Author, Subjects, Keywords

Cited Author

 

 
   » By Author or Editor
 » Browse Author by Alphabet
 » By Journal
 » By Subjects
 » Malaysian Journals
 » By Type
 » By Year
 » By Latest Additions
 
 
   » By Author
 » Top 20 Authors
 » Top 20 Article
 » Top Journal Cited
 » Top Article Cited
 » Journal Citation Statistics
 » Usage Since Sept 2007


 
 
 

Login | Create Account

A Study of Students’ Perceptions and Attitudes Towards ESL Writing Using Computer-Based Learning Materials

Wah, Cheong Lai, (2006) A Study of Students’ Perceptions and Attitudes Towards ESL Writing Using Computer-Based Learning Materials. Internet Journal of e-Language Learning & Teaching, 3 (1). pp. 26-48. ISSN 1985-6024

[img]
Preview
PDF - Requires a PDF viewer such as GSview, Xpdf or Adobe Acrobat Reader
182Kb

Official URL: http://pkukmweb.ukm.my/mojel/pdf/CheongLaiWah.pdf

Affiliations

Not indicated

Abstract

Effective incorporation of technology in the ESL writing classroom relies on adopting a critical view of the fundamental theories and practices about computer-assisted language learning (CALL), and understanding how instructional design can be helpful to learners in the composing process. The purpose of this study is to investigate how computer-based instruction (CBI) should be designed and used to improve the way students process information to improve writing in the composing process. The sampling population consisted of twenty randomly selected Form Four students from a secondary school.Drawing on the essence of behaviourist, cognitive, and constructivist theories, the study adopted an eclectic view to language learning. Instructional design principles were based on the guiding principles of a four-phased instruction. The study employed a one-sample pre- and post-treatment design. Research instruments include: Kwikwest (a courseware design by this researcher), questionnaires, students’ journals and essay drafts, and interviews. Data collected from the questionnaires was analyzed quantitatively using one-sample t-test technique and frequency distributions of subjects’ positive responses. The data was then triangulated qualitatively through analysis of students’ journals and essay drafts,and transcripts of interviews. Overall, findings show that students considered the topics on writing skills, the language items, and the types of language lessons and practices as aspects of instructional process beneficial to their English writing process. The students reported less blocking behaviours on the “attitude”,“editing”, and “blocking” sub-scales in the WAQ. Findings also indicate students considered the instructional design principles pertaining to phase 1 (presenting information)and phase 3 (practicing by the students) less helpful in the composing process. Analysis of data obtained from phase 4(assessing student learning) indicates incomplete mastery of higher order thinking skills needed for quality writing. However, the students regarded the instructional design principles for phase 2 of instruction(guiding the students) beneficial.

Item Type:Journal
Additional Information:Continued: Malaysian Online Journal of e-Learning (MOJeL)
Keywords:Students, ELS writing, computer based learning, learning material
Subjects:L Education
ID Code:10418

lessi, S.M. & Trollip, S.R. (1991). Computer Based Instruction: Methods and Development. 2nd Ed. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Alessi, S.M. & Trollip, S.R. (2001). Multimedia for Learning: Methods and Development. 3rd Ed. Massachusetts:

Allyn & Bacon. Alonso, I. & McCabe, A. (2003). Improving Text Flow in ESL Learner Compositions. The Internet TESL Journal, IX (2): 1-5. (available online)http://iteslj.org/Articles/Alonso-ImprovingFlow.html (6 March 2003).

Cohen, L. & Manion, L. (1989). Research Methods in Education. 3rd Ed. London: Routledge.

Doolittle, P. (2001). Integrating Constructivism and Cognitivism. Draft.Educational Psychology. (available online) http://www.tandl.vt.edu/doolittle/research/icc.html (21 August 2004).

Ferris, D. & Hedgcock, J.S. (1998). Teaching ESL Composition: Purpose, Process, and Practice. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.

Foddy, W. (2004). Checks to Ensure that Questions Work as Intended. In: Bulmer, M. (Ed.), Questionnaires: Sage Benchmarks in Social Research Methods.Vol. 1. London: Sage Publications Ltd.

Gabrielatos, C. (2002). EFL Writing: Product and Process. Karen’s Linguistics Issues, May 2002:1-14. (available online) http://www3.telus.net/linguisticsissues/eflwriting.html(18 February 2003).

Gocsik, K. (1997). Teaching Critical Thinking. (available online) http://www.dartmouth.edu/~compose/faculty/ethods/responding.htm (6 August 2004).

Grabe, M. & Grabe, C. (1996). Integrating Technology for Meaningful Learning. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Handal, B. & Herrington, A. (2003). Re-examining Categories of Computer-based Learning in Mathematics Education. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 3(3): 275-287.

amieson, J. & Chapelle, C. (1988). Using CALL Effectively: What Do We Need to Know about Students? System, 16(2):151-162.

Jonassen, D.H. (1994). Thinking Technology: Toward a Constructivist Design Model. Educational Technology, 34(4): 34-37.

Jonassen, D.H. & McAleese, T.M.R. (Undated). A Manifesto for a Constructive Approach to Technology in Higher Education. (available online) http://led.gcal.ac.uk/clti/papers/TMPaper11.html (17 August 2004).

Kang, Yunkyoung. (1987). A Review of: Carrell, Patricia L. Content and Formal Schemata in ESL Reading. TESOL Quarterly, 21(3): 461-481.

Kearsley, G. (2004). Elaboration Theory – C. Reigeluth. (available online) http://tip.psychology.org/reigelut.html (17 August 2004).

Langan, J. (1989). College Writing Skills with Readings.2nd Ed. USA: McGraw-Hill Publishing Company.

Lederfein, B. (1992). Writing: Who Needs It? TRENDS, 2: 75-80.(available online) http://ett.mofet.macam1998.ac.il/resourse/lederfein92.htm (26 February 2004).

Levy, M. (1997).Computer-assisted Language Learning:Context and Conceptualization. New York: Oxford University Press.

Lim, G. (1998). Replacing Classroom Lecture with Web-based Instruction: Implication for Courseware Design and Development. Paper presented at the Sixth International Conference on Computers in Education ICCE98. (available online) http://ole.tp.edu.sg/courseware/teaching_guide/resources/article/Grace/icce98a.pdf (3 March 2004).

Malaysian Examination Syndicate. (2002). English Language Marking Scheme 1119/2. Kuala Lumpur: Malaysian Examination Syndicate.

Microsoft FrontPage. (2000). (available online)http://support.microsoft.com/support. (4 March 2003).

Newby, T.J. (1996). Instructional Technology for Teaching and Learning: Designing Instruction, Integrating Computers, and Using Media. New Jersey: Merrill.

Norlida Alias. (2004). Enhancing the Language Learning Experience via Web-based Learning. Ph.D. Thesis. Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.

Bangi Nunan, D. (1999). Second Language Teaching & Learning. USA: Heinle & Heinle Publishing.

Owston, R.D. & Wideman, H.H. (1996). Word Processors and Children's Writing in a High Computer Access Setting. (available online) http://www.edu.yorku.ca:8080/~owston/written.html (11 August 2004).

Phinney, M. (1991). Word Processing and Writing Apprehension in the First and Second Language Writer. Computers and Composition, 11(1): 65-82. (available online)

http://www.hu.mtu.edu/~candc.archives/v9/9_1_html/9_1_5_Phinney.html (17 January 2004).

Raimes, A. (1996). Out of the Woods: Emerging Traditions in the Teaching of Writing. In Leed, B. (Ed.), Writing in a Second Language: Insights from First and Second Language Teaching and Research. London: Longman.

Rose, M. (1984). Writer's Block: The Cognitive Dimension. Studies in Writing & Rhetoric. Illinois: Southern Illinois University Press.

Rosen, D. (1997). Do Technology Based Lessons Meet the Needs of Student Learning Styles? (available online)http://edweb.sdsu.edu/courses/edtec596r/students/Rosen/Rosen.html (6 January 2004)

Salvin, R.E. (1994). Education Psychology: Theory and Practice. 4th Ed. Massachusetts: Allyn and Bacon.

Scott, V.M. (1996). Rethinking Foreign Language Writing. Massachusetts: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.

Siti Hanim Stapa. (1998). The Process Approach to ESL Writing. Bangi: Penerbit Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.

Sullivan, N. & Pratt, E. (1996). A Comparative Study of Two ESL Writing Environments: A Computer-assisted Classroom and a Traditional Oral Classroom. System, 29(4):491-501.

Toh, S.C. (2003). The Design and Development of a Constructivist Multimedia Learning Environment (CMLE): The Universiti Sains Malaysia Experience. Proceeding at the 16th

Educational Technology Convention, pp 66-75.

Warschauer, M. & Healey, D. (1998). Computers and Language Learning: An Overview.Language Teaching, 31:57-71. (available online)http://www.gse.uci.edu/markw/overview.html (7 July 2004)

Warschauer, M. & Kern, R. (2000). Introduction: Theory and Practice of Network-based Language Teaching. In:Warschauer, M. & Kern, R. (Eds,), Network-based Language Teaching: Concepts and Practice (pp 1-19). UK: Cambridge University Press.

Repository Staff Only: item control page