Use of a Virtual Learning Environment to Teach Referencing and Researching, Polls and Plenaries, Collaboration and Success - EDMODO
Available to purchase at
http://ijtar.cgpublisher.com/product/pub.295/prod.7
http://ijtar.cgpublisher.com/product/pub.295/prod.7
Use of a Virtual Learning Environment to Teach Referencing and Researching, Polls and Plenaries, Collaboration and Success
Brian Gallagher, Nagoya University
of Foreign Studies, Japan
Abstract: Effective use of a Virtual
Learning Environment can dramatically increase student understanding and lead
to success in writing academic papers, promote collaboration and document
success. By maximizing cooperation and transparency, plagiarism can be learned
more easily and reduced to minimal levels. Correct referencing and extended
research can create a positive climate outside of class, leading to a more
productive climate in class. Inclusive polls and plenaries can support student
learning and flag those students who are falling behind. Individual student
progress can be monitored and used as a teaching tool. Withdrawing assessment
for learning may increase student involvement and commitment to your program
leading to greater student satisfaction and ultimate student success. The
EDMODO virtual learning environment is a well-supported and easily maintainable
system which allows teacher control at both class and student levels. This
paper will show techniques and the pedagogical reasoning behind usage in order
to enhance student learning and the process of writing as well as understanding
of plagiarism and how to avoid it. Learning how to set-up a class and teach
collaboration with different exercises will extend participants the opportunity
to extrapolate further application of the environment for their own purposes.
Keywords: Academic Writing, Second Language, Blended Learning, Communication
Introduction
R
|
esearch has highlighted many of the issues
affecting second language (L2) learners of English in their writing of academic
essays (Archibald 2014), (Beare 2002), (Gallagher 2013), (Matsumoto 1995),
(Myles 2002) & (Silva 1993). This means that there is a need to approach
the teaching in a different fashion in order to reduce the impact of these
issues and where possible eliminate them. Employing a virtual learning
environment (VLE) alongside classroom teaching may effectively reduce the
difficulties that lecturers face in teaching and preparing students for success
in quality assessment of student writing abilities, and as such, merits
investigation. After Springer, Stanne & Donavon (1999) conducted an
impressive meta-analysis of the effects of cooperative learning they concluded
that students who learned in small groups demonstrated greater achievement than
students in traditional instruction. Action research then enables this to be
put to the test and to establish measureable results and to engage students by
valuing their input at all stages throughout the learning process. With focus
on more engagement and collaboration the students can avoid the now standard
processes of assessment. Freeing students from the burden and stress of
assessment during the learning process (assessment of, as and for learning) and
allowing them to use modern collaborative methods (e-learning) alongside
traditional communication (discussion and free talk) blends together
traditional and practical classroom activities with ICT skills, and modernizes
the real-life practicalities of collaborating in the modern world.
Effective use of a VLE can dramatically increase student
understanding and lead to success in writing academic papers, promoting
collaboration, providing documented success and materials for progression and
lesson planning. By maximizing cooperation and transparency, the definition of plagiarism
can be more easily learned and reduced to minimal levels. Corrections of
referencing and extended research can create a positive climate outside of
class time, leading to a more productive climate in class. Blending both
in-class tutoring with out-of-class work, teachers can create a clear, recorded
environment for learners to follow through the process of learning and
formatively assess progress and understanding through inclusive polls and
plenaries in effect supporting student learning and flagging those students who
are falling behind. Individual student progress can be monitored and used as a
teaching tool. Formative plenary assessments for learning may increase student
involvement and commitment to your programme leading to greater student
satisfaction and ultimately student success. The EDMODO[1]
virtual learning environment used in this study is a well-supported and easily
maintainable system which allows teacher control at both class and individual
student levels. This VLE allows simple implementation of teaching ideas that
sample and deal with actual student work that can be re-input to build and
follow a scheme of work. By using a VLE to support classroom instruction we can
enhance student learning and the process of writing, while understanding the
significance of clear communication and shared understanding. Edmodo is truly
an interactive course management system (CMS) that allows teachers to create
and distribute course content, manage groups of learners, assess with
customizable polls and quizzes, and fundamentally allow teachers to extend the
classroom beyond the traditional classroom boundaries. The technical interface
(see figure 1) is more like a social media interface than a traditional
institutional interface and, as such, reduces student fears of low technical
ability which can increase engagement. The teacher interface is equally simple
allowing teachers with similar fears to create, manage and control their
content with very little or no training. There are neither initial nor running
costs to this entire system meaning that anyone can get started and maintain
their own VLE for any group they wish. The internal transparency within each
group allows “lurking” which means a student can read each other’s entries and
posts without the writers being notified of it having happened. All students
are aware of this and are encouraged to leave positive comments and specific
criticisms. Other CMSs at this time can be one-directional and do not
facilitate the critical interaction between students and teachers, as student
to student.
Prominent open source VLEs are used by schools, businesses,
and training organizations (Moodle, eFront, OLAT, Sakai, ILIAS, ATutor, Fedena,
openelms, Claroline, and Dokeos). While commercial VLEs include such favorites
as Blackboard, Lotus Workplace, COSE, and WebCT; of which Moodle and Web CT are
currently popular in many Japanese Universities programs.
Figure
1 - Technical Interface of Edmodo*
The Process Employed
The groups of students taught and measured in this study
followed the same instruction and scheduled approach to creating a quality
academic essay which addressed the same prompts in similar classroom conditions
and used the same VLE (Edmodo*).
Students had a four week period for each essay, with one 90
minute lesson per week. There were three essays per semester as well as a
further in-class timed written assessment. This paper looks to tackle the
issues of the regular class teaching period only. The process of teaching was
as follows:
In the first lesson students are introduced to the topic of
the assignment through picture, video, teacher led discussion, or most often, a
combination of these. Students have a discussion on the topic as laid down by
the teacher after being provided the essay prompt (essay title). After the
initial discussion students were given a selection of questions and talking
points to work through in small teacher chosen groups which allow for relaxed,
informal discussion. They were encouraged to create an initial and appropriate
vocabulary list and collaborate together in that same small group to facilitate
initial sharing and to speed the process along. Electronic dictionaries and
online searches (Weblio, SpaceALC, Thesuarus.com & Dictionary.com) were
encouraged to enhance understanding in both their first language (L1) and
second language (L2). Students were then given a selection of materials to read
both in and out of class that were carefully selected to assist them in
formulating a coherent argument and for writing a successful essay. All
materials (digital content) were posted in the group by the teacher with direct
links to the original sources as well as stored in the VLE library for easy
access for all. The first file downloaded by students from the VLE was the
standardized template (in Word format) for them to write their essay and was
used as the first formative assessment of understanding and functioning within
the online environment by checking that students have accessed, saved, opened
and renamed the file to their USBs. Students were also instructed to save the
documents to their “backpack” which is a file management folder in their
account that can hold any shared document or weblink for easy access. This “backpacking”
allows students to manage files for quick reference and reducing the need to
scroll through multiple postings within the learning environment. This function
was also available throughout semester allowing students to store useful and
shared references that they had searched for themselves and those they have
encountered through reading posts from other students.
In the second lesson students were expected to share their
expanding vocabulary list with classmates and take a dictation of a concept
relating to the topic as read aloud by the teacher. This section of the lesson
ensures a break from their computer screens and a chance to blend their
learning between technology based and hard copy. This timing of the lesson
encourages regular breaks from their computer which is encouraged in order to
avoid eye strain (Eichenbaum 1996), discomfort (Bergqvist & Knave 1994) and
physical, psychological and ergonomic problems (Travers & Stanton, 2002),
(Kaniktar, Carlson & Richard 2005). (The first reading is always normal
native speaker speed after which time students were encouraged to share with
their neighbour what they wrote down, a “pair and share.” The second reading
was at a slower speed with clear annunciation of punctuation and pronunciation,
after which time students were instructed to read-aloud what they had written
to their classmate once more and allow their classmate to fill in the gaps to
reaffirm the vocabulary and keywords that were heard. The final reading was
again, normal speed, with a final chance for students to catch any remaining
information). After the dictation was completed, the dictated text was
displayed on the screen to allow students to mark their own writing and to have
a low risk exercise completed at the beginning of class which promoted confidence
and supplemented their vocabulary list, knowledge of writing terminology or
some concept from the lesson. The remaining class time was used for students to
read and share notes in small neighbourly groups, including their thesis
statements and to write down an outline for their essay. Once their face to
face sharing was over students were polled on how they would write their essays
using a simple online poll worded either for or against the prompt (see
appendix 1). This required a simple selection and submission (2 clicks) which
then allowed the entire class to see what the others were thinking and were
encouraged to seek out like-minded individuals in the next class.
By the third lesson students should have created a solid
thesis statement that tackled the question/prompt, have planned an outline for
their essay with information that supported both sides of each argument and
have written or be ready to write their first draft. At this point the teacher
established the sensibility of the argument in the essay by having students sit
in small groups of those with similar thesis statements and ideas. This was
established by splitting the class into agree/disagree sections and then
grouping down into smaller groups. Here students were encouraged to share their
initial thoughts and any evidence that they may have found by posting the
information into the VLE and by explaining orally why they selected those
references. This allowed a record of the information to be logged (time and
date) and proved completion of the task set. Teacher discussion with groups at
this stage promoted discussion, clarified misconceptions with information,
encouraged exploration from surface level depth to more meaningful group
discussion and formatively assessed students on their progress with immediate
teacher praise. Peer review of first drafts and feedback at this point
established logical structure of ideas, critical thinking, demonstrating
understanding, clarity of expression and quality of argument. These are just
some of the features, which should be considered by individual students as well
as by the teachers. Essay drafts were then collected with feedback on how to
positively adjust the grammar, lexis, punctuation, structure and layout of the
essay, as well as address any other major errors. Evidence of research (posted
to the group) must be open and freely available to all classmates to assist
each other in their own writing and researching. Teacher comments on
originality, individual effort, quality referencing, and communication during
the process were written on the paper copy of the essays submitted at this
point and returned soon afterwards (normally within 3 working days). They were
collected a few days later from the teacher outbox so as to allow changes to be
made before the next class and subsequent submission. The collection rate was
not as expected with some students not following up on their collection until
the day before or day of class. All parties must look for improvement on this
point.
The fourth lesson was another opportunity for dictation,
addition of vocabulary, improvement of grammar, citing, reference writing and
sharing, as well as a more critical peer review of the second draft of the
essay before submission and data back-up. At this near-completion stage,
students were requested to post (to the group) their introduction and
conclusion to make sure that they matched, to record the work had been
completed, to facilitate teacher checking (a progress check-point), to share
their writing with others and to encourage classmates to compete, relate and
share before final papers were written. The following week was the submission
of that paper and the introduction of the next topic. Before the introduction
of the next topic there was opportunity for: re-teaching points made using the
materials from that previous assignment; a formative assessment of the sharing
that occurred by looking at quality of referencing, research and citation; and
a student plenary on the learning that occurred during the process.
In the next section of the course the process was repeated
again and altered and adjusted to allow further teaching points to be inserted,
for expansion on the necessity of researching well, citing correctly and
writing properly formatted (APA) references. Errors that were made in each
section were posted as a reply under each entry made to the group and
supplemented with a tag, flag or comment that was positive in nature.
Encouraging positivity was extremely important when giving feedback in order to
move forward with confidence and to progress without fear of criticism or
negativity. Positive in-class climate facilitated a better online climate
between students. Some in-class exercises were focused on posting information
in the form of direct and indirect quotations, with citations and references.
Replies to these posts were used as a way to interact with classmates and to
support each other by error checking, sharing sources and in some cases just
giving supportive comments. This type of collaborative or social learning has
been around for many years but only in recent years have a plethora of school
specific platforms become available that support serious levels of teacher
devised and developed services aimed at maximizing security while allowing easy
access and reliability.
Social Learning Theory
The Social Learning Theory (SLT) developed by Millar &
Dollard (1941) incorporates the principles of learning: reinforcement,
punishment, extinction and imitation of models. They have posited that human
behaviour is motivated by drives and responses, and one organism’s responses
can serve as stimuli for other organisms. Peer pressure is often a resistive
force that decelerates classroom activities and environment. Low level and
often oscitant students can reduce cooperation in learning as much as enthusiastic
students can excite and propel classmates to spark positive classroom climate
and learning behaviour. Currently, there exists a subset of theories that are
based on social learning principles that place an emphasis on cognitive
variables. Whereas strict behaviourism supports a direct and unidirectional
pathway between stimulus and response, representing human behaviour as a simple
reaction to external stimuli, the SLT asserts that there is a mediator (human
cognition) between stimulus and response, placing individual control over
behavioural responses to stimuli.
While there are several versions of SLT to which researchers
currently subscribe, they all share three basic tenets (Woodward 1982; Jones
1989; Perry et.al. 1990; Thomas, 1990; Crosbie-Brunett and Lewis 1993). Tenet
1: Response consequences (such as rewards or punishments) influence the
likelihood that a person will perform a particular behaviour again in a given
situation. This can only be applied to formative assessment at classroom level
in the forms of plenaries and polls. Summative assessments are regulated by
university policy and have mostly negative effects and repercussions. Tenet 2:
Humans can learn by observing others, in addition to learning by participating
in an act personally. Learning by observing others is possible in this online
environment where work is openly shared and encouraged to be commented on in
the form of feed-forward information in place of closed-ended feedback.
Students are at all times encouraged to make their feedback positive while
clearly highlighting errors if they are found. Tenet 3: Individuals are most
likely to model behaviour observed by others they identify with. Identification
with others is a function of the degree to which a person is perceived to be
similar to one's self, in addition to the degree of emotional attachment that
is felt toward an individual. By enabling classes studying the same topics and
writing responses to the same prompts to share online all their research and
writing, a peer system is in place to allow students the opportunity to be
aware of the progress of others and to emulate both their peers’ workload and
quality. This openness also has the downside that inertial delays in the
commencement of sharing have a negative effect on student input. The obvious
remedy to this lack of input, is to revert to the first tenet, and employ a
reward/punishment system where class participation points are at risk in the
event of non-compliance with the sharing ethic of the group. Actuation of each
group needs to be done in the classroom as a class activity in order to get the
ball rolling and initiate a consanguinity between students.
Benefits of the Process
Feed-forward, Feedback and Assessment
Lecturers and students benefit from frequent feedback. The
VLE employed provides effective feedback containing information about how to
improve rather than just evaluating levels of achievement. As we know, to be
effective, assessments, both formative and summative need to be reliable
(dependable) and valid (meaningful). Tests of general ability may be reliable
but often lack validity. However, writing an academic essay with the key
components, format and in a recordable fashion is more meaningful for students
and gives teachers a clearer understanding of the tangible output possible by
each student. The majority of formative assessments (in class online plenaries
and quizzes) should precede any summative assessments (submitted essays and
timed written tests). Students must also be astutely aware of which are which
and why they are being used in each situation. The improvement of communicative
skills and understanding leads to improvement of cognitive skills—which are
clearly seen in the quality of student work. Timely student self-assessment
(student activity record) and the required skills to perform such
self-assessment (familiarity of the environment) should be included in the
teaching practice in order for students to absorb this information and to adopt
it as their own. Openness to information is sometimes a hurdle for both
students and academics with worries of accountability and privacy, but this
freedom of information pulls down barriers to learning and progression,
increases collaboration and facilitates evidence gathering for measurement and
quality control of teaching and course curriculum. Using a secure platform
which ensures safety and privacy is made possible with a closed environment,
where no private information is required from students, who can only join the VLE
by the invitation of their teacher, where all communication is archived and the
teacher has full management control. Whilst academic writing results are
holistic in nature, grading can be supported with quality and quantity of
evidence collected and recorded to establish a clear feed-forward of points for
progression for each student.
Reluctance to Write is Reduced
Students' active participation is greater when they have a
positive view of themselves as learners and greater visibility of their peers
(SLT-Tenet 3) and when they feel motivation to learn. Long (2003) suggests that
this “motivation refers to whatever it is that leads us to engage in some
activity.” Kedir (2012) suggests that a “reluctance to write among students
falls into two major categories, namely complete avoidance reluctance and
partial avoidance reluctance.” If this is true, then these students fall into
the latter category. He goes on to suggest that instructor perception of the
reason for student reluctance behaviours largely points to students’ lack of
requisite skills and preparedness to engage, while students’ perception of
their reluctance behaviour largely points to their instructors’ failure to
engage them actively. Parr, Hamilton & Hawthorn (2008) put forward the idea
“that reluctant writers are more likely to be influenced by teacher,
self-belief and knowledge and skill factors than engaged writers who are more
likely to want choice and control over their writing.” The openness of the VLE
allows visibility while the platform also enables introvert students to perform
beyond their normal comfort zone and to low-risk engagement in activities and
interaction with classmates. This can build a climate of confidence in each
student and with the group. Confidence comes from success, and success is
apparent and measurable with each small activity completed. Encouraging writers
to write a little more in the next task and the next. Reluctance is therefore
reduced with increasing student confidence. Conversely, summative assignments
that are high risk-high reward have a negative effect on confidence. One might
suggest then, that more focus be placed on continual assessment and reward be
given at the time of the learning, described as an assessment for learning
(AFL), as opposed to a later assessment of learning (AOL). A percentile of the
overall grade must therefore be in some part considerate of the work done in
the VLE, and on reflection, that percentile should be large enough to warrant a
serious commitment of time and effort.
Research, Referencing and Risk of Error
Availability of materials online (available in and out of
class) enhances students’ self-motivation, understanding of the tasks set and
how to put these materials to best use. There appears to be greater acceptance
of rigorous procedures in classroom exercises and set homework, research
practice, essay structure and flow, reportage of progression and communication.
This can be seen in the completion of work and the volume and quantity of each
submission. This persistence during writing tasks must be actively pursued and
promoted by the teaching and learning of skills that best promote writing and
engagement, which this style of teaching and learning supports. Errors in
referencing may be accidental or deliberate, and often in the case of student
work, the former may be more likely. Understanding when work is copied or
reworked in a way that still gives the same message without giving proper
credit to the source, means that it has been plagiarized but students often
believe that they are taking generalizations from the source and not author
specifics or ideas. Their perception of when they are copying too much
information from any source and when they are not, is unclear. Often, errors
made are predominantly in their own favour and this is when deliberate
error-making should be highlighted to the student. In the educational or
learning context this can be handled with careful editing and marking, giving
the student opportunity to make changes, or preferably, include the original
source information by including a full citation and reference. It is important
to note that plagiarism is only an issue when people publish their writing in
some form and in this study, this was not the case. All student works are
purely for learning and assessment purposes in order to establish a grade of
their skills.
Survey Results
After a year of learning
and working with the VLE four classes of students (two from 2nd year and two
from 3rd year) were questioned on their opinions of the environment and the course
in general by using an online survey service [surveymonkey.com]. Survey results
showed that the dictation exercises and content were considered good or very
good by 72% of students which supports the use of them as a valuable in-class
exercise to help learn about writing and give confidence as a low risk
formative exercise. First week discussions had the most positive feedback with
over 81% of students responding that they helped them understand each topic
well. Over 70% of students reported that sharing information in the VLE helped
them in their learning which was supported by end of semester summative grades
that showed marked improvement.
Figure 2: Student Responses to Learning
with the VLE.
Student Responses on their perceptions of learning using the VLE
based on a basic Likert scale where 3 would signify neither agree or disagree,
and 5 strongly agree
As shown in figure 2, the VLE was perceived as being useful
by all students and helped students confidence that they had learned through
using the online environment to supplement their classroom learning. As for how
often they used the VLE, numbers show that again there was total adoption by
each student and that a high number of students used it in moderation or more,
with only a quarter of students only using it slightly often. Student’s use of
the VLE did not count towards their score which is sure to have had some effect
on their responses. During the course some students recommended that the VLE be
included in their grade so as to commit more members of the class to become
more active in their participation to improve the volume of communication.
Figure 3: Student Reported Frequency of
Usage
Over 78% of students agreed that the VLE was useful for
sharing information and materials which was again supported by later formative
results upon analysis of the amount of student engagement and interaction as
recorded at the individual student level. The lowest scores were recorded for
the value of the VLE for learning about writing (55.32%) and the usefulness of
the VLE for storing information for later (57.45%) which would imply that
either the short term nature of a scheme of work that is not used across the
entirety of their writing experience because some teachers do not employ the
use of a VLE to support student progression. Alternatively it maybe that
writing for them is not associated with anything else at university and so
content is not applicable to other sections of their learning. With 62% of
students remarking that they would recommend using this VLE to other students
and less than 13% of students disagreeing that they would recommend it, we can
judge that less than one eighth of students were unhappy with using the online
environment to improve their learning. With overall numbers as high as we can
see here, on average more than 70% of students were enthused by the whole
experience and had positive comments to make about the experience. This clearly
indicates that blending together use of a VLE to support classroom based
instruction of academic writing for non-native Japanese speakers of English is
highly effective. Collaborative learning improves student understanding which
leads to improved quality of writing and student confidence which again reduces
the reluctance to write as levels of engagement increase.
Figure 4: Student Questionnaire Results
on the Process and the VLE.
Figure 4 shows the
rating for each of the responses that students were asked to comment on. The
most popular aspects of the learning were the in-class discussions at the
beginning of each topic and the sharing aspects of the VLE. While essay
drafting remains an effective exercise, dictation exercises also proved popular
while students reported enjoyment with learning ICT skills during the course.
The third tenet of social learning theory is that learners model the good
behaviour of others with whom they identify which is seen in the responses
where collaboration was key, however, the lowest rating was given to the value
of peer sharing in being good for learning writing, which may be a concern.
Possibly students may not feel that their classmates’ feedback is less valuable
in learning, rather, it could be suggested that the pace of work required to be
done in order for the peer review to be possible may be too demanding for busy
students. This would explain the value of this opportunity being seen as
comparatively low.
Table
1: Student survey after 2 semesters of using the VLE in academic writing class.
Post
2nd Semester Questionnaire for Virtual Learning Environment for Academic
Writing
|
|||||||
Answer
Options
|
SD
|
D
|
ND/NA
|
A
|
SA
|
Rating
Average
|
Response
Count
|
Dictation was good
for learning about writing
|
3
|
2
|
6
|
21
|
15
|
3.91
|
47
|
Peer sharing was
good for learning writing
|
3
|
4
|
4
|
31
|
5
|
3.66
|
47
|
Drafting essays was
good for learning writing
|
4
|
2
|
3
|
22
|
16
|
3.94
|
47
|
Discussions in the
first week helped me understand the topic
|
0
|
4
|
2
|
29
|
12
|
4.04
|
47
|
Sharing information
in Edmodo helped my learning
|
1
|
3
|
7
|
22
|
14
|
3.96
|
47
|
Edmodo was very
good for learning about writing
|
0
|
4
|
11
|
23
|
9
|
3.79
|
47
|
Edmodo is useful
for sharing information and materials
|
1
|
4
|
4
|
19
|
19
|
4.09
|
47
|
Edmodo is useful
for storing information for later
|
1
|
3
|
11
|
20
|
12
|
3.83
|
47
|
I would recommend
using this VLE to other students
|
2
|
1
|
13
|
23
|
7
|
3.70
|
46
|
I enjoyed learning
about new technology during this course
|
0
|
5
|
8
|
19
|
14
|
3.91
|
46
|
Condensing these results (table 1) into broader categories
of agreement and disagreement shows the more general trends in student opinion. The classroom dictation was seen as
good for learning about writing in an “agree: disagree” ratio of more than 6:1,
peer sharing was more than 7:1, drafting essays more than 5:1, pre-writing
discussions more than 10:1, sharing in the VLE helping learning 9:1, VLE good
for learning about writing 8:1, VLE being useful for sharing info and materials
more than 7:1, and usefulness in storing information in a ratio of 8:1.
While one of the highest ratios of 10:1 would recommend
using the VLE only a little higher than 6:1 enjoyed learning more ICT skills
during the process.
Table
2: Condensed survey results.
Answer
Options
|
SD
or D
|
Neutral
|
A
or SA
|
Dictation
was good for learning about writing
|
5
|
6
|
36
|
Peer
sharing was good for learning writing
|
7
|
4
|
36
|
Drafting
essays was good for learning writing
|
6
|
3
|
38
|
Discussions
in the first week helped me understand the topic
|
4
|
2
|
41
|
Sharing
information in Edmodo helped my learning
|
4
|
7
|
36
|
Edmodo
was very good for learning about writing
|
4
|
11
|
32
|
Edmodo
is useful for sharing information and materials
|
5
|
4
|
38
|
Edmodo
is useful for storing information for later
|
4
|
11
|
32
|
I
would recommend using this VLE to other students
|
3
|
13
|
30
|
I
enjoyed learning about new technology during this course
|
5
|
8
|
33
|
All positive aspects of the data show that in general the
majority of students enjoyed the experience and the techniques employed in the
learning process with the inclusion of the technology and the communication
(table 2).
Key Implications
A meaningful dictation activity is strongly perceived as an
enjoyable and worthwhile activity. This is even more valuable if the content of
the dictation directly links to the topic of the essay that students will write
about. By providing the dictated information in the VLE for students to review
and relate to confidence is gained and climate is improved with the supportive
activity of the teacher. In-class peer-sharing of written work is seen as one
the least popular activities most likely because of the checking that students
are on task with their writing progress. As a feature of Japanese university
life, many students enjoy the relaxed nature of learning once they have begun
university, as the entrance examination to university is for some, their most
difficult and important test. While perceived as being very good for learning
about writing participation in the VLE remains a central communicative part of
exploration of the topic as well as integral in the learning process.
Generally, the drafting of essays remains very useful as the first attempt at
any task by any student always needs revision. Initial discussions are often
reported by students as the most beneficial in helping to understand all of the
activities because of the face-to-face interaction. This is a critical
classroom activity and key to the centre of blended learning. Classroom climate
dictates the climate of the VLE and the former leads the latter. Sharing via
the VLE helps in actual content learning as well as skills even for the
minority of students who reported that the VLE in and of itself was only
moderately good for learning about academic writing. As a storage facility or
service the VLE was seen as very useful and a healthy number of students would
recommend using a VLE to help learning academic writing. If the students
recommend using the VLE to others then they must certainly be the most important
informer of the value of the service and format.
While a 3:1 majority of students enjoyed learning about the
technology during this course it can be inferred that ITC skills were improved
during the process and that a great deal of incidental learning occurred as
well as, well-thought-out computer literacy skills combined with web 2.0
skills.
Table
3: How often did you use Edmodo?
Answer
Options
|
Response
Percent
|
Response
Count
|
Extremely
often
|
2.1%
|
1
|
Quite
often
|
29.8%
|
14
|
Moderately
often
|
42.6%
|
20
|
Slightly
often
|
25.5%
|
12
|
Not
at all often
|
0.0%
|
0
|
answered
question
|
47
|
|
Table
4: Did using the Virtual learning Environment (VLE) “Edmodo” help you
learn?
Answer
Options
|
Response
Percent
|
Response
Count
|
Yes,
it was very useful
|
31.9%
|
15
|
Yes,
it was quite useful
|
48.9%
|
23
|
Yes,
it was a little useful
|
23.4%
|
11
|
No,
it was not useful for me to learn
|
0.0%
|
0
|
Other
(please specify)
|
0.0%
|
0
|
answered
question
|
47
|
|
Discussion
Employing this teaching process and carefully blending
in-class tuition with this type of virtual learning environment facilitates:
sharing of information, positivity, insights into the writing of peers and
their viewpoints, recording work done both in and out of the classroom,
promotes better understanding, builds rapport and improves academic writing
skills. Issues are clearly being tackled and progress is genuinely being made.
Qualitative research with case studies may exemplify standards and benchmarks in
the learning process in secondary education but these studies are often
uncommon in EFL tertiary education and academic writing in particular. That
being said, marked student writing samples may be employed as data collection
instruments, as learning materials, and as exemplars for following cohorts of
students. They can be later analysed and compared to update and establish real
improvement in class by class averages. If learners wish to use technology
safely in their studies and ICT skills are required in the business world and
beyond, then promoting this type of blended learning is perhaps a professional
obligation of instructors to include in their programs. Assessment of learning
should be comprehensive and include a range of assessments that cover a range
of skills learned throughout the process and not exclusively the final written
reports.
Inclusive polls and plenaries can support student learning
and flag those students who are falling behind while allowing individual
student progress to be monitored and used as a teaching tool. Formative plenary
assessments for learning may increase student involvement and commitment to
each programme leading to greater student satisfaction and ultimately, student
success.
Further action research must be performed more extensively
to gain better insight into asking students and lecturers the right questions
and in a way that facilitates positive reciprocity and progression.
Representatives from universities and companies should be charged with the
responsibility of clarifying what they want of graduates and what skills they
should have so that courses can be quality assured to provide appropriately
skilled individuals to maintain the world economy. At this stage, students are
made aware that they are learning academic writing as a way of improving their
researching skills, their communication skills and their ICT competency.
While we use this technology to extend our students’
capabilities and skills we must remember that the primary focus is on improving
their academic writing. That being said, through this process their way of
learning as students is developing every week. They become more competent and
comfortable with managing their resources, more productive with their time and
generally more active in researching than with previous techniques. Although
students enjoy and benefit from the use of a VLE that supports their in-class
learning and shared research it is unclear as to how the writing process itself
could be improved upon using the technology available. While the online
information is also available on smartphone devices for free it is not clear how
much students are using information without commenting and “lurking” in the
online environment either deliberately or passively. With the course scoring
being based on only the written content of essays, commitment to the online
part of the learning is heavily affected and must be factored into the holistic
scoring system.
Conclusion / Points for Progression
Blending classroom use of a VLE with out-of-class research
and collaboration is a highly effective way of improving students’ skills and
confidence in academic researching and writing. Especially in an EFL
environment, the ability to review, re-learn and re-try content bridges gaps in
students’ learning while accommodating occasional absence or simple
misunderstanding that may have happened during the course of the classroom
learning. Based on this small scale action research it is clear to see that
students’ confidence in ICT skill grow, in-class and online collaboration is
increased allowing more communication between students in a controlled environment
which promotes openness with all the communiqués being unfiltered and equal in
importance. Participation in the VLE should be of some credit score to students
to encourage use. While this course of study did not give credit points for
involvement in the VLE to participants it was an integral part to the teaching
process and course completion would have been markedly more difficult had
students not participated in any form. Student feedback is incredibly important
for the success of any course and while teachers lead by being the “sage on the
stage” they should also be the “guide on the side” allowing students to
participate in a more integrated manner.
Caton-Rosser, Looney and Schneider (2014) suggest that “ever-upgrading
social digital and social media formats” leads “higher education faculty and
their students” to “face challenges in dealing with” “communication channels”
which “can be double-edged swords depending on the quality of the transmitted
messages and information.” They focus on the practical usage of online learning
services as tools in order to measure “the learning experience and the
development of curricula and policies that result in improved learning and
teacher-learner communication” (Ibid).
Scaled up action research should be performed in order to
gain further insight into the issues explored and to further the participation
of both teachers and students in greater numbers. It is worth considering the
possible negative impact of using computers and other devices for longer
periods of time if adoption of this style of teaching is planned to increase
student commitment and participation. Participants should include ESL first,
second and third year students and their instructors in a somewhat horizontally
and vertically aligned manner so that the student learning experience is as
standard as possible. Questionnaires, focus group interviews and marked student
writing samples could be employed as data collection instruments. This action
research must be performed more extensively in participant number to dismiss
any teacher specific influences and to gain better insight into asking students
and lecturers focused questions and in a way that facilitates positive
reciprocity and progression.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Anthony Brian
Gallagher: MAODE (Open), PGCE(Open), ProGCE, B.Sc.(Hons.) EFL Lecturer,
Nagoya University of Foreign Studies, Aichi, Japan.
REFERENCES
Archibald,
Alisdair. 2014. “Writing in a Second Language.” Centre for Languages
Linguistics & Area Studies. Accessed December 2014 www.llas.ac.uk/resources/gpg/2175.
Beare,
Sophie. 2002. “Writing Strategies: Differences in L1 and L2 Writing.” Centre
for Languages Linguistics & Area Studies. Accessed December 2014 from www.llas.ac.uk/resources/paper/1292.
Bergqvist,
Uo. and B. G. Knave. 1994. “Eye Discomfort and Work with Visual Display Terminals.”
Scandinavian Journal of Work & Environmental Health, 20 pp 27-33.
Crosbie-Brunett
Margaret and Edith. A. Lewis. 1993. “Theoretical Contributions from Social and
Cognitive Behavioral Psychology.” IN: Sourcebook
of Family Theories and Methods: A Contextual Approach. P. G. Boss, W. J. Dohetry,
R. LaRossa, W. R. Schumm, and S. K. Streinmetz (Eds). Plenum Press: New York.
Eichenbaum,
J. W. 1996. Computers and Eyestrain.
Journal of Ophthalmic Nursing Technology 15: 23–26.
Gallagher,
Anthony Brian. 2013. “Issues Affecting Second Language (L2) Learning Students
of Academic Writing. Nagoya University of Foreign Studies.” Ronshu Journal 44: 277–297.
Jones,
James W. 1989. “Personality and Epistemology: Cognitive Social Learning Theory
as a Philosophy of Science.” Zygon 24
(1): 23–38.
Kanitkar,
Kunal. Alan. N. Carlson and Y. Richard. 2005. “Ocular Problems Associated with
Computer Use. Review of Ophthalmology.” Jobson Medical Information LLC.
Retrieved from http://revophth.com/content/d/features/i/1317/c/25354/
Kedir,
Assefa Tessema. 2012. “Reluctance to Write Among Students in the Context of an
Academic Writing Course in an Ethiopian University.” The Asian EFL Journal Quarterly 14 (1): 142–176. Accessed from
http://asian-efl-journal.com/quarterly-journal/2012/03/24/reluctance-to-write-among-students-in-the-context-of-an-academic-writing-course-in-an-ethiopian-university/.
Long,
Martyn. 2000. The Psychology of Education—Involving
Students: 128. Routledge: London & New York.
Matsumoto, Kazuko. 1995. “Research
Paper Writing Strategies of Professional Japanese EFL Writers.” TESL Canada Journal 13 (1): 17–27. Accessed
at www.teslcanadajournal.ca/index.php/tesl/article/viewFile/658/489.
Miller,
N. & J. Dollard. 1941. Social
Learning and Imitation. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Myles,
Johanne. 2002. “Second Language Writing and Research: The Writing Process and
Error Analysis in Student Texts.” TESL-EJ
6 (2). Accessed at
http://tesl-ej.org/ej22/a1.html.
Parr,
Judy, M., Richard J. Hamilton, and Shaun Hawthorne. 2008. “Engaging Reluctant
Writers: The Nature of Reluctance to Write and the Effect of a Self-Regulation
Strategy Training Programme on the Engagement and Writing Performance of
Reluctant Writers in Secondary School.” Thesis. The University of Auckland, NZ.
Accessed at https://researchspace.auckland.ac.nz/handle/2292/3128?show=full.
Perry,
Cheryl. L., Tom Baranowski & Guy. S. Parcel. 1990. “How Individuals,
Environments, and Health Behavior Interact: Social Learning Theory.” IN: Health Behavior and Health Education.
Glanz Karen, Lewis FM, and Rimer Barbara. K (Eds). Jossey-Bass: San Fransisco.
Silva,
Tony. 1993. “Toward and Understanding of the Distinct Nature of L2 Writing.” TESOL Quarterly 27 (4): 657–677.
Springer,
Leonard, Mary Elizabeth Stanne and Samuel S. Donovan. 1999. “Effects of
Small-Group Learning on Undergraduates in Science, Mathematics, Engineering,
and Technology: A Meta-Analysis.” Review
of Educational Research 69 (Spring 1999): 21–51,
Thomas,
Margo. 1990. Social Learning Theory. IN: The
Encyclopedia of Human Development and Education: Theory, Research, and Studies.
Thomas, Margo (Ed). Pergamon Press: New York.
Travers,
P. H. and B. A. Stanton, 2002. “Office Workers and Video Display Terminals:
Physical, Psychological and Ergonomic Factors.” AAOHN J. Accessed from www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12465203.
Woodward,
William. R. 1982. “The ‘discovery’ of Social Behaviorism and Social Learning
Theory,” American Psychologist 37 (4):
396–410.
Appendix A: REFERENCED WEBSITES
Weblio http://ejje.weblio.jp/
SpaceALC http://www.alc.co.jp/
Thesuarus.com http://www.thesaurus.com/
Dictionary.com http://dictionary.reference.com/
Edmodo* https://www.edmodo.com/
*“Edmodo and the Edmodo logo are registered trademarks of Edmodo,
Inc., used with permission.”
[ABG1]Eye-stain is a common reason for users to feel
uncomfortable with computers and can become a barrier. This is why it is
included. It is also directly linked to my other research and has featured in
many news outlets.
[ABG2]I have permission to use Edmodo under condition
that this is included. The same permission was granted to present at the
Berkeley 2015 conference.
Comments
Post a Comment