion of the input content (speaking skills-mediation). The texts/videos can vary.	3-A. Students reflect on the input content and think how they will mediate it in the classroom using personal strategies. Planning for the next class relies on anticipation. Time and thoroughness depend on the individual student’s diligence.	3-B. Students collaborate reflecting on the input content and generating ideas how they will mediate it in the classroom pooling strategies. Planning for the next class mediation unfolds as a collaborative process. Time and thoroughness depend on the students’ diligence and shared responsibility.
4. Preparation for the classroom negotiation of meaning: working with controversial ideas, organizing ideas, deciding on the content of what is to be said and the language to be used (student generated content). Speaking skills: a variety of speech acts for conversations and discussing problem issues.	4-A. Students reflect on the problem issues related to the topic generating personal ideas, deciding on the content of what is to be said and the language to be used. Planning for the next class discussion relies on anticipation	4-B. Students reflect on the problem issues related to the topic and discuss them in pairs or small groups. They generate ideas and negotiate their meaning, actually being involved in discussion. They decide together on the content of what is to be said and the language to be used sharing ideas and suggesting ways of formulating them.
5. Preparation for the classroom personal information or opinion exchange task (personal information exchange, polls and interviews, decision-making and argumentation). Speaking skills: practicing speech acts in conversations and extended monologues in discussion.	5-A. Students generate questions to poll their group-mates in the classroom. They may also think about their personal opinions and possible arguments.	5-B. Pre-task phase (individual): students generate questions to poll their group-mates. While-on-the-task phase (interactive, performed by mingling with a few groupmates by turns): students ask each other the questions using mobile devices and changing partners. After-task phase (individual): students analyze the information and prepare to present the results as an extended monologue in the classroom. They conclude with their personal well-reasoned opinions
6. Problem-solving tasks; creative tasks (projects, complex role plays, debates, essays, etc.) Foreign language communicative competence based on the integration of all personal recourses.	6-A. Students fulfill complex tasks activating all the resources (information, sub-skills and skills, all types of strategies) they have acquired studying the topic.	6-B. Students fulfill complex tasks in collaboration vie mobile devices pooling all the resources they have acquired studying the topic. They also rehearse the future presentation of their product. These tasks can combine mobile interactive and individual pre-task and after-task phases.

.

Mobile homework tasks in fact suggest a combination of individual and interactive work. Their pre-task phase is based on the individual student preparation for future interaction and may include preliminary vocabulary review or content reception or generating questions as well as ideas for discussion. Their post-task phase for tasks 4-B and 5-B requires individual summarizing of the results of student-to-student discussion. Still the core activity of mobile tasks consists of student interaction to complete the task for the next classroom work.

It is evident that interactive homework tasks are multifunctional based on the use of varied ways of student interaction, on the one hand, and also on the implementation of the individual learning path. Moreover, homework tasks, both individual and interactive, need to be connected with classroom tasks (before and after classes) providing a growing level of complexity and the use of higher order thinking skills [49].

4. Materials and Methods

The study was conducted for two months (November–December) in 2021.

Participants and educational context: 56 university students majoring in English and French/German, upper intermediate (B2–C1) foreign language level [25]. The learners had reached a stable proficiency level in the main skills and sub-skills, however, accuracy could be an issue for some of them, especially while speaking. That is the reason why we introduced accuracy criterion in assessing all of the activities during the experimental study.

Another specific point is related to the students’ rich experiences in foreign language learning and use. Therefore, it is often impossible to ascribe the outcomes that a student demonstrates to one particular task factor. This idea agrees with the study performed by Skehan who examined the contribution of diverse task factors and conditions to the outcomes of classroom tasks [33].

Keeping this in mind, in our study we set the goal to compare the effects that individual and interactive mobile homework tasks bring about, being the principle distinctive condition of task fulfillment. and through this to identify the trend concerning their particular learning benefits. The focus was on acquiring fluency in varied contexts of foreign language oral interaction [25] for problem solving and achieving consensus through discussion.

Methods: (1) a pre-experimental questionnaire to identify student experiences in fulfilling interactive homework tasks by means of apps (WhatsApp, Telegram, Viber, Zoom or Skype, or social networks) and their attitude to such tasks (+/−); (2) an experimental comparative study to identify learning effects for different task modes and homework task types; (3) a post-experimental questionnaire to explore the students’ experience self-evaluation.

Questionnaire

Pre-experimental questions:

• Do you see the dependence of your learning outcomes on the regular and persistent fulfillment of your homework?
• Do you have any experience of interactive home assignments? (yes often/yes occasionally/yes seldom/none).
• What is your experience of interactive home assignment (home assignments which imply working in pairs or groups)? (positive/negative).

Post-experimental questions:

• Which of the Modes (Individual, Interactive, a combination of both) do you prefer for vocabulary practice?
• Which of the Modes (Individual, Interactive, a combination of both) do you prefer for Content Mediation?
• Which of the Modes (Individual, Interactive, a combination of both) do you prefer for Problem Discussion?

5. Results

5.1. Pre-Experimental Questionnaire

The results of the pre-experimental questionnaire are presented in Figure 1, Figure 2 and Figure 3.

The questions of the pre-experimental questionnaire and the precise percentage of the respondents who answered the questions can be seen in

Table 2. Pre-experimental questionnaire results.

Questions	Answers in Percentage
Dependence of learning outcomes on the regular and persistent fulfillment of homework	Yes 53 students (95%) No −3 students (5%)
Personal experiences of interactive home assignments which are completed together with another student (yes often, yes occasionally, yes seldom, none)	Yes often 5 (9%) Yes occasionally 12 (21%) Yes seldom 29 (52%)/ None 10 (18%)
Attitude to interactive home assignment (home assignments which imply working in pairs or groups) (positive/negative)	Positive 38 (83%) Negative 8 (17%)

.

5.2. Experimental Study

Content: two topics presented as a set of related problems.

Time: two months (four classroom hours a week + homework tasks in-between).

Homework assignments: two sets of homework assignments for each topic in-between fulfilled in turn individually and interactively (in pairs or small groups) through apps.

Students’ activities can be described in the algorithm presented in Figure 4.

Homework task types (

Table 3. Examples of homework tasks.

Individual Tasks	Interactive Mobile Tasks
Type 1-A: Use the vocabulary to complete the sentences	Type 1-B: Use the vocabulary to complete the sentences. Then, working together, check each other with the help of the keys.
Types 2-A and 3-A: Read the article. Get ready to present and discuss its content and the author’s message in the classroom.	Types 2-B and 3-B: Read the article. As a pair, get ready to present and discuss its content and the author’s message in the classroom
Type 4-A: Get ready to discuss (a) the pros and cons of different options of solving the given problems and (b) your opinion on the topic, providing some arguments to support it	Type 4-B: working together, get ready to discuss (a) the pros and cons of different options of solving the given problems and (b) your opinions on the topic, providing some arguments to support your ideas

): (1) language focused: vocabulary practice (type 1); (2) mapping out the future content mediation based on the article that the students first read (type 3); (3) preparing for future problem discussion (type 4).

Classroom tasks in both options of homework assignments are the same.

• Vocabulary practice (task types 1-A and 1-B)

In the following classroom, the students had to do two types of assignments based on the homework, (a) a vocabulary test, (b) a conversation which requires the use of the vocabulary.

Criteria for assessment: (a) accuracy of vocabulary usage; (b) the number of the new words that the students applied in the classroom speech acts (out of 12 new phrases).

High: more than 85% of phrases are used and are used correctly (10–12 phrases).

Medium: 65–85% of phrases are used and are used correctly (7–9 phrases).

Low: below 65% of phrases are used and are used correctly (6 and fewer phrases).

The results on vocabulary practice are displayed in

Table 4. Vocabulary practice performance results.

	Individual Mode			Interactive Mode
	High	Medium	Low	High	Medium	Low
accuracy	28	26	2	20	24	12
word number	26	25	5	19	22	15
mean value on 2 criteria	27	26	3	20	23	14

.

2.

Text mediation and discussion (task types 3-A and 3-B)

In the following classroom, the students had to share and discuss the content of the articles based on the homework.

Criteria for mediation assessment: (a) number of the key ideas of the text rendered; (b) the author’s message comprehension; (c) accuracy.

Content mediation assessment criteria are presented in

Table 5. Content mediation assessment criteria.

	Number of Key Ideas Rendered	Author’s Message Comprehension	Accuracy
high	80–100%	fully	minor mistakes which do not inhibit communication
medium	60–79%	partly	1–2 mistakes or slips which are self-corrected and do not cause misunderstanding, generally the speech is accurate
low	below 59%	none	several mistakes in grammar (including syntax) or vocabulary use

.

The results of content mediation tasks after carrying out home assignments in individual and interactive modes are shown in

Table 6. Content mediation performance results.

	Individual Mode			Interactive Mode
	High	Medium	Low	High	Medium	Low
accuracy	16	32	8	24	28	4
key ideas number	18	32	6	28	25	3
author’s message comprehension	18	31	7	28	27	1
mean value on 3 criteria	17	31	7	27	27	3

.

3.

Problem discussion (task types 4-A and 4-B)

In the following classroom the students had to discuss all together a few problem issues related to the topic.

Criteria for problem tasks assessment: (a) accuracy; (b) discussion participation and mediation (high, medium, low), (c) diversity of communicative functions that the participants demonstrate.

Discussion participation and mediation criteria were developed based on CEFR Companion volume [25] (p. 87). We elicited the following functions of participation and mediation:

• establish a supportive environment;
• show appreciation of different perspectives;
• work collaboratively;
• invite diverse reactions.

Based on CEFR Companion volume [25] (p. 87), which offers several can do statements to describe interaction strategies and interaction task typology offered by Clandfield, L. and Hadfield, J. [50], we identified the following communicative functions:

• initiate, maintain and end discourse;
• intervene in the discussion;
• provide factual information;
• express attitude and opinion;
• use stock phrases;
• help the discussion along;
• summarize;
• formulate and ask follow-up questions;
• ask for explanation or clarification.

The number of the functions used during the discussions reflects the level of foreign language communicative competence of the students.

Detailed problem discussion assessment criteria are presented in

Table 7. Problem discussion assessment criteria.

	Accuracy	Discussion Participation	Diversity of Communicative Functions
high	minor mistakes which do not inhibit communication	3–4	8–9
medium	1–2 mistakes or slips which are self-corrected and do not cause misunderstanding, generally the speech is accurate	2	4–7
low	several mistakes in grammar, vocabulary use or syntax	0–1	below 3

.

Results of problem discussion participation after carrying out home assignments in individual and interactive modes are shown in

Table 8. Problem discussion performance results.

	Individual Mode			Interactive Mode
	High	Medium	Low	High	Medium	Low
accuracy	20	29	7	24	31	1
active discussion participation	18	31	7	32	21	3
diversity of communicative functions	16	20	20	25	29	2
mean value on 3 criteria	18	27	11	27	27	2

.

The shift in the number of the students with high, medium, and low level of foreign language competency was proved statistically through chi-square test. The results are presented in Table 9, Table 10, Table 11, Table 12, Table 13, Table 14, Table 15 and Table 16.

Table 9. Results of chi-square statistics on accuracy criterion (vocabulary practice).

Results on Accuracy Criterion (Vocabulary Practice)
	Interactive	Individual	Row Totals
high	20 (24.00) [0.67]	28 (24.00) [0.67]	48
medium	24 (25.00) [0.04]	26 (25.00) [0.04]	50
low	12 (7.00) [3.57]	2 (7.00) [3.57]	14
Column Totals	56	56	112 (Grand Total)

Table 9. Results of chi-square statistics on accuracy criterion (vocabulary practice).

Results on Accuracy Criterion (Vocabulary Practice)
	Interactive	Individual	Row Totals
high	20 (24.00) [0.67]	28 (24.00) [0.67]	48
medium	24 (25.00) [0.04]	26 (25.00) [0.04]	50
low	12 (7.00) [3.57]	2 (7.00) [3.57]	14
Column Totals	56	56	112 (Grand Total)

The chi-square statistic is 8.5562. The p-value is 0.013869. The result is significant at p < 0.05.

Table 10. Results of chi-square statistics on word number criterion (vocabulary practice).

Results on Word Number Criterion (Vocabulary Practice)
	Interactive	Individual	Row Totals
high	19 (22.50) [0.54]	26 (22.50) [0.54]	45
medium	22 (23.50) [0.10]	25 (23.50) [0.10]	47
low	15 (10.00) [2.50]	5 (10.00) [2.50]	20
Column Totals	56	56	112 (Grand Total)

Table 10. Results of chi-square statistics on word number criterion (vocabulary practice).

Results on Word Number Criterion (Vocabulary Practice)
	Interactive	Individual	Row Totals
high	19 (22.50) [0.54]	26 (22.50) [0.54]	45
medium	22 (23.50) [0.10]	25 (23.50) [0.10]	47
low	15 (10.00) [2.50]	5 (10.00) [2.50]	20
Column Totals	56	56	112 (Grand Total)

The chi-square statistic is 6.2804. The p-value is 0.043275. The result is significant at p < 0.05.

Table 11. Results of chi-square statistics on accuracy criterion (content mediation).

Results of Chi-Square Statistic on Accuracy Criterion (Content Mediation)
	Individual Mode	Interactive Mode	Row Totals
high	16 (20.00) [0.80]	24 (20.00) [0.80]	40
medium	26 (27.00) [0.04]	28 (27.00) [0.04]	54
low	14 (9.00) [2.78]	4 (9.00) [2.78]	18
Column Totals	56	56	112 (Grand Total)

Table 11. Results of chi-square statistics on accuracy criterion (content mediation).

Results of Chi-Square Statistic on Accuracy Criterion (Content Mediation)
	Individual Mode	Interactive Mode	Row Totals
high	16 (20.00) [0.80]	24 (20.00) [0.80]	40
medium	26 (27.00) [0.04]	28 (27.00) [0.04]	54
low	14 (9.00) [2.78]	4 (9.00) [2.78]	18
Column Totals	56	56	112 (Grand Total)

The chi-square statistic is 7.2296. The p-value is 0.026922. The result is significant at p < 0.05.

Table 12. Results of chi-square statistics on key ideas number criterion (content mediation).

Results on Key Ideas Number (Content Mediation)
	Individual Mode	Interactive Mode	Row Totals
high	18 (23.00) [1.09]	28 (23.00) [1.09]	46
medium	28 (26.50) [0.08]	25 (26.50) [0.08]	53
low	10 (6.50) [1.88]	3 (6.50) [1.88]	13
Column Totals	56	56	112 (Grand Total)

Table 12. Results of chi-square statistics on key ideas number criterion (content mediation).

Results on Key Ideas Number (Content Mediation)
	Individual Mode	Interactive Mode	Row Totals
high	18 (23.00) [1.09]	28 (23.00) [1.09]	46
medium	28 (26.50) [0.08]	25 (26.50) [0.08]	53
low	10 (6.50) [1.88]	3 (6.50) [1.88]	13
Column Totals	56	56	112 (Grand Total)

The chi-square statistic is 6.113. The p-value is 0.047053. The result is significant at p < 0.05.

Table 13. Results of chi-square statistics on author’s message comprehension criterion (content mediation).

Results on Author’s Message Comprehension (Content Mediation)
	Individual Mode	Interactive Mode	Row Totals
high	18 (23.00) [1.09]	28 (23.00) [1.09]	46
medium	31 (29.00) [0.14]	27 (29.00) [0.14]	58
low	7 (4.00) [2.25]	1 (4.00) [2.25]	8
Column Totals	56	56	112 (Grand Total)

Table 13. Results of chi-square statistics on author’s message comprehension criterion (content mediation).

Results on Author’s Message Comprehension (Content Mediation)
	Individual Mode	Interactive Mode	Row Totals
high	18 (23.00) [1.09]	28 (23.00) [1.09]	46
medium	31 (29.00) [0.14]	27 (29.00) [0.14]	58
low	7 (4.00) [2.25]	1 (4.00) [2.25]	8
Column Totals	56	56	112 (Grand Total)

The chi-square statistic is 6.9498. The p-value is 0.030965. The result is significant at p < 0.05.

Table 14. Results of chi-square statistics on accuracy criterion (problem discussion).

Results on Accuracy Criterion (Problem Discussion)
	Individual Mode	Interactive Mode	Row Totals
high	19 (21.00) [0.19]	23 (21.00) [0.19]	42
medium	26 (29.00) [0.31]	32 (29.00) [0.31]	58
low	11 (6.00) [4.17]	1 (6.00) [4.17]	12
Column Totals	56	56	112 (Grand Total)

Table 14. Results of chi-square statistics on accuracy criterion (problem discussion).

Results on Accuracy Criterion (Problem Discussion)
	Individual Mode	Interactive Mode	Row Totals
high	19 (21.00) [0.19]	23 (21.00) [0.19]	42
medium	26 (29.00) [0.31]	32 (29.00) [0.31]	58
low	11 (6.00) [4.17]	1 (6.00) [4.17]	12
Column Totals	56	56	112 (Grand Total)

The chi-square statistic is 9.335. The p-value is 0.009396. The result is significant at p < 0.05.

Table 15. Results of chi-square statistics on participation and mediation criterion (problem discussion).

Results on Participation and Mediation (Problem Discussion)
	Individual Mode	Interactive Mode	Row Totals
high	18 (25.00) [1.96]	32 (25.00) [1.96]	50
medium	31 (26.00) [0.96]	21 (26.00) [0.96]	52
low	7 (5.00) [0.80]	3 (5.00) [0.80]	10
Column Totals	56	56	112 (Grand Total)

Table 15. Results of chi-square statistics on participation and mediation criterion (problem discussion).

Results on Participation and Mediation (Problem Discussion)
	Individual Mode	Interactive Mode	Row Totals
high	18 (25.00) [1.96]	32 (25.00) [1.96]	50
medium	31 (26.00) [0.96]	21 (26.00) [0.96]	52
low	7 (5.00) [0.80]	3 (5.00) [0.80]	10
Column Totals	56	56	112 (Grand Total)

The chi-square statistic is 7.4431. The p-value is 0.024197. The result is significant at p < 0.05.

Table 16. Results of chi-square statistics on diversity of communicative functions criterion (problem discussion).

Results on Diversity of Communicative Functions (Problem Discussion)
	Individual Mode	Interactive Mode	Row Totals
high	16 (20.50) [0.99]	25 (20.50) [0.99]	41
medium	20 (24.50) [0.83]	29 (24.50) [0.83]	49
low	20 (11.00) [7.36]	2 (11.00) [7.36]	22
Column Totals	56	56	112 (Grand Total)

Table 16. Results of chi-square statistics on diversity of communicative functions criterion (problem discussion).

Results on Diversity of Communicative Functions (Problem Discussion)
	Individual Mode	Interactive Mode	Row Totals
high	16 (20.50) [0.99]	25 (20.50) [0.99]	41
medium	20 (24.50) [0.83]	29 (24.50) [0.83]	49
low	20 (11.00) [7.36]	2 (11.00) [7.36]	22
Column Totals	56	56	112 (Grand Total)

The chi-square statistic is 18.3559. The p-value is 0.000103. The result is significant at p < 0.05.

5.3. Post-Experimental Questionnaire Results

The results of the post-experimental questionnaire are presented visually in Figure 5, Figure 6 and Figure 7.

6. Discussion

The experimental phase of the study was aimed at identifying (1) the students’ preferences of the mode of homework completion and (2) the learning potential of the two modes for achieving various outcomes (see the problem questions of the study). The discussion section of the article is focused on these aims.

The main essential difference between the set of the tasks A and B (Table 1) is the mode of completion: either individual or interactive via mobile apps. Our assumption before the study was that the interactive mode would be more attractive to the majority of the learners partly due to the students’ familiarity with the use of various communication apps (WhatsApp, Viber, or social networks) which allow online synchronous communication through the use of calls and video calls, etc. The students’ answers to the questionnaires confirmed this assumption. This positive attitude can be a significant driving force for homework completion.

As the pre-experimental questionnaire has revealed, the vast majority of the questioned students (53 students out of 56) consider homework completion to be an integral part of learning and see the dependence of their learning outcomes on the regular and persistent fulfillment of their homework. This fact indicates the students’ readiness to take on authentic agency and responsibility in self-directed learning [13] as they admit to the link between their personal contribution (homework) and their success in the classroom.

It is evident from the answers that mobile homework tasks are not regularly and widely used by foreign language teachers for not all of the students had the experience of interactive homework tasks using mobile technology (18% had no experience at all, while 52% faced such tasks rarely; only 8% completed them often). Thus, university teachers miss an opportunity to enhance verbalization and interaction which lays the foundation of student foreign language communicative competency as a researcher’s highlight [29,30,31]. The limited usage of the target tasks can be accounted for by shortage of related literature and detailed guidelines as our literature review shows.

Meanwhile, after completing such tasks, the majority of the participants evaluated this experience as positive, clearly expressing their preferences. Therefore, we can expect a higher degree of student engagement and responsibility while fulfilling this mode of homework tasks. The study and the literature review above allow us to claim that there are a few significant characteristics of mobile homework assignments that appeal to modern students. First, mobile apps are an indispensable part of their everyday life. Second, students have another opportunity to get in touch with their peers for communication and collaborative learning. Moreover, they can choose partners on their own. The conditions of interactive homework completion enable them to get feedback and support, pooling their efforts and thus more likely succeed in the classroom. The students’ collaboration in completing their homework, either in pairs or small groups, evokes a feeling of shared responsibility for the future success of each partner in the classroom in front of the whole class and the teacher. In our view, all these factors partly eliminate the risk of neglecting homework on the part of the students.

As homework is hard to observe, the students’ performance at the lesson following the completion of the tasks (individual or interactive) was assessed in the study in accordance with different criteria which allow identification of both foreign language communicative competence components as well as soft skills development. These criteria partly vary for different task types, but they are the same for both modes.

The comparative study of the two different modes of homework tasks (individual and interactive) has shown two main trends. The first one is that language-focused tasks (type 1, Table 1) are better performed individually, the second one is that content mediation and problem discussion tasks (types 3 and 4, Table 1) lead to better learning outcomes if accomplished interactively.

Vocabulary acquisition has proved to be more effective in the individual mode of homework assignments with a higher number of students displaying a high level of the related sub-skills in vocabulary tests (with mean value for 2 criteria 27) and only three students showed a low level in this aspect, meanwhile the figures for the interactive mode account for 20 and 14 (high and low levels respectively). This result can be explained by the nature of purely language tasks as they do not involve higher order thinking skills and are mainly based on individual memorizing enhanced by attention concentration.

The opposite trend can be seen in the number of students who displayed a high and low level of foreign language competence in the tasks on content mediation and problem discussion (types 3 and 4). The interactive mode proved to lead to better results in both types of activities offered as homework. After completing the interactive mobile tasks on content mediation (type 3-B), in the classroom the students were more likely to render all or most of the key ideas from the text and to fully comprehend and express the author’s message. Overall, the number of the students with a high result turned out to be much higher than after completing the individual homework tasks which was also proved statistically through chi-square test. The numbers account for 17 and 27 students respectively.

What is also important, the number of the students with a low level of foreign language competency decreased quite significantly from seven (individual mode) to two (interactive mode). The same tendency is identified in the problem discussion tasks (type 4). Interactive mobile home tasks on problem discussion preparation (type 4-B) resulted in an increased number of students who participated in the classroom discussion actively showing a variety of speech acts, showing appreciation of different views, and cooperating with other students through diverse reactions. Therefore, in line with the literature review, interaction has proved to lead not only to a better performance at the level of cognition (content mediation tasks) but at the level of learner–learner interaction and key-competency (soft skills) development: cooperation and collaboration, appreciation of others’ opinions as well as establishing a supportive environment. All in all, after completing interactive homework tasks of type 4-B, the results of the participants in regard of the discussion participation and diversity of communicative function criteria appear to be almost twice as high as after fulfilling individual home assignments.

The higher students’ classroom performance rate after the implementation of interactive mobile home tasks (types 3-B and 4-B) can be accounted for by the nature of these tasks which imply negotiation of meaning and cooperation encouraged at the home preparatory stage. Being inherently interactive and communicative, these tasks require pooling mutual efforts in sharing ideas and language in task completion, thus providing supportive peer teaching and learning. Actually, these tasks suggest a preliminary rehearsal of future classroom activity accompanied with a partner’s feedback and which individual homework tasks lack. The interactive mobile tasks noticeably increase student listening, talking, and writing time because the participants have to take notes of their ideas and mutual conclusions. Moreover, such tasks are based on the cumulative activation of student higher order thinking skills and other soft skills as well as foreign language speaking skills in communication which are applied to some content [51]. If one component of this base is weak, students can hardly show a better result in oral self-expression and interaction. Partly though, the better outcomes of interactive mobile home tasks may be attributed to the longer amount of time they take because students have to prepare before and summarize everything after the core mobile interaction phase.

The results of the post-experimental questionnaire proved the study’s results as the students expressed their preference of the individual mode of homework when it comes to vocabulary practice (54%) and of interactive modes (more than 60%) in other cases (interactive content mediation and problem discussion tasks). A combination of the individual and interactive modes was favored by 34% and 32% of the respondents in content mediation and problem discussion respectively.

We assume that it is impossible to precisely evaluate the contribution of each format of homework tasks into the learning outcomes which to a great extent depend on the time spent and the degree of the student engagement and responsibility. Nevertheless, both individually and interactionally performed homework assignments support one another, each possessing a number of obvious merits. The qualitative analysis reveals these merits and confirms the idea that each can contribute to the development of certain features of foreign language communicative competency and soft skills as well. A balanced combination of both types brings diversity into homework and types of interaction leading to positive changes in the students’ growth, though, as the study reveals, university teachers underestimate the potential of interactive mobile home assignments while students tend to be positive about completing such tasks.

The limitations of the study were a limited number of upper-intermediate students who took part in the experimental study along with a variety of factors influencing students’ performance which were not taken into consideration. Therefore, a further study should be conducted, involving learners of lower levels of foreign language communicative competency as well as considering other task factors.

7. Conclusions

The study confirms the idea that homework is an indispensable aspect of effective university foreign language education which requires teacher’s special attention and regular modification. The research results give evidence to conclude that in foreign language education, mobile apps appear to significantly contribute to diversifying the conditions of student independent studies. Interactive mobile homework assignments possess a few obvious benefits, being appealing to learners, providing abundant practice in communicative interaction, enriching the learning environment through pooling diverse ideas and language, activating higher order thinking strategies, together with fostering mutual support, shared responsibility, and understanding, However, our intention is not to state that all homework assignments have to be completed via mobile devices. Meanwhile, during the period of distance learning, they can be a viable option to compensate for the lack of face-to-face interaction.

The comparative approbation and analysis of the two modes of homework tasks have led us to claim that cumulative quality learning outcomes depend on the balance of both individual and interactive homework assignments with a different focus. To achieve better accuracy, fluency, and ability to fulfill a variety of communicative functions, every student needs to be actively engaged in regular and appropriate learning activities regardless of the place where they are performed.