Transcript (CMC) to enhance students` participation in group discussion

Using Computer-Mediated
Communication (CMC) to
enhance students’ participation
in group discussion
Presented by Carol Sze Pui Shan
Carol P.S. Sze
CITERS 2004 10 July 2004
1
Outline of Presentation
•
•
•
•
•
Introduction of Study
Summary of literature review
Research Methodology and Design
Major findings
Conclusions and recommendations
Carol P.S. Sze
CITERS 2004 10 July 2004
2
Purpose of the Study
• To investigate the use of CMC to encourage
student dialogue in English through the use
of WebCT tools in a vocational institute in
Hong Kong
• Graphical representation of the use of CMC
in this study
Carol P.S. Sze
CITERS 2004 10 July 2004
3
CMC tools
Bulletin Board
(Asynchronous
communication)
Chat
(Synchronous
communication)
To facilitate group discussion in an English Project
Carol P.S. Sze
CITERS 2004 10 July 2004
4
Research Questions
• 1. Can CMC enhance students’ participation in
group discussion?
• 2. Are students more willing to discuss in English
using CMC than in face-to-face(f2f) context?
• 3. Can students develop a greater sense of
satisfaction and achievements in using CMC to
complete an English project?
• 4. How can CMC be implemented in a language
curriculum?
Carol P.S. Sze
CITERS 2004 10 July 2004
5
What is CMC? (1/3)
• 1. CMC as a new form of learning
environment
• - students can discuss and construct their
knowledge
• - by interacting with people and the world
through the internet
Carol P.S. Sze
CITERS 2004 10 July 2004
6
What is CMC? (2/3)
• 2. CMC as a tool for collaborative learning
• - it involves active construction of knowledge by
putting new ideas into words and receiving
reactions from others (Hiltz, 1994)
• - turn taking is more equally distributed in CMC
discussion (Graddol, 1989)
• - written records can maintain the discussions to
be run continuously (Kaye, 1989)
Carol P.S. Sze
CITERS 2004 10 July 2004
7
What is CMC? (3/3)
• 3.CMC as an educational forum
• - students can post and read each other’s
contributions anytime and anywhere
• - promotes a high level of interaction
between participants (Nesi, 1996)
Carol P.S. Sze
CITERS 2004 10 July 2004
8
Conceptual framework of this
study
• The implementation of CMC in a language
curriculum is governed by:
• Nature of CMC
• Design and management of online
discussion
• Online learning environment
• Students’ characteristics
Carol P.S. Sze
CITERS 2004 10 July 2004
9
Nature of CMC
•
•
•
•
Asynchronicity
Text-based communication
Authentic use of target language
Conversation in slow motion
Carol P.S. Sze
CITERS 2004 10 July 2004
10
Asynchronicity
• Time asynchrony is an important advantage of
CMC (Kaye, 1989; Harasim, 1990, Hutchings,
2002).
• Students have more time for reflective thinking
before they give response and students who do not
have good spoken English can be beneficial with
this asynchronous features of communication
channel (Cannone-Syrcos and Syrcos Tei Piraeus,
2000).
Carol P.S. Sze
CITERS 2004 10 July 2004
11
Text-based communication
• It enables participants to make selfcorrections to utterances during production
and review them (Glatz, 2001)
• It provides opportunity for students to
improve their writing skills (Mason and
Kaye, 1989) and increase attentiveness to
written contribution (Harasim, 1990)
Carol P.S. Sze
CITERS 2004 10 July 2004
12
Asynchronous CMC in second
language learning
• It encourages purposeful use of the target
language (Kawamura, 1998).
• It facilitates language production and
monitor language use (Glatz, 2001).
• It allows students who are shy and less
capable to discuss in their second language
in a less stressful way (Garratt, 2002).
Carol P.S. Sze
CITERS 2004 10 July 2004
13
Synchronous CMC in second
language learning
• It reduces students’ anxiety and maximize
students’ motivation in using the target
language (Beauvois, 1997, 1999).
• “Conversation in slow motion” (Beauvois,
1997)
• - It allows more time to think and compose
in which it can increase student
communication in the target language.
Carol P.S. Sze
CITERS 2004 10 July 2004
14
Design and management of
online discussion
•
•
•
•
Task design
Task requirements
Rewards or assessments
Teachers’ involvement
Carol P.S. Sze
CITERS 2004 10 July 2004
15
Students’ characteristics and
online learning environment
•
•
•
•
Readiness
Perceptions
Language proficiency
Incorporation of computer use in existing
classroom culture
Carol P.S. Sze
CITERS 2004 10 July 2004
16
Research Methodology and
Design
• Case study
• 38 Year One Higher Diploma Engineering students
studying in a vocational institute in 2003
• Students were asked to use WebCT tools to discuss with
their group members in setting a research topic, collecting
data, analyzing data and preparing a formal presentation.
• Guidelines and discussion requirements were given and
students participation in online discussion were assessed
through the submission of a Writing Portfolio.
Carol P.S. Sze
CITERS 2004 10 July 2004
17
Graphical Representation of research data
Records of online
discussion and
posting
WebCT
Records
Research Data
Quantitative
Data
Questionnair
e
Carol P.S. Sze
Qualitative Data
Writing
Portfolio
s
CITERS 2004 10 July 2004
Interviews
Observation
18
Summary of findings (1/2)
• Using WebCT tools encouraged students to
use more English in students’ group
discussion.
• The nature of CMC facilitated more
students’ dialogue in group discussion.
• The design of the project facilitated more
discussions among the group.
Carol P.S. Sze
CITERS 2004 10 July 2004
19
Summary of findings (2/2)
• Students did not enjoy much in using WebCT tools.
• WebCT tools are less convenient than other online
tools such as ICQ.
• Students preferred more human contacts when
communicating with each other.
• Students’ participation was hindered by their low
proficiency in English.
• The long time lag between responses discouraged
students’ participation.
Carol P.S. Sze
CITERS 2004 10 July 2004
20
Conclusions
• 1. Can CMC enhance students’ participation in
group discussion?
• 2. Are students more willing to discuss in English
using CMC than in face-to-face(f2f) context?
• 3. Can students develop a greater sense of
satisfaction and achievements in using CMC to
complete an English project?
• 4. How can CMC be implemented in a language
curriculum?
Carol P.S. Sze
CITERS 2004 10 July 2004
21
Can CMC enhance students’
participation in group discussion?
• Yes.
• It increases the amount and depth of discussion.
• Students mentioned the advantages of asynchronicity
of online communication in their Writing Portfolio.
• The written form of communication allows students
who are shy or lack of confidence to participate in the
discussion.
• Students reported that they were motivated to discuss
online as they knew that their participation would be
assessed and they had to submit records of online
discussion.
Carol P.S. Sze
CITERS 2004 10 July 2004
22
Are students more willing to discuss in
English using CMC than in face-toface(f2f) context
• Yes.
• Students used more English in online
discussion than they did in f2f context.
• However, it failed in monitoring their
language use. ICQ or simplified language
was found to be common.
Carol P.S. Sze
CITERS 2004 10 July 2004
23
Can students develop a greater sense of
satisfaction and achievements in using
CMC to complete an English project?
• Yes and No.
• They agreed that the online discussion helped
them do better in their English project.
• They would like the same practice to be continued
in the following year.
• Some students did not participate actively.
• Students enjoyed more the fun and the human
contacts which were not found in online
discussion.
Carol P.S. Sze
CITERS 2004 10 July 2004
24
How can CMC be implemented in a
language curriculum?
• It should be made compulsory to students.
• Clear guidelines on how to conduct online
discussion should be given.
• Both teachers and students can help to
realize the potentials of CMC in
overcoming some of the problems we
encountered when the same activity was
done without technology.
Carol P.S. Sze
CITERS 2004 10 July 2004
25
Role of teachers
• 1. Pedagogical role
• 2. Managerial role
• 3. Social role
Carol P.S. Sze
CITERS 2004 10 July 2004
26
Pedagogical
•Task design
•Facilitator
•Providing guidance
•Relevant contribution
•Role Model behaviour in online discussion
Teacher
Managerial
•Course structuring
•Task requirement
•Participation requirement
•Awarding participation
Carol P.S. Sze
Social
•Developing online learning
environment
•Encouraging social interaction
•Encouraging participation
CITERS 2004 10 July 2004
27
Role of students
• Participation
• Readiness
• Language Use
Carol P.S. Sze
CITERS 2004 10 July 2004
28
Participation
•Logging on to the platform
•Reading messages
•Posting messages
•Responding to messages
Student
Readiness
•Access to technology
•Confidence in using CMC tools
•Comfortability in online
Communication
•Responsibility in online
communication
Language Use
•Proficiency in target language
•Text-based communication
Carol P.S. Sze
CITERS 2004 10 July 2004
29
Limitations of the study
• Some students did not use WebCT to
discuss with their classmates even when it
was set as a requirement in the project.
• Teacher’s views were restricted to the
researcher who was teaching the group.
Data reflecting teachers’ view might be
subjective.
Carol P.S. Sze
CITERS 2004 10 July 2004
30
Direction for further research
• To explore the possibilities on how CMC
could be an additional way of reducing
students’ anxiety while at the same time
developing their language skills
• To find out the cognitive load of nonEnglish speakers in the use of CMC
Carol P.S. Sze
CITERS 2004 10 July 2004
31
References (1/2)
•
•
•
•
•
•
Beauvois, M. (1997). Computer-mediated communication (CMC): Technology on improving
speaking and writing. In Bush, M. and Terry, R. (Ed). Technology-Enhanced Language Learning.
National Textbook Company.
Beauvois, M. (1999). Computer-mediated communication: Reducing anxiety and building
community. In Young, D. (Ed). Affect in Foreign Language and Second Language Learning. A
Practical Guide to Creating a Low-Anxiety Classroom Atmosphere. McGraw-Hill College.
Cannone-Syrcos, B. and Syrcos Tei Piraeus, G. (2000). Computer-mediated communication in
distance education. In Orange, G. and Hobbs, D. (Ed). International Perspectives on Tele-education
and Virtual Learning Environments. Ashgate
Garratt, L. (2002). The Development, Implementation and Evaluation of a Social Constructivist Webbased English Language Learning Module. MSc Project. The University of Hong Kong.
Glatz, L. (2001). Technology in language teacher training. The new challenges of multimedia-based
content, technology-enhanced language learning, and computer-mediated communication. In Brauer,
G. (Ed). Pedagogy of Language Learning in Higher Education. An Introduction. Advances in Foreign
and Second Language Pedagogy Vol 2. Ablex Publishing.
Graddol, D. (1989). Some CMC discourse properties and their educational significance. In Mason, R.
and Kaye, R. (Ed). Mindweave: Communication, Computers and Distance Education. Oxford.
Pergamon.
Carol P.S. Sze
CITERS 2004 10 July 2004
32
References (2/2)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Harasim, L. (1990). Online education: an environment for collaboration and intellectual amplification.
In Harasim, L. (Ed). Online Education: Perspectives on a New Environment. New York. Praeger.
Hiltz, S. (1994). The Virtual Classroom. Learning Without Limits via Computer Networks. Ablex
Publishing Corporation. New Jersey.
Hutchings, M. (2002). Computer mediated communication: impact on learning. In Fallows, S. and
Bhanot, R. (Ed). Educational Development through Information and Communications Technology.
Kogan Page.
Kawamura, H. (1998). Constructing a Learning Community in a Global Culture. Retrieved 16
December 2002 from http://leahi.kcc.hawaii.edu/org/tcon98/paper/kawamura.html
Kaye, A. (1989). Computer-mediated communication and distance education. In Mason, R. and Kaye,
A. (Ed). Mindweave. Communication, Computers and Distance Education. Pergamon Press.
Mason, R. and Kaye, A. (1989). Mindweave: Communication, Computers and Distance Education.
Oxford. Pergamon Press.
Nesi, H. (1996). Roles for Trainers and Trainees in Computer-Mediated Courses.
ELTED
Vol
2,
Issue
1.
Retrieved
16
December
2002
from
http://www.cels.bham.ac.uk/ELTED/Vol2Issue1/nesi.pdf
Carol P.S. Sze
CITERS 2004 10 July 2004
33
Q &A
THANK YOU
Carol Sze Pui Shan
IVE (ST)
[email protected]
Carol P.S. Sze
CITERS 2004 10 July 2004
34