Moodle and Telegram to develop students’ language performance and knowledge co-construction in technology-enhanced CLIL

David Imamyartha, Utami Widiati, Mirjam Anugerahwati, Afendi Hamat

Abstract


This study compared Moodle and Telegram as mobile-instant messaging (MIM) to understand how the platforms performed in technology-enhanced content and language integrated learning (TECLIL) settings. It involved 68 English for Academic Purpose (EAP) students enrolled in two groups, i.e., Moodle group and Telegram group. Using the mixed-method design, the study garnered quantitative data through pre- and post-tests of language performance coupled with post-tests of spoken presentation, content knowledge, and collective knowledge co-construction. Qualitative data concerning the interaction patterns in online discussion forums were amassed by retrieving students’ postings on both platforms. This study garnered additional quantitative data as covariates, which involved a survey of technology acceptance and a survey of teacher evaluation. Upon analysis, paired sample t-test was operative to identify noteworthy differences between groups with respect to technology acceptance, evaluation of teacher performance, language performance, and content knowledge. For the qualitative inquiry, thread analysis on the interaction patterns in both groups was conducted to scrutinize their depth of knowledge co-construction. Although the interaction trends in both platforms mark the dominance of knowledge sharing, the findings lend credence to the stronger potential of Moodle to empower students’ in-depth knowledge co-construction while exercising their subject-specific language performance. For deep engagement in knowledge co-construction and authentic language use, teachers need to provide appropriate scaffolding through modeling effective collaboration, making explicit the characteristics of quality discussion, and establishing a mutual understanding of what students need to achieve in the online discussion forum.

Keywords


Knowledge co-construction; language performance; Moodle; TECLIL; Telegram

Full Text:

PDF

References


Agustina, N., Mayuni, I., Iskandar, I., & Ratminingsih, N. M. (2022). Mobile learning application: Infusing critical thinking in the EFL classroom. Studies in English Language and Education, 9(2), 724–743. https://doi.org/10.24815/siele.v9i2.23476

Amiryousefi, M. (2019). The incorporation of flipped learning into conventional classes to enhance EFL learners’ L2 speaking, L2 listening, and engagement. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 13(2), 147–161. https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2017.1394307

Andujar, A., & Salaberri-Ramiro, M. S. (2019). Exploring chat-based communication in the EFL class: Computer and mobile environments. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 34(1), 434-461. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2019.1614632

Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (2016). “Good Moves” in knowledge-creating dialogue. Qwerty - Open and Interdisciplinary Journal of Technology, Culture and Education, 11(2), 12–26.

Council of Europe. (2001). Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge University Press.

Coyle, D. (2007). Content and language integrated learning: Towards a connected research agenda for CLIL pedagogies. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10(5), 543–562. https://doi.org/10.2167/beb459.0

Crossman, K. (2018). Immersed in academic English: Vocabulary and academic outcomes of a CLIL university preparation course. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 21(5), 564–577. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2018.1494698

Dixson, M. D. (2010). Creating effective student engagement in online courses: What do students find engaging? Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching & Learning, 10(2), 1–13.

Elshami, W., Taha, M. H., Abuzaid, M., Saravanan, C., Al Kawas, S., & Abdalla, M. E. (2021). Satisfaction with online learning in the new normal: Perspective of students and faculty at medical and health sciences colleges. Medical Education Online, 26(1), Article 1920090. https://doi.org/10.1080/10872981.2021.1920090

Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education. McGraw Hill.

Garzón-Díaz, E. (2021). From cultural awareness to scientific citizenship: implementing content and language integrated learning projects to connect environmental science and English in a state school in Colombia. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 24(2), 242–259. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2018.1456512

Gu, P., Zhang, Y., & Gu, H. (2020). Creating a technology-enhanced constructivist learning environment for research ability development in a BA Thesis Writing course. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 33(5–6), 538–566. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2019.1576735

Haghighi, H., Jafarigohar, M., Khoshsima, H., & Vahdany, F. (2019). Impact of flipped classroom on EFL learners’ appropriate use of refusal: achievement, participation, perception. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 32(3), 261–293. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2018.1504083

Hou, H. T., Wang, S. M., Lin, P. C., & Chang, K. E. (2015). Exploring the learner’s knowledge construction and cognitive patterns of different asynchronous platforms: Comparison of an online discussion forum and Facebook. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 52(6), 610–620. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2013.847381

Imamyartha, D., Wahjuningsih, E., A’yunin, A., Santihastuti, A., Mitasari, Fauzie, D. L. T. A., & Andika, E. C. H. (2022). Efl learners’ engagement and learning motivation in Team-Based mobile language learning through Whatsapp. Teaching English with Technology, 22(1), 82–103.

Imamyartha, D., Wahjuningsih, E., Puspa, A., Bilqis, M., & Hudori, R. F. A. (2021). An experiment on mobile learning to leverage EFL learners’ engagement, emotional intelligence, and learning motivation. Journal of Asia TEFL, 18(4), 1285–1301. https://doi.org/10.18823/asiatefl.2021.18.4.13.1285

Ke, F., & Xie, K. (2009). Toward deep learning for adult students in online courses. Internet and Higher Education, 12(3–4), 136–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.08.001

Kisaka, S. T. (2017). Peer critique using the Discussion Forum: A case of two Honours students. International Journal of Educational Sciences, 19(1), 42–53. https://doi.org/10.1080/09751122.2017.1391891

Kukulska-Hulme, A., & Viberg, O. (2018). Mobile collaborative language learning: State of the art. British Journal of Educational Technology, 49(2), 207–218. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12580

Lai, C. (2019). Learning beliefs and autonomous language learning with technology beyond the classroom. Language Awareness, 28(4), 291–309. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2019.1675679

Lei, C., & Chan, C. K. K. (2018). Developing metadiscourse through reflective assessment in knowledge building environments. Computers and Education, 126, 153-169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.07.006

Liaw, S. (2008). Investigating students’ perceived satisfaction, behavioral intention, and effectiveness of e-learning: A case study of the Blackboard system. Computers and Education, 51, 864–873. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2007.09.005

Ma, Q. (2017). A multi-case study of university students’ language-learning experience mediated by mobile technologies: A socio-cultural perspective. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 30(3–4), 183–203. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2017.1301957

Meyer, O., Coyle, D., Halbach, A., Schuck, K., & Ting, T. (2015). A pluriliteracies approach to content and language integrated learning – mapping learner progressions in knowledge construction and meaning-making. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 28(1), 41–57. https://doi.org/10.1080/07908318.2014.1000924

Nor, N. F. M., Hamat, A., & Embi, M. A. (2012). Patterns of discourse in online interaction: Seeking evidence of the collaborative learning process. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 25(3), 237–256. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2012.655748

O’Dowd, R. (2018). Innovations and challenges in using online communication technologies in CLIL. Theory into Practice, 57(3), 232–240. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2018.1484039

Pérez-Pérez, M., Serrano-Bedia, A. M., & García-Piqueres, G. (2020). An analysis of factors affecting students´ perceptions of learning outcomes with Moodle. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 44(8), 1114–1129. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2019.1664730

Porto, M. (2014). Intercultural citizenship education in an EFL online project in Argentina. Language and Intercultural Communication, 14(2), 245–261. https://doi.org/10.1080/14708477.2014.890625

Porto, M. (2015). Ecological and intercultural citizenship in the primary English as a foreign language (EFL) classroom: An online project in Argentina. Cambridge Journal of Education, 46(4), 395–415. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.2015.1064094

Rutta, C. B., Schiavo, G., Zancanaro, M., & Rubegni, E. (2021). Comic-based digital storytelling for content and language integrated learning. Educational Media International, 58(1), 21–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/09523987.2021.1908499

Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2006). Knowledge building: Theory, pedagogy, and technology. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 97–115). Cambridge University Press.

Sun, Z., Lin, C. H., Wu, M., Zhou, J., & Luo, L. (2017). A tale of two communication tools: Discussion-forum and mobile instant-messaging apps in collaborative learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 49(2), 248–261. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12571

Sun, Z., Liu, R., Luo, L., Wu, M., & Shi, C. (2017). Exploring collaborative learning effect in blended learning environments. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 33(6), 575–587. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12201

Teo, T., Zhou, M., Fan, A. C. W., & Huang, F. (2019). Factors that influence university students’ intention to use Moodle: A study in Macau. Educational Technology Research and Development, 67(3), 749–766. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-019-09650-x

van Aalst, J. (2009). Distinguishing knowledge-sharing, knowledge-construction, and knowledge-creation discourses. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4(3), 259–287. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-009-9069-5

Venkatesh, V., & Bala, H. (2008). Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on interventions. Decision Sciences, 39(2), 273–315. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.2008.00192.x

Wang, M. S., Yang, L., & Chen, T. C. (2020). The effectiveness of ICT-enhanced learning on raising intercultural competencies and class interaction in a hospitality course competencies and class interaction in a hospitality course. Interactive Learning Environments, 31(2), 994-1006. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1815223

Zhao, K., Zhou, J., & Zou, B. (2022). Developing subject knowledge co-construction and specific language use in a technology-enhanced CLIL programme: Effectiveness and productive patterns. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 25(6), 2172–2185. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2021.1890688

Zhu, Q., & Wang, M. (2020). Team-based mobile learning supported by an intelligent system: case study of STEM students. Interactive Learning Environments, 28(5), 543–559. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1696838

Zou, B., Li, H., & Li, J. (2018). Exploring a curriculum app and a social communication app for EFL learning. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 31(7), 694–713. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2018.1438474




DOI: https://doi.org/10.24815/siele.v10i2.28295

Article Metrics

Abstract view : 0 times
PDF - 0 times

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Print ISSN: 2355-2794, Online ISSN: 2461-0275

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.


View Journal Stats