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 As discussed, previous research on the efficacy of WebQuests suggests that the task supports reading comprehension because it requires student analysis, synthesis, evaluation, judgment, problem solving and creativity (Dodge, 2006; Perkins & McKnight, 2005). The three underlying constructs found by Zheng et. al. (2007) to be critical to the design and related benefits of WebQuests are constructivist problem solving, social interaction and scaffolded learning. Scaffolding teaching, in which a knowledgeable teacher provides individualized support for students, is a method that aims to build on prior knowledge while internalizing new information or skills. Such as with WebQuest, the task utilized in a scaffolded teaching activity should be just beyond the current ability level of the student. Important to the concept of scaffolded learning is the notion that the support mechanisms of the learning intervention should easily be taken away as the student gains proficiency at the given task. The goal of the teacher is, therefore, to support the student to be an autonomous learner. WebQuests well support this method as the task is designed to motivate students in a blended learning environment by using simple directions to accomplish an activity with clearly defined learning expectations. Furthermore, as suggested by Zheng et al. (2007), the emphasis of learning via WebQuest could be placed on constructivist learning that incorporates critical thinking and knowledge application. Luźon-Marco (2010) found that WebQuests help students engage with texts related to their discipline by supporting autonomous learning and helping the students become accustomed to the methods of meaning construction needed in digital learning. Similar to the findings of Zheng et al., Barros and Carvalho (2007) found WebQuest to be a valuable environment for teaching extensive reading as it can enhance motivation and promote constructivist learning. Similarly, this study supports the theory that WebQuest can be a useful tool in constructivist learning as the method does create an environment in which learning seems relevant, supports the acquisition of skills that are needed in real-world scenarios, and encourages students to analyze information using multiple tools and perspectives. Reading comprehension, the subject of this research, is dependent on the student’s ability to analyze and interpret text. Employing critical thinking skills in order to meaningfully draw connections between newly introduced text and previous knowledge is a crucial step in the development of reading comprehension. Finding that WebQuest supports the development of critical thinking, Puthikanon (2009) reported that students actively analyzed, synthesized, evaluated, and reflected on information pertaining to the topic of the WebQuest. Although Puthikanon found that low proficiency students struggled to effectively communicate their thoughts in the final products of the WebQuest task, this difficulty does not necessarily reflect the student’s ability to comprehend the text or analyze it critically. Although the teacher’s role is to provide the support, or scaffolding, for the learning activity, student engagement in cooperative learning can effectively further the learning process. An environment such as created by WebQuest in which students work in small group settings with teacher assistance can help in reducing the support required from the teacher by the students. Many studies have found that using WebQuest enhanced vital cooperation and collaboration among students (Gorghiu, Gorghiu, González, & García de la Santa, 2006; Lara & Repáraz, 2007; Murray & Mcpherson, 2009; Torres, 2007). This aspect of the learning process, and its role in reading comprehension, was not the specific topic of this research, but should be noted as an area in need of further research. While this study specifically focused on 10th grade male students, previous research has found that students in all grades indicate they prefer WebQuest to traditional teaching methods (Abbitt & Ophus, 2008; Noordin, Samed & Razali, 2008; Prapinwong, 2008; Puthikanon, 2009). Gaskill, McNulty and Brooks (2006), while finding no difference in learning outcomes when WebQuests were compared to conventional methods, did reveal that both teachers and students enjoyed WebQuest instruction and the learning environment it created. Although student perceptions were not the focus of this research, general impressions suggest that in agreement with the findings of Vidoni and Maddux (2002), WebQuest can be viewed as an up-to-date strategy that provides knowledge to students in an interesting way. CONCLUSIONS The results showed the potential of WebQuest use for promoting reading comprehension. Teachers and students do, however, need to be trained in order to use WebQuests more effectively in the blended learning classroom. The students of this study, only needed help to get started on the task and then managed to continue on their own with no difficulty. Although the teachers who participated in this study were experienced with WebQuest, teachers in general need to be provided with training to explore the usefulness of WebQuests and to master its integration in their classrooms. There are challenges inherent in the implementation of WebQuests due to the Copyright © The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology 303
TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology – October 2012, volume 11 Issue 4 changing pedagogical principles and practices arising from the use of the tool. Teachers need support in understanding and adjusting to the new way of teaching, especially when they are used to the transmissive mode of instruction. Therefore, it is crucial for the teachers to understand the changing role from an authoritative figure to the role of facilitator or mentor as required by the WebQuest design. Also, the use of pre-designed WebQuests in this study may have constrained the teachers in implementation and in choosing interesting topics that meet the needs of the students. The authors suggest that the teacher’s experience of the WebQuest tool, and the challenges to its integration in the blended learning classroom, should be investigated further. The use of WebQuest seems to be motivating for students as indicated by the teachers in the study. Although this is anecdotal evidence, teachers should invest in the potential of WebQuests as a motivating activity. However, more research is needed. Moreover, the topic and difficulty level of materials are important issues that the teacher should consider when selecting or designing a WebQuest. March (2004) suggests the teacher choose a topic that the students find compelling and then build an authentic learning task around it. If more than one WebQuest is to be used, the teacher may design topics that seem likely to draw diverse student interest. The type of task should also be designed carefully. If for example, an information gathering task is to be included, it should be used as a step to a more complex task rather than an end in itself. However, the teacher needs to be careful about the level of difficulty of the tasks and its appropriateness for the students. One limitation of the study was the time constraint of the summer semester (10 weeks) which made it difficult to implement a larger number of WebQuests. Only four WebQuests were used in eight class sessions in four weeks. Future research should consider longer implementation over one semester, or four months, in order to allow more exposure to WebQuests as well as the possibility to test comprehension at a point other than the end of the semester. Also limited by gender, grade level, and level of language ability, this study can be considered a starting point for additional research addressing the use of WebQuests in other educational settings. Additionally, the study was limited in using a comprehension test as the predictor of reading comprehension. This limitation made it difficult to generalize the results to other classroom contexts. As the study suggested that WebQuests have positive effects on reading comprehension, more qualitative investigation is needed into the processes that students followed that helped enhance reading comprehension. REFERENCES Abbitt, J., & Ophus, J. (2008). What We Know about the Impacts of WebQuests: A Review of Research. AACE Journal, 16(4), 441-456. Al-Issa, A., & Al-Bulushi, A. (2011). Mere indolence or genuine Hindrance: Paucity of publishing in ELT at Sultan Qaboos University. Cypriot Journal of Educational Sciences, 6(1). Retrieved May 10, 2012, from http://www.world-education-center.org/index.php/cjes/article/view/206. Alshumaimeri, Y. A. (2008). Perceptions and Attitudes toward Using CALL in English Classrooms among Saudi Secondary EFL Teachers. The JALT CALL Journal, 44(2), 29-66. Ary, D., Jacobs, L., & Razavieh, A. (2002). Introduction to Research in Education. USA: Wadsworth-Thomas learning. Barros, A. C., & Carvalho, A. A. (2007). From a WebQuest to a Reading Quest: learners' reactions in an EFL extensive reading class. Interactive Educational Multimedia, (15), 37-51. Bravo, E., Enache, M., Fernandez, V., & Simo, P. (2010). An innovative teaching practice based on online channels: A qualitative approach. World Journal on Educational Technology, 2(2). Retrieved May 10, 2012, from http://www.world-education-center.org/index.php/wjet/article/view/174. Cambridge University ESOL Examination. (2010). Preliminary English Test 6 Students’ Book with Answers. UK: Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Chang, C., Chen, T., & Hsu, W. (2010). The study on integrating WebQuest with mobile learning for environmental education. Computers & Education, 57, 1228–1239. Chuo, T. I. (2007). The Effects of the WebQuest Writing Instruction. Program on EFL Learners' Writing Performance, Writing Apprehension, and Perception. TESL-EJ-Wenzao Ursuline College of Languages, Taiwan, 11(3). Retrieved from http://tesl-ej.org/ej43/a3.html. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education (Sixth ed.). US: New York: Routledge. Crawford, C. M., & Brown, E. (2002). Focusing upon higher order thinking skills: WebQuests and the learnercentered Mathematical learning environment. Retrieved from ERIC databases. (ED474086). Dewitt, D., & Siraj, S. (2010). Learners’ perceptions of technology for design of a collaborative m-Learning module. World Journal on Educational Technology, 2(3). Retrieved May 10, 2012, fromhttp://www.world-education-center.org/index.php/wjet/article/view/172. Dodge, B. (1997). Some Thoughts about WebQuests. San Diego State University. Retrieved April 2, 2010, from Copyright © The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology 304
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:
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
Stage 2 Process Stage 3 Output Stag
Page 102 and 103:
Page 104 and 105:
Page 106 and 107:
Page 108 and 109:
Page 110 and 111:
Page 112 and 113:
Page 114 and 115:
Learning effectiveness TOJET: The T
Page 116 and 117:
Page 118 and 119:
Appendix A: Questionnaire TOJET: Th
Page 120 and 121:
Page 122 and 123:
Page 124 and 125:
Page 126 and 127:
Page 128 and 129:
Page 130 and 131:
Page 132 and 133:
Page 134 and 135:
Page 136 and 137:
3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 TOJET: The Turk
Page 138 and 139:
Page 140 and 141:
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148 and 149:
Page 150 and 151:
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154 and 155:
Page 156 and 157:
Page 158 and 159:
Page 160 and 161:
Page 162 and 163:
Page 164 and 165:
Page 166 and 167:
Page 168 and 169:
Page 170 and 171:
Page 172 and 173:
Page 174 and 175:
Page 176 and 177:
Page 178 and 179:
Page 180 and 181:
Computer Use Transformational Leade
Page 182 and 183:
Page 184 and 185:
Page 186 and 187:
Page 188 and 189:
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: TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal o
Page 300 and 301: section to the user. TOJET: The Tur
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 ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?