able budgetary sums to ensure that computer classes are scheduled and taught by the regular classroom teacher. Many teachers must embrace technological ...
Integrating Online Discussion in an Australian Intensive English Language Course Wendy Sutherland-Smith
E
ffectively integrating Internet technology into ESL classes can be technically and pedagogically challenging for teachers. Many institutions require technology integration in ESL curricula and apportion considerable budgetary sums to ensure that computer classes are scheduled and taught by the regular classroom teacher. Many teachers must embrace technological change without necessarily having had prior experience using it themselves. As a consequence, there can be temptation to use technology as an add-on rather than a truly integrated part of course structure, and “using lots of technology does not guarantee that you are using constructivist approaches” (Marlowe & Page, 1998, p. 130). However, many electronic tools, such as e-mail, e-journals, chat rooms, and virtual classrooms, help learners construct meaning by offering them, and their instructors, new opportunities to work toward autonomous models of learning. In this article, I describe how I used the Internet for online interaction in a 10-week ESL course for undergraduates. My aims were to • provide real-life language experiences for the students so they have the opportunity to communicate with a real audience, for a real purpose—not just with the teacher for a grade (Dixon-Krauss, 1996; Vygotsky, 1978) • expose students to other means of communication through the use of Internet elements, such as Web sites, hyperlinks, animations, and other visual data (Snyder, 1999) • introduce students to new forms of literacy on the Web from which they learn to visually analyze multimedia components, such as text, animation, video displays, and audio recordings (for Web literacy, see Leu, 2000, and Sutherland-Smith, 2002; for visual literacy, see Burbules & Callister, 1996, and Kress, 1997) For this course, I investigated the possibility that computer-mediated discussion may “empower students” and change classroom dynamics by “modelling a more egalitarian mode of dialogue” (Flores, 1990, p. 112), as had been claimed for computer-mediated writing. I wanted to discover whether computer-mediated discussion could provide “equity of access, equity of participation, and VOL. 11 NO. 3
equity of opportunity,” as suggested by Selfe (1990, p. 133). Additionally, I explored ESL students’ attitudes toward online discussion compared to traditional face-toface discussion in order to consider their preferences in classroom learning techniques. I combined online discussions (via e-mail, an e-forum, and e-journals) and reading assignments (e.g., from Internet Web sites and news services) with traditional classroom reading and group discussions. The theme of the impact of the globalization of education on different countries was used in Internet and classroom forums over the 10-week course. Writing tasks were offered in three genres—reflective, informative, and argumentative—which were peer and teacher reviewed and published on the class Web page.
Description of the Students and the Course The students enrolled in this 10-week ESL program at Deakin University in Melbourne, Australia, were highly motivated and seeking eventual admittance to undergraduate programs through successful completion of International English Language Testing System (IELTS) examinations. There were 14 students (six male and eight female) from different countries, including Vietnam, Taiwan, Indonesia, Japan, and Korea. Their ages ranged from 18– 22 years. Classes were held in two locations on campus: a traditional classroom and a computer lab. The traditional classroom contained a whiteboard; four large corkboards, which we used for mounting word banks and ideas; a mounted television with a video recorder; and an overhead projector. The computer lab was equipped with 35 IBM Pentium personal computers, which were linked to the university’s central server and networked to one another. The software used for the course was FirstClass (2000), which allowed students to share ideas online through a single server using synchronous (real-time) and asynchronous (e.g., e-mail) communication on the discussion site. There were sufficient computers to allow students to work individually or in pairs. Of the 25 hours of instruction per week, 7 were scheduled in the computer lab; however, many students used the facility after hours and some worked from home computers. TESOL JOURNAL
31
Course Structure and Tasks During the first 2 weeks of computer class time (a total of 14 hours), students focused on setting up networked discussion groups, honing their typing skills, reviewing how to send and receive e-mail, practicing using e-forum (the in-house, networked communication forum), and working with netiquette (Internet etiquette) rules (see Shea, 2000, for a discussion of netiquette). Noncomputer time was spent developing and enhancing group-work skills and extending reading proficiency. Additional focus was on building vocabulary skills, developing skimming and scanning competencies, and deepening levels of comprehension. I selected newspaper and journal articles at a basic comprehension level and asked students to read and discuss them, prompted by short questions that I prepared about the texts. I also asked questions to test students’ speculation and extension levels. For example, a question used to test their extension level might be, “What is the likely impact of English as an international language on education programs in your country?” These exercises encouraged collaborative learning and opinion formulation, which students needed in order to function effectively in online discussions, and which helped form a sense of community. By creating Palmer’s (1990) sense of “hospitable space” (p. 15), students were afforded the opportunity to engage in forums encouraging social interaction, opinion-giving, and the risk-taking involved in presenting ideas to the group. This was a necessary element underpinning one course aim, that of providing students the opportunity for self-directed learning. The next 8 weeks focused on the globalization of education theme. In the traditional classroom, students brainstormed ideas they read about in Australian government newspapers and current affairs reports, and international news services available via the Internet. In groups, they discussed information, elicited facts, and formulated questions and possible solutions to problems for later use in Internet discussions. Students were asked to focus on using the appropriate form for asking questions, predicting possible answers, and developing probing questions to pose to the global online discussion group. Students shared their views on the articles in informal e-forum discussions and were asked to keep e-journals (or pen and paper diaries if they preferred), which I commented on weekly via e-mail or on paper. This assignment was designed to encourage students to explore and express their ideas freely. It was made clear to them that accurate grammar was not the focus, nor would their grammar errors be corrected. During the final 2 weeks of the course, students evaluated the experience through individual questionnaires, personal interviews with me, class-based discussions, and written comments (submitted online as well as on paper). They also were asked to complete a major written assignment from among the following three choices: 1.
32
a reflection on your education in your home country TESOL JOURNAL
2.
3.
an informative essay comparing your own educational system to that of two or three other countries, based on information gathered from paper and electronic sources A response to the idea that the globalization of education is the future for the world, including evidence to support your views
One student chose to compile reflections into a souvenir class booklet for her classmates. Students also had the option to select one written piece for inclusion on the class Web page.
Online Discussion in the Classroom The Internet was central to the course. Not only was it used internally (Intranet) to facilitate language practice between classmates through e-forum discussions but also to promote students’ active participation in discussions with a real audience outside of class via e-mail. This participation in the world of cyberspace was achieved by having students role play as education ministers representing the views of their countries. Students discussed their ministerial roles, placing emphasis on the need to be diplomatic, particularly if they encountered individual differences of opinion with other users. Students practiced this strategy in in-class eforum situations, which I monitored in order to give individual feedback to students. In Week 3, students logged on in pairs to the Worldlink site (http://www.worldlinkonline.com)1 to participate in worldwide e-mail exchanges on the issue of globalization’s effects on individual countries’ cultures, educational systems, and beliefs. One of the advantages of this site was that anyone with access to the Internet and Adobe Acrobat software could read and respond to information posted there. Another was that it provided ample opportunities for students to correspond with a variety of users, not only those of their same age but also guests invited to the site, such as United Nations delegates. Furthermore, answers to questions were posted instantly, which simulated live talk. Most students keenly participated in this exchange. They posted their prepared questions and received e-mail responses from around the globe. One student remarked, “this is exciting, like waiting for Chinese New Year present.” Students worked in pairs to respond to e-mail, conferring with one another for advice on appropriate vocabulary, meanings of words, and suggestions for replies. In this collaborative effort to gather information and respond in a global context, students created what Palmer (1990) referred to as a “community of seekers” (p. 12)—a community distinct from other relationships, such as personal friendships, study groups, and social networks. Students usually only approached me for technical support; I was asked questions about how to phrase responses in computer-mediated discussions far less often than in classroom face-to-face discussions. Students were able to work at their own pace and level VOL. 11 NO. 3
of ability. For example, those with stronger typing skills and broader vocabulary ranges typically sent three to four more e-mail responses per session than other students. One student commented in his e-journal: I like the e-mail because I don’t have to wait long time for other student to answer and can keep asking more question. Sometimes in class it takes slower time to wait for classmate to answer. Now I can ask all of questions that I like.
Another student, who used an online dictionary a great deal in all classes, sent only one or two e-mail responses per class. She liked the fact that she could “take time to read all the comments so not to have embarrassed if I need dictionary.” Responses such as these indicate that the Internet can provide a means for teachers to cater to mixed ability classrooms, where students are empowered to work at their own level within set tasks.
Computers and the Construction of Meaning Using the Internet for online discussion contributed to constructivist notions of student empowerment in a number of observable ways.
Real-Life Audience All students actively participated in online discussions. On their course questionnaires, the majority of students noted that they enjoyed the online discussions and had benefited from a real-audience and real-life language experience when discussing globalization of education with their e-pals from around the world. My observation was that students appeared to work harder choosing appropriate vocabulary and completing reading tasks in preparation for online discussions than they did preparing for traditional face-toface classroom discussions. This observation is further supported by the increased number of questions students posed in the class e-forum discussions. For example, on
My observation was that students appeared to work harder choosing appropriate vocabulary and completing reading tasks in preparation for online discussions than they did preparing for traditional face-to-face classroom discussions. most days, students asked between one and three questions; however, in sessions preceding global e-mail exchange periods, students displayed greater interest and intensity, asking six or seven questions per pair of students. In addition, students prepared their e-mail responses to the global discussion group more carefully than they did their responses for Intranet e-forum discussions or traditional VOL. 11 NO. 3
classroom discussions. They not only wanted their global postings to be grammatically correct but also to reflect their knowledge of the topic. Working in pairs, students coached one another on how to phrase their responses. For example, one student advised his partner not to say that globalization of education “was a bad thing” in terms of effect on local culture, reminding her that the class had “talked how baby [student emphasis] the word ‘bad’ and ‘good’ are.” He then suggested that she read what another classmate had written because “his [response] has better words.”
Current Information One of the greatest advantages of using the Internet is that students have access to the latest information and can apply this learning to real-world events. The online reading and listening materials for the course consisted of audio news bulletins (e.g., from Cable News Network, British Broadcasting Corporation, Australian Broadcasting Corporation, and Special Broadcasting Service), recent publications (e.g., online newspaper and magazine articles), and Internet dialogue with people from around the world, which meant that students had to keep up with the latest developments in world events in order to communicate knowledgeably with their international audience. One student’s comment summed up student attitudes toward this challenge: “All the information is so new, it is like we are all there at the one place with others in the world. It’s great, but a lot of work!”
Increased Topic Focus Students seemed to stay more focused on the topic and show greater commitment during online discussions than they did during classroom discussions, in which conversations often sidetracked to extraneous issues, such as social events. This increased focus during Internet sessions may be attributable to students’ desire to cover as much material as possible in the limited computer lab time. As one student said, “I want to have a good opinion to share, so to keep concentrating is necessary.”
Egalitarianism Several students felt that online discussions provided them with greater opportunities to participate than classroom discussions because of the increased time to respond via email. As one stated, “computer e-mail was good for us because we could write our whole idea and finish it and the idea was not gone because another student would talk about something before it was finished.” Students also commented that pronunciation and incorrect stress on syllables often hindered their understanding in face-to-face discussion but was not a problem in computer-mediated discussion: “There are no pronunciation problems for me in e-forum and everyone understand all what I say in the first time.” TESOL JOURNAL
33
Some students alluded to a certain equality of participation in which students who struggled in classroom discussions had time to read and reflect in e-mail discussions and could present their views without interruption. Although greater opportunities to participate may exist in computer-mediated discussions, less proficient or shy students may not choose to take advantage of them.
sponse may be a reflection of her feelings about computers, in general, or of her lack of typing proficiency. This student and another of the less computer-proficient students chose to work in pairs with two of the more computer-proficient students, after which they appeared to do better. Their responses about online discussions on the course evaluations were relatively positive overall.
The Internet and Visual Literacy
Global Time Differences
In addition to the real-life language experiences provided via online discussions, Internet communication also exposed students to new forms of literacy. Students had to engage in a high degree of visual analysis to make sense of the multimedia components. This required them to differentiate between visual images that conveyed important information and those that merely embellished the site (Kress, 1997). Because visual elements can be distracting, some students required assistance in decoding images and discerning credible, reliable visual elements. As Sorapure, Inglesby, and Yatchisin (1998) state:
The Worldlink site offered a wonderful range of experiences through technology, such as video conferencing and live discussion. However, the problem with time differences and the live camera not being active during our class time meant we could not avail ourselves of this opportunity. Additionally, video conferencing was not technically possible given the lack of technical support and equipment available at the center at the time of this course. The eforum and e-mail exchanges, however, ran relatively smoothly, with few technical difficulties.
Students need, at the least, to be made aware of the possible ways visual information can be manipulated. Charts and graphs are not just neutral presentations of facts. Pictographs can lie …. Drawings and photographs can manipulate the eye through tricks of perspective and visual illusions. (p. 418)
Teachers can model visual literacy skills so that students become more confident and competent in understanding, evaluating, and even creating their own multimedia. For example, after I demonstrated the use of Microsoft Excel software, students created their own graphs. The skills thus developed enabled students to gain confidence in their ability to translate numerical or statistical information into visual representations, such as tables and charts. Students used this skill to create their own graphs illustrating educational trends in their home countries. They felt this exercise was particularly helpful in preparing them for writing task one on the IELTS examination, which requires them to analyze visual data. As one Japanese student commented in his e-journal, “Now I can understand it, why the numbers are drawn as pictures because I did this by myself.”
Difficulties With Online Discussion Poor Computer Skills Although many students in the course had used computers in their secondary schools, some were computer illiterate. One Japanese female student had never worked on a computer before. Although her computer skills improved during the course, she never became particularly comfortable with the technology. Her response to the e-forum and e-mail exchanges was, “I prefer to reading what others like to say. I do not have need to write by myself.” Her re34
TESOL JOURNAL
Student Evaluation of Discussion Formats Students unanimously agreed that online discussion led to more equity in discussion turn-taking. All students said they had an opportunity to express themselves and, importantly, that everyone’s opinion was shared. The students’ responses support the views of Flores (1990) and Selfe (1990), who believe that greater equity in participation and opportunity may be afforded in an online discussion environment. Overall, students appeared to enjoy using online discussion, although some found it less fulfilling for their needs than others. Almost all the students felt that online discussions allowed them time to think before
In addition to the real-life language experiences provided via online discussions, Internet communication also exposed students to new forms of literacy. responding. None advocated that online discussion should replace face-to-face classroom discussion, but most wished to use it in addition. As one said, “it is a good way to read and think before answering.” She felt “it is better to take time with an e-mail answer than in the class answer.” A Vietnamese student responded that “people write their thoughts and it is quicker than in class, waiting for answers.” One Japanese student thought online discussion was less threatening than classroom discussion: “I like to know what everyone thinks and say but there is not the necessary for me to speak.” Online discussion met individual needs by allowing students to work at their own speed, avoid pronunciation problems, and read before responding. It appeared to VOL. 11 NO. 3
provide a supportive mode of interaction in which students felt a sense of belonging and empowerment. However, three students in particular preferred traditional face-to-face discussions over Internet-based sessions, as they felt their ideas were better expressed when dealing with issues faceto-face and enjoyed the stimulation of personal contact. One of them felt more at ease in face-to-face situations because his speaking skills were better than his typing skills. The other two felt that visual and verbal cues in face-toface situations were important in helping them comprehend meaning. As one stated, “I like to see the bodily movings. It helps to get meaning into words.” The other said: “I understand more when I see and hear the stress in their voice, so I know what part of information is the important one.” When evaluating the course myself, I consider how students such as the latter two might have benefited from Internet video conferencing sessions, in which verbal and nonverbal features are presented via the computer. Although this resource was not available at the time of this course, further research is needed to evaluate its role in helping students construct meaning from language interaction in the classroom.
Conclusion As teachers, we constantly strive to improve the learning environment for students and encourage greater degrees of student empowerment and autonomy. The Internet added new dimensions of experience for the adult ESL learners in this course, providing opportunities to communicate in ways they found interesting, engaging, and relevant to the real world. One of those ways included experimenting with the new forms of written communication emerging from email and chat rooms, including emoticons (keyboard symbols that depict emotions and moods) such as a smiley face, displayed as :-), and acronyms such as BTW (by the way) and TTFN (Ta Ta For Now). For myself, I found the level of student engagement with tasks to be higher than in traditional classroom settings. Unravelling the Internet proved to be a creative and collaborative challenge for the whole group. Online discussion offers students a degree of egalitarianism and provides opportunities to work at selfdirected levels. At the same time, it enhances teachers’ abilities to implement autonomous learning strategies that empower students.
References Burbules, N. C., & Callister, T. A. (1996). Knowledge at the crossroads: Some alternative futures of hypertext learning environments. Educational Theory, 46(1), 23–50. Dixon-Krauss, L. (1996). Vygotsky in the classroom: Mediated literacy instruction and assessment. New York: Longman. FirstClass (Version 6.1) [Computer software] (2000). Richmond Hill, Ontario, Canada: Centrinity. Flores, M. (1990). Computer conferencing: Composing a feminist community of writers. In C. Handa (Ed.), Computers and community (pp. 106–117). Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook Heinemann. Kress, G. (1997). Visual and verbal modes of representation in electronically mediated communication: The potential of new forms of text. In I. Snyder (Ed.), Page to screen: Taking literacy into the electronic era (pp. 53–79). Sydney, Australia: Allen & Unwin. Leu, D. J. (2000). Exploring literacy on the Internet. The Reading Teacher, 53(5), 424–428. Marlowe, B. A., & Page, M. L. (1998). Creating and sustaining the constructivist classroom. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Palmer, P. (1990). Good teaching: A matter of living the mystery. Change, 22, 11–16. Selfe, C. L. (1990). Technology in the English classroom: Computers through the lens of feminist theory. In C. Handa (Ed.), Computers and community (pp. 118–139). Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook Heinemann. Shea, V. (2000). The core rules of netiquette. Retrieved June 26, 2002, from http://www.albion.com/netiquette/corerules.html Snyder, I. (1999). Digital literacies: Renegotiating the visual and the verbal in communication. Prospect, 14(3), 13–23. Sorapure, M., Inglesby, P., & Yatchisin, G. (1998). Web literacy: Challenges and opportunities for research in a new medium. Computers and Composition, 15, 409–424. Sutherland-Smith, W. (2002). Weaving the literacy web: Changes in reading from page to screen. The Reading Teacher, 55(7), 2–9. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Author Wendy Sutherland-Smith has taught in secondary and adult ESL settings for many years. She is currently pursuing her PhD at Monash University, in Melbourne, Australia. Her research interests include hypertext literacy, ESL learning in CALL, and Internet intellectual property.
Note 1
At the time of printing, the Worldlink site was no longer available.
VOL. 11 NO. 3
TESOL JOURNAL
35
