between theory and reality: teachers' perspective on evaluating websites for teaching purposes
DESCRIPTION
Between theory and reality: Teachers' perspective on evaluating websites for teaching purposes. Neny Isharyanti & Anne I. Timotius Satya Wacana Christian University TEFLIN 2006. Outline. Introduction Review of Literature Research Questions Methodology Results and Discussions - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Between theory and reality: Teachers' perspective on
evaluating websites for teaching purposes
Neny Isharyanti & Anne I. Timotius
Satya Wacana Christian University
TEFLIN 2006
Outline
• Introduction• Review of Literature• Research Questions• Methodology• Results and Discussions• Recommendation• Question and Answer
Introduction•Ease of the Internet
–Access–Creation–Materials for teaching
•Credibility of sources? •Teachers’ responsibility•Research vs. experiences
Review of Literature
•General Website Evaluation Guidelines
–content-related criteria (more emphasized)
–style-and-functionality-related criteria
Review of Literature (con’t)•content-related criteria
–authority–accuracy–comprehensiveness/coverage –objectivity/bias–currency–domain name–links/further information
Review of Literature (con’t)
•style-and-functionality-related criteria–website interface–ease of navigation–speed of download– the use of multimedia– requirements of the website–browser compatibility
Review of Literature (con’t)
•Criteria for CALL Learning Tasks Appropriateness–Chapelle (2001)–Egbert (2005)–Davies (2005)
Review of Literature (con’t)
•Chapelle (2001) & Egbert (2005)–Language learning potential–Learner fit–Meaning focus–Authenticity–Positive impact–Practicality
Review of Literature (con’t)
•Davies (2005)– Interface –Credibility–Currency
Research Questions
• Based on the criteria suggested by research, which criteria are of teachers’ consideration when they select a website for teaching purposes?
• Among those criteria, which criteria which the teachers consider to be more important?
• Is there a difference between the research criteria and the teachers’ criteria?
Subjects
•22 teachers in Round Table Discussion (RTD) Program
•All but one are computer literate
•Frequency of computer and internet usage
Frequency of Computer Usage
Computer Usage
10; 47%
6; 29%
4; 19%
1; 5%
Everyday
2-4 times a week
once a week
2-4 times per month
Frequency of Internet UsageInternet Usage
3; 19%
3; 19%
6; 37%
4; 25%
Everyday2-4 times a weekonce a week2-4 times per month
Methodology
•Questionnaire –Background of Subjects–Preferred Criterion–Criterion Importance
•Before RTD•Descriptive Statistics
Results and Discussions
• Preferred Criterion• Importance of the Criterion• Comparison
Preferred Criterion
No Criteria Number of responses
1 learner fit 10
2 practicality 10
3 authenticity 8
4 meaning focus 8
5 interface 7
6 language learning potential 7
7 credibility 6
8 positive impact 5
Importance of the Criterion
Order of Importanc
e Criteria
Absolutely not
important
Not importan
t
Quite importan
t ImportantVery
important
Total responses/crit
eria1 2 3 4 5
1 language learning potential 0 0 0 6 5 11
2 meaning focus 0 0 3 2 6 11
3 authenticity 0 0 2 4 3 9
4 learner fit 0 1 0 4 5 10
5 practicality 1 0 0 4 5 10
6 credibility 0 1 1 3 5 10
7 interface 0 2 1 4 3 10
8 positive impact 0 3 4 2 1 10
ComparisonOrder of No. of Response Preferred Criteria
Order of Importance Criteria Importance
1 learner fit 1 language learning potential
2 practicality 2 meaning focus
3 authenticity 3 authenticity
4 meaning focus 4 learner fit
5 interface 5 practicality
6 language learning potential 6 credibility
7 credibility 7 interface
8 positive impact 8 positive impact
Top vs. Bottom List
• Consistent– Top list
• learner fit• Authenticity• meaning focus
– Bottom list• interface• credibility• positive impact
• Not consistent– Language learning potential– practicality
Conclusion
•Research vs. study–Preferred criterion
•Research: all criteria•Study: Practicality and learner fit most preferred
– Importance of criterion•Language learning potential most important
Conclusion (con’t)
•Easier to spot–Practicality–Learner fit
•More subtle features–Language learning potential–Meaning focus
Conclusion (con’t)
•Two levels of search and evaluation?–Search Results (short listing)
•Easier features to spot
–Deeper evaluation (actual selection)•More subtle features
Recommendation
•Further study– Interview–Behavior tracking
Questions?
Thank you!
Contact us:
•Neny Isharyanti–[email protected]–http://neny.edublogs.org
•Anne I. Timotius–[email protected]–http://annei.edublogs.org