D.
What other factors are important when we integrate technology
into our daily teaching?
I
want to share the findings of my research so far. I welcome
any comments.
Easy
access
The
integration of technology was perceived helpful when the technology
provided students with convenience (unlimited access at anytime
from anywhere) and comfort (knowing exactly what was going
on and expected in class). On the other hand, students perceived
technology unfavorably when they had access problems. A student
said, “Because of technical difficulties with my saclink
account, I could not listen to any audio files,” “the
streaming voice exercise was helpful, but if you don’t
have dsl or a faster internet hook up, it was frustrating
for the file to upload.“ Those who were not able to
install Japanese fonts on their computer tended to see technology
as a problem until they successfully set up their computer.
Frequent
usage
It
appears that the students engaged themselves to online learning
when they had a routine usage of technology in class and hence
formed “good” habits to use the online materials
regularly. This routine usage of computers in the lab with
technical support helped students to gain knowledge and skills
in using technology. Tessmer (1991) stresses the need to analyze
the environment in which the potential adopter is expected
to use the technology. This study confirms the importance
of frequent use of a hands-on learning environment.
Frequent usage is seemed to
assist students to form a positive perception towards technology.
In other words, the more they used it, the more they felt
that technology was useful to their learning. Those who engaged
into online exercises intensively perceived that online exercises
facilitated their language learning. On the other hand, the
students tended to perceive the technology that was not used
and/or the instructor did not focus on nor update frequently
as less useful. A student said, “(The least useful is)
email. That is only because I rarely used it…I did not
really use it to communicate with anyone.”
Learning
“Hub”
The
students perception was favorable when all necessary information
is stored in one place. One student wrote, “ I like
how everything on WebCT was all in one place so you did not
have to look at several handouts and websites for the information
on the class. I liked how you could look at the class schedule
online and see what you were going to be doing in future.”
Others commented, “Instead of what most instructors
do, which is to make using WebCT optional, you (the instructor)
have made it an integral part of the class by creating assignments
for posting and completing in WebCT. With your setup, we can,
at any time, check the schedule for upcoming assignments,
practice and improve our language skills with the exercises
you have made available, contact you, and much more”
(online anonymous survey).
Consistency
The
students formed positive views toward the technology when
the delivery of online materials was consistent in terms of
time (when posted), location (where posted), and format (how
presented). A systematic presentation of visual and descriptive
advanced organizers such as the online daily schedule increased
the value of online material in the eyes of students. The
students felt that they learn better and more efficiently
when there are ample step-by-step presentations (i.e. modeling).
A student commented: “I enjoyed the content section
of each lesson. It helped me understand the lesson more clearly.
Moreover the schedule of what was going on each week.”
The students appreciated a minimalist approach to instruction,
which meant brief, concise instructions and descriptions.
Solidarity
The
students formed positive views towards the use of technology
when technology promoted social aspects of learning, namely
communication with other students. A student said, “Her
use of technology has made it more convenient to interact
with others and has created a friendly atmosphere with fellow
students.” Many students stated that the Diva©e
program provided an opportunity to work with a number of students
with different backgrounds: “we use the language lab
to get the opportunity to interact with others who we might
not get the privilege to if we were just to sit in class.”
Limitation
& Future
The
above findings have limitations because this is an intrinsic
case study. I only used one site. To verify the findings and
explore possible factors, I need to keep conducting this survey
for next several years, and I should employ different data
collection approaches such as in-depth interviews and journal
writing. I am also looking for people who are interested in
pursuing this sort of research together.
End
of Working Paper
kmasuyama@csus.edu.
Top
|
Introduction
