Relative Advantage of Using the Basic Suite for Learning

When I think of technology, I usually don’t think of the basic suite. In fact, if I was asked, before thinking about this post, to create a list of the top 5 most useful types of technology, I’d bet that I would not have even thought of including the basic suite on my list. Maybe this just goes to show how fully the basic suite has integrated into my daily life. At home, it’s a given. On the go, it’s a given. For school and at work, it’s a necessity. In education, the basic suite is one of the most important sets of software tools for both students and instructors. Although its word-processing, spreadsheet, and presentation functions are all useful in general, in the ESL courses, writing courses in specific, certain capabilities are more effectively leveraged than others.

Word Processing Software

ESL writing students can benefit from word processing in a variety of ways. In summarizing several studies on the effect of word processing on student writing, Robyler (2016) points out that word processing, among other benefits, increases the overall quality of writing, reduces surface errors, and fosters a positive attitude toward writing. Software such as Microsoft Word and Openoffice can be used most basically for completion of homework assignments and longer writing assignments. They can play a major role in all parts of the writing process from invention (blank-screen freewriting) to editing a final draft. Additionally, programs such as Google Docs allow shared documents which can foster collaboration in pairs, groups, or even whole classes. For example, an instructor could assign each student to complete a vocabulary entry on a shared Google Docs so that every student could have access to a common vocabulary journal. This would hold each student accountable for their share of the class’s learning and would allow the instructor to grade one online document rather than 25-35 paper vocabulary journals.

Instructors can use word processing to create basic grammar/vocabulary exercises and quizzes/tests as well as more complex materials utilizing graphic and visual functions. Traditional reading comprehension discussion questions, for instance, could be supplemented with visual representations of concepts presented in a difficult academic reading. This would allow the instructor to attend to students who learn effectively from reading and those who learn better by visualizing ideas rather reading words. In addition to the variety of formats that instructors can use to present material, the commenting function of word processing programs allows instructors to comment on student writing through comment boxes that can target a specific area in a sentence or paragraph. In a quantitative study of computer-mediated corrective feedback in the writing of English as a foreign language (EFL) students, AbuSeileek (2013) found that students at an intermediate level of English proficiency who used the commenting function in conjunction with the ‘track changes’ feature of a word-processing program effectively reduced the number of both global and local linguistic errors. This further supports the use of word processing as a support software.  

Spreadsheet Software

Although it is true that the utility of a spreadsheet is more obvious in fields such as mathematics or the natural sciences in which numbers must be manipulated and visual representations must be efficiently generated, spreadsheets can have some less obvious but nonetheless relevant uses in the ESL writing class. In content-based writing courses, students might be able to use spreadsheets in the way they were originally intended to be used, for collecting data and creating graphs and/or charts of data. Students could then use these visuals as springboard for practicing the linguistic and rhetorical features of a results section of a research paper. A less obvious way for students to utilize spreadsheets in a writing class is in the creation of vocabulary journals or grid notes.

Spreadsheets also have use in classroom management, administrative, lesson planning, research, and curriculum related tasks. Instructors can utilize spreadsheets for maintaining attendance records, tracking student progress, and assigning small groups. Instructors who engage in research can use spreadsheets to college quantitative and qualitative data. Many ESL writing programs, for example, have compiled English learner writing corpuses using spreadsheets. In addition, departments can use spreadsheets to collect data that could inform future curricular adjustments.

Presentation Software

After word processing, presentation software is probably the most relevant to content-driven communicative ESL writing classes. With presentation programs such as Microsoft Powerpoint, Google Slides, and Prezi students can collaborate in the creation of content-related oral presentations. Collaborative groups could each be assigned academic readings revolving around a central theme. Each group could then create a presentation using presentation software to explicate the material in the readings for the rest of the class. The information presented by each group might then be used in a culminating writing assignment.  

Instructors can also leverage presentation software in a variety of ways. The most common use of presentation software is as a basic visual aide to supplement grammar, vocabulary, reading, and writing lectures. However, instructors can use presentation software in other ways such as projecting the day’s objectives, collaborative group name lists, and written directions for group activities. Programs such as Microsoft Powerpoint offer users the ability to embed images, Youtube videos, Poll Everywhere surveys, and a host of other features into their presentations opening up the possibility for a highly interactive use of presentation software in the classroom.

References

AbuSeileek, A.F. (2013). Using track changes and word processor to provide corrective 

feedback to learners in writing. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29(4), pp. 

319-333.

Robyler, M. D. (2016). Integrating educational technology into teaching. Upper Saddle 

River, NJ: Pearson.

Instructional Software Overview

As I mentioned in my last post, technology has been utilized in the field of ESL/language learning since the 1950s. Educational technology in language learning has evolved from the use of simple audio recordings for drill and practice in the language classroom and lab to the application of a wide variety of computer, digital, and internet technology-based instructional software that has become available under the broad label of computer assisted language learning (CALL).

Selecting instructional software for language learning as for any field is a complex task. In the case of language pedagogy, technology has mostly been ancillary to classroom instruction, and as such selected software should display its full utility in supplementing not supplanting the instruction of the teacher. It must clearly function to aid the learner in the acquisition of specific language skills outlined by set learning outcomes rather than merely to capture the learner’s attention. The process of selecting technology for language learning can be informed by both the notion of relative advantage and Robyler’s (2016) classification scheme in which she categorizes instructional software into drill-and-practice, tutorial, simulation, instructional game, and problem-solving types. In the context of the ESL academic writing course, where learners are often at a the proficient end of the language learning spectrum, the instructor should consider the two aforementioned guiding factors and the needs specific to individual learners when choosing instructional software.

Drill-and-practice instructional software which provides students with practice and immediate feedback is likely the type of CALL that language instructors are most familiar with. Though it has faced criticism by constructivist theorists and educators, Drill-and-practice software has been a mainstay in language pedagogy since the 1960s when language teaching was guided by the principles of structural linguistics (Warschauer, 2004) and behaviorist learning theories. With regards to the ESL academic writing class, the utility of drill-and-practice software is most apparent in vocabulary and grammar learning. Quizlet and Studyblue, which are both free online study tools, allow students to create their own sets of customized flashcards, for example. Students can add as much or as little information on their electronic flashcards as the instructor requires. After they have created their own set, they can test themselves on their computers or mobile devices. This is particularly useful for the memorization required for vocabulary acquisition. Similarly, the multitude of grammar exercises available through various online sources such as Englisch-Hilfen.com and UsingEnglish.com and smartphone/tablet apps such as Cambridge’s English Grammar in Use app provide students with numerous multiple choice or fill-in-the-blank grammar exercise. Drill-and-practice instructional software is useful in that it allows learners to customize practice to their specific needs, it reduces the necessity for paper used for flash cards and handouts, and it reduces the time required for hand-grading assignments.

Also based in directed instruction and objectivist learning theories is tutorial software. Tutorial software attempts to delivers content as a classroom teacher would and in addition provides all the advantages characteristic of drill-and-practice software (Robyler, 2016).Tutorials also have the added benefit of allowing students to repeatedly review content at their own pace. The most widely accepted tutorials are frequently found either as a  technology supplement that students purchase with their textbooks or on various online sources such as Khan Academy. In addition, free online software such as Camtasia, Screencast-O-Matic, and Ezvid allow instructors to create their own video tutorials. Tutorial software, however, like drill-and-practice software does have its detractors. According to Robyler, constructivists have criticized tutorial software for several limitations including a lack of well-designed products and the uniformity of instructional approach inherent in any particular tutorial product. Though the design quality of tutorial software may indeed vary to a great degree, the sheer number of tutorials available on the Internet may possibly diminish the idea that a topic is only taught using one instructional approach.

At the moment tutorial software that fully integrates tutorial and adequate feedback capabilities seems unavailable for the ESL writing class. This is probably due in part to the fact that although many aspects of ESL writing, such as grammar, vocabulary, and spelling, may be attended to objectively, and automatic feedback can be easily provided, at the level of academic writing the focus moves toward more subjective features of composition such as a strong thesis statement and well-reasoned, logical arguments. It is this latter aspect in which most if not all ESL writing tutorials are inclined to fail. For example, Cambridge University Press’ Writing Skills Interactive provide students with sequenced tutorials covering a range of topics related to academic essay writing followed by multiple-choice and drag-and-drop exercises that focus on language features characteristic of these topics. However, a feature that assesses student-generated original sentences for say a cause and effect relationship is lacking. Likewise, software such as automated essay scoring, which might fulfill this need for subjective assessment, is usually limited to standardized writing tests and not for the individual writing classroom.

The third category in Robyler’s classification scheme is simulation software. She explains that simulation software are “programs that provide computerized models of a real or imagined system that is designed to teach how the system works” (Robyler, 2016, p. 104) and support both directed and constructivist teaching strategies. Simulation software is more relevant to STEM fields and thus may not be directly pertinent for ESL writing. However, given that many academic writing courses are content-based that is instructors teach language features and their functions in the context of sustained academic content areas such as business or psychology, simulations may be useful in providing students with additional explanations and visualizations of field specific content from which they can practice various forms of academic writing. For example, in a unit focused on health or human biology, an instructor might ask learners to write a process paragraph outlining the steps in the sleep-wake cycle after viewing a simulation explicating the steps in this cycle. This paragraph could then be used in an essay about the sleeping habits of college students.

Another category of instructional software that is gaining popularity among educators and is highly appealing to students of all ages is instructional gaming. According to Robyler, instructional games are similar to drill-and-practice and simulations in their use, but have the added elements of game rules, competition, and entertaining formats. It is these distinct characteristics that make these programs “highly motivating” (p. 104). Instructional games are useful as they can be used in any content area and may be used in any class format (e.g. individual, whole class, pairs, small groups). One instructional game which is popular today is Kahoot!. Kahoot! allows the instructor to create informal assessments around any content area and deliver it via a free, online audience-response platform. Learners interact with the game using their own mobile devices over wi-fi or their own 3/4G network. This program also allows the instructor to add images and embed Youtube videos into each question increasing its dynamic nature. Similar to Kahoot!, is the audience-response program, Poll Everywhere. Poll Everywhere mirrors the functionality of Kahoot! and provides additional features such as short answer questions, in which students can type sentences or paragraphs, and interactive image questions, in which students touch a specific area of an image that appears on their mobile devices to answer questions.

Instructional games such as Kahoot! and Poll Everywhere benefit both the student and the instructor in several ways. Tremblay (2010) found through surveys of post-secondary science learners that the use of cell phone-based audience-response systems increased enjoyment, decreased boredom, increased interactivity, and increased emotional engagement in the classroom. Additionally, depending on the type of instructional game, students can learn cooperation and communication skills through group activities centered around gaming platform. In the ESL academic writing class, instructional games can be used to review any and all aspects of the course objectives from grammar and vocabulary issues to the creation of thesis statements and even full paragraphs. Instructors, on the other hand, benefit from the ability to quickly provide ongoing informal assessments of previous content and reduce the need for paper-based worksheets and quizzes. In addition to their gaming functions, Both Kahoot! and Poll Everywhere include analytics that allow the instructor to track student progress.

Problem-solving programs, which are designed with the goal of developing discrete problem-solving skills, are the fifth category of instructional software. Created with the underpinnings of constructivist learning theories in mind, problem-solving programs, according to Roblyer, benefit students by increasing interest, increasing motivation, encouraging collaboration, and preventing “inert knowledge”. The value of problem-solving software in the ESL academic writing class would presumably be most apparent in content-driven writing courses in which the problem-solving program in conjunction with vocabulary and grammar instruction facilitates a culminating writing assignment. Consistent with this notion, a preliminary study by Hussein et. al. (2012) in which problem-solving activities were used to teach academic writing in the English as a Foreign Language (EFL) context showed that students improved their mean scores on a standardized writing assessment.

Instructional software provides many opportunities to engage students in learning. In the context of an ESL academic writing classroom they can provide both direct and indirect supplemental materials. Drill-and-practice and instructional games are easily applicable as are tutorials to some extent in the teaching and reinforcement of specific language structures and discourse features. Simulations and problem-solving software, on the other hand, lend themselves to supporting content-driven writing courses. Writing students will benefit the most from the customizability of these programs and from the opportunity to review material at their own pace, while instructors will gain the advantage of having a reduced amount of homework to collect and a decreased amount of paper consumption.

References

Hussein, H., Roslan, S., Noordin, N., & Abdullah, M. (2012). Using the problem solving 

approach to teach writing to EFL learners. The English Teacher, 41(2), pp. 144-

159.

Robyler, M. D. (2016). Integrating educational technology into teaching. Upper Saddle 

River, NJ: Pearson.

Tremblay, E. A. (2010). Educating the mobile generation - using personal cell phones as 

audience response systems in post-secondary science teaching. Journal of 

Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 29(2), pp. 217-227.

Warschauer, M. (2004). Technological change and the future of CALL. In S. Fotos & C. 

Brown (Eds.), New perspectives on CALL for second and foreign language 

classrooms (pp. 15-25). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Vision Statement

As educators we see many of our students in class every day with their smart devices. A great many of our students are connected. They may be what Prensky (2001) has aptly called, “digital natives,” or those who have been raised in an environment in which digital technology is ubiquitous. Educators in all fields are in a position to utilize this technology to help their students learn, discover, and create in ways that could not have been imagined just a few decades ago.

In the field of language teaching, technology has been integral since the beginnings of the field of applied linguistics in the early 1950s. The first type of technology experiencing widespread use in the context of language instruction was audio recordings. The use of audio recordings naturally complemented the accepted method of language instruction of the time, the audio-lingual method, which was characterized by listening to and repeating recorded phrases and sentences. Since the time of the audio-lingual method, both language pedagogy and its associated technology have undergone enormous transformations. Audio-recordings, although still frequently used, are no longer the cornerstone technology in the language classroom. Computer technology has brought with it programs developed to assist learners with not only their listening and speaking skills, but also their reading and writing skills. Although educational technology is now being used in all skill areas and levels of language learning, in the area of writing, ESL academic writing in particular, educational technology can and should be leveraged to promote learner understanding of both the fundamental and advanced elements of written academic discourse.

Educational technology can address several critical issues that concern the area of ESL academic writing instruction. The most significant of these issues facing ESL writers and writing instructors today is likely plagiarism. Although plagiarism has always to some degree been an issue in higher education in general, it is even more salient in ESL writing instruction possibly because of differing cultural views regarding the abstract notions of intellectual property and academic integrity (Russikoff et al., 2003; Lund, 2004). Robyler (2015) points out that instructors can utilize technology based solutions for issues such as teaching abstract concepts. The concept of plagiarism or stealing an idea is one that learners who are unfamiliar with the conventions of western academic discourse often times struggle with. Its abstract nature requires constant review and practice on the part of the learner. Given the ever-present time constraint on class time, it is neither practical or feasible to expect either the instructor or student to devote valuable class time to studying and reviewing plagiarism to the extent that is needed. This is where educational technology can be applied. Websites such as Plagiarism.org and programs such a Turnitin.com can enhance student understanding of plagiarism and even prevent it while saving in-class time for other more course-specific material. Turnitin.com, in addition, also increases instructor productivity and effectiveness by assisting in identifying plagiarism and increasing the turn around rate for graded work.

Many ESL language classrooms focus on a communicative approach to language learning. This approach finds its foundations in constructivist learning theories such as Vygotsky’s (1978) Zone of Proximal Development. Students learn through communication and co-construction of knowledge rather than through the standard teacher-led lecture. Educational technology can be utilized to facilitate the communicative approach to language learning both inside and outside of the classroom via online interaction and collaboration using shared cloud-based platforms such as Google Docs, threaded discussions offered through course management systems, social networking sites, and even simple presentation programs such as Power Point.

In the context of the ESL writing classroom, educational technology is indispensable. It addresses not only field-specific pedagogical issues but also issues such as plagiarism which affect the academic community at large. Moreover, it reinforces currently accepted language pedagogy by creating more opportunities for novel, engaging, and collaborative communicative language use. These are only two of the many possibilities that educational technology holds.

References

Lund, J. (2004). Plagiarism: A cultural perspective. Journal of Religious and Theological

Information, 6(3/4), pp. 93-101.

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5), pp.1-6.

Robyler, M. D. (2016). Integrating educational technology into teaching. Upper Saddle

River, NJ: Pearson.

Rusikoff, K., Fucaloro, L., & Salkauskiene, D. (2003). Plagiarism as a cross-cultural

phenomenon. The Cal Poly Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, 16, pp. 109-120.