october 2012 - TOJET the Turkish online journal of educational ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology – October 2012, volume 11 Issue 4 The above results show that trust has been built up in the course of this project. This lends support to Wang, Sierra, and Folger’s (2003) finding that “Trust channels the energy of group members toward reaching goals and serves to motivate group processes and performance” (p. 57). Efforts were made to carefully plan the schedule and provide students with “scaffolding” during the project: 20 pairs out of 22 finished the project. However, when looking closely at Tables 6 and 7, there seems to be a gap between the perception of trust and the actions taken in dealing with emotion. Participants perceived positive peer trust, but did not seek help from peers. That is, participants did not like to seek assistance from the distant party and preferred to rely on themselves, the peers around them and the student helpers. Owing to the asynchronous nature of the interaction in the present study, participants disregarded the possibility of delayed help so as to reduce the potential trouble caused and accelerate the completion of the tasks. Another possible explanation is that, in the context of CMC, participants tended to reduce negative social appraisals (Derks, Fischer, & Bos, 2008) and tried to maintain friendly social interaction and focus on task-oriented communication (Bulu & Yildirim, 2008). More in-depth investigation should be made to reveal more details about the correlation of perceptions of peer trust and the collaboration behaviors in onlinelearning environments. CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS This study examined Hong Kong- and Taiwan-based students’ emotions resulting from online interaction and their trust levels in online pair work. The major findings are summarized as follows. In general, the Taiwan students expressed their feelings more strongly than their Hong Kong counterparts. There is a statistical significance in the differences between the Taiwan and Hong Kong groups in the emotions of nervousness and anxiety. The Taiwan students felt slightly more irritable, dispirited and angry than the Hong Kong students during this process. Regarding the two timelines, the Hong Kong students were happier in week 6 than in week 3. The Taiwan participants, however, felt the opposite. Three sources that caused most emotional comments are self; social; and others (for example, technical problems and workload). Most students attempted to solve problems for themselves, then with help from peers, then from students helpers, and finally from their partners. Both groups gave positive responses in terms of peer trust for all items. However, there seemed to be asymmetry between the perception of trust and the actions taken in dealing with emotion. There are some limitations to this study. First of all, the project only lasted for six weeks, so that the emotions assessed are mainly of a “snapshot” nature, as they were only recorded in weeks 3 and 6. In addition, students only recorded the emotions listed in the checklist and seldom detailed any other emotions they encountered during the process. Finally, given the complicated interaction of the variables involved in computer-mediated communication activities, fully investigating the emotional arousal in a single project is impossible. In terms of teaching implications, first of all, the Taiwan students demonstrated their emotions more strongly than the Hong Kong group. This may be because students from Taiwan had received fewer opportunities for international contact than their Hong Kong counterparts. Most of the Hong Kong participants in this study had either had one-semester immersion experiences in English-speaking countries or attended summer exchange programs in Asian or European countries. It was not a new experience for them to participate in intercultural communication, and this may have contributed to their ease during the process. More online cultural-exchange courses could be provided to those who are not easily able to visit a foreign country. Secondly, to implement an online cultural-exchange course is not an easy task. Most of the teachers have usually placed too much focus on platform design and material preparation. Several factors should be more carefully considered: for example, matching the schools’ schedules; partnership, and commitment between the teachers of the two schools; and the students’ willingness and autonomy. Building up peer trust and helping deal with emotional changes are essential to keeping all the participants together and making the course successful. On the basis of the findings, some suggestions for future research may be made. Much existing research stresses that the affective aspects must be properly acknowledged in order to explore the students’ emotions, which are aroused by participating in online language activities, and the impact of emotions on learning outcomes. Moreover, the lack of emotional disclosure may result from personal characteristics or culture background. In fact, the expression of negative emotions is not always a bad phenomenon. As Derks, Fischer, and Bos (2008) pointed out, the reasons why students do or do not disclose their emotion and how this influences their learning is another area worthy of research. Finally, just as students need scaffolding in learning, it behooves researchers to consider exploring the emotions teachers encounter in dealing with the frustration and challenges resulting from maintaining online learning progress. What are the emotions aroused in the process when teachers apply ICT in their teaching? How do they deal with these emotions? How do these emotions influence teachers’ use of ICT? It is essential to support teachers who are willing to adopt ICT in language learning. The more support the teachers receive, the more strength they have to sustain innovation in ICT teaching strategies. Copyright © The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology 129
TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology – October 2012, volume 11 Issue 4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT This work was supported by the Centre for Popular Culture and Education at the Hong Kong Institute of Education, and the National Science Council in Taiwan [grant number 100-2511-S-328-001- ]. REFERENCES Al Musawi, A., Askin, A., Abdelraheem, A., & Osman, M. (2012). A Case of web-based inquiry learning model using learning objects. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 11(1), 1-9. Altstaedter, L., & Jones, B. (2009). Motivating students' foreign language and culture acquisition through webbased inquiry. Foreign language annals, 42(4), 640-657. Bower, J. (2011). Negotiation of meaning and corrective feedback in Japanese/English eTandem. Language Learning & Technology, 15(1), 41-71. Baharani, T., & Sim, T. S.(2012). Informal language learning setting: Technology or Social interaction? The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 11(2), Bulu, S. T., & Yildirim, Z. (2008). Communication behaviors and trust in collaborative online teams. Educational Technology & Society, 11(1), 132-147. Carroll, A. (2007). Team assessment task for management accounting: A divisional management case study approach. E-Journal of Business Education & Scholarship of Teaching, 1(1), 70-78. Coppola, N., Hiltz, S. R., & Rotter, N. (2001). Building trust in virtual teams. Proceedings of International Professional Communication Conference, Santa Fe, New Mexico. Derks, D., Fischer, A. H., & Bos, A. R. (2008). The role of emotion in computer-mediated communication: A review. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(3), 766-785. Dodge, B. (1995). Some thoughts about Web-Quests. Retrieved October 26, 2011, from http://WebQuest.sdsu.edu/about_WebQuests.html De Lera, E., Fernández, C., & Almirall, M. (2009). Emotions: the forgotten key success in online learning. // 13th UNESCO-APEID International Conference and World Bank-KERIS High Level Seminar on ICT in Education, Hangzhou, China, 15 - 17 November 2009. Retrieved October 26, 2011, from http://www.unescobkk.org/fileadmin/user_upload/apeid/Conference/13th_Conference/Papers/3.D.1_Emo tion__Eva__updated.pdf (2010-03) Freiermuth, M. R. && Huand, H. C. (2012). Bringing Japan and Taiwan closer electronically: A look at an intercultural online synchronic chat task and its effect on motivation. Language Teaching Research, 16, 61-88. Gaulin, S. J. C., & McBurney. D. H. (2003). Evolutionary psychology (2nd ed.). Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ. Hargreaves, A. (2000) Mixed emotions: teachers’ perceptions of their interactions with students. Teaching and Teacher Education, 16, 811–826. Handy, C. (1995). Trust and the virtual organization. Harvard Business Review, 73(3), 40-50. Iacono, C. S., & Weisband, S. (1997). Developing trust in virtual teams. Proceedings of the 30th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Hawaii, 412-420. Ishaya, T., & Macaulay, L. (1999). The role of trust in virtual teams. Electronic Journal of Organizational Virtualness, 1, 140-157. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1975). Joining together: Group theory and group skills. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Jarvenpaa, S. L., & Leidner, D. E. (1999). Communication and trust in global virtual teams. Organization Science, 10(6), 791-815. Kay, R. H., & Loverock, S. (2008). Assessing emotions related to learning new software: The computer emotions scale. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(4), 1605-1623. Kilimci, S. (2010). Integration of the Internet into a language curriculum in a multicultural society. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 9(1), 107-113. Kitade, K. (2008). The role of offline metalanguage talk in asynchronous computer-mediated communication. Language Learning & Technology, 12(1), 64-84. http://llt.msu.edu/vol12num1/kitade/default.html Lewicki, R. J., McAllister, D. J., & Bies, R. J. (1998). Trust and distrust: New relationships and realities. Academy of Management Review, 23, 438-458. Li, J., & Erben, T. (2007). Intercultural learning via instant messenger interaction. CALICO Journal, 24(2), 291- 311. Lyons, M. J., Kluender, D., & Tetsutani, N. (2005). Supporting empathy in online learning with artificial expressions. Educational Technology & Society, 8(4), 22-30. McKnight, D. H., & Cummings, L. L. and Chervany, N. L. (1998). Initial trust formation in new organizational relationships. Academy of Management Review, 23, 473–490. Meyer, K. A. (2004). Evaluating online discussions: Four different frames of analysis. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 8(2), 101-114. Copyright © The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology 130
Page 2 and 3:
THE TURKISH ONLINE JOURNAL OF EDUCA
Page 4 and 5:
Dear Colleagues, TOJET: The Turkish
Page 6 and 7:
TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal o
Page 8 and 9:
Page 10 and 11:
Page 12 and 13:
Page 14 and 15:
Page 16 and 17:
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20 and 21:
Page 22 and 23:
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Annotation retrieval TOJET: The Tur
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
Page 44 and 45:
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
Page 50 and 51:
Page 52 and 53:
Page 54 and 55:
Page 56 and 57:
Page 58 and 59:
Page 60 and 61:
Page 62 and 63:
Page 64 and 65:
Page 66 and 67:
Page 68 and 69:
Page 70 and 71:
Page 72 and 73:
Page 74 and 75:
Page 76 and 77:
Page 78 and 79:
Page 80 and 81:
Page 82 and 83:
Page 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91: TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal o
Page 100 and 101: Stage 2 Process Stage 3 Output Stag
Page 114 and 115: Learning effectiveness TOJET: The T
Page 118 and 119: Appendix A: Questionnaire TOJET: Th
Page 136 and 137: 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 TOJET: The Turk
Page 180 and 181: Computer Use Transformational Leade
Page 190 and 191:
Page 192 and 193:
Page 194 and 195:
Page 196 and 197:
Page 198 and 199:
Page 200 and 201:
Page 202 and 203:
Page 204 and 205:
Page 206 and 207:
Page 208 and 209:
Page 210 and 211:
Page 212 and 213:
Page 214 and 215:
Page 216 and 217:
Page 218 and 219:
Page 220 and 221:
Page 222 and 223:
Page 224 and 225:
Page 226 and 227:
Diverger TOJET: The Turkish Online
Page 228 and 229:
Page 230 and 231:
Page 232 and 233:
Page 234 and 235:
Page 236 and 237:
Page 238 and 239:
Page 240 and 241:
Page 242 and 243:
Page 244 and 245:
Page 246 and 247:
Page 248 and 249:
clarify their misconceptions. TOJET
Page 250 and 251:
Page 252 and 253:
Page 254 and 255:
Page 256 and 257:
Page 258 and 259:
Page 260 and 261:
Page 262 and 263:
*p < .05 TOJET: The Turkish Online
Page 264 and 265:
Page 266 and 267:
Page 268 and 269:
Page 270 and 271:
Page 272 and 273:
Page 274 and 275:
Page 276 and 277:
Page 278 and 279:
Page 280 and 281:
Page 282 and 283:
Page 284 and 285:
Page 286 and 287:
Page 288 and 289:
Page 290 and 291:
Page 292 and 293:
Page 294 and 295:
Page 296 and 297:
Page 298 and 299:
Page 300 and 301:
section to the user. TOJET: The Tur
Page 302 and 303:
Page 304 and 305:
Page 306 and 307:
Page 308 and 309:
Page 310 and 311:
Page 312 and 313:
Page 314 and 315:
Page 316 and 317:
Page 318 and 319:
Page 320 and 321:
Page 322 and 323:
Page 324 and 325:
Page 326 and 327:
Page 328 and 329:
Page 330 and 331:
Page 332 and 333:
Page 334 and 335:
Page 336 and 337:
Page 338 and 339:
Page 340 and 341:
Page 342 and 343:
Page 344 and 345:
Page 346 and 347:
Page 348 and 349:
Page 350 and 351:
Page 352 and 353:
Page 354 and 355:
Page 356 and 357:
Page 358 and 359:
Page 360 and 361:
Page 362 and 363:
Page 364 and 365:
Page 366 and 367:
Page 368 and 369:
Page 370 and 371:
Statement Analysis TOJET: The Turki
Page 372 and 373:
Page 374 and 375:
Page 376 and 377:
Page 378 and 379:
Page 380 and 381:
Page 382 and 383:
Page 384 and 385:
Page 386 and 387:
Page 388 and 389:
Appendices TOJET: The Turkish Onlin
Page 390 and 391:
Page 392 and 393:
Page 394 and 395:
Page 396 and 397:
Page 398 and 399:
Page 400 and 401:
Page 402 and 403:
Page 404 and 405:
Page 406 and 407:
Page 408 and 409:
Page 410 and 411:
Page 412 and 413:
TOJEET: The Turkish Online Journal
Page 414 and 415:
TOJEET: The Turkish Online Journal
Page 416 and 417:
Page 418 and 419:
Page 420 and 421:
Page 422 and 423:
Page 424 and 425:
Page 426 and 427:
eactions TOJET: The Turkish Online
Page 428 and 429:
Page 430 and 431:
Page 432 and 433:
Page 434 and 435:
Page 436 and 437:
Page 438 and 439:
Page 440 and 441:
Page 442 and 443:
Page 444 and 445:
Page 446 and 447:
Page 448 and 449:
Page 450 and 451:
Page 452 and 453:
Page 454 and 455:
Page 456 and 457:
Page 458 and 459:
Page 460 and 461:
Page 462 and 463:
Page 464 and 465:
Page 466 and 467:
Page 468 and 469:
Page 470:
show all

october 2012 - TOJET the Turkish online journal of educational ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?