Çevrimiçi Öğretmen Katılımı ve Etkileşimli Akran Öğrenmesinin Karşılaştırılması: Çinli Yabancı Dil Öğrencilerinin Algılarıları ve Deneyimleri

Year 2019, , 56 - 73, 31.01.2019

Chen Chen

https://doi.org/10.31681/jetol.512896

Abstract

Bu karşılaştırmalı çalışmanın amacı etkileşimli öğrenmenin iki türü olan çevrimiçi  öğretmen katılımı ve akran öğrenme yöntemleri hakkında Çindeki bir üniversitede yer alan yabancı dil öğrencilerinin algılarını ve deneyimlerini araştırmaktır. Rasgele iki gruba ayrılan katılımcılar, Çin’de bir üniversitede öğrenim gören 32 yabancı dil öğrencisinden oluşmaktadır. Bir grup öğretmen katılımlı etkileşimli öğrenme yöntemi ile ders işlerken, diğer grup  akran katılımlı etkileşimli öğrenme yöntemi ile ders işlemiştir. Veriler öğrencilerin çevrimiçi dökümanları ve yarı yapılandırılmış görüşme formu aracılığı ile elde edilmiştir. Sonuç olarak iki grup arasında öğrencilerin algıları ve deneyimleri açısından faklılıklar tespit edilmiştir. Öğretmen katılımlı grupta öğrenciler baskın bir şekilde öğretmenin etkisi altındadırlar ve öğrenme etkinliklerine katılımları normal düzeydedir. Akran etkileşimli grupta ise öğrenciler bir çok dış faktörden etkilenmişlerdir. Böylece öğrenme etkinliklerine katılımları ve katkıları olumsuz yönde etkilemiştir. Bununla birlikte öğretmen katılımlı gruptaki öğrencilerin öğrenme etkinliklerinde daha aktif rol oynadıkları ortaya çıkmıştır. Araştırma sonunda gelecekteki çalışmalara yönelik önerilere yer verilmiştir. 

Keywords

Çevrimiçi öğrenme, yabancı dil olarak İngilizce, etkileşimli öğrenme, öğretmen-öğrenci etkileşimi, akran etkileşimi

A Comparative Study of Online Teacher-Involved and Peer Interactive Learning: Chinese EFL Students’ Perceptions and Practices

Abstract

This comparative study aims at exploring Chinese university English as a foreign language (EFL) students’ perceptions and practice of two types of interactive learning: the teacher-involved one and the peer one, as well as the factors that may have impacts on their learning. Participants of the study were 32 Chinese EFL students enrolled in a university, being randomly divided into two groups. One group of students participated in teacher-involved interactive learning in an online context; the other group interacted with peers for learning while the teachers were not involved in learning activities. Data collection were administrated via students’ online learning documents and semi-structured individual interviews. It was found that students’ perceptions and practice were different in two types of interaction. In teacher-involved interactive learning, participants were under the strong impacts of their teachers, and had more stable engagement in learning; while students in peer interactive learning were influenced by a wider range of factors, leading to their less stable participation and production in learning activities. Besides, EFL students were found to be more active in a teacher-involved learning context. Recommendations for future studies are provided on the base of these findings.

Keywords

English as a foreign language, interactive learning, teacher-student interaction, peer interaction, Online learning, peer interaction

References

• AbuSeileek, A. F. (2012). The effect of computer-assisted cooperative learning methods and group size on the EFL learners’ achievement in communication skills. Computers & Education, 58(1), 231-239.
• Barry, K., King, L., & Burke, M. (2000, December). Student talk in a whole class and cooperation learning setting in a philosophy for children program. In Australian Association for Research in Education (AARE) Conference.
• Bloch, J. (2002). Student/teacher interaction via email: The social context of Internet discourse. Journal of Second Language Writing, 11(2), 117-134.
• Carson, J. G., & Nelson, G. L. (1996). Chinese students' perceptions of ESL peer response group interaction. Journal of second language writing, 5(1), 1-19.
• Chapelle, C. A. (2003). English language learning and technology. Amsterdam, Netherland: John Benjamins.
• Chen, Z., & Goh, C. (2011). Teaching oral English in higher education: Challenges to EFL teachers. Teaching in Higher Education, 16(3), 333-345.
• Ching, Y. H., & Hsu, Y. C. (2016). Learners’ Interpersonal Beliefs and Generated Feedback in an Online Role-Playing Peer-Feedback Activity: An Exploratory Study. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 17(2).
• Chou, C. (2003). Interactivity and interactive functions in web‐based learning systems: a technical framework for designers. British Journal of Educational Technology, 34(3), 265-279.
• Ciftci, H., & Kocoglu, Z. (2012). Effects of peer e-feedback on Turkish EFL students' writing performance. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 46(1), 61-84.
• Clément, R., Baker, S. C., & MacIntyre, P. D. (2003). Willingness to communicate in a second language: The effects of context, norms, and vitality. Journal of language and social psychology, 22(2), 190-209.
• Duffy, T. M., & Jonassen, D. H. (2013). Constructivism and the technology of instruction: A conversation. Routledge.Gilbert, L., & Moore, D. R. (1998). Building interactivity into Web courses: Tools for social and instructional interactions. Educational Technology, 38(3), 29-35.
• Gregersen, T., & Horwitz, E. K. (2002). Language learning and perfectionism: Anxious and non‐anxious language learners' reactions to their own oral performance. The Modern Language Journal, 86(4), 562-570.
• Horwitz, E. (2001). Language anxiety and achievement. Annual review of applied linguistics, 21, 112-126.
• Hung, H. C., Young, S. S. C., & Lin, C. P. (2015). No student left behind: a collaborative and competitive game-based learning environment to reduce the achievement gap of EFL students in Taiwan. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 24(1), 35-49.
• Hüseyin, Ö. Z. (2014). Teachers’ and students’ perceptions of interactive whiteboards in the English as a foreign language classroom. TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 13(3), 156-177.
• Hsieh, C. J. S., Wu, W. C. V., & Marek, M. W. (2017). Using the flipped classroom to enhance EFL learning. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 30(1-2), 1-21.
• Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2009). An educational psychology success story: Social interdependence theory and cooperative learning. Educational researcher, 38(5), 365-379.
• Kalanzadeh, G. A., Soleimani, H., & Bakhtiarvand, M. (2014). Exploring the influence of using technology on Iranian EFL students’ motivation. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 814-823.
• Liaw, S. S., & Huang, H. M. (2000). Enhancing interactivity in web-based instruction: A review of the literature. Educational Technology, 40(3), 41-45.
• Littlewood, W. (2007). Communicative and task-based language teaching in East Asian classrooms. Language teaching, 40(3), 243-249.
• Long, M. H. (2018). Interaction in L2 Classrooms. The TESOL Encyclopedia of English Language Teaching, 1-7.
• Luk, J. C., & Lin, A. M. (2017). Classroom interactions as cross-cultural encounters: Native speakers in EFL lessons. Routledge.
• Morell, T. (2007). What enhances EFL students’ participation in lecture discourse? Student, lecturer and discourse perspectives. Journal of English for academic Purposes, 6(3), 222-237.
• Peeters, W. (2018). Applying the networking power of Web 2.0 to the foreign language classroom: a taxonomy of the online peer interaction process. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 1-27.
• Pishghadam, R., & Ghadiri, S. (2011). Symmetrical or asymmetrical scaffolding: Piagetian vs. Vygotskyan views to reading comprehension. Journal of Language and Literacy Education, 7.
• Rahnama, M., Fatehi Rad, N., & Bagheri, H. (2016). Developing EFL Learners’ Speaking Ability, Accuracy, and Fluency. ELT Voices, 6(1), 1-7.
• Rostami, G., Kashanian, V., & Gholami, H. (2016). The relationship between language proficiency and willingness to communicate in English in an Iranian EFL Context. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Research, 3(2), 166-176.
• Saeed, M. A., Ghazali, K., Sahuri, S. S., & Abdulrab, M. (2018). Engaging EFL Learners in Online Peer Feedback on Writing: What Does It Tell Us?. Journal of Information Technology Education, 17.
• Storch, N. (2005). Collaborative writing: Product, process, and students’ reflections. Journal of second language writing, 14(3), 153-173.
• Wang, Y. C. (2014). Using wikis to facilitate interaction and collaboration among EFL learners: A social constructivist approach to language teaching. System, 42, 383-390.
• Woo, Y., & Reeves, T. C. (2007). Meaningful interaction in web-based learning: A social constructivist interpretation. The Internet and higher education, 10(1), 15-25.
• Xu, Y., & Liu, Y. (2009). Teacher assessment knowledge and practice: A narrative inquiry of a Chinese college EFL teacher's experience. Tesol Quarterly, 43(3), 492-513.
• Yan, J. X., & Horwitz, E. K. (2008). Learners' perceptions of how anxiety interacts with personal and instructional factors to influence their achievement in English: A qualitative analysis of EFL learners in China. Language learning, 58(1), 151-183.
• Yang, M., Badger, R., & Yu, Z. (2006). A comparative study of peer and teacher feedback in a Chinese EFL writing class. Journal of second language writing, 15(3), 179-200.
• Yeh, H. C., & Yang, Y. F. (2011). Prospective teachers’ insights towards scaffolding students’ writing processes through teacher–student role reversal in an online system. Educational Technology Research and Development, 59(3), 351-368.
• Yen, Y. C., Hou, H. T., & Chang, K. E. (2015). Applying role-playing strategy to enhance learners’ writing and speaking skills in EFL courses using Facebook and Skype as learning tools: A case study in Taiwan. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 28(5), 383-406.