Exploring two teachers’ engagement with their students in an online writing environment

Nagaletchimee Annamalai; Kok Eng Tan

doi:10.4995/eurocall.2015.4668

Authors

Nagaletchimee Annamalai Universiti Sains Malaysia
Kok Eng Tan Universiti Sains Malaysia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.4995/eurocall.2015.4668

Keywords:

Online learning, Teachers engagement, Online community, Web 2.0 tools, Social networking

Abstract

Little research in the ESL context has examined the online teaching and learning activities in high schools. One main reason is the lack of appropriate theoretical framework rather than the learners or the environment. Using data from twelve high school students and two teachers from two Malaysian schools, the current study adapted Borup et al.’s framework to identify the teachers’ interaction with the students while engaged in the online writing environment. Borup et al. termed the construct as teacher engagement. Findings revealed that the teacher from the urban school was actively engaged in the interactions. However, the interactions of the sub-urban teacher were limited. The implications of this study suggest that teachers who are seen as digital immigrants need to consider the use of technology. Appropriate training and a checklist will be helpful to encourage the adoption of technology by teachers.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Anderson, T., Rourke, L., Garrison, D.R., & Archer, W. (2001). Assessing teacher presence in a computer conferencing context. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 5(2), 1-17.

Annamalai, N., Tan, K. E. & Amelia Abdullah (2016). Teaching presence in an online collaborative learning environment. Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities, 24(1) (in press).

Belair, M. (2012). The investigation of virtual school communications. TechTrends, 56(4): 26-33. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11528-012-0584-2

Borup, J., Graham, C. R., & Drysdale, J. S. (2014). The nature of teacher engagement at an online high school. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(5): 793-806. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12089

Crews, T. B., & Neill, J. (2014). Preferred delivery method for online instruction: Secondary students' perceptions. Journal of Applied Research for Business Instruction, 12(1): 1.

Di Pietro, M., Ferdig, R. E., Black, E. W., & Preston, M. (2008). Best practices in teaching K-12 online: Lessons learned from Michigan Virtual School teachers. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 7(1): 10-35.

Garrison, D. R., Anderson T., & Archer W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. Internet and Higher Education, 11(2): 1-14.

Hawkins, A., Graham, C. R., Sudweeks, R. R., & Barbour, M. K. (2013). Academic performance, course completion rates, and student perception of the quality and frequency of interaction in a virtual high school. Distance Education, 34(1): 64-83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2013.770430

Hawkins, A., Barbour, M. K., & Graham, C. R. (2011). Strictly business: Teacher perceptions of interaction in virtual schooling. International Journal of E-Learning & Distance Education, 25(2).

Hiew, W. (2012). English language teaching and learning issues in Malaysia: learners' perceptions via Facebook Dialogue Journal. Journal of Arts, Science, and Commerce, 3(1): 11-19.

Kimmons, R. M. (2014). Developing open education literacies with practicing K-12 teachers. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 15(6).

Koh, S. C. (2005). Total Revision. English 1119. SPM. Petaling Jaya:Sasbadi.

Labov, W. & Waletzky, J. (1967). Narrative analysis, In J. Helm (Eds.), Essays on verbal and visual. Seattle: Washington Press. Reprinted in Journal of Narrative and Life History, 7:3-38, 1997.

Malaysian Education Blueprint 2013-2025. (2013). Ministry of Education, Malaysia.

Maarof, N., Yamat, H., & Li, K. L. (2011). Role of teacher, peer and teacher-peer feedback in enhancing ESL students' writing. World Applied Sciences Journal, 15: 29-35.

Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed). Thousand Oaks: SAGE publication.

Minocha, S., & Roberts, D. (2008). Social, usability, and pedagogical factors influencing students learning experiences with wikis and blogs. Pragmatics & Cognition, 16(2): 272-306.

Murphy, E., & Rodríguez-Manzanares, M. A. (2009). Teachers' perspectives on motivation in high-school distance education. International Journal of E-Learning & Distance Education, 23(3): 1-24.

Ong, J., and Zhang, L.J. (2013). Effects of the manipulation of cognitive processes on EFL writers' text quality. TESOL Quarterly 47(2): 375-398. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/tesq.55

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants Part 2: Do they really think differently? On the horizon, 9(6): 1-6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/10748120110424843

Pushor, D. & Ruitenberg, C. (2005).Teaching and learning research exchange:parent engagement and leadership. Saskatoon,SK:DrStirling mc Dowell Foundation for Reseach into Teaching.

Richardson, W. (Ed.). (2006). Blogs, wikis, podcasts and other powerful web tools for classrooms: Thousand Oaks, Calif: Corwin Press.

Rojas-Drummond, S., & Mercer, N. (2003). Scaffolding the development of effective collaboration and learning. International journal of educational research, 39(1): 99-111. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0883-0355(03)00075-2

Rice, K. (2009). Priorities in K–12 distance education: A Delphi study examining multiple perspectives on policy, practice, and research. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 12(3): 163-177.

Sebastian, M., & Roy, J. (2005). Model composition and summaries for SPM 1119, English. Shah Alam: Fajar Bakti.

Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes: Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.