Takahide Ishii s1170047Supervised by Prof. Debopriyo Roy
1. Introduction 2. The Background this research 3. The Objective this research 4. Research Questions 5. Sample and context 6. Research Design・ In-class Website Analysis Assignment・ Actual Experiment・ Data Analysis – Use of Coders 7. Findings 8. Conclusions
Literature on computer assisted languagelearning is mostly silent on how web-baseddesign analysis could be effectively used as atool and framework for developing criticalthinking skills and language proficiency in anEFL classroom. This article reported onhow EFL learners performwith English website analysistasks in a language receptionand product context.
There is substantial research in language studies andcognition that establishes cognition and languagedevelopment to be closely related Educators have identified multiple features andelements of reading and writing to have alwaysinfluenced thinking skills to a large extent. There has always been a strong appeal to promotehigher order thinking in ESL and EFL classrooms, andresearch has clearly focused on the need to fostercritical thinking in a foreign language classroom However, unfortunately language learning and thinkingskills were almost always treated as independentprocesses
This study focused on extensive and sustainedcontent analysis using information technologyresources. This study establishes that such attempt helpswith both linguistic and cognitive informationprocessing ability. This study is also influenced by the fact that wehave shifted from Web 1.0 towards Web 2.0where there is an increased emergence ofcomputer-mediated communication, socialnetworking and active interaction between theuser and the web environment.
How did the EFL readers perform withvarious design questions as asked duringwebsite analysis? Is there any significant differencebetween coders who gradedresponses to the designquestions suggesting significantdifference between responses toa design question and/or suggesting thatone or more coder(s) have not understoodthe questions and responses correctly andresultantly could not use the assessmentrubric correctly for grading the designresponses?
Participants (N=17) are junior level students (agegroup: 18-20 years) in their third yearundergraduate program specializing in computerscience in a Japanese technical university With this specific elective course named Writingand Design for World Wide Web, students mostlyfocused on the process of online writing,designing and analyzingwebsites based on designprinciples, besides designingconcept maps on websitesthey analyzed.
As part of the website analysis assignment,students were asked to study a specificwebsite in a chosen domain (e.g., education,entertainment, government, tourism, sportsetc) Students provide open-ended responses to 8standard questions asked of them.
1. Explain whether the organization of information in the site is user-friendly or not?2. Explain whether the presentation of content is appealing or not?3. Explain whether the effective use of technology is demonstrated?4. Who is the target audience? Is the website appropriate for the projected audience?5. Explain the quality of the text content.6. Is the information accessible?7. Explain whether the resources use real-world situations.8. Here are some common reasons for building this website. Rank them in order ofimportance to you. Do you have a reason that is not listed?Open-ended Design Questions asked of the Participants
The experiment was conducted in a controlledenvironment as an in-class activity, and over twoweeks. students analyzed the Belize tourism websitebased on the 8 open-ended questions askedduring the same assignment that happened overthe previous weeks Students had one-week to complete the analysis,besides the 90 minutes of class time where theycould consult their friends. To encourage writing and proper explanation,the minimum word limit for the assignment wasset at 500 words.
Three undergraduate students (not part of the classwith the sample) who took the same class at anearlier semester were appointed as coders with thetask of grading the first week assignment wherereaders participated in an open-ended evaluation ofthe Belize tourism website. The coders were given a set of criteria on the basis ofwhich they graded each open-ended response, for allthe 8 questions assigned. Each of the 8 open-ended responses for each of the17 participants was rated thrice, once by each of thethree coders. The group (including the project supervisor and thethree coders) then discussed each grade for eachquestion and criterion.
The Coding Schema
N Minimum Maximum Sum of Mean Scores Std. DeviationQuestion118 9 16 14.56 2.479Question218 3 16 12.56 3.110Question318 0 14 11.56 3.585Question418 3 15 11.50 4.148Question518 3 15 11.33 3.804Question618 2 15 11.28 4.254Question718 0 15 10.33 4.366Question818 6 15 11.67 2.990Valid N (listwise)18Mean and SD Values for Each Question on 6 Criteria and Each Criteria Scored Thrice by Three Different Coders
This study, Coders were a test of not onlyunderstanding what constitutes validinformation, and good organization ofresponse, but it also required ability to readthrough the criteria rubric used in the study demonstrate at least moderate levels oflanguage proficiency.