Synchronous and Asynchronous E-Language Learning: A Case Study of Virtual University of Pakistan

Ayesha Perveen

Abstract


This case study evaluated the impact of synchronous and asynchronous E-Language Learning activities (ELL-tivities) in an E-Language Learning Environment (ELLE) at Virtual University of Pakistan. The purpose of the study was to assess e-language learning analytics based on the constructivist approach of collaborative construction of knowledge. The courses selected for random sampling were English Comprehension (Eng101), Business & Technical English (Eng201) and Business Communication (Eng301). Three methods were employed to collect the data: observation of the communication and performance on given channels, students’ opinions on Graded Discussion Board (GDB), and a survey questionnaire. Out of a total population of 9919, 1025 responses were received for the survey questionnaire. The findings revealed that asynchronous e-language learning was quite beneficial for second language (L2) learners, but with some limitations which could be scaffolded by synchronous sessions. Based on the findings, the researcher suggested a blend of both synchronous and asynchronous paradigms to create an ideal environment for e-language learning in Pakistan.


Keywords


E-Language Learning Environment; E-Language Learning activities; constructivism; asynchronous communication; synchronous communication; second language learning

Full Text:

PDF

References


AbuSeileek, A. F. & Qatawneh, K. (2013). Effects of synchronous and asynchronous computer-mediated communication (CMC) oral conversations on English language learners' discourse functions. Computers & Education, 62, 181-190. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.10.013

Asoodar, M., Atai, M. R., Vaezi, S., & Marandi, S. S. (2014). Examining effectiveness of communities of practice in online English for academic purposes (EAP) assessment in virtual classes. Computers & Education, 70, 291-300. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.08.016

Bialystok, E., & Hakuta, K. (1999). Confounded age: Linguistic and cognitive factors in age differences for second language acquisition. Second language acquisition and the critical period hypothesis, 161-181.

Borg, S. & Al-Busaidi, S. (2012). Teachers’ beliefs and practices regarding learner autonomy. ELT Journal, 66(3), 283-292. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccr065

Chambers, F. (1980). A re-evaluation of needs analysis in ESP. The ESP Journal, 1(1), 25-33.

Chen, C. M., & Lee, T. H. (2011). Emotion recognition and communication for reducing second‐language speaking anxiety in a web‐based one‐to‐one synchronous learning environment. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42(3), 417-440. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.01035.x

Chen, N. S., Ko, H. C., Kinshuk*, & Lin, T. (2005). A model for synchronous learning using the Internet. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 42(2), 181-194.

Crystal, D. (2012). English as a global language. Cambridge University Press.

Dudley-Evans, T. & St John, M. J. (1998). Developments in English for specific purposes: A multi-disciplinary approach. Cambridge University Press.

Gardner, H. (2011). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. Basic books.

Garrison, D. R. & Anderson T. (2003). E-learning in the 21st century. A Framework for Research and Practice. London: RoutledgeFalmer.

Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T. & Archer, W. (1999). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2-3), 87-105. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6

Ge, Z. G. (2011). Exploring e-learners’ perceptions of net-based peer-reviewed English writing. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 6(1), 75-91.

Greller, W. & Drachsler, H. (2012). Translating learning into numbers: A generic framework for learning analytics. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 15(3), 42-57.

Guichon, N. (2010). Preparatory study for the design of a desktop videoconferencing platform for synchronous language teaching. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 23(2), 169-182. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09588221003666255

Guth, S., & Helm, F. (2012). Developing multiliteracies in ELT through telecollaboration. ELT journal, 66(1), 42-51. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccr027

Hrastinski, S. (2008). Asynchronous and synchronous e-learning. Educause quarterly, 31(4), 51-55. Retrieved from https://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/eqm0848.pdf

Huang, X. & Hsiao, E. L. (2012). Synchronous and asynchronous communication in an online environment: Faculty experiences and perceptions. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 13(1), 15-30.

Johns, A. M. (1991). English for specific purposes (ESP): Its history and contributions. Teaching English as a second or foreign language, 67-75.

Jordan, R. R. (1997). English for academic purposes: A guide and resource book for teachers. Cambridge University Press.

Keegan, D., Schwenke, E., Fritsch, H., Kenny, G., Kismihók, G., Bíró, M., Nix, J. (2005). Virtual classrooms in educational provision: synchronous e-learning systems for European institutions. FernUniversität ZIFF Papiere, 126.

Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2005). What happens when teachers design educational technology? The development of technological pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of educational computing research, 32(2), 131-152.

Koehler, M. J., Mishra, P., & Yahya, K. (2007). Tracing the development of teacher knowledge in a design seminar: Integrating content, pedagogy and technology. Computers & Education, 49(3), 740-762. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2005.11.012

Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon Press.

Larsen-Freeman, D. & Anderson, M. (2013). Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching (3rd edition). Oxford University Press.

Laurillard, D. (2007). Pedagogical forms of mobile learning: framing research questions. London: Institute of Education

Laurillard, D. (2013). Rethinking university teaching: A conversational framework for the effective use of learning technologies. Routledge.

Lin, H. S., Hong, Z. R., & Lawrenz, F. (2012). Promoting and scaffolding argumentation through reflective asynchronous discussions. Computers & Education, 59(2), 378-384. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.01.019

MacIntyre, P. D., Clément, R., Dörnyei, Z., & Noels, K. A. (1998). Conceptualizing willingness to communicate in a L2: a situational model of L2 confidence and affiliation. Modern Language Journal, 82, 545-562.

Martín-Blas, T. & Serrano-Fernández, A. (2009). The role of new technologies in the learning process: Moodle as a teaching tool in Physics. Computers & Education, 52(1), 35-44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.06.005

McBrien, J. L., Cheng, R., & Jones, P. (2009). Virtual spaces: Employing a synchronous online classroom to facilitate student engagement in online learning. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 10(3). Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/605/1264

McCloskey, M. L., Thrush, E. A., Wilson-Patton, M. E., & Kleckova, G. (2013). Developing English language curriculum for online delivery. Calico Journal, 26(1), 182-203. http://dx.doi.org/10.1558/cj.v26i1.182-203

McLoughlin, C. & Lee, M. J. (2010a). Pedagogy 2.0: Critical Challenges and Responses to Web 2.0 and Social Software in Tertiary Teaching. In C. McLoughlin & M. J. Lee (eds.). Web 2.0-Based E-Learning: Applying Social Informatics for Tertiary Teaching (pp. 43-69). Hershey: Information Science Reference. http://dx.doi.org/10.4018/978-1-60566-294-7.ch003

McLoughlin, C. & Lee, M. J. (2010b). Personalised and self regulated learning in the Web 2.0 era: International exemplars of innovative pedagogy using social software. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(1).

McLuhan, M. (1995). Understanding media: The extensions of man. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

Mellow, J. D. (2002). Towards principled eclecticism in language teaching: The two-dimensional model and the centering principle. TESL-EJ, 5(4), 1-18.

Murphy, E., Rodríguez‐Manzanares, M. A., & Barbour, M. (2011). Asynchronous and synchronous online teaching: Perspectives of Canadian high school distance education teachers. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42(4), 583-591. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2010.01112.x

Parsad, B. & Lewis, L. (2008). Distance Education at Degree-Granting Postsecondary Institutions: 2006–07 (NCES 2009–044). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2009/2009044.pdf

Pérez, L. C. (2013). Foreign language productivity in synchronous versus asynchronous computer-mediated communication. CALICO journal, 21(1), 89-104. http://dx.doi.org/10.1558/cj.v21i1.89-104

Pfister, H. R. (2005). How to support synchronous net-based learning discourses: Principles and perspectives (pp. 39-57). Springer US.

Polkinghorne, D. E. (2005). Language and meaning: Data collection in qualitative research. Journal of counseling psychology, 52(2), 137.

Reynolds, D., Wang, X., & Poor, H. V. (2002). Blind adaptive space-time multiuser detection with multiple transmitter and receiver antennas. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, 50(6), 1261-1276. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TSP.2002.1003052

Salmon, G. (2013). E-tivities: The key to active online learning. Routledge.

Seedhouse, P. (1995). Needs analysis and the general English classroom. ELT Journal, 49(1), 59-65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/elt/49.1.59

Somenarain, L., Akkaraju, S., & Gharbaran, R. (2010). Student perceptions and learning outcomes in asynchronous and synchronous online learning environments in a biology course. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 6(2), 353-356. Retrieved from http://jolt.merlot.org/vol6no2/somenarain_0610.pdf

Stein, P. & Newfield, D. (2006). Multiliteracies and multimodality in English in education in Africa: Mapping the terrain. English Studies in Africa, 49(1), 1-21.

Sun, S. Y. H. (2011). Online language teaching: the pedagogical challenges. Knowledge Management & E-learning: An International Journal (KM&EL), 3(3), 428-447. Retrieved from http://www.kmel-journal.org/ojs/index.php/online-publication/article/view/89

Swan, K. (2001). Virtual interaction: Design factors affecting student satisfaction and perceived learning in asynchronous online courses. Distance education, 22(2), 306-331. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0158791010220208

Teng, D. C. E., Chen, N. S., Kinshuk & Leo, T. (2012). Exploring students’ learning experience in an international online research seminar in the Synchronous Cyber Classroom. Computers & Education, 58(3), 918-930. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.10.018

Wang, Y. & Chen, N. S. (2009). Criteria for evaluating synchronous learning management systems: arguments from the distance language classroom. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 22(1), 1-18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09588220802613773

Watkins, C., Carnell, E., Lodge, C. & Whalley, C. (1996). Effective learning. The School Improvement Network, Research Matters, No. 5. Institute of Education, University of London.

Watson, J., Gemin, B., Ryan, J., & Wicks, M. (2009). Keeping Pace with K-12 Online Learning: An Annual Review of State-Level Policy and Practice, 2009. Evergreen Education Group. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED535909.pdf

West, R. (1994). Needs analysis in language teaching. Language teaching, 27(01), 1-19.

Yamagata-Lynch, L. C. (2014). Blending online asynchronous and synchronous learning. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 15(2). Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/1778/2837

Yang, Y. F. (2011). Engaging students in an online situated language learning environment. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 24(2), 181-198. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2010.538700




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5944/openpraxis.8.1.212

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.