Interaction in an EFL reading Comprehension Distance Web-based Course

Authors

  • Jaime Alberto Osorno González Universidad de Antioquia
  • Sergio Alonso Lopera Medina Universidad de Antioquia

Keywords:

interaction, EFL reading, MOODLE platform

Abstract


This article reports the positive and negative effects of an EFL reading comprehension distance web-based course based on four models of interaction (Bouhnik & Marcus, 2006; Moore, 1989). The methodology used was a case study, and researchers used five different data collection instruments and the tools from the platform Moodle to collect them. Some of the positive findings include: language improvement, individualized assistance, a friendly environment, and a different teacher's role. Conversely, some of the negative results are: the number of exercises, anxiety, limited feed-back, lack of interaction among students, and the absence of a tutorial guide. In conclusion, it is suggested that web-based courses balance the number of exercises, give deeper feed-back, encourage interaction among students, and design a tutorial.

|Abstract
= 27 veces | PDF
= 21 veces|

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Jaime Alberto Osorno González, Universidad de Antioquia

is an undergraduate student in Foreign Language Teaching at Escuela de Idiomas, Universidad de Antioquia, Medellín, Antioquia. Member of the research group EALE (Enseñanza y Aprendizaje de Lenguas Extranjeras).

Sergio Alonso Lopera Medina, Universidad de Antioquia

is a Ph.D student in Linguistics at Universidad de Antioquia. He is a full time professor at Escuela de Idiomas, Universidad de Antioquia, Medellín, Colombia. Member of the research group EALE (Enseñanza y Aprendizaje de Lenguas Extranjeras).

References

Aebersold, J., & Field, M. (1997). From reader to reading teacher. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

Alyousef, H. (2005). Teaching reading comprehension to ESL/EFL Learners. The Reading Matrix, 5(2), 143-154.

Andrade, M., & Bunker, E. (2009). A model for self- regulated distance language learning. Distance Education, 30(1), 47-61.

Ardila, M., & Bedoya, J. (2006). La inclusión de la plataforma de aprendizaje en línea MOODLE en un curso de gramática contrastiva español-inglés. Íkala, revista de lenguaje y cultura, 11(17), 181-205.

Arnó, E., Rueda, C., Soler, A., & Barahona, C. (2004). Developing learner autonomy through a virtual EAP course at university. English Language and Literature Studies, 12. Retrieved from http://www.publicacions.ub.edu/revistes/bells12/articulos.asp?codart=30

Block, E. (1986). The comprehension strategies of second language readers. TESOL Quarterly, 20, 463-494.

Boling, E. (2008). Learning from teachers' conceptions of technology integration: What do blogs, instant messages, and 3D chat rooms have to do with it? Research in the Teaching of English, 43(1), 74-100.

Bonk, C. (2001). Online teaching in an online world. Retrieved from http://php.indiana.edu/~cjbonk/faculty_survey_report.pdf

Bouhnik, D., & Marcus, T. (2006). Interaction in distance- learning courses. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57(3), 299–305.

Brandl, K. (2005). Are you ready to ''MOODLE''? Retrieved from http://llt.msu.edu/vol9num2/review1/review1.htm

Brown, D. (1994). Teaching by principles. New Jersey, NJ: Prentice Hall Regents.

Carswell, A., & Venkatesh, V. (2002). Learners outcome and asynchronous distance education environment. International Journal of Human Computer Studies, 56, 475-494.

Cassany, D. (2006). Tras las líneas. Barcelona, Spain: Editorial Anagrama.

Cohen, A. (1990). Language learning: Insights for learners, teachers, and researchers. New York, NY: Newbury House.

Collison, G., Elbaum, B., Haavind, S., & Tinker, R. (2000). Facilitating online learning. Effective strategies for moderators. Madison, WI: Atwood Publishing.

Creswell, J. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (2nd edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Dubin, F., & Bycina, D. (1984). Academic reading and the ESL/EFL teacher. In Celce-Murcia, M. Teaching English as a second or foreign language (pp. 195-216).

Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.

Dutton, J., & Perry, J. (2002). How do online students differ from lecture students? Journal of Management Information Systems, 18(4), 169–190.

Freeman, D. (1998). Doing teacher research: From inquiry to understanding. Boston, MA: Newbury House.

González, M. (2000). La habilidad de la lectura: sus implicaciones en la enseñanza del inglés como lengua extranjera o como segunda lengua. Revista de Ciencias Humanas, 19. Retrieved from http://www.utp.edu.co/~chumanas/revistas/revistas/rev19/gonzalez.htm

Goodyear, P., Salmon, G., Spector, J., Steeples, C., & Tickner, S. (2001). Competencies for online teaching: a special report. Educational Technology Research and Development, 49(1), 65-72

Grabe, W., & Stoller, F. (2002). Teaching and researching reading. London, England: Pearson Education.

Hara, N., & Kling, R. (2003). Students' distress with a web- based distance education course: An ethnographic study of participants' experiences. Turkish Online

Journal of Distance Education-TOJDE, 4(2). Retrieved from http://tojde.anadolu.edu.tr/tojde10/articles/hara.htm

Harasim, L. (1986). Computer learning networks: Educational applications of computer conferencing. Journal of Distance Education, 1(1), 59-70.

Jeffrey, D., & Hadley, G. (2002). Balancing intuition with insight: Reflective teaching through diary studies. The Language Teacher Online, 26(5). Retrieved from http://www.jaltpublications.org/tlt/articles/2002/05/jeffrey

Jonassen, D., & Kwon, H. (2001). Communication patterns in computer mediated versus face-to-face group problem solving. Educational Technology Research and Development, 49(1), 35–51.

Kamberelis, G., & Dimitriadis, G. (2005). Focus groups: Strategic articulations of pedagogy, politics and inquiry. In Denzin, N. & Lincoln, Y. (Eds.). The sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd edition) (pp. 887-907). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

Kember, D., Lai, T., & Murphy, D. (1994). Student progress in distance education courses: A replication study. Adult Education Quarterly, 45(1), 286–301.

Kiriakidis, P. (2008). Online learner satisfaction: Learner- instructor discourse. College Teaching Methods and & Styles Journal, 4(1), 11-18.

Klemm, W., & Snell, J. (1996). Enriching computer- mediated group learning by coupling constructivism with collaborative learning. Journal of Instructional Science and Technology, 57(3), 299-305.

Lai, K. (1997). Computer mediated communication for teenage students: A content analysis of a student messaging system. Education and Information

Technologies, 2, 31–45.

Lavooy, M., & Newlin, M. (2008). Online chats and cyber- office hours: Everything but the office. International Journal of E-Learning, 7(1), 107-116.

Leu, D. Jr. (1997). Internet en el aula: nuevas oportunidades para la educación, el aprendizaje y la enseñanza. In Fundalectura (ed.), Lectura y Nuevas Tecnologías. 3er Congreso Nacional de Lectura (pp. 47-68). Bogotá, Colombia: Fundación para el Fomento de la Lectura.

Leu, D., & Kinzer, C. (2000). The convergence of literacy instruction with networked technologies for information and communication. Reading Research Quarterly, 35, 108-127.

Leu, D., Kinzer, C., Coiro, J., & Cammack, D. (2004). Toward a theory of new literacies emerging from the Internet and other information and communication technologies. In Ruddell, R., & Unrau, N. (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (5th edition) (pp.1570-1613). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Marcus, T. (2003). Communication, technology and education-The role of the discussion group in asynchronic distance learning courses as a beneficial factor in the learning process (Unpublished master's thesis). Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel.

McNamara, C. (2009). General guidelines for conducting interviews. Retrieved from http://managementhelp.org/evaluatn/intrview.htm

Merriam, S. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Moore, M. (1980). Independent study. In Boyd, R., & Apps, J. (Eds.), Redefining the discipline of adult education (pp. 16–31). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Retrieved from http://www.ajde.com/publications.htm

Moore, M. (1989). Three types of interaction. The American Journal of Distance Education, 3(2), 1–6.

Muirhead, B. (2005). Encouraging interaction in online classes. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 1(6). Retrieved from http://itdl.org/Journal/Jun_04/article07.htm

Muñoz, H., & González, A. (2010). Teaching reading comprehension in English in a distance web-based Course: New roles for teachers. PROFILE, 12(2), 69-85.

Odlin, T. (1989). Language transfer. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

Picciano, A. (2002). Beyond student perceptions: Issues of interaction, presence, and performance in an online course. JALN, 6(1), 21-40.

Roblyer, M. (1999). Is choice important in distance learning? A study of student motives for taking internet- based courses at the high school and community college levels. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 32, 157–171.

Royer, J. (2004). Teaching reading comprehension skills. Retrieved from http://educator.readingsuccesslab.com/Tips/TeachingReadingComprehensionSkills.html

Swan, K. (2001). Virtual interaction: Design factors affecting student satisfaction and perceived learning in asynchronous online courses. Distance Education, 22(2), 306–331.

Tellis, W. (1997). Introduction to case study. The Qualitative Report, 3(2). Retrieved from http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR32/tellis1.html

Thurmond, V., & Wambach K. (2004). Understanding interactions in distance education: A review of literature. International Journal of Instructional Technology & Distance Learning, 1(1), 9–26. Retrieved from http://www.itdl.org/journal/Jan_04/article02/htm

Thurmond, V. (2003). Examination of interaction variables as predictors of students' satisfaction and willingness to enroll in future web-based courses while controlling for student characteristics. Ph.D Dissertation. University of Kansas. Parkland, FL: Dissertation. com. Retrieved from http://www.dissertation.com/library/1121814a.htm

Trentin, G. (1998). Computer conferencing systems as seen by a designer of online courses. Educational Technology, 38(3), 36–43.

Wagner, E. (1994). In support of a functional definition of interaction. The American Journal of Distance Education, 8(2), 6-26.

Weir, C. (1993). Understanding and developing language tests. Hemel Hempstead, England: Prentice Hall.

Yin, R. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Downloads

Published

2012-04-01

How to Cite

Osorno González, J. A., & Lopera Medina, S. A. (2012). Interaction in an EFL reading Comprehension Distance Web-based Course. Íkala, Revista De Lenguaje Y Cultura, 17(1), 45–59. Retrieved from https://revistas.udea.edu.co/index.php/ikala/article/view/9489

Issue

Section

Research papers